Loading...
07 July 18, 2005 Technical advisory committeeRecords • TIME: DATE: LOCATION: TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITT; MEETING AGENDA* 10:00 A.M. July 18, 2005 72824 Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA Conference Room A, 3' Floor *By request, agenda and minutes may be available in alternative format; i.e. large print, tape. COMMITTEE MEMBERS Ahmad Ansari, City of Perris Dave Barakian, City of Palm Springs Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City Tom Boyd, City of Riverside Bill Brunet, City of Blythe Chris Gallanes, RTA Mike Gow, City of Hemet Mark Greenwood, City of Palm Desert 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 Wendy Li, Ca!trans District 8 Eunice Lovi, SunLine Transit Amir Modarressi, City of Indio Habib Motlagh, Cities of Canyon Lake, Perris and San Jacinto Les Nelson, PVVTA Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley Kahono Oei, City of Banning Dan Patneaude, City of Desert Hot Springs Juan Perez, County of Riverside Amad Qattan, City of Corona Ken Seumalo, City of Calimesa Ruthanne Taylor Berger, WRCOG Bill Thompson, City of Norco Allyn Waggle, CVAG Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells John Wilder, City of Beaumont City of Lake Elsinore Cathy Bechtel, Division Head, Planning 11.36.2 • • !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: July 18, 2005 LOCATION: Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA Conference Room A, 3`d Floor 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, p/ease contact Riverside County Transportation Commission at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. SELF -INTRODUCTION 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — June 20, 2005 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. RTP MODELING (Presentation by SCAG) 6. UPDATED TUMF MODEL AGREEMENT (Attachment) 7. CLOSE OUT OF TEA 21 TE PROGRAM/STATUS OF UNOBLIGATED TE PROJECTS (Attachment) Technical Advisory Committee Meeting July 18, 2005 Page 2 8. 2005 TE CALL (Attachment) 9. STIP UPDATE (Attachment) 10. STATE/FEDERAL LEGISLATION (Oral Presentation) 11. LOCAL ASSISTANCE REPORT (Oral Presentation) 12. CETAP UPDATE (Oral Presentation) 13. RTIP/FTIP AND RTP UPDATE (OralPresentation) 14. JULY 13, 2005 COMMISSION HIGHLIGHTS (Oral Presentation) 15. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ITS REGIONAL ARCHITECTURE WEBSITE (Attachment) 16. ADJOURNMENT (The next meeting will be August 15, 2005, 10:00 A.M. in Banning.) MINUTES TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Monday, June 20, 2005 1. Call to Order The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was called to order at 10:05 A.M., at Banning City Hall Civic Center, 99 East Ramsey Street, Banning, CA. 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 Ryan Duarte, City of Desert Hot Springs Mike Gow, City of Hemet Mark Greenwood, City of Palm Desert Bruce Harry, City of Rancho Mirage Bill Hughes, City of Temecula Tim Jonasson, City of LaQuinta Eldon Lee, City of Coachella Eunice Lovi, SunLine Mike McCoy, RTA Amir Modarressi, City of Indio Bob Moehling, City of Lake Elsinore Russ Napier, City of Murrieta Nader Naguib, Ca!trans Craig Neustaedter, City of Moreno Valley Kahono Oei, City of Banning Juan Perez, County of Riverside Amad Qattan, City of Corona Ken Seumalo, City of £alimesa Bill Thompson, City of Norco Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells John Wilder, City of Beaumont Cathy Bechtel, RCTC Bill Clapper, NAI Consulting, City of Cathedral City J. D. Douglas, Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc. Shirley Gooding, RCTC Technical Advisory Committee Meeting June 20, 2005 Page 2 Ken Lobeck, RCTC Anne Mayer, RCTC Randy Viegas, City of Rancho Mirage Stephanie Wiggins, RCTC 3. Approval of Minutes Regarding agenda item number 7 (Draft 2005 Transportation Enhancements (TE) Call for Projects) the motion should read as follows: MlSIC _ (Neustaedter/Perez) for a minimum of $350,000: and a cap of $1.5 million per project for a total submittal of 3 projects per local agency or 4 per, Supervisory District. Eunice Lovi, SunLine Transit Agency, pointed out that the Members Present list indicates an error in the spelling of her last name. It should read "Lovi. 4. Public Comments There were no public comments. 5. RAIL CROSSING PRIORITY PRELIMINARY LIST Stephanie Wiggins, RCTC, corrected the title of agenda item number 5. It should be "Grade Crossing Priority Update." She reminded the TAC that in coordination with the TAC, the priority list of at -grade crossings on the main line for grade separation was developed in March, 2001 and RCTC is in the process of updating the priority list based upon population growth, freight train traffic, etc. As part of the update, RCTC provided the TAC's input on the ,evaluation criteria that's been adopted by the Commission. With the adoption of the evaluation criteria by the Commission, staff was directed for this update to provide a preliminary analysis of the ranking prior to receiving local jurisdiction input. The local jurisdiction input is one of the key criteria factors included in the evaluation of the priority listing. She introduced J. D. Douglas of Kimley-Horn & Associates, who reviewed the preliminary analysis and results. She requested that the agencies receive the input and go back to their local jurisdictions and provide rankings to RCTC by July 28, 2005 to allow Kimley-Horn to complete the analysis to present it to the TAC at the August meeting prior to going to the Commission. • { Technical Advisory Committee Meeting June 20, 2005 Page 3 Mr. Douglas provided the Evaluation Criteria for ROTC Rail Crossing Priority Study as well as initial results for several criteria. He reviewed the factors involved in the study and responded to _questions. He stated that the weighting is the same for each criterion. Ms. Wiggins clarified that safety and delay are weighted 20% and the other criteria 10%. Mr. Douglas' intent is to have the TAC members look at the preliminary list, making sure that all the crossings are there and if there is something that is unclear the item should be brought to Stephanie Wiggins' attention in the next week (swiggins@rctc.org). Ms. Wiggins indicated that the "next steps are to return to the August TAC meeting with the updated list followed by submitting it to the Commission at its September meeting. 2004 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE Ken Lobeck, RCTC, provided a copy of his PowerPoint presentation. He pointed out that the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is the key document used to receive federal funding. SCAG is responsible for developing the RTP and it is updated every 3 years. RCTC is acting as the central clearing house to coordinate RTP project inclusion for a single countywide submission to SCAG. Mr. Lobeck indicated that the 2004 RTP expires June 2007 and SCAG has initiated early development of the 2007 RTP primarily because of concerns over financial constraint. He stated that the project lists he sent out recently were from the 2004 RTP with some proposed changes. He. requested that the lists be compared with the long range project plans up to 2030. The 2007 RTP planning years will be 2007 to 2030. A key part of the early development is the review of projects. There are 4 categories in the RTP. The first 2 categories are the Baseline and Tier I1, which also comprises the RTIP. The third category is the "plan" section, which includes projects with a committed funding source outside of the RTIP years. The plan section divides projects into arterials, grade separations, and mainline improvement projects. The mainline subsection contains interchanges, auxiliary lanes, ITS, transit, and other projects that do not fit in the arterial or grade separations section. He stated that the updated plan section project lists are due to RCTC by July 28, 2005. Transit agencies will be handled differently. Those lists will be sent out mid -July with a due date in August. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting June 20, 2005 Page 4 In response toa question regarding the inclusion of TUMF projects, Mr. Lobeck stated. that TUMF projects are already included. He further stated that SCAG wants additional capacity enhancing projects that are locally funded as well. Cathy Bechtel, RCTC, said she will ask for further clarification from SCAG. TAC members raised questions concerning if the impact of the additional projects would increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT). TAC members ,requested clarification of the impact of a VMT increase on the conformity finding for the RTP. 7. STIP UPDATE Anne Mayer, RCTC, reported that at last week's STIP workshop, it was discussed what can be expected for FY 2005/06, which will also set the course for where we are headed in the next STIP cycle. Currently, the assumption is being made that the .Governor's revised budget proposals will be passed by the Legislature with respect to transportation funding. If the. Legislature makes any changes, revisions may be made. Last week it was announced that the California Transportation Commission (CTC) expects to have $4 Billion .for allocations in 2005/06. The key priority is to get people back to work, primarily focusing on the construction industry. FY 2005/06 looks good but 2006/07 is uncertain as it is dependent upon Proposition 42. Of the $4 Billion, $1.8 Billion is going to the State Highway Operations and Protection Program(SHOPP) to make sure the state highway system is maintained. $1.384 Billion will be allocated to the STIP but if tribal gaming doesn't come through this year, $584 Million will be subtracted, leaving only $800 Million for the STIP for FY 2005/06. $968 Million is proposed to be allocated to the Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) with $290 Million dependent upon tribal gaming. The Commissioners have developed guiding principals for allocations for FY 2005/06 to provide economic stimulus, provide for maximum use of TIP funds and federal funds, maintain existing STIP and SHOPP programming and allocation processes and act in accordance with statutory priorities in safety operations. Priorities for FY 2005/06 are going to be all SHOPP projects, all projects eligible for funding from federal TE funds, all projects eligible for funding from the public transportation account, annual STIP allocations for planning, programming and monitoring (PPM), required STIP mitigation projects for construction projects already allocated and projects to match HBRR funds:. Those are all top priorities in the first funding categories which will get funding in FY 2005/06. • • Technical Advisory Committee Meeting r June 20, 2005 Page 5 In the second category, up to $500 Million will be allocated first come, first served for projects in the following categories: interregional road system, highway railroad grade separation projects,- projects to increase the capacity of state highways and local roads by adding new lanes, operational improvement including improvements to interchanges, intersections, signals, turn lanes, etc. It is projected that the $500 Million will be spent by September. It is likely that projects coming in July or August will have funds allocated. In response to a question regarding grade separation, she stated that if a grade separation project is already programmed in FY 2005/06 it can be considered an allocation. The lowest category would be local rehab and reconstruction, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, landscaping, soundwalls and signage enhancement in the FY 2005/06 cycle, unless it is a TE project. She . also said that it is expected that these priority guidelines will continue in the 2006 STIP development. The Fund Estimate has been developed and there are basically two tiers (or two scenarios) in the 2006 STIP. The first Tier I is a conservative estimate. It assumes a minimum level of programming or de -programming, no loan repayments. Tier II assumes everything comes in — tribal gaming, Proposition 42 is preserved and protected, loans are repaid, high level of federal funding. Tier II is good. The difference between Tier I and Tier II is $5.7 Billion. The challenge is going to be how much to program because when it comes time to do the 2006 STIP, we will not have all the answers yet. She further announced that in July.the CTC will probably adopt performance. measures to help guide funding decisions, e.g., decreasing travel time, increasing reliability, increasing accessibility. There are a variety of different measures being included. The Commission is going to start measuring not only at a system level but at a project level. 2006 STIP guidelines as well. as the fund estimate should be adopted by August. The STIP submittal is December, 2005. Currently Riverside County and Orange County both have about $166 Million of unprogrammed reserve. In response to a question regarding a summary of the STIP projects list, Cathy Bechtel said that staff wilt provide a listing before the next meeting. Technical Advisory Committee Meeting June 20, 2005 Page 6 8. PROJECT MILESTONE REPORTS Ken Lobeck provided a Revised Project Milestone Report for Programmatic Categorical Exempt (PCE) Projects. He stated that the updates to Project Milestone Reports will be sent out by June 23 and are due back toRCTC by July 8. There are over 100 projects. Milestone reports from the new 2005 STPL Rehab Call will be included. 9. LOCAL ASSISTANCE REPORT Nader Naguib, Ca!trans, reported that the Division of Local Assistance hired 3 environmental planners, which will reduce the time to review environmental documents. A local assistance project database is 80% developed. Local Assistance will be able to sign off on CE's, EA's and PCE's. He provided 'a partial listing of projects and invited the TAC members to take their respective lists from it. He also stated that Damage Assessment forms are due August 25. 