HomeMy Public PortalAbout07 July 16, 2007 Technical Advisory Committee80988
TIME:
DATE:
LOCATION:
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MEETING AGENDA*
10:00 A.M.
July 16, 2007
Records
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Riverside County Regional Complex
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA
Conference Room A, 3rd Floor
*By request, agenda and minutes may be available in alternative format; i.e. large print, tape.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Dave Barakian, City of Palm Springs
Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City
Tom Boyd, City of Riverside
Duane Burk, City of Banning
Bill Gallegos, City of Coachella
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
Eunice Lovi, SunLine Transit
Steven Mendoza, City of Desert Hot
Springs
Amir Modarressi, City of Indio
Habib Motlagh, Cities of Canyon
Lake, Perris and San Jacinto
Les Nelson, PVVTA
Juan Perez, County of Riverside
Amad Qattan, City of Corona
Jim Rodkey, City of Blythe
Anne Schneider,. City of Calimesa
Ken Seumalo,.City of Lake Elsinore
Mark Stanley, Riverside Transit Agency
Ruthanne Taylor Berger, WRCOG
Bill Thompson, City of Norco
Chris Vogt, City of Moreno Valley
Allyn Waggle, CVAG
Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells
John Wilder, City of Beaumont
Sean Yeung, Caltrans District 8
Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director
11.36.02
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listedon the agenda.
TIME: 10:00AM.
DATE: July 16, 2007
LOCATION: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Riverside County Regional Complex
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA
Conference Room A, 3rd 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 please 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 -INTRODUCTIONS
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS (This is for comments on items not listed on agenda.
Comments relating to an item on theagenda will be taken when the item is
before the Committee.)
5. ..SB1266 (Prop . 1 B) Local Streets and , , Road .:Improvement Funds
Presentation/Update (Attachment)
6. Local Assistance Report (Attachment)
• FY 06/07 Obligations/RFA Reviews Update
RFA Submissions after July 2nd
NEPA Delegation Update
• FY 06/07, Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
DBE Update
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
July 16, 2007
Page 2
7. 2006 RTIP Update (Attachment)
8. 2008 RTIP Update; Request for Capacity Enhancing Project Exhibits
(Attachment)
9. COMMISSION CONNECTION/COMMISSION HIGHLIGHTS
1.0. OTHER BUSINESS:
11. ADJOURNMENT (The, next meeting will be August. 20, . 2007, 1000 A.M. ,in .
Banning.)
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES
Monday, June 18, 2007
1. Calf to Order
Tom Boyd, Chair, cabled the meeting of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission :(RCTC) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to order at 10:05 A.M.
at Banning City Hail Civic Center, 99 East Ramsey Street, Banning,CA:
2. Self -Introductions
Members Present: Dave Barakian, City of Palm .Springs, .
-Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City
Tom Boyd, City of Riverside
Duane Burk, City of Banning
• Mike Gow, City of Hemet
Bill Hughes, City of Temecula
Timothy .Jonasson, .City of. La Quinta
Prern Kumar, Cityof Moreno Valley
Eldon Lee, City of Desert Hot Springs;
Eunice Lovi, Sur' Line
Mike McCoy, RTA
Amir °Modarressi, City of Indio
Habib Motlagh, Cities of Perris,
San Jacinto, Canyon. Lake
Russ Napier, City of Murrieta
Juan Perez, County of Riverside
Amad.Qattan, City of Corona
Jim Rodkey, City of Blythe
Randy Viejas, City of Rancho Mirage
Tire Wassil, City of Indian Wells
Sean Yeung, Caltrans .District
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
June 18, 2007
Page 2
Others Present_
Fred Alamolhoda, LAE Associates
Grace Alvarez, RCTC
Ruby Are!fano, RCTC
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC
Eric Haley, RCTC
Ken Lobeck, RCTC
Shirley Medina, RCTC
Brenda Morrison, Caltrans
Mila Nelson, RTA
Theresia Trevino, RCTC
Laura Zaninovich, Caltrans
Approval of Minutes - May 21, 2007
M/S/C (Bayne/Qattan) to approve the May 21, 2007 minutes
Public Comments
There were no public comments.
Ca!trans HQ SB1210/Emminent Domain Implementation issues
Brenda; Morrison, Caltrans Regional Condemnation Office; Diamond Bar;
provided an overview of SB1210 Eminent Domain_ implementation issues.
