Loading...
02 February 10, 2010 Commission88676 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside Commissioners Chair: Bob Buster 1' Vice Chair: Greg Pettis 2n4 Vice Chair: John J. Benoit Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / To Be Appointed, City of Blythe Ray Quinto / Jim Hyatt, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / Jordan Ehrenkranz, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Steve Nolan, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller / Ben Godfrey, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Wallace Edgerton / Darcy Kuenzi, City of Menifee Bonnie Flickinger / Jesse Molina, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Malcolm Miller / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Jim Ferguson / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert Steve Pougnet / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Ron Meepos / To Be Appointed, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Steve Di Memmo / Vacant, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar Raymond Wolfe, Governor's Appointee Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.00 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, February 10, 2010 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda February 10, 2010 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JANUARY 13, 2010 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS - The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. if there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR - Al/ matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7A. PROPOSED COMMITTEE RESTRUCTURING Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Approve the restructuring of the Budget and Implementation Committee; 2) Approve disbanding the Plans and Programs Committee; 3) Approve the formation of the Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee and the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee; and 4) Adopt Ordinance No. 10-001, "An Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending the Commission's Administrative Code", to reflect the changes to the committee structure. 7B. FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 COMMISSION AUDIT RESULTS Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the FY 2008/09: Page 9 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR); 2) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Audited Financial Statements; 3) State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) Audited Financial Statements; 4) Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) Audited Financial Statements; 5) Compliance Report; 6) Commercial Paper Compliance Report; 7) Auditor Required Communications Report; • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda February 10, 2010 Page 3 8) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriation Limit Calculation; 9) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance Program incentives; and 10) Management certifications. 7C. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 12 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 3 (Q3) 2009. 7D. ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATION TO COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 Page 20 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) planning funds totaling $260,015 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work program. 7E. AMENDMENT TO CALIBER PAVING AGREEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 25 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-24-063-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-24-063-00, with Caliber Paving, Inc. for the unanticipated increase in costs for the rehabilitation of the various Metrolink commuter rail station parking lots in the amount of $218,408, and an additional contingency of $40,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $1,049,293; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda February 10, 2010 Page 4 7F. RESOLUTION NO. 10-005, CONSIDERING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKING RESPONSIBLE AGENCY FINDINGS, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND AN ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION, AND APPROVING THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION PROJECT Page 28 Overview This item is for the Commission to Adopt Resolution No. 10-005, "A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Considering an Environmental Impact Report, Making Responsible Agency Findings, and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension, and Approving the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project." • 7G. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES INCLUDING THE TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDITS FOR • FISCAL YEARS 2006/07 THROUGH 2008/09 Page 33 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-029-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-029-00, with Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA), to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audit of the Commission for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $30,000, and to increase the contract amount $100,000 for additional on -call internal audit services; and 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-030-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-030-00, with Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C., (MHM) to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audits of the Riverside County transit operators for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $61,600, and to increase the contract amount $ 100,000 for additional on -call internal audit services. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda February 10, • 2010 Page 5 7H. FISCAL YEAR 2010 APPROPRIATIONS - ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST Page 36 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve on a first -come -first - served -basis, the allocation of $1.349 million in support of Alameda Corridor East (ACE) grade separations located in Riverside County. 8. EXTENSION OF THE COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 39 1) Adopt Resolution No. 10-006, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of an Amendment to the Credit Agreement and Related Amendments to Certain Other Documents, a Supplement to the Offering Memorandum and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith"; 2) Approve the draft Amendment No. 1 to the reimbursement agreement dated as of March 1, 2005, by and between the Commission and Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America), relating to the Commission's Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 1; 3) Approve an amendment to the commercial paper dealer agreement between the Commission and Barclays Capital Inc. (Barclays) to reduce the authorized amount of Commercial Paper Notes, Series A from $1 10 million to $75 million and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 2; 4) Approve an amendment to the commercial paper dealer agreement between the Commission and Bank of America Merrill Lynch (Merrill Lynch) to reduce the authorized amount of Commercial Paper Notes, Series B from $75 million to $45 million and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 2; 5) Approve the draft supplement to the offering memorandum for the issuance of $120 million in Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the printing and distribution of the supplement to the offering memorandum; and 6) Approve the estimated costs related to the amendment of the letter of credit and authorize the Executive Director to execute related professional service agreements, as required. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda February 10, 2010 Page 6 9.. FISCAL YEAR 2011 FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTS Overview Page 71• This item is for the Commission to adopt the Commission's FY 2011 Federal Appropriations Requests. 10. 2010 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt the Commission's 2010 Federal Legislative Platform. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 12. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview Page 75 This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (c) Possible Initiation of Litigation: One Case 14. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, March 10, 2010, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California. 3000 dIZ A110 133111S :'ON 3NOHd 3000 dIZ :ssnaad ss3N1sn8 dnokio / NOIIVZINV`JHO / A3N301/ JO 3INVN Ally r ►� V S :DN11N3S31:1d31i 133111S :'ON 3NOHd =SS321013V rangy;1/6/ Ulos�p :1N311 VON3OV IVON39V 3H1 NO 031SI1 SV) Ua1,utc,,D� AO 1031'8nS :3WtlN :'ON IN311 VaN3OV I%9'n� :S1N3WW00 01180d O :S1N3WW00 0118nd r AO 103f 8nS 31 NO3H0 =31V0 nuwria an vua,If1 =A I 111 I imanq mut/ unwiin BLUEPRINT building partnerships_ serving communities. COMPASS B On May 5, 2010, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will host the Fourth Annual Compass Blueprint Recognition Awards program during the General Assembly at the to Ouinta Resort & Spa. As part of this event, SCAG wilt present awards to recognize the great planning and development work occurring throughout the region that exemplifies the Compass Btueprint principles. Starting in January 2010, SCAG wilt begin accepting nominations for projects that coordinate land use and transportation actions to improve the mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability of our region. The Recognition Awards Program is open to all parties, including local governments, non -profits, developers and others. Partnerships are welcome; public agencies, in combination with other public or private organizations or individuals may jointly submit an entry. Eligible submittals include plans, projects, and programs completed or adopted after January 1; 2005 and prior to March 1, 2010. Thedeadline for entries is Frida%harch 12, 2010 at 2 00 P.M, Compass Blueprint Principles 1. Improve mobility for all residents Encourage transportation investments and la tha are mutually supportive Locate new noosing near existing jobs eFi ],g housing courage transit -oriented development to a variety of travel choices SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of SOYERNAUNTS use decisions UEPRINT 2. Foster livability in all communities Promote in -fill development and redevelopment to ,e+,3italize existing communities Promote developments that provide a mix of uses 'Promote "people -scale di' wa ble communities Support the preservation of stable neighborhoods 3. Enable prosperity for all people Provide a variety of housing types in each community to meet the housing needs of all income levels Support educational opportunities that pr growth isure environ income class Support local and growth urage civic engagement tal justice re3ardless of ra balanced sCalpolicies that en ourage balanced 4. Promote sustcrinability for future generations reserve rural; agricultural, recreational and environmentally sensitive areas us development in urban center and existing Develop strategies to accommodate growth that efficiently and minimizes pollution and waste Utilize 'green" development techniques 818 W. i th Street, 12th Flom Cris Angeles, CA 90017 TeL t213) 236-1800 t Email: info@compassblueprintorg www_compass6lueprint.org : - RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET FEBRUARY 10, 2010 AGENCY EMAIL ADDRESS . Ttrl ,/14— V =17 (A`� 1 q (GO�f"O 1 'e.,r _ , `1 0�'D rr _ A/1.A/z- o1--�e As1fL:-' �v ,2 k V <nfe 0 c6c,ci_ r-v W t t-pDMNR-- -o-cT- .—�P-n)A/u t C m I A V' _;/L.(L f !�')�- C.. 6 -421✓.� �h 4 � .� ✓ n o �-r- _ �O OCA.� S� C u ga4 t ce , l �.,/�7.e_i .2,3,e,„, \ \J (1,- fiW Sel ea6d C'oexgrvx_o_- pr wa` C. -1.17 -NS7�c / �U1?'j71 I 6-02.4 L Cr 7 ) "�� A.C.L.l0 � � ' \)C._,0 --). 17-(i�v �/�-- / J// ,,..+� !4Z �i./i7/ / /VI `410 'Ji Yl7-6r.-4,.wr- 5c4,- ':IGC,tii G us Kts1 IA 14t..6-o — �N O O 1 � A< �u . 4, oFtA9 , 42.R-A-i3 )&y._,z,z ,��� y S'reue PDv4aLr P se. s pa, A)4s s-4P:evi %lPffh. u,/1 Z i044 C % aci Sui j - ri-va-r/-j Dn5ra-47 5��5 l�i ` I i � -IT -4 1OQ� L� II i l / RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL FEBRUARY 10, 2010 Prese t Absent County of Riverside, District I - Q County of Riverside, District II O County of Riv ; ids, District III' O County of Riverside, District IV County _of Ff'iverside, District V City of Banning_ 0 City of Beaumont City of Blythe 17 City of Calimesa Q City of Canyon Lake 0 City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio- City of La Quinta City of takeElsinore City of Menifee City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rancho Mirage City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula City of Wildomar Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 0 O O O O • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, January 13, 2010 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Bob Buster at 9:30 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Vice Chair Greg Pettis led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Steve Adams Marion Ashley Roger Berg John J. Benoit Daryl Busch Bob Buster Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Steve Di Memmo Wallace Edgerton Scott Farnam Bonnie Flickinger Eduardo Garcia Rick Gibbs Terry Henderson Robin Lowe 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Magee Scott Matas Glenn Miller Malcolm Miller Patrick J. Mullany Greg Pettis Ray Quinto Ron Roberts Don Robinson Karen Spiegel Jeff Stone John F. Tavaglione Ray Wolfe Commissioners Absent Jim Ferguson Steve Pougnet Ron Meepos At this time, Chair Buster presented Commissioner Bob Magee with a plaque to commemorate his tenure as Chair for 2009, expressing appreciation for his sound leadership during a time of extraordinary economic and fiscal challenges. Commissioner Magee expressed his gratitude to the Commissioners and staff. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 2 Commissioner John Benoit announced that the Commission's alternate for the city of Rancho Mirage, Councilman Alan Seman, passed away on January 12. He expressed his sincerest condolences to his wife and family on behalf of the Commission. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — DECEMBER 9, 2009 M/S/C (Stone/Spiegel) to approve the minutes of December 9, 2009, meeting. Abstain: Flickinger, Garcia, Lowe and Robinson 6. RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FEE AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT INTERESTS IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, LOCATED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS TO THE STATE ROUTE 74/INTERSTATE 215 INTERCHANGE PROJECT IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The following Commissioners recused themselves due to a conflict of interest on Agenda Item 6: Ashley, Benoit, Buster, Stone, and Tavaglione. At this time, Vice Chair Pettis assumed the Chair, opened the public hearing, and requested legal counsel to explain the nature and scope of the hearing. Steve DeBaun, legal counsel, explained the purpose of this hearing is for the Board to consider the adoption of Resolutions of Necessity Nos. 10-002, 10-003, and 10-004, to acquire by eminent domain certain real property in the city of Perris for the construction and maintenance of improvements related to the SR-74/I-215 interchange project. He stated at the conclusion of this hearing the Board will be asked to adopt the Resolutions of Necessity and provided the findings. He also announced there was a revision and additional information for Agenda Item 6 related to Resolution of Necessity No. 10-002. Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board, verified the proof of mailing that certifies on December 29, 2009, notices were sent to the property owners of said parcel numbers. Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager, stated the Commission is requested to determine and find that the full requirements for the adoption of a resolution of necessity has been met and satisfied. He explained that Caltrans and the Commission entered into a cooperative agreement for the construction and maintenance of the SR-74/I-215 interchange project, highlighting the following areas: • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 3 • A review of the four required findings; • An aerial view depicting the project area and the properties being acquired; and • An artist rendering of the project after construction. Jennifer Harmon stated there were no written objections, protests, or requests to speak from the property owners. Vice Chair Pettis called upon any persons with an interest in the property who wish to be heard on this matter. There were no requests to speak. Vice Chair Pettis then called upon all other persons who wish to be heard on this matter. There were no requests to speak. At this time, Vice Chair Pettis closed the public hearing. M/S/C (Lowe/G. Miller) to approve to: 1) Make the following findings as hereinafter described in this report: a► The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; b) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; c) The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and d) The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. 2) Adopt Resolutions of Necessity Nos. 10-002, 10-003 and 10-004, "Resolutions of Necessity for the Acquisition of Fee and Easement Interests in Certain Real Property, Located in Riverside County, California, by Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Assessor Parcel Numbers 310-100-004, 310-100-005, 310-100-006, 310-100-040, and 310-100-042 (CPN 21483-1); 310-100-007, 310-100-008, 310-100-009, 310-100-010, 310-100-011, 310-100-012, 310-100-013, 310-100-014, and 310-110-016 (CPN 21474-1); 310-062-004 and 310-062-007 (CPNs 21488-1 and 21488-2), for the Construction and Maintenance of Improvements to the State Route 74/Interstate 215 Interchange Project in Riverside County, California". Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 4 At this time, Chair Buster reassumed the Chair. 7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions/revisions to the agenda. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Lowe/Henderson) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 8A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended September 30, 2009. 88. EXTENSION OF COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS ADVANCE FUNDING AGREEMENT REPAYMENT TERM 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-31-517-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 06-31-517, with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to modify the repayment term to 20 years; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8C. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call property maintenance and repair services for a three-year period, inclusive of a single -year option to extend the agreements, in an amount that is not to exceed an aggregate value of $1.5 million; a) Agreement No. 10-51-038-00 with Warren Bros. Tractor Work; b) Agreement No. 10-51-039-00 with Sunshine Landscape and Maintenance, Inc.; c) Agreement No. 10-51-040-00 with Real Estate Consulting and Services, Inc.; d) Agreement No. 10-51-041-00 with Zamiski Construction; e) Agreement No. 10-51-042-00 with Pest Options, Inc.; and f) Agreement No. 10-51-043-00 with Carry -All LLC; • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 5 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders competed among and awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreement(s); and 3► Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8D. AGREEMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTING AND FUNDING THE STATE ROUTE GO/INTERSTATE 215 EAST JUNCTION HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES CONNECTOR 1) Approve programming $17.722 million of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds and $770,000 of the Commission's Rail Program lease proceeds funds for construction of the 60/215 East Junction High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes project; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute Cooperative Agreement No. 10-31-018-00 (Caltrans Agreement #08-1451) with Caltrans and related funding, construction, operations and maintenance, and utility agreements with Caltrans, Southern California Edison and the county of Riverside associated with constructing the 60/215 East Junction HOV project. 8E. AGREEMENT WITH COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO REPROGRAM 1989 MEASURE A FUNDS TO THE STATE ROUTE 79 WIDENING PROJECT 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-72-035-00 with the county of Riverside, for the reprogramming of $2.1 million of 1989 Measure A highway funds from the State Route 60/Valley Way interchange to the SR-79 widening project, Thompson Road to Domenigoni Road; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8F. ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATION TO WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/ 10 Approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) planning funds totaling $476,695 to the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work program. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 6 8G. RIVERSIDE COUNTY 2011 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FINANCIAL RESOLUTION 1) Adopt Resolution No. 10-001, "Resolution Certifying that the Riverside County Has Resources to Fund Projects in Fiscal Years 2010/11 Through 2015/16 Transportation Improvement Program and Affirming Commitment to Implement All Projects in the Program"; and 2) Forward to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in the 2011 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). 8H. NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK STATION PEDESTRIAN TOWER AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATION OF A SEISMIC SEPARATION JOINT 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-51-037-00 with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) for the construction, maintenance, and operation of a seismic separation joint at the North Main Corona Metrolink Station Pedestrian Tower; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 81. MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT FUNDS AS CAPITAL MATCH FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 SECTION 5310 PROGRAMS 1) Allocate Measure A Specialized Transit funds to provide the required capital match for the FY 2008 Section 5310 program as follows: • $14,452 to Mountain Shadows Support Group (MSSG); • $10,896 to Care Connexxus, Inc. (CCI); • $5,850 to Peppermint Ridge; • $5,047 to Care -A -Van Transit Systems, Inc. (Care -A -Van); 2) Approve agreements with the following FY 2008 Section 5310 grant recipients for Measure A Specialized Transit funds available in Western Riverside County as follows: • Agreement No. 10-26-044-00 with MSSG for $14,452; • Agreement No. 10-26-045-00 with CCI, Inc. for $10,896; • Agreement No. 10-26-046-00 with Peppermint Ridge for $5,850; • Agreement No. 10-26-047-00 with Care -A -Van for $5,047; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 7 8J. AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION OF THE FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAM IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-45-036-00 with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the operation of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in the amount of $1,657,171 in state funding for FY 2009/10; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 9. MID -YEAR REVENUE PROJECTIONS Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, presented Agenda Item 9, "Mid -Year Revenue Projections", and Agenda Item 10, "Fiscal Year 2010/11 Revenue Projections", highlighting the following areas: • Revenue projections; • Sales tax trends in 2009; • Activity by economic category; • Activity by three largest economic segments; • Historical sales tax by segment; • Measure A revenues; • LTF revenues; • Measure A and LTF taxes; • TUMF revenues; • State Transit Assistance (STA) revenues; and • Next steps. At Commissioner Jeff Stone's request, Theresia Trevino explained point of consumption sales tax, noting that the sales tax reporting process is complex. She explained the Commission hired MuniServices, LLC to ensure that the Commission is receiving its fair share of sales tax revenue. Anne Mayer, Executive Director, stated revenues are at a significant low for the Commission and staff will continue to aggressively monitor the situation. She expressed that the Commission's recommendation to all the member and transit agencies is to add another layer of conservative analysis when evaluating future budgets. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 8 M/S/C (Tavaglione/Henderson) to: 1) Approve the Mid -Year Revenue Projections; 2) Approve the budget reduction adjustments to Measure A revenues of $15.5 million and expenditures of $7,307,100 to reflect the revised Measure A projections; and 3) Approve the budget reduction adjustments to LTF revenues of $6,586,600 and expenditures of $123,200 to reflect the revised LTF projections. 10. FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 REVENUE PROJECTIONS M/SIC (Tavaglione/Henderson) to: 1) Approve the projections of the LTF apportionment for the Western Riverside County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley areas; 2) Approve the projections for Measure A and the related allocations; and 3) Approve the projections for Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues. 11. FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, provided an overview on federal and state legislation, discussing the following areas: • Federal legislation - H.R. 1835 and S. 1408; • Appropriations bill projects; • Governor's budget proposal; • Proposition 42; • Governor's Proposal; • Breakdown of sales tax; • Sources of transit funds; • Public transportation account; • Impacts to funding; • State transit funds diverted between 2001-2009; and • Next steps. Commissioner John Tavaglione expressed strong concern regarding the Governor's budget and its impact on Proposition 42 and asked John Standiford to provide additional information. He expressed it is critical for all member agencies and associations to work collaboratively on transportation and transit funding issues to present a consistent message to the Legislature. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 9 John Standiford discussed the details of the excise tax versus Proposition 42. Chair Buster expressed concern that the excise tax is inconsistent with the governor's environmental proposals. Commissioner Terry Henderson expressed strong concern regarding the continued economic downturn and altering of the budget process. She briefed the Commission on the National League of Cities position on the Governor's proposal and the importance for directing funds to local jurisdictions. She then discussed the importance of congressionally directed funding. Chair Buster concurred with Commissioner Henderson's comments. Commissioner Roger Berg expressed concern for the state and federal debt and recommended preparing an alternate proposal on solutions to reduce the debt in order to stabilize the economy. Chair Buster concurred with Commissioner Berg's comment. Commissioner Robin Lowe discussed the importance of partnerships as it will be imperative this next year to maintain local revenues. Commissioner Benoit expressed strong concern for the potential adverse effect the governor's budget proposal will have on several programs, the unrealistic nature of the proposal that includes funding from the federal government that he believes will not materialize, and the uncertainty of how the final budget will be structured. M/S/C (Pettis/Henderson) to: 1) Receive and file an update on the federal and state legislation; and 2) Adopt positions on the following bills: a. H.R. 1835 — SUPPORT; and b. S. 1408 — SUPPORT. 12. ITEMIS) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 13. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 13A. Commissioner Ray Wolfe, Caltrans District 8, announced a survey was mailed to all city and county representatives to assess the Caltrans services. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes January 13, 2010 Page 10 13B. Anne Mayer announced: • The Government Finance Officers Association has awarded the Commission with the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the Commission's current FY 2009/10 budget and congratulated staff; • The Perris Station Transit Center grand opening event was held on January 11; • The SR-60/Valley Way interchange groundbreaking event will be held on January 20 at 1:30 p.m.; and • The I-10/Bob Hope Drive/Ramon Road interchange groundbreaking event will be held on February 26 at 10:00 a.m. 14. CLOSED SESSION 14A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Properties: Agency Negotiator: Purchasing Party: There were no announcements 15. ADJOURNMENT 294-060-001, 294-060-008, 294-070-002, 294-140-004, and 297-160-006 Executive Director or Designee Metropolitan Water District of Southern California from the Closed Session item. There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, February 10, 2010, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Executive Committee John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Committee Restructuring EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the restructuring of the Budget and Implementation Committee; 2) Approve disbanding the Plans and Programs Committee; 3) Approve the formation of the Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee and the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee; and 4) Adopt Ordinance No. 10-001, "An Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending the Commission's Administrative Code", to reflect the changes to the committee structure. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Upon expansion of the Commission in 1999, the existing committee structure was defined and implemented per the Administrative Code. Budget and Implementation and Plans and Programs have served as two primary Commission committees that provide policy and program direction. A summary of the existing committee responsibilities and 2009 appointments are attached. The following observations have been made by staff and/or Commissioners regarding these two standing committees. • Many of the Commission's programs overlap and specific project decisions could come under the purview of either committee; • There can be an imbalance in the number of agenda items for each committee; • Committees are occasionally canceled due to lack of substantive items; Agenda Item 7A 1 • Due to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) active role and authority in administering the Coachella Valley's share of transportation funding, the Commission's committee agenda items are often Western County related; and • Coachella Valley Commissioners have expressed concern regarding travel . and time commitments for committee items unrelated to their geographic area or the county as a whole. DISCUSSION: Measure A contains a unique feature in providing a geographic return to source of funding between Western Riverside County, the Coachella Valley, and the Palo Verde Valley. The existence of this provision recognizes the economic importance of the eastern part of Riverside County in spite of its smaller population and fewer municipal jurisdictions. Ten of Riverside County's cities are located in the eastern portion of the county, one county supervisorial district is located entirely in the eastern part of the county, and another supervisorial district is partially located within the Coachella Valley. The intent of this proposal is to formulate a committee and governance structure to serve the entire county, but to also provide opportunities to receive advice and counsel from all Commissioners and ensure that every Commissioner has an opportunity to fully participate. As mentioned above, there have been times where Commission discussions have often centered on topics that are localized to the western portion of the county. A prime example of this can be seen on discussions regarding the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The main reason for the dichotomy is the specific authority that is granted to CVAG under Measure A to actively participate in the programming of Measure A revenues returned to the Coachella Valley. Based on the above, staff believes that some slight modifications of the existing committee structure will benefit the Commission as a whole and has explored the following options for discussion: 1. Disband the existing Plans and Programs Committee and form two geographically -based committees. • Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects: Responsibilities include air quality, capital projects, communications and outreach programs, Congestion Management Program (CMP), intermodal programs, motorist services (ie. SAFE), new corridors, regional agencies/regional planning, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and State Transportation Improvement Agenda Item 7A 2 • • • Program (STIP) related to the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. It is proposed that this committee will meet at 10:30 a.m. or directly following the CVAG Transportation Committee on the first Monday of the month. Membership includes all of the Coachella Valley/ Palo Verde Valley representatives including the Fourth and Fifth District Supervisors. Issues for resolution regarding CVAG Transportation Committee: • The existing CVAG Committee will adjourn and then the Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee will convene. Membership and procedural issues can be addressed and a format developed through discussion with respective staff and legal counsel. • CVAG proposes to move its committee date from second Monday of the month at Noon to the first Monday of the month at 10:00 a.m., except when the first Monday and second Wednesday fall in the same week, in order to meet Commission agenda deadlines. • Western Riverside County Programs and Projects: Responsibilities include air quality, capital projects, communications and outreach programs, Congestion Management Program (CMP), intermodal programs, motorist services lie. SAFE/Freeway Service Patrol), new corridors, regional agencies/regional planning, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program related to Western Riverside County and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. This committee meets on the fourth Monday of the month at 1:30 p.m. Membership is comprised of 10 Western County representatives as appointed by the Chair, including the Fifth District Supervisor. Agenda Item 7A 2. Restructure Budget and Implementation Committee Responsibilities include annual budget development and oversight, competitive state and federal grant programs, countywide communications and outreach programs, countywide strategic plan, legislation, Measure A implementation, short range transit plans (SRTP), and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. This Committee will still include members from both the western and eastern portions of the county. This Committee meets on the fourth Monday of each month at 9:30 a.m. (no change). Membership is comprised of 10 Western County representatives and five Coachella Valley/Palo Verde Valley representatives as appointed by the Chair. One thing to note is the members from the eastern part of the county will be required to serve on more than one committee because those members will also serve on the Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee. IMPLEMENTATION: Executive Committee action on this recommendation is expected prior to the Commission meeting on February 10. This item will also be considered by the CVAG Executive Committee on February 8. Staff recommends implementation of new committee structures to begin in late February. Upon direction by the Chair, most committee assignments will closely mirror those existing appointments to minimize impact and inconvenience for Commissioners. Attachment: Ordinance No. 10-001 Agenda Item 7A 4 • • • ORDINANCE NO. 10-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AMENDING THE COMMISSION'S ADMINISTRATIVE CODE WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission") is a public agency of the state of California formed under the County Transportation Commission Act set forth in California Public Utilities Code Section 130000 et seq.; and WHEREAS, the Commission has the power to adopt such rules and regulations as it may deem necessary for the conduct of the Commission's affairs; and WHEREAS, the Commission has enacted an Administrative Code and has amended it; and WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that it is now necessary to amend its Administrative Code to approve the restructuring of its Budget and Implementation Committee; and WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that it is now necessary to amend its Administrative Code to approve the disbanding of the Plans and Programs Committee; and WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that it is now necessary to amend its Administrative Code to approve the formation of the Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee and the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's Board hereby ordains as follows: Section 1: Article III, Section H, Paragraph 1(a) shall be deleted in its entirety and shall be replaced with the following: (a) The Budget and Implementation Committee. This Committee shall be composed of ten (10) Western Riverside County regular members of the Commission and five (5) Eastern Riverside County regular members of the Commission for a total of fifteen (151 regular members of the Commission selected by the Chair. For the purposes of this subsection (a) the Fifth District Supervisor shall be considered a Western Riverside County member. Subject to supervision by the Commission, the jurisdiction of the Committee shall be as follows: annual budget development and oversight, competitive state and federal grant programs, countywide communications and 1 5 outreach programs, countywide strategic plan, legislation, Measure A implementation, short range transit plans (SRTP), and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. Meetings shall be held at 9:30 a.m. on the fourth Monday of the month at the offices of the Commission, unless otherwise determined by the Committee or the Commission. At any regular meeting not yet convened because of the lack of a quorum, the committee members who are present may constitute themselves a "Committee of the Whole", for purposes of discussing agenda matters or any other matter of interest to the members present. The Committee of the Whole may act to take recommendations to the Commission but may take no final actions. Any recommendation presented to the Commission from a Committee of the Whole and not the whole committee and should state the number of votes for, against and abstaining in reference to the recommendation. The Committee shall automatically cease to exist if a quorum of the Commission is present at the meeting. (b) Programs and Projects Committees. The following Programs and Projects Committees are hereby created: (1) The Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee shall be composed of all of the regular members of the Commission representing the Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley areas of the County, including the Fourth and Fifth District Supervisors. Subject to supervision by the Commission, the jurisdiction of the Committee shall be as follows: air quality, capital projects, communications and outreach programs, Congestion Management Program (CMP), intermodal programs, motorist services (ie. SAFE), new corridors, regional agencies/regional planning, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) related to the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys, and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. Meetings shall be held at 10:30 a.m. or directly following the meeting of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments Transportation Committee on the first Monday of the month, except when the first Monday and second Wednesday fall in the same week, at the offices of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, unless otherwise directed by the Committee or the Commission. At 2 • • 6 any regular meeting not yet convened because of the lack of a quorum, the committee members who are present may constitute themselves a "Committee of the Whole," for purposes of discussing agenda matters or any other matter of interest to the members present. The Committee of the Whole may act to take recommendations to the Commission but may take no final actions. Any recommendation presented to the Commission from a Committee of the Whole and not the whole committee should state the number of votes for, against and abstaining in reference to the recommendation. The Committee shall automatically cease to exist if a quorum of the Commission is present at the meeting. (2) The Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee shall be composed of ten (10) Western Riverside County regular members of the Commission selected by the Chair, including the Fifth District Supervisor. Subject to supervision by the Commission, the jurisdiction of the Committee shall be as follows: air quality, capital projects, communications and outreach programs, Congestion Management Program (CMP), intermodal programs, motorist services (ie. SAFE/Freeway Service Patrol), new corridors, regional agencies/regional planning, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program related to Western Riverside County, and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. Meetings shall be held at 1:30 p.m. on the fourth Monday of the month at the offices of the Commission unless otherwise directed by the Committee or the Commission. At any regular meeting not yet convened because of the lack of a quorum, the committee members who are present may constitute themselves a "Committee of the Whole," for purposes of discussing agenda matters or any other matter of interest to the members present. The Committee of the Whole may act to take recommendations to the Commission but may 3 7 take no final actions. Any recommendation presented to the Commission from a Committee of the Whole and not the whole committee should state the number of votes for, against and abstaining in reference to the recommendation. The Committee shall automatically cease to exist if a quorum of the Commission is present at the meeting. Section 2: Article III, Section H, Paragraph 3(g) shall be amended to read as follows: (g) Amendments to this Administration Code may be approved by the Executive Committee, subject to review by the Commission as set forth in Paragraph 3(c) above. This Ordinance shall be effective on February 15, 2010. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of February, 2010. Bob Buster, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 4 8 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM Audit Ad Hoc Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2008/09 Commission Audit Results AUDIT AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the FY 2008/09: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR); 2) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Audited Financial Statements; 3) State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) Audited Financial Statements; 4) Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) Audited Financial Statements; 5) Compliance Report; 6) Commercial Paper Compliance Report; 7) Auditor Required Communications Report; 8) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriation Limit Calculation; 9) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance Program incentives; and 10) Management certifications. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In March 2008, McGladrey & Pullen LLP (McGladrey) was selected to perform the annual audit of the Commission's basic financial statements included in the CAFR, LTF, STA, and federal awards. Additionally, it was requested to perform agreed -upon procedures related to the annual Appropriations Limit Calculation and the Commuter Assistance Program (CAP) incentives, and to report on compliance with commercial paper debt covenants. As a result of the receipt of PTMISEA funds, a separate audit is required. The scope of work for McGladrey was subsequently expanded to include the PTMISEA audit. The audits, agreed -upon procedures, and compliance procedures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 have been completed, and McGladrey has issued all reports. Agenda Item 7B 9 The Commission's CAFR consists of three sections: introductory, financial, and statistical. While the introductory and statistical sections were not audited by McGladrey, the basic financial statements included in the financial section were audited by McGladrey. The Commission received an unqualified opinion on its basic financial statements from McGladrey, which is the highest form of assurance. Limited procedures were performed related to the required supplementary information, including Management's Discussion and Analysis; suchinformation was not audited. The other supplementary information was subject to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and, in the opinion of the auditors, it is fairly stated in relation to the basic financial statements. The basic financial statements include government -wide financial statements and fund financial statements. Additionally, Management's Discussion and Analysis is required and provides a narrative overview and analysis of the Commission's financial activities for the fiscal year. Financial highlights include net assets of approximately $566 million at June 30, 2009, representing a decrease of approximately $14 million from the prior year, and governmental funds fund balances of approximately $456 million at June 30, 2009, representing a decrease of approximately $75 million from the prior year. The audit reports related to the separately issued financial statements of the LTF, STA, and PTMISEA also reflect unqualified opinions from McGladrey. These financial statements are required to be issued separately under the Transportation Development Act ITDA), including the provisions for PTMISEA in accordance with Proposition 16; however, the LTF and STA financial position and operations are also included in the fund financial statements in the CAFR. The PTMISEA financial position and operations are part of the Measure A Western County Commuter Rail accounts. These reports noted no matters considered to be a material weakness in internal control and no instances of noncompliance. The Compliance Report, often referred to as the Single Audit Report, includes the reports on compliance and internal control over financial reporting and over federal awards. These reports noted no matters considered to be material weaknesses in internal control and no instances of noncompliance; however, a significant deficiency related to disbursements was identified and included in the Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs as #2009-1 Disbursements. As a result of the establishment of the commercial paper program in March 2005, the bank reimbursement agreement requires a report from the auditor regarding compliance with certain covenants. The report issued by the auditors indicated that nothing came to their attention that caused them to believe that the Commission failed to comply with these covenants. Agenda Item 7B 10 • • • A management letter usually includes recommendations for improvements and operational efficiencies related to internal control and other matters noted during the audit. McGladrey did not have any recommendations or comments on other matters, and, therefore, it did not issue a management letter. The Appropriations Limit Calculation and CAP reports are based on specific procedures agreed to by the Commission and other agencies. For the Appropriations Limit Calculation, the auditors noted no exceptions or findings related to the procedures performed. As required by AICPA Auditing Standards Board Statement of Audit No. 114, "The Auditor's Communication With Those Charged With Governance," the Commission's auditor is required to make certain annual communications to the Commission's audit committee, or its equivalent, regarding the audit of the Commission's financial statements prior to the completion of the audit. The annual audit for FY 2008/09 conducted by McGladrey was completed in November 2009. The report to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee from the auditor contains the required communications about the audit. Representatives from McGladrey will review this information with the ad hoc committee as part of the required communications. As part of the development of the Commission's Accountability Program that commenced following the June 30, 2005 audit, the directors have completed certifications relating to financial reporting and operational disclosures. Attachments: (Posted on the Commission Website) 1) 2009 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2) 2009 Local Transportation Fund Financial and Compliance Report 3) 2009 State Transit Assistance Fund Financial and Compliance Report 4) 2009 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account Financial and Compliance Report; 5) 2009 Compliance Report 6) 2009 Commercial Paper Compliance Report 7) 2009 Report to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee 8) 2009 Agreed -Upon Procedures Report on Appropriations Limit Calculation 9) 2009 Agreed -Upon Procedures Report on Commuter Assistance Program Incentives 10) 2009 Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer Certification 1 1) 2009 Directors Certification Agenda Item 78 11 88367 Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County, California �— �-�1ierrlir 1V r I M �� 1-- ' TM711 17TT1T iI 1,,vir 1 Plir Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009 EEE.54.11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009 Submitted by: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission CONTENTS Introductory Section Letter of Transmittal i Organizational Chart xi List of Principal Officials xi Certificate of Achievement xiii Financial Section Independent Auditor's Report 1 Management's Discussion and Analysis 3 Basic Financial Statements Government -wide Financial Statements Statement of Net Assets 16 Statement of Activities 17 Fund Financial Statements Balance Sheet —Governmental Funds 18 Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets 19 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Deficit) —Governmental Funds 20 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities 21 Notes to Financial Statements 22 Required Supplementary Information Budgetary Comparison Schedules General Fund 42 Major Special Revenue Funds 43 Schedule of Funding Progress for Postretirement Health Care 44 Notes to Required Supplementary Information 45 Other Supplementary Information Nonmajor Governmental Funds 47 Combining Balance Sheet 48 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 49 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Deficit) —Budget and Actual: Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds 50 Capital Projects and Debt Service Funds 51 Schedule of Expenditures for Local Streets and Roads by Geographic Area —All Special Revenue Funds 52 Schedule of Expenditures for Transit and Specialized Transportation by Geographic Area and Source — All Special Revenue Funds 53 CONTENTS, CONTINUED Statistical Section Statistical Section Overview 55 Net Assets by Component 57 Changes in Net Assets 58 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 60 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds 61 Sources of County of Riverside Taxable Sales by Business Type 62 Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates 63 Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City 64 Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area 65 Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type 66 Computation of Legal Debt Margin 67 Pledged Revenue Coverage 68 Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside 69 Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside 70 Full-time Equivalent Employees by Function/Program 71 Operating Indicators 72 Capital Asset Statistics by Program 73 NOLD1S aOlDf140KN1 INTRODUCTORY SECTION Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor • Riverside, CA Mailing Address: P. O. Box 12008 • Riverside, CA 92502-2208 (951) 787-7141 • Fax (951) 787-7920 • www.rctc.org Moe Riverside County Transportation Commission November 16, 2009 To the Riverside County Transportation Commission Commissioners and Citizens of the County of Riverside: Letter of Transmittal State law requires that the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) publish within six months of the close of each fiscal year a complete set of financial statements presented in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) and audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards by independent certified public accountants. Pursuant to that requirement, we hereby issue the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the Commission for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. Management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all of the information presented in this report, based upon the Commission's comprehensive framework of internal controls established for this purpose. Because the cost of internal control should not exceed anticipated benefits, the objective is to provide reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance that the financial statements are free of any material misstatements. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP, has issued an unqualified opinion on the Commission's financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2009. The independent auditor's report is located at the front of the financial section of this report. Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) immediately follows the independent auditor's report and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the basic financial statements. MD&A complement this letter of transmittal and should be read in conjunction with it. Profile of the Government The Commission was established by state law in 1977 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within the county of Riverside (County). The Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in Riverside County and to maximize the cost effectiveness of transportation dollars in the County. The governing body is the Board of Commissioners (Board), which consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 26 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Governor. The Commission is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transportation operators and agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non -motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and other transportation activities. The Commission also serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter -approved Measure A Transportation Improvement Program. Measure was approved by the County's electorate in 1988 and imposes a half -cent sales tax for 20 years, beginning in 1989 and concluding on June 30, 2009, to fund a specific program of transportation improvements (1989 Measure A). In November 2002 Riverside County's voters approved a 30-year extension of Measure A commencing July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2039 (2009 Measure A). The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. The TDA provides two major sources of funding: Local Transportation Funds, which are derived from a one -quarter cent state sales tax, and State Transit Assistance, which is derived from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. Additionally, the Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists, and the Freeway i Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service to assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods. These services are provided at no charge to motorists and are funded through a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations. The Commission is financially accountable for SAFE, a legally separate entity which is blended within the Commission's financial statements. Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the County. As the CMA, the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system. The Commission is required to adopt a budget prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. The annual budget, which includes all funds, serves as the foundation for the Commission's financial planning and control regarding staffing, operations, and capital plans. The budget is prepared by fund (financial responsibility unit), department, and function. Management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function. During the fiscal year, all budget amendments requiring Board approval are presented to the Board for consideration and adoption. Local Economy In recent years, the County had experienced significant growth due to housing that is more available and affordable relative to nearby coastal counties, a more diversified employment and commercial base, and increasing share of the regional economy. During those years, Riverside County's economy thrived, reflecting the area's competitive advantages over its neighboring counties, largely as a result of the County's continuing ability to draw jobs, residents, and affordable housing away from the Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego county areas. The availability of affordable space for both residents and businesses along with improved transportation and communication access to employment centers in Los Angeles and Orange counties were the primary reasons for expansion and growth in recent years. Reflecting the general level of economic activity, taxable sales had a solid record of continued growth from fiscal year (FY) 1998/99 through FY 2005/06. Similarly, taxable sales have been declining the past three years through June 30, 2009. Today the economy in Riverside County reflects the nationwide recession, as evidenced by an increased unemployment rate, a slowdown in total personal income and taxable sales, a drop in residential building permits, a decline in the rate of home sales and the median price of single-family homes and condominiums, and an increase in notices of default on mortgage loans secured by homes and condominiums. The effects of the national credit crisis that began in 2008 continue to affect liquidity in the credit markets, credit availability, and difficulties in issuing short-term debt. The impact of the recession has been amplified in the Inland Empire due to its relatively greater recent growth and the relatively lower average income levels when compared to coastal areas. In FY 2008/09, the effects of the economic slowdown were evident as Measure A sales tax revenues experienced a 16.0% decline from the prior year, decreasing to slightly more than $119 million. Although economic reports indicate that the national recession has ended, recovery in the state of California (State) and the local Inland Empire economy is expected to be slower through 2010. Commission staff has conservatively projected Measure A sales tax revenues at $121.5 million, similar to the FY 2008/09 projected budget. The Commission and its staff will continue to assess the situation and determine if a mid -year budget revision to estimated sales tax revenues is appropriate. Regardless of the recent economic trends, the Commission faces formidable ongoing challenges in terms of providing needed infrastructure enhancements to support a population and an economy that has outgrown the capacity of its existing infrastructure. Fortunately, the foundation of the regional economy continues to retain many of the fundamental positive attributes that fueled its growth earlier in this decade, including lower priced real estate with proximity to coastal communities, a large pool of skilled workers, and increasing wealth and education levels. Long-term Financial Planning Proactive financial planning is a critical element for the success of the Commission as it builds for the future. Continually reviewing revenues and projecting expenditures ensures that the Commission's expectations are realistic and goals are achievable. Scarce resources, especially at the state and federal level, can be directed to projects of regional significance or, with additional funding, project priorities can be expanded to address unfunded project requirements or developing needs. ii At the state level, there continues to be concerns regarding California's overall budget situation. Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature are faced with an ongoing, structural imbalance in the state budget that may result in the short-term diversion of Proposition 42 transportation funds, which are derived from the sales tax on gasoline. While this would be constitutionally limited to a loan that would have to be repaid in three years, the cash flow impact could impact the delivery of a number of local projects —most notably a number of freeway interchanges that are dependent on State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) dollars. The news on the federal level is somewhat less predictable. Congress provided a modest amount of one-time funding for transportation projects through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). In Riverside County, ARRA funds were used on several critical freeway interchanges in the Coachella Valley on Interstate (I) 10 and also on State Route (SR) 60 and 1-215 in Western County. ARRA funds also provided a small infusion to transit capital needs. While ARRA was helpful to bring a number of long-awaited projects to construction, the "economic stimulus" program has not resolved the long-term need for a stable, reliable source of federal funding. The current federal authorization bill for transportation known as SAFETEA-LU has expired and is being continued at reduced funding levels on a month -to -month basis until Congress can agree on a multi -month extension of the program or a new full six -year program. The Commission's objective in working with Congress on the new authorization bill will be to secure predictable and substantial investments on key Riverside County transportation corridors including railroad grade separations on the Alameda Corridor East (ACE) and freeway improvements on major interstates such as 1-10 and 1-215. In December 2006, the Commission approved a multi -year Western Riverside County Delivery Plan (Delivery Plan) that focuses on investing more than $2 billion in improvements along a number of major freeways during the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A program, including the 1-15, 1-215, and SR-91. In order to make the needed investments, the plan relies on Measure A, STIP, and Proposition 1 B dollars as well as the development of tolled express lanes on 1-15 and the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. NORCO CORONA RIVERSIDE 91 MORENO VALLEY Alessandro Blvd. Von Buren Blvd. Nalco Rood CALIMESA BANNING BEAUMONT Ramona Expressway SAN JACINTO PERRIS 79 ® - 79 CANYON MENIFEE LAKE ELSINORE MURRIETA WILDOMAR TEMECULA s4 DESERT HOT SPRINGS 0 PALM SPRINGS CATHEDRAL CITY RANCHO MIRAGE PALM DESERT S AN" INDIAN WELLS BEYTHE 95 10 78 INDIO UIOUINTA COACHELLA ROSA 0 iii Major Initiatives Capital Project Delivery and Implementation The Capital Project Development and Delivery Department is responsible for major highway, regional arterial, and rail capital projects from initial environmental study through preliminary engineering, final design, right of way acquisition, and construction. This past year was one of significant accomplishments for the Commission as progress was made on a number of major projects. Difficult funding decisions were made on millions of dollars in transportation projects to expand freeways, improve mobility on streets and roads, and improve rail passenger facilities. Highways. The Commission is currently working on the development phases for a number of projects that are slated for construction in the near future. For example, the SR-60/I-215 East Junction High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) connector project is currently in the design phase. This project will provide two HOV bridges that will connect the SR-60 HOV lanes constructed by the Commission in Moreno Valley to the HOV lanes that were constructed on the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange and corridor improvement project that was completed in Fall 2008. The SR-60/I-215 East Junction project is anticipated to begin construction in August 2010 with an estimated completion date of Spring 2013. The SR-91 HOV project from Adams Street to the SR-60/SR-91/1-215 interchange was approved for Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funding of $157.2 million related to the construction phase. The environmental document was approved in August 2007. Given the stringent deadlines associated with the CMIA projects, the Commission and Caltrans District 8 are partnering on the right of way activities. It is anticipated that the project will begin construction in late 2011 with an estimated completion date of July 2015. The SR-91 HOV project is one of the few remaining projects yet to be completed from the 1989 Measure A program. Another remaining 1989 Measure A project is the SR-74/I-215 interchange. This project is in the final stages of final design and right of way acquisition. The project will realign and widen the on -ramps from SR-74 to 1-215 and widen the Redlands Avenue overcrossing. The project is funded with Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) zonal funding and Measure A funds and will likely utilize ARRA funding from savings that are realized from other ARRA projects. The funding is in place for the construction and construction management efforts. Programming requests for the TUMF zonal funds have been made in anticipation of construction advertisement in early 2010. The project construction will begin shortly thereafter and take approximately 24 months to complete. In addition to the SR 74/1-215 interchange, the 1-215 corridor will prove to be an important corridor for the Commission in the coming years. Two projects make up the 1-215 widening projects included in the 2009 Measure A Delivery Plan. The first is the 1-215 mixed flow lanes from 1-15 to Scott Road. This project will provide a third mixed flow lane in each direction of the existing median of 1-215. Final design began in early 2008 with construction commencing in early 2010. The project is funded with STIP funds and was approved for CMIA funding of $38,600,000 for the construction phase. The second 1-215 Widening Project is the 1-215 mixed flow lanes from Scott Road to Nuevo Road. This project will also add a third mixed flow lane in each direction of 1-215. Final design will begin in mid 2010 with construction starting in 2013. The project is funded with STIP, Measure A, and other sources. Commuter Rail. Since 1993 the Commission has held title to and managed the 38-mile San Jacinto Branch Line and several adjacent properties in anticipation of offering Metrolink commuter rail service to a wider area of the County, initially including Moreno Valley and Perris and ultimately to Hemet/San Jacinto. The first major expansion for commuter rail along this corridor is known as the Perris Valley Line. The Commission is currently in the midst of completing an Environmental Impact Statement/Report for the project which is set to be completed in 2011. In September 2007 a Small Starts application was submitted to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requesting authorization to enter into project development for the Perris Valley Line rail extension project. In December 2007 the Commission received approval from the FTA with a project rating of medium -high. The 2006 STIP also allocated $30 million to the project. New commuter rail service on the Perris Valley Line is anticipated to commence in late 2012. The Senate approved $45 million in federal funding for the Perris Valley Line project as part of the FY 2009 Senate Transportation, iv Housing, and Urban Development appropriations bill, consistent with recommendations from the FTA and the White House. The Perris Valley Line extension project remains eligible for another $28 million of Small Starts funding, which the Commission will pursue in the FY 2011 federal budget. An ongoing concern for Metrolink passengers is the need for additional parking capacity at the Commission's stations. The situation has always been acute in Downtown Corona where demand required more spaces to be met with a parking structure at the North Main Corona station. Construction began in early 2008, and the structure was placed into service in July 2009. The facility has eliminated the overcrowding and hassle that has plagued the North Main Corona station since it opened in 2002. Additionally, the Rail Department is taking the lead on the expansion of the La Sierra Metrolink station via the design and eventual construction of a new multimodal facility that will serve both as a park and ride facility and bus facility. With the continued growth of patronage, commuter rail's challenges for the future include securing state or federal allocations for Positive Train Control to ensure safety, more passenger coaches, and additional train storage and maintenance facilities. Toll Program Moves Forward In September 2008 two landmark legislative bills were passed by the California State Legislature and signed by Governor Schwarzenegger that bear major significance to the Commission. The first bill, SB1316 (Correa), allows for the extension of the 91 Express Lanes from the Orange/Riverside County line to I-15. This bill was co -sponsored by both the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Commission and provides benefits for both counties. This bill will allow the Commission to construct two tolled express lanes in each direction in the median of SR-91. The extension of these lanes will provide more choices for Riverside County drivers, improve congestion on the general-purpose lanes, and ensure a speedy, uncongested trip for drivers willing to pay a toll. The SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project includes these express lanes as well as numerous non -toll lane improvements including an additional general purpose lane in each direction on SR-91 as detailed in the 2009 Measure A program. Environmental studies and preliminary engineering work are expected to be completed in mid 2011. In October 2009 the Commission hired a Project and Construction Manager to manage the design -build phase of work. The new lanes are planned to be operational in late 2015 assuming the design -build method of project delivery. Also in October 2009 the Commission obtained the necessary federal tolling authority for the SR-91 corridor through the United States Department of Transportation's (USDOT) section 129 tolling program. The second bill, AB1954 (Jeffries), provides the Commission the state authority to toll the 1-15 corridor within Riverside County. This bill will allow the Commission to construct two express lanes in each direction in the median of 1-15. The first phase of these lanes is planned to extend from SR-74 in the south to SR-60 to the north, approximately 31 miles. The lanes will have the same benefits mentioned previously for the 91 Express Lanes extension. The 1-15 Corridor Improvement Project includes these tolled express lanes as well as numerous non -toll lane improvements including an additional lane in each direction on 1-15 as detailed in the 2009 Measure A program. This project's environmental studies and preliminary engineering work are scheduled to be completed in 2012. The project is planned to be operational in 2019. In July 2009 the Commission obtained the necessary federal tolling authority for the 1-15 corridor through the USDOT's Value Pricing Pilot Program. The passage of these bills and obtaining federal tolling authority for both corridors are major milestones for the Commission. The legislation and tolling authority granted supports the Commission's long-term plan to deliver freeway improvements using tolling as a new source of funding to complement more traditional funding sources. These projects will also mark the introduction of tolling to the Inland Empire region of Southern California. TUMF Plays an Important Role In the Coachella Valley, a TUMF program was established shortly after the passage of the 1989 Measure A. The program requires developers to pay a fee on new development to fund arterial improvements. Cities are required to participate in the program or forfeit Measure A local dollars to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, which oversees the arterial program and has been successful in funding a number of important arterial projects. With the passage of the 2009 Measure A, a TUMF program with participation requirements similar to that in the Coachella Valley is now in place in western Riverside County (Western County). As provided for in the 2009 Measure A, the first $400 v million in TUMF funding is to be allocated to the Commission to be split evenly between new corridors and regional arterials. In order to prevent a disruption of funding for TUMF projects, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the Commission agreed on lifting the $400 million cap, resulting in the Commission receiving an equal share of the TUMF regional arterial revenue indefinitely. The memorandum of understanding and Administrative Plan were amended to reflect this agreement at the August 2008 WRCOG and September 2008 Commission meetings. In fiscal year 2005, the Commission took its first steps to allocate its share of Western County TUMF revenues with allocations for the development of the Mid County Parkway and the SR-79 realignment and to project development for 24 regional arterial projects throughout Western County. Since the inception of the program, the Commission has programmed more than $75 million in TUMF funding related to the approval of approximately $188 million in funding the regional arterial projects through construction. To date, three projects have been completed, two are under construction, and one is out to bid. Rail Development, Operations and Support The County's participation in commuter rail service began with the 1989 Measure A. Riverside County voters were the first to specify commuter rail service in Southern California as a priority transportation improvement project. The subsequent passage of similar measures in adjoining counties and the passage of statewide rail infrastructure bonds in 1990 provided enough capital funding to build the initial system. As one of five funding partners in the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, which operates the Metrolink commuter rail service, the Commission is engaged in a continual exercise of consensus building with its partners. Now consisting of seven lines, serving origins and destinations in six counties, the system carries an average of 45,000 passengers each weekday. The Commission owns and operates five stations served by the three Metrolink lines operating through the County: ▪ Riverside Line (1993): Originates in the Downtown Riverside station and stops at the Pedley station before proceeding through Ontario, Pomona, Industry, and Montebello to Los Angeles Union Station. Ridership has improved slightly this past year with better on -time performance and is now carrying approximately 5,300 daily riders. ▪ Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) Line (1995): Begins in nearby San Bernardino with stops in the Downtown Riverside, La Sierra, North Main Corona, and West Corona stations before entering Orange County with stops in Anaheim, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, Irvine, Laguna Niguel/Mission Viejo, and San Juan Capistrano. When initiated this service was described as the first suburb -to -suburb commuter rail service in the nation. Due to the economic downturn, the IEOC line has experienced a slight decrease in patronage with an average daily ridership of 4,600. ▪ 91 Line (2002): Provides another alternative to commute from Riverside to Los Angeles with stops in Riverside, Orange, and Los Angeles counties. Patronage on the line has remained steady with an average daily ridership of 2,300. In addition to regular weekday service, the Commission partnered with the OCTA and San BernardinoAssociated Governments (SANBAG) to provide weekend service along the IEOC. Three round trip trains on Saturday and two round trips on Sunday serve as another link between Orange and Riverside counties and provide an effective transportation alternative for weekend travel. Planning for the Future In terms of future progress, the Commission has given its unanimous support to the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) and its transportation component, the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP). The RCIP was intended to be a model for streamlining the environmental process while providing for the long-term development and economic growth of the County. The County and the Commission worked together in a first -of -its kind endeavor to provide for new transportation options and land use planning to support the economic growth of the County while providing for preservation of open space and protection for endangered species. CETAP addresses the impact of future population and economic growth on the existing transportation system by identifying and establishing new transportation corridors and vi arterial system improvements. The entire CETAP program was recognized under President Bush's Executive Order for Environmental Streamlining and Stewardship. The Commission's CETAP effort focuses on four new transportation corridors: two located within the County and two that would link Riverside County with the neighboring counties of Orange and San Bernardino. Each of the corridors is progressing on differing schedules as noted below: * Internal north/south transportation corridor between Winchester and Temecula: As a result of the Tier 1 environmental work completed, the Commission now can protect right of way for the future widening of 1-15 and 1-215 in the south County area as well as a future French Valley Parkway connection from Winchester Road to 1-15. ▪ New East-West Internal Corridor. The Mid County Parkway project is a proposed transportation corridor designed to relieve local and regional traffic congestion. The draft environmental document was completed and circulated to the public in FY 2008/09. In response to comments received on the document, the Commission took action to focus the project to make the best use of limited transportation dollars while addressing the most immediate traffic needs. The Mid County Parkway project is now a proposed 16 mile corridor to relieve local and regional traffic congestion in the San Jacinto and Perris areas and surrounding Riverside County communities. * New transportation corridors and alternatives between Riverside and Orange counties: In 2005 the Commission completed a Major Investment Study in cooperation with OCTA and the Transportation Corridor Agencies to evaluate potential projects. The locally preferred strategy includes a combination of improvements to SR-91 as well as consideration of new facilities to improve mobility between the two counties. The Commission is currently conducting geotechnical feasibility tests in the Cleveland National Forest to determine the feasibility of a tunnel structure with the study results being available in early 2010. The overall effort garnered a financial boost with a $15 million in direct Congressional funding. * New transportation corridor and arterial improvements between Riverside and San Bernardino counties: A combination of arterial improvements and a new transportation facility have been studied in a joint effort between the Commission, SANBAG, and local cities to improve mobility between the two counties. The County of Riverside, in cooperation with the affected jurisdictions, is currently conducting the required environmental work for the arterial improvements. Another large planning effort affecting the Hemet and San Jacinto communities is the realignment of SR-79. This 2009 Measure A project is undergoing early project development funded through the TUMF program and federal earmarks. An environmental document is being prepared in cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies to allow the realignment of SR-79 between Domenigoni Parkway, south of SR-74, and Gilman Springs Road, north of San Jacinto. The project would realign the highway to provide a more direct route within the San Jacinto Valley. A draft document is anticipated to be available for public review in mid-2010. Commuter Assistance Program The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program provides a variety of rideshare services and products both to employers and commuters. Through voluntary participation, commuters and employers receive a direct benefit from their sales tax dollars, and the entire region benefits from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality as a result of trip elimination or use of alternative means of transportation. The Commission's continued success in serving commuters and employers within the County resulted in SANBAG's renewal of its contract with the Commission, for the thirteenth year, to provide an identical commuter assistance program for San Bernardino County residents. This unique bi-county partnership allows for greater cost efficiency in program delivery and consistency of program application for all Inland Empire participants. vii At the core of the Commuter Assistance Program are employer partnerships. To support voluntary efforts by local employers in implementing and maintaining rideshare activities at work sites, rideshare services, tools and resources are provided to Riverside and San Bernardino County employers. Employer partners also gain access to various incentives for their employees and function as an efficient and effective delivery mechanism for the program's commuter products. The most prominent commuter product continues to be the Advantage Rideshare Program, a short-term incentive project, which offers $2 per day for each day new ridesharers use an alternate mode of transportation in a three-month period. Long-term ridesharers are recognized and rewarded for their continuing commitment to use alternate modes of transportation to and from work through the Club Ride Program. Another component of the Commuter Assistance program is the provision of park and ride lots. Typically, the Commission leases excess parking from business and civic institutional partners at a reasonable rate. Working in partnership with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) which provides signage and insurance, the Commission currently provides over 2,000 spaces to Riverside County commuters. The Commuter Assistance Program is also taking the lead on the development of a 200-car park and ride/bus facility in the city of Lake Elsinore. The Commission's program also extends beyond the borders of the Inland Empire. To support coordinated and efficient services through a five -county region that includes transportation agencies in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties, the Commission operates two key regional rideshare components. The first is the Regional Rideshare Database that serves as a central depository for commuter transportation surveys and as the region's primary ridematching application. The other element of regional significance is the www.commutesmart.info website that the Commission administers. This website provides a one -stop online resource for both commuters looking to rideshare, get transit or traffic information and for employers looking to implement or maintain a ridesharing program at their worksite. In providing commuter benefits to employers and employees during FY 2008/09, the program attracted 2,082 drive alone commuters to rideshare and participate in the Advantage Rideshare program —almost double the amount of last year's participants. Club Ride membership grew by 40% to 7,378 members for the same period. There were 2,423 calls made to the 866-RIDESHARE rideshare information service for commuters in FY 2008/09. Additionally, using air quality mitigation grant funds awarded by the County of Riverside, the Commission expanded its service area into the Coachella Valley. The benefits of ridesharing were promoted both to employers and commuters in FY 2008/09, the last of a two-year Coachella Valley demonstration, and resulted in over 50,800 one-way trips reduced, 688,000 miles saved, and approximately 13,700 pounds of emissions reduced. Finally, using unexpended 1989 Measure A funds, the Commission, in partnership with SANBAG, has initiated work on the development of an Inland Empire 511 system to provide a web and phone -based traveler information resource for Inland Empire commuters. This service will be fully operational in early 2010. Specialized Transit The Commission has maintained a long-term commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. During FY 2008/09, the nonprofit operators provided approximately 87,860 Measure A trips. Along with support of traditional dial -a -ride services, the Commission supports innovative programs providing transit assistance in hard -to -serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. During the last quarter of FY 2007/08, the Commission adopted the Public Transit -Human Services Coordinated Plan (Coordinated Plan), making the Commission eligible for federal funding of specialized transit in Riverside County. Concurrent with the adoption of the Coordinated Plan, the Commission also authorized staff to conduct a Universal Call for Projects for Specialized Transit (Universal Call) and evaluate and select projects eligible to receive the new federal funds under the Job Access Reverse Commute and New Freedom programs. Using this competitive process allowed the Commission to seek proposals from a wide range of providers and make decisions with respect to funding specialized transit projects that result in viii the most efficient delivery of trips. The Universal Call included approximately $1.9 million in new federal funding augmenting the $6 million in Measure A committed locally by the Commission. The Universal Call resulted in the award in FY 2009/10 of two-year contracts to selected providers in both Western County and the Coachella Valley. Motorist Assistance Programs In cooperation with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and Caltrans, the Commission, in its capacity as the SAFE, assists motorists who experience accidents, mechanical breakdowns, or other unforeseen problems by providing access to cellular call boxes along the County's major highways. The Commission's system includes 614 call boxes serving more than 650 miles of highways. The call box program is funded by an annual $1 surcharge added to vehicle registrations. Each call box is a battery -powered, solar -charged roadside terminal containing a microprocessor and cellular telephone. Spacing between call boxes ranges from one-half mile in high traffic areas to two miles in remote areas of the County. Call boxes are installed on the three interstates, U.S. Route 95, and the 14 state routes located within the County. The phones are programmed to call a private call answer center, and the call box operator responds to the call by routing emergency calls to the CHP for appropriate services (i.e., ambulance, tow truck, fire, or police unit) or providing a direct connection to routine service through auto clubs or other private tow and service providers. Call box operators answered approximately 6,600 calls during FY 2008/09. In an effort to relieve congestion and reduce pollution, the Commission provides an additional motorist assistance program with the FSP. The FSP program is a special team of 20 tow trucks traveling along portions of SR-60, SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 within the County during peak, weekday commuter hours to assist drivers when their vehicles break down or experience other mechanical problems. The purpose of the FSP is to clear debris and remove disabled vehicles from the freeway as quickly as possible to help keep freeway traffic moving during rush hour periods. Services provided are free to the motorist and include changing a flat tire, providing one gallon of fuel, taping radiator hoses, or towing the vehicle off the freeway to designated locations where the motorist can make other arrangements for repair. Another effort augments existing FSP service with additional tow trucks in construction areas as another means of construction -related congestion mitigation. The FSP is funded by the Riverside County SAFE and the State. During FY 2008/09, the FSP provided assistance to approximately 43,100 motorists. Goods Movement The impact of delays caused by freight trains traveling through Riverside County is one of the area's most pressing transportation concerns. In fact, the Commission adopted, as its number one priority for the upcoming federal reauthorization bill a robust federal investment in ACE grade separations. Previously there were 61 at -grade ACE crossings in Riverside County presenting conflicts between rail and highway traffic. Of the 61 crossings, three have been completed (Avenue 48/ Dillon Road, Avenue 50, and Jurupa Avenue); two additional crossings (Columbia Avenue and Magnolia Avenue) will be completed by 2010. Twenty-nine of the remaining 56 at -grade crossings remain as a Commission priority that requires funding. The cost of constructing grade separations at the 29 locations is currently estimated at $1.7 billion, yet only $414.8 million is currently committed through federal, state, and local funding sources. At the October 2008 Commission meeting, the Commission approved a strategy for funding 20 of the 31 crossings for a total project cost of $980.5 million. The balance of the needed funds—$565.7 million —will be included as part of Commission's strategy for the upcoming federal transportation reauthorization bill. Awards and Acknowledgements The Government Finance OfficersAssociation of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the Commission for its CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008. This was the 16th straight year the Commission has received this prestigious national award, which recognizes conformance with the highest standards for preparation of state and local government financial reports. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government unit must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized CAFR conforming to program standards. Such CAFR must satisfy both GAAP and applicable legal requirements. ix This award for financial reporting excellence is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current report continues to conform to the GFOA program's requirements, and we are submitting it to the GFOA for consideration for another certificate. The CAFR each year is a collaborative effort by Commission staff and its independent auditors. The undersigned are grateful to all staff for their willingness to expend the effort necessary to ensure the financial information contained herein is informative and completed within established deadlines. Special thanks must be extended to the Finance staff, Commission's auditors, and the program management and staff for the time, effort, and commitment so vital for the final completion of the CAFR. In closing, without the leadership and the support of the Board, preparation of this report would not have been possible. Its prudent management must be credited for the strength of the Commission's fiscal condition, and its vision ensures that the Riverside County Transportation Commission will be on the move planning for and building a better future. Very truly yours, .4z ANNE MAYER Executive Director THERESIATREVINO Chief Financial Officer x (Z)JBBDUDW POKLId II°l • }s�lDuy }}°+S }SAIDUy }}°+S JOI1.18S CJerk) uo y J<Dnn }° 4ije% / (Z) 's 1 S}�°Jd IDI!i.°}� °0• Jr C }sAiouy Bois } r 4Sd1DUy HD}S JoivaS i /JOLDUDW BUIUUD({ I g 6wwwDJ60Jd_ Jr / JaBDUDW SUOi+°led h iunwwo� Ja6DUDW 1 s}DaloJd 1D}idDD Jr / +sAl°W }MS }I • (=JaBouow D!meS 1°Pow!+I"W / 1 }shiDuy lints — J JOBDUDW }!SUDJl 1 + RI°uy }10}S — • J JGBouoyy I!D21 i 1 / \ J0130J10 J0438JKI JOPOJ!1 Jo}DOJKI swoJ6ad II°l J ` dJanilad+raloJd / `awdolanad }DaloJ� `aDwaS 1°P°wi+InW 1 1 1 1 CJE1BDUDW SU01}D18N }U8wUJOA00 .) Ja6DUDW 41.1011.10AOW 93000 } w sd u sls• }uo}s!ssvJo!u (S) uis!ui sy ani}a}siww aD1}}p JoluaS •J `and}oysluiwpy J \ JauaS Pb / I I �Ja6DUOW SOD!nJOS, pJDoB aD,y}p , I Bwjurio.D J8 }uD}slssy Bw}unoDDy (Z uopp.a Dal ugunoxv / JO}7aJIQ \ an1}nDax3 Andad Jo}Daga emoD8x3 I JOSIAJadnS 6ugunoDDy } SJOUOISilwwOD 1 JO pJDOg \ Jo}w}siwwpy sassy _ �g }uawaJnDOJd J / 1 / 1 Ja6ouow sBDJnosaa Ja6ouoyy sEassy wnH $ 6uRunoDDy ` v +UawaJnDOJd J I / 1 1 J8Dujo lopuould }aND / I lasunop 1°691 J peuo ieuonezpe6a0 uoissiwwoo uogepodsueal Alunoo apisaanN Riverside County Transportation Commission List of Principal Officials As of June 30, 2009 Board of Commissioners Name and Position Title Agency Bob Magee Bob Buster Greg Pettis Bob Botts Roger Berg Joseph DeConinck Ray Quinto Mary Craton Eduardo Garcia Karen Spiegel Scott Matas Robin Lowe Patrick J. Mullany Glenn Miller Terry Henderson Darcy Kuenzi Jesse Molina Rick Gibbs Frank Hall Jim Ferguson Steve Pougnet Daryl Busch Ron Meepos Steve Adams James Potts Ron Roberts Scott Farnam John F. Tavaglione Jeff Stone Vacant Marion Ashley Ray Wolfe Chair (Commission) 1st Vice Chair (Commission) 2nd Vice Chair (Commission); Vice Chair (Budget & Implementation Committee) Chair (Plans & Programs Committee) Member Member Member Chair (Budget & Implementation Committee) Member Vice Chair (Plans & Programs Committee) Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Member Governor's Appointee Management Staff Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director Michael Blomquist, Toll Programs Director Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director City of Lake Elsinore County of Riverside, District 1 City of Cathedral City City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of La Quinta City of Menifee City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rancho Mirage City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula City of Wildomar County of Riverside, District 2 County of Riverside, District 3 County of Riverside, District 4 County of Riverside, District 5 Caltrans District #8 xii Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to Riverside County Transportation Commission California For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2008 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. President Executive Director This page intentionally left blank. xiv FINANCIAL SECTION NOLD3S 1VIJNVNl3 Riverside County Transportation Commission McGladrey& Pullen Certified Public Accountants Independent Auditor's Report Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009, which collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission's management. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commission as of June 30, 2009, and the respective changes in financial position for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The management's discussion and analysis, budgetary comparison and other post -employment benefits information, as listed in the table of contents, are not a required part of the basic financial statements but are supplementary information required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. We have applied certain limited procedures, which consisted principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation of the required supplementary information. However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it. Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the Commission's basic financial statements. The combining and individual nonmajor fund financial statements and other schedules, listed in the table of contents as supplementary information, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. The accompanying introductory and statistical sections, as listed in the table of contents, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. This information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it. ,Oe."(4,147 / -� Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 2 Riverside County Transportation Commission Management's Discussion and Analysis Year Ended June 30, 2009 As management of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), we offer readers of the Commission's financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the Commission's financial activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. We encourage readers to consider the information on financial performance presented here in conjunction with the transmittal letter on pages i-x and the Commission's financial statements which begin on page 16. Financial Highlights • Total net assets of the Commission were $566,462,471 and consisted of invested capital assets, net of related debt, of $266,647,382; restricted net assets of $505,474,075; and unrestricted net asset (deficit) of ($205,658,986). • The unrestricted net asset (deficit) results primarily from the recording of the debt issued for Measure A highway, local street and road, and regional arterial projects. As title to substantially most of those assets vests with the State of California (State) Department of Transportation (Caltrans) or local jurisdictions, there is no asset corresponding to the liability. Accordingly, the Commission does not have sufficient current resources on hand to cover current and long-term liabilities; however, future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments when made. • Net assets decreased by $13,721,771 during fiscal 2009. General revenues consisting primarily of sales taxes and investment earnings are the major funding source for the governmental activities. The change in net assets was lower than in prior years due to the decline in sales taxes and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues as a result of a slowdown in the local economy. • Total capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, were $290,222,852 at June 30, 2009, representing an increase of $77,901,524, or 37%, from June 30, 2008. The increase in capital assets was primarily related to the purchase of land for the Mid County Parkway, a proposed Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridor, and the construction in progress costs related to commuter rail and tolled express lane projects. • The Commission's governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $456,243,471, a decrease of $74,800,623 compared to fiscal 2008. Approximately 76% of the governmental fund balances represent amounts available for the Measure A program, including debt service and funding from the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes, and the TUMF program. Overview of the Financial Statements This discussion and analysis are intended to serve as an introduction to the Commission's basic financial statements, which are comprised of three components consisting of government -wide financial statements, fund financial statements, and notes to the financial statements. This report also contains required supplementary information and other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements. Government -wide Financial Statements The government -wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the Commission's finances, in a manner similar to a private -sector business. The statement of net assets presents information on all of the Commission's assets and liabilities, with the difference between assets and liabilities reported as net assets. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the Commission is improving or deteriorating. 3 The statement of activities presents information showing how the Commission's net assets changed during the fiscal year. All changes in net assets are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. The government -wide financial statements report the functions of the Commission that are principally supported by sales taxes and intergovernmental revenues, or governmental activities. The governmental activities of the Commission include general government, the Measure program, CETAP, regional arterials, commuter rail, transit and specialized transportation services, planning and programming, bicycle and pedestrian projects, motorist services, and right of way management. Measure A program services are divided within the three regions of Riverside County (County), namely Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The government -wide financial statements include only the Commission and its blended component unit. The government - wide financial statements can be found on pages 16-17 of this report. Fund Financial Statements A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. Fund accounting is used to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal requirements. All of the Commission's funds are governmental funds. Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements; however, governmental fund financial statements focus on near -term inflows and outflows of spendable resources and on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a government's near -term financing requirements. Since the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. As a result, readers may better understand the long-term impact of the government's near -term financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities. The Commission maintains 12 individual governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental fund balance sheet and in the related statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances for the Commission's major governmental funds comprised of the General fund; Measure A Western County, Measure A Coachella Valley, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Special Revenue funds; Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund; and Debt Service fund. Data from the other five governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation. Individual fund data for each of these nonmajor governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements in the other supplementary information section. The Commission adopts an annual appropriated budget for the General fund, all Special Revenue funds, all Capital Projects funds, and the Debt Service fund. Budgetary comparison schedules have been provided for the General fund and major Special Revenue funds as required supplementary information and for the nonmajor Special Revenue funds and the Capital Projects and Debt Service funds as other supplementary information to demonstrate compliance with these budgets. The governmental fund financial statements, including the reconciliation between the fund financial statements and the government -wide financial statements, can be found on pages 18-21 of this report. Notes to the Financial Statements The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government -wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements can be found on pages 22-40 of this report. 