10. CETAP UPDATE Cathy Bechtel stated that they are in the middle of technical studies for the Mid; County Parkway. They are looking at the possibility of adding a new alternative west of 1-215, a more southern alignment that would completely avoid the MWD and multi species reserve area. There are issues regarding alignment close to the Lake Mathews Dam and the Lake Perris Dam. Meetings with Dam Safety are being scheduled. Regarding the Riverside County to Orange County Corridor, the project is still on schedule. July 15 will be the next Policy Committee Meeting at which time it is expected that the number of alternatives will shrink to 3 different strategies. The next PDT for that corridor is July 6. On the Moreno Valley to San Bernardino CETAP Corridor, it is still on hold awaiting San Bernardino County's decisions. 11. JULY 13, 2005 COMMISSION HIGHLIGHTS Ms.- Bechtel reported that the Commission meeting was combined with the retreat. The Commission approved the RCTC budget and formed 2 Ad Hoc Committees to look at the possibility of developing a request for proposal for a public/private partnership. Many large engineering firms have approached the Commission with the possibility of fronting the funds in light of the state • Technical Advisory Committee Meeting June 20, 2005 Page 7 budget and the delay of the federal transportation bill. The plan would involve the engineering firms using their funding until 2009 when the new Measure "A" funding is available or until the state budget picture turns around. The Commission is interested so that projects can be delivered sooner. The Ad Hoc Committee will be formed assuming that the Governor's budget includes the public/private partnership changes are approved. If that happens, an RFP should be sent out early 2006. The second Ad Hoc Committee is to look at developing an RFP for economic development. This is basically a western county project. In the new Measure, there was $40 Million identified that would be used as an economic development incentive. 12. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS In response to a question regarding the TE Call for Projects, Ms. Bechtel stated that Shirley Medina is working on it and it is expected that it will go out the end of this month. Mark Greenwood, City of Palm Desert, requested that facts and figures be reflected in the minutes to include deadlines. An announcement will be sent to the TAC if the July meeting is cancelled. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Technical Advisory Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 1 1:30 A.M.. The next meeting is scheduled for July 18, 2005, 10:00 A.M., Riverside County Transportation Commission, Riverside County Regional Complex, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, Conference Room A, 3`d Floor. Respectfully submitted, Shirley Med Program Manager AGENDA ITEM 5 A presentation will be made but there is no attachment to the agenda for item 5. AGENDA ITEM 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 18, 2005 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Programs and Public Affairs THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Division Head — Programming and Administration SUBJECT: Updated TUMF Model Agreement STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the updated TUMF Model Agreement for future use by local jurisdictions in the preparation of agreements pursuant to RCTC's TUMF Regional Arterial Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its February 9, 2005 meeting, the Commission took action to approve a model agreement between RCTC and local jurisdictions setting forth the terms and conditions for reimbursement of TUMF Regional Arterial funds awarded by the Commission. The Commission has approved 24 local jurisdiction projects totaling $46.7 million in funding and established a five-year program of projects. RCTC staff has been working with two local jurisdictions, City of Temecula and City of San Jacinto, to develop and process three TUMF agreements using the model agreement format originally transmitted to TAC members on February 11, 2005. Based on the joint staff discussions, several administrative changes and additions have been made to the Model Agreement to assist local_ jurisdictions in preparing their agreements. The changes relate to right-of-way acquisition language under Section 3.2.1.1 and Exhibits A and B. RCTC Legal Counsel has determined that the changes are not substantive and therefore do not require approval by the Commission. Attached to this agenda item is the updated TUMF model agreement. Local jurisdictions are asked to use this version when preparing draft TUMF Regional Arterial agreements in the future. Agreement No. 00-000 • • AGREEMENT FOR THE FUNDING OF TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY OF I [NOTE: If using this model agreement for a County project, globally replace the term "City" with "County".] 1. Parties and Date. 1.1 This Agreement is executed and entered into this day of , 2004, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("RCTC") and [Name of local jurisdiction] ("City"). RCTC and City are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the "Parties". 2. Recitals. 2.1 RCTC is a county transportation commission created and existing pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5. 2.2 On November 5, 2002 the voters of Riverside County approved Measure A authorizing the collection of a one-half percent (1/2%) retail transactions and use tax to fund transportation programs and improvements within the County of Riverside, and adopting the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan (the "Plan"). 2.3 The Plan requires cities and the County in western Riverside County to participate in a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program to be eligible to receive Local Streets and Roads funds generated by Measure A. 2.4 The Plan further requires that the first $400 million in revenues from TUMF be made available to RCTC to fund equally the Regional Arterial System and development of New Transportation Corridors identified through the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP). To receive TUMF funding, CETAP corridors must also be designated on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials as established in the October 2002 TUMF Nexus Study, amended in March 2004, and as may be amended in the future. 2.5 The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) has been selected to administer the overall TUMF Program pursuant to applicable state laws including Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with RCTC dated July 10, 2003 regarding the allocation of the $400 million in TUMF Regional Funds to be made available to RCTC for programming. 2.6 RCTC issued to the cities and the County a "Call for Projects" to be funded with TUMF Regional funds, and in response to the Project Nomination Forms, took action on September 1 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreemenffinal Agreement 7-05.doc • • • • 8, 2004 to adopt a five year TUMF Regional Arterial Program which identifies the projects and the maximum funding commitments awarded for specific phases of work. RCTC's TUMF Regional Arterial Program may be updated from time to time. 2.7 RCTC intends, by this Agreement, to distribute TUMF Regional Funds, subject to the conditions provided herein, and to participate in the joint development of the Project, as defined herein. 3. Terms. 3.1 Description of Work. This Agreement is intended to distribute TUMF Regional Funds to the City for [insert general description of work], ("the Work"). The Work, including a timetable and a detailed scope of work, is more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and, pursuant to Section 3.15 below, is subject to modification as requested by the City and approved by RCTC. The Work shall be consistent with one or more of the defined RCTC Call for Projects phases detailed herein as follows: 1) PA&ED — Project Approvals & Environmental Document 2) PS&E — Plans, Specifications and Estimates 3) R/W — Right of Way Acquisition and Utility Relocation 4) CONS — Construction The Work phase(s) funded pursuant to this Agreement shall be consistent with the City's Call for Projects Nomination Form submitted to the RCTC ("the Project") and as approved by the RCTC on September 8, 2004. The Project is more fully described in Exhibit `B" attached hereto. It is understood and agreed that the City shall expend TUMF Regional Funds only as set forth in this Agreement and only for the Work. To this end, any use of funds provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of RCTC. 3.2 RCTC Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to distribute to the City, on the terms and conditions set forth herein, a sum not to exceed [Insert dollars in text form] ($ [Insert dollars in number form]), to be used exclusively for reimbursing the City for eligible Work expenses as described herein ("Funding Amount"). The City acknowledges and agrees that the Funding Amount may be less than the actual cost of the Work, and that RCTC shall not contribute TUMF Regional Funds in excess of the maximum TUMF share for the phase/project identified in Appendix F of the TUMF Nexus Study. 3.2.1 Eligible Work Costs. The total Work costs ("Total Work Cost") may include the following items, provided that such items are included in the scope of work attached as Exhibit "A": (1) City and/or consultant costs associated with direct Work coordination and support; (2) funds expended in preparation of preliminary engineering studies; (3) funds expended for preparation of environmental review documentation for the Work; (4) all costs associated with right-of-way acquisition, including right-of-way engineering, appraisal, acquisition, legal costs for condemnation procedures if authorized by the City, and costs of reviewing appraisals and offers for property acquisition; (5) costs reasonably incurred if condemnation proceeds; (6) costs incurred in the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates by City or consultants; (7) City costs associated 2 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF \2005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc • ,with bidding, advertising and awarding of the Work contracts; (8) construction costs, including change orders to construction contract approved by the City; and (9) construction management, field inspection and material testing costs. 3.2.1.1 Right -of -Way Acquisition. The Parties acknowledge that in order to protect the City's ability to deliver the Project in a timely cost effective manner, the City may purchase parcels of property in advance of the completion of the Project's final design (PS&E). The Parties acknowledge that acquired parcels or remnants purchased in advance of final design may not ultimately be required for the Project. Upon completion of the Project's final design, the City shall provide RCTC with a detailed list of all parcels purchased by the City for which it received TUMF Regional Funds pursuant to this Agreement. The City shall identify any parcels or remnants thereof which were acquired using TUMF Regional Funds and are not required for construction of the Project. A preliminary list shall be submitted to the RCTC 30 days before the issuance of bid documents for construction of the Project and a final list shall be submitted to the RCTC no later than 30 days following the recording of the Certificated of Completion for the Project. 3.2.1.2 Valuation and Repayment of Any Property Remnants. Upon receipt of the City's final list, RCTC shall meet with the City for the purpose of identifying any parcel or reasonably usable remnant of a parcel for which TUMF Regional Funds were expended that may reasonably be developed for other use by the City and/or sold. The Parties shall confer in good faith to agree upon the disposition of such parcels and remnant parcels and their fair market value as of a date agreed to by the parties, but in no event later than the date of completion of the Project. "Fair Market Value" shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.320 and "remnant" shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.410. Nothing herein shall preclude the City and RCTC from beginning the meetings earlier in the event both parties agree that the parcel or remnant will not be used for the Project. 3.2.1.3 Reimbursement for Unused Parcels. Following recordation of the Certificate of Completion for the Project, the City shall be responsible for promptly reimbursing RCTC for any TUMF Regional Funds which were used to acquire parcels which are completely unused in the Project. If City funds other than TUMF were used to purchase the Parcel, those local funds shall be considered in determining the reimbursement amount. 3.2.1.4 Appeal to Commission. In the event of a disagreement between the Parties regarding the reimbursement of TUMF Regional Funds under this section 3.2.1, either party may appeal, in writing, to the RCTC Board. The RCTC Board's determination regarding excess right-of-way and value pursuant to this section shall be final. 3.2.2 Ineligible Work Costs. The Total Work Cost shall not include the following items which shall be borne solely by the City without reimbursement: (1) City administrative costs; (2) City costs attributed to the preparation of invoices, billings and payments; (3) any City fees attributed to the processing of the Work; and (4) expenses for items of work not included within the scope of work in Exhibit "A". 