Handouts were distributed which show the current process and how it differs
from the old condemnation process. A short discussion ensued and Nis.
Morrison told the TAC members that she's available to assist them . with any
questions.
Infrastructure Contributions to MSHCP
A review was conducted of the February 28, 2007 letter and staff reports, from the:
WesternRiverside County Regional Conservation Authority concerning
Infrastructure Contributions to the MSHP. Tom Boyd ;provided clarification.
regarding the contents addressed in the letter. A contribution of . 5% '`of
construction costs applies to new roads or widening of existing roads. The
exceptions to this are portions paid for by Measure. A, and :portions using .TUMF
funds.
Measure A CIP Maintenance of Effort:
The Maintenance of Effort guidelines . have ' been updated by . RCTC staff, for
review and comment by the TAC members. The - new guidelines will become ,
effective July 1, 2009. Theresia Trevino noted that the same basic guidelines are,
being used with a few changes. First, the new period .of measurement will now
be 2007/08. A new evaluation period of ten years instead of .the previous period
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
June 18, 2007
Page 3
of thirty years has also :been added: Language has been included establishing a
"base year" amount for the cities incorporated after the passage of Measure A.
Further, the revised guideline includes language 'relative to the TUM'F and Multi-
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) requirements. Any comments may
be submitted to -RCTC by July 20, 2007.
8. FY 06/07 Obligation .Plan Update
A status report on the FFY 06/07 Obligation Plan projects was distributed.
Shirley Medina provided an update on the project :listing and: reminded the TAC
that RFA's FFY 06/07 for obligations were due to District 8'by June 1st.. if an RFA
has not been Submitted, please do so immediately:
9. Local Assistance Report
Sean Yeung, Caltrans District 8 DLAE, reported that June 1, 2007 was the date
in which RFA's were to be submitted to District 8 with the guarantee that they
wouldbe obligated- by the end of the "federal fiscal year. Packages will still -be
accepted after this deadline but may not be obligated this federal fiscal year.
Local Assistance must submit the final 06/07 RFA, submissions to Caltrans HQ
by July 2, 2007 to help ensure all required reviews occur and the funds can be
obligated by the end of FFY 06/07 (September 30', 2007). . ROTC -staff
encoura ed local agencies to proceed with re grin R'FA packages and > submit
. g _ 9 p p: p g p g
to Local Assistance:
Sean also requested that when a`. city uses. a consultant as .a City `'Engineer or
Public Works Director, they needto providedocumentation to District . 8 stating
that the consultant is. working on behalf of the city and delineate the job role and
responsibilities. This will allow privileged informationto be conveyed to the
appropriate personnel.
Sean further advised the group that: if a Federal Aid Number is needed by a -city,
the first two pages of.Form 7B need to be completed. The purpose of the form is
to initiate a Federal Project Number to track the project during its life cycle.
Laura Zaninovich provided an update on the Inactive List. All the information
regarding inactive = projects, both current andearned over, is posted on the
website. Projects will be eliminated from being placed on the inactive list as long
as an invoice is sent every 6=12 months. Invoices can be sent to the local office
or directly to headquarters with a copy to the local office. -If an invoice cannot be
submittedwithin that time frame, a justification form must be sent.
10. STIP Augmentation .and CMIA Update
Shirley Medina reportedkthat the STD' Augmentation was approved by the CTC
on June 6, 2007. The Augmentation included more funding for current projects,
specifically the Ramon Rd interchange, California Oaks/1-15 interchange, and
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
June 18, 2007
Page 4
the Van Buren/91 interchange. New projects that were added are the 91/71
connector interchange, ;the 215 widening from 1-15 to Scott Rd, the continuation
of 21.5 widening from Scott Road to Nuevo, French Valley Parkway interchange ,
in Temecula, and CVAG nominated the Palm Drive/Gene Autry interchange, and
Date Palm Dr. interchange: Additional STIP Augmentation funding was also.
added to the Perris Valley Line. The total Augmentation funding (totaling' $172 -
million) was all accepted and approved by CTC.
Eric Haley, RCTC Executive. Director, added that the CMIA program still includes
the Local Street and Roads portion and the Trade Corridors component. The
funding direction for, the Trade Corridors is expected to occur during FY 08/09
with a three. -year requirement for projects to be under construction. This may be
an opportunity for a few of the grade separation projects in Riverside County to
receive funding.
