The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About10 October 18, 2004 Technical AdvisoryRECORDS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMIT _ __ __.__ MEETING AGENDA* TIME: 10:00 A.M. DATE: October 18, 2004 LOCATION: 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 John Andoh, PVVTA Dave Barakian, City of Palm Springs Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City Tom Boyd, City of Riverside Bill Brunet, City of Blythe Mike Gow, City of Hemet Mark Greenwood, City of Palm Desert Keith Haan, City of Calimesa Bruce Harry, City of Rancho Mirage Bill Hughes, City of Temecula George Johnson, County of Riverside Tim Jonasson, City of LaQuinta Jim Kinley, City of Murrieta Eldon Lee, City of Coachella Cis Leroy, SunLine Transit Wendy Li, Caltrans District 08 Amir Modarressi, City of Indio Habib Motlagh, Cities of Perris, San Jacinto, Canyon Lake Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley Kahono Oei, City of Banning Anne Palatino, RTA Dan Patneaude, City of Desert Hot Springs Juan Perez, County of Riverside Amad Qattan, City of Corona Joe Schenk, City of Norco Ken Seumalo, City of Lake Elsinore 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: October 18, 2004 LOCATION: Banning City Hall Civic Center Large Conference Room 99 East Ramsey Street Banning, CA In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact Riverside County Transportation Commission at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at (east 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. SELF -INTRODUCTION 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — September 20, 2004 4. 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.) 5. STP REHABILITATION CALL FOR PROJECTS (Attachment) 6. PROJECT STATUS REPORT TO COMMISSION (Attachment) 7. 2004 FSTIP/FTIP ADOPTION (Attachment) 8. TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT FUNDS ACTIVITIES — 6 MONTH EXTENSION REQUEST (Attachment) 9. CALTRANS LOCAL ASSISTANCE UPDATE Technical Advisory Committee Meeting October 18, 2004 Page 2 10. CETAP UPDATE 11. OCTOBER 13, 2004 COMMISSION HIGHLIGHTS 12. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS (Attachments) • 2005/06 STATE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL • BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT • ITS TRAINING 13. ADJOURNMENT (The next meeting will be November 15, 2004 in Riverside.) MINUTES TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Monday, September 20, 2004 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 Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA. 2. Self -Introductions Members Present: Others Present: Dave Barakian, City of Palm Springs Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City Tom Boyd, City of Riverside Bill Brunet, City of Blythe Mark Greenwood, City of Palm Desert Keith Haan, City of Calimesa Julee Heckermann, City of Hemet Bill Hughes, City of Temecula Tim Jonasson, City of LaQuinta George Johnson, County of Riverside Wendy Li, Caltrans District 08 Amir Modarressi, City of Indio Victor Monz, City of Coachella Habib Motlagh, Cities of Perris, San Jacinto, Canyon Lake Russ Napier, City of Murrieta Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley Kahono Oei, City of Banning Anne Palatino, City of Corona Dan Patneaude, City of Desert Hot Springs Juan Perez, County of Riverside Amad Qattan, City of Corona Ken Seumalo, City of Lake Elsinore Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells Cathy Bechtel, RCTC Shirley Gooding, RCTC Ken Lobeck, RCTC Shirley Medina, RCTC Technical Advisory Committee Meeting September 20, 2004 Page 2 Hazem Mobarek, W. Koo & Associates Nader Naquib, Caltrans Marie Petry, Caltrans Hideo Sugita, RCTC Stephanie Wiggins, RCTC Mike West, Urban Crossroads Marilyn Williams, RCTC 3. Approval of Minutes No objections. 4. Public Comments There were no public comments. 5. MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN - Stephanie Wiggins, RCTC, provided a self-explanatory Fact Sheet outlining the Southern California Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan. She announced that during the past 9 months, the 5 county transportation commissions (Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Orange Counties) have been meeting with SCAG and Caltrans to discuss a comprehensive goods movement action plan. An effort is being designed to prepare an action plan. The purpose of the action plan is to develop a complete strategy to maintain freight mobility throughout the region along with reducing the community impact. The fact sheet is self-explanatory. 6. RTA DESIGN GUIDELINES Anne Palatino, RTA, presented RTA's Power Point Design Guidelines, which formalizes a process that's been in place for sometime. It is a guide for planners, engineers, developers, and decision -makers and copies have been sent to the elected officials who sit on RTA's Board of Directors and to each City Manager in the RTA service area. The goal of the guidelines is to show where turnouts or staging areas should go. "Design Guidelines for Bus Transit" is available on RTA's website. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting September 20, 2004 Page 3 7. DEVELOPMENT OF STP REHABILITATION CALL FOR PROJECTS Shirley Medina, RCTC, provided a staff report and indicated that Craig Neustaedter, Amir Modarressi, Ned Ibrahim, Bill Bayne and Juan Perez were present at the most recent STP Rehab TAC Subcommittee meeting. She reminded the TAC that in January, 2004, the Commission approved a call for $15M of surface transportation program funds, specifically to fund rehabilitation projects in response to the fact that Proposition 42 funding was suspended, which left agencies with little or no funding options for road maintenance. She summarized her staff report and answered questions. Following extensive discussion, it was agreed to support the criteria recommendation and present it to the Commission in October, 2004. Eligibility criteria were modified to include: roadway rehabilitation, curb and gutter, sidewalks and loops as part of rehab project. (M/S/C Boyd/Greenwood to support staff as modified above.) 8. WESTERN COUNTY TUMF UPDATE Hideo Sugita, RCTC, stated that the TUMF regional arterial priority project recommendation that went forward to the Commission was endorsed. He requested 3 members of the TAC to form a sub -committee to identify the language that will go into the TUMF agreements. He stated. that he is hopeful of taking the committee's recommendation to the Commission in the October/November timeframe. Following are the volunteers: Tom Boyd, City of Riverside Bill Hughes, City of Temecula Habib Motlagh, Cities of Canyon Lake, Perris and San Jacinto Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley Juan Perez, County of Riverside Amad Qattan, City of Corona Marilyn Williams, RCTC, said that in developing an agreement, existing RCTC agreements will be used that have already been executed in some form. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting September 20, 2004 Page 4 9. 2004 STIP ADOPTION Shirley Medina stated that this item went to the Commission September 8, 2004 and highlighted that the CTC adopted the 2004 STIP on August 5, 2004 and that there is still no funding available. The CTC halted all allocations until after the November, 2004 elections. She highlighted the State Route 60 High Occupancy Lane project from Valley Way to Interstate 15 in that the project has been waiting for an allocation of $13 million and staff is reviewing other options to accomplish awarding that project. 