3 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF 12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doe • 3.2.3 Increases in Work Funding. The Funding Amount may, in RCTC's sole discretion, be augmented with additional TUMF Regional Funds if the TUMF Nexus Study is amended to increase the maximum eligible TUMF share for the Work. Any such increase in the Funding Amount must be approved in writing by RCTC's Executive Director. In no case shall the amount of TUMF Regional Funds allocated to the City exceed the then -current maximum eligible TUMF share for the Work. No such increased funding shall be expended to pay for any Work already completed. For purposes of this Agreement, the Work or any portion thereof shall be deemed complete upon its acceptance by RCTC's Executive Director. 3.2.4 No Funding for Temporary Improvements. Only segments or components of ' the Work that are intended to form part of or be integrated into the Work may be funded by TUMF Regional Funds. No improvement which is temporary in nature, including but not limited to temporary roads, curbs, or drainage facilities, shall be funded with TUMF Regional Funds except as needed for staged construction of the Work. 3.3 City's Funding Obligation to Complete the Work. In the event that the TUMF Regional Funds allocated to the Work represent less than the total cost of the Work, the City shall provide such additional funds as may be required to complete the Work as described in Exhibit "A". 3.3.1 City's Obligation to Repay TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC. In the event that: (i) the City, for any reason, determines not to proceed with or complete the Work; or (ii) the i Work is not timely completed, subject to any extension of time granted by RCTC pursuant to Section 3.15; the City agrees that any TUMF Regional Funds that were distributed to the City for the Work 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. The City acknowledges and agrees that RCTC shall have the right to withhold any Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues due the City, in an amount not to exceed the total of the funds distributed to the City, and/or initiate legal action to compel repayment, if the City fails to repay RCTC within a reasonable time period not to exceed 180 days from receipt of written notification from RCTC that repayment is required. (Note: For Phase 1— PA&ED agreements, delete this Repayment Section.) 3.3.2 City's Local Match Contribution. The City shall provide at least dollars ($ ) of funding toward the Work, as shown in Exhibit "A" and as called out in the City's Project Nomination Form submitted to RCTC in response to its Call for Projects. (Note: Include this Section only if the City identified Local Match funds in its Project Nomination Form.) 3.4 Work Responsibilities of the City. The City shall be responsible for the following aspects of the Work, in compliance with state and federal law provided that such items are included in the Project scope of work attached as Exhibit "A": (i) development and approval of plans, specifications and engineer's estimate (PS&E), environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and obtaining all permits required by impacted agencies prior to commencement of the Work ; (ii) all aspects of bidding, awarding, and administration of the contracts for the Work; (iii) all construction management of any construction activities undertaken in connection with the Work, including survey 4 V _Users\Preprint\TUMF\2005 Model Agreemenainal Agreement 7-05.doe • • • and material testing; and (iv) development of a budget for the Work prior to award of any contract for the Work, taking into consideration available funding, including TUMF Regional Funds. 3.5 Term/Notice of Completion. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date first herein above written until: (i) the date RCTC formally accepts the Work as complete, pursuant to Section 3.2.3; (ii) termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 3.9; or (iii) the City has fully satisfied its obligations under this Agreement, (Note: If this Agreement is for Phase I work do not include the following text) "including full repayment of TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC as provided herein". All applicable indemnification provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect following the termination of this Agreement. 3.6 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. The City hereby designates [insert name and title], or his or her designee, as the City's representative to ROTC. The City's representative shall have the authority to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Agreement and shall coordinate all activities of the Work under the City's responsibility. The City shall work closely and cooperate fully with RCTC's representative and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction over or an interest in the Work. 3.7 Expenditure of Funds by City Prior to Execution of Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent or preclude the City from expending funds on the Work prior to the execution of the Agreement, or from being reimbursed by RCTC for such expenditures. However, the City understands and acknowledges that any expenditure of funds on the Work prior to the execution of the Agreement is made at the City's sole risk, and that some expenditures by the City may not be eligible for reimbursement under this Agreement. 3.8 Review of Services. The City shall allow RCTC's Representative to inspect or review the progress of the Work at any reasonable time in order to determine whether the terms of this Agreement are being met. V:Users\Preprint \TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc 3.9 Termination. • • • 3.9.1 Notice. Either RCTC or City 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 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. 3.9.2 Effect of Termination. In the event that the City terminates this Agreement, the City shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all TUMF Regional Funds provided to the City under this Agreement. In the event that RCTC terminates this Agreement, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the City TUMF Regional Funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from the City regarding the Work at the time of the notice of termination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 3.14.2, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information. This Agreement shall terminate upon receipt by the non -terminating Party of the amounts due it under this Section 3.9.2. 3.9.3 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies ofthe Parties provided in this Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement. 3.10 Prevailing Wages. The City and any other person or entity hired to perform services on the Work are alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1770 et sec ., which would require the payment of prevailing wages were the services or any portion thereof determined to be a public work, as defined therein. The City shall ensure compliance with these prevailing wage requirements by any person or entity hired to perform the Work. The City shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, employees, consultants, and agents from any claim or liability, including without limitation attorneys, fees, arising from its failure or alleged failure to comply with California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq. 3.11 Progress Reports. RCTC may request the City to provide RCTC with progress reports concerning the status of the Work. 3.12 Indemnification. 3.12.1 City Responsibilities. In addition to the indemnification required under Section 3.10, the City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or liability arising from or connected with all activities governed by this Agreement including all design and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City or its subcontractors. The City will reimburse RCTC for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by RCTC, in defending against claims ultimately determined to be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City. 3.12.2 RCTC Responsibilities. RCTC agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or V:Users\Preprint\rUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05: oe • • • liability arising from or connected with all activities govemed by this Agreement including all design and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of ROTC or its sub -consultants. RCTC will reimburse the City for any expenditures, including reasonable attomeys' fees, incurred by the City, in defending against claims ultimately determined to be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of ROTC. 3.12.3 Effect of Acceptance. The City shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and the coordination of any services provided to complete the Work. RCTC's review, acceptance or funding of any services performed by the City or any other person or entity under this agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights RCTC may hold under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of this Agreement. Further, the City shall be and remain liable to RCTC, in accordance with applicable law, for all damages to RCTC caused by the City's negligent performance of this Agreement or supervision of any services provided to complete the Work. 3.13 Insurance. The City shall require, at a minimum, all persons or entities hired to perform the Work to obtain, and require their subcontractors to obtain, insurance of the types and in the amounts described below and satisfactory to the City and RCTC. Such insurance shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement, or until completion of the Work, whichever occurs last. 3.13.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. Occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to the Work or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall: 3.13.1.1 Name RCTC and City, and their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants as insured with respect to performance of the services on the Work and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of coverage or the protection afforded to these insured; 3.13.1.2 Be primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance programs covering RCTC and City, and/or their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants; and 3.13.1.3 Contain standard separation of insured provisions. 3.13.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance. Business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. 3.13.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Errors and omissions liability insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 Professional liability insurance shall only be required of design or engineering professionals. 7 V:UsersTreprint\TUM112005 Model Ageemenainal Agreement 7-05.doc • 3.13.4 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000.00 each accident. 3.14 Procedures for Distribution of TUMF Regional Funds to City. 3.14.1 Initial Payment by the City. The City shall be responsible for initial payment of all the Work costs as they are incurred. Following payment of such Work costs, the City shall submit invoices to RCTC requesting reimbursement of eligible Work costs. Each invoice shall be accompanied by detailed contractor invoices, or other demands for payment addressed to the City, and documents evidencing the City's payment of the invoices or demands for payment. The City shall submit invoices not more often than monthly and not less often than quarterly. 3.14.2 Review and Reimbursement by RCTC. Upon receipt of an invoice from the City, RCTC may request additional documentation or explanation of the Work costs for which reimbursement is sought. Undisputed amounts shall be paid by RCTC to the City within thirty (30) days. In the event that RCTC disputes the eligibility of the City for reimbursement of all or a portion of an invoiced amount, the Parties shall meet and confer in an attempt to resolve the dispute. If the meet and confer process is unsuccessful in resolving the dispute, the City may appeal RCTC's decision as to the eligibility of one or more invoices to RCTC's Executive Director. The City may appeal the decision of the Executive Director to the full RCTC Board, the decision of which shall be final. Additional details concerning the procedure for the City's submittal of invoices to RCTC and RCTC's consideration and payment of submitted invoices are set forth in Exhibit "C", attached hereto. 3.14.3 Funding Amount/Adjustment. If a post Work audit or review indicates that RCTC has provided reimbursement to the City in an amount in excess of the maximum eligible TUMF share of the Work, as determined by the TUMF Nexus Study, or has provided reimbursement of ineligible Work costs, the City shall reimburse RCTC for the excess or ineligible payments within 30 days of notification by RCTC. 3.15 Work Amendments. Changes to the characteristics of the Work, including the deadline for Work completion, and any responsibilities of the City or RCTC may be requested in writing by the City and are subject to the approval of RCTC's Representative, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, provided that extensions of time for completion of the Work shall be approved in the sole discretion of RCTC's Representative. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require or allow completion of the Work without full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; "CEQA") and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4231 et seg.), but the necessity of compliance with CEQA and NEPA shall not justify, excuse, or permit a delay in completion of the Work. 3.16 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of the City or RCTC, during the term of his or her service with the City 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. 8 V:UsersTreprinl\TUMf12005 Model Agreementlina1 Agreement 7-05.doc • • • 3.17 Limited Scope of Duties. RCTC's and the City's duties and obligations under this Agreement are limited to those described herein. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the safety of any Work performed at a job site. In addition, RCTC shall not be liable for any action of City or its contractors relating to the condemnation of property undertaken by City or construction related to the Work. 3.18 Books and Records. Each party shall maintain complete, accurate, and clearly identifiable records with respect to costs incurred for the Work under this Agreement. They shall make available for examination by the other party, its authorized agents, officers or employees any and all ledgers and books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or related to the expenditures and disbursements charged to the other party pursuant to this disbursements charged to the other party pursuant to this Agreement. Further, each , party shall furnish to the other party, its agents or employees such other evidence or information as they may require with respect to any such expense or disbursement charged by them. All such information shall be retained by the Parties for at least three (3) years following termination of this Agreement, and they shall have access to such information during the three-year period for the purposes of examination or audit. 3.19 Equal Opportunity Employment. The Parties represent that they are equal opportunity employers and they shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant of reemployment because of race, religion, color, national origin, 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. 3.20 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed with the laws of the State of California. 3.21 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 3.22 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.23 Headings. Article and Section Headings, paragraph captions or marginal headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall have no effect in the construction or interpretation of any provision herein. 3.24 Notification. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Agreement or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: (Name of local jurisdiction) RCTC (address) Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon, 3rd Floor Mailing address: P.O. Box 12008 9 V.UsersTreprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doe '1 ATTN: Riverside, CA 92501 • • ATTN: Executive Director Any notice so given shall be considered served on the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred regardless of the method of service. 3.25 Conflicting Provisions. In the event that provisions of any attached appendices or exhibits conflict in any way with the provisions set forth in this Agreement, the language, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall control the actions and obligations of the Parties and the interpretation of the Parties' understanding conceming the performance of the Services. 3.26 Contract Amendment. In the event that the Parties determine that the provisions of this Agreement should be altered, the Parties may execute a contract amendment to add any provision to this Agreement, or delete or amend any provision of this Agreement. All such contract amendments must be in the form of a written instrument signed by the original signatories to this Agreement, or their successors or designees. 3.27 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous agreements or understandings. 3.28 Validity of Agreement. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement. 3.29 Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by the City or any contractor shall be retained on an independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of ROTC. Any personnel performing services on the Work shall at all times be under the exclusive direction and control of the City or contractor, whichever is applicable. The City or contractor shall pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of services on the Work and as required by law. The City or consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance. to V:Users\Preprint\TUMF2005 Model Agreement\Final Agrec„,ent 7-05.doc • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY (Name of local jurisdiction) TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: (Name, Title) (Name, Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: By: Best, Best & Krieger Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation Commission lI V:Users\Preprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc (Name, Title) EXHIBIT "A" • SCOPE OF WORK, FUNDING AND TIMETABLE SCOPE OF WORK: Detail the Phase(s) of Work to be performed under this Agreement. (Note: Detail the full Project description on Exhibit B.) Provide specific information regarding the Work to be performed, identify the reaches of the work and include a general location map and site map, if applicable. For guidance in developing this Exhibit, please refer to Exhibit A-1. FUNDING: Identify TUMF, local, state and/or federal funding for each Phase of Work. Delete those Phase which are not part of this Agreement. PHASE TUMF LOCAL TOTAL PA&ED $ $_ $ PS&E $ $ RIGHT OF WAY $ $_ $ CONSTRUCTION $ $ $ TOTAL $ , $ TIMETABLE: Provide at a minimum the beginning and ending dates for each phase of work including major milestones within a phase. 12 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF \2005 Model Agreemenainal Agreement 7-05.doc EXHIBIT "A-1" • GUIDANCE for COMPLETION OF EXHIBIT A The following list of items generally identified as eligible or ineligible for TUMF Regional Funding reimbursement are consistent with those used to develop the costs for improvements in the first NEXUS Study prepared by WRCOG. In general, all improvements, with the exception of sidewalks, must be within the curbs of the roadway and extend no further than the curb returns at intersections. In addition, all improvements on or connecting to interstate and state route facilities shall be consistent with Caltrans Highway Design Manual standards. Items which are typically considered eligible include: • Asphalt concrete pavement, up to 16' per lane, to accomplish a 12' travel lane and ancillary treatment and appropriate base materials • Concrete curb and gutter and associated drainage — paved roadway shoulders and swale may be used as a substitute • Class II Bike Lanes • Paved and painted 14' median, may be used as a dual left turn lanes • Traffic signals at intersections with state highways and major arterials which are also on the TUMF Network • Pavement striping and roadway signing as required. Items which are not typically considered eligible include: • Portland Cement pavement or other aesthetic pavement types (except at intersections) • Major rehabilitation or overlay of existing pavement in adjacent roadway lanes • Raised Medians • Parking Lanes • Landscaping • Lighting • Class I Bike Lanes 13 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc • EXHIBIT `B" "PROJECT"DESCRIPTION, FUNDING AND MILESTONES PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Detail the full Project including the work identified in Exhibit A of this Agreement. The Project description should be consistent with the local jurisdiction's Project Nomination Form originally submitted in response to RCTC's Call for Projects. Provide specific information regarding the Work to be performed, identify the reaches of the work and include a general location map and site map. FUNDING: Identify TUMF, local, state and/or federal funding for each Phase of Work. PHASE TUMF LOCAL TOTAL PA&ED $ $_, $ , PS&E $ $ $ RIGHT OF WAY $ $ , $ CONSTRUCTION $ $ $ ,_ TOTAL $ $ $ , MILESTONES — provide a list of phases and milestones for completion of the improvements and estimated dates when each is expected to be accomplished. 14 V:Users\Prepruri\TUMF\2005 Model Agreement\Final Agreewcot 7-05.doc EXIIIBIT "C" • • PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL, CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT OF INVOICES 1. RCTC recommends that the City incorporate Exhibit "C-1" into its contracts with any subcontractors to establish a standard method for preparation of invoices by contractors to the City and ultimately to RCTC for reimbursement of City contractor costs. 2. Each month the City shall submit an invoice for eligible Work costs incurred during the preceding month. The original invoice shall be submitted to RCTC's Executive Director with a copy to RCTC's Project Coordinator. Each invoice shall be accompanied by a cover letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit "C-2". 3. Each invoice shall include documentation from each contractor used by the City for the { Work, listing labor costs, subcontractor costs, and other expenses. Each invoice shall also include a monthly progress report and spreadsheets showing the hours or amounts expended by each contractor or consultant for the month and for the entire Work to date. Samples of acceptable task level documentation and progress reports are attached as Exhibits "C-4" and "C-5". All documentation from the City's contractors should be accompanied by a cover letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit "C-3". If the City is seeking reimbursement for direct expenses incurred by City staff for eligible Work costs, the City shall detail the same level of information for its labor and any expenses in the same level of detail as required of contractors pursuant to Exhibit "C" and its attachments. 5. Charges for each task and milestone listed in Exhibit "A" shall be listed separately in the invoice. 6. Each invoice shall include a certification signed by the City Representative or his or her designee which reads as follows: "I hereby certify that the hours and salary rates submitted for reimbursement in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the consultants or contractors listed. Signed Title Date Invoice No. 15 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreemenainal Agreement 7-05.doc RCTC will pay the City within 30 days after receipt by the Commission of an invoice. If RCTC disputes any portion of an invoice, payment for that portion will be withheld, without interest, pending resolution of the dispute, but the uncontested balance will be paid. The final payment under this Agreement will be made only after: (i) the City has obtained a Release and Certificate of Final Payment from each contractor or consultant used on theWork; (ii) the City has executed a Release and Certificate of Final Payment; and (iii) the City has provided copies of each such Release to RCTC. 16 V:Users\PreprMt\"IUMF\Z005 Model AgreementWinal Agreement 7-05.doc AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: July 18, 2005 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: Close-out of TEA 21 TE Program/Status of Unobligated TE Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the TAC to: 1) Receive and file. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: When RCTC originally programmed the last Transportation Enhancement (TE) projects in 2000, we included the apportionment years : of 1999/00 through 2003/04. Caltrans allowed the regions to: include the 2003/04 apportionment year in this call even though it was outside of TEA 21 (TEA 21 included FFY's 1997/98 - 2002/03). Subsequently during the development of the 2004 STIP, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) restructured the TEA program and incorporated it into the STIP starting with FFY 2003/04. The "new" TE funds in the 2004 STIP include FFY 2003/04 through 2008/09 apportionments. RCTC programmed the TE apportionments for these years in the 2004 STIP as. a reserve in fiscal years 2006/07 through 2008/09 totaling $14.6 million. TEA 21 "Old" TE Program - The "old" TEA 21 TE funds are being closed out and will expire once the Obligational Authority (OA) for TEA 21 TE funds is depleted. Riverside County's OA should be depleted by the end of this month. All unobligated TE funds/projects will be programmed in the 2006 STIP beginning in state fiscal year 2006/07, depending on their respective project schedule. The TEA 21 unobligated TE projects are: Agency Project TE Funds (0 Status Calimesa Calimesa landscaping $236 PE was obligated Feb 05 Cathedral City Ramon Road lands $312 Funds are for constr Project is starting design. Hemet State Street B Path $516 Norco Santa Ana Regiona $364 Total $912 The table below identifies the TE Apportionments received under TEA 21,. the Obligation Rate, and the Obligation Target. As a reminder, federal apportionments/appropriations are also accompanied by Obligation Authority. An Obligation Rate is established each year by Congress. Generally, California receives 90% of the funds apportioned in the transportation bill. Therefore, the Obligation Target is the amount we can obligate per year regardless of the apportionment amount. However, we have the opportunity to obligate more than our target after June 1st of each year due to other regions in the state that cannot deliver/obligate enough projects to meet their respective Obligation Target. Federal Fiscal Year TE Apportionmen Obligation Rate Obligation Target 2002/03 $ 2,154,921 103.00% $ 2,219,569 2001/02 $ 2,236,223 89.50% $ 2,001,420 2000/01 $ 2,143,707 87.70% $ 1,880,031 1999/00 $ 2,076,000 86.70% $ 1,799,892 1998/99 $ 1,912,000 87.30% $ 1,669,176 1997/98 $ 1,573,000 89.10% $ 1,401,543 Total $14,250,772 Avg. 90.55% $13,°191,199 • AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 18, 2005 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: 2005 Transportation Enhancements (TE) Call for Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the TAC to: 1) Receive and file. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2005 TE Call for Projects was released on July 29, 2005. The Call for Projects was emailed to all TAC members as well as mailed. It can also be accessed on the RCTC website at (www.rctc.org). As a reminder, those projects approved for funding will be incorporated into the 2006 STIP in fiscal years 2006/07, .2007/08, and 2008/09 respective to project scheduling and fund availability per year. In the 2004 STIP, a reserve of $14.6 million is programmed as follows: FY 2006/07 - $7.6 M FY 2007/08 - $4.4 M FY 2008/09 - $2.6 M Depending on the 2006 STIP Fund Estimate, the above programming amounts may be revised. As previously reported, TE projects that were not obligated from TEA 21 will use the above apportionments since there is overlap (FY 2003/04) with the "Old" TE program (TEA 21) and the "New" TE program (SAFETEA). Therefore, the available funding level for the 2005 TE Call is $13.7 million. $14.648 New TE projects $ .912 Unobligated Old TE projects $13.736 Available for 2005 TE Call The 2005 TE Call for Projects submittal deadline is 5:00 pm, August, 29, 2005. Please contact Shirley Medina or Ken Lobeck with any questions regarding the Call for Projects. , AGENDA ITEM 9 r 1)1 II I , II I RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 18, 2005 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager SUBJECT: STIP Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the TAC to: 2) Receive and file. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 2004 STIP — As reported at the June20, 2005 TAC meeting, funding has been identified for the STIP in the Governor's budget that was passed on July 11, 2005. Therefore, fiscal year 2005/06 will be the start of allocations for State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) projects, removing the "freeze" that has been in effect since FY 2002/03. The CTC has set aside $500 million for allocations in fiscal year 2005/06 that will be made in accordance to guidelines that established priorities for funding allocations. The $500 million is expected to be depleted after the September 2005 CTC meeting. Riverside County Projects requesting allocations at the July 13-14 CTC meeting are: Desert Hot Springs, Pierson Blvd Improvement project RCTC, Corona Metrolink Station Parking Structure Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PPM) Given that the Pierson Blvd project is primarily rehabilitation, the CTC may not allocate the STIP funds because it is ranked low on the allocation priority guidelines. At the June RCTC Board meeting, trading STIP funds with federal STP funds was approved in the event the CTC does not allocate funding for the Pierson Blvd. project. We will provide the status of the above allocation requests at the July 18 TAC meeting. At the June TAC meeting, a request was made to provide the STIP project list. This list is attached. 2006 STIP — As previously reported, the 2006 STIP is to include two tiers (or options). The first tier (Tier A) will include the reprogramming of projects remaining from the 2004 STIP and the addition of new programming, which will be identified in the 2006 STIP Fund Estimate (draft due in August). The Tier B STIP will include a subset of the projects in the Tier A STIP, at the same project costs, with project components rescheduled to match the Tier B Fund Estimate. Along with the development of a two -tiered STIP, staff will work with Caltrans and the CTC on addressing the following issues: $166 million of unprogrammed county share balance - Currently, Riverside County has an unprogrammed county share balance of $166 million. These funds have been approved by RCTC for the SR 91 HOV lane project (Adams to 60/91 /215 Interchange). Until the 2006 STIP Fund Estimate is released, it is unknown whether or not we will be able to program all or a portion of the reserve in the 2006 STIP. • Interregional Improvement Program (Caltrans 25% share of STIP Funds) - RCTC will also be working with Caltrans to program Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds that were replaced with local funds through AB 3090• agreements on SR 60 HOV and SR 91 /Green River Interchange projects. RCTC has proposed that the IIP funds be reprogrammed to the 60/215 East Junction HOV connector project: Performance Measures - Caltrans has developed System Performance Measures as directed by the Governor's administration. The purpose of the performance measures is to determine that the STIP funds are being programmed on projects that provide the most benefit to the transportation system. AB 3090 Reimbursement (from 60/91 /215 IC project) - In 2003, we received approval of an AB 3090 Reimbursement Agreement. Approximately, $31 million ($26.6 million in RIP and $47 in IIP funds) to be repaid in fiscal year 2006/07. Programming of new additional STIP funds - Any new additional STIP funding will be considered to fund project components that are currently underfunded (e.g. 91 HOV, 60/215 E. Jct, etc). Deprogramming STIP projects — If deprogramming is necessary, we will determine which projects to delete and. propose substitute funding. AGENDA ITEM 13 A presentation will be made but • there is no attachment to the agenda for item 13. r �� P. • AGENDA ITEM 14 A presentation will be made but there is no attachment to the agenda for item 14. r s, J • AGENDA ITEM 15 Shirley Medina - its 'a` • From: Shirley Medina To: Shirley Medina Date: 7/11/2005 4:50:09 PM Subject: its To All Recipients, SCAG has posted the Southern California Regional ITS Architecture to our SCAG website. This is available to those needing information on compliance with the ITS Architecture Regulation, 23 CFR 940.9 and 940.11 in the planning and preparation of Federal funding requests for ITS projects. The ITS page is now available www.scao.ca.gov/its . This site includes the Architecture documents for Ventura, Orange, Los Angeles, Imperial Counties, and links to the Inland Empire (Riverside and San Bernardino Counties), as well as the Regional document. This site also includes the Turbo Architecture data files. These may be read with the Turbo Architecture Program, which is available separately. The Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual also contains important information on meeting requirements for Systems Engineering requirements and offer guidance on procurement of ITS systems and components. It is 'on-line at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ho/LocalProorams/lam/laom.htm . i I want to thank all of our Regional partners at the FTA, FHWA, the CTC's, and Caltrans, and IVAG and the many local agencies, cities, and ;emergency services providers, as well as to our NET team and sub -contractors for all of your efforts and participation in the development of the Southern California Regional ITS Architecture. Please feel free to contact me with any questions regarding the 'Regional ITS Architecture, or the Website. Bob Huddy Senior Transportation Planner Regional Transit and ITS Planning SCAG 213-236-1972 Southern California Intelligent Transportation System Regional Architecture Page 1 of 2 Home Regional Activities Home Get Involved Doing Business with SCAG Regional Activities Intergovernmental Review (IGR) Community Development Environment Transportation AboutSCAG News a Announcements Resources Publications Jobs •SCAG Members Login Galen. Site M Searc Conta Help : Transportation : Southern California Intelligent Transportation System Regional Architecture Southern California Intelligent Transportation System Regional Architec. Overview Southem California Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Regional Architecture is a Regional ITS Architecture for the SCAG region. The region includes the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bemardino, and Imperial. The goal of the project is to document the ITS Architecture covering the Southern Califomia Region: An ITS Architecture is a framework for ensuring institutional agreement and technical integration of technologies for the implementation of projects or groups of projects under an ITS strategy. Regional ITS projects, or transportation projects, both highway and transit, with ITS elements, which want to be eligible for the use of Federal transportation funds, are required to be consistent with the Regional Architecture pursuant to 23 CFR 940.9 and 940.11. In addition, such projects must comply with system engineering requirements and applicable Federal standards that have been adopted for the implementation of ITS. If your project is not consistent with the user services described in the Southern Califomia Regional Architecture, an amendment to the Regional Architecture could be required to be consistent. In such a case please contact SCAG to request a review of proposed amendments or changes to the Regional Architecture. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Bob Huddy at (213) 236-1972 or e-mail at huddy@scag.ca.gov Multi -County Issue ► Final Architecture Documents r s PDF i DOC ► Turbo Database » TBO ► Interconnect Diagrams s DOC ► Flow Diagrams , > DOC Imperial County ► Final Architecture Documents > > PDF I DOC ► Turbo Database > > TBO ► Interconnect Diagrams > > DOC http://www.scag.ca.gov/its/ 7/11/2.005 Southern California Intelligent Transportation System Regional Architecture Page 2 of 2 ► Flow Diagrams > r DOC Orange County ► Final Architecture Documents > > PDF I DOC ► Turbo Database > r TBO ► Interconnect Diagrams > > DOC ► Flow Diagrams > > DOC Ventura County ► Final Architecture Documents t , PDF I DOC ► Turbo Database > > TBO ► interconnect Diagrams > > DOC ► Flow Diagrams r > DOC 1 Los Angeles County ► Executive Summary > > PDF I DOC ► Final Architecture Documents > r PDF I DOC ► Turbo Database > > TBO 1 Inland Empire )San Bernardino & Riverside Counties) ► www.iteris.com/inlandempire-its 1 Important Links ► California Statewide ITS Architecture ► FHWA's Final Rule and FTA's Policy for Applying the National ITS Architecture at the Regional ► Los Angeles County Arterial ITS Inventory and Architecture ► National ITS Architecture Version 5.1 ► Regional Integration of Intelligent Transportation Systems ► USDOT Intelligent Transportation Systems Home ) Calendar ) Site Map I Search) Contact Us I Help ®1999-2005 Souther Califomia Association of Govemments I Privacy Policy I Disclaimer The SCAG Web site is financed in part through grants from the United States Department of Transportation and the California E of Transportation. Maps included in this Web site are produced In whole or in part from Thomas Bros. Maps digital database. Tt reproduced with permission granted by Thomas Bros Maps. SOUTBERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS http://www.scag.ca.gov/its/ 7/11/2005 SCAG Travel Demand Model Improvement Program Overview of the Model Improvement Program Current model improvements • Enhanced modeling area • Trip generation and auto ownership models • External trip models • Mode choice models • Trip distribution models 4 Future model improvements • Network management system • Freight models • Time -of -day models Software evaluation and conversion CAMBRIDGE 1 Vehicle Availability Models w Variables included u Estimates households with vehicles available • 0 vehicles • 1 vehicle • 2 vehicles • 3 vehicles • 4+ vehicles • Persons, per household • Workers per household • Household income • Persons by Age Group - Driving Age, 16-64 - Retired Age, over 65 • Accessibility - Highway - Transit 4 External Trips Expanded to match traffic counts v. Estimated by time of day, mode and purpose Person trips estimated from occupancy counts ✓ Internal -external person trips subtracted from trip generation model Total Externals Percent Externals 5 597,399 97% 15,822 3"/0 613,221 3 i Mode Choice. Variables included • In -vehicle time • Out -of -vehicle time (walk, wait, transfer, drive access) • Cost (park, operating, fare) by income • Density (pop and emp) • Attractiveness (bike and walk) • Household size • Vehicles available • Vehicles per worker 8 �+ Estimates modes (13) Drive Alone Shared Ride 2 Shared Ride 3+ Local Bus (Walk and Drive Access) • Express Bus (Walk and Drive Access) • Urban Rail (Walk and Drive Access) • Commuter Rail (Walk and Drive Access) Bike Walk CAMBRIDGE MIEREGmmumm Status Report Model development • Trip generation and vehicle availability (complete) • External trip models (complete) • Mode choice (development complete, calibration underway) • Trip Distribution (calibration underway) • Trip assignment (SCAG) Model validation • Targets (complete) • Evaluation (underway) 9 5 HDT Model Update - Tasks 2 • Task 1 — Review Current Model tg Task 2 — Data for Internal Models • Task 3 — Data for External Model • Task 4 —.Improve External Model • Task 5 — Improve Internal Trip Generation/Distribution Models • Task 6 — Port Trip Generation/Distribution Models CAMBRIDGE inconcomarromus HDT Model Update — Tasks (cont.) - Task 7 — Improve Truck Assignment Methodology Task 8 — Validation Task 9 — Execute Future Year Model Runs Task 10 — Document Future Truck Modeling Direction I 3 Port Model w Incorporate outputs from POLA/POLB trip generation model (QuickTrip) Update port O-D matrix from recent gate surveys by ports rko Forecasts — Fratar-based pivot point approach ro Other — Consider including Port of Hueneme 6 AMD..RIDGE Trip Assignment Time of day factors Roadway capacity and congested speeds — re -visit PCE approach Route choice flexibility Truck prohibitions HDT model validation - Screenline volumes - VMT validation by county, air basin - Freeway and arterial speed validation n 9 Deciding to Include Projects in the 2007 RTP For Capacity Enhancing Projects If the project is: Needs to be in RTP? • On State Highway system Yes • Has or could have federal funds...... .. . .. .... Yes • Requires federal approvals (e.g. NEPA):. Yes Regionally significant (in RIV-SAN model)Yes Locally funded, no chance of federal funds, no NEPA required, no other federal approvals required, & not regionally significant (e.g. widening collector arterial not part of RIV-SAN model) Agreement No. 00-000 AGREEMENT FOR THE FUNDING OF TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY OF [NOTE: If using this model agreement for a County project, globally replace the term "City" with "County".] 