Agenda — Norco City Council, June 19, 2024 (part 2 of 5)

Governmental Body Application
Submission Date: May 13, 2024
Applicant Type: New Applicant
Primary Selection: Planning Commission
Name: Jarret Young
Address:

Phone:

Email:

Basic Requirements: I am a citizen of the United States I am a resident of the City of Norco
I am at least 18 years old
I am a registered voter
Felony Conviction: No
Length of Residency: 22
Employment Status: Employed
Norco Business Owner: No
Business Name:

Employed in Norco: No
Business Name:

GENERAL QUESTIONS
Community Involvement (List any boards, commissions, committees and/or organizations on which you are currently serving or have served on)
Board of Directors Anaheim Boys and Girls Club
Crossroads Christian Church Safety Team Member
Employment Background (List titles and duties)

Page 159 of 830 ends

Police Captain at Anaheim Police Department, 30 years or service. I currently lead our Support Services Division, but I had the opportunity to lead every Division within the Department over my 12 years as a Captain.

Educational Background (List degrees, majors, credentials, certificates and/or licenses) Masters of Arts in Criminal Justice from Chapman University, Orange, California Bachelor or Arts Degree in Public Administration from the University of Laverne, Laverne, California Graduation of FBI National Academy Session 269, Quantico, Virginia Relevant Experience (Briefly explain how your background, training, education and/or interests specifically qualify you as an applicant for the governmental body you are applying to serve on)
I have experience and knowledge related to laws and regulations governing various types of business. I have experience dealing with the negative repercussions and quality of life issues coming from problematic license, zoning and permit approval of businesses and traffic management . I have also seen the positive effect certain industries and businesses can have on a city.

Why are you interested in serving on a City of Norco Commission/Committee/Advisory Council?
I will be retiring in late July 2024. I would like to dedicate some of my time and expertise to the City I have raised my two daughters in and have called him for the past 22 years.

In your opinion, what are the goals and objectives of the Commission(s)/Committee(s)/Advisory Council(s) you are applying to serve on? To achieve responsible, measured growth of our City in a way that brings revenue to the City while honoring our past and preserving our way of life as Horse Town USA.

If appointed, how would you help achieve these goals and objectives? YES
If appointed to serve, do you see any potential for a conflict of interest claim based on personal interests?
No

APPLICATION AGREEMENT
☒ I understand and agree to the above statements

Page 160 of 830 ends

☒ I have read and understand the contents of the City of Norco’s Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest Code and Social Media Policy.
☒ I consent to the City of Norco conducting a basic background check if I am selected for appointment.
☒ I agree that all of the information contained in this application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I further agree that, by submitting this application online or otherwise, I am affixing my digital signature to this form as of the date submitted.

Signature: Jarret Young Date Submitted: May 13, 2024

Page 161 of 830 ends

Jarret J. Young
OBJECTIVE: OBTAIN A POSITION ON THE CITY OF NORCO PLANNING COMMISSION.

EDUCATION
Master of Arts Degree- Criminal Justice- Chapman University, Orange, CA Bachelor of Science- Public Administration- University of La Verne, CA Associate of Arts- Administration of Justice-Fullerton College, Fullerton, CA Management P.O.S.T. Certificate- #M27019
Graduate of FBI National Academy, Session #269
Graduate of P.O.S.T. Executive Development Course
Graduate of I.A.C.P Leadership in Police Organizations Course Supervisor Leadership Institute (SLI) Class # 244

EXPERIENCE
Anaheim Police Department
425 S. Harbor Blvd, Anaheim, CA 92805
The Anaheim Police Department provides public safety services for California’s tenth most populated city. The City of Anaheim is home to world-class sports and entertainment, including the Disneyland Resort, Los Angeles Angels, Anaheim Ducks, and the Anaheim Convention Center. Anaheim hosts 25 million visitors annually.

Total Sworn Experience: Officer, Investigator, Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain- over 30 years
Police Captain – May 2012 to Present
Management, budget oversight, and leadership of personnel within a Department Division. I am the senior captain at the Anaheim Police Department. I have commanded the Support Services Division, Investigations Division, Operations Division, Special Operations Division, Operations Support Division, and Administration Divisions. Some of the areas I have led include Patrol, Resort

Page 162 of 830 ends

Policing, Real Time Crime Center, Emergency Management, Air Support, Community Policing, Detectives, Vice, Narcotics, Criminal Intelligence, Detention Facility, Communications Center, Personnel, Internal Affairs, and Budget & Finance. I have been responsible for managing the Division with the most employees and the largest operating budget within the Department, approximately 41.25 million dollars. I have led projects that brought state-of-the-art technology to the Department, such as drones, high-definition camera systems, and analytical software. I have led efforts in planning and coordinating multiple large, high-profile events, which required partnering with local, state, and federal agencies. Examples of events where I served as the overall Incident Commander include a University Commencement Address by then President Obama at Angel Stadium and, most recently, the 2023 California Republican Fall Convention, where former President Trump delivered a speech, as well as a Pro-Palestinian / Disney Boycott protest involving over two thousand protesters at the Disneyland Resort.

Major League Baseball Authenticator- April 2010 to Present Major League Baseball Office of Commissioner
1271 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020
Working with MLB club officials, staff, players, and umpires to witness, document, and categorize items used in official MLB games. Duties also include witnessing and authenticating autographs and items related to MLB, Club, or Players Milestone Events.

Safety Team, Lead Member – January 2022 to Present
Crossroads Christian Church
2331 Kellogg Ave, Corona, CA 92881
The Safety Team consists of over forty armed individuals who provide security and safety services for all events at the Mega Church Campus. In my volunteer role, I lead the team during events, plan and provide training, and assist in policy review and drafting. I also liaise with local law enforcement and EMS to ensure we deliver a coordinated and timely response in the event of an emergency.

SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
Leadership and Management Experience
* Oversight and management of Investigative/Administrative/Patrol personnel * Coordinate, direct, and plan inter-agency operations
* Analyze/develop police response and procedures
* Develop/Manage Division Budget

Page 163 of 830 ends

* Review Internal Affairs Investigations and Administer Discipline Human Resource Experience
* Supervised department Personnel Detail, with vast experience in personnel matters such as employee relations, selection process, training, promotional processes, evaluations, and administrative investigations.
* Assisted Human Resources with developing, reclassifying, and converting positions within the department.
* Served is the department's Internal Affairs Commander Intergovernmental Experience
* Liaison with federal agencies, FBI, DHS, as well as state and local agencies regularly * Work with the City Attorney to investigate/mitigate liability * Work closely with other City Department Heads and Executive staff Training Experience
* P.O.S.T. subject matter expert, assisted in the development of state-wide training related to ethics for police officers.
* Developed training courses to meet the needs of the department and the community * Attended management courses related to budget, organizational change, liability, community policing, special tactics, tourist policing, crowd control, terrorism liaison officer and terrorist bombing response.
* FBI Secret Level Clearance
Financial
* Prepare, justify, and manage of mufti-million-dollar Division budgets * Secure and oversight of grant funding
* Oversight of Asset Forfeiture Program
* Oversight and management of financial audits
Community Involvement
* Board of Directors, Anaheim Boys and Girls Club (Past member) * Former Volunteer Official/Coach AYSO Region 37 -Youth Soccer * Active Volunteer Crossroads Chrisitan Church
Professional Affiliations

Page 164 of 830 ends

* California Police Chief's Association
* International Association of Chiefs of Police- IACP
* FBI National Academy Alumni Association - FBINAA
* Orange County Commanders Association

Page 165 of 830 ends

Governmental Body Application
Submission Date: April 25, 2024
Applicant Type: Reapplying for Current Position
Primary Selection: Planning Commission
Name: Patricia Hedges
Address:

Phone:

Email:

Employed in Norco: No
Business Name:

GENERAL QUESTIONS
Community Involvement (List any boards, commissions, committees and/or organizations on which you are currently serving or have served on)
NHA board member, Seniors and Pets board member, RURAL member, vice president of Support Sisterz, 20+ years of volunteering for the city in various organizations.

Employment Background (List titles and duties)

Page 166 of 830 ends

Residential property management; collect rents, produce statements for owners, deputy building inspector for various cities in the past; inspected concrete, rebar, masonry on various commercial properties
Educational Background (List degrees, majors, credentials, certificates and/or licenses) Some college, certification for property management, past realtor, various past certifications for building inspections for commercial and residential properties.

Relevant Experience (Briefly explain how your background, training, education and/or interests specifically qualify you as an applicant for the governmental body you are applying to serve on)
Having a background in construction and real estate helped me to have a knowledge of codes, plans and zoning requirements. Having served on the planning commission for quite a few years gives me the history and knowledge to make informative decisions.

Why are you interested in serving on a City of Norco Commission/Committee/Advisory Council?
I’ve enjoyed my time on the commission. I feel like I’ve contributed a lot to the city thru my decisions.

I feel like I still have more to offer.

In your opinion, what are the goals and objectives of the Commission(s)/Committee(s)/Advisory Council(s) you are applying to serve on? I see the goals and objectives as continuing to direct Norco’s growth to bring in more income to the city but without sacrificing our Horsetown USA commitments to the public.

If appointed, how would you help achieve these goals and objectives? I will continue to carry out the commitments of the office by working with the codes, the city council and others on the commission to help Norco grow but in the direction the citizens want.

If appointed to serve, do you see any potential for a conflict of interest claim based on personal interests?
I don’t. I believe I’ve been a fair, honest commissioner and I would continue to be.

APPLICATION AGREEMENT
☒ I understand and agree to the above statements
☒ I have read and understand the contents of the City of Norco’s Code of Ethics, Conflict of Interest Code and Social Media Policy.
☒ I consent to the City of Norco conducting a basic background check if I am selected for appointment.

Page 167 of 830 ends

☒ I agree that all of the information contained in this application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I further agree that, by submitting this application online or otherwise, I am affixing my digital signature to this form as of the date submitted.

Signature: Patricia Hedges Date Submitted: April 25, 2024

Page 168 of 830 ends

Governmental Body Application
Submission Date: July 27, 2023
Applicant Type: New Applicant
Primary Selection: Planning Commission
Name: Robin Riddle van Geest
Address:

Phone:

Email:

Basic Requirements: I am a citizen of the United States I am a resident of the City of Norco
I am at least 18 years old
I am a registered voter
Felony Conviction: No
Length of Residency: 37
Employment Status: Employed
Norco Business Owner: No
Business Name:

Employed in Norco: No
Business Name:

GENERAL QUESTIONS
Community Involvement (List any boards, commissions, committees and/or organizations on which you are currently serving or have served on)
none
Employment Background (List titles and duties)
I am a RN with over 37 years experience. I am currently working as a RN consultant for a adult day care center in Corona

Page 169 of 830 ends

Educational Background (List degrees, majors, credentials, certificates and/or licenses) Bachelor degree in Nursing.

Public health certificate
Vocational Teaching certificate
Relevant Experience (Briefly explain how your background, training, education and/or interests specifically qualify you as an applicant for the governmental body you are applying to serve on)
As I have been a long time resident of this city I have seen many changes. I am vested in this city. I would like to see it kept as a rural animal keeping place to live and raise a family. I also have a interest in the public health of the city and what happens in this town. As a nurse with many years of experience I feel I am a good candidate in the health and well being of the citizens here.

Why are you interested in serving on a City of Norco Commission/Committee/Advisory Council?
To help keep the city the way it should be: Rural and animal keeping with a emphasis on family living.

Always keeping in mind the need to change, but, change for the better.

In your opinion, what are the goals and objectives of the Commission(s)/Committee(s)/Advisory Council(s) you are applying to serve on? My goal and goals of the others would be to do my job as best I can to the best of my ability. Always keeping the citizens of this town updated in the on goings so they can also be kept aware of how the city is being run. Keep Norco rural and Horsetown USA. Make Norco a good family town and a great place to live and raise a family safely.

If appointed, how would you help achieve these goals and objectives? Work to the best of my ability to keep the goals and objectives real, honest ,and in the best interest of the citizens. I would keep a very close eye on things as they happen, or, things that might happen while staying open minded.

If appointed to serve, do you see any potential for a conflict of interest claim based on personal interests?
None

Page 170 of 830 ends

☒ I consent to the City of Norco conducting a basic background check if I am selected for appointment.
☒ I agree that all of the information contained in this application is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I further agree that, by submitting this application online or otherwise, I am affixing my digital signature to this form as of the date submitted.

Signature: Robin A Riddle van Geest Date Submitted: July 27, 2023

Page 171 of 830 ends

Governmental Body Application
Submission Date: March 22, 2024
Applicant Type: New Applicant
Primary Selection: Planning Commission
Secondary Selection(s): Streets, Trails & Utilities Commission Name: Wynemia Johnson
Address:

Phone:

Email:

Basic Requirements: I am a citizen of the United States I am a resident of the City of Norco
I am at least 18 years old
I am a registered voter
Felony Conviction: No
Length of Residency: 32
Employment Status: Unemployed
Norco Business Owner: Yes
Business Name: Cowgirl Cheer and Dance
Employed in Norco: No
Business Name:

GENERAL QUESTIONS
Community Involvement (List any boards, commissions, committees and/or organizations on which you are currently serving or have served on)
Member of the Corona and Eastvale Chamber of Commerce
Employment Background (List titles and duties)
I have worked for Kaiser Permanente and Bank of America for over 20+ years

Page 172 of 830 ends

Educational Background (List degrees, majors, credentials, certificates and/or licenses) AA Business Administration
Certified Graphic Artist
Relevant Experience (Briefly explain how your background, training, education and/or interests specifically qualify you as an applicant for the governmental body you are applying to serve on)
I have served as the JAAF Cheer Commissioner for SCAL for 5 years. PTA member for all the years my children attended school. My family has privately owned CCA gym for over 12 years and have developed thousands of youth to become productive citizens of the community.

Why are you interested in serving on a City of Norco Commission/Committee/Advisory Council?
I have always been active in the community. My kids have played sports and been apart of the youth programs. I am interested in the new development of our community and want to ensure it retains it's rural appeal in the middle of a thriving county.

In your opinion, what are the goals and objectives of the Commission(s)/Committee(s)/Advisory Council(s) you are applying to serve on? The Commission's responsibilities and duties are in accordance with the conservation and planning laws as related to General Law cities in California. Specifically, it is charged with the oversight of local zoning laws or other land use regulations, and consideration of various entitlements (e.g., rezoning, conditional use permits, variances, site plan approval) for proposed developments.

If appointed, how would you help achieve these goals and objectives? Educating myself of laws and regulations that are used on the committee and assist with the planning of how to best implement and enforce any and all laws and regulations.

If appointed to serve, do you see any potential for a conflict of interest claim based on personal interests?
None

Page 173 of 830 ends

Signature: Wynemia Johnson Date Submitted: March 22,
2024

Page 174 of 830 ends

Governmental Body Application
Submission Date: May 24, 2023
Applicant Type: New Applicant
Primary Selection: Planning Commission
Secondary Selection(s): Historic Preservation & Agricultural Heritage Commission Name: Dan Letbetter
Address: 92860
Phone:

Email: com
Basic Requirements: I am a citizen of the United States I am a resident of the City of Norco
I am at least 18 years old
I am a registered voter
Age (For Youth Commissioner):

Felony Conviction:
64 No
Length of Residency: 38
Employment Status: Retired
Norco Business Owner: No
Business Name:

Employed in Norco: No
Business Name:

GENERAL QUESTIONS
Community Involvement (List any boards, commissions, committees and/or organizations on which you are currently serving or have served on)
None, however, just retired, looking to serve the city of Norco Employment Background (List titles and duties)

Page 175 of 830 ends

Program Manager, Technical Director for the Boeing Company Educational Background (List degrees, majors, credentials, certificates and/or licenses) BS in Business Management from California State University Long Beach in 1982 Private pilots license
Relevant Experience (Briefly explain how your background, training, education and/or interests specifically qualify you as an applicant for the governmental body you are applying to serve on)
Diverse background in project planning, development and completion with adherence to cost, schedule and quality. Work well in various scenarios, strong team player.

Why are you interested in serving on a City of Norco Commission/Committee/Advisory Council?
Advance Norco as a progressive city while maintaining the rural heritage and values.

In your opinion, what are the goals and objectives of the Commission(s)/Committee(s)/Advisory Council(s) you are applying to serve on? Development of Norco for the betterment of business and homeowners, provide a non biased, impartial voice for the community. Maintain the history and legacy of Norco and the rural values that it was built on.

If appointed, how would you help achieve these goals and objectives? Work with other council members on specific goals and objectives for the betterment of Norco, reaching consensus on plans and opportunities.

If appointed to serve, do you see any potential for a conflict of interest claim based on personal interests?
No

Page 176 of 830 ends

Signature: Dan Letbetter Date Submitted: May 24, 2023

Page 177 of 830 ends

Daniel J. Letbetter
Norco CA, 92860
Clearance – Top Secret
Program Management Technical Solutions Business Development Aerospace professional with over 38 years’ experience as a program manager, proposal manager, capture team lead, subcontract manager, technical and functional manager. I have an extensive background in technical, cost and schedule management. I also possess a strong understanding of the government acquisition process and regulations as well as the Integrated Business Acquisition Process (IBAP) and NBF process. Knowledgeable in the implementation and advancement of a collaborative environment with program management that stresses program execution and excellence. Strong background in the implementation of proven business management practices including Program Management Best Practices (PMBP), EVMS, TPMs and baseline management. Solid history of customer satisfaction (outstanding CPAR and Award Fee scores), delivery of quality products and managing multiple priorities. Excellent interpersonal and team building skills, managing multiple priorities and communication.

Summary of Professional Experience
Consultant / Part Time Retirement May 2021 - Present
Boeing Phantom Works, Special Programs and Capabilities Director, Advanced Tactical Communications June 2007 – April 2021 Director and Program Manager for Boeing Phantom Works, Advanced Tactical Communications as part of Boeing Defense Space and Security. I’ve led numerous successful programs, proposals, strategy and IR&D development of tactical networks, communications and software defined radio systems and other related defense programs. I’ve developed winning proposals and led program execution for a diverse service portfolio that included Proprietary Programs (P924), ABMS, USA Project Convergence, USN Project Overmatch and Next Generation Networking Waveform (NGNW), Australian Wedgetail, Future Vertical Lift (FVL), USMC and NAVAIR flight demonstrations, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (including Airborne Launch Effects), the Common Data Link (CDL) Anti Jam contract and Talon HATE. Other proposal and program execution efforts include the Data Link Enterprise Delivery Order procurements out of Hanscom AFB (Capture Team Lead), the Tactical Combat Training System (TCTS, PW Program Manager) out of Pax River and the JTRS Enterprise Network Management (JENM). Current duties also include Program Manager for multiple labs including the Network Development Center and Gateway Network Integration Center. Duties include providing live, virtual and constructive modeling and analysis for communications systems for Boeing pursuits as well as developing and integrating flight hardware and prototype demonstrations.

Previously Program Manager for the Generic Heterogeneous Network Core (GHC) program.

Responsibilities included the design development and delivery of the GHC prototype. This was a software defined radio networking core that was delivered to the JTRS JPEO on time and under cost. Provided weekly EVMs status to the customer as well as conducted monthly TIMs, Program Reviews and Executive Briefings. Prototype was delivered ahead of schedule with an excellent award fee evaluation from the government.

Boeing Network and Space Systems
Network & Information Systems, Broadband Network Terminals (BNT) Sept 2004 – May 2007 As Proposal Operations Manager for BNT, responsible for the end to end execution and delivery of proposals within the FAB-T and HC3 programs. These include engineering change proposals, contract

Page 178 of 830 ends

change proposals and competitive procurements. Responsibilities include helping the Air Force customer develop POM updates and RFPs, work with the IPTs to develop BOEs, coordinate with subcontract management to develop SOWs for suppliers and support contracts and pricing cost and negotiation efforts.

