HomeMy Public PortalAbout09 September 19, 2016 Technical Advisory CommitteeCOMM-TAC-00050
TIME:
DATE:
LOCATION:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda.
10:00 A.M.
September 19, 2016
Riverside County Transportation Commission
4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special
assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact the Riverside County Transportation Commission
at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable
arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting.
1. Call to Order
2. Self -Introductions
3. Approval of May 16, 2016 Minutes
4. Public Comments (This is for comments on items not listed on agenda. Comments relating
to an item on the agenda will be taken when the item is before the Committee.)
5. Caltrans Local Assistance Overview - Presentation by Anthony Liao, PE, PMP, Supervising
Transportation Engineer, Program Project Management Caltrans D-8 (Verbal
Presentation)
6. Update on the Final FFY 2015/16 and FFY 2016/17 Obligation Plan (Attachment)
7. Status of Federally Funded Projects (Verbal Presentation)
8. SCAG Updates on the 2016 RTP/SCS, 2015 FTIP and 2017 FTIP (Attachment)
9. Federal Earmark Repurposing Update (Attachment)
10. FY 2017/18 Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Opportunity
(Attachment)
11. Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 3 Update and SCAG's Sustainability Planning
Grants Active Transportation Call for Projects (Attachment)
12. Caltrans Local Assistance Update (Verbal Presentation)
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
September 19, 2016
Page 2
13. September Commission Meeting Highlights (Verbal Presentation)
14. Other Business
15. Adjournment (The next meeting will be November 21 in Beaumont.)
C )9) OGoi 'UvaS
,-CX 5
nauOu3 itlla palm°
A loadoN piegoN
Joloama slioM oggnd wl�alul
zawpeW ezlueiN
sr.vo `--
4u ndi\ ugd S
Jeaw6u3 Jopeg
suowlS 1119
Joloana slioM ollgnd
gouai3 qo9
Ja6eueW Ain wualul
e6epn-sgge •W glagezll3
lsi(leuy slioM ollgnd
penis AIIoH
.186eueW svoM ollgnd SONINdS
SVtINOd 131Nva 10H 1213S30
Jeaw6u3 Allapopei!a sVoM ollgnd
NOS13N NOS13N
JeauOu3 Ally
AOH NVH1tIN01
JeauOu3 Ally
V113NO3 NHOf
naul6u3 aouelslssy pool lolilsla
ON113A NV3S
Jeauw6u3 Ally
NO1NHOHl 13VHaIW
uogepodsueil to ioloaija
VNVOVIN NIl?JtIW
s>poM ollgnd to Joloaila
3NOzz1alt/8 OaNt ION
Jaa0u3 Allapoloana mpoM ollgnd
N3HNV1' HMV
slioM ollgnd to Jolowla 6wloy
V13A 1NV
`dN0a03
`d113H3d00
Alla 1b21a3H1`d0
3NV1 NOAN`d0
SNb2111`da
- VS311411`d3
OVA3
3H1A18
1NOvinn8
ONINN`d8
11dW3 pue 321f11dNJIS
3WdN 1NRId
31dNN311d
21391N3W 3d1
A3N3Jd
NI NOIS 3SV3-1d
910Z `61, aagwegleS
33111WW03 ANOSIACIV 1VOINH331
Cll t v-rt3 S (17-
sag!Ign James pue Ja1eM
uosdwo41 II!8
Je6eueW
uogorwsuoa svoM ollgnd
4o1!H oaf
Jaau!6u3 Anpe6eueW
opmo uogepodsueJl
s!mei ou3
uuRie ana1S
Jt_ p
1� uQsduilS iiosef
J
Jaau!6u3 ledlouud
Jeww!M piemP3
JOG
JoloeAa svoM o!Ignd
swig OVHO
Jaau!6u3 Apo
ONIlH30W SOS
I
Ala svoM ollgnd
ItIVSNV OVWHV
Jaau!6u3 A1!apoloai!a slioM o!Ignd
H11WS NVH1VNOf
O0a0N
V131aaf1W
A311VA ON3a0W
MINN'
Jaau!6u3 A1!a
113aJV3 anis 3a0NIS13 3NV1
Jaaw6u3 I!A!a ledlouud
wol
II JeauOu3 we1s!ssy
Je leg a!puog
ctsikz
• "zINIREIrtR
Jeau!6u3 AIlapopana s)1•10M o!Ignd
NOSSVNOf AH10WIl
Jeaul6u3 AIlapopana svoM ollgnd
NOSN31-1d31S ACM
Jo1oai!a s)1.10M o!Ignd
IISSVM WIl
Joloana svoM ollgnd
NIVHO 30IA - OlVWf13S N3a
V1Nino Vl
A311VA Vdunr
OIONI
S113M NVIONI
Jaau!6u3 A1!a
ONI1V1 3A313 13141311
'''.1,001/42r4/)9%�( iaaul6u3
31VA1SV3
321111VNJIS
3WdN 1NRId
31VN21311d
21381A3W A3N3Jd
NI NOIS 3SV3id
910Z `61 aaquieples
33111WW03 AtIOSIAaV 1V3INH331
A66-*1#14Xevow,
1J/'1';, � V #/-j';, e'2"�/aj
_,,. G„ k„(1
)/
DO 7 t Is ) FA all
1
IIVW3 Pue minivNJIS
SY! p� , -vds2 /
ezcivniyo
31AWN 1NR1d
kit
Jelly aawy
Je6eueW 6u!uueld pueil
elgad .W el!uy
eweles peyeloW
-era fijy
Je6eueW 6uuaau!6u3
!pewweyoW piped
d
Joioana svoM o!Ignd
diaadO 14101 dlna3W31
3N11NnS
Jeau!6u3 ��!a
HJd110141818dH OlNladf N`dS
uogepodsueil;o Joioana luels!ssy
OWON dlalaldd A1Nn0a 341Sa3Ala
Z3NIladW SINN
Jaau!6u3 ��!a
sou3 II!8
1: l=4. '.) 4sgeloads
bu,wweJ6aicrpue &Au ueld
w Misi u!MP>I
splow(e elea
noydwey>{ ienes
svoM o!Ignd Jo Joioana
0118WdS Nadal
nddnanm NdHON
Jeau!6u3 ��!a
aldHa - HJd110141818dH
Ja6eueW leJeuae }!sued
I13ONd100 30N030 'N
Jeau!6u3 Anpa6eueW luels!ssy
a3llnd SnaadW
341SN3AIN
3OVNIW O1-13NVN
dla
Slaa3d
Jaau!6u3 uogepodsueil
sloia!a lJeW
3IVNN311V
Jea"3 !a
N3Ha 08
2138W3W 3V1
d1AAd
SONIadS WPM
1a3S3a Wldd
AON 3 Jed
NI NOIS 3S`d3-Id
91.0Z `61. aaquie4des
331111AIIAIO3 ANOSIACIV 1` OINH331
.,,„„i
14-V
p ' b 244 1 %
R-73fe--
d
//"N
51)1 / y cion
-7,2fwelte, A0��
say �� Pray
llauua8 neW
Ja6eueW weLoid
6uazl spo
Jeaul6u3 AinisvoM oyind
;o Joioaijape6euen Al!O auelsissy
H210A Nda
17"
47.,1
Sal l v1.9
/" ^
s�
rni-o-a'iy t v
wiNoaIIM
uoppodsueil Joioand
Ab21�J b3HdOlSIbH3 90021M
11HW3 Pie 321f11HNJIS
3WHN 1NRId
31HNU311H
21381A13W OH1 AON3JH
NI NOIS 3Sd31d
91.0Z `61. aagwaldes
33111WW03 A?:10SInad 1d3INH331
MINUTES
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES
Monday, May 16, 2016
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) was called to order by Vice Chair Ken Seumalo at 10:05 a.m. at the Riverside County
Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA.
2. SELF -INTRODUCTIONS
Members Present: Amer Attar, City of Temecula
Bo Chen, City of Palm Desert
John Corella, City of Cathedral City
Tom Garcia, City of Temecula
Joe Indrawan, City of Eastvale
Tim Jonasson, City of La Quinta
Steve Latino, City of Hemet
Eric Lewis, City of Moreno Valley
Bob Moehling, City of Murrieta
Nelson Nelson, City of Corona
Anita Petke, SunLine Transit Agency
Patricia Romo, County of Riverside
Mark Sambito, City of Rancho Mirage
Ken Seumalo, City of Indian Wells
Jonathan Smith, City of Menifee
Michael Thornton, City of Calimesa
Chris Vogt, City of Beaumont
Kristin Warsinski, Riverside Transit Agency
Tim Wassil, City of Indio
Sean Yeung, Caltrans
Dan York, City of Wildomar
Others Present:
Fred Alamolhoda, LAE Associates, Inc.
Grace Alvarez, RCTC
Christy Connors, Caltrans
Eric DeHate, RCTC
Ray Desselle, Caltrans
J. D. Douglas, HDR Engineering
Marlin Feenstra, RCTC
Shirley Gooding, RCTC
Tanya Love, RCTC
Alex Menor, RCTC
Lorelle Moe -Luna, RCTC
Jerry Montoya, Caltrans
Roy Null, County of Riverside
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
May 16, 2016
Page 2
Eric Ruehr, VRPA Technologies, Inc.
Mojahed Salama, County of Riverside
Mark Samuelson, Caltrans
Uthrya Sandira, Athalye Consulting, Inc.
Karla Sutliff, Caltrans
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The March 21, 2016 minutes were amended to reflect Amer Attar's attendance and were approved
as submitted.
Abstain: Tim Jonasson
Tim Wassil
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Tanya Love, RCTC, provided a Clean Transportation flyer and reported that MSRC is holding a series
of workshops looking at the work program for the following two years. She announced Dan York is
the new vice chair on the MSRC TAC.
5. SB 743 — CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
Eric Ruehr, VRPA Technologies, Inc. provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding SB 743, legislation
proposed to change the way CEQA studies are done. He gave a brief introduction to
• Guidelines
• Consideration
• Screening/Exemptions
• VMT Thresholds
• Threshold Considerations
• Transportation Projects
• Safety
• Case Studies
• Expected Next Steps
• Preparing for Implementation
He then responded to various questions.
6. 2016 GRADE SEPARATION COMPANION STUDY
Tanya Love stated that the MSRC workshops will be in the city of Cathedral City and one at RCTC in
Riverside. She encouraged attendance.
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
May 16, 2016
Page 3
She provided a PowerPoint presentation and reported that as of 2008, RCTC has 52 At -Grade
Crossings. She outlined the projects that have been completed and those under construction. She
said $440.3 million has been invested. Her presentation and staff report outline many of the projects.
She further reported there are 46 at -grade crossings remaining on the Alameda Corridor. She
reported that RCTC retained HDR to develop a four -month 2016 Grade Separation Companion Study
and requested that member agencies with remaining planned grade separation improvements to
participate in the companion study. A sign -in sheet went around to the TAC requesting participating
cities members contact information.
7. CALTRANS DESIGN FLEXIBILITY
Marlin Feenstra, RCTC, introduced Caltrans staff:
Karla Sutliff, Chief Engineer, Deputy for Project Delivery
Christy Connors, District 8
Ray Desselle, Planning, District 8
Jerry Montoya, Deputy Chief Counsel
Mark Samuelson, HQ Local Assistance
Karla Sutliff provided a PowerPoint presentation that outlined Caltrans Improvement Project —
Innovation, Design Flexibility and Risk Management.
The Caltrans team responded to various questions.
8. LOCAL ASSISTANCE UPDATE
Sean Yeung, Caltrans Local Assistance, announced that Local Assistance recently sent out a list of
inactive projects and requested agencies submit invoices.
He stated that Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 3 applications are due June 15. He
encouraged viewing the Caltrans website for further information.
Regarding HSIP Cycle 8, the call for projects began last Monday and will run until August 12. There is
$150 million available statewide. Agencies may submit as many applications as they want. However,
no one agency may receive more than $10 million and no one project may receive more than $10
million. The cost ratio must be 3.5 or higher.
Caltrans is offering a webinar May 19 to help agencies process their HSIP project applications.
Phase II of the Systematic Safety Analysis Report Program is $10 million and the application due date
is May 27.
He announced a California Department of Public Health Safe Routes to School Webinar for rural areas
May 24 from 1:30 to 3:00.
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
May 16, 2016
Page 4
9. MAY COMMISSION MEETING HIGHLIGHTS
Grace Alvarez, RCTC, reported
• The Fiscal Year 2016/17 budget opened public hearings and should be approved next month.
• An agreement was awarded to HDR Engineering, Inc. for rail forecasting services for the
Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Development Plan.
• Shirley Medina provided an update for the 2016 State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP)
and indicated no new projects would be allowed in the 2016 STIP, therefore, funding was
removed from the 1-15 at Railroad Canyon Rd. IC.
10. OTHER BUSINESS
Lorelle Moe -Luna, RCTC, provided information regarding the Local Highway Safety Improvement
Program (HSIP). She thanked the TAC members for completing the Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
survey. She offered an opportunity to submit draft applications to RCTC staff for review prior to
submission. The deadline for submitting the draft applications is May 20. She recommended advising
her in advance if any agency wants to submit the draft application after May 20. She also said RCTC
would provide letters of support if requested.
Eric DeHate thanked the TAC for sending their Measure A submittals.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Technical Advisory Committee, the meeting
adjourned at approximately 11:55 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
, c,
Shirley Medina
Planning and Programming Director
AGENDA ITEM 5
A presentation will be made but
there is no attachment to the
agenda for item 5.
Office of Local Assistance@District 08August 2016
2What is Local Assistance?Local Assistance Office assistslocal agencies in utilizing all available federal and statetransportation funds in accordance with federal and state transportation statutes and regulations.
��C h 2 3 C o d e o f F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n s ( C F R ) ��S t e w a r d s h i p A g r e e m e n t - F H W A �%L A P r o c e d u r e s M a n u a l ( L A P M ) �%L A P r o g r a m G u i d e l i n e s ( L A P G ) ��C a l i f o r n i a S t r e e t s & H i g h w a y s C o d e ��C a l t r a n s S t a n d a r d a n d S p e c s , A A S H T O ��C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( C T C ) 3
��P r o g r a m S u p p o r t ( P S ) $ 3 9 . 3 m i l l i o n ��O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s ( O E ) $ 2 . 0 m i l l i o n ��P o s i t i o n s 2 6 4 ��@ D i s t r i c t 0 8 " P S = $ 1 . 3 M " O E = $ 2 0 K " P o s i t i o n = 9 R e g + 1 B o n d + 2 R e i m b ( ? ) 4
��F e d e r a l - $ 1 . 6 6 B i l l i o n ��S t a t e - $ 2 5 2 M i l l i o n ��I n C o m p a r i s o n C a p i t a l P r o g r a m " S T I P - $ 2 . 4 B / 5 y r s o r ~ $ 5 0 0 M / y r " S H O P P - $ 1 2 B / 5 y r s o r ~ $ 2 . 4 B / y r 5
��E x a m p l e P r o g r a m s " A T P C y c l e 3 J u n e 1 5 t h F�$ 2 4 0 M - F Y 1 9 / 2 0 t o F Y 2 0 / 2 1 " H S I P C y c l e 8 A u g 1 2 t h F�$ 1 5 0 M @ 6 m o P E , @ 3 0 m o C o n " H B P ~ $ 3 0 0 M / y r 6
Active Transportation Program 40 %CMAQRSTP 61.3%RTPAPROGRAMMEDEmergency Relief Program Local Seismic RetrofitActive Transportation Program 60%HSIPHBPState ProgrammedDiscretionaryProgramsNCIIPDEMO/HPPCTC SelectedDIVISION OF LOCALASSISTANCE ADMINISTEREDLOCAL SHARE40%SURFACE TRANSPORTATIONPROGRAM 38.2%NATIONAL HIGHWAY PERFOMANCEPROGRAM (NHPP)STIP(75% RTIP, 25% IIP)HSIPSHOPPRAILWAY-HIGHWAYCROSSING PROGRAMSTATE SHARE60%FEDERAL FUNDS7
��5 , 0 0 0 a c t i v e p r o j e c t s ��4 , 0 0 0 f e d e r a l p r o j e c t s ��6 8 0 l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l a g e n c i e s ��O v e r 3 0 y e a r s ��$ 1 . 0 + B / y r d e l i v e r y o r O A f o r 1 5 y e a r s . ��3 0 0 T r i b e s 8
��> 1 5 0 a c t i v e p r o j e c t s ��> 9 5 % f e d e r a l p r o j e c t ��6 4 l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l a g e n c i e s ��$ 2 0 0 M a n n u a l d e l i v e r y / O A ��3 4 T r i b e s 9
��D e v e l o p P o l i c e s a n d P r o c e d u r e s ��P r o v i d e T r a i n i n g ��M a x i m u m D e l e g a t i o n o f P r o j e c t D e v e l o p m e n t a n d A d m i n i s t r a t i o n �%T h r o u g h S t e w a r d s h i p a g r e e m e n t w i t h F H W A �%U s e o f C h e c k l i s t s & C e r t i f i c a t i o n s ��L o C o d e o r C o m p l i a n c e R e v i e w ��A u d i t s S C O , D O F , o r F H W A ��C o r r e c t i v e A c t i o n s 1 0
��C a l t r a n s �%P o l i c i e s a n d P r o c e d u r e s �%P r o g r a m a n d B u d g e t E x p e n d i t u r e s �%E - 7 6 , A g r e e m e n t s , a n d P a y m e n t s �%F i e l d a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l R e v i e w s �%P r o j e c t O v e r s i g h t , C o m p l i a n c e A u d i t s �%D B E a n d E E O c o m p l i a n c e �%A u d i t F i n d i n g s & C o r r e c t i v e A c t i o n 1 1
��L o c a l A g e n c y " I n 1 9 9 5 , u n d e r t h e R e e n g i n e e r i n g o f L o c a l A s s i s t a n c e P r o c e d u r e s m a n y C h a p t e r 2 3 o f C F R r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w e r e d e l e g a t e d b y C a l t r a n s t o l o c a l a g e n c i e s " A g e n c y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i m p l e m e n t i n g p r o j e c t s o P l a n n i n g o E n v i r o n m e n t a l & D e s i g n o C o n s t r u c t i o n o M a i n t e n a n c e 1 2
��F H W A ��F e d e r a l a g e n c y u l t i m a t e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e n s u r i n g c o m p l i a n c e w i t h a l l f e d e r a l r e q u i r e m e n t s o n h i g h w a y p r o j e c t s ��T h e S t e w a r d s h i p A g r e e m e n t d e l e g a t e s F H W A r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o C a l t r a n s f o r D e l e g a t e d p r o j e c t s 1 3
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT & BUSINESS SERVICESTony PrandiniACTIVE TRANSPORTATION & SPECIAL PROGRAMSApril NitsosPOLICY DEVELOPMENT & QUALITY ASSURANCEMark SamuelsonBRIDGE, BOND & SAFETY PROGRAMSJesse BhullarPROJECT IMPLEMENTATION - NORTHWinton EmmettPROJECT IIMPLEMENTATION - SOUTHJohn HooleNEPA ASSIGNMENT AND ENV COMPLIANCEGermaine BelangerDIVISION OF LOCAL ASSISTANCERay Zhang Division ChiefDISTRICT LOCAL ASSISTANCE ENGINEERS12 DISTRICTS14
15
StateHBPHSIPERTCRPProp 1BSTIP - RIPRegionalCMAQRSTP/STPLDEMOOtherATP16
��F e d e r a l P r o j e c t N u m b e r ( F P N ) & F i e l d R e v i e w s ��P r e l i m i n a r y E n v i r o n m e n t a l S t u d y ( P E S ) ��C T C A l l o c a t i o n s ��T i m e E x t e n s i o n s ��A u t h o r i z a t i o n s P E , R W , C o n ��E n v i r o n m e n t a l D o c u m e n t s ( N E P A ) 1 7
��R i g h t o f W a y C e r t ��A w a r d P a c k a g e ��A g r e e m e n t s M a s t e r , P r o g r a m S u p p l e m e n t , C o o p ��I n v o i c e P a y m e n t ��F i n a l I n v o i c e / F i n a l I n s p e c t i o n ��P r o j e c t C l o s e o u t 1 8
��T r a i n i n g ��P o l i c y & P r o c e d u r e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n ��M a n u a l s & G u i d e l i n e s ��P a r t n e r i n g M e e t i n g s ( T A C , A i r p o r t M e e t i n g ) ��R e p o r t i n g ( I n a c t i v e L i s t , P E > 1 0 ) 1 9
��C o n s t r u c t i o n O v e r s i g h t R e v i e w s - 3 x / p r o j e c t ��A u d i t s S C O , D O F , a n d F H W A ��C o r r e c t i v e A c t i o n s ��C o n f o r m a n c e R e v i e w ��Q u a l i t y A s s u r a n c e P r o g r a m ( Q A P ) ��C o m p l i a n c e A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m ( C A P ) 2 0
��I n a c t i v e P r o j e c t s ��P E > 1 0 y e a r s ��C o o p e r a t i v e W o r k A g r e e m e n t s ( C W A ) 6 y r s ��A B 1 0 1 2 ��P e r f o r m a n c e M e a s u r e s , H S I P R e d F l a g ��D a t a b a s e M a n a g e m e n t ��R e p o r t i n g : C T C , F H W A , G o v e r n o r s O f f i c e , E t c 2 1
��C a l t r a n s N E P A ��N E P A R e v i e w & A p p r o v a l ��I n t e r a g e n c y c o n s u l t a t i o n ��T r i b a l C o n s u l t a t i o n ��C o m p l i a n c e T r a c k i n g & R e p o r t i n g 2 2
��N u m b e r o f P r o j e c t s ��S i z e / S c o p e o f P r o j e c t s ��P r o j e c t S c h e d u l e ��R e s o u r c e s - C a l t r a n s ��R e s o u r c e s - L o c a l A g e n c i e s ��T u r n o v e r s 2 3
��L o c a l P r o g r a m P r o j e c t D a t a b a s e s ��P r o d u c t A c c e p t a n c e ��S t a n d a r d & C o d e I n t e r p r e t a t i o n ��A D A S t a n d a r d s , D O J ( ? ) ��A u d i t s & C o r r e c t i v e A c t i o n s ��W h a t d o w e r e p r e s e n t A & I , F H W A , C T C , e t c . 2 4
��L o c a l A g e n c i e s E x p e c t a t i o n s v s C o n s t r a i n t s ��C h a n g i n g R u l e s �%P r o g r a m s , D B E , B u y A m e r i c a ��W h a t t o a t t a c h I C E , E m i s s i o n A n a l y s i s , e t c ��P e r f o r m a n c e M e a s u r e s ��A p p l i c a t i o n R e v i e w s - S c h e d u l e & S c o p e ��F o r m s & E x h i b i t s 2 5
26
27
��R e - O r g a n i z i n g ��A s s e s s i n g B u s i n e s s P r a c t i c e @ D 0 8 ��P r o j e c t M a n a g e m e n t D a t a b a s e ��R e i m b u r s e d W o r k ��M o n t h l y M e e t i n g w / R T P A s ��P a r t n e r w i t h R T P A s a n d L o c a l A g e n c i e s ��P a r t n e r w i t h E n v i r o n m e n t a l S t a f f 2 8
29
AGENDA ITEM 6
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 19, 2016
TO:
Technical Advisory Committee
FROM:
LoreIle Moe -Luna, Senior Management Analyst
Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager
Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director
SUBJECT:
Obligation Delivery Plan Updates — FFY 2015/16 and FFY 2016/17
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
As the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), RCTC is responsible for ensuring that federal
funds for Riverside County are allocated and obligated. Federal Obligation Authority (OA) for the region
is provided on an annual basis and has to be used in the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) it is provided. The
Commission's goal is to ensure that 100 percent of its OA is obligated.
In FFY 2014/15, 74.5 percent of the $43.2 million in OA was obligated. In FFY 2015/16, 35 percent (as
of September 12, 2016) of the $59.5 million in OA has been obligated. Remaining OA may be loaned
to other counties or used by Caltrans on other projects per AB 1012 in order to avoid lapse of federal
funds.
RCTC has been working closely with local agencies and Caltrans to ensure projects on the Obligation
Delivery Plan are obligated and delivered. Many of these projects were from the 2013 Multi -Funding
Call for Projects, 2013 RSTP Call for Projects, CVAG's 2014 CMAQ Call for Projects, and various other
projects that had been awarded RSTP or CMAQ funds by the Commission. The attached obligation plan
is an outline of the projects that have STP or CMAQ programmed in FFY 2015/16 and
FFY 2016/17. The information provided in the obligation plans came from milestone updates,
discussions with project sponsors, and continuous discussions with local assistance.