1. Parties and Date. 1.1 This Agreement is executed and entered into this _ day of , 2004, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("RCTC") and [Name of local jurisdiction] ("City"). RCTC and City are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the "Parties". 2. Recitals. 2.1 RCTC is a county transportation commission created and existing pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5. 2.2 On November 5, 2002 the voters of Riverside County approved Measure A authorizing the collection of a one-half percent (1/2%) retail transactions and use tax to fund transportation programs and improvements within the County of Riverside, and adopting the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan (the "Plan"). 2.3 The Plan requires cities and the County in western Riverside County to participate in a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program to be eligible to receive Local Streets and Roads funds generated by Measure A. 2.4 The Plan further requires that the first $400 million in revenues from TUMF be made available to RCTC to fund equally the Regional Arterial System and development of New Transportation Corridors identified through the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP). To receive TUMF funding, CETAP corridors must also be designated on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials as established in the October 2002 TUMF Nexus Study, amended in March 2004, and as may be amended in the future. 2.5 The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) has been selected to administer the overall TUMF Program pursuant to applicable state laws including Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with RCTC dated July 10, 2003 regarding the allocation of the $400 million in TUMF Regional Funds to be made available to RCTC for programming. 2.6 RCTC issued to the cities and the County a "Call for Projects" to be funded with TUMF Regional funds, and in response to the Project Nomination Forms, took action on September 1 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF2005 Model AgreementTinal Agreement 7-05.doc 8, 2004 to adopt a five year TUMF Regional Arterial Program which identifies the projects and the maximum funding commitments awarded for specific phases of work. RCTC's TUMF Regional Arterial Program may be updated from time to time. 2.7 RCTC intends, by this Agreement, to distribute TUMF Regional Funds, subject to the conditions provided herein, and to participate in the joint development of the Project, as defined herein. 3. Terms. 3.1 Description of Work. This Agreement is intended to distribute TUMF Regional Funds to the City for [insert general description of work], ("the Work"). The Work, including a timetable and a detailed scope of work, is more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and, pursuant to Section 3.15 below, is subject to modification as requested by the City and approved by RCTC. The Work shall be consistent with one or more ofthe defined RCTC Call for Projects phases detailed herein as follows: 1) PA&ED — Project Approvals & Environmental Document 2) PS&E — Plans, Specifications and Estimates 3) R/W — Right of Way Acquisition and Utility Relocation 4) CONS — Construction The Work phase(s) funded pursuant to this Agreement shall be consistent with the City's Call for j Projects Nomination Form submitted to the RCTC ("the Project") and as approved by the RCTC on September 8, 2004. The Project is more fully described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. It is understood and agreed that the City shall expend TUMF Regional Funds only as set forth in this Agreement and only for the Work. To this end, any use of funds provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of RCTC. 3.2 RCTC Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to distribute to the City, on the terms and conditions set forth herein, a sum not to exceed [Insert dollars in text form] ($ [Insert dollars in number form]), to be used exclusively for reimbursing the City for eligible Work expenses as described herein ("Funding Amount"). The City acknowledges and agrees that the Funding Amount maybe less than the actual cost of the Work, and that RCTC shall not contribute TUMF Regional Funds in excess of the maximum TUMF share for the phase/project identified in Appendix F of the TUMF Nexus Study. 3.2.1 Eligible Work Costs. The total Work costs ("Total Work Cost") may include the following items, provided that such items are included in the scope of work attached as Exhibit "A": (I) City and/or consultant costs associated with direct Work coordination and support; (2) funds expended in preparation of preliminary engineering studies; (3) funds expended for preparation of environmental review documentation for the Work; (4) all costs associated with right-of-way acquisition, including right-of-way engineering, appraisal, acquisition, legal costs for condemnation procedures if authorized by the City, and costs of reviewing appraisals and offers for property acquisition; (5) costs reasonably incurred if condemnation proceeds; (6) costs incurred in the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates by City or consultants; (7) City costs associated 2 V.Users\Preprint\TUMF\2005 Model AgreementWinal Ageement 7-05.doc with bidding, advertising and awarding of the Work contracts; (8) construction costs, including change orders to construction contract approved by the City; and (9) construction management, field inspection and material testing costs. 3.2.1.1 Right -of -Way Acquisition. The Parties acknowledge that in order to protect the City's ability to deliver the Project in a timely cost effective manner, the City may purchase parcels of property in advance of the completion of the Project's final design (PS&E). The Parties acknowledge that acquired parcels or remnants purchased in advance of final design may not ultimately be required for the Project. Upon completion of the Project's final design, the City shall provide RCTC with a detailed list of all parcels purchased by the City for which it received TUMF Regional Funds pursuant to this Agreement. The City shall identify any parcels or remnants thereof which were acquired using TUMF Regional Funds and are not required for construction of the Project. A preliminary list shall be submitted to the RCTC 30 days before the issuance of bid documents for construction of the Project and a final list shall be submitted to the RCTC no later than 30 days following the recording of the Certificated of Completion for the Project. 3.2.1.2 Valuation and Repayment of Any Property Remnants. Upon receipt of the City's final list, RCTC shall meet with the City for the purpose of identifying any parcel or reasonably usable remnant of a parcel for which TUMF Regional Funds were expended that may reasonably be developed for other use by the City and/or sold. The Parties shall confer in good faith to agree upon the disposition of such parcels and remnant parcels and their fair market value as of a date agreed to by the parties, but in no event later than the date of completion of the Project. "Fair Market Value" shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.320 and "remnant" shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.410. Nothing herein shall preclude the City and RCTC from beginning the meetings earlier in the event both parties agree that the parcel or remnant will not be used for the Project. 3.2.1.3 Reimbursement for Unused Parcels. Following recordation of the Certificate of Completion for the Project, the City shall be responsible for promptly reimbursing RCTC for any TUMF Regional Funds which were used to acquire parcels which are completely unused in the Project. If City funds other than TUMF were used to purchase the Parcel, those local funds shall be considered in determining the reimbursement amount. 3.2.1.4 Appeal to Commission. In the event of a disagreement between the Parties regarding the reimbursement of TUMF Regional Funds under this section 3.2.1, either party may appeal, in writing, to the RCTC Board. The RCTC Board's determination regarding excess right-of-way and value pursuant to this section shall be final. 3.2.2 Ineligible Work Costs. The Total Work Cost shall not include the following items which shall be borne solely by the City without reimbursement: (1) City administrative costs; (2) City costs attributed to the preparation of invoices, billings and payments; (3) any City fees attributed to the processing of the Work; and (4) expenses for items of work not included within the scope of work in Exhibit "A". 3 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc 3.2.3 Increases in Work Funding. The Funding Amount may, in RCTC's sole discretion, be augmented with additional TUMF Regional Funds if the TUMF Nexus Study is amended to increase the maximum eligible TUMF share for the Work. Any such increase in the Funding Amount must be approved in writing by RCTC's Executive Director. In no case shall the amount of TUMF Regional Funds allocated to the City exceed the then -current maximum eligible TUMF share for the Work. No such increased funding shall be expended to pay for any Work already completed. For purposes of this Agreement, the Work or any portion thereof shall be deemed complete upon its acceptance by RCTC's Executive Director. 3.2.4 No Funding for Temporary Improvements. Only segments or components of the Work that are intended to form part of or be integrated into the Work may be funded by TUMF Regional Funds. No improvement which is temporary in nature, including but not limited to temporary roads, curbs, or drainage facilities, shall be funded with TUMF Regional Funds except as needed for staged construction of the Work. 3.3 City's Funding Obligation to Complete the Work. In the event that the TUMF Regional Funds allocated to the Work represent less than the total cost of the Work, the City shall provide such additional funds as may be required to complete the Work as described in Exhibit "A". 3.3.1 City's Obligation to Repay TUMF Regional Funds to ROTC. In the event that: (i) the City, for any reason, determines not to proceed with or complete the Work; or (ii) the Work is not timely completed, subject to any extension of time granted by RCTC pursuant to Section 3.15; the City agrees that any TUMF Regional Funds that were distributed to the City for the Work 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. The City acknowledges and agrees that RCTC shall have the right to withhold any Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues due the City, in an amount not to exceed the total of the funds distributed to the City, and/or initiate legal action to compel repayment, if the City fails to repay RCTC within a reasonable time period not to exceed 180 days from receipt of written notification from RCTC that repayment is required. (Note: For Phase 1— PA&ED agreements, delete this Repayment Section.) 3.3.2 City's Local Match Contribution. The City shall provide at least dollars ($ ) of funding toward the Work, as shown in Exhibit "A" and as called out in the City's Project Nomination Form submitted to RCTC in response to its Call for Projects. (Note: Include this Section only if the City identified Local Match funds in its Project Nomination Form.) 3.4 Work Responsibilities of the City. The City shall be responsible for the following aspects of the Work, in compliance with state and federal law provided that such items are included in the Project scope of work attached as Exhibit "A": (i) development and approval of plans, specifications and engineer's estimate (PS&E), environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and obtaining all permits required by impacted agencies prior to commencement of the Work ; (ii) all aspects of bidding, awarding, and administration of the contracts for the Work; (iii) all construction management of any construction activities undertaken in connection with the Work, including survey 4 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF\Z00S Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc and material testing; and (iv) development of a budget for the Work prior to award of any contract for the Work, taking into consideration available funding, including TUMF Regional Funds. 3.5 Term/Notice of Completion. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date first herein above written until: (i) the date RCTC formally accepts the Work as complete, pursuant to Section 3.2.3; (ii) termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 3.9; or (iii) the City has fully satisfied its obligations under this Agreement, (Note: If this Agreement is for Phase I work do not include the following text) "including full repayment of TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC as provided herein". All applicable indemnification provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect following the termination of this Agreement. 3.6 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. The City hereby designates [insert name and title], or his or her designee, as the City's representative to RCTC. The City's representative shall have the authority to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Agreement and shall coordinate all activities of the Work under the City's responsibility. The City shall work closely and cooperate fully with RCTC's representative and any other agencies which may have jurisdiction over or an interest in the Work. 3.7 Expenditure of Funds by City Prior to Execution of Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to prevent or preclude the City from expending funds on the Work prior to the execution of the Agreement, or from being reimbursed by RCTC for such expenditures. ' However, the City understands and acknowledges that any expenditure of funds on the Work prior to the execution of the Agreement is made at the City's sole risk, and that some expenditures by the City may not be eligible for reimbursement under this Agreement. 