HomeMy WebLinkAbout40- City Adminstrator CITY OF SAN BERK .RDINO - REQUEST I _)R COUNCIL ACTION
From: Mary Fifield, Transportation Subject: Authorize execution of agreement
Programs Coordinator Dike Partnership for the development
Dept: City Administrator ' s Office of a bicycle master plan at a cost
not-to-exceed $35 , 000. 00 .
Date: 2/25/93
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
None .
Recommended motion:
1 . That the City Administrator be authorized to execute an agreement
with Dike Partnership for the development of a bicycle master plan
at a cost not-to-exceed $35, 000 .
2 . That the Finance Director be authorized to allocate $35, 000 from the
Pollution Reduction Fund balance (111-000-30405) and appropriated
into Prof . /Contractual Services line item 111-102-53150.
0
Sig ature
Contact person: Mary Fifield Phone: 5122
Supporting data attached: See Attached Ward: N/A
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: not-to-exceed $35, 000. 00
Source: (Acct. No.) 111-102-53150
(Acct. Description) Pollution Reduction Fund
Professional/Contractual
Finance:
Council Notes:
79-0262 Agenda Item No. 7 4
CITY OF SAN BERN. ADINO - REQUEST F R COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
It is recommended that the Council authorize the City Administrator
to execute a contract with The Dike Partnership to develop a
bikeway master plan. The amount of the contract is not to exceed
$35, 000. The entire amount for the consultant would be funded from
the Pollution Reduction Fund reserve, an account funded entirely by
vehicle license fee revenue from the state. This project will have
no financial impact on the General Fund whatsoever.
Several reasons exist for developing a bikeway master plan.
Chapter 6. 4, section I6. 21 of the General Plan requires the City to
develop a bikeway master plan to provide direction on the
development of bicycle paths, lanes, and other facilities for
cyclists. A bicycle plan will help the City comply with the
regional Congestion Management Plan, which mitigates traffic
congestion and air pollution. SANBAG is in the process of hiring
a consultant to develop a regional master plan that will not
delineate bikeways within cities but instead provide a network
between cities and in county islands. In concert with this effort,
surrounding cities, such as Rialto, Highland, and Colton, either
have bicycle plans or are developing them, and San Bernardino
should develop a plan to create a true cross-county system.
San Bernardino also has a large number of transit-dependent
residents who cannot afford cars or cannot afford to keep them
running well. These constituents would greatly benefit from a
network of bicycle lanes, routes, and paths to help them get to
work or other activity centers. With San Bernardino Valley College
and Cal State, the City has a large student population that would
similarly benefit from bicycle facilities. Typically, students use
bicycles for transportation. If bikeways were installed, the
number of students cycling would increase, particularly in San
Bernardino where most students do not live on campus.
While in the past the City had painted bike lanes on a few streets,
those lanes did not form a network connecting residential areas to
commercial and business districts. Apparently there was no
comprehensive plan in place to guide the use or development of
those bike lanes. As a result, they were infrequently used and
were removed. Based on the recent formation of several bicycle
coalitions and the growing popularity of bicycling in and around
San Bernardino, the current need for a bicycle plan is becoming
evident.
Importantly, there are several state and federal funding
opportunities for bicycle projects, including Transportation
Activities Enhancement (TEA) funding from Caltrans. Over six
years, $200 million will be apportioned to California for projects
in ten categories. But the deadline"-for the first round of funding
for TEA projects is within the next six months. Projects submitted
for any state grant must be outlined in a bicycle master plan to
show that the applicant has appropriately planned for a viable
5-0264
bicycle network. Because of the short time frame, a request for
proposals process to select a consultant might prohibit the City
from completing a bicycle master plan in time to submit proposals
for state funding.
As a result, it is recommended that The Dike Partnership be
selected as the sole source contractor to develop a master plan.
The Dike Partnership was selected through the RFP process to
develop the City's Parks, Recreation, and Community Services master
plan and has an extensive familiarity with San Bernardino. The
Dike Partnership has proven expertise in bicycle planning as they
have completed a bike master plan for the City of Solana Beach and
Capistrano Bay Parks & Recreation District. Since no proposals
will be solicited, the contract with the Dike Partnership will be
negotiated to ensure the best end product at the lowest cost.
This project will be supported from the Pollution Reduction Fund
reserve, an account funded entirely by vehicle license fee revenue.
According to Assembly Bill 2766, this funding must be spent on
pollution reduction projects only. AB 2766 also mandates that the
funding be used in the community from which it was collected; a
bicycle master plan is a legitimate and widely accepted use for the
funding.
Attached is a draft copy of Caltrans' TEA funding announcement for
information.
Draft Proposed Guidelines
Transportation Enhancement Activities
Program
Ov
,so
40
�r
a
�a
California Department of Transportation
November 30, 1992
NOMINATION FORM
Transportation Enhancement Activities
ADVISORY COUNCIL
One way interested people can participate in the Transportation Enhancement
Activities program is to nominate representatives to the Advisory Council.
The Advisory Council's purpose will be primarily to facilitate communication to and
from interested organizations and agencies, but also to assist in analyzing the first
cycle of selected transportation enhancement activities and advise Caltrans on
issues.
Your nomination must be signed by the nominee and received by the California
Department of Transportation on or before February 24, 1993. Nomination forms
should be mailed to:
California Department of Transportation
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office
Transportation Enhancement Activities Branch
1120 N Street, Room 5306
Sacramento, CA 95814
Name:
Representing (organization or agency):
Relationship to organization/agency:
How is the organization/agency interested in the Transportation Enhancement
Activities?
The scope of the nominee's representation of this organization/agency is:
(circle one) local regional statewide national
If selected, the nominee would represent (how many) people.