Contract awards for my first six months in this position totaled over $120 million. In October of 2007, managed and delivered a FAB-T Increment I re-plan proposal priced at over $600M. Contract award was received February 2008.

Network & Information Systems, Program Operations and Integration April 2004 – Sept 2004 Responsible for taking the Network & Information Systems (N&IS) business area and integrating the program management processes, procedures and tools across approximately 11 different businesses that include FAB-T, CSEL, JTRS Cluster 1 and Network Technologies. Integration includes adoption of common EVMS methodologies, VSP reporting and Program Management Best Practices. Position reports to the director of NCS and has matrixed support staff from each program area.

Future Combat Systems, C4ISR Chief of Staff, Program Operation and Integration Feb 2003 – April 2004 As Chief of Staff, provide direct support to the C4ISR Director in the day-to-day and long-term execution of an FCS Tier 3 team with a budget of approximately $3.4 billion. Responsible for over-site and management of the Tier 4 product teams (Battle Command, SoSCOE, ISR, SEIT and Network Systems) to ensure cost, technical and schedule performance is being met. Also oversee business management and subcontractor management personnel assigned to the C4ISR team to ensure continuity of processes and support to the C4ISR teams. Interface with other Tier 3 Directors as well as the Army Program Manager and the Boeing FCS Vice President to provide weekly, monthly and quarterly status reports, as well as information briefings.

GPS Sustainment Program Manager Dec 1999 – Feb 2003
As a senior manager, I was responsible for the management and daily operations and maintenance of the GPS ground system which includes the master control station, remote site ground antennas and monitor stations and the GPS support facility. Activities centered around Performance Based Logistics (PBL) that included level 1 and 2 software maintenance, organizational and depot hardware maintenance, technology upgrade studies, configuration/data management, emergency support and other contractor logistics support requirements. Developed GPS Sustainment Information Management System for tracking inventories and system performance evaluations and status. Ensure continued quality of engineering and ILS products and processes and provide program status through TPMs, metrics and earned value reporting. Manage a budget of approximately $37 million dollars per year that supports a staff of over 160 personnel (including two major subcontractors) and annual hardware and software procurements. Lead numerous proposals for follow-on work for site modifications. Position reports to the director of GPS programs and works directly with senior Air Force personnel. I have received consistent blue CPARs and high award fee ratings.

GPS IIF Integrated Logistics Support IPT Manager Apr 1996 – Feb 2003 Navigation Systems Functional Manager
As a senior manager, I was responsible for the design, development and delivery of all ILS products for the new GPS control segment and IIF space vehicle, on time and within cost. Products include maintainability, reliability, testability and human factors analysis, software maintenance planning, technical documentation, training materials, LSA/LSAR, provisioning documentation, procurement of spares and development of logistics management plans. Worked directly with other IPTs including the ground segment software development team, space vehicle and SEIT to influence design and convert engineering materials into ILS products. Position reports directly to the program manager and senior Air Force personnel and manages a budget of approximately $8 million per year. Received consistent blue CPARs and high award fee ratings.

During this time, also led an IR&D project for Total Maintenance Responsibility in 1999 for the GPS program that resulted in approximately $300 million dollars of additional contract value and scope to the GPS IIF contract and an extended period of performance through 2012 for the above sustainment work.

Also, during this time I was the functional manager of the Navigation Systems logistics staff, responsible for hiring and maintaining resources to support advance programs, IR&D efforts, proposals and funded

Page 179 of 830 ends

programs. As functional manager also oversaw ILS support to various proposals that included Teledesic, Elipso and Global Broadcast System.

Rockwell Space Systems Divisions
Proposal Manager / Program Manager Oct 1994 – Apr 1996
Proposal Manager for the Space Systems Acquisition Support (SSAS) and for the Operational Space Systems Support (OSSS) procurements. Awarded the SSAS contract in June 1995 and served as program manager until April 1996, when I joined the GPS IIF program. SSAS was a time and materials, task order contract for the Space and Missiles Systems Center (SMC) at LA Air Force Base. The contract provided engineering and technical support to various programs at SMC. Managed numerous task orders which included systems engineering support to the SMC systems engineering center and engineering support to the Delta launch programs and other various satellite programs. Managed cost and schedule of all task orders. SSAS was a five year contract with a $200 million ceiling. OSSS was an Air Force Space Command proposal that I led for Boeing in 2000 while also acting as the GPS IIF ILS and sustainment manager. Contract was awarded to Harris.

Advanced Programs and Proposal Support Mar 1991 - Oct 1994 Worked in Advanced Programs providing systems engineering and ILS support to study contracts and IR&D projects. Programs supported included Advanced Launch System (ALS), Shuttle C, and National Launch System (NLS). Also provided engineering and logistics support to numerous proposals that included Global Broadcast System (GBS), Mars Surveyor, Assured Crew Rescue Vehicle (ACRV) Space Station and GPS IIF.

Logistics Engineer Feb 1990 – Mar 1991
Logistics engineer for space shuttle avionics subsystems. Responsible for supply support, development of technical documentation and other ILS products. Also during this time supported development of the NASA Space Logistics Depot (NSLD).

Rockwell Autonetics, Marine System Division
Logistics Analyst Oct 1982 – Feb 1990
Logistics Analyst for the ESGM/N programs. Responsible for supply support and other ILS duties in specific areas. Also worked in field engineering supporting failures and repairs.

Education
Boeing Leadership Center – Multiple courses including Program Managers Workshop, Strategic Leadership Seminar and Leading at Boeing.

Classes / Courses Taken include Writing Winning Proposals, Writing Cost Volumes, Systems Engineering Course, Risk Management, Effective Communications, Government Business Acquisition Process, Leadership 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and various functional courses (interpersonal skills, resolving conflict etc).

California State University, Long Beach – B.S. Business Management Awards and Recognition
Papers presented at Space Congress and numerous Symposiums Receipt of numerous cash and stock awards, launch honoree, letters of recognition and other awards

Page 180 of 830 ends

City Council

STAFF REPORT
Date: June 19, 2024 Agenda Item:

6.B.

To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Chad Blais, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Chad Blais, Public Works Director
Department: Public Works
SUBJECT:

Discussion regarding the methodology used for establishment of speed limits in Norco RECOMMENDATION:

City Council provide direction regarding potential modification of the process to establish speed limits.

SUMMARY:

Questions and concerns have been raised regarding some of the existing speed limits in town and whether the City could consider lowering the speeds beyond currently adopted posted limits. Public Works has recently reviewed this issue and provided feedback in a memorandum dated May 29, 2024. Based on Public Works comments, the City Council requested an additional discussion at the next Council meeting specifically addressing whether speed limits could be lowered despite findings from speed surveys. Public Works has prepared additional information for Council's consideration and discussion.

BACKGROUND:

On May 29, 2024, Public Works provided a memorandum to City Council regarding information on the establishment of speed limits and mediation of truck routes (see attached memo). This memorandum was in response to Public Works evaluation of various materials provided by a Street, Trails, and Utilities Commission member and the memorandum outlines how the City already uses all required methodologies and speed reduction exceptions to ensure the lowest speed limits possible in Norco. On June 5, 2024, Council asked Public Works to bring back a discussion item to review the methodologies used to establish speed limits to determine if more could be done to legally lower speed limits or if the City could just lower the speeds limits to any level. To provide some context for Council discussion, the City Engineer prepared a memo outlining the use of speed survey guidelines to establish speed limits and consequences

Page 181 of 830 ends

related to enforcement of speed limits if these guidelines are not followed (see attached memo).

Also, for additional background information for this discussion, Public Works has also attached the summary report from the most recent Speed Survey Study completed in 2020 (excludes the appendixes).

Public Works is seeking Council review of the information and provide any comments or direction regarding this matter.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Not applicable for this item.

RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN:

This discussion item is consistent with Strategic Plan Direction No. 1 - Public Health, Safety and Wellness: Enhance quality of life by promoting public health, safety and wellness initiatives for all community members.

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

Certified as to Availability of Funds: Lisette Free, Finance Director Approved by: Lori Sassoon, City Manager
Approved as to Form: Harper and Burns, LLP, City Attorney ATTACHMENT(S):

Memo - Norco Speed Limits & Truck Routes
Memo - Speed Survey Guidelines
Citywide Traffic Survey 2020 Report pg 1 -13

Page 182 of 830 ends

Memorandum

CITY OF NORCO
City Engineer’s Office
DATE: MAY 29, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CHAD BLAIS, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DAVID GILBERTSON, CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: SPEED LIMIT REGULATIONS AND TRUCK ROUTES
_____________________________________________________________________ At the May 1, 2024 City Council meeting, STUC member Mike Williams provided the City Council with some public comments and reference material regarding truck routes and speed limits (see Exhibit A). Specifically, Mr. Williams stated his research has led him to believe the speed surveys conducted by the City are not using current allowable exceptions that would enable the City to consider lower speed limits and that there is an unused legal basis for more truck restrictions in Norco. Mr. Williams also requested the Council allow STUC to review this information and come up with recommendations, which Council elected to do.

However, prior to bringing any discussion forward, the Director of Public Works and City Engineer reviewed the material provided by Mr. Williams to ensure the information was accurate and relevant for a potential discussion.

Establishment of Speed Limits – General Information
Engineering and Traffic (E&T) Surveys are required by the State of California to establish intermediate speed limits on local streets and to enforce those limits using radar or other speed measuring devices. These surveys must be updated every 5, 7, or 14 years to ensure the speeds reflect current conditions as dictated by the California Vehicle Code (CVC). The CVC also requires that the surveys be conducted based on the methodology required by the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CaMUTCD).

Speed limits are established at the nearest 5-mile per hour (mph) increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic travels. This threshold represents what is historically found to be a safe and reasonable speed for most drivers based on common roadway conditions.

The CVC authorizes an agency to adjust the established speed limit an additional 5 MPH after a careful review of the prevailing speeds, accident records, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.

Speed Limit Discussion
Assembly Bill No. 1669 (Chapter 282) - An act to add Section 22353.5 to the Vehicle Code, related to speed limits. Approved August 2014.

Page 183 of 830 ends

The information provided by Mr. Williams was a self-written summary of the actual assembly bill and not the complete language of the bill. A full copy of the bill is attached for your reference in Exhibit B. The key issue discussed in AB 1669 (Wagner) was to allow “Authorizes Orange County, when conducting an engineering and traffic survey within the unincorporated City of Orange Park Acres, to consider equestrian safety in addition to the other factors specified in law.” The City of Norco has been able to use equestrian safety in their speed limit evaluations since 2003 and this has been previously stated and reminded to the STUC on multiple occasions when the discussion of speed limits has been raised.

Assembly Bill No. 43 (Chapter 690) - An act to amend Sections 627, 21400, 22352, 22354, 22358, and 40802 of, and to add Sections 22358.6, 22358.7, 22358.8, and 22358.9 to, the Vehicle Code, relating to traffic safety. Approved October 08, 2021.

The information provided by Mr. Williams was a self-written summary of the actual assembly bill and not the complete language of the bill. A full copy of the bill is attached for your reference In Exhibit C. Mr. Williams states “Basically, the 85th Percentile was considered outdated. AB 43 gives cities more flexibility when setting speed limits.” Unfortunately, the Bill does not address the use of the 85th Percentile as being outdated in any way. Rather, the key issue discussed in AB 43 (Friedman) was to ”authorize local authorities to consider the safety of vulnerable pedestrian groups”. The Bill also stated “Existing law authorizes local authorities to consider additional factors, including pedestrian and bicyclist safety.”
The City has been able to use equestrian and bicyclist safety in their speed limit evaluations since 2003 and this has been previously stated and reminded to the STUC on multiple occasions when the discussion of speed limits has been raised. Although the State added another factor for consideration (i.e. pedestrians) when considering 5 mph speed reduction exemptions as part of establishing speed limits, the E&T does not allow those exemptions to be compounded or cumulative. Meaning, you can’t add 5 mph reduction for equestrians, 5 mph reduction for bicyclists and 5 mph reduction for pedestrians. The City’s default use of equestrian exemption in use since 2003 is the maximum reduction allowed and already factored into the current established speed limits in Norco.

Truck Routes
Mr. Williams provided one resource, a partial summation from the Caltrans website regarding truck restrictions and Vehicle Code 21101 that focuses on “Local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution”. Mr. Williams suggested this information would allow the City to potentially eliminate truck traffic on California Avenue. However, Section 21101 of the vehicle code is specific about closing roads to all vehicular traffic, not just limiting truck traffic (see Exhibit D). Caltrans website which Mr. Williams quoted as a resource (see Exhibit E) mentions that truck traffic for commerce is legally protected and any changes “requires substantial supporting evidence such as accident data and a reasonable alternate route”.

Public Works is not aware of any historical issue with vehicle accidents on California Avenue or anywhere in the City related to truck traffic. Even if there was data to show a high level of truck traffic related to accidents on California Avenue, there is no reasonable alternate route available (i.e. Crestview Drive). All other adjacent streets nearby to California Avenue are local residential streets and are not favorable to truck traffic and would present a greater impact to the community.

Page 184 of 830 ends

Final Thoughts and Recommendations
All the reference materials provided by Mr. Williams related to speed limits were already known parameters taken into consideration and utilized when appropriate by the City. The safety of the community in regards to vehicle speed is a paramount concern for the City and the Public Works Department and its consultants are aware of the laws that govern how speed limits are established, including any legal authorized speed reduction factors that can be used. While we appreciate the passion of our community to want to see something more done to limit vehicle speeds, posted speed limitations must be defensible in a court of law because they were established based on State guidelines. While truck traffic in general is not desirable, it is a critical function of commerce and problematic to restrict without sufficient data and reasonable alternate routes. In summary, no action is warranted at this time and this information will be provided to the STUC members at the next meeting.

Page 185 of 830 ends

EXHIBIT A

Page 186 of 830 ends

Page 187 of 830 ends

Page 188 of 830 ends

Page 189 of 830 ends

EXHIBIT B

Page 190 of 830 ends

BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1669

Page 1 ends

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1669 (Wagner)
As Amended June 17, 2014
Majority vote

----------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |74-0 |(April 7, 2014) |SENATE: |36-0 |(August 7, | | | | | | |2014) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Original Committee Reference: TRANS.

SUMMARY : Authorizes Orange County, when conducting an
engineering and traffic survey within the unincorporated City of Orange Park Acres, to consider equestrian safety. Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes Orange County, when conducting an engineering and traffic survey within the unincorporated City of Orange Park Acres, to consider equestrian safety in addition to the other factors specified in law.
2)Makes findings related to the necessity of a special law due to unique circumstances applicable only to the unincorporated City of Orange Park Acres and its equestrian trails.

The Senate amendments clarify that Orange Park Acres is a common interest development and that the engineering traffic survey called for in this bill would be conducted on public streets within the common interest development boundary.

EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), after consultation with local agencies and public hearings, to adopt rules and regulations prescribing uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic control devices, including, but not limited to, stop signs, yield right-of-way signs, speed restriction signs, railroad warning approach signs, street name signs, lines and markings on the roadway, and stock crossing signs.
2)Requires an engineering and traffic survey to include, among other requirements deemed necessary by Caltrans, consideration of all of the following:

AB 1669

Page 2 ends

a) Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements;
b) Accident records; and,
c) Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.
1)Permits local authorities to additionally consider all of the following when conducting an engineering and traffic survey:
a) Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:
i) Upon one side of the highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting
thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling
houses or business structures;
ii) Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous
property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more
separate dwelling houses or business structures; or,
iii) The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway
described in either of the above.
b) Pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

FISCAL EFFECT : None
5/26/24, 3:53 PM AB 1669 Assembly Bill - Bill Analysis
www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_1651-1700/ab_1669_cfa_20140808_165455_asm_floor.html 1/3

Page 191 of 830 ends

COMMENTS : Existing law requires Caltrans, after consultation with local agencies and public hearings, to adopt rules and regulations that prescribe uniform standards and specifications for traffic control devices, including the posting of speed limits. Caltrans adopts these rules as the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (the California MUTCD), which, among other things, prescribes the process for setting speed limits in this state.

In California and elsewhere, speed limits are generally set in AB 1669

Page 3 ends

accordance with engineering and traffic surveys, which measure prevailing vehicular speeds and establish the limit at or near the 85th percentile (i.e., the speed that 15% of motorists exceed). California uses the 85th percentile to set speed limits except in cases where the limit is set in state law, such as the 25 miles per hour (MPH) limit in residence districts and school zones, or where an engineering and traffic survey shows that other safety-related factors suggest that a lower speed limit is warranted. These safety-related factors, as prescribed by law, include accident data; highway, traffic, and roadway conditions not readily apparent to the driver; residential density; and pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Based on any of these safety-related factors, Caltrans regulations allow a local jurisdiction to reduce a speed limit by 5 MPH from the 85th percentile.

In cases where the 85th percentile speed is not an increment of 5 MPH, the California MUTCD directs a jurisdiction to round to the nearest 5 MPH increment. Thus, if the survey shows an 85th percentile speed of 32 MPH, the jurisdiction must set the speed limit at 30 MPH. The jurisdiction may then lower the speed limit to 25 MPH if it identifies and documents a safety-related factor. The jurisdiction cannot lower the speed limit by more than 5 MPH, regardless of additional safety factors. In instances where the jurisdiction should round up to reach the nearest 5 MPH, the MUTCD allows the jurisdiction to instead round down, but then the jurisdiction may not reduce the posted speed limit by 5 MPH based on a safety-related factor.

This bill would allow Orange County, when conducting an engineering and traffic study within the community of Orange Park Acres, to consider equestrian safety. Orange Park Acres is an unincorporated community in Orange County that has an extensive network of equestrian trails. Residents frequently travel through the community by horse, often traversing the same roads as vehicles. Orange Park Acres would like Orange County to consider the safety of equestrian users in determining speed limits on public roads within the community, but the county is currently limited to considering only the safety-related listed in statute.

Prior Legislation: AB 2402 (Rod Pacheco), Chapter 186, Statutes of 2002, authorized the City of Norco, when conducting an engineering and traffic survey, to consider equestrian safety in addition to other factors required by law.

AB 1669

Page 4 ends

Analysis Prepared by : Anya Lawler / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 FN: 0004124
5/26/24, 3:53 PM AB 1669 Assembly Bill - Bill Analysis
www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_1651-1700/ab_1669_cfa_20140808_165455_asm_floor.html 2/3

Page 192 of 830 ends

EXHIBIT C

Page 193 of 830 ends

Assembly Bill No. 43
CHAPTER 690
An act to amend Sections 627, 21400, 22352, 22354, 22358, and 40802 of, and to add Sections 22358.6, 22358.7, 22358.8, and 22358.9 to, the Vehicle Code, relating to traffic safety.
[Approved by Governor October 8, 2021. Filed with Secretary of State October 8, 2021.]
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 43, Friedman. Traffic safety.
(1) Existing law establishes various default speed limits for vehicles upon highways, as specified. Existing law authorizes state and local authorities to adjust these default speed limits, as specified, based upon certain findings determined by an engineering and traffic survey. Existing law defines an engineering and traffic survey and prescribes specified factors that must be included in the survey, including prevailing speeds and road conditions.

Existing law authorizes local authorities to consider additional factors, including pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

This bill would authorize local authorities to consider the safety of vulnerable pedestrian groups, as specified.
(2) Existing law establishes a prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour on any highway, other than a state highway, located in any business or residence district, as defined. Existing law authorizes a local authority to change the speed limit on any such highway, as prescribed, including erecting signs to give notice thereof.

This bill would establish a prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour on state highways located in any business or residence district and would authorize the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to change the speed limit on any such highway, as prescribed, including erecting signs to give notice thereof.
(3) Existing law establishes a speed limit of 65 miles per hour on state highways, as specified. Existing law authorizes Caltrans to declare a speed limit on any such highway, as prescribed, of 60, 55, 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, or 25 miles per hour, including erecting signs to give notice thereof. Existing law also authorizes a local authority, on a section of highway, other than a state highway, where the speed limit is 65 miles per hour to declare a lower speed limit, as specified.