4 Other Information Other information is in addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes to the financial statements. This report also presents certain required supplementary information concerning the Commission's budgetary results for the General fund and major Special Revenue funds as well as the schedule of funding progress for postretirement health care benefits. Required supplementary information can be found on pages 42-45 of this report. The combining statements referred to earlier relating to nonmajor governmental funds are presented immediately following the required supplementary information. Other supplementary information includes budgetary results for the nonmajor Special Revenue funds, all Capital Projects funds, and the Debt Service fund as well as schedules of expenditures for local streets and roads and expenditures for transit and specialized transportation. This other supplementary information can be found on pages 48-53 of this report. Government -wide Financial Analysis As noted previously, net assets may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government's financial position. At June 30, 2009, the Commission's assets exceeded liabilities by $566,462,471, a $13,721,771 decrease from June 30, 2008. Our analysis below focuses on the net assets and changes in net assets of the Commission's governmental activities. Net Assets Approximately 47%, compared to 36% in 2008, of the Commission's net assets reflect its investment in capital assets (i.e., construction and development in progress; land and improvements; rail operating easements; rail stations; office improvements; and office furniture, equipment, and vehicles), less any related outstanding debt used to acquire those assets, primarily related to land and tolled express lane projects in progress. The Commission uses these capital assets to provide transportation services to the residents and business community of the County. The increase of $59,169,348 in net assets invested in capital assets, net of related debt, from governmental activities resulted primarily from the reduction in the related debt, acquisition of land for the Mid County Parkway project, and construction in progress for commuter rail and tolled express lane projects. The most significant portion of the Commission's net assets represents resources subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. Restricted net assets from governmental activities represented approximately 89% and 90% of the total net assets at June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Restricted net assets from governmental activities decreased by $16,237,097, as a result of the use of restricted net assets for highway and regional arterial projects and transit and specialized transportation programs and the declining sales tax and TUMF revenues. Unrestricted net assets represent the portion of net assets that can be used to finance day-to-day operations without constraints established by debt covenants, enabling legislation, or other legal requirements. Unrestricted net assets from governmental activities changed from a $149,004,964 deficit at June 30, 2008 to a $205,658,986 deficit at June 30, 2009. This deficit results primarily from the impact of recording of the Commission's long-term debt, consisting of sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes, issued for Measure highway, local street and road, and regional arterial projects. While a significant portion of the debt has been incurred to build these projects which are capital assets, upon completion for most projects, these projects are transferred to Caltrans or the local jurisdiction. Accordingly, these projects are not assets of the Commission that offset the long-term debt in the statement of net assets. 5 The following is condensed financial data related to net assets at June 30, 2009 and June 30, 2008: Net Assets June 30, 2009 June 30, 2008 Current and other assets $ 577,431,939 $ 578,874,105 Capital assets not being depreciated 249,292,443 169,622,405 Capital assets being depreciated, net of accumulated depreciation 40,930,409 42,698,923 Total assets 867,654,791 791,195,433 Long-term obligations 238,114,639 165,231,179 Other liabilities 63,077,681 45,780,012 Total liabilities 301,192,320 211,011,191 Net assets: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt Restricted Unrestricted (deficit) Total net assets 266,647,382 505,474,075 (205,658,986) 207,478,034 521,711,172 (149,004,964) $ 566,462,471 $ 580,184, 242 Changes in Net Assets The Commission's total program and general revenues were $331,843,770, while the total cost of all programs was $345,565,541. Total revenues increased by 10%, and the total cost of all programs increased by 23%. Approximately 34% of the costs of the Commission's programs were paid by those who directly benefited from the programs or by other governments that subsidized certain programs with grants and contributions. Sales taxes ultimately financed a significant portion of the programs' net costs. Governmental activities decreased the Commission's net assets by $13,721,771, and condensed financial data related to the change in net assets is presented in the table below. Key elements of this decrease are as follows: • Charges for services increased by $2,104,421, or 244%, as a result of miscellaneous reimbursements received for the construction of the North Main Corona station parking structure; • Operating grants and contributions increased by $61,888,639, or 218%, primarily due to federal and state reimbursements related to 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A highway projects including the State Route (SR) 60 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, SR-91 HOV lanes, 60/91/215 interchange, I-215/SR-60 East Junction HOV lane connector, SR-91/71 connectors, and 1-215 corridor improvements; • Capital grants and contributions increased by $15,579,606, or 160%, because of federal, state, and local grants which funded rail capital projects related to the Perris Valley Line extension, Perris Multimodal Transportation Facility, North Main Corona commuter rail station parking structure, and station rehabilitation and security projects; • Measure A sales tax revenues decreased by $22,849,259, or 16%, due to the recession and decreased consumer spending; 6 Year Ended Changes in Net Assets June 30, 2009 June 30, 2008 Revenues Program revenues: Charges for services Operating grants and contributions Capital grants and contributions General revenues: Measure A sales taxes Transportation Development Act sales taxes Unrestricted investment earnings Other miscellaneous revenue Total revenues $ 2,966,876 90,280,426 25,321,886 119,688,289 77,920,485 14,211,197 1,454,611 $ 862,455 28,391,787 9,742,280 142,537,548 93,042,150 25,055,456 1,565,674 331,843,770 301,197, 350 Expenses General government 5,525,963 5,299,048 Bicycle and pedestrian facilities 2,747,151 1,436,710 CETAP 4,832,008 8,017,024 Commuter assistance 5,199,032 3,464,834 Commuter rail 16,038,028 14,832,473 Highways 143,532,009 59,988,334 Local streets and roads 45,661,155 54,520,115 Motorist assistance 2,623,184 3,983,252 Planning and programming 10,126,142 7,931,869 Right of way management 1,399,316 551,960 Regional arterials 20,948,530 31,131,731 Transit and specialized transportation 77,417,741 83,927,945 Interest expense 9,515,282 6,281,232 Total expenses 345,565,541 281,366,527 (Decrease)/ Increase in net assets Net assets at beginning of year Net assets at end of year (13,721,771) 580,184,242 19,830,823 560,353,419 $ 566,462,471 $ 580,184,242 • Transportation Development Act (TDA) sales taxes decreased by $15,121,665, or 16%, as a result of the recession and decreased spending as well as a 51 % decrease in State Transit Assistance (STA) revenues allocated by the State; • Unrestricted investment earnings decreased by $10,844,258, or 43% due to declining cash balances resulting from decreased sales tax revenues and increased project costs as well as low investment yields; • Bicycle and pedestrian facilities expenses increased by $1,310,441, or 91%, because of local jurisdiction claims of previous year's allocations; • CETAP expenses decreased by $3,185,016, or 40%, due to a decrease in consultant efforts required during the draft environmental document review phase and public comment period related to the Mid County Parkway project; • Commuter assistance expenses increased by $1,734,198, or 50%, due to the installation of detection stations on the Interstate (I) 15 and 1-215 corridors to support traveler information services; • Commuter rail expenses increased by $1,205,555, or 8%, as a result of increased commuter rail station operating costs and program management activities related to the North Main Corona commuter rail station parking structure and Perris Valley Line extension projects; • Highway expenses increased by $83,543,675, or 139%, due to project engineering, right of way, and construction 7 activities on various 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A projects throughout the County as well as land mitigation acquisitions in the Western County and Coachella Valley; • Local streets and roads expenses decreased by $8,858,960, or 16%, because of the decline in Measure A sales tax revenues; • Motorist assistance expenses decreased by $1,360,068, or 34%, as a result of technology upgrades and site accessibility improvements for call boxes completed in the prior year; • Planning and programming expenses increased by $2,194,273, or 28%, due to the geotechnical field exploration and evaluation for the proposed Irvine -Corona Expressway project; • Right of way management expenses increased by $847,356, or 154%, because of increased weed abatement enforcement by local jurisdictions, demolition of structures on properties, and property management activities related to the SR-74 widening project acquisition files and excess land; • Regional arterial expenses decreased by $10,183,201, or 33%, as a result of a decrease in reimbursements to local jurisdictions for approved regional arterial projects and right of way acquisitions related to the SR-79 realignment project; • Transit and specialized transportation expenses decreased by $6,510,204, or 8%, due to a decrease in Western County bus transit operating claims resulting from cost reduction efforts offset by increases in Coachella Valley bus transit operating claims and rail capital claims; and • Interest expenses increased by $3,234,050, or 52%, primarily as a result of interest related to the sales tax bonds issued in June 2008. The graph below presents the program and general revenues by source for the Commission's governmental activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009: Charges for services 1% Other 0% Operating grants and contributions 27% Unrestricted investment earnings 4% Capital grants and contributions 8% Measure A sales taxes 36% Transportation Development Act sales taxes 24% 8 The graph below depicts program expenses for the Commission's governmental activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009: $160,000,000 $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $- I ,` \es <PQ a�aaao� �o 0�k" as „050 °a��6°+Geci' J�e5 0aa�yQ<0 a��raaa5r� `oa°a3y<°y� JeG ��a�aa° \' Q\eP as 2P 5� K<ao Financial Analysis of the Commission's Funds As of June 30, 2009, the Commission's governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $456,243,471, a decrease of $74,800,623 compared to 2008. Of this total amount, $37,938,889 constitutes an unreserved fund deficit. The unreserved fund deficit is comprised of designations aggregating $8,289,036 primarily for bicycle and pedestrian projects and for motorist assistance services, unreserved fund balance of $3,348,711 in the General fund, and an unreserved fund deficit of $49,576,636 in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund. The deficit in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund is due to the recording of $56,284,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes issued during fiscal 2009 as a current liability in the fund financial statements as the underlying letter of credit expires in March 2010. The remainder of the fund balance is reserved to indicate that it is not available for new spending because of the following commitments: • $1,156,425 in TDA funds that have been allocated to cities within the County for bicycle and pedestrian projects; • $46,752,672 for new CETAP corridors in Western County; • $13,591,633 for commuter assistance activities such as expansion of park -and -ride facilities, implementation of the Inland Empire 511 system, and other projects and programs that encourage commuters to use alternative modes of transportation; • $93,389,219 primarily for commuter rail capital projects including the Perris Valley Line extension which is expected to be completed in 2012; • $42,372,142 related to debt service that is to be paid over the next year as well as excess reserve funds remaining following the retirement of all debt related to the 1989 Measure A program; • $119,406,647 for highway projects primarily related to the 1989 Measure A program; • $1,137,960 for intrafund advances due from the 1989 Measure A Western County and 2009 Measure A Western County highway programs; • $19,510,497 in advances receivable from cities and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments for funds that were loaned to them to enable the construction and improvement of streets and roads as well as highways and regional arterials and that are to be repaid from their future 2009 Measure A funds; • $351,730 for local streets and roads programs that are returned to the cities within the County for maintenance of their roads and local arterials under the 1989 Measure A program; • $1,450,546 for planning and programming activities; • $2,171,452 in prepaid amounts for various expenditures; • $1,689,239 in right of way management funds that were generated from highway and rail properties that will be used for property management activities; • $1,864,695 for regional arterials in the Coachella Valley and $47,212,275 for regional arterials in Western County; • $10,924,515 for Western County specialized transportation projects; and • $91,200,713 in TDA funds available to the commuter rail and bus transit operators in the County. 9 The following table presents the changes in fund balances for the governmental funds for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2009 and 2008: Fund Balances Year Ended June 30 2009 2008 % Change General fund Special Revenue major funds: Measure A Western County Measure A Coachella Valley Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Local Transportation Fund Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund Debt Service fund Nonmajor governmental funds $ 10,105,419 $ 10,125,237 (0)% 233,744,173 5,161,226 93,964,947 68,307,007 (30,039,375) 42,372,142 32,627,932 211,427,329 17,027,905 123,081,074 74,922,455 6,327,358 50,838,184 37,294,552 11% (70)% (24)% Key elements for the changes in fund balances are as follows: • The 11 % increase in the Measure Western County Special Revenue fund resulted from the excess of 1989 Measure A sales tax revenues over commuter rail, highway, and specialized transportation program expenditures as these programs' activities include multi -year funding commitments for specified projects that are in varying stages; • The 70% decrease in the Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue fund was attributed to the excess of highway and regional arterial program expenditures over 1989 Measure A sales tax revenues as these programs' activities include multi -year funding commitments for specified 1989 Measure A projects that are nearing completion; • The 24% decrease in the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Special Revenue fund was due to a 30% decrease in TUMF revenues caused by the housing slowdown; • The 9%decrease in the Local Transportation Fund related to a decline in sales tax revenues caused by the recession and decreased spending and the use of approximately $6,615,448 million in reserved fund balances related to claims of current year allocations for transit operations and prior year allocations for bicycle and pedestrian facility projects and transit capital projects; • The 575% decrease in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund was attributed to the recording of a portion of the commercial paper notes issued during fiscal 2009, for the advance funding of 2009 Measure A projects, as a current liability in the fund financial statements; • The 17% decrease in the Debt Service fund was due primarily to the use of the 2008 Series A-1 and A-2 sales tax revenue bonds (2008 bonds) proceeds to fund debt service payments during the year; and • The 13% decrease in the nonmajor governmental funds resulted primarily from the excess of expenditures to public bus and rail operators over declining STA revenues, as allocations to the operators are primarily for capital needs that may have long procurement cycles. General Fund Budgetary Highlights Differences between the original budget and the final amended budget for the General fund resulted in a $3,266,859 increase in appropriations and were related to the following changes: • $284,447 increase to administration primarily for salaries and benefits as a result of early retirement costs and for professional services related to the implementation of a new financial management software system; • $205,000 increase to the commuter rail program for increased security at the Commission's commuter rail stations; • $2,183,977 increase for various planning and programming services primarily related to professional services for geotechnical field exploration on the Irvine -Corona Expressway project; • $25,000 increase to right of way management activities related to consultant support services; • $45,000 increase to transit and specialized transportation for consultant support services; and • $523,435 increase to capital outlay related to the new financial management software system. 10 Budget increases were budgeted from available fund balance and grant revenues. During the year, General fund revenues were below budgetary estimates by $5,688,167 primarily as a result of lower intergovernmental reimbursements and decreased sales tax revenues; however, expenditures were less than budgetary estimates resulting in the need to only draw upon available fund balance by $19,818. General fund budgetary variances between the final amended budget and actual amounts are as follows: Year Ended June 30, 2009 General Fund Budgetary Variances Final Amended Budget Actual % Variance Revenues Sales taxes $ 20,729,275 $ 16,481,969 (20)% Intergovernmental 6,829,604 5,333,455 (22)% Interest 164,616 263,332 60% Other 491,952 448,524 (9)% Total revenues $ 28,215,447 $ 22,527,280 (20)% Expenditures Current Administration $ 4,831,654 $ 3,815,395 21 % Programs 24,198,177 17,403,407 28% Debt service 18,016 N/A Intergovernmental distributions 1,050,000 975,833 7% Capital outlay 856,530 451,574 47% Total expenditures $ 30,936,361 $ 22,664,225 27% Other financing sources (uses) Capital lease $ - $ 117,127 N/A Transfers in 264,300 - (100)% Total other financing sources (uses) $ 264,300 $ 117,127 (56)% Significant budgetary variances between the final amended budget and actual amounts are as follows: • $4,247,306 negative variance related to declining Measure and LTF sales tax revenues resulting from the recession and decreased spending; • $1,496,149 negative variance for intergovernmental revenues that are on a reimbursement basis and are received as project expenditures are incurred and billed to the respective agencies; • $1,016,259 positive variance for administration primarily related to benefits, professional services, and other expenditures such as insurance, training, and travel; and • $6,794,770 positive variance for programs due to delays in preliminary engineering activities on the proposed Irvine - Corona Expressway project and lower commuter rail operating costs. 11 Capital Assets and Debt Administration Capital Assets As of June 30, 2009, the Commission had $290,222,852, net of accumulated depreciation, invested in a broad range of capital assets including construction and development in progress; land and land improvements; rail operating easements and stations; and office improvements, furniture, equipment, and vehicles. The total increase in the Commission's total capital assets, net for FY 2008/09 was 37%. Major capital asset additions during 2009 included land purchases for the Mid County Parkway project as well as construction in progress related to preliminary engineering costs for the SR-91 and 1-15 tolled express lanes and the Perris Valley Line extension projects and construction of the North Main Corona commuter rail station parking structure. The table below is a comparative summary of the Commission's capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation: June 30, 2009 June 30, 2008 Capital Assets not being depreciated: Land and land improvements $ 143,071,211 $ 114,391,969 Rail operating easements 39,484,143 39,484,143 Construction and development in progress 66,737,089 15,746,293 Total capital assets not being depreciated 249,292,443 169,622,405 Capital Assets being depreciated, net of accumulated depreciation: Rail stations 40,398,759 42,352,794 Office improvements, furniture, equipment, and vehicles 531,650 346,129 Total capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 40,930,409 42,698,923 Total capital assets $ 290,222,852 $ 212,321,328 More detailed information about the Commission's capital assets is presented in Note 4 to the financial statements. Debt Administration As of June 30, 2009, the Commission had bonds outstanding under two different authorizations: the original 1989 Measure A program which ended on June 30, 2009 and the 2009 Measure A program which commenced on July 1, 2009. The Commission had $126,395,000 outstanding in 2008 bonds under the 2009 Measure A program; all sales tax revenue bonds issued under the 1989 Measure A program were retired in June 2009. The total debt decreased from the $160,025,000 outstanding as of June 30, 2008. The Commission's bonds received ratings of "AA-' from Standard & Poor's (S&P), "Aa2" from Moody's Investors Service (Moody's), and "AA" from Fitch Ratings. In March 2005 the Commission established a $185,000,000 commercial paper program to provide advance funding for 2009 Measure A capital projects. The commercial paper notes are rated "A1-' by S&P and "P1" by Moody's. As of June 30, 2009, the Commission had $110,000,000 in outstanding commercial paper notes. The debt limitation for the Commission under the 2009 Measure A program is $500,000,000, which exceeds the total outstanding debt of $236,395,000. Additional information on the Commission's long-term debt can be found in Note 6 to the financial statements. Economic Factors and Other Factors During its March 2009 Commission meeting, the Commission adopted guiding principles for use in the preparation of the FY 2009/10 Budget. These principles have been incorporated in goals of the Commission and will continue to be updated annually in response to the ever -changing social, political, and economic environment. The principles are a business planning 12 tool designed to assist the Commission in implementing its strategic goals and objectives and lays the foundation for future financial planning for the annual budget process. The Commission adopted the FY 2009/10 annual budget on June 10, 2009. Over 39% of the $669,545,200 balanced budget is related to capital project expenditures, including: $29,509,300 to support various city highway and regional arterial construction projects in Western County and the Coachella Valley; $26,300,000 for various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects; $48,826,600 for preliminary engineering, right of way acquisition, and design -build activities related to the SR-91 corridor improvement projects consisting of tolled express and mixed flow lanes and interchange improvements; $12,010,000 for preliminary engineering and right ofway support services related to the I-15 corridor improvements consisting of tolled express lanes, HOV lanes, and mixed flow lanes; $25,824,500 for final design and right of way acquisition related to the SR-91 HOV lanes from Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange; $14,420,000 for final design, construction, and right of way acquisition related to the SR-74/I-215 interchange project; and $47,910,000 for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension project engineering, construction, and right of way acquisition. Distributions to the local jurisdictions for local streets and roads are budgeted at $35,908,900. Budgeted expenditures related to funding of public bus and rail transit operations and capital projects in the County aggregate $84,122,800. Debt service costs of $198,255,000, or 30% of the budget, represent another significant expenditure as a result of the issuance of bonds to refund the 2008 bonds and approximately $50,000,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes. Leading economic indicators show that the local economy has been impacted by the national recession, particularly in decreased spending and a housing slowdown. These factors were considered in preparing the Commission's 2010 fiscal year budget, including the sales tax and TUMF fee revenue projections. There are obvious variables in terms of project financing available from federal and state funds. There is continuing uncertainty related to the fiscal condition of the state of California and the impact on transportation as well as the status of the federal transportation trust fund and appropriation bill. The Commission continues to study innovative financing alternatives such as tolled express lane facilities and federal financing programs to support the delivery of 2009 Measure A projects. Contacting the Commission's Management This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the Commission's finances for all those with an interest in the government's finances and to show the Commission's accountability for the money it receives. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional information should be addressed to the Chief Financial Officer, Finance Department at the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, California 92502-2208. 13 This page intentionally left blank. 14 Basic Financial Statements 15 Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2009 Governmental Activities Assets Cash and investments $ 462,131,317 Receivables: Accounts 76,283,747 Advances to other governments 19,510,497 Interest 3,709,404 Prepaid expenses and other assets 2,500,164 Restricted investments held by trustee 13,296,810 Capital assets not being depreciated 249,292,443 Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 40,930,409 Total assets 867,654,791 Liabilities Accounts payable 62,080,663 Interest payable 540,768 Other liabilities 456,250 Long-term liabilities: Due within one year 237,771,999 Due in more than one year 342,640 Total liabilities 301,192,320 Net assets Invested in capital assets, net of related debt 266,647,382 Restricted for: Bicycle and pedestrian facilities 1,156,425 CETAP 46,752,672 Commuter assistance 13,939,723 Commuter rail 93,401,878 Debt service 42,372,142 Highways 139,835,974 Local streets and roads 5,993,815 Planning and programming 1,451,106 Right of way management 1,689,454 Regional arterials 56,755,658 Transit and specialized transportation 102,125,228 Unrestricted (deficit) (205,658,986) Total net assets $ 566,462,471 See notes to financial statements 16 Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Activities Year Ended June 30, 2009 Program Revenues Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Assets Charges for Operating Grants Capital Grants Governmental Functions/Programs Expenses Services and Contributions and Contributions Activities Primary Government Governmental Activities: General government $ 5,525,963 $ 46 $ $ $ (5,525,917) Bicycle and pedestrian facilities 2,747,151 - - (2,747,151) CETAP 4,832,008 4,944,659 112,651 Commuter assistance 5,199,032 - 1,892,906 - (3,306,126) Commuter rail 16,038,028 2,525,314 825,264 25,321,886 12,634,436 Highways 143,532,009 - 69,017,452 - (74,514,557) Local streets and roads 45,661,155 - - (45,661,155) Motorist assistance 2,623,184 19,778 3,389,309 785,903 Planning and programming 10,126,142 - 5,124,163 (5,001,979) Right of way management 1,399,316 421,738 - (977,578) Regional arterials 20,948,530 5,108,154 (15,840,376) Transit and specialized transportation 77,417,741 (21,481) (77,439,222) Interest expense 9,515,282 - - - (9,515,282) Total governmental activities $ 345,565,541 $ 2,966,876 $ 90,280,426 $ 25,321,886 (226,996,353) See notes to financial statements General Revenues: Measure A sales taxes 119,688,289 Transportation Development Act sales taxes 77,920,485 Unrestricted investment earnings 14,211,197 Other miscellaneous revenue 1,454,611 Total general revenues 213,274,582 Change in net assets (13,721,771) Net assets at beginning of year 580,184,242 Net assets at end of year $ 566,462,471 17 Riverside County Transportation Commission Balance Sheet - Governmental Funds June 30, 2009 Major Funds General Special Revenue Transportation Commercial Other Measure Measure Uniform Local Paper Nonmajor Western Coachella Mitigation Transportation Capital Debt Governmental County Valley Fee Fund Projects Service Funds Total Assets Cash and investments $ 10,448,134 $ 207,194,130 $ 8,175,766 $ 92,130,799 $ 60,901,273 $ 19,743,316 $ 29,018,919 $ 34,518,980 $ 462,131,317 Receivables: Accounts 1,778,024 57,024,953 4,628,378 999,138 9,515,029 1,651 2,336,574 76,283,747 Advances 19,510,497 19,510,497 Interest 36,504 709,033 25,548 318,863 215,831 2,209,726 75,033 118,866 3,709,404 Due from other funds 911,870 3,081,586 2,298,146 2,431,823 8,723,425 Prepaid expenditures 353,480 1,791,202 26,764 6 2,171,452 Restricted investments held by trustee 13,278,190 18,620 13,296,810 Total assets $ 13,528,012 $ 269,800,904 $ 12,829,692 $ 95,746,946 $ 70,632,133 $ 43,923,777 $ 42,372,142 $ 36,993,046 $ 585,826,652 Liabilities and Fund Balances (Deficit) Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 3,215,827 $ 32,543,534 $ 7,666,339 $ 1,688,669 $ 2,126,680 $ 13,426,598 $ $ 1,413,016 $ 62,080,663 Due to other funds 5,000 3,184,567 1,831 86,596 198,446 2,298,146 2,948,839 8,723,425 Commercial paper notes payable 56,284,000 56,284,000 F8 Other liabilities 201,766 328,630 296 6,734 1,954,408 3,259 2,495,093 Total liabilities 3,422,593 36,056,731 7,668,466 1,781,999 2,325,126 73,963,152 4,365,114 129,583,181 Fund balances (deficit) Reserved for: Bicycle and pedestrian facilities 1,156,425 1,156,425 CETAP 46,752,672 46,752,672 Commuter assistance 13,591,633 13,591,633 Commuter rail 3,348,626 90,040,593 93,389,219 Debt service 42,372,142 42,372,142 Highways 116,067,941 3,203,377 135,329 119,406,647 Loans and advances receivable 1,137,960 19,510,497 20,648,457 Local streets and roads 190,329 93,154 68,247 351,730 Planning and programming 1,365,363 85,183 1,450,546 Prepaid amounts 353,480 1,791,202 26,764 6 2,171,452 Right of way management 1,689,239 1,689,239 Regional arterials 1,864,695 47,212,275 49,076,970 Transit and specialized transportation 10,924,515 65,114,861 26,085,852 102,125,228 Unreserved: Designated for bicycles and pedestrians 1,950,538 1,950,538 Designated, reported in special revenue funds 6,338,498 6,338,498 Undesignated (deficit) 3,348,711 (49,576,636) (46,227,925) Total fund balances (deficit) 10,105,419 233,744,173 5,161,226 93,964,947 68,307,007 (30,039,375) 42,372,142 32,627,932 456,243,471 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 13,528,012 $ 269,800,904 $ 12,829,692 $ 95,746,946 $ 70,632,133 $ 43,923,777 $ 42,372,142 $ 36,993,046 $ 585,826,652 See notes to financial statements Riverside County Transportation Commission Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Net Assets June 30, 2009 Total fund balances - Governmental funds (page 18) Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net assets (page 16) are different because: Capital assets, less related accumulated depreciation, used in governmental activities are not financial resources and therefore are not reported in the funds. Other long-term assets are not available to pay for current -period expenditures and, therefore, are deferred in funds. Interest payable on bonds outstanding is not due and payable in the current period and therefore is not reported in the funds. Debt issuance costs are not current financial resources and therefore are not reported in the governmental funds. Long-term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and therefore are not reported in the funds. Those liabilities consist of: $ 456,243,471 290,222,852 2,038,843 (540,768) 328,712 Compensated absences (475,099) Capital lease obligation (100,652) Debt issuance payable (126,395,000) Premium on debt issuance (1,143,888) Commercial paper notes payable (53,716,000) Net adjustment (181,830,639) Net assets of governmental activities (page 16) $ 566,462,471 See notes to financial statements 19 sl('awalels iepueuy of solo(' aas 6L17'917t 99b V60'17170'199 (£Z9'009'vz) $ Z£6'LZ9'Z£ Z99'b6Z'L£ (0Z9'99917) $ Z176'ZL£'Z17 1796'9£9'09 070'9917'9) $ (9L£'6£0'0£) $ L00'LO£'99 99£'LZ£'9 9917'ZZ6'17L (££L'99£'9£) (91717'919'9) $ L1761796'96 17L0'690'£Z6 (EV96V6Z) $ 9ZZ'696'9 $ £L6'1717L'££Z $ 6617'901'01 $ 906'LZO'L6 6Z£'LZ17'66Z L£Z'9Z6'06 (6L9'999'66) 17179'919'ZZ (919'61) E l.'££9'£9 (96Z'9917'££) 96Z'99b'££ LZVZ11 000'91[99 (09L'££9'9Z6) (0Z9'99917) Z9 V99 6' 6 £ Z9 V99 6' 6 £ (1761'17£9'6d 1799'L 6 b' 69 (9176'96Z'Z) 000'91 [99 (L99'p9L'L9) (91717'919'9) 9b 6'96Z'Z 9b 6'96Z'Z (£LZ'p6b'6£) (L9Z'ObZ'L) (L9Z'ObZ'L) (Z6£'9Z9'17) (999'LZ6'£Z) (999'LZ6'£Z) 60f 1717t 9b LZVZ11 LZVZ11 (9176'991) 69Z'17£9'6917 L66'990'6 ££9'9L6 L 6b'£L9'9b Zb6'9Z0'Z6 9Lb'9b9'££ L££'09[9017 117fL6b'LL 0£9'9176'0Z 919'669'1 bb6'961'6 b9 6'£Z9'Z 991'199'917 199'001'991 901'170f 017 £9Z'996'9 96£'609'9£ 696'ZVZ'Z LL9'99£'9 b99'L99'6 L9£'L9£ 990' 169' 1 609'191 190'119'1 b00'69L'176 ZO£'b 6 1716 911 96Z 9170'Z99'176 17£Z'9170'66 b9 6'£Z9'Z LZ9'Z99 £pL'£96 ZLO'£b 09Z'L 6 £99'9b 19£'b LLb'ZL 669'OOZ'6££ p9£'p90'06 617£'9L9'6 (6Z9'96) 1719119' 1 1719119' 1 9£6'L99'£6 999'L176 999'Z69'906 91[19[1, OZVZ96'06 17LL'909'L66 $ 69£'917[9 $ b 66'£Z£' 6b b66'£Z£'6b b66'969'Z 000'099'££ OZ6'999'6 OZ6'999'6 Z 6 Z'£9£'99 £L£'6££'b £L£' 6 ££'b 00£'io7'£9 00£'io7'£9 6£9'L09 9L6' 6 96£'9b9 917t09 9Z9'9L9 9Z9'9L9 Z99'600'L9 Z99'6£Z'99 600'17L£'69 009'961 Z 19 VZ17ZZ 000'Z9L 000'Z9L 9£9'Z66'bb 9£9'Z66'bb Opp'£0£'9 96£'609'9£ 170Z'99£'09 £99'969'Z6 916'909' 1 09[9179'Z £179'Z£9'9 9617'£91 666'£9Z'96 9 69'699'6 ZO 6'990' 6 $ 99Z'6LL'99 $ $ 066'ZL9'LZ $ 99Z'6£L'99 £0L'££6'b£ £OL'££Vp£ Ob9'06L'Z £69'Z179'0 6 OLO'L9L'6 00Z'£176'0 6 969'17917'L176 6Z6'069 176£'1769'9176 L99'Z69'6 L6b'Z00'Z 99p'6Z0'9£ 690'££L'OL act 690'Z£ £9Z'996'9 66£'L09'6Z 96Z'0£b' 6 991'b0Z 17ZZ'6ZL'£66 0£Z'£ 6 9ZZ'b99'ZZ bL9'69b ££9'9L6 910'91 L££'Z 6L9'96 L017'£017'L 6 6LL'£ 6£ 919'669' 6 bbb'9L0'L 999'b 19'9 96£'9 69'£ 919'099 L60'017£ 991'660' 6 0 w'L9 p99'9£p' 6 09Z'LZ9'ZZ bZ9'9bb Z££'£9Z 99b'£££'9 $ 696' 1917'91 !earl spun] le;uawuJanoO JofeuiuoN Jag3O aauues ;qea s;aafoJd le;lde3 Jaded lepJaunuo3 punj uogepodsueJl leao-1 aaj uoge6gm uuo;lug uogepodsueJl AelleA ellagaeo3 y amseapi AlunoO uJa;saM y amseapi anuanaa lelaads leJaueo spunjJofepi 600Z `OE aunt papu3 JeaA spun] le;uawuJanoO - (;lagaa) saaueleo pund ul sebum pue sam;lpuedx3 `sanuanaa;o;uawa;e;s uolsslwwoO uogepodsueJl 6}unoO aplsJanla Jea/ to pua }e (}!ollap) saoueleq pund Jea/ l0 6uluul6aq }e saoueleq pund saoueleq punt u! a6ue110 leN (sasn) sawnos 6uloueu4Jay}o !e}ol Inc) sJalsueJl u! sJalsueJl asea! le}ldeO aouenss! }ciao :(sasn) sawnos 6uloueu4 Ja1110 saJn}puadxa (Japun) Jano sanuanal to (/oualogap) ssaox3 saJn}puadxa !e}ol /el}no le}ldeO suo!}nciu}sp le}uauwJano6Ja}ul ao!mas }gap le}ol }saJa}uI ledloupd :ao!mas }ciao sweJ6ad !e}ol uo!}epodsueJ} pazlleloads pue }lsueJl sleuape leuol6ab }uawa6euew /em to 1g6N 6uluwaeJ6wd pue 6uluueld aoue}slsse }suo}on spec pue s}aaJ}s !earl s/emg6!H !!eJ Ja}nuwaoO aoue}slsse Ja}nuwaoO dVl30 sa!}!!loel ueu}sapad pue apAo!9 :suaeJ6ad 0 N uo!}eJ}s!uluape !e}ol Jay}0 asea! 80111O sao!mas leuolssalad sao!mas!Oa! pane s}llauaq pue saueleS : uo!}ells! u! wpV eon° saJn}puadxa sanuana l !e}ol Jay}0 seal Jasn uonagsl60J a!olgaA }saJa}uI le}uauwJano6J2}1,11 aad uo!}e6m imollun uo!}epodsuau Saxe} saleS sanuanab Riverside County Transportation Commission Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Statement of Activities For the Year Ended June 30, 2009 Net change in fund balances - Total governmental funds (page 20) $ (74,800,623) Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities (page 17) are different because: Governmental funds report capital outlays as expenditures. However in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. The adjustment combines the net changes of the following amounts: Capital outlay Depreciation expense Donation of land to other governmental agency Net adjustments 82,480,768 (2,281,098) (2,298,146) 77,901,524 Revenues in the statement of activities that do not provide current financial resources 643,257 are reported as revenues in the funds. The issuance of long-term debt (e.g., bonds) provides current financial resources to governmental funds, while the repayment of the principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any effect on net assets. Also, governmental funds report the effect of issuance costs, premiums, discounts, and similar items when debt is first issued, whereas these amounts are deferred and amortized in the statement of activities. The adjustment combines the net changes of the following amounts: Principal payments for sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes Issuance of commercial paper notes Amortization of bond premium Amortization of debt issuance costs Capital lease Capital lease payments Change in accrued interest Highway expenditure related to contract payable Net adjustments Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and therefore are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. The adjustment combines the net changes of the following amounts: 33,630,000 (53,716,000) 2,569,347 (808,780) (117,127) 16,475 (57,689) 1,100,000 (17,383,774) Compensated absences (82,155) Change in net assets of governmental activities (page 17) $ (13,721,771) See notes to financial statements 21 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Reporting entity: The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) was formed in 1976 under Division 12 (commencing with Section 130000) of the California Public Utilities Code. The Commission is a special district governed by a 32 member board of commissioners (Board) consisting of one representative from each city in the county, all five county supervisors, and a nonvoting state representative. The Commission provides short-range transportation planning and programming for Riverside County (County), which includes the administration of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and the State Transit Assistance (STA) programs created under the Transportation Development Act (TDA) by the State of California (State). The LTF is administered by the Commission on behalf of the County. The purpose of this program is to allocate funds for public transportation needs, local streets and roads, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and multimodal transportation terminals. The STA program allocates funds for public transportation purposes to those geographic areas with special public transportation needs, which cannot be met otherwise. On November 8, 1988, the Commission was empowered by the voters of the County, under Ordinance No. 88-1 (1989 Measure A), to collect a one-half of one percent sales tax for the purpose of improving the transportation system of the County. Measure A was enacted, in part, pursuant to the provisions of Division 25 (commencing with Section 240000) of the California Public Utilities Code and Section 7252.22 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. On November 12, 2002 Riverside County's voters approved a 30-year renewal of Measure A under Ordinance No. 02-001 (2009 Measure A). The voter action ensures the replacement of the 1989 Measure A program when it expires in 2009 with a new 30 year program that will continue funding improvements until June 2039. In connection with the 2009 Measure A program, the County and cities in the Western County area implemented a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program to fund a regional arterial system to handle the traffic demands in the Western Riverside County (Western County) area as a result of future development. Under the 2009 Measure A program, the Commission shall receive the first $400 million of TUMF revenues to fund the regional arterial projects and new Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) corridors included in the 2009 Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan. As a result of the commencement of the TUMF program prior to the 2009 Measure A program, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Commission and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), administrator of the TUMF program, was executed regarding the allocation of TUMF revenues, net of a set -aside for WRCOG administration costs, until the 2009 Measure A program is effective. Under the MOU, the majority of net revenues are allocated in equal amounts to the Commission for regional arterial projects and to WRCOG for local arterial projects; a small percentage is allocated for public transit. In September 2008, the Commission approved an amendment to the MOU whereby the $400 million cap was lifted and the Commission will continue to receive its share of TUMF revenues indefinitely. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States require that the reporting entity include the primary government, organizations for which the primary government is financially accountable, and other organizations for which the nature and significance of their relationship with the primary government are such that exclusion would cause the reporting entity's financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. The basic financial statements include all funds of the Commission including those of the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a component unit, for which the Commission is considered financially accountable. SAFE was created under Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 2550) of Division 3 of the California Streets and Highways Code and Sections 2421.5 and 9250.1 of the Vehicle Code. SAFE receives monies from fees levied on registered vehicles to be used to implement and maintain an emergency motorist aid system, as specified, on portions of the California Freeway and Expressway System in the County. The governing body of SAFE is substantially identical to that of the Commission and is responsible for approval of SAFE's budget. SAFE is presented as a special revenue fund. Separate financial statements are not issued for SAFE. 22 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued There are many other governmental agencies, including the County of Riverside, providing services within the area served by the Commission. These other governmental agencies have independently elected governing boards and consequently are not under the direction of the Commission. Financial information for these agencies is not included in the accompanying financial statements. Basis of presentation: The Commission's basic financial statements consist of government -wide financial statements, including a statement of net assets and a statement of activities, and fund financial statements which provide a more detailed level of financial information. Government -wide statements: The statement of net assets and the statement of activities report information on all of the nonfiduciary activities of the Commission. The effect of interfund activity has been removed from these statements. These statements report governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues. The Commission does not have any business -type activities, which rely to a significant extent on charges and fees for support. The statement of activities demonstrates the degree to which the program expenses of a given function are offset by program revenues. Program expenses include direct expenses, which are clearly identifiable with a specific function, and allocated indirect expenses. Program revenues include 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use, or directly benefit from goods, services, or privileges provided by a given function and 2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular function. Taxes and other internally dedicated resources, which are properly not included among program revenues, are reported instead as general revenues. Fund financial statements: The fund financial statements provide information about the Commission's governmental funds; the Commission has no proprietary or fiduciary funds. The emphasis of fund financial statements is on major governmental funds, each displayed in a separate column. All remaining governmental funds are aggregated and reported as nonmajor funds. The Commission reports the following major governmental funds: General Fund: The General Fund is the general operating fund of the Commission and accounts for financial resources not required to be accounted for in another fund. Measure A Western County Special Revenue Fund: This fund accounts for the revenues from sales taxes which are restricted to expenditures for 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A Western County programs and activities. Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue Fund: This fund accounts for the revenues from sales taxes which are restricted to expenditures for 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley programs and activities. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund: This special revenue fund accounts for TUMF revenues, which are restricted to expenditures for Western County regional arterial and CETAP projects. Local Transportation Fund: This special revenue fund accounts for the one -quarter percent of the state sales tax collected within the County under TDA for planning and programming, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit operations including the Commission's commuter rail operations. 23 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Commercial Paper Capital Projects Fund: This fund records proceeds from the issuance of commercial paper notes and the use of these proceeds to advance right of way and mitigation land acquisition and project development for capital projects included in the 2009 Measure A. Debt Service Fund: This fund accounts for the resources accumulated and payments made for principal and interest on the sales tax revenue bonds. Measurement focus and basis of accounting: The government -wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned, and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Governmental fund financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available. Revenues are considered to be available when they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the current period. For this purpose, the Commission considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 180 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Expenditures generally are recorded when a liability is incurred; however, principal and interest expenditures on long-term debt as well as compensated absences and claims and judgments are recorded only when payment is due. Those revenues susceptible to accrual include sales taxes collected and held by the State at year-end on behalf of the Commission, TUMF, intergovernmental revenues, interest revenue, and vehicle registration user fees. Intergovernmental revenues are recognized in the period when all applicable eligibility requirements have been met. Cash and investments: The Commission maintains cash and investments in accordance with an investment policy adopted initially by the Board on September 13, 1995, and most recently amended May 13, 2009. The investment policy complies with, or is more restrictive than, applicable state statutes. Investments of bond and commercial paper proceeds as permitted by the applicable bond documents are maintained by U.S. Bank as custodial bank, and the earnings for each bond and commercial paper issue are accounted for separately. Cash from other Commission revenue sources is commingled for investment purposes, with investment earnings allocated to the different accounts based on average monthly dollar account balances. The Commission's investment policy authorizes investments in U.S. Treasury notes and bonds, federal agency notes, repurchase agreements, corporate bonds, commercial paper, banker's acceptances, money market mutual funds, the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund (RCPIF), the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), and certificates of deposit. Other investments permitted by the California Government Code (Code) are permitted but only with prior Board authorization, except for securities that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity that are ineligible. LAIF is regulated by Code Section 16429 and is under the management of the State Treasurer with oversight provided by the Local Agency Investment Advisory Board. Oversight of the RCPIF is conducted by the County Treasury Oversight Committee. All investments, except for those related to bond reserve funds, are subject to a maximum maturity of five years unless specific direction to exceed the limit is given by the Board. Local Transportation Fund moneys are legally required to be deposited in the RCPIF. 24 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued The RCPIF and the LAIF are carried at fair value based on the value of each participating dollar as provided by the RCPIF and LAIF, respectively. The fair value of the Commission's position in the RCPIF and LAIF is the same as the value of the pool shares. Investments in U.S. government and agency securities are carried at fair value based on quoted market prices. Money market mutual funds are carried at fair value based on each fund's share price. Bank balances are secured by the pledging of a pool of eligible securities to collateralize the Commission's deposits with the bank in accordance with the Code. Accounts receivable: Accounts receivable consist primarily of Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues from the State Board of Equalization on all taxable sales within the County of Riverside, California through June 30, 2009. Interfund transactions: During the course of operations, numerous transactions occur between individual funds involving goods provided or services rendered. There are also transfers of revenues from funds authorized to receive the revenue to funds authorized to expend it. Outstanding interfund balances are reported as due from/to other funds; internal financing balances are reported as advances to/from other funds. Prepaid items: Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in both the government -wide and fund financial statements. Restricted investments held by trustee: Restricted investments held by trustee represent unexpended bond proceeds, interest earnings thereon, and capitalized interest and reserve amounts of sales tax revenue bonds. Under the related bond resolutions and indentures, any remaining bond proceeds are restricted for the use of future construction improvements to the respective projects, for debt service, or for reserve requirements in accordance with applicable debt covenants. Capital assets: Capital assets consisting of land and land improvements; construction in progress; rail easements; rail stations; and office furniture, equipment, and vehicles are reported in governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements. Capital assets are defined by the Commission as assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000 and an estimated useful life in excess of three years. Such assets are recorded at historical costs or estimated historical costs if purchased or constructed. Donated capital assets are recorded at estimated fair value at the date of donation. Highway construction and certain purchases of right of way property, for which title vests with the California Department of Transportation, are included in highway program expenditures. Infrastructure consisting primarily of highway construction and right of way acquisition is not recorded as a capital asset, because the Commission does not have title to such assets or rights of way. However, costs related to the development of toll lanes are recorded as construction in progress, as the Commission anticipates obtaining franchise rights from the state to operate such toll lanes for a certain period of time. Accordingly, the Commission adopted Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 51, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Intangible Assets, during the year ended June 30, 2008. The costs of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the asset or materially extend the life of the asset are not capitalized. Rail stations, furniture and equipment, and vehicles of the primary government are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives: 25 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Asset Type Useful Life Rail stations 10 to 30 years Office furniture and equipment 3 to 5 years Vehicles 5 years Compensated absences: Vacation leave in governmental funds that is due and payable at year-end is reported as an expenditure and a liability of the General fund. Earned vacation leave that is not currently due is reported as a long-term liability in the government -wide financial statements. Sick leave is recorded as an expenditure in the General fund when taken by the employee. Employees with continuous five years of service have the option of being paid for sick leave accumulated in excess of 240 hours at a rate of 50% (i.e., one hour's pay for every two hours in excess of 240). Any sick leave in excess of 240 hours is accrued at fiscal year end, and a liability is reported in the government -wide financial statements. Sick leave that is due and payable at year-end is reported as an expenditure and a fund liability of the General fund. Risk management: The Commission is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to, or destruction of assets; and errors or omissions. The Commission protects itself against such losses by a balanced program of risk retention, risk transfers, and the purchase of commercial insurance. Loss exposures retained by the Commission are treated as normal expenditures and include any loss contingency not covered by the Commission's purchased insurance policies. Construction projects and rail properties are protected through a combination of commercial insurance, insurance required of Commission consultants, and a self-insurance fund established by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA). Settled claims have not exceeded insurance coverage in any of the past three fiscal years. Fund equity: In the fund financial statements, governmental funds report reservations of fund balance for amounts that are not available for appropriation or are legally restricted by outside parties for use for a specific purpose. Designations of fund balance represent tentative management plans and are subject to change. Net assets: In the government -wide financial statements, net assets represent the difference between assets and liabilities and are classified into three categories: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation, reduced by the outstanding balances of any borrowings used for the acquisition, construction, or improvement of those assets and excludes unspent debt proceeds. Restricted net assets represent the net assets that are not accessible for general use because their use is subject to restrictions enforceable by third parties. Unrestricted net assets (deficit) represent those net assets that are available (unavailable) for general use. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the Commission's policy to use restricted resources first and then unrestricted resources, as they are needed. Administration expenditures: The Commission's staff and resources are used in the performance of its responsibilities relating to the activities of the Commission and its component unit. Accordingly, the Commission allocates salaries and benefits to each applicable fund on the basis of actual hours spent by activity, and other indirect overhead is allocated based on management's budgetary estimates. Administrative salaries and benefits of $1,196,882 allocated to Measure A in 2009 were 1 % of revenues and in compliance with the law. 26 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 2. Cash and Investments Cash and investments at June 30, 2009 consist of the following: Unrestricted Cash in bank Petty cash RCPIF LAI F Investments with fiscal agents Total cash and investments Cash $ 9,184 1,018 Investments $ — $ — 438,832,042 — 3,546,649 — 19,742,424 Total 9,184 1,018 438,832,042 3,546,649 19,742,424 Restricted Investments 13,278,189 18,621 Total $ 9,184 1,018 452,110, 231 3,546,649 19,761,045 $ 10,202 $462,121,115 $462,131,317 $ 13,296,810 $ 475,428,127 As of June 30, 2009, the Commission had the following investments: Investment Maturities Fair Value First American Government Obligations mutual fund LAI F RCPIF Total investments 47 days average 235 days average 372 days average $ 19,761,045 3,546,649 452,110,231 $ 475 417 925 Custodial credit risk: Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that, in the event of the failure of a depository financial institution, a government will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. The custodial credit risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty (e.g., broker -dealer) to a transaction, a government will not be able to recover the value of its investment or collateral securities that are in the possession of another party. The Commission's investment policy requires that a third party bank trust department hold all securities owned by the Commission. All trades are settled on a delivery versus payment basis through the Commission's safekeeping agent. The Commission has deposits with a bank balance of $1,035,737 with a financial institution; bank balances over $5,000,000 are swept daily into a money market account. Of the bank balance, $1,035,737 is federally insured under the Federal Depository Insurance Corporation's Transaction Account Guarantee Program. Any balance over $5,000,000 is collateralized in accordance with the Code; however, the collateralized securities are not held in the name of the Commission. Interest rate risk: While the Commission does not have a formal policy related to the interest rate risk of investments, the Commission's investment policy follows the Code as it relates to limits on investment maturities as a means of managing exposure to fair value losses arising from increasing interest rates. Credit risk: As of June 30, 2009, the Commission's investment in the RCPIF was rated Aaa/MR1 by Moody's Investors Service (Moody's) and AAAN1+ by Fitch Ratings. The investments in the First American Government Obligations mutual fund were rated AAA by both Moody's and Standard & Poor's. LAIF is not rated. The Commission's investment policy only requires credit quality ratings for repurchase agreements, U.S. corporate debt, commercial paper, bankers acceptances and certificates of deposit. Concentration of credit risk: The Commission's investment policy places a limit of 10%on the amount of investment holdings with any one non -governmental issuer. More than 5 percent of the Commission's investments are in the RCPIF. This investment is 95.1 % of the Commission's investments. The investments in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund are unexpended commercial paper note proceeds invested in the First American Government Obligations mutual fund. The 27 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 2. Cash and Investments, Continued investments in the Measure A Western County Capital Projects fund are unexpended bond proceeds invested in the First American Government Obligations mutual fund for project funds as required by the bond agreements. The investments in the Debt Service fund are capitalized interest and reserve funds invested in the First American Government Obligations fund for interest and principal as required by the bond agreements. Note 3. Advances to Other Governments The Commission has approved advance loans, which are to be funded by commercial paper note proceeds, to the cities of Hemet, Indio, and Blythe and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) in the amounts of $3,000,000, $4,000,000, $1,500,000, and $43,300,000, respectively. The cities have pledged their share of 2009 Measure local streets and roads revenues, and CVAG has pledged its share of 2009 Measure A highway and regional road revenue allocations in accordance with repayment terms specified in each agreement for actual advances. These loans are due on or before September 1, 2019. No advance has been made to the city of Hemet as of June 30, 2009. The outstanding advances as of June 30, 2009 were as follows: City of Blythe City of Indio Coachella Valley Associated Governments Total loans receivable Note 4. Capital Assets Capital assets activity for the year ended June 30, 2009 was as follows: Governmental activities Capital assets not being depreciated: Land and land improvements Construction in progress Development in progress Rail operating easements $ 1,500,000 4,000,000 14,010,497 $ 19,510,497 Balance Additions/ Retirements/ Balance July 1, 2008 Transfers Transfers June 30, 2009 $114,391,969 $30,977,388 ($2,298,146) $143,071,211 15,746,293 50,815,642 — 66,561,935 — 175,154 — 175,154 39, 484,143 — — 39, 484,143 Total capital assets not being depreciated 169,622,405 81,968,184 (2,298,146) 249,292,443 Capital assets being depreciated: Rail stations 63,445,666 226,527 — 63,672,193 Office improvements 56,658 16,124 — 72,782 Office furniture, equipment and vehicles 1,151,788 269,933 — 1,421,721 Total capital assets being depreciated 64,654,112 512,584 — 65,166,696 Less accumulated depreciation for: Rail stations (21,092,872) (2,188,566) 8,004 (23,273,434) Office improvements (12,088) (8,579) (8,004) (28,671) Office furniture, equipment and vehicles (850,229) (83,953) — (934,182) Total accumulated depreciation (21,955,189) (2,281,098) — (24,236,287) Total capital assets being depreciated, net 42,698,923 (1,768,514) — 40,930,409 Governmental activities capital assets, net $212,321,328 $ 80,199,670 ($2,298,146) $290,222,852 28 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 4. Capital Assets, Continued Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of the Commission's governmental activities during the year ended June 30, 2009 as follows: General government $ 54,229 Commuter rail 2,188, 620 Commuter assistance 37,508 Planning and programming 741 Total depreciation expense $ 2,281,098 Note 5. Interfund Transactions Due from/to Other Funds: The composition of balances related to due from other funds and due to other funds at June 30, 2009 is as follows: Receivable Fund Payable Fund Amount Explanation General fund General fund General fund General fund Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Special Revenue fund Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund Measure A Western County $ 752,744 Special Revenue fund Measure A Coachella Valley 1,831 Special Revenue fund Transportation Uniform 86,596 Mitigation Fee Special Revenue fund Nonmajor Governmental funds General fund Local Transportation Fund Special Revenue Fund Nonmajor Governmental funds Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Reimbursement for fringe benefits Reimbursement for fringe benefits Reimbursement for fringe benefits 70,699 Reimbursement for fringe benefits 5,000 Reimbursement for right of entry 198,446 Capital allocation for commuter rail station parking structure costs 2,878,140 Capital allocation for commuter rail station parking structure costs 2,298,146 Reimbursement for property acquisition costs 2,431,823 Reimbursement for construction costs Total due from/to other funds $ 8,723,425 29 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 5. Interfund Transactions, Continued Interfund Transfers: During 2009, interfund transfers were as follows: Transfers Out Transfers In Amount Explanation Measure A Western County Special Revenue fund Measure A Coachella Valley Special Revenue fund Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund Total transfers Debt Service fund Debt Service fund Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Special Revenue Fund $ 23,927,865 Debt service related to highways and commuter rail for Western County 7,240,287 Debt service related to highways and regional arterials for Coachella Valley 2,298,146 Transfer of commercial paper proceeds for property acquisition costs $ 33,466,298 Note 6. Long-term Obligations and Subsequent Events The following is a summary of the changes in long-term obligations for the year ended June 30, 2009: Bonds payable Add: Issuance premiums Total bonds payable Commercial paper notes Contract payable Capital lease Compensated absences Total long-term obligations Balance July 1, 2008 Additions Balance Reductions June 30, 2009 Due Within One Year $ 160,025,000 3,713,235 163,738,235 1,100, 000 392,944 $ 165,231,179 $ - $ (33,630,000) $ 126,395,000 $ 126,395,000 - (2,569,347) 1,143,888 1,143,888 - (36,199,347) 127,538,888 127,538,888 110,000,000 110,000,000 110,000,000 - (1,100,000) - - 117,127 (16,475) 100,652 22,548 542,394 (460,239) 475,099 210,563 $110,659,521 $ (37,776,061) $ 238,114,639 $ 237,771,999 The Commission has pledged a portion of future sales tax revenues to repay $126,395,000 in sales tax revenue bonds payable issued in June 2008 and $110,000,000 in commercial paper notes payable issued during fiscal 2009. The bonds and notes are payable solely from the 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues. Annual principal and interest payments on the bonds and notes are expected to require less than 50% of 2009 Measure A revenues. Total principal and interest remaining on the bonds is $129,394,875 and is payable on December 1, 2009 from the proceeds of long-term bonds issued during fiscal 2010 (see below regarding "Subsequent Issuances"). For the current year, interest paid on the bonds and commercial paper notes was $5,849,756 and $878,920, respectively. There were no 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues during fiscal 2009, as the sales tax commences on July 1, 2009. Bonds payable: Under the provisions of the 2009 Measure A, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $500,000,000. The following is a summary of bonds issued and secured by 2009 Measure A revenues: 30 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 6. Long-term Obligations and Subsequent Events, Continued 2008 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A-1 and A-2: In June 2008, the Commission issued serial bonds in the principal amount of $94,395,000 and $32,000,000, respectively, for an aggregate amount of $126,395,000 to refinance all of the outstanding principal amount of the commercial paper notes and a portion of accrued interest on the notes, fund capitalized interest through December 1, 2009, and fund a reserve fund. Net proceeds amounted to $130,249,021, inclusive of premium of $3,854,021. The serial bonds mature in annual installments of $1,005,000 to $7,205,000 on various dates through June 1, 2029 with initial interest rates ranging from 4.00% to 5.00%; however, the bonds are subject to redemption on December 1, 2009. If the bonds are not redeemed, they are subject to a mandatory tender at a new interest rate. If the bonds are not remarketed at the tender date, the interest rate will be 11% until the bonds are successfully remarketed. The required reserve amount is $10,124,024. Annual debt service requirements to maturity for bonds payable are as follows: Year Ending June 30 Amount Outstanding $ 126,395,000 Principal Interest Total 2010 $ 126,395,000 $ 2,999,875 $ 129,394,875 Commercial paper notes payable: In February 2005, the Commission authorized the issuance of tax-exempt commercial paper notes in an amount not to exceed $200,000,000 for the primary purpose of financing right of way and mitigation land acquisition and project development costs of capital projects under the 2009 Measure A. From inception through 2008, the Commission issued commercial paper notes aggregating $110,005,000, which were refinanced in June 2008 by the 2008 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds. During 2009 the Commission issued $110,000,000 in commercial paper notes, which were outstanding at June 30, 2009. The source of revenue to repay the commercial paper notes and any subsequent long-term debt refinancing is the 2009 Measure A sales tax. Interest is payable on the respective maturity dates of the commercial paper notes, which is up to 270 days from the date of issuance. The maximum allowable interest rate on the commercial paper notes is 12%. As a requirement for the issuance of the commercial paper notes, the Commission entered into a $190,000,000 irrevocable direct draw letter of credit and reimbursement agreement with Bank of America, N.A. as credit and liquidity support for the commercial paper notes. Funds may be drawn under the letter of credit to pay debt service on the commercial paper notes in the event that the commercial paper dealers are unable to market commercial paper notes at the maturity dates of the outstanding commercial paper notes. Amounts drawn on the letter of credit are not due until expiration of the letter of credit in March 2010. Accordingly, the commercial paper notes are classified as current liabilities in the Commission's government - wide financial statements. The Commission did not draw on this letter of credit authorization during the year ended June 30, 2009, nor were there any amounts outstanding under this letter of credit agreement at June 30, 2009. In October 2009, the Commission retired $53,716,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes as a result of the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds (see below regarding "Subsequent Issuances"). In order to classify the remaining $56,284,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes as long-term debt, the Commission plans to either extend its irrevocable direct draw letter of credit beyond March 2010, execute a new liquidity facility, or issue additional long-term bonds to retire the commercial paper notes; however, such actions are not expected to be concluded prior to March 2010. As a result of not extending the letter of credit or a new liquidity facility beyond March 2010 or refinancing the remaining outstanding commercial paper notes, the Commission has recorded $56,284,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes as a current liability in the Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund as of June 30, 2009. 31 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 6. Long-term Obligations and Subsequent Events, Continued Capital lease obligation: The Commission has entered into a lease agreement for financing the acquisition of office equipment. This lease agreement qualifies as a capital lease for accounting purposes and, therefore, has been recorded at the present value of its future minimum lease payments. The office equipment value of $117,127 is recorded as a capital asset in the governmental activities. Total future minimum lease obligations and the net present value of these minimum lease payments as of June 30, 2009 are as follows: Year Ending June 30 Total 2010 $ 25,241 2011 25,241 2012 25,241 2013 25,241 2014 6,310 Total minimum lease payments 107,274 Less amount representing interest (6,622) Present value of minimum lease payments $ 100.652 Interest Rate Swaps: As a means to achieve a greater level of interest rate stability in connection with an anticipated variable rate debt refinancing of a portion of the outstanding commercial paper notes and 2008 sales tax revenue bonds in late 2009, the Commission entered into two forward -starting interest rate swaps in August 2006 for a total notional amount of $185,000,000. The counterparty for the first swap ($100,000,000 notional amount) is Bank of America, N.A (Bank of America), and the counterparty for the second swap ($85,000,000 notional amount) was Lehman Brothers Derivative Products Inc. (Lehman Brothers DP). In September 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings filed for bankruptcy, which was a trigger event under the swap agreement with Lehman Brothers DP. As a result of the trigger event, the swap agreement was terminated on September 23, 2008. A termination payment of $3,452,453 was paid to Lehman Brothers DP on October 1, 2008. The Commission entered into a replacement swap with Deutsche Bank AG (Deutsche Bank) for a notional amount of $85,000,000 on September 24, 2008. Under the swap agreements which become effective in October 2009, the Commission will pay Bank of America and Deutsche Bank (Counterparties) a fixed rate of 3.679% and 3.206%, respectively, for twenty years, the term of the variable rate debt to be issued in October 2009; the Counterparties will pay the Commission a floating rate equal to 67% of the one -month London Interbank Offer Rate (LIBOR). The interest rate swaps are, among other things, subject to credit, basis, and termination risk. The credit and termination risks have been mitigated with collateral posting requirements, in the form of U.S. treasury and certain federal agency securities, by the Counterparties in the event of a ratings downgrade below a specified threshold. Upon issuance of the variable rate debt in 2009, basis risk is expected to be mitigated with a variable rate paid to bond holders that approximates the 67%of one -month LIBOR to be received from the Counterparties. Accordingly, the interest rate swaps effectively create synthetic fixed rate debt for the Commission. The swap policy adopted by the Board requires the Commission to calculate the fair termination values of its swaps at least annually. The calculation of the fair termination value takes into consideration the prevailing interest rate environment, the specific terms and conditions of a given transaction, and any upfront payments that were received, if any. Fair valuations of termination values are realized only if the swaps were to be terminated at the valuation date, and only the Commission retains the right to optionally terminate the transactions. 32 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 6. Long-term Obligations and Subsequent Events, Continued As of June 30, 2009, the negative fair values for the $100,000,000 swap with Bank of America and the $85,000,000 swap with Deutsche Bank were estimated by an independent third -party to be $9,581,909 and $4,093,838, respectively. Therefore, if the swaps were terminated on June 30, 2009, the Commission would have paid a termination payment of $9,581,909 and $4,093,838 to Bank of America and Deutsche Bank, respectively, for a total termination payment of $13,675,747; however, such amounts are not recorded as a liability in the financial statements. The termination payments that would have been paid by the Commission if the swaps were terminated on June 30, 2009 are a result of the change in interest rate levels and certain interest rate relationships. The rates used to calculate the fixed swap payment owed by the Commission to the Counterparties are 3.679% for Bank of America and 3.206% for Deutsche Bank. As of June 30, 2009, this fixed rate was higher than the current rate for a swap of identical terms and conditions. The terms, fair values, and credit ratings of the outstanding swaps as of June 30, 2009 are as follows: Fixed variable Swap Associated Notional Effective Rate to Rate to be Termination Counterparty Debt Issue Counterparty Amount Date be Paid Received Fair value Date Credit Rating Commercial Bank of 67%of paper America $ 100,000,000 10/01/2009 3.679% LIBOR $ (9,581,909) 06/01/2029 A+/Aa3/A+ Commercial Deutsche 67%of paper Bank 85,000,000 10/01/2009 3.206% LIBOR (4,093,838) 06/01/2029 A+/Aa1/AA- $ 185.000 000 $ (13 675_747) Arbitrage Rebate: The Tax Reform Act of 1986 instituted certain arbitrage restrictions with respect to the issuance of tax-exempt bonds and commercial paper notes after August 31, 1986. In general, arbitrage regulations deal with the investment of all tax-exempt bond and commercial paper note proceeds at an interest yield greater than the interest yield paid to bondholders or noteholders. Failure to follow the arbitrage regulations could result in all interest paid to bondholders or noteholders retroactively rendered taxable. In accordance with the arbitrage regulations, if excess earnings were calculated, 90% of the amount calculated would be due to the Internal Revenue Service at the end of each five-year period. The remaining 10%would be recorded as a liability and paid after all bonds had been redeemed. During the current year, the Commission performed calculations of excess investment earnings on all bond and commercial paper financings. There was no arbitrage liability at June 30, 2009. Subsequent Issuances: In September 2009, the Commission issued $27,000,000 in additional commercial paper notes. In October 2009, the Commission issued sales tax revenue bonds consisting of the $85,000,000 Series A, $65,000,000 Series B, and $35,000,000 Series C, for a total issuance of $185,000,000 (2009 Bonds). A portion of the 2009 Bonds was used to refund all of the 2008 Bonds and retire $53,716,000 of the outstanding commercial paper notes with the remaining proceeds used to fund a portion of the debt service reserve and pay costs of issuance for the 2009 Bonds. The 2009 Bonds mature in annual installments ranging from $4,000,000 to $13,700,000 on various dates through June 1, 2029 with variable interest rates set on a weekly basis. The 2009 Bonds are integrated with the interest rate swaps that are effective in October 2009, thereby creating synthetic fixed rate debt. The 2009 Bonds are secured by Standby Bond Purchase Agreements (SBPAs) with JPMorgan Chase Bank (JPMorgan). Under the SBPAs, if the 2009 Bonds are not successfully remarketed or repaid according to their terms, JP Morgan is required to purchase the 2009 Bonds. 33 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 7. Net Assets and Fund Balances Net Assets: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt, as reported on the government -wide statement of net assets represents capital assets of $290,222,852, net of related debt of $23,575,470. The related debt includes the portion of the 1993 and 1996 sales tax revenues bonds that were used for the acquisition and construction of the commuter rail capital assets. Additionally, the government -wide statement of net assets reports $505,474,075 of restricted assets, of which $254,615,837 is restricted by enabling legislation. Fund Balances Measure A: Measure A sales tax revenues are allocated to the three defined geographic areas of Riverside County, consisting of Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley in proportion to the funds generated within those areas. Revenues must then be allocated to the programs of the geographic areas according to percentages as defined by Measure A and are legally restricted for applicable program expenditures. Bond and commercial paper note proceeds are allocated to the geographic areas based on the estimated uses. Accordingly, the related fund balances are reserved as follows: Highways, commuter rail, and accounts and loans receivable: Funds for state highways are to be used for project costs including engineering, right of way acquisitions, and construction. Such funds are intended to supplement existing federal and state resources. Commuter rail projects anticipate the use of existing rail lines, and funds are used for costs related to planning, capital improvements, right of way purchase, and/or use rights agreements. Amounts advanced to certain cities under funding agreements are reflected in fund balance as reserved for advances to other governments and loans receivable, respectively. Debt service: Certain bond proceeds have been used to make required sinking fund payments in the Debt Service fund as required by the bond agreements. Amounts held by the trustee equal to the maximum annual debt service are recorded in the Debt Service fund. Local streets and roads: Funds are expended by local jurisdictions for the construction, repair, and maintenance of local streets and roads. The County and local cities are required to supplement those expenditures with other previously dedicated revenue sources to maintain road improvements. Monies are disbursed to the jurisdictions which comply with the requirement to maintain the same level of funding for streets and roads as existed just prior to the passage of the 1989 Measure A and which annually submit a five-year capital improvement plan. Regional arterials: Funds for regional arterials are used to implement the planned regional arterial system, as defined by CVAG, in the Coachella Valley. Funds are matched by TUMF revenues generated in the Coachella Valley. Commuter assistance and specialized transportation: Funds for specialized transportation are used to promote and subsidize commuter assistance programs such as ridesharing and telecommuting and to guarantee reduced transit fares, expand existing transit services, and implement new transit services for seniors and persons with disabilities. Additionally, CVAG has elected to use a portion of the Coachella Valley local streets and roads funds to provide additional funding for bus replacement or other transit programs that will improve air quality. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee: TUMF revenues to be received by the Commission are to be used for new CETAP corridors and the regional arterial system in Western County and are reserved as follows: CETAP: Funds for the development of new transportation corridors are used to provide congestion relief and mobility within the County and between the County and its neighboring Orange and San Bernardino counties. Funds will be matched by revenues of $370 million generated from the 2009 Measure A. 34 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 7. Net Assets and Fund Balances, Continued Regional arterials: Funds for regional arterials are used to implement the planned regional arterial system, as defined in the 2009 Measure A, in the Western County. Funds will be matched by revenues of $300 million generated from the 2009 Measure A. Transportation Development Act: Reserves for the Local Transportation Fund represent the unclaimed apportionments related to claims for transit programs, the unexpired allocations available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, prepaid transit allocations, and earned but not received revenues. Expired allocations of $1,950,538 related to bicycle and pedestrian projects are unreserved and designated in the Local Transportation Fund. Reserves for the State Transit Assistance represent the unclaimed apportionments related to claims for transit. The TDA reserves at June 30, 2009 are as follows: Bicycle and pedestrian facilities Planning and programming, allocated and unclaimed Transit and specialized transportation Western County: Bus transit: City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Corona City of Riverside Riverside Transit Agency Apportioned and unallocated Commuter rail: Commission Apportioned and unallocated Total Western County Coachella Valley: SunLine Transit Agency Apportioned and unallocated Total Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley: Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Apportioned and unallocated for transit and local streets and roads Total Palo Verde Valley Unapportioned carryover, net Total transit and specialized transportation Local Transportation Fund State Transit Assistance Total $ 1,156,425 $ — $ 1,156,425 $ 85,183 $ — $ 85,183 28,062,199 11,476,662 17,552,788 $ 1,762,402 $ 1,762,402 550,290 550,290 293,898 293,898 301,000 301,000 9,083,702 9,083,702 6,703,007 34,765,206 2,676,639 14,153,301 2,698,864 20,251,652 57,091,649 24,069,802 81,161,451 1,166,225 1,455,724 2,621,949 914,934 183,046 1,097,980 2,081,159 1,638,770 3,719,929 399,597 261,234 365,055 764,652 12,225 273,459 660,831 377,280 1,038,111 5,281,222 — 5,281,222 $ 65,114,861 $ 26,085,852 $ 91,200,713 35 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 7. Net Assets and Fund Balances, Continued Commuter Rail: Reserves represent TDA monies in the General fund to be used for commuter rail operations. Planning and Programming: Reserves represent TDA monies in the General fund to be used for planning and programming services. Right of Way Management: Reserves represent highway and rail lease monies to be used for the management of Commission properties. Prepaid Amounts: Reserves represent amounts related to prepaid expenditures that are not available for appropriation. Motorist Assistance: The Commission has designated unexpended funds in the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies and Freeway Service Patrol Special Revenue funds of $6,010,587 and $327,911, respectively, to assist motorists on County roads. Fund Deficit: The Commercial Paper Capital Projects fund has a fund deficit of $30,039,375. Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies Operating lease: The Commission has entered into an operating lease agreement for office facilities. The term of the lease is for a period of ten years expiring on October 30, 2012 and may be extended for two additional five-year terms. Rental expenditures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 were $357,357. The total minimum rental commitment at June 30, 2009 is due as follows: Year Ending June 30 Amount 2010 $ 379,710 2011 395,373 2012 411,682 2013 142,888 Total minimum rental commitment $ 1.329.653 Real property and project agreements: The Commission has entered into other agreements in the ordinary course of business with companies and other governmental agencies for the acquisition of real property as well as the engineering and construction of certain highway and commuter rail projects. Litigation: Certain claims involving disputed construction costs have arisen in the ordinary course of business. Additionally, the Commission is a defendant in lawsuits. Although the outcome of these matters is not presently determinable, management does not expect that the resolution of these matters will have a material adverse impact on the financial condition of the Commission. Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance Fund: The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), a major transit provider for the County of Riverside, obtained available lease financing for bus acquisitions through the proceeds from certificates of participation issued by the California Transit Finance Corporation (Corporation). Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funds, to the extent of RTA's eligible share, along with other federal and state funds were pledged as support for RTA's lease payments to the Corporation. 36 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies, Continued For the year ended June 30, 2009, there were no Local Transportation Fund or State Transit Assistance Fund revenues expended for lease payments. Project Funding Advances: In January 2006, the Commission authorized the TUMF Special Revenue fund to advance $3,114,600 to the State to replace state and federal funding for the State Route (SR) 91/Green River interchange project. During the year ended June 30, 2009, there were no additional advances to the State from the TUMF Special Revenue fund for the SR-91/Green River interchange project. In December 2004, the Commission authorized the TUMF Special Revenue fund to advance $13,046,000 to the State to replace state and federal funding for the SR-60 widening project from Interstate(1) 15 to Valley Way. The final agreement with the State resulted in a reduction of the Commission's commitment to $8,881,000. During the year ended June 30, 2009, there were no additional advances to the State from the TUMF Special Revenue fund for the SR-60 widening project. Cumulative advances as of June 30, 2009 for the SR-91/Green River interchange and SR-60 widening projects were $3,114,600 and $8,636,096, respectively. The advances are to be repaid in the form of a commitment of future State funding on TUMF projects; in various actions since 2006, the Commission approved programming the County's share of State funding to the SR-91Nan Buren interchange, a TUMF project, and the future State funding commitment to the I-215/SR-60 East Junction high occupancy vehicle lane connectors project. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) allocated the funds for the SR-91Nan Buren interchange project in October 2009; the allocation of the additional funds for the 1-215/ SR-60 East Junction project is subject to future approval by the CTC. Note 9. Joint Agreements Joint Venture: The Commission is one of five members of the SCRRA, an independent joint powers authority created in June 1992. The SCRRA's board consists of one member from the Ventura County Transportation Commission; two each from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), the San Bernardino Associated Governments, and the Commission; and four members from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The SCRRA is responsible for implementing and operating a regional commuter rail system (Metrolink) in five southern California counties. As a member of SCRRA, the Commission makes capital and operating contributions for its pro rata share of rail lines servicing the County. The Commission expended $5,677,200 during 2009 for its share of Metrolink capital and operating costs. As of June 30, 2009, cumulative capital contributions were $26,599,997. Other funds for rail service are contributed to the SCRRA by the State from state rail bonds on behalf of the Commission. Separate financial statements are prepared by and available from the SCRRA, which is located at 700 N. Flower Street, 26th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90017. On September 12, 2008, one of the Metrolink trains was involved in a collision with a freight train. Management has not determined the impact, if any, of this incident on the financial condition of the Commission. Cooperative Agreement: In May 2006 the Commission entered into a cooperative agreement, Riverside Orange Corridor Authority, with OCTA and the Transportation Corridor Agencies to jointly exercise the common powers of the parties to manage geotechnical studies regarding the Riverside Orange Corridor. The Commission is the recipient and administering entity of federal and state funds as may be necessary to accomplish this work, and the three agencies will share in meeting the local agency matching requirements. As of June 30, 2009, the Commission was not required to make any contributions. 37 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 10. Employees' Pension Plans Public Employees' Retirement System: The Commission contracts with the State of California Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) to provide its employees retirement as well as death and retirement disability benefits, which are paid by the PERS under a cost sharing multiple -employer plan. Copies of the PERS' annual financial report may be obtained from its executive office located at 400 P Street, Sacramento, California 95814, or by visiting the PERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov. Through the June 30, 2003 valuation, the PERS plan was an agent multiple -employer retirement plan. Effective July 1, 2003, due to the Commission having less than 100 active members, the Commission's PERS plan was converted from an agent multiple -employer plan (former plan) to a cost sharing multiple -employer plan. The former plan is an aggregation of single employer plans, where separate accounts are maintained for each employer and contributions by the employer benefit only the employees of the employer. Under this plan, separate actuarial valuations are performed for each employer, and the results are attributed to and accounted for by the employer. The cost sharing multiple -employer plan is a pooling arrangement whereby risks, rewards, and benefit costs are shared and not attributed individually to any single employer. Periodic employer pension expense can be significantly different between the plan types. The change to the pooling arrangement was initially effective for the Commission's required contribution rate during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006. At the time of joining the risk pool under the cost -sharing multiple -employer plan, a side fund (the amount that the Commission would owe PERS if it exited the plan) was created to account for the difference between the funded status of the pool and the funded status of the Commission's plan. As of the June 30, 2007 valuation (most current valuation available), the estimated amount of the side fund liability was $1,630,003. All permanent Commission employees are eligible to participate in PERS. Employees attaining the age of 55 with five years of credited California service (service) are eligible for normal retirement and are entitled to a monthly benefit of 2.7% of their final compensation for each year of service. Final compensation is defined as the highest annual salary earned. Retirement may begin at age 50 with a reduced benefit rate. The plan also credits employees for unused sick leave. Upon separation from the plan prior to retirement, members' accumulated contributions are refundable with interest credited through the date of separation. The Commission pays the employees' required contribution of 8% of regular earnings. New employees hired after November 28, 2002 are responsible for 1 % of the 8% required contribution. The Commission is required to contribute the remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits of its members, using the actuarially determined rate, which was 21.115% for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. Three-year trend information for PERS: Annual Required Percentage of Fiscal Year Contribution ARC Net Pension Ended June 30 (ARC) Contributed Obligation 2009 $ 893,063 100% $ 2008 767,046 100% 2007 697,324 100% 38 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 10. Employees' Pension Plans, Continued 401(a) plan: The Commission offers its employees a 401(a) defined contribution plan referred to as the Money Purchase Plan & Trust (Plan), which covers all permanent full-time employees. Employees are fully vested in the Plan after five years. The Plan, which is administered by the International City/County ManagementAssociation (ICMA), requires the Commission to make a contribution of 7.5% of the employees' earnings for the Plan year. Fiduciary responsibility and reporting of the Plan assets rests with ICMA. The Commission has the authority to amend the contribution requirements. Total payroll for covered employees for the current year was $3,805,596. The Commission's contributions to the Plan were $275,414 for the year ended June 30, 2009. Note 11. Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) Plan Information: Per Resolution of the Board, the Commission provides postretirement health benefits for eligible retirees and their dependents at retirement. For employees hired on or after January 1, 2007, retirees must have a minimum of 10 years of PERS service and no less than five years of Commission service in order to receive postretirement health benefits in accordance with PERS as per Government Code Section 22893. For employees hired prior to January 1, 2007, retirees are not required to meet the eligibility criteria and may receive postretirement health benefits at the monthly health benefit rate paid for active employees, which is currently at $600. The Commission's contributions toward premiums for retiree health insurance are coordinated with Medicare and other benefits provided by federal and state law, when available, to the extent it reduces the cost of insurance premiums. In June 2007, the Commission adopted a resolution for an election of the Commission to prefund postretirement health benefits through the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT), an agent multiple -employer defined benefit health care plan administered by PERS. The System accepted the Commission's application to participate in the CERBT in September 2007. Copies of the CERBT Prefunding Plan annual financial report may be obtained from its executive office or its website. Plan Funding Policy. The contribution requirements of plan members are established and may be amended by the Commission. Currently, OPEB contributions are not required from plan members. The Commission has adopted a policy to fund 100% of the future ARC. The ARC represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover the annual normal cost and the amortization of unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities (or funding excess) over a 20-year period. The Commission is required to contribute the amounts necessary to fund the benefits of its members, using the actuarially determined rate, which was 10.1 % for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009. Annual OPEB Cost. For 2009, the Commission's OPEB cost of $172,000 was equal to the ARC. The Commission's annual OPEB cost, the percentage of annual OPEB cost contributed to the plan, and the net OPEB obligation for 2009 and the preceding two years were as follows: OPEB Annual Required Percentage of Fiscal Year Contribution OPEB ARC Net OPEB Ended June 30 (ARC) Contributed Obligation 2009 $ 172,000 100% $ — 2008 289,000 100% 2007 — 0% 39 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 2009 Note 11. Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB), Continued Funded Status and Funding Progress: The funded status of the plan as of January 1, 2009, was as follows: Actuarial accrued liability (AAL) Actuarial value of plan assets Unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) Funded ratio (actuarial value of plan assets/AAL) Covered payroll (active plan members) UAAL as a percentage of covered payroll $ 2,145,000 1,583,000 $ 562,000 73.8% $ 3,805,596 14.8% Actuarial Valuations: Actuarial valuations of an ongoing plan involve estimates of the value of the reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Examples include assumptions about future employment, mortality, and the healthcare cost trend. Amounts determined regarding the funded status of the plan and the ARC of the Commission are subject to continual revision, as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. Projections of benefits for financial reporting purposes are based on the substantive plan (the plan as understood by the Commission and plan members) and include the types of benefits provided at the time of each valuation and the historical pattern of sharing of benefit costs between the Commission and plan members to that point. The actuarial methods and assumptions used include techniques that are designed to reduce short-term volatility in the AAL and the actuarial value of assets, consistent with the long-term perspective of the calculations. In the January 1, 2009 actuarial valuation, the entry age normal actuarial cost method was used. The actuarial assumptions included a 7.75%investment rate of return. The annual healthcare cost trend rate for non -Medicare eligible health maintenance organization (HMO) and preferred provider organization (PPO) premiums were 9.7% and 10.5%, respectively; Medicare eligible HMO and PPO premiums were 10.1% and 10.9%, respectively. The trend rate was reduced by decrements to an ultimate rate of 4.5% after ten years. A 3.25% annual rate of increase in future salaries is also assumed in the valuation. The Commission's UAAL will be amortized as a level percentage of projected covered payroll on a closed basis over a 20-year period. Note 12. Measure A Conformance Requirements Measure A requires that the sales taxes collected may only be used for transportation purposes including administration and the construction, capital acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways including state highways, and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include expenditures for planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right of way acquisition. Note 13. Pronouncements Issued, Not Yet Effective The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued pronouncements prior to June 30, 2009 that have an effective date that may impact future financial presentations. Management has not currently determined what, if any, impact implementation of the following statements may have on the financial statements of the Commission. • GASB Statement No. 53, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Derivative Instruments, and • GASB Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. 