Loading...
03 March 28, 2011 Western Riverside County Programs and Projects90725 RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 1:30 p.m. DATE: Monday, March 28, 2011 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside 9- COMMITTEE MEMBERS .40 Karen Spiegel, Chair / Steve Nolan, City of Corona Marcelo Co / Richard Stewart, City of Moreno Valley Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Adam Rush / Ike Bootsma, City of Eastvale Darcy Kuenzi / Wallace Edgerton, City of Menifee Berwin Hanna / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Scott Miller l Andrew Kotyuk, City of San Jacinto Ben Benoit / Timothy Walker, City of Wildomar Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District I Marion Ashley, County of Riverside, District V 9. STAFF .0%0 Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 9. AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY ot, 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. Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.54 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 1:30 p.m. Monday, March 28, 2011 BOARD ROOM County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor Riverside, California 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.orq. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact 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 Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Committee, 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. Also, the Committee may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee March 28, 2011 Page 2 Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matter. raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members may refer such mattes to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 27, 2010 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee 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 Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. if there are less than 2/3 of the Committee 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. ELECTION. OF OFFICERS Pagel Overview This item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee to conduct an election of officers for 201 1 - Chair and Vice Chair. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY TO PROVIDE RAILWAY FLAGGING SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT DURING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL, CONSTRUCTION, AND PROPERTY MAINTENANCE WORK Page 2 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-33-013-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 09-33-013-00, with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) to extend the term for an additional three years and two one-year options, and additional compensation in the amount of $250,000 for the continued provision of railway flagging services; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. • • • • Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee March 28, 2011 Page 3 9. 2011 CORRIDOR MOBILITY IMPROVEMENT ACCOUNT - CALL FOR PROJECTS Page 9 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the nomination and application submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for the Interstate 215 Widening, from Scott Road to Nuevo Road for Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funds; 2) In partnership with the county of Riverside, approve the nomination and application submittal to the CTC for the I-215/Van Buren Boulevard interchange project for CMIA funds pending review of the project's eligibility; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 11. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING The next Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, April 25, 2011, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS SIGN -IN SHEET MARCH 28, 2011 AME ,0( tAts ,N N* �fzfize/ •Sp ahem ki 01-4 AI 647 AGENCY 0-t n Qom. /1 iv, ..to�U /` CAD � 4iodr ofMOWSe&rta *PLP—$4 Lkt v cc ,6- �) •� " E MAIL ADDRESS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE ROLL CALL March 28, 2011 County of Riverside, District Co 401t1 Ft ct City of Banning City of Eastvale C City of Moreno Valley City of City of Perris City of Wildomar Present .............. Absent O O kft.e.\VQ.d. \ • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE Monday, September 27, 2010 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee was called to order by Chair Karen Spiegel at 1:30 p.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Daryl Busch led the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Members Absent Marion Ashley Bob Botts Daryl Busch Bob Buster Steve Di Memmo Wallace Edgerton Scott Farnam Bonnie Flickinger Karen Spiegel Malcolm Miller 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests to speak from the public. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 23, 2010 M/S/C IBusch/Flickinger) to approve the minutes of August 23, 2010, as submitted. Abstain: Ashley RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 Page 2 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to this agenda. 