This bill would additionally authorize Caltrans and a local authority to declare a speed limit of 20 or 15 miles per hour, as specified, on these highways.
(4) Existing law authorizes a local authority, without an engineering and traffic survey, to declare a lowered speed limit on portions of highway, as

Page 194 of 830 ends

specified, approaching a school building or school grounds. Existing law limits this authority to sections of highway meeting specified requirements relating to the number of lanes and the speed limit of the highway before the school zone.

This bill would similarly authorize a lowered speed limit on a section of highway contiguous to a business activity district, as defined, and would require that certain violations be subject to a warning citation, for the first 30 days of implementation.
(5) Existing law requires Caltrans, by regulation, to provide for the rounding up or down to the nearest 5 miles per hour increment of the 85th percentile speed of free-flowing traffic on a portion of highway as determined by a traffic and engineering survey. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to create and implement an online tool by June 30, 2024, for the adjudication of traffic infractions, among other things.

This bill would authorize a local authority to further reduce the speed limit, as specified, and require that certain violations be subject to a warning citation, for the first 30 days of implementation. The bill would, in some circumstances, authorize the reduction of a speed limit beginning June 30, 2024, or when the Judicial Council has developed an online tool for adjudicating traffic infraction violations, whichever is sooner. The bill would require Caltrans to accordingly revise the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, as specified.
(6) Existing law defines a speed trap and prohibits evidence of a driver’s speed obtained through a speed trap from being admissible in court in any prosecution against a driver for a speed-related offense. Existing law deems a road where the speed limit is not justified by a traffic and engineering survey conducted within the previous 7 years to be a speed trap, unless the roadway has been evaluated by a registered engineer, as specified, in which case the speed limit remains enforceable for a period of 10 years. Existing law exempts a school zone, as defined, from certain provisions relating to defining a speed trap.

This bill would extend the period that a speed limit justified by a traffic and engineering survey conducted more the 7 years ago remains valid, for purposes of speed enforcement, if evaluated by a registered engineer, as specified, to 14 years.

This bill would also exempt a senior zone and business activity district, as defined, from those provisions.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 627 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
627. (a) “Engineering and traffic survey,” as used in this code, means a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for use by state and local authorities.
90 Ch. 690 — 2 —

Page 195 of 830 ends

(b)  An engineering and traffic survey shall include, among other requirements deemed necessary by the department, consideration of all of the following:
(1)  Prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements. (2)  Accident records.
(3)  Highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.
(c)  When conducting an engineering and traffic survey, local authorities, in addition to the factors set forth in paragraphs (1) to (3), inclusive, of subdivision (b) may consider all of the following:
(1)  Residential density, if any of the following conditions exist on the particular portion of highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district:
(A)  Upon one side of the highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures.
(B)  Upon both sides of the highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures. (C)  The portion of highway is longer than one-quarter of a mile but has the ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway described in either subparagraph (A) or (B). (2)  Safety of bicyclists and pedestrians, with increased consideration for vulnerable pedestrian groups including children, seniors, persons with disabilities, users of personal assistive mobility devices, and the unhoused.

SEC. 2. Section 21400 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
21400. (a)  The Department of Transportation shall, after consultation with local agencies and public hearings, adopt rules and regulations prescribing uniform standards and specifications for all official traffic control devices placed pursuant to this code, including, but not limited to, stop signs, yield right-of-way signs, speed restriction signs, railroad warning approach signs, street name signs, lines and markings on the roadway, and stock crossing signs placed pursuant to Section 21364.
(b)  The Department of Transportation shall, after notice and public hearing, determine and publicize the specifications for uniform types of warning signs, lights, and devices to be placed upon a highway by a person engaged in performing work that interferes with or endangers the safe movement of traffic upon that highway.
(c)  Only those signs, lights, and devices as are provided for in this section shall be placed upon a highway to warn traffic of work that is being performed on the highway.
(d)   Control devices or markings installed upon traffic barriers on or after January 1, 1984, shall conform to the uniform standards and specifications required by this section.

SEC. 3. Section 22352 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
90 — 3 — Ch. 690

Page 196 of 830 ends

22352. The prima facie limits are as follows and shall be applicable unless changed as authorized in this code and, if so changed, only when signs have been erected giving notice thereof:
(a)  Fifteen miles per hour:
(1)  When traversing a railway grade crossing, if during the last 100 feet of the approach to the crossing the driver does not have a clear and unobstructed view of the crossing and of any traffic on the railway for a distance of 400 feet in both directions along the railway. This subdivision does not apply in the case of any railway grade crossing where a human flagperson is on duty or a clearly visible electrical or mechanical railway crossing signal device is installed but does not then indicate the immediate approach of a railway train or car.
(2)  When traversing any intersection of highways if during the last 100 feet of the driver’s approach to the intersection the driver does not have a clear and unobstructed view of the intersection and of any traffic upon all of the highways entering the intersection for a distance of 100 feet along all those highways, except at an intersection protected by stop signs or yield right-of-way signs or controlled by official traffic control signals. (3)  On any alley.
(b)  Twenty-five miles per hour:
(1)  On any highway, in any business or residence district unless a different speed is determined by local authority or the Department of Transportation under procedures set forth in this code.
(2)  When approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching or passing any school grounds which are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign. For purposes of this subparagraph, standard “SCHOOL” warning signs may be placed at any distance up to 500 feet away from school grounds.
(3)  When passing a senior center or other facility primarily used by senior citizens, contiguous to a street other than a state highway and posted with a standard “SENIOR” warning sign. A local authority may erect a sign pursuant to this paragraph when the local agency makes a determination that the proposed signing should be implemented. A local authority may request grant funding from the Active Transportation Program pursuant to Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 2380) of Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code, or any other grant funding available to it, and use that grant funding to pay for the erection of those signs, or may utilize any other funds available to it to pay for the erection of those signs, including, but not limited to, donations from private sources.

SEC. 4. Section 22354 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
22354. (a) Whenever the Department of Transportation determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the limit of 65 miles 90 Ch. 690 — 4 —

Page 197 of 830 ends

per hour is more than is reasonable or safe upon any portion of a state highway where the limit of 65 miles is applicable, the department may determine and declare a prima facie speed limit of 60, 55, 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, 25, 20, or 15 miles per hour, whichever is found most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and is reasonable and safe, which declared prima facie speed limit shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the highway.
(b) This section shall become operative on the date specified in subdivision (c) of Section 22366.

SEC. 5. Section 22358 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
22358. (a) Whenever a local authority determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the limit of 65 miles per hour is more than is reasonable or safe upon any portion of any street other than a state highway where the limit of 65 miles per hour is applicable, the local authority may by ordinance determine and declare a prima facie speed limit of 60, 55, 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, 25, 20, or 15 miles per hour, whichever is found most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and is reasonable and safe, which declared prima facie limit shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the street. (b) This section shall become operative on the date specified in subdivision (c) of Section 22366.

SEC. 6. Section 22358.6 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
22358.6. The Department of Transportation shall, in the next scheduled revision, revise and thereafter maintain the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices to require the Department of Transportation or a local authority to round speed limits to the nearest five miles per hour of the 85th percentile of the free-flowing traffic. However, in cases in which the speed limit needs to be rounded up to the nearest five miles per hour increment of the 85th-percentile speed, the Department of Transportation or a local authority may decide to instead round down the speed limit to the lower five miles per hour increment. A local authority may additionally lower the speed limit as provided in Sections 22358.7 and 22358.8.

SEC. 7. Section 22358.7 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
22358.7. (a)  If a local authority, after completing an engineering and traffic survey, finds that the speed limit is still more than is reasonable or safe, the local authority may, by ordinance, determine and declare a prima facie speed limit that has been reduced an additional five miles per hour for either of the following reasons:
(1)  The portion of highway has been designated as a safety corridor. A local authority shall not deem more than one-fifth of their streets as safety corridors.
(2)  The portion of highway is adjacent to any land or facility that generates high concentrations of bicyclists or pedestrians, especially those from vulnerable groups such as children, seniors, persons with disabilities, and the unhoused.
(b)  (1)  As used in this section, “safety corridor” shall be defined by the Department of Transportation in the next revision of the California Manual 90 — 5 — Ch. 690

Page 198 of 830 ends

on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In making this determination, the department shall consider highways that have the highest number of serious injuries and fatalities based on collision data that may be derived from, but not limited to, the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System. (2) The Department of Transportation shall, in the next revision of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, determine what constitutes land or facilities that generate high concentrations of bicyclists and pedestrians, as used in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a). In making this determination, the department shall consider density, road use type, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure present on a section of highway. (c) A local authority may not lower a speed limit as authorized by this section until June 30, 2024, or until the Judicial Council has developed an online tool for adjudicating infraction violations statewide as specified in Article 7 (commencing with Section 68645) of Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Government Code, whichever is sooner.
(d) A local authority shall issue only warning citations for violations of exceeding the speed limit by 10 miles per hour or less for the first 30 days that a lower speed limit is in effect as authorized by this section.

SEC. 8. Section 22358.8 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
22358.8. (a)  If a local authority, after completing an engineering and traffic survey, finds that the speed limit is still more than is reasonable or safe, the local authority may, by ordinance, retain the current speed limit or restore the immediately prior speed limit if that speed limit was established with an engineering and traffic survey and if a registered engineer has evaluated the section of highway and determined that no additional general purpose lanes have been added to the roadway since completion of the traffic survey that established the prior speed limit.
(b)  This section does not authorize a speed limit to be reduced by any more than five miles per hour from the current speed limit nor below the immediately prior speed limit.
(c)  A local authority shall issue only warning citations for violations of exceeding the speed limit by 10 miles per hour or less for the first 30 days that a lower speed limit is in effect as authorized by this section.

SEC. 9. Section 22358.9 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
22358.9. (a)  (1)  Notwithstanding any other law, a local authority may, by ordinance, determine and declare a 25 or 20 miles per hour prima facie speed limit on a highway contiguous to a business activity district when posted with a sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 or 20 miles per hour. (2)  The prima facie limits established under paragraph (1) apply only to highways that meet all of the following conditions:
(A)  A maximum of four traffic lanes.
(B)  A maximum posted 30 miles per hour prima facie speed limit immediately prior to and after the business activity district, if establishing a 25 miles per hour speed limit.
(C)  A maximum posted 25 miles per hour prima facie speed limit immediately prior to and after the business activity district, if establishing a 20 miles per hour speed limit.
90 Ch. 690 — 6 —

Page 199 of 830 ends

(b)  As used in this section, a “business activity district” is that portion of a highway and the property contiguous thereto that includes central or neighborhood downtowns, urban villages, or zoning designations that prioritize commercial land uses at the downtown or neighborhood scale and meets at least three of the following requirements in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive:
(1)  No less than 50 percent of the contiguous property fronting the highway consists of retail or dining commercial uses, including outdoor dining, that open directly onto sidewalks adjacent to the highway. (2)  Parking, including parallel, diagonal, or perpendicular spaces located alongside the highway.
(3)  Traffic control signals or stop signs regulating traffic flow on the highway, located at intervals of no more than 600 feet. (4)  Marked crosswalks not controlled by a traffic control device. (c)  A local authority shall not declare a prima facie speed limit under this section on a portion of a highway where the local authority has already lowered the speed limit as permitted under Sections 22358.7 and 22358.8. (d)  A local authority shall issue only warning citations for violations of exceeding the speed limit by 10 miles per hour or less for the first 30 days that a lower speed limit is in effect as authorized by this section.

SEC. 10. Section 40802 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read:
40802. (a)  A “speed trap” is either of the following:
(1)  A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.
(2)  A particular section of a highway with a prima facie speed limit that is provided by this code or by local ordinance under paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357, 22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects. This paragraph does not apply to a local street, road, school zone, senior zone, or business activity district.
(b)  (1)  For purposes of this section, a local street or road is one that is functionally classified as “local” on the “California Road System Maps,” that are approved by the Federal Highway Administration and maintained by the Department of Transportation. It may also be defined as a “local street or road” if it primarily provides access to abutting residential property and meets the following three conditions:
(A)  Roadway width of not more than 40 feet.
(B)  Not more than one-half of a mile of uninterrupted length. Interruptions shall include official traffic control signals as defined in Section 445. (C)  Not more than one traffic lane in each direction.
(2)  For purposes of this section, “school zone” means that area approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof that is 90 — 7 — Ch. 690

Page 200 of 830 ends

contiguous to a highway and on which is posted a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the noon recess period. “School zone” also includes the area approaching or passing any school grounds that are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children if that highway is posted with a standard “SCHOOL” warning sign.
(3)  For purposes of this section, “senior zone” means that area approaching or passing a senior center building or other facility primarily used by senior citizens, or the grounds thereof that is contiguous to a highway and on which is posted a standard “SENIOR” warning sign, pursuant to Section 22352.
(4)  For purposes of this section, “business activity district” means a section of highway described in subdivision (b) of Section 22358.9 in which a standard 25 miles per hour or 20 miles per hour speed limit sign has been posted pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of that section. (c)  (1)  When all of the following criteria are met, paragraph (2) of this subdivision shall be applicable and subdivision (a) shall not be applicable:
(A)  When radar is used, the arresting officer has successfully completed a radar operator course of not less than 24 hours on the use of police traffic radar, and the course was approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(B)  When laser or any other electronic device is used to measure the speed of moving objects, the arresting officer has successfully completed the training required in subparagraph (A) and an additional training course of not less than two hours approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(C)  (i)  The prosecution proved that the arresting officer complied with subparagraphs (A) and (B) and that an engineering and traffic survey has been conducted in accordance with subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2). The prosecution proved that, prior to the officer issuing the notice to appear, the arresting officer established that the radar, laser, or other electronic device conformed to the requirements of subparagraph (D).
(ii)  The prosecution proved the speed of the accused was unsafe for the conditions present at the time of alleged violation unless the citation was for a violation of Section 22349, 22356, or 22406.
(D)  The radar, laser, or other electronic device used to measure the speed of the accused meets or exceeds the minimal operational standards of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and has been calibrated within the three years prior to the date of the alleged violation by an independent certified laser or radar repair and testing or calibration facility. (2)  A “speed trap” is either of the following:
(A)  A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.
90 Ch. 690 — 8 —

Page 201 of 830 ends

(B)  (i)  A particular section of a highway or state highway with a prima facie speed limit that is provided by this code or by local ordinance under paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357, 22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within one of the following time periods, prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects:
(I)  Except as specified in subclause (II), seven years. (II)  If an engineering and traffic survey was conducted more than seven years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and a registered engineer evaluates the section of the highway and determines that no significant changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred, including, but not limited to, changes in adjoining property or land use, roadway width, or traffic volume, 14 years.
(ii)  This subparagraph does not apply to a local street, road, or school zone, senior zone, or business activity district.

O
90 — 9 — Ch. 690

Page 202 of 830 ends

EXHIBIT D

Page 203 of 830 ends

2011 California Code
Vehicle Code
DIVISION 11. RULES OF THE ROAD
[21000 - 23336]
ARTICLE 3. Local Regulation
Section 21101
Universal Citation: CA Veh Code § 21101 (through 2012 Leg Sess) Local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution on the following matters:
(a) Closing any highway to vehicular traffic when, in the opinion of the legislative body having jurisdiction, the highway is either of the following:
(1) No longer needed for vehicular traffic.
(2) The closure is in the interests of public safety and all of the following conditions and requirements are met:
(A) The street proposed for closure is located in a county with a population of 6,000,000 or more.
(B) The street has an unsafe volume of traffic and a significant incidence of crime.

There is a newer version of the California Code
View our newest version here
5/26/24, 4:29 PM CA Veh Code § 21101 :: Section 21101 :: 2011 California Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/veh/division-11/21100-21117/21101 1/3

Page 204 of 830 ends

(C) The affected local authority conducts a public hearing on the proposed street closure. (D) Notice of the hearing is provided to residents and owners of property adjacent to the street proposed for closure.
(E) The local authority makes a finding that closure of the street likely would result in a reduced rate of crime.
(b) Designating any highway as a through highway and requiring that all vehicles observe official traffic control devices before entering or crossing the highway or designating any intersection as a stop intersection and requiring all vehicles to stop at one or more entrances to the intersection.
(c) Prohibiting the use of particular highways by certain vehicles, except as otherwise provided by the Public Utilities Commission pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 1031) of Chapter 5 of Part 1 of Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code. (d) Closing particular streets during regular school hours for the purpose of conducting automobile driver training programs in the secondary schools and colleges of this state. (e) Temporarily closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction or a public officer or employee that the local authority designates by resolution, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing.
(f) Prohibiting entry to, or exit from, or both, from any street by means of islands, curbs, traffic barriers, or other roadway design features to implement the circulation element of a general plan adopted pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 65350) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. The rules and regulations authorized by this subdivision shall be consistent with the responsibility of local government to provide for the health and safety of its citizens.
(Amended by Stats. 1998, Ch. 877, Sec. 63.5. Effective January 1, 1999.) Disclaimer: These codes may not be the most recent version. California may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
5/26/24, 4:29 PM CA Veh Code § 21101 :: Section 21101 :: 2011 California Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/veh/division-11/21100-21117/21101 2/3

Page 205 of 830 ends

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. 5/26/24, 4:29 PM CA Veh Code § 21101 :: Section 21101 :: 2011 California Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/veh/division-11/21100-21117/21101 3/3

Page 206 of 830 ends

EXHIBIT E

Page 207 of 830 ends

Home Programs Traffic Operations Legal Truck Access
Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions
Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions
Feasibility
Legal protection for commerce: Most truck ban requests arise from noise complaints. However, overland trucking is the primary means of moving goods in the United States. Commerce and trade have state and federal legal protection; therefore, restriction of commerce is difficult. It requires substantial supporting evidence such as accident data and a reasonable alternate route.

Legal Trucks
Height: Truck Height is limited to 14 feet. For more information, see Height and Low Clearance .

Width: Truck width is limited to 8.5 feet. For more information, see Vehicle Widths .

Length - Single Unit: The basic length limit for all single unit vehicles is 40 feet; however, length exceptions are given for buses and motorhomes up to 45 feet on certain routes (see 45' Buses and 45' Motorhomes ) Length - Combinations: Combination vehicles coupled together, such as a truck tractor and semitrailer, or a truck tractor, semitrailer and trailer, are limited to 65 feet, or 75 feet, or may be unlimited depending on the route. In addition, legal trucks in California must not exceed a kingpin-to-rear-axle (KPRA) length of 40 feet. See Quick Guide: Truck Lengths & Routes.

Weight: The maximum overall weight limit is 80,000 pounds. The California Vehicle Code (CVC) also specifies maximum axle weight limits as well.

Generally, the maximum allowable weights are 20,000 pounds on single axles and 34,000 pounds on tandem axles equipped with the proper tire weight capacity ratings. For weight requirements, see Weight Limitation .

Current State Route Restrictions
Current restrictions: There are approximately 20 State route segments with specific truck restrictions, including number of axles, gross weight, length, and cargo type (e.g. flammables, explosives, radioactive materials). See State route restrictions at Special Route Restrictions , which includes links to the histories of some restrictions.