40 Required Supplementary Information 41 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual - General Fund Year Ended June 30, 2009 General Original Final Budget Budget Actual Variance with Final Budget Positive (Negative) Revenues Sales taxes $ 20,660,000 $ 20,729,275 $ 16,481,969 $ (4,247,306) Intergovernmental 5,303,752 6,829,604 5,333,455 (1,496,149) Interest 164,616 164,616 263,332 98,716 Other 491,952 491,952 448,524 (43,428) Total revenues 26,620,320 28,215,447 22,527,280 (5,688,167) Expenditures Current: Administration: Salaries and benefits 1,584,389 1,759,389 1,438,584 320,805 General legal services 86,604 86,605 87,010 (405) Professional services 1,181,345 1,290,791 1,099,188 191,603 Office lease 394,956 394,956 340,097 54,859 Other 1,299,913 1,299,913 850,516 449,397 Total administration 4,547,207 4,831,654 3,815,395 1,016,259 Programs: Commuter rail 9,122,100 9,327,100 8,614,868 712,232 Planning and programming 11,033,600 13,217,577 7,075,444 6,142,133 Right of way management 1,212,000 1,237,000 1,399,316 (162,316) Transit and specialized transportation 371,500 416,500 313,779 102,721 Total programs 21,739,200 24,198,177 17,403,407 6,794,770 Debt service: Principal 15,679 (15,679) Interest 2,337 (2,337) Total debt service 18,016 (18,016) Intergovernmental distributions 1,050,000 1,050,000 975,833 74,167 Capital outlay 333,095 856,530 451,574 404,956 Total expenditures 27,669,502 30,936,361 22,664,225 8,272,136 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (1,049,182) (2,720,914) (136,945) 2,583,969 Other financing sources (uses): Capital lease 117,127 117,127 Transfers in 264,300 264,300 (264,300) Total other financing sources (uses) 264,300 264,300 117,127 (147,173) Net change in fund balances $ (784,882) $ (2,456,614) (19,818) $ Fund balances at beginning of year 10,125,237 Fund balances at end of year $ 10,105,419 See notes to required supplementary information 2,436,796 42 L00'LO£'89 $ L1761796£6 $ 9ZZ'1•9L'S $ £LL'bbL'££Z $ SSb'ZZ6'171 bL0'l80'£ZL SO6'LZO'LL 6Z£'LZ17 L4Z ZSO`OLV4 $ (8WGI,9`9) (00S`S80`80 $ (00S`S80`14) $ £LO`OLL`OL $ (LZI14'6Z) (00t9Z8`66) $ (00t9Z8`66) $ (6L6`08L) $ (6L9`998`4) (00L`S80`4) $ (00L$LL`00 $ L6t1708`S8 $ bb8`9L£`ZZ (£Sb28b$9) $ (00n8L`Lb) $ (bS8`60Z) 917 '86Z`Z 000`00S`Z 000`00S`Z (L8L`99b`£) (L8Z`ObtL) (OOS`£LL`£) (OOS`£LL`£) (S99`L90`ZZ) (S98`LZ6'CZ) (00Z098`6) (00b$6n) £6Z8S9 (L8Z`ObtL) (00S`868`L) (00S`868`L) S£0`£08`17 (S98`LZ6'CZ) (006`0£L`8Z) (008`SS0`6Z) (bS8`60Z) 917 '86Z`Z 000`00S`Z 000`00S`Z (000`SZ6`17) - 000`SZ6`17 000`SZI:b (00L`OL8`9Z) - 00L`OL8`9Z 0017`Z9L`9Z - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ZSO`OLb`LL (817`S I, WO (00S`S80`86) (00S`S80`4) LZ6`L1•6`0L (£LZ`b1,17`6£) (00t9Z£`ZO6) (00t9Z£`ZO6) 808`S89`Z (Z6£`9Z9`17) (00Z`Z6£`0 (00t000`L) Z96`118`L06 60L`bbZ`9b (£SZ`LZ9`69) (008`Ma'gla) 817£'6L£'Z1 ZS9'l00'L9 000'l8£'6L 000'l8£'6L 179Z817G99 9£8'Z4It 00L'L99'04 00L'L99'04 L60'061,'S COL '££l'b£ 008'£Z£'6£ 008'LbZ'lb ZL8'£LO'6L SlS17817 L8£'8SS'9ZZ OOS'Z£L'£lZ L£L'LL£ 6Z1:06S ZSB'L06 000'017G 817£'6L£'ZI, ZS9'6£Z'99 000'669'8L 000'669'8L 179Z'8bS'99 9£8'ZWit 00[199'04 001A99'04 L60'066S £OL'££Cb£ 008'£Z£'6£ 008'LlatHa 6171:9SL'BL b6£1768'9176 S£S'0S9'SZZ 00S'Z6C£6Z 66£'6SL'£6 I,00'bL£'69 OOb'££CSL OOb'££CSL - - - - 091:17SZ 0178'06L'Z 000'Sb0'£ 000'69Z'£ £6S'8178'Z L88'Z68'6 OOb'bbL'b 0017'98917 099a£b2£ Obb'CO£`8 OOL`L£L`Sb 001A08`Sb (£6t8bS) £6S`Zb9`06 00£`1760`06 00£`68L`8 (L6VZ) L6VZOO'Z 000`000`Z 00S'84Z 00S'84Z 00S'81•1•'Z - - - - - - - - - - - - 0£S'b88 OLO'LSL'6 009'1•179'01• 009'9W I•1• Zbb'6Z 8S17'6Z0'S£ 006'0SO'S£ 006'8ZL'L£ 00L'66S'b 00Z'£176'06 006'ZbS'SL 006'ZbL'LL 178Z'S9£'9S 6S0'££L'OL S££'860'LZI, 009'668171,1, Z9C£ZC8I, 8£Z'680'Z£ OOb'ZIZ'OS 006'0£17'617 L£Z'Z6£'6 £9Z'SSCS OOS'Llan 00S'Lbb'9 (LSO`08£`U LSL'LbL'Z 00l'L9£'L 00l'L9£'L 000'Z9L 000'Z9L 000'Z9L 1709'171•l'6Z 96£'608'S£ 000'17Z6'179 000'098179 000'Z9L 000'Z9L 000'Z9L (96t606) bOt98£`09 00S`S6t1,9 00S`S6t89 £99`£9£`b £9S`869`ZI, 006`17££`8 006`17££`8 (68tbOS`Z) 1•1•£`LOS`6Z 009`40`Z£ 0092bZ`b£ 060`86AZ bZZ`6ZLa6I, 17£L`L£6`179l 00L`Obt89I, 96 91•Z'0£b'L 00Z'0£b'L 00Z'0£b'6 0£Z'£6 0£Z'£6 - 814'4£ 81,6'909'1, 00S'S6Z'6 00S'S6Z'6 0S8'£OS'6 OSL'Sb9'Z 006'471:6 006'141'L S8L'£L S8L'170Z 0017'0£L 0017'0£6 £bS'LSO'Z £179'Z£9'S 00l'SLS'£ 006'SLS'£ (SOS`6ZO'Z) S6b$9I, 000$66`Z 000`£61•`Z - - - LS6`SSS`6Z 666aCH'86 b£0`8ZL`89 009`9S£`S9 86£'68817 86£'688'6 000'000'G 000'000'G - - - - Z01:890'1, Z01:890'1, (171,L`OZZ`0 $ 98t6LL`8S $ 000`000`09 $ 000`000`L9 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (060`8LS`Z) $ 0L6`ZL8`LZ $ 000`LSb`0£ $ 000`L89`Z£ $ (ZbL`968`£) $ 8SZ`6£L`88 $ 000`8ZWZ6 $ 000`60£`66 $ (ange6ary) anglsod la6png leul j Wroi aaueueA lenlay la6png la6png (ange6ary) lenloy la6png la6png (ange6ary) lenlay 06png la6png (ange6ary) lenlay la6png la6png leulj lew6u0 anglsod leulj lew6u0 anglsod leulj lew6u0 anglsod leulj lew6u0 la6png leul j la6png leul j 06png leul j Wroi aaueueA Wroi aaueueA yllm aaueueA pun j uogepodsuNi le3o3 as j uoge6gm uuo)lun uogepodsueJi AageA egayaeo0 y amseaw Iguno0 walsapll y amseam] 600Z DOE aunp papu3.1e0A spun] anuanaa leloadg aofeW - len)oy pue )0613n8 03uele8 pund ul sa6ueyo pue saan)lpuadx3'sanuanaa )o alnpayog uolsslwwoo uogepodsue4 A)unoo aplsaanlry uogewojui lueluawalddns pannbax of salou eas Jew(jo pug le saoueleq punj Jean )o 6uiuui6.g le saoueleq pun j saoueleq pun) w a6ueyo laN (sasn) saomos 6uioueug nig° lelol ;no wejsue.l1 ui sJ.)suwl °seal lelide0 :(sasn) saomos 6uioueug ny10 s.mlipu.dx. (.pun) J.no s.nu.n.1 )o (Rou.iog.p) ss.0x3 s.mlipu.dx. lelol Rellno lelide0 suoyngulsip lelu.ww.no6nlul aouu.s Nap lelol xel.legw efieq v ;swam lediouud :aowas lga0 sww6on lelol uogeindsuwl p.zw!oads pue lisuwl slepope leuoi6.b lu.w.6euew /term )o ION 6uiwww6on pue 6uiuueld spew pue me* pool sRenny6iH liw J.lnwwo0 aouelsisse J.lnwwo0 dy130 se!Roe) ueuls.p.d pue .loRoo :sweJfiwd uogwlsiuiwpe lelol .410 .seal .oig0 saoinJas leuoiss.)ad saoinJas le6.l lw.u.0 slg.u.q pue s.ueles :uoywlsiuiwpy :Imm0 s.mlipu.dx3 s.nu.n.1lelol Ja410 ;swam lelu.ww.no6nlul gad uogefim uu pun uogelmdsue.11 s.xel sales s.nu.n.b Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Funding Progress for Postretirement Health Care Actuarial Accrued UAAL as a Actuarial Valuation Actuarial Value Liability (AAL)-- Unfunded AAL Funded Covered Percentage of Date of Assets Entry Age (UAAL) Ratio Payroll Covered Payroll January 1, 2009 $ 1,583,000 $ 2,145,000 $ 562,000 73.8% $ 3,805,596 June 30, 2007 - 1,794,000 1,794,000 0.0% 2,396,757 See notes to required supplementary information 14.8% 74.9% 44 Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Required Supplementary Information June 30, 2009 Budgetary Data In February of each year, department heads begin the process of compiling budget data for the upcoming fiscal year. Budget numbers along with supporting documentation are provided to the Chief Financial Officer by March 15. That budget data is compiled and presented to the Executive Director for review and approval and is submitted to the Budget and Implementation Committee at its April meeting. After review by the Budget and Implementation Committee, the proposed budget is scheduled for preliminary review and comment as well as public hearing at the Commission's May meeting. The final budget for the new fiscal year is then adopted by motion of the Board of Commissioners (Board) no later than June 15 of the current year. This appropriated budget covers substantially all Commission expenditures by financial responsibility unit [e.g., General fund and Measure A (for each of the three county areas), Local Transportation Fund, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee special revenue funds] by fund. All appropriated amounts are as originally adopted or as amended by the Commission. Unexpended appropriations lapse at year-end. All budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. As adopted by the Board, expenditure activities of the funds with adopted budgets are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level, for each function (i.e., administration, programs, intergovernmental distributions, and capital outlay). These functions provide the legal level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount). Management has the discretion to transfer the budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function. Supplemental budget appropriations were necessary during the year. Funding Progress for Postretirement Health Benefits The schedule of funding progress presents multiyear trend information that shows whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liabilities for benefits. 45 Other Supplementary Information Riverside County Transportation Commission Nonmajor Governmental Funds Description Special Revenue Funds Measure A Palo Verde Valley: This fund is used to account for the revenues from sales taxes which are restricted to expenditures for Palo Verde Valley programs and activities. Freeway Service Patrol: This fund is used to record the revenues received for the purpose of implementing a freeway service patrol for motorists. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies: This fund is used to record the revenues received from Department of Motor Vehicle user registration fees for the purpose of implementing an emergency call box system for motorists. State Transit Assistance: This fund is used to account for revenues from sales taxes on gasoline restricted for transit projects. Capital Projects Fund Measure A Western County: This fund is used to account for sales tax revenue bond proceeds used for Western County highway projects. 47 Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining Balance Sheet - Nonmajor Governmental Funds June 30, 2009 Special Revenue Service Measure Freeway Authority State Palo Verde Service for Freeway Transit Valley Patrol Emergencies Assistance Total Capital Projects Measure A Western Total County Nonmajor Capital Governmental Projects Funds Assets Cash and investments $ 136,475 $ 384,794 $ 5,788,382 $ 28,092,826 $ 34,402,477 $ 116,503 $ 34,518,980 Receivables: Accounts 146,553 282,168 307,970 1,599,883 2,336,574 - 2,336,574 Interest 351 1,410 19,790 97,109 118,660 206 118,866 Prepaid expenditures - 3 3 - 6 - 6 Restricted investments held by trustee - - - - 18,620 18,620 Total assets $ 283,379 $ 668,375 $ 6,116,145 $ 29,789,818 $ 36,857,717 $ 135,329 $ 36,993,046 Liabilities and fund balances Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 215,109 $ 292,036 $ 80,045 $ 825,826 $ 1,413,016 $ $ 1,413,016 co Due to other funds 23 46,176 24,500 2,878,140 2,948,839 2,948,839 Other liabilities 2,249 1,010 3,259 3,259 Total liabilities 215,132 340,461 105,555 3,703,966 4,365,114 4,365,114 Fund balances: Reserved for: Highways - - 135,329 135,329 Local streets and roads 68,247 - 68,247 - 68,247 Prepaid amounts - 3 3 - 6 6 Transit and specialized transportation - - 26,085,852 26,085,852 26,085,852 Unreserved: Designated for motorist assistance - 327,911 6,010,587 - 6,338,498 - 6,338,498 Total fund balances 68,247 327,914 6,010,590 26,085,852 32,492,603 135,329 32,627,932 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 283,379 $ 668,375 $ 6,116,145 $ 29,789,818 $ 36,857,717 $ 135,329 $ 36,993,046 Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances Nonmajor Governmental Funds Year Ended June 30, 2009 Special Revenue Service Measure Freeway Authority State Palo Verde Service for Freeway Transit Valley Patrol Emergencies Assistance Total Capital Projects Measure A Western Total County Nonmajor Capital Governmental Projects Funds Revenues Sales taxes $ 882,567 $ $ $ 4,860,784 $ 5,743,351 $ $ 5,743,351 Intergovernmental 1,711,936 19,779 1,731,715 1,731,715 Interest 2,596 9,007 146,525 788,000 946,128 1,437 947,565 Vehicle registration user fees 1,677,374 1,677,374 1,677,374 Other 205 (15,826) (15,621) (15,621) Total revenues 885,163 1,721,148 1,827,852 5,648,784 10,082,947 1,437 10,084,384 Expenditures -i- Current: co Administration: Salaries and benefits 39,015 33,462 72,477 72,477 General legal services 2,342 2,009 4,351 4,351 Professional services 25,076 21,507 46,583 46,583 Office lease 9,291 7,969 17,260 17,260 Other 23,188 19,884 43,072 43,072 Total administration 98,912 84,831 183,743 183,743 Programs: Local streets and roads 882,627 882,627 882,627 Motorist assistance 2,204,349 418,835 2,623,184 2,623,184 Transit and specialized transportation - - 11,046,234 11,046,234 11,046,234 Total programs 882,627 2,204,349 418,835 11,046,234 14,552,045 14,552,045 Debt service: Principal 428 Interest 64 368 54 796 118 796 118 Total debt service 492 422 914 914 Capital outlay 7,699 6,603 14,302 14,302 Total expenditures 882,627 2,311,452 510,691 11,046,234 14,751,004 14,751,004 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 2,536 (590,304) 1,317,161 (5,397,450) (4,668,057) 1,437 (4,666,620) Fund balances at beginning of year 65,711 918,218 4,693,429 31,483,302 37,160,660 133,892 37,294,552 Fund balances at end of year $ 68,247 $ 327,914 $ 6,010,590 $ 26,085,852 $ 32,492,603 $ 135,329 $ 32,627,932 Z98'980'9Z $ 0690)0'9 $ 17)6YZ£ $ LE 89 $ ZO£'£8b'L£ 6Zb'£69'1, 211Z8L6 LLL'99 Z)9`9)9`£ $ (0917`L6£`9) (Z96`CHI 6) $ 00Z`Eta $ Et006 $ L9L`LL£`L ObL`9lb $ 699`L£1, $ £LL`Lb $ (b02'060 (LLb`)£9) $ (L89`)89) $ 9£Z`bZ $ 9£9`Z (OOL`LZ) $ 00£`L $ EL'LZ9'L b£Z'9170'14 Z96'£L9'8) 0017'8Z6'ZZ 90L'999 L69'OL9 L6£'L9L'L 899'Z9L'L 899'98L Z917'14£'Z OZO'861E 0£Z'8171E £L£ LZ9'Z88 000'£88 000'£Z6 L9b'£L £09'9 OLO'OZ 908'L LOL'9L 669'L OOb'£Z 001'6 (ZZb) ZZb (Z6b) Z6b (b9) 1,9 - - (b9) b9 (89£) 89£ - - (8Z17) BZb Jew(do pua Le saoueleq punj Jew(do 6uiuui6aq Le saoueleq punj samppuadxa Oapun) Jano sanuanaJdo (douapyap) ssaox3 samppuadxa �elol ,(epno ieede0 aouwas Lgap �elol Lsa�alu� pdpuud :aouuas Lgaa EL`LZ9`L b£Z`9b0`LL Z96`£L9`8L 00171Z6`ZZ 99£`6L9 9£8`8Lb 00t8£0`L 00Z`8£0`L L90a17l 61,£`bOn OOb`Len 006`17in £L£ LZWZ88 000`£88 000V6 sweAwd!qui ELLZ9`L KZ`9b0`LL Z96$L9`8) 001,`8Z6`ZZ - uogeuodsue4 pazgepads pueesue.il 99£'6L9 9£8'8Lb 00Z'8£0'L 00Z'8£0'L L90'£17l 61,£'bOZ'Z OOb'Lb£'Z 006'17in aoueppse;spawn £L£ LZ9'Z88 000'£88 000'£Z6 spew pue slMls 1e001 :sww6wd 96tE L£8'1,8 LZL'60L £99'90L 80£'8Z ZL6'86 OWE) 0£Z17Zl 989'0L 1,88'6L OLb'0£ OLb'0£ 6Z£'ZL 88G'£Z LL9'9£ LL9'9£ 9E'L 696'L b9Z'6 b9Z'6 6617'L L6Z'6 06L'OL 06L'OL 6£L'8 LO9'LZ 9E'0£ L89'LZ 88L'0L 9L0'9Z b9Z'9£ bLZ'Z£ OZ 600'Z 6Z0'Z 0£0'Z bZ Zen 99£'Z 99£'Z 999'£ Z917'££ BZG'L£ Era 89Z17 9L0'6£ £BZ'£b £BZ'£b (9E140`0 b8L`131,9`9 000`099`6 009`Z9£aZ 91•L`£bZ Z98`LZB`) L£L`b89`L L£L`b89`L (96£`917)) 8bl`LZL`L £1,9`998`L £1,9`998`L £98`£Z £9L`988 00£198 OCICE6 (8178`OZ) (Hs GO ZZO`9 ZZO`9 6L) 90Z 9Z 9Z bL£'ZBL bL£'LL9'L 000'96V) 000'96V) 000`21Zb 000`88L 000`09£ 000`09£ Z£b`Z9 Ent) £60178 £60178 (17817`9) L00`6 L6Vel L617`17l 96Z`L 969`Z 00£`L 00£`L L9L`6L 6LL`6L ZZ ZZ (060`Obl) 9£6`llt) 9Z0`Z98`L 9ZWZ98`L (92'6217'0 $ b8L`09817 $ 000`002'6 $ 009`Z66`ZZ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ L99`ZZ $ L99`Z88 $ 000`098 $ 000`£Z6 $ (angeBeN) lumpy ;a6pne ;a6pne (anye6aN) lenioy ;a6pne ;a6pne (anye6aN) lenpy ;a6pne ;a6pne *gam) lumpy ;a6pne ;a6pne ang!sod leu!j leu!6uo ang!sod leu!j leu!6uo ang!sod leu!j leu!6uo ang!sod leu!j leu!6uo ;a6png leu!j ;a6pne leu!j ;a6pne leu!j ;a6png leu!j Wm aoueuen Wu aoueuen Wu aoueuen LIM aoueuen aoueMssy �!sueil a�e�s sa!ou86i81.1131(e1,1188i j AN /quoyyiy ao!mas loiied ao!nias Aennaaij 600Z'0£ aunp papu3 RoA spun3 anuanaa !quads JofewuoN—!elijOy pue aa6png saoue!es pun j u! sa6ueya pue sainupuadx3'sanuanaa;o a!npayos uo!ss!wwoo uogepodsue4 Awnoo ap!sianw AelleA alum °led y annum uoilapsumupe !qui 0 )a(1l0 @seal 801110 saowas ieuoissaiwd saowas Oa! pnua0 slgauaq pue saueies :uogwlsiuiwpy qua.uno samppuadx3 sanuanaJIelol )ayl0 saadJasn uopapsi6w apiyaq Lsanlui �eluawwano6�ary� saxel sales sanuanay Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Deficit) Budget and Actual -Capital Projects and Debt Service Funds Year Ended June 30, 2009 Capital Projects Funds Measure A Western County Commercial Paper Debt Service Fund Variance with Variance with Variance with Final Budget Final Budget Final Budget Original Final Positive Original Final Positive Original Final Positive Budget Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Budget Actual (Negative) Budget Budget Actual (Negative) Revenues Interest $ 2,200 $ 2,200 $ 1,437 $ (763) $ 2,200 $ 2,200 $ 578,625 $ 576,425 $ 1,208,200 $ 1,208,200 $ 1,688,920 $ 480,720 Total revenues 2,200 2,200 1,437 (763) 2,200 2,200 578,625 576,425 1,208,200 1,208,200 1,688,920 480,720 Expenditures Current: Administration: General legal services 60,000 60,248 (248) Professional services 500,000 530,000 545,315 (15,315) Other 1,976 (1,976) Total administration 500,000 590,000 607,539 (17,539) Programs: Highways 76,764,400 76,764,400 83,424,300 (6,659,900) Regional arterials 7,384,000 7,384,000 7,384,000 Total programs 84,148,400 84,148,400 83,424,300 724,100 Debt service: Principal 33,630,000 33,630,000 33,630,000 Interest 11,200,000 8,803,000 4,331,373 4,471,627 1,843,400 7,693,400 7,693,114 286 Total debt service 11,200,000 8,803,000 4,331,373 4,471,627 35,473,400 41,323,400 41,323,114 286 Total expenditures 95,848,400 93,541,400 88,363,212 5,178,188 35,473,400 41,323,400 41,323,114 286 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures 2,200 2,200 1,437 (763) (95,846,200) (93,539,200) (87,784,587) 5,754,613 (34,265,200) (40,115,200) (39,634,194) 481,006 Other financing sources (uses) Debt issuance Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) 130,000,000 130,000,000 53,716,000 (76,284,000) (32,387,400) (32,387,400) (2,298,146) 30,089,254 97,612,600 97,612,600 51,417,854 (46,194,746) 35,473,400 35,473,400 31,168,152 (4,305,248) 35,473,400 35,473,400 31,168,152 (4,305,248) Net change in fund balances $ 2,200 $ 2,200 1,437 $ (763) $ 1,766,400 $ 4,073,400 (36,366,733) $ (40,440,133) $ 1,208,200 $ (4,641,800) (8,466,042) $ (3,824,242) Fund balances at beginning of year 133,892 6,327,358 50,838,184 Fund balances (deficit) at end of year $ 135,329 $ (30,039,375) $ 42,372,142 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Expenditures for Local Streets and Roads by Geographic Area - All Special Revenue Funds Year Ended June 30, 2009 Western County: City of Banning $ 565,036 City of Beaumont 627,163 City of Calimesa 145,759 City of Canyon Lake 184,951 City of Corona 3,958,685 City of Hemet 1,633,065 City of Lake Elsinore 1,130,398 City of Menifee 914,301 City of Moreno Valley 3,554,927 City of Murrieta 2,126,567 City of Norco 672,477 City of Perris 1,130,111 City of Riverside 6,937,184 City of San Jacinto 658,976 City of Temecula 2,782,523 City of Wildomar 546,083 Riverside County 7,449,209 Other 4,043 35,021,458 Coachella Valley: City of Cathedral City 1,113,155 City of Coachella 454,391 City of Desert Hot Springs 309,810 City of Indian Wells 183,757 City of Indio 1,243,785 City of Palm Desert 1,993,354 City of Palm Springs 1,354,760 City of Rancho Mirage 704,545 Riverside County 1,313,276 Coachella Valley Association of Governments 1,084,686 Other 1,551 9,757,070 Palo Verde Valley: City of Blythe 692,995 Riverside County 189,572 Other 60 882,627 Total local streets and roads expenditures $ 45,661,155 52 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Expenditures for Transit and Specialized Transportation by Geographic Area and Source - All Special Revenue Funds Year Ended June 30, 2009 Sales Taxes Measure A Local State Transportation Transit Fund Assistance Total Western County: Beaumont Unified School District $ 20,812 $ $ $ 20,812 Blindness Support Services, Inc. 75,112 75,112 Boys and Girls Club of Southwest County 74,896 74,896 Casa for Riverside County 30,000 30,000 Care -A -Van 231,524 231,524 Care Connexxus 175,000 - 175,000 City of Banning 979,407 1,896 981,303 City of Beaumont 2,011,733 22,710 2,034,443 City of Corona 1,549,405 12,468 1,561,873 City of Norco 73,116 - 73,116 City of Riverside 2,150,513 2,150,513 Friends of the Moreno Valley Senior Citizens 47,772 - 47,772 Independent Living Partnership 404,447 404,447 Inland Aids Project 100,000 100,000 Operation Safe House 5,000 5,000 Riverside County Regional Medical Center 206,636 - 206,636 Riverside County Transportation Commission 11,020,415 2,525,315 13,545,730 Riverside Transit Agency 88,410 26,813,829 1,594,566 28,496,805 Volunteer Center of Greater Riverside 192,352 - 192,352 Other 167,810 - 167,810 1,892,887 44,525,302 4,156,955 50,575,144 Coachella Valley: SunLine Transit Agency 2,789,731 15,934,261 6,731,205 25,455,197 Other 1,109 1,109 2,790,840 15,934,261 6,731,205 25,456,306 Palo Verde Valley: Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 914,438 158,074 1,072,512 914,438 158,074 1,072,512 Total transit and specialized transportation expenditures $ 4,683,727 $ 61,374,001 $ 11,046,234 $ 77,103,962 53 This page intentionally left blank 54 r STATISTICAL SECTION NOLD3S 1VDIELLVIS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STATISTICAL SECTION OVERVIEW This part of the Riverside County Transportation Commission's comprehensive annual financial report presents detailed information as a context for understanding what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures, and required supplementary information says about the Commission's overall financial health. Financial Trends: These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the government's financial performance and well-being have changed over time. The schedules include: Net Assets By Component Changes in Net Assets Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Revenue Capacity: These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the government's most significant local revenue source, the Measure A sales tax. These schedules include: Sources of County of Riverside Taxable Sales by Business Type Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area Debt Capacity: These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the government's current levels of outstanding debt and the government's ability to issue additional debt in the future. These schedules include: Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type Computation of Legal Debt Margin Pledged Revenue Coverage Demographic and Economic Information: These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the government's financial activities take place. These schedules include: Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside Operating Information: These schedules contain service and infrastructure data to help the reader understand how the information in the government's financial report relates to the services the government provides and the activities it performs. These schedules include: Full-time Equivalent Employees by Function/Program Operating Indicators Capital Asset Statistics by Program 55 This page intentionally left blank 56 Riverside County Transportation Commission Net Assets by Component Last Eight Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis) Fiscal Year 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 Governmental activities: Invested in capital assets, net of related debt $ 266,647,382 5 $ 207,478,034 ' $ 147,874,291 $ 137,129,082 $ 133,225,528 3 $ 104,716,712 2 $ 128,247,454 ' $ 130,051,343 Restricted 505,474,075 521,711,172 531,154,177 442,129,220 325,504,623 232,719,198 2 154,913,051 ' (44,501,093) Unrestricted (205,658,986) (149,004,964) (118,675,049) (102,074,881) (124,274,292) (121,829,477) 2 (174,443,946) ' 5,985,213 Total governmental activities net assets $ 566,462,471 $ 580,184,242 $ 560,353,419 $ 477,183,421 $ 334,455,859 $ 215,606,433 $ 108,716,559 $ 91,535,463 GASB 34 was implemented July 1, 2001. Prior years' information is not available. Source: Finance Department Beginning net assets in 2003 were restated as a result of corrections to capital assets and revenue recognition, resulting in a net decrease of $20,492,947. Additionally, certain components of beginning net assets were reclassified to conform to the presentation in the 2003 financial statements. Prior year amounts in this presentation have not been revised to reflect these changes. 2 The Local Transportation Fund, previously reported as a fiduciary fund, was reclassified as a special revenue fund in the 2004 financial statements, resulting in an increase to beginning net assets of $34,295,645. Additionally, certain components of beginning net assets were reclassified to conform to the presentation in the 2004 financial statements. Prior year amounts in this presentation have not been revised to reflect these changes. 3 The beginning balance of invested in capital assets, net of related debt, was restated due to a correction in the accounting for certain rail capital assets in the 2005 financial statements, resulting in an increase of $19,283,259. Prior year amounts in this presentation have not been revised to reflect these changes. ' Invested in capital assets, net of related debt, increased in 2008 primarily as a result of right of way purchases related to the Mid County Parkway project. 5 Invested in capital assets, net of related debt, increased in 2009 primarily as a result of right of way purchases related to the Mid County Parkway project, the planning and development of toll projects, and the construction of a multimodal transit facility and a commuter rail station parking structure. $1,000,000,000 $800,000,000 $600,000,000 $400,000,000 $200,000,000 $- $(200,000,000) $(400,000,000) Net Assets by Component 1 I 1 1 1 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 ['Unrestricted ['Restricted ■Invested in capital assets, net of related debt Expenses Governmental activities: General government Bicycle and pedestrian projects CETAP Commuter assistance Commuter rail Highways Local streets and roads Motorist assistance Planning and programming Right of way management Regional arterials Transit and specialized transportation Interest expense Total governmental activities expenses Program Revenues Governmental activities: Charges for services Commuter assistance Riverside County Transportation Commission Changes in Net Assets Last Eight Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis) Fiscal Year Ended June 30 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 $ 5,525,963 $ 5,299,048 $ 5,592,637 $ 4,848,292 $ 4,115,907 $ 3,909,942 $ 4,307,544 $ 5,407,800 2,747,151 1,436,710 760,840 848,959 1,021,637 927,138 l 4,832,008 8,017,024 5,433,499 3,549,683 4,147,758 608,882 2 5,199,032 3,464,834 3,122,306 2,888,451 2,599,448 2,959,732 2,318,033 2,088,746 16,038,028 14,832,473 12,458,895 11,350,220 8,907,828 8,702,803 5,659,863 14,772,034 143,532,009 59,988,334 42,436,979 36,226,705 35,362,793 35,456,330 29,812,083 27,850,447 45,661,155 54,520,115 60,099,526 60,389,876 53,333,169 46,208,968 40,256,464 36,541,323 2,623,184 3,983,252 2,408,612 2,280,646 2,191,061 1,978,380 1,843,017 2,559,409 10,126,142 7,931,869 6,561,185 5,976,647 4,328,038 4,287,696 2,978,044 5,890,377 1,399,316 551,960 631,996 622,498 580,224 338,353 154,582 145,158 20,948,530 31,131,731 30,756,287 17,164,803 17,621,505 13,996,300 2 8,428,021 11,720,342 77,417,741 83,927,945 75,567,829 62,527,276 55,905,814 53,411,921 l 9,913,504 8,680,284 9,515,282 6,281,232 6,881,128 7,832,733 8,348,928 11,736,129 10,381,790 - 3 345,565,541 281,366,527 252,711,719 216,506,789 198,464,110 184,522,574 116,052,945 115,655,920 Commuter rail 2,525,314 352,826 463 382 2,564 Right of way management 421,738 507,298 497,656 445,313 547,075 Highways - - 50 - Motorist assistance 19,778 Planning and programming Other 46 2,331 2,367 26,273 24,972 55,255 4,498 Operating grants and contributions 90,280,426 28,391,787 47,313,916 90,389,018 72,202,430 61,412,882 2 10,489,860 Capital grants and contributions 25,321,886 9,742,280 620,292 997,362 877,665 1,183,922 21,190,027 Total governmental activities program revenues 118,569,188 38,996,522 48,434,694 91,858,398 73,654,706 63,767,577 33,241,152 16,550,975 1,566,840 3,794,146 4 2,928,573 4 3,507,520 4 7,293 4,746,603 3 573,864 146,349 395,305 948,532 394,924 213,311 Net Revenues (Expenses) Governmental activities (226,996,353) (242,370,005) (204,277,025) (124,648,391) (124,809,404) (120,754,997) (82,811,793) (99,104,945) General Revenues Governmental activities: Measure A sales taxes 119,688,289 142,537,548 154,539,723 157,236,314 138,921,247 120,564,890 105,782,595 95,797,287 Transportation Development Act sales taxes 77,920,485 93,042,150 104,160,163 90,927,244 77,818,565 69,133,102 , 7,488,638 6,876,656 Vehicle registration fees - - - 1,288,655 Unrestricted investment earnings 14,211,197 25,055,456 23,897,399 11,639,575 5,146,325 3,115,232 4,932,021 5,942,480 Other miscellaneous revenue 1,454,611 1,565,674 1,571,716 1,698,024 2,366,380 536,002 2,282,582 4,888,250 Gain on sale of capital assets - 3,278,022 5,874,796 123,054 - Total governmental activities general revenues 213,274,582 262,200,828 287,447,023 267,375,953 224,375,571 193,349,226 120,485,836 114,793,328 Changes in Net Assets Governmental activities $(13,721,771) $ 19,830,823 $ 83,169,998 $142,727,562 $ 99,566,167 $ 72,594,229 $ 37,674,043 $ 15,688,383 GASB 34 was implemented July 1, 2001. Prior years' information is not available. Source: Finance Department The Local Transportation Fund, previously reported as a fiduciary fund, was reclassified as a special revenue fund in the 2004 financial increase in sales tax revenues as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit and specialized transportation expenditures. Prior have not been revised to reflect these changes. 2 The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee program was implemented in fiscal year 2004, resulting in a new revenue source for expendi regional arterials programs. statements, resulting in an year amounts in this presentation tures related to the CETAP and 3 Interest expense of $12,242,557 in 2002 was classified within each respective program. ° Federal and state reimbursements were classified as charges for services in fiscal year 2002 but were classified as operating or capital grants and contributions in subsequent years. 58 400,000,000 - 350,000,000 300,000,000 - 250,000,000 200,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 50,000,000 Riverside County Transportation Commission Changes in Net Assets (Continued) Last Eight Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis) Expenses by Function 400,000,000 350,000,000 300,000,000 250,000,000 200,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 50,000,000 K. 1 a 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 a 2009 2008 2007 1 71 Revenues by Source 1 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 O lnterest expense ® Transit and specialized transportation O Regional arterials ■ Right of way management ■ Planning and programming O Motorist assistance ■ Local streets and roads ■ Highways ■ Commuter rail O Commuter assistance O CETAP ■ Bicycle and pedestrian facilities ® General government ■ Gain on sale of capital assets O Other miscellaneous revenue ■ Unrestricted investment earnings ■ Vehicle registration fees ■ Transportation Development Act sales taxes O Measure A sales taxes O Capital grants and contributions ■ Operating grants and contributions ■ Charges for services 59 Riverside County Transportation Commission Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Last Ten Fiscal Years (Modified Accrual Basis) Fiscal Year 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 General fund: Reserved $ 6,756,708 $ 6,886,986 $ 7,070,115 $ 7,215,579 $ 6,304,837 $ 5,821,023 $ 5,001,493 $ 5,594,227 $ 4,814,296 $ 1,935,975 Unreserved 3,348,711 3,238,251 2,877,923 2,014,480 2,215,643 1,531,151 756,299 885,890 777,104 2,183,869 Total general fund $ 10,105,419 $ 10,125,237 $ 9,948,038 $ 9,230,059 $ 8,520,480 $ 7,352,174 $ 5,757,792 $ 6,480,117 $ 5,591,400 $ 4,119,844 All other governmental funds: Reserved $ 487,425,652 $ 520,874,648 $ 533,276,158 $ 438,453,362 $ 323,219,025 $ 233,973,154 $ 149,911,558 $ 152,810,730 $ 145,180,481 $ 100,032,179 Unreserved, reported in: Special revenue funds 8,289,036 7,297,744 6,936,417 5,745,792 4,895,792 4,049,038 3,225,168 5,375,669 7,473,997 8,410,769 Capital projects funds (49,576,636) (7,253,535) Total all other governmental funds $ 446,138,052 $ 520,918,857 $ 540,212,575 $ 444,199,154 $ 328,114,817 $ 238,022,192 ' $ 153,136,726 $ 158,186,399 $ 152,654,478 $ 108,442,948 Source: Finance Department The Local Transportation Fund, previously reported as a fiduciary fund, was reclassified as a special revenue fund in the 2004 financial statements, resulting in an increase to beginning fund balance of $34,295,645. 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds $- $45 $90 $135 $180 $225 $270 $315 $360 $405 $450 $495 $540 $585 Millions ®General fund: Reserved ■ General fund: Unreserved DAII other governmental funds: Unreserved, reported in: Special revenue funds ❑ AII other governmental funds: Reserved Riverside County Transportation Commission Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds Last Ten Fiscal Years (Modified Accrual Basis) Fiscal Year 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 Revenues Sales taxes $ 197,608,774 $ 235,579,698 $ 258,699,886 $ 248,163,558 $ 216,739,812 $ 189,697,992 I $ 117,982,195 $ 107,420,546 $ 98,110,780 $ 89,951,364 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee 10,957,420 14,556,029 40,757,248 85,228,383 46,325,334 35,615,226 3 - - - - Intergovernmental 105,512,656 22,249,107 5,498,660 4,365,183 25,241,083 23,276,534 26,765,599 11,804,372 5,286,109 6,542,447 Interest 13,567,938 23,744,305 23,897,399 11,639,575 5,146,325 3,115,232 4,932,021 5,942,480 9,842,472 4,493,979 Vehicle registration user fees 1,677,374 1,684,088 1,681,130 1,629,087 1,541,216 1,435,098 1,332,707 1,288,655 1,297,474 1,189,662 Other 1,876,349 2,072,972 2,175,372 2,143,330 3,118,002 3,976,721 2,714,466 4,888,250 4,086,123 3,759,132 Total revenues 331,200,511 299,886,199 332,709,695 353,169,116 298,111,772 257,116,803 153,726,988 131,344,303 118,622,958 105,936,584 Expenditures Current: Administration 5,368,677 5,290,616 5,545,466 4,674,157 3,827,427 3,663,957 4,120,493 3,122,035 2,625,800 2,644,640 Programs: Bicycle and pedestrian facilities 2,747,151 1,436,710 760,840 848,959 1,021,637 927,138 1 CETAP 35,809,396 21,098,240 5,433,499 3,549,683 8,600,659 608,882 2 - - - - Commuter assistance 5,155,263 3,377,881 3,097,534 2,883,352 2,583,679 2,943,963 2,296,177 2,088,746 1,698,814 1,116,402 Commuter rail 40,704,106 21,470,133 14,044,435 10,570,931 7,580,484 13,016,707 29,345,902 8,382,102 7,269,992 8,484,958 Highways 165,100,551 65,697,249 48,359,404 37,073,826 36,340,818 33,133,748 29,459,603 11,959,224 10,049,767 6,071,625 Local streets and roads 45,661,155 54,520,115 60,099,526 60,389,876 53,333,169 46,208,968 40,260,340 36,030,413 34,339,969 31,275,141 Motorist assistance 2,623,184 3,983,252 2,408,612 2,280,646 2,191,061 1,978,380 1,843,017 2,559,409 2,065,096 1,757,219 Planning and programming 9,193,944 6,939,409 5,586,992 4,884,556 3,621,810 3,537,513 2,310,810 5,284,892 2,144,893 3,036,045 Right of way management 1,399,316 551,960 631,996 622,498 580,224 338,353 154,582 145,158 - - 0-) Regional arterials 20,948,530 59,841,509 30,756,287 19,462,949 22,174,406 8,896,300 2 8,445,554 9,734,705 10,534,691 6,467,674 Transit and specialized transportation 77,417,741 83,927,945 75,567,829 62,527,276 55,905,814 53,411,921 1 9,913,503 8,680,284 6,883,655 4,472,295 Debt service: Principal 33,646,475 141,870,000 30,225,589 28,669,418 27,228,073 26,316,788 25,199,054 24,068,939 22,478,844 18,529,107 Interest 12,026,942 6,657,569 6,564,973 7,679,019 8,400,410 9,191,799 10,381,795 11,476,956 12,530,366 11,998,197 Other - 1,261,668 - 236,058 2,580,124 - - - 433,148 - Intergovernmental distributions 975,833 992,460 974,193 1,092,091 706,228 750,183 667,234 605,485 632,361 518,609 Capital outlay 1,055,997 335,023 161,268 290,461 179,818 8,000 315,240 569,041 63,502 50,319 Total expenditures 459,834,261 479,251,739 290,218,443 247,735,756 236,855,841 204,932,600 164,713,304 124,707,389 113,750,898 96,422,231 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over(under)expenditures Other financing sources (uses): Sales of capital assets Capital lease Debt issuance Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) (128,633,750) (179,365,540) 42,491,252 105,433,360 61,255,931 52,184,203 (10,986,316) 6,636,914 4,872,060 9,514,353 - 4,240,148 11,360,556 117,127 - 53,716,000 160,249,021 50,000,000 - 30,005,000 33,466,298 164,063,070 34,745,015 34,517,083 37,050,167 (33,466,298) (164,063,070) (34,745,015) (34,517,083) (37,050,167) 53,833,127 160,249,021 54,240,148 11,360,556 30,005,000 - - - 35,934,149 - 41,523,149 77,308,990 68,714,250 44,014,685 32,056,359 (41,523,149) (77,308,990) (68,714,250) (44,014,685) (32,056,359) 35,934,149 Net change in fund balances $ (74,800,623) $ (19,116,519) $ 96,731,400 $ 116,793,916 $ 91,260,931 $ 52,184,203 $ (10,986,316) $ 6,636,914 $ 40,806,209 $ 9,514,353 Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures 12.10 % 35.36 % " 13.1 % 15.0 % 16.8 % 17.9 % 25.5 % 30.0 % N/A ' N/A ' Source: Finance Department The Local Transportation Fund, previously reported as a fiduciary fund, was reclassified as a special revenue fund in the 2004 financial statements, resulting in an increase in sales tax revenues as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit and specialized transportation. 2 The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee program was implemented in fiscal 2004, resulting in a new revenue source for expenditures related to the CETAP and regional arterials programs. 3 GASB 34 was implemented July 1, 2001. Prior years' information related to capital assets additions is not available. 4 Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures in 2008 increased significantly as a result of the refinancing of $110,005,000 of commercial paper, which is included in principal payments. %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 %09 0 1799'0176'£6 $ 9176'9L0'96 $ 61717'6L6'96 $ 999'6£Z'96 $ 1766'9617'61 $ 9£6'60L'6Z $ 9176'L£Z'9Z $ 6617'99Z'9Z $ L£Z'969'6Z $ 609'9Z0'6Z $ 99£'996£ 171£'969'£ 6£Z'L£6'£ Z6L'9ZZ'17 L£L'9907 £96'9L9'9 6£9'6L17'9 60L'96Z'9 6£0'ZZ9'9 999'999'9 190'969 £0£ Et 6 Z 60'Z 66' 6 £60'606' 6 6Z9' 696' 6 9617'Z69 6Z0' 666' 6 969'9bL' 6 9Z9' 699' 6 ZZ6'Z917'Z 90Z'996'6 9L9'696'Z 9L0769'Z 9£6'17£6'£ 9N'£99'£ 191Z99'£ 61717'99£'17 9176'£6L'17 6£6'6171'17 99£'6007 9£bb09 6£L'996 £69'966' 6 £9L'9ZZ' 6 9179'617t 6 017t9£9' 6 £9Z'999' 6 Z90'LLZ'Z 96L'0£9'Z 069'9£9'Z £69'£LO' 6 1799'L60' 6 9£9'06Z' 6 OZO'6££' 6 6£9'LZb' 6 L17£'9L9' 6 199'969'Z 969'17Z17'Z 9£Z'06£'Z L176' 666'Z Z69'L9£ 1769'L1717 9L9'L69 £90'9Z9 6170'1769 190'169 699'Z99 6Z9'1796 L1t9176 9176'£b9 6Z6'L66' 6 bLZ'££Z' 6 909'179£' 6 L917'9917' 1 96Z'699' 6 Z£9'£6L' 6 01,9'0176' 1 609'L96'Z ZZ17'96£'Z 6£0'99£'Z 69L'917 196'N 917£'L9 09Z'99 6917'99 1769'69 9ZL'99 9Z9'b1 969'9L L6£'179 6Z9'99L 6179'9N 1769'699 Z£Zb£6 6L VL96 Z6£'9Z0' 6 ZL6'6L0' 6 9£b'L66' 6 Z9L'60£' 6 609'Z9£' 6 £OZ'1700' 6 6£Z'996' 6 69£'LLZ' 6 6L6'6L£' 6 901' 109' 6 17ZZ'6179' 6 9£b'999' 6 0170'1701 Z Z1717'Z9Z'Z Z179'06Z' 6 9£9'Z179' 6 199'9179' 6 9£L'Z90'Z 9£L'9LZ'Z 9170'6917 Z 116' 6L9'Z 9££'9Z0'£ 17117'170£'£ 1799'£99'£ b£ 6'£69'£ £9L'9617 $ 9176'9617 $ 9L9'9£9 $ 96Z'999 $ 99£b69 $ 960'9171 $ 9LZ'L99 $ 6Z6'066 $ 99£b90'6 $ £60'6L6'6 $ 8666 6666 000Z 600Z ZOOZ £OOZ v00Z 900Z 900Z LOOZ (spuesnogl smaA mpualeo ual;sei adAi ssauisne Aq sales anexel appianwjo Awnoo;o saomos uoissiwwoo uoppodsueil fqunoo appianw algellene e}ep }sow s}uesada> ReA uol}ezllenb3 peo8 ele}s :ewnos a}e� xe} sales paip 1,$g eoueuppyanseeA spina Jay}o Ile pp' snoeuelleom eueld pue eloAwo}ow leoq 'eNowo}ny suol}e}s eouues sweweldwl ale; pue sleuelew Bupp8 seouelldde pue Bwyslwn; ewoH Buplupp/Bul}e3 mop Jonbg e5goed saJo}s 'mod mop /(}l eds saJo}s espueywew leiaues mop laieddy Fiscal Year Riverside County Transportation Commission Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates Last Ten Fiscal Years Measure A Direct Rate' County of Riverside 2009 0.50% 8.75% 2008 0.50% 7.75% 2007 0.50% 7.75% 2006 0.50% 7.75% 2005 0.50% 7.75% 2004 0.50% 7.75% 2003 0.50% 7.75% 2002 0.50% 7.75% 2001 0.50% 7.75% 2000 0.50% 7.75% Source: Commission Finance Department and California State Board of Equalization. The Measure A sales tax rate may be changed only with the approval of 2/3 of the voters. 2 The State of California increased the state sales tax rate 1 % in April 2009. 63 Riverside County Transportation Commission Principal Taxable Sales Generation by City Current Year and Nine Years Ago 2007 1998 Taxable Sales (in thousands) Rank Percentage of Taxable Sales (in Total thousands) Rank Percentage of Total City of Riverside $ 4,789,554 2 16.5% $ 2,601,975 2 19.8% City of Corona 3,478,337 3 12.0% 1,283,288 3 9.8% City of Temecula 2,583,938 4 8.9% 922,772 5 7.0% City of Palm Desert 1,593,698 5 5.5% 923,979 4 7.0% City of Moreno Valley 1,267,045 6 4.4% 647,240 6 4.9% City ofMurrieta 1,098,431 7 3.8% 281,799 13 2.1% City of Hemet 962,919 8 3.3% 502,107 8 3.8% City of Palm Springs 852,473 9 2.9% 498,519 9 3.8% City of La Quinta 826,488 10 2.9% 213,973 16 1.6% City of Cathedral City 812,985 11 2.8% 507,167 7 3.9% City of Indio 766,341 12 2.7% 345,934 10 2.6% City of Lake Elsinore 723,996 13 2.5% 287,228 11 2.2% City of Perris 554,129 14 1.9% 263,976 14 2.0% City of Norco 509,334 15 1.8% 283,606 12 2.2% City of Rancho Mirage 501,618 16 1.7% 256,200 15 1.9% City of Coachella 319,336 17 1.1 % 98,254 19 0.7% City of Beaumont 262,964 18 0.9% 75,937 20 0.6% City of Banning 232,890 19 0.8% 156,092 17 1.2% City of Blythe 178,507 20 0.6% 111,750 18 0.9% City of San Jacinto 173,716 21 0.6% 62,694 21 0.5% City of Desert Hot Springs 94,617 22 0.3% 52,998 23 0.4% City of Indian Wells 94,073 23 0.3% 60,581 22 0.5% City ofCalimesa 51,047 24 0.2% 19,235 24 0.1% City of Canyon Lake 12,938 25 0.0% 8,163 25 0.1% Incorporated 22,741,374 78.4% 10,465,467 79.6% Unincorporated 6,282,235 1 21.6% 2,675,387 1 20.4% Countywide $ 29,023,609 100.0% $ 13,140,854 100.0% California $ 561,050,149 Source: California State Board of Equalization for the calendar year indicated. $ 358,858,378 Taxable Sales by City $6,000,000 - $5,000,000 $4,000,000 t 2007 $3,000,000 t 1998 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $ 0 � 0 ,5 a�c0' oJ.e�G \a0 0 OF P e- 031/4' Q 0 o Qyal'e 0°°c0e‹e •4bc*a tic5 Q [�°�ar �aDQ�� ��cO�•c o °�°° e.O,0.°���.t00Qk k0 cioNP eV 0,�,e0�0ic` 0' 2!>kc o1/4o0�a°c0� °��a°SarC.)��G\G\�'oo�o�°G�a�oGa • tc1 6 4Gc' kg•�G�qg'GooGr 0e�61/4� ,1 °G:oGoo��G�g�G° CtG mGCT- GG�G G`kO o Cl 64 Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area Year Ended June 30, 2009 Special Revenue Funds General Western Coachella Palo Fund County Valley Verde Total Administration $ 3,400,000 $ $ $ $ 3,400,000 Commuter assistance 2,188,320 2,188,320 Highways 33,941,548 4,180,937 38,122,485 Commuter rail 14,201,499 14,201,499 Local streets and roads 35,013,125 9,755,518 882,567 45,651,210 Regional arterials 11,149,164 11,149,164 Specialized transportation 2,188,320 2,787,291 4,975,611 $ 3,400,000 $ 87,532,812 $ 27,872,910 $ 882,567 $ 119,688,289 Source: Finance Department Geographic Distribution by Area Palo Verde 1% Coachella Valley 24% General Fund 2% Western County 73% $50,000,000 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 5- Sales Tax Revenues by Program and Geographic Area Administration Commuter Highways Commute rail Local streets Regional Specialized assistance and roads arterials transportation ■ Palo Verde ■ Coachella Valley ▪ Western County ▪ General Fund 65 tienuer p se uowindod Jo4 eoueuu }ueLupedeo ele}s epopleo pue 0£ amp pepue ReA leosy ay} Jo4 }qep Buipue}s}no Jo4 }ueLupedeo eoueuu :somas £ 6 6£ 6 0 66'ZZ9' 6 006'699' 11 9LZ' 6L 6 9Z9'9 6L' 1, OOOZ ZZ0176 OL£'609'6 9L9'999'9ZZ 07'L66 Lb17'6179'9ZZ 600Z 99 ZZ 6 9LZ'17179' 6 OZn-170'Z0Z 0617'99 0£L'£86' 60Z ZOOZ 901701 9Z9'90L'6 6KZ917'LL6 OL9'606 669'Z9£'LL6 £OOZ CZ 99 09L'9LL'6 Z80'86L'996 Z80'N 000'001'9 000'9£9'696 b00Z 1717179 000'LL8' 6 600'9617'991 600'99 000'001'17 000'900'0e 000'9W17Z6 900Z 9699 0££'£96'6 669'9N'9Z6 669'9Z 000'006'£ 000'900'0e 000'969'96 900Z 99 ZL 9Z9' 6£0'Z 000'009'Lb6 000'001 Z 000'900'09 000'9617'99 LOOZ 91LL ZZ£'880'Z 000'9Z6'691 000'001'1 000'9Z0'096 900Z 111, $ £99'L06'Z Z99'9617'9£Z $ n9'006 $ $ $ 000'000'011 $ 000'96£'9Z6 $ 600Z e;ldeo gad Aea uol;elndod sal;Inpv seseei le;ldeo eneAed a;oN algehd pe.;u03 Jaded lepieww03 spuoe aplsienwjo Awnoo lewewuJenoo le;ol anueneN xel saleS sal31nR3V le;uawuJanoo sJeaA leosld ual;set adAi ;gaa 6ulpue;s;no;o sol;ea uolsslwwoo uol;epodsueil fuunoo aplsienw JeaA Riverside County Transportation Commission Computation of Legal Debt Margin' Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 Measure A Ordinance No. 88-1, as amended by Ordinance 92-1 Total debt limit authorized $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 $ 525,000,000 Amount of debt applicable to debt limit 33,630,000 65,495,000 95,695,000 124,335,000 151,535,000 177,352,519 201,983,730 225,541,447 211,718,625 Legal debt margin $ 525,000,000 $ 491,370,000 $ 459,505,000 $ 429,305,000 $ 400,665,000 $ 373,465,000 $ 347,647,481 $ 323,016,270 $ 299,458,553 $ 313,281,375 % of debt to legal debt limit 0.0% 6.4% 12.5% 18.2% 23.7% 28.9% 33.8% 38.5% 43.0% 40.3% Measure A Ordinance No. 02-0012 Total debt limit authorized $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 Amount of debt applicable to debt limit 236,395,000 126,395,000 80,005,000 30,005,000 30,005,000 Legal debt margin $ 263,605,000 $ 373,605,000 $ 419,995,000 $ 469,995,000 $ 469,995,000 $ 500,000,000 $ 500,000,000 % of debt to legal debt limit 47.3% 25.3% 16.0% 6.0% 6.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: Finance Department ' The Commission's debt limits were approved by the voters of Riverside County as part of the sales tax ordinances and are specific to the Commission; accordingly, there are no overlapping debt considerations. 2 Ordinance No. 02-001 was approved by a 2/3 majority of the voters in November 2002. $600,000,000 $500,000,000 $400,000,000 $300,000,000 $200,000,000 $100,000,000 s- Measure A Ordinance No. 88-1, as amended by Ordinance 92-1 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 . Total debt llmlt authorized . Amount of debt appfmable to debtllmlt $600,000,000 $500,000,000 $400,000,000 $300,000,000 $200,000,000 $100,000,000 9r Measure Ordinance No. 02-001 I 1 • ■ 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 • Total debt limit aumonzed . Amount of debt appooable to debtllmlt Riverside County Transportation Commission Pledged Revenue Coverage' Last Ten Fiscal Years Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Measure A Measure A Sales Total Debt Sales Tax Tax Receipt Senior Lien Senior Lien Total Senior Lien Senior Lien Subordinate Lien Subordinate Lien Total Debt Service Fiscal Year Receipts2 Growth Rate Principal Interest Debt Service Coverage Ratio Principal Interest Service Coverage Ratio co 2000 81,543,732 15.83% 17,574,107 11,479,986 29,054,093 2.81 955,000 518,212 30,527,305 2.67 2009 $ 124,691,932-14.64% $ 32,245,500 $ 1,775,224 $ 34,020,724 3.67 $ 1,384,500 $ 68,134 $ 35,473,358 3.52 2008 146,083,683 -7.01% 30,525,000 3,477,732 34,002,732 4.30 1,340,000 130,388 35,473,120 4.12 2007 157,092,807 1.22% 28,920,000 5,085,357 34,005,357 4.62 1,280,000 189,588 35,474,945 4.43 2006 155,206,029 15.38% 27,420,000 6,592,634 34,012,634 4.56 1,220,000 250,587 35,483,221 4.37 2005 134,516,986 14.35% 26,030,000 7,983,294 34,013,294 3.95 1,170,000 302,237 35,485,531 3.79 2004 117,632,722 14.41% 25,170,000 8,834,981 34,004,981 3.46 1,120,000 352,237 35,477,218 3.32 2003 102,817,407 8.92% 24,098,490 9,978,063 34,076,553 3.02 1,075,000 397,925 35,549,478 2.89 2002 94,400,890 5.52% 23,038,939 11,036,545 34,075,484 2.77 1,030,000 440,412 35,545,896 2.66 2001 89,464,634 9.71% 21,488,844 12,050,355 33,539,199 2.67 990,000 480,012 35,009,211 2.56 Source: Finance Department This schedule meets the requirements for Continuing Disclosure of historical Measure Asales tax receipts and bond coverage ratios. 2 Sales tax revenue bonds are backed by the sales tax receipts, net of Board of Equalization fees, during the fiscal year. Riverside County Transportation Commission Demographic and Economic Statistics for the County of Riverside Last Ten Calendar Years Personal Income Per Capita Calendar Year Population' (thousands)2 Personal Income Unemployment Rate' 2007 2,031,625 $ 61,023,518 $ 30,037 6.0% 2006 1,953,330 57,666,983 29,522 5.1% 2005 1,877,000 52,850,398 28,157 5.4% 2004 1,776,780 49,443,185 27,827 5.8% 2003 1,705,625 45,016,790 26,393 6.3% 2002 1,644,275 42,010,066 25,549 6.3% 2001 1,609,370 39,974,556 24,839 5.5% 2000 1,522,910 37,014,951 24,305 5.4% 1999 1,473,307 34,088,221 23,137 5.5% 1998 1,441,237 32,089,788 22,265 6.7% Sources: California State Department of Finance as of January 1. 2 U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis 3 Riverside County Economic Development Agency 69 Riverside County Transportation Commission Employment Statistics by Industry for the County of Riverside Calendar Year 2007 and Nine Years Prior % of Total Industry Type 2007' Employment 1998 % of Total Employment Farm 8,836 1.0% 13,634 2.3% Agricultural services, forestry, fishing and other 8,880 1.0% 19,647 3.3% Mining 1,392 0.2% 876 0.1% Construction 94,347 10.6% 49,713 8.4% Manufacturing 58,921 6.6% 51,861 8.8% Transportation and public utilities 26,820 3.0% 17,994 3.0% Wholesale trade 27,190 3.1% 18,838 3.2% Retail trade 111,459 12.5% 106,896 18.1% Finance, insurance, and real estate 80,339 9.0% 44,563 7.5% Services 344,328 38.7% 181,232 30.6% Federal government, civilian 6,623 0.7% 6,383 1.1% Military 3,430 0.4% 3,024 0.5% State government 12,751 1.4% 10,913 1.9% Local government 105,274 11.8% 66,179 11.2% Total employment 890,590 100.0% 591,753 100.0% Source: U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis Year represents most recent data available. 70 O ZZ 0 9Z 0 9Z 0 9Z 0 9Z 0 9Z Z 0£ 0 9£ 0 8£ 0 9£ 06 80 60 60 66 OZ 0£ bb 89 L6 96 06 06 06 80 80 80 L0 L0 80 06 86 96 ZZ 9Z 6Z 6Z £6 £6 Z6 60 Z6 176 Z6 £6 176 £Z bZ OZ ZZ 80 90 L0 L0 66 06 L6 OZ 66 176 OZ 9Z 9Z bZ OZ 96 6£ 8Z 6£ 6Z 0£ 6£ 9£ 9£ L£ b£ 09 179 179 69 L 66 Z£6 ££6 0£6 9Z6 Ln ZZ6 091 9LI, Ln 000Z 600Z ZOOZ EOM v00Z 900Z 900Z LOOZ 800Z 600Z OE aunr;o sy sJeaA !eosi j ual;sei wei6adiuopund saakidwg wale/int] a ug-pnd uoissiwwoo uoppodsueil f4unoo apisianw }uewpedeo eoueuu :eamos s}uelenlnbe eumi-Ilnb le}ol tianllep pue }uewdolenep peraad lepcleo eoue}slsse }spo}oW eouelslsse Jalnwwoo uol}epodsuel}j}lsuel} pezlleloads }uewePeuew Aem }yBlb suogeiado Ileb Buluawathid pue Buluueld uol}ei}sluppe pue saolnJas }uewePeueW wei6adiuopund Riverside County Transportation Commission Operating Indicators Last Ten Fiscal Years As of June 30 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 Commuter rail operations: Weekday trips 12,224 12,304 11,696 11,391 9,721 9,532 8,818 7,589 7,283 6,284 Growth of average daily ridership on commuter lines: Riverside line 5,269 5,184 4,769 4,370 4,566 4,462 4,241 4,200 4,521 4,311 IEOCline 4,611 4,859 4,651 4,149 3,634 3,641 3,169 2,923 2,757 1,985 91 line 2,344 2,261 2,276 2,107 1,876 1,700 1,557 240 N/A N/A Farebox recovery ratio: Riverside line 51.0% 53.01 % 67.07% 48.5% 46.9% 51.1 % 49.8% 55.3% 50.9% 53.1 IEOC line 37.3% 42.60% 42.19% 45.5% 48.7% 56.6% 49.3% 46.3% 50.4% 39.0% 91 line 53.0% 45.53% 49.02% 57.2% 107.0% 101.4% 71.3% 16.6% N/A N/A Specialized transit/transportation: Specialized transit grants awarded 22 14 15 9 10 8 10 9 8 11 Commuter assistance: v N.)Club Ride members 7,378 5,860 4,436 3,901 2,837 1,994 1,960 1,792 2,005 1,901 Incoming 1-866-RIDESHARE telephone calls 2,423 3,709 2,613 2,433 801 829 1,243 N/A N/A N/A RideSmart Tips produced N/A N/A ' 45,304 27,790 32,379 9,335 N/A N/A N/A N/A Rideguides produced 34,940 23,121 24,676 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Commuter Exchange events 73 71 60 23 5 9 8 10 9 10 Motorist assistance: Call boxes 614 630 682 979 1,058 1,083 1,090 1,085 947 1,118 Calls made from call boxes 6,574 7,543 9,595 15,390 19,945 23,713 28,404 37,730 44,158 55,780 Contracted Freeway Service Patrol vehicles 20 20 17 15 15 15 13 13 12 12 Vehicles assisted by Freeway Service Patrol 43,119 45,500 40,025 31,838 32,542 32,564 27,485 25,952 25,679 24,532 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee program: Approved regional arterial projects 24 24 24 24 24 Measure A program: Highways $165,100,551 $ 65,697,249 $ 48,359,404 $ 37,073,826 $ 36,340,818 $ 33,133,748 $ 29,459,603 $ 11,959,224 $ 9,872,346 $ 5,923,971 Commuter rail 32,089,238 12,419,675 14,044,435 2,784,423 2,250,187 8,116,270 24,973,615 4,254,712 2,025,664 3,346,604 Regional arterials 12,645,090 18,220,540 30,756,287 10,350,500 10,056,326 8,246,797 8,445,554 9,734,705 10,534,691 6,467,674 Local streets and roads 45,661,155 54,520,115 59,202,631 60,389,876 53,333,169 46,208,968 40,260,340 36,030,413 34,339,969 31,275,141 Specialized transit and commuter assistance 9,838,990 9,071,302 6,358,224 7,887,298 7,458,994 7,238,299 6,295,180 6,403,786 8,426,277 5,513,655 Total program expenditures $265,335,024 $159,928,881 $158,720,981 $ 118,485,923 $109,439,494 $102,944,082 $109,434,292 $ 68,382,840 $ 65,198,947 $ 52,527,045 Source: Commission Departments This brochure was discontinued beginning FY 2007/08. 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 9 b06 b b b 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 000Z 600Z ZOOZ £OOZ b00Z 900Z 900Z LOOZ 800Z 600Z 0£ aunt;o sd saeaA leasid ual;sel uaea6oad Aq sagsgm;assd iewle3 uoisquauao3 uogepodsueal A;uno3 api nim s}uewpedea uopsivauaoa :eamos eioNeA ebueyox3 aa}nuauaoa :eoue}sissy aa}nuauaoa s}uewesee aa}nuauaoo to sapW pebeueua pue peumo suoi}e}s aa}nuauaoa :�iea aa}nuauaoa NUM R1111in — Riverside County Transporla6on Commission (951) 787-7141 www.rctc.org 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Financial and Compliance Report Year Ended June 30, 2009 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. Contents Independent Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information 1-2 Financial Statements Balance Sheet 3 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance 4 Notes to Financial Statements 5-7 Supplementary Information Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements 8 Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Articles 4 and 8)9 Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Article 3)10 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards 11-12 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 1 Independent Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009, as listed in the table of contents.These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission’s management.Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements present only the Local Transportation Fund and do not purport to, and do not,present fairly the financial position of the Commission or the County of Riverside, California, as of June 30, 2009, and the change in its financial position for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Commission, as of June 30, 2009,and the change in financial position,for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards,we have also issued our report dated November 13, 2009 on our consideration of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts,grant agreements and other matters.The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance.That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. The Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside has not presented a Management’s Discussion and Analysis as required by Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 that the GASB has determined is necessary to supplement, although not required to be a part of, the financial statements. 2 Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements of the Local Transportation Fund of the Commission taken as a whole.The schedules listed in the table of contents as supplementary information are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the financial statements of the Local Transportation Fund. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 3 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Balance Sheet June 30, 2009 Assets Cash and investments in County Treasury 60,901,273$ Accounts receivable 9,515,029 Interest receivable 215,831 Total assets 70,632,133$ Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts payable 2,126,680$ Due to other Commission funds 198,446 Total liabilities 2,325,126 Fund Balance Reserved: Unapportioned carryover, net 5,281,222 Rail and bus transit and local streets and roads apportionments 59,833,639 Bicycle and pedestrian projects 1,156,425 Planning and programming 85,183 Unreserved and designated for bicycles and pedestrians 1,950,538 Total fund balance 68,307,007 Total liabilities and fund balance 70,632,133$ See Notes to Financial Statements. 4 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance Year Ended June 30, 2009 Revenues: Sales taxes 58,779,286$ Interest 1,606,918 Total revenues 60,386,204 Expenditures: Bicycle and pedestrian projects 2,747,151 Transit 61,374,001 Planning and programming 2,880,500 Total expenditures 67,001,652 Excess of expenditures over revenues (6,615,448) Fund balance at beginning of year 74,922,455 Fund balance at end of year 68,307,007$ See Notes to Financial Statements. Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 5 Note 1. Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), in its capacity as the transportation planning agency for the County of Riverside, California (County),is responsible for administering funds provided through the Local Transportation Fund (Fund), which was created in accordance with the provisions of the Transportation Development Act of 1971. The significant revenue to the Fund is derived from one-fourth of one percent of the eight and one quarter percent statewide sales tax collected in the County by the State Board of Equalization (State). The accounting policies of the Commission conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States as applicable to governmental units. A summary of the Commission’s significant accounting policies is as follows: Presentation:The accompanying financial statements of the Fund are intended to present the financial position and the changes in financial position of only that portion of the governmental activities of the Commission that is attributable to the transactions of the Local Transportation Fund of the Commission. They do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission as of June 30, 2009 and the changes in its financial position, where applicable, for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Basis of accounting:In accordance with the requirements for governmental funds, the modified accrual basis of accounting is followed in the Fund. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, expenditures are recorded when they are expected to be liquidated with expendable available resources, and revenue is recorded when it becomes both measurable and available.“Measurable”means the amount of the transaction can be determined, and “available”means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period.For this purpose, the Commission considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 180 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Those revenues susceptible to accrual include sales taxes collected and held by the state at year-end on behalf of the Commission and interest revenue. Funding:There is a three-step process for obtaining funds from the Fund: apportionment, allocation and payment. Annually, the Commission determines each area’s share of the anticipated Fund. This share is the area apportionment. Once funds are apportioned to a given area, they are typically available only for allocation to claimants in that area. Allocation is the discretionary action by the Commission which designates funds for a specific claimant for a specific purpose. Payment is authorized by disbursement instructions issued by the Commission. Expenditures:Expenditures represent disbursements to the Commission, Southern California Association of Governments, cities, the County of Riverside and transit operators that have met the claimant eligibility requirements to receive Fund monies per various Public Utilities Code Sections. All disbursements are to be used for transportation purposes. Accounts receivable:Accounts receivable consists primarily of Fund sales tax revenues from the state on all taxable sales within the County of Riverside, California through June 30, 2009. Accounts payable:Accounts payable consists primarily of claims approved by the Commission, but not paid by the Commission,to the appropriate transit operators by June 30, 2009. Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 6 Note 2. Cash and Investments With County Treasurer The funds in the County Treasury are pooled with those of other entities in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund (RCPIF)and invested in accordance with the County’s investment policy. These pooled funds are carried at fair value. Fair value is based on quoted market prices and/or direct bids, when needed, from government dealers on some variable or floating rate items.Moneys in the Fund are legally required to be deposited in the County Treasury pool.An Investment Oversight Committee has been established by the County, which acts as a regulator of the pool. As of June 30, 2009, the Commission had $60,901,273 invested in the RCPIF, with an average maturity of 372 days. Interest rate risk:While the Commission does not have a formal policy related to the interest rate risk of investments, the Commission’s investment policy follows the California Government Code as it relates to limits on investment maturities as a means of managing exposure to fair value losses arising from increasing interest rates. Credit risk:As of June 30, 2009, the Commission’s investment in the RCPIF was rated Aaa/MR1 by Moody’s Investors Service and AAA/V1+ by Fitch Ratings. The Commission’s investment policy only requires credit quality ratings for repurchase agreements, U.S. corporate debt, commercial paper, banker’s acceptances and certificates of deposit. Note 3.Fund Balance Reserves for the Fund represent the unclaimed apportionments related to claims for transit programs, the unexpired allocations available for bicycle and pedestrian projects,prepaid transit allocations,earned but not received revenues for transportation programs,and unapportioned carryover.Expired allocations related to bicycle and pedestrian projects are unreserved and designated. Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 7 Note 3. Fund Balance, Continued At June 30, 2009, amounts in fund balance are allocated as follows: Rail and Bus Transit and Local Streets and Roads Apportionments: Western County: Commuter rail: Allocated and unclaimed 11,476,662$ Apportioned and unallocated 17,552,788 Bus transit: City of Beaumont - Riverside Transit Agency (RTA)- Apportioned and unallocated 28,062,199 Total rail and bus transit—Western County 57,091,649 Coachella Valley apportioned and unallocated Allocated and unclaimed 1,166,225 Apportioned and unallocated 914,934 Total bus transit—Coachella Valley 2,081,159 Palo Verde Valley: Allocated and unclaimed—Transit 399,597 Apportioned and unallocated for transit and local streets and roads 261,234 Total bus transit and local streets and roads—Palo Verde Valley 660,831 Total for rail and bus transit and local streets and roads apportionments 59,833,639$ Bicycle and pedestrian projects: Reserved for allocated amounts 1,156,425$ Unreserved and designated for unallocated amounts 1,950,538 Total for bicycle and pedestrian projects 3,106,963$ Planning and programming, allocated and unclaimed 85,183$ Reserved for unapportioned carryover, net 5,281,222$ Note 4. Commitments RTA,a major transit provider for the County, obtained available lease financing for bus acquisitions through the proceeds from certificates of participation issued by the California Transit Finance Corporation (Corporation). Local transportation funds, to the extent of RTA’s eligible share,along with other federal and state funds were pledged as support for RTA’s lease payments to the Corporation.For the year ended June 30, 2009, Fund revenue was not expended for lease payments. Supplementary Information 8 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Year Ended June 30, 2009 Unclaimed Allocations Disbursements Allocations Disbursements Allocations Disbursements Allocations Disbursements Amount Expenditures: City of Banning 457,174$412,174$979,407$979,407$-$-$1,436,581$1,391,581$45,000$ City of Beaumont 277,780 98,500 2,011,733 2,011,733 --2,289,513 2,110,233 179,280 City of Cathedral City 282,089 282,089 ----282,089 282,089 - City of Coachella 74,280 74,280 ----74,280 74,280 - City of Corona 106,500 64,492 1,549,405 1,549,405 --1,655,905 1,613,897 42,008 City of Desert Hot Springs 264,135 264,135 ----264,135 264,135 - City of Hemet 185,000 95,000 ----185,000 95,000 90,000 City of Lake Elsinore 113,775 -----113,775 -113,775 City of Murrieta 69,090 69,090 ----69,090 69,090 - City of Palm Springs 180,400 -----180,400 -180,400 City of Perris 80,000 80,000 ----80,000 80,000 - City of Riverside 340,969 190,969 2,783,015 2,150,513 --3,123,984 2,341,482 782,502 City of San Jacinto 257,500 237,500 ----257,500 237,500 20,000 City of Temecula 132,000 -----132,000 -132,000 County of Riverside: Auditor/Controller ----12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 - Road Department 1,251,922 878,922 ----1,251,922 878,922 373,000 Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency --1,002,968 914,438 --1,002,968 914,438 88,530 Commission --19,919,231 11,020,415 2,829,275 2,760,000 22,748,506 13,780,415 8,968,091 Riverside Transit Agency --26,813,829 26,813,829 --26,813,829 26,813,829 - SCAG ----122,000 108,500 122,000 108,500 13,500 Sunline Transit Agency --17,100,486 15,934,261 --17,100,486 15,934,261 1,166,225 4,072,614$2,747,151$72,160,074$61,374,001$2,963,275$2,880,500$79,195,963$67,001,652$12,194,311$ Article 3 Planning, Programming and Administrative TotalsSB 821 Article 3 Article 4 9 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Articles 4 and 8) Year Ended June 30, 2009 Total Unclaimed Amounts Unclaimed Unclaimed Amount Amount Unclaimed Interest Apportionment Apportionment Claimed Apportionment Apportionment Claimed Returned Apportionment Allocation June 30, 2009 Western County: Rail 9,926,434$9,296,100$630,334$29,619,393$1,724,315$-$27,895,078$504,038$29,029,450$ Bus 35,193,720 32,427,523 2,766,197 25,565,171 1,077,364 -24,487,807 808,195 28,062,199 Coachella Valley 12,495,644 13,038,323 (542,679)5,493,503 2,895,938 -2,597,565 26,273 2,081,159 Palo Verde Valley: Transit 901,277 782,121 119,156 401,283 132,317 -268,966 11,475 399,597 Unallocated ---253,733 --253,733 7,501 261,234 Total transportation 58,517,075 55,544,067 2,973,008 61,333,083 5,829,934 -55,503,149 1,357,482 59,833,639 Auditor/Controller 12,000 12,000 ------- Commission administration 750,000 750,000 ------- Commission planning 2,079,275 2,010,000 69,275 (38)--(38)2,446 71,683 SCAG planning 122,000 108,500 13,500 -----13,500 Total administration and planning 2,963,275 2,880,500 82,775 (38)--(38)2,446 85,183 Total apportionments 61,480,350$58,424,567$3,055,783$61,333,045$5,829,934$-$55,503,111$1,359,928$59,918,822$ Prior Fiscal YearFiscal Year 2008/2009 10 Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Unclaimed Apportionments (Article 3) Year Ended June 30, 2009 Unclaimed Unclaimed Apportionment Interest Apportionment July 1, 2008 Apportionment Disbursements Allocations June 30, 2009 Bicycle and pedestrian projects 4,280,206$1,326,918$2,747,151$246,990$3,106,963$ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 11 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the financial statements of the Local Transportation Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission),as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009,and have issued our report thereon dated November 13, 2009.We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting.Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be deficiencies,significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts.This included those provisions of laws and regulations identified in the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended, and corresponding regulations of the California Government Code.However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. 12 This report is intended solely for the information and use of management of the Commission, the Board of Commissioners, and the State of California’s Department of Transportation and State Controller’s Office,and is not intended to be,and should not be,used by anyone other than those specified parties. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Financial and Compliance Report Year Ended June 30, 2009 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. Contents Independent Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information 1-2 Financial Statements Balance Sheet 3 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance 4 Notes to Financial Statements 5-7 Supplementary Information Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Approved During the Year 8 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards 9-10 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 1 Independent Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements present only the State Transit Assistance Fund and do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission or the County of Riverside, California, as of June 30, 2009, and the change in its financial position for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Commission, as of June 30, 2009, and the change in financial position for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated November 13, 2009 on our consideration of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. The State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside has not presented a Management’s Discussion and Analysis as required by Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 that the GASB has determined is necessary to supplement, although not required to be a part of, the financial statements. 2 Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the Commission taken as a whole. The schedules listed in the table of contents as supplementary information are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 3 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Balance Sheet June 30, 2009 Assets Cash and investments 28,092,826 $ State allocation receivable 1,599,883 Interest receivable 97,109 Total assets 29,789,818 $ Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts payable 825,826 $ Due to other Commission funds 2,878,140 Total liabilities 3,703,966 Fund Balance Reserved for allocations available for programming 9,597,142 Reserved for unclaimed allocations 16,488,710 Total fund balance 26,085,852 Total liabilities and fund balance 29,789,818 $ See Notes to Financial Statements. 4 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balance Year Ended June 30, 2009 Revenues: Sales taxes 4,860,784 $ Interest 788,000 Total revenues 5,648,784 Expenditures: Disbursements to claimants 11,046,234 Net change in fund balance (5,397,450) Fund balance at beginning of year 31,483,302 Fund balance at end of year 26,085,852 $ See Notes to Financial Statements. State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 5 Note 1. Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission), in its capacity as the transportation planning agency for the County of Riverside, California (County), is responsible for administering funds provided through the State Transit Assistance Program, which was created in 1979 under Chapter 161 (SB 620) of the California statutes to provide a second source of Transportation Development Act funding for the development of transit systems. The funds are derived from fuel sales tax revenue and are budgeted through legislation and appropriated to the State Controller’s Office (State) for allocation to local agencies. The accounting policies of the Commission conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States as applicable to governmental units. A summary of the Commission’s significant accounting policies is as follows: Presentation: The accompanying financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund (Fund) are intended to present the financial position and the changes in financial position of only that portion of the governmental activities of the Commission that is attributable to the transactions of the Fund of the Commission. They do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission as of June 30, 2009 and the changes in its financial position, where applicable, for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Basis of accounting: In accordance with the requirements for governmental funds, the modified accrual basis of accounting is followed in the Fund. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, expenditures are recorded when they are expected to be liquidated with expendable available resources, and revenue is recorded when it becomes both measurable and available. “Measurable” means the amount of the transaction can be determined, and “available” means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. For this purpose, the Commission considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 180 days of the end of the fiscal year. Those revenues susceptible to accrual include fuel sales tax revenue and interest revenue. Allocations to local agencies: State transit assistance funds are allocated to the operators within the County. Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99313 allocates funds to regional transportation planning agencies based on the ratio of area population to state population. PUC Section 99314 allocates funds to public operators based on their share of fares and local support to other operators in the state. The allocations must be made in a resolution adopted by the Commission. Cash: It is the Commission’s policy to deposit all funds received with the County of Riverside Tax Collector-Treasurer for investment until the funds are required for disbursement. Interest income is earned while these funds are so deposited. Fund balance reservations: The reserve for allocations available for programming represents amounts apportioned but not allocated to claimants. The reserve for unclaimed allocations represents amounts allocated by the Commission and due to claimants but not yet paid. Disbursements to claimants: Disbursements to claimants represent funds disbursed to transit operators that have met the eligibility requirements to receive State Transit Assistance Program funds per PUC Sections 99313 to 99314. All disbursements are to be used for transit purposes. State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 6 Note 2. Cash and Investments Cash and investments at June 30, 2009 consist of the following: Cash and investments with County Treasurer 28,092,239 $ Cash in bank 587 Total cash and investments 28,092,826 $ The funds in the County Treasury are pooled with those of other entities in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund (RCPIF) and invested in accordance with the County’s investment policy. These pooled funds are carried at fair value. Fair value is based on quoted market prices and/or direct bids, when needed, from government dealers on some variable- or floating-rate items. The Commission is a voluntary participant in the pool. An Investment Oversight Committee has been established by the County, which acts as a regulator of the pool. As of June 30, 2009, the Commission had $28,092,239 invested in the RCPIF, with an average maturity of 372 days. Interest rate risk: While the Commission does not have a formal policy related to the interest rate risk of investments, its investment policy follows the California Government Code as it relates to limits on investment maturities as a means of managing exposure to fair value losses arising from increasing interest rates. Credit risk: As of June 30, 2009, the Commission’s investment in the RCPIF was rated AAA/MR1 by Moody’s Investors Service and AAA/V1+ by Fitch Ratings. The Commission’s investment policy requires credit quality ratings only for repurchase agreements, U.S. corporate debt, commercial paper, banker’s acceptances and certificates of deposit. State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 7 Note 3. Fund Balance At June 30, 2009, amounts reserved for unpaid allocations and for apportioned and unallocated amounts are as follows: Reserved for allocations available for programming: Western County: Commuter rail 2,698,864 $ Bus 6,703,007 Coachella Valley 183,046 Palo Verde Valley 12,225 9,597,142 Reserved for unclaimed allocations: Western County: Commuter rail 2,676,639 City of Banning 1,762,402 City of Beaumont 550,290 City of Corona 293,898 City of Riverside 301,000 Riverside Transit Agency (RTA)9,083,702 Coachella Valley: SunLine Transit Agency 1,455,724 Palo Verde Valley: Palo Verde Transit 365,055 16,488,710 Total fund balance 26,085,852 $ Note 4. Commitments RTA, a major transit provider for the County, obtained available lease financing for bus acquisitions through the proceeds from certificates of participation issued by the California Transit Finance Corporation (Corporation). State transit assistance funds, to the extent of RTA’s eligible share, along with other federal and state funds were pledged as support for RTA’s lease payments to the Corporation. For the year ended June 30, 2009, no Fund revenues were expended for lease payments by RTA. Supplementary Information 8 State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside as Administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Allocations and Disbursements Approved During the Year Year Ended June 30, 2009 California Code of Regulations Amount Amount Section No. Recipient Allocated Disbursed Reference Western County: City of Banning 849,298 $ 1,896 $ 6731 City of Beaumont 573,000 22,710 6731 City of Corona 306,276 12,468 6731 City of Riverside 216,000 - 6731 Riverside Transit Agency 4,394,339 1,594,567 6730 Commission Commuter Rail Program 2,031,004 2,525,314 6730 Total Western County 8,369,917 4,156,955 SunLine Transit Agency 5,590,140 6,731,205 6730 Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 126,997 158,074 6730 14,087,054 $ 11,046,234 $ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 9 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the financial statements of the State Transit Assistance Fund of the County of Riverside, as administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009, and have issued our report thereon dated November 13, 2009. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. This included those provisions of laws and regulations identified in the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended, and corresponding regulations of the California Government Code. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. 10 This report is intended solely for the information and use of management of the Commission, the Board of Commissioners and the State of California’s Department of Transportation and State Controller’s Office and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than those specified parties. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Financial and Compliance Report Years Ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. . Contents Independent Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information 1-2 Financial Statements Balance Sheets 3 Statements of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Account Balance 4 Notes to Financial Statements 5-6 Supplementary Information Combining Balance Sheets—by Project Combining Statements of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Account Balance—by Project 7-8 9-10 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards 11-12 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities.1 Independent Auditor’s Report on the Financial Statements and Supplementary Information Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission), as of and for the years ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Commission’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements present only the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account and do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission as of June 30, 2009 and 2008, and the changes in its financial position for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account of the Commission, as of June 30, 2009 and 2008, and the changes in financial position for the years then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated November 13, 2009 on our consideration of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and should be considered in assessing the results of our audit. The Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an account of the Commission, has not presented a Management’s Discussion and Analysis that accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require to supplement,although do not require to be a part of, the financial statements. 2 Our audits were conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements of the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an account of the Commission, taken as a whole. The schedules, listed in the table of contents as supplementary information, are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements of the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audits of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 3 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Balance Sheets June 30, 2009 and 2008 Assets 2009 2008 Cash and investments with County Treasurer 2,968,125$3,477,714$ Accounts receivable 1,484,472 - Interest receivable 13,807 14,790 Total assets 4,466,404$3,492,504$ Liabilities and Account Balance Liabilities Accounts payable 473,679$-$ Accrued payroll 1,165 - Total liabilities 474,844 - Account Balance Reserved: Rail projects 3,991,560 3,492,504 Total account balance 3,991,560 3,492,504 Total liabilities and account balance 4,466,404$3,492,504$ See Notes to Financial Statements. 4 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Statements of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Account Balance Years Ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 2009 2008 Revenues: State allocations 1,832,325$3,477,714$ Interest 83,606 14,790 Total revenues 1,915,931 3,492,504 Expenditures: Rail 1,416,875 - Net change in account balance 499,056 3,492,504 Account balance at beginning of year 3,492,504 - Account balance at end of year 3,991,560$3,492,504$ See Notes to Financial Statements. Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 5 Note 1. Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies On November 7, 2006, the voters of California approved the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Bond Act or Proposition 1B). Proposition 1B included a state program of funding in the amount of $4 billion to be deposited in the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA). A significant portion of the PTMISEA funds is to be made available to project sponsors in California for eligible public transportation projects. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) owns and operates five commuter rail stations in Riverside County. As a project sponsor, the Commission has applied for and obtained approval for PTMISEA funds for various projects related to its commuter rail stations. These funds are accounted for in the Measure A Western County Rail Capital Special Revenue Fund in a project account (Account). The significant revenue to the Account is derived from allocations approved by the Controller of the State of California (Controller). The accounting policies of the Commission conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States as applicable to governmental units. A summary of the Commission’s significant accounting policies is as follows: Presentation:The accompanying financial statements of the Account are intended to present the financial position and the changes in financial position of only that portion of the governmental activities of the Commission that is attributable to the transactions of the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an account of the Commission. They do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the Commission as of June 30, 2009 and 2008 and the changes in its financial position, where applicable, for the years then ended,in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Basis of accounting:In accordance with the requirements for governmental funds, the modified accrual basis of accounting is followed in the PTMISEA Account. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, expenditures are recorded when they are expected to be liquidated with expendable available resources, and revenue is recorded when it becomes both measurable and available.“Measurable”means the amount of the transaction can be determined and “available”means collectible within the current period, or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period.For this purpose, the Commission considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 180 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Those revenues susceptible to accrual include PTMISEA allocations and interest revenue. For the year ended June 30, 2009, the Commission received allocations of $800,000 for the Perris Multimodal Facility #2 project, $684,472 for the Station Rehabilitation #2 project and $347,853 for Station Security project,for a total of $1,832,325. For the year ended June 30, 2008, the Commission received allocations of $1,000,000 for the Perris Multimodal Facility project and $2,477,714 for the Station Rehabilitation project,for a total of $3,477,714. Funding:Project sponsors may submit applications for funding of eligible transit capital projects to the California Department of Transportation, which approves projects for funding.Eligible projects include rehabilitation, safety or modernization improvements; capital service enhancements or expansions; new capital projects; bus rapid transit improvements; and rolling stock procurement, rehabilitation, expansion or replacement. The controller will disburse funds upon receipt of the approved PTMISEA projects. Funds must be encumbered within three years of receipt and must be expended within three years of being encumbered. Cash:It is the Commission’s policy to deposit all funds received with the County of Riverside Tax Collector-Treasurer for investment until the funds are required for disbursement. Interest income is earned while these funds are so deposited. Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Notes to Financial Statements 6 Note 1. Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies, Continued Expenditures:Expenditures represent rail capital projects as identified in PTMISEA applications submitted by the Commission. For the year ended June 30, 2009, the Commission incurred qualifying expenditures of $454,245 for th e Perris Multimodal Facility #1 project, $673,630 for the Station Rehabilitation #1 project and $289,000 for the Station Security project,for a total of $1,416,875. There were no qualifying expenditures incurred for the year ended June 30, 2008. Note 2.Cash and Investments With County Treasurer The funds in the County Treasury are pooled with those of other entities in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund (RCPIF)and invested in accordance with the County’s investment policy. These pooled funds are carried at fair value. Fair value is based on quoted market prices and/or direct bids, when needed, from government dealers on some variable or floating rate items.The Commission is a voluntary participant in the pool.An Investment Oversight Committee has been established by the County, which acts as a regulator of the pool. As of June 30, 2009, the Account has $2,968,125 included in the Commission’s investment with the RCPIF, with an average maturity of 372 days. Interest rate risk:While the Commission does not have a formal policy related to the interest rate risk of investments, the Commission’s investment policy follows the California Government Code as it relates to limits on investment maturities as a means of managing exposure to fair value losses arising from increasing interest rates. Credit risk:As of June 30, 2009, the Commission’s investment in the RCPIF was rated Aaa/MR1 by Moody’s Investors Service and AAA/V1+ by Fitch Ratings. The Commission’s investment policy only requires credit quality ratings for repurchase agreements, U.S. corporate debt, commercial paper, banker’s acceptances and certificates of deposit. Supplementary Information 7 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining Balance Sheet—By Project June 30, 2009 Perris Multimodal Perris Multimodal Station Station Station Assets Facility #1 Facility #2 Rehabilitation #1 Rehabilitation #2 Security Total Cash and investments with County Treasurer 804,517$-$2,005,202$-$158,406$2,968,125$ Accounts receivable -800,000 -684,472 -1,484,472 Interest receivable 3,629 -8,927 -1,251 13,807 Total assets 808,146$800,000$2,014,129$684,472$159,657$4,466,404$ Liabilities and Account Balance Liabilities Accounts payable 230,002$-$149,226$-$94,451$473,679$ Accrued payroll --1,165 --1,165 Total liabilities 230,002 -150,391 -94,451 474,844 Account Balance Reserved: Rail projects 578,144 800,000 1,863,738 684,472 65,206 3,991,560 Total account balance 578,144 800,000 1,863,738 684,472 65,206 3,991,560 Total liabilities and account balance 808,146$800,000$2,014,129$684,472$159,657$4,466,404$ Project 8 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining Balance Sheet—By Project June 30, 2008 Perris Multimodal Station Assets Facility Rehabilitation Total Cash and investments with County Treasurer 1,000,000$2,477,714$3,477,714$ Interest receivable 9,464 5,326 14,790 Total assets 1,009,464$2,483,040$3,492,504$ Liabilities and Account Balance Liabilities -$-$-$ Total liabilities --- Account Balance Reserved: Rail projects 1,009,464 2,483,040 3,492,504 Total account balance 1,009,464 2,483,040 3,492,504 Total liabilities and account balance 1,009,464$2,483,040$3,492,504$ Project 9 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Account Balance—By Project Year Ended June 30, 2009 Project Perris Multimodal Perris Multimodal Station Station Station Facility #1 Facility #2 Rehabilitation #1 Rehabilitation #2 Security Total Revenues: State allocations -$800,000$-$684,472$347,853$1,832,325$ Interest 22,925 -54,328 -6,353 83,606 Total revenues 22,925 800,000 54,328 684,472 354,206 1,915,931 Expenditures: Rail 454,245 -673,630 -289,000 1,416,875 Net change in account balance (431,320)800,000 (619,302)684,472 65,206 499,056 Account balance at beginning of year 1,009,464 -2,483,040 --3,492,504 Account balance at end of year 578,144$800,000$1,863,738$684,472$65,206$3,991,560$ 10 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an Account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Account Balance—By Project Year Ended June 30, 2008 Project Perris Multimodal Station Facility Rehabilitation Total Revenues: State allocations 1,000,000$2,477,714$3,477,714$ Interest 9,464 5,326 14,790 Total revenues 1,009,464 2,483,040 3,492,504 Expenditures: Rail --- Net change in account balance 1,009,464 2,483,040 3,492,504 Account balance at beginning of year --- Account balance at end of year 1,009,464$2,483,040$3,492,504$ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 11 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the financial statements of the Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account, an account of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission), as of and for the years ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, and have issued our report thereon dated November 13, 2009. We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting.Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be deficiencies,significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. This included those provisions of laws and regulations identified in the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as amended, and corresponding regulations of the California Government Code. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we d o not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. 12 This report is intended solely for the information and use of management of the Commission, the Board of Commissioners, and the State of California’s Department of Transportation and State Controller’s Office, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than those specified parties. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 Riverside County Transportation Commission Compliance Reports Year Ended June 30, 2009 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. Contents Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Note to schedule of expenditures of federal awards 1 2 Independent Auditor’s Report on: Internal control over financial reporting and on compliance and other matters based on an audit of financial statements performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards Compliance with requirements applicable to its major program and on internal control over compliance in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and on the schedule of expenditures of federal awards 3-4 5-6 Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs 7-8 Summary Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings 9 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Year Ended June 30, 2009 Catalog of Federal Domestic Pass-Through Entity Assistance Identifying Number/Federal Grantor/Pass-Through Grantor/Cluster Program Title Number Grant Number Expenditures U.S. Department of Transportation: Highway Planning and Construction Program Pass-through State Department of Transportation: East Junction I-215 & SR-60 20.205*07-31-082-01 5,191,477$ State Regional Rideshare 20.205*08-41-042-00 329,152 Riverside to Orange Counties Major Investment Study 20.205*07-65-085-010/07-65-084-00/07-65-083-00 3,754,450 SR-60 from I-215 to Redlands Boulevard 20.205*03-31-925 5,034,072 SR-79 Realignment Study 20.205*08-72-112-01 1,024,055 60/91/215 Interchange 20.205*03-31-064-04 17,820,000 Pass-through San Bernardino Associated Governments: Trip Reduction/Rideshare Programs 20.205*09-41-008-00 1,094,065 Regional Ridematching 20.205*09-41-008-00 31,839 Pass-through Orange County Transportation Authority Regional Ridematching Services Project 20.205*07-41-115-00/C-6-0678/C-4-0329 62,231 Pass-through Ventura County Transportation Commission: Regional Ridematching 20.205*06-41-082-03 22,309 Total Highway Planning and Construction Program 34,363,650 Federal Transit Cluster: Federal Transit, Capital Investment Grants: Pass-through Riverside Transit Agency: Perris Multimodal Facility 20.500 04-33-519-01 735,145 Direct Program, Perris Valley Line 20.500 CA-90-Y152-00/CA-03-0799-00 2,946,118 Total Federal Transit, Capital Investment Grants 3,681,263 Federal Transit, Formula Grant: Urbanized Area Formula: Direct Program, Perris Valley Line 20.507 CA-95-X069-00/CA-90-Y637-01 3,317,800 Direct Program, North Main Corona Rail Station Parking Structure 20.507 CA-95-X031-00/CA90-Y542-00/CA-90-Y679-00 9,311,437 Total Federal Transit, Formula Grant 12,629,237 Total Federal Transit Cluster 16,310,500 Public Transportation Research: Pass-through State Department of Transportation: Rising Stars in Transit 20.514 MOU 06-042-M1/06-25-029-01 18,551 Total expenditures of federal awards 50,692,701$ * Denotes major program See Note to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Riverside County Transportation Commission Note to Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards 2 Note 1. Basis of Presentation The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (the Schedule) presents the activity of all federal award programs of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission). The Schedule includes federal awards received directly from federal agencies, as well as federal awards passed through other agencies. The Commission’s reporting entity is defined in Note 1 to the Commission’s basic financial statements. Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of the Commission, it is not intended to, and does not, present the financial position of the Commission. The accompanying Schedule is presented on the modified-accrual basis of accounting. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-133,Audits of States, Local Governments,and Non-Profit Organizations.Therefore, some amounts presented in this Schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 3 Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009, which collectively comprise the Commission’s basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated November 13, 2009. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting.Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over financial reporting. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected,on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be deficiencies,significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. However, as discussed below, we identified a certain deficiency in internal control that we consider to be a significant deficiency. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. We consider the deficiency described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs as item #2009-1 to be a significant deficiency in internal control over financial reporting. Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Commission’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. 4 This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners, management, federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than those specified parties. Irvine, CA November 13,2009 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 5 Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance With Requirements Applicable to Its Major Program and on Internal Control Over Compliance in Accordance with OMB Circular A-133 and on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA Compliance We have audited the compliance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) with the types of compliance requirements described in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB)Circular A-133, Compliance Supplement,that are applicable to its major federal program for the year ended June 30, 2009. The Commission’s major federal program is identified in the summary of the auditor’s results section of the accompanying Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs. Compliance with the requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to its major federal program is the responsibility of the Commission’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Commission’s compliance based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and OMB Circular A-133,Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non- Profit Organizations.Those standards and OMB Circular A-133 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program occurred. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Commission’s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination on the Commission’s compliance with those requirements. In our opinion, the Commission complied, in all material respects, with the requirements referred to above that are applicable to its major federal program for the year ended June 30, 2009. Internal Control Over Compliance The management of the Commission is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with requirements of laws, regulations, contracts and grants applicable to federal programs. In planning and performing our audit, we considered the Commission’s internal control over compliance with requirements that could have a direct and material effect on a major federal program in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Commission’s internal control over compliance. 6 A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct,noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis.A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be deficiencies,significant deficiencies or material weaknesses.We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Commission as of and for the year ended June 30, 2009,which collectively comprise the Commission’s basic financial statements,and have issued our report thereon, dated November 13, 2009. Our audit was performed for the purpose of forming opinions on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards is presented for purposes of additional analysis as required by OMB Circular A-133 and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners, management, federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than those specified parties. Irvine, CA November 13,2009 Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2009 7 I.Summary of Independent Auditor’s Results Financial Statements Type of auditor’s report issued: Unqualified Internal control over financial reporting: Material weakness(es) identified?Yes X No Significant deficiency(ies) identified that are not considered to be material weaknesses?X Yes None Reported Noncompliance material to financial statements noted?Yes X No Federal Awards Internal control over major program: Material weakness(es) identified?Yes X No Significant deficiency(ies) identified that are not considered to be material weaknesses?Yes X None Reported Type of auditor’s report issued on compliance for major programs: Unqualified Any audit findings disclosed that are required to be reported in accordance with Section 510(a) of OMB Circular A-133?Yes X No Identification of major programs: CFDA Number Name of Federal Program or Cluster 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Dollar threshold used to distinguish between type A and type B programs:$1,520,781 Auditee qualified as low-risk auditee?X Yes No Riverside County Transportation Commission Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs, Continued Year Ended June 30, 2009 8 II.Financial Statement Findings A.Internal Controls #2009-1 Disbursements Condition:An overpayment of approximately $1.1 million was made to a vendor that was not detected in a timely manner by the Commission’s internal controls.This overpayment was due to the respective program manager not including the appropriate dollar amount of the disbursement on the approval form submitted to the Finance Department,which incorrectly determined the disbursement based on the supporting documentation. The overpayment was identified by the recipient vendor who notified the Commission of the discrepancy . Criteria:Internal controls, when properly implemented and functioning, are designed to provide reasonable assurance about the achievement of the entity’s objectives with regard to the reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Effect:As the Commission’s internal controls did not timely prevent or detect the overpayment of the disbursement, this resulted in the Commission pursuing the receipt of the overpayment from the recipient and a reclassification to the trial balance as both accounts payable and accounts receivable were overstated. Recommendation:We recommend that management review its policies and procedures over disbursements to ensure that the invoice package remitted to the Finance Department by the respective program manager is complete and accurate. This would include identifying the appropriate amount of the disbursement. Management Response:Management concurs with the finding. We have reviewed and revised our procedures for processing invoice packages to include the disbursement amount before submitting an approved package for processing. The Commission is in the process of implementing a new financial software system whereby invoice packages will be processed and approved electronically. The procedures for this new electronic process will require a higher level of staff participation regarding the processing and approval of invoice packages. B.Compliance Findings No matters were reported. III.Findings and Questioned Costs for Federal Awards A.Internal Controls No matters were reported. B.Compliance Findings No matters were reported. Riverside County Transportation Commission Summary Schedule of Prior Year Audit Findings Year Ended June 30, 2009 9 There were no audit findings reported for the year ended June 30, 2008. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. Independent Auditor’s Report Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America,and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States,the financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission)as of and for the year ended June 30,2009, which collectively comprise the Commission’s basic financial statements,and have issued our report thereon, dated November 13, 2009. In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Commission failed to comply with the terms, covenants, provisions or conditions of Section 6.2(g) or Section 6.2(l)contained in the Reimbursement Agreement dated March 1, 2005, with Bank of America, N.A., a national banking association organized under the laws of the United States of America,relating to the Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds) Series A and Series B,insofar as they relate to accounting matters.However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and management of the Commission and Bank of America, N.A.,and is not intended to be,and should not be,used by anyone other than these specified parties. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 Riverside County Transportation Commission Report to the Audit Ad Hoc Committee December 3, 2009 McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. December 3, 2009 To the Audit Ad Hoc Committee of the Riverside County Transportation Commission We are pleased to present this report related to our audit of the basic financial statements and compliance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) for the year ended June 30, 2009. This report summarizes certain matters required by professional standards to be communicated to you in your oversight responsibility for the Commission’s financial reporting process. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Audit Ad Hoc Committee, the Board of Commissioners and management, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. It will be our pleasure to respond to any questions you have regarding this report. We appreciate the opportunity to continue to be of service to the Commission. Contents Required Communications 1-3 Summary of Accounting Estimates 4-5 Summary of Recorded Audit Reclassifications 6 Exhibit A—Certain Written Communications Between Management and Our Firm Representation Letter Exhibit B— Other Written Communications Letter Communicating Significant Deficiency 1 Required Communications Statement on Auditing Standards No. 114 requires the auditor to communicate certain matters to keep those charged with governance adequately informed about matters related to the financial statement audit that are, in our professional judgment, significant and relevant to the responsibilities of those charged with governance in overseeing the financial reporting process. The following summarizes these communications. Area Comments Auditor’s Responsibility Under Professional Standards Our responsibility under auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; the provisions of the Single Audit Act; OMB Circular A-133 and OMB’s Compliance Supplement has been described to you in our arrangement letter dated April 25, 2009, our letter to dated October 8, 2009 and our meeting with you dated October 14, 2009. Accounting Practices Adoption of, or Change in, Accounting Policies Management has the ultimate responsibility for the appropriateness of the accounting policies used by the Commission. In the current year, the Commission adopted the following Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement: • GASB Statement No. 49, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pollution Remediation Obligations. This Statement, issued November 2006, addresses accounting and financial reporting standards for pollution (including contamination) remediation obligations, which are obligations to address the current or potential detrimental effects of existing pollution by participating in pollution remediation activities, such as site assessments and cleanups. This standard requires the Commission to estimate the components of expected pollution remediation outlays and determine whether the outlays for those components should be accrued as a liability or, if appropriate, capitalized when goods and services are acquired. Adoption of this Statement did not materially impact the Commission. Significant or Unusual Transactions We did not identify any significant or unusual transactions or significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging areas for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. 2 Area Comments Accounting Practices, Continued Alternative Treatments Discussed with Management We did not discuss with management any alternative treatments within generally accepted accounting principles for accounting policies and practices related to material items during the current audit period. Management’s Judgments and Accounting Estimates Summary information about the process used by management in formulating particularly sensitive accounting estimates and about our conclusions regarding the reasonableness of those estimates is in the attached Summary of Accounting Estimates. Financial Statement Disclosures In our meeting with you on October 14, 2009 we discussed with you the following items as they relate to the neutrality, consistency and clarity of the disclosures in the financial statements: • Accounting for pollution remediation • Debt Audit Adjustments/Reclassifications Audit adjustments/reclassifications recorded by the Commission are shown on the attached Summary of Recorded Audit Reclassifications. Uncorrected Misstatements Uncorrected misstatements are summarized within management’s representation letter to us, attached as Exhibit A. Disagreements with Management We encountered no disagreements with management over the application of significant accounting principles, the basis for management’s judgments on any significant matters, the scope of the audit, or significant disclosures to be included in the financial statements. Consultations with Other Accountants We are not aware of any consultations management had with other accountants about accounting or auditing matters. Significant Issues Discussed with Management No significant issues arising from the audit were discussed or were the subject of correspondence with management. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We did not encounter any difficulties in dealing with management during the audit. 3 Area Comments Letter Communicating Significant Deficiencies and Material Weaknesses We have separately communicated a significant deficiency identified during our audit of the financial statements. This communication is included in the Commission’s compliance report and is attached for reference as Exhibit B. We are not aware of any material weaknesses. Certain Written Communications Between Management and Our Firm Copies of certain written communications between our firm and the management of the Commission are attached as Exhibit A. 4 Riverside County Transportation Commission Summary of Accounting Estimates Year Ended June 30, 2009 Accounting estimates are an integral part of the preparation of financial statements and are based upon management’s current judgment. The process used by management encompasses its knowledge and experience about past and current events and certain assumptions about future events. You may wish to monitor throughout the year the process used to compute and record these accounting estimates. The following describes the significant accounting estimates reflected in the Commission’s June 30, 2009 financial statements: Area Accounting Policy Estimation Process Comments Useful Lives of Long- Lived Assets The estimated useful lives of assets generally have the following ranges: rail stations 10- 30 years; office furniture and equipment three to five years; vehicles five years. These assets are depreciated using the straight-line method. Land and rail operating easements are not depreciated and construction in process is not depreciated until ready for service and capitalized. Management reviews for changes in the useful lives of long-lived assets by evaluating prominent events or changes in circumstances affecting capital assets to determine whether impairment of a capital asset has occurred. A capital asset is considered impaired if both the decline in the service utility of the capital asset is large in magnitude and the event or change in circumstance is outside the normal life cycle of the capital asset. Common indicators of impairment include evidence of physical damage where effort is needed to restore service utility, enactment or approval of laws or regulations setting standards that the capital asset would not be able to meet, technological development or evidence of obsolescence, a change in the manner or expected duration of use of a capital asset, or construction stoppage. We tested the reasonableness of information underlying management’s estimate. Based on our procedures, we concluded that assigned useful lives of capital assets are reasonable. 5 Area Accounting Policy Estimation Process Comments Pension Obligations and Postemployment Benefits Other than Pensions Pension and postemployment benefits are recorded at cost based on an estimated annual contribution rate. For postemployment benefits other than pensions, management utilizes an actuarial consulting firm to perform an evaluation using the entry age actuarial cost method. Management reviewed and approved the actuarial assumptions and calculations used to determine the postemployment benefit costs. For pension obligations, management utilizes CalPERS actuaries for cost sharing multiple- employer plans. A cost sharing multiple-employer plan is a pooling arrangement whereby risks, rewards and benefit costs are shared and not attributed individually to any single employer. Management reviewed the actuarial assumptions and calculations used to determine the pension costs. We tested the reasonableness of the information underlying the actuarial evaluations. Based on our procedures, we concluded that the costs recorded are reasonable. 6 Riverside County Transportation Commission Summary of Recorded Audit Reclassifications Year Ended June 30, 2009 Description Assets Liabilities Equity Revenue Expenses • To reclassify AR and AP for the TUMF Special Revenue Fund (1,150,935) $ (1,150,935) $ -$ -$ -$ Net effect on the statement of activities (1,150,935) $ (1,150,935) $ -$ -$ -$ Effect—Increase(Decrease) Exhibit A—Certain Written Communications Between Management and Our Firm Exhibit B—Other Written Communications #2009-1 Disbursements Condition: An overpayment of approximately $1.1 million was made to a vendor that was not detected in a timely manner by the Commission's internal controls. This overpayment was due to the respective program manager not including the appropriate dollar amount of the disbursement on the approval form submitted to the Finance Department, which incorrectly determined the disbursement based on the supporting documentation. The overpayment was identified by the recipient vendor who notified the Commission of the discrepancy. Criteria: Internal controls, when properly implemented and functioning, are designed to provide reasonable assurance about the achievement of the entity's objectives with regard to the reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Effect: As the Commission's internal controls did not timely prevent or detect the overpayment of the disbursement, this resulted in the Commission pursuing the receipt of the overpayment from the recipient and a reclassification to the trial balance as both accounts payable and accounts receivable were overstated. Recommendation: We recommend that management review its policies and procedures over disbursements to ensure that the invoice package remitted to the Finance Department by the respective program manager is complete and accurate. This would include identifying the appropriate amount of the disbursement. Management Response: Management concurs with the finding. We have reviewed and revised our procedures for processing invoice packages to include the disbursement amount before submitting an approved package for processing. The Commission is in the process of implementing a new financial software system whereby invoice packages will be processed and approved electronically. The procedures for this new electronic process will require a higher level of staff participation regarding the processing and approval of invoice packages. McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed-upon Procedures Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) for the year ended June 30, 2009. These procedures, which were agreed to by the Commission and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed-upon Procedures Applied to the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XIII-B of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the Commission in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIII-B of the California Constitution. The Commission’s management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit Calculation. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: 1. We obtained the completed internal calculations from management and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those calculations to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by a resolution of the Board of Commissioners. We also compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned calculations to those that were selected by a recorded vote of the Board of Commissioners. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation, we added line A, last year’s limit, to line E, total adjustments, and compared the resulting amount to line F, this year’s limit. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 3. We compared the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation to the supporting calculations described in item 1 above. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 4. We compared the prior year Appropriations Limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation to the prior year Appropriations Limit adopted by the Board of Commissioners during the prior year. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct an audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the accompanying Appropriations Limit Calculation of the Commission. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by Article XIII-B of the California Constitution. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and management of the Commission, and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. Irvine, CA November 13, 2009 Riverside County Transportation Commission Appropriations Limit Calculation Year Ended June 30, 2009 Amount Source A. Last year’s limit 289,297,351 $ B. Adjustment factors: 1. Population change 1.027000 State Finance 2. Per capita change 1.049000 State Finance Total adjustments [(B.1 x B.2)-1.0]0.077323 C. Annual adjustment 22,369,339 (BxA) D. Other adjustments: 1. Lost responsibility (-) - 2. Transfer to private (-) - 3. Transfer to fees (-) - 4. Assumed responsibility (+) - Subtotal - E. Total adjustments 22,369,339 (C+D) F. This year’s limit 311,666,690 $ (A+E) McGladrey & Pullen, LLP is a member firm of RSM International, an affiliation of separate and independent legal entities. 1 Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures Board of Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, CA We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) solely to assist the Commission with respect to the purchase of gift certificates or coupon incentives and the payment of incentives related to the Commuter Assistance Program (Program) administered by Inland Transportation Services (ITS) for the year ended June 30, 2009. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below, either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. As background information for this engagement to perform agreed-upon procedures, we were provided with Resolution No. 03-025, Resolution of the Commission Amending Guidelines for the Administration of the Measure A Funded Commuter Incentive Projects as part of its Program, and Agreement No. 00-41-021-10, Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement for Development and Management of Commuter Assistance between ITS and the Commission, entered into as of July 1, 2008. In addition, we received an explanation of the ITS registration process with the employer and employee from the program manager of ITS. The procedures and related findings are as follows: 1. We obtained a list of all disbursements recorded by the Commission to vendors for the purchase of gift certificates or coupon incentives for the year ended June 30, 2009 and judgmentally selected a sample of 10 disbursements for selected testing (see Exhibit 1). Our procedures and findings related to Exhibit 1 are as follows: a. We agreed the amount recorded as disbursed by the Commission to canceled checks or warrants without exception. b. We agreed the amount recorded as disbursed to ITS to check requests without exception. c. We agreed the amount recorded and the payee to the log of requested gift certificates maintained by ITS without exception. 2. We obtained the “Rideshare Payment” Reports that list recorded disbursements made to recipients by ITS for the year ended June 30, 2009 and judgmentally selected a sample of 10 items for selected testing (see Exhibit 2). Our selected testing and findings related to Exhibit 2 are as follows: a. We obtained the Employer Information Form and Statement of Participation (SOP) for the employer indicating its participation with ITS as a participant. No exceptions were noted. b. We obtained the Employee Enrollment Form indicating the employee is registered with ITS as a participant. No exceptions were noted. 2 c. We agreed ITS’ disbursement to the employee claim form, noting proper approval of the claim, without exception. d. We recalculated the number of days the employee participated in each rideshare mode and the incentive earned for each rideshare mode and agreed those totals to the amounts listed on the monthly incentive claim form without exception. e. We agreed the daily amount of reimbursement per mode of transportation on the monthly incentive claim form to the amount approved on the SOP without exception. f. We agreed the recorded disbursement amount per the Incentive Payment Report to the employer transmittal letter without exception. 3. We compared ITS’ total gift certificate inventory balance from gift certificate inventory schedules provided by ITS as of June 30, 2009 to the actual gift certificates maintained by ITS by judgmentally selecting the following four gift certificates for recounting: a) Vons gift certificates under the Commission Advantage Rideshare program noting an inventory balance of $44,985; b) Stater Bros gift certificates under the Coachella Valley Association of Governments program noting an inventory balance of $4,995; and c) Stater Bros and Target gift certificates under the San Bernardino Associated Governments Option Rideshare program noting an inventory balance of $43,161 and $2,500, respectively. No exceptions were noted. The total gift certificate inventory balance per the inventory schedules as of June 30, 2009 is $163,637. We were not engaged to and did not conduct an audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the specified elements, accounts or items thereof related to the program. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Commissioners and management of Riverside County Transportation Commission and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties. Irvine, CA November 30, 2009 3 Exhibit 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission and Inland Transportation Services (Contractor) Schedule of Selected Purchases of Gift Certificates and Coupons by the Contractor Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009 Project Vendor Voucher Date Amount Check # Advantage Vons 07/29/08 20,000 $ 41427 Advantage Stater Bros 09/30/08 10,000 41952 Advantage Target 12/12/08 5,000 42778 Advantage Stater Bros 04/13/09 20,000 43926 Advantage- CV Vons 08/20/08 15,000 41858 Advantage- CV Stater Bros 04/13/09 2,500 43926 Option Vons 04/13/09 7,500 43936 Option Target 12/12/08 2,500 42778 Option Stater Bros 09/30/08 25,000 41952 Option Stater Bros 07/29/08 25,000 41408 4 Exhibit 2 Riverside County Transportation Commission and Inland Transportation Services (Contractor) Schedule of Selected Employee Incentive Payments Made by the Contractor Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009 Employee Incentive Commute Disbursement Initials Employer Name Type Mode Date Amount M.H. Armtec Defense Group Vons Carpool 08/18/08 100 $ M.A. Sunrise Company Stater Bros Carpool 07/10/08 110 K.F. Hansens Beverage Co. Vons Carpool 08/13/08 40 W.W. The Press Enterprise Vons Walking 01/09/09 95 M.C. Patton State Hospital Stater Bros Carpool 03/04/09 75 R.A. Walgreens Stater Bros Public Bus 11/25/08 120 D.O. County of San Bernardino Vons Carpool 02/10/09 110 J.S. NAMM Vons Carpool 07/10/08 65 C.D. Loma Linda University Medical Center Stater Bros Bicycling 10/06/08 120 T.H. Student Transportation of America Stater Bros Buspool 01/16/09 110 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis - STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 3 (Q3) 2009. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales taxes. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices has submitted an audit update, which reported findings that have been generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 117 businesses. Through Q3 2009 for July through September 2009, the SBOE has approved corrections for 71 of these accounts for a total sales tax revenue recovery of $598,746. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission would receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices has provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for the third quarter of calendar 2009 for July through September. Most of the Q3 2009 Measure A sales taxes were received by the Commission in the fourth quarter of calendar 2009 during October through December due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. This summary report includes an overview of California sales tax receipts, a performance review, a summary of the top 25 sales tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, sales tax by business category, economic trends for a significant business category, and results. The Agenda Item 7C 12 summary section of the Q3 2009 report is included as an attachment to the staff report. The following observations were noted in the Q3 2009 report: • The decline in sales tax revenues for Riverside County was less for the benchmark year Q3 2009 (-16.6%) compared to the benchmark year Q2 2009 (-21.6%). • While the Cash-for-Clunkers program did not result in a cash windfall for many local governments, it likely contributed to a 12.1 % increase in the transportation economic category compared to Q2 2009; however, this economic category experienced significant declines in previous quarters. • Over the last two-year period, the Q3 2009 sales tax levels were at or near the low points for all of the top 10 economic segments. • Over the last two-year period, the Q3 2009 sales tax levels for new auto sales, service stations, and building materials (retail and wholesale) showed a significant variance from the high point, indicating that these segments continue to have been significantly affected by the slowdown in the economy and changes in gas prices. • Over the last two-year period, the high and low points related to sales tax levels for apparel stores have no significant differentiation. • Department stores, restaurants, and service stations represent the three largest economic segments. • The construction economic category has declined approximately 43% in the benchmark year Q3 2009 compared to the benchmark year Q3 2007. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any additional adjustment to the revised revenue projections in FY 2009/10, as well as the development for the budget for FY 2010/11. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios included with the detail information and recent trends in such projections. Attachment: Sales Tax Analysis for Q3 2009 Agenda Item 7C 13 • • District of Riverside Co RCTC Sales Tax Digest Summary FOURTH Quarter Collection of THIRD Quarter Sales Quarter 3, 2009 CALIFORNIA OVERVIEW 88487 TT While the overall news for the 3rd Quarter 2009 is not rosy. However, the quarter experienced less of a decline from the prior year same quarter than 2nd Quarter 2009. California local governments continue to search for ways to stabilize their communities by reducing costs while preserving service levels. The possibility of economic stability in 2010 may bring encouragement, but any 'growth' is expected only to be moderate. The current sales tax baseline is likely the new benchmark going forward. Overall Continued high unemployment consumer uncertainty and housing problems led to a statewide sales decline of -14.8% for the quarter compared to the same quarter a year ago. Northern California sales were down -14.0% for the quarter. Southern California sales were down - 15.5% for the quarter. As for the District of Riverside Co ROTC, sales changed by-16.6%. General Retail Over the last year, retail consumers, led by the unemployed or underemployed, made a fundamental shift in the way they approach purchases. This new normal, lower level of consumer spending is not expected to change for a very long time. Retailers will need to change the way they deliver goods and in many cases will need to reduce inventories to accommodate reduced spending by consumers. Food Products Sales of Food Products continue to search for secure footing. Consumers are downgrading restaurant choices and more frequently cooking at home. Restaurants at all levels are lowering their price points with smaller meals or weekly specials.. Grocery stores continue to experiment with various formats and price points with the larger chains reducing prices to compete with Wal-Mart and Target. Transportation The Cash-for-Clunkers program is the foremost Transportation topic this quarter. Many local governments will not see a cash windfall From the program. Consumers purchased less expensive, higher fuel efficient models, which generate less sales tax Additionally, the Cash-for- Clunkers portion of the purchase price was exempt from sales and use tax. Combining lower purchase prices, decreased future demand due to accelerated purchases and dealership closures means a less -than -hoped -for result. Service Station revenue felt in accordance with the change in fuel prices compared to prior year. www.. Munderulces. corn 1801104 800-8181 Page EEE.54.26.03 District of Riverside Co RCTC $5.00 $4.50 $4.00 53.50 $3.00 $ 2.50 $ 2.00 $1.50 $1.00 Regular Unleaded Gasoline in California Historical Gasoline Prices Per Gallon Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Construction Sales from construction activities will continue to search for the market bottom. Banks continue to curb lending for residential housing and commercial construction. Continued economic uncertainty will lead home owners to delay home improvement purchases. Business to Business Demand for semiconductors is expected to decline by 24% in 2009. More businesses are moving out of California to take advantage of more business -friendly environments. Job losses and corresponding declines in productivity add hurdles to the Business -to -Business recovery. Energy Sales revenue fell in accordance with the change in fuel prices compared to the prior year. Nevertheless, Business to Business promises the fastest recovery of any category once capital lending constraints ease up. Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.096 SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 302009 Receipts Net 302008 Receipts Actual Percentage Change S27,415,742 0 0 27,415,742 .00 (365,500) 27,050,242 32.430,930 -16.6% vvww.MuniServices com (soot 800-8181 15 Paget District of Riverside Co RCTC Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 302009 Collections Projected 302009 Late Payments Projected 302009 Final Results Actual 302008 Results Projected Percentage Change $27,415,742 (2,1 17,1501 25,298,592 1,542,075 HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER r _n Y u b CA b z S45,000 S40,000 435,000 S30,000 525,060 S20,000 S 15,000 510,000 55,000 S0 26,840,667 32,230,320 -16.7% (in thousands of S) 2Q2007 3Q2007 4Q 2007 1Q 2000 2Q 2000 30 2000 4Q 2008 IQ2005 2Q2009 3Q 2009 UNOi9et Receipts �e^S00E Aduie Fees Dee S450 S400 S350 S300 Y S250 a. a $200 a 9 e 5150 S 100 S50 So TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies Riverside Co RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended ri Quarter 2009. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 23.4% of Riverside Co RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. ALBERTSON'S FOOD CENTERS ARCO AWPM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES HOME DEPOT J C PENNEY COMPANY JACK IN THE BOX RESTAURANTS K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES VERIZON WIRELESS WAL MART STORES WALGREEN'S DRUG STORES www.Munderuices com /800j 800-8181 16 Page 3 District of Riverside Co RCTC HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level for the year ended 3ro Quarter 2009, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years. S20,000 S18,000 516,000 S14,000 Sl 2,000 510,000 S8,000 S6,000 S4,000 — (io thousands orS) S2,080 SO 4Q' O O`' d a�� �e s� 44j y asy�o �a4ya y`'ao t �� �`� 4ns,j„ Da' �� ` Q 4�c ems 9��D oyaW �`aa .'� Batt` `taaa?f P ��• • o a‘ O 40 4C Vs% • Oo P 406' 0. $� n3Qb/H ; •H lib >t Low www.MuniServices.com /800J 800-8181 17 Page • • District of Riverside Co RCTC ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY 3Q 2009 2Q 2099 IQ 2609 4Q 2008 3Q 2998 21) 2998 1 Q 2008 4Q 2007 3Q 2007 Z�1 _'00 �1 S2 U.o ti 5-19;0111) In 0,999 K.40.Unli illl 0,n if S1'0,:10 i1 .}119,000 SIRU_f1 II ri c,7 J v�aJu<n DI ranapot tv lion C7 Conetr e<lion C.3tl oein eee T. nnslneas CIl! F1VE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: Auto Sales - New .7iSer vxrs. con' (in thousands of Si} j800/ 800-8 i 8 J 18 89.09 Raye5 District of Riverside Co RCTC 2"° QUARTER 2009 FINAL RESULTS Local Net Cash Collections Less: Pool Amounts Less: Prior Quarter Payments Add: Late Payments Local Net Economic Collections after Adjustments Percent Change from 2nd Quarter 2008 MUNISERVICES' ON -GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $146,633 Total to Date $527,296 S27,492,009 (S-365,500) ($2,053,063) $1,768,926 $27,573,372 DOWN BY 21.8% www.MuniServices corn (800) 800-8181 19 Page 6 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Annual Local Transportation Fund Planning Allocation to Coachella Valley Association of Governments for Fiscal Year 2009/10 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) planning funds totaling $260,015 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 99233.2 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), Code of Regulations, up to three percent of the annual TDA revenues shall be allocated for transportation planning and programming purposes. The TDA also requires one half of these funds to be allocated for planning activities within the Western Riverside County and the Coachella Valley areas as determined by the Commission. CVAG has submitted its FY 2009/10 LTF Program Goals and Objectives/Work Plan (attached). The work plan identifies efforts necessary to address the following key program areas: • Transportation Department Operations • Project Management and Contract Administration • Commission Programs • Planning, Programming, and Monitoring Program • Miscellaneous Programs • Congestion Management/Air Quality Programs • Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program • Governmental and Special Projects/Southern California Association of Governments Overall Work Program Agenda Item 7D 20 Staff has reviewed the work plan and finds it consistent with the Commission's overall transportation program and planning objectives. The amount of TDA funding available to CVAG is $260,015, which is included in the Commission's FY 2009/10 adopted budget. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $260,015 Source of Funds: LTF Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 106 65 86205 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \X0c; Date: 01 /24/2010 Attachment: CVAG Transportation FY 2009/10 Program Goals and Objectives/Work Plan Agenda Item 7D 21 • TRANSPORTATION FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Work Plan for 2009/10 is separated into eight main program areas: 1) Transportation Department Operations Transportation Program Administration Monitor Implementation of Transportation Project Prioritization Study (TPPS) Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Update Other Transportation Planning Operations Management and Administration This program area performs primarily administrative functions which consist of general transportation program administrative activities and various transportation planning duties in support of the Transportation Department. (Funded from Measure A and TUMF) Project Management and Contract Administration Financial Cash Flow Project Status Tracking Preparation and Monitoring Agreements Includes staff time to conduct project oversight (design, environmental, construction and close-out), preparation of reimbursement agreements for regional arterial projects, review and approval of project billings in accordance with project scope of work and participation in project development team meetings and associated staff reports. (Funded from Measure A, TUMF and TEA-LU) 3) Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC) Programs State Highway Routes in the Coachella Valley Congestion Management Program/System (CMP/CMS) RCTC Technical Advisory Committee Includes staff time to support the Riverside County Congestion Management Program through building permit analysis of the one non-TUMF jurisdiction and analysis of traffic patterns through the traffic count program, to provide RCTC staff regional transportation project information for the State Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and to support the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee. (Funded front CMAQ, and TUMF) 22 Planning, Programming and Monitoring Program Regional Transportation Improvement Program/State Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP/STIP) This area includes staff time in support of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), support in implementation and updating of the CVAG Transportation Project Prioritization Study (TPPS), coordination of updates to the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and monitoring and examining impacts of implementing SB 45. TPPS activities support the regional project construction program which includes staff time to develop an annual prioritized list of construction projects and required fmancial resources. (Funded from SAFETEA-L U, PP&M, LTF and Measure A) 5) Miscellaneous Programs GIS Information Services Maintain Transportation Model Regional Arterial Traffic Count Program This area involves support to multiple programs with a focus on key project areas. These areas include staff time and project management to maintain and provide input for GIS Information Services, the countywide transportation demand model, the regional arterial traffic count program, and transportation legislation review and analysis. GIS Information Services includes staff time to provide regional land use information to CVAG jurisdictions, developers, SCAG and Caltrans. The countywide transportation model involves support for the current transportation model for forecasting projected transportation system needs to the year 2039. (Funded from Measure A, TUMF, CMAQ and Special Program Funds) 6) Congestion Management /Air Oualitv Programs SB 821 Program Conformance with SIP requirements Involves Transportation Department staff support to CMAQ program areas, with focus on the SB 821 program. Also includes implementation of State Implementation Plan (SIP) conformance to CVAG regional projects. (Funded from TEA-LU, Measure A and SB 821) 23 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program TUMF Program Administration TUMF/GIS Interface Includes staff time in support of the TUMF program and TUMF/GIS Interface program. TUMF program activities include staff time to monitor the implementation of the TUMF program in member jurisdictions, to perform annual fiscal reviews of building permits and TUMF collections, to research, analyze and prepare reports for TUMF appeals, to enter TUMF collections in the TUMF data base, to meet with developers on request to review potential TUMF assessments, and to perform special TUMF analysis on request. The TUMF/GIS Interface program requires support for continuing the development of integrating the TUMF collection process with electronic transmission of new development information for land use coverages. (Funded from TUMF) 8) Governmental and Special Projects Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Overall Work Program The SCAG OWP program includes staff time to coordinate the CVAG sub -region SCAG Overall Work Program needs, develop annual growth projections, collect annual Highway Performance Monitoring System data, provide input to the Federal Regional Transportation Plan, and assist SCAG with transportation modeling refinements.. Additionally, staff performs specific transportation project work for SCAG through their Overall Work Program. (Funded from SCAG OWP funds) Special Projects Some proposed projects may involve general fund money or special grants. Any project not already a part of the regular work programs, will be brought through the committee process for approval of the proposed work. (Funded frorn Special Grant funds) 24 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Caliber Paving Agreement for Additional Costs STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-24-063-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-24-063-00, with Caliber Paving, Inc. for the unanticipated increase in costs for the rehabilitation of the various Metrolink commuter rail station parking lots in the amount of $218,408, and an additional contingency of $40,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $1,049,293; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its June 2009 meeting, the Commission approved Agreement No. 09-24-063-00, for repairs, paving, slurry sealing, and striping at various Commission -owned commuter rail station parking lots. The total contract amount authorized by the Commission was $790,885. The contract special provisions require that all work be performed at night and on the weekends and that the parking lots remain fully accessible to the public by 5:00 a.m. on Monday mornings, in order to avoid hampering station operations. The nature of the work on the parking lots necessitates that the parking lots be closed or partially closed and void of any vehicles. Much of the work has been completed over a period of several months at four different station sites with only minor work remaining. DISCUSSION: During the execution of the work, a number of problems were encountered that required immediate resolution by the construction manager while the work was in progress. The underlying condition behind the pavement at the La Sierra and the Downtown Riverside Metrolink stations had deteriorated to the point where more Agenda Item 7E 25 extensive, and costly repairs were needed to make an appropriate repair and to protect public safety and Metrolink passengers. For example, the La Sierra Metrolink station main entrance asphalt required significant repairs due to the impact of heavy bus traffic. The solution to repair the failure was to remove the asphalt and base, overexcavate the subgrade, replace the subgrade with a six -sack slurry mix (cement and sand), and replace the asphalt pavement with concrete paving. The extent and scope of work was not discovered until an inspection of the subgrade was completed by the contractor. Overall, the budgeted cost for the La Sierra Metrolink station parking lot was $197,281; the actual cost, based on the newly discovered requirements, was $372,417, resulting in a cost increase of $175,136. If immediate action had not been taken, staff believes that there would have been additional costs and would have resulted in negative impacts to Metrolink riders. A similar circumstance took place at the Downtown Riverside Metrolink station. The subgrade under the asphalt in the bus loop was found to be damaged and unsuitable for its intended purpose; this was discovered only after the asphalt and base materials were removed by the contractor. This was not anticipated, and additional excavation of the unsuitable subgrade material and import of suitable materials were required to rehabilitate and repair the subgrade prior to placement of the new base material and concrete. Overall, the budgeted amount for the Downtown Riverside Metrolink station main parking lot and bus loop of $310,025 increased $109,104 to an actual cost of $419,129. Cost increases resulting from inadequate subgrade were not as extensive at the Pedley and North Main Corona Metrolink stations parking lots and the temporary parking lot at the Downtown Riverside Metrolink station. Additionally, it was determined that three parking lots did not require rehabilitation, and the savings of $94,000 was applied to the unanticipated remedial work required at the other lots. In order to address these concerns and to mitigate the adverse impacts to the long- term integrity of the required repairs and the immediate concerns regarding uninterrupted operations of the parking lots and Metrolink stations, the contractor was directed to proceed with the additional work resulting in a net overrun of the contract by $218,408. The underlying contract was a competitively bid (six bids received) unit price contract, which typically would have a contingency of 10% to 20% applied to the overall bid price to provide for unforeseen circumstances that might arise during the performance of work. In this case, however, no contingency value was included in the original request for authorization presented to the Commission. A standard contingency value, in any case, would not have been sufficient to cover the consequential scope and cost increases experienced under this project. Agenda Item 7E 26 • • In looking forward, Commission staff will be instituting a number of process improvements to ensure that future investments in rail facilities are accurately forecasted. A thorough review will be taken by the Commission's executive, capital projects and rail operations management staff, and steps will be taken to ensure a better process for future station repair needs. While emergency repairs to public facilities are sometimes necessary, a more proactive approach to station investment will minimize unexpected costs. Staff will also return to the Commission in the coming months to provide more information and seek Commission direction regarding Metrolink operating costs. While this is a much larger issue than those involving station locations, the Commission's ownership and operation of rail stations does add to the Commission's overall funding responsibility. Staff recommends that the Commission approve this amendment to Agreement No. 09-24-063-00. The amount of the contract under this amendment is to be increased by $258,408 to a not to exceed value of $1,049,293. The funding for this project is Proposition 18 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA). Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $ 258,408 Source of Funds: Prop 1 B PTMISEA Budget Adjustment: Yes (transfer only) GLA No.: 004011 81301 00000 0000 221 33 81301 $ 258,408 003809 81301 00000 0000 265 33 81301 0258,408) Fiscal Procedures Approved: ,41.9. Date: 02/02/2010 Agenda Item 7E 27 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 10-005 Considering an Environmental Impact Report, Making Responsible Agency Findings, and Adopting a Statement Of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation. Monitoring and Reporting Program, and an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension, and Approving the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to Adopt Resolution No. 10-005, `Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Considering an Environmental Impact Report, Making Responsible Agency Findings, and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension, and Approving the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Corona City Council, acting as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), approved the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project pursuant to a certified environmental impact report (EIR) in February of 2009. The Project involves the westerly extension of Foothill Parkway as a four -lane roadway from its existing terminus approximately 600 feet west of Skyline Drive to Green River Road for a distance of approximately two miles, along the base of the Santa Ana mountains. Roadway improvements would require right of way acquisition for the proposed roadway alignment, roadway improvements (curb, shoulders, travel lanes, and landscaped medians), slope easement areas, and drainage facilities, as well as temporary construction easements. At its September 9, 2009 meeting, the Commission approved Agreement No. 06-72-540-02, Amendment No. 2 to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial agreement with the city of Corona to authorize staff to oversee right of way acquisition for a specific parcel. Agenda Item 7F 28 The EIR identified the city of Corona as the lead agency, and various other entities as responsible agencies. The Commission was not formally identified as a responsible agency; however, the Commission has subsequently been identified as a potential responsible agency for discretionary funding or other actions related to property acquisition for the project. CEQA requires that the lead or responsible agency prepare an addendum to an EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Resolution No.10-005 adopts an addendum identifying the Commission as a potential responsible agency. Except for identifying an additional responsible agency, the addendum does not change the Project in any way. The proposed modification of identifying an additional responsible agency will not result in any substantial change to the project that would implicate new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There has not been any substantial change in circumstances or any discovery of any substantial new information regarding the project's environmental effects or mitigation measures. Staff has considered the Environmental Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by the city of Corona for the project and concludes that none of the conditions requiring preparations of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred and that an addendum to the project EIR is appropriate. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 10-005 2) Exhibit A to Resolution No 10-005, Addendum to Foothill Parkway Westerly Expansion EIR (Posted on the Commission Website) 3) Exhibit B to Resolution No. 10-005, Final Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Expansion (Posted on the Commission Website) 4) Exhibit C to Resolution No. 10-005, Environmental Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Consideration (Posted on the Commission Website) Agenda Item 7F • • 29 • RESOLUTION NO. 10-005 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONSIDERING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKING RESPONSIBLE AGENCY FINDINGS, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND AN ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION, AND APPROVING THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION PROJECT WHEREAS, on February 4, 2009, the city of Corona ("City"), as lead agency, prepared and certified a final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ("Project") that was reviewed, studied and found by the City to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.); and WHEREAS, on February 4, 2009, the city of Corona also adopted Environmental Findings, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project involves the westerly extension of Foothill Parkway as a four -lane roadway from its existing terminus approximately 600 feet west of Skyline Drive to Green River Road for a distance of approximately two miles, along the base of the Santa Ana Mountains; and WHEREAS, the EIR identified several responsible agencies under CEQA which did not include the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC"); and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to identify RCTC as a potential Responsible Agency; and WHEREAS, RCTC has determined that none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR as specified in State CEQA Guidelines section 15162(a) arise in connection with this modification and that preparation of an addendum to the Project EIR is appropriate; and WHEREAS, RCTC has reviewed the EIR and Addendum and all other relevant information regarding the Project; and WHEREAS, RCTC, considering the EIR, Environmental Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and after evaluating the environmental impacts associated with the Project and the Addendum, has concluded that none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred and that an addendum to the Project EIR is appropriate. 30 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of RCTC as follows: Section 1. Findings on EIR and Addendum. As the decision -making body for RCTC, and in RCTC's limited role as a responsible agency under CEQA, the Board of Directors has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Addendum, the EIR, Environmental Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and supporting documentation. Based on this review, the Board finds that, as to those potential environmental impacts within RCTC's powers and authorities as responsible agency, that the EIR contains a complete, objective, and accurate reporting of those potential impacts, that there are no environmental impacts associated with the modification to the Project stated in the Addendum, and that these findings reflect the independent judgment and analysis of the Board. The Board further finds that the Addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The Addendum, the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension, and the Environmental Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, are attached hereto as Exhibits "A," "B," and "C," respectively, and are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based on the Addendum, the EIR, Environmental Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and all related information presented to the Board, the Board finds that the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR is not required because the modification specified in the Addendum: (1) does not constitute substantial changes to the Project that will require major revisions of the Project EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) does not constitute substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is administered that will require major revisions of the Project EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects; and (3) does not contain new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Project EIR was certified, that shows any of the following: (a) the modification will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Project EIR; (b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the Project EIR; (c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Board declined to adopt such measures; or (d) mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the Project EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but which the Board declined to adopt. 31 • • Section 3. Findings on Environmental Impacts and Statements of Overriding Considerations. In its limited role as a responsible agency under CEQA, the Board finds that there are no feasible alternatives to the proposed Project which would avoid or substantially lessen the Project's potentially significant environmental impacts but still achieve most of the Project's objectives. The Board further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures within RCTC's authority which would eliminate or reduce the Project's potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant. The Board further finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by the City of Corona are supported by substantial evidence and that each Overriding Consideration outweighs the Project's potentially significant impacts. As such, the Board concurs with the Environmental Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations made by the City of Corona and therefore the Board adopts those Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations as its own and incorporates them herein. Section 4. Approval of the Project and Addendum. As required by State CEQA Guidelines section 15096 and its role as responsible agency under CEQA, the Board hereby approves the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension and the Addendum to the same. Section 5. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Board hereby approves and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the Project and approved by the City of Corona, and included within its written Findings. Section 6. Notice of Determination. The Board directs staff to file a Notice of Determination with the Riverside County Clerk's Office and the Office of Planning and Research within five (5) working days of adoption of this Resolution. Section 7. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution and the above findings have been based are located at the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, CA 92502-2208. Section 8. Execution of the Resolution. The Chair of the Board shall sign this Resolution and the Clerk of the Board shall certify the adoption thereof. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this February 10, 2010. ATTEST: Bob Buster, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 32 EXHIBIT “A” ADDENDUM TO FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXPANSION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION A. INTRODUCTION On February 4, 2009, the Corona City Council approved the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension (the “Project”) pursuant to a certified Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) (State Clearinghouse No. 2007061044). The proposed Project is located within the southwesterly limits of the city of Corona (“City”) and in the unincorporated area of Riverside County within the City’s sphere of influence. The Project involves the westerly extension of Foothill Parkway as a four-lane roadway from its existing terminus approximately 600 feet west of Skyline Drive to Green River Road for a distance of approximately two miles, along the base of the Santa Ana Mountains. At Skyline Drive, the roadway would veer to the west into the unincorporated area of Riverside County and continue in an east/west direction along the City/County boundary. The alignment would then curve to the north and connect to Green River Road in the vicinity of Paseo Grande. The Project would include either two parallel bridge structures or an aboveground arch structure to protect the existing Metropolitan Water District feeder line east of Paseo Grande. Roadway improvements would require right-of-way acquisition for the proposed roadway alignment, roadway improvements (curb, shoulders, travel lanes, and landscaped medians), slope easement areas, and drainage facilities, as well as temporary construction easements. The Project also includes a new signalized intersection at Paseo Grande, and two possible additional signalized intersections at the proposed Border Avenue and Chase Drive connections. Portions of Foothill Parkway have been recently completed as a four-lane divided roadway from Interstate 15 to Skyline Drive. Green River Road from west of Paseo Grande to Tanglewood Drive will be widened to a four-lane roadway. A portion of Green River Road from SR-91 to Palisades Drive is improved as a four-lane roadway and will be ultimately improved to a six-lane roadway in the future in conjunction with improvements at the SR-91/Green River Road interchange. B. DESCRIPTION OF MODIFICATION The EIR identified the city of Corona as the Lead Agency, and the following entities as Responsible Agencies: (1) United States Army Corps of Engineers; (2) California Department of Fish and Game; (3) California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region; (4) Riverside County Flood Control District; (5) California Division of Dam Safety; and the (6) Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (“RCTC”) was not formally identified as a Responsible Agency. The purpose of this Addendum is to identify RCTC as a potential Responsible Agency for discretionary funding or other actions related to property acquisition for the Project. Except for revising the list of Responsible Agencies, this Addendum makes no other changes to the previously approved EIR on the Project itself. C. CEQA REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ADDENDUM The California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that the lead or responsible agency prepare an addendum to an EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164(a).) Section 15162 requires further environmental review only if: (1) substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR due to new or increased significant effects; (2) substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the EIR due to new or increased significant effects; (3) new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, shows that the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the EIR or will have significant effects previously examined but which will be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR, or that new or different mitigation measures could considerably reduce one or more significant effects of the project. Except for identifying an additional responsible agency, the proposed modification does not change the Project in any way. No facts or circumstances exist which create new or increased significant effects or which would require further analysis. Accordingly, this modification does not meet any of the criteria requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under section 15162 and an Addendum to the Project EIR is the appropriate environmental document. D. CONCLUSION The proposed modification merely identifies an additional responsible agency and will not result in any substantial changes to the Project that would implicate new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There has not been any substantial change in circumstances or any discovery of any substantial new information regarding the Project’s environmental effects or mitigation measures. Accordingly, the clarification regarding the identification of RCTC as a responsible agency are properly addressed and identified through this Addendum. EXHIBIT "B" FINAL ENVIRONNIENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION RVPUB\zKATOR\766916.1 BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK BLANK EXHIBIT "C" ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION RVPUB\zKATOR\7669 I 6.1 RESOLUTION NO. 2009-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORONA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION PROJECT; ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension project (the "Project") is under consideration by the City of Corona (the "City"); and WHEREAS, the Project would result in the westerly extension of Foothill Parkway as a four-lane roadway from its existing terminus approximately 600 feet west of Skyline Drive to Green River Road for a distance of approximately two miles; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Res. Code, §§ 21000 et seq.) ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 15000 et seq.), and the Corona CEQA Guidelines, the City determined that an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") should be prepared pursuant to CEQA in order to analyze all potential adverse environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (''NOP'') of a Draft EIR on or about July 11, 2007 and circulated the NOP until August 10,2007; and WHEREAS, the City solicited comments from potential responsible agencies; and WHEREAS, the City received nine (9) written comments in response to the NOP, which assisted the City in narrowing the issues and alternatives for analysis in the Draft EIR;and WHEREAS, on or about August 27, 2008 the City mailed a Notice of Completion and Availability to the State Office of Planning and Research; and WHEREAS, on or about September 2, 2008 the City released the Draft EIR (the "Draft EIR") for public review and comment for a 45-day period that ended on October 16, 2008; and WHEREAS, on or about September 2, 2008, the City published a Notice of Availability in a newspaper of general circulation in the Project area, filed the Notice of Availability with the Riverside County Clerk's Office, and placed copies of the Notice of Availability at the City of Corona Clerk's Office, the Corona Public Library, the Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments, and on the internet homepage for the Project, www.foothillwest.com. The Notice of Availability was also mailed to public agencies, special districts, members of the public, and interested parties. Copies of the Draft EIR were available at the public counters of the City's Community Development and Public Works Departments, the City Public Library, and online at the City'S and the Project's internet websites; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15086 and Corona CEQA Guidelines Section 7.06, the City consulted with and requested comments from all responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory agencies, and others during the 45-day comment period; and WHEREAS, the City received forty-seven (47) written comments during the public review period for the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, the City prepared the Final EIR, which consisted of the Draft EIR, errata to the Draft EIR, comments and responses to comments on the Draft EIR, and a proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (collectively, the "Final EIR") and, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.5, the City provided copies of the Final EIR to all commenting agencies and persons requesting copies of the responses; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corona (the "City Council") held a public study session on January 20, 2009, at which time the Project and its Final EIR were discussed by City staff and comments were made to the City Council by members of the public; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Corona (the "City Council"), at its regularly scheduled public meeting on February 4,2009, considered and reviewed the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, as contained herein, the City has endeavored in good faith to set forth the basis for its decision on the Project; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Corona CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied by the City in the Final EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project have been adequately evaluated; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR prepared in connection with the Project sufficiently analyzes both the feasible Mitigation Measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen the 2 Project's potential environmental impacts and a range of feasible alternatives capable of eliminating or reducing these effects in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Corona CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by the City Council pursuant to this Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence presented to it as a whole and not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR which the City finds are less than significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section 2 hereof; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but which the City finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant, through the imposition of feasible Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 3 hereof; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but which the City finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of all feasible Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 4 hereof; and WHEREAS, alternatives to the Project that might eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts are described in Section 8 hereof; and WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the City Council has heard, been presented with, reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including the Final EIR, and all oral and written evidence presented to it during all meetings; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council and is deemed adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project; and WHEREAS, no comments made in the public meetings conducted by the City or any additional information submitted to the City have produced substantial new information requiring recirculation or additional environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 and Corona CEQA Guidelines Section 7.26; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Corona, California, as follows: 3 SECTION 1: FINDINGS. At a regular session assembled on February 4, 2009 the City Council determined that, based on all of the evidence presented, including but not limited to the Final EIR., written and oral testimony given at meetings, and submission of testimony from the public, organizations and regulatory agencies, the following environmental impacts associated with the Project are: (1) less than significant and do not require mitigation; or (2) potentially significant and each of these impacts will be avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance through the identified Mitigation Measures; or (3) significant and cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant but will be substantially lessened to the extent feasible by the identified Mitigation Measures. SECTION 2: RESOLUTION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION. The City Council hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts of the Project are less than significant and therefore do not require the imposition of Mitigation Measures. A. LAND USE & PLANNING Impact 5.1-2. The Project would not result in inconsistencies with relevant planning policies. (Draft EIR, p. 5.1-14.) Supporting Explanation. The westerly extension of Foothill Parkway is identified within the City of Corona General Plan as being required to help alleviate congestion on the east/west routes within the City. (Id.) The proposed alignment was reviewed in the Draft EIR. and determined to be consistent with the following regional plans: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan (RCCGP) (Id.), South Corona Community Facilities Plan (CFP) (Draft EIR., p. 5.1­ 15), Regional Transportation Improvement Program (R TIP) (Id.), Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) (Id.), and Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) (Id.). B. PUBLIC HEALTH & SAFETY Impact 5.3-2. Project implementation would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the route transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (Draft EIR., p. 5.3-13.) Supporting Explanation. The proposed extension of Foothill Parkway would serve as a secondary four-lane roadway as identified by the City of Corona General Plan Circulation Element. Although Foothill Parkway is not identified as a truck route within the City's General Plan, the potential exists for the incidental transport of materials and chemicals along Foothill Parkway that meet the definition of "hazardous". Delivery trucks often haul "household" chemicals commonly found in grocery store and/or commercial uses, such as cleaning products 4 and pesticides. In addition, small amounts of hazardous materials may be found in solvents and chemicals used for road maintenance and landscaping. Several Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies that oversee hazardous materials transportation and enforce regulations related with incidental transport of hazardous materials throughout the State. With proper use and disposal, these chemicals are not expected to result in hazardous or unhealthful conditions for nearby residents or maintenance workers. (Draft EIR., p. 5.3-13.) This impact is less than significant. Impact 5.3-5. Project implementation would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. (Draft EIR. p. 15.) Supporting Explanation. The proposed alignment includes native drought-tolerant species and omamentallandscaping. (ld.) The proposed alignment traverses the boundary ofthe Cleveland National Forest and is within close proximity to an existing brush fire area. Although the proposed extension of Foothill Parkway in and of itself does not pose a fire risk, the final design would be subject to review by the City of Corona Fire Department to ensure that fire regulations are met, such as ensuring adequate brush clearance of flammable vegetation to prevent the spread of fire, the provision of fire hydrants, and adequate roadway design to provide for the efficient movement of fire equipment. (ld.) The new roadway alignment would also serve as a barrier between surrounding urban and wildland interface areas that are particularly vulnerable to wildfire/wildland threats. (ld.) This impact is less than significant. C. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Impact 5.4-2: The proposed alignment would not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial relative to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections). (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-16.) Supporting Explanation. The proposed Project would result in the redistribution oftraffic in the vicinity of the roadway extension. Analysis has concluded that due to circulation and access improvements implemented as part of the City of Corona General Plan, deterioration in Levels of Service ("LOS") within the Project area is anticipated to occur at some locations. However, the deterioration in levels of service is within the criteria set by the City of Corona General Plan Circulation Element Policy 6.1.6. In other locations within the Project area, increased levels of service are expected. (ld.) Draft EIR Table 5.4-7 (Forecast Year 2010 With Project Conditions) and Table 5.4-8 (Forecast Year 2025 With Project Conditions) show that all intersections all operate at the City's Level of Service standard, "D", with the exception of one intersection, which pursuant to City of Corona General Plan Circulation Element Policy 6.1.6 is considered to be a critical link and therefore allowed to operate at Level of Service "E". (Draft EIR, p 5.4-25.) Relevant roadway 5 segments of Mangular Avenue and Border Avenue are also expected to operate at Level of Service "A". (Draft EIR, pp. 5.4-25 to 5.4-26.) Furthermore, a Focused Neighborhood Traffic Study showed that potential increases in cut-through traffic would still not exceed the designated capacity for the relevant collector roadways. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.4-26 to 5.4-27.) This impact is less than significant. Impact 5.4-3. Implementation of the Project would not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a LOS standard established by the CMP agency for designated roads or highways. (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-27.) Supporting Explanation. The Riverside County Congestion Management Program facilities located within the Project area are State Route 91 (SR-91) and Interstate 15 (1-15). Volume changes associated with the proposed Project on SR-91 and 1-15 are minor. On SR-91 , west of Green River Road, and on 1-15, south of El Cerrito Road, less than a 1% increase in average daily trips (ADT) is expected. (ld.) On SR-91, between Green River Road and the SR­ 9111-15 interchange, and on 1-15, between El Cerrito Road and the SR-9111-15 interchange, model volume ADT's are expected to decrease, ranging from 0% to 4%, with an average 1.8% decrease. These expected increases and decreases are minor, and are within expected tolerances of the model. (ld.) As identified in the CMP, State Route 91 (SR-91) between State Route 71 and Interstate 15 (1-15) had a LOS of"F" in 1991 when the CMP was first established, and therefore, is exempt from CMP requirements. As identified in the CMP, 1-15 operates at a deficient LOS (LOS F) based on floating car runs. Therefore, the proposed Project would not cause a nearby CMP facility to change to deficient LOS (LOS F), and no CMP impact is forecast to occur. (ld.) This impact is less than significant. Impact 5.4-5. Project implementation would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-33.) Supporting Explanation. Consistent with the City of Corona General Plan Circulation Element, a Class II Bike Lane is proposed along the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension. (ld.) A Class II Bike Lane provides a striped lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway for bicyclists. Currently, access to regional trails in Cleveland National Forest is provided via the Project site. The design of the Project will allow for continued access to these trails and private property located within the Cleveland National Forest. (ld.) No transit lines are located or proposed within the Project site. However, potential impacts to the City's bus routes in the area would be minimized by advanced coordination with the transit providers and notifications. (ld.) Furthermore, the proposed alignment would help accommodate planned circulation needs of the future. This is viewed as a positive impact to the circulation needs of the City. (ld.) This impact is less than significant. 6 Impact 5.4-6. The Project would not result in inadequate emergency access. (Draft EIR, p.5.4-33.) Supporting Explanation. There are many properties, both adjacent to the proposed roadway and in remote locations, whose access will be impacted by the proposed Foothill Parkway extension. In order to maintain access to these locations, points of connection will be made along Foothill Parkway at key locations. (Id.) The design of the proposed access locations would allow for adequate vehicular and emergency access to public roadways. (Draft ErR, p 5.4-34.) Additionally, the proposed Project will provide an additional east/west corridor in the City for emergency vehicles to reach their destinations, as well as for emergency evacuations. The proposed connections to Border Avenue and Chase Drive/Mangular Avenue will allow for emergency ingress and egress for the adjacent neighborhoods. (Id.) The current layout of fire station locations within the City was planned based on the City's General Plan Circulation Element, which assumes the extension of Foothill Parkway and connections to Border Avenue and Chase Drive/Mangular Avenue would be constructed. (Id.) This impact is less than significant. D. AIR QUALITY Impact 5.5-2. Long-term mobile emIssIons would occur as a result of Project implementation, but would not violate air quality standards or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-24.) Supporting Explanation. Unlike land development projects, which include residential, commercial, or retail developments, transportation-related projects do not directly create vehicle trips. Instead, transportation-related projects typically result in the redistribution of traffic along the local and regional transportation networks. Therefore, the SCAQMD required carbon monoxide (CO) screening to determine if the potential exists for air quality impacts due to the redistribution of traffic associated with the proposed Foothill Parkway extension. (Jd.) CO is the primary criteria pollutant and is directly emitted from mobile sources; thus CO levels are usually' indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of its impacts upon local air quality. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-25.) Draft EIR Table 5.5­ 8 demonstrates that traffic volumes in the Project vicinity would be less than those of the two worst-case intersections analyzed in the 2003 Air Quality Management Plan ("AQMP"), which nevertheless did not exceed Federal or State CO concentration standards. (Jd.) Impacts associated with long-term operational emissions are less than significant. Furthermore, Draft EIR Tables 5.5-10 and 5.5-11 show that Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) and Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) emissions will be reduced significantly over time along the proposed alignment of the Project. (Draft ErR, pp. 5.5-27 to 5.5-28.) Based upon this, improvements in diesel cleanliness as per CARB's Diesel Risk Reduction Plan, analysis by the 7 US EPA regarding the effects of existing and newly promulgated mobile source control programs, and the fact that roadways that have daily traffic volumes below 140,000 to 150,000 average daily trips do not contain enough traffic to generate particulate matter that would result in an adverse impact, this impact is considered to be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.5-28 to 5.5-29.) Impact 5.5-3. The proposed roadway alignment would be consistent with the implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. SURPOrting Explanation. On an operational basis, the project is a roadway extension and, as it is an "infrastructure project," is classified as an indirect source by the SCAQMD. As such, direct emissions from the project are not quantified as it is not a trip generating project (rather vehicle trips are redistributed, new trips are not created). (Draft EIR, pp. 5.5-29 to 5.5-30.) The proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway has been master planned by both the City and the County (in the General Plans) since the 1980's, as both agencies recognized the desirability of developing a high-grade arterial which would facilitate continuous east/west travel across the City. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-30.) Therefore, both the County and the City have identified the proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway, as well as its consistency within the Circulation Element of both General Plans. The proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway is also included in the South Corona Community Facilities Plan (CFP). (Id.) Therefore, the proposed alignment would be consistent with the AQMP and would result in less than significant impacts. (Id.) E. NOISE Impact 5.6-3. Stationary noise impacts associated with the proposed alignment are anticipated to be minimal, and would not result in the exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-53) Supporting Explanation. Due to the scope and nature of the proposed alignment, no long­ term stationary noise impacts have been identified. (Id.) Stationary noise sources are generally associated with commercial and industrial developments involving mechanical equipment, trash compactors, loading areas, parking areas, heating, and ventilation units. (Id.) No noise generating stationary operations are anticipated to be implemented into the Project design. (ld.) This impact is less than significant. F. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact 5.7-3. Construction of the proposed alignment would result in the loss of approximately 54.14 acres of native habitat and 22.01 acres of non-native habitat. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-47.) Removing or altering habitats on the Project site would result in the loss of small 8 mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and other slow-moving animals that live in the Project's direct impact area. More mobile wildlife species that are now using the Project site would be forced to move into the remaining areas of open space, which would consequently increase competition for available resources in those areas. This situation would result in the loss of individuals that cannot successfully compete. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-48.) With compliance with the Western Riverside County MSHCP, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-48.) Supporting Explanation. The loss of native and non-native habitats that provide wildlife habitat is considered an adverse impact. However, the Project site has not been identified as an area to be conserved by the MSHCP (Le., it is not located within the Criteria Area). (Id.) Therefore, impacts on these vegetation types are considered adverse but mitigated by the City of Corona's participation in the MSHCP. Therefore, no mitigation would be required beyond the provisions contained in the MSHCP. (Id.) This impact is less than significant. G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact 5.9-3. Implementation of the proposed alignment would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would not drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-22.) Supporting Explanation. The proposed alignment would not require additional entitlements or resources regarding groundwater supplies. (Id.) Any water for irrigation purposes would be negligible since the Project proposes the use of native drought tolerant species, consistent with City-approved landscaping themes, the City would require the Project to use reclaimed water for irrigation. (Id.) Therefore, the proposed alignment would not deplete groundwater supplies. As such, impacts would be less than significant in this regard and no mitigation would be required. The Project site is located within the Santa Ana Watershed, which encompasses 153.2 square miles. (Id.) According to the Water Quality Assessment, as compared to the size of the watershed, the size of the Project area is insignificant (less than one percent). While the Project would create new impervious area, the impact it generates would be inconsequential when compared to the total watershed area. (Id.) Existing culverts and control structures that divert and regulate water to the City of Corona Department of Water & Power's recharge ponds would be lengthened andlor relocated if determined necessary during development of final design plans. (Id.) Therefore, the proposed alignment would result in a less than significant impacts related to groundwater recharge. Impact 5.9-4. The Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-22.) 9 Supporting Explanation. The proposed alignment would increase the impervious area by approximately 21.6 acres. According to the Water Quality Assessment, the overall impact this represents to the Santa Ana Watershed is insignificant as the impact is less than one percent of the entire watershed area. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-23.) Furthennore, stonn water runoff from the proposed alignment would drain into concrete lined engineered flood control channels, which controls the discharge from the Project and prevents erosion. (ld.) Additionally, proposed landscaping along the hillside and slope areas would help to prevent erosion. (ld.) Proposed culverts, channels, and main line stonn drains associated with the proposed alignment for both on-site and off-site drainage facilities would be designed to accommodate peak flow rates and debris loads under the Project condition; thereby preventing increased flows that would exceed the capacity of downstream drainage systems. (ld.) The Water Quality Assessment has determined that the proposed alignment would not cause a hydrologic condition of concern, since runoff from the Project site drains to engineered channel facilities. The increase in runoff volume caused by the proposed Project is insignificant. (ld.) As a result, Project implementation would not significantly alter the existing drainage pattern of the area resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on-site or in the project vicinity. Therefore, this impact is less than significant. Impact 5.9-5. The Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site. (ld.) Supporting Explanation. The development of the proposed alignment would alter the drainage pattern within the Project site through the introduction of impervious surfaces. (ld.) Any water that is anticipated to drain off-site would be required by the City and County to drain into a stonn drain infrastructure. As noted above, stonn water runoff from the proposed alignment would drain into concrete lined engineered flood control channels. Proposed stonn drainage improvements would be designed to accommodate existing and anticipated future runoff volumes and flow rate. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-24.) As noted above, the increase in runoff volume caused by the proposed Project is insignificant. Additionally, detention basins, culverts, channels, main line stonn drains, and other runoff conveyance facilities associated with the proposed alignment would have a design capacity adequate to operate under projected runoff and debris loads. (ld.) Therefore, stonn drain improvements associated with the proposed alignment would reduce potential flooding impacts related to stonnwater runoff to a less than significant level. Impact 5.9-7. The Project would not be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, mudflow, or dam failure. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-27.) Supporting Explanation. The potential for tsunamis impacting the proposed roadway alignment is not considered a risk due to the Project site's distance from the Pacific Ocean and the absence of lakes or large bodies of water in the immediate area. (ld.) The two dams 10 containing Lake Matthews are at risk for inundation by a seiche as a result of seismic hazards. Failure of either dam would cause flooding along the Temescal Wash in the eastern and northeastern portions of the City. As such, Lake Matthews does not pose a significant flood risk to the Project site. (ld.) The flow pattern from Prado Dam is westward away from Corona, and as a result Prado Basin and Dam do not pose a significant flood risk to the Project site. (ld.) The proposed alignment would cross over the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin. The basin is used for flood control and typically does not retain water year round. The proposed roadway alignment would not result in the redirection of flood flows in a manner that would subsequently lead to the loss of adequate flood conveyance in the City. (ld.) Lastly, the Project would be required to comply with various regulatory requirements concerning the debris basin. (ld.) Therefore, flooding impacts related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, mudflow, or dam failure would be less than significant. H. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS Impact 5.10-5. Implementation of the proposed alignment has a low potential of exposing people to seismically induced landslides. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-24.) Supporting Explanation. According to the Geotechnical Study, no existing landslides have been mapped along the alignment of the Project site. However, the potential for heavily sheared and fractured material should be considered due to the proximity of the alignment of the Whittier-Elsinore Fault Zone. (ld.) If left untreated, areas of weak materials would have the potential to be subject to movement triggered by strong seismic shaking and, therefore, adverse conditions could occur. (ld.) However, during the design phase of the proposed alignment, areas that are found to contain weak materials would be investigated and thus, remedial grading options would be developed to stabilize materials that are susceptible to seismic landslide movement. (ld.) This impact is less than significant. SECTION 3: RESOLUTION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. The City Council hereby finds that Mitigation Measures have been identified in the Draft EIR which will avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The potentially significant impacts and the Mitigation Measures which will reduce them to a less then significant level are as follows: A. LAND USE Impact 5.1-1. Implementation of the proposed project alignment may result in land use compatibility and access impacts to surrounding uses. (Draft EIR, p. 5.1-10.) Finding. The following Mitigation Measures will mitigate potential impacts related to land use compatibility and access to surrounding uses to less than significant levels. 11 Mitigation Measure 5.4-1 a. Refer to hnpact 5.4-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.4-lb. Refer to Impact 5.4-1, below. Mitigation Measure 55-la. Refer to hnpact 5.5-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.5-lb. Refer to Impact 5.5-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.5-lc. Refer to hnpact 5.5-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.5-ld. Refer to hnpact 5.5-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-la. Refer to Impact 5.5-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-lb. Refer to hnpact 5.6-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1c. Refer to Impact 5.6-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1d. Refer to Impact 5.6-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-le. Refer to hnpact 5.6-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1f. Refer to Impact 5.6-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1 g. Refer to Impact 5.6-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.6-2. Refer to hnpact 5.6-2, below. Supporting Explanation. As the Project site is currently undeveloped, the existing adjacent residential uses to the north of the Project site had the benefit of being located adjacent to undeveloped open space. However, the City has acknowledged and anticipated the construction of Foothill Parkway as part of the City of Corona General Plan. (Draft EIR, p. 5.1­ B.) The proposed alignment is considered compatible with the existing City of Corona General Plan land use and zoning designations for undeveloped properties that adjoin the site to the north, east, south, and west. (ld.) It should also be noted that the proposed alignment would ease traffic congestion on surrounding roads, thereby benefiting the community. (ld.) Although the proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway would alter current conditions along the alignment, implementation of design features such as the location of the proposed alignment area, balancing earthwork, providing wildlife corridors, landscaping and multi-purpose trails would serve to minimize impacts to adjacent uses. (ld.) Potential compatibility impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels with implementation of the Mitigation Measures identified in association with short-term and long-term noise, traffic, air quality, and aesthetics impacts, as analyzed in the applicable sections of the Draft EIR. (ld.) B. AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE Impact 5.2-4. Development of the proposed alignment would introduce new sources of light and glare into the Project area. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-58.) Finding. hnplementation of the following Mitigation Measures will ensure that long­ term light and glare impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measure 5.2-4a. Traffic signal and streetlights shall comply with the City of Corona's Street Light Standard (Standard Plan 502-0), in consultation with the City Public Works Department. 12 Mitigation Measure 5.2-4b. All on-site street lighting shall utilize directional lighting techniques and low wattage bulbs that direct light downwards and minimize light spillover, without compromising sit safety or security. Lighting fixtures shall use shielding, if necessary, to prevent spill lighting on adjacent off-site uses. Streetlights shall include high-pressure sodium vapor luminaire with 240 volt, swing down power module integral regulator ballast and lexan or glass refractor. Supporting Explanation. Headlights from travelers along Foothill Parkway, as well as new traffic signals, would increase light and glare within the area. Due to the orientation of the proposed roadway, vehicle headlights would not be directed onto sensitive receptors near the Project site. In areas where headlights may increase, existing roadways are present and other light sources are currently present. Furthermore, existing topography vegetation, and walls, as well as proposed landscaping would reduce increased light and glare impacts. Therefore, light and glare impacts associated with increased vehicle headlights and light from traffic signals would be less than significant. (Final EIR, p. E-3; Draft EIR Figures 5.2-2A to 5.2-2C.) Also, with implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-4a, the Project would be developed in accordance with the City of Corona's Street Light Standard (Standard Plan 502-0), and in consultation with the City Public Works Department. (Draft EIR., p. 5.2-58.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-4b would ensure that all street lighting would utilize directional lighting techniques and low wattage bulbs that direct light downwards and minimize light spill-over, without compromising site safety or security. (Id.) Lighting fixtures would use shielding, if necessary, to prevent spill-over lighting onto adjacent off-site uses.. (Id.) Additionally, streetlights would include high-pressure sodium vapor luminaire with 240 volt, swing down power module integral regulator ballast and lexan or glass refractor. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.2-58 to 5.2-59.) Upon implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-4a and 5.2-4b, this impact would be less than significant. (Id.) C. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY Impact 5.3-1. Construction activities associated with the proposed alignment have the potential to encounter known hazardous materials or wastes. (Draft EIR., p. 5.3-11.) Finding. Implementation of the following Mitigation Measures will reduced impacts related to hazardous materials or wastes to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measure 53-la. The interior of individual structures shall be visually inspected prior to demolition or renovation activities (if necessary). If hazardous materials are encountered, the materials shall be tested and properly disposed of in accordance with State and Federal regulatory requirements. Any stained soils or surfaces underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling would indicate the appropriate level of remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana 13 RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-lb. Prior to property acquisition, the presence or absence of septic tanks, underground storage tanks, as well as the presence or absence of hydraulic lifts located within the former automobile shop (APN 102-320-009) shall be confirmed by the City, or designee, through an interview with the current owner of the property. If present, the specific location of the tanks shall be identified, removed, and properly disposed of at an approved landfill facility, under the purview of the applicable agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Once the tanks are removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed tanks shall be performed, by the appropriate agency. Any stained soils observed underneath the septic tanks shall be sampled. Results of the sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-1c. All miscellaneous debris (Le., wood, concrete, 55-gallon drums, miscellaneous household debris, automobiles, scrap metal, and plastic piping, etc.) shall be removed and disposed of at an approved landfill facility prior to construction activities under the purview of the appropriate agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDER). Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that may be required. Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDER). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-ld. Any transformers or hydraulic lifts to be relocated during construction shall be conducted under the purview of the local utility purveyor to identify property-handling procedures regarding potential PCBs. 14 Mitigation Measure 5.3-le. The tenninus of the undocumented metal pipe shall be defined to detennine if any undocumented UST exists. Should a UST be present, the tank shall be removed and properly disposed of at an approved landfill facility. Once the UST is removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed UST shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the UST shall be sampled. Results of sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana R WQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-If. ASTs shall be removed and properly disposed of at an approved landfill facility. Once the ASTs are removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed ASTs shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the ASTs shall be sampled. Results of the sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-1g. If unknown wastes or suspect materials are discovered during construction by the Project Contractor, which is thought to include hazardous waste and/or materials, the following shall occur: o Immediately stop work in the vicinity of the suspected contaminant, removing workers and the public from the area; o Notify the City of Corona Fire Department o Notify the Project Engineer of the implementing agency (the City of Corona); o Secure the area as directed by the Project Engineer; and o Notify the implementing agency's Hazardous WastelMaterials Coordinator. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana R WQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB. and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 15 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-1h. Prior to construction, an asbestos survey shall be conducted by an Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration certified building inspector to determine the levels of asbestos in structures should renovation or demolition occur. District Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions From Demolition/Renovation Activities) would be required for any demolition or renovation work involving asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). District Rule 1403 specifies work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of ACM. The requirements for demolition and renovation activities include asbestos surveying, notification, ACM removal procedures and time schedules, ACM handling and clean-up procedures, and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements for asbestos­ containing waste materials. All operators are required to maintain records, including waste shipment records, and are required to use appropriate warning labels, signs, and markings. Mitigation Measure 5.3-Ii. Prior to construction, a survey shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of lead-based paint. If lead-based paint is found, abatement shall be required before any demolition activities occur that would create a lead dust or fume hazard. Lead-based paint removal shall be perfonned in accordance with California Code of Regulation Title 8, Section 1532.1, which specifies exposure limits, exposure monitoring, and respiratory protection, and mandates good working practices by workers exposed to lead. The individual(s) perfonning lead-based paint removal shall provide evidence of certified training for lead-related construction work. Mitigation Measure 5.3-1j. The specific location, use, and terminus of the on-site well (noted in building records) shall be defined. Iflocated on the subject site, the well shall be surveyed and evaluated immediately prior to preceding with site development. Once the well is removed, any stained soils, if observed underneath the removed materials, shall be tested to identify appropriate remedial activities, if necessary. Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. Mitigation Measure 5.3-1k. Prior to construction, within areas associated with known historic agricultural uses (eastern portion of the Project site), the City shall perfonn soil tests within the project grading limits to determine concentrations of pesticide and fungicide residues that may be present. Should contamination levels 16 be in excess of acceptable Federal, State, and/or County of Riverside levels, a remedial action plan (subject to approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and responsible regulatory agencies) shall be implemented to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. Supporting Explanation. The physical site inspection revealed that several potential RECs were observed within the immediate vicinity of the Project site. (ld.) Potential RECs observed within the Project site include two portable ASTs, a former automobile shop, one unidentified metal pipe extending out of the ground, miscellaneous debris (i.e., wood, concrete, 55-gallon drums, miscellaneous household debris, automobiles, scrap metal, and plastic piping, etc.), one metal storage container which appeared to be utilized as a storage structure, and pole mounted transformers. (Draft EIR, p. 5.3-12.) Demolition of structures that date pre-1978 could contain asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint, resulting in potential health hazards during demolition/renovation activities. (ld.) Based on aerial photographs, structures situated along the western terminus of the alignment were constructed prior to 1968. Due to the age of the structures (prior to the banned use of ACMs and LBPs in 1978), the potential for these materials to be present in building materials is considered likely. (ld.) The significance and potential hazard associated with these materials as they relate to the proposed alignment exists only in the event these structur~ are modified or demolished during construction. In addition, eight regulatory properties associated with subsurface releases of hazardous materials are reported within one-quarter mile of the alignment. (ld. ) A recognized environmental condition caused by one or more of these sites is considered to be low due to the groundwater flow direction, distance, and/or the status of the identified sites. (ld.) In the event undiscovered hazardous material contamination is found in the soil or groundwater during construction activities, such contamination could cause various short-term or long-term adverse health effects in persons exposed to the hazardous substances. To prevent potential health hazards to construction workers and the public from exposure to previously unknown contamination, Policy 10.1.3 in the Environmental Resources Element of the City's General Plan would require the suspension of construction activities when previously unknown soil or groundwater contamination is encountered and the implementation of appropriate health and safety procedures. (ld.) If contamination is identified, a remediation plan approved by the City and DTSC shall be implemented by the proposed Project. Mitigation Measure 5.3-lg would ensure compliance with Policy 10.1.3. (ld.) Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3-la through 5.3-lk would ensure potential impacts related to hazardous materials and wastes would be reduced to less than significant levels. (ld.) Impact 5.3-3. Construction activities associated with the proposed alignment have the potential to create a significant hazard to the public through foreseeable upset and accidental conditions. (Draft EIR, p. 5.3-13.) 