7. AGREEMENT WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE FOR THE TRANSFER OF EQUIPMENT AND FUNDING TO ASSIST WITH CONTINUED GROUND WATER MONITORING AT FIVE COREHOLE SITES IN THE CLEVELAND NATIONAL FOREST John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, presented an overview of the scope of the agreement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service for the transfer of equipment and funding to assist with continued ground water monitoring at five corehole sites in the Cleveland National Forest. M/S/C (Busch/Di Memmo) to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 11-65-027-00 with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service - Cleveland National Forest (Forest Service) for the transfer of ground water monitoring equipment and a one-time stipend of $200,000 to assist in the Forest Service's monitoring of ground water at the five corehole sites; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 8. AGREEMENT WITH TRC SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF A PROJECT REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR THE INTERSTATE 215 SOUTH CONNECTOR PROJECT FROM INTERSTATE 15 TO MURRIETA HOT SPRINGS ROAD — ADD ONE MIXED FLOW LANE IN THE SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION, IN THE CITY OF MURRIETA Lisa DaSilva, Capital Projects Manager, presented an overview of the scope of the agreement with TRC Solutions, Inc. for preparation of a project report and environmental document for the Interstate 215 South connector project from Interstate 15 to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. At Commissioner Wallace Edgerton's request, Lisa DaSilva clarified that the addition of the mixed flow lane will only be for the southbound direction because the northbound direction has an additional lane. • • RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 Page 3 M/S/C (Di Memmo/Edgerton) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 11-31-022-00 to TRC Solutions, Inc. to prepare a project report and environmental document (PR/ED) for the Interstate 215 South connector project from 1-15 to Murrieta Hot Springs Road — Add one mixed flow lane in the southbound direction, in the city of Murrieta, based on the project scope and cost for the base amount of $774,716, plus a contingency amount of $150,284 for potential scope changes, for a total not to exceed amount of $925,000; 2) Approve Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Remove Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work as may be required for the project; 4) Authorize the Executive Director to execute non -funding related cooperative agreements with Ca[trans as may be required for the project; and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. AGREEMENT WITH IVS SYSTEMS TO PROVIDE CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION SECURITY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR THE FIVE COMMISSION -OWNED COMMUTER RAIL STATIONS AND THE PERRIS TRANSIT CENTER IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Greg Moore, Procurement and Assets Manager, presented a brief overview of the scope of the agreement with IVS Systems to provide closed circuit television security system maintenance services for the five Commission - owned commuter rail stations and the Perris Transit Center. At Commissioner Bonnie Flickinger's request, Greg Moore named the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations. John Standiford noted that Riverside County is unique in that the localities do not own and operate the stations. M/S/C (Farnam/Buster) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 10-24-111-00 to IVS Systems (IVS) for Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) security system maintenance services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations and the Perris Transit Center for a three-year period, plus three one-year options to extend the agreement, for a total contract amount of $687,432; RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 Page 4 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT 10A. Commissioner Busch announced H.R. 6150 (Gallegly) is moving forward and will retroactively raise the limit on insurance liability for passenger rail accidents and recommended the Commission oppose this bill. 10B. John Standiford announced that Executive Director Anne Mayer, Chief Financial Officer Theresia Trevino, and Toll Projects Director Michael Blomquist are in New York meeting with the rating agencies regarding the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds to finance the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project. 11. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 1:48 p.m. The next meeting of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee is scheduled for October 25, 2010 at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, C�jevz_ \ Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 28, 2011 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Election of Officers STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee to conduct an election of officers for 2011 — Chair and Vice Chair. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The election of officers for the full Commission and its Committees are held on an annual basis. Commissioners Karen Spiegel and Bonnie Flickinger were elected as the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee's officers in January 2010. Once the election has been conducted, the new Chair and Vice Chair will immediately assume the positions. Agenda Item 7 1 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 28, 2011 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Joe Colayco, Staff Analyst Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company to Provide Railway Flagging Services for the Perris Valley Line Project During Preliminary and Final Engineering, Environmental, Construction, and Property Maintenance Work STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-33-013-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 