10. AB 1012 "USE IT OR LOSE IT" CYCLE 5 Shirley Medina said that as of July 31, 2004 the three-year old balances (subject to reprogramming in December) are as follows: CMAQ $ 0 STP $ 139,149 TE $1,526,697 Caltrans currently has a TE project for $500,000 which will bring the TE amount to approximately $1M. Ms. Medina stated that an extension will be requested for the above balances. If the CTC approves the extension, the balance will need to be obligated by May, 2005 or the funds will be lost. Ms. Medina summarized her staff report, answered questions and stated that a call for projects for new TE funds (from TEA 21 Reauthorization) will be scheduled in 2005. 11. RTIP/FTIP UPDATE Ken Lobeck, RCTC, said that the 2002 RTIP will expire on October 4. Because of the complexity of the 2004 RTIP, there may be a two week lapse during which time projects are not allowed to be obligated. The 2004 RTIP should be approved in October. Once the 2004 RTIP is approved, SCAG will notify the Commissions of the amendment schedule. Mr. Lobeck will e-mail a schedule to all agencies once the amendments have been determined. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting September 20, 2004 Page 5 12. PROJECT STATUS REPORTING TO COMMISSION Shirley Medina provided a Milestone Status Update for Non or Partially Obligated Projects for CMAQ, DEMO, STPL, STIP, and TEA funded projects as of the July, 2004 update. It is a preliminary draft of what will be submitted to the Commission in November. Agencies should review their projects for accuracy. Ms. Medina indicated that the update will be e -mailed to TAC members who were not in attendance at today's meeting. It is critical to respond to the milestone reports as requested. They will be reported to the Commission at least twice a year, unless the Commission requests the report more frequently and we need to provide the Commission with the most recent information. STIP projects will be handled differently in that once the project has been allocated the milestones, e.g. award date, completion date will continue to be monitored. Ken Lobeck indicated that once a project is obligated, that project (or the obligated funds) will be removed from the list. 13. CETAP UPDATE Cathy Bechtel reminded the TAC of the 3 public meetings on the Mid -County Parkway and on the Riverside County to Orange County Corridor scheduled: Tuesday, September 21, Valley Wide Recreation, San Jacinto Wednesday, September 22, Val Verde School District, Perris Thursday, September 23, Eagle Glen Country Club at which both the Mid County Parkway and Riverside County to Orange County Corridors will be addressed. Regarding SR 79, public hearings will be held Wednesday, September 29 at Hemet Simpson Senior Center, Hemet and Wednesday, October 6, San Jacinto Unified School District 14. SEPTEMBER 8, 2004 COMMISSION HIGHLIGHTS The Commission Connection provided highlights for the September 8, 2004 Commission meeting. 15. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS There was no other business or announcements. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting September 20, 2004 Page 6 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Technical Advisory Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 A.M. The next meeting is scheduled for October 18, 2004, 10:00 A.M., Banning City Hall Civic Center, 99 East Ramsey Street, Banning, CA. Respectfully submitted, Shirley Me a Program Manager AGENDA ITEM 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: October 18, 2004 TO: FROM: Technical Advisory Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: Surface Transportation Program - $15 million CaII for Rehabilitation Projects At the September 27, 2004 Budget and Implementation Committee meeting, the Committee approved the criteria for the Surface Transportation Program (STP) $15 million Call for Rehabilitation Projects. This item will be placed on the consent calendar of the October 13, 2004 Commission agenda (attached) for final approval. At the October 18, 2004 TAC meeting, staff will distribute a draft Call for Projects for review and comment. The Call for Projects is planned to be released in November 2004. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 13, 2004 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: $15 Million Surface Transportation Program` Rehabilitation Projects (STP) Call For BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the criteria for the Surface Transportation Program (STP) Call for Rehabilitation Projects, and 2) Authorize staff to release the call for rehabilitation projects in November 2004. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On January 14, 2004 the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) approved the use of TEA 21 Reauthorization Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to replace approximately $40 million of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Regional Improvement Program (RIP). This action was in response to the Commissions' direction to backfill the STIP projects that were impacted by the state funding crisis. The recommendation also consisted of earmarking $15 million of TEA 21 Reauthorization STP funds specifically for rehabilitation projects. Previous STP programming (from ISTEA and TEA 21) consisted of funding rehabilitation projects for local agencies. This was discontinued as a result of the state funding crisis and the Commissions priority to backfill previously committed STIP projects. However, given the suspension of Proposition 42 funding, the local agencies' reliance on funding rehabilitation projects with STP funds was even greater. The RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) established a sub -committee that met in July and September to define the parameters and develop evaluation criteria for the upcoming call for projects. The TAC subcommittee recommended establishing two levels of criteria. Local agencies will be required to submit projects to RCTC that meet Tier I criteria as noted below. Projects meeting Tier criteria will be reviewed by RCTC for concurrence and then Tier II criteria will be applied, which is the distribution of the STP funds based on a combination of road miles and population for each local agency. STP Rehabilitation Criteria TIER I Criteria • Projects must be on the Federal -aid highway system (i.e. en any highways, including NHS and Interstate Highways that are not functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors) or on bridges (including bridges on public roads of all functional classifications). • Projects must be rehabilitation and/or consist of other maintenance needs within the roadway right-of-way (e.g. curb, gutter, loop detector replacement as a result of rehabilitation work, and sidewalk improvements including ADA requirements). • Funds must be programmed for construction. • Projects must be evaluated at the local level and only high priority rehabilitation projects are to be submitted (PMS score/factor or other qualified ranking system must be identified in submittal). • Local match (minimum of 11.47% programmed in construction) must be committed by local agency and a copy of the city council/county board minute action must be included in the submittal. TIER II Criteria Projects meeting the Tier I criteria will receive funding based on a combination of road miles and population. Target allocations for each agency