As we transition to the new FFY 2016/17, it is recommended you start your federal -aid process early
on in the year to ensure timely obligation of federal funds. A disadvantage of not making the OA goal
is the region loses out on August redistribution. The August redistribution for FFY 2015/16 to California
was $293.1 million, however, none of those funds are coming to Riverside County because we did not
exceed our OA for the year.
It is critical that local agencies that were awarded federal funds meet the milestones established to
ensure local OA does not lapse. RCTC will be reviewing agreement dates and contacting agencies that
have made little to no progress to discuss alternatives for the federal award.
Attachment: FFY 2015/16 Obligation Plan
FFY 2016/17 Obligation Plan
WORKING FFY 2015/2016 OBLIGATION PLAN
As of 9/14/2016
Caltrans Staff
Agency
System
PIP ID
FPN
Project Location
CMAO
STP-L
Funding
Phase
Current
Project
Status
FTIP
Funding
Year
RCiC Comments
Information
from
Caltrans Status
Albert Vergel
de Dios
Blythe
Local
RIV130402
STPL
5233(008)
N. Broadway Pavement
Rehab
150,000
Con
PS&E
FY 15/16
9/7 - Albert to check on
status.
RFA for cons at HQs for
approval as of8/16/2016-
pending DBE approval and
Ann Marie
Loconte
8/16/16 - OAP, DBE and Revisions to
Finance Letter being reviewed by Albert.
Chigo Dike
Corona
Local
RIV130401
STPL 5104
(045)
Ontario Ave Pavement
Rehab
832,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - Chigo to complete
RFA review today.
7/25/16 - RW cert was
submitted and is pending
approval.
Peter Ramey
CE/CE determination form has been signed.
Albert Vergel
de Dios
Coachella
Local
RIV130402
STPL
5294 017
( )
Grapefruit Blvd.
Pavement
Rehabilitation /
Reconstruction
215,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - Sent to HQ.
RFA for construction at
H Qs as of 8/8/16.
Oscar
Espinoza
6/14/16 Sent RFA CON comments to the
City. 6/27/16. MAIL LOG ENTRY: PS&E Cert.
1 original, 0 copies
Albert Vergel
de Dios
Rancho Mirage
Local
RIV110130
STPLN
5412(011)
Monterey Ave. 5B
Widening - Dinah Shore
to Gerald Ford
850,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - Sent to HQ
RFA for const at HQs at of
8/8/16
Jeff Benson
MAIL LOG ENTRY: RFA (Con.) 1 original, 2
copies, 3 copies contractor Doc's & Spec's
Albert Vergel
de Dios
Rancho Mirage
Local
RIV130402
RSTP
5412(013)
Old Hwy 111 Pavement
Rehab
162,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - Sent to HQ.
RFA for const at HQs as of
8/4/16
Jeff Benson
MAIL LOG ENTRY: RFA (Con.) 1 original, 2
copies, w/Contract Doc's & Spec's, R/W
Cert, 1 original, 2 copies
Chigo Dike
San Jacinto
Local
RIV130401
STPLN
5075(018)
San Jacinto Ave
Pavement Rehab
290,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - RCTC to follow-up
with Gary.
R/w Cert submitted on
Brad Tri-Lake
CE is approved
Chigo Dike
Riverside
Local
RIV151205
5058(Q104}
Magnolia Ave from
First street to Buchanan
(TCM)
1,012,500
Con
PS&E
FY 15/16
9/7 - Sent to HQCMA.
RFA for const at HQs as of
8/4/16.
Nathan
Mu tafa
RFA package was hand delivered to Caltrans
office.
Chigo Dike
Riverside
Local
RIV151209
CML
5058(098)
Bike share program -4
Locations (TCM)
240,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - Sent to HQ.
RFA for const at HQs as of
8/2/16
Nathan
Mustafa
RFA currently under review
$1,252,500 $2,499,000
Page 1 of 5
WORKING FFY 2015/2016 OBLIGATION PLAN
As of 9/14/2016
Current
FM'
Ca!trans Staff
Agency
System
FTIP ID
FPN
Project Location
CMAQ
STP-L
Funding
Phase
Project
Status
Funding
Year
RCTC Comments
Information
from
Ca!trans Status
Obligated
Evita Premdas
RCTC
State
RIV071267
STPLN
6208(025)
1-15 From SR60 to
Cajalco Rd
1,104,847
PE
PA&ED
FY 16/17
RFA for PE submitted to
Danieal Ciachella on
6/8/16 - Fund obligated at
the end of July 2016.
Grace Alvarez
07/06/2016 OA Reporting: FPN was created
on 06/22/2016. RFA for PE (PSE Only) -
Design Build has been reviewed, waiting for
the 7/6/16 3PM Meeting with the Project
Team, so Evita can have the revised Finance
Letter to reflect $ 1,176,241 per Exhibit D of
Coop 08-1625.
Chigo Dike
Lake Elsinore
Local
RIV130401
STPL
5074(017)
Gunnerson St.
Pavement
Rehabilitation
286,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
As of 6/29/2016 - RFA for
Cons re -submitted - Funds
obligated
Nicole
McCalmont
E-76 funds request completed via FADS and
sent to HQ.
Evita Premdas
Temecula
State
RIV62031
STPHPLULN
5459(025)
I-15/SR-79 IC
12,976,000
Con
R/W CERT
FY 15/16
9/7 - Need AL to follow up
with HQ regarding finance
code bounce back.
RFA for Cons at FHWA for
approval as of 8/19/2016 -
FMIS approval8/23/16
Julie Tarrant
07/06/2016 OA Reporting: RFA for CONS
received by Evita on 07/05/2016 PM. Initial
Review Comments 1 sent to Avlin Odviar,
Meardey Tim the same afternoon.
Evita Premdas
Menifee
Local
RIV130401
STPL 5483
(002)
Newport Rd Pavement
Rehab
323,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
9/7 - Awaiting final
signature.
RFA for Construction at
FHWA for approval as of
Carlos
Geronimo
07/05/2016 RFA has been reviewed and
waiting for signature from the DLAE prior to
transmitting the E76 to HQ.
Evita Premdas
Perris
Local
RIV130401
STPL 5198
(017)
Redlands Ave
pavement rehab
312,609
Con
Con
FY 15/16
RFA for const at FHWA for
approval as of 8/19/2016.
E-76 Approved 8/26/16.
Gary Tri-Lake
07/06/2016 OA Reporting: CE signed
05/26/2016; ROW Cert has been sent to
ROW Unit on 06/16/2016. Evita to follow-
up.
Chigo Dike
Riverside
Local
RIV151215
CML
5058(100)
Bruce Street (TCM)
195,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
8/2/16 - RFA at HQs per
CT staff
Thuy Nguyen
MAIL LOG ENTRY: RFA (Con) i original, 1
copy, R/W Cert. 1 original, 2 copies
15,002,456
Page 2 of 5
WORKING FFY 2016/2017 OBLIGATION PLAN
As of 9/14/2016
Cattrans Staff/
Caltrans PM
Agency
System
FTIP ID
FPN
Project location
CMAQ
STPL
Funding
Phase
Current
Project Status
FTIP
Funding
Year
RCTC Comments
Information from
Caltrans Status
Chigo Dike
Calimesa
State
RIV060116
CML
5460(008)
I-10/Cherry Valley IC
443,000
PA&ED
Planning
FY 14/15
9/7 - Shirley to fwd email re: PSR.
8/29/16 - RCTC to recommend moving
<cao- rr,..., e.,e.,., i ea., /C7.1(1.11,11 .,-,
Dave Kinzie
RFA rejected. No SOP. No co-op agreement.
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Palm Springs
State
RIV133001
CML
5282(045)
Gene Autry Trail and
Vista Chino
246200
Con
PA&ED
FY 16/17
As of 6/29/2016 - No new information
Savat Khamphou
MAIL LOG ENTRY: ISA Checklist, 3 copies, 0 originals. LA
memo attached, Traffic Memo, 3 copies, 0 originals. LA
memo attached, AQR, 3 copies, 0 originals, LA memo
Attached
Evita Premdas
RCFC
State
RIV071267
STPLN-
6208(025)
1-15 from SR 60 and
Cajalco Rd
55,000,000
53,895,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 16/17
Env. Cleared but environmental
document will have to be revadlidated to
include the increase of TEL (pending the
2016 RTP/SCS A-1 .
)
Chigo Dike
Temecula
State
RIV130401
STPL
5459(024)
Winchester Rd.
Pavement Rehab
646,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
As of 6/29/2016 - RFA re -submitted
Julie Tarrant
E-76 requests sent to HQ
Albert Vergel de
- Dios
Beaumont
State
RIV050535
DEM10
5209(008)
SR60/Potrero Blvd.
Interchange Ph.l
8,929,000
Con
PS&E
FY 16/17
Caltrans considering AAA for the city of
Beaumont
Chris Vogt
No new submittal
Chigo Dike
Riverside
State
RIV131202
Adams St at 91 IC
935,000
Eng
PSR
FY 15/16
As of 6/29/2016 -May start PA&ED by
December 2016
Thuy Nguyen
Chigo Dike
Riverside
State
RIV151206
SR 91 to Mulberry
Pedestrian Bridge
638,000
Eng
PSR
FY 16/17
PSR required - city staff will be working
with CT to secure SR91 HOV as the basis
to start the PSR
Chigo Dike
g
Banning
g
Local
RIV130401
STPL
5214 011
( )
Ramsey St. Pavement
Rehab
182,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
9/7 - Chigo to set up mtg w/ Aaron and
city.
8/2 - Chigo to set up mtg w/ Aaron on
8/8. Revised PES under review.
5/23/2016, City needs to hire consultant
for the following reports:
- HPSR
-APE
-ASR
- HRER
This will happen in FY 16/17
Ann Marie Locon[e/
Art Vela
PES, 1 original, 5 copies. LA memo attached
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Beaumont
Local
RIV130401
Sth Street Resurfacing,
Restoration, and
Rehabilitation
220,000
Con
Planning
FY 15/16
As of 6/29/2016 - No new information
Chris Vogt
No new submittal
Chigo Dike
Callmesa
Local
RIV130401
STPL
5460(009)
Calimesa and Avenue l
Pavement Rehab
S4,000
Con
Planning
FY 16/17
8/29/16 - Likely to delete this project and
move funds to Cherry Valley IC
As of 6/2'3/2016 - No new information
Dave Kinzie
MAIL LOG ENTRY: RF FPN and Advantage ID Number, 1
original, 1 copy. Proj. a RIV130401. FPN to be issued
soon.
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Coachella
Local
RIV151217
STPL
5294(014)
Ave 48 from Jackson to
Van Buren
2,278,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 16/17
9/7 - NES had format issue; Caltrans staff
per AL to work with city on format issue.
Moving fwd with issues. CT to meet with
1Hoy on 9/9.
8/2 - Per Albert, needs noise study;
consultant report was incomplete.
Technical studies comments provided to
agency/agency consultant between May
and June 2016 (TS, NSR, AQR, NES(MI),
APE, HPSR, and ASR).
Oscar Espinoza
Pending resubmittal of technical studies addressing CT
comments of May -June 2016. Cultural cumments
provided to Coachella on 6/1/16 - extensive.
ED reduced to a CE.
WQAR and CIA requirements waived.
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Coachella
Local
RIV140816
CML
5294(010)
Install 8.2 Mi. of Class II
bike lanes on various city
arterials
460,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
CE cleared on 4/7/16.
Oscar Espinoza
DLAE signs CE/CE Determination Form.
Chigo Dike
g
Hemet
Local
RIV130401
STPL
5186(O35)
Gilbert St. Pavement
Rehab
443,000
Cgrbge 3 o
Qon
FY 15/16
CM of Hemet ga
2016/17. prefers obit ton if FFY
Nino Abad
WORKING FFY 2016/2017 OBLIGATION PLAN
As of 9/14/2016
Cattrans Staff/
Cahrans PM
Agency
System
FTIP ID
FPN
Project. location
CNI AO,
STP-L
Funding
phase
Current
Project Status
FTIP
Funding
Year
RCTC Comments
Information from
Caltrans Status
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Indian Wells
Local
RIV130402
STPL
5401(003)
Cook Street Rubberized
Overlay
135,000
Con
Con
FY 15/16
As of 5/23/2016, currently in design with
expected RFA in October 2016 according
to City
Bondie Baker
The requested NEPA Re -Validation has been signed by
Aaron Burton and sent to the City for their record as of
12/07/15.
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Indio
Local
RIV140819
CML-
5275(030)
Four (4) residential roads
in Indio
1, 132,000
Con
Design
FY 16/17
CE cleared on 7/12/2016
Josh Nickerson
Albert Verge! de
Dios
Indio
Local
RIV151001
STPLN
5275(027J
HWY 111 Widening
4,680,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 16/17
Per Aaron Burton agency needs to
resubmit revised NSR to CT for review.
Once approved PANED can be met.
pP
Josh Nickerson
Per Aaron Burton agency needs to resubmit revised NSR
to CT for review. Once approved PA/ED can be met.
MAIL LOG ENTRY: Noise Study Rpt. Z copies, 0 originals.
LA memo attached
Chigo Dike
Moreno
Valley
Local
RIV151202
CML
5441(065)
Various Locations Signal
Synchronization (TCM)
1,542,000
_o .
PA&ED
FY 1S/16
9/7 - Chigo to setup mtg w/
Environmental.
8/2 - Chigo to meet with city.
Agency needs to submit APE, HPSR & ASR
to CT for initial review.
John Kerenyi
5441(065): Assigned to Eduardo Castaneda
• PES: approved 9/24/2015
• Studies required per PES:
o ISA: received on 7/5/16, under review.
o Bio No Effect Memo: to be prepared by CT
o APE: Not yet submitted to CT
o HPSR: Not yet submitted to CT
o ASR: Not yet submitted to CT
• Projected Environmental Document: CE
• Notes: RFA planned for 3/2016:
Chigo Dike
Moreno
Valley
Local
RIV351203
CML
5441(063)
Cactus, Alessandro and
Day (Dynamic Message
Signs)
341,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
9/7 - Chigo to setup mtg w/
Environmental.
8/2 - Chigo to meet with city.
Agency needs to submit APE and HPSR to
CT for initial review.
John Kerenyi
5441(063): Assigned to Eduardo Castaneda
• PES: approved 9/24/2015
• Studies required per PES:
o ISA: Approved on 6/8/16
o Bio No Effect memo: to be prepared by CT
o APE: Under review 7/5/16
o HPSR: Not yet submitted to CT
• Projected Environmental Document: CE
• Notes: RFA planned for 3/2016
Unknown
Norco
Local
RIV130401
Pavement Overlay -
Various Locations
178,000
Con
Planning
FY 15/16
RCTC considering transferring the funds
to the Hamner Ave Bridge (HBP) - RCTC to
contact city staff
Chad Blais
No new submittals
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Palm Springs
Local
RIV140818
CML
5282 044
( )
Various Locations (Bike
lanes )
402,000
Con
PS&E
FY 15/16
As of 8/15/16 - public opposition to
removal of off street parking for bike
lanes requires relocaiton of bike lanes to
other qualifying streets -back to square 1
(PA&ED).
Savat Khamphou
Contacted the City and left a message to know the
status of the subject
I project.
Albert Verge! de
Dios
Palm Springs
Local
RIV990727
BRLO-
5282(017)
Indian Canyon Drive:
UPRR Overcrossing to
Garnet Ave
146,000
Con
R/W Cert
FY 16/17
As of 6/29/2016 - No new information
Savat Khamphou
MAIL LOG ENTRY: Checklist 5-1, 1 original, 2 copies
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Rancho
Mirage
g
Local
RIV140814
CML
5412 017
( )
Bob Hope Dr and Dinah
Shore Dr
75,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 16/17
As of 10/6/2015, PA&ED and PS&E
Underway. Expect to start R W in August
y' p / g
2016 FY 16/17
Jeff Benson
MAIL LOG ENTRY: PSA 4013-N, 1 copy, 0 originals Per
Aaron Burton as of 11/5/15 No PES Form submitted as
of 11/05/2015.
Albert Verge! de
Dios
Rancho
Mirage
Local
RIV140815
CML
5412(016)
Ramon Rd and Dinah
Shore Dr
621,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 16/17
/
As of 10/6/2015, PA&ED and PS&E
Underway. Expect to start R W in August
y' P / Su
2016 FY 16/17
Jeff Benson
MAIL LOG ENTRY: Project Description Revision Ltr, 1
original, 0 copies
Albert Vergel de
Dios
Rancho
Mirage
Local
RIV140815
CML
5412(016)
Ramon Rd and Dinah
Shore Dr
31,000
R W
/
PA&ED
FY 15/16
/
As of 10/6/2015, PA&ED and PS&E
Underway.Expect to start R/W in August
17 g
2016. FY 16/17
Jeff Benson
MAIL LOG ENTRY: Project Description Revision Ltr, 1
original, 0 copies
Chigo Dike
Riverside
Local
RIV151216
STPL
5058(102)
Magnolia Ave from
Buchanan to Banbury
2,620,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
9/7 - Just submitted to TCWG for SCAG to
clear.
Technical studies anticipated to be
completed by Dec. 2016.
Edward Lara
06/27/16 MAIL LOG ENTRY: NES, 5 copies, 0 originals.
LA memo attached, ISA Checklist, 5 copies, 0
originals.LA me meo attached, 6/16/16 received APE &
Concurrence Ltr, 5 copies, 0 originals. LA memo
attached. 07/06/16 APE and
NAC letter were received and are being reviewed.
Chigo Dike
Riverside
Local
RIV151207
TBD
Adjacent to Santa Ana
River Trail
2,376,000
_L
Con
Page 4 0
Planning
5
FY 18/19
9/7 - RFA at HQ pending.
As of 6/29/2016 - No new information
WORKING FFY 2016/2017 OBLIGATION PLAN
As of 9/14/2016
Caltrans Stall/
Caltrans PM
Agency
System
FTIP ID
FPN
Project Location
CMAQ
STP-L
Funding
Phase
Current
Project Status
Fi1F
Funding
Year
RCTC Comments
Information from
Cattrans Status
Evita Premdas
Riverside
County
Local
RIV090903
STPL
5956(195)
CaJalw Rd Widening
6,000,000
PA&ED
PA&ED
FY 16/17
8/22 - RCTC staff report increased
funding from $3m to $6m; to be included
B
in 2015 FTIP #22 amendment
_ _
Roy Null
07/06/2016 OA Reporting: SAME SINCE LAST
p g
O6/08/2016 OA Reporting: Still on the ENV Phase
(Cul[ural/Tribal Consultations). Possibly EIS/EIR.
Evita Premdas
Riverside
County
(formely
Jurupa Valley)
Local
RIV130401
STPL
5956(255)
Van Buren Blvd.
Pavement Rehab
387,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
8/4 - Per Roy, working on completing PSE;
RFA for CON ready in about 2 months.
As of 6/29/2016 - No new information
Roy Null
07/06/2016 OA Reporting: On 06/30/2016 DLAE signs
CE/CE Determination Form.
Chigo Dike
Wildomar
Local
RIV151213
CML
5484(007)
Grand Ave Bike Lanes
(TCM)
614,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
9/7 - Chigo to setup mtg w/
Environmental and city.
8/17 - Per Shawn Ortiz, CT is coordinating
w/ city & consultants on the cultural dots
and the Native Amer Consultation. Ann and
Herner to send updated reports shortly.
As of 6/29/2016 - PA&ED underway
Dan York/
Ann Herner
(Consultant)
5484(007): Assigned to Shawn Oriaz
• PES: approved 10/8/2075
• required per PES:
o 15A Checklist: ISA submitted to CT —hard copies with
wet signatures per Donald Cheng's request
o Bio No Effect Memo: To be prepared by CT.
o APE: DLAE signs revised APE Map, which accounts for
assessor's parcel number. Prior APE Map signed on
1/15/2016 did not have APN per Environmental.
o HPSR: Rec'd on 6/6/16
o ASR: Not yet submitted to CT
o HRER: Not yet submitted to CT 7/6/16
• Projected Environmental Document: CE
• Notes: RFA planned for4/30/2016 is at risk due to
the necessary tribal coordination (Pechanga and
Soboba). CT cultural has been working with Wildomar
and/or their consultant to get the required information
and procedures into the cultural documents now.
Chigo Dike
Wildomar
Local
RIV151214
CML
5484(008)
Grand Ave Bike Lanes
(TCM)
747,000
Con
PA&ED
FY 15/16
9/7 - Chigo to setup mtg w/
Environmental and city.
8/17 - Per Shawn Ortiz, CT is coordinating
w/ city &consultants on the cultural dots
and the Native Amer Consultation. Ann
Herner to send updated reports shortly.
As of 6/29/2016 - PA&ED underway
Dan York/
Ann Hemer
(Consultant)
$64,668,200
$81,728,000
Page 5 of 5
AGENDA ITEM 7
A presentation will be made but
there is no attachment to the
agenda for item 7.
r;r{oN
bof
Eo
(o
bo
$r{oN
bof
Eo
(o
b!0
+r{oN
oc:t
Fu-
o
(u
tnc(o
FxoE
Eo
(o
bo
srr'{oN
->f
FlJ-
o
o
tac(o
F
Xo
lJ-
Eo
(o
b0
IrirloN()oo
Eo
(o
bo
o]no\old
F{\]nr{.(,}
.$-llo
=I-(!PoF
-oo -oo -oo -oo -oo
tn
Flo
N
rl
cn
sf
FloN
Fl
tn
rf
FloN
Fl
ro
sl'rloN
Fl
l'\
LN
FloN
Fl
Fl
ootn
-isf
Fl
<t>
ooodst
cn{..}
ooo
'riNFl+{.r}
oo
oo
-irlN
oi{J>
olnr\docn.i
1rt>
vlco(J
oul
od
o-
tnco(J
VIcoU
ttl
oU
-cL)c
VI
(oc
.go.tl
oc
E(oT
=(o
F
PufEofg
oE
=Eo
tn
rll
.gtnc(o
F
I
ttlF
.:
v1
o
cf
I
oc
ho(u
Jc
JE'a
(oE
oE
E.
c
J
(u
o-
o
fIo
EoF
o
(o
Ptn(o
UJ
(u
(o
oco
o Ft Fe
G'
:l(Jo
EoF
EoPo
.9p-lto
qi
tn(o
o-
&.VIo-
c
o|aB€a.
slU
s-
o|a
B€a.
sl!
s
otn(o
o-
E,
LT,o-
s
\o
HoN
q,sS\!o+.*.
EaS(atq
tot{o(\
Ulsq
!q)+f
*f
EaS
14tq
\ortaN
trlSq
!o+f+.
EaSvltq
c;ta(o
-co-
c
IJ.J
c
Puo
o
o-
b0c'a
o(Jtno
.9
cfoU
qj
tn(o
o-
|J.J
c
qi
ttl(o
o-
l!
s
otn(o
-co-
IJ
c
rn
FloN
rl
d
tn
Flo
N
Fl
tn
tn
Flo
N
Fl
tn
sf
FloN
r{
rn
rn
FloN
rl
sf
LN
F{o
N
rl
O)
rn
FloN
Fl
Cl)
rnr{oN
F{
Nrl
tn
Flo
N
Fl
N
Fl
rn
FloN
Fl
cn
LN
FloN
rl
cn
ooo
cfisfsf
<t>
oorn
ctsl'
cn1t>
ootn
^isttn
-i</>
ootn
r\
cn(o{/}
ooodsf
N{..}
ooo
rri
O)
Fl{t\
ootn
o{tFlo-i{.'}
ooodr\
cn
c.i
<J>
ooOd
Ofo
r/i
1J>
oo
oo
cfir{(o
<t>
osf(\o
dsfr\{t>
o<fsf\FfnNt(nr{vD
->cooIJ
od
o-
tncoL)
vlcoU
coot!
od
o-
tnco(J
thcoL)
(n
oU
tncoU
ttlco(J
tncoU
tncoU
ijo+,(ug
llo
o6
oF
9
(u
(o
t-t-o
-cL)
o
Fl
ootn
P
o
o
o
(o
F
.L)
E(oc
o
(u
c(uU
E
oo
o-tnc(o
F
bocx-o
oo-
(u
J
i5
J
.gb
Po
E(u
boo
o-
o
(o
.C,VI
oE
(J
o
o-
-E
JE
3o
=VI
VI
o(J
f
o
-c.L)c
tt'l
(oc
.9pltl
(u
.(o
oc
bo(o
-c+)(o
+Eoo-
(I'
F
o
d.