09-33-013-00, with Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) to extend the term for an additional three years and two one-year options, and additional compensation in the amount of $250,000 for the continued provision of railway flagging services; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: BNSF requires, per the shared use agreement entered on October 30, 1992, a BNSF flagger be present during the performance of any work that has the potential to foul the railroad tracks. The BNSF flagger has direct contact with the train's engineer and can alert the engineer to the work being performed and control the movement of the trains through the work zone. This provides a safe and secure area for other contractors' field crews to work and reduces the potential for conflicts between the field crews and the train movements. BNSF requires that only trained BNSF employees perform flagging and will not allow outside consultants to perform the work. Though the labor rate and crew size varies depending on the particular project requirements, the typical cost for a BNSF flagger for an eight hour day is $1,000. At its September 10, 2008 meeting, the Commission awarded Agreement No. 09-33-013-00 to BNSF to provide flagging services for the Perris Valley Line Agenda Item 8 2 for a term of three years ending on September 9, 2011, for a total contract amount of $110,000. The Commission also authorized the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to approve amendments for potential additional work in the amount of $40,000. Pursuant to that authorization, a contract amendment was executed with BNSF on August 16, 2010, to increase the contract amount by $40,000 for a total contract value that was not to exceed $150,000. Additional flagging services will be needed beyond this initial three-year term for the remaining work in constructing the Perris Valley Line, highway construction, and property maintenance work at locations intersecting the railroad, and property maintenance work on the railway itself. Staff recommends approval of this second amendment to provide an additional $250,000 to cover flagging services for an additional term of three years with two one-year options. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A N/A N/A Year: FY 201 1 /12 2012/13 2013/14 Amount: $150 000 50 000 50,000 Source of Funds: Rail Measure A Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 003823 65520 00000 0000 221 33 65520 $210,000 003023 65520 00000 0000 262 31 65520 20,000 512402 65520 00000 0000 105 51 65520 10,000 522402 65520 00000 0000 105 52 65520 10,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \)/Xii,,„/„aot ai Date: 03/15/11 Attachment: Agreement No. 09-33-013-02 Agenda Item 8 • • • 3 • • • Agreement No. 09-33-013-02 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR FLAGGING SERVICES WITH THE BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement for Flagging Services is made and entered into as of , 2011, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (the "Commission") and BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY., a Delaware corporation (the "Railway"). 2. RECITALS 2.1 The Commission and the Railway have entered into an agreement dated September 10, 2008 for the purpose of providing the Commission with railway flagging services on its railways. (the "Master Agreement"), with compensation not to exceed One Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars ($110,000). 2.2 On August 16, 2010, the Commission and Railway entered into Agreement No. 09-33-013-01 increasing the compensation to an amount not to exceed One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000). 2.3 The Commission and Railway now desire to amend the Master Agreement in order to extend the term thereof and to provide additional compensation for the continued provision of flagging services. TERMS 3.1 The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Amendment No. 2 by this reference, as though fully set forth herein. 3.2 The term of the Master agreement shall be extended for an additional term of three (3) years, ending September 9, 2014, with two one-year options to extend at the discretion of the Commission's Executive Director. 17336.00603\5789833.1 1 4 3.3 Compensation for Services provided under this Amendment No. 2 shall be at the rates set forth in Exhibit "A", attached to this amendment and incorporated herein by reference. 3.4 The maximum compensation to be provided under this Amendment No. 2 shall not exceed Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000), without written authorization from the Commission's Executive Director. 3.5 The total contract value for the Master Agreement, including this Amendment No. 2, is Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000). 3.6 Except as amended by this Amendment No. 2, all provisions of the Master Agreement, as heretofore amended, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment No. 2. 17336.0060315 789833.1 [Signatures on following page] 2 • • • • • SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT NO. 09-33-013-02 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY COMMISSION By: By: Melvin Thomas Anne Mayer Manager, Public Projects Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel 17336.00603\5789833. 