shall have a qualified Designated biologist, pre-approved by CDFW, perform a survey for burrowing owls between 30 and 60 days prior to any Project impacts. If the Project site is in within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Burrowing Owl Survey Area, the following is required. A minimum of one site visit must occur, but additional visits may be warranted depending on the results of the first site visit. Surveys conducted during the breeding season March 1 - August 31 are required to describe if, when, and how the site is used by burrowing owls. All surveys shall be conducted as described in Parts A and B below. Surveys shall be conducted during weather that is conducive to observing owls outside their burrows and detecting burrowing owl sign. Surveys will not be accepted if they are conducted during rain, high winds (> 20 mph), dense fog, or temperatures over 90 °F. Part B surveys shall be conducted in the morning one hour before sunrise to two hours after sunrise or in the early evening two hours before sunset to one hour after sunset. Count and map all burrowing owl sightings, occupied burrows, and burrows with owl sign. Record the location of all owls including numbers of pairs and juveniles and any behavior such as courtship and mating. Map the extent of all suitable habitat. Owl signs may not be detectable if surveys under Part A are conducted within 5 days following rain. Absence of burrowing owl sign cannot be used to confirm absence of the species if the focused burrow survey (Part A) is conducted within 5 days of rain; therefore, in this instance, completion of all four focused burrowing owl surveys (Part B) is required.
Part A: Focused Burrow Surveys
A focused burrow survey that includes natural burrows or suitable manmade structures needs to be conducted as described below.
1. A systematic survey for burrows including burrowing owl sign shall be conducted by walking through suitable habitat over the entire survey area (i.e., the Project site and within 150 meters).
Pedestrian survey transects need to be spaced to allow 100% visual coverage of the ground surface. The distance between transect center lines should be no more than 30 meters
(approximately 100 ft.) and should be reduced to account for differences in terrain, vegetation density, and ground surface visibility. To efficiently survey Projects larger than 100 acres, it is recommended that two or more qualified surveyors conduct concurrent surveys.
2. The location of all suitable burrowing owl habitat, potential owl burrows, burrowing owl signs, and any owls observed shall be recorded and mapped, including GPS coordinates. If the survey area contains natural or man-made structures that could 229
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
potentially support burrowing owls, or owls are observed during the burrow surveys, the systematic surveys shall continue as described in Part B. If no potential burrows are detected, no further surveys are required. A written report including photographs of the Project site, location of burrowing owl habitat surveyed, location of transects, and burrow survey methods shall be prepared and submitted to CDFW.
Part B: Focused Burrowing Owl Surveys
Focused Burrowing Owl Surveys shall consist of site visits on four separate days at least one week apart. The first one may be conducted concurrent with the Focused Burrow Survey.
1. Upon arrival at the survey area and prior to initiating the walking surveys, surveyors using binoculars or spotting scopes shall scan all suitable habitat, location of mapped burrows, owl sign, and owls, including perch locations to ascertain owl presence. This is particularly important if access has not been granted for adjacent areas with suitable habitat.
2. A survey for owls and owl sign shall then be conducted by walking through suitable habitat over the entire Project site and within the adjacent 150 m (approx. 500 feet), if permission to access the buffer area has been obtained. These “pedestrian surveys” should be spaced to allow 100% visual coverage of the ground surface.
The distance between transect center lines should be no more than 30 meters (approx. 100 feet.) and should be reduced to account for differences in terrain, vegetation density, and ground surface visibility. To efficiently survey projects larger than 100 acres, it is recommended that two or more qualified surveyors conduct concurrent surveys. It is important to minimize disturbance near occupied burrows during all seasons.
3. If access is not obtained, then the area adjacent to the Project site shall also be surveyed using binoculars or spotting scopes to determine if owls are present in areas adjacent to Project site.
This 150-meter buffer zone is included to fully characterize the population. If the site is determined not to be occupied, no further surveys are required except as described below.
2.12.2 Burrowing Owl Focused Survey Results. Permittee shall submit the survey methodology and results within ten days of survey completion and at least twenty-one days prior to commencement of Project activities addressed by this Agreement to CDFW Inland Deserts Region at the address below under Contact Information. Results shall discuss the survey methodology, transect width, duration, conditions, and results 230
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
of the survey. Appropriate maps showing burrow locations shall be included. If the report indicates further surveys are not required, then the report should state the reason(s) why further focused burrowing owl surveys are not necessary.
2.12.3 Burrowing Owl Pre-Construction Inspection. If burrows or suitable burrowing owl habitat is found onsite, Permittee shall have a qualified biologist, pre-approved by CDFW, inspect all burrows that exhibit typical characteristics of owl activity within three (3) days prior to any ground disturbing or site-preparation activities. Evidence of owl activity may include presence of owls themselves, burrows, and owl signs at burrow entrances such as pellets, whitewash or other “ornamentation,” feathers, prey remains, etc. If owl presence is difficult to determine, Permittee shall monitor the burrows with motion-activated trail cameras for at least 24 hours to evaluate burrow occupancy. If it is evident that the burrows are actively being used, Permittee shall not commence activities until no sign is present that the burrows are being used by adult or juvenile owls or following CDFW approval of a Burrowing Owl Plan. CDFW shall be notified in writing of detection of active burrows within three (3) days.
2.12.4 Burrowing Owls Observed During Construction. If burrowing owls are observed within Project Site(s) during Project implementation and construction, Permittee shall notify CDFW immediately in writing at the address below under Contact Information (reference SAA# EPIMS-RIV54902-R6). Further, Permittee shall be responsible for implementing appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures, including burrow avoidance, passive or active relocation, or other appropriate mitigation measures as identified in the Burrowing Owl Plan.
2.12.5 Burrowing Owl Plan. If burrowing owls are detected on the Project site, the Permittee shall prepare a Burrowing Owl Plan that shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval at least 30 days prior to initiation of Project activities. If burrowing owls are detected after Project activities have been initiated, a Burrowing Owl Plan shall be submitted to CDFW for review and approval within two weeks of detection and no Project activity shall continue within 1000 feet of the burrowing owls until CDFW approves the Burrowing Owl Plan. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall describe proposed avoidance, relocation, monitoring, minimization, and/or mitigation actions. If the site is within an MSHCP Criteria Area, then at least 90 percent of the area with long-term conservation value shall be included in the MSHCP Conservation Area. If the Project site (including adjacent areas) supports three or more pairs of burrowing owls and supports greater than 35 acres of suitable habitat and is noncontiguous with MSHCP Conservation Area lands, at least 90 percent of the area with long-term conservation value and burrowing owl pairs shall be conserved onsite. The Burrowing Owl Plan shall include the number 231
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
and location of occupied burrow sites and details on proposed buffers if avoiding the burrowing owls or information on the adjacent or nearby suitable habitat available to owls for relocation. If no suitable habitat is available nearby for relocation, details regarding the creation and funding of artificial burrows (numbers, location, and type of burrows) and management activities for relocated owls shall also be included in the Burrowing Owl Plan. The Permittee shall implement the Burrowing Owl Plan following CDFW review and approval.
Crotch’s Bumble Bee
2.13 Crotch’s Bumble Bee – Habitat Mapping. No less than 120 days prior to the initiation of activities addressed by this Agreement, Permittee shall complete and submit to CDFW for review and comment a baseline habitat mapping report encompassing Fish and Game Code section 1602 resources (including channel side slopes) identified under this Agreement. Mapping will identify habitat alliances following Sawyer et al. (2009[1]) and the report will identify species composition for each mapped alliance. Results of the habitat mapping effort shall be submitted to CDFW.
2.14 Crotch’s Bumble Bee – Surveys. If the habitat mapping addressed by this agreement identifies the presence of plants (e.g., genera Antirrhinum, Phacelia, Clarkia, Cordylanthus, Dendromecon, Eschscholzia, Eriogonum, Hypericum, Lantana, Lupinus, Salvia, Asclepias, Cirsium, Monardella, Keckiella, Acmispon, Euthamia, Ehrendorferia, Vicia, and/or Trichostema) or other suitable habitat (i.e. nesting, foraging, and overwintering habitat), Permittee shall:
2.14.1 Retain an appropriately qualified biologist to prepare a draft survey plan, and conduct surveys for Crotch’s bumble bee. The name and qualifications of the proposed biologist shall be submitted to CDFW for review and comment prior to preparation of the draft survey plan or commencement of surveys. The qualifications shall clearly identify direct experience conducting surveys for and identification of Crotch’s bumble bee.
2.14.2 No Less than 90 days prior to initiation of Project activities within suitable habitat addressed by this Agreement, the qualified biologist shall prepare and submit to CDFW for review and comment a draft survey plan for Crotch’s bumble bee. Survey methodology shall generally follow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocol for the Rusty Patched bumble bee (USFWS 2019[2]). Crotch’s bumble bee are typically active between March and September, with peak activity coinciding with peak forage blooming periods. CDFW recommends the completion of multiple surveys, coinciding with the peak blooming periods of the plant genera as listed above. The survey plan will identify the timing, number, and duration of survey efforts, and procedures to follow should Crotch’s bumble bee be 232
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
detected within the Project area. The survey plan shall be submitted to CDFW.
2.14.3 The qualified biologist shall complete surveys for Crotch’s bumble bee, following the CDFW-reviewed survey plan. Following completion of surveys, and no less than 30 days prior to initiation of Project activities within suitable habitat addressed by this Agreement, survey results shall be submitted to CDFW for review and comment.
Survey results will describe the number and timing of surveys, and results of survey efforts. If Crotch’s bumble bee are detected during surveys, Project activities shall NOT occur in any occupied habitat areas and the qualified biologist shall immediately notify CDFW via the email addresses and phone number listed below under Contact Information.
Focused surveys conducted within the year of signing this Agreement shall be valid until January 31 of the following year. Delay of ground disturbance following after January 31 shall result in the Permittee resurveying the area for CBB.
2.14.4 Permittee shall conduct flight/forage and nest search surveys for the species in the following manner:
2.14.4.1 Surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate season, between February 1 and October 31.
2.14.4.2 Work sites containing any one or more of the following habitat requisites shall be surveyed: flowering vegetation, any potential preferred nectar plants, small mammal burrows, bunch grasses, thatch, brush piles, old bird nests, dead trees.
2.14.4.3 During the flight survey effort, if bumble bees are observed using any animal burrow entrances, the approved qualified biologist will block/cover any burrow entrance with a
sandbag/jar/vial (or similar) of appropriate size and return in 30 minutes to determine if the bees are potential Crotch’s bumble bee and if a potential nest could be present. If bumble bees are observed using bunch grasses, thatched annual grasses, brush piles, old bird nests, dead trees, or hollowed logs, the resource area will be flagged and monitored by the approved qualified biologist for 15 minutes to determine if a potential nest could be present.
2.14.5 To reduce potential impacts to Crotch’s bumble bee to the greatest extent feasible the following measures shall be included in the Crotch’s bumble bee survey plan:
2.14.5.1 If during vegetation removal and ground clearing activities an overwintering or dead Crotch’s bumble bee is observed,
233
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
activities shall immediately stop, and a 100 ft Environmentally Sensitive Area boundary will be erected around the spot where the bee was found. A Crotch’s bumble bee approved qualified biologist will be notified and will evaluate the site where the bee was found. CDFW will be immediately notified thereafter for consultation.
Best Management Practices
2.15 Best Management Practices. Permittee shall actively implement BMPs to prevent erosion and the discharge of sediment and pollutants during Project activities.
BMPs shall be monitored and repaired if necessary to ensure maximum erosion, sediment, and pollution control. Permittee shall prohibit the use of erosion control materials potentially harmful to fish and wildlife species, such as mono-filament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material. All fiber rolls, straw wattles, and/or hay bales utilized within and adjacent to the Project site shall be free of non- native plant materials. Fiber rolls or erosion control mesh shall be made of loose- weave mesh that is not fused at the intersections of the weave, such as jute, or coconut (coir) fiber, or other products without welded weaves. Nonwelded weaves reduce entanglement risks to wildlife by allowing animals to push through the weave, which expands when spread. Permittee shall ensure BMPs do not pose a barrier to wildlife movement and shall be installed to allow for the safe passage of wildlife movement, particularly of less vagile species (such as small mammals and reptiles), out of the Project area. Long, continuous lengths of silt-fencing or other BMP materials installed without gaps can create a barrier to wildlife movement, trapping wildlife within the Project area. Areas of safe passage can be easily accommodated by leaving small gaps between parallel and overlapping lengths of BMPs.
2.15.1 If work is performed within the stream channel during the winter storm period, the Permittee shall monitor the five (5) day weather forecast. If it is forecasted for any precipitation, work activities shall involve the securing of the site, so as no materials may enter or be washed into the stream.
The site shall be completely secured one (1) day prior to precipitation, unless prior written approval has been provided by CDFW. During period of precipitation, no construction activities may occur; activities involving the preventing of materials from entering the stream or being washed downstream may be conducted.
Equipment and Vehicles
2.16 Equipment and Vehicles. Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjacent to the stream/lake shall be checked and maintained daily, to prevent leaks of materials that if introduced to water could be deleterious to aquatic life. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream, 234
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
channel, or lake margin where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow.
2.17 Clean Equipment Prior to Entering Area Regulated by Agreement. All equipment shall be free of materials deleterious to aquatic life including noxious and nuisance weeds, aquatic invasive species, oil, grease, hydraulic fluid, soil, and other debris. The Permittee shall follow equipment washing guidelines certify that decontamination, as specified in the sub-measures below, has been completed, and shall require operator of equipment to re-certify equipment upon reentry to areas by this Agreement after contact with water and/or wet soil from a stream or lake in areas outside those regulated under this Agreement.
2.17.1 Clean and Inspect Equipment Prior to Entering Stream. Permittee shall inspect all vehicles, tools, waders and boots, and other Project-related equipment and remove all visible soil/mud, plant materials, and animal remnants prior to initially entering areas regulated by this Agreement. Any contaminants shall be cleaned prior to any work within a streambed and shall be maintained daily. In addition, equipment shall be cleaned daily to ensure pollutants and non-natives are not introduced into mitigation areas or spread throughout Project sites.
2.17.2 Decontamination of Project Equipment. Prior to initially entering, and upon reentering areas subject to the this Agreement, Permittee shall decontaminate all tools, waders and boots, vehicles, trailers, and other equipment that will be used in areas regulated by this Agreement and make contact with water or wetted soils. Permittee shall decontaminate Project gear and equipment utilizing one of four methods: drying, using a hot water soak, hot-water pressure washing, or freezing, as appropriate to the type of gear or equipment. For all methods, Permittee shall begin the decontamination process by thoroughly scrubbing equipment, paying close attention to hard to reach areas and clean areas with a stiff-bristled brush to remove all plant, seeds, soil, and other organisms. To decontaminate by drying, Permittee shall allow equipment to dry thoroughly (i.e., until there is a complete absence of water and all plant, seeds, and soil), preferably in the sun, for a minimum of 48 hours. To decontaminate using hot water, Permittee shall immerse equipment in 140°F or hotter water and soak for a minimum of 5 minutes or by pressure washing with hot water 140°F minimum at the point of contact or 155°F at the nozzle. To decontaminate by freezing, Permittee shall place equipment in a freezer 32°F or colder for a minimum of 8 hours. Repeat decontamination is required only if the equipment/clothing is removed from the site, used in contact with water or wet soil within a different watershed, and returned to the Project site.
2.17.3 Decontamination Sites. Permittee shall perform decontamination of vehicles, watercraft, and other Project gear and equipment in a designated 235
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
location where runoff can be contained and not allowed to pass into any river, lake, or stream and associated riparian areas and other sensitive habitat areas. Cleaning of equipment may occur at a location that contains and recycles resulting wastewater.
2.18 Stationary Equipment. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, generators, and welders, located within or adjacent to the stream/lake shall be positioned over drip pans. Stationary heavy equipment shall have suitable containment to handle a catastrophic spill/leak. Clean up equipment such as extra booms, absorbent pads, skimmers, shall be on site prior to the start of construction.
2.19 Staging and Storage Areas. Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials shall be located outside of the stream/lake. Any materials placed in seasonally dry portions of a stream or lake that could be washed downstream or could be deleterious to aquatic life shall be removed from the Project site prior to inundation by high flows.
Trash and Pollution Measures
2.20 Trash Abatement and Refuse Removal. Permittee shall ensure that trash and food items are contained in animal-proof containers and removed at the end of each work day to avoid attracting opportunistic predators such as ravens, coyotes, and feral dogs. Upon completion of Project activities within each Project location, Permittee shall remove and properly dispose of all construction refuse, including, but not limited to, broken equipment parts, wrapping material, cords, cables, wire, rope, strapping, twine, buckets, metal or plastic containers, and boxes.
2.21 Pollution and Litter. Permittee shall comply with all litter and pollution laws. All contractors, subcontractors, and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the responsibility of Permittee to ensure compliance.
2.21.1 Spoil sites shall not be located within a lake, streambed, or flowing stream or locations that may be subjected to high storm flows, where spoil may be washed back into a lake, streambed, or flowing stream where it may impact streambed habitat and aquatic or riparian vegetation.
2.21.2 No broken concrete, cement, debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products, or other organic or earthen material from any construction or associated activity of whatever nature shall be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the State. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shall be removed from the work area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet of the high water mark of any lake, streambed, or flowing stream.
2.21.3 No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any lake, 236
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
streambed, or flowing stream where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow.
2.22 Spill Containment. All activities performed in or near a stream shall have absorbent materials designated for spill containment and cleanup activities onsite for use in an accidental spill. If a spill occurs the Permittee shall immediately notify the California Emergency Management Agency at 1-800-852-7550 and immediately initiate the cleanup activities. CDFW shall also be notified within 24 hours by the Permittee and consulted regarding clean-up procedures.
Invasive Species
2.23 Prohibited Plant Species. Permittee shall not plant, seed or otherwise introduce invasive exotic plant species. Prohibited exotic plant species include those identified in the California Exotic Pest Plant Council's database, which is accessible at: https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/.
2.24 Notification of Invasive Species. Permittee shall notify CDFW immediately if an invasive species not previously known to occur within the Project site is discovered during Project activities by submitting a completed Suspect Invasive Species Report (available online at:
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Invasives/Report) and photos to the Invasive Species Program by email at: [email protected]. Notification may also be provided by calling (866) 440- 9530. Upon receiving notification, CDFW will provide Permittee with guidance for further action as appropriate to the species.
Diversion Plan
2.25 Diversion Plan. If Project activities are proposed to occur at any time when flowing water is present or reasonably anticipated, Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and approval a water diversion/dewatering plan a minimum of 30 days before initiating Project activities involving water diversion.
Downstream Flow
2.26 Maintain Pre-Project Flows. Permittee shall design all flow conveyance structures to maintain downstream timing and volume of flows to Highland Wash, Smith Creek, and Pershing Creek, to pre-Project flow patterns. Permittee shall ensure turbidity, siltation, or pollution is not increased to downstream reaches. Flows to downstream reaches shall be provided during all times that the natural flow would have occurred. Normal flow shall be restored to the affected stream immediately upon completion of work at that location. Permittee shall monitor downstream conditions to ensure pre-Project flow patterns are maintained.
3. Compensatory Measures
To compensate for adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources identified above that cannot be avoided or minimized, Permittee shall provide mitigation for permanent and 237
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
temporary impacts through measure 3.1, 3.2, and an option between 3.3 or 3.4 and each sub-measure thereafter.
3.1 Habitat Restoration – On-site (On-site Temporary Restoration). To compensate for the temporary impacts of 0.09 acres of fish and wildlife resources subject to Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq., Permittee shall restore no less than
0.18 acres of in-kind streambed and associated habitat.
3.1.1 Restoration of Temporary Impacts. Upon completion of construction activities, Permittee shall restore all temporary impacts to pre-project conditions or better. Restoration activities should include, but not be limited to: contouring the ground surface to pre-impact grade; removing all construction related materials, trash, and debris; and replacing any natural materials/refugia moved during Project activities. Photo documentation and reporting of restoration efforts will be included in the Project Completion Report.
3.2 Development of Memorandum of Understanding. Permittee shall enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the members of the ‘Smith Creek Stakeholder Group’ within 6 months of Project completion. The objective of the MOU is to collectively develop an Action Plan that is agreeable to all parties. The action plan will include, but is not limited to, funding responsibilities, restoration goals, long-term monitoring and testing goals, schedule of updates to resource agencies, goals for maintenance, and adaptive management strategies.
Additional details on items included in the action plan are described below, but are subject to change based on the agencies’ decisions:
3.2.1 Five-Year Study. The MOU’s Action Plan shall include a 5-year study that monitors the function of the Project’s catch basins and corridor in its developed condition (annual reports shall be provided over the course of the 5-year study to demonstrate consistency or change in sediment distribution over time as part of the MOU’s schedule of updates to resource agencies). The study shall describe the methods used to collect data on the system’s sediment transport function and potential flaws in the methods used. Methods may include activities such as: repetitive channel elevation surveys; discharge and turbidity measurements; streambed material or condition characterization; bedload and suspended load sampling or rating curves; or other acceptable quantitative methods.
3.2.2 Adaptive Management Strategies. The MOU’s Action Plan shall utilize the data collected from the 5-year monitoring plan and compare the function of the developed Project area to the historical transport function of Smith Creek. If it is determined that the sediment distribution has lowered, the Action Plan shall propose adaptive management strategies necessary for maintaining sediment distribution equilibrium. These adaptive management strategies shall then be included in the completion of a 238
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Sediment Restoration Plan that will be used in perpetuity.
3.2.3 Development of Sediment Restoration Plan The MOU’s Action Plan shall include a Sediment Restoration Plan that will assist in monitoring, recording, and maintaining the amount of sediment conveyed past the downstream end of the Project site as well as the overall Smith Creek system.
3.2.4 Maintenance of Culverts. Maintenance inspections of the reinforced concrete box (RCB) culverts shall be included as part of the Sediment Restoration Plan. Maintenance inspections are proposed to occur regularly (at a minimum annually) prior to flood season and after any significant runoff event. Accumulated debris and sediment at the RCB opening and support piers would be monitored and transported downstream in the absence of sediment flow.
3.3 Habitat Rehabilitation and Enhancement – Offsite (Mitigation Site). Permittee shall compensate for permanent impacts of 0.37 acres to stream bed, bank, and channel, through the acquisition, and perpetual conservation and management of a “Mitigation Site”, or several mitigation sites, containing no less than 1.3 acres of streambed and stream-associated habitat within Western Riverside County.
The Permittee shall prepare, or fund the preparation of, a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP;) to be reviewed and approved by CDFW; and a LongTerm Management Plan (LTMP;) designed to sustain or surpass the habitat quality of the Mitigation Site in perpetuity. Permittee shall also establish long-term management funding. Permanent protection and funding for perpetual management of Habitat Management lands must be complete prior to initiation of Project activities, or within 18 months of starting Project activities if Security is provided for all uncompleted obligations.
3.3.1 Habitat Acquisition and Protection. Permittee shall obtain written approval from CDFW for the proposed Mitigation Site(s) with a minimum of 1.3 acres of offsite streambed and stream-associated habitat. Permittee shall submit a proposed Mitigation Site, including pertinent biological resources information and a preliminary title report, for CDFW review and approval no later than five months prior to the start of Project activities OR four months following start of Project activities if Security is provided.
3.3.2 Mitigation Site Conservation Easement. After CDFW approval of the Mitigation Site and no later than four months prior to the start of Project activities OR six months following start of Project activities if Security is provided. Permittee shall provide to CDFW, for review and approval, a draft Conservation Easement (CE) prepared using a CDFWprovided CE template, a preliminary title report, and a Phase I environmental assessment. Permittee shall also provide the necessary documents specified in the CDFW Habitat Management Land Acquisition 239
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Package Checklist for Third Party Beneficiary (TPB) Project Applicants or a revised version to be provided by CDFW, in preparation for conservation easement(s) recordation. All documents conveying the Mitigation Site(s) and all conditions of title are subject to the review and approval of CDFW prior to recordation of the CE. Permittee shall ensure the preservation and long-term management of the CDFW-approved 1.3 acres of streambed and stream-associated habitat within the Mitigation Site(s) through recordation of a conservation easement(s). Permittee shall record a CE approved by CDFW with an entity, to be approved by CDFW in its sole discretion, acting as grantee for the CE. Permittee shall also provide the necessary documents requested by CDFW for due diligence review at the time the grantee is proposed. CDFW shall be expressly named in the CE as a third-party beneficiary. The CE shall expressly require implementation of the LTMP by the grantor, and land manager, as authorized by the grantor and landowner, and shall expressly require the grantee to monitor implementation of the LTMP. Permittee shall record the CE after CDFW approval of the CE and all associated documents prior to the start of Project activities OR within 18 months following start of Project activities if Security is provided. Permittee shall be responsible for all costs associated with the CE, including recording, CE monitoring, and long-term management costs.
3.3.3 Mitigation Site Land Manager. After CDFW approval of the Mitigation Site and no later than four months prior to the start of Project activities OR six months following start of Project activities if Security is provided, Permittee shall obtain CDFW approval of a land manager entity to manage the Mitigation Site. Permittee shall identify separate entities to fulfill the grantee and land manager roles and shall not identify the same entity to fulfill both roles. Permittee shall also provide the necessary documents requested by CDFW for due diligence review at the time the land manager is proposed. Permittee shall also obtain CDFW approval of an interim Mitigation Site land manager if they are different than the long-term Mitigation site manager. The interim and/or long-term land managers may be the landowner or another party approved by CDFW. Documents related to land management shall identify both the interim and long-term land managers. Permittee shall notify CDFW, for review and approval, of any subsequent changes in the land manager within 30 days of the change.
3.3.4 Start-Up Activities. Permittee shall provide for the implementation of startup activities, including the initial site protection of the CDFW-approved Mitigation Site(s). Start-up activities include, at a minimum: 1) preparing both a HMMP and a LTMP for CDFW approval, 2) conducting baseline biological assessment and land survey report during the first growing season, 3) developing and transferring to the Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data if applicable, 4) establishing initial fencing (if 240
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
necessary), 5) conducting initial removal of litter and debris, and 6) installing signage.
3.3.5 Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. After CDFW approval of the Mitigation Site and no later than four months prior to the start of Project activities OR six months following start of Project activities if Security is provided, Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and written approval a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP). At a minimum, the HMMP shall include the following:
3.3.5.1 Restoration Specialist. Preparation of the HMMP shall be by persons with expertise in southern California ecosystems and native plant re-vegetation techniques (restoration specialist).
Planting, maintenance, monitoring, and reporting activities shall be overseen by the restoration specialist familiar with restoration of native plants.
3.3.5.2 Site Description. A description of the physical conditions and vegetation communities including a map and GIS shapefiles.
Photo-documentation of restored areas shall be provided before and after restoration.
3.3.5.3 Planting Plan. Details of the site preparation consisting of a detailed contouring/grading plan and details of native plant installation (Planting Plan), including the type and number of materials to be used (e.g., local native seeds, cutting, and/or container stock), source(s) of the materials, planting location, methods of installation, and a local California native plant palette. This Planting Plan shall include plantings of both overstory and understory vegetation as appropriate. All seeded/planted species installed shall include only local California native container plants and cuttings and shall be typical of the existing native plant species present within, or immediately adjacent to the site. The Planting Plan shall have adequate detail regarding the sampling plan so that it can be duplicated by different people and shall include a sample data collection sheet that shows appropriate data to be collected per the proposed sampling methodology.
3.3.5.4 Native Plant Sources. Plant material for revegetation shall be derived from cuttings, materials salvaged from disturbed areas, and/or seeds obtained from randomly selected native trees and shrubs occurring locally within the same drainages. Any replacement tree/shrub stock, if used, which cannot be grown from cuttings or seeds, shall be obtained from a native plant nursery, be ant-free, and shall not be inoculated to prevent heart 241
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
rot.
3.3.5.5 Sampling Techniques. The sampling techniques (e.g., quadrats, transects, or relevé) to be used to collect quantitative/qualitative data (e.g., vegetation relative/absolute cover, density, diversity indices, recruitment, survivorship, etc.) for baseline conditions and to establish and measure success criteria.
3.3.5.6 Survey Timing. The primary monitoring surveys to determine the success of restoration efforts (survival, cover, and growth of plants) shall be conducted at a minimum twice annually, preferably in May and September.
3.3.5.7 Maintenance Activities. A description of maintenance operations with particular emphasis on invasive species control and watering methods and schedules; details on any irrigation to be used, if applicable, that includes method of watering; sprinkler placement, if applicable; and timing/schedule; irrigation may only be used to help the plants become established during the first three years following planting. Watering/ irrigation of the site shall be discontinued at least two years prior to completion of the monitoring period.
3.3.5.8 Corrective Actions: A description of corrective actions to be taken when restoration measures do not meet the proposed targets.
3.3.5.9 Success Criteria. The HMMP shall identify the success criteria for the Mitigation Site and shall be compared against an appropriate reference site with as good or better-quality habitat then the pre-Project impact site. The reference site shall be approved by CDFW. The success criteria shall include percent relative and absolute cover (invasive and native vegetation), species diversity, abundance, and any other measures of success deemed appropriate by CDFW. Permittee shall be
responsible for any cost incurred during the
restoration/mitigation or in subsequent corrective measures.
3.3.5.10 Reporting. Permittee shall have the qualified restoration specialist monitor the recovery of plant, wildlife, and aquatic resources in the area following mitigation implementation.
Monitoring of plant, wildlife, and aquatic resources shall be done twice a year as outlined in the HMMP, through the term of restoration. The results and analysis shall be submitted with the annual restoration monitoring report to CDFW by February 1 of each year after mitigation implementation for at least 5 years and until mitigation success criteria have been met. This report 242
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
shall include the status and any success trends (i.e.,
comparison throughout the 5 years of monitoring) for the success criteria outlined in the HMMP. Photos from designated photo stations shall be included.
3.3.5.11 Mitigation Success. After the fifth monitoring year, if the site has met the success criteria outlined in the HMMP, CDFW may request a site visit to determine if the mitigation portion of the Agreement is deemed complete. The site should be free of trash and any irrigation infrastructure shall be removed if it was used.
3.3.5.12 Property Analysis Record for Establishment and Success of Restoration Site. The Permittee shall prepare a Property Analysis Record (PAR), or PAR-equivalent analysis (hereinafter “Habitat Restoration PAR”) negotiated with the approved restoration ecologist to calculate the amount of funding necessary to ensure planning and engineering, restoration, monitoring, and legal fees for the establishment and success of mitigation sites subject to this Agreement. The analysis should include but is not limited to funding for adaptive invasive species management, trespass, monitoring, and fire management.
Permittee shall submit the results of the Habitat Restoration PAR to CDFW for review and approval.
3.3.6 Mitigation Site Long Term Management Plan. After CDFW approval of the mitigation Site and no later than three months prior to the start of Project activities OR seven months following start of Project activities if Security is provided, Permittee shall provide a Long-Term Management Plan (LTMP) to CDFW for review and written approval. The LTMP be implemented in perpetuity and shall be designed to sustain or surpass the habitat quality of the Mitigation Site(s) upon achieving HMMP success criteria as approved by CDFW in writing. At a minimum, the LTMP shall identify: 1) a description of the physical conditions of the Mitigation Site upon achieving HMMP success criteria, including water resources and habitat types, and a map that identifies the location of the site; 2) goals related to sustaining habitat quality, wildlife usage, and overall function of the Mitigation Site; and 3) specific tasks and management strategies proposed to meet those goals, including but not limited to fencing, invasive species management, trash and trespass control, and resource monitoring using a monitoring and management schedule, adaptive management plans, strategies to address foreseeable site disturbances (e.g., dumping, wildfires, unauthorized recreational activities, etc.), and maintenance of signage and fencing. The Permittee shall be responsible for implementing the LTMP and shall submit a Management Report every five years documenting, at a minimum: 1) management activities completed within the previous five-year term, 243
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
including: (a) any remedial measures completed, (b) details of invasive species management including: (i) species and location where they were treated and/or removed, (ii) the amount and frequency of removal, and (iii) the techniques used, (c) fencing information (d) resource monitoring, adaptive management strategies developed and how they were implemented, and (d) enforcement activity necessary; 2) an assessment of overall habitat quality within the Mitigation Site, including: (a) any changes to native and non-native vegetation cover, (b) any shifts in habitat type, (c) any loss of habitat cover, (d) any change in water resources, and (e) any new invasive species observed; and 3) an evaluation of the success or failure of management strategies implemented and any changes to management strategies proposed in response to the successes or failures. The Management Report shall include photos documenting the management activities.
3.3.7 Mitigation Site Endowment Fund. Permittee shall ensure that the Mitigation Site is perpetually managed, maintained, and monitored by the land manager as described in this Agreement, the CE, and the LTMP approved by CDFW. After obtaining CDFW approval of the Mitigation Site, Permittee shall provide long-term management funding for the perpetual management of the Mitigation Site by establishing a separate long-term management fund (Endowment) for the site. The Endowment is a sum of money, held in a CDFW-approved fund that provides funds for the perpetual management, invasive species control (as needed), monitoring, and other activities on the Mitigation Site consistent with the management plan(s) required by Measure 3.3.4. Endowment as used in this Agreement shall refer to the endowment deposit and all interest, dividends, other earnings, additions, and appreciation thereon. The Endowment shall be governed by this Agreement, Government Code sections 65965-65968, as amended, and Probate Code sections 18501-18510, as amended.
After the interim management period, Permittee shall ensure that the designated long-term land manager implements the management and monitoring of the Mitigation Site according to LTMP. The long-term land manager shall be obligated to manage and monitor the Mitigation Site in perpetuity to preserve their conservation values in accordance with this Agreement, the CE, and the LTMP. Such activities shall be funded through the Endowment.
3.3.8 Identify an Endowment Manager. The Endowment shall be held by the Endowment Manager, which shall be an entity qualified pursuant to Government Code sections 65965-65968, as amended, and approved in writing by CDFW in its sole discretion. Permittee shall submit to CDFW a written proposal for an Endowment Manager along with a copy of the proposed Endowment Manager’s certification pursuant to Government Code section 65968(e). CDFW shall notify Permittee in writing of its 244
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
approval or disapproval of the proposed Endowment Manager. If CDFW does not approve the proposed Endowment Manager, it shall provide Permittee with a written explanation of the reasons for its disapproval.
3.3.9 Endowment Funds Deposit. After obtaining CDFW written approval of the Mitigation Sites, LTMP, and Endowment Manager, Permittee shall prepare in coordination with the land manager, a Long-Term Management Endowment PAR (or PAR-equivalent analysis) to calculate the amount of funding necessary to ensure the long-term management of the Mitigation Site (Endowment Deposit Amount) consistent with the LTMP and to fund the grantee for CE monitoring. The Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and approval the results of the Long-Term Management Endowment PAR before transferring funds to the Endowment Manager and no later than three months prior to the start of Project activities OR seven months following start of Project activities if Security is provided.
3.3.10 Capitalization Rate and Fees. Permittee shall obtain the capitalization rate from the selected Endowment Manager for use in calculating the LongTerm Management Endowment PAR and adjust for any additional administrative, periodic, or annual fee. The capitalization rate used to calculate the PAR shall be 3.5% or less, unless otherwise approved in writing by CDFW.
3.3.11 Endowment Buffers/Assumptions. Permittee shall include in the LongTerm Management Endowment PAR assumptions the following buffers for endowment establishment and use that will substantially ensure long-term viability and security of the Endowment:
3.3.11.1 10 Percent Contingency. A 10 percent contingency shall be added to each endowment calculation to hedge against
underestimation of the fund, unanticipated expenditures, inflation, or catastrophic events.
3.3.11.2 Three Years Delayed Spending. The endowment shall be established assuming spending will not occur for the first three years after full funding.
3.3.11.3 Non-annualized Expenses. For all large capital expenses to occur periodically but not annually such as fence replacement or well replacement, payments shall be withheld from the annual disbursement until the year of anticipated need or upon request to Endowment Manager and CDFW.
3.3.12 Transfer Long-term Endowment Funds. Permittee shall transfer the LongTerm Endowment Funds to the Endowment Fund Manager upon CDFW approval of the Endowment Deposit Amount identified above prior to the 245
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
start of Project activities OR within 18 months following start of Project activities if Security is provided. The Endowment Manager shall, at all times, hold and manage the Endowment in compliance with this Agreement, Government Code sections 65965-65968, as amended, and Probate Code sections 18501-18510, as amended.
3.4 Security. If permanent protection and funding for perpetual management of compensatory habitat is not complete prior to the initiation of Project activities, Permittee shall provide financial security in the form of a Letter of Credit (LOC) (LOC Form provided upon request), or other form of security approved by CDFW, for an amount sufficient for CDFW or its contractors to complete land acquisition, property enhancement/restoration, initial management and site protection, and perpetual management and monitoring of the 1.3-acre Mitigation Site. The LOC shall be submitted to CDFW for approval and shall be executed no later than 30 days prior to initiation of Project activities.
3.4.1 Draft Copy of LOC. The Permittee shall provide a draft copy of the LOC, or other form of security approved by CDFW, to CDFW at the address listed below for review and approval [no later than 60 days prior to initiation of Project activities and] prior to execution of security. The LOC shall not be executed without CDFW's prior approval.
3.4.2 Expiration of LOC. In the event that the LOC will expire before the mitigation obligations have been met, the Permittee shall be responsible for providing CDFW a new LOC to replace the existing LOC at least sixty (60) days prior to the expiration date.
3.4.3 Execution of LOC. If CDFW will hold a cash security, Permittee shall transmit it to CDFW with a completed Mitigation Payment Transmittal Form. Otherwise, upon execution of the LOC, or other form of security approved by CDFW, the Permittee shall provide the original to the address listed on the LOC template, and one copy of the executed document to CDFW at the address listed below.
3.4.4 The LOC, or other form of security approved by CDFW, shall allow CDFW to draw on the principal sum if CDFW, in its sole discretion, determines that the Permittee has failed to complete the compensatory mitigation measures of this Agreement.
4. Reporting Measures
Permittee shall meet each reporting requirement described below.
4.1 Notification at the Start and End of Work. The Permittee shall notify CDFW, in writing, at least five (5) days prior to re-initiation of Project-related activities and at least five (5) days prior to completion of Project and mitigation activities.
Permittee shall document compliance with all pre-Project Conditions of Approval 246
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
before starting work through submitting a copy of the MMRP table with notes showing current implementation status and date of completion of each mitigation measure. Notification shall be sent to the email address:
[email protected], Reference # EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6, and cc:
4.2 Reporting. All surveys, pre- and post- construction notifications, monitoring reports, and any other required communication between the Permittee and CDFW shall be submitted in digital copy to [email protected].
Please reference # EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6 and cc:
[email protected]. The electronic files shall include GIS shapefiles, along with the appropriate metadata, of the Project area and any mitigation areas. If CDFW requests hard copies of any documentation, Permittee shall mail hard copies to 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C-220, Ontario, CA 91764, Attn: Lake and Streambed Program. Please reference # EPIMS-RIV54902-R6.
4.3 List of Designated Biologist(s). The Permittee shall submit a proposed list of Designated Biologist(s) to CDFW for review at least 30 days prior to Project start.
CDFW will provide a written response within 21 days of Permittee submittal, unless a shortened review period is otherwise agreed to by CDFW in writing (email or letter). The list may be updated at any time by CDFW or the Permittee with the prior approval of CDFW.
4.4 Nesting Bird and Burrowing Owl Survey Report. Prior to commencement of Project activities addressed by this Agreement, the Permittee shall submit to CDFW the results of pre-construction nesting bird and burrowing owl surveys completed pursuant to this Agreement.
4.5 Nesting Bird Summary Report. Permittee shall prepare and submit to CDFW a summary of nesting species identified onsite, discovery of nests, the status/outcome of any previously identified nest, buffer distances established for each nest, and any adjustments made to established buffers. Summary reports shall be submitted on a weekly basis until there is no further evidence of nesting activity. If the Project results in the abandonment of or damage to a nest, Permittee shall notify CDFW within 24 hours.
4.6 Crotch’s Bumble Bee – Habitat Mapping Report. No less than 120 days prior to initiation of activities addressed by this Agreement, Permittee shall submit a baseline habitat report of the project site (including channel side slopes). The report will identify habitat alliances following Sawyer et al. (2009), as well as species composition. A map of habitat alliances will be included in the report and GIS files of the habitat mapping will be submitted to CDFW with the report.
4.7 Crotch’s’ Bumble Bee – Survey Plan. If habitat mapping identifies the presence of suitable habitat, no less than 90 days prior to initiation of project activities addressed by this Agreement, Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and 247
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
comment a survey plan for Crotch’s’ bumble bee. The survey plan shall be created in coordination with the Designated Biologist. The survey plan will identify the timing, number, and duration of survey efforts, and procedures to follow should Crotch’s’ bumble bee be detected within the project area.
4.8 Crotch’s’ Bumble Bee – Survey Results. Survey results shall be submitted to CDFW within 30 days completion of survey efforts. The report will be prepared by the Designated Biologist and will describe survey results.
4.9 Diversion Plan. If Project activities are proposed at any time when flowing water is present, or reasonably anticipated, no later than 30 days prior to commencement of Project activities addressed by this Agreement, Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and approval a detailed water diversion/dewatering plan. Dewatering structures may include the use of sand bags, Port-a dams, water bladder dams, K-rails, or driven sheet metal coffer dams. CDFW will review the proposed water diversion method, to approve the plan or provide the requirements for that approval. Permittee may not commence dewatering of a stream/diversion of water without explicit approval from CDFW.
4.10 Sediment Transport Plan. As part of the Permittee’s commitment to the sediment transport function of the Smith Creek watershed and the completion of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the Sediment Transport Plan shall implement a 5-year monitoring plan to ensure that, in the developed condition, the catch basins and corridor are functioning properly and the specified sediment quantities are being conveyed downstream to the property boundary and beyond.
Annual reports shall be submitted to CDFW by January 31 each year quantifying the amount (ton/year) of sediment leaving the Project site.
4.11 On-site Resource Updates. Permittee shall provide updates on the status/outcome of any new or previously identified resource, and any adjustments made to applied avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, and any other pertinent information. Summaries shall be submitted on a monthly basis during periods of Project activity until Project completion or monitoring is complete. Monitoring reports of any passively relocated species shall also be included. The updates shall be provided to CDFW as a Status Report in EPIMS, and any unsupported file type shall be emailed to the addresses below. CDFW may adjust the rate of updates in writing. If the Project results in the abandonment of or damage to a resource, Permittee shall notify CDFW within 24 hours via phone call or email at the contact information listed below.
4.12 Photo Documentation. The Permittee shall include, at minimum, pre-Project and post-Project color photographs taken from fixed locations of all Project areas within or directly adjacent to stream habitat. Two photo monitoring points shall be established at each stream impact area. Each photo point shall have an unobstructed view of the disturbed streambed area. Photo documentation shall be performed from each photo point prior to Project initiation and after Project completion. These photos shall be included in the Project Completion Report. 248
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
4.13 Project Completion Report. Permittee shall provide a Project Completion Report to CDFW via EPIMS no later than one month after the Project is fully completed.
The Project Completion Report shall summarize all Project activities including the implementation of all items specified in Section 2 of this Agreement. This report shall include, at minimum, photo documentation, avoidance/minimization measures implemented, biological survey notes (including construction monitoring), and a summary of temporary and permanent restoration efforts with photo documentation. Permittee shall include a copy of the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Plan table with notes showing status and date of implementation for each of the mitigation measures. Notification shall be submitted via EPIMS and emailed to: [email protected], please reference Notification No. EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6, and cc:
4.14 Notification to CNDDB. If any special-status or listed species are/have been observed on or in proximity to the Project site, Permittee shall submit California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) forms and maps to the CNDDB within five working days of the sightings. The CNDDB form is available online at:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. A digital copy of this information shall also be emailed within five days to CDFW. Please reference Notification No. EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6.
4.15 Compliance. CDFW shall verify compliance with protective measures to ensure the accuracy of the Permittee’s mitigation, monitoring, and reporting efforts.
CDFW may, at its sole discretion, review relevant documents maintained by the Permittee, interview the Permittee’s employees and agents, inspect the work site, and take other actions to assess compliance with or effectiveness of protective measures in this Agreement.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any communication that Permittee or CDFW submits to the other shall be submitted through Environmental Permit Information Management System (EPIMS) as instructed by CDFW.
To Permittee:
City of Banning
Attn: Nathan Smith
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project
99 East Ramsey Street
Banning, CA 92220
[email protected]
To CDFW:
249
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Inland Deserts Region
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project
[email protected]
cc: [email protected]
LIABILITY
Permittee shall be solely liable for any violations of the Agreement, whether committed by Permittee or any person acting on behalf of Permittee, including its officers, employees, representatives, agents or contractors and subcontractors, to complete the project or any activity related to it that the Agreement authorizes.
This Agreement does not constitute CDFW’s endorsement of, or require Permittee to proceed with the project. The decision to proceed with the project is Permittee’s alone.
SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION
CDFW may suspend or revoke in its entirety the Agreement if it determines that Permittee or any person acting on behalf of Permittee, including its officers, employees, representatives, agents, or contractors and subcontractors, is not in compliance with the Agreement.
Before CDFW suspends or revokes the Agreement, it shall provide Permittee written notice by certified or registered mail that it intends to suspend or revoke. The notice shall state the reason(s) for the proposed suspension or revocation, provide Permittee an opportunity to correct any deficiency before CDFW suspends or revokes the Agreement, and include instructions to Permittee, if necessary, including but not limited to a directive to immediately cease the specific activity or activities that caused CDFW to issue the notice.
ENFORCEMENT
Nothing in the Agreement precludes CDFW from pursuing an enforcement action against Permittee instead of, or in addition to, suspending or revoking the Agreement.
Nothing in the Agreement limits or otherwise affects CDFW's enforcement authority or that of its enforcement personnel.
OTHER LEGAL OBLIGATIONS
This Agreement does not relieve Permittee or any person acting on behalf of Permittee, including its officers, employees, representatives, agents, or contractors and subcontractors, from complying with, or obtaining any other permits or authorizations that might be required under, other federal, state, or local laws or regulations before beginning the project or an activity related to it. For example, if the project causes take 250
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), such take will be unlawful under the ESA absent a permit or other form of authorization from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service.
This Agreement does not relieve Permittee or any person acting on behalf of Permittee, including its officers, employees, representatives, agents, or contractors and subcontractors, from complying with other applicable statutes in the Fish and Game Code including, but not limited to, Fish and Game Code sections 2050 et seq. (threatened and endangered species), section 3503 (bird nests and eggs), section 3503.5 (birds of prey), section 5650 (water pollution), section 5652 (refuse disposal into water), section 5901 (fish passage), section 5937 (sufficient water for fish), and section 5948 (obstruction of stream).
Nothing in the Agreement authorizes Permittee or any person acting on behalf of Permittee, including its officers, employees, representatives, agents, or contractors and subcontractors, to trespass.
AMENDMENT
CDFW may amend the Agreement at any time during its term if CDFW determines the amendment is necessary to protect an existing fish or wildlife resource.
Permittee may amend the Agreement at any time during its term, provided the amendment is mutually agreed to in writing by CDFW and Permittee. To request an amendment, Permittee shall use the “Amendments & Extension” form in EPIMS to submit the request. Permittee shall include with the completed form, payment of the corresponding amendment fee identified in CDFW’s current fee schedule (see Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, § 699.5).
TRANSFER AND ASSIGNMENT
This Agreement may not be transferred or assigned to another entity, and any purported transfer or assignment of the Agreement to another entity shall not be valid or effective, unless the transfer or assignment is requested by Permittee in writing, as specified below, and thereafter CDFW approves the transfer or assignment in writing.
The transfer or assignment of the Agreement to another entity shall constitute a minor amendment, and therefore to request a transfer or assignment, Permittee shall use the “Amendments & Extension” form in EPIMS to submit the request. Permittee shall include with the completed form, payment of the minor amendment fee identified in CDFW’s current fee schedule (see Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 699.5).
EXTENSIONS
In accordance with Fish and Game Code section 1605, subdivision (b), Permittee may request one extension of the Agreement, provided the request is made prior to the 251
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
expiration of the Agreement’s term. To request an extension, Permittee shall use the “Amendments & Extension” form in EPIMS to submit the request. Permittee shall include with the completed form, payment of the extension fee identified in CDFW’s current fee schedule (see Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 699.5). CDFW shall process the extension request in accordance with Fish and Game Code section 1605, subdivisions (b) through (e).
If Permittee fails to submit a request to extend the Agreement prior to its expiration, Permittee must submit a new notification and notification fee before beginning or continuing the project the Agreement covers (Fish & G. Code § 1605, subd. (f)).
EFFECTIVE DATE
The Agreement becomes effective on the date of CDFW’s signature, which shall be: 1) after Permittee’s signature; 2) after CDFW complies with all applicable requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 3) after payment of the applicable Fish and Game Code section 711.4 filing fee listed at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/CEQA/Fees.
TERM
This Agreement shall expire on August 6, 2030, unless it is terminated or extended before then. All provisions in the Agreement shall remain in force throughout its term.
Permittee shall remain responsible for implementing any provisions specified herein to protect fish and wildlife resources after the Agreement expires or is terminated, as Fish and Game Code section 1605, subdivision (a)(2) requires.
EXHIBITS
The documents listed below are included as exhibits to the Agreement and incorporated herein by reference.
Exhibit 1. Regional Location of Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project (Project) Exhibit 2. Project Site Map Location of Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project (Project)
Exhibit 3. Mitigation Monitoring and management Plan (MMRP)
AUTHORITY
If the person signing the Agreement (signatory) is doing so as a representative of Permittee, the signatory hereby acknowledges that he or she is doing so on Permittee’s behalf and represents and warrants that he or she has the authority to legally bind Permittee to the provisions herein.
AUTHORIZATION
252
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
This Agreement authorizes only the project described herein. If Permittee begins or completes a project different from the project the Agreement authorizes, Permittee may be subject to civil or criminal prosecution for failing to notify CDFW in accordance with Fish and Game Code section 1602.
CONCURRENCE
Through the electronic signature by the permittee or permittee’s representative as evidenced by the attached concurrence from CDFW’s EPIMS, the permittee accepts and agrees to comply with all provisions contained herein.
The EPIMS concurrence page containing electronic signatures must be attached to this agreement to be valid.
253
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 1. REGIONAL LOCATION OF SUN LAKES BOULEVARD EXTENSION
PROJECT (PROJECT)
254
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 2. PROJECT SITE MAP OF SUN LAKES BOULEVARD EXTENSION
PROJECT (PROJECT)
255
Exhibit 3
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN (MMRP)
LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT
LAKE OR STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT NO. EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6 PERMITTEE: City of Banning
PROJECT: Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project
PURPOSE OF THE MMRP
The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure that the impact mitigation measures required by the Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for the above-referenced Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement EPIMS No. RIV-54902-R6 (Agreement) are properly implemented, and thereby to ensure compliance with, section 15097 of the California Code of Regulations and section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. A table summarizing the mitigation measures required by Fish and Game Code 1600 et seq. is attached. This table is a tool for use in monitoring and reporting on implementation of mitigation measures, but the descriptions in the table do not supersede the mitigation measures set forth in the Agreement, and the omission of a permit requirement from the attached table does not relieve the Permittee of the obligation to ensure the requirement is performed.
OBLIGATIONS OF PERMITTEE
Permittee has the primary responsibility for monitoring compliance with all mitigation measures and for reporting to CDFW on the progress in implementing those measures. These monitoring and reporting requirements are set forth in the Agreement itself and are summarized at the front of the attached table.
VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE, EFFECTIVENESS
CDFW may, at its sole discretion, verify compliance with any mitigation measure or independently assess the effectiveness of any mitigation measure.
256
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Ver. EPIMS 03/08/2022
TABLE OF MITIGATION MEASURES
Table 1. The following items are identified for each Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure number (#), Mitigation Measure Submittal, Timeline for Submittal, Date Submitted to CDFW, Date Reviewed or Approved by CDFW, and Notes on Status.
The # column indicates the mitigation measure number in the Agreement. The Mitigation Measure column summarizes the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements contained in the Agreement. The Timeline column shows the date or phase when each mitigation measure will be implemented. The Responsible Party column identifies the entity that is primarily responsible for implementing the mitigation measure. The Status/Date/Initials column shall be completed by the Permittee during preparation of each Status Report and the Final Mitigation Report. The Permittee must identify the implementation status of each mitigation measure, the date that status was determined, and the initials of the person determining that status. # Mitigation Measures Implementation
Schedule
Responsible
Party Status/Date/Initials
Pre-project Activities
1.7 Notify CDFW Prior to Work
Minimum of 5 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
2.1 Designated Biologist(s) and Biological
Monitor(s) (approval)
Minimum of 45 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
2.5 Delineate Work Area Boundary Before commencing ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities. Permittee
2.8 Educational Program Before commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities. Permittee
2.8.1 Invasive Species Education Program Before commencing ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities. Permittee
2.25 Diversion Plan (approval)
Minimum of 30 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
257
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Ver. EPIMS 03/08/2022
# Mitigation Measures Implementation
Schedule
Responsible
Party Status/Date/Initials
2.11.1 Pre-construction Surveys
Three days before commencing
ground- or vegetation-disturbing
activities.
Permittee
2.12.1 Focused Survey for Burrowing Owls
30-60 days before commencing
ground- or vegetation-disturbing
activities.
Permittee
2.12.3 Burrowing Owl Pre-Construction Inspection
Within 3 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
2.12.2 Burrowing Owl Survey Results
Within 10 days of survey
completion and minimum of 21
days before commencing groundor vegetation-disturbing activities Permittee
2.12.5 Burrowing Owl Plan
At least 30 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
2.32 Work According to Plans
At least 30 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
3.1 Habitat Re-establishment/Rehabilitation –
Offsite Mitigation Bank
At least 30 days before
commencing ground or
vegetation distribution activities
Permittee
3.3.1 Habitat Protection (approval)
Five months before commencing
ground- or vegetation-disturbing
activities.
Permittee
3.3.2 Mitigation Site Conservation Easement
(approval)
18 months before commencing
ground- or vegetation-disturbing
activities.