(Uc
(o
P
(o
LN
(g
3J
(o
o-
Joo
U
(I'
(./l
-c
(I'
o-
oJ'co
-c.:o\z
c
U
OU
-oc(o
(o
.tl
-C,
(o
o-
oJ
i5
c(ot-(9dco
(o
rno
E6U
o
(o
oco
o
o
(o
oco
o
oE oE (uro (uE oE
c
JoL)
oE (o
EoE
;
t-(I'
EoE
=
tn
(u
tn
o
tn
(u
tn
o
tn
(u
tn
(u
&,E E,E,t E,
tnNot]ntoo
(n
<f{r}
.99--Cto
o-Fltl-(!PoF
tnEc
=lJ-
d
(J
+r{oN
o-oVI
!o
(o
bo
+rl
ON
->f
Eo
(o
bo
sf
F{oN
o-ottl
Eo
(o
bo
(o
r'{oN
o-o.tl
Eo
(o
ho
-oo -oo -oo -oo
sf
Flor\
rl
tn
sfrlo
N
Fl
rn
rn
r{oN
Fl
Fl
sf
FloN
Fl
Nr{
t.r)
Nq
o)
O)sf+r{
1t>
ooO+r\o
O)
{t}
ooo
triNro+
Fl
<t>
oO
FldN
Cl)
O{-r{
1t>
(ncoU
coo
lrj
od
o-
tt)co(J
tnco(J
I
co.tlt-o
o
or{
I
9
(u
oEoo
.C,F
oro
E,ttl
9too-
3oz
rn
F{N
I
I
Olr\
E,ttl
rn:
.9-o
C
_9
(o
oco
o
Pc
fo(J
oE
th
(u
E,
(o
f
L)o
EoF
iioP(!
.90-.cro
o-oo
LorF
tro]nooE
tr(oPtno
oPrh
th ttlcogFo
=ogh-
-CE
=5b0 {=c(o
=pe9
tnE;7UI
EES 'o'
rh l-
=o-{)Yzn
UJ
3
boc
v)
.tlrn(o
ttlc(o
g
(oU
Pc(og
ftnco
L.)
3
Eo
-oo
o-
attn(o
o-
lJ.j
c
otn(!
-c.o-
c
TIJ
s
aitn(o
o-
E,V\o-
c
(o
r'{
ON
Ioo
.sco
C'
.9p
.oo
6
co
Eo
o-o-
:Jtt',
z-.a
f\o
g
oo
?o
EEOpEhsa
sfr{oN
F{
ro
rn
FloN
rl
Fl
rn
FloN
r{
drl
(o
!-lo
N
Fl
rn
sfrloN
Fl
rn
Fl
FloN
Fl
Fl
vlttg
5It
o.Fln
P
E
EC5lL
ooo-
O)N
Cl)
oo-
<J>
orn
N
oo'l'\N
oi{.'}
oood
oo(o+
1r/>
oOodN(o
(\.t'
1l>
ooo
rri
cn
O)<t>
ooodood<t\
olftN
N<fsf
trnN<t\
EoP|!
.99-llo
oo
oF
otnt!
-go-
PIo.qol-o.
tncoU
vlco(J
ttlcoU
tn
Co(J
>coo
IJ.J
od
o-
.go
-oo
o-o-
f9
->coo
IJ.J
od
o-
P(Jo.qoLo.
Fl
-cCL
9
o
otoo-
oto
E,
Lrl
E(u
o-
od
o
-v,b
ho
C.E
oE
=oosf
o
1nPc(u
Eo
o
o-
.E
rlr{
Fl
3T
boc.E
(u
E
=
.g
o
C
ho(o
9
tn
EoE
rl
Cl)
d,ttl
bo
.gc(u
E
=-oE
o(J
(o
(oU
(Jco
h,0
co
E
f(oo
co
(o
-o
-c()
(ooU
.oEC
o!oE
c:toU
(u
E
tn
o
tn
o
tn
(u
6.&,E
\
l:
I ..'.,
r=1-/
<f
F{oN
L(!
=tro-T'o
oL
CL
CL
I
1n*,(,o.qol-o.
Loth
I
I o(J
b,0g
a-Eg
5]L
I
a-PE
AGENDA ITEM 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 19, 2016
TO:
Technical Advisory Committee
FROM:
Grace Alvarez, Planning and Programming Manager
SUBJECT:
SCAG Updates on the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS), 2015 Federal Transportation
Improvement Program (FTIP) and 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement
Program
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
2016 RTP/SCS
The 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2040 long-range
planning document) that started in mid -August 2014 was finally approved by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) on June 1, 2016. This long-range
planning document is essential for the implementation of short range projects in the Federal
Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) as it allows utilization of federal funds and federal
approvals for project permitting while also evaluating compliance with the Green House Gas (GHG)
emission targets established by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). As you know, the process is
long and complex as it includes approximately 4,000 projects with an estimated value of $556 billion
($275.5 billion for operations and maintenance and $246.6 billion for transportation capital projects).
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization
in charge of the long-range planning task covering the counties of Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San
Bernardino, Riverside, and Imperial. RCTC appreciates your cooperation with this long-range planning
effort and congratulates you on the approval of the 2016 RTP/SCS.
Subsequent to the approval of the 2016 RTP/SCS, on August 3, 2016, the TAC was notified of the limited
opportunity to include projects that warrant scope of work changes and/or are experiencing project
schedule delays that cross model years and that must be incorporated into the RTP/SCS before securing
environmental approvals. We did not receive responses from the TAC for scope of work changes and
project delays that were of urgency for federal approvals, therefore, RCTC is moving forward with the
submission of the 2016 RTP/SCS Amendment No. 1, including six projects, three on the state highway
and three on the local highway. The state highway projects include phasing of the I-215/Scott Road
Interchange, the 1-15 Express Lanes, and the 1-15 at Railroad Canyon Road Interchange. The three
projects on the local highway include the city of La Quinta's Avenue 50 Highway Bridge
Replacement/Widening, the city of Corona's Magnolia Avenue Bridge Widening, and the county of
Riverside's Avenue 66 Grade Separation/Bypass in the community of Mecca.
The anticipated federal approval of the 2016 RTP/SCS Amendment No. 1 is June 2016. We will keep
you updated on the progress of this effort.
2015 FTIP Update
The 2015 FTIP is set to expire in mid -December 2016 when the 2017 FTIP is anticipated to be approved
by the federal reviewing agencies. To sum up the activities of the 2015 FTIP, we have had a total of 17
amendments that RCTC participated in with a total of 341 project changes. Amendments 1-21 have
been approved. Amendment No. 22 (15-22) was our latest submittal on August 30th and included the
Short Range Transit Plans for capital and operations for Federal Fiscal Year 2016/17. The anticipated
approval for 15-22 is at the end of October 2016. There is one more amendment opportunity for the
2015 FTIP. It is an administrative modification due to SCAG on October 11, 2016.
For your use and information, I have included the 2015 FTIP Amendment Log with relevant amendment
information.
2017 FTIP Update
The 2017 FTIP process started on July 20, 2015 (initial notification to the TAC) with project submittal
due to RCTC on October 7, 2015. On September 1, the SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2017 FTIP
and authorized staff to proceed to secure the federal agencies approval which are anticipated by
December 16, 2016. A quick summary of our combined efforts for the 2017 FTIP include 266 active
projects on the state highway, local highway and transit capital and operations with a combined value
of $5.7 billion for the six -year period of programming (2017-2022). Included for your use and
information are SCAG's 2017 FTIP fact sheet with projections for reducing travel time, emission
reductions, job creation by county, level of highway investment, active transportation and transit.
Attachment: 2015 FTIP Amendment Log
SCAG 2017 FTIP Fact Sheet
2015 FTIP Amendment Schedule
2017 FTIP Amendment Schedule
2015 Federal Transportation Improvement Program - Amendment Submittals and Approval Dates
2015 FTIP
Purpose
No. of Projects
Due to RCTC
Due to SCAG
Anticipated Approval
Final Approval
Final
Update
381
10/7/2013
1/3/2014
12/17/2014
12/15/2014
Amendment 1
Formal Amendment
81
8/5/2014
8/12/2014
12/17/2014
12/15/2014
Amendment 2
Administrative Modification
13
10/27/2014
11/4/2014
12/29/2014
12/16/2014
Amendment 99
RTP Consistency Amendment
23
12/2/2014
12/9/2014
6/1/2016
Amendment 3*
Administrative Modification
0
Amendment 4
Formal Amendment
28
12/16/2014
12/23/2014
2/15/2015
4/8/2015
Amendment 5
Administrative Modification
10
2/10/2015
2/17/2015
3/10/2015
3/9/2015
Amendment 6
Formal Amendment
15
3/10/2015
3/17/2015
5/15/2015
6/2/2015
Amendment
Administrative Modification
13
4/21/2015
4/28/2015
5/31/2015
5/21/2015
Amendment 8**
Formal Amendment
0
Amendment 9
Formal Amendment
33
6/2/2015
6/9/2015
8/25/2015
8/4/2015
Amendment 10**
Administrative Modification
0
Amendment 11 ***
Administrative Modification
0
Amendment 12
RTP Consistency Amendment
7
8/11/2015
8/18/2015
6/1/2016
Amendment 13
Formal Amendment
7
9/8/2015
9/15/2015
11/10/2015
11/9/2015
Amendment 98
STIP Projects Only
5
9/23/2015
9/30/2015
6/1/2016
Amendment 14
Administrative Modification
29
10/27/2015
11/3/2015
12/1/2015
11/20/2015
Amendment 15
Formai Amendment
15
1/19/2016
1/26/2016
3/29/2016
Amendment 16**
Administrative Modification
0
Amendment 17
Administrative Modification
3
3/1/2016
3/8/2016
3/29/2016
Amendment 18
Administrative Modification
0
Amendment 19
Formal Amendment
22
4/5/2016
4/26/2016
6/30/2016
7/13/2016
Amendment 20
Administrative Modification
3
6/7/2016
6/21/2016
7/13/2016
7/13/2016
Amendment 21
Administrative Modification
0
Amendment 22
Formal Amendment
34
8/9/2016
8/30/2016
10/24/2016
Total Number of Projects
341
*RCTC did not participate in this amendment. This amendment was for OCTA
** RCTC will not participate in this amendment. This amendment is for LA Metro
***RCTC did not participate in this amendment.
As of Sep 6, 2016
SCAG's Updates - Attachment No. 1.xlsx 9/7/2016 - 9:54 AM
Page 1 of 1
2017 FEDE
IV PROVEN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
RAL TEA\SPORTATIO\
E\T FROG RAVI
To download the 2017 FTIP and its project
lists, please visit http://ftip.scag.ca.gov
The Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) is a federally
mandated list of transportation investment priorities in the SCAG
region. It is developed through a bottom -up process by which the county
transportation commissions submit projects for inclusion, including
highway, local arterial, bridge, public transit, rail, bicycle, pedestrian,
safety, maintenance, operational and planning projects. The 2017 FTIP
includes approximately 2,000 projects for the region, totaling nearly $28
billion over a six -year period.
The FTIP is an important document for the region, allowing project
sponsors to move forward with state and federal environmental review
or project funding allocation/ obligation. It also reflects how the region is
moving forward in implementing the policies and goals of the 2016-2040
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016
RTP/SCS), SCAG's long-range strategic vision for regional transportation
investments and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The 2017 FTIP reflects a continued emphasis on properly maintaining
the region's transportation system. The region's commitment to
active transportation is also growing, with nearly double the active
transportation investments made in the previous FTIP. Implementing
the projects in the 2017 FTIP will help the region reduce travel time for all
automobile trips by 870,000 hours per day, improve air quality by reducing
nitrogen oxides by 110 tons per day and meet the state's greenhouse
gas emissions reduction target in 2020. In addition to expanding our
multimodal system and improving public health, these projects will benefit
the region and the local economy with 82,000 direct jobs created each year
over the six year period.
Progress Since the Adoption of the 2015 FTIP
365 561
r,s,,,,
$6.44 B $12.79 B
completed projects initiated projects
•
funded landed
secured funding secured funding
projects benefiting
the region
■
In 2020, The 2017 FTIP Will Help Achieve
w�
h
•
870,000 H RS/DAY
in reduced travel time for all automobile trips
N
110 TONS/DAY
reduction of nitrogen oxides from
2016 level, improving air quality
• itilit„
••
8% PER CAPITA
0, REDUCTION
in regional GHG emissions, meeting target
set by the California Air Resources Board
Jobs Generated Per Year in Each County
as a Result of 2017 FTIP Projects
Ursntura
,100
33,100
Orange
16,000
San
Bernardino
12,500
Riverside
17,800
Imperial
300
y
Funding Sources
$5.9 B
FEDERAL: 2VA
$4.9 B
STATE: 1813/0 LOCAL 61%
t
Where Investments Are Going
HIGHWAY INVESTMENTS
$18
BILLION
The201i FTIP includes approximately2,000 projects for the region, totaling nearly $28 BILLION
over six -year period.
Capacity Enhancing Improvements (Highway) $6.6 B 36%
Other Highway Improvements $5.2 B 29%
Highway Operations & Maintenance $3.6B 20%
HOV Lanes $1.8 B 10%
ITS, TDM, Non -Motorized & Other $842.1 M 5%
6 INCLUDES ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS
Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure $481.9 M 47%
Active Transportation as Part of a Larger Project
(est. average s%of total cost) $179.0 M 17%
Dedicated Pedestrian Infrastructure $154.6 M 15%
Dedicated Bicycle Infrastructure $153.9 M 15%
First Mile/Last Mile Strategies $51.4 M 5%
Bicycle Detection & Traffic Signals $14.7 M 1%
•I
$1
BILLION
TRANSIT INVESTMENTS
An estimated $1 billion is programmed on over360 active transportation projects in the 2017 FTIP,
nearly doubling the $520 million programmed in the 2015 FTIP. The 2017 FTIP does not capture funds
to be awarded in Cycle 3 of the ATP program for FY2019/20 - FY2020/21, which will be approved
in April201Z When compared to the 2015 FTIP, the 2017 FTIP reflects a larger investment in active
transportation improvements that are incorporated into larger transportation projects. The growth
is partially attributed to improved reporting methods integrated into SCAG's FTIP database to
provide a greater understanding of active transportation investment in the region.
Transit Improvement - Expansion
Transit Operations & Maintenance
Transit Improvement
$6.0 B 62%
$3.1 B 32%
$579.4 M 6%
11111
ram more online: rm.p://ftip.scag.ca.gox
have any questions or comments regarding Active Transportation please contact
h Jepson at (213) 236-1955 or . For questions regarding the FTIP,
e contact: Maria Lopez at (213) 236-1806 or
ease recycle. 2690 updated:2016.08.11
�N CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION ofGOVERNMENTr
818 W. 7th Street, 12`h Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel: (213) 236-1800 • Fax: (213) 236-1963
www.scag.ca.gov
2015 FTIP
AMENDMENT/ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
SCHEDULE
Only for projects that urgently need to be updated (ornergeric,V WV.
Due Date
(by Noon)
I Amendments
Administrative Modifications
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Amendment #15-15
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
#15-16
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
#15-17
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
#15-18
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Amendment #15-19
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
#15-20
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
#15-21
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
Amendment #15-22
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
#15-23
Note: For Amednment/Adm Mod #15-15, #15-17, and #15-19 DO NOT INCLUDE PROJECTS THAT ARE PART OF CONSISTENCY
AMENDMENT #15-12
Amendments submitted during this period should only be for emergency type projects as the 2017 FTIP is being developed
during this time.
As of July 25, 201{>
2017 FTIP
AMENDMENT/ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
SCHEDULE
Due Date
(by Noon)
Amendments
Administrative Modifications
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Amendment #17-01
2016 STIP, 2016 SHOPP, HBP and
emergency type changes to address
comments received on Draft 2017
FTIP only. Concurrent with 2017
FTIP base
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
2016 RTP/SCS Amendment #1
FTIP Amendment #17-97 (will become #17-06)
CONSISTENCY AMENDMENT FOR
MODELING ONLY (New and updates
to existing modeled projects -- only
scope or completion date)
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Amendment #17-02
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Administrative Modification #17-03
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
Amendment #17-04
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Administrative Modification #17-05
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
Consistency Amendment #17-06
(programming for #17-97)
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
Amendment #17-07
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Administrative Modification #17-08
Tuesday, July 11, 2017
Amendment #17-09
Tuesday, August 29, 2017
Administrative Modification #17-10
Note: Amendment # may change depending on emergency requests between December and August.
Updated 8/24/16
AGENDA ITEM 9
FORNIA'S EARMARK REPURPOSi
Transfer Requests Submitted to FHWA as of September 2, 2016
RCTC
RTPA
Sponsoring Agency
District
Demo ID
Legislation
Demo Description
Transfer Amount 0)
"TO" project description (from transfer form)
Caltrans Note to FHWA
RCTC
RCTC
8
CA081
TEA-21
Realign and improve California Route 79 in Riverside County
$84,435.75
Pachappa Underpass in the city of Riverside
RCTC
Beaumont
8
CA535
SAFETEA-LU
Design and Construct new Interchange at Potrero Blvd and State
Route 60 in Beaumont
$1,439,839.50
Pachappa Underpass in the city of Riverside
RCTC
RCTC
8
CA657
SAFETEA-LU
Highway 74 and Interstate 215 Interchange Project
$719,920.75
Pachappa Underpass in the city of Riverside
RCTC
City of Corona
8
CA069
TEA-21
Improve SR-91/Green River Road interchange
$156,585.00
McKinley Street grade separation at the BNSF Railroad tracks
in the City of Corona
RCTC
City of Banning
8
CA213
2003 APP ACT
Ramsey Street extension, Banning, California
$1,738,625.00
1-10 Bypass south of 1-10 from the City of Banning east city
limits to Apache Trail in the community of Ca bazon
Allocation Requested
RCTC
Riverside County
8
CA321
SAFETEA-LU
State Route 865 and Ave. 66 highway safety grade separation
$3,239,640.38
Avenue 66 from west of Lincoln Street to Dale Kiler Road in
Riverside County - construct grade separation
RCTC
City of Murrieta
8
CA567
SAFETEA-LU
Interstate 15, California Oaks Road Interchange Project.
$1,439,839.50
Reconstruct the 1-215 / Keller Road interchange in the City of
Murrieta
RCTC
City of Desert Hot Springs
8
CA576
SAFETEA-LU
Upgrade essential road arterials, connectors, bridges and other
road infrastructure improvements in the Town of Desert Hot
Sorines CA.
$36,543.67
1-10 Bypass south of 1-10 from the City of Banning east city
limits to Apache Trail in the community of Cabazon
RCTC
City of Riverside
8
CA668
SAFETEA-LU
Restoration of Victoria Avenue in the City of Riverside, CA.
$359,960.38
Roadway widening of Magnolia Avenue from Buchanan Street
to Banbury Drive in the City of Riverside
TOTALS
$9,215,389.93
Submittal to FHWA Page 1 09/02/16
ver
2016 Earmark Repurpose Timeline
Federal Agency
Caltrans/DLA
se jiZ/105
Passage or 2E46
Appraprlghsn
Develop Implementation j
Guidance
4/15/16
Caltrans Provides Earmark
Lists and Guidance to RTPAs
Develop Guidance and
Reconcile Eligible Eramark
Lists with FHWA/local agencies
RTPA/Local Agencies
FHWA/Caltrans/
RTPAs/Local Agencies
3/8/16
FHWA
Guidance
Receive and process repurpose requests
Caltrans
Receive and process repurpose
requests to FHWA
5/30/16
FROEs to Districts for
de-ob/closeouts on
remnant List
1
himmiE
9/12/16
Deadline for
Repurposing
9/15/19
Deadline for
Obligation
Receive and process requests for authorization from Caltrans 1111
8/31/16
Repurpose Lists
to FHWA
Receive and process requests for authorization to FHWA
8/1/16
Repurpose Lists
to Caltrans
Itrans prepare arSd suN it r cfueata for authorization to Catrans
g Implementation outreach through reular
rterly report and monitoring of progress on Repurposed projectsinalik
8/1/19
Deadline for
E76 to FHWA
1
7/1/19
Deadline for
E76 to Caltrans
N
Important Reference Documents:
1 FHWA Earmark Repurposing Guidance Memorandum115
2 FHWA Earmark Repurposing Guidance Frequently Asked Questionsr]fr
April 26, 2016
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 14, 2016
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director
THROUGH:
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
2016 Earmark Repurposing of Federal Funds Update
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive and file a report on the status of the 2016 Earmark Repurposing of Federal
Funds; and
2) Approve the replacement of the earmark balance for the State Route 60/Potrero
Boulevard interchange with federal funds, in the amount of $1,439,840, at such time
when the project is deemed by Caltrans to be ready to list.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
On March 8, 2016, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued guidance on repurposing
earmark balances (or savings) that are 10 years old or have not been obligated. The
repurposing funds are made available from the federal transportation bill, Fixing America's
Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), and will be a one-time only opportunity to repurpose the
earmark balances. Per FHWA guidance, the repurposed earmark must be obligated by
September 30, 2019, and if the funds are not obligated by this date, the funds will lapse with no
opportunity for an extension or to repurpose the funds to another project. Since the funds are
federal, any project identified for repurposing must comply with all federal aid requirements.
Projects identified for repurposing must also be within 50'miles of the original earmark project.
At the July 13, 2016 Commission meeting, three of the Commission's earmark balances were
approved for repurposing to the Pachappa Underpass project in the amount of $847,552. In
addition, seven other local agency e.armark balances were eligible for repurposing. Below are
the earmark balances and repurposing projects proposed by the Commission and local
agencies:
Agenda Item 7K
164
Agency
Project
Legislation
Project Proposed for
Repurposing
Balance
Banning/County
of Riverside
Ramsey Street
Extension
2003 App Act
1-10 Bypass in the
Pass Area
$ 1,738,625
*Beaumont
SR-60/Potrero IC
SAFETEA-LU
Pachappa Underpass
1,439,840
Corona
SR-91/Green River
TEA-21
McKinley Avenue
Grade Separation
156,585
County of
Riverside
SR-86/Avenue 66
Grade Separation
SAFETEA-LU
Construct a new two-
lane (one lane in each
direction) grade
separation bypass with
elevated structure over
the UPRR, Hammond
Road and SR-111
3,239,640
Desert Hot
Springs
Upgrade Essential
Roads `
SAFETEA-LU
1-10 Bypass in the
Pass Area
36,544
Murrieta
I-15/California
SAFETEA-LU
I-215/Keller Road
Interchange
1,439,840
Riverside
Victoria
SAFETEA-LU
Widening of Magnolia
Avenue
359,960
*City staff concurred with repurposing earmark balance. Staff recommends replacing the
earmark balance with future federal funds when the SR-60/Potrero interchange project is ready
for construction.
The schedule for recommending projects for repurposing is as follows:
August 1, `2016
August 31, :2016
September 12, 201.6
Regions submit project repurposing forms to Caltrans
Caltrans submits repurposed list of projects to FHWA
Deadline for repurposing
Staff submitted the project repurposing forms to Caltrans prior to August 1, 2016. Staff will
continue to work with the cities, county, and Caltrans to ensure the request to repurpose the
earmark balance is done according to FHWA and Caltrans guidance.
There is, no financial impact related to the repurposing of the earmark funds; rather, the
programming of repurposed funds for the, Pachappa Underpass project in the amount of
$1,439,840 results in a reduction of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) or Congestion
Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ)-funds programmed on the Pachappa Underpass project. The
FY 2016/17 Budget for the Pachappa Underpass project includes federal revenues of
$12 million; therefore, a budget adjustment of $1,439,840 is not required to increase the
federal revenues. Rather, a budget transfer, which does not require Commission approval, will
be made to replace $1,439,840 of federal STP or CMAQ funds with the federal repurposed
earmark funds.
Agenda Item 7K
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Yes
Year:
FY 2016/17
Amount:
I $1,439,840
Source of Funds:
1Federal repurposed earmarks
Budget Adjustment:
Yes
GL/Project Accounting No.:
003038 414 41410 0000 221 3141401
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\jitbuii;iateijyr
Date:
I 08/11/2016
Agenda Item 7K
166
AGENDA ITEM 10
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 19, 2016
TO:
Technical Advisory Committee
FROM:
Martha Durbin, Management Analyst
SUBJECT:
FY 2017/18 Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Opportunity
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Caltrans Division of Transportation Planning released the FY 2017/18 Sustainable Transportation
Planning Grant Program Application Guide for the Strategic Partnerships Grant and Sustainable
Communities Grant (STPGP-SPSC). The Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program is
intended to strengthen the economy, promote equity, and protect the environment. The
implementation of grants should ultimately lead to the adoption, initiation, and programming of
transportation improvements.