Please attach supportive material: personal resume, organization brochure,
letters of support.
I hereby authorize my nomination to the Transportation Enhancement Activities
Advisory Council.
Signature of Nominee Date
November 30, 1992
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION A - INSTRUCTIONS FOR NOMINATING PROJECTS
About These Guidelines .............................................................................. 1
II Vision 1
III References to Authority...............................................................................2
IV Responsible Governmental Agencies and Their Roles ............................... 2
V Public Participation Process ........................................................................4
VI Accelerated First Programming Cycle .........................................................4
VII Implementation Timeline..............................................................................4
VIIIEligibility ................................................................................................7
IX Project Evaluation Process..........................................................................9
X Screening and Ranking Criteria................................................................... 9
1 Evaluation for Screening.......................................................................9
2 Evaluation for Ranking........................................................................ 13
XI Nomination Process................................................................................... 17
SECTION B - DEFINITION OF TERMS ....................................... 1-2
SECTION C - QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS .............................. 1-3
SECTION D - LIST OF CONTACTS............................................. 1-9
SECTION E - GUIDE TO PROJECT ELIGIBILITY ...................... 1-5
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Table of Contents
Caltrans
Guid"n"-Draft Propo"d
November 25, 1992
SECTION A
INSTRUCTIONS FOR NOMINATING PROJECTS
I. ABOUT THESE GUIDELINES
California could receive more than $200 million over a 6 year period for
Transportation Enhancement Activities from the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). This represents a 10 percent set-
aside of California's Surface Transportation Program funds, available only for this
program.
These guidelines explain how activities are nominated, selected and funded, and
by whom. Although this is not a grant process, it is a competitive process for
federal aid funds. Selection of activities will occur at the regional level and
funding decisions at the state level. These guidelines are intended to assist
project sponsors to nominate transportation enhancement activities.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in the text are defined in Section B. A
brief overview of this program, with particular emphasis on questions that might
be asked by those interested in a specific project, is included in Question and
Answer format, Section C. Section D has the names of contacts in the Regional
Transportation Planning Agencies and Caltrans Districts. Section E includes a
more detailed discussion of eligibility.
II. VISION
The National Policy in ISTEA discusses creation of a national intermodal
transportation system that "must be the centerpiece bf a national investment
commitment to create the new wealth of the Nation for the 21st century." It
defines this system as "all forms of transportation in a unified, interconnected
manner..."
ISTEA reflects a growing recognition that transportation programs, while vital for
national mobility and international competitiveness, must be environmentally
sound. Transportation enhancement projects are to provide the maximum
benefit to the public. Projects must be directly connected to the transportation
system and should also provide the maximum enhancement to the environments
and communities in California. Projects should have a quality-of-life benefit while
providing the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people.
Transportation enhancement activities are a means of more creatively and
sensitively integrating transportation facilities into their surrounding communities.
What distinguishes transportation enhancement activities from other worthwhile
"quality of life" and environmental activities is their potential to create a
transportation experience that is more than merely adequate and at the same
time to protect the environment and provide a more aesthetic, pleasant and
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 1
Caltrans Section A
GuideinewDrafl Proposed
November 24, 1992
B. California Transportation Commission (Commission) has responsibility
for the Fund Estimate, programming decisions, and funding eligible
transportation enhancement activities. The Commission defines the
size of the program through the Fund Estimate. The Commission must
select which activities will be funded from among activities
recommended by Regional Transportation Planning Agencies and
Caltrans. The Commission also ensures that proper environmental
documentation has been completed prior to funding a transportation
enhancement activities project.
C. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has primary
responsibility for the administration of this program, including
development of policies and procedures, and monitoring program
implementation. Caltrans will screen and score activities of a statewide
nature, based on the statewide screening and ranking criteria, and
recommend a prioritized list of such transportation enhancement
activities in the PSTIP. The Department will comment from a policy
standpoint on specific activities to assist the Commission to determine
which activities will be funded, develop contracts for activities on its
rights-of-way, and certify completion. Caltrans has responsibility to see
that requirements under Title 23 are met and has responsibility for final
acceptance of the projects.
D. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs), including
Metropolitan Planning Organizations and local transportation planning
agencies, have responsibility for selecting activities within their
jurisdiction, based on statewide screening and ranking criteria. RTPAs
will recommend their prioritized lists of eligible transportation
enhancement activities to the Commission in their Regional
Transportation Improvement Programs (RTIPs). RTPAs also will
submit their prioritized list of remaining eligible activities. The RTPA
with authority for activity screening and ranking shall be the same
agency established for other ISTEA funds in Senate Bill 1435. (See
Definitions, Section B.) RTPAs will comment on specific activities, with
regard to their priorities, to assist the Commission to determine which
activities will be funded. The RTPAs will ensure adequate public
participation in the entire process.
E. Public Agency sponsors will nominate transportation enhancement
activities to the appropriate RTPAs, with a copy to the affected county.
Nominations for activities of a statewide nature will be submitted to
Caltrans, with copies to affected RTPAs and counties.
F. The State Office of Historic Preservation has responsibility for the
administration of the historic preservation program in California. The
State Historic Preservation Officer is the chief administrative officer of
the Office of Historic Preservation.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 3
Caltrans Section A
GuideYnerDreN Proposed
November 24, 1992
January 20/21, 1993 CTC Meeting: CTC receives public comments,
holds hearing on Draft Proposed Guidelines. Draft
Programming Targets.
January 24, 1992 RTPAs distribute project nomination forms.
January 27, 1992 Sponsors receive nomination forms. (Due April 1 St.)
Before February 1, 1993 Caltrans refines Draft Proposed Guidelines into
"Proposed Guidelines".
February 23/24, 1993 CTC Meeting: CTC adopts Guidelines. Final
programming targets approved.