Permittee
258
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Ver. EPIMS 03/08/2022
# Mitigation Measures Implementation
Schedule
Responsible
Party Status/Date/Initials
3.3.3 Mitigation Site Land Manager (approval)
Four months before commencing
ground- or vegetation-disturbing
activities or six months following
the start of project activities if
security is provided.
Permittee
3.3.5 Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
(approval)
Four months before commencing
ground- or vegetation-disturbing
activities or six months following
the start of project activities if
security is provided.
Permittee
3.3.6 Mitigation Site Long Term Management Plan
(approval)
Three months before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities or
seven months following the start
of project activities if security is
provided.
Permittee
3.3.9 Endowment Funds Deposit (approval)
Three months before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities or
seven months following the start
of project activities if security is
provided.
Permittee
3.3.12 Transfer Long-term Endowment Funds
(approval)
Prior to commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities or
within 18 months following the
start of project activities if security
is provided.
Permittee
259
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Ver. EPIMS 03/08/2022
# Mitigation Measures Implementation
Schedule
Responsible
Party Status/Date/Initials
3.4 Security (approval) At least 30 days prior to the
initiation of project activities. Permittee
3.4.1 Draft Copy of LOC (approval)
No later than 60 days prior to
initiation of project activities and
prior to execution of security.
Permittee
3.4.2 Expiration of LOC At least 60 days prior to the
expiration date. Permittee
4.1 Notification at the Start and End of Work
At least 5 days prior to initiation
of project-related activities and at
least 5 days prior to completion of
project and mitigation activities.
Permittee
4.3 List of Designated Biologist(s) (approval) At least 45 days prior to initiation of Project-related activities Permittee
4.4 Nesting Bird and Burrowing Owl Survey
Report
At least one business day prior to
commencement of Project
activities
Permittee
4.5 Nesting Bird Summary Report
On a weekly basis until there is
no further evidence of nesting
activity. If the Project results in
the abandonment of or damage
to a nest, Permittee shall notify
CDFW within 24 hours
Permittee
4.11 On-site Resource Updates
On a monthly basis during
periods of Project activity until
Project completion or monitoring
is complete
Permittee
260
EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Ver. EPIMS 03/08/2022
# Mitigation Measures Implementation
Schedule
Responsible
Party Status/Date/Initials
4.9 Diversion Plan (approval)
Minimum of 30 days before
commencing ground- or
vegetation-disturbing activities.
Permittee
4.14 Notification to CNDDB Within 5 working days of the sightings. Permittee
During Project Operations
2.9.1 Excavated Areas At the end of each workday. Permittee/ Biologists
2.11.5 Reporting No less than once weekly. Permittee
2.12.4 Burrowing Owls Observed During
Construction
During project implementation
and construction. Permittee
3.1 Habitat Rehabilitation and/or Restoration –
On-site (Mitigation Site Temporary and
Permanent)
Within 18 months of starting
project activities if security is
provided.
Permittee
Post-project Activities
4.13 Project Completion Report. No later than one month after the Project is fully completed. Permittee
261
Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board
WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR DREDGED OR FILL DISCHARGES
TO WATERS OF THE STATE
ORDER R7-2025-0014
Effective Date: June 3, 2025
Program Type: Fill/Excavation
Project Type: Roads and Highways
Project: Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project
Regulatory Measure ID: 459421
WDID: 7A333292001
Place ID: 897966
Applicant: City of Banning Public Works Department
Applicant Contact: Nathan (Nate) Smith
Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer
99 E. Ramsey Street
Banning, California 92220
Phone: (951) 922-3182
Email: [email protected]
Applicant’s Agent: City of Banning Public Works Department Patrick Safari
CIP Manager
99 E. Ramsey Street
Banning, California 92220
Phone: (951) 922-3168
Email: [email protected]
Regional Water
Board Staff:
Logan Raub
Senior Environmental Scientist
73-720 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Phone: (760) 776-8966
Email: [email protected]
262
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Colorado River Basin Water Board Contact Person:
If you have any questions, please call the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board (Colorado River Basin Water Board) staff contact listed above or (760) 346-7491 and ask to speak with the 401 Water Quality Certification Program Manager.
263
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Table of Contents
I. Order ................................................................................................................4 II. Public Notice.....................................................................................................4 III. Project Purpose ................................................................................................4 IV. Project Description............................................................................................4 V. Project Location................................................................................................5 VI. Project Impact and Receiving Waters Information............................................5 VII. Description of Direct Impacts to Waters of the State ........................................5 VIII. Compensatory Mitigation ..................................................................................6 IX. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)...................................................6 X. Petitions for Review..........................................................................................7 XI. Fees Received..................................................................................................7 XII. Conditions.........................................................................................................7 XIII. Conclusion......................................................................................................21 Attachment A
Project Maps ................................................................................................................22 Attachment B
Receiving Waters, Impact, and Mitigation Information .................................................34 Attachment C
CEQA Findings ............................................................................................................38 Attachment D
Signatory Requirements............................................................................................... 39 Attachment E
Reporting Requirements .............................................................................................. 40 264
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
I. Order
This Order for Waste Discharge Requirements (Order) is issued at the request of the City of Banning Public Works Department (Permittee) for the Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project (Project). This Order is for the purpose described in the application for this Order and supplemental information submitted by the Permittee. The application was received on December 5, 2024. Supplemental information was requested on January 3, 2025. Supplemental information was received on January 17, 2025. The application was deemed complete on January 21, 2025.
II. Public Notice
The Colorado River Basin Water Board has notified the Permittee and all known interested agencies and persons of its intent to issue Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for this discharge and has provided them with an opportunity for a public meeting and to submit comments. The Colorado River Basin Water Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments pertaining to this discharge.
III. Project Purpose
The Project purpose is to construct a new arterial highway segment that connects two existing roads in the City of Banning.
IV. Project Description
The Project involves construction of a new section of Sun Lakes Boulevard between South Highland Home Road and Sunset Avenue. Sun Lakes Boulevard will be an east-west arterial highway with two eastbound and two westbound lanes, a raised median, bike lanes, sidewalks, and intersection improvements. The Project will relocate approximately 13 power poles and various other utilities including portions of three steel pipelines that convey petroleum, natural gas, and telecommunications.
Sun Lakes Boulevard will cross Highland Wash, Smith Creek, and Pershing Creek from west to east. Multi-cell reinforced concrete box culverts, designed to minimally impact existing ephemeral flows, will be installed at each crossing. Straight wing walls with concrete and riprap aprons will be constructed at the upstream end of the culverts. Vertical wing walls and concrete aprons with concrete maintenance access ramps will be constructed at the downstream end of the culverts. Concrete swales and trapezoidal channels will intercept and route stormwater to Smith Creek and Pershing Creek consistent with the City of Banning's Master Drainage Plan. Catch basins fitted with approved filters will capture and treat post-construction debris and runoff from the new roadway. The Project design was developed in coordination with the California Department Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to avoid impacts to sediment transport in this reach of the stream channels.
The Project is consistent with the City of Banning's Circulation Element that was amended in January 2020 through General Plan Amendment (GPA) 19-2502. This GPA modified the previous Circulation Element (GPA 16-2501) by changing the alignment of Sun Lakes Boulevard to its current alignment north (upstream) of 265
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Westward Avenue. Westward Avenue is an existing unpaved dirt road with concrete Arizona crossings and pipe culverts currently in place at Highland Wash, Smith Creek, and Pershing Creek. Westward Avenue will not be modified by this Project.
V. Project Location
The Project site is located in the western portion of the City of Banning, south of Interstate 10 (I-10), between the intersections of South Highland Home Road to the west and Sunset Avenue to the east, and north of Westward Avenue in Riverside County, California. Maps showing the Project location are in Attachment A of this Order.
VI. Project Impact and Receiving Waters Information
The Project is located within the jurisdiction of the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
Receiving waters and groundwater potentially impacted by the Project are protected in accordance with the Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (www.waterboards.ca.gov/coloradoriver/water_issues/programs/basin_planning/) (Basin Plan) and other Plans and Policies (www.waterboards.ca.gov/plans_policies/).
The Basin Plan includes water quality standards, which consist of existing, intermittent, and potential beneficial uses of waters of the state, water quality objectives to protect those uses, and the state and federal antidegradation policies.
Project impact and receiving waters information can be found in Attachment B. Table 1 of Attachment B shows the receiving waters and beneficial uses of waters of the state impacted by the Project. Individual impact locations and quantities are in Table 2 of Attachment B.
VII. Description of Direct Impacts to Waters of the State The Project will temporarily and permanently impact jurisdictional waters of the state within washes (ephemeral streams).
Total Project fill/excavation quantities for all impacts are summarized in Table 1.
Permanent impacts are categorized as those resulting in a physical loss in area and also those degrading ecological conditions.
266
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Table 1: Total Project Fill/Excavation Quantity
Temporary Impact1 Permanent Impact -
Physical Loss of Area
Permanent Impact -
Degradation of Ecological
Condition Only
0.09 acres
(187 linear feet)
0.37 acres
(748 linear feet) N/A
VIII. Compensatory Mitigation
The Permittee will provide compensatory mitigation for the authorized impacts to waters of the state at a ratio of 3:1 for permanent impacts and 2:1 for temporary impacts by preserving and enhancing 1.3 acres of in-kind waters of the state via permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation.
IX. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
On November 12, 2024, the City of Banning, as lead agency, adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Project (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2024090237) and filed a Notice of Determination with the SCH on November 14, 2024.
As a responsible agency under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069), the Colorado River Basin Water Board has reviewed and considered the environmental documents prepared by the City of Banning and finds that they adequately address the Project's water resource impacts (Cal. Code of Regs., tit. 14, § 15096, subd. (f)). Pursuant to CEQA (Cal. Code of Regs., tit. 14, § 15096, subd. (h)), the Colorado River Basin Water Board has made Findings of Facts (Findings) which support the issuance of this Order and are included in Attachment C.
1 Includes only temporary direct impacts to waters of the state and does not include areas of temporary disturbance which could result in a discharge to waters of the state.
Temporary impacts, by definition, are restored to pre-project conditions and therefore do not include a physical loss of area or degradation of ecological condition. 267
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
X. Petitions for Review
Any person aggrieved by the Colorado River Basin Water Board action may petition the State Water Board for review in accordance with Water Code section 13320 and California Code of Regulations, title 23 (Title 23), section 2050 et seq. The State Water Board must receive the petition by 5:00 p.m. on the 30th day after the adoption date of this Order; if the 30th day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m. on the next business day.
Copies of the statutes and regulations applicable to filing petitions are available on the State Water Board’s website and can be provided upon request.
XI. Fees Received
An application fee of $4,212 and the project fee of $13,058, based on total Project impacts, were received on December 5, 2024. The fee amounts were determined as required by the California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 3833(b)(3) and 2200(a)(3) and were calculated as a Category A - Fill & Excavation Discharges (fee code 84) with the dredge and fill fee calculator.
XII. Conditions
The Colorado River Basin Water Board has independently reviewed the record of the Project to analyze impacts to water quality and designated beneficial uses within the watershed(s) of the Project. In accordance with this Order, the Permittee may proceed with the Project under the following terms and conditions:
A. Authorization
Impacts to waters of the state shall not exceed quantities shown in Table 1.
B. Reporting and Notification Requirements
The following section details the reporting and notification types and timing of submittals. Requirements for the content of these reporting and notification types are detailed in Attachment E, including specifications for photo and map documentation during the Project.
Written reports and notifications must be submitted using the Reporting and Notification Cover Sheet located in Attachment E, which must be signed by the Permittee or an authorized representative.
1. Project Reporting
a. Monthly Reporting:
The Permittee must submit a Monthly Report to the Colorado River Basin Water Board on the 15th day of each month for the duration of the construction phase. Monthly reporting shall continue until the Colorado River Basin Water Board issues a Notice of Project Complete Letter to the Permittee and this Order is terminated by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
268
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
b. Annual Reporting:
The Permittee must submit an Annual Report including activities conducted for the previous fiscal year (July 1 - June 30) to the Colorado River Basin Water Board on the 1st of September. Annual Reports must be submitted even if Project construction has not begun. Annual reporting shall continue until a Notice of Project Complete Letter is issued to the Permittee and this Order is terminated by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board. c. Other Reporting:
If pollutants are observed in surface water, the Permittee shall submit a report to the Colorado River Basin Water Board within 30 days after encountering the pollutants and describe actions taken to correct the problem and provide photographic documentation that supports the information in the report.
If repairs are required, the Permittee shall take pictures of the area where work needs to take place, documenting the before and after conditions of the area, and shall maintain a daily log for each site where work is taking place pursuant to this Order, while the Permittee conducts its repair activities. The log shall:
• Provide a general description of the repair work;
• Specify the date and daily starting and ending time for the repair work; • Note key weather conditions (e.g., temperature, wind speed and direction, precipitation, if any);
• Include notes from visual observations regarding the presence/absence of construction debris/trash (e.g., discarded filter fiber) and used oil (e.g., oil that leaks from construction equipment) in the area where the work has taken place.
Within 30 days following completion of all repair work, the Permittee shall submit to the Colorado River Basin Water Board a summary report of the key daily log entries. The summary report shall include the above-mentioned before and after pictures of the conditions of the area and shall be signed by the Permittee's Project Manager.
2. Project Status Notifications
a. Commencement of Construction:
The Permittee shall submit a Commencement of Construction Report at least seven (7) days prior to the start of initial ground disturbance activities. b. Request for Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter:
The Permittee shall submit a Request for Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter following completion of active Project construction activities, including any required restoration and permittee-responsible mitigation. This request shall be submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff within 30 days following completion of all Project construction activities. Upon 269
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
acceptance of the request, Colorado River Basin Water Board staff shall issue a Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter to the Permittee which will end the active discharge period and associated annual fees. c. Request for Notice of Project Complete Letter:
The Permittee shall submit a Request for Notice of Project Complete Letter when construction and/or any post-construction monitoring is complete2, and no further Project activities will occur. This request shall be submitted to Colorado River Basin Water Board staff within 30 days following completion of all Project activities. Upon approval of the request, the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff will issue a Notice of Project Complete Letter to the Permittee and prepare a draft order terminating this Order for approval by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board. Board approval of the termination will end the post discharge monitoring period and associated annual fees.
3. Conditional Notifications and Reports
The following notifications and reports are required as appropriate:
a. Accidental Discharges of Hazardous Materials3:
Following an accidental discharge of a reportable quantity of a hazardous material, sewage, or an unknown material, the following applies (Wat. Code, § 13271):
i. As soon as (A) the Permittee has knowledge of the discharge or noncompliance, (B) notification is possible, and (C) notification can be provided without substantially impeding cleanup or other emergency measures, then:
• First call - 911 (to notify local response agency)
• Then call - Office of Emergency Services (OES) State Warning Center at: (800) 852-7550 or (916) 845-8911
2 Completion of post-construction monitoring shall be determined by Colorado River Basin Water Board staff and shall be contingent on successful attainment of restoration and mitigation performance criteria.
3 "Hazardous material" means any material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. "Hazardous materials" include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing that it would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment (Health and Saf. Code § 25501).
270
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
• Lastly, follow the required OES procedures as set forth in the California Hazardous Materials Spill/Release Notification Guidance (www.caloes.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/
Fire-Rescue/Documents/
CalOES-Spill_Booklet_Feb2014_FINAL_BW_Acc.pdf)
ii. Following notification to OES, the Permittee shall notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board, as soon as practicable (ideally within 24 hours). Notification may be via telephone, e-mail, delivered written notice, or other verifiable means.
iii. Within five (5) working days of notification to the Colorado River Basin Water Board, the Permittee must submit an Accidental Discharge of Hazardous Material Report.
b. Violation of Compliance with Water Quality Standards:
i. The Permittee shall notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board of any event causing a violation of compliance with water quality standards. Notification may be via telephone, e-mail, delivered written notice, or other verifiable means.
ii. Examples of noncompliance events include lack of storm water treatment following a rain event, discharges causing a visible plume in a water of the state, and runoff from water contact with uncured concrete.
iii. This notification must be followed within three (3) working days by submission of a Violation of Compliance with Water Quality Standards Report.
c. In-Water Work:
i. The Permittee shall notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board at least 48 hours prior to initiating work in water or stream diversions.
Notification may be via telephone, e-mail, delivered written notice, or other verifiable means.
ii. Within three (3) working days following completion of work in water or stream diversions, an In-Water Work/Diversions Water Quality Monitoring Report must be submitted to Colorado River Basin Water Board staff.
271
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
d. Modifications to Project:
Project modifications may require an amendment of this Order. The Permittee shall give advance notice to Colorado River Basin Water Board staff if Project implementation as described in the application materials is altered in any way or by the imposition of subsequent permit conditions by any local, state, or federal regulatory authority by submitting a Modifications to Project Report.
The Permittee shall inform Colorado River Basin Water Board staff of any Project modifications that will interfere with the Permittee’s compliance with this Order.
e. Transfer of Property Ownership:
This Order is not transferable in its entirety or in part to any person or organization except after notice to the Colorado River Basin Water Board in accordance with the following terms:
i. The Permittee must notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board of any change in ownership or interest in ownership of the Project area by submitting a Transfer of Property Ownership Report. The Permittee and purchaser must sign and date the notification and provide such notification to the Colorado River Basin Water Board at least 10 days prior to the transfer of ownership.
ii. Until such time as this Order has been modified to name the purchaser as the permittee, the Permittee shall continue to be responsible for all requirements set forth in this Order.
f. Transfer of Long-Term BMP Maintenance:
If maintenance responsibility for post-construction best management practices (BMPs) is legally transferred, the Permittee must submit to the Colorado River Basin Water Board a copy of such documentation and must provide the transferee with a copy of a long-term BMP maintenance plan that complies with manufacturer or designer specifications. The Permittee must provide such notification to the Colorado River Basin Water Board with a Transfer of Long-Term BMP Maintenance Report at least 10 days prior to the transfer of BMP maintenance responsibility.
272
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
C. Water Quality Monitoring
1. General:
If surface water is present, continuous visual surface water monitoring shall be conducted to detect accidental discharge of construction related pollutants (e.g. oil and grease, turbidity plume, or uncured concrete).
2. Accidental Discharge/Noncompliance:
Upon occurrence of an accidental discharge of hazardous materials or a violation of compliance with a water quality standard, Colorado River Basin Water Board staff may require water quality monitoring based on the discharge constituents and/or related water quality objectives and beneficial uses.
3. In-Water Work or Diversions:
For projects involving planned work in water or stream diversions, a water quality monitoring plan shall be submitted to Colorado River Basin Water Board staff for acceptance at least 30 days in advance of any discharge to the affected water body. Water quality monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with the approved plan. Sampling shall be conducted in accordance with Table 2 sampling parameters, and work in water or stream diversionary discharge(s) to waters of the state shall conform to the following water quality standards4 at a minimum. In the event that water quality sampling shows an exceedance of water quality objectives, notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board in the Monthly Report.
4 Pollutants shall be analyzed using the analytical methods described in 40 Code of Federal Regulations part 136. Where no methods are specified for a given pollutant, the method shall be approved by Colorado River Basin Water Board’s Executive Officer.
Grab samples shall be taken between the surface and mid-depth and not be collected at the same time each day to get a complete representation of variations in the receiving water. A hand-held field meter may be used, provided the meter utilizes a USEPA-approved algorithm/method and is calibrated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. A calibration and maintenance log for each meter used for monitoring shall be maintained onsite
273
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Table 2: Sample Type and Frequency Requirements
Parameter Unit of
Measurement
Type of
Sample
Minimum
Frequency
Water Quality
Objective
Oil and Grease N/A Visual Continuous 25 mg/L
Dissolved
Oxygen
mg/L and %
saturation Grab Every 4 hours ≥ 5 mg/L
pH Standard Units Grab Every 4 hours 6 - 9
Turbidity NTU Grab Every 4 hours Narrative5
Temperature °F (or as °C) Grab Every 4 hours Narrative6
4. Post-Construction:
The Permittee shall visually inspect the Project site following each rain event of greater than 0.1 inches that produces a discharge for five (5) years to ensure excessive erosion, stream instability, or other water quality pollution is not occurring in or downstream of the Project site. If water quality pollution is occurring, the Permittee shall contact the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff member overseeing the Project within three (3) working days. The Colorado River Basin Water Board may require the submission of a Violation of Compliance with Water Quality Standards Report. Additional permits may be required to carry out any necessary site remediation.
D. Standard
1. This Order is subject to modification or revocation upon administrative or judicial review, including review and amendment pursuant to Water Code section 13320, and Title 23, division 3, chapter 6 commencing with section 2050. Additionally, the Colorado River Basin Water Board reserves the right to suspend, cancel, or modify and reissue this Order, after providing notice to the Permittee, if the Colorado River Basin Water Board determines that: the Project fails to comply with any of the conditions of this Order; or, when necessary to implement any new or revised water quality standards and implementation plans adopted or 5 Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.
6 The natural receiving water temperature of surface waters shall not be altered by discharges of waste unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
274
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
approved pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.) or federal Clean Water Act section 303 (33 U.S.C. § 1313).
2. This Order is conditioned upon total payment of any fee required under title 23 of the California Code of Regulations and owed by the Permittee.
E. General Compliance
1. The Colorado River Basin Water Board reserves the right to take any enforcement action authorized by law. Accordingly, failure to timely comply with any provisions of this Order may subject the Discharger to enforcement action.
Such actions include, but are not limited to, the assessment of administrative civil liability pursuant to Water Code sections 13323, 13268, and 13350, a Time Schedule Order (TSO) issued pursuant to Water Code section 13308, or referral to the California Attorney General for recovery of judicial civil liability.
2. Permitted actions must not cause a violation of any applicable water quality standards, including impairment of designated beneficial uses for receiving waters as adopted in the Basin Plan by the Colorado River Basin Water Board or in any applicable State Water Board water quality control plan or policy. The source of any such discharge must be eliminated as soon as practicable.
3. In response to a suspected violation of any condition of this Order, the Colorado River Basin Water Board may require the holder of this Order to furnish, under penalty of perjury, any technical or monitoring reports the Water Boards deem appropriate, provided that the burden, including costs, of the reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the reports and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. Additional monitoring requirements ensure that permitted discharges and activities comport with any applicable effluent limitations, water quality standards, and/or other appropriate requirement of state law.
4. The Permittee must, at all times, fully comply with engineering plans, specifications, and technical reports submitted to support this Order; and all subsequent submittals required as part of this Order. The conditions within this Order and Attachments supersede conflicting provisions within Permittee submittals.
5. Construction General Permit Requirement: The Permittee shall maintain compliance with conditions described in and required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ; NPDES No. CAS000002).
F. Administrative
1. Signatory requirements for all document submittals required by this Order are presented in Attachment D of this Order.
275
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
2. This Order does not authorize any act which results in the taking of a threatened, endangered or candidate species or any act, which is now prohibited, or becomes prohibited in the future, under either the California Endangered Species Act (Fish & G. Code, §§ 2050-2097) or the federal Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544). If a “take” will result from any act authorized under this Order held by the Permittee, the Permittee must obtain authorization for the take prior to any construction or operation of the portion of the Project that may result in a take. The Permittee is responsible for meeting all requirements of the applicable endangered species act for the Project authorized under this Order.
3. The Permittee shall grant Colorado River Basin Water Board staff or an authorized representative (including an authorized contractor acting as a Water Board representative), upon presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, permission to:
a. Enter upon the Project or compensatory mitigation site(s) premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or conducted, or where records are kept.
b. Have access to and copy any records that are kept and are relevant to the Project or the requirements of this Order.
c. Inspect any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this Order. d. Sample or monitor for the purposes of assuring Order compliance.
4. A copy of this Order shall be provided to any consultants, contractors, and subcontractors working on the Project. Copies of this Order shall remain at the Project site for the duration of this Order. The Permittee shall be responsible for work conducted by its consultants, contractors, and any subcontractors.
5. A copy of this Order must be available at the Project site(s) during construction for review by site personnel and agencies. All personnel performing work on the Project shall be familiar with the content of this Order and its posted location at the Project site.
6. Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement - The Permittee shall submit a signed copy of the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement to the Colorado River Basin Water Board immediately upon execution and prior to any discharge to waters of the state.
G. Construction
Good Site Management “Housekeeping”
1. The Permittee shall follow good site management “housekeeping” and implement erosion control, sediment control, and other construction-related best management practices (BMPs) depicted in Table 3 below.
276
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
2. All ground-disturbing activities (work area preparation, grading, clearing, grubbing, trenching, construction, and decommissioning activities) shall comply with biological monitoring standards outlined in the issued Streambed Alteration Agreement or other Department of Fish and Wildlife agreement and be subject to approval by the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
3. The area of vegetation and soil disturbance shall be restricted to the smallest extent possible.
4. After completing construction activities, any disturbed areas shall be restored to pre-existing contours and conditions to the extent feasible.
Table 3: BMPs
Type of BMP BMP Application
Construction
BMPs
Erosion control Implement erosion control BMPs to mitigate soil erosion, minimize soil loss from wind
erosion, and to reduce air pollution during
construction activities for all disturbed areas.
Examples: mulch, straw, wood chips, soil
application, lot perimeter protection per
county standards, bonded fiber matrix or
stabilized fiber matrix, physical stabilization
erosion control blanket.
Velocity reduction Implement velocity reduction BMPs to reduce water/runoff velocity. Examples: energy
dissipater outlet protection.
Sediment control Implement sediment control BMPs to remove sediment loads from runoff generated within
the construction site for all disturbed areas.
Examples: silt fence, fiber rolls, gravel bags,
dewatering filtration.
Off-site sediment
tracking control
Implement off-site sediment tracking control
BMPs for reducing the transport of sediment
on tires off, and within, construction site.
Examples: stabilized construction entrance,
construction road stabilization, entrance/exit
tire wash, entrance/exit inspection and
cleaning facility.
277
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Type of BMP BMP Application
General site and
materials
management
Implement general site and materials
management BMPs for materials and waste
management. Examples: material delivery
and storage management, spill prevention
and control, concrete waste management,
solid waste management, sanitary waste
management, hazardous waste management.
Low Impact
Development
(LID)
Conservation of
natural drainages
Implement LID BMPs to conserve natural
drainages. Examples: minimize disturbances of
natural areas, construct in least environmentally
sensitive areas.
Minimize
disturbances to
natural drainages
Implement LID BMPs to minimize
disturbances to natural drainages. Examples:
avoid disturbing natural swales and
topographic depressions, construction
setback from creeks.
Minimize impervious
surfaces
Implement LID BMPs to reduce impervious
surfaces through efficient site design.
Examples: preserve existing vegetation,
permeable roads with minimum widths.
Minimize soil
compaction
Implement LID BMPs to minimize soil
compaction. Examples: protect native soil and
vegetation from construction equipment.
Drain runoff from
impervious surfaces
to pervious areas
Implement LID BMPs to drain runoff from
impervious surfaces to pervious areas.
Hydrologic design Implement LID BMPs for optimizing
hydrologic design. Examples: infiltration
trenches or basins, depression areas for
infiltration, bio-filters such as vegetated or
rock swales.
Permeable
pavement design
Implement LID BMPs using permeable
pavement design. Examples: pervious
concrete, permeable asphalt concrete/pavers,
granular material.
278
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Type of BMP BMP Application
LID road design Implement LID BMPs for road design.
Examples: permeable roads, reduction of
overall road coverage, direct runoff to
vegetated swales.
PostConstruction
BMPs
Protection of
channel
banks/manufactured
slopes
Implement channel protection BMPs to
protect banks of the channels as well as the
slopes.
Outlet protection Implement outlet protection BMPs to reduce discharge/water velocity. Examples: energy
dissipater outlet protection, velocity
dissipation devices.
Hazardous Materials
5. No toxic and/or hazardous materials shall be stored near or within wash/drainage areas. To the extent practicable, these materials shall be stored offsite and placed in appropriate secondary containment.
6. Spoil sites shall not be located where spoil could be washed back into the stream channel or where spoil covers aquatic or riparian vegetation. Any materials placed in seasonally dry portions of the drainage areas that could be washed downstream or could be harmful to aquatic life shall be removed from the streambed prior to inundation by high flows.
7. No fueling or maintenance of equipment or vehicles shall occur adjacent or within the wash/drainage areas.
Roads
8. Work and staging areas and temporary access routes shall be sized, located, and flagged to limit potential impacts to natural areas. Previously disturbed areas shall be used to the extent feasible.
Sediment Control
9. The Permittee shall implement sediment control BMPs to remove sediment loads from runoff generated within the construction site for all disturbed areas.
10.The Permittee shall implement off-site sediment tracking control BMPs for reducing the transport of sediment on tires off and within the construction site.
Stabilization/Erosion Control
11.The Permittee shall implement erosion control BMPs to mitigate soil erosion, minimize soil loss from wind erosion, and to reduce air pollution during construction activities for all disturbed areas.
279
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Stormwater
12.Work that may cause sediment discharge into ephemeral dry washes or stream channels shall not be conducted during rain events.
13.The Permittee shall develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that complies with the requirements of the State Water Board’s Construction General Permit.
14.Post-construction, the Permittee shall implement channel protection BMPs to protect banks of the channels as well as the slopes.
15.Post-construction, the Permittee shall implement outlet protection BMPs to reduce discharge/water velocity. Examples: energy dissipater outlet protection, velocity dissipation devices.
H. Mitigation for Permanent Impacts
1. Total Required Compensatory Mitigation
a. The Permittee is required to provide compensatory mitigation for authorized impacts to waters of the state through the preservation and enhancement of 1.3 acres of waters of the state within washes (ephemeral streams) via permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation. b. Total required Project compensatory mitigation information for permanent physical loss of area is summarized in Table 4.
Table 4: Required Project Compensatory Mitigation for Permanent Impacts Aquatic
Resource
Type7
Compensatory
Mitigation
Type8
Est.9 Reest. Reh. Enh. Pres. Unknown
Stream
Channel PR N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.3acres
N/A
7 Aquatic resource type may be Lake, Ocean/Bay/Estuary, Riparian Zone, Stream Channel, Vernal Pool, Wetland, or Unknown.
8 Compensatory mitigation type may be In-Lieu Fee Credits (ILF), Mitigation Bank Credits (MB), or Permittee-Responsible (PR).
9 Compensatory mitigation method may be Establishment (Est.), Re-establishment (Re-est.), Rehabilitation (Reh.), Enhancement (Enh.), Preservation (Pres.), or Unknown. 280
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
2. Draft Compensatory Mitigation Plan
a. The Permittee has submitted a draft compensatory mitigation plan dated January 9, 2025 as part of a complete application. The Permittee shall provide a final compensatory mitigation plan for review and approval by Water Board staff prior to any impacts to waters of the state. Impacts to waters of the state are not authorized and shall not occur until a final compensatory mitigation plan has been approved by Water Board staff. Upon approval by Water Board staff, the Permittee shall implement the approved plan. b. The final compensatory mitigation plan shall include all plan elements as outlined in the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State and the State Supplemental Dredge or Fill Guidelines, Subpart J – Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources.
3. Permittee-Responsible Compensatory Mitigation Responsibility a. Permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation shall be completed within 18 months of authorized impacts.
b. The Permittee is responsible for the required compensatory mitigation in perpetuity. However, the Permittee may transfer the compensatory mitigation requirements associated with long-term management when the following conditions have been met:
i. Performance standards are met.
ii. A Transfer Agreement to a third party has been approved by Water Board staff.
iii. An endowment fund has been provided by the Permittee to a third party for management in perpetuity of the mitigation site. iv. A conservation easement, deed restriction, or other appropriate restrictive covenant for the mitigation site has been recorded and approved by Water Board staff.
c. Transfer of Long-Term Permittee-Responsible Compensatory Mitigation and Management Responsibility
i. A transfer agreement shall be submitted from an authorized representative of the new party (transferee) for acceptance by Water Board staff. This agreement shall demonstrate acceptance and understanding of the responsibility to comply with and fully satisfy the required compensatory mitigation and long-term management conditions. Failure to comply with the mitigation conditions and associated requirements may subject the transferee to enforcement by the Water Board under Water Code section 13385, subdivision (a). 281
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
ii. Notification of transfer of responsibilities meeting the above condition must be provided to the Water Board staff. A draft transfer agreement shall be submitted to Water Board staff no less than 30 days prior to the transfer of the mitigation responsibility. A final transfer agreement shall be submitted to Water Board staff within 30 days of the completion of the transfer.
I. Mitigation for Temporary Impacts
1. Restoration of Temporary Impact Areas
a. The Permittee shall restore all areas of temporary impacts to waters of the state and all Project site upland areas of temporary disturbance which could result in a discharge to waters of the state to pre-Project conditions according to the approved Restoration Plan dated January 9, 2025, and incorporated herein by reference.
XIII. Conclusion
I, MICHAEL PLACENCIA, Executive Officer, hereby certify that the following is a full, true, and correct copy of the order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region, on June 3, 2025.
Original Signed By
Michael Placencia
Executive Officer
Colorado River Basin
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Attachment A Maps
Attachment B Receiving Waters, Impact, and Mitigation Information Attachment C CEQA Findings
Attachment D Signatory Requirements
Attachment E Reporting Requirements
282
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Attachment A
Project Maps
This page is intentionally left blank.
283
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 1: Regional map showing the Project location.10
10 Figures and photos submitted with the Application for Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredged or Fill Discharges to Waters of the State and supplemental materials for the Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project received by Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board on December 5, 2024.
284
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 2: Regional map showing the Project site and mitigation site locations within the Whitewater Hydrologic Unit (719.0).
285
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 3: Temporary and permanent impacts and stream channels in the Project area. 286
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 4: Waters of the state, flow direction, and existing culverts in the Project area. 287
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 5: Temporary and permanent impacts to waters of the state in the western portion of the Project. 288
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 6: Temporary and permanent impacts to waters of the state in the eastern portion of the Project. 289
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 7: Photo showing Highland Wash upstream of the Project area. 290
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 8: Photo showing Highland Wash downstream of the Project area. 291
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 9: Photo showing Smith Creek downstream of the Project area. 292
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 10: Photo showing Pershing Creek upstream of the Project area. 293
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Figure 11: Photo showing the existing Pershing Creek crossing and Westward Avenue downstream of the Project area. 294
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Attachment B
Receiving Waters, Impact, and Mitigation Information
Receiving Waters
The following table shows the receiving waters associated with each impact site. 295
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Table 1: Receiving Water(s) Information
Impact
Site ID
Waterbody
Name
Impacted Aquatic
Resource Type11
Water Board
Hydrologic
Units
Receiving
Waters
Receiving Waters
Beneficial Uses12
303(d)
Listing
Pollutant
eCRAM
ID
1 Highland
Wash Stream Channel Whitewater (719.0)
Wash
(Ephemeral
Stream)13
FRSH14, GWR,
REC II, WARM15,
WILD
N/A16 N/A17
2 Smith Creek Stream Channel Whitewater
(719.0)
Wash
(Ephemeral
Stream)
FRSH, GWR,
REC II, WARM,
WILD
N/A N/A
3 Pershing
Creek Stream Channel Whitewater (719.0)
Wash
(Ephemeral
Stream)
FRSH, GWR,
REC II, WARM,
WILD
N/A N/A
11 Aquatic resource type may be Lake, Ocean/Bay/Estuary, Riparian Zone, Stream Channel, Vernal Pool, Wetland, or Unknown.
12 Beneficial uses for Washes (Ephemeral Streams) in the West Colorado River Basin described in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Basin Plan). All beneficial uses are Intermittent. 13 Including the section of ephemeral flow in the Whitewater River Storm Water Channel and Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel from Indian Avenue to approximately 1/4 mile west of Monroe Street crossing (Basin Plan). 14 Applies only to tributaries to Salton Sea (Basin Plan). 15 Use, if any, to be determined on a case-by-case basis (Basin Plan). 16 Based on the 2020-2022 California Integrated Report for Clean Water Act 303(d) List and 305(b) Report 17 California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM) index score for impacted sites. 296
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Individual Direct Impact Locations
The following table shows individual direct impact locations.
Table 2: Individual Direct Impact Information
Impact
Site ID Latitude Longitude
Direct Impact
Requiring
Mitigation?
Temporary
Dredge
Impacts
Permanent
Dredge
Impacts
Temporary
Fill/Excavation
Impacts
Permanent
Fill/Excavation
Impacts
1 33.918440° -116.925143° Yes N/A N/A 0.01 acres
(61 linear feet)
0.10 acres
(394 linear feet)
2 33.918411° -116.923950° Yes N/A N/A 0.04 acres
(65 linear feet)
0.08 acres
(128 linear feet)
3 33.918355° -116.914648° Yes N/A N/A 0.03 acres
(72 linear feet)
0.20 acres
(230 linear feet)
297
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Compensatory Mitigation
The following table shows compensatory mitigation information.
Table 3: Compensatory Mitigation
Aquatic
Resource Type
Compensatory
Mitigation Type18 Est.19 Re-est. Reh. Enh. Pres. Unknown Stream Channel PR N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.3 acres N/A
The Permittee has agreed to provide permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation for authorized impacts to waters of the state at a ratio of 3:1 for permanent impacts and 2:1 for temporary impacts according to the approved compensatory mitigation plan.
18 Compensatory mitigation type may be In-Lieu Fee Credits (ILF), Mitigation Bank Credits (MB), or Permittee-Responsible (PR).
19 Compensatory mitigation method may be Establishment (Est.), Re-establishment (Re-est.), Rehabilitation (Reh.), Enhancement (Enh.), Preservation (Pres.), or Unknown.
298
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Attachment C
CEQA Findings
A. Environmental Review
On November 12, 2024, the City of Banning, as lead agency, adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (State Clearinghouse No. 2024090237) for the Project and filed a Notice of Determination at the State Clearinghouse on November 14, 2024. The Colorado River Basin Water Board is a responsible agency under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069) and in making its determinations and findings, must presume that the City of Banning's adopted environmental document complies with the requirements of CEQA and is valid (Cal. Code of Regs., tit. 14, § 15231). The Colorado River Basin Water Board has reviewed and considered the environmental document and finds that it adequately addresses the Project's water resource impacts (Cal. Code of Regs., tit. 14, § 15096, subd. (f)). The environmental document includes the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for all mitigation measures that have been adopted for the Project to reduce potential significant impacts (Pub. Resources Code, § 21081.6, subd. (a)(1); Cal. Code of Regs., tit. 14, § 15074, subd. (d).).
B. Incorporation by Reference
Pursuant to CEQA, these Findings of Facts (Findings) support the issuance of this Order based on the Project IS/MND, the application for this Order, and other supplemental documentation.
All CEQA project impacts are analyzed in detail in the Project Final IS/MND which is incorporated herein by reference. The Project IS/MND is available at:
https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/Project/2024090237.
Requirements under the purview of the Colorado River Basin Water Board in the MMRP are incorporated herein by reference.
The Permittee's application for this Order, including all supplemental information provided, are incorporated herein by reference.
C. Findings
The IS/MND states that there are no potentially significant environmental effects to water resources after the mitigation measures imposed by the lead agency.
D. Determination
Colorado River Basin Water Board has determined that the Project, when implemented in accordance with the MMRP and the conditions in this Order, will not result in any significant adverse water resource impacts (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15096, subd. (h).).
299
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Attachment D
Signatory Requirements
SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS
All documents submitted in compliance with this Order shall meet the following signatory requirements:
1. All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board shall be signed and certified as follows
a. For a corporation, by a responsible corporate officer of at least the level of vice-president.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship, by a general partner or proprietor respectively.
c. For a municipality, or a state, federal, or other public agency, by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.
2. A duly authorized representative of a person designated in items 1.a through 1.c above may sign documents if:
a. The authorization is made in writing by a person described in items 1.a through 1.c above.
b. The authorization specifies either an individual or position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated activity. c. The written authorization is submitted to the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff contact prior to submitting any documents listed in item 1 above.
3. Any person signing a document under this section shall make the following certification:
“I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.”
300
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Attachment E
Reporting Requirements
Copies of this Form
In order to identify your Project, it is necessary to include a copy of the Projectspecific Cover Sheet below with your report: please retain for your records. If you need to obtain a copy of the Cover Sheet, you may download a copy of this Order as follows:
1. Go to the Adopted Board Orders and Resolutions | Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board webpage
(www.waterboards.ca.gov/coloradoriver/board_decisions/adopted_orders/).
2. Find your Order in the table based on Date, Order No., and Board Order headers.
Report Submittal Instructions
1. Check the box on the Report and Notification Cover Sheet next to the report or notification you are submitting.
a. Part A (Annual Report): This report will be submitted annually from the anniversary of the Order effective date until a Notice of Project Complete Letter is issued and this Order is terminated by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
b. Part B (Project Status Notifications): Used to notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board of the status of the Project schedule that may affect Project billing.
c. Part C (Conditional Notifications and Reports): Required on a case-bycase basis for accidental discharges of hazardous materials, violation of compliance with water quality standards, notification of in-water work, or other reports.
2. Sign the Report and Notification Cover Sheet and attach all information requested for the Report Type.
3. Electronic Report Submittal Instructions:
a. Submit signed Report and Notification Cover Sheet and required information via email to: [email protected] and cc:
[email protected].
b. Include in the subject line of the email: Subject: ATTN: Logan Raub; Reg.
Measure ID: 459421_Report
301
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Definition of Reporting Terms
1. Active Discharge Period: The active discharge period begins with the effective date of this Order and ends on the date that the Permittee receives a Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter or, if no post-construction monitoring is required, a Notice of Project Complete Letter. The Active Discharge Period includes all elements of the Project including site construction and restoration, and any Permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation construction.
2. Request for Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter: This request by the Permittee to the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff pertains to projects that have post-construction monitoring requirements, e.g. if site restoration was required to be monitored for 5 years following construction. Colorado River Basin Water Board staff will review the request and send a Completion of Discharges Letter to the Permittee upon approval. This letter will initiate the post-discharge monitoring period and a change in fees from the annual active discharge fee to the annual post-discharge monitoring fee.
3. Request for Notice of Project Complete Letter: This request by the Permittee to the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff pertains to projects that either have completed post-construction monitoring and achieved performance standards or have no post-construction monitoring requirements, and no further Project activities are planned. Colorado River Basin Water Board staff will review the request and upon approval, will issue a Project Complete Letter and prepare an order terminating the WDRs for approval by the Colorado River Basin Water Board. Termination of annual invoicing of fees will correspond with the date of termination of this Order by the Board.
4. Post-Discharge Monitoring Period: The Post-Discharge Monitoring Period begins on the date of the Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter and ends on the date of termination of this Order by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board. The Post-Discharge Monitoring Period includes continued water quality monitoring or compensatory mitigation monitoring.
5. Effective Date: Date of Order issuance.
302
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Map/Photo Documentation Information
When submitting maps or photos, please use the following formats.
1. Map Format Information:
Preferred map formats of at least 1:24000 (1” = 2000’) detail (listed in order of preference):
• GIS shapefiles: The shapefiles must depict the boundaries of all Project areas and extent of aquatic resources impacted. Each shape should be attributed with the extent/type of aquatic resources impacted. Features and boundaries should be accurate to within 33 feet (10 meters). Identify datum/projection used and if possible, provide map with a North American Datum of 1983 (NAD38) in the California Teale Albers projection in feet.
• Google KML files saved from Google Maps, My Maps, or Google Earth Pro: Maps must show the boundaries of all Project areas and extent/type of aquatic resources impacted. Include URL(s) of maps. If this format is used, include a spreadsheet with the object ID and attributed with the extent/type of aquatic resources impacted.
• Other electronic format (CAD or illustration format): When other electronic formats are used to provide a context for location (inclusion of landmarks, known structures, geographic coordinates, or USGS DRG or DOQQ), maps must show the boundaries of all Project areas and extent/type of aquatic resources impacted. If this format is used, include a spreadsheet with the object ID and attributed with the extent/type of aquatic resources impacted. • Aquatic resource maps marked on paper USGS 7.5-minute topographic maps or Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quads (DOQQ) printouts: Maps must show the boundaries of all Project areas and extent/type of aquatic resources impacted. If this format is used, include a spreadsheet with the object ID and attributed with the extent/type of aquatic resources impacted.
2. Photo-Documentation: Include a unique identifier, date stamp, written description of photo details, and latitude/longitude (in decimal degrees) or map indicating location of photo. Successive photos should be taken from the same vantage point to compare pre/post construction conditions.
303
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
REPORT AND NOTIFICATION COVER SHEET
Project: Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project
Permittee: City of Banning Public Works Department
WDID No.: 7A333292001
Reg. Meas. ID: 459421
Place ID: 897966
Order Effective Date: June 3, 2025
Report Type Submitted
Part A – Project Reporting
Report Type 1 ☐ Monthly Report
Report Type 2 ☐ Annual Report
Part B – Project Status Notifications
Report Type 3 ☐ Commencement of Construction
Report Type 4 ☐ Request for Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter Report Type 5 ☐ Request for Notice of Project Complete Letter and Order Rescission
Part C – Conditional Notifications and Reports
Report Type 6 ☐ Accidental Discharge of Hazardous Material Report Report Type 7 ☐ Violation of Compliance with Water Quality Standards Report Report Type 8 ☐ In-Water Work/Diversions Water Quality Monitoring Report Report Type 9 ☐ Modifications to Project Report
Report Type 10 ☐ Transfer of Property Ownership Report
Report Type 11 ☐Transfer of Long-Term BMP Maintenance Report 304
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
“I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.
Print Name20 Affiliation and Job Title
Signature Date
I hereby authorize to act in my behalf as my
representative in the submittal of this report, and to furnish upon request, supplemental information in support of this submittal.
Permittee’s Signature Date
*This Report and Notification Cover Sheet must be signed by the Permittee or a duly authorized representative and included with all written submittals 20 STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION (include if authorization has changed since application was submitted)
305
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Part A – Project Reporting
Report Type 1 Monthly Report
Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff of the Project status and environmental compliance activities on a monthly basis.
When to Submit The Permittee must submit a Monthly Report to the Colorado River Basin Water Board on the 15th day of each month for the duration of the construction phase.
Monthly reporting shall continue until the Colorado River Basin Water Board issues a Notice of Project Complete Letter to the Permittee and this Order is terminated by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
Report Contents 1. Construction Summary
Describe Project progress and schedule including initial ground disturbance, site clearing and grubbing, road
construction, site construction, and the implementation status of construction storm water Best Management Practices
(BMPs). If construction has not started, provide an estimated start date.
2. Event Summary
Describe distinct Project activities and occurrences, including environmental monitoring, surveys, and inspections.
3. Photo Summary
Provide photos of Project activities. For each photo, include a unique site identifier, date stamp, written description of photo details, and latitude/longitude (in decimal degrees) or map indicating location of photo. Successive photos should be taken from the same vantage point to compare pre/post
construction conditions.
4. Compliance Summary
a) List name and organization of environmental surveyors, monitors, and inspectors involved with monitoring
environmental compliance for the reporting period.
b) List associated monitoring reports for the reporting period. c) Summarize observed incidences of non-compliance,
compliance issues, minor problems, or occurrences.
306
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Report Type 1 Monthly Report
d) Describe each observed incidence in detail. List monitor name and organization, date, location, type of incident, corrective action taken (if any), status, and resolution.
Report Type 2 Annual Report
Report Purpose Notify the Colorado River Basin Water Board staff of Project status during both the Active Discharge Period and PostDischarge Monitoring Periods.
When to Submit The Permittee must submit an Annual Report including activities conducted for the previous fiscal year (July 1 - June 30) to the Colorado River Basin Water Board on the 1st of September.
Annual Reports must be submitted even if Project construction has not begun. Annual reporting shall continue until a Notice of Project Complete Letter is issued to the Permittee by the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
Report Contents The contents of the annual report shall include the topics indicated below for each project period. Report contents are outlined in Annual Report Topics below.
During the Active Discharge Period
• Topic 1: Construction Summary
• Topic 2: Mitigation for Temporary Impacts Status
• Topic 3: Compensatory Mitigation for Permanent Impacts Status
During the Post-Discharge Monitoring Period
• Topic 2: Mitigation for Temporary Impacts Status
• Topic 3: Compensatory Mitigation for Permanent Impacts Status
307
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Annual Report Topics (1-3)
Annual Report
Topic 1 Construction Summary
When to Submit With the annual report during the Active Discharge Period.
Report Contents 1. Project progress and schedule, including initial ground disturbance, site clearing and grubbing, road construction, site construction, and the implementation status of
construction storm water best management practices
(BMPs). If construction has not started, provide estimated start date and reasons for delay.
2. Map showing general Project progress.
3. If applicable:
a. Summary of Conditional Notification and Report Types 6 and 7 (Part C below).
b. Summary of Certification Deviations. See Certification Deviation Attachment for further information.
Annual Report
Topic 2 Mitigation for Temporary Impacts Status
When to Submit With the annual report during both the Active Discharge Period and Post-Discharge Monitoring Period.
Report Contents 1. Planned date of initiation and map showing locations of mitigation for temporary impacts to waters of the state and all upland areas of temporary disturbance which could result in a discharge to waters of the state.
2. If mitigation for temporary impacts has already commenced, provide a map and information concerning attainment of
performance standards contained in the restoration plan. 308
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Annual Report
Topic 3 Compensatory Mitigation for Permanent Impacts Status When to Submit With the annual report during both the Active Discharge Period and Post-Discharge Monitoring Period.
Report Contents *If not applicable, report “N/A”.
Part A. Permittee Responsible
1. Planned date of initiation of compensatory mitigation site installation.
2. If installation is in progress, a map of what has been completed to date.
3. If the compensatory mitigation site has been installed, provide a final map and information concerning attainment of performance standards contained in the compensatory
mitigation plan.
Part B. Mitigation Bank or In-Lieu Fee
1. Status or proof of purchase of credit types and quantities.
2. Include the name of bank/ILF Program and contact
information.
3. If ILF, location of project and type if known.
309
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Part B – Project Status Notifications
Report Type 3 Commencement of Construction
Report Purpose Notify Colorado River Basin Water Board staff prior to the start of construction.
When to Submit Must be received at least seven (7) days prior to start of initial ground disturbance activities.
Report Contents 1. Date of commencement of construction.
2. Anticipated date when discharges to waters of the state will occur.
3. Project schedule milestones, including a schedule for onsite compensatory mitigation, if applicable.
Report Type 4 Request for Notice of Completion of Discharges Letter Report Purpose Notify Colorado River Basin Water Board staff that postconstruction monitoring is required and that active Project construction, including any mitigation and Permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation, is complete.
When to Submit Must be received by Colorado River Basin Water Board staff within thirty (30) days following completion of all Project construction activities.
Report Contents 1. Status of stormwater Notice of Termination(s), if applicable.
2. Status of post-construction stormwater BMP installation.
3. Pre- and post-photo documentation of all Project activity sites where the discharge of dredge and/or fill/excavation was authorized.
4. Summary of Certification Deviation discharge quantities compared to initial authorized impacts to waters of the state, if applicable.
5. An updated monitoring schedule for mitigation for temporary impacts to waters of the state and Permittee-responsible compensatory mitigation during the Post-Discharge
Monitoring Period, if applicable.
310
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Report Type 5 Request for Notice of Project Complete Letter and Order Termination
Report Purpose Notify Colorado River Basin Water Board staff that construction and/or any post-construction monitoring is complete, or is not required, and no further Project activity is planned.
When to Submit Must be received by Colorado River Basin Water Board staff within thirty (30) days following completion of all Project activities.
Report Contents Part A: Mitigation for Temporary Impacts
1. A report establishing that the performance standards outlined in the restoration plan have been met for Project site upland areas of temporary disturbance which could result in a
discharge to waters of the state.
2. A report establishing that the performance standards outlined in the restoration plan have been met for restored areas of temporary impacts to waters of the state. Pre- and post-photo documentation of all restoration sites.
Part B: Permittee Responsible Compensatory Mitigation
3. A report establishing that the performance standards outlined in the compensatory mitigation plan have been met.
4. Status on the implementation of the long-term maintenance and management plan and funding of endowment.
5. Pre- and post-photo documentation of all compensatory mitigation sites.
6. Final maps of all compensatory mitigation areas (including buffers).
Part C: Post-Construction Stormwater BMPs
7. Date of storm water Notice of Termination(s), if applicable.
8. Report status and functionality of all post-construction BMPs. 311
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Part C – Conditional Notifications and Reports
Report Type 6 Accidental Discharge of Hazardous Material Report Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff that an accidental discharge of hazardous material has occurred.
When to Submit Within five (5) working days following the date of an accidental discharge. Continue reporting as required by Colorado River Basin Water Board staff.
Report Contents 1. The report shall include the OES Incident/Assessment Form, a full description and map of the accidental discharge incident (i.e. location, time and date, source, discharge constituent and quantity, aerial extent, and photo documentation). If applicable, the OES Written Follow-Up Report may be
substituted.
2. If applicable, any required sampling data, a full description of the sampling methods including frequency/dates and times of sampling, equipment, locations of sampling sites.
3. Locations and construction specifications of any barriers, including silt curtains or diverting structures, and any associated trenching or anchoring.
Report Type 7 Violation of Compliance with Water Quality Standards Report
Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff that a violation of compliance with water quality standards has occurred.
When to Submit The Permittee shall report any event that causes a violation of water quality standards within three (3) working days of the noncompliance event to Colorado River Basin Water Board staff.
Report Contents The report shall include: the cause; the location shown on a map; and the period of the noncompliance including exact dates and times. If the noncompliance has not been corrected, include:
the anticipated time it is expected to continue; the steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance; and any monitoring results if required by Colorado River Basin Water Board staff.
312
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Report Type 8 In-Water Work and Diversions Water Quality Monitoring Report
Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff of the completion of in-water work.
When to Submit Within three (3) working days following the completion of inwater work. Continue reporting in accordance with the approved water quality monitoring plan.
Report Contents As required by the approved water quality monitoring plan.
Report Type 9 Modifications to Project Report
Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff if the Project, as described in the application materials, is altered in any way or by the imposition of subsequent permit conditions by any local, state or federal regulatory authority.
