The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About07 July 8, 2015 CommissionCOMM-COMM-00048 Riwe5ide County Trowel -lotion Commission MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside e'a. COMMISSIONERS eel Chair— Daryl Busch Vice Chair — Scott Matas Second Vice Chair —John F. Tavaglione Kevin Jeffries, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Chuck Washington, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Deborah Franklin / Art Welch, City of Banning Brenda Knight / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Tim Wade, City of Blythe Ella Zanowic / Jim Hyatt, City of Calimesa Dawn Haggerty / Jordan Ehrenkranz, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Shelley Kaplan, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / To Be Appointed, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Randy Fox, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Adam Rush / Clint Lorimore, City of Eastvale Linda Krupa / Paul Raver, City of Hemet Dana Reed / Douglas Hanson, City of Indian Wells Troy Strange / Glenn Miller, City of Indio Frank Johnston / Brian Berkson, City of Jurupa Valley Robert Radi / To Be Appointed, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore Scott Mann / To Be Appointed, City of Menifee Jesse Molina / Jeffrey J. Giba, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Jonathan Ingram, City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Jan Harnik / Susan Marie Weber, City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat / Paul Lewin, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Rita Rogers, City of Perris Ted Weill / To Be Appointed, City of Rancho Mirage To Be Appointed / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk / Scott Miller, City of San Jacinto Michael S. Naggar / Michael McCracken, City of Temecula Ben Benoit / Timothy Walker, City of Wildomar John Bulinski, Interim Director, Governor's Appointee Caltrans District 8 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. Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 8:30 AM To: Tara Byerly Cc: Jennifer Harmon Subject: RCTC: July Commission Agenda - 07.08.2015 Importance: High Good morning Commissioners: The July Commission Agenda for the meeting scheduled for Wednesday, July 8, 2015 @ 9:30 a.m. is available. Please copy the link: http://www.rctc.orauploads/media items/july-8-2015-1.original.pdf Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant RCTC 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501. (951)787-7141 1 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 8:33 AM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC: July Commission Agenda - 07.08.2015 Importance: High Good morning Commission Alternates: The July Commission Agenda for the meeting scheduled for Wednesday, July 8, 2015 @ 9:30 a.m. is now available. http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media itemshuly-8-2015-1.original.pdf Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant RCTC 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951)787-7141 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, July 8, 2015 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, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance 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 Commission should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda that are not listed on the agenda. Commission members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JUNE 10, 2015 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 8, 2015 Page 2 6. PUBLIC HEARING — ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY AND AMENDED RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FEE, PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT, AND PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT INTERESTS IN PORTIONS OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY BY EMINENT DOMAIN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS AN ALLEYWAY WITH NO ASSIGNED ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO., AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 102-050-003 AND 102-050-006 LOCATED IN CORONA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BETWEEN PIERCE STREET ON THE EAST TO THE COUNTY LINE ON THE WEST, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Conduct a hearing to consider the adoption of resolutions of necessity, including providing all parties interested in the affected property and their attorneys, or their representatives, an opportunity to be heard on the issues relevant to the resolutions of necessity; 2) 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 owner. 3) Adopt Resolution of Necessity No. 15-015 and Amended Resolutions of Necessity Nos. 13-045 and 13-046, "Resolutions of Necessity for the Acquisition of Property Interests in Certain Real Property, by Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Caltrans Parcel No. 23769 and Assessor Parcel Nos. 102-050-003 and 102-050-006 located in Corona, Riverside County, California'; for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP), between Pierce Street on the east to the Riverside/Orange County line on the West, in Riverside County, California. 7. PUBLIC HEARING — RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICES FUNDING ALLOCATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 45 1) Conduct a public hearing at its July Commission meeting on the proposed Section 5307 Program of Projects (POP); 2) Approve the Fiscal Year 2015/16 Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County; 3) Approve the FY 2015/16 Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) fund allocations for transit; 4) Direct staff to add projects into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTI P); Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 8, 2015 Page 3 5) Adopt Resolution No. 15-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate State Transit Assistance Funds"; and 6) Approve the disbursement of $4,798,000 in LTF funds to Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) as a bridge loan due to the United States Department of Labor (DOL) suspension of federal funds due to Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) issues. 8. 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. 9. CONSENT CALENDAR — All 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. 9A. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED TRIENNIAL OVERALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM GOAL FOR FEDERAL FISCAL YEARS 2016-18 Page 67 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt 10.8 percent as the Commission's Federal Transit Administration (FTA) proposed triennial Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) race - neutral goal for Federal Fiscal Years 2016-18 for the period October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2018; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 15-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting Its Triennial Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Goal (49 CFR Part 26) as it Applies to Funding Received Directly from the Federal Transit Administration"; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve final adjustments to the DBE race -neutral goal for FFY 2016-18 as a result of comments received during the public notice and comment period. 9B. FISCAL YEARS 2016-20 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS Page 81 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the Fiscal Years 2016-20 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) for Local Streets and Roads (LSR) as submitted. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 8, 2015 Page 4 9C. 2009 MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT BASE YEAR REQUIREMENTS FOR EASTVALE AND JURUPA VALLEY Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 84 1) Approve the 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads (LSR) Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year requirement of $38,949 for the city of Eastvale (Eastvale); and 2) Approve the 2009 Measure A LSR MOE base year requirement of $0 for the city of Jurupa Valley (Jurupa Valley). 9D. 2015 STATE ROUTE 91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Page 87 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the 2015 State Route 91 Implementation Plan. 9E. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REQUEST FOR TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE REGIONAL ARTERIAL PROGRAM FUNDS FOR INTERSTATE 15/RAILROAD CANYON ROAD AND FRANKLIN STREET INTERCHANGE PROJECT Page 122 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve programming $4.6 million in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial funds for design and right of way phases for the Interstate 15/Railroad Canyon Road and Franklin Street interchange project; 2) Approve an additional $4 million in TUMF Regional Arterial funds for the construction phase contingent upon approval of U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) funding; 3) Approve Agreement No. 10-72-016-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 10-71-016-00, with the city of Lake Elsinore for $2 million in design and $2.6 million in right of way funds related to the project; 4) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Approve a budget adjustment to increase Fiscal Year 2015/16 TUMF Regional Arterial expenditures in the amount of $4.6 million. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 8, 2015 Page 5 9F. UTILITY AGREEMENTS FOR THE STATE ROUTE 74 WIDENING PROJECT BETWEEN DEXTER AVENUE IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND 7TH STREET IN THE CITY OF PERRIS Page124 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 15-31-113-00 between the Commission and Southern California Edison Company (SCE) to reimburse SCE's review cost of joint use agreements (JUAs), legal descriptions, and plat maps to establish SCE utility easements with prior rights relocated by the State Route 74 widening project between Dexter Avenue in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 15-31-115-00 between the Commission and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) to reimburse EVMWD's review cost of JUAs, legal descriptions, and plat maps to establish EVMWD's utility easements with prior rights relocated by the SR-74 widening project between Dexter Avenue in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris, for a total amount not to exceed $45,000; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, on behalf of the Commission. 9G. COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT REVISION AND DRAFT CONCEPT ALTERNATIVES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Page135 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file the revised Purpose and Need Statement for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study; and 2) Receive and file the draft Concept Alternatives Technical Memorandum. 9H. RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013/14 Page160 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Riverside County Public Transportation Annual Countywide Performance Report (Countywide Report) for Fiscal Year 2013/14. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 8, 2015 Page 6 91. FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS AGREEMENT FOR INLAND EMPIRE RIDESHARE AND 511 SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 198 1) Approve Agreement No. 15-41-114-00 with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) as part of the Commission's continuing bi-county partnership with SANBAG to deliver commuter/employer rideshare services and operation of the Inland Empire 511 (IE511) system for Fiscal Year 2015/16 in an amount not to exceed $1,650,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 10. 2016 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PLAN UPDATE Page 203 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the formula percentage distribution among the three geographic areas in Riverside County (Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley) based on taxable sales per the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Intracounty Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for purposes of preparing the 2016 STIP submittal. 11. 91 PROJECT — CONSTRUCTION UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the 91 Project. 12. FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATION UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file an update on federal and state legislation; and 2) Adopt the following bill position — H.R. 2497 — Support. 13. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA Page 207 Page 208 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda July 8, 2015 Page 7 14. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview 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. 15. CLOSED SESSION 15A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) Case No(s). RIC 1314276 and RIC 1311601 16. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, September 9, 2015, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL J U LY 8, 2015 Present County of Riverside, District I County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside, District III County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District V City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Blythe City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake City of Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Eastvale City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of Jurupa Valley City of La Quinta City of Lake Elsinore 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 Absent 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET JULY 8, 2015 NAME AGENCY EMAIL ADDRESS ,D4),b 1 b rk. A Y1 j2 t-t- ;A-- ? P,,cn_ n/ , ) L��/ Yon "►3 re cff7 liw�e/. M lY )cla itr)C� (6e4umCn f— lv al>7 ��g q erty 6 A s ©n /oi ffe 45.5t:, Z../ //1%a/../A/A j A462EA/o t4 z-L,E_-s . J< <'-'- / A: /4474- ) / t \jf ` R C c s -Gvi-AL. t/ - // . v 7A2�v- (2r-� --a5A0.4 P. l G✓�- C'��414.5 #r I, it .ek. �L s- Ar a0A4v sw i a: G. A1-1,. s otosier'S i1r i\A - A Gi 4 , ki c3( "-a, 40 )1(71 s �<4-7 .--< VS- .g-`l g-A N f_ l - Q i 9v � i1-' / /14 -&e--� C*1/ /�/! /-- ---- 0// t -�t v / 5 L �l C� -rw'S b $ /�', it �G._/�, 4-, o-/`', -41/act "*4sti" / i/'sT ,040: /" L A-1't / 01 X �'s il��1 F�(t /�/ 1t -_ D tr1T- ,077,lc y]t'.��0-4/ - rftr'" /-:;N /G � �1,i-e, v��UD it )4(v (0 L/ �ee/r K,et-vi ciricp M N--AQ ---71v 79t DpsFT)"7- i.-► 4.;Pyr UJ2\lS __l�totl IZe-e i -e0 CA '''gyp L �^tiA..2-d- /3/v V !. ucIACH AND SUBMIT TO THE C[,IrRK OF THE BOARD DATE: 1 CHECK IF � SUBJECT OF \I I PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS: mbill Sit 1041k Eves AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) _ AGENDA ITEM: fry NtINA- NAME: PHONE NO.: ADDRESS: STREET REPRESENTING: CITY ZIP CODE NAMT OF tENCY(kORTIZATION / ORO; PHONE NO.: ./ q BUSINESS ADDRESS:�V 1 aC 0 STREET CITY ZIP CODE AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, June 10, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Daryl Busch at 9:32 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Michael Naggar led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Marion Ashley Ben Benoit John J. Benoit Daryl Busch Joseph DeConinck Deborah Franklin Rick Gibbs Dawn Haggerty Berwin Hanna Jan Harnik Steven Hernandez Frank Johnston Brenda Knight Linda Krupa 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Clint Lorimore Bob Magee Scott Mann Scott Matas Jesse Molina Michael Naggar Robert Radi Syed Raza Dana Reed Karen Spiegel Troy Strange Ted Weill Chuck Washington Ella Zanowic Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Ginny Foat Kevin Jeffries Andrew Kotyuk Greg Pettis John F. Tavaglione Chair Busch presented Executive Director Anne Mayer with a 10-year service award. Anne Mayer expressed gratitude for Chair Busch's comments and to the Commissioners for their leadership, guidance, and support. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 2 Anne Mayer announced and congratulated Geographics for receiving a Gold Award from the American Advertising Association for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor logo. Maryann Edwards, representing Senator Jeff Stone, congratulated Anne Mayer for her 10 years of service with the Commission and then presented her with a certificate on behalf of Senator Stone for being chosen as the 2015 Athena Award recipient by the Greater Riverside County Chamber of Commerce. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — MAY 13, 2015 M/S/C (Ashley/Radi) to approve the May 13, 2015 minutes as submitted. Abstain: Spiegel 6. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 Chair Busch announced the continuation of the public hearing opened at the May 13 meeting. Michele Cisneros, Finance Manager/Controller, presented the proposed Budget for FY 2015/16 and discussed the following areas: • Budget adjustments; • Budget summary; • Funding sources and comparison; • Summary of uses; • Management services; • Legislative affairs and communications; • Regional programs; • Capital project development and delivery expenditures/uses; • Capital projects and operations expenditures and highlights; • Functional uses breakdown; and • Measure A management services. At this time, Chair Busch asked if there were any comments from the public. No comments were received. Chair Busch closed the public hearing. M/S/C (Gibbs/Harnik) to: 1) Approve the salary schedule effective July 9, 2015, located in Appendix B of proposed budget; and 2) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2015/16. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 3 7. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS Chair Busch announced there is a revision to the attachment for Agenda Item 81, "State Route 60 Truck Climbing/Descending Lane Project — Right of Way Funding Increase". Chair Busch then announced an urgency item, "Bridge Loan from the Local Transportation Fund to SunLine Transit Agency", which requires 2/3 vote of the Commission to add it to the agenda for action. Commissioner John Benoit explained there is an unusual short term fiscal situation that occurred, which requires a short term bridge loan for the SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine). After the publication of the Commission agenda, it came to the Commission's attention the expected payment would not arrive as needed. He recommended adding this item to the agenda for discussion and action. Steve DeBaun, legal counsel, stated for process purposes, the Board needs to find that the agenda item arose subsequent to the publication of the agenda and must be addressed at this time. He stated both conditions have been satisfied and requested it be included in a motion approved by the Commission. M/S/C (J. Benoit/Harnik) to add the urgency agenda item, 'Bridge Loan from the Local Transportation Fund to SunLine Transit Agency", to the end of the discussion calendar. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Matas/Mann) to approve the following Consent Calendar items. 8A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended March 31, 2015. 8B. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 Approve Resolution No. 15-012, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Annual Appropriations Limit", for Fiscal Year 2015/16. 8C. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 2014 (Q4 2014). Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 4 8D. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 1) Approve the recurring contracts for Fiscal Year 2015/16; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8E. AGREEMENT WITH EXIGIS, LLC FOR INSURANCE TRACKING SYSTEM 1) Approve Agreement No. 15-19-017-00 with EXIGIS, LLC (EXIGIS) for the use of the RiskWorks risk management operating system (RiskWorks) for insurance tracking services for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in the amount of $73,815, plus a contingency amount of $7,382, for a total amount not to exceed $81,197; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for these services. 8F. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2015. 8G. AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for a four-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $950,000; a) Agreement No. 15-31-056-00 with Bender Rosenthal, Inc; b) Agreement No. 15-31-097-00 with Hennessy & Hennessy, LLC; c) Agreement No. 15-31-098-00 with Integra Realty Resources — Los Angeles; d) Agreement No. 15-31-099-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants; and e) Agreement No. 15-31-100-00 with Riggs & Riggs, Inc.; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 5 8H. AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL REVIEW SERVICES 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal review services for a four-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $500,000; a) Agreement No. 15-31-057-00 with Bender Rosenthal, Inc; b) Agreement No. 15-31-101-00 with Hennessy & Hennessy, LLC; c) Agreement No. 15-31-102-00 with Integra Realty Resources — Los Angeles; d) Agreement No. 15-31-103-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers & Consultants; and e) Agreement No. 15-31-104-00 with R. P. Laurain & Associates, Inc.; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements. 81. STATE ROUTE 60 TRUCK CLIMBING/DESCENDING LANE PROJECT — RIGHT OF WAY FUNDING INCREASE 1) Approve the programming of 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds in the amount of $1,497,000 for the State Route 60 truck climbing lane/descending lane project right of way (ROW) phase; 2) Approve Agreement No. 12-31-092-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 12-31-092-00, with Caltrans to revise the right of way roles and responsibilities for the State Route 60 truck climbing lane/descending lane project, including current funding commitments; 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute utility agreements and future agreements with Caltrans within approved funding amounts, on behalf of the Commission. 8J. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH HDR ENGINEERING INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT 1) Approve Agreement No. 10-31-058-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 10-31-058-00, with HDR Engineering Inc. (HDR) to provide construction management for the Perris Valley Line (PVL) project in the amount of $4.7 million, plus a contingency amount of $500,000, Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 6 for an additional amount of $5.2 million, and a total amount not to exceed $22,750,146; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee, pursuant to legal counsel review, to approve the use of the contingency as may be required for the project. 8K. FISCAL YEARS 2015/16 — 2017/18 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Approve the FYs 2015/16 — 2017/18 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission's Commuter Rail Program. 8L. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR THE CITY OF BANNING'S MUNICIPAL TRANSIT SYSTEM 1) Allocate additional operating funds of $132,094 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to the city of Banning's Municipal Transit System (Banning Transit); and 2) Amend Banning Transit's FY 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect the additional operating funds. 8M. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH JACOBS PROJECT MANAGEMENT CO. FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE INTERSTATE 215 CENTRAL WIDENING PROJECT FROM SCOTT ROAD TO NUEVO ROAD IN THE CITY OF PERRIS 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-31-034-05, Amendment No. 5 to Agreement No. 12-31-034-00 with Jacobs Project Management Co. (Jacobs) to provide construction management services for required three-year plant establishment period and project close-out for the Interstate 215 Central widening project in the amount of $276,857, plus a contingency amount of $27,643, for an additional amount of $304,500, and a total amount not to exceed $13,304,500; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 7 8N. AGREEMENT FOR ON -CALL GRAPHIC DESIGN AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES 1) Award Agreement No. 15-15-065-00 to Geographics for the provision of graphic design and communications services on an as -needed, time and expense basis, pursuant to its proposed fixed unit rates, for a two-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in amount of $2,940,000, plus a contingency amount of $400,000, for a total amount not to exceed $3,340,000; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for these services. 9. FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Jillian Guizado, Staff Analyst, presented the FY 2015/16 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program funding recommendations. She stated the second city of Riverside's project title on the attachment was incorrectly listed as it should be Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Improvements, noting the recommended allocation amount is correct. M/S/C (Matas/Magee) to approve the FY 2015/16 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program recommended funding of $2,752,015. 10. PROPOSED METROLINK BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager, presented the proposed Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) Metrolink Budget for FY 2015/16, highlighting the following areas: • Metrolink system; • FY 2015/16 operating budget and service expansion; • Metrolink update; and • Commission impacts. At Chair Busch's request, Sheldon Peterson defined a Tier 4 locomotive, noting this will be one of the first sets of Tier 4 locomotives in service. Commissioner Karen Spiegel discussed the importance of upgrading the ticket vending machines (TVM), including the issues of fare evasion and lost revenue. Anne Mayer explained the success of the Metrolink system is crucial to the Commission's future, both as the existing system, the Perris Valley Line expansion, and Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 8 the other discussions to expand Metrolink to the Hemet/San Jacinto Valley. Ms. Mayer stated the Commission's rail background and experiences will inform several decisions the Commission makes throughout the entire county in the years to come. She expressed appreciation and recognized the outstanding work of Sheldon Peterson and Staff Analyst Brenda Ramirez. At Chair Busch's request, Anne Mayer identified the Commission's representatives to SCRRA — Chair Busch, Commissioner Spiegel, Commissioner Deborah Franklin (alternate), and Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk (alternate). M/S/C (Gibbs/Franklin) to: 1) Adopt the Fiscal Year 2015/16 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget; and 2) Receive and file a report on the Commission's portion of the FY 2015/16 SCRRA operating and capital budget. 11. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION UPDATE Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, presented an update on the state and federal legislative activities and discussed SB 39 (Pavley). Anne Mayer stated electric vehicles do not pay any gas taxes, however, the benefits for electric vehicles continue to expand. While electric vehicles are very beneficial to air quality, these vehicles still use the system, which results in wear and tear on the roads and contributes to congestion. Commissioner Spiegel expressed concern that while the state does not own the 91 Express Lanes or the future 1-15 toll lanes, it allows the electric vehicles to drive free on toll roads the Commission bonded for and the approved number of vehicles continues to increase. Anne Mayer concurred with Commissioner Spiegel's concern the legislature is imposing impacts to the Commission's financial responsibilities. She noted the Commission was able to get a clause in the 1-15 toll lane legislation to charge electric vehicles at a free or reduced rate. Commissioner Spiegel expressed the need for Commissioners to be consistent on the Commission's adopted bills when involved in other organizations in order for the Commission to be successful. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 9 M/S/C (Gibbs/Radi) to: 1) Receive and file an update on state and federal legislation; and 2) Adopt the following bill position — SB 39 (Pavley) — Oppose. 12. BRIDGE LOAN FROM THE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND TO SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director, presented the bridge loan request from SunLine due to the United States Department of Labor suspension of federal Section 5307 funds. M/S/C (Hernandez/Radi) to approve the disbursement of $3 million in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to the SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) as a bridge loan due to the United States Department of Labor suspension of federal Section 5307 funds. 13. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 14. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 14A. Commissioner Spiegel congratulated Ms. Mayer for receiving the 2015 Athena Award, acknowledging the selection process and the high caliber of the previous recipients. 14B. Anne Mayer announced the November Commission meeting will be held on Thursday, November 12, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. in the Eastern Municipal Water District's Board Room in Perris due to the Veterans' Day holiday. At this time, Commissioner Dana Reed and Caltrans District 8 Representative Syed Raza left the meeting. 15. CLOSED SESSION Steve DeBaun announced the Closed Session items, noting Case No. RIC 1311348 will not be discussed. 15A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Property Owner(s): Refer to the Following List: Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes June 10, 2015 Page 10 Item APN(s) CPN(s) Property Owner(s) 1 118-183-019 23767 Midas Realty Corp. 2 N/A 23769 D.N. Schneider 3 N/A 23880 City of Corona, John M. Brewster, Sr., et al. 15B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) Case No(s). RIC 1311318, RIC 1311600, and RIC 1505449 Commissioners Michael Naggar and Chuck Washington recused themselves from the discussion on Case No. RIC 1505449. 16. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Chair Busch adjourned the meeting at 10:59 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, July 8, 2015, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. Respectfully submitted, OS)-)""*--k-H Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 6 PUBLIC HEARING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Mark Lancaster, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity and Amended Resolutions of Necessity for the Acquisition of Fee, Permanent Access Easement, and Permanent Slope Easement Interests in Portions of Certain Real Property by Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as an Alleyway with No Assigned Assessor's Parcel No., and Assessor Parcel Nos. 102-050-003 and 102-050-006 Located in Corona, Riverside County, California, for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project, Between Pierce Street on the East to the County Line on the West, in Riverside County, California STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Conduct a hearing to consider the adoption of resolutions of necessity, including providing all parties interested in the affected property and their attorneys, or their representatives, an opportunity to be heard on the issues relevant to the resolutions of necessity; 2) 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 owner. 3) Adopt Resolution of Necessity No. 15-015 and Amended Resolutions of Necessity Nos. 13-045 and 13-046, "Resolutions of Necessity for the Acquisition of Property Interests in Certain Real Property, by Eminent Domain, More Particularly Described as Caltrans Parcel No. 23769 and Assessor Parcel Nos. 102-050-003 and 102-050-006 located in Corona, Riverside County, California", for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP), between Pierce Street on the east to the Riverside/Orange County line on the West, in Riverside County, California. Agenda Item 6 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission is being asked to consider the adoption of resolutions of necessity to acquire additional property interests in the parcels listed below. These interests are required for construction of the SR-91 CIP. The power of eminent domain is used by the Commission only as a last resort to obtain interests necessary for public highway projects after 1) negotiations have stalled; or 2) the owner has requested that the Commission proceed directly to eminent domain for tax or other advantages; or 3) the eminent domain process is necessary to clear the title to the property. In this case, offers of just compensation have been made to the owners for the full Fair Market Value as determined by an appraisal. Commission staff attempted to negotiate amicable settlements in good faith, and will continue to do so throughout the process. Fair Market Value is defined by the state of California and is one of the most inclusive definitions in the United States. It requires the highest and best use of the property be considered. All of the Commission's appraisals must meet the California definition of Fair Market Value. One of the requirements for acquiring property for improvement projects is that an offer of just compensation be made to the owners of the property. The Commission makes these offers in person whenever possible. The amount of compensation is determined by appraisals prepared by independent appraisal firms licensed by the Bureau of Real Estate Appraisers. The content of these appraisals, what elements are considered in them, and the methodologies used in the preparation are all proscribed by various laws and the Uniform Standards of Appraisal Practice (USPAP), published by the Appraisal Foundation. The Federal Government recognizes the USPAP as generally accepted appraisal standards and requires USPAP compliance for appraisers in federally related transactions. Every appraisal calculates the market value of the acquisition as defined by the California Code of Civil Procedure, based on the highest and best use, as defined in USPAP, and includes consideration of severance damages and project benefits which is also defined in the California Code of Civil Procedure. In every case, the owner is invited to accompany the appraiser during the site visit so that as much information as possible is considered in the appraisal. A review appraisal prepared by a different certified appraiser is then conducted to ensure all proper procedures have been followed. Additionally, in accordance with state law, every owner is offered up to $5,000 to reimburse them for the cost to have their own appraisal prepared. Staff will bring to the Commission those interests that meet one of the criteria above. The timing of these resolutions will balance the need to give the owners as much time as possible to reach an agreement, while at the same time allowing enough time for the Commission to go through the process to obtain possession in time to avoid delays to the design -build contractor. The legal process from adoption of the resolutions of necessity to receiving legal possession of the properties takes approximately 150 days. California eminent domain law provides that a public entity may not commence with eminent domain proceedings until its governing body has adopted a resolution of necessity, which resolution may only be adopted after the governing Agenda Item 6 2 body has given each party with an interest in the affected property, or their representatives, a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard on the following matters: 1) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3) The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and 4) The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. Since an agreement has not been reached with some property owners, it may be necessary to acquire necessary interests by eminent domain. The initiation of the eminent domain process is accomplished by the Commission's adoption of resolutions of necessity for the affected properties. Record property owners must be afforded an opportunity to appear at the hearing and lodge objections. A notice of this hearing was sent by first class mail to the property owners, and stated the Commission's intent to consider the adoption of resolutions, the right of the property owners to appear and be heard on these issues, and that failure to file a written request to appear would result in a waiver of the right to appear and be heard. The Commission scheduled this hearing at which all persons who filed a written request in compliance with applicable law may appear and be heard. Aerial views of the parcels subject to this staff report in relation to the SR-91 CIP are attached. Finding 1: Public Interest and Necessity Require the Project SR-91 in Riverside County ranks among the nation's worst commutes. Stop -and -go traffic is the norm, especially during morning and late afternoon rush hours. Traffic congestion on eastbound SR-91 between the cities of Anaheim and Corona is routinely among the worst 15 areas in the nation. SR-91 is continuing to experience increased congestion as a result of population growth in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties and the increase in jobs in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Demographic projections for the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region show population and employment in Riverside and Orange Counties are forecast to increase substantially by 2035. As a result, traffic volumes on SR-91 are expected to increase by approximately 50 percent by 2035, which would result in even greater congestion and delays on SR-91. The existing travel demand on SR-91 has led to a heavy directional commute pattern between Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties that is projected to continue into the future. SR-91 is the only major highway that links Orange and Riverside Counties. Extending from the Riverside County/Orange County line in the city of Corona to Pierce Street in Riverside, the SR-91 CIP will add mixed flow lanes, tolled express lanes, improve interchanges, bridges, ramps, and local streets. New freeway to freeway ramp connections between SR-91 and Interstate 15 also will be made. Agenda Item 6 3 The SR-91 CIP is designed to reduce delays, improve air quality, offer a choice between regular (mixed flow) lanes and express lanes, allow faster emergency response, relieve local street congestion, and provide better access to public transit and commuter rail. Finding 2: The Project is Planned or Located in a Manner Most Compatible with Greatest Public Good and Least Private Injury A thorough analysis was conducted to find the single best location for the SR-91 CIP. Environmental analyses and findings indicate the chosen alignment uniquely satisfies engineering, public health, and environmental issues, and is the most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury. To minimize private injury, a thorough analysis regarding the need for each property and each interest was conducted in the planning stages of the SR-91 CIP. Efforts during the planning stages included conducting public outreach meetings and seeking feedback about the SR-91 CIP alignment and potential impacts. Staff also met regularly with various local agencies and businesses to determine if modifications to the alignment were necessary to minimize impacts. These efforts continued over the course of years to ensure the alignment design achieved the greatest public good with the least private injury. As part of the acquisition process, unless settlement was reached within the first 30 days after an offer was made, every property owner was provided an opportunity to participate in meetings with project staff. The goal of these meetings was to minimize private injury not only on the basis of information staff obtained through the planning process, but also on the information provided by the property owners. As a result, staff has in some cases included mitigation measures to reduce and minimize impacts to the property. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act has been satisfied by Caltrans' certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) in its role as lead agency on August 8, 2012, and the Commission's subsequent consideration of that certified EIR in its role as a responsible agency on November 14, 2012. Finding 3: The Real Property to be Acquired is Necessary for the Project The property interests sought below have been analyzed to determine if a feasible design alternative that exists would alleviate the need for the interest. As indicated above, the property owners of the interests were invited to meet with project staff and provide input to address any concerns the property owners may have with the design of the SR-91 CIP in the manner proposed and the necessity of the acquisition. To the extent the property owners raised such concerns, staff took those concerns into consideration and attempted to make design modifications as feasible as possible. In the end, staff recommends the following interests in real property are necessary for the project. Agenda Item 6 4 RON No. 15-015 — Owner: D. N. Schneider, No Assigned Assessor Parcel No.; CPN 23769 The real property to consider in this resolution is owned in fee by D. N. Schneider and was a formerly dedicated but not accepted alleyway that is comprised of approximately 41,706 square feet. The property is currently vacant and is roughly L shaped. The alley is approximately 28 feet wide on the west end at Ridgeview Terrace and 20 feet wide on the east end, where it connects to the existing Frontage Road. The Commission is now seeking to acquire the entire alley in fee. Since the land is a vacant lot, no improvements will be impacted. The Commission needs to acquire the property to construct a sound wall required for sound mitigation for the project so that it effectively attenuates the sound for the adjacent residential neighborhood. An offer of just compensation for the property identified was made to the property owner on March 11, 2015. Legal definition(s), legal description(s) and/or plat map(s) of the alley are attached as an exhibit to Resolution of Necessity No. 15-015. An aerial view of the parcel and the parcel's relationship to the SR-91 CIP is also attached. A Notice of Hearing to the property owners was mailed on May 22, 2015. RON Nos. 13-045 and 13-046 — Owner: Serfas Development LLC; APNs 102-050-003 and 102-050-006; CPNs 22122-13, 22122-14, 22131-4, and 22131-5 The real property subject to these amended resolutions owned in fee by Serfas Development LLC is a non -operating golf course located in Corona, California. The larger parcel encompasses five non-contiguous parcels separated by various public streets and is located on the south side of SR-91, generally between Serfas Club Drive and Paseo Grande, consisting of 105.433 acres, or 4,592,659 sq. ft. of land area, net of previous areas acquired by the Commission in 2013. The site has a highest and best use of open space recreational or mitigation land. The Commission is now seeking to acquire additional right of way described as three permanent (perpetual) access easements and two permanent (perpetual) slope easements containing a total of 44,979 square feet. The land is not occupied and no improvements will be impacted. An offer of just compensation for the additional property interests was made to the property owners on April 20, 2015. Legal definition(s), legal description(s) and/or a plat map(s) of the additional portions to be acquired are attached as an exhibit to Amended Resolutions of Necessity No. 13-045 and 13-046. An aerial view of the parcel and the parcel's relationship to the SR-91 CIP is also attached. A Notice of Hearing to the property owners was mailed on May 22, 2015. Finding 4: Offers of Just Compensation Have Been Made to the Property Owners Litigation guarantees were obtained from Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company to confirm and identify the parties with an interest in the parcels affected by the SR-91 CIP. The Agenda Item 6 5 Commission then served the affected property owners and other interested parties as appropriate, with a notice of the Commission's decision to appraise the property. The Commission had the real property interests of appraised by the appraisal firms of Lidgard and Associates, Inc., and Thomas M. Pike, Jr., MAI, to establish the Fair Market Value of the property interests the Commission is seeking to acquire from the parties identified herein. Offers of just compensation were made to the property owners to purchase the property interests, based on the approved appraisals, as required by Section 7267.2 of the California Government Code. In this instance, the Commission will acquire the interests necessary and set forth above from the property owners to ensure the property will be available to meet the time frames associated with the construction of the SR-91 CIP. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact due to adoption of the resolution of necessity. All property acquisition expenses are included in the SR-91 CIP budget. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 15-015 2) Amended Resolution No. 13-045 3) Amended Resolution No. 13-046 Agenda Item 6 6 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 15-015 RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A FEE INTEREST IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, BEARING NO ASSIGNED ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER, DESCRIBED AS AN ALLEY WAY LOCATED IN CORONA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WHICH COVERS THE AREA BETWEEN PIERCE STREET ON THE EAST TO THE COUNTY LINE ON THE WEST, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") proposes to acquire a fee interest in certain real property, located in Riverside County, California, more particularly described as an alley way bearing no assigned Assessor Parcel Number (and therefore identified as Caltrans Parcel Number 23769-1), for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project in Riverside County, California, pursuant to the authority granted to it by section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code; and sections 1240.110 and 1240.120 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the Commission scheduled a public hearing for Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 9:30 a.m., at the County Administration Building, Board of Supervisors Chambers, at 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, and gave to each person whose property is to be acquired and whose name and address appeared on the last equalized county assessment roll, notice and a reasonable opportunity to appear at said hearing and be heard on the matters referred to in section 1240.030 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; and WHEREAS, said hearing has been held by the Commission, and the affected property owner and other interested parties were afforded an opportunity to be heard on said matters; and WHEREAS, the Commission may now adopt a Resolution of Necessity pursuant to section 1240.040 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSION DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. There has been compliance by the Commission with the requirements of section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure regarding notice and hearing. Section 2. Public Use. The public use for the fee interest to be acquired is for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project in Riverside County, California. Section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes the Commission to acquire, by eminent domain, property necessary for such purposes. 7 Section 3. Description of Property. Attached and marked as Exhibit "A" are the legal description and depiction of the property to be acquired by the Commission, and which describes the general location and extent of the property with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. Section 4. Findings. The Commission hereby finds and determines each of the following: (a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; (b) The proposed project is planned and/or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; (c) The property defined, described and depicted in Exhibit "A" is necessary for the proposed project; and (d) The offer required by section 7267.2 of the California Government Code was made. Section 5. Use Not Unreasonably Interfering with Existing Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights of way appropriated to existing public uses. The legal descriptions of these easements and rights of way are on file with the Commission and describe the general location and extent of the easements and rights of way with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. In the event the herein described use or uses will not unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described interest subject to such existing public use(s) pursuant to section 1240.510 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Section 6. More Necessary Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights of way appropriated to existing public uses. To the extent that the herein described use or uses will unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, the Commission finds and determines that the herein described use or uses are more necessary than said existing public use. Counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described real property appropriated to such existing public uses pursuant to section 1240.610 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Staff is further authorized to make such improvements to the affected real property that it determines are reasonably necessary to mitigate any adverse impact upon the existing public use. 8 Section 7. Further Activities. Counsel for the Commission is hereby authorized to acquire the hereinabove described real property in the name of and on behalf of the Commission by eminent domain, and counsel is authorized to institute and prosecute such legal proceedings as may be required in connection therewith. Legal counsel is further authorized to take such steps as may be authorized and required by law, and to make such security deposits as may be required by order of court, to permit the Commission to take possession of and use said real property at the earliest possible time. Counsel is further authorized to correct any errors or to make or agree to non- material changes in the legal description of the real property that are deemed necessary for the conduct of the condemnation action, or other proceedings or transactions required to acquire the subject real property. Counsel is further authorized to reduce or modify the extent of the interest or property to be acquired so as to reduce the compensation payable in the action where such change would not substantially impair the construction and operation for the project for which the real property is being acquired. Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of July, 2015. Daryl R. Busch, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 9 10 PS OMA EXHIBIT `Al' LEGAL DESCRIPTION Caltr'ans Parcel No. 23769-1 Fee acquisition In the County of Riverside, State of California, being the land described in the document recorded dune 01, 1964 in Book 3709, Page 239 as Document No. 67189 of Official Records of said County, described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly corner of said lands, said corner also being the northwesterly corner of the lands described in the document recorded March 24, 2003 as Document No. 2003-204775 of Official Records of said County; thence South 09°26'52" West 183.60 feet along the easterly line of said Document No. 67189, said line also being the westerly line of the lands of said Document No. 2003-204775 to a point, said point also being the most northerly corner of Lot 1 of Tract No. 2319 as said lot is shown on that certain map filed in Book 43 of Maps, Pages 74, 75 and 76, Riverside County Records; thence along the general southerly line of the lands of said Document No. 67189, said line also being the general northerly line of said Tract No. 2319, the following three (3) courses: 1. South 42'51'17" West 37.61 feet; 2. North 80'33'08" West 760.89 feet; 3. North 82'1925" West 580.47 feet to a point, said point being the most westerly corner of the lands of said Document No. 67189, said point also being the northwesterly corner of Lot 46 of said Tract No. 2319 and a point on the easterly right of way line of the westerly portion of that street known as Ridgeview Terrace; thence North 16° 14'29" East 28.32 feet along the westerly line of the lands of said Document No. 67189 to an angle point thereof, said line also being a portion of said easterly right of way line of Ridgeview Terrace, said angle point also being the southwesterly corner of Parcel 1 as said parcel is shown on that certain Parcel Map filed in Book 7 of Parcel Maps at Page 77, Riverside County Records; thence easterly along the general northerly line of M:12PT00105011SURVEYII_FGALS123769_APN 102-]01-002_ALLEYILegals123784-1_ALLEYdoe Page 1 of 5f1412015 11 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 1 OF 3 1 7 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 P OMA the lands of said Document No. 67189, a portion of said line also being the general southerly line of Parcels 1 and 2, and the easterly lime of Parcel 2 of said Parcel Map, the following five (5) courses: 1. South 82'19'25" East 576,69 feet; 2. South 80°33'08" East 742.03 feet; 3. North 54°26'52" East 28.29 feet 4. North 09°26'52" East 167.00 feet S. South 80'33'08" East 20.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 41,706 square feet. See Exhibit `.AT attached hereto and made a part hereof. The distances described herein are grid distances and are based on California Coordinate System of 1983, ,lone 6, 2007.00 epoch. Ground distances may be obtained by dividing grid distances by the mean combination factor of the courses being described. The mean combination factor for this conversion is 0.99997476. Prepared under the direction of r Brian E. Bullock, PLS 5260 51 14 - a5- Date M:12PTG0105011SURVEYII.EGALS1237692PN 102-101-002_ALLEYILega1s123769-1_,ALLEY.doe 5/14/2015 Page 2 of 2 12 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 2 OF 3 EXHIBIT A2 PARCEL* TITLE AREA APN 23769-1 FEE 41706 SO.FT. -�- FRONTAGE RD. 1 tzPWII' �T 7-PROPOSED RfW III IYill 1111If IYYYIIIIYIYrTY111IIIrYYYY11llm 30, 102-092-001 P .. NJ 2, IO2•-092-022 Pel_ i 7/1 J J 2 102-092-023 ITLYYIYIEI 102-101-001 30. _ O�, Pay I 23769—) r ---' S82' 19'25'E 578.69' __ L4 w Ct O.R Q rl FRONTAGE ALLEY DOC. #671 89, BK 3709, PG 239, I-+ REC O 06141 /64 � —7 ff �g�25'�W Lor 42 I a T 46 ABT I- 2319; — 580.47' y1�L2 - Lo7 34 La Lor 41 Lar 33 24 LOT 32 LOT 25 1V1,2., z13 / lzi — pia J ROUTE 91 RIVERSIDE FREEWAY --- 4 . ---FxISTING R/W - PaB - - - cv — cn FRONTAGE RD. L6 in 7-PROPOSED r�/w _ �� I I I I I� --'T- I l l f n l l I 1 1 (77771-7- Pal_ NJ 102-701-001 J ,r, I I I 11-n I I I 2 Ny � �0 7 l I 102•-101-ao2 ��Ncoo`- - ivo o Ln co— I a Nvi o2� -- 2a'r nr `f� 23769,1 ~ o # o 03 � L5 4 ti ' U S80'33'08' E 742.03' Ls �`.�` DOC. #67169, BK 3709, PG 239, O.R. REC'0 06/01 /64 N80'33'OrW La•r 24 LOT 2A JJ }} r Lpr Jrby Lar 11}5 L TRAD J 231 Jy` NJ,. rJa FRONTAGE ALLEY yLo r/ 1 4 L -43 / 71I LINE TABLE 7Bd.89' / Lor 13 J6 Lor 12 1.07 � . ,,``•, L1 Ln'r 1 � • �y��[, LEGEND i0'T L1 - S42°51'17'W 37.61' I .' ` POB Indicates Point Of Beginning IR) Indicates Radial Bearing L2 - 58pa33'08"E 760.89' I L3 - N16 14'29"E 28.32' L4 - 580°33'08"E 742.03' ( ) Title to State L5 - N54°26'52"E 28.29' _L_LLI_ Access Prohibited L6 - S80°33'08"E 20,00' I _ — NOTES Coordinates and bearings are an CC5 1963(2007.00) Zone B. Distances and stationing ore grid distances. Divide by 0.99997476 to obtain ground 2 3 7 6 9- FEE ACQUISITION 1 distances. All distances are in feet unless other"wiSe nated. 1 Immommommi ' FEET 0 50 1C10 200 300 PREPARED BY. PSOMAS soot. Ah°tton C C011forrnioe92707 e. Z411 (04)413+ aos3/i7141s4s-aaa3 IFewl DATE: 01-07-15 REV.: 05-14-15 EA: OF540 FA#: DISTRICT COUNTY ZJ ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS 8 RIV 91 3.92 1 1 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 3 OF 3 ATTACHMENT 2 AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 13-045 RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT AND PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT INTERESTS IN PORTIONS OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 102-050-006 LOCATED IN CORONA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BETWEEN PIERCE STREET ON THE EAST TO THE COUNTY LINE ON THE WEST, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") proposes to acquire permanent access easement and permanent slope easement interests in portions of certain real property, located in Riverside County, California, more particularly described as Assessor Parcel No. 102-050-006 (Caltrans Parcel Nos. 22122-13 and 22122-14), for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project in Riverside County, California, pursuant to the authority granted to it by section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the Commission scheduled a public hearing for Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 9:30 a.m., at the County Administration Building, Board of Supervisors Chambers, at 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, and gave to each person whose property is to be acquired and whose name and address appeared on the last equalized county assessment roll, notice and a reasonable opportunity to appear at said hearing and be heard on the matters referred to in section 1240.030 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; and WHEREAS, said hearing has been held by the Commission, and the affected property owner(s) and other interested parties were afforded an opportunity to be heard on said matters; and WHEREAS, the Commission may now adopt a Resolution of Necessity pursuant to section 1240.040 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSION DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. There has been compliance by the Commission with the requirements of section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure regarding notice and hearing. Section 2. Public Use. The public use for permanent access easement and permanent slope easement interests in the property to be acquired is for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project in Riverside County, California. Section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes the Commission to acquire, by eminent domain, property necessary for such purposes. 14 Section 3. Description of Property. Attached and marked as Exhibit "A" are the legal definitions, descriptions and maps of the interests to be acquired by the Commission that describe the general location and extent of the property with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. Section 4. Findings. The Commission hereby finds and determines each of the following: (a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; (b) The proposed project is planned and/or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; (c) The property defined, described and depicted in Exhibit "A" is necessary for the proposed project; and (d) The offer required by section 7267.2 of the California Government Code was made. Section 5. Use Not Unreasonably Interfering with Existing Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights of way appropriated to existing public uses. The legal descriptions of these easements and rights of way are on file with the Commission and describe the general location and extent of the easements and rights of way with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. In the event the herein described use or uses will not unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described interest subject to such existing public uses pursuant to section 1240.510 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Section 6. More Necessary Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights of way appropriated to existing public uses. To the extent that the herein described use or uses will unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, the Commission finds and determines that the herein described use or uses are more necessary than said existing public use. Counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described real property appropriated to such existing public uses pursuant to section 1240.610 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Staff is further authorized to make such improvements to the affected real property that it determines are reasonably necessary to mitigate any adverse impact upon the existing public use. Section 7. Further Activities. Counsel for the Commission is hereby authorized to acquire the hereinabove described real property in the name of and on behalf of the Commission by eminent domain, and counsel is authorized to institute and prosecute such legal proceedings as may be required in connection therewith. Legal counsel is further authorized to take such steps as may be 15 authorized and required by law, and to make such security deposits as may be required by order of court, to permit the Commission to take possession of and use said real property at the earliest possible time. Counsel is further authorized to correct any errors or to make or agree to non- material changes in the legal description of the real property that are deemed necessary for the conduct of the condemnation action, or other proceedings or transactions required to acquire the subject real property. Counsel is further authorized to reduce or modify the extent of the interests or property to be acquired so as to reduce the compensation payable in the action where such change would not substantially impair the construction and operation for the project for which the real property is being acquired. Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day ofJuly, 2015. Daryl R. Busch, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 16 17 Legal Definitions of Property to be Acquired The following is a list of definitions of legal rights to be acquired by Riverside County Transportation Commission: "Permanent Access Easement" (as to CPNS 22122-14 and 22131-5) grants to RCTC, including its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive permanent and perpetual easement, to construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain and traverse an access way to access RCTC owned or public facilities, construction site, or right of way, as determined necessary by RCTC, together with all necessary rights incidental thereto, on, over and across the property in connection with the exercise of any easement rights described herein. Property owners shall not erect or construct, or permit to be erected or constructed, any building, structure or improvement on, over or under any portion of the easement, or plant any tree or trees or plant any other vegetation or flora on any portion of the easement except at the written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. RCTC will not unreasonably withhold from Grantor, its successors and assigns, the right to utilize the easement area for parking, driveway access, landscaping (exclusive of vertical penetration), open space and density or floor area calculation. RCTC shall be entitled to trim, cut, or clear away any trees, brush, or other vegetation or flora from time to time determined in its sole discretion without payment of any additional compensation. No other easement or easements shall be granted on, under or over the easement without obtaining the prior written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. "Permanent Slope Easement" (as to CPNS 22122-13 and 22131-4) grants to RCTC, including its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive permanent and perpetual easement, to construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain and traverse the embankment slope areas defined on the attached legal descriptions and maps, including, but not limited to, the right to plant and maintain grass, plant trees and to place rock slope protection or other erosion control improvements on storm drain outlets for the protection and beautification of the slope, as determined necessary by RCTC, together with all necessary rights incidental thereto, on, over, under and across the property in connection with the exercise of any easement rights described herein. Property Owner shall not erect or construct, or permit to be erected or constructed, any building, structure or improvement on, over, or under any portion of the easement, or plant trees or any other vegetation on any portion of the easement except with the prior written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. RCTC will not unreasonably withhold from Grantor, its successors and assigns, the right to utilize the easement area for landscaping. 17336.02100\9757730.1 18 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 1 OF 12 RCTC shall have the right to trim, cut or clear away any trees, brush, or other vegetation from time to time as determined in its sole discretion, without payment of additional compensation. No other easements shall be granted on, under or over the easement without the prior written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. The ground elevations of the easement upon completion of construction shall not be further increased or decreased without the prior written consent of RCTC. Property Owner shall not cause, directly, indirectly or negligently, any interference with or harm to the rights conveyed hereunder. 17336.02100\9757730.1 19 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 2 OF 12 P OMAS EXHIBIT `All' LEGAL DESCRIPTION Caltrans Parcel No. 22122-13 Permanent Slope Easement APN 102-050-006 In the County of Riverside, State of California, being a portion of the land described in the Documents recorded August 18, 1981 as Document No. 156438, July 18, 1986 as Document No. 169607, April 26, 1988 as Document No. 110370, January 11, 1989 as Document No. 9785, December 26, 2002 as Document No. 2002-776543, and November 17, 2008 as Document No, 2008-0606601, all of Official Records of said County, said land also being a portion of Lot "A" of Tract 2585, as said Iot is shown on that map, filed in Book 47 of Maps, Pages 10 to 14, Riverside County Records, described as follows: Beginning at the most easterly corner of said land, said corner being on a curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 455.99 feet, a radial line to said corner bears South 80°33'26" Fast; thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said land and said curve 293.38 feet through a central angle of 36°51'49" to the most easterly corner of the land described in the Grant Deed recorded June 18, 1965 as Document No. 70781 of Official Records of said County; thence North 55°51'29" West 22,71 feet along the northeasterly line of said land to the True Point of Beginning; thence North 55'51'29" West 25.79 feet along last said line to a point thereon, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 423.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 41 ° 10'35" East; thence northeasterly along said curve 51.95 feet through a central angle of 07°02' 11 " to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 423.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 46°40'22" East; thence northeasterly along said curve 65.76 feet through a central angle of08°54'27'; thence North 16°31'47" West 16.99 feet; thence North 67°00'05" West 38.34 feet to the beginning of curve concave easterly having a radius of 175,00 feet; thence northerly along said curve 284.90 feet through a central angle of 93° 16'35"; thence M:12PTQ0 ] 050115URVEYILEGAL5122122_APN_102-050-0061Legals122122-13_PE.doe 3/23/2015 Page 1 of 2 20 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 3 OF 12 P OMA North 26° 16'30" East 49.02 feet to a point on the northeasterly line of said land, said point being distant North 49'32'46" West 267.81 feet from said most easterly corner of said land; thence South 49°32'46" East 11.01 feet along said northeasterly line to a point thereon; thence South 07'39'05" East 26.53 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave easterly having a radius of 162.00 feet to which point a radial line bears North 56°02'13" West; thence southerly along said curve 285.47 feet through a central angle of 100°57'52"; thence South 67°00'05" East 47.22 feet; thence South 16°31'47" East 27.51 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 448.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 57'07'14" East; thence southwesterly along said curve 81.36 feet through a central angle of 10°24'18" to the beginning of non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 448.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 48'10'12" East; thence southwesterly along said curve 48.14 feet through a central angle of 06°09'26" to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 11,153 square feet. See Exhibit `M2' attached hereto and made a part hereof. The distances described herein are grid distances and are based on California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6, 2007.00 epoch. Ground distances may be obtained by dividing grid distances by the mean combination factor of the courses being described. The mean combination factor for this conversion is 0.99997476. Prepared under the direction of Brian E. Bullock, PLS 5260 Date -- / M:12PTG0105011SURMILEGALS122122_APN_102-050-0051Legels122122-13 PE.doc Page 2 of 2 3/2312015 21 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 4 OF 12 EXHIBIT M2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 22122-13 PE 11,153 SOFT. 102-050-006 '30u 1', a% R sus � k,r c�sI � j�� .. 31 ,}u 1 c , 3 R�4 A 4 � \ ! VC "' V lf'" Ll J S u, \ ?T�1 r�/i �\ w y 4 ~4~ \ f J�J1� �� - 7 16�.4� � � ; /N r hA �4 �7 4 s'u'o i 4 Opa��'4_ �dY j6, DOC. #1 56438 REC'D 8/18/81 �, o' D PAW `3 DOCLD„. #169607 REC'D 7/18/86 `,� s�6,, F 4_ DOC. #110370 REC'D 4/26/88 %,, <CN 0� '`,, DOC. #9785 REC'D 1 /1 1 /89 7 0�'* o' DOC. #2002-776543 REC'D 1 2/26/0e\ L'; '0�-', o�,5270 DOC. #2008-06066a01 REC'D 1 1 11 7/081 - -`�`0Q `0, '6°F . ,,5* 0 0 F LINE TABLE {, o o p61 `� - �, L1 - N55° 51 '29"W L2 - N39° 51 '01 "W "W 140.02' 1 53.97' 1 +7s- o /��;, mac] . // �� `'`• /I L3 - 583° 28'31 65.1 6' L4 - 51 7° 1 4'21 "W 98.64' SEE SHEET 2 - y /f ', ` \ ; `% -- FOR DETAIL L5 - S63°26'34'W 66.89' L3 1 1 `•,, I o k ` li 1, ,,` '1P RADIAL TABLE o; L4 • B :---. �I R1 - S80° 33'26"E ` ,'`, g c (r), � R2 - 543°41.37"E \1 f, /J/ CURVE TABLE */0� ('t, •/� % Cl - A=36°51149" R=455.99' L-293.38' ` TP013% '` � r;s_ N36° 29'01 "W� l' , .,,,,,_- ��I. LEGEND 124.38 0 P06 Indicates Point 4f Beginning �\, TPOB Indicates True Paint Of Beginning L5 ��e IR) Indicates Radial Bearing A=se51'001i ( ) Title to State N36°24'26"W(R) R=543•99' J_LLL Access Prohibited L=93.52' NOTES Coordinates and bearings are on 2 2 1 2 2- 1 3 CCS 1963(2007.00) Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances, Divide PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT by 0.99997476 to obtain ground distances. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. FEET 0 100 200 400 600 PREPARED BY: DATE: 03-23-15 REV.: EA:OF540 FA#: PSOMAS MD DISTRICT COLINTI2ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS SoniafAna. t lifornie d§ (714)481-8053/{7141545••89153 ifno+: 8 R I V 91 3.6 1 2 EXHIBIT M2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 22122-13 RE 11,153 SO.F'T. 102-050-006 .4. \ DOC. #156438 REC'D 8/18/81 ") #169607 REC'D 7/18/86 ti�O`)1; DOC. #11 0370 REVD 4/26/88 co DY DOC. #E;9785 REC'D 1 /1 1 /89 � ��` V DOC. #2002-776543 REC'D 12/26/02 DOC. #2006-0606601 REC'D 11 /1 7/08 � , N 4.o. \ F \� oQ)DOC. \\ �o��, o o'• / -- c r; 0 � 0 \ \ „A(n �Qp� 0 ' ° / \ ��°• 6 � 0 • 'pQ �O}2\ \� �'' �o,.+("�� ply � / O. t" . 6'•, ;-'6, / r ! tn �' n / -.'`y' ' -P� � / I /� f � \ vc� �, dQ�/ - I ; \ •� °�- / ,n, ,_ .Ay DETAIL 4 � Il 0 221 22-1 3) \ SCALE. 1 "-60` t il r 1 , TRACI 525r \ RADIAL TABLE \ � 0 c9 R3 - 555°34'4S"E� \ 1`11,8, 4-7 / 10-14 POB l R4 - S46°40'22"E j PIDF�"rl�i�l OF LOT"A"' R5 - S42°00'46"E o '°0. o. \ CURVE TABLE ,.0 \ 0 C2 - A=08°54'27" R=423.00' L=65.76' � °� C3 - A=07°O2'11" R=423.00' L=51.95' \��\ S6-�°p9'0 1; N. ; C4 - A=06°09'26" R=448.00' L=48.14' \ Al .2-2 ,N a C5 - A=10°24'181' R=448.00' L=81.36' =)� c� „r) N67'00'05"w �� , , ,, O 38.34' N.�` a c)c- . `-, `" N16'31'4�7"'W o� r �o sir, 7j., AD' q. ,, L9 . F• c,`� ,, <0* .49:j LEGEND �'1`' � �'f ", �� A2' S6 ( '' P0B Indicates Point 4f Beginning TPOB Indicates True Point Of Beginning (R) indicates Radial Bearing 46" �� G�` �� 12"�� J � „Immr1ry S48.10, C4� � ` ( ] Title to Statec,�4'A1'7 r J_L_L_ Access Prohibited Pa = NOTES Coordinates and bearings are on CCS 1983(2007,00) Zone 5. Distances and stationing are grid distances. divide by 0.99997476 to obtain ground 2 2 1 2 2- PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT 1 3 distances. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. ` FEET b 30 60 120 180 PREPARED BY: PSOMAS e Ana, tollfernio927007 eon yen+p1Centre Drive, 171Ay4B4-B053(014j545-B96i VOX) DATE; 03-23-15 REV.: EA; 0E540 FA#: DISTRICT COUNTy3ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS 8 R I V r-, 91 3,6 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 PSOMAS EXHIBIT `N1' LEGAL DESCRIPTION Caltrans Parcel No. 22122-14 Permanent Access Easement APN 102-050-006 In the County of Riverside, State of California, being a portion of the land described in the Documents recorded August 18, 1981 as Document No. 156438, July 18, 1986 as Document No. 169607, April 26, 1988 as Document No. 110370, January 11, 1989 as Document No. 9785, December 26, 2002 as Document No. 2002-776543, and November 17, 2008 as Document No. 2008-060601, all of Official Records of said County, said land also being a portion of Lot "A" of Tract 2585, as said lot is shown on that map, filed in Book 47 of Maps, Pages 10 to 14, Riverside County Records, described as follows: Parcel 1 Beginning at the most easterly corner of said land; thence North 49'32'46" `Nest 267.81 feet along the northeasterly line of said land to a point thereon, said point being the True Point of Beginning; thence South 26° 16'30" West 49.02 feet to the beginning of a curve concave easterly having a radius of 175.00 feet; thence southerly along said curve 284.90 feet through a central angle of 93°16'35"; thence South 67'00'05" East 38.34 feet; thence South 16'31'47" East 16.99 feet to the beginning of a. non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 423.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 55'34'49' East; thence southwesterly along said curve 65.76 feet through a central angle of 08'54'27" to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of423.00 feet to which point a radial line bears Soutla 48012'47" East; thence southwesterly along said curve 1.96 feet through a central angle of 00° 15'56"; thence North 52°00'00" West 45.84 feet; thence North 38°00'00" East 53.09 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave easterly having a radius of 190.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 22'59'55" West; thence northerly along said curve M:12P700105011SURVEVILEGAL5122122_APN_102.050-0061Lega1s122122-14_PAE.doc Page 1 of 3 3/23/2015 24 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 7 OF 12 POMA 307.02 feet through a central angle of 92°34'58"; thence North 67'35'00" West 76.00 feet; thence North 14°23'30" West 98.92 feet to a point being 20.00 feet southwesterly of said northeasterly line; thence parallel with said northeasterly line North 49°32'46" West 193.32 feet; thence North 40°27'14" East 20.00 feet to a point on said northeasterly line, said point hereinafter referenced as Paint "A"; thence South. 49°32'46" East 348.42 feet along last said line to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 20,834 square feet. Parcel 2 Beginning at said Point "A" of Parcel 1 described herein; thence North 49°32'46" West 211.37 feet along the northeasterly line of said land to a point thereon, said point being the True Point of Beginning, said point also being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 2054.00 feet to which point a radial line bears South 09°14'22" West; thence westerly along said curve 182.15 feet through a central angle of 05°04'51 "; thence North 75°40'46" West 24.65 feet to a point on the general northerly line of said Lot "A", said portion of said general northerly line shown as "North 09'44'20" East 169.42 feet" on said map; thence North 09°34'20" East 20.07 feet along last said line, also being the easterly line of the land described as parcel 6 in the document recorded October 29, 1971 as Document No. 123743, of Official Records of said County to a point thereon, said point being distant South 09°34'20" West 38.03 feet from the northeasterly corner of said Parcel 6, said corner also being an angle point of said general northerly line of said Got "A"; thence South 75°40'46" East 26.31 feet to the beginning of a curve concave northerly having a radius of 2034.00 feet; thence easterly along said curve 146.91 feet through a central angle of 04°08'18" to a point on said northeasterly line of said land; thence South 49'32'46" East 39.12 feet along last said line to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 3,802 square feet. MA2PTG0t05011SURVE EGAL5122122_APN_102-050-0061Legals122122-1++_PAE.doc 303/2015 25 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 8 OF 12 Page 2 of 3 2 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 PS OMA See Exhibit `1‘,T2' attached hereto and made a part hereof The distances described herein are grid distances and are based on California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6, 2007.00 epoch. Ground distances may be obtained by dividing grid distances by the mean combination factor of the courses being described. The mean combination factor for this conversion is 0.99997476. Prepared under the direction of Brian E. BulIock, PLS 5260 Date M:12. PTO 0105011511RVEYILEGAL5122122_APN_102-050-0061Legals122122-1A_PAF.doc Page 3 of 3 3/23/2015 26 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 9 OF 12 27 EXHIBIT" N2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 22122-14 Pc1-1 PAF 20,834 SO,,FT. 102-050-006 22122-14 PC1-2 PAL 3,602 SOFT. 102-050-006 - *u, sPik 'Poor _ 7 2$"E21-14 IDS'1 - 53e 7 0 PCI-2 ,-�,� 7 r T o r �4 � ' 7 3 , l NON f� *. +i02-050-007 � ��s4,785 4, y r30�, 6 .i •?4- TPOB? .v, ' I- 8s- SEE SHEET 3 9 r FOR DETAIL N�0� pOp 16�4�OS IRADI 2535r.42, Ofz- :�� R�dY �° Fis 'DRT 1 LiI�J U LOT �1' ,9° ' — . G `50_ DOC. #156438 REC'D 8/1 8/81 ",)-4P#. " A " DOC. #169607 FREC D 7/18/861 496. ty DOC. 4110370 REC'D 4/26/88 j � 'o0� DOC. #9785 REC'D 1 /1 1 /89 / \ o •o` DOC. #2002-776543 REC'D 1 2/26/0 d' 'o04', `ono•`a DOC. #2008-0606601 REC'D '1 1 /1 7/0B -` `a k `Q�po-.' LINE TABLE SEE SHEET 2 \ TPB e� �s\ %—e 'o 6 v L1 - N55°51 '29"W 1 40.02' FOR DETAIL \ PcI-1 , \� L2 - N39°51 'Q1 "W 1 53.97' C221 22-1 4 fr "W ` L3 - S83°28'31 65.1 6' PC1-1 L4 - 51 7° 14'21 "W 98.64' L 5 - S63° 26'34 "W 66.89' j \+ / L 3 1 ; `'' L4 • N ," ,. ,, •' ,,, * :'',� ■�% RADIAL TABLE 1 R2 - 543°41'37"E 7 � C; 9 _, o CURVE TABLE o ', C r/ j.,, C1 - a=36°51'49"' R=455.99' L=293.38' ° o / �,. T .-A .` .a N36° 29'01 "W _ r-`�- LEGEND 124.38' �0 '0 FOB Indicates Paint Of Beginning TPOB Indicates True Point 0f Beginning (R) indicates Radial Bearing ----- L5 A=119°51'091" \.\ ) title to State N36¢ 24 26 W(R) R=543.99 \ 11LL Access Prohibited L=93.52' NOTES Coordinates and bearings are an Cc5 1983(2007.00} zone 6. Distances and Stationing are grid distances. Divide by 0.99997476 to obtain ground 2 2 PERMANENT 1 2 2" 1 4 ACCESS EASEMENT distances. All distances are in feet unleS$ otherwise noted. ' FEET 0 100 No 400 600 PREPARED BY: PSOMAS 3 Hutton Centre Drive Ste. 200 Santa Ana, California 42707 0.14)461-6053/17141545-0485 free) DATE: 03-23-15 REV.: EA:OF540 FA#: DISTRICT COUNTA ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS 8 R I V 91 3,5 1 3 EXHIBIT N2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 22122-14 Pc 1-1 PAE 20,834 SO.FT. 102-050-006 MATCH LINE HEREON � 221 22- 1 4 � Pci-2 TPOB N67'35'OnN b i — Pc 1- 2 et 76.00' Zo,c, N6q°5'06"WfR) °0� N40'27'14"E c „ f Nim 20.00' '� Pt." A DETAIL 0.q- 4 i rn TPOB � Pci-1 SCALE 1 "=60'o41111111111111) _�7 V'- • r Y - I Pei - i � �f�`6� .°� o� RADIAL TABLE I 1 I ° am R3 - S55°34'49HE ,,°' '� , rii t 20.00' R4 - 546°40122"E ^3 22122-14 i R5 - S48°12'47"E °) hi � R6 - 547° 5E'S1 "E co w ~1- - cv 44 ram') -t co 1� Q ° O r rn as v $ Q II ct• '' N38'a0'a0"E �,,�(R1 ^)0 5 3.09' lhiiiih..._ S0' � O 0 � !1 Cr / / Pc1-1 / I + L, J., l f l f +gip /1 v / cv rn o a7 m v) ° \ IS 64, i R6 567'00'05"E ` . 38.34' '6`, '' C S16'31'47"E� WATCH L INE HEREON :. R3 1 g.99 POB R�423.00' _ R=423.00' �+ A=00'15'56" - - 0=08'54'27u _� L=1.96' L-65.75' D LEGEND ��'�� - R=4 55.99' G� OB POg Indicates Paint Of Beginning TPOB Indicates True Paint Of Beginning iR1 Indicates Radial Bearing - _ 5 - 0,5 ( ) Title to State J_J—LL Access Prohibited ��_~� 1,0. NOTES Coordinates and bearings are an CCS 1983(2007.00) Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Divide by 0.99997476 to obtain ground 2 2 PERMANENT 1 2 2- ACCESS EASEMENT 1 4 distances. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. ' ' ' ' FEET 0 30 EO 120 184 PREPARED BY: PSOMAS centre3 Hutton Sonto Anornia92707 266 California j714I481-8053/(7141545-8&93 WOK) DATE: 03-23-15 REV.: EA: OF5A0 FAA: DISTRICT COUNTYIgROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO, TOTAL SHEETS pp 8 1 RI V 91 3.5 2 3 EXHIBIT N2 PARCEL* TITLE AREA APN 22122-14 PC1-2 PAE 3,802 SOFT. 102-050-006 °�' \- LIJ 0 0-0 a • � 0�,S, [c." /4 V • Nab rt�� 5�. � 0 I d �: + vaa,Naa 1 z`� 'be LAB 0_ 0, �' ,N\1- ;' �, \ 1.f\ .4 b '7, \ N,0 7 •ap .0-""'6) \ L.1% 1 oN 221 22- 4 o \o ■ NSs0DETAILS°� �. \\ �; 7��1}}7I-5f; I ry I� s, -A lYJ r rJ' , f J f 1 0- 1 � � ,G. \ •V,Q) SCALE' 1 "-60' FORT] ON OF LOT 'A' • TPPIOB --.NLO DOC. #1 56438 REC O 8/1 B/81 DOC. #1 69607 REC'D 7/1 B/B6 - sue` -73 DOC. #110370 REC'D 4/26/88 0-0 �" -57 ROC. #9785 REC'D 1 /1 1 /89 0 u', � DOC. #2002-776543 REC'D 12/26/02 o DOC. #2008-0606601 REC'D 11 /1 7/08 al 1 � 13 CURVE TABLE �� C2 - d=04°08'1 8" R=2034.00' L=1 46.91 ` cv \ � \ 1 \ •Kr \ \ � \ \ LEGEND v Pt4`iA" \ \\ 22122-14 POD Indicates Paint Of Beginning TPOB Indicates True Point Of Beginning PCI-i 1 \ (R) Indicates Radial Bearing \ \ f ( ) Title to State \ 1 1 1 1 Access Prohibited NOTES Coordinates and bearings are on 1 2 2 1 2 2,- 1 4 CCS 1983(2007.00) Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Divide PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT by 0.999974176 to obtain ground distances. Afl distances are in feet r unless otherwise noted. FEET 0 30 60 120 180 PREPARED BY: DATE: 03-23-15 REV.: EA: OF540 FA#: PSOMAS ton Centre Drive, 5te. 244 DISTRICT COUNT/0 ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SAETS Sanio100, colifornio 9z7p7 i714j4B5-1053/1714154B-BBB3 (FW 8 R I V 91 3.5 3 3 ATTACHMENT 3 AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 13-046 RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT AND PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT INTERESTS IN PORTIONS OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 102-050-003 LOCATED IN CORONA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WHICH COVERS THE AREA BETWEEN PIERCE STREET ON THE EAST TO THE COUNTY LINE ON THE WEST, IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") proposes to permanent access easement and permanent slope easement interests in portions of certain real property, located in Riverside County, California, more particularly described as Assessor Parcel No. 102-050-003 (Caltrans Parcel Nos. 22131-4 and 22131-5), for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project in Riverside County, California, pursuant to the authority granted to it by section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the Commission scheduled a public hearing for Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 9:30 a.m., at the County Administration Building, Board of Supervisors Chambers, at 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, and gave to each person whose property is to be acquired and whose name and address appeared on the last equalized county assessment roll, notice and a reasonable opportunity to appear at said hearing and be heard on the matters referred to in section 1240.030 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; and WHEREAS, said hearing has been held by the Commission, and the affected property owner and other interested parties afforded an opportunity to be heard on said matters; and WHEREAS, the Commission may now adopt a Resolution of Necessity pursuant to section 1240.040 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSION DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. There has been compliance by the Commission with the requirements of section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure regarding notice and hearing. Section 2. Public Use. The public use for permanent access easement and permanent slope easement interests in the portion of the property to be acquired is for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project in Riverside County, California. Section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes the Commission to acquire, by eminent domain, property necessary for such purposes. 31 Section 3. Description of Property. Attached and marked as Exhibit "A" are the legal definitions, descriptions and maps of the interests to be acquired by the Commission that describe the general location and extent of the property with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. Section 4. Findings. The Commission hereby finds and determines each of the following: (a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; (b) The proposed project is planned and/or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; (c) The offer required by section 7267.2 of the California Government Code was made; and, (d) A portion of the property will be acquired pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1240.410. Section 5. Use Not Unreasonably Interfering with Existing Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights of way appropriated to existing public uses. The legal descriptions of these easements and rights of way are on file with the Commission and describe the general location and extent of the easements and rights of way with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. In the event the herein described use or uses will not unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described interest subject to such existing public uses pursuant to section 1240.510 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Section 6. More Necessary Public Use. Some or all of the real property affected by the interest to be acquired is subject to easements and rights of way appropriated to existing public uses. To the extent that the herein described use or uses will unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, the Commission finds and determines that the herein described use or uses are more necessary than said existing public use. Counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described real property appropriated to such existing public uses pursuant to section 1240.610 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Staff is further authorized to make such improvements to the affected real property that it determines are reasonably necessary to mitigate any adverse impact upon the existing public use. Section 7. Further Activities. Counsel for the Commission is hereby authorized to 32 acquire the hereinabove described real property in the name of and on behalf of the Commission by eminent domain, and counsel is authorized to institute and prosecute such legal proceedings as may be required in connection therewith. Legal counsel is further authorized to take such steps as may be authorized and required by law, and to make such security deposits as may be required by order of court, to permit the Commission to take possession of and use said real property at the earliest possible time. Counsel is further authorized to correct any errors or to make or agree to non- material changes in the legal description of the real property that are deemed necessary for the conduct of the condemnation action, or other proceedings or transactions required to acquire the subject real property. Counsel is further authorized to reduce or modify the extent of the interests or property to be acquired so as to reduce the compensation payable in the action where such change would not substantially impair the construction and operation for the project for which the real property is being acquired. Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day ofJuly, 2015. Daryl R. Busch, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 33 34 Legal Definitions of Property to be Acquired The following is a list of definitions of legal rights to be acquired by Riverside County Transportation Commission: "Permanent Access Easement" (as to CPNS 22122-14 and 22131-5) grants to RCTC, including its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive permanent and perpetual easement, to construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain and traverse an access way to access RCTC owned or public facilities, construction site, or right of way, as determined necessary by RCTC, together with all necessary rights incidental thereto, on, over and across the property in connection with the exercise of any easement rights described herein. Property owners shall not erect or construct, or permit to be erected or constructed, any building, structure or improvement on, over or under any portion of the easement, or plant any tree or trees or plant any other vegetation or flora on any portion of the easement except at the written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. RCTC will not unreasonably withhold from Grantor, its successors and assigns, the right to utilize the easement area for parking, driveway access, landscaping (exclusive of vertical penetration), open space and density or floor area calculation. RCTC shall be entitled to trim, cut, or clear away any trees, brush, or other vegetation or flora from time to time determined in its sole discretion without payment of any additional compensation. No other easement or easements shall be granted on, under or over the easement without obtaining the prior written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. "Permanent Slope Easement" (as to CPNS 22122-13 and 22131-4) grants to RCTC, including its successors and assigns, a non-exclusive permanent and perpetual easement, to construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain and traverse the embankment slope areas defined on the attached legal descriptions and maps, including, but not limited to, the right to plant and maintain grass, plant trees and to place rock slope protection or other erosion control improvements on storm drain outlets for the protection and beautification of the slope, as determined necessary by RCTC, together with all necessary rights incidental thereto, on, over, under and across the property in connection with the exercise of any easement rights described herein. Property Owner shall not erect or construct, or permit to be erected or constructed, any building, structure or improvement on, over, or under any portion of the easement, or plant trees or any other vegetation on any portion of the easement except with the prior written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. RCTC will not unreasonably withhold from Grantor, its successors and assigns, the right to utilize the easement area for landscaping. 17336.02100\9757730.1 35 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 1 OF 10 RCTC shall have the right to trim, cut or clear away any trees, brush, or other vegetation from time to time as determined in its sole discretion, without payment of additional compensation. No other easements shall be granted on, under or over the easement without the prior written consent of RCTC, its successors and assigns. The ground elevations of the easement upon completion of construction shall not be further increased or decreased without the prior written consent of RCTC. Property Owner shall not cause, directly, indirectly or negligently, any interference with or harm to the rights conveyed hereunder. 17336.02100\9757730.1 36 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 2 OF 10 a 4 5 6 7 fi Ica 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 PS OMAS EXHIBIT 'Di' LEGAL DESCRIPTION Ca'trans Parcel No. 22131-4 Permanent Slope Easement APN 102-050-003 In the Unincorporated Territory of the County of riverside, State of California, being a portion of Lot "B" of Tract 2585, as shown on the map filed in Book 47, Pages 10 through 14, inclusive, of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said county, described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly corner of Lot 49 of Tract No. 2319, as shown on the map filed in Book 43, Pages 74 through 76 of Maps, in said office of the County Recorder, said corner being an angle point in the general northerly line of said Lot "B"; thence North 75'37'23" West 18.00 feet on a line between said most westerly corner and the southerly terminus of that certain course in the westerly line of Lot "U" of said Tract 2585, shown on the map of said tract as having a bearing and length of "S 14°33'02" W 219.15 "' to a point, said point also being the beginning of a curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 223.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 61 °51' 15" East; thence southwesterly along said curve 39.64 feet through a central angle of 10°11'02" to a point, said paint being the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing southwesterly along said curve 78.45 feet through a central angle of 20'09'27" to a point, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 223.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 29'21'23" East; thence westerly along said curve 169.75 feet through a central angle of43°36'52"; thence South 67°31'08 " West 23.28 feet to a point on the general westerly line of said Lot "B", said point also being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 543.99 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 61 °45'21" East; thence southwesterly along said general westerly line and said curve 1.36 feet through a central angle of 00'08'35" to a point thereon, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly M:12PTG01050115URWALEGALS122131_APN_IO2-050-0031Legals122I31-4-PE.doex Page 1 of 3/24/2015 37 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 3 OF 10 POMA having a radius of 239.00 feet, to which point a radial lime bears South 1 S°48'53" West; thence easterly along said curve 201.24 feet through a central angle of 48°14'35" to a point, said point being the beginning of non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 239.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 31 °26'26" East; thence northeasterly along said curve 84.38 feet through a central angle of 20°13'47"; thence North 51'40'13" West 16.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 4,283 square feet. The distances described herein are grid distances and are based on California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6, 2007.00 epoch, Ground distances may be obtained by dividing grid distances by the mean combination factor of the courses being described. The mean combination factor for this conversion is 0.99997476. See Exhibit `DT attached hereto and made apart hereof: Prepared under the direction of Z,efez,a„4 Brian E. Bullock, PLS 5260 Date . - 2 -15 M:12PT00105011SURVEYILEGALS122131 APN 102-050-0031Legals122131-4-PEdocx Page 2 of 3/24/2015 38 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 4 OF 10 EXHIBIT D2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA A P N 221 31 -4 575 1 LBT !J C\ r �J Au84°54'34 R=20.00' L=29.64' -1) IF /:9 .., p/D � CURVE TABLE C1 - b= 63°43'1 2" C2 - 0=90°00100" C3 - 0=05°47'18" PE 102-091-020 7'23"E 0.57' 4,283 SF POB r 102-091-009 N\ 4 ;19 s / P O RI�.� OF PARCEL }I�} 1 � VDOC. NO. 156438, Vol.1 . REC . 08-1 8-1 981 L 01 e IRADT NO, 2525 SEE SHEET 2 N18 J O- 14 FOR DETAIL 102--050-003 r a a°° °� w S ,\ 31.23 c3 �- R= 75.00' L=83.41' R= 20.00' L=31.42' R=183.00' L=18.49' LEGEND Indicates Radial Bearing Point of Beginning Title to State Access Prohibited N63° r 02 5•''W s 4e/ 4-9? LINE TABLE L1 - 576°09150"E 0.39' L2 - N22°37114"W 48.99' L3 - 567°22'46"W 11.87' L5 - N1 9° 59'52"E 56.83' L6 - S16°49'56"E 105.91 ' (R) RADIAL TABLE R 1 - 5701 2'07"E R2 - 549°53'02"E 599 a - 40), I ,s- NOTES Coordinates and bearings ore an CCS 1983(2007.00) Zane 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Divide by 0.999974/6 to obtain ground distances. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted, 22131-4 PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT FEET 0 50 100 200 300 PREPARED BY: DATE: 03-24-15 REV.: EA: OF540 FA#: PSOMAS 3 Hutton Centre Drive, Ste. 200 4M+p AhC C4lifornfo 4270? ?lA}?$a-�°1T3/(714}g45-BB93 lFoH1 DISTRICT COUNT119 ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS RCV 3.7 1 2 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 5 OF 10 EXHIBIT D2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 22131-4 PE 4,283 SF 102-050-003 LINE TABLE RADIAL TABLE L1 - S76°09'50"E 0.39' R1- 570°12'07"E R2- S49 53 02 E co L4 - 567° 31 '08"W 23.28' G�� R3- S31 ° 30'46"E ALP w z 1 L5 - N1 9° 59'52"E 56.83' ' � �Z IT �'' R4- 529° 21 '23"E \6:.cr N- O s � q' R5- 561°45'21"E ° 0uN. \ �f R6- 561 36 46 E \`� (' a rn � 1)- ___Cr' (514°33'02"W 219.15' {zee'" an M.B. 47/10-14) � cn 1,2 ' 0�/ 60.5775°37'23"� .�o1 � �� -�� \ l 142.57' '� L 1 - A=1 0° 1 1 '02" 1 R=223.00' L=39.64' T P 0.3 18.00' -Zr. cO , '�, 0) o73 5 ,-,1 Q. ".. P' 6, -° . ;,. 