Close of nominations for Advisory Council.
March 10, 1993 Project proponents nominate accelerated first phase
deliverable projects to RTPAs.
March 10 to August 1, 1993 Project proponents nominate projects to RTPAs for
regular 1994 State Transportation Improvement
Program cycle.
April 1, 1993 RTPAs screen and rank projects for accelerated
phase of Transportation Enhancement Activities
program.
May 1, 1993 RTPA Board Meeting: RTPAs have board action on
TEA program.
RTPAs send new TEA projects lists to CTC.
Caltrans sends Rrogrammed TEA prroiects list to
CTC.
June 1993 Caltrans and RTPAs send recommendations on
TEA program.
CTC Meeting: CTC reviews Draft TEA program
and holds hearing.
July 1993 CTC Meeting: CTC adopts TEA program.
August 1993 Activate Advisory Council.
December 1993 Regional Transportation Improvement Programs
adopted (date varies by RTPA)
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 5
Caltrans Section A
Guide na►Draft Prepossd
November 24, 1992
VIII. ELIGIBILITY
Transportation enhancement activities are subject to all Title 23 United States
Code, requirements, the Uniform Relocation Act, all federal, state, and local
environmental laws, Caltrans' administrative guidelines, and require federal
approval.
A. Eligible Agencies
Projects may be nominated to the Regional Transportation Planning
Agencies (RTPAs) for inclusion in the Regional Transportation Improvement
Program (RTIP) by Caltrans, by the RTPAs, and by other federal, state, and
local public agencies, i.e. Regents of the University of California, a county,
city, city and county, special district, public authority, transit operator,
transportation commission or county transportation authority.
B. Eligible Costs
Transportation Enhancement Activities funds are reimbursable federal aid
moneys, subject to all the requirements of Title 23, United States Code.
Eligible costs for federal funds include preliminary engineering (including
environmental studies), right-of-way acquisition, and construction costs
associated with conducting an eligible activity. These funds are not to be
used for program planning. They may be used for archaeological planning
projects.
Many projects are a mix of elements, some on the list of 10 categories and
some not. Those project elements which are on the list may be counted as
transportation enhancement activities. For example, a rest area might
include a historic site purchased and developed as an interpretive site
illustrating local history. The historic site purchase and development would
qualify as a transportation enhancement activity.
Activities which are not explicitly on the list might qualify if they are an
integral part of a larger qualifying activity. For example, if the rehabilitation
of a historic railroad station required the construction of new drainage
facilities, the entire project could be considered a transportation
enhancement activity. Similarly, environmental analysis, project planning,
design, land acquisition, and construction activities necessary for
implementing qualifying transportation enhancement activities are eligible
for funding. For example, construction costs for required mitigation for
impacts arising from a stand-alone transportation enhancement project
would be eligible as part of the transportation enhancement activity project.
Allowable expenditures do not include those incurred as part of routine or
customary elements of transportation projects or those provided to mitigate
project impacts in compliance with the requirements of environmental, or
other federal, state, or local laws, even if those aspects constitute a
Transportation Facilities Enhancement office Page 7
Caltrans Section A
GuideNnes-DrsR Proposed
November 24, 1992
IX. PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS
The Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) will screen and rank
transportation enhancement activities on the basis of statewide criteria. The
RTPAs will submit the transportation enhancement activities list to the
Commission as part of the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP).
Eligible transportation enhancement activities which are not part of the RTIP will
be included in a prioritized list of eligible activities, to accompany the RTIP.
For the initial cycle, that is for the 1993/94 fiscal year, the RTPAs may submit
deliverable transportation enhancement activities to the Commission as proposed
amendments to the 1992 State Transportation Improvement Program.
X. SCREENING AND RANKING CRITERIA
Projects will be selected according to the following statewide criteria.
EVALUATION FOR SCREENING
Transportation enhancement activities must meet all of the following screening
requirements, where applicable. If a proposal meets all of the applicable criteria
within these requirements, it is eligible for prioritization; if not, it will be dropped at
this point. The requirements fall into seven groups:
1. Transportation Enhancement
2. Consistency
3. Financial
4. Project-Specific
5. Air Quality
6. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and
7. Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for
Archeology and Historic Preservation
1. Transportation Enhancement Requirements
Transportation enhancement activities must meet three basic criteria, based on
instruction from the Federal Highway Administration:
a. Enhancement activities are over and above normal transportation
projects. Typically, a normal transportation project includes mitigation,
standard landscaping, other permit requirements and provisions
negotiated as a condition of obtaining a permit for a transportation
project for a normal [non-enhancement] transportation project.
b. Projects must have a direct relationship to the intermodal
transportation system, which consists of all forms of transportation in a
unified, interconnected manner. This relationship may be one of
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 9
Caltrans Section A
Guideines•Draft Proposed
November 24, 1992
c. All proposed activities must be consistent with local land use plans.
Proof of consistency, where the local land use plans do not provide a
sufficient level of detail, is acceptable.
d. In Transportation Management Areas (generally, all urbanized areas
over 200,000 population) Federal funds may not be programmed for
any highway project that will result in a significant increase in carrying
capacity for single occupant vehicles unless the project is part of an
approved congestion management system. (In the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) region, all projects, if programmed,
will be required to comply with MTC Resolution No. 2270.)