TE - FY 07/08. TE Projects
Shirley Medina reminded TE project sponsors that there is a two-step process for
allocating and obligating the TE funds. First, the STIP allocation goes to the CTC
for vote, and then_ a. Request for Authorization/Obligation needs to be submitted
to Ca'itrans . Local Assistance. Once the allocation is approved by CTC the
project rnust be 'awarded : within six months or the . CTC will rescind the funds.
The RFA may be submitted to Local Assistance concurrently so. it .may ibe
reviewed and ready to send to Headquarters once the ,allocation ;is approved by
CTC. RCTC will be working with each agency to develop a schedule for the
allocation and obligation steps.
An update wasprovided by Ken Lobeck on the status , of current amendments.
Amendments 06 & 08 have both completed' the ;required 30=day public :review,
and are currently under _ review by Headquarters; and FHWA. Approval is
estimated to occur by early to mid July.
Amendments 09, 10, and 11 will be included in the next .RTIP quarterly
amendment.
Because of the ;changes in several areas of the RT1P, RCTC is offering to hold
two 2008 RTIP Update workshop/seminars.; this summer. One workshop will be
held in:' western Riverside County, and :.:theother is proposedto occur in the
Coachella Valley. Dates and times are still to be determined
Project Milestone Reports
Ken Lobeck announced that local agencies will . be . asked : to update Project
Milestone Reports of all unobligated projects and submit to RCTC during July.
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
June 18, 2007
Page 5
14. Measure : A Call for Regional Projects
Shirley Medina announced that a call for projects :is being developed. The TAC
subcommittee will . meet on Monday to review the previously used criteria and
develop the Measure A Call for Projects. A draft will :be provided at a subsequent
TAC meeting for review and comments.
15. Commission Connection/Commission Highlights
The budget has been adopted by the. RCTC Board. A key policy item is an effort
to provide .$1.5 million in funding for grade separation proposals: Thereare
several jurisdictions in western county and the Coachella Valley `which would
benefit ;from the grade : separations. RCTC is .working with CVAG indeveloping
the grant criteria and will report back the recommendedaward for approval.
16. ADJOURNMENT
Therebeing no further "business- for consideration by the Technical Advisory
Committee, the meeting adjoumed at approximately 1145 A.M. The next
meeting is scheduled for July 16, 2007, 10:00 A.M., - Riverside County
Transportation Commission;.4080 Lemon Street, Riverside,CA.
Respectfully submitted;
Shirley Med'irta
Program Manager
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
July 16, 2007
TO:
Technical Advisory Committee
FROM:
Ken Lobeck, Senior Staff Analyst
THROUGH:
Shirley Medina, Program Manager
SUBJECT:
SB1266 (Prop 1 B) Local Street and Road Improvement fun
Presentation/Update
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item provides the TAC with a presentation and update concerning SB1266 Local `Street
and Road Improvement Funds as part of Proposition 1 B.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Dave Willmon, Executive Director, Riverside .County Chapter,. California League of Cities, will
provide a short presentation and update concerning the status of the. SB1266 Local Street
and Road Improvement funds. Attached with this item is language from .SB1266 and, initial
city allocation projections previously provided to the TAC:, Note: The allocation projections are
considered an estimate only and -could change.
Attachment:
1 SB1266 Local Streets Bill Pages and Estimated Allocation_ s
2. Prop 1 B Local Streets ProposedCounty Funds
Ch. 25
high -priority railroad crossing improvements; including grade separation
projects, that arenot part of the process established in Chapter 10
(commencing with. Section 2450) of Division 3 of the Streets and
Highways Code. The allocation of funds under this paragraph shall be .
made in consultation and coordinationwiththe High -Speed Rail Authority
created pursuant to :Division 19.5 (commencing with Section 185000) of
the Public Utilities Code. .
(k) (1) Seven hundred fifty million dollars ($750,000,000) shall be
deposited in ,the Highway: Safety; Rehabilitation, and Preservation
Account, which: is hereby created in the fund. Funds `inthe account shall be
available, upon ,appropriation by the Legislature, to the Department of;
Transportation,as allocated by the California Transportation Commission,-
for the purposes of the state highway` operation :and protection program as
described in Section 14526.5.