are included in Attachment A. The criteria recommended for this call for projects meets the federal requirements for sub -allocating STP funds. Tier I criteria is based on a competitive evaluation of projects at the local level, which ensures high priority projects are funded throughout the County. Tier II criteria distributes the funds relative to the demand on the arterial system and ensures road rehabilitation/maintenance improvements are implemented throughout the countywide arterial system. RCTC encourages local agencies to spread the programming of rehabilitation funds over a three-year time period starting with fiscal year 2005/06. Given the project schedules provided by the local agencies, RCTC will use its discretion in project programming. Close monitoring of the status of projects will need to occur so that projects can be delivered as scheduled and programmed in the RTIP. RCTC staff will make every effort to advance projects if possible. It should be noted that the County continues to receive annual allocations for rural roads, as specified in TEA 21 legislation, in addition to the target allocation from this $15 million call for rehabilitation projects. Caltrans takes these rural funds off - the -top of the total Riverside County STP allocation. The amount is equivalent to pre-ISTEA levels, which is $1.2 million annually. Attachment: Agency Allocation Tier II Calculation DRAFT The Riverside County Transportation Commission Announces the Surface Transportation Program (STP) Call for Rehabilitation Projects November 2004 DATE: November 2004 TO: County of Riverside Riverside County Local Jurisdictions FROM: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: TEA 21 Reauthorization Surface Transportation Program — $15 million Call for Projects The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is announcing a Call for Projects to program $15 million of TEA 21 Reauthorization Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds. These funds will be awarded on a competitive basis at the local level, and the allocation amount for each agency will consist of a combination of population and road miles. STP funds will be programmed over three fiscal years, 2005/06 through 2007/08. RCTC will use its discretion in programming projects according to project schedules and funding availability. Local match must be a minimum of 11.47% as required by TEA 21. STP funding must be used for the construction phase of the rehabilitation project. Eligible rehabilitation projects may also include the following work: curb and gutter, loops damaged by rehabilitation, and sidewalks. For further questions or clarifications regarding this Call for Projects, please contact Shirley Medina, Program Manager, at (951) 787-7141. On behalf of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, we look forward to receiving your proposal. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Call for Projects Introduction 1 I.A. STP Program Overview ..1 I.B. Project Eligibility 1 I.C. Evaluation Criteria .1 I.D. Local Agency Match 1 I.E. Agency Allocation Targets ..2 I.F. Ca11 for Projects Schedule 2 Section II: Proposal Requirements ..3 II.A. Proposal Elements ..3 II.B. Proposal Submittal ..3 Attachments Attachment A: Agency Allocation Target Amounts .4 Exhibits Exhibit A: Project Information Form 5 Section I: Call for Projects Introduction I.A. STP PROGRAM OVERVIEW The Surface Transportation Program was first established as one of the primary fund sources under the federal transportation act of 1991 called the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). The act was re -authorized in 1997, which was renamed as the Transportation Equity Act for the 21St Century, (TEA -21). The next reauthorization of the federal transportation act is anticipated to occur in early 2005. STP funds can be used for a variety of transportation projects that are located on the federal -aid highway system. This Call for Projects sets aside $15 million for road rehabilitation projects. RCTC's objective of this Call for Rehabilitation Projects is to provide road rehabilitation/maintenance funds to agencies that are experiencing decreased revenues due to the state budget crisis, specifically Proposition 42 funds. I.B. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY Rehabilitation projects include reconstruction and asphalt overlays of roadways identified on the federal functional classification system. Rehabilitation projects may also include related work such as: sidewalks, curb and gutter, and loops damaged by rehabilitation. LC. PROJECT CRITERIA Evaluation criteria will be applied in two tiers. Tier I consists of each local agency conducting project evaluations using an evaluation methodology that would rank rehabilitation projects in priority order. The local agency will include with their project application the ranking methodology used and associated scores (e.g. PMS score/factor). RCTC staff will review the methodology and rankings for concurrence. Tier II consists of applying target allocation amounts for each agency. The agency allocation targets were developed using a combination of population and road miles. Agencies may identify one or more projects to be funded from their respective target allocation. STP funding will only be applied to the construction portion of the project. The intent is to fund projects ready for construction so that the funds can be obligated in a timely manner. I.D. LOCAL AGENCY MATCH The local match requirement for STP funds is 11.47%. Agencies must identify, at a minimum, 11.47% towards the construction phase of the project. Agency allocation targets equal 88.53%. I.E. AGENCY ALLOCATION TARGETS $15 million of Surface Transportation Program funds will be awarded under this Call for Projects. Allocation Targets have been developed using a combination of 2000 Census population figures and road miles reported on the California Highway Performance Monitoring System/Federal Functional Classification System (Attachment A). The population and road mile figures were averaged to determine the target allocation amounts for each agency. A lump sum for rehabilitation projects has been identified in the 2004 Federal Transportation Improvement Program/Regional Transportation Improvement Program in fiscal years 2005/06, 2006/07, and 2007/08. Agencies are encouraged to spread funding among these years. RCTC will program the projects according to project schedules and funding availability. RCTC will work with Caltrans and local agencies to advance projects if they are ready to proceed and funding is available. I.F. CALL FOR PROJECTS SCHEDULE As shown, the STP Rehabilitation Call for Projects commences on November 19, 2004 with RCTC project recommendations scheduled for March 9, 2005. Proposals are due by 5:00 p.m. on January 24, 2005. The schedule for the call for rehabilitation projects is as follows: CALL FOR PROJECTS TIMELINE DATE Release of Call for Projects Proposal Due by 5:00 pm Proposal Evaluation Period Technical Advisory Committee Review Recommendations to Plans & Programs Committee Recommendations to Commission November 19, 2004 January 24, 2005 January 25 — February 11, 2005 February 21, 2005 February 28, 2005 March 9, 2005 Section II: Proposal Requirements ILA PROPOSAL ELEMENTS Proposals must be submitted in accordance with the instructions outlined below and all requested information must be supplied. 