3. Financial Requirements
a. The sponsor must have the ability to meet financial processing
requirements within a realistic time frame for project completion, level
Of funding, and experience of project personnel.
b. The proposed project must have reasonable cost estimates and be
supported by an adequate financial plan. Adequate financial plans
include the identification of all sources of funding to build the project, a
logical cash flow given that these are reimbursable funds, and sensible
project phasing. All facilities that require an ongoing operating budget
to bE; useful must demonstrate that such financial capability exists as
part of this requirement.
c. As required by the Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans, all
local contributions to the activity must be affirmed by a formal action of
a policy board with the authority to commit funds. Such a formal action
must have occurred prior to the inclusion of a project in the adopted
Stall: Transportation Improvement Prodram.
d. Project sponsors must demonstrate the ability and commitment to
maintain the transportation enhancement activity. (Title 23, U.S. Code)
4. Project-Specific Requirements
a. The proposed activities must have a completed nomination form,
including all attachments, and should be submitted in accordance with
established deadlines.
b. The 1proposed activities must be well-defined. They must have clear
project limits, intended scope of work and project concept.
c. The proposed activities must be well-justified. Wherever possible, this
justification should include the results of quantitative analysis.
Adequate information must be submitted so that evaluation can be
made of what the activities will accomplish.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 11
Cattrans Section A
Gukkb..or.n Prod
November 24, 1992
EVALUATIOI4 FOR RANKING
Each project nomination can receive a maximum of 100 points: up to 60 points in
general scoring and up to 40 points in activity-specific scoring. In addition, 5
bonus points are available. In the general scoring process, all nominations are
scored by the same point system. For the specific-activity scoring, the 10
transportation enhancement activity categories are grouped into four divisions of
commonality, then a proposal is scored within the applicable divisions. The 10
categories are grouped only for this purpose.
These are the scoring values for the general merit criteria, and the possible
points in each area:
1. Regional and Community Enhancement 50 points
2. Cost Effectiveness/Reasonable Cost 10 points
Total Possible General Score 60 points
These are the activity-specific divisions and the possible points in each area. A
project can score in only one of the specific divisions.
1. Bicycle, Pedestrian, Abandoned Rail Right-of-Way 40 points
2. Historic/Archaeological 40 points
3. Transportation Aesthetics and Scenic Values 40 points
4. Water Pollution Due to Highway Runoff 40 points
Total Possible Specific Score (1 Division only) 40 points
These are the bonus points available for any project:.
1. Ones-time Opportunity 5 points
General ScorEt
EACH NOMINATION WILL BE EVALUATED ON THE FOLLOWING GENERAL
CRITERIA:
1. Regional and Community Enhancement (50 points)
The project score in this area is derived from the project's primary effects -- its
intent and purpose -- on the following elements.
a. Increases access to activity 0-10 points
centers, connects
transportation modes/
multimodal aspects,
reinforces, fills deficiency,
and/or complements the
regional transportation
system.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 13
Caftrans Section A
Guid"nesDraR Proposed
November 25, 1992
High projected use for project or low supply of existing facilities,
establishes a link in a larger system, provides space for a new facility
senfing the system:
High 10 - 20 points
Medium 5 - 10 points
Low 0 - 5 points
Incorporates facilities for both bicyclists and pedestrians:
High 10 - 20 points
Medium 5 - 10 points
Low 0 - 5 points
2. Historic/,Archaeological Specific Division (40 points)
Category 2 - Acquisition of historic sites
Category, 3 - Historic highway programs
Category 5 - Historic preservation
Category 6 - Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation
buildings, structures or facilities (including historic railroad
facilities and canals)
Category 9 - Archaeological planning and research
Current recognized level of historic significance (federal, state, or
local):
High 10 - 20 points
Medium 5 - 10 points
Low 0 - 5 points
Degree project activity will enhance, preserve, or protect the
historic/archaeological resource:
High 10 - 20 points
Medium 5 - 10 points
Low 0 - 5 points
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 15
Caltrans Section A
GUIdWrAwDrett Proposed
November 24, 1992
XI. NOMINATION PROCESS
Nominations will be submitted to the Regional Transportation Planning Agencies
ilist attached in Section D) for screening and ranking, and inclusion in the
Regional Transportation Improvement Programs (RTIPs). All eligible activities
will be submitted to the California Transportation Commission. Eligible activities
not programmed in the RTIPs will be submitted in a prioritized list of other
remaining activities. The RTIPs go to the Commission for statewide
programming and funding. The initial cycle of project nominations will be in
spring 1993. Thereafter, transportation enhancement activities will be
programmed every two years, beginning with the 1994 STIP cycle. (See
Availability of Transportation Enhancement Funds Chart.)
A. Due Dates: (March 10 1993 - Accelerated first phase (deliverable)
ro. wa, and August 1. 1993 - Projects for 1994 STIP cycle)
B. A complete nomination package consists of:
1. Completed nomination form
2. Resolution from governing body
3. Completed transportation enhancement activity proposal
4. Indication of amount and source of matching funds
5. Completed budget statement
6. NEPA/CEQA documentation
7. Activity location map
8. Photographs of site and resources
9. Evidence of land tenure (development project)
10. Cost estimate and site plan (development project)
11. Acquisition schedule (acquisition project)
12. Acquisition map showing exterior boundaries and parcel numbers
(acquisition project)
13. Permits (if applicable).
C. Contact Persons: Please contact your RTPA for further information.
(See Section D.)
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 17
Caltrans Section A
QuWOnesDraft Propoxd
November 24, 1992
SECTION B
DEFINITION OF TERMS
This glossary provides definitions for the major terms used in the program. Although its contents
are explained in a variety of other Caltrans documents, this document constitutes a convenient
reference, since it brings them together in one place.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) - Public Law 101-336
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a comprehensive law prohibiting discrimination
against people with disabilities in employment, public transportation,telecommunications and
public accommodations. It extends to persons with disabilities similar comprehensive civil rights
protections provided to persons on the basis of race, sex, national origin and religion under the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. In regard to physical accessibility, ADA extends the intent of the
Architectural Barriers Act to cover all public facilities regardless of federal funding.