7 r 2 21 31 - 4 \o v- f. ' q 1,• (j :JJ ' w ,..;,/ /AI 9 \� -%-6-.Q-- -1 i)o)-/ ��1J ram\ o N. . /� . ,-*/ 55 it 1, ' J / r Df Q4 ,,- .i � , V a�- �bc)' 1.4� �A °\Ai3Q`' J `1 `i /CQ/J r r `'_ l — ,R°�� 2Al wj -Fir1C7L �l 00 L51 8— - __"W (R-IN} �` �f �°j l�li }7JTO1 J�- 1 . - -- _I caf o, POR. OF PARCEL 1 D l-f v ,; DOC. NO. 1564389 O.R. -, REC. 08-1 6-1 9$1 �� cI CURVE TABLE cnl / C4 - d=00°08'35" R=543.99' L=1.36' LEGEND (R) indicates Radial Bearing TPOB True Point of Beginning POB Point of Beginning ( ) Title to State I I l 11 Access Prohibited NOTES 2 2 1 3 1_ 4 Coordinates and bearings are on CC5 1983(2007.00) Zane 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances, Divide by 0.99997476 to obtain PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT ground distances. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. FEET 0 25 50 100 150 PREPARED BY: PSOMAS Santo�Ana, CerifOrrlloc200 92707 (714)751-7373/(714)545-U53 {Fox} DATE: 03-24-2015 REV,: EA: 0E5.10 FA#: DISTRICT COUNT ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS 8 R I V 91 3.7 2 2 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 6 OF 10 1 PSOMAS EXHIBIT `E1' LEGAL DESCRIPTION Caltrans Parcel No. 22131-5 Permanent Access Easement APN 102-050-003 In the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, being a portion of Lot "B" of Tract 2585, as shown on the map filed in Book 47, Pages 10 through 14, inclusive, of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said county, described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly corner of Lot 49 of Tract No. 2319, as shown on the map filed in Book 43, Pages 74 through 76 of Maps, in said office of the County Recorder, said corner being an angle point in the general northerly line of said Lot "B"; thence North 75'37 23" West 18.00 feet on a line between said most westerly corner and the southerly terminus of that certain course in the westerly line of Lot "tr' of said Tract 2585, shown on the: map of said tract as having a bearing and length of "S 14°33'02" W 219.15' to a point, said point also being the beginning of curve concave Northwesterly having a radius of 223.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 61 °51'15" East; thence southwesterly along said curve 39.64 feet through a central angle of 10'11'02" to a point; thence South 51'40'13" East 16.00 feet to a point, said paint being the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing southeasterly along last said line South 51'40'13" East 15,00 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 254.00 feet, to which beginning a radial line bears South 51'40'13" East; thence southwesterly along said curve 89.94 feet through a central angle of20'17'20" to a point, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 254.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 29'29'17" East; thence westerly along said curve 185,98 feet through a central angle of 41 °57'10" to a point, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 573.99 feet, to which point a radial line hears South 60'45'21" East; thence: southwesterly M:12PTG0105011SURVEYILEGALS122131_APN_102-050-0031Legals122131-5-PAE.docx Page 1 of 3/24/2015 41 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 7 OF 10 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1a 15 fir 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 PSOMA along said curve 15.69 feet through a central angle of 01'33'58" to a point, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of269.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 13'28'24" West; thence westerly along said curve 30.99 feet through a central angle of 06'36'06" to a point on the general westerly line of said Lot "B", said point also being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 543.99 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 58°23'54" East; thence northeasterly along said general westerly line and along said curve 30.52 feet through a central angle of 03'12'52" to a point thereon, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 239.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 18°48153" West; thence easterly along said curve 201,24 feet through a central angle of 48° 14'35" to a point, said point being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 239.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 31°26'26" East; thence northeasterly along said curve 84.38 feet through a central angle of 20° 13'47" to the True Point of Beginning. Containing 4,907 square feet. The distances described herein are grid distances and are based on California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6, 2007.00 epoch. Ground distances nnay be obtained by dividing grid distances by the mean combination factor of the courses being described. The mean combination factor for this conversion is 0.99997476. See Exhibit `E2' attached hereto and made apart hereof. Prepared under the direction of % re -,25 Brian E. Bullock, )BLS 5260 Date MA2PTG0105011SURUEY1LEGALS122131_APN_102-050-0031Legals122131-5-PAE.doex Page 2 of 2 3/24/2015 42 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 8 OF 10 EXHIBIT E2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 221 31 -5 PAE _ 4,907 SF 1 02-050-003 LINE TABLE RADIAL TABLE o , , r R1 - 570° 1 2'07"E L1 - S76 09 50 E 0.39 . (o j R2- 549 53 02 E cr o r- L4 - S51°40113"E (R) 31.00' g R3- S59°11'23"E ti� Liz l L5 - N19°59'52"E 56.83' ,��ti' R4- 513p28�24"W°Et w- L7 -- 551°40'13"E (R) 16.00' 0 0''0 R5- 520°04 29"W '01 0an--r LB - 551 °40'1 3"E (R) 1 5.00' }� R6- S58 23'S4 Eix 7r ' . \ R7- 561 °36'46"E \� i'` RB- 518°48'53"W`- -' � (S14°33'02"W 219.15' —1r 6 eCo �,y; ch PER M.B. 47/10-14) + A� 575°37r23�� OB o o a � r� � f�o'S b.� ' 160.5 ,\ � ��c� {•�'�� 142.57' 7 \Fpsa \ t, o ")' co 444q' \\�9 \�� (zz p ,,.\ lJ � r A. \/ , IJ� \• f ! .am0 �� v` C, Qi '/ ti 0 `f' 2 2 � 31 - 5 /ti°(l, °). P ° tr7 co"" Cis, s, �� it 11(Sr' - 8-a _' 1 0�' I OT D '1• BOUT\ 2` '00 qb, M8 4 /i 10- 1 r.� A=48° 1 4'35" �� 'bb' / / R6 I �' r � �.0 R� (Z./of RS 3Q, - 6 .10 Cq \_512°27'53"W (R-OUT) % f%%r POR. OF PARCEL 1 / ) 56osq '21 "� (R_ I ) � ,4) DOC . NO. 156438, O.R. / •Z`, /ate/ R� 73 99 $ tiov0 %� REC. 08-18-1981 LEGEND (R) Indicates Radial Bearing TPOB True Paint of Beginning POB Paint CURVE TABLE of Beginning ( -) Title to State C4 - a=06°36'06" R=269.00' L=30.99' Access Prohibited C5 - 0=03°12'52" R=543.99' L=30.52' _LLL1_I NOTE 22131-5 Coordinates and bearings are on CCS 1983(2007.00) Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Divide by 0.99997476 to obtain PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT ground distances. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. i FEET 0 25 50 100 150 PREPARED BY: PSOMAS 04 5aniaFon Ana, Califorrniae02707 2 (7107$1-7373f(7t4)545-BBB3 (Fox) DATE: 03-24-2015 REV.I EA: OF540 FA*: DISTRICT COUNT' i ROUTE SHEET PM SHEET No. TOTAL SHEETS p 8 11 R I Y 91 3.7 2 2 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 9 OF 10 EXHIBIT E2 PARCEL# TITLE AREA APN 221 31 -5 PAE 4,907 SF 102-050-003 U)QIL I /-6=1 G o ".. / 4;)e /7 , ' /. 575 1 LOT J A=84°54'34" R=20.00' L�29.64' C` � 70 o 0 u"- 5 �;y`° 9_ 102-091-020 37'23"E 0.57' O 102-091-009 r POR . OFPARCELG/O.R. /DOCil . N. 1 156438, O REC. 08-1 8-1 981 pp ff��L ra-r -rRAC 3 NO. 2595 SEE SHEET 2 1t11 ' 471 1 J- 1 '4 FOR DETAIL �o c TF'4'R F\%L A° 07 W '13.\'23 CURVE TABLE Cl - A=63°43'12" R= 75.00' L=83.41' C2 - A=90°00'00" R= 20.00' L=31.42' C3 - A=05°47'18" R=183.00' L-18.49' LEGEND Indicates Radial Bearing Paint of Beginning Title to Slate Access Prohibited NSpa 3? 2 /197 40y. LINE TABLE `./.5/ L1 - 576°09'50"E 0.39' L2 - N22°37'141W 48.99' L3 - S67°22'46"W 11.87' L5 - N19°59'52"E 56.83' L6 - S16°49156"E 105.91' (R) .599.98, RADIAL TABLE R1 - 570°12'07"E R2 - S49°53'02"E NOTES Coordinates and bearings are an COS 1983(2007.00) Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Divide by 0.999974176 to obtain ground distances. All distances ore in feet unless otherwise noted. 221.31.-5 PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT FEET 0 50 100 200 300 PREPARED BY: P S O M Q DATE: 03-2A-15 REV,: EA: OF540 FA#: DISTRICT COUNT ROUTE SHEET PSI SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS 1 Hutton Cen4re Drive Ste. 200 Santo Ah0 CCIif6MiC 42707 014j751-7373((/1 )50-eaa5 (pox) 8 RIV 91 3.7 1 2 EXHIBIT A, PAGE 10 OF 10 Commission Request =CTC Riverside Counq ironsportolion Commission THE COMM! SSI ON I S REQUESTED TO MAKE THE FOLLOW! NG FI NDI NGS: 1. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3. The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and 4. The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. 301Sb3A1H/39INHti0 3N11 A1Nf10D 9 PROJECT FAST FORWARD PROJECT MAP Parcel Locations in the Project CORONA A NORTH EXPRESS LANES WESTBOUND REGULAR LANES EASTBOUND REGULAR LANES MAGNOLIA AVE ONTARIO AVE. RCTC INEms Riverside County ironsporloiion Commission PIERCE ST r 'A� OFFERS OF JUST COMPENSATION RCTC 91 PR°JECT FAST FORWARD No. 1 2 3 Ownership D.N. Schneider Serfas Development, LLC Serfas Development, LLC Offer Date March 11, 2015 April 20, 2015 April 20, 2015 PARCEL 1 Po' D.N. Schneider No Referenced Assessor's Parcel No. 91 PR°JECT FAST FOR n-R-a mp -fro m sClub FEE 41,706 SF PARCEL 2 Serfas Development LLC 102-050-006 Riverside County irunsporlolion Commission 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD Permanent Slope Easement 11,153 SF Permanent Access Easement 20,834 SF Permanent Access Easement 3,802 SF 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD Serfas Development LLC 102-050-006 biatintfJoill nee - FEE 48,519 SF (Total Parcel Area 4,665,711 SF) Permanent Slope Easement 11,153 SF Permanent Access Easement 20,834 SF Permanent Access Easement 3,802 SF Permanent Wall Footing Easement 4,845 SF Temporary Construction Easement 8,342 SF PARCEL 3 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD Serfas Development LLC 102-050-003 popmad Eaz2bourom: .RIVOISKI® CO N,ew_Ernta ga-Ro=a d • I mart" Permanent Slope Easement 4,283 SF Permanent Access Easement 4,907 SF Serfas Development LLC 102-050-003 PROJECT FAST FORWARD rloiion Commission ■ 1 5" Zf �i�l�» 1 1\ i i i 1 1 1 S �1�1`� lr- 4 i' C `tl FEE 24,533 SF ( Total Parcel Area 4,665,711 SF) Permanent Slope Easement 4,283 SF Permanent Access Easement 4,907 SF Temporary Construction Easement 4,971 SF Staff Recommends: RIY6r5id® County Uonsporloiion Commission THE COMM! SSI ON ADOPT A RESOLUTI ON OF N ECESSI TY BASED ON THE FOLLOW! N G FI N DI N GS: 1. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2. The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3. The real property to be acquired is necessary for the project; and 4. The offer of just compensation has been made to the property owner. AGENDA ITEM 7 PUBLIC HEARING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Josefina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Riverside County Transit Services Funding Allocation for Fiscal Year 2015/16 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Conduct a public hearing at its July Commission meeting on the proposed Section 5307 Program of Projects (POP); 2) Approve the Fiscal Year 2015/16 Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County; 3) Approve the FY 2015/16 Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) fund allocations for transit; 4) Direct staff to add projects into the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTI P); 5) Adopt Resolution No. 15-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Allocate State Transit Assistance Funds"; and 6) Approve the disbursement of $4,798,000 in LTF funds to Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) as a bridge loan due to the United States Department of Labor (DOL) suspension of federal funds due to Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) issues. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its June 10 meeting, the Commission approved the FY 2015/16 — FY 2017/18 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; the Commission's Commuter Rail Program; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); RTA; and SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine). The core components of each agency's SRTP include the operating and capital plans and accompanying budget with cost estimates for each aspect of the plan along with an implementation timeline. The SRTPs also document each operator's system and route performance data which provide the basis for the Commission's oversight activities to ensure compliance with federal regulations, the Transportation Development Act (TDA), state law, and Commission -adopted policies and guidelines. The annual update is aimed at refining and improving productivity and mobility to ensure sales tax funds and other funding Agenda Item 7 45 resources are spent in the most efficient and cost effective manner. Throughout the development and execution of the SRTPs, the Commission maintains its immediate focus by providing an integrated network of transit services convenient for county residents to meet the county's identified unmet needs over a three-year time frame. In January 2015, the Commission received information on the FY 2015/16 revenue projections, indicating an increase of nearly 2 percent in both LTF and Measure A funding compared to the FY 2014/15 original estimates. The California State Controller's office also released the STA preliminary allocation estimates for the region for FY 2015/16, indicating approximately 3 percent increase compared to last year's estimate. This year's STA funding allocation for Coachella Valley includes a set aside of 7 percent of STA funds into the Coachella Valley Intercity Rail fund to cover operating expenses related to technical work for the development of the Los Angeles to Coachella Valley corridor in the state rail plan. The intent is to allocate up to 10 percent of the STA funds currently apportioned to Coachella Valley, using a phased -in approach. Based on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Commission and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), the funding split for FY 2015/16 is 7 percent and will be 10 percent in FY 2016/17 and thereafter. The MOU demonstrates both agencies' commitment toward implementing a rail program in the Coachella Valley by using both federal and state funding sources. Public Employee Pension Reform Act Federal funding has always been a major source for operating and capital support for public transit in the county. Currently, implementation of transit service as well as significant capital projects funded with Federal Section 5307 and 5339 monies are impacted due to unresolved issues related to PEPRA, California's pension reform law enacted in 2013. At issue is an objection by the DOL and operator and mechanic unions that PEPRA infringed on the collective bargaining rights of unionized transit employees. The DOL made its opposition to PEPRA known by suspending approval of federal formula grant funds. Without DOL approval of the formula grant funds, transit operators cannot access these funds, which are necessary to ensure continued service delivery at existing levels. Earlier this year, the courts ruled in favor of California and supported the state's right to implement pension reform. The DOL appealed that case. As of May 14, 2015, and resultant from the DOL having lost in court, the DOL and FTA authorized some reimbursement of operating and capitalized preventive maintenance grant funds to operators for the period prior to January 1, 2015. While a positive step, the reduced fund availability for the remainder of FY 2014/15 means operations and capital improvements remain impacted for both the current fiscal year and also going forward for FY 2015/16. Agenda Item 7 46 Pertaining to the preparation of the SRTPs and the Commission's budget preparation for FY 2015/16, Riverside County transit operators at staff direction incorporated federal grant funds in their FY 2015/16 SRTPs as part of the projected revenue sources. This move was thought by staff to be prudent in light of the federal government's obligation to support public transit and the fact the court ruled against the DOL. While these funds are programmed, their availability remains uncertain. Accordingly and to counter the short term effect of PEPRA on grant fund availability, staff recommends the use of LTF reserve funds in the form of bridge loans to each affected operator. Staff believes this to be a short-term solution only, in order to protect existing transit service levels until the appeal filed by the DOL can be adjudicated. At this time, staff is requesting and recommending a bridge loan in the amount of $4,798,000 be provided to RTA. A similar loan was approved for SunLine at the June 10 Commission meeting. These funds are to cover shortfalls experienced by each operator for FY 2014/15, and will be repaid to the Commission immediately upon receipt of the federal funds. Should the PEPRA issue not be resolved soon, transit operators across the state including those in Riverside County will continue to be significantly impacted. Commission staff will continue to work collaboratively with Riverside County transit operators affected by the grant disruption to develop contingency plans to deal with the lack of federal funding. Staff instructed the operators to begin preparation of a service reduction strategy in the event the PEPRA issue is not resolved during the FY 2015/16. Should the case continue to drag out, further discussion will be needed with respect to the efficacy of using reserves generated from state and local sources as an alternative to the obligation by the federal government to fund transit operations and capital improvements. Staff will continue to monitor the situation and report back to the Commission as well as seek additional Commission approval on any aspect of transit funding related to PEPRA and the loss of federal funds. SRTP Financial and Ridership Overview Approximately $198 million in total funding is required to support the FY 2015/16 operating and capital requests for the provision of transit services in Riverside County. The following table provides an overview of the total operating and capital costs together with projected ridership levels by apportionment area. Agenda Item 7 47 FY 2015/16 Operating, Capital, and Ridership Projections Expense Type Western Riverside Coachella Valley Palo Verde ValleyTotal Bus Rail Bus Rail Operating Capital $ 78,860,965 29,506,173 $ 32,105,066 $ 30,794,949 25,502,013 $ 189,439 - $ 988,075 341,788 $ 142,938,494 55,349,974 Total (Operating & Capital)* $ 108,367,138 $ 32,105,066 $ 56,296,962 $ 189,439 $ 1,329,863 $ 198,288,468 FY 2015/16 Projected Ridership 11,160,640 3,106,075 5,143,610 0 50,004 19,460,329 * Exclusive of LA Metro, OCTA & SANBAG's share and passenger fare revenues for Commuter Rail expenses The ridership estimate for FY 2014/15 indicates an all-time ridership record of about 19.2 million passengers in Riverside County, an increase of more than 3.5 percent over FY 2013/14. As shown in Attachment 4, the funding plan for FY 2015/16 is projected to generate ridership of 19.5 million, 1.6 percent higher than the forecast for FY 2014/15. Next year's transit operations reflect a systemwide increase of 10 percent in total operating expenses and nearly 17 percent more in capital expenditures compared to FY 2014/15 funding levels. Capital funds programmed in FY 2015/16 are higher than the previous year due to planned procurements of additional fixed route and paratransit vehicles and a huge capital outlay for RTA's new maintenance facility funded mainly with FY 2014/15 Proposition 18 Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement (PTMISEA) funds awarded to transit operators this year. In addition, SunLine is embarking on the development and deployment of five new hydrogen fuel cell buses funded mainly with a FTA Low and No Emission Vehicle program (LoNo) award. The rise in operating costs is attributable mainly to increased start-up operating expenses for the new Perris Valley Line (PVL) service due to start in December 2015. FY 2015/16 Operating and Capital Costs To implement the SRTPs for FY 2015/16, the request is to utilize available funding of approximately $143 million for operating and $55 million for capital purposes. This total does not include the additional rail subsidy and fare subsidy (approximately $37 million) from the other Metrolink partner agencies to leverage the Commission's Commuter Rail Program. The following chart provides an overview of the operating and capital costs by funding source required to support the county's transit operations. Agenda Item 7 48 Riverside County: FY 2015/16 Operating and Capital Costs TDA & STA Funds), $ 88,192,800 , 45 Carryover Funds (STA/5307/5316/5317/53 $4,542,942 , 2% Other Revenues, $5,848,645 , 3% Passenger Fares, $23,939,509,12% — Measure A, $9,325,531 , 5% Federal Formula Funds (Sec 5307, 5304, 5311, 5310, 5339, 5316, 5317) & CMAQ $35,874,667,18% -J State Prop 1B (Cap+Security) & LCTOP funds, $20,760,514 ,10% ■ Federal Discretionary Sec 5312 LoNo Funds , $9,803,860 , 5% Approximately $164 million (83 percent) consists of federal, state, and local funds, including Proposition 18 funds that are primarily allocated through Commission action. The remaining $34.3 million (17 percent) of the $198 million total operating and capital costs identified in the chart is funded by the following sources: • $24.0 million — Passenger fares • $ 4.5 million — Carryover funds — Federal funds 5307, 5316, 5317, 5339, and STA • $ 5.8 million — Miscellaneous other revenues (advertising fees, compressed natural gas sales, general fund contributions, low carbon fuel standard credits, building lease, Southern California Regional Rail Authority pass -through funds for security guards, pass - through funds from Measure A Western County Commuter Assistance funds for the Perris Multimodal Transit Center, pass-thru funds for PVL dispatching services and maintenance of way, vending machine revenues, taxi voucher sales, and interest income) Agenda Item 7 49 Transportation Development Act Funding TDA is one of the major funding sources for public transit in California and provides two funding sources — LTF and STA for transit capital, operations, and planning. The LTF funds are derived from a quarter cent of the statewide general sales tax collected in each county. The State Board of Equalization returns the sales tax revenues to the county of Riverside where it is held until the Commission provides written allocation instructions for disbursement. It is estimated that LTF revenue for transit services for FY 2015/16 will be $77,395,990 reflecting a 2 percent increase compared to the original projected amount for FY 2014/15, and is consistent with the revenue projection provided at the January 2015 Commission meeting. There is approximately $90.8 million in LTF unallocated reserve funds projected at the end of FY 2014/15, resulting in a total available amount of $160.4 million. Approximately $82.6 million of this amount will be programmed by county transit operators for operating and capital needs in FY 2015/16. STA funding is derived from sales tax on diesel fuel. Fifty percent of STA funds are allocated according to population, and the other 50 percent is allocated according to the ratio of fare revenues generated in each area during the prior fiscal year. For Riverside County, there is approximately $43.3 million in STA unallocated reserve funds projected at the end of FY 2014/15. Additional revenues of $12 million are anticipated in FY 2015/16 for a total available amount of $55.3 million. About $5.6 million of this fund balance will be programmed by county transit operators for various capital projects in FY 2015/16. Per Commission policy adopted in March 2010, all operators are required to spend down existing capital balances prior to requesting additional funds. As a result, the county's STA fund balance gradually improved following the resumption of STA funding in FY 2010. Beginning FY 2013/14, however, the rate of increases in annual STA revenues started to slow down, showing only slight improvement this FY 2015/16. Therefore, the current fund reserve which serves as a cushion in the event of another economic recession will be used conservatively, so that the county is better prepared for inevitable needs such as replacing old vehicles and upgrading equipment. Prior to approving STA allocations, the Commission must adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) as specified in the TDA statutes and California Code of Regulations. For public transit operators to claim LTF and/or STA funds, the Commission must allocate funds to support the transit services and capital projects contained in the FY 2015/16 SRTPs. The requested allocations need to be consistent with the approved SRTPs, and the funds are explicitly for the projects stated in the approved plans. Attachment 2 outlines the TDA allocations for FY 2015/16 requested by each operator. Measure A Funding Another primary source of funding for transit comes from Measure A — the half cent sales tax transportation initiative in Riverside County. Measure A funds for transit programs in Western County and Coachella Valley provide funding support for specialized transit, intercity bus Agenda Item 7 50 services, and commuter rail. About 5 percent of the FY 2015/16 proposed operating and capital expenditures will be covered by Measure A funds. Measure A spending plan for public transit is outlined below. Measure A Requested Funds Agency Amount RTA $ 2,833,432 SunLine 6,492,099 Total $ 9,325,531 Proposition 1B Funding Proposition 1B bond proceeds fund various transportation programs, including the Proposition 1B PTMISEA program administered by Caltrans and the California Transit Security Grant Program managed by the California Office of Emergency Services. The PTMISEA program funds new replacement equipment, system rehabilitation, capital service improvements or expansion, and bus rapid transit but not operating costs. Projects eligible under the Proposition 1B security program include capital projects to protect against security threats or develop a disaster response plan for transit. Each region is guaranteed a share of the Proposition 1B formula funds, however, these funds are distributed as bonds are sold. Riverside County was appropriated approximately $1.8 million in Proposition 1B Security funds for FY 2014/15. About $23.6 million in Proposition 1B capital funding was also appropriated to the region to cover a three-year spending plan for FY 2014/15 — FY 2016/17, all of which have been programmed in FY 2014/15 and FY 2015/16 for various capital projects. Proposition 1B Capital and Security funds programmed by agencies in FY 2015/16 through prior Commission approvals are as follows: Agency Proposition 1B Capital Security City of Banning $ 253,596 $ 19,189 City of Beaumont 247,451 18,724 City of Corona 522,723 79,125 City of Riverside 640,323 48,452 RTA 12,045,649 911,470 SunLine 4,931,311 373,153 PVVTA 249,057 18,846 Total $ 18,890,110 $ 1,468,959 Low Carbon Transit Operations Program The Low Carbon Transit Operation program (LCTOP) is funded from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund aimed at providing operating and capital assistance for transit agencies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve mobility with a priority to serve disadvantaged Agenda Item 7 51 communities. The programmed LCTOP funding in Riverside County is part of the $25 million appropriation for FY 2014/15, as detailed in the state of California's 2014 Budget Act. Caltrans is the administering agency for this program, and eligible recipients include transportation planning agencies, county transportation commissions, and transit operators with allocation shares determined by formula based on population and ratio of revenue of transit operator's jurisdiction to the total operator revenues in the state. FY 2015/16 LCTOP Requested Funds Agency Amount City of Beaumont $ 665 RTA 58,822 RCTC Commuter Rail 177,166 SunLine 155,907 PVVTA 8,885 Total $ 401,445 FY 2015/16 Federal Funds Section 5307 Formula Funds The Urbanized Area Formula Section 5307 program is one of the major funding programs for public transit. Funds are appropriated annually by Congress and distributed to regions by urbanized area formula based upon population served and the amount of transit service provided. This funding provides transit capital and operating assistance to urbanized areas with a population of 50,000 or more. Under Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the use of urbanized area (UZA) formula funds has been expanded for operating expenses. Systems operating 100 or fewer buses in fixed -route service during peak service hours may now use up to 75 percent of their share of funding for operating. Previously, only urbanized areas with populations below 200,000 were eligible to use the Section 5307 funds for operating. This new program also allows up to 85 percent federal share for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant vehicles for paratransit service. Riverside County consists of four UZAs, namely: • Riverside/San Bernardino; • Hemet/San Jacinto; • Temecula/Murrieta; and • Indio/Cathedral City/Palm Springs. The Commission must develop and approve a POP for each UZA and conduct a public hearing prior to an operator submitting its Section 5307 grant application to FTA. If the draft POP is not amended through the public hearing process, the POP will become final as presented and will be included in an approved FTIP, which is subsequently forwarded to the Southern California Agenda Item 7 52 Association of Governments (SCAG) for review and processing. Attachment 3 shows the proposed Section 5307 POP for Riverside County. Section 5307 funds requested by operators are shown below: FY 2015/16 Section 5307 Requested Funds Agency Amount City of Riverside $ 400,000 RTA 19,754,251 SunLine 6,658,489 Total $ 26,812,740 The actual Section 5307 apportionments for FY 2015/16 will not be known until later this calendar year when final appropriations are made by Congress. The POP was developed at the highest anticipated funding amount based on actual available apportionments for FY 2014/15 to allow the operators to proceed with the grant applications and avoid delays associated with program amendments. Any excess funds will be carried over to the subsequent fiscal year and will be made available to cover future projects. Sections 5310 Funds — Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities The federal Section 5310 grant provides financial assistance to enhance mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities to serve their special needs beyond traditional public transit and ADA complementary paratransit. The program was modified under MAP-21 and offers additional project eligibility categories including Section 5317 (New Freedom) program activities. The expanded eligibility provisions are a result of the consolidation of the Section 5317 program, which was repealed and folded with the Section 5310 program. The program's main focus is funding mobility management activities and capital project expenses, primarily for nonprofit agencies; however, public agencies are eligible to apply for projects if the public agencies certify that no non-profit organizations are readily available to provide the services in the same area. Funds can be used to cover capital and operating expenses. RTA identified the use of Section 5310 funding to cover expenses for its ongoing travel training program. SunLine will use Section 5310 funds to procure one paratransit van and to partially fund its taxi voucher program. FY 2015/16 Section 5310 Requested Funds Agency Amount RTA $ 323,500 SunLine 121,406 Total $ 444,906 Agenda Item 7 53 Section 5311 Formula Funds The Federal Section 5311 transit funding provides formula funds to rural or non -urbanized areas in the state. The program is administered by Caltrans, and the majority of these funds are passed through to counties based on population formula. Remaining funds are awarded in a statewide discretionary program for rural capital projects and intercity bus programs. This year's program allocates $939,664 in formula funds for Riverside County. As in previous years, both RTA and SunLine identified the use of Section 5311 formula funds for operating. FY 2015/16 Section 5311 Requested Funds Agency Amount RTA $ 579,773 SunLine 359,891 Total $ 939,664 Section 5316 & 5317 Formula Funds Under the MAP-21 authorization, Federal programs Section 5316 — Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and Section 5317 — New Freedom (NF) funding were folded under the current Section 5307 and 5310 federal programs. Previous FY 2012/13 and FY 2013/14 JARC and NF funding were distributed to public and non-profit agencies through the bi-annual Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects from which RTA's grant funds were used to cover expenses for RTA's CommuterLink 212 and 217, extended fixed route services, and travel training. As of June 2015, RTA reported unprogrammed and unexpended funding allotments and is programming the remaining funds in FY 2015/16 as follows: Agency Section 5316 (JARC) Section 5317 (NF) RTA $ 70,000 $ 90,000 Total $ 70,000 $ 90,000 Section 5339 Formula Funds The FTA Section 5339 (Bus and Bus Facilities) program provides capital funding to replace, rehabilitate and purchase buses/vans and related equipment and to construct bus -related facilities. Funds can also be used to introduce new technology and safety and security items for transit systems. It is a new formula grant program under MAP-21, replacing the previous Section 5309 Bus and Bus Facilities discretionary program. The program apportions funds to urban areas by population and service factors. This year's program allocates about $2.2 million in formula funds for both RTA and city of Riverside. Agenda Item 7 54 FY 2015/16 Section 5339 Requested Funds Agency Amount RTA $ 1,980,705 City of Riverside 194,637 Total $ 2,175,342 Section 5304 Funds Section 5304 federal funds are apportioned annually to states by formula in which transit agencies can apply as a sub -recipient through the metropolitan planning organization (MPO). This program can fund statewide or urban transit planning studies that examine transit issues having statewide or multi -regional significance to assist in reducing congestion. RTA was successful in receiving an award of $171,600 under Caltrans' Statewide or Urban Transit Planning Study Grant program to solve first and last mile barriers for commuters who could potentially take transit. The study will examine four pilot locations that include the UCR/Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station, Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink Station/Moreno Valley Mall, Perris Station Transit Center Metrolink Station, and the Promenade Mall in Temecula. Results of these four case studies can be used as a template to improve multimodal accessibility for other locations throughout RTA's service area. Since most transit trips begin as an active transportation trip, the results of the study can be used to further examine improved multimodal access as well as eliminate barriers that prohibit use of public transit. FY 2015/16 Section 5304 Requested Funds Agency Amount RTA $ 171,600 Total $ 171,600 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program helps fund regional and local efforts to attain compliance with national air quality standards established in the federal Clean Air Act. These funds are largely spent on transportation control measures such as improving public transit service, traffic flow improvements, trip reduction, and other ridesharing initiatives primarily aimed at reducing air pollution emissions. Eligible activities include transit improvements, travel demand management strategies, traffic flow improvements, and public fleet conversion to cleaner fuels. These funds are distributed by SCAG to regions which conduct the project selection process according to the MPO's Regional Transportation Plan priorities. The federal share of CMAQ-eligible projects is 80 percent and funds can be used for both capital and operating assistance. Agenda Item 7 55 FY 2015/16 Section CMAQ Requested Funds Agency Amount RCTC Commuter Rail $ 4,000,000 SunLine 1,170,415 Total $ 5,170,415 Low or No Emission Vehicle Program The FTA LoNo discretionary program provides funding to facilitate the development of zero and near zero emission bus technology and related infrastructure. The program funds are intended to encourage more widespread adoption of reliable green energy buses into transit fleets giving priority consideration to buses with the lowest energy consumption and least harmful emission, including direct carbon emission. The FYs 2012/13 and 2013/14 LoNo funds were awarded on a competitive basis to transit agencies, and SunLine's project application for $9.8 million was one of the 10 selected projects around the nation. With this award, SunLine, in partnership with SCAG, will build and deploy five hydrogen electric hybrid fuel cell buses, increasing SunLine's current fleet of fuel cell buses to enable expansion of transit service in the Coachella Valley. FY 2015/16 LoNo Requested Funds Agency Amount SunLine $ 9,803,860 Total $ 9,803,860 Summary Staff recommendation is to approve the TDA and FTA funds as presented. If any additional funding revenue becomes available during the budget year, transit operators will prepare the necessary SRTP amendments, as appropriate, to identify new or expanded services and capital projects. Modifications in farebox revenues, federal grants, Measure A funding, or carryover funds may require operators to revise these services to operate within the funding limit available. Impacts related to ongoing PEPRA issues may also require operators to modify and revise their service deliveries. Fiscal Impact Funding allocations are based on the revenue estimates developed for the FY 2015/16 Commission budget. The budget adopted at its June 10, 2015 Commission meeting included $87.9 million in LTF transit operating and $13.8 million in LTF transit capital expenditures as well as $190,000 in STA transit operating and $22.3 million in STA transit capital expenditures. Agenda Item 7 56 These budgeted expenditures, which include use of prior year capital allocations, are expected to be funded by FY 2015/16 revenues, as well as available fund balances. No budget adjustments are required based on these recommended allocations. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2015/16 Amount: $82,638,366 (LTF) $ 5,554,434 (STA) Source of Funds: TDA: LTF and STA Budget Adjustment: No GLA No.: LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE Western County Bus Western County Bus 601 62 86101 P2210 $47,433,208 Western County Rail 241 62 86102 P2201 $4,432,031 Coachella Valley Bus 241 62 86102 P2202 $ 867,964 Coachella Valley Rail 601 62 97001 P2213 $19,322,900 Coachella Valley Bus 601 62 86101 P2211 $15,029,833 Palo Verde Valley 241 62 97001 P2202 $ 189,439 (Transfer Out) Palo Verde Valley 241 62 86102 P2203 $ 65,000 601 62 86101 P2212 $ 852,425 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \I--Xlivii64,34, Date: 06/12/15 Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 15-014 2) TDA Allocations (STA and LTF) 3) Section 5307 Program of Projects 4) FY 2015/16 and FY 2014/15 Operating and Capital Requests and Ridership Projections Agenda Item 7 57 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 15-014 A RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO ALLOCATE STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission is designated the regional entity responsible for the allocation of State Transit Assistance Funds within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission has examined the Short Range Transit Plans and Transportation Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, all proposed expenditures in Riverside County are in conformity with the Regional Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the level of passenger fares is sufficient for claimants to meet the fare revenue requirements of Public Utilities Code Sections 99268.2, 99268.3, 99268.4, 99268.5, and 99268.9, as applicable; and WHEREAS, the claimant is making full use of federal funds available under the Federal Transit Act; and WHEREAS, the sum of the claimant's allocations from the state transit assistance fund and from the local transportation fund does not exceed the amount the claimant is eligible to receive during the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, priority consideration has been given to claims to offset reductions in federal operating assistance and the unanticipated increase in the cost of fuel, to enhance existing public transportation services, and to meet high priority regional, countywide, or area -wide public transportation needs; and WHEREAS, the public transit operators have made a reasonable effort to implement the productivity improvements recommended pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 99244; and WHEREAS, the claimant is not precluded by any contract entered into on or after June 28, 1979, from employing part-time drivers or contracting with common carriers or persons operating under a franchise or license; and WHEREAS, operators are in full compliance with Section 18081.1 of the Vehicle Code, as required in Public Utilities Code Section 99251. 58 ATTACHMENT 1 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission to allocate State Transit Assistance Funds for FY 2015/16 as detailed in Attachment 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of July, 2015. Daryl R. Busch, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 59 ATTACHMENT Page 1 of 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUNDING FY 2015/16 TRANSIT ALLOCATIONS LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS AGENCY/APPORTIONMENT AREA ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED NON - RECOMMENDED LTF OPERATING LTF CAPITAL LTF TRANSIT ALLOCATIONS FOR OPERATING COSTS CAPITAL COSTS TOTAL COSTS LTF REVENUES FY 2015/16 FY 2015/16 FY 2015/16 City of Banning $ 1,666,675 City of Beaumont 2,266,000 City of Corona 2,349,103 Riverside Special Services 3,499,600 Riverside Transit Agency 69,079,587 $ 272,785 566,840 601,848 1,028,972 27,035,728 $ 1,939,460 2,832,840 2,950,951 4,528,572 96,115,315 $ 469,712 793,440 1,071,669 1,811,972 56,787,137 $ 1,469,748 2,039,400 1,879,282 2,716,600 39,328,178 $ 1,469,748 2,039,400 1,879,282 2,716,600 39,328,178 $ - - - - - TOTAL: WESTERN RIVERSIDE - BUS 78,860,965 29,506,173 108,367,138 60,933,930 47,433,208 47,433,208 - RCTC's Commuter Rail (Metrolink) 32,105,066 32,105,066 12,782,166 19,322,900 19,322,900 TOTAL: WESTERN RIVERSIDE - RAIL 32,105,066 - 32,105,066 12,782,166 19,322,900 19,322,900 - SunLine Transit Agency 30,794,949 25,502,013 56,296,962 41,267,129 15,029,833 15,029,833 - TOTAL: COACHELLA VALLEY - BUS 30,794,949 25,502,013 56,296,962 41,267,129 15,029,833 15,029,833 - RCTC's Rail (Coachella) 189,439 189,439 189,439 TOTAL: COACHELLA VALLEY - RAIL 189,439 - 189,439 189,439 - - Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 988,075 341,788 1,329,863 477,438 852,425 852,425 - ITOTAL: PALO VERDE VALLEY 988,075 341,788 1,329,863 477,438 852,425 852,425 - COUNTYWIDE TOTAL $ 142,938,494 $ 55,349,974 $ 198,288,468 $ 115,650,102 $ 82,638,366 $ 82,638,366 $ - 60 ATTACHMENT Page 2 of 2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUNDING FY 2015/16 TRANSIT ALLOCATIONS STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS AGENCY/APPORTIONMENT AREA ESTIMATED STA ESTIMATED STA RECOMMENDED STA STA Operating STA Capital ESTIMATED STA CARRY OVER TRANSIT ALLOCATIONS OPERATING COSTS CAPITAL COSTS FUNDS FOR FY 2015/16 FY 2015/16 FY 2015/16 City of Banning $ - $ - $ City of Beaumont 300,000 City of Corona - - Riverside Special Services - 44,200 Riverside Transit Agency - 4,087,831 - $ - 300,000 - - - 44,200 - 4,087,831 $ - $ - 300,000 - - - 44,200 - 4,087,831 TOTAL: WESTERN RIVERSIDE - BUS - 4,432,031 - 4,432,031 - 4,432,031 RCTC's Commuter Rail (Metrolink) - - - - - TOTAL: WESTERN RIVERSIDE - RAIL - - - - _ - SunLine Transit Agency - 867,964 - 867,964 - 867,964 TOTAL: COACHELLA VALLEY -BUS - 867,964 - 867,964 - 867,964 RCTC's Rail (Coachella) 189,439 - - 189,439 189,439 - TOTAL: COACHELLA VALLEY -RAIL 189,439 - 189,439 189,439 - Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency - 65,000 - 65,000 - 65,000 TOTAL: PALO VERDE VALLEY - 65,000 - 65,000 - 65,000 COUNTYWIDE TOTAL $ 189,439 $ 5,364,995 $ - $ 5,554,434 $ 189,439 $ 5,364,995 61 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 1 of 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2015/16 URBANIZED AREA: RIVERSIDE/SAN BERNARDINO Total Apportionment (Estimate based on FY14/15 Fed Register & Inter -county Allocation) Bus Rail Total Apportionment $ 11,453,930 $ 5,825,448 $ 17,279,378 Lapsing Funds (per FTA) - Carryover (Estimate) 8,906,253 5,364,310 14,270,563 Total Funds Available 20,360,183 11,189,758 31,549,941 Less Current Requests 9,288,694 - 9,288,694 Balance (Projected) $ 11,071,489 $ 11,189,758 $ 22,261,247 Sub Area Allocation Riverside, City of Riverside Transit Agency $ 400,000 8,888,694 TOTAL $ 9,288,694 TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT 1) Riverside, City of Preventive Maintenance $ 500,000 $ 400,000 Capital/Operating SCAG TOTAL: City of Riverside $ 500,000 $ 400,000 Riverside Transit Agency 2) Operating Assistance (Extended Route/CommuterLink) $ 1,590,000 $ 626,000 Operating SCAG 3) Capitalized Preventive Maintenance 6,531,250 4,500,000 Capital/Operating SCAG 4) Capital Cost of Contracting 6,906,250 1,400,000 Capital/Operating SCAG 5) Non -Revenue Vehicles - (22) Support Vehicles 546,480 437,184 Capital SCAG 6) Associated Transit Improvements 1,100,000 802,000 Capital SCAG 7) Capitalized Tire Lease 386,857 309,486 Capital SCAG 8) Facility Maintenance 1,017,530 814,024 Capital SCAG TOTAL: Riverside Transit Agency $ 18,078,367 $ 8,888,694 GRAND TOTAL $ 18,578,367 $ 9,288,694 Updated: 6/22/2015 Approved: 7/08/2015 (pending) 62 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2015/16 URBANIZED AREA: HEMET/SAN JACINTO RECIPIENT: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Total Apportionment (Estimate based on FY 14/15 Fed Register 8/12 Actuals) Apportionment Carryover (estimate) Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available Less Current Requests Balance (Projected) $ 3,137,018 3,081,651 6,218,668 4,638,747 $ 1,579,921 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 2 of 4 TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT 1) Operating Assistance $ 38,357,820 $ 1,800,000 Operating Caltrans 2) Capital Cost of Contracting 6,906,250 500,000 Capital/Operatinc Caltrans 3) Revenue Vehicles - (29) DAR-Replacement 2,713,820 2,306,747 Capital Caltrans 4) Associated Transit Improvements 1,100,000 32,000 Capital Caltrans TOTAL: $ 49,077,890 $ 4,638,747 Updated: 6/22/2015 Approved: 7/08/15 (pending) 63 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2015/16 URBANIZED AREA: INDIO/CATHEDRAL CITY/PALM SPRINGS RECIPIENT: SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Total Apportionment (Estimate based on FY 14/15 Fed Register 8/12 Actuals) Apportionment $ 4,382,730 Carryover (Estimate) 3,710,734 Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available 8,093,464 Less Current Requests 6,658,489 Balance (Projected) $ 1,434,975 NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS ATTACHMENT 3 Page 3 of 4 TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT 1) Operating Assistance $ 29,992,743 $ 3,200,000 Operating SCAG 2) Paratransit Vans - (13) Replacements 1,560,000 1,294,800 Capital SCAG 3) Transit Enhancements (25 bus shelters) 393,153 20,000 Capital SCAG 4) Refurbished Hydrogen Fueling Station 1,500,000 1,200,000 Capital SCAG 5) Information Technology System (IT) Projects 300,000 240,000 Capital SCAG 6) Replacement Service Vehicles (3 cars, 2 trucks) 200,000 160,000 Capital SCAG 7) Fixed Route Buses - (9) Replacements 5,175,000 243,689 Capital SCAG 8) Hydrogen Electric Hybrid Fuel Cell Bus - (5) 13,103,860 300,000 Capital SCAG TOTAL: $ 52,224,756 $ 6,658,489 Updated: 6/22/2015 Approved: 7/08/2015 (pending) 64 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 4 of 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FTA SECTION 5307 FY 2015/16 URBANIZED AREA: TEMECULA/MURRIETA RECIPIENT: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Total Apportionment (Estimate based on FY 14/15 Fed Register 8/12 Actuals) Apportionment $ 4,531,848 Lapsing Funds (per FTA) Carryover 3,671,099 Transfer of Funds (CMAQ) Total Funds Available 8,202,947 Less Current Requests 6,226,810 Balance (Projected) $ 1,976,137 TOTAL FEDERAL PROJECT DESIGNATED NUMBER PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AMOUNT SHARE TYPE RECIPIENT 1) Capital Cost of Contracting $ 6,906,250 $ 3,000,000 Capital/Operating SCAG 2) Revenue Vehicles - (16) COFR - Replacement 3,228,040 2,743,834 Capital SCAG 3) Associated Transit Improvements 1,100,000 46,000 Capital SCAG 4) Maintenance/Support Equipment 217,100 173,680 Capital SCAG 5) Information Systems 329,120 263,296 Capital SCAG TOTAL: $ 11,780,510 $ 6,226,810 Updated: 6/22/2015 Approved: 7/08/15 (pending) 65 ATTACHMENT 4 Comparison of FY 2015/16 & FY 2014/15 Operating & Capital Costs and Ridership Projections OPERATING CAPITAL TOTAL COST RIDERSHIP AGENCY/APPORTIONMENT AREA FY15/16 FY14/15 % Incr/Decr FY15/16 FY14/15 % Incr/Decr FY15/16 FY14/15 % Incr/Decr FY 15/16 Projection FY 14/15 Estimate % Incr/Decr City of Banning $ 1,666,675 $ 1,626,566 2.47% $ 272,785 $ 19,189 1321.57% $ 1,939,460 $ 1,645,755 17.85% 199,050 138,641 43.57% City of Beaumont 2,266,000 2,200,000 3.00% 566,840 1,361,399 -58.36% 2,832,840 3,561,399 -20.46% 227,618 219,627 3.64% City of Corona 2,349,103 2,235,422 5.09% 601,848 1,085,000 -44.53% 2,950,951 3,320,422 -11.13% 238,365 236,005 1.00% Riverside Special Services 3,499,600 3,323,825 5.29% 1,028,972 60,451 1602.16% 4,528,572 3,384,276 33.81% 190,000 183,040 3.80% Riverside Transit Agency 69,079,587 66,972,981 3.15% 27,035,728 34,356,167 -21.31% 96,115,315 101,329,148 -5.15% 10,305,607 9,826,966 4.87% Western County: Bus 78,860,965 76,358,794 3.28% 29,506,173 36,882,206 -20.00% 108,367,138 113,241,000 -4.30% 11,160,640 10,604,279 5.25% Western County: Rail 32,105,066 23,612,050 35.97% 32,105,066 23,612,050 35.97% 3,106,075 3,638,724 -14.64% WESTERN COUNTY: TOTAL (Bus & Rail) 110,966,031 99,970,844 11.00% 29,506,173 36,882,206 -20.00% 140,472,204 136,853,050 2.64% 14,266,715 14,243,003 0.17% Sun Line Transit Agency (Bus) 30,794,949 28,044,924 9.81% 25,502,013 10,057,417 153.56% 56,296,962 38,102,341 47.75% 5,143,610 4,873,159 5.55% Coachella Valley (Rail) 189,439 779,531 -75.70% 189,439 779,531 -75.70% COACHELLA VALLEY: TOTAL (Bus & Rail) 30,984,388 28,824,455 7.49% 25,502,013 10,057,417 153.56% 56,486,401 38,881,872 45.28% 5,143,610 4,873,159 5.55% Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 988,075 937,289 5.42% 341,788 442,624 -22.78% 1,329,863 1,379,913 -3.63% 50,004 46,043 8.60% PALO VERDE VALLEY: TOTAL 988,075 937,289 5.42% 341,788 442,624 -22.78% 1,329,863 1,379,913 -3.63% 50,004 46,043 8.60% TOTAL: ALL AREAS $ 142,938,494 $ 129,732,588 10.18% $ 55,349,974 $ 47,382,247 16.82% $ 198,288,468 $ 177,114,835 11.95% 19,460,329 19,162,205 1.56% Note: FY 2015/16 total cost includes $4,542,942 in sTA/5307/5316/5317 & 5339 carryover funds from prior year. 66 Riverside County Transportation Commission FY 2015/16 Funding Allocation for Riverside County Transit Services July 8, 2015 Short Range Transit Plans FY 2015/16 — FY 2017/18 iffEND Riverside (aunty Transportation Commission City of Banning Riverside Transit Agency SunLine Transit Agency Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency RCTC Rail Program [WR - Commuter Rail] [CV — Intercity Rail] 2 Riverside County FY 2015/16 Transit Funding Request M11.1`` Riverside [aunty Transportation Commission y Total Funding Request: $198 million Tr... ..g4&411. Ridership of 19.5 million OPERATING & CAPITA L COSTS INNEN Riverside County Transportation Commission EXPENSE TYPE NEC BUS SERVICE FY 14/15 FY 15/16 /Change million million RAIL SERVICE 70TAL BUS & RAIL FY 14/15 FY 15/16 % CHANGE million million Change OPERATING COST CAPITAL COST TOTAL $106.1 $110.6 4% 47.4 55.3 17% $153.5 $165.9 8% $23.6 $32.3 37% $23.6 $32.3 37% TDA (LTF & STA Funds), $88,192,800, 45% ■ Carryover Funds (STA/5307/5316/5317/533 $4,542,942 , 2 Other Revenues, $5,848,645 , 3 Passenger Fares, $23,939,509, 12% r IMMEN Riverside (aunty frmnporiation [omrissian —J Measure A, $9,325,531, 5% Federal Formula Funds (Sec 5307, 5304, 5311, 5310, 5339, 5316, 5317) & CMAQ, $35,874,667, 18% —' State Pro Ca p 1B ( p +Securit Y) & LCTOP funds, $20,760,514 ,10% Federal Discretionary Sec5312 LoNo Funds, $9,803,860 , 5 RCTC a FY 2015/16 Transit Revenue Outlook: Riverside County irnnspodotion Commission Year Measure A LTF (Transit) STA FY 2014/15 $76.0 million $16.0 million $12.9 million FY 2015/16 $77.4 million $16.3 million $13.4 million Change 1.8% 1.7% 3.3% Staff Recommendations Approve the FY 2015/16 FTA Section 5307 and 5311 POP for Riverside County; Approve the FY 2015/16 LTF and STA fund allocations for transit; Direct staff to add projects into the FTIP; Adopt Resolution No. 15-014, "Resolution of the RCTC to Allocate STA Funds"; and Approve the disbursement of $4,798,000 in LTF funds to RTA as a bridge loan due to the DOL suspension of federal funds due to PERPA issues. AGENDA ITEM 9A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Anne Mayer, Executive Director THROUGH: Budget and Implementation Committee Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Federal Transit Administration Proposed Triennial Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Goal for Federal Fiscal Years 2016-18 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt 10.8 percent as the Commission's Federal Transit Administration (FTA) proposed triennial Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) race -neutral goal for Federal Fiscal Years 2016-18 for the period October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2018; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 15-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting Its Triennial Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Goal (49 CFR Part 26) as it Applies to Funding Received Directly from the Federal Transit Administration"; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve final adjustments to the DBE race -neutral goal for FFY 2016-18 as a result of comments received during the public notice and comment period. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) under Title 49 CFR Part 26, the Commission must implement a DBE program and develop a triennial overall DBE program goal as a condition to receive a commitment for federal financial assistance from the FTA as a direct recipient. The DBE Program and Policy Statement was developed by the Commission to address this requirement and is administered by the Commission's DBE Liaison Officer, who is the Commission's Procurement Manager. This DBE program has been implemented in a wholly race -neutral fashion to conform with directives issued by the U.S. DOT related to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) decision in the Western States Paving Co. vs. Washington State Department of Transportation case. These directives prohibit any U.S. DOT recipient in the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, including the Commission, from using race -conscious contract DBE goals on DOT -assisted contracts if the recipient does not possess Agenda Item 9A 67 evidence of discrimination in its transportation contracting program. The Commission does not possess such evidence of discrimination and for this reason has implemented a wholly race - neutral DBE program. Under a wholly race -neutral DBE program, contracts let by the Commission will not include a DBE participation goal as a condition of award. Rather, in accordance with 49 CFR Part 26, the Commission performs extensive small business outreach efforts and uses other race -neutral measures when applicable. The proposed FTA triennial overall DBE Program race -neutral goal is 10.8 percent. The goal is based on the relative availability of DBE firms in the Commission's geographic market area (defined as Riverside County, Orange County, and San Bernardino County). The established market area represents where the Commission anticipates a majority of contractors and subcontractors will be located. Data to determine this relative availability was extracted from the California Unified Certification Program DBE Directory of Certified Firms and the 2013 U.S. Census Bureau County Business Pattern database. The analysis, which is attached details the methodology utilized in developing the triennial goal for anticipated Commission projects, which will be funded either in whole or in part with FTA funds. Anticipated projects include, but are not limited to: • Completion of the Riverside Layover Facility; • Addition of a third platform at the Riverside Downtown Station; and • Other track work, security, station maintenance, and siding track. Additionally, the Commission is the direct recipient of several FTA grants that will be passed - through to Metrolink. The Commission will be responsible for oversight of the Metrolink's DBE program compliance related to those funds and will enter into a memorandum of understanding with Metrolink to further define DBE roles and responsibilities. Metrolink, as a direct recipient of other FTA funds, will adopt its own DBE program when soliciting and awarding contracts that are partially or fully funded with the FTA funds passed -through by the Commission to Metrolink. The proposed overall triennial goal will undergo a public notice and comment period. The public notice has been published on the Commission's website to inform the public of the proposed goals and the rationale for setting the goal. These documents are available for inspection at the Commission office for 30 days following the date of the notice. Additionally staff published the public notice in the Press Enterprise and other minority -focused media such as La Prensa, Black Voice News, La Opinion, Asian Journal, and the Small Business Exchange. Staff has begun and will continue its consultation with minority, women, and general contractor groups; community organizations; and other officials or organizations, which could be expected to have information concerning the availability of disadvantaged and non -disadvantaged businesses, the effects of discrimination on opportunities for DBEs, and staff's efforts to establish a level playing field for the participation of DBEs. If there is compelling evidence received during the public comment period that supports a modification to the proposed Agenda Item 9A 68 overall DBE program goal, staff will make the appropriate adjustment before submitting its final overall DBE program goal to the FTA by August 1, 2015. There is no financial impact to the Commission. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 15-016 2) Draft RCTC FTA Overall DBE Goal — Setting Methodology for FFY 2016 — FFY 2018 Agenda Item 9A 69 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 15-016 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADOPTING ITS TRIENNIAL OVERALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM GOAL (49 CFR PART 26) AS IT APPLIES TO FUNDING RECEIVED DIRECTLY FROM THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) adopted a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program in 2009, as updated in 2012; WHEREAS, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a decision regarding the Washington State Department of Transportation, determined that sufficient evidence must exist to support the use of race -conscious measures on federal -aid contracts; WHEREAS, the Commission does not currently have sufficient evidence of discrimination or its effects which would support the adoption or implementation of a race -conscious DBE goal; WHEREAS, the Commission is still required, pursuant to 49 CFR Part 26, to adopt a DBE goal and implement its DBE program as applies to federal funding received by the Commission directly from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA); WHEREAS, the methodology to determine the agency's DBE goal shall be in accordance with 49 CFR Part 26; WHEREAS, the Commission is a direct recipient of FTA funds; WHEREAS, in light of the Ninth Circuit ruling and the U.S. DOT directive, and in accordance with 49 CFR Part 26, the Commission has utilized an all race -neutral methodology in calculating the Triennial Overall DBE Program goal. NOW, THEREFORE, the Commission hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1. The Commission submits its Triennial Overall DBE Program goal for Federal Fiscal Years (FFY) for the period October 1, 2015 — September 20, 2018 (FFY 2016-18). SECTION 2. The Triennial Overall DBE Program goal shall be 10.8 percent. SECTION 3. The Commission shall implement a race -neutral DBE program, and shall take affirmative steps to utilize race -neutral means of meeting its overall goal. 70 ADOPTED this 8th day of July, 2015. Daryl R. Busch, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 71 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Overall DBE Goal -Setting Methodology FFY 2016-FFY 2018 Submitted in fulfillment of: Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 26 This analysis is prepared exclusively for RCTC; it is non -transferable and is not to be duplicated. 72 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFV 2016-FFy 2018 Page 2 of 9 EMI TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. BACKGROUND 3 III. FTA-ASSISTED CONTRACTING PROGRAM FOR FFY 2016-2018 3 IV. GOAL METHODOLOGY 5 Step 1: Determination of a Base Figure (26.45) 5 Step 2: Adjusting the Base Figure 6 A. Past DBE Goal Attainments 6 B. Disparity Study 7 C. Other Available Evidence 7 V. PROPOSED OVERALL DBE GOAL 7 VI. RACE -NEUTRAL IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 8 Fostering Small Business Participation 9 VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND FACILITATION 9 73 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFY 2016-FFY 2018 Page 3 of 9 I. INTRODUCTION The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) herein sets forth its Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Goal and corresponding federally prescribed goal - setting methodology for the three-year Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) goal period of 2016-2018 (October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2018), pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 26 "Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in U.S. Department of Transportation Programs." The purpose of the DBE goal -setting process is to level the playing field so that DBEs can compete fairly for Department of Transportation - assisted contracts, however, the program must be narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law. II. BACKGROUND RCTC is a recipient of U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), funding. As a condition of receiving this assistance, RCTC signed an assurance that it will comply with FTA's DBE requirements. In accordance with Title 49 CFR Part 26 provisions: Participation by DBEs in USDOT Programs, RCTC is required to develop and submit a Triennial Overall DBE Goal for its FTA-assisted projects. RCTC herein presents its Overall DBE Goal Methodology for FFY 2016-18. III. FTA-ASSISTED CONTRACTING PROGRAM FOR FFY 2016-2018 Table 1 represents RCTC's FTA-assisted contracting program, which consists of projects considered in preparing this goal methodology. The projects, which include Construction, Professional Services and Materials/Supplies contracting opportunities, are anticipated to be awarded during the triennial period: TABLE 1 PROJECT NAME/DESCRIPTION EST. TOTAL PROJECT COST RCTC Finish Riverside Layover Facility 3,000,000 RCTC Riverside Downtown 3rd Platform/Layover 5,500,000 RCTC Follow Up Work Riverside County (Stations/Siding Track) 3,181,771 RCTC La Sierra Station Project 2,500,000 TOTAL $14,181,771 74 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFV 2016-FFy 2018 Page 4 of 9 In addition to the above listed projects, RCTC has several grants that will be reallocated to Metrolink (Southern California Regional Rail Authority). These grant projects are listed in Table 2 below. TABLE 2 PROJECT NAME/DESCRIPTION EST. TOTAL PROJECT COST Commuter Rail 5 Year Rehab 5309 Grant CA-05-0268 10,366,791 Commuter Rail Rehab Final 5309 Grant CA-05-0268 2,281,747 Commuter Rail State of Good Repair CA-54-033 11,631,985 Perris Valley Line CMAQ Operating Assistance CA-TBD 20,000,000 TOTAL $44,280,523 RCTC will be responsible for oversight of the DBE Program compliance for these projects and will execute an MOU with Metrolink to ensure it receives each semi-annual report that shows Metrolink is reporting the awards/commitments and payments made on any resulting contracts entered into with these FTA funds. RCTC will also include oversight provisions that allow it to review solicitations and resulting contracts to verify that adequate DBE Program flow down provisions are included in each document. Metrolink, as a direct recipient of other FTA funds, will adopt its own DBE Program when soliciting and awarding contracts that are partially or fully funded with the FTA funds reallocated by RCTC to Metrolink. Table 3 provides a summary of the categories of work with estimated cost breakdown for each. Categories of work are groups utilizing comparable North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes for purposes of weighting the categories of work based on the engineer's estimates. TABLE 3: CATEGORY OF WORK NAICS CODES ESTIMATED $ BY NAICS ESTIMATED NAICS % Building Inspection Services 541350 1,594,752 11.2% Engineering Services 541330 4,348,758 30.7% Environmental Consulting Services 541620 1,614,503 11.4% Landscape Architectural Services 541320 744,752 5.3% Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 237990 5,879,006 41.5% TOTAL 14,181,771 100% 75 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFY 2016-FFY 2018 Page 5 of 9 IV. GOAL METHODOLOGY Step 1: Determination of a Base Figure (26.45)1 To establish RCTC's Base Figure of the relative availability of DBEs to all comparable firms (DBE and Non -DBE) available to bid or propose on RCTC's FTA-assisted contracting opportunities projected to be solicited during the triennial goal period, RCTC followed the prescribed federal methodology to determine relative availability. This was accomplished by assessing the California Unified Certification Program (CUCP) DBE Database of Certified Firms and the 2013 U.S. Census Bureau County Business Patterns Database within RCTC's market area (defined as Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties) for each of the categories of work defined in Table 2. RCTC's local market area consists of the geographic area where a substantial majority of contracting dollars are expended and/or where the substantial majority of contractor and subcontractor bids or quotes are located. RCTC's bidder's list (compiled from the FTA-assisted Perris Valley Line project) was reviewed and it confirms this market area. In accordance with the formula below, the Base Figure is derived by dividing the number of ready, willing and able DBE firms identified for each work category by the number of all firms identified for each corresponding work category (relative availability), weighting the relative availability for each work category by the corresponding work category weight from Table 2 (weighted ratio), and adding the weighted ratio figures together. N Base Figure - X (Number of Ready,Willing and Able DBEs) X weight x 100 Number of All Ready,Willing and Able Firms b For the numerator: CUCP DBE Database of Certified Firms b For the denominator: 2013 U.S. Census Bureau's Business Patterns Database A concerted effort was made to ensure that the scope of businesses included in the numerator was as close as possible to the scope included in the denominator. The result of the Base Figure calculation is shown in Table 4 as follows: 26.45 represents Title 49 CFR Part 26 regulatory goal setting methodology reference. 76 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFV 2016-FFy 2018 Page 6 of 9 CD TABLE 4 CATEGORY OF WORK CATEGORY DBES ALL WEIGHTED WEIGHT FIRMS RATIO Building Inspection Services 11.2% 9 210 0.5 % Engineering Services 30.7% 86 1,553 1.7% Environmental Consulting Services 11.4 % 54 246 2.5 % Landscape Architectural Services 5.3 % 7 162 0.2 % Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 41.4% 21 88 9.9 % Base Figure (i.e., Sum of Weighted Ratios for all Work Categories) 14.8 % Step 2: Adjusting the Base Figure Upon establishing the Base Figure, RCTC reviewed and assessed other known evidence potentially impacting the relative availability of DBEs within the market area, in accordance with prescribed narrow tailoring provisions set forth under 49 CFR Part 26.45: Step 2; DBE Goal Adjustment guidelines. Evidence considered in making an adjustment to the Base Figure included Past DBE Goal Attainments and Other Evidence, as follows: A. Past DBE Goal Attainments As historical DBE participation attainments provide demonstrable evidence of DBE availability and capacity to perform, RCTC proceeded to calculate past DBE participation attainments for the three (3) federal fiscal years, for which DBE attainment data is available. The table below reflects the demonstrated capacity of DBEs (measured by actual historical DBE participation attainments) on FTA-assisted contracts awarded by RCTC within the last three (3) federal fiscal years. TABLE 5 FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR FTA DBE PARTICIPATION % 2012/2013 0.0% 2013/2014 6.86% 2014/20152 8.56% Median DBE Participation Within the Last Three (3) Years 6.86% 2 Through March 31, 2015. 77 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFY 2016-FFY 2018 Page 7 of 9 The median participation for the past three years is lower than the Base Figure derived from Step 1; therefore, an adjustment to the Base Figure based on RCTC's past DBE goal attainments has been made. The adjustment is calculated by averaging the Base Figure with the median DBE Past Attainment, as shown below. Base Figure (A) 14.80 % Median DBE Attainment (B) 6.86% Adjusted Base Figure [(A+B)/2] 10.8% B. Disparity Study RCTC has not conducted a disparity study nor does it possess evidence on hand of discrimination in its transportation contracting program. RCTC has considered the use of other disparity studies, including the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the San Diego — Imperial County disparity studies in this goal setting process, however, has declined to apply these results here since the nature of procurements covered under these other studies include significantly different projects and market areas from the projects anticipated during this triennial period. For this reason, RCTC will not be making an adjustment to the base figure using evidence from the other disparity studies. RCTC will consider undergoing its own disparity study should additional FTA-funded projects be identified in the future. C. Other Available Evidence RCTC is not in possession of other information that would have an impact on the DBE goal assessment. V. PROPOSED OVERALL DBE GOAL The Final Proposed Overall DBE Goal for FFY 2016-2018 for RCTC's FTA-assisted contracts is 10.8%. As a part of the prescribed goal -setting methodology, RCTC must project the percentage of its Proposed Overall DBE Goal that can be met utilizing race -neutral and race -conscious measures. Race -Conscious & Race -Neutral Projection RCTC operates a strictly race -neutral FTA DBE program. RCTC intends to continue to use race - neutral methods to meet the overall DBE goal of 10.8% for FFY 2016-2018 in accordance with Title 49 CFR Part 26.51. 78 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFY 2016-FFY 2018 Page 8 of 9 RACE -CONSCIOUS & RACE -NEUTRAL PROJECTIONS DBE Adjusted Base Figure 10.8 Race -Conscious Component 0.0 Race -Neutral Component 10.8 VI. RACE -NEUTRAL IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES RCTC is currently implementing a number of race- and gender -neutral remedies to outreach and promote the participation of DBEs and small businesses in RCTC's FTA-assisted contracting program. RCTC plans to continue or implement the following race -neutral measures for FFY 2016-2018 and will continue to explore other options for consideration based on RCTC's success in meeting its overall DBE goals based on these efforts: • RCTC will structure and present solicitations and schedules in ways that facilitate DBE and other small business participation with prospective prime contractors. RCTC will also participate in Small Business conferences, which may include a networking component to promote teaming opportunities between prospective prime contractors and the DBE and Small Business contracting community. • RCTC will provide assistance to Small Business including DBEs in overcoming limitations such as inability to obtain bonding or financing RCTC will additionally refer the DBE and Small Business contracting community to the SBA Bonding Assistance Program. • RCTC will carry out a communications effort to inform DBEs and other Small Businesses of opportunities that may be available. • RCTC will actively promote Small Business conferences, programs and supportive services currently offered by peer agencies which have mature DBE and Small Business Programs and are seeking increased DBE and Small Business participation in their programs as a supportive service to help develop and improve immediate and long-term business management, record keeping, and financial and accounting capability for DBEs and other small businesses. • RCTC will advise contractors to the online directory of certified DBEs, found at the California Unified Certification Program website: www.CaliforniaUCP.org • Advising the DBE and small business community to participate in Caltrans' DBE Supportive Services Program, which offers free training classes and one-on-one technical assistance. 79 RCTC FTA DBE Goal Methodology FFY 2016-FFY 2018 Page 9 of 9 Fostering Small Business Participation RCTC has implemented several strategies to foster small business participation in its contracting process. These include the following: • In multi -year design -build contracts or other large contracts (e.g., for "megaprojects") requiring bidders on the prime contract to specify elements of the contract or specific subcontracts that are of a size that small businesses, including DBEs, can reasonably perform. • On larger prime contracts encouraging the prime contractor to consider subcontracting opportunities of a size that small businesses, including DBEs, can reasonably perform, rather than self -performing all the work involved. • Identifying alternative acquisition strategies and structuring procurements to facilitate the ability of consortia or joint ventures consisting of small businesses, including DBEs, to compete for and perform prime contracts. • Ensuring that a reasonable number of prime contracts are of a size that small businesses, including DBEs, can reasonably perform. • Provide outreach to current RCTC contractors or past RCTC contractors who may qualify for DBE -certification by encouraging them to seek and obtain DBE -certification. VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND FACILITATION In accordance with Public Participation Regulatory Requirements of Title 49 CFR Part 26, minority, women, local business associations, and community organizations within the market area will be consulted and provided an opportunity to review the triennial goal analysis and provide input. RCTC plans to issue a Public Notice on the RCTC website publishing the Draft Proposed FTA Overall DBE Goal -Setting Methodology for FFY 2016-2018. The notice will inform the public that the proposed goal and rationale are available for inspection at RCTC's principal office during normal business hours for 30 days following the date of the Public Notice, and that RCTC will accept comments on the goal analysis for 30 days from the date of the Public Notice. RCTC will give full consideration to all comments and input received as a part of this process and will assess its impact on the goal -setting methodology. 80 AGENDA ITEM 9B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Eric De Hate, Staff Analyst Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2016-20 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans for Local Streets and Roads BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the Fiscal Years 2016-20 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) for Local Streets and Roads (LSR) as submitted. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A provides member agencies with local funding for street maintenance and operations, street repairs, street improvements, and new infrastructure of their local streets and roads systems. Since the commencement of the 2009 Measure A, the cities and the county of Riverside received over $237 million from July 1, 2009 to March 31, 2015. Measure A imposes several requirements on local agencies in order to receive LSR funds. First, the Coachella Valley and Western County cities and the county must participate in either the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) or Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. Western County agencies must also participate in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) managed by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA). Staff received confirmations from WRCOG and CVAG for the respective TUMF program and from RCA for the Western County MSHCP. The certification from WRCOG for the Western County TUMF program states all member cities are in compliance with the exception of the city of Lake Elsinore due to an issue identified in the annual TUMF audit; both agencies are working to resolve the matter. Additionally, agencies are required to annually provide to the Commission a project status report for the prior year CIP, a five-year CIP detailing how the Measure A funds are to be expended, and an annual certification of maintenance of effort. On February 6, 2015, staff provided the local agencies with a five-year Measure A revenue projection for LSR to assist in preparation of the required CIP, and this revenue projection is Agenda Item 9B 81 attached. The required CIPs and supporting documentation have been received from all of the local agencies and have been reviewed by staff to ensure compliance with Measure A requirements. The FY 2015/16 Measure A LSR disbursements to eligible local agencies with Commission - approved CIPs are expected to commence in September 2015. Staff will obtain an update from WRCOG regarding the city of Lake Elsinore's compliance status before releasing the first FY 2015/16 Measure A distribution in September 2015. Attachments: 1) Measure A Fiscal Year 2016-20 LSR Revenue Projections 2) FYs 2016-20 Measure A Five -Year CIPs — Posted on Commission Website Agenda Item 9B 82 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A PROGRAM ALLOCATION (PROJECTION) FY 2014/15 (revised) FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 FY 2017/18 FY 2018/19 FY 2019/20 Western County BANNING $ 530,000 $ 535,000 $ 546,000 $ 557,000 $ 574,000 $ 591,000 BEAUMONT' CALI M ESA 149,000 152,000 155,000 158,000 163,000 168,000 CANYON LAKE 169,000 172,000 175,000 179,000 184,000 190,000 CORONA 3,707,000 3,776,000 3,852,000 3,929,000 4,047,000 4,168,000 EASTVALE 1,088,000 1,141,000 1,164,000 1,187,000 1,223,000 1,260,000 HEMET 1,611,000 1,634,000 1,667,000 1,700,000 1,751,000 1,804,000 JURUPA VALLEY 1,802,000 1,830,000 1,867,000 1,904,000 1,961,000 2,020,000 LAKE ELSINORE 1,137,000 1,159,000 1,182,000 1,206,000 1,242,000 1,279,000 M EN I FEE 1,438,000 1,476,000 1,506,000 1,536,000 1,582,000 1,629,000 MORENO VALLEY 3,586,000 3,611,000 3,683,000 3,757,000 3,870,000 3,986,000 MURRIETA 2,065,000 2,114,000 2,156,000 2,199,000 2,265,000 2,333,000 NORCO 599,000 607,000 619,000 631,000 650,000 670,000 PERRI S 1,353,000 1,416,000 1,444,000 1,473,000 1,517,000 1,563,000 RIVERSIDE 6,655,000 6,797,000 6,933,000 7,072,000 7,284,000 7,503,000 SAN JACINTO 718,000 782,000 798,000 814,000 838,000 863,000 TEMECULA 2,744,000 2,747,000 2,802,000 2,858,000 2,944,000 3,032,000 WILDOMAR 555,000 565,000 576,000 588,000 606,000 624,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 5,112,000 5,238,000 5,343,000 5,450,000 5,614,000 5,782,000 RCTC Regional Arterial' 751,000 772,000 787,000 803,000 827,000 852,000 SUBTOTAL -Western County 35,769,000 36,524,000 37,255,000 38,001,000 39,142,000 40,317,000 Coachella Valley CATHEDRAL CITY 1,401,000 1,427,000 1,456,000 1,485,000 1,530,000 1,576,000 COACHELLA 629,000 627,000 640,000 653,000 673,000 693,000 DESERT HOT SPRINGS 494,000 498,000 508,000 518,000 534,000 550,000 INDIAN WELLS 244,000 253,000 258,000 263,000 271,000 279,000 INDIO 1,716,000 1,796,000 1,832,000 1,869,000 1,925,000 1,983,000 LA QUINTAz 1,509,000 1,499,000 1,529,000 1,560,000 1,607,000 1,655,000 PALM DESERT 2,718,000 2,686,000 2,740,000 2,795,000 2,879,000 2,965,000 PALM SPRINGS 2,048,000 2,035,000 2,076,000 2,118,000 2,182,000 2,247,000 RANCHO MIRAGE 876,000 871,000 888,000 906,000 933,000 961,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 2,007,000 2,071,000 2,112,000 2,154,000 2,219,000 2,286,000 CVAG2 - - - SUBTOTAL -Coachella Valley 13,642,000 13,763,000 14,039,000 14,321,000 14,753,000 15,195,000 Palo Verde Valley BLYTHE 973,000 928,000 947,000 966,000 995,000 1,025,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 249,000 236,000 241,000 246,000 253,000 261,000 SUBTOTAL -Palo Verde Valley 1,222,000 1,164,000 1,188,000 1,212,000 1,248,000 1,286,000 TOTAL $ 50,633,000 $ 51,451,000 $ 52,482,000 $ 53,534,000 $ 55,143,000 $ 56,798,000 ' Beaumont is not eligible for Measure A local streets and roads funds and its share is allocated to the Western County Measure A Regional Arterial fund. 2 Under an agreement between CVAG and La Quinta, CVAG receives 50% of La Quinta's allocation and La Quinta the remaining 50% until such time La Quinta has reimbursed CVAG for TUMF fees CVAG would have received from La Quinta if La Quinta had joined the TUMF program when the TUMF was established. Note: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change and rounding differences. 83 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF BANNING FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 STAGECOACH TOWN USA Proust History-Proeperoue Tomorrow May 7, 2015 City of Banning Public Works Department IIECEOVE-1 MAY 08 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Grace Alvarez, Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: Five -Year Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plan Dear Ms. Alvarez: The City of Banning respectfully submits its Five -Year Measure "A" Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2015/2016 — 2019/2020 as approved by the City Council during its regular meeting on April 14, 2015. Also enclosed with this letter you will find the City's MOE Certification Statement, Project Status Report for FY 2014/2015 along with a certified copy of the Resolution approving the Five -Year Measure "A" CIP Plan. Please note that the Project Status Report for projects listed in the FY 2014/2015 CIP have been revised to add Project No. 2014-05. Additionally, Ramsey Street from San Gorgonio Avenue to 4th Street (AC Overlay) has replaced Lincoln Street from San Gorgonio Avenue to Hargrave Street (AC Overlay). Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at (951) 922-3130. Sincerely, Art Vela, P.E. Acting Director of Public Works Copy: File Enc. Certified Resolution Five -Year Measure "A" Plan Project Status Report MOE Certification Statement 99 E. Ramsey St. • P.O. Box 998 • Banning, CA 92220-0998 • (951) 922-3130 • Fax (951) 922-3141 FY 2015/2016 MEASURE A PROGRAM MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the CITY OF BANNING (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Measure "A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's 1 Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $164,325.00, approved by the Commission at its July 11, 2012 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary Local Funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure "A" funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: k%D�� L /S , 2015 - r... Ore James ' Smith �F Attest: City Manager L-/-72ate. &d.ide(dn City Clerk RESOLUTION NO.2015-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE MEASURE "A" FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, in 1988, Riverside County voters approved a 0.5% sales tax (Measure "A") over a 20-year span to be used toward improvements of state highways, local transit systems, and public streets; and WHEREAS, in 2002, Riverside County voters approved a 30-year extension of the Measure "A" 0.5% sales tax; and WHEREAS, each City in Riverside County is required by the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") to submit a Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (attached as Exhibit "A"), as approved by its governing board, to indicate how Measure "A" funding is to be utilized over the next five years; and WHEREAS, the RCTC has estimated that the City of Banning will receive a total of $2,803,000.00 in Measure "A" funds over the next five years; and WHEREAS, the program is intended to support local transit systems, street pavement rehabilitation and public street improvements; and WHEREAS, the Measure "A" Ordinance requires annual certification that discretionary General Fund expenditures for transportation -related construction and maintenance activities for Fiscal Year 2015/2016 will meet or exceed the Maintenance of Effort Certification ("MOE") base year amount and commitment to expending Measure "A" funds to projects identified in the city's Five Year CIP; and WHEREAS, the priority list of street locations can be changed by the City Council by submitting a written request to RCTC. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Banning as follows: SECTION 1. City Council adopts Resolution No. 2015-24, "Approving the Measure `A' Five Year Capital Improvement Plan." SECTION 2. The City Manager is authorized to execute the Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement. Reso. No. 2015-24 I PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of April, 2015. ATTEST:) / /2 ;L__ Marie A.. Calderon, City Clerk City of Banning APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALSOINT Lona N. L,ay n, Assistant City Attorney Aleshir ynder, LLP Reso. No. 2015-24 2 42thihttl4,A6Alex Deborah Franklin, Mayor CERTIFIED TO BE A TIME AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. L/ ;29,1/i& 6,6414(2,/t-- BY TITLE C� C b• DATE CERTIFICATION: I, Marie A. Calderon, City Clerk of the City of Banning, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2015-24, was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Banning, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of April, 2015, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmembers Miller, Moyer, Peterson, Welch, Mayor Franklin NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Reso. No. 2015-24 3 Marie A. Calderon, City Clerk City of Banning, California RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY2014/2015 Agency: City of Banning Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Arturo Vela, P.E. Phone #: 951.922-3130 Date: 6-4-15 Item No, Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status S 2014-15. Sidewalk Repairs at SNV Improvements $70,170.50 $70,170.50 Completed Various Locations 2 Cherry Street: Hoffer Street to AG Overlay $120,000.00 S120,000.00 9/1/2015 Scheduled to bid in George Street May, 2015. 3 Ramsey Street: San Gorgonio AC Overlay $300,000.00 $300,000.00 9/1/2015 Scheduled to bid in Avenue to 4th Street May, 2015. .i City Wide Slurry Seal Slurry Seal $110,000.00 $110,000.00 9/1/2015 Scheduled to bid in May, 2015. TOTALS $600,170.50 $600,170.50 Agency: City Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Phone #: 951 Date: 6-4-15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015/2016 of Banning Arturo Vela, P.E. -922-3130 c� Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015/2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015/2016 Projects: FY 2015/2016 $1,511,191.50 $535, 000.00 $2,046,191.50 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Nicolet Street: Sims Street to Sunset AC Overlay $310,000.00 $310,000.00 Avenue 2 FTIP: Ramsey Street: Hargrave Street to Street Rehabilitation $477,000.00 $295,000.00 East City Limits 3 Feasibility Study: Lincoln Street - Sunset Planning $75,000.00 $75,000.00 Ave to Highland Home Road TOTALS $680,000.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016/2017 Agency: City of Banning Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: Arturo Vela, P.E. Phone #: 951-922-3130 Date: 6-4-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016/2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016/2017 Projects: FY 2016/2017 $1,366,191.50 $546,000.00 $1,912,191.50 c� Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 2 3 4 Theodore Street: Alessandro Road to Almond Way 8th Street: Lincoln Street to Westward Avenue Charles Street: Hargrave Street to 1037 E. Charles Street Wesley Street: Hargrave Street to 1041 E. Wesley Street AC Overlay AC Overlay AC Overlay AC Overlay TOTALS $166,000.00 $180,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $166,000.00 $180,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $546,000.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017/2018 Agency: City of Banning Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Arturo Vela, P.E. Phone #: 951-922-3130 Date: 6-4-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017/2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017/2018 Projects: FY 2017/2018 $1,366,191.50 $557,000.00 !� $1,923,191.50 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Cottonwood Road: 8th Street to 12th Street AC Overlay $100,000.00 $100,000.00 2 George Street: 8th Street to 12th Street AC Overlay $100,000.00 $100,000.00 3 10th Street: Williams Street to George Street AC Overlay $115,000.00 $115,000.00 4 12th Street Williams Street to George Street AC Overlay $122,000.00 $122,000.00 5 14th Street: Williams Street to George Street AC Overlay $120,000.00 $120,000.00 TOTALS $557,000.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018/2019 Agency: City of Banning Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Arturo Vela, P.E. Phone #: 951-922-3130 Date: 6-4-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018/2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018/2019 Projects: FY 2018/2019 $1,366,191.50 $574, 000.00 $1,940,191.50 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Lincoln Street: Highland Home Road to Sunset Avenue New Construction $1,325,384.77 $1,325,384.77 TOTALS $1,325,384.77 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019/2020 Agency: City of Banning Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Arturo Vela, P.E. Phone #: 951-922-3130 Date: 6-4-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019/2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019/2020 Projects: FY 2019/2020 $614,806.73 $591,000.00 $1,205,806.73 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Indian School Lane: 8th Street to San AC Overlay $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Gorgonio Avenue 2 Lincoln Street: San Gorgonio Avenue to AC Overlay $300,000.00 $300,000.00 Hargrave Street 3 City Wide Slurry Seal Slurry Seal $91,000.00 $91,000.00 TOTALS $591,000.00 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF BLYTHE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY OF BLYTHE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 440 SOUTH MAIN STREET BLYTHE, CALIFORNIA 92225-2717 PHONE (760) 922-6611 FAX (760) 922-0278 May 28, 2015 Grace Alvarez Planning and Programming Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92505-2208 Subject: City of Blythe Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2015/16. Dear Ms. Alvarez, Enclosed please find the City of Blythe Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan (C1P) for Fiscal Year 2015/2016, Maintenance of Efforts Certification FY 2015/2016, and Project Status Report for C1P FY 2014/2015. The submittal for FY 2015/2016 incorporates a balance carried over from the 2012 and 2014 Sta IY nsportation Improvement Program trade for local Measure A funds. Si Armando Baldizzo , P.E. Director of Public arks, City of1Mythe Enclosures FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Blythe (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $520,192, approved by the Commission at its July 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: S /i1 /1 S- , 2015 CITY MAN GER ATTEST: tJ.even ``-, j a� SECRETARY ATTACHMENT D 'SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT' RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY2014-2015 Agency: City of Blythe Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Armando Baldizzone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: May 11, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 1998/15 Wheelchair Ramps (ADA) (25,000/yr) i/ Construction $100 $0 June 2016 80% completed 2 2014/15 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project i% Construction $100 $0 June 2015 Annual improvements 3 2014/15 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements v Construction $50 $0 June 2015 Annual improvements 4 2014/15 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal ,i% Construction $100 $0 June 2015 Annual project 5 2013/16 Hobsonway Reconstruction/Engineering (Phase 4) - Riviera t✓ Engineering $529 $50 November 2014 Completed 6 2014/15 Administrative Overhead 1./ Administrative Overhead $78 $78 June 2015 Annual admin charges 7 2014/15 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) ✓ Construction $100 $45 June 2015 Annual Stock Material 8 2009/19 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment (Debt Service) ✓ Debt Payment $240 $215 Sept 2019 Last payment due Sept 2019 9 2014/15 N Solano Avenue from Hobsonway to W Chanslor Way .". Engineering $51 $51 April 2015 completed 10 2014/15 N Solano Avenue from Hobsonway to W Chanslor Way ✓ Construction $680 $680 July 2015 In construction 11 2014/15 E Barnard St. from 2nd St to Birch St. , Engineering $48 $48 Sept 2015 In progress 30% completed 12 2014/15 W. Rice St. from S. Willow Ave. to S. Lovekin Blvd. ✓ Engineering $21 $21 Sept 2015 In progress 30% completed 13 2014/15 14TH Ave. from Lovekin Blvd to Braodway ✓ Engineering $42 $42 Sept 2015 In progress 30% completed 14 2014/15 Broadway from 14TH Ave. to Hobsonway ✓ Engineering $58 $58 Sept 2015 In progress 30% completed 15 2014/15 7th St. from Bamard St to Chanslorway ,/ Engineering $26 $26 Sept 2015 In progress 30% completed TOTALS $2,223 $1,314 / Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) STIP Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status _ 16 _ 2004/15 Hobsonway/CVAG Loan Payment (Phase 1) (STIP Trade) Debt Payment $2,100 $180 November2014 Completed Agency: City of Blythe Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Armando Baldizzone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: May 11, 2015 CITY OF BLYTHE FIVE-YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $3,123, 244 $928,000 $4,051,244 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 1 Wheelchair Ramps (ADA) (25,000/yr) Construction and Repair of wheel chair ramps $25,000 $25,000 2 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project Grind and ovelay, curb gutter and sidewalks $100,000 $50,000 3 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements Grind and overlay on alleys $50,000 $50,000 4 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal Preventive maintenance $100,000 $50,000 5 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance $100,000 $50,000 6 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Service (2009/2019) $215,300 $215,300 7 E Barnard St. from 2nd Street to Birch Street Major reconstruction surface treatment $771,600 $771,600 8 Traffic Signal Rehabilitation (various locations) $50,000 $50,000 9 Administrative Overhead $74,240 $74,240 TOTALS $1,336,140 Estimated Prior Year STIP Trade Balance: $925,822 Estimated FY 2012 STIP Allocation: Estimated FY 2014 STIP Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015/16 Projects: $925,822 $0 $0 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost STIP Trade Funds 2015-2016 10 N Broadway From Juniper Trail to 10the Ave Grind and Overlay (STIP Trade) $323,700 $161,850 11 W Rice Street from S Willow Ave to S Lovekin Blvd Major reconstruction, curb and gutter, sidewalk and ADA ramps (STIP Trade) $195,000 $195,000 TOTALS $356,850 Agency: City of Blythe Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Armando Baldizzone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: May 11, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016-2017 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $2,715,104 $947,000 $3,662,104 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 1 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project Grind and ovelay, curb gutter and sidewalks $150,000 $100,000 2 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements Grind and overlay on alleys $100,000 $100,000 3 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal Preventive maintenance $100,000 $100,000 4 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance $100,000 $100,000 5 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Service (2009/2019) $215,200 $215,200 6 14TH Ave. from Lovekin Blvd to Braodway Major reconstruction, surface treatment $440,400 $440,400 7 Traffic Signal Rehabilitation (various locations) $50,000 $50,000 8 Administrative Overhead $75,760 $75,760 TOTALS $1,181,360 Estimated Prior Year STIP Trade Balance: Estimated FY 2012 STIP Allocation: Estimated FY 2014 STIP Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016/17 Projects: $568,972 $568,972 ,/ $0 $0 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost STIP Trade Funds 2016-2017 Broadway from 14TH Ave. to Hobsonway (Phase 1 of 2) Major reconstruction, surface treatment (STIP Trade) $342,000 $342,000 9 TOTALS $342,000 Agency: City of Blythe Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Armando Baldizzone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: May 11, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $2,480,744 $966,000 $3,446,744 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project Grind and ovelay, curb gutter and sidewalks $150,000 $50,000 2 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements Grind and overlay on alleys $100,000 $50,000 3 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal Preventive maintenance $100,000 $50,000 4 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance $150,000 $100,000 5 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Service (2009/2019) $215,200 $215,200 6 Broadway from 14TH Ave. to Hobsonway (Phase 2 of 2) Major reconstruction, surface treatment $798,000 $798,000 7 7rh Street from Barnard Street to Chanslorway Major reconstruction, surface treatment $260,400 $33,428 8 Traffic Signal Rehabilitation (various locations) $200,000 $200,000 g Administrative Overhead $77,280 $77,280 TOTALS $1,573,908 Estimated Prior Year STIP Trade Balance: $226,972 Estimated FY 2012 STIP Allocation: $0 Estimated FY 2014 STIP Allocation: $0 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016/17 Projects: $226,972 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost STIP Trade Funds 2017-2018 7h Street from Barnard Street to Chanslorway Major reconstruction, surface treatment (STIP Trade) $260,400 $226,972 10 TOTALS $226,972 Agency: City of Blythe Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Armando Baldizzone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: May 11, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018.2019 Projects: $1,872,836 $995,000 $2,867,836 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project Grind and ovelay, curb gutter and sidewalks $150,000 $50,000 2 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements Grind and overlay on alleys $100,000 $50,000 3 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal Preventive maintenance $100,000 $60,000 4 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance $150,000 $60,000 5 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Service (2009/2019) $215,200 $215,200 Hobsonway from Sparklin Lagoon to the City Limits 7 (Phase1 of 3) Major reconstruction, surface treatment $2,376,000 $792,000 8 Administrative Overhead $79,600 $79,600 TOTALS $1,306,800 C1 Agency: City of Blythe Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Armando Baldizzone Phone #: (760) 922-6611 Date: May 11, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $1,561,036 $1, 025, 000 $2,586,036 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 1 Combined Streets Annual Improvement Project Grind and ovelay, curb gutter and sidewalks $150,000 $50,000 2 Alleyway Improvements/Annual Improvements Grind and overlay on alleys $100,000 $50,000 3 Fog, Chip & Slurry Seal Preventive maintenance $100,000 $60,000 4 Asphalt Emulsion Oil/Base Material (Annual Stock) Pot hole repairs/street maintenance $150,000 $60,000 5 Lovekin/Chanslorway Loan Advance Payment Debt Service (2009/2019) $215,200 $215,200 6 Hobsonway from Sparklin Lagoon to the City Limits (Phase2 of 3) Major reconstruction, surface treatment $2,376,000 $792,000 7 Administrative Overhead $82,000 $82,000 TOTALS $1,309,200 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF CALIMESA FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 City of Calimesa May 7, 2015 Grace Alvarez Riverside County Transportation Commission Planning and Programming Manager 4080 Lemon St., 31-d Floor Riverside, Ca 92501 Re: City of Calimesa Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2016-2020 Dear Ms. Alvarez: Enclosed please find the City of Calimesa Measure A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Fiscal Years 2016-2020, Maintenance of Effort Certification for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and the Project Status Report for Fiscal Year 2014-15. Please let me know if you should have any questions. Sincer Z4 Bonnie ]ohnso Assistant City Manager/Finance Director 908 Park Avenue • Calimesa, California 92320 • (909) 795-9801 FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of Calimesa (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,401, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: May 7, 2015 RANDY ANSTINE, CITY MANAGER CITY OF CALIMESA FIVE-YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Calimesa Page of 1 of 6 Prepared by: Bob French, Public Works Director Phone #: (909) 795-9801 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $1,158,725 $152,000 $1,310,725 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 2062 SR2S - 2nd St. and Avenue L (adjusted to include roundabout @ 2nd St.) Pedestrian Improvements 1,878,697 778,997 2076 Desert Lawn Drive (Cherry Valley to Desert Lawn Cemetery) Pavement Rehabilitation 290,000 145,000 2068 Citywide Slurry Seal Pavement Rehabilitation 100,000 100,000 2078 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehabilitation 125,000 125,000 2010 Citywide Pavement Striping Pavement Rehabilitation 50,000 50,000 0000 Indirect Costs - Administration Indirect Costs 12,160 12,160 TOTALS 2,455,857 1,211,157 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Calimesa Page of 2 of 6 Prepared by: Bob French, Public Works Director Phone #: (909) 795-9801 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 99,568 ;. 