3 17336.00603\5789833.1 EXHIBIT "A" COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES (ATTACHED BEHIND THIS PAGE) EXHIBIT A 7 EXHIBIT "A" COMPENSATION The estimated cost for one (1) flagger is approximately between $800.00-$1,600.00 for an eight (8) hour basic day with time and one-half or double time for overtime, rest days and holidays. The estimated cost for each flagger includes vacation allowance, paid holidays, Railway and unemployment insurance, public liability and property damage insurance, health and welfare benefits, vehicle, transportation, meals, lodging, radio, equipment, supervision and other costs incidental to performing flagging services. Negotiations for Railway labor or collective bargaining agreements and rate changes authorized by appropriate Federal authorities may increase actual or estimated flagging rates. The flagging rate in effect at the time of performance by the Contractor hereunder will be used to calculate the actual costs of flagging pursuant to this paragraph. Exhibit A 8 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 28, 2011 TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee FROM: Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: 2011 Corridor Mobility Improvement Account - Call for Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve the nomination and application submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for the Interstate 215 Widening project from Scott Road to Nuevo Road for Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funds; 2) In partnership with the county of Riverside, approve the nomination and application submittal to the CTC for the I-215/Van Buren Boulevard interchange project for CMIA funds pending review of the project's eligibility; and 3) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In November 2006, Proposition 1 B authorized $4.5 billion in general obligation bond proceeds to be deposited in the CMIA. The funding was made available for performance improvements on the state highway system, or major access routes to the state highway system on the local road system, that relieve congestion by expanding capacity, enhancing operations or otherwise improving travel times within these high -congestion travel corridors. The CMIA funding was devoted to highway projects with a construction award date no later than December 31, 2012. Funding was allocated on a 60/40 split with a 60% share allocated in Southern California and a 40% share allocated for Northern California projects. As a result, $2.7 billion in CMIA funding was available for Southern California projects. Of that amount, two Riverside County projects received a total of $195,768,000: Agenda Item 9 9 Project CMIA Funding 1-215 South Widening Project $ 38,570,000 SR-91 HOV/Adams Street to 60/91 /215 Interchange $157,198,000 Total: $195,768,000 The CTC adopted the initial CMIA program of projects in February 2007. Since that time, many of the projects awarded for construction have accrued substantial project cost savings. To address the cost savings issue, the CTC adopted Supplement 2 to the CMIA and State Route 99 Accountability Implementation Plan in December 2009. The purpose of Supplement 2 was to clarify and expand the CTC's policy regarding project cost savings for CMIA and State Route 99 projects and to communicate how project cost savings will be administered. Supplement 2 reflects the CTC's intent to program project cost savings to: 1) Eligible projects nominated but not programmed in the initial CMIA program; and/or 2) Enhancements to existing CMIA projects. Based on the level of project cost savings accrued through March 2010, the CTC approved amendments to the CMIA program at the May and June 2010 CTC meetings, programming $227.8 million for projects located in the north and $79.6 million for projects in the south. CMIA projects delivered since March 2010 have accrued additional cost savings and as a result, the CTC is expected to approve a call for projects at its March 23-24, 2011 meeting. In anticipation, Commission staff is seeking approval to nominate the following two projects: 1-215 Central Widening Project - Scott Road to Nuevo Road Estimated project construction cost: $95 million Seeking CMIA funds: $82 million The project consists of constructing an additional mixed flow lane in each direction and will require additional right of way to accommodate the widening. The environmental document is scheduled for approval in April 2011. Contract award is scheduled to occur in September 2012. This project is part of an overall corridor improvement that will complete a gap in the system and improve mobility within Murrieta, Temecula, Perris, and nearby unincorporated areas. Agenda Item 9 • • • 10 • • • 1-215 Van Buren Boulevard — Ground Access Improvement Project Estimated project construction cost: $66 million Seeking CMIA funds: $10 million The project proposes to reconstruct the Van Buren Boulevard interchange. Improvements include reconfiguration of the interchange, bridge replacements, auxiliary lanes to the north, improvements to Van Buren Boulevard, and realignment of southbound 1-215 to accommodate future widening of the freeway. This project is needed to provide improved access to not only the joint -use March Air Reserve Base/March Inland Port but also the Meridian Business Park, an employment based redevelopment of the former March Air Force Base, that is planned for significant goods movement related uses including rail -served manufacturing, light industrial, and logistics/warehousing. The project is scheduled to begin construction in December 2011. Criteria for 2011 CMIA Call for Projects The complete criteria for submitting projects for the 2011 CMIA call for projects is detailed in the