1. Proposal Elements — all proposals must contain the following: a) Cover letter — Transmittal of the proposal must be accompanied by a cover letter affirming that the lead agency has approved the proposed project. b) Commitment of funding — Proposals must include a copy of an approved Resolution or Minute Action from the governing body of the lead agency that: 1) authorizes the proposed project; 2) commits the lead agency to the project implementation schedule reflected in the proposal; and 3) allocates the necessary local match funds and other funding necessary to complete the project. c) Project Information Form (Exhibit A) d) Ranking/Evaluation Methodology — A description of the methodology used to rank/evaluate projects must be included along with the project score(s) (e.g. PMS score/factor). e) Location Map — Provide map identifying project location (e.g. Thomas Bros. map, Map Quest, or the like) II.B. SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS 1. Proposal Submittal — All submittals should include one (1) original and two (2) copies (total of three) in a sealed envelope. The submittal should be unbound on white, 8 1/2" x 11" paper (including maps or illustrations). ALL PROPOSALS MUST BE RECEIVED BY RCTC NO LATER THAN 5:00 P.M. ON JANUARY 24, 2005. PROPOSALS SHOULD BE SENT TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention: Shirley Medina, Program Manager PO Box 12008 Riverside, California 92502-2208 Submittals can also be hand delivered to: Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention: Shirley Medina, Program Manager 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, California Please note that faxed or e -mailed proposals will not be accepted. For information regarding the preparation of submittals or any other questions related to this call for rehabilitation projects, please contact Shirley Medina or Ken Lobeck. Agency Target Allocations $15 Million STP Rehabilitation Call for Projects Agencies Agency Allocation Per Road Mile Agency Allocation Per 2000 Census ATTACHMENT A STP Agency Allocation Banning $ 185,575 $ 228,700 $ 207,138 138,611 $ 117,980 $ 128,296 Blythe '• w s '" •:�^h`'i 1.,{ . 0 , .113,1. „-1:4;-a . $ .•`r y$ y�_rry1. `. - .. _ • ,..:. , 28 t(,2 • s -r+• pa� �F J.} %` � i'^.j3" j. 1.''--r, a2 9 ' 1, 1 -r-: h 7� *Y+ {' rf'. .S.c: ;46.7 $ 50 737s, :1 , $ 197,862 1 ,11 i I » Can on Lake !:. l 11 i Coachella lr'r1,Y! $ 4,876 $ 175,158 � "`. ,.. (1 y 1 .. .. $ 96,597 $ 220,566 - J''c Desert Hot S • rin • s $ 230,168 $ 160,950 $ 195,559 I:I Indian Wells ')i. c $ 33,245 $ 37,039 - i' r $ 35142 Lake Elsinore $ 341,207 $ 280,784 $ 310 996 i. iLio? ... ,t. O , ,-2.-4 ..,,:v.;) i_ , ":_g.4• Fr2 :. Moreno Valle $ 1,368,353 $ 1,381,994 $ 1,375,174 i +L 3 I _ A uL%e 4<r . .. :A - 4:=).4,:l 1' .. - '11 .: 'f_1 Norco $ 191,249 $ 234,475 $ 212,862 Palm Springs $ 580,551 $ 415,498 $ 498,025 U.ts.:<_ . -. t • $ Rancho Mirage $ 186,395 $ 128,599 $ 157,497 �'^'�J ; • .,erstde ? ,t " ` �2 . �,1, ET �t � L• �• o :, �,x' '" xa� .� ±7�0 'r1�e i � _ , 29,588.^ San Jacinto $ 328,884. $ 230,806_ $ 279,845 '4- •''- ! E"L. j�'�',Tt -.• 4�z/ } S ;emec`uIa. � i �tt.N r j F } $ i7,4, l$ 1 1?x?�`4` ~tY } R t 1,f- 0 _ 09 .. _. Yy- .y SY: kt24J.r � t r$�--A.-r.w�s...�t4,177264 Unincorporated $ 5,821,845 $ 4,164,288 $ 4,993,067 Total $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 15,000,000 Exhibit A Project Information Form 6/10/04 iverside County ransportation Commission Riverside County Transportation Commission STP Rehabilitation Project Information Form Section A: Lead Agency 1 Lead Agency: 'I te 2 Address: 3 4 Contact Person: Title: Telephone: Fax: 5 Email Address: 6 If Joint Project, include;partner.>age:n:cy:name, contact person and telephone: Agency: Contact: Telephone: Section B: Proposed Project 7 Project Location 8 Project Limits 9 Agency Priority Rating (if submitting more than one project) Priority Rank # 10 Project Description: A. Describe the Existing Facility and the Proposed Infrastructure Improvements To Be Constructed. 6/10/04 Section C: Project Schedule Phase 11 Environmental Start (month/year) End (month/year) 12 Design (PS&E) Comments 13 14 Right of Way Construction Section D: Project Funding 16 Funding and Phase, STP and Local funds: STP Funds $ (000's) (for construction phase only) Environmental Design.(PS&E) Right of Way #"` €.;_:,'ya��:rTy{�;�-jy�. ;5'•:�,. •,.*`V1i^ ifsig f mismunm '3��wr'v �.J.Y.A.t'cy Kx�JG Local Match Funds $ (000's) (11.47% must be in construction phase) Other Funds S (000's) (if applicable) Construction TOTAL Funding AGENDA ITEM 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: October 18, 2004 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: Project Status Report to Commission At last month's meeting we distributed a draft project status report that denotes the expected obligation dates for CMAQ, STP, Demo, and STIP projects. This report will be presented to the Commission at their November 10, 2004 meeting. Local agencies need to review the estimated obligation dates for their respective projects. Please contact Ken Lobeck as soon as possible if any corrections are needed. It is important to provide realistic obligation dates on the milestone reports so that we can work with Caltrans on ensuring timely processing of project reviews and obligations. The Project Status Report will be reported to the Commission approximately twice a year. Pr oject Status Reports b i` ated CMAQ, DEMO, STPL, STIP, and TEA Funded Projects �.----�,,,, for � 9 Jul 2004 Reporting Cycle Y p 9 Y Pro ject Fund Type Appr oved Amount (000s) Obligated or STIP All ocated Am ount Programming Summary 2004/2005 Milestone Rep orts Estimated Obligation Dates as of: Comments Pr oject Phase Fiscal Year July 2004 November 2004 March 2005 City of Banning Ramsey Road, Construct 4 - Lane Extension DEMO DEMO DEMO 1,000 Eng R/W Cons 500 239 Total: 1,739 .11 City of Blythe U.S 95/Intake Blvd widening from 2 to 4 Lanes Install Signal STIP-RIP $ 50 $ - Eng 05/06 Jul -05 New project in 2004 STIP STIP-RIP $ 53 $ - Design 06/07 Jul -06 STIP-RIP $ 928 $ - Cons 07/08 Apr -07 Total: $ 1,031 $ - Lovekin Rehab/Reconst from So of 1-10 ramps to 14th St STIP-RIP $ 54 $ - Design 06/07 Jul -06 New pr oject in 2004 STIP STIP-RIP $ 760 $ - Cons 07/08 1 Jul -07 Total: $ 814 $ - Hobson Way Rehab/ Channelization TEA $ 202 $ - Cons 03/04 ` Dec -041 1 TE funds will be required to be amended in to the STIP if not obligated by 5/01/05. Total: $ 202 $ 05/06 05/06 06/07 Jul -05 Jul -05 Jul -06 Project received federal earmark in FY 03/04 City of Calimesa Calimesa Blvd Landscaping Improvements Caltrans On 1-10 at and Near Ramon Rd IC: Construct Bob Hope IC, Extend Bob Dr - Ramon to Varner, & Modify Ramon Rd IC TEA $ 56 TEA $ 236 Design Cons Total: $ 292 04/05 Dec -04 04/05 Oct -05 STIP-RIP $ 2,704 $ 2,704 STIP-RIP $ 1,024 $ 18,538 $ 850 $ 1,024 Eng R/W 03/04 In Nov 03 scope and schedule were revised. TE funds will be required to be amended into the STIP if not obligated by 5/01/05. 