Apportionment -Apportionments are typically available for four years. At the end of four years,
apportionments Lapse and the Federal Highway Administration takes back the lapsed
apportionments. Lapsing apportionments in California has not been a problem.
California Environmental Quality Act- To qualify for Federal funds, local agency projects must be
developed according to the procedures specified by the National Environmental Policy Act.
Projects also must comply with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
which are somewhat different than the Federal law.
California Register of Historical Resources-Authoritative inventory guide of important historical
resources in California, used to identify the state's historical resources and to indicate what
properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible,from substantial adverse
change.
Commission - Ca1fornia Transportation Commission -A commission which advises and assists
the Secretary of Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency and the Legislature in formulating
and evaluating state policies and plans for transportation programs in the state.
FTIP - Federal Transportation Improvement Program-A document listing of those improvement
projects from the transportation plan to be federally funded.
Fund Estimate -An estimate of all federal and state funds reasonably expected to be available to
each region for transportation purposes during the next ten (10)years.
Intermodal- all forms of transportation in a unified, interconnected manner.
Mode -A single method of transportation, such as bicycle, pedestrian, or motorized vehicle.
National Environmental Policy Act-The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires
environmental clearance of Federal-aid projects, which may take one of three forms: Categorical
Exclusion; Finding of No Significant Impact; or Environmental Impact Statement.
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966-As amended,this Act declares that the spirit and
direction of the nation are founded upon and reflected in its historic heritage and that the historical
and cultural foundaitons of the nation should be preserved as a living part of our community life
and development in order to give a sense of orientation to the American people. The Act further
declares it shall bei the policy of the federal government to provide leadership in the preservation
of the prehistoric and historic resources of the United States and of the international community of
nations and in the administration of national preservation program in partnership with states,
Indian tribes, Native Hawaiians, and local governments.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 1
Caltrans Section B
GuideMnesDralt Proposed
November 25, 1992
SECTION C
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1. What are lthe Transportation Enhancement Activities?
New definition of 10 categories of activities in Title 23, U.S. Highway Code.
Emphasis on people, aesthetics, historical and cultural aspects.
2. How much money could be made available for Transportation
Enhancement Activities?.
Over$200 million in Federal dollars to California over 6 years.
10%of Surface Transportation Program (STP).
Funds may only be spent on transportation enhancement activities.
Match: Approximately 88 Federal dollars to 12 state/local dollars.
3. What are the project characteristics?
Must fit into one or more of the 10 categories.
Above and beyond normal program. (No project mitigation or standard landscaping.)
Direct relationship to intermodal transportation system.
Can be stand-alone projects or part of other transportation projects.
4. What is planned process for funding a project?
Transportation enhancement activity is sponsored by a public agency starting spring 1993:
Projects are screened and ranked by Regional Transportation Planning Agencies(RTPA) in
spring, summer and fall 1993.
Eligible activities are forwarded to the California Transportation Commission (Commission)
in the, Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)by December 1993.
The Commission decides which activities will be programmed through amendment to the
1992 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), and regular programming
into the 1994 STIP.
5. What steps can private organizations take to have their project funded?
Get on mailing list to receive preliminary guidelines iri November 1992.
(Contact Edward N. Kress, Program Manager, Caltrans'Transportation Facilities
Enhancement Office 1120 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, FAX: (916) 654-3770)
Attend symposium in January to get more information about program
Contact local agency to obtain project sponsorship.
Contact RTPA,to get its timeline for submittal of project. (See implementation timeline in
guidelines).
(See Ouesi ion 9.)
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 1
Caltrans Section C
GuldelnesDreM Proposed
November 24, 1992'
9. We have an idea for a project...
Where do we start?
RTPA
Talk to your Regional
Transportation Planning
Agency about sponsorship. Complete
Nomination
Is the Transportation �nau�� ackage
Enhancement Activity Nom e
site-specific or Pacca9
within one region?
Could the project be ready
� ® b October 1 1
�> � y Ober 1, 1995.
•If yes,the deadline Is
= March 10, 1993.
PROJECT 0 If not; the deadline Is
IDEA August 1, 1993
Is It a statewide Transportation (may vary by region)
Enhancement Activity or
one that crosses regional
boundaries?
Talk to your
Caltrsns Distdtct
,sbout sponsorship.
Private organizations
negotiate sponsorship.
Lists and maps of Regional Transportation Planning Agencies and Caltrans Districts are in Appendix D