155,000 254,568 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 2078 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehabilitation 200,000 200,000 0000 Indirect Costs - Administration Indirect Costs 12,400 12,400 TOTALS 212,400 212,400 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Calimesa Page of 3 of 6 Prepared by: Bob French, Public Works Director Phone #: (909) 795-9801 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 42,168 158,000 200,168 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 2078 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehabilitation 150,000 150,000 0000 Indirect Costs - Administration Indirect Costs 12,640 12,640 TOTALS 162,640 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Calimesa Page of 4 of 6 Prepared by: Bob French, Public Works Director Phone #: (909) 795-9801 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 37,528 163,000 200,528 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 2078 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehabilitation 150,000 150,000 0000 Indirect Costs - Administration Indirect Costs 13,040 13,040 TOTALS 163,040 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Calimesa Page of 5 of 6 Prepared by: Bob French, Public Works Director Phone #: (909) 795-9801 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 37,488 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: 168,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 205,488 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 2078 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehabilitation 150,000 150,000 0000 Indirect Costs - Administration Indirect Costs 13,440 13,440 TOTALS 163,440 ATTACHMENT D **SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Calimesa Page of 6 of 6 Prepared by: Bob French, Public Works Director Phone #: (909) 795-9801 Date: May 11, 2015 Item Total Cost Measure A Estimated No. Project Name / Limits Project Type ($000's) Funds ($000's) Completion Status 2014-2015 2062 SR2S - 2nd St. and Avenue L Pedestrian Improvements $ 1,298,697 $ - November 2015 Contract Awarded 2076 Desert Lawn Dr (Cherry Valley to Desert Lawn Cemetery) Pavement Rehabilitation $ 290,000 $ 145,000 August 2015 Contract Awarded 2065 Donna Lane - Avenue L to Myrtiewood Pavement Rehabilitation $ 5,000 $ 5,000 N/A Project deferred 0000 Indirect Costs - administration Indirect Costs 11,920 11,920 June 30, 2015 Completed TOTALS $ 1,605,617 $ 161,920 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF CANYON LAKE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY OF CANYON LAKE COVER LETTER TO: FROM: Grace Alvarez Ilkfiiefk Gomez COMPANY: DATE: RCTC 5/11/2015 FAX NUMBER: (951) 787-7920 TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: PHONE NUMBER: (951) 787-7141 SENDER'S EMAIL: Accountant@cityofcanyonhke..com RE: SENDER'S PHONE: SENDER'S FAX: Measure A 951-244-2955 951-246-2022 ❑ URGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY ❑ PLEASE RECYCLE NOTES/COMMENTS: Transmitting the CIP FY 2016 through 2020, Maintenance of Effort Certification, and Project Status Report for FY 2014/15 31516 RAILROAD CANYON ROAD CANYON LAKE, CA 92587 951-244-2955 951-246-2022 FAX FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for City of Canyon Lake (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $28,873 approved by the commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure "A" funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 1061 , 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Canyon Lake Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #' (951) 943-6504 Date: February. 25, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015..2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $218,000 / $172,000 / $390,000 7.. item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 1 Debt Service for Measure "A" Loan 84 84 2 Debt Service to County 53 53 3 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab. Signal 120 97 Maint Landscaping, Lighting & Signage Improvements TOTALS 257 234 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Canyon Lake Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: February 25, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016.2017 Projects: $156,000 $175,000 $331,000 / Item No, Project Name (Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2017 1 Debt Service for Measure "A" Loan 84 84 2 Debt Service to County 58 58 3 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal 250 175 Maint. Landscaping, Lighting & Signage Improvements. TOTALS 392 317 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Canyon Lake Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: February 25, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $14,000 $179,000 ✓ $193,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type i otai t.,ost ($000's) measure A Funds ($000's) 2017-2018 1 Debt Service for Measure "A" Loan 84 84 2 Debt Service to County 63 63 3 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal 80 32 Maint. & Other Maint. TOTALS 227 179 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Canyon Lake Page 4 of 5 Prepared by Habib Motlagh Phone it (951) 943-6504 Date: February 25, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $14,000 $184,000 $198,000 r"--- item No., Project Name / Limits Project Type i mai cost ($000's) nneasure A Funds ($000"s) 2018-2019 1 Debt Service for Measure "A" Loan 84 84 2 Debt Service to County 63 63 3 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal 100 37 Maint, & Other Maint. TOTALS 247 184 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency. City of Canyon Lake Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: February 25, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation; Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $14,000 $190, 000 -/ $204, 000 zi item No. Project Name t Limits Project Type 'mat cost ($000's) measure A Funds MOD's) 2019-2020 1 Debt Service for Measure "A" Loan 19 19 2 Debt Service to County 27 2l 3 Railroad Canyon Road Pavement Rehab, Signal 100 43 Maint. & Other Maint. TOTALS 146 89 ZC T ZS'S relod, .>poiyi slip ioj pazmln SPAA OuTpunj .14-40 -u!o2u0 aula-uo s! qeqa.! luoulatied .loj wpfs..mAIN 10 Saunon of luomed ueo-r 5u1o5-uo s! 2upaplm '138 u.Ka peoiffea uo luoLuXed treol ViN VINT 0 R-17 i7S Lgg aoueuQ4uFejAi Teu2Is `•cieijaa luaumAed r peoN uo,,WeD peoillea / /t oplsiQARTI jo Llunop of aatn.1s lqou / ueo! OELDH - !rem v- ainsenq Joj QD1AJOS iggia c .1 SI1W4S UO110'011103 p-aieurpsa (S1000$) sPund y amseaw (sX)00$) iso3 few", adS,!, looroid slIturi / atueN loQraid 111QII oN tOS9-£.176 (TS6) 142e1401A1 €1.1cleH o3iei uoXueo jo 13 3 T OE. - laociaa SALVIS loaroad PIV800dcf savoa ann, ,S1232113 714D07 NOISSIBIPITOD mauvlaocisivvai AIAT110,9 acuswgma :31.e(1 3UOLfd paredald I Jo I a2.d :/buo2v NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CATHEDRAL CITY FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 III Cathedral City May 4, 2015 Riverside County Transportation Commission Attention Grace Alvarez, Programming and Planning Manager 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Re: MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS REVENUE PROJECTIONS, MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION, and FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (FYs 2015/16 — 2019/20 Dear Ms. Alvarez: The City of Cathedral City is pleased to submit documentation in support of the above referenced request. Please let me know if you need additional information. Sincerely, `/ 5 Bill Simons Senior Engineer 68-700 AVENIDA LALO GUERRERO • CATHEDRAL CITY, CA 92234 • 760/770-0360 • FAX: 760/202-1460 MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS REVENUE PROJECTIONS MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION and FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2019/2020 SUBMITTED TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION itt Cathedral City FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Cathedral City (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $391,688, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: ilpvi 2c) , 2015 I.ITY MANAGER ATTEST: SECRETAR Agency: Cathedral City Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Bill Simons Phone #: (760) 770-0360 Date: May 4, 2015 CATHEDRAL CITY FIVE-YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $654,276.00 $1,427,000.00 $2,081,276.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Public Works Department City wide maintenance operations including pavement and median maintenance; street light energy; transportation and traffic related planning and development activities; pavement management planning; street design and related engineering activities; and maintenance of the traffic signal system. 1,350,000 $1,141,700.00 Capital Improvement Projects (Ongoing and Proposed Projects) Various transportation related oroiects 2 ADA Transition Plan 25,000 $25,000.00 3 Cathedral Canyon Pavement Rehab Pavement Rehabilitation $500,000 $250,000.00 4 Date Palm Drive Pavement Rehabilitation Pavement Rehabilitation $750,000 $375,000.00 TOTALS $2,625,000 $1,791,700.00 Agency: Cathedral City Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: Bill Simons Phone #: (760) 770-0360 Date: May 4, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 289,576.00 1,456,000.00 1, 745, 576.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 City wide maintenance operations including pavement and median maintenance; street light energy; transportation and traffic related planning and development activities; pavement management planning; street design and related engineering activities; and maintenance of the traffic signal system. 1,375,000 1,187,400 Capital Improvement Projects Various Transportation Related (Ongoing and Proposed Projects) Projects Construction of traffic $150,000 $75,000.00 2 Dinah Shore Medians improvements Construction of traffic $50,000 $25,000.00 3 Da Vali Drive Medians _improvements TOTALS $1,575,000 $1,287,400.00 Agency: Cathedral City Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Bill Simons Phone #: (760) 770-0360 Date: May 4, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $458,176.00 $1,485,000.00 $1, 943,176.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 City wide maintenance operations including pavement and median maintenance; street light energy; transportation and traffic related planning and development activities; pavement management planning; street design and related engineering activities; and maintenance of the traffic signal system. 1,440,000 $1,223,000.00 Capital Improvement Projects Various transportation related (Ongoing and Proposed Projects) Projects 2 Ramon Road Street and Bridge Widening Street and Bridge Widening $35,600,000 $615,425.00 TOTALS $37,040,000 $1,838,425.00 Agency: Cathedral City Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Bill Simons Phone #: (760) 770-0360 Date: May 4, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $104, 751.00 $1, 530, 000.00 $1,634, 751.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 City wide maintenance operations including pavement and median maintenance; street light energy; transportation and traffic related planning and development activities; pavement management planning; street design and related engineering activities; and maintenance of the traffic signal system. 1,475,000 $1,084,700.00 Capital Improvement Projects Various transportation related (Ongoing and Proposed Projects) Proiects 2 Ramon Road Street and Bridge Widening Street and Bridge Widening $35,600,000 $550,051.00 TOTALS $37,075,000 $1,634,751.00 Agency: Cathedral City Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Bill Simons Phone #: (760) 770-0360 Date: May 4, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $0.00 $1,576,000.00 $1,576,000.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 City wide maintenance operations including pavement and median maintenance; street light energy; transportation and traffic related planning and development activities; pavement management planning; street design and related engineering activities; and maintenance of the traffic signal system. 1,495,000 $1,297,500.00 Capital Improvement Projects (Ongoing and Proposed Projects) Various transportation related proiects. 2 Ramon Road Street and Bridge Street and Bridge Widening 35,600,000 $65,374.00 Widening TOTALS $37,095,000 $1,362,874.00 ATTACHMENT D **SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: Cathedral City Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Bill Simons Phone #: (760) 770-0360 Date: May 4, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Public Works Street Maintenance Labor Operation/Maintenance $596.8 $596.8 Ongoing Public Works Street Maintenance Operations Operation/Maintenance $518.0 $501.2 Ongoing 2 3 Travel Way ADA Compliance Date Palm Drive Bridge Widening Capital Capital 25 19,000 25 100 Jun-15 Apr-16 Work is Underway Ca!trans ROW Phase TOTALS 20,140 1,223 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF COACHELLA FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 COAL •'" a p RO R�; June 4, 2015 Shirley Medina RCTC PO Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Ms. Medina: The City of Coachella Engineer's Department would like to submit an updated 5-Year FY 2016-2020 Measure A Local Funds Program. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) approved the City of Coachella's FY 2015-2019 Measure A Local Streets and Roads 5-Year Plan that was submitted on May 19, 2014. Adjustments have been made to the FYI4/15, FY15/16, FY16/17, FY17/18 and FY 18/19 project since the approval of the FY 2015- 2019 Measure A Local Streets and Roads 5-Year Plan. These adjustments are within the amended project listing for FY14/15, FY15/16, FY16/17, FY17/18 and FY 18/19 enclosed for RCTCs approval. These adjustments will provide funding for synchronization of eleven traffic signals along the Harrison corridor, Avenue 49 sidewalk improvements from Grapefruit to Frederick Street north and the cost for the construction of an interchange northbound Indio Blvd. The prior streets have been moved back one fiscal year. These revisions are incorporated in the 5-Year Plan, which is attached. If you have any question please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you, // / nathan Hoy, P.E., City Engineer City of Coachella 760-398-5744 jhoy a,coachella.org FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Coachella (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $92,205, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: Jvn.c f, L 2015 ATTEST: SECR �-'Y RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Coachella Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy, P.E., City Engine Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 6-9-15 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Frederick Street Extension Avenue 51 and Avenue 52 The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap ramps as required. The street pavements are identified from the 1,033,375 1,033,375 FY 14/15 Completed Pavement Management Update. In accordance with the CVAG Agreement, the Six -lane bridge northbound Indio City of Coachella is responsible for a 2 Blvd Crossing Reimbursement Agreement with CVAG portion of the expenses to be reimburwsed for the construction of the overcrossing 179,600 75,860 FY 16/17 Ongoing TOTALS 1,212,975 1,109,235 ATTACHMENT B SAMPLE FIVE-YEAR C/P FORMAT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Coachella Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 6-9-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $127,264 $627,000 $754,264 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 Street Resurfacing Phase 11 Grapefruit Blvd and Avenue 48 The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap ramps as required. The 1 street pavements are identified from the 196,764 196,764 Pavement Management Update. Six -lane bridge northbound Indio Blvd In accordance with the Crossing Reimbursement Agreement with CVAG Agreement, the CVAG City of Coachella is responsible for a 2 portion of the expenses to be reimbursed for the construction of the overcrossing 179,600 32,500 3 Synchronization of Eleven Traffic Signals along the Harrison Corridor Synchronization of traffic signals 1,950,000 225,000 Avenue 49 Sidewalk improvements from Grapefruit to Frederick Street North. Avenue 49 sidewalk improvements from 4 Grapefruit to Frederick 300,000 300,000 Street North about .25 sidewalk TOTALS 2,626,364 754,264 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Coachella Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 6-9-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 0 640,000 640,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 Street Resurfacing Phase 12 Naomi The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap ramps as required. The 1 Court from La Ponderosa to East End street pavements are identified from the 158,760 158,760 Pavement Management Update. Perez from Naomi Court to La Pavement Resurfacing 160,000 160,000 2 Hernandez 3 Romaulda from Perez to La Hernandez East End Pavement Resurfacing 150,000 150,000 4 Ortiz from Perez to La Hernandez Pavement Resurfacing 100,000 100,000 In accordance with the 179,600 71,240 CVAG Agreement, the Six -lane bridge northbound Indio City of Coachella is responsible for a 5 Blvd Crossing Reimbursement Agreement with CVAG portion of the expenses to be reimbursed for the construction of the overcrossing TOTALS 748,360 640,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Coachella Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 6-9-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 0 653,000 653,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 Street Resurfacing Phase 13 Via The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap ramps as required. The 1 Conchilla from Avenida De Plata to Avenida De Platina street pavements are identified from the 167,000 167,000 Pavement Management Update. 2 Avenida De Oro from Avenue 50 to Guitron Pavement Resurfacing 251,000 251,000 3 Avenida Cortez from Avenue 50 to Calle Leon Pavement Resurfacing 235,000 235,000 TOTALS 653,000 653,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Coachella Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 6-9-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 0 673,000 673,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 Street Resurfacing Phase 14 Calle The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap ramps as required. The 1 Vega from Calle Leon to Paseo Laredo street pavements are identified from the 125,000 125,000 Pavement Management Update. 2 Paseo De Laredo from Frederick to Avenida Cortez Pavement Resurfacing 133,000 133,000 3 dDurango from Avenida Coez to E Viand Pavement Resurfacing 136,000 136,000 4 Avenue 48 from Van Buren West 1/4 mile Pavement Resurfacing 279,000 279,000 TOTALS 673,000 673,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Coachella Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Jonathan Hoy P.E., City Engineer Phone #: 760-398-5744 Date: 6-9-15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 0 693,000 693,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 Street Resurfacing Phase 15 Via The project will improve street surface, full width of the roadway and the installation of handicap ramps as required. The 1 Hermonsa from Avenida Cortez to End street pavements are identified from the 245,000 245,000 Pavement Management Update. 2 Vera Cruz from E vdenida Cortez to Pavement Resurfacing 129,000 129,000 3 Frederick from Avenue 50 to Avenue 49 Pavement Resurfacing 100,000 100,000 4 Avenue 49 from Harrison to Van Buren Pavement Resurfacing 219,000 219,000 TOTALS 693,000 693,000 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF CORONA FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (951) 736-2266 (951) 279-3627 (FAX) Nelson. Nelson@ci.corona.ca. u4 May 4, 2015 400 SOUTH VICENTIA AVENUE, P.O. BOX 940, CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92879-0940 CITY HALL - ON LINE ALL THE TIME (http://www.discovercorona.com) Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 C E _R\ MAY 06 2015 • XRANavor i8a8M IM 8Si0N SUBJECT: MEASURE A FIVE YEAR PLAN, MOE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT, AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT Ms. Trevino: The following documents are enclosed for your review: • Measure A proposed FY 2015/16 through 2019/20 Capital Improvements Plan • Maintenance of Effort (MOE) signed certification statement • Program Status Report for current Fiscal Year 2014/15 • Measure A Annual Disbursement Projects received at the City The City's minimum MOE is set at $2,208,200; however, as of June 30, 2015, the City will have spent $4,858,399 from Measure A and $5,236,986 from other funds to support Measure A project expenditures. The document supporting the MOE calculations can be found attached, entitled "FY 2014/15 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures." The Measure A proposed FY 2015/16 through 2019/20 Capital Improvement Plan will be presented to our City Council for review at the Budget Workshop and for adoption at the regularly scheduled City Council Meeting on June 3, 2015. If you have any questions please contact Kim Sitton, Finance Manager at (951) 279-3532. Sincerely, N(son D. Nelson, P.E. Public Works Director Attachments c: Kim Sitton, Finance Manager Elaine Fleming -Stanford, Principal Accountant Theresa Daily, Principal Accountant FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for The City of Corona (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and base year amount of $2,208,200 approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: Mt�Li) , 2015 11/1k Darrell Talbert, City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk, i *f Corona FY 2014/15 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures (Round to nearest dollar) City of Corona _ Funding Breakdown Project Expenditures Included in General Ledger _ total Cost General Fund Meas A Federal _ State City Funds Other Construcrlon: _ _ Auto Ctr/BSNF RR $ 1,723 $ 1,723 _ _ Foothill Parkway Westerly Ext. $ 371,863 $ 371,863 _ I-15/Calalco Interchange Improvement_ • Foothill Pkwy $ 235,182 Resurfacing & Pavement Maintenance $ 142,446 $ 142,446 Alley Improvements $ 142,640 $ 144,872 Pavement Rehab/Local Streets $ 4872 5 4,872 Striping Rehab $ 72,318 - $ 72, Green River Road Improvements " $ 2 093 $ 2,093 " 93 i Ontario Ave Street Improvements $ 37,001 $ 37,001 Sidewalk/Curb/Gutter Install $_ 344,891 _ _ $ 304,891 Overlook Street Improvement $ 14,067 $ 14,067 Resurfacing & Pavement Maintenance Green River Road Improvements $ 107,028 $ 107,028 Sidewalk Construction $ 57,380 $ 57,380 Ontario Ave Street Improvements $ 20,780 $ 20,780 Citywide Handicap Ramps $ 54,336 $ 54,336 Striping Rehab _ $ 111,871 $ 111,B71 Sidewalk/Curb/Gutter Install $ 306,787 $ 306,787 Foothill Pkwy - MARA Funding $ 810,214 Foothill Pkwy Phase II $ 16,649 Foothill Parkway West $ 32,716 $ 32,716 Pavement Rehab! Local Streets $ 2,104,396 $ 2,104,396 " Pavement Management Study Major Pavement Rehab ,Smith St Pavement Rehab Auto Ctr/BSNF RR $ _ 3,704 $ 3,704 Alley Improvements I-15/CalalcoInterchangeImprovement _ $ 495,620 $ 495,620 ' $ Fed -CA Auto Center DR / BNSF $ _ 6,337,283 $ 2,086,474 $ 3,956,326 _ • $ 294,483 Foothill Parkway west _ $ 377,783 _ $ 377,783 $ _ Foothill Parkway Westerly Ext. S 382,180 $ 382,180 Green River Road Improvements $ 14,890 $ 14,890 Auto Center/BSNF RR Grade Sep $ 578,164 $ 578,164 Annualize for months of April, May & June 2015 $ 4,371,382 $ 124,087 $ 1,211,272 $ 857,557 $ 1,439,430 $ 739,035 Maintenance: Operations Services $ 147,450 $ 147,450 { Concrete Maintenance $ 3,806 $ 3,806 Street Maintenance $ 905,450 $ 905,450 Drainage Maintenance $ 109,492 5 109,492 HOA/Street Lighting $ 73,793 $ 73,793 Street Signs $ 4,313 $ 4,313 Street Sweeping $ 300,233 $ 300,233 Graffiti Removal $ 37,060 $ 37,060 Fund 245 - Drainage Quality Engineering $ 594,505 $ 594,505 Special Projects S 40,958 $ 40,95858 Fund 446 - Street Lighting $ 679,558 $ , Signal Maintenance $ 481,695 $ 48181,695 95 Special Projects $ 85,931 $ 85,931 $ Annualize for months of April, May & June 2015 $ 1,150,534 $ 525,275 $ 625,259 Fy 2014/J.5 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures (Round to nearest dollar) City of Corona Funding Breakdown Project Expenditures Included in General ledger Total Cost General Fund Meas A Federal State City Funds Other Engineering/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects: Engineering Administration $ 254,322 $ 254,322 Transportation/Env Planning $ 2,416 $ 2,416 P.W. Capital Improvements $ 449,034 $ 449,034 Public Works -Special Projects $ 37 $ 37 Drainage Quality Engineering $ 51,846 $ 51,846 Public Works Inspection-Misc $ 697,922 $ 697,922 Urban Forestry $ 254,323 $ 254,323 Annualize for months of April, May & June 2015 $ 567,886 $ 567,886 rtdmttf i S 23,817,321 it $ 4,508,746 $ 4,858,399 5 3,439,651 $ $ 5,236,986 Deductions for Special Consideration (Deductions Must Also Be included in Project Expenditures Above): Total Project Cost General Fund State Reason Why Project Expenditure Should Be Deducted from MOE Construction: Maintenance: HOA/Street Lighting $ 73,793 Enyineeri�/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects: $ 254,322 'rim $ 328,115 Total GF Expenditures $ 4,508,746 minus Deductions S 328,115 MOE Base Year $ 2,208,200 Less, Transfers to the General Fund from Street Related Funds $ (1,021,500) Total General Fund Expenditures for Fiscal Year Total Discretionary Funded Street Expenditures, including Street Lighting S 3,159,131 $ 19,308,575 MOE Base Year-2009 $ 2,208,2%. Agency: City of Corona Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April20, 2015 (Revised May 21, 2015) FIVE YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2014-15 Continuing Appropriation: MARA Appropriation (Foothill Project): Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Project: $ 2,733,515 12,964, 743 26,064,123 3,776,000 $ 45,538,381 MEASURE A FUNDS Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost FY 14-15 Estimated Meas A Funds Carryover FY 15-16 Measure A Funds Estimated Measure A Approp Available 1 Arterial Widening Roads, Bridges and Freeways $ 242,378 $ 181,746 $ - $ 181,746 2 Auto Center/Santa Fe Railroad Grade Separation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 31,111,742 318,040 318,040 3 Citywide Benchmark Update Roads, Bridges and Freeways 80,000 40,000 40,000 4 Citywide GIS Master Plan Building, Facilities and Systems 165,031 36,141 - 36,141 5 Citywide Traffic Model Update Roads, Bridges and Freeways 100,000 100,000 - 100,000 6 Foothill Parkway Phase II Roads, Bridges and Freeways 737,955 183,351 183,351 7 Foothill Parkway Westeriy Extension Roads, Bridges and Freeways 54,493,633 26,064,123 26,064,123 8 Green River Road Improvements Roads, Bridges and Freeways 4,399,622 570,343 570,343 9 Local Street Widening, Curb and Gutter Improvements Roads, Bridges and Freeways 613,850 613,850 - 613,850 10 Magnolia Avenue Beautification Roads, Bridges and Freeways 281,823 275,502 - 275,502 11 Ontario Avenue Street Improvements Roads, Bridges and Freeways 107,968 32,791 50,000 82,791 12 Public Safety Way Slurry Roads, Bridges and Freeways 35,000 35,000 35,000 13 Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Cycle 3 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 15,877 15,877 - 15,877 14 Smith Street Pavement Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,050,000 941,537 941,537 15 Alley Improvements Roads, Bridges and Freeways 632,421 95,557 100,000 195,557 16 Chase Drive Improvements - Phase III Roads, Bridges and Freeways - 400,000 400,000 17 Citywide Miscellaneous ADA Facilities Roads, Bridges and Freeways 324,135 210,114 150,000 360,114 18 Corona Storm Drain Line 52 Drainage 4,097,830 700,000 700,000 19 Major Pavement Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 5,298,556 4,582,643 300,000 4,882,643 20 Miscellaneous Repair and Replacement of Traffic Sign Lighting and Signals 100,000 100,000 21 Overlook Street Improvements Roads, Bridges and Freeways - - 250,000 250,000 22 Pavement Management Study Roads, Bridges and Freeways 87,969 86,226 5,000 91,226 23 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Roads, Bridges and Freeways 4,868,173 2,740,707 1,700,000 4,440,707 24 Resurfacing and Pavement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 736,235 511,546 300,000 811,546 25 Sidewalk Construction Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,269,015 1,211,635 400,000 1,611,635 Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Installation/Replacement 26 Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 969,928 51,100 300,000 351,100 27 SR-91 Capital Improvement Project Betterment Roads, Bridges and Freeways 100,000 100,000 100,000 200,000 28 Striping Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 381,467 31,037 325,000 356,037 29 Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) - 255,346 255,346 Total: $ 112,200,608 $ 39,028,866 $ 5,435,346 $ Estimated FY 2015-16 Measure A Balance: Note: Above list does not include projects anticipated to close by June 30, 2015. 44,464,212 1,074,169 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Corona Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April 20, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,074,169 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: 3,852,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Project: $ 4,926,169 Item No. Project Name/Llmits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Chase Drive Improvements - Phase III Roads, Bridges and Freeways 200,000 200,000 2 Citywide Miscellaneous ADA Facilities Roads, Bridges and Freeways 100,000 100,000 3 Major Pavement Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 4 Pavement Management Study Roads, Bridges and Freeways 5,000 5,000 5 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 6 Resurfacing and Pavement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 300,000 7 Sidewalk Construction Roads, Bridges and Freeways 400,000 400,000 8 Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Installation/Replacement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 150,000 9 SR-91 CIP Betterment Roads, Bridges and Freeways 75,800 75,800 10 Striping Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 325,000 100,000 11 City's Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational Budget 263,006 263,006 Total: $ 3,968,806 $ 3,593,806 ' Estimated FY 2016-17 Measure A Balance: $ 1,332,363 Agency: City of Corona Page 3 o/ 5 Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April 20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,332,363 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: 3,929,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Project: $ 5,261,363 Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide Miscellaneous ADA Facilities Roads, Bridges and Freeways $ 100,000 $ 100,000 2 Major Pavement Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 3 Pavement Management Study Roads, Bridges and Freeways 5,000 5,000 4 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 5 Resurfacing and Pavement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 300,000 6 Sidewalk Construction Roads, Bridges and Freeways 400,000 400,000 7 Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Installation/Replacement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 150,000 8 Striping Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 325,000 100,000 9 City's Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational Budget 270,897 270,897 Total: $ 3,700,897 $ 3,325,897 ' Estimated FY 2017-18 Measure A Balance: $ 1,936,466 ' Agency: City of Corona Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,935,466 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: 4,047,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Project: $ 5,982,466 Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide Miscellaneous ADA Facilities Roads, Bridges and Freeways $ 50,000 $ 50,000 2 Major Pavement Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 3 Pavement Management Study Roads, Bridges and Freeways 5,000 5,000 4 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 5 Resurfacing and Pavement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 300,000 6 Sidewalk Construction Roads, Bridges and Freeways 400,000 400,000 7 Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Installation/Replacement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 150,000 8 Striping Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 325,000 100,000 9 Cost Allocation (Overhead) Operational Budget 279,023 279,023 Total: $ 3,659,023 $ 3,284,023 Estimated FY 2018-19 Measure A Balance: $ 2,698,443 Agency: City of Corona Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April 20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 2,698,443 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: 4,168,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Project: $ 6,866,443 Item No. Project Name/Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide Miscellaneous ADA Facilities Roads, Bridges and Freeways $ 50,000 $ 50,000 2 Major Pavement Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 3 Pavement Management Study Roads, Bridges and Freeways 5,000 5,000 4 Pavement Rehabilitation for Local Streets Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,000,000 1,000,000 5 Resurfacing and Pavement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 300,000 6 Sidewalk Construction Roads, Bridges and Freeways 400,000 400,000 7 Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Installation/Replacement Maintenance Roads, Bridges and Freeways 300,000 150,000 8 Striping Rehabilitation Roads, Bridges and Freeways 325,000 100,000 9 Cost Allocation (Overhead) Operational Budget 287,394 287,394 Total: $ 3,667,394 $ 3,292,394 Estimated FY 2019-20 Measure A Balance: $ 3,574,048 u6isa0 Papaoueo loafoud 6wo6-u0 6wo6-u0 6wo6-u0 6wo6-u0 Pallaoueo loafoud uogonuisuo0 uapun 6wo6-u0 6wo6-uo 6upo6-u0 - 6wo6-u0 6wo6-u0 6wo6-u0 6wo6-u0 9 LOZ 100 6wo6-up 5wo6-u0 649'91. - 9EE149 4144'£ - - 40L'E - £44'4 $ 996'LEL 99£'LL£ 000'00l 9E1.17Z£ 1.£0'991. 000'08 000' l4 Z4L' L 1 L' lE 8L£'Z4Z LZVZ£9 $ sr(ennaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa sLennaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa sAennaaud pue sa6pu8 'sPe021 sbemaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa swalsAspue sawoed'6u!PI!n8 sAennaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa sAennaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa sAennaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa sAevnaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa sAennaaud pue sa6pu8 'speoa 90$9 ZL lL 9969 6LOL BOLL gm 4969 91. LL LSOL LLZ9 •suelpaw pue 6wuappnn luawaned 'weup iwols `uapn6 quno sapnioul uogorulsuo0 •anuany epwople0 of oluua013 /91-1 wa4Ilenroped 11141ood uo; sluawanoudwi peon II eseyd nemoued 1114400d '01. pue, uogeuoduo0 ay1 Aq laauis ma uo 6wuappnn a6pu8 buluaPM abpu8 el00 •6 r 'alepdn luawal3 uogelno110 ueld Ieuaua0 alepd fl RPM 011;84 01)Imn110 'a 'Aeon;o lg6u oggnd ay1 uwm samipe; luepdwoo (ypy) loy sagplgesp0 41!M sueouawy;o uogorulsuo0 saMlioed VaV snoeuellaos1W aplmAip0 'L 'uogeluawaldwp apwnAlpJo; 'so JO'UJOISAs uogewo;ul olydeu6oa0 6u11spxa ayl puedxa of luawdolanap suolleopldde pue uolsuanuoo elep 'auennl;os pue auennpuey;o uoglspnboy ueldualsepiSIJapIMn110'9 'E8 (OVN) wnle0 ueouawy q uoN of sluawisnrpe pue sluewyouaq ap1nnAllO;o alepdfl - Auewyouae aP1M40 •4 •Aennpeou adulsau pue iCunls 'lpeydse flume; aoeidau pue anowaa /wnis nem uogelnV 1, '6upssouo apeu6 ad elves waypoN uo46upn8 ay1 y11M 9410 uawn olny;o uogoasualul 1e uolleuedas apeu6 auel uno; a prulsuo0 uogeuedas apeu0 peoullea ad eluesNalueo olnV 'E •sluawanoudwl palls Jo ylpm lin; ay1 alaldwoo o149 ay; lnoy6nou41 seam snouen up 6upapp laauis ouluaP p M Ieual+V 'Z •suoglpuoo 6ulnup yloows pue a;es apinoud pun sluawanoudwi •sAalie snouen of sluawanoudwi to uogorulsuoo pue u61sa0 sluawanoudwi nom( 'l snz?zS uollaldwop pa;ewl;s3 slenloy 9PkGOZAd ;sop le;ol °dig loefoid •ory I' ;oaloud 11 ' uopduo ' sap pue aweN Laafwd ..oN well (SLOZ 4Z Aeyi pasrnaa) SLOZ'et iPdy :alep LESE-6LZ aS6) :'0N auogd sianwd-oaruoa euep :dq pwedaid euoiop;o Aua :doueBy S60Z-140Z Ad 1210d321 SI71V_LS 103rOdd 1411,2100dd SON & 7V307 V 32111SV3W NOISSIWW00 NO/1FJ121OdSNVaL A1N1700 30ISd3AMI RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Corona Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April20, 2015 (Revised May 21, 2015) Item No., Project Name and Description Project No. Project Type Total Cost FY2014-15 Actua/s Estimated Completion Status 11. Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension 8604 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 54,493,633 992,980 Sept 2016 Under Construction Design and construction of Foothill Parkway from Skyline Drive to Paseo Grande. 12. Green River Road Improvements 6197 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 4,399,622 112,515 Jan 2016 Under Construction Widen Green River road to four lanes between the 91 freeway and Palisades Drive. 13. Local Street Widening, Curb and Gutter Improvements 7352 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 613,850 - On -going On -going Widening of local streets and installation of curbs, gutters, driveways, and sidewalks. Miscellaneous curb and gutter repair and related work. 14. Magnolia Avenue Beautification 6241 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 281,823 On -going Design This project will enhance the transportation system by providing raised medians, decorative landscaping and irrigation, pedestrian scale trees, decorative hardscape and beautification elements such as themed bus benches. The improvements will result in a more pleasing environment for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. 15. Magnolia/ I-15 Freeway Corridor 7096 Roads, Bridges and Freeways - Complete Project Completed Improvements to the Magnolia Avenue/I-15 Freeway interchange to improve traffic flow. Ramp northbound, widening of the on ramp and widening Magnolia between both 1-15 Freeway ramps. 16. Major Pavement Rehabilitation 7080 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 5,298,556 3,289 On -going On -going Pavement rehabilitation of various streets in accordance with the Pavement Management Program. 17. Ontario Avenue Street Improvements 6969 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 107,968 21,193 On -going Construction July 2015 Cold in place recycling (CIR) of existing pavement along Ontario Avenue between Calrfomia Avenue and Magnolia Avenue. 18. Parkridge and Lincoln Improvement Project 6854 Roads, Bridges and Freeways - Complete Project Completed Installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Parkridge and Lincoln Avenue. 5u105-uc 6u!o6-u0 papaau Ja6uo! ou 6u!pund 6uo6-u0 6u!o6-up 6u!o6-u0 6u!o6-u0 6u!o6-up 6u!o6-u0 6u!o6-u0 - 6u!o6-u0 6u!o6-u0 6u!o6-up 6u!o6-u0 6u!o6-u0 8Z8'80£ 08E'L9 1.9Z'9 6LL'901'Z E4L' L 8Z6'696 SLO'69Z'I. LL8'51. 9EZ'9EL 000'9E ELL'898'4 696'L8 sAemaaJpue sa6 u d p p g 'speo! sAemaald pue sa6pug 'speo! sAemaaid pue sa6pug 'speo sAemaaJd pue sa6pug 'speo ! sAemaau pue sa6pug 'speo! sAemaaJd pue sa6pug 'speo! sAemaaJd pue sa6pug 'speo! sAemaaJd pue sa6pug 'speo! ELOL LZ08 gggg L889 ZZ69 9969 269 690L •Niom !ewappu! pue '6uuaau!6ua '6u!urud low 'syled avq 'sdwe.! ssaooe 'iaun6 `q.Bo '311emap!s 6u!ss!w;o uogeye;su! •sayoewdde anup pue `memap!s 'iaun6 'curio Jo luawaoe!dai Jo nedaa aoueua;u!e!ry wawa oe!dab/uo!;ells;su! uanne pue'q.in0 >f!eMap!S '9Z 'VON\ iewap!ow pue '6uuaau!6ua '6u!urud low 'syled avq 'sdwea ssaooe 'Jaun6 'cpno '5llemap!s 6u!ss!w;o uogeyelsu! 'sayoewdde anup pue 'memapp 'Jaun6 'giro Jo luawaoe!da Jo nedaa upponu;suo0 A!emep!S 'SZ •a6ppped pue uiooun le ieu6p °w ll e;o uoprulsu00 g a!0n0 !ooyoS o; sa;nob a;eS '4Z 'yoJeuoy!! Jo yuou uoua!!nd uo pubis >Hem sswo a loru;suo0 g apn0 !ooyog o; sa;noa a;eS 'EZ 41els 40 yl!m sam!!e; luawaned snoaue!!aos!w pue sa!oy;od medal pue aoeunsaa aaueuelu!e yy ;uewane d pue bu!oe}rnsa! 'ZZ •Aempew adulsal pue an!s 'yeydse 6u!!!e; aoe!da.! pue anowaa /u rn ABM Alain o!!gnd ' LZ 'ola 'Am!s '6ugeas Nowo '6u!ned uogoru;suom apnpu! Aew uouel!!!geya! 'Aprils luawa6euew luawaned lua.uno ayl 14M aouep000e u! slaa Bs !eoo! Jo; uogemeyal luawaned 51.90.11S ie30-1.10; uppemmegeN luawaned 'OZ -sloafwd uogelg!geyai Jo; Apnls;o alepdn pue tioluanui leans ay; a;a!dwoo of Janedwom ow! uo!snpu! Jo; slaails moo! Jo Aaluns plaid ApnlS wewebeueyy luawaned '61 sme;S uo.appli ro0 pemarp s,envoy 91--4GOZAd MO /elol ad fl pafoid -oN Petoid uopdposappue aweN pefoid "oN wen (SGOZ 'GZ ne;y paws& SGOZ 'OZ lud y :0MO LESE-6ZZ (GS6) roN auogd ai med-oaw%! eueo :dq paiedaid euoiooio LGIO :Awa6y SLOZ-PLOZ Ad 1210d3d Snl b'1S 103rO dd Wb2I002Id SOW& 7V307 V 321I7SV3W NOISSIWW00 NOLLVIZIOdSNV2LL A1Nri00 3OISH3A121 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Corona Prepared by: Dana Romeo -Powers Phone No.: (951) 279-3537 Date: April 20, 2015 (Revised May 21, 2015) Item No., Project Name and Description Project No. Project Type Total Cost FY2014-15 Actuals Estimated Completion j Status 27. Sixth Street East Improvements 7107 Roads, Bridges and Freeways Complete Project Completed Design and construct landscape median on East Sixth Street from El Sobrante Road to the easterly city limits. Improve the East Sixth Street / El Camino intersection to ultimate improvements and install traffic signal. 28. Smith Street Pavement Rehabilitation 6889 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 1,050,000 8,463 Aug 2015 Under Construction Grind and overlay Smith Street between SR-91 and Rincon. 29. SR-91 Capital Improvement Proiect Betterment 6967 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 100,000 - On -going On -going In conjunction with the SR-91 Capital Improvement Project the City will fund improvements to local streets beyond the requirements for the SR-91 Project. 30. Striping Rehabilitation 7292 Roads, Bridges and Freeways 381,467 125,430 On -going On -going Upgrade and maintenance of striping citywide by City forces or annual contract. 31. Cost Allocation Plan (Overhead) Operational 167,141 TOTAL $ 108,461,144 $ 3,994,538 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 City of Desert Hot Springs 65-950 Pierson Blvd. • Desert Hot Springs • CA • 92240 (760) 329-6411 www.cityofdhs.org April 20, 2015 Shirley Medina Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 RE: City of Desert Hot Spring Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2015/16-2019/20 and Maintenance of Effort Dear Ms Medina, Attached is the City of Desert Hot Springs' Measure "A" Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 201612020, a Project Status Report for our FY 2014/15 and the City's Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 329-6411 Ext. 234 Sincerely, Joe Tanner Administrative Services Director Attachments: Measure "A" Five Year (CIP) FY 2015-2020 Project Status Report FY 2014/15 CIP Maintenance of Effort Certification Cc: Finance Department Engineering FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Desert Hot Springs (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $75,147, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: A-PRiI; Za 2015 CITY MANAGER ATTEST: RETARY ATTACHMENT B SAMPLE FIVE-YEAR C/P FORMAT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Desert Hot Springs Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Richard Kopecky Phone #: 760-329-6411 Ext. 218 Date: April20,2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $0 / Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $498,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $498,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter & sidewalk repairs and improvements and signage and striping Maintenance $1,760,084 $180,160 2 Debt Service for T.R.I.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services 2012A COP's (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service $402,000 $200,000 3 Jefferson Street and Palm Drive Interchange with I-10 Reimbursement $30,000 $30,000 4 STP Slurry Project Hacienda/Mission Lakes Surfacing $230,000 $48,000 5 Indirect Costs Overhead $39,840 $39,840 2015-2016 TOTALS 2,461,924 498,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Desert Hot Springs Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: Richard Kopecky Phone #: 760-329-6411 Ext 218 Date: April20,2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $508,000 / Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $508,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter & sidewalk repairs and improvements and signage and striping Maintenance $1,445,780 $245,360 2 Debt Service for T.R.I.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services 2012A COP's (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service $398,000 $200,000 3 Jefferson Street and Palm Drive Interchange with 1-10 Reimbursement $22,000 $22,000 4 Indirect Costs Overhead 40,640 $40,640 ' 2016-2017 TOTALS 1,906,420 508,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Desert Hot Springs Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Richard Kopecky Phone #: 760-329-6411 Ext 218 Date: April20,2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $518,000 S Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 518,000 Item No. Proj_ect Name / Limits P_r_ojec_t Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter & sidewalk repairs and improvements and signage and striping Maintenance $500,000 $276,560 2 Debt Service for T.R.I.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services 2012A COP's (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service $400,000 $200,000 3 Indirect Costs Overhead $41,440 $41,440 2017-2018 941,440 TOTALS 518,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Desert Hot Springs Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Richard Kopecky Phone #: 760-329-6411 Ext 218 Date: Apri! 20,2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 / Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $534,000 ,/ Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 534,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter & sidewalk repairs and improvements and signage and striping Maintenance $630,000 $291,280 2 Debt Service for T.R.I.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services 2012A COP's (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service $401,000 $200,000 3 Indirect Costs Overhead $42,720 $42,720 2018-2019 TOTALS 1,073,720 / 534,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Desert Hot Springs Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Richard Kopecky Phone #: 760-329-6411 Ext 218 Date: April20,2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $550,000 / Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 550,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Citywide resurfacing, curb, gutter & sidewalk repairs and improvements and signage and striping Maintenance $750,000 $306,000 2 Debt Service for T.R.I.P. (Total Road Improvement Program Services 2012A COP's (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service $402,000 $200,000 3 Indirect Costs Overhead $44,000 $44,000 2019-2020 TOTALS 1,196,09t1 550,000 ATTACHIvitNT D **SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Desert Hot Springs Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Richard Kopecky Phone #: 760-329-6411 Ext 218 Date: April 20, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Citywide Roadway Rehab/Slurry Sealing Maintenance 600 255 Jun-15 In -Progress 2 Debt Service for T.R.I.P. (Total Road Improvement Program) Service 2012A COP's (Certificate of Participation) Debt Service 399 200 On -Going 3 Jefferson Street and Date Palm Interchange with 1-10 Reimbursement 39 3f.: On -Going TOTALS '.,638 494 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF EASTVALE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 City of Eastvale 12363 Limonite Avenue, Suite #910 • Eastvale, CA 91752 (951) 361-0900 • Fax: (951) 361-0888 • www.EastvaleCA.gov May 20, 2015 Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: City of Eastvale's Measure A Expenditure Plan FY 2015/16 — FY 2019/20 Dear Ms. Trevino: Please find enclosed the Fiscal Year 2015/16 — 2019/20 Measure A Expenditure Plan for the City of Eastvale. The City of Eastvale has submitted a Maintenance of Effort (MOE) for FY13/14 to your office as required . Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ann Herner at aherner(a�interwestgrp.com or myself at or jindrawan(�eastvaleca.gov (909) 618-7384. Sincerely, Joe Indrawan Deputy City Engineer Enclosure FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Eastvale (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $38,948.51, scheduled for approval by the Commission at its July 8, 2015 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds, Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: arn4) 43 , 2015 / 'CI`fY MANAGER, MICHELE NISSEN ATTEST: CITY CLERK, MARC DONOHUE FY 2013/14 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures (Round to nearest dollar) Project Expenditures Included in General Ledger Construction: Total Cost Maintenance: Storm Drainage $ 38,948.51 Engineering/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects: NPDES Annual permit payment $ 23,982.00 Printing and Publishing ; $ 43.60 Operating/Departemtnal Supplies I $ 65.40 Interwest Consulting Group $ 35,536.25 Expenditure Totals! I $ 57_.75 CITY OF EASTVALE FY 13/14 Funding Breakdown General Fund Meas A Federal State City Funds Other $ 38,948.51 $ 23,982.00 $ 43.60 $ 65.40 $ 35,536.25 5 9e.,•,.... $, $ $ $ S $ Deductions for Special Consideration (Deductions Must Also Be Included in Project Expenditures Above): Total Project Cost General Fund State Reason Why Project Expenditure Should Be Deducted from MOE Construction: Maintenance: Engineering/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects: NPDES Annual permit payment $ 23,982.00 $ 23,982.00 This is an annual permit fee not allocatted to any specific project, part of the overhead cost for the City to comply with the State Water Resources Control Board Printing and Publishing $ 43.60 $ 43.60 This was an expense for printing to support a community meeting for the schools safety forum on walking/biking and is not for any specific project Operating/Departmental Supplies $ 65.40 $ 65.40 These are general overhead adminsitration cost not related to a specif porject - business cards (inspectors) and reproductin of documents under the public records request Interwest Consulting Group $ 35,536.25 $ 35,536.25 This is staff engineer/administration support on monitoring and managing mandatory Stormwater permit meetings and program requirements for the City. Deduct Totals 59,627.25 59,627.25 Total GF Expenditures $ 98,575.76 minus Deductions 59,627.25 MOE Base Year 38,948.51 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Eastvale Page: 1 of 6 Prepared by: George Alvarez, Public Works Director Phone #: (714) 615-0883 Date: May 15, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 3,104,033 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,141,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 4,245,033 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 1 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety and traffic improvements; traffic signal synchronization. $ 722,387 $ 105,612 2 Street Improvement Program Widen, repair, or reconstruct roadways as needed. $ 5,208,736 $ 1,203,941 3 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling; repairs to streets and culvert/drainage facilities; storm damage/flood control projects; widening streets $ 1,031,658 $ 1,010,000 TOTALS 6,962,781 2,319,553 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Eastvale Page: 2 of 6 Prepared by: George Alvarez, Public Works Director Phone #: (714) 615-0883 Date: May 28, 2014 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,925,480 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,164,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 3,089,480 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 1 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety and traffic improvements; traffic signal synchronization. $ 16,000 $ 16,000 2 Street Improvement Program Widen, repair, or reconstruct roadways as needed. $ 850,000 $ 400,000 3 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling; repairs to streets and culvert/drainage facilities; storm damage/flood control projects; $ 310,000 $ 310,000 TOTALS 1,176,000 726,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Eastvale Page: 3 of 6 Prepared by: George Alvarez, Public Works Director Phone #: (714) 615-0883 Date: May 28, 2014 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 2,363,480 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,187,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 3,550,480 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety and traffic improvements; traffic signal synchronization. $ 16,000 $ 16,000 2 Street Improvement Program Widen, repair, or reconstruct roadways as needed. 850,000 $ 400,000 3 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling; repairs to streets and culvert/drainage facilities; storm damage/flood control projects; $ 310,000 $ 310,000 TOTALS 1,176,000 726,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Eastvale Page: 4 of 6 Prepared by: George Alvarez, Public Works Director Phone #: (714) 615-0883 Date: May 28, 2014 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 2,824,480 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,223,000 / Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 4,047,480 P/ Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety and traffic improvements; traffic signal synchronization. $ 16,000 $ 16,000 2 Street Improvement Program Widen, repair, or reconstruct roadways as needed. $ 850,000 $ 400,000 3 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling; repairs to streets and culvert/drainage facilities; storm damage/flood control projects; $ 310,000 $ 310,000 TOTALS 1,176,000 726,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Eastvale Page: 5 of 6 Prepared by: George Alvarez, Public Works Director Phone #: (714) 615-0883 Date: May 28, 2014 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 3,321,480 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,260,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 4,581,480 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 1 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety and traffic improvements; traffic signal synchronization. $ 16,000 $ 16,000 2 Street Improvement Program Widen, repair, or reconstruct roadways as needed. $ 850,000 $ 400,000 3 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling; repairs to streets and culvert/drainage facilities; storm damage/flood control projects; $ 310,000 $ 310,000 TOTALS 1,176,000 726,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Eastvale Page: 6 of 6 Prepared by: George Alvarez, Public Works Director Phone #: (714) 615-0883 Date: May 15, 2015 Item N . Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion / Expended to Date Status 1 Road Safety/Traffic Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety and traffic improvements; traffic signal synchronization. $ 542,105 $ 145,105 $ 27,613 This is an annual program. Unexpended costs are carried over to next FY. 2 Street Improvement Program Widen, repair, or reconstruct roadways as needed. $ 4,530,821 $ 1,974,450 $ 39,921 This is an annual program. Unexpended costs are carried over to next FY. /3 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling; repairs to streets and culvert/drainage facilities; storm damage/flood control projects; $ 326,215 $ 326,215 $ 531,265 This is an annual program. Unexpended costs are carried over to next FY. TOTALS 5,399,141 2,445,770 598,799 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF HEMET FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 Shirley Medina Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street P.O. Box 2008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 May 12, 2015 Attn: Grace Alvarez Program Administrator Dear Grace: Enclosed please find the Measure "A" 2014-15 status report and the FY 2016-2020 Local Funds Program, including the city's MOE signed by the City Manager. Our Finance Department provided us with the "anticipated" year-end balance of $760,998 and we included a reimbursement anticipated from WRCOG in the amount of $253,686 for the Sanderson Avenue Widening Project, Acacia to the BNSF RR Tracks, for a total beginning balance of $1,014,684. The next 5 years are computed using the above balance and have projected the projects with these figures. If you have any questions, please let us know at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, Victor Monz, PE CITY OF HEMET CC: Gary Thornhill, Interim City Manager Habib Motlagh, Interim Director of Engineering/City Engineer FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Hemet (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $18,924, approved by the Commission at its October 12, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: /ij // ,, 2015 it c CITY MANAGER ATTEST: , uLiValic SECRETARY ATTACHMENT B SAMPLE FIVE-YEAR CIP FORMAT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Hemet Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: Victor Monz, PE Phone #: (951) 765-3847 Date May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: FY 2015-16 2,282,101.00 1,634,000.00 3,916,101.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 1 FY 2014-15 Citywide Pavement 4" grind and overlay 1,750,000 1,750,000 Rehabilitation including ADA access ramps as necessary 2 Gilbert Street Rehabilitation STP Federal Funding 11.47% 4" grind and overlay concrete curb/gutter 574,450 148,589 Local Participation = 88.53% :i FY Citywide Slurry and Crack Seal Type II slurry and crack seal 1,500,000 1,500,000 TOTALS 3,824,450 3,398,589 i/ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Hemet Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Victor Monz, PE Phone #: (951) 765-3847 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 517,512 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 1.667,000 -/ Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 2,184,512 / FY 2016-17 Item No. Project Name / Limits Total Cost Project Type Measure A Funds 1 FY 2016 17 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation including ADA access ramps as necessary 4" grind and overlay $ 1,750,000 $ 1,750,000 2 FY Citywide Slurry and Crack Seal Type II slurry and crack seal $ 250,000 $ 250,000 TOTALS $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 Balance $ 184,512 /� RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Hemet Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Victor Monz, PE Phone #: (951) 765-3847 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 184,512 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,700,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 1,884,512 FY 2017-18 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 I I i i FY 2017-18 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation including ADA access ramps as necessary 4" grind and overlay concrete curb/gutter $ 1,850,000.00 $ 1,850,000 TOTALS $ 1,850,000.00 $ 1,850,000 Balance $ 34,512 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Hemet Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Victor Monz, PE Phone #: (951) 765-3847 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 34,512 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,751,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 1,785,512 FY 2018-19 Item No. Project Name / Limits ; Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 FY 2018-19 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation including ADA access ramps as necessary 4 grind and overlay concrete curb/gutter $ 1,750,000 $ 1,750,000.00 TOTALS $ 1,750,000 $ 1,750,000.00 Balance $ 35,512.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Hemet Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Victor Monz, PE Phone #: (951) 765-3847 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 35,512 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,804,000 / Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 1,839,512 FY 2019-20 Item No. Project Name / Limits 1 Total Cost ' Measure A Project Type Funds 1 FY 2019-20 Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation including ADA access ramps 4" rind and overlay 9 y concrete curb/gutter I i $ 1,839,512 $ 1,839,512 TOTALS $ 1,839,512 Balance ATTACHMENT D **SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Hemet Page 1 of 1 6 Prepared by: Victor Monz, PE Phone #: (951) 765-3847 Date: May 5. 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure "A" Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status FY 2014-15 Citywide Pavement PS&E 100% complete and 1 Rehabilitation including ADA access 4" grind and overlay $ 2.286.636 $ 2,286.636 June 30. 2015 construction 60% Gilbert Street Rehabilitation PS&E 75% complete, construction anticipated in 3rd 2 from Acacia Ave. to Stetson Ave. 4" grind and overlay $ 574.450 $ 131,171 December 31. 2015 quarter I 2,861,086 2,417,807 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF INDIAN WELLS FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 I N D IAN WELLS CALI FORNIA April 13, 2015 Riverside County Transportation Commission Attn: Grace Alvarez 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 pEcEllvE APR 20 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION D, Re: Measure "A": Local Streets and Roads five-year Capital Improvement Plan and Status Update Dear Ms. Alvarez: Attached is the City of Indian Wells Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Five Year Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2015/16-2019/20. Following is the status of the City project listed on the FY 2014-15 five-year plan: Project Status Cost Measure "A" ($000's) ($000's) Citywide Parkways Ongoing $585 $244 Sincerely, Ken Seumalo Public Works Director cc: Finance Director FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Indian Wells (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Cymission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year l amount of $963,640, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 4114. , 2015 ktettit4, tits) CITY MANAGER ATTES CRETARY RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: KEN SEUMALO, P.E., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Phone #: (760) 776-0237 Date: APRIL 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: 100 / 253 353 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000%) Measure A Funds ( 00%) 2015-2016 1 Street Striping Street Improvement 25 0 2 Street Grind Overlay Street Improvement 1,000 0 3 Slurry Seal on Local Streets Street Improvement 250 0 4 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement 585 353 TOTALS 1,860 353 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: KEN SEUMALO, P.E., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Phone #: (760) 776-0237 Date: APRIL 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 0 258 ✓ 258 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2017 1 Street Striping Street Improvement 25 0 2 Slurry Seal on Highway 111 Street Improvement 100 0 3 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement 585 258 TOTALS 710 258 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: KEN SEUMALO, P.E., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Phone #: (760) 776-0237 Date: APRIL 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 0 263 263 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2017-2018 1 Street Striping Street Improvement 25 0 2 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement 585 263 TOTALS 610 263 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: KEN SEUMALO, P.E., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Phone #: (760) 776-0237 Date: APRIL 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 0 271 271 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2018-2019 1 Street Striping Street Improvement 25 0 2 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement 585 271 TOTALS 610 271 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: KEN SEUMALO, P.E., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Phone #: (760) 776-0237 Date: APRIL 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 0 279 ---- 279 Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) - Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019-2020 1 Street Striping Street Improvement 25 0 2 Citywide Parkways Street Improvement 585 279 TOTALS 610 7.'T9 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF INDIO FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 May 22, 2015 Ms. Grace Alvarez Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Subject: Five Year Measure A Capital Improvement Plan (FY15/16 — FY19/2O) Dear Ms. Alvarez: Enclosed is the City of Indio's submittal of the Five Year Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 15/16 to 19/20 to the Riverside County Transportation Commission for review and approval. The City's Maintenance of Effort certification is also enclosed, as well as a status report for projects utilizing Measure A funds in Fiscal Year 2014-2015. -you hre any questions, please call me at (760) 391-4017. (Sincerely, —1�/f Timothy T. Wassil, PE, PMP, CCM Public Works Director cc: Juan Raya, PE City Engineer Brian Kinder, Accountant p: 760.391.4000 • f: 760.391.4008 100 Civic Center Mall Indio, CA 92201 www.INDIO.org FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Indio (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,048,564, approved by the Commission at its July 11, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: /n et c 2 Z 2015 CITY MANAGER ATTEST: SECRETARY FUND DEPT CITY OF INDIO MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT FYE 6/30/15 ACCOUNT/DESCRIPTION EXPENDITURES 101 4411 Engineering Services $ 1,635,091 101 4341 Street Maintenance $ 2,409,766 TOTAL EXPENDITURES - UNAUDITED ESTIMATED $ 4,044,857 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT FOR YEAR ENDING 6/30/15 $ 4,044,857 APPROVED BY: ROB ROCKWELL ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER/FINANCE DIRECTOR Agency: City of Indio Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Juan Rays, P.E. Phone p: 7600.541-4225 Date: 05/19/15 CITY OF INDIO FIVE-YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015.2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2018 Projects: $1,741 , $35,3737 ern No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Tout Cost Measure A Funds ;018-2914 1 2 3 4 6 ¢ 1 a 8 l4 11 12 17 14 16 18 IZ 14 j10 go it gg gg M gi g¢ 27 Indio Blvd. Bridge N/B @ Storm Channel - Seismic: Retrofit Design i 2,758 $ 5 Jackson St Bridge @ Storm Channel - seismic retrofit Design $ 2,452 $ 3 Indio BNd Bridges over UPRR (railroad) Design - Pending PW Recommendation i 25,150 $ 175 Indio Blvd. Bridge S/B @ Storm Channel - scour protection Constructlat Pending'Indio Blvd, NB @ Storm Channel • Retrofit' $ 439 i 3 Avenue 44 Bridge at the Wash Design i 19,000 $ 5 Shields Road Connecta) (south of Hwy 111) Right -of -Way i 580 i 15 Hwy, 111 Improvements (Rubldoux St t0 Arabia St) Construction pending Caltrans approval i 937 8 25 Hwy. 111 Improvements (Madison St to Rubkioux St) Design $ 11,440 $ 25 Hwy 111 Median and Landscaping Design i 500 i 25 North Indio Pavement Improvements Design i 1,407 i 120 Grant Applications for Transportation Projects On -Going i 50 i 45 Jackson St/Monroe St @ I-10 Fv y Interchanges Design $ 0,000 i 3 Madison Canal Improvements (Madison & Ave 50), Phase 2 Design i 3,200 i 5 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 50 - Ave 52) Phase 2 Design i 6,800 $ 5 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/Supplies (see List A) On -Going a 650 i 275 City Wide Pavement Rehabilitation Program (see List B) Design $ 4,570 i 350 I-10 at Jefferson Street Interchange Project Construction i 72,000 i 300 Hwy 111 Sidewalk and Ramp Upgrade Construction i 226 i 66 Jefferson Street Sidewalk Infill Construction 8 264 S 86 Andrew Jackson Elementary Pedestrian improvements Design S 2,820 S 10 Jackson Street Signal Upgrades & Synchronotatlon Design i 3,276 $ 100 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements On•Going i 50 i 40 Jefferson & Dunbar Traffic Signal City of to QuInta (Lead Agency) $ 300 i 140 Avenue 42 and Gore Street Design to begin summer 2015 $ 300 5 195 Measure A Advance Debt Repayment Payment $ 673 S 673 Salaries & Benefits for PW Employees Project Management & Maintenance S 510 S 100 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries & Benefits 6 66 S 44 TOTALS 108,288 2,838 Agency: City of Indio Page 2 of 8 Prepared by: Juan Raya, P.E Phone N: 780-541-4226 Date; 05✓19/16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2010 - 2017 Estimated Pdor Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 699 1632 2,631 Rem No. Prided Name / limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funde 2018-2017 t 2 3 4 5 6 Z 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 111 17 14 19 22 21 22 22 24 25 28 Indio Blvd. Bridge N/B 0 Storm Channel - Seismi Retrofit _ Design i 2,758 i 3 Jackson St Bridge 0 Storm Channel - seismic retrofit Design a 2,452 i 3 Indio Blvd Bridges over UPRR (railroad) Design - Pending PW Recommendation i 25,150 1 30 Indio Blvd. Bridge S/B 0 Storm Channel - scour protection Construction Pendirm'Indio Blvd. NB 0 Storm Channel - Retrofit' i 439 i 3 Avenue 44 Bridle at the Wash Design i 19,000 i 6 Shields Road Connection (south of Hwy 111) Design 0 600 i 3 Jim. 111 Improvements (Rubidoux St to Arabia St) Construction i 937 i 28 Hwy, 111 Improvements (Madison St to Rubkioux St) Construction i 11,440 i 192 Jiwy 111 median and Landscaping Construction i 500 i 20 North Indlo Pavement Improvements Construction $ 1,407 i 146 Grant Applications for Transportation Projects On -Going i 50 i 45 Jackson St/Monroe St @ I-10 Fwy Interchanges COnStruCtion 5 8,060 i 3 Madison Canal Improvements (Madison & Ave 50), Phase 2 Construction a 3,200 S 27 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 50 - Ave 52) Phase 2 DeSkin (pending 110 Issues) i 0,800 i 6 Annual Street Maintenance ContrdctslSuppkes (see Ust A) On -Going $ 1,000 i 680 1-10 at Jefferson Street Interchange Protect In Construction. $69M Protect $ 22,000 $ 3 Hwy 111 Sidewalk and Ramp Upgrade In Construction i 228 i 9 Jefferson Street Sidewalk infill In Construction i 204 i 13 Andrew Jackson Elementary Pedestrian Improvements Design i 2,820 i 10 Jackson Street Signal Upgrades & Synchronoitation Construction $ 3.276 i 184 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvemenni s On•Gokyt i 60 i 40 Jefferson & Dunbar Traffic Signal City of to Oulnta (lead Agency) i 300 $ 3 Avenue 42 and Gore Street Design $ 300 i 3 Measure A Advance Debt Repayment Payment i 873 s 873 Salaries & Benefits for PW Employees Protect Management & Maintenance i 509 i 102 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries & Benefits i 85 i 45 164,035 TOTALS 2,177 Agency: City of Indio Page 3 of 8 Prepared by: Juan Rem PE Phone M: 780-641-4225 Date: 0519/15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017.2018 Projects: 364 1889 2,223 Rem No. Protect Name I Limits Protest Type Total Cost Measure A Funks 2917.2019 t Z 3 4 4 e 7 A 9 14 11 12 .12 14 1,1 19. 1j 1e indio Blvd. Bridge N/B hid Storm Channel - Seismic Retrofit Construction i 2,758 1 3 Jackson St Bridge hid Storm Channel - seismic retrofit Oesign 1 2,452 / 3 Indio Blvd Bridges over UPRR (railroad) Realgn 1 25.150 1 30 Indio Blvd. Bridge S/B @ Storm Channel - scour protection Construction 1 439 1 40 Avenue 44 Bridge at the Wash pesi9n 4 19.000 i 5 Hwy. 111 Improvements (Madison St to Rubidoux St) construction i 11,440 i 3 Hwy 111 Median and Landscaping Construction 1 500 1 20 Grant Appikations for Transportation Protects On•Golna 3 50 i 45 Jackson St/MOnroe St at 1-10 EwS Interchanges Construction i 8,000 i 3 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 50 - Ave 52) Phase 2 OeSign (ptyndbrt 110Issues) 1 8,800 i eo Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/Supplies (see List A) 9n•GOinxl i 1.000 i 025 I-10 at Jefferson Street interchange Protect COnstnuctlon $ 72.000 1 3 Andrew Jackson Elementary Pedestrian Improvements Construction / 2,820 $ 10 J0c1kSOn Street Signal Upgrades 0 SynchronoiratlOn Construction i 3,275 $ 5 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements On•Going i 50 1 40 Measure A Advance Debt Repayment Payment i 879 i 873 Salaries & Benefits for PW Employees Protect Management & Matntena cce $ 509 1 105 Indio Internal Se rvites Percentage of Salaries & Benefits 1 85 i 45 158,801 TOTALS 1,718 Agency: City of Indio Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Juan Raya, P.E. Phone* 760-5414225 Date: 05/19/15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 505 1925 2,430 em No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Fends 2018.2019 1 a 3 4 6 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1s Indio Blvd. Bridge N/B @ Storm Channel - Seismic Retrofit Construction $ 2,758 $ 3 Jackson St Bridge @ Storm Channel - seismic retrofit Design $ 2,452 $ 3 Indio Blvd Bridges Over UPRR (railroad) ConStructlon $ 25,160 $ 3o Indio Blvd. Bridge S/B @ Storm Channel - scour protection Construction $ 439 $ 9 Avenue 44 Bridge at the Wash Construction $ 19,000 $ 5 Hwy. 111 Improvements (Madison St to Rubidoux St) Construction $ 11,440 $ 3 Date Street Pavement Rehabilitation (Calhoun - Cypress) Design $ 540 $ 100 Grant Applications for Transportation Projects On -Going $ 50 $ 50 Jackson St/Monroe St @ I-10 Fwy Interchanges Construction $ 8,080 $ 3 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 48 - Hwy 111) Design $ 2,800 $ 5 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/Supplies (see List A) On -Going $ 1.0o0 $ 650 I-10 at Jefferson Street Interchange Project Construction $ 72.000 $ 3 Clinton Street Sidewalk (So. of Mlles Ave) Design $ 240 $ 8 Jackson Street Signal Upgrades & Synchronoiaation Construction $ 3,275 $ 3 Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements On -Going $ 50 $ 40 Measure A Advance Debt Repayment Payment $ 673 $ 873 Salaries & Benefits for PW Employees Project Management & Maintenance $ 509 $ 109 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries & Benefits $ 85 $ 45 150,541 TOTALS 1,742 Agency: City of Indio Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Juan Raya, P.E. Phone #: 76o-541-4225 Date: 05/19/15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 688 J 1983�/ 2,671 No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019.2020 J. 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 13 1_4 15 16 17 18 Indio Blvd. Bridge N/B @ Storm Channel - Seismic Retrofit Construction $ 2,758 $ 3 Jackson St Bridge @ Storm Channel - seismic retrofit Design $ 2.452 $ 3 Indio Blvd Bridges over UPRR (railroad) Construction $ 25,150 $ 25o Indio Blvd. Bridge S/B @ Storm Channel - scour protection Construction $ 439 $ 10 Avenue 44 BNdge at the Wash Construction $ 19,000 $ 46 Hwy. 111 Improvements (Madison St to Rubldoux St) Construction $ 11,440 $ 3 Date Street Pavement Rehabilitation (Calhoun - Cypress) Design $ 540 $ 5 Grant Applications for Transportation ProjeOS On -Going $ 50 $ 45 Jackson St/Monroe St @ I-10 Fwy Interchanges Construction $ 8,089 $ 3 Madison Street Improvements (Ave 48 - Hwy 111) Design $ 2,e00 $ 5 Annual Street Maintenance Contracts/Supplies (see List A) On -Going $ 1.000 $ 600 I-10 at Jefferson Street Interchange Project Construction $ 72,000 $ - Clinton Street Sidewalk (So. of Miles Ave) Design $ 240 $ 3 Jackson Street Signal Upgrades & Synchronoization Construction $ 3.275 $ Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements On -Going $ 50 $ 40 Measure A Advance Debt Repayment _ Payment $ 673 $ 673 Salaries & Benefits for PW Employees Project Management & Maintenance $ 509 $ 114 Indio Internal Services Percentage of Salaries & Benefits $ 85 $ 45. 150,541 TOTALS 1,845 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Indio Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Juan Raya, P.E Phone*: 760541-4225 Date: 05 /9//5 tem Mo. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Indio Blvd Bridge NB ® Storm Channel - seismic retrofit Design $ 50 $ 15 06/2020 Design - 90%. Construction - Spring 2016 2 Jackson St Bridge a Starr Channel - seismic retrofit Design $ 50 $ 13 06/2019 Design - 95%- Construction - Spring 2016 air.i Inds Blvd. Bridge S/B et UPRR- seismic iobufd Design $ 50 S 20 06/2020 projects merged. Design - Construction PWto present options ewer. Inds Blvd. Bridge WB ft Storm Channel - scour protection Design $ 60 $ 10 06/2020 �r Indio Blvd. Bridge SB et Storm Channel - scour protection Design $ 60 $ 10 06/2020 Design Blvd NB complete. Channel - retrofit' rag 'Indio later Avenue 44 Bridge at the Wash Preliminary Design $ 500 $ 10 06/2020 Design - 20% pg NIP Shields Road Connection (south of Hwy 111) Design. Right -of -Way $ 150 $ 10 06/2019 Right -of -Way required Design - 30% �w Jefferson Street & Varner Road Widening Construction S 1.000 S 707 Complete T Hwy. 111 Improvements (Rubidoux St to Arabia St) Design $ 140 $ 53 12/2017 Design complete. Construction - pending Caltrans approval (Summer 2015) ills Hay. 111 Improvements (Madison St to Rubidatt St) Design $ 1.000 $ 38 12/2017 Design - 80%. Construction - Spring 2018 U Jackson St/Monroe St W-10 Fwv Interchanges � Design $ 8,080 $ 273 06/2020 PSR - 20% alfrar 1-10 and Jefferson Street Interchange Construction 1.340 $ 10 In tion M Madison Street Improvements$ (Ave 48 - F1wv 111) Design S 310 i 10 06/2020 06/2020 signConpectin Design pending 14 Madison Canal Improvements (Madison St & Ave 50). Phase 2 Design $ 3.200 $ 50 06/2017 Slit into two projects:. Connsbuction Summer 220s18 � M Mad son Street Improvements (Ave 50-Ave 52). Phase 2 Design 9 6.800 $ 50 06/2011 Soli into two projects: Design 30% ew4fflor North Indio Pavement Improvements Design. Applied for CMAQ Grant for Construction $ 82 $ 52 06/0217 Design - Spring 2015 MN.' Date Street Pavement Rehabilitation (Calhoun -Cypress) Design & Construction S 540 $ 5 06/202D Design complete_ Construction - Pending tuning, Fall 2018 weir' Amual Street Maintenance Contracts/Supplies Construction S 1,480 S 10 On -Going Completed for 14/1WY era)+ Hwv 111 Sidewalk and Ramp Upgrade Construction S 1W S 5 12/2017 In Construction i11)f Jefferson Street Sidewalk Infill COnSttkktiOn $ 207 $ 3 06/2016 In Construction roller. Cinton Street Sidewalk (So. Of Nees Ave) Design S 48 $ 20 06/2020 Design Only 22 Andrew Jackson E.S. Pedestrian Improvements Design $ 2.820 $ 12 06/2018 Design only war,. Jackson/Market Traffic Signal Construction $ 502 $ 20 Complete eves - 3 Traffic Signals & Landscaping at Ave 42 & Monroe St Construction $ 100 $ 50 Complete "76' Misc. Traffic Safety Improvements Misc. (as neede0) $ 60 $ 50 On -Going Completed for 14/15FY - 36 Jackson Street Signal Upgrades & Svrrchronoization Design & Construction. Applied for CMAQ Grant S 629 $ 24 06/2018 Design - Stickler 2016 -if , Jefferson & Dunbar Traffic Signal Design. Applied for CMAQ with City Of La Quinta $ 72 $ 20 06/2017 Cray of La Quints (Lead Agency) .-Ile Westward Ho & Road Runner Mini Roundabout Design. Applied for CMAQ with City of La QLurlta $ 88 $ 20 On -Going .41 Measure A Advance Debt Repayment ( Payment $ 873 $ 673 On -Going Completed for 14/15FY Gram Applications for Transportation Projects Grant Preparation $ 62 S 20 On -Going Completed for 14/15FY e 31 Salaries & Benefits for PW Employees Project Mngmt & Mntnce S 500 $ 84 On -Going Completed for 14/15FY SP.. India Internal Services (Overhead) Internal Service Fees $ 49 $ 49 On -Going Completed for 14/15FY / TOTALS 30,330 2.396 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 Brad Hancock, Mayor . Laura Roughton, Mayor Pro Tem . Brian Berkson, Council Member . Frank Johnston, Council Member . Verne Lauritzen, Council Member May 14, 2015 Attn: Grace Alvarez, Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon St, 3`d Floor Riverside CA 92502 D MAY 18 2015 J RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Subject: RCTC MEASURE A LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS REVENUE PROJECTIONS, MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION, AND JURUPA VALLEY FIVE - YEAR MEASURE A 2015/16-2019/20 CIP Dear Ms. Alvarez, The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley, at its regular meeting on May 7, 2015, adopted the City's Five Year Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2015/16-2019/20. Included with this letter are the following documents: • Five-year Jurupa Valley CIP for Fiscal Years 2015/16-2019/20 • Measure "A" Local Funds Program Project Status Report for Fiscal Year 2014/15 • MOE Certification Statement The City requests that the Riverside County Transportation Commission accept and approve the City's Measure "A" Five -Year CIP and find the City eligible to continue receiving its fair share of Measure "A" revenues. If you should have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me via email at sloriso a jurupavalley.org or via telephone at (951) 332-6464. Sincerely, Steve R. Loriso, P.E. Deputy City Engineer Cc: Gary S. Thompson, City Manager George Wentz, Assistant City Manager Jim Smith, City Engineer 8930 Limonite Ave., Jurupa Valley, CA 92509-5183, (951) 332-6464 www.jurupavalley.org Brad Hancock, Mayor . Laura Boughton, Mayor Pro Tem . Brian Berkson, Council Member . Frank Johnston, Council Member . Verne Lauritzen, Council Member FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the City of Jurupa Valley (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $0, scheduled for approval by the Commission at its July 8, 2015 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: May 7, 2015 City Manager ATTEST: Victoria Wasko, CMC City Clerk 8930 Limonite Ave., Jurupa Valley, CA 92509-5183, (951) 332-6464 www.jurupavalley.org RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: Jurupa Valley Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Steve Loriso Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 5/7/2015 Updated: 6/3/15 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds Budget ($000's) Measure A Funds Expended($000's) Estimated Completion Status 2014.1 Camino Real Pavement Rehabilitation, Linares Ave to 270' N/o Black Hills Dr., (8300 LF) Reimburse Riv Co 3rd of 4 Yrs Street rehab 1,500 188 188 June 30, 2016 In Repayment 2014.2 Van Buren Blvd. Pvmt Rehab Ph 2, Jurupa rd. to Bel!grave Ave Street Rehab (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,192 160 0 October 31, 2014 Design complete, construction moved to FY 16-17 2014.3 Annual (FY 13/14) Miscellaneous St Pavement Program Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,000 500 430 September 30, 2014 Complete 2014.4 Annual (FY 12/13) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Street Maintenance 120 120 120 July 30, 2014 Complete 2014.5 Annual (FY 13 14) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Street Maintenance 120 120 120 Complete 2014.6 Annual (FY 13-14) Miscellaneous St Maintenance Program (Slurry/Crack Seal) Street Maintenance 120 120 104 Complete 2014.7 Rutile St/Galena Rd Pvmt Rehab, Woodbridge Ln to 1100" E of Rutile/Van Buren Street Rehab 240 240 216 October 31, 2014 Complete 2014.8 Pacific Ave Pavement Rehabilitation: From 45th St. to Mission Blvd. (Coordination with RCSD Water Project). Street Rehab (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 328 190 0 Project not started due to coordination with RCSD, construction moved to FY 15-16 2014.9 Rubidoux Blvd. Pavement Rehab: From Mission Blvd. to SR60 Street Rehab (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 612 300 0 Project delayed till FY 19-20 2014.10 Annual Miscellaneous St Pavement Program (FY 14-15) Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,000 500 1,035 April 1, 2015 Complete 2014.11 Annual Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program (FY 14-15) Traffic 120 120 120 September 30, 2014 Complete 2014.12 Annual Miscellaneous St Maintenance Program (FY 14-15) Street Maintenance 120 120 25 September 30, 2014 Complete 2014.13 8% Overhead/ Administration Administration 144 144 144 June 30, 2014 Complete TOTALS 6,616 2,822 2,502 JURUPA VALLEY FIVE YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Jurupa Valley Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: Steve Loriso Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 5/7/2015 Updated: 6/3/15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: 1,160 ' 1,830 -1 2,990 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 2015.1 Limonite Pavement Rehabilitation and Shoulder Improvement Street Resurfacing 600 600 Pacific Ave Pavement 2015.2 Rehabilitation: From 45th St. to Mission Blvd. (Coordination with Street Rehab (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 328 190 RCSD Water Project). 