Examples of project types include: studies that advance a community's efforts to reduce
transportation related greenhouse gases, transit plans, community to school studies or safe routes to
school plans, jobs and affordable housing proximity studies, complete street plans, bike and
pedestrian safety enhancement plans, and more.
Caltrans anticipates awarding approximately $9.3 million for the following two grants under the
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants Program:
Strategic Partnerships Grant:
Funding is intended for planning projects that encourage regional agencies to partner with Caltrans to
identify and address statewide/interregional transportation deficiencies in the state highway system,
strengthen government -to -government relationships, and result in programmed system
improvements.
Estimated Budget: $1.5 Million
Local Match: 20 percent of the total project amount
Minimum grant award: $100,000
Maximum grant award: $500,000
Under the Strategic Partnership Grant, SCAG is the primary applicant so it is important to contact
SCAG to start discussing your application. The application under this grant is due to SCAG October 7.
SCAG would then submit the application to Caltrans by the due date of November 4.
Sustainable Communities Grant:
Funding is intended to identify and address mobility deficiencies in the multimodal transportation
system, encourage stakeholder collaboration, involve active public engagement, integrate Smart
Mobility 2010 concepts, and ultimately result in programmed system improvements.
Estimated Budget: $7.8 Million
Local Match: 11.47 percent of the total project amount
Minimum grant award: $50,000
Maximum grant award: $500,000
Under the Sustainable Communities Grant, applicants are encouraged to submit draft applications to
Caltrans District 8, Rebecca Forbes, by October 21 for review. The final application is due to Caltrans
at Regional.Planning.Grants@dot.ca.gov on November 4 by 5pm.
Attachments: FY 2017/18 STPGP-SPSC Application Guide
Grant Application
Caltrans PowerPoint Presentation
SCAG PowerPoint Presentation
Contact List
CALTRANS SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING
GRANT PROGRAM
f:
L4
600040
FY 2017-2018
Grant Application Guide
STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
11116110411111116
r,
�4
• 411
.{ ,'
Application Deadline
.1 v
-
California Department of Transportation
Division of Transportation Planning
Table of Contents
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program 1
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Summary Chart 5
General Information and Requirements 6
Grant Program Overview 10
Application Preparation 16
• Application Submittal Instructions 17
• Tips and Pointers for Writing a Successful Grant Application 18
• Grant Application Checklist and Sample 19
• Scope of Work Checklist and Sample 29
• Project Timeline Checklist and Sample 35
• Third Party In -Kind Valuation Plan Checklist and Sample 37
• Local Resolution Checklist and Sample 39
Caltrans District and Regional Agency Boundaries Map 41
Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant District Contact List 42
ADA Notice: For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats.
For information call (916) 654-6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms
Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814.
[Intentionally left blank]
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program
The Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program was created to support the California
Department of Transportation's (Caltrans') Mission: Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and
efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability.
Current significant efforts were also considered during Grant Program development, such as:
• California Transportation Infrastructure Priorities Vision and Core Concepts;
• State Smart Transportation Initiative Assessment and Recommendations;
• Caltrans Program Review Major Actions;
• California Transportation Plan (CTP) 2040 Vision and Goals; and,
• Smart Mobility 2010 Principles.
The Grant Programs Overarching Objectives were also identified to ensure consideration of these
major efforts in transportation planning, including: Sustainability, Preservation, Mobility, Safety,
Innovation, Economy, Health, and Equity.
In addition, grant administration processes have been further streamlined and made consistent to
benefit our partners and District grant managers. Most notable is the earlier release date of this Grant
Application Guide, the earlier application deadline, and an earlier grant award announcement date.
With this advanced process, grant recipients can anticipate starting project activities early in Fiscal
Year (FY) 2017-2018, pending State Budget approval.
The intent and amount of funding available for the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant
Program remains unchanged from previous years. Caltrans still provides transportation planning
grants to promote a balanced, comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes
sustainability and these grants may still be used for a wide range of transportation planning purposes
that address local, regional, and interregional transportation needs and issues. The implementation of
these grants should ultimately lead to the adoption, initiation, and programming of transportation
improvements.
The Caltrans Division of Transportation Planning provides the following transportation planning
grants:
❖ Strategic Partnerships
• Sustainable Communities for MPOs & RTPAs
❖ Sustainable Communities for Cities, Counties, Transit Agencies, and Tribal Governments
Integrating Goals and Objectives
All grant applications must align with the Caltrans Mission, Grant Program Overarching Objectives,
and the CTP 2040 Vision. The State and Federal goals provide the framework for the Strategic
Partnerships and Sustainable Communities grants. A competitive grant application addresses and
articulates how the project relates to the Caltrans Mission, Grant Program Overarching Objectives,
CTP 2040 Vision, and multiple State and Federal goals. The Grant Specific Objectives on Page 14
indicate the specific purpose of each grant, and should also be considered when preparing an
application. Overall, successful grant applications clearly demonstrate how the proposed project
integrates the State and Federal goals and the Grant Program Overarching objectives.
1
State Transportation Planning Goals'
1. Improve Multimodal Mobility and Accessibility for All People: Expand the system and
enhance modal choices and connectivity to meet the State's future transportation demands.
2. Preserve the Multimodal Transportation System: Maintain, manage, and efficiently utilize
California's existing transportation system.
3. Support a Vibrant Economy: Maintain, manage, and enhance the movement of goods and
people to spur the economic development and growth, job creation, and trade.
4. Improve Public Safety and Security: Ensure the safety and security of people, goods, services,
and information in all modes of transportation.
5. Foster Livable and Healthy Communities and Promote Social Equity: Find transportation
solutions that balance and integrate community values with transportation safety and
performance, and encourage public involvement in transportation decisions.
6. Practice Environmental Stewardship: Plan and provide transportation services while
protecting our environment, wildlife, historical, and cultural assets.
Federal Transportation Planning Goals2
1. Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global
competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.
2. Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non -motorized users.
3. Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non -motorized users.
4. Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and freight.
5. Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life,
and promote consistency between transportation improvements and state and local planned
growth and economic development patterns.
6. Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between
modes, for people and freight.
7. Promote efficient system management and operation.
8. Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.
9. Improve the resiliency and reliability of the transportation system and reduce or mitigate
stormwater impacts of surface transportation.
10. Enhance travel and tourism.
California Transportation Plan 2040 Vision
California's transportation system is safe, sustainable, and globally competitive. It provides reliable
and efficient mobility and accessibility for people, goods, and services while meeting our greenhouse
gas emission reduction goals and preserving the unique character of California's communities.. This
integrated, connected, and resilient multimodal system supports a thriving economy, human and
environmental health, and social equity.
I Source: California Transportation Plan 2040
z Source: Title 23, United States Code, Section 134
2
Promoting Sustainable Communities in California
Caltrans supports Senate Bill 375 (SB 375, 2008) Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) efforts.
Applications should complement SCS efforts, if they exist in the geographical region. The SCS is a
tool that is intended to help communities reduce transportation related greenhouse gas emissions and
assist local and regional governments in creating sustainable communities for residents throughout
the State. Information on SCS efforts can be found at: http://www.arb.ea.gov/ec/sb375/sb375.htm.
Although most rural areas of the State are not subjected to SB 375/SCS requirements, Caltrans still
promotes the development of sustainable communities in these areas of the State. Eligible rural
agencies are strongly encouraged to apply for Sustainable Communities grants.
Addressing Environmental Justice and Disadvantaged Communities34
Caltrans strives for environmental justice in all of its activities. In the past, low-income and minority
communities bore many of the negative impacts of transportation projects. It is the goal of
environmental justice to ensure that when transportation decisions are made, low-income and
minority communities have a full opportunity to participate in the decision -making process, and they
receive an equitable distribution of benefits and not a disproportionate share of burdens. Caltrans
encourages eligible applicants to apply for Sustainable Communities grants to address transportation
needs and deficiencies in disadvantaged communities. CalEnviroScreen Version 2.0 is used to verify
the disadvantaged communities that will benefit from awarded grant projects. Information about
environmental justice and disadvantaged communities can be found at:
CalEnviroScreen Version 2.0:
http://oehha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=dae2fble42674c12a04a2b302a080
598
Desk Guide — Environmental Justice in Transportation Planning Investments:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/documents/ej_titlevi_files/EnvironmentalJusticeDesk
GuideJan2003.pdf
Community Primer on Environmental Justice & Transportation Planning:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/documents/ej_titlevi_files/EJ Primer_4_10_WEB.pdf
Complete Streets and Smart Mobility Framework
Caltrans also supports complete streets and the Smart Mobility Framework (SMF). If applicable,
Caltrans encourages applicants to consider the tools and techniques contained in the SMF as well as
typical components of complete streets. Specifically, this might include how the project addresses
components of community design, regional accessibility, place types, and priority activities to achieve
smart mobility outcomes, community transition, and associated multimodal performance measures for
the appropriate context of the problem. Information on these efforts can be found at:
Complete Streets: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/complete_streets.html
SMF: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/smf.html
3 Source: Desk Guide — Environmental Justice in Transportation Planning Investments (2003)
4 Source: Community Primer on Environmental Justice & Transportation Planning (2008)
3
Climate -Ready Transportation
California's six key climate change strategy pillars provides a framework for reducing California's
greenhouse gases emissions and increasing resiliency to the anticipated effects of global warming:
(1) reducing today's petroleum use in cars and trucks by up to 50 percent; (2) increasing to 50 percent
our electricity derived from renewable sources; (3) doubling the efficiency savings achieved at
existing buildings and making heating fuels cleaner; (4) reducing the release of short-lived climate
pollutants; (5) managing farm and rangelands, forests and wetlands so they can store carbon; and,
(6) updating the Safeguarding California Plan - California's climate adaptation strategy. Climate
change poses many threats to our communities' health, well-being, environment, and property.
Extreme weather, rising sea levels, shifting snowpack, among other impacts will touch every part of
peoples' lives in the next century. Planning key actions now will help lessen impacts and cope with
changes. Government, at every level, must work together to safeguard our state by taking steps to
reduce our own impacts and increase our resilience in the future.
Executive Order B-30-15 specifically addresses the need for all of the state's planning and
investments to consider the exposures and risks from a changing climate, anticipating current and
future impacts and disruptions that are likely to occur. The order establishes a California greenhouse
gas emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 19901evels by 2030, directs state government to
take climate change into account in all planning and investment decisions, and employ full life -cycle
cost accounting to evaluate and compare infrastructure investments and alternatives. It describes four
guiding principles when making planning and investment decisions:
• Priority should be given to actions that both build climate preparedness and reduce greenhouse
gas emissions;
• Where possible, flexible and adaptive approaches should be taken to prepare for uncertain
climate impacts;
• Actions should protect the state's most vulnerable populations; and
• Natural infrastructure solutions should be prioritized.
Safeguarding California — http://resources.ca.gov/climate/safeguarding/
California Climate Adaptation Planning Guide —
http://resou rces.ca.gov/climate/safeguarding/adaptation_policy_guide/
4
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Summary Chart
GRANT
FUND SOURCE
PURPOSE
WHO MAY APPLY
LOCAL MATCH
The following are eligible to apply as a
primary applicant:
Federal Highway
• Metropolitan Planning Organizations and
Administration—
Regional Transportation Planning
State Planning and
Agencies (MPOs/RTPAs)
20% minimum (in non -
federal funds or an in -
Research, Part 1
Funds transportation
The following are eligible to apply as a
kind* contribution). The
Strategic
Budget
planning studies of
sub -applicant:
entire minimum 20%
Partnerships
Federal funds
interregional and
• MPOs/RTPAs
local match may be in the
$1,500,000
statewide significance,
in partnership with
• Transit Agencies
form of an eligible in -
kind contribution.
Grant Min
Caltrans.
• Universities and Community Colleges
Additional local funds
$100,000
• Native American Tribal Governments
above the minimum local
Grant Max
• Cities and Counties
match are desired.
MPOs $1,000,000,
All others $500,000
• Community -Based Organizations
• Non -Profit Organizations (501.C.3)
• Other Public Entities**
Federal Transit
The following are eligible to apply as a
primary applicant:
Administration
(FTA), Section
• MPOs/RTPAs
5304
• Transit Agencies; Cities and Counties;
Funds studies of
Native American Tribal Governments
&
State Highway
multimodal
transportation issues
The following are eligible to apply as a
sub -applicant:
11.47% minimum in
cash or an in -kind
Sustainable
Account (SHA)
having statewide,
contribution). The entire
Communities
interregional, regional
• MPOs/RTPAs
minimum 11.47% local
Budget
or local significance to
• Transit Agencies
match may be in the form
Federal/State funds
$7,800,000
assist in achieving the
Caltrans Mission and
• Universities and Community Colleges
f an eligible in -kind
og
contribution.
Grant Min
overarching
• Native American Tribal Governments
$50,000
objectives.
• Cities and Counties
Grant Max
• Community -Based Organizations
MPOs $1,000,000,
All others $500,000
• Non -Profit Organizations (501.C.3)
• Other Public Entities**
* For in -kind contribution requirements, refer to Page 12 of this Guide.
** Public entities include state agencies, the Regents of the University of California, district, public authority, public agency,
and any other political subdivision or public corporation in the State (Government Code Section 811.2).
5
General Information and Requirements
This section provides a brief overview of the financial, subcontracting, and legal requirements
pertaining to all grant programs. The content of this section should be notably considered in the
development of grant applications as it lays the foundation for what to expect when applying for these
grant funds. Upon award, grantees will receive more specific guidelines including administrative and
reporting requirements.
Accounting Requirements
Grantees are required to maintain an accounting and record system that properly accumulates and
segregates incurred project costs and matching funds by line item. The accounting system of the
grantee, including its sub -applicants and subcontractors, must conform to Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles that enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion
and provides support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices sent to or paid by Caltrans.
Allowable project costs must comply with 2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200. It is the
grantee's responsibility, in conjunction with Caltrans District staff, to monitor work and expenses to
ensure the project is completed according to the contracted Scope of Work and Project Timeline.
Grantees must monitor work and costs to ensure invoices are submitted on a regular and timely basis
(monthly or quarterly as milestones are completed). Grantees must communicate with their local
Caltrans District Office to ensure any issues are addressed early during the project period.
indirect and Direct Costs
Indirect costs require an Indirect Cost Allocation Plan (ICAP). For example, reproduction costs,
computer rental and office supplies are considered indirect costs. However, if these costs are tied to a
specific task or activity, they are considered direct costs.
If a grantee, including sub -recipients and third party contractors/consultants, are seeking
reimbursement of indirect costs, they must annually submit an ICAP or an Indirect Cost Rate
Proposal (ICRP) to Caltrans Audits and Investigations for review and approval prior to
reimbursement. An ICAP or ICRP must be prepared and submitted in accordance with 2 CFR, Part
200. For more information visit the following website:
Indirect Cost Allocation Plan: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/audits/icap_icrp.html
Due to the competitive nature of the grant award process, applications must include any indirect costs
in the Project Timeline. Indirect costs can only be reimbursed if they are identified in the Project
Timeline submitted with the initial application.
6
Eligible Activities and Expenses
Direct costs must be used only for transportation planning -related activities. Please consult with
Caltrans District staff for more information on whether costs are eligible for funding. Some examples
of eligible costs include:
• Data gathering and analysis
• Planning consultants
• Conceptual drawings and design
• Community surveys, meetings, charrettes, focus groups
• Bilingual services for interpreting and/or translation services for meetings
Travel Expenses
Grantees may be eligible to claim travel expenses if they have been approved in the Scope of Work
and Project Timeline. Travel expenses and per diem rates are not to exceed the rate specified by the
State of California Department of Personnel Administration for similar employees (i.e. non -
represented employees). For more information on eligible travel expenses, visit the following
website:
Caltrans Travel Guide: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/asc/travel/
Ineligible Activities and Expenses
Some activities, tasks, project components, etc. are not eligible under these grant programs, regardless
of funding source. If an application has any of the following elements, it will be disqualified.
Ineligible activities and expenses include:
• Environmental studies, plans, or documents normally required for project development under
the National Environmental Policy Act or the California Environmental Quality Act
• Engineering plans and design specification work
• Project Initiation Documents (PIDs)
• Regional Transportation Plans (RTP) or updates to the RTP
• Economic development plans or studies
• Land use plans or studies
• General Plans or updates to elements
• Construction projects, such as the building of a facility, or maintenance
• Purchasing of office furniture, or other capital expenditures
• Decorations
• Acquisition of vehicles or shuttle programs
• Organizational membership fees
• Unreasonable incentives such as prizes for public participation
• Charges passed on to sub -recipient for oversight of awarded grant funds
• Other items unrelated to the project
7
Third Party Contracts
The agreements between a grantee and a sub -recipient, consultant, or sub -consultant are often referred
to as "third party contracts." An eligible sub -applicant will be identified by an eligible applicant on
the onset of the application. If a grantee or a sub -recipient is going to hire a consultant to perform
work during the project, then proper procurement procedures must always be used.
Grantees may use their agency's procurement procedures as long as they comply with 2 CFR, Part
200 and Local Assistance Procedures Manual, Chapter 10. In addition, work can only be contracted if
it has been stated in the applicant's Scope of Work and Project Timeline. A grantee is fully
responsible for all work performed by its sub -recipient, consultant, or sub -consultant. Caltrans solely
enters into a contract directly with the grantee; therefore the grantee is responsible to ensure that all
third parties adhere to the same provisions included in the contractual agreement between Caltrans
and the grantee.
All government funded consultant procurement transactions must be conducted using a fair and
competitive procurement process that is consistent with 2 CFR, Part 200 and Local Assistance
Procedures Manual, Chapter 10.
All documentation of third party contract procurements must be retained and copies of all agreements
must be submitted to Caltrans. For more information on third party contracting, visit the following links:
2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200 - http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-
idx?tp1=/ecfrbrowse/Tit1e02/2cfr200_m ain_02.tp1
Local Assistance Procedures Manual: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/lam/lapm.htm
Title VI Non -Discrimination Requirement
Title VI of the U.S. Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national
origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance. Specifically Title VI provides
the following:
No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, national origin,
religion, sex, age, or disability be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits
of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial
assistance from the Federal government.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) each
have requirements that recipients of Metropolitan Planning federal funds must demonstrate continued
compliance with Title VI. Compliance with Title VI includes conducting meetings in a fair and
reasonable manner that are open to all members of a community. Compliance reflects not only the
law, but is also a good policy that builds the kind of trust and information sharing upon which
successful planning is done. Even where a city or county may not be receiving federal funding for
transportation, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 also obligates that a city or county comply
with Title VI, if it receives any other federal funding for any program.
Caltrans is responsible for complying with Civil Rights requirements and for monitoring funding
compliance of any sub -applicants. Grant recipients of federal funds, primarily Metropolitan Planning
8
Organizations (MPOs) and Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs), are required to
comply with FTA Circular 4702.1B, and must submit a copy of the agency's governing board -
approved Title VI Program. Caltrans staff will contact grantees to ensure this requirement is satisfied.
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Reporting
Grant recipients of federal funds, primarily MPOs and RTPAs, are required to report any Strategic
Partnerships and/or Sustainable Communities contracting opportunities that may involve
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation. DBE reporting is required twice a year:
April 1 st and October 1st
For details about DBE requirements, visit the Office of Regional Planning (ORP) DBE website at:
http://vvvvw.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/orip/DBE/DBE.html.
Pre -Award Audit
The Strategic Partnerships and Sustainable Communities grants are available in amounts up to
$500,000 ($1 million for MPOs). However, any awarded grant in excess of $250,000 may require a
pre -award audit. The pre -award audit is to ensure that recipients of state and federal funds maintain
adequate financial management systems prior to receiving the funds. Pre -award audits may be
required of new grantees, agencies that have not recently been audited, agencies that have undergone
prior audits with significant weaknesses or deficiencies in their financial management systems, or
those determined to be a higher risk to Caltrans.
If a pre -award audit is needed, the local Caltrans District Office will contact the grantee to facilitate
the appropriate action. This has the potential to delay the start of the project and applicants are
encouraged to determine if the delay will hinder their ability to complete the project by the terms
specified in the agreement.
Additional Performance Considerations
Previous grantee performance will be considered during the evaluation process. Applicants with a
history of inadequate performance such as poor grant project management, failure to achieve grant
project milestones, untimely invoice submittals, or an overall poor quality of the final grant product
may be at a competitive disadvantage in the application review process. Grant funds may not be
awarded to prior grant recipients with unresolved past grant performance issues. Additionally,
applicants that have an excessive balance of or consistently relinquish any transportation funds
administered by Caltrans Planning and/or have unresolved audit issues or findings will also be at a
competitive disadvantage in the application review process. Applicants that have also failed to satisfy
the required state and federal planning requirements, including submittal and administration of the
Overall Work Program, Regional Transportation Plans, and Transportation Improvement Program,
may not be awarded grants.
9
Award Terms
Caltrans is committed to being an active partner. If awarded a grant, the applicant should include
Caltrans District staff when planning both technical advisory and community meetings. In addition,
Caltrans District staff will help to ensure that the approved Scope of Work, Project Timeline, and
project funding will be maintained throughout the life of the contract. Applicants are also
recommended to engage Caltrans District Staff throughout the entire grant life, when applicable.
If an agency does not demonstrate adequate performance and timely use of funds, Caltrans may take
appropriate actions, which can include termination of the grant. As stated in the previous section,
inadequate performance by grantees, sub -recipients, or consultants may hinder the grantee's ability to
leverage future grant awards.
Ownership
Any technologies or inventions that may result from the use of these grants are in the public domain
and may not be copyrighted, sold, or used exclusively by any business, organization, or agency.
Caltrans reserves a royalty -free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or
otherwise use and to authorize others to use for public purposes.
Grant Program Overview
The Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program is both state and federally funded.
The role of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and Regional Transportation
Planning Agency (RTPA) is to facilitate a fair and open competitive application and outreach
process. For an MPO or RTPA to influence the applicant pool either formally or informally by
pre-screening applications is contrary to both state and federal administration of these grant
programs.
Sub -applicants are encouraged to work far in advance of the application deadline with the appropriate
MPO or RTPA to coordinate application development. It is also beneficial for sub -applicants to be
informed of the appropriate MPO or RTPA process and schedule, as they may differ slightly from
those of Caltrans. RTPAs residing within MPO boundaries should also coordinate application
development with the MPO, as it is critical to ensure that proposed studies align with the RTP/SCS
for the entire MPO region and do not duplicate efforts being applied for or already awarded to the
MPO.
Who May Apply — Strategic Partnerships
Only MPOs and RTPAs that have a current Master Fund Transfer Agreement (MFTA) with ORP
may apply directly for the Strategic Partnerships grants. Eligible sub -applicants include: MPOs
and RTPAs, universities and community colleges, Native American Tribal Governments, cities and
counties, community -based organizations, non-profit organizations (501.c.3), and public entities.
10
Who May Apply — Sustainable Communities
Eligible primary applicants for the Sustainable Communities grants include: MPOs and RTPAs;
transit agencies; cities and counties, and Native American Tribal Governments. Eligible sub -
applicants include: MPOs and RTPAs, universities and community colleges, Native American Tribal
Governments, cities and counties, community -based organizations, non-profit organizations (501.c.3),
and public entities.
For awarded grantees that do not have a current MFTA with ORP (i.e. cities, counties, transit
agencies, Tribal Governments), Caltrans will contract directly with the primary grant recipients
through the Restricted Grant Agreement (RGA) process.
Project Start Dates
All awarded grant funds must be programmed during the State's 2017-18 Fiscal Year. The project
start date depends on the method of contracting with Caltrans. For MPOs and RTPAs with a current
MFTA, work may begin as early as July 2017. For other grant recipients that will undergo the RGA
contracting process, work may begin as early as October 2017, assuming the grantee has received a
fully executed contract and has been notified by Caltrans District Staff to begin work. It is important
for applicants to reflect the estimated project start date in the Scope of Work and Project Timeline.
Awardees are required to submit all supporting materials and a signed agreement or risk forfeiting the
grant award.
The following section provides the project timeline constraints for both methods of contracting with
Caltrans.
Restricted Grant Agreement Project Timeline
Consider these dates when developing the Scope of Work and Project Timeline:
October 2017
• Anticipated start date, pending State Budget approval
February 28, 2020
• Contract expires (no time extensions will be granted)
• Reimbursable work must be completed
April 28, 2020
• All final invoices must be submitted to Caltrans for approval and reimbursement. This allows
Caltrans sufficient time to comply with the State Controller's Office payment requirements.