When to Submit If Project implementation as described in the application materials is altered in any way or by the imposition of subsequent permit conditions by any local, state or federal regulatory authority.
Report Contents A description and location of any alterations to Project implementation. Identification of any Project modifications that will interfere with the Permittee’s compliance with the Order. 313
City of Banning Public Works Department WDID: 7A333292001 Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension Project Reg. Meas. ID: 459421 Place ID: 897966
Report Type 10 Transfer of Property Ownership Report
Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff of change in ownership of the Project or Permittee-responsible mitigation area.
When to Submit At least ten (10) working days prior to the transfer of ownership.
Report Contents 1. A statement that the Permittee has provided the purchaser with a copy of this Order and that the purchaser understands and accepts:
a. the Order’s requirements and the obligation to
implement them or be subject to administrative and/or
civil liability for failure to do so; and
b. responsibility for compliance with any long-term BMP maintenance plan requirements in this Order.
2. A statement that the Permittee has informed the purchaser to submit a written request to the Colorado River Basin Water Board to be named as the permittee in a revised order.
Report Type 11 Transfer of Long-Term BMP Maintenance Report Report Purpose Notifies Colorado River Basin Water Board staff of transfer of long-term BMP maintenance responsibility.
When to Submit At least ten (10) working days prior to the transfer of BMP maintenance responsibility.
Report Contents A copy of the legal document transferring maintenance responsibility of post-construction BMPs21.
21 Best Management Practices (BMPs) is a term used to describe a type of water pollution or environmental control.
314
Corporate Office – Orange County Telephone: 949.788.4900 16431 Scientific Way Facsimile: 949.788.4901
Irvine, CA 92618-4355 Website: www.ultrasystems.com
February 11, 2026
Project No: 7366 | CO# 1
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department VIA EMAIL City of Banning
99 E. Ramsey Street
Banning, CA 92220
E: [email protected]
Subject: Change Order #1
Regulatory Requirements for CDFW/SAA and RWQCB/WDR
Dear Patrick:
Change Order #1 includes additional mitigation monitoring required pursuant to regulatory permits for the Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension. There are three separate permits that need specific compliance.
They include the following:
1. ITP (2081-2025-079-06). The ITP work relating to Compliance is being handled by Albert Webb.
2. CDFW-SAA – EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6. See table below for compliance.
3. RWQCB - WDR – Order R7-2025-0014. See table below for compliance.
SCOPE OF WORK
Presented below is our Scope of Work, based on compliance conditions within each of the specific regulatory permits.
For the CDFW - SAA Permit, UltraSystems would assist with those compliance requirements that are not being handled by Albert Webb. Areas of responsibility are noted in the table below. 315
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
CDFW - SAA
Requirement No. Section Responsible
Administrative
Measures
1.7 Notify CDFW Prior to Work. Permittee shall notify CDFW by email at least five (5) working days prior to initiation of Project activities. See contact information below.
UEI Biologist
1.8 Reporting of Violations. Permittee shall report any violations of the Agreement, whether committed by Permittee or any person acting on behalf of Permittee, to the CDFW contact identified below within 48 hours of the violation occurring.
UEI Biologist
1.9 Dead or Injured Species. Permittee shall report any dead or injured CESAor ESA- listed threatened, endangered, or fully protected species, or species of special concern found along roads or in Project areas to CDFW within 24 hours via email according to contact information below. The Permittee shall report the location, cause of death or injury, species found, and any other relevant information.
UEI Biologist
1.11 Work According to Plans. Final stamped engineered design plans shall be submitted to CDFW a minimum of 30 days prior to start of Project activities, for review by CDFW prior to Project start. The final plans shall be based on the Project design plans submitted to CDFW in the notification package. If the submitted Project plans differ substantially from the Project description, Permittee shall provide CDFW a detailed, written description of the changes made. CDFW may require an amendment to this Agreement or submission of a new notification prior to starting the Project if the Project designs have changed from those submitted in the Notification Package.
Contractor
and
City
General Wildlife
Protection and
Prevention
Measures
2.1 Designated Biologist(s) and Biological Monitor(s). Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and approval the names, qualifications, business addresses, and contact information of any qualified biologists (Designated Biologist(s)) and Biological Monitor(s) that will be utilized to conduct species/habitat surveys, biological monitoring, or mitigation planning and implementation activities at least 30 days before initiating ground- or vegetation- disturbing activities. Permittee shall specify the proposed responsibilities of each Designated Biologist(s) and/or Biological Monitor(s) and provide clear evidence of knowledge, experience, and capability of performing those proposed duties. Optional CDFW biologist resume form available here:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=202869.
UEI Biologist
2.2 Responsibility of the Designated Biologist(s). The Designated Biologist(s) shall be responsible for monitoring activities addressed by this Agreement, including, but not limited to all activities that result in clearing, grading, drilling, and/or other ground-disturbing activities. To ensure compliance with the measures of this Agreement, the Designated Biologist(s) shall confirm and monitor the limits of Project activities addressed by this Agreement.
UEI Biologist
2.4 Authority of Biological Monitor(s). The Permittee or Designated Biologist shall designate a person to monitor on-site compliance with all conditions of this Agreement. The Biological Monitor shall halt Project Activities to comply with the terms of this Agreement and otherwise avoid impacts to species or habitats.
UEI Biologist
316
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
General Wildlife
Protection and
Prevention
Measures
2.5 Delineate Work Area Boundary. In consultation with the Designated Biologist(s), Permittee shall clearly delineate the outer perimeter of the work areas and access routes with appropriate fencing, signage, and/or flagging to prevent damage to adjacent habitats prior to start of Project activities. The delineation materials shall be in place during all periods of operation and all persons employed or otherwise working on the Project site shall be instructed about the restrictions. Permittee shall ensure the delineation materials are monitored daily, and maintained, repaired, or replaced immediately if the materials are damaged, lost, stolen, or become ineffective in any way. The Designated Biologist(s) shall ensure the delineation materials do not create a barrier to wildlife movement and will not pose a risk to wildlife safety.
UEI Biologist
2.6 Environmentally Sensitive Areas. The Designated Biologist shall determine and clearly delineate any necessary avoidance and/or buffer areas with appropriate fencing, signage, and/or flagging. The delineation materials shall be visibly discernable from the ‘standard work area boundary’ materials and all persons employed or otherwise working on the Project site shall be instructed about the restrictions associated with these environmentally sensitive areas. Permittee shall ensure the delineation materials are monitored daily, and maintained, repaired, or replaced immediately if the materials are damaged, lost, stolen, or become ineffective in any way. The Designated Biologist(s) shall ensure the delineation materials do not create a barrier to wildlife movement and will not pose a risk to wildlife safety.
UEI Biologist
2.7 Wildlife Species. To avoid impact to any non-listed wildlife species, a Designated Biologist shall inspect the project area prior to any project activities. Any individuals found shall not be harassed and shall be allowed to leave the project area unharmed. If needed, a Designated Biologist may guide, handle, or capture an individual non-listed wildlife species to move it to a nearby safe location within nearby refugium, or it shall be allowed to leave the project site of its own volition. Capture methods may include hand, dip net, lizard lasso, snake tongs and snake hook. If the wildlife species is discovered or is caught in any pits, ditches, or other types of excavations, the Designated Biologist shall release it into the most suitable habitat near the site of capture.
UEI Biologist
2.9 Daily Clearance Survey. Before the start and end of daily Project activities.
The Designated Biologist or Biological Monitor shall survey the Project area to ensure wildlife incidentally trapped due to project activities are allowed to escape.
UEI Biologist
2.9.1 Excavated Areas. At the end of each workday, Permittee shall, with the oversight of the Designated Biologist(s) or a trained construction management staff, secure any open trench or excavated area within the Project area addressed by this Agreement such that animals are unable to enter and become entrapped. The excavated areas must be secured using appropriate site- and species-specific methods, such as, placing plywood or other barrier materials over the excavated area, placing an escape ramp of suitable material and at an angle no greater than 30 degrees at each end of the open trench/excavated area, or installing temporary fencing around the perimeter of trenches or holes.
UEI Biologist
317
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
General Wildlife
Protection and
Prevention
Measures
2.9.2 Check for Wildlife in Pipes/Construction Materials. Permittee shall visually inspect all sections of pipe/construction materials for the presence of wildlife sheltering within them prior to the pipe sections being placed in the trench and attached together or shall have the ends capped while stored on site to prevent wildlife from entering. After attaching the pipe sections to one another, whether in the trench or not, the exposed end(s) of the pipeline shall be capped at the end of each day during construction to prevent wildlife from entering and being trapped in the pipeline. All pipes, hoses, or similar structures less than 12 inches in diameter shall be closed or covered to prevent animal entry.
UEI Biologist
Diversion/
Dewatering Plan
2.25 Diversion Plan. If Project activities are proposed to occur at any time when flowing water is present or reasonably anticipated, Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and approval a water diversion/dewatering plan a minimum of 30 days before initiating Project activities involving water diversion.
Contractor’s
Engineering
Consultant
4.9 Diversion Plan. If Project activities are proposed at any time when flowing water is present, or reasonably anticipated, no later than 30 days prior to commencement of Project activities addressed by this Agreement, Permittee shall submit to CDFW for review and approval a detailed water diversion/dewatering plan. Dewatering structures may include the use of sandbags, Port-a dams, water bladder dams, K-rails, or driven sheet metal coffer dams. CDFW will review the proposed water diversion method, to approve the plan or provide the requirements for that approval.
Permittee may not commence dewatering of a stream/diversion of water without explicit approval from CDFW.
Contractor’s
Engineering
Consultant
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.15 -
2.19 Best Management Practices. Permittee shall actively implement BMPs to prevent erosion and the discharge of sediment and pollutants during Project activities. BMPs shall be monitored and repaired if necessary to ensure maximum erosion, sediment, and pollution control. Permittee shall prohibit the use of erosion control materials potentially harmful to fish and wildlife species, such as mono-filament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material. All fiber rolls, straw wattles, and/or hay bales utilized within and adjacent to the Project site shall be free of non- native plant materials. Fiber rolls or erosion control mesh shall be made of loose- weave mesh that is not fused at the intersections of the weave, such as jute, or coconut (coir) fiber, or other products without welded weaves. Nonwelded weaves reduce entanglement risks to wildlife by allowing animals to push through the weave, which expands when spread. Permittee shall ensure BMPs do not pose a barrier to wildlife movement and shall be installed to allow for the safe passage of wildlife movement, particularly of less vagile species (such as small mammals and reptiles), out of the Project area. Long, continuous lengths of silt-fencing or other BMP materials installed without gaps can create a barrier to wildlife movement, trapping wildlife within the Project area. Areas of safe passage can be easily accommodated by leaving small gaps between parallel and overlapping lengths of BMPs.
Contractor
and
UEI Biologist
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.15.1 If work is performed within the stream channel during the winter storm period, the Permittee shall monitor the five (5) day weather forecast. If it is forecasted for any precipitation, work activities shall involve the securing of the site, so as no materials may enter or be washed into the stream. The site shall be completely secured one (1) day prior to precipitation, unless prior written approval has been provided by CDFW. During period of precipitation, no construction activities may occur; activities involving the preventing of materials from entering the stream or being washed downstream may be conducted.
Contractor
and
Biologist
318
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.16 Equipment and Vehicles. Any equipment or vehicles driven and/or operated within or adjacent to the stream/lake shall be checked and maintained daily, to prevent leaks of materials that if introduced to water could be deleterious to aquatic life. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream, channel, or lake margin where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow.
Contractor
and
Biologist
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.17 Clean Equipment Prior to Entering Area Regulated by Agreement. All equipment shall be free of materials deleterious to aquatic life including noxious and nuisance weeds, aquatic invasive species, oil, grease, hydraulic fluid, soil, and other debris. The Permittee shall follow equipment washing guidelines certify that decontamination, as specified in the sub-measures below, has been completed, and shall require operator of equipment to recertify equipment upon reentry to areas by this Agreement after contact with water and/or wet soil from a stream or lake in areas outside those regulated under this Agreement.
Contractor
and
Biologist
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.17.1 Clean and Inspect Equipment Prior to Entering Stream. Permittee shall inspect all vehicles, tools, waders and boots, and other Project-related equipment and remove all visible soil/mud, plant materials, and animal remnants prior to initially entering areas regulated by this Agreement. Any contaminants shall be cleaned prior to any work within a streambed and shall be maintained daily. In addition, equipment shall be cleaned daily to ensure pollutants and non-natives are not introduced into mitigation areas or spread throughout Project sites.
Contractor
and
Biologist
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.17.2 Decontamination of Project Equipment. Prior to initially entering, and upon reentering areas subject to this Agreement, Permittee shall decontaminate all tools, waders and boots, vehicles, trailers, and other equipment that will be used in areas regulated by this Agreement and make contact with water or wetted soils. Permittee shall decontaminate Project gear and equipment utilizing one of four methods: drying, using a hot water soak, hot-water pressure washing, or freezing, as appropriate to the type of gear or equipment. For all methods,
Permittee shall begin the decontamination process by thoroughly scrubbing equipment, paying close attention to hard to reach areas and clean areas with a stiff-bristled brush to remove all plant, seeds, soil, and other organisms. To decontaminate by drying, Permittee shall allow equipment to dry thoroughly (i.e., until there is a complete absence of water and all plant, seeds, and soil), preferably in the sun, for a minimum of 48 hours. To decontaminate using hot water, Permittee shall immerse equipment in 140°F or hotter water and soak for a minimum of 5 minutes or by pressure washing with hot water 140°F minimum at the point of contact or 155°F at the nozzle. To decontaminate by freezing, Permittee shall place equipment in a freezer 32°F or colder for a minimum of 8 hours. Repeat decontamination is required only if the equipment/clothing is removed from the site, used in contact with water or wet soil within a different watershed, and returned to the Project site.
Contractor
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.17.3 Decontamination Sites. Permittee shall perform decontamination of vehicles, watercraft, and other Project gear and equipment in a designated location where runoff can be contained and not allowed to pass into any river, lake, or stream and associated riparian areas and other sensitive habitat areas. Cleaning of equipment may occur at a location that contains and recycles resulting wastewater.
Contractor
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.18 Stationary Equipment. Stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, generators, and welders, located within or adjacent to the stream/lake shall be positioned over drip pans. Stationary heavy equipment shall have suitable containment to handle a catastrophic spill/leak. Clean up Contractor
319
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
equipment such as extra booms, absorbent pads, skimmers, shall be on site prior to the start of construction.
Implement BMPs
and daily
monitoring
2.19 Staging and Storage Areas. Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials shall be located outside of the stream/lake. Any materials placed in seasonally dry portions of a stream or lake that could be washed downstream or could be deleterious to aquatic life shall be removed from the Project site prior to inundation by high flows.
Contractor
Weekly nesting
bird reports
2.11.5 Reporting. The Designated Biologist shall be responsible for providing summary reports, where relevant, to CDFW no less than once weekly regarding the nesting species identified onsite, discovery of any of new nests, the status/outcome of any previously identified nest, buffer distances established for each nest, and any adjustments made to established buffers.
If Project activities result in the abandonment of, or damage to a nest, Permittee shall notify CDFW within 24 hours of detection.
UEI Biologist
4.5 Nesting Bird Summary Report. Permittee shall prepare and submit to CDFW a summary of nesting species identified onsite, discovery of nests, the status/outcome of any previously identified nest, buffer distances established for each nest, and any adjustments made to established buffers.
Summary reports shall be submitted on a weekly basis until there is no further evidence of nesting activity. If the Project results in the abandonment of or damage to a nest, Permittee shall notify CDFW within 24 hours.
UEI Biologist
Monthly resource
status updates
4.11 On-site Resource Updates. Permittee shall provide updates on the status/outcome of any new or previously identified resource, and any adjustments made to applied avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, and any other pertinent information. Summaries shall be submitted on a monthly basis during periods of Project activity until Project completion or monitoring is complete. Monitoring reports of any passively relocated species shall also be included. The updates shall be provided to CDFW as a Status Report in EPIMS, and any unsupported file type shall be emailed to the addresses below. CDFW may adjust the rate of updates in writing. If the Project results in the abandonment of or damage to a resource, Permittee shall notify CDFW within 24 hours via phone call or email at the contact information listed below.
City
and
Consultant
Restore
temporary
impacts (0.09 ac)
3.1 Habitat Restoration – On-site (On-site Temporary Restoration). To compensate for the temporary impacts of 0.09 acres of fish and wildlife resources subject to Fish and Game Code section 1600 et seq., Permittee shall restore no less than 0.18 acres of in-kind streambed and associated habitat.
City
3.1.1 Restoration of Temporary Impacts. Upon completion of construction activities, Permittee shall restore all temporary impacts to pre-project conditions or better. Restoration activities should include, but not be limited to: contouring the ground surface to pre-impact grade; removing all construction related materials, trash, and debris; and replacing any natural materials/refugia moved during Project activities. Photo documentation and reporting of restoration efforts will be included in the Project Completion Report.
City
320
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
Project
Completion
Report
4.13 Project Completion Report. Permittee shall provide a Project Completion Report to CDFW via EPIMS no later than one month after the Project is fully completed. The Project Completion Report shall summarize all Project activities including the implementation of all items specified in Section 2 of this Agreement. This report shall include, at minimum, photo documentation, avoidance/minimization measures implemented, biological survey notes (including construction monitoring), and a summary of temporary and permanent restoration efforts with photo documentation.
Permittee shall include a copy of the Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Plan table with notes showing status and date of implementation for each of the mitigation measures. Notification shall be submitted via EPIMS and emailed to: [email protected], please reference Notification No. EPIMS-RIV-54902-R6, and cc: [email protected].
City and
Consultant
RWQCB - WDR
Section Section Section Section
Reporting and
Notification
Requirements
XII.B.1.a
Project Reporting a. Monthly Reporting: The Permittee must submit a Monthly Report to the Colorado River Basin Water Board on the 15th day of each month for the duration of the construction phase. Monthly reporting shall continue until the Colorado River Basin Water Board issues a Notice of Project Complete Letter to the Permittee and this Order is terminated by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
City and
Consultant
Annual Reports XII.B.1.b The Permittee must submit an Annual Report including activities conducted for the previous fiscal year (July 1 -June 30) to the Colorado River Basin Water Board on the 1st of September. Annual Reports must be submitted even if Project construction has not begun. Annual reporting shall continue until a Notice of Project Complete Letter is issued to the Permittee and this Order is terminated by vote of the Colorado River Basin Water Board.
City and
Consultant
321
Patrick Safari, CIP Manager, Public Works Department
City of Banning
February 11, 2026
COSTS
The following table specifies our proposed costs for our proposed work scope.
TABLE 1
ESTIMATED FEES
Tasks Description Cost
CDFW - SAA
Administrative Measures $184.020
Diversion/Dewatering Plan – Provided by Contractor $0
Implement BMP and Daily Monitoring $46,750
RWQCB - WDR
Reporting and Notification $0
Monthly Reporting $0
TOTAL $230,770
ULTRASYSTEMS’ PROJECT MANAGER FOR THIS CONTRACT
Should you have any questions relating to this Change Order #1, please contact me via my cellphone or email.
Sincerely,
Betsy A. Lindsay
President/CEO
322
Labor Categories >>>> Senior
Biologist II
Senior
Biologist I
Staff
Biologist I
Biological
Monitor
Senior GIS
Analyst
Word
Processor
Hourly Rate By Labor Category >>>> $179 $173 $163.00 $95 $173 $137 Hours Cost Miles $0.725 Subs Markup Days $180 10%
1.7 Notify CDFW Prior to Work 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 $358 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $360
1.8 Reporting Violations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
1.9 Dead or Injured Species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
1.11 Work According to Plans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.1 Designated Biologist(s) and Biological Monitor(s) 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 $358 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $360
2.2 Responsibility of the Designated Biologist(s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.4 Authority of Biological Monitor(s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.5 Delineate Work Area Boundary 0 0 25 25 0 0 50 $6,450 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,450
2.6 ESAs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.7 Wildlife Species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.9 Daily Clearance Survey 0 0 0 1440 0 0 1440 $136,800 18,000 $13,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,000 $176,850
2.9.1 Excavated Areas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.92 Check for Wildlife in Pipes/Construction Materials 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUBTOTAL 4 0 25 1465 0 0 1494 $143,966 18,000 $13,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,000 $184,020
2.25 Diversion Plan - Contractor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
4.9 Diversion Plan - Contractor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.15 BMPs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.15.1 BMPs in stream channel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.16 Equipment and Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.17 Clean Equipment Prior to Entering Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.17.1 Clean and Inspect Equipment Prior to Entering a
Stream 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
2.11.5 Weekly nesting bird reports 40 0 0 0 0 0 40 $7,160 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,160
4.5 Nesting Bird Summary Report 40 24 0 0 0 0 64 $11,312 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,310
4.11 Monthly Resource Status Updates 24 24 0 0 0 0 48 $8,448 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,450
3.1 Restore temporary impacts - Habitate Restoration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
3.1.1 Restoration of Temporary Impacts - City 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
4.13 Project Completion Report 40 40 0 24 16 4 124 $19,676 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150 $19,830 SUBTOTAL 144 88 0 24 16 4 276 $46,596 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $150 $46,750 XII.B.1.a Reporting and Notifcation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 XII.B.1.b Annual Reports 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUBTOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL LABOR HOURS 148 88 25 1489 16 4
TOTAL COST $26,492 $15,224 $4,075 $141,455 $2,768 $548 1770 $190,562 18,000 $13,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,150 $230,770 Diversion/Dewatering Plan
Implement BMP and Daily Monitoring
CDFW - SAA
RWQCB - WDR
Adminstrative Measures
TASK COST BREAKDOWN • SUN LAKES BOULEVARD EXTENSION - ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING - CHANGE ORDER #1 Total Vehicle Travel Direct Costs
Direct
Expense
TOTAL
(rounded)
Per Diem
Hours
323
CITY OF BANNING
STAFF REPORT
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Art Vela, Interim City Manager
PREPARED BY: Mark Staples, Planning Manager
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2026
SUBJECT: Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 1621, and Adoption of Resolution No. 2026-35, an update and amendment to Chapter 15.76 the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Waive full reading and introduce by title only Ordinance No. 1621 and determine this action is exempt under CEQA
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-35, amending the applicable Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) applicable to all developments in the City of Banning.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Banning is a Member Jurisdiction of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and eighteen (18) cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, in 2002-2003 the WRCOG Member Jurisdictions developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials due to new development in Western Riverside County could be made up in part by a Transportation Unform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) on future residential, commercial and industrial development. As a Member Jurisdiction of WRCOG and as a TUMF Participating Jurisdiction, the City participated in the preparation of a certain “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study,” (“2002 Nexus Study”) later adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted and implemented Ordinance No. 1291 authorizing the City’s participation in the TUMF Program and established Section 15.76 in the Banning Municipal Code. The City’s participation in the Program has since been amended by Ordinance No. 1322 (2005), Ordinance No. 1344 (2006), Ordinance No. 1514 (2017), Ordinance No. 1549 (2019).
Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code Section 66000 et seq.), WRCOG prepared a new nexus study (“2024 Nexus Study”) to update the TUMF fees. On September 9, 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions update their fees by amending their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect the changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction. The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1607 on January 14, 2025, based on 2024 Nexus Study, and Resolution No. 2024-196 on December 10, 2024, establishing the current TUMF fees, which went into effect on April 1, 2025.
The TUMF Administrative Plan calls for a Construction Cost Index (“CCI”) adjustment to be brought forth to the WRCOG Executive Committee on an annual basis. On December 1, 2025, the WRCOG Executive Committee approved the implementation of an automatic CCI adjustment for all TUMF land uses tied to the September indices of the National Association of Realtors and Engineering News Record 324
with a cap at 5% of any annual adjustments.
JUSTIFICATION:
The proposed ordinance and resolution provide the legal basis for a revised TUMF schedule. The Ordinance amends the definitions of Multi-Family Residential Unit and Single-Family Residential Unit.
Section 15.76.030(C) Fee Adjustment is amended to include the CCI Index adjustment as follows:
15.76.030 Establishment of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee C. Fee Adjustment. The fee schedule may be periodically reviewed and the amounts adjusted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Fees may be increased or decreased to reflect the changes in actual and estimated costs of the Regional System including, but not limited to, debt service, lease payments and construction costs. The adjustment of the fees may also reflect changes in the facilities required to be constructed, estimated revenues received pursuant to this Ordinance, as well as the availability or lack thereof of other funds with which to construct the Regional System. WRCOG shall review the TUMF Program no less than every four (4) years after the effective date of this Ordinance.
1. Beginning July 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) shall be automatically adjusted to reflect changes in construction costs. The annual adjustment shall be calculated by WRCOG based on a blended Construction Cost Index derived from: (1) the National Association of Realtors – Median Sales Price of Existing Single-Family Homes, and (2) the Engineering News-Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index, using the September values of each index from the prior calendar year. The percentage adjustment applied to the TUMF shall equal the annual percentage change in the blended index; provided, however, that in no event shall the annual adjustment exceed five percent (5%), whether positive or negative. The calculated adjustment shall be implemented on July 1 of the year following index calculation. If either referenced index is discontinued or materially altered, WRCOG shall apply a comparable, industry-recognized index that most closely reflects regional transportation construction costs.” In accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act, the proposed Ordinance and 2024 Nexus Study with the CCI Index adjustment: (i) identify the purpose of the revised fees; (ii) identify the use to which the revised fees is to be put, including identification of any facilities to be financed; (iii) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the is imposed; (iv) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development project upon which the fees are imposed; and (v) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the cost of the public facilities or portion or the public facility attributable to the development on which the fees are imposed.
Resolution No. 2026-35 establishes the Fee Schedule for TUMF as follows:
1. $12,705 per single family residential unit 1,800 square feet or less
2. $14,292 per single family residential unit between 1,801 and 2,300 square feet
3. $15,881 per single family residential unit between 2,301 and 2,700 square feet
4. $19,851 per single family residential unit greater than 2,700 square feet
5. $8,021 per multi-family residential unit
6. $2.39 per square foot of an industrial project
7. $7.92 per square foot of a retail commercial project
8. $5.02 per square foot of a service commercial project
9. $2.51 per square foot of a service Class A and B Office The effective date for the new TUMF Schedule is April 1, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact for the ordinance and resolution preparation includes publication costs and some City 325
staff time to prepare the staff report and attachments, however, WRCOG prepared most information (nexus study, and templates for the ordinance and resolution) to minimize impacts to City staff.
If adopted, the proposed ordinance and resolution will ensure the City as a Member Agency of WRCOG collects its share of development impact fees from development projects consistent with the other Member Agencies of WRCOG, to receive benefits from the shared funding pool for roadway improvements in the region and City of Banning. Recent local transportation projects that have benefitted from the City’s compliance with and implementation of the TUMF Program include the Sun Lakes Boulevard extension and the Highland Springs Interchange. The City has benefitted from the funding towards the Sunset Grade Separation Project, and future projects eligible for funding include the Hargrave Grade Separation, Sunset Interchange Improvements, and the Cabazon Connector Project.
ALTERNATIVES:
Do not introduce the ordinance or adopt the associate resolution and provide alternative direction to staff. It should be noted that this alternative may result in the loss of funding for current transportation projects (Sun Lakes Boulevard Extension) and inhibit future transportation improvements, resulting in traffic congestion and unacceptable levels of service. Furthermore, the failure to mitigate growing traffic impacts on the Regional System will substantially impair the ability of public safety services (police and fire) to response and, thus, adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare.
BUDGETED?:
Yes
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT:
No
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 7.1a CC Ordinance No 1621.pdf
2. 7.1b Exhibit A TUMF Regional System Map.pdf
3. 7.1c Exhibit B TUMF 2024 Nexus Study.pdf
4. 7.1d CC Resolution No 2026-35.pdf
5. 7.1e PHN CC Meeting 2-24-2026 TUMF.pdf
6. column_affidavit_Aeru7JIVQDeUlWiXrb99.pdf
326
Ordinance No. 1621
ORDINANCE NO. 1621
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BANNING, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1607, AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 15.76 OF THE
BANNING MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX
ADJUSTMENTS TO THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Banning is a member agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and 18 cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, the WRCOG Member Agencies developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials in Western Riverside County (the “Regional System”) could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) on future residential, commercial and industrial development; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of this plan, the WRCOG Executive Committee adopted the “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study”, dated October 18, 2002 (the “2002 Nexus Study”); and
WHEREAS, based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 12901 on March 25, 2003, (the “TUMF Ordinance”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. authorizing the City to impose the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) upon new development; and
WHEREAS, in 2016, the TUMF Nexus Study (“2016 Nexus Study”) was updated for the purpose of updating the fees. On July 10, 2017, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2016 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program; and
WHEREAS, on September 11, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1514 which adopted the 2016 Nexus Study and updated the TUMF; and
WHEREAS, in 2018, the TUMF Program was altered to adopt a process in which WRCOG calculates and collects TUMF on behalf of member agencies under the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2018; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1549 on August 27, 2019, allowing WRCOG to calculate and collect TUMF on behalf of the City; and WHEREAS, WRCOG, with the assistance of TUMF Participating Jurisdictions, prepared an updated nexus study entitled “Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Nexus Study: 2024 Update” (“2024 Nexus Study”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act), for the purpose of updating the fees; and WHEREAS, in September 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program; and
327
Ordinance No. 1621
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2025, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1607, which adopted the 2024 Nexus Study and its findings; and
WHEREAS, the TUMF Administrative Plan calls for a Construction Cost Index (“CCI”) adjustment to be brought forth to the WRCOG Executive Committee on an annual basis; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 2025, the WRCOG Executive Committee approved the implementation of an automatic CCI adjustment for all TUMF land uses tied to the September indices of the National Association of Realtors and Engineering News Record with a cap at 5% of any annual adjustments; and
WHEREAS, an automatic CCI adjustment ensures that fee levels keep pace with increases in cost of constructing transportation projects and avoids large increases at comprehensive TUMF Nexus Study updates; and
WHEREAS, this approach also allows for consistency and predictability for the TUMF Program, while ensuring that the fair share principles under AB 1600 are satisfied; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to provide for automatic inflationary adjustments to the TUMF to reflect changes in construction costs over time, without modifying the underlying fee nexus, land use assumptions, or fee methodology; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance also includes minor updates to the definitions portion of the previous Ordinance to clarify the definitions of residential units.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANING DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. The definition of “Multi-Family Residential Unit” outlined in Section
15.76.020(M) of the Banning Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Multi-Family Residential Unit” means a residential dwelling unit that is physically attached to one or more other dwelling units by a shared wall, floor, ceiling, roof, or structural foundation, regardless of the lot or parcel configuration, ownership structure, or type of subdivision (including condominium subdivisions). Multi-family residential units include, but are not limited to, duplexes, townhomes, apartments, and condominiums with attached units. As outlined in the Ordinance, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs), as defined by state law, are exempt from TUMF and shall not be counted in determining residential land use classification.
SECTION 3. The definition of “Single Family Residential Unit” outlined in Section
15.76.020(T) of the Banning Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Single Family Residential Unit” means a residential dwelling unit that is physically detached from any other dwelling unit, sharing no common wall, floor, ceiling, roof, or structural foundation with another dwelling unit, regardless of the lot or parcel configuration, ownership structure, or type of subdivision (including condominium subdivisions). As outlined in the Ordinance, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs), as 328
Ordinance No. 1621
defined by state law, are exempt from TUMF and shall not be counted in determining residential land use classification.
SECTION 4. Section 15.76.030(C) of the Banning Municipal Code shall be amended to read as follows:
C. Fee Adjustment. The fee schedule may be periodically reviewed and the amounts adjusted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Fees may be increased or decreased to reflect the changes in actual and estimated costs of the Regional System including, but not limited to, debt service, lease payments and construction costs. The adjustment of the fees may also reflect changes in the facilities required to be constructed, estimated revenues received pursuant to this Ordinance, as well as the availability or lack thereof of other funds with which to construct the Regional System. WRCOG shall review the TUMF Program no less than every four (4) years after the effective date of this Ordinance.
1. Beginning July 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) shall be automatically adjusted to reflect changes in construction costs. The annual adjustment shall be calculated by WRCOG based on a blended Construction Cost Index derived from: (1) the National Association of Realtors – Median Sales Price of Existing Single-Family Homes, and (2) the Engineering NewsRecord (ENR) Construction Cost Index, using the September values of each index from the prior calendar year. The percentage adjustment applied to the TUMF shall equal the annual percentage change in the blended index; provided, however, that in no event shall the annual adjustment exceed five percent (5%), whether positive or negative. The calculated adjustment shall be implemented on July 1 of the year following index calculation. If either referenced index is discontinued or materially altered, WRCOG shall apply a comparable, industry-recognized index that most closely reflects regional transportation construction costs.”
SECTION 5. Effect. No provisions of this Ordinance shall entitle any person who has already paid the TUMF to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment. This Ordinance does not create any new TUMF.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or any part thereof, is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase be declared unconstitutional. If for any reason any portion of this ordinance is found to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the balance of this ordinance shall not be affected.
SECTION 7. No Procedural Defenses. Prohibition of Jurisdictions from raising procedural defenses, including without limitation a statute of limitations, laches, the California Government Tort Claims Act, and necessary parties in a dispute with WRCOG regarding the matters set forth herein.
SECTION 8. Judicial Review. In accordance with State law, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this Ordinance shall be commenced within 180 days of the date of adoption of this Ordinance.
329
Ordinance No. 1621
SECTION 9. Ordinance No. 1607. This Ordinance amends certain provisions of Ordinance No. 1607 provided this Ordinance is not declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction. If, for whatever reason, this Ordinance is declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, Ordinance No. 1607 all other related ordinances and polices shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND READ for the first time and ordered posted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Banning, California, held on the 24th day of February 2026, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Banning, California, held on the 10th day of March 2026, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Richard Royce, Mayor
City of Banning
ATTEST:
Sandra Calderon, Deputy City Clerk
City of Banning
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John Pinkney, City Attorney
Slovak, Baron, Empey, Murphy & Pinkney, LLP
330
Ordinance No. 1621
CERTIFICATION:
I, Sandra Calderon, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Banning, California, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1621 was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Banning, held on the 24th day of February, 2026, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the 10th day of March, 2026, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Sandra Calderon, Deputy City Clerk
City of Banning, California
331
332
TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE
NEXUS STUDY
2024 UPDATE
FINAL REPORT
Prepared for the Western Riverside Council of Governments In Cooperation with
The City of Banning
The City of Beaumont
The City of Calimesa
The City of Canyon Lake
The City of Corona
The City of Eastvale
The City of Hemet
The City of Jurupa Valley
The City of Lake Elsinore
The City of Menifee
The City of Moreno Valley
The City of Murrieta
The City of Norco
The City of Perris
The City of Riverside
The City of San Jacinto
The City of Temecula
The City of Wildomar
The County of Riverside
Eastern Municipal Water District
March Joint Powers Authority
Riverside County Superintendent of Schools
Riverside Transit Agency
Western Water
Prepared by GHD
As adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee, September 9, 2024 333
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................i LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................. ii ES.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................iii ES.1 Introduction and Purpose of the Nexus Study ........................................................iii ES.2 Future Growth ............................................................................................................ vi ES.3 Need for the TUMF ..................................................................................................... vi ES.4 The TUMF Network ....................................................................................................viii ES.5 TUMF Nexus Analysis ...................................................................................................x ES.6 Fair-Share Fee Calculation ........................................................................................x ES.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ xi
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THE NEXUS STUDY ................................................ 1
1.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 TUMF Nexus Study History ......................................................................................... 3
1.3 TUMF Nexus Study Process ....................................................................................... 5
2.3.1. Establish the TUMF Network Project List ............................................................... 7
2.3.2. Determine the TUMF Network Project Costs ....................................................... 8
2.3.3. Determine the TUMF Transit Component ............................................................ 9
2.3.4. Computing the Fee for Residential Developments ..........................................10
2.3.5. Computing the Fee for Non-Residential Developments ..................................10
2.0 FUTURE GROWTH .........................................................................................................13
2.1 Recent Historical Trend ...........................................................................................13
2.2 Available Demographic Data ...............................................................................13
2.3 Demographic Assumptions Used for the Nexus Study Analysis ...........................14
3.0 NEED FOR THE TUMF ....................................................................................................21
3.1 Future Highway Congestion Levels ........................................................................21
3.2 Future Transit Utilization Levels ................................................................................24
3.3 The TUMF Concept ..................................................................................................25
4.0 THE TUMF NETWORK .....................................................................................................27
4.1 Identification of the TUMF Roadway Network ......................................................27
4.2 Backbone Network and Secondary Network .......................................................30
4.3 Future Roadway Transportation Needs .................................................................33
4.4 Public Transportation Component of the TUMF System .......................................37
4.5 Existing Obligated Funding .....................................................................................40
4.6 Unfunded Existing Improvement Needs ................................................................40
4.7 Maximum TUMF Eligible Cost ..................................................................................42
4.8 TUMF Network Evaluation .......................................................................................53
5.0 TUMF NEXUS ANALYSIS .................................................................................................55
5.1 Future Development and the Need for Improvements .......................................55
5.2 Application of Fee to System Components ..........................................................56
5.3 Application of Fee to Residential and Non-Residential Developments .............59
6.0 FAIR-SHARE FEE CALCULATION ...................................................................................60
6.1 Residential Fees .......................................................................................................60
6.2 Non-Residential Fees ...............................................................................................62
7.0 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................64
8.0 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................65 334
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County ............ xii Table 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ................14 Table 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045) .............................................................................................................................17 Table 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison) .......................................................................19 Table 3.1 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing to 2045 No-Build) ...........................................................................................................................22 Table 4.1 - Unit Costs for Arterial Highway and Street Construction ...................................35 Table 4.2 – Forecasted Daily Traffic in Western Riverside County .......................................36 Table 4.3 - Unit Costs for Transit Capital Expenditures ..........................................................39 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates ..............................................................................45 Table 4.5 – TUMF Transit Cost Estimates .................................................................................53 Table 4.6 – Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build Scenarios to 2045 TUMF Build Scenario) ..........................................................54 Table 5.1 - 2045 No-Build Peak Period Vehicle Trips by WRCOG Zone ...............................57 Table 5.2 – 2045 No-Build Percent Peak Period Vehicle Trips By WRCOG Zone ................57 Table 5.3 - Backbone-Secondary Network Share Calculation ...........................................58 Table 5.4 - Daily VMT Growth by Trip Purpose for Western Riverside County (2018 - 2045) ..........................................................................................................................................59 Table 6.1 - Fee Calculation for Residential Share .................................................................61 Table 6.2 – Single-Family Residential Fee Adjustments by Unit Size ....................................62 Table 6.3 - Fee Calculation for Non-Residential Share ........................................................63 Table 7.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County ..............64
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure ES.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process ................................. v Figure ES.2 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045) ......................................................................................................................vii Figure ES.3 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials–TUMF Network Improvements ...ix Figure 1.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process ................................. 6 Figure 2.1 – Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ..............15 Table 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ............16 Figure 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ...........16 Figure 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045) .............................................................................................................................18 Figure 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison) .......................................................................20 Figure 4.1 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials for Western Riverside County .....29 Figure 4.2 - The Backbone Network of Highways and Arterials for Western Riverside County ..............................................................................................................................31 Figure 4.3 - Western Riverside County Area Planning Districts (TUMF Zones) .....................32 Figure 4.4 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials–TUMF Network Improvements ...44 335
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 iii
ES.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 Introduction and Purpose of the Nexus Study
Western Riverside County includes 18 incorporated cities and the unincorporated county covering an area of approximately 2,100 square miles. Through the mid 2000’s, this portion of Riverside County was growing at a pace exceeding the capacity of existing financial resources to meet increasing demand for transportation infrastructure.
Although the economic recession of the late 2000’s, and the associated crises in the mortgage and housing industries, slowed this rate of growth, the regional economy has recovered and the projected rate of development in Western Riverside County remains high. Similarly, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on travel demand in the region has also passed, with travel demands, especially for the highway network, surpassing pre-pandemic levels. Continued high growth in households and jobs in Western Riverside County could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial roadways of regional significance, since traditional sources of transportation funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the needed improvements.
In February 1999, the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the Building Industry Association (BIA) met to discuss the concept of a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for southwest Riverside County. In August 2000, the concept was expanded to include the entire WRCOG subregion.
Continued high growth in households and jobs in Western Riverside County could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial roadways of regional significance, since traditional sources of transportation funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the needed improvements. While the TUMF cannot fund all necessary transportation system improvements, it is intended to address a current transportation funding shortfall by establishing a new revenue source that ensures future new development will contribute toward addressing its indirect cumulative traffic impacts on regional transportation infrastructure. Funding accumulated through the TUMF Program will be used to construct transportation improvements such as new arterial highway lanes, reconfigured freeway interchanges, railroad grade separations and new regional express bus services that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand in Western Riverside County. By levying a fee on new developments in the region, local agencies will be establishing a mechanism by which developers and in turn new county residents and employees will effectively contribute their “fair share” toward sustaining the regional transportation system.
336
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 iv
This TUMF Draft Nexus Study is intended to satisfy the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Fees for Development Projects (also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or the Mitigation Fee Act) which governs imposing development impact fees in California. The initial WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study was completed in October 2002 and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in November 2002. The results of the first review of the Program were documented in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on February 6, 2006. A second comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on October 5, 2009. A third comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was conducted following the adoption of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) on April 7, 2016.
The WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update Report was adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on July 10, 2017.
On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted Connect SoCal; The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments (2020 RTP/SCS). The adoption of the 2020 RTP/SCS confirmed new growth forecasts for the region that provide a foundational element for updating the TUMF program and the associated nexus determination prompting WRCOG to initiate the current program update. These forecasts are also integrated into the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivCoM) used to forecast the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development on the arterial highway network in Western Riverside County.
The overall process for establishing the TUMF nexus is illustrated in Figure ES.1. Each technical step is denoted with a number on the flow chart with the numbers correlating to the detailed description of each step provided in Section 1.3 of the Nexus Study Report. The flow chart also incorporates color coding of the steps to indicate those steps that involved the application of RivCoM, steps that utilized other input data, steps that are computations of various inputs, and steps that required specific actions of the various WRCOG committees to confirm major variables. Where appropriate, the flow chart also includes specific cross references to the sections or tables included in the Nexus Study document that correlate to the particular step.
This version of the WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study Report documents the results of the fourth comprehensive review of the TUMF Program. This version of the document also incorporates revisions in response to comments received during the formal review of the earlier Draft TUMF Nexus Study 2024 Update. The findings of this report were ultimately adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on September 9, 2024. 337
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 v
Figure ES.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process 338
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 vi
ES.2 Future Growth
In preparation for the 2020 RTP/SCS, SCAG undertook robust stakeholder engagement, including participation by WRCOG, Riverside County and the various cities in Western Riverside County, to develop regional demographic forecasts. Using input from regional stakeholders regarding anticipated patterns and rates of development, SCAG compiled and disseminated the forecasts that were ultimately adopted in 2020. The SCAG forecasts adopted for the 2020 RTP/SCS were subsequently used as the basis for RivCoM and are used as the basis for this TUMF Nexus Study Update.
A major distinction between data used for the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update and the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS data used for this 2024 Update is the change in the base year from 2012 to 2018, as well as the change in the horizon year from 2040 to 2045. This shift in the base year and horizon year demographic assumptions of the program carries through all aspects of the nexus analysis, including the travel demand forecasting, network review and fee calculation.
The population of Western Riverside County is projected to increase by 33% in the period between 2018 and 2045. During the same period, employment in Western Riverside County is anticipated to grow by 48%. Figure ES.2 illustrates the forecast growth in population, household and employment for Western Riverside County.
ES.3 Need for the TUMF
The WRCOG TUMF study area was extracted from the greater RivCoM model network for the purpose of calculating measures for Western Riverside County only. Peak period performance measures for the TUMF study area included total vehicle miles of travel (VMT), total vehicle hours of travel (VHT), total combined vehicle hours of delay (VHD), and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS E).
As a result of the new development and associated growth in population and employment in Western Riverside County, additional pressure will be placed on the transportation infrastructure, particularly the arterial roadways, with the peak period VMT on the TUMF Network estimated to increase by 38% between 2018 and 2045. By 2045, 37% of the total VMT on the TUMF Network is forecast to be traveling on facilities experiencing peak period LOS E or worse. Without improvements to the arterial highway system, the total vehicle hours of delay (VHD) experienced by area motorists on the TUMF Network will increase over 5.0% per year. The need to improve these roadways and relieve future congestion is therefore directly linked to the future development which generates the travel demand.
339
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 vii
Figure ES.2 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045)
As population and employment in Western Riverside County grows because of new development, demand for regional transit services in the region is also expected to grow. Weekday system ridership for RTA bus transit services is approximately 16,575 riders per day in Western Riverside County in 2023. By 2045, bus transit services are forecast to serve approximately 57,282 riders per weekday. This represents an average increase of 1,850 weekday riders each year. Based on this rate of ridership growth, weekday ridership is estimated to increase by 40,707 riders per weekday between 2018 and 2045.
The idea behind a uniform mitigation fee is to have new development throughout the region contribute equally to paying the cost of improving the transportation facilities that serve these longer-distance trips between communities. Thus, the fee should be used to improve transportation facilities that serve trips between communities within the region (primarily arterial roadways) as well as the infrastructure for public transportation.
The fee should be assessed proportionately on new residential and non-residential development based on the relative impact of each use on the transportation system. 340
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 viii
ES.4 The TUMF Network
The Regional System of Highways and Arterials (also referred to as the TUMF Network) is the system of roadways that serve inter-community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. Transportation facilities in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied these guidelines were initially identified, and a skeletal regional transportation framework evolved from facilities where several guidelines were observed. Representatives of all WRCOG constituent jurisdictions reviewed this framework in the context of current local transportation plans to define the TUMF Network, which was subsequently endorsed by the WRCOG Public Works Committee, WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee, TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee.
The TUMF Network was reviewed as part of the 2024 Nexus Update to ensure facilities generally still met the previously described performance guidelines, and/or that the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network were roughly proportional to the impacts needing to be mitigated. This review process resulted in the removal of various facilities from the TUMF Network, as well as various changes in the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network.
Figure ES.3 illustrates the TUMF improvements to the Regional System of Highways and Arterials.
The total cost of improving the TUMF system is $5.28 billion. Accounting for obligated funds and unfunded existing needs, the estimated maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program is $4.24 billion. The maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program includes approximately $3.87 billion in eligible arterial highway and street related improvements and $154.8 million in eligible transit related improvements. An additional $53.9 million is also eligible as part of the TUMF Program to mitigate the impact of eligible TUMF related arterial highway and street projects on critical native species and wildlife habitat, while $161.2 million is provided to cover the costs incurred by WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program.
341
342
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 x
ES.5 TUMF Nexus Analysis
There is a reasonable relationship between the future growth and the need for improvements to the TUMF system. These factors include:
Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing as a result of future new development.
Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways. The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County. Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development.
Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program.
Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit-dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automobile travel.
The split of fee revenues between the backbone and secondary highway networks is related to the proportion of highway vehicle travel that is relatively local (between adjacent communities) and longer distance (between more distant communities but still within Western Riverside County). To estimate a rational fee split between the respective networks, the future travel forecast estimates were aggregated to a matrix of peak period trips between zones. The overall result is that 51.1% of the regional travel is attributable to the backbone network and 48.9% is assigned to the secondary network.
In order to establish the approximate proportionality of the future traffic impacts associated with new residential development and new non-residential development, peak period growth in VMT between 2018 and 2045 was derived from RivCoM and aggregated by trip purpose. It was concluded that home-based person trips represent
77.7% of the total future person trips, and the non-home-based person trips represent
22.3% of the total future person trips.
ES.6 Fair-Share Fee Calculation
The balance of the unfunded TUMF system improvement needs is $4.24 billion which is the maximum value attributable to the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development in the WRCOG region and will be captured through the TUMF Program. By levying the uniform fee directly on future new developments (and indirectly on new residents and new employees to Western Riverside County), these transportation system users are assigned their “fair share” of the 343
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 xi
costs to address the cumulative impacts of additional traffic they will generate on the regional transportation system.
Of the $4.24 billion in unfunded future improvement needs, 77.7% ($3.30 billion) will be assigned to future new residential development and 22.3% ($946.5 million) will be assigned to future new non-residential development.
ES.7 Conclusions
Based on the results of the Nexus Study evaluation, it can be demonstrated that there is reasonable relationship between the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the need to mitigate these transportation impacts using funds levied through the proposed TUMF Program.
Factors that reflect this reasonable relationship include:
Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing as a result of future new development.
Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways; The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County; Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development;
Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program;
Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit-dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automotive travel.
The Nexus Study evaluation has established a proportional “fair share” of the improvement cost attributable to new development based on the impacts of existing development and the availability of obligated funding through traditional sources. The fair share fee allocable to future new residential and non-residential development in Western Riverside County is summarized for differing use types in Table ES.1. 344
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 xii
Table ES.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County Land Use Type Units Development
Change
Fee Per Unit Total Revenue
($ million)
Single-Family Residential DU 167,491 $15,476 $2,592.0
Multi-Family Residential DU 90,335 $7,816 $706.1
Industrial SF GFA 61,489,565 $2.33 $143.1
Retail SF GFA 6,557,500 $11.21 $73.5
Service SF GFA 66,735,957 $9.76 $651.1
Government/Public SF GFA 3,420,665 $23.07 $78.9
MAXIMUM TUMF VALUE $2,961.0
345
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THE NEXUS STUDY
1.1 Background
Western Riverside County includes 18 incorporated cities and the unincorporated county covering an area of approximately 2,100 square miles. Through the mid 2000’s, this portion of Riverside County was growing at a pace exceeding the capacity of existing financial resources to meet increasing demand for transportation infrastructure.
Although the economic recession of the late 2000’s, and the associated crises in the mortgage and housing industries, slowed this rate of growth, the regional economy has recovered and the projected rate of development in Western Riverside County remains high. Similarly, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on travel demand in the region has also passed, with travel demands, especially for the highway network, surpassing pre-pandemic levels.
Continued high growth in households and jobs in Western Riverside County could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial roadways of regional significance, since traditional sources of transportation funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the needed improvements. Development exactions only provide improvements near the development site, and the broad-based county-level funding sources (i.e., Riverside County’s half-cent sales tax known as Measure A) designate only a small portion of their revenues for arterial roadway improvements.
In anticipation of the continued future growth projected in Riverside County, several county-wide planning processes were initiated in 1999. These planning processes include the Riverside County General Plan Update, the Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) and the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Related to these planning processes is the need to fund the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development.
Regional arterial highways in Western Riverside County are forecast to carry significant traffic volumes by 2045. While some localized fee programs exist to mitigate the local impacts of new development on the transportation system in specific areas, and while these programs are effective locally, they are insufficient in their ability to meet the regional demand for transportation infrastructure. Former Riverside County Supervisor Buster recognized the need to establish a comprehensive funding source to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development on regional arterial highways. The need to establish a comprehensive funding source for arterial highway improvements has evolved into the development of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for Western Riverside County.
In February 1999, the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the Building Industry Association (BIA) met to discuss the 346
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 2 concept of a TUMF. The intent of this effort was to have the southwest area of Western Riverside County act as a demonstration for the development of policies and a process for a regional TUMF Program before applying the concept countywide. From February 1999 to September 2000, the Southwest Area Transportation Infrastructure System Funding Year 2020 (SATISFY 2020) Program progressed with policy development, the identification of transportation improvements, traffic modeling, cost estimates, fee scenarios and a draft Implementation Agreement.
In May 2000, Riverside County Supervisor Tavaglione initiated discussions in the northwest area of Western Riverside County to determine the level of interest in developing a TUMF for that area of the county. Interest in the development of a northwest area fee program was high. In August 2000, the WRCOG Executive Committee took action to build upon the work completed in the southwest area for the SATISFY 2020 program and to develop a single consolidated mitigation fee program for all of Western Riverside County. This action was predicated on the desire to establish a single uniform mitigation fee program to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the regional arterial highway system, rather than multiple discrete and disparate fee programs with varying policies, fees and improvement projects. A TUMF Policy Committee comprising regional elected officials was formed to recommend and set policies for staff to develop the TUMF Program and provide overall guidance to all other staff committees.
While the TUMF cannot fund all necessary transportation system improvements, it is intended to address a current transportation funding shortfall by establishing a new revenue source that ensures future new development will contribute toward addressing its indirect cumulative traffic impacts on regional transportation infrastructure. Funding accumulated through the TUMF Program will be used to construct transportation improvements such as new arterial highway lanes, reconfigured freeway interchanges, railroad grade separations and new regional express bus services that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand in Western Riverside County. By levying a fee on new developments in the region, local agencies will be establishing a mechanism by which developers and in turn new county residents and employees will effectively contribute their “fair share” toward sustaining the regional transportation system.
This TUMF Nexus Study is intended to satisfy the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Fees for Development Projects (also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or the Mitigation Fee Act), which governs imposing development impact fees in California. The Mitigation Fee Act requires that all local agencies in California, including cities, counties, and special districts follow two basic rules when instituting impact fees. These rules are as follows:
1) Establish a nexus or reasonable relationship between the development impact fee’s use and the type of project for which the fee is required. 2) The fee must not exceed the project’s proportional “fair share” of the proposed improvement and cannot be used to correct current problems or to make improvements for existing development.
347
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 3 1.2 TUMF Nexus Study History
The TUMF Program is implemented through the auspices of WRCOG. As the council of governments for Western Riverside County, WRCOG provides a forum for representatives from 18 cities, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, the Eastern Municipal Water District, Western Water, the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools, the March Joint Powers Authority and the Riverside Transit Agency to collaborate on issues that affect the entire subregion, such as air quality, solid waste, transportation and the environment. WRCOG strives to "respect local control, provide regional perspective, and make a difference" to elevate the quality of life throughout the subregion. A current list of the standing WRCOG committees and committee membership that oversee the TUMF program is included in Appendix A.
The initial WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study was completed in October 2002 and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in November 2002. Its purpose was to establish the nexus or reasonable relationship between new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the proposed development impact fee that would be used to improve regional transportation facilities. It also identified the proportional “fair share” of the improvement cost attributable to new development.