2015.3 Golden West Sidewalk Will Project Sidewalk Replacement 270 200 (45th Street to Rathke Ave.) (SB 821) 2015.4 Mission Blvd. Bridge (PA/ED) Co-op agreement with Riverside County 114 50 2015.5 Camino Real Pavement Rehabilitation _ Street Resurfacing 1,500 188 2015.E Annual (FY 15/16) Miscellaneous St Pavement Program Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,000 750 2015.7 Annual (FY 15/16) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Roadway Safety and Traffic Enhancement 200 175 Annual (FY 15/16) Miscellaneous St 2015.8 Maintenance Program (Slurry/Crack Street Maintenance 250 250 Seal 2015.9 8% Overhead/ Administration Administration 146 146 TOTALS 2,549 - JURUPA VALLEY FIVE YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Jurupa Valley Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Steve Loriso Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 5/7/2015 Updated: 6/3/15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 441 1,867 2,308 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 Sierra Ave Pavement 2016.1 Rehabilitation,Armstrong Rd to 200' Street Resurfacing 500 500 S/o Karen Ln (2750 Lf) 2016.2 Van Buren Blvd. Pvmt Rehab Ph 2, Jurupa rd. to Bellgrave Ave Street Rehab (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,315 250 2016.3 Mission Blvd. Bridge (PA/ED) Co-op agreement with Riverside County 114 50 2016,4 Annual (FY 16/17) Miscellaneous St Pavement Program Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,000 750 2016.5 Annual (FY 16/17) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Roadway Safety and Traffic Enhancement 200 200 Annual (FY 16/17) Miscellaneous St 2016.6 Maintenance Program (Slurry/Crack Street Maintenance 131 131 Seal 2016.7 8% Overhead/ Administration Administration 149 149 TOTALS 2,030 JURUPA VALLEY RIVERSIDE COUNTYFIrijettraWHITION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Jurupa Valley Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Steve Loriso Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 5/7/2015 Updated: 6/3/15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 278 1,904 2,182 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 2017.1 Van Buren Blvd Pavement Rehab - Ph 3: From Bellegrave Ave to SE/o Street Rehabilitation 2 Gas Tax) 1,300 350 Etiwanda (Funds Rubidoux Blvd., 28th and 29th St 2017.2 Pavement Rehab: SR60 to 28th and 29th and 30th st, Avalon to Street Rehabilitation (Funds 2 Gas Tax) 600 400 Rubidoux Blvd 2017.3 Mission_ Blvd Bridge (PS&E) Co-op agreement with Riverside County 108 50 2017.4 Annual (FY 17/18) Miscellaneous St Pavement Program Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,000 750 2017.5 Annual (FY 17/18) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Roadway Safety and Traffic Enhancement 200 200 Annual (FY 17/18) Miscellaneous St 2017.6 Maintenance Program (Slurry/Crack Street Maintenance 123 123 Seal 2017.7 80/0 Overhead/ Administration Administration 152 152 TOTALS 2,025 JURUPA VALLEY FIVE YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Jurupa Valley Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Steve Loriso Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 5/7/2015 Updated: 6/3/15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: s 157 ` 1,961 2,118 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 . Street Rehabilitation 280 280 2018.1 Valley Way Pavement Rehab: Mission Blvd to Jurupa Rd 2018.2 Wineville Ave Pavement Rehab: Riverside Dr to Mission Blvd. Street Rehabilitation/ Construction 390 390 2018.3 2018.4 2018.5 General Dr. Pavement Rehab: 200' East of Clay St. East End Street Rehabilitation/ Construction 260 260 50 750 110 107 Mission Blvd. Bridge (PS&E) Annual (FY 18/19) Miscellaneous St Pavement Program Co-op agreement with Riverside County Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 108 1,000 110 107 2018.6 2018.7 Annual (FY 18/19) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Roadway Safety and Traffic Enhancement Annual (FY 18/19) Miscellaneous St Maintenance Program (Slurry/Crack Seal Street Maintenance 2018.8 8% Overhead/ Administration Administration 156 156 TOTALS 2,103 JURUPA VALLEY FIVE YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Jurupa Valley Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: Steve Loriso Phone #: 951-332-6464 Date: 5/7/2015 Updated: 6/3/15 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 15 2,020 2,035 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 2019.1 Rubidoux Blvd. Pavement Rehab: From Mission Blvd. to SR60 Street Rehab (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 612 300 2019.2 Mission Blvd. Bridge (Construction) Co-op agreement with Riverside County 709 237 2019.3 Annual (FY 19/20) Miscellaneous St Pavement Program Street Betterment (Fund 2 Gas Tax) 1,000 750 2019.4 Annual (FY 19/20) Roadway Safety and Traffic Improvement Program Roadway Safety and Traffic Enhancement 200 200 Annual (FY 19/20) Miscellaneous St 2019.5 Maintenance Program (Slurry/Crack Street Maintenance 125 125 Seal 2019.6 g% Overhead/ Administration Administration 161 161 TOTALS 1,773 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF LA QUINTA FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 TA/tit 4 4 Qgdarc v May 5, 2015 Grace Alvarez Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Subject: City of La Quinta Fiscal Year 2015/2016 — 2019/2020 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan and Maintenance of Effort Certification Dear Ms. Alvarez, The City of La Quinta respectfully submits its Measure A Capital Improvement Plan, Project Status Report and Maintenance of Effort Certification for the Commission's review and approval. The City of La Quinta is a full participant in the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Programs. Please do not hesitate to contact Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer, at (760) 777-7042 or Nick Nickerson, Project Manager, at (760) 323-5344 if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Frank J, pevaL, k City Mai tiger Enclosures 78-495 Calle Tampico I La Quinta I California 92253 I 760.777.7000 I www.La-Quinta.org FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of La Quinta (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $937,007, approved by the Commission at its June 12, 2013 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2015 rank J. " • evac',,, City Manager ATTEST: ` I Susan Maysels, C Clerk CITY OF LA QUINTA FIVE-YEAR C/P RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of La Quinta Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7042 Date: May 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $860,829 $749, 500 $1,610,329 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 1 Citywide Street and Traffic Signal Maintenance Program Street/Signal Maintenance 275,000 275,000 2 Dune Palms Road Improvements (Black Hawk Way to Street Improvement 2,483,000 350,829 Whitewater Channel 3 Eisenhower Drive Pavement Rehabilitation Street Improvement 400,000 400,000 4 New Traffic Signal (Jefferson St. at Dunbar) Traffic Signal Improvement 430,000 47,500 5 Adams Street Signal and Street Improvements Street Improvement 1,116,122 201,000 6 Avenue 52 at Jefferson Street Roundabout Striping Modification Street Improvement 376,000 336,000 TOTALS 1,610,329 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of La Quinta Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7042 Date: May 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 0 764,500 764,500 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 1 Citywide Street and Traffic Signal Maintenance Program Street/Signal Maintenance 235,000 235,000 2 Highway 111 at La Quinta Centre Drive (Dual Left Turn Lanes) Street Improvement 529,500 529,500 TOTALS 764,500 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of La Quinta Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7042 Date: May 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 0 780,000 780,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 Citywide Street and Traffic Signal Maintenance Program Street/Signal Maintenance 235,000 235,000 2 Fred Waring Drive Reconstruction Street Improvement 545,000 545,000 TOTALS 780,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of La Quinta Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., City Engineer Phone #: (760) 777-7042 Date: May 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 0 803,500 803,500 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Citywide Street and Traffic Signal Maintenance Program Street/Signal Maintenance 235,000 235,000 2 Village Circulation Improvements Street Improvements 1,001,000 568,500 TOTALS 803,500 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of La Quinta Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., City Engineer Phone It (760) 777-7042 Date: May 13, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: 827,500 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 827,500 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 1 Citywide Street and Traffic Signal Maintenance Program Street/Signal Maintenance 235,000 235,000 2 Village Circulation Improvements Street Improvements 1,001,000 432,500 3 Washington Street Left Turn Lane Street Improvements 160,000 160,000 TOTALS 827,500 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of La Ouinta Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., City Engineer Phone p: (760) 777-7042 Date: May 13, 2015 Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status 1 Citywide Street and Traffic Signal Maintenance Program (Amendment 1-April 23, 2015) Street/Signal Maintenance 235,000 235,000 30-Jun-15 Annual Maintenance 2 Avenue 52 at Jefferson Street Roundabout (Amendment 2 - May 2015) Street Improvement 376,000 40,000 30-Oct-15 Construction Phase Initiated 3 Dune Palms Road Improvement (Black Hawk Way to WWR) (Amendment 2 - May 2015) Street Improvement 2,483,000 25,000 30-Jun-17 PA/ED/PE Phase Underway 4 Adams Street Signal and Street Improvements (Amendment 2 - May 2015) Street Improvement 1,116,122 60,000 30-Sep-15 Construction Phase Initiated TOTALS 4,210,122 360,000 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY OF LAI_E L LSINOU DREAM EXTREME May 8, 2015 Ms. Grace Alvarez Planning & Programming Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Subject: City of Lake Elsinore Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (FYs 2015/16 — 2019/20) Dear Ms. Alvarez: The City of Lake Elsinore has updated the Five Year Plan and the following documents are enclosed for your review: • City of Lake Elsinore Maintenance of Effort (MOE) signed Certification Statement for FY 2015-2016 • Measure A Five -Year CIP plans for FY 2015/16 — 2019/20 • Project Status Report for FY 2014-15 Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 674.3124 ext. 244. Sincerely, Jim Smith Interim Director of Public Works 951.674.3124 130 S. MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 W W W.LAKE-ELSINORE.ORG U:\engr\Measure A (FY14-19)-Revised\FY 2016-2020\Msr A 16-20.docx FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Lake Elsinore (the Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $960,771, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: -5/1 r�� , 2015 Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Page 1 of 6 Prepared By: Jim Smith, PW Director Phone #: (951) 674-3124 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,072,125 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,159,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 2,231,125 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 1 Annual Roadway Drainage Repair Program - Citywide (Project No. DRR16) Maintenance $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Annual Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair Program - Citywide 2 (Project No. CGS16) Maintenance $ 55,000 $ 55,000 3 Annual Traffic Striping Program - Citywide (Project No. STRP16) Maintenance $ 175,000 $ 175,000 4 Annual Pavement Management Program - PMP Update (Project No. PMP16) Maintenance $ 45,500 $ 45,500 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal Program - Maintenance $ 351,700 $ 351,700 6 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide (Project No. Z10008) Maintenance $ 5,144,728 $ 145,157 7 Avenue 7 Sidewalk & Street Improvements - construct segment of Avenue 7 to Mill, at the RRC Elementary School. (New Project) Construction $ 51,500 $ 51,500 8 I-15/SR 74 (Central Ave) Interchange - PA&ED phase of IC and ramp improvements (New Project) Construction $ 450,000 $ 300,000 I-15/Railroad Canyon SB Ramp Deceleration Lane - 9 Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans/construct decel lane on SB 1-15 at RCR (Project No. 4432) "formerly Project No. 4235-1 Construction $ 1,394,640 $ 307,268 10 Main Street Interchange - PSR for IC improvements and road widening (New Project) Construction $ 600,000 $ 200,000 11 Grand Ave. Rehabilitation - City/County project; City contribution to County roadway project (New Project) 1 Construction $ 150,000 $ - 12 I-15/Franklin Street Interchange - Phase II - Construction $ 150,000 $ - 13 Gunnerson Street Pavement Rehabilitation - City/State project; City contribution to State roadway project (New Project) Rehabilitation $ 1,136,000 $ - Debt Service - Local Measure A Sales Tax Revenue Certificates 14 of Participation, Series 2014A (T.R.I.P. - Total Road Improvement Program) Debt Service $ 500,000 $ 500,000 TOTALS $ 10,304,068 $ 2,231,125 T.R.I.P. Proceeds $ 4, 999, 571 $ 914,515 $ 200,000 $ 300,000 $ 189,000 $6,603,086 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016-2017 Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Page 2 of 6 Prepared By: Jim Smith, PW Director Phone #: (951) 674-3124 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,182,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 1,182,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 1 Annual Roadway Drainage Repair Program - Citywide (Project No. DRR17) Maintenance $ 115,000 $ 115,000 Annual Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair Program - Citywide 2 (Project No. CGS17) Maintenance $ 55,000 $ 55,000 3 Annual Traffic Striping Program - Citywide Maintenance $ 215,000 $ 215,000 (Project No. STRP17) 4 Annual Pavement Management Program - PMP Update Maintenance $ 45,500 $ 32,000 (Project No. PMP17) 5 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal Program - Maintenance $ 413,562 $ 211,000 Avenue 7 Sidewalk & Street Improvements - construct 6 segment of Avenue 7 to Mill, at the RRC Elementary School. (New Project) Construction $ 54,000 $ 54,000 Debt Service - Local Measure A Sales Tax Revenue Certificates 7 of Participation, Series 2014A (T.R.I.P. - Total Road Improvement Program) Debt Service $ 500,000 $ 500,000 TOTALS $ 1,398,062 $ 1,182,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Page 3 of 6 Prepared By: Jim Smith, PW Director Phone #: (951) 674-3124 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,206,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 1,206,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 Annual Roadway Drainage Repair Program - Citywide (Project No. DRR18) Maintenance $ 140,000 $ 140,000 2 Annual Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair Program - Citywide Maintenance $ 55,000 $ 55,000 (Project No. CGS18) 3 Annual Traffic Striping Program - Citywide Maintenance $ 215,000 $ 215,000 (Project No. STRP18) Annual Pavement Management Program - PMP Update 4 (Project No. PMP18) Maintenance $ 45,500 $ 32,000 5 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal Proqram - Maintenance $ 250,575 $ 209,000 Avenue 7 Sidewalk & Street Improvements - construct 6 segment of Avenue 7 to Mill, at the RRC Elementary School. (New Project) Construction $ 55,000 $ 55,000 Debt Service - Local Measure A Sales Tax Revenue Certificates 7 of Participation, Series 2014A (T.R.I.P. - Total Road Improvement Program) Debt Service $ 500,000 $ 500,000 TOTALS $ 1,261,075 $ 1,206,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Page 4 of 6 Prepared By: Jim Smith, PW Director Phone #: (951) 674-3124 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,242,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 1,242,000 Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Annual Roadway Drainage Repair Program - Citywide Maintenance $ 190,000 $ 190,000 (Project No. DRR19) 2 Annual Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair Program - Citywide Maintenance $ 55,000 $ 55,000 (Project No. CGS19) 3 Annual Traffic Striping Program - Citywide (Project No. STRP19) Maintenance $ 215,000 $ 215,000 4 Annual Pavement Management Program - PMP Update (Project No. PMP19) Maintenance $ 45,500 $ 32,000 5 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal Program - Maintenance $ 452,562 $ 250,000 Debt Service - Local Measure A Sales Tax Revenue Certificates 6 of Participation, Series 2014A (T.R.I.P. - Total Road Improvement Program) Debt Service $ 500,000 $ 500,000 TOTALS $ 1,458,062 $ 1,242,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: Page 5 of 6 Prepared By: Jim Smith, PW Director Phone #: (951) 674-3124 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 0 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,279,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 1,279,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 Annual Roadway Drainage Repair Program - Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Debt Service $ 190,000 $ 55,000 $ 215,000 $ 69,000 $ 452,562 $ 500,000 $ 190,000 $ 55,000 $ 215,000 $ 69,000 $ 250,000 $ 500,000 1 2 3 4 5 6 Citywide (Project No. DRR19) Annual Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair Program - Citywide (Project No. CGS19) Annual Traffic Striping Program - Citywide (Project No. STRP19) Annual Pavement Management Program - PMP Update (Project No. PMP19) Annual Citywide Slurry Seal Program - Debt Service - Local Measure A Sales Tax Revenue Certificates of Participation, Series 2014A (T.R.I.P. - Total Road Improvement Program) TOTALS $ 1,481,562 $ 1,279,000 Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Page 6 of 6 Prepared By: Jim Smith, PW Director Phone #: (951) 674-3124 Date: May 8, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Expenditures as of Ma v 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Annual Roadway Drainage Repair Program - Citywide (Project No. DRR15) Maintenance $ 735,000 $ 4,280 6/30/2015 Project is on schedule 2 Annual Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Repair Program - Citywide (Project No. CGS15) Maintenance $ 275,000 $ 55,000 6/30/2015 Project is on schedule 3 Annual Traffic Striping Program - Citywide (Project No. STRP15) Maintenance $ 1,035,000 $ 60 8/30/2015 Project is on schedule 4 Annual Pavement Management Program - PMP Update (Project No. PMP15) Maintenance $ 251,000 $ 32,900 8/30/2015 Project is on schedule 5 Annual Citywide Slurry Seal Program - Maintenance $ 1,920,961 $ 85,500 1/15/2015 Project is complete for FY 14/15 6 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Maintenance $ 5,144,728 $ 42,900 6/30/2016 Project is on schedule 7 Avenue 7 Sidewalk & Street Improvements - design segment of Avenue 7 to Mill, at the RRC Elementary School. (New Project) Construction $ 161,393 $ 893 6/30/2018 Project is on schedule 8 I-15/SR 74 (Central Ave) Interchange - PA&ED phase of IC and ramp improvements (New Project) Construction $ 1,083,000 $ 10,000 6/30/2016 Project is on schedule 9 I-15/Railroad Canyon SB Ramp Deceleration Lane - Cooperative Agreement with Ca!trans/construct decel lane on SB I-15 at RCR (Project No. 4432) `formerly Project No. 4235-1 Construction $ 1,425,000 $ 55,087 10/30/2015 Project is on schedule 10 Traffic Signal Installation @ Canyon Hills/Sage Lane - (Project No. 4368) Construction $ 248,000 $ 234,721 8/30/2015 Project is on schedule 11 Main Street Interchange - PSR for IC improvements and road widening (New Project) Construction $ 600,000 $ 6,308 10/30/2015 Project is on schedule 12 Grand Ave. Rehabilitation - City/County project; City contribution to County roadway project (New Project) Construction $ 300,000 $ 1,635 10/30/2015 Project is on schedule 13 Downtown Street Rehab & Slurry Seal - Main St. from Lakshore to 1-15 and adjacent side streets (New Project) Rehabilitation $ 800,000 $ 630,933 1/15/2015 Project is complete 14 I-15/Franklin Street Interchange - Phase 11 - Construction $ 250,000 $ 671 6/30/2016 Project is on schedule 15 Gunnerson Street Pavement Rehabilitation - City/State project; City contribution to State roadway project (New Project) Rehabilitation $ 1,185,000 $ 33,260 12/30/2015 Project is on schedule Debt Service $ 2,500,000 TOTALS $ 17,914,082 $ 1,194,148 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF MENIFEE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 Scott A. Mann Mayor John V. Denver Mayor Pro Tem Wallace W. Edgerton Councilmember Greg August Councilmember Matthew Llesemeyer Councilmember 2.97i4 Haun Road Menifee, CA 92586 Phone 95i.672.6777 Fax 951.679.3843 www.cityofinenifee.us May 7, 2015 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Ms. Grace Alvarez Planning & Programming Manager Subject: CIP and Project Status Report Ms. Alvarez Enclosed please find the City of Menifee's Measure A Local Funds Capital Improvement Program for FY 2015/16 through 2019/20 and the project status report for FY 2014/15. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions or need additional information. Thanks you, Bruce Foltz Finance Director FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Menifee (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $214,225, approved by the Commission at its September 11, 2013 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: ral y 7 , 2015 ATTEST: Mttrr SECRETARY City of Menifee Bruce Foltz 951-672-6777 April 15, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015-2016 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,994,712 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,476,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 3,470,712 Item Number Project Name Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Capital $ 20,000,000 $ 1,303,588 2 Pavement Management Program Maintenance $ 1,450,000 $ 220,008 3 Bradley Bridge Capital $ 499,903 $ 499,903 4 Encanto Road Reconstruction Capital $ 180,089 $ 180,089 Total $ 22,129,992 $ 2,203,588 Balance Remaining $ 1,267,124 Page 2 of 6 City of Menifee Bruce Foltz 951-672-6777 April 15, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016-2017 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 1,267,124 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,506,000' Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 2,773,124 Item Number Project Name Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 2 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Pavement Management Program Capital Maintenance $ 20,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,302,488 $ 800,000 Total $ 21,500,000 $ 2,102,488 Balance Remaining $ 670,636 Page 3 of 6 City of Menifee Bruce Foltz 951-672-6777 April 15, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017-2018 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 670,636 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,536,000 / Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 2,206,636 Item Number Project Name Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1. )_ Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Pavement Management Program Capital Maintenance $ 20,000,000 $ 1,600,000 $ 1,301,088 $ 700,000 Total $ 21,600,000 $ 2,001,088 Balance Remaining $ 205,548 Page 4 of 6 City of Menifee Bruce Foltz 951-672-6777 April 15, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018-2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 205,548 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,582,000 ' Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 1,787,548 Item Number Project Name Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 2 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Pavement Management Program Capital Maintenance $ 20,000,000 $ 1,750,000 $ 1,305,488 $ 450,000 Total $ 21,750,000 $ 1,755,488 Balance Remaining $ 32,060 Page 5 of 6 City of Menifee Bruce Foltz 951-672-6777 April 15, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019-2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 32,060 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 1,629,000 ' Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 1,661,060 Item Number Project Name Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 2 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Pavement Management Program Capital Maintenance $ 20,000,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,304,088 $ 350,000 Total $ 21,800,000 $ 1,654,088 Balance Remaining $ 6,972 Page 6 of 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 City of Menifee Bruce Foltz 951-672-6777 April 15, 2015 Item Numb Project Name Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status 1 Bond Payment for TRIP Financing Capital $ 1,301,388 $ 401,388 30 Year Band Payment Active 2 Pavement Management Program Maintenance $ 1,256,766 $ 517,040 Yearly Road Maint. Active 3 Bradley Bridge Capital $ 499,903 $ - FY 2019-2020 Preliminary Design 4 1215/Newport Interchange Capital $ 50,000 $ 50,000 FY'2016-2017 Active 5 McCall Interchange Capital $ 189,759 $ 167,453 FY 2019-2020 Preliminary Design 6 Encanto Road Reconstruction Capital $ 200,000 $ 19,911 FY2014-15 Active 7 Administrative Costs Overhead $ 115,040 $ 115,040 FY 2014-15 Active Total $ 3,612,856 $ 1,270,832 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF MORENO VALLEY FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 TEL: 951.413.3100 WWW.MOVAL,ORG May 11, 2015 F MORENO VALLEY WHER F DREAMS. S O A R Ms. Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3`d Floor Riverside, California 92502 WM FREDERICK STREET P.O. BOX 88005 MORENO VALLEY, CA 92552-0805 BECEINETI) MAY 12 2015 IVRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Subject: City of Moreno Valley's Five -Year Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2015/16 — 2019/20 and Maintenance of Effort Certification for Fiscal Year 2015/16. Dear Ms. Medina: The City of Moreno Valley is pleased to submit its Fiscal Year (FY) 2015/16 — 2019/20 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification, approved by the City Council on April 28,• 2015. An amended five-year Measure A CIP will be submitted to RCTC if changes are made by City Council to the listed Measure A projects as part of the upcoming FY 2015/16 CIP approval process. Please contact me if there are any questions regarding the Measure A CIP. Sincerely, Linda Wilson Senior Management Analyst (951) 413-3132 lindawi@moval.org Enclosures: MOE Certification Statement Measure A Local Funds Program FY 2015/16 Project Status Report Measure A Local Funds Program FY 2015/16-2019/20 c: File Prem Kumar, Deputy Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer Rick Teichert, Financial and Administrative Services Director Punic WORKS DEPARTMENT :>:`,..............`.x�:��:i r�.�'`�C��:'n:�:,t;:*;?�<.;r a�s`.c�"•.t:.'=A �;4"-�r�i�.e�+4� FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Moreno Valley (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,459,153, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 5 / 7 , 2015 CITY MANAGER ATT' CI L RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 1 of 7 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April28, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $7,367,262 V Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $3,611,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $10,978,262 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 1 Measure A Program Budget Program Budget 328,755 328,755 Provide cost effective administrative functions for essential transportation projects and services: annual update of 5-Year CIP, revisions to Standard Plans, DBE Program Management, preparation of grant applications, quarterly utility coordination, and project engineering and right of way services for unfunded new projects. 2 Public Works - Signing/Striping Operating Budget 239,485 239,485 3 Indirect Cost Rate Overhead Costs 435,500 288,880 4 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 919,313 919,313 5 Transfers to 2005 Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,080,000 1,080,000 Local Match for Grant 6 Transfers to Capital Projects Grants Funded Projects a. Alessandro Blvd at Chagall Court and at Graham Street Street Improvements 613,000 61,300 b. Aqueduct Trail c. Cactus Ave EB 3rd Ln Imprv/Veterans Way to Street Improvements 335,000 67,000 Heacock St Street Improvements 997,323 349,063 d. Dynamic Traveler Alert Message Boards Traffic Signals 420,000 101,766 e. ITS Deployment Traffic Signals 2,320,000 348,000 f. Safe Routes to School Outreach Program Public Outreach 417,600 41,760 7 Alessandro Blvd Median/Indian St to Perris Blvd Street Improvements 10,000 10,000 Alessandro Blvd/Elsworth St Intersection 8 Improvements Street Improvements 730,000 73,000 9 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramps Street Improvements 234,657 234,657 10 'Bike Lane Improvements I Street Improvements 83,569 I 58,569 I RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 2 of 7 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April28, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $7,367,262 $3,611,000 $10,978,262 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 11 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing Street Improvements 1,521,513 505,513 Cycle 1 ATP Citywide SRTS Pedestrian Facility 12 Improvements Street Improvements 1,675,000 35,000 13 Delphinium Ave Sidewalk Improvements Street Improvements 5,000 5,000 14 Heacock St/PVSD Lateral A to Cactus Ave Street Improvements 725,000 725,000 15 Heacock St/San Michelle Rd to PVSD Lateral A Street Improvements 324,000 24,000 16 On -Call Property Acqusition for Street Purposes Street Improvements 25,000 25,000 Pavement Rehabilitation and Slurry Seal 17 Program Street Improvements 84,623 84,623 Perris Blvd Widening/Ironwood Ave to Mazanita 18 Ave Street Improvements 1,126,864 196,359 19 Residential Traffic Management Program Street Improvements 52,796 52,796 20 SR-60/Nason St Interchange Street Improvements 3,027 3,027 21 SR-60/Theodore St Interchange Street Improvements 1,865,543 1,117,238 22 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 3,254,625 606,810 Sunnymead Blvd/SR-60 EB Onramp Intersection 23 Improvements Street Improvements 350,000 91,455 24 Bridge Repair Maintenance Program Bridge Maintenance 10,186 10,186 25 San Timoteo Foothill Storm Drain K-1 and K-4 Drainage 1,222,106 305,527 Pedestrian Highbrid Beacon on Cactus Ave at 26 Woodland Park Traffic Signals 219,000 219,000 27 Pedestrian Signal at Catus ave and Philo St Traffic Signals 279,000 279,000 28 Traffic Signal Equipment / Upgrades Traffic Signals 91,249 91,249 TOTALS 21,998,734 8,578,331 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 3 of 7 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April 28, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 2,399,931 3,683,000 6,082,931 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 1 Measure A Program Budget Program Budget 329,758 329,758 2 Public Works - Signing/Striping Operating Budget 242,155 242,155 Indirect Cost Rate Calculated amount at 8% of revenue - $294,640 .- ^ ` 3 Estimated amount due to fewer projects - $100,000 Overhead Costs 435,500 ...._ r 00,000 4 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,481,313 1,481,313 5 Transfers to 2005 Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,060,000 1,060,000 6 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 7 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing Street Improvements 600,000 600,000 8 Pavement Rehabilitation and Slurry Seal Program Street Improvements 60,000 60,000 9 Residential Traffic Management Program Street Improvements 50,000 50,000 10 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 11 Bridge Repair Maintenance Program Bridge Maintenance 10,000 10,000 12 Indian Street Cardinal Ave Bridge Bridge Improvements 350,000 350,000 13 Traffic Signal Equipment / Upgrades Traffic Signals 80,000 80,000 TOTALS 5,098,726 4,763,226 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 4 of 7 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April28, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 1,319,705 3,757,000 5,076,705 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 Measure A Program Budget Program Budget 329,758 329,758 2 Public Works - Signing/Striping Operating Budget 242,155 242,155 Indirect Cost Rate Calculated amount at 8% of revenue - $300,560 3 Estimated amount due to fewer projects - $80,000 Overhead Costs 435,500 80� 4 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,481,313 1,48-1,313 5 Transfers to 2005 Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,056,000 1,056,000 6 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 7 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing Street Improvements 600,000 600,000 8 Pavement Rehabilitation and Slurry Seal Program Street Improvements 60,000 60,000 9 Residential Traffic Management Program Street Improvements 50,000 50,000 10 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 11 Bridge Repair Maintenance Program Bridge Maintenance 10,000 10,000 12 Traffic Signal Equipment / Upgrades Traffic Signals 80,000 80,000 TOTALS 4,744,726 4,389,226 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 5 of 7 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April 28, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 687,479 3,870,000 4,557,479 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Measure A Program Budget Program Budget 319,000 319,000 2 Public Works - Signing/Striping Operating Budget 237,000 237,000 Indirect Cost Rate Calculated amount at 8% of revenue - $309,600 3 Estimated amount due to fewer projects - $80,000 Overhead Costs 435,500 80,000 4 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,481,313 1,481,313 5 Transfers to 2005 Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,053,000 1,053,000 6 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 7 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing Street Improvements 600,000 600,000 8 Pavement Rehabilitation and Slurry Seal Program Street Improvements 60,000 60,000 9 Residential Traffic Management Program Street Improvements 50,000 50,000 10 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 11 Bridge Repair Maintenance Program Bridge Maintenance 10,000 10,000 12 Traffic Signal Equipment / Upgrades Traffic Signals 80,000 80,000 TOTALS 4,725,813 4,370,313 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 6 of 7 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April28, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 187,166 3,986,000 4,173,166 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 1 Measure A Program Budget Program Budget 94,000 94,000 2 Public Works - Signing/Striping Operating Budget 76,000 76,000 Indirect Cost Rate Calculated amount at 8% of revenue - $309,600 3 Estimated amount due to fewer projects - $80,000 Overhead Costs 309,600 80,000 4 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service Debt Service 1,481,313 1,481,313 5 Transfers to 2005 Lease Revenue Bonds Debt Service 1,059,000 1,059,000 6 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 7 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing Street Improvements 600,000 600,000 8 Pavement Rehabilitation and Slurry Seal Program Street Improvements 60,000 60,000 9 Residential Traffic Management Program Street Improvements 50,000 50,000 10 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 200,000 200,000 11 Bridge Repair Maintenance Program Bridge Maintenance 10,000 10,000 12 Traffic Signal Equipment / Upgrades Traffic Signals 80,000 80,000 TOTALS 4,219,913 3,990,313 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 1 of 2 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April 28, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Measure A Program Budget - Program Budget 445 445 NA Annual Programs 2 Public Works - Sign/Striping _- Operating Budget 225 225 NA Annual Budget / Street Maintenance Vehicle/Equipment rI., $200,000 original budget; $759,400 transferred from equipment replacement; $98,600 re - appropriated from the Pavement Rehab/Slurry L Seal budget. Equipment Budget 1,058 1,058 Jun-15 Purchase in Process 4 Indirect Cost Rate � Overhead Costs 287 287 NA Annual 5 Transfers to TRIP Debt Service ;% Debt Service 991 991 Jun-39 Annual 6 Transfers to 2005 LRB Debt Service / Debt Service 560 560 NA Annual Transfers to Capital Proiects Grants ` Local Match for Grant 7 Total transfer amount - $1,495,760 a. Alessandro Blvd at Chagall Court and at Funded Projects Graham Street Street Improvements 74 7 Jun-18 Design Subject to Available b. Aqueduct Trail c. Cactus Ave EB 3rd Ln Imprv/Veterans Way Street Improvements 90 18 Funding PA&ED to Heacock St Street Improvements 1,353 474 Jan-16 Under Construction d. Dynamic Traveler Alert Message Boards Traffic Signal 30 7 Dec-16 Design e. ITS Deployment Traffic Signal 80 12 Jun-16 Design f. Safe Routes to School Outreach Program Public Outreach - - Aug-15 On -going Alessandro Blvd/Elsworth St Intersection ;--. 8 Improvements Street Improvements 143 14 Sep-16 Design !' 9 Alessandro Blvd Median/Indian St to Perris Blvd Street Improvements 1,138 370 Jan-15 Completed On -going annual 10 Annual ADA Compliant Curb Ramp Upgrades Street Improvements 235 235 NA project 11 Bike Lane Improvements Street Improvements 70 35 Jun-15 Under Construction ,',v. On -going annual 12 Citywide Annual Pavement Resurfacing ✓ Street Improvements 4,221 580 NA project Cycle 1 )VP Citywide SRTS Pedestrian Facility 13 Improvements I. -A Street Improvements 60 60 Jan-18 PA&ED 14 Delphinium Ave Sidewalk Improvements '--/ Street Improvements 326 33 Jan-15 Completed 15 Heacock St/San Michelle Rd to PVSD Lateral A Street Improvements 1,724 98 Oct-15 Under Construction Subject to Avaliable 35% Design 16 Heacock Street South Extension ✓ Street Improvements 15 15 Funding Completed 17 Moreno Valley Bicycle Master Plan Update ✓ Street Improvements 36 4 Feb-15 Completed Completed 18 Nason St/Cactus Ave Street Improvements '/ Street Improvements 5 5 May-13 Project Closeout Pavement Rehabilitation and Slurry Seal c% On -going annual 19 Program Street Improvements 30 30 NA project Perris Blvd Widening/Ironwood Ave to , • 20 Manzanita Ave Street Improvements 5,944 1,000 Oct-15 Under Construction Reche Vista Dr Realignment / Perris Blvd / 21 Heacock St to NCL Street Improvements 304 4 Jun-16 Advertise / Award Residential Traffic Management Program On-going annual 22 (Speed Humps) 1 Street Improvements 71 71 NA project 23 24 SR-60/Nason St Interchange SR-60/Theodore St Interchange Street Improvements Street Improvements 63 626 63 275 Jun-12 Subject to Avaliable Funding Closeout and Audit PA&ED RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Moreno Valley Page 2 of 2 Prepared by: Linda Wilson Phone #: 951.413.3132 Date: April28, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status On -going annual 25 Street Improvement Program Street Improvements 80 38 NA project Sunnymead Blvd/SR-60 EB On -ramp 1/ 26 Intersection Imrpovements Street Improvements 77 20 Jan-17 Design Completed 27 Wayfinding and Welcome Signs ✓ Street Improvements 6 1 Dec-13 Project Closeout On -going annual 28 Bridge Repair Maintenance Program "/— Bridge Maintenance 48 8 NA project 29 Indian St/Cardinal Ave Bridge I.V. Bridge Improvements 70 70 Jun-19 PA&ED 30 San Timoteo Foothill Storm Drain K-1 and K-4 Drainage 220 55 Dec-16 Design 31 Citywide Traffic Sign Retroreflectivity Inventory ;/Traffic Signals 15 15 Jun-15 Completed 32 � v Traffic Signal Equipment/Upgrades Traffic Signals 90 90 NA On -going annual project TOTALS 20,810 7,27), NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF MURRIETA FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY OF MURRIETA May 11, 2015 Grace Alvarez, Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 BECEOVET)\ MAY 15 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Subject: Measure a Local Streets and Road Revenue Projections, Maintenance of Effort Certification, and Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (FY 2015/16-2019/20) Dear Grace: Enclosed are the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification Statement, proposed Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and Project Status Report for the City of Murrieta for your consideration and approval. Since the City Council has not adopted a formal Capital Improvement Plan budget for FY 2016-20, the enclosed Five - Year CIP is based on staff recommendation and may be subject to change upon further consideration by the City Council. We will contact you if there are any changes requested by the City Council. The Measure A balance carried over to FY 2015/16 is large due to several projects that are progressing through the right-of-way acquisition phase prior to construction. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact me at (951) 461-6036 or bmoehlinq murrieta.orq at your convenience. Sincerely, Sig/ Bob Moehling E. City Engineer Attachments cc: Rick Dudley, City Manager Ivan Holler, Director of Development Services Joy Canfield, Director of Administrative Services 1 Town Square • Murrieta, California 92562 phone: 951.304.CITY (2489) • fax: 951.698.4509 • web: murrieta.org FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Murrieta (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $595,702, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: Aid/ // , 2015 clAcisAn CITY MANAGER ATTE T: TAR RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Murrieta Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Reister, Senior Accountant Phone #: 951-461-6429 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 6,305,730 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,114,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 8,419,730 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type 2015-2016 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 8043 Pavement Resurfacing 8079 Murrieta Hot Springs Widening 8137 Resurfacing - Slurry Seal 8257 Citywide Signal Mods 8283 Traffic Striping Modifications 8293 Sidewalk Replacement 8303 I-215/Clinton Keith Rd Interchange 8311 I-15/Los Alamos Rd Overcrossing 8323 Guava Bridge/Murrieta Creek 8330 Traffic Signal Optimization 8335 Jackson Ave Bridge (at Warm Springs Creek) 8389 Whitewood: Hunter to Clinton Keith 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Management Pro 8433 Mur Hot Springs Medians: Alta to Marg 8448 Meadowlark Lane Improvement 8456 Whitewood Extension 10012 Jackson Ave Median COP 2007 for 15/215 MHS Interchange Maintenance Construction Maintenance Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction Debt Service Total Cost 1,500,000 50,000 500 250,000 50,000 150,000 5,000 50,000 3,000,000 100,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 100,000 5,000 735,000 TOTALS 9,135,500 Measure A Funds 900,000 50,000 500 200,000 500 150,000 500 10,000 50,000 70,000 20,000 20,000 50,000 800,000 1,000,000 100,000 5,000 735,000 4,161,500 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Murrieta Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Reister, Senior Accountant Phone #: 951-461-6429 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 4,258,230 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,156,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 6,414,230 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance 500,000 500,000 2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 650,000 650,000 3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Construction 75,000 75,000 4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Construction 50,000 50,000 5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Construction 70,000 70,000 6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Construction 15,000 15,000 7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 733,645 733,645 TOTALS 2,093,645 2,093,645 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Murrieta Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Reister, Senior Accountant Phone #: 951-461-6429 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 4,320,585 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,199,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 6,519,585 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance 500,000 500,000 2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 650,000 650,000 3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Construction 75,000 75,000 4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Construction 50,000 50,000 5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Construction 70,000 70,000 6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Construction 15,000 15,000 7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 729,145 729,145 TOTALS 2,089,145 2,089,145 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Murrieta Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Reister, Senior Accountant Phone #: 951-461-6429 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 4,430,440 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,265,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 6,695,440 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance 500,000 500,000 2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 650,000 650,000 3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Construction 75,000 75,000 4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Construction 50,000 50,000 5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Construction 70,000 70,000 6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Construction 15,000 15,000 7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 731,645 731,645 TOTALS 2,091,645 2,091,645 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Murrieta Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Reister, Senior Accountant Phone #: 951-461-6429 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 4,603,795 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,333,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 6,936,795 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing - Asphalt Maintenance 500,000 500,000 2 8137 Pavement Resurfacing - Slurry Maintenance 650,000 650,000 3 8257 Signal Mods- Citywide Construction 75,000 75,000 4 8293 Sidewalk Replacement - Citywide Construction 50,000 50,000 5 8330 Traffic Signal Optimizations Construction 70,000 70,000 6 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Manage Construction 15,000 15,000 7 COP 2007 for 15/215 at MHS Int. Debt Service 728,239 728,239 TOTALS 2,088,239 2,088,239 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Murrieta Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Mark Reister, Senior Accountant Phone #` 951-461-6429 Date: May 11, 2015 Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 8043 Pavement Resurfacing Maintenance $ 1,335,575 $ 1,331,575 Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 2 8079 Murrieta Hot Springs Widening Construction $ - $ - Nov-17 Design, Acquire ROW, start Con 2017 3 8137 Resurfacing - Slurry Seal Construction $ 1,228,473 $ 392,633 Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 4 8257 Citywide Signal Mods Construction $ 92,505 $ 71,214 Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 5 8283 Traffic Striping Modifications Construction $ 35,635 $ 17,658 Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 6 8293 Sidewalk Replacement Construction $ - $ - Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 7 8303 1-215/Clinton Keith Rd Interchange Construction $ 40,139 $ 2,682 Dec-15 Project closeout in progress 8 8311 I-15/Los Alamos Rd Overcrossing Construction $ 2,243,238 $ 511,576 Dee-15 Project closeout in progress 9 8323 Guava Bridge/Murrieta Creek Construction $ 113,567 $ - Nov-16 Start const. in Oct 2015 10 8330 Traffic Signal Optimization Construction $ 73,832 $ 60,136 Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 11 8335 Jackson Ave Bridge (at Warm Springs Creek) Construction $ 653,841 $ 81,396 Jul-14 Construction complete/ongoing mitigation 12 8389 Whitewood: Hunter to Clinton Keith Construction $ - $ - Jun-16 Design, ROW Acq 13 8430 Neighborhood Traffic Management Pro Construction $ 33,243 $ 16,487 Jun-15 Ongoing annual project 14 8433 Mur Hot Springs Medians; Alta to Marg Construction $ 18,190 $ 18,19.0 Feb-16 Start Con Dec 2015 15 8456 Whitewood Extension Construction $ 38,615 $ 38,615 Dec-15 TUMF Network Addition request 16 10012 Jackson Ave Median Construction $ - $ - May-16 Start const.. in Mar 2015 17 19000 Line G Emergency Repairs Construction $ 8,081 $ 8,081 Jul-14 Construction complete 18 COP 2007 for 15/215 MHS Interchange Debt Service $ 723,238 $ 723,238 Jun-27 Construction complete / Annual Debt Service TOTALS $ 6,638,171 $ 3,273,481 l NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF NORCO FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY of NORCO CITY HALL • 2870 CLARK AVENUE • NORCO CA 92860 • (9511 735-3900 • www.norco.ca.us • In June 11, 2015 Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 RE: 2015-2020 Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Five -Year Capital Improvement Program Plan Dear Ms. Trevino: The City of Norco is pleased to submit for your consideration and approval our Five - Year Measure "A" Capital Improvement Program Plan projections, commencing with Fiscal Year 2015/16. I have included for your records a copy of the City of Norco Five -Year Measure "A" Capital Improvement Program Fund (preliminary at this time), and the Annual Certification of the City's "Maintenance of Effort" document signed by City Manager, Andy Okoro. If you have any questions regarding the City of Norco 2015 submittal, please contact me at 951-270-5678. We appreciate your cooperation and assistance with the City of Norco's planned expenditures for maintenance and capital improvements to our local streets and roads. Respectfully, (htkO Z� Lori J. Askew Director of Public Works Attachments: City of Norco Five -Year CIP Measure "A" Five -Year CIP Maintenance of Effort Letter CITY COUNCIL HERB MGGINS KEVIN BASH Mayor Mayor Pro Tem KATHY AZEVEQO Council Member BERWIN HANNA Council Member GREG NEWTON Council Member FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Norco (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $22,536, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: June lI , 2015 C ITY MANNA l City of Norco, California Five -Year Capital Improvement Program Measure "A" Projects Fund 137 Fiscal Years 2016 through 2020 Sources of Funds: FY 2015/2016 FY 2016/2017 FY 2017/2018 FY 2018/2019 FY 2019/2020 Beginning Fund Balance July 1 $ 3,087,155 538,177 25,522 (46,414) 28,470 Measure "A" Revenues 607,000 619,000 631,000 650,000 670,000 Investment Earnings 7,718 1,345 64 (116) 71 Total Sources of Funds $ 3,701,873 1,158,522 656,586 603,470 698,541 Uses of Funds: FY 2015/2016 FY 2016/2017 FY 2017/2018 FY 2018/2019 FY 2019/2020 Overlay: Unspecified Pavement Overlays $ 150,000 150,000 150,000 100,000 100,000 Rocky View - 50,000 Hillside - Sixth St. to River Dr. 331,000 Rehab and Overlay: Valley View - First to Second 136,500 - Hilltop Crane 64,000 - - Sierra - Fifth to Sixth 271,000 Haileah Circle 38,000 - - - Lookout Pt. 35,000 - - Fourth St. - Temescal to Hillside 65,000 Hamner Ave. - Detroit to Bridge 63,000 River Road - Bluff to Corydon - 100,000 - - - Golden Gate Circle - 25,000 - Corona Ave. - First to Second - 200,000 - - Bluff St -River Rd to Vine 25,000 Hillside Ave. - Second To Third - 20,000 50,000 50,000 Norconian Dr. - Fifth St. to Norco Dr. - 100,000 - - - Unspecified Rehabilatation and Overlay 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Reservoir -Corona to Temescal 50,000 - - Street Reconstruction: Misc. Reconstruction Projects 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Hamner Avenue Bridge (Planning) 83,000 83,000 83,000 - 100 MP City of Norco, California Five -Year Capital Improvement Program Measure "A" Projects Fund 137 Fiscal Years 2016 through 2020 Norco Drive - Fifth Street to Rocky View Drive 827,246 Third Street - Valley View to Corona 508,000 Crestview Ave. North to Sixth St. Uses of Funds: FY 2015/2016 FY 2016/2017 FY 2017/2018 FY 2018/2019 FY 2019/2020 Street Reconstruction: (Continued) TUMF Projects Match -Hidden Valley 25,000 Traffic Signal Improvements: Traffic Signal Improvements 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Street Striping Street Striping 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Miscellaneous Seal Coats 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Slurry Seal - Hamner Avenue 67,650 - - Slurry Seal - Sixth St - Sierra Ave to California 94,300 Unspecified Slurry Seal -St Fund 25,000 Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs 30,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Total Uses of Funds 3,163,696 1,133,000 703,000 575,000 550,000 Ending Fund Balance June 30 $ 538,177 25,522 (46,414) 28,470 148,541 101 CITY OF NORCO FIVE-YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 City of Norco Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: 951-270-5678 Date: June 4, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: 2015-2016 $3,087,155 $607,000 $3,694,155 Item No. Project Name ! Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay $ 200,000 $ 150,000 2 Hillside - Sixth St to River Dr. Overlay $ 331,000 $ 331,000 3 ValleyView - First St to Second St Rehab and Overlay $ 136,500 $ 136,500 4 Hilltop Lane Rehab and Overlay $ 64,000 $ 64,000 5 Sierra - Fifth St to Sixth St Rehab and Overlay $ 271,000 $ 271,000 6 Haileah Circle Rehab and Overlay $ 38,000 $ 38,000 7 Lookout Pt Rehab and Overlay $ 35,000 $ 35,000 8 Fourth St - Temescal Ave to Hillside Ave Rehab and Overlay $ 65,000 $ 65,000 9 Hamner Ave - Detroit St to Hamner Bridge Rehab and Overlay $ 63,000 $ 63,000 10 Third Street - Valley View to Corona Ave Rehab and Overlay $ 1,288,000 $ 508,000 11 Unspecified Rehabilitation & Overlay Rehab and Overlay $ 200,000 $ 150,000 12 Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction $ 200,000 $ 150.000 13 Hamner Ave Bridge (Planning) Reconstruction $ 83,000 $ 83,000 14 Norco Dr. - Fifth St to Rocky View Dr Reconstruction $ 875,246 $ 827,246 15 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Improvemen $ 300,000 $ 25,000 16 Street Striping Striping $ 35,000 $ 25,000 17 Miscellaneous Seal Coats Slurry Seal $ 25,000 $ 25,000 18 Hamner Ave Slurry Seal $ 67,650 $ 67,650 19 Sixth St - Sierra Ave to California Slurry Seal $ 94,300 $ 94,300 20 Unspecified Slurry Seal Slurry Seal $ 75,000 $ 25,000 21 Misc. Pavement Repairs Maintenance $ 30,000 $ 30,000 TOTALS $ 4,476,696 $ 3,163,696 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Norco Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: 951-270-5678 Date: June 4, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 2016-2017 $530,459 $619,000 $1,149,459 Item No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay $ 200,000 $ 150,000 2 River Rd - Bluff to Corydon Rehab and Overlay $ 100,000 $ 100,000 3 Golden Gate Circle Rehab and Overlay $ 25,000 $ 25,000 4 Corona Ave - First to Second Rehab and Overlay $ 200,000 $ 200,000 5 Bluff St - River Rd to Vine St Rehab and Overlay $ 25,000 $ 25,000 6 Norconian Dr - Fifth to Norco Rehab and Overlay $ 160,000 $ 100,000 7 Unspecified Rehabilitation & Overlay Rehab and Overlay $ 200,000 $ 150,000 8 Reservoir - Corona to Temescal Rehab and Overlay $ 50,000 $ 50,000 8 Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction $ 200,000 $ 150,000 9 Hamner Avenue Bridge (Planning) Reconstruction $ 83,000 $ 83,000 10 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Improvements $ 75,000 $ 25,000 11 Street Striping Street Striping $ 35,000 $ 25,000 12 Miscellaneous Seal Coats Slurry Seal $ 75,000 $ 25,000 13 Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs Maintenance $ 25,000 $ 25,000 TOTALS $ 1,453,000 $ 1,133,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Norco Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Lori J, Askew Phone #: 951-270-5678 Date: June 4, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 2017.2018 16,459 631,000 647,459 e1�m ^ No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay $200,000 $/00,000 2 Rocky View Overlay $50,000 $50,000 3 Hillside Ave - Second to Third Rehab and Overlay $20,000 $20,000 4 Unspecified Rehabilitation & Overlay Rehab and Overlay $200,000 $143,000 5 Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction $200,000 $150,000 6 Hamner Avenue Bridge (Planning) Reconstruction $83,000 $83,000 7 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal ImprovmentF. $25,000 $25,000 8 Street Striping Striping $35,000 $25,000 9 Misc. Seal Coats Slurry Seal $75,000 $25,000 10 Misc. Pavement Repairs Maintenance $25,000 $25,000 TOTALS $913,000 $646,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Norco Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: 951-270-5678 Date: June 4, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 2018-2019 $1,459 $650,000 $651,459 lfem No. Project Name ! Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay $ 150,000 $ 100,000 2 Hillside Ave - Second to Third Rehab and Overlay $ 50,000 $ 50,000 3 Unspecified Rehabilitation & Overlay Rehab and Overlay $ 200,000 $ 150,000 4 Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction $ 200,000 $ 150,000 5 TUMF Project Match - Hidden Valley Reconstruction $ 25,000 $ 25,000 6 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Improvement! $ 25,000 $ 25,000 7 Street Striping Striping $ 35,000 $ 25,000 8 Misc. Seal Coats Slurry Seal $ 75,000 $ 25,000 9 Misc. Pavement Repairs Maintenance $ 25,000 TOTALS $ 760,000 $ 575,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Norco Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: 951-270-5678 Date: June 4, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 76,459 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 670,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 746,459 2019-2020 Item No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Unspecified Pavement Overlays Overlay $ 110,000 $ 100,000 2 Hillside Ave - Second to Third Rehab and Overlay $ 50,000 $ 50,000 3 Unspecified Rehabilitation & Overlay Rehab and Overlay $ 150,000 $ 150,000 4 Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction $ 150,000 $ 150,000 5 Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal Improvemen $ 25,000 $ 25,000 6 Street Striping Striping $ 35,000 $ 25,000 7 Misc. Seal Coats Slurry Seal $ 25,000 $ 25,000 S Misc. Pavement Repairs Maintenance $ 25,000 $ 25,000 TOTALS $ 570,000 $ 550,000 ATTACHMENT D **SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Norco Page of 111 Prepared by: Lori J. Askew Phone #: 951270-5678 Date: June 4, 2015 Item No. Project Name/ Limits Project Type Total Cost (SDON Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 2 3 4 Unspecified Pavement Overlays_ Overlay 350 150 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15116 _ Hillside Ave - Sixth St- to Rivers Dr. Overlay 0 0 Valley View Ave - First to Second/Forth to Fifth Overlay/Reconstruction_ 0 0 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bid In July of FY 15116 Hilltop Lane Overlay/Reconstruction 0 0 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bld in July of FY 15/16 _ _ Sierra Ave. - Fifth to Sixth Overlay/Reconstruction D 0 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15116 5 6 7 8 Haileah Cl Overlay/Reconstruction D 0 Dec-15 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15116 _ Lookout Pt. Overlay/Reconstruction 0 D Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15116 Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15116 Fourth St-Temescal to Hillside Overlay/Reconstruction 0 0 Dec-15 Hamner Ave -Detroit to Bridge Overlay/Reconstruction 0 0 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15116 9 Third St- Valley view to Corona Overlay/Reconstruction_ 50 25 Nov-15 Under Construction 10 Unspecified Rehabilitation and Overlay Overlay/Reconstruction 55 55 Dec-15 Design Complete; Bid in July of FY 15I16 11 Misc. Reconstruction Projects Reconstruction 0 0 Feb-16 Moved to FY15/16 12 Traffic Signal Improvements Signal Q 0 Feb-16 Moved to FY15/16 13 Street Striping Striping 0 0 Dec-15 Moved to FY15/16 14 _ Miscellaneous Seal Coats Seal Coats 0 0 Dec-15 Moved to FY15/16 _ 15 16 17 18 19 20 Unspecified Slurry Seal Slurry 0 0 Dec-15 Moved to FY15/16 Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs Street Maintenance 0 2 Nov-15 Moved to FY15/16 Hamner Avenue Slurry 0 0 Dec-15 Moved to FY15/16 _ Norco Dr. Reconstruction 0 0 May-16 Moved to FY15/16 _ Sixth Street Slurry 0 D Dec-15 Moved to FY15/16 - TOTALS: _ 455 232 — ---- NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF PALM DESERT FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY Of PALM OMR' 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TILL: 76o 346-061 r info@cityorpalmdesert.org May 8, 2015 Shirley Medina Planning and Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 31d Floor Riverside, California 92502-2208 Subject: Measure A Capital Improvement Program Dear Shirley, Enclosed for Commission consideration is the City of Palm Desert's proposed 2015/2016 — 2019/2020 Five -Year Measure A Capital Improvement Program, as well as the Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement and calculation documentation. The Five -Year Program will be reviewed in the near future by our City Council. If the City Council makes any changes to the program, a revised version will be submitted to you for approval. If no changes are made, please treat this as the official submittal. If you have any questions, please contact me at (760) 346-0611, extension 469. Sin ;rely M - r r wood, Direct r Public Wo Enclosur cc: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager Paul Gibson, Director of Finance J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Director of Finance :i nnailunnauuru FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Palm Desert (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $2,398,146, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2015 FY 2014/15 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures Report as of April 30, 2015 'Round to nearest dollar) Ewldirtkartekdewn Prefect EandltwaMdudedInGenerNledger ry Total Cost General Wad MemA Federal Slate Oty Fends Medal 1 ammo , Other DONeNeli AlessandroImpraeemenb _ qqe n4 Son Pascual Room Verne Accessible Pod !meal Pnyri. - Pertainion nonnenls 95,401 OMB _ _ lE0 ktditat eealeesraert Preerarw _PM F4.000 Rq0 Valley W Petit 7e,014 7014 /notch MtetdteAe111.10 Fred Warbyl Madeira Turn pocket - San Pablo Fred Warless Tom Packet Ind Waent f thee 111 kaproyeanents - k ill 71 1.411 212 Moraarq f 1•10 4541122 1,74F 901 1.S**20 S12,M0 1,2e1,101 Feedback glens , Stant Turntand Hwy 111 to Fred WMAIej - i1s250 - J.250 Jefferson Street Intardtwe i 72,t11 72.161 M+aNMA(f:_ _ Sneet MakdeONree 1970AF4 1,11714411 Snail IleurMeslne e•SM111 fFI1et2 1.1K,11d 19101900 7B5.1k0 Gob&Getter S1�2f 1 i22 cases stye 2F4110 173,102 95,111 TnllkSignal Maintenance IS„ ICI lfdd]� !Breed Medina 1 Traffic Vali I Wide Wed Wm Mail PAO IRAK Cam Vent •Street 4072 BA9?2 Street STINT Mstnteeaw — ISLIP - 112.12T MMUS, 122 HS • Deductions for 5pedel Conddendon (Deductions Mint IWe M included In Pt0pct 6pa0diluret Algye(: TOM Prided Cost eenerel Mid Sum Reason VFW Project bpendltere %add Mr Deducted Iran MOT fawstrVttlorr: MeeUeeerrov . y Tnotate ihigaiusiWbetlW Ove+MM Not Aghttdto$001kAyrra r I40.7RP S 2.allt291 Deduct Tots S 1A19,701 $ 2A19,70e TOWNP40wAwes mnesOductions MOE Tots) Base Tear Amount Was (Undo) S bSe0.424 S 2,OF9,70F S 2.451716 $ 7,9911e4 5 52,570 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 -2016 Agency: City of Palm Desert Page 1 of 5 Prepared by Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: 16,983,877 $2,686,000 $19,669,877 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 I Monterey Avenue / 1-10 Interchange Improvements On-ramp/off-ramp 12,699,000 79,861 Estimated carryover FY14/15 $79,861 construction 2 Right Tum Lane - Fred Waring Drive to Hwy 111 Estimated carryover FY14/15 $543,267 Street Project 775,000 543,267 Right Tum Lane - Hwy 111 to Fred Waring 3 (northwest comer) and Sidewalk Infill Street Project 465,000 465,000 Estimated carryover FY14/15 request $385,000 4 Portola Interchange at 1-10 Estimated Carryover FY14/15 $15,110,661 On-ramp/off-ramp construction 71,993,000 0 Street Resurfacing 5 Estimated Carryover FY14/15 1,105,775 Maintenance Project 4,900,000 3,005,775 FY15/16 request $1,900,000 Monterey Avenue Widening from Fred Waring 6 Drive to Country Club Drive Estimated carryover FY14/15 $4,500,000 Street Project 6,500,000 6,500,000 FY15/16 request $2,000,000 7 Portola Free Right at Fred Waring FY 15/16 request $500,000 Street Project 1,850,000 500,000 8 Traffic Signals - Accessible Pedestrian Program Estimated carryover FY14/15 $50,000 Maintenance Project 50,000 50,000 9 Citywide Street Striping FY15/16 request $300,000 Maintenance Project 300,000 300,000 10 Jefferson Street Interchange Estimated Carryover FY14/15 $239,538 on-ramp/off-ramp constrr 312,500 239,538 San Pablo Right Turn lane at Fred Waring 11 (southeast corner) Street Project 365,000 365,000 Estimated carryover FY14/15 $365,000 12 Gerald Ford East of Cook Improvements Estimated carryover FY14/15 $265,000 Roadway Improvements 265,000 265,000 San Pablo Ave Street Improvements from fred 13 Waring Drive to Magnesia Falls Drive Street Project 1,400,000 1,400,000 FY15/16 request $1,400,000 ADA Curb Ramp Modifications 14 Estimated Carryover FY 14/15 $79,117 Maintenance Project 200,000 129,117 FY15/16 request 50,000 15 Bridge Inspection Program FY15/16 request $100,000 Maintenance Project 100,000 100,000 LED Indication Replacement Program 16 Estimated Carryover FY14/15 $50,000 Maintenance Project 100,000 100,000 FY15/16 request $50,000 IISNS Upgrades Program 17 Estimated Carryover FY14/15 $75,000 Maintenance Project 150,000 150,000 FY15/16 request $75,000 18 Controller Cabinet Assembly Upgrades Program FY 15/16 request $112,000 Maintenance Project 336,000 112,000 TOTALS 14,304,558 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Palm Desert Page of 2 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 5,365,319 $2, 740, 000 8,105, 319 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016-2017 Cook Street Widening - Phase II Street Improvement 6,100,000 3,655,500 1 Street Resurfacing Maintenance Maintenance Project 3,100,000 1,900,000 2 3 Traffic Signals -Accessible Pedestrian Program Maintenance Project 50,000 50,000 Citywide Striping Maintenance Project 300,000 300,000 4 ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Maintenance Project 75,000 50,000 5 Bridge Inspection Program Maintenance Project 100,000 100,000 6 7 LED Indication Replacement Program Maintenance Project 100,000 50,000 IISNS Upgrades Program Maintenance Project 75,000 75,000 8 9 Controller Cabinet Assembly Upgrades Program Maintenance Project 336,000 112,000 TOTALS 6,292,500 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Palm Desert Page of 3 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 1,812,819 $2,795,000 4,607,819 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 Cook Street Widening - Phase II Street Improvement 6,100,000 2,000,000 1 Street Resurfacing Maintenance Maintenance Project 3,100,000 1,900,000 2 3 Traffic Signals -Accessible Pedestrian Program Maintenance Project 50,000 50,000 Citywide Striping Maintenance Project 300,000 300,000 4 ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Maintenance Project 75,000 50,000 5 Bridge Inspection Program Maintenance Project 100,000 50,000 6 7 LED Indication Replacement Program Maintenance Project 100,000 50,000 IISNS Upgrades Program Maintenance Project 75,000 75,000 8 Controller Cabinet Assembly Maintenance Project 336,000 112,000 9 Upgrades Program TOTALS 4,587,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Palm Desert Page of 4 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 20,819 $2, 879, 000 2,899,819 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Street Resurfacing Maintenance Maintenance Project 3,500,000 1,900,000 2 Traffic Signals -Accessible Pedestrian Program Maintenance Project 50,000 50,000 3 Citywide Striping Maintenance Project 300,000 300,000 4 ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Maintenance Project 75,000 50,000 5 Bridge Inspection Program Maintenance Project 100,000 100,000 6 LED Indication Replacement Program Maintenance Project 50,000 50,000 7 IISNS Upgrades Program Maintenance Project 75,000 75,000 TOTALS 2,525,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019-2020 Agency: City of Palm Desert Page of 5 of 5 Prepared by: Mark Greenwood Phone #: 760-346-0611 Date: May 8, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 374,819 $2, 965, 000 3,339,819 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-2020 1 Street Resurfacing Maintenance Maintenance Project 3,500,000 1,900,000 2 Traffic Signals -Accessible Maintenance Project 50,000 50,000 Pedestrian Program 3 Citywide Striping Maintenance Project 300,000 300,000 4 ADA Curb Ramp Modifications Maintenance Project 75,000 50,000 5 Bridge Inspection Program Maintenance Project 100,000 100,000 TOTALS 2,400,000 CITY Of PRIM [HMI 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 76o 346—o611 info "utyofpalmdcsert.org May 8, 2015 Shirley Medina Planning and Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3nd Floor Riverside, California 92502-2208 Subject: Project Status Report — Measure "A" Projects Prior Year Plan - Fiscal Year Ending (FYE) June 30, 2015 Dear Shirley, At the beginning of the 14/15 Fiscal Year, the City of Palm Desert had 17 projects with Measure "A" funding. The status of those projects is as follows: 1. Monterey Avenue / 1-10 Intersection Improvements Construction began March 2014 and is substantially complete. The maintenance period extends to December 2015. Final billing will be issued at that time. Measure A funding of $79,861 is being carried over to FY 15/16. 2. Fred Waring Drive Right Tum Pocket at Hwy 111 The design for this project is 99% complete and is at Caltrans in process for authorization to bid. Measure A funds of $543,267 are being carried over to FY 15/16. 3. Right Tum Lane — Hwy 111 to Fred Waring (northwest comer) Project has been awarded and construction is to begin summer of 2015: —It is —� estimated to be completed by September of 2015. Measure A Fund of $300,000 are being carried over to FY 15/16. 4. Highway 111 Sidewalk Intr`ll Project was combined with Item No. 3. Construction is to begin summer of 2015T and estimated to be completed by September of 2015. Measure A funds of p5,00p are being carried over to FY 15/16. 5. Portola Interchange 0,1-10 This project is in the environmental and preliminary engineering phase and is now being managed by the Riverside Country Transportation Land Management Agency. NCR has been conditionally approved by FHWA. We are in the process of updating the environmental documents. We anticipate approval in the summer of 2015. Project funding is programmed for 2019. Over $15,110,661 of Measure A funds are being carried over for ongoing obligations. tis ,1,.1„,,,11 .,,,1. Project Status Report May 8, 2015 Page 2 of 3 6. Street Resurfacing This is an annual program. Construction for this fiscal year began September of 2014 and was completed in December of 2014 at the total cost of $2,185,396. Measure A funding in the amount of $1,105,775 is being carried over to FY 15/16. 7. Monterey Avenue Widening from Fred Waring Drive and Country Club Drive We are currently developing conceptual alignment plans for this project. Most of the west side of the project is within the boundaries of the City of Rancho Mirage. We continue to work closely with them. $4,500,000 of Measure A funds are being carried over to FY 15/16. 8. Traffic Signals -- Accessible Pedestrian Program This is an annual program that installs accessible pedestrian push buttons with countdown timers. Construction is to begin in September 2015 and completed in October 2015. $50,000 of Measure A funds are being carried over to FY 15/16. 9. Citywide Street Striping This is an annual program for restriping traffic lines and markings. Construction for this fiscal year began in August of 2014 and was completed in December of 2014 at the total cost of $268,971. 10. San Pablo Right Turn Lane at Fred Waring (southeast corner) Project is on hold pending the general plan update. $365,000 of Measure A funding is carried over to FY 15/16. 11. Gerald Ford East of Cook Improvements Project is under preliminary investigation. An estimated $265,000 of Measure A funds is being carried over to FY 15/16. 12. ADA Curb Ramp Modifications This is an annual program. Project has been awarded and construction is estimated to begin in June of 2015. An estimated $79,117 of Measure A funds are being carried over to the FY 15/16 project. 13. Bridge Inspection Program Locations have been identified and remediations are in design. The contract has been awarded for the first location and construction will began in July 2015 and will be completed in September of 2015. 14. LED Indication Replacement Program This is an annual program that upgrades current traffic signal indications with energy saving LED indicators. This fiscal year, locations were identified, and project was awarded in August of 2014 and completed in February of 2015 at a total cost of $74,153. $50,000 of Measure A funds are being carried over to FY 15/16. CITY UE NUM EMT 0 /UMWIFmi1ruu Project Status Report May 8, 2015 Page 3 of 3 15. IISNS Upgrades Program This is an annual program that upgrades aged internally illuminated street name signs. Locations are being identified and anticipated to be awarded in September 2015. An estimated $75,000 of Measure A funds are being carried over to FY 15/16. 16. Jefferson Street Interchange Project is under construction. This is the City's portion of a cost share formula. An estimated $239,538 of Measure A funds are being carried over to FY 15/16. 17. Citywide Advanced Transportation Management System (ATMS) Project CVAG is funding and managing project. Enclosed is the City of Palm Desert's Measure A Local Funds Program Project Status Report FY 2015 - 2016. The amounts in the "Measure A Funds" column are balances as of April 30, 2015. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (760) 346-0611, extension 469 or via email at moreenwood(c�citvofpalmdesert.orq. Sincerely, Mar Director df Public Works Enclosure cc: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager Paul Gibson, Director of Finance J. Luis Espinoza, Assistant Director of Finance CITY Of PRIM OEM RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Patin Desert Page 1 of 1 Prepered by: Mark Greenwood Phone df: 760-346.0811 Date: May 8, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Coot Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status Monterey Avenue 1 I-101nterchange Improvements On•ramp/oIt-ramp construction 12,899000 4.548,122 December 2015 In maintenance period ? Right Tum Lane - Fred Waring Drive to Hwy 111 Street Project 775,000 1,766 August 2015 Wailing for Caltrans' authorization to bid 3 Right Tum Lane - Hwy 111 to Fred Street Project 380,000 8,250 September 2015 Construction to begin June Waring (northwest comer) 2015 4 Highway 111 Sidewalk Will - combined with Item No. 3 Street Project 85,000 0 September 2015 Contruclion to begin June 2015 On-ramp/oIt•ramp In environmental and 5 Portola Interchange at 1-10 construction 71 993.000 0 September 2019 preliminary engineering phase 6 Street Resurfacing Maintenance Project 4,900,000 2,185,398 December 2014 Current FY completed 7 Monterey Avenue Widening from Fred Wanng Drive to Country Club °nve Street Project 6,500,000 0 June 2018 Developing conceptual P 9 alignment 9 Traffic Signals -Accessible Maintenance Project 50,000 0 October 2015 Construction to begin Pedestrian Program September 2015 9 Citywide Street Striping Maintenance Project 200,000 173,102 December 20/4 Current FY completed Citywide Advanced Transportation 10 Management System (ATMS) Program 794,000 0 Cancelled CVAG Project Project 11 San Pablo Right Tum lane at Fred Waring (southeast comer) Street Project 365,000 0 On hold 1? Gerald Ford East of Cook Improvements Roadway Improvements 285,000 0 In elimina investigation ry 13 ADA Curb Aamp Modifications Maintenance Project 125,000 0 August 2016 Construction to begin June 2015 14 Bridge Inspection Program Maintenance Project 200,000 0 September 2016 In design 75 PrgramIndication Replacement Maintenance Project 100,000 50,000 February 2015 Current FY completed 16 IISNS Upgrades Program Maintenance Project 75,000 0 September 2015 Locations are being identified 17 Jefferson Street Interchange on-ramp/off-ramp construction 312,500 72,981 2017 Under construction TOTALS 99,810,500 7,039,597 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF PALM SPRINGS FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 City of Palm Springs Department of Public Works and Engineering 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way • Palm Springs, C.A. 92262 Tel: (760) 323-8253 • Fax: (760) 322-8360 • Web: www.palmspringsca.gov May 20, 2015 Ms. Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92502-22083 Re: Revised Measure "A" Local Street & Road Program City of Palm Springs Annual Five -Year Measure "A" CIP (Fiscal Year 2015/16 - 2019/20) Dear Ms. Trevino: Enclosed are the revised, Project Status Report for CIP Projects in FY 2014/15 and proposed Local Measure "A" Five -Year CIP Plan for fiscal year 2015/2016 through 2019/2020 per your comments e-mailed on May 12, 2015. If you have any questions, please call me at (760) 322-8380, or Savat Khamphou at (760) 323-8253 ext. 8744 or via e-mail at Savat.Khamphou@palmspringsca.gov. Sincerely, Marcus L. Fuller, MPA, PE, PLS Assistant City Manager / City Engineer Enclosures c: David H. Ready, City Manager Geoffrey Kiehl, Director of Finance/Treasurer Nancy Klukan, Asst. Director of Finance Post Office Box 2743 • Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Palm Springs (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of d,498,732, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: M a -/ ; 2015 ATTEST: CRETARY Agency: City of Palm Springs Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Savat Khamphou Phone #: (760) 323-8253 ext.8744 Date: Revised May 20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 B Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 9,922,983 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,035,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 11,957,983 I ACCT ff'S Project Name! Limits Project Type Total Cost (All Funding Sources) Measure A Funds (To Expend in FY) ;015-2016 50290 Agua Caliente Museum Roadway on Hermosa Drive Roadway Improvements $ 1,300,000 $ 320,000 50326 _ Local Measure A Bond Payment Road Maintenance $ 1800,000 $ 1,100,000 50225 Annual Overlay & Reconstruction Road Maintenance $ 920,000 $ 320,000 50100 Annual Slurry Seal Road Maintenance $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000 000 50244 Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation $ 5,000,000 $ 500,000 50120 Bridge Repairs Bridge Maintenance $ 100,000 $ 100,000 50272 Traffic MGMT Center/Citywide Traffic Signal Interconnect Traffic Signal improvements $ 2,100 000_ $ 1,000,000 50242 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance $ 50,000 $ 50,000 50307 Date Palm Drive / 1-10 Interchange Widening Expanded Freeway Interchange $ 16,800,000 $ 7,000 50316 East Palm Canyon @ Palm Canyon Wash Bridge Rehabilitation $ 5,973,000 $ 30,000 60076 Farrell Drive / Vista Chino Traffic Improvements $ 450,000 $ 50,000 50196 Indian Canyon Drive Widening (UPRR to Garnet Ave including UPRR Bridge Widening) Roadway and Bridge Widening $ 21,250,000 $ 120,000 50321 Jefferson Street / 1-10 Interchange (Proportionate Share to CVAG) Expanded Freeway Interchange $ 435,733 $ 300,000 50229 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $ 10,422 $ 1_0,422 50245 Ramon Road Widening @ Whitewater River (Incl. Bridge) Bridge/Roadway Widening $ 32,000,000 $ 80,000 50322 Ramon Road Pvmt Rehab. from Sunrise to Compadre Road Maintenance $ 447,000 $ 100,000 South Palm Canyon Bridge @ Arenas Wash (LWC) New Bridge New Bridge $ 4,875,000 $ 75,000 _50221 50317 South Palm Canyon Bridge @ Tahquitz Creek Bridge Replacement $ 6,165,000 $ 30,000 50224 Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Improvements $ 40L000 $ 40,000 50298 Vista Chino Bridge Q Whitewater River New Bridge $ 95,000,000 $ 250,000 CP 14-12 Gene Autry Trail Second Left Turn Lane@Vista Chino (Hwy 111) Traffic Improvements Street Improvements $ 500,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 300,000 $ 900,000 CP 15-19 San Rafael Widening (Virginia to Indian) TOTALS $ 206,216,155 S 7,662,422 Balance (New Project) (New Project) $ 4,295,561 t Agency: City of Palm Springs Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Savat Khamphou Phone #: (760) 323-8253 ext.8744 Date: Revised May 20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2017 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 4,295,561 t' Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,076,000 , Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 6,371,561 . - Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost (All Funding Sources) Measure A Funds (To Expend in FY) 2016-2017 Road Maintenance $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Local Measure ABond Payment Annual Slurry Seal Road Maintenance $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Bogert Trail Bridge Rehabilitation Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation $ 5,000,000 $ 50,000 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance $ 50,000 $ 50,000 East Palm Canyon @ Palm Cyn Wash Bridge Rehabilitation $ 5,973,000 $ 10,000 Indian Canyon Drive UPRR Bridge Widening (UPRR to Garnet Ave Including UPRR Bridge Widening) Roadway &Bridge Widening $ 21,250,000 $ 510,000 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $ 10,422 $ 10,422 North Indian Avenue - 20th to Dillon (MOU with DHS) Street Improvements $ 600,000 $ 200,000 l Ramon Road Widening @ Whitewater River (Incl. Bridge) Bridge/Roadway Widening $ 32,000,000 $ 50,000 San Rafael Widening (Virginia to Indian) Street Improvements $4,000,000 $ 500,000 South Palm Canyon Bridge @ Arenas Wash South Palm Canyon Bridge @ Tahguitz Creek New Bridge $6,165,000 $ 400,000 Bridge Replacement $ 6,165,000 $ 20,000 Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Improvements $ $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Vista Chino Bridge @ Whitewater River New Bridge $ 95,000,000 $ 300,000 TOTALS $ 178,353,422 $ 4,240,422 Balance $ 2,131,139 Agency: City of Palm Springs Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Savat Khamphou Phone #: (760) 323-8253 ext.8744 Date: Revised May 20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 2,131,139 Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,118,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 4,249,139 Item No. Project Name f Limits Project Type Total Cost (All Funding Sources) Measure A Funds (To Expend in FY) 2017-2018 Local Measure A Bond Payment Road Maintenance $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Annual Slurry Seal Road Maintenance $ 1,000,000 $ 4,000,000 Bridge Repairs Bridge Maintenance $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance $ 50,000 $ 50,000 East Palm Canyon @ Palm Cyn Wash Bridge Rehabilitation $ 5,973,000 $ 143,000 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $ 10,422 $ 10,422 North Indian Avenue - 20th to Dillon (MOU with DHS) Street Improvements $ 600,000 _ $ 200,000 Ramon Road Widening @ Whitewater River (Ind. Bridge) Bridge/Roadway Widening $ 32,000,000 $ 375,000 Sonora (East of Sonora Court) Street Improvements $ 80,000 $ 80,000 South Palm Canyon @ Tahguitz Creek Bridge Replacement $ 6,165,000 $ 145,000 Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Improvements $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Vista Chino Bridge @ Whitewater River New Bridge $ 95,000,000 $ 80,000 TOTALS $ 142,118,422 $ 3,323,422 Balance $ 925,717 t Agency: City of Palm Springs Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Savat Khamphou Phone #: (760) 323-8253 ext.8744 Date: Revised May 20, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 925,717 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure AAllocation: $ 2,182,000 Estimated Measure AAvailable for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 3,107,717 Item No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost (All Funding Sources) Measure A Funds (To Expend in FY) 2018-2019, Local Measure A Bond Payment Road Maintenance $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Annual Slurry Seal Road Maintenance $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $ 10,422 $ 10,422 North Indian Avenue - 20th to Dillon (MOU with DHS) Street Improvements $ 600,000 $ 200,000 Ramon Road Widening @ Whitewater River (Incl. Bridge) Bridge/Roadway Widening $ 32,000,000 $ 375,000 Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Improvements $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Vista Chino Bridge @ Whitewater River New Bridge $ 95,000,000 $ 400,000 TOTALS $ 129,300,422 $ 2,675,422 Balance RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Palm Springs Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Savat Khamphou Phone #: (760) 323-8253 ext.8744 Date: Revised May 20, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 432,295 Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,247,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 2,679,295 Item No. Project Name ! Limits Project Type Total Cost (All Funding Sources) Measure A Funds (To Expend in FY) 2019-2020 Local Measure A Bond Payment Road Maintenance $ 1,100,000 $ 1,100,000 Bridge Repairs Bridge Maintenance $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $ 10,422 $ 10,422 Traffic Safety_Projects Traffic Improvements $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Vista Chino Bridge @ Whitewater River New Bridge $ 95,000,000 $ 900,000 TOTALS $ 1,300,422 $ 2,200,422 Balance J 478,873 I RNERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT - C1P Projects FY 2014-201 5 Agency: City of Palm Springs Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Savat Khamphou Phone #: (760) 323-8253 ext. 8744 Date: Revised May 20, 2015 item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost (All Funding Sources) 14/15 FY Measure A Funds (Expended) Estimated Completion Status June 2016 June 2021 Dec 2015 April 2016 June 2016 Annually June 2016 Completed June 2016 Dec 2019 Dec 2015 Dec 2018 Dec 2016 June 2038 June 2015 June 2019 June 2016 N/A Dec 2017 Dec 2017 June 2015 Annually Dec 2020 RFA (E-76) for Construction with Caltrans pending FTIP Amend. Bond being processed. Last Payment June 2021. Construction Completed from 13/14 fiscal year. Compiling List of Streets. Notice to Proceed with Construction issued 4/14/2015. As needed. All repairs up to date. Notice to Proceed with Construction 4/16/2015. As needed. All repairs up to date. Awaiting final billing from CVAG. Remaining balance of $6,500. Proceeding with Environmental Studies. Pre -Construction meeting held on 4/14/2015. Completion of Final Design and Acquiring Right of Way. Project In Construction. On -Going Contract Until Year 2038 90% Complete. To be completed by June 30, 2015. Project Completed. RFA (E-76) for Design with Caltrans. PANED Approved. RFA (E-76) for CON with Caltrans - FTIP Approved April 2014 Grant not awarded. 95% Plans and Acquiring Right of Way. Environmental Studies On -Going. Project is under construction. As Needed. Ali Environmental Studies Completed. Begin CEQA Circulation. 50290 Agua Caliente Museum Roadway on Hermosa Drive Roadway Improvements $ 1,300,000 $ - 50326 Annual Overlay & Reconstruction or Debt Service for the Sar Road Maintenance _ $ 5,969,448 $ - 50225 Annual Overlay & Reconstruction Road Maintenance $ 920,000 $ 600,000 50100 Annual Slurry Seal Road Maintenance $ 1,150,000 $ 250,000 50244 Bogert Trail Bye Rehabilitation Bridge Widening/Rehabilitation $ 5,024,000 $ 100,000 50120 Bridge Repairs Bridge Maintenance $ 100,000 $ 5,000 50272 Traffic MGMT Center/Citywide Traffic Signal Interconnect Traffic Signal Improvements $ 2,650,000 $ 300,000 50242 Curb & Gutter Repair Road Maintenance $ 50,000 $ 35,000 50307 Date Palm Drive / I-10 Interchange Widening Expanded Freeway Interchange $ 16,800,000 $ 200 50316 East Palm Canyon @ Palm Canyon Wash Bridge Rehabilitation $ 5,973,000 $ 5,000 60076 Farrell Drive / Vista Chino Traffic Improvements $ 450,000 $ _ 15,000 50196 Indian Canyon Drive Widening (UPRR to Gamet Ave including UPRR Bridge Widening) Roadway and Bridge Widening $ 21,250,000 $ 80,000 50321 Jefferson Street/ 1-10 Interchange (proportionate Share) Expanded Freeway Interchange $ 435,733 $ 150,000 50229 Mid -Valley Parkway Reimbursement - CVAG Street Improvements $ 10,422 $ 10,422 50312 Pavement Condition Survey Road Maintenance $ 100,000 $ 100,000 50293 Ramon Road / I-10 Interchange Expanded Freeway Interchange $ 15,000,000 $ 87,958 50245 Ramon Road Widening @ Whitewater River (Incl. Bridge) Bridge/Roadway Widening $ 32,000,000 $ 5,000� 50322 Ramon Road Pvmt Rehab. from Sunrise to Compadre Road Maintenance $ 447,000 $ 5,000 50311 SB 821 Sidewalk Project FY 14/15 Sidewalk Construction $ 90,000 $ - 50221 South Palm Canyon @ Arenas Wash (LWC) New Bridge New Bridge $ 4,875,000 $ - 50317 South Palm Canyon Bridge @ Tahquitz Creek Bridge Replacement $ 6,165,000 $ 20,000 59416 Sunrise Way at Rash's Shopping Center Trafficlignal Installation $ 300,000 $ 260,000 50224 Traffic Safety Projects Traffic Improvements .. $ 40,000 $ 95,000,000 $ 1,500 50298 Vista Chino Bridge a Whitewater River New Bridge $ 5.000 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF PERRIS FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY OF PERRIS HABIB MOTLAGH, CITY ENGINEER May 28, 2014 Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Attn.: Grace Alvarez Re: FY 2015-2020 Measure "A" Improvement Plan Enclosed, please find City of Perris proposed 5-year capital improvement plan. Also enclosed, please find an exhibit depicting the status of the currently adopted 5-year plan and the MOE prepared by the Finance Department and signed by the City Manager. The City anticipates start of construction for 4th Street during 2015-2016 fiscal year. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Habib Motlagh City Engineer Cc: Ron Carr, Assistant City Manager Jennifer Erwin, Assistant Finance Director DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING 170 WILKERSON AVE., SUITE D, PERRIS, CA 92570-2200 TEL.: (951) 943-6504 - FAX: (951) 943-8416 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned hereby agrees and certifies for the City of Perris that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,218,470, approved by the Commission at its July 2011 meeting, and that the City of Perris shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the City of Perris for local transportation purposes. The City of Perris hereby acknowledges that the failure of the City of Perris to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the City of Perris commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: 2015 t� FT/Tad Belmu+ez, ger ATTEST: Ron arr, Assistant City Manager FY 2014/2015 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures (Round to nearest dollar) Funding Breakdown Project Expenditures Included in General Ledger 4 Total Cost General Fund Meas A Federal State RBBD Other Construction: Harley Knox Phase II (5066) $ 3,284,382.00 $ 6,678.00 $ 343,349.00 $ 2,934,355.00 Maintenance: Street Maintenance (0013033) $ 1,064,069.00 $ 1,064,069.00 Fleet Maintenance(0013034j $ 250,423.00 $ 250,423.00 Engineering/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects:{0013031) .s ~ $ 4,598,874.00 $ 1,321,170.00 General Engineering (0013031) 5 282,392.00 $ 282,392.00 Deductions for Special Consideration (Deductions Must Also Be Included in Project Expenditures Above): Total Project Cost General Fund State Reason Why Project Expenditure Should Be Deducted from MOE Construction: Maintenance: Street Maintenance Overhead (0013033) S 442,568.00 $ 98,073.00 Employees are non field staff or Admin Fleet Maintenance Overhead (0013034) $ 59,155.00 $ 12,973.00 Employees are non field staff or Admin t Engineering/Administrative Overhead Nat Allocated to Spec Pro 0013031 $ 75,516.00 S 25,516 00 Employees are non field staff or Admin im - x _ minus Deduction MOE Expenditures less 2009 Base Year !Difference 186,562.00 1,417,000.00 (1,218,470.00) 198,530.00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Perris Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motiagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: April27, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $3, 380,000 $1,416,000 $4,796,000 / Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 1 Pavement Rehabilitation & Slurry Pavement rehab. 1,500 1,000 2 1-215 Widening Project Oversight 100 100 3 Perris Blvd. Widening (1st to 1-215) Street Widening 1,500 500 4 Annual Pothole Repair Maintenance 50 50 5 4th Street (City Limits) Pavement Rehab. 1,300 400 6 Nuevo Interchange @ 1-215 Widening & Pavement 4,000 400 Rehab. 1 Murrieta Road Bridge New Bridge 1,200 200 TOTALS 9,650 2,650 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Perris Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: April 27, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $2,146, 000 $1,444,000 $3, 590, 000/ Item No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2017 1 Perris Blvd. Widening (1st to 5th Widening, Right -of -Way 3,500 1,000 Street) 2 Annual Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maintenance 2,000 '1,000 3 Redlands Blvd. from San Jacinto Pavement Rehab. 850 450 Ave. to Rider 4 Nuevo Bridge New Bridge 5,000 1,000 TOTALS 11,350 3,450 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Perris Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: April 27, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $140,000 $1,473,000 $1,613,000 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type 1 otal cost ($000's) measure A Funds ($000's) 2017-2018 ! Annual Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maintenance 1,500 500 2 Nuevo Road from Redlands to Widening & Pavement 1,200 300 Murrieta Rehab. 3 Ramona Expressway (City Limits) Pavement Rehab. 1,000 600 TOTALS 3,700 1,400 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Perris Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: April 27, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $213,000 Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $1,517,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $1,730,000 item No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type i otai Lost ($000's) measure A Funds ($000's) 2018-2019 1 Annual Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maintenance 1,500 300 2 Perris Blvd. (City Limits) Widening & Pavement 1,200 1,000 Rehab. TOTALS 2,700 1,300 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Perris Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: April 27, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: f $430,000 $1,563,000 $1,993,000 item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type i otai t,ost ($000's) measure A Funds ($000's) 2019-2020 1 Annual Slurry Seal & Overlay Pavement Maintenance 1,500 1,000 2 Downtown Streets Pavement Maintenance 1,500 `i00 TOTALS 3,000 1,500 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT S TA TUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City mfPerris Page 1of1 Prepared by: HobibModagh PhuneM. (051)943'6504 Date: April 272U/5 Item No. Project Name /Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000'm) Measure Fmndm($&00's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Perris Blvd. Improvements (San Jacinto to 1-215) Pavement Rehab, Widening 1.000 400 Nuvember-18 Design /F5ght-of-WayUnderway 2 Annual Slurry Seal &Overlay Pavement Maintenance 1`500 800 This Phase in Completed 3 Annual Pothole Repairs Pavement Maintenance 60 50 On -Going 4 1`215V0dening Project Oversight 250 250 On -Going 5 "D" Street (4thto 11th) Pavement Rehab., SiQnage.and Other 1.200 100 Completed section from 4thtu Gth,Balance onhold. Improvements G 4thStreet (City Limits) Pavement Rehab. 1'000 0 On -hold until 215widening is complete TOTALS 6,000 1'600 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 CITY OF R NC O MIRAGE rf May 7, 2015 Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside County Regional Complex, 3rd Floor P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: FY 2016-2020 Measure "A" Local Street and Roads Capital Improvement Plan Dear Ms. Trevino: Attached are the Local Streets and Roads Program for Measure "A" Funds for FY 2016- 2020, project status report for prior year Plan (FY 2014/2015) and the FY 2015/2016 Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement. The City's maintenance of effort for FY 2015/2016 is $1,456,367, which exceeds our established maintenance of effort requirement of $674,811. The City's five-year Capital Improvement Program totals $40,620,000 and identifies Measure "A" local funds for the five-year plan totaling $5,899,000. The Measure A Fund Balance is projected to be $661,019 as a result of the 5-year Program. The City currently carries a balance of approximately $2,001,019 in the Measure "A" Local Fund account. Therefore, with current and projected future allocations, adequate funds appear to be available for the plan. Attached is the City's status report for our prior year Plan FYE June 30, 2015. Please feel free to call me at (760) 770-3224 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Bruce B. Harry Jr. Director of Public Works Enclosures: Measure "A" FY 2016-2020 Capital Improvement Plan Project Status Report FY 2014/2015 FY 2015/2016 MOE Certification Statement ADMINISTRATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FINANCE HOUSING PUBLIC LIBRARY PUBLIC WORKS Te1.1.760.324.4511 Tel.1.760.324.4511 Te1.1.760.770.3207 Te1.1.760.770.3210 Te1.1.760.341.7323 Tel.1.760.770.3224 Fax.1.760.324.8830 Fax.1.760.202.4792 Fax.1.760.324.052B Fax.1.760.324.1617 Fax.1.760.341.5213 Fax.1.760.770.3261 69-825 HIGI+WAY ill / RANCHO MIRAGE, CA 92270 www.RanchoMirageCA.gov www.RelaxRanchoMirage.com FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Rancho Mirage (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with th?_,Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $674,811, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: %y Ay / / , 2015 /1.(71'-'4j-- MANAGER City of Rancho Mirage Department of Public Works Maintenance of Effort — Measure "A" Fiscal Year 2015-2016 General Fund Expenditures 101 13100 Engineering r r 7100, 7200 Salaries and Benefits 7460 7623, 7624 7800, 7803 7806 [7818 7839 8000 8020 101 (30% of $1,304,542) Inspections (50% of $8,000) r Vehicle Operations/Maintenance (50% of $4,700) Mileage (30% of $200) Meetings & Travel (50% of $8,000) Dues & Subscriptions (50% of $3,000) Reproduction & Printing (50% of $100) Supplies (50% of $4,000) [Uniforms (50% of $500) 3200 Street Maintenance r f r $391,362 $4,000 $2,350 $60 T $4,000 $1,500 $50 $2,000 $250 Sub Total: $405.572 7100, 7200 Salaries and Benefits 7120 7444 7603, 7606 7617-7621 Overtime Temporary Agency Services Utilities Street Related Maintenance $655,695 $18,000 $0 $21,000 $260,000 7623, 7624, 7634, Vehicle Operations/Maintenance 7800 7806-7818 Meetings & Travel/Dues & Subscriptions 8000-8024 $53,000 $1,100 `Maintenance Supplies/Small r $42,000 Tools/Uniforms/Traffic Control Supplies Sub Total: 31.050.795 MOE Grand Total: $1 ,406,307 EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Fiscal Years 2015.2016 and 2016.2017 FUND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3100 - ENGINEERING REQUESTED REQUESTED ACCT ACCOUNT JUSTIFICATION FOR FY2013-14 FY2014-15 FY2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 NO. NAME STAFF REQUESTS ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE AMOUNT AMOUNT 7100 Salaries - Director of Public Works - Current $ 177,877 $ 90,717 $ Full Time Director of Public Works - Successor 105,049 110,302 City Engineer 154,006 157,086 157,086 Senior Civil Engineer 133,036 135,697 135,697 Assoc. Civil Engineer - New Position 82,309 86,425 Project Manager 95,392 97,300 97,300 Public Works Inspector 90,044 91,844 91,844 Engineering Technician II 77.816 79,604 79,604 Department Secretary 75,516 77,026 77,026 Office Assistant III 58,043 59,204 59,204 7120 Overtime TOTAL $ 824,244 $ 861,730 $ 861,730 $ 975,836 $ 894,488 Public Works Inspector performing early inspections in order to maintain quality control offsite/onsite construction. Also ensure projects are properly closed at the end of the day. $ 500 $ 500 TOTAL $ 287 $ 500 $ Soo $ 500 $ 500 7200 Benefits Benefits paid by City including group insurance, retirement and other benefits. $ 328,706 $ 319,151 TOTAL $ 395,110 $ 344,044 $ 344,044 $ 328,706 $ 319,151 7400 Professional/ 1) Traffic Engineering consulting services as needed. $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Technical 2) Plan Checking services, special engineering studies, traffic counts, speed surveys, and software services. 30,000 30,000 TOTAL $ 4,783 $ 46,000 $ 34,000 7460 Inspections Provides special inspections and testing in areas where greater expertise is required and supplementary inspector when City Inspector is absent. $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 TOTAL $ 5,060 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 7623 Vehicle Fuel Fuel for Public Works Inspector's vehicle. $ 3,000 $ 3,500 TOTAL $ 2,582 $ 3,900 $ 2,300 $ 3,000 $ 3,500 FUND 101- GENERAL FIEND DIVISION 3100 - ENGINEERING ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Fiscal Years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 REQUESTED REQUESTED JUSTIFICATION FOR FY2013 14 FY2014-15 FY2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 STAFF REQUESTS ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE AMOUNT AMOUNT 7624 Vehicle Maintenance Maintenance for the Public Works Inspector's vehicle. TOTAL $ 2,041 $ 1,700 $ 1,300 $ 1,700 $ 1,700 $ 1,800 1,800 7800 Mileage Reimbursement for use of personal vehicles by Engineering personnel on project administration and inspections. $ 200 $ _ 200 TOTAL $ 202 $ 800 $ 200 $ 200 $ 200 7806 Meetings, Training & Travel 7818 Dues & Subscriptions Attendance at conferences, workshops, technical training sessions and continuing education classes in conjunction with job responsibilities or to obtain/maintain certifications, licenses, notary commissions, registrations and the like. $ 8,000 $ 8,000 TOTAL $ 7,951 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 TOTAL $ 2,607 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 7839 Reproduction & Printing specifications, plans, special prints, etc. Printing Annual dues for American Public Works Association, Construction Management Association of America, Project Management Institute, American Society of Civil Engineers, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Notary Public, First American Data Tree, technical publications, certifications and registrations. TOTAL $ - $ 8000 Supplies 8012 Small Tools, Furniture & Equipment 100 $ 100 $ Office supplies, print paper, delivery services for plan checks, training videos, and film. TOTAL $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 100 $ 100 100 $ 100 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 2,965 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ Miscellaneous small tools & office equipment as may be necessary. TOTAL $ 137 $ 1,000 $ 200 4,000 $ 4,000 $ 300 $ 400 8020 Uniforms Uniforms for Public Works Inspector and safety clothing for Engineering staff. TOTAL $ 470 $ 500 $ 500 $ 300 $ 400 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 DMSION TOTAL $ 1,378,842 $ 1,288,639 FOND 101- GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3200 - STREET MAINTENANCE ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME 7100 Salaries - Full Time 7120 Overtime EXPENDffURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Fiscal Years 2015-2016 and 2016.2017 REQUESTED REQUESTED JUSTIFICATION FOR FY2013-14 FY2014-15 FY2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 STAFF REQUESTS ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE AMOUNT AMOUNT Street Maintenance Supervisor Sr. Traffic Signal Technician Traffic Signal Technician U Street Maintenance Worker II Street Maintenance Worker I Street Maintenance Worker I Street Maintenance Worker I - New Position TOTAL $ 355,260 $ 424,268 $ 424,269 $ 85,756 90,044 59,384 67,193 60,946 60,946 1) For emergency callouts for traffic accident clean up, traffic control, traffic signals, cleaning debris and fallen tree limbs, placing barricades and warning signs during rainstorms, and completing projects started during regular work hours. 2) On -call Pay $ 87,471 $ 87,471 91,844 91,844 62,353 64,981 68,537 68,537 65,273 65,273 41,572 43,650 _ 41,572 43,650 $ 458,622 $ 465,406 TOTAL $ 26,777 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 $ 7200 Benefits 7603 Electricity 5,000 $ 5,000 13,000 13,000 18,000 $ 18,000 Benefits paid by City including group insurance, retirement and other benefits. $ 197,073 206,975 $ 197,073 $ 206,975 TOTAL $ 197,838 $ 201,899 $ 201,899 Electricity and maintenance for 91 streetlights throughout the City. TOTAL $ 12,730 $ 15,000 $ 16,000 7606 Water Water for street sweeping and dust control. TOTAL $ 3,940 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 7617 Sidewalk/Curb/ City-wide sidewalk , curb and gutter repairs. Gutter Maintenance 7618 Traffic Signal Maintenance/ Electricity TOTAL $ - $ 10,000 $ $ 16,500 $ 17,000 $ 16,500 $ 17,000 4,500 $ 4,500 4,500 $ 4,500 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 5,507 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Electricity for 55 traffic signals, re-lamping, emergency callouts, major knockdowns and replacement of equipment as necessary, joint cities maintenance agreement for 15 shared signals. $ 225,000 $ 250,000 TOTAL $ 188,194 $ 170,000 $ 150,000 $ 225,000 $ 250,000 FOND 101 • GENERAL FOND DIVISION 3200 - STREET MAINTENANCE ACCT ACCOUNT NO. NAME EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For HScal Years 2015.2016 and 2016-2017 REQUESTED JUSTIFICATION FOR FY2013-14 FY2014-15 FY2014-15 FY 2015-16 STAFF REQUESTS ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE AMOUNT REQUESTED FY 2016-17 AMOUNT 7621 Street Related Repairs 7623 Vehicle Fuel 7624 Vehicle Maintenance 7627 Graffiti Removal 7630 Trails Maintenance Asphalt, concrete, aggregate base for repairing streets, disposal of old asphalt and concrete, equipment rental, catch basin repairs, landfill charges for disposal of roadside refuse, and miscellaneous other street repairs as needed. TOTAL $ 8,694 $ 25,000 $ 40,000 Fuel for the Division's vehicles. TOTAL $ 17,711 $ 25,700 $ 14,600 Maintenance for the Division's vehicles. TOTAL $ 26,167 $ 20,000 $ 27,150 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 20,000 $ 22,000 $ 20,000 $ 22,000 $ 28,000 $ 29,000 $ 28,000 $ 29,000 Purchase of supplies for City Street Maintenance and Code Compliance crews and/or contract personnel for graffiti removal and supplies in public right of way. $ 2,500 $ 2,500 TOTAL $ 3,685 $ 1,500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Contract services for the annual maintenance of the city's multi -use trail system. $ _ 28,000 $ 28,500 TOTAL $ 45,898 $ 48,000 $ 45,000 $ 28,000 $ 28,500 7634 Equipment Maintenance and fuels costs for air compressor, steer skid loader, ford Maintenance & tractor, speed trailers, compactor, cement mixer, arrow board and other Fuel miscellaneous equipment. $ TOTAL $ 3,841 $ 4,000 $ 3,500 $ 7806 Meetings, Training & Travel 7818 Dues & Subscriptions Attendance at technical training sessions to obtain/maintain special licenses or certifications; technical seminars related to asphalt and concrete maintenance; traffic classes for Class A licensed drivers; other topical sessions depending on need at the time, such as water quality testing, new laws or regulations for supervisors, etc. TOTAL $ 673 $ 4000 $ Dues for Maintenance Superintendents Association, American Construction Inspectors Association and technical publications. 