Master Fund Transfer Agreement Project Timeline (MPOs/RTPAs Only)
Consider these dates when developing the Scope of Work and Project Timeline:
July 2017
• Anticipated start date, pending State Budget approval
June 30, 2020
• Project end date
• Reimbursable work must be completed
11
Final Request for Reimbursement
• A Final Request for Reimbursement must be filed no later than 60 days after the end of the
fiscal year to coincide with the submission of the Overall Work Program (OWP) Final
Expenditure Report.
Overall Work Program (for MPOs/RTPAs Only)
All MPOs and RTPAs must have the entire grant award and local match programmed in the Fiscal
Year 2017-18 OWP no later than May 1, 2018. Approved grant projects must be identified as
individual Work Elements in the current OWP and in future OWPs until the project is completed.
Requests for Reimbursements
Grant payments are made only as reimbursements. Invoices or Requests for Reimbursements (RFR)
need to be submitted no more frequently than monthly or at a minimum quarterly. Grantees must pay
sub -recipients and subcontractors prior to submitting a RFR to Caltrans. A one-time, lump sum RFR
for the entire grant is not allowed. Local match (cash and third party in -kind contributions) must be
expended on a proportional basis coinciding with each grant Work Element (MPOs/RTPAs only)
and/or tasks in each RFR. The proportional expenditure of local match must be clearly identified in
the Project Timeline. The minimum required local match (i.e., 11.47% or 20%) must be rendered
during the invoicing period to which the matching requirement applies. The minimum required local
match must also be satisfied with each RFR.
Local Match Contribution
All grants require a local match. Revenue sources for a local match can include local sales tax,
special bond measures, private donations, private foundations, etc. The Strategic Partnerships grants
require the applicant to provide a minimum 20 percent non-federal local match. The Sustainable
Communities grants require the applicant to provide a minimum 11.47 percent local match —federal
fund grant recipients, primarily MPOs, must provide a non-federal local match and other grantees
may use any source of funds for the local match. The minimum local match is a percentage of the
total project cost (i.e., minimum local match amount plus the grant amount). The local match can be
all cash, all third party in -kind contributions, or a combination of the two.
To better assist applicants, the Local Match Calculator can be found at :
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/orip/Grants/2015/Match_Calculator.xlsx
Third Party In -Kind Contributions
Third party in -kind contributions are typically goods and services donated from outside the primary
grantee's agency. Examples of third party in -kind contributions include donated printing, facilities,
interpreters, equipment, advertising, time and effort, staff time, and other goods and services. The
value of third party in -kind contributions must be directly benefiting and specifically identifiable to
the project. Third party in -kind contribution information must be identified on the Grant Application
Cover Sheet, the Project Timeline, and the project specific Work Element in the OWP (if applicable).
If third party in -kind contributions are used to satisfy the local match requirements, a third party in -kind
valuation plan must also be submitted to Caltrans for approval as a condition of grant acceptance. The
third party in -kind valuation plan is an itemized breakdown by task and serves as documentation for the
12
goods and/or services to be rendered. The Third Party In -Kind Valuation Plan Checklist and Sample are
provided on Pages 37-38.
Quarterly (deporting
For MPOs and RTPAs, the progress of each awarded grant project must be included as part of the
OWP Quarterly Progress and Expenditure Report. If this method of reporting is not adequately
satisfied, Caltrans staff will require separate quarterly reports for each awarded grant project.
All other primary grant recipients shall submit progress reports every quarter for each awarded grant
project. Caltrans District staff will provide the brief report form and due dates.
Final Product
All final reports funded through the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program shall credit
the FTA, FHWA, or Caltrans' financial participation on the cover or title page. An electronic copy of
all final reports shall be forwarded to the Caltrans District Office responsible for the administration
and oversight of the grant.
Review Process
All applications submitted to the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program go through
multiple levels of review including reviews by Caltrans District and HQ staff, and State and Federal
interagency review committees. District staff reviews all applications for content, submission of
proper documentation, and overall relationship to regional and local planning efforts. The District
rates each application and provides comments to inform the interagency review committee. The
grant review committees evaluate applications for content, completeness, meeting technical
requirements, overall relationship to statewide planning efforts, and compliance with state and federal
planning requirements. Once the grant review committees evaluate, rank, and select the best
applications for grant funding, final recommendations are presented to Caltrans management for
approval.
Strategic Partnerships
Funding
The Strategic Partnerships grants are funded by the FHWA (State Planning and Research, Part I).
Approximately $1.5 million will be available for the Fiscal Year 2017-18 grant cycle. For the
Strategic Partnerships grant, the minimum grant award is $100,000 and the maximum grant award
cannot exceed $500,000. MPOs may apply for a grant maximum of $1 million.
Grant Specific Objective
The objective of the Strategic Partnership grant program is to: achieve the Caltrans Mission and Grant
Program Overarching Objectives on Page 1. Applicants should demonstrate that the proposed effort
will:
1. encourage regional agencies to partner with Caltrans to identify and address
statewide/interregional transportation deficiencies in the state highway system,
2. strengthen government -to -government relationships,
3. and result in programmed system improvements.
13
Example Strategic Partnerships Project Types
• Studies that identify interregional, inter -county, and/or statewide mobility and access needs
• Corridor studies and corridor performance/preservation studies
• Studies that evaluate transportation issues involving ground access to international borders,
seaports, airports, intermodal facilities, freight hubs, and recreational sites
• Development of planning activities intended to result in investment in sustainable
transportation projects
• Enhanced tools to capture Green House Gas benefits of Operation and System Management
type of projects
• Modeling requirements necessary for the development or implementation of SCS'
• Integration of transportation and economic development,
• Planning for sustainable freight.
• Planning for transportation safety
• Studies for relinquishment of state routes
• Statewide research or modeling tools
• Transportation demand management plans
• System investment prioritization plans
• Assessment and integration of new technology
Sustainable Communities
Funding
The Sustainable Communities grants are funded by the FTA (Section 5304) and the State Highway
Account (SHA). Funding distribution will depend on the quality and number of applications in each
applicant pool (i.e., MPOs, RTPAs, cities and counties, transit agencies, and Native American Tribal
Governments).
Approximately $7.8 million will be available for the Fiscal Year 2017-18 grant cycle. Of the
estimated $7.8 million available, the MPO/RTPA pool will consist of an estimated $2.8 million in
FTA 5304 funding. The remaining $5.0 million will be funded from the SHA and cities, counties,
transit agencies, and Tribal Governments will be eligible to apply. For the Sustainable Communities
Grant, the minimum grant award is $50,000 and the maximum grant award cannot exceed $500,000.
MPOs may apply for a grant maximum of $1 million.
Grant Specific Objective
The objective of the Sustainable Communities grant program is to: achieve the Caltrans Mission and
Grant Program Overarching Objectives on Page 1. Applicants should demonstrate that the proposed
effort will:
1. identify and address mobility deficiencies in the multimodal transportation system including
the mobility needs of environmental justice and disadvantaged communities,
2. encourage stakeholder collaboration,
3. involve active public engagement,
4. integrate Smart Mobility 2010 concepts,
5. and ultimately result in programmed system improvements.
14
Student Internships
Student internships provide students with the opportunity to gain work experience in transit planning
at public transportation agencies. The intent is to foster the education of university and community
college students with an interest in the field of transit planning. Internships are for students only. The
objective of these internships is to:
1. expose students to the skills, knowledge and abilities associated with incorporating transit and
transportation issues and priorities into planning for rural sustainable communities,
2. assist transit authorities and transportation agencies in building capacity in sustainability
issues, and
3. develop interest and creativity to respond to difficulties and challenges faced by rural areas
dealing with poverty, public health, isolation and social justice issues.
The application, including the Scope of Work and Project Timeline, should include administration of
the internship program (i.e., recruitment, orientation, performance evaluation, etc.) and the specific
intern assignments to be completed. However, the administrative costs should be limited, with the
larger portion of costs allocated to intern wages and activities.
Only rural transit agencies may apply for student internships.
Example Sustainable Communities Grant Project Types
• Studies that advance a community's effort to reduce transportation related greenhouse gases
• Studies that assist transportation agencies in creating sustainable communities
• Community to school studies or safe routes to school plans
• Studies that advance a community's effort to address the impacts of climate change and sea
level rise
• Jobs and affordable housing proximity studies
• Context -sensitive streetscapes or town center plans
• Complete street plans
• Bike and pedestrian safety enhancement plans
• Traffic calming and safety enhancement plans
• Corridor enhancement studies
• Health equity transportation studies
• Climate change adaptation plans for transportation facilities
• Transit plans, surveys, and research
• Identification of policies, strategies, and programs to preserve transit facilities and
optimize transit infrastructure
• Studies that evaluate accessibility and connectivity of the multimodal transportation
network
• Short range transit development plans
• Transit marketing plans
• Social service improvement studies
• Student Internships (Only for Rural Transit Agencies)
• Studies that address environmental justice issues in a transportation related context
• Station area planning
• First Mile/Last Mile project development planning
15
" P l a n n i n g f o r z e r o o r n e a r z e r o e m i s s i o n v e h i c l e s
" I n t e g r a t i o n o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l p l a n n i n g
A p p l i c a t i o n P r e p a r a t i o n
T h e S u s t a i n a b l e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n i n g G r a n t P r o g r a m i s h i g h l y c o m p e t i t i v e . T h i s s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s
a p p l i c a n t s w i t h s u p p l e m e n t a l i n f o r m a t i o n a s w e l l a s d e t a i l s o n r e q u i r e d d o c u m e n t s t h a t m u s t
a c c o m p a n y a n a p p l i c a t i o n a t t h e t i m e o f s u b m i t t a l . A l l a p p l i c a n t s a r e s t r o n g l y e n c o u r a g e d t o a d h e r e
t o t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s i n o r d e r t o s c o r e c o m p e t i t i v e l y d u r i n g t h e a p p l i c a t i o n e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s .
R e q u i r e d D o c u m e n t s
U s e t h e s a m p l e s a n d c h e c k l i s t s p r o v i d e d f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g r e q u i r e d d o c u m e n t s :
" A p p l i c a t i o n
" S c o p e o f W o r k
" P r o j e c t T i m e l i n e
A m a p o f t h e p r o j e c t a r e a i s a l s o r e q u i r e d t o c l e a r l y i d e n t i f y t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e p r o j e c t a r e a a n d
t o p r o v i d e a s e n s e o f t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e p r o j e c t .
A d d i t i o n a l D o c u m e n t s
T h e f o l l o w i n g d o c u m e n t s a r e n o t r e q u i r e d , b u t e n h a n c e t h e o v e r a l l a p p l i c a t i o n a n d t y p i c a l l y r e s u l t i n
a m o r e c o m p e t i t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n d u r i n g t h e e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s .
" L e t t e r s o f S u p p o r t
o I f s u b m i t t e d , l e t t e r s o f s u p p o r t m u s t b e i n c l u d e d w i t h t h e a p p l i c a t i o n p a c k a g e . L e t t e r s
r e c e i v e d s e p a r a t e f r o m t h e a p p l i c a t i o n p a c k a g e m a y n o t b e c o n s i d e r e d . T h e l e t t e r s
s h o u l d b e a d d r e s s e d t o t h e a p p l i c a n t . S u c h l e t t e r s c a n c o m e f r o m c o m m u n i t y - b a s e d
o r g a n i z a t i o n s , l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t s , N a t i v e A m e r i c a n T r i b a l g o v e r n m e n t s , s e r v i c e
a g e n c i e s , a n d e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l s .
" P h o t o g r a p h s
o P h o t o g r a p h s o f t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t a r e a c o n v e y e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s a n d h e l p t o
f u r t h e r e x p l a i n t h e n e e d f o r t h e g r a n t .
" S a f e t y D a t a
o S t a t i s t i c a l d a t a s u c h a s p e d e s t r i a n - v e h i c l e i n j u r i e s / c r a s h e s o r f a t a l i t i e s r e s u l t i n g f r o m
l a c k o f s a f e i n f r a s t r u c t u r e , u n s a f e p e d e s t r i a n b e h a v i o r , v e h i c l e a n d d r i v e r f a c t o r s o r
o t h e r r o a d c o n d i t i o n s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e t o p o s s i b l e i n j u r i e s . T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n m a y b e
o b t a i n e d f r o m p o l i c e r e p o r t s , t r a n s i t a g e n c i e s , N a t i o n a l H i g h w a y T r a f f i c
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o r t h e G o v e r n o r ' s H i g h w a y S a f e t y A s s o c i a t i o n .
1 6
Application Submittal Instructions
An applicant may submit more than one application. However, any application can only be
submitted to either the Strategic Partnerships or Sustainable Communities Grants. Caltrans
Headquarters staff checks all applications between grant programs for duplication.
All grant application packages are required to be submitted via e-mail. An agency may only submit
one application package per e-mail. The Caltrans District Office contact must be copied (refer to
the District Contact List on Page 42) and the subject line needs to identify the district number, grant
program, and brief project title (e.g., D1, SP, City of Can Do Planning Project). The required items
outlined on the Grant Application Checklist on Page 19 must be attached to the e-mail as separate
documents.
Please submit your application package to: Regional.Planning.Grants@dot.ca.gov
APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED VIA E-MAIL NO LATER THAN
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2016
BY 5:00 PM
HARD COPIES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED &
LATE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE REVIEWED
The Grant Application Guide and application form are available at the following website:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/grants.html
Anticipated award announcements: Spring 2017 (all awards are contingent upon approval of the State
Budget)
Download the latest version of Adobe Reader DC ® to complete the
application form. This version of Adobe is available free of charge.
Caltrans District Office staff is a valuable resource and will be available during the
application period to answer questions and help interested groups complete their
applications. Refer to the District Contact List on Page 42 for contact information.
I
17
Tips and Pointers for Writing a Successful Grant Application
✓ Consult with your District representative for technical assistance before the application
deadline.
✓ Use the Samples and Checklists provided for the Application, Scope of Work, and Project
Timeline.
✓ Include Caltrans as an active partner in the study.
✓ Provide letters of support and project area photographs to enhance the application.
✓ Overall Grant Application: Clearly demonstrate how the project promotes State and
Federal Transportation Planning Goals, without stating the goals verbatim. Also
demonstrate how the project fits the appropriate Grant Specific Objective.
✓ Project Summary: Concisely describe the project in less than 100 words. Explain the
"Who, what, when, where, and why."
✓ Project Justification: Clearly define and explain the transportation problem or
deficiency that the project will attempt to address. Why is it critical to address the
problem now? Make the case for a critical need that the project will address and support
it with verifiable data, if available.
✓ Scope of Work: Identify the project area demographics, public participation, and project
implementation..
✓ Project Timeline: Identify the current indirect cost rate if indirect costs will be sought
for reimbursement. Since indirect cost rates will not be approved until fiscal year 2017-
2018, the rate will be an estimate based on the currently approved rate.
✓ Keep administrative project tasks below 5 percent of the grant amount requested.
✓ Ensure the appropriate minimum local match amount, calculated as a percentage of the total
project cost (grant plus local match), is provided.
18
GRANT APPLICATION CHECKLIST
The following documents are required and must be submitted via e-mail as
separate attachments. Please keep file names brief, as files become corrupted
when the names are too long. Refer to the Grant Application Guide for additional
information and/or samples. Failure to include any of the required documents will
result in a reduced application score.
❑ Application* (Complete the PDF form provided online at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/grants.html.)
❑ Application Signature Page (print, sign, and scan this page in PDF format)
❑ Scope of Work (Microsoft Word format)
❑ Project Timeline (Microsoft Excel format)
❑ Map of Project Area
Supplemental Information:
❑ Digital Photographs of Project Area (when applicable)
❑ Letter(s) of Support
❑ Safety Data
*Scanned or hard copies of the application will not be accepted.
19
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
Check One Grant Program:
❑ Strategic Partnerships
❑ Sustainable Communities
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT LOCATION
(city and county)
APPLICANT
SUB -APPLICANT
SUB -APPLICANT
Organization
Mailing Address
City
Zip Code
Executive
Director/designee
and title
Mr.r1Ms.❑Mrs.❑
Mr.❑Ms.❑Mrs.❑
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs.❑
E-mail Address
Contact Person
and title
Mr.❑Ms.❑Mrs.❑
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs.0
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs. ❑
Contact E-mail
Address
Phone Number
FUNDING INFORMATION
Use the Match Calculator to complete this section.
Match Calculator
Grant Funds Requested
Local Match - Cash
Local Match - In -Kind
Total Project Cost
$
$
$
$
Specific Source of Local Cash Match (i.e. local transportation funds, local sales tax, special bond measures, etc.)
20
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
Information in this section must directly be tied to the applicant's address.
All legislative members in the project area do not need to be listed.
State Senator(s)
Assembly Member(s)
Name(s)
District
Name(s)
District
*Use the following link to determine the legislators.
http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ (search by address)
Grant applications must clearly demonstrate how the proposed transportation planning project
promotes State and Federal Transportation Planning Goals. Select all that apply.
STATE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GOALS
n Improve Multimodal Mobility and Accessibility for All People: Expand the system and
enhance modal choices and connectivity to meet the state's future transportation demands.
Please explain how:
Preserve the Multimodal Transportation System: Maintain, manage, and efficiently utilize
California's existing transportation system.
Please explain how:
21
n Support a Vibrant Economy: Maintain, manage, and enhance the movement of goods and
people to spur the economic development and growth, job creation, and trade.
Please explain how:
n Improve Public Safety and Security: Ensure the safety and security of people, goods,
services, and information in all modes of transportation.
Please explain how:
n Foster Livable and Healthy Communities and Promote Social Equity: Find transportation
solutions that balance and integrate community values with transportation safety and
performance, and encourage public involvement in transportation decisions.
Please explain how:
n Practice Environmental Stewardship: Plan and provide transportation services while
protecting our environment, wildlife, historical, and cultural assets.
Please explain how:
22
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GOALS
n Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global
competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.
Please explain how:
n Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non -motorized users.
Please explain how:
n Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non -motorized users.
Please explain how:
U Increase accessibility and mobility of people and freight.
Please explain how:
n Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of
life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local
planned growth and economic development patterns.
Please explain how:
23
Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between
modes, for people and freight.
Please explain how:
n Promote efficient system management and operation.
Please explain how:
Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.
Please explain how:
24
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
1. Project Description (100 words maximum) (25 points): Briefly summarize project.
A good project description is one that can summarize the
project in a clear and concise manner, including any
connections to state or regional planning efforts.
25
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
2. Project Justification (Do not exceed the space provided.) (25 points): Describe the problems or
deficiencies the project is attempting to address, as well as how the project will address the identified
problems or deficiencies. Describe how the project will lead to implementation of future projects.
Additionally, list the ramifications of not funding this project.
This section needs to clearly define the existing issues surrounding
the project (e.g., transportation issues, inadequate transit services,
impacts of heavy trucking on local streets, air pollution, etc).
Competitive applications support the need for the project with
empirical data, describe how this project addresses the issues raised,
how the project will lead to implementation of future projects (this
may also be addressed as a task showing how future funding sources
will be explored in the Scope of Work) and describe the impact of not
funding the project.
26
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
3. Project Management (50 points)
A. Scope of Work in required Microsoft Word format (25 points)
B. Project Timeline in required Microsoft Excel format (25 points)
See Scope of Work and Project Timeline samples and checklists for
requirements.
27
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
Application Signature Page
If selected for funding, the information contained in this application will become the
foundation of the contract with Caltrans.
To the best of my knowledge, all information contained in this application is true and
correct. If awarded a grant with Caltrans, I agree that I will adhere to the program
guidelines.
Signature of Authorized Official (Applicant) Print Name
Title Date
Signature of Authorized Official (Sub -Applicant) Print Name
Title Date
28
SCOPE OF WORK CHECKLIST
The scope of work is the official description of the work that is to be completed
during the contract. The scope of work must be consistent with the project
timeline.
The scope of work must:
❑ Be completed using the Fiscal Year 2017-18 template provided and in
Microsoft Word format.
❑ List all tasks and sub -tasks using the same title as stated in the project
timeline.
❑ Have task and sub -task numbers in accurate and proper sequencing;
consistent with the project timeline.
❑ List the responsible party for each task and subtask and ensure that it is
consistent with the project timeline (i.e. applicant, sub -applicant, or consultant).
❑ Have a thorough Introduction to describe the project and project area
demographics.
❑ Have a thorough and accurate narrative description of each
task and sub -task.
❑ Include a task for a kick-off meeting with Caltrans at the start of the grant.
❑ Include a task for procurement of consultants, if consultants are needed.
❑ Include a task for invoicing.
❑ Include a task for quarterly reporting to Caltrans.
❑ Include public participation and services to diverse communities.
❑ Include project implementation/next steps.
❑ NOT include environmental, complex design, engineering work, and other
ineligible activities.
❑ List the project deliverable for each task in a table following each task and
ensure that it is consistent with the project timeline.
NOTE: Applications with missing components will be at a competitive disadvantage. Please use this
checklist to make sure your scope of work is complete.
29
SAMPLE SCOPE OF WORK:
City of Can Do Complete Street Plan
The City of Can Do Complete Street Plan will provide a conceptual multi -modal
planning foundation for the City's downtown main street corridor. The Plan will be used
to evaluate how different complete street features enhance or detract from the vision of
the community. The city intends to gather public input through interactive community
workshops which will be the driving factor of the planning process. The City of Can Do
Complete Street Plan will contain conceptual design only. It is the City of Can Do's
intent that once this plan is complete, it will lead to implementation and development.
The scope of work shown below reflects the anticipated process and deliverables for the
City of Can Do Complete Street Plan.
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
The City of Can Do with the assistance of a consulting firm will perform this work. The
City has not yet selected a consulting firm and the proper procurement procedures will be
used through a competitive RFP process. City staff anticipates these figures will not
differ substantially and will not exceed the grant request amount.
OVERALL PROJECT OBJECTIVES
• Reduce street crown and replace surface with enhanced and/or porous street pavers.
• Sidewalk widening and fully accessible ramp improvements at intersections.
• Add and improve bicycle lanes.
• Installation of street trees with grates and tree grates for existing trees that can be
preserved.
• Installation of pedestrian -scale street lighting at intersections.
• Installation of street furniture and other design features.
• Application of "green street" concepts, such as storm water planter boxes and porous
pavement where possible.
• Conceptual designs for underground utilities.
• Conceptual designs to improve drainage conveyance.
1. Project Initiation
Task 1.1: Project Kick-off Meeting
• The City will hold a kick-off meeting with Caltrans staff to discuss grant
procedures and project expectations including invoicing, quarterly reporting, and
all other relevant project information. Meeting summary will be documented.
• Responsible Party: The City
30
Task 1.2: Staff Coordination
• Monthly face-to-face project team meetings with consultants to ensure good
communication on upcoming tasks and to make sure the project remains on time
and within budget. Caltrans staff will be invited to the project team meetings.
• Responsible Party: The City
Task 1.3: RFP for Consultant Services
• Complete an RFP process for selection of a consultant using the proper
procurement procedures.
• Responsible Party: The City
Task 1.4: Identify Existing Conditions
• Gather existing conditions and background data by identifying opportunities and
constraints as well as standards that should be used to guide preparation of the
plan such as existing and planned land uses, population characteristics, and travel
projections within the City.
• Inventory and evaluate existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task
Deliverable
1.1
Meeting Notes
1.2
Monthly Meetings Notes
1.3
Copy of Procurement Procedures and
Executed Consultant Contract
1.4
Existing Conditions Report
2. Public Outreach
Note: All meetings will be publically noticed to ensure maximum attendance. All public
notices will be in English and Spanish. Spanish translators and sign language
interpreters will be present at all workshops.
Task 2.1: Community Workshop #1
• Walking tour and workshop. This workshop will introduce the project to the
public, define project parameters, inform the community of project opportunities
and constraints, and solicit opinions from the community to shape Task 3.1,
Develop Streetscape Concept.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
31
Task 2.2: Community Workshop #2
• An interactive workshop that will use clicker technology, modeling tools, and
maps to present the streetscape design concept alternatives. Community will
decide on preferred alternatives. Continue to solicit feedback from the
community to shape Task 3.3, Draft Complete Street Plan.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task 2.3: Community Workshop #3
• Present Draft Design Concept and Report and continue to solicit feedback for
public comments to shape Task 3.3, Draft Complete Street Plan and Task 3.6,
Final Complete Street Plan.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task
Deliverable
2.1
PowerPoint Presentation, Workshop Summary,
Photos
2.2
PowerPoint Presentation, Workshop Summary,
Photos
2.3
PowerPoint Presentation, Workshop Summary,
Photos
3. Streetscape Plan
Task 3.1: Develop Streetscape Concept
• Based on the existing conditions report and the community input from Workshop
#1, a streetscape concept will be developed. Streetscape conceptual design will
incorporate complete streets concepts and will include plans, sketches, and
photos.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task 3.2: Develop Conceptual Design Concept Alternatives
• Up to three complete street conceptual design alternatives will be developed.