Page 3
Section C
SECTION D
CONTACT PEOPLE
CALTRANS DISTRICTS
DISTRICT 1
Rick Knapp
1656 Union Street
Eureka, CA 95501
(P. O. Box 3700) 95502
(707)445-6413 DISTRICT 7
Lew Bedolla
DISTRICT 2 120 South Spring Street
Bob Buckley Los Angeles, CA 90012
1657 Riverside Drive (213)897-0362
Redding, CA 96001
(P. O. Box 494040) 96049-4040 DISTRICT 8
(916)225-3280 Louise Givens
247 West Third Street
DISTRICT 3 San Bernardino, CA 92401
Jeff Loudon (P. O. Box 231) 92402
703 B Street (714)383-6320
Marysville, CA 95901
(P. O. Box 911) DISTRICT 9
(916)741-4598 Ken DeBoy
500 South Main Street
DISTRICT 4 Bishop, CA 93514
Dottie Odell (619)872-0604
111 Grand Avenue
Oakland, CA 94612 DISTRICT 10
(P. O. Box 23660) 94623-0660 Don MacVicar
(510)286-5898 1976 East Charter Way
Stockton, CA 95205
DISTRICT 5 (P. O. Box 2048) 95201
Gerald Laumer (209)948-7975
50 Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 DISTRICT 11
(P. O. Box 8114) 93403-8114 Jeff Funk
(805)549-3161 2829 Juan Street
San Diego, CA 92110
DISTRICT 6 (P. O. Box 85406) 92186-5406
Lynn Riley (619)688-6784
1352 West Olive Avenue
Fresno, CA 93728 DISTRICT 12
(P. O. Box 12616) 93778-2616 Sandy Ankhasirisan
(209)488-4358 2501 Pullman Street
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 1
Caltrans Section D
Guidelines -Draft Proposed
November 25, 1992
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCIES
ALPINE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Alpine
P.O. Box 158 (916) 694-2255
Markleeville, CA 96120 FAX: (916) 694-2214
Mr. Leonard Turnbeaugh, Executive Secretary
AMADOR COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Amador
108 Court Street (209) 223-6429
Jackson, CA 95642 FAX: (209) 223-6430
Mr. Gary Caldwell, Executive Director
BUTTE COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Bye
#7 County Center Drive (916) 538-7601
Oroville, CA 95965 FAX: (916) 538-2140
Ms. Bettye Kircher, Executive Secretary
CALAVERAS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Calaveras
Department of Public Works (209) 754-6402
Government Center FAX: (209) 754-6566
891 Mountain Ranch Rd.
San Andreas, CA 95249
Mr. Ted Pedersen, Executive Director
COLUSA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Colusa
1215 Market Street (916) 458-5186
Colusa, CA 95932 FAX: (916)458-2035
Mr. Russell Gum, Executive Director
DEL NORTE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Del Norte
983 Third Street, Suite E (707) 465-3878
Crescent City, CA 95531 FAX: None
Ms. Kathryn Mathews, Transportation Coordinator
EL DORADO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION El Dorado(excluding
2441 Headington Rd. the Tahoe Basin)
Placerville, CA 95667 (916) 621-5983
Mr. W. Don Farrimond, Executive Director FAX: (916) 626-0387
COUNCIL OF FRESNO COUNTY OF GOVERNMENTS Fresno
2100 Tulare Street, Suite 619 (209) 233-4148
Fresno, CA 93721 FAX: (209) 233-9645
Mr. William Briam, Executive Director
GLENN COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Glenn
777 North Colusa Street (916) 934-6530
Willows, CA 95988 FAX: (916) 934-6533
Mr. John Joyce, Executive Director
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 3
Caltrans Section D
Guidelines -Draft Proposed
November 25, 1992
MODOC COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Modoc
202 West 4th Street (916) 233-3939
Alturas, CA 96101 Extension 411
Mr. Mike MacDonald, Acting Executive Secretary FAX: (916) 233-3132
MONO COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Mono
P.O. Box 8 (619) 932-5217
Bridgeport, CA 93517 FAX: (619) 932-7145
Mr. Scott Burns, Executive Director
TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY' Monterey
312 E. Alisal Street (408) 755-4800
Salinas, CA 93901 FAX: (408) 755-4957
Mr. Gerald J. Gromko, Executive Director
MERCED COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF Merced
GOVERNMENTS (209) 723-3153
1770 M Street FAX: (209) 723-0322
Merced, CA 95340
Mr. Jesse Brown, Executive Director
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) Alameda, Contra Costa,
Metro Center Marin, Napa, San Francisco
101 8th Street San Mateo, Santa Clara,
Oakland, CA 94607 Solano and Sonoma
Mr. Lawrence D. Dahms, Executive Director (510) 464-7700
FAX: (510) 464-7848
ASSOCIATION OF MONTEREY BAY AREA OF GOVERNMENTS Santa Cruz,
445 Reservation Road, Suite G Monterey
P.O. Box 838 (408) 883-3750
Marina, CA 93833-0838 FAX: (408) 883-3755
Mr. Nicolas Papadakis, Executive Director
SACRAMENTO AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Sacramento, Sutter,
3000 S Street, Suite 300 Yolo and Yuba.
Sacramento, CA 95816 Cities of Rocklin, Roseville,
Mr. Mike Hoffacker, Executive Director Lincoln and Loomis
(916) 457-2264
FAX: (916) 457-3299
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS San Diego
First Interstate Plaza (619) 595-5300
401 B Street, Suite 800 FAX: (619) 595-5305
San Diego, CA 92101
Mr. Kenneth E. Sulzer, Executive Director
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS San Joaquin
102 S. San Joaquin Street (209) 468-3913
Stockton, CA 95202 FAX: (209)468-3330
Mr. Barton R. Meays, Executive Director
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 5
Caltrans Section D
Guidelines-Draft Proposed
November 25, 1992
PLUMAS COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Plumas
1834 E. Main Street (916) 283-6268
Quincy, CA 95971 FAX: (916) 283-6323
Mr. Don Humbird, Executive Director
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (714) 787-7141
3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 FAX: (714) 787-7920
Riverside, CA 92501
Mr. Jack Reagan, Executive Director
SAN BENITO COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS San Benito
3220 Southside Road (408) 637-3725
Hollister, CA 95023 FAX: (408) 636-8746
Mr. Max Bridges, Executive Director
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION San Bernardino
c/o San Bernardino Associated Governments (714) 884-8276
472 North Arrowhead Avenue FAX: (714) 885-4407
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Mr. Wesley C. McDaniel, Executive Director
SAN LUIS OBISPO AREA COORDINATING COUNCIL San Luis Obispo
County Government Center (805) 549-5714
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 FAX: (805) 546-1242
Mr. Ronald L. DeCarli, Executive Director
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL Santa Cruz
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION' (408) 425-2779
701 Ocean Street, Room 220 FAX: (408) 458-7075
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-4071
Ms. Linda Wilshusen, Executive Director
SIERRA COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Sierra
P.O. Box 98 (916) 289-3201
Downieville, CA 95936 FAX: (916) 289-3620
Mr. Tim H. Beals, Executive Director/Chairman
SISKIYOU COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Siskiyou
County Public Works Building (916) 842-8250
305 Butte Street FAX: (916) 842-8288
Yreka, CA 96097
Mr. D. A. Gravenkamp, Executive Director
TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY El Dorado, Placer-
P.O. Box 1038 Douglas, Washoe,
Zephyr Cove, NV 89448-1038 Carson City- Nevada
Mr. David S. Ziegler, Executive Director (702) 588-4547
FAX: (702) 588-4527
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office page 7
Caltrans Section D
Guidelines -Draft Proposed
November 25, 1992
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCY
BOUNDARIES
O ■ E O O .