Consistent with the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act, the WRCOG Executive Committee has established that the TUMF Nexus Study will be subject of a comprehensive review of the underlying program assumptions at least every five years to confirm the Nexus. Acknowledging the unprecedented and unique nature of the TUMF Program, the Executive Committee determined that the first comprehensive review of the Program should be initiated within two years of initial adoption of the Program primarily to validate the findings and recommendations of the study and to correct any program oversights. The results of the first review of the Program were documented in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on February 6, 2006. A second comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was conducted in 2008 and 2009 in part to address the impacts of the economic recession on the rate of development within the region and on transportation project costs. The findings of the 2009 review of the program were adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on October 5, 2009.
A third comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was conducted in 2014 and 2015 leading to a Draft Nexus Study document being distributed for review in August 2015.
The WRCOG Executive Committee subsequently considered comments related to the Draft Nexus Study 2015 Update at the meeting held on September 14, 2015, where it was resolved to “delay finalizing the Nexus Study for the TUMF Program Update until the 2016 Southern California Association of Governments’ 2016 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy growth forecast is available for inclusion in the Nexus Study”. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) adopted the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) on April 7, 2016, enabling WRCOG staff to proceed with finalizing the update of the TUMF Nexus Study. The WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update Report was ultimately adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on July 10, 2017. 348
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 4 On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted Connect SoCal; The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments (2020 RTP/SCS). As stated in the plan document “Connect SoCal embodies a collective vision for the region’s future, through the horizon year of 2045. It is developed with input from a wide range of constituents and stakeholders within the Counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura, including public agencies, community organizations, elected officials, tribal governments, the business community and the public. Connect SoCal is an important planning document for the region, allowing public agencies who implement transportation projects to do so in a coordinated manner, while qualifying for federal and state funding.”
The adoption of the 2020 RTP/SCS confirmed new growth forecasts for the region that were used as the basis to develop the Connect SoCal plan. These forecasts also provide a foundational element for updating the TUMF program and the associated nexus determination prompting WRCOG to initiate the current program update. The 2020 RTP/SCS growth forecasts are used directly in the fee calculation as the basis for determining the anticipated growth in households and employment in the region through the program horizon year of 2045. These forecasts are also integrated into the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivCoM) used to forecast the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development on the arterial highway network in Western Riverside County.
Completed in 2021 to succeed the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RIVTAM), RivCoM provides a valuable tool for supporting a variety of transportation planning activities in Riverside County, including the update of the TUMF Nexus Study. RivCoM was developed under the leadership of WRCOG in conjunction with regional partners with the intent to provide jurisdictions in Riverside County with a traffic forecasting tool that, while consistent with the SCAG regional travel demand model, provides a more appropriate level of detail to support transportation planning at the County or City level.
RivCoM is a critical tool for quantifying the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development as part of the TUMF Nexus Study Update. Utilizing the 2020 RTP/SCS growth forecasts, RivCoM is used to quantify changes in travel demand and traffic conditions on the regional highway network, with a specific focus on the TUMF Network.
RivCoM outputs are used to analyze project eligibility and quantify the fair share of traffic growth that is attributable to new development as inputs to determining the fee.
The adoption of the Connect SoCal plan and the availability of RivCoM to serve as a critical tool for quantifying network impacts for the TUMF Nexus Study Update were key factors driving the schedule for this update of the fee.
To ensure new development continues to contribute a fair share of the cost to mitigate its cumulative regional transportation impacts in the period between the comprehensive review of program assumptions completed at least every five years, the WRCOG Executive Committee has also established that the TUMF Schedule of Fees will be reviewed annually, and adjusted, as needed, on July 1st to reflect current costs. The revised schedule of fees will typically be recalculated in February of each year based 349
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 5 on the percentage increase or decrease in the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) for the twelve (12) month period from January of the prior year to January of the current year, and the percentage increase or decrease in the National Association of Realtors (NAR) Median Sales Price of Existing Single Family Homes in the Riverside/San Bernardino Metropolitan Statistical Area for the twelve (12) month period from the 3rd Quarter of the second year prior to the 3rd Quarter of the prior year (to coincide with the publication of the most recently updated index). If approved by the Executive Committee, the resultant percentage change for each of the indices will be applied to the unit cost assumptions for roadway and bus transit costs, and land acquisition costs, respectively, to reflect the combined effects of changes in eligible project costs on the resultant per unit fee for each defined land use category. The most recent annual cost adjustment to the TUMF Schedule of Fees was adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on July 12, 2021.
1.3 TUMF Nexus Study Process
In coordination with WRCOG, city and county representatives and other interested parties have reviewed the underlying assumptions of the Nexus Study as part of this comprehensive program review. In particular, the most recent socioeconomic forecasts developed by SCAG as the basis for the 2020 RTP/SCS were incorporated. This use of the most recent SCAG forecasts resulted in a shift of the program base year from 2012 to 2018, as well as a shift in the program horizon year from 2040 to 2045.
Furthermore, the TUMF Network was re-examined in detail based on travel demand forecasts derived from the most recent version of the Riverside County Model (RivCoM) to more accurately reflect future project needs to address the cumulative regional impacts of new development in Western Riverside County as well as eliminating those projects having been completed prior to the commencement of the Nexus review in 2021.
The subsequent chapters of this Nexus Study document describe the various assumptions, data inputs and analysis leading to the determination of each major variable in the TUMF calculation, and ultimately leading to the determination of the TUMF Schedule of Fees that indicates the maximum “fair share” fee for each of the various use types defined in the TUMF program. The overall process for establishing the TUMF nexus is summarized in this section, including the flow chart in Figure 1.1 that illustrates the various technical steps in this fee calculation process. Each technical step that was followed to determine the TUMF Schedule of Fees and establish the program nexus is summarized below, with the numbers denoted on the flow chart correlating to the steps described. The flow chart also incorporates color coding of the steps to indicate those steps that involved the application of RivCoM, steps that utilized other input data, steps that are computations of various inputs, and steps that required specific actions of the various WRCOG committees to confirm major variables. Where appropriate, the flow chart also includes specific cross references to the sections or tables included in this Nexus Study document that correlate to the particular step. 350
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 6 Figure 1.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process 351
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 7 2.3.1. Establish the TUMF Network Project List
The roadway network in Western Riverside County must be evaluated to determine how new development activity will impact the performance of the network, and how the resultant traffic impacts can be mitigated by completing various roadway improvements. The following steps integrate the latest SCAG socio-economic forecasts into RivCoM as the basis for determining future roadway deficiencies and identifying the list of eligible improvements to address these future deficiencies. The rational and methodology for accomplishing these steps is further explained in Chapters 2 and 3 of this report, with the resultant TUMF Network described in Chapter 4. 1) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS was developed using housing and employment data for 2018 as its base year. This adopted dataset was integrated into RivCoM providing a critical analytic tool to support the Nexus Study Update. 2) The RivCoM model1 has datasets available that represent the capacity of the different facilities in the road network for several different study years. For this nexus update, the RivCoM 2018 base network that was developed following the adoption of the SCAG 2020 RTP was selected as the one most closely resembling current conditions. This network was subsequently reviewed and updated, including a detailed review by WRCOG staff and participating jurisdictions, to identify projects that were completed on the arterial network in the period between 2016 and December 2021. The arterial network was then recoded to reflect the changes to the TUMF Network to create a 2021 Existing Network as the base network for analysis. A second version of the base network was also developed adding only those facilities that had been identified on the 2016 TUMF network that did not currently exist and therefore were not represented by a link(s) in RivCoM. The Supplemental 2021 Existing Network was utilized as the basis for assessing only those projects that did not currently exist on the TUMF Network.
3) RivCoM was run using the 2018 socio-economic data (SED) and the 2021 Existing Networks to produce the baseline volumes on the roads in the TUMF Network. 4) The baseline volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio was then determined. The target LOS for TUMF facilities is “D”, meaning that facilities with LOS “E” or “F”, i.e. those with a V/C ratio of 0.9 or higher, are deemed to have inadequate capacity. The result of this step is a list of roads that have existing capacity deficiencies. 1 The macro-level traffic forecasting was conducted using the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivCoM).
RivCoM is consistent of SCAG’s six-county model with additional detail (traffic analysis zones and local roads) added within Riverside County. It was developed for use in traffic studies in Riverside County as a replacement for the Riverside County Transportation and Analysis Model (RivTAM) integrating an updated modeling platform to improve run time and reliability, as well as a more focused model area, more detailed network and zone structure, and prost processors to satisfy more recent legislative requirements. RivCoM has both the geographic scope needed to analyze all TUMF facilities and conformity with regional planning assumptions. There is a memorandum of understanding among the jurisdictions of Riverside County that encourages the use of the RivCoM model for use in regional traffic studies. 352
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 8 5) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS was developed using housing and employment data for 2045 as its forecast horizon year. This adopted dataset was also used as the future base year for the TUMF update calculation.
6) RivCoM was run using the 2021 Existing Networks with the land use assumptions for 2045. These “Future No-Build” scenarios was used to determine where deficiencies would occur in the roadway system if development occurred as expected but no roadway improvements were implemented.
7) Comparing the existing capacity deficiencies with the future deficiencies showed where new deficiencies would occur that are entirely attributable to growth in households and employment. Comparing the existing and future traffic volume to capacity ratio on the roads that are currently deficient shows the portion of the future deficiency that is attributable to growth. 8) It is generally acknowledged that the TUMF program cannot and should not attempt to fund every roadway improvement needed in Western Riverside County. WRCOG has adopted a set of selection criteria that was used to choose which roadway improvements would be eligible for TUMF funding. 9) The selection criteria were applied to the forecast deficiencies to identify projects for the TUMF Project List. The project list was subsequently reviewed to confirm the eligibility of proposed projects, including projects previously included in the TUMF program, as well as additional projects requested for inclusion as part of the current update. The project list was then subsequently updated to reflect those projects considered eligible for TUMF funding as part of the 2024 Nexus Study Update.
2.3.2. Determine the TUMF Network Project Costs
The estimated costs of proposed improvements on the TUMF Network are calculated based on the prices of construction materials, labor and land values for the various eligible project types included as part of the TUMF program. The approach and outcomes of the following steps is described in Chapter 4 of this report.
10) The TUMF program has design standards covering the road project components that are eligible for TUMF funding. This ensures that projects in jurisdictions with different design standards are treated equally2.
11) Current cost values for labor and materials such as cement, asphalt, reinforcing steel, etc., as derived from Caltrans cost database, RCTC and other sources, were tabulated and updated to December 2023. Additionally, the ROW cost components per square foot for various land use types were also updated based on current property valuations in Riverside County as researched by Overland, Pacific and Cutler.
2 A jurisdiction may choose to design to a higher standard, but if it does so, TUMF will only fund up to the equivalent of what costs would have been had the TUMF design standards been followed. 353
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 9 12) The cost values for the contributing labor, materials and land components were applied to estimated quantities of these components for the various roadway project types that are eligible under TUMF to generate aggregate unit cost values for each project type (road costs per lane-mile, typical costs per arterialfreeway interchange, bridge costs per linear foot, etc.). 13) The unit costs from the previous step were then applied to the project list to estimate the costs of the improvements on the TUMF project list. 14) The percentage of each project that was attributable to new development was then applied to the costs of TUMF road projects to find the total road project cost that is attributable to new development.
2.3.3. Determine the TUMF Transit Component
A portion of the TUMF funding is made available for transit services that provide an alternative to car travel for medium-to-long distance intra-regional trips. The eligible transit projects and their associated costs are determined using the following steps, with additional explanation provided in Chapter 4 of this report. 15) Actual average weekday daily ridership for Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) transit bus services was tabulated for 2023.
16) Forecast average weekday daily ridership for RTA bus transit services was retrieved from the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS Model for horizon year 2045. 17) The growth in ridership between 2023 and 2045 was compared to determine the portion of 2045 average weekday daily ridership that is attributable to existing passengers and the portion attributable to new growth.
18) A proposed transit project list was provided by RTA staff and was reviewed to confirm the validity of the project list to establish a final recommended transit project list to be included as part of the program. The result was the TUMF Transit Project List.
19) RTA provided information on current costs for the listed transit infrastructure. 20) The cost information was then used to determine the cost of the items on the TUMF Transit Project List.
21) The percent attribution from Step 17 was applied to the project cost estimates from the previous step to determine the cost of transit improvements that are attributable to new development.
22) The costs for road and transit projects that are attributable to new development are then combined along with information on other (non-TUMF) funds to determine the total cost for TUMF projects that is to be cover by new development through the imposition of the fees. The available alternate funding sources were reviewed as part of the Nexus update, specifically including the completion of a detailed review of available federal, state and local funding sources administered by RCTC.
354
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 10 2.3.4. Computing the Fee for Residential Developments Having determined the total project costs to be covered by new development under the TUMF program, it is necessary to divide these costs among different types of developments roughly in proportion to their expected traffic impacts. The following steps describes the process for determining the proportion attributable to new residential development. The approach for accomplishing these steps along with the findings of this analysis are described in detail in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 of this report. 23) California legislation encourages the use of vehicle miles of travel (VMT) as the primary indicator of traffic impacts because it combines the number of vehicle trips and the average length of those trips to reflect the proportional impact to the roadway network. As a result, the methodology for determining the relative distribution of traffic impacts between residential and non-residential uses for the purposes of TUMF utilizes a VMT based approach. The RivCoM 2021 Existing Network and 2045 No-Build model runs were examined to determine the VMT of various trip types that would take place in Western Riverside County (excluding through trips). The results were compared to determine the growth in VMT for each trip type. Per WRCOG policy (based on National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) recommended practice) trips originating in or destined for a home are attributed to residential development while trips where neither the origin nor the destination are a home are attributed to non-residential development.
24) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS socio-economic forecasts were used to estimate the number of single-family and multi-family dwelling units that will be developed during the 2018 to 2045 period.
25) The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE’s) trip generation rates, which come from surveys of existing sites for various development types, were then used to estimate the daily number of trips that will be generated by future single- and multi-family developments that will occur in the region from 2018 to 2045. 26) The cost to be covered by residential development was divided into the portion attributable to new single-family dwellings and portion attributable to new multifamily development to calculate the cost share for each use. 27) The cost share for single-family dwellings and multi-family dwellings was divided by the number of dwellings of each type to determine the fee level required from each new dwelling unit to cover their fair share of the cost to mitigate the impacts of new developments.
2.3.5. Computing the Fee for Non-Residential Developments A process similar to that used for residential units was used to determine the fee level for non-residential development. However, the determination of fees for non-residential development involves additional steps due to the additional complexity of accounting for a greater variety of development types within each use category. Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 of this report provide additional explanation regarding the methodology for accomplishing these steps along with the results of this analysis. 355
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 11 28) Like many impact fee programs, TUMF groups similar development projects together into general use categories to simplify the administration of the program. TUMF groups the various land use categories found in ITE’s Trip Generation Manual into four non-residential categories (industrial, retail, service, and government/public sector) based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), which is also used by the U.S. Census Bureau and SCAG for demographic classifications and is the basis for such classifications in the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model as well as and the RivCoM model. The ITE trip generation rates for all uses were reviewed for accuracy updated to reflect the most current ITE published rates. The median value for the tripgeneration rates for all uses within each category was used in the nexus study to represent the trip-generation characteristics for the category. 29) The trip-generation rates of retail and service uses were adjusted to take into account the share of pass-by trips these uses generate. Pass by trip rates for various retail and service uses were derived from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine the median value of all uses as the basis for the adjustment. The ITE pass by trip rates for all uses were reviewed for accuracy and updated to reflect the most current ITE published rates.
30) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS socio economic forecasts included non-residential employment for 2018 and 2045. These forecasts were used to estimate the growth in employment in each of the four non-residential uses. 31) The SCAG employment forecasts are denominated in jobs while development applications are typically denominated in square feet of floorspace. The ratio of floorspace per employee was determined as a median value derived from four studies, including a comprehensive study San Bernardino and Riverside Counties conducted in 1990, an OCTA study conducted in 2001, a SCAG study (including a specific focus on Riverside County) conducted in 2001, and the Riverside County General Plan adopted in 2015.
32) The forecast growth in employees was multiplied by the floorspace per employee to produce a forecast of the floorspace that will be developed for each of the four non-residential use types.
33) The trip-generation rate for each of the four uses was multiplied by the forecast of new floorspace to estimate the number of trips generated by each use. 34) The amount of project costs to be covered by non-residential development was split between the four non-residential uses to determine the TUMF cost share for each.
35) The TUMF cost share for each of the four non-residential uses was divided by the forecast growth in floorspace to determine the fee level required from each new square foot of non-residential development to cover their fair share of the cost to mitigate the impacts of new developments.
36) WRCOG has adopted a TUMF Fee Calculation Handbook that allows for fee adjustments to be made to account for unusual circumstances for certain types of residential and non-residential development (fuel filling stations, golf courses, high-cube warehouses, wineries, electric charging stations, etc.) These 356
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 12 adjustments are intended to calculate a fairer proportional fee based on the unique trip generation characteristics of these development types.
The outcome of this process is a schedule of fees for the various use categories identified as part of the TUMF program. The study conclusions including the Schedule of Fees is presented in Chapter 7 of this report. The schedule of fees represents the maximum fee permissible under California law for the purposes of the TUMF program.
The WRCOG Executive Committee has the option to adopt lower fees, however, in doing so each use category subject to a lower fee would not be contributing a fair share of the cost of their impacts. This would in turn create a funding gap for the program that would necessitate identifying additional project funding from some other source to ensure the cumulative regional impacts of new development are being mitigated fully in accordance with the program.
357
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 13 2.0 FUTURE GROWTH
2.1 Recent Historical Trend
Western Riverside County experienced robust growth in the period from the late 1990’s to the mid 2000’s. The results of Census 2000 indicate that in the year 2000, Western Riverside County had a population of 1.187 million representing a 30% increase (or 2.7% average annual increase) from the 1990 population of 912,000. Total employment in Western Riverside County in 2000 was estimated by the SCAG to be 381,000 representing a 46% increase (or 3.9% average annual increase) over the 1990 employment of 261,000.
Despite the impacts of the Great Recession and the associated residential mortgage and foreclosure crisis, and more recently with the shifting of population during and following the COVID-19 pandemic, Western Riverside County has continued to grow due to the availability of relatively affordable residential and commercial property, and a generally well-educated workforce. By 2010, the population of the region had grown to 1.742 million, a further 47% growth in population from 2000. Similarly, total employment in the region had also grown from 2000 to 2010 with 434,000 employees estimated to be working in Western Riverside County. This represents a 12% increase from the 381,000 employees working in the region in 2000.
2.2 Available Demographic Data
A variety of alternate demographic information that quantifies future population, household and employment growth is available for Western Riverside County. For earlier versions of the TUMF Nexus Study, the primary available source of consolidated demographic information for Western Riverside County was provided by SCAG. SCAG is the largest of nearly 700 Councils of Government (COG) in the United States and functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties in Southern California including Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial. SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and plan for issues of regional significance including transportation and growth management. As part of these responsibilities, SCAG maintains a comprehensive database of regional socioeconomic data and develops demographic projections and travel demand forecasts for Southern California.
In preparation for the 2020 RTP/SCS, SCAG undertook robust stakeholder engagement, including participation by WRCOG, Riverside County and the various cities in Western Riverside County, to develop regional demographic forecasts. Using input from regional stakeholders regarding anticipated patterns and rates of development, SCAG compiled and disseminated the forecasts that were ultimately adopted in 2020, including those specific to Western Riverside County. The SCAG forecasts adopted for the 2020 RTP/SCS were subsequently used as the basis for RivCoM and are used as the basis for this TUMF Nexus Study Update.
358
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 14 2.3 Demographic Assumptions Used for the Nexus Study Analysis A major distinction between data used for the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update and the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS data used for this 2024 Update is the change in the base year from 2012 to 2018, as well as the change in the horizon year from 2040 to 2045. This shift in the base year and horizon year demographic assumptions of the program carries through all aspects of the nexus analysis, including the travel demand forecasting, network review and fee calculation.
The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS data were compared to the 2016 RTP/SCS data used in the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update. As can be seen in Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1, the 2018 data reflects an increase in population and single-family households, and a very slight decline in multi-family households. Employment grew substantially overall, with significant growth in industrial employment, largely attributable to the rapid expansion of warehousing and logistics facilities in Western Riverside County. In contrast, there was a notable decline in government and public sector employment in the region from 2012 to 2018
Table 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County SED Type 2016 Update
(2012)
2024 Update
(2018) Change Percent
Total Population 1,773,935 1,905,440 131,505 7%
Total Households 525,149 554,573 29,424 6%
Single-Family 366,588 397,407 30,819 8%
Multi-Family 158,561 157,166 -1,395 -1%
Total Employment 460,787 570,420 109,633 24%
Industrial 120,736 169,334 48,598 40%
Retail 65,888 73,814 7,926 12%
Service 253,372 308,703 55,331 22%
Government/Public Sector 20,791 18,569 -2,222 -11%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
359
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 15 Figure 2.1 – Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County Table 2.2 and Figure 2.2 compare the socioeconomic forecasts for the program horizon year of 2045 used in the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update and 2045 for this study. The most recent forecasts reflect an increase in the horizon year population and households, and a decrease in overall employment in Western Riverside County. The change in employment was not, however, consistent across sectors. The retail employment forecast has decreased approximately 15% from 2040 to 2045, while the industrial employment forecast has increased over 20%. This shift is consistent with the emergence of e-commerce as an alternative to traditional “brick and mortar” retail. 360
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 16 Table 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County
SED Type 2016 Update
(2040)
2024 Update
(2045) Change Percent
Total Population 2,429,633 2,533,876 104,243 4%
Total Households 775,231 812,399 37,168 5%
Single-Family 539,631 564,898 25,267 5%
Multi-Family 235,600 247,501 11,901 5%
Total Employment 861,455 846,442 -15,013 -2%
TUMF Industrial 201,328 245,915 44,587 22%
TUMF Retail 101,729 86,929 -14,800 -15%
TUMF Service 528,092 482,958 -45,134 -9%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 30,306 30,640 334 1%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
Figure 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County 361
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 17 Table 2.3 and Figure 2.3 summarize the socioeconomic data obtained from SCAG and used as the basis for completing this Nexus Study analysis. The SCAG employment data for 2018 and 2045 was provided for thirteen employment sectors consistent with the California Employment Development Department (EDD) Major Groups including:
Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Retail Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities; Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service; and Government. For the purposes of the Nexus Study, the EDD Major Groups were aggregated to Industrial (Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities), Retail (Retail Trade), Service (Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service) and Government/Public Sector (Government). These four aggregated sector types were used as the basis for calculating the fee as described in Section 6.2. Appendix B provides a table detailing the EDD Major Groups and corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Categories that are included in each nonresidential sector type.
Table 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045)
SED Type 2018 2045 Change Percent
Total Population 1,905,440 2,533,876 628,436 33%
Total Households 554,573 812,399 257,826 46%
Single-Family 397,407 564,898 167,491 42%
Multi-Family 157,166 247,501 90,335 57%
Total Employment 570,420 846,442 276,022 48%
TUMF Industrial 169,334 245,915 76,581 45%
TUMF Retail 73,814 86,929 13,115 18%
TUMF Service 308,703 482,958 174,255 56%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 18,569 30,640 12,071 65%
Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
362
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 18 Figure 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045)
The combined effects of the changes in the base year and horizon year socioeconomic data are modest reductions in the total growth in population and single-family households, but a notable increase in multi-family households. The change in total employment is reduced by 31%, with the most significant reduction in employment growth in the retail sector (-63%), while the industrial sector saw only a slight reduction in total employment growth compared to the 2016 Nexus Update (5%).
The Government/public sector employment growth has increased by 27% from the 2016 Nexus Study to the 2024 Nexus Study, although the total number of jobs increased is relatively small as a share of the total employment. Table 2.4 and Figure 2.4 provide a comparison of the changes in population, households and employment between the 2016 Nexus Update and the 2024 Nexus Update. The table and figure clearly illustrate the reduction in the rate of growth in Western Riverside County largely attributable to the effects of the economic recession. This reduced rate of growth in the region will serve as the basis for reevaluating the level of impact of new development on the transportation system in the next section, as well as providing the basis for the determination of the fair share fee for each land use type. 363
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 19 Table 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison)
SED Type 2016 Update
(2012-2040)
2024 Update
(2018-2045) Difference Percent
Total Population 655,698 628,436 -27,262 -4%
Total Households 250,082 257,826 7,744 3%
Single-Family 173,043 167,491 -5,552 -3%
Multi-Family 77,039 90,335 13,296 17%
Total Employment 400,668 276,022 -124,646 -31%
TUMF Industrial 80,592 76,581 -4,011 -5%
TUMF Retail 35,841 13,115 -22,726 -63%
TUMF Service 274,720 174,255 -100,465 -37%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 9,515 12,071 2,556 27%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
364
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 20 Figure 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison)
365
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 21 3.0 NEED FOR THE TUMF
All new developments have some effect on the transportation infrastructure in a community, city or county due to an increase in travel demand. Increasing usage of the transportation facilities leads to more traffic, progressively increasing VMT, traffic congestion and decreasing the level of service (LOS)3. To meet the increased travel demand and keep traffic flowing, improvements to transportation facilities become necessary to sustain pre-development traffic conditions.
The projected growth in Western Riverside County (33% growth in population and 48% growth in employment in 27 years) and the related growth in VMT can be expected to increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in the transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial highways and roadways that carry a significant number of the trips between cities, since traditional sources of transportation improvement funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the improvements needed to serve new development. Development exactions generally provide only a fraction of the improvements with those being confined to the area immediately adjacent to the respective development, and the broad-based county-level funding sources (i.e., Riverside County’s half-cent sales tax known as Measure A) designate only a small portion of their revenues for arterial roadway improvements.
This section documents the existing and future congestion levels that demonstrate the need for future improvements to the transportation system to specifically mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development. It then describes the TUMF concept that has been developed to fund future new developments’ fair share of needed improvements.
The forecast of future congestion levels is derived from Year 2045 No-Build travel demand forecasts for Western Riverside County developed using RivCoM. The Year 2045 No-Build scenario evaluates the effects of 2045 population, employment and resultant traffic generation on the 2021 existing arterial highway network.
3.1 Future Highway Congestion Levels
To support the evaluation of the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the existing arterial highway system in Western Riverside County, existing (2018) and future (2045) SED were modeled on the existing (2021) arterial highway network using RivCoM. To quantify traffic growth impacts, various traffic measures of effectiveness were calculated for the AM and PM peak periods for each of the two scenarios. The 3 The Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition – A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 2016, Volume 1 – Concepts, pp 5-3) describes LOS as a “quantitative stratification of performance measure or measures representing quality of service….HCM defines six levels of service, ranging from A to F, for each service measure or combination of measures. LOS A represents the best operating conditions from the traveler’s perspective and LOS F the worst.” 366
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 22 WRCOG TUMF study area was extracted from the greater regional model network for the purpose of calculating measures for Western Riverside County only. Peak period performance measures for the Western Riverside County TUMF study area included total VMT, total vehicle hours of travel (VHT), total combined vehicle hours of delay (VHD), and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS E). These results were tabulated in Table 3.1. Plots of the Network Extents are attached in Appendix C.
Total Arterial VMT, VHT, VHD and LOS E Threshold VMT were calculated to include all principal arterials, minor arterials and major connectors, respectively. Regional values for each threshold were calculated for a total of all facilities including arterials, freeways, freeway ramps and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes.
Table 3.1 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing to 2045 No-Build)
Measure of Performance*
Peak Periods (Total)
2018 Existing 2045 No-Build % Change % Annual
VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 23,284,724 29,897,254 28% 0.9% VMT - FREEWAYS 13,514,522 15,490,284 15% 0.5%
VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 9,770,202 14,406,970 47% 1.4%
TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 6,216,985 8,597,200 38% 1.2%
VHT - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 541,350 915,439 69% 2.0%
VHT - FREEWAYS 263,792 399,128 51% 1.5%
VHT - ALL ARTERIALS 277,558 516,311 86% 2.3%
TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHT 174,455 320,869 84% 2.3%
VHD - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 108,900 338,056 210% 4.3%
VHD - FREEWAYS 66,156 170,649 158% 3.6%
VHD - ALL ARTERIALS 42,745 167,407 292% 5.2%
TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHD 33,249 124,863 276% 5.0%
VMT LOS E - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 5,605,070 13,369,483 139% 3.3% VMT LOS E - FREEWAYS 4,725,471 9,316,891 97% 2.5%
VMT LOS E & F - ALL ARTERIALS 879,599 4,052,592 361% 5.8% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 765,782 3,184,133 316% 5.4% % of TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 12% 37%
* Based on RivCoM 2018 base network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network as existing in December 2021
NOTES:
Volume is adjusted by PCE factor
VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT = vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined time that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free-flow (ideal) travel time) LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios).
LOS E or Worse was determined by V/C ratio that exceeds 0.9 thresholds as indicated in the Riverside County General Plan. 367
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 23 The following formulas were used to calculate the respective values:
The calculated values were compared to assess the total change between 2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build scenarios, and the average annual change between 2018 Existing and 2044 No-Build. As can be seen from the RivCoM outputs summarized in Table 3.1, the additional traffic generated by new development will cause peak period VMT on the arterial highway network to increase by approximately 47% by the year 2045 (approximately 1.4% per year). In the absence of additional improvements to the transportation network in Western Riverside County, the growth in VMT will cause congestion on the highway system to increase almost exponentially, with the most significant increase in congestion observed on the arterial highway system that includes the TUMF Network. Many facilities will experience a significant increase in vehicle delay and deterioration in LOS to unacceptable levels because of new development and the associated growth in traffic. According to the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition – A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 2016), “LOS E describes operation at or near capacity. Operations…at this level are highly volatile because there are virtually no usable gaps within the traffic stream, leaving little room to maneuver within the traffic stream. Any disruption to the traffic stream, such as vehicles entering…or a vehicle changing lanes, can establish a disruption wave that propagates throughout the upstream traffic stream….the physical and psychological comfort afforded drivers is poor.”
The Congestion Management Program for Riverside County (CMP) published by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in 2011 designates LOS E as the “traffic standards must be set no lower than LOS E for any segment or intersection along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways” in Riverside County. “The intent of the CMP is to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts, and improve air quality.” 4 The CMP provides a mechanism for monitoring congestion on the highway system and, where congestion is observed, establishes procedures for developing a deficiency plan to address improvement needs. The reactive nature of the CMP to identify and remediate existing congestion differs from the proactive nature of the TUMF program to anticipate and provide for future traffic needs. For this reason, the TUMF 4 Congestion Management Program for Riverside County – Executive Summary (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2011) Page ES-3, ES-1
VMT = Link Distance * Total Daily Volume
VHT = Average Loaded (Congested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume VHD = VHT – (Free-flow (Uncongested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume) VMT LOS E or F = VMT (on links where Daily V/C exceeded 0.90) Note: Volume to capacity (v/c) ratio thresholds for LOS E are based on the Transportation Research Board 2010 Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) LOS Maximum V/C Criteria for Multilane Highways with 45 mph Free Flow Speed (Exhibit 14-5, Chapter 14, Page 14-5). .
368
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 24 program follows the guidance of the Highway Capacity Manual in establishing LOS E as the threshold for unacceptable level of service, and subsequently as the basis for measuring system performance and accounting for existing needs. This approach ensures a more conservative accounting of existing system needs as part of the determination of the “fair share” of mitigating the cumulative regional impacts of future new development on the transportation system.
The continuing need for a mitigation fee on new development is shown by the adverse impact that new development will have on Western Riverside County’s transportation infrastructure, and particularly the arterial highway network. As a result of the new development and associated growth in population and employment in Western Riverside County, additional pressure will be placed on the transportation infrastructure with the total peak period VMT on the Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials (RSHA; also referred to as the TUMF Network) estimated to increase by approximately 38% or 1.2% compounded annually.
As shown in Table 3.1, the peak period VMT on arterial facilities within the TUMF Network experiencing LOS E or worse will increase by approximately 316% or 5.4% compounded annually in Western Riverside County in the period between 2018 and 2045. By 2045, 37% of the total VMT on the TUMF arterial highway system is forecast to be traveling on facilities experiencing daily LOS E or worse. Without improvements to the TUMF arterial highway system, the total vehicle hours of delay (VHD) experienced by area motorists on TUMF arterial highways during the peak periods will increase by approximately 5.0% per year. The combined influences of increased travel demand and worsened LOS that manifest themselves in severe congestion and delay highlighting the continuing need to complete substantial capacity expansion on the TUMF arterial highway system to mitigate the cumulative regional impact of increased travel demand resulting from new development.
The RivCoM outputs summarized in Table 3.1 clearly demonstrate that the travel demands generated by future new development in the region will lead to increasing levels of traffic congestion, especially on the arterial roadways. The need to improve these roadways to accommodate the anticipated growth in VMT and relieve future congestion is therefore directly linked to the future development which generates the additional travel demand.
3.2 Future Transit Utilization Levels
In addition to the roadway network, public transportation will play a role in serving future travel demand in the region. Transit represents a critical component of the transportation system by providing an alternative mode choice for those not wanting to use an automobile, and particularly for those who do not readily have access to an automobile. As population and employment in Western Riverside County grows because of new development, demand for regional transit services in the region is also expected to grow.
369
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 25 While some future transit trips will be accommodated by inter-regional transit services such as Metrolink, a substantial number of the trips within Western Riverside County will be served by bus transit services and for this reason the provision of regional bus transit service is considered integral to addressing the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new developments. Regional bus transit services within Western Riverside County are primarily provided by RTA.
In 2023, RTA reported average weekday daily ridership of 16,575 on their network of buses5. The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS forecasts for RTA average weekday daily ridership in 2045 is 57,282. These values were used to represent the existing and future transit trips consistent with the analysis of highway trips described in Section 3.1. The existing and future transit ridership were compared to assess the impact of new development on transit demand. Average weekday daily ridership would be expected to grow by 40,707 between 2023 and 2045, or an average increase of 1,850 weekday daily riders each year. Average weekday daily system ridership is summarized in Appendix D.
The future growth in demand for public transit services is reflective of the cumulative regional impacts of new development, and the associated increase in demand for all types of transportation infrastructure and services to accommodate this growth.
Furthermore, bus transit ridership is expected to grow as the improved services being planned and implemented by RTA attract new riders and encourages existing riders to use transit more often as an alternative to driving. Attracting additional riders to bus transit services contributes to the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development by reducing the number of trips that need to be served on the highway system. The need to provide additional bus transit services within Western Riverside County to satisfy this future demand is therefore directly linked to the future development that generates the demand.
3.3 The TUMF Concept
A sizable percentage of trip-making for any given local community extends beyond the bounds of the individual community as residents pursue employment, education, shopping and entertainment opportunities elsewhere. As new development occurs within a particular local community, this dispersal of trips of all purposes by new residents and the new business that serve them generates additional travel demand and contributes to the need for transportation improvements within their community and in the other communities of Western Riverside County. The idea behind a uniform mitigation fee is to have new development throughout the region contribute uniformly to paying the fair share cost of improving the transportation facilities that serve these trips between communities. Thus, the fee is intended to be used primarily to improve 5 RTA, like most public transportation agencies, have seen significant short-term declines in transit ridership resulting from changes in travel demands, mode choice and trip distribution following the COVID-19 pandemic. RTA’s 2016 actual average weekday daily ridership was 30,700. Post COVID-19, the RTA actual average weekday daily ridership in 2023 was 16,575, a decline of almost 50% of pre-pandemic ridership levels. These levels would be expected to continue to recover toward pre-pandemic levels as potential riders resume more regular work schedules, and apprehension toward the use of transit services for public health reasons wane.
370
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 26 transportation facilities that serve trips between communities within the region (in particular, arterial roadways and regional bus transit services).
Some roadways serve trips between adjacent communities, while some also serve trips between more distant communities within the region. The differing roadway functions led to the concept of using a portion of the fee revenues for a backbone system of arterial roadways that serve the longer-distance trips (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the entire region), while using a second portion of the fee revenues for a secondary system of arterials that serve inter-community trips within a specific subregion or zone (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the communities most directly served by these roads – to some extent, a return-to-source of that portion of the funds). Reflecting the importance of public transit to provide an alternative to highway travel as part of a balanced regional transportation strategy, a third portion of fee revenues was reserved for improvements to regional bus transit services (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the entire region).
Much, but not all, of the new trip-making in each area is generated by residential development (i.e. when people move into new homes, they create new trips on the transportation system as they travel to work, school, shopping or entertainment). Some of the new trips are generated simply by activities associated with new businesses (i.e. new businesses will create new trips through the delivery of goods and services, etc.).
Apart from commute trips by residents coming to and from work, and the trips of residents coming to and from new businesses to get goods and services, the travel demands of new businesses are not considered to be directly attributable to residential development. The consideration of different sources of new travel demand is therefore reflected in the concept of assessing both residential and non-residential development for their related transportation impacts.
In summary, the TUMF concept includes the following:
A uniform fee that is levied on new development throughout Western Riverside County.
The fee is assessed roughly proportionately on new residential and non-residential development based on the relative impact of each new use on the transportation system.
A portion of the fee is used to fund capacity improvements on a backbone system of arterial roadways that serve longer-distance trips within the region; a portion of the fee is returned to the subregion or zone in which it was generated to fund capacity improvements on a secondary system of arterial roadways that link the communities in that area; and a portion of the fee is used to fund improvements to regional bus transit services that serve trips between the communities within the region.
371
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 27 4.0 THE TUMF NETWORK
4.1 Identification of the TUMF Roadway Network
An integral element of the initial Nexus Study was the designation of the Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials. This network of regionally significant highways represents those arterial and collector highway and roadway facilities that primarily support inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and supplement the regional freeway system. As a result, this system also represents the extents of the network of highways and roadways that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements. The TUMF Network does not include the freeways of Western Riverside County as these facilities primarily serve longer distance inter-regional trips and a significant number of pass-through trips that have no origin or destination in Western Riverside County6.
The TUMF Network is the system of roadways that serve inter-community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. The RSHA for Western Riverside County was identified based on several transportation network and performance guidelines as follows:
1. Arterial highway facilities proposed to have a minimum of four lanes at ultimate build-out (not including freeways).
2. Facilities that serve multiple jurisdictions and/or provide connectivity between communities both within and adjoining Western Riverside County.
3. Facilities with forecast traffic volumes exceeding 20,000 vehicles per day in the future horizon year.
4. Facilities with forecast volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 (LOS E) or greater in the future horizon year.
5. Facilities that accommodate regional fixed route transit services.
6. Facilities that provide direct access to major commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational or tourist activity centers, and multi-modal transportation facilities (such as airports, railway terminals and transit centers).
Appendix E includes exhibits illustrating the various performance measures assessed during the definition of the RSHA.
Transportation facilities in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied these guidelines were initially identified, and a skeletal regional transportation framework evolved from facilities where several guidelines were observed. Representatives of all WRCOG constituent jurisdictions reviewed this framework in the context of current local transportation plans to define the TUMF Network, which was subsequently endorsed by 6 Since pass-through trips have no origin or destination in Western Riverside County, new development within Western Riverside County cannot be considered responsible for mitigating the impacts of pass-through trips. The impact of passthrough trips and the associated cost to mitigate the impact of pass-through trips (and other inter-regional freeway trips) is addressed in the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Western Riverside County Freeway Strategic Plan, Phase II – Detailed Evaluation and Impact Fee Nexus Determination, Final Report dated May 31, 2008. 372
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 28 the WRCOG Public Works Committee, WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee, TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee.
The RSHA is illustrated in Figure 4.1. As stated previously, the RSHA represents those regional significant highway facilities that primarily serve inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and therefore also represents the extents of the network of highways and roadways that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements.
The TUMF Network was reviewed as part of the 2024 Nexus Update to ensure facilities generally still met the previously described performance guidelines, and/or that the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network were roughly proportional to the impacts needing to be mitigated. This review process resulted in the removal of various facilities from the TUMF Network, as well as various changes in the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network. The resulting TUMF Network used as the basis for this Nexus Update is discussed in Section 4.3 of this report.
373
374
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 30 4.2 Backbone Network and Secondary Network
As indicated previously, the TUMF roadway network was refined to distinguish between facilities of “Regional Significance” and facilities of “Zonal Significance.” Facilities of Regional Significance were identified as those that typically are proposed to have a minimum of six lanes at general plan build-out7, extend across and/or between multiple Area Planning Districts8, and are forecast to carry at least 25,000 vehicles per day in 2045. The Facilities of Regional Significance have been identified as the “backbone” highway network for Western Riverside County. A portion of the TUMF fee is specifically designated for improvement projects on the backbone system. The backbone network is illustrated in Figure 4.2.
Facilities of Zonal Significance (the “secondary” network) represent the balance of the RSHA for Western Riverside County. These facilities are typically within one zone and carry comparatively lesser traffic volumes than the backbone highway network, although they are considered significant for circulation within the respective zone. A portion of the TUMF is specifically designated for improvement projects on the secondary network within the zone in which it is collected. The WRCOG APD or zones are illustrated in Figure 4.3.
7 Although facilities were identified based on the minimum number of lanes anticipated at general plan buildout, in some cases it was determined that there was not sufficient demand for all additional lanes on some facilities until beyond the current timeframe of the TUMF Program (2045). As a result, only a portion of the additional lanes on these facilities have currently been identified for funding with TUMF revenues, reflecting the cumulative impact of new development through the current duration of the TUMF Program.
8 Area Planning Districts (APD) are the five aggregations of communities used for regional planning functions within the WRCOG area. Area Planning Districts are interchangeably referred to as TUMF Zones.
375
376
377
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 33 4.3 Future Roadway Transportation Needs
To calculate a “fair share” fee for new development, it is necessary to estimate the cost of improvements on the TUMF system that will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of future transportation demands created by new development.
Estimates of the cost to improve the network to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development were originally developed based on unit costs prepared for the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Regional Arterial Cost Estimate (RACE)9, and the WRCOG Southwest District SATISFY 2020 Summary of Cost Estimates10 (TKC/WRCOG 2000). The RACE cost estimates were developed based on a summary of actual construction costs for projects constructed in Riverside County in 1998.
The initial unit cost estimates for the TUMF (based on inflated RACE cost estimates) were reviewed in the context of the SATISFY 2020 Draft Cost Estimates and were consolidated to provide typical improvement costs for each eligible improvement type. The refinement of unit costs was completed to simplify the process of estimating the cost to improve the entire TUMF network. Based on RACE and SATISFY 2020, consolidated cost estimates included typical per mile or lump sum costs for each of the improvement types eligible under the TUMF Program. The resultant revised unit cost estimates were used as the basis for estimating the cost to complete the necessary improvements to the TUMF network to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development.
Variations in the consolidated cost estimates for specific improvement types were provided to reflect differences in topography and land use across the region. Unit costs for roadway construction were originally varied to account for variations in construction cost (in particular, roadway excavation and embankment cost) associated with construction on level (code 1) rolling (code 2) and mountainous (code 3) terrain, respectively. Right-of-way acquisition costs which originally included consideration for land acquisition, documentation and legal fees, relocation and demolition costs, condemnation compensation requirements, utility relocation, and environmental mitigation costs were also varied to account for variations in right-of-way costs associated with urban (developed commercial/residential mixed uses – code 1), suburban (developed residential uses – code 2) and rural (undeveloped uses – code 3) land uses, respectively. Lump sum costs for interchange improvements were originally varied to account for variations in cost associated with new complex, new standard (or fully reconstructed), or major (or partially reconstructed) or minor (individual ramp improvements) interchange improvements.
As part of the 2024 TUMF Nexus Update, the original unit cost categories were revised to generate entirely new unit cost values based on the most recent available construction cost, labor cost and land acquisition cost values for comparable projects within Riverside County. The recalculation of the TUMF unit cost components was completed 9 Parsons Brinckerhoff/Coachella Valley Association of Governments, 1999, Regional Arterial Cost Estimate (RACE)
10 TKC/Western Riverside Council of Governments, 2000, SATISFY 2020 Summary of Cost Estimates 378
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 34 as part of the 2024 Nexus Update to reflect the effects of significant changes in materials, labor and land acquisition costs including the influences of supply chain disruptions during and following the COVID-19 pandemic, and the elevated rates of inflation prevailing in the past few years. Appendix F provides a detailed outline of the assumptions and methodology leading to the revised TUMF unit cost assumptions developed as part of the 2024 Nexus Update. A new category was also added to the cost assumptions to facilitate the use of intelligent transportation systems (ITS) to enhance traffic flows in arterial corridors that require mitigation but cannot accommodate construction of addition lane capacity.
Section 8.5.1 of the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2003, states that “each new transportation project will contribute to Plan implementation. Historically, these projects have budgeted 3% - 5% of their construction costs to mitigate environmental impacts.” This expectation is reiterated in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., October 2020) Section 6 which indicates that “about 44% of the revenue for the program” is expected to be derived from non-fee sources, including ” the Measure A sales tax which is authorized through 2039 and other transportation funding sources such as the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF).” Consistent with the MSHCP Nexus Report, an amount equal to 5% of the construction cost for new TUMF network lanes, bridges and railroad grade separations will be specifically included as part of TUMF Program with revenues to be provided to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) for the acquisition of land identified in the MSHCP. The relevant sections of the MSHCP document and the most recent MSHCP Nexus Report are included in Appendix F.
Table 4.1 summarizes the unit cost estimate assumptions used to develop the TUMF network cost estimate as part of the current Nexus Update. Table 4.1 also includes a comparison of the original TUMF unit cost assumptions and the 2016 Nexus Study unit cost assumptions that demonstrates the significant increases in unit costs observed during recent years. In most cases the unit cost assumptions have more than doubled from those used for the 2016 Nexus Study. Cost estimates are provided in current year values as indicated.
To estimate the cost of improving the regional network to provide for traffic growth from new development, the network characteristics and performance guidelines (outlined in Section 4.1) were initially used as a basis for determining the needed improvements.
The initial list of improvements was then compared with local General Plan Circulation Elements to ensure that the TUMF network included planned arterial roadways of regional significance. A consolidated list of proposed improvements and the unit cost assumptions were then used to establish an initial estimate of the cost to improve the network to mitigate for future traffic growth associated with new development. This initial list of proposed improvements has since been revised and updated as part of each subsequent Nexus Update to reflect the completion of projects, changing levels of development and associated changes in travel demand and transportation system impacts to be mitigated as part of the TUMF program.
379
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 35 Table 4.1 - Unit Costs for Arterial Highway and Street Construction Component
Type
Original Cost
Assumptions as
published
October 18, 2002
Cost Assumptions
per 2016 Nexus
Study
July 10, 2017
Cost Assumptions
per 2024 Nexus
Update
Description
Terrain 1 $550,000 $692,000 $1,132,000 Construction cost per lane mile - level terrain
Terrain 2 $850,000 $878,000 $1,740,000 Construction cost per lane mile - rolling terrain
Terrain 3 $1,150,000 $1,064,000 $2,350,000 Construction cost per lane mile - mountainous terrain
Landuse 1 $900,000 $2,509,000 $7,830,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - urban areas
Landuse 2 $420,000 $2,263,000 $5,440,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - suburban areas
Landuse 3 $240,000 $287,000 $490,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - rural areas
Interchange 1 n/a $50,032,000 $84,190,000
Complex new
interchange/interchange
modification cost
Interchange 2 $20,000,000 $25,558,000 $43,490,000 New interchange/interchange modification total cost
Interchange 3 $10,000,000 $12,343,000 $22,550,000 Major interchange improvement total cost
Bridge 1 $2,000 $3,180 $4,800 Bridge total cost per lane per linear foot
RRXing 1 $4,500,000 $6,376,000 $18,200,000 New Rail Grade Crossing per lane RRXing 2 $2,250,000 $2,733,000 $6,900,000 Existing Rail Grade Crossing per lane ITS 1 $686,400 Infrastructure for ITS of roadway
segments per route mile
Planning 10% 10% 10%
Planning, preliminary engineering
and environmental assessment costs
based on construction cost only
Engineering 25% 25% 25%
Project study report, design,
permitting and construction
oversight costs based on
construction cost only
Contingency 10% 10% 10% Contingency costs based on total segment cost
Administration 4% 4% TUMF program administration based
on total TUMF eligible network cost
MSHCP 5% 5%
TUMF component of MSHCP based
on total TUMF eligible construction
cost
As indicated in Table 2.4 and Figure 2.4, the anticipated rate of forecasted growth in Western Riverside County has been reduced by 4% for population, 3% for single-family residential and 31% for employment. This reduced rate of forecasted socioeconomic growth has a commensurate impact on the forecasted daily traffic in the region as demonstrated by the 2016 Nexus Study VMT compared to the 2024 Nexus Update VMT in Table 4.2. As shown in the table, the forecast peak period VMT on the TUMF arterial network in the year 2045 as the basis for the 2024 Nexus Update is more than 5% less than the comparable peak period VMT for 2040 used for the 2016 Nexus Study. 380
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 36 Table 4.2 – Forecasted Daily Traffic in Western Riverside County Measure of Performance
2024 Nexus Update 2016 Nexus Study
Peak Period Peak Period
2018 Existing 2045 No-Build 2012 Existing 2040 No-Build VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 23,284,724 29,897,254 19,532,437 29,277,587 VMT - FREEWAYS 13,514,522 15,490,284 11,019,155 14,487,570 VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 9,770,202 14,406,970 8,513,282 14,790,016 TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 6,216,985 8,597,200 5,585,202 9,089,495 Source: RivCoM 2018 base network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network as existing in December 2021; RivTAM 2012 network and SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2015 arterial network completed by WSP, September 2016
As a result of the reduced forecast traffic growth in the region, it is anticipated that the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the arterial highway and transit systems in the region is also reduced necessitating a reduction in the projects identified on the TUMF Network to mitigate the impacts of new development. As part of the 2024 Nexus Update, the list of proposed improvements included in the initial Nexus Study and validated during the subsequent Nexus updates was reviewed for accuracy and, where necessary, amended to remove or modify projects that have changed in need to mitigate impacts based on changes in the patterns of growth and travel demand within the region. Projects completed since the adoption of the 2016 Nexus Update were also removed from the network to reflect the fact that mitigation at these locations is no longer required. The specific network changes were screened by the WRCOG Public Works Committee for consistency with TUMF network guidelines including travel demand and traffic performance.
Based on the findings of the network screening, elements of specific projects were revised to reflect necessary network corrections and modifications to project assumptions. A matrix summarizing the disposition of the requests received as part of the 2024 TUMF Nexus Update was developed and is included in Appendix G.
Eligible arterial highway and street improvement types to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development on Network facilities include:
1. Construction of additional Network roadway lanes
2. Construction of new Network roadway segments
3. Expansion of existing Network bridge structures
4. Construction of new Network bridge structures
5. Expansion of existing Network interchanges with freeways
6. Construction of new Network interchanges with freeways
7. Grade separation of existing Network at-grade railroad crossings
8. Installation of ITS along Network roadway segments
All eligible improvement types, except for ITS, provide additional capacity to Network facilities to accommodate future traffic growth generated by new development in Western Riverside County. ITS provides the ability to improve traffic flows along corridors 381
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 37 where capacity expansion is not possible. Following the comprehensive update of the TUMF Program, the estimated total cost to improve the RSHA for Western Riverside County is $4.84 billion with this cost including all arterial highway and street planning, engineering, design, right-of-way acquisition and capital construction costs, but not including transit, MSHCP or program administration costs that will be subsequently described. It should be noted that the full cost to improve the TUMF Network cannot be entirely attributed to new development and must be adjusted to account for the previous obligation of other funds to complete necessary improvements and unfunded existing needs. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 describe the adjustments to the total TUMF Network improvement need to account for existing needs and obligated funds.
In addition to the arterial highway and street improvement costs indicated above, the TUMF Nexus Update included specific consideration for the TUMF Program obligation to the MSHCP program to mitigate the impact of TUMF network improvements on species and habitat within Western Riverside County. The TUMF obligation to MSHCP was calculated at a rate of 5% of the total construction (capital) cost of new lane segments, bridges and railroad grade separations on the TUMF Network. The total obligation to the MSHCP as indicated in the TUMF Network cost fee table is approximately $64.6 million, although the total obligation specific to the TUMF program is reduced to account for MSHCP obligations associated with improvements addressing existing needs and therefore excluded from TUMF.
The TUMF 2024 Nexus Update similarly includes specific consideration of the costs associated with WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program. The average cost for WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program was calculated at a rate of 4% of the total eligible cost of new lane segments (including interchanges, bridges and railroad grade separations) on the TUMF Network and new transit services. Administration costs incurred by WRCOG include direct salary, fringe benefit and overhead costs for WRCOG staff assigned to administer the program and support participating jurisdictions, and costs for consultant, legal and auditing services to support the implementation of the TUMF program. The total cost for WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program as indicated in the TUMF Network cost fee table is approximately $161.2 million.
The detailed TUMF network cost calculations are provided in Section 4.7, including each of the individual segments and cost components considered as part of the TUMF Program, and the maximum eligible TUMF share for each segment following adjustments for obligated funding and unfunded existing needs as described in subsequent sections.
4.4 Public Transportation Component of the TUMF System
In addition to the roadway network, public transportation plays a key role in serving future travel demand in the region. Public transportation serving inter-community trips is generally provided in the form of public bus transit services and in particular express bus or other high frequency services between strategically located community transit centers. In Western Riverside County, these bus transit services are typically provided by 382
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 38 RTA. Transit needs to serve future regional travel in Western Riverside County via bus transit include vehicle acquisitions, transit centers, express bus stop upgrades, maintenance facilities and other associated capital improvements to develop express bus or other high frequency inter-community transit bus services within the region.
Metrolink commuter rail service improvements were not included in the TUMF Program as they typically serve longer inter-regional commute trips equivalent to freeway trips on the inter-regional highway system.
The network of regionally significant bus transit services represents those express bus and other high frequency transit bus services that primarily support inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and supplement the regional highway system and interregional commuter rail services. As a result, this portion of the bus transit system also represents the extents of the network of bus services that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements.