17 Finding. Compliance with applicable Federal, State and local regulations, and implementation of the following Mitigation Measures, will ensure that impacts relating to the risk of upset and accidents during construction will be reduced to less than significant. Mitigation Measure 5.3-3a. Prior to excavation/grading activities on the Project site, the City of Corona shall coordinate and provide preconstruction notification to purveyors with underground pipelines traversing the Project site prior to excavation/grading activities. Prior to excavation/grading activities on the Project site, the contractor shall obtain information on the location of underground pipelines located within the Project area, and any information regarding safety concerns of these pipelines. Mitigation Measure 5.3-3b. Prior to excavation/grading activities on the Project site, the City of Corona shall coordinate the design and construction planning for the roadway extension over the MWD pipeline. At the discretion of the MWD, the MWD shall enter into an agreement with the City to allow its personnel to monitor grading and construction within 100 feet of the pipeline. Mitigation Measure 5.3-3c. Prior to construction, Underground Service Alert (Le., Dig Alert) shall be contacted at 811 in order to determine the location of underground pipelines. The proposed excavation area shall be delineated with white marking paint or with other suitable markers such as flags or stakes at least two days prior to commencing any excavation work. A "Dig Alert" ticket number shall be issued at the time Underground Service Alert is contacted. Excavating is not permitted without this ticket number. Underground Service Alert shall notify its member utilities having underground facilities in the area. Mitigation Measure 5.3-3d. If any pipeline is ruptured during construction, the Corona Fire Department shall be notified. Should the rupture of an unmarked pipeline occur, the Corona Fire Department shall be contacted for on-site guidance during pipeline removal activities. If the rupture indicates an emergency, 911 shall be dialed. Supporting Explanation. The level of risk associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances is not considered significant due to the small volume and low concentration of hazardous materials associated with construction equipment. (ld.) The Project Contractor shall be required to use established construction controls and safety procedures that would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances into the environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. (Id.) Therefore, impacts in this regard are considered less than significant. During construction, it is possible that grading or construction activities could damage on-site natural gas pipelines and the MWD pipeline located approximately 500 feet east of Paseo 18 Grande. If during final design natural gas pipelines are required to be relocated, the Project Engineer shall notify the pipeline owner and appropriate regulatory agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). (Draft EIR, p. 5.3-14.) The Project Engineer, pipeline owner, and regulatory agencies shall coordinate to detennine the location and methods of relocation. However, the MWD pipeline and natural gas pipelines within the Project site are anticipated to be protected in place. Prior to development, the location of the underground pipelines should be determined. For safety reasons, State regulations prohibit the construction of any structures directly over the pipeline and a right-of-way (RIW) is usually established. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.3-3a requires the City of Corona to coordinate and provide pre­ construction notification to purveyors with underground pipelines traversing the Project site, prior to excavation/grading activities. Mitigation Measure 5.3-3b requires the City to coordinate the design and construction planning for the roadway extension over the MWD pipeline. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.3-3c requires the Underground Service Alert (i.e., Dig Alert) be contacted prior to construction, in order to detennine the location of underground pipelines. (Id.) If any pipeline is ruptured during construction, the Corona Fire Department shall be notified pursuant to Mitigation Measure 5.3-3d. (Id.) Should the rupture of an unmarked pipeline occur, the Corona Fire Department shall be contacted for on-site guidance during pipeline removal activities. If the rupture indicates an emergency, 911 shall be dialed. (Id.) Compliance with State and applicable local regulations would reduce potential impacts' on health and safety related to underground pipelines to less than significant levels. The potential for damage or injury associated with the proposed Project to occur is small with proper planning and caution during construction. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3-3a through 5.3-3d would minimize the risk of upset and accidental conditions involving the MWD pipeline and natural gas pipelines. (Id.) Impact 5.3-4. Project implementation could potentially impair the implementation of or physical interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emerge~cy evacuation plan. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.3-14 to 5.3-15.) Finding. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would ensure that impacts relating to the impairment of or interference with adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans would be reduced to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measure 5.4-1a. Refer to Impact 5.4-1, below. Mitigation Measure 5.4-lb. Refer to Impact 5.4-1, below. Supporting Explanation. The extension of Foothill Parkway would provide greater access and improve mobility in south Corona. (Draft EIR, p. 5.3-15.) The proposed connections, Border Avenue and Chase Drive/Mangular Avenue, would provide alternate emergency evacuation routes for the surrounding neighborhoods. This is considered a long-term beneficial impact. (Id.) The proposed extension would satisfy local design standards related to emergency access and will be consistent with applicable safety criteria including speed, sight distance, signage, and signalization. Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.4­ 19 la and 5.4-lb would ensure that emergency access and emergency response/evacuation plans are not interfered with during construction by maintaining circulation through the area. (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-16.) Consequently, the proposed alignment would result in a less than significant impact in this regard. D. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Impact 5.4-1. Project implementation would result in temporary circulation impacts associated with construction of the roadway extension. Impacts to nearby residents, pedestrians, bicyclists, and traffic congestion may occur during construction. These impacts are temporary in nature and would cease upon project completion. (ld.) Finding. Temporary traffic circulation impacts relating to construction of the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.4-la. Short-term mitigation for roadways shall be mitigated by a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be established by the City prior to construction. This Plan shall consist of prior notices, adequate signposting, and detours (including pedestrian, horseback, and bicycle paths). The TMP shall specify implementation timing of each plan element (prior notices, sign-posting, detours, etc.) as determined appropriate by the City Engineer. Adequate access to and from adjacent residential areas shall be provided at all times. The TMP shall be revised and approved by the City Public Works, Police and Fire Departments so that construction shall not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation plans. Construction activities shall proceed in a timely manner in an effort to reduce impacts. Mitigation Measure 5.4-1 b. Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety. Alternative routes for the existing bicycle, horseback, and hiking trails along the Project site into the Cleveland National Forest shall be clearly marked and safety of those that utilize the path shall be considered at all times. This includes the use of proper lighting (where appropriate), fencing/shielding, sufficient headway for horse riders to pass through, proper storage of equipment and construction supplies, covering loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand debris, or other earthen material so as to eliminate any discharge onto the existing pathway or temporary pathway, and immediately hosing down/cleaning such areas of the existing pathway or temporary pathway that have been affected by construction debris or sedimentation from the Project. Upon completion of construction, access to the existing bicycle, horseback, and hiking trails into the Cleveland National Forest shall be maintained. Trails that are impacted during construction, and remain in place after construction, shall be returned to pre-project conditions. 20 Supporting Explanation. Anticipated impacts to traffic congestion during construction would be minor and cease upon completion of Project construction. A detailed Traffic Management Plan (TMP) shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer prior to construction of the proposed alignment. (Id.) The TMP will delineate all road closures, provisions to maintain access to adjacent residential properties at all times, prior notices, adequate sign­ postings, detours, provisions for pedestrians along the trails and bicycle transportation, and permitted hours of construction activity. Proper detours and warning signs would be established along all adjacent roadways and the existing hiking trails to ensure public safety. (Id.) The TMP shall be devised so that construction would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.4-1 a and 5.4-1 b, less than significant impacts are anticipated. Impact 5.4-4. The proposed alignment of the Project could substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment). (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-28.) Finding. Traffic hazard impacts due to the design of the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measure. Mitigation Measure 5.4-4. A traffic signal warrant analysis shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer or Registered Traffic Engineer prior to construction of the proposed alignment at the following intersection: o Foothill Parkway/Trudy Way Additional intersections may require traffic signal warrant analysis based on direction from the City of Corona Public Works Director. A traffic signal will be installed at an intersection where it is deemed appropriate, based on the traffic signal warrant determination and the professional recommendation of the City Traffic Engineer. Supporting Explanation. Design standards set forth by the City of Corona, County of Riverside, Caltrans, and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, such as minimum roadway geometrics, stopping sight distances, and minimum clearances, have been used to develop the proposed alignment. Use of such standards minimizes potential hazards for roadway users. (Id.) Traffic signals are often considered to improve the safety and operation at intersection locations. As part of this Project, a traffic signal warrant analysis shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer prior to construction of the proposed alignment at the Foothill ParkwaylTrudy Way intersection pursuant to Mitigation Measure 5.4-4. (Id.) The traffic signal warrant analysis that was prepared by the City of Corona for the Foothill Parkway/Elysia Street intersection determined that the forecast volumes on opening day (year 2010) do not warrant a traffic signal. (Id.) A traffic signal has been constructed at the Foothill Parkway/Lincoln A venue intersection, and is currently in operation. (Id.) Additional intersections may require 21 traffic signal warrant analysis based on direction from the City of Corona Public Works Director. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.4-4, which allows the Public Works Director to install traffic signals as the need arises, this impact would be less than significant. (Id.) E. NOISE Impact 5.6-2. Implementation of the proposed alignment would create a roadway extension of Foothill Parkway with connections to Border Avenue and Chase Drive/Mangular Avenue and introduce increased vehicular noise adjacent to existing sensitive uses. (Draft EIR., p.5.6-39.) Finding. Long-term operational noise impacts to adjacent existing sensitive uses would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.6-2. Noise barriers (i.e., walls and/or earthen berms) shall be constructed at the following locations and heights; however, if the noise barriers identified below are already constructed as a community perimeter wall, during final design, these walls shall be examined to determine their efficiency at mitigating noise to the levels specified: o A minimum barrier height of 6 feet for Sound Barrier 1 located along Foothill Parkway west of Trudy Way. o A minimum barrier height of 6 feet for Sound Barrier 2 located along Foothill Parkway east of Trudy Way. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the existing wall's acoustical barrier efficiency shall be tested to ensure it meets the requirements to reduce noise levels below 65 dBA. o A minimum barrier height of 8 to 10 feet for Sound Barrier 3 located along Foothill Parkway between Elysia Street and Lincoln Avenue. Supporting Explanation. The buildout of the proposed alignment would introduce vehicular traffic in the Project area and thereby potentially increase ambient noise levels on sensitive receptors. (Id.) An analysis of Year 2025 With and Without Project scenarios shows that 17 out of 150 modeled receptors would exceed the City's noise standards. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-40.) A second analysis assuming the installation of noise barriers of varying heights for these affected receptors that would exceed the City's exterior noise standard and have a Project­ related increase of 3 dBA or more. (Id.) Based upon Draft EIR Table 5.6-12, the sound barriers required by Mitigation Measure 5.6-2 would be sufficient to either reduce exterior noise levels to less than 65 dBA or reduce the increase in noise to less than 3 dBA. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-42.) This impact would be less than significant. Transportation projects have the potential to create long-term vibration impacts as a result of vehicular traffic along roadways. (Id.) Most problems with on-road vehicle-related vibration can be directly related to a pothole, bump, expansion joint, or other discontinuity in the road surface. Smoothing bumps, correcting uneven pavement surfaces, or filling existing 22 potholes would usually solve the problem. If a roadway is smooth, the ground-borne vibration from traffic is barely perceptible, and rubber tires and vehicle suspension systems provide vibration isolation. (Id.) Therefore, it is unusual for vehicles on roadways to cause ground­ borne noise or vibration impacts. Long-tenn maintenance of the proposed alignment roadway would be provided by the City of Corona to ensure surface degradation is minimized. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.6-52 to 5.6-53.) As such, implementation of the proposed alignment would result in less than significant impacts in this regard. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-53.) F. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact 5.7-1. Construction of the proposed alignment could result in temporary impacts to biological resources in the Project area. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-38.) Finding. Impacts to biological resources due to construction of the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.7-la. Refer to Mitigation Measure 5.5-1a; Mitigation Measures 5.9-la through 5.9-1c; and Mitigation Measures 5.6-la through 5.6-le, and 5.6­ Ig. Mitigation Measure 5.7-lb. The following Construction Minimization Measures (Section 7.5.3 of the MSHCP) shall be implemented during Project construction to minimize impacts on biological resources during construction: o Plans for water pollution and erosion control shall be prepared for all Discretionary Projects involving the movement of earth in excess of 50 cubic yards. The plans shall describe sediment and hazardous materials control, dewatering or diversion structures, fueling and equipment management practices, and use of plant material for erosion control. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Corona, prior to construction. o Timing of construction activities shall consider seasonal requirements for breeding birds and migratory non-resident species covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Habitat clearing shall be avoided during species active breeding season, defined as March I to June 30. o Sediment and erosion control measures shall be implemented until such time soils are determined to be successfully stabilized. o Short-tenn stream diversions shall be accomplished by use of sand bags or other methods that will result in minimal in-stream impacts. Short-tenn diversions shall consider effects on wildlife. o Silt fencing or other sediment trapping materials shall be installed at the downstream end of construction activities to minimize the transport of sediments off-site. o Settling ponds where sediment is collected shall be cleaned in a manner that prevents sediment from re-entering the stream or damaging/disturbing 23 adjacent areas. Sediment from settling ponds shall be removed and diverted to a location where sediment cannot re-enter the stream or surrounding drainage area. Caution shall be exercised during removal of silt fencing to minimize release of debris or sediment into streams. o No erodible materials shall be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or other debris material shall not be stockpiled within stream channels or on adjacent banks. o The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. Access to the Project site shall occur on pre-existing access routes to the greatest extent possible. o Equipment storage, fueling and staging areas shall be sited on non-sensitive upland habitat types with minimal risk of direct discharge into riparian areas or other sensitive habitat types. o The limits of disturbance, including the upstream, downstream and lateral extents, shall be clearly defined and marked in the field. Mitigation Monitoring Program personnel shall review the limits of disturbance prior to initiation of construction activities. o During construction, the placement of equipment within the stream or on adjacent banks or adjacent upland habitats occupied by Covered Species that are outside of the Project footprint shall be avoided. o Exotic species removed during construction shall be properly handled to prevent sprouting or re-growth. o Training of construction personnel shall be provided. o Ongoing monitoring and reporting shall occur for the duration of the construction activity to ensure implementation of best management practices (BMPs). o When work is conducted during the fire season (as identified by the Riverside County Fire Department) adjacent to coastal sage scrub or chaparral vegetation, appropriate fire-fighting equipment (e.g., extinguishers, shovels, water tankers) shall be available on the site during all phases of Project construction to help minimize the chance of human-caused wildfires. Shields, protective mats, and/or other fire preventative methods shall be used during grinding, welding, and other spark-inducing activities. Personnel trained in fire hazards, preventative actions, and responses to fires shall advise contractors regarding fire risk from all construction-related activities. o Active construction areas shall be watered regularly to control dust and minimize impacts to adjacent vegetation. o All equipment maintenance, staging, and dispensing of fuel, oil, coolant, or any other toxic substances shall occur only in designated areas within the proposed grading limits of the Project site. These designated areas shall be clearly marked and located in such a manner as to contain run-off. o Waste, dirt, rubble, or trash shall not be deposited in the Conservation Area or on native habitat. 24 Mitigation Measure 5.7-1c. Proposed noise-generating land uses affecting the MSHCP Conservation Area shall incorporate setbacks, berms, or walls to minimize the effects of noise on MSHCP Conservation Area resources pursuant to applicable rules, regulations, and guidelines related to land use noise standards. For planning purposes, wildlife within the MSHCP Conservation Area shall not be subject to noise that would exceed 60 dBA CNEL. Supporting Explanation. Development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area may result in edge effects that could adversely affect biological resources in the MSHCP Conservation Area. (Id.) To minimize these edge effects, the MSHCP provides guidelines for drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasives, and barriers. The proposed alignment is adjacent to the Cleveland National Forest, which is within the MSHCP Criteria Area (Le., reserve). Mitigation Measures 5.7-1b and 5.7-lc implement the MSHCP guidelines in order to address these impacts. Construction of the proposed alignment may result in several indirect impacts on biological resources. These impacts could include increased runoff that may affect water quality, increased lighting that would affect the behavior patterns of nocturnal and crepuscular (active at dawn and dusk) wildlife, increased dust accumulation on surrounding vegetation, impacts on nesting birds/raptors, increased fire danger, and the spread of exotic species. These impacts would be considered adverse and potentially significant because the proposed alignment is located adjacent to the Cleveland National Forest. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.5-1a (i.e. standard dust suppression) would serve to reduce construction-related dust generation. (Id.) Implementation of water quality Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a through 5.9-1c in Draft EIR Section 5.9, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY, would ensure impacts to water resources would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure 5.7-1c would require the incorporation of noise reducing mechanisms (Le. setbacks, berms or sound walls) and that noise levels within the MSHCP Conservation Area not exceed residential noise standards (refer to Section 5.6, NOISE, for a discussion of the City of Corona's noise standards). (Id.) In addition, Mitigation Measures 5.6-1a through 5.6-1e, and 5.6-1g in Section 5.6, NOISE, also provide construction noise mitigation measures. (Id.) Thus, implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.7-1 a through 5.7-1 c would reduce short-term construction related impacts to biological resources to less than significant. Impact 5.7-2. Implementation of the Project would impact a total of 79.40-acres of native and non-native vegetation types and other areas, impacting plant and wildlife species known to occur in the Project area. (Draft EJR, p. 5.7-40.) Finding. Impacts to 79.40 acres of native and non-native vegetation types and other areas would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of relevant measures from the Western Riverside MSHCP and the following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.7-2a. The City of Corona shall obtain all appropriate permits for impacts on USACE and CDFG jurisdictional areas. Mitigation for the loss of 25 jurisdictional areas shall consist of restoration of riparian habitat at no less than a 2: 1 ratio to ensure no net loss of habitat. Any creation of habitat will be in kind and proportional to Project impacts. Native trees within the riparian habitat shall be replaced as follows per the City of Corona: coast live oaks 4:1; sycamore 3:1; cottonwood 3:1; willow 2: 1; and scrub oak 2:1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a detailed restoration program shall be prepared for approval by the USACE and CDFG with the following items: o Responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan. The responsibilities of the landowner, specialists, and maintenance personnel that would supervise and implement the plan will be specified. o Site selection. The site for the mitigation will be determined in coordination with the City of Corona and the resource agencies. The site shall either be located on the Project site in a dedicated open space area or land will be purchased off the site. o Site preparation and planting implementation. The site preparation will include: (1) protection of existing native species; (2) trash and weed removal; (3) native species salvage and reuse (i.e., duff); (4) soil treatments (Le. imprinting, decompacting); (5) temporary irrigation installation; (6) erosion control measures (Le. rice or willow wattles); (7) seed mix application; and (8) container species. o Schedule. A schedule will be developed which includes planting to occur in late fall and early winter, between October 1 and January 30. o Maintenance Plan/Guidelines. The maintenance plan will include: (l) weed control; (2) herbivory control; (3) trash removal; (4) irrigation system maintenance; (5) maintenance training; and (6) replacement planting. o Monitoring Plan. The Monitoring Plan will include: (1) qualitative monitoring (i.e., photographs and general observations); (2) quantitative monitoring (i.e., randomly placed transects); (3) performance criteria as approved by the resource agencies; (4) monthly reports for the first year, and reports every other month thereafter; and (5) annual reports for five years, which will be submitted to the resource agencies on an annual basis. The site will be monitored and maintained for five years to ensure successful establishment of riparian habitat within the restored and created areas. o Long-term preservation. Long-term preservation of the site will also be outlined in the conceptual mitigation plan to ensure the mitigation site is not impacted by future development. In addition, the City of Corona will shall provide the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) with the proposed Mitigation Plan to the USFWS and CDFG for review. The resource agencies shall review the Project for consistency with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP (i.e., RiparianJRiverine). 26 Mitigation Measure 5.7-2b. As outlined in the Native Tree Survey prepared for the proposed Project, the following mitigation for removal of native trees shall be required by the Project: o Prior to grading, orange snow fencing shall be installed around trees (outside the dripline) that would not be impacted by construction. Fencing shall be in place and inspected by a qualified Biological Monitor prior to commencement of grading. This fencing shall remain in place throughout the entire period of Project construction, and shall be periodically checked by the Biological Monitor. o For each native tree removed, trees will be replaced at the ratios indicated in Table 5.7-7. Table 5.7-7 a ve ree lltaN ti T Miti tion Species Total (Quercus agrifolia) 4:1 Coast live oak (Quercus berberifidolia) 2:1 Scrub oak (Platanus racemosa) 3:1 California sycamore (Populus fremontii) 3:1 Fremont cottonwood i (Salix goodingii) 2:1 Black willow o The Landscape Architect shall design the replacement trees into the riparian revegetation to replace the habitat value of the woodlands and trees removed by the proposed alignment. At least 5.06 acres of replacement habitat shall be planted to compensate for the loss of coast live oak woodland habitat. The Planting Plan will be reviewed by a qualified biologist and to ensure that the replacement oak trees are located in such a way to provide comparable habitat quality. o All replacement trees shall be located in the riparian and oak woodland revegetation areas if possible. If spacing requirements cannot accommodate the number of replacement trees, the trees may be planted adjacent to the proposed road as a transition to open space. o Planting specifications shall consider the following: a. Newly planted trees shall be planted above grade and maintained for five years, including irrigation, weed control, herbivore protections, and replacement. b. Amending the backfill soil with wood shavings, oak leaf-mold, etc. is not recommended when existing soil is high in natural organic matter with a sandy loam texture. c. Recommendations for the need of planting amendments and drainage 27 systems shall be based on soil tests Qf this Project site and approved by the City. d. Any City approved work within the driplines of saved trees, including branch removal, shall be under the inspection of a qualified arborist. e. Landscaping requiring irrigation shall not be planted within the dripline of oaks due to the susceptibility of native oaks to root rot caused by excessive unseasonable irrigation. The design and installation of landscape irrigation systems outside the dripline of the oaks shall be such that the area within the dripline is not wetted during operation of the system. In addition, surface runoff from impermeable surfaces shall be directed away from oaks; where natural topography has been altered, provisions shall be made for drainage away from trunks of oaks so that water will not pond or collect within the dripline of any oak. Supporting Explanation. Implementation of the Project would result in the impacting of coastal sage scrub, coastal sage scrub/chaparral, coastal sage scrub/ruderal, chaparral, non-native grassland, ruderal, ornamental, ornamental/developed, disturbed, developedlruderal, developed and riparian vegetation areas. Furthermore, 55 western sycamores, 3 Fremont cottonwoods, and 6 black willows would be removed, and the potential widening of Mabey Canyon Road may result in an additional impact on native and non-native vegetation. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.7-40 to 5.7­ 47.) Impacts to most of these vegetation types are addressed by the City's participation in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.7-43 to 5.7-47.) Impacts to native trees within riparian areas as well as impacts to riparian areas themselves would be addressed by Mitigation Measures 5.7-2a and 5.7-2b, which require submitting to the US Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish & Game permitting process, including the replacement of lost riparian areas, as well as the replacement of lost native trees. This impact is consequently less than significant. Impact 5.7-4. Development of the Project would substantially impact regional wildlife movement along Wardlow Wash. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-48.) Finding. Impacts of the Project on wildlife movement and habitat fragmentation would be reduced to less than significant levels with impiementation of the following Mitigation Measure and compliance with relevant measures from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Mitigation Measure 5.7-4. It is recommended that the base of the manufactured slope west of the constructed roadway be vegetated with native species to encourage the continued use of Wardlow Wash for wildlife movement. This area may count toward the mitigation requirement for riparian vegetation (Mitigation Measure 5.7 -2a), oak tree replacement (Mitigation Measure 5.7 -2b), and special status plant relocation (Mitigation Measure 5.7-5) if determined to be appropriate for these mitigation areas. 28 The culvert under Paseo Grande should be designed following guidelines in Section 7.5.2 of the MSHCP. Guidelines in Section 7.5.2 recommend a width of at least five feet to allow for passage by medium -sized wildlife. (The existing 8­ foot culvert under Paseo Grande exceeds these minimum requirements.) In addition, the crossing should be designed in a manner which allows a dry crossing under most circumstances. This may include designing an elevated bench above the nonnal high water line or providing a textured gentle slope up the side of the culve:rt/undercrossing. Barriers to small terrestrial wildlife movement should be encouraged along new and modified roadways, so that they are guided toward appropriate undercrossings. Supporting Explanation. The Project site is bordered to the south and west by the Cleveland National Forest. The areas to the north and east of the proposed roadway extension are developed. (Id.) The proposed Project would extend a roadway along the edge of existing and proposed development. The proposed Project would remove local travel routes within the direct impact area; however, few native habitat areas would be located northeast of the proposed alignment. (Id.) Therefore, the proposed Project would not be expected to substantially impact wildlife movement along local travel routes. In addition, there are several local travel routes remaining to the southwest of the alignment. Therefore, impacts on local wildlife movement would be considered less than significant and no mitigation would be required. (Id.) The proposed Project would adversely affect regional wildlife movement along a segment of Wardlow Wash within the Project impact area. The City of Corona is a participant in the Western Riverside MSHCP, which was prepared to balance the goals of wildlife conservation and economic development. (Id.) Although Wardlow Wash functions as a regional wildlife corridor between the Cleveland National Forest and the Santa Ana RiverlPrado Basin and impacts on wildlife movement along Wardlow Wash are considered significant, the impact is considered mitigated by the City of Corona's participation in the MSHCP. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.7-4 would require that the base of the manufactured slope of the road be vegated with native species to retain the potential for some wildlife movement in Wardlow Wash, and that the culvert conveying water from Wardlow Wash under Paseo Grande remain large enough to allow for continued movement of wildlife species. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.7-48 to 5.7-49.) This impact is therefore less than significant. Impact 5.7-5. Special status plant species occur within the area (i.e., intennediate mariposa lily and Coulter's matilija poppy) and could be impacted by development of the proposed alignment. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-49.) Finding. Impacts to special status plant species would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measure and compliance with relevant measures from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Mitigation Measure 5.7-5. If construction occurs after fall 2008, a pre-construction 29 survey during the peak flowering period for the intermediate mariposa lily and Coulter's matilija poppy, approximately March through June, shall be conducted by the Project biologist the spring prior to construction. The limits of each plant location within the impact area shall be clearly delineated with brightly colored flagging. The plants shall be mitigated by transplantation (for matilija poppy), bulb collection (mariposa lily), and seed collection (both matilija poppy and mariposa lily). The plants, seeds or bulbs shall then be placed into a suitable mitigation site in the undeveloped portion of the Project site or at an approved off­ site location. A qualified biologist shall be selected by the Project Applicant to prepare and implement the mitigation plan. The detailed mitigation plan will include the following requirements and be approved by the City of Corona prior to issuance of the grading permit: o Seed ripeness will be monitored every two weeks by a qualified biologist and/or a qualified seed collector at the existing locations of lilies and poppies to determine when the seeds are ready for collection. A qualified seed collector shall collect all of the seeds from the plants to be impacted when the seeds are ripe. The seeds shall be cleaned and stored by a qualified nursery or institution with appropriate storage facilities. o Following the seed collection, the bulbs/plants shall be removed by bulb/plant collection, block transplantation method, or root cuttings, whichever is believed to be the most successful method for each species. The bulbs/plants shall either be transplanted directly or stored by a qualified nursery or institution with appropriate storage facilities. If the bulbs/plants are collected and the block transplantation method is not used, then the top 12 inches of topsoil from the lily/poppy locations shall be scraped, stockpiled, and used at the selected mitigation site. o The mitigation site shall be located in dedicated open space on the Project site or at an off-site mitigation site. The mitigation site will not be within the road easement and will not be located in a fuel modification zone. The mitigation site shall not attempt to enhance existing populations and shall not be impacted by any pesticides or herbicides used on adjacent properties. o The lily/poppy mitigation site shall be prepared for seeding as described in a conceptual restoration plan. o The topsoil shall be respread in the selected location as approved by the Project biologist. Approximately 60 to 80 percent of the seeds and bulbs/plants collected shall be spread/placed in the fall following soil preparation. The remainder of the seed and bulbs/plants shall be kept in storage for subsequent seeding, if necessary. o A detailed maintenance and monitoring plan shall be developed by a qualified biologist. The plan shall include detailed descriptions of maintenance appropriate for the mitigation site, monitoring requirements, and annual report requirements, and shall have the full authority to suspend any operation in the study area which is, in the qualified biologist's opinion, not consistent with the restoration plan. Any disputes regarding the consistency of an action with the 30 restoration plan shall be resolved by the City of Corona and the biologist. o The performance criteria for intermediate mariposa lily and Coulter's matilija poppy will be 80 percent of transplanted bulbs/plants established within the mitigation site producing leaves each year of the long-term maintenance and monitoring program. If the performance criteria is not achieved following the first season, remediation measures shall be implemented prior to seeding with the remaining contingency seed and bulbs. Remedial measures shall include at a minimum: soils testing, control of invasive species, soil amendments, and physical disturbance (to provide scarification of the seed) of the planted areas by raking or similar actions. Additional mitigation measures may be suggested as determined appropriate by the Project biologist. Suyporting Explanation. Two special status plants observed on the Project site are the intermediate mariposa lily and Coulter's matilija poppy. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-49.) The intermediate mariposa lily was observed during the 2000, 2006, and 2008 focused surveys. A total of 303 individuals were observed in 30 locations on the Project site during the pre­ construction surveys conducted in May 2008. (Id.) This species is a California Native Plant Society C'CNPS") Listed 1B.2 ("fairly endangered" in California). As such, impacts on this species would be considered significant under CEQA. (Id.) This species is not covered by the MSHCP until its species specific objectives are met. These objectives include preservation of a certain number of localities of this species, which includes the populations know from the Sierra Peak: area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-5 would reduce impacts on intermediate mariposa lily to less than significant. (Id.) The Coulter's matilija poppy was observed in scattered locations along Wardlow Wash during the 2006 and 2008 focused surveys. (Id.) A total of 66 individuals were observed in 11 locations during the pre-construction surveys conducted in May 2008. Although it is considered a special status species (i.e., CNPS List 4.2 [,<watch list"]), impacts on this species often do not typically meet the significance criteria under CEQA. (Id.) However, this species is not covered by the MSHCP until its species specific objectives are met, therefore the City considers impacts on this species significant. Impacts on Coulter's matilija poppy would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-5. (Id.) Impact 5.7-6. Special status wildlife species may occur within the area and could be impacted by development of the Project. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-52.) Finding. Impacts to special status wildlife species would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures and compliance with relevant measures from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Mitigation Measure 5.7-6a. The habitat creation included in Mitigation Measure 5.7-2a will be required to mitigate for impacts on the least Bell's vireo. In addition, the following conditions will apply: o Vegetation clearing activities shall occur during the non-breeding season 31 (September 16 to March 14). If the construction is scheduled to occur during the breeding season, a pre-construction protocol survey will be conducted the spring/summer prior to construction to confinn the absence of this species from the impact area and vicinity (i.e., within 500 feet) prior to the start of construction activities. o The 2008 focused survey results shall be provided to the USACE, USFWS, and CDFG for consideration during jurisdictional permitting and review of the revised DBESP. Mitigation Measure 5.7-6b. Pursuant to the MSHCP Objective 6, for burrowing owl, a pre-construction burrowing owl survey shall be conducted prior to issuance of a grading permit to verify the presence/absence of the owl on the Project site. Within thirty days of the onset of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall survey within 500 feet of the Project site for the presence of any active owl burrows. Any active burrow found during survey efforts shall be mapped on the construction plans. If no active burrows are found, no further mitigation would be required. Results of the surveys shall be provided to the City of Corona. If nesting activity is present at an active burrow, the active site shall be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code. Nesting activity for burrowing owl in the region normally occurs between March and August. To protect the active burrow, the following restrictions to construction activities shall be required until the burrow is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a 500-foot buffer around any active burrow, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist, and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within 300 feet of any active burrow, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist. Any encroachment into the buffer area around the active burrow shall only be allowed if the biologist determines that the proposed activity will not disturb the nest occupants. Construction can proceed when the qualified biologist has determined that fledglings have left the nest. If an active burrow is observed during the non-nesting season, the nest site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist, and when the raptor is away from the nest, the biologist will either actively or passively relocate the burrowing owl based on direction from the WRC RCA. The biologist shall then remove the burrow so the burrowing owl cannot return to the burrow. Mitigation Measure 5.7-6c. Seven days prior to the onset of construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30), a qualified biologist shall survey within 500 feet of the Project impact area for the presence of any active raptor nests (common or special status). Any nest found during survey efforts shall be mapped on the construction plans. If no active nests are found, no further mitigation would be required. Results of the surveys shall be provided to 32 the CDFG. If nesting activity is present at any raptor nest site, the active site shall be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activities are required until nests are no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist: (I) clearing limits shall be established within a 500-foot buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise detennined by a qualified biologist, and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within 300 feet of any occupied nest, unless otherwise detennined by a qualified biologist. Any encroachment into the buffer area around the known nest shall only be allowed if the biologist determines that the proposed activity will not disturb the nest occupants. Construction can proceed when the qualified biologist has determined that fledglings have left the nest. If an active nest is observed during the non-nesting season, the nest site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist, and when the raptor is away from the nest, the biologist will flush any raptor to open space areas. A qualified biologist, or construction personnel under the direction of the qualified biologist, shall then remove the nest site so raptors cannot return to a nest. Supporting Explanation. Fifty-four special status species are known to occur in the vicinity of the Project site. (Draft EIR 5.7-52.) Of these species, the majority are not expected to occur on site due to the lack of suitable habitat. Coast Range newt and western spadefoot have a limited potential to occur onsite but impacts to these species are considered mitigated by the City's participation in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. (/d.) Likewise, impacts to the San Diego banded gecko, coast homed lizard, orange-throated whiptail, coastal western whiptail. California mountain kingsnake, northern red diamond rattlesnake, Loggerhead shrike, California homed lark, cactus wren, coastal California gnatcatcher, yellow warbler, yellow-breasted chat, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, Bell's sage sparrow, San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit and northwestern San Diego pocket mouse are considered mitigated via participation in the MSHCP. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.7-52 to 5.7-53.) While least Bell's vireo and burrowing owl were not detected onsite, Mitigation Measures 5.7-6a and 5.7-6b would require pre-construction surveys for these species, with either avoidance or removal required if members of these species are found. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-53.) Cooper's hawk, golden eagle, white-tailed kite, and long-eared owl also have potential to nest on the Project site. The loss of any active raptor nest would be considered significant. Impacts on active raptor nests would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-6c, which requires pre-construction surveys and avoidance/removal of raptornests. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-54.) Impact 5.7-7. Development of the Project would impact the urban/wildlands interface. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-54.) 33 Finding. Project impacts on the urban/wildlands interface would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures and compliance with relevant measures from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Mitigation Measure 5.7-7a. Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a through 5.9-1c, and 5.9­ 2 in [Draft EIR] Section 5.9, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Mitigation Measure 5.7-7b. Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP Conservation Area to protect species within the MSHCP Conservation Area from direct night lighting. Shielding shall be incorporated in Project designs to ensure ambient lighting in the MSHCP Conservation Area is not increased. Mitigation Measure 5.7-7c. Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.2-4a and 5.2-4b in [Draft EIR] Section 5.2, AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE, regarding light spillover and glare mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure 5.7-7d. When approving landscape plans for proposed landscaping adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area, the City shall consider the invasive, non-native plant species listed in the MSHCP and will require revisions to landscape plans to avoid the use of invasive species for the landscaping adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area. Considerations in reviewing the applicability of this list will include proximity of planting areas to the MSHCP Conservation Areas, species considered in the planting plans, resources being protected within the MSHCP Conservation Area and their relative sensitivity to invasion, and barriers to plant and seed dispersal, such as walls, topography and other features. Mitigation Measure 5.7-7e. Where appropriate, barriers shall be placed in individual Project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass or dumping in the MSHCP Conservation Area. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage and/or other appropriate mechanisms. Supporting Explanation. Development in proximity to the MSHCP Conservation Area may result in edge effects that could adversely affect biological resources in the MSHCP Conservation Area. During operation of the proposed alignment, runoff carrying petroleum residues from vehicles using the proposed alignment could potentially impact water quality and associated species. Impacts on drainage would be considered potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a though 5.9-1c and 5.9-2 would reduce edge effect impacts related to less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-55.) The proposed alignment would not use toxic chemicals or generate toxic byproducts. Therefore, there would be no impacts in this regard from the development of the proposed alignment, and no mitigation would be required. (ld.) 34 Night lighting would increase due to car headlights and Project related night lighting during and after completion of the Project alignment. While lighting of the Project alignment would be limited to proposed intersections, this lighting would inadvertently affect the behavior patterns of nocturnal and crepuscular (active at dawn and dusk) wildlife adjacent to these areas. Incorporation of Mitigation Measures 5.7-7b and 5.7-7c, below, (i.e. shielding and Mitigation Measures 5.2-4a and 5.2-4b) would reduce Project-related night lighting to less than significant. (Id.) During operation of the proposed roadway alignment, noise impacts would increase over existing levels. Wildlife species stressed by noise may disperse from the habitat in the vicinity of the proposed alignment. (Id.) For planning purposes, it is assumed a noise level above of 60 dBA Leq would be a significant impact upon natural biological resources. The 60 dBA Leq noise contour extends approximately 200 feet from the centerline of the Project site, which is outside the Cleveland National Forest boundary. (Id.) As such, the proposed alignment would result in less than significant impacts to biological resources located within the Cleveland National Forest. (Id.) The proposed alignment includes landscaping adjacent to the alignment, which would include the planting of native drought-tolerant species and ornamental species, some of which could be invasive and degrade native vegetation. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-56.) Mitigation Measures 5.7-7d would require the consideration of the proximity and the species of planned landscape areas adjacent to MSHCP Conservation Areas and the utilization of barriers to prevent invasive species from spreading from planned landscape areas into the MSHCP Conservation Areas. (Id.) Incorporation of Mitigation Measures 5.7-7d would reduce this impact to less than significant. (Id.) The proposed Project would not create new areas of permanent water; therefore, it would not increase the likelihood of an exotic fish or amphibian infestation. The new roadway is an extension of existing development rather than an introduction of new development; therefore, it would not be expected to introduce non-native mammal or bird populations though it may bring them closer to the natural areas in the Cleveland National Forest than they currently inhabit. This impact would be considered adverse, but is expected to be less than significant with the City's participation in the Western Riverside MSHCP. Therefore, no mitigation would be required. (Id.) The proposed alignment would increase human activity along the proposed roadway. This may include unauthorized public access, or illegal dumping. Mitigation Measure 5.7-7e requires the use of barriers, such as landscaping, rockslboulders, fencing, walls, and/or signage, to deter and minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass or dumping in the MSHCP Conservation Area. (Id.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-7e would reduce this impact to less than significant. (Id.) Impact 5.7-8. Construction of the Project would impact public/quasi-public lands. (Draft 35 EIR, p. 5.7-56.) Finding. bnpacts of the Project on public/quasi-public lands would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measure and compliance with relevant measures from the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Mitigation Measure 5.7-8. The DBESP Report includes replacement of Public/Quasi­ public land pennanently impacted by the proposed alignment through the purchase of equivalent or superior quality habitat at a 1:1 ratio that shall be dedicated in fee title or conservation easement to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority. The resource agencies shall review the proposed acquisition to ensure that the lands to be acquired by the City of Corona are of equivalent or superior quality to the Public/Quasi-public lands impacted by the proposed alignment. The dedicated lands shall be managed by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority in a manner that is consistent with the goals of the MSHCP. Supporting Explanation. The proposed Project would impact a total of 8.27 acres of Public/Quasi-Public lands within the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin and Kroonen Channel, owned by the Riverside County Flood Control District. (Id.) Of this impact, 2.28 acres would be pennanently impacted (Kroonen Channel), while 5.99 acres of the impact would be temporarily impacted (Mabey Canyon Debris Basin) because the basin would be shifted back to accommodate the road. This impact would be considered a significant impact on the assembly of the MSHCP reserve, and would require purchase and dedication of an equivalent amount of land into the MSHCP Reserve per Section 7.2.2 of the MSHCP. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.7-56 to -57.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-8 would reduce this impact to less than significant by requiring equivalent or superior habitat to be dedicated for conservation at a 1: 1 ratio. bnpact 5.7-9. bnplementation of the Project would impact areas under the jurisdiction of the United States Anny Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish & Game. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-57.) Finding. bnpacts of the Project to areas under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department ofFish & Game would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measure. Mitigation Measure 5.7-9. Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.7-2a and 5.7-2b. Supporting Explanation. Construction activities within jurisdictional areas of the USACE and CDFG will be subject to approval by the USACE 404 Pennit, the CDFG 1602 Pennit, the RWQCB 401 Pennit, approval of a General Construction Activity Storm Water Pennit and any other approvals deemed necessary during construction entitlement by the RWQCB, approval of Mabey Canyon Debris Basin modifications, Kroonen Canyon Channel modifications and regional storm drain facilities by the Riverside County Flood Control District, and an approval of Mabey Canyon Debris Basin dam modifications by California Division of 36 Dam Safety. (ld.) Riparian areas and their associated streambeds are also under the jurisdiction of the USACE and CDFG. A total of 4.63 acres of waters of the U.S. are under the jurisdiction of USACE, 4.66 acres ofjurisdiction under the RWQCB, and 9.77 acres of streambed are under the jurisdiction of CDFG. (Id.) Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.7-2a and 5.7-2b would reduce impacts on jurisdictional impacts to less than significant by requiring compliance with the USACE and CDFG regulatory permitting process, which includes the provision of mitigation in the form of replacement lands. As indicated in the Delineation Report prepared for the Project, there are no wetlands on the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in impacts to wetlands. (Id.) G. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact 5.8-2. Implementation of the Project may cause impacts to unknown archaeological resources or human remains on-site. (Draft EIR, p. 5.8-21.) Finding. Potential impacts. of the Project with regard to unknown archaeological resources or human remains would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation ofthe following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.8-2a. If archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and grading activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and shall retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Requirements may include, but not limited to, preservation, recordation, relocation, salvage, recovery, and/or collection of archaeological resources. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered archaeological resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes and regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission. Mitigation Measure 5.8-2b. If human remains are discovered as a result of the Project during development, all activity shall cease immediately, and the Contractor shall notify the Riverside County Coroner's Office immediately pursuant to California Health and Safety Section 7050.5, and a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be contacted. Should the Coroner determine the human remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The descendents or his or her authorized representative, with the permission of the City of Corona, may inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the City or Project Contractor actions for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated 37 grave goods. Native American descendents shall complete their inspection and make their recommendation within 48 hours of their notification by the Native American Heritage Commission. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. If human remains are discovered, the City of Corona may be required to preserve, salvage, or relinquish the remains and associated items to the descendants for treatment, as well as recordation. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered human remains. Sup,porting Explanation. According to the Cultural Assessment, no potentially significant archaeological resources were identified on-site or adjacent to the proposed Project during the archaeological field surveyor records search. (Id.) A check of the NAHC Sacred Lands Files failed to identify any Native· American resources that would potentially be impacted by the proposed alignment. (Id.) Human burials, in addition to being potential archaeological resources, have specific provisions for treatment in Section 5097 of the California Public Resources Code. Disturbing human remains could violate the health code, as well as destroy the resource. (Draft EIR, p. 5.8­ 22.) The proposed Project would be consistent with Policies 4.3-2 through 4.3-5 of the City's General Plan, which requires the incorporation of specific measures to identify, protect, and preserve cultural resources. These policies also require monitoring of earth-disturbing activities in archaeologically and culturally sensitive areas, as well as evaluation by a qualified archaeologist of cultural resources found prior to or during construction, application of appropriate mitigation measures, and consultation, as appropriate, with Native American Tribes before resumption of development activities. (Id.) These policies provide substantial protection to human burials by protecting and ensuring the appropriate treatment of the archaeological contexts within which these burials would be most likely to be encountered. Additionally, implementation of Policy 4.3-8 of the City's General Plan would ensure the appropriate treatment of human burials and Native American cultural resources, according to the applicable provisions of State law. Mitigation Measure 5.8-2b also requires the proposed Project to comply with applicable provisions of State law and specifies possible procedures that may be taken in the event human remains are discovered. Consequently, implementation of the City'S General Plan policies and Mitigation Measure 5.8-2b would ensure impacts to human remains would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Id.) Although no archaeological resources were identified within or immediately adjacent to the Project area, the presence of subsurface archaeological resources is a possibility in areas where only surface inspections have occurred. (Id.) Ground-disturbing activities of the proposed alignment could unearth previously unknown archaeological resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed alignment has the potential to disturb or destroy undocumented archaeological resources, or human remains. Implementation of the Mitigation Measures 5.8-2a and 5.8-2b would reduce potential impacts to undocumented archaeological resources and human remains to less than significant levels. (Id.) 38 Impact 5.8-3. Implementation of the Project may result In impacts to buried paleontological resources on-site. {Draft EIR., p. 5.8-22.} Finding. Impacts of the Project to buried paleontological resources would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.8-3a. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to examine earthwork spoils generated during construction activities. If paleontological resources are discovered, the Project Contractor shall stop all work and the paleontologist shall evaluate the significance of the finding and the appropriate course of action. Requirements may include, but not limited to, preservation, recordation, relocation, salvage, recovery, and/or collection of paleontological resources. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered paleontological resources. Any measures applied shall include the preparation of a report meeting professional standards, which shall be submitted to the Riverside County Museum of Natural History. Mitigation Measure 5.8-3b. A pre-construction meeting shall be conducted in which the Project paleontologist shall explain procedures necessary to protect and safely mitigate impacts to potentially significant fossil materials for study and curation. Supporting Explanation. The Project area is located in an area of high paleontological sensitivity due to the presence of the Williams and Ladd Formations and Silverado Formation. The older Pleistocene Alluvium has an unknown paleontological sensitivity; however, plant and extinct animal fossils have been recovered from these deposits in Riverside County and other Inland Empire locations. Excavations into any and all previously undisturbed sediment of the Williams and Ladd Formations and Silverado Formation, and exposed deposits of older Pleistocene Alluvium have the potential to encounter nonrenewable paleontological resources. Therefore, grading and other ground-disturbing activities within the Project area could significantly impact paleontological resources. {Id.} A monitoring program shall be developed by a qualified paleontologist for excavation of these deposits in order to identify significant paleontological resources and mitigate the effects of development. {Draft EIR, p. 5.8-23.} The monitoring program shall include measures such as retaining a qualified paleontologist to inspect ground-disturbing activities, and salvage, catalogue, and curation of previously unknown fossil remains into an accredited and permanent scientific institution. Implementation of the Mitigation Measures 5.8-3a and 5.8-3b would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. (Id.) H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impact 5.9-1. Construction of the Project may violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-18.) 39 Finding. Impacts relating to violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction of the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures and with compliance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. Mitigation Measure 5.9-1a. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confinn that the plans and specifications stipulate that prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Project Applicant shall be responsible for filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) and for filing the appropriate fees pursuant to the NPDES program. The Project Contractor shall incorporate stormwater pollution control measures into a SWPPP. A copy of the SWPPP shall be available and implemented at the construction site at all times. BMPs shall be implemented to the maximum extent possible by incorporating water pollution control practices in the following categories: soil stabilization, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-stonn water management, and waste management and materials pollution control. BMPs may include, but not limited to, sandbag barriers, sediment basins, debris removal wheel washes, biofiltration strips or swales, debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the SWRCB, including coverage under the NPDES statewide General Storm water Permit for Construction Activities, must be demonstrated. Mitigation Measure 5.9-lb. Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confinn that the plans and specifications stipulate that prior to the issuance of grading permits, on-site drainage plans shall be in compliance with the NPDES guidelines. BMPs may include, but not be limited to, sandbag barriers, sediment basins, debris removal wheel washes, bioI filtration strips or swales, debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. Mitigation Measure 5.9-1 c. Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications illustrate that the proposed alignment complies with the DAMP guidelines and procedures. The proposed alignment is required to implement pollution prevention, treatment controls, and construction BMPs consistent with the requirements of DAMP. BMPs may include, but not limited to, biofiltration strips or swales, debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. During final design of the proposed alignment, the type, selection, and sizing of biofiltration strips or swales, and debris basins shall be specified and illustrated on Project plans and specifications. Mitigation Measure 5.9-1d. In the event that previously unknown soil or groundwater 40 contamination is encountered during Project construction, construction activities shall be suspended and appropriate health and safety procedures shall be implemented, including implementation of an appropriate remediation strategy that is approved by the City and Department of Toxic Substance Control. If concentrations of materials are detected above regulatory cleanup levels during demolition or construction activities, the following mitigation measure shall include: o Excavation and disposal at a permitted off-site facility; o On-site treatment; or o Other measures as appropriate. Should contamination levels be in excess of acceptable Federal, State, and/or County of Riverside levels, a remedial action plan (subject to approval by the Department of Toxic Substance Control, Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, and responsible regulatory agencies) shall be implemented to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. Additionally, refer to Mitigation Measure 5.3-lk in Section 5.3, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. Supporting Explanation. Construction of the Project would result in impacts to water quality, waste discharge, runoff, erosion, and/or siltation. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-19.) Pursuant to the CWA the proposed alignment would be required to obtain a Section 404 Permit. For the USACE Section 404 Permit to be approved for the proposed alignment, an approval of a Section 401 Permit Water Quality Certification from the Santa Ana RWQCB would be required. (Id.) The proposed alignment would be required to prepare a SWPPP prior to construction activities (refer to Mitigation Measure 5.9-1a). (ld.) The SWPPP must outline the source control and/or treatment control BMPs that would avoid or mitigate runoff pollutants at a construction site to the "maximum extent practicable" by incorporating water pollution control practices in the following categories: soil stabilization, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-storm water management, and waste management and materials pollution control. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-20.) The SWPPP must also address the use of appropriately selected, correctly installed and properly maintained pollution reduction BMPs to address temporary water quality impacts during construction. (Id.) The goal of BMPs is to capture and treat "first flush" storm water run-off generated by surrounding and on-site watersheds. (Id.) The proposed alignment would be expected to follow the guidelines and procedures outlined in the DAMP. (Id.) Additionally, the Project Contractor is required to implement pollution prevention, treatment controls, and construction BMPs consistent with the requirements outlined in the DAMP (refer to mitigation Measure 5.9-1c). Several DAMP-approved BMP devices could be implemented within roadway projects. The following BMPs are being considered for implementation for the proposed alignment: biofiltration strips or swales, debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. (Id.) During final design of the proposed alignment, the type, selection, and sizing of biofiltration strips or swales, and debris basins shall be specified. Proof of compliance with DAMP requirements shall be 41 illustrated on Project plans and specifications. (Id.) Implementation of the specified requirements (i.e., compliance with the NPDES and DAMP requirements and the completion of a SWPPP) would reduce construction-related water quality impacts to a less than significant level (refer to Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a through 5.9­ 1c). (Id.) Additionally, previously unknown soil or groundwater contamination may be encountered during Project construction. If this occurs, construction activities shall be suspended and appropriate health and safety procedures shall be implemented, including implementation of an appropriate remediation strategy that is approved by the City and Department of Toxic Substance Control (refer to Mitigation Measure Mitigation Measure 5.9­ 1d). With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9-1d impacts would be reduced to less than significant in this regard. (Id.) Also during construction, the Project Contractor is required to adhere to the South Coast AQMD Regulation VIII Control Measures, which lists construction dust control measures to reduce construction dust that has the potential for creating water quality problems if particulate matter enters the live stream channels. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-21.) Impact 5.9-2. Operation of the Project could violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-21.) Finding. Impacts relating to violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during operation of the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measure and with compliance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. Mitigation Measure 5.9-2. The following BMPs shall be utilized for development of the proposed roadway alignment for the Foothill Parkway extension Project: o Excavation within and outside the existing basin RCFC&WCD RIW to retain the original storage volume through extending the southern end of the basin approximately 150 feet; o Construction of a new low-level outlet upgraded to be consistent with other debris basin outlet structures constructed by RCFC&WCD; o Construction of an extension of the existing spillway, which would consist of a triple-box culvert; and o New access ramps to the bottom of the roadway and perimeter access roadway. Supporting Explanation. It is anticipated that various pollutants, including sediments, heavy metals, trash and debris, and oils and greases, as well as nutrients, organic substances, and oxygen-demanding substances, would be introduced into receiving waters from operation of the proposed alignment since it consists of a four-lane roadway. (Id.) To prevent potentially 42 contaminated runoff from reaching downstream waters, adequate water quality treatment must be applied in accordance with the RWQCB regulations. The primary objective of the water quality element of the BMPs is to ensure that the project-generated pollutants do not exceed the applicable water quality standards of the receiving water established by the RWQCB. (Id.) Structural and non-structural BMPs are an integral element of post-construction stonnwater management practices. The proposed alignment would primarily utilize a variety of structural and non-structural post-construction BMPs to reduce long-term water quality impacts to the Santa Ana River as well as the multiple groundwater basins that serve the area. (Id.) Drainage from the roadway alignment would directly drain into the concreted-lined channels, the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin, and Wardlow Wash. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9-2 for post construction BMPs would serve to reduce long-tenn water quality impacts to less than significant levels. (Id.) Im;gact 5.9-6. The Project could create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stonnwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-24.) Finding. Project impacts relating to exceeding the capacity of existing or planned stonnwater drainage systems or providing substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measure and compliance with applicable State and local regulations. Mitigation Measure 5.9-6. During the PS&E Phase a design level Hydraulic Report shall be prepared and include an analysis of hydrologic conditions for the proposed alignment and recommend specific drainage improvement required to accommodate storage volumes and flood protection for existing and future runoff, such as culvert, detention basins, and debris basins. This report shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. Supporting Ex;glanation. The Project proposes to accommodate street runoffby directing street surface flows during stonn events to drainage facilities such as culverts, channels, and oversized drains, and several improvements to existing drainage facilities would be incorporated. (Id.) The Project proposes the construction of a stonn water conveyance facility in Wardlow Wash, modifications to the RCFC&WCD Mabey Canyon Debris Basin, and incorporates drainage improvements to facilitate continued flow through a culvert at Kroonen Canyon to the Oak: Street Debris Basin. (Id.) Consistent with Riverside County requirements, the proposed alignment has been evaluated for the potential to cause a hydrologic change or condition of concern that could significantly impact downstream channels. The Water Quality Assessment determined that the proposed alignment would not cause a hydrologic condition of concern, since runoff from the proposed alignment drains to engineered channel facilities. (Id.) Proposed culverts, channels, and main line stonn drains associated with the proposed alignment for both on-site and off-site drainage facilities would be designed to accommodate peak: flow rates and debris loads under the 43 Project condition. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.9-24 to 5.9-25.) Mitigation recommendations in the Hydraulic Report would be incorporated into the proposed alignment to accomplish this, as per Mitigation Measure 5.9-6. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-25.) With implementation of the Mitigation Measures 5.9-6, the proposed alignment would be designed to result in less than significant impacts related to the drainage system capacity. (ld.) I. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS Impact 5.10-1. Grading activities would be required to prepare the Project site for the proposed roadway alignment, subsequently resulting in impacts relating to the exposure of soils to short-term erosion by wind and water. (Draft EIR, p. 5.1 0-21.) Finding. Impacts relating to the exposure of soils to short-term erosion by wind and water due to Project grading activities would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure 5.9-la. Refer to Impact 5.9-1, above. Mitigation Measure 5.9-lb. Refer to Impact 5.9-1, above. Mitigation Measure 5.9-lc. Refer to Impact 5.9-1, above. Supporting Explanation. Depending upon the specific on-site conditions of the soil, the Project Contractor would be required to remove "'non-engineered" fill as part of the grading associated with the proposed alignment. (ld.) Due to the low density and compressible nature of existing young alluvial channel deposits within the Project site, remedial removals would be required prior to placement of engineered fills. Grading operations and the resultant manufactured embankments could increase the potential for erosion and siltation both during and after the construction phase of the Project. In order to mitigate the potential effects of erosion on-site, temporary and permanent erosion control measures would be required, such as the use of . sandbags, hydroseeding, landscaping, and/or soil stabilizers. Additionally, proposed landscaping along the hillside and slope areas would help to prevent erosion. (ld.) The Project Contractor will be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which includes erosion control measures in order to comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a through 5.9-1c, regarding compliance with NPDES requirements, would reduce the potential erosion impacts to less than significant levels. (ld.) Impact 5.10-3. Implementation of the Project may increase the number of people exposed to effects associated with seismically induced ground shaking. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-22). Finding. Impacts related to the exposure of people to effects associated with seismically­ induced ground shaking would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures, which will ensure compliance with applicable State, County, and City regulations and the Uniform Building Code. Mitigation Measure 5.10-3a. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a site-specific 44 geotechnical report shall be prepared by a registered geologist or soils engineer and submitted to the City Engineer, or his designee, for approval. The geotechnical report shall provide construction recommendations to minimize impacts related to seismic ground shaking. All recommendations in the geotechnical report shall be implemented during site preparation, grading, and construction. Mitigation Measure 5.10-3b. Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment complies with Uniform Building Code and the most current engineering standards related seismic ground shaking. Supporting Explanation. The proposed alignment would be designed and constructed to withstand the magnitude of an earthquake of the surrounding faults. (Id.) The proposed Project is required to comply with the Uniform Building Code ("UBC"), State, County, and City regulations related to seismic ground shaking. Follow-up field studies during PS&E would confirm that the Project design meets these seismic safety standards, or would recommend engineering techniques to ensure compliance with regulations. The follow-up geotechnical report will evaluate potential stability impacts related to seismic ground shaking and recommend mitigation as necessary, which shall be implemented as per Mitigation Measure 5.10-3a. (Id.) The proposed soil nail wall will be designed considering the seismic conditions. The design of the proposed alignment may include longer nails, and smaller horizontal and vertical spacing of the nails. Stabilization fills or buttress fills may be required in front of cut slopes to limit slope displacement due to large earthquake events. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-23.) However, specific engineering recommendations related to seismic ground shaking shall be identified in the required follow up geotechnical report (refer to Mitigation Measure 5.1 0-3a). Compliance with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations related to seismic ground shaking would reduce this potential impact to less than significant levels, and implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.10-3a and 5.10-3b would ensure the proposed alignment is designed to meet these regulations . . (Id.) Impact 5.10-4. Implementation of the Project may increase the number of people subject to substantial adverse effects associated with liquefaction. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-23.) Finding. Impacts of the Project with regard to subjecting people to substantial adverse effects associated with liquefaction would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures, which will ensure compliance with applicable State, County, and City regulations and the Uniform Building Code. Mitigation Measure 5.1 0-4a. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a site­ specific geotechnical report shall be prepared by a registered geologist or soils engineer and submitted to the City Engineer, or his designee, for approval. The geotechnical report shall provide construction recommendations to minimize impacts related to liquefaction. All 45 recommendations in the geotechnical report shall be implemented during site preparation, grading, and construction. Mitigation Measure 5.l0-4b. Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment complies with Uniform Building Code and the most current engineering standards related design for development on liquefiable soils. Supporting Explanation. The proposed Project is required to comply with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations related to liquefaction. (/d.) Structures founded on shallow foundations are designed to accommodate settlement or movement. Structures founded on deep foundations (Piles) are designed to carry additional loads due to liquefaction. Slopes can potentially experience varying magnitudes of vertical and lateral deformation. (Id.) Specific recommendations to minimize impacts related to liquefaction shall be determined in a site­ specific geotechnical report prepared by a registered geologist or soils engineer, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (refer to Mitigation Measure 5.10-4a). (Id.) All recommendations in the geotechnical report shall be implemented during site preparation, grading, and construction of the proposed alignment. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.10-23 to 5.10-24.) Furthermore, development of the proposed alignment in conformance with established construction and design parameters set forth in the UBC would reduce potential liquefaction impacts to a permissible level. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-24.) Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment complies with UBC and the most current engineering standards related design for development on liquefiable soils (refer to Mitigation Measure 5.1O-4b). Compliance with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations related to liquefaction, as required by Mitigation Measures 5.1O-4a and 5.1 0-4b, would reduce this potential impact to less than significant levels. (/d.) Impact 5.10-6. The Project could potentially expose commuters or roadways to soil expansion and slope stability impacts as a result of on-site slope/soil stability characteristics. (Id.) Finding. Impacts of the Project related to soil expansion and slope stability would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures and compliance with the Uniform Building Code. Mitigation Measure 5.10-6a. Cut slopes which expose loose sands and gravels shall be required to include over excavation and replacement with a drained stabilization fill. Mitigation Measure 5.10-6b. Fill slopes shall be designed at a two to one ratio (or flatter), in a horizontal to vertical direction. Locally steeper fill slopes shall be 46 considered but shall be constructed with geosynthetics to enhance the shear strength of fill materials. Higher compaction standards, which are typically 93 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density, should be implemented in deeper fills of greater than 40 feet to enhance engineering characteristics and reduce the amount of potential settlement. Subsurface drainage devices shall be installed below fills to intercept and direct water that may seep from the bedrock or be introduced from the surface. Mitigation Measure 5.10-6c. Natural slopes that expose loose sands and gravels shall require and include over excavation and replacement with a drained stabilization fill/shear key. Mitigation Measure 5.1 0-6d. To ensure stability of expansive soils, the following techniques shall be followed: proper design of foundations, slabs, streets and other improvements subject to the influence of soils; over excavation of the expansive soils and replacement with less expansive fill soils; utilizing selective grading techniques to place more highly expansive soils well below foundation elements; employment of presaturation techniques to lessen expansion potential; control of surface and subsurface drainages to prevent moisture variations; and combinations of these various techniques. Supporting Explanation. Construction of the proposed alignment would include man­ made fill, trench-walls, and cut and fill slopes. According to the Geotechnical Study, bedrock underlies the Project site and is considered only slightly compressible. Therefore, it is expected to adequately support embankment fills and roadway loads. (Id.) Man-made fill and alluvium along the alignment are typically compressible and may be collapsible; as a result, these materials may not be suitable for the support of fills and structural loads in its natural state. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.10-24 to 5.10-25.) During the final design phase and the construction of the proposed alignment, soils with the potential to collapse or expand will be identified, evaluated, and mitigated, as per Mitigation Measure 5.10-6d. Therefore, the potential damage related to expansive soils is less than significant. (Id.) All cut and fill slopes that are proposed along the Foothill Parkway extension would incorporate standard practices of the UBC during the design phase and construction to identify any unstable conditions. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-25.) If any unstable conditions were found on-site, the Project Contractor would suggest recommendations for the final design phase of the Project. (Id.) Also, the Project Contractor would suggest recommendations regarding trench-wall stability, which would be provided during the design phase of the proposed roadway alignment, as required by Mitigation Measures 5.1O-6a through 5.1O-6d. (Id.) Therefore, impacts associated with unstable slopes and trench-wall stability would result in less than significant impacts. (Id.) SECTION 4: RESOLUTION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT FULLY MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. 47 The City Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measures outlined in the Draft EIR, the following impacts of the Project cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is therefore included herein: A. AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE Impact 5.2-1. Development of the Project would result in grading and construction activities that would temporarily alter the visual character of the Project site and the surrounding area. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-9.) Finding. Temporary impacts of the Project due to alteration of the visual character of the Project site and the surrounding area would be reduced to the extent feasible with the implementation of the following Mitigation Measure; however, the impact would still be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.2-1. Construction equipment staging areas shall use appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material) to buffer views of construction equipment and material. Staging locations shall be indicated on final plans and grading plans are subject to review and approval of the City. Compliance with this measure is subject to periodic field inspection by City Staff. Supporting Explanation. Construction activities associated with the proposed alignment would create short-term impacts. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-10.) Project construction activities would alter views across the Project area from surrounding locations, including views from motorists along Foothill Parkway, Lincoln Avenue, Green River Road, Paseo Grande, and smaller collector roads associated with residential uses to the north of the Project site. (Id.) In addition, views from the surrounding land uses, including the low-density residential uses to the north, east, and west, as well as rural residential uses to the south of the Project site, would be impacted by construction activities. The eastern portion of the Project site, along Chase Drive from Mangular Avenue to State Street, is also designated as a City Scenic Highway. Project implementation would alter westward views toward the Santa Ana Mountains along this scenic highway, (Id.) During construction, demolition operations, graded surfaces, construction materials, equipment, and truck traffic would be visible. Soil would be stockpiled and equipment for grading activities would be staged at various locations within the Project area. (Id.) With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-1, staging equipment areas shall be required to use appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material) and impacts would be reduced. (Id.) Although construction-related activities are anticipated to be short-term and Mitigation Measure 5.2-1 would lessen impacts, surrounding residential areas and viewers along the designated scenic highway would be exposed to the visually-related impacts of construction activities for a period of approximately two years. Thus, construction-related aesthetic impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. (Id.) 48 Construction activities would only occur during daylight hours. Therefore, short-term light and glare impacts associated with construction activities would be less than significant. (ld.) Impact 5.2-2. Development of the Project would result in an alteration to a scenic vista within the viewshed of the Project site. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-11.) Finding. Impacts of the Project related to the alteration of a scenic vista within the viewshed of the Project site would be reduced to the extent feasible with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures; however, the impact would still be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.2-2a. To maintain the context of the Project area, roadway landscaping within the roadway median and parkways shall be similar in appearance to the existing ornamental landscaping along Green River Road and Foothill Parkway. Mitigation Measure 5.2-2b. Disrupted areas of vegetation, wildlife habitat, natural watercourses, and drainage swales shall be replaced. Vegetation shall be arranged in informal masses to create a textured slope that is characteristic to a natural chaparral mountain slope terrain. Hillside and canyon slopes shall be planted with drought tolerant species to soften the impact of land grading, retaining walls, structures, and roads. All proposed landscaping species shall be selected to agree with the local climate, humidity, soil types, and local wind. All selected species shall share similar water requirements. The street tree maintenance and enhancement program and new landscaping palette and location shall be developed in consultation with the City Public Works Department. Mitigation Measure 5.2-2c. All cut and fill activities for the Project shall be developed in consultation with the City Public Works Department during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) phase. The area and height of cut and fill shall be minimized, to the extent technically achievable, ensuring that slope tops and bottoms are rounded and facilitate a smooth and seamless transition where natural and built slopes intersect to the extent feasible. Supporting Explanation. The southern views from southbound travelers (along Paseo Grande toward the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains) would be altered by the proposed alignment. (ld.) Implementation of the Project would disturb the native vegetation, introduce ornamental and native vegetation, and alter the existing topography of the Project site. Upon Project implementation, background views to the Santa Ana Mountains would remain. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-2a, the roadway RJW and medians would be landscaped in a manner similar to the existing streetscape along Green River Road and Foothill Parkway. (ld.) Additionally, disturbed areas of vegetation, wildlife habitat, natural watercourses/drainage swales, and other prominent viewshed features would be replanted 49 (Mitigation Measure 5.2-2b). Vegetation would be arranged in infonnal masses to create a textured slope that is characteristic to a natural chaparral mountain slope terrain. Hillside and canyon slopes would be planted to soften the impact of grading, retaining walls, structures, and roads. (Id.) With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-2c, Project development would minimize the area and height of cut and fill, to the extent technically feasible to ensure that slope cut and fill are rounded and facilitate a smooth and seamless transition where natural and built slopes intersect. (Id.) Although Mitigation Measure 5.2-2c would reduce the appearance of the altered topography, these visual impacts to the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains would remain significant and unavoidable. (Id.) This designated highway provides western views toward the Santa Ana Mountains. The proposed alignment would alter westward foreground and middleground views. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-12.) Visible project features would include a new roundabout intersection at Chase Drive and Mangular Avenue, the new roadway connection from Chase Drive to proposed Foothill Parkway, and disturbed hillside vegetation. Although this scenic vista would be altered, the background views to the Santa Ana Mountains would remain. (Id.) With implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a and 5.2-2b, the increased hardscape features and disturbed vegetation resulting from the Project would be reduced. However, as this view is a designated City Scenic Highway, the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact after implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a and 5.2-2b. (Id.) Impact 5.2-3. Development of the Project would result in a substantial alteration to the existing visual character and quality of the Project site and its surroundings. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2­ 12.) Finding. Impacts of the Project related to the substantial alteration of the existing visual character and quality of the Project site and its surroundings would be reduced to the extent feasible with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.2-3a. To maintain consistency with the existing infrastructure (Le., bridges, roadways, walls, sidewalks, signage, etc.) of the surrounding Project area, architectural treatments (which may include vine treatment) for the structural elements of the Project shall be determined in consultation with the City Public Works Department during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) phase. Mitigation Measure 5.2-3b. All aesthetic treatments to retaining walls and other wall features shall be developed in consultation with the City Public Works Department during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) phase. The height of wall features shall be minimized and all walls shall be designed with smooth flowing fonns that follow topography and utilize material, colors, and 50 textures that blend in with the surrounding landscape, to the extent feasible. Supporting Explanation. Residences adjacent to the Project site would experience a change in topography due to approximately 1.7 million cubic yards of cut and 1.6 million cubic yards of fill proposed by the Project. Additionally, approximately 3,600 cubic yards of fill would be used if the Border Avenue connection is constructed and 3,400 cubic yards of cut and 23,400 cubic yards of fill would be used if the Chase DrivelMangular Avenue connection is constructed. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-2c would reduce the area and height of cut and fill, to the extent technically feasible, ensuring that slope tops and bottoms are rounded and facilitate a smooth and seamless transition where natural and built slopes intersect. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-42.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-2a would also ensure a seamless transition between the streetscape for the new alignment and the existing streetscapes at Paseo Grande, Skyline Drive, and the existing Foothill Parkway (to the east). (Id.) Generally, the slopes would be hydroseeded with plant species that would complement the surrounding native vegetation and require no permanent irrigation (Mitigation Measure 5.2-2b). Trees and other landscaping would be placed at the base of cut slopes, up to the first drainage terrace, in order to soften the appearance from the driver's and pedestrian's perspective. (Id.) From Border A venue to Skyline Drive, medians and parkways along Foothill Parkway would consist of street trees and medium to low growing shrubs and ground cover. Overall, the plant palette would be designed to coalesce with the recently constructed Foothill Parkway, east of Skyline Drive. (Id.) Particular attention would be focused on the cut and fill slopes facing residents that adjoin the Project site. Irrigation and maintenance would be provided by the City of Corona, where necessary. (Id.) Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a and 5.2-2b, visual impacts pertaining to the Project's overall unity and intactness with the existing character of the Project site would be reduced. However, as the Project would require significant alterations to the existing topography, impacts in this regard would be considered significant and unavoidable. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-57.) Upon Project implementation, the existing rural/open space landscape would be interrupted by the proposed alignment. (Id.) Impacts to the overall change in landscape (from rural/open space to a developed streetscape) would be considered significant. (Id.) Views to Wardlow Wash would be obstructed by the proposed bridge features and the new alignment from residences adjoining the Project site to the northwest and north. Existing native landscaping and mature trees would be removed and replaced with ornamental streetscape. (Id.) Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a and 5.2-2b would reduce visual impacts to vegetation by requiring the installation of roadway landscaping that is similar in appearance to the existing roadway vegetation surrounding the Project site. From Paseo Grande to Border A venue, medians and parkways would consist of street trees and medium-to low-growing shrubs and groundcover. Through this area, a "rural highway" feel would be the aesthetic goal. (Id.) The hydroseed mix would include both native and non-native drought tolerant species that would appear similar to the surrounding native vegetation. Furthermore, Mitigation Measure 5.2-2b would require the 51 replanting of disrupted areas of vegetation, wildlife habitat, natural watercourses, and drainage swales. Although implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a and 5.2-2b would reduce the visual impacts to character/quality at the Project site, the overall change in landscape at the Project site (from rural/open space to a developed streetscape) would remain significant and unavoidable. (Id.) The proposed roadway, associated bridge features, and retaining wall structures would increase hardscape features within the area. Additionally, Project implementation would require alteration to multiple existing perimeter walls located along residential uses to the southeast of the Project site. (/d.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-3a would ensure that all Project structures would appear similar to surrounding development. (/d.) Motorists traveling along the proposed Foothill Parkway alignment would experience up to six retaining wall structures to the north of the roadway and one retaining wall structure located to the south of the roadway. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-3b would require all proposed wall features to be designed to include smooth flowing forms that follow topography and utilize material, colors, and textures that blend in with the surrounding landscape, to the extent feasible. (Id.) As Chase Drive would be extended to connect to Foothill Parkway and would result in a new transportation use located within close proximity to residential uses, the Project may include a new wall feature along Chase Drive to reduce the visibility of proposed transportation uses. Should the wall feature be constructed, additional visual impacts may result from the increased hardscape. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-58.) With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-3b, architectural treatments (which may include vine treatments) would be added to the walls (should it be constructed) to reduce the appearance of hardscape features. (Id.) In addition to wall features, the proposed medians and parkways would contribute to the resultant hardscape. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-2a, all medians and parkways would be landscaped to soften and screen traffic flow from the pedestrian Walkways and buffer adjacent retaining walls and slopes along Foothill Parkway. In summary, Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a, 5.2-3a, and 5.2-3b would reduce the appearance ofhardscape features, and impacts in this regard would be less than significant. (Id.) B. AIR QUALITY Impact 5.5-1. Construction of the Project would result in PM 10, PM2.5, and NOx emissions that would exceed SCAQMD's threshold of significance. Finding. Impacts of the Project from violating SCAQMD's daily emission thresholds for construction activities would be reduced to the extent feasible with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.5-1 a. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the Public Works Director, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be controlled by regular watering or other dust 52 preventive measures, as specified in the SCAQMD's Rules and Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Implementation of the following measures would reduce short-term fugitive dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors: o All active portions of the construction site shall be watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust; o On-site vehicles speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph); o All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered periodically, or chemically stabilized; o All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering, with complete coverage, shall occur at least twice daily, preferably in the late morning and after work is done for the day; o If dust is generated and visibly occurs beyond the site boundaries, clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities that generate dust shall cease during periods of high winds (i.e., greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour); and o All material transported off site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Mitigation Measure 5.5-lb. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the Public Works Director shall confirm that the plans and specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles shall be controlled by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer's specifications, to the satisfaction of the Resident Engineer. The City inspector shall be responsible for ensuring that contractors comply with this measure during construction. Mitigation Measure 5.5-1 c. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the Director of Public Works, or his designee, shall confirm that the construction bid packages include a separate "Diesel Fuel Reduction Plan." This plan shall identify the actions to be taken to reduce diesel fuel emissions during construction activities (inclusive of grading and excavation activities). Reductions in diesel fuel emissions can be achieved by measures including, but not limited to, the following: a) use of alternative energy sources, such as compressed natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas, in mobile equipment and vehicles; b) use of "retrofit technology," including diesel particulate trips, on existing diesel engines and vehicles; and c) other appropriate measures with equal or better efficiency (as determined in consultation with the South Coast Air Quality Management District). Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Diesel Fuel Reduction Plan shall be filed with the City of Corona. The Diesel Fuel Reduction Plan shall include the following provisions: o All diesel fueled off-road construction equipment shall be CARB certified or 53 use post-combustion controls that reduce pollutant emissions to the same level as CARB certified equipment. CARB certified off-road engines are engines that are three years old or less and comply with lower emission standards. Post-combustion controls are devices that are installed downstream of the engine on the tailpipe to treat the exhaust. These devices are now widely used on construction equipment and are capable of removing over 90 percent of the PMIO, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds from engine exhaust, depending on the specific device, sulfur content of the fuel, and specific engine type. The most common and widely used post-combustion control devices are particulate traps (i.e., soot filters), oxidation catalysts, and combinations thereof. o All diesel fueled on-road construction vehicles shall meet the emission standards applicable to the most current year to the greatest extent possible. To achieve this standard, new vehicles shall be used or older vehicles shall use post-combustion controls that reduce pollutant emissions to the greatest extent feasible. The effectiveness of the latest diesel emission controls is highly dependant on the sulfur content of the fuel. Therefore, diesel fuel used by on-road and off-road construction equipment shall be low sulfur (>15 ppm) or other alternative low polluting diesel fuel formulation. Mitigation Measure 5.5-ld. All trucks that are to haul excavated or graded material on­ site shall comply with State Vehicle Code Section 23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)( 4) as amended, regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets and roads. Supporting Explanation. The Project would result in fugitive dust emissions (i.e., PMI0 and PM2.5) from clearing and grading activities on-site. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-19.) PMI0 and PM2.5 emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors, making quantification difficult. The highest potential for construction dust impacts would occur during the dry late spring, summer, and early fall months when soils are dry. Despite this variability in emissions, experience has shown that there are a number of feasible control measures that can be reasonably implemented to significantly reduce PM} 0 and PM2.5 emissions from construction activities, such as Mitigation Measure 5.5.-1a. (ld.) However, according to the Air Quality Assessment, the daily construction emissions would exceed the established thresholds and, therefore, would be considered significant. (ld.) Exhaust emissions from construction activities include emissions associated with the transport of machinery and supplies to and from the Project site, emissions produced on-site as the equipment is used, and emissions from trucks transporting excavated materials from the Project site and fill soils to the Project site. (ld.) Emitted pollutants would include CO, VOC, SOx, NOx, PMIO, and PM2.5. Standard SCAQMD regulations would be required, via 54 Mitigation Measures 5.5-lb through 5.5-lc, to maintain all construction equipment, shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time, and implementing SCAQMD Rule 403. (ld.) However, construction equipment exhaust would cause an exceedance of the SCAQMD's NOx thresholds during the entire construction period. Therefore, a Diesel Reduction Plan shall be implemented via Mitigation Measure 5.5-lc to reduce the increased levels of nitrogen oxides generated by on-site construction equipment. (ld.) However, even with implementation of the Diesel Reduction Plan and compliance with the SCAQMD standards, emissions from the proposed alignment would remain significant and unavoidable. (ld.) In addition to gaseous and particulate emissions, the application of asphalt and surface coatings creates VOC emissions, which are 03 precursors. According to the Air Quality Assessment and as illustrated in Table 5.5-5 above, VOC emissions would be below SCAQMD standards. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-20.) Implementation of the proposed alignment may require the demolition of five on-site structures. Due to the age of the on-site structures (prior to the banned use of asbestos containing materials [ACMs] in 1978), the potential for ACMs to be found on-site is considered likely. (ld.) Regulations have been established, which require demolition activities to minimize asbestos released into the air. Primarily, this is accomplished through the asbestos National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), which is enforced by CARB and SCAQMD. (ld.) Should renovation or demolition of anyon-site structures be required, the Project would be subject to the asbestos NESHAP and SCAQMD Rule 1403, Asbestos Emissions from DemolitionlRenovation Activities. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-21.) As noted in Mitigation Measure 5.3­ I h, an asbestos survey shall be conducted prior to construction activities by an Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration certified building inspector to determine the levels of asbestos in structures should renovation or demolition occur. (ld.) Therefore, no airborne asbestos would be generated during demolition activities. (ld.) According to a general 111tramafic rock formation map created by the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, the Project site is not anticipated to be underlain by Ultramafic rock formations and therefore is not expected to contain naturally­ occurring asbestos. (ld.) No impacts would occur in this regard. (ld.) Construction vehicle pollutant emission generators would consist primarily of haul truck activities such as earthwork haulage, graders, pavers, contractor vehicles, and diesel-electric generators. Construction emissions of diesel particulate matter utilized within the SCREEN3 model were taken from the URBEMIS 2007 construction outputs for the proposed alignment. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-22.) Based upon the model results, the particulate matter concentrations are below the SCAQMD Cancer Risk Threshold of one in one million for both construction years. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-22 to 5.5-23.) Therefore, it is anticipated that impacts would be less than significant for cancer risks from toxic air emissions during construction activities. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-23.) 55 Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the use of architectural coatings and solvents. SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the amount of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings and solvents. (ld.) Following compliance with the SCAQMD rules, no construction activities or materials would create objectionable odors or noxious fumes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required. (ld.) It is anticipated that odors, asbestos, and diesel particulate matter emissions during construction of the proposed alignment would be considered less than significant Construction emissions associated with the Foothill Parkway extension would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for PM10, PM2.5, and NOx, and would therefore be cOnsidered significant. (ld.) Mitigation Measures 5.5-1a through 5.5-1d are required in order to reduce the pollutant emission levels associated with the short-term construction of the Project. However, the applied mitigation measures would not provide a reduction substantial enough to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. (ld.) Therefore, PM10, PM2.5, and NOx emissions would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. (ld.) C. NOISE Impact 5.6-1. Grading, construction, and construction-related vibration generated by construction equipment within the Project area would result in temporary noise and vibration impacts to nearby noise-sensitive receptors. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-23.) Finding. Temporary noise and vibration impacts of the Project on nearby noise-sensitive receptors during Project grading and construction would be reduced to the extent feasible with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1a. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed alignment, the Project Contractor shall provide evidence acceptable to the City of Corona Public Works Director, or designee, that (1) all construction equipment, fixed and/or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufllers consistent with manufacturers' standards, (2) construction activities shall be limited to the designated daytime hours as specified by the City of Corona, currently 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday and 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday and federal holidays. These restrictions apply to all trucks, vehicles, and equipment that are making or involved with material deliveries, loading or transfer of materials, equipment service, and maintenance of any devices for or within the Project construction site. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1 b. During construction, the Project Contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment such that emitted noise is directed away from noise-sensitive receptors. The placement of the equipment shall meet the satisfaction of the Building Official and is subject to site inspection. Additionally, 56 the Project Contractor shall provide evidence of the placement of the stationary equipment to the Building Official. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1c. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the City of Corona Public Works Director, or designee, shall confirm that the Project plans and specifications stipulate that the Project Contractor shall incorporate feasible muffling features into all construction vehicles and equipment and into construction methods, and shall maintain all construction vehicles and equipment in efficient operating condition. Mitigation Measure 5.6-ld. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the City of Corona Public Works Director, or designee, shall confirm the Project plans and specifications stipulate that the Project Contractor shall locate stockpiling and construction vehicle staging areas as far away as practical from noise sensitive receptors during construction activities. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1e. During construction, the Project Contractor shall install temporary construction barriers with an effective height of 8 to 10 feet around construction activities located within 100 feet of residences, where it is feasible, to provide a noise reduction of 8 to 10 dBA. These barriers shall be provided along Green River Road, Paseo Grande, and Meadowcrest Street and near the cul­ de-sacs of Condor Circle, Clearview Circle, and Folson Circle. Mitigation Measure 5.6-lf. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed alignment, the Project Contractor shall develop and execute a community information program, notifying neighbors of planned construction schedules and periods of maximum activity. The notice shall provide a construction schedule, required noise conditions applied to the proposed alignment, and the name and telephone number of the Construction Project Manager who can address questions and problems that may arise during construction. Mitigation Measure 5.6-1g. If pile driving occurs within 200 feet of sensitive receptors, alternative construction methods such as pre-drilling, drilled piles, Giken silent piling, pile cushioning, or any non-impact drivers shall be implemented to significantly reduce vibration levels generated by construction activities. SUnPorting Explanation. Short-term noise impacts would be associated with the excavation and grading activities along the proposed alignment during construction. Construction activities would result in short-term noise levels higher than existing ambient noise levels in the Project area. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.6-33 to 5.6-34.) With the incorporation of Mitigation Measures 5.6-1a through 5.6-lf, noise levels between noise sources and sensitive receptors would be reduced. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-35.) Mitigation Measure 5.6-1a would require that all Project construction equipment be operated and 57 maintained with noise reducing mufflers. (Id.) In addition, adherence to the hours specified in Section 17.84.040, Noise, of the City's Municipal Code regarding construction activities would minimize construction noise impacts. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.6-lb also requires all stationary construction equipment be directed away from sensitive noise receptors. Additionally, Mitigation Measure 5.6-1c would further reduce noise impacts to noise-sensitive receptors by requiring the incorporation of noise reducing mufflers into construction vehicles and into construction methods to the extent feasible. (ld.) Mitigation Measure 5.6-ld requires all construction equipment staging areas to be located as far away from noise sensitive receptors as practical. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.6-le requires temporary construction barriers with an effective height of 8 to 10 feet be installed around construction activities located within 100 feet of residences, where it is feasible, in order to provide a noise reduction of 8 to 10 dBA. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.6-35 to 5.6-36.) These barriers shall be provided along Green River Road, Paseo Grande, and Meadowcrest Street and near Condor Circle, Clearview Circle, and Folsom Circle. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.6-le, the closest residence would experience a maximum noise level of 81 to 83 dBA Lmax. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-36.) As such, substantial (exceed noise standards) temporary and periodic increases in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above existing conditions would occur due to the operation of construction equipment. (Id.) As construction activities would still potentially generate high noise levels with the installation of temporary construction barriers, construction noise would cause disturbance or annoyance to persons of nonnal sensitivity residing in the area. (Id.) Therefore, construction noise impacts would have a significant and unavoidable impact on nearby residences. Mitigation Measure 5.6-lf recommends the Project Contractor develop and execute a community infonnation program, notifying neighbors of planned construction schedules and periods of maximum activity. (Id.) The notice shall provide a construction schedule, required noise conditions applied to the proposed alignment, and the name and telephone number of the Construction Project Manager who can address questions and problems that may arise during construction. Although, implementation of the Mitigation Measures 5.6-la through 5.6-1fwould reduce short-term construction impacts, construction activities still have the potential to exceed the City's noise standards. ([d.) Therefore, short-term construction impacts would be significant and unavoidable. D. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact 5.8-1. Implementation of the Project would cause a significant impact to historical resources on-site. (Draft EIR, p. 5.8-20.) Finding. Impacts of the Project relating to adverse effects to significant on-site historical resources would be reduced to the extent feasible with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.8-1a. Recordation. If the historic arroyo stone footbridge is demolished or relocated, recordation (by photographs, measured drawings, and 58 narrative) of the historic resource shall be made in order to ensure a permanent record of the present appearance and context of the historical resource is maintained. Demolition/relocation and recordation of historic resources shall be according to Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) standards prior to any construction activities. Once the HAER documentation is approved by a designated Project architectural historian, who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, the resulting archival documentation shall be filed with the State Office of Historic Preservation, City of Corona Planning Department, and Corona Public Library, Heritage Room. Mitigation Measure 5.8-lb. Relocation. Relocate the historic arroyo stone footbridge to a comparable location/setting within the community, if feasible. Such relocation efforts shall be undertaken in accordance with a Relocation Plan prepared by a qualified architectural historian, historic architect, or historic preservation professional that satisfies the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for History, Architectural History, or Architecture. The Relocation Plan shall include relocation methodology recommended by the National Park Service, which are outlined in the booklet entitled "Moving Historic Buildings," by John Obed Curtis (1979), and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, as applicable. Upon relocation of the structure to the new site, any maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction work performed in conjunction with the relocation of the footbridge shall be undertaken in a manner consistent with the Standards. At the relocation site, provide a public information sign/plaque that explains why the resource is significant. Mitigation Measure 5.8-lc. Salvage. Offer the resource and/or elements of it to a local preservation groupe s) for salvage or reuse, if relocation is not feasible. SUImOrting Explanation. Implementation of the proposed alignment would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to the one historic resource identified on-site, an arroyo stone footbridge, since the Project would require its demolition. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.8-la requires the recordation (by photographs, measured drawings, and narrative) of the arroyo stone footbridge in order to ensure a permanent record of the present appearance and context of the historical resource is maintained. (Id.) Adherence to the required mitigation would ensure that the demolition/relocation and recordation of the historic arroyo stone footbridge complies with HAER standards. Once the HAER documentation is approved by a designated Project architectural historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, the resulting archival documentation would be filed with the State Office of Historic Preservation, City of Corona Planning Department, and Corona Public Library, Heritage Room. (Id.) Additionally, Mitigation Measures 5.8-lb and 5.8-Ic would further lessen historical impacts by requiring the arroyo stone footbridge be relocated or salvaged. (Id.) Although Mitigation Measures 5.8-1a through 5.8-lc would lessen impacts to historic resources, impacts would not be fully mitigated and reduced to a less than significant level since the stone bridge 59 would still be removed from its site. Therefore, impacts under the Project to historic resources would remain significant and unavoidable. (Id.) E. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS Impact 5.10-2. Implementation of the Project has the potential to expose commuters to adverse effects associated with rupture of a known earthquake fault. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-21.) Finding. Impacts of the Project relating to the exposure of commuters to adverse effects associated with the rupture of a known earthquake fault would be reduced to the extent feasible with implementation of the following Mitigation Measures; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure 5.10-2. Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment complies with Uniform Building Code and the most current engineering standards related to design and siting for seismic hazards. Supporting Explanation. Active faults that are part of the Whittier-Elsinore and Chino Fault Zones traverse the Project site. The southern two-thirds of the proposed alignment lie within these zones. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.10-21 to 5.10-22.) The City's General Plan provides goals and policies for the potential geotechnical hazards within the City of Corona (refer to the City's General Plan Policies 11.1.2 and 11.1.5). (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-22.) The goals and policies were established to ensure that development satisfactorily addresses the proper siting, design, and construction of "essential facilities", including their continued functioning in the event of a seismic or other geologic disaster. The Project is required to comply with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations related to seismic hazards. (Id.) Follow-up field studies during PS&E would confirm that the Project design meets these seismic safety standards, or would recommend engineering techniques to ensure compliance with the most current engineering standards for seismic design. (Id.) However, due to the fact that the proposed roadway alignment is an essential facility and active faults traverse the Project site, the proposed Project would not be consistent with the City's General Plan Policy 11.1.2. The proposed alignment will be designed to minimize seismic impacts. (Id.) Nonetheless, development of the proposed alignment with adequate setbacks to avoid fault rupture impacts may not be possible, as active faults traverse the Project site. (Id.) Although Mitigation Measure 5.10-2 would reduce fault rupture impacts, significant and unavoidable impacts would occur in this regard. (Id.) SECTION 5: RESOLUTION REGARDING CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A. LAND USE AND RELEVANT PLANNING Aside from the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and adopted specific plans (with 60 which the Project was determined to be consistent, see Impacts 5.1-1 and 5.1-2, above), development in the City is required to comply with the following: • 1997 Air Quality Management Plan • 1999 Amendment for Ozone • SCAG's RTIP, RTP, and RCPG As all development would be required to comply with these plans, policies, and regulations, overall cumulative impacts would be less than significant. (Draft ErR, p. 5.1-16.) The proposed Project is required to comply with these plans, policies, and regulations as well. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts. (ld.) B. AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE Construction activities associated with the proposed alignment would contribute to cumulative short-term impacts, as Project construction would occur over two years. (Draft EIR, p.5.2-29.) With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-1, staging equipment areas shall be required to use appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material) and impacts would be reduced. (ld.) Although construction-related activities are anticipated to be short-term and Mitigation Measure 5.2-1 would lessen impacts, surrounding residential areas and viewers along the designated scenic highway would be exposed to the visually-related impacts of construction activities for a period of approximately two years. (ld.) Therefore, although implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-1 would reduce impacts, the Project would cumulatively contribute to the degradation of character/quality in the Project area, as well as contribute to the alteration of designated scenic vistas toward the foothills and Santa Ana Mountains. (ld.) Thus, the Project would have a significant cumulative impact in this regard. Construction activities would only occur during daylight hours. Therefore, the Project would not contribute cumulatively to short-term light and glare impacts. (ld.) Although implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-1 would reduce impacts, the Project would cumulatively contribute to short-term (construction) impacts with regard to the degradation of character/quality in the Project area, as well as the alteration of designated scenic vistas. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-60.) Thus, the Project would cumulatively contribute to the construction-related visual impacts and these impacts would be significant and unavoidable. (ld.) Thus, the Project would have a significant cumulative impact in this regard. Significant views within the City include views of Prado Dam from Sierra del Oro, views for the Santa Ana Mountains from I-15/SR-91 interchange, southern view of foothills from north-south streets, views from higher elevations in the City, and Grand Boulevard. Scenic vistas within the Project area include westward views toward the Santa Ana Mountains from Chase Drive and southern views of foothills from Paseo Grande. Cumulative projects in the Project area are not anticipated to impact these two specific scenic vistas. (ld.) Development within the City would be required to undergo environmental review and design to ensure scenic vistas are not affected. Additionally, adherence to policies in the City's General Plan would 61 reduce impacts to less that significant. (Id.) The proposed alignment and profile would alter two scenic vistas, which include the southern views along Pasoo Grande toward the foothills and the western views along Chase Drive toward the Santa Ana Mountains. Proposed alterations would include the disturbance of native vegetation, the introduction of ornamental and native vegetation, and the alteration of topography at the Project site. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-2a through 5.2­ 2c, impacts to the altered topography would be reduced; however, these visual impacts to foreground and middleground views to the two scenic vistas along Chase Drive and Pasoo Grande would remain significant and unavoidable. Although the proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact at these scenic vistas, there would not be a significant cumulative impact due to the incremental effects on scenic vistas of the cumulative projects identified in Draft EIR Section 4.0, BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS. (Id.) Therefore, while the Project would result in a significant project-specific impact, it would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact. As such, the proposed Project would result in less than significant cumulative impacts in this regard. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-60.) Construction of currently approved and pending projects in the vicinity would permanently alter the nature and appearance of the area through the loss of undeveloped areas. (Id.) As development occurs throughout the Project area, residents and travelers in the area would notice the visual effects of increased development. With implementation of project­ specific mitigation measures, cumulative construction impacts would be reduced; however, impacts resulting from increased development in the area would remain significant and unavoidable. (Id.) Thus, the Project would have a significant cumulative impact in this regard. Development of the proposed roadway alignment as well as other local projects would result in a decrease in visible open space and rural character in the City. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-3a through 5.2-3b, on-site impacts pertaining to the degradation of visual character/quality would be reduced. (Id.) However, the Project's cumulative contribution to the degradation of the existing rural and open space landscape would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the Project would incrementally increase cumulative impacts to the visual character/quality of the area. (Id.) Thus, the Project would have a significant cumulative impact in this regard. Development proposed in the General Plan would create new sources of light and glare. However, the General Plan includes policies that require new structures to utilize building materials that complement and blend into surrounding uses and directional lighting. Therefore, cumulative light and glare impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5.2-62.) The Project would increase the existing light and glare within the Project vicinity. However, the Project would be developed in accordance with the City of Corona's Street Light Standard (Standard Plan 502-0), and implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-4a and 5.2-4b 62 would ensure that all street lighting would utilize directional Hghting techniques and low wattage bulbs that direct light downwards and minimize light spill-over. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2-4a and 5.2-4b, the Project would not create a cumulatively considerable light and glare impact. (Id.) C. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY All development within the City of Corona would be required to comply with the regulations, standards, and guidelines for storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials established by the U.S. EPA, State, Riverside County, and City of Corona. (Draft EIR, p. 5.3­ 15.) Transport of hazardous materials is required to comply with the regulations of the California Department of Transportation and the California Highway Patrol. New development would be overviewed by Federal, State, and local agencies and would be required to comply with hazardous materials handling regulations. (Draft EIR, p. 5.3-16.) As each project is required to undergo environmental review and comply with regulations, overall cumulative impacts would be less than significant. (Id.) As the Project would also be required to comply with hazardous materials regulations, the Project will not contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) Development within the City, in accordance with the General Plan, would result in infill development and intensification of development Due to the infill nature of development, it is anticipated that existing structures would be required to be demolished, which would expose the public to hazardous substances. However, the SCAQMD, Cal/OSHA, and the California Code of Regulations include requirements to minimize the exposure to asbestos and lead and emergency action procedures. (Id.) A hazardous materials evaluation would also evaluate the existing and historic conditions of the development site and would recommend mitigation measures to reduce impacts from hazardous materials. (Id.) Site-specific mitigation measures and compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations and policies regarding hazardous materials would minimize overall cumulative impacts to less than significant. The Preliminary Hazardous Materials Assessment prepared for the proposed Project evaluated the potential for hazardous materials on-site. Several potential hazardous materials were identified within the proposed alignment; however, the Preliminary Hazardous Materials Assessment includes mitigation measures that would reduce impacts to less than significant. (Id.) Therefore, upon implementation of the mitigation measures and compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations and policies, the Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) Development within the City would increase the City's population and would increase the amount of hazardous materials in the City. (Draft EIR, 5.3-17.) Increases in population would increase traffic congestion. The City of Corona Fire Department and the Office of Emergency Services published the City of Corona Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The General Plan includes goals and policies that would provide mitigation for traffic congestion on streets and intersections that would slow emergency response times. Development projects would be required to conduct a project specific environmental review, which would require a traffic impact analysis. (Id.) Mitigation measures, if applicable, would be implemented prior to construction to ensure impacts to traffic are less than significant. (ld.) With implementation of 63 the EOP, project specific traffic mitigation, and the goals and policies of the General Plan, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. As the Project proposes the construction of a roadway, the project is likely to improve emergency access. Therefore, the Project does not have the capacity to contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) The City of Corona is located along the boundary of the Cleveland National Forest and therefore could be subject to wildfires. (Draft EIR, p. 5.3-18.) Additionally, development in the foothills of the western and southern edges of the City is subject to wildland fires. Development within the City along the National Forest boundary and foothill area are required to evaluate the potential for wildland fires during the development specific environmental review. Cumulative development projects are not located within wildland fire areas, with the exception of DPR07­ 010 (located at 4300 Green River Road). (Id.) Development project DPR07-0l0 may be located within a wildland fire interface area, as it is located near the Cleveland National Forest. However, future development would be required to undergo environmental analysis pursuant to CEQA. (Id.) Project specific mitigation measures would be required to minimize impacts of wildland fires on future urbanized areas. As concluded in the City's General Plan EIR, wildland fire impacts citywide would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of General Plan policies. (Id.) The proposed alignment would be landscaped with native drought­ tolerant species and ornamental landscaping, which would not have the potential to expose existing residents to fire hazards. (Id.) The proposed alignment traverses the boundary of the Cleveland National Forest and is within close proximity to an existing brush fire area. (Id.) The final design shall be reviewed by the City of Corona Fire Department to ensure that fire regulations are met. The new roadway would also serve as a bamer between the Cleveland National Forest and urban uses. Therefore, the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) D. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION As shown in Draft EIR Table 5.4-8, the study roadways for the Project are forecast to operate acceptably, according to City of Corona performance criteria, for forecast year 2025 with Project conditions, with the exception of Green River Road west of Palisades Drive. (Draft ErR, p. 5.4-35.) Due to the roadway geometry and close proximity of this segment to State Route 91, this arterial is considered a critical link of the interchange; therefore the City of Corona has identified LOS E as acceptable for this heavily traveled freeway interchange, consistent with the City of Corona General Plan Circulation Element Policy 6.1.6. (/d.) Therefore, all study roadways are forecast to operate acceptably according to City of Corona performance criteria for forecast year 2025 with Project conditions. As such, overall cumulative impacts would be less than significant in this regard. (Id.) The traffic analysis conducted for the proposed Project concluded that cut through traffic on Four Kings Road, Elysia Street, Mangular Avenue, and Border Avenue near Ontario Avenue would be reduced greatly with construction of the Foothill Parkway extension with connections at both Chase Drive and Border Avenue. (Id.) Near Foothill Parkway, the traffic volumes on Border Avenue and Mangular Avenue are expected to increase, however, the volume on these 64 streets is below the expected traffic volumes for collector roadways. (Id.) As the extension of Foothill Parkway will provide traffic congestion relief, the extension would also increase safety along the City streets by reducing the numbers of vehicles utilizing the same roadway. Therefore, the Project would improve traffic flow within the City and would not significantly contribute to a cumulative impact. (Id.) Site-specific designs of future developments are identified on a project-by-project basis. Therefore, the specific street layouts and driveway locations are unknown. (Draft EIR, p. 5.4­ 36.) Without this detail, it is not possible to determine ifhazards exist due to design. However, the City's General Plan includes goals and policies to ensure that roadways be designed for safe and efficient movement. Compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan ensures that overall cumulative impacts from roadway hazards and incompatible uses do not occur within the City. (Id.) Design standards set forth by the City of Corona, County of Riverside, Caltrans, and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, such as minimum roadway geometrics, stopping sight distances, and minimum clearances, have been used to develop the Project's proposed alignment. (Id.) Additionally, Mitigation Measure 5.4-4 would ensure a traffic warrant analysis is prepared if directed by the City of Corona Public Works Director. Hazards due to incompatible uses of the roadway, such as farm equipment, are not anticipated. (Id.) The proposed Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts. The City's General Plan policies require developments to provide adequate access for emergency vehicles, including adequate width and vertical clearance for new streets. Therefore, all developments would not result in an overall cumulative impact to emergency access. (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-36.) The nature of the proposed Project, a roadway extension, would provide increased emergency access through providing another alternative transportation route and by alleviating traffic congestion on other streets within the City. (Id.) Additionally, the proposed roadway design would include adequate width and vertical clearance to allow for emergency vehicles. Therefore, the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in this regard. (Id.) The City of Corona provides several transit routes for alternative transportation. The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides bus service, the City provides a dial-a-ride service, and Metrolink provide commuter rail. Sidewalks, 4 to 5 feet in width, are required along all roadways and bikeways are located throughout the city, as outlined in the Bicycle Master Plan. New development is required to undergo site-specific environmental review, which would address impacts to alternative transportation and provide mitigation for impacts to alternative transportation. With implementation of the City's policies and project-specific mitigation measures, development within the City is not anticipated to have an overall cumulative impact. (Draft EIR, p. 5.4-37.) The proposed Project includes a 7-to 8-foot wide Class II Bike Lane. Additionally, the design of the Project allows for continued access to trails within the Cleveland 65 National Forest. No transit lines are located or proposed within the Project site, however, the closest transit line is located within ~ mile of the Project site. (Id.) Project impacts to the City's bus routes would be minimized through coordination with the transit providers. The proposed Project provides an additional route for public transportation. This is viewed as a positive impact to the circulation needs of the City, therefore the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) E. AIR QUALITY The City of Corona is subject to the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Additionally, the City is located within the Riverside County subregion of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), which governs population growth. The General Plan is consistent with the RCPG, and since the RCPG is consistent with the AQMP, growth under the General Plan is consistent with the AQMP. Therefore, development in the City would not conflict or obstruct the AQMP and cumulative impacts would not result. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-30.) The proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway is identified within the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of the AQMP and would not contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) The SCAQMD recommends that a project's potential contribution to cumulative impacts should be assessed using the same significance criteria as those for project-specific impacts. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-31.) Therefore, individual development projects that generate construction­ related or operational emissions that exceed the SCAQMD recommended daily thresholds for project-specific impacts would also cause a cumulative considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the SCAB is nonattainment. Of the projects that have been identified within the Project study area, there are a number of related projects that have not been built or are currently under construction. (Id.) Since project applicants have no control over the timing or sequencing of the related projects, any quantitative analysis to ascertain the daily construction emissions that assumes multiple, concurrent construction would be speculative. (Id.) According to the City's General Plan, the City anticipates several construction projects each year. The total amount of construction and development within the City would exceed the SCAQMD's recommended thresholds of significance, resulting in a cumulative impact. (ld.) With respect to the proposed Project's construction-period air quality emissions and cumulative SCAB conditions, the SCAQMD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the 2007 AQMP pursuant to FCAA mandates. As such, the proposed alignment would comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements, and implement all feasible mitigation measures. (Id.) In addition, the proposed alignment would comply with adopted 2007 AQMP emissions control measures. Per SCAQMD rules and mandates, as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same requirements (Le., Rule 403 compliance, the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, and compliance with adopted 2007 Plan emissions control measures) would also be imposed on construction projects throughout the SCAB, which would include each of the related projects mentioned above. (Id.) 66 Although compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations would reduce construction­ related impacts, the project-related construction emissions have been concluded to be significant and unavoidable for NOX, PMlO, and PM2.5 emissions during the excavation, demolition, and grading phase. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-32.) Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the project-related construction activities, in combination with those from other projects in the area, would deteriorate the local air quality and lead to cumulative construction-related impacts. (Id.) Thus, the Project is determined to have a significant cumulative impact in this regard. Due to the SCAB's nonattainment status for 03 and PMlO for both Federal and State air quality standards, and PM2.5 for Federal standards, additional emissions in excess of SCAQMD thresholds under a long-term condition for VOC, NOx, CO, and PMlO would be considered significant and unavoidable for cumulative impacts. (Id.) However, the proposed alignment would not exceed the SCAQMD's operational emission thresholds. (Id.) Thus, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to this significant cumulative impact. Furthermore, the proposed alignment would be implemented in order to improve traffic circulation within the area, thereby improving air quality. The proposed alignment would not result in CO hotspots and would also be consistent with the SCAQMD AQMP, as discussed above in the Long-Term (Operational) Emissions and the Consistency with Regional Plans Impact sections. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-33.) Therefore, operational cumulative impacts would be less than significant. Global Climate Change Global Climate Change impacts are a result of cumulative emissions from anthropogenic activities in the region, the state, and the world. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-34.) This is considered overall to be a significant cumulative impact. As previously mentioned, the proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway has been master planned by both the City and the County (in the General Plans) since the 1980s, as both agencies recognized the desirability of developing a high-grade arterial which would facilitate continuous east/west travel across the City as well as provide much needed access to State Route 91. As indicated in Table 5.5-8, the proposed alignment is anticipated to alleviate traffic along surrounding roadways within the Project study area. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-34 to 5.5-35.) The purpose of the proposed alignment is to improve both existing and future mobility and reduce congestion. (Draft EIR, p. 5.5-35.) Both the County and the City have included the proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway within the Circulation Element of both General Plans, and it is also included in the South Corona Community Facilities Plan (CFP). Therefore, the proposed alignment would be consistent with the AQMP and would result in less than significant impacts. (ld.) In conclusion, the proposed alignment would improve the operational deficiencies that 67 would result from increased traffic demand and congestion from forecasted growth. Additionally, there is significant uncertainty involved in making predictions of the extent of which the Project operations would have on greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change. As the proposed alignment would not directly generate traffic (additional vehicle miles traveled), it would not result in a significant increase of greenhouse gases beyond "no project" conditions. (Id.) Thus, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the significant overall cumulative impact. Construction activities in accordance with the General Plan and the proposed Project have the potential to generate airborne odors due to the construction equipment. However, these emissions would occur during daytime hours and would be isolated to the vicinity of the construction site. (Id.) Therefore, a limited number of people would be impacted and cumulative impacts would not occur. (Id.) F. NOISE As indicated in Draft EIR Tables 5.6-13, none of the 1 50-receptor locations analyzed in the Noise Impact Analysis would result in a noise increase of 3 dBA or more and exceed the City's exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL. Therefore, no cumulative noise impacts would result from development of the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-53.) The proposed alignment does not include any stationary equipment. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6­ 60.) Therefore, the proposed alignment would not contribute to cumulative stationary noise impacts within the area. Future development proposals within the City of Corona would require separate discretionary approval and CEQA assessment, which would address potential noise impacts and identify necessary attenuation measures, where appropriate. Therefore, in conjunction with cumulative projects, the proposed alignment would not have the potential to result in significant cumulative stationary noise impacts. (Id.) Noise from construction of the cumulative projects could expose adjacent receptors to noise levels between 70 and 90 decibels at 50 feet from the noise source. (Draft EIR, p. 5.6-61.) The degree of impact would be site-specific and would be dependant upon the distance between the construction site and the nearest noise sensitive receptor. The City's exterior residential noise standard (65 dBA) could be exceeded during the construction phase of the cumulative projects. (Id.) Construction noise impacts would cease upon completion of grading/construction. Compliance with site-specific mitigation, as well as compliance with requirements of the City's Municipal Code (Section 17.84.040, Noise), would serve to minimize the length of time noise­ sensitive receptors are exposed to significant noise levels. (Id.) Additionally, because noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts from construction activities would be limited to each of the respective sites and their vicinities. According to the City's General Plan, overall cumulative noise impacts associated with construction activities would not be cumulatively considerable and a less than significant impact would occur in this regard. (Id.) Although Project-related short-tenn construction impacts would be significant and unavoidable, construction noise from cumulative projects would not interact with noise from the proposed 68 Project due to distances between the specific sites. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard. (Id.) G. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Development in the City would result in the cumulative loss of natural vegetation. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-57.) However, each project is required to comply with the FESA and CESA, which protect Threatened and Endangered species. (Id.) Additionally, projects would be required to comply with the goals and policies in the City's General Plan, which protect plant and wildlife species and their habitats, ensure that impacts on biological resources are avoided or minimized during construction and development, and require adherence to policies within the Western Riverside MSHCP, which conserves habitat for 146 covered species. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.7-57 to 5.7-58.) With compliance to Federal, State, and local regulations, and compliance with measures . of the Western Riverside MSHCP, cumulative impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be reduced to less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-58.) Riparian habitat and other sensitive natural communities occur within the City. Development in the City would result in the cumulative loss of riparian habitat. (Id.l Riparian habitat is protected by Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code and Section 404 of the CW A. Additionally, the City's General Plan includes goals and policies that would avoid or minimize impacts to riparian areas. (Id.) Each project is required to comply with Federal, State, and local regulations (FE SA, CESA, CWA, and the City's General Plan goals and policies). (Id.) In addition, the MSHCP has and will require mitigation to compensate for the loss habitat on projects previously processed through the MSHCP and for future projects in the area. With compliance to Federal, State, and local regulations, and compliance with measures of the Western Riverside MSHCP, cumulative impacts to riparian habitat would be reduced to less than significant. (Id.) Streams under the jurisdiction of the US ACE, RWQCB, and CDFG are located within the City. The Federal and State laws and regulations (Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code) would require a permit/agreement prior to alteration of these jurisdictional areas. (Id.) Federal and State regulations would be required to be implemented prior to development activities. Each project is required to obtain all appropriate permits for impacts on USACE and CDFG jurisdictional areas. Additionally, mitigation for the loss ofjurisdictional areas is required to be no less than a 1:1 ratio. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-59.) Each project shall also consult with the resource agencies (i.e., USFWS and CDFG) to ensure that permitting is adequate to satisfy requirements of Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. (Id.) Additionally, the City's General Plan includes policies that would protect natural and biological resources within wetlands. With compliance to Federal, State, and local regulations, and compliance with measures of the Western Riverside MSHCP, cumulative impacts to wetlands would be less than significant. (Id.) As indicated in the Delineation Report prepared for the Project site, there are no wetlands on the Project site. (Id.) Therefore, the proposed Project would not contribute to cumulative impacts on federally protected wetlands. (/d.) 69 According to the City's General Plan, lands within the City boundaries are largely urbanized and contain limited biological resources. (Id.) As such, existing biological resources within the City boundaries are fragmented. However, the City's SOl includes large tracts of undeveloped habitat that may be subject to development. Development of these areas would lead to habitat fragmentation, which occurs when new development fragments undisturbed habitats. (Id.) The City's General Plan includes policies that reduce further impacts to native, resident, or migratory wildlife corridors are avoided or minimized. Although implementation of the City's General Plan policies would reduce impacts, there would still be residual significant impacts on wildlife movement due to habitat fragmentation from development of vacant lands. (Id.) Therefore, overall cumulative impacts to wildlife movement would be significant and unavoidable. (Id.) The proposed Project would remove local travel routes within the direct impact area; however, few native habitat areas would be located northeast of the proposed alignment. Therefore, the proposed Project would not be expected to substantially impact wildlife movement along local travel routes. (Id.) The proposed Project would adversely affect regional wildlife movement along a segment of Wardlow Wash within the Project impact area This impact would be considered significant on a Project level. The City of Corona is a participant in the Western Riverside MSHCP, which was prepared to balance the goals of wildlife conservation and economic development. Thus, although Wardlow Wash functions as a regional wildlife corridor between the Cleveland National Forest and the Santa Ana RiverlPrado Basin and impacts on wildlife movement along Wardlow Wash are considered significant, the impact is considered mitigated by the City of Corona's participation in the MSHCP. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7­ 60.) Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in cumulative considerable impacts to wildlife movement. Mitigation Measure 5.7-4 includes recommendations to encourage continued wildlife movement along this segment of Wardlow Wash. (Id.) The City's compliance with measures of the Western Riverside MSHCP provides mitigation for impacts to biological resources resulting from development within Western Riverside County. (Id.) Present and reasonably foreseeable future projects within the vicinity of the Project site are also subject to compliance with the requirements of the MSHCP, which would reduce the cumulative impact to biological resources to a less than significant level. Thus, cumulative impacts on biological resources within the City have been addressed and have been reduced to less than significant levels by the City of Corona's participation in the MSHCP. (Id.) The City of Corona does not have an oak tree preservation ordinance. However, as a guideline, the City referred to the County's oak tree ordinance for appropriate mitigation for oak trees impacted by the proposed Project. (Id.) Mitigation Measure 5.7-2b requires Project impacts on oak trees to be replaced at a ratio of no less than 2: 1. (Id.) Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7-2b would reduce the impact on oak trees to less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5.7-61.) Thus, cumulative impacts on oak trees within the Project area would be reduced to less than significant levels by the replacement of oak trees within jurisdictional areas. As such, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulative considerable impact in this regard. (Id.) 70 H. CULTURAL RESOURCES The General Plan includes policies that would maintain and strengthen the existing preservation program. However, these policies do not prevent the demolition of historic structures. Therefore, Citywide cumulative impacts to historic structures are considered significant and unavoidable. (Draft EIR, p. 5.8-23.) The proposed alignment would result in the demolition or removal of the historic arroyo stone footbridge presently located on the Project site. (ld.) Although Mitigation Measures 5.8­ la through 5.8-lc would lessen impacts to this historic resource, none of the Measures would prevent the physical loss of historically significant resources. .(ld.) As such, these Mitigation Measures would not fully mitigate the loss of the historical arroyo stone footbridge to a less than significant level. Therefore, loss of the historic arroyo footbridge on-site would be a significant and unavoidable impact. As such, the proposed Project would result in a cumulative considerable impact in this regard. (ld.) According to the General Plan, two structures in the City are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and a third is eligible for listing, and over 600 structures have been or are under consideration for the City's Register of Historic Resources. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.8-23 to 5.8-24.) Redevelopment activities have the potential to impact historic resources within the City. However, the City has adopted a Historic Preservation Element that provides of the identification, preservation, and maintenance of historic structures. The General Plan identifies that the potential exists for archaeological resources to occur in areas that have not been subject to development. The General Plan also indicates that human burials often occur in prehistoric archaeological contexts. The General Plan includes policies that would maintain and strengthen the existing preservation program. The General Plan also identifies specific measures to identify, protect, and preserve archaeological resources and human burial grounds. With implementation of these policies during construction activities, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, p. 5.8-24.) No archaeological resources were identified within or immediately adjacent to the Project area. However, the potential exists for archaeological resources to occur subsurface. With implementation of mitigation measures, potential impacts would be mitigated. (ld.) Therefore, the project does not have the capacity to contribute to cumulative impacts. Mitigation Measures 5.8-2a and 5.8-2b would reduce potential impacts to undocumented archaeological resources to less than significant levels. (ld.) Implementation of development under the General Plan has the potential to damage or destroy paleontological resources. However, the General Plan includes policies that identify, protect, and preserve paleontological resources. (ld.) Implementation of these policies would reduce cumulative impacts to less than significant levels. The Project is located in an area of high paleontological sensitivity due to the presence of the Williams and Ladd Formations and Silverado Formation. Therefore, ground-disturbing activities could significantly impact paleontological resources. (ld.) With implementation of the mitigation measures the project 71 would not contribute to cumulative impacts. (Id.) I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY During construction and operation of future development projects, storm water runoff could result in the transport of sediments and pollutants to waterways and the groundwater aquifer; thereby resulting in potential water quality, erosion, and/or siltation impacts. Additionally, new development within the City would involve an increase in impervious surfaces, which could in turn increase storm water runoff in the City. This increased runoff could exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-28.) Future development projects would be required to comply with State regulations consisting of preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs), and requirements of the NPDES Phase II. (Id.) Additionally, the City's Municipal Code includes grading requirements. New development projects would also be required to implement improvements identified in the City's Drainage Master Plan in order to ensure adequate storm drain capacity. Implementation of these regulations and requirements would reduce potential impacts on water quality, waste discharge, runoff, erosion, and siltation to less than significant for overall cumulative impacts. (Id.) Construction and operation of the proposed Project could result in impacts to water quality, waste discharge, runoff, erosion, and/or siltation. Pursuant to the CWA, the proposed alignment would be required to obtain a Section 401 and Section 404 Permit. (Id.) Additionally, the proposed alignment would be required to prepare a SWPPP prior to construction activities. During construction, BMPs would be employed to control the discharge of sediment in storm water runoff. In addition, a Notice of Intent (NOI) would be prepared and submitted to the SWRCB providing notification and intent to comply with the General NPDES Permit and the project would be expected to follow the guidelines and procedures outlined in the DAMP. (Id.) Also during construction, the Project Contractor is required to adhere to the South Coast AQMD Regulation VIII Control Measures. (Id.) Detention basins, culverts, channels, main line storm drains, and other runoff conveyance facilities associated with the proposed alignment would have a design capacity adequate to operate under projected runoff and debris loads. Compliance with the permit requirements and implementation of the Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a through 5.9­ 1 d would reduce short-term impacts on water quality, waste discharge, runoff, erosion, and/or siltation. (Draft EIR, pp. 5.9-28 to 5.9-29.) Incorporation of Mitigation Measure 5.9-2 for post construction BMPs would serve to reduce long-term water quality impacts to less than significant levels. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-29.) With implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9-6, the proposed alignment would be designed to result in less than significant impacts related to the drainage system capacity. Compliance with the permit requirements and implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts on water quality, waste discharge, runoff, erosion, and siltation to less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in this regard. (Id.) According to the General Plan, development in the City would increase the amount of impervious surfaces in the City, which would reduce the amount of groundwater recharge 72 resulting from percolation of water into the City's aquifers. However, the City's General Plan identifies goals and policies for replacing groundwater recharge capacity. (fd.) With implementation of these policies, overall cumulative impacts in the City would be less than significant. (fd.) Final design of Foothill Parkway would include modifications to existing culverts and control structures, and new catch basin that would tie into the existing storm drain lines. These design measures ensure that the proposed alignment will not contaminate a public water supply, substantially degrade water quality, or interfere with groundwater recharge. (fd.) The proposed alignment would not require additional entitlements or resources regarding groundwater supplies. (fd.) Any water for irrigation purposes would be negligible since the Project proposes the use of native drought tolerant species, consistent with City-approved landscaping themes, and the City would require the Project to use reclaimed water for irrigation. Therefore, the proposed alignment would not deplete groundwater supplies. Although the Project would create new impervious area, the impact it generates would be inconsequential when compared to the total watershed area. Therefore, the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in this regard. (fd.) Future development within the City would primarily involve infill and urban expansion of vacant lands in developed areas within the City. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-30.) New development projects would be required to implement improvements identified in the City's Drainage Master Plan in order to ensure adequate storm drain capacity to control flooding. In addition, compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan would also reduce potential flooding impacts. Therefore, flooding impacts related to the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff would be less than significant for overall cumulative impacts. (fd.) The proposed roadway alignment would not result in the redirection of flood flows in a manner that would subsequently lead to the loss of adequate flood conveyance in the City. The policies identified in the General Plan would minimize the effects of flooding hazards. (fd.) Therefore, the Project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts in this regard. (fd.) The two dams containing Lake Matthews are the primary inundation threat to the City. Posing a relatively less significant inundation threat to the City are the Prado Dam and the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin. Should either of the two Lake Matthews dams fail, water would reach the City of Corona city limits in 40 minutes and Prado Basin in 65 minutes. The water flow from Lake Matthews would generally follow the Temescal Channel from southeast to northwest of the 1-15 and SR-91 intersection. Flows from the Prado Dam would be westward and away from the City, while the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin would pose a threat of inundation for only a short duration in the western portion of the City before flows would empty into the Oak Avenue and Mangular Avenue Channels. Therefore, Prado Basin and Dam do not pose a significant flood risk to the City. (Draft EIR, p. 5.9-31.) The Mabey Canyon Debris Basin was built to provide flood protection for the developed areas downstream, and is completely dry 73 during most of the year. This, along with its limited capacity, helps minimize the likelihood of a damaging inundation. According to the City's General Plan, the Santa Ana River does not pose a major flooding hazard to the City of Corona due to several upstream flood control projects, including the Seven Oaks Dam. In addition to the potential for dam failure, Lake Matthews is at risk for inundation by a seiche as a result of seismic hazards. (Id.) Development in accordance with the City's General Plan would result in the construction in 100-year flood hazard zones associated with the Temescal Creek and Mabey Canyon Wash. All new development in the City is subject to the provisions of Title 18 (Flood Plain Management) of the City's Municipal Code. (Id.) Additionally, the General Plan includes policies that would minimize the potential for flooding to impact property and human life. (Id.) Compliance with the City's Master Drainage Plan would also reduce the dangers associated with flooding during storm events. (Id.) Development would also be required to obtain an encroachment permit from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District if development is to occur in their right­ of-way. With compliance with the City's Master Drainage Plan, General Plan policies, Title 18 of the Municipal Code, and the Riverside County Flood Control, and Water Conservation District requirements overall cumulative impacts related to inundation by dam failure or seiche would be less than significant. (Id.) The proposed alignment would also be subject to the provisions of Title 18 of the City's Municipal Code and the City's General Plan policies that minimize the potential for flooding to impact property and human life. (Id.) Additionally, compliance with the City's Master Drainage Plan would also reduce the dangers associated with flooding during storm events. The proposed Project would also be required to obtain approval of Mabey Canyon Debris Basin modifications, Kroonen Canyon Channel modifications, and regional storm drain facilities from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. (Id.) Therefore, flooding impacts related to inundation by dam failure or seiche would be less than significant. (Id.) As indicated in the City's General Plan EIR, the City of Corona is not located within the immediate area of the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, there would be no impacts associated with inundation by tsunamis. (Id.) Mudflows result from the downslope movement of soil and/or rock under the influence of gravity. Prior to development, projects would be required to conduct a site-specific geotechnical study to determine the potential for unstable geologic units and soils. (Id.) Additionally, development would be required to comply with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations. Upon compliance with these regulations, and any site-specific mitigation measures, overall cumulative and Project impacts would be less than significant in this regard. (Id.) J. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS The Glen Ivy Fault, part of the Elsinore Fault, is located in the southwestern portion of the City and is designated as an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-25.) The Whittier Fault and the Chino-Central Avenue Fault are located within five miles of the City. The City'S General Plan includes policies to minimize the risk of injury, loss of life, and property 74 damage from an earthquake. Any development within 1/8 mile of an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone is required to conduct a site-specific geotechnical report. Compliance with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations related to seismic hazards would reduce overall cumulative impacts of earthquakes to less than significant. (ld.) Two active faults traverse the Project site. Therefore, local commuters may be exposed to seismic ground shaking if it occurs during the short period of time that they drive on the proposed roadway alignment. (ld.) The proposed alignment would be designed and constructed to withstand seismic ground shaking. The proposed alignment will be designed to minimize seismic impacts. Compliance with the UBC, State, County, and City regulations related to seismic hazards would reduce impacts to less than significant in this regard. (ld.) However, development of the proposed alignment would result in significant unavoidable impacts related to fault rupture. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in an incremental increase to cumulative impacts with regards to fault rupture. (ld.) Areas of the City are subject to subsidence, landslides, and liquefaction. (Draft EIR, p. 5.10-26.) Prior to development, projects would be required to conduct a site-specific geotechnical study to determine the potential for unstable geologic units and soils. (ld.) Additionally, development projects would be required to comply with the UBC, State, County and City regulations. (ld.) Upon compliance with these regulations, and any site-specific mitigation measures, overall cumulative impacts would be less than significant. (ld.) The Geotechnical Study for the proposed Project concluded that the liquefaction potential of unconsolidated alluvial deposits shall be defined during final design, no existing landslides have been mapped along the alignment of the Project site, and there are no known ongoing or planned large-scale extractions that would cause subsidence in the Project area (ld.) However, the Project shall conform with applicable City criteria, adhere to standard engineering practices, and incorporate standard practices of the UBC during the design phase and construction. (ld.) Additionally, the Geotechnical Study recommended mitigation measures to minimize impacts. Therefore, the project would not contribute to cumulative impacts. (ld.) SECTION 6: RESOLUTION REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES. If the proposed Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension is approved and constructed, a variety of short term and long term impacts would occur on a local level. During the duration of construction, a portion of the land uses surrounding the Project site would experience short-tenn impacts related to aesthetic, fugitive dust, and construction noise. Short term erosion may also occur during grading. There may also be an increase in vehicle emissions caused by grading, construction activities, and worker vehicles. However, these disruptions would be temporary in nature, and may be mitigated to a large degree through mitigation cited in Section 5.1 through 5.10 of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and all applicable standards for construction activities as cited in the City of Corona Municipal Code (refer to Section 5.0, DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES). Short­ 75 term construction emissions, short-term construction aesthetic, and long-term aesthetic impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Construction of the proposed alignment would create long term environmental consequences such as altering natural landscape with construction materials such as concrete and asphalt associated with roadway construction. The long term effects of the proposed alignment and subsequent development may impact the physical, aesthetic, and human environments. Long-term physical consequences associated with the development of the proposed Project include: • Introduction of traffic into the Project area; • Additional noise created by traffic traveling on the Project; • Increased energy and natural resource consumption; • Alterations of views from existing conditions; and • Addition of light and glare impacts to surrounding land uses. Furthermore, approval of the proposed Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension would cause irreversible environmental changes. Implementation of the proposed alignment would result in the following changes: • Permanent commitment of vacant land, which would be physically altered to construct a four-lane roadway extension of Foothill Parkway. • Soil erosion associated with grading and construction activities. • Increased use for public services and utilities during and after construction including lighting and periodic maintenance. This would result in temporary and permanent use of these resources. • Utilization of various new raw materials, such as lumber, sand, and gravel for construction. The energy consumed in construction and maintenance of the roadway may be considered a permanent investment • Vehicular activity along the roadway extension, resulting in associated increases in noise levels. SECTION 7: RESOLUTION REGARDING GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS. Pursuant to CEQA, Section 15126(g), the following discussion identifies ways in which the proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. According to CEQA, growth-inducing impacts should be assessed in terms of whether a project influences the rate, location, and the amount of growth. Projects which remove obstacles to population growth, or allow or encourage growth that would not otherwise have occurred if the project were not built, would be growth inducing. Potential growth-inducing impacts are also assessed based on a project's consistency with adopted plans that have addressed growth management from a local and regional standpoint When considering growth-inducing impacts, it is also important to consider the context 76 and historical trends of the area. There are many factors that can affect the amount, location, and rate of growth in the City of Corona and the region in general. These include market demand for housing, employment, and commercial services; the acknowledged desirability of climate and living/working environment and commercial economy; availability of other services/infrastructure; and land use and growth management policies of the local jurisdictions. Growth inducement can take several forms. A project can remove barriers and constraints or provide new or improved access, thus encouraging growth in the area that has been already planned or approved through the general planning process. This plarmed growth is reflected in land use plans, approved with the underlying assumption that adequate transportation facilities would be constructed. This type of growth inducement is referred to as accommodating or facilitating growth. In addition, a project can remove barriers, provide new access or otherwise encourage growth that is not assumed as planned growth in the general plans or growth projections. This could include areas that are currently designated for open space, agricultural uses or other similar non-urban land uses, which, because of the improved access provided by the project, would experience pressure to develop into urban uses or to develop at a higher level ofintensity that originally anticipated. Traditionally, significant growth is induced in one of three ways. In the first instance, a new project is located in an isolated area and, when developed, it brings sufficient urban infrastructure to cause new or additional development pressure on the intervening and surrounding land. This type of induced growth leads to conversion of adjacent acreage to higher intensity uses, either unexpectedly or through accelerated development. This conversion occurs because the adjacent land becomes more suitable for development and, hence, more valuable because of the availability of the new infrastructure. This type of growth inducement is typically termed "leap frog" or "premature" development because it creates an island of higher intensity developed land within a larger area oflower intensity land use. The proposed alignment will not cause or contribute to "leap frog" or "premature" development because existing and entitled future land uses adjacent to the Project site are presently served by the existing circulation network and the existing easterly extension of Foothill Parkway without the introduction of the proposed westerly extension. The purpose of the proposed alignment is to enhance the efficiency of the local circulation network. Because the proposed alignment does not extend service to new uses or areas that cannot be served by the existing transportation system, the Project itself does not have the potential to cause or contribute to the accelerated development within the Project area. Thus, implementation of the proposed alignment cannot cause or contribute to leap frog or premature growth. A second type of growth inducement is caused when a project of large size, relative to the surrounding community or area, is developed within a community and impacts the surrounding community by producing a "multiplier effect," which results in substantial indirect community growth, not necessarily adjacent to the project site or of the same type of use as the project itself. This type of stimulus to community growth is typified by the development of major destination recreation facilities, such as Disney World near Orlando, Florida, or around a military base, such 77 as the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center near Twentynine Palms. The proposed alignment is not a new development that has a potential to cause growth through a "multiplier effect." The proposed roadway does not have the potential to induce population growth or growth in the economy itself. Development within the Project area will be consistent with growth decisions already made by the City and County which govern land use decisions. No new "large" projects are known to be proposed or contingent on the implementation of the proposed alignment, and potential for this type of multiplier growth inducement cannot be caused by implementing the proposed alignment. \ A third and more subtle type of growth inducement occurs when land use plans are established that create a potential for growth because the available land and pennitted land uses may result in the attraction of new development. This type of growth inducement is often attributed to projects designed to provide new infrastructure necessary to meet the land use objectives, or community vision, contained in the governing land use agencies' general plans. In this case, the proposed alignment will install new transportation infrastructure, but it will be an enhancement of existing transportation systems that is not forecast to attract new development. The question still remains as to whether the proposed alignment accommodates existing residential and commercial demand and the related environmental impacts caused by the increased population that can utilize the Project's new capacity in the future. The answer to this question can be found in the land use planning process which now detennines the future vision of the City of Corona to which the proposed alignment is a key transportation component. The ultimate vision of the area is established by the plans of the regional planning agencies, which include the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan (RCCGP) and Southern California Association of Governments, in conjunction with the City of Corona General Plan. These plans assume that the transportation infrastructure required to support the region's population will be in place as growth occurs in the future. The net effect of the City's General Plan combined with other regional plans is to create a set of expectations regarding future land use, commercial demand, and growth that mayor may not occur depending upon the actual carrying capacity of the various utility system resources required to meet future growth. Recent growth in population and intensified land uses both within the City and County has put increasing pressures on the City's arterial street system. Development demands in Corona will continue to put pressure on the existing transportation network, resulting in deterioration of the local circulation system, decreased public safety, and further exacerbation of vehicular generated emissions. The purpose of the proposed alignment is to implement a critical component of the Circulation Element of the City'S General Plan. This component of the City's General Plan has been developed to provide for the existing and future travel needs for the residents of the City of Corona and ensure that there is a balance between land use and circulation. The proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway is consistent with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan, as well as the RCCGP. Development of the proposed Foothill Parkway Extension is an important component of this planned circulation network and would serve to complete a critical transportation link in south Corona envisioned in the City'S General Plan Circulation Element. The roadway extension would alleviate existing 78 traffic congestion on the local circulation network and accommodate traffic generated by approved and planned development in south Corona. The proposed alignment is deemed to accommodate a level of future growth that is consistent with adopted City of Corona General Plan land use designations; therefore, the proposed alignment will not modify this level of future growth. Under this circumstance, the evaluation (above) of the third type of growth inducement concluded that the proposed alignment would not significantly or adversely induce growth; rather, the proposed alignment is growth accommodating. The proposed alignment would not provide improvements greater than contained in both regional planning documents and local growth forecasts. Additionally, the proposed alignment does not include infrastructure designed to support more intensive uses of land than is provided for within the City of Corona General Plan. Therefore, the proposed alignment is not anticipated to cause significant or adverse growth inducing impacts. SECTION 8: RESOLUTION REGARDING ALTERNATIVES. The Stone Bridge Avoidance Alternative is considered to be the "environmentally superior alternative" because it reduces one of the significant impacts of the Project (the removal of a historical resource) to less than significant levels. This alternative, however, does not achieve Objective 3 of the Project to the same extent as the Project, and is also considered to be infeasible due to the refusal of the County Flood Control District to allow such a reconfiguration of the flood control basin that would avoid the identified arroyo stone foot bridge. The City's objectives for the Project are to: (1) Minimize congestion on the local circulation network and provide a continuous connection from Lincoln A venue to Green River Road; (2) Accommodate planned circulation needs by providing the extension of Foothill Parkway consistent with the City of Corona Circulation Element; (3) Provide a roadway design that is sensitive to the environmental resources in the study area and minimizes, to the extent feasible, impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species, while providing adequate geometric design to minimize safety hazards and maximize operational efficiency; (4) Develop a roadway design that is compatible with the provisions of the Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP); (5) Improve air quality in the South Coast Air Basin by providing system improvements that would reduce traffic congestion, and thereby the amount of pollutants generated; (6) Avoid impacts to the Cleveland National Forest; and (7) Implement circulation improvements in south Corona that will provide enhanced public services access (i.e., emergency response) to existing and planned uses in the area. 79 A. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE Description: The No Project Alternative would not result in the construction of the proposed westerly extension of Foothill Parkway. Future traffic volumes would be accommodated by existing or other planned roadways in the City. The No Project Alternative would produce no direct environmental impacts within the Project area or surrounding areas. However, the No Project Alternative may exacerbate existing deficiencies experienced along Ontario Avenue. (Draft EIR, p. 7-11.) Impacts: Relative to the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative results in reduced impacts to land use compatibility and access; aesthetics, light, and glare; public health and safety; air quality; noise; biological resources; cultural resources; hydrology and water quality; and geologic and seismic hazards. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant for the proposed alignment, with the exception of aesthetic, light, and glare; short-term air quality impacts; short-term noise; cultural resources; and geologic and seismic hazards. The No Project Alternative would result in greater impacts to consistency with relevant planning and traffic and circulation. (Draft EIR, p. 7-18.) Objectives: The No Project Alternative does not meet most of the Project objectives. The No Project Alternative does attain Objective 6 at the same level as the proposed Project, because there will be no impact to the Cleveland National Forest. The No Project Alternative would not attain Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7, which would minimize congestion on local circulation networks, accommodate planned circulation, provide a roadway design, and provide enhanced public services access. (Draft EIR, p. 7-19.) Finding: The City Council finds that although the No Project Alternative is environmentally superior to the Project, it is infeasible because it fails to meet almost all of the Project objectives. On this basis, the City Council rejects the No Project Alternative. B. NO BORDER AVENUE OR CHASE DRIVEIMANGULAR AVENUE CONNECTION ALTERNATIVE Description. The "No Border Avenue or Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection" Alternative would construct the westerly extension of Foothill Parkway; however, the proposed roadway would not connect to Border Avenue or Chase DrivelMangular A venue. (Draft EIR, p. 7-19.) Impacts. The No Border Avenue or Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative would result in lesser impacts related to aesthetics, light, and glare; short-term air quality; and biological resources than the proposed Project. The No Border Avenue or Chase Drive/Mangular Avenue Connection Alternative would result in relatively the same impacts related to land use compatibility and access; consistency with relevant planning; public health and safety; traffic and circulation; noise; cultural resources; hydrology and water quality; and geologic and seismic hazards as the proposed Project. The No Border Avenue or Chase 80 DrivelMangular A venue Connection Alternative results in greater impacts related to long-term air quality than the proposed Project. However, as with the proposed Project, impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant under the No Border A venue or Chase DrivelMangular A venue Connection Alternative, with the exception of aesthetic; short-term air quality; short-term noise; cultural resource; and geologic and seismic hazards impacts. (Draft EIR, p. 7-50.) Objectives. The No Border A venue or Chase Drive/Mangular A venue Connection Alternative would attain Objectives 1,3, 5, and 7 at a lesser level than the proposed Project. The No Border A venue or Chase DrivelMangular A venue Connection Alternative would attain Objectives 2, 4, and 6 at the same level as the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 7-50.) Finding. The City Council finds that the No Border A venue or Chase DriveiMangular Avenue Connection Alternative would fail to meet the Project objectives to the same degree as the Project and would fail to avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. (Draft EIR, p. 7-50.) The City Council therefore rejects the No Border Avenue or Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative on these bases, each of which is sufficient on its own to substantiate the action of the City Council.. C. WITH CHASE DRIVEIMANGULAR AVENUE CONNECTION ALTERNATIVE Description. The "With Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection" Alternative would result in the construction of the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension along the same alignment as described for the proposed Project and only the proposed roadway connection to Chase DrivelMangular A venue would be constructed. The proposed connection to Border A venue would not be constructed. (Draft EIR, p. 7-50.) The existing Chase Drive would be extended westerly approximately 650 feet from Mangular Avenue as a two lane undivided collector and form a "T" intersection with Foothill Parkway. The proposed typical section includes a l2-foot traffic lane and 6-foot wide Class III Bike Lane in each direction, with 7-foot parkways and 5-foot sidewalks, for a total RIW width of 60 feet. A 100-foot inscribed diameter roundabout would be provided at the intersection of Mangular A venue and Chase Drive as a means to reduce speeds at the intersection. The roundabout would be designed to accommodate existing access to adjacent properties. A traffic signal would be placed at the intersection of Chase Drive and Foothill Parkway. (Draft EIR, pp. 7-50 to 7-51.) As part of the Chase Drive connection to Foothill Parkway, a portion of Mangular A venue would be widened and improved to match existing Mangular Avenue to the north. The roadway section would be widened from approximately 31 feet to 44 feet, with one lO-foot traffic lane, a 5-foot Class II Bike Lane, and a 7-foot parking lane in each direction. A curb­ adjacent 5-foot sidewalk and 3-foot parkway would be added on the east side of the street. These improvements would not require additional RIW, however they may require a construction 81 easement. Overhead power lines located behind the existing easterly asphalt dike would be relocated behind the new easterly curb. Other utility relocations may also be required. (Draft EIR, p. 7-50.) Impacts. The With Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative would result in lesser impacts related to aesthetics, light, and glare; short-tenn air quality; and biological resources than the proposed Project. The With Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative would result in relatively the same impact related to land use compatibility and access; consistency with relevant planning; public health and safety; traffic and circulation; noise; cultural resources; hydrology and water quality; and geologic and seismic hazards as the proposed Project. The With Chase DrivelMangular A venue Connection Alternative would result in greater impacts related to long-tenn air quality than the proposed Project. However, as with the proposed Project, impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant under the With Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative, with the exception of aesthetics; short­ term air quality; short-term noise; cultural resource impacts; and geologic and seismic impacts. (Draft EIR, p. 7-80.) Objectives. The With Chase DrivelMangular A venue Connection Alternative would attain Objectives 1, 3, 5, and 7 at a lesser level than the proposed Project. The With Chase DrivelMangular A venue Connection Alternative would attain Objectives 2, 4, and 6 at the same level as the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 7-80.) Finding. The City Council finds that the With Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative would fail to meet the Project objectives to the same degree as the Project and would fail to avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. (Draft EIR, pp. 7-80 to 7-81.) The City Council therefore rejects the With Chase DrivelMangular Avenue Connection Alternative on these bases, each of which is sufficient on its own to substantiate the action of the City Council. D. WITH BORDER A VENUE CONNECTION ALTERNATIVE Description. The "With Border A venue Connection" Alternative would result in the construction of the Foothill Parkway westerly extension along the same alignment as described for the proposed Project and only the proposed roadway connection to Border A venue would be constructed; however, the proposed connection to Chase Drive/Mangular Avenue would not be constructed. (Draft EIR, p. 7-81.) The Project proposes to extend Border A venue approximately 200 feet south from its existing tenninus and connect to Foothill Parkway, approximately 400 feet east of the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin. The proposed Foothill Parkway profile at that location is higher than the existing Border terminus. Therefore, approximately 200 feet of the existing south end of Border Avenue woUld be reconstructed to accommodate the elevated profile. The proposed typical section includes a 12-foot wide traffic lane and lO-foot wide Class III Bike Lane in each direction, a 7-foot parkway and 5-foot sidewalk on the west side of the street, and an 8-foot 82 parkway on the east side, for a total right of way width of 64 feet. A traffic signal would be placed at the intersection of Border Avenue and Foothill Parkway as part of the connection. (Draft EIR, p. 7-81.) Impacts. The With Border A venue Connection Alternative would result in lesser impacts related to aesthetics, light, and glare; short-term air quality; and biological resources than the proposed Project The With Border A venue Connection Alternative would result in relatively the same impacts related to land use compatibility and access; consistency with relevant planning; public health and safety; traffic and circulation; noise; cultural resources; hydrology and water quality; and geologic and seismic hazards as the proposed Project. The With Border Avenue Connection Alternative results in greater impacts related to long-term air quality than the proposed Project. However, as with the proposed Project, impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant under the With Border Avenue Connection Alternative, with the exception of aesthetic; short-term air quality; noise; cultural resource; and geologic and seismic hazards impacts. (Draft EIR, p. 7-110.) Objectives. The With Border Avenue Connection Alternative would attain Objectives 1, 3, 5, and 7 at a lesser level than the proposed Project. The With Border Avenue Connection Alternative would attain Objectives 2, 4, and 6 at the same level as the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 110.) Finding. The City Council finds that the With Border A venue Connection Alternative would fail to meet the Project objectives to the same degree as the Project and would fail to avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. (Draft EIR, p. 110.) The City Council therefore rejects the With Border A venue Connection Alternative on these bases, each of which is sufficient on its own to substantiate the action of the City Council. E. REDUCED WIDTH ALTERNATIVE Description. The "Reduced Width" Alternative would result in the construction of the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension as a two-lane roadway along the same alignment as described for the proposed Project. With one lane of travel in each direction, rather than two, this would allow for a reduced roadway width relative to the proposed Project. The proposed roadway connections at Border Avenue and Chase Drive would be constructed, as with the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 7-110.) The horizontal and vertical alignments for the Reduced Width Alternative would be the same as for the proposed Project; therefore, the roadway grades for the Reduced Width Alternative would vary from 1.8 percent to 9 percent. Roadway width from hinge to hinge would vary in width from 83 feet to 94 feet in width, with an actual roadway width ranging from 50 to 54 feet. Similar to the proposed Project, the reduced width is through Wardlow Wash. This would be accomplished by the use of a lO-foot wide median. A 14-ft wide median is proposed for the remainder of the extension, from Border A venue to the existing Foothill Parkway. For the Reduced Width Alternative, two travel lanes with one in each direction, would be provided, with 83 7-foot wide parkways, a 5-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of the roadway, and a 10-to 14­ foot wide multipurpose trail on the south side. Travel lane widths would be 12 feet, with an 8­ foot wide Class II Bike Lane. Striping would be modified through the superelevated 700-foot­ radius curve to accommodate street runoff that will drain toward the median. In this specific location, the travel lane would be 13 feet wide, and the Class II Bike Lane would be 7 feet wide. The overall roadway width would not change. As Foothill Parkway passes over the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin dam, the sidewalk and roadside multi-purpose trail would be located behind the curb, eliminating the 7-foot wide parkway. The trail width would be reduced to 5 feet, and a maintenance access road would be placed adjacent to the south for access to the Mabey Canyon Debris Basin. (Draft EIR, p. 7-111.) Impacts. The Reduced Width Alternative results in reduced impacts related to aesthetics, light, and glare; short-term air quality; and biological resources. The Reduced Width Alternative would result in relatively the same impact related to land use compatibility and access; public health and safety; noise; cultural resources; hydrology and water quality; and geologic and seismic hazards as the proposed Project. The Reduced Width Alternative would result in a greater impact related to consistency with relevant planning; traffic and circulation; and long­ term air quality than the proposed Project. However, as with the proposed Project, impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant under the Reduced Width Alternative, with the exception of aesthetic; traffic and circulation; short-term air quality; noise; cultural resource; and geologic and seismic hazards impacts. (Draft EIR, p. 7-131.) Objectives. The Reduced Width Alternative would attain Objectives 1, 3, 5, and 7 at a lesser level than the proposed Project. The Reduced Width Alternative would attain Objectives 4 and 6 at the same level as the proposed Project. The Reduced Width Alternative would not attain Objective 2. (Draft EIR, p. 7-131.) The Reduced Width Alternative was rejected because it failed to meet the Project objectives to the same degree as the proposed Project. Additionally, this Alternative was rejected because it failed to avoid significant and unavoidable impacts. The Reduced Width Alternative would result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts as the proposed Project. Finding. The City Council finds that the Reduced Width Connection Alternative would fail to meet the Project objectives to the same degree as the Project and would fail to avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project. (Draft EIR, p. 131.) The City Council therefore rejects the Reduced Width Alternative on these bases, each of which is sufficient on its own to substantiate the action of the City Council. F. STONE BRIDGE AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVE Description. The "Stone Bridge Avoidance" Alternative would result in the construction of the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension along the same alignment as described for the proposed Project, including the proposed roadway connections to Border Avenue and Chase DriveIMangular Avenue. (Draft EIR, p. 7-131.) 