Loading...
09 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. Ch 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)Stewardship Agreement - FHWA◦LA Procedures Manual (LAPM)◦LA Program Guidelines (LAPG)California Streets & Highways CodeCaltrans Standard and Specs, AASHTOCalifornia Transportation Commission (CTC)3 Program Support (PS) $39.3 millionOperating Expenses (OE) $2.0 million Positions 264@District 08•PS = $1.3M•OE = $20K•Position = 9 Reg + 1 Bond + 2 Reimb(?)4 Federal - $1.66 BillionState - $252 MillionIn Comparison – Capital Program•STIP - $2.4B /5yrs or ~$500M/yr•SHOPP - $12B /5yrs or ~$2.4B/yr5 Example Programs•ATP Cycle 3 – June 15th$240M - FY 19/20 to FY 20/21•HSIP Cycle 8 – Aug 12th$150M – @6 mo PE, @30 mo Con•HBP – ~$300M /yr6 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 5,000 active projects 4,000 federal projects 680 local and regional agenciesOver 30 years$1.0+B/yr delivery or OA for 15 years.300 Tribes8 >150 active projects >95% federal project64 local and regional agencies$200M annual delivery /OA34 Tribes9 Develop Polices and ProceduresProvide Training Maximum Delegation of Project Development and Administration◦Through Stewardship agreement with FHWA ◦Use of Checklists & CertificationsLoCode or Compliance ReviewAudits – SCO, DOF, or FHWACorrective Actions10 Caltrans◦Policies and Procedures◦Program and Budget Expenditures◦E-76, Agreements, and Payments◦Field and Environmental Reviews◦Project Oversight, Compliance Audits◦DBE and EEO compliance◦Audit Findings & Corrective Action 11 Local Agency•In 1995, under the “Reengineering of Local Assistance Procedures” many Chapter 23 of CFR responsibilities were delegated by Caltrans to local agencies•Agency responsible for implementing projectsoPlanning oEnvironmental & DesignoConstructionoMaintenance12 FHWAFederal agency ultimately responsible for ensuring compliance with all federal requirements on highway projectsThe Stewardship Agreement delegates FHWA responsibility to Caltrans for “Delegated” projects13 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 Federal Project Number (FPN) & Field ReviewsPreliminary Environmental Study (PES)CTC AllocationsTime ExtensionsAuthorizations – PE, RW, ConEnvironmental Documents (NEPA)17 Right of Way CertAward PackageAgreements – Master, Program Supplement, CoopInvoice PaymentFinal Invoice/Final InspectionProject Closeout18 TrainingPolicy & Procedure Interpretation Manuals & Guidelines Partnering Meetings (TAC, Airport Meeting)Reporting (Inactive List, PE >10)19 Construction Oversight Reviews - 3x/projectAudits – SCO, DOF, and FHWA Corrective Actions Conformance ReviewQuality Assurance Program (QAP)Compliance Assessment Program (CAP)20 Inactive ProjectsPE > 10 yearsCooperative Work Agreements (CWA) – 6 yrsAB1012Performance Measures, HSIP Red FlagDatabase ManagementReporting: CTC, FHWA, Governor’s Office, Etc21 Caltrans NEPANEPA Review & ApprovalInteragency consultationTribal ConsultationCompliance Tracking & Reporting22 Number of ProjectsSize/Scope of ProjectsProject ScheduleResources - Caltrans Resources - Local AgenciesTurnovers 23 Local Program Project DatabasesProduct AcceptanceStandard & Code InterpretationADA – Standards, DOJ(?)Audits & Corrective ActionsWhat do we represent – A&I, FHWA, CTC, etc.24 Local Agencies Expectations vs ConstraintsChanging Rules◦Programs, DBE, Buy AmericaWhat to attach– ICE, Emission Analysis, etcPerformance Measures Application Reviews - Schedule & ScopeForms & Exhibits25 26 27 Re-Organizing Assessing Business Practice @D08Project Management DatabaseReimbursed WorkMonthly Meeting w/ RTPAsPartner with RTPAs and Local AgenciesPartner with Environmental Staff28 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 • Planning for zero or near zero emission vehicles • Integration of transportation and environmental planning Application Preparation The Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program is highly competitive. This section provides applicants with supplemental information as well as details on required documents that must accompany an application at the time of submittal. All applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to these requirements in order to score competitively during the application evaluation process. Required Documents Use the samples and checklists provided for the following required documents: • Application • Scope of Work • Project Timeline A map of the project area is also required to clearly identify the boundaries of the project area and to provide a sense of the context of the project. Additional Documents The following documents are not required, but enhance the overall application and typically result in a more competitive application during the evaluation process. • Letters of Support o If submitted, letters of support must be included with the application package. Letters received separate from the application package may not be considered. The letters should be addressed to the applicant. Such letters can come from community -based organizations, local governments, Native American Tribal governments, service agencies, and elected officials. • Photographs o Photographs of the proposed project area convey existing conditions and help to further explain the need for the grant. • Safety Data o Statistical data such as pedestrian -vehicle injuries/crashes or fatalities resulting from lack of safe infrastructure, unsafe pedestrian behavior, vehicle and driver factors or other road conditions that contribute to possible injuries. This information may be obtained from police reports, transit agencies, National Highway Traffic Administration or the Governor's Highway Safety Association. 16 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 •sluawanoadw! walsAs pawweJ5oad u! linsaa Alalewpin `pue `.sldaDuop 01,0z Almgow 1.aews fluauaa5e5ua pncind am.pe anionui :uopeJogeilop aapioLiaNels a5eanoDuj `.samunwwoD pa eluenpestp pup appsn f ieluauauoalnua jo spaau 5utpnput w@lsAs uopewdsueal lepowpinw aye u! sapuapi.jap Almqow ssaappe pue Ajpuapi `.san paCgo 5uNaaeaana 5oad lueJD pue uo!ssm suealiej at.p. anappe of anwalgo Dijpads 4uoi9 sawunuauaoj aigeu!elsns 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. •�aoda� aanlyuadx] eu!A (dMO) uual5oid N-10M Jo uotss!wgns aya. y iM appupp aeaA ieDsu. jo pua aLp. aal je sAep 09 ueip aaou paw aq lsnw luawasanqw�a� }"ao lsanba eul 4uawas.mn wla ao lsenball ieutj palaldwoD aq lsnw �aonn algesangw!aa uagm alep pua paroad - OZOZ `O£ aunt~ ienoadde la5png awls 5uLpuad 1.Je paledPPuV - L OZ Alnr :aunawa paCoai pue )aom Jo adops auk aujdolanap uagm salep asagl aaNsuo3 sVd id /Od W sated pafo a •sluawaajnbaa luawAed aDwo seaaiiculuo3 awls at.n. Aidwoa awp luapujns sueiliej smoiie sluawas.ingw!aa pue ienoadde aoj sueJliej o� pala.pgns aq lsnw sappnu! ieuk4 11V - OZOZ `8Z 1PdV palaidwoD aq lsnw aiqes.inquipJ uaLIM a121) pua Pa f oad - OZOZ `8Z A-lee-K A ienwdde la5pn8 awls 5u!puad `alep paledplud - L bOZ Jaqwal.das :aunawki paCoad pue �1adM jo adoas aql 5u!doianap uagm salep asagl aamsuoj ' agla c lDblaWV ann DN `sa`auaSV vsuna `sa p unoxsa pD saleo 1...124s parom 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.