Illustrations will be made in plan view, as street cross sections, and as sketches.
A model simulation will be developed for each alternative. The alternatives will
be prepared and presented at Community Workshop #2.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
32
Task 3.3: Draft Complete Street Plan
• Based on the preferred design alternative chosen in Workshop #2, a draft report
will be prepared. The draft report will be presented at Workshop #3 for public
comment.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task 3.4: Identify Potential Funding Sources
• Review and identify potential funding sources for future implementation of the
preferred alternative.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task 3.5: Joint Planning/Parking and Safety/Bicycle Advisory Commission Meeting
• Coordinate a joint session among the three commissions to review the draft
report and conceptual design alternative. Solicit feedback, respond to any
questions, and resolve any critical issues.
• Responsible Party: The City/Consultant
Task 3.6: Final Complete Street Plan
• Complete the final report that addresses the comments given from Workshop #3
and the Joint Commission Meeting. Four hard -copies and four electronic copies
of the final report will be submitted to Caltrans. Credit of the financial
contribution of the grant program will be credited on the cover of the report.
• Responsible Party: Consultant
Task 3.7: City Council Adoption
• Present the final Complete Street Plan at the City Council meeting. Resolve any
critical issues. Adopt final City of Can Do Complete Street Plan.
• Responsible Party: The City/Consultant
Task
Deliverable
3.1
Sketches, illustrations
3.2
Sketches, illustrations
3.3
Draft Report
3.4
Funding Source Report
3.5
PowerPoint Presentation, Workshop Summary, Photos
3.6
Final Report
3.7
Meeting Notes
33
4. Fiscal Management
Task 4.1: Invoicing
• Submit complete invoice packages to Caltrans District staff based on milestone
completion —at least quarterly, but no more frequently than monthly.
• Responsible Party: The City
Task 4.2: Quarterly Reports
• Submit quarterly reports to Caltrans District staff providing a summary of project
progress and grant/local match expenditures.
• Responsible Party: The City
Task
Deliverable
4.1
4.2
Invoice Packages
Quarterly Reports
34
PROJECT TIMELINE CHECKLIST
The project timeline is the official documentation of the budget and time frame of
the project. The project timeline must be consistent with the scope of work.
The project timeline must:
❑ Be completed using the Fiscal Year 2017-18 template provided (do not alter the
template) and submitted in Microsoft Excel format.
❑ List all tasks and sub -tasks with the same title as stated in the scope of work.
❑ Have task and sub -task numbers in proper sequencing, consistent with the scope
of work.
❑ Include a task for a kick-off meeting with Caltrans at the start of the grant.
❑ Include a task for procurement of consultants, if consultants are needed.
❑ Include a task for quarterly reporting to Caltrans.
❑ Include a task for invoicing.
❑ List the responsible party for each task and sub -task, and ensure that it is
consistent with the scope of work (i.e. applicant, sub -applicant, or consultant).
❑ Complete all budget columns as appropriate: Total Cost, Grant Amount, Local
Cash Match, and if applicable, Local In -Kind Match.
❑ State a realistic total cost for each task based on the work that will be completed.
Project management/administration costs should not exceed 5% of the grant
amount requested.
❑ Include a proportional spread of local match amongst each task. The match
amount must be at least the minimum amount required by the grant program.
❑ Identify the indirect cost rate if indirect costs will be reimbursed.
❑ Have a best estimate of the amount of time needed to complete each task.
❑ Have the timeframe start at the beginning of the grant period
(July 2017 for MPO/RTPAs; October 2017 for non-MPO/RTPAs).
❑ Have the timeframe extend all the way to the end of the grant period (June 2020
for MPO/RTPAs or February 2020 for non-MPO/RTPAs).
❑ List the deliverable for each task as stated in the scope of work.
NOTE: Applications with missing components will be at a competitive disadvantage.
35
California Department of Transportation
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SAMPLE PROJECT TIMELINE
Project Title
City of Can Do Complete Street Plan
Grantee
IThe RTPA of Can Do
Task
Number
Task Title
Responsible
Party
Budget
FY 2011/98
FY 2018/19
FY 2016/20
Deliverable
Total
Cost
Grant
Amount
Local
Cash
Match
Local
In -Kind
Match
J AS
ON
DJ
F
MA
M i-!
J A
SON
D
J F
WA
rq ii
J A.
S ON
D J
F R'
AM J
1 .0
Project initiation
1,1
Project Kick-off Meeting
The City
5970
5770
$194
50
Meeting Notes
1,2
Staff Coordination
The City
52,000
52400
5600
sa
Monthly !Meeting Notes
1.3
RFP for Consultant Services
The City
51500
51,200
5300
50
Copy of Procurement Procedures and
Executed Consultant Cortlrad.
1.4
Identify Existing Condtions
Consultant
$2,400
51,520
5400
50
Existing Conditions Report
2.0
Pubfic Outreach
2.1
Community Workshop Cl
Coreunant
517.743
513.949
53200
5349
PowarPant Presentation, Workshop
Sumo ary, Photos
2.2
Community Workshop l#
Consultant
517,744
513,555
S3,199
535D
PaemrPairrt Presentation. Workshop
Summary, Photos
2.3
Community Workshop A3
Consultant
$17.743
514,194
53030
516
Powe Pa nt Presentation, Workshop
Summary, Photos
3.0
Stmetscape Plan
3.1
Oevetop Streetscape Cancel:(
Consultant
525.000
$20.000
55.000
50
°
ketches, illustrations
3 2
Oevetop Conceptual Design Concept AlternativesConsonant
512,000
$9,600
52,400
SD
Sketches, Illustrations
3.3
Draft Complete Street Plan
Consonant
$19.000
$14A00
$3.too
5C
[raft report
3.4
identify Polentiat Funding Sources
Comottart
$1.500
51,200
5300
50
Funding Source Report
3.5
.biM PlanningrParking and
safety/Bicycle Advisory CommtsSian
Meeting
The City/
Consonant
52.20:
51.760
5440
50
PowrerPoint Presentation, Workshop
Summary, Photos
3.6
final Canplete Street Plan
Consultant
57,000
55.600
$1.400
Sty
Feral Report
3.7
City Catntli Aoaption
The City/
Comottent
5500
$#IIII
5100
SO
meeting ng Notes
4 0
Fiscal Management
4.1
invoicing
The City
51,000
5800
V00
S0
Invoice Packages
4.2
Quartelyy Reports
The City
51.200
$950
S240
SO
Quarterly Repcels
TOTALS
$111,954
5103.144
S25,183
5717
Reimbursement of indirect casts is allowable upon approval of an Indrect Cost Allocation Plan for each year of project activities.
Provide rate if indirect costs are included in the project budget. Approved Indirect Cost Rate: K
This sample timeline is for illustrative purposes only. Your scope of work and timeline will include different tasks, funding amounts, deliverables, etc. The project timeline must be consistent with the scope of work.
Ng= Each task must contain a grant amount and a kcal cash match amount. Local cash match must be proportionally distributed by the at least the minimum required match peroentage throughout each task. Local in -kind match
needs to be incioated where in -kind services will be used. Please review the grant program section that you are applying to for details on local match requirements_
36
THIRD PARTY IN -KIND VALUATION PLAN
CHECKLIST
The third party in -kind valuation plan is an itemized breakdown by task and sub -
task and serves as documentation for the goods and/or services to be donated. The
third party in -kind valuation plan must be consistent with the information
provided on the Project Timeline and Grant Application Cover Sheet.
This document is required upon grant award as a condition of grant acceptance.
The third party in -kind valuation plan must:
❑ Be completed using the Fiscal Year 2017-18 template provided (do not
alter the format).
❑ Name the third party in -kind local match provider.
❑ Describe how the third party in -kind local match will be tracked and
documented for accounting purposes.
❑ Describe the fair market value of third party in -kind contributions and how
the values were determined.
❑ Include an itemized breakdown by task and sub -task consistent with the
project timeline.
❑ Be consistent with the in -kind local match amount reflected on the grant
application cover sheet.
37
Sample
Third Party In -.Kind Valuation Plan
Task
Activity
Tltk
NAIDe of In•lilnd
hatch Prot Mer
Falr Market Value UMerminatlon
Fair M:vl et
Va(uc or
Bundy Rate
Numixr
or Houn
Estinrated
Cost
2.1
CommunityWorles top g1
Donated Workshop Conk:relax Roots
C.F3O
Tile rental rate is established by C13O.
S50
a
$200
weelahop vaunted.
Joe Smith, CI3O
City of Can Do researched the cost
for worbhop facilitators and
determined the. avagee rate.
S f3
i
S170
2.2
Community Workshop 42
Use of projector tmd laptop
CDO
Tire rental rate is tatablished by C130_
S50
.1
S200
Worizhop Volunteer
Joe Smith, Ce0
City of Can Do researched the cost
for workshop facilitators and
detmnindthe average rate,
S•13
I
S170
2.3
Community Workshop +3
Copies and llycr.:
030
Average Copy Costs
S0.35
570
S200
Worlahop Volunteer
Foe Smith,CBO
City of Can Do researched the cost
for ttorkAhop facilitators and
determined the average rate,
S-13
i
Sl70
Totdtn-kind:.fatck:
Stall
Jlaw the third party in -kind
Ina tett will be decumeated for
accounting purposes:
fhe third patty to -land prc'+rrder will submit a uNentelt fix donated sereteas rem: Y.w' to '1 e ;}' of Con Do with the vs.ue of the estimated cost fcr ea:-: t .
noted.
38
LOCAL RESOLUTION
(Not Applicable to MPO/RTPAs)
A local resolution is NOT required at the grant application stage; however, it
is required upon award, as a condition of grant acceptance.
The local resolution must:
1. State the title of the project.
2. State the job title of the person authorized to enter into a contract with Caltrans
on behalf of the applicant.
3. Be no more than a year old or will not be accepted.
4. Be signed by the governing board of the grant applicant.
39
SAMPLE LOCAL RESOLUTION
CITY OF CAN DO
RESOLUTION NO.009-2012
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF CAN DO
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS
WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR THE CITY OF CAN DO COMPLETE STREET
PLAN
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the City of Can Do is eligible to receive
Federal and/or State funding for certain transportation planning related plans, through the
California Department of Transportation; and
WHEREAS, a Restricted Grant Agreement is needed to be executed with the
California Department of Transportation before such funds can be claimed through the
Transportation Planning Grant Programs; and
WHEREAS, the City of Can Do wishes to delegate authorization to execute
these agreements and any amendments thereto;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the City
of Can Do, authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute all Restricted Grant
Agreements and any amendments thereto with the California Department of
Transportation.
APPROVED AND PASSED this 4th day of August, 2015.
ATTEST:
i
Eileen Wright, Executive Director
40
N^r
:LY 1
Lc
,,.y
CTC
DISTRICT 1
uera«m>
Coo
T„t
CLIC
Tear,..
CTC
Cronn CTC
C..a.ea
C1L
IA.,n
CALIFORNIA
Metropolitan Planning Organizations(MPOs)
and
Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs)
DISTRICT 2
DISTRICT d Coot,*
4 Coda
SanflOOOTco
son ua:eo
Sams Crux Cranty
Repcaui Tranepartatoet
canmtie+an
(SCCRTCr
CTC
crc e
TMPO
f TRPA
•wn.
CTC
Arommr
CTC -
Tuolumne
ICTC
r— DISTRICT10
�L2 DISTRICT 9
:.n PCOG_ F-1
3 wnra OlsTRICT 6
AMBAG'
BCAG
FCOG
KCAG
KCOG
f iCAG
MCTC
MTCz
SACOG3
SANDAG
SJCOG
SLOCOG
SBCAG
SRTA
SCAGI
StanCOG
TCAG
TMPO'
ltAnapa.tAluin
loony rti
Co—t,
DIS TRICT•5
SLOCOG
SBCAG
RTPAs within MPOs
L� MPO Areas
Nan-MPO Rural RTPA Areas
I Caltrans District Boundary
rat -
California Department a/Transportation
Division of Transportation Manning
March 2016
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
Butte County Association of Governments
Fresno Council of Governments
Kings County Association of Governments
Kern Council of Governments
Merced County Association of Governments
Madera County Transportation Commission
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
San Diego Association of Governments
San Joaquin Council of Governments
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
Santa Barbara County Association of Governments
Shasta Regional Transportation Agency
Southern California Association of Governments
Stanisiaus Council of Governments
Tulare County Association of Governments
Tahoe Metropolitan Planning Organization
1AMDAGincludes SCCRTC, TAMC, and StitCOG,
All retain RTPA status.
2MTC covers a nine county region.
3SACOG is the RTPA for Sacramento, Sutter,
Yolo, and Yuba Counties, tt is the MPO for the
federally designated ozone non -attainment area in
Sacramento, Yolo, Yuba, Sutter, Placer, and El Dorado
Counties: Placer and El Dorado Counties retain RTPA status
up to the crest of the Sierras.
{SCAGcovers a six county region that serve as
County Transportation Commissions:
ICTC, LAMTA, OCTA, RCTC, SAN SAG, and VCTC.
5T1APO is a multi•state MPO created by federal law, It covers
portions of El Dorado and Placer counties as well as
Washoe and Douglas counties in Nevada, and shares
board members with the TRPA.
LC
DISTRICT 12
0,114e ee�r r
T.rn”u.olA,u,n�
Auduu.ty
fan ammonium
Aeeo{YteC Gw.rm+enb
til.a,ae
CTC
SANDAG
Of.STRICT 11
41
Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant
District Contact List
DISTRICT
CONTACT
MPO/RTPA
DISTRICT 1
1656 Union Street
P.O. Box 3700
Eureka, CA 95502
Mendocino and Lake Counties —
Rex Jackman (707) 445-6412
Email: rex.jackman@dot.ca.gov
• Del Norte LTC
• Humboldt CAOG
• Lake CCAPC
• Mendocino COG
Del Norte and Humboldt Counties—
Kevin Tucker (707) 441-5770
Email: kevin.tucker@dot.ca.gov
DISTRICT 2
1657 Riverside Drive
Redding, CA 96001
Kathy Grah (530) 229-0517
Email: kathy.grah@dot.ca.gov
• Lassen CTC
• Tehama CTC
• Modoc LTC
• Trinity CTC
• Plumas CTC
• Siskiyou CLTC
• Shasta RTA
DISTRICT 3
703 B Street
Marysville, CA 95901
Beatriz Gonzalez (530) 741-5173
Email: beatriz.gonzalez@dot.ca.gov
• Butte CAG
• Sierra LTC
• Colusa CTC
• Glenn CTC
• El Dorado CTC
• Nevada CTC
• Placer CTPA
• Sacramento Area COG
• Tahoe MPO
DISTRICT 4
111 Grand Avenue
P.O. Box 23660
Oakland, CA 94623-0660
Sustainable Communities —
Becky Frank (510) 286-5536
Email: becky.frank@dot.ca.gov
• Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
Blesilda Gebreyesus (510) 286-5575
Email: blesilda.gebreyesus@dot.ca.gov
Strategic Partnerships —
Cameron Oakes (510) 622-5758
Email: cameron.oakes@dot.ca.gov
DISTRICT 5
50 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
93401-5415
Hana Mengsteab (805) 549-3130
Email: hana.mengsteab@dot.ca.gov
• Monterey TAMC
• Santa Cruz CCRTC
• San Benito COG
• Association of Monterey County
Bay Area Governments
• Santa Barbara CAG
• San Luis Obispo COG
42
Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant
District Contact List
DISTRICT
CONTACT
MPO/RTPA
DISTRICT 6
1352 W. Olive Avenue
P.O. Box 12616
Fresno, CA 93778-2616
Paul Marquez (559) 445-5867
Email: paul.marquez@dot.ca.gov
• Fresno COG
• Tulare CAG
• Kern COG
. Kings CAG
• Madera CTC
DISTRICT 7
100 S. Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Charles Lau (213) 897-0197
Email: charles.lau@dot.ca.gov
• Southern California
Association of Governments
DISTRICT 8
464 W. 4th Street
Mail Station 722
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Rebecca Forbes (909) 388-7139
Email: rebecca.forbes@dot.ca.gov
• Southern California
Association of Governments
DISTRICT 9
500 S. Main Street
Bishop, CA 93514
Ryan Dermody (760) 872-0691
Email: ryan.dermody@dot.ca.gov
• Inyo LTC
• Mono LTC
• Eastern Kern (COG)
DISTRICT 10
1976 E. Dr. Martin Luther
King Boulevard
P.O. Box 2048
Stockton, CA 95201
Mountain Counties—
Carl Baker (209) 948-7325
Email: carl.baker@dot.ca.gov
• Alpine CTC
• Amador CTC
• Calaveras COG
• Mariposa LTC
• Merced CAG
• Tuolumne CCAPC
• San Joaquin COG
• Stanislaus COG
Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus
Counties—
Tom Dumas (209) 941-1921
Email: tom.dumas@dot.ca.gov
DISTRICT 11
4050 Taylor Street
Mail Station 240
San Diego, CA 92110
Barby Valentine (619) 688-6003
Email: barbara.valentine@dot.ca.gov
• San Diego Association of
Governments
• Southern California
Association of Governments
DISTRICT 12
3347 Michelson Drive
Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92612-0661
Yatman Kwan (949) 724-2731
Email: yatman.kwan@dot.ca.gov
• Southern California
Association of Governments
Marlon Regisford (949) 724-2241
Email: marlon.regisford@dot.ca.gov
43
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
Check One Grant Program:
❑ Strategic Partnerships
❑ Sustainable Communities
PROJECT TITLE
PROJECT LOCATION
(city and county)
APPLICANT
SUB -APPLICANT
SUB -APPLICANT
Organization
Mailing Address
City
Zip Code
Executive
Director/designee
and title
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs. ❑
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs. ❑
Mr.❑Ms.❑Mrs.❑
E-mail Address
Contact Person
and title
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs. ❑
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs. ❑
Mr. ❑Ms. ❑Mrs. ❑
Contact E-mail
Address
Phone Number
FUNDING INFORMATION
Use the Match Calculator to complete this section.
Match Calculator
Grant Funds Requested
Local Match - Cash
Local Match - In -Kind
Total Project Cost
$
$
$
$
Specific Source of Local Cash Match (i.e. local transportation funds, local sales tax, special bond measures, etc.)
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
Information in this section must directly be tied to the applicant's address.
All legislative members in the project area do not need to be listed.
State Senator(s)
Name(s)
District
Name(s)
Assembly Member(s)
District
*Use the following link to determine the legislators.
http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ (search by address)
Grant applications must clearly demonstrate how the proposed transportation planning project
promotes State and Federal Transportation Planning Goals. Select all that apply.
STATE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GOALS
n Improve Multimodal Mobility and Accessibility for All People: Expand the system and
enhance modal choices and connectivity to meet the state's future transportation demands.
Please explain how:
n Preserve the Multimodal Transportation System: Maintain, manage, and efficiently utilize
California's existing transportation system.
Please explain how:
I
Support a Vibrant Economy: Maintain, manage, and enhance the movement of goods and
people to spur the economic development and growth, job creation, and trade.
Please explain how:
Improve Public Safety and Security: Ensure the safety and security of people, goods,
services, and information in all modes of transportation.
Please explain how:
Foster Livable and Healthy Communities and Promote Social Equity: Find transportation
solutions that balance and integrate community values with transportation safety and
performance, and encourage public involvement in transportation decisions.
Please explain how:
n Practice Environmental Stewardship: Plan and provide transportation services while
protecting our environment, wildlife, historical, and cultural assets.
Please explain how:
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GOALS
n Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global
competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency.
Please explain how:
n Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non -motorized users.
Please explain how:
1 Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non -motorized users.
Please explain how:
n Increase accessibility and mobility of people and freight.
Please explain how:
n Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of
life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local
planned growth and economic development patterns.
Please explain how:
Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between
modes, for people and freight.
Please explain how. -
Promote efficient system management and operation.
Please explain how:
Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.
Please explain how:
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
1. Project Description (100 words maximum) (25 points): Briefly summarize project.
A good project description is one that can summarize the
project in a clear and concise manner, including any
connections to state or regional planning efforts.
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
2. Project Justification (Do not exceed the space provided.) (25 points): Describe the problems or
deficiencies the project is attempting to address, as well as how the project will address the identified
problems or deficiencies. Additionally, list the ramifications of not funding this project.
This section needs to clearly define the existing issues
surrounding the project (e.g., transportation issues, inadequate
transit services, impacts of heavy trucking on local streets, air
pollution, etc). Competitive applications support the need for the
project with empirical data, describe how this project addresses
issues raised, and describe the impact of not funding the project.
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
3. Project Management (50 points)
A. Scope of Work in required Microsoft Word format (25 points)
B. Project Timeline in required Microsoft Excel format (25 points)
See Scope of Work and Project Timeline samples and checklists for
requirements.
Fiscal Year 2017-18
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
GRANT APPLICATION
Application Signature Page
If selected for funding, the information contained in this application will become the
foundation of the contract with Caltrans.
To the best of my knowledge, all information contained in this application is true and
correct. If awarded a grant with Caltrans, I agree that I will adhere to the program
guidelines.
Signature of Authorized Official (Applicant) Print Name
Title Date
Signature of Authorized Official (Sub -Applicant) Print Name
Title Date
(sue.me')
uopewdsueal jo
luawliedaa e!wople'
Aq paluasaad
sapwnwwo3 aigeuie;sns
g sdiys_aulied xOaaeU5
S l-L lOZ Ad
weJ5wd lueig
5ui.uueid uopeliodsuaa
oicieu!elsns sueilieD
saidpuPd 01,0Z Al!Mow a.aeuas
eop pue otoZ ueld uopel.aodsuaa e!uao jneD
suoppv aorew Mapnai uaea5oad sueallej
suopepuawwoDa�
- _ ,
'-a:7 slclapuo3 amp pue
u2 luawssassv and ep!ui uopeliodsuaa11.Jews awls
uos!A sappopd aanpnapsaa jul not eliodsuaa1 e!uaopiej
Avipcinnn pun AwouoDa s Diwojno3
F•``.. aDurniva o wa3sAs uo aliodsuan 3ua ilia pun
:pa3DiS03u! `alcirm isns `ains n ap wid ;uoisspN suan.iej
4. • . «� ; woiEoid 4un.19 act? Jo
•
4 uawth5li oai n pai dcuoid s4Jo jja Jofow 4 ualad i naaAas
wea5oad lueig pas!Atai
- alepdfl 8l-LIOZ AA
.4.nb3
u�1�aH
AWOUOD]
Jes
AlMqoW
uopenaasaad
Almgeuielsns
santpalgoisappopd
a.lnn Jo uonn.iapisuo) aansua paijouapi
sanipaCgp
2uNDJeJaA0 uapJ5oad lueJD
sappu3 Nqnd aayl0
(£'D' GOS) suopez!ueSap lqoad-uoN
suopez!ue5a0 pase8-/(i4unuauaoj
sapunoj sapD
quauauaanog reqpl ueppawy anpeN
sa5alioj Al4unuauaoj sap!saan!un
Sddl2i/SOdW
:apnpul queNdde-qns aiqH.5!13
Su!.uueld ieuo0ad jo aDuip saalaenbpeaH suealleD nn
,ouaaaa2y aa4suall punk aalseW luaaanD e ynlnn (svan) sapua5d
214uue1d uopelaodsue.a1 ieuo0ai pue (sodw) suopez!ue2a0
5Lijuueld uemodoalaW :apnput queDnddd kieuapd aiqAl3
Addy ithW o4M
sdlysaaulaed D!.5aleals
4
.000`00S$ s-1@g10 11V 4)00`000` L$ sodw iquo 1112a5 wnwpoew
`000`001,$ lua.15 wnwil4W
•lunowe
laaCoad 1E4101 aqp JO 11322W 1epo1 1eaapakuou wnw!up % z
•aiDAD lue.15 8 L-L l0Z Aj
aq ao j a1ge1 gene aq 11 iM uonilw 5.1,$ Aialew pxoiddd
•spun] lue.15 asagp aingp1s!.p
o� sue.mej pazpoglne seq V'MHA aql • (1 `11DJPGsal
due 2uiju eld alelS V'MHA) uonalls!uppb AeMq 1H ieJapaj
-= a4, 4 papun j, 0.12 slueJD sdNsJaulae3�5alei
d S a q1
4aSpn8
sdNsaaumed Digaleal5
51,-0E-2 0] siJowanog aLp
eaSaid spauuop „uopewdsue.th Apeai-alewnD„
•sluawanoidw! walsAs pawweJ5aid linsad
pue fsdNsuoneial luawwano5-ol-luawwano5 uaip2uails
twalsAs Aemq5N awls NI Li! sapuap.jap
uopeliodsueil ieul:45aualu!iammalels ssaippe pup Apluam
sueJlieD Jaulied sapua5e leuo!Sai a5amoDuj
!saApparqo 5uNaieJano
weJSaid lue.19 pue uo!ssm suailieD aAaNDe of
aApaparq() pliPads 4uDJ9
scimsioulJed D!5aTans
sued uopezppopd luawlsanu! walsAs
sued quawa5euew puewap uopeliodsuaki
s�oo� 51410pOW ao Lpeasaa ap«alels
salnoa awls jo luawLislnbunaa aoj sa!pnls
sa4s ieuopeanal pue `sgny `sapn pej lepowJalu!
slJodaije `sliodeas `saapaog 7euopewalu! ssappe puno.i5
5u!nionu! sanss! uopeliodsueJ4 alemena salpri4s
sa�pn�.s
1J0p2nJasaad/i9DU2WJOJJad JOMJJOD pue sapnls aoppio3
spaau ssaDD.2 pue Almgow ammalels
aoipue `Alunop-aalu! `ieuo!5atia4ut Ajp.uapl Tan satpnls
sadAi aldw x3
sd!ysaaulaed D!8al.e.ij.s
Sustainable Communities
Who May Apply?