3.8 Review of Services. The City shall allow RCTC's Representative to inspect or review the progress of the Work at any reasonable time in order to determine whether the terms of this Agreement are being met. 5 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF \2005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc 3.9 Termination. 3.9.1 Notice. Either RCTC or City 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 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. 3.9.2 Effect of Termination. In the event that the City terminates this Agreement, the City shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all TUMF Regional Funds provided to the City under this Agreement. In the event that RCTC terminates this Agreement, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the City TUMF Regional Funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from the City regarding the Work at the time of the notice of termination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 3.14.2, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information. This Agreement shall terminate upon receipt by the non -terminating Party of the amounts due it under this Section 3.9.2. 3.9.3 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies of the Parties provided in this Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement. 3.10 Prevailing Wages. The City and any other person or entity hired to perform services on the Work are alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq., which would require the payment of prevailing wages were the services or any portion thereof determined to be a public work, as defined therein. The City shall ensure compliance with these prevailing wage requirements by any person or entity hired to perform the Work. The City shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, employees, consultants, and agents from any claim or liability, including without limitation attorneys, fees, arising from its failure or alleged failure to comply with California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq. 3.11 Progress Reports. RCTC may request the City to provide RCTC with progress reports concerning the status of the Work. 3.12 Indemnification. 3.12.1 City Responsibilities. In addition to the indemnification required under Section 3.10, the City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or liability arising from or connected with all activities governed by this Agreement including all design and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City or its subcontractors. The City will reimburse RCTC for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by RCTC, in defending against claims ultimately determined to be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City. 3.12.2 RCTC Responsibilities. RCTC agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or 6 V:UsersTreprintlTUMF l2005 Model Agreemenainal Agreement 7-05.doe liability arising from or connected with all activities governed by this Agreement including all design and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of RCTC or its sub -consultants. RCTC will reimburse the City for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the City, in defending against claims ultimately determined to be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of RCTC. 3.12.3 Effect of Acceptance. The City shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy and the coordination of any services provided to complete the Work. RCTC's review, acceptance or funding of any services performed by the City or any other person or entity under this agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights RCTC may hold under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of this Agreement. Further, the City shall be and remain liable to RCTC, in accordance with applicable law, for all damages to RCTC caused by the City's negligent performance of this Agreement or supervision of any services provided to complete the Work. 3.13 Insurance. The City shall require, at a minimum, all persons or entities hired to perform the Work to obtain, and require their subcontractors to obtain, insurance of the types and in the amounts described below and satisfactory to the City and RCTC. Such insurance shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement, or until completion of the Work, whichever occurs last. 3.13.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. Occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to the Work or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall: 3.13.1.1 Name RCTC and City, and their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants as insured with respect to performance of the services on the Work and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of coverage or the protection afforded to these insured; 3.13.1.2 Be primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance programs covering RCTC and City, and/or their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants; and 3.13.1.3 Contain standard separation of insured provisions. 3.13.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance. Business automobile liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non -owned automobiles. 3.13.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Errors and omissions liability insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 Professional liability insurance shall only be required of design or engineering professionals. 7 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF2005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc 3.13.4 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Workers' compensation insurance with statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000.00 each accident. 3.14 Procedures for Distribution of TUMF Regional Funds to City. 3.14.1 Initial Payment by the City. The City shall be responsible for initial payment of all the Work costs as they are incurred. Following payment of such Work costs, the City shall submit invoices to RCTC requesting reimbursement of eligible Work costs. Each invoice shall be accompanied by detailed contractor invoices, or other demands for payment addressed to the City, and documents evidencing the City's payment of the invoices or demands for payment. The City shall submit invoices not more often than monthly and not less often than quarterly. 3.14.2 Review and Reimbursement by RCTC. Upon receipt of an invoice from the City, RCTC may request additional documentation or explanation of the Work costs for which reimbursement is sought. Undisputed amounts shall be paid by RCTC to the City within thirty (30) days. In the event that RCTC disputes the eligibility of the City for reimbursement of all or a portion of an invoiced amount, the Parties shall meet and confer in an attempt to resolve the dispute. If the meet and confer process is unsuccessful in resolving the dispute, the City may appeal RCTC's decision as to the eligibility of one or more invoices to RCTC's Executive Director. The City may appeal the decision of the Executive Director to the full RCTC Board, the decision of which shall be final. Additional details concerning the procedure for the City's submittal of invoices to RCTC and RCTC's consideration and payment of submitted invoices are set forth in Exhibit "C", attached hereto. 3.14.3 Funding Amount/Adiustment. If a post Work audit or review indicates that RCTC has provided reimbursement to the City in an amount in excess of the maximum eligible TUMF share of the Work, as determined by the TUMF Nexus Study, or has provided reimbursement of ineligible Work costs, the City shall reimburse RCTC for the excess or ineligible payments within 30 days of notification by RCTC. 3.15 Work Amendments. Changes to the characteristics of the Work, including the deadline for Work completion, and any responsibilities of the City or RCTC may be requested in writing by the City and are subject to the approval of RCTC's Representative, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, provided that extensions of time for completion of the Work shall be approved in the sole discretion of RCTC's Representative. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require or allow completion of the Work without full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; "CEQA") and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USC 4231 et seq.), but the necessity of compliance with CEQA and NEPA shall not justify, excuse, or permit a delay in completion of the Work. 3.16 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of the City or RCTC, during the term of his or her service with the City 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. 8 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF\2005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc 3.17 Limited Scope of Duties. RCTC's and the City's duties and obligations under this Agreement are limited to those described herein. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the safety of any Work performed at a job site. In addition, RCTC shall not be liable for any action of City or its contractors relating to the condemnation of property undertaken by City or construction related to the Work. 3.18 Books and Records. Each party shall maintain complete, accurate, and clearly identifiable records with respect to costs incurred for the Work under this Agreement. They shall make available for examination by the other party, its authorized agents, officers or employees any and all ledgers and books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or related to the expenditures and disbursements charged to the other party pursuant to this disbursements charged to the other party pursuant to this Agreement. Further, each party shall furnish to the other party, its agents or employees such other evidence or information as they may require with respect to any such expense or disbursement charged by them. All such information shall be retained by the Parties for at least three (3) years following termination of this Agreement, and they shall have access to such information during the three-year period for the purposes of examination or audit. 3.19 Equal Opportunity Employment. The Parties represent that they are equal opportunity employers and they shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant of reemployment because of race, religion, color, national origin, 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. 3.20 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed with the laws of the State of California. 3.21 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 3.22 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.23 Headings. Article and Section Headings, paragraph captions or marginal headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall have no effect in the construction or interpretation of any provision herein. 3.24 Notification. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of the Agreement or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: (Name of local jurisdiction) RCTC (address) Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon, 31-d Floor Mailing address: P.O. Box 12008 9 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreemenainal Agreement 7-05.doc ATTN: Riverside, CA 92501 ATTN: Executive Director Any notice so given shall be considered served on the other party three (3) days after deposit in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred regardless of the method of service. 3.25 Conflicting Provisions. In the event that provisions of any attached appendices or exhibits conflict in any way with the provisions set forth in this Agreement, the language, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall control the actions and obligations of the Parties and the interpretation of the Parties' understanding concerning the performance of the Services. 3.26 Contract Amendment. In the event that the Parties determine that the provisions of this Agreement should be altered, the Parties may execute a contract amendment to add any provision to this Agreement, or delete or amend any provision of this Agreement. All such contract amendments must be in the form of a written instrument signed by the original signatories to this Agreement, or their successors or designees. 3.27 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous agreements or understandings. 3.28 Validity of Agreement. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement. 