The TUMF Bus Transit Network is the system of bus services that serve inter-community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. The Bus Transit Network for Western Riverside County was identified based on several transit network and performance guidelines as follows:
1. Bus transit routes (or corridors comprised of multiple overlapping routes) proposed to have a frequency of greater than three buses per direction during peak hours at ultimate build out.
2. Routes or corridors that serve multiple jurisdictions and/or provide connectivity between communities, both within and adjoining western Riverside County.
3. Routes or corridors with forecast weekday bus ridership in excess of 1,000 person trips per day by 2040.
4. Routes or corridors that are proposed to provide timed interconnections with at least four other routes or corridors at ultimate build out.
5. Routes or corridors that utilize the majority of travel along the TUMF RSHA.
6. Routes or corridors that provide direct access to areas of forecast population and employment growth, major commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational or tourist activity centers, and multi-modal transportation facilities (such as airports, railway terminals and transit centers).
Express bus routes and other high-frequency bus transit routes and corridors in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied the respective guidelines were identified by RTA. Updated cost estimates for improving the infrastructure serving public transportation, including construction of transit centers and transfer facilities, express bus stop upgrades, and capital improvements needed to develop express bus and other high frequency bus transit service within the region were also provided by RTA.
The updated transit unit cost data provided by RTA are shown in Table 4.3. 383
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 39 Table 4.3 - Unit Costs for Transit Capital Expenditures Component Type*
Original Cost
Assumptions as
published
October 18, 2002
Cost Assumptions
per 2016 Nexus
Study
July 10, 2017
Cost
Assumptions per
2024 Nexus
Update
Description
Transit Center 1 $6,000,000 $7,465,000
Relocation/expansion of
existing Regional Transit
Center with up to 14 bus
bays and park and ride
Transit Center 2 $6,000,000 $9,000,000 $11,195,000
New Regional Transit Center
with up to 14 bus bays and
park and ride
Transfer Facility $1,000,000 $1,245,000 Multiple route transfer hub O & M Facility $50,000,000 $62,186,000 Regional Operations and Maintenance Facility
Green Technology $100,000 ZEB technology
enhancements
Bus Stop $10,000 $40,000 $50,000 Bus Stop Amenities Upgrade on TUMF Network
BRT Service Capital $540,000 $60,000 $75,000 BRT/Limited Stop Service Capital (per stop**)
Vehicle Fleet 1*** $160,000 Small Sized Bus/Van
Contract Operated
Vehicle Fleet 2 $155,000 $300,000 Medium Sized Bus Contract Operated
Vehicle Fleet 3 $325,125 $585,000 $1,271,000 Large Sized Bus Directly Operated
COA Study $950,000 $1,150,000
Comprehensive
Operational Analysis Study
component of Nexus Study
Update
* Transit Cost Component Types were restructured as part of the 2016 Nexus Update in accordance with the RTA Comprehensive Operational Analysis (January 2015) ** BRT Service Capital Cost Assumption was based on a per mile unit prior to the 2016 Nexus Update. 2016 Nexus Update uses a per stop unit cost for BRT Service Capital *** Vehicle Fleet component was restructured as part of the 2024 Nexus Update with the inclusion of Small Sized Bus/Van Contract Operated as Vehicle Fleet 1 and subsequent renumbering of Vehicle Fleet 2 and 3, respectively The estimated total cost for future RTA bus transit services to accommodate forecast transit demand is approximately $217.9 million with this cost including all planning, engineering, design and capital improvement costs. Detailed transit component cost estimates are included in Section 4.7. The full cost to improve RTA bus transit services cannot be entirely attributed to new development and must be adjusted to account for existing needs. Section 4.6 describes the adjustments to the total transit cost to account for existing needs.
384
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 40 4.5 Existing Obligated Funding
For some of the facilities identified in the TUMF network, existing obligated funding has previously been secured through traditional funding sources to complete necessary improvements. Since funding has been obligated to provide for the completion of needed improvements to the TUMF system, the funded cost of these improvements will not be recaptured from future developments through the TUMF Program. As a result, the TUMF network cost was adjusted accordingly to reflect the availability of obligated funds.
To determine the availability of obligated funds, WRCOG staff, in conjunction with RCTC staff, completed a review of the current Federal Transportation improvement Program (FTIP) to identify TUMF eligible projects that were also programmed to receive funding from alternate sources. A table summarizing the obligated funds for segments of the TUMF network is included in Appendix H. A total of $382.9 million in obligated funding was identified for improvements to the TUMF system. The estimated total TUMF network project cost was subsequently reduced by this amount.
4.6 Unfunded Existing Improvement Needs
A review of the existing traffic conditions on the TUMF network (as presented in Table
3.1) indicates that some segments of the roadways on the TUMF system currently experience congestion and operate at unacceptable levels of service. In addition, demand for inter-community transit service already exists and future utilization of proposed inter-community transit services will partially satisfy this existing demand. The need to improve these portions of the system is generated, at least in part, by existing demand, rather than solely the cumulative regional impacts of future new development, so future new development cannot be assessed for the equivalent cost share of improvements providing for this existing need.
To account for existing need in the TUMF Network, the cost for facilities identified as currently experiencing LOS E or F was adjusted. This was done by identifying the portion of any segment of the TUMF Network with a volume to capacity (v/c) ratio of greater than 0.9 (the threshold for LOS E) in the RivCoM 2018 Existing scenario and extracting the share of the overall facility cost to improve that portion. This cost adjustment provides for the mitigation of incremental traffic growth on those TUMF segments with an existing high level of congestion. The following approach was applied to account for incremental traffic growth associated with new development as part of the existing need methodology:
1. Facilities with an existing need were identified by reviewing the RivCoM 2018 Existing scenario assigned traffic on the 2021 existing network and delineating 385
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 41 those facilities included on the TUMF Cost Fee Summary Table that have an average directional v/c exceeding 0.9011.
a. Weighted directional v/c values were used to determine existing need for network segments, which was calculated by:
i. Determining the length for the portion of each segment (model link), and calculating the ratio of link length to the overall segment length
ii. Generating the average directional v/c for each link, for both directions in AM and PM periods, and multiplying by link/segment length ratio
iii. Determining the maximum peak-period peak-direction v/c for each link, representing the highest directional v/c in either AM or PM
iv. Calculating weighted average v/c for each TUMF segment, based on the sum of all weighted max v/c values of each link within a segment
b. A similar method was used to determine existing need for spot improvements including interchanges, railroad crossings and bridges.
However, no weighting was used in the calculation of existing need for spot improvements. For these facilities, the peak-period peak-direction v/c values (highest directional v/c in either AM or PM) were utilized in the existing need calculation. This was based on the individual link within a network segment where a bridge or railroad crossing is located, or onand off-ramps in the case of interchanges.
2. Initial costs of addressing the existing need were calculated by estimating the share of a particular roadway segments “new lane” cost, or individual spot improvement cost (including all associated ROW and soft costs).
3. Incremental growth in v/c was determined by comparing the average directional exisitng year v/c for the TUMF facilities (delineated under step one) with the horizon year v/c for the corresponding segments and spot improvements calculated based on the RivCoM 2045 No-Build scenario assigned traffic on the 2021 existing network using the same methodology as the existing year v/c.
11 The RivCoM 2021 Existing Network used for the TUMF Nexus Study analyses reflects the RivCoM 2018 base year network augmented to include highways facilities on the TUMF Network as they existed in December 2021. A second version of the base network was also developed adding only those facilities that had been identified on the 2016 TUMF Nexus study 2040 Build scenario that did not currently exist in December 2021 and therefore were not represented by a link(s) in the RivCoM base network. The Supplemental 2021 Existing Network was utilized as the basis for determining existing and future v/c for only those projects that did not currently exist on the 2021 TUMF Network.
386
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 42 4. The proportion of the incremental growth attributable to new development was determined by dividing the result of step three with the total 2045 No-Build scenario v/c exceeding LOS E.
5. For those segments experiencing a net increase in v/c over the base year, TUMF will ‘discount’ the cost of existing need improvements by the proportion of the incremental v/c growth through 2045 No-Build compared to the 2018 Baseline v/c (up to a maximum of 100%).
The unfunded cost of existing highway improvement needs (including the related MSHCP obligation) totals $582.6 million. Appendix H includes a detailed breakdown of the existing highway improvement needs on the TUMF network, including the associated unfunded improvement cost estimate for each segment and spot improvement experiencing unacceptable LOS.
For transit service improvements, the cost to provide for existing demand was determined by multiplying the total transit component cost by the share of future transit trips representing existing demand. The cost of existing transit service improvement needs is $63.0 million representing 28.9% of the TUMF transit component. Appendix H includes tables reflecting the calculation of the existing transit need share and the existing transit need cost.
4.7 Maximum TUMF Eligible Cost
A total of $382.9 million in obligated funding was identified for improvements to the TUMF system. Since these improvements are already funded with other available revenue sources, the funded portion of these projects cannot also be funded with TUMF revenues. Furthermore, the total cost of the unfunded existing improvement need is $646.9 million. These improvements are needed to mitigate existing transportation deficiencies and therefore their costs cannot be assigned to new development through TUMF.
Based on the estimated costs described in Sections 4.3 and 4.4, the total value to complete the identified TUMF network and transit improvements, and administer the program is $5.28 billion. Having accounted for obligated funds and unfunded existing needs as described in Sections 4.5 and 4.6, respectively, the estimated maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program is $4.24 billion. The maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program includes approximately $3.87 billion in eligible arterial highway and street related improvements and $154.8 million in eligible transit related improvements. An additional $53.9 million is eligible as part of the TUMF Program to mitigate the impact of eligible TUMF related arterial highway and street projects on critical native species and wildlife habitat, while $161.2 million is provided to cover the costs incurred by WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program.
Figure 4.4 illustrates the various improvements to the RSHA included as part of the TUMF network cost calculation. Table 4.4 summarizes the TUMF network cost calculations for each of the individual segments. This table also identifies the maximum eligible TUMF share for each segment having accounted for obligated funding and unfunded 387
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 43 existing need. A detailed breakdown of the individual cost components and values for the various TUMF Network segments is included in Appendix H. Table 4.5 outlines the detailed transit component cost estimates. It should be noted that the detailed cost tables (and fee levels) are subject to regular review and updating by WRCOG and therefore WRCOG should be contacted directly to obtain the most recently adopted version of these tables (and to confirm the corresponding fee level). 388
389
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 45 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Central Menifee Ethanac Goetz Murrieta $0 $0
Central Menifee Ethanac Murrieta I-215 $0 $0
Central Menifee Ethanac I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Central Menifee Ethanac Sherman Matthews $2,674,000 $2,674,000 Central Menifee Ethanac BNSF San Jacinto Branch railroad crossing $105,560,000 $105,560,000 Central Menifee Menifee SR-74 (Pinacate) Simpson $1,307,000 $1,307,000 Central Menifee Menifee Salt Creek bridge $4,384,000 $4,384,000 Central Menifee Menifee Simpson Aldergate $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Aldergate Newport $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Newport Holland $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Holland Garbani $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Garbani Scott $4,353,000 $4,353,000 Central Menifee Menifee/Whitewood Scott Murrieta City Limit $0 $0 Central Menifee Newport Goetz Murrieta $0 $0
Central Menifee Newport Murrieta I-215 $1,130,000 $1,130,000 Central Menifee Newport I-215 Menifee $0 $0
Central Menifee Newport Menifee Lindenberger $0 $0
Central Menifee Newport Lindenberger SR-79 (Winchester) $0 $0 Central Menifee Scott I-215 Briggs $8,635,000 $8,635,000 Central Menifee Scott I-215 interchange $0 $0
Central Menifee Scott Sunset Murrieta $4,388,000 $4,388,000 Central Menifee Scott Murrieta I-215 $16,949,000 $12,949,000 Central Menifee SR-74 Matthews Briggs $8,254,000 $8,254,000 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro I-215 Perris $13,420,000 $13,420,000 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Perris Nason $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Nason Moreno Beach $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Moreno Beach Gilman Springs $18,019,000 $18,019,000 Central Moreno Valley Gilman Springs SR-60 Alessandro $7,291,000 $7,291,000 Central Moreno Valley Gilman Springs SR-60 interchange $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Perris Reche Vista Ironwood $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Perris Ironwood Sunnymead $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Perris SR-60 interchange $32,698,000 $11,192,000 Central Moreno Valley Perris Sunnymead Cactus $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Perris Cactus Harley Knox $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Reche Vista Country Heacock $7,486,000 $3,799,000 Central Perris 11th/Case Perris Goetz $4,582,000 $4,582,000 Central Perris Case Goetz I-215 $20,876,000 $20,876,000 Central Perris Case San Jacinto River bridge $1,740,000 $1,235,000 Central Perris Ethanac Keystone Goetz $6,056,000 $6,056,000 Central Perris Ethanac San Jacinto River bridge $5,568,000 $5,568,000 Central Perris Ethanac I-215 Sherman $5,316,000 $5,316,000 Central Perris Goetz Case Ethanac $1,507,000 $999,000
Central Perris Goetz San Jacinto River bridge $5,568,000 $3,398,000 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) I-215 Perris $15,655,000 $15,655,000 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) I-215 interchange $0 $0 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) Perris Evans $22,985,000 $22,985,000 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) Perris Valley Storm Channel bridge $8,352,000 $8,352,000 Central Perris Perris Harley Knox Ramona $0 $0
Central Perris Perris Ramona Citrus $7,063,000 $7,063,000 Central Perris Perris Citrus Nuevo $0 $0
Central Perris Perris Nuevo 11th $6,927,000 $6,927,000
Central Perris Perris I-215 overcrossing bridge $0 $0
Central Perris Ramona I-215 Perris $5,039,000 $5,039,000 Central Perris Ramona I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $7,725,000 Central Perris Ramona Perris Evans $0 $0
Central Perris Ramona Evans Mid-County (2,800 ft E of Rider) $0 $0 Central Perris SR-74 (4th) Ellis I-215 $0 $0
Central Unincorporated Ethanac SR-74 Keystone $4,666,000 $4,666,000 Central Unincorporated Gilman Springs Alessandro Bridge Road $30,601,000 $30,601,000 Central Unincorporated Menifee Nuevo SR-74 (Pinacate) $16,684,000 $16,684,000 Central Unincorporated Mid-County Evans Ramona (2,800 ft E of Rider) $12,156,000 $12,156,000 Central Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) Ramona (2,800 ft E of Rider) Pico Avenue $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) Pico Avenue Bridge Road $47,769,000 $47,769,000 Central Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) San Jacinto River bridge $36,192,000 $36,192,000 Central Unincorporated Reche Canyon San Bernardino County Reche Vista $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Reche Vista Reche Canyon Country $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Scott Briggs SR-79 (Winchester) $0 $0 Central Unincorporated SR-74 Ethanac Ellis $0 $0
Northwest Corona Cajalco I-15 Temescal Canyon $0 $0
Northwest Corona Cajalco I-15 interchange $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill Paseo Grande Lincoln $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill Wardlow Wash bridge $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill Lincoln California $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill California I-15 $0 $0
Northwest Corona Green River SR-91 Dominguez Ranch $0 $0 Northwest Corona Green River Dominguez Ranch Palisades $0 $0 Northwest Corona Green River Palisades Paseo Grande $0 $0 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman San Bernardino County 600' e/o Cucamonga Creek $648,000 $648,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Cucamonga Creek bridge $0 $0 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman 600' e/o Cucamonga Creek Harrison $866,000 $866,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Harrison Sumner $488,000 $488,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Sumner Scholar $7,625,000 $7,625,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Scholar A Street $119,000 $119,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman A Street Hamner $209,000 $209,000 390
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 46 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Northwest Jurupa Valley Van Buren SR-60 Bellegrave $23,928,000 $10,461,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Van Buren Bellegrave Santa Ana River $60,900,000 $0 Northwest Riverside Alessandro Arlington Trautwein $2,410,000 $2,410,000 Northwest Riverside Arlington La Sierra Magnolia $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Arlington Magnolia Alessandro $46,465,000 $46,465,000 Northwest Riverside Van Buren Santa Ana River SR-91 $5,230,000 $4,392,000 Northwest Riverside Van Buren SR-91 Mockingbird Canyon $39,493,000 $21,292,000 Northwest Riverside Van Buren Wood Trautwein $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Van Buren Trautwein Orange Terrace $7,574,000 $7,574,000 Northwest Unincorporated Alessandro Trautwein Vista Grande $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Alessandro Vista Grande I-215 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Cajalco El Sobrante Harley John $10,580,000 $9,817,000 Northwest Unincorporated Cajalco Harley John Harvil $166,492,000 $166,492,000 Northwest Unincorporated Cajalco Harvil I-215 $1,238,000 $1,238,000 Northwest Unincorporated Cajalco Temescal Canyon La Sierra $49,596,000 $35,953,000 Northwest Unincorporated Cajalco Temescal Wash bridge $4,872,000 $1,907,000 Northwest Unincorporated Cajalco La Sierra El Sobrante $96,453,000 $96,453,000 Northwest Unincorporated Van Buren Mockingbird Canyon Wood $67,429,000 $67,429,000 Northwest Unincorporated Van Buren Orange Terrace I-215 $0 $0 Pass Banning Highland Springs Wilson (8th) Sun Lakes $0 $0 Pass Banning Highland Springs I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $32,516,000 Pass Banning Highland Springs Oak Valley (14th) Wilson (8th) $0 $0 Pass Banning Highland Springs Cherry Valley Oak Valley (14th) $0 $0 Pass Banning I-10 Bypass South I-10 Morongo Trail (Apache Trail) $50,110,000 $50,110,000 Pass Banning I-10 Bypass South I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $63,061,000 Pass Banning I-10 Bypass South San Gorgonio bridge $4,176,000 $4,176,000 Pass Banning I-10 Bypass South UP/Hargrave railroad crossing $52,780,000 $52,780,000 Pass Beaumont Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) I-10 $0 $0
Pass Beaumont Potrero Oak Valley (San Timoteo Canyon) SR-60 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 Pass Beaumont Potrero SR-60 interchange $63,061,000 $29,561,000 Pass Beaumont Potrero UP railroad crossing $40,020,000 $40,020,000 Pass Beaumont Potrero Noble Creek bridge $0 $0
Pass Beaumont Potrero SR-60 4th $0 $0
Pass Beaumont SR-79 (Beaumont) I-10 California $0 $0
Pass Beaumont SR-79 (Beaumont) I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $7,408,000 Pass Calimesa Cherry Valley I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $59,773,000 Pass Calimesa Cherry Valley Roberts St Roberts Rd $3,053,000 $3,053,000 Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Bellflower Noble $6,411,000 $6,411,000 Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Highland Springs Bellflower $0 $0 Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Noble Roberts St $0 $0 Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley San Timoteo Wash bridge $0 $0 Pass Unincorporated SR-79 (Lamb Canyon) California Gilman Springs $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Domenigoni Warren Sanderson $7,726,000 $7,726,000 San Jacinto Hemet Domenigoni Sanderson State $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet SR-74 Winchester Warren $35,208,000 $35,208,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Mid-County (Ramona) Warren Sanderson $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Mid-County (Ramona) Sanderson/SR-79 (Hemet Bypass) interchange $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Sanderson State $0 $0
San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona State Main $0 $0
San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Main Cedar $31,518,000 $26,928,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Cedar SR-74 $0 $0
San Jacinto Unincorporated Domenigoni SR-79 (Winchester) Warren $13,508,000 $13,508,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated Domenigoni San Diego Aqueduct bridge $4,176,000 $4,176,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated Gilman Springs Bridge Sanderson $0 $0 San Jacinto Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) Bridge Warren $9,221,000 $9,221,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-74 Briggs SR-79 (Winchester) $15,417,000 $15,417,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Hemet Bypass) SR-74 (Florida) Domenigoni $13,901,000 $13,901,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Hemet Bypass) San Diego Aqueduct bridge $4,176,000 $4,176,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Hemet Bypass) Domenigoni Winchester $6,542,000 $6,542,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (San Jacinto Bypass) Mid-County (Ramona) SR-74 (Florida) $56,690,000 $56,690,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Sanderson) Gilman Springs Ramona $6,899,000 $2,555,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Sanderson) San Jacinto River bridge $19,488,000 $7,651,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Winchester) Domenigoni Keller $65,022,000 $65,022,000 391
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 47 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Southwest Canyon Lake Goetz Railroad Canyon Newport $0 $0 Southwest Canyon Lake Railroad Canyon Canyon Hills Goetz $0 $0 Southwest Lake Elsinore Railroad Canyon I-15 Canyon Hills $0 $0 Southwest Lake Elsinore Railroad Canyon I-15 interchange $0 $0 Southwest Lake Elsinore SR-74 I-15 interchange $63,061,000 $24,162,000 Southwest Murrieta Clinton Keith Copper Craft Toulon $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Clinton Keith Toulon I-215 $2,076,000 $2,076,000 Southwest Murrieta Clinton Keith I-215 Whitewood $0 $0
Southwest Murrieta French Valley (Date) Murrieta Hot Springs Winchester Creek $7,321,000 $7,321,000 Southwest Murrieta French Valley (Date) Winchester Creek Margarita $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Whitewood Menifee City Limit Keller $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Whitewood Keller Clinton Keith $0 $0 Southwest Temecula French Valley (Cherry) Jefferson Diaz $3,929,000 $3,929,000 Southwest Temecula French Valley (Cherry) Murrieta Creek bridge $5,846,000 $5,846,000 Southwest Temecula French Valley (Date) Margarita Ynez $0 $0 Southwest Temecula French Valley (Date) Ynez Jefferson $5,010,000 $5,010,000 Southwest Temecula French Valley (Date) I-15 interchange $122,076,000 $122,076,000 Southwest Temecula SR-79 (Winchester) Murrieta Hot Springs Jefferson $2,697,000 $2,697,000 Southwest Temecula SR-79 (Winchester) I-15 interchange $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Western Bypass (Diaz) Cherry Rancho California $2,285,000 $2,285,000 Southwest Temecula Western Bypass (Vincent Moroga) Rancho California SR-79 (Front) $23,629,000 $23,629,000 Southwest Temecula Western Bypass (Vincent Moroga) I-15 interchange $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Western Bypass (Vincent Moroga) Murrieta Creek bridge $4,176,000 $4,176,000 Southwest Unincorporated Benton SR-79 Eastern Bypass $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Clinton Keith Whitewood SR-79 $5,539,000 $5,539,000 Southwest Unincorporated Clinton Keith Warm Springs Creek bridge $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated SR-74 I-15 Ethanac $27,699,000 $26,347,000 Southwest Unincorporated SR-79 (Winchester) Keller Thompson $34,213,000 $34,213,000 Southwest Unincorporated SR-79 (Winchester) Thompson La Alba $27,699,000 $27,699,000 Southwest Unincorporated SR-79 (Winchester) La Alba Hunter $7,854,000 $3,042,000 Southwest Unincorporated SR-79 (Winchester) Hunter Murrieta Hot Springs $595,000 $442,000 Southwest Wildomar Bundy Canyon I-15 Monte Vista $1,362,000 $1,362,000 Southwest Wildomar Bundy Canyon Monte Vista Sunset $24,818,000 $24,818,000 Southwest Wildomar Bundy Canyon I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $24,613,000 Southwest Wildomar Clinton Keith Palomar I-15 $0 $0
Southwest Wildomar Clinton Keith I-15 Copper Craft $5,030,000 $0 Subtotal $2,331,921,000 $1,961,707,000
392
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 48 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Central Menifee Briggs Newport Scott $0 $0
Central Menifee Briggs SR-74 (Pinacate) Simpson $2,991,000 $2,991,000 Central Menifee Briggs Simpson Old Newport $5,430,000 $5,430,000 Central Menifee Briggs Salt Creek bridge $8,352,000 $8,352,000 Central Menifee Garbani I-215 interchange $63,061,000 $42,483,000 Central Menifee Goetz Juanita Lesser Lane $11,378,000 $11,378,000 Central Menifee Goetz Newport Juanita $0 $0
Central Menifee Holland Murrieta Bradley $15,708,000 $15,708,000 Central Menifee Holland Bradley Haun $11,439,000 $11,439,000 Central Menifee Holland Haun Antelope $9,456,000 $9,456,000 Central Menifee Holland I-215 overcrossing bridge $9,744,000 $9,744,000 Central Menifee Holland Antelope Menifee $3,844,000 $3,844,000 Central Menifee McCall I-215 Aspel $5,354,000 $5,354,000 Central Menifee McCall I-215 interchange $0 $0
Central Menifee McCall Aspel Menifee $2,288,000 $2,288,000 Central Menifee Murrieta Ethanac McCall $0 $0
Central Menifee Murrieta McCall Newport $7,967,000 $7,967,000 Central Menifee Murrieta Newport Bundy Canyon $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Cactus I-215 Heacock $5,617,000 $5,617,000 Central Moreno Valley Cactus I-215 interchange $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Day Ironwood SR-60 $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Day SR-60 interchange $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Day SR-60 Eucalyptus $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus I-215 Towngate $8,843,000 $8,843,000 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus Towngate Frederick $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus Frederick Heacock $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus Heacock Kitching $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus Kitching Moreno Beach $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus Moreno Beach Theodore $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Frederick SR-60 Alessandro $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Heacock Cactus San Michele $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Heacock Reche Vista Cactus $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Heacock San Michele Harley Knox $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Ironwood SR-60 Day $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Ironwood Day Heacock $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Lasselle Alessandro John F Kennedy $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Lasselle John F Kennedy Oleander $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Moreno Beach Reche Canyon SR-60 $18,797,000 $18,797,000 Central Moreno Valley Moreno Beach SR-60 overcrossing bridge $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Nason SR-60 Alessandro $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Pigeon Pass Ironwood SR-60 $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Pigeon Pass/CETAP Corridor Hidden Springs Ironwood $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Reche Canyon Moreno Valley City Limit Locust $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Redlands Locust Alessandro $39,789,000 $39,789,000 Central Moreno Valley Redlands SR-60 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Central Moreno Valley Theodore SR-60 Eucalyptus $3,966,000 $3,966,000 Central Moreno Valley Theodore SR-60 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Central Perris Ellis Goetz Evans $9,526,000 $9,526,000
Central Perris Evans Oleander Ramona $0 $0
Central Perris Evans Ramona Morgan $0 $0
Central Perris Evans Morgan Rider $0 $0
Central Perris Evans Rider Placentia $0 $0
Central Perris Evans Placentia Nuevo $6,492,000 $6,492,000 Central Perris Evans Nuevo Ellis $17,705,000 $17,705,000 Central Perris Evans San Jacinto River bridge $11,136,000 $11,136,000 Central Perris Evans I-215 bridge $8,352,000 $8,352,000 Central Perris Goetz Lesser Ethanac $7,845,000 $7,845,000 Central Perris Harley Knox I-215 Indian $0 $0
Central Perris Harley Knox I-215 interchange $0 $0
Central Perris Harley Knox Indian Perris $0 $0
Central Perris Harley Knox Perris Redlands $0 $0
Central Perris Nuevo I-215 Murrieta $16,971,000 $16,971,000 Central Perris Nuevo I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $19,736,000 Central Perris Nuevo Murrieta Dunlap $4,367,000 $4,367,000 Central Perris Nuevo Perris Valley Storm Channel bridge $0 $0 Central Perris SR-74 (Matthews) I-215 Ethanac $0 $0
Central Perris SR-74 (Matthews) I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $21,835,000 Central Unincorporated Center (Main) I-215 Mt Vernon $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Center (Main) I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $11,912,000 Central Unincorporated Center (Main) BNSF railroad crossing $20,010,000 $20,010,000 Central Unincorporated Ellis Post SR-74 $11,550,000 $11,550,000 Central Unincorporated Mount Vernon/CETAP Corridor Center Pigeon Pass $2,582,000 $2,582,000 Central Unincorporated Nuevo Dunlap Menifee $8,737,000 $2,505,000 Central Unincorporated Nuevo San Jacinto River bridge $5,568,000 $5,568,000 Central Unincorporated Pigeon Pass/CETAP Corridor Hidden Springs Mount Vernon $8,106,000 $8,106,000 Central Unincorporated Post Santa Rosa Mine Ellis $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Reche Canyon Reche Vista Moreno Valley City Limit $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Redlands San Timoteo Canyon Locust $0 $0 393
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 49 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Northwest Corona 6th SR-91 Magnolia $0 $0
Northwest Corona Auto Center Railroad SR-91 $0 $0
Northwest Corona Cajalco Bedford Canyon I-15 $0 $0
Northwest Corona Hidden Valley Norco Hills McKinley $0 $0 Northwest Corona Lincoln Parkridge Ontario $0 $0
Northwest Corona Magnolia 6th Sherborn $7,054,000 $6,419,000 Northwest Corona Magnolia Temescal Creek bridge $4,176,000 $3,580,000 Northwest Corona Magnolia Sherborn Rimpau $0 $0
Northwest Corona Magnolia Rimpau Ontario $0 $0
Northwest Corona Main Grand Ontario $0 $0
Northwest Corona Main Ontario Foothill $0 $0
Northwest Corona Main Hidden Valley Parkridge $5,314,000 $4,389,000 Northwest Corona Main Parkridge SR-91 $0 $0
Northwest Corona Main SR-91 S. Grand $0 $0
Northwest Corona McKinley Hidden Valley Promenade $0 $0 Northwest Corona McKinley Promenade SR-91 $0 $0
Northwest Corona McKinley SR-91 Magnolia $0 $0
Northwest Corona McKinley Arlington Channel bridge $0 $0 Northwest Corona McKinley BNSF railroad crossing $105,560,000 $0 Northwest Corona Ontario I-15 El Cerrito $13,451,000 $13,451,000 Northwest Corona Ontario Lincoln Buena Vista $0 $0
Northwest Corona Ontario Buena Vista Main $0 $0
Northwest Corona Ontario Main Kellogg $0 $0
Northwest Corona Ontario Kellogg Fullerton $0 $0
Northwest Corona Ontario Fullerton Rimpau $0 $0
Northwest Corona Ontario Rimpau I-15 $0 $0
Northwest Corona Railroad Auto Club Buena Vista $0 $0
Northwest Corona Railroad BNSF railroad crossing $40,020,000 $40,020,000 Northwest Corona Railroad Buena Vista Main (at Grand) $0 $0 Northwest Corona River Corydon Main $0 $0
Northwest Corona Serfas Club SR-91 Green River $0 $0
Northwest Eastvale Archibald Remington River $3,382,000 $3,382,000 Northwest Eastvale Hamner Mission Bellegrave $0 $0
Northwest Eastvale Hamner Bellegrave Amberhill $199,000 $199,000 Northwest Eastvale Hamner Amberhill Limonite $2,787,000 $2,787,000 Northwest Eastvale Hamner Limonite Schleisman $991,000 $991,000 Northwest Eastvale Hamner Schleisman Santa Ana River $5,533,000 $3,675,000 Northwest Eastvale Hellman Schleisman Walters $419,000 $419,000 Northwest Eastvale Hellman Walters River $21,503,000 $21,503,000 Northwest Eastvale Hellman Cucamonga Creek bridge $3,828,000 $3,828,000 Northwest Eastvale Limonite I-15 Eastvale Gateway $289,000 $289,000 Northwest Eastvale Limonite I-15 interchange $0 $0
Northwest Eastvale Limonite Eastvale Gateway Hamner $255,000 $255,000 Northwest Eastvale Limonite Hamner Sumner $1,094,000 $1,094,000 Northwest Eastvale Limonite Sumner Harrison $497,000 $497,000 Northwest Eastvale Limonite Harrison Archibald $0 $0
Northwest Eastvale Limonite Archibald Hellman (Keller SBD Co.) $2,208,000 $2,208,000 Northwest Eastvale Limonite Cucamonga Creek bridge $13,920,000 $0 Northwest Eastvale River Hellman Archibald $5,948,000 $5,948,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Armstrong San Bernardino County Valley $6,192,000 $6,192,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Bellegrave Cantu-Galleano Ranch Van Buren $464,000 $464,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Cantu-Galleano Ranch Wineville Bellegrave $793,000 $793,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Etiwanda Philadelphia SR-60 $1,515,000 $989,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Etiwanda SR-60 Limonite $0 $0
Northwest Jurupa Valley Limonite I-15 Wineville $0 $0
Northwest Jurupa Valley Limonite Wineville Etiwanda $0 $0 Northwest Jurupa Valley Limonite Etiwanda Van Buren $2,981,000 $2,981,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Limonite Van Buren Clay $0 $0
Northwest Jurupa Valley Limonite Clay Riverview $0 $0
Northwest Jurupa Valley Market Rubidoux Santa Ana River $5,181,000 $0 Northwest Jurupa Valley Market Santa Ana River bridge $13,920,000 $6,204,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Mission Milliken SR-60 $0 $0
Northwest Jurupa Valley Mission SR-60 Santa Ana River $0 $0 Northwest Jurupa Valley Riverview Limonite Mission $0 $0 Northwest Jurupa Valley Rubidoux Pine Mission $0 $0
Northwest Jurupa Valley Rubidoux SR-60 interchange $32,698,000 $9,051,000 Northwest Jurupa Valley Valley Armstrong Mission $0 $0
Northwest Norco 1st Parkridge Mountain $0 $0
Northwest Norco 1st Mountain Hamner $0 $0
Northwest Norco 2nd River I-15 $0 $0
Northwest Norco 6th Hamner California $0 $0
Northwest Norco 6th I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $3,489,000 Northwest Norco Arlington Crestview Fairhaven $4,342,000 $4,342,000 Northwest Norco California Arlington 6th $15,237,000 $12,525,000 Northwest Norco Corydon River 5th $0 $0
Northwest Norco Hamner Santa Ana River bridge $33,408,000 $11,455,000 Northwest Norco Hamner Santa Ana River Hidden Valley $49,591,000 $49,591,000 Northwest Norco Hidden Valley I-15 Norco Hills $0 $0
Northwest Norco Hidden Valley Hamner I-15 $0 $0
Northwest Norco Norco Corydon Hamner $0 $0
Northwest Norco North California Crestview $0 $0
Northwest Norco River Archibald Corydon $1,743,000 $1,109,000 394
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 50 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Northwest Riverside 14th Market Martin Luther King $0 $0 Northwest Riverside 1st Market Main $0 $0
Northwest Riverside 3rd SR-91 I-215 $1,941,000 $1,941,000 Northwest Riverside 3rd BNSF railroad crossing $105,560,000 $30,560,000 Northwest Riverside Adams Arlington SR-91 $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Adams SR-91 Lincoln $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Adams SR-91 interchange $32,698,000 $3,262,000 Northwest Riverside Arlington Fairhaven La Sierra $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Buena Vista Santa Ana River Redwood $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Martin Luther King Central $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Central Country Club $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Country Club Via Vista $4,996,000 $1,593,000 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Via Vista Alessandro $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Central Chicago I-215/SR-60 $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Central SR-91 Magnolia $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Central Alessandro SR-91 $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Central Van Buren Magnolia $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Chicago Alessandro Spruce $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Chicago Spruce Columbia $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Columbia Main Iowa $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Columbia I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $9,050,000 Northwest Riverside Iowa Center 3rd $30,272,000 $30,272,000 Northwest Riverside Iowa 3rd University $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Iowa University Martin Luther King $0 $0 Northwest Riverside JFK Trautwein Wood $1,880,000 $1,880,000 Northwest Riverside La Sierra Arlington SR-91 $0 $0
Northwest Riverside La Sierra SR-91 Indiana $192,000 $192,000 Northwest Riverside La Sierra Indiana Victoria $778,000 $778,000 Northwest Riverside Lemon (NB One way) Mission Inn University $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Lincoln Van Buren Jefferson $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Lincoln Jefferson Washington $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Lincoln Washington Victoria $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Madison SR-91 Victoria $853,000 $853,000 Northwest Riverside Madison BNSF railroad crossing $20,010,000 $20,010,000 Northwest Riverside Magnolia BNSF Railroad Tyler $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Magnolia BNSF railroad crossing $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Magnolia Tyler Harrison $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Magnolia Harrison 14th $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Main 1st San Bernardino County $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Market 14th Santa Ana River $9,491,000 $9,491,000 Northwest Riverside Martin Luther King 14th I-215/SR-60 $24,031,000 $24,031,000 Northwest Riverside Mission Inn Redwood Lemon $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Redwood (SB One way) Mission Inn University $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Trautwein Alessandro Van Buren $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Tyler SR-91 Magnolia $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Tyler SR-91 interchange $63,061,000 $21,814,000 Northwest Riverside Tyler Magnolia Hole $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Tyler Hole Wells $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Tyler Wells Arlington $0 $0
Northwest Riverside University Redwood SR-91 $859,000 $859,000 Northwest Riverside University SR-91 I-215/SR-60 $2,067,000 $2,067,000 Northwest Riverside Victoria Lincoln Arlington $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Victoria Madison Washington $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Washington Victoria Hermosa $27,018,000 $27,018,000 Northwest Riverside Wood JFK Van Buren $3,053,000 $3,053,000 Northwest Riverside Wood Van Buren Bergamont $0 $0
Northwest Riverside Wood Bergamont Krameria $0 $0
Northwest Unincorporated Cantu-Galleano Ranch Hamner Wineville $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Dos Lagos (Weirick) Temescal Canyon I-15 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated El Cerrito I-15 Ontario $0 $0
Northwest Unincorporated El Sobrante Mockingbird Canyon Cajalco $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Harley John Washington Scottsdale $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Harley John Scottsdale Cajalco $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated La Sierra Victoria El Sobrante $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated La Sierra El Sobrante Cajalco $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Mockingbird Canyon Van Buren El Sobrante $20,871,000 $20,871,000 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon El Cerrito Tuscany $3,168,000 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Tuscany Dos Lagos $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Dos Lagos Leroy $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Leroy Dawson Canyon $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Dawson Canyon I-15 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon I-15 Park Canyon $14,329,000 $14,329,000 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Park Canyon Indian Truck Trail $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Washington Hermosa Harley John $12,787,000 $12,787,000 Northwest Unincorporated Wood Krameria Cajalco $12,537,000 $12,537,000 395
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 51 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Pass Banning 8th Wilson I-10 $0 $0
Pass Banning Lincoln Sunset SR-243 $0 $0
Pass Banning Ramsey I-10 8th $0 $0
Pass Banning Ramsey 8th Highland Springs $0 $0
Pass Banning SR-243 I-10 Wesley $0 $0
Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Home Sunset $30,502,000 $30,502,000 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Smith Creek bridge $8,352,000 $8,352,000 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Montgomery Creek bridge $5,568,000 $5,568,000 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Springs Highland Home $0 $0 Pass Banning Sunset Ramsey Lincoln $0 $0
Pass Banning Sunset I-10 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Pass Banning Wilson Highland Home 8th $0 $0
Pass Banning Wilson Highland Springs Highland Home $0 $0 Pass Beaumont 1st Viele Pennsylvania $0 $0
Pass Beaumont 1st Pennsylvania Highland Springs $0 $0
Pass Beaumont 6th I-10 Highland Springs $0 $0
Pass Beaumont Desert Lawn Champions Oak Valley (STC) $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) Highland Springs Pennsylvania $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) Pennsylvania Oak View $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) Oak View I-10 $0 $0
Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $62,401,000 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (STC) UP Railroad Tukwet Canyon $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (STC) Tukwet Canyon I-10 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Pennsylvania 6th 1st $6,588,000 $6,588,000 Pass Beaumont Pennsylvania I-10 interchange $0 $0
Pass Calimesa Bryant County Line Avenue L $0 $0
Pass Calimesa Calimesa County Line I-10 $0 $0
Pass Calimesa Calimesa I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $63,061,000 Pass Calimesa County Line 7th Bryant $0 $0
Pass Calimesa County Line I-10 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Pass Calimesa Desert Lawn Palmer Champions $0 $0
Pass Calimesa Singleton Avenue L Condit $0 $0
Pass Calimesa Singleton Condit Roberts $12,972,000 $12,972,000 Pass Calimesa Singleton I-10 interchange $63,061,000 $0 Pass Calimesa Tukwet Canyon Roberts Rd Palmer $0 $0
Pass Unincorporated Live Oak Canyon Oak Valley (STC) San Bernardino County $0 $0 Pass Unincorporated San Timoteo Canyon San Bernardino County UP Railroad $0 $0 Pass Unincorporated San Timoteo Canyon UP Railroad railroad crossing $52,780,000 $52,780,000 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Acacia Menlo $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Domenigoni Stetson $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson RR Crossing Acacia $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Stetson RR Crossing $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Menlo Esplanade $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet SR-74 (Florida) Warren Cawston $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet SR-74 (Florida) Columbia Ramona $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SR-74/SR-79 (Florida) Cawston Columbia $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Domenigoni Chambers $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet State Chambers Stetson $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet State Florida Esplanade $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet State Stetson Florida $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet Stetson Cawston State $0 $0
San Jacinto Hemet Stetson Warren Cawston $4,357,000 $4,357,000 San Jacinto Hemet Warren Esplanade Domenigoni $19,926,000 $19,926,000 San Jacinto Hemet Warren Salt Creek bridge $4,176,000 $4,176,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade Mountain State $0 $0
San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade State Warren $0 $0
San Jacinto San Jacinto Sanderson Ramona Esplanade $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-79 (North Ramona) State San Jacinto $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-79 (San Jacinto) North Ramona Blvd 7th $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-79 (San Jacinto) 7th SR-74 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Ramona Esplanade $0 $0
San Jacinto San Jacinto State Gilman Springs Quandt Ranch $3,317,000 $3,317,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto State San Jacinto River bridge $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Quandt Ranch Ramona $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Warren Ramona Esplanade $13,469,000 $13,469,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated Gilman Springs Sanderson State $11,097,000 $11,097,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated Gilman Springs Massacre Canyon Wash bridge $1,392,000 $1,392,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79 (Winchester) SR-74 (Florida) Domenigoni $0 $0 396
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 52 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Southwest Lake Elsinore Corydon Mission Grand $3,336,000 $3,336,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Diamond Mission I-15 $0 $0
Southwest Lake Elsinore Franklin (integral to Railroad
Canyon Interchange)
I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000
Southwest Lake Elsinore Grand Lincoln Toft $0 $0
Southwest Lake Elsinore Grand Toft SR-74 (Riverside) $3,512,000 $3,512,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Lake I-15 Lincoln $39,817,000 $32,726,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Lake I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $15,771,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Lake Temescal Wash bridge $2,506,000 $1,150,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Mission Railroad Canyon Bundy Canyon $0 $0 Southwest Lake Elsinore Nichols I-15 Lake $7,850,000 $7,850,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Nichols Temescal Wash bridge $4,176,000 $4,176,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Nichols I-15 interchange $63,061,000 $63,061,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore SR-74 (Collier/Riverside) I-15 Lakeshore $24,303,000 $24,303,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore SR-74 (Grand) Riverside SR-74 (Ortega) $9,733,000 $3,691,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore SR-74 (Riverside) Lakeshore Grand $20,175,000 $20,175,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Temescal Canyon I-15 Lake $7,411,000 $7,411,000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Temescal Canyon Temescal Wash bridge $3,480,000 $3,480,000 Southwest Murrieta California Oaks Jefferson I-15 $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta California Oaks I-15 Jackson $0 $0
Southwest Murrieta California Oaks Jackson Clinton Keith $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Jackson Whitewood Ynez $0 $0
Southwest Murrieta Jefferson Palomar Nutmeg $1,562,000 $1,562,000 Southwest Murrieta Jefferson Nutmeg Murrieta Hot Springs $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Jefferson Murrieta Hot Springs Cherry $30,634,000 $30,634,000 Southwest Murrieta Keller I-215 Whitewood $0 $0
Southwest Murrieta Keller I-215 interchange $0 $0
Southwest Murrieta Los Alamos Jefferson I-215 $0 $0
Southwest Murrieta Murrieta Hot Springs Jefferson I-215 $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Murrieta Hot Springs I-215 Margarita $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Murrieta Hot Springs Margarita SR-79 (Winchester) $4,057,000 $3,899,000 Southwest Murrieta Nutmeg Jefferson Clinton Keith $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Whitewood Clinton Keith Los Alamos $2,708,000 $2,708,000 Southwest Murrieta Whitewood Los Alamos Murrieta Hot Springs $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Whitewood Murrieta Hot Springs Jackson $4,629,000 $4,629,000 Southwest Murrieta Ynez Jackson SR-79 (Winchester) $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Butterfield Stage Murrieta Hot Springs Calle Chapos $816,000 $816,000 Southwest Temecula Butterfield Stage Calle Chapos La Serena $696,000 $696,000 Southwest Temecula Butterfield Stage La Serena Rancho California $904,000 $904,000 Southwest Temecula Butterfield Stage Rancho California Pauba $846,000 $846,000 Southwest Temecula Butterfield Stage Pauba SR-79 (Temecula Pkwy) $725,000 $725,000 Southwest Temecula Jefferson Cherry Rancho California $2,285,000 $2,285,000 Southwest Temecula Margarita Murrieta Hot Springs SR-79 (Temecula Pkwy) $7,644,000 $7,644,000 Southwest Temecula Old Town Front Rancho California I-15/SR-79 (Temecula Pkwy) $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Pechanga Pkwy SR-79 (Temecula Pkwy) Via Gilberto $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Pechanga Pkwy Via Gilberto Pechanga Pkwy $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Rancho California Jefferson Margarita $18,254,000 $18,181,000 Southwest Temecula Rancho California I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $0 Southwest Temecula Rancho California Margarita Butterfield Stage $0 $0 Southwest Temecula SR-79 (Temecula Pkwy) I-15 Pechanga Pkwy $0 $0 Southwest Temecula SR-79 (Temecula Pkwy) Pechanga Pkwy Butterfield Stage $3,065,000 $3,065,000 Southwest Unincorporated Briggs Scott SR-79 (Winchester) $6,509,000 $6,509,000 Southwest Unincorporated Butterfield Stage Tucalota Creek bridge $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Butterfield Stage (Pourroy) Auld Murrieta Hot Springs $23,076,000 $23,076,000 Southwest Unincorporated Grand Ortega Corydon $68,025,000 $68,025,000 Southwest Unincorporated Horsethief Canyon Temescal Canyon I-15 $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Indian Truck Trail Temescal Canyon I-15 $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Murrieta Hot Springs SR-79 (Winchester) Pourroy $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Pala Pechanga San Diego County $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Pourroy SR-79 (Winchester) Auld $2,236,000 $2,236,000 Southwest Unincorporated Rancho California Butterfield Stage Glen Oaks $87,369,000 $87,369,000 Southwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Horsethief Canyon Wash bridge $3,340,000 $3,340,000 Southwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Indian Truck Trail I-15 $15,739,000 $15,739,000 Southwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Indian Wash bridge $1,462,000 $1,462,000 Southwest Wildomar Bundy Canyon Mission I-15 $9,704,000 $9,704,000 Southwest Wildomar Grand Corydon Wildomar Trail $0 $0
Southwest Wildomar Mission Bundy Canyon Palomar $0 $0
Southwest Wildomar Palomar Clinton Keith Washington $3,227,000 $3,227,000 Southwest Wildomar Palomar Mission Clinton Keith $13,493,000 $13,493,000 Southwest Wildomar Wildomar Trail I-15 Baxter $1,281,000 $1,281,000 Southwest Wildomar Wildomar Trail I-15 interchange $32,698,000 $27,858,000 Southwest Wildomar Wildomar Trail Baxter Palomar $11,316,000 $11,316,000 Southwest Wildomar Wildomar Trail Palomar Grand $0 $0
Subtotal $2,508,329,000 $1,913,028,000
Totals Network $4,840,250,000 $3,874,735,000
Transit $217,870,000 $154,831,000
Administration $161,183,000 $161,183,000
MSHCP $64,606,000 $53,859,000
TOTAL $5,283,909,000 $4,244,608,000
397
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 53 Table 4.5 – TUMF Transit Cost Estimates
AREA PLAN
DIST
LEAD
AGENCY PROJECT NAME LOCATION UNITS (number/ length in miles) UNIT COST TOTAL MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Central RTA Menifee Mobility Hub Menifee 1 $7,465,000 $7,465,000 $5,305,000 Northwest RTA Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street Riverside 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 Central RTA Moreno Valley Mobility Hub(s) Moreno Valley 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 Northwest RTA Jurupa Valley Mobility Hub(s) Jurupa Valley 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 Pass RTA Pass Area Mobility Hub(s) Banning 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 Southwest RTA Lake Elsinore / Canyon Lake Mobility
Hub(s) Lake Elsinore 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 San Jacinto RTA Hemet Mobility Hub Hemet 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 San Jacinto RTA San Jacinto Mobility Hub San Jacinto 1 $11,195,000 $11,195,000 $7,956,000 San Jacinto RTA MSJC Mobility Hub San Jacinto 1 $1,245,000 $1,245,000 $885,000 Regional RTA ZEB Technology Enhancements Various locations region wide 10 $100,000 $1,000,000 $711,000 Northwest RTA Regional Operations and Maintenance
Facility Riverside 1 $62,186,000 $62,186,000 $44,192,000 Regional RTA Annual Transit Enhancements Program Various locations region wide 290 $50,000 $14,500,000 $10,304,000 Northwest RTA HQTC Improvements UCR, Riverside to Perris 42 $75,000 $3,150,000 $2,239,000 Regional RTA Vehicle Fleet Small Buses/Vans Various locations region wide 30 $160,000 $4,800,000 $3,411,000 Regional RTA Vehicle Fleet Medium Buses Various locations region wide 20 $300,000 $6,000,000 $4,264,000 Regional RTA Vehicle Fleet Large Buses Various locations region wide 29 $1,271,000 $36,859,000 $26,194,000 Regional RTA COA Study Various locations region wide 2 $1,150,000 $2,300,000 $1,634,000 TOTAL $217,870,000 $154,831,000
4.8 TUMF Network Evaluation
To assess the effectiveness of the proposed TUMF Network improvements to mitigate the cumulative regional impact of new development in Western Riverside County, the proposed network improvements were added to the 2021 existing network in RivCoM and the model was run with 2045 socioeconomic data to determine the relative impacts on horizon year traffic conditions. To quantify the impacts of the TUMF Network improvements, the various traffic measures of effectiveness described in Section 3.1 for the 2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build scenarios were again calculated for the 2045 TUMF Build scenario. The results for VMT, VHT, VHD, and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS E) were then compared to the results presented in Table 3.1 for the no-build conditions. The 2045 TUMF Build comparison results are provided in Table 4.6. Plots of the Network Extents are attached in Appendix H.
As shown in Table 4.6, the 2045 peak period VMT on all arterial facilities experiencing LOS of E or worse will decrease with the addition of the TUMF Network improvements while the share of VMT on the TUMF arterial network experiencing LOS E or worse during the peak periods will be reduced to 32% (which is still above the level experienced in 2018). It should be noted that the total VMT on the arterial system increases because of freeway trips being diverted to the arterial system to benefit from the proposed TUMF improvements.
Despite a greater share of the total peak period VMT in 2045, the arterial system can more efficiently accommodate the increased demand with the proposed TUMF improvements. Although peak period VMT on the TUMF improved arterial system increases by approximately 6% in 2045 compared to the No Build condition, VHT on the arterial system remains almost constant. Additionally, a benefit is observed on the 398
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 54 freeway system with VMT and VHT being reduced following TUMF Network improvements. By completing TUMF improvements, the total VHD experienced by all area motorists would be reduced during the peak period by over 7% from the levels that would be experienced under the 2045 No-Build scenario. These results highlight the effectiveness of the TUMF Program to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development commensurate with the level of impact being created.
Table 4.6 – Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build Scenarios to 2045 TUMF Build Scenario) Measure of Performance*
Peak Periods (Total)
2018 Existing 2045 No-Build 2045 Build
VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 23,284,724 29,897,254 30,160,328 VMT - FREEWAYS 13,514,522 15,490,284 15,418,548
VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 9,770,202 14,406,970 14,741,781
TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 6,216,985 8,597,200 9,096,417 VHT - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 541,350 915,439 895,725
VHT - FREEWAYS 263,792 399,128 388,847
VHT - ALL ARTERIALS 277,558 516,311 506,878
TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHT 174,455 320,869 321,062
VHD - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 108,900 338,056 313,288
VHD - FREEWAYS 66,156 170,649 161,528
VHD - ALL ARTERIALS 42,745 167,407 151,760
TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHD 33,249 124,863 114,451
VMT LOS E - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 5,605,070 13,369,483 12,788,016 VMT LOS E - FREEWAYS 4,725,471 9,316,891 9,115,937
VMT LOS E & F - ALL ARTERIALS 879,599 4,052,592 3,672,079 TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 765,782 3,184,133 2,929,288 % of TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 12% 37% 32%
* Source: RivCoM 2018 base network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network as existing in December 2021and RivCoM 2018 base network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network plus future TUMF network projects.
NOTES:
Volume is adjusted by PCE factor
VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT = vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined time that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free-flow (ideal) travel time) LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios).
LOS E or Worse was determined by V/C ratio that exceeds 0.9 thresholds as indicated in the Riverside County General Plan. 399
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 55 5.0 TUMF NEXUS ANALYSIS
The objective of this section is to evaluate and document the rational nexus (or reasonable relationship) between the proposed fee and the transportation system improvements it will be used to help fund. The analysis starts by documenting the correlation between future development and the need for transportation system improvements on the TUMF network to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of this new development, followed by analysis of the nexus evaluation of the key components of the TUMF concept.
5.1 Future Development and the Need for Improvements
Previous sections of this report documented the projected population, household and employment growth in Western Riverside County, the expected increases in traffic congestion and travel delay, and the identification of the transportation system improvements that will serve these future inter-community travel demands. The following points coalesce this information in a synopsis of how the future growth relates to the need for improvements to the TUMF system.
Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing.
Development in Western Riverside County is expected to continue at a robust rate of growth into the foreseeable future. Current projections estimate the population is projected to grow from a level of approximately 1.91 million in 2018 to a future level of about 2.53 million in 2045, while employment is projected to grow from a level of about 570,000 in 2018 to approximately 846,000 in 2045 (as shown in Table 2.3). Continuing growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways.