oei
TC� LTC
LTC THE 43 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
AGENCIES (RTPA)
LTC LTC
LTC
COG : •-_- :•
- .
i.... �• SACRAMENTO AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
............... LTC
LTC
...o«■.° �... COG
COG r' LTC
COG'�LTC LTC "TAHOE
REGIONAL
'\ PLANNING
"C •� EL=_00 .`^y,AGENCY —LEGEND—
LTC
ro"o...` ,.,... -'• -t,,�. LTC
STATUTORILY CREATED
RTPA'S (2)
METROPOLITAN "' a��" �' COG LTC- LOCAL TRANSPORTATION
w".., ra.o
TRANSPORTATION con• COG ; LTC f COMMISSION
COMMISSION !••••••o■�= --'
..•.ol. COG - COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
COG, LTC," ........_.
s+. .a■cao LTC:
COG
*LTC
OG COG LTC
�;-LTC COG
COG
y.■lU.l of.s o •■••
COG �` COG
� v.aa■..•■o.c
- SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
L..•..•.... ASSOCIATION OF
COG GOVERNMENTS
(COGS)
,_,_Las
.....�-•----•------- _ �.....-
1- i-
' ■wa■s"
ow...aa
*SANTA CRUZ AND MONTEREY LTC'S OPERATE IN
COOPERATION WITH AMBAG(ASSOCIATION OF
MONTEREY SAY AREA GOVERNMENTS)THE yw moo .n�••
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW AND COORDINATION AGENCY. COG
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 9
Section D
Caltrans
Guidelines -Draft Proposed
November 25, 1992
SECTION E
TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES
GUIDE TO PROJECT ELIGIBILITY
What makes a project eligible?
Requests for eligibility must meet the Guidelines and will be cleared by the Regional
Transportation Planning Agency or Caltrans' Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office on a
case-by-case basis before submittal to Federal Highway Administration.
Transportation enhancement activities must meet three basic criteria, based on instruction from
the Federal Highway Administration:
Enhancement activities are over and above normal projects. Typically, a normal project includes
mitigation, permits and landscaping required to complete a project and move it ahead. These will
not be eligible for Enhancement funding.
Routine, customary or required elements of transportation projects or those provided to mitigate
project impacts in compliance with existing environmental, historic preservation and public health
and safety regulations are not eligible for funding from the 10% set-aside for enhancements.
Projects must have a direct relationship to the intermodal transportation system, which consists
of all forms of transportation in a unified, interconnected manner. This relationship may be one of
function, proximity, or impact. For example, a bikeway is a functional component of the
intermodal transportation system. Removal of outdoor advertising in the viewshed of a highway is
justified in light of its proximity. Retrofitting an existing highway by creating a wetland to filter
runoff from the highway would qualify based on the impact of the highway in terms of water
pollution.
Projects must fit one or more of the ten activities categories.
The ten categories and typical activities are:
1. Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles.
This category provides an opportunity to create linkages in the existing transportation system by
funding non-motorized modes of travel. The bicycle and pedestrian modes connect people to
activity centers, such as businesses, schools, and shopping areas, and to other modes.
Projects accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians beyond or in addition to what is necessary for
safe accommodation. This includes activities that enhance the transportation system through
more aesthetic routing or design or improving existing facilities to make them more usable for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Purpose of the project must be primarily for transportation, rather than
for recreation.
Activities are not eligible where they are conducted as an incidental and routine part of new
transportation projects in order to accommodate routine use by pedestrians and bicycles. Paved
shoulder, wide curb lanes, sidewalks, and curb cuts are not eligible if incidental and routine to
road construction or reconstruction, however bicycle lanes are eligible.
Projects to retrofit existing facilities solely for conformance to accessibility standards in the
California Building Code do not qualify.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 1
CaRrans Section E
io cetegorin Described
November 25, 1992
4. Landscaping and other scenic beautification.
This category includes landscape planning, design and construction activities which enhance the
aesthetic or ecological resources along transportation corridors, points of access, and lands
qualifying for other categories of transportation enhancement activities.
Architectural treatment, applied or integrated, of transportation structures, including bridges and
highways beyond Caltrans' utilitarian design may be considered an enhancement activity, as long
as it is beyond mitigation required in an environmental document. The primary purpose must be
to enhance the scenic view.
Projects which enhance the aesthetic resources or beauty of the transportation system may
include planning, design and construction of scenic vistas and overlooks, and restoration of
historic landscapes. Projects which enhance the ecological balance along a transportation
corridor include planning, testing and planting for restoration or reintroduction of native plant
communities and appropriate adaptive species, and the provision of interpretive information about
the federal and state agency programs through which ecological resources are preserved.
Projects on the National Highway System must be consistent with Caltrans'overall landscape
enhancement program and policies, and will be approved by the District Landscape Architect.
Projects may not be for routine, incidental or maintenance activities such as grass cutting, tree
pruning or removal, erosion control, screen planting, construction of noise barriers, drainage
improvement and post-construction finish work such as replanting and reseeding.