5,000 $ 6,000 5,000 $ 6,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 476 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ TOTAL $ - $ /00 $ 100 $ 100 $ 100 100 $ 100 EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY DETAIL For Fiscal Years 2015.2016 and 2016-2017 FUND 101- GENERAL FIND DMSION 3200 - STREET MAINTENANCE REQUESTED REQUESTED ACCT ACCOUNT JUSTIFICATION FOR FY2013-14 FY2014-15 FY2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 NO. NAME STAFF REQUESTS ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATE AMOUNT AMOUNT 8000 Supplies 8002 Equipment Rental The purchase of silica sand for sandblasting, guardrail material and posts, concrete patch material and other supplies as needed. TOTAL $ 1,375 $ 3,000 $ 1,000 For rental of equipment as needed. TOTAL $ 8,292 $ 8003 Street Signs & Purchase of regulatory signs & street marking supplies. Markings $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 1,000 $ 5,500 $ TOTAL $ 23,885 $ 25,000 $ 37,000 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 8012 Small Tools, Shovels, chain saw chains, drills and bits, jacks, jack stands, landscape Furniture & tools, signal maintenance tools, mechanic tools, safety equipment, and Equipment miscellaneous special tools as required. $ 4,000 $ 2,500 8020 Uniforms TOTAL $ 599 $ 500 $ 2,100 $ 4,000 $ 2,500 Purchase uniforms, safety clothing, and shoes for all Street Maintenance personnel and Traffic Signal Technician. $ 3,000 $ 3,000 TOTAL $ 3,257 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 8024 Traffic Control This account provides for the purchase of barricades, both large and small, traffic cones, light board replacement parts, batteries, lights, and rental of traffic control setups. $ _ 2,000 $ 2,000 TOTAL $ 443 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 DIVISION TOTAL $ 1,081,295 $ 1,126,481 Agency: Rancho Mirage Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: William Enos Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 7, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $2,001,019 $871,000 $2,872,019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 1 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays and AC overlays and striping on various public streets identified by MicroPaver Preventative Maintenance 1,000 1,000 2 Monterey Avenue Street Improvements -Gerald Ford to Dinah Shore (R/W, Const.) Widening/Reconstruction 1,200 350 3 Frank Sinatra Bridge at Whitewater Channel (PS&E) Replace Low Water Xing 1,500 43 4 Traffic Signal Coordination Grant Design and Construction Traffic Signal Coordination 2,000 230 5 Administration of Programmed Projects (8%) Administration 100 70 TOTALS 5,800 1,693 Agency: Rancho Mirage Page 2 of 6 Prepared by: William Enos Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 7, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $1,179,019 / $888,000 ./ $2,067,019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2017 1 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays and striping on various public streets identified by MicroPaver. Preventative Maintenance 1,200 700 2 Frank Sinatra Bridge at Whitewater Channel (PSE/Const.) Replace Low Water Xing 30,000 460 3 Administration of Programmed Projects (8%) Administration 100 71 TOTALS 31,300 1,231 Agency: Rancho Mirage Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: William Enos Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 7, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $836,019 $906,000 $1,742,019 item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type i otai cost ($000's) measure A rungs ($000's) 2017-2018 1 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays and striping on various public streets identified by MicroPaver Preventative Maintenance 1000 750 2 Administration of Programmed Projects (8%) Administration 100 73 TOTALS 1,100 823 Agency: Rancho Mirage Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: William Enos Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 7, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $919,019 / $ 933, 000 .-'" $1,852,019 �- item No, Project Name / Limits Project Type Iota! frost ($000's) iineasure A i-unas ($000's) 2018-2019 1 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays and striping on various public streets identified by MicroPaver Preventative Maintenance 1,000 1,000 2 Administration of Programmed Projects (8%) Administration 110 75 TOTALS 1,110 1,075 Agency: Rancho Mirage Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: William Enos Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 7, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $777, 019 .o $961,000 J $1,738,019 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type total cost ($000's) Measure A rungs ($000's) 2019-2020 1 Citywide slurry seal, crack seal, AC overlays and striping on various public streets identified by MicroPaver. Preventative Maintenance 1200 1000 2 Administration of Programmed Projects (8%) Administration 110 77 TOTALS 1,310 1,077 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: Rancho Mirage Page 6 of 6 Prepared by: William Enos Phone #: (760) 770-3224 Date: May 7, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Citywide slurry seal and crack seal on various public streets Preventative Maintenance 2,300 2,300 May -15 Completed Ongoing - Awaiting r/w & utility clearance - 2 Monterey Ave. Street Imp. (Gerald Ford to Dinah Shore) Widening/Reconstruction 1,200 350 Oct - 16 Construction summer 2016 Awaiting NEPA CE from Caltrans, RFA for PE ready 3 Frank Sinatra Bridge at Whitewater Channel (PA&ED) Replace Low Water Xing 1,300 50 to submit 4 Traffic Signal Coordination Grant Design and Construction Traffic Signal Coordination 2,000 0 Awaiting NEPA clearance 5 Administration of Programmed Projects Administration 100 70 Spent TOTALS 6,900 2,770 _ NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF RIVERSIDE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 Public Works Department oLE, C IE11WE k MAY 07 2015 [0) -I TRANArc ATE iedi MISSIUN Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 May 6, 2015 Attn.: Ms. Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager Subject: Measure A Maintenance of Effort, CIP and Project Status Report Enclosed are the City of Riverside's FY 2015/16 Maintenance of Effort Certification Statement, Measure A Local Funds Capital Improvement Program for FY 2015/16 through FY 2019/20 and a status report for FY 2014/15. If you have any questions, please contact Patrick Keeney at (951) 826-2406. Sincerely, ` ‘,/ - r. l Thomas J. Boyd Public Works Director Attachments pmk 3900 Main Street • Riverside, CA 92522 • 951.826.5341 • fax 951.826.5542 • www.riversideca.gov FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Riverside (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the. Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $12,449,203, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the. Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: April ] 7 , 2015 APPROVED AS TO FURL CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BY ttamav Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April28, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: 20,416 6,797 27,213 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 1 Arlington Ave - Fairhaven to City Limit Traffic Safety Improvements 1,313 *600 2 Arlington Ave - Van Buren to SR 91 Street Resurfacing 2,100 *91 3 Brockton Avenue Bike Lanes Street Rehabilitation & Restriping 1,747 *873 4 Central Ave/UPRR Crossing Improvements Railroad Crossing Improvements 250 *170 5 Collett Extension - Napa to Buchanan New Street Construction 3,225 *168 6 Indiana - Vallejo to Auto Center Pavement Rehabilitation 2,050 *1,482 a\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 1 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 201E - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 • Item No. Project Name ( Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000%) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2016 7 Indiana Widening @ Pierce Street Widening and improvements 1,115 *420 8 Jurupa Ave Extension - Rutland to Crest New Street Construction 300 *300 9 Jurupa Ave Extension - Van Buren to Rutland New Street Construction 6,237 *1 10 Magnolia Widening - Buchanan to Banbury Street Widening 6,331 *3,301 11 Major Street Rehabilitation 14/15 Street Resurfacing 4,080 *493 12 Major Street Rehabilitation 15/16 Street Resurfacing 2,400 2,400 13 Market Street Bridge Replacement City Contribution for County Bridge Replacement 100 *100 14 Misc. Railroad Project Management Grade Separations/Quiet Zones 980 *560 G:1Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A C1P 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 2 of 15 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April28, 2015 Item No. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Project Name / Limits 2015-2016 15 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement 16 17 18 19 20 21 Paving Projects COP - Debt Service** Quiet Zone/BNSF - Buchanan to Jane Quiet Zone/BNSF - Mission Inn/3rd/Spruce Project Type City Contribution for County Bridge Replacement Street Paving Railroad Quiet Zone Railroad Quiet Zone Quiet Zone/BNSF & UPRR - Cridge & Panorama Railroad Quiet Zone Quiet Zone/UPRR - Brockton & Palm Railroad Grade Separation - Iowa Railroad Quiet Zone Grade Separation Total Cost ($000's) 1,233 2,996 17,439 4,120 3,393 1,700 31,686 Measure A Funds ($000's) 100 *100 2,996 **For a more complete list of proposed street projects to be financed from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds, please see the attached Exhibit A. The City reserves the right to update Exhibit A and substitute various street repairs for the ones listed. *7 *20 680 *856 *200 *99 G:1Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 PAMeasure A C1P 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 3 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 28, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 22 Railroad Grade Separation - Magnolia Grade Separation 50,917 *9 23 Railroad Grade Separation - Riverside Grade Separation 31,184 *197 24 Railroad Grade Separation - Streeter Grade Separation 33,971 *1,290 25 10% Measure A Rail Set -Aside Grade Separations/Quiet Zones 7 *7 26 Sidewalk/Trail Construction 13/14 Sidewalk Construction 500 *473 27 Tyler Widening - Wells to Hole Street Widening and Improvements 11,700 *4,236 28 Van Buren - Indiana to South City Limit Street Widening 26,750 *78 29 Van Buren - Jurupa to Santa Ana River Street Widening 1,141 *873 30 Van Buren/91 Freeway Interchange Interchange Improvements 33,399 - GAAdmin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 Fr.Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 4 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April28, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 31 3rd/Blaine Bike Lanes -Mulberry to Watkins Street Widening & Restriping 383 *40 32 Arterial Interconnections Traffic Signal Coordination 550 40 *40 33 Brockton Protective/Permissive Left Turns Traffic Signal Revisions 100 *79 34 CalTrans Ramps Coordination Traffic Signal Coordination 73 - 35 LED Luminaire Safety Lighting Traffic Signal Revisions 111 111 36 Magnolia - Buchanan to First Traffic Signal Coordination 1,876 *489 37 Traffic Signal Revisions Traffic Signal Modifications 1,489 100 *533 38 New Traffic Signals - Prioritized Locations New Traffic Signal Installation 190 *2 G:Wdmin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY1Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 5 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 28, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 39 Rumsey - Central New Traffic Signal Installation 250 *250 40 University - Brockton to Campus Traffic Signal Coordination 50 *50 41 University - Protected/Permissive Left Tums Traffic Signal Modifications 125 *125 42 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 43 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 125 125 44 Controller Assembly Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 40 40 45 LED Signal Lenses Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 40 40 46 Spread Spectrum Radio Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 10 10 47 Traffic Management Center Traffic Signal Coordination 50 50 G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort115 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 6 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April28, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost (5000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 48 Traffic Signal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 35 35 49 Traffic Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 300 300 TOTALS 290,211 25,689 * Indicates Measure A funding in prior fiscal years and not expended at 7/1/14. a\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 7 of 15 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 28, 2015 RiVERSDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 1,524 6,933 8,457 Item No, Project Name / Limits 2016-2017 1 Major Street Rehabilitation 16/17 2 3 4 5 6 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Paving Projects COP - Debt Service* Project Type Street Resurfacing City Contribution for County Bridge Replacement Street Paving Quiet Zone/BNSF & UPRR - Cridge & Panorama Railroad Quiet Zone Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision New Traffic Signal Installation Total Cost ($000's) 2,400 1,233 3,000 3,393 315 250 Measure A Funds ($000's) 2,400 100 3,000 693 315 250 *For a more complete list of proposed street projects to be financed from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds, please see the attached Exhibit A. The City reserves the right to update Exhibit A and substitute various street repairs for the ones listed. G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 8 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: Apri128, 2015 ltem No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2017 7 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 8 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 125 125 9 Traffic Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 300 300 TOTALS 11,066 7,233 G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 9 of 15 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 28, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 1,224 7,072 8,296 Item I No. Project Name / Limits 2017-2018 1 Major Street Rehabilitation 17/18 2 3 4 5 6 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Paving Projects COP - Debt Service* Quiet Zone/UPRR - Brockton /£ Palm Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations Project Type Street Resurfacing City Contribution for County Bridge Replacement Street Paving Railroad Quiet Zone Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision New Traffic Signal Installation Total Cost ($000%) 2,400 1,233 3,000 1,700 315 250 Measure A Funds ($000's) 2,400 100 3,000 707 315 250 *For a more complete list of proposed street projects to be financed from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds, please see the attached Exhibit A. The City reserves the right to update Exhibit A and substitute various street repairs for the ones listed. G:1Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 10 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 28, 2015 Item No. I Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2017-2018 7 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 8 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 125 125 9 Traffic Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 300 300 TOTALS 9,373 7,247 a\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 11 of 15 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April28, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 1,049 7,284 " 8,333 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2018-2019 1 Major Street Rehabilitation 18/19 2 3 4 5 6 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Paving Projects COP - Debt Service* Quiet Zone/UPRR - Brockton & Palm Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations Street Resurfacing City Contribution for County Bridge Replacement Street Paving Railroad Quiet Zone Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision New Traffic Signal Installation 2,400 1,233 3,000 1,700 315 250 2,400 100 3,000 728 315 250 *For a more complete list of proposed street projects to be financed from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds, please see the attached Exhibit A. The City reserves the right to update Exhibit A and substitute various street repairs for the ones listed. G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort115 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 12 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: Apri128, 2015 Item No. i Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000%) 2018-2019 7 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 8 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 125 125 9 Traffic Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 300 300 TOTALS 9,373 7,268 G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 13 of 15 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April 28, 2015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 1,065 , 7,503 8, 568 Item No. Project Name / Limits 2019-2020 1 Major Street Rehabilitation 19/20 2 3 4 5 6 Paving Projects COP - Debt Service* Project Type Street Resurfacing Street Paving Quiet Zone/BNSF - Mission Inn, 3rd & Spruce Railroad Quiet Zone Quiet Zone/UPRR - Brockton & Palm Traffic Signal Improvements Traffic Signal - Prioritized Locations Railroad Quiet Zone Traffic Signal Coordination/Revision New Traffic Signal Installation Total Cost ($000's) 2,400 3,000 4,120 1,700 315 250 Measure A Funds ($000's) 2,400 3,000 686 64 315 250 *For a more complete list of proposed street projects to be financed from the City of Riverside apportionment of Local Measure A funds, please see the attached Exhibit A. The City reserves the right to update Exhibit A and substitute various street repairs for the ones listed. G:1Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 14 of 15 RiVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO11MMiSSSON MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: City of Riverside Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone #: (951) 826-2406 Date: April28, 2015 Item + No. I Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019-2020 7 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 8 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 125 125 9 Traffic Planning/Investigation Traffic Engineering 300 300 TOTALS 12,260 7,190 G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A CIP 2016-2020 updated 04282015 Page 15 of 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY 2014-15 Agency: City of Riverside Page I of 5 Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 14, 2015 Project No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST ($000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS ($000'S) STATUS 1 Arlington Ave - Fairhaven to West City Limit Traffic Safety Improvements 1,313 100 Design in progress. "500 2 Arlington Ave Rehab - Van Buren to SR 91 Street Resurfacing 2,100 "91 Design in progress. 3 Brockton Avenue Bike Lanes Street Rehabilitation & Restriping 1,747 "873 Construction complete. Project close out in progress. 4 Central Ave at UPRR Crossing Railroad Crossing Improvements 250 170 Design in progress. 5 Collett Extension - Napa to Buchanan New Street Construction 3,225 "168 Construction complete. Project close out in progress. 6 Indiana - Vallejo to Auto Center Pavement Rehabilitation 2,050 100 Design in progress. "1, 382 7 Indiana Widening @ Pierce Street Widening and Improvements 1,115 "420 Pending billing from school district. 8 Jurupa Extension - Rutland to Crest New Street Construction 300 "300 Design in progress. 9 Jurupa Extension - Van Buren to Rutland New Street Construction 6,237 "1 Construction complete. Required environmental mitigation still underway. 10 Magnolia Ave - Buchanan St to Banbury Dr Street Widening and Improvements 6,331 301 Design in progress. "3, 000 11 Major Street Rehabilitation 13/14 Street Resurfacing 8 - Funds used for specific projects. 12 Major Street Rehabilitation 14/15 Street Resurfacing 4,080 493 Construction contract awarded in February 2015. " Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2014. G:Wdmin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A Status 2015 updated 05142015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2014-15 Agency: City of Riverside Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 14, 2015 Project No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST (S000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS (S000'S) STATUS 13 Market St Arbor Repair s/o SR 60 Public Right -of -Way Repairs 50 "50 Project is complete. 14 Market Street Bridge Replacement Bridge Replacement 100 "100 Project on hold pending co-operative agreement with County and Jurupa Valley. 15 Market St Slurry - Mission Inn Ave to 1st St Street Slurry 100 "100 Project is complete. 16 Miscelllaneous Railroad Project Management Grade Separations/Quiet Zones 980 "560 Ongoing project management. 17 Mission Blvd Bridge Replacement Bridge Replacement 1,233 "100 City share for County project. 18 Paving Projects COP - Debt Serivice Street Paving 1,711 1,711 Annual debt service. 19 Quiet Zone/BNSF - Buchanan to Jane Quiet Zone for BNSF Railroad 17,439 "7 Phase III railroad work is underway. 20 Quiet Zone/BNSF - Mission Inn/3rd/Spruce Quiet Zone for BNSF Railroad 4,120 "20 Design in progress. 21 Quiet Zone/BNSF/UPRR - Cridge & Panorama Quiet Zone for BNSF & UP Railroads 3,393 496 Design in progress. "360 22 Quiet Zone/UPRR - Brockton & Palm Quiet Zone for UP Railroad 1,700 "200 Design in progress. 23 RR Grade Separation - Iowa Avenue Grade Separation - Iowa @ BNSF 31,686 "99 Construction complete. Project close out in progress. 24 NOT USED " Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2014. G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A Status 2015 updated 05142015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2014-15 Agency: City of Riverside Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 14, 2015 Project No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST (S000'S) MEASURE A FUNDS (MOO'S) STATUS 25 RR Grade Separation - Magnolia Avenue Grade Separation - Magnolia @ UPRR 50,917 *9 Project construction is complete. Close out right-of-way pending. 26 NOT USED 27 RR Grade Separation - Riverside Avenue Grade Separation - Riverside @ UPRR 31,184 *197 Construction contract awarded in December 2013. 28 RR Grade Separation - Streeter Avenue Grade Separation - Streeter @ UPRR 33,971 *1,290 Construction contract awarded in October 2012. 29 10% Measure A Rail Set -Aside (This is same as Item # 27 in approved CIP FY Grade Separations 7 *7 For debt service or allocation to specific projects. 2014/15) 30 Sidewalk/Trail Construction 13/14 Sidewalk Construction 500 *473 Projects underway. 31 Tyler Widening - Wells to Hole Street Widening and Improvements 11,700 *4,236 Design and right-of-way acquisition in progress. 32 Van Buren Blvd. Improvements - Wells to Street Resurfacing 2,578 *360 Project is complete. Jackson 33 Van Buren Blvd. Widening - Indiana to South Street Widening 26,750 *78 Project on hold until funding is available. City Limit 34 Van Buren Blvd. Widening - Jurupa to Santa Ana River Bridge Street Widening 1,141 *873 Construction complete. Project close out in progress. unexpended funds at July 1, 2014. G:Wdmin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A Status 2015 updated 05142015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2014-15 Agency: City of Riverside Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 14, 2015 Project No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST (SOO'S) MEASURE A FUNDS (S000'S) STATUS 35 Van Buren Blvd / 91 Frwy Interchange Interchange Improvements 33,399 - Project construction is complete. Final Caltrans right-of-way map and project close out pending. 36 3rd/Blaine Bike Lanes Street Rehabilitation & Restriping 383 40 Construction complete. Project close out in progress. 37 Arterial Interconnections Signal Coordinations 550 40 Current funding to be used for specific projects. 38 Brockton Protected/Permissive Left Turns Signal Modifications 100 *79 Design in progress. 39 CalTrans Ramps Coordination Signal Coordinations 73 On -going signal coordination work. 40 Iowa - Citrus New Traffic Signal 202 - Project is complete. 41 Lincoln - St. Lawrence New Traffic Signal 250 "230 Project is complete. 42 Magnolia - Buchanan to First Signal Coordination 1,876 25 Design in progress. *464 43 Magnolia - Jackson to Arlington Signal Modifications 90 *90 Project is complete. 44 Traffic Signal Revisions Signal Modifications 1,489 150 Project is underway. *383 45 New Traffic Signals New Traffic Signals 190 2 Funds used for specific projects. 46 Rumsey - Central New Traffic Signal 250 250 Construction contract awarded in March 2015. 47 SR2S - Jefferson/Madison Signals New Traffic & Pedestrian Signals 351 - Project is complete. * Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2014. G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A Status 2015 updated 05142015 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE "A" LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM STATUS FY2014-15 Agency: City of Riverside Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Patrick M. Keeney Phone No.: (951) 826-2406 Date: May 14, 2015 Project No. PROJECT NAME/LIMITS PROJECT TYPE TOTAL COST (SOO'S) MEASURE A FUNDS (S000'S) ST-ITUS 48 University - Brockton to Campus Signal Coordination 50 *50 Design in progress. 49 University - Protect/Permit Left Turns Signal Modifications 125 125 Design in progress. 50 Transportation Planning Engineering Planning 50 50 Ongoing annual expenditure. 51 Pavement Management Program Ongoing Annual Expenditure 129 125 Ongoing annual expenditure. *4 52 Spread Spectrum Radio Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 10 10 Ongoing annual expenditure. 53 Traffic Management Center Signal Coordination 118 75 Ongoing annual expenditure. *43 54 Traffic Signal Loop Replacement Ongoing Traffic Signal Maintenance 35 35 Ongoing annual expenditure. 55 Traffic Planning/Investigations Traffic Engineering 301 300 Ongoing annual expenditure. *1 * Prior years unexpended funds at July 1, 2014. G:\Admin\Common\Measure of Effort\15 16 FY\Measure A Status 2015 updated 05142015 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 F Rly�r� 4`. \ �1 -kr °NIIAND tO Juan C. Perez, P.E., T. E Director of Transportation and Land Management May 11, 2015 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Transportation Department Ms. Grace Alvarez Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 S. Lemon St., Third floor Riverside, CA 92501 RE: Measure A Local Streets and Roads Program Dear Ms. Alvarez: Patricia Romo, P.E. Assistant Director of T ransportation Attached is the County's five-year program of projects for the County's portion of Measure A funds for Fiscal Year 2016/2020. The County's Transportation Department receives no general funds and no certification of MOE is included. Also attached is a copy of our Fiscal Year 2015/2019 plan with comments addressing project status, project additions and delays. We have scheduled expenditures based on revenue projections. Three reports are attached representing the Western, Coachella Valley and the Palo Verde Valley regions, respectively. These projects are incorporated in the County's proposed Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) which is planned for Board approval. We will inform your agency of any changes that occur to the Measure A program due to future revisions of the County's TIP. If you have any questions concerning this program, please feel free to contact me at (951) 955-6740. Sincerely, _- - - "l - , Patricia Romo Assistant Director of Transportation RKN: attachments cc: Rebecca Carr Glenn Higa/Roy Null (transmittal only) 4080 Lemon Street, 8`h Floor • Riverside, California 92501 • (951) 955-6740 P.O. Box 1090 • Riverside, California 92502-1090 • FAX (951) 955-3198 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Western County Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 5,238 - Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 5,238 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2015-2016 1 BOREL RD: Auld Rd - 200' N Buck Rd Resurf AC paved road 504 504 3 2 BRIGGS RD & BAXTER RD: -- Loan Payback for road improvements built 447 16 3 3 BUCK RD: Rancho California Rd - Warren Resurf AC paved road 80 80 3 Rd 4 CABAZON AREA RESURFACING Resurf AC paved road 1754 1704 5 GROUP: 13 Various Streets -- 5 CABAZON ST: Dolores Ave - Carmen Ave Resurf AC paved road 154 154 5 6 CAMINO DEL SOL AREA GROUP 2: 2 Resurf AC paved road 380 45 1 Area Streets -- 7 CITRUS VIEW DR: Fairview Ave - Tangelo Resurf AC paved road 131 131 3 Ave 8 DECKER RD: Martin St - Markham St Resurf RMS paved road 191 191 1 9 FAIRVIEW AVE: 649' S Bautista Rd - Resurf AC paved road 54 54 3 Bautista Rd 10 Indian Truck Trail: at 1-215 Interchange Widen roadway and ramps, const. signals 8860 360 1 11 MANDARIN DR: Tangelo Ave - Citrus View Resurf AC paved road 106 106 3 Dr 12 MARGARTH ST: S.H. 74 - Marie St Resurf RMS paved road 91 91 1 13 MARIE ST: Margarth St - Mapes Rd Resurf RMS paved road 97 97 1 14 MOUNTAIN AVE: Theda St - Baxter Rd Resurf RMS paved road 245 245 1 15 PERRY ST: Decker Rd - Seaton Ave Resurf RMS paved road 138 138 1 16 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD: DeLuz Rd -- Reconst AC paved road 3617 3 1 Temecula City Limits 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 RIVERSIDE COUNTY BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM: Various locations -- Countywide SAGE RD - 2 SEGMENTS: Red Mnt Rd -- Nly Red Mnt Rd .62 mi SOPHIE ST: Mapes Rd - Mountain Ave SOPHIE ST: Mountain Ave - S.H. 74 SPEED WARNING SIGNS: 5 Various Locations -- STAGECOACH RD: Horseshoe Trl - 2682' E Horseshoe Trl STAGECOACH RD: Juniper Flats Rd - Horseshoe Trl TANGELO AVE: Mandarin Dr - Citrus View Dr THORNTON AVE: 1000'W Tierra Verde Dr • Lake St WARREN RD: Buck Rd - E. Benton Rd WARREN RD: E. Benton Rd - Borel Rd WHITTIER AVE: Yale St -- Cornell St WHITTIER AVE: Yale St -- Cornell St Pursue federal bridge maintenance funds Reconst AC paved road Resurf RMS paved road Resurf RMS paved road Install solar -powered speed feedback signs Resurf RMS paved road Resurf RMS paved road Resurf AC paved road Resurf AC paved road Resurf AC paved road Resurf AC paved road Resurf AC paved road Const sidewalk on Sly side W. of Columbia 819 1230 105 25 597 111 217 26 102 100 197 621 869 50 3 386 3 0 1 0 1 58 1 111 5 217 5 26 3 102 3 100 3 197 3 30 3 42 3 TOTALS 21,868 5,238 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Western County Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $ 5,343 ' Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 5,343 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2016-2017 1 BRIGGS RD & BAXTER RD: -- Loan Payback for road improvements built 450 180 3 2 EL SOBRANTE RD: Cajalco Rd -- Recon AC paved road 3,240 3,010 1 Mc Allister Rd 3 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 3 Pavement Rehab 13,601 2,153 3 Only -- TOTALS 17,291 5,343 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Western County Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 5,450 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 5,450 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2017-2018 1 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 1 Only -- Pavement Rehab 5,257 2,050 1 2 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 3 Only -- Pavement Rehab 13,601 2,700 3 3 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 5 Only -- Pavement Rehab 3,576 700 5 TOTALS 22,434 5,450 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Western County Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 5,614 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 5,614 ' Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2018-2019 1 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 1 Only -- Pavement Rehab 5,25/ 1,900 1 2 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 3 Only -- Pavement Rehab 13,601 2,810 3 3 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 5 Only -- Pavement Rehab 3,576 904 5 22,434 TOTALS 5,614 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Western County Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 5,782 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 5,782 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2019-2020 1 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 1 Only -- Pavement Rehab 5,257 1,900 1 2 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 3 Only -- Pavement Rehab 13,601 2,910 3 3 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 5 Only -- Pavement Rehab 3,576 972 5 TOTALS 22,434 5,782 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Western County Region Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status Supv. Dist. 1 BEAUVIEW DR: Oak Creek Rd -- Reconst AC paved road 109 109 Scheduled to finish in 5 Oak View Ln FY 14/15 2 BRIGGS RD: Barn Rd -- Install Traffic Signal 295 298 Completed 3 3 BRIGGS RD & BAXTER RD: -- Loan Payback for road improvements built 450 0 FY 16/17 Ongoing 3 4 CABAZON AREA RESURFACING Resurf AC paved road 1754 50 In design 5 GROUP: 13 Various Streets -- 5 CAMINO DEL SOL AREA GROUP Resurf AC paved road 380 335 FY 15/16 Under construction 1 2: 2 Area Streets -- 6 CHERRY OAK RD: Oak Glen Rd -- Reconst AC paved road 97 97 Scheduled to finish in 5 Oak Creek Rd FY 14/15 7 CHIP SEAL OF 1ST DISTRICT Chip Seal 566 839 Completed 1 ROADS FY14/15: various roads -- 8 CHIP SEAL OF 3RD DISTRICT Chip Seal 751 1220 Completed 3 ROADS FY14/15: various roads -- 9 CHIP SEAL OF 5TH DISTRICT Chip Seal 551 539 Completed 5 ROADS FY14/15: various roads -- 10 EAST BENTON RD: Calle Jojoba W -- Calle Jojoba E Reconstruct AC paved road 327 320 Scheduled to finish in FY 14/15 3 11 FRONTAGE RD: Rainbow Canyon Resurf RMS paved road 387 379 Scheduled to finish in 3 Rd / N -- San Diego C.L. FY 14/15 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 OLD STATE HWY: Green Ave -- SH 74 RAINBOW CANYON RD: Frontage Rd / N -- San Diego C.L. RIVERSIDE COUNTY BRIDGE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM: Various locations -- Countywide SAGE RD - 2 SEGMENTS: Red Mnt Rd -- N ly Red M nt Rd .62 m i SPEED WARNING SIGNS: 5 Various Locations -- TEMESCAL CANYON RD (EXTENSION): 1-15 -- Park Canyon Rd VAN BUREN BLVD: Washington St - - Wood Rd WHITTIER AVE: Yale St -- Cornell St WHITTIER AVE: Yale St -- Cornell St ADOBE DR: E;ly Rio Vista Dr ALLEN AVE: Leon Rd -- Naumann BLACKWELL BLVD: Sutherland Ave -- Grand Ave Cajalco Rd: at Alexander St CORTEZ CT: Adobe Dr -- SE'ly Grant St : Indiana Ave -- Magnolia Ave Indian Truck Trail: at 1-215 Interchange JULIE LN: Allen Ave -- Sly Resurf AC paved road Resurf RMS paved road Pursue federal bridge maintenance funds Reconst AC paved road Install solar -powered speed feedback signs Realign and widen AC paved road Widen AC paved road to 6 lanes Resurf AC paved road Const sidewalk on Sly side W. of Columbia Reconst AC paved road Reconst AC paved road Resurf AC paved road Const Signal Reconst AC paved road Const sidewalk Widen roadway and ramps, const. signals Reconst AC paved road 497 0 247 247 819 130 1230 727 527 74 481 0 7092 20 621 472 869 529 143 67 130 71 106 185 633 252 22 8 475 295 8860 10 38 11 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 Moved to other fund source Scheduled to finish in FY 14/15 Ongoing Under construction Pending CON RFA Moved to other fund source In design Under construction Under construction Completed Completed Scheduled to finish in FY 14/15 Completed Completed Completed Waiting for utility invoices Completed 1 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 2 1 3 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD: DeLuz Rd -- Temecula City Limits RIM RD: Rio Vista -- Adobe Dr RIO VISTA DR: Mayberry Ave -- Adobe Dr SPRADLIN AVE: Allen Ave -- Sly SUNNY AVE: Julie Ave -- Wily VIEJO DR: Rim Rd -- Ely Winchester Rd: Thompson Rd -- Domenigoni Rd Reconst AC paved road Reconst AC paved road Reconst AC paved road Reconst AC paved road Reconst AC paved road Reconst AC paved road Widen AC paved road to 4 lanes 3617 189 209 37 30 57 25929 980 97 132 44 7 57 120 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 Under construction Completed Completed Completed Completed Completed Under construction 1 3 3 3 3 TOTALS 58,525 8,721 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Coachella Valley Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 125 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,071 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $ 2,196 Item No Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2016-2016 1 66TH Ave: Van Buren St -- Harrison St Resurf AC paved road 497 38 4 2 HARRION ST: NW'ly Pierce St -- Sly Resurf AC paved road 312 20 4 Pierce St 3 LANDFILL RD: Dillon Rd -- Ely Resurf AC paved road 850 50 4 4 MONTEREY AVE AT I-10: C.L. Palm Desert -- N'ly Varner Rd 0.1 mi Realign/Add W.bound ramps, Widen Varner 326 28 4 Rd 5 PORTOLA AVE 1-10 INTERCHANGE: Const new interchange 30 10 4 Between Monterey Av IC -- Cook St IC 6 TYLER ST: N'ly 66th Ave 0.46mi -- N'ly Reconst AC paved road 423 31 4 66th Ave 1.0mi 7 58TH AVE: Monroe St - Jackson St Resurf RMS paved road 190 190 4 8 68TH AVE: Lincoln St - 2664' W Lincoln St Resurf RMS paved road 110 115 4 9 70TH AVE: Fillmore St - Harrison St Resurf RMS paved road 390 410 4 10 CALHOUN ST: 55th Ave - 54th Ave Resurf AC paved road 260 267 4 11 CALHOUN ST: 54th Ave - 53rd Ave Resurf AC paved road 270 277 4 12 FILLMORE ST: 70th Ave - 3710' S 70th Resurf RMS paved road 155 160 4 Ave 13 FILLMORE ST: 3710' S 70th Ave - 72nd Resurf RMS paved road 70 70 4 Ave 14 FILLMORE ST: 72nd Ave - 73rd Ave Resurf RMS paved road 110 115 4 15 POLK ST: 70th Ave - 68th Ave Resurf RMS paved road 400 415 4 TOTALS 4,393 2,196 f RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Coachella Valley Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure AAllocation: $ 2,112 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ 2,112 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2016-2017 1 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: various roads -- Resurfacing program in the Coachella Valley 2,500 650 4 2 Z" FUTURE PROJECTS: District 4 Pavement Rehab 5,701 1,462 4 Only -- TOTALS 8,201 2,112 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Coachella Valley Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,154 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 2,154 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2017-2018 1 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: various roads -- Resurfacing program in the Coachella Valley 2,500 650 4 2 Z" FUTURE PROJECTS: District 4 Pavement Rehab 13,701 1,504 4 Only -- TOTALS 1" 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Coachella Valley Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,219 ' Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 2,219 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2018-2019 1 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: various roads -- Resurfacing program in the Coachella Valley 2,500 700 4 2 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 4 Pavement Rehab 13,701 1,519 4 Only -- TOTALS 16,201 2,219 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Coachella Valley Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 2,286 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 2,286 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2019-2020 1 COACHELLA VALLEY AREA: various roads -- Resurfacing program in the Coachella Valley 2,500 700 4 2 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 4 Pavement Rehab 13,701 1,486 4 Only -- 3 Z* FUTURE PROJECTS: District 5 Pavement Rehab 3,576 100 f) Only -- TOTALS 19,777 2,286 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Cd4, �� vGl�<<� � Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status Supv. Dist. 1 60th AVE: Pierce St -- Buchanan St Resurf RMS paved road 183 143 FY 14/15 Closeout Pending 4 2 60th AVE: Buchanan St -- Lincoln St Resurf RMS paved road 210 210 FY 14/15 Closeout Pending 4 3 AVENIDA FLORENCITA: Camino Aventura -- Camino Campanero Const curb, gutter & sidewalk on east side 308 49 Complete 4 4 CASCADIA DR: Cecina Way -- Carter Ln Reconst AC paved road 53 0 moved to other fund source 4 5 CECINA WAY: 41 st Ave -- Cascadia Drive Recon AC paved road 51 0 moved to other fund source 4 6 CHIP SEAL OF 4TH DISTRICT Chip Seal 1,361 848 Complete 4 ROADS FY14/15: various roads -- 7 CHIP SEAL OF 5TH DISTRICT Chip Seal 551 398 Complete 4 ROADS FY14/15: various roads -- 8 CIENEGA PL: Cascadia Dr -- 227' S Cascadia Dr Reconst AC paved road 24 0 moved to other fund source 4 9 LINCOLN ST: 7th St -- 62nd Ave Resurf AC paved road 1,323 13 moved to other fund source future FY 4 10 MONTEREY AVE AT 1-10: C.L. Palm Desert -- N'ly Varner Rd 0.1 mi Realign/Add W.bound ramps, Widen Varner Rd 326 13 FY 15/16 Ongoing coordination on City project 4 11 PIERCE ST: 60th Ave -- 58th Ave Resurf RMS paved road 223 223 FY 14/15 Closeout Pending 4 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 PORTOLA AVE 1-10 INTERCHANGE: Between Monterey Av IC -- Cook St IC WORSLEY RD: Dillon Rd -- Pierson Blvd 66TH Ave: Van Buren St -- Harrison St BUCHANAN ST: 58th Ave -- Airport Blvd HARRION ST: 54th Ave -- Airport Blvd HARRION ST: NW'ly Pierce St -- S'ly Pierce St LANDFILL RD: Dillon Rd -- Ely TYLER ST: N'ly 66th Ave 0.46mi -- N'ly 66th Ave 1.0mi Const new interchange Resurf RMS paved road Resurf AC paved road Resurf RMS paved road Resurf AC paved road ResurfAC paved road Resurf AC paved road Reconst AC paved road 30 521 542 305 872 332 950 469 52 FY 21 /22 +/- 459 FY 15/16 239 FY 14/15 82 FY 16/17 292 FY 15/16 800 FY 15/16 392 FY 15/16 Ongoing coordination on City project moved to other fund source under construction Closeout Pending Ongoing design under construction under construction under construction 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 TOTALS 8,634 4,213 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Item No. Palo Verde Region $ x 1,000 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $136 Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: $236 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $372 Project Name / Limits 2015-2016 1 2 3 C & D Blvd: 6th Ave to 8th Ave C & D Blvd: 8th Ave to 10th Ave SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES: -- Project Type Resurf RMS paved road Resurf RMS paved road Develop Plans of Action for 2 bridges TOTALS Total Cost 236 235 214 685 Measure A Funds 236 59 77 372 Supv. Dist. 4 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Palo Verde Region Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $ x 1,000 0 241 241 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2016-2017 Resurf RMS paved road 241 1 PALO VERDE AREA: various roads • TOTALS 0 p" , RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Palo Verde Region Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ x 1,000 0 246 246 item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2017-2018 Resurf RMS paved road 0 2.46 4 1 PALO VERDE AREA: various roads TOTALS 246 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Palo Verde Region Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ x 1,000 0 253 253 item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost measure A Funds aupv. Dist. 2018-2019 Resurf RMS paved road 0 253 1 PALO VERDE AREA: various roads -- TOTALS 253 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2016 - 2020 Agency: Riverside County Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Palo Verde Region Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ x 1,000 0 261 261 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Supv. Dist. 2019-2020 Resurf RMS paved road 261 4 1 PALO VERDE AREA: various roads TOTALS 0 261 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: Riverside County Page of Prepared by: Roy Null Phone #: 951-955-2057 Date: 5/7/15 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status Supv. Dist. 1 04TH AVE: Hunter Ave -- SH 95 Resurf RMS paved road 117 117 FY 14/15 Scheduled 4 2 ARROWHEAD BLVD: N'ly 14th Ave Resurf AC paved road 180 0 N/A Deleted 4 -- 1-10 3 CHIP SEAL OF 4TH DISTRICT Chip Seal 1,782 433 early FY 14/15 Completed 4 ROADS FY13/14: various roads -- 4 SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES: -- Develop Plans of Action for 2 bridges 190 10 Ongoing Design 4 TOTALS 2,152 /5PC- ./ NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF SAN JACINTO FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 reimpi WI- SAN JACINTO May 12, 2015 Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Attn: Grace Alvarez, Programming and Planning Manager RE: 2015-20 Measure "A" Improvement Plan and 2014-15 Status Report Enclosed please find the City of San Jacinto's proposed 5-year capital improvement plan. Also enclosed is a status report of the currently adopted 5-year plan and the MOE certification. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Please call me at 951-487-7340 or Habib Motlagh at 951-654-3592 if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Thomas Prill Finance Director 595 S. San Jacinto Ave. I San Jacinto, CA 92583 I Ph (951) 654-7337 ( Fax (951) 654-3728 I www.ci.san-jacinto.ca.LN FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of San Jacinto (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $156,391, approved by the Commission at its September 14, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: y t 2- S , 2015 A CITY MANAGER /..J__A-- CITY OF SAN 1ACINTO FY 2014/15 Construction and Maintenance Expenditures Funding Breakdown Project Expenditures Included in Genera( Ledger Total Cost General Fund ; Meas A Federal State City Funds Other Construction: 1. Ramona X - Eagle to Main/Lake Park (#15-002) $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ $ $ $ $ - $ Maintenance: 1. Streets Dept - #010-4150 - offset by Gas Tax, net cost $ - $ 2. Storm Drain Maintenance Dept - #010-4140 - net cost $ 56,478 $ 56,478 Engineering/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects: _ $ 1 890 $ 890 Expenditure Totals $ 157,368 $ 157,368 Deductions for Special Consideration (Deductions Must Also Be Included in Project Expenditures Above): Total Project Cost General Fund State Reason Why Project Expenditure Should 8e Deducted from MOE Construction: I. $ $ Maintenance: Engineering/Administrative Overhead Not Allocated to Specific Projects: ^ $ $ Deduct Totals $ $ Total GF Expenditures $ 157,368 minus Deductions S - MOE $ 157,368 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of San Jacinto Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: May 7, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: i 2,680,000.00 782,000.00 3,462,000.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2015-2016 1 Warren Road Pavement Rehab. 1,500 200 Esplanade Avenue (Warren Road to 1,000 1,000 2 Mountain) Pavement Rehab. 3 San Jacinto Avenue (City Limits) Pavement Rehab. 600 200 Miscellaneous Traffic Study and Reports & 100 30 4 Improvements Improvements Bike Lane, Widening, 900 100 5 De Anza Drive (ATP) Sidewalk TOTALS 4,100 1,530 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of San Jacinto Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: May 7, 2015 ;r✓ Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 1,932,000.00 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: 798,000.00 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 2,730,000.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2016-2017 1 Sanderson Avenue Rehab. (City Pavement Rehab. 800 800 Wide) 2 Miscellaneous Traffic Control & Pavement Rehab. 100 50 Devices 3 Downtown Pavement Pavement Rehab. 600 500 „l ,, 1,500 1,350 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of San Jacinto Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: May 7, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 1,380,000.00 814,000.00 2,194,000.00 G Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2017-2018 1 Miscellaneous Pavement Rehab Pavement Rehab. & 1,200 1,200 (City Wide) Widening 2 Ramona Expressway (City Wide) Pavement Rehab. 1,000 800 TOTALS 2,200 . 2,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of San Jacinto Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: May 7, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 194,000.00 / 838,000.00 l 1,032,000.00 f Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2018-2019 1 Esplanade Avenue (Sanderson to Pavement Rehab. & 2,500 500 Warren) Widening Widening, Pavement 1,200 500 2 Pavement Rehab. (City Wide) Rehab. TOTALS 3,700 1,000 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of San Jacinto Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: May 7, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 32,000.00 G7' 863,000.00 - 895,000.00 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) 2019-2020 1 City Wide Pavement Rehab. 1,000 500 2 State Street (City Wide) Pavement Rehab. 1,500 300 TOTALS 2,500 800 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of San Jacinto Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Habib Motlagh Phone #: (951) 943-6504 Date: May 7, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure "A" Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Warren Road Pavement Rehab. Pavement Rehab. 1,500 1,200 Jul-15 Construction Underway 2 Downtown Area Pavement Rehab. 500 280 Complete Signage, traffic control devices and 3 City Wide Traffic Control reports 163 9 Ongoing Preliminary Design 4 San Jacinto Avenue Round About 500 2 2017 Complete Pavement Rehab. / Complete. Working on 5 Ramona Expressway Widening 400 TBD Closure 3,063 1,491 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF TEMECULA FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 jDepartment of Public Works 41000 Main Street ■ Temecula, CA 92590 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 ■ Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Phone (951) 694-641 1 ■ Fax (951) 694-6475 ■ www.cityoftemecula.org May 6, 2015 City of Temecula Grace Alvarez, Programming and Planning Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 RECEJIVE1T MAY 11 2015 -� RIVERSID Cp��TY TRANSPORTAiI� COMMISSION Re: FY2016-2020 Measure 'A' Local Streets and Roads Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan, MOE Certification and Project Status Report Dear Ms. Alvarez; Attached is the City of Temecula's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for Measure 'A' funds, including our Project Status Report. The City's Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Certification Statement is also enclosed for your review and approval. All of the projects submitted are included in the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Program, scheduled for approval by City Council at their regular meeting of June 9, 2015. if any changes are incorporated subsequent to this meeting, a revised five-year plan will be submitted to you. If you require any additional information, please contact me at (951) 506-5163. Tom Garcia Director of Public Works/City Engineer Enclosures cc: Jennifer Hennessy - Director of Finance Rudy Graciano — Revenue Manager ® Printed on Recycled Paper R \CIP DIVISION\ STAFFUuIieD\PUBWKS\MeasureA FY2016-20coveritr.jc.doc FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Temecula (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $1,431,799, approved by the Commission at its July 13, 2011 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: May 6, 2015 Aaron Adams CITY MANAGER ATT, Randy CITY CLERK on CITY OF TEMECULA FIVE-YEAR CIP RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2016 Agency: City of Temecula Page 1 of 5 Prepared by: Julie Dauer, Sr. Management Analyst Phone #: (951) 69443463 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $3,425 $2,747 $6,172 Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2015-2016 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 9,649 3,008 2 Citywide Street Maintenance Program Right -of -Way maintenance and repairs to include: Striping/Stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW Maintenance of Drainaae Facilities 1,712 1,712 3 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Winchester Road Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 1,530 884 TOTALS 12,891 5,604 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2016 - 2017 Agency: City of Temecula Page 2 of 5 Prepared by: Julie Dauer, Sr. Management Analyst Phone #: (961) 694.6463 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: 568 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: 2,802 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: 3,370 --"" Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2016.2017 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 3,739 942 2 Citywide Street Maintenance Program Right -of -Way maintenance and repairs to include: Striping/Stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW Maintenance of Drainage Facilities 1,462 1,462 6,201 TOTALS 2,404 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2017 - 2018 Agency: City of Temecula Page 3 of 5 Prepared by: Julie Dauer, Sr. Management Analyst Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: 966 2,858 3,824 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2017-2018 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 4,800 1,050 2 Citywide Street Maintenance Program Right -of -Way maintenance and repairs to include: Striping/Stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW Maintenance of Drainage Facilities 1,462 1,462 TOTALS 6,262 2,512 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2018 - 2019 Agency: City of Temecula Page 4 of 5 Prepared by: Julie Dauer, Sr. Management Analyst Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: 1,312 2,944 4,256 Item No. Project Name I Limits Project Type TitaI Cost Measure A Funds 2018-2019 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 4,800 1,164 2 Citywide Street Maintenance Program Right -of -Way maintenance and repairs to include: Striping/Stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW Maintenance of Drainage Facilities 1,462 1,462 TOTALS 6,262 2,626 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2019 - 2020 Agency: City of Temecula Page 5 of 5 Prepared by: Julie Dauer, Sr. Management Analyst Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: May 11, 2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: 1,630 3,032 d 4,662 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 2019-202Q 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Street Reconstruction 8 Rehabilitation 4,800 1,284 2 Citywide Street Maintenance Program Right -of -Way maintenance and repairs to include: Striping/Stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW Maintenance of Drainage Facilities 1,462 1,462 TOTALS 6,262 2,746 ATTACHMENT D **SAMPLE PROJECT STATUS REPORT FORMAT** RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Temecula Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: Julie Dauer, Sr. Management Analyst Phone #: (951) 694-6463 Date: May 11, 2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost ($000's) Measure A Funds ($000's) Estimated Completion Status 1 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 5,265 1,212 Annual pavement rehabilitation nroaram On -going annual pavement rehabilitation nroiects 2 Citywide Street Maintenance Program Right -of -Way maintenance and repairs to include: Striping/Stenciling, PCC & AC Repairs, Street & ROW Maintenance of nrainana Fariliticc 2,502 1,866 Annual right -of- way maintenance On -going annual ROW maintenance projects 3 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Winchester Road Street Reconstruction & Rehabilitation 1,530 0 February, 2016 Approved CE has been received from Caltrans. Construction anticipated to begin Fall 9n15 TOTALS 9,297 3,078 NMMom im.....—__ Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Local Streets and Roads CITY OF WILDOMAR FIVE YEAR CIP 2016-2020 MOE CERTIFICATION AND PROJECT STATUS REPORT CIP FY 14/15 June 3, 2015 Theresia Trevino Chief Financial Officer Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Re: City of Wildomar's Measure A Expenditure Plan Dear Ms. Trevino: Please find enclosed the Measure A Expenditure Plan for the City of Wildomar. This Expenditure Plan was approved by Wildomar City Council at the February 12, 2014 meeting. The City restated a Maintenance of Effort (MOE) and this adjustment was approved at the March 12, 2014 Riverside County Transportation Commission meeting. The City of Wildomar is requesting an amendment to CIP FY 2014/ 15 to include the list projects/ program implemented in FY 2014/ 15. These additional projects were adopted by City Council as part of the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program and the Fiscal Year 2014/ 15 capital improvement budget was amended to include them as Measure A funded. Item # 9 Grand Avenue Multi Use Trail 10 Clinton Keith/ Hidden Springs Traffic Signal Modification 11 Master Plan of Drainage Design Multipurpose Trail Signal Modification Update Master Plan of Drainage Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact mbennettaa.cityofwildomar.orq or directly at (951) 297-3396. Sincerely, e2i Matt Bennett, P.E. Deputy City Engineer me via email FY 2015/16 MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT The undersigned agrees and certifies for the city of Wildomar (the "Agency") that sales tax transportation funds received pursuant to Ordinance No. 02-001 of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Measure A") shall be used in compliance with the Commission's Maintenance of Effort Guidelines and a base year amount of $0, approved by the Commission at its March 12, 2014 meeting, and that the Agency shall not use such funds to replace discretionary local funds previously expended by the Agency for local transportation purposes. The Agency hereby acknowledges that the failure of the Agency to continue such local expenditure shall result in a reduction or loss of Measure A funds. Additionally, the Agency commits to expending Measure A Local Streets and Roads funds for projects listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan as approved by Riverside County Transportation Commission. Dated: • -i • / 2015 CIT A.a ? CER A ST: a /� P� Ct per • G% --- ITY C!eeK. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 12, 2014 TO: FROM: Riverside County Transportation Commission Budget and Implementation Committee Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: SUBJECT: Anne Mayer, Executive Director 2009 Measure A Maintenance of Effort Base Year Adjustment for City of Wildomar BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Thls item is for the Commission to approve the adjustment to the city of Wildomar's (Wildomar) 2009 Measure A Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A imposes several requirements on local agencies in order to receive local streets and roads funds. The 2009 Measure A ordinance continued the requirement for local agencies to maintain the current commitment of local discretionary expenditures, such as the general fund toward transportation construction and maintenance activities. This requirement is to ensure Measure A funds supplement current expenditures, not supplant. In accordance with the 2009 Measure A ordinance, if local agencies do not meet the respective MOE base year level in a given year, Measure A Local Streets and Roads disbursements will be withheld the following year. As a newly incorporated city, Wildomar submitted the MOE base year level in 2013, based on the MOE guidelines that state a newly incorporated city determines its respective MOE base year levels after the third year of incorporation. For Wildomar, the third year after incorporation was FY 2011/12. At its July 2013 meeting, the Commission approved Wildomar's Measure A MOE base of $22,100, Wildomar is requesting an adjustment to its base year level from $22,100 to $0. The request is based on the fact that the MOE FY 2011/12 base year included electrical charges for street lighting that were erroneously coded to the general fund when these should have been coded and paid out of the gas tax fund. Wildomar corrected the FY 2011/12 charges through a prior year period adjustment, as reflected in Wildomar's FY 2012/13 audited financial statements. Therefore, there are no general fund expenditures for transportation -related construction and maintenance activities in FY 2011/12, resulting in a revision to the Measure A MOE base year of $o. Agenda Item 8G 109 Staff supports Wildomar's request to adjust its 2009 Measure A MOE base year FY 2011/12 to $0, as it is consistent with the MOE guidelines. Additionally, this appears reasonable given the fact prior to the incorporation of Wildomar, the Riverside County had no general fund expenditures. As a newly incorporated city, Wildomar will continue the same practice with an MOE of $0. There is no financial impact to the Commission related to the adjustment of Wildomar's 2009 Measure A MOE base year. Attachment: City of Wildomar Restatement of FY 2011/12 MOE Agenda Item 86 110 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Wildomar Page 1 of 6 Prepared by: Matt Bennett, Deputy City Engineer Phone #: 951-677-7751 Date: 5/27/2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: Estimated FY 2015-2016 Measure A Allocation: Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2015-2016 Projects: $27,060 $565,000 $592,060 Item No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Accessibility Improvements Sidewalk, ramps, repairs, pedestrian and ADA improvements $260,400 $47,000 2 Road Safety Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety improvements $40,000 $40,000 3 Pavement Maintenance Program Remove, repair, crack fill, slurry seal as needed $215,600 $80,600 4 Pavement Repair Program Repair or reconstruct roadways $25,000 $35,000 5 Bundy Canyon Road Safety Improvements Widen shoulder, upgrade signs, install! speed feedback signs $252,200 $25,300 6 Grand Ave, Bike Paths - Corydon to BMS Class II and III Bike Paths $714,600 $25,000 7 Grand Ave. Bike Paths - Corydon to BMS Class II Bike Paths $863,340 $35,200 8 Grand Ave. Multi Use Trail Design Multipurpose trail $138,000 $38,000 ROW mainatenance and $127,000 $127,000 9 Citywide Maintenance Program repair 10 George Avenue Sidewalk Improvements Construct sidewalk, CMG and ADA ramps $133,000 $5,000 Clinton Keith/ Hidden Springs Traffic Signal Modify traffic signal, restripe $110,000 $11,000 11 Modification Project Update Master Plan of $60,000 $60,000 12 Master Plan of Drainage Drainage 13 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $45,200 $45,200 TOTALS $2,981,340 $574,300 c L i RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Wildomar Page 2 of 6 Prepared by. Matt Bennett, Deputy City Engineer Phone #: 951-677-7751 Date: 5/27/2015 Tie Nc Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $17,760 Estimated FY 2016-2017 Measure A Allocation: $576,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2016-2017 Projects: $593,760 c/ m 1. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 2 3 4 5 6 Accessibility Improvements Road Safety Improvements Pavement Maintenance Program Pavement Repair Program Citywide Maintenance Program Public Works Cost Allocation Sidewalk, ramps, repairs, pedestrian and ADA , improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety improvements Remove, repair, crack fill, slurry seal as needed Repair or reconstruct roadways ROW mainatenance and repair Interfund Transfer $20,000 $40,000 $325,000 $35,000 $127,000 $46,080 $20,000 $40,000 $325,000 $35,000 $127,000 $46,080 TOTALS $593,080 $593,080 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Wildomar Page 3 of 6 Prepared by: Matt Bennett, Deputy City Engineer Phone #: 951-677-7751 Date: 5/27/2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $680 ✓ - Estimated FY 2017-2018 Measure A Allocation: $ 588,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2017-2018 Projects: $ 588,680 em No. Project Name 1 Limits Project Type o a os ' easure • Funds 1 2 3 4 5 6 Accessibility Improvements Road Safety Improvements Pavement Maintenance Program Pavement Repair Program Citywide Maintenance Program Public Works Cost Allocation Sidewalk, ramps, repairs, pedestrian and ADA improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety Remove, repair, crack fill, slurry seal as needed Repair or reconstruct roadways Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling: repairs to streets and culvert/ drainage facilities; storm damage/ flood control projects; widening streets Interfund Transfer $20,000 $40,000 $300,000 $35,000 $127,000 $47,040 $20,000 $40,000 $300,000 $35,000 $127,000 $47,040 TOTALS $569,040 $569,040 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Wildomar Page 4 of 6 Prepared by: Matt Bennett, Deputy City Engineer Phone #: 951-677-7751 Date: 5/27/2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 19,640 t Estimated FY 2018-2019 Measure A Allocation: $ 606,000 Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2018-2019 Projects: $ 625,640 ,/' em No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Accessibility Improvements Sidewalk, ramps, repairs, pedestrian and ADA improvements $20,000 $20,000 2 Road Safety Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety $40,000 $40,000 Remove, repair, crack $350,000 $350,000 3 Pavement Maintenance Program fill, slurry seal as needed 4 Pavement Repair Program Repair or reconstruct roadways $35,000 $35,000 5 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling: repairs to streets and culvert/ drainage facilities; $127,000 $127,000 6 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $48,480 $48,480 TOTALS $620,480 $620,480 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEASURE A LOCAL FUNDS PROGRAM FY 2015 - 2020 Agency: City of Wildomar Page 5 of 6 Prepared by: Matt Bennett, Deputy City Engineer Phone #: 951-677-7751 Date: 5/27/2015 Estimated Prior Year Measure A Balance: $ 5,160 ✓ Estimated FY 2019-2020 Measure A Allocation: $ 624,000 J Estimated Measure A Available for FY 2019-2020 Projects: $ 629,160 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds 1 Accessibility Improvements Sidewalk, ramps, repairs, pedestrian and ADA improvements $20,000 $20,000 2 Road Safety Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related roadway safety $40,000 $40,000 Remove, repair, crack $350,000 $350,000 3 Pavement Maintenance Program fill, slurry seal as needed 4 Pavement Repair Program Repair or reconstruct roadways $35,000 $35,000 5 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling: repairs to streets and culvert/ drainage facilities; $127,000 $127,000 6 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $49,920 $49,920 TOTALS $621,920 $621,920 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROJECT STATUS REPORT FY 2014-2015 Agency: City of Indomar Page 6of6 Prepared by: Matt Bennett, Deputy City Engineer Phone #: 951-677-7751 Date: 5/27/2015 Item No. Project Name / Limits Project Type Total Cost Measure A Funds Estimated Completion Status 1 Accessibility Improvements (Almond Street Sidewalk) Sidewalk, ramps, repairs, pedestrian $279,700 $118,000 - Ongoing program. Unexpended funds will carry over. 2 Road Safety Improvements Remove, replace, install signs, pavement markings, related $75,000 $75,000 - Ongoing program. Unexpended funds will carry over. 3 Pavement Maintenance Program Remove, repair, crack fill, slurry seal as $765,600 $687,103 Spring 2015 Ongoing program. Unexpended funds wilt carry over. 4 Pavement Repair Program (Replaced Roadway Imp. to Unpaved Rds. Repair or reconstruct roadways $35,000 $35,000 Ongoing program. Unexpended funds will carry over. 5 George Avenue Sidewalk Sidewalk improvement $139,430 $66,500 Spring 2015 NOC filed 6 Bundy Canyon Road Safety Improvements Dirt shoulder improvements and signage $252,200 $25,300 Winter 2015 PE 7 Grand Ave. & Clinton Keith Rd. Bike Paths Class II and it Bike Pat $949,500 $100,800 Summer 2015 PE 8 Grand Ave. Bike Pats - Corydon to BMS Class II Bike Paths $863,340 $116,700 Summer 2015 PE 9 Grand Ave. Multi Use Trail Design Multipurpose trail $135.000 $135.000 Summer 2015 PE 10 Clinton Keith/Hidden Springs Traffic Signal Modification Project Signal modification $110,000 $11,000 Fall 2015 Prepare nia documents & advertise 11 Master Plan of Drainage Update Update MDP $100,000 $100,000 Winter 2015 Research 12 Citywide Maintenance Program Right-of-way maintenance and repair to include but not limited to: striping, stenciling: repairs to streets and culvert/ drainage facilities; $127,000 $127,000 - Ongoing program. Unexpended funds will carry over. 13 Public Works Cost Allocation Interfund Transfer $44,000 $44,000 (8% of Measure A revenue) TOTALS 3,875,770 1,641,403 Project 9, 10, and 11 in italics have been implented in FY 2014/ 15 and were no part of the FY 14/15 Measure A CIP approved at the July 9, 2014 Commission meeting. These projects and program were adopted by Wildomar's City Council on Feb 12, 2014 as part of the Five -Year CIP, and the budgets were amended by the Dec. 10th, 2014 and the April 8th, 2015 . AGENDA ITEM 9C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Eric DeHate, Staff Analyst Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Maintenance of Effort Base Year Requirements for Eastvale and Jurupa Valley BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads (LSR) Maintenance of Effort (MOE) base year requirement of $38,949 for the city of Eastvale (Eastvale); and 2) Approve the 2009 Measure A LSR MOE base year requirement of $0 for the city of Jurupa Valley (Jurupa Valley). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Measure A imposes several requirements on local agencies in order to receive LSR funds. The 2009 Measure A ordinance continued the requirement for local agencies to maintain the current commitment of local discretionary expenditures, such as the general fund, toward transportation construction and maintenance activities. This requirement is to ensure Measure A funds supplement current expenditures, not supplant. In accordance with the 2009 Measure A ordinance, if local agencies do not meet the respective MOE base year level in a given year, Measure A LSR disbursements will be withheld the following year. Funds withheld from a local agency for failure to meet its MOE Base Year requirement will be distributed in accordance with Ordinance No. 02-001 within the Measure A area in which the agency is located (Western County, Coachella Valley, or Palo Verde Valley). Commission policy also allows for agencies to utilize excess MOE to offset a year the MOE was not met, and/or request special consideration from the Commission for a given year. To date, all agencies are in compliance with the MOE requirement. The Commission's MOE guidelines require newly incorporated cities to determine MOE base year levels after the third year of incorporation. Accordingly, Eastvale and Jurupa Valley calculated their respective MOE base year levels based on FY 2013/14 amounts at $38,949 and $0, respectively. Agenda Item 9C 84 Eastvale and Jurupa Valley prepared the MOE base year calculations using discretionary general fund expenditures for transportation -related construction and maintenance activities that occurred in FY 2013/14. The submittals have been reviewed by staff and meet the Measure A 2009 MOE guidelines. Staff recommends approval of the MOE base year amounts of $38,949 for Eastvale and $0 for Jurupa Valley. There is no fiscal impact to the Commission. Attachment: 2009 Measure A MOE Base Year Levels Agenda Item 9C 85 ATTACHMENT 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission 2009 Measure A MOE Base Year Levels Agency 2009 MOE Base Year Approved Amount Approval Date Riverside County Western County: Banning Beaumont Calimesa Canyon Lake Corona Eastvale Hemet Jurupa Valley Lake Elsinore Menifee Moreno Valley Murrieta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinto Temecula Wildomar Coachella Valley: Cathedral City Coachella Desert Hot Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Palo Verde Valley: Blythe $ 164,325 N/A 2,401 28,873 2,208,200 38,949 18,924 960,771 214,225 1,459,153 595,702 22,536 1,218,470 12,449, 203 156,391 1,431,799 391,688 92,205 75,147 963,640 2,048,564 937,007 2,398,146 1,498,732 674,811 July 2011 July 2012 Not eligible for Measure A LSR funds September 2011 July 2011 July 2011 July 2015 (proposed) October 2011 July 2015 (proposed) July 2011 September 2013 July 2011 July 2011 July 2011 July 2011 July 2011 September 2011 July 2011 March 2014 September 2011 September 2011 July 2011 July 2011 July 2011 June 2013 September 2011 September 2011 September 2011 520,192 July 2011 86 AGENDA ITEM 9D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2015 State Route 91 Implementation Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the 2015 State Route 91 Implementation Plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 2002, AB 1010 authored by former Assemblyman Lou Correa allowed the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to purchase the 91 Express Lanes franchise from the California Private Transportation Company. The purchase agreement was completed in January 2003, at a cost of $207.5 million. AB 1010 also eliminated the existing non -compete clause in the franchise agreement that prohibited any capacity -enhancing improvements from being made to SR-91 until the year 2030. SB 1316 passed in August 2008, authorizing the Commission to impose tolls for 50 years on transportation facilities on its portion of SR-91, and authorized toll revenues to be used for constructing and operating toll facilities on SR-91 in Riverside County. The purchase of the 91 Express Lanes and the elimination of the non -compete clause allowed much needed improvements to be planned and implemented within the SR-91 corridor. Caltrans Districts 8 and 12, the Commission and OCTA have been coordinating these improvements. SB 1316 required creation of a new advisory committee with specific responsibilities appointed by board members from the Commission and OCTA. SB 1316 also required the continuation of annual updates of an implementation plan of SR-91 improvements for the Legislature. As spelled out in the legislation, the 2015 State Route 91 Implementation Plan was completed by OCTA, in consultation with Caltrans and the Commission, and details proposed projects and completion schedules for transportation improvements to Metrolink, express bus, freeways and interchanges, new east -west highway corridors, and high-speed rail. Attachment: 2015 State Route 91 Implementation Plan Agenda Item 9D 87 ME p.,L1 F 0 Rnibi n Association with: at/trans- Com7ulting 15pp 2015 State Route 91 Implemehm— Plan JUNE 2015 Prepared for: Michael Baker INTERNATIONAL Prepared by: RBF Consulting a Michael Baker international Company TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS I SECTION 1: 2015 STATUS REPORT AND UPDATE 1 SECTION 2: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 8 PROJECTS BY YEAR 2019 9 PROJECTS BY YEAR 2025 15 PROJECTS BY YEAR 2035 19 SECTION 3: APPENDIX A - CONCEPTS BY POST-2035 22 SECTION 4: APPENDIX B - COMPLETED PROJECT EXHIBITS 26 SECTION 5: REFERENCES 31 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN i 89 SECTION 1: 20 1 5 STATUS REPORT AND UPDATE INTRODUCTION Previous law authorized the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to enter into franchise agreements with private companies to construct and operate four demonstration toll road projects in California. This resulted in the development of the 91 Express Lanes facility in Orange County. The four -lane, 10-mile toll road runs along the median of State Route 91 (SR-91) in northeast Orange County between the Orange/Riverside County line and State Route 55 (SR-55). Since the 91 Express Lanes carried its first vehicle on December 27, 1995, the facility has saved users tens of millions of hours of commuting time (over 50 million hours since 2003). While the 91 Express Lanes facility has improved travel time along the SR-91 corridor, provisions in the franchise agreement between Caltrans and the private franchisee, the California Private Transportation Company (CPTC), prohibited Caltrans and county transportation agencies from adding transportation capacity or operational improvements to the SR-91 corridor through the year 2030 from Interstate 15 (1-15) in Riverside County to the Orange/Los Angeles Counties border. Consequently, the public agencies were barred from adding new lanes, improving interchanges, and adding other improvements to decrease congestion on the SR-91 freeway. Recognizing the need to eliminate the non -compete provision of the franchise agreement, Governor Gray Davis signed Assembly Bill 1010 (Lou Correa) (AB 1010) into law in September 2002, paving the way for much - needed congestion relief for thousands of drivers who use SR-91 to travel between Riverside and Orange Counties each day. The bill allowed the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to purchase the 91 Express Lanes franchise and eliminate the existing clause that prohibited any capacity -enhancing improvements from being made to SR-91 until the year 2030. The purchase agreement for the 91 Express Lanes was completed on January 3, 2003, placing the road in public hands at a cost of $207.5 million. With the elimination of the non -compete provision through AB 1010 and the subsequent 91 Express Lanes purchase by OCTA, Orange County and Riverside County public officials and Caltrans Districts 8 and 12 have been coordinating improvement plans for SR-91. Senate Bill 1316 (Lou Correa) (SB 1316) was signed into law in September 2008 as an update to the provisions of AB 1010. SB 1316 authorizes OCTA to transfer its rights and interests in the Riverside County portion of SR-91 toll lanes by assigning them to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), and authorizes RCTC to impose tolls for 50 years. SB 1316 also requires OCTA, in consultation with Caltrans and RCTC, to issue an annual SR-91 Implementation Plan (Plan) and a proposed completion schedule for SR-91 improvements from State Route 57 (SR-57) to 1-15. The Plans prior to adoption of SB 1316 included a westerly project limit of SR-55. The Plan establishes a program of projects eligible for funding by the use of potential excess toll revenue and other funds. This 2015 Plan is the result of the requirement to provide the State Legislature with an annual Implementation Plan for SR-91 improvements and builds on the 2014 report, which was a major update of the previous annual Implementation Plans. This year's update includes projects that were identified in the 2006 Riverside County — Orange County Major Investment Study (MIS) as well as other project development efforts and funding programs such as the RCTC 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan that outlines a number of projects such as the extension of High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes from the Orange/Riverside County line to 1-15, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) that provides a funding source for transportation projects, the extension of the Measure A program that provides funding for transportation projects in Riverside County, and the Renewed Measure M program that provides funding for transportation projects in Orange County. The 2015 Plan includes an overview, identification of issues and needs, time frames for project packages to improve mobility on SR-91, and are listed based on a logical sequence for implementation. Project descriptions include conceptual 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1 90 lane diagrams (as appropriate), cost estimates (in 2015 dollars, or as noted), and discussion of key considerations that need to be addressed in the planning and development of each project. This Plan will provide OCTA, RCTC, and Caltrans with a framework to implement SR-91 and other related improvements. Future annual Plan updates will continue to refine the scope, cost, and schedule of each project included in this version of the Plan. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS Much progress has been made since the initial 2003 SR-91 Implementation Plan was approved. The 2015 Plan includes select completed project exhibits as a historical reference, see Section 4 Appendix B. Completed Construction/Improvement Projects As of June 2015, the following physical improvements have been constructed/implemented: • Repave and seal pavement surfaces, restripe, and replace raised channelizers on the 91 Express Lanes. • EB SR-91 restripe and median barrier reconstruction project that removed the CHP enforcement area and extended the EB auxiliary lane from SR-71 to the Serfas Club Drive off -ramp. ❖ WB auxiliary lane extension between the County line and SR-241. This project eliminated the lane drop at the 91 Express Lanes and extended the existing auxiliary lane from the County line to SR-241 in the westbound direction. This improvement minimized the traffic delays at the lane drop area, resulting in improved vehicle progression. ❖ WB restripe project extended the auxiliary lane between SR-71 and the County line resulting in a new continuous auxiliary lane between SR-71 & SR-241. ❖ Express Bus improvements are implemented for the Galleria at Tyler to South Coast Metro route and Village at Orange to Riverside/Corona. ❖ Safety Improvements at the Truck Scales. Existing shoulders were improved, lanes were re -striped, illumination improved, and signage was modified into and out of the EB facilities. ❖ Green River Road overcrossing replacement (See Section 4). • Metrolink parking structure at the North Main Street Corona Metrolink Station (See Section 4). • EB SR-91 lane addition from SR-241 to SR-71 (See Section 4). ❖ New SR-91 WB/EB travel lanes between SR-55 and SR-241 (See Section 4). These projects provide enhanced freeway capacity and improved mobility for one of the most congested segments of SR-91. The completed EB SR-91 lane addition project from SR-241 to SR-71 (See Section 4) has greatly enhanced highway operations. This accounts for some of the improvement in existing EB p.m. peak hour travel time from approximately 70+ minutes in 2010 to approximately 50 minutes in 2014 (for the baseline travel time). In addition, there are two projects that have a direct impact upon SR-91 widening projects. The first is the $2 billion U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Santa Ana River Mainstem (SARM) improvement project that provides flood protection from the recently improved Prado Dam (near SR-71) to the Pacific Ocean. As part of the Corps' project, existing riverbanks have been improved due to the increased capacity of the Prado Dam outlet works, which can now release up to 30,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) compared to the previous facility capacity of 10,000 cfs. The only remaining segments of the Santa Ana River to be improved are Reach 9 Phase 2A, which includes areas along SR-91 from just east of the Coal Canyon Wildlife Corridor Crossing to SR-71, and segments along Weir Canyon Road near Savi Ranch. SR-91 project design teams have coordinated with the Corps, Caltrans, and other federal, regional, and local agencies in order to accommodate future SR-91 improvements by the Corps bank protection project within Reach 9 Phase 2B by relocating the Santa Ana River. This has greatly enhanced the ability of Caltrans and other regional transportation agencies to implement many of the SR-91 improvement projects listed herein. The Corps SARM Reach 9 Phase 2B improvements were under construction as of September 2009 with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) "stimulus" funding and construction was finalized in April 2015. Environmental mitigation within the Santa Ana River perennial stream habitat restoration area will continue for another seven years of the nine year mitigation program. The other project with a direct impact to SR-91 is the $120 million Santa Ana Regional Interceptor (SARI) sewer trunk line relocation. The existing SARI line is within the Santa Ana River floodplain and was in jeopardy of failure due to 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2 91 scour from the potential increased flood releases by the aforementioned Corps project. In order to relocate the proposed 48-inch diameter SARI line outside of the floodplain, which is immediately adjacent to SR-91, Caltrans highway R/W was relinquished to the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) for location of the SARI line. SR-91 project teams have coordinated with the OCFCD, Caltrans, and other federal, regional, and local agencies in order to accommodate planned SR-91 improvements within the remaining State R/W subsequent to relinquishment. This project completed the construction phase in mid-2014. Completed Designs and other Reports In addition to the physical improvements in the corridor, there are various project development phase documents (Feasibility Reports, Studies, PSR, PANED, or PS&E) that are completed, or are in draft form and anticipated to be approved that identify improvements that will provide improved mobility. These documents include (also see Section 5): ❖ MIS — Final Project Report: Locally Preferred Strategy Report (January 2006). ❖ Project Study Report "On Route 91 from State Route 241 in Orange County to Pierce Street in the City of Riverside in Riverside County" (October 2006). ❖ Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan (November 2006). ❖ Project Study Report for SR-71/SR-91 Interchange (December 2006). ❖ RCTC 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan (December 2006). ❖ SR-91 Feasibility Study from SR-57 to SR-55 (June 2009). ❖ SR-91/Fairmont Boulevard Feasibility Study (December 2009). ❖ Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) Orange County SR-91 Corridor Final Report (August 2010). ❖ Renewed Measure M Early Action Plan, approved August 2007 and subsequently renamed as the Capital Action Plan (April 2011). ❖ PSR-PDS for SR-241/SR-91 Connector (January 2012). ❖ PS&E for Initial SR-91 CIP Project (2014). ❖ PSR-PDS on SR-91 between SR-57 and SR-55 (October 2014). Updates from the 2014 SR-91 Implementation Plan In addition to the improvements and progress noted above, the following items that were included in the 2014 SR-91 Implementation Plan have been modified for the 2015 Plan update: ❖ Project schedules have been revised within the horizon year timelines. The 2016 horizon year is updated to 2019. ❖ Various project descriptions, costs, and schedules have been updated from the 2014 Plan based on continued project development. ❖ Projects that were identified for implementation by Post-2035 are now defined as Concepts by Post- 2035 and are located in Appendix A. ❖ The WB SR-91 to SB SR-55 flyover reconstruction (Option 1 in the PSR) is included in Project #8. SR-91 CORRIDOR CONDITIONS Project Limits The project study limits encompass the segment of SR-91 from west of the junction of SR-57 and SR-91 in the City of Anaheim in Orange County, to east of the junction of SR-91 and 1-15 in the City of Corona in Riverside County. The freeway segment is approximately 20.3 miles long, and includes approximately 12.7 miles within Orange County and approximately 7.6 miles within Riverside County. Traffic Conditions Summary A review of traffic conditions in the Corridor indicates that the existing carrying capacity of the facility is inadequate to accommodate current and future peak demand volumes, and that Level of Service (LOS) F prevails in the peak direction during the entire peak period, where LOS F is defined as the worst freeway operating condition and is defined as a density of more than 45 passenger cars/lane/mile. The results also indicate that there are several physical constraints that generate unacceptable traffic queues. The following list summarizes the deficiencies identified along the SR-91 Corridor: ❖ Heavy traffic volumes from 1-15 (North and South) converge with SR-91. The weaving and merging condition is complicated by the close proximity of the Westbound (WB) Main Street off -ramp. 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 3 92 V' High demand from several on -ramps within the eastern segment exacerbates traffic conditions during peak hours. V' High traffic volumes from Gypsum Canyon Road and Santa Ana Canyon Road contribute to congestion on the mainline. V' One of the two EB lanes from The Eastern Transportation Corridor (State Route 241) is dropped at the merge to State Route 91 (SR-91), causing additional congestion in the EB direction. V' Heavy traffic reentering the freeway merges at slow speeds from existing WB and EB truck scales, impacting the general-purpose lanes. V' SR-55 merges with SR-91. An EB lane on SR-91 is dropped (as a dedicated exit) at Lakeview Avenue and a second EB lane is dropped (as a dedicated exit) at Imperial Highway creating a weave condition. V' WB SR-91 drops a GP lane and a 91 Express Lane to SB SR-55, which contributes to mainline congestion. This drop also occurs on the left-hand side of SR-91 as opposed to the typical right-hand connector exit. V' High demand from Weir Canyon Road, Imperial Highway and Lakeview Avenue increases delay during the peak hours. V' WB traffic entering SR-91 at Lakeview Avenue to southbound (SB) SR-55 contributes to mainline congestion by weaving through three lanes on WB SR-91. PROJECT SUMMARY Many of the highway projects and concepts identified in this 2015 Plan are based on the MIS that was completed in January 2006. The projects and concepts are presented based on potential implementation schedules and priorities established in the MIS as well as through subsequent project development. Table 1 summarizes the various pending, potential concepts, and completed projects in the 2015 Plan, and they are outlined below by implementation/construction schedule (see Section 2 for detailed pending projects, Section 3 Appendix A for concept project summaries, and Section 4 Appendix B for completed project summaries): V' The first set of projects is anticipated to be completed by 2019 and includes five improvements at a total Gp��,tFOR.y�� 91 cost of approximately $1.9 billion. The projects include a new SR-91 WB auxiliary lane at Tustin Avenue; Metrolink service improvements; the Initial SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) that will widen SR-91 by one GP lane in each direction east of Green River Rd, add collector -distributor (CD) roads and direct south connectors at I-15/SR-91, extend the 91 Express Lanes to I-15, and provide system/local interchange improvements; Express Bus service improvements; and a State Route 241 (SR-241)/ 91 Express Lanes connector. These projects are in the process of final design, construction, or procurement and implementation, as noted in the project summaries. V' Three projects for implementation by 2025 include the interchange improvements at SR-71/SR-91, Metrolink station improvements, and SR-91 widening improvements between SR-57 and SR-55. OCTA, RCTC, and Caltrans have initiated preliminary planning activities for these projects to ensure readiness when local, state, or federal funding becomes available. Some of the 2025 projects are funded and underway in various stages of project development. Projects for implementation by 2025 would cost approximately $388 million to $885 million. V' Projects for implementation by 2035 focus on longer - lead time projects and include a potential new interchange or overcrossing at Fairmont Boulevard and the Ultimate SR-91 CIP that includes widening SR-91 by one GP lane in each direction from SR-241 to Green River Road, I-15/SR-91 Direct North Connector, and SR-91 improvements east of 1-15. V' Long-range concepts for potential implementation by Post-2035 in Appendix A include an elevated 4-lane facility (MIS Corridor A) from SR-241 to 1-15, the Anaheim to Ontario International Airport Maglev High Speed Rail, and the Irvine -Corona Expressway (ICE) 4-lane facility from SR-241/ SR-133 to I-15/Cajalco Road (formerly known as MIS Corridor B). These three multi -billion dollar potential concepts require a significant amount of planning, design, and future policy and public input. In some cases, these concepts 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4 93 may include previous projects as components, such that all concepts within this summary may not be implemented. Traffic Analysis For the 2015 Plan, the traffic analysis for major SR-91 capacity projects has been updated from the 2014 Plan. This analysis used the latest freeway operations software model available from UC Berkeley and traffic data calibrated to reflect new traffic patterns since the 2014 Plan. This freeway operations model provides a better depiction of actual travel delays experienced by motorists compared to traditional travel demand models. The model can be used to analyze freeway bottlenecks sometimes neglected in traditional travel demand models. This approach is especially important given high SR-91 traffic volumes and the potential for relatively few vehicles to significantly slow down traffic. For example, a minor freeway merging area can cause many vehicles to slow, cascading delay through the traffic stream, and suddenly both speed and volume rapidly decrease for major segments of the freeway. The operations analysis quantified travel time savings for WB morning and EB afternoon conditions for the following major capacity enhancing projects: ❖ New SR-91 WB/EB lanes from SR-71 to 1-15 by 2017 (Initial CIP, Project 3). ❖ SR-241/91 Express Lanes connector with lanes to Coal Canyon on SR-91 by 2019 (Project 5). ❖ SR-91 EB lane between SR-57 and SR-55 by 2025 (Project 8). ❖ New SR-91 WB/EB lanes, various segments, from SR-241 to 1-15 by 2035 (Ultimate CIP, Project 10). The WB morning (a.m.) traffic analysis results indicate that for the year 2019 forecasts, travel times in Riverside and Orange Counties are anticipated to improve significantly (by about 24 minutes) due to the inclusion of the Initial Phase of the CIP (Project #3), though bottlenecks are anticipated at the Orange - Riverside County line and at the SR-55 interchange. A minor bottleneck is shown at the SR-241 interchange. The main bottlenecks in Riverside County have decreased because of the completion of proposed Table 1 — SR-91 Implementation Plan Projects Project No. Project Summary (Implementation Year) Projects By Year 2019 1 SR-91 WB Lane at Tustin Avenue (2016) 2 Metrolink Short -Term Expansion Plan (2016) 3 Initial Phase CIP: Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction East of Green River Rd, CD Roads and I-15/SR-91 Direct South Connector, Extension of Express Lanes to 1-15 and System/Local Interchange Improvements (2017) 4 Express Bus Service Improvements Between Orange County and Riverside County (2017) 5 SR-241/91 Express Lanes Connector (2019) SUBTOTAL Cost $M 45.2 249.2 1,407 6 180 1,887 Projects By Year 2025 6 SR-71/SR-91 Interchange Improvements (2020) 7 Metrolink Stations 8 SR-91 between SR-57 and SR-55 (2025) SUBTOTAL 123.4 43.4 221-718 388 — 885 Projects By Year 2035 9 Fairmont Boulevard Improvements (Post-2025) 10 Ultimate CIP: Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction from SR-241 to SR-71, I-15/SR-91 Direct North Connector, and SR-91 Improvements East of 1-15 (2035) SUBTOTAL 76.8 TBD 77+ Appx. A Concept Summary (Implementation Year) Cost ($M) A-1 Concepts By Post-2035 Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) from SR-241 to 1-15 (Post-2035) A-2 Anaheim to Ontario International Airport Maglev High 2,770 — Speed Rail (Post-2035) 3,200 A-3 Irvine -Corona Expressway (ICE) 4-Lane Facility from SR-241/SR-133 to I-15/Cajalco Road ( Post-2035) SUBTOTAL 2,720 8,855 14,350 — 14,780 Appx. B Completed Project Summary Since 2006 (Constructed Year) Cost ($M) B-1 Green River Road Overcrossing Replacement (March 2009) B-2 North Main Street Corona Metrolink Station Parking 25 Structure (June 2009) B-3 Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71 51.2 (September 2010) B-4 Widen SR-91 between SR-55 and SR-241 by Adding a 85.2 5th GP Lane in Each Direction (January 2013) 24.3 projects (including the Initial Phase of the CIP), though some congestion is still forecasted. In the year 2025 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 5 94 forecast, WB bottlenecks occur at Main Street, the Orange -Riverside County line, at the SR-241 interchange, and at the SR-55 interchange. This results in an increase in travel time, mostly within Riverside County from about 16 minutes in 2019 to over 40 minutes in 2025. Assuming Corridor A and the ICE are not constructed by 2035, bottlenecks appear at Main Street, just east of the SR-71 interchange, at the Orange -Riverside County line, at the SR-241 interchange, and at the SR-55 interchange. With completion of the ultimate CIP project, Riverside County travel times improve dramatically with reduction to near 2019 levels (about 16 minutes). For all forecast horizon years, travel times in Orange County remain relatively unchanged between Existing (2014) and 2035 with the exception that there is about a 20 minute travel time savings with implementation of projects in 2019. OCTA has initiated a study to address the operational aspects at the WB SR-91 to SB SR-55 movement as well as explore multi -modal opportunities on, or adjacent to, the SR-91 corridor that would relieve congestion. The EB evening (p.m.) traffic analysis indicates that for the year 2019 forecasts, bottlenecks are shown just before the SR-55 interchange and at the Orange -Riverside County line. Implementation of Project #3, the Initial Phase of the CIP, results in decreased Riverside County corridor travel times from approximately 21 minutes to under 10 minutes. In the year 2025 forecast, EB bottlenecks are still shown west of the SR-55 interchange and at the Orange - Riverside County line. The queuing in Riverside County has largely decreased because of the completion of proposed projects, and corridor travel times are forecast to be less than existing conditions through 2035. For the 2035 horizon year, bottlenecks appear at SR-55, at the SR-241 interchange, and at Lincoln Avenue. The 2035 travel times remain consistently low for EB SR-91 in Riverside County. Figures 1-1 and 1-2 below show the travel times by horizon year. Figure 1-1 — Mainline Westbound SR-91 from 1-15 to SR-57 A.M. Peak Hour Average Travel Time 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Existing (2014) 2019 2025 2035 ❑Orange County ❑ Riverside County 91 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 95 6 Figure 1-2 — Mainline Eastbound SR-91 from SR-57 to 1-15 P.M. Peak Hour Average Travel Time 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Exist ing(2014) 2019 2025 ❑Orange County ❑ Riverside County 2035 ICE STATUS SUMMARY The ICE concept (see Concept #A-3) was conceived as part of the MIS and was established as part of a suite of projects to support future peak demand volumes between Riverside and Orange Counties. The ICE was further evaluated in 2009 for financial and geotechnical feasibility. Seven (7) primary feasibility issues were considered: ❖ Geologic, hydrogeologic/hydrologic, and geotechnical conditions ❖ Corridor concepts (full tunnel and partial tunnel/partial surface road) ❖ Tunnel configuration ❖ Tunnel excavation and support methods ❖ Tunnel systems (e.g. ventilation, emergency fire system, operation building, toll system, etc.) ❖ Construction considerations ❖ Construction, Operation & Maintenance (0&M) costs At the conclusion of the financial and geotechnical feasibility study in 2010, the Riverside -Orange Corridor Authority Board (ROCA) directed staff to shelve the project due to its high construction cost and the difficult economic climate, and to reevaluate the concept on an annual basis during the preparation of the SR-91 Implementation Plan. The National Forest Service has continued monitoring of the ground water level along the preliminary alignment of the tunnel and has not found any significant changes since 2010. The technological ability to construct the large -diameter tunnels is currently available; however, the cost of tunnel boring machines (TBM) required to construct this project has not been reduced significantly. In general, no significant changes to the seven feasibility issues considered for the ICE concept have occurred over the last five years. Conclusion An assessment of current economic conditions, lack of state and federal transportation funding; and the high construction cost is hampering the ability of OCTA and RCTC to implement this concept. Until considerable advancements are made in regards to efficient and affordable tunneling technology, and more state and federal funding are made available, the concept will remain a challenge to implement. 