Traffic congestion and delay on arterial roadways are projected to increase dramatically in the future (as shown in Table 3.1). Without improvements to the transportation system, congestion levels will grow rapidly and travelers will experience unacceptable travel conditions with slow travel speeds and lengthy delays.
The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to future development in Western Riverside County.
Traffic using arterial roadways within Western Riverside County is virtually all generated within or attracted to Western Riverside County, since longer-distance trips passing through the region typically use the freeway system, not arterial roadways. Therefore, the future recurring congestion problems on these roadways will be attributable to new trips that originate in, terminate in, or travel within Western Riverside County.
Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to alleviate the future congestion caused by new development.
To maintain transportation service closer to current levels of efficiency, capacity enhancements will need to be made to the arterial roadway system. These enhancements could include new or realigned roads, additional lanes on existing 400
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 56 roads, new or expanded bridges, new or upgraded freeway interchanges, grade separation of at-grade rail crossings, or the installation of new ITS to improve traffic flows. The completion of improvements to the arterial roadway system would enhance regional mobility and reduce the total peak period vehicles hours of travel (VHT) by over 2%, reduce peak period vehicle hours of delay (VHD) by over 7%, and reduce the share of traffic experiencing congestion in the peak periods by over 4% (as shown in Table 4.6). The specific needs and timing of implementation will depend on the location and rate of future development, so the specific improvements to be funded by the TUMF and their priority of implementation will be determined during future project programming activities as improvement needs unfold and as TUMF funds become available.
Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program.
The criteria used to identify roads for the TUMF network (future number of lanes, future traffic volume, future congestion level, and roadway function linking communities and activity centers and serving public transportation) were selected to ensure that these are the roadways that will serve inter-community travel and will require future improvement to alleviate congestion.
Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit-dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automobile travel.
Since a portion of the population does not own an automobile and depends on public transportation for mobility, public transportation infrastructure and service will need to be enhanced and expanded to ensure continued mobility for this segment of the population. In addition, improvements to the public transportation system will be required to ensure that transit service can function as a viable option for future new Western Riverside County residents and employees who choose to avoid congestion by using public transportation.
For the reasons cited above, it can be readily concluded that there is a rational nexus between the future need for transportation improvements on the TUMF system and the future development upon which the proposed TUMF would be levied. The following sections evaluate the rational nexus in relation to the system components and the types of uses upon which the fee is assessed.
5.2 Application of Fee to System Components
As noted in Section 3.2, the TUMF concept includes splitting the fee revenues between the backbone system of arterials, the secondary system of arterials, and the public transportation system. This section evaluates the travel demands to determine the rational nexus between the future travel demands and the use of the fee to fund improvements to the future system components.
The split of fee revenues between the backbone and secondary highway networks is related to the proportion of highway vehicle trips that are relatively local (between 401
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 57 adjacent communities) and longer distance (between more distant communities but still within Western Riverside County). To estimate a rational fee split between the respective networks, the future combined AM and PM peak period travel forecast estimates were aggregated to a matrix of trips between zones to show the percentage of trips that remain within each zone in relation to the volume that travels to the other zones. This analysis was completed using the Year 2045 No-Build scenario trip tables from RivCoM.
The first step in the analysis was to create a correspondence table between the TAZs in the model and the five WRCOG TUMF zones (i.e. Northwest, Southwest, Central, Hemet/San Jacinto and Pass). The TAZs were then compressed into six districts (the five WRCOG zones and one for the rest of the SCAG region).
Table 5.1 shows the estimated peak period vehicle trips within and between each of the zones. Table 5.2 shows the percentage of peak period vehicle trips within and between the respective zones. Appendix I includes the detailed RivCoM outputs used to develop the regional trip distribution profile shown in Table 5.1 and 5.2.
Table 5.1 - 2045 No-Build Peak Period Vehicle Trips by WRCOG Zone
To
From Central Hemet/San Jacinto Northwest Pass Southwest Outside WRCOG TOTAL Central 417,608 23,474 89,780 6,301 55,101 57,558 649,822 Hemet/San Jacinto 29,401 209,005 8,647 8,432 16,081 18,078 289,645 Northwest 58,578 2,684 743,234 2,687 11,032 196,041 1,014,257 Pass 8,068 7,585 6,114 110,385 908 32,334 165,395
Southwest 55,812 16,232 32,852 1,976 667,255 62,713 836,839 Outside WRCOG 33,907 7,574 192,712 24,490 33,867 292,550 TOTAL 603,375 266,554 1,073,340 154,271 784,244 366,724 3,248,507 Based on RivCoM Year 2045 No-Build scenario
Table 5.2 – 2045 No-Build Percent Peak Period Vehicle Trips By WRCOG Zone
To
From Central Hemet/San Jacinto Northwest Pass Southwest Outside WRCOG TOTAL Central 64.3% 3.6% 13.8% 1.0% 8.5% 8.9% 100%
Hemet/San Jacinto 10.2% 72.2% 3.0% 2.9% 5.6% 6.2% 100%
Northwest 5.8% 0.3% 73.3% 0.3% 1.1% 19.3% 100%
Pass 4.9% 4.6% 3.7% 66.7% 0.5% 19.5% 100%
Southwest 6.7% 1.9% 3.9% 0.2% 79.7% 7.5% 100%
Based on RivCoM Year 2045 No-Build scenario
402
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 58 Table 5.3 summarizes the calculation of the split between the backbone and secondary highway networks as derived from the peak period trip values provided in Table 5.1. Peak period vehicle trips to and from areas outside Western Riverside County were subtracted from the calculation, on the presumption that most of their interregional travel would occur on the freeway system. Peak period trips between zones (regional) were assigned to the backbone network, since these trips are primarily served by the arterial roadways that provide connections between the zones. Peak period trips within zones (local) were split between the backbone network and the secondary network in proportion to their lane-miles, since roadways on both networks serve intra-zonal trips. The backbone network includes approximately 41.1% of the lane-miles on the future TUMF system, and the secondary network includes approximately 58.9% of the lane-miles.
The backbone network is therefore assigned all the inter-zonal peak period trips plus
41.1% of the intra-zonal peak period trips. The secondary network is assigned 58.9% of the intra-zonal peak period trips and none of the inter-zonal peak period trips. The overall result is that 51.1% of the regional travel is assigned to the backbone network and 48.9% is assigned to the secondary network.
Table 5.3 - Backbone-Secondary Network Share Calculation Calculation Value Description Input Values Backbone
Value
Backbone
Share
Secondary
Value
Secondary
Share
Total Western Riverside County
Peak Period Vehicle Trips 3,248,507
Less Internal/External Peak Period
Vehicle Trips -659,273
Total Peak Period Vehicle Trips
Internal to Western Riverside
County
2,589,234
Peak Period Vehicle Trips Between
TUMF Zones 441,747
Peak Period Vehicle Trips Within
TUMF Zones 2,147,487
TUMF Future Network Lane-Miles 3,029.9 1,243.9 41.1% 1,786.0 58.9% Peak Period Vehicle Trips Between
TUMF Zones 441,747 441,747 100.0% 0 0.0%
Peak Period Vehicle Trips Within
TUMF Zones (as share of intrazonal trips) 2,147,487 882,332 41.1% 1,265,155 58.9% Total Peak Period Vehicle Trips
Assigned 2,589,234 1,324,079 51.1% 1,265,155 48.9%
Based on RivCoM Year 2045 No-Build scenario; TUMF Nexus Study Exhibit H-1 403
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 59 5.3 Application of Fee to Residential and Non-Residential Developments In order to establish the approximate proportionality of the future traffic impacts associated with new residential development and new non-residential development, the growth in daily VMT between the 2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build Scenarios from RivCoM were aggregated by trip purpose. RivCoM produces person trips (irrespective of mode choice) on the basis of five trip purposes: home-based-work (HBW), homebased-other (HBO), home-based-school (HBS), non-home-based (NHB), and homebased-university (HBU).
NCHRP Report #187 Quick Response Urban Travel Estimation Techniques and Transferable Parameters User's Guide (Transportation Research Board, 1978) details operational travel estimation techniques that are universally used for the travel demand modeling. Chapter 2 of this report, which details trip generation estimation, states that "HBW (Home Based Work) and HBNW (Home Based Non-Work) trips are generated at the households, whereas the NHB (Non-Home Based) trips are generated elsewhere." In accordance with NCHRP Report #187, growth in daily VMT was aggregated into homebased growth in daily VMT (combining the four home-based purposes: HBW, HBO, HBSC and HBU) and non-home-based growth in daily VMT. The home-based growth in daily VMT represents 77.7% of the total future growth in daily VMT and the non-home-based growth in daily VMT represent 22.3% of the total future growth in daily VMT, as shown in Table 5.4. Appendix J includes the RivCoM outputs used to develop the trip purpose summary in Table 5.4.
Table 5.4 - Daily VMT Growth by Trip Purpose for Western Riverside County (2018 - 2045) VEHICLE TRIP PURPOSE 2018 EXISTING
DAILY VMT
2045 NO-BUILD
DAILY VMT
DAILY VMT
GROWTH
DAILY VMT
GROWTH
SHARE
Home-Based-Work 81,121,525 98,818,811 17,697,286 31.8%
Home-Based-Other 114,840,696 138,710,519 23,869,822 42.9% Home-Based-School (K-12) 8,592,941 9,230,272 637,331 1.1% Non-Home-Based 61,534,566 73,907,099 12,372,533 22.3%
Home-Based-University 5,377,197 6,400,662 1,023,465 1.8% TOTAL 271,466,925 327,067,363 55,600,437 100.00%
Home-Based Trips
(Residential Uses) 43,227,904 77.7%
Non-Home-Based Trips
(Non-Residential Uses) 12,372,533 22.3%
Based on RivCoM Year 2018 Existing Scenario, November 2023 and RivCoM Year 2045 No Build Scenario, November 2023
404
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 60 6.0 FAIR-SHARE FEE CALCULATION
The fee amounts, by type of development, that are justified to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development on transportation facilities in Western Riverside County are quantified in this section. The total cost of improving the TUMF system is $5.28 billion. Existing funding obligated for improvements to the TUMF system totals $382.9 million while unfunded improvement needs generated by existing development represent $646.9 million of the total cost. The balance of the unfunded TUMF system improvement needs is $4.24 billion which is the maximum value attributable to the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development in the WRCOG region and will be captured through the TUMF Program.
By levying the uniform fee directly on future new developments (and indirectly on new residents and new employees to Western Riverside County), these transportation system users are assigned their “fair share” of the costs to address the cumulative impacts of additional traffic they will generate on the regional transportation system.
Of the $4.24 billion in unfunded future improvement needs, 77.7% ($3.30 billion) will be assigned to future new residential development and 22.3% ($946.5 million) will be assigned to future new non-residential development.
6.1 Residential Fees
The portion of the unfunded future improvement cost allocable to new residential development through the TUMF is $3.30 billion. Since this future transportation system improvement need is generated by new residential development anticipated through the Year 2045, the fee will be spread between the residential developments projected to be constructed between 2018 and 2045. The projected residential growth from year 2018 to 2045 is 257,826 households (or dwelling units) as is indicated in Table 2.3.
Different household types generate different numbers of trips. To reflect the difference in trip generation between lower density “single-family” dwelling units and higher density “multi-family” dwelling units, the TUMF was weighted based on the respective trip generation rates of these different dwelling unit types. For the purposes of the TUMF Program, single family dwelling units are those housing units with a density of less than 8 units per acre while multi-family units are those with a density of 8 or more units per acre. According to the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS forecasts included in Table 2.3 and Appendix B, single family dwelling units (including mobile homes) are forecast to constitute 65.0% of the growth in residential dwelling units in the region between 2018 and 2045.
Data provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) show that, on average, single-family dwelling units generate 0.99 vehicle trips per dwelling unit per hour in the PM peak hour, whereas apartments, condominiums and townhouses (considered to be representative of higher density multi-family dwelling units) generate a median of 0.50 vehicle trips per unit per hour in the PM peak hour. The growth in dwelling units for single-family and multi-family, respectively, were multiplied by the corresponding trip generation rates to determine 405
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 61 the weighted proportion of the change in trips attributable to each use type as the basis for determining the per unit fee required to levy the necessary $3.20 billion to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new residential development. Table 6.1 summarizes the calculation of the fee for single-family and multi-family dwelling units. Appendix K includes worksheets detailing the calculation of the residential (and non-residential) TUMF for Western Riverside County.
Table 6.1 - Fee Calculation for Residential Share
Residential Sector
2018
Dwelling
Units
2045
Dwelling
Units
Dwelling
Unit
Change
Trip
Generation
Rate
Trip Change
Percentage
of Trip
Change
Fee/DU
Single-Family 397,407 564,898 167,491 0.99 165,816 78.6% $15,476 Multi-Family 157,166 247,501 90,335 0.50 45,168 21.4% $7,816 Total 554,573 812,399 257,826 210,984 100.0%
Household data based on SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS;
Trip Generation based on ITE Trip Generation (2021).
Consistent with the socio-economic forecasts developed by SCAG and the trip generation basis to assess the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development, the residential fee calculation for TUMF reflects a uniform fee per dwelling unit for two categories as described previously: single-family residential and multi-family residential. On September 28, 2021, California Governor Gavin Newsome signed Assembly Bill 602 (AB 602) approving several changes to the Mitigation Fee Act, including the additional of §66016.5 to the California Government Code (CGC). CGC §66016.5(a)(5)(A) states “A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development.…” unless certain findings are made. These findings include:
“(i) An explanation as to why square footage is not appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development project.
(ii) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
(iii) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.”
To address these provisions of AB 602, WRCOG analyzed the trip generation characteristics of single-family and multi-family residential dwelling units of various sizes to determine whether the TUMF should be imposed based on the square footage of the respective housing type. The findings of the analyses for single-family and multi-family, respectively, were summarized in technical memoranda that are included in Appendix K. Based on the findings of the analyses, WRCOG has determined that the fee for single-family residential units should be adjusted in four tiers to correlate to the trip generation characteristics associated with various ranges of single-family housing sizes to demonstrate compliance with AB 602. The tiers reflecting the adjustments to the 406
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 62 standard single-family residential fee per dwelling unit (as calculated in Table 6.1) for differing ranges of single-family dwelling unit sizes are summarized in Table 6.2.
Adjustments to the standard uniform fair-share single-family residential fee to account for variations in trip generation rates based on the size of the units will be made at the time of determining the fee obligation consistent with the process outlined further in the WRCOG TUMF Fee Calculation Handbook.
Table 6.2 – Single-Family Residential Fee Adjustments by Unit Size Adjustment Tier Housing Unit Size Range (in square feet) Base Fee Adjustment Tier 1 Less than or equal to 1,800 80%
Tier 2 1,801 to 2,300 90%
Tier 3 2,301 to 2,700 100%
Tier 4 More than 2,700 125%
For multi-family residential units, WRCOG determined that the fee can be imposed on all multi-family units uniformly consistent with the conclusions of the analysis of multifamily trip generation rates by unit size, which demonstrated little variation in trip generation rates across the range of multi-family residential unit sizes. Therefore, the multi-family residential fee, as calculated in Table 6.2, can be applied uniformly to all multi-family residential units under the TUMF program.
6.2 Non-Residential Fees
The portion of the unfunded future improvement cost allocable to new non-residential development through the TUMF is $946.5 million. Estimates of employment by sector were obtained from the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS socioeconomic data included in Table 2.3 and Appendix B. From the 2045 employment forecast, the amount of employee growth in each sector was calculated. The employment figures were then translated into square footage of new development using typical ratios of square feet per employee derived from four sources including: Cordoba Corporation/Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas (PBQD), Land Use Density Conversion Factors For Long Range Corridor Study San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, August 20, 1990; Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Orange County Subarea Model Guidelines Manual, June 2001; SCAG, Employment Density Study, October 31, 2001; and the County of Riverside, General Plan, as amended December 15, 2015. Worksheets showing the development of the TUMF employee conversion factors and the application of the conversion factors to calculate the square footage of future new non-residential development in Western Riverside County are included in Appendix L.
To account for the differences in trip generation between various types of nonresidential uses, the new non-residential development was weighted by trip generation rate for each sector. Typical trip generation rates per employee were obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation – 11th Edition (2021), and were weighted based on a calculated value of trips per employee as derived from the 407
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 63 employee conversion factors and ITE typical trip generation rates per square foot of development, before being assigned to the non-residential categories as follows:
Industrial – 0.6 PM peak hour trips per employee, Retail – 1.8 PM peak hour trips per employee, Service – 1.2 PM peak hour trips per employee, and Government/Public –
2.1 PM peak hour trips per employee12. These rates were applied to the employment growth in each sector to determine the relative contribution of each sector to new tripmaking, and the $946.5 million was then allocated among the non-residential categories based on the percentage of new trips added. This proportionate nonresidential fee share by sector was then divided by the estimated square footage of future new development to obtain the rate per square foot for each type of use. The calculation of the non-residential fee by sector is shown in Table 6.3.
Table 6.3 - Fee Calculation for Non-Residential Share
Non-Residential Sector Employment
Change
Trip
Generation
Rate per
Employee
Trip Change
Percentage
of Trip
Change
Change in
Square Feet of
Gross Floor
Area
Fee/SF
Industrial 76,581 0.6 45,949 15.1% 61,489,565 $2.33
Retail 13,115 1.8 23,607 7.8% 6,557,500 $11.21
Service 174,255 1.2 209,106 68.8% 66,735,957 $9.76
Government/Public 12,071 2.1 25,349 8.3% 3,420,665 $23.07 Total 276,022 304,011 100.0% 138,203,688
Employment Change data based on SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS; Trip Generation based on ITE (2021); Change in Square Feet conversion factor based on Cordoba (1990), OCTA (2001), SCAG (2001) and County of Riverside (2015). 12 The median trip generation rate for ‘Retail’ and ‘Service’ was reduced to reflect the influence of pass-by trips using the weekday PM peak median pass-by trip rate for select uses as derived from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) (September 2021).
408
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 64 7.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the Nexus Study evaluation, there is reasonable relationship between the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the need to mitigate these transportation impacts using funds levied through the ongoing TUMF Program. Factors that reflect this reasonable relationship include:
Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing because of future new development.
Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways. The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County. Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development.
Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program.
Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit-dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automobile travel.
The Nexus Study evaluation has established a proportional “fair share” of the improvement cost attributable to new development based on the impacts of existing development and the availability of obligated funding through traditional sources.
Furthermore, the Nexus Study evaluation has divided the fair share of the cost to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of future new development in Western Riverside County in rough proportionality to the cumulative impacts of future residential and non-residential development in the region. The respective fee allocable to future new residential and non-residential development in Western Riverside County is summarized for differing use types in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County Land Use Type Units Development
Change Fee Per Unit Total Revenue ($ million)
Single Family Residential DU 167,491 $15,476 $2,592.0
Multi Family Residential DU 90,335 $7,816 $706.1
Industrial SF GFA 61,489,565 $2.33 $143.1
Retail SF GFA 6,557,500 $11.21 $73.5
Service SF GFA 66,735,957 $9.76 $651.1
Government/Public SF GFA 3,420,665 $23.07 $78.9
MAXIMUM TUMF VALUE $4,244.6
409
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 65 8.0 APPENDICES
The following Appendices incorporate the extent of materials used to support the development of the WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study and, where appropriate, specifically the 2024 Update. The respective Appendices also incorporate an explanation of the methodology and assumptions used to develop the various elements of the Nexus Study.
These Appendices represent a compilation of materials derived from a variety of technical resources. Each of the following Appendices relate to the development of a specific element of the Nexus Study. These Appendices are as follows:
Appendix A - List of WRCOG Committees
Appendix B - Western Riverside County Population and Employment Growth 2018 – 2045
Appendix C - Western Riverside County Traffic Growth 2018 – 2045 Appendix D - Western Riverside County Transit System Ridership 2018 – 2045 Appendix E - Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials Performance Measures
Appendix F - TUMF Network Cost Assumptions
Appendix G - TUMF 2024 Program Update Disposition of Network Change Requests Appendix H - TUMF Network Cost Estimate and Evaluation
Appendix I - Western Riverside County Regional Trip Distribution Appendix J - Western Riverside County Regional Trip Purpose Appendix K - Residential Fee Calculation
Appendix L - Non-Residential Fee Calculation
410
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 A-1
Appendix A - List of WRCOG Committees
WRCOG Executive Committee
Sheri Flynn City of Banning
Mike Lara City of Beaumont
Wendy Hewitt City of Calimesa
Mark Terry City of Canyon Lake
Jacque Casillas (2nd Vice-Chair) City of Corona
Christian Dinco City of Eastvale
Jackie Peterson City of Hemet
Chris Barajas (Past Chair) City of Jurupa Valley
Brian Tisdale City of Lake Elsinore
Bob Karwin City of Menifee
Elena Baca-Santa Cruz City of Moreno Valley
Lisa DeForest City of Murrieta
Kevin Bash City of Norco
Rita Rogers (Chair) City of Perris
Chuck Conder City of Riverside
Crystal Ruiz City of San Jacinto
James Stewart City of Temecula
Joseph Morabito City of Wildomar
Kevin Jeffries County of Riverside Dist. 1
Karen Spiegel County of Riverside Dist. 2
Chuck Washington County of Riverside Dist. 3
Yxstian Gutierrez County of Riverside Dist. 5
Phil Paule Eastern Municipal Water District
Dr. Edwin Gomez Riverside County Superintendent of
Schools (ex-officio)
Brenda Dennstedt (Vice-Chair) Western Water
411
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 A-2
WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee
Doug Schulze City of Banning
Elizabeth Gibbs City of Beaumont
Will Kolbow City of Calimesa
Aaron Brown City of Canyon Lake
Brett Channing City of Corona
Mark Orme City of Eastvale
Mark Prestwich City of Hemet
Rod Butler (Past Chair) City of Jurupa Valley
Jason Simpson City of Lake Elsinore
Armando Villa City of Menifee
Mike Lee City of Moreno Valley
Kim Summers City of Murrieta
Lori Sassoon City of Norco
Clara Miramontes (Chair) City of Perris
Mike Futrell City of Riverside
Rob Johnson City of San Jacinto
Aaron Adams City of Temecula
Dan York City of Wildomar
Jeff Van Wagenen County of Riverside
Joe Mouawad Eastern Municipal Water District
Grace Martin March Joint Power Authority
Matt Snellings Riverside County Office of Education
Craig Miller Western Water
412
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 A-3
WRCOG Planning Directors’ Committee
no new appointment made (as of 07/24/24) City of Banning Carole Kendrick City of Beaumont
Kelly Lucia City of Calimesa
Jim Morrisey City of Canyon Lake
Joanne Coletta City of Corona
David Murray City of Eastvale
Monique Alaniz-Flejter City of Hemet
Joe Perez (Chair) City of Jurupa Valley
Damaris Abraham City of Lake Elsinore
Cheryl Kitzerow City of Menifee
Sean Kelleher (2nd Vice-Chair) City of Moreno Valley
David Chantarangsu City of Murrieta
Alma Robles City of Norco
Kenneth Phung (Vice-Chair) City of Perris
Judy Eguez City of Riverside
Travis Randel City of San Jacinto
Matt Peters City of Temecula
Matthew Bassi City of Wildomar
John Hildebrand County of Riverside
Jeffrey Smith March Joint Powers Authority
Jennifer Nguyen Riverside Transit Agency
Ryan Shaw Western Water
413
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 A-4
WRCOG Public Works Committee
Art Vela City of Banning
Robert Vestal City of Beaumont
Michael Thornton City of Calimesa
Stuart McKibben City of Canyon Lake
Savat Khamphou (Vice-Chair) City of Corona
Jimmy Chung City of Eastvale
Noah Rau City of Hemet
Paul Toor (Chair) City of Jurupa Valley
Remon Habib City of Lake Elsinore
Nick Fidler City of Menifee
Melissa Walker City of Moreno Valley
Bob Moehling City of Murrieta
Sam Nelson City of Norco
John Pourkazemi City of Perris
Gil Hernandez City of Riverside
Stuart McKibbin (Vice-Chair) City of San Jacinto
Patrick Thomas City of Temecula
Jason Farag City of Wildomar
Patricia Romo County of Riverside
Lauren Sotelo March Joint Powers Authority
Jillian Guizado Riverside County Transportation Commission Mauricio Alvarez Riverside Transit Agency
414
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 A-5
WRCOG Finance Directors’ Committee
Lincoln Bogard City of Banning
Jennifer Ustation City of Beaumont
Celeste Reid City of Calimesa
Terry Shea City of Canyon Lake
Kim Sitton City of Corona
Amanda Wells City of Eastvale
vacant City of Hemet
June Overholt City of Jurupa Valley
Shannon Buckley City of Lake Elsinore
Travis Hickey City of Menifee
Launa Jimenez City of Moreno Valley
Javier Carcamo (Past Chair) City of Murrieta
Lisette Free City of Norco
Ernie Reyna (Chair) City of Perris
Kristie Thomas City of Riverside
Erika Gomez (2nd Vice-Chair) City of San Jacinto
Jennifer Hennessy City of Temecula
Adam Jantz City of Wildomar
Vacant County of Riverside
John Adams Eastern Municipal Water District
Grace Martin March Joint Power Authority
Dr. Ruth Perez Riverside County Office of Education
Kevin Mascaro Western Water
415
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9. 2024 B-1
Appendix B - Western Riverside County Population and Employment Growth 2008 – 2035 Although a variety of alternate demographic information is available for the purpose of quantifying population and household growth in Western Riverside County, it was determined that the data developed by SCAG to support the 2020 RTP/SCS represented the most comprehensive source of socioeconomic data (SED) for the sixcounty SCAG region that includes Riverside County. The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED information is disaggregated to the level of traffic analysis zones (TAZ) that comprise inputs to RivCoM. These SED data by TAZ were extracted from RivCoM (specifically the TAZ_Data.CSV file located in the PopSyn output folder) and aggregated to correspond with the TUMF zones to support this update of the TUMF Nexus. The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED data retrieved from RivCoM and used as the basis for the Nexus Update is summarized in this Appendix.
The SCAG employment data for 2018 and 2045 was provided for thirteen employment sectors consistent with the California Employment Development Department (EDD) Major Groups including: Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Retail Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities; Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service; and Government. For the purposes of the Nexus Study, the SCAG Employment Categories were aggregated to Industrial (Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities), Retail (Retail Trade), Service (Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service) and Government/Public Sector (Government). These four aggregated sector types were used as the basis for calculating the fee as described in Section 6.2. This Appendix includes tables detailing the SCAG RTP/SCS SED Employment Categories and corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Categories that are included in each nonresidential sector type. 416
EXHIBIT B-1
Western Riverside County Population, Households and Employment (2018) - SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS Base Year SED Type/Zone Central Northwest Pass San Jacinto Southwest Total Total Population 408,260 777,900 98,688 187,677 432,915 1,905,440 Single-Family 83,142 152,897 24,937 38,888 97,543 397,407 Multi-Family 26,889 63,591 8,661 26,055 31,970 157,166
Total Households 110,031 216,488 33,598 64,943 129,513 554,573 Farming, Natural Resources and Mining 799 3,431 559 1,625 2,080 8,494 Construction 6,245 31,914 1,807 2,067 13,290 55,323
Manufacturing 4,172 25,866 1,101 925 8,902 40,966
Wholesale Trade 8,428 9,269 268 546 6,490 25,001
Retail Trade 13,346 32,061 5,472 4,564 18,371 73,814
Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities 7,349 22,686 1,132 2,132 6,251 39,550 Information 425 2,073 496 177 863 4,034
Financial Activities 1,887 8,632 586 1,003 5,414 17,522 Professional and Business Service 7,834 32,973 3,434 1,630 13,532 59,403 Education and Health Service 20,423 76,884 6,092 13,659 29,192 146,250 Leisure and Hospitality 8,391 21,990 7,207 3,726 18,270 59,584 Other Service 2,834 10,603 1,244 1,891 5,338 21,910
Government 2,579 11,727 871 761 2,631 18,569
TUMF Industrial 26,993 93,166 4,867 7,295 37,013 169,334 TUMF Retail 13,346 32,061 5,472 4,564 18,371 73,814
TUMF Service 41,794 153,155 19,059 22,086 72,609 308,703 TUMF Government/Public Sector 2,579 11,727 871 761 2,631 18,569 Total Employment 84,712 290,109 30,269 34,706 130,624 570,420 Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
Population
Households
Employment
417
EXHIBIT B-2
Western Riverside County Population, Households & Employment (2045) - SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS Horizon Year SED Type/Zone Central Northwest Pass San Jacinto Southwest Total Total Population 594,678 925,228 158,040 289,439 566,491 2,533,876 Single-Family 133,507 181,827 43,988 70,713 134,863 564,898 Multi-Family 53,555 79,359 14,362 43,654 56,571 247,501 Total Households 187,062 261,186 58,350 114,367 191,434 812,399 Farming, Natural Resources and Mining 712 2,212 527 1,218 2,001 6,670 Construction 18,304 48,533 3,186 5,861 20,236 96,120
Manufacturing 6,836 24,624 1,393 1,149 10,335 44,337
Wholesale Trade 6,150 9,048 324 559 6,529 22,610
Retail Trade 16,310 33,656 7,136 6,338 23,489 86,929
Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities 18,227 38,043 2,705 4,771 12,432 76,178 Information 642 2,166 476 191 1,116 4,591
Financial Activities 2,906 9,889 1,229 1,536 6,665 22,225 Professional and Business Service 14,214 41,712 6,016 4,518 21,058 87,518 Education and Health Service 52,764 111,454 13,803 25,739 51,118 254,878 Leisure and Hospitality 13,197 27,739 10,540 8,424 24,641 84,541 Other Service 5,148 13,062 1,532 2,838 6,625 29,205
Government 6,229 18,222 1,176 1,471 3,542 30,640
TUMF Industrial 50,229 122,460 8,135 13,558 51,533 245,915 TUMF Retail 16,310 33,656 7,136 6,338 23,489 86,929
TUMF Service 88,871 206,022 33,596 43,246 111,223 482,958 TUMF Government/Public Sector 6,229 18,222 1,176 1,471 3,542 30,640 Total Employment 161,639 380,360 50,043 64,613 189,787 846,442 Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
Population
Households
Employment
418
EXHIBIT B-3
Western Riverside County Population, Households and Employment (2018 to 2045 Change) - SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED Type/Zone Central Northwest Pass San Jacinto Southwest Total Total Population 186,418 147,328 59,352 101,762 133,576 628,436 Single-Family 50,365 28,930 19,051 31,825 37,320 167,491 Multi-Family 26,666 15,768 5,701 17,599 24,601 90,335
Total Households 77,031 44,698 24,752 49,424 61,921 257,826 Farming, Natural Resources and Mining -87 -1,219 -32 -407 -79 -1,824 Construction 12,059 16,619 1,379 3,794 6,946 40,797
Manufacturing 2,664 -1,242 292 224 1,433 3,371
Wholesale Trade -2,278 -221 56 13 39 -2,391
Retail Trade 2,964 1,595 1,664 1,774 5,118 13,115
Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities 10,878 15,357 1,573 2,639 6,181 36,628 Information 217 93 -20 14 253 557
Financial Activities 1,019 1,257 643 533 1,251 4,703
Professional and Business Service 6,380 8,739 2,582 2,888 7,526 28,115 Education and Health Service 32,341 34,570 7,711 12,080 21,926 108,628 Leisure and Hospitality 4,806 5,749 3,333 4,698 6,371 24,957 Other Service 2,314 2,459 288 947 1,287 7,295
Government 3,650 6,495 305 710 911 12,071
TUMF Industrial 23,236 29,294 3,268 6,263 14,520 76,581 TUMF Retail 2,964 1,595 1,664 1,774 5,118 13,115
TUMF Service 47,077 52,867 14,537 21,160 38,614 174,255 TUMF Government/Public Sector 3,650 6,495 305 710 911 12,071 Total Employment 76,927 90,251 19,774 29,907 59,163 276,022 Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
Population
Households
Employment
419
Exhibit B-4a - TUMF 2024 Nexus Update
Western Riverside County Population, Households and Employment (2018-2045) SED Type/Zone 2018 2045 Change Percent
Total Population 1,905,440 2,533,876 628,436 33%
Total Households 554,573 812,399 257,826 46%
Single-Family 397,407 564,898 167,491 42%
Multi-Family 157,166 247,501 90,335 57%
Total Employment 570,420 846,442 276,022 48%
TUMF Industrial 169,334 245,915 76,581 45%
TUMF Retail 73,814 86,929 13,115 18%
TUMF Service 308,703 482,958 174,255 56%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 18,569 30,640 12,071 65%
Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
Exhibit B-4b - TUMF 2016 Nexus Update
Western Riverside County Population, Households and Employment (2012-2040) SED Type/Zone 2012 2040 Change Percent
Total Population 1,773,935 2,429,633 655,698 37%
Total Households 525,149 775,231 250,082 48%
Single-Family 366,588 539,631 173,043 47%
Multi-Family 158,561 235,600 77,039 49%
Total Employment 460,787 861,455 400,668 87%
TUMF Industrial 120,736 201,328 80,592 67%
TUMF Retail 65,888 101,729 35,841 54%
TUMF Service 253,372 528,092 274,720 108%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 20,791 30,306 9,515 46%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS
420
Exhibit B-4c - TUMF 2016 Nexus Update to 2024 Nexus Update Comparison Western Riverside County Population, Households and Employment (Existing to Future Change) SED Type/Zone 2016 Update
(2012-2040)
2024 Update
(2018-2045) Difference Percent
Total Population 655,698 628,436 -27,262 -4%
Total Households 250,082 257,826 7,744 3%
Single-Family 173,043 167,491 -5,552 -3%
Multi-Family 77,039 90,335 13,296 17%
Total Employment 400,668 276,022 -124,646 -31%
TUMF Industrial 80,592 76,581 -4,011 -5%
TUMF Retail 35,841 13,115 -22,726 -63%
TUMF Service 274,720 174,255 -100,465 -37%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 9,515 12,071 2,556 27%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
421
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 B-7
EXHIBIT B-4d
Western Riverside County Population, Households and Employment Change (2012 to 2040 and 2018 to 2045) TUMF 2016 Nexus Update Comparison to TUMF 2024 Nexus Update Sources:
Year 2012 to Year 2040 Growth (2016 Nexus Update): SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; WSP, April 2016 Year 2018 to Year 2045 Growth (2024 Nexus Update): SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS 422
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 B-8
EXHIBIT B-4e
Difference in Population, Households and Employment Growth in Western Riverside County TUMF 2016 Nexus Update Comparison to TUMF 2024 Nexus Update Source:
Year 2012 to Year 2040 Growth (2016 Nexus Update): SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; WSP, April 2016 Year 2018 to Year 2045 Growth (2024 Nexus Update): SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS 423
EXHIBIT B-5a
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence Summary SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title Industrial
Farming, Natural Resources and Mining
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
111 Crop Production
112 Animal Production and Aquaculture
113 Forestry and Logging
114 Fishing, Hunting and Trapping
115 Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry
21 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction
211 Oil and Gas Extraction
212 Mining (except Oil and Gas)
213 Support Activities for Mining
Construction
23 Construction
236 Construction of Buildings
237 Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
238 Specialty Trade Contractors
Manufacturing
31-33 Manufacturing
311 Food Manufacturing
312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing
313 Textile Mills
314 Textile Product Mills
315 Apparel Manufacturing
316 Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing
321 Wood Product Manufacturing
322 Paper Manufacturing
323 Printing and Related Support Activities
324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing
325 Chemical Manufacturing
326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing
327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing
331 Primary Metal Manufacturing
332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
333 Machinery Manufacturing
334 Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
335 Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing 337 Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing
339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
42 Wholesale Trade
423 Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
424 Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods
425 Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers
Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities
22 Utilities
221 Utilities
48-49 Transportation and Warehousing
481 Air Transportation
482 Rail Transportation
483 Water Transportation
484 Truck Transportation
485 Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation
486 Pipeline Transportation
487 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation
488 Support Activities for Transportation
491 Postal Service
492 Couriers and Messengers
493 Warehousing and Storage
Retail
Retail Trade
44-45 Retail Trade
441 Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers
444 Building Material and Garden Equipment and Supplies Dealers 445 Food and Beverage Retailers
449 Furniture, Home Furnishings, Electronics, and Appliance Retailers 455 General Merchandise Retailers
456 Health and Personal Care Retailers
457 Gasoline Stations and Fuel Dealers
458 Clothing, Clothing Accessories, Shoe, and Jewelry Retailers 459 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Musical Instrument, Book, and Miscellaneous Retailers TUMF Category
424
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence Summary SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category Service
Information
51 Information
512 Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries
513 Publishing Industries
516 Broadcasting and Content Providers
517 Telecommunications
518 Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services 519 Web Search Portals, Libraries, Archives, and Other Information Services Financial Activities
52 Finance and Insurance
521 Monetary Authorities-Central Bank
522 Credit Intermediation and Related Activities
523 Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investments and Related Activities 524 Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
525 Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles
53 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
531 Real Estate
532 Rental and Leasing Services
533 Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works) Professional and Business Services
54 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
55 Management of Companies and Enterprises
551 Management of Companies and Enterprises
56 Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services 561 Administrative and Support Services
562 Waste Management and Remediation Services
Education and Health Services
61 Educational Services
611 Educational Services
62 Health Care and Social Assistance
621 Ambulatory Health Care Services
622 Hospitals
623 Nursing and Residential Care Facilities
624 Social Assistance
Leisure and Hospitality
71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
711 Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries 712 Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions 713 Amusement, Gambling, and Recreation Industries
72 Accommodation and Food Services
721 Accommodation
722 Food Services and Drinking Places
Other Service
81 Other Services (except Public Administration)
811 Repair and Maintenance
812 Personal and Laundry Services
813 Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations 814 Private Households
Government/Public Sector
Government
92 Public Administration
921 Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support 922 Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
923 Administration of Human Resource Programs
924 Administration of Environmental Quality Programs
925 Administration of Housing Programs, Urban Planning, and Community Development 926 Administration of Economic Programs
927 Space Research and Technology
928 National Security and International Affairs
Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
California Employment Development Department (EDD)
US Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), 2022 425
EXHIBIT B-5b
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title Industrial
Farming, Natural Resources and Mining
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
111 Crop Production
111110 Soybean Farming
111120 Oilseed (except Soybean) Farming
111130 Dry Pea and Bean Farming
111140 Wheat Farming
111150 Corn Farming
111160 Rice Farming
111191 Oilseed and Grain Combination Farming
111199 All Other Grain Farming
111211 Potato Farming
111219 Other Vegetable (except Potato) and Melon Farming 111310 Orange Groves
111320 Citrus (except Orange) Groves
111331 Apple Orchards
111332 Grape Vineyards
111333 Strawberry Farming
111334 Berry (except Strawberry) Farming
111335 Tree Nut Farming
111336 Fruit and Tree Nut Combination Farming
111339 Other Noncitrus Fruit Farming
111411 Mushroom Production
111419 Other Food Crops Grown Under Cover
111421 Nursery and Tree Production
111422 Floriculture Production
111910 Tobacco Farming
111920 Cotton Farming
111930 Sugarcane Farming
111940 Hay Farming
111991 Sugar Beet Farming
111992 Peanut Farming
111998 All Other Miscellaneous Crop Farming
112 Animal Production and Aquaculture
112111 Beef Cattle Ranching and Farming
112112 Cattle Feedlots
112120 Dairy Cattle and Milk Production
112130 Dual-Purpose Cattle Ranching and Farming
112210 Hog and Pig Farming
112310 Chicken Egg Production
112320 Broilers and Other Meat Type Chicken Production
112330 Turkey Production
112340 Poultry Hatcheries
112390 Other Poultry Production
112410 Sheep Farming
112420 Goat Farming
112511 Finfish Farming and Fish Hatcheries
112512 Shellfish Farming
112519 Other Aquaculture
112910 Apiculture
112920 Horses and Other Equine Production
112930 Fur-Bearing Animal and Rabbit Production
112990 All Other Animal Production
113 Forestry and Logging
113110 Timber Tract Operations
113210 Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products 113310 Logging
114 Fishing, Hunting and Trapping
114111 Finfish Fishing
114112 Shellfish Fishing
114119 Other Marine Fishing
114210 Hunting and Trapping
115 Support Activities for Agriculture and Forestry
115111 Cotton Ginning
115112 Soil Preparation, Planting, and Cultivating
115113 Crop Harvesting, Primarily by Machine
115114 Postharvest Crop Activities (except Cotton Ginning) 115115 Farm Labor Contractors and Crew Leaders
115116 Farm Management Services
115210 Support Activities for Animal Production
115310 Support Activities for Forestry
21 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction
211 Oil and Gas Extraction
211120 Crude Petroleum Extraction
211130 Natural Gas Extraction
212 Mining (except Oil and Gas)
212114 Surface Coal Mining
212115 Underground Coal Mining
212210 Iron Ore Mining
212220 Gold Ore and Silver Ore Mining
212230 Copper, Nickel, Lead, and Zinc Mining
212290 Other Metal Ore Mining
212311 Dimension Stone Mining and Quarrying
212312 Crushed and Broken Limestone Mining and Quarrying 212313 Crushed and Broken Granite Mining and Quarrying
212319 Other Crushed and Broken Stone Mining and Quarrying 212321 Construction Sand and Gravel Mining
212322 Industrial Sand Mining
212323 Kaolin, Clay, and Ceramic and Refractory Minerals Mining 212390 Other Nonmetallic Mineral Mining and Quarrying
213 Support Activities for Mining
213111 Drilling Oil and Gas Wells
213112 Support Activities for Oil and Gas Operations
213113 Support Activities for Coal Mining
213114 Support Activities for Metal Mining
213115 Support Activities for Nonmetallic Minerals (except Fuels) Mining TUMF Category
426
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
Construction
23 Construction
236 Construction of Buildings
236115 New Single-Family Housing Construction (except For-Sale Builders) 236116 New Multifamily Housing Construction (except For-Sale Builders) 236117 New Housing For-Sale Builders
236118 Residential Remodelers
236210 Industrial Building Construction
236220 Commercial and Institutional Building Construction 237 Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
237110 Water and Sewer Line and Related Structures Construction 237120 Oil and Gas Pipeline and Related Structures Construction 237130 Power and Communication Line and Related Structures Construction 237210 Land Subdivision
237310 Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction
237990 Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
238 Specialty Trade Contractors
238110 Poured Concrete Foundation and Structure Contractors 238120 Structural Steel and Precast Concrete Contractors 238130 Framing Contractors
238140 Masonry Contractors
238150 Glass and Glazing Contractors
238160 Roofing Contractors
238170 Siding Contractors
238190 Other Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors 238210 Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors 238220 Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors 238290 Other Building Equipment Contractors
238310 Drywall and Insulation Contractors
238320 Painting and Wall Covering Contractors
238330 Flooring Contractors
238340 Tile and Terrazzo Contractors
238350 Finish Carpentry Contractors
238390 Other Building Finishing Contractors
238910 Site Preparation Contractors
238990 All Other Specialty Trade Contractors
Manufacturing
31-33 Manufacturing
311 Food Manufacturing
311111 Dog and Cat Food Manufacturing
311119 Other Animal Food Manufacturing
311211 Flour Milling
311212 Rice Milling
311213 Malt Manufacturing
311221 Wet Corn Milling and Starch Manufacturing
311224 Soybean and Other Oilseed Processing
311225 Fats and Oils Refining and Blending
311230 Breakfast Cereal Manufacturing
311313 Beet Sugar Manufacturing
311314 Cane Sugar Manufacturing
311340 Nonchocolate Confectionery Manufacturing
311351 Chocolate and Confectionery Manufacturing from Cacao Beans 311352 Confectionery Manufacturing from Purchased Chocolate 311411 Frozen Fruit, Juice, and Vegetable Manufacturing 311412 Frozen Specialty Food Manufacturing
311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning
311422 Specialty Canning
311423 Dried and Dehydrated Food Manufacturing
311511 Fluid Milk Manufacturing
311512 Creamery Butter Manufacturing
311513 Cheese Manufacturing
311514 Dry, Condensed, and Evaporated Dairy Product Manufacturing 311520 Ice Cream and Frozen Dessert Manufacturing
311611 Animal (except Poultry) Slaughtering
311612 Meat Processed from Carcasses
311613 Rendering and Meat Byproduct Processing
311615 Poultry Processing
311710 Seafood Product Preparation and Packaging
311811 Retail Bakeries
311812 Commercial Bakeries
311813 Frozen Cakes, Pies, and Other Pastries Manufacturing 311821 Cookie and Cracker Manufacturing
311824 Dry Pasta, Dough, and Flour Mixes Manufacturing from Purchased Flour 311830 Tortilla Manufacturing
311911 Roasted Nuts and Peanut Butter Manufacturing
311919 Other Snack Food Manufacturing
311920 Coffee and Tea Manufacturing
311930 Flavoring Syrup and Concentrate Manufacturing
311941 Mayonnaise, Dressing, and Other Prepared Sauce Manufacturing 311942 Spice and Extract Manufacturing
311991 Perishable Prepared Food Manufacturing
311999 All Other Miscellaneous Food Manufacturing
312 Beverage and Tobacco Product Manufacturing
312111 Soft Drink Manufacturing
312112 Bottled Water Manufacturing
312113 Ice Manufacturing
312120 Breweries
312130 Wineries
312140 Distilleries
312230 Tobacco Manufacturing
313 Textile Mills
313110 Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills
313210 Broadwoven Fabric Mills
313220 Narrow Fabric Mills and Schiffli Machine Embroidery 313230 Nonwoven Fabric Mills
313240 Knit Fabric Mills
313310 Textile and Fabric Finishing Mills
313320 Fabric Coating Mills
314 Textile Product Mills
314110 Carpet and Rug Mills
314120 Curtain and Linen Mills
314910 Textile Bag and Canvas Mills
314994 Rope, Cordage, Twine, Tire Cord, and Tire Fabric Mills 314999 All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills
315 Apparel Manufacturing
315120 Apparel Knitting Mills
315210 Cut and Sew Apparel Contractors
315250 Cut and Sew Apparel Manufacturing (except Contractors) 315990 Apparel Accessories and Other Apparel Manufacturing 316 Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing
316110 Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing
316210 Footwear Manufacturing
316990 Other Leather and Allied Product Manufacturing
427
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
321 Wood Product Manufacturing
321113 Sawmills
321114 Wood Preservation
321211 Hardwood Veneer and Plywood Manufacturing
321212 Softwood Veneer and Plywood Manufacturing
321215 Engineered Wood Member Manufacturing
321219 Reconstituted Wood Product Manufacturing
321911 Wood Window and Door Manufacturing
321912 Cut Stock, Resawing Lumber, and Planing
321918 Other Millwork (including Flooring)
321920 Wood Container and Pallet Manufacturing
321991 Manufactured Home (Mobile Home) Manufacturing
321992 Prefabricated Wood Building Manufacturing
321999 All Other Miscellaneous Wood Product Manufacturing 322 Paper Manufacturing
322110 Pulp Mills
322120 Paper Mills
322130 Paperboard Mills
322211 Corrugated and Solid Fiber Box Manufacturing
322212 Folding Paperboard Box Manufacturing
322219 Other Paperboard Container Manufacturing
322220 Paper Bag and Coated and Treated Paper Manufacturing 322230 Stationery Product Manufacturing
322291 Sanitary Paper Product Manufacturing
322299 All Other Converted Paper Product Manufacturing
323 Printing and Related Support Activities
323111 Commercial Printing (except Screen and Books)
323113 Commercial Screen Printing
323117 Books Printing
323120 Support Activities for Printing
324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing
324110 Petroleum Refineries
324121 Asphalt Paving Mixture and Block Manufacturing
324122 Asphalt Shingle and Coating Materials Manufacturing 324191 Petroleum Lubricating Oil and Grease Manufacturing 324199 All Other Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 325 Chemical Manufacturing
325110 Petrochemical Manufacturing
325120 Industrial Gas Manufacturing
325130 Synthetic Dye and Pigment Manufacturing
325180 Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing
325193 Ethyl Alcohol Manufacturing
325194 Cyclic Crude, Intermediate, and Gum and Wood Chemical Manufacturing 325199 All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
325211 Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing
325212 Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing
325220 Artificial and Synthetic Fibers and Filaments Manufacturing 325311 Nitrogenous Fertilizer Manufacturing
325312 Phosphatic Fertilizer Manufacturing
325314 Fertilizer (Mixing Only) Manufacturing
325315 Compost Manufacturing
325320 Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing 325411 Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing
325412 Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing
325413 In-Vitro Diagnostic Substance Manufacturing
325414 Biological Product (except Diagnostic) Manufacturing 325510 Paint and Coating Manufacturing
325520 Adhesive Manufacturing
325611 Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing
325612 Polish and Other Sanitation Good Manufacturing
325613 Surface Active Agent Manufacturing
325620 Toilet Preparation Manufacturing
325910 Printing Ink Manufacturing
325920 Explosives Manufacturing
325991 Custom Compounding of Purchased Resins
325992 Photographic Film, Paper, Plate, Chemical, and Copy Toner Manufacturing 325998 All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing
326111 Plastics Bag and Pouch Manufacturing
326112 Plastics Packaging Film and Sheet (including Laminated) Manufacturing 326113 Unlaminated Plastics Film and Sheet (except Packaging) Manufacturing 326121 Unlaminated Plastics Profile Shape Manufacturing 326122 Plastics Pipe and Pipe Fitting Manufacturing
326130 Laminated Plastics Plate, Sheet (except Packaging), and Shape Manufacturing 326140 Polystyrene Foam Product Manufacturing
326150 Urethane and Other Foam Product (except Polystyrene) Manufacturing 326160 Plastics Bottle Manufacturing
326191 Plastics Plumbing Fixture Manufacturing
326199 All Other Plastics Product Manufacturing
326211 Tire Manufacturing (except Retreading)
326212 Tire Retreading
326220 Rubber and Plastics Hoses and Belting Manufacturing 326291 Rubber Product Manufacturing for Mechanical Use
326299 All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing
327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing
327110 Pottery, Ceramics, and Plumbing Fixture Manufacturing 327120 Clay Building Material and Refractories Manufacturing 327211 Flat Glass Manufacturing
327212 Other Pressed and Blown Glass and Glassware Manufacturing 327213 Glass Container Manufacturing
327215 Glass Product Manufacturing Made of Purchased Glass 327310 Cement Manufacturing
327320 Ready-Mix Concrete Manufacturing
327331 Concrete Block and Brick Manufacturing
327332 Concrete Pipe Manufacturing
327390 Other Concrete Product Manufacturing
327410 Lime Manufacturing
327420 Gypsum Product Manufacturing
327910 Abrasive Product Manufacturing
327991 Cut Stone and Stone Product Manufacturing
327992 Ground or Treated Mineral and Earth Manufacturing 327993 Mineral Wool Manufacturing
327999 All Other Miscellaneous Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 428
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
331 Primary Metal Manufacturing
331110 Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing 331210 Iron and Steel Pipe and Tube Manufacturing from Purchased Steel 331221 Rolled Steel Shape Manufacturing
331222 Steel Wire Drawing
331313 Alumina Refining and Primary Aluminum Production 331314 Secondary Smelting and Alloying of Aluminum
331315 Aluminum Sheet, Plate, and Foil Manufacturing
331318 Other Aluminum Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding
331410 Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) Smelting and Refining 331420 Copper Rolling, Drawing, Extruding, and Alloying 331491 Nonferrous Metal (except Copper and Aluminum) Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding 331492 Secondary Smelting, Refining, and Alloying of Nonferrous Metal (except Copper and Aluminum) 331511 Iron Foundries
331512 Steel Investment Foundries
331513 Steel Foundries (except Investment)
331523 Nonferrous Metal Die-Casting Foundries
331524 Aluminum Foundries (except Die-Casting)
331529 Other Nonferrous Metal Foundries (except Die-Casting) 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing
332111 Iron and Steel Forging
332112 Nonferrous Forging
332114 Custom Roll Forming
332117 Powder Metallurgy Part Manufacturing
332119 Metal Crown, Closure, and Other Metal Stamping (except Automotive) 332215 Metal Kitchen Cookware, Utensil, Cutlery, and Flatware (except Precious) Manufacturing 332216 Saw Blade and Handtool Manufacturing
332311 Prefabricated Metal Building and Component Manufacturing 332312 Fabricated Structural Metal Manufacturing
332313 Plate Work Manufacturing
332321 Metal Window and Door Manufacturing
332322 Sheet Metal Work Manufacturing
332323 Ornamental and Architectural Metal Work Manufacturing 332410 Power Boiler and Heat Exchanger Manufacturing
332420 Metal Tank (Heavy Gauge) Manufacturing
332431 Metal Can Manufacturing
332439 Other Metal Container Manufacturing
332510 Hardware Manufacturing
332613 Spring Manufacturing
332618 Other Fabricated Wire Product Manufacturing
332710 Machine Shops
332721 Precision Turned Product Manufacturing
332722 Bolt, Nut, Screw, Rivet, and Washer Manufacturing 332811 Metal Heat Treating
332812 Metal Coating, Engraving (except Jewelry and Silverware), and Allied Services to Manufacturers 332813 Electroplating, Plating, Polishing, Anodizing, and Coloring 332911 Industrial Valve Manufacturing
332912 Fluid Power Valve and Hose Fitting Manufacturing 332913 Plumbing Fixture Fitting and Trim Manufacturing
332919 Other Metal Valve and Pipe Fitting Manufacturing 332991 Ball and Roller Bearing Manufacturing
332992 Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturing
332993 Ammunition (except Small Arms) Manufacturing
332994 Small Arms, Ordnance, and Ordnance Accessories Manufacturing 332996 Fabricated Pipe and Pipe Fitting Manufacturing
332999 All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 333 Machinery Manufacturing
333111 Farm Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
333112 Lawn and Garden Tractor and Home Lawn and Garden Equipment Manufacturing 333120 Construction Machinery Manufacturing
333131 Mining Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
333132 Oil and Gas Field Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing 333241 Food Product Machinery Manufacturing
333242 Semiconductor Machinery Manufacturing
333243 Sawmill, Woodworking, and Paper Machinery Manufacturing 333248 All Other Industrial Machinery Manufacturing
333310 Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing 333413 Industrial and Commercial Fan and Blower and Air Purification Equipment Manufacturing 333414 Heating Equipment (except Warm Air Furnaces) Manufacturing 333415 Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing 333511 Industrial Mold Manufacturing
333514 Special Die and Tool, Die Set, Jig, and Fixture Manufacturing 333515 Cutting Tool and Machine Tool Accessory Manufacturing 333517 Machine Tool Manufacturing
333519 Rolling Mill and Other Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing 333611 Turbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing 333612 Speed Changer, Industrial High-Speed Drive, and Gear Manufacturing 333613 Mechanical Power Transmission Equipment Manufacturing 333618 Other Engine Equipment Manufacturing
333912 Air and Gas Compressor Manufacturing
333914 Measuring, Dispensing, and Other Pumping Equipment Manufacturing 333921 Elevator and Moving Stairway Manufacturing
333922 Conveyor and Conveying Equipment Manufacturing
333923 Overhead Traveling Crane, Hoist, and Monorail System Manufacturing 333924 Industrial Truck, Tractor, Trailer, and Stacker Machinery Manufacturing 333991 Power-Driven Handtool Manufacturing
333992 Welding and Soldering Equipment Manufacturing
333993 Packaging Machinery Manufacturing
333994 Industrial Process Furnace and Oven Manufacturing 333995 Fluid Power Cylinder and Actuator Manufacturing
333996 Fluid Power Pump and Motor Manufacturing
333998 All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing 334 Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
334111 Electronic Computer Manufacturing
334112 Computer Storage Device Manufacturing
334118 Computer Terminal and Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing 334210 Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing
334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing 334290 Other Communications Equipment Manufacturing
334310 Audio and Video Equipment Manufacturing
334412 Bare Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing
334413 Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing
334416 Capacitor, Resistor, Coil, Transformer, and Other Inductor Manufacturing 334417 Electronic Connector Manufacturing
334418 Printed Circuit Assembly (Electronic Assembly) Manufacturing 334419 Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