03/04 STIP-RIP Cons 06/07 Jul -06 STPL Total: $ 23,116 $ 3,728 Cons 06/07 Jul -06 Project delays due to environmental clearance, design changes, and r/w mitigation funding increases In June 2004, CVAG appro ved $11.7 million of TUMF and Meas A funds for additional right of way mitigation costs . Page 1 of 7 "° y Project 7.,3 a , ' { "::• Fund Type Approved Amount (000s) Obligated or STIP Allocated Amount Pr ogramming Summary 2004/2005 Milest one Rep orts Estimated Obligation Dates as of: Comments Project Phase — Fiscal Year July 2004 November 2004 March 2005 Caltrans - (con't) On SR60 - Jct 1-15 to Valley Way IC: Add 1 HOV and 1 Mixed Flow Lane NH $ 13,046 $ 13,046 Cons 04/05 1 Aug -04 1 Allocation of STIP funds was requested at August 2004 CTC meeting; however, approval is pending. $25 million of CMAQ funds were allocated in August 2004 . Total: $ 13,046 $ 13,046 On SR71/SR 91: Conduct Wildlife Movement Study for Mitigation Commitment DEMO $ 4,000 Eng 04/05 1 Nov -04 ST -CASH $ 1,000 $ - Eng 04/05 Nov -04 Total: $ 5,000 $ - On SR91 at Green River IC: Reconstruct/Replace IC Including Overcross Widening from 3 to 6 Lanes and WB Ramps Widening NH-STIP $ 16,183 Cons 07/08 04/05 STIP delay - construction moved from fy 05/06 to 07/08. In In May 2004, RCTC approved local funds to advance project to me et construction schedule in fy 05/06 . DEMO $ 53 $ - R/W DEMO $ 4,364 $ - Cons 06/07 TCRF $ 590 $ - Cons 06/07 Total: $ 21,190 $ - City of Cathedral City Ramon Road Corridor Improvements STPL $ 54 $ - Cons 05/06 Nov 05 Project is tied to other work in Ramon Corridor TE projects will will be required to be amended into the STIP reprogramming if not obligated by 5/01/05. TEA $ 312 $ Cons 05/06 N05 1 Total: $ 366 $ - — Widen Ramon Rd 2 to 6 Lanes - Date Palm to CL STIP-RIP $ 1,385 $ - Cons 1 06/07 9 Jul -051 1 STIP funds delay - may advance if funds are available. Total: $ 1,385 $ - Date Palm/White Water Bridge Restoration STPL $ 135 $ - Cons 05/06 1 Aug -051 Delay due to additional recommendations from Caltrans maintenance inspector . Total: $ 135 $ - City of Coac hella Dillon Road 4 Lane Grade Separation STIP-RIP $ 4,559 $ - Cons 1 08/09 1 Jun -061 L_ STIP delay - project reprogrammed from 06/07 to 08/09. Total: $ 4,559 $ - Dillon Road Widening 2 to 4 Lanes - SR86 to 1-10 STIP-RIP $ 2,117 $ - Cons J 07/08 ' pr -05L 1 STIP delay - project repr ogrammed fr om 06/07 to 07/08. Total: $ 2,117 $ - CVAG PM10 Engineering PM10 PM 10 Program Cons L PM10 Morongo Ck Fences PM10 FTL Fences CMAQ $ 314 Eng Cons 04/05 Feb -05 CMAQ $ 1,540 04/05 Sep -05 CMAQ $ 704 CMAQ $ 160 $ Total: $ 2,718 $ Cons Cons 04/05 04/05 Ma r -05 Feb -05 Page 2 of 7 ri. .o rr Fund Type Approved Amount (OOOs) Obligated or STIP Allocated Amount Pr ogramming Summary 2004/2005 Milestone Rep orts Estimated Obligati on Dates as of: C omments Project Phase Fiscal Year July I 2004 No vember 2004 March 2005 City of Corona Lincoln Ave/Pomona Rd Channelization Magnolia Ave IC Ramp Improvements City of Desert Ho t Springs Pierson Blvd Rehab and Mino Widening STPL $ 671 Total: $ 671 $ STPL $ 6,418 Total: $ 6,418 Cons 04/05 1 Oct -04 Cons I 04/05 9 Oct -04 Jan 04 ROTC reprogrammed STIP funds with STPL funds. Jan 04 RCTC reprogrammed STIP funds with STPL funds . STIP-RIP $ 627 Total: $ 627 Cons 05/06 Jul -05 Environmental delays. City of Hemet Construct Park -N -Ride at Harvard/Latham Ave CMAQ $ 207 $ - Cons 04/05 0 Nov -04 TCM project Total: $ 207 $ - Sye St Multi -Use Bicycle and Pedestrian Path TEA $ 520 $ - Cons , 04/05 J Jun -051_ Project is dependent on completion of another project. TE funds will be amended into STIP if not obligated by 5/05. Total: $ 520 $ - ____I City of Indian Wells Rubberized Pavement Overlay/Rehab on Cook St. STPL $ 84 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Jan -05 Total: $ 84 $ - City of Indio Widen/Reconstruct Jefferson IC - 2 to 6 Lanes City of Moreno Valley Modify/Reconstruct Nason St IC and Nason St from Elder to Fir DEMO $ 4,500 $ - Cons 04/05 Mar -06 Several environmental issues have delayed the project. STPL $ 2,200 $ - Cons 06/07 Mar -06 Total: $ 6,700 $ - Widen Perris Blvd 2 to 4 Lanes STIP-RIP $ 3,184 $ - Cons I 05/06 1 Oct -05 i Total: $ 3,184 $ - Reche Vista Dr Realignment STIP-RIP $ 1,967 $ - Cons 1 05/06 I Oct -06 Total: $ 1,967 $ - STIP-RIP $ 10,710 $ 10,710 Total Cons 07/08 V Jun -07 STIP funds delayed due to State budget crisis . Page 3 of 7 Pro je � 1 • Fund Type Approved Amount (000s) Obligated or STIP Allocated Pr ogramming Summary Fiscal 2004/2005 Milestone Rep orts Estimated Obligation Dates — as of: Comments Project July November March 5 Amount Phase Year 2004 2004 2005 Moreno Valle y (con 't) Rehab/Reconstruct Ironwood Ave STPL $ 1,111 $ - Cons 05/06 1 Nov -051 Total: $ 1,111 $ - Aqueduct Bike Trail TEA $ 688 $ - Cons 04/05 0 May -05 I TE funds will be amended into STIP if not obligated by 5/1/05. Total: $ 688 $ - City of Murrieta Widen Cal Oaks/Kalmia St IC 4 to 6 Lanes STIP-RIP $ 2,224 STIP-RIP $ 5,142 Total: $ 7,366 R/W 05/06 Cons 06/07 Dec -05 Jun -06 STIP funds delayed. City of No rco Signal Installation at Parkridge/Lincoln / First STPL $ 75 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Feb -051 Total: $ 75 $ - . Santa Ana River Trail Missing Link TEA $ 365 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Dec -041 1 No update received. TE funds will be amended into STIP if not obligated by 5/01/05. Total: $ 365 $ - City of Palm Desert Construct New Portola IC (4 Lanes) and Ramps at 1-10 City of Palm Sprin gs STPL $ 1,275 Total: $ 1,275 R/W 06/07 1 Feb -09 On 1-10 at Indian Ave: Widen Overcorssing from 2 to 6 Lanes and Ramps 1 to 2 Lanes STIP-RIP $ 2,000 $ - $ - R/W 06/07 Jan -05 STIP funds delayed - may advance if project is ready and funds are available. STIP-RIP $ 13,262 Cons 07/08 Feb -06 DEMO $ 1,260 $ - Cons 07/08 Feb -06 Total: $ 16,522 $ - Widen Gene Autry Trail from 2 to 6 Lanes from Salvia to South of UPRR Bridge STPL $ 190 $ - Eng 04/05 Nov -04 STIP funds delayed - In Jan 04 RCTC replaced STIP funds with STPL funds. STPL $ 1,540 $ - Cons 05/06 May -05 Total: $ 1,730 $ - Widen Indian Canyon Dr 2 to 6 Lanes - Garnet to UPRR Bridge STPL $ 146 Cons 05/06 1 Jun -061 . I Environmental delays. Federal Bridge funds delayed to fy 07/08. Total: $ 146 $ pc)a d of 7 Prole ' FT n 12 PI a Fund Type Approved Am ount (000s) Obligated or STIP Allocated Am ount Programming I Summary 2004/2005 Milestone Rep orts Estimated Obligation Dates C omments Project Fiscal as of: Phase Year July 2004 November 2004 March 2005 Palm Springs (con't) Widen Indian Cyn Dr 2 to 6 Lanes (Phase 1 - 2 to 4 Lanes) UPRR to Tramview STPL $ 263 Eng Cons 04/05 May -07 07/08 Nov -07 STPL Total: $ 1,936 $ 2,199 City of Perris Reconstruct Intersection at CMAQ $ 194 $ - Cons 04/05 Jan 05 Scope change including roundabout and IC ramp 4th St/Redlands Blvd ST -CASH $ 750 $ - Cons 04/05 I Jan 05 improvements by Caltrans have delayed project Including Roundabout, Minor Landscaping & R/W Total: $ 944 $ - Restoration of Historic Sante TEA $ 298 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Jan -05 Environmental delays, Sec 106. TE funds will be amended Fe Depot Total: $ 298 $ - _� into STIP if not obligated by 5/01/05 . STIP funds delayed - In Jan 04 RCTC replaced STIP funds with STPL funds . City of Riverside Construct Underpass at Jurupa Ave/UPRR CMAQ $ 3,100 $ - R/W 04/05 Oct -04 E Environmental document delays . CMAQ $ 3,171 $ - Cons 04/05 Jun -05 Total: $ 6,271 $ - SR91/Van Buren IC: Reconstruct Ramps, Widen Overcrossing 4 to 6 Lanes CMAQ $ 500 $ - R/W 04/05 Sep -05 STPL $ 1,681 $ - Cons 05/06 > Sep -05 Total: $ 2,181 $ - Rehab Various City Streets STPL $ 235 $ 5,625 Cons L 04/05 Jun -05 J Total: $ 235 $ 5,625 Widen Van Buren Blvd - STIP-RIP $ 3,465 $ - Cons 06/07 9 May -07 STIP funds delayed, Jackson to Santa Ana Riv Total: $ 3,465 $ - University Ave Streetscape Enhancements TEA $ 502 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Nov -051 Environmental delays, Sec 106. TE funds will be amended into STIP if not obligated by 5/01/05. Total: $ 502 $ - _� Riverside County SR60Nalley Way IC - Relocate/Construct Ramps CMAQ $ 2,670 Total: $ 2,670 Construct New Galena St Intarr ha nna at 1-15 DEMO $ 1,750 STPL $ 9,432 Cons 04/05 1 May -05 Cons Cons 05/06 15 Nov -04 04/05 Nov -04 Page of 7 Environmental and preliminary d esign delays. Environmental delays. Obligation of funds will occur over the next few months . 