Legal Basis
State authority:

CA.gov About Caltrans Contact Us ADA Certification Request ADA Compliant Documents  Settings  Translate 
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 1/7

Page 208 of 830 ends

Streets & Highways Code (SHC) §124 . "The department may restrict the use of, or close, any State highway whenever the department considers such closing or restriction of use necessary: (a) For the protection of the public. (b) For the protection of such highway from damage during storms or during construction, improvement or maintenance operations thereon.” SHC §125 . “To notify the public that a state highway is close or its use restricted, the department may: (a) Erect suitable barriers or obstructions upon such highway. (b) Post warnings and notices of the condition of any such highway. (c) Post signs for the direction of traffic upon any other highway or detour open to the public travel. (d) Place warning devices on such highway. (e) Assign a flagman to warn, detour or direct traffic on such highway."
CVC §21370 . “The Department of Transportation, ..., while engaged in the construction of a state highway ... may restrict the use of and regulate the movement of traffic upon any highway intersecting the project at or near the place of intersection whenever such work interferes with or endangers the safe movement of traffic through the work.”
Legal basis in accordance with CVC for the restriction process:

Legal basis in accordance with CVC for the Department varying weight limits:
§21101 "Local authorities...may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution... (c) Prohibiting the use of particular highways by certain vehicles..."
§21104 "No ordinance or resolution proposed to be enacted under Section 21101...is effective as to any highway not under the exclusive jurisdiction of the local authority enacting the same, except that an ordinance or resolution which is submitted to the Department of Transportation by a local legislative body in complete draft form for approval...is effective as to any state highway..."
§21105 “No rule or regulation… shall be effective as to boundary line streets where portions thereof are within different jurisdiction unless approved by all authorities having jurisdiction of such portions of the street concerned have approved the same.”
§35650 “The Department of Transportation…shall have authority to declare and to fix a weight limit greater than the maximum weight limit set forth in this code...”
§35651 “Whenever in the judgement of the Department of
Transportation any state highway will not with safety to itself sustain the maximum weights…the department shall determine, after a public hearing, the maximum weight which the highway will sustain.” §35652 “The Department of Transportation shall give notice of the time and place of the hearing by posting a notice in the county seat of each county in which any affected portion of the highway is located …Notice of the hearing shall be given for not less than 10 days…” §35653 “The hearing shall be conducted by one or more engineers appointed by the Director of Transportation…Upon the basis of the findings, the Director of Transportation shall declare in writing the maximum weight which can be maintained with safety upon the state highway…”
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 2/7

Page 209 of 830 ends

Legal basis in accordance with CVC for local authorities varying weight limits or restricting vehicles:

Legal basis in accordance with CVC for restricting Combination Length to 60 feet:

Legal basis in accordance with CVC for restricting KPRA to 38 feet:
§35654 “Following the declaration of maximum weight as provided in this article, the Department of Transportation shall erect suitable signs at each end of the affected portion of the highway and at such other points…”
§35701 "(a) Any city, or county for a residence district, may, by ordinance, prohibit the use of a street by any commercial vehicle or by any vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit...(b) The ordinance shall not be effective until...signs are erected...(c) No ordinance...shall apply to any state highway...in the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, except (that) approved by a two-thirds vote of the California Transportation Commission."
§35702 "No ordinance proposed under §35701 is effective with respect to any...state highway, until the ordinance has been submitted by the...local authority to, and approved in writing by, the Department of Transportation. ...the local authority shall designate...an alternate route..."
§35703 "No ordinance adopted pursuant to §35701 shall prohibit any commercial vehicles coming from an unrestricted street...by direct route to and from a restricted street...for the purpose of making pickups or deliveries..."
§35712 "(a) Any county may, by ordinance, prohibit the use of any highway located in an unincorporated residential or subdivision area by any commercial vehicle exceeding a gross weight of 14,000 pounds. (b) Any county of the third class...may...prohibit the use of any highway...by any commercial vehicle exceeding a gross weight of 5,000 pounds." §35714 "No ordinance adopted pursuant to §35712 shall be effective with respect to: ... (c) Any commercial vehicle ... for the purpose of making pickups or deliveries (f) Any state highway, until the proposed ordinance has been submitted by the board of supervisors of the county to and approved in writing by the Department of Transportation. In submitting a proposed ordinance to the department for approval, the board of supervisors shall designate therein, an alternate route for the use of the vehicles which shall remain unrestricted by any local regulation as to commercial vehicles so long as the ordinance proposed shall remain in effect. The approval of the proposed ordinance by the Department of Transportation shall constitute an approval by the department of the alternate route so designated.”
§35704-§35721 discuss topics such as exemptions for public utilities, tax funds, hearings, delivery routes, residential areas, signs, other exempted vehicles, and defective roadways.
§35401(d) “A city or county may, by ordinance, prohibit a combination of vehicles of a total length in excess of 60 feet upon highways under its respective jurisdiction. The ordinance may not be effective until appropriate signs are erected …, as the local authority determines will best serve to give notice of the ordinance.”
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 3/7

Page 210 of 830 ends

In addition, the city or county may appoint an advisory committee consisting of local representatives of those interests that are likely to be affected and shall consider the recommendations of the advisory committee in adopting the ordinance. The ordinance may not be effective until appropriate signs are erected indicating the highways or highway portions affected by the ordinance.

This subdivision shall only become operative upon the adoption of an enabling ordinance by a city or county.”
This subdivision shall only become operative upon the adoption of an enabling ordinance by a city or county.”
§35401(e) “A city or county, upon a determination that a highway or portion of highway under its jurisdiction cannot, in consideration of public safety, sustain the operation of trailers or semitrailers of the maximum kingpin to rearmost axle distances permitted under Section 35400, may, by ordinance, establish lesser distances consistent with the maximum distances that the highway or highway portion can sustain, except that a city or county may not restrict the kingpin to rearmost axle measurement to less than 38 feet on those highways or highway portions. A city or county considering the adoption of an ordinance shall consider, but not be limited to, consideration of all the following: (1) A comparison of the operating characteristics of the vehicles to be limited as compared to operating characteristics of other vehicles regulated by this code. (2) Actual traffic volume. (3) Frequency of accidents. (4) Any other relevant data.
§35401(f) “Whenever, in the judgment of the Department of Transportation, a state highway cannot, in consideration of public safety, sustain the operation of trailers or semitrailers of the maximum kingpin to rearmost axle distances permitted under Section 35400, the director, in consultation with the Department of the California Highway Patrol, shall compile data on total traffic volume, frequency of use by vehicles covered by this subdivision, accidents involving these vehicles, and other relevant data to assess whether these vehicles are a threat to public safety and should be excluded from the highway or highway segment. The study, containing the conclusions and recommendations of the director, shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency. Unless otherwise notified by the secretary, the director shall hold public hearings in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article 3 (commencing with Section 35650) of Chapter 5 for the purpose of determining the maximum kingpin to rear axle length, which shall be not less than 38 feet, that the highway or highway segment can sustain without unreasonable threat to the safety of the public. Upon the basis of the findings, the Director of Transportation shall declare in writing the maximum kingpin to rear axle lengths which can be maintained with safety upon the highway.

Following the declaration of maximum lengths as provided by this subdivision, the Department of Transportation shall erect suitable signs at each end of the affected portion of the highway and at any other points that the Department of Transportation determines to be necessary to give adequate notice of the length limits. §35650 “The Department of Transportation, whenever it determines after an engineering investigation that any highway under its jurisdiction will with safety to itself sustain vehicles and loads weighing more than the maximum weight limits set forth in this code, shall have authority to declare and to fix a weight limit for the highway greater than the maximum weight limit set forth in this code. Thereafter it shall be lawful to operate or move vehicles and loads of a gross weight upon the highways designated, equal to but not in excess of the maximum weight limit fixed by the department.”
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 4/7

Page 211 of 830 ends

Legal basis in accordance with CVC for restrictions on crossings:

Crossings in the CVC: The Caldecott Tunnel, which connects Oakland with Contra Costa County; is restricted by § 31301 , "(a) No person shall transport any explosive substance, flammable liquid, liquefied petroleum gas or poisonous gas in a tank truck, trailer, or semitrailer through the Caldecott Tunnel...Route 24...at any time other than between the hours of 3 a.m. to 5 a.m.”
Vehicular crossings: §23254 defines "vehicular crossing" as "any toll bridge or toll highway crossing and the approaches thereto, constructed or acquired by the Department of Transportation under the provisions of the California Toll Bridge Authority Act."

NATIONAL NETWORK ROUTE RESTRICTIONS
Federal law: The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 23, § 658.11 covers requirements for additions, deletions, exceptions, and restrictions on the National Network.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Requests for restrictions on the National Network must be submitted in writing to the appropriate FHWA Division Office .

CFR -- Federal approval: §658.11(d) states: "Deletions and use restrictions--Federal-aid interstate. (1) The deletion of, or imposition of use restrictions on, any specific segment of the Interstate Highway System on the National Network, except as otherwise provided in this part, must be approved by the FHWA. Such action will be initiated ... on the request of the Governor or the Governor's authorized representative of the State in which the Interstate segment is located. Requests from the Governor or the Governor's authorized representative shall be submitted along with justification for the deletion or restriction, in writing, to the appropriate FHWA Division Office for transmittal to Washington Headquarters." CFR -- Justification: §658.11(d)(2) "The justification accompanying a request shall be based on the following: (i) Analysis of evidence of safety problems supporting the deletion or restriction as identified in §658.11(c) . (ii) Analysis of the impact on interstate commerce. (iii) Analysis and recommendation of any alternative routes that can safely accommodate commercial motor vehicles of the dimensions and configurations described in §658.13 and §658.15 and serve the area in which such segment is located. (iv) Evidence of consultation with the local governments in which the segment is located as well as the Governor or the Governor's authorized representative of any adjacent State that might be directly affected by such a deletion or restriction."
National Network routes: To determine whether the route is National Network, open the Truck Route List (XLSX) , find the route number and route segment, and look for the NN in the Column titled "Desig" (for "Designation").
§23334 "The Department of Transportation may adopt rules and regulations...for the control of traffic on any vehicular crossing to aid and insure the safe and orderly flow of traffic, and shall, so far as practicable, notify the public of the rules and regulations by signs on the vehicular crossings"
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 5/7

Page 212 of 830 ends

Peak-hour Truck Restrictions
Peak-hour truck restrictions: California does not currently have any truck restrictions during certain hours. State and federal law forbids highway restrictions to truck access except for "safety and engineering" reasons.

There is no mention in the law of time limitations. However, a peak-hour truck restriction would hinder trucks from making deliveries and would probably, therefore, be considered a restriction under the law. In order to enact a time restriction, it would seem necessary to validate a safety issue by traffic study.

Studies of peak-hour restrictions: The California Legislature commissioned the "Urban Freeway Gridlock Study," dated 1988, to investigate the impact of large trucks on peak-period freeway congestion and explore management techniques to reduce congestion. The study focused on freeways in the Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego metropolitan areas. The study's conclusions were that a peak-period truck ban would not provide significant relief from peak-period congestion, and that a peak-period ban is unlikely due to provisions of the federal Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (STAA) and subsequent court decisions.

Related Links:

Legal Truck Access
Legal Truck Access Homepage
45' Buses & Motorhomes
Exemptions
Getting to Eureka
Motorsports
Truck Lane Use
Winter Operations - Chain Requirements
Encroachment Permits
Exit Number Signs
Toll Operations
Truck-Only Lanes
Transportation Permits
Permits Contact List
Road Conditions
Weigh Stations
Call Before You Haul
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 6/7

Page 213 of 830 ends

Copyright © 2024 State of California
Statewide Campaigns
 ADA Access
 Adopt-A-Highway
 Amber Alert
 Be Work Zone Alert
 CAL FIRE
 Cal OES: Power Outage and Fire Recovery Resources
 California Climate Investments
 California Connected
 California Transportation Plan 2050
 Clean California
 Energy Upgrade
 Go Safely California
 HeatReadyCA.com
 Move Over Law
 REAL ID
 Save Our Water
 Stormwater Education Campaign
 Tenant and Landlord Resources
 Unclaimed Property
Back to Top Accessibility
Privacy Policy Conditions of Use
Register to Vote
Facebook Twitter
5/29/24, 10:22 AM Legal Basis for Truck Restrictions | Caltrans https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truck-access/legal-basis-truck-restrictions 7/7

Page 214 of 830 ends

Memorandum

CITY OF NORCO
City Engineer’s Office
DATE: June 11, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CHAD BLAIS, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS

DAVID GILBERTSON, CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: SPEED SURVEY GUIDELINES
_____________________________________________________________________ Engineering and Traffic (E&T) Surveys are required by the State of California to establish intermediate speed limits on local streets and to enforce those limits using radar or other speed measuring devices. These surveys must be updated every 5, 7, or 14 years to ensure the speeds reflect current conditions as dictated by the California Vehicle Code (CVC). The CVC also requires that the surveys be conducted based on the methodology required by the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CaMUTCD).

The CaMUTCD requires speed limits to be established at the nearest 5-mile per hour (mph) increment to the 85th percentile speed. The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of the traffic travels. This threshold represents what is historically found to be a safe and reasonable speed for most drivers based on common roadway conditions.

The CVC authorizes an agency to adjust the established speed limit a maximum of an additional 5 MPH. This can only be justified after a careful review of the prevailing speeds, accident records, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.

Posted speed limits are established primarily to protect the general public from the reckless and unpredictable behavior of dangerous drivers. They provide law enforcement with a clearly understood method to identify and apprehend violators of the basic speed law (CVC Section 22350). This law states that "No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property." The posted speed limit gives motorists a clear warning of the maximum speed that is reasonable and prudent under typical driving conditions.

The basic fundamentals for establishing speed limits recognize that the majority of drivers behave in a safe and reasonable manner, and therefore, the normally careful and competent actions of a reasonable driver should be considered legal. Speed limits established on these fundamentals conform to the consensus that those who drive the highway determine what speed is reasonable and safe, not on the judgment of one or a few individuals. A radar speed study is usually used to record the prevailing speed of reasonable drivers.

Page 215 of 830 ends

Speed limits are also established to advise drivers of conditions which may not be readily apparent to a reasonable driver. For this reason, accident history, roadway conditions, traffic characteristics, and land use must also be analyzed before determining speed limits.

Additionally, it is generally accepted that speed limits cannot be successfully enforced without voluntary compliance by a majority of drivers. Consequently, only the driver whose behavior is clearly out of line with the normal flow of traffic is usually targeted for enforcement.

Collision History
Reported collisions are reviewed for each street segment to determine if there is a higher than average rate of collisions. A segment that has an above-average collision rate typically suggests conditions that are not readily apparent to motorists.

Conditions Not Readily Apparent To Motorists
Each street segment is field inspected to identify roadway conditions that may not be readily apparent to motorists. A determination is made whether any conditions are significant and warrant the recommendation of the speed limit 5 mph or more below the basic speed limit.

It is important to note that The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California MUTCD) recommends exercising great care when establishing speed limits 5 mph or more below the basic speed limit.

Enforcement
The posted speed limit would be considered a “speed trap” if the speed is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving object (CVC Section 40802).

Under California law, a vehicle’s speed cannot be admitted into evidence if it was obtained or determined by using a speed trap. This prohibition includes using speed as either circumstantial or direct evidence. Therefore, Riverside County Sheriff’s Deputies would more than likely not issue citations on a roadway segment if the posted speed limit is not justified by a valid speed survey.

Local judges may disallow all speeding citations on a specific roadway segment in the City of Norco if it is determined that the posted speed limit is not justified by a valid speed survey.

In fact, the local judges may determine that the city-wide speed survey is invalid and direct the City of Norco to provide an updated speed survey that complies with the California Vehicle Code at a tremendous expense.

Page 216 of 830 ends

Page 217 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey
Page i
Table of Contents
Section

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1

2.0 Study Methodology................................................................................................. 2

3.0 Survey Results......................................................................................................... 3

3.1 Street Surveillance ..................................................................................... 3

3.2 Collision Rate Analysis................................................................................ 3

3.3 Spot Speed Survey ..................................................................................... 4

3.4 Equestrian Community Orientation........................................................... 7

4.0 Survey Findings and Recommendations................................................................. 8

4.1 Speed Limit Signing .................................................................................. 12

5.0 Summary and Conclusions.................................................................................... 13 Tables
1 Collision Survey Analysis......................................................................................... 5 2 Segment Spot Speed Summary............................................................................... 9 Appendices
A Regulations Governing Speed Limits (Excerpts from California Vehicle Code) B Speed Zoning Regulations from Caltrans California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
C Speed Limit Map
D Radar Certifications
E Engineering and Traffic Survey Summary Reports
F Average Daily Traffic (Separate Binder)
G Field Data (Separate Binder)

Page 218 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 1 ends

SECTION 1.0
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to document the results of an engineering and traffic survey conducted to update selected speed limits in the City of Norco arterial and collector street network. The study complies with existing State regulations concerning the increase or decrease of speed limits within City boundaries.

It is a common belief that posting of speed limit traffic signs will influence drivers to drive at the posted speed. However, the facts indicate otherwise. Driver behavioral research conducted nationwide over several decades shows that the average driver is largely influenced by the appearance of the highway itself and the prevailing traffic conditions in choosing the speed at which he or she drives. Recognizing this, the California Vehicle Code (CVC) requires that speed limits be established in accordance with appropriate engineering practice and methods.

This report documents and satisfies conditions identified in the latest edition of the CVC, Section 627, as well as properly identifying other conditions not readily apparent to a motorist. To use radar as a legal basis for speed enforcement, Section 40802(b) of the CVC requires that speed limits be established. Per Sections 22357 and 22358 of the CVC, the limits must be justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation. However, a change in State law allows cities to extend the survey period up to seven or ten years depending on specific criteria.

According to City records, the last speed zone survey for the selected segments was prepared in 2013. This study will confirm, increase, or decrease speed limits within the City of Norco based on its data and results. As the latest edition of the CVC has highlighted bicycle and pedestrian safety as part of the traffic and engineering survey, this aspect was also considered in this report. For further details on the relevant CVC sections, see Appendix A.

At 77 locations on the City’s network, spot speed surveys were taken in conformance with State law for conducting engineering and traffic surveys to establish prima facie speed limits. The data and analysis was collected per procedures and methodologies outlined in the 2014 California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) Revision 2. Sections of the CA MUTCD detailing regulations for conducting the required “Engineering and Traffic Survey” are presented in Appendix B, along with definitions of terms used in speed zone surveys.

The speed zone surveys were conducted by Albert Grover & Associates, Inc. (AGA). A California-registered Traffic Engineer from AGA reviewed the street conditions, survey data, and collision data to arrive at the recommended speed limits for each segment.

Page 219 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 2 ends

SECTION 2.0
Study Methodology
The study involved three categories of data collection and analysis: (1) geometric and characteristic street surveillance; (2) collision rate analysis; and (3) spot speed survey.

The street surveillance process used field observations to determine the existing roadway characteristics, condition and placement of signs and pavement markings, land uses, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and other roadway characteristics that may not be readily apparent to motorists.

Historical collision data was obtained from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) for the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2018 (i.e., three years) for all roadway segments. The collision rate was calculated and considered in recommending the speed limit by using the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes collected for this study in October 2019 (provided in Appendix F) and the historical collision data.

Spot speed surveys, utilizing a calibrated radar gun, were conducted at 77 locations to determine existing vehicular travel speeds. A copy of the “Traffic Radar Certification” is provided in Appendix D. Typically, a minimum of 100 observations were recorded, 50 for each direction of travel, on all the streets included in the study. This data was used to calculate statistical information such as the 85th percentile travel speed, 10 mile per hour (mph) pace speed, percentage of vehicles within the 10 mph pace, median speed, and other pertinent data for analysis.

Page 220 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 3 ends

SECTION 3.0
Survey Results

3.1 Street Surveillance
Section 2B.13 of the 2014 CA MUTCD Revision 2, “Speed Limit Signs,” states thatspeed limitsshould be established based on speeds recorded during the spot speed survey. However, in considering existing conditions along with the traffic safety needs of the community, engineering judgment may indicate the need for a further reduction in speed. Whenever such factors are considered to establish the speed limit, they are documented on the speed survey or in the accompanying engineering report.