84 The Project proposes a modified Mabey Canyon Debris Basin, which includes an open spillway structure (triple~box culvert), rather than a drop inlet structure. Also, instead of lowering the basin floor, the basin limits would be extended upstream to accommodate the original storage volume. This design was submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD, or "Flood Control") in the Mabey Canyon Hydrology and Hydraulics Study prepared by RBF, dated October 2007, and was approved by Flood Control in April 2008. This "Stone Bridge Avoidance" Alternative revisits the grading concept currently proposed for the Project. In this Alternative, the basin floor would be lowered in order to maintain the existing basin perimeter and fully avoid the existing historic arroyo stone footbridge. This Alternative, as in the proposed Project, maintains the previously~approved open spillwayconcept. (DraftEIR,pp. 7-131 t07~132.) Impacts. Most of the short-term and long-term impacts of the Stone Bridge Avoidance Alternative would be similar to those of the Project. (Draft EIR, p. 7-132.) The Stone Bridge Avoidance Alternative would reduce the already less than significant impact of the Project on habitat and vegetation due to the fact that less acreage of vegetation would be disturbed by the Alternative. (Draft EIR, pp. 7-132 to 7-133.) The significant and unavoidable impact of the Project related to the removal of the historic arroyo stone foot bridge would be completely avoided by this Alternative. (Draft EIR, p. 7-135.) However, this Alternative would result in a significant and unavoidable impact due to the risk of dam failure. (Draft EIR, pp. 7-135 to 7­ 136.) Objectives. The "Stone Bridge Avoidance" Alternative would attain Project objective 3 at a lesser degree than the proposed Project. (Draft EIR, p. 7-135.) Finding. The City Council finds that (1) the Stone Bridge Avoidance Alternative would not offer an overall environmental advantage over the proposed Project, as avoidance of the Project's significant and unavoidable impact to cultural resources is offset by a new significant and unavoidable impact related to dam failure (Draft EIR, pp. 7-134 to 7-135); (2) this Alternative would not attain Project objective 3 to the same degree than the proposed Project (Draft EIR, p. 7-135); and (3) this Alternative is infeasible due to social, legal, and policy reasons, as the Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District has indicated they would not approve the debris basin modifications associated with this Alternative because of potential safety impacts to upstream and downstream residents (Draft EIR pp. 7-134 to 7-136). The City Council therefore rejects the Stone Bridge A voidance Alternative on these bases, each of which is sufficient on its own to substantiate the action ofthe City Council. SECTION 9: RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. The City Council hereby declares that, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against any unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to recommend approval of the Project to the City 85 Council. If the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered "acceptable." The City Council hereby declares that the Draft EIR and Final EIR have identified and discussed significant effects which may occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of the Mitigation Measures discussed in the Draft EIR and Final EIR, these effects can be mitigated to a level of less than significant except for unavoidable significant impacts as discussed in Section 4 of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project. The City Council hereby declares that to the extent any Mitigation Measures recommended in the Draft EIR could not be incorporated, such Mitigation Measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the Project that would prohibit the realization of specific economic, social and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts. The City Council further finds that except for the Project, all other alternatives set forth in the Draft EIR and Final EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of Project objectives and/or specific economic, social and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. The City Council hereby declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed Mitigation Measures, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project, and having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, the City Council has determined that the each of the following social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations: • The completion of the City's overall traffic circulation plan in the southern portion of the City (Draft EIR, p. 3-28); • The alleviation of existing traffic congestion on the local circulation network (Id.); • The accommodation of traffic generated by approved and planned development in south Corona (Id.); • Increasing access to existing and future developments in the southern portion of Corona for routine daily traffic and emergency response vehicles (Id.); and • The achieving the City's standard of Level of Service "D" for local streets and arterial highways in the most cost-effective manner that would be compatible with existing and future physical and legal constraints while minimizing impacts to the extent feasible and providing value to the community. (Draft EIR, pp. 3-28 to 3­ 29.) 86 The City Council hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the Project outweigh the identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project, which cannot be mitigated. The City Council finds that each of the Project benefits separately and individually outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR and therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable. SECTION 10: RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR. The City Council finds that it has reviewed and considered the Final EIR in evaluating the Project, that the Final EIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Corona CEQA Guidelines and that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The City Council declares that no evidence of new significant impacts as defined by State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 have been received by the City after circulation of the Draft EIR which would require recirculation. The City Council certifies the EIR based on the following findings and conclusions: A. Findings. The following significant environmental impacts have been identified in the EIR and will require mitigation as set forth in Sections 4 and 5 of this Resolution but cannot be mitigated to a level ofless than significant: • Short-tenn impacts to the visual character of the Project site and the surrounding area; • Long-tenn impacts from the alteration of a scenic vista within the viewshed of the Project site; • Long-tenn impacts from the alteration of the existing visual character and quality of the Project site and its surroundings; • Cumulative aesthetic impacts relating to short-tenn impacts to the visual character of the Project site and the surrounding area, long-tenn impacts to scenic vistas within a viewshed of the Project site, and long-term impacts to the visual character and quality of the Project site and its surroundings; • Short-term impacts from exceeding SCAQMD's daily emissions thresholds for construction activities; • Cumulative air quality impacts; • Short-tenn noise and vibration impacts on nearby noise-sensitive receptors due to construction of the Project; • Impacts related to adverse effects on a significant historical resource; • Cumulative impacts related to adverse effects on significant historical resources; • Impacts related to the exposure of commuters to adverse effects associated with 87 the rupture of a known earthquake fault; and • Cumulative impacts related to the adverse effects associated with the rupture of known earthquake faults. B. Conclusions. All significant environmental impacts from the implementation of the Project have been identified in the EIR and, with implementation of the Mitigation Measures identified, will be mitigated to a less than significant level, except for the impacts listed in subsection A above. Other reasonable alternatives to the Project which could feasibly achieve the basic objectives of the Project have been considered and rejected in favor of the Project. Environmental, economic, social and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Project or further Mitigation Measures beyond those incorporated into the Project. SECTION 11: RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A". In the event of any inconsistencies between the Mitigation Measures as set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan shall control. SECTION 12: RESOLUTION REGARDING CUSTODIAN OF RECORD. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these Findings have been based are located at the City of Corona, Public Works Department 400 South Vicentia Avenue, Corona, California 92882. The custodian for these records is the Public Works Director. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6. SECTION 13. RESOLUTION REGARDING STAFF DIRECTION. A Notice of Determination shall be filed with the County of Riverside and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days of final Project approval. 88 ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 4th day of February, 2009. ATTEST: CERTIFICATION I, Victoria J. Wasko, City Clerk of the City of Corona, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of Corona, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 4th day of February, 2009, by the following vote: AYES: MONTANEZ, NOLAN, SCOTT, SKIPWORTH, SPIEGEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAINED: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Corona, California, this 4th day of February, 2009. A)~-d'Wd-d City Clerk of the City rona, California [SEAL] 89 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 2009-014 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN [attached behind this page] A-I CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extenaion 13.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Section 2.0, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, of this EIR identifies the mitigation measures that will be implemented to reduce the impacts associated with the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2007061044). CEOA was amended in 1989 to add Section 21081.6, which requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with any required mitigation measures applied to proposed development. As stated in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, Ii. • • the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted, or made a condition of project approval, in order to mitigate or avoid signifICant effects on the environment. n Section 21081.6 requires a public agency to adopt a monitqring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with any required mitigation measures applied to proposed develqpment. Section 21081.6 provides general guidelines for implementing mitigation monitoring programs and mandates that specific reporting and/or monitoring requirements, to be enforced during project implementation, shall be defined prior to final certification of the EIR. PURPOSE The purpose of the proposed Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project Mitigation MonitOring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is to ensure compliance with all mitigation measures to mitigate or avoid potentially significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project that were identified in the Draft EIR. Implementation of this MMRP shall be accomplished by the City. Mitigation measures will be implemented as part of project implementation. RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES In general. monitoring will consist of demonstrating that mitigation measures were implemented, and that the responsible unit monitored the implementation of the measures. The responsible unit for determining compliance with all mitigation measures will be the City Community Development Department or other affected City departments or public agencies, as applicable. MonitOring will consist of determining whether activities identified in the mitigation measures have been. or are being, implemented. LIST OF MITIGATION MEASURES Table 13-1, below, identifies the mitigation measures by resource area. Table 13-1 also provides the specific mitigation monitoring requirements along with implementation and monitoring phases and the responsible monitoring party. Verification of compliance with each measure is to be indicated by signature of the mitigation monitor, together with date of verification. The City shall be responsible for implementation of all mitigation measures, unless otherwise noted in the table. FI NAL • JANUARY 2009 13-1 MlUgation Monitoring and Reporting Short·TennJConstruction) Impacts 'Construction equipment staging areas shall use appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material) to buffer views of construction equipment and material. Staging 5.2-1 Ilocations shall be indicated on final plans and grading plans are subject to review and approval of the City. Compfiance with this measure is subject to periodic field inspection by City Staff. Impacts to Scenic Vistas 'Monltotlng .ph ... Pre-Construction; Prior I COIlstructiol1 to the issuance of grading permits To maintain the context of the Project area, roadway Prior to the issuance of Construction landscaping within the roadway median and parkways shall be parkway landscape 5.2-2a Isimilar in appearance to the existing omamentallandscaping plans or landscape along Green River Road and Foothill Parkway. maintenance district 5.2·2b 5.2-2c Disrupted areas of vegetation, wildlife habitat, natural atercourses, and drainage swales shal be replaced. egetation shal be arranged in informal masses to create a extured slope that is characteristic to a natural chaparral ountain slope terrain. Hillside and canyon slopes shall be planted with drought tolerant species to soften the impact of land grading, retaining waRs, structures, and roads. All proposed landscaping species shall be selected to agree with he local dimate, humidity, soil types, and local wind. All lected species shan share similar water requirements. The tree maintenance and enhancement program and new ndscaping palette and location shall be developed in lconsultation with the City PubHc Works DeDartment II cut and fiR activities for the Project shall be developed in :onsultation with the City Public Works Department during the Plans, !)pecifications, and Estimate (PS&E) phase. The area lans Construction Construction Pre-Construction; Prior I Pre-Construction to the issuance of radinQ oermits CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Community Development and Parks Departments City of Corona Community Development, Pubtic Works, and Parks Departments City of Corona Public Works DeDartment FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ~" ..J~"~bgJ!':tfQQ!~~~1f"P~~~l:"I~~~9N"~tf!~It.t~~~!ft~~~T;. ...~:!',:1,r;l.c'c., .... Mo:!~,~t!QN,MqjffQ~~iK~~p~~~~Q8nl'.f~~~~t ..:._.~, MltIgIfJon M...~tt.··'. , """,'" ., ' ::,"~. , .-'."­':' . and height of cut and fill shall be minimized, to the extent Itechnicaly achievable, ensuring that slope tops and bottoms are rounded and facilitate a smooth and seamless transition [vJhere natural and blJilt slopes intersect to the extent feasible. .', ;<Y', ",;-,,, .. ", ·t',:;,-:,::, ·t'"ptero"'tatl~i' ... Mo"ltd~ng " '.~rIfOrcIng . ... Phil."", . fillH. Ag,ncy V.,m~ftJ'!tL~,-~..,pIiIHCI Initial. . I I Aemltttt Ilmpacts to Visual Character/Qual' • 'To maintain consistency with the existing infrastructure (i.e., Pre-Construction; Prior I Pre-Construction I City of Corona ---, -------I urrounding Project area, architectural treatments (which may grading permits and/or~ ridgeS' roadways, walls, sidewalks, signage, etc.) of the to the issuance of 5.2-3a .indude vine treatment) for the structural elements of the street improvement Project shall be determined in consultation with the City Public plans Works Department during the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) phase. IAIi aesthetic treatments to retaining walls and other wall Pre-Construction; Prior ~eatures shall be developed in consultation with the City Public to the issuance of Works Department during the Plans, Specifications, and grading pennits 5 2-3b Estimate (PS&E) phase. The height of wall features shaD be . minimized and all walls shall be designed with smooth flowing forms that follow topography and utilize material, colors, and .extures that blend in with the surrounding landscape, to the .... lextent feasible. ~on ­Tem Li ht and Glare rafflc Signal and streetlights shall comply with the City of 5 2-4 Corona's street Light Standard (Standard Plan 502-0), in . a consultation with the City Public Works Department. Pre-Construction; Prior to issuance of permits of the street ... un_nuimprovementsplans IAII on-site street lighting shall utilize directional lighting Pre-Construction; Prior echniques and low wattage bulbs that direct light downwards to issuance of permits 5.2-4b and minimize light spillover, without compromising site safety of the street lor security. Lighting fixtures shall use shielding, if necessary, improvements plans a prevent spill lighting on adjacent off-site uses. StreeUights Ishall indude high-pressure sodium vapor luminaire with 240 Pre-Construction; Construction Pre-Construction Pre-Construction Public Works Department City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department ._­ FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ITheil1tenor of individual structures shall be visually inspected prior to demolition or renovation activities (if necessary). If hazardous materials are encountered, the materials shall be ested and property disposed of in accordance with State and Federal regulatory requirements. Any stained soils or surfaces undemeath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling would indicate the appropriate level of remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and. 5.3-1a lremedlation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation Ishall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, andlor RCDEH). An taminated soil locations identified shaD be remedlated elow hazardous levels estab6shed by TlUe 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the laoolicable Lead Aaencv. IPrior to property acquisition, the presence or absence of tic tanks, underground storage tanks, as wen as the nee or absenee of hydraulic lifts located within the forme utomobile shop (APN 102-320-009) shall be confirmed by th City, or designee, through an interview wHh the current owner lof the property. If present, the specific location of the tanks shall be identified, removed, and property disposed of at an approved landfdl facility, under the purview of the applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, andlor RCDEH). Once the tanks are removed, a visual insoection of the areas Pre-Construction; Prior to the issuance of demolition permits Pre-Construction; Prior to the City's final acquisition of the property Construction Pre-Construction City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department tA.bE1~t'OGlTHI~~~Artf(WAY§HVlfl()~fttENtAL IMPACTREPPItTI. . ·',~,!?JSfif!:;,:[li:,;:t:MJl~ir.~N:iQ&iQ~',ti!A~Rft~PR,~i'N(I P~gqij~TT:' fl II 'I" . .! I Hazardous Materials 5.3-1b l lane!t Date I Remarks FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting & CITY OF CORONA :';'I;~~ Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension tABLE 13-1 FOOtHILL PARKWAY ENViRONMENTALIMpACTREPDftt "', .r..• ."<. .•. ,.., .'." ,'''""",,. __ ",'""",.'_',' ..• ~ "",~"_.,"_.,,,.,.", ...-,,"(..,,.~" .. --­- MitiGATION MONITORING ANI) RePORTING .PROGRAM .~-",,' ..:. ',' ',_ ...... _.,',,',' /,,' ...."... "~._....,........ ',i..,:.,,.' ..,,·,..,.....................•.... ,,, ,'.' ....__._,'"',.,, ,'•... _,."'.~ .,..... ",".,...," .:,".".' ".c.<,.:., '."'z",:",~_·-_",.r...._,"-,,,,J.l',,".,_,,_~,,,,,,, .:i:,.'i'~~n·~;ur.•... :""':;::'i:r!,i ,: ":,, ..," • I"~ :',": ' i''''''';;'<o' ImplefnliltaticH1Ph... '-~."'.:.:"c ..'........~~'-~.c.~.~"" ..'1101:,_ Remarkt 5.3-1c beneath and around the removed tanks shaD be performed, by he appropriate agency. Any stained soils observed underneath the septic tanks shall be sampled. Results of the sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa lAna RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be !conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All l contaminated soil locations identified shaD be remediated below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency. ~I miscellaneous debris (i.e., wood, concrete, 55..ganon drums, miscelaneous household debris, automobiles, scrap metal, and plastic piping, etc.) shall be removed and disposed lof at an approved landfill facility prior to construction activities under the purview of the appropriate agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that may be required. Remediation shall be conducted to the standards estabMshed by the Lead Agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWOCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels Pre-Construction Pre·Construction City of Corona Public Works Department established by TIDe 22 of the California Code of Regulations ,and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Agency.'-------" FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-5 MItigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension .'t~(JLE,1~1 FOOTHILL 'ARKWAY ENvaRONM_NtAL IMPActREPO~T ..•.. ..~:MITIGATION MONITORING ANDREpOfJt't-I~ .PRO(J~~.:c '.' 0.:::..• 'c,.•... ,.... ~~'" I...·. MOhltGiingI~plem"'.o~Mitigation Meas..re :··..ft...~··<; .'I· Ph_. , '.,....) < ' .'. , ....... Any transformers or hydraulic lifts to be relocated during Construction Construction construction shall be conducted under the purview of the local5.3-1d utility purveyor to identify property-handling procedures regarding potential PCBs. The terminus of the undocumented metal pipe shall be defined Pre-Conslruclion Pre-Construction to determine if any undocumented UST exists. Should a UST be present, the tank shall be removed and property disposed of at an approved landfill facility. Once the UST is removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed UST shall be performed. Any stained soils observed undemeath the UST shall be sampled. Results of sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of remediation efforts that 5.3·1e may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (I.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels established by Tide 22 of the CaNtomia Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable Lead Aoency. ASTs shall be removed and properly disposed of at an Pre-Construction approved landfill facility. Once the ASTs are removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed ASTs shall be perfonned. Any stained so~s Dbserved undemeath the AST s shall be sampled. Results of he sampling, if necessary, would indicate the level of Pre-Construction 5.3-1f remediation efforts that may be required. Testing and remediation of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducted under the purview of the applicable agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). AI .' " , ' .....•. "'.>" ..·.i •.. ,·..' •. ···.V.~_."qfO.pli~:., ' ."(:" "::<.:.:' ..',·.···.,~I".;.··:· I··' 1~1tI.,:I/;. Ditt',!': RemarD ., ...•.i~•• :" ":."'" I., . City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension TABle 13-1 FooTHIL'" PAlkWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMpAct REPORT v", f ~f-~-' .. ".~", ·'itvVr"·v'~'1e""V'T ",·'£tjar0~"tjVVAdT~,··t='t·3t:"'yyt'etj>wr '¥;s"_:-w>"'---'.'~-" .. ,,,"-v._.• ~r·t ' "rlrirb··.Ie{;tf' ['titret'" fe' 4 tV tV '''',~ C . . MITIGATION MONIfORiNGANDRIPORtlNO PROGRAM ...,,",.<-'. '" {.lh""," ,v". -;'~'I>v ._,'." ~-_ -., ',,,", "'''~' ,-_' _~" -"vv,-"" _'_ Mitigation M_uft Contaminated soil locations identified shaA be remediated below hazardous levels established by Tine 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the ~pplicable Lead Agency. If unknown wastes or suspect materials are discovered during construction by the Project Contractor, which is thought to linclude hazardous waste and/or materials, the following shall 100000r: Q Immediately stop work in the vicinity of the suspected contaminant, removing workers and the public from the area; Q Notify the City of Corona Fire Department Q Notify the Project Engineer of the implementing agency (the City of Corona); Q Secure the area as directed by the Project Engineer; 5.3-1g and Q Notify the implementing agency's Hazardous Waste/Materials Coordinalor. Tesling and remedialion of unknown wastes or suspect materials shall be conducled under the purview of Ihe applicable agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). Remediation shall be conducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (i.e., DTSC, Santa Ana RWQCB, and/or RCDEH). All contaminated soil locations identified shall be remedialed below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the ~icable Lead .Agency. Prior to construction, an asbestos survey shall be conducted5.3-1h by an Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act and v.. . .. _. IIbPl=:.tatkJ~: ·M~hlng . Construction Construction Pre-Construction; Prior I Pre-Construction to the issuance of -__ ...r."-;~"",,-,."~ Remarks City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works and FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension TABLE 13-1 FOOTHILL PARKWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RSPORT ~ -~-v" '. '_ •. , ......... "_"'m''"''v-~'''"""_t",·_.,--_.,,· ~,.-_•... _'""-....'._.-__ ."'~_, __ ._ .~>"_.~.'''~J._~_.__ ..-.:;:,._·~~,'",''."1t. .. v,._''v._v.. v... ,,.",-,<"" MITIGATION MO'NI1~~.I~~,A~"4BEPORTI~oQ~@~~~~ . Mitigation Me.lurt California Occupational Safety and Health Administration !certified building inspector to detennine the levels of asbestos in structures should renovation or demolition occur. District Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions From DemoutionlRenovation IActivities) would be required for any demotition or renovation Iwork involving asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). District Rule 1403 specifies work practice requirements to limn asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activnies. including the removal and associated disturbance of IACM. The requirements for demontion and renovation activHies include asbestos surveying, notification, ACM emoval procedures and time schedules, ACM handling and clean-up procedures, and storage, disposal. and landfilling requirements for asbestos-containing waste materials. All operators are required to maintain records, including waste shipment records, and are required to use appropriate warning labels, signs. and markings. rior to construction, a survey shall be conducted to determine he presence or absence of lead-based paint. If lead-based aint is found. abatement shall be required before any emolnion activities occur that would create a lead dust or Jme hazard. Lead-based paint removal shall be performed in l 5.3-1i ccordance with California Code of Regulation nle 8. Section 1532.1. which specifies exposure limits, exposure monitoring. and respiratory protection. and mandates good working practices by workers exposed to lead. The individual(s) performing lead-based paint removal shall provide evidence of Icertified training for lead-related construction work. The specific location, use, and terminus of the on-site well (noted in building records) shall be defined. If located on the5.3-1j subject site, the well shall be surveyed and evaluatedL__ ...)',rlflcltto,. of (;Otnplhlnc. Monltotlng ,. EnfQi'CIngIrnpltmentatlon RemarksbateInltl",Phase Phal' A'ItI~_,.0. demolition permits Building Departments City of CoronaPre-ConstructionPre-Construction; Prior Public Worksto the issuance of Departmentdemolition pennits Pre-Construction; Prior I Pre-Construction City of Corona to the issuance of Public Works applicable grading Department FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension IA~L~.'..~1F9QtH'b"~Ar.tKyVAYENVIItONM@~,rAL'MPA~1 R~.PQ"f ......... MI"IGA.tlQ~,~QN'TO~IHf!~pltE~Q8r~8g.~~Q~MN ........•..•..•.••.. ; MItigatIOn .M~iU.~ . immediately prior to preceding with site development. Once the well is removed, any stained soils, if obselVed underneath he removed materials, shaH be tested to identify appropriate remedial activities, if necessary. Remediation shall be (:onducted to the standards established by the Lead Agency (Le., DTSC, Santa Ana RWaCB, and RCDEH). AI ~ontaminated soil locations identified shall be remediated below hazardous levels estabHshed by TiUe 22 of the California Code of Regulations and to the satisfaction of the applicable L~ad Agency. Prior to construction, within areas associated with known historic agricultural uses (eastern portion of the Project site), he City shall perform soil tests within the project grading limits o determine concentrations of pesticide and fungicide residues that may be present. Should contamination levels be5.3·1k in excess of acceptable Federal, State, and/or County of Riverside levels, a remedial action plan (subject to approval by he Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and responsible regulatory agencies) shall be implemented to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. Risk of Accident Prior to excavation/grading activities on the Project site, the City of Corona shall coordinate and provide pre-construction notification to pUlVeyors with underground pipelines traversing the Project site prior to excavation/grading activities. Prior to5.3·3a excavation/grading activities on the Project site, the contractor shall obtain information on the location of underground pipelines located within the Project area, and any information regarding safety concerns of these pipelines. ' .. .' IrnPlim_on .Phil' permits Pre-Construction; Prior to the issuance of grading perm~s Pre-Construction meeting with City staff and contractors Monitoring Ph •••..•....•.•.. Pre-Construction Pre·Construction < Enforcing ... ,~AI.bCy " City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department ",.. , yetjfl~on of Oompllartc• ... Inltial. RemarbDate . .......... " FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13·9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting I Prior to excavation/grading activities on the Project site. the Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction City of Corona shaH coordinate the design and construction to the issuance of 5 3-3b r.'anning for the roadway extension over the MWD pipeline. At grading permits · 'he discretion of the MWD. the MWD shall enter into an reement with the City to allow its personnel to monitor radin and construction within 100 feet of the . eline. Prior to "",strucHon. Underground SeMC8 Alert Ii .•.. Dig ----p.e:i:OnstJiid~nl C<ll1strucHon lert) shall be contacted at 811 in order to determine the location of underground pipelines. The proposed excavation area shall be delineated with white marking paint or with other 5 3.3 Isuitable markers such as Dags or stakes at least two days CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department · c prior to commencing any excavation work. A "Dig Alert" ticket number shall be issued at the time Underground Service Alert is contacted. Excavating is not permitted without this ticket number. Underground Service Alert shall notify its member utilities havin under round facilities in the area. If any pipeline is ruptured during construction, the Corona Fire Department shaH be notified. Should the rupture of an lunmarked pipeline occur. the Corona Fire Department shall be contacted for on-site guidance during pipeline removal activities. If the rupture indicates an emergency, 911 shaa be ldialed. 5 3-3d · Construction Construction City of Corona Public Works Department Construction City of Corona to issuance of permits Pre-Construction; Prior Public Works of the Traffic Department 5.4-1a ladeauate sian-oostina. and detours finctudina oedestrian. I Management Plan RAFfIC AND CIRCULATION rerm {Construction} Im~acts FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting I CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension TABLE 134 FOOfHILLPARKWAY ENViRONMENTAL IMPACt REPORT.. .. .••.<. < "" .:" .h....,i".,.::;S.'i> ',l",:"~,"/'L:..:.::x.::..•..""!...tj·",",~",,..., ..... ,",.• ' ",.•,,,-,,,,,,_.,.,~',,,<.;;., ..,..,i,;_,,,,_,':,:::,:',,,,,,,c.,,,::_'-_-,"Ic·,_, 'b-~,~~_.",. "~''''""ki. '.• ,,,-,," ..F"!'.. ' _"",A"': ,j'" ,'....", ",_, :-.:",j-~.'"' "',, ." , MItIGAfIQ.fMONrrORING AND REPORTING.PRooRAM '~-"'-'-,~._.. _" .. ,~,,~c ""::.c.:.:::.,'.L_,__:::.:,~,,o;;I'l,....... :..1t/:.::;::.""·. -. ,,,,,:2,,,,,> :·J,:-"a~., ~,)!!~...... " _' ".: ,w, .....,_;, ',,·,___ 'cI ' ,,, ,";.n...-"."~._:,j"".. ",,,,,,,,:(:!J"i,';l..r..,,,' iG:..~L.i;Y"~i',,;i.• ;,, .' •. .1, "',,,_"_'. _ M~.~lltloil...Me."re City Engineer. Adequate access to and from adjacent I~esidential areas shaN be provided at an times. The TMP shall !be revised and approved by the City Public Works. Police. and Fire Departments so that construction shall not interfere with lany emergency response or evacuation plans. Construction activities shall proceed in a timely manner in an effort to reduce im acts. ·lroper detours and warning signs shall be established to nsure public safety. Alternative routes for the existing icycle. horseback. and hiking tra~s along the Project site into he Cleveland National Forest shall be dearly marked and safety of those that utilize the path shall be considered at aN imes. This indudes the use of proper lighting (where lappropriate). fencing/shielding. sufficient headway for horse riders to pass through, proper storage of equipment and onstruction supplies. covering loose piles of soil, sHt, day, 5.4-1b ~ sand debris, or other earthen matenal so as to eliminate any ischarge onto the existing pathway or temporary pathway, and immediately hosing down/deaning such areas of the ~xisting pathway or temporary pathway that have been affected by construction debris or sedimentation from the Project. Upon completion of construction, access to the XiSting bicycle. horseback, and hiking trails into the Cleveland National Forest shall be maintained. Trails that are impacted uring construction, and remain in place after construction, ~ shall be returned to pre-project conditions. Design Elements V~!lfCari!PU~ ImpiementatJon Monl~ng Etlforc1no,'. Initial. '1,01(8 1 Remlt1ttPh_ '. Agency··"PhHe pre..constructic)O;lpre:construction; Cityof Corona"";u-I·, Construction Construction Public Works Department 'A~tr~affi~~~s~ig-n-al~w-a-IT-an~t-an-a71~~is-sh~a~1I7be--pr-e-pa-r-ed~b~y-a-----r.P~r~~C-on-s~tru-ct~i-on-;~P~rio-r~P~~-C~o-n~st-ru-ct~io-n"~C~ity-O~f~C~o-ro-na--.-------,--------r--------~ egistered Civil Engineer or Registered Traffic Engineer prior to issuance of permtts Public Works 5.44 ~o construction of the proposed alignment at the following of the street Department lintersection: improvement plans FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-11 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ~ CITY OF CORONA ~ Foothill Part<way Weste~y Extension T~B~~,~~~tEqQ1t:f1~~JJA~~AY Ii~VlrtPt4_ME~TAl:IMP~~T"E.PO,.r", . "', . . .( . .' ,"'ITI~~T~~J.'O"ITOIt'N.~ ~NQRI!~~ll~O,Prtpqrw.t,_ - " ., ...-,:, .'--" " ", " ,y.tlflcitlol1~f qOthplllhCt , hnpietnlntltlon Monitoring ,SflforOlnl Remark.Initial. bate"Mitigation Mature ' AgencyPhllePhale Q Foothill Parkwayrrrudy Way ~dditional intersections may require traffic signal warrant analysis based on direction from the City of Corona Public Works Director. A traffic signal will be installed at an intersection where it is deemed appropriate, based on the raffic signal warrant determination and the professional recommendation of the City Traffic Engineer. AIR QUALITY Short·Tenn (Construction) Emissions Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction; City of Corona Public Works Director, or his designee, shall confirm that the to issuance of permits Construction Public Works plans and specifications stipulate that, in compliance with of the street Department; SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be SCAQMD controlled by regular watering or other dust preventive improvements and/or grading permits measures, as specified in the SCAQMD's Rules and Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Implementation of the following measures would reduce short-term fugitive dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors: 5.5-1a Q All active portions of the construction site shall be watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust; Q On-site vehides speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph); Q All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered periodically, or chemically stabilized; Q All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension " TABLE 13-1 FOOTt:lILL P~FtKWAY.I!N~RONMENTALIMPACT Ri:PORt· . .. ,:', MlTIOAtlON MONITORINd AND REPORTING PROGRAM " " . _ .. ", .. ,_, Mitigation Millure, .,' ".' .: ••' .:> ..•:' :',.:" '.,: .. J.. " Watering, with complete coverage, shall occur at leas twice daily, preferably in the late moming and after work is done for the day; I.J If dust is generated and visibly occurs beyond the site boundaries, clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities that generate dust shall cease during periods of high winds (Le., greater than 25 mph averaged over one hour); and I.J All material transported off site shall be either sufficienUy watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the Public Works Director shaM confirm that the plans and specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule ~03, ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment 5.5-1b vehicles shal be controlled by maintaining equipment engines n good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer's specifications, to the satisfaction of the Resident Engineer. The Ctty inspector shaD be responsible for ensuring that contractors comply with this measure during construction. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the Public Works Director, or his designee, shall confirm that the construction bid packages include a separate "Diesel Fuel Reduction Plan.' This plan shall identify the actions to be aken to reduce diesel fuel emissions during construction5.5-1c ~tivities Qnclusive of grading and excavation activities). Reduclions in diesel fuel emissions can be achieved by measures including, but not linited to, the following: a) use of altemative energy sources, such as compressed natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas, in mobile equipment and vehicles; "." ,;,;~,' •. '\/' "". . • '". ·lmpillmihtatlOri Phase Pre-Construction; Prior to issuance of permits of the street improvements and/or grading permits Pre-Construction c.',_.":" "",.' .'. MonltOrt·,..' .ngPH_ . '" .. Pre-Construction; Construction Pre-Construction; Construction " ,. '.n".>. .:.,~ , .. ,.:.: 1":'1"1" : '''1"'\;:'': ':. ErlfO,..~g ••'•• ,,.,:.' •...··Ajlftcy "'., .,' , City of Corona Public Works Department; SCAQMD City of Corona Public Works Department ' :: .. , .,.::< ,:,,,,., " ',. Vtrtnilat!on' Of CompIJi~~. . :..• '.'•.... Date Remarkt.Inltllls ;', . FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension . · .. TABLE 13-fFOOtHILL PARKWAY ENVIRONMENtAL IMPAct REPORT ~ .' '.;'. -~-""co> -.'-v.£-';"·· -: ,--.;. _ -c'----' _;.;:;,-.i•...,.•.•. &b,·.1' ,~: :-\ ..:f,,' '.. I: -",_..'".'. ~.,:';:::'.:.-_;'. ,;,.", '. :":,·',,,,,~·:~_.-.. ~.;;..::.-i.;;.;'.'I.X).!..-,,.,,~.•._--, _-.,' -,,'. -c .."'""""",-...1..'-._"'..<.." .•....•...-'. ,:,-_""-"i:fr.~,,, ;=~-.*'.....•.,' '>::,.:-::._;o:,,~,..• <,~- ....ft1It1(JAtIPN~~~rr()~INg,MPJ~~qf!r!~!t!»It~!tAM RemarklbateMltIgatiGn.ellu~} ':'I~~~l"~~r b) use of "retrofit technology," including diesel particulate trips, on existing diesel engines and vehicles; and c) other appropriate measures with equal or better efficiency (as determined in consultation with the South Coast Air Quality Management District). Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. the Diesel Fuel Reduction Plan shall be filed with the City of Corona. The Diesel Fuel Reduction Plan shall include Ithe following provisions: Q All diesel fueled off-road construction equipment shall be CARB certified or use post-combustion controls that reduce pollutant emissions to the serne level as CARS certified equipment. CARS certified off-road engines are engines that are three years old or less and comply with lower emission standards. Post­ combustion controls are devices that are installed downstream of the engine on the tailpipe to treat the exhaust. These devices are now widely used on construction equipment and are capable of removing over 90 percent of the PM10, carbon monoxide, and volatile organic compounds from engine exhaust, depending on the specific device. sulfur content of the fuel, and specific engine type. The most common and widely used post~mbustion control devices are particulate traps (Le., soot filters), oxidation catalysts, and combinations thereof. Q All diesel fueled on-road construction vehicles shall meet the emission standards applicable to the most current year to the greatest extent possible. To achieve this standard. new vehides shaft be used or older vehicles shall use post-combustion controls that reduce pollutant emissions to the greatest extent feasible. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13·14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ~ CITVOFCORONA ~ Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension IJ The effectiveness of the latest diesel emission controls is highly dependant on the sulfur content of the fuel. Therefore, diesel fuel used by OIHOad and off-road construction equipment shall be low sulfur (>15 ppm) or other alternative low polluting diesel fuel formulation. trucks that are to haul excavated or comply with State Vehicle Code Section 23114, v.rith attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(4) as amended, IrAn;Jrrtinn the prevention of such material spilling onto public roads. issuance of grading permits ~ 'ignment. the Project Contractor shall cceplable to the City of Corona Public Works Director. or esignee, that (1) all construction equipment, fixed and/or shall be equipped v.rith Im~jntmned mufflers consistent (2) construction activities shall be limited to the Idesignated daytime hours as specified by the City of Corona, ~lllTAntly 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. IIIl1lla::!VS. These restrictions apply to all trucks. vehicles, and that are making or loading or transfer of materials, equipment service, maintenance of any devices for or v.rithin the Project site. construction, the Project Contractor shall place all Id;Jtinn~ry construction equipment such that emitted noise is away from noise-sensitive receptors. The placement shall meet the satisfaction of the Construction Pre-Construction; Prior to issuance of grading permits Construction Construction Construction City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Building Department for the proposed provide evidence proper1y operating and with manufacturers' on Sunday and federal involved with material FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-15 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ----- ~ CITY OF CORONA ~ Foothill Po_.y Weslerly Exlanslon Official and is subject to site inspection. Additionally, the Project Contractor shall provide evidence of the placement of he stationa ui ment to the Buildin Official. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the City of Corona City of Corona Public Works Director, or designee, shall Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction: to issuance of permits Construction Public Works onfirm that the Project plans and specifications stipulate that of the street Department 5,6-1' rProject Con~actor shallinoorporate ,,",sIDle muffling improvements IIldior features into all construction vehicles and eqUipment and into grading permits construction methods, and shall maintain all construction vehicles and ui ment in efficient 0 ratin condition. Prior to approval of the Project plans and specifications, the City of Corona Public Works Director, or designee, shall 5 6-1d Eonfirm the Project plans and specifications stipulate that the · ~roject Contractor shall locate stockpiling and construction hicle staging areas as far away as practical from noise sitive receptors during construction activities. uring construction, the Project Contractor shall install emporary construction barriers with an effective height of 8 10 feet around construction activities located within 100 5 6-1 I",et of residences, where it is feasible, to provide a noise · e 'ucticn of 8 to 10 dBA. These barriers shall be provided ng Green River Road, Paseo Grande, and Meadowcrest Street and near the cul-de-sacs of Condor Circle, Clearview Circle, and Folson Circle. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed alignment, the Project Contractor shall develop and execute a 5 6-1f fommunity information program, notifying neighbors of · IPlanned construction schedules and periods of maximum activity. The notice shall provide a construction schedule. uired noise conditions applied to the proposed alignment, and the name and telephone number of the Construction Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction; to issuance of permits Construction of stockpile and/or grading permits Construction Construction Construction to issuance of grading permits Pre-Construction; Prior City of Coron a Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department City of Corona Public Works Department FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-16 MItigation Monitoring and Reporting 5.6-2 Manager who can address questions and problems 1----4r~·.CI=trnay anse during construction. If pile driving occurs within 200 feet of sensitive receptors, alternative construction methods such as pre-drilling, driled lpiles, Giken silent piling, pile cushioning, or any non-impact shall be implemented to Significantly reduce vibration enerated bv construction activities. 1__ .... Ter'!"~rationallmpacts Construction Construction CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly extension Snl6,cln,,':," Agericy·· City of Corona Public Works Department Noise barriers (i.e., walls and/or earthen berms) shal be onstructed at the following locations and heights; however, if he noise barriers identified below are already constructed as community perimeter wall, during final design, these walls hall be examined to determine their efficiency at mitigating noise to the levels specified: Q A minimum barrier height of 6 feet for Sound Barrier 1 located along Foothill Parkway west of Trudy Way. 1 u A minimum barrier height of 6 feet for Sound Barrier 2 located along Foothill Parkway east of Trudy Way.2 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the existing wall's acoustical barrier efficiency shall be tested to ensure it meets the requirements to reduce noise levels below 65 dBA. Q A minimum barrier height of 8 to 10 feet for Sound Barrier 3 located along Foothin Parkway between Elvsia Street and Uncaln Avenue. Pre-Construction; Construction City of Corona Construction Public Works Department Trudy Way is identified as Bartol Street in the Noise Impact Analysis. Foothill Palkway Westerly Extension, prepared by LSA Associates, Inc., dated January 2008. However, Bartol Street has been renamed as Trudy Way. Ibid. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-17 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting --- CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension 'TAQU: '1J"fF~!HILL P~RKWAY~~VlRQ~MEN1ALI,.~~qT.R.PQ~T ·.'~4.Mlrlq~tI9N"ONltOftl"G~~It"'QR1IN";,~ftOQMM ":'::, :\ .Jlt\pl...entailonM~g~~n·•.~~·~."': ·;PI1........ BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Short·Tenn (Construction) Impacts The following Construction Minimization Measures (Section 7.5.3 of the MSHCP) shall be implemented during Project ~onstruction to minimize impacts on biological resources during construction: u Plans for water pollution and erosion control shaR be prepared for all Discretionary Projects involving the movement of earth in excess of 50 cubic yards. The plans shall describe sediment and hazardous materials control, dewatering or diversion structures, fueling and equipment management practices, and use of plant material for erosion control. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Corona, prior to construction. 5.7-1b u Timing of construction activtties shaR consider seasonal requirements for breeding birds and migratory non-resident species covered under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Habitat dearing shall be avoided during species active breeding season, defined as March 1 to June 30. C) Sediment and erosion control measures shall be implemented until such time soils are determined to be successfully stabilized. r.:J Short-term stream diversions shall be accomplished by use of sand bags or other methods that will result in minimal instream impacts. Short-term diversions shall consider effects on wildlife. Pre-Construction; Included on the erosion control plans of the precise grading plans ,,'< , ......_---,­ ',Y';":'::, .;.;.:r.tctnft6tJng """hm Construction ",-:,~<',:::"-.:, '. " l~ft,tci"'· :·:~ateInltl••.•A.Hey ------,-----------,-------­ City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments Remark. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-18 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension TABLE 13..1FOOtHIL.L PARKWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAQT REPORT ­ -, " :"", ___ . ", .' _'~ ",.' """-C';,. _,:': ."-T':,:;;,,. ~:",P."i""".:,ii~:'i"._"'...• >-""-,4ii~j"i"",, ,,,_"~,,::,,,c. ,;.~,',,:,,,_ ~._,~. ,','., .,.... w._ ' -.,. ­ ........ .MItIGATIDN MONrrORING AND REPORTING PROOW;!:( . '~ . ,:,,:.<,,<::& "_Y",,,,",,:..L'"_. __c._&::.,."Y.,;.~:: ',:" -, -."'-:,->"i,. A1S ,;~f"3!'" ':~" -, _,,",',.. •..2;;]",.;"".' "','_--'c,,,--,' ~L ~" ._.....•....•...0_ " .....:..,,,.~:z-/,;" ,.,.", ~,'j' "I':' '~"'_" "~..,,,:., .'0"'::.?-"".~ .>:':±+,"...» : ,; H ...:, ,," , Im~"'tatIon .·EnfotclriO Remarb .Initial. DIIeMltlgatJolt Me.'uf' ~;1.~~'~ . .4g."Cy I:l Silt fencing or other sediment trapping materials shall be installed at the downstream end of construction activfties to minimize the transport of sediments off­ site. I:l Settling ponds where sediment is collected shal be cleaned in a manner that prevents sediment from re­ entering the stream or damaging/disturbing adjacent areas. Sediment from settling ponds shall be removed and diverted to a location where sediment cannot re­ enter the stream or surrounding drainage area. Caution shall be exercised during removal of sin fencing to minimize release of debris or sediment into streams. I:l No erodible materials shall be deposited into water courses. Brush. loose soils. or other debris material shall not be stockpiled within stream channels or on adjacent banks. I:l The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. Access to the Project site shall occur on pre-existing access routes to the greatest extent possible. I:l Equipment storage. fueling and staging areas shall be sited on non-sensitive upland habHat types with minimal risk of direct discharge into riparian areas or other sensitive habitat types. I:l The limHs of disturbance. including the upstream. downstream and lateral extents. shall be dearly defined and marked in the field. Mitigation Monitoring Program personnel shall review the limits of disturbance prior to initiation of construction activities. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ,~, < '. '" -, .>; mY' t ,,-" "'A' " - -_'--" "".' '," ,,:o'.x: ~'t" 'm~-'iW' n .,. -~-_--' :":;..;.;:-:'.....,. -~-,t ''$ ,": k '"' -' -j .,.: _ "~,v 5' '1' r"", TAIILE 13-1 FOOTHtLhPARKWAvENVIRONM!NTAL IM,PACT .EpORr(~i ~~ . M!fIOAtIONMONffO,ilJNOAND ft~PORtlNQPRO!-' " r oI-~'-" -,. "--,. ~ *-:%40.; --: " -~__ :-~'_____ ::-.. ya(-r"'''-~'''f':~'n_'''''-''iytt/'_'''J'::':i'_'.,"" 4.-,,,--, ','.'\ *",,' "'" :'~ 5'"':_:"¥ "-,, (l.,~ (.J During construction, the placement of equipment within the stream or on adjacent banks or adjacent upland habitats occupied by Covered Species that are outside of the Project footprint shall be avoided. Q EKotic species removed during construction shall be property handled to prevent sprouting or regrowth. Q Training of construction personnel shall be provided. Q Ongoing monitoring and reporting shall occur for the duration of the construction activity to ensure implementation of best management practices (BMPs). Q When work is conducted during the fire season (as identified by the Riverside County Fire Department) adjacent to coastal sage scrub or chaparral vegetation, appropriate fire-fighting equipment (e.g., eKtinguishers, shovels, water tankers) shaD be available on the site during all phases of Project construction to help minimize the chance of human­ caused wildfires. Shields, protective mats, and/or other fire preventative methods shall be used during grinding, welding, and other spark-inducing activ~ies. Personnel trained in fire hazards, preventative actions, and responses to fires shall advise contractors regarding fire risk from all construction­ related activities. (.J Active construction areas shaH be watered regularty to control dust and minimize impacts to adjacent vegetation. MonltorltJI Ph ....'· CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ' . : .".,',.;i,"Z( ';!'iY~-'::':<; J~'-? ::--f .~,,,, 't"T'( .j,! be S•. '1'" t -*--y(f ' 't . " " " FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-20 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting -------- --------- CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension rABL&J~1r=09tttla.~PARIWfAY .N\IIAQNMeNfAl.(IM~A9r ARPORT ,. ..,,'~" .,j;'•., . ..' ......, .. , ,.'" ,'.' """. " " ."" MITIGATION'MONltORINGANDREPORt'HQ PROGRAM' ····..·,c./ i" , ., -/'-'-.'-" ',';-": ,",.,,, ,. , ..' ." "";"',~ : ,,'"_:";,h"""~;r " '.' .1"'•• , "-, -"',' ,r,-' , '-'-b<," --. < ' .' , ..... MIHgatlonM...utt r ....... .,. Q All equipment maintenance, staging. and dispensing of fuel. oil. coolant, or any other toxic substances shall occur only in designated areas within the proposed grading limits of the Project site. These designated areas shall be dearly marked and located in such a manner as to contain run-off. Q Waste, dirt. rubble, or trash shall not be deposited in the Conservation Area or on native habitat Proposed noise-generating land uses affecting the MSHCP Conservation Area shall incorporate setbacks, berms. or walls o minimize the effects of noise on MSHCP Conservation Area S.7-1c resources pursuant to applicable rules. regulations. and ~uidelines related to land use noise standards. For planning purposes. wildlife within the MSHCP Conservation Area shall not be subject to noise that would exceed 60 dBA CNEL '.' .... \ ,:::-",',';-.-"'-"',' ::'; 1:;':,\ MDnltO~rig:, I*"Pltlfltlt\~~ ,. 'h ... ·····',,·,,···, Phdl ... Pre-Construction Construction ' ,"" >.,"" ,_,' _'c, Enforcing '........ . A,.ncy .. City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments ,': . C'i VMftCItJPhof QCH'iIPIl.ricl . ..... loltf•• Date <.. Remlll'kl i ~egetatlon Types iThe City of Corona shall obtain all appropriate permits for impacts on USACE and CDFG jurisdictional areas. Mitigation or the loss of jurisdictional areas shall consist of restoration of riparian habitat at no less than a 2: 1 ratio to ensure no net loss of habitat. Any creation of habitat will be in kind and proportional to Project impacts. Native trees within the riparian habitat shall be replaced as follows per the City of Corona 5.7-2a (2008): coast live oaks 4:1; sycamore 3:1; cottonwood 3:1; willow 2:1; and scrub oak 2:1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a detailed restoration program shal be prepared for ~pproval by the USACE and CDFG with the following items: Q Responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the plan. The responsibilities of the landowner. s~ecialists. and ---- ~'" Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction; to issuance of the Construction; Post clearing and grubbing Construction and/or grading permits City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-21 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ,!A~L~J~j~Q!)t!ll~!J!~,~KYi~Y~!!!!V!RQN.Mg~1&JMP"~Jt~"t~ ~;,., ..• xMlflGATIONMOt4tfORINGAHCItEPORTIt4iMOOAAM' .. ':<"'<" ,,,,,',,"",,,_~l.L,,,;:l· ".L±!-"i!.....!'ct.c-_. ;\ lit '/,'.IAliffi,.,..,., ".t' '" ,'••" ....,;yAo'f",", "'",e>._:,. """"'......,,,-"' _",,*'.c"'':''.,", ...'''.-• ""....::."':""'... ,.. ~,...C... I;'k,,._'":_ . .L,.,:;::""C:"':t:.""".L.y.. U.. ,L_.~,,_'o.:i-:""L'/'''''''''- I lmpltm.·'tmltion l· MOftitt\HnaMltlg.n Meitll... Phi. Phi. ..~. maintenance personnel that would supervise and implement the plan will be spedfied. o Site selection. The site for the mijigation will be determined in coordination with the City of Corona and the resource agencies. The site shall either be located on the Project site in a dedicated open space area or land wiD be purchased off the site. o Site preparation and planting implementation. The site preparation will include: (1) protection of existing native spedes; (2) trash and weed removal; (3) native species salvage and reuse (i.e., duff); (4) soil treatments (i.e. imprinting. decompacting); (5) temporary irrigation instanation; (6) erosion control measures (i.e. rice or willow watUes); (7) seed mix application; and (8) container species. o Schedule. A schedule win be developed which includes planting to occur in late fall and early winter. between October 1 and January 30. o Maintenance Plan/Guidelines. The maintenance plan will indude: (1) weed control; (2) herbivory control; (3) trash removal; (4) inigation system maintenance; (5) maintenance training; and (6) replacement planting. o MonitOring Plan. The Monitoring Plan will include: qualitative monitoring (i.e., photographs and general observations); (2) quantitative monitoring (i.e .• randomly placed transects); (3) performance criteria as approved by the resource agencies; (4) monthly reports for the first year, and reports every other month thereafter; and (5) annual reports for five :;yItifi9Atlon Of C,..pll.nc~ Enf6rdnll Initial. Date RtIm.rkI.·•.. AI~ FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension r~.~E;,"1 tQgttlJb~.~A~~~'i~1i~1"9~"'I~I~I~P~Pl~[tE~RT MfrlGAflOHMONItORINGANfl ttePOrtTlNB pftooftAM""~.' .".,,: _.,._, .....,'.,...,.f".... .:[:,... ".:";i,~:.::.::..:II,""..::,.::_,.••."'''.'<_~.~ .!o••:t.,:.,.~,;,'.:.'.L... i.c".' .,..',4.0.. :'0' -b'Jo,/II.,,,'f''''';dtJLo.i.!,"c",,,,,,:,:.':.''-';'' ,~......,..... J ..:, ....,..., •. _0-' .'.' .•. "" ; ...•,. ,',,:~:: "'~"""'~' .' ,_.•.•'·C' .,,;',, _, i.'. ........>" ....... '. ..' '. . .;·,Hi,.':II :'MltltlatlO~_'d~ra ,lmPlilflentationMonltoring '..'!ft,jrclflOPhue~~"1 .' ,Agef\¢Y., . 'illnee . years, whidl will be submitted to the resource agencies on an annual basis. The site will be monitored and maintained for five years to ensure successful establishment of riparian habitat within the restored and created areas. a Long-term preseNstion. Long-term preservation of the site will also be outlined in the conceptual mitigation plan to ensure the mitigation site is not impacted by future development. r-­ 5.7-2b In addition, the City of Corona will shall provide the Detennination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) with the proposed Mitigation Plan to he USFWS and CDFG for review. The resource agencies shall review the Project for consistency with Section 6.1.2 of Ithe MSHCP (i.e., RiparianlRiverine). !As outlined in the Native Tree Survey prepared for the Pre-Construction; Prior ~roposed Project, the following m~igation for removal of native to issuance of the trees shall be required by the Project: clearing and grubbing, Q Prior to grading, orange snow fencing shall be instaUed around trees (outside the dripline) that would not be impacted by construction. Fencing shall be in place and inspected by a qualified Biological Monitor prior to commencement of grading. This fencing shall remain in place throughout the entire period of Project construction, and shall be periodically checked by the Biological Monitor. a For each native tree removed, trees will be replaced at the ratios indicated in Table 5.7-7. and/or grading permits Pre-Construction; Construction City of Corona Community Development and Public WOIts Departments J FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-23 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ~ CITY OF CORONA ~ Foothill Parkway W ..t.~y Extension TA8LEi3<o1 FOOTHILL pARKWAY ENVIRONMENTAl IMPACT REPORT :,~,_~:~,;--.,. '1-1<."""".'':;'"".,<:. c_ ·_~.:>_, ... __... ,._.L...... ,"''' _¥1K$ .•,,",,",,",."" ". . _"'-~>.•". .,."" x,',.', -,> .-,_·"':,L .._, ......... _ __," _,.'=io:;<.•.' .. ,_ ..;_ .:-,;,._"-,"...:,.. .:...::",;:,,,. ;_''__ ._.......:.....:....•...:"-'""."'." ... ,:}" ...",-:::~,:,1.bi_._-,'-'''''' ~ iii> ;·MtTIGAtIOH MoNI'I'OAINGAND REPORTINOPROGW . >;i. ..........•..;..• - ;:;:.:.:;:--" ___,-'u;.,,..•..•. k ...•'s..::,.;,;· ,·'1Si.,"'\,,,,..,,....,L'. ii:'" H"./b."""'~·'_:"'__ ,.,c",""bi,,':;:::!J:.';;,c..i"_-';;~__", _" "'.,. .-, --:'..._,'... , .. ",.;-_...... _ .... , "','!~•..:"'"'...,.""""'.:',",:.jtl.,~""_.:,.... ,.... ,!..,,..j"':J""."C_,L: '",u.//JClliiOdOl..'.....:•.::,.,.'.L.....•, .. -'---'_.....'....,..'.L:.... :"~J,~_">:.-.,,z ..._...'P.;:.'":·, I·)"'\;Y'z I ~.~i.. ._.. Vlliflution Of· Com ,. lmpl.·.tmertt.oc;" .. M... n Inltlill'Oate.' ..,. 0 .....It.'...............· Remlllb Mltltatlon MUlu._; ,~i'hlU Ptial. ',:"~-.. ::::-... Q The Landscape Architect shall design the replacement trees into the riparian revegetation to replace the habitat value of the woodlands and trees removed by the proposed alignment. At least 5.06 acres of replacement habitat shall be planted to compensate for the loss of coast live oak woodland habitat. The Planting Plan will be reviewed by a qualified biologist and to ensure that the replacement oak trees are located in such a way to provide comparable habitat quality. Q All replacement trees shall be located in the riparian and oak woodland revegetation areas if possible. If spacing requirements cannot accommodate the number of replacement trees, the trees may be planted adjacent to the proposed road as a transition to open space. Q Planting specifications shall consider the following: a. Newly planted trees shall be planted above grade and maintained for five years, including irrigation, weed control. herbivore protections, and replacement. b, Amending the backfill soil with wood shavings, oak leaf-mold, etc. is not recommended when existing soil is high in natural organic matter with a sandy loam texture. c. Recommendations for the need of planting amendments and drainage systems shall be based on soil tests of this Project site and approved by the City. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-24 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension TAll.I."i.1 'OOTHILL ftARKWAVENVtRONiENTAL IMPA¢T REPORt.""01""',,,, "=~->;i, ..."'-","'" ,', .. " . ". <.', ·.';;'';'-,~.di_.ii'!>'.,'''i>::;::':'~:i'o' ,'.,.•.•.""L .. ;...:..:.;."~~;;"~~.,,..."".."" _"r;\."Ii'••t"",..,_+._...... ; _'" "-, i';"'·.~,_.;:",,-~l't~"h' ~"'_~'"' •._...k,JOi",..., _. '., ".",'!'~,"~>."'-"- , ,.... ,", .' ,MrrlGATION MiNitORINGANDRI!POFtnHG'ROGRAM~";:':;I ,'"'' "f "I ' ,i " , '5i, ""i':' Xi' j' "twice 'V"" •., ""'-",,'9..,,5,*_,,,,,£" Fl'Wi""", ...." .,",.......1.', ''0(,<'''.'.'='1'£".'.1, rH!!.i,....'b'I.'.'...• '.,I" .•.:iv.,.,•. ,i.:;".'.""""I.'.,.i',.. ' , ',' .., I' 'H' . " ,. ," , "1 ...•. ' .",' '. "'. ",.'>'•. .,' :­-._, ' .',-'. -.~C_" '., , -':' ';­~" MltlgatiOri:"eiI""!;) ~ Pre-Construction; Construction ' Pre-Construction; I City of Corona Construction Community Development and Public Works Departments d. Any City approved work within the driplines of saved trees, induding branch removal, shall be under the inspection of a qualified arborist. e. Landscaping requiring irrigation shall not be planted within the dripline of oaks due to the susceptibility of native oaks to root rot caused by excessive unseasonable irrigation. The design and installation of landscape irrigation systems outside the dripline of the oaks shall be such that the area within the dripline is not wetted during operation of the system. In addition, surface runoff from impenneable surfaces shall be directed away from oaks; where natural topography has been altered, proviSions shall be made for drainage away from trunks of oaks so that water will not pond , L or collect within the dri line of an oak. !Wildlife Movement and Habitat Fragmentation :It is recommended that the base of the manufactured slope 5t of the constructed roadway be vegetated with native species to encourage the continued use of Wardlow Wash for emovement. This area may count toward the mHigation equirement for riparian vegetation (Mitigation Measure 5.7­ 2a), oak tree replacement (Mitigation Measure 5.7-2b), and 5.7-4 Ispecial status plant.relocation (Mitigation Measure 5.7-5) if etennined to be appropriate for these mitigation areas. he culvert under Paseo Grande should be designed following Iguidetines in Section 7.5.2 of the MSHCP. Guidelines in Section 7.5.2 recommend a width of at least five feet to allow Ifor oassaoe bv medium-sized wildlife. (The existinG 8-foot , ~ , ___-' ~~____ FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-25 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting lculvert under Paseo Grande exceeds these minimum requirements.) In addition. the crossing should be designed in a manner which allows a dry crossing under most ircumstances. This may indude designing an elevated bench above the normal high water line or providing a textured genII slope up the side of the culvert/undercrossing. Barriers to mall terrestrial wildlife movement should be encouraged along new and modified roadways, so that they are guided oward aDDfopriate undercrossinas. SDecial Status Plants 5.7-5 If construction occurs after fall 2008, a pre-construction survey Pre-Construction; Prior I Pre-Construction; uring the peak ftowering period for the intermediate mariposa to issuance of the I Post-ConstruCtion ily and Coulter's matilija poppy, approximately March through clearing and grubbing, June, shan be conducted by the Project biologist the spring andlor grading permits I Prior to construction. The limits of each plant location within the impact area shall be clearly delineated with brighUy colored flagging. The plants shaH be mitigated by ransplantation (for matilija poppy), bulb collection (mariposa ily), and seed collection (both matilija poppy and mariposa ily). The plants, seeds or bulbs shall then be placed into a uitable mitigation site in the undeveloped portion of the Project site or at an approved off-site location. A qualified iologist shall be selected by the Project Applicant to prepare and implement the mitigation plan. The detailed mitigation I Plan will indude the foHowing requirements and be approved by the City of Corona prior to issuance of the grading permit: Q Seed ripeness wiU be monitored every two weeks by a qualified biologist andlor a quafified seed collector at the existing locations of lilies and poppies to determine when the seeds are ready for collection. A City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments llAte CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension orA'~E 1J~1F()QtHILl,. PA~t<WAt.tMfltONMt4tALIM~'\C:T REpaRT < •••'•• ;<V) , @MITIGATI,iN MONrtOAlHGAHb ltapo~itNQ'PROORA,.rt.c "1"'" .' ' 0"" rei ,_H -'b ;" : -.i . . ' 'J." ':""T." --:-'1' "--', .----.~~:.~. ~~--?';.i\~;r?1-_ '6'#"(*11', ?," , *.:"*,,_.'/ --:*)~'~:_':: ',', _f ,'" -'f; -'t:!i"t" ~::';''".'' ", -,". ,-' _. -, -,~"-_<,,, <"'j" :"05<; f,' =-''-.-,'. -.-.-',,' ".-_'-,:'''i'f' ."" !. '_,' t .,,'~¥,,??: .-..:-IH', . impl..nent.atlonPh_ ... i.~lng.X'Mltlgation M.....~<' <··.···.Agency FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-26 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting I:J I:J I:J I:J ,'''.;.~.,.: ,.,.. ,," . . .. .... _...... . . .tNO AND ItEPOl'ttlNQPROORAM qualified seed collector shall collect al of the seeds from the plants to be impacted when the seeds are ripe. The seeds shall be deaned and stored by a qualified nursery or institution with appropriate storage facUities. Following the seed collection, the bulbs/plants shall be removed by bulb/plant collection, block transplantation method. or root cuttings. whichever is believed to be the most successful method for each species. The bulbs/plants shall either be transplanted directly or stored by a qualified nursery or institution with appropriate storage fadMties. If the bulbslplants are collected and the block transplantation method is not used, then the top 12 inches of topsoil from the lily/poppy locations shall be scraped, stockpiled, and used at the selected mitigation site. The mitigation site shall be located in dedicated open space on the Project site or at an off-site mitigation site. The mitigation site will not be within the road easement and will not be located in a fuel modification zone. The mitigation site shall not attempt to enhance existing populations and shall not be impacted by any pesticides or herbicides used on adjacent properties. The lily/poppy mitigation site shall be prepared for seeding as described in a conceptual restoration plan. The topso~ shall be respread in the selected location as approved by the Project biologist. Approximately 60 to 80 oercent of the seeds and bulbsiDlants "' -',,", ~_=_~_-~~ _~_ '_;...i.,• .l..P;""" " , . '~'•. '"~',""'."""""-~ • CITY Of CORONA . ~;.;;';~~ Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension I.·.. ·." ..·. . '"r ...J~.~§j"1~1.EQ9J"Jb~.~A~PI~!.E.i'~8P~M§~TAbIij~A9tB§~~!j'u'. urn,," __"''T_-"",.,,,, ___ FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-27 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension L...­ TABLE 13011 FOOTHILL PARKWAY.ENVlRONMENtAL IMPACT REPORT ".",' ,« .:" ,. __ ,,~.:, ,~ ","',:.. ... .....• • • .f<r.>&M. _,",___ ..)'I.v!L:.L'i ",}J.i ...• ":!mi·;I.,""': ",j."._)_.u',,,',At, ",:i ,,,., _" .." _.....• :>"." ,~".,' ~,._ "_~_.•\.L~~L.,",,\.:rn,'t,," _~, _ .. ____.' ,_"c." ." -•. ' MITIGATION MONITORIMdAND REPORTINGPItOORAM_'--' "',.v_ .....~~_:__ .o_"'~ ,.',".J'L"',:,,,.,~,_,,·"'·:;"~ •.!l.,,"' , ..,..,., ,.,;..:',_';'!"A_:__ .,~:.'·'._'" ":~".:,:'.,, ,'d"V.,ui."'~M~••.•• ··.··1····.·· 1".10.relit'... ..h/lnltlil~ ";:"bj.· 1 ..RemarictMitigation "eIt.,re Pfla" ... .... AgehUY .,,, -, .,' ~::">~. ,;" i collected shall be spread/placed in the faU following soil preparation. The remainder of the seed and bulbs/plants shall be kept in storage for subsequent seeding, if necessary. u A detailed maintenance and monitoring plan shall be developed by a qualified biologist The plan shall indude detaHed descriptions of maintenance appropriate for the mitigation site, monitoring requirements, and annual report requirements, and shall have the full authority to suspend any operation in the study area which is, in the qualified biologisfs opinion, not consistent with the restoration plan. Any disputes regarding the consistency of an action with the restoration plan shall be resolved by the City of Corona and the biologist. u The performance criteria for intermediate mariposa lily and Coulter's matilija poppy w~1 be 80 percent of transplanted bulbs/plants established within the mitigation site producing leaves each year of the long­ term maintenance and monitoring program. If the performance criteria is not achieved follOwing the first season, remediation measures shall be implemented prior to seeding with the remaining contingency seed and bulbs. Remedial measures shall indude at a minimum: soils testing. control of invasive species, soil amendments, and phYSical disturbance (to provide scarification of the seed) of the planted areas by raking or similar actions. Additional mitigation measures may be suggested as determined appropriate by the Project biologist. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-28 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting e CITY OF CORONA .:;:.:~:~~ Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ' .. TABLE 13001 FOOTHILL PARKWAY ENVIRONMeNTAL IMPACT REPORT , ',:" • , :~ ::-.: " •• 'I. '" '" '. : " • • , • ••• '~'" i ,,"" , ' " ' , , \ ' , ,':'", "., ." : , '" ",". , . " : ... ..... ,.' MlTl~~TlO.N .,.,PNrtPRIN(i ANQJt.,POIJ!IN(t PR(.lCi~,. ." ... . •:> ..... ......... '. ". ' i; ' , i" ·}'i.V.dflCi~9I1Of COl11~inc. ..,,'••i • . '.':Impltm_on. ,..,.., •. ~hfotClftl .••. '.',Monltoflnl )InltlallMIlI_nM_ute .. Dati R....tiks' ,", Agency .PhRe' .... :""".-,I·...'··..... Ph.. -';. ... ' -'" ','," Special Status Wildlife -Least Bell's Vireo r---.... iThe habitat creation included in Mitigation Measure 5.7-2a will Pre-Construction Pre-Construction; City of Corona be required to mitigate for impacts on the least Bel's vireo. In Construction Community addition, the folowing cond~ions will apply: Construction Development and Public Works [J Vegetation clearing activities shall occur during the Departmentsnon-breeding season (September 16 to March 14). If the construction is scheduled to occur during the breeding season, a pr&-construction protocol survey 5.7-6a will be conducted the spring/summer prior to construction to confirm the absence of this species from the impact area and vicinity (i.e., within 500 feet) prior to the start of construction activities. [J The 2008 focused survey results shall be provided to the USACE, USFWS, and CDFG for consideration during jurisdictional permitting and review of the revised DBESP. Special Status Wildlife -Burrowing Owl Pursuant to the MSHCP Objective 6, for burrowing owl, a pre-Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction: City of Corona construction burrowing owl survey shall be conducted prior to to issuance of grading Community issuance of a grading perm~to verify the presence/absence of Construction permits Development and he 0\\1 on the Project site. Within thirty days of the onset of Public Works \iOOstruction activities, a qualified biologist shall survey within Departments 5.7-6b 500 feet of the Project site for the presence of any active owl burrows. Any active burrow found during survey efforts shall be mapped on the construction plans. If no active burrows are found, no further mitigation would be required. Resutts of the surveys shall be provided to the City of Corona. If nesting activity is present at an active burrow, the active site shall be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure _______________ L___ . FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-29 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting pliance with Section 3503.5 of the Califomia Fish and Game Code. Nesting activity for burrowing owl in the region orrnally occurs between March and August. To protect the ctive burrow, the following restrictions to construction ·'}'~'bh~~Itt."i;, Ph... " CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension lactivities shall be required until the burrow is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a 500-foot buffer around any active burrow, unless oIherwise determined by a qualified biologist, and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted wi.thin 300 eel of any active burrow, unless otherwise determined by a ualified biologist. Any encroachment into the buffer area iround the active burrow shall only be allowed ~ the biologist Idetermines that the proposed activity wi. not disturb the nest Iccupants. Construction can proceed when the qualified 'iologist has determined that fledglings have left the nest. If an active burrow is observed during the non-nesting season, he nest site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist. and when the raptor is away from the nest, the biologist will either Iactively or passively relocate the burrowing owl based on direction from the WRC RCA. The biologist shall then remove the burrow so the burrowin owl cannot return to the burrow. - -..--'Seven days prior to the onset of construction activities during Pre-Construction; Prior IPre-Construction; he raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30), a qualified to issuance of the Construction biologist shall survey within 500 feet of the Project impact area clearing and grubbing, ,for the presence of any active raptor nests (common or special and/or grading permits 5.7-6c status). Any nest found during survey efforts shall be mapped Ion the construction plans. If no active nests are found, no 'urther mitigation would be required. Results of the surveys shall be provided to the CDFG. City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-30 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting I CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension ,;.•.. ;. ' ' ~, "'i.'.~,••.·""tA(l~S'3..t fOqrHILL .~AI\f<\VAY I~VlRQNMENTALtMPACrItE~C)Rri .", " "..:. . . . " , .... ,,", .. t.tttiQAft9Nfe'O~tfPRlN(I A~D R!PORlt"~PRQORA,.,. ~." . ~," "'. ".." ,i" "."..'..... '.' MitigatiOn MelSure ',' " ." If nesting activity is present at any raptor nest site, the acUve site shall be protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with Section 3503.5 of the Califomia Fish and Game Code. To protect any nest site, the following restrictions to construction activitles are required until nests are no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist (1) clearing limits shall be established within a 500-foot buffer around any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist, and (2) access and surveying shall be restricted within 300 feet of any occupied nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist. Any encroachment into the buffer area around the known nest shall only be allowed if the biologist determines that the proposed activity wiR not disturb the nest occupants. Construction can proceed when the qualified biologist has determined that fledgtings have left the nest. If an acUve nest is observed during the non-nesting season, the nest site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist, and when the raptor is away from the nest, the biologist will flush any raptor to open space areas. A qualified bidogist. or Fonstruction personnel under the direcUon of the qualified biologist. shall then remove the nest site so raptors cannot retum to a nest. Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP Conservation Area to protect species within the MSHCP 5.7-7b Conservation Area from direct night lighting. Shielding shan be 'ncorporated in Project designs to ensure ambient lighting in the MSHCP Conservation Area is not increased. When approving landscape plans for proposed landscaping5.7-7d iildjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area. the City shall 'Im~_tMlon',,', PhIlO' Pre-Construction; Post- Construction; Operation Pre-Construction; Prior to issuance of permits ,.,' r.tOhltOrlng Ph... Pre-Construction : Post-Construction; Operation Construction , .' '7 '. ,V~on of C.,,,~anCi I '.' Enictrclng '.b. RemllbInldillAgency City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments City of Corona Communi!}' , FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-31 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting 5.7-8 CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension :,,"," " >:~< TAB~,,1!e,1,f;Q91Hn,.L PARI(YiAV eNVI~Q~~.~,1~1~PAgr,!'~l'Orrt ,,' , ;, :) , "'..c., " ; , .), MiTIGAflON MONITORINO ANDAIPOItTlNG PROGRAM,i., i., .... ,,' -. -, "', " .. ,,'." _,,",,'F'i'»-;:; ..•C' ",:,,--.-. -;,'"',:,-":.-:,-;,., ,",,-, -" " ",' / ,',' ,.', c· _,', ,'_' _"'._ " ", , ". • ie', ,~,:, ,...;;. ',"",""" ';';;;;:,i:;, ' "" ',",.""'" .," ;.,.,VerifiCation oftompHanuI.?;,: ',,":"'.i.i ,::,:" ,'Impl~.ntlijon ",,, 'S~n9;'"Monltatl~ Jnltj,. ",,,,' RaritarklMitigation ,.~~~ Dati:';Agency ,Ph... Ph."'", ,;" , ,>; . ;, ~ •__ : ·';r,·', ,-"--,,,' ":" " ,,'"""~ " ""-­- Construction City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments --_._-­ -----­ consider the invasive, non-native plant species listed in the Development and MSHCP and will require revisions to landscape plans to avoid of the landscape plans Public Works the use of invasive species for the landscaping adjacent to the Departments MSHCP Conservation Area. Considerations in reviewing the applicability of this list will indude proximity of planting areas o the MSHCP Conservation Areas, species considered in the planting plans, resources being protected within the MSHCP Conservation Area and their relative sensitivity to invasion, and barriers to plant and seed dispersal, such as walls, ollQlLraphy and other features. [where appropriate, barriers shall be placed in individual Pre-Construction Pre-Con struction; City of Corona Project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, Construction Community ~omestic animal predation, illegal trespass or dumping in the Development and5.7-7e MSHCP Conservation Area. Such barriers may include native Public Works landscaping, rockslboulders, fencing, walls, sign age andlor Departments other appropriate mechanisms. ~Quasi.Public Lands """---"""­ The DBESP Report includes replacement of Public/Quasi Pre-Construction public land permanenlly impacted by the proposed alignmen hrough the purchase of equivalent or superior quality habita at a 1:1 ratio that shall be dedicated in fee tille or conservatior ~asement to the Westem Riverside County Regiona Conservation Authority. The resource agencies shall reviev. he proposed acquisition to ensure that the lands to be acquired by the City of Corona are of equivalent or superio quality to the Public/Quasi-public lands impacted by thE proposed alignment. The dedicated lands shall be managec by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservatior Authorlty in a manner that is consistent with the goals of the MSHCP. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-32 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ------ --------- CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension .., , .......•.•.. ... \/....•....... TABLE 13-1 FootHILLpARkWAY ENVIRONMBNTALIM!ACT REPORT . :," , .... _,'. _ -,,,,'" ': ".'-"""." ,,-", '-~'" ., -''''.," ~, .. ,;!"!"_-,:,,,,,' , '" - , " 1 -. j,"C>,," '-, 'J ",., " ' " ,",' ----,':_,-_:,. ,,",,',' ,-, '\ .,' " ," , I .,:, ..:,.' "'. Mm~TIQ~:.M()NII~RI~~ ~ND~!PORtINGeRgg~f4 ·...t ,,:, :. .'" j " ·"""i>·':·lli,. ".•.••"•.' ,',.', ,', ·".,l>;:; .;" ~ ;;~,. I,: ..Y'tIflt$lI~n9f~pllance, , 'i ,':' iii';n', i!' I:::':'" "i' :;.1\ .' ,:.' , '.,.,..'Ertfotclnj~:;'Im~~on~:"'tn~,1~p.:. Ihltla.1s I .•••.. D•..• ,.... ,···1,/···· I'Ms.,.""Iligatlon MOlufl";" Agency" ,,~~'H ,'.' ·.'ha.. , ;, ' ".,'. '" ."',J":: , Jurisdictional Impacts Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.7-2a and 5.7 -2b Pre-Construction; Pre-Construction; City of Corona Construction Construction Community 5.7-9 Development and Public Works Departments _ .. ------" CULTURAL RESOURCES Historic Resources Recordation. If the historic arroyo stone footbridge is -­ ~emolished or relocated, recordation (by photographs, measured drawings, and narrative) of the historic resource shall be made in order to ensure a permanent record of the present appearance and context of the historical resource is maintained. Demolition/relocation and recordation of historic resources shall be according to Historic American Engineering5.8-1a Record (HAER) standards prior to any construction activities. Once the HAER documentation is approved by a designated Project architectural historian, who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards, the resulting archival documentation shaR be filed with the State Office of Historic PreselVation, City of Corona Planning Deparbnent, and Corona Public Ubrary, Heritage Room. Relocation. Relocate the historic arroyo stone footbridge to a comparable location/setting within the community, if feasible. Such relocation efforts shall be undertaken in accordance with a Relocation Plan prepared by a qualified architectural 5.8-1b historian, historic architect, or historic preselVation professional that satisfies the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for History, Architectural History, or Architecture. The Relocation Plan shall include relocation methodology recommended by the National Park Pre-Construction; Prior to the issuance of demolition permits Pre-Construction Pre-Construction: Construction Pre-Construction City Of Corona Community Development and Public Works Deparbnents i City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-33 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension T~BLEJ 3·' FOC)t~ILL PA~KWAY ENVlRO~Mt;~r~IM~A.CTREPQ~T " "".'. MITIGATION M()NrtOrtIN(lAHfjR!PORrING PRO.GRA~ .•.... I"> ......., .. "..•...."" V.tHlcation.ufCornpliance ." MltIgatton MIDure.: Implementation MonitOring Enforcing Inltl~. bate !lernarkJ·Ph_ Phase Aglncy Service, which are outlined in the booklet entitled aMoving Historic Buildings: by John Obed Curtis (1979), and the Secretary of the Interior's standards for the Treatment of lHistoric Properties, as applicable. Upon relocation of the ~tructure to the new site, any maintenance, repair. stabilization, rehabilitation, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction work perfonned in conjunction with the relocation of the footbridge shall be undertaken in a manner consistent with the Standards. At the relocation site, provide a public information sign/plaque that explains why the resource is significant. """""--------­ ~.Offer the resource and/or elements of it to a local Pre-Construction Pre-Construction; City of Corona preservation group(s) for salvage or reuse, if relocation is not Construction Community 5.8-1c feasible. Development and Public Works Departments ---------------­ Archaeological Resources If archaeological resources are discovered during excavation Construction Construction City of Corona and grading activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work Community and shall retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the Development and significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Public Works Requirements may include. but not limited to, preservation, Departments recordation, relocation. salvage, recovery, and/or collection of 5.8-2a larchaeological resources. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered archaeological resources. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes and regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-34 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension f~aLl1a..1 POOTHILLl'AAKWAY I1NViAONMeNtALIMPAC1 REPORTI ,', ," I:' I ::,' :,_?cr ,'~':_'" -, -'! ! '!-;i;~-!:~'~~J:ii~«i9iJ:iHrri~iiQ;ij9.:i~Ri8ji!~:ta~liif:~~:"t: S.8-2b MitigAtiOn Mttiutt If human remains are discovered as a result of the Project uring development. aM activity shall cease immediately, and he Contractor shall notify the Riverside County Coroner's Office immediately pursuant to California Health and Safety Section 7050.5. and a qualified archaeologist and Native mencan monitor shall be contacted. Should the Coroner termine the human remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shaD be contacted IPursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The descendents or his or her authorized representative, with the permission of the City of Corona, may inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the C~y or Project Contractor actions for treating or disposing. with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. Native merican descendents shall complete their inspection and make their recommendation within 48 hours of their notification by the Native American Heritage Commission. The ecommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of hUman remains and items sociated with Native American burials. If human remains arl Idiscovered, the City of Corona may be required to preserve, alvage, or retinquish the remains and associated items to the lescendants for treatmen~ as well as recordation. The Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time e of discovered human remains. Paleontological Resources qualified paleontologist shall be retained to examine 5 8-3 ,earthwork spoils generated during construction activities. If . a Ipaleontological resources are clscovered. the Project Contractor shall stoP all work and the paleontoloQist shall Construction Construction Construction Construction City of Corona Community Development and Public Works Departments City of Corona Community Development and Public Works -------------------~ 'Remarl$ ", FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-35 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension 'c r~LE 1a~1 ~~THIL.J..,PA~t<WAY EN\1~9N~EN1'AJ..JM~~¢rf R.poRl.i .' ,~. ~ c. c~MrrtG~rIQNfetQNltOrtlf4(\~l)l\E~R11~Q;Pllqo~t( . . .' ,'.:' . oc c 0, . . . ' . c':. V~~~->f Compliance Inqj..,.,tauon Enforcing······· ., .. MItigatiOn MIaIW'e MonltOling .:' Initial. Date Remarki . <';:'<::' Ph... 'has." . Agency evaluate the significance of the finding and the appropriate Departments liourse of action. Requirements may include. but not limited to, preservation, recordation, relocation, salvage, recovery, andfor colledion of paleontological resources. The Project Contractor shall provide a reasonable period of time for salvage of discovered paleontological resources. Any measures applied shaH include the preparation of a report meeting professional standards, which shall be submitted to .' i I i the Riverside County Museum of Natural History. ~~~~ -­~pre-construction meeting shall be conducted in which the Pre-Construction Pre-Construction City of Corona Project paleontologist shall explain procedures necessary to Community 5.8-3b protect and safely mitigate impacts to potentially significant Development and ossil materials for study and curation. Public Works Departments HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAUTY Water Quality ­Short·TennlConstruction)lm~acts Prior to approval of the Project plans and Specifications. the Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction; City of Corona Public City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans to the issuance of Construction Works Department and specifications stipulate that prior to the issuance of any grading permits grading permits, the Project Applicant shall be responsible for filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) and for filing the appropriate fees pursuant to the NPDES program. The Project Contractor shall incorporate stonnwater pollution control measures into a 5.9·1a SWPPP. A copy of the SWPPP shall be available and implemented at the construction site at all times. BMPs shall be implemented to the maximum extent possible by incorporating water pollution control practices in the follOwing categories: soil stabilization, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-storm water management, and r.vaste management and materials pollution control. BMPs may indude, but not limited 10, sandbag barriers, sediment FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-36 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension 5.9-1b 5.9-1c 5.9-1d t~SL~13-1 Fo~t~Ii.+P'I\f.tKWA,Y~~VlRONMENtALIM~~eT REP9ltt ~~ :: , 'c"' MitiGAtiON MONITORINGANb REPORTING PROGRAM = " '. "" "'" ',1" . ",""': '. • ,'" '" I"~ .. c, ::. '," ", ~; '.' • • .. " '".~ _. " "" ,. j "'''' ~, ,"" , , V.rHI~on of CQiWlpll.,ct ImplemlriWlon Monltotfno ' Inf6tclng' " ::';:', 'I.' ,: '; (~:::, .' 'I ' Mltlgatiol'l MeaiUre " Ii Ph •••.· Fi~... " . '',' Agil1ey' Initial. '. Dati . Itlmarb '. .< . '", ,,'< basins, debris removal wheel washes, biofdlration strips or swales, debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the SWRCB, ineluding coverage under he NPDES statewide General Stonmwater Penmit for Con.!tructi_on Activities, must be demonstrated. - Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction City of Corona Public the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confinm that the plans to the issuance of Works Department and specifications stipulate that prior to the issuance of grading permits ~rading penmits, on-site drainage plans shall be in compMance lwith the NPDES guidelines. BMPs may include, but not be limited to, sandbag barriers, sediment basins, debris removal wheel washes, biolfiltration strips or swales, debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. -------------~-~~~ Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction City of Corona Public the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans to the issuance of Works Department and specifications illustrate that the proposed aHgnment permits of the street complies with the DAMP guidelines and procedures. The improvement plans proposed alignment is required to implement pollution prevention, treatment controls, and construction BMPs consistent with the requirements of DAMP. BMPs may 'nelude, but not limited to, biofiltration strips or swales. debris basins, hydro dynamic separators, and/or gross solid removal devices. During final design of the proposed alignment, the ype, selection, and sizing of biofiltration strips or swales, and ~ebriS basins shall be specified and illustrated on Project plans and specifications. ~~-- In the event that previously unknown soil or groundwater Construction Construction City of Corona Public contamination is encountered during Project construction, WorKs Department ~nstruction activities shall be suspended and appropriate ---­ FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-37 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting I CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension TABLE t3-1 FOOTHIL~PARKWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTREPbRT" , ,', ;, .,"' .' ", ..~',,"~.t~"~·"'·"" ..iL_~: .J,.;',.~':.:~. ,,,b'.-'._.L'A""'';:~':~_ ,.;C~' '. ,..,"' .... , .... " ,':",",,"_ r. • ",.' ''''''''",".,." • _.~, ','-,'Y;" , . ..,,~, ...".c,',. (. ".::.)~. '''',,' '" MITIGAtiON MGNITORlNOAND REPORtiNG PROGRAM Ii ,11"",-"-",-; ,',_ ~,,' ·"",,, .. ",~",,.. ;,.,::,,.:":"":.,;l:,,,,',Uc.'.L:~,.'N,!,"(,,.,~._,., :"",..\.e ........ '. _L' .t..'~,;;,.i,,:••.~,. ,,.~,,: _._'" '.' MltiOation Mift.,rI health and safety procedures shall be implemented. including implementation of an appropriate remediation strategy that is approved by the City and Department of Toxic Substance Control. If concentrations of materials are detected above regulatory cleanup levels during demomion or construction activities. the following mitigation measure shall include: (J Excavation and disposal at a permitted off-site facility; lJ On-site treatment; or (J Other measures as appropriate. Should contamination levels be in excess of acceptable Federal. State. and/or County of Riverside levels, a remedial faction plan (subject to approval by the Department of Toxic Substance Control, Riverside County Department of Environmental Health. and responsible regulatory agendes) shall be implemented to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. Additionally. refer to M~igation Measure 5.3-1k in Section 5.3, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. iWater Quality -Long·Term (Operational) Impacts The follOwing BMPs shall be utUized for development of the Iproposed roadway alignment for the Foothill Par1Iway ~xtension Project: o Excavation within and outside the existing basin 5.9-2 RCFC&WCD RIW to retain the original storage volume through extending the southern end of the basin approximately 150 feet; lJ Construction of a new low-level outlet upgraded to be consistent with other debris basin outlet structures constructed by RCFC&WCD; V.fI"*Oft ~fC~~!lanCi ',;JtriPlementltion': Monltorl~ !ftfOrclnO Inltill. I It_arb.. Phate Ph... AgenCY, Construction Construction ICity of Corona Public Wor\(s Department FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-38 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting iI:f!::::\ CITY OF CORONA ~ Foothill Parkway Westerly Ext ....lon TABLE 13-1 FOOtHILL PARKWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPoRT .', '." " • """,' ,,' '-. --';\"",-, '>' ,,;,,"n' ., ,.,'.'" .. -, ,,,,"'. ,. ' ",',"" " ,'. '".. ',:~;.: .", ,,' c,_. ,'",;._ ..:.,.. ,', ',"','. . .; J ' ..: .L: i ' Mtrl(JATIQ" MQN1to~'N~,ANDIlEP,QRrl~CPR()ORA'..·';;.'; ;.'". .. .. ". 'ii.. ' 'i:' ","""" . '.' ..': .VOriftcatlon, of COI't\PUI""'., . Impl...,_tltttoh, "~nltOrtng·';·1 ,. Igforclng •. .; ',.. MltillifJon Mwu~ ,L ..•••.•.. I····· Initialt Date RemarlelPh'" ' Ph. I',. Agellly Q Construction of an extension of the existing spillway, which would consist of a triple-box culvert; and Q New access ramps to the bottom of the roadway and perimeter access roadway. Groundwater 5.9-3 No mitigation measures are required. ------­ Drainage Pattems ­Erosion/Siltation ~-4 No mitigation measures are required. ----------­-.-J Drainage Pattems •• Flooding 5.9-5 No mitigation measures are required. ------­ Drainage Pattems •• Drainage System Ca~ill .-~. DUring the PS&E Phase a design level Hydraulic Report shall ! Pre-Construction Pre-Construction City of Corona Public be prepared and indude an analysis of hydrologic conditions Works Department or the proposed alignment and recommend specific drainage 5.9-6 improvement required to accommodate storage volumes and flood protection for existing and future runoff, such as culvert, detention basins. and debris basins. This report shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS Soils 5.10-1 Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.9-1 a through 5.9-1c in Section Pre-Construction; Pre-Construction; City of Corona Public 5.9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUAUTY. Construction Construction Works Department Fault Fiupture Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction City of Corona Public the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans to the issuance of Works Department 5.10-2 and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment compfies permits of the street with Uniform Building Code and the most current engineering improvement plans standards related to design and siting for seismic hazards. FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-39 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension .-. , ~,:. TA8LS.1~tfOOrttltL PAR!M~YeN~I\O~M.Nr41'''~~TR.eQ~T )2.. . .... ; :. ..... : .;;-'.• :: MITIGA1IONMONlTORlN6'AND WO~1IN8·HtOlIWt··· .... . y: .:,. ,i.; ". '.;. """"" "'<,,,,, '''I,:', ',y "," 'J:.,.;" ,r -,' ";' r ',-r;:.,,-'., '~';;i-' " ,,'" '<' '" .. ~: .. ~-'1 ,. ." •••••••••• :: .. ' .", . ~". 1,\."'...;.');1 1·-­" 1~'2! •. V.tifIC~.of QO!'Ji~.""•... Irii~etItatlon" : MOhltoring EnforciltO .:....• :. ,/1 " ,(, .. Mltlgation-M.ltI... :.,...• " ·'h...·< '.. "hal' AfI"'~ Ilnltl. Dlfe Rentlrkl . ' ... .. ,5 ' ·;·i • Seismic Ground Shaking Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a site-specific Pre-Construction; Prior Construction City of Corona Public geotechnical report shall be prepared by a registered geologist to issuance of grading Works Department or soils engineer and submitted to the City Engineer, or his pennit 5. 1()"'3a ~esignee, for approval. The geotechnical report shan provide ~onstruction recommendations to minimize impacts related to seismic ground shaking. All recommendations in the geotechnical report shal be implemented during site preparation, grading, and construction. Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications. Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction City of Corona Public he City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that the plans to the issuance of Works Department 5.10-3b and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment complies permits of the street with Uniform Building Code and the most current engineering improvement plans standards related seismicground shaking. --------------------... Liquefaction Prior to the issuance of a grading permit. a s~e-specific Pre-Construction; Prior Construction City of Corona Public geotechnical report shaH be prepared by a registered geologis to issuance of grading Works Department or soils engineer and submUed to the C~y Engineer, or his permit 5.10-4a designee, for approval. The geotechnical report shall provide construction recommendations to minimize impacts related to liquefaction. All recommendations in the geotechnical report shall be implemented during site preparation, grading. and construction. -­ Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications. Pre-Construction; Prior Pre-Construction City of Corona Public he City Engineer, or his designee, shall conflnn that the plans to issuance of grading Works Department 5.10-4b and specifications illustrate the proposed alignment complies pennit ~th Uniform Building Code and the most current engineering standards related design for development on liquefiable soils. .......-~-. Landslides 5.10-5 INo mitigation measures are required. 1 I I I I 1 .' FINAL. JANUARY 2009 13-40 Mitigation Monitoring and Repol1lng ____ CITY OF CORONA Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension "AB~E13-1.Fcm'tHILL.i'ARKWA yeNYlRONM~N,.ALIM"ACT~EPOR"··· ... :.:' ,. ,: :;.ii~,I~AU9~:~9iITq~N9}iilJ:ij~6itj'~fiS§9~~:::2i'::>~: .. ,:....;.::: ..;;:;','::::: .'...• :0:::::.::' I Expansive Soils/Slo ._._ ~ut slopes which expose loose sands and gravels shall be Construction 5.10-6a Irequired to include over excavation and replacement with a rained stabilization fill. 5.10-6b Fill slopes shall be designed at a two to one ratio (or natter), in Pre-Construction; Prior la horizontal to vertical direction. Locally steeper fill slopes to the issuance of shall be considered but shall be constructed with grading permits leosynthetics to enhance the shear strength of fill materials. Higher compaction standards, which are typically 93 percent of the laboralory maximum dry dens~y, should be limplemented in deeper fills of greater than 40 feel to enhance ngineering characteristics and reduce the amount of potential settlement. Subsurface drainage devices shall be installed below fills to intercept and direct water that may seep from the bedrock or be introduced from the surface. Natural slopes that expose loose sands and gravels shall Construction 510-& . ,require and include over excavation and replacement with a 'rained stabilization fill/shear key. Construction I City 01 Corona PublIc Works Department Pre-Construction; ICity of Corona Public Construction Works Department Construction ICity 01 Corona Public Works Department o ensure stabil~y of expansive soils, the following techniques shall be followed: proper design of foundations, slabs, streets and other improvements subject to the influence of soils; over xcavation of the expansive soils and replacement with less xpansive fill soils; utili2ing selective grading techniques to5. 