11111. ,1.11,1111W., u. ,- ,v Total: $ 11,182 Fund Approved Obligated or STIP Programming Summary 2004/2005 Milestone Reports Estimated Obligation Dates Proj Fir Type Amount (000s) Allocated Project Fiscal as of: November Comments July March fl gra Amount Phase Year 2004 2004 2005 Riverside Co unty (con't) Miles/Clinton Widening & Bridge Construction STIP $ 2,040 $ - Cons 1 05/06 1 May -06 Total: $ 2,040 $ - Rehab Defrain Blvd from Hobson Way to 6th St STIP-RIP I $ 810 $ - Cons 1 07/08 1 Jul -07L L Schedule being developed. Total: $ 810 $ - Signal Installation at SR74 and Sherman Ave STPL $ 305 $ - Cons 1 04/05 1 Nov -04L Total: $ 305 $ - Rehab Cajalco Road from Lake Matthews to Kirpatrick STPL $ 761 $ - Cons I 04/05 Jan -05 I Total: $ 761 $ - Monterey Ave from Varner Rd to Ramon Rd - Rehab STPL $ 425 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Nov -041 I Total: $ 425 $ - Rimon Rd from Miguelito to 1000 Palms - Rehab STPL $ 1,000 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Nov-04� 1 Total: $ 1,000 $ - Ramon Rd from Varner Rd to UPRR Bridge - Rehab STPL $ 512 $ - Cons 04/05 1 Nov -0 A1 I Total: $ 512 $ - Varner Rd from Ramon Rd to E. Harry Oliver Tr - Rehab STPL $ 550 $ - Cons 1 04/05 Nov -04 Total: $ 550 $ - SR79 from Hunter to Domenigoni Pkwy (1st Phase Widening 2 to 4 lanes) STPL $ 1,000 $ - Eng 04/05 Jan -05 STIP funds delayed . Jan 04 RCTC replaced STIP funds with STPL funds. STPL $ 1,012 $ - Eng 05/06 Jan -05 STPL $ 676 $ - R/W 05/06 Apr -06 STPL $ 1,300 $ - R/W 06/07 Apr -06 STPL $ 16,857 $ - Cons 07/08 Aug -07 Total: $ 20,845 $ - Prepare PA&ED Alignment DEMO 1 $ 1,502 $ - R/W 04/05 1 Jan -051 Alternatives -South of Domenigoni Pkwy to Gilman Total: $ 1,502 $ - Construct Corona North Main STIP-ITIP $ 1,000 $ - Design 05/06 Sep -05 STIP (IIP funds) delay - construction reprogrammed from fy STIP-ITIP $ 9,500 $ - Cons 08/09 Nov -07 05/06 to 08/09. Parking Structure Total: $ 10,500 $ - Page 6 of 7 Obligated Programming 2004/2005 Milestone Rep orts Fund Appr oved or STIP Summary Estimated Obligation Dates Proje Amount as of: Comments z :- Type 000s ( ) Allocated Amount Project Phase Fiscal Year July No vember March 2004 2004 2005 RCTC (con't) Regional Rideshare Program STIP-RIP $ 400 $ - Cons 05/06 May -05 STIP-RIP $ 300 $ - Cons 06/07 May -06 STIP-RIP $ 400 $ - Cons 07/08 May -07 STIP-RIP Total: $ 120 $ 1,220 $ - $ - Cons 08/09 May -08 SR91 HOV Lanes - Mary St to Jct SR91/60/215 STIP-RIP $ 13,070 $ - Design 05/06 1 Jul -051 Eng and design currently programmed, Funding for construction anticipated from 2006 & 2008 STIP cycles . Total: $ 13,070 $ - SEA45 -Planning, Programming, and Monitoring STIP-RIP $ 170 $ - Eng 04/05 Aug -04 Allocation requested FY 04/05 in August, STIP funds not available until lat er in FY . FY 05/06 funding includes CETAP work. STIP-RIP $ 953 $ - Eng 05/06 Aug -05 STIP-RIP $ 105 $ - Eng 06/07 Aug -06 STIP-RIP $ 500 Eng 07/08 Aug -07 STIP-RIP $ 500 $ - Eng 08/09 Aug -08 Total: $ 2,228 $ - Perris Valley Line STPL $ 500 $ - Eng 04/05 1 Apr -05 Total: $ 500 $ - SCRRA Purchase Expansion Rolling Stock STIP-ITIP $ 12,000 $ - Cons 07/08 1.._ STIP (IIP) delay - construction reprogrammed from FY 05/06 to 07/08. Procurement process initiated in May 04. Total: $ 12,000 $ - City of Temecula Pavement Rehab and Reconstruction Lump Sum STPL $ 906 $ - Cons 04/05 Jan -05 FY 06/07 funds may be advanced if project(s) is ready and funds are available. STPL $ 1,814 $ - Cons 06/07 Total: $ 2,720 Murrieta Creek Multi -Purpose Trail TEA $ 886 $ - Cons 04/05 Mar -05 Additio nal required environmental studies have delayed project. TE funds may be subject to reprogramming by CTC if not obligated by 5/01/05. Total: $ 886 $ - Page 7 of 7 AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: October 18, 2004 Technical Advisory Committee TO: FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: 2004 FSTIP Approval Letter The attached letter is the approval of the 2004 Federal._ State Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which includes approval of the 2004 SCAG Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). FHWA's letter specifies that the approval is conditional and that further reviews are forthcoming. The conditions applied to the approval mostly refer to unresolved issues with certifying the financial constraint requirement. Caltrans will continue to work on resolving financial constraint issues with the STIP, SHOPP, and HBRR funding programs. Further clarification of the approval letter is being sought as regions begin the process of amending their respective RTIPs. The California Federal Program Group (CFPG) will be discussing the approval letter at their October 12, 2004 meeting and this item will also be discussed at the October 27, 2004 Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPA) meeting. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA DIVISION 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 4-100 Sacramento, CA. 95814 October 4, 2004 IN REPLY REFER TO HDA-CA File #: 740 Document #: 45808 Mr. Randall Iwasaki, Acting Director California Department of Transportation 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Attention: Federal Resources Office, Room 3500 For Ross A. Chittenden, Transportation Programming Dear Mr. Iwasaki: SUBJECT: California 2005-2007 Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program We have completed our review of the State of California's 2005-2007 Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (FSTIP) and statewide planning certification submitted by the California Department of Transportation (Department) to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) by letter dated September 10, 2004. We have also completed our review of the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) 2005-2007 Interim Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) submitted by the Department for inclusion in the 2005-2007 FSTIP by letter dated September 23, 2004. The Statewide Transportation Improvement Program approval provisions in section 450.220 of title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR) require the State to submit the entire proposed FSTIP concurrently to the FTA and the FHWA at least every two years for approval. Once approved by the FTA and FHWA, California's 2005-2007 FSTIP will supersede the State's 2002 FSTIP that was approved by FHWA and FTA on October 4, 2002, including any subsequent amendments to the 2002 FSTIP. California's proposed 2005-2007 FSTIP incorporates by reference those projects listed in the 2005-2007 Federal Transportation Improvement Programs (FTIPs), including the SBCAG Interim FTIP, that have been adopted by California's metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), approved by the Governor, and subsequently proposed for inclusion in the 2005-2007 FSTIP by the Department. As currently proposed, the 2005-2007 FSTIP excludes programming for all projects from the Tahoe Metropolitan Planning Organization planning areas, as well as programming for those projects in the Sacramento Metropolitan 1 -Hour Ozone Non -attainment area within