91 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 7 96 SECTION 2: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN OVERVIEW The 2015 Plan describes projects, implementation schedules, key consideration, benefits, and costs (in 2015 dollars, or as noted) for major projects and concepts through Post-2035. Most of the projects and concepts identified in this Implementation Plan are based on the MIS that was completed in January 2006. The projects and concepts are presented based on potential implementation schedules and priorities established in the MIS and subsequent updates. The schedules for implementation of the packages of projects include 2019, 2025, and 2035. The 2019 projects are capable of being implemented through the project development process with minimal to moderate environmental constraints. Some of the longer -range projects for 2025 and 2035 require more significant planning and environmental assessment prior to design. Each of the project or concept improvements includes an estimate of project schedules. It is important to note that implementing various time saving measures, such as design -build or contractor incentives for early completion, may potentially reduce project schedules. The implementation phases are defined as follows: FULL TON PLACENTIA Gp�,tFOR.y�� 91 ❖ Conceptual Engineering = Pre -Project Study Report (Pre-PSR) — Conceptual planning and engineering for project scoping and feasibility prior to initiating the PSR phase. • Preliminary Engineering = Project Study Report (PSR) — Conceptual planning and engineering phase that allows for programming of funds. ❖ Environmental = Project Approval/Environmental Document (PA/ED) — The detailed concept design that provides environmental clearance for the project and programs for final design and right of way acquisition. The duration for this phase is typically 2-3 years. ❖ Design = Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) — Provide detailed design to contractors for construction bidding and implementation. ❖ Construction = The project has completed construction and will provide congestion relief to motorists. The intent of these Implementation Plan project packages is to provide an action list for OCTA, RCTC and Caltrans to pursue in the project development process or for initiating further studies. Figure 2-1 — SR-91 Project Study Area from SR-57 to 1-15 Bernardino CHINO HILLS ANAHEIM NORCO -CORONA i E. E FoalAy� PMY 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 8 97 PROJECTS BY YEAR 20 1 9 The first set of projects will be completed by 2019 and includes five (5) improvements at a total cost of approximately $1.9 billion (in 2015 dollars, or as noted). The five projects include a new SR-91 WB auxiliary lane at Tustin Avenue; Metrolink service improvements; the Initial SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) that will widen SR-91 by one GP lane in each direction east of Green River Rd, add collector -distributor (CD) roads and direct south connectors at I-15/SR-91, extend the 91 Express Lanes to 1-15, and provide system/local interchange improvements; Express Bus service improvements; and a SR-241/ 91 Express Lanes connector . Further details for each of the projects are included following the summary below. Project No. Project Summary (Implementation Year) Cost 01) 45.2 1 SR-91 WB Lane at Tustin Avenue (2016) 2 Metrolink Service Improvements (2016) 249.2 3 Initial Phase CIP: Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction East of Green River Rd, CD Roads and I-15/SR-91 Direct South Connector, Extension of Express Lanes to 1-15 and System/Local Interchange Improvements (2017) 1,407 4 Express Bus Service Improvements (2017) 6 5 SR-241/91 Express Lanes Connector (2019) 180 SUBTOTAL 1,887 FULL= TON PLACENTIA Gp�,tFOR.y�� 91 Figure 2-2 — Summary of Projects for Implementation By 2019 YORSA LINDA ALLA P PARR Bernardin❑ CHINO HILLS Perris Valley Line (Project 2) RIYERSME CORONA .0t1. 4w VATIC. PERRIS NORC❑ 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 9 98 SR-91 WB Lane at Tustin Avenue Project No: 1 Anticipated Completion: 2016 Project Cost Estimate` Capital Cost Support Cost R/W Cost Total Project Cost Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $ 23,100,000 $ 15,419,000 $ 6,717,000 $ 45,236,000 Comp I eted Completed Completed 2014-2016 * Schedule is derived from April 2012 OCTA Capital Action plan. Costs are from 2012 Caltrans Estimate at Completion. LEGEND - Existing Highway - Interchange/Ramp County Line MON HOV Lane r'+ Toiled Express Lane ! Existing Lane ! Proposed Improvement Lane �P�AFOR.y�� 91 Project Description The project will add a westbound {WB} auxiliary lane on SR-91 beginning at the northbound (NB) SR-55 to WB SR-91 connector through the Tustin Avenue interchange. Key Considerations Build Alternative 3 was selected from the Project Study Report (PSR), On Westbound (WB) SR-91 Auxiliary Lane from the Northbound (NB) SR-551WB SR-91 Connector to the Tustin Avenue Interchange, and requires additional right-of-way. City of Anaheim utilities are within close proximity of the proposed widening section. Widening of the Santa Ana River bridge is required. Coordination with the City of Anaheim occurred for widening of Tustin Avenue and the WB SR-91 Off -Ramp that was completed in early 2011. Benefits The project would reduce or eliminate operational problems and deficiencies on this section of WB SR-91 including weaving and merging maneuvers. This project would also address Choke -paint conditions, which are caused primarily by extensive weaving between the NB SR-55 to WB SR-91 connector and the WB SR-91 off -ramp to Tustin Avenue. Current Status Preliminary engineering was completed and approved by Caltrans. The environmental phase was completed in November 2010, and design was completed in mid-2013. Construction was initiated in February 2014. The project received $14M from the Proposition 1B State -Local Partnership Program (SLPP), $14M from Measure M, with the balance from Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds. WB SR-91 Tustin Av On Off Lakeview Av oft On 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 10 99 Metrolink Service Improvements Project No: 2 Anticipated Completion: 2016 Project Cost Estimate` IEOC Service Cost Perris Valley Line Cost Total Metrolink Costs Project Schedule To be completed by 2016 $ 1,160, 000 $ 248,000,000 $ 249,160,000 * Costs from OCTA and RCTC (in 2015 dollars) Project Description Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) are coordinating on the implementation of additional commuter rail service on the Inland Empire — Orange County (IEOC) Line, which operates between Oceanside and San Bernardino. The ongoing success of the IEOC Line service and significant freeway construction on parallel corridors would bolster potential growth on Metrolink. Currently, there are sixteen (16) daily trains that run on the IEOC Line and nine (9) trains running on the 91 Line for a total of 25 daily trains. There will be an additional two IEOC roundtrips by late 2015. The long-term service improvements will include 24 IEOC trains by 2030. Construction began in October 2013 on the $248,000,000 Perris Valley Line (PVL), which will expand Metrolink commuter rail service on the 91 Line (Riverside to Los Angeles, via Fullerton). The new service will extend 24 miles from downtown Riverside to south Perris and will add four new stations along the route_ The PVL is expected to open to riders by December 2015_ The project is located within the right of way of the existing San Jacinto Branch Line through Riverside, Moreno Valley and Perris. The PVL is the first extension of Metrolink service since the Antelope Valley Line was built in 1994. The initial schedule (December 2015) has nine trains through to Los Angeles and 12 between Perris and Riverside. Key Considerations The long-term plan (by 2020) adds more service by constructing additional stations. The City of Anaheim is also proposing Anaheim Canyon Station improvements for a second track and platform to be implemented as part of the long-term plan. The City of Placentia is currently in the environmental phase for a new Metrolink commuter rail passenger station and parking lot to be constructed as part of the long-term plan. Benefits Enables development of expanded Metrolink service and improves efficiency, which will contribute to congestion relief on SR-91. Current Status Two additional IE0C Line roundtrips will be added by late 2015 and nine trains from the expanded PVL by December 2015. FULL 'TON- PLACENTIA l �PS,IFOR.ys� 91 Trains to Los Angefes via Fuilerton YORBA LINDA DAILY TRAINS Existing: 25 Late-2015: 27 li-Trairps to Central l' South Orange County ANAHEIM DAILY TRAINS Existing: 16 Late-2015: 18 Bernardino CHINO HILLS Perris Valley Line RWERSIOE NORCO CORONA 111111011 wA[Ror�4.1.Pi, .cN �.o Pr. P. • PERRIS PERMS iT.T.W soyPn rims sn1SgY 1 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 11 100 Initial Phase CIP: Widen SR-91 by One GP lane In Each Direction East of Green River Road, CD Roads and 1-15/SR-91 Direct South Connector, Extension of Express Lanes to 1-15 and System 1 Local Interchange Improvements outrU17MfA 91 Project No: 3 Anticipated Completion: 2017 Project Cost Estimate* Total Capital Cost Support Cost Total Project Cost $ 1.161,000,000 $ 246,000,000 $ 1,407,000,000 Project Schedule** Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design/Construction Completed Completed 2013-2017 * Cost obtained for Initial Phase is from ROTC and is 2014 dollars * ` Schedule for lnital Phase; subsequent phase for Ultimate Project anticipated in 2035 (see Project #10) LEGEND - Existing Highway - Interchange/Ramp - County Line ✓ rr Coal Canyon Crossing p HOV Lane ATolled Express Lane Existing Lane 11=1 Proposed Improvement Lane Ca Road Auxiliary Lane * Braided Connector i r Off On Project Description The approved Project Study Report (PSR) for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP), from SR-241 to Pierce Street, includes the addition of a 5th general purpose lane in each direction, the addition of auxiliary lanes at various locations, additional lanes at the SR-711SR-91 interchange (Project #6), and collector -distributor (CD) lanes at the 1-151SR-91 interchange_ Subsequently, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (ROTC) 10-Year Delivery Plan recommended the following in addition to the PSR recommended improvements: the extension of the 91 Express Lanes from the Orange County line to 1-15, the construction of SR-91 (EBIWB)11-15 (SBJNB) Express Lanes median direct connectors, and the construction of one Express Lane in each direction from the I-151SR-91 interchange southerly to 1-15/Cajalco Road, and northerly to I-151Hidden Valley Parkway. An Express Lanes ingress/egress lane is also planned near the County Line. Due to economic conditions, a Project Phasing Plan was developed to allow an Initial Phase with reduced improvements to move forward as scheduled, with the remaining ultimate improvements to be completed later. The following is a summary of the deferred ultimate improvements (Project #10): SR-9111-15 median North Direct Connector and 1-15 Express Lanes North to Hidden Valley Parkway; general purpose lanes and Express Lanes from 1-15 to Pierce Street; and general purpose lanes from SR-241 to SR-71. The 1-15 Express Lanes to be extended from Ontario Avenue to Cajalco Road are included in RCTC's 1-15 Express Lane Project with an anticipated completion in 2020. Key Considerations Coordination among many of the SR-91 freeway projects that overlap the project limits is critical to successfully delivering these projects on schedule and within budget. Designing to accommodate future projects is a recurring theme for each of these projects_ Minimizing conflicts in scope between projects requires direct coordination between each project team. Additionally, future projects frequently have multiple alternatives under study, each with differing scope and construction footprints. Specifically, the project improvements need to continue to be coordinated with the SR-711SR-91 interchange (Project #6), the SR-241191 Express Lanes Connector (Project #5), and RCTC's 1-15 Express Lane Project. Benefits The Initial Phase and Ultimate CIP projects will reduce congestion and delays by providing additional SR-91 capacity from SR-241 to Pierce Street, along I-15 from SR-91 to Cajalco Road to the south, and to Hidden Valley Parkway to the north. Traffic operation will improve by eliminating or reducing weaving conflicts along SR-91 and 1-15 by the use of C❑ roads and auxiliary lanes. The project will provide motorists a choice to use Express Lanes for a fee in exchange for time savings_ Current Status The environmental phase was completed in Fall 2012. A Design -Build contractor was selected in May 2013 and construction activities began in early 2014 for the Initial Phase. Off Coal Canyon Crossing i ! i ! ! Tam Ingress/Egress lanes shown within the Express Lanes by restriping County Line Green River Rd On Off Off Off* Maple St Serfas Club Dr Maple St Lincoln Av or A to Auto Center Dr On" from Sulfas Club Dr, T I Ott On Off to Off Main to y 11111 St 1-15 3-Lane CD Road — Connector from Main St EB on -ramp braid to join SR-91 as a merge ramp Main St Off On Off On On On From On NB From 1-15 Sg On" On' From From Main SB St 1-15 1-15 HOVIHOT lanes to 1-15/Ontario Av Additional lane by restripe of existing lanes McKinley St On Off From NB 1-15 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 12 Pierce St A Off On 101 Express Bus Service Improvements Project No: 4 Anticipated Completion: 2017 Project Cost Estimate* Total Annual Capital Cost $ 1,000,000" Total Annual Operating Cost $ 5,000,000" Project Schedule Riverside/Corona to Anaheim Resort Temecula to Village at Orange Village at Orange to Riverside/Corona FY 2017 (Planned RTA Route 200) FY 2017 (Planned RTA Route 205) Existing (RTA Route 215) Riverside/Corona to Existing South Coast Metro (OCTA Route 794) " Capital and Operating costs from OCTA and RCTC (2015 dollars) "20-year average Protect Description Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), working with the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), and the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), plans an expansion of Express Bus service between Riverside and Orange counties. Commuters lack direct transit connections to some Orange County employment centers, and new Express Bus service can provide this connection_ Existing Service OCTA has operated Route 794 since 200E from Riverside County to Hutton Centre and South Coast Metro (shown in orange below). RTA has operated Route 216 since 2010 between the Village at Orange and Downtown Riverside (shown in red below). New Service Two new Express Bus routes are planned for implementation by Fiscal Year 2017 between Riverside County and Orange County including RTA route 200 (shown in blue below) from Riverside County to Corona and to the Anaheim Resort. The route would include three AM and three PM roundtrips by three buses. RTA route 205 (shown in green below) from Temecula to the Village at Orange is proposed to include two AM and two PM roundtrips by 2 buses. Existing RTA route 216 (shown in red below) from the Riverside Downtown Terminal to the Village at Orange is planned for expansion of service from the current two buses to five buses by Fiscal Year 2023. Upon completion of the proposed 91 Express Lanes, RCTC expects to nearly double Express Bus service on SR-91. Currently, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and OCTA operate 21 bus trips per day on 5R-91 and RCTC envisions adding 20 additional trips, bringing the total to 41 daily trips. Service duration for this expansion will increase by 11,500 hours per year and will be served by five new transit coaches to be procured specifically for this service. Key Considerations Operating costs will average $5,0013,000 each year and capital costs will average $1,000,000 per year. The cost sharing will be negotiated between Orange and Riverside counties. RCTC is committing $5,000,000 for Express Bus purchases once the Riverside County portion of the 91 Express Lanes open. Intercounty Express Bus service is effective between locations where transit travel times by Express Bus would be more competitive than Metrolink and connecting rail feeder buses_ There is some duplication of service between the existing Express Bus routes and Metrolink service_ One reason customers are attracted to Express Bus service over Metrolink is that the cost is approximately 33% lower. There may be some merit to subsidizing Metrolink fares for price -sensitive transit riders in this corridor instead of keeping competitive bus service. Benefits Development of Express Bus services will contribute to congestion relief on 5R-91. Current Status A cooperative agreement covering the Riverside/Corona to South Coast Metro service with Riverside County has been developed. The Riverside County to South Coast Metro Express Bus route is currently operating. Expansion of the program is dependent upon available operating funds and future financial commitments with Riverside County. The implementation dates may change based on funding availability. RTON PLACENTIA Fri,c«i II 3 YORBA LINDA vin To South Coast Metro . To Riverside To Temecula Gp�,tFOR.y�� 91 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 13 102 5R-241/91 Express Lanes Connector Project No: 5 Anticipated Completion: 2019 Project Cast Estimate* Total Project Cost 180,000,000 Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design/Construction Completed 2012-2017 2017-2019 * Assumes a 2-lane connector, extending as far as Coal Canyon_ Costs from State Route 241 ! 91 Connector Fact Sheet (10/28/2013). I Project Description The SR-241191 Express Lanes connector will carry northbound (NB) SR-241 traffic to eastbound (EB) 91 Express Lanes and carry westbound {WB} 91 Express Lanes traffic to southbound {SB} SR-241. Outside widening would be required mainly on the south side of SR-91 for realignment of EB lanes up to the Coal Canyon Crossing. Key Considerations This project was originally permitted as a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) connector into the SR-91 HOV lane. With the implementation of the 91 Express Lanes, the project will need to carefully coordinate the traffic operations and tolling policies that will result with the convergence of the SR-241 toll road, the existing OCTA 91 Express Lanes, and the proposed extension of the 91 Express Lanes by RCTC. The project will 'follow the SR-91 CIP (Project #3) in its implementation and will need to be designed accordingly. Continuous operations of the 91 Express Lanes will be a key consideration for this project_ The preliminary analysis calls for the SR-91 center median to be widened to the south to make room for a two lane {one in each direction} direct connector and associated Express Auxilliary Lanes in each direction. The project would tie into the SR-91 GIP improvements at Coal Canyon. Benefits The project will provide connectivity from the 91 Express Lanes and the SR-241 Eastern Transportation Corridor System. The project improves access to SR-241 and South County for traffic that does not currently utilize the 91 Express Lanes, which also improves WB SR-91 by eliminating the need for HOV and Express Lane users to weave across four general purpose lanes to use the existing SB SR-241 connector. It will help alleviate congestion on NB SR-241 and EB SR-91 by allowing SR-241 users to bypass the existing EB SR-91 general purpose connector. The project will also provide a benefit to the Central County MIS area. Current Status Preliminary engineering concepts for a SR-241191 Express Lanes direct connector have been developed by The Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) and Caitrans. The 91 Express Lanes Extension and SR-241 Connector Feasibility Study was completed in March 2009 and was initiated to evaluate the various alternatives_ An expanded alternative would connect to SR-71 or extend the ingresslegress further east. A Project Study Report was initiated in January 2011 and was completed by January 2012. The Project Report and Environmental Document is anticipated to be completed by early 2017. CnY Gypsum Canyon Rd - Cff On Off Off Cff-� On Coal Canyon Crossing County Line Ingress/Egress lanes shown within Express Lanes by restriping (Project #3) LEGEND - Existing Highway •ip Interchange/Ramp - County Line ■ ■ Coal Canyon Crossing — Tolled Express Lane 1E Existing Lane Proposed improvement Lane •_ _ Project #3 Improvements 91 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 103 14 PROJECTS BY YEAR 2025 Projects for implementation by 2025 include the interchange improvements at SR-71/SR-91, Metrolink station improvements, and SR-91 widening improvements between SR-57 and SR-55. Some of the 2025 projects are funded and underway in various stages of project development. OCTA, RCTC, and Caltrans have initiated preliminary planning activities for these projects to ensure readiness when local, state, or federal funding becomes available. Consequently, there may be opportunities to advance these projects if additional funding is made available. Projects for implementation by 2025 are expected to cost approximately $388 million to $885 million (in 2015 dollars, or as noted). Project No. Project Summary (Implementation Year) Cost ($M) 6 SR-71/SR-91 Interchange Improvements (2020) 123.4 7 Metrolink Station Improvements (2020) 43.4 8 SR-91 between SR-57 and SR-55 (2025) 221-718 SUBTOTAL 388 — 885 Figure 2-3 — Summary of Projects for Implementation By 2025 FULLS TON o l� v� el n PL CENTIA RANGI I t� m., .,WLLA tPARK Bernardino CHINO • �Z HILLS i YOR6A LINOA • 7 �;. ANAHEIM CORONA NORCO O 91 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 104 15 511-71f5R-91 Interchange Improvements outrU17MfA 91 Project No: 6 Anticipated Completion: 2020 Project Cost Estimate* Total Project Cost $ 123,397,000 Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Des ign/Construction Completed Completed 2013-2020 Cost obtained from preliminary engineer's cost estimate (2011 dollars) I LEGEND Existing Highway Intemhange/Ramp County Line ■ - ■ Coal Canyon Crossing - Tolled Express Lane NM Existing Lane tl� Proposed Improvement Lane . CO Road Auxiliary Lane Project #3 and #5 Improvements Project Description The current project includes a new two-lane direct connector flyover from eastbound (EB) SR-91 to northbound (NB) SR-71 and modifications to the existing Green River Road EB SR-91 on -ramp_ Key Considerations Project improvements must be coordinated with the following projects: the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) (Project #3 and #10) and the SR-241191 Express Lanes Connector (Project #5). The Green River Road ❑vercrossing Replacement was completed in March 2009 (see Appendix B Project No. B-1) and consisted of replacing the previously existing Green River Road Gvercrossing with a new six -lane wide, 4-span overcrossing to accommodate widening of SR-91 by Projects #3, #5, and #10_ The SR-91 CIP (Project #3 and #10) project design -build team began construction activities in early 2014. The Project Report and Environmental Document for the SR-241 /91 Express Lanes Connector (Project #5) is anticipated to be completed by early 2017. Close coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S_ Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife will also be required as the connector crosses the Santa Ana River below the Prado Dam. In addition, implementation of Major Investment Study (MIS) Corridor (Concept #A-1) within the median of SR-91 will require the need for a three -level crossing of SR-91 and the proposed SR-71 direct flyover connector. Coordination will be required with an at -grade or grade -separated managed lane ingress/egress facility that may be located near the county boundary as part of the SR-91 CIP (Project #3 and #10). Benefits The project will provide a new direct connector improvement from EB SR-91 to NB SR-71, replacing the geometric choke point created by the existing connector. The project will also improve traffic operations and Operational efficiency by eliminating or minimizing weaving conflicts through the use of auxiliary lanes. Current Status The environmental phase was completed in June 2011 _ Final design is underway and is anticipated to be complete in mid-2015. Ingress/Egress lanes shown within the Express Lanes by restriping by Project #3 Off Lanes shown are for the SR-241191 Express Lanes Project #5 Gypsum Canyon Rd On Off 1. T Coal Canyon Off Crossing 1 ! ! ! 1 1 -► Or. A County Line Lane shown is for Project #3 (Typical) Green River Rd On A► Off On 1 Off SIT 1 On from Green River Rd Auto Center Dr On from Maple St A On Off Off to Maple 5t Serfas Club Dr 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 16 105 Metrolink Station Improvements Project No; 7 Anticipated Completion: 2020 Project Cost Estimate* Anaheim Canyon Station Cost Placentia Station Cost Total Metrolink Costs Project Schedule To be completed by 2020 Costs from OCTA and RCTC {in 2015 dollars} $ 20,005,000 $ 23,420.000 $ 43,425,000 Project Description This long-term plan (by 2020) adds more Metrolink service by constructing additional stations. The Anaheim Canyon Station improvement project includes the addition of a second station track. platform, extensions of the existing platform, and associated passenger amenities, including ticket vending machines, benches, canopies, and signage. The project is anticipated to move forward with OCTA as the lead agency on all phases of project development, including environmental. The proposed Placentia Metrolink Station improvements include platforms and parking that will be located on BNSF Railway and City of Placentia right of way. OCTA is the lead for design and construction of the project. Key Considerations Coordination has been ongoing with the Metrolink extension studies for the Anaheim Canyon and Placentia Station improvements. Benefits Enables development of expanded Metrolink service and improves efficiency, which will contribute to congestion relief on SR-91. Current Status OCTA staff continues to work with the City to define the Anaheim Canyon Station project in a project definition report (PDR). A final version of the PDR was sent to the City on December 22, 2014, for signature. OCTA anticipates releasing a request for proposals for a consultant to perform the environmental and preliminary design, once the City approves and signs the PDR. A cooperative agreement with the City is in place for the project defining roles and responsibilities. Plans for the Placentia Station platforms, station amenities, and parking are 95 percent complete. However, finalization of the design is on hold pending the outcome of the City of Placentia's negotiations with private developers for a possible transit -oriented development on city -owned property where a surface parking lot was planned to be constructed. A new cooperative agreement with the City for construction of the station will need to be presented to the Board for approval once the City has a signed an agreement with the developer. The City of Placentia is 90 percent complete with demolishing a packing house on the site for construction of the southern station platform. PLACENTIA lacentia Station „MILLA PARK ANAHEIM Image source: Perris Valley Line, a project of Riversrde County Transportation Commission (PCTC) 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 17 106 SR-91 Improvements between SR-57 and SR-55 Project No: 8 Anticipated Completion: 2025 Project Cost Estimate* Capital Cost TBD R1W Cost TBD Support Cost TBD Management & Contingency TBD Total Project Cost, Low' $ 221,000,000 Total Project Cost, High" $ 718,000,000 Project Schedule Conceptual Engineering Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction Completed Completed 2015-2017 2018-2021 2021-2025 Project Costs from SR-91 PSR/PDS (2014 dollars)- Cost Range is for reduced shoulder Alternative 2A (low) and full standard Alternative 26 with Option 1 (high) (excludes support costs)_ LEGEND - Existing Highway - Interchange/Ramp MOM HOV Lane A Tolled Express Lane Existing Lane : Proposed Improvement Lane - Project #1 Improvements J State College Blvd A Off on 4111611i On i x:-- ,it• _ Off V' On Off SR-57 Off EB SR-91 at Kraemer Blvd interchange improvements Project description Improve the SR-571SR-91 interchange complex, including nearby local interchanges, as well as adding freeway capacity between SR-55 and SR-57. Some improvements to NB SR-57may be considered and will be further analyzed during the Environmental phase. Specificimprovements will be subject to approved plans developed in cooperation with local jurisdictions and affected communities. The improvements shown are from the concepts developed by the SR-91 Project Study Report - Project Development Support from SR-57 to SR-55. The improvements for Altemative 2A include one EB GP lane from east of SR-57 to west of the SR-55 connector. One WB GP lane is added from west of the Kraemer Blvd/Glassell St interchange to State College Blvd. Also, NB SR-57 from Lincoln Av to Orangethorpe Av is realigned. Alternative 26 is the same as Alternative 2A with the exception of a proposed standard left shoulder width of 10 feet in both directions. Option 1 could be applied to either Alternative and includes reconfiguring the WB SR-91 to SB SR-55 connector as a standard right diverge. KeyConsiderations The proposed project improvements on WB and eastbound (EB) SR-91 between SR-57 and SR-55 may require right-of-way acquisition- Coordin.ation with the SR-91 WB Lane at Tustin Avenue improvements (Project #1) will be required. Benefits The proposed project Improvements on WB and EB SR-91 between SR-57 and SR-55 include, among other features, adding one EB general purpose lane to achieve lane balancing_ The project improvement will alleviate congestion and reduce delay. Current Status The project improvement for EB SR-91 widening and for improvements to SR-571SR-91 and SR-551SR-91 were studied by the SR-91 Feasibility Study, which was completed in June 2009. Preliminary engineering was completed in 2014 and the Environmental phase began in early 2015. The proposed improvements are included in the Measure M2 program through the Environmental phase_ Lane shown is for Project #1 Kraemer Blvd On " Off On _-_ Atka- T OnOff On Off Giassell St Tustin Av Off On Lakeview Av Off to WO SR-91 Tustin Av On T 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 18 107 PROJECTS BY YEAR 203 5 Projects for implementation by 2035 focus on longer -lead time projects and include a potential new interchange or overcrossing at Fairmont Boulevard and the Ultimate SR-91 CIP that includes widening SR-91 by one GP lane in each direction from SR-241 to Green River Road, I-15/SR-91 direct north connector, and SR-91 improvements east of 1-15. Project No. Project Summary (Implementation Year) Cost ($M) 9 Fairmont Boulevard Improvements (Post-2025) 76.8 10 Ultimate CIP: Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction from SR-241 to SR-71, I-15/SR-91 Direct North Connector, and SR-91 Improvements East of 1-15 (2035) TBD SUBTOTAL 77+ Figure 2-4 — Summary of Projects for Implementation by 2035 FULL = TON PLACENTIA ® .,)ALLA PRARK YORBA LINDA ANAHEIM Sernord+no CHINO ti HILLS CORONA NORCO p�,tFOR.y�� 91 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 19 G 108 Fairmont Boulevard Improvements Project No: 9 Anticipated Completion: Post-2025 Project Cost Estimate' Capital Cost Support Cost Total Project Cost Project Schedule Conceptual Engineering Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $ 67,800,000 $ 9,000,000 $ 76,800,000 Completed TBD TBD TBD TBD " Costs from Feasibility Study (2009 dollars). RNV cost is undetermined at this time. Cost does not include potential impact to Santa Ana River. LEGEND Existing Highway Interchange/Ramp County Line - Tolled Express Lane i Existing Lane i Proposed Improvement Lane Project Description The project would provide a new interchange with SR-91 at Fairmont Boulevard. ❑n- and off -ramps will connect Fairmont Boulevard to eastbound (EB) and westbound (WB) SR-91_ The proposed interchange does not include a Fairmont Boulevard connection to Santa Ana Canyon Road to the south_ Key Considerations Interchange spacing and weaving issues (to SR-55) need to be evaluated. Widening of SR-91 may be needed to accommodate interchange ramps. Proximity of the Santa Ana River may require that the WB ramp junction be located north of the river_ New connection requirements and interchange spacing needs to be considered. Benefits The interchange is expected to relieve congestion at Imperial Highway (SR-90), Lakeview Avenue, and Weir Canyon Road Interchanges_ Preliminary traffic modeling shows a 10-15% decrease in volumes at Weir Canyon and SR-90 interchanges with the interchange alternative. Current Status The City of Anaheim completed a conceptual engineering study in December 2009, Multiple alternatives have been developed as part a the conceptual engineering study. Project development is pending funding identification. Fairmont Blvd 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 20 109 Ultimate CIP: Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction from SR-241 to SR-71, 1-151SR-91 Direct North Connector, and SR-91 Improvements East of 1-15 Project No: 10 Anticipated Completion: 2035 Project Cost Estimate* To Be Determined Project Schedule* Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design/Construction Completed Completed TB❑ ' Schedule for Ultimate Project anticipated by 2035 l LEGEND 11 • • • A t: Existing Highway Interchange/Ramp County Line Coal Canyon Crossing HOV Lane Tolled Express Lane Existing Lane Proposed Improvement Lane CD Road !< • Auxiliary Lane Project #3. #5 and #6 Improvements * Braided Connector Off Lanes shown are for the SR-241191 Express Lanes Connector (Project #5) Project Description The approved Project Study Report (PSR) for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP), from SR-241 to Pierce Street, recommended the addition of a 5th lane in each direction, the addition of auxiliary lanes at various locations, and the addition of collector -distributor (CD) lanes at the I-151SR-91 interchange. Subsequently, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) 10-Year Delivery Plan recommended the following in addition to the PSR recommended improvements: the extension of the 91 Express Lanes from the Orange County line to 1-15, the construction of SR-91 (EBNVBy1-15 (SB/NB) Express Lanes median direct connectors, and the construction of one Express Lane in each direction from the 1-151SR-91 interchange southerly to 1-151Cajalco Road (now part of RCTC 1-15 CIF), and northerly to I-151Hidden Valley Parkway. Due to economic conditions, a Project Phasing Plan was developed to allow an Initial Phase (Project #3), with reduced improvements, to move forward as scheduled, with the remaining ultimate improvements to be completed later. The following is a summary of the proposed ultimate improvements included in Project No. 10: SR-9111-15 median North Direct Connector and 1-15 Express Lanes North to Hidden Valley Parkway; SR-91 general purpose lanes from 1-15 to Pierce Street; and SR-91 general purpose lanes from SR-241 to Green River Road. Ultimate project widens all SR-91 lanes to full standard lane and shoulder widths from SR-241 to SR-71. These Ultimate improvements are the subject of this project. The I-15 Express Lanes to be extended from Ontario Avenue to Cajalco Road are included in RCTC's 1-15 Express Lane Project with an anticipated completion date in 2020. Key Considerations Coordination among many of the SR-91 freeway projects that overlap the project limits is critical to successfully delivering these projects on schedule and within budget. Designing to accommodate future projects is a recurring theme for each of these projects. Minimizing conflicts in scope between projects requires direct coordination between each project team. Additionally, future projects frequently have multiple alternatives under study, each with differing scope and construction footprints. Specifically, the project improvements need to continue to be coordinated with the Initial CIP (Project #3), the SR-711SR-91 interchange (Project #6), the SR-241191 Express Lanes Connector (Project #5), and RCTC's 1-15 Express Lane Project. Benefits The Initial Phase and Ultimate CIP projects will reduce congestion and delays by providing additional SR-91 capacity from SR-241 to Pierce Street and along 1-15 from SR-91 to Cajalco Road to the south and to Hidden Valley Parkway to the north. Traffic operation will improve by eliminating or reducing weaving conflicts along SR-91 and 1-15 by the use of CD roads and auxiliary lanes. The project will provide motorists a choice to use Express Lanes for a fee in exchange far time savings_ Current Status Preliminary engineering is complete but may need to be revisited at a future date. The Ultimate Project is currently discussed in the environmental document for the Initial Phase that was completed in 2012. Existing bike path will be preserved Off Coal Canyon Crossing County Line Green River Rd On Off off Lanes shown are for the SR-711SR-91 interchange east to north flyover connector for SR-71, and connector from Green River Road to EB SR-91 (Project #6) On On 1 Off Ultimate project widens all SR-91 lanes to standard HDVIHOT lanes to lane and shoulder widths from SR-241 to SR-71 Off Auto Center Dr r On Off Off' On' On" Off* Maple St A Serbs Club Dr Lane shown is for Green River Rd EB SR-91 On -Ramp (Project #6) Lincoln Av A Off On On y it 1-15/Hidden Valley Pkwy Main St Off On On Y, pt — On off V 3-Lane CD Road from Main St EB On -Ramp braid to join SR-91 as a merge ramp (Project #3) Off On' From Main St 1 On Off r On' From SB 1-15 McKinley St Pierce St Off to NBISB 1-15 On On Off From From SB NB 1-15 1-15 HDVIHOT lanes to I-15ICajalco Rd (by RCTC 1-15 CIP) On Off w Off ouroRmtA 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 110 21 SECTION 3: APPENDIX A - CONCEPTS BY POST-2035 Concepts for potential implementation by Post-2035 focus on longer -lead time projects. This multi -billion dollar program may include: an elevated 4-lane facility (MIS Corridor A) from SR-241 to 1-15; the Anaheim to Ontario International Airport Maglev High Speed Rail; and the Irvine -Corona Expressway (ICE) 4-lane facility from SR-241/SR-133 to I-15/Cajalco Road (formerly known as MIS Corridor B). The multi -billion dollar potential concepts include significant environmental constraints and right of way requirements in addition to requiring a significant amount of planning, design, and future policy and public input. The Corridor A Concept may incorporate projects being developed in the earlier programs as concept components. Appendix Concept No. Concept Summary (Implementation Year) Cost ($M) A-1 Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) from SR-241 to 1-15 (Post-2035) 2,720 A-2 Anaheim to Ontario International Airport Maglev High Speed Rail (Post-2035) A-3 Irvine -Corona Expressway (ICE) 4-Lane Facility from SR-241/SR-133 to I-15/Cajalco Road (Post-2035) SUBTOTAL 2,770-3,200 8,855 14,350-14,780 Figure 3-1 - Summary of Concepts for Implementation by Post-2035 u a FULL = TON Yor6a r Lr�dn rr PLACENTIA Placentia YORBA LINUA Bernardino '� CHINO 1. HILLS /NORCO CORONA 2015 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 22 111 Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) from SR-241 to 1-15 Concept No: A-9 Anticipated Completion: Post-2035 Concept Cost Estimate** Capital Cost' Support Cost (25%) RNV Cost Total Project Cost Concept Schedule Conceptual Engineering Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $1,488,000,000 $372, 000, 000 $860, 000, 000 $2,720,000,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD * Capital costs include $1601V1 for environmental mitigation excluding corresponding support cost, which is included in support cost estimate **Costs derived from Riverside County - Orange County MIS, January 2006 (2005 dollars) Concept Description The improvements primarily consist of constructing a new 4-lane elevated expressway near or within the Santa Ana Canyon with freeway -to -freeway connectors at SR-241 and 1-15. The facility may include managed lanes and potential reversible operations. Key Considerations Choice of alignment will be key to determining net capacity increase_ Extensive right-of-way (RJW) will be required to implement the improvements if the alignment is not on the SR-91 corridor. If Project #3 or #10 is constructed and a 4-lane elevated facility is proposed within the median of SR-91 through Corona, then extensive managed lane closures would be required during construction (thus temporarily reducing SR-91 capacity during construction). An alternative could be studied for the median Corridor A viaduct along NV with reduced SR-91 geometric standards to minimize Rimpacts_ Also, direct connectors (such as for High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) 1 High Occupancy Toll (HOT) at 1-15JSR-91) to/from the median could be precluded by Maglev columns located within the same median area. Ca!trans and Maglev highway RAW, maintenance, safety, and operations considerations would need to be analyzed if shared use with a Maglev facility were pursued. Additional mitigation costs may be required for improvements to SR-241 and SR-133 as a result of additional Corridor traffic volumes. Corridor A as managed lanes, with potential extension of 91 Express Lanes to 1-15 (Project #3 and #10), may affect traffic distribution due to "parallel" tolled facilities_ Benefits The concept would provide significant congestion relief by allowing vehicles to bypass the at -grade freeway lanes and local arterial interchanges between SR-241 and 1-15. Connections are proposed directly between SR-91, SR-241, and 1-15. Oflltl 2 VVQ LoIIDS ---- - -.-- G EB LdI IDS Or 11U ,ci Abbreviations: WB = Westbound EB = Eastbound Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) Cross -Section Current Status This concept is identified in the Riverside County - Orange County Major Investment Study (MIS) as part of the Locally Preferred Strategy to improve mobility between Riverside County and Orange County. No project development work is planned at this time �pl.lFORMl� 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 23 112 Anaheim to Ontario International Airport Maglev High Speed Rail Concept No: A-2 Anticipated Completion: 2035 Concept Cost Estimate* Total Capital Cost, Low $ 2,770,000,000 Total Capital Cost, High $ 3,200,000,000 Concept Schedule To be determined " Concept costs from American Magline Group (2012 dollars) Concept Description Proposals for a new super -speed train corridor from Anaheim to Ontario are included in this concept. This concept includes an alternative that would use SR-91 right-of-way, or would be aligned adjacent to SR-91 right-of-way, or could potentially be co -located with the Major Investment Study (MIS) Corridor A (Concept #A-1) alignment. Another alignment opportunity is being investigated along SR-57. Key Considerations Alternative alignment impacts to SR-91 right-of-way envelope and/or Santa Ana River are undetermined. The choice of alignment will potentially impact MIS Corridor A (Concept #A-1). Right-of-way (R/W) will be required to implement the improvements. Potential considerations for co -locating the Magnetic Levitation (maglev) train adjacent to Corridor A (and also SR-91) include providing a two -column structure with a barrier between the trains and vehicles. Ca!trans and maglev highway R/W, maintenance, safety, and operations considerations would need to be analyzed if shared use with a maglev facility were pursued. See the MIS Corridor A (Project #11) for additional considerations. Coordination with Met°link improvements (Project #9) will be required. Benefits The concept would provide congestion relief by providing a direct high-speed/high-capacity connection with Ontario International Airport for Orange County air passengers and business next -day deliveries. Maglev will make the trip in just 14.5 minutes. Relieves congestion on SR-91 by providing additional capacity in the corridor. Current Status Preliminary design, engineering and Phases 1 and 2 of a Preliminary Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS/EIS) are completed. Congress has approved $45M in SAFETEA-LU for the environmental phase of the project. The Anaheim to Ontario segment is included in the "Constrained" Plan of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) passed in April 2012. Construction funding of up to $7 billion has been identified through a loan commitment from the China Export -Import Bank. LEGEND Existing Highway High Speed Rail Representative Alignment LOE ANGELES COUNT,' REPRESENTATIVE ALIGNMENT SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY �p�AFORJy�� 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 113 24 Irvine -Corona Expressway (ICE) 4-Lane Facility from SR-241ISR-133 to I-151Cajalco Road Concept No: A-3 Anticipated Completion: Post-2035 Concept Cast Estimate* Capital Cost Support Cost R1W Cost Total Project Cost Concept Schedule Geotechnical Feasibility Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $ 7,675,000,000 $ 880,000,000 $ 300,000,000 $ 8,855,000,000 Completed TBD TBD TBD TBD * Costs derived from the Feasibility Evaluation Report (2009 dollars) l LEGEND Existing Highway ICE (Corridor 8) Representative Alignment 1 NOTE: REPRESENTATIVE ALIGNMENT SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY Concept Description The improvements primarily consist of constructing a highway and rail facility through the Cleveland National Forest with freeway -to -freeway connectors at SR-2411SR-133 and I-15/Cajalco Road. The facility would essentially be a continuation of SR-133 on the west end of the corridor, to 1-15 on the east end. Key Considerations The tunnel concept is technically feasible based on the geotechnical investigation completed in December 2009. The initial project phase would be the construction of one 2-lane highway tunnel and one rail tunnel. The second project phase would include construction of a second 2-lane highway tunnel. Additional technical studies and geotechnical borings would be needed to refine the tunnel alignments and grades. Costs associated with the Irvine -Corona Expressway (ICE) tunnels are based on the Feasibility Evaluation Report completed in December 2009. A financial analysis will be needed for the construction, operations and toll requirements of the ICE tunnels. Benefits The concept would provide significant congestion relief by providing an alternative route between Orange and Riverside counties and would allow vehicles to bypass SR-91 between SR-241 and 1-15. The concept would not disrupt SR-91 traffic during construction and would allow for additional route selection for incident management, emergency evacuation, and for continuity of the highway network by linking SR-133 to 1-15. Current Status On August 27, 2010 the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority Board took action to defer additional study of the ICE concept until such time as financial considerations improve and/or technological advancements warrant reexamination. Review of the concept shall be done annually through the SR-91 Implementation Plan update to determine if any of the major assumptions with regard to financial considerations, private sector interest, or technological advancements have changed to make the tunnel financially viable. (See "ICE status summary" for further discussion). ICE (CORRIDOR BJ 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 25 114 SECTION4: APPENDIX B - COMPLETED PROJECT EXHIBITS The following exhibits represent completed projects from previous Plans since 2006, and are intended to be used as a reference to illustrate the progress made since the inception of the Plan. Note: some projects listed in the Plan as completed (see Section 1, Project Accomplishments) are not included herein since there was no exhibit created or necessary for use with prior Plans (such as for restriping projects, various safety enhancements, minor operational improvements, etc.). Appendix Project No. Project Improvements Constructed B-1 Green River Road Overcrossing Replacement March 2009 B-2 North Main Street Corona Metrolink Station Parking Structure June 2009 B-3 Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71 September 2010 B-4 Widen SR-91 between SR-55 and SR-241 by Adding a 5th GP Lane in Each Direction December 2012 ouvaRw4 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 26 115 Green River Road Overcrossing Replacement Appendix Project No: B-1 Actual Completion: March 2009 Project Costs Capital Cost Support Cost RIW Cost Total Project Cost Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $ 21,000,000 $ 3,000,000 $301,000 $ 24,301,000 Completed Completed Completed Completed �putaRw1� 91 Project Schedule Caltrans Equivalents: Preliminary Engineering = RID Environmental = PA/ED Design = PS&E Abbreviations: CD = Collector Distributor Lane FTR = Future HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle SHLD = Shoulder 77' 138' i , I 1 � .� I i ? 117/ � Iw eNn• W ; w med uaE V1!! UMl1 LAM LANE 114. LIIE I ufi£ IV ! fY ; 1 . ! IP' 1 6' 1P' ; '" 12 1Y ! u. 12 fY 14'% 1l' E YYU Project Description Improvements primarily consist of replacing the existing Green River Road overcrossing with a new six -lane wide, 4-span overcrossing to accommodate future widening of SR-91. The interior spans will accommodate up to eight mainline lanes in each direction including two HOV lanes. The exterior spans can accommodate two lanes, either for auxiliary lanes or collector distributor roads. Entrance and exit ramps will be realigned and widened to accommodate the new bridge, yet the interchange will retain its current configuration. New signals will be installed at the ramp intersections. Ramp and bridge improvements will be constructed within existing right of way. Key Considerations Design interface is required with the Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71, SR-711SR-91 Interchange Improvements, SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project, and SR-2411SR-91 HOV/HOT Connector. Benefits The project will improve the level of service at ramp and local street intersections at the interchange. Improvements will reduce ramp queues that extend into the freeway's general purpose lanes, thus contributing to congestion relief on SR-91. Current Status The project began construction in March 2007 and was completed in March 2009. 138' 79' L41JIIEI LN!!`LMT!1 lMEI761r:A I F111 (D { CO i01 12'141 17: 17 1 17 t7•; 171 171 WI t 1P1 1i 61711E1'J EB �^ GREEN RIVER BRIDGE CROSS-SECTION NOTE: All dimensions are approximate 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 27 116 North Main Street Corona Metrolink Station Parking Structure Appendix Project No: B-2 Actual Completion: June 2009 Project Costs Capital Cost $ 20,000,000 Support Cost $ 5,000,000 RIW Cost $0 Total Project Cost $ 25,000,000 Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction Completed Completed Completed Completed Project Description The project provides a six level parking structure with 1,065 parking stalls. The construction is within the existing North Main Street Metrolink station property in Corona. Key Considerations Proposed improvements were constructed within existing right of way. Currently there are 700 users of the facility, 200 more that were previously able to accomodate. Additionally RCTC has opened up the lot to park and ride carpools and vanpools and has issued over 120 permits for carpoolers to use the expanded station. This shows an added benefit of supporting carpooling as well as transit to offset congestion on SR-91. Benefits Demand for parking currently exceeds the capacity at the North Main Street Corona station. New parking capacity will allow Metrolink ridership to increase thereby diverting vehicle trips from SR-91. Current Status Construction was initiated in January 2008 and was completed in June 2009. The project was funded with Federal Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. PLACENTIA �n I- . 'S5i Irr nsoft NGE Fs map co YORBA LI NDA VILLA PARK ANAHEIM pynghted by Thomas Bros Maps an CHINO HILLS i. 0- •r Metrcll'nk Parking Structu 241 produced with permission 4 CiOR ONA NORCO 8 �puvaRwi� 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 28 117 Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71 Appendix Project No: B-3 Actual Completion: September 2010 Project Cost Estimate Capital Cost Support Cost RIW Cost Total Project Cost Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $ 41,000,000 $ 8,000,000 $ 2,200,000 $ 51,200,000 Completed Completed Completed Completed LEGEND Existing Highway ,1 Interchange/Ramp County Line - HOV or HOT Lane Existing Lane _ki Project Improvement Lane Existing Interchange On e Gypsum Canyon Rd Doff On aft L 1 WOMB- �puvaRwi� 91 Project Description The project will provide an additional eastbound (EB) lane from the SR-911SR-241 interchange to the SR-71ISR-91 interchange and will widen all EB lanes and shoulders to standard widths. Key Considerations Coordination with the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Projects (Project #3 and #11) will be required. Staged construction would be required for all ramp reconstruction and freeway widening. Freeway operations would most likely be affected by this project, however, freeway lane closures are not anticipated. An EB concrete shoulder will be constructed with a 12 foot width to provide for future widening as contemplated by Project #3 and #11. Benefits The lane addition would help to alleviate the weaving condition between SR-241 and SR-71, as well as remove vehicles from the SR-91 mainline that would be exiting at Green River Road and SR-71. Current Status Funding is from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) with $71.44M approved, and the balance of project costs are from other sources. Construction began in late 2009 and was completed in September 2010. Coal Canyon WLC IVL. r�1 I Off - On I Off�� On County Line Green River Rd 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 29 118 Widen SR-91 between SR-55 and SR-241 by Adding a 5th GP Lane in Each Direction Appendix Project No: B-4 Actual Completion: January 2013 Project Costs Capital Cost Support Cost RIW Cost Total Project Cost Project Schedule Preliminary Engineering Environmental Design Construction $ 65,005,000 $ 19,639,000 $ 573,000 $ 85,217,000 Completed Completed Completed Completed LEGEND - Existing Highway InterchangelRamp - Existing Interchange ® HOV or HOT Lane _ - Existing Lane Project Improvement Lane i Auxiliary Lane Lakeview Av Off On Off U_ __L n Off On Off On Off Project Description This project proposes capacity and operational improvements by adding one general purpose (GP) lane on eastbound (EB) SR-91 from the SR-551 SR-91 connector to east of the Weir Canyon Road interchange and on westbound (WB) SR-91 from just east of Weir Canyon Road interchange to the Imperial Highway (SR-90) interchange. Additionally, this project would facilitate truck traffic approaching the truck scales in both directions. Key Considerations Caftans is not considering relocation of the truck scales at this time. Benefits Alleviates congestion on WB SR-91 by eliminating the lane drop at the truck scales and providing a continuous GP lane to SR-90. Alleviates congestion on EB SR-91 by eliminating the lane drop for northbound (NB) SR-55 at SR-91 by providing an auxiliary lane to Lakeview Avenue, and at SR-90 by providing a continuous GP lane through Weir Canyon Road. Current Status Construction was completed in January 2013. The project received $221V1 of Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) funding and $74M of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Augmentation funds. Truck Scales Weir Canyon Rd On Oi an O t On Off Gypsum Canyon Rd On Off —�- On Off On Off On Dff�� NOTE: FAIRMONT BLV❑ IS CONTINGENT UPON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 30 119 SECTION 5: REFERENCES The following documents and resources were used in the development of the 2015 Plan. Data was provided by OCTA, RCTC, Caltrans Districts 8 and 12, Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), and other agencies. PSR-PDS for SR-241/SR-91 Connector, January 2012 Project Report and Environmental Document (EIR/EIS) for SR-91 CIP from SR-241 to Pierce Street Project, October 2012 Draft PSR-PDS "On SR-91 Between SR-57 and SR-55" PS&E "On State Route 91 Between the SR-91/SR-55 Interchange and the SR-91/SR-241 Interchange in Orange County" (April 2011) Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) Orange County SR-91 Corridor Final Report, August 2010 Project Study Report/Project Report "Right of Way Relinquishment on Westbound State Route 91 Between Weir Canyon Road and Coal Canyon", May 2010 SR-91/Fairmont Boulevard Feasibility Study, December 2009 SR-91 Feasibility Study from SR-57 to SR-55, December 2009 Feasibility Evaluation Report for Irvine -Corona Expressway Tunnels, December 2009 Renewed Measure M Strategic Plan, June 2009 Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) for Eastbound SR-91 lane addition from SR-241 to SR-71, May 2009 PSR "On State Route 91 Between the SR-91/SR-55 Interchange and the SR-91/SR-241 Interchange in Orange County", April 2009 91 Express Lanes Extension and State Route 241 Connector Feasibility Study, March 2009 PSR/PR "On Gypsum Canyon Road Between the Gypsum Canyon Road/SR-91 Westbound Off -Ramp (PM 16.4) and the Gypsum Canyon Road/SR-91 Eastbound Direct On -Ramp (PM 16.4)", June 2008 California Transportation Commission, Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), February 2007 PSR "On Route 91 from Green River Road to Serfas Club Drive in the City of Corona in Riverside County", December 2006 Orange County Transportation Authority Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, November 2006 PSR "On Route 91 from State Route 241 in Orange County to Pierce Street in the City of Riverside in Riverside County", October 2006 Riverside County -Orange County Major Investment Study (MIS) — Final Project Report: Locally Preferred Strategy Report, January 2006 Preliminary design plans for Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71, 2006 Project Study Report "Westbound State Route 91 Auxiliary Lane from the NB SR-55/WB SR-91 Connector to the Tustin Avenue Interchange", July 2004 California — Nevada Interstate Maglev Project Report, Anaheim -Ontario Segment; California -Nevada Super Speed Train Commission, American Magline Group, August 2003 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 31 120 PSR-PDS on SR-91 between SR-57 and SR-55, October 2014 Riverside Transit Agency, Ten -Year Transit Network Plan, January 22, 2015 Route Concept Reports for SR-91, Caltrans Districts 8 and 12 Various Preliminary Drawings and Cross Sections, Caltrans Districts 8 and 12 91 2015 SR-91 Implementation Plan 32 121 AGENDA ITEM 9E RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Technical Advisory TUMF Subcommittee Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: City of Lake Elsinore Request for Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Regional Arterial Program Funds for Interstate 15/Railroad Canyon Road and Franklin Street Interchange Project TECHNICAL ADVISORY TUMF SUBCOMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve programming $4.6 million in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial funds for design and right of way phases for the Interstate 15/ Railroad Canyon Road and Franklin Street interchange project; 2) Approve an additional $4 million in TUMF Regional Arterial funds for the construction phase contingent upon approval of U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) funding; 3) Approve Agreement No. 10-72-016-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 10-71-016-00, with the city of Lake Elsinore for $2 million in design and $2.6 million in right of way funds related to the project; 4) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Approve a budget adjustment to increase Fiscal Year 2015/16 TUMF Regional Arterial expenditures in the amount of $4.6 million. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Technical Advisory TUMF Subcommittee, consisting of public works directors, meets annually to review the progress of projects approved by the Commission in September 2004 and determine the programming needs for the upcoming year based on available programming capacity. Programming capacity at the end of FY 2015/16 is estimated at $16 million. On May 6, 2015, the subcommittee met to discuss the programming request from Lake Elsinore for the project. The I-15/Railroad Canyon Road and Franklin Street interchange project is currently in the environmental phase, which is scheduled to be complete in December 2015. The city would like to pursue design and right of way phases as soon as the environmental document is Agenda Item 9E 122 complete to continue the project's schedule and secure future construction grant funding. The city is requesting programming a total of $4.6 million of TUMF Regional Arterial funds in FY 2015/16 ($2.0 million for design and $2.6 million for right of way). The $4.6 million of final design and right of way expenditures are not included in the FY 2015/16 budget; therefore, staff recommends approval of a budget adjustment to increase TUMF expenditures in the amount of $4.6 million. The city is also pursuing a federal grant for construction funding for the project. The total cost for construction is estimated at $24 million. The city is applying for $20 million of federal TIGER funding, which requires a minimum local (non-federal) match of 20 percent. The city is requesting $4 million of TUMF Regional Arterial funds as local match funds for construction in the event it receives approval of the federal grant funds. Staff supports the city's request to program $4 million for the construction phase contingent upon U. S. DOT approval of federal TIGER Cycle 7 funding. The city is expected to be notified of the status of the grant in fall 2015. If the city does not receive approval of TIGER Cycle 7 funds, staff will continue to work with the city in seeking other funding opportunities for construction along with the remaining TUMF Regional Arterial projects. The remaining TUMF Regional Arterial projects are scheduled for construction in FY 2017/18. The projects listed below are the remaining projects to be programmed based on the September 2004 Commission approval of TUMF Regional Arterial projects. • I-15/Limonite Avenue Interchange — Construction • I-15/French Valley Parkway Interchange — Construction • I-15/Railroad Canyon Road and Franklin Street Interchange — Construction Since the majority of the TUMF Regional Arterial projects approved by the Commission in September 2004 have been implemented, staff will be meeting with the Technical Advisory TUMF Subcommittee to develop funding recommendations for the above remaining projects. During the upcoming year, staff will meet with the Western Riverside Council of Governments to discuss the development of the next program of projects for TUMF Regional Arterial funds. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No N/A Year: FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 Amount: $2.3 million $2.3 million Source of Funds: TUMF Regional Arterial Budget Adjustment: Yes N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 005104 81102 00000 0000 210 72 81101 005104 81401 00000 0000 210 72 81401 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \IX/4.."3 Date: 06/12/15 Agenda Item 9E 123 AGENDA ITEM 9F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Alex Menor, Capital Projects Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Utility Agreements for the State Route 74 Widening Project Between Dexter Avenue in the City of Lake Elsinore and 7tn Street in the City of Perris STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 15-31-113-00 between the Commission and Southern California Edison Company (SCE) to reimburse SCE's review cost of joint use agreements (JUAs), legal descriptions, and plat maps to establish SCE utility easements with prior rights relocated by the State Route 74 widening project between Dexter Avenue in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7t" Street in the city of Perris, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 15-31-115-00 between the Commission and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) to reimburse EVMWD's review cost of JUAs, legal descriptions, and plat maps to establish EVMWD's utility easements with prior rights relocated by the SR-74 widening project between Dexter Avenue in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7tn Street in the city of Perris, for a total amount not to exceed $45,000; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-74 widening project, between Dexter Avenue in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris, was completed and accepted by Caltrans in 2006. The improvements included acquisition of right of way, realignment of curves, and highway widening from two lanes to four lanes plus eight -foot shoulders and a continuous 14-foot paved median. The highway widening required the relocation of existing utilities with prior rights to new locations inside the state right of way. The utilities affected are The Gas Company, EVMWD, and SCE. At the September 2014 meeting, the Commission awarded a contract to SC Engineering to prepare the JUAs and necessary exhibits (legal descriptions and plat maps) and to secure Caltrans review and approval to re-establish The Gas Company, EVMWD, and SCE prior rights in the state right of way for a not to exceed amount of $147,808. Agenda Item 9F 124 DISCUSSION: California statutes allow utility companies to recover utility relocation costs. Both SCE and EVMWD requested that their costs for review of the JUAs be reimbursed by the Commission. SCE estimates its cost to review the JUA and exhibits (79 legal descriptions and plat map) at $65,000. EVMWD estimates its cost to review the JUA and exhibits (42 legal description and plat maps) at $45,000. Actual cost of review will be invoiced by SCE and EVMWD not to exceed the agreement amounts. Utility Company Estimated Number of Exhibits (Legal Descriptions and Plat Maps) per JUAs Dexter Avenue to Wasson Creek 1. SCE 17 2. EVMWD 27 Wasson Creek to 7th Street 3. EVMWD 15 4. SCE 62 5. The Gas Company 5 Staff recommends the Executive Director be authorized to approve and execute the utility agreements with SCE and EVMWD. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2015/16 Amount: $ 110,000 Source of Funds: 1989 Measure A Western County Highway Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 003001 81403 222-31 81403 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \I-XeiViitiv,iii Date: 06/23/15 Attachments: 1) Utility Agreement No. 15-31-113-00 2) Utility Agreement No. 15-31-115-00 3) Project Schedule Agenda Item 9F 125 ATTACHMENT 1 Agreement No. 15-31-113-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR SR-74 SEGMENTS 1 AND 2 This Utility Agreement for SR-74 Segments 1 and 2 ("Agreement") is effective as of day of ("Effective Date"), by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") and Southern California Edison Company ("SCE"). RCTC and SCE are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties". RECITALS A RCTC, in cooperation with the State Department of Transportation ("State"), realigned and widened State Route 74 ("Project") from Dexter Avenue to 0 5 kilometer east of Wasson Canyon Road, also referred to as SR-74 Segments 1 and 2; B SCE owns and maintains utility lines within the limits of RCTC's Project which were relocated to accommodate RCTC's Project; C RCTC and SCE entered into that certain Utility Agreement No. 02-31-073 dated September 3, 2002, pursuant to which SCE agreed to relocate its utility lines within the limits of RCTC's Project pursuant to the terms and conditions thereof; and D. RCTC desires to provide funding to SCE to enable SCE to perform an administrative review of the documents created by RCTC for the provision of replacement property rights to SCE related to the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: TERMS 1. Work Performed by SCE. In accordance with the terms of this Agreement, SCE shall review the documents prepared by RCTC for the purpose of providing replacement property rights to SCE related to the Project. 2. Reimbursement of SCE's Estimated Costs. RCTC agrees to pay to SCE an amount not to exceed Sixty -Five Thousand Dollars ($65,000.00) as reimbursement for the actual costs incurred by SCE in performance of its administrative review of the documents prepared by RCTC for the purpose of providing replacement property rights to SCE related to the Project ("Estimated Review Costs"). RCTC shall reimburse SCE for the Estimated Review Costs as follows: (a) RCTC shall reimburse SCE for the actual and necessary cost of the herein described work within 45 days after receipt of five (5) copies of SCE's itemized invoice, signed by a responsible official of SCE's organization and prepared on SCE's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual and necessary cost and expense. SCE shall maintain records of the actual 17336.00300\9818387.5 1 126 costs incurred and charged or allocated to the Project in accordance with recognized accounting principles. (b) SCE shall prepare and submit progress invoices for costs incurred not to exceed SCE's recorded costs as of the billing date less estimated credits applicable to completed work. Progress invoices may be submitted not more frequently than once per month. SCE may elect not to submit progress invoices, and to submit a final invoice only at completion of the work described herein. Payment of invoices not to exceed the Estimated Review Costs may be made under the terms of this Agreement. (c) The final invoice shall be in the form of an itemized statement of the total costs charged to the Project, less the credits provided for in this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by progress billings. However, RCTC shall not pay final invoices which exceed the Estimated Review Costs without documentation of the reason for the increase of said cost from SCE and approval of documentation by RCTC. (d) In any event if the final invoice exceeds 125% of the Estimated Review Costs, an amendment to this Agreement shall be executed by the parties prior to the payment of SCE's final invoice. Any and all increases in costs that are the direct result of deviations from the work described herein shall have the prior concurrence of RCTC. (e) Detailed records from which the billing is compiled shall be retained by SCE for a period of three years from the date of the final payment and shall be available for audit by RCTC and/or any State or Federal auditors, if applicable. 3. Notices. Notification under this Agreement except for written notices required or authorized herein, may be made by telephone or such other means as mutually agreed to among the Parties. Any written notice required or authorized under this Agreement shall be delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail postage prepaid as specified below: To SCE Southern California Edison 2885 Foothill Blvd Rialto, CA 92531 Attn: Jay Glasser To RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street 3rd Floor Riverside CA 92502 Attn: Executive Director Any Party may by notice to the other Party change the designation or address of the person so specified as the one to receive notice pursuant to this Agreement. 4. Amendment, Modification, or Supplement. No amendment, modification, or supplement to this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by the Parties. 17336.00300\9818387.5 2 127 5. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any lawsuit brought in connection with this Agreement shall be brought in the appropriate court in the County of Riverside, California. 6. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought in connection with this Agreement, the successful or prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and other related costs, in addition to any other relief to which the Party is entitled. 7. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and the Parties agree to execute all documents and proceed with due diligence to complete all covenants and conditions. 8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and which collectively shall constitute one instrument. 9. Invalidity, Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall constitute in full force and effect. 10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written statements or agreements between the Parties. 11. Signature Clause. The signatories hereto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. 12. No Appreciation and Depreciation Value. The Parties understand and agree that the Project will not result in (i) an increase or decrease of capacity of SCE's utility lines in the new location, (2) any betterment or improvement to SCE's utility lines, and (iii) SCE's ability to provide new or additional services to any parcel, property, or territory within SCE's jurisdiction. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 17336.00300\9818387.5 3 128 SIGNATURE PAGE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR SR-74 SEGMENTS 1 AND 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed as of the Effective Date. RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION EDISON COMPANY By: Anne Mayer, Executive Director By: Name: Title: Approved as to Form: Attest: By: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Its: Secretary 17336.00300\9818387.5 4 129 ATTACHMENT 2 Agreement No. 15-31-115-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR SR-74 SEGMENTS 1 AND 2 This Utility Agreement for SR-74 Segments 1 and 2 ("Agreement") is effective as of day of ("Effective Date"), by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") and Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ("EVMWD"). RCTC and EVMWD are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties". RECITALS A RCTC, in cooperation with the State Department of Transportation ("State"), realigned and widened State Route 74 ("Project") from 0 5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street, also referred to as SR-74 Segments 1 and 2; B EVMWD owns and maintains utility lines within the limits of RCTC's Project which were relocated to accommodate RCTC's Project; C RCTC and EVMWD entered into that certain Utility Agreement (Agreement No. 03-31-044), pursuant to which EVMWD agreed to relocate its utility lines within the limits of RCTC's Project pursuant to the terms and conditions thereof; and D. RCTC desires to provide funding to EVMWD to enable EVMWD to perform an administrative review of the documents created by RCTC for the provision of replacement property rights to EVMWD related to the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: TERMS 1. Work Performed by EVMWD. In accordance with the terms of this Agreement, EVMWD shall review the documents prepared by RCTC for the purpose of providing replacement property rights to EVMWD related to the Project. 2. Reimbursement of EVMWD's Estimated Costs. RCTC agrees to pay to EVMWD an amount not to exceed Forty -Five Thousand Dollars ($45,000.00) as reimbursement for the actual costs incurred by EVMWD in performance of its administrative review of the documents prepared by RCTC for the purpose of providing replacement property rights to EVMWD related to the Project ("Estimated Review Costs"). RCTC shall reimburse EVMWD for the Estimated Review Costs as follows: (a) RCTC shall reimburse EVMWD for the actual and necessary cost of the herein described work within 45 days after receipt of five (5) copies of EVMWD's itemized invoice, signed by a responsible official of EVMWD's organization and prepared on EVMWD's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual and necessary cost and expense. EVMWD shall 17336.00300\9818573.5 1 130 maintain records of the actual costs incurred and charged or allocated to the Project in accordance with recognized accounting principles. (b) EVMWD shall prepare and submit progress invoices for costs incurred not to exceed EVMWD's recorded costs as of the billing date less estimated credits applicable to completed work. Progress invoices may be submitted not more frequently than once per month. EVMWD may elect not to submit progress invoices, and to submit a final invoice only at completion of the work described herein. Payment of invoices not to exceed the Estimated Review Costs may be made under the terms of this Agreement. (c) The final invoice shall be in the form of an itemized statement of the total costs charged to the Project, less the credits provided for in this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by progress billings. However, RCTC shall not pay final invoices which exceed the Estimated Review Costs without documentation of the reason for the increase of said cost from EVMWD and approval of documentation by RCTC. (d) In any event if the final invoice exceeds 125% of the Estimated Review Costs, an amendment to this Agreement shall be executed by the parties prior to the payment of EVMWD's final invoice. Any and all increases in costs that are the direct result of deviations from the work described herein shall have the prior concurrence of RCTC. (e) Detailed records from which the billing is compiled shall be retained by EVMWD for a period of three years from the date of the final payment and shall be available for audit by RCTC and/or any State or Federal auditors, if applicable. 3. Notices. Notification under this Agreement except for written notices required or authorized herein, may be made by telephone or such other means as mutually agreed to among the Parties. Any written notice required or authorized under this Agreement shall be delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail postage prepaid as specified below: To EVMWD Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District 31315 Chaney Street Post Office Box 3000 Lake Elsinore, CA 92531-3000 Attn: Imad Baiyasi To RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street 3rd Floor Riverside CA 92502 Attn: Executive Director Any Party may by notice to the other Party change the designation or address of the person so specified as the one to receive notice pursuant to this Agreement. 4. Amendment, Modification, or Supplement. No amendment, modification, or supplement to this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by the Parties. 17336.00300\9818573.5 2 131 5. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any lawsuit brought in connection with this Agreement shall be brought in the appropriate court in the County of Riverside, California. 6. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought in connection with this Agreement, the successful or prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and other related costs, in addition to any other relief to which the Party is entitled. 7. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and the Parties agree to execute all documents and proceed with due diligence to complete all covenants and conditions. 8. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and which collectively shall constitute one instrument. 9. Invalidity, Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall constitute in full force and effect. 10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written statements or agreements between the Parties. 11. Signature Clause. The signatories hereto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. 12. No Appreciation and Depreciation Value. The Parties understand and agree that the Project will not result in (i) an increase or decrease of capacity of EVMWD's utility lines in the new location, (2) any betterment or improvement to EVMWD's utility lines, and (iii) EVMWD's ability to provide new or additional services to any parcel, property, or territory within EVMWD's jurisdiction. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 17336.00300\9818573.5 3 132 SIGNATURE PAGE TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR SR-74 SEGMENTS 1 AND 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed as of the Effective Date. RIVERSIDE COUNTY ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WATER DISTRICT By: Arne Mayer, Executive Director By: Name: Title: 17336.00300\9818573.5 4 133 ATTACHMENT 3 74_JUA_06.22.2015 Route 74, Segment 1 & 2 Joint Use Agreements (JUAs) 74_JUA_06.22.2015 2015 2016 ID Task Name % Complete Duration Start Finish J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A 1 Project Management/Meeting/Coordination 4% 239 days Thu 1/15/15 Tue 12/15/15 ► 4 1. JUA for Southern California Edison (Segment 1) 38% 312.8 days Thu 1/29/15 Mon 4/11/16 ► 5 Prepare Utility Agreement and take to RCTC Board for Approval 85% 71 days Wed 4/1/15 Wed 7/8/15 I J Thu 7/9/15 Wed 7/29/15 6 SCE Review/Concurrence 0% 15 days Thu 7/30/15 Wed 8/12/15 7 Finalize Utility Agreement 0% 10 days (Segment 1) Thu 1/29/15 Mon 10/12/15 8 Prepare Draft JUA for SCE 61% 110 days Review Mon 10/12/15 Mon 12/14/15 hi 9 1st Utility Company/Caltrans 0% 45 days H 10 Update JUA for SCE (Segment 1) 0% 20 days Mon 12/14/15 Mon 1/11/16 4 Review Mon 1/11/16 Mon 3/14/16 11 2nd/Final Review Utility Company/Caltrans 0% 45 days 41 Mon 3/14/16 Mon 3/28/16 12 Finalize JUA 0% 10 days 4 1) (RCTC) 0% 10 days Mon 3/28/16 Mon 4/11/16 13 Record JUA for SCE (Segment Water District (EVMWD) (Segment 1 & 2) Thu 1/29/15 Mon 4/11/16 14 2. JUA for Elsinore Valley Municipal 36% 312.2 days ► 15 Prepare Utility Agreement and take to RCTC Board for Approval 85% 71 days Wed 4/1/15 Wed 7/8/15 I 0% 15 days Thu 7/9/15 Wed 7/29/15 16 EVMWD Review/Concurrence 41 —I 0% 10 days Thu 7/30/15 Wed 8/12/15 17 Finalize Utility Agreement 41 I (Segment 1 & 2) 58% 101 days Thu 1/29/15 Mon 10/12/15 18 Prepare Draft JUA for EVMWD 19 1st Utility Company/Caltrans Review 0% 45 days Mon 10/12/15 Mon 12/14/15 N 1 & 2) 0% 20 days Mon 12/14/15 Mon 1/11/16 20 Update JUA for EVMWD (Segment Review Mon 1/11/16 Mon 3/14/16 21 2nd/Final Review Utility Company/Caltrans 0% 45 days 4 0% 10 days Mon 3/14/16 Mon 3/28/16 22 Finalize JUA 1) (RCTC) 0% 10 days Mon 3/28/16 Mon 4/11/16 �I 23 Record JUA for EVMWD (Segment I 3. JUA for Southern California Edison (Segment 2) 39% 308.6 days Thu 1/29/15 Tue 4/5/16 24 ► 25 Prepare Utility Agreement and take to RCTC Board for Approval 85% 71 days Wed 4/1/15 Wed 7/8/15 Thu 7/9/15 Wed 7/29/15 26 SCE Review/Concurrence 0% 15 days Thu 7/30/15 Wed 8/12/15 �I 27 Finalize Utility Agreement 0% 10 days I (Segment 2) Thu 1/29/15 Tue 10/6/15 28 Prepare Draft JUA for SCE 65% 110 days Review Tue 10/6/15 29 1st Utility Company/Caltrans 0% 45 days Tue 12/8/15 H 2) Tue 12/8/15 Tue 1/5/16 30 Update JUA for SCE (Segment 0% 20 days 4 Review Tue 1/5/16 Tue 3/8/16 31 2nd/Final Review Utility Company/Caltrans 0% 45 days 41 I —I Tue 3/8/16 Tue 3/22/16 32 Finalize JUA 0% 10 days 41 h Record JUA for SCE (Segment 2) (RCTC) Tue 3/22/16 Tue 4/5/16 33 0% 10 days 41 I 4. JUA for The Gas Company (Segment 2) Tue 1/19/99 Mon 11/2/15 34 51% 4380 days? 35 Prepare Draft JUA for The Gas Company (Segment 2) 100% 34 days Thu 1/29/15 Tue 3/17/15 r Review Wed 3/18/15 36 1st Utility Company/Caltrans 85% 79 days Mon 7/6/15 Company (Segment 2) Tue 7/7/15 Mon 8/3/15 37 Update JUA for The Gas 0% 20 days Review Tue 8/4/15 Mon 10/5/15 38 2nd/Final Review Utility Company/Caltrans 0% 45 days Tue 10/6/15 Mon 10/19/15 39 Finalize JUA 0% 10 days Company (Segment 2) (by RCTC) Tue 10/20/15 Mon 11/2/15 40 Record JUA for The Gas 0% 10 days 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 0% 1 day? Tue 1/19/99 Tue 1/19/99 Project: 74_Seg1_Seg2 Progress External Deadline b Task I I Summary Tasks I I Date: Mon 6/22/15 Split Milestone ♦ Project External Milestone • Summary Page 1 SC Engineering 134 AGENDA ITEM 9G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study Ad Hoc Committee Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study Purpose and Need Statement Revision and Draft Concept Alternatives Technical Memorandum COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR STUDY AD HOC COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file the revised Purpose and Need Statement for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study; and 2) Receive and file the draft Concept Alternatives Technical Memorandum. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Continuing progress on the project, staff has been working on revising the Purpose and Need Statement, which was presented to the Commission in February 2015, and completing the draft of the Concept Alternatives Technical Memorandum. DISCUSSION: The Purpose and Need Statement is considered to be a "living document", which allows for changes and refinements to be made as the project study progresses. In the development of the Concept Alternatives Technical Memorandum, it became clear that slight modifications to the Purpose and Need Statement would have to occur. These refinements are directly related to the drafting of the project alternatives. Staff will provide a presentation on both documents as well as a general update on the project status. There is no budgetary impact as this item is for informational purposes only. Attachments: 1) Revised Draft Purpose and Need Statement 2) Draft Concept Alternatives Technical Memorandum Agenda Item 9G 135 ATTACHMENT 1 COACHELLA VALLEY — SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT Draft Fcbruary 5June 16, 2015 CONTEXT AND FRAMEWORK The basic purpose of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Study is to identify transportation service improvements for interregional trips between the Coachella Valley and San Gorgonio Pass and the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area. (For the sake of simplicity, this document refers to these trips as traveling between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin.) The Purpose and Need Statement is the guiding document for the study. It identifies the specific transportation problems and needs to be addressed, as well as the purpose and objectives to be achieved by the service improvements. Alternative improvements must be designed to address the purpose and need, and the evaluation process will compare alternatives on the basis of how well they achieve the identified objectives. The Purpose and Need Statement is organized in two sections: the first identifies improvement needs, and the second identifies the purpose and key objectives for the service. The section on transportation needs begins with a summary of the problems and needs, followed by discussions of the corridor and its transportation system, system performance, and the interregional transportation problems that drive the need for this study. The section on purpose begins with a list of the transportation service objectives, followed by a list of key performance objectives relating to project benefits, impacts, and costs that will be used to compare alternatives. BACKGROUND Description of the Study Corridor The Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Corridor links the eastern deserts of Southern California with the urbanized areas comprising the Los Angeles Basin. The Los Angeles Basin, which includes the urbanized areas of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties, has a population over 16 million and employment of seven million. The Coachella Valley has a permanent population approaching 450,000, which increases substantially during winter months with part-time residents from colder climates. The Coachella Valley has an employment base of almost 170,000, and is a center of renowned tourist destinations — including resorts, casinos, festivals, golf and tennis tournaments, and natural attractions — that attract a total of 12.2 million annual visitors from Southern California and around the world. The San Gorgonio Pass area — comprised of the cities of Banning, Beaumont, and Calimesa, and the unincorporated community of Cabazon — has a population over 72,000 and employment over 15,000 including a major resort/casino and outlet mall. 1 136 Att _ Las Angeles yj3.• Ontario t r l '"IliUti,BERNARDINO COUNTY opulation �' s Anehaifl`3' �! long Beach itehht P . a [ _ 1011 San • Bamardino } 101_1: Springs m Dasars c 4f r 1:.- A • ELL tVAL El . 3,00E�su�a?r The Coachella Valley and Pass area are home to a substantial population of economically disadvantaged people, many of whom do not own an automobile and must depend on rail and bus services for transportation. Four of the nine incorporated cities in the Coachella Valley, containing over 40 percent of the Valley's population, have poverty rates exceeding 14 percent (which is the poverty rate for Riverside County, California, and the United States). Two of the nine incorporated cities have poverty rates that exceed 25 percent. In addition, two of the unincorporated communities of the Coachella Valley have poverty rates approaching 50 percent. In the Pass area, two cities and Cabazon, which collectively comprise 89 percent of the area's population, have poverty rates exceeding the county's average rate of 14 percent. The corridor includes a number of communities classified as SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA). These communities are specifically targeted for investment of proceeds from the state's cap -and -trade program, for the purpose of improving public health, quality of life and economic opportunity in California's most burdened communities at the same time they're reducing pollution that causes climate change. The map below highlights the disadvantaged communities in the eastern half of the corridor, which include much of the eastern Coachella Valley and part of the city of Beaumont. 2 137 The corridor is projected to grow substantially in the coming years. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) estimates the Los Angeles Basin will grow more than 20 percent by 2035, to a total population exceeding 20 million with employment approaching 9 million. The Coachella Valley is projected to be one of the fastest -growing areas in the state during this timeframe, with the permanent population projected to double to almost 900,000 and employment growing by 83 percent to over 300,000. The Pass area population is projected to more than double to 170,000 with employment more than doubling to 34,000. The Coachella Valley and Los Angeles Basin are separated by major mountain ranges, and virtually all travel between them flows through the San Gorgonio Pass, the only direct route between the two areas. On a typical weekday, 130,000 people travel through the Pass. Significantly, only about half (55 percent) of these trips have their eastern terminus in the Coachella Valley. The remaining trips have their eastern terminus in the high desert areas of Yucca Valley and Twentynine Palms (14 percent), or travel east to Blythe and Phoenix (27 percent), or south to the Imperial Valley (4 percent ). The trips encompass a variety of purposes, with work commute trips comprising the largest single trip purpose — the Southern California Association of Governments estimates, and cell phone trip data provided by AirSage confirms, approximately 13,000 commuters make the daily round trip through the San Gorgonio Pass. Leisure and social/recreational trips increase these travel flows on weekends, with 45 percent more trips being made through the Pass on a typical Friday than a typical midweek day. This number can grow even greater on weekends when major festivals and events are held. On the highest travel weekend of the year, which includes Easter and the Coachella Festival, 125 percent more trips travel through the Pass than on a typical midweek day. Transportation Facilities and Services in the Corridor RaiIcafx4 bus, and air service that links the Coachella Valley with the Los Angeles Basin currently consists of five six services, each of which is limited in terms of geographic reach or hours of service: 1. The Amtrak Sunset Limited, which travels between Los Angeles and New Orleans by way of Yuma, Tucson, and El Paso. The service operates three days per week, with corridor stops in Pomona, Ontario, and Palm Springs. The stops in Palm Springs occur in the middle of the night — at 2:02 a.m. en route to Los Angeles and at 12:36 a.m. en route to New Orleans — and the Palm Springs Amtrak station is located in a remote area north of the city that has no connecting transit service. 2. Amtrak Thruway intercity bus coaches, which carry Amtrak passengers from the Coachella Valley to train connections in Fullerton and Bakersfield, with two round trips per day to each. The Thruway service has Coachella Valley stops in Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, and Palm Springs, and at Cabazon in the San Gorgonio Pass. A Thruway 3 138 ticket can only be purchased as part of a train journey, so the only Coachella Valley -to - Los Angeles Basin trips it can serve are those traveling to cities along the Pacific Surfliner route north or south of Fullerton. 3. SunLine's Commuter Link 220 provides commuter bus service between the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County, covering a 73-mile route. This service operates on a schedule designed to serve commuters with their home in the Coachella Valley — two trips are operated weekday mornings westbound to Riverside, with two trips returning eastbound to the Coachella Valley weekday afternoon/evenings. The service has Coachella Valley stops in Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage, and Pass area stops in Cabazon, Banning, and Beaumont. In Riverside, Commuter Link 220 stops at the Metrolink station, where riders can catch trains to travel to other parts of the Los Angeles Basin. 4. Beaumont Commuter Link 120 provides express bus service between Beaumont and the San Bernardino Metrolink station, with stops in Calimesa and at the Loma Linda Veterans Administration (VA) Hospital. The service makes seven round trips throughout the day each weekday (no weekend service), with the first bus leaving Beaumont at 5:35 a.m. and the last bus arriving back in Beaumont at 7:25 p.m. In San Bernardino, riders can catch Metrolink trains to travel to other parts of the Los Angeles Basin. This service originates in the western part of the Pass area, so it does not directly serve Banning, Cabazon, or the Coachella Valley. 