In order to assess their traffic and geometric characteristics, AGA staff reviewed the streets. The roadway characteristics, location of speed limit signs, type of area adjoining the street (commercial, residential, school zone, parks, etc.) and type of roadway (divided, undivided, number of lanes, etc.) were recorded along with notes regarding other conditions not readily apparent to the driver. The roadway characteristics recorded were used to determine if any physical conditions warranted consideration of an additional 5 mph reduction of the recommended speed, in accordance with CVC Section 627.

The speed survey segment roadway characteristics for each segment are indicated on the Engineering and Speed Survey Summary Reports in Appendix E.

3.2 Collision Rate Analysis
The collision rate for each speed survey segment was determined using the most recent collision records as required by CVC Section 627. The mid-block collision totals are based on a review of the collision reports from SWITRS from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018. Subsequently, these totals were used to calculate the mid-block collision rate, which also uses ADT volume data. The mid-block collision rate for each street surveyed was calculated in terms of “collisions per million vehicle miles traveled” (C/MVM) and is shown on the Engineering and Traffic Survey Summary Reports. The following shows a sample calculation.

The rate was calculated using the following equation:

Collision Rate = Number of Midblock Collisions × 106
24-hour volume × 365 × segment length × number of years The number of mid-block collisions is based on three years’ collision data (January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018), recent 24-hour traffic volume (for both directions) within the survey segment, and the segment’s length given in miles.

Page 221 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 4 ends

Example:

Segment: Hamner Avenue between Fifth Street and Fourth Street:

Collision Rate =
8 × 106
27,250 × 365 × 0.60 × 3
= 0.60 C/MVM
The Average Expected Collision Rate for thissegment is 1.67 and is based on data of statewide crash statistics. Therefore, the calculated collision rate of 0.60 is well below the expected rate for this segment.

The results of the collision rate calculations, including the Average Expected Collision Rates for each type of roadways, are shown in Table 1 and detailed in Appendix E. The following Average Expected Collision Rates were obtained from “2015 Collision Data on California State Highways” published by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans):
 Suburban, conventional 2 lanes or less, less than 45 mph: 1.80 C/MVM  Suburban, conventional 2 lanes or less, 45 – 55 mph: 1.19 C/MVM  Suburban, undivided 4 lanes, less than 55 mph: 1.67 C/MVM  Suburban, divided 4 lanes, less than 55 mph: 1.42 C/MVM  Rural, conventional 2 lanes or less (flat), less than 55 mph: 0.79 C/MVM

3.3 Spot Speed Survey
Spot speed surveys were conducted at each street segment to assess the actual behavior of the majority of motorists. A reasonable and effective speed limit is based on the premise that a speed limit, thus established, conforms to the actual behavior of the majority of motorists. The speed limit should typically be established at the 5 mph increment nearest the 85th percentile speed recorded for the surveyed segment. However, engineering judgment and other factors such as street surveillance (Section 3.1) and collision rates (Section 3.2) may indicate the need for further reduction in establishing reasonable and effective speed limits.

The criteria used in conducting the radar survey are listed in Appendix B. The information collected and data calculated for the radar speed survey are as follows:
 Date and time of speed survey
 Direction of survey
 Number of vehicles observed
 Pedestrian, bicycle, equestrian activity
 Road description
 Average Daily Traffic
 Collision history
 Collision rate
 Posted speed limit
 Average speed
 Range of speeds
 50th Percentile speed
 85th percentile speed
 10 mph pace speed
 Percent over pace speed

Page 222 of 830 ends

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Norco
Table 1. 2020 Speed Zone Survey - Collision Analysis
Distance Distance Crashes1 Crash Expected2
(mile) (feet) 3 yrs Total Rate Crash Rate
Alhambra Street 1 Norco Drive to River Ridge Drive 0.65 3,432 598 0 0.00 1.80 2 River Ridge Drive to Acacia Avenue 0.27 1,426 15,740 2 0.43 1.80 Bluff Street 3 River Road to Vine Street 0.43 2,270 2,288 0 0.00 1.80 4 Vine Street to Corydon Avenue 0.33 1,742 1,197 1 2.31 1.80 Branding Iron Way 5 Dapplegray Lane to Wild Horse Lane 0.22 1,162 1,872 2 4.43 1.80 California Avenue 6 Fifth Street to Sixth Street 0.50 2,640 1,881 2 1.94 1.80 7 Sixth Street to Seventh Street 0.50 2,640 10,452 1 0.17 1.80 8 Seventh Street to North Drive 0.50 2,640 11,660 5 0.78 1.80 Corydon Avenue 9 Fifth Street to Bluff Street 1.30 6,864 8,186 2 0.17 1.80 10 Bluff Street to River Road 0.60 3,168 5,721 3 0.80 1.80 Crestview Drive 11 North Drive to Seventh Street 0.61 3,221 1,881 2 1.59 1.80 12 Seventh Street to Sixth Street 0.52 2,746 1,435 2 2.45 1.80 13 Sixth Street to East Street 0.30 1,584 979 2 6.22 1.80 14 East Street to Wild Horse Lane 0.75 3,960 609 0 0.00 1.80 15 Wild Horse Lane to Valley Drive 0.60 3,168 1,194 1 1.27 0.79 Detroit Street 16 Valley View Avenue to Hamner Avenue 0.50 2,640 7,143 0 0.00 1.80 El Paso Drive 17 Hillside Avenue to Dogwood Way 0.56 2,957 2,919 5 2.79 1.80 18 Dogwood Way to Hidden Valley Parkway 0.45 2,376 1,346 0 0.00 1.80 Fifth Street 19 Corydon Avenue to Norconian Drive 0.70 3,696 7,667 3 0.51 1.42 20 Norconian Drive to Hamner Avenue 0.50 2,640 2,680 2 1.36 1.80 21 Hamner Avenue to Corona Avenue 0.70 3,696 4,735 3 0.83 1.80 22 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue 0.50 2,640 2,988 2 1.22 1.80 23 Hillside Avenue to California Avenue 0.40 2,112 2,584 0 0.00 1.80 First Street 24 Parkridge Avenue to Hamner Avenue 0.50 2,640 9,230 6 1.19 1.80 25 Valley View Avenue to Corona Avenue 0.40 2,112 321 0 0.00 0.79 26 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue 0.50 2,640 2,411 0 0.00 1.80 Fourth Street 27 Clark Avenue to Valley View Avenue 0.60 3,168 5,291 2 0.58 1.80 28 Valley View Avenue to Hillside Avenue 0.75 3,960 2,594 2 0.94 1.80 Hamner Avenue 29 North City Limit to Sixth Street 0.64 3,379 27,940 23 1.17 1.42 30 Sixth Street to Fifth Street 0.45 2,376 26,728 1 0.08 1.42 31 Fifth Street to Fourth Street 0.45 2,376 27,250 8 0.60 1.67 32 Fourth Street to Second Street 1.00 5,280 30,011 23 0.70 1.67 33 Second Street to First Street 0.60 3,168 23,780 14 0.90 1.67 34 First Street to South City Limit 0.50 2,640 21,959 7 0.58 1.42 Hidden Valley Parkway 35 Hamner Avenue to 4000' east of I-15 0.50 2,640 19,478 8 0.75 1.67 36 4000' east of I-15 to El Paso Drive 0.50 2,640 21,457 3 0.26 1.42 37 El Paso Drive to Norco Hills Road 0.50 2,640 22,144 1 0.08 1.42 Hillside Avenue 38 First Street to Second Street 0.40 2,112 4,191 0 0.00 1.80 39 Second Street to Third Street 0.40 2,112 2,668 0 0.00 1.80 40 Third Street to Fourth Street 0.50 2,640 2,421 1 0.75 1.80 41 Fourth Street to Fifth Street 0.40 2,112 2,738 0 0.00 1.80 42 Fifth Street to Sixth Street 0.50 2,640 1,897 0 0.00 1.80 Mountain Avenue 43 Hamner Avenue to First Street 0.27 1,426 8,264 6 2.46 1.67 44 First Street to Second Street 0.50 2,640 3,866 2 0.94 1.80 Street No. Location
Average
Daily
Traffic

1. Accident Data from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018

2. Statewide Average Accident Rate for 2015 \\SERVER2\c\Projects\RKA\687-010 Norco Speed Surveys 2019\Report\Tables 1 & 2 Accident Analysis & Segment Spot Survey 2/10/2020

Page 223 of 830 ends

Page 2 of 2 ends

City of Norco
Table 1. 2020 Speed Zone Survey - Collision Analysis
Distance Distance Crashes1 Crash Expected2
(mile) (feet) 3 yrs Total Rate Crash Rate
Street No. Location
Average
Daily
Traffic
Norco Drive 45 Hamner Avenue to Alhambra Street 0.72 3,802 3,869 4 1.31 1.80 46 Alhambra Street to Fifth Street 0.50 2,640 3,420 2 1.07 1.80 Norco Hills Road 47 Hidden Valley Parkway to Valley Drive 1.00 5,280 3,405 5 1.34 1.19 Norconian Drive 48 Fifth Street to Norco Drive 0.48 2,534 155 0 0.00 0.79 North Drive 49 California Avenue to East City Limit 0.30 1,584 12,439 4 0.98 1.80 Parkridge Avenue 50 Second Street to South City Limit 0.30 1,584 4,023 3 2.27 1.80 Pedley Avenue 51 Seventh Street to Sixth Street 0.50 2,640 1,363 2 2.68 1.80 52 Sixth Street to Fifth Street 0.50 2,640 1,743 1 1.05 1.80 River Road 53 North City Limit to Corydon Avenue 0.77 4066 27,101 4 0.18 1.67 54 Corydon Avenue to Second Street (SCL) 0.60 3,168 24,980 4 0.24 1.42 Rock Springs Avenue 55 First Street to Thoroughbred Lane 0.20 1,056 2,652 0 0.00 0.79 Second Street 56 River Road to Mountain Avenue 0.82 4,330 9,513 10 1.17 1.80 57 Mountain Avenue to Hamner Avenue 0.27 1,426 13,184 3 0.77 1.67 58 Hamner Avenue to Corona Avenue 0.50 2,640 9,127 0 0.00 1.67 59 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue 0.50 2,640 7,886 4 0.93 1.80 Seventh Street 60 Valley View Avenue to Corona Avenue 0.25 1,320 3,082 0 0.00 1.80 61 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue 0.50 2,640 3,196 0 0.00 1.80 62 Hillside Avenue to California Avenue 0.80 4,224 3,047 1 0.37 1.80 Sierra Avenue 63 Fifth Street to Sixth Street 0.50 2,640 4,369 4 1.67 1.80 Sixth Street 64 Hamner Avenue to Valley View Avenue 0.41 2,165 22,036 5 0.51 1.67 65 Valley View Avenue to Hillside Avenue 0.70 3,696 19,364 10 0.67 1.67 66 Hillside Avenue to California Avenue 0.41 2,165 15,740 4 0.57 1.67 67 California Avenue to Crestview Drive 0.25 1,320 2,792 1 1.31 1.67 Third Street 68 Valley View Avenue to Hamner Avenue 0.27 1,426 3,758 0 0.00 1.80 69 Hamner Avenue to West End Drive 0.70 3,696 13,931 1 0.09 1.42 Thoroughbred Lane 70 El Paso Drive to Sedona Lane 0.80 4,224 550 1 2.08 0.79 Valley Drive 71 Country Club Drive to Fresian Street 0.29 1,531 1,873 1 1.68 0.79 Valley View Avenue 72 Seventh Street to Detroit Street 0.25 1,320 5,296 3 2.07 1.80 73 Detroit Street to Fifth Street 0.75 3,960 2,740 2 0.89 1.80 74 Third Street to Second Street 0.60 3,168 4,906 3 0.93 1.80 Vine Street 75 Corydon Avenue (N) to Bluff Street 0.60 3,168 439 1 3.47 1.80 Vine Avenue 76 Bluff Street to Corydon Avenue (S) 0.60 3,168 1,241 0 0.00 1.80 Wild Horse Lane 77 Branding Iron Way to Cavaletti Lane 0.21 1,109 1,364 0 0.00 1.80 78 Cavaletti Lane to Crestview Drive 0.28 1,478 1,197 2 5.45 1.80

1. Accident Data from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2018

2. Statewide Average Accident Rate for 2015 \\SERVER2\c\Projects\RKA\687-010 Norco Speed Surveys 2019\Report\Tables 1 & 2 Accident Analysis & Segment Spot Survey 2/10/2020

Page 224 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 7 ends

Appendix E contains information about vehicular speed data observed, collision data, street classification, and any unusual conditions at the location.

3.4 Equestrian Community Orientation
The City of Norco has many unique aspects that are controlled by the equestrian orientation of the community. In a community with a total population of over 27,500, current estimates on the equine population are in the range of 17,000 to 18,000 animals. The City has established a minimum half acre lot size, and all residential lots are zoned for and allow animal keeping. In view of the equine population, the City has and maintains an extensive trail system. With approximately 110 miles of streets, it also has a trail system exceeding 120 miles. The vast majority of equestrian trails are along the roadways. In keeping with a rural atmosphere, streets generally do not have curb and gutter or sidewalks. Where curbs exist, they are predominately rolled curbs allowing access to the adjacent property. The trail system is composed of compacted decomposed granite and provides for the equestrian, pedestrian and bicycle travel in the community. The majority of roadways are 24-26 feet of paved width.

While the minimum lot size is half an acre, many lots exceed one acre, with a few exceeding five acres. With the adjacent Norco Hills and Santa Ana River Bluffs, the topography of the City dictates narrow winding roads, large lots and an overall low density of residential development. There are few “through” streets and the few streets that do cross the community are neither straight nor direct in their linkage to adjacent roadway sections.

In the past, there have been questions about establishment of residential districts in the community.

By function, design, and usage, the majority of streets are residential even when they do not meet the specific language of the CVC with respect to the number of dwelling units within a specific distance. However, these streets are only accessible from other residential streets, are residential in development, and only fail to meet the CVC language due to large lot requirements and topography considerations.

Overall, the unique aspects of the community, its rural design, equestrian orientation, number and location of trails, lack of sidewalks and curbs, and lack of street lighting all affect the determination of appropriate speeds on the roadway system.

Due to the equestrian orientation of the community and the concern of vehicle/equestrian conflicts, the City of Norco pursued special legislation to allow equestrian ridership to be considered in the overall engineering speed survey. This activity culminated in the adoption of Section 22353 into the CVC via Assembly Bill 2402, that allows consideration of equestrian ridership as one of the factors considered in the speed survey.

Page 225 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 8 ends

SECTION 4.0
Survey Findings and Recommendations
In accordance with the State-imposed speed limit establishment regulation, as defined by CVC Section 627 (Appendix A), several factors may be considered to justify setting the prima facie speed limits more than 5 mph below the observed 85th percentile speed.

It should be noted that the regulations in Appendix B also state that the maximum permissible lowering of the proposed speed limit from the 85th percentile is 10 mph.

The factors to be considered when setting the speed limit are:
 Most recent collision record (mid-block)
 Roadway design speed
 Safe stopping sight distance
 Super-elevation
 Grades
 Shoulder condition
 Profile condition
 Intersection spacing offsets
 Commercial driveway characteristics (land use)
 Pedestrian traffic with and without sidewalks
 Pedestrian and bicycle safety
 Equestrian Safety (City of Norco only)
The above factors for each roadway segment surveyed are listed in the Engineering and Speed Survey Summary sheets. The 85th percentile speed and the above factors were considered in verifying existing speed limits and recommending speed limit changes (increase or decrease).

Additionally, discussions were held with City staff in making decisions with respect to changing existing speed limits, allowing for consideration of any special circumstancesregarding the segment that were not immediately observed or discovered by AGA. The Speed Zone Survey – Collision Survey Analysis (Table 1) lists the total number of collisions, calculated collision rate, and the expected collision rate. Table 2 shows the surveyed road segments with posted and recommended speed limits.

Page 226 of 830 ends

Page 1 of 3 ends

Table 2: 2020 City of Norco Segment Spot Speed Survey
10-Mile % in 50th 85th Posted Recommended
Street No Location Direction Date Pace 10-Mile %tile %tile Speed Limit Speed Limit Comments (mph) Pace (mph) (mph) (mph) (mph)
Alhambra Street 1 Norco Drive to River Ridge Drive E/W 10/7/19 22-31 77 23 28 25 25 No change, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 2 River Ridge Drive to Acacia Avenue E/W 10/7/19 24-33 79 25 30 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 Bluff Street 3 River Road to Vine Street E/W 10/4/19 28-37 72 34 39 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed 4 Vine Street to Corydon Avenue E/W 10/4/19 27-36 71 29 35 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 Branding Iron Way 5 Dapplegray Lane to Wild Horse Lane E/W 10/3/19 18-27 82 22 27 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, high crash rate, CVC 22353 California Avenue 6 Fifth Street to Sixth Street N/S 9/30/19 23-32 71 28 33 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 7 Sixth Street to Seventh Street N/S 9/30/19 30-39 80 35 39 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 8 Seventh Street to North Drive N/S 9/30/19 29-38 82 31 36 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 Corydon Avenue 9 Fifth Street to Bluff Street N/S 10/3/19 31-40 87 35 38 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 10 Bluff Street to River Road N/S 10/3/19 31-40 88 35 39 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 Crestview Drive 11 North Drive to Seventh Street N/S 10/10/19 23-32 78 27 31 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 12 Seventh Street to Sixth Street N/S 10/10/19 25-34 70 31 36 25 25 No change, high crash rate, bike lane, CVC 22353 13 Sixth Street to East Street N/S 10/15/19 22-31 61 27 35 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 14 East Street to Wild Horse Lane N/S 10/15/19 25-34 79 28 33 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed 15 Wild Horse Lane to Valley Drive N/S 10/11/19 31-40 63 34 40 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 Detroit Street 16 Valley View Avenue to Hamner Avenue E/W 10/10/19 25-34 77 27 33 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 El Paso Drive 17 Hillside Avenue to Dogwood Way E/W 10/11/19 24-33 82 28 34 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 18 Dogwood Way to Hidden Valley Parkway E/W 10/11/19 25-34 75 29 34 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed Fifth Street 19 Corydon Avenue to Norconian Drive E/W 10/8/19 38-47 67 41 46 40 40 No change, CVC 22353 20 Norconian Drive to Hamner Avenue E/W 10/3/19 34-43 69 37 42 35 35 No change, CVC 22353 21 Hamner Avenue to Corona Avenue E/W 10/3/19 24-33 81 29 33 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 22 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue E/W 10/3/19 26-35 75 30 35 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 23 Hillside Avenue to California Avenue E/W 10/3/19 27-36 79 30 34 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 First Street 24 Parkridge Avenue to Hamner Avenue E/W 10/8/19 30-39 82 33 37 35 30 Decrease, high crash rate 25 Valley View Avenue to Corona Avenue E/W 10/4/19 31-40 73 32 37 25 30 Increase, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 26 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue E/W 10/4/19 21-30 77 26 29 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 Fourth Street 27 Clark Avenue to Valley View Avenue E/W 10/3/19 25-34 81 29 33 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed 28 Valley View Avenue to Hillside Avenue E/W 10/3/19 24-33 81 28 33 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 \\SERVER2\c\Projects\RKA\687-010 Norco Speed Surveys 2019\Report\Tables 1 & 2 Accident Analysis & Segment Spot Survey 2/10/2020