the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) planning region. Those projects proposed in the SACOG planning region that are within the Sutter -Yuba ozone non - attainment area are included by reference in the proposed 2005-2007 FSTIP. At the Department's request, the projects in the SCAG region listed in the Department's September 30, 2004 and SCAG's September 29, 2004 letter that were previously obligated or received prior State funding commitments are excluded from the FSTIP approval. Finally, the submitted 2 FSTIP includes the required project listing information for proposed transportation projects in California that are outside the planning area boundaries of the designated metropolitan planning organizations. Based on our review of the information provided in the State's 2005-2007 FSTIP submittals, including the financial constraint information and documentation to support the Statewide planning certification, we are approving California's 2005-2007 FSTIP subject to the following conditions and limitations: 1. The Department will provide the FHWA and the FTA with a further explanation and documentation of the methodology used to prepare the 2005-2007 FSTIP financial plan and related financial constraint demonstration. • 2. Pending submission of the final financial plan information by the Department, and an adequate opportunity for the FHWA and the FTA to review the final information: a. Any project that is listed in the FSTIP with funding proposed from the State's SHOPP or STIP programs, or proposed for funding with FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) funds is approved through April 1, 2005. b. No FSTIP amendments (either formal or administrative) should be proposed or approved that would add, delete or otherwise modify any project that is listed in the FSTIP with funding proposed from the State's SHOPP or STIP programs, or proposed for funding with FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP). c. If an amendment to an FTIP and/or the FSTIP is required based on the outcome of the FHWA/FTA review of the final SHOPP/STIP and HBRR financial documentation, the proposed FSTIP amendment shall be submitted to FHWA/FTA by the Department before April 1, 2005. 3. Proposed FSTIP project listings for the FTA 5311 Non -urbanized Area Formula Program are approved for the following Metropolitan planning regions: BCAG, COFCG, KCOG, KINGS, MCAG, MTC SANDAG, SJCOG and SBCAG. We are withholding approval for FTA 5311 Prograni.projects in the non -metropolitan areas and following MPO regions in California pending submission of acceptable financial constraint documentation by the Department: AMBAG, MCTC, SACOG, SLOCOG, SHASTA, SCAG, STANCOG, and TCAG. 4. Projects listed in the FSTIP that are proposed for funding outside the Program's triennial element (2005-2007) are accepted for information only. There may be additional comments/conditions that require corrective action by the Department and/or MPO's once FHWA/FTA have completed all of our reviews related to the FSTIP approval. 3 The FHWA and the FTA have reviewed the FSTIP development process and related planning processes in order to evaluate the extent to which the proposed projects in the FSTIP are based on a planning process that substantially meets the requirements of title 23 U.S.C., the Federal Transit Act, and the statewide and metropolitan planning regulations codified in part 450 of title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR part 450). Based on our review of the State and MPO self -certifications and related information and documentation submitted with the FSTIP, as well as the on -going involvement of FHWA and FTA staff in the State and metropolitan transportation planning processes and activities, including Federal certification of transportation management areas (TMAs) within California, we find that California's proposed 2005-2007 FSTIP was developed through a process that is in substantial compliance with the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135 and 49 U.S.C. Sections 5303-5305. This joint FTA/FHWA Planning Finding is being made in conjunction with the 2005-2007 FSTIP approval subject to the conditions: 1. We request the Department provide written responses to the corrective actions and planning process recommendations cited in the joint FHWA/FTA approval letter for the 2002-2005 FSTIP dated October 4, 2002. 2. There may be additional comments/conditions that require corrective action by the Department or MPO's once FHWA/FTA have completed all of our reviews related to the Statewide Planning Finding. As a follow-up to the corrective action cited in our previous Statewide Planning Finding regarding the timely approval of the Statewide Transportation Plan, we have received the Department's September 3, 2004, letter requesting the date of delivery of the California Transportation Plan (CTP) 2025 be postponed to December 31, 2004. Based on the information provided, we understand that the Department has transmitted the Statewide Plan to the Governor's office where it is currently awaiting final approval. Based on the Department's efforts to secure approval of the CTP by the Governor, we approve the request to postpone delivery of approved Plan from September 1, 2004, to December 31, 2004. Sincerely, /s/Leslie T. Rogers Leslie T. Rogers Regional Administrator Federal Transit Administration Whobbs: /s/K. Sue Kiser (for) Gene K. Fong Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 4 cc: EPA, Region IX ARB Caltrans: Federal Resources Local Programs Transportation Programming Transportation Planning Bureau of Indian Affairs, Kanue Patel 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825 All California MPOs (18) FTA, R. Sukys FHWA: LA Metro Office, G. Balmir, E. Poka CFLHD, J. McCullough NV Division, R. Bellard A ENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: October 18, 2004 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: AB 1012 Use It or Lose It — Cycle 5 6 -month Extension Request for Activities Funds Transportation Enhancement As indicated at last month's TAC meeting,, we will need to request a 6 -month extension for obligating our 3 -year old balance for Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) funds. The balance reported in the August 31, 2004 Apportionment Status Report is $1,484,697. Under AB 1012, these funds are subject to reprogramming by the California Transportation Commission in December 2004 or January 2005. However, a provision in the legislation allows agencies to request a 6 -month time extension. If the balance is not obligated after the 6 - months have expired, the CTC will reprogram the funds to a state project. The attached draft letter identifies the projects that are scheduled to be obligated over the next few months. If all projects are obligated as indicated (over $3 million), we will more than exceed the target balance of $1.4 million. Given that two large projects are expected to be obligated (Temecula's and Moreno Valley's) it is crucial that every project is obligated in the event that one or both of these projects cannot be obligated. Further, projects that are not obligated by May 2005 will be required to be amended into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). TEA projects that are amended into the STIP must undergo the same process for allocating projects as STIP projects (additional steps in allocating funds and time restrictions). We urge agencies to notify RCTC of any potential delays with the