EXAMPLE OF PROJECTS: 'Gateway' plantings to communities. Landscaping transplants to
move trees outside of clear zones and into more attractive, safer locations. Retrofitting existing
noise barriers with landscaping. Replacement of a utilitarian bridge with one of appropriate
architectural qualities in a setting which calls for more than a utilitarian design. Roadside
Ecological Viewing Areas. Development of visually sensitive bridge rails, which meet Caltrans
and FHWA safety requirements.
5. Historic preservation.
Cultural properties listed in the California Register of Historical Resources are eligible for
Transportation Enhancement Activity funding. Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources
Code defines the California Register as an authoritative guide in California to be used by state
and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state's historical resources. The
Califomia Register includes properties determined eligible for or listed on the National Register of
Historic Places, California State Historical Landmarks, and State Points of Historical Interest
programs. In addition, the California Register includes locally designated historic and prehistoric
resources as well as local survey inventories using the National Register standards.
All work must be done in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines
for Archeology and Historic Preservation, or Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic
Preservation Protects, and must be managed under the direction of professionals meeting the
standards published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR, Part 61. The qualifications
define minimum education and experience required to perform eligible historic preservation
activities. In some cases, additional areas or levels of expertise may be needed depending on
the complexity of the task and the nature of the historic properties involved.
In some circumstances, the cultural and sacred values of a Native American or other ethnic
community site may require the inclusion of additional viewpoints. Proposals referring to such
sites must be accompanied by evidence that appropriate Native American and ethnic community
representatives have been consulted.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Off ice Page 3
Caltrans Section E
10 cmeWa.oexrbea
November 24, 1992
8. Control and removal of outdoor advertising.
Includes the control and removal of existing nonconforming outdoor advertising signs, displays
and devices in addition to removal of illegal signs required to exercise effective control of outdoor
advertising under Section 131 of Title 23. Priority shall be given to the removal of outdoor
advertising signs, displays and devices in conjunction with other enhancement activities, and with
nonconforming displays along scenic highways. This category may include compilation of an
accurate inventory of nonconforming outdoor advertising displays.
EXAMPLE OF PROJECTS: Removal of nonconforming billboards on scenic highways.
9. Archaeological planning and research.
This includes, but is not limited to, research on sites qualified for transportation enhancement
funds; experimental activities in archaeological site preservation and interpretation; planning to
improve identification, evaluation and treatment of archaeological sites; problem-oriented
synthesis using data derived from (though not limited to)transportation-related archaeological
activities, local and regional research designs to guide future surveys, data recovery and
synthetic research, and activities having similar purposes carried out in partnership with other
federal, state, local and tribal government agencies and non-governmental organizations.
All work must be done in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines
for Archeology and Historic Preservation or Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic
Preservation Projects and must be managed under the direction of professionals meeting the
standards published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR, Part 61. The qualifications
define minimum education and experience required to perform eligible historic preservation
activities. In some cases, additional areas or levels of expertise may be needed depending on
the complexity of the task and the nature of the historic properties involved.
In some circumstances, the cultural and sacred values of a Native American or other ethnic
community site may require the inclusion of additional viewpoints. Proposals referring to such
sites must be accompanied by evidence that appropriate Native American and ethnic community
representatives have been consulted.
This category is not for excavations.
EXAMPLE OF PROJECTS: Regional or statewide research. Statewide or regional
archaeological study for State Routes in archaeologically sensitive areas, developing an
Archaeological Inventory similar to the existing Bridge Inventory. Upgrade or expansion of
regional curation facilities to meet federal and state guidelines, in order to regionalize
archaeological collections and facilitate regional archaeological research.
10. Mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff.
Projects are for facilities and programs reducing or eliminating pollution from storm water run-off
from highway facilities in addition to current requirements and procedures for such mitigation.
Projects that demonstrate aesthetic and ecological methods for mitigation and that enhance
recharge are encouraged.
Projects may have groundwater recharge, multiple resource benefits, and aesthetic preservation
components, but only when secondary to the purpose of mitigating water pollution due to highway
runoff.
EXAMPLE OF PROJECTS: Water pollution control alongside an existing highway to protect or
improve a drinking water supply.
Transportation Facilities Enhancement Office Page 5
Caltrans Section E
10 caleWws oescdbed
November 24, 1992
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA)
Transportation Enhancement Activities
SYMPOSIUM
a �
.................:: ..
> . ..
Find answers to your questions -
What are Transportation Enhancement Activities? Where do we
start? How are projects selected? Who should we contact for help?
DATES: TIMES: LOCATION:
January 7, 1993 1:30 p.m. -3:30 p.m. Los Angeles
Thursday or The Junipero Serra Bldg. (The State Building)
7:00 p.m. -9:00 p.m. 107 S. Broadway, Room 1138
Los Angeles CA 90012
January 12, 1993 1:30 p.m. -3:30 p.m. Sacramento
Tuesday Employment Development Dept., Room 1098
722 Capitol Mall, Sacramento CA 95814
January 14, 1993 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Oakland
Thursday Caltrans District 4 Auditorium
111 Grand Avenue, Oakland CA 94623
AGENDA: EXPERT PANEL TOPICS:
Welcome/introductions 15 minutes Transportation Enhancement Activities
Explanation of workshop 10 minutes Historic Preservation
Mufti-media presentation 15 minutes Bicycle/Pedestrian
Expert Panel Presentations 20 minutes Scenic Highways
Question/Answer Period 1 hour Water Pollution Relief
meeting adjourned after 2 hours Federal Aid Dollars
Funding and Approval Process
For more information, write Darold Heikens, Caltrans ,1120 °N" Street,
Room 5306, Sacramento CA 95814 or fax# (916) 654-3770
Symposium invitation