Eligible Primary Applicants Include:
MPOs/RTPAs with a current Master Fund Transfer,
Agreement with Caltrans Headquarters Office of 'Regiona
Planning
Cities Et, Counties
Transit Agencies
Native American Tribal Governments
Eligible sub -applicants include those listed above, as well as:
Universities Et Community Colleges
Community -Based Organizations
-Non-Profit Organizations (501.c.3)
Other Public Entities
-000`005$ f000`000` 1.$ sodw Aluo luea2 wnwpoew
`000`0S$ lueJ2 wnw!um
unowe paroKI jo galew leaol /Lt• 1,1
•sluawuaanog
leq dal ueapawv anp.eN pue `sa«ua5e 14sue.a1 `sapunoa
- pue Sapp (z) `pue `sddn Isodw (1,) `'a• `food lueatldde
•
pea u!. suopeNdde Jo Alpuenb pue Alnenb auk uo
uadap iilm uopngp1s!.p 5uipund •apAi 1112a5 -L 1,0z .a2aA
eigj 61.11 ao j aigel.ene aq iilm uonu.w g •L$ Aialewi.xoaddd
•spun] lue.12 asagp aingp1slp
o� sup meD pazpoglne seq gild aul •lunoaav Aemt. .H
121S pue (tOES § VIA) uope.n.s!uppd l!sueJi leaapad
aye Aq papunj ale slueJD sap!.unwwoD aiciaijelsnsa
�aSpng
sawunuauao' aiqeu!elsns
" s l u a w a n o a d w ! w a l s A s p a w w e J 5 o a d u ! l i n s a a A l a l e w p i n
` p u e ` . s l d a D u o p 0 1 , 0 z A l m g o w 1 . a e w s
f l u a u a a 5 e 5 u a p n c i n d a m . p e a n i o n u i
: u o p e J o g e i l o p a a p i o L i a N e l s a 5 e a n o D u j
` . s a m u n w w o D p a e l u e n p e s t p p u p a p p s n f i e l u a u a u o a l n u a
j o s p a a u 5 u t p n p u t w @ l s A s u o p e w d s u e a l l e p o w p i n w
a y e u ! s a p u a p i . j a p A l m q o w s s a a p p e p u e A j p u a p i
` . s a n p a C g o 5 u N a a e a a n a
5 o a d l u e J D p u e u o ! s s m s u e a l i e j a t . p . a n a p p e o f
a n w a l g o D i j p a d s 4 u o i 9
s a w u n u a u a o j a i g e u ! e l s n s
sueid luawaDueyua Ala jes pue agwlo> Duj.ea1
sueid luawaDueyua Ala jes ueplsapad pue ay.g
sueld aaluao un0101. ao sadeDslaa qs anp.suas-lxaluo'
satpnns Al!wtxoad 5u!snoy aigepao j je pue sqor
obuopelaodsueal e sanss! aDpsnf ieluawuoajnua ssaappe lap sa!pnls
asp lanai eas pue
la2uep alewnD jo spedw! aye ssaappe laojja s,Al!unwwoa e aDuenpe sapnls
'4
•
sueld loops of salnoa a jes ao satpnls loops off. Al!unwwoD
nwwoo aigeu!elsns 5upean u! sapuo5e uopeliodsuan ls!sse leyl sapnls
sase5 asnoyuaaa5
�aa uopelaodsuean aDnpaa 1ao j ja s,Al!unwwoa e aDuenpe saipnls
sadAi aidcunx.3
sapiunuauao' aigpu!elsns
sanpnls luawanoadw! aDI.n.aas lepoS
sued 5upa)aew �isueal
sued luawdolanap 14suea. a5uea 1.aoys
a mpnAlsei jui .4suea1 aztu pdo
pue samipej anaasaad sweAoad pue `sai5alesIs `sappd jo uopeDmluapi
yoaeasaa pue sAanans `sueid 14sue.al
said pe j uopeaodsueal ao j. sued uope4depe a5ueya aleuaji3
saEpngs uopelJodsueaa. Ai4nba tpieaH
/-lomlau
tlelaodsuea1 lepowilinw aye jo Alvg1Dauuoo pue Almcgssa»e alemena sapi s
sued laans alaidwoD
salprgs luawaaueyua aoppio3
sadAi paCoid alchnox3
sawunwuaoD aigeutelsnS
xslxuomelnalejya1eW/SLOZ/slueJD/dpo/sapgjo/ddl/by/no5•eylop•MMM/
anssappe aolelnaleD imeW lepoi ayl
•aDue1da»e 1ueag 40 uop.puoD e se
lenoadde JOJ pall!wgns aq ueld uopenlen puN-ui ue aajnbaa suopngpluoD pupa-ui
•onq aye jo uopeu!gwoD
e ao `suopngpluoa pu ftu! p4141 lie `yseD lle aq ueo yp1ew leaol ayl
•apionul AJana y4M papinoad aq lsnw pue luawas.angwijaa
palsanbaa jo popad Sup!onui Gip Supnp paaapua.i aq I.snw yplew leDol wnw!up ay1
•(lunowe lueJ5 aye snld lunowe imew leaoi
wnw!up `•a•!) lsoa paraid ayp jo ageluaDiad e sl yalew leaol wnwi.up ayl
asod.and sN1 ao j sMoile
apanos leaapaj aDmos yD1ew leaapaj-uoN aaanos yplew leaapaj-uoN
5uflpniDu! `apJnos Auv
s2u4w" weAo9
legpi `sapuagv
��sue�l `sanunop/saran)
spun] vHS
samunwwoD algeuielsns
(sdd111/0dW)
spun) t,0£5 VIA
samunwwo' aigeutelsnS
•
(svdl. /OdW)
spun] I i-1ed `2ldS vMH�
sdiysaaulJed 3!2ale-nS
sluauaaijnbalj plew epoi
Characteristics of
Competitive Applications
Tips for Writing a Competitive Ap• icatio
Include Caltrans' Roles
Provide letters of support
Clearly demonstrate how the
Receive feedback from Caltrans
District staff prior to the deadline
Provide photographs
Clearly define the transportation:
1 I'
:•A-7S4;.
project promotes State and Federal problem and address every aspect of
Transportation Planning Goals the Grant Specific Objective
Administrative tasks do not exceed
5 percent of the grant request
Applicants require to describe how
they met goals under State
Transportation Et Federal
Transportation Goals Checklist
Support the problem with concrete
data, if available
Describe how this project will lead
to implementation of future
projects and the impact of not
funding the grant application
Y
{
•
1.
•
•t
R�
Anticipated Schedule for
FY 2016-17 Grant Awards
Application Period
• August 29, 2016 - Grant Application Guide Release Date
• November 4, 2016 - Grant Applications Due via E-mail by 5 PM to
Regionl.Planning.Grants@dot.ca.gov
Evaluation Period
• November / December - District Review
• January / February - Headquarters Review
• February / March - Management Approval of Funding Recommendations
Preliminary Notifications
;: W =1 LI_
• March / April - Preliminary E-mail Notices Inform Applicants of the Outcome
Official Award Letters
' • April - Award Letters with Conditions of Grant Acceptance
Project Start Date
• July/September Grantees may begin grant -funded work, pending State Budget
approval.
" ��a o d a �� a a n l y u a d x ]
e u ! A ( d M O ) u u a l 5 o i d N - 1 0 M J o u o t s s ! w g n s
a y a . y i M a p p u p p a e a A i e D s u . j o p u a a L p . a a l j e
s A e p 0 9 u e i p a a o u p a w a q l s n w l u a w a s a n q w ��a ��
} " a o l s a n b a e u l 4 u a w a s . m n w l a a o l s e n b a l l i e u t j
p a l a l d w o D a q l s n w ��a o n n
a l g e s a n g w ! a a u a g m a l e p p u a p a r o a d - O Z O Z ` O � a u n t ~
i e n o a d d e l a 5 p n g
a w l s 5 u L p u a d 1 . J e p a l e d P P u V - L O Z A l n r
: a u n a w a p a C o a i p u e
) a o m J o a d o p s a u k a u j d o l a n a p u a g m s a l e p a s a g l a a N s u o 3
s V d i d / O d W
s a t e d p a f o
a
" s l u a w a a j n b a a l u a w A e d a D w o s e a a i i c u l u o 3 a w l s
a t . n . A i d w o a a w p l u a p u j n s s u e i l i e j s m o i i e
s l u a w a s . i n g w ! a a p u e i e n o a d d e a o j s u e J l i e j o ��
p a l a . p g n s a q l s n w s a p p n u ! i e u k 4 1 1 V - O Z O Z ` 8 Z 1 P d V
p a l a i d w o D a q l s n w a i q e s . i n q u i p J
u a L I M a 1 2 1 ) p u a P a f o a d - O Z O Z ` 8 Z A - l e e - K A
i e n w d d e l a 5 p n 8 a w l s
5 u ! p u a d ` a l e p p a l e d p l u d - L b O Z J a q w a l . d a s
: a u n a w k i p a C o a d p u e
��1 a d M j o a d o a s a q l 5 u ! d o i a n a p u a g m s a l e p a s a g l a a m s u o j
' a g l a c l D b l a W V a n n D N ` s a ` a u a S V v s u n a ` s a p u n o x s a p D
s a l e o 1 . . . 1 2 4 s p a r o m
9 J V 4 J 4
•i . •- #
—11•ue'41•614 ®31.1...4*OPT 191.019 udWese,d 1:111.111...S .'
:Bupmpa!'Bmuueld uoDeltadauell u! c,.sy ,dew assysp uoDasl�}Ilea amen. .91.9.1.19.1.........f.10 6upoe,a,0 we,bwd luesg
sappu!y 01.0Z APP9.11 u.wS
31.119 Pue .ers!A 819Z veld uo!seyxsuul ewai!KJ r.
',mono? .4ira Ewa wrLo d suerye� :.
:suorepiusuwoaaa P. IuanssessV a+geg!W uoyevodsue,l yews aseiS
:ssdaaua� aw0 Due uo!s�q senuoud amiangsrgul uo!ten.dsuelt pump
-se ions' Iuewdoiasep ww6o,d leek buunp poppet's osp a,am suoya lueoy!u6!s Immo
n;.itgev! Pee 8emwoa eaten/yes, 20.1414 G welsAS e011e41hoe; 7 : 41a pue peols.6m 'apeu e7ses 'ajar a apuoy uaas!yy waum
!salon) syeeseedsuesl p luawuedap .1uw11le0 ays poddes ay pee.. sem ue,6o1/41 lue'0 fiu!uueld uog.uods.. apet.msns ayi
' e6,eyo to .ag apepae s! espy is tups.t , ply'uonesgdde ayy soldweo pesd xrryrvita eoptes !poi ays peopusop
h./T5fi:tNinKs ..to.neeense ?t:. fa:y0:wu:4:.; rt:;,W„
sN:'a9-e 997,e'1l'if!i:btiatt>13 elt S151919'bj pee set4€au t975i .41eig
splemv luedp Buluueld uope;podsuefl algeupnsnS L1910Z max leasld
tons wewd te.eom oog4wfh sou. <Duw,z>n, Iwpwrrd ,
W!RPeaw.,d sa sitem awu,j
strpalep1 loci° apA3 snoptaid
7l"..rakrTiaij _
E}f�ti(:frainyl�l� J-wo e
="so%11
3:7
sletla;epy;ue3p Suluuvld uoimpadsuell algvulelsrts 81-LLBZ Ad
'espeoidde sustb ays!7adto. s 6u00p¢ap p m clogs.. Aue ae .iayl p hp: J uogeaipd;. luee.11 •......... ....... ....
u! palsg)pals PMw,pa7epdwdde.yl yaeluoo peald'nd L Aq 4leZ'P lagmanoN Kapud enp'suo!pa!Idde Wedi &puss. useeuedsuen sal l
p uo!yldwm pisseoans ayy Lima msse Ipe sow pap.. tope.. atm •sp ntelels spats. 6u!uueld uoireedsuep l.1 apepee sn tarPbJ
"l'u lol r.
s “"S p leV'eP!no!I �J uea9pdV Yseu) 6u!uue� uogspcdsue,l apeu!eisnS 81.11 Z AA .11 eses. of paseeld s! stmee�
suolleagddY bl 91.0 - *PPM
uogeagddY;mup fitipmeid uopepodsueuj, aiguulelslap 81-t10Z .maA irasu alp Suraurtouuy
u>uaioaa lueao gunuie[a uonelaac[szuau aIneutelsuS slu, alb
11,0180.1d W1119 8ulmnid eelsmwdeuasl a Bwuu� 1avpgmcuw.1y e. 71
aussw�- 2.s•19 sgW
aeay. 6Atiwry .
apyj 6unriey .
scow 6 weH
uogeyadauul p uo!swp
ONINNVId
NOl1Vlt)OdSNVUL
o,egl 00.1119ai call a{eM—mgaW3;
M»aK73Intcs117 Y1WY'NofIoval eMetl: Uu!tc„u16u3 MOH
NOLIVISOdSNVNI A00*
%- 111... yeda8a0..laO *.
iwly•sluea2/ddl/byino2•eplop'MMM/ / :dlly
sluaag
nob•PD•lop nei•sapep
L6 G 0-L68 (E 1-Z)
aauueid uopelJodsue.t1 alepossd - nei sopeu
nob •PD.lop®Misindoi • uea
E V Zo-L68 (E V Z)
awanow spooD 81.4uueid ieuo.5ad `jaND - AisindoN ueQ
•suollsanb
S1N3INN213A00 JO NOIIVIDOSSV
VIN210J11d0 N2i3N1flOS
9TOZ/80/60
1.1.J2JD bu!uuesid
uopeliodsue.A± alcieu!e4sns sue_14123
GRANT INFORMATION
The Caltrans planning grants may be used for a wide range of transportation planning purposes, which
address local and regional transportation needs and issues. Implementing the grants should lead to
adoption and initiation of transportation improvements.
s, •
•
�.
Description
Funding Minimum
Funding Maximum"
Estimated Funding
Availability
Local Match Requirement
Eligibility
Consistent with the intent of partnership planning, the Strategic
Partnerships grant funds planning projects that encourage The Sustainable Communities grant funds transportation planning
regional agencies to partner with Caltrans to identify and address Projects that identify and address mobility deficiencies in the
statewide/interregional transportation deficiencies in the state multimodal transportation system, encourage stakeholder
collaboration, involve active public engagement, integrate Smart
highway system, strengthen government -to -government
Mobility 2010 concepts, ultimately result in programmed system
relationships, and result in programmed system improvements,
all in an effort to achieve the Caltrans mission and overarching improvements, and achieve the Caltrans mission and overarching
objectives. objectives.
100,000
500,000
$1.5 Million FHWA- SPR
20%
Metropolitan Planning Organizations/Regional Transportation
Planning Agencies (MPO/RTPAs); Sub -recipients —Transit
Agencies, Universities, Community Colleges, Native American
Tribal Governments, Cities and Counties, Community -Based
Organizations, Non -Profit Organizations, and Other Public
Entities.
50,000
500,000
$7.8 Million Total ($2.8 Million, Federal Transit Administration,
Section 5304; $5.0 Million, State Highway Account)
11.47%
MPO/RTPAs, Transit Agencies, Cities, Counties, and Native
American Tribal Governments; Sub -recipients —Transit Agencies,
Universities, Community Colleges, Native American Tribal
Governments, Cities and Counties, Community -Based
Organizations, Non -Profit Organizations, and Other Public
Entities.
" Funding Maximum is $1,000,000 for MPO's applying without other MPO partners.
N011:31c16U00
GZ:itiAlt' 03.1.Vd1011NV 1N31A130N(IONNV
08VMscf
1VNOLLI0NO0
031V 1011NV
LTOZ
OZ 'T AlfIt
ititutvans
NOI1V011dc1V 1VN13
:1!s!A uo!leutiolu! @JOW and
M3IA38 INV80
803 3N11C1V30 OVOS
8320.13183S A18\13
112:idtf /14381/IN 9TOCI, WIZ amono TZ-OT 83E10100 9T0eL. 8320100 833W31433S 01411 ./isnonv 31.111
3190 .1.8VIS
08VAW 031Vd1011NV
CAIdS 3.1V0 3f10
OVOS
GM! SNVallt/0
IN31dId38-EfIS AEI C131SOH
30 NOLLV80EIV1100 dOHS>#80M INV80
NI NOLLV011ciati
S3SIA38 9VOS
SNOLLY31 ddli2:10d
11VO CILVdININ'd
SIN\fdD DNINNVid
SNVaLlVD 8I/LTAJ ]NI-1]IAILL ClalD]CO`dd
3 3 V1S
ADN3JV A8 a3aInO2:1d
1N3VU3JVNVW 1D31-O21d
aNV 1N3 :1f1D0Hd
aNV NO11VN1SINIWaV
JVDS A8 a3 a IACMd
1N31A13JVNV1N 1D3fOHd
aNV 1.1\131N32:1f1D0Hd
aNV NOI1VW.SINI1A1aV
In 31111 `dVJI `V13W
JVJS A8 4341A02jd
AC1V]H1V S1NlAInDOC1
/S1N3 AI11HDV 11V
NOI1VW_SINI1AIaV 1D3fOU S1Niinm lf1b3H 1N31A1f1DOCI
LTOZ Z H38O130
LZOZ Z aag01.3O
H 31-I1O
JVDS
31Va IHV1S 1NVHD ADN1DV C1V31
SS3J02id 1-13V32i1110
aNV NOIlFfJIlddH N3d0
C1NV 21IV31HlI1IJVOl SI 31021 S,DVDS
DVDS 1-19f1O21H1 JNIXIddY
eaaij patoad pasodoad;o stideBoloyd •g
poddns o saauai •s
.I�
eaa+ aavuasipatoad o dew •�
(letwoa iaax3 leuppo ut) aunauail paioad •£
(ameldaaab sr Mop dad pauueas) aged aanleu2ls uogeauddv •e t
(}euaaol lad leul2p0 ui) uogeaiiddv •�
STVRI alVIA1
APPLICATION
Clearly C1e111011Strate how the project promotes State
and Federal Transportation Planning Goals, without stating
the goals verbatim.
t
Concisely aeSCrlbe the project. Explain, "Who,
what, when, where, and why." Include Ca!trans and
SCAG as active partner in the study.
j • it 44
I
ue- rly C enne and explain the transportation problem or
1
0. deficiency that the project will attempt to address.
It' III
1
0
•sawn!pe ampflau! Jaylo
pue 'mom Supaau!Sua JO ‘u2!sap xaldwo3 leluaLuuoi!Aue apnput joN oa
Asel 2u!vodai Alia4.Jenb atn. Jo; Aped alcpsuodsai
aLp. se DvDs Is!l pue sueme3 2ugiodai Apapenb e apnpul
- -
•msel 2up!onu!
ato /Wed avpsuodsai aLp. se DvDs sll pue 2up!onu! Joj. e apnpui
0
Asel luawannoid aro. Jol Aped alq!suodsai aql
se mos Is!! pue luawainacud Jolmsel. e apnpu! Ipaa!nbai an sluelinsuo) II
0 luea
atn Jo lie4s aye e DvDs pue sueallep ttlyvk 2u!laau.1 go-13!), e Jo' lsel e apnpul
aunaLuu aye Imnft sappu!op voAA adoas a.insu3
• m• J. a. — —0
MOM dO ]d ODS
•
• ..t.....41,-.441-1.11.-4,1444.144..
tf to tinf: e ,t4,1 Ir..I P 411_4 I_'
.'i, ':1
)1.e6 ` rtt -.? el 91dierlocpws
l y r* i'iJ!�.��ii 1:"411 �.ir h., 1 '_:� w u.3 i��°":►�39..1 r11
i
•
>1?6 rii.J6bwri l
it, 1 _. r '' 'I In. ;01:6•01. . 1� tlx$ t L� 3 ' t �,. ,s t tip
AGENDA ITEM 11
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 19, 2016
TO:
Technical Advisory Committee
FROM:
LoreIle Moe -Luna, Senior Management Analyst
SUBJECT:
Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 3 Update and
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Sustainability
Planning Grants — Active Transportation Call for Projects
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
ATP Cycle 3 Update
The ATP Cycle 3 Call for Projects opened on April 15, 2016 and applications were due June 15, 2016.
Available funding for Cycle 3 was approximately $240 million from state Fiscal Years 2019/20 and
2020/21. The program is comprised of various federal and state funds appropriated in the annual
Budget Act, including the federal Transportation Alternative Program, Highway Safety Improvement
Program, and State Highway Account funds. Distribution of the funds must meet the following
requirements:
• Fifty percent ($120 million) to projects competitively awarded on a statewide basis;
• Forty percent ($96 million) to Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) in urban areas with
populations greater than 200,000;
• Ten percent ($24 million) to small urban and rural areas with populations of 200,000 or less;
• A maximum of 2 percent may be awarded to planning projects; and
• A minimum of 25 percent of the funds must benefit disadvantaged communities.
A total of 456 applications were submitted throughout the state, totaling $977.6 million in ATP funds.
In Riverside County, a total of 26 applications were submitted, totaling $66.1 million in ATP funds.
The California Transportation Commission (CTC) staff is expected to announce statewide
recommended awards by October 28, 2016 for approval by the CTC at the December 7-8, 2016
meeting.
SCAG Sustainable Planning Grants — Active Transportation Call for Projects
As part of the 40 percent of ATP funds allocated to MPOs, SCAG will receive approximately $51 million,
of which $2.5 million, will be combined with SCAG's Sustainability Planning Grant (SPG) Program
(formerly known as Compass Blueprint Grant Program). SCAG anticipates a total of approximately
$9 million will be available with additional local, state, and federal funding sources.
The goals of the SPG program are to provide needed planning resources to local jurisdictions for
sustainable planning efforts; develop local plans that support the implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS;
and achieve efficiencies by consolidating SCAG's regional portion of the ATP with the SPG in one call
for projects. The SPG program is comprised of three main project areas: 1) Active Transportation (AT);
2) Integrated Land Use; and 3) Green Region.
The Active Transportation category will fund the following three types of projects:
1) Community or Area -Wide Active Transportation Plans (maximum award: $200,000)
2) Non -Infrastructure Projects (maximum award: $200,000)
3) Capacity Building Mini -Grants (maximum award: $50,000)
The Integrated Land Use/Green Region Initiatives will fund the following three types of projects:
1) Integrated Shared Vision Proposals (maximum award: $750,000)
2) Focused Planning Proposals (maximum award: $200,000)
3) Capacity Building Mini -Grants (maximum award: $50,000)
Applicants who submitted an application for either a planning or NI project through the Statewide ATP
call for projects but are not awarded may notify SCAG if they wish to have their statewide application
considered in the SPG-Active Transportation call for projects. The $200,000 cap will not be applied to
projects that were submitted through the Statewide ATP call for projects. These applicants will also
have the opportunity to apply their statewide application score for consideration or, they may resubmit
their application using the SCAG application.