Page 227 of 830 ends

Page 2 of 3 ends

Table 2: 2020 City of Norco Segment Spot Speed Survey
10-Mile % in 50th 85th Posted Recommended
Street No Location Direction Date Pace 10-Mile %tile %tile Speed Limit Speed Limit Comments (mph) Pace (mph) (mph) (mph) (mph)
Hamner Avenue 29 North City Limit to Sixth Street N/S 10/8/19 41-50 69 47 53 45 50 Increase, 85th per., CVC 21400(b), 50 mph in Eastvale 30 Sixth Street to Fifth Street N/S 10/9/19 34-43 73 38 44 40 40 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b) 31 Fifth Street to Fourth Street N/S 10/7/19 35-44 79 38 42 40 40 No change, 85th percentile 32 Fourth Street to Second Street N/S 10/9/19 36-45 87 39 42 40 40 No change, 85th percentile 33 Second Street to First Street N/S 10/9/19 41-50 77 43 47 40 40 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 627(b) 34 First Street to South City Limit N/S 10/9/19 27-36 79 32 36 40 40 No change, continuity of speed, 40 mph in Corona Hidden Valley Parkway 35 Hamner Avenue to 4000' east of I-15 E/W 10/9/19 34-43 75 38 44 45 45 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 36 4000' east of I-15 to El Paso Drive E/W 10/9/19 42-51 65 44 50 45 45 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 37 El Paso Drive to Norco Hills Road E/W 10/9/19 37-46 69 42 49 45 45 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 Hillside Avenue 38 First Street to Second Street N/S 10/7/19 25-34 74 26 33 25 25 No change, CVC 22353 39 Second Street to Third Street N/S 10/7/19 28-37 70 32 37 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 40 Third Street to Fourth Street N/S 10/1/19 26-35 77 31 35 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 41 Fourth Street to Fifth Street N/S 10/1/19 27-36 69 30 35 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 42 Fifth Street to Sixth Street N/S 10/1/19 24-33 67 29 37 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 Mountain Avenue 43 Hamner Avenue to First Street N/S 10/8/19 34-43 79 38 42 40 40 No change, 85th percentile, high crash rate 44 First Street to Second Street N/S 10/7/19 36-45 71 40 46 40 40 No change, continuity of speed Norco Drive 45 Hamner Avenue to Alhambra Street E/W 10/7/19 26-35 73 31 35 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 46 Alhambra Street to Fifth Street E/W 10/7/19 30-39 73 33 37 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, bike lanes, CVC 22353 Norco Hills Road 47 Hidden Valley Parkway to Valley Drive E/W 10/7/19 43-52 63 45 51 50 50 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 Norconian Drive 48 Fifth Street to Norco Drive N/S
North Drive 49 California Avenue to East City Limit E/W 9/30/19 28-37 85 32 36 40 35 Decrease, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 Parkridge Avenue 50 Second Street to South City Limit E/W 10/8/19 27-36 71 31 35 40 40 No change, 40 mph in Corona Pedley Avenue 51 Seventh Street to Sixth Street N/S 9/30/19 27-36 62 30 37 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 52 Sixth Street to Fifth Street N/S 9/30/19 25-34 64 28 35 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed River Road 53 North City Limit to Corydon Avenue E/W 10/8/19 39-48 73 44 49 45 45 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 54 Corydon Avenue to Second Street (SCL) E/W 10/9/19 42-51 71 46 52 45 45 No change, continuity of speed, 45 mph in Corona Rock Springs Avenue 55 First Street to Thoroughbred Lane N/S 10/11/19 28-37 83 31 35 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353, park This segment has been removed due to the road closure
\\SERVER2\c\Projects\RKA\687-010 Norco Speed Surveys 2019\Report\Tables 1 & 2 Accident Analysis & Segment Spot Survey 2/10/2020

Page 228 of 830 ends

Page 3 of 3 ends

Table 2: 2020 City of Norco Segment Spot Speed Survey
10-Mile % in 50th 85th Posted Recommended
Street No Location Direction Date Pace 10-Mile %tile %tile Speed Limit Speed Limit Comments (mph) Pace (mph) (mph) (mph) (mph)
Second Street 56 River Road to Mountain Avenue E/W 10/10/19 32-41 81 35 39 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 57 Mountain Avenue to Hamner Avenue E/W 10/15/19 33-42 74 35 41 35 35 No change, CVC 22353 58 Hamner Avenue to Corona Avenue E/W 10/11/19 24-33 75 27 32 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 59 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue E/W 10/15/19 27-36 77 29 35 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 Seventh Street 60 Valley View Avenue to Corona Avenue E/W 10/15/19 22-31 84 24 29 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b) 61 Corona Avenue to Hillside Avenue E/W 10/15/19 24-33 83 26 31 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 62 Hillside Avenue to California Avenue E/W 10/15/19 25-34 74 28 33 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 Sierra Avenue 63 Fifth Street to Sixth Street N/S 10/10/19 28-37 76 31 36 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 Sixth Street 64 Hamner Avenue to Valley View Avenue E/W 10/16/19 32-41 92 36 39 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 21400(b), CVC 22353 65 Valley View Avenue to Hillside Avenue E/W 10/15/19 33-42 81 36 41 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 66 Hillside Avenue to California Avenue E/W 10/15/19 35-44 75 38 42 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 67 California Avenue to Crestview Drive E/W 10/15/19 30-39 79 32 36 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 Third Street 68 Valley View Avenue to Hamner Avenue E/W 10/15/19 28-37 72 32 37 25 30 Increase, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 69 Hamner Avenue to West End Drive E/W 10/15/19 32-41 79 36 40 35 35 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 Thoroughbred Lane 70 El Paso Drive to Sedona Lane E/W 10/11/19 23-32 88 25 30 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 Valley Drive 71 Country Club Drive to Fresian Street N/S 10/11/19 35-44 62 40 47 35 35 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 Valley View Avenue 72 Seventh Street to Detroit Street N/S 10/15/19 24-33 80 28 33 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 73 Detroit Street to Fifth Street N/S 10/15/19 25-34 76 29 33 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed 74 Third Street to Second Street N/S 10/15/19 27-36 74 31 37 25 25 No change, CVC 22353, continuity of speed Vine Street 75 Corydon Avenue (N) to Bluff Street E/W 10/4/19 27-36 75 30 34 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 Vine Avenue 76 Bluff Street to Corydon Avenue (S) E/W 10/4/19 20-29 90 25 27 25 25 No change, 85th percentile, CVC 22353 Wild Horse Lane 77 Branding Iron Way to Cavaletti Lane E/W 9/30/19 25-34 78 29 33 25 25 No change, CVC 627(b), CVC 22353 78 Cavaletti Lane to Crestview Drive E/W 10/3/19 25-34 60 31 38 25 25 No change, high crash rate, CVC 22353 \\SERVER2\c\Projects\RKA\687-010 Norco Speed Surveys 2019\Report\Tables 1 & 2 Accident Analysis & Segment Spot Survey 2/10/2020

Page 229 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 12 ends

4.1 Speed Limit Signing
All California motorists are required to know the basic 15, 25, 55, and 65 mph speed laws and are tested on the subject when applying for a driver’s license. The maximum speed limit on most California highways is 65 mph; however, drivers are permitted to travel 70 mph where posted.

Unless otherwise posted, the maximum speed limit is 55 mph on two-lane undivided highways and for vehicles towing trailers. Likewise, the 15 mph speed limit applies to uncontrolled railway crossings, alleyways, and blind, uncontrolled intersections. Again, the 25 mph speed limit applies to business areas, residential areas, school zones, and areas immediately around senior centers.

Consequently, speed limit signs covering these conditions need not be posted on City streets.

Although not required by law, speed limit signs for these limits can be posted by a jurisdiction when an engineer determines that doing so would enhance public awareness and compliance of the basic speed law. Typically, such postings occur upon streets that have significant daily vehicular traffic volumes, cut-through traffic problems, significant grades, continued violation of residential 25 mph speed zones, or other unusual environmental or traffic flow characteristics. It is normal engineering practice to recommend the posting of speed limit signs only on streets that have specific speed limits enacted by City ordinance or determined to be justified by an engineer.

Speed limit signs should be installed at approximately half-mile intervals on streets which have been speed zoned. Signs are typically installed at the beginning of the speed zone on the departure side of a traffic signal-controlled intersection. It is also advisable to install signs at key intersections where there is high side-street vehicle entry. It is important that motorists be given adequate notice of the speed limit without over-signing, which increases maintenance costs and rarely results in increased compliance.

The CA MUTCD outlines speed limit sign size specifications based on the type of roadways. Sign sizes vary from a minimum of 24 inches by 30 inches on a single lane conventional roadway to 48 inches by 60 inches on a freeway. It is also important to post signs in a manner such that they are clearly visible to approaching traffic from a distance. Care should be taken to maintain landscaping and ensure vegetation does not grow to block the motorist’s view of signs. In certain circumstances, when an engineer has determined that additional motorist awareness of the speed limit is needed, the speed limit can also be painted on the roadway immediately adjacent to a speed limit sign.

Enforcement problems can occur when: (a) the highway is posted with inappropriate speed limit signs, (b) the highway speed limit is improperly or inadequately posted, or (c) the highway speed limit is not posted nor covered by ordinance and therefore falls under the basic speed law. In any of these events, the result is a debatable validity that may be questioned in court cases where citations are issued and contested.

Page 230 of 830 ends

Citywide Engineering & Traffic Survey

Page 13 ends

SECTION 5.0
Summary and Conclusions
An engineering speed study was conducted per CVC Section 627. The study includes documentation of existing roadway conditions, radar spot speed surveys, and midblock collision analysis. A total of 77 roadway segments on the City’s arterial, secondary arterial, and collector roadway network were surveyed. The collision rate (Table 1) for many of the street segments is well below the expected collision rate published by the State of California for various types of roadways within the state.

Based on the radar speed survey, collision history, and field conditions, it is recommended that the existing speed limits on most arterial, secondary arterial, and collector roadways in the City of Norco remain unchanged, except for the following roadway segments:

Speed Limit Increases
• First Street between Valley View Avenue and Corona Avenue, it is recommended that the existing speed limit of 25 mph be increased to 30 mph based on the speed of traffic. • Hamner Avenue between North City Limit and Sixth Street, it is recommended that the existing speed limit of 45 mph be increased to 50 mph based on the speed of traffic as well as the adjoining segment in the City of Eastvale is also 50 mph.

It should be noted that the City of Norco will work with the City of Eastvale regarding the proposed improvements along this stretch of Hamner Avenue. The posted speed limit will need to be re-examined once all proposed improvements have been completed. • Third Street between Valley View Avenue and Hamner Avenue, it is recommended that the existing speed limit of 25 mph be increased to 30 mph based on the speed of traffic.

Speed Limit Decreases
• First Street between Parkridge Avenue to Hamner Avenue, it is recommended that the existing speed limit of 35 mph be decreased to 30 mph based on the high crash rate. • North Drive between California Avenue and East City Limit, it is recommended that the existing speed limit of 40 mph be decreased to 35 mph based on the speed of traffic.

Segment Removals
• Norconian Drive between Fifth Street and Norco Drive, this segment has been removed due to the road closure.

Page 231 of 830 ends

City Council

STAFF REPORT
Date: June 19, 2024 Agenda Item:

6.C.

To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
From: Lisette Free, Finance Director
Prepared By: Lisette Free, Finance Director
Department: Finance
SUBJECT:

Approval and Adoption of the City of Norco Operating and Capital Improvement Project Budgets for Fiscal Year 2024-25
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-46 approving and adopting the City Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25 and authorizing appropriations therefrom.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-47 approving and adopting the City of Norco Capital Improvement Program Budget for Fiscal Years 2024-25.

3. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-48 approving and adopting the Norco General Employees Association (NGEA) and Part-Time Salary Schedules for FY 2024-

25. SUMMARY:

On May 1, May 15 and June 5, staff conducted budget workshops and discussions to review the proposed Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets for FY 2024-25. During these workshops, staff presented Preliminary Operating and Capital Budgets to the City Council. The total recommended Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget appropriation is $122,490,012.

The Funds included in the City’s Operating Budget consist of the General Fund, Water Fund, Sewer Fund, Recycled Water Fund, Housing Fund, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund, Gas Tax Fund, Measure R Fund, Miscellaneous Grants Fund, Nancy Newman Trust Fund, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Fund, and Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Fund. Total estimated revenues and available fund balance or working capital for each Fund exceeds the estimated total expenditures for the year, thus providing for a balanced budget for all Funds, with the exception of the Gas Tax Fund and NPDES.

BACKGROUND:

Page 232 of 830 ends

The City’s Operating and Capital Budget for FY 2024-25 includes the General Fund, Water Fund, Sewer Fund, Recycled Water Fund, Housing Fund, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund, Gas Tax Fund, Measure R Fund, Miscellaneous Grants Fund, Nancy Newman Trust Fund, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Fund, and Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Fund with total recommended appropriation of $122,490,012. The Appropriation Schedule is provided as Attachment A .

During the FY 2023-24 budget discussions, the City Council discussed the history of the City’s budget development, noting that for a number of prior years, the proposed General Fund budget often projected a General Fund deficit that was balanced by use of unappropriated fund balance. By the end of each of those fiscal years, the budget would end in a positive fiscal position, through a combination of expenditure savings and revenue surpluses. The Council expressed a desire to improve the City’s budget practices by developing a budget that better approximates the actual results at the end of each budget years.

Revenues:
 Recognized Tru Hotel by Hilton coming online in FY 2024  Assumes fee increases
 Sales tax has only modest increases, but does have some growth Expenditures:
 Salaries projected based on projected step increases in their ranges, instead of top step for every employee; and includes the cost-of-living adjustments approved in their corresponding Memorandum of Understanding (MOUs) agreements.
 Public safety contract expenditures recognize historical savings in each contract.  Cost of CAL FIRE transition to 66-hour workweek is reduced by a factor to recognize the time it will take to staff to the new level.  Departmental expenditures have been scrutinized throughout and adjusted closer to actual historical spending.

The City’s General Fund is the primary Operating Fund of the City and is the main source of monies use to pay for public safety services (fire and police), community services, facilities and maintenance, administration, community development, engineering, and other essential governmental type services. The total recommended appropriation and projected revenue are $31,373,857 and $31,420,480, respectively.

The end result of these changes is that the Preliminary FY 2024-25 General Fund budget is balanced with no use of reserves. We will continue to exercise fiscal prudence while working to deliver the best quality services possible with the people and resources we have for these purposes, working every day to support the ideals of Horsetown USA and advance our lifestyle.

The Water Operating Fund has total estimated operating revenues of $11.9 million and total estimated expenses of $13.7 million while the Sewer Operating Fund includes total estimated operating revenues of $7.2 million and total projected expenses of $6.9 million. The difference between total projected revenues and expenses in the Water and Sewer Funds are ($1,792,189) and $319,939, respectively. This will reduce the ending working capital for the Water Fund and provide working capital to the Sewer Fund. The

Page 233 of 830 ends

ending working capital will be used to fund operating reserves, rate stabilization reserves and future capital projects.

For additional information regarding revenues and expenditures estimates for the rest of the City Operating Funds, including Gas Tax, NPDES, CDBG, AQMD, Nancy Newman Trust, Measure R and Miscellaneous Grant Funds, see Appropriation Schedule (Attachment A and the Operating Budget).

The budget data for the Successor Agency of the former Norco Community Redevelopment Agency, which includes total estimated expenditures of $6,302,525 are presented in the City’s budget document for information purposes only. The Countywide Oversight Board and the State Department of Finance have the authority for approving the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS). On the other hand, budget information for the Housing Successor Agency, which includes total estimated expenditures in the amount of $385,200, is included in the total City budget because the City Council is the Successor Housing Entity's Governing Board.

Factors Affecting the Proposed Operating Budget:

The proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Operating Budget has been developed under the key assumption that economic activities are leveling off, with revenue growth slowing overall as compared to expenditure growth due to rising inflation. With sales tax being the City’s most significant source of General Fund revenue, we continue to be focused on how the economic conditions are likely to impact that revenue in the coming year.

During the pandemic years, taxable spending increased dramatically on home improvements, recreational and other vehicles, and general consumer goods, bringing a temporary spike in spending that has since moderated to more moderate levels.

Outlined below are additional major factors that are likely to impact Operating Budget revenue in FY 2024-25:
 Sales tax, which represents nearly 36% of total estimated General Fund revenue, is projected to increase by 7.7%. City sales tax revenue has risen substantially in recent years. However, sales tax is highly sensitive to economic conditions.

Rising inflation may lead to a slow-down in consumer spending, which, along with ongoing redistribution of online sales tax, could have a significant negative impact on FY 2024-25 sales tax revenue growth. Since the initial pandemic increases, auto and recreational vehicle sales have moderated. This sector has also been adversely impacted by higher interest rates that have increased the cost of borrowing, and higher prices for used vehicles that are pricing some buyers out of that market.
 Revenue growth is slower than expenditure growth.
 Water and Sewer Funds revenues are estimated based on current consumption levels and approved rate structures. No rate adjustments are scheduled to be implemented during the fiscal year. It is important to note that with the rising cost of purchased water and other costs, the Water Fund expects expenditures to be greater than revenues. Unless this trend is reversed, future rate increases will be necessary.

Page 234 of 830 ends

The following are key changes affecting the FY 2024-25 Proposed Operating Budget estimated expenditures:
 Public safety – fire and police contract rates: Riverside County Sheriff’s Department contract rates are projected to increase by 4% while CAL FIRE/Riverside County Fire Department contract rates are projected to increase by 10%.
 Staffing levels are expected to remain generally flat across the organization, with the exception of converting one Part-Time position to Full-Time to meet workloads to serve the needs of the community as the staff serves as the City's Public Information Officer and supports all departments, including Sheriff and Fire. Like other city departments, the Communications Division requires 24/7 coverage and accessibility for emergency response, and staff members often work on holidays and outside of normal business hours to cover special events.  Salary and benefits proposed budget includes a 2% Cost-of-Living adjustment effective in July 2024, as well as an $50/month increase in the City’s maximum medical premium contribution, bringing the total maximum to $1,550 per month.  Expenditure growth is driven by inflationary pressures and regulatory requirements.
 Increases in general liability, workers' compensation and other insurance programs. The insurance market is suffering its worst time since the 1970's, driving unusual rate increases across the board.
 Cost increases in third-party contractual and professional services.  Rising costs of purchased water.
 Increase in third-party sewer treatment costs.
 Increase in Information Technology spending for equipment, security and software upgrades and replacements.

Fund and Working Capital Balances
The estimated beginning and ending fund and working capital balances for the major Operating Funds consisting of the General Fund, Water Fund, Sewer Fund, Recycled Water Fund and Other Funds are discussed below.

General Fund:

Since FY 2014-15, the City has steadily added to the fund balance through a combination of revenue growth/enhancement and expenditure control. This year, fund balance is expected to remain the same as FY 2023-24 to an estimated fund balance of $34.7 million by the end of the fiscal year. During these years of record fund balance, the City has also continued to make contributions to the Equipment Replacement Fund for future replacement of equipment. Contributions have been made to a Section 115 Trust to set aside funds that can be used to pay down pension costs in the future. The strong fund balance in the General Fund, along with these other financial resources, has created a financially resilient environment in which current service levels should continue to be maintained over the next several years, even in recessionary years when expenditures exceed revenues.

Existing City Council resolution requires that an amount equal to a minimum of 25% of estimated General Fund expenditures be maintained as fund balance for emergencies.

Page 235 of 830 ends

Based on the recommended total General Fund budget of $31,373,857, the amount of fund balance required for emergencies in FY 2024-25 is $7,843,465.

Water Fund:

The estimated beginning working capital balance as of July 1, 2024 is $5,894,397. Total estimated expenses including transfers-out during FY 2024-25 is $13,664,989 while total estimated revenue is $11,872,800 resulting in estimated decrease of $1,792,189 in working capital. With this decrease, ending working capital is projected to be $4,102,208 by June 30, 2025. The ending working capital will be used to fund rate stabilization reserve, operating reserves and future capital projects.

The Water Fund’s working capital balance is reviewed annually to determine the amount necessary to make the required contribution in order to meet the target for operating and rate stabilization reserves; and make transfers to Water Capital Fund for future capital projects. The target operating reserve was set to equal three (3) months of the cost of Water Fund operations or $3.4 million for FY 2024-25. The rate stabilization reserve target is $2 million with a goal to fully fund the reserves by FY 2025-26. The actual amount of working capital balance available to be transferred to Water Capital Fund for future projects will be determined at the end of each fiscal year based on actual results.