334510 Electromedical and Electrotherapeutic Apparatus Manufacturing 334511 Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing 334512 Automatic Environmental Control Manufacturing for Residential, Commercial, and Appliance Use 334513 Instruments and Related Products Manufacturing for Measuring, Displaying, and Controlling Industrial Process Variables 334514 Totalizing Fluid Meter and Counting Device Manufacturing 334515 Instrument Manufacturing for Measuring and Testing Electricity and Electrical Signals 334516 Analytical Laboratory Instrument Manufacturing
334517 Irradiation Apparatus Manufacturing
334519 Other Measuring and Controlling Device Manufacturing 334610 Manufacturing and Reproducing Magnetic and Optical Media 429
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
335 Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing 335131 Residential Electric Lighting Fixture Manufacturing 335132 Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Electric Lighting Fixture Manufacturing 335139 Electric Lamp Bulb and Other Lighting Equipment Manufacturing 335210 Small Electrical Appliance Manufacturing
335220 Major Household Appliance Manufacturing
335311 Power, Distribution, and Specialty Transformer Manufacturing 335312 Motor and Generator Manufacturing
335313 Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus Manufacturing 335314 Relay and Industrial Control Manufacturing
335910 Battery Manufacturing
335921 Fiber Optic Cable Manufacturing
335929 Other Communication and Energy Wire Manufacturing 335931 Current-Carrying Wiring Device Manufacturing
335932 Noncurrent-Carrying Wiring Device Manufacturing
335991 Carbon and Graphite Product Manufacturing
335999 All Other Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing
336110 Automobile and Light Duty Motor Vehicle Manufacturing 336120 Heavy Duty Truck Manufacturing
336211 Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing
336212 Truck Trailer Manufacturing
336213 Motor Home Manufacturing
336214 Travel Trailer and Camper Manufacturing
336310 Motor Vehicle Gasoline Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing 336320 Motor Vehicle Electrical and Electronic Equipment Manufacturing 336330 Motor Vehicle Steering and Suspension Components (except Spring) Manufacturing 336340 Motor Vehicle Brake System Manufacturing
336350 Motor Vehicle Transmission and Power Train Parts Manufacturing 336360 Motor Vehicle Seating and Interior Trim Manufacturing 336370 Motor Vehicle Metal Stamping
336390 Other Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing
336411 Aircraft Manufacturing
336412 Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing
336413 Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing 336414 Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
336415 Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Propulsion Unit and Propulsion Unit Parts Manufacturing 336419 Other Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing 336510 Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing
336611 Ship Building and Repairing
336612 Boat Building
336991 Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Parts Manufacturing
336992 Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing 336999 All Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 337 Furniture and Related Product Manufacturing
337110 Wood Kitchen Cabinet and Countertop Manufacturing 337121 Upholstered Household Furniture Manufacturing
337122 Nonupholstered Wood Household Furniture Manufacturing 337126 Household Furniture (except Wood and Upholstered) Manufacturing 337127 Institutional Furniture Manufacturing
337211 Wood Office Furniture Manufacturing
337212 Custom Architectural Woodwork and Millwork Manufacturing 337214 Office Furniture (except Wood) Manufacturing
337215 Showcase, Partition, Shelving, and Locker Manufacturing 337910 Mattress Manufacturing
337920 Blind and Shade Manufacturing
339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing
339112 Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing
339113 Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing
339114 Dental Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
339115 Ophthalmic Goods Manufacturing
339116 Dental Laboratories
339910 Jewelry and Silverware Manufacturing
339920 Sporting and Athletic Goods Manufacturing
339930 Doll, Toy, and Game Manufacturing
339940 Office Supplies (except Paper) Manufacturing
339950 Sign Manufacturing
339991 Gasket, Packing, and Sealing Device Manufacturing 339992 Musical Instrument Manufacturing
339993 Fastener, Button, Needle, and Pin Manufacturing
339994 Broom, Brush, and Mop Manufacturing
339995 Burial Casket Manufacturing
339999 All Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
42 Wholesale Trade
423 Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods
423110 Automobile and Other Motor Vehicle Merchant Wholesalers 423120 Motor Vehicle Supplies and New Parts Merchant Wholesalers 423130 Tire and Tube Merchant Wholesalers
423140 Motor Vehicle Parts (Used) Merchant Wholesalers
423210 Furniture Merchant Wholesalers
423220 Home Furnishing Merchant Wholesalers
423310 Lumber, Plywood, Millwork, and Wood Panel Merchant Wholesalers 423320 Brick, Stone, and Related Construction Material Merchant Wholesalers 423330 Roofing, Siding, and Insulation Material Merchant Wholesalers 423390 Other Construction Material Merchant Wholesalers 423410 Photographic Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423420 Office Equipment Merchant Wholesalers
423430 Computer and Computer Peripheral Equipment and Software Merchant Wholesalers 423440 Other Commercial Equipment Merchant Wholesalers
423450 Medical, Dental, and Hospital Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423460 Ophthalmic Goods Merchant Wholesalers
423490 Other Professional Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423510 Metal Service Centers and Other Metal Merchant Wholesalers 423520 Coal and Other Mineral and Ore Merchant Wholesalers 423610 Electrical Apparatus and Equipment, Wiring Supplies, and Related Equipment Merchant Wholesalers 423620 Household Appliances, Electric Housewares, and Consumer Electronics Merchant Wholesalers 423690 Other Electronic Parts and Equipment Merchant Wholesalers 423710 Hardware Merchant Wholesalers
423720 Plumbing and Heating Equipment and Supplies (Hydronics) Merchant Wholesalers 423730 Warm Air Heating and Air-Conditioning Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423740 Refrigeration Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423810 Construction and Mining (except Oil Well) Machinery and Equipment Merchant Wholesalers 423820 Farm and Garden Machinery and Equipment Merchant Wholesalers 423830 Industrial Machinery and Equipment Merchant Wholesalers 423840 Industrial Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
423850 Service Establishment Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423860 Transportation Equipment and Supplies (except Motor Vehicle) Merchant Wholesalers 423910 Sporting and Recreational Goods and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423920 Toy and Hobby Goods and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 423930 Recyclable Material Merchant Wholesalers
423940 Jewelry, Watch, Precious Stone, and Precious Metal Merchant Wholesalers 423990 Other Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers 430
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
424 Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods
424110 Printing and Writing Paper Merchant Wholesalers
424120 Stationery and Office Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 424130 Industrial and Personal Service Paper Merchant Wholesalers 424210 Drugs and Druggists' Sundries Merchant Wholesalers 424310 Piece Goods, Notions, and Other Dry Goods Merchant Wholesalers 424340 Footwear Merchant Wholesalers
424350 Clothing and Clothing Accessories Merchant Wholesalers 424410 General Line Grocery Merchant Wholesalers
424420 Packaged Frozen Food Merchant Wholesalers
424430 Dairy Product (except Dried or Canned) Merchant Wholesalers 424440 Poultry and Poultry Product Merchant Wholesalers 424450 Confectionery Merchant Wholesalers
424460 Fish and Seafood Merchant Wholesalers
424470 Meat and Meat Product Merchant Wholesalers
424480 Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Merchant Wholesalers
424490 Other Grocery and Related Products Merchant Wholesalers 424510 Grain and Field Bean Merchant Wholesalers
424520 Livestock Merchant Wholesalers
424590 Other Farm Product Raw Material Merchant Wholesalers 424610 Plastics Materials and Basic Forms and Shapes Merchant Wholesalers 424690 Other Chemical and Allied Products Merchant Wholesalers 424710 Petroleum Bulk Stations and Terminals
424720 Petroleum and Petroleum Products Merchant Wholesalers (except Bulk Stations and Terminals) 424810 Beer and Ale Merchant Wholesalers
424820 Wine and Distilled Alcoholic Beverage Merchant Wholesalers 424910 Farm Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
424920 Book, Periodical, and Newspaper Merchant Wholesalers 424930 Flower, Nursery Stock, and Florists' Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 424940 Tobacco Product and Electronic Cigarette Merchant Wholesalers 424950 Paint, Varnish, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers 424990 Other Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers 425 Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers
425120 Wholesale Trade Agents and Brokers
Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities
22 Utilities
221 Utilities
221111 Hydroelectric Power Generation
221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation
221113 Nuclear Electric Power Generation
221114 Solar Electric Power Generation
221115 Wind Electric Power Generation
221116 Geothermal Electric Power Generation
221117 Biomass Electric Power Generation
221118 Other Electric Power Generation
221121 Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control
221122 Electric Power Distribution
221210 Natural Gas Distribution
221310 Water Supply and Irrigation Systems
221320 Sewage Treatment Facilities
221330 Steam and Air-Conditioning Supply
48-49 Transportation and Warehousing
481 Air Transportation
481111 Scheduled Passenger Air Transportation
481112 Scheduled Freight Air Transportation
481211 Nonscheduled Chartered Passenger Air Transportation 481212 Nonscheduled Chartered Freight Air Transportation 481219 Other Nonscheduled Air Transportation
482 Rail Transportation
482111 Line-Haul Railroads
482112 Short Line Railroads
483 Water Transportation
483111 Deep Sea Freight Transportation
483112 Deep Sea Passenger Transportation
483113 Coastal and Great Lakes Freight Transportation
483114 Coastal and Great Lakes Passenger Transportation 483211 Inland Water Freight Transportation
483212 Inland Water Passenger Transportation
484 Truck Transportation
484110 General Freight Trucking, Local
484121 General Freight Trucking, Long-Distance, Truckload 484122 General Freight Trucking, Long-Distance, Less Than Truckload 484210 Used Household and Office Goods Moving
484220 Specialized Freight (except Used Goods) Trucking, Local 484230 Specialized Freight (except Used Goods) Trucking, Long-Distance 485 Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation
485111 Mixed Mode Transit Systems
485112 Commuter Rail Systems
485113 Bus and Other Motor Vehicle Transit Systems
485119 Other Urban Transit Systems
485210 Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation
485310 Taxi and Ridesharing Services
485320 Limousine Service
485410 School and Employee Bus Transportation
485510 Charter Bus Industry
485991 Special Needs Transportation
485999 All Other Transit and Ground Passenger Transportation 486 Pipeline Transportation
486110 Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil
486210 Pipeline Transportation of Natural Gas
486910 Pipeline Transportation of Refined Petroleum Products 486990 All Other Pipeline Transportation
487 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation
487110 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Land
487210 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water
487990 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other
488 Support Activities for Transportation
488111 Air Traffic Control
488119 Other Airport Operations
488190 Other Support Activities for Air Transportation
488210 Support Activities for Rail Transportation
488310 Port and Harbor Operations
488320 Marine Cargo Handling
488330 Navigational Services to Shipping
488390 Other Support Activities for Water Transportation 488410 Motor Vehicle Towing
488490 Other Support Activities for Road Transportation 488510 Freight Transportation Arrangement
488991 Packing and Crating
488999 All Other Support Activities for Transportation
491 Postal Service
491110 Postal Service
492 Couriers and Messengers
492110 Couriers and Express Delivery Services
492210 Local Messengers and Local Delivery
493 Warehousing and Storage
493110 General Warehousing and Storage
493120 Refrigerated Warehousing and Storage
493130 Farm Product Warehousing and Storage
493190 Other Warehousing and Storage
431
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
Retail
Retail Trade
44-45 Retail Trade
441 Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers
441110 New Car Dealers
441120 Used Car Dealers
441210 Recreational Vehicle Dealers
441222 Boat Dealers
441227 Motorcycle, ATV, and All Other Motor Vehicle Dealers 441330 Automotive Parts and Accessories Retailers
441340 Tire Dealers
444 Building Material and Garden Equipment and Supplies Dealers 444110 Home Centers
444120 Paint and Wallpaper Retailers
444140 Hardware Retailers
444180 Other Building Material Dealers
444230 Outdoor Power Equipment Retailers
444240 Nursery, Garden Center, and Farm Supply Retailers 445 Food and Beverage Retailers
445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery Retailers (except Convenience Retailers) 445131 Convenience Retailers
445132 Vending Machine Operators
445230 Fruit and Vegetable Retailers
445240 Meat Retailers
445250 Fish and Seafood Retailers
445291 Baked Goods Retailers
445292 Confectionery and Nut Retailers
445298 All Other Specialty Food Retailers
445320 Beer, Wine, and Liquor Retailers
449 Furniture, Home Furnishings, Electronics, and Appliance Retailers 449110 Furniture Retailers
449121 Floor Covering Retailers
449122 Window Treatment Retailers
449129 All Other Home Furnishings Retailers
449210 Electronics and Appliance Retailers
455 General Merchandise Retailers
455110 Department Stores
455211 Warehouse Clubs and Supercenters
455219 All Other General Merchandise Retailers
456 Health and Personal Care Retailers
456110 Pharmacies and Drug Retailers
456120 Cosmetics, Beauty Supplies, and Perfume Retailers 456130 Optical Goods Retailers
456191 Food (Health) Supplement Retailers
456199 All Other Health and Personal Care Retailers
457 Gasoline Stations and Fuel Dealers
457110 Gasoline Stations with Convenience Stores
457120 Other Gasoline Stations
457210 Fuel Dealers
458 Clothing, Clothing Accessories, Shoe, and Jewelry Retailers 458110 Clothing and Clothing Accessories Retailers
458210 Shoe Retailers
458310 Jewelry Retailers
458320 Luggage and Leather Goods Retailers
459 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Musical Instrument, Book, and Miscellaneous Retailers 459110 Sporting Goods Retailers
459120 Hobby, Toy, and Game Retailers
459130 Sewing, Needlework, and Piece Goods Retailers
459140 Musical Instrument and Supplies Retailers
459210 Book Retailers and News Dealers
459310 Florists
459410 Office Supplies and Stationery Retailers
459420 Gift, Novelty, and Souvenir Retailers
459510 Used Merchandise Retailers
459910 Pet and Pet Supplies Retailers
459920 Art Dealers
459930 Manufactured (Mobile) Home Dealers
459991 Tobacco, Electronic Cigarette, and Other Smoking Supplies Retailers 459999 All Other Miscellaneous Retailers
432
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
Service
Information
51 Information
512 Motion Picture and Sound Recording Industries
512110 Motion Picture and Video Production
512120 Motion Picture and Video Distribution
512131 Motion Picture Theaters (except Drive-Ins)
512132 Drive-In Motion Picture Theaters
512191 Teleproduction and Other Postproduction Services 512199 Other Motion Picture and Video Industries
512230 Music Publishers
512240 Sound Recording Studios
512250 Record Production and Distribution
512290 Other Sound Recording Industries
513 Publishing Industries
513110 Newspaper Publishers
513120 Periodical Publishers
513130 Book Publishers
513140 Directory and Mailing List Publishers
513191 Greeting Card Publishers
513199 All Other Publishers
513210 Software Publishers
516 Broadcasting and Content Providers
516110 Radio Broadcasting Stations
516120 Television Broadcasting Stations
516210 Media Streaming Distribution Services, Social Networks, and Other Media Networks and Content Providers 517 Telecommunications
517111 Wired Telecommunications Carriers
517112 Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) 517121 Telecommunications Resellers
517122 Agents for Wireless Telecommunications Services
517410 Satellite Telecommunications
517810 All Other Telecommunications
518 Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services 518210 Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services 519 Web Search Portals, Libraries, Archives, and Other Information Services 519210 Libraries and Archives
519290 Web Search Portals and All Other Information Services Financial Activities
52 Finance and Insurance
521 Monetary Authorities-Central Bank
521110 Monetary Authorities-Central Bank
522 Credit Intermediation and Related Activities
522110 Commercial Banking
522130 Credit Unions
522180 Savings Institutions and Other Depository Credit Intermediation 522210 Credit Card Issuing
522220 Sales Financing
522291 Consumer Lending
522292 Real Estate Credit
522299 International, Secondary Market, and All Other Nondepository Credit Intermediation 522310 Mortgage and Nonmortgage Loan Brokers
522320 Financial Transactions Processing, Reserve, and Clearinghouse Activities 522390 Other Activities Related to Credit Intermediation 523 Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other Financial Investments and Related Activities 523150 Investment Banking and Securities Intermediation 523160 Commodity Contracts Intermediation
523210 Securities and Commodity Exchanges
523910 Miscellaneous Intermediation
523940 Portfolio Management and Investment Advice
523991 Trust, Fiduciary, and Custody Activities
523999 Miscellaneous Financial Investment Activities
524 Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
524113 Direct Life Insurance Carriers
524114 Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carriers
524126 Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Carriers
524127 Direct Title Insurance Carriers
524128 Other Direct Insurance (except Life, Health, and Medical) Carriers 524130 Reinsurance Carriers
524210 Insurance Agencies and Brokerages
524291 Claims Adjusting
524292 Pharmacy Benefit Management and Other Third Party Administration of Insurance and Pension Funds 524298 All Other Insurance Related Activities
525 Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles
525110 Pension Funds
525120 Health and Welfare Funds
525190 Other Insurance Funds
525910 Open-End Investment Funds
525920 Trusts, Estates, and Agency Accounts
525990 Other Financial Vehicles
53 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
531 Real Estate
531110 Lessors of Residential Buildings and Dwellings
531120 Lessors of Nonresidential Buildings (except Miniwarehouses) 531130 Lessors of Miniwarehouses and Self-Storage Units 531190 Lessors of Other Real Estate Property
531210 Offices of Real Estate Agents and Brokers
531311 Residential Property Managers
531312 Nonresidential Property Managers
531320 Offices of Real Estate Appraisers
531390 Other Activities Related to Real Estate
532 Rental and Leasing Services
532111 Passenger Car Rental
532112 Passenger Car Leasing
532120 Truck, Utility Trailer, and RV (Recreational Vehicle) Rental and Leasing 532210 Consumer Electronics and Appliances Rental
532281 Formal Wear and Costume Rental
532282 Video Tape and Disc Rental
532283 Home Health Equipment Rental
532284 Recreational Goods Rental
532289 All Other Consumer Goods Rental
532310 General Rental Centers
532411 Commercial Air, Rail, and Water Transportation Equipment Rental and Leasing 532412 Construction, Mining, and Forestry Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing 532420 Office Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing 532490 Other Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment Rental and Leasing 533 Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works) 533110 Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets (except Copyrighted Works) 433
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
Professional and Business Services
54 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
541110 Offices of Lawyers
541120 Offices of Notaries
541191 Title Abstract and Settlement Offices
541199 All Other Legal Services
541211 Offices of Certified Public Accountants
541213 Tax Preparation Services
541214 Payroll Services
541219 Other Accounting Services
541310 Architectural Services
541320 Landscape Architectural Services
541330 Engineering Services
541340 Drafting Services
541350 Building Inspection Services
541360 Geophysical Surveying and Mapping Services
541370 Surveying and Mapping (except Geophysical) Services 541380 Testing Laboratories and Services
541410 Interior Design Services
541420 Industrial Design Services
541430 Graphic Design Services
541490 Other Specialized Design Services
541511 Custom Computer Programming Services
541512 Computer Systems Design Services
541513 Computer Facilities Management Services
541519 Other Computer Related Services
541611 Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services 541612 Human Resources Consulting Services
541613 Marketing Consulting Services
541614 Process, Physical Distribution, and Logistics Consulting Services 541618 Other Management Consulting Services
541620 Environmental Consulting Services
541690 Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services 541713 Research and Development in Nanotechnology
541714 Research and Development in Biotechnology (except Nanobiotechnology) 541715 Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology) 541720 Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities 541810 Advertising Agencies
541820 Public Relations Agencies
541830 Media Buying Agencies
541840 Media Representatives
541850 Indoor and Outdoor Display Advertising
541860 Direct Mail Advertising
541870 Advertising Material Distribution Services
541890 Other Services Related to Advertising
541910 Marketing Research and Public Opinion Polling
541921 Photography Studios, Portrait
541922 Commercial Photography
541930 Translation and Interpretation Services
541940 Veterinary Services
541990 All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 55 Management of Companies and Enterprises
551 Management of Companies and Enterprises
551111 Offices of Bank Holding Companies
551112 Offices of Other Holding Companies
551114 Corporate, Subsidiary, and Regional Managing Offices 56 Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services 561 Administrative and Support Services
561110 Office Administrative Services
561210 Facilities Support Services
561311 Employment Placement Agencies
561312 Executive Search Services
561320 Temporary Help Services
561330 Professional Employer Organizations
561410 Document Preparation Services
561421 Telephone Answering Services
561422 Telemarketing Bureaus and Other Contact Centers
561431 Private Mail Centers
561439 Other Business Service Centers (including Copy Shops) 561440 Collection Agencies
561450 Credit Bureaus
561491 Repossession Services
561492 Court Reporting and Stenotype Services
561499 All Other Business Support Services
561510 Travel Agencies
561520 Tour Operators
561591 Convention and Visitors Bureaus
561599 All Other Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services 561611 Investigation and Personal Background Check Services 561612 Security Guards and Patrol Services
561613 Armored Car Services
561621 Security Systems Services (except Locksmiths)
561622 Locksmiths
561710 Exterminating and Pest Control Services
561720 Janitorial Services
561730 Landscaping Services
561740 Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning Services
561790 Other Services to Buildings and Dwellings
561910 Packaging and Labeling Services
561920 Convention and Trade Show Organizers
561990 All Other Support Services
562 Waste Management and Remediation Services
562111 Solid Waste Collection
562112 Hazardous Waste Collection
562119 Other Waste Collection
562211 Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal
562212 Solid Waste Landfill
562213 Solid Waste Combustors and Incinerators
562219 Other Nonhazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal
562910 Remediation Services
562920 Materials Recovery Facilities
562991 Septic Tank and Related Services
562998 All Other Miscellaneous Waste Management Services 434
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
Education and Health Services
61 Educational Services
611 Educational Services
611110 Elementary and Secondary Schools
611210 Junior Colleges
611310 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools 611410 Business and Secretarial Schools
611420 Computer Training
611430 Professional and Management Development Training 611511 Cosmetology and Barber Schools
611512 Flight Training
611513 Apprenticeship Training
611519 Other Technical and Trade Schools
611610 Fine Arts Schools
611620 Sports and Recreation Instruction
611630 Language Schools
611691 Exam Preparation and Tutoring
611692 Automobile Driving Schools
611699 All Other Miscellaneous Schools and Instruction
611710 Educational Support Services
62 Health Care and Social Assistance
621 Ambulatory Health Care Services
621111 Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists) 621112 Offices of Physicians, Mental Health Specialists 621210 Offices of Dentists
621310 Offices of Chiropractors
621320 Offices of Optometrists
621330 Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians) 621340 Offices of Physical, Occupational and Speech Therapists, and Audiologists 621391 Offices of Podiatrists
621399 Offices of All Other Miscellaneous Health Practitioners 621410 Family Planning Centers
621420 Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Centers 621491 HMO Medical Centers
621492 Kidney Dialysis Centers
621493 Freestanding Ambulatory Surgical and Emergency Centers 621498 All Other Outpatient Care Centers
621511 Medical Laboratories
621512 Diagnostic Imaging Centers
621610 Home Health Care Services
621910 Ambulance Services
621991 Blood and Organ Banks
621999 All Other Miscellaneous Ambulatory Health Care Services 622 Hospitals
622110 General Medical and Surgical Hospitals
622210 Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals
622310 Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals 623 Nursing and Residential Care Facilities
623110 Nursing Care Facilities (Skilled Nursing Facilities) 623210 Residential Intellectual and Developmental Disability Facilities 623220 Residential Mental Health and Substance Abuse Facilities 623311 Continuing Care Retirement Communities
623312 Assisted Living Facilities for the Elderly
623990 Other Residential Care Facilities
624 Social Assistance
624110 Child and Youth Services
624120 Services for the Elderly and Persons with Disabilities 624190 Other Individual and Family Services
624210 Community Food Services
624221 Temporary Shelters
624229 Other Community Housing Services
624230 Emergency and Other Relief Services
624310 Vocational Rehabilitation Services
624410 Child Care Services
Leisure and Hospitality
71 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
711 Performing Arts, Spectator Sports, and Related Industries 711110 Theater Companies and Dinner Theaters
711120 Dance Companies
711130 Musical Groups and Artists
711190 Other Performing Arts Companies
711211 Sports Teams and Clubs
711212 Racetracks
711219 Other Spectator Sports
711310 Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events with Facilities 711320 Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events without Facilities 711410 Agents and Managers for Artists, Athletes, Entertainers, and Other Public Figures 711510 Independent Artists, Writers, and Performers
712 Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions 712110 Museums
712120 Historical Sites
712130 Zoos and Botanical Gardens
712190 Nature Parks and Other Similar Institutions
713 Amusement, Gambling, and Recreation Industries
713110 Amusement and Theme Parks
713120 Amusement Arcades
713210 Casinos (except Casino Hotels)
713290 Other Gambling Industries
713910 Golf Courses and Country Clubs
713920 Skiing Facilities
713930 Marinas
713940 Fitness and Recreational Sports Centers
713950 Bowling Centers
713990 All Other Amusement and Recreation Industries
435
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
72 Accommodation and Food Services
721 Accommodation
721110 Hotels (except Casino Hotels) and Motels
721120 Casino Hotels
721191 Bed-and-Breakfast Inns
721199 All Other Traveler Accommodation
721211 RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks and Campgrounds
721214 Recreational and Vacation Camps (except Campgrounds) 721310 Rooming and Boarding Houses, Dormitories, and Workers' Camps 722 Food Services and Drinking Places
722310 Food Service Contractors
722320 Caterers
722330 Mobile Food Services
722410 Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages)
722511 Full-Service Restaurants
722513 Limited-Service Restaurants
722514 Cafeterias, Grill Buffets, and Buffets
722515 Snack and Nonalcoholic Beverage Bars
Other Service
81 Other Services (except Public Administration)
811 Repair and Maintenance
811111 General Automotive Repair
811114 Specialized Automotive Repair
811121 Automotive Body, Paint, and Interior Repair and Maintenance 811122 Automotive Glass Replacement Shops
811191 Automotive Oil Change and Lubrication Shops
811192 Car Washes
811198 All Other Automotive Repair and Maintenance
811210 Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance 811310 Commercial and Industrial Machinery and Equipment (except Automotive and Electronic) Repair and Maintenance 811411 Home and Garden Equipment Repair and Maintenance 811412 Appliance Repair and Maintenance
811420 Reupholstery and Furniture Repair
811430 Footwear and Leather Goods Repair
811490 Other Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance 812 Personal and Laundry Services
812111 Barber Shops
812112 Beauty Salons
812113 Nail Salons
812191 Diet and Weight Reducing Centers
812199 Other Personal Care Services
812210 Funeral Homes and Funeral Services
812220 Cemeteries and Crematories
812310 Coin-Operated Laundries and Drycleaners
812320 Drycleaning and Laundry Services (except Coin-Operated) 812331 Linen Supply
812332 Industrial Launderers
812910 Pet Care (except Veterinary) Services
812921 Photofinishing Laboratories (except One-Hour)
812922 One-Hour Photofinishing
812930 Parking Lots and Garages
812990 All Other Personal Services
813 Religious, Grantmaking, Civic, Professional, and Similar Organizations 813110 Religious Organizations
813211 Grantmaking Foundations
813212 Voluntary Health Organizations
813219 Other Grantmaking and Giving Services
813311 Human Rights Organizations
813312 Environment, Conservation and Wildlife Organizations 813319 Other Social Advocacy Organizations
813410 Civic and Social Organizations
813910 Business Associations
813920 Professional Organizations
813930 Labor Unions and Similar Labor Organizations
813940 Political Organizations
813990 Other Similar Organizations (except Business, Professional, Labor, and Political Organizations) 814 Private Households
814110 Private Households
436
TUMF Non-Residential Category Detailed NAICS Correspondence SCAG RTP/SCS NAICS Two Digit Code NAICS Three Digit Code NAICS Six Digit Code Employment Categories NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title NAICS Code NAICS Title TUMF Category
Government/Public Sector
Government
92 Public Administration
921 Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support 921110 Executive Offices
921120 Legislative Bodies
921130 Public Finance Activities
921140 Executive and Legislative Offices, Combined
921150 American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Governments 921190 Other General Government Support
922 Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
922110 Courts
922120 Police Protection
922130 Legal Counsel and Prosecution
922140 Correctional Institutions
922150 Parole Offices and Probation Offices
922160 Fire Protection
922190 Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities 923 Administration of Human Resource Programs
923110 Administration of Education Programs
923120 Administration of Public Health Programs
923130 Administration of Human Resource Programs (except Education, Public Health, and Veterans' Affairs Programs) 923140 Administration of Veterans' Affairs
924 Administration of Environmental Quality Programs
924110 Administration of Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste Management Programs 924120 Administration of Conservation Programs
925 Administration of Housing Programs, Urban Planning, and Community Development 925110 Administration of Housing Programs
925120 Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Rural Development 926 Administration of Economic Programs
926110 Administration of General Economic Programs
926120 Regulation and Administration of Transportation Programs 926130 Regulation and Administration of Communications, Electric, Gas, and Other Utilities 926140 Regulation of Agricultural Marketing and Commodities 926150 Regulation, Licensing, and Inspection of Miscellaneous Commercial Sectors 927 Space Research and Technology
927110 Space Research and Technology
928 National Security and International Affairs
928110 National Security
928120 International Affairs
Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS
California Employment Development Department (EDD)
US Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), 2022 437
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 C-1
Appendix C - Western Riverside County Traffic Growth 2018 – 2045 Existing (2018) and future (2045) traffic data were derived from RivCoM. The model area of coverage, level of roadway network and TAZ detail, and application on other regional transportation study efforts represented RivCoM as the appropriate tool for evaluating traffic growth as part of the Nexus Study.
The forecasts of existing and future congestion levels were derived from the Year 2018 Existing and Year 2045 No-Build scenarios, respectively. The 2018 Existing and 2045 NoBuild scenarios were developed using RivCoM to model 2018 and 2045 SED, respectively, as derived from the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS adopted SED forecasts, on the transportation network as it existed in 2021. The 2018 existing transportation network represents the most recent baseline network developed for RivCoM, and only reflects the inclusion of those projects that were funded, committed and under construction at that time, and therefore imminently to be part of the baseline transportation system in 2018. For the purposes of the TUMF network analysis, additional improvements on the TUMF arterial highway network that were either completed or under construction in the period between 2018 and December 2021 were added to the network to create a 2021 existing network. The 2021 existing network was subsequently modeled in RivCoM using both 2018 and 2045 SED to provide the 2018 Baseline and 2045 No-Build scenarios as the basis for comparison and analysis. The 2045 No-Build scenario did not include transportation improvements that are planned as part of the recently adopted SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS on the basis they are uncommitted (meaning that their implementation is dependent on securing future funding and approval). Inclusion of the uncommitted improvements masks the congestion effects of increasing travel. Inclusion of these improvements and the resultant masking is not appropriate for this analysis aimed at identifying the effects of increasing travel if improvements were not built.
The WRCOG TUMF study area was extracted from RivCoM for the purpose of calculating the following measures for Western Riverside County only. Traffic growth impacts for each of the two scenarios were calculated using the TransCAD platform. Total daily vehicle miles of travel (VMT),
Total daily VMT on facilities experiencing LOS E or worse. Total daily vehicle hours of travel (VHT), and
Total combined daily vehicle hours of delay (VHD)
The following formulas were used to calculate the respective values. VMT = Link Distance * Total Daily Volume
VHT = Average Loaded (Congested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume VHD = VHT – (Free-flow (Uncongested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume) VMT LOS E or F = VMT (on links where Daily V/C exceeded 0.90)13 13 LOS Thresholds for LOS E are based on the 2010 Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2010) LOS Maximum V/C Criteria for Multilane Highways with 45 mph Free Flow Speed (Exhibit 14-5, Chapter 14, Page 14-5). 438
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 C-2
RivCoM breaks down its roadway network into functional categories called assignment groups. The measures were calculated selectively for all facilities, freeways only, arterials only, and TUMF arterials only by including and excluding different assignment groups and facilities. For the calculation of measures on “all facilities”, only the centroid connectors were excluded. Arterial values excluded all mixed-flow to carpool lane connector ramps, freeways, carpool lanes, centroid connectors, and freeway-tofreeway connector ramps, respectively. Freeways were defined as including mixedflow to carpool lane connector ramps, freeways, carpool lanes, and freeway-tofreeway connector ramps, respectively.
The 2021 Existing Network by Facility Type is included in this Appendix as Exhibit C-1. The 2021 existing network was used as the basis for the 2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build scenarios by modeling 2018 and 2045 SED, respectively, on the 2021 existing network using RivCoM to determine the comparative effects of population, household an employment growth in the region. The results of the analysis of existing and future congestion levels are presented for peak periods in Exhibit C-2 and for daily in Exhibit C3 in this Appendix and extracted for the combined peak periods in Table 3.1 of the study report.
439
440
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 C-4
EXHIBIT C-2
Western Riverside County
Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 - 2045) – Peak Periods Measures of Performance
AM Peak PM Peak
2018 2045 % Change % Annual 2018 2045 % Change % Annual VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 10,324,900 13,225,039 28% 0.9% 12,959,824 16,672,215 29% 0.9% VMT - FREEWAYS 5,877,972 6,720,682 14% 0.5% 7,636,550 8,769,602 15% 0.5% VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 4,446,928 6,504,357 46% 1.4% 5,323,274 7,902,613 48% 1.5% TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 2,793,846 3,826,810 37% 1.2% 3,423,139 4,770,390 39% 1.2% VHT - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 251,133 435,243 73% 2.1% 290,218 480,196 65% 1.9% VHT - FREEWAYS 120,257 186,102 55% 1.6% 143,535 213,027 48% 1.5% VHT - ALL ARTERIALS 130,875 249,142 90% 2.4% 146,683 267,169 82% 2.2% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHT 81,578 154,106 89% 2.4% 92,877 166,763 80% 2.2% VHD - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 57,989 177,814 207% 4.2% 50,911 160,242 215% 4.3% VHD - FREEWAYS 34,221 86,616 153% 3.5% 31,935 84,033 163% 3.6% VHD - ALL ARTERIALS 23,768 91,198 284% 5.1% 18,977 76,209 302% 5.3% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHD 18,024 66,789 271% 5.0% 15,225 58,074 281% 5.1% VMT LOS E & F - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 2,960,551 6,364,419 115% 2.9% 2,644,519 7,005,063 165% 3.7% VMT LOS E & F - FREEWAYS 2,435,804 4,276,258 76% 2.1% 2,289,667 5,040,633 120% 3.0% VMT LOS E & F - ALL ARTERIALS 524,747 2,088,161 298% 5.2% 354,852 1,964,430 454% 6.5% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E & F 448,168 1,585,571 254% 4.8% 317,614 1,598,561 403% 6.2% % of TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E & F 16% 41% 9% 34%
* Based on RivCoM 2018 network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network completed.
NOTES:
Volume is adjusted by PCE factor
VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT = vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined time that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free-flow (ideal) travel time)
LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios).
LOS E or Worse was determined by V/C ratio that exceeds 0.9 thresholds as indicated in the Riverside County General Plan. 441
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 C-5
EXHIBIT C-3
Western Riverside County
Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 - 2045) – Daily Measures of Performance
Peak Periods (Total) Daily
2018 2045 % Change % Annual 2018 2045 % Change % Annual VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 23,284,724 29,897,254 28% 0.9% 41,378,907 53,832,389 30% 1.0% VMT - FREEWAYS 13,514,522 15,490,284 15% 0.5% 24,642,357 29,200,582 18% 0.6% VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 9,770,202 14,406,970 47% 1.4% 16,736,551 24,631,807 47% 1.4% TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 6,216,985 8,597,200 38% 1.2% 10,794,415 15,170,125 41% 1.3% VHT - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 541,350 915,439 69% 2.0% 893,813 1,433,458 60% 1.8% VHT - FREEWAYS 263,792 399,128 51% 1.5% 440,073 637,990 45% 1.4% VHT - ALL ARTERIALS 277,558 516,311 86% 2.3% 453,740 795,469 75% 2.1% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHT 174,455 320,869 84% 2.3% 285,520 496,757 74% 2.1% VHD - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 108,900 338,056 210% 4.3% 131,965 410,511 211% 4.3% VHD - FREEWAYS 66,156 170,649 158% 3.6% 79,532 208,287 162% 3.6% VHD - ALL ARTERIALS 42,745 167,407 292% 5.2% 52,434 202,223 286% 5.1% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHD 33,249 124,863 276% 5.0% 41,025 152,200 271% 5.0% VMT LOS E - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 5,605,070 13,369,483 139% 3.3% 6,153,146 16,090,205 161% 3.6% VMT LOS E - FREEWAYS 4,725,471 9,316,891 97% 2.5% 5,141,215 11,306,348 120% 3.0% VMT LOS E & F - ALL ARTERIALS 879,599 4,052,592 361% 5.8% 1,011,931 4,783,858 373% 5.9% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 765,782 3,184,133 316% 5.4% 878,465 3,819,635 335% 5.6% % of TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 12% 37% 8% 25%
* Based on RivCoM 2018 network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network completed.
NOTES:
Volume is adjusted by PCE factor
VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT = vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined time that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios).
LOS E or Worse was determined by V/C ratio that exceeds 0.9 thresholds as indicated in the Riverside County General Plan. 442
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 D-1
Appendix D - Western Riverside County Bus Transit System Ridership 2023 – 2045 Actual average weekday daily ridership for Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) transit bus services was tabulated for 2023. Forecast average weekday daily ridership for RTA bus transit services was retrieved from the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS Model for horizon year 2045.
The bus transit ridership for 2023 and 2045 was tabulated to represent existing and future regional bus transit trips consistent with the analysis of highway trips described in Section
3.1 and Appendix C. Table D-1 summarizes the weekday bus transit ridership in Western Riverside County.
TABLE D-1 - Regional Bus Transit Weekday System Ridership Year Western Riverside
Weekday Projected System Ridership
2023* 16,575
2045** 57,282
Notes: * - 2023 actual average weekday daily ridership provided by RTA staff December 1, 2023
** - 2045 forecast average weekday daily ridership obtained from SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS Model as provided by Fehr and
Peers, November 28, 2023
443
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 E-1
Appendix E - Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials Performance Measures
An integral element of the Nexus Study is the designation of the Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials (also referred to as the “TUMF Network”). This network of regionally significant highways represents those arterial and collector highway and roadway facilities that primarily support inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and supplement the regional freeway system, and represents the extents of the network of highways and roadways that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements. The Regional System of Highways and Arterials does NOT include the freeways of Western Riverside County which primarily serve inter-regional trips.
The designation of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials in the original TUMF Nexus Study adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in October 2002 was initiated with the identification of highways and roadways that met certain specified guidelines as defined by the WRCOG Public Works Committee. The guidelines are defined in Section 4.1 of the Nexus Report, and include:
1. Arterial highway facilities proposed to have a minimum of four lanes at future buildout (not including freeways).
2. Facilities that serve multiple jurisdictions and/or provide connectivity between communities both within and adjoining Western Riverside County.
3. Facilities with forecast traffic volumes in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day in the future horizon year.
4. Facilities with forecast volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 (LOS E) or greater in the future horizon year.
5. Facilities that accommodate regional fixed route transit services.
6. Facilities that provide direct access to major commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational or tourist activity centers, and multi-modal transportation facilities (such as airports, railway terminals and transit centers).
The original candidate facilities were identified by overlaying various transportation system and land use plots depicting parameters consistent with those defined by the specified guidelines. These plots included existing and proposed numbers of lanes, network volumes and volume to capacity ratio (LOS) derived from SCAG CTP Model networks developed by Transcore to support the ongoing Western Riverside County CETAP study, and existing land use information provided by SCAG. These plots were included in the Appendices that accompanied the original 2002 TUMF Nexus Study.
Fixed route transit service information was provided by the Riverside County Regional Transportation Authority (RTA).
These various data inputs were overlaid and reviewed leading the definition of a segmented skeletal network of highways and roadways for further consideration. The skeletal network was further enhanced to reflect regional connectivity and access to activity center considerations. An initial draft Regional System of Highways and Arterials was developed and subsequently distributed to the County of Riverside and each City in Western Riverside County for review in the context of their respective City General 444
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 E-2
Plan Circulation Elements, primarily to confirm existing and future number of lanes and appropriateness of the facilities identified. The initial draft network was subsequently revised to consolidate appropriate General Plan Circulation Elements, including the identification of proposed new facilities as alternatives to existing facilities. It should be pointed out that the Regional System of Highways and Arterials does not represent a simple compilation of regional General Plan Circulation Elements, but rather incorporates the elements of regional General Plan Circulation Elements that are necessary for mitigating the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development within the horizon year of the TUMF program.
The consolidated list of proposed network improvements (along with associated initial cost estimates) was subsequently distributed to each of the WRCOG jurisdictions, individual landowners, and other stakeholders including representatives of the development community through the Building Industry Association (BIA) for review. The review of the consolidated list of improvements (and associated costs) prompted a series of five peer review workshop meetings to specifically review each segment of roadway identified and the associated improvements to mitigate the traffic impacts of new development. One peer review workshop meeting was held for each of the five zones in the WRCOG region with meetings held at the Riverside County Assessor’s Office between June 27, 2002 and July 18, 2002. The peer review workshop meetings involved representatives from WRCOG, the respective zone jurisdictions and the BIA.
The peer review workshops culminated in the development (by consensus of the groups) of a revised list of proposed network improvements (and associated costs) more accurately reflecting the improvements necessary to mitigate the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development.
Following the peer review, the initial Regional System of Highways and Arterials was reviewed and endorsed by the TUMF Technical Advisory Committee, the TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee and utilized as the basis for developing the original TUMF Nexus Study in October 2002.
For the 2024 update of the TUMF Nexus Study, the Regional System of Highways and Arterials was reassessed. Consistent with the changing rate of new development forecast for Western Riverside County as part of the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS, including reductions in the overall level of non-residential employment, the review of the TUMF Network as part of the 2024 Nexus Update ensured facilities generally still met the previously described performance guidelines, and/or that the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network were roughly proportional to the impacts needing to be mitigated. This review process involved the comparison of model outputs for the 2018 Baseline and 2045 No-Build Scenarios on the 2021 Existing arterial network to identify those facilities no longer expected to be impacted substantially by the cumulative effects of traffic growth from new development. This review resulted in various changes in the scope and magnitude of specific improvements previously identified on the TUMF Network. The updated model output plots utilized as the basis for the latest network review are included in this appendix as Exhibit E-1 through E-8.
The Regional System of Highways and Arterials is included as Figure 4.1 in the Nexus Study report.
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-1
Appendix F - TUMF Network Cost Assumptions
The TUMF program was established as a uniform impact fee program that is applied to mitigate the cumulative transportation impacts of new development on the regional arterial highway system. In establishing the technical basis for TUMF, like any impact fee program, there are two fundamental requirements that must be addressed: establishing a rational nexus for the program; and determining that any fee is roughly proportional to the impact of a proposed development. These requirements are rooted in two wellknown legal cases: Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) 483 U.S. 825; and Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994) 512 U.S. 374.
To establish project costs that meet the rough proportionality test for an expansive network of facilities, WRCOG utilizes a conceptual planning level project and cost estimation approach based on typical unit costs for a variety of project types and conditions. These unit costs are intended to reflect a range of values that are typical for the types of projects that are necessary to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development. These unit costs are developed for each typical project type based on actual observed values for the various materials, labor and right-of-way that would typically be required to complete a project. Although the actual materials, labor, right-of-way and associate costs to complete each specific project can be expected to vary based on the particular conditions of each site and project requirements at the time the project is actually implemented, the approach of using typical unit costs as the basis for the TUMF program represents a manageable and appropriate level of detail to establish conceptual project cost estimates that meet the requirement for rough proportionality.
The application of typical unit costs and the associated identification of a maximum TUMF share for each eligible project also provides a framework that protects the program from projects with actual costs that vary significantly from the typical cost estimates used as the program basis. The TUMF program administrative polices limit reimbursement of costs associated with eligible TUMF projects to the lesser of maximum TUMF share identified in the Nexus Study or the actual eligible project costs. In this manner, projects that are completed by participating jurisdictions or developers for less than the maximum TUMF share are reimbursed (or credited) for the actual amount expended, while projects that exceed the maximum TUMF share are only reimbursed (or credited) by the program up to the maximum TUMF share value ensuring that the program is mitigating impacts at a level that is roughly proportional to that typically expected, and is not subject to extreme project costs to address unusual or exceptional local conditions or requirements.
For the purposes of TUMF, unit cost values were developed for various eligible improvement types that all provide additional capacity needed to mitigate the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development to facilities on the TUMF Network. Eligible improvement types include:
1. Construction of additional Network roadway lanes;
2. Construction of new Network roadway segments;
3. Expansion of existing Network bridge structures;
454
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-2
4. Construction of new Network bridge structures;
5. Expansion of existing Network interchanges with freeways;
6. Construction of new Network interchanges with freeways;
7. Grade separation of existing Network at-grade railroad crossings;
8. Expansion of existing Network-to-Network intersections;
9. Infrastructure for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) of Network roadway segments.
Because roadway improvement standards vary considerably between respective jurisdictions, a typical roadway standard for the TUMF Network was recommended by the Public Works Committee (PWC) during the development of the original TUMF Nexus Study adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in October 2002 as the basis for developing the TUMF Network cost estimate. The typical roadway standard assumes the following design characteristics that are consistent with the minimum requirements of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual:
Asphalt concrete pavement and appropriate base material to accomplish up to 12 feet per travel lane plus up to four feet for ancillary treatments (e.g. shoulders, or Class II Bike Lane);
Concrete curb and gutter and associated drainage (e.g. paved roadway shoulders and/or open swale);
Storm drains located within curb to curb, and associated transverse portions perpendicular to the roadway and adjoining portions longitudinal to the roadway;
14 foot paved and painted median (or dual center left turn lane); Traffic signals at intersections with state highways and other major arterials that are also on the TUMF Network;
Pavement striping and roadway signing, as required;
6 foot wide concrete sidewalks and associated curb cuts for ADA access at street crossings.
A cross-section of the Typical Roadway Standard is illustrated in Figure F-1.
Figure F-1. Typical Roadway Standard Cross-Section
It is recognized that the typical roadway standard is not appropriate in all potential TUMF Network locations. Where appropriate, typical design standards could be substituted with design elements such as open swale drainage and paved roadway shoulders with no curbing that would typically cost less than the implementation of the 455
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-3
Typical Roadway Standard. Roadway improvements in excess of the Typical Roadway Standard include, but are not limited to:
Portland concrete cement pavement or other aesthetic pavement types (except at intersections);
Major rehabilitation or overlay of existing pavement in adjacent roadway lanes; Raised barrier medians;
Parking lanes;
Roadway tapers outside the extents of the approved project Sanitary sewage infrastructure;
Water systems
Dry utilities
Undergrounding infrastructure
Relocation of non-prior rights utilities
Storm Drain Systems in excess of draining the roadway Landscaping;
Streetlighting;
Class I Bike Lanes (e.g. separate bicycle paths)
Environmental Permitting
Detection/Retention Basins outside of Street Right-of-Way Agency Staff time in excess of 15% of Engineering
Agency Staff Time in excess of 15% of Construction
These improvements in excess of Typical Roadway Standards are not eligible for TUMF funding and will be the responsibility of the local funding agency.
Unit cost estimates for the implementation of TUMF Network improvements were developed based on the unit cost to accomplish the Typical Roadway Standard. Initial unit cost estimates were developed as part of the original TUMF Nexus in 2002. These original values were adjusted as part of the 2005 Nexus Update to reflect changes in cost based on relevant indices. The unit cost estimates were fully revised as part of the 2009 Nexus Update to capture the full effects of the economic recession on the costs of labor, materials and property acquisition. For the previous 2016 Nexus Update, the unit costs were fully revised. The 2016 Nexus Update reflected the effects of the ongoing recovery from the economic recession that has saw the costs of materials, labor and land acquisition in California rebound from relative historical lows previously observed at the time of the 2009 Nexus Update.
For the 2024 Nexus Update, the unit costs were again fully revised to generate entirely new unit cost values based on the most recent available construction cost, labor cost and land acquisition cost values for comparable projects within and adjacent to Riverside County. The recalculation of the TUMF unit cost components was completed as part of the 2024 Nexus Update to account for the unprecedented materials cost increases, labor shortages and high rate of inflation generally attributable to a combination of the disruption to global supply chains caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and additional tariffs on a range of products imported into the United States.
In December 2023, the unit cost values were validated utilizing Caltrans Contract Cost Data and the resultant unit costs are noted in Exhibit F-2 and summarized in Table 4.1. 456
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-4
For simplicity, the roadway unit cost was assumed to provide for the full depth construction (including grading) of 16 feet of new pavement per lane (to accommodate a minimum 12 foot lane and ancillary treatments). The unit cost was assumed to include the following construction elements:
Sawcut of existing pavement
Removal of existing pavement
Roadway excavation and embankment
10” thick class 2 aggregate base
4.0” thick asphaltic concrete surface
Concrete curb, gutter and drainage improvements
Roadway unit costs were determined for each unique cost item. The source used to determine the roadway unit costs as part of the 2024 Nexus Update are listed below. Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021-2022
Projects within Riverside County and Adjacent Counties Typical experience for local cities, Western Riverside County Michael Baker international (MBI), Structural Group
MBI, ITS Group
Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2022-2023
All data described above was initially obtained in October 2022 and refreshed and validated in December 2023.
Right-of-way acquisition costs were determined based on the cost to acquire 18 feet of right-of-way per lane of new roadway improvement. For urban and suburban land use areas, the amount of right-of-way to be acquired as part of the TUMF program was reduced by 75% to account for property already owned by a participating jurisdiction through prior acquisition or dedication. Right-of-way unit costs were assumed to include the following elements:
Land acquisition
Documentation and legal fees
Relocation and demolition costs and condemnation compensation requirements
Utility relocation
Direct environmental mitigation
Right-of-way unit costs were determined based on a review of actual property sales within the WRCOG region during the prior 18 month period. The task of determining the valuation per square foot of right-of-way for different land uses was completed by Epic Land Solutions, Inc.
A typical existing condition of each component type was used as a guideline for quantity assessments.
Terrain 1: Level terrain with 0% profile grade. Construction cost is per lane mile. Terrain 2: Rolling Terrain with 1.5 % profile grade. Construction cost is per lane mile. 457
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-5
Terrain 3: Mountainous Terrain with 3% profile grade. Construction cost is per lane mile.
Land Use 1, 2 and 3; ROW cost factor per lane mile, for Urban, Suburban and Rural areas respectively.
Interchange 1: Complex New Interchange/Interchange Modification. Existing complex interchange at I-15 & SR-91 was used as a guideline for quantity assessments.
Interchange 2: New Interchange/Interchange Modification is assumed to be a New Cloverleaf Interchange consisting of 4 (3 lane) direct ramps and 4 (2 lane) loop ramps.
Interchange 3: Major Interchange Improvement is assumed to correspond to adding 1 lane to each ramp on a cloverleaf Interchange. Bridge: New Bridge cost. Construction cost is per linear foot per lane. RRXing 1: New Rail Grade Crossing. Construction cost is per lane per crossing. RRXing 2: Widening Existing Grade Crossing. Construction cost is per lane per crossing.
ITS 1: Infrastructure for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) on TUMF Network roadway segments per route mile
The cost estimating methodology here is intended to provide a Present Value Cost Estimate for the WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee based on year 2023 unit prices. A more detailed description of cost categories is detailed below.
I. Roadway Items
Roadway Excavation:
A unit cost of $38.55 per cubic yard (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data) is applied to account for the excavation quantities. Assuming proposed profiles to be at 0% grade, the excavation values are estimated based on the component type as follows:
Terrain 2 and 3: excavation for one lane (16 feet wide and 4 feet deep) is assumed.
Imported Borrow:
The unit cost used for imported borrow is $20.47 per cubic yard (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data). Locations where imported borrow is required are determined from aerial photos.
Terrain 2 and 3: Excavation for one lane (16 feet wide and 4 feet deep) is assumed.
Interchanges 1, 2, and 3: Vertical clearance of 24.5 feet is used to calculate the maximum amount of imported borrow at areas adjacent to an undercrossing. RRXing 1 and 2: Vertical clearance of 31.5 feet and Bridge approach of 1,000 feet is used to determine the quantity of Imported borrow for this component type.