(2) The department shall . develop a program for distribution of two
hundred and fifty million dollars ($250,000,000) from the funds identified
in paragraph (1) to fund traffic light synchronization .projects or other.
technology -based improvements to improve safety, operations and the
effective capacity of local streets and roads.
(l) (1) Two billion dollars .($2,000,000,000) shad be deposited in the
Local Streets and Road Improvement, Congestion Relief, and Traffic
Safety Account of 2006, which is hereby created in the fund. The proceeds
of :bonds deposited into that, account shall be available, upon appropriation
by the Legislature, for the purposes specified in this subdivision to. the
Controller for administration and allocation in the fiscal year in which the
bonds are issued and sold, including any interest or other return earned on
the investment of those moneys, in the following manner:
(A) Fifty percent to the counties, including a city and county, in
accordance` with the following formulas:,
(i) Seventy-five percent of the funds payable under this subparagraph
shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the number
of fee -paid and exempt vehicles that are :registered in the county bears to
the number of fee -paid and exempt vehicles registered in the state
(ii) Twenty-five percent of the funds payable under this subparagraph
shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the number
of miles of maintained county roads in each county bears to the total
number of miles of maintained county roads in the state. For. the purposes
of apportioning funds under this clause, any roads within the boundaries of
a city and county that are not state highways shall be deemed to be county
roads.
(B) Fifty percent to the cities,: including a city and county, apportioned
among the cities in the proportion that the total population of the city bears
to the total populationof all the cities in the state, provided, however, that
the Controller shall allocate a minimum of four hundred thousand dollars
($400,000) to each city, pursuant to this subparagraph.
(2) Funds received under this subdivision shall be deposited as follows
in order to avoid the commingling of those fundswith other local funds:
Ch. 25 —10 —
(A) In the case of a city, into the city account that is designated for the
receipt of state funds allocated for local streets and roads.
(B) In the case of an eligible county, into the county road fund.
(C) In the case of a city and county, into a local account that is
designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for local streets and
roads.
(3) For the purpose of allocating funds under this subdivision to cities
and a city and county, the Controller shall use the most recent population
estimates preparedby the Demographic Research Unit of the Department
of Finance. For a city that incorporated after January 1, 1998, that does not
appear on the most recent population estimates prepared by the
Demographic Research Unit, the Controller shall use the population
determined for that :: city under Section 11005.3 of the Revenue and
Taxation Code.
(4): Funds apportioned to a city, county,:: or city and countyunder this
subdivision shall lie used for improvements to transportation facilities that
will assist in reducing local traffic congestion and further deterioration,
improving traffic flows, or increasing traffic safety that may include, but
not . be limited to, .'street and highway pavement maintenance, .
rehabilitation, installation, ,construction andreconstruction of necessary'
associated facilities :such as drainage and :traffic control devices,or the
maintenance, rehabilitation, installation, construction and reconstruction of .
facilities that expand ridership on transit systems, safety projects to reduce
fatalities, or as a -local match to obtain state or federal transportation funds
for similar purposes.
(5) At the conclusion of each fiscal year during which a city or county
expends the fundsit has received under this .subdivision, the Controller
may verify the :;city:'s.or county's compliance with paragraph (4). Any city
or county that 'has not complied with ,paragraph (4) shall reimburse the
state for the _funds ,it received during that fiscal year. Any funds withheld
or returned as a result of`a failure to comply with paragraph (4) shall be
reallocated to the other counties and cities whose expenditures are in
compliance.
Article 3. Fiscal Provisions
8879.25. Bonds in the ;total amount of nineteen billion nine hundred
twenty-five million dollars ($19,925,000,000), exclusive of refunding
bonds, . or so much thereof as is necessary, are hereby authorized to be
issued and sold for carrying out the purposes' expressed in this chapter and
to reimburse the ;General Obligation. Bond Expense Revolving Fund
pursuant to Section 16724.5 All bonds herein authorized which'. have been
duly sold and delivered as provided herein shall constitute valid and
legally binding general obligationsof the state, and the full faith and credit
of the state is hereby pledged for the punctual payment of both principal
and interest _thereof.
95
"
"
m j g c 6 M a y 2 0 0 6
S B 1 2 6 6 L o c a l S t r e e t a n d R o a d I m p r v m t F u n d s
A l l o c a t i o n o f
C i t y A l l o c a t i o n - - - - - >