Sewer Fund:

The estimated beginning working capital balance as of July 1, 2024 is $724,067. Total estimated expenses including transfers-out during FY 2024-25 is $6,910,561 while total estimated revenue is $7,230,500 resulting in estimated increase of $319,939 in working capital. With this increase, ending working capital is projected to be $1,044,006 by June 30, 2025. Like the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund’s working capital balance is annually reviewed to determine the amount to be allocated to meet operating reserve target and to fund capital projects. The operating reserve target was set to equal three (3) months

Page 236 of 830 ends

of the annual cost of Sewer Fund operations or $1.7 million. A rate stabilization reserve was not recommended for the Sewer Fund due to the stability of sewer revenues. The actual amount of working capital balance available to be transferred to Sewer Capital Fund for future projects will be determined at the end of each fiscal year based on actual results.

Recycled Water Fund:

Over the past 20-years, California has experienced multiple prolonged periods of drought that have resulted in historic low levels in storage reservoirs and groundwater levels. As a result, many water supply agencies have been investing in alternate sources of water to augment or offset potable water demands. One of the primary alternate sources is the use of recycled water to meet irrigation demands rather than using potable water. The City is partnering with all the members of Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority (WRCRWA) to fund a new regional recycled water booster station that will allow recycled water to be delivered to each member agency. The Recycled Water Fund has estimated operating revenues of $3 million from grant funding and total estimated expenses of $2.7 million to be transferred for recycled water capital projects.

Other Funds:

The proposed budget for other Funds, including CDBG, NPDES, Housing Miscellaneous Grant Funds, and Measure R estimates that there will be sufficient revenues and fund balances during the fiscal year to cover total recommended expenditure appropriations as shown on Attachment A, with the exception of the Gas Tax Fund and NPDES. The Gas Tax and NPDES Funds will be monitored through out the year to ensure sufficient funding to support its operations are met and will make adjustments as needed. For more details, please refer to the City’s Proposed Budget schedules for FY 2024-25.

See Proposed FY 2024-25 Operating Budget (see Attachment E).

Capital Improvement Budget
During the Budget Workshops, staff reviewed key projects funded by the City’s various Capital Improvement Project Funds; including projects to be funded with Measure R revenues. The Measure R Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC) met to review funding requests submitted by staff regarding FY 2024-25 budget requests at their April 24, 2024 meeting. The COC completed its review and finalized its recommendations to the City Council for final review and approval (seeAttachment B).

See Proposed FY 2024-25 Capital Improvement Program Budget (see Attachment F).

Changes to Preliminary Budget:

Based on the budget workshops, the Proposed Budgets include the following changes that were made to the Preliminary Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budgets:
 The LMD Engineer's Reports were approved by City Council on June 5, 2024 resulting in changes to the administrative overhead costs from the LMDs to the General Fund. Staff has increased revenues for the administrative overhead to agree to the LMDs Engineer's Reports.

Page 237 of 830 ends

 Increase revenues for property tax in lieu of VLF by $50,000, tax increment by $40,000 and interest income by $300,000. Based on FY 2023-24 actuals to date, revenues are higher than originally anticipated and expect to continue in FY 2024-25.
 Include the $120,000 Temescal Ave Tree Planting Project. This was discussed and recommended for Council approval by the Measure R Committee to add to preliminary budget at their April 24, 2024 meeting.
 City Council requested that Staff review the conferences and meetings budgeted items to reduce costs. It is noted that Committee and Commission stipends are also included in the conferences and meetings line item. Conferences and meetings were reduced by $25,000.
 City Council requested to identify the cost recovery fee estimated as part of the refuse franchise agreement concurrent with the deficit identified in the proposed Gas Tax Fund. A portion of this cost recovery fee, $883,000, has been allocated towards street and parkway maintenance in accordance with the estimated impact of the refuse franchise on the City’s Street and Parkway infrastructure.

The City analyzed the street maintenance and repairs costs in the proposed budgets and has identified the following items to address the cost recovery costs:
 Remove the $300,000 for the Slurry Seal Project from Measure R Budget and appropriate it in the Street Improvement Fund Budget. A transfer from the General Fund to the Street Fund to fund the Slurry Seal Project.  Reclassify $80,900 for asphalt repairs from the Gas Tax Fund to the General Fund. With the addition of the $80,900 appropriation for asphalt repairs, the Parkway Maintenance Division's total appropriation will be $440,200 with the majority of costs dedicated for street maintenance and repairs.

Position Changes
Staff compiled the necessary salary data to create a new classification for the Communication Specialist position. The City and NGEA have met and conferred in good faith and have agreed on the terms and conditions to add a new classification on the comprehensive salary schedule and description (see Attachment C). The Communications Specialist position was added to the NGEA Salary Resolution; as such, the Part-Time Salary Schedule removes the Part-Time Communications Specialist position (see Attachment D).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Attachment A of the resolution provides a summary of estimated beginning fund balance and working capital; FY 2024-25 estimated revenues, transfers, expenditures/expenses; and estimated ending fund balance and working capital for each Operating Fund. The total operating budget, for all City Funds excluding Successor Agency for FY 2024-25 is $116,187,487. Any changes to this recommended budget will be incorporated into the final published budget document.

RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN:

The allocation of financial resources through the City's Operating and Capital Improvement Program Budget for FY 2024-25 is consistent with all the five Strategic Priorities established by the City Council.

Page 238 of 830 ends

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

Certified as to Availability of Funds: Lisette Free, Finance Director Approved by: Lori Sassoon, City Manager
Approved as to Form: Harper and Burns, LLP, City Attorney ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment A - Appropriations Schedule
Attachment B - Staff Report - Measure R 04.24.24
Attachment C - Salary Schedules NGEA Effective 06.22.24 Attachment D - PT Salary Schedules - Effective 06.22.24 Attachment E - FY 24-25 Proposed Operating Budget
Attachment F - FY 24-25 Proposed CIP Budget
Resolution 2024-46 Operating Budget
Resolution 2024-47 CIP Budget
Resolution 2024-48 Add FT Communications Specialist

Page 239 of 830 ends

Fund # Fund Name
Estimated
Beginning
Fund Balance
July 1, 2024
FY 2024-2025
Estimated
Revenues
FY 2024-2025
Transfers In
FY 2024-2025
Transfers Out
FY 2024-2025
Estimated
Expenditures
Estimated
Ending Fund
Balance
June 30, 2025
Increase
(Decrease) in
Fund Balance
General Fund
121 General Fund $ 34,726,486 31,050,980 $ 369,500 $ 300,000 $ 31,073,857 $ 34,773,110 $ 46,623 127/132 Measure R 10,341,576 8,713,000 - - 18,407,400 647,176 (9,694,400) 131 Nancy Newman Trust Fund 62,569 2,000 - - 39,800 24,769 (37,800) Special Revenues
016 Cal Home 128,422 3,000 - - - 131,422 3,000
018 Housing 3,828,717 90,800 - - 385,200 3,534,317 (294,400) 123 CDBG Funds - 290,600 - - 290,600 - -
133 Gas Tax (19,100) 749,000 - - 780,700 (50,800) (31,700) 136 SB1 Road Maint & Rehabilitation 148,488 685,237 - - 750,000 83,725 (64,763) 137 Measure A Projects 1,202,736 1,011,055 - - 150,000 2,063,791 861,055 139 NPDES 2,785 133,000 - - 169,200 (33,415) (36,200)
156 AQMD 82,769 35,000 - 1,500 100,000 16,269 (66,500)
Various Miscellaneous Grants - 1,327,111 - - 1,327,111 - - Enterprise Funds
124 Water 5,894,397 11,872,800 - 129,100 13,535,889 4,102,208 (1,792,189) 126 Sewer 724,067 7,230,500 - 129,100 6,781,461 1,044,007 319,939 144 Water Projects 9,922,029 2,796,900 - - 6,875,000 5,843,929 (4,078,100) 147 Sewer Projects 11,753,946 1,491,970 - - 7,850,000 5,395,916 (6,358,030) 159 Recycled Water Projects - - 2,700,000 - 2,700,000 - - 166 Recycled Water 3,200,000 3,000,000 - 2,700,000 - 3,500,000 300,000 Capital Improvement Funds
129 Storm Drain Projects 974,921 16,928,458 - - 16,908,960 994,419 19,498 140 General Government Projects 409,746 8,195 - - 109,800 308,141 (101,605) 141 Park Projects 1,035,391 20,708 - - 630,000 426,099 (609,292) 142 Fire Improvement Projects 497,063 9,941 - - - 507,005 9,941 143 Trails Projects 217,279 4,346 - - 50,000 171,624 (45,654) 146 Public Meeting Facilities 217,666 4,353 - - - 222,019 4,353 149 Street Projects 61,017 151,220 300,000 - 450,000 62,237 1,220 151 Animal Services Projects 41,472 829 - - 40,000 2,301 (39,171) 152 Facility Projects 127,073 2,541 - - - 129,614 2,541 Internal Service Funds
128 Fleet Management 5,869,150 850,309 - - 628,810 6,090,650 221,499 134 Benefits and Insurance (962,218) 1,715,700 - - 1,700,700 (947,218) 15,000 135 Information Management 1,305,803 1,250,000 - - 1,193,300 1,362,503 56,700 Fuduciary Funds
012 Successor Agency Projects 532,464 10,649 - - - 543,113 10,649 017 Redevelopment Obligations - 6,377,525 - - 6,302,525 75,000 75,000 Special Districts
Various CFDs - Memo Only - - - 109,800 - - -
TOTAL $ 92,326,714 $ 97,817,729 $ 3,369,500 $ 3,369,500 $ 119,230,312 $ 71,023,931 $ (21,302,783) SCHEDULE SUMMARY DETAIL General Fund General Fund
Revenue Expenditure Total Budget
General Fund Revenue 31,050,980 General Fund Expenditures 31,073,857 Total Operating Budget 119,230,312 Add Transfers In 369,500 Add Transfers Out 300,000 Add Transfers Out 3,369,500 Total General Fund Revenue 31,420,480 Total General Fund Expenditures 31,373,857 Less Special Districts - Memo (109,800) Total Budget 122,490,012
(Includes AQMD $1,500 Transfer Out)
City of Norco
FY 2024-2025 Operating Budget
Budget Summary

Page 240 of 830 ends

Measure R Citizens' Oversight
Committee

STAFF REPORT
Date: April 24, 2024 Agenda Item:

4.A.

To: Honorable Chair and Committee Members
From: Lisette Free, Finance Director
Prepared By: Lisette Free, Finance Director
Department: Finance
SUBJECT:

Review of FY 2024-25 Measure R Budget Recommendations for Various Projects and Programs
RECOMMENDATION:

Recommend the FY 2024-25 Measure R Budget for approval by City Council.

SUMMARY:

The purpose of this item is for the Measure R Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC) to review the proposed uses of Measure R revenues to fund various projects and programs in FY 2024-25. Total revenues are estimated at $8,713,000 and total expenditures are estimated to be $18,587,400 for FY 2024-25.

BACKGROUND:

Staff analyzed the needs of the City and is bringing various projects to the COC for their review. After review by the COC, the FY 2024-25 Measure R Budget will be transmitted to the City Council for final approval. Staff is requesting that the COC conduct a review of the various projects and programs presented and recommend for funding with Measure R revenues to the City Council in the amounts summarized below and in Attachment A.

Measure R is a 1% local sales tax that was approved by the voters of Norco on November 6, 2018, and began collections in April 2019. This sales tax may be used for general purposes, including maintenance and replacement of streets, roads, trails, parks, public facilities and to fund general city services, including fire, police, and 9-1-1 emergency medical services response. Historically, the City had struggled to keep up with needed repairs and maintenance of the City's infrastructure that included streets, roads, trails, parks and public facilities. Measure R was supported by the City Council and community leaders as a means to bring much needed maintenance and

Page 241 of 830 ends

infrastructure investment to the community, and to ensure that public safety services could be preserved and even enhanced.

Funding for Fiscal Year 2024-25 Measure R Budget projects and programs is noted below and represents investment in our City’s roads, public facilities, parks, trails, technology, and community amenities. More than $17.9 million in these capital investments are planned for FY 2024-25, including expenditures that are continuing from prior years. Some of these initiatives are already in progress from prior years, while other projects are new to our plans:

Operations & Maintenance Funding:

Administrative Costs: Operating and Administrative costs include committee member’s stipends and professional services. Professional services budget is for the cost of conducting the required independent audit under COC Bylaws. The recommended funding is $11,400.

Trail Maintenance and Repairs: Regular ongoing trail maintenance of the trail system ($600,000); backyard trail maintenance ($20,000); and miscellaneous trail fencing repairs ($30,000). The recommended funding is $650,000.

Facility Improvements
Annual Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Improvement Project: Staff will take the information provided by the CASP report and address the locations that need to be addressed in order to comply with Americans with Disabilities Act laws and regulations and to avoid ADA compliance violation lawsuits. The recommended funding is $170,000.

City Hall Remodel: Efficiency Assessment: City Hall building assessed for more efficient use of offices, storage areas, and bathrooms for the overall useful function of the facility. The office areas inside City Hall need to be evaluated for the most efficient use available. Offices are over and under sized. There is also a great need for additional storage areas. This will also include a balance assessment of the City Hall HVAC/AC ducting. The recommended funding is $40,000.

City Hall Security and Lobby Project: This project will upgrade security throughout City Hall. This is the last phase of the project that will incorporate new counter space for the frontage of City Hall along with the Community Services/Facilities and Maintenance Counter Area. The recommended funding is $600,000.

Community Services & Facilities Assessment: This project will assess current recreation programs, services and facilities to determine the impact on enhancing health, wellness and quality of life and recommend new programs to launch. The results will also aide in discussions for future Master Plan projects. The recommended funding is $122,000.

Facilities and Maintenance Office: Disposal and Replacement of the Facility and Maintenance Trailer at 1281 Fifth Street and a Facility and Maintenance trailer for the staff at the Ingalls Event Center. The Facilities and Maintenance Trailer at 1281 Fifth

Page 242 of 830 ends

Street has been utilized for 20+ years. The trailer is in disrepair and has several leaks that have caused water to enter the office area. Employees have placed plastic on the windows to keep rain from entering the office area. The trailer has met its useful life expectancy. The recommended funding is $400,000.

HVAC System Replacement: Project will replace air conditioners at Fire Station 47 (FY 2023-24), the Senior Center (FY 2024-25), and the feline room at the Animal Shelter (FY 2025-26). The recommended funding is $650,000.

Ingalls Event Center Wayfinding Project: Project will incorporate wayfinding signs to the various venues at the Event Center. The project will allow for visitors towing trailers and attending events to have a seamless experience navigating the Event Center. The recommended funding is $140,000.

Moreno Arena Bleacher & Arena Lighting: Project will upgrade the arena lighting in Moreno Arena along with the emergency bleacher lighting. The new lighting system will be LED and will provide sufficient lighting for all events at the Ingalls Event Center. The recommended funding is $235,000.

Moreno Arena Bleacher Replacement: Project includes permanent repairs to the structural integrity of the Moreno Arena Bleachers. The recommended funding is $762,000.

Moreno Arena Bucking Chute System: Replacement of the existing WW Bucking Chute System and roping boxes with a new Priefert Bucking Chute System and new roping boxes. The current bucking chutes are approximately 20 years old and have had a great deal of use over the years. The existing units are damaged and need to be replaced. The recommended funding is $100,000.

Senior Center Emergency Generator: Project includes the installation of an emergency generator at the Senior Center. Currently, this facility is designated as an emergency evacuation center. The recommended funding is $250,000.

Nellie Weaver Hall Improvements: The remainder of this project is focused on the parking lot improvements to The Hall at the Ingalls Event Center. As part of the parking lot improvements, the electrical service line will also need to be upgraded in order to provide enough electricity to power The Hall, The Barn and the new lighting and pedestals that will be installed in the parking lot. Vehicle charging units are also required as part of this project as a condition for The Barn construction. The recommended funding is $50,000.

Information Technology Improvements
Ingalls Event Center Camera System: The camera system is to monitor events that take place in the Moreno and Clark Arenas. This system will also be used as an added measure for security during large rodeo events. The recommended funding is $300,000.

Security System Upgrade: Upgrade security analog security panels and install video cameras and additional security measures in the Finance Department at City Hall. City facilities with older “Non-Sonitrol” alarm systems are due for an upgrade. The facilities are currently using analog phone line alarm transmission where many companies are

Page 243 of 830 ends

moving towards using cellular and/or network communications for transmitting alarm signals to the monitoring center. The recommended funding is $75,000.

Structured Connectivity System: A structured connectivity system is a complete set of cabling and connectivity products that integrates voice, data, wireless, video and other technology systems into a comprehensive infrastructure. This project will replace all City Hall cabling with CAT6A cabling with the creation of a Structured Cabling Systems standard. This standard will then be used at all satellite facilities replacing all CAT5E with CAT6A.The recommended funding is $35,000.

Park Improvements
Citywide Park Enhancements: This project will revitalize parks, particularly those that have recently been funded for installation of new playground equipment. Amenities may include BBQ areas, shade covers, shelters, tables, signage, athletic courts and arena renovation. This is a multi-year approach to consistently upgrade the park system with consistent furniture, vinyl fencing and needed park equipment. FY 2024-25 includes a new shade structure at Parmenter Park. The recommended funding is $200,000.

Park Light Post Replacement & Repair: This project is to replace and repair the lights in our park system that have degraded over the years. This project includes the replacement of poles, lighting fixtures, sports lighting, and electrical wiring. The recommended funding is $150,000.

Parking Lot Slurry Seal Project: This project will include new striping and slurry seal to extend the life of the existing pavement at Wayne Makin, the Senior Center, City Hall, and Ingalls. FY 2024-25 will include slurry seal at Veterans Way from Gate 1 to the Arena level. The recommended funding is $50,000.

Parmenter Park Parking Lot Improvement Project: This project will reconfigure the parking lot at Parmenter Park to meet ADA and NPDES requirements. This project was bid in FY 2023-24 but was significantly over budget. This project will be in FY 2024-25.

The recommended funding is $600,000.

Pikes Peak Playground Replacement Project: This project would replace the existing playground structure at Pikes Peak Park and would also include the addition of the PIP playground surfacing. The current system is not ADA compliant and cannot be retrofitted to meet compliance standards. The playground is almost 20 years old and is the City's most heavily used park. The new playground will incorporate inclusive playground equipment, a zip line and interactive features to inspire young minds. The recommended funding is $830,000.

Veterans Memorial Landscaping Project: Landscape the existing slope to prevent erosion from the Veterans Memorial Plaza to parking lot 3. The recommended funding is $60,000.

Storm Drain Improvements
Animal Shelter Parking & Drainage Project: Project will include the installation of a clarifier for the Animal Shelter, along with necessary drainage improvements. The project will also include the addition of a trash enclosure with the reconfiguration of the

Page 244 of 830 ends

back livestock pens, additional lighting and the repaving of the back parking lot. The recommended funding is $270,000.

Street Improvements
Center Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St: This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of Center Avenue from Sixth Street to Seventh Street. The recommended funding is $100,000.

Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade Project: Project will upgrade existing traffic signals to include new cabinet, LED signal lighting, LED safety lighting, traffic cameras, and backup batteries. The recommended funding is $120,000.

Fifth St - Temescal Ave to I-15 Fwy Project: This project will reconstruct Hillside Avenue from Temescal Avenue to I-15 Freeway and will include curbs and gutters to help control surface runoff. The recommended funding is $62,000.

Fourth St - Corona Ave to I-15 Fwy Project: This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of Fourth Street from the I-15 freeway to Corona Ave. The recommended funding is $1,875,000.

Hillside Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St Project: This project will reconstruct Hillside Avenue from Sixth Street to Seventh Street. The recommended funding is $110,000.