Following is the proposed SPG-Active Transportation timeline.
SPG-AT Schedule
SCAG SPG-AT Call for Projects Opens
9/29/16
Application Workshop
Week of 10/7/16
SCAG SPG-AT Call for Project Application Deadline*
11/18/16
Staff Recommended Draft SPG-AT project list
12/21/16
County Transportation Commission Approvals of SPG-AT Project List
12/21/16 - 1/27/17
SCAG Regional Council Approval of 2017 Regional ATP (including SPG-AT
selected projects)
2/2/17
California Transportation Commission approval of 2017 Regional ATP
(including SPG-AT selected projects)
3/15/17
*Applicants who did not receive funding in the statewide call for projects must alert SCAG by 11/18/16 in writing if they
wish to have their application considered in SCAG's SPG-AT Call for Projects.
Attachments: SCAG's Consolidated Sustainability Planning Grant Call for Proposals Guidelines
Source: SCAG Transportation Committee
Staff Report (9/1 /2016)
Southern California Association of Governments
2016 Sustainability Planning Grants Call for Proposals
ATTACHMENT 1
Overview
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) announces the Call for Proposals for the
2016 Sustainability Planning Grants Program (SPG). Since 2005, SCAG's Sustainability Planning Grant
Program has provided resources and direct technical assistance to member jurisdictions to complete
important local planning efforts and enable implementation of the Regional Transportation Plan and
Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).
The SPG allows SCAG to strengthen partnerships with local agencies who are responsible for land use
and transportation decisions. Projects selected will allow local agencies to facilitate coordination and
integration of transportation planning with land use, open space, job -housing balance, environmental
constraints, and growth management. The SPG also serves as the primary funding vehicle where SCAG
partners with local agencies to implement the goals, objectives and strategies of the recently adopted
2016 RTP/SCS. Applicants are encouraged to review strategies promoted in the 2016 RTP/SCS to align
project proposals with regional planning priorities and concepts. The most competitive proposals will
advance multiple planning goals, utilize new or innovative planning practices, and result in planning
products or programs that are clearly tied to implementation. Conducting collaborative public
participation efforts to further extend planning to communities previously not engaged in land use and
transportation discussions is highly encouraged.
The 2016 SPG will incorporate five percent (5%) of SCAG's portion of the regional funding from Cycle 3
of the Active Transportation Program to support planning and non -infrastructure active transportation
projects, fulfilling SCAG's responsibilities to conduct a competitive process for the regional portion of
the program. Hosting a combined call for proposals to award funds through multiple funding streams is
intended to simplify the application process and achieve efficiencies in program administration.
Goals
The SPG Call for Proposals seeks to support the goals below. In addition, each category has additional
goals for the eligible project proposal types.
• Provide needed planning resources to local jurisdictions for sustainability planning efforts
• Develop local plans that support the implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS
• Increase the region's competitiveness for federal and state funds, including but not limited to
the California Active Transportation Program and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds.
Categories
The 2016 SPG is comprised of 3 main project proposal categories that meet the goals of the overall
program. Each category is detailed further in the category guidelines.
• Active Transportation (AT) — Examples includes bicycle, pedestrian and safe routes to school
plans and programs
Page 71 of 103
2
• Integrated Land Use (ILU) — Examples include sustainable land use planning, Transit Oriented
Development (TOD) and land use & transportation integration
• Green Region Initiatives (GRI) — Examples include natural resource plans, climate action plans
(CAPS), green street plans, and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction programs
Applicants may apply in more than one category and may submit multiple proposals within a single
category. SCAG staff is available to support applicants in determining the most appropriate category for
their project(s).
Scoring Criteria
The scoring criteria across all three project proposal types funded through the SPG will be the same. For
each category, the application includes 3 main topic areas — 1) Project Need, 2) Goals, Objectives and
Outcomes, and 3) Partnerships and Leveraging. Application questions vary by category within each topic
area depending on the types of projects eligible. The potential points to be awarded for responses to
each question are noted in each application.
Scoring Criteria
Topic 1
Project Need
50 Points
Topic 2
Goals, Objectives and Outcomes
35 Points
Topic 3
Partnerships and Leveraging
15 Points
Funding Sources
Funding for the 2016 SPG will be provided through a combination of federal, state and local sources.
SCAG will allocate funding for project proposals based on the eligibility of each funding source and the
applicant's readiness. Grants will be managed by SCAG and implemented through its consultants, unless
otherwise negotiated with the project sponsor.
Timely Use of Funds/Time Extensions
All project sponsors must be prepared to initiate their projects in Spring 2017. All work must be
completed within 12 to 36 months of project initiation. A more exact period of performance will be
determined at the time of project initiation based on project complexity and funding source. Time
extensions will be considered on a case -by -case basis. Extensions and scope changes must be in letter
format. All requests must include an explanation of the issues and actions the agency has taken to
correct the issues. All extensions will be contingent on funding availability and the program
requirements of the funding source assigned to the project when awarded. SCAG intends all selected
projects to be completed in a timely manner and requires that applicants coordinate internal resources
to ensure timely completion of the projects.
Schedule
The following schedule outlines important dates
Schedule
SCAG SPG Call for Proposals Opens
9/29/16
Page 72 of 103
3
Application Workshop
Week of 10/17/16
SCAG SPG Call for Project Application Deadline
11/18/16
Staff Recommended Draft SPG project list
12/21/16
SCAG Regional Council Approval of 2017 SPG Proposal Rankings
2/2/17
Contact Information
Questions regarding the SPG application or application process should be directed to:
Green Region and Integrated Land Use
Active Transportation
Marco Anderson
Senior Regional Planner
Telephone: 213-236-1879
Email: anderson@scag.ca.gov
Stephen Patchan
Senior Regional Planner
Telephone: 213.236.1923
Email: patchan@scag.ca.gov
Submittal Information
Applications are due November 18, 2016 by 5:00 pm using the instructions provided in the Application.
Questions regarding submitting applications for each category should be emailed to contact person
listed above. Applications should include all supporting documents in a single PDF file. Files should be
labeled in the following format: AgencyName_ApplicationCategory_ProjectName. For example:
SCAG AT GoHuman or SCAG GRI ClimateActionPlan.
Page 73 of 103
4
Active Transportation
Overview
The Sustainability Planning Grants Program Active Transportation Category (SPG-AT) will fund planning
and non -infrastructure projects or programs that promote safety and encourage people to walk and
bicycle. These projects will be designed to enhance local interest and/or capacity to build safe, efficient
active transportation networks.
Goats and Purpose
The SPG-AT Call for Proposals seeks to implement SCAG's 2016 Regional Transportation Plan and
Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and fulfill SCAG's responsibilities to implement the
planning element of the Regional Program of the California Active Transportation Program (ATP). The
2016 RTP/SCS was adopted on April 7, 2016 and is a long range vision for transportation and land use
planning for the region. The 2016 RTP/SCS outlines recommended strategies for increasing rates of
active transportation in the Active Transportation Appendix.
The goals of the SPG-AT program are to:
• Increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and walking
• Increase safety and mobility of non -motorized users
• Continue to foster jurisdictional support and promote implementation of the goals, objectives and
strategies of 2016 RTP/SCS.
• Seed active transportation concepts and produce plans that provide a preliminary step for future
ATP applicants.
• Integrate multiple funding streams to increase the overall budget for active transportation planning
and capacity building projects.
Funding Sources
Funding for the SPG-AT will be provided from a combination of federal, state and local funding sources.
SCAG in collaboration with the county transportation commissions will establish fund assignments at the
time of award based on eligibility requirements of each funding source.
Approximately $2.5 million of the program will be funded using no more the five percent (5%) of SCAG's
allocation from of the 2017 Active Transportation Program. The policies and procedures for awarding
these funds are consistent with the direction established by the California Transportation Commission
and can be found in SCAG's 2017 Regional Active Transportation Guidelines. The balance of the program
funding will be comprised of federal, state and local funds.
Grants will be managed by SCAG and implemented through its consultants, unless otherwise negotiated
with the project sponsor. As part of the grant management, SCAG will assume responsibility for
procuring consultant support, and provide all necessary reporting and documentation required to
funding partners. The Sponsoring Agency will assign a project manager and assume responsibility for
the timely use of funds.
Page 74 of 103
5
Regional Equity
The majority of funds to be programmed through the SPG-AT are constrained based on county and
geographic equity requirements established by the funding guidelines for each of the respective funding
sources. To ensure compliance with funding guidelines, minimum funding targets will be established for
each county and project proposals will be evaluated against other proposals received in their respective
county. Capacity Building Mini -Grants are not subject to geographic equity requirements and will be
competitively awarded by SCAG based on scoring criteria.
Eligible Applicants
The following entities, within the SCAG region, are eligible to apply for SPG-AT funds:
• Local or Regional Agency - Examples include cities, counties, Regional Transportation Planning
Agency and County Public Health Departments.
• Transit Agencies - Any agency responsible for public transportation that is eligible for funds under
the Federal Transit Administration.
• Public schools or School districts
• Tribal Governments - Federally -recognized Native American Tribes.
Eligible Project Types/Maximum Awards
The SPG-AT will fund three types of projects 1) Community or Area -Wide Active Transportation Plans
(including First -Last Mile Plans) 2) Non -Infrastructure Projects, and 3) Capacity Building Mini -Grants.
Projects should advance one or more program goals by enhancing community support for active
transportation, increasing local capacity to implement active transportation infrastructure
improvements and/or improving a local agency's competitiveness for future state and federal funding
opportunities.
Community or Area -Wide Active Transportation Plans (maximum award: $200,000)
Planning proposals must meet the requirements of the Active Transportation Program, as described in
the 2017 Statewide ATP Guidelines, with one exception: SCAG will allow for plan proposals to be
completed in communities or areas that are not considered disadvantaged. A list of the components
that must be included in an active transportation plan can be found in Section 13, subsection E of the
2017 ATP Guidelines. Examples of eligible plans include but are not limited to:
• Community -wide Active Transportation Master Plan
• Community -wide Bicycle or Pedestrian Master Plan
• Safe Routes to School Master Plan
• First -Last Mile Plans (active transportation improvements only)
• Neighborhood Mobility Area (NMA) Plan (active transportation only). See RTP/SCS for
description of NMAs
Non -Infrastructure Projects (maximum award: $200,000)
Non -infrastructure proposals must meet the requirements of the Active Transportation Program as
described the 2017 Statewide ATP Guidelines. SCAG will allow for non -infrastructure proposals to be
completed in communities or areas that are not considered disadvantaged. Non -infrastructure projects
Page 75 of 103
6
with permanent infrastructure components are not eligible. Project sponsors are encouraged to apply
for activities that extend the reach and impact of the region's successful Go Human Campaign, including
through implementation of Go Human demonstration projects in new communities, expansion of the
advertising campaign and collateral, and/or use of the Go Human branding in other activities. Examples
of eligible projects include but are not limited to:
• Open Streets Event or demonstration projects (pop -ups) directly linked to the promotion of a
new infrastructure project or designed to promote walking and biking on a daily basis
• Conducting pedestrian and bicycle safety education programs, including community -wide
advertising campaigns
• Development and implementation of bike -to -work or walk -to -work school day/month programs.
• Conducting bicycle and/or pedestrian counts, walkability and/or bicycle friendly assessments or
audits, or pedestrian and/or bicycle safety analysis.Development and publishing of community
walking and biking maps, including school route/travel plans
• Development and implementation of walking school bus or bike train programs
Capacity Building Mini -Grants (Maximum project award: $50,000)
Capacity Building Mini -Grants will be funded that position local agencies to compete for capital funding.
There are no disadvantaged communities requirements for this category. In this category, applicants are
encouraged to consider projects that advance multiple sustainability goals, like water and energy
conservation and climate adaption, as a component of the active transportation project or program
design. Examples of eligible projects include but are not limited to:
• Concept Plans
• Corridor Plans
• Design Charrettes
• Capacity Building/Educational Initiatives
• Supportive Active Transportation Policies (Complete Streets)
Match Requirements
Project sponsors are not required to provide match to receive funding through the SPG-AT. However,
project proposals that include a hard match or leveraging through in -kind efforts will be prioritized in
the scoring criteria.
Scoring Criteria
The scoring criteria across all three project types funded through the SPG-AT will be the same. For each
category, the application includes 3 main focus areas. The potential points to be awarded for responses
to each area are noted in the application. The question topics and their relationship to the scoring
criteria are outlined below.
Scoring Criteria
Topic 1: Project Need
50 Points
Mobility
15
Page 76 of 103
7
Safety
20
Public Health
5
Disadvantaged Communities (Plans and NI)/
Community Need (Capacity Building Mini -Grants)
10
Topic 2: Goals, Objectives and Outcomes
35 Points
Mobility
20
Safety
5
Public Health
5
Public Participation
5
Topic 3: Partnerships and Leveraging
15 Points
Leveraging
5
Cost Effectiveness
5
Public Participation
5
Application Process
Eligible applicants are encouraged to apply to the SPG-AT by completing an application specific to one
the three Project Types, above. Please contact SCAG staff if the project includes multiple components,
or if for any other reason, support is needed in identifying the proper application to use for a project
proposal. Application workshops will be scheduled in October 2016 to address any questions related to
the application process. For more information and details on the workshop see —website. Applicants
must complete and submit their application by 5:00pm, November 18, 2016.
Exceptions: Non -Infrastructure and planning projects that were submitted through the 2017 ATP
statewide competition, but not selected for funding, will be considered for funding through the SPG-AT.
Because the scoring criteria for the SPG-AT are identical to the 2017 ATP, project sponsors are not
required, but may if they choose, submit a new application to SCAG through the SPG-AT. If the applicant
chooses to complete a new application through the SPG-AT, the application must be received by the
November 18 deadline. Otherwise, SCAG will use the scores provided by the California Transportation
Commission's (CTC) ATP review process to rank and select statewide submitted projects alongside SPG-
AT projects submitted through this call. The $200,000 cap will not be applied to projects that first
submitted an application through the Statewide ATP Call for Proposals. However, project sponsors may
wish to review and revise their funding request in consideration of the limited ATP funding ($2.5 million)
to be awarded through the SPG and SCAG's regional equity goals.
Evaluation Process
For SPG-AT projects, six (6) evaluation teams, one (1) per county, will be established to review, score
and rank app►ications submitted to the SPG-AT. Each team will be comprised of staff from the county
transportation commissions and SCAG. Projects will compete and be ranked against other projects
within their respective county, except as noted below. Final awards will be based on application score,
regional equity targets and funding eligibility.
Exceptions: Capacity Building Mini -Grants will be awarded competitively across the region and will be
scored by SCAG staff only to avoid a conflict of interest. In addition, if a county transportation
Page 77 of 103
8
commission submits a proposal for any of the project types, the application will be reviewed and scored
by SCAG staff only.
Schedule
Projects awarded ATP funding should be aware of additional program dates beyond those discussed in
the SPG guidelines overview.
SPG-AT Schedule
SCAG SPG-AT Call for Proposals Opens
9/29/16
Application Workshop
Week of 10/17/16
SCAG SPG-AT Call for Project Application Deadline*
11/18/16
Staff Recommended Draft SPG-AT project list
12/21/16
County Transportation Commission approvals (if required by assigned funding
source)
12/21/16 - 1/27/17
SCAG Regional Council Approval of 2017 Regional ATP (including SPG-AT
selected projects)
2/2/17
California Transportation Commission approval of 2017 Regional ATP
(including SPG-AT selected projectsrce)
3/15/17
* Deadline applies to all applicants, including project sponsors who wish to submit a new proposal for a
project that failed to receive funding through the Cycle 3 ATP. See Application Process above. .
Page 78 of 103
9
Integrated Land Use & Green Region Initiatives
Overview
The 2017 Sustainability Planning Grants Program Integrated Land Use/Green Region Initiatives
Categories (SPG-ILU/GRI) will fund planning, visioning, and capacity building projects or programs that
promote sustainable development, transportation/land use integration, resource efficiency, climate
action, and adaptation/resiliency studies.
Goals and Purpose
The ILU/GRI Call for Proposals seeks to implement SCAG's 2016 Regional Transportation Plan and
Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and fulfill SCAG's responsibilities to achieve the
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions called for in Senate Bill 375 (SB375). The 2016 RTP/SCS was
adopted on April 7, 2016 and is a long range vision for transportation and land use planning for the
region. The 2016 RTP/SCS outlines recommended strategies for reducing GHG emissions through
resource conservation, and integrated land use and transportation (see Chapter 5 in the 2016 RTP/SCS).
The goals of the SPG-ILU/GRI program are to:
• Identify regional strategic areas for infill and investment
• Focus new growth around transit
• Plan for growth around Livable Corridors
• Support local sustainability planning and climate action planning
• Continue to foster jurisdictional support and promote implementation of the goals, objectives and
strategies of 2016 RTP/SCS.
• Encourage integrated concepts and produce plans that promote implementation, are eligible for
sustainability-oriented funding, and help achieve a regional shared vision.
Funding Sources
Funding for the SPG-ILU/GRI will be provided from a combination of federa►, state and SCAG funding
sources. SCAG will establish fund assignments at the time of award based on eligibility requirements of
each funding source.
Grants will be managed by SCAG and implemented through its consultants, unless otherwise negotiated
with the project sponsor. As part of the grant management, SCAG will assume responsibility for
procuring consultant support, and provide all necessary reporting and documentation required to
funding partners. The Sponsoring Agency will assign a project manager and assume responsibility the
timely use of funds.
Regional Equity
SCAG will take regional geographic equity into consideration when ranking SPG-ILU/GRI program
applications.
Page 79 of 103
10
Eligible Applicants
Only SCAG member jurisdictions are eligible to submit SPG-ILU/GRI applications. All projects must be
within the SCAG region. Non-profit groups, community based organizations and non-member
government agencies may request that a member agency sponsor their application. These applications
must identify both a sponsoring agency project manager as well as a Managing Organization project
manager.
Eligible Project Types/Maximum Awards
The SPG-ILU/GRI will fund three types of projects 1) Integrated Shared Vision Proposals 2) Single -
Purpose Planning Proposals, and 3) Capacity Building Mini -Grants. Projects should advance one or more
program goals by increasing local capacity to implement plans, enhancing community support for land
use transportation integration or climate action planning, and/or improving a local agency's
competitiveness for future state and federal funding opportunities.
Integrated Shared Vision Proposals (maximum award: $750,000)
These proposals must present significant multi -faceted planning and plan efforts focused on preparing
projects for "shovel -ready" status. Projects should promote infill, Transit Oriented Development (TOD),
complete communities or other forms of sustainable development. Projects should address climate
change through GHG emission reduction, adaptation planning, and promote overall sustainability on
various resource issues. Preparation of environmental clearance documentation is strictly prohibited.
Planning elements should emphasize a comprehensive approach to connectivity and location strategy;
community design and neighborhood form; and green buildings and infrastructure. Eligible plans should
include, but are not limited to, three or more of the following elements:
o Land Use Strategies such as those included in the 2016 RTP/SCS
o Strategies to Encourage mixed -income diverse communities
o Transit and/or Active Transportation/Land Use Integration
o Entitlement Strategies
o Innovative Financing Strategies
o Resource Conservation Strategies & Green Design
Focused Planning Proposals (maximum award: $200,000)
These planning efforts are a continuation of previous calls for proposals. Proposals can include land use
visioning efforts, plan preparation, climate action plans, or other innovative proposals. Multi -
jurisdictional efforts are encouraged. As noted above, Preparation of environmental clearance
documentation is strictly prohibited. Projects should be 12 months in duration. Proposals can either be
stand-alone projects or supplement planning concepts with additional analysis or presentation
materials. Examples of eligible projects include, but are not limited to:
Integrated Land Use
Green Region Initiative
o
o
Transit -Oriented Development (TOD), and
Livable Corridor Plans
General Plan Element updates, Specific
o
o
o
Local or Subregional Climate Action Plans
Energy and/or Water Efficiency Plans
Open Space, Natural and Farm Lands
Page 80 of 103
11
Plans and Development Code Assistance
o Affordable Housing Development
Feasibility Analyses
o Mobility Innovations
Preservation
o Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Plans
o Ecodistrict Planning
o Urban Greening
Capacity Building Mini -Grants (Maximum project award: $50,000)
Partnership building, community outreach, planning research or early visioning exercises will be funded
that position local agencies to compete for additional funding. In this category, applicants are
encouraged to consider projects that advance multiple sustainability goals, like water and energy
conservation and climate adaptation, as a component of project design. Funding may be used to hire
grant writers, and/or contract staff for a limited term. Examples of eligible projects include, but are not
limited to:
o Concept Planning and Design Charrettes
o Neighborhood Vision Plans
o Economic Development Strategies
o Innovative Technology / Social Media Deployment
o Capacity Building/Educational Initiatives
o Grant Preparation and Project Pipeline Development
Match Requirements
Project sponsors are not required to provide match to receive funding through the SPG-ILU/GRI.
However, project proposals that include a hard match or leveraging through in -kind efforts will be
prioritized in the scoring criteria.
Scoring Criteria
The scoring criteria across all three project types funded through the SPG-ILU/GRI will be the same. For
each category, the application includes 3 topic areas. The potential points to be awarded for responses
to each question are noted in the application. To minimize redundancy and simplify the application,
some questions may be used to assess more than one criteria. The questions and their relationship to
the scoring criteria are outlined below.
Scoring Criteria
Topic 1:Project Need
50 Points
Readiness
15
Sustainability
20
Resource Need
10
Disadvantaged Communities
5
Topic 2: Project Goals, Objectives and Outcomes
35 Points
Readiness
20
Sustainability
5
Resource Need
5
Public Participation
5
Page 81 of 103
12
Topic 3: Partnerships and Leveraging
15 Points
Leveraging
Cost Effectiveness
Public Participation
5
5
5
Application Process
Eligible applicants are encouraged to apply to the SPG-ILU/GRI by completing an application specific to
one of the three Project Types. Please contact SCAG staff if the project includes multiple components,
or if support is needed in identifying the proper application to use for a project proposal. Application
workshops will be scheduled in October 2016 to address any questions related to the application
process. For more information and details on the workshop see—website. Applicants must complete
and submit their application by 5:00pm, November 18, 2016.
Evaluation Process
Three (3) evaluation teams, one (1) for each project category, will be established to review, score and
rank applications submitted to the SPG-ILU/GRI. Each team will be comprised of staff from partner
agencies, and from SCAG. Projects will compete with and be ranked against other projects within their
respective categories. Final awards will be based on application score, regional geographic equity and
funding eligibility.
Schedule
Schedule
SCAG SPG-ILU/GRI Call for Proposals Opens
9/29/16
Application Workshop
Week of 10/17/16
SCAG SPG-ILU/GRI Call for Project Application Deadline*
11/18/16
Staff Recommended Draft SPG-ILU/GRI project list
12/21/16
SCAG Regional Council Approval of 2017 SPG-ILU/GRI Proposal Rankings
2/02/17
Page 82 of 103
AGENDA ITEM 12
A presentation will be made but
there is no attachment to the
agenda for item 12.
,
CALIFORNIALTAP CENTER
Local Technical Assistance Program
Caltrans I Sacramento State
IHT RTSI IITlil T]IGI 1I TTRS AGIIIHIIY
Core training in state andfedcral regulationsfor LocalAgenqt Resident Engineers
The Resident Engineers Academy provides core training in state and federal regulations for Local Agency Resident Engineers.
The Academy, partially subsidized by Caltrans, is ideal for both seasoned and newly-hired Resident Engineers.
This four-day course provides practical, hands-on training for Resident Engineers. The subject matter experts and instructors
use a reaFlife approach to deliver information utilizing examples, problem-solving activities, and exercises. The Resident
Engineers Academy also provides a unique learning environment designed to promote networking.
Specifically, participants will learn how to efficiently manage a project from beginning to completion in compliance with state
and federal regulations. Topics will include:
o Resident Engineer's Roles and Responsibilities
o Pre-Construction Preparation
o Scope of Work
o Legal Relations and Responsibility to the Public
o Payment
o Control of Work
o Prosecution and Progress
o Contract Change Orders
o Environmental Stewardship, Water Pollution Control, and Public Relations
o Project Completion and Invoicing
o Control of Materials
. Construction Claims and Disputes
o Litigation Awareness
o Labor Compliance
o Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
o Construction Oversight Program
The Resldent Engineers Academy is intended for resident engineers, structure reprcsentatives, construction inspedors, field
office engineers, material and phnt inspectors, or any otherc that have direct inyolvement in a constructlon project.
AGENDA ITEM 13
A presentation will be made but
there is no attachment to the
agenda for item 13.