attached CMIA and State Route 99 Accountability Implementation Plan. The CTC requires Caltrans and individual project sponsors to jointly propose projects that meet eligibility requirements detailed in the CMIA guidelines, including but not limited to, the following: • The proposed corridor enhancement project either 1) reduces travel time or delay; 2) improves connectivity of the state highway system between rural, suburban, and urban areas; or 3) improves the operation or safety of a highway or road segment; • The project improves access to jobs, housing, markets, and commerce.; and • The project can commence construction no later than December 31, 2012. Commission staff believes that the 1-215 Central widening project is a prime candidate for the 2011 CMIA Call for Projects as it was originally submitted in 2007 for CMIA funding. Additionally, the project is adjacent to the 1-215 South widening project, which received $38.57 million in CMIA funding. The I-215/Van Buren Boulevard ground access improvement project was not included as a project in the 2007 CMIA project list. It was included in the Proposition 1 B Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF) program and was approved for $10 million of TCIF funds. Potentially, the project could be considered as an enhancement project to the 1-215 corridor. The CMIA guidelines indicate that project sponsors provide a ranking of their nomination projects. Based on the CTC criteria, staff believes that the priority Agenda Item 9 11 should be given to the 1-215 Central widening project as it meets the CTC's intent to program project cost savings to an eligible project nominated in the 2007 CMIA Call, and it directly enhances an existing CMIA project (1-215 South, Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road) since the project is an adjacent segment. Although the I-215/Van Buren interchange project was not originally nominated for CMIA funds in 2007, the project improves access to jobs, housing, markets, and commerce. The interchange improvements are among the most important mobility projects in the county as it provides needed capacity for the completion of the Meridian Business Park, which will be the single largest employment center in Riverside County, creating close to 15,000 jobs. Commission staff will attend the March CTC meeting and will explore the feasibility of submitting one or both of these projects in the 2011 CMIA Call for Projects. Staff will provide an update at the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee. If the I-215/Van Buren Boulevard interchange project is deemed ineligible for CMIA funds, staff will continue to work with the county of Riverside in seeking other funds to complete the funding gap. The CTC is scheduled to approve the 2011 CMIA projects in June. It should be noted that the California Treasurer has announced that there will be no Proposition 1 B bond sale this spring as planned due to the State budget situation. CMIA funding availability is dependent on such bond sales and is uncertain at this time. Since this item is for approval of a nomination and application submittal, there is no financial impact at this time. Attachment: CTC CMIA and State Route 99 Accountability and Implementation Plan Supplement 2 Agenda Item 9 • • 12 California Transportation Commission Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) & State Route 99 (SR 99) Accountability Implementation Plan Supplement 2 Project Cost Savings I. General: The Accountability Implementation Plan for the CMIA and SR 99 programs was approved by the Commission in October 2007 and Supplement 1 (Financial Accountability) was approved by the Commission in June 2008. The Commission later extended the applicability of the Accountability Implementation Plan and Supplement I to the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) and the Highway Railroad Crossing Safety Account (HRCSA) Proposition la bond programs. The purpose of Supplement 2 is to clarify and expand the Commission's policy regarding project cost savings for CMIA and SR 99 projects and to:, communicate to project sponsors and implementing agencies. the. expectations related to financial.accountability, and more specifically, how project savings will be administered. Supplement 2 also addresses the special provisrons.fereost savings on projects subject to Assembly Bill.X3-20 or a private placement Bond Purchase Contract. As such, Supplement 2 revises only the Project Cost Savings,provisions of Supplement 1 for CMIA and SR 99 projects with the exception of the provisions related to Cost Savings on Projects Subject to Assembly Bill X3720 and. Cost.Savings on Projects Subject to a Private;Plaeement Bond Purchase Contract. These provisions may also apply to certain. TCIF and HRCSA projects under the limited circumstances detailed in Supplement 2. Absent these special circumstances, the Project Cost Savings provisions of Supplement 1 remain in effect for TCIF and HRCSA projects as originally adopted. Allotherprovisions of. Supplement 1 remain in effect for all designated bond programs (CMIA, SR 99, TCIF and HRCSA) as originallyadopted. 