5. Greyhound, the private intercity bus operator, operates direct service between Los Angeles and Indio, with seven weekday trips from Los Angeles to Indio and six from Indio to Los Angeles. About half of these trips extend to Phoenix. Intermediate stops are made on some of these trips in El Monte, Claremont, Riverside, San Bernardino, Banning, and the Palm Springs Amtrak station. From these stations, Greyhound provides connecting service to six other locations throughout the Los Angeles Basin — Perris, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Long Beach, North Hollywood, and San Fernando. 6. United Airlines operates nonstop flights between Palm Springs Airport (PSP) and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). United is currently the only carrier offering nonstop flights in this market. The average number of daily flights varies seasonally — in 2014 it ranged from 9 flights per day (total both directions) in August to 13.5 flights per day in March. The advance one—way fare in over $500 (Spring 2015). 4 139 F �- ta rj1 illtArlt7r" - Los Angeles Long Beach „Anaheim \Santa Ana _ IrY1pe N43ERNARDII40 COUNTY .211E;CAUE :U11ifl1 LEGEND �- Sunset Limited -SunlineCommuter Link 220 Pacific Surfliner Thruway Connection ¢ - Existing Stations d r• Desert A single highway, 1-10, traverses the San Gorgonio Pass to connect the Coachella Valley with the Los Angeles Basin. East of the Pass, the Coachella Valley is served by a network of arterial roads, though only two roads, 1-10 and SR-111, carry traffic to the eastern end of the Pass. West of the Pass, SR-60 splits off from 1-10 in the city of Beaumont, with 1-10 traveling into the Basin through Redlands and San Bernardino, and SR-60 entering the Basin through Moreno Valley and Riverside. The Los Angeles Basin is served by an extensive network of highway and arterial roads; the three main east -west highways that cross the region and carry traffic to the western end of the Pass include 1-10, SR-60, and SR-91. 141,3 SJJilff Fullerton Pomona Montrlair Ontario Platlentla Yarba \ Llntla !Math* Nib i 2. J1Js rliJf7 w �——r m Arrowhead SNIYq! San aP10i i �:lil IlailA;W ilU 5JUilf Redlands mar Valley, bandlerrase (a Nmesa aiver,ide Moreno Walley Yuaraina [henry Valley Neaommt Banning [ahazen Desert Not Springs Palm Springs Cathedral Ctg Honcho Mirage Palm De Thousand Palms 1:11.1! 1 Indio Performance of the Transportation System The highway routes serving the corridor provide an overall good level of service, though several areas are subject to regular recurring congestion that can substantially increase travel times. Congestion affects westbound travel in the morning peak and eastbound travel in the afternoon peak. Typical weekday congestion levels are more severe than Saturdays or Sundays; the heaviest congestion occurs on Friday afternoon in the eastbound direction, as evidenced by the typical driving times for the 128-mile trip between downtown Los Angeles and Indio: 5 140 DRIVING TIME BETWEEN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES AND INDIO (in minutes) Eastbound Westbound Morning Peak Afternoon Peak Morning Peak Afternoon Peak Midweek day 114 140 141 114 Friday 112 165 130 119 Areas of recurring congestion are in the western half of the corridor (see map below); the eastern half of the corridor is relatively congestion -free unless an incident closes freeway lanes. non Fullerton walh Sul Monellalr Rialto Arrowhead pan ^Ing San p gmnaraiM U'133,1,-1:L'iJLU ; 4Jll f! Ponlana Canon Momngo �r[�}]\ Redlands vaue� Pomona � �/� Yuaraipa r✓�� \ Ontario {'j'i_ 7hrand lerrare � canmeaa I� ehamyV:::5:1i1 �Ji1ri11c eeaumom Dannin Plane.' Yorha� I •Q 9 Cabazon Linda \ Noma I Rlrerside \VYY Malley Corona Palley Anaheim o m Hills Anaheim tg7� rd iT i}1e1;1019_ C99i177 Palm Springs Y:li:a Desert Nat Springs thousand Palms Cathedral 61Y Rancho Mirage Palm he rc SU:1E11E11;1 1:1LI_f Indio dian tells Coachella ranuinta norm l CC a Since 1-10 is the only road through the San Gorgonio Pass, corridor travel is susceptible to significant disruption if an incident closes the roadway for any period of time. In the past ten years, four separate incidents in the Pass have disrupted travel for several hours: • June 2005: A high-speed pursuit of a homicide suspect led to gunfire and a 12-hour shutdown of the freeway near Cabazon. Stranded drivers slept in their cars while others needed medical attention due to the heat. • December 2010: A fatal collision involving a big rig and a spill of fertilizer and diesel oil near Whitewater closed 1-10 for six hours. • February 2012: A broken computer system led to a delay in concrete slabs needed for lanes that were ground up during repaving. Three of the four westbound lanes were closed for almost a full day, leading to a 25-mile backup in Banning and traffic spilling into Palm Springs. • September 2014: A fiery big rig crash shut down westbound 1-10 east of Cabazon. Three of the four westbound lanes were closed all morning. Rail and transit travel can take much more time than normal highway travel because the trip is indirect, involves intermediate stops, and usually requires mode transfers. The following table illustrates each service's current travel time between Los Angeles and Indio (or the service's easternmost point), with the SunLine and Beaumont bus trips extended to Downtown Los Angeles using Metrolink service, and the current daily ridership. 6 141 Western Terminus Eastern Terminus Travel time (in minutes) Existing daily ridership Sunset Limited Los Angeles Palm Springs 156 6 (riders/train) Amtrak Thruway Los Angeles Indio 240 48 SunLine CL 220 + Metrolink Los Angeles Palm Desert 234 70 Beaumont CL 120 + Metrolink Los Angeles Beaumont 145 n/a. Greyhound Los Angeles Indio 240 n/a United Airlines Los Angeles Palm Springs 56 251 (LAX) (PSP) Specific Transportation Problems in the Corridor 1. Lack of Transportation Options The primary transportation problem driving the need for this study is the lack of transportation alternatives to the private vehicle for travel between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin. Existing services are limited, and not convenient for most travelers because of service timing, frequency, or poor connections: • The Amtrak Sunset Limited operates only three times per week, it stops in Palms Springs after midnight at a station location 2.5 miles from the edge of the developed part of the city, and there is no connecting service to provide access to the station; • The Amtrak Thruway service carries only travelers with a ticket to ride on an Amtrak train, and provides only two round trips each day to the Amtrak station in Fullerton; • The schedule of SunLine Commuter Link 220 only serves the needs of commuters, with two weekday trips into Riverside in the morning and two trips back to the Coachella Valley at the end of the normal work day; • The Beaumont Commuter Link 120 travels only as far east as Beaumont, so it does not serve the eastern part of the Pass area or the Coachella Valley, and it provides no weekend service; and • Greyhound does not conveniently serve most corridor travelers from the Coachella Valley, as its Indio station is located in the eastern end of the corridor and its Palm Springs stop is at the Amtrak station which in a remote location with no transit access. Also, the Los Angeles station is located about two miles away from Los Angeles Union Station, so it is not conveniently located in terms of transit access to locations in the western end of the corridor..-; and • Flights between Palm Springs and Los Angeles are not affordable for most travelers as they are priced and scheduled as a through service to distant cities in the U.S. making the fare to fly between Palm Springs and Los Angeles very expensive and discouraging air travel as an option for most corridor travelers. 7 142 For people who do not own a vehicle, an alternative transportation service could provide the opportunity to make trips that they are unable to make currently because of the limited travel options. This includes economically disadvantaged people who cannot afford to own a car and people who choose not to own a car, some of whom reside in livable communities with good access to transit service. 2, Need for Transportation Alternative During 1 10 Emergency Closures There is a need for alternative transportation through the San Gorgonio Pass during incidents and emergencies that close 1 10. 1 10 carries all travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin except the few who drive the mountain roads or ride the Sunsct Limitcd. Through the Pass, there is no parallel road alternative. Therefore, when 1 10 is shut down through the Pass during an emergency or major incident, travel between the two regions comes to a halt. 3,2. Need for Alternative Mode with Reliable Travel Time Performance • Corridor transportation performance is being increasingly degraded by congestion and an alternative transportation service could provide a viable travel option. Congested highway conditions that substantially increase the peak period travel time on the corridor's three key highways — 1-10, SR-60 and SR-91. The congested highway segments lie mostly in the western half of the corridor, so the corridor travelers affected by congestion are primarily those traveling from Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Future growth in the corridor and the accompanying increases in travel demand will exacerbate the existing congestion problems and further increase p ak travel times. • Emergency closures of 1-10 through San Gorgonio Pass can severely disrupt or totally shut down corridor travel for extended periods of time. 1-10 carries all travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin except the few who drive the mountain roads or ride the Sunset Limited. Through the Pass, there is no parallel road alternative, so there is no reasonable route or alternative transportation service available that travelers could choose for their trip to avoid the possibility of long delays from a closure on 1-10 through the Pass during an emergency or major incident. An alternative transportation service that does not use the congested Los Angeles Basin freeway system or 1-10 through the San Gorgonio Pass could provide a reliable travel option. 8 143 PURPOSE AND NEED Need for Transportation Improvements 1. For interregional travel between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, there are very limited alternatives to driving a private vehicle. People who do not own a vehicle have very limited ability to travel between the regions, and people who might prefer not to drive do not have a viable alternative. _. 1-Fit-e-Fstat-e—l0—t11-rig-h t#e—S-241—Gorgonio Pass carries virtually all travelers moving between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin in addition to interstate traffic including trucks. When the highway is shut down for an emergency or incident management, there is no r asonable alternative route or service to carry travelers between the two regions. 3,2. Congested highway conditions in the Los Angeles Basin cause delays and unreliability for longer -distance corridor driving trips. Emergency closures of 1-10 through the San Gorgonio Pass further undermine the reliability of the corridor's transportation system. , and fFuture growth will result in more congestion, an -GI —even longer travel times..-, and more unreliability. Thus driving is an increasingly unattractive and inconvenient mode of travel through the corridor. 4.3. In short, the need is for transportation service linking the Coachella Valley and San Gorgonio Pass with the Los Angeles Basin that can provide a viable interregional travel alternative for a variety of travel purposes. Purpose and Objectives for Transportation Improvements The transportation service improvements should achieve the following objectives: 1. Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with an. alternative to driving a public transportation service that offers more convenient and competitive travel trip times, better station access, and more frequency than currently available public transportation services; 2. Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with an alternative to driving that offers reliable travel schedules; 2,3. Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a transportation service that is affordable; 3,4. Serves a range of trip purposes traveling between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, particularly including commute trips to work and business, social, medical, leisure, and recreational trips; Improves regional travel opportunities between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for transit dependent people; 5,6. Is planned to serve the expected population growth in the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin; 9 144 Offers the potential for Does not preclude, by choice of alignment or technology, a possible future corridor expansion to serve the travel corridor between the Coachella Valley and Phoenix.; a�el 7, Improves the ability of the transportation system to serve travel needs through theSan Gorgonio Pass in the event of an incident or emergency that closes 110. The alternatives identified to meet the above service objectives will be evaluated and compared in terms of their ability to achieve the following performance objectives: The service should be cost effective to implement and to operate. 9. There should be plausible and financially sustainable potential sources of funding for up front capital costs and ongoing operations/maintenance costs. 10. The selected alternative should maximize ridership potential to the extent practical and consistent with achieving cost effectiveness. 11. The selected alternative should have station locations that support the objectives of manner consistent with Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) corridor planning guidelines. 12. The selected alternative should minimize up front capital investment while maximizing ridership potential. 13. The selected alternative should promote sustainable interregional transportation options, providing improved mobility while reducing energy consumption and supporting livable communities. 14. The selected alternative should minimize related environmental adverse effects (e.g., air quality/greenhouse gas emissions, natural resources) to the extent practical. 15. The selected service alternative and recommended phasing strategy should be able to achieve n ar term improvement in transportation mobility for trips through the Pass while I ading to a long term strategy that optimizes achievement of all the objectives. 10 145 ATTACHMENT 2 Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Technical Memorandum Date: June 16, 2015 Project: Coachella Valley — San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service To: RCTC From JD Douglas, HDR Copies to: Subject: Concept Alternatives Table of Contents Process of Identifying Alternatives 2 Purpose & Need Objectives 2 The No -Build Alternative 3 Possible Improvement Options 6 Intercity Rail 6 Intercity Bus 10 Alternatives to Be Studied 13 List of Figures Figure 1: No -Build Alternative: Transit and Rail Services 4 Figure 2: No -Build Alternative: Intercity Bus Service 4 Figure 3: Corridor Rail Lines 7 Figure 4: Potential Rail Service Options between Indio and the Inland Empire 8 Figure 5: Coachella Valley — San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Route Alternatives 14 List of Tables Table 1: Purpose & Need Objectives and Service Characteristics 3 Table 2: Purpose & Need Objectives Consistency for No -Build Alternative 4 Table 3: Purpose & Need Objectives Consistency for Intercity Rail 8 Table 4: Purpose & Need Objectives Consistency for Intercity Bus 10 Table 5: Coachella Valley — San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Route Alternatives 14 146 FEZ o Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service This memorandum defines the transportation service and route alternatives to be evaluated for the Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass (CV-SGP) Rail Corridor Service. The alternatives represent the range of potential improvements that address the objectives identified in the project's Purpose & Need statement. Process of Identifying Alternatives The Project Purpose & Need Statement identifies the corridor's transportation needs and the objectives to be achieved by a new corridor transportation service. The project's technical study team initially identified a number of service and route options, and the initial list of options was expanded using input received during a series of outreach meetings including one-on-one meetings with 16 elected officials from the Coachella Valley and Pass Area, the project's Technical Advisory Committee, and public outreach meetings held in Banning and Palm Desert with the Palm Desert meeting broadcast as a webinar. The various options identified through this process are reviewed below in light of the Purpose & Need objectives, to determine their ability to meet the project Purpose & Need. The options that have realistic potential to achieve the Purpose & Need will be carried forward into an alternatives screening process. This memorandum documents the alternatives identification process and the alternatives identified for evaluation. Purpose & Need Objectives The project Purpose & Need Statement identifies two needs for corridor transportation improvements, which are summarized as follows: 1. For interregional travel between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin there are very limited options to driving a private vehicle, so people who cannot afford to own and operate a private vehicle, or choose not to, have very limited ability to travel between the regions, and people who might prefer not to drive do not have a viable alternative. 2. Congested highway conditions in the Los Angeles Basin cause delays and unreliability for longer -distance corridor driving trips. Closures of Interstate 10 through San Gorgonio Pass by incidents further undermine the reliability of the corridor's transportation system. Future growth will result in more congestion and even longer travel times, and more unreliability. Thus driving is an increasingly unattractive and inconvenient mode of travel through the corridor. The Purpose & Need Statement also identifies seven service objectives, which describe the purposes to be achieved by corridor transportation improvements. The P&N service objectives are presented in Table 1 below, along with brief descriptions of the basic service characteristics that will be needed to achieve the objectives. 147 2 FEZ Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Table 1: Purpose & Need Objectives and Service Characteristics P&N Objective Service Characteristics 1 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a public transportation service that offers more convenient and competitive trip times, better station access, and more frequency, than currently -available public transportation services Alternative mode to driving for regional trips; more convenient and shorter trip times than existing transit/rail 2 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with an alternative to driving that offers reliable travel schedules Reliable scheduling and ability to operate through San Gorgonio Pass during 1-10 closure 3 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a transportation service that is affordable. Affordable travel mode 4 Serves a range of trip purposes traveling between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, particularly including business, social, medical, leisure, and recreational trips Schedule and amenities to accommodate multiple trip purposes including business, leisure and recreational travel 5 Improves regional travel opportunities between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for transit dependent people Intercity service, affordable fares, and accessible to transit -dependent populations 6 Is planned to serve the expected population growth in the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin Capable of capacity expansion 7 Does not preclude, by choice of alignment or technology, a possible future corridor expansion between the Coachella Valley and Phoenix Capable of expansion to serve Phoenix -LA corridor The No -Build Alternative The No -Build Alternative includes existing and programmed services that currently serve the corridor (connecting the Coachella Valley with the Los Angeles Basin). Currently five intercity rail and bus services provide such regional linkages: • The Amtrak Sunset Limited provides train service three times per week between Palm Springs and Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) as part of its route between Los Angeles and New Orleans; • The Amtrak Thruway service provides two bus trips each way daily between Indio and Fullerton for passengers riding on the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner; • The SunLine Commuter Link 220 provides two bus trips each way between Palm Desert and the Riverside Metrolink station on weekdays during commute hours; • The Beaumont Commuter Link 120 provides seven bus trips each way between Beaumont and the San Bernardino Metrolink station on weekdays; and • Greyhound Lines provides intercity bus service that connects various locations throughout the Los Angeles Basin with Banning, Palm Springs, and Indio. Figure 1 illustrates the rail and transit services connecting the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles Basin (Amtrak, SunLine, and Beaumont), and Figure 2 illustrates the cities connected by Greyhound service. 148 3 imlarMmrmpmmlee_ 'y- Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Figure 1: No -Build Alternative: Transit and Rail Services :1;1 S�FJf11'r��- ele na San Fontana (altm �F• �. O .Marisa V;L:1;]:4W' t ILO�d •gar rdino And Villrr. Valley • Beaumont 1il �J;irr • a, Palm Springs day enM naPaima P5P� t Caahedralr"- �! -LW i �.-e nlmoesen MD MD MI'," LEGEND — • Amtrak Sunset Limited ..-Sunline Commuter Link 220 • Beaumont Commuter Link 120 - Amtrak Pacific Surfliner Amtrak Thruway Connection Ol -Existing Stations emert Nat Sp rl gs 7 Figure 2: No -Build Alternative: Intercity Bus Service -V,To Bakersfield San Fernando To Oxnard North Hollywood LIJUJ-'f RVictorville El Monte Claremont Los Angeles ! - Fontana Long Beach Pomona 4__ ,. FONT 'Mein Linda r Anaheim` San Bernardino �WMarano Beann,Mn- Valley Santa Ana 011:149.16 v. J;l1 / To Oceanside ::1;1 i=151:1JiD]ilD Ea1-11017 Sx,n ciD;11.5p;119 oeseel Hot springs Banning - ImSprin gs PSP %O LGreyhoundoute Connections) \ al 7,13;i1;Ji f U IJ, I .r e rr �lfo Tememla Palm lie ser sand Palms 7:11lw: Indio motto - --- WMIb mamma Coachella Thermal To Phoenix, A2 Alecto No new corridor services are programmed and funded for implementation at this time, so the No -Build Alternative consists of the five existing services described above. As indicated in Table 2, the No -Build Alternative would not meet most of the Purpose & Need objectives. Table 2: Purpose & Need Objectives Consistency for No -Build Alternative P&N Objective Consistency for No -Build Alternative 1 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a public transportation service that offers more convenient and competitive trip times, better station access, and more frequency, than currently - available public transportation Objective Not Achieved. The No -Build Alternative does not include any programmed improvements to existing services, so this alternative does not improve upon the travel times of existing services. 149 4 FEZ �423 Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service services P&N Objective Consistency for No -Build Alternative 2 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with an alternative to driving that offers reliable travel schedules Objective Not Achieved. Existing services are limited and not convenient and reliable for most travelers because of service timing, frequency, or poor connections as noted below. • The Amtrak Sunset Limited operations only three times per week, it stops in Palm Springs after midnight at a station location 2.5 miles from the edge of the developed part of the city, it often runs well behind schedule because of delays during its long cross-country journey, and there is no connecting service to provide access to the station. • Of existing services only the Sunset Limited would be able to operate through San Gorgonio Pass in the event of Interstate 10 being shut down. • The Amtrak Thruway service carries only travelers with a ticket to ride on an Amtrak train, provides only two round trips each day to the Amtrak station in Fullerton, and operates in a highly congested freeway corridor. • The schedule of SunLine Commuter Link 220 only serves the schedule of commuters, with two weekday trips into Riverside in the morning and two trips back to the Coachella Valley at the end of the normal work day. • The Beaumont Commuter Link 120 travels only as far east as Beaumont so it does not serve the eastern part of the pass area or the Coachella Valley and does not provide weekend service. • Greyhound does not conveniently serve most of the corridor travelers from the Coachella Valley — the Indio station is located in the eastern end of the corridor and the Palm Springs stop is at the Amtrak station which is in a remote location with no transit access. 3 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a transportation service that is affordable. Objective Achieved. Existing services are affordable. 4 Serves a range of trip purposes traveling between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, particularly including business, social, medical, leisure, and recreational trips Objective Not Achieved. Existing services are limited and not convenient for most travelers because of service timing, frequency, or poor connections. (See Objective 2 explanation above.) In addition, the Commuter Link bus services do not provide the kinds of traveler amenities desired by leisure and recreational travelers. The intercity (Greyhound) buses do have traveler amenities. 5 Improves regional travel opportunities between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for transit dependent people Objective Not Achieved. The No -Build Alternative does not include any programmed improvements to existing services, so this alternative does not enhance the regional travel connections. 6 Is planned to serve the expected population growth in the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin Objective Not Achieved. The No -Build Alternative does not include any programmed improvements to existing services, so this alternative does not do anything to enhance service for the growing regional population. 7 Does not preclude, by choice of alignment or technology, a possible future corridor expansion between the Coachella Valley and Phoenix Objective Achieved. Existing Greyhound service provides connections from the Coachella Valley to Phoenix and could be expanded. 150 5 FEZ �4Z) Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Possible Improvement Options The improvement alternatives identified for study (sometimes called "build" alternatives) represent the range of potential improvements that meet the objectives identified in the Purpose & Need Statement. For this corridor study, potential improvement types were identified using information in the Market Analysis (under separate cover) as well as input obtained from public outreach meetings and meetings with corridor elected officials. The Purpose & Need objectives to address the three basic corridor needs narrow the range of potential travel modes. The type of corridor service must by nature be an alternative to driving. It must connect the Coachella Valley with the Los Angeles Basin, so it must be accessible from throughout both regions. It must be affordable, which rules out air travel and high -cost individual and small -group travel modes such as taxis or shuttles. The only two travel modes that meet these requirements and have the potential to reduce current rail/transit travel times are intercity rail and intercity bus. Intercity Rail To build a new rail line for an intercity service through this corridor would be cost -prohibitive and would involve adverseenvironmental impacts/effects, so rail alternatives that involve a new route will not be considered further. There are existing rail lines that connect the Coachella Valley with the Los Angeles Basin, and these could be used to facilitate a new intercity rail service. The existing rail lines in the corridor are shown in Figure 3. A single existing line — the Union Pacific (UP) Yuma Subdivision — runs through the San Gorgonio Pass to connect the Coachella Valley with the Los Angeles Basin. In the City of Colton the Yuma Sub intersects other lines that provide four alternative routes linking Colton to Los Angeles: (1) the San Bernardino Subdivision (owned by BNSF Railway) which passes through Riverside and Fullerton; (2) the Los Angeles Subdivision (owned by UP) which passes through Riverside and Pomona; (3) the Alhambra Subdivision (owned by UP) which runs due west from Colton and passes through Pomona; and (4) the San Gabriel Subdivision (owned by the San Bernardino Associated Governments and the LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) which lies north of Colton and carries the Metrolink San Bernardino Line commuter rail service between San Bernardino and Los Angeles. Each of these four routes can be combined with the Yuma Sub to provide route alternatives for a service from Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) on the west to Indio on the east. LAUS is the logical western terminus for service because it is the primary hub of rail and transit connections for the rest of Southern California. Indio is the logical eastern terminus for service because it is near the eastern end of the Coachella Valley (so service could capture travelers throughout the Valley) and is accessible to the highly transit -dependent communities further south and east. 151 6 F�2 Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Figure 3: Corridor Rail Lines ~r, © e99111•1 ]:S1i:3il:111.r91;1JGJJ;I'f1 L Lake Arrowhead emniig Sap SP,ings Mir, Ca hem cmryvanr,„l;ltlJ;fS�JilJp a eaumom Banning ahavon roma Mora Moreno Palm so P5P Cathedral Q�gL. City Rancho 9 ;117 y �9° LJJiI'f7 Palm Dane Delon NM Springs LEGEND -SCARA San Gabriel Sub - Union Pacific AR Alhambra Soh - BNSF Railway San Bernardino Sub - Union Pacific AR Yuma Sub - Union Pacific AA Los Angeles Sub - Downtown San Bernardino Passenger Rail Project - Redlands Passenger Rail Project Thousand Palms SJA:;J71 L viis�= i+ d ® :nio IWIs IMBa \��mti La qulnm Themui For route option #4 above it might be possible to connect the San Gabriel Sub to the Yuma Sub using a new passenger rail route being developed to connect the existing San Bernardino Metrolink station and the City of Redlands along the Redlands Branch line (see Figure 3). This alignment would require a gap closure piece of approximately 1-1/2 miles in the Loma Linda/Redlands area. Also, in addition to the challenges and impacts of developing a new rail alignment for connecting the two lines, the planned improvements and associated operations along the Redlands Branch line may be incompatible with the CV-SGP service. The Redlands Passenger Rail Project (RPRP) service proposes to use DMU vehicles which may not be compliant with Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) passenger equipment requirements. For intercity trains to operate in the same corridor as non -compliant DMU vehicles, either a second track would need to be constructed along the Redlands Branch line or all three services (the RPRP operation, freight service, and intercity service) would need to be time -separated through this area, jeopardizing the reliability of all three types of service. The combination of these factors makes the RPRP route connection a very implausible option for carrying the CV-SGP service, therefore it will not be considered further as an alternative. Another possible way to provide rail service between Indio and Los Angeles would be to operate a new intercity rail service between Indio and the Inland Empire (Riverside or San Bernardino), where passengers could transfer to existing Metrolink commuter rail lines to travel to Los Angeles and other parts of the Los Angeles Basin (see Figure 4). However, as shown in Table 3, such a service option would not achieve some of the key Purpose & Need objectives identified for the CV-SGP corridor service. 152 FEZ �CB) Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Figure 4: Potential Rail Service Options between Indio and the Inland Empire }a);rrr S:S J 3s;ti1:l;l�lil9 "_ J IJi1 rit San Bernardino (Warm Cuilm :..... r_19;frAil r �Beaumunt Pannmr EUJJ7'1 Desert Not Springs Cathedral Potential Rail Connections LEGEND - Indio- Riverside - Indio - San Bernardino LEGEND •_•__ n -San Bernardino Line - Riverside line - 91 Line - IE - OC Line '> - Orange County Line/ Amtrak Surfliner Thousand Palms Palm Pewit indlan` MI-LE-1 India _ Table 3 shows the ability of the intercity rail service options to meet the Purpose & Need objectives. Table 3: Purpose & Need Objectives Consistency for Intercity Rail P&N Objective Consistency for Indio -Los Angeles Intercity Rail Service Consistency for Indio -Inland Empire Intercity Rail Service 1 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a public transportation service that offers more convenient and competitive trip times, better station access, and more frequency, than currently -available public transportation services Objective Achieved. An intercity train service between Indio and Los Angeles could make the trip in as little as 3:09, with the longest route option taking 3:27. This is a substantial trip time reduction compared to the existing trip which takes four hours (4:00) using Amtrak Thruway and Pacific Surfliner. Objective Not Achieved. Because of the need to transfer in Riverside or San Bernardino, the possible reduction in rail/transit travel time is decidedly less than a service that provides passengers with Done -seat ride between Indio and Los Angeles. The existing trip takes four hours (4:00) using Amtrak Thruway and Pacific Surfliner. A one -seat intercity train service could make the trip in as little as 3:09, with the longest route option taking 3:27. With a transfer to Metrolink in Riverside or San Bernardino, the shortest travel time that could be achieved is 3:27 and with the variations in Metrolink trip times the overall trip could take up to 3:48, which is a very modest reduction from the existing travel time. 153 8 FEZ �Cla Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service P&N Objective Consistency for Indio -Los Angeles Intercity Rail Service Consistency for Indio -Inland Empire Intercity Rail Service 2 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with an alternative to driving that offers reliable travel schedules Objective Achieved. An intercity train service between Indio and Los Angeles would have reliable schedules because it would operate in an exclusive rail right-of-way and would not involve transfer to another, less reliable, service. An intercity train service between Indio and Los Angeles would be able to operate through San Gorgonio Pass in the event of Interstate 10 being shut down. Objective Not Achieved. Because of the variability in Metrolink's travel times due to scheduling issues, reliability would be decidedly less for a service that requires passengers to rely on Metrolink for a significant portion of their travel through the corridor. Scheduled Metrolink travel times between Riverside and Los Angeles vary by as much as 15 minutes (from 1:23 to 1:38), and scheduled times between San Bernardino and Los Angevary by as much as (fromles 1 28 to 2 05) and by as3much ases 60 minutes when the express train's travel time of 1:05 is considered. An intercity train service between Indio and the Inland Empire would be able to operate through San Gorgonio Pass in the event of Interstate 10 being shut down. 3 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a transportation service that is affordable. Objective Achieved. Intercity rail service would be an affordable travel option. Objective Achieved. Intercity rail service would be an affordable travel option. 4 Serves a range of trip purposes traveling between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, particularly including business, social, medical, leisure, and recreational trips Objective Achieved. Intercity trains provide travelers with comfortable and spacious seating, baggage service, wifi connection, cafe service, and other amenities suited to leisure/recreation and business travelers that are not available on Metrolink. Objective Not Achieved. Metrolink schedules and traveler amenities are geared to commuters traveling to work, and do not accommodate as well the needs and desires of the leisure and recreational travelers that constitute a very significant component segment of this corridor's travelers. 5 Improves regional travel opportunities between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for transit dependent people Objective Achieved. A new intercity rail service between Indio and Los Angeles would provide direct service to Los Angeles and connections throughout the Los Angeles Basin. Objective Achieved. A new intercity rail service between Indio and the Inland Empire (Riverside or San Bernardino) would provide travelers with connections to much of the Los Angeles Basin by transfer to Metrolink commuter rail service. 6 Is planned to serve the expected population growth in the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin Objective Achieved. Intercity rail service could be expanded to accommodate ridership growth. Objective Achieved. Intercity rail service could be expanded to accommodate ridership growth. 7 Does not preclude, by choice of alignment or technology, a possible future corridor expansion between the Coachella Valley and Phoenix Objective Achieved. The UP Yuma Sub offers a potential opportunity for service expansion from Indio to the Phoenix area. Objective Achieved. The UP Yuma Sub offers a potential opportunity for service expansion from Indio to the Phoenix area. 154 9 FEZ o Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service From these comparisons it can be concluded that an intercity rail service from Indio to Los Angeles would meet the Purpose & Need objectives, whereas a short intercity rail service between Indio and the Inland Empire and relies on Metrolink service to collect and distribute travelers throughout the Los Angeles Basin would not meet the Purpose & Need objectives, so the short service options should not be considered as standalone alternatives for analysis. The short service options should, however, be considered as possible strategies for phased implementation of corridor service during the next phase of the project development process, the Service Development Plan (SDP). Intercity Bus To meet the basic service objective of connecting the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles Basin, intercity bus service could be operated either (1) as a one -seat ride between Indio and LAUS with intermediate stops, or (2) with service between Indio and a rail station in Riverside, San Bernardino, or Fullerton, where riders could connect with Amtrak or Metrolink train services. To meet the basic service objective of reducing rail/transit travel times, intercity bus service would need to operate almost entirely on the freeway system with a very limited number of intermediate stops that involve minimal diversion from the freeway route. However, as shown in Table 4, an intercity bus service operating between Indio and Los Angeles would not be able to successfully address some of the key Purpose & Need objectives. Similarly, an intercity bus service operating between Indio and Riverside, San Bernardino, or Fullerton, would not be able to successfully address some of the key Purpose & Need objectives. Table 4: Purpose & Need Objectives Consistency for Intercity Bus P&N Objective Consistency for Indio -Los Angeles Bus Service Consistency for Bus Service Connecting Indio to Metrolink (Riverside, San Bernardino, or Fullerton) 1 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a public transportation service that offers more convenient and competitive trip times, better station access, and more frequency, than currently- available public transportation services Objective Not Achieved. A new intercity bus service would operate over the same highway and street system as the existing intercity service, so anew bus service would not be able to provide any reduction in travel time. Travel time between Los Angeles and Indio on the existing Greyhound service ranges between 2:25 and 4:05, depending on the number of intermediate stops and the time of day, and a new bus service would have essentially the same travel times for comparable trips. Objective Not Achieved. Because of the need to transfer between bus and rail, combined with the need to exit the freeway for intermediate stops, the potential for substantially reducing travel time with this type of service is small. Including the transfer to Metrolink in Riverside or San Bernardino, the shortest travel time that could be achieved between Indio and Los Angeles is 3:38 and the variations in Metrolink trip times could increase the overall trip time to 3:58 or more, which is little or no reduction from the existing travel time of 3:54 using the existing SunLine service andgMetrolinkbetween Palm Desert and Los An eles. 155 10 FEZ imela Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service P&N Objective Consistency for Indio- Los Angeles Bus Service Consistency for Bus Service Connecting Indio to Metrolink (Riverside, San Bernardino, or Fullerton) 2 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with an alternative to driving that offers reliable travel schedules Objective Not Achieved. A new intercity bus service would be subject to the same recurring congestion on the Los Angeles area freeway system that is encountered by the existing intercity bus service; therefore, a bus option would not offer any improvement in reliability. Because buses travel on the roadway system, a closure of I-10 through the San Gorgonio Pass would render bus service inoperable through the area, so this option would not be able to achieve this objective. Objective Not Achieved. This service option would be subject to the variability in Metrolink's travel times and to recurring freeway congestion in the part of the corridor where buses would travel on freeways. Scheduled Metrolink travel times between Riverside and Los Angeles vary by as much as 15 minutes (from 1:23 to 1:38), and scheduled times between San Bernardino and Los Angeles vary by as much as 37 minutes (from 1:28 to 2:05) and by as much as 60 minutes when the express train's travel time of 1:05 is considered. Also, both freeways leading east from Riverside and San Bernardino (SR-60 and 1-10) experience regular recurring peak period congestion. So this option would not improve existing service reliability, and travelers would be subject to both Metrolink schedule variability and recurring freeway congestion. Because buses travel on the roadway system, a closure of 1-10 through the San Gorgonio Pass would render bus service inoperable through the area, so this option would not be able to achieve this objective. 3 Provides travelers between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin with a transportation service that is affordable. Objective Achieved. Intercity bus service would be an affordable travel option. Objective Achieved. Intercity bus service would be an affordable travel option. 4 Serves a range of trip purposes traveling between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin, particularly including business, social, medical, leisure, and recreational trips Objective Achieved. Intercity bus service would include traveler amenities. Objective Not Achieved. Metrolink schedules and traveler amenities are geared to commuters traveling to work, and do not accommodate as well the needs and desires of the leisure and recreational travelers that constitute a very significant component segment of this corridor's travelers. 5 Improves regional travel opportunities between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for transit dependent people Objective Not Achieved. This option would not improve regional connections — it would provide essentially similar regional connections to the existing intercity bus service operated by Greyhound. Objective Achieved. This option would provide more regional bus opportunities between the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin for transit dependent people through an intercity bus service with service between Indio and a rail station in Riverside, San Bernardino, or Fullerton, where riders could connect with Amtrak or Metrolink train services. This service option could somewhat increase the service area compared to existing SunLine service (with an eastern terminus in Palm Desert rather than Indio) and provide service during more hours of the day (the SunLine service operates only during weekday commute hours). 156 11 FEZ imela Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service P&N Objective Consistency for Indio- Los Angeles Bus Service Consistency for Bus Service Connecting Indio to Metrolink (Riverside, San Bernardino, or Fullerton) 6 Is planned to serve the expected population growth in the Coachella Valley and the Los Angeles Basin Objective Achieved. This service could be expanded to accommodate ridership growth. Objective Achieved. This service could be expanded to accommodate ridership growth. Does not preclude, by choice of alignment or technology, a possible future corridor expansion between the Coachella Valley and Phoenix Objective Achieved. An intercity bus service could be expanded to provide service to Phoenix, though it would essentially duplicate the existing Greyhound service to Phoenix. Objective Achieved. An intercity bus service could be expanded to provide service to Phoenix, though it would essentially duplicate the existing Greyhound service to Phoenix. From these comparisons, it can be concluded that an intercity bus service would not meet the Purpose & Need objectives, so these bus service options should not be considered as standalone alternatives for analysis. The options to provide intercity bus service connecting with Metrolink in either Riverside or San Bernardino should be considered in the SDP as possible strategies for phased implementation of the corridor service. 157 12 FEZ �CB) Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Alternatives to Be Studied Based on the evaluation above, the alternatives to be studied will be comprised of intercity rail service between Indio and Los Angeles, operating on the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio and on the four existing rail lines between Los Angeles and Colton. A total of five alternatives have been identified for further analysis. Alternatives 1 through 3 follow three of the four rail lines west of Colton, as described below. • Alternative 1 uses the BNSF San Bernardino Sub, travels through Fullerton and Riverside to reach Colton, and uses the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio; • Alternative 2 uses the UP Los Angeles Sub, travels through Pomona and Riverside to reach Colton, and uses the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio; • Alternative 3 uses the UP Alhambra Sub, travels through Pomona and Ontario to reach Colton, and uses the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio. Alternative 4 uses the San Gabriel Sub, owned by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). It has two variations so there can be one option that serves the San Bernardino Metrolink station and one option that uses a more direct route and has a shorter travel time. Having a stop at San Bernardino would involve a 20-minute station layover to reverse the train's operation (due to the operational needs of Positive Train Control) and would involve some backtracking along the route to Colton. • Alternative 4A travels through Montclair and Rialto to reach Colton, and uses the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio. • Alternative 4B travels through Montclair to San Bernardino, then reverses its direction to travel to Colton, and uses the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio. Alternative 5 was identified for study because the San Gabriel Sub (Alternative 4) has a single- track capacity constraint where it operates in the median of 1-10 east of LAUS. This segment of the San Gabriel Sub operates at capacity during peak commute hours, so Alternative 4 is viable operationally only if the CV-SGP service operates in and out of LAUS during off-peak hours. Alternative 5 avoids the constrained segment of the San Gabriel Sub by using the Alhambra Sub to avoid the constraint, so it is able to serve the same stations as Alternative 4 and provide service into LAUS during peak commute hours. • Alternative 5 uses the Alhambra Sub from LAUS to the east, transitions to the San Gabriel Sub where it crosses near El Monte, travels through Montclair to San Bernardino, then reverses its direction to travel to Colton, and uses the Yuma Sub between Colton and Indio. 158 13 FEZ ..,,ra.,<a-1- Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service The alternatives to be studied are illustrated in Figure 5 and summarized in Table 5. Figure 5: Coachella Valley— San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Route Alternatives LIJ�:U75_! S°J L',1 f'/ 1 Las Angeles Montclair Union Station Pomona R jt/ Fullerton orange, ;i;7;153 jity Rialto (AIt�San 8ernardinolAlt5.4B, 5) Loma LindalRedlands ;f17 ;tSJ�aC9JtJf7 �� I1 6.7 wnev :�111 59.351;1lJ Pass Area llll I Desert Xot Springs Paim Springs' PS9/15. / LaIhedra 164 Palm of LEGEND - Alternative] - Alternative 2 - Alternative 3 - Alternative 4 - Alternative 5 Alternatives l-5 CATCHMENT AREAS •- ExistingStationAreas 0-Potential Station Areas , — -- Table 5: Coachella Valley — San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Route Alternatives Alt. Description Termini Mode Rail Lines West East LA -Indio Rail Service via Fullerton/Riverside Los Angeles Union Station Indio IntercitRail y BNSF San Bernardino Sub + UP Yuma Sub 2 LA -Indio Rail Service via Pomona/Riverside Los Angeles Union Station Indio Intercity Rail UP Los Angeles Sub + UP Yuma Sub 3 LA -Indio Rail Service via Pomona/Ontario Airport Los Angeles Union Station Indio Intercity Rail UP Alhambra Sub + UP Yuma Sub 4A LA -Indio Rail Service via Montclair/Rialto Los Angeles Union Station Indio Intercity Rail San Gabriel Sub + UP Yuma Sub 4B LA -Indio Rail Service via Montclair/San Bernardino Los Angeles Union Station Indio Intercity Rail San Gabriel Sub + UP Yuma Sub 5 LA -Indio Rail Service via Montclair/San Bernardino Los Angeles Union Station Indio Intercity Rail UP Alhambra + San Gabriel Sub + UP Yuma Sub 159 14 AGENDA ITEM 9H RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Martha Durbin, Staff Analyst Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Riverside County Public Transportation: Annual Countywide Performance Report for Fiscal Year 2013/14 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Riverside County Public Transportation Annual Countywide Performance Report (Countywide Report) for Fiscal Year 2013/14. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Transportation funding in the state is governed by the Transportation Development Act (TDA). In order for the Commission to annually approve funding, the TDA requires the Commission to have a formal process in place wherein transit operator productivity and performance is reviewed. Data was compiled and audits of each transit operator have now been completed for FY 2013/14. Accordingly, this information becomes the basis for compiling and drafting the Countywide Report, which is intended to meet the TDA requirement. DISCUSSION: In July 2014 the Commission approved goals and objectives for crafting the annual report. These goals and objectives are as follows: 1) The report is to be a stand-alone review of transit service measured via annual audited financial performance. 2) The report utilizes farebox recovery as the only mandated metric. 3) The report also is to derive additional metrics that allow for a macro discussion of transit performance countywide. 4) The metrics are to be repeatable and deliver consistent results, which provide a baseline year and a recurring "snapshot in time" over many years. 5) The report should possess the capability to be expandable to other modes. 6) The report requires the transit operators to utilize the TransTrack program for the reporting of operator specific performance information for a reliable and consistent pool of data to examine on an as -needed basis. Agenda Item 9H 160 The FY 2013/14 Countywide Report continues a comprehensive performance reporting program for Riverside County with the goal of documenting how public transit funding was spent and the results achieved for the dollars invested. The following represents a high level re -cap of the information contained in the report. Farebox Recovery The primary and only state -mandated indicator described in the Countywide Report is farebox recovery ratio. Farebox recovery is the proportion that passenger fares, and other eligible revenues, contribute to the transit program's general operating expenses over and beyond the subsidy provided by the Commission and federal government. The farebox recovery ratio is extremely useful as a tool for measuring and assessing a transit program's strength. The overall countywide farebox recovery ratio for FY 2013/14 was 23.3 percent. This represents a negative 8.5 percent change from the previous fiscal year. This decrease in return is primarily due to a slightly lower level of fares received from riders coupled with increased operating expenses. The increase in operating expenses can be traced to a modest expansion of service, as well as increased administrative functions relating to comprehensive operational planning activities. It is important to note each Riverside County public transit operator met its minimum state -mandated farebox recovery ratio. Trips Per Capita Trips per capita reflect total trips provided in relation to the overall county population. The total population for Riverside County in FY 2013/14 was 2.25 million and the total trips provided was 16.4 million. Considering all public transit modes of rail, fixed route bus, demand responsive dial -a -ride, and specialized transportation, a trips per capita rate of 7.3 was achieved during FY 2013/14. This represents a positive 3 percent change from the previous fiscal year. This metric firmly identifies that even with increasing population transit ridership continues to grow at a faster rate thus demonstrating robust demand for public transit by Riverside County residents. Transit Related Resources Finally, a big picture perspective of Riverside County's public transportation system can be measured by reviewing the financial resources available to the transit operators. The impact of Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) notwithstanding, resources increased from prior fiscal year by 15 percent. Approximately $61.8 million in state and local funding resources was made available to support the county's operators. This increase indicates the provision of service can continue to be expanded at a rate sufficient enough to keep up with both population growth in Riverside County and the demand by residents for access to public transit. Agenda Item 9H 161 NEXT STEPS: Generally the public transit measures reported in the Countywide Report were positive and overall represent good news for the Commission and the operators. Sufficient resources were identified and service is generally available to support mobility for Riverside County residents. Service is also identified as being operated in a cost effective manner although more emphasis can be placed by the operators in addressing better farebox return. The above -referenced metrics and conclusions are more fully described in the attached FY 2013/14 Countywide Report. Staff will continue to provide oversight with respect to the data reporting process via the TransTrack system, as well as with the individual operator audits and financial reporting for FY 2014/15. With the continuing flow of data and financial reporting, this report will be updated and presented to the Commission in July 2016 for discussion. Attachment: Riverside County Public Transportation — FY 2013/14 Countywide Report Agenda Item 9H 162 Riverside County Public Transportation: Annual Countywide Performance Report, FY 2013/2014 Riverside County Transportation Commission Robert J. Yates Multi -modal Services Director June 2015 Prepared by: Am-m-A T n N$I T PLIN 163 164 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Recent Transit and Transportation -Related Initiatives in Riverside County 1 Perris Valley Line 1 Coachella Rail Planning Effort 2 Riverside Transit Agency's "Comprehensive Operational Analysis" 2 SunLine Transit Agency's "Focused Comprehensive Operational Analysis" 3 Other Transportation -Related Initiatives 3 Performance Reporting Purposes 5 Into the Measures 6 1. Policy and Compliance 6 2. Utilization 8 3. Accessibility and Coverage 11 4. Connectivity 17 5. Resources 18 Conclusion 20 Appendices 23 Appendix A — Definitions, Data Sets, and References 24 Appendix B — Public Transportation Trips Provided, All Modes 25 Appendix C — Bus Stop Location Counts by Operator and Revised FY 2012/13 Table 7 26 Appendix D — Public Transit Fleet Size Over Three Years 31 ii l Page 165 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 List of Figures FIGURE 1 - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS 4 FIGURE 2 — RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY— 74% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE 12 FIGURE 3—SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY - 81% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE 13 FIGURE 4 — CORONA CRUISER - 73% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE 14 FIGURE 5 — PASS TRANSIT - 84% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE 15 FIGURE 6 — PALO VERDE VALLEY - 72% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE 16 FIGURE 7 — HISTORY OF ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS BY MODE 22 List of Tables TABLE 1— COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, AUDITED FAREBOX RECOVERY, FY 2013/14 —23.3% 7 TABLE 2 — PUBLIC TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA, FY 2013/14 9 TABLE 3 —TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA FOR OTHER AREAS, BUS BOARDINGS ONLY 10 TABLE 4— BUS AND RAIL TRANSFER LOCATION COUNTS FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY 17 TABLE 5 — PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY: COMMISSION ALLOCATED STATE AND LOCAL TRANSIT FUNDING, VEHICLES AND VEHICLE REVENUE MILES 19 TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE 21 iii I Page 166 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 INTRODUCTION The Riverside County Annual Countywide Performance Report, FY 2013/14 (Countywide Report) is prepared to assure compliance by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) with Public Utilities Code Section 99244 which, through the Transportation Development Act (TDA), requires county transportation planning agencies to monitor transit provider performance. The Countywide Report continues a comprehensive, countywide public transportation performance reporting program begun last fiscal year for Riverside County with the goal of documenting how public transit funding was spent and what have been the results of Riverside County transit dollars invested. Building upon last year's baseline measurements, this Countywide Report considers two time frames which are FY 2012/13 and FY 2013/14 and also highlights new initiatives during the recent calendar year to improve the mobility of Riverside County residents. Transit provider experience for the reporting year FY 2013/14 in relation to five performance measures is reported. These recent initiatives are presented in the subsection immediately following and experience against the reporting year FY 2013/14 follows subsequently, describing a number of positive impacts. RECENT TRANSIT AND TRANSPORTATION -RELATED INITIATIVES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PERRIS VALLEY LINE RCTC has moved steadily towards the opening of the Perris Valley Line (PVL). This rail service between downtown Riverside and Perris adds 24 miles to the Metrolink network and four new stations. These stations include Riverside Hunter Park, Moreno Valley/March Field, Downtown Perris, and South Perris. The PVL will provide greater access to Southern California's commuter rail network for residents in Menifee, Murrieta, Temecula, San Jacinto, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, and Wildomar, and is expected to open to riders by late 2015. Projected FY 2015/16 annual operating expenses are $14 million for all of 167 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 RCTC's rail operations, representing a 43% increase to RCTC over its previously required state and local subsidy to Metrolink and the Southern California Regional Rail Authority. COACHELLA RAIL PLANNING EFFORT RCTC, with the communities of the Coachella Valley and the San Gorgonio Pass area, initiated a Coachella intercity rail feasibility study during the 2014 year to examine the potential for Amtrak rail service between the Coachella Valley and downtown Los Angeles' Union Station. RCTC is funding this planning effort through Phase I, which identifies the purpose and need of the proposed rail service, identifies alternatives that address the purpose and need, and performs an initial evaluation of the alternatives. A Federal Rail Administration (FRA) grant has been awarded to Caltrans and RCTC to support Phase II, which will involve preparation of a Service Development Plan and a program -level Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report in accordance with FRA guidelines. These are each critical steps to establishing a new rail service and providing new transportation service to connect the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles. RCTC supported the Phase I planning activities at a level of $1.7 million, and the Phase II analysis is expected to cost just over $4 million. Almost $3 million will be coming from the FRA grant to be matched by RCTC with $1.1 million from local sources. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S "COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS" Over the past two years, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) has conducted a major, system -wide Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) that will bring about significant changes to RTA's public transit services in Western Riverside County. This planning effort, culminating in a Ten -Year Transit Network Plan, was funded with local transit funds to provide a framework ensuring RTA's transit services are productive and responsive to Riverside County residents' mobility needs. Service Related Recommendations Numerous planned changes are expected to improve and increase transit service levels across Western Riverside County that include recent FY 2014/15 changes to RTA's highest ridership services (such as Routes 1, 3, 15, 16, 19, 22, 27, 29, 49, and 74) in cities such as Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley, Perris, Lake Elsinore, Hemet, San Jacinto, and Jurupa Valley to provide significant weekday and/or weekend frequency improvements with service increased to every 15, 30, or 60 minutes. Further planned changes during FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17 include: ■ Existing Routes 7 and 8 in Lake Elsinore and Wildomar will be restructured as a bi-directional loop route, with an extension of Route 23 further into Wildomar to connect with the new loop route; ■ Bus service changes to feed new Perris Valley Line stations: including two new routes, extra trips on existing routes, and schedule revisions for connecting to/from train at: 2 1 168 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 o Hunter Park Station (Riverside): Existing Route 13 and new Route 52 (to UC Riverside), o Moreno Valley/March Field: Existing Route 20 and new 26 (to Orange Crest and Moreno Valley Mall), o Downtown Perris: Existing Routes 19, 22, 27, 30, 74, 208, and 212, and o South Perris: Existing Routes 61 and 7; ■ In January 2017, new RapidLink limited stop service is slated to be launched every 15 minutes during peak periods on weekdays between UC Riverside and Corona via University and Magnolia Avenues; and ■ Two new CommuterLink peak period express routes are planned, using the SR-91 Freeway to link Temecula to Orange County, the Village at Orange, and Riverside to Orange County in Anaheim. New Downtown Riverside and Vine Street Metrolink Rail Station bus stop improvements are planned, in conjunction with the closure of the existing downtown transit terminal. The RapidLink service will be funded by a $9.2 million award of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (AQMD) funds, which were approved through RCTC's multi -funding call for projects in 2014. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY'S "FOCUSED COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS" SunLine Transit Agency has initiated a Focused Comprehensive Operational Analysis to develop a long- range plan for the purpose of growing system -wide ridership. Last undertaken in 2005, SunLine anticipates receiving the recommendations of this significant planning effort during the spring of 2016. Implementation of SunLine Board -approved recommendations will follow in two-year phases, over a ten- year horizon, to improve transit services throughout the Coachella Valley. OTHER TRANSPORTATION -RELATED INITIATIVES Active Transportation Active Transportation is the term for non -motorized initiatives supporting bicycle and pedestrian safety projects. They often involve establishing bike lanes or cyclist facilities and making pedestrian safety improvements to sidewalks, crosswalks, signalization, and roadway medians. Active Transportation projects seek to improve the cyclist and pedestrian experience. These improvements also help to make the first and last mile connections safer and easier for transit users who are themselves pedestrians and often bicyclists. Increased walking and biking is supported by various parties, including the California Department of Transportation which has established a new policy of tripling bicycle use and doubling pedestrian and transit trips by 2020. Public health spokespersons have identified clear links between Active Transportation and healthier lifestyles, with positive impacts documented in Figure 1 by Active Living Research, making these desirable goals. Wage 169 In Riverside County, with a strengthening partnership between the Riverside County Department of Public Health and the cities and transit applicants, there has been success in securing state and regional level funding: $21.9 million in state and federal awarded funds and twelve (12) successful projects in Caltrans Cycle 1 Active Transportation Program statewide competitive offering; and $9 million in SCAG's Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Active Transportation Program awards for seven (7) projects. RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 FIGURE 1 - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS THE ROLE OF Transportation IN PROMOTING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ''.ni ■ I� MD RCM� � SI DEWAI KS Peoptewho I hie in neighborhoods with sidewalks on rn051 5l reetsare `t7 % more likely to be active at least 30 minutes a day. r ■ �f I RAFT If CAL M8rl6 Medians, speed humps and other bathe -calming efforts can reduce the number of automobile cashes wiill pedecirian injuries by in.. 1,1 1 J% ■NN %%VI' BUS LIKE fALILTTIES In Portland Are., bic yde commuters role 49% of shear miles on gad, with bike r acres, e,ien though these are on ly Flr! of road niili, P iRANSPOPT�fffATl[lry PubSe transit users lake 3o % more steps pei day than people who rely an cars opm Active Living Research www.ec11.14Ingreeeorch. org .�sLE1'�l• 5...,3wr.h e.ornei Ara. w` .k,!.a![...a..M.11Ar'mt1 rz-mkr si�Y.+ii[wfrKwnr�+JwmHcn...M'.s/,�.,si.ciN6. dal-e101vr100Y� BCWM.PII!Aaeer-I.+pHrhi.F1��x Mk, 4T1.000. T95 , 10.Criaipmeslzioesss wow o WHG:a..r F Cenri nnn:.n TVT. FriW TrekL.wn Mrhren,y NAL 4165.0nW.'Ce.1,..13TiWIr N Sylinni.r in..1.rl1.lrrwn NV9: FTWA-T: wM'sa Vida MetlwYw JSralr tivre. dm�n�l�.nee-.r„n�sYli!ll.L/la,o till N.srinrydICRn*Gk Mr.*0.Yikk[r.na Ghkntr. Ind h4hYCe.Te.,..,,MaMrpnA.d.s'Nn.�unr...cbnn Further success is anticipated with new Active Transportation projects submitted June 1st, 2015 across the county to Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 2 offering. Future projects in Riverside County are anticipated to be funded from this competitive $600 million statewide budget. As the statewide ATP becomes more competitive, securing these funds will require both continued local investment and effective coordination between local governments, public health officials, school administrators, and others to demonstrate high -priority need for requested Active Transportation projects. New County -Level Funding Decisions for FTA Section 5310 Specialized Transportation New funding responsibilities came to RCTC in FY 2013/14 with RCTC now responsible for the selection and programming of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Older Adults and Individuals with Disabilities. Caltrans previously fully administered the Section 5310 program. The Commission now acts as arbiter for these funds, responsible for the Call for Projects and award decisions, but not involved in the distribution of funds. That responsibility still remains with Caltrans. RCTC conducted a successful Section 5310 Call for Projects providing $2.6 million in grants to improve mobility of older adults and persons with disabilities with capital and operating projects. Grantees were a mix of human service transportation agencies as well as public transit providers receiving funding to provide trips, purchase vehicles, and provide mobility management support for the transportation of disadvantaged populations. These programs' operations reports will be included in the next Countywide Report. Wage 170 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 VetLink — New Multi -Modal Trip Planner for Inland Southern California The VetLink-To-Go Trip Planner was initiated in early 2015 (www.211VetLink.org) to assist veterans, active duty service members, and their families locate and plan needed transportation. This project is an outgrowth of a federal grant secured by San Bernardino and Riverside Counties from the FTA's highly competitive Veterans Transportation and Community Living Initiative (VTCLI) to support one-call/one-click projects that assist veterans in connecting with transit services. Lead locally by the 2-1-1 organizations of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, the project has built an effective partnership with the transit providers of both counties, with RCTC and the San Bernardino Associated Governments, and the Loma Linda Veterans Administration Medical Center as well as other community -based organizations. The VetLink Trip Planner differs from Google Transit and other such trip planners in that it provides multi -modal origin -to -destination information. VetLink includes paratransit program information and details of volunteer services of the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) and Riverside's Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project as well as each of the public transit operators of both counties. VetLink currently maintains current service -level information on about three - dozen providers, to provide detailed trip plans to veterans and others who inquire. The VTCLI grant of $300,000 in Federal funds supported this initiative. Subsequent Measure A grants support the VetLink mobility manager position at Riverside's 2-1-1 Community Connect. Care -A -Van and Youth Build Transportation Collaboration With a $135,000 Job Access and Reverse Commute grant from RCTC, the Care -A -Van organization provided regular transportation to Hemet area youth in 2014 and 2015, enabling them to participate in the Riverside County Youth Build project. Youth Build is a collaboration between the Riverside County Office of Education, Habitat for Humanity, the California Family Life Center, and Care -A -Van. Trips provided to participating youth, all of whom were high school dropouts, were between the Hemet youth center at the California Family Life Center and two sites where these youth were building homes under the supervision of Habitat for Humanity. Youth were also transported to community college classes. Presently, the program's 50 youth have achieved a 70% success rate of either full-time enrollment in post -secondary education or securing regular employment. PERFORMANCE REPORTING PURPOSES The Riverside County Annual Countywide Performance Report, FY 2013/14 presents the second year of an updated performance reporting structure first approved by the Commission in July 2014. This describes Riverside County's transportation network in relation to five indicator categories. Commission purposes of this Countywide Report include: 1. Presenting a countywide view of transit performance, establishing a neutral reporting program of Riverside County's public transportation services; 5 I 171 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 2. Providing a reporting resource to support Commission -level transportation planning and programming decisions that can help identify transit issues related to land -use decisions on a city and countywide level; 3. Providing a snapshot in time, a benchmark set of measures from which to view public transportation and to assess countywide trends; 4. Using outcome -based performance reporting methodologies that meet Federal statute Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) and State of California Transportation Development Act (TDA) statutory requirements; and 5. Using a framework that is expandable to other modes and to other measures, potentially including vanpool, rideshare, 5-1-1, and bicycles, and may be adapted to aid in documenting Riverside County's SB 375 goals for reducing passenger vehicle emissions. INTO THE MEASURES Riverside County public transportation programs are funded by a mix of federal, state, and local sources. While RCTC has programming responsibility for all public transit funding sources and directly manages state (TDA) and local (Measure A) funds for Riverside County, the transit operators themselves are responsible for management of the federal funds. The single exception to this is with regard to Metrolink operations. RCTC is directly responsible for and administers the FTA Section 5307 and 5309 rail funding allocated to Riverside County. With respect to this report, while federal funding for transit is referenced, performance reporting for the federal funds is not covered. Performance reporting of the federal funds occurs through the federal triennial audit process reviewed by the Commission's Audit Ad Hoc Committee. This report considers the state and local funds received by Riverside County, examining indicators in five specific categories. These categories were selected in order to provide a comprehensive picture of Riverside County public transportation services and programs. Some indicators are presented in relation to individual transit providers. Others reflect the experience of three Riverside County geographic regions: Western Riverside, the Coachella Valley, and the Palo Verde Valley. 1. POLICY AND COMPLIANCE This first measure is based upon existing California law, farebox recovery ratio. All transit providers must achieve established minimum contributions to operating costs from their riders' fares, called farebox. The State of California, Transportation Development Act (TDA) Section 6633.2 statutorily requires that in order to protect continued funding, public transit programs receiving Local Transportation Funds (LTF) must collect passenger fares to contribute to overall operating costs at minimum proportion of fares to total expense. This is expressed as the farebox recovery ratio. The farebox recovery ratio is the proportion that passenger fares, and other eligible revenues, contribute to the transit program's overall operating expense. Table 1 presents the farebox recovery ratios for each of Riverside County's TDA-funded public transit providers, showing that each of the county's Wage 172 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 operators are meeting and exceeding their respective minimum farebox requirement. The mandatory farebox standards for these state -mandated minimums are: ■ 20% for urban transit providers; and ■ 10% for rural or demand -response -only providers. In Riverside County, because each of the large transit providers operate in both urban and rural areas, Caltrans allows a "blended" minimum fare revenue standard through a formula created by the Riverside County Transportation Commission and approved by Caltrans. Blended ratios combine the modes of fixed route and demand response fare recovery rates for both urban and non -urbanized areas, recognizing the large expanses that Riverside County's public transportation programs must serve. Farebox recovery ratios reflect the interaction of several factors: ■ Farebox levels are influenced positively by ridership as more riders will generate increased fare revenue and therefore achieve a higher fare contribution to operating costs; ■ Farebox recovery reflects critical agency policy in that transit fares are a key policy area and are determined locally; and ■ Farebox recovery is influenced by attention to operating costs, as systems operating efficiently will have lower expenses and fares will represent a comparatively higher proportion of total costs —a higher farebox recovery ratio. Table 1 presents the specific farebox recovery ratio of the individual transit providers that range from 11% to 26% fare recovery in relation to total operations expense. The overall countywide fare revenue to operating expense is 23.3%. TABLE 1— COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, AUDITED FAREBOX RECOVERY, FY 2013/14 — 23.3% Audit Results for All BANNING BEAUMONT CORONA PVVTA RIVERSIDE RTA SUNLINE COUNTYWIDE Operators 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 Total Operating Revenue from Passenger Fares Total Operating Expenses, Net Farebox [1] Minimum Farebox Recovery Requirement, Per TDA and RCTC Adopted Policy Actual Farebox Recovery Ratio $163,258 $1,441,840 10% $167, 869 $1,474,989 10% $409, 812 $2, 042, 898 20% $64,166 $469,112 10% $382, 963 $3, 436, 714 10% $14,823,807 $55, 837, 080 17.49% 5,052,148 $25, 623, 354 17.55% 11.3% 11.4% 20.1% 13.7% 26.5% 19.7% $21,064,023 $90,325,987 n/a 23.3% [1] Net fare box is based upon agency policy, in conformance with TDA rules and RCTC adopted policy. Source: Annual Financial Statements with Independent Auditor's Report For the Year Ended June 30, 2014 - All Operators' Final Transit Services Fund Farebox recovery ratios are a tool by which to assess a transit program's strength. This ratio reflects the interaction of operator fare policy and efficiency in handling expenses and riders' utilization of the service. A healthy transportation network — with higher farebox recovery ratios — is finding the right balance between rider contribution to cost, public subsidy of operating expense, and optimal operating efficiency. 7'Page 173 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 How Are We Doing? As noted above, each of the county's transit providers exceeded their minimum state -mandated farebox recovery ratios of 10% for Banning, Beaumont, Palo Verde Valley and the City of Riverside, of 17% for RTA and SunLine, and of 20% for Corona. For Riverside County the FY 2013/14 overall county farebox recovery ratio was at a very healthy 23.3%, although down 8.5% from the prior reporting period when the farebox recovery ratio was 25.5.%. Farebox reflects both revenue from riders and operating expense. The ratios of this reporting period were influenced by a slightly lower level of fares received from riders, $21.1 million, down just 2% from last year's $21.6 million in fares received and coupled with increased operating expense. Total operating expenses increased from the prior year's $84.4 million to the current $90.3 million, a 6.9% increase that reflected increased sales tax revenue generated from a strengthening local economy. Despite higher expenditures and slightly lower fare revenues, each of Riverside County's public operators exceeded its minimum state -mandated farebox. 2. UTILIZATION The second measure, trips per capita, points to the utilization of the public transportation network in Riverside County. Trips per capita reflect total trips provided in relation to the overall county population. This measure represents use of public transit by the total population to present an annual figure of trips taken per county resident. Land use decisions made by the county and the cities can influence transit availability, convenience, cost, and even reliability. These all combine to impact the public's use of transit routes and transportation programs. Riverside County has continued to experience high levels of population growth. Its 41.7% increase from years 2000 to 2010 was reported by the US Census as the highest county growth rate in the State of California. Since last year, the county's population grew by 2.3%. In an environment of continuing population growth, public transportation must work steadily to increase ridership for its trips -per -capita indicator to simply stay constant. Monitoring trips per capita over time suggests how well the network connects people and available transit services, even as more people are traveling to more places. Table 2 presents the trips -per -capita calculation that is inclusive of all public transportation programs within Riverside County, providing more than 16.4 million trips to the county's 2.25 million residents, as of January 2014. Appendix B presents the system -level detail from which the modal trip counts that are presented in Table 2 are compiled. Wage 174 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 TABLE 2 — PUBLIC TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA, FY 2013/14 Public Transportation Trips Provided FY 2013/14 Western Riverside County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Countywide Service by Mode Trips % of Total Trips Rail [1] 898,216 898,216 5% Public Bus, Fixed Route [2] 9,415,242 4,684,278 44,432 14,143,952 86% Public Demand Responsive 684,607 139,042 823,649 5% Specialized Transportation/Universal Call Program 462,216 115,520 577,736 4% ALL TRIPS: Including Rail, Public Transit, Measure A, JARC and New Freedom Programs [3] 10,562,065 4,938,840 44,432 16,443,553 100% TOTAL POPULATION [4] 1,791,727 437,342 25,990 2,255,059 Trips per Capita for FY 2013/14 Total Population [4] 7.3 Notes: [1] Annualized from average weekday daily boardings at Riverside County stations: Riverside, 91 and Inland Empire -Orange County Lines. [2] Public Bus, Fixed Route trip counts do not include Specialized Transportation funded fixed route trips. [3] Ridership and vehicle data for Public Transit Operators extracted from TransTrack Table 2 on 4/15/15. [4] RCTC FY 2014/15 Mid -Year Revenue Projections Agenda - Department of Finance January 1, 2013, Demographic Research Unit Trips per capita is a standard industry measure for reporting the volumes of public transit trips taken in relation to a region's population. For Riverside County as a whole, and considering all public transit modes of rail, fixed route, demand responsive, and specialized transportation, a trips -per -capita rate of 7.3 was achieved during FY 2013/14. The 16.4 million public transit trips presented in Table 2 and detailed in Appendix B, include Metrolink boardings of almost 898,216. This count reflects a change in how annual boardings are calculated, beginning after 2010. This year's annual Metrolink boardings are based upon pass sales for trips boarding at Riverside County stations on the three Metrolink lines that originate in Riverside: the Riverside Line, the 91 Line, and the Inland Empire -Orange County Line. Of the trips reported in Table 2, 96.5% were provided by the public transit providers, including over 14 million (86%) fixed route trips and almost 824,000 (5%) demand responsive trips. RCTC's specialized transportation program provided almost 578,000 trips, 4% of total trips, supplementing public transit's demand responsive programs and providing more choices to Riverside County users. How Are We Doing? A measure of 7.3 transit trips per capita is calculated for this most recent 2013/14 reporting year, relating the 16.4 million trips provided to the county's population of 2.25 million persons in January 2013. Wage 175 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 As reported later in this document, this 7.3 trips -per -capita measure reflects an increasing transit ridership base, in the face of a growing county population. Monitoring this important indicator over time provides insight into how effectively the transit network keeps pace with a resident population that both grows in number and spreads geographically. To provide a context for this indicator in Riverside County, Table 3 compares per capita transit use with several other regions. TABLE 3 — TRANSIT TRIPS PER CAPITA FOR OTHER AREAS, BUS BOARDINGS ONLY 2013 National Transit Database Service Area Unlinked Population Passenger Trips Motor Bus Statistics Only Trips per Capita Service Area Square Mileage Population per Square Mile (In persons) Riverside Countywide Annual Performance Report \* 2,255,059 16,443,553 7.3 Sunline Transit Agency 423,644 4,571,588 10.8 1,120 378 Riverside Transit Agency 1,700,356 8,486,735 5.0 2,725 624 Corona Cruiser 160,000 163,054 1.0 41 3,902 LA Metro 8,626,817 350,385,593 40.6 1,513 5,702 San Diego MTS 2,218,791 51,587,559 23.3 716 3,099 Orange County Transit Authority 3,028,546 51,067,292 16.9 465 6,513 Sacramento Regional Transit 972,076 13,784,179 14.2 213 4,564 Omnitrans 1,484,000 15,655,099 10.5 463 3,205 North County Transit District (San Diego County) 896,787 8,347,213 9.3 403 2,225 Victor Valley Transit Authority 334,988 1,765,073 5.3 424 790 Valley Metro (Phoenix, AZ.) 3,629,114 9,619,743 2.7 732 4,958 Source: National Transit Database (http://www.ntdprogram.goy/ntdprogram/profiles.htm) NTD Transit Profiles/Transit Agency Search/2013 \* As documented in this report and inclusive of some NTD-reported data but including additonal data sources. Table 3 draws from the National Transit Database (NTD) annually reported ridership and reports only bus boardings for fixed -schedule service and three Riverside County providers reporting into the NTD. Table 3 does not include demand responsive, specialized transportation trips or rail passenger trips as these are not consistently reported in the NTD. It also presents service area square mileage and population density figures, both of which impact the transit operators' ability to efficiently provide trips. Although Table 3 shows other regions achieving higher trips per capita rates — such as Los Angeles, North San Diego, Orange, and Sacramento Counties — none approach RTA's service area of over 2,700 square miles that includes rural communities and extensive low -density suburban development as well as urban Riverside. In the case of SunLine, its 10.8 trips -per -capita level in relation to service area size and population density reflects the solid utilization of this system. Again, it is reiterated that Table 3 presents only fixed route (the NTD category called motor bus) and does not include demand responsive, specialized transit nor rail trips. These additional modes were incorporated into the countywide trips -per -capita measure, previously presented in Table 2 and collectively achieving the 7.3 trips per -capita -rate reported for FY 2013/14. 101Page 176 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 3. ACCESSIBILITY AND COVERAGE This measure considers the array of low -density urban, suburban, and rural operating environments in which Riverside County public transit services operate. The challenge of serving such dispersed population centers — over large expanses of space — is reflected in the effort required to provide adequate levels of coverage. The coverage metric presented here is percentage of residents within 3/ of a mile of public fixed route transit. This assesses the proportion of the population who live within 3/ of a mile of transit fixed route service, excluding dial -a -ride services. This % of a mile metric is greater than the typical %-mile walkable distance commonly used by transit planners. It does however suggest transit's sphere of influence as the %-mile envelope mirrors the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement for the provision of complementary paratransit to persons with disabilities. The indicator identifies total population living within 3/ of a mile of local fixed route, or of a commuter service bus stop, as a percentage of total service area population. It should be noted that additional transit service, specifically paratransit, may exist past this 3/-mile metric. While continuing effort is being made to spatially quantify and measure paratransit services, costs and performance, both modes are reflected in the farebox and trips -per -capita metrics. For commuters living at significant distances from their jobs, the long trips between home and work can be difficult. Transit can ameliorate challenges that a jobs -housing imbalance presents by providing an alternative to driving alone. For local trips, with housing often at distances from city centers or shopping and local jobs, public transit seeks the balance between coverage to serve sprawling, low -density neighborhoods and operating efficiencies necessary to pick up sufficient riders, transport them quickly, and generate adequate farebox revenues. This balancing act is reflected in decisions about where buses travel and how frequently. The accessibility measure reported here of residences within 3/ of a mile of transit routes presents a "30,000 foot level" assessment of public transit's fixed route coverage of its service area in relation to the population residing there. Five maps follow depicting each transit provider's service area and the population within % of a mile for that provider, presenting only services within Riverside County. 111Page 177 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 FIGURE 2 — RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY — 74% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE Rancho Cucamonga Ontario Trabuco Canyon Rancho Santa Margarita Coto de Can San Capistrano San Clemente Rialto Fontana Colton San Bernardino Highland Western Riverside: Population of RTA District Service Area and 3/4 Mile of RTA Bus Routes and Commuter Link Stops Redlands Loma Linda Yucaipa h.s,----.—._,_.--.—,_.r—...,,,.,.,.,...........r.r.rr,r•,..__.Im• •• Rut7i�oux ..7.. Yucca Vallee Riverside San l�a C I n to .vall� He -met • �U sta ff rr—S LaCanyon ti banning • '�. b eau mont POPULATION o - 49 _ 280 - 529 SO-13S 530-1,017 13S - 279 1.018 - 2.40 7 Service Area = 1,747,410 (100%) 3/4 Mile Buffer = 1,299,636 (74%) r Fixed Routes Commuter Link Routes bCeser� H07 ,„ Springs Palm Springs Cathedral C i _, Rancho Mirage Data Source- 29TQ U.5 Gera , DEC_90_S P 9_F9, 61Q41.7 M^4 et Ja is 60:1124412144yr= al tsa, Ma* Pupa iatiarr = 5,000. s �o�ta EfaC7! nilhin 3if at. buffer=';a% ESHrnaled Populat4o, vrCe eus $bek Nilh4,1(4*r_k'1&fai $9e, Prere•�tmr;--IMAD f983 TataPf3re_C3Afora _17 FfF' • =af 0, 121Page 178 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 FIGURE 3 — SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY - 81% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE R.fr San .'acinry Sri. Pa rir Sart Heimaroin o Narien al Fore ex S;. :Desert Hot Springs Palm Springs Sunline Routes Rancho P.9irage DatData Source: 2050 U.S. Czraus. DEC :3 FF5 _PS, Block lerei dam. IAethodologyc a a.: f emus El took Popu titian = 5,000, % of Cer sus 81odc.a/ ithin 3.4 mile Acffer=50%, EstiroaEai Population of err us 8 bdc virkin 3/4 rude -buffer = 2,500 _ =_ation: NAD 1983_StatePlane California Yl FlPS O4Feet 0 3.5 - litkges - : StSALJantrary, 20F 4Source: 2Jt0 U.S. Census. -06 - 1 ' ' l l . �. �.�.„.�.„.�.„....".f �. �.• •a Diego Ccur.fr. Coachella Valley: Population of SunLine Service Area and 3{4 Mile of SunLine Bus Routes Palm Desert La Q uinta .7 POPULATION o-49 254-529 50 -135 =I 534 - 1, 017 136-279 - 1,418-2,406 Service Area =422.874 (100%) 314 Mile Buffer = 341,739 (81 %) fe=hLta Tree riari on al Far* Coachella Therrna6 Salton Sea 131Page 179 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 FIGURE 4 — CORONA CRUISER - 73% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE City of Corona: Population of Corona Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride Service Area and 3/4 Mile of Cruiser Bus Routes 1 i l 1 San Bernardino ! Riverside County County f t 4 t t t POPULATION�t. Corona Municipal Acporr Aviation 6r 0-49 280-529?t tr 50 - 135 ati 530 - 1.017 =t 4- ifQ 136-279 - 1.018 -2.406 \t )1 Service Area = 110.964 (100%) 3/4 Mile Buffer = 123.965 (73%) Cruiser Routes La Sierra s� V® Riverside4¢ y� H pure &Tat s 'a 141Page 180 ,t _akeview RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 FIGURE 5 — PASS TRANSIT - 84% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MILE Cities of Banning and Beaumont: Population of Pass Transit Service Area and 3/4 Mile of Pass Bus Routes Che'rry ey Highlanc o t tmn5t5Prings �s Sroo�=_id=Ave �• .; j 1 ....IR nl� �•ati,�.� BeaumanT i. Cott cn W96 nE6' r �°NL-'Sot}oha HbE•5prings Riverside County POPULATION 280 - 52s 50-135 - 530-1,017 136 - 279 1,018 - 2,466 Service Area = 84.113 (1009'0) 3/4 Mile Buffer = 70.934 (84%) Pass Transit Service Area i=i c Fou[f. Jun_ 2012 Fixed Routes' Cam muter Link 151Page 181 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 FIGURE 6 — PALO VERDE VALLEY - 72% POPULATION COVERAGE WITHIN % OF A MIL Palo Verde Valley: Population of Palo Verde Valley Transit Service Area and 3/4 Mile of PVVTA Bus Routes POPULATION 0 -49 1.111 220- 529 50 -135 530 - 1,017 136-279 1.018 -2.617 Service Area = 24,295 (100%) 3/4 Mile Buffer = 17,436 (72%) , — Y-1 41; 3____d?e,FLI:Fe d ar, rEEE L....-- ,-------- - 111011---------,-.- 4.„,- esa Verde .(—='.til --r = M ec_).__,r 'IV -, C ,lE= I •-:-,, f f t 7 .. _ .74-1,7 :i PVVTA l. 7! Senfice A rea Riverside ,,_;. 2 Ironwood State Prison WW1' c Hie Caunty 411 51 thboox 5111Ake Palo Verde College ozE 1=IE' z . t F1V"nAae CK—ri I , I Pal_Perde HS ra County .;1S4 21.311A...1. 41125, _sg;hfir, ' T- i 78 n KM ART 11 II 11 1 See Nye to A v .P.See y Ave 1L423J Arc 20-.h kre 32 red Ave • 125 I Ave ill _ • •iLCasa ein as 25F7 An I. kic La Paz County PVVTA Routes 1_ •. P:i -t-r . is • - i. 161Page 182 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 4. CONNECTIVITY A measure of connectivity was identified for this Countywide Report as transfers between transit routes, modes, systems, and corridors. These all contribute to the robustness of a transit network. Connections help riders make regional trips and travel beyond their immediate neighborhood. Improved connections also speed the trip, whether by physical transfer or common fare media or coordinated schedules. The particular connectivity indicator reported here counts the existing physical connections between transit routes and transportation systems in Riverside County. These may be transfers between routes within a transit property, within the county as a whole or between transit systems operating in different counties. The count alone does not reflect the quality of the individual connection, in terms of how well or how poorly services are connected, but it does indicate that a connection exists. Frequency, span, and time between connections can all have an effect on connectivity. Working to improve connectivity by considering these factors in both transit planning and performance reporting between Riverside and its neighboring counties will contribute to improved mobility for Riverside County residents. TABLE 4 — BUS AND RAIL TRANSFER LOCATION COUNTS FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY Public Transportation Transfer Locations Fixed -Route and Rail Western Riverside County FY 13/14 [ii Coachella Valley FY 13/14 pi Palo Verde Countywide Totals Valley FY 13/14 Intra-System Bus Inter -County Bus, Within County Regional Bus Transit Between Counties Regional Rail and National Inter -City Bus TOTAL 1,118 116 21 85.3% 5.3% 6.1% 42 3.3% 1,255 100 [1] Reflects RTA and Corona's May 2015 service changes. [2] Reflects SunLine's January 2015 service change. Source: See Appendix C for detail by operator. How Are We Doing? There has been fairly nominal change in the overall network, looked at from a countywide perspective, with a 5% reduction in the total number of transfer locations reported. This is generally positive where re- routing and service enhancements lead to inter -lining of routes and more "one -seat" trips for transit users. Changes have been at the margins, with just a few segments adding additional connections or resulting in some loss of other transfer points as service levels to new, different areas are improved. Supporting regional connectivity points to continued attention to the transfers within the county and between systems (5% of transfer opportunities), between counties (6% of all transfer opportunities), and to 171Page 183 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 the regional rail and inter -city bus service (3% of all transfer opportunities). These aid in the mobility of Riverside County residents who wish to use the larger regional network. The good news here is that there are twice as many of these inter -county transfer opportunities and a 33% increase in connections to regional rail and inter -city bus reported this year versus in the previous reporting period. In the next reporting periods, greater change in these transfer connection counts are likely as the Perris Valley Line begins operation, as RTA realizes the near -term recommendations from its Comprehensive Operational Analysis, and as other operators institute additional system changes. 