3.29 Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by the City or any contractor shall be retained on an independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of RCTC. Any personnel performing services on the Work shall at all times be under the exclusive direction and control of the City or contractor, whichever is applicable. The City or contractor shall pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of services on the Work and as required by law. The City or consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance. to V:Users\Preprint\TUMF\2005 Model Agreement\Final Agree lent 7-05.doc RIVERSIDE COUNTY (Name of local jurisdiction) TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION I By: By: (Name, Title) (Name, Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: By. Best, Best & Krieger Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation Commission 11 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF2005 Model AgreementTina! Agreement 7-05.doe (Name, Title) EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF WORK, FUNDING AND TIMETABLE SCOPE OF WORK: Detail the Phase(s) of Work to be performed under this Agreement. (Note: Detail the full Project description on Exhibit B.) Provide specific information regarding the Work to be performed, identify the reaches of the work and include a general location map and site map, if applicable. For guidance in developing this Exhibit, please refer to Exhibit A-1. FUNDING: Identify TUMF, local, state and/or federal funding for each Phase of Work. Delete those Phase which are not part of this Agreement. PHASE TUMF LOCAL TOTAL PA&ED $ ,_ $ , $ , PS&E $ $ , $ RIGHT OF WAY $ $, $ , CONSTRUCTION $ $ $ , TOTAL $ $ , $ , , TIMETABLE: Provide at a minimum the beginning and ending dates for each phase of work including major milestones within a phase. ]2 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF12005 Model AgreementWinal Agreement 7-05.doc EXHIBIT "A-1" GUIDANCE for COMPLETION OF EXHIBIT A The following list of items generally identified as eligible or ineligible for TUMF Regional Funding reimbursement are consistent with those used to develop the costs for improvements in the first NEXUS Study prepared by WRCOG. In general, all improvements, with the exception of sidewalks, must be within the curbs of the roadway and extend no further than the curb returns at intersections. In addition, all improvements on or connecting to interstate and state route facilities shall be consistent with Caltrans Highway Design Manual standards. Items which are typically considered eligible include: • Asphalt concrete pavement, up to 1 b' per lane, to accomplish a 12' travel lane and ancillary treatment and appropriate base materials • Concrete curb and gutter and associated drainage — paved roadway shoulders and swale may be used as a substitute • Class II Bike Lanes • Paved and painted 14' median, may be used as a dual left turn lanes • Traffic signals at intersections with state highways and major arterials which are also on the TUMF Network • Pavement striping and roadway signing as required. Items which are not typically considered eligible include:. • Portland Cement pavement or other aesthetic pavement types (except at intersections) • Major rehabilitation or overlay of existing pavement in adjacent roadway lanes • Raised Medians • Parking Lanes • Landscaping • Lighting • Class I Bike Lanes 13 V:UsersTreprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc EXHIBIT "B" "PROJECT"DESCRIPTION, FUNDING AND MILESTONES PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Detail the full Project including the work identified in Exhibit A of this Agreement. The Project description should be consistent with the local jurisdiction's Project Nomination Form originally submitted in response to RCTC's Call for Projects. Provide specific information regarding the Work to be performed, identify the reaches of the work and include a general location map and site map. FUNDING: Identify TUMF, local, state and/or federal funding for each Phase of Work. PHASE TUMF LOCAL TOTAL PA&ED $ $ , $ , PS&E $ $ $ , RIGHT OF WAY $ $_ $_ CONSTRUCTION $ $ $ , TOTAL $ $ $ , , MILESTONES — provide a list of phases and milestones for completion of the improvements and estimated dates when each is expected to be accomplished. 14 V:UsersTreprint1TUMF12005 Model Agreemenainal Agreement 7-05.doc EXHIBIT "C" PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL, CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT OF INVOICES 1. RCTC recommends that the City incorporate Exhibit "C-1" into its contracts with any subcontractors to establish a standard method for preparation of invoices by contractors to the City and ultimately to RCTC for reimbursement of City contractor costs. 2. Each month the City shall submit an invoice for eligible Work costs incurred during the preceding month. The original invoice shall be submitted to RCTC's Executive Director with a copy to RCTC's Project Coordinator. Each invoice shall be accompanied by a cover letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit "C-2". 3. Each invoice shall include documentation from each contractor used by the City for the Work, listing labor costs, subcontractor costs, and other expenses. Each invoice shall also include a monthly progress report and spreadsheets showing the hours or amounts expended by each contractor or consultant for the month and for the entire Work to date. Samples of acceptable task level documentation and progress reports are attached as Exhibits "C-4" and "C-5". All documentation from the City's contractors should be accompanied by a cover letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit "C-3". If the City is seeking reimbursement for direct expenses incurred by City staff for eligible Work costs, the City shall detail the same level of information for its labor and any expenses in the same level of detail as required of contractors pursuant to Exhibit "C" and its attachments. 5. Charges for each task and milestone listed in Exhibit "A" shall be listed separately in the invoice. 6. Each invoice shall include a certification signed by the City Representative or his or her designee which reads as follows: "I hereby certify that the hours and salary rates submitted for reimbursement in this invoice are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the consultants or contractors listed. Signed Title Date Invoice No. 15 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF12005 Model AgreementWinal Agreement 7-05.doc 7. RCTC will pay the City within 30 days after receipt by the Commission of an invoice. If RCTC disputes any portion of an invoice, payment for that portion will be withheld, without interest, pending resolution of the dispute, but the uncontested balance will be paid. 8. The final payment under this Agreement will be made only after: (i) the City has obtained a Release and Certificate of Final Payment from each contractor or consultant used on theWork; (ii) the City has executed a Release and Certificate of Final Payment; and (iii) the City has provided copies of each such Release to RCTC. 16 V:Users\Preprint\TUMF12005 Model Agreement\Final Agreement 7-05.doc 1T io Prop 42 Local Street and Road Improvements - Estimated City by City Allocations FY 2002-03 PI FY 2003-04 (2) FY 2004-05 (3) FY 2005-06 t°i Planned Approved Actual (CurrentLaw) Budget $74,956,800 $ 126,500,000 $ 126,500,000 $ 4.10 $ 4.10 City Allocation=> Estimated Per CaPita(5)=> LA PALMA LOS ALAMITOS $ 2.59 40,955 $ 30,323 MISSION VIEJO $ 253,996 NEWPORT BEACH $ 192,176 ORANGE $ 344,081 PLACENTIA $ 125,194 RANCHO SANTA MARGf $ 167,621 SAN CLEMENTE > $ 145,618 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO $ 89,893 SANTA ANA i $ 898,231 i $ 63,830 $ 98,901 a $ 178,914 a $ 15,932 WESTMINSTER a $ 232,503 YORBA LINDA $ 158,153 SEAL BEACH STANTON TUSTIN VILLA PARK PLACER COUNTY AUBURN COLFAX LINCOLN LOOMIS ROCKLIN ROSEVILLE PUMAS COUNTY. PORTOLA RIVERSIDE COUNTY BANNING BEAUMONT BLYTHE CALIMESA CANYON LAKE CATHEDRAL CITY COACHELLA CORONA DESERT HOT SPRINGS HEMET INDIAN WELLS 4 32.279 4,293 Original Actual $ 94,000,000 $ - $ 3.23 $ - $ 51,278 $ 38,022 $ 316,649 $ 257,412 $ 433,522 $ 158,221 $ 156,840 $ 196,720 $ 113,524 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Original Actual $ 90,000,000 $ - $ 2.97 $ - 48,393 0 36,015 0 294,928 0 245,304 0 412,768 0 150,680 0 147,909 0 191,781 0 108,176 0 $ 67,333 $ 67,333 $ 50,161 $ 50,161 $ 410,370 $ 410,370 $ 347,362 $ 347,362 $ 575,667 $ 575,667 $ 210,302 $ 210,302 $ 205,814 $ 205,814 $ 273,050 $ 273,050 $ 150,772 $ 150,772 $ 1,116,067 0 $ 80,026 0 $ 123,454 $ 226,567 $ 19,918 $ 291,598 $ 202,224 0 0 0 0 0 1,054,078 0 75,508 0 116,521 0 218,712 0 18,714 0 276,246 0 194,061 0 $ 1,469,757 $ 1,469,757 $ 105,872 $ 105,872 $ 162,197 $ 162,197 $ 296,173 $ 296,173 26,035 $ 26,035 385,600 $ 385,600 274,233 $ 274,233 $ 39,597 $ 5,550 0 0 47,610 ': $ 67,897 0 16,226 j $ 19,837 0 107,738 i $ 144,206 224,213 i $ 296,216 $ 38,262 0 $ 5,397 0 E 72,709 $ 18,815 53,697 $ 53-697 $ 7,614 7,614 0 i $ 114,322 $ 114,322 0 € $ 26,219 $ 26,219 $ 148,702 0 $ 211,017 $ 211,017 $ 296,217 0 ': $ 427,061 $. 427,061 5,800 I $ 6,975 0 • • • $ 6,581 0 $ 9,069 $ 9,069 64159 $ 83,218 0 32,560 i $ 46,277 0 54,754 : $ 68,700 0 18,804 $ 23,555 0 26,803 $ 33,863 0 118,451 : $ 152,860 0 64,339 ; $ 86,652 0 347,703 ' $ 443,621 $ 43,982 i $ 55,564 0 0 159,159 ; $ 201,003 0 11,251 $ 14,143 "0 INDIO 1 $ 136,181 1 $ 178,521 0 LAKE ELSINORE LA QUINTA ' 81,469 $ 107,899 0 75,265 $ 99,406 0 MORENO VALLEY $ 380,501 $ 486,116 0 MURRIETA 1 $ 145,610 $ 199,306 NORCO 1 $ 64,476 i $ 81,243 PALM DESERT PALM SPRINGS PERRIS RANCHO MIRAGE RIVERSIDE 111,304 $ 141,707 0 113,177 ; $ 141,464 0 97,320 ': $ 125,108 0 37,432 ; $ 48,484 0 698,242 : $ 882,266 0 SAN JACINTO $ 65,759 i $ 84,147 0 TEMECULA $ 189,169 $ 242,773 0 SACRAh1ENTO COUNTY CITRUS HEIGHTS ELK GROVE FOLSOM GALT ISLETON RANCHO CORDOVA a $ 82,573 51,249 0 $ 116,821 $ 116,821 79,327 $ 79,327 66,284 0 i $ 91,960 $ 91,960 22,224 0 $ 31,067 $ 31,067 32,332 0 $ 45,602 $ 45,602 148,053 0 $ 211,593 $ 211,593 85,714 0 $ 128,564 .$ 128,564 429,219 0 : $ 602,075 $ 602,075 54,611 0 ; $ 81,015 $ 81,015 194,336 0 $ 277,718 $ 277,718 13,628 0 19,980 $ 19,980 183,527 0 $ 276,310 $ 276,310 108,631 0 $ 158,992 $ 158,992 100,774 0 $ 151,052 $ 151052 475,370 0 i $ 690,913 $ 690,913 239,744 0 $ 355,645 $ 355,645 77,771 0 $ 111,593 $ 111,593 138,467 0 ; $ 205,943 $ 205,943 134,574 0 $ 191,112 $ 191,112 127,034 0 $ 186,360 $ 186,360 47,467 0 $ 68,603 $ 68,603 841,800 0 $ 1,193,272 $ 1,193,272 81,868 0 4 $ 118,839 $ 118,839 236,533 0 $ 340,162 $ 340,162 355,375 i $ 279,737 288,237 I $ 293,880 158,797 ; $. 206,160 55,455 $ 70,764 0 0 2,178 I $ 2,683 0 - I $ 38,649 SACRAMENTO $ 1,104,122 $ 1,397,347 mjgc Rev07Ju1y2005 0 0 $ 262,858 0 $ 365,871 $ 365,871 $ 338,362 0 $ 508,209 $ 508,209 $ 199,593 0 $ 284,313 $ 284,313 67,401 0 $ 95,930 $ 95,930 2,500 0 $ 3,427 $ 3,427 152,003 0 $ 230,453 $ 230,453 1,338,817 0 $ 1,892,936 $ 1,892,936 GaliforniaGityfinance.com - page 6 of 10 AMENDED IN SENATE JULY 13, 2005 AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 9, 2005 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2005-06REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 462 Introduced by Assembly Member Tran February 15, 2005 An act to amend Section 4454 of the Government Code, relating to disability access, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 462, as amended, Tran. Disability access. ;Existing law requires the Department of General Services, for the purpose of ensuring access and use by persons with disabilities, to issue a written approval before a contract may be awarded where state funds are used for specified buildings or facilities, or where funds of counties, municipalities, or other political subdivisions are utilized for the construction of specified educational buildings or facilities. This bill would authorize the Department of Transportation to approve plans for specified transportation facilities—plal3s located within state highway rights -of -way to ensure access and use by persons with disabilities. The bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State -mandated local program: no. 97 AB 462 — 2 — i The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. Section 4454 of the Government Code is 2 amended to read: 3 4454. (a) Where state funds are utilized for any building or 4 facility subject to this chapter, or where funds of counties, 5 municipalities, or other political subdivisions areutilizedfor the 6 construction of elementary school, secondary school, or 7 community college buildings and facilities subject to this chapter, 8 no contract shall be awarded until the Department of General 9 Services has issued written approval stating that the plans and 10 specifications comply with the intent of this chapter. 11 (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), for all transportation 12 facilities, other than rail or transit stations, located within state 13 highway rights -of -way, the Department of Transportation is 14 authorized to issue the required written approval stating that the 15 plans and specifications comply with intent of this chapter. 16 (c) In each case the application for approval shall be 17 accompanied by the plans and full, complete, and accurate 18 specifications, which shall comply in every respect with any and 19 all requirements prescribed by the Department of General 20 Services. 21 (d) Except for facilities located within state highway 22 rights -of -way, other than rail or transit stations, the application 23 shall be accompanied by a filing fee in amounts as determined by 24 the Department of General Services. All fees shall be deposited 25 into the Access for Handicapped Account, which is hereby 26 renamed the Disability Access Account as of July 1, 2001, and 27 established in the General Fund. Notwithstanding Section 13340, 28 the account is continuously appropriated for expenditures for the 29 use of the Department of General Services, in carrying out the 30 department's responsibilities under this chapter. 31 (e) The Department of General Services shall consult with the 32 Department of Rehabilitation in identifying the requirements 33 necessary to comply with this chapter. 34 (f) The Department of General Services, Division of the State 35 Architect, shall include the cost of carrying out the 36 responsibilities identified in this chapter as part of the plan 37 review costs in determining fees. 97 — 3 — AB 462 l SEC. 2. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the 2 immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety 3 within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go 4 into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: 5 In order for the provisions of this act to take effect as soon as 6 possible, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately. O 97