2. Project Cost Savings/CMIA Projects: Since the adoption of the CMIA program, the Commission approved a Financial Accountability plan (Supplement 1) that allows funds to be de -allocated from a project at contract award when the cost to award the construction contract is lower than the total sum of allocated funds. However, funds de -allocated from the project at contract award were to remain available to address potential cost increases necessary to complete the project or to supplement a funding plan for another project or contract only upon prior Commission approval. In the latter case the project sponsor would have to commit to funding any cost increases to 13 ensure the completion of both projects — the original project where the savings were realized and the resulting new project using the savings in bond funds. The Commission has continued to emphasize its intent that the use of CMIA bond funds will be limited to the cost of construction, and that bond funds will not be utilized to cover project cost increases. As a condition of adopting a project into the CMIA, the Commission resolved that all project cost increases beyond the February 2007 program adoption are the responsibility of the nominating and sponsoring agencies. When the cost to award the construction contract is lower than the total sum of allocated funds, the project sponsor is required to provide documentation identifying a proportional credit to each of the respective funds shown in the original (or amended) baseline agreement for the construction component. The project sponsor may consider crediting the funding source that contributed additional funds in preparation for contract advertisement prior to applying the proportional credits to the funding sources in the original (or amended) baseline agreement. This supplement provides that remaining bond funds de -allocated from the project at project award; and will be administered in the following manner.: • . Ten percent of the project's bond savings will be held in a CMIA program reserve and available, upon approval by the Commission, to: contribute to funding potential: construction cost increases necessary to complete the project,: where the savings were taken from. Upon project close-out, the remaining bond funds will be available for re -programming by the Commission. • 'Remaining project bond savings, beyond those reserved for pdtential eonstruetion cost increases and are not subject to the constraints of Assent* Bill X3120 or a pnvateplacement Bond Purchase Contract, will be available for programming by the Commission for additional or enhanced benefits; consistent with the stattitory intern ofthe CMIA program. Under the Bond Act; a CMIA project must be on the state highway system or on a. major access route to the state highway system on.the local road system. To include a project the CMIA program, the Commission must find that'it "improves mobility in a high -congestion corridor, by improving travel times or reducing the number of daily vehicle hours ofdelay, improves the connectivity ofthe state highway system between -rural, suburban, and urbari areas, or improves the operation or safety of a highway or road segment." The Bond Act also requires the Commission, in adopting a program for the CMIA, to find that the program is geographically balanced, consistent with the north/south split that applies to the STIP (40% north, 60% south), and to find that it "provides mobility improvements in highly traveled or highly congestedcorridors in all regions of California." Further, the Bond Act requires the Commission to find that the program targets funding "to provide the mobility benefit in the earliest possible timeframe." It also mandates that the inclusion of a project in the CMIA program be based on a demonstration that the project can commence construction or implementation no later than December 31, 2012. 14 In addition, Commission policies reflected in the CMIA program guidelines include provisions for program updates and allow the Department of Transportation and regional agencies to request program amendments in the same manner as for STIP amendments, except that "CMIA program amendments will not add new projects that were not included in the nominations for the initial program" received by the Commission on or before January 16, 2007. The Commission will consider proposals to program projects nominated and considered during the original CMIA process that were not programmed as part of the 2007 CMIA Adopted Program of Projects or projects which will enhance the benefits of already programmed CMIA projects. The Commission expects the Department of Transportation and individual projects sponsors to jointly propose those projects that meet eligibility requirements detailed in the CMIA Guidelines, including, but not limited to, the following: • The proposed corridor enhancement project either (1) reduces travel time or delay, (2) improves connectivity of the state highway system between rural, suburban, and urban areas, or (3) improves the operation or safety of a highway or road segment. • The project improves access to jobs, housing, markets, and commerce. • 'The project can commence construction no later than December 31, 2012. The Commission expects that bond funding contributions for these additional projects will be limited to the costs of construction and that projects willhave a full funding commitment through project completion and closeout. The Commission also intends to programproject savings consistent with the north/south provisions of the original CMIA Program. 