5. RESOURCES The final measure is that of combined resources that together establish the composite picture of Riverside County's public transportation network. The resources presented in Table 5 detail the county's combined transit -related resources within the county's three geographic regions, including: 1. State and local funding that support service and can match available federal funding; 2. Public transit vehicles by which these programs provide trips; and 3. Revenue vehicle miles driven that reflect the quantities of public transit's fixed route and paratransit service provided across these large service areas. Table 5 reports available transit resources and also includes two measures that reflect the service area sizes and quantities of revenue service miles provided. The measures presented in Table 5 include first, transit vehicle per square mile and secondly, vehicle revenue miles per square mile. These indicators give a sense of the physical space that Riverside County transit operators must cover. They provide some indication of how much transit service is provided in relation to the size of the service area, over the course of the year, and within these three regions. 181Page 184 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 TABLE 5 — PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY: COMMISSION ALLOCATED STATE AND LOCAL TRANSIT FUNDING, VEHICLES AND VEHICLE REVENUE MILES Public Transportation Resources FY 2013/14 Western Riverside Coachella Valley County Palo Verde Valley Countywide Totals State and Local Transit Funding, Excluding all Federal $s $ 44,059,664 $ 16,985,614 $ 790,596 Programmed LTF and Measure A Transit, FY 2013/14, exclusive of state and local rail funding Transit Vehicles (fixed route & paratransit, excluding taxis) RTA, City of Riverside, Corona, Banning, Beaumont, SunLine, Palo Verde Valley Vehicle Revenue Miles (fixed route & paratransit) RTA, City of Riverside, Corona, Banning, Beaumont, SunLine, Palo Verde Valley Transit Service Area Square Mileage (Total County=7,206 sq. mi. 11) 482 12, 777, 587 2,337 $ 61,835,874 114 12 608 16, 856,113 4,499 3,902,105 176,421 1,120 1,042 Measure - Vehicles per Square Mile 0.21 0.10 0.01 Measure - Vehicle Revenue Miles Per Square Mile 5,468 3,484 169 0.14 3,747 Sources: Vehicle and mileage information from FY 2013/14 TransTrack Reports - Table 1 Fleet Inventory and Quarterly Performance Scorecard. Extracted from TransTrack on April 15, 2015. Square mileage for total county - US Census Quick Facts; Square mileage for operators' service areas: SRTP for SunLine; GIS analysis for RTA as presented in Figure 1 and for PPVTA as presented in Figure 3. How Are We Doing? As noted earlier, transit funding from state and local resources increased from the prior period's $54 million to this reporting year's almost $62 million, a healthy 15% increase. This provides somewhat greater flexibility to the transit providers and enables them to begin to consider judicious increases to service levels, guided by their short range transit plans and comprehensive operational plan recommendations. Notably, this increase in funding has enabled some transit providers to expand and replace vehicle fleets. Total public transit vehicles reported have gone from 445 reported in the prior period to the current 608, a 37% increase. For RTA, its capital funding resources allowed for expansion of 27 vehicles, spread across fixed route and demand responsive operations. But equally importantly, capital funds supported the replacement of the entire fleet to ensure fuel -efficient, safe, and attractive new vehicles operating throughout its service. SunLine increased its fleet size by 14%, adding 14 new vehicles to its Americans with Disabilities Act complementary paratransit. The City of Riverside Special Transit Services increased its fleet from 30 to 47 vehicles, a 57% increases. Both services are addressing the increasing demand of an aging population, with more older adults considering public dial -a -ride services as an alternative to driving themselves. The PASS Transit program of Banning and Beaumont increased its fleet by 2 vehicles, now a combined fleet of 32 vehicles. The addition of one new vehicle in Palo Verde Valley enabled increased service by this now 12- vehicle fleet and greater assurance about back-up capacity. 191Page 185 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 For the spatial measure of vehicles per square mile, the increase in fleet size for most operators had a positive impact upon the vehicles per square mile. It grew from last year's 0.09 to this reporting period's 0.14 measure, an impressive 50% increase in the ratio between vehicles and the transit service area square mileage of this large county. Similarly for the service level measure of vehicle revenue miles per square mile, the same good news is reflected with a 14% increase to 3,747 vehicle revenue miles per square mile from the prior reporting period value of 3,301. CONCLUSION Generally, the public transit measures reported in this Countywide Report have been positive and represent good news for the mobility of Riverside County residents as summarized in Table 6. The single exception is that the countywide farebox recovery ratio did decline by 8.5% from 25.5% to 23.3%. However, this remains above a statewide minimum of 20% for most fixed route operations, while still including all of the county's public paratransit programs. The decline in farebox partly reflects increased spending power that is the result of increasing sales tax revenue from a recovering economy without yet commensurate increases in ridership. Of critical importance, despite this modest decline in the overall ratio, every Riverside County public transit program exceeded their individual, mandated farebox recovery minimum. Further good news is that transit ridership increased by 3%. This sits against a backdrop of declining ridership levels in adjacent Orange, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties, and many of the public transit programs operating in Los Angeles basin cities. Both Los Angeles Metro and OCTA instituted significant fare hikes that typically suppress ridership. Further, a recovering economy coupled with stable gas prices enabled some previously transit dependent riders to purchase cars. In the face of these factors that contribute to decline in ridership in neighboring counties, Riverside County's overall 3% increase in ridership suggests that some new riders are using public transit, while some riders are taking more transit trips. Ridership increases are also reflected in an increasing trip -per -capita measure of 7.3, steadily, although slowly, increasing over the past three reporting periods, detailed in Appendix B. Contrasted with annual population increases of 2% to 3%, this means that Riverside County transit programs are not only holding their own in the face of a continuously increasing county population, but are growing transit ridership use. Within these transit ridership increases, every mode showed increased utilization. Fixed route and demand response services both increased ridership 3.5% and specialized transportation increased ridership 3.3% over the prior reporting period. Metrolink saw the smallest proportionate increase, just 1.1%, although other parts of the Metrolink system, outside of Riverside County, saw ridership declines. 201Page 186 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 TABLE 6 —SUMMARY OF COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE Riverside County Public Transportation Summary of Countywide Performance Farebox Recovery Ratio FY 2012/13 25.5% FY 2013/14 23.3% %chng -8.5% Total Transit Trips 15,911,447 16,443,553 3% Excluding Metrolink 15,022,603 15,545,337 3% Transit Trips Per Capita 7.1 7.3 3% Transit Accessibility & Coverage 77% 77% no change Countywide Average 3/4 Mile Accessibility to Fixed Route Bus Stop Transfer Connections 1315 1,255 -5% Intra-System 88.3% 85.3% -3% Inter -County Bus, Within County 3.4% 5.3% 54% Regional Bus Transit Between Counties 5.8% 6.1% 6% Regional Rail and National Inter -City Bus 2.5% 3.3% 33% FY 13/14 Transportation Resources State and Local Operating Funds $53.9 million $61.8 million 15% Public Transit Vehicles (Fixed Route & Paratransit) 445 608 37% Vehicle Revenue Miles (Fixed Route & Paratransit) 16.1 million 16.9 million 5% Square Miles of Transit Service Area 4,499 4,499 no change Vehicles Per Square Mile 0.09 0.14 50% Vehicle Revenue Miles Per Square Mile 3,301 3,747 14% Measures of accessibility and coverage show no change. Changes in the bus stop and transfer connections within and between transit programs were limited. There was some increase in the number of inter -system, regional rail, and inter -city bus service connections. There will likely be greater change among these measures during the next reporting period when the new Perris Valley Line, and routing changes for RTA and SunLine, are instituted. Underlying transit operations change lies in the 15% increase in operating revenue received from state and local funds. Growing from $53.9 million to this reporting period's $61.8 million, this 15% increase has translated into increased fleet sizes and more vehicle revenue miles on the road. Much of this was put into the 37% increase in the number of transit vehicles in peak service. There was a 5% increase in the number of revenue vehicle miles countywide, a modest increase to the volume of transit services available. This is all good news as Riverside County, and its various public transportation programs, continue to improve mobility for residents, commuters, and visitors. They are all using public transit services that include regional rail, regional and community -level fixed -route buses, demand responsive services to riders 21 I 187 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 who are ADA certified, and to other riders who are elderly and disabled as well as RCTC's specialized transportation programs that include mileage reimbursement and other special purpose shuttles. Initiatives during this recent fiscal year of 2014/15 will help to further these gains. The new Perris Valley Line and exploration of rail service from the Coachella Valley, expands rail options. The system -wide, long- range planning of the two largest transit operators in the county sets these organizations on solid footing for planned growth, within their respective revenue bases. Active Transportation improvements to the infrastructure for pedestrians and bicyclists will help transit users. Information tools continue to grow, helping to connect riders with available transit. In this past year, for veterans, active military duty personnel, and their family members, the VetLink To -Go Trip Planner builds upon RCTC's effective implementation of the IE 511 traveler information program. And specialized transportation services, such as Care-A-Van's support to Youth Build and through RCTC's new administrative responsibility for the Section 5310 capital and operating funds, ensures that highly specialized transportation needs are addressed. In conclusion, Figure 7 depicts the experience of all Riverside County transit ridership by mode, showing the steady increases across each mode over these four reporting years. This solid growth bodes well for the continued expansion and development of Riverside County's public transportation network across this large and diverse county and its growing number of residents. FIGURE 7 — HISTORY OF ANNUAL PASSENGER TRIPS BY MODE 18000 -15 I— 16000 Annual One -Way Passenger Trips 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Riverside County Annual Passenger Trips by Mode, Four Reporting Periods 2,700 62 549 10,575 1 FY 05/06 - 559 495 796 768 578 824 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 FY 13/14 ■ Regional Rail Specialized Transportation Public Demand Response ■ Public Bus, Fixed Route Note: Change in how Metrolink reported trips for Riverside County were made between FY 05/06 and FY 11/12. 221Page 188 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 APPENDICES Appendix A — Definitions, Data Sets and References Appendix B — Public Transportation Trips Provided, All Modes, Four Fiscal Years Appendix C — Bus Stop Location Counts by Operator and Revised Table 7 - FY 12/13 Transfer Locations Appendix D — Public Transit Fleet Size Over Three Years 23'Page 189 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 APPENDIX A- DEFINITIONS, DATA SETS, AND REFERENCES Data Element Anticipated Data Sources nefinition Passenger trips TransTrack data — extracted from Table 2 — SRTP Service Summary on April 15, 2015. No Metrolink at present in Transit Reporting - One-way passenger boardings of fixed -route, paratransit, deviated fixed -route; - Metrolink boardings at Riverside County stations. Operating expense FY 2013/14 Annual Financial Statements with Independent Auditor's Report Definition from March 2008 adopted Commission policy, all operating expense object classes exclusive of depreciation and amortization, vehicle lease expense. PUC 99247(a) Fare revenue FY 2013/14 Annual Financial Statements with Independent Auditor's Report Definition from March 2008 adopted Commission policy: Fare revenue plus supplemental fare revenues from local support, which may include interest, advertising, etc. as provided for in PUC 6611.3 Transit route structure Active service operating along a fixed -route or deviated fixed -route as of June 30tn. GIS shape files for active routes County population data at the block level US Census, American Community Survey: 1 Yr. - 2011 Estimates - Total county population - Block level data for most current one year ACS estimate Transit transfer data: Intra- system Inter -system Inter -county Transfer locations at which routes connect; each location counted only once; counts validated by operator Count each stop -level transfer location one time for each operator, as of June 30, 2014. Vehicle revenue miles TransTrack data — extracted from Table 2 — SRTP Service Summary on April 15, 2015 Annual revenue service miles as of June 30, 2014 Or total vehicle service miles, inclusive of deadhead. Square mileage US Census County square mileage Operator service area square mileage reported in NTD Whatever is reported to NTD, by operator. Vehicle revenue hours TransTrack data — extracted from Table 2 — SRTP Service Summary on April 15, 2015 Annual revenue service hours as of June 30, 2014 Accessibility and coverage GIS calculation for Figures 2 thru 6. The methodology used to calculate population within the % mile buffers and service areas is included on each map. Using the local California State Plane Coordinate system with distance units measured in feet, buffer and service area polygons for each set of transit routes were first overlaid on top of the area's 2010 US census blocks. Then, 2010 census population counts for each block intersecting these polygons were applied to the corresponding buffer or service area using an area -ratio calculation. If, for example, only % of the area of a census block fell within the buffer or service area then only % of the population of that census block was applied to it. The sum of all these census block calculations, in turn, comprised the population estimate for the corresponding buffer or service area. 241Page 190 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 APPENDIX B - PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TRIPS PROVIDED, ALL MODES Public Transportation Trips Provided 2007 Coordinated FY05/06 Plan RCTC's Annual Report FY 11/12 RCTC's Annual Report FY 12/13 RCTC's Annual Report FY 13/14 Service by Mode [1] Trips %of Total %of Chng Trips Total from Veh Iles in % of cling Trips Total from Veh fiefs in Trips % of Total Chng From Trips Trips FY Active Trips Prior Active Trips Prior 05/O6 Service Year Service year Rail 2,700,117 19% 878,438 6% N/A 888,844 6% 1.2% 898,216 5% 1.1% RCTC Commuter Rail - Riverside Line 1,101,646 215,864 208,230 175,032 RCTC Commuter Rail - Inland Empire Orange County Line 1,066,541 455,510 500,786 553,520 RCTC Commuter Rail - 91 Line 531,930 207,064 179,828 169,664 Public Bus, Fixed Route [3] 10,575,445 76% 13,115,046 86% 24.0% 275 13,667,996 86% 4.2% 389 14,143,952 86% 3.5% RTA FR 5,718,234 6,555,135 94 6,861,830 191 7,155,365 SunLine FR 3,474,361 4,436,917 69 4,558,720 69 4,684,278 RTA Contract FR 916,366 1,635,377 80 1,713,555 90 1,744,652 Banning FR 183,265 127,499 9 138,503 10 146,981 Corona FR 146,983 153,783 4 163,054 4 169,745 Beaumont FR 89,962 164,390 8 190,589 13 198,499 Palo Verde Valley FR 46,274 41,945 11 41,745 12 44,432 ■ ME Public Demand Responsive 548,845 4% 767,883 5% 170 795,503 5% 3.6% 219 823,649 5% 3.5% RTA DAR 199,322 372,322 88 384,442 106 398,636 Riverside Special Transportation Services DAR 145,223 174,058 30 172,725 47 182,878 SunLine DAR 83,956 124,720 31 136,208 45 139,042 Corona DAR 58,892 61,285 12 65,635 12 68,852 Beaumont DAR 28,656 18,786 4 18,710 3 16,899 RTA Tab 18,536 7,648 - 8,539 - 8,271 Banning DAR 9,463 9,064 5 9,244 6 9,071 Palo Verde Valley DAR 4,797 - - - - - Specialized Transportation/ Universal Call Program 61,859 0.4% 494,516 3% 699% 45 559,104 4% 13.1% 54 577,736 4% 3.3% Fixed Route: RTA Extended Services - 101,038 108,180 68,726 RTA Commuter Link - 58,466 64,171 62,542 SunLine Commuter Link 220 - - 12,868 14,528 SunLine Line 95 North Shore - - - 26,603 Paratransit/ Community Shuttle Services: Boys & Girls Club of Southwest County - 57,044 13 49,135 16 41,676 Care -A -Van/ HOPE Bus 9,295 20,115 10 25,060 12 29,845 Care Connemus 13,755 15,829 4 17,597 5 16,333 City of Norco - Senior Shuttle 2,606 1,130 1 2,066 1 1,956 CVAG Roy's Desert Resource Center - 38,945 2 46,561 2 45,272 Friends of Moreno Valley MoVan 4842 5,364 1 4,941 1 3,002 Inland AIDS Project 1,974 2,377 2 2,354 2 2,342 Operation Safehouse - 524 1 309 1 624 Riverside County Regional Medical Center - 10,071 10 9,208 10 5,835 United States Veterans Initiative - - - - 4 5,217 W ildomar Senior Community - 440 1 446 - - Mileage Reimbursement (one-way trips supported): Court Appointed Special Advocates- CASA - 9,380 6,696 5,702 TRIP - Partnership to Preserve Independent Living 24,393 82,383 83,831 87,850 Bus Passes/ Taxi Vouchers/ Van Pool Trips Community Connect/ TAP Bus Pass Trips - 65,263 62,742 65,212 RCTC Commuter benefits/ Coachella Van Pool Trips - 19,037 17,700 18,740 RTA-Travel Training - 5,026 39,334 65,354 SunLine TaA Voucher Program - 2,084 5,905 10,377 Mobility Management and Travel Training Projects Care Connexwls - Driver SensitMly Training - n/a n/a n/a Community Connect/ 211 - n/a n/a n/a Blindness Support -Travel Training - n/a n/a n/a RTA Travel Training - n/a n/a n/a ALL TRIPS: Including Rail, Public Transit, Measure A, JARC and New Freedom 13,886,266 100% 15,255,883 100% 10% 490 15,911,447 100% 4% 662 16,443,553 100% 3% TOTAL POPULATION 2,005,477 2,217,778 2,227,577 2,255,059 Trips per Capita for 2006 Total Population (2,005,477) [4] 6.9 Trips per Capita for 2012 Total Population 151 6.9 Trips per Capita for 2013 Total Population Ic/ 7.1 Trips per Capita for 2014 Total Population 171 7.3 Notes: [1] Ridership and vehicle data for Public Transit Operators populated from TransTrack Tables 1&2 - SRTP Service Summary on 4/15/15. [2] FY 11-12 through FY 13-14 Annualized from average weekday daily boardings at Riverside County stations: Riverside, 91 and Inland Empire -Orange County Lines. [3] Public bus, Fixed Route trip counts for RTA and SunLine do not include Specialized Transportation funded fixed route trips (RTA Extended, Commuterlink and Travel Training, SunLine Commuter, and Community Connect TAP) [4] State of California, Department of Finance, July 2007, and July 2011 [5] RCTC FY 2012/13 Mid -Year Revenue Projects - Department of Finance January 1, 2011, Demographic Research Unit [6] RCTC FY 2013/14 Mid -Year Revenue Projects - Department of Finance January 1, 2012, Demographic Research Unit [7] RCTC FY 2014/15 Mid -Year Revenue Projects - Department of Finance January 1, 2013, Demographic Research Unit 251Page 191 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 APPENDIX C — BUS STOP LOCATION COUNTS BY OPERATOR AND REVISED FY 2012/13 TABLE 7 RTA Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations INTRA SYSTEM I INTER COUNTY REGIONAL ROUTES/' 1 2 3 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 27 29 30 31 32 33 35 40 41 42 49 50 51 55 61 74 79 202 204 206 208 210 212 216 oa�°u, ,�°o,¢' �dn dad4f ,�(s 217 F c- c°‘ cg� 1`k cFs G`� ?' tlF e .6' +6° P6°S o6 06Ps4°O . 1 1 3 3 3 3 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 49 3 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 11 7 3 7 8 4 7 10 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 34 11 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 11 12 4 3 4 3 6 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 40 13 4 3 3 3 5 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 41 14 4 5 2 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 37 15 5 3 5 4 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 38 16 4 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 4 5 3 1 1 1 1 5 44 18 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 11 19 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 22 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 15 21 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 28 23 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 14 24 2 2 2 3 10 27 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 27 29 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 22 30 2 1 2 8 31 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 16 32 1 2 2 3 1 2 2 15 33 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 15 35 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 13 40 1 6 41 3 2 8 42 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 10 49 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18 50 3 3 3 9 51 3 1 1 5 2 1 1 2 1 1 18 55 2 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 14 61 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 15 74 1 1 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 2 29 79 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 3 27 202 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 14 204 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 25 206 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 208 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 46 210 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 4 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 5 4 1 1 1 6 1 47 212 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 41 216 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 30 217 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 26 OCTA 794 1 1 1 3 48 1 5 8 6 34 10 31 34 30 39 34 12 21 10 14 31 15 10 29 18 8 13 16 12 10 6 7 10 16 3 6 14 15 30 26 7 19 12 47 33 43 24 22 0 1 6 6 4 0 15 6 1 2 8 15 2 2 1 32 3 2 1 1 2 1 950 TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION NOTE: Some routes connect only in one direction, do not necessarily make a meaningful connection on the route's reverse dirction. Intra System 839 I tm-C unty 17 Region !Rail 24 Region I Bus 70 26' Page 192 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 SunLine Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations as of January 2015 INTRA-SYSTEM INTER -COUNTY REGIONAL RAIL/INTER-CITYI i- ofrb et` `¢ar 'a- 0 Routes 14 15 24 30 32 53 54 70 80 81 90 91 95 111 .S<b' eSto``c* -* 220 Q Cr 14 1 1 2 1 1 6 15 1 1 24 1 1 1 3 30 2 1 2 2 7 32 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 8 53 1 1 2 1 1 6 *** 54 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 14 70 1 1 1 3 80 2 3 1 1 1 1 9 81 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 10 90 1 1 1 2 2 1 8 91 1 1 1 2 2 1 8 ** 95 1 1 1 2 2 1 8 111 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 18 * 220 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 6 1 3 7 7 4 13 2 9 9 8 8 8 16 4 1 1 8 1 116 TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION Intra-System 101 Inter -Co. 5 Regional 10 116 * Effective date: September 10, 2012 ** Effective date: September 2, 2013 *** Effective date: January 6, 2014 SunLine's Route #220 to the Metrolink station and downtown Riverside supports out -of -county connections to San Bernardino, Los Angeles and San Diego Counties through the host of transfer options afforded at each of these stops. 27'Page 193 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 Pass Transit Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations I NTRA-SYSTEM INTER -COUNTY REGIONAL Route#s 1 3 4 5 7 9 11 17 40 120 c° yF �,� 3 ,c''' Q,a J41 �J e� a�0 0e e� c +c� ii 'L't0 +ceiL 'L y \�Qe `� �oC` �yac c�`0° Fc`y Fc\~ Fc\y tcc\~o �c\3ti Ps,- Ps,-, Ptiy o,CP ��i°\`pP�� `e�roJc��p�o ci ;\`c Ptib P31 Ply Pti10 Jc... .so 4� P'� Q. Q� P� ,, 'C O O O O O e� 4, 'C 4, 1 3 3 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 23 3 5 3 4 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 15 5 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 9 7 1 2 2 2 7 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 12 11 3 2 1 1 1 8 17 1 2 1 1 5 40 r 0 120 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 Cab Circ 1 ` 1 1 19 16 11 11 8 10 10 3 0 3 1 1 6 6 5 5 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 0 126 TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION Intra-System Bus 92 Inter -County Bus 23 Regional Bus 7 Regional Rail/ Intercity Bus 4 126 Routes #1, 5, and 6 interact with other routes but have street stops and no number stops of their own. Route #40 - Free Shuttle service to annual Music Concert at Stewart Park. Pick up and drop offs at various locations in Beaumont. 28'Page 194 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 Corona Cruiser Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations INTRA-SYSTEM INTER -COUNTY REGIONAL RAIL/ INTERCITY BUS Routes Red •<P ssNe 0� eS' er0Jra � � a Blue Q- � Cr p� o'' Red 9 10 1 20 Blue 9 11 2 22 9 9 21 0 3 0 0 42 TOTALS BY TYPE OF CONNECTION Intra-System 18 Inter -County 21 Regional 3 42 PVVTA Routes and Connections/ Transfer Locations INTRA-SYSTEM INTER -COUNTY REGIONAL Routes 1 2 3 4 2 * o°a '`P Se,`�0 �QP earo 5 P- �` 1 3 1 2 1 7 2 3 1 2 6 3 1 1 1 3 4 2 2 1 5 5 0 TOTALS 6 6 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 21 Note: Route 5 is a weekend route and is the only route in operation. No other routes are available to transfer to. Quartzsite Transit Services in Arizona connects paratransit services into Blythe/PVVTA Monday -Friday. 29'Page 195 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 REVISED TABLE 7 — FY 2012/13 TRANSFER LOCATIONS Public Transportation Transfer Locations Fixed -Route and Rail Intra-System Inter -System Within County Regional, Transit Between Counties Regional, Rail and National Inter -City Bus TOTAL Coachella Palo Verd Valley Valley FY 12/13 [1] FY 12/13 Western Riverside County FY 12/13 1,051 92 18 42 3 0 76 0 0 29 3 1 1,198 98 19 Countywide Totals FY 12/13 [1] Through SunLine's January 2014 service change. Source: See Appendix C for detail by operator. 301Page 196 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FY 2013/2014 APPENDIX D - PUBLIC TRANSIT FLEET SIZE OVER THREE YEARS Public Transit FY FY %Change FY %Change Vehicles 2011/2012 2012/2013 from Prior 2013/2014 from Prior Year Year 3-Year History Transit Vehicles only (fixed -route and demand response, excluding taxis) RTA, City of Riverside, Corona, Banning, Beaumont, SunLine, Palo Verde Valley Western Riverside County 333 334 0% 482 31% Fixed Route Demand Response 202 131 195 139 308 174 Coachella Valley 100 100 0% 114 14% Fixed Route Demand Response 69 31 69 31 69 45 Palo Verde Valley 9 11 22% 12 9% Fixed Route Demand Response 9 11 12 Countywide Totals 442 445 1% 608 37% Source: Vehicle information from FY 2013/14 TransTrack Reports -- Table 1 Fleet Inventory. TransTrack Report extracted on April 15, 2015 31' Page 197 AGENDA ITEM 91 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2015/16 San Bernardino Associated Governments Agreement for Inland Empire Rideshare and 511 Services STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 15-41-114-00 with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) as part of the Commission's continuing bi-county partnership with SANBAG to deliver commuter/employer rideshare services and operation of the Inland Empire 511 (IE511) system for Fiscal Year 2015/16 in an amount not to exceed $1,650,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since 1993, SANBAG has contracted with the Commission to develop, implement, and manage a commuter assistance program (CAP) for San Bernardino County commuters. The program consists of several projects: • Rideshare Incentives, developed as a sister incentive project to the Commission's Measure A commuter incentive project, focusing on encouraging solo drivers to try alternative commute modes; • RidesharePlus, modeled after the Commission's rideshare rewards program, providing Entertainment© discounts to local and national merchants for long-term ridesharers. • Employer Services, implemented by SANBAG and the Commission in FY 1995/96 when it was determined by the two agencies that the Inland Empire would assume direct responsibility for the provision of local employer rideshare services. CAP provides various services to employers in the bi-county area including the provision of marketing promotions, rideshare survey processing, assistance with average vehicle ridership calculations/compliance, employer network meetings, and newsletters; • Ridematching and Information Services, jointly established in FY 2002/03 by the Commission and SANBAG when they began providing these services directly; Agenda Item 91 198 " 1E511, implemented in FY 2009/10 to provide traveler information to Riverside and San Bernardino County commuters; and " IECommuter, launched earlier in FY 2014/15, integrating 1E511 traveler information and rideshare services to provide commuters with a personalized service. In partnership with SANBAG, a FY 2015/16 work plan and budget for continuation of SANBAG's CAP and the ongoing maintenance and operation of a 511 travel information services system was developed by Commission staff. The proposed agreement between SANBAG and the Commission was approved by SANBAG's committee on June 10 and will be brought to its board for final approval on July 1, 2015. Staff is seeking Commission approval for an agreement with SANBAG in an amount not to exceed $1,650,000 to be reimbursed to the Commission. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget Yes Year: FY 2015/16 Amount: $1,650,000 Source of Funds: SANBAG Budget Adjustment: No 002111/002112/632113/002139/002146/002178/002182/002188/002191416 41605 0000 GLA No.: 263 41 41203 $1,278,700 452124 416 41605 0000 202 45 41203 $371,300 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14111A1.64,�� Date: 06/12/2015 Attachment: FY 2015/16 SANBAG Agreement and Scope of Work Agenda Item 91 199 Attachment "A " Scope of Work San Bernardino Employer and Commuter Assistance Programs Fiscal Year 2015-16 IE Commuter Provide a variety of services to employers and commuters, who participate in trip reduction activities. Activities shall include, but not be limited to: Host and maintain the IE511.org and IECOMMUTER.org websites, mobile device interfaces, social media platforms, and other regional products/outreach as assigned. Respond and coordinate inquiries with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff that are San Bernardino County specific and generated from 511, 1-866- RIDESHARE as well as direct referrals. Oversee and maintain an Inland Empire focused database of commuters with SANBAG owning all Documents and Data (hard copy and electronic formats), as that term is defined in Section F(1) of the Agreement. Administer and provide technical assistance for the IE Commuter program including employer, employee, and end user account management, SCAQMD Rule 2202, Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) certified South Coast Air Quality Management District calculations, coordinating and implementing employer surveys and Ridematching including disseminating and production of RideGuides both electronically and paper, incentive program management, production of output reports including analysis of survey results, and maintaining marketing logs and commuter diary. Coordination with other rideshare agencies and service providers to assist multi -site and multi - jurisdictional employers and Employee Transportation Coordinator's (ETC) within San Bernardino County as well as related worksites outside of the County. Conducting ETC networking meetings including bi-annual workshops, rideshare week kick-off event and recognition events. Marketing to employers, employees, and end user commuters including Rideshare Connection broadcast a -mails and eNewsletters, administering commuter promotions and incentives, graphic design for various collateral materials including but not limited to brochures, RideGuides, posters, banners etc., and web based advertising, and developing messaging for print, media, and social media advertising campaigns. Support for employer and community events as well as transportation forums. Market and administer the regional Guaranteed Ride Home Program and Vanpool Subsidization Program to employers in San Bernardino County. Maintain and increase the County's leased Park and Ride lot program. Operate the 511 program through phone and web services, providing enhancements, resolving issues, conducting marketing and periodic surveys. Conduct special projects and studies, as assigned, and work closely with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff on all special projects and/or studies that impact the San Bernardino Rideshare and/or 511 programs. RCTC is to advise at the start of and coordinate with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff of all potential enhancements, issues, and periodic surveys if such tasks could change/alter the current Rideshare and/or 511 programs in San Bernardino County. 15-1001245 200 In addition, SANBAG rideshare/511 staff to work closely at the start with RCTC and to be in partnership during the review and subsequent approval process of the rideshare and/or 511 marketing and communication plan, messaging development, media buy, advertising materials or any incentive outreach changes. RCTC shall also provide SANBAG rideshare/511 staff with the following reports: (i) Employer Activity Report for all employers with signed Employer Participation Agreements; (ii) Program Performance; (iii) Program Management (employer output, employer management, eRideGuides, contact management, etc.); (iv) 511 mobile app statistics; (v) 511 calls and Interactive Voice Response statistical data; (vi) ie511.org statistics; and (vii) any newly developed reports. Goals and Performance Measures: 1. Implementation of commuter assistance programs to approximately 490 regulated and non -regulated employer worksites in San Bernardino County, to assist in the development and implementation of trip reduction programs and for technical assistance. 2. Work with approximately 175 employers on AVR/Transportation surveys and AVR calculations. 3. Maintain an accurate database of approximately 47,400 active San Bernardino County commuter registrants, resulting from completed commuter surveys at approximately 175 San Bernardino County employers. 4. Disseminate approximately 8,900 RideGuides to San Bernardino County commuters at approximately 490 worksites. 5. Provide assistance to seven multisite/multijurisdictional headquarters located in San Bernardino County representing 23 worksites in San Bernardino, Riverside, as well as Los Angeles and Orange counties. 6. Develop and implement three employer transportation network meetings, one promotional marketing campaign at San Bernardino employer worksites, and other events. 7. Produce and disseminate other regional marketing materials, as standalone campaigns within the Inland Empire or regional campaigns in coordination with the five County Transportation Commissions. 8. Broadcast 12 Rideshare Connection a -mails to San Bernardino County employers. 9. For the two -county area, respond to approximately 2,000 inquires/calls from commuters who work or reside in San Bernardino or Riverside counties, via 1-866-RIDESHARE, 1-866- IECS4HELP, 511, direct referrals and other internet sources. Of these 2,000 inquiries, approximately 200 RideGuides will be generated. In addition, approximately 575 Inland residents will register in the database via the www.iecommuter.org" www.iecommuter.org website. SANBAG rideshare/511 staff will be copied on all responses that are specific to San Bernardino County. 10. Manage and operate the 511 system which will be available to commuters 24 hours a day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year. 11. The 511 phone system will provide assistance to approximately 25,000 callers per month throughout the year. The system will have the capacity to handle approximately 100,000 concurrent callers. 12. The www.ie511.org website will potentially receive approximately 40,000 unique visitors per month. Website will be able to handle approximately 100,000 concurrent users. 15-1001245 201 13. Continue 511 marketing/outreach and coordinating development of the marketing plan, campaign themes, surveys, studies and potential collateral materials for San Bernardino County with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff, before the tasks are implemented. 14. Conduct and coordinate periodic surveys with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff to determine the 511 program use, effectiveness and customer satisfaction. 15. Provide IE511 website, phone, and mobile application enhancements/upgrades as needed. 16. Finalize work with Caltrans and the Interactive Voice Response/map contractor to implement HERE data for closure of gaps in detection on the traffic map. 17. Collaboratively with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff, explore possible opportunities to improve the 511 system for the motorists and residents of both counties. Rideshare Incentive Programs The SANBAG $2/day Rideshare Incentive offers San Bernardino County residents who commute to work, up to $2 a day (in gift cards) for each day they participate in a rideshare mode, during a three-month period. The Vanpool Incentive Program provides up to $1,800 over nine months in discounted vanpool fares. The SANBAG Rideshare Plus program provides ongoing ridesharers who reside in San Bernardino County a Rideshare Plus Rewards Book with discounts to local merchants plus 200,000 additional discounts available online. RCTC to manage and operate the Incentive Programs listed above, and to coordinate and discuss with SANBAG rideshare/511 staff when potential changes to the Incentive Programs are being considered. Goals and Performance Measures: 1 The SANBAG $2/day Rideshare Incentive program will enlist 1,100 County residents, who commute to work to 125 employers in Southern California. These participants on average have a one-way commute distance of 27.59 miles and the goal is to reduce 109,000 one way vehicle trips from the roadways. 2. The SANBAG Rideshare Plus program will consist of 6,400 members when the program is at its highest membership. Members will work at employment sites from 350 employers throughout Southern California. 15-1001245 202 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2016 State Transportation Improvement Program Plan Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the formula percentage distribution among the three geographic areas in Riverside County (Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley) based on taxable sales per the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Intracounty Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for purposes of preparing the 2016 STIP submittal. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The STIP is a five-year program of projects that is updated every two years outlining the commitment of transportation funds for highways, rail operations, mass transportation, and local roads with a new emphasis on bike and pedestrian facilities, also known as Active Transportation. In June of every odd year, Caltrans is required to prepare a draft STIP Fund Estimate (FE) that estimates how much funding will be available for programming over the next five-year period, Fiscal Years 2016-21. Since each STIP cycle adds on two years, the programming capacity is typically in the last two years. In August, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) is scheduled to adopt the FE along with guidelines on how regional agencies are to prepare the submittal. The 2016 STIP FE establishes funding levels for the STIP and also the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). STIP funds are allocated into two broad programs — the Regional Improvement Program (RIP) receives 75 percent of the total STIP funds, and the remaining 25 percent is directed to Caltrans for its Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). The 75 percent RIP funding is further subdivided by formula into county shares. County shares are available solely for projects nominated by regional agencies. At the June 25, 2015 CTC meeting, CTC staff reported that the 2016 STIP Draft FE for statewide programming capacity is $30 million, which would be available in FY 2020/21. In addition, programming capacity is less than projected in the 2014 STIP. Therefore, with $30 million being Agenda Item 10 203 a relatively insignificant amount and a 2014 STIP overprogramming issue in FY's 2016/17- 2018/19, the 2016 STIP cycle will provide zero new programming capacity and current projects would need to be reprogrammed to the outer years. Governor Brown's announcement of a Special Session of the State Legislature to address transportation maintenance funding may provide a solution to the funding limitations for road maintenance and future STIP cycles. CTC staff also reported at the June meeting that there is a possibility the adoption of the 2016 FE in August could be delayed based on the outcome of the Special Session. If the Special Session results in increased revenues for the 2016 STIP, a revised STIP FE will be determined including county shares for each region for programming purposes. STIP programming capacity for Riverside County has been as follows: STIP Cycle Amount 2000 $49,000,000 2002 $34,000,000 2004 $2,000,000 2006 $167,000,000 (Prop 1B STIP fund) 2008 $0 2010 $0 2012 $90,000,000 2014 $67,000,000 2016 ? The current 2014 STIP projects for Riverside County include the following preliminary engineering, right of way, and construction phases as follows: APPROVED 2014 STIP Agency Project Phase FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 FY 2017/18 FY 2018/19 Total STIP Temecula I-15/French Valley IC Cons $41,545,000 $41,545,000 *Caltrans/RCTC SR-60 Truck Climbing/ Descending Lane ROW, Cons $32,105,000 32,105,000 *Caltrans/RCTC ** B Canyon Wildlife Crossing PE, ROW $500,000 $980,000 1,480,000 **County/Indio 1-10 Jefferson IC Cons 33,310,000 33,310,000 *RCTC 1-215 SB connector Cons 8,975,000 8,975,000 **RCTC/CVAG PPM Cons 664,000 664,000 663,000 668,000 $668,000 3,327,000 *CVAG CV Link, Phase 1 Cons 2,000,000 2,000,000 Totals $34,474,000 $1,644,000 $32,768,000 $53,188,000 $668,000 $122,742,000 *New projects added in 2014 STIP cycle. Cons=Construction **Allocated in FY 2014/15 incl. B Canyon Wildlife Crossing PA/ED IC=Interchange and PPM. PA/ED=Project Approval/Environmental Document CVAG=Coachella Valley Association of Governments PE=Preliminary Engineering PPM=Planning, Programming, and Monitoring ROW=Right of Way Agenda Item 10 204 STIP Intracounty Formula Per the Commission's STIP intracounty formula, STIP funds are allocated to Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley based on the most recent fiscal year taxable sales by geographic area data used for Measure A allocations. In addition, STIP guidelines allow up to five percent of funding for PPM activities. The Commission's policy is to set aside two percent for PPM. The geographic area percentages of taxable sales for 2011 used for the 2014 STIP compared to 2013 for the 2016 STIP are as follows: Geographic Area 2014 STIP 2016 STIP Western County 75.17% 75.76% Coachella Valley 24.12% 23.54% Palo Verde Valley 0.71% 0.70% Based on the above percentages for the 2016 STIP, the FE amount for Riverside County will be calculated in accordance with the following format with the Riverside County share to be determined upon adoption of the 2016 STIP FE: 2016 STIP Total Riverside County Share $ Less: 2% PPM ( ) Total New Project Programming $ Western County 75.76% $ Coachella Valley 23.54% $ Palo Verde Valley 00.70% $ 2016 STIP Proposed Project Programming Western Riverside County projects are nominated by Commission staff. Staff will review the projects remaining in the STIP and check the deliverability of the projects as programmed in the STIP. Recommendations for new projects for STIP funds will be based on consistency with Measure A and high priority projects approved by the Commission. As previously mentioned, the state's priorities have shifted to meet the goals established in SB 375, which is to reduce greenhouse gases according to targets set by the California Air Resources Board. Therefore, the STIP submittal should include a multimodal approach in the development of a program of projects. CVAG nominates its projects and notifies Commission staff for final concurrence and submittal to the CTC. Palo Verde Valley projects are nominated by the city of Blythe (Blythe); however, given the minor amount of funding and complexity in processing these funds, the Commission Agenda Item 10 205 and Blythe have executed MOU's in past STIP cycles trading Palo Verde Valley STIP funds with Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds. Staff will meet with Blythe to discuss applying the MOU for 2016 STIP funds. 2016 STIP Submittal The 2016 STIP submittal is due to the CTC on December 15, 2015, unless the schedule is revised. The submittal requires various forms and reports that will include the involvement of Ca!trans, project sponsors and consultants, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The CTC is scheduled to adopt the 2016 STIP in March 2016. To accommodate the above schedule, staff will present its recommendations for 2016 STIP programming at the September 9, 2015 Commission meeting, unless the FE is delayed by CTC. The proposed STIP projects will need to be submitted to SCAG by the end of September in order for SCAG to conduct performance measures analyses in accordance with STIP guidelines. There is no fiscal impact to the Commission. Agenda Item 10 206 2016 State Transportation Improvement Program Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director July 8,2015 State Transportation Improvement Program - Administered by California Transportation Commission - Five-year statewide program of projects - Updated every 2 years - 75 percent of funding allocated to regions (RCTC) - 25 percent of funding allocated to Caltrans for Interregional Road System projects cam, lromQonows ccomisuon STIP Fund Estimate: Caltrans prepares the Fund Estimate (FE) based on current legislation and budget 2016 STIP Programming years are FY's 2016/17 through 2020/21 2016 Draft FE was released June 25, 2015 = $30 million statewide!!! Adoption of Final FE scheduled for August 27 CTC meeting Unless ST I P Cycle = 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 (draft FE) i $49million $ 34 million $ 2 million $ 167 million (Prop 1B) $0 $0 $90million $ 67 million $ 1.7 million (FY 2020/21) t l k17.. 1 �CrC prjil aciO dig] - ACR1 21?c! 2016 STI P Reprogramming Exercise MitaScam: Draft 2025 STTFFund Emanate EPue bars re -prime -lit dollar amounts of proje-= proGram ed by FY in the- Z.+DiA Slip when funding levels mere asf urned to ue hiGirar. Reel bars are the new. much lower, handing capacity estimate s. Ydlow represents the- rreded t. be sh Rted to later re's to brir- the STIP back all err me rtt with new Jowre r fu nd i n E e sti rn a trs. The tiny pp in F.f 20-21 rcPrcenits the $3 1 miIIiar of nr v prograrnming capacity far toe errtire 2016ST1R period. lrli SfrL7 i I r17-13 • 311-1S i"Fr rt r n.rr. With vary few exceptions, projectsv�ll 6e delayed one or two -Focal years due ha lads of timely fundirg. 115E 20 Fiume REar •2Gi!! STIF Prograin MET! Prgel3ZE • 2016 S 113 Fundng Y E. Reprogrammed Proixl Near Progomrning C..:pGroty (..30 millian� Caftrans-Trarsia•irtrtinn Prag-a m mi rig Julys 1. 2.015 Temecula RCTC/CVAG Caltrans/RCTC Caltrans/RCTC County/Indio RCTC CVAG -15/French Valley Parkway IC Planning, Programming, and Monitoring (approx. $664,000 per yr) SR-60 Truck Climbing/Descending Lane B Canyon Wildlife Crossing -10/Jefferson IC Cons T ROW, Cons PE, ROW Cons 1-215 SB connector Cons CV Link, Phase 1 Cons 2017/18 2014/15- 2018/19 2016/17 2014/15, 2015/16 2014/15 2017/18 2017/18 Total $ 41, 545, 000 $ 3,327,000 $ 32,105,000 $ 1,480,000 $ 33,310,000 $ 8,975,000 $ 2,000,000 $122,742,000 Unless... Governor Brown called a Special Session of the Legislature "to consider and act upon legislation necessary to enact permanent, sustainable funding to adequately and responsibly maintain and repair the state's transportation and other critical infrastructure." Possible outcome = Increase revenues for STIP If STIP funds become available.... Riverside County's STIP share is allocated among the 3 geographic areas based on current taxable sales: - Western County - Coachella Valley - Palo Verde Valley 75.76% 23.54% 0.70% If STIP funds become available.... Total Riverside County Share $ Less: 2% PPM (per MOU) ($ ) Total New Project Programming $ ... , . Western County 75.76% $ Coachella Valley 23.54% $ Palo Verde Valley 0.70% $ If STIP funds become available.... • RCTC will select Western County projects • CVAG will select Eastern County projects • Blythe and County will select Palo Verde Valley projects Ca!trans releases draft STIP FE: by July 15, 2015 CTC adopts Final STIP FE: August 26-27, 2015 RCTC approval of 2016 STIP: September 9, 2015 STIP projects due to SCAG: September 30, 2015 (Performance Measures) STIP submittal due to CTC: December 15, 2015 CTC approves 2016 STIP: By April 1, 2016 Note: Dates subject to change per CTC adoption of Final STIP FE Approve the formula percentage distribution among the 3 geographic areas, per the STIP Intracounty MOU, for the purpose of the 2016 STIP submittal: - Western County 75.76% - Coachella Valley 23.54% - Palo Verde Valley 0.70% ...if STIP funds become available AGENDA ITEM 11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: David Thomas, Toll Project Manager SUBJECT: 91 Project - Construction Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the 91 Project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Construction is progressing well on the widening of State Route 91 in Corona. Staff will provide an update on the current construction activity for the 91 Project. Agenda Item 11 207 FAST FORWARD 91 PROJECT UPDATE Riverside County Transportation Commission July8, 2015 _,ro.m..• Rnenide County Tronsporlofion Commission 1 {11.11 .11 kulvo,u1;s111s ulili ku Plsi11l4m,11.sstf 1{yy,4144111111111111 ,r � r.m.. lr7 iJhria d 117711.'.i�li 41111rimi11111' 11 • LL yp �1 •bloilil Lenin' I • .• . _ . , .,,. _AL Location: Old EB SR-91 to NB/SB 1-15 Connector at BR-27 — Facing West Description: Existing bridge demolition over BNSF tracks. " 41: " " 1.- I 0-M.,10, 11' !I''" " heft " t " i!,..,....... _______. - _ - ,o_., :. _ .,..,,,.... 4 . 21*. -" -- I MI, ' -In! .1-s . - ' i.r r. " ' " - . ...... L4L.i. .. . -,..- . `"4*.k,-.. Location: Bridge 25 (SB 1-15 to WB SR-91 Connector), Worksite Facing West Description: Bridge 25 soffit and stem installation. t„. A rr I4uw. • IP" • .1 . • .5 r . • • t 4.4t. 4 . ,t. 1 "or 4 iffj , • # , z 440 • • ' - ta3 co Bescri•tion: Existin: eri• :e •emo ition over BNSF trac s / 4/ I i ' I' 4,,,r I frI$11 i' • .. ,,,, '4,4%'''' ' / .1....' * A .e. . ; • 01 r .tt..,' N.1.1.11, • .,e...• ... ..rileikki6 •P•'' 4 • 0 'Or 4* .1;°.. 1 .;• ,i f :,'"::::.- - r. ) ..... A 7. , • ,,...._-,h..... A. 4., - r V.A_ # • • 0••• ' • ! •_p• • • .••• :e • r T :•• • " J 2r• . e• • ( f!.....),/ .... ., .'- 0, . - l'- 1) •-• ., ' • . . C,,;';'-ir 7 ' /,,./ Illl ;.,--7 1. "' , ..,,,, . f Pi: • • '. . 'J'' ' ' . ,'''K ili'l '..:.. ,..., / - :, - er r4'. .,..': .4.4.,. • :. -,'.. ...,' '7.:, . . A ' 7-4' .,,,..' - • . •., ,.:....,,.... ...', -, . , -7...... - • ..•,- iw.......'. . :.-.jf.';`,:-/-:;'.;t1, ' • • 11 v.' P ' ' I.1�.i N •, I frs r�a .i __ r�y14 � • N CD i .� C3 LL Q 4_4- 1E2 a) L O a7, V � C /\^�) E V 0 O F � v CO to m zc u O O m to M � O to r .c E re „ .0 o ca (.) U p a) J cr ' '41�*y5 .J v '1',+Y 4 •.k4. ¢ , � •• ' . . + RIverxldr �# -, • _ f #s fir.crt Ciri#s . fiT _ Barstow it tilr .', a iillti I i ItMl_kt .. . C ��.-_i� F•' . .. 1 WI", ,.r Location: 1-15 Median @ Old Temescal Rd. — Facing North Description: PCC pavement along 1-15 median. Blockout for median sign structure foundation. r r i Tii a) f a) 0_ 2 0. 8 0 E _c -ti o z © o_ E vo ce % 4 0 8.w > _a 1=7•71111W5Will :I:1 055 FWei V; cc u.i c •_ c) as u_ 1 Location: WB SR-91 @ SR-71 Interchange — Looking Northeast Description: Earthwork for WB SR-91 widening between Auto Center Dr. and SR-71. s. t•_.'.,-16 �. ` 4.M - 11ytT•• ►. 1". f � - 'iw._ i �.14 1111 s. `- r" . +.41 r Location: - - :e 2 (WB SR-91/Green River Rd. off -ramp) @ West Prado Rd. — Facing West Description: Stem -soffit concrete pour between Abut 1 and Bent 4 '— ..._ _ II ii - / .."'Mtf. 5131#456.4 1.•*1.. Wig---- :-.7"wdr...,i+Frjfi, .i 4- ,iii. .e-:*:•.*':---tiv,,----i-, i---.71F-9r iviLumriiir —"— .14. -7,--11 TZ i'i ,-,__i ____4.1_.__.J.L4LcIj-.----,f-----44, —7- •—•.,5 i.ji,„4„,-IFITC—row,w,. 1_42.4,-.,_ -1_....i .„„ i . v :ilk% war wme 4ujiRd...1- INURNIII dMile,._,L.LTAI{ —= -- '•O-- —"11: .,'"14.1°1 sr t'1F . 3"' lift - 1, —741( lir 111% i Wir ,:ill N I-- V' .-.-- --- „ .,:Trw71-14F-ci Ti-,71.5-4-4,41ti 471-4,7kiji14. Iiirri'17 •!:.10-riir.'2:10'. —.. __„... ..J. -kll, . mis . T. AL tmi irwiwsi..oinitrittlikir ,r.. 74... ...- ..... .... . • 7n1 () 12 13 Location: Bridge 2 (WB SR-91/Green River Rd. off -ramp) @ West Prado Rd. — Facing North Description: Deck concrete placement between Abutland Bent4. cri -I-, c a) co -0 c co ,--I -I-, c a) E z _o < c CU CD CU _0 01— CU cm Ta 4- 45 To > o E a) cc E. 0 0_ ._ 0 cr) a) 0 Major Activities 91 FROJECT FAST FORWARD RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION OMain Street squeeze and EB on -ramp closure January 20, 2015 —Approximately April 2016 Q ES connector traffic switch April 27, 2015 Q Closure, WB Main Street off -ramp May 15, 2015 —Approximately March 2016 91 Corona squeeze (lane width reductions) June 1, 2015 —Approximately April 2016 Q Serfas Club Drive —Maple Street makeover June 26, 2015 Approximately Late 2016 Coming Soon... 91 FROJECT FAST FORWARD RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION August 2015 • Completion, new Frontage Road and EB Maple St. on -ramp. • Closure, Serfas Club WB off -ramp (2 months). • Closure, Serfas Club EB on -ramp (15 months). September 2015 • NW connector traffic switch. • Green River Road WB off -ramp traffic switch. ➢ETTM Turnover —April 14, 2016 ➢New Lanes Open! — 2017 FROJECT FAST FORWARD Stay Connected RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION sr91project.info 877-770-9191 @sr91project sr91project.com Check out our mobile website! Atirg Real-time traffic updates, ie511.org AGENDA ITEM 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: July 8, 2015 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Federal and State Legislation Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file an update on federal and state legislation; and 2) Adopt the following bill position — H.R. 2497 — Support. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Federal Update NEPA Reciprocity Act Introduced Congressman Jeff Denham (R-CA-10) introduced H.R. 2497, known as the "National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Reciprocity Act." This bill strongly aligns with a long-standing legislative priority of the Commission to reduce duplicative environmental reviews. The bill is similar to legislation previously introduced by then -Congressman Gary Miller. H.R. 2497 creates a program to be administered by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation that eliminates duplicative environmental reviews and approvals of transportation projects under state and federal laws. Under the program, a state may apply to the Secretary for permission to substitute one or more state environmental laws and/or regulations for one or more federal laws and/or regulations. In order to obtain approval, the Secretary must determine the state laws and/or regulations provide environmental protection and public participation opportunities "substantially equivalent" to federal laws and/or regulations. Importantly, the bill sets a 90-day deadline for the Secretary to render a decision on applications for the program. At least every five years, the Secretary must review and allow public comment on the environmental review and approval procedures authorized under the program. Upon completion of the review and comment period, the Secretary has the discretion to terminate a state's participation in the program or award an extension for another five years. Agenda Item 12 208 California is known throughout the nation as having one of the most robust and thorough environmental review and public participation laws for transportation (and other types of) projects, known as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Many elements of CEQA are identical to, or more far-reaching than the NEPA, which must also be followed for any project that uses federal funds or takes place on a federal -aid highway. California and the federal government also have several other overlapping natural resource regulations and laws. This overlap leads to the creation of multiple public documents that often report the same findings, yet have different agencies overseeing the studies with different requirements as to how the work is to be done. The cacophony of bureaucratic input can lead to extensive costs and time delays, uncoordinated (and even conflicting) decision -making, while producing minimal value added, compared to the likely results of following a more simplified set of procedures. The Commission experienced this expensive fact on numerous major public works projects that have substantial benefit to the environment and quality of life of Riverside County residents. Therefore, the Commission strongly supported policy efforts to consolidate and coordinate environmental reviews and approvals wherever possible, without sacrificing environmental protection. In fact, the Commission and all of Riverside County has been a leader in this concept via the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP). These efforts helped address environmental and public concerns in a holistic, up front fashion, demonstrating that environmental sustainability and transportation network growth are not mutually exclusive goals. Based on these facts and history, staff recommends the Commission support H.R. 2497. Staff believes the bill language could use several clarifications to ensure the intent of the bill is implemented in practice; however, it is important the Commission get behind policy proposals in this genre as Congress considers reauthorization of MAP-21. Commission staff will work with stakeholders and Representative Denham's office to work further on H.R. 2497. DRIVE Act Moves in Senate On a bipartisan basis, the Senate Environment & Public Works (EPW) Committee approved the "Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy Act" (DRIVE Act) without amendments. This bill is a six -year reauthorization of federal surface transportation law, which builds on many of the policies contained in MAP-21. The DRIVE Act provides for modest increases in spending on transportation, although the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways & Means Committee have yet to identify funding sources to continue current spending levels beyond July 31, 2015. The DRIVE Act has several positive provisions of interest to the Commission: • A new $2 billion freight program that is apportioned to states on a formula basis; • Authority for states to fill gaps in the primary freight network as mapped by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); Agenda Item 12 209 " Authority for metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) to designate critical urban freight corridors; " Continuation of project streamlining programs in MAP-21 and further direction to U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to find efficiencies in environmental reviews and approvals; " Increases the share of Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds that go directly to urban regions from 50 percent to 55 percent, which reduces the state's share of STP funds from 50 percent to 45 percent. This is a valuable, flexible funding source the Commission uses on many important projects; and " Increases opportunity for local control of Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) funds for projects such as sidewalks, bicycle paths, ADA compliance, and other non - motorized transportation improvements. Several of these provisions have been championed by the Commission. Given the long-term nature of the bill and policy improvements, staff believes the DRIVE Act is an excellent step forward and encourages the Commission's active support. Credit is due to the majority and minority staffs of the EPW Committee, who met with Commission staff and representatives several times this spring and throughout the last two years. Given that much Congressional activity will take place between the time this staff report is presented and the next Commission meeting, staff will keep Commissioners apprised of important developments via email. U.S. Department of Labor Continues to Hold Transit Funds Another issue in flux is the continued withholding of certification of millions of dollars of federal transit grants by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). California transit properties, including Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), are hostage to a legal battle between DOL and the State of California over the compatibility of California's Public Employee Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) and section 13(c) of the Urban Mass Transportation Act (UMTA) of 1964 section 13(c). Section 13(c) protects bargaining units from being harmed by the receipt of federal grants and provides a formal union objection process that is adjudicated by DOL. Transit unions and DOL contended PEPRA violates collective bargaining rights protected by section 13(c), leading to a halt in the certification of federal transit grants to California transit operators. In 2013 Governor Brown, the State Legislature, and the Sacramento Regional Transit District (Sac RT) reached an agreement with DOL to settle the matter legally as follows: " Sac RT allowed DOL to reject one of its federal grants; the State backfilled the lost federal funding with State Transit Assistance (STA) funds; " Now with legal standing, Sac RT and the state sued DOL over its interpretation and implementation of section 13(c); " The Governor and State Legislature approved AB 1222 to temporarily exempt transit workers from PEPRA until such time that a federal district court judge ruled that DOL Agenda Item 12 210 erred in denying certification to Sac RT, or January 1, 2016 (originally January 1, 2015, but was extended by subsequent law); • The dispute between the state's pension reform and whether it is compatible with federal collective bargaining protections for transit workers would be settled by the federal judicial process. In December 2014, a federal district judge ruled DOL was "arbitrary and capricious" in its implementation of section 13(c) and remanded the case back to DOL. Yet, DOL notes the judge did formally state DOL "erred" in not certifying Sac RT's grant. Nonetheless, the California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS) notified all CaIPERS transit agencies in February 2015, the temporary exemption from PEPRA for transit workers was expired due to the judge's ruling. DOL filed an appeal of the judge's ruling and is preparing its remand decision back to the court. In the meantime, transit funds are still not fully flowing to California transit agencies that are reliant upon these federal grants for the FY 2015/16 budgets the transit agencies have just adopted. Instead, DOL offered to certify grants only as follows: • Grants for expenses prior to January 1, 2015; and • If grantees accept the following condition: o If on remand from the federal district court, DOL determines PEPRA and section 13(c) are not compatible and that position is not legally challenged (by the state and Sac RT) within 60 days, the grantee must agree to either: ■ Retroactively restore pre-PEPRA collective bargaining rights; or ■ Return the federal grant funds. Accepting this condition presents a legal risk that is still being analyzed by counsel to RTA, SunLine, and the Commission. Transit agencies lack the authority to retroactively restore collective bargaining; to do so would be in violation of PEPRA. Furthermore, transit agencies do not have the authority to cause the state or Sac RT to challenge any DOL decision on remand. This legal dispute and the resulting administrative processes have already created significant financial consequences in Riverside County. Concurrently on this Commission agenda is an approximately $4.8 million emergency bridge loan to RTA to cover FY 2014/15 costs that were budgeted last year to be covered by federal funds. This loan is in addition to a $3 million loan provided to SunLine at the June Commission meeting. The Commission, RTA, and SunLine have spent many years building a financially sustainable, modern transit system in Riverside County using very limited funding for the increasing mobility needs of our constituents. A protracted dispute between the state and DOL threatens to undermine the fiscal stability of Riverside County's transit system. Such instability will ultimately lead to near -term reductions in service that will harm transit -dependent populations such as low-income, senior, and disabled persons, and reduce the transit workforce. Agenda Item 12 211 The Governor and Legislature have indicated no willingness to extend the temporary exemptions from PEPRA given transit employees in 2013. Meanwhile, PEPRA continues to apply to all other represented and non -represented public employees throughout California. To urge DOL action on all California transit grants, Representative Ken Calvert (R-Corona) led a California delegation letter to U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez, which is attached. Representative Calvert also sponsored report language in the FY 2015/16 Labor/Health and Human Services Appropriations Bill directing DOL to begin certifying transit grants to California agencies, which is attached. The office of Representative Raul Ruiz engaged by facilitating dialogue between RTA, SunLine, and the Commission with DOL. These conversations have helped both local and federal agencies gain clarity on the situation and talk through the legal complexities that face both sides. The office of Representative Mark Takano has also been monitoring the situation and communicating with local transit agencies, DOL, and the Governor's Administration. The Commission is extraordinarily grateful to all of the Members of Congress who have focused on this issue and worked towards a solution. The Commission, RTA, and, SunLine will continue working collaboratively with federal representatives to avert the unfortunate consequences of a long-term halt of federal transit funds. Governor Calls Special Session of the Legislature to Deal With Transportation State Update Governor Brown called a special session of the State Legislature to address transportation funding issues. The Governor's proclamation focuses the special session on: • Maintenance and repair of the state's transportation and other critical infrastructure; • Key trade corridors; • Complementing local efforts for repair and improvements of local transportation infrastructure; • Performance objectives for maintenance of roads; and • Efficiencies to expedite project delivery or reduce project costs. The Governor notes that current excise fuel tax revenues are only sufficient to fund $2.3 billion in annual highway repairs, while $5.7 billion in needs remain unfunded every year. This does not include the unfunded maintenance needs on local streets and roads. As staff has presented to the Commission previously, the recent reduction in fuel tax will further reduce maintenance funding for local cities and the county of Riverside by 25 percent, or approximately $26 million in FY 2015/16. Agenda Item 12 212 At its May meeting, the Commission adopted six core principles to measure any transportation funding package in Sacramento. Staff and Commission lobbyists will use these principles to advocate during the special session. These principles are: 1) Restore funds for transportation projects; 2) Regional share, decision -making, equity; 3) Geographic equity for state funds; 4) User -pay = User -benefit; 5) Reduce the costs of delivery; and 6) Fund trade corridors. These principles are being communicated to Riverside County's state legislative delegation. Senate Minority Leader Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar) introduced SCAX1-1, identical to his proposed SCA 7 in regular session. This constitutional amendment would restrict all state borrowing of all revenue derived from taxes and fees on motor vehicles, and would prohibit those revenues from paying for debt service. SCAX1-1 will also ensure that these revenues are restricted to being spent on projects on streets and highways, and not diverted to other transportation purposes. This proposal is consistent with the Commission's adopted principles. Senate Transportation & Housing Chairman Jim Beall (D-Santa Clara) introduced SBX1-1, identical to his SB 16 in regular session. As discussed at the Commission previously, this bill: • Presses Caltrans to reduce costs by 30 percent; and • Raises revenue for road maintenance (state and local) and trade corridors through various user fees on motorists. SBX1-1 is generally consistent with the Commission's adopted principles. Additional bills and information relating to the special session are included in the attached memo authored by Mark Watts, the Commission's advocate in Sacramento. Mr. Watts and Commission staff will be actively engaged in Sacramento over the next few weeks. Commission staff may call upon Commissioners to conduct outreach and advocacy as needed. Attachments: 1) H.R.2497 2) California House Delegation Letter to DOL 3) Labor/HHS Appropriations Language 4) Special Session Report by Mark Watts 5) Proclamation by Governor Brown 6) Legislative Matrix Agenda Item 12 213 AUTHENTICATED U.S. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION GPO ATTACHMENT 1 T 114Tx CONGRESS � • � • 1ST SESSION 2497 To direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish a program to eliminate duplicative environmental reviews and approvals under State and Federal law of rail and highway projects, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES MAY 21, 2015 Mr. DENHAM (for himself, Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California, Mr. COOK, Mr. LAMALFA, Mr. ISSA, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. FARENTHOLD, Mr. HARDY, and Mr. NuNEs) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the com- mittee concerned A BILL To direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish a program to eliminate duplicative environmental reviews and approvals under State and Federal law of rail and highway projects, and for other purposes. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 2 lives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 4 This Act may be cited as the "NEPA Reciprocity 5 Act". 214 2 1 SEC. 2. USE OF ALTERNATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 2 AND APPROVAL PROCEDURES UNDER STATE 3 LAWS FOR RAIL AND HIGHWAY PROJECTS. 4 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.- 5 (1) IN GENERAL. —The Secretary shall establish 6 a program to eliminate duplicative environmental re- 7 views and approvals under State and Federal law of 8 projects. Under this program, a State may use State 9 laws and procedures to conduct reviews and make 10 approvals in lieu of Federal environmental laws and 11 regulations, consistent with the provisions of this 12 section. 13 (2) PARTICIPATING STATES. All States are eli- 14 Bible to participate in the program. 15 (3) SCOPE OF ALTERNATIVE REVIEW AND AP- 16 PROVAL PROCEDURES. —For purposes of this sec- 17 tion, alternative environmental review and approval 18 procedures may include one or more of the following: 19 (A) Substitution of one or more State envi- 20 ronmental laws for one or more Federal envi- 21 ronmental laws, if the Secretary determines in 22 accordance with this section that the State envi- 23 ronmental laws provide environmental protec- 24 tion and opportunities for public involvement 25 that are substantially equivalent to the applica- 26 ble Federal environmental laws. •HR 2497 IH 215 3 1 (B) Substitution of one or more State reg- 2 ulations for Federal regulations implementing 3 one or more Federal environmental laws, if the 4 Secretary determines in accordance with this 5 section that the State regulations provide envi- 6 ronmental protection and opportunities for pub- 7 lic involvement that are substantially equivalent 8 to the Federal regulations. 9 (b) APPLICATION. —To participate in the program, a 10 State shall submit to the Secretary an application con- 11 taining such information as the Secretary may require, in- 12 eluding- 13 (1) a full and complete description of the pro- 14 posed alternative environmental review and approval 15 procedures of the State; 16 (2) for each State law or regulation included in 17 the proposed alternative environmental review and 18 approval procedures of the State, an explanation of 19 the basis for concluding that the law or regulation 20 meets the requirements under subsection (a)(3); and 21 (3) evidence of having sought, received, and ad- 22 dressed comments on the proposed application from 23 the public and appropriate Federal environmental 24 resource agencies. •HR 2497 IH 216 4 1 (c) REVIEW OF APPLICATION. —The Secretary 2 shall- 3 (1) review an application submitted under sub- 4 section (b); 5 (2) approve or disapprove the application in ac- 6 cordance with subsection (d) not later than 90 days 7 after the date of the receipt of the application; and 8 (3) transmit to the State notice of the approval 9 or disapproval, together with a statement of the rea- 1 0 sons for the approval or disapproval. 11 (d) APPROVAL OF STATE PROGRAMS.- 12 (1) IN GENERAL —The Secretary shall approve 13 each such application if the Secretary finds that the 14 proposed alternative environmental review and ap- 15 proval procedures of the State are substantially 16 equivalent to the applicable Federal environmental 17 laws and Federal regulations. 18 (2) EXCLUSION. —The National Environmental 19 Policy Act of 1969 and the Endangered Species Act 20 of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) shall not apply to 21 any decision by the Secretary to approve or dis- 22 approve any application submitted pursuant to this 23 section. 24 (e) COMPLIANCE WITH PERMITS. —Compliance with 25 a permit or other approval of a project issued pursuant •HR 2497 IH 217 5 1 to a program approved by the Secretary under this section 2 shall be considered compliance with the Federal laws and 3 regulations identified in the program approved by the Sec- 4 retary pursuant to this section. 5 (f) REVIEW AND TERMINATION.- 6 (1) REVIEW. All State alternative environ- 7 mental review and approval procedures approved 8 under this section shall be reviewed by the Secretary 9 not less than once every 5 years. 10 (2) PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT. —In con- 11 ducting the review process under paragraph (1), the 12 Secretary shall provide notice and an opportunity for 13 public comment. 14 (3) EXTENSIONS AND TERMINATIONS. At the 15 conclusion of the review process, the Secretary may 16 extend the State alternative environmental review 17 and approval procedures for an additional 5-year pe- t $ riod or terminate the State program. 19 (g) REPORT TO CONGRESS. —Not later than 2 years 20 after the date of enactment of this section, and annually 21 thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report 22 that describes the administration of the program. 23 (h) DEFINITIONS. —For purposes of this section: 24 (1) ENVIRONMENTAL LAW. —The term "envi- 25 ronmental law" includes any law that provides pro- •HR 2497 IH 218 6 1 cedural or substantive protection, as applicable, for 2 the natural or built environment with regard to the 3 construction and operation of projects. 4 (2) FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS. —The 5 term "Federal environmental laws" means laws gov- erning the review of environmental impacts of, and 7 issuance of permits and other approvals for, the con- 8 struction and operation of projects, including section 9 102 (2) (C) of the National Environmental Policy Act 10 of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)), section 404 of the 11 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 12 1344), section 106 of the National Historic Preser- 13 vation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f), and sections 7(a)(2), 14 9(a)(1)(B), and 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Spe- 15 cies Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), 16 1538(a)(1)(B), 1539(a)(1)(B)). 17 (3) PROJECT. —The term "project" means any 18 project eligible for federal assistance under title 23, 19 subtitle V of title 49, or chapter 53 of title 49 of the 20 United States Code, or involves the participation of 21 more than one Department of Transportation modal 22 administration or secretarial office. •HR 2497 IH O 219 Cot:gregg of tijebtateg ElAsbutgtan, )IDC 20515 June 23, 2015 The Honorable Thomas E. Perez Secretary of Labor 200 Constitution Ave. NW Washington DC 20210 Dear Mr. Secretary: ATTACHMENT 2 As the state of California faces an impending halt of federally funded transit operations, we respectfully request certification of all pending transit grants, without condition, to the state's mass transit providers. Local agencies across the state have made it clear that delays in federal transit funding will result in layoffs, deferrals of preventive maintenance, delays in planned service expansions and capital improvements, and service cuts. Without question, the Department of Labor's (DOL) actions have been and will continue to be disastrous to the every day function of the state's transportation system. The state law at issue, California's 2012 bipartisan pension reform law, the Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) [Chapters 296 and 297, Statutes of 2012], was an important step forward in ensuring the health of statewide public employees pensions at the time of their retirement. In difficult economic times, such meaningful reforms were a necessary action, considering the continuous underfunding of pension accounts. We wholeheartedly support the state's passage of legislation that both protects employee's rights while also ensuring employee's livelihoods are not threatened. Moreover, we are particularly concerned with the DOL's position that the most effective way to make the case for carving transit workers out of PEPRA is withholding the certification of transit grants. The application of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 in such a case is harmful to states' rights to make difficult but necessary reforms as they see fit. We believe that the federal government has overstepped its bounds; the best authority for negotiating for a specific state's employee's bargaining rights is in fact the state itself. It is absolutely imperative that the DOL allow states to act in their best interest to ensure that important accounts remain stable, including public employee pensions. Compromising the state's right to do so, by withholding grants, puts service providers in the difficult position of laying off the many transit workers the DOL insists it is trying to protect. Furthermore, though the dispute continues, we support the December 2014 ruling by the United States Eastern District Court against the DOL, in the State of California and Sacramento Regional Transit District v. DOL, regarding the DOL's absence of authority to decline certification of transit grants. In echoing the sentiments of assigned U.S. District Judge, PRINTED ON FiEL All PAPER Kimberly Mueller, the application of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 in this case was "arbitrary" and "capricious" and in violation of the federal Administrative Procedure Act. Once again, we appreciate your consideration of this important request to immediately certify all transit grants, vital and due funding, as local transit authorities provide necessary services essential to our state's economy. Sincerely, N VERT Member of Congress SAM FARR Member of Congress gress MCC1:INTOCK ember of Congress b._ DANA ROHRABACHER Member of Congress \**417. .2•441( MIMI WALTERS Member of Congress Member of Congress DEV' + NUNES ber of Congress EDWARD R. ROYC� Member of Congress 221 ATTACHMENT 3 15 hire im- �e Com- �ter and the same than the ° `FUNDS .for Ad- ds. The ccounts employ- <t Fund (minis - fiscal iepart- ion in- Treas- tration Ben - on is and other stra- anty the 2016 that fore- ulti- ------>---„-....„.....-:-...._,,,,,...'-':----;,,,r,... ,,.........,:.„..k._-_.--r_._--5.---__A:e-'-__,---",,,.,--' Y �~ -,-14;;:' „,_______:,„----4-----0-00:t x,?3j''- jA111j7 ram^ /s-• ?• A _ .,,+�:111... 3. �:y.. .��+"'�; WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION SALARIES AND EXPENSES The Committee recommends $215,500,000 for the Wage and Hour Division (WHD). This recommendation is $12,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $61,600,000 less than the fiscal year 2016 budget request. The WHD enforces federal minimum wage, overtime pay, record - keeping, and child labor requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. WHD also has enforcement and other administrative respon- sibilities related to the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Davis Bacon Act and the Service Con- tract Act. The Committee directs the Wage and Hour Division to submit a report to the House and Senate Committee on Appropriations with- in 120 days of enactment of this Act on the steps taken to correct deficiencies, address recommendations, and improve the process for wage determinations for public works projects cited in OIG report No. 04-04-003-04-420, (Mar. 30, 2004) and in GAO testimony GAO-11-486T (April 14, 2011). OFFICE OF LABOR-MANAGEMENT STANDARDS SALARIES AND EXPENSES The Committee recommends $42,000,000 for the Office of Labor - Management Standards (OLMS). This recommendation is $2,871,000 more than the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $4,981,000 less than the fiscal year 2016 budget request. OLMS administers the Labor -Management Reporting and Disclo- sure Act, which establishes safeguards for union democracy and union financial integrity, and requires public disclosure reporting by unions, union officers, employees of unions, labor relations con- sultants, employers, and surety companies. The Committee is troubled that the Department continues to withhold appropriated and obligated transit grant funding to the State of California due to the State's bipartisan 2012 pension re- form law, the Public Employee Pension Reform Act (PEPRA). The Department contends that PEPRA violates transit worker's bar- gaining rights under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 [PI. 88-365, USC Title 49, Chapter 53]. The United States East- ern District Court ruled that the Department has acted in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act [P.L. 79-404, 60 Stat. 237] and its application of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 to justify withholding grants is "arbitrary" and "capricious." The Department's actions have forced layoffs; deferrals of preventive maintenance; delays in planned service expansions and capital im- provements; and service cuts statewide, threatening the livelihood of the workers the Department claims to protect. The Committee directs the Department to act in accordance with the applicable court ruling in effect during the time leading up to the end of the fiscal year such that grants may be certified according to the pre- vailing court order, prior to the funds lapsing, in order to minimize further disruption to California's mass transit providers. �; �=-='a 'tea^• . � -�, / ATTACHMENT 4 Smith, Watts &Company, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation Clients FROM: Mark Watts DATE: June 26, 2015 SUBJECT: Special Session #1 Report — Everything you need to know about the Special Session Legislature Special Session The Governor called two special sessions last week: Infrastructure and Healthcare. The Transportation & Infrastructure special session is referred to as the First Extraordinary Session. Call of the Special Sessions: The wording in the proclamation by the Governor is important because the Legislature is limited, in the special session, to the consideration of the matters specified in the Governor's Proclamation (Art. IV, Sec. 3(b)). This is referred to as the "call of the special session". "Call" in Transportation Infrastructure Special Session: Legislation to enact pay-as-you-go, permanent and sustainable funding to: a. Adequately and responsibly maintain and repair the state's transportation and other critical infrastructure; and b. Improve the state's key trade corridors; and c. Complement local efforts for repair and improvements of local transportation infrastructure 925 L Street, Suite 200. Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 446-5508 . Fax: (916) 266-4580 223 Also, to consider and act upon legislation necessary to: a. Establish clear performance objectives measured by the percentage of pavement, bridges and culverts in good condition; and b. Incorporate project development efficiencies to expedite project delivery or reduce project costs." Committees Created: Yesterday, both the Senate and Assembly announced the committees that will hear special session bills. No committee hearings have been scheduled at this time. Senate Special session #1 Committees Transportation and Infrastructure Development (13 members): Beall (Chair), Cannella (Vice Chair), Allen, Bates, Berryhill, Gaines, Hertzberg, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Pavley, and Wieckowski. Appropriations (7 members): Lara (Chair), Bates (Vice Chair), Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, and Nielsen. Assembly Special Session #1 Committees Transportation And Infrastructure Development (13 members): Frazier (Chair), Achadjian (Vice Chair), Alejo, Burke, Chiu, Dodd, Eggman, Gatto, Hadley, Kim, Linder, Nazarian, and O'Donnell. Finance (9 members): Gomez (Chair), Bigelow (Vice Chair), Bloom, Jones —Sawyer, McCarty, Melendez, Obernolte, Ting, and Weber. Special Session Procedures Some unique aspects of special sessions include: • Bills do not need to wait 30 days in print to be heard. • Extraordinary session bills are exempt from the four/two day file notice requirement, so committees can be scheduled rapidly, as needed. • Majority vote special session bills take effect 91 days after the final adjournment of that special session (Con. Art. IV, Sec. 8(c)(1)) unless they are urgency measures. • Taxes still require a 2/3rds vote 2 224 Special Session #1 bills Introduced Senate SB X1 1 (Beall): Senator Beall reintroduced his regular session $4 billion roadway repair funding bill proposal (SB 16) in the Transportation Special Session SCAX1 1 (Huff): This bill would constitutionally guarantee that the transportation taxes paid by California drivers annually are only used for transportation purposes and is a reintroduction of SCA 7 in the Regular session. SB X1 2 (Huff): This bill would dedicate cap and trade taxes paid from putting gasoline production under the cap to improving California's streets and roads. SB X12 would direct how approximately $1.9 billion in revenues would be spent. Assembly AB X1 1 (Alejo) This bill is a reintroduction of Mr. Alejo's AB 227 from regular session. It would transfer truck weight fees back from Prop 1B debt Service to state highway purposes and would also accelerate repayment of outstanding loans back from the General fund. AB X1 2 (Perea) This bill is a reintroduction of Mr. Perea's AB 1265 relating to Public Private partnerships (P3). 3 225 1,0 Executive n epartment ($tote of California ATTACHMENT 5 A PROCLAMATION BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS maintaining infrastructure is a critical function of state government and vital to California's continued economic growth; and WHEREAS California faces considerable challenges in its ability to fund crucial maintenance and repair of its core transportation infrastructure --state highways, local streets, roads, and bridges —and current resources do not adequately support the maintenance of this vast system; and WHEREAS the current fuel excise tax revenues are only sufficient to fund $2.3 billion in annual highway repairs, leaving $5.7 billion in unfunded repairs each year based on the latest estimate of the state's deferred maintenance; and WHEREAS these extraordinary circumstances require the Legislature of the State of California to be convened in a special session. NOW, THEREFORE, I, EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor of the State of California, in accordance with Section 3{b} of Article IV of the Constitution of the State of California, hereby convene the Legislature of the State of California to assemble in extraordinary session in Sacramento, California, on the 19th day of June, 2015, at a time to be determined, for the following purposes: To consider and act upon legislation necessary to enact pay-as-you-go, permanent and sustainable funding to: a. Adequately and responsibly maintain and repair the state's transportation and other critical infrastructure; and b. Improve the state's key trade corridors; and c. Complement local efforts for repair and improvements of local transportation infrastructure. To consider and act upon legislation necessary to: a. Establish clear performance objectives measured by the percentage of pavement, bridges, and culverts in good condition; and b. Incorporate project development efficiencies to expedite project delivery or reduce project costs. FURTHER DIRECT that as soon as hereafter possible, this Proclamation be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Proclamation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great Seal of the State of California to be affixed this 16th day of Jane 2015. EDMUN -' BLOWN JR. Governor of alifornia ATTEST: ALEX PADILLA Secretary of State ATTACHMENT 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION —July 2015 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 4 (Linder) This bill would bring truck weight fees back to transportation accounts and would prohibit weight fee revenues from being transferred from the State Highway Account to the Transportation Debt Service Fund, the Transportation Bond Direct Payment Account, or any other fund or account for the purpose of payment of the debt service on transportation general obligation bonds, and would also prohibit loans of weight fee revenues to the General Fund. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. (April 9). SUPPORT 3/11/15 AB 194 (Frazier) This bill provides a uniform, less -political process for tolling projects to be reviewed and approved by the state. Today, each tolling project must be approved via a bill in the Legislature. AB 194 provides the California Transportation Commission (CTC) with the authority to review and approve tolling projects, subject to specified conditions that provide for public transparency and collaboration between state and regional governments. The most important aspect of this bill is it rests decision -making authority over tolling projects with the governmental entity financially responsible for the project. The bill is sponsored by the Self -Help Counties Coalition, of which the Commission is a member. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 62. Noes 17. Page 1862.) (June 3). Referred to Com. On T. & H. (June 18). SUPPORT 3/11/15 AB 218 (Melendez) This bill allows for the relinquishment from state to local control of State Route 74 in the area between the cities of Lake Elsinore and Perris. This bill is sponsored by the county of Riverside and is championed by First District Supervisor and Commissioner Kevin Jeffries. Referred to Com. On T. & H. (June 11). SUPPORT 3/11/15 AB 914 (Brown) AB 914 authorizes San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) to implement tolling on Interstate 10 and Interstate 15 within the County of San Bernardino. The bill contains language that requires cooperative agreements between SANBAG and the Commission prior to construction commencing on SANBAG's 1-15 project. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 69. Noes 7.) (May 28). Referred to Com. On T. & H. (June 11). SUPPORT 4/08/15 AB 1171 (Linder) This bill authorizes the widespread use of an alternative contracting method known as construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) for projects not on the state highway system. Like design -build, CM/GC offers a streamlined private sector risk -transfer in project delivery that is capable of saving time and money on complex transportation projects. In short, CM/GC allows a project sponsor (such as the Commission) to enter into a preconstruction contract with a private entity to provide services that assist in preparing a design and schedule for the project, while reserving the option to allow that contractor to bid on the actual construction of the project. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re - refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 16). Read second time and amended. Re -referred to Com. on APPR. (June 19). SUPPORT 4/08/15 228 Legislation/ Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption HR 2497 (Denham) H.R. 2497 creates a program to be administered by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation that eliminates duplicative environmental reviews and approvals of transportation projects under state and federal laws. Importantly, the bill sets a 90- day deadline for the Secretary to render a decision on applications for the program. Referred to House subcommittee on Highway and Transit. (May 22). Referred to House subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. (May 22). SUPPORT Pending SB 39 (Pavley) This bill raises the maximum number of green stickers issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for plug-in hybrid vehicles, which allow those vehicles to travel in high -occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes regardless of the number of occupants. SB 39 raises the cap to 85,000.. This bill represents a 112 percent increase in green stickers over a two-year period. The green sticker program expires on January 1, 2019. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk. (May 7). Referred to Com. On TRANS. (May 22). OPPOSE 6/10/15 SB 321 (Beall) This bill allows the BOE to adjust the price -based excise tax using a five-year forecast period instead of just a one-year period, thereby reducing the impact of short-term disruptions in fuel prices. SB 321 also extends the revenue -neutrality requirement to cover a three-year period instead of just one year, offering another opportunity for the BOE to smooth -out dramatic revenue swings. Finally, the bill allows the BOE to adjust the price -based excise tax every quarter, rather than once per year. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk. (June 2). Referred to Com. On REV. & TAX. (June 15). SUPPORT 3/11/15 229 Federal and State Update Riverside County Transportation Commission Aaron Hake July 8, 2015 " Substitution of "Substantially Equivalent" state environmental laws and regulations Timeline for approval " California counties' input (includes Riverside) " Target: Federal Reauthorization " More local control " More streamlining " More money " Focus: Maintenance, Trade, and Streamlining " Maneuvering on all sides " Expected action this summer " Commissioner involvement may be needed " Collective bargaining rights of transit employees protected by federal law "section 13(c)". " DOL, unions contend PEPRA violates section 13(c). " State, DOL, unions agree to temporary PEPRA exemption. Whoever wins lawsuit is "winner". " Federal Judge rules in favor of California: Referred back to DOL "on remand". CaIPERS directs transit agencies to implement PEPRA. " DOL appeals ruling, still not certifying grants. Pre-2015 funds being certified (good however not great). " In the mean time, New Conditions! If DOL maintains its legal position on remand, and that position is not challenged in court " Grantees (RTA and SunLine) must: Retroactively restore pre-PEPRA collective bargaining rights (violate state law); OR Return funds to the federal government " Congressional activity: Representative Ruiz Facilitating dialogue between DOL, RTA, and SunLine Representative Calvert Strongly -worded letter to DOL and language in FY 2016 Labor/HHS Appropriations Act Representative Takano Dialogue with DOL, Governor's office Senator Feinstein Dialogue with DOL, Governor's office " California Transit Association: Expected to hold firm against conditions. " RTA and SunLine responses to DOL due shortly. " DOL remand decision to court due next week. " Governor not interested in further exemptions. " Long administrative and legal process ahead.