obligation schedules listed on the extension request form (attached). The extension request will be sent to Caltrans next week. REGIONAL TEA FUNDS REQUEST FOR AB 1012 TIME EXTENSION Dra October 18, 2004 Ms. Wendy Li District Local Assistance Engineer Caltrans, Division of Local Assistance 464 West Fourth Street, 6th Floor San Bemardinom, CA 92401-1400 Subject: Request for AB 1012 Time Extension for Transportation Enhancement Activities Funds — Cycle 5 Dear Wendy: We request that the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approve a 6 -month time extension for obligation of Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) funds for the projects listed below. It is our understanding that the CTC will consider this request at either their December 2004 or January 2005 meeting. Please forward this request to the appropriate staff at Caltrans Headquarters and CTC. Per the 8/31/04 Apportionment Status Report, the balance of TEA Cycle 5 is $1,484,697. Projects that are scheduled to be obligated over the next few months are as follows: Agency Project Phase Amount Estimated Obligation Riverside Historic Victoria Parkway Restoration Con $ 511,571 October 2004 Blythe Hobsonway Pedestrian Improvements Con $ 201,571 December 2004 Calimesa Calimesa Blvd Landscaping PS&E $ 56.000 December 2004 Norco Santa Ana Regional Trail Con $ 364.174 December 2004 Perris Restoration of Historic Santa Fe Depot Con $ 297.518 December 2004 Temecula Murrieta Creek Multi -purpose Tail Con $ 885,511 March 2005 Moreno Valley Aqueduct Bike Trail Con $ 892,776 May 2005 Total $3,209,121 All but one project will be ready to obligate construction funds within the next few months. These projects have required extensive environmental studies and reviews (including Section 106 studies) that required coordination with other agencies, (e.g. flood control, Santa Ana River Conservancy, Fish and Wildlife, flood control districts, etc.). In addition, Caltrans District 08 Office of Local Assistance lost three key staff members over the last year, which has caused additional delays with project approvals. This Request for AB 1012 Time Extension form has been prepared in accordance with CTC Resolution G-01-30 dated October 4, 2001. I certify that information provided in this document is accurate and correct. I understand that if the required information has not been provided, this form will be retumed and the request may be delayed. Please advise us as soon as the time extension has been approved. You may direct any questions to Shirley Medina at (951) 787-7141 Signature: Title: Program Manager Date: October 2004 Agency/Commission: Riverside County Transportation Commission F. Regional Transportation Planning Agency/County Transportation Commission Concurrence Concurred Signature: Title: Program Manager Date: October 2004 Agency/Commission: Riverside County Transportation Commission G. Caltrans District Local Assistance Engineer Acceptance I have reviewed the information submitted on the Request for AB 1012 Time Extension form and agree it is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CTC Resolution G-01-30 dated October 4, 2001. Signature: Title: AGENDA ITEM 9 A presentation will be made but there is no attachment to the agenda for item 9. AGENDA ITEM 10 A presentation will be made but there is no attachment to the agenda for item 10. AGENDA ITEM 11 A presentation will be made but there is no attachment to the agenda for item 11. AG NDA ITEM 12 Dear Executive Directors of Transportation Agencies and Community Based Organizations, "Safe Routes to School" and "Bicycle Transportation Account" are two funding programs that may be of interest to your organization. The Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program funds local agency projects that improve and enhance the safety of pedestrian and bicycle facilities used by students traveling to and from schools. SR2S projects will be solicited for fiscal year 2005-06 following the release of the 2004-05 cycle plan and after the revision of the Program Guidelines and Application Form. At that time, notices will be mailed to all local agencies in California. The Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funds local agency projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters. Local agencies must have an approved Bicycle Transportation Plan to participate in the BTA program. Applications for the 2005/2006 fiscal year are due to Caltrans district offices by February 1, 2005. Cities and counties are the eligible applicants for both programs. We encourage local agency officials to solicit input from various stakeholders, community based organizations, and tribal governments when developing project applications. If you are interested in becoming involved with the development of a project, please contact your city or county governments to find out if they are currently preparing an application in your area. If not, you may want to discuss ideas with them and develop an application for this, or future, program funding cycles. The guidelines, application forms, contact information for both programs are available on the State of California Department of Transportation Division of Local Assistance website at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/. ITS Colleagues, "Do more with less!" That's a phrase we hear a lot today. One way tp do that is to "work smarter" -- and that requires even stronger professional skills. Responding to that challenge, we will have an expanded ITS training program over the next three months, sponsored by several organizations. It consists of introductory and advanced courses across a range of topics: - Systems Engineering for ITS, - ITS Architecture (Intro and Advanced), - ITS Standards (Intro), - Caltrans ITS Procedures, and - ITS Project Management. The attached brochure lists the courses available, with dates and locations plus hotlinks to get course descriptions and to register. Please take special note of one new course, "Managing High -Tech Projects in Transportation." This freshly -updated course will be offered ONE TIME ONLY in Southern California, on November 2, under the auspices of ITS America, CAATS, and USDOT. I took this course last year, and I believe that it offers solid, practical value to ITS professionals at all levels. If you or your colleagues have any ITS project management responsibilities -- especially if the projects are federally funded -- I urge you to attend this class. This special, 1 -day class will fill up soon, so please act quickly. See item 3-E on the attached brochure, or click on the link below to go directly to the course announcement. am sending this ADVANCED notice to recipients of FHWA and FTA funding for ITS projects, to ensure that you have the first opportunity to attend. The "broadcast" announcement will go out tomorrow (and you might get a second copy of this). If questions arise regarding any of these courses, or if you have a problem registering, please call or email me. Also, please remember to forward this announcement to all of your ITS colleagues. - Jesse < <ITS Training in SoCal (Fall 2004).doc> > Direct link to Project Management course announcement: http://www.itsa.org/ITSNEWS.NSF/4e0650bef6193b3e852562350056a3a7 /61141 ced22f403b385256f23004d2015?OpenDocument Lawrence Jesse Glazer ITS Engineer FHWA/FTA Metro Office 888 S. Figueroa St. - #1850 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 202-3955 Fax: (213) 202-3961 Email: Jesse.Glazer@fhwa.dot.gov