Clearing and Grubbing:
The unit cost for clearing and grubbing is $12,100.00 per acre (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data).
458
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-6
Terrain 1, 2 and 3: The area of clearing and grubbing is assumed to extend 16 feet for the addition of each new lane.
Interchange 1 and 2: The area of clearing and grubbing is assumed to extend 40 feet beyond the proposed outside edge of shoulder. The clearing and grubbing width varies depending on the number of added lanes.
Interchange 3 and Intersection: The area of clearing and grubbing is assumed to extend 16 feet for the addition of each lane.
Development of Water Supply:
A lump sum value is used to account for developing water supply. The lump sum cost is estimated as 10% of the combined cost for roadway excavation and imported borrow (Source: RCTC).
PCC Pavement:
The unit cost for PCC pavement is $354.83 per cubic yard (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data).
Terrain 1, 2 and 3: It is assumed that PCC is used at mainline shoulders. The PCC shoulder pavement is assumed to be 4 inch thick and 4 feet wide.
Asphalt Concrete Type A:
It is assumed that Asphalt Concrete is used at mainline and where ramp and bridge widening is required. A unit cost of $240.62 per cubic yard (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data) is used to account for asphalt concrete quantities. The asphalt concrete overlay is assumed to be 4 inch thick.
Aggregate Base:
The unit cost for aggregate base is $73.54 per cubic yard (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data). Aggregate base quantities are estimated by means of calculating the areas of additional lanes. The aggregate base layer is considered to be 10 inch thick. It is assumed that aggregate base is used over the entire widening width below the PCC pavement and asphalt concrete layers.
Curb and Gutter:
The unit cost used for curb and gutter is $65.74 per linear foot (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data). It is assumed that type A2-6 curb and gutter is used on the entire length of travel way where required.
Project Drainage:
A lump sum value is used to account for project drainage cost of roadway construction. The project drainage cost is estimated as 15% (Source: RCTC project 2007) of combined cost for earthwork and pavement structural section.
Traffic Signals:
The costs for traffic signals are calculated per ramp termini intersection. The unit cost used for traffic signals is $531,086 (Source: Caltrans Contract Cost Data and typical experience, Western Riverside County) per intersection. Traffic signals costs are considered only at the Intersection (Network-to-Network) upgrade. 459
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-7
Striping:
The unit cost used for Striping is $2.58 per linear foot (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data). It is assumed that two lines of thermo-plastic striping are required for every lane addition.
Marking:
The unit cost used for marking is $7.31 per square foot (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data).
Terrains 1, 2 and 3: It is assumed that there are 8 arrow markers, 2 Stop sign markers and 4 Bike sign markers.
Interchanges 1, 2, and 3: It is assumed that there are 2 Type I arrows on each on ramp, and 2 Type IV (L) arrows on each off ramp.
Intersection (network to network) upgrade: It is assumed that there are 2 right turn arrows and two right lane drop arrows for each lane modification for the interchange upgrade
Pavement Marker:
Type G one-way clear retroreflective pavement markers (Spacing @ 48 feet) were assumed for Terrain 1, 2 and 3 component types only. The unit cost used for pavement marker is $5.06 each (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data).
Signage:
The signage unit cost accounts for the costs of one-post signs and two-post signs.
The unit cost used for one-post signs and two-post signs are $367.69 and $1,211.58 each, respectively (Source: Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data). The post sign quantities assumed for each component type is summarized below.
Sign Type Terrain 1, 2 & 3 Interchange Intersection 1 2 3 One Post Signs 33 14 36 20 3
Two Post Signs - 4 4 4 0
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS):
The unit cost used for ITS is $686,338.50 per route mile (Source: Local Projects and MBI ITS Group). It is assumed that there is no existing ITS infrastructure (with the exception of isolated ITS devices) within the TUMF Network roadway segments and essential ITS infrastructure is furnished and installed. This essential ITS infrastructure includes ethernet switch, fiber jumper, fiber distribution unit, splice enclosure, pull box, new cabinet with foundation, 144 strand single-mode fiber optic (SMFO) cable and 3” conduits.
Minor Items, Roadway Mobilization, and Roadway Additions:
A lump sum value is used to account for minor items, roadway mobilization and roadway additions as described below. These lump sum values are recommended based on provisions in Project Development Procedure Manual (PDPM) and the 460
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-8
date from individual sources presented in the introduction of this report (Source:
RCTC)
Items Unit Cost
Minor Items 10% of earthwork, pavement structure, drainage, specialty items and traffic items.
Roadway
Mobilization
10% of earthwork, pavement structure, drainage,
specialty items, traffic items and minor items.
Roadway Additions 10% of earthwork, pavement structure, drainage, specialty items, traffic items and minor items.
II. Structure Items
New Bridge:
New interchanges account for construction of a new bridge. The unit cost for a new travel way bridge construction and RRXings1 and 2 (New and Widening of Rail Grade Crossings) is $400.00 per square foot (Source: MBI Structural group). The width of a new bridge is assumed to be 82 feet (4 lanes x 12ft + 10ft shoulder x 2 + 14ft median).
Bridge Widening:
Bridge widenings account for the widening of existing bridges. The unit cost is $500.00 per square foot (Source: MBI Structural group). The width of a bridge widening is assumed to be: 2 lanes x 12ft + 10ft shoulder. The width of an arterial crossing over rail road is assumed to be 16 feet (1 lane x 12ft + 4ft shoulder).
Structural Mobilization:
The cost for structural mobilization is estimated as 10% of total structure item cost (Source: Typical experience).
III. Right of Way Items
The right of way unit cost varies with land use designation. The unit cost for ROW was developed by Epic Land Solutions, Inc. based on a review of actual property sales within the WRCOG region during the prior 18 month period. The area of right of way acquisition for the travel way is calculated per additional lane mile, assuming the width of the right-of-way required to be 18 feet per lane (to accommodate a 12 foot roadway lane, shoulders and ancillary amenities, like storm water drainage).
The right of way acquisition for RRXings1 and 2 is calculated based on ROW acquisition for bridge approaches.
Property costs per square foot are derived by reviewing a large sample of recently sold land and improved properties within the greater Riverside area. The properties reviewed are identified specifically from completed semi large to very large infrastructure projects and upcoming projects with preferred alternatives and/or approved environmental reports. For the purposes of the 2022 Nexus Study update, an overall sample of approximately 2,700 properties was used. 461
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-9
The properties were designated as: urban areas (generally considered downtown, or very close to downtown in the larger cities - predominantly Corona and Riverside, with a few parcels in Temecula and Moreno Valley); suburban (primarily considered the greater areas of Hemet, Perris, San Jacinto, Moreno Valley, Lake Elsinore, outer portions of Riverside / Corona, Temecula, Murrieta, Calimesa, Eastvale, Norco, and other cities of relative size and location as those previously mentioned); and rural (considered the exurban areas between Corona / Lake Elsinore and Perris along the SR-74/79, Lake Matthews, between Wildomar and Murrieta, Temecula and Perris and other similar areas) to correspond with the land use classifications used for cost estimating purposes in the TUMF program. The properties were also determined to be partial or full property takes to determine the relative percentage of each in order to appropriately weight the average cost per square foot of each type of property. Specialty cost percentages as a share of total acquisition costs (i.e. relocation and demolition) were also derived from actual costs based on a sample of the Inland Empire projects that Epic Land Solutions, Inc. was directly involved in and therefore able to obtain reliable data.
The result is an estimated average cost per square foot for ROW acquisition by land use classification which is then multiplied by the number of square feet per lane mile to obtain the required ROW to accomplish the TUMF typical cross section. The ROW requirement is then reduced by a factor of 75% for urban and suburban areas based on the collective recommendation of the PWC during the development of the initial program cost estimation methodology to reflect the assumption that a majority of the proposed TUMF facilities in these areas already exist and/or have a substantial portion of the necessary right-of-way already owned by or dedicated to the responsible jurisdiction. As a result, the TUMF program only includes the estimated cost for 25% of the right-of-way that could potentially be required to accomplish the TUMF cross sections for the conceptual improvement projects identified as part of the program in urban and suburban areas.
Maintenance of Traffic:
A lump sum value is used to account for maintenance of traffic cost of roadway construction. The project maintenance of traffic cost is estimated as 5% (Source:
RCTC) of the total project cost.
The consolidated unit cost values include typical per mile or lump sum costs for each of the eligible improvement element. These elements include new roadways, bridge improvements, interchange improvements and railroad grade separation construction costs, and right of way acquisition.
The consolidated unit costs as developed for the 2024 Nexus Update are summarized in Exhibit F-1. Exhibit F-2 provides a summary of the unit costs for the various roadway and structures construction elements defined. Exhibit F-3 provides a summary of the unit costs for the various right of way categories. Exhibit F-4 provides worksheets showing the detailed unit cost calculation for each TUMF unit cost category related to roadway and structures construction, and right of way acquisition. 462
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-10
The unit cost assumptions were subsequently applied to the TUMF Network improvements identified to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development. The resultant cost value was tabulated for each unique segment of the network, by improvement type. A separate cost estimate was generated for regional transit improvements based on information provided by RTA and added to the TUMF Network Cost Estimate table.
Supplemental categories have been added to the cost assumptions to better delineate the costs associated with planning and engineering a project, accommodating contingencies, mitigating the cumulate multi-species habitat impacts of TUMF arterial highway improvements in accordance with the adopted Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), and administering the TUMF program.
Soft Costs
The TUMF program provides for planning, engineering and contingency costs (collectively referred to as soft costs) for eligible projects to be reimbursed through the program. As indicated in Table 4.1, planning costs are considered to include those costs associated with planning, preliminary engineering and environmental assessment of the proposed project, with the eligible amount being 10% of the estimated TUMF eligible construction cost only. Engineering costs are considered to include project study report, design, permitting and construction oversight costs based on 25% of the estimated eligible construction cost only. Contingency is provided based on 10% of the total estimated eligible facility cost.
Soft costs include all reasonable required planning, environmental clearance and mitigation, right-of-way documentation, engineering design, plan, specification and estimate preparation and construction management and oversight costs necessary to accomplish the project. The estimated soft cost factors for planning, engineering and contingency were initially established in 2002 by the WRCOG Public Works Committee, which was responsible for the development of the initial TUMF Nexus Study. The percentage multipliers were established by consensus of the PWC based on the collective experience of members in delivering similar public highway projects. A review of various data sources indicates the cost factors are generally consistent with industry guidance for conceptual cost estimation purposes. The City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering California Multi-Agency CIP Benchmarking Study (December 2016) indicates that combined design and construction management costs for roadway projects represent, on average, 50% of the total cost of construction14. Similarly, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Practical Guide for Estimating (December 2011) also cites the following average multipliers for a range of planning and engineering activities based on national research as a basis for conceptual cost estimation:
14 City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering California MultiAgency CIP Benchmarking Study (December 2016), Table 3-6 Average Project Delivery Costs by Project Type (% of TCC) (Full Range of TCC).
463
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-11
Preliminary Engineering Costs (including survey/data collection, design, environmental, utilities and contract administration) – 10% to 25% of total construction cost15
Construction Engineering – 10% to 26% of total construction costs16 Furthermore, the contingency rate utilized in the TUMF program is significantly less than the industry norm for conceptual cost estimation purposes. Specifically, Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (July 2021) advocates for contingency rates of 30% to 50% of total costs to be used at the project feasibility (conceptual planning) phase of project development17, with contingency rates reduced to 10% for preliminary engineers cost estimates completed during project design18.
MSHCP
Section 8.5.1 of the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2003, states that “each new transportation project will contribute to Plan implementation. Historically, these projects have budgeted 3% - 5% of their construction costs to mitigate environmental impacts.” This provision is reiterated in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update Final Report (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., October 2020) section “6. RCA Non-Fee Revenues” which states “The MSHCP forecast an array of revenue sources, in addition to fee revenue, supporting the conservation program. These sources were anticipated to total about 44 percent of the revenue for the program, including:
• Transportation funding – includes the Measure A sales tax which is authorized through 2039 and other transportation funding sources such as the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) charged on new development.” Table 23 Annual Non-Fee Revenue Projection in this section indicates that an average of $950,000 in MSHCP revenue was derived annually from TUMF during the three years from FY16/17- 18/19 reflecting a TUMF contribution at 5% of construction costs consistent with the MSHCP as adopted in 2003. To clearly demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the MSHCP, the TUMF program will continue to incorporate a cost element to account for the required MSHCP contribution to mitigate the multi-species habitat impacts of constructing TUMF projects.
15 AASHTO Technical Committee on Cost Estimating (TCCE) AASHTO Practical Guide for Estimating (December 2011), Table 2.4. Preliminary Engineering Costs’ Average Percentage Ranges (% of Construction).
16 AASHTO Technical Committee on Cost Estimating (TCCE) AASHTO Practical Guide for Estimating (December 2011), Section 2.2.3.2.3 Construction Engineering, “highway improvement projects in an urban environment”.
17 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Design Project Development Procedures Manual (July 2021), Chapter 20 – Project Development Cost Estimates, Section 2 – Project Planning Cost Estimates, Article 2 Project Feasibility Cost Estimate, Contingencies. 18 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Division of Design Project Development Procedures Manual (July 2021), Chapter 20 – Project Development Cost Estimates, Section 3 – Project Design Cost Estimates, Article 4 Preliminary Engineer’s Cost Estimate, Contingencies. 464
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-12
An amount equal to 5% of the construction cost for new TUMF network lanes, bridges and railroad grade separations will continue to be specifically included as part of TUMF program with revenues to be provided to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) for the acquisition of land identified in the MSHCP. The relevant sections of the MSHCP document and the 2020 MSHCP Nexus Report are included in this Appendix as Exhibits F-5 and F-6, respectively.
Similarly, an amount of 4% of the total TUMF eligible network cost is included as part of the TUMF program with revenues to be utilized by WRCOG to cover the direct costs to administer the program. The costs incurred by WRCOG include direct salary, fringe benefit and overhead costs for WRCOG staff assigned to administer the program and support participating jurisdictions, and costs for consultant, legal and auditing services to support the implementation of the TUMF program.
Table 4.1 summarizes the unit cost estimate assumptions used to develop the TUMF network cost estimate, including a comparison of the original TUMF unit cost assumptions and the current revised unit cost assumptions developed as part of the 2009 Update of the TUMF Nexus Study. Cost estimates are provided in year of original values as indicated.
465
EXHIBIT F-1
2024 TUMF Nexus Update - Arterial Highway Cost Assumptions:
Component
Type
Cost Assumptions
as published
October 18, 2002
Cost Assumption per
2009 Nexus Update
October 5, 2009
Cost Assumptions per
2016 Update
Cost Assumptions per
2024 Update Description
Terrain 1 $550,000.00 $628,000.00 $692,000.00 $1,132,000 Construction cost per lane mile - level terrain Terrain 2 $850,000.00 $761,000.00 $878,000.00 $1,740,000 Construction cost per lane mile - rolling terrain Terrain 3 $1,150,000.00 $895,000.00 $1,064,000.00 $2,350,000 Construction cost per lane mile - mountainous terrain Landuse 1 $900,000.00 $1,682,000.00 $2,509,000.00 $7,830,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - urban areas Landuse 2 $420,000.00 $803,000.00 $2,263,000.00 $5,440,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - suburban areas Landuse 3 $240,000.00 $237,000.00 $287,000.00 $490,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - rural areas Interchange 1 n/a $43,780,000.00 $50,032,000.00 $84,190,000 Complex new interchange/interchange modification cost Interchange 2 $20,000,000.00 $22,280,000.00 $25,558,000.00 $43,490,000 New interchange/interchange modification total cost Interchange 3 $10,000,000.00 $10,890,000.00 $12,343,000.00 $22,550,000 Major interchange improvement total cost Bridge 1 $2,000.00 $2,880.00 $3,180.00 $4,800 Bridge total cost per lane per linear foot RRXing 1 $4,500,000.00 $4,550,000.00 $6,376,000.00 $18,200,000 New Rail Grade Crossing per lane mile RRXing 2 $2,250,000.00 $2,120,000.00 $2,733,000.00 $6,900,000 Existing Rail Grade Crossing per lane mile ITS n/a n/a n/a $686,400 Infrastructure for ITS of Network roadway segments per route mile Planning 10% 10% 10% 10% Planning, preliminary engineering and environmental assessment costs based on construction cost only Engineering 25% 25% 25% 25% Project study report, design, permitting and construction oversight costs based on construction cost only Contingency 10% 10% 10% 10% Contingency costs, including TUMF program administration based on total segment cost Administration 3% 4% 4% TUMF program administration based on total TUMF eligible network cost MSHCP 5% 5% 5% TUMF component of MSHCP based on total TUMF eligible construction cost 466
I. Roadway Items Unit Notes
Section 1: Earthwork
Roadway Excavation
Travel way cubic yard $38.55 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 190101 Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 198010 Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 170105 Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost Same as RCTC Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
PCC cubic yard $354.83 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 401050 Asphalt Concrete Type A (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $240.62 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 390132 Aggregate Base (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $73.54 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 260203 Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2022/2023 - ITEM 731504 Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 Same as RCTC Section 4: Specialty Items
Retaining Walls square foot $90.00 Source: MBI structural group Ramp Realignment each
Water Quality and Erosion Control lump sum 3% of sections 1 to 3 Same as RCTC Environmental Mitigation lump sum 3% of sections 1 to 3 Same as RCTC Section 5: Traffic Items
Lighting each $7,500 Source: RCTC
Traffic Signals each $531,086 Typical for public agency projects in Western Riverside County and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2022/2023 Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 846007 Marking - Thermo plastic cross walks & pavement marking square foot $7.31 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 840516 Pavement Marker Retroreflective each $5.06 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2022/2023 - ITEM 810230 Signage - 1 Post each $367.69 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2021/2022 - ITEM 820840 Signage - 2 Post each $1,211.58 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and Caltrans Contract Cost Data 2022/2023 - ITEM 820850 Infrastructure for ITS of Network roadway segments route mile $686,383.00 Source: Ave unit costs from Local Projects and MBI ITS Team - Assumptions: 3 Traffic Signals per route mile Section 6: Minor Items lump sum 10% of sections 1 to 5 Same as RCTC Section 7: Roadway Mobilization lump sum 10% of sections 1 to 6 Same as RCTC Section 8:Roadway Additions lump sum 10% of sections 1 to 6 Same as RCTC II. STRUCTURE ITEMS
Major New Interchange - 2 Lane New Bridge square foot $400.00 Interchange/Interchange, Cloverleaf Interchange - Cost provided by MBI Structural Group New Interchange - 2 Lane New Bridge square foot $400.00 Interchange/Interchange, Diamond Interchange - Cost provided by MBI Structural Group Major Interchange Improvement - 2 Lane Bridge Widening square foot $500.00 Interchange/Interchange, Cloverleaf Interchange - Cost provided by MBI Structural Group Bridge square foot $400.00 Cost provided by MBI Structural Group Structure Mobilization lump sum 10% of structure cost Typical for public agency projects in Western Riverside County III. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS
Urban
Travel Way - Additional lane square foot $330 Provided by Epic Land Solutions, Inc.
Suburban
Travel Way - Additional lane square foot $229 Provided by Epic Land Solutions, Inc.
Rural
Travel Way - Additional lane square foot $5 Provided by Epic Land Solutions, Inc.
Utility Relocation lump sum 10% of ROW Includes mobilization for one occurrence per lane mile Total Items I + II + III Same as RCTC
Maintenance of Traffic lump sum 5% of total items Same as RCTC WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
EXHIBIT F-2
Unit Cost
2024 Nexus Update Master Unit Cost Summary
467
URBAN Avg. $ per SF % of Total Area Weighted Cost
Commercial
Part Take $22 1.4% $0.30
Full Take $597 7.9% $47.40
9.3%
Industrial
Part Take $29 0.5% $0.15
Full Take $267 6.0% $16.02
6.5%
Single Family Residential
Part Take $10 16.8% $1.68
Full Take $348 66.2% $230.24
83.0%
Multi Family Residential
Part Take $27 0.3% $0.07
Full Take $307 0.8% $2.52
1.1%
Average Unit Price per Square Foot: $298.38
Residential & Non-Res. Relocation (7.5%): $22.38
Demolition (3%) $8.95
Urban Unit Cost per Square Foot: $329.71
SUBURBAN Avg. $ per SF % of Total Area Weighted Share
Commercial
Part Take $17 5.1% $0.87
Full Take $425 14.6% $62.01
19.7%
Industrial
Part Take $20 0.0288 $0.58
Full Take $227 0.08645 $19.62
11.5%
Single Family Residential
Part Take $4 0.24 $0.96
Full Take $292 0.3866 $112.89
62.7%
Multi Family Residential
Part Take $14 0.0284 $0.40
Full Take $313 0.0321 $10.05
6.1%
Average Unit Price per Square Foot: $207.37
Residential & Non-Res. Relocation (7.5%): $15.55
Demolition (3%) $6.22
Suburban Unit Cost per Square Foot: $229.14
RURAL $ per SF
Range of Value of Rural Vacant land sold within last year: $0.07 - $31.48 Average price per square foot of rural land: $4.66
Miscellaneous improvements (10%): $0.46
Rural Unit Cost per Square Foot: $5.12
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
2024 Nexus Update Master Property Cost Summary
EXHIBIT F-3
468
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Roadway Excavation
Travel way cubic yard $38.55 0.00 $0
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 0.00 $0
Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 1.94 $23,467
Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost 1.00 $0 Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Sidewalk
PCC cubic yard $354.83 258.13 $91,593
Travel way
Asphalt Concrete Type A cubic yard $240.62 1,032.53 $248,448 Aggregate Base cubic yard $73.54 2,596.98 $190,982
Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 5,280.00 $347,107
Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $135,240 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 10,560.00 $27,245 Marking square foot $7.31 211.50 $1,546
Pavement Marker (Type G One-way Clear Retroreflective) each $5.06 110.00 $557 Signage - 1 Post (Mainline) each $367.69 33.00 $12,134
Total Items I $1,078,318
Maintenance of Traffic 5% of total items 1.00 $53,916
Project Cost / Lane mile $1,132,234
EXHIBIT F-4
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Terrain 1 - Level Terrain
Unit Cost
469
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Roadway Excavation
Travel way cubic yard $38.55 7,739.26 $298,348
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 7,739.26 $158,423
Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 1.94 $23,467
Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost 1.00 $45,677 Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Sidewalk
PCC cubic yard $354.83 258.13 $91,593
Travel way
Asphalt Concrete Type A cubic yard $240.62 1,032.53 $248,448 Aggregate Base cubic yard $73.54 2,596.98 $190,982
Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 5,280.00 $347,107
Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $210,607 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 10,560.00 $27,245 Marking square foot $7.31 211.50 $1,546
Pavement Marker (Type G One-way Clear Retroreflective) each $5.06 110.00 $557 Signage - 1 Post (Mainline) each $367.69 33.00 $12,134
Total Items I $1,656,133
Maintenance of Traffic 5% of total items 1.00 $82,807
Project Cost / Lane mile $1,738,940
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Terrain 2 - Rolling Terrain
Unit Cost
470
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Roadway Excavation
Travel way cubic yard $38.55 15,478.52 $596,697
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 15,478.52 $316,845
Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 1.94 $23,467
Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost 1.00 $91,354 Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Sidewalk
PCC cubic yard $354.83 258.13 $91,593
Travel way
Asphalt Concrete Type A cubic yard $240.62 1,032.53 $248,448 Aggregate Base cubic yard $73.54 2,596.98 $190,982
Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 5,280.00 $347,107
Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $285,974 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 10,560.00 $27,245 Marking square foot $7.31 211.50 $1,546
Pavement Marker (Type G One-way Clear Retroreflective) each $5.06 110.00 $557 Signage - 1 Post (Mainline) each $367.69 33.00 $12,134
Total Items I $2,233,949
Maintenance of Traffic 5% of total items 1.00 $111,697
Project Cost / Lane mile $2,345,646
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Terrain 3 - Mountainous Terrain
Unit Cost
471
Unit Unit Cost Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile
III. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS
Urban
Travel Way square foot $329.71 95,040.00 $31,335,419
Project Cost / Lane mile 25% $7,833,855
Unit Unit Cost Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile
III. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS
Suburban
Travel Way square foot $229.14 95,040.00 $21,777,847
Project Cost / Lane mile 25% $5,444,462
I. Roadway Items Unit Unit Cost Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile III. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS
Rural
Travel Way square foot $5.12 95,040.00 $486,605
Project Cost / Lane mile $486,605
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
Landuse 3 - ROW Rural areas
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Landuse 1 - ROW Urban areas
Landuse 2 - ROW Suburban Areas
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
472
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 700,000.00 $14,329,000
Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 51.93 $628,349
Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost 1.00 $1,432,900 Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Asphalt Concrete Type A (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $240.62 13,500.00 $3,248,370 Aggregate Base (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $73.54 34,000.00 $2,500,360 Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 31,000.00 $2,037,940 Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $3,626,538 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 84,250.00 $217,365 Marking square foot $7.31 368.00 $2,690
Signage - 1 Post each $367.69 14.00 $5,148
Signage - 2 Post each $1,211.58 4.00 $4,846
II. STRUCTURE ITEMS
Complex New Interchange - 2 Lane New Bridge square foot $400.00 140,400.00 $56,160,000 Total Items I + II + III $84,193,506
Total Project Cost / lane mile $84,193,506
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Interchange 1 - Complex New Interchange/Interchange Modification Unit Cost
473
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 400,000.00 $8,188,000
Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 25.12 $304,000
Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost 1.00 $818,800 Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Asphalt Concrete Type A (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $240.62 7,040.00 $1,693,965 Aggregate Base (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $73.54 17,706.67 $1,302,148 Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 16,000.00 $1,051,840 Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $2,003,813 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 43,200.00 $111,456 Marking square foot $7.31 368.00 $2,690
Signage - 1 Post each $367.69 36.00 $13,237
Signage - 2 Post each $1,211.58 4.00 $4,846
II. STRUCTURE ITEMS
New Interchange - 2 Lane New Bridge square foot $400.00 70,000.00 $28,000,000 Total Items I + II + III $43,494,795
Total Project Cost / lane mile $43,494,795
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Interchange 2 - New Interchange/Interchange Modification Unit Cost
474
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 180,000.00 $3,684,600
Clearing & Grubbing
Travel way acre $12,100.00 3.97 $48,000
Develop Water Supply lump sum 10% of Excavation and Borrow Cost 1.00 $368,460 Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Asphalt Concrete Type A (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $240.62 3,128.89 $752,873 Aggregate Base (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $73.54 7,869.63 $578,733 Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 16,000.00 $1,051,840 Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $972,676 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 32,000.00 $82,560 Marking square foot $7.31 184.00 $1,345
Signage - 1 Post each $367.69 20.00 $7,354
Signage - 2 Post each $1,211.58 4.00 $4,846
II. STRUCTURE ITEMS
Major Interchange Improvement - 2 Lane Bridge Widening square foot $500.00 30,000.00 $15,000,000 Total Items I + II + III $22,553,287
Total Project Cost / lane mile $22,553,287
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Interchange 3 - Major Interchange Improvement
Unit Cost
475
II. STRUCTURE ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Bridge square foot $400.00 12.00 $4,800
Total Items I + II + III $4,800
Total Project Cost / lane mile $4,800
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Bridge 1 - New Bridge Cost
Unit Cost
476
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 17,931.03 $367,048
Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Asphalt Concrete Type A (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $240.62 782.22 $188,218 Aggregate Base (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $73.54 1,967.41 $144,683 Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 1,180.00 $77,573
Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $116,628 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 1,180.00 $3,044 II. STRUCTURE ITEMS
Bridge square foot $400.00 2,880.00 $1,152,000
III. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS
Urban
Travel Way - Additional lane square foot $329.71 49,000.00 $16,155,790 Total Items I + II + III $18,204,986
Total Project Cost / lane mile $18,204,986
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
RRXing 1 - New Rail Grade Crossing
Unit Cost
477
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / lane mile Cost / lane mile Section 1: Earthwork
Imported Borrow
Travel way cubic yard $20.47 17.78 $364
Section 2: Pavement Structural Section
Asphalt Concrete Type A (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $240.62 782.22 $188,218 Aggregate Base (Including Bike Lane) cubic yard $73.54 1,967.41 $144,683 Curb and Gutter linear foot $65.74 1,180.00 $77,573
Section 3: Drainage
Project Drainage lump sum 15% of Sections 1 and 2 1.00 $61,626 Section 5: Traffic Items
Striping - Thermo plastic (1 GP Lane, per direction) linear foot $2.58 1,180.00 $3,044 II. STRUCTURE ITEMS
Bridge square foot $400.00 2,880.00 $1,152,000
III. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS
Urban
Travel Way - Additional lane square foot $329.71 16,000.00 $5,275,360 Total Items I + II + III $6,902,869
Total Project Cost / lane mile $6,902,869
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
RRXing 2 - Widen Existing Rail Grade Crossing
Unit Cost
478
I. ROADWAY ITEMS Unit Quantity / route mile Cost / route mile Infrastructure for ITS of Network roadway segments route mile $686,383.00 1.00 $686,383 Total Items I + II + III $686,383
Total Project Cost / route mile $686,383
EXHIBIT F-4 (Continued)
WRCOG Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Cost Assumption Estimate - 2024 Nexus Update
Infrastructure for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) on TUMF Network Roadway Segments Unit Cost
479
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-13
EXHIBIT F-5
Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP)
adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2003 Section 8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of Reserve Assembly and Management 480
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-14
8.5 LOCAL FUNDING PROGRAM
The following local funding plan describes the local commitment for funding Reserve Assembly, Management, and Monitoring.
The local funding program includes funding from a variety of sources, including but not limited to, regional funding resulting from the importation of waste into landfills in Riverside County, mitigation for regional public infrastructure projects, mitigation for private infrastructure projects, mitigation for private Development, funds generated by local or regional incentive programs that encourage compact growth and the creation oftransit-oriented communities, and dedications of lands in conjunction with local approval of private development projects.
The local funding program will fund the local portion of:
! Land acquisition
! Management
! Monitoring
! Adaptive Management
! Plan administration
8.5.1 Funding Sources
Local funding sources include funding from both public and private developers and regional entities in an effort to spread the financial burden of the MSHCP over a broad base. The mix of funding sources provides an equitable distribution of the cost for local mitigation under the MSHCP. In addition to equitably distributing mitigation for local projects, utilizing a mixture of funding sources will help ensure the long-term viability of the local funding program because a temporary decline in funding from one source may be offset by increases from another. The proposed local funding sources are described below and include:
! Local Development Mitigation Fees
! Density Bonus Fees
! Regional Infrastructure Project Contribution
! Landfill Tipping Fees
481
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-15
! Other Potential New Revenue Sources
' Local Development Mitigation Fees
New Development affects the environment directly through construction activity and cumulatively through population bases that result from Development. Government Code Section 66000 et seq. allows cities and counties to charge new Development for the costs of mitigating the impacts of new Development. The Cities and County will implement a Development Mitigation Fee pursuant to the MSHCP; this fee will be one of the primary sources of funding the implementation of the MSHCP.
The fee ordinance adopted by the Cities and the County will provide for an annual CPI adjustment based upon the Consumer Price Index for “All Urban Consumers” in the Los Angeles-AnaheimRiverside Area, measured as of the month of December in the calendar year which ends in the previous Fiscal Year. There will also be a provision for the fee to be reevaluated and revised should it be found to insufficiently cover mitigation of new Development. A fee of approximately $1,500 per residential unit (or an equivalent fee per acre) and $4,800 per acre of commercial or industrial Development was used in the revenue projection shown in Appendix B-05 of this document. The projected revenues from the Development Mitigation Fee are anticipated to be approximately $540 million over the next 25 years. A nexus study is required to demonstrate that the proposed fee is proportionate to the impacts of the new Development.
' Density Bonus Fees
The New Riverside County General Plan creates a number of incentive plans that have the potential both to further the goals of the County’s General Plan and to facilitate the implementation of the MSHCP. Section 8.4.2 above discusses the use of the Rural Incentive Program to aid in the Conservation of lands through non-acquisition means. An additional component of the Incentive Program enables developers to acquire the right to develop at an additional 25% increase in density by providing enhancements to their projects and by paying a “Density Bonus Fee.” The fee is anticipated to be $3,000 – $5,000 per additional unit. This program offers a significant incentive to developers when compared with the typical cost of creating a new buildable lot.
The Density Bonus program is new to Riverside County, and it is, therefore, difficult to project annual revenues. The Local Funding Program assumes that between 10% and 20% of the residential units built in the unincorporated County area will participate in the incentive program and that only 50% of the revenues of the program will be committed to the MSHCP, with the remaining portion staying in the local community in which the additional units are located to provide additional 482
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-16
amenities that will help offset the greater density. Of the 330,000 units projected to be built over the next 25 years, 10% (or 33,000 units) are assumed to be built utilizing the Density Bonus Fee resulting in $132,000,000 in revenues of which 50% (or $66,000,000) will be allocated to the MSHCP.
' Regional Infrastructure Project Contribution
Regional infrastructure projects directly affect the environment not only through the effect they have on species and their Habitats, but also by facilitating continued new Development. It is appropriate, therefore, for regional infrastructure projects to contribute to Plan implementation . Four general categories of infrastructure projects have been identified:
! Transportation Infrastructure
! Regional Utility Projects
! Local Public Capital Construction Projects
! Regional Flood Control Projects
Transportation Infrastructure
The RCIP has identified the need for approximately $12 billion in new transportation infrastructure to support the Development proposed for the next 25 years. Each new transportation project will contribute to Plan implementation . Historically, these projects have budgeted 3% – 5% of their construction costs to mitigate environmental impacts. The local funding program anticipates that more than one-half of the $12 billion cost of contribution to acquisition of Additional Reserve Lands will be funded locally and will result in approximately $371 million in contribution over the next 25 years as discussed below.
< Riverside County’s ½ cent sales tax for Transportation In 1988, Riverside County voters approved a measure to increase local sales tax by ½ cent to fund new transportation projects (Measure A). The sales tax measure is due to be reauthorized in 2002.
Under the reauthorization, $121 million will be allocated as local contribution under the MSHCP. (For further information on the sales tax measure, see Section 13.5 of the MSHCP Implementing Agreement and Appendix B-07 of this document).
483
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-17
Regional Utility Projects
As Riverside County’s population doubles over the next 25 years, new regional utility infrastructure will be required. Since the utilities are not Permittees under the MSHCP, they may choose to mitigate under the Plan or seek their own regulatory permits. In either case, their mitigation will be focused on the objectives of the MSHCP and will contribute to the local implementation funding.
No estimate of the number of projects or the scope or costs is available at this time; consequently, no estimate of mitigation funding has been made. The Permittees expect that regional utility projects will contribute to the implementation of the MSHCP and provide an additional contingency should other revenue sources not generate the projected levels of funding or should implementation costs be higher than projected.
Local Public Capital Construction Projects
Local public capital construction projects may include construction of new schools, universities, City or County administrative facilities, jails, courts, juvenile facilities, parks, libraries, or other facilities that serve the public. These projects will be mitigated under the MSHCP and will utilize a per acre mitigation fee based on the fee then in place for private, commercial and industrial Development.
No attempt has been made to estimate the number or magnitude of these projects. The Permittees expect that local pubic construction projects will contribute to the implementation of the MSHCP and provide an additional contingency should other revenue sources not generate the projected levels of funding or should implementation costs be higher than projected.
Regional Flood Control Projects
Flood control projects will receive coverage under the MSHCP for both new capital construction and for the maintenance of existing and new facilities. Preliminary estimates from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District indicate that they will likely budget approximately $15 M in projects annually. Based on using 3% of capital costs, the District would be expected to contribute approximately $450,000 to $750,000 annually to MSHCP implementation. Since many flood control projects serve existing developed communities and therefore have less impacts than projects adding capacity to serve new Development and may provide some conservation value especially in terms of Constrained Linkages, the District’s contributions may average something below the 5% level on average.
484
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-18
' Landfill Tipping Fees
Riverside County has utilized revenues from public and private landfills in Riverside County to generate funding for conservation and open space projects for over a decade. In 1990, the County utilized $1 per ton tipping fee assessed all waste deposited in County landfills to fund the acquisition of the Santa Rosa Plateau and approximately $260,000 annually to fund the operation of the County Park and Open Space Districts. More recently, the County has negotiated agreements with two private landfills in the County to commit $1 per ton on all waste imported from outside Riverside County to Conservation within Riverside County.
El Sobrante Landfill
This privately owned landfill was permitted to expand its capacity to 10,000 tons per day in 2001.
In approving the landfill expansion, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors authorized fifty cents per ton of the County’s portion of the revenue from the landfill expansion to be applied to Conservation in addition to the $1 per ton that was committed under the landfill agreement. The projection of the annual tonnage and revenue for Conservation included in Appendix B-09 of this document reflects the $1.5 per ton commitment to Conservation. Over the life of the landfill, 60 million tons of imported waste are allowed. Sixty million tons at $1.5 per ton will generate $90 million for Conservation. The Cash Flow Analysis in Appendix B-10 of this document reflects the annual revenues from the El Sobrante Landfill.
County Landfills
The County Board of Supervisors, beginning in 1990, authorized $1 per ton for all in-county waste deposited in County landfills to go toward habitat and open space Conservation. After adjusting for the debt service on the Santa Rosa Plateau acquisition and an annual commitment to the Park and Open Space District, there is a projected annual balance of $400,000 that can be applied to additional Conservation under the MSHCP. Appendix B-09 of this document includes a projection of tonnage from in-County waste at County landfills. The Cash Flow Analysis in Appendix B-10 of this document reflects the annual revenues from the County landfills. Over the next 25 years, County landfills will contribute approximately $10 million to the implementation of the MSHCP. 485
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-19
Eagle Mountain
In 1997, the County approved the use of the old Kaiser mine at Eagle Mountain in eastern Riverside County as a regional landfill to serve primarily Los Angeles County. Subsequently, the Los Angeles County Sanitation District has acquired the rights to the Eagle Mountain Landfill and intends to begin operation of the landfill within the next decade. At this time, litigation is still pending that could prohibit the development of the landfill. The Development Agreement with the County would require the payment of $1 per ton for Conservation if the landfill is developed. Conservation needs in the Coachella Valley would have first priority over the revenues from the Eagle Mountain Landfill; however, some portion of the revenues would be available to support Conservation needs in Western Riverside County. The Permittees expect that the Eagle Mountain Landfill will provide funding to support implementation of the MSHCP over the life of the MSHCP. However, no revenue from the Eagle Mountain Landfill has been projected in the funding program at this time.
These potential revenues provide a contingency should other revenue sources not generate the projected levels of funding or should implementation costs be higher than projected. ' Potential New Revenue Sources
The County and Cities may levy assessments to pay for services that directly benefit the property on which the fee is levied. Under current law, a local election may be required to initially levy the assessment or to confirm the assessment if a protest is filed. No such assessments are currently projected for the MSHCP. As the MSHCP Conservation Area is developed, however, its value as open space and for recreation opportunities may lend itself to a local funding program for ongoing management and enhancement. In more urban areas, which Western Riverside County will be in 25 years, local voters routinely approve such funding programs.
Other revenue opportunities may be realized over the next 25 years. The County, Cities, and RCA will explore new revenue sources to support the acquisition of the MSHCP Conservation Area and its long-term management and enhancement. A goal of any new fee would be to spread a portion of the costs for the MSHCP across as broad a regional base as possible. 486
8.0 MSHCP Funding/Financing of
Reserve Assembly and Management
VOLUME I SECTION 8 June 17, 2003
FINAL MSHCP 8-20
TABLE 8-5
LOCAL PUBLIC/REGIONAL FUNDING SOURCES
Source Anticipated $ Range Requirements to Implement Responsible Party Private Funding Sources:
Cities and County
Development Mitigation Fees
$539.6M Approval of County Ordinance
Approval of City(ies) Ordinance
County
Cities
Density Bonus Fees $66M Approval of General Plan County Public Funding Sources
Local Roads $121M Approval of Measure A, local agreement on allocation
RCTC/County
Other Transportation $250M % of new road construction RCTC/County Other infrastructure Projects $unknown Project-by-project negotiation County and Cities El Sobrante Landfill $90M In place County
County Landfills $10M In place County
Eagle Mountain Landfill $unknown In place pending start-up County New Regional funding $unknown Voter approval County and Cities TOTAL LOCAL FUNDS $1,076.6M
8.6 ADEQUACY OF FUNDING
The Permittees and the Wildlife Agencies will annually evaluate the performance of the funding mechanisms and, notwithstanding other provisions of the MSHCP, will develop any necessary modifications to the funding mechanisms to address additional funding needs. Additionally, this annual evaluation will include an assessment of the funding plan and anticipate funding needs over the ensuing 18 months for the purpose of identifying any potential deficiencies in cash flow. If deficiencies are identified through this evaluation, then the Permittees and the Wildlife Agencieswill develop strategies to address any additional funding needs consistent with the terms and conditions of the MSHCP.
487
WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 F-14
EXHIBIT F-6
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update Final Report
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., October 2020
488
Final Report
Western Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan
Nexus Fee Study Update
Prepared for:
Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority Prepared by:
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
October 2020
EPS #171034
489
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION AND KEY FINDINGS ..............................................................................1 Background............................................................................................................ 1 Original and Existing Fee Schedule ............................................................................ 2 Updated Mitigation Fee Schedules ............................................................................. 3 Key Drivers of Fee Change ....................................................................................... 6 Organization of Report............................................................................................. 8
2. MSHCP POLICIES, GOALS, AND FINANCING STRATEGY.......................................................9 MSHCP Purpose, Basis, and Goals.............................................................................. 9 MSHCP Financing Strategy ..................................................................................... 11 MSHCP Implementation Costs and Funding Sources ................................................... 13 Development Mitigation Fees and Calculation ............................................................ 16
3. HABITAT PROTECTION TO DATE AND FUTURE CONSERVATION SCENARIO................................. 18 Habitat Protection Accomplishments Through 2019 .................................................... 18 Conservation Goals and Progress ............................................................................ 18 Land Dedications .................................................................................................. 20 Future Conservation Scenario ................................................................................. 21
4. FORECASTS OF DEVELOPMENT, DEDICATION, FEE PAYMENT ................................................ 25 Historic Development and HCP Fees......................................................................... 25 Growth Projections................................................................................................ 26
5. MSHCP IMPLEMENTATION COSTS.............................................................................. 31 Land Costs........................................................................................................... 31 Other Costs—Administration, Management, and Monitoring......................................... 35 Endowment Funding.............................................................................................. 38 Total Implementation Costs.................................................................................... 40
6. RCA NON-FEE REVENUES ....................................................................................... 43 MSHCP Forecast of Non-Fee Revenues ..................................................................... 43 New Forecast of Non-Fee Revenues ......................................................................... 44
7. MITIGATION FEE CALCULATION ................................................................................. 46 490
8. MITIGATION FEE ACT (NEXUS) FINDINGS..................................................................... 52 Purpose of Fee ..................................................................................................... 52 Use of Fee Revenues ............................................................................................. 53 Relationship ......................................................................................................... 53 Need................................................................................................................... 54 Proportionality...................................................................................................... 54
9. FEE IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................ 56 Adoption of Revised LDMF ...................................................................................... 56 Securing Supplemental Funding .............................................................................. 56 Annual Review...................................................................................................... 56 Surplus Funds ...................................................................................................... 57 Annual and Periodic Updates................................................................................... 57 Appendix I: Detailed Time Series of Implementation Costs, Excluding Endowment Funding Appendix II: Detailed Time Series of Endowment Funding
List of Tables
Table 1 2004 and 2021 MSHCP Fee Schedule ............................................................ 3 Table 2 Updated MSHCP Implementation Costs and Per Acre Mitigation Fees.................. 4 Table 3 Updated Mitigation Fee Schedule by Extension Scenario................................... 6 Table 4 MSHCP Goals by Area Plan ........................................................................ 11 Table 5 2004 Estimates: MSHCP Implementation Costs and Funding Sources............... 14 Table 6 2004 and 2021 MSHCP Fee Schedule .......................................................... 17 Table 7 Conservation Through End of 2019 ............................................................. 18 Table 8 Required Acquisition Acres to Achieve ARL Goals .......................................... 24 Table 9 Projected Growth in Western Riverside County, through 2050......................... 29 Table 10 Projected Developed Acres in Western Riverside County, by Extension Scenario................................................................................... 30 Table 11 Per-Acre Land Value Estimates—2003 Dollars (2003 Nexus Study) .................. 32 Table 12 Local Conservation Costs Through 2018 ...................................................... 32 Table 13 Planning Level Per Acre Land Value Estimates by Category............................. 33 491
Table 14 Illustrative Distribution of Land Acquisitions by Land Use and Size................... 34 Table 15 Aggregate Land Value of Remaining Areas (2017 dollars)............................... 34 Table 16 Administrative and Professional Services Costs ............................................. 36 Table 17 Management and Monitoring Anticipated Costs in 2004 and 2019 Dollars ........ 38 Table 18 Annual Implementation Cost Estimate (2019$)............................................. 39 Table 19 Endowment Funding (2019$), by Extension Scenario .................................... 40 Table 20 Total Implementation Costs (2019$*), by Extension Scenario......................... 41 Table 21 Average Annual Implementation Costs (2019$), by Extension Scenario............ 42 Table 22 2004 MSHCP Anticipated Funding Sources ................................................... 44 Table 23 Annual Non-Fee Revenue Projection (2019$s) .............................................. 45 Table 24 MSHCP Implementation Costs and Per Acre Mitigation Fees ............................ 47 Table 25 Recommended Fee Level—No Extension ...................................................... 48 Table 26 Recommended Fee Level—5-Year Extension................................................. 49 Table 27 Recommended Fee Level—10-Year Extension ............................................... 50 Table 28 Recommended Fee Level—15-Year Extension ............................................... 51 List of Figures
Figure 1 State of Conservation in 2003: Conserved Land, Additional Reserve Land to be Acquired, and Total MSHCP Conservation Area Needed .................. 10 Figure 2 MSHCP Estimated Annual Costs in Millions, 2004 Dollars ................................ 15 Figure 3 MSHCP Estimated Annual Revenues in Millions, 2004 Dollars .......................... 16 Figure 4 MSHCP Conservation Goals, 2019 and 2029 Goals Highlighted........................ 19 Figure 5 Progress Towards ARL Through End of 2019 ................................................ 20 Figure 6 Residential Unit Development, Western Riverside County, 2005-2019.............. 25 Figure 7 New Housing Units per Year, SCAG and MSHCP Projections and Historic Production (2005-2019)................................................................. 27 Figure 8 Newly Developed Commercial Acres per Year ............................................... 27 Figure 9 Comparison of Costs by Category ............................................................... 40 Figure 10 2004 MSHCP Anticipated Funding Sources ................................................... 44 492
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 C:\Users\ktraynor\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\YAAP6MDD\NexusStudy_Final_23Oct2020.docx
1. INTRODUCTION AND KEY FINDINGS
This Updated Nexus Study (2020 Nexus Study) provides the technical justification for changes to the Local Development Mitigation Fee schedule that applies to Local Permittee participants in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP or Plan). These changes are necessary to ensure adequate funding of the obligations of the Local Permittees under the MSHCP and the associated Incidental Take Permit and Implementing Agreement. The resulting increased fee revenues will support the continued implementation of the MSHCP and the streamlining of endangered species incidental take permitting for new Western Riverside County development provided under the MSHCP. This Nexus Study is consistent with the requirements of California Government Code 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act) that requires specific findings (as well as administration and implementation procedures) for “any action establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition of approval of a development project by a local agency.”
Background
The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP or Plan), originally adopted in 2004, is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) focusing on the conservation of species and their associated habitats in Western Riverside County. The MSHCP was developed in response to the need for future growth opportunities in Western Riverside County while addressing the requirements of the State and federal Endangered Species Acts. The MSHCP serves as an HCP pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 as well as a Natural Communities Conservation Plan under the NCCP Act of 2001. The MSHCP streamlines these environmental permitting processes by allowing the participating jurisdictions to authorize “take” of plant and wildlife species identified within the Plan Area. At the same time, Plan implementation provides a coordinated MSHCP Conservation Area and implementation program to preserve biological diversity and maintain the region’s quality of life.
The MSHCP and the associated Implementing Agreement and Incidental Take Permit collectively determine a set of conservation actions that must be taken to meet the terms of the Incidental Take Permit and benefit from the regulatory streamlining and other benefits of the MSHCP. This includes the identification of the responsible parties, including the responsibilities of the Local Permittees.1 One of the key requirements of the MSHCP, Implementing Agreement, and Incidental Take Permit (consistent with the requirements of the federal Endangered Species Act) is the provision of adequate funding by Local Permittees to the Implementing Entity (the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority2) to conduct their portion of the conservation actions identified in the MSHCP.
1 Local Permittees include the Western Riverside cities, the County of Riverside, County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County Regional Park and Open-Space District, County Department of Waste Resources, and Riverside County Transportation Commission. 2 The Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Agency is a Joint Powers Authority established in 2004 to implement the MSHCP.
493
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update Final Report October 2020
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 C:\Users\ktraynor\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\YAAP6MDD\NexusStudy_Final_23Oct2020.docx Section 8.0 of the MSHCP outlines the MSHCP funding/financing approach. It also identified best estimates of Plan implementation costs at the time of Plan adoption, including the local funding commitment that represents a portion of the overall land acquisition, management and monitoring, and Plan administration costs. The Local Funding Program included a mix of funding sources to provide “an equitable distribution of the cost for local mitigation under the MSHCP.” The proposed funding sources included Local Development Mitigation Fees (and land dedications), regional infrastructure project public contributions (including contributions to mitigate for transportation infrastructure, regional utility projects, local public capital construction projects, and regional flood control projects), and landfill tipping fees.
Participating cities and the County were each required to implement a Local Development Mitigation Fee under California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. (the “Mitigation Fee Act”) and supported by the separate “Final Mitigation Fee Nexus Study Report for the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan,” July 1, 2003 (Original or 2003 Nexus Study). The MSHCP funding chapter notes the need for frequent evaluations of the performance of the funding mechanisms and assessments of the funding plan and the need to make any necessary modifications to the funding mechanisms. The MSHCP also notes that the mitigation fee will need to be “reevaluated and revised should it be found to insufficiently cover mitigation of new development.”
In addition to the common practice of updating mitigation fees periodically to account for changing circumstances, the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) has determined that significant changes have occurred and/or circumstances have arisen that justify an update to the mitigation fees. These changes include, but are not limited to, the following:
• The need to acquire more land than originally forecast due to the lower than expected land dedication.
• The lower-than-expected levels of non-fee funding from local and regional funding sources. • The lower than expected levels of residential development. • The need to diversify land acquisitions away from a focus on the larger, more remote parcels to also acquiring parcels closer to urbanized areas, consistent with the reserve assembly requirements of the MSHCP.
Original and Existing Fee Schedule
All local jurisdictions participating in the MSHCP and obtaining coverage for public and private take in their jurisdictions were required to adopt and implement the 2004 Mitigation Fee Schedule through ordinance and resolution and then to pass through the fee funding (except for any additional administrative charges added by the jurisdictions) to the RCA to fund MSHCP implementation. The ordinances allowed for periodic inflationary increases based on the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside area. In 2018 the Bureau of Labor Statistics implemented a geographic revision, establishing Riverside as its own Core Based Statistical Area. As a result, Riverside was removed from the Consumer Price Index encompassing Los Angeles and Anaheim. Going forward, inflationary increases will be based on the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for the newly established Riverside-San 494
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update Final Report October 2020
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 C:\Users\ktraynor\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\YAAP6MDD\NexusStudy_Final_23Oct2020.docx Bernardino-Ontario area. As outlined in the 2003 Nexus Study (Original Nexus Study), all new development in Western Riverside County is required to pay the mitigation fee.
Table 1 shows the original 2004 Local Development Mitigation Fee schedule and the current 2021 Fee Schedule that reflects periodic inflationary fee adjustments using the indexing process that collectively increased the fees by 35 percent between 2004 and 2020 (this was below the overall inflation index increase over this period).
Table 1 2004 and 2021 MSHCP Fee Schedule
Fee Category
2004 Fee per unit or
per acre
2021 Fee per
unit or per acre3
Residential: Up to 8.0 dwelling units per acre
(DUAC) $1,651 $2,234
Residential: 8.0-14.0 DUAC $1,057 $1,430
Residential: 14.0+ DUAC $859 $1,161
Commercial (per acre) $5,620 $7,606
Industrial (per acre) $5,620 $7,606
Updated Mitigation Fee Schedules
This 2020 Nexus Study has estimated the increased fee level that would be required to provide sufficient revenues, based on the best available forecasts of future growth, to support the full implementation of the MSHCP, including the completion of all land acquisition and the establishment of the necessary endowment, by 2029 (Year 25 of Plan implementation).4 Because, as shown below, this would require a major increase in the fee levels, three other scenarios are also considered where different time extensions provide more time for land acquisition.5 These extensions allow for the costs of Plan implementation (including land acquisitions) to be spread across more development and, as a result, moderate the level of mitigation fee increase required. In addition, the longer extension scenarios require a pace of land acquisition that is more consistent with what has proven to be achievable. All of these fee 3 Note it is RCA procedure to refer to fees during, for example, Fiscal Year 2020/2021, as the 2021 fee. The 2021 fee became effective July 1, 2020, and applies for the fiscal year of 2020-21 (i.e., until June 30, 2021 when the 2022 Fee begins).
4 The MSHCP provided a 25-year period of the required land acquisition with the larger 75-year permit term. This is labelled the “No Extension” or “Baseline Scenario” in this Update Study. 5 The baseline scenario as well as the extension scenarios assume that all land acquisition as well as the full endowment will be completed/ established by the end of the specified implementation/ land acquisition period. Interest from the non-depleting endowment will fund all ongoing costs thereafter. 495
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update Final Report October 2020
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 C:\Users\ktraynor\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\YAAP6MDD\NexusStudy_Final_23Oct2020.docx increases would be consistent with the Mitigation Fee Act and the MSHCP and associated Incidental Take Permit and Implementing Agreement.