1O-Gd place more highly expansive soils well below foundation lements; employment of presaturation techniques to lessen lexpansion potential; control of surface and subsurface drainages to prevent moistUre variations; and comtinations of hese various techniQues. City of Corona Public Works Department Construction Construction FINAL. JANUARY 2009 1341 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting REVISED AGENDA ITEM 7G Additions are noted by Bold Italics, Deletions are noted by Strikcthrough RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director Gregory Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendments to Agreements for On -Call Internal Audit Services Including the Triennial Performance Audits for Fiscal Years 2006/07 through 2008/09 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-029-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-029-00, with Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA), to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audit of the Commission for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $30,000, and to increase the contract amount $100,000 $200,000 for additional on -call internal audit services; and 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-030-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-030-00, with Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C., (MHM) to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audits of the Riverside County transit operators for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $61,600, and to increase the contract amount $100,000 $200,000 for additional on -call internal audit services. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its October 10, 2007 meeting, the Commission approved the selection of TCBA and MHM to perform on -call internal audit services, including audits related to mandated pre -award audits and contract close-outs as well as other reviews and assistance, for an initial three-year period plus two one-year options. Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 with TCBA and Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 with MHM were each approved in the amount of $100,000. During the past two years, staff has awarded various task orders to each of these firms for pre -award audits, contract close-out audits, and/or vendor audits totaling $94,825 to TCBA under five separate task orders, and $74,895 to MHM under four separate tasks orders. Performance and Operations Audit In accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 99246, the Commission is required to designate an entity other than itself to conduct a performance audit of its activities and the activities of each operator to whom it allocates funds. The audits are required to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of the Commission and public transit operators. The audits must be conducted in accordance with the guidelines set by the State of California Department of Transportation's Performance Audit Guidebook for Transit Operators and Regional Transportation Planning Entities and the Standards for Audits of Governmental Organizations, Programs, Activities, and Functions (Government Auditing Standards) issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. These audits are required every three years and the next audits for the FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 must be completed by June 30, 2010. Barring any complications, staff expects to complete the work by June although an extension through September 30, 2010 has been granted by the state should exigent circumstances arise. The performance audits will cover FYs 2006/07, 2007/08, and 2008/09 and will include the Commission and seven public operators: the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, Riverside Special Services, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, Riverside Transit Agency, and SunLine Transit Agency. It should be noted the Commission's Commuter Rail Program is included as part of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority's performance audit. Based on the original proposals submitted in 2007 by TCBA and MHM in response to the Commission's request for proposals for internal audit services, staff determined that TCBA and MHM had the experience and qualifications to conduct performance and operational audits. Accordingly, staff requested updated information from each of these two firms, including recent experience, a work plan, identification of staff, and cost proposal. As a result of this information, staff recommends the selection of TCBA to conduct the performance audit of the Commission for $30,000 and MHM to conduct the performance audits of the transit operators, including a review of capital project management, for $61,600. Pre -Award and Project Close-out Audits The utilization of these firms to conduct various contractor audits, as noted earlier, has facilitated Commission's adherence to state and federal funding prerequisites, and has resulted in effective contract negotiations and substantial cost savings. Due to the successful utilization of these firms for on -call internal audit services, the contract amounts have been virtually exhausted over the past two years. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Commission approve exercising of the two one-year option periods for a revised contract term ending on October 31, 2012, REVISED Agenda Item 7G and an increase of $200,000 each to the total contract amount for on -call internal audit services agreements with MHM and TCBA that will secure the required audit services through the issuance of task orders. Staff recommends amendments to the existing on -call internal audit services with TCBA and MHM to include additional scope of services related to the performance audits for the stated fees as well as to increase the contract amounts for the on -call internal audit services. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $125,000 N/A FY 2010/11 + $366,600 Source of Funds: Federal, state, and Measure A funds Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 106 62 65401 (Performance Audits) XXX XX 65401 (Contractor Audits) Fiscal Procedures Approved: \44,4,e3%, Date: 02/02/2010 REVISED Agenda Item 7G • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director Gregory Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendments to Agreements for On -Call Internal Audit Services Including the Triennial Performance Audits for Fiscal Years 2006/07 through 2008/09 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-029-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-029-00, with Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA), to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audit of the Commission for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $30,000, and to increase the contract amount $100,000 for additional on -call internal audit services; and 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-030-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-030-00, with Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C., (MHM) to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audits of the Riverside County transit operators for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $61,600, and to increase the contract amount $100,000 for additional on -call internal audit services. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its October 10, 2007 meeting, the Commission approved the selection of TCBA and MHM to perform on -call internal audit services, including audits related to mandated pre -award audits and contract close-outs as well as other reviews and assistance, for an initial three-year period plus two one-year options. Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 with TCBA and Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 with MHM were each approved in the amount of $100,000. During the past two years, staff has awarded various task orders to each of these firms for pre -award audits, contract close-out audits, and/or vendor audits totaling $94,825 to TCBA under five separate task orders, and $74,895 to MHM under four separate tasks orders. Agenda Item 7G 33 Performance and Operations Audit In accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 99246, the Commission is required to designate an entity other than itself to conduct a performance audit of its activities and the activities of each operator to whom it allocates funds. The audits are required to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of the Commission and public transit operators. The audits must be conducted in accordance with the guidelines set by the State of California Department of Transportation's Performance Audit Guidebook for Transit Operators and Regional Transportation Planning Entities and the Standards for Audits of Governmental Organizations, Programs, Activities, and Functions (Government Auditing Standards) issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. These audits are required every three years and the next audits for the FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 must be completed by June 30, 2010. Barring any complications, staff expects to complete the work by June although an extension through September 30, 2010 has been granted by the state should exigent circumstances arise. The performance audits will cover FYs 2006/07, 2007/08, and 2008/09 and will include the Commission and seven public operators: the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, Riverside Special Services, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, Riverside Transit Agency, and SunLine Transit Agency. It should be noted the Commission's Commuter Rail Program is included as part of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority's performance audit. Based on the original proposals submitted in 2007 by TCBA and MHM in response to the Commission's request for proposals for internal audit services, staff determined that TCBA and MHM had the experience and qualifications to conduct performance and operational audits. Accordingly, staff requested updated information from each of these two firms, including recent experience, a work plan, identification of staff, and cost proposal. As a result of this information, staff recommends the selection of TCBA to conduct the performance audit of the Commission for $30,000 and MHM to conduct the performance audits of the transit operators, including a review of capital project management, for $61,600. Pre -Award and Project Close-out Audits The utilization of these firms to conduct various contractor audits, as noted earlier, has facilitated Commission's adherence to state and federal funding prerequisites, and has resulted in effective contract negotiations and substantial cost savings. Due to the successful utilization of these firms for on -call internal audit services, the contract amounts have been virtually exhausted over the past two years. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Commission approve exercising of the two one-year option periods for a revised contract term ending on October 31, 2012, Agenda Item 7G 34 • and an increase of $200,000 each to the total contract amount for on -call internal audit services agreements with MHM and TCBA that will secure the required audit services through the issuance of task orders. Staff recommends amendments to the existing on -call internal audit services with TCBA and MHM to include additional scope of services related to the performance audits for the stated fees as well as to increase the contract amounts for the on -call internal audit services. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 + Amount: $125,000 $366,600 Source of Funds: Federal, state, and Measure A funds Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No,: 106 62 65401 (Performance Audits) XXX XX 65401 (Contractor Audits) Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Y1z141,414,, , Date: 02/02/2010 Agenda Item 7G 35 • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriations - Alameda Corridor East STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve on a first -come -first -served -basis, the allocation of $1.349 million in support of Alameda Corridor East (ACE) grade separations located in Riverside County. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In December 2009, President Obama signed a consolidated appropriations bill containing congressionally -directed funding in the amount of $1.349 million for grade separation projects on the ACE for projects located in Riverside County. As identified in the 2008 Grade Separation Funding Strategy: A Blueprint for Advancing Projects, there were 61 at -grade ACE crossings in Riverside County. A total of three of the at -grade crossings have been completed (Avenue 48/Dillon Road, Avenue 50, and Jurupa Avenue) and an additional two (Columbia Avenue and Magnolia Avenue) are under construction. The remaining 56 crossings continue to present conflicts between rail and highway traffic and are located on the main lines of either the Union Pacific (UP) or Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroads. The purpose of the 2008 funding blueprint, which was approved by the Commission at its October 2008 meeting, was to develop a strategy and funding plan that leverages existing funding commitments of local jurisdictions. In doing so, the plan developed a strategy for funding 20 of the 61 crossings for a total project cost of $980.5 million. Of that amount, $414.8 million in funding was secured through local, state, and federal funding sources. The funding balance of $565.7 million consists of unsecured sources, including railroad contributions, the California Public Utilities Commission, voluntary container premiums, or have an unidentified funding source. Attached is a copy of Appendix B from the Commission Grade Separation Funding Strategy, which provides a summary of the 20 priority projects including an overview of the funding and project status. Staff is requesting that the $1.349 million appropriation be allocated to one of the 20 high priority ACE projects. If approved, the funding would be allocated on a first -come -first -served Agenda Item 7H 36 basis. Once funding is requested and project deliverability is demonstrated, staff will seek approval from the Commission to allocate the earmark to a specific project or projects. Attachment: Appendix B — RCTC Grade Separation Funding Strategy - Summary Agenda Item 7H 37 • • • Appendix B RCTC Grade Separation Funding Strategy - Summary RCTC Priority Tier Crossing Total Project Cost Federal State CPUC Railroad Section Local Contribution 190 Voluntary Total Container ANA. Balance Premiums Funds' Needed Project Status Funding Strategy Priority A 2 Auto Center Drive/ BNSF $32.0 $8.30 $16.00 $2.70 - $5.0 $32.0 - FD 3 Avenue 52/UP $17.3 $10.20 - $2.10 - $5.0 - $17.3 - CE PSR i 4 Avenue 56/ Airport Blvd./UP $60.0 - $10.00 $50.00 - - - $60.0 - CE PSR (Eqv.) 3 Avenue 66NP $33.6 - $10.00 $23.50 - - - $33.5 - CE PSR (Eqv.) i 1 1 Columbia Avenue/ BNSF & UP $34.1 - $6.00 $20.45 $2.60 $5.0 - $34.1 - C 1 Iowa Avenue/ BNSF & UP $32.0 $10.30 $13.00 $2.40 $1.30 $5.0 - $32.0 - PS&E 1 Magnolia Avenue/UP $51.2 - $20.00 $26.20 - $5.0 - $51.2 - 'Rerorar1 Ir 1 Sunset Avenue/UP $36.5 $10.60 $10.00 $12.90 $3.00 - - $36.5 - PE Funding Strategy Priority B 1 3rd Street/ BNSF & UP $40.2 $7.66 $17.50 $0.50 $2.00 $5.0 $7.5 . $40.2 - PE 2 1 Clay Street/UP Magnolia Avenue/ BNSF .137.4 $81.8 $10.00 $15.00 $12.50 $13.70 $1.18 $1.87 $15.10 $4.09 $5.0 $5.0 $6.9 $28.9 $37.4 - _$81.8 - CE PSR (Eqv.) CE PSR (Eqv.) r 1 Riverside Avenue/UP $30.3 $5.00 $8.50 $2.50 $1.30 $5.0 $8.0 $30.3 E 2 Streeter Avenue/UP $36.8 $7.80 $15.50 $2.20 $1.30 $5.0 $5.0 $36,8 E i Funding Strategy Priority C 3 Bellgrave Avenue/ UP $105.5 - - $1.00 - - $- 31.0 $104.5 CE PSR (Eqv.) 2 Center Street/ BNSF & UP $36.3 - - $0.50 - - $- $0.5 $35.8 CPU .) 1 Jurupa Road/UP $108.4 - - $12.00 $10.34 45.0 $81.1 $108.4 - CE PSR (Eqv.) j ! 2 Mary Street/BNSF $38.0 - - $2.25 - $5.0 $30.8 $38.0 - PE 1 McKinley Street/ BNSF $109.2 $0.40 - $1.5D - - $- $1.9 $107.3 CE PSR (Eqv.) 3 Railroad Street/ BNSF $30.0 - - $0.25 - - $- $0.3 $29.8 CE PSR (Eqv.) 2 Smith Avenue/ BNSF $30.0 - - $0.25 - - S- $0.3 $29.8 CE PSR (Eqv.) TOTALS: $980.5 $85.3 $152.7 $179.5 $27.8 $60.0 $168.1 $673.3 $307.1 Total available funds include unsecured funding including railroad contributions, CPUC Section 190 and voluntary container fees. (All dollars in millions. Slight discrepancies may occur due to rounding.) i i 24 LEGEND CPU Conceptual Planning Underway CE PSR Conceptual Engineering PSR CE PSR (Eqv.) Conceptual Engineering PSR for Equivalent) PE Preliminary Engineering E Environmental ROW&D Right of Way and Design C Construction PS&E Plans, Specifications and Estimate FD Final Design 38 RCTC Grade Separation Funding Strategy 2008 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Extension of the Commercial Paper Program Standby Letter of Credit STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 10-006, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of an Amendment to the Credit Agreement and Related Amendments to Certain Other Documents, a Supplement to the Offering Memorandum and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith"; 2) Approve the draft Amendment No. 1 to the reimbursement agreement dated as of March 1, 2005, by and between the Commission and Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America), relating to the Commission's Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 1; 3) Approve an amendment to the commercial paper dealer agreement between the Commission and Barclays Capital Inc. (Barclays) to reduce the authorized amount of Commercial Paper Notes, Series A from $110 million to $75 million and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 2; 4) Approve an amendment to the commercial paper dealer agreement between the Commission and Bank of America Merrill Lynch (Merrill Lynch) to reduce the authorized amount of Commercial Paper Notes, Series B from $75 million to $45 million and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 2; 5) Approve the draft supplement to the offering memorandum for the issuance of $120 million in Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the printing and distribution of the supplement to the offering memorandum; and 6) Approve the estimated costs related to the amendment of the letter of credit and authorize the Executive Director to execute related professional service agreements, as required. Agenda Item 8 39 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In February 2005, the Commission authorized a $200 million commercial paper program to advance right of way acquisition, environmental mitigation, and project development related to the 2009 Measure A. The commercial paper program was established in March 2005 in the amount of $185 million. A five-year, $190 million direct pay letter of credit with Bank of America was obtained as a liquidity facility for the commercial paper program. The letter of credit expires on March 29, 2010. Additionally, the Commission entered into agreements with Barclays (as assigned by Lehman Brothers) and Merrill Lynch . (formerly Banc of America Securities LLC) to serve as the commercial paper dealers for the $110 million Series A and $75 million Series B, respectively. Based on the following factors, staff determined that the commercial paper program should be reduced to $120 million in connection with obtaining a new letter of credit or extension of the existing letter of credit: • The maximum amount of outstanding commercial paper notes at any time has not exceeded $137 million during the nearly five years that the commercial paper program has been in place; • Significant project development progress has occurred with the funding provided by the commercial paper program; • Long term sales tax revenue bonds may now be issued for projects with the commencement of the 2009 Measure A in July 2009; and • The current market cost for a letter of credit is significantly higher than the fees of 21 basis points for the utilized and 16 basis points for the unutilized portions of the prior Bank of America letter of credit. In November 2009, the Commission's financial advisors, Fieldman Rolapp & Associates, conducted a request for indications of interest and availability for a letter of credit to support the commercial paper program at a reduced amount of $120 million. Four responses were received from banks for the entire $120 million, and one response was received for up to $50 million. After an evaluation of the responses, staff selected the proposal from Bank of America to amend the existing reimbursement agreement for a direct pay letter of credit to support $120 million of commercial paper notes and extend the term two years to March 29, 2012, at an annual cost of 105 basis points. A draft of Amendment No. 1 to the reimbursement agreement is attached. As a result of the decrease in amount of the commercial paper program, it will be necessary to amend the dealer agreements with Barclays and Merrill Lynch to reduce the maximum amount of commercial paper notes for which each dealer is responsible. Staff currently anticipates that the Series A commercial paper notes managed by Barclays will be reduced from $110 million to $75 million, and the Agenda Item 8 40 • • Series B notes managed by Merrill Lynch will be reduced from $75 million to $45 million. In connection with the amendment of the letter of credit, a supplement to the initial offering memorandum will be required to describe the extension and reduction in the amount of the letter of credit and update information about Bank of America. As noted in previous debt issuances, the Commissioners serving on the Board as the governing body of the issuer are expected to read and be familiar with the Offering Memorandum (related to commercial paper notes) or Official Statement (related to sales tax revenue bonds). The Commissioners may employ the services of experts to take the lead in the drafting and review of such offering document; however, the Commissioners have the duty to review the information and bring to the attention of those responsible for the preparation of the offering document any misstatements or omissions in the draft and to ask questions it is unclear about the information or their role. Staff will be available at the Commission meeting to respond to the identification of any misstatements or omissions or to such questions related to the draft of the supplement to the offering memorandum, which is attached. The estimated costs for professional services related to the amendment of the letter credit are $175,000. The costs primarily include fees for the financial advisor, bond counsel, bank counsel, disclosure counsel, dealer counsel, and general counsel. Amendments to certain professional services agreements will be required in connection with this amendment. Staff recommends that the Commission adopt Resolution No. 10-006; approve the draft amendment to the reimbursement agreement, proposed amendments to the dealer agreements, draft supplement to the offering memorandum, and estimated professional services costs; and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final form of these documents. Significant changes to these documents are not anticipated. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY2009/10 FY2010/11 + Amount: $ 490,000 $2,205,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 303 19 96103 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \A441.44, m Date: 02/02/2010 Agenda Item 8 41 Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 10-006 2) Draft Amendment No. 1 to Reimbursement Agreement 3) Draft Supplement to the Offering Memorandum Agenda Item 8 42 ATTACHMENT 1 NO.10-006 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CREDIT AGREEMENT AND RELATED AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN OTHER DOCUMENTS, A SUPPLEMENT TO THE OFFERING MEMORANDUM AND THE TAKING OF ALL OTHER ACTIONS NECESSARY IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") is a county transportation commission duly organized and existing pursuant to the County Transportation Commissions Act, being Division 12 of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California (Section 130000 et seq.); WHEREAS, the Commission is authorized pursuant to the Riverside County Transportation Sales Tax Act, being Division 25 of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California (Section 240000 et seq.) (the "Act'), to, among other things, and with voter approval, levy a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code (the "Sales Tax Law") and to issue limited tax bonds payable from the proceeds of such tax; WHEREAS, the Commission adopted Ordinance No. 02-001, named the "Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance" (the "Ordinance") on May 8, 2002, pursuant to the provisions of the Act, which Ordinance provides for the imposition of a retail transactions and use tax (the "Sales Tax") applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County in accordance with the provisions of the Sales Tax Law at the rate of zero percent (0%) until the expiration of the 1988 Sales Tax on June 30, 2009, and thereafter at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for a period not to exceed thirty (30) years; WHEREAS, by its terms, the Ordinance became effective at the close of the polls on November 5, 2002, the day of the election at which the proposition imposing the Sales Tax was approved by more than two-thirds of the electors voting on the measure; WHEREAS, the Ordinance empowers the Commission to sell or issue, from time to time, bonds, or other evidences of indebtedness, in the aggregate principal amount at any one time outstanding not to exceed $500 million for capital expenditures for various purposes, including to carry out the transportation projects described in the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan, adopted as part of the Ordinance, including any future amendments thereto (the "Expenditure Plan"); WHEREAS, the Commission is authorized by Section 240309 of the California Public Utilities Code to issue from time to time limited tax bonds (defined to include indebtedness and securities of any kind or class, including sales tax revenue bonds), secured and payable in whole or in part from revenues of the Sales Tax; OHS West. 2608109764 43 WHEREAS, the Commission has heretofore authorized the issuance of not to exceed S200,000,000 in aggregate principal amount of its Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A (the "Series A Notes" and its Commercial. Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series B (the "Series B Notes" and, together with the Series A Notes, the "CP Notes"), pursuant to an Indenture dated as of March 1, 2005 (the "CP Indenture"), by and between the Commission and U.S. Bank National Association, as successor trustee; WHEREAS, the Notes are authenticated and delivered from time to time pursuant to an Issuing and Paying Agent Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2005, between the Commission and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as issuing and paying agent (the "Issuing and Paying Agent"); WHEREAS, the Series A Notes are offered and sold from time to time by Barclays Capital, Inc. (`Barclays"), pursuant to a Commercial Paper Dealer Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2005, by and between the Commission and Lehman Brothers, as assigned to Barclays with the written consent of the Commission, dated September 24, 2008 (collectively, the "Series A Dealer Agreement"); WHEREAS, the Series B Notes are offered and sold from time to time by Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. ("Merrill' and, together with Barclays, the "Dealers"), pursuant to a Commercial Paper Dealer Agreement, dated March 1, 2005, by and between the Commission and Merrill as successor in interest to Banc of America Securities LLC (the "Series B Dealer Agreement' and, together with the Series A Dealer Agreement, the "Dealer Agreements"); WHEREAS, in order to provide information about the CP Notes and related matters to purchasers and potential purchasers of the CP Notes, the Commission executed and delivered an Offering Memorandum, dated March 22, 2005 (the "Offering Memorandum"); WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a Reimbursement Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2005 (the "Credit Agreement'), by and between the Commission and Bank of America, N.A. (the "Credit Provider"), the Credit Provider issued an Irrevocable Direct Draw Letter of Credit on March 30, 2005 (the "Letter of Credit") in favor of the Issuing and Paying Agent, which Letter of Credit provides credit and liquidity support for the issuance, from time to time, of the CP Notes; WHEREAS, the Letter of Credit is scheduled to expire pursuant to its terms on March 29, 2010; WHEREAS, the Commission hereby determines it to be in the best interests of the Commission, on or prior to March 29, 2010, to renew or replace the Letter of Credit providing credit and liquidity support for the CP Notes; WHEREAS, the provisions of the Indenture and the Credit Agreement provide for the renewal of the Letter of Credit by extension of the stated expiration date of the Letter of Credit (the "Stated Expiration Date"); WHEREAS, an Amendment No. 1 to Reimbursement Agreement providing for the issuance of a notice of extension with respect to the Letter of Credit extending the Stated .OHS West260810976.4 -2- 44 • • • • Expiration Date (the "First Amendment"), and providing for such other terms and conditions as are therein provided, is proposed to be entered into between the Commission and the Credit Provider; WHEREAS, the Commission has been presented with a proposed form of First Amendment; WHEREAS, there has been prepared and presented to the Commission a proposed form of Supplement to Offering Memorandum (the "Supplement") describing the extension of the Stated Expiration Date and related matters; WHEREAS, in order to reflect certain terms of the First Amendment and the renewed Letter of Credit, it will be necessary and desirable to amend certain provisions of the Dealer Agreements in connection with the renewal of the Letter of Credit; WHEREAS, amendments to each of the Dealer Agreements (as so amended, the "Amended Dealer Agreements') are proposed to be entered into by the Commission and the respective Dealers; WHEREAS, the Commission has been presented with proposed forms of First Amendment and Supplement, and the Commission has examined and approved each document and desires to authorize and direct the execution of such documents as are specified herein and such other documents as are necessary in connection with the renewal of the Letter of Credit, and to authorize and direct the renewal of the Letter of Credit; and WHEREAS, all acts, conditions and things required by the Law and the Constitution and laws of the State of California to exist, to have happened and to have been performed precedent to and in connection with the renewal of the Letter of Credit do exist, have happened and have been performed in regular and due time, form and manner as required by law, and the Commission is now duly authorized and empowered, pursuant to each and every requirement of law, to authorize such renewal of the Letter of Credit and to authorize the execution of the First Amendment, the Supplement and the Amended Dealer Agreements, for the purposes, in the manner and upon the terms provided; NOW THEREFORE, THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RESOLVES: Section 1. The Commission finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct. Section 2. The proposed form of First Amendment presented to this meeting and the terms and conditions thereof are hereby approved. The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to enter into such First Amendment in substantially said form, with such changes therein as the Executive Officer may, with the advice of Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP ("Bond Counsel"), require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof. OHS West260810976.4 -3- 45 Section 3. The proposed form of Supplement presented to this meeting is hereby approved. The Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed, for and in the name and on behalf of the Commission, to execute and deliver the Supplement, in substantially said form, with such changes therein as the officer executing the same may require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof. The Dealers are hereby authorized to distribute the Offering Memorandum together with the Supplement in the form so executed by the Executive Director, if the Executive Director determines such distribution is appropriate for the sale of the CP Notes. Section 4. If the Executive Director, with the advice of Bond Counsel, determines that any specific amendments to the provisions of the Dealer Agreements are necessary or desirable in connection with the renewal of the Letter of Credit, the Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to enter into Amended Dealer Agreements with Barclays and Merrill setting forth such amended provisions as the Executive Director determines are appropriate. Section 5. All approvals, consents, directions, notices, orders, requests and other actions permitted or required by any of the documents authorized by this Resolution, the CP Notes, the CP Indenture or the Credit Agreement, including, without limitation, any further amendments or substitutions of any of the documents authorized by this Resolution or other agreement related thereto, and any of the foregoing that may be necessary or desirable in connection with renewal of the Letter of Credit or substitution of the Letter of Credit, or any similar action may be given or taken by an Authorized Representative (as such term is defined in the Indenture), without further authorization or direction by the Commission, and each Authorized Representative is hereby authorized and directed to give any such approval, consent, direction, notice, order, request, or other action and to execute such documents and take any such action which such Authorized Representative may deem necessary or desirable to further the purposes of this Resolution. Section 6. All actions heretofore taken by the officers and agents of the Commission with respect to the issuance and sale of the CP Notes, the renewal of the Letter of Credit and such other actions as have been or shall be necessary in connection therewith, are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved. If at the time of execution of any of the documents authorized herein, the Executive Director is unavailable, such documents may be executed by the Deputy Executive Director of the Commission or the Chief Financial Officer in lieu of the Executive Director. The Clerk of the Board of the Commission is hereby authorized to attest to the execution by the Executive Director or the Deputy Executive Director or the Chief Financial Officer of any of such documents as said officers deem appropriate. The proper officers and agents of the Commission are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and severally, for and in the name and on behalf of the Commission, to do any and all things and to take any and all actions and to execute and deliver any and all agreements, certificates and documents, which they, or any of them, may deem necessary or advisable in order to consummate the renewal or substitution of the Letter of Credit and otherwise, to carry out, give effect to and comply with the terms and intent of the Ordinance, this Resolution, the CP Notes, the CP Indenture, the Credit Agreement and the documents approved hereby. OHS West 260810976.4 -4- 46 • Section 7. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and approval. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission at its meeting on February 10, 2010. ATTEST: By: Clerk of the Board of the Commission 0115 Wese260810976.4 By: Chairman, Board of Commissioners -5- 47 CERTIFICATE OF THE CLERK OF THE BOARD OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION I, Jennifer Hannon, Clerk of the Board of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission'), hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at a meeting of the governing board of said Commission duly and regularly held in Riverside, California, on February 10, 2010, of which meeting all of the members of said Commission had due notice. I further certify that I have carefully compared the foregoing copy with the original minutes of said meeting on file and of record in my office; that said copy is a full, true and correct copy of the original resolution adopted at said meeting and entered in said minutes; and that said resolution has not been amended, modified, rescinded or revoked in any manner since the date of its adoption, and the same is now in full force and effect. I further certify that an agenda of said meeting was posted at least 72 hours before said meeting at a location in Riverside, California, freely accessible to the public and a brief general description of the resolution to be adopted at said meeting appeared on said agenda. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this certificate hereto as of this date, , 2010. OHS Wese2608109764 By Clerk -6- 48 ATTACHMENT 2 AMENDMENT NO.1 TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO.1 AMENDMENT TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (this "Amendment No. 1") is dated as of March [ ], 2010, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, a public entity organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (the "Obligor") and BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., a national banking association organized under the laws of the United States of America (the `Bank"), amending that certain Reimbursement Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2005, by and between the Obligor and the Bank (the "Original Reimbursement Agreement"). PRELIMINARY STATEMENT A. The Obligor from time to time issues its Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds) Series A (the "Series A Notes") and its Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds) Series B (the "Series B Notes" and together with the Series A Notes, the "Notes") pursuant to Resolution No. 05-001 of the Obligor adopted on February 9, 2005 (the "Resolution") and pursuant to Section 240309 of the California Public Utilities Code (the "Utilities Code"), the Indenture, dated as of March 1, 2005 (the "Indenture"), between the Commission and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee"), Ordinance No. 02-001, named the "Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance" (the "Ordinance") adopted by the Obligor on May 8, 2002, pursuant to the provisions of the Riverside County Transportation Sales Tax Act, being Division 25 of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California (Sections 240000 et seq.) (the "Act"), which Ordinance provides for the imposition of a retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside (the "County") in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code (the "Sales Tax Law") at the rate of one-half of one percent (1/2%) for a period not to exceed thirty (30) years. B. In order to assure timely payment of the principal and interest with respect to the Notes in accordance with their terms, the Obligor requested the Bank issue an irrevocable direct draw letter of credit for the Notes, in substantially the form of Exhibit A to the Original Reimbursement Agreement (together with any amendments or supplements thereto, the "Letter of Credit"), and the Bank issued the Letter of Credit pursuant to and upon the terms and conditions stated in the Original Reimbursement Agreement. C. The Obligor has requested the Bank to extend the current Stated Expiration Date from March 29, 2010 to March 29, 2012 by execution and delivery of a notice of extension substantially in the form of Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Notice of Extension") and to revise the definition of "Unutilized Amount" to change the reference therein to $190,000,000 to $[121,500,000] and the Obligor and the Bank desire to enter into this Amendment No. 1 to provide for delivery of the Notice of Extension and to set forth the Obligor's and the Bank's agreement to amend certain provisions of the Original Reimbursement Agreement. D. All acts, conditions and things required by law to exist, to have happened and to have been performed precedent to and in connection with the execution and entering into 21926.4 001098 AGMT 49 of this Amendment No. 1 do exist, have happened and have been performed in regular and due time, form and manner as required by law, and the parties hereto are now duly authorized to execute and enter into this Amendment No. 1. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above Preliminary Statement and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: SECTION 1. AUTHORITY AND DEFINITIONS. a. This Amendment No. 1 is entered into pursuant to Sections 2.12 and 8.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement. b. This Amendment No. 1 amends the Original Reimbursement Agreement. c. Capitalized terms used herein without definition shall have the meanings set forth in the Original Reimbursement Agreement. d. Subject to the satisfaction of the conditions precedent set forth in Section 3 hereof, this Amendment No. 1 shall become effective, and the Notice of Extension shall be issued by the Bank, upon the execution hereof by the Obligor and the Bank on March [ 1, 2010 (the "Amendment Effective Date"). e. The provisions of this Amendment No. 1 shall supersede and prevail over any conflicting provisions of the Original Reimbursement Agreement. If there is any conflict between the terms, conditions and provisions of this Amendment No. 1 and those of any of the other Financing Documents, the terms, conditions and provisions of this Amendment No. 1, as applicable, shall prevail. Save and except as expressly amended hereby, all of the terms and provisions of the Original Reimbursement Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and are applicable to the provisions of this Amendment No. 1 and the obligations of the parties hereunder. Reference to this specific Amendment No. 1 need not be made in any note, document, agreement, letter, certificate, the Reimbursement Agreement or any communication issued or made subsequent to, or with respect to, the Reimbursement Agreement, it being hereby agreed that any reference to the Reimbursement Agreement shall be sufficient to refer to the Original Reimbursement Agreement as hereby amended. The parties hereto expressly agree that this Amendment No. 1 shall constitute a modification of the Original Reimbursement Agreement and does not constitute a novation or substitution with respect to the Original Reimbursement Agreement. SECTION 2. AMENDMENT OF THE ORIGINAL REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. a. Effective on March 30, 2010, the definition of "Default Rate" in Section 1.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: "Default Rate" shall mean a rate of interest equal to the Liquidity Rate plus 3.00% per annum. 2 21926.4 001098 AGMT 50 • • • b. The definition of "Liquidity Period" in Section 1.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: "Liquidity Period" shall mean the period of time from and after an Advance under the Letter of Credit, to and including the date thirty (30) days from the date of such Advance. c. Effective on March 30, 2010, the definition of "Liquidity Rate" in Section 1.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: "Liquidity Rate" shall mean a rate of interest equal to the greater of (i) the Prime Rate plus 1.50% per annum, (ii) the Federal Funds Rate plus 3.00% per annum and (iii) 7.50% per annum; provided, however, that at no time shall the Liquidity Rate be less than the applicable rate of interest on any outstanding Notes. d. The definition of "Unutilized Amount" in Section 1.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: "Unutilized Amount" means an amount equal to (a) $[121,500,000], minus (b) the sum of (i) the Stated Amount of the Letter of Credit determined (x) without regard to reductions in such Stated Amount subject to automatic reinstatement as provided in the Letter of Credit, but (y) after giving effect to any reductions in the Stated Amount of the Letter of Credit as contemplated by Annex L to the Letter of Credit and any increases in the Stated Amount of the Letter of Credit as contemplated by Annex K to the Letter of Credit, plus (ii) the amount of all drawings for which the Bank has not been reimbursed to the extent that the Stated Amount of the Letter of Credit will not be automatically reinstated upon the Bank's reimbursement for such drawing. e. Section 1.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following definitions thereto: "Federal Funds Rate" means, for any day, the rate per annum equal to the weighted average of the rates on overnight Federal funds transactions with members of the Federal Reserve System arranged by Federal funds brokers on such day, as published by the Federal Reserve Bank on the Business Day next succeeding such day; provided that (a) if such day is not a Business Day, the Federal Funds Rate for such day shall be such rate on such transactions on the next preceding Business Day as so published on the next succeeding Business Day, and (b) if no such 3 51 21926.4 001098 AGMT rate is so published on such next succeeding Business Day, the Federal Funds Rate for such day shall be the average rate (rounded upward, if necessary, to a whole multiple of 1/100 of 1%) charged to the Bank on such day on such transactions as determined by the Bank. Each determination of the Federal Funds Rate by the Bank shall be deemed conclusive and binding on the Obligor absent manifest error. "Prime Rate" means for any day a fluctuating rate per annum equal to the rate of interest in effect for such day as publicly announced from time to time by the Bank as its "prime rate." The "prime rate" is a rate set by the Bank based upon various factors including the Bank's costs and desired return, general economic conditions and other factors, and is used as a reference point for pricing some loans, which may be priced at, above, or below such announced rate. Any change in such rate announced by the Bank shall take effect at the opening of business on the day specified in the public announcement of such change. f. Effective on March 30, 2010, Section 2.3(a) of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: (a) So long as no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing, all Advances under the Letter of Credit not reimbursed on the Advance Date shall bear interest (computed on the basis of a 360-day year and actual days elapsed) payable in arrears on the last day of the Liquidity Period at a rate per annum equal to the Liquidity Rate for the period from and including the Advance Date to and including the last day of the Liquidity Period. g. Effective on March 30, 2010, Section 2.3(b) of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: (b) All Term Loans shall bear interest at the Liquidity Rate plus 2.00% per annum (the "Term Loan Rate"). h. Effective on March 30, 2010, Section 2.4(b)(i) of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: (i) A fee calculated at the rates set forth below (the "Commitment Fee" including both the Initial Commitment Fee and the Amended Commitment Fee, each as defined below), payable quarterly in arrears commencing June 1, 2005 and thereafter on the first Business Day of each March, June, September and December 4 21926.4 001098 AGMT 52 • • • • with final payment due on the Letter of Credit Expiration Date. The Commitment Fee for the period commencing with and including the Date of Issuance and ending on and including March 29, 2010 (the "Initial Commitment Fee") shall be equal to 0.21% per annum on the daily average Stated Amount in effect from time to time, plus 0.16% per annum on the daily average Unutilized Amount in effect from time to time; provided, however, that in the event that any of S&P, Moody's or Fitch reduces to or maintains a long-term unenhanced rating on any Sales Tax Debt of the Obligor of A, A2 or A, respectively, such Initial Commitment Fee shall be increased by 0.05% per annum above the Initial Commitment Fee on the Date of Issuance; in the event that any of S&P, Moody's or Fitch reduces to or maintains a long-term unenhanced rating on any Sales Tax Debt of the Obligor of A-, A3 or A-, respectively, such Initial Commitment Fee shall be increased by 0.10% per annum above the Initial Commitment Fee on the Date of Issuance; and in the event that any of S&P, Moody's or Fitch reduces to or maintains a long-term unenhanced rating on any Sales Tax Debt of the Obligor of below A-, A3 or A-, respectively, or shall suspend or withdraw its long-term unenhanced rating, such Initial Commitment Fee shall be increased by 0.40% per annum above the Initial Commitment Fee on the Date of Issuance. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, the Initial Commitment Fee shall be increased by 1.00% per annum above the Initial Commitment Fee on the Date of Issuance, from and after the date of such Event of Default. The Commitment Fee for the period commencing with and including March 30, 2010 and ending on and including the Letter of Credit Expiration Date (the "Amended Commitment Fee") shall be equal to 1.05% per annum on the sum of the daily average Stated Amount in effect from time to time plus the daily average Unutilized Amount in effect from time to time; provided, however, that such Amended Commitment Fee shall be increased from time to time in the event that S&P or Moody's downgrades, withdraws or suspends a long-term unenhanced rating on any Sales Tax Debt as set forth in the table and the immediately following paragraph below. Amended Commitment Moody's S&P Fee Aa2 AA 1.05% Aa3 AA- 1.10 Al A+ 1.30 A2 A 1.50 A3 A- 1.70 5 53 21926.4 001098 AGMT Baal BBB+ 1.90 Baa2 BBB 2.10 Baa3 BBB- 2.30 The Amended Commitment Fee shall be increased automatically and immediately (without notice to the Obligor) on such date that Moody's or S&P shall have publicly announced such downgrade of a long-term unenhanced rating on any Sales Tax Debt. If the long-term unenhanced ratings on any Sales Tax Debt appear in more than one row (i.e., a split rating), the Amended Commitment Fee shall be based on the row that includes the lowest rating. In addition to the foregoing, if any such rating is withdrawn or suspended, then the Amended Commitment Fee shall increase automatically and immediately (without notice to the Obligor) by an additional 1.50% per annum, and upon the occurrence and during the continuance of an Event of Default hereunder, then the Amended Commitment Fee shall increase automatically and immediately (without notice to the Obligor) by an additional 1.50% per annum. i. Effective on March 30, 2010, Section 2.4(b)(iii) of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: (iii) For each Advance equal to $250 plus customary courier and wire transfer fees, up to a maximum aggregate amount of $10,000 per calendar year, payable quarterly in arrears on the first Business Day of each March, June, September and December with final payment due on the Letter of Credit Expiration Date. j. Section 6.1 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby amended by adding the following at the end thereof (q) Additional Rights. In the event that the Obligor shall directly or indirectly, enter into or otherwise consent to any credit agreement, reimbursement agreement, bond purchase agreement, liquidity agreement or other agreement or instrument (or any amendment, supplement or modification thereto) under which, directly or indirectly, any Person or Persons undertakes to make loans or advances or extend credit or liquidity to the Obligor as support for any commercial paper program payable from or secured by, any of the Available Revenues or any of the other sources identified in clauses (i) through (vi) of Section 5.1 hereof, which such agreement (or amendment thereto) contains pricing terms (including, without limitation, interest rates, default rates, utilized facility fees, unutilized facility fees and termination fees) that are more favorable to such Person than those contained in this 6 21926.4 001098 AGMT 54 • • • Agreement, covenants that are more restricted on the part of the Obligor than those contained in this Agreement and/or events of default and/or remedies that are more favorable to such Person than those contained in this Agreement (collectively, the "Additional Rights"), the Obligor shall promptly notify the Bank of such Additional Rights and if, within 90 days after such notice the Bank so requests, the Obligor shall promptly enter into an amendment to this Agreement with the Bank to include such Additional Rights, effective immediately after any applicable requirements of the Indenture, if any, have been satisfied. k. Section 8.2 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby amended by substituting the following information for the Bank: If to the Bank, with respect to credit matters: Bank of America, N.A. 333 S. Hope Street, 13`h Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 Attention: Product Delivery Officer Telephone: (213) 621-7131 Facsimile: (213) 621-3607 If to the Bank, with respect to administrative matters: Bank of America, N.A. Attn: Allen Ralph Sacramento Main Office 555 Capitol Mall Sacramento, California 95814-4503 Telephone: (916) 307-8610 Facsimile: (415) 796-1206 1. The last paragraph of Section 8.2 of the Original Reimbursement Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor: Payments to the Bank under this Agreement shall be made to: Bank of America, N.A., New York, ABA 026009593, Account: 45358-83980, Attn: Los Angeles Standby, For Further Credit: RCTC Letter of Credit # 3074087, or to such other account as the Bank may from time to time designate in writing to the Obligor, Obligor #9662961416. SECTION 3. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT. The Bank's obligation to issue the Notice of Extension and to execute and deliver this Amendment No. 1, is subject to the conditions precedent that, on or prior to the Amendment Effective Date: 7 55 21926.4 001098 AGMT a. Executed Documents. The Bank shall have received on or before the Amendment Effective Date an executed original of this Amendment No, 1, and any other documents which the Bank may reasonably request evidencing that all necessary action (including, without limitation, adoption of resolutions) required to be taken by the Obligor in connection with the authorization, execution, issuance, delivery and performance of such documents, this Amendment No. 1 or the transactions contemplated hereby, has been taken and all in form and substance satisfactory to the Bank and its counsel. b. Representations and Warranties. The representations and warranties set forth in Section 4 of this Amendment No. 1 shall be true and correct as of the Amendment Effective Date. c. Expenses. The Bank shall have received evidence of the payment of the Bank's out of pocket expenses (including, without limitations, reasonable fees and expenses of counsel to the Bank) payable by the Obligor pursuant to Section 5 hereof. d. No Material Adverse Change. (i) No material adverse change shall have occurred in the condition or operations (financial or otherwise) of the Obligor, including but not limited to the Obligor's ratings from any Rating Agency, between the date of the Obligor's audited financial statements received by the Bank pursuant to Section 6.1(a)(i) of the Reimbursement Agreement and the Amendment Effective Date; (ii) on or prior to the Amendment Effective Date no material transactions or obligations (not in the ordinary course of business) shall have been entered into by the Obligor subsequent to such financial statements, except as disclosed in the Offering Memorandum or to the Bank in writing; and (iii) on the Amendment Effective Date no Event of Default, shall have occurred and be continuing. e. Other Legal Matters. All other legal matters pertaining to the execution and delivery of this Amendment No. 1 shall be satisfactory to the Bank and its counsel. SECTION 4. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES BY THE OBLIGOR. In order to induce the Bank to execute and deliver this Amendment No. 1, the Obligor hereby represents and warrants to the Bank that as of the Amendment Effective Date: a. the representations and warranties of the Obligor set forth in Section 4 of the Reimbursement Agreement (except for the representations and warranties set forth in Section 4(f) thereof) are and remain true and correct; b. the Obligor is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Reimbursement Agreement and has performed or complied with all of its obligations, agreements and covenants to be performed or complied with pursuant to the Reimbursement Agreement on or prior to the Amendment Effective Date; c. no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing under the Reimbursement Agreement and no event has occurred and is continuing which is or with the passage of time or the giving of notice or both would be an Event of Default or will result after giving effect to this Amendment No. 1; 8 21926.4 001098 AGMT 56 • • • • d. no default has occurred and is continuing under any of the Financing Documents; e. (i) no material adverse change has occurred in the condition or operations (financial or otherwise) of the Obligor, including but not limited to the Obligor's ratings from any Rating Agency, between the date of the Obligor's audited financial statements received by the Bank pursuant to Section 6.1(a)(i) of the Reimbursement Agreement and the Amendment Effective Date, and (ii) on or prior to the Amendment Effective Date no material transactions or obligations (not in the ordinary course of business) have been entered into by the Obligor subsequent to such financial statements, except as disclosed in the Offering Memorandum or to the Bank in writing. f. this Amendment No. 1 has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Obligor and the Agreement is valid and binding and is enforceable against the Obligor in accordance with its terms; and g• all information, documents, statements and certificates provided to the Bank by or on behalf of the Obligor in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Amendment No. 1 are true and correct as of the date thereof and were provided in expectation of the Bank's reliance thereon in executing this Amendment No. 1. SECTION 5. COSTS AND EXPENSES. The Obligor hereby agrees that all costs and expenses incurred by the Bank in connection with the transactions contemplated herein and the satisfaction of the foregoing conditions (whether or not this transaction closes), including, without limitation, attorneys' fees and disbursements, are included as obligations of the Obligor under the Original Reimbursement Agreement, as amended hereby. SECTION 6. NO WAIVER. The Obligor acknowledges and agrees that, if and to the extent that the Bank has not heretofore required strict compliance with the performance by the Obligor of the covenants, agreements and obligations of the Obligor under the Original Reimbursement Agreement and the Financing Documents, such action or inaction shall not constitute a waiver of, or otherwise affect in any manner, the Bank's rights and remedies under the Original Reimbursement Agreement and the Financing Documents, as amended hereby, including the right to require performance of such covenants, agreements and obligations strictly in accordance with the terms and provisions thereof. SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY. Any provision of this Amendment No. 1 which is prohibited, unenforceable or not authorized in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition, unenforceability or non - authorization without invalidating the remaining provisions hereof or affecting the validity, enforceability or legality of such provision in any other jurisdiction. SECTION 8. GOVERNING LAW. This Amendment No. 1 shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. SECTION 9. COUNTERPARTS. This Amendment No. l may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original but both or all of which, 9 57 21926.4 001098 AGMT when taken together, shall constitute but one document, and shall become effective when copies hereof which, when taken together, bear the signatures of each of the parties hereto. SECTION 10. NOTICE OF ALTERNATE ADDRESSES. The Obligor shall deliver an executed copy of this Amendment No. 1 to the Issuing and Paying Agent, the Series A Dealer and the Series B Dealer on the Amendment Effective Date, and such delivery shall be deemed a designation to such parties pursuant to Section 8.2 of the Reimbursement Agreement of the addresses set forth in Section 2(k) hereof as the address for notices and communications to the Bank provided for under the Reimbursement Agreement. This Amendment No. 1, when delivered to the Issuing and Paying Agent, shall also constitute designation of our office located at 100 W. Temple Street, 7th Floor, Mail Code: CA9-705-07-05, Los Angeles, California, 90012- 1514, Attention: Standby Letter of Credit Department, telephone number (213) 240-6986 and facsimile number (213) 457-8841 for presentation of a demand for payment under the Letter of Credit. [The Remainder of this Page Intentionally Left Blank] 10 21926.4 001098 AGMT 58 • • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to Reimbursement Agreement to be duly executed and delivered by their respective duly authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Name: Title: BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. By: Name: Title: S-1 59 21926.4 001098 AGMT • EXHIBIT A FORM OF NOTICE OF EXTENSION Notice of Extension Irrevocable Direct Draw Letter of Credit No. 3074087 Beneficiary: U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as Issuing and Paying Agent 100 Wall Street, 16th Floor New York, NY 10005 Re: Notice of Extension Ladies and Gentlemen: Pursuant to Section 2.1(a) of the Reimbursement Agreement dated as of March 1, 2005 (the "Reimbursement Agreement"), by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Obligor") and Bank of America, N.A. (the "Bank"), the Bank has approved an extension of Letter of Credit No. 3074087 (the "Letter of Credit"), dated March 30, 2005, effective as of March [ 1, 2010 (the "Effective Date"). The new Stated Expiration Date is March 29, 2012. You are hereby authorized to attach this Notice of Extension to the Letter of Credit and to treat this Notice of Extension as an amendment to the Letter of Credit. The Obligor's acknowledgment hereof shall be deemed to be the Obligor's representation and warranty that all its representations and warranties contained in Section 4 of the Reimbursement Agreement are true and correct and will be true and correct as of the Effective Date and that no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing. Exhibit A-1 60 21926.4 001098 AGMT [Signature Pages to Amendment No. 1 to Reimbursement Agreement Continued] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have executed and delivered this certificate to the Issuing and Paying Agent as of the [ day of March, 2010. Very truly yours, BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: Acknowledged as of March [ ], 2010 by RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Title: Acknowledged as of March [ 1, 2010 by U.S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Issuing and Paying Agent By: Title: Exhibit A-2 21926.4 001098 AGMT 61 ATTACHMENT 3 Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. — Draft 02/02/10 — 3rd SUPPLEMENT DATED , 2010 TO 011'1(ERING MEMORANDUM DATED MARCH 23, 2005 On March 30, 2005, the date of original issuance of the Notes, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Bond Counsel to the Commission, delivered an opinion with respect to the Notes to the effect that based upon an analysis of existing laws, regulations, rulings and court decisions, and assuming, among other matters, the accuracy of certain representations and compliance with certain covenants, interest on the Notes, when issued in accordance with the Indenture, the Tax Certificate and the Issuing and Paying Agent Agreement, is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is exempt from State of California personal income taxes. The opinion of Bond Counsel stated that the amount treated as interest on the Notes and excluded from gross income may depend upon the taxpayer's election under Internal Revenue Service Notice 94-84. The opinion of Bond Counsel further stated that interest on the Notes is not a specific preference item for purposes of the federal individual or corporate alternative minimum taxes, although Bond Counsel observed that such interest is included in adjusted current earnings when calculating corporate alternative minimum taxable income. Bond Counsel expressed no opinion regarding any other tax consequences related to the ownership or disposition of, or the accrual or receipt of interest on, the Notes. See "TAX MATTERS." $185,000,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMERCIAL PAPER NOTES (LIMITED TAX BONDS) RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A General RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series B This Supplement, dated , 2010 (this "Supplement"), to the Offering Memorandum, dated March 23, 2005 (the "Offering Memorandum"), is issued with respect to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds) (the "Notes"). This Supplement is being delivered in connection with the extension of the irrevocable, direct -pay letter of credit (the "Letter of Credit") issued by Bank of America, N.A. (the "Bank") to support the payment of principal and interest with respect to the Notes. The Stated Expiration Date for the Letter of Credit has been extended to March 29, 2012. Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Offering Memorandum. Barclays Capital BofA Merrill Lynch Dealer for the Series A Notes Dealer for the Series B Notes 85471497.6 62 Letter of Credit The information set forth in the Offering Memorandum under the captions "THE LE 1'1'ER OF CREDIT" and "THE BANK" is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: THE LETTER OF CREDIT The following is a summary of certain provisions of the Letter of Credit. This summary is not to be considered a full statement of the terms of the Letter of Credit and accordingly is qualified by reference thereto and is subject to the full text thereof. Except as otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms used in this Offering Memorandum without definition have the respective meanings set forth in the Letter of Credit. At the request and for the account of the Commission, the Bank issued the Letter of Credit in favor of the Issuing and Paying Agent, on or prior to the date of initial issuance of the Notes. The current stated amount of the Letter of Credit is equal to $87,000,000. [The Commission may request the Bank to increase the stated amount of the Letter of Credit from time to time by an amount not to exceed the unutilized commitment under the Reimbursement Agreement prior to the Letter of Credit Expiration Date (defined below) or such earlier date on which the Bank or the Commission may permanently reduce the unutilized commitment under the Reimbursement Agreement to zero; but in no event shall the stated amount of the Letter of Credit exceed $[121,500,000]. Upon satisfaction of certain conditions precedent, the Bank will execute and deliver a specified Notice of Increase in Stated Amount to the Issuing and Paying Agent, thereby increasing the stated amount of the Letter of Credit.] The stated amount of the Letter of Credit in effect from time to time shall be subject to reductions and reinstatements as set forth in the Letter of Credit. The stated amount of the Letter of Credit in effect from time to time shall be subject to reductions and reinstatements as set forth in the Letter of Credit. The Issuing and Paying Agent will draw moneys under the Letter of Credit to the extent necessary to pay principal of and interest on the Notes. Drawings by the Issuing and Paying Agent under the Letter of Credit will reduce the amounts available for subsequent drawings under the Letter of Credit, subject to reinstatement as provided in the Letter of Credit. The Bank will use only its own funds in honoring a drawing on the Letter of Credit. The Letter of Credit shall expire on the earliest of the following (the "Letter of Credit Expiration Date") (i) March 29, 2012, as such date may be extended by the Bank upon delivery of a Notice of Extension substantially in the form set forth in the Letter of Credit (the "Stated Expiration Date"), (ii) the date on which the Bank honors a draw request accompanied by the Issuing and Paying Agent's certification in the form set forth in the Letter of Credit for payment of Notes which will reduce the Stated Amount to $0.00, (iii) the date of the Bank's receipt of notice from the Issuing and Paying Agent to the effect that an Alternate Credit Facility (as defined in the Indenture) in full and complete substitution for the Letter of Credit has been issued and is in effect, which notice shall be substantially in the form of the certificate attached to the Letter of Credit, or (iv) the date which is five days after the date of the Bank's receipt of notice from the Issuing and Paying Agent to the effect that no Notes (other than Notes with respect to which an Alternate Credit Facility has been issued and is in effect) remain outstanding under the 85471497.6 1 63 • Indenture and the Commission does not contemplate any further issuance of Notes, which notice shall be substantially in the form of the certificate attached to the Letter of Credit. The Commission has the right to deliver to the Issuing and Paying Agent an Alternate Credit Facility for the Letter of Credit upon satisfaction of certain conditions set forth in the Indenture. The Issuing and Paying Agent will provide 30 days' advance written notice of the acceptance of any Alternate Credit Facility to the owners of the Notes. THE BANK Bank of America, N.A. (the "Bank") is a national banking association organized under the laws of the United States, with its principal executive offices located in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Bank is a wholly -owned indirect subsidiary of Bank of America Corporation (the "Corporation") and is engaged in a general consumer banking, commercial banking and trust business, offering a wide range of commercial, corporate, international, financial market, retail and fiduciary banking services. As of September 30, 2009, the Bank had consolidated assets of $1.460 trillion, consolidated deposits of $1.003 trillion and stockholder's equity of $163 billion based on regulatory accounting principles. The Corporation is a bank holding company and a financial holding company, with its principal executive offices located in Charlotte, North Carolina. Additional information regarding the Corporation is set forth in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, together with its subsequent periodic and current reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). Filings can be inspected and copied at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549, United States, at prescribed rates. In addition, the SEC maintains a website at http://www.sec.gov, which contains reports, proxy statements and other information regarding registrants that file such information electronically with the SEC. The information concerning the Corporation and the Bank is furnished solely to provide limited introductory information and does not purport to be comprehensive. Such information is qualified in its entirety by the detailed information appearing in the documents and financial statements referenced herein. The Letter of Credit has been issued by the Bank. Moody's Investors Service, Inc. ("Moody's") currently rates the Bank's long-term debt as "Aa3" and short-term debt as "P-1." The outlook is stable. Standard & Poor's currently rates the Bank's long-term debt as "A+" and its short -tern debt as "A-1." The outlook is stable. Fitch Ratings, Inc. ("Fitch") currently rates long-term debt of the Bank as "A+" and short-term debt as "F1+" The outlook is stable. Further information with respect to such ratings may be obtained from Moody's, Standard & Poor's and Fitch, respectively. No assurances can be given that the current ratings of the Bank's instruments will be maintained. The Bank will provide copies of the most recent Bank of America Corporation Annual Report on Form I0-K, any subsequent reports on Form 10-Q, and any required reports on Form 8-K (in each case as filed with the SEC pursuant to the Exchange Act), and the publicly available 854714976 2 64 portions of the most recent quarterly Call Report of the Bank delivered to the Comptroller of the Currency, without charge, to each person to whom this document is delivered, on the written request of such person. Written requests should be directed to: Bank of America Corporate Communications 100 North Tryon Street, l 8th Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28255 Attention: Corporate Communication PAYMENTS OF PRINCIPAL OF AND INTEREST ON THE NOTES WILL BE MADE FROM DRAWINGS UNDER THE LETTER OF CREDIT. ALTHOUGH THE LE ITER OF CREDIT IS A BINDING OBLIGATION OF THE BANK, THE NOTES ARE NOT DEPOSITS OR OBLIGATIONS OF THE CORPORATION OR ANY OF ITS AFFILIATED BANKS AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED BY ANY OF THESE ENTITIES. THE NOTES ARE NOT INSURED BY THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION OR ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY AND ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN INVESTMENT RISKS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE LOSS OF THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT INVESTED. The delivery hereof shall not create any implication that there has been no change in the affairs of the Corporation or the Bank since the date hereof, or that the information contained or referred to under this caption "THE BANK" is correct as of any time subsequent to its date. Special Investment Consideration The following special investment consideration is hereby added to the Offering Memorandum after the section entitled "THE BANK." RECEIVER'S POWER TO REPUDIATE LETTER OF CREDIT If a financial institution, such as the Bank, is placed into receivership, the receiver generally will have broad powers with respect to the disposition of the assets and liabilities of such financial institution. A receiver may, depending on the circumstances and the scope of its legal authority, repudiate letters of credit issued by the failed financial institution while discharging its powers as receiver. No assurance can be given that if the Bank were to enter receivership that the Letter of Credit would not be subject to repudiation by the Bank's receiver. Tax Matters The information set forth in the Offering Memorandum under the caption "TAX MATTERS" is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: TAX MATTERS On March 30, 2005, the date of original issuance of the Notes, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Bond Counsel to the Commission, delivered an opinion with respect to the Notes to the effect that based upon an analysis of existing laws, regulations, rulings and court decisions, 85471497 6 3 65 • • • and assuming, among other matters, the accuracy of certain representations and compliance with certain covenants, interest on the Notes, when issued in accordance with the Indenture, the Issuing and Paying Agent Agreement and the Master Tax Certificate of the Commission (the "Tax Certificate"), is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the "Code") and is exempt from State of California personal income taxes. The opinion of Bond Counsel further stated that interest on the Notes is not a specific preference item for purposes of the federal individual or corporate alternative minimum taxes, although Bond Counsel observed that such interest is included in adjusted current earnings when calculating corporate alternative minimum taxable income. A complete copy of the opinion Bond Counsel delivered at the time of original issuance of the Notes is set forth in Appendix A hereto, subject to the matters discussed below. Notice 94-84, 1994-2 C.B. 559, states that the Internal Revenue Service (the "IRS") is studying whether the amount of the payment at maturity on short-term debt obligations (i.e., debt obligations with a stated fixed rate of interest which mature not more than one year from the date of issue) that is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes is (i) the stated interest payable at maturity or (ii) the difference between the issue price of the short-term debt obligations and the aggregate amount to be paid at maturity of the short-term debt obligations (the "original issue discount"). For this purpose, the issue price of the short-term debt obligations is the first price at which a substantial amount of the short-term debt obligations is sold to the public (excluding bond houses, brokers, or similar persons or organizations acting in the capacity of Dealers, placement agents or wholesalers). Until the IRS provides further guidance with respect to tax-exempt short-term debt obligations, taxpayers may treat either the stated interest payable at maturity or the original issue discount as interest that is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes. However, taxpayers must treat the amount to be paid at maturity on all tax-exempt short-term debt obligations in a consistent manner. Taxpayers should consult their own tax advisors with respect to the tax consequences of ownership of Notes if the taxpayer elects original issue discount treatment. Notes purchased, whether at original issuance or otherwise, for an amount higher than their principal amount payable at maturity (or, in some cases, at their earlier call date) ("Premium Notes") will be treated as having amortizable bond premium. No deduction is allowable for the amortizable bond premium in the case of notes, like the Premium Notes, the interest on which is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes. However, the amount of tax-exempt interest received, and a Holder's basis in a Premium Note, will be reduced by the amount of amortizable bond premium properly allocable to such Holder. Holders of Premium Notes should consult their own tax advisors with respect to the proper treatment of amortizable bond premium in their particular circumstances. The Code imposes various restrictions, conditions and requirements relating to the exclusion from gross income for federal income tax purposes of interest on obligations such as the Notes. The Commission has made certain representations and covenanted to comply with certain restrictions, conditions and requirements designed to ensure that interest on the Notes will not be included in federal gross income. Inaccuracy of these representations or failure to comply or to have complied with these covenants may result in interest on the Notes being included in gross income for federal income tax purposes, possibly from the date of original issuance of the Notes. The opinion of Bond Counsel rendered in connection with the original issuance of the 85471497.6 4 66 Notes assumes the accuracy of these representations and compliance with these covenants. Bond Counsel has not undertaken to determine (or to inform any person) whether any actions taken (or not taken), or events occurring (or not occurring), or any other matters coming to Bond Counsel's attention after the date of issuance of the Notes may adversely affect or have adversely affected the value of, or the tax status of interest on, the Notes. Accordingly, the opinion of Bond Counsel was and is not intended to, and may not, be relied upon in connection with any such actions, events or matters. Certain requirements and procedures contained or referred to in the Indenture, the Issuing and Paying Agent Agreement, the Tax Certificate and other relevant documents may be or may have been changed and certain actions (including, without limitation, defeasance of the Notes) may be or may have been taken or omitted under the circumstances and subject to the terms and conditions set forth in such documents. Bond Counsel has expressed no opinion as to any Note or the interest thereon if any such change occurs or has occurred or action is or was taken or omitted upon the advice or approval of Bond Counsel other than Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP. Although the opinion Bond Counsel rendered in connection with the original issuance of the Notes stated that interest on the Notes is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes and is exempt from State of California personal income taxes, the ownership or disposition of, or the accrual or receipt of interest on, the Notes may otherwise affect a Holder's federal, state or local tax liability. The nature and extent of these other tax consequences depends upon the particular tax status of the Holder or the Holder's other items of income or deduction. Bond Counsel has expressed no opinion regarding any such other tax consequences. The opinion of Bond Counsel described herein is deemed to be delivered and in effect by Bond Counsel as to any Note issued after the date of such opinion, to the extent that, at the date of issuance of such Note: (i) there is and has been no change in applicable existing federal or State of California law; (ii) the provisions of the Indenture, in so far as such provisions affect the terms and conditions pursuant to which Notes are issued and held, have not been materially amended or supplemented; (iii) the representations and covenants of the parties contained in the Indenture, the Issuing and Paying Agent Agreement, the Tax Certificate and certain certificates dated the date of the opinion of Bond Counsel and delivered by authorized officers of the Commission remain and have remained from the date of original issuance true and accurate and are and have been complied with in all material respects; and (iv) no litigation affecting the issuance or validity of the Notes is pending at the time of delivery of any such Notes. Legislation, if enacted into law, or clarification of the Code subsequent to the date Bond Counsel delivered its opinion may cause or may have caused interest on the Notes to be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal income taxation, or otherwise prevent Holders from realizing the full current benefit of the tax status of such interest. The introduction or enactment of any such subsequent legislation or clarification of the Code may also affect or have affected the market price for, or marketability of, the Notes. Prospective purchasers of the Notes should consult their own tax advisors regarding any federal tax legislation pending, proposed or enacted subsequent to the date Bond Counsel delivered its opinion in connection with the original issuance of the Notes, as to which Bond Counsel has expressed no opinion. 85471497 6 5 67 • • • The opinion of Bond Counsel was based on current legal authority, covered certain matters not directly addressed by such authorities, and represented Bond Counsel's judgment as to the proper treatment of the Notes for federal income tax purposes. It is not binding on the IRS or the courts. Furthermore, Bond Counsel cannot give and has not given any opinion or assurance about activities of the Commission subsequent to the date Bond Counsel delivered its opinion, or about the effect of changes in the Code, the applicable regulations, the interpretation thereof or the enforcement thereof by the IRS subsequent to the date Bond Counsel delivered its opinion. The Commission has covenanted, however, to comply with the requirements of the Code. Bond Counsel's engagement with respect to the Notes ended with the issuance of the Notes, and, unless separately engaged, Bond Counsel is not obligated to defend the Commission or the Holders regarding the tax-exempt status of the Notes in the event of an audit examination by the IRS. Under current procedures, parties other than the Commission and their appointed counsel, including the Holders, would have little, if any, right to participate in the audit examination process. Moreover, because achieving judicial review in connection with an audit examination of tax-exempt notes is difficult, obtaining an independent review of IRS positions with which the Commission legitimately disagrees, may not be practicable. Any action of the IRS, including but not limited to selection of the Notes for audit, or the course or result of such audit, or an audit of notes presenting similar tax issues may affect the market price for, or the marketability of, the Notes, and may cause the Commission or the Holders to incur significant expense. The Dealers The section of the Offering Memorandum entitled "THE DEALERS" is hereby deleted and replaced in its entirety with the following: THE DEALERS The Commission has appointed Barclays Capital Inc. as Series A dealer (the "Series A Dealer") with respect to the offering and sale of the Series A Notes pursuant to the Series A Dealer Agreement and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, as Series B dealer (the "Series B Dealer" and, together with the Series A Dealer, the "Dealers") with respect to the offering and sale of the Series B Notes pursuant to the Series B Dealer Agreement (the "Series B Dealer Agreement" and, together with the Series A Dealer Agreement, the "Dealer Agreements"). The Dealer Agreements, among other things, do not require the Dealers to purchase the Notes. Furthermore, pursuant to the Dealer Agreements, the Dealers may resign or be replaced by the Commission. Related Parties The Series B Dealer and Bank of America, N.A, the letter of credit provider for the Notes, are both wholly -owned, indirect subsidiaries of Bank of America Corporation. 85471497.6 68 The execution and delivery of this Supplement has been duly authorized by the Commission. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Executive Director 85471497.6 7 69 • 85471497.6 APPENDIX A 70 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Federal Authorization Legislative Ad Hoc Committee Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2011 Federal Appropriations Requests FEDERAL AUTHORIZATION LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt the Commission's FY 2011 Federal Appropriations Requests. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Every year, Congress must approve a spending bill for the Department of Transportation, commonly known as the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act (THUD). Within the bill, members of Congress have the opportunity to direct small line items of funding towards priority projects under various federal programs. Every year, members of Congress solicit requests from local agencies for priority projects worthy of congressional support. Successful requests typically yield no more than a few million dollars, with the exception of transit capital projects in the New or Small Starts (5309) program. Consistent with Commission policy to focus appropriations requests on regional priorities and support local transit operators, staff recommends that the following requests be made to members of Congress representing Riverside County: Representative Ken Calvert (CA-44) • State Route 91 Corridor Improvements • Perris Valley Line (PVL) • Alameda Corridor East (ACE) Grade Separations in Riverside County Representative Mary Bono Mack (CA-45) • Perris Valley Line • ACE Grade Separations in Riverside County • 1-10 Corridor Interchanges in the Coachella Valley Agenda Item 9 71 Representative Jerry Lewis (CA-41) • Interstate 215 Bi-County widening project • ACE Grade Separations in Riverside County Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (CA) • SR-91 Corridor Improvements • PVL • ACE Grade Separations in Riverside County The basis of this recommendation is as follows: Perris Valley Line This project has received appropriations in the last three fiscal years under the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Small Starts program, due in large part to the support of Senator Feinstein and Representatives Calvert and Bono Mack. The project is due to receive another (approx.) $24 million to achieve the maximum Small Starts share of $75 million. As the project nears the concluding phases of the environmental process, the Commission is hopeful that construction can proceed soon, and therefore will need the final installment of Small Starts money. The Commission's request for funds will be bolstered if the President's budget for FTA, due to be released in February, contains funding for the project; however, if the FTA budget does not include the project, the Commission will need to engage in a higher level of advocacy. Alameda Corridor East Grade Separations in Riverside County The Commission has seen great success in working with its House delegation over the last three years to support funds allocated on a corridor basis to the most shovel -ready grade separations along the ACE in Riverside County. Last year, Representatives Calvert and Bono Mack teamed up on an appropriation that yielded $1.3 million. Staff recommends continuing to build on this success, as part of the Commission's adopted Grade Separation Funding Strategy, ultimately working towards a larger sum of federal money from a multi -year authorization bill. SR-91 Corridor Improvements A new addition to the Commission's requests this year, staff recommends that the SR-91 corridor improvement project through the city of Corona become a high priority request. During this year, environmental clearance and project development work will intensify and having federal support for the effort during an early phase of the project would be helpful. Agenda Item 9 72 • • 1-215 Bi-County Project The widening of 1-215 north between Riverside and the San Bernardino County line is about to begin design work for the addition of a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction. The timing of asking for federal funding on this project is especially advantageous in that the majority of the project is in San Bernardino County and will be funded by San Bernardino Associated Governments from project savings realized by the current project to widen the 1-215 in San Bernardino. A joint effort to obtain federal funding with San Bernardino County is likely to be successful and should have the support of Congressman Lewis. Construction on this project could begin in 2011 and will provide better mobility north of the recently completed 60/91 /215 interchange project. 1-10 Corridor Interchanges in the Coachella Valley The 1-10 corridor in the Coachella Valley was a major recipient of dollars from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), enabling key interchange projects to move to construction after many years of development by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and local cities. However, more work remains to be done on other interchanges that facilitate access to desert cities for people and goods. The Commission and CVAG will work on a joint request for 1-10 corridor funds that reflects the strengthening partnership between the two agencies and emphasizes the importance of 1-10 to the economic development of the Coachella Valley. Support for Requests from Agency Partners In addition to the Commission specific projects, the Commission will lend its support for regionally important Congressional spending requests from other public agencies. This is especially true for capital requests made by transit operators including the Riverside Transit Agency and SunLine Transit Agency. Another agency that the Commission will work closely with is CVAG if there are opportunities to support requests that will further CVAG's transportation efforts. This is consistent with prior Commission action in allocating ARRA funding to a handful of interchange projects on 1-10 and CVAG's role in administering Measure A dollars within the region. Metrolink is yet another transit provider of which the Commission is a member and is facing a federal mandate to implement positive train control technology in response to the 2008 Chatsworth Metrolink tragedy. As a member agency of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority and due to its investment in the PVL project, the Commission should enthusiastically support Metrolink's efforts in seeking federal support. It is recommended that the Commission take actions Agenda Item 9 73 necessary to ensure that every effort is made to secure adequate funds for positive train control. Finally, there might be opportunities to support funding requests for regional arterial projects as long as the regional arterials are included in the regional arterial or Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee networks. The Commission has taken an active role in supporting funding for the French Valley Parkway in the past and is supporting the city of Corona in the right of way acquisition process for the development of the Foothill Parkway. If local jurisdictions seek federal funding for these regional projects, staff recommends providing a letter of support for the local request. Demonstration Project for Coachella Valley Passenger Rail Service The Federal Authorization Legislative Ad Hoc Committee approved a motion to seek federal funds for a demonstration project for Coachella. Valley passenger rail service. Following this direction, the Commission and CVAG staff will begin working together ;along with Congressional offices to develop a strategy to secure funding for such a project. Agenda Item 9 74 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Federal Authorization Legislative Ad Hoc Committee Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2010 Federal Legislative Platform FEDERAL AUTHORIZATION LEGISLATIVE AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt the Commission's 2010 Federal Legislative Platform. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: There are many critical transportation policy issues facing the federal government in 2010. With the delay in authorizing the next transportation program and the prospect of a "jobs bill" that will spend money on infrastructure, 2010 will be an important year for the nation's infrastructure future. In Washington D.C., the Commission will be prepared to advocate on behalf of the mobility needs of Riverside County residents. This agenda item contains staff's recommended federal legislative platform, which speaks to the key issues likely to receive attention from Congress this year. This year's platform sets forth a policy that focuses on achieving greater federal investment in Riverside County, as well as policy reforms that will help move regionally and nationally significant projects forward. Attachment: Proposed 2010 Federal Legislative Platform Agenda Item 10 75 Riverside County Transportation Commission 2010 Federal Legislative Platform Vision Statement: The Riverside County Transportation Commission believes that federal investment in transportation infrastructure and policy reform will lead directly to our nation's economic recovery and job creation. The Commission will advocate for funding and policies for multi -modal infrastructure that will move people and goods in a cleaner, safer, more efficient way throughout our region — and the nation. Overarching Goals • Support local agencies seeking federal transportation funding in a coordinated manner in order to maximize project funding from federal legislation. • Seek a fair share for Riverside County of any federal funding made available for transportation programs and projects, recognizing Riverside County's congestion, air quality, and growth projections. • Seek a fair share and equitable rate of return of federal transportation funding for California. • Support legislative or administrative policies that promote a regional approach to transportation planning. New Authorization • Ensure that funding is reliable and enables longer -term planning, either through a multi - month or multi -year extension of SAFETEA-LU or new multi -year authorizing legislation. New Authorization should contain sustainable, stable, reliable, long-term transportation funding. • Monitor new programs created in authorizing legislation to ensure that they: benefit Riverside County transportation projects, reduce delays in project delivery, reduce the cost associated with such delays, make investments based on objective needs, respect local control, and are consistent with the rest of the Commission's platform. • Continue to support the federal authorization principles of Mobility 21. "Jobs Bill" • Support efforts to invest in infrastructure to spur job creation, sustain current employment and create economic growth. 76 • Support measures to reduce the amount of time it takes to spend federal money. • Advocate for deadlines to obligate, award, or have funds under contract that are reasonable and can be met by federal and state employees responsible for processing necessary approvals. • Support sub -allocation of funds to regional agencies to the greatest extent possible. • Allow flexibility to use federal funds to "save" state -funded projects that may not receive planned state funds due to state budget crises. Goods Movement • Seek specialized funding for goods movement projects of international and national significance that are beyond the funding ability or responsibility of local and state transportation programs and budgets. • Pursue full funding of the Commission's 2008 Grade Separation Funding Strategy of the 20 highest priority grade crossings in Riverside County. Climate Change • Oppose legislation that imposes unfunded greenhouse gas reduction mandates or establishes policies that open the door to the possibility of future such mandates • Support provisions that direct revenue created from climate change legislation to public transportation. Transit • Advocate for use of federal transit funds to cover operating costs. • Pursue a federally funded demonstration project for Coachella Valley rail service. Rail Safety • Support efforts by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority to secure Positive Train Control funding and enact policies that support increased rail safety investment by the federal government on corridors that share national freight and passenger routes. Project Delivery • Support legislation and policies that expand the availability of innovative project delivery methods to regional transportation planning agencies. 77 • • Sponsor and support efforts to streamline administrative processes that create delays in project delivery while saving the taxpayers millions of dollars in project costs and congestion costs. • Sponsor and support new statutory authority for local agencies to perform at -risk design on projects prior to NEPA approval if the design work is paid for with non-federal funds. TIFIA NOTE: TIFIA is a federal credit assistance program for nationally/regionally significant transportation projects that leverages private capital. • Support policies that will increase the likelihood of securing federal TIFIA loans for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project and improve the Commission's financing package for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project, including but not limited to: o Increased federal investment in the TIFIA program o Raising the current borrowing limit of 33% of a project's cost to 50% Tolling, Congestion Pricing, and Innovative Financing • Oppose efforts to impose federal control over toll rates, schedules, and revenue on locally -sponsored projects. • Oppose any measure that interferes with the authority provided to the Commission by SB 1316 (Correa) or AB 1954 (Jeffries). • Support efforts to expand the responsible use of tolling, congestion pricing, and innovative financing of infrastructure. Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Program (CMAQ) • Ensure the CMAQ program continues to focus on non -attainment areas and is not diluted to become a "50 state program." • Oppose efforts to reduce regional transportation agency control over the expenditure of CMAQ funds. • Support increased funding for the CMAQ program. 78 Small Starts • Support raising the current $75 million cap on Small Starts investment per project to at least $100 million. • Support expanding the criteria for project ratings to include future economic development, growth and ridership, insofar as rewriting this criteria does not result in delays to projects already under development. • Support measures that would give higher ratings to projects that "overmatch" with local money. • Support the elimination, or raising, of the current $250 million net capital cost of Small Starts projects. • Support efforts to reduce delays in project delivery under this program. • Stay on track to enter into a Project Construction Grant Agreement (PCGA) in 2011 with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension. Self -Help • Support policies that reward self-help cities, counties, and regional agencies for their voters' commitment to local funding of transportation infrastructure. High Speed Rail • Support eligibility of commuter rail improvements under federal high speed rail programs. Livability • Monitor Administration and Congressional actions that introduce the concept of "livability" to federal programs. • Ensure that suburban areas, growing regions, and low -density regions are not penalized in livability programs. • Support incentive programs (not mandates) that encourage "livable" or "sustainable" communities, where local agencies deem them appropriate. • Oppose measures to erode local control of land use or transportation decisions. 79 • • • Commuter Assistance • Support funding and policies that encourage traveler information systems, freeway service patrols, intelligent transportation systems, ridesharing, and other innovative tools to reduce congestion and improve efficiency of our surface transportation network. Regional Cooperation • Support legislation that provides priority funding to states, counties, and cities that have regional cooperation efforts across boundaries to provide national systemic solutions to congestion and goods movement. 80 01.0Z `0 AJerugaj uops!wwoo uoppodsuail *no° eppeni� alepdn anpisi6ai 12-10Pod 04e4S quawenes ui glum siyl . uaaopeld annelsifiai latoPed 0.1.01 • sTsanbaj 5upund 1-0Z Ad 01M:I • uoi.6uiysem ui y}uow siyl • Saor• 6uoisuaixa ni-ya13d`dS • paounouue quea6 13011 • 3nQ sisanba� suoReiadoaddy 1. 1.pZ Ad • paseapH la6pn8 1- 10OZ Ad • umfiuiyseM ui gluon siyl uilsanbai osfe OVEINVS •4100,41, .0 6! u 0lo?j• :4sanbaa me Liols!H Jexos `upisuiad `penleo (s)aaquaaw pafoad i.uauaangiOwl • aoppi90 1.6- 1S 4aafoad :uoRepuewwooaa aapwwoo ooH pd papal suogeudoaddy 1.0Z l.� Alunoo '8 se!PO . saoiaiado psuaal . :saiouaba aaupad poddns spafoad puopei 6uipunj uo assl ipm voM Ilan Callan allauoaoo aoj. waaboad 6uipunj uowilsuowep ansmd :(pcwoo) uoppuewwoow aapwwoo ooH py suoi;eudoaddy 1.1.0Z Ad •eivaolgeo uaayinos suopiadoadde puomppe fiuinsand pue sTsanbaa fiuipuni. )iunoapW 6upoddns aae sapua6y aaquaaW . aaojaaa yl ssaoons pop° 1.0Z Ad = aullpeaP ZI-OZ • wioaq.aW uoupw +LO 1-$ • $$$ lied paadS-y6iH ON • lafipnq sjuapisaad ui you uoill!w 05$ • 1041103 meal ani; sod 31ui1oa;aw suopudoaddy 1.0Z A� uownd000 leuoi6a1 lied paadS y61H aoueispsy aalnww00 „Aliligenil„ dial-11PS Odwo 6urnol'8 didIl AnApea loafold AleieS lied 6uipun j puaal e6ueyo a}euai�� �uauaanoua spoon • Buipuni. ao sioe[ad shoed w i 6u i iAud • „Ine Saor„ • uoRezpouind • sanssi AoHod Aa}i . ipeoadde anpeoad . aeaA kleAe paldopy . woo;;eld lalePed 0102:1 owauaeneS ui gluon siyl lsuonseno