3. Protect Cost Savings/SR 99 Projects: Similar to the CMIA program, the de - allocation of bond funds are allowed from a project in the SR 99 program at contract award when.the cost to award the construction contract is lowerthan the total: sum of allocated funds. De -allocated fundswill remain availableto address potentiafcost increases necessary to complete the project;.or may be utilized to supplement a funding plan foranother project or contract only upon prior Commission approval.. The SR 99 program distributed funds based on 15 percent to the north for the Sacramento Valley and counties north of-Sacramento/San Joaquin County line and 85 percent to the south for the San Joaquin Valley._ Project savings willTemain within the geographic boundaries where the savings were attained. When the cost to award the construction contract is lower than the total sum of allocated funds, the project sponsor will provide documentation identifying a proportional credit to each of the respective funds shown in the original (or amended) baseline agreement for the construction component.. The project sponsor may consider crediting the funding source that contributed additional funds in preparation • for contract advertisement prior to applying the proportional credits to the funding 15 sources in the original (or amended) baseline agreement. This supplement provides that remaining bond funds will bede-allocated from the project at project award, and will be administered in the following manner: • Ten percent of project bond savings will be held in a SR 99 program reserve and available, upon approval by the Commission, to contribute to funding potential construction cost increases necessary to complete construction of all programmed SR 99 projects. Upon project close-out, the remaining bond funds will be available for re -programming by the Commission. • The remainder of bond savings may also be used to add new projects or enhancements on already programmed SR 99 projects. Prior to making any proposals to program additional projects into the SR 99 program, the Department of Transportation will consult with the San Joaquin Valley and/or the Sacramento Valley Regional Transportation Planning Agencies to identify corridor priorities for the reprogramming of project savings. When proposing additional projects into the 99 Bond Program; consideration must be given to existing projects and needs identified in the SR 99 Business Plans, Corridor System Management Plans, and project deliverability within the timelines established in the SR 99 Guidelines. The following criteria will be used to reprogram 'any SR 99 project savings: o Proposed new project or enhancement is identified in the.SR.99 Business Plan, or in a Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) produced as a result of SR 99 bond. programming. o Proposed new project can 'begin -construction by Deceniber-31; 2012. o SR 99 Bond funding, or a combination of bond funding and other committed funds, will complete the funding needs for the new project. o Project selection will take into consideration the priorities outlined in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley-Route'99 Business Plans: 4. Cost Savings on -Projects Subject to Assembly Bill X3=20: Under the provisions of Assembly Bill X3-20, if a metropolitamplanning organization; county- transportation commission, regional transportationplanning agency, or other local agency. uses federal_ Recovery Act funds to fund a project programmed under a Proposition IB Bond Program with:the effect of displacing the need for those bond funds on the • project, the Cotmission will allocate funds for one or more qualifying projects in the appropriate program; in the jurisdiction of that agency, and in the same amount of the displaced bond funds. Requests to re -program such funds are subject to the eligibility requirements of the appropriate Proposition 1 B program and subject to Commission approval. 5. Cost Savings on Projects Subject to a Private Placement Bond Purchase Contract: If a metropolitan planning organization, county transportation commission, regional transportation planning agency, or other local agency enters into a private placement Bond Purchase Contract with the Treasurer of the State of 16 • • California to secure funding for a Proposition IB Bond Program project(s), the provisions of the Bond Purchase Contract state that if Bond proceeds remain after completion of the Projects, such proceeds will be expended for other projects qualified under the Bond Act and located in the same geographic region as the projects funded with those proceeds. 6. Cost Savings on Projects with a Letter of No Prejudice (LONP): For projects using LONPs, allocations will be adjusted to reflect the cost to award the contract, thus making the savings available for reserve and reprogramming. 7. Submittals of Project Proposals: Proposals to program additional CMIA or SR 99 projects will be evaluated on their merits if they are received by February I, 2010. Proposals to program additional CMIA or SR 99 projects received on or after February 2, 20I0 will be evaluated on an ongoing, first come, first serve basis. Proposals must include: • A cover letter from the sponsoring agency with signature authorizing and approving the proposal to program the project. • A letter from the Department of Transportation with signature authorizing and concurring with the proposal to program the project. • An updated Project Programming Request (PPR) form that describes the project scope, cost, funding plan, project delivery milestones, and major benefits. • A brief narrative (1-2 pages) that updates information submitted as part of the original nomination. The proposals must be submitted in hard copy and addressed or delivered to: Bimla G. Rhinehart, Executive Director California Transportation Commission Mail Station 52, Room 2222 ] 120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 17