Hillside Ave - Third St to Fourth St Project: This project will reconstruct Hillside Avenue from Third Street to Fourth Street. The recommended funding is $150,000.

Second St - River Rd to Hamner Ave Project: This project will reconstruct Second Street from River Road to Pacific Avenue. The recommended funding is $2,000,000.

Slurry Seal Project: Slurry seal treatment project conducted annually. The recommended funding is $300,000.

Temescal Ave - Fifth St to Sixth St Project: This project will design and construct a 4" grind and overlay that will include new curb and gutter. The recommended funding is $20,000.

Third St Valley View Ave to Norco College Project: This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of Third Street from Valley View Avenue to the Norco College property boundary. The recommended funding is $1,100,000.

Valley View Ave - Fifth St to Sixth St Project: This project will reconstruct Valley View Avenue from Fifth Street to Sixth Street. The recommended funding is $1,950,000.

Valley View Ave - Third St to Fourth St Project: This project will reconstruct Valley View Avenue from Third Street to Fourth Street as part of the Norco MDP Line N-5 Storm Drain Project. The recommended funding is $2,100,000.

Page 245 of 830 ends

Woodward Ave Pavement Project: This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of Woodward Avenue from Detroit Street to River Drive. The recommended funding is $1,100,000.

Trails Improvements
Silverlakes Causeway: This project will incorporate ADA Improvements to the underpass of Hamner Avenue for pedestrians to access Silverlakes from Eastvale Community Park. It will also provide access for Emergency Vehicles into Silverlakes.

Total recommended funding is $250,000.

Trail Fencing Replacement for FY 2024-25: Project consists of continuing installing new white vinyl fencing and removal of old wooden fencing at various locations.

Locations are selected annually by Public Works Department. Total recommended funding is $600,000.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total estimated fund balance as of the beginning of FY 2024-25 is $10,341,576.

Total estimated revenues in FY 2024-25 are $8,713,000 including $8,463,000 from Measure R Transactions and Use Tax and $250,000 of investment earnings. Total estimated expenditures in FY 2024-25 are $18,587,400. This leaves an estimated available fund balance of $467,176 to be appropriated for future projects and programs.

Detailed information regarding revenues, expenditures and fund balance estimates is noted in Attachment A.

RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN:

This item is consistent with Strategic Plan #3 - Economic Development and Financial Stability: Assure financial stability by expanding development efforts, diversifying revenue sources and continuing prudent financial management.

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

Certified as to Availability of Funds: Lisette Free, Finance Director Approved by: Lori Sassoon, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

Measure R CIP Book

Page 246 of 830 ends

MEASURE R

CAPITAL PROJECTS

Page 247 of 830 ends

Page Intentionally Left Blank

Page 248 of 830 ends

MEASURE R FUND 127/132
Operating, Maintenance and Capital Projects Division Various Object Code Line-Item Description
FY 2022-2023
Actual
FY 2023-2024
Amended
Budget
FY 2023-2024
Projected
Year-End
FY 2024-2025
Budget
Projection
30300 Conferences and Meetings $ - $ 1,400 $ 1,000 $ 1,400 34125 Accounting & Auditing Svc 6,150 10,000 10,000 10,000 Subtotal Operating Costs 6,150 11,400 11,000 11,400
32400 Trail Maintenance & Repairs 517,287 600,000 580,000 650,000 Subtotal Trail Maintenance 517,287 600,000 580,000 650,000 Various Capital Improvement Projects 5,193,727 16,582,527 10,400,000 17,926,000 Subtotal Capital Projects 5,193,727 16,582,527 10,400,000 17,926,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 5,717,164 $ 17,193,927 $ 10,991,000 $ 18,587,400 50151 Sales Tax - Measure R $ 8,129,336 $ 8,463,000 $ 8,300,000 $ 8,463,000 54200 Interest Income 229,888 175,000 425,000 250,000
TOTAL REVENUES $ 8,359,224 $ 8,638,000 $ 8,725,000 $ 8,713,000 Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures $ (2,266,000) $ (9,874,400) Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 12,607,576 10,341,576
Estimated Ending Fund Balance $ 10,341,576 $ 467,176

MEASURE R
1

Page 249 of 830 ends

Page Intentionally Left Blank
2

Page 250 of 830 ends

MEASURE R
3

Page 251 of 830 ends

Page Intentionally Left Blank
4

Page 252 of 830 ends

Measure R Fund 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29
Animal Shelter Kennel Drains - - 150,000 - -
Annual ADA Improvement Project 170,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Arena Structural Maintenance - 50,000 10,000 50,000 10,000 City Hall Remodel - Efficiency Assessment 40,000 - - - - City Hall Security and Lobby Project 600,000 - - - -
Citywide Facility Painting and Treatment - 250,000 150,000 100,000 150,000 Clark Arena Lighting Improvements - - 25,000 200,000 -
Community Services & Facilities Assessment 122,000 - - - - Facilities and Maintenance Office 400,000 - - - -
Facility Roofing Project - 375,000 - 500,000 -
Fire Station 47 Apparatus Bay Doors - 700,000 - - -
HVAC System Replacement 650,000 300,000 100,000 - -
Ingalls Event Center Equipment Replacement - - 30,000 30,000 30,000 Ingalls Event Center Wayfinding Project 140,000 - - - - Moreno Arena Bleacher & Arena Lighting 235,000 - - - -
Moreno Arena Bleacher Replacement 762,000 - - - -
Moreno Arena Bucking Chute System 100,000 - - - -
Senior Center Emergency Generator 250,000 - - - -
The Hall Improvements 50,000 500,000 - - -
Ingalls Event Center Camera System 300,000 - - - -
Security System Upgrade 75,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Structured Connectivity System 35,000 127,500 127,500 127,500 127,500 Citywide Park Enhancements 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Community Center Playground & Pour-In-Place Project - 660,000 - - - Ingalls Event Center Master Plan - 1,000,000 - - -
Neal Snipes Restroom Upgrade - 25,000 300,000 - -
Park Arena Renovations - - 25,000 300,000 -
Park Lightpost Replacement & Repair 150,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Park Signage Project - 20,000 200,000 - -
Parking Lot Slurry Seal Project 50,000 - - - 300,000
Parmenter Park Parking Lot Improvement Project 600,000 - - - - Pikes Peak Park Lighting Upgrades - - 25,000 300,000 -
Pikes Peak Playground Replacement Project 830,000 - - - - Veterans Memorial Landscaping Project 60,000 - - - -
Animal Shelter Parking and Drainage 270,000 - - - -
Fire Station 47 Sump Pump Upgrade-Backlot - 100,000 - - - Underground Storm Drain Line - 300,000 - - -
California Ave - North Ave to Eighth St - - - 120,000 1,600,000 California Ave - Seventh St to Eighth St - - 150,000 1,900,000 - California Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St - 150,000 1,900,000 - - Center Ave - Seventh St to River Dr - - - 500,000 -
Center Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St 100,000 1,800,000 - - - Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade Project 120,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Corona Ave - Reservoir Dr to Second St - - - 150,000 1,800,000 Corona Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St - - - 2,200,000 -
Detroit Ave - Valley View Ave to I-15 - 1,500,000 - - - Fifth St - Temescal Ave to I-15 Fwy 62,000 2,000,000 - - - Fourth St - Corona Ave to Dapplegray Dr - - - 1,800,000 - Fourth St - Corona Ave to I-15 Fwy 1,875,000 - - - -
Hidden Valley Pkwy - I-15 to Lonesome Dove Ct - - - - 500,000 Hillside Ave - Fourth St to Fifth St - 600,000 - - -
Hillside Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St 110,000 - 1,900,000 - - Hillside Ave - Third St to Fourth St 150,000 - 2,200,000 - - River Dr - Temescal Ave to Pedley Ave - - 1,800,000 - - River Dr - Woodward to Corona Ave - - 1,200,000 - -
Second St - River Rd to Hamner Ave 2,000,000 - - - -
Slurry Seal Project 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Temescal Ave - Fifth St to Sixth St 20,000 1,850,000 - - - Third St - Valley View Ave to College 1,100,000 - - - - Valley View Ave - Fifth St to Sixth St 1,950,000 - - - - Valley View Ave - Third St to Fourth St 2,100,000 - - - - Woodward Ave Pavement Project 1,100,000 - - - -
Silverlakes Causeway 250,000 - - - -
Trail Fencing Replacement Program 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 FUND 132 MEASURE R CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL $ 17,926,000 $ 13,687,500 $ 11,672,500 $ 9,657,500 $ 5,897,500 Trail Improvements
Information Technology Improvements
Facility Improvements
Park Improvements
Street Improvements

MEASURE R

FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
FISCAL YEARS 2024-2025 TO 2028-2029
Storm Drain Improvements
5

Page 253 of 830 ends

Page Intentionally Left Blank
6

Page 254 of 830 ends

FACILITY

IMPROVEMENTS
7

Page 255 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - 150,000 - - 150,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ 150,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - - - 150,000 - - 150,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ 150,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets. The drains are not functioning properly and need to be reinstalled at the correct elevation to collect water and keep the kennels dry.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project would remove and replace the existing kennel drains at the Animal Shelter.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Animal Shelter Kennel Drains
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Animal Shelter
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

CATEGORIES
Risk to Health, Safety and
Environment
Regulatory Requirements
Asset Condition, Annual
Recurring Costs and Asset
Longevity
Community Investment and
Economic Prosperity
Level and Quality of Service
Sustainability and Conservation
Grant Availability
Project Readiness
Multiple Category Benefit and
Leveraging Opportunities
Imperative (Very High Priority)
Essential (High Priority)
Important (Moderate Priority)
Desirable (Low Priority)
8

Page 256 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
339,398 170,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,109,398 - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 339,398 $ 170,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 1,109,398 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 339,398 170,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,109,398 $ 339,398 $ 170,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 1,109,398 *Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement and improvement of capital assets and addresses federal requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The FY 2022-23 improvements were completed.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This annual project identifies locations in the CASp Report that need to be addressed to keep facilities ADA compliant. In FY 24/25 $20,000 is allocated for ADA Horse Mounting Ramps at various facilities and parks.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Annual ADA Improvement Project
PROJECT NUMBER: 54300.2
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 257 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
30,000 - 50,000 10,000 50,000 10,000 150,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 30,000 $ - $ 50,000 $ 10,000 $ 50,000 $ 10,000 $ 150,000 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 30,000 - 50,000 10,000 50,000 10,000 150,000 $ 30,000 $ - $ 50,000 $ 10,000 $ 50,000 $ 10,000 $ 150,000 *Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project includes the structural maintenance of the Moreno Arena and Clark Arena. Bolt tightening and maintenance of the structure is integral for the prolonged use of the covers. Also includes the inspection costs for the bleachers in Moreno Arena.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Arena Structural Maintenance
PROJECT NUMBER: 54111.8
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 258 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
60,000 40,000 - - - - 100,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 60,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
20,000 - - - - 20,000
Construction/Other 60,000 20,000 - - - - 80,000
$ 60,000 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
This project will assess the efficiency and evaluate the best uses of the City Hall facility for appropriate office space, shortage and bathrooms.

This project also incorporates the issues with the HVAC ducting and will incorporate changes to the ducting to run more efficiently.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: City Hall Remodel - Efficiency Assessment PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.10
LOCATION: City Hall
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement and improvement of capital assets, addresses safety issue and improves internal services.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 259 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ 254,405 $ 39,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 293,405
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
166,403 600,000 - - - - 766,403
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 420,808 $ 639,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,059,808
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 420,808 639,000 - - - - 1,059,808
$ 420,808 $ 639,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,059,808
This project will upgrade security throughout City Hall. This is the last phase of the project that will incorporate new counter space for the frontage of City Hall along with the Community Services/Facilities and Maintenance Counter Area.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: City Hall Security and Lobby Project
PROJECT NUMBER: 4303.1-54303.2
LOCATION: City Hall
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 140.910.43130
132.910.43115
Total
This proejct aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement and improvement of a capital asset, addresses safety issues and ADA compliance, and improves internal services.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 260 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
250,000 - 250,000 150,000 100,000 150,000 900,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 250,000 $ - $ 250,000 $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ 150,000 $ 900,000 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 250,000 - 250,000 150,000 100,000 150,000 900,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ 250,000 $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ 150,000 $ 900,000 This is the last phase of a multi-year project to repaint the exterior and interior painting of City-owned facilities. FY 2025-26 will include repainting of Animal Control, Ingalls Event Center Arena covers along with the interior of the both Fire Staiton 47 and 57. FY 2026-27 will include the painting of the snack bars and restrooms at Wayne Makin.

FY 2027-28 will include the interior of the Senior Center. FY 2028-29 will include the interior of City Hall.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Citywide Facility Painting and Treatment
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.8
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement and improvement of capital assets that have not been painted or treated in more than 20 years.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 261 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - 25,000 200,000 - 225,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ 225,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - 25,000 200,000 - 225,000
Construction/Other - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ 225,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will design and replace the existing HPS lighting system with LED lights.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Clark Arena Lighting Improvements
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 262 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
104,000 122,000 - - - - 226,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 104,000 $ 122,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 226,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
104,000 122,000 - - - - 226,000
Construction/Other - - - - - - -
$ 104,000 $ 122,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 226,000
This project will assess current recreation programs, services and facilities to determine impact on enhancing health wellness and quality of life, and recommend new programs to launch. The results will also aide in discussions for future Master Plan projects.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Community Svcs & Facilities Assessment
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.14
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Community Services
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 1 to enhance quality of life by promoting public health, safety and wellness initiatives for all community members. This funding was previously dedicated to the Neal Snipes Park Master Plan.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 263 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
250,000 400,000 - - - - 650,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 250,000 $ 400,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
250,000 200,000 - - - - 450,000
Construction/Other - 200,000 - - - - 200,000
$ 250,000 $ 400,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000
This project will provide a Facilities and Maintenance trailer for the staff at the Ingalls Event Center for Fiscal Year 23/24. In Fiscal Year 24/25 the existing trailer at 1281 Fifth Street will be replaced.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Facilities and Maintenance Office
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.11
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Cetner and 1281 Fifth Street
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement of capital imporvement assets and addresses building saftey issues. Staff is currently utilizing the previous announcer booth at Moreno Arena as an office space.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 264 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
400,000 - 375,000 - 500,000 - 1,275,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 400,000 $ - $ 375,000 $ - $ 500,000 $ - $ 1,275,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - -
Construction/Other 400,000 - 375,000 - 500,000 - 1,275,000 $ 400,000 $ - $ 375,000 $ - $ 500,000 $ - $ 1,275,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets. The roof at The Hall is a metal roof that leaks during every rain event. This roof is in need of replacement in FY 2024-25, as only repairs have been made in the past 20 years. The Senior Center roof is in need of replacement in FY 2027-28 due to the age of the roof (20+ years).

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will incorporate the removal and replacement of the roof at The Hall and the Senior Center.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Facility Roofing Project
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: The Hall, Senior Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 265 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 700,000 - - - 700,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - - 700,000 - - - 700,000
$ - $ - $ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
Replacement of the existing apparatus bay doors at Fire Sation 47. The existing doors have been in operaiton for over 20 years and are used daily. The existing doors have been failing and are requiring a great deal of maintence to keep them operational.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Fire Station 47 Apparatus Bay Doors
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: 3902 Hillside Avenue, Norco CA
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 266 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
50,000 650,000 300,000 100,000 - - 1,100,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 50,000 $ 650,000 $ 300,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ 1,100,000 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
50,000 - - - - - 50,000
Construction/Other - 650,000 300,000 100,000 - - 1,050,000 $ 50,000 $ 650,000 $ 300,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ 1,100,000 *Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will replace air conditioners at Fire Station 47 (FY 2023-24), the Senior Center (FY 2024-25), and the feline room at the Animal Shelter (FY 2025-26).

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: HVAC System Replacement
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.15
LOCATION: Fire Station 47, Senior Center, Animal Control DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 267 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 90,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - - - 30,000 30,000 30,000 90,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 90,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project is an annual project to replace broken pipe panels and gates at the Ingalls Event Center. This equipment is used at both of the larger arenas (Moreno and Clark), but is not limited to the warm up arena and The Barn.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Ingalls Event Center Equipment Replacement PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 268 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
10,000 140,000 - - - - 150,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 10,000 $ 140,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 10,000 140,000 - - - 150,000
$ 10,000 $ 140,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

The project is currently in the design phase with Urban Arena.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will incorporate wayfinding signs to the various venues at the Event Center. The project will allow for visitors towing trailers and attending events to have a seamless experience navigating the Event Center.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Ingalls Event Center Wayfinding Project
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.16
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 269 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
15,000 235,000 - - - - 250,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 15,000 $ 235,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
15,000 - - - - - 15,000
Construction/Other - 235,000 - - - - 235,000
$ 15,000 $ 235,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000
This project will upgrade the arena lighting in Moreno Arena along with the emergency bleacher lighting. The new lighting system will be LED and will provide sufficient lighting for all events at the Event Center.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Moreno Arena Bleachers & Arena Lighting
PROJECT NUMBER: 54111.5
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement of infrastructure and address building and safety issues with an unreliable lighting system.

This project has been designed. It is currently in the plan check process and will be ready to bid.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 270 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
800,000 762,000 - - - - 1,562,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 800,000 $ 762,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,562,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 800,000 762,000 - - - - 1,562,000
$ 800,000 $ 762,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,562,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets. Over the years, water has damaged the structure and temporary repairs were made in 2021. The manufacture has inspected the structure and has provided a quote for the necessary repairs.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project includes permanent repairs to the structural integrity of the Moreno Arena Bleachers.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Moreno Arena Bleacher Replacement
PROJECT NUMBER: 54111.9
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 271 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 100,000 - - - - 100,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - 100,000 - - - - 100,000
$ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
Replacement of the existing WW Bucking Chute System and roping boxes with a new Priefert Bucking Chute System and new roping boxes.

The current bucking chutes are approximately 20 years old and have had a great deal of use over the years. The existing units are damaged and need to be replaced.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Moreno Arena Bucking Chute System
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center - Moreno Arena
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 272 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
50,000 250,000 - - - - 300,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 50,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 50,000 250,000 - - - - 300,000
$ 50,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

The project is currently in the design phase with JCA.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project includes the installation of an emergency generator at the Senior Center. Currently, this facility is designated as an emergency evacuation center.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Senior Center Emergency Generator
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.17
LOCATION: Senior Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 273 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
197,597 50,000 500,000 - - - 747,597
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 197,597 $ 50,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 747,597
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
197,597 50,000 - - - - 247,597
Construction/Other - - 500,000 - - - 500,000
$ 197,597 $ 50,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 747,597
The remainder of this project is focused on the parking lot improvements to The Hall at the Ingalls Event Center along with the removal of the ampetheater. As part of the parking lot improvements, the electrical service line will also need to be upgraded in order to provide enough electricity to power The Hall, The Barn, and the new lighting and pedestals that will be installed in the parking lot. Vehicle charging units are also required as part of this project as a condition for The Barn CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Facility Improvements
PROJECT NAME: The Hall Improvements
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.6
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely replacement and improvement of capital assets, and addresses building and safety concerns for the facility.

The stage door and exterior painting are complete. The next phase includes the parking lot improvements.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 274 of 830 ends

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

IMPROVEMENTS
27

Page 275 of 830 ends

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Information Technology Improvements

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 300,000 - - - - 300,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - 300,000 - - - - 300,000
$ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacment and improvement of capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
The camera system is to monitor events that take place in the Moreno and Clark Areanas. This system will also be used as an added measure for security during large rodeo events.

PROJECT NAME: Ingalls Event Center Camera System
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 276 of 830 ends

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Information Technology Improvements

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
35,001 75,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 230,001
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 35,001 $ 75,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 230,001 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 35,001 75,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 230,001 $ 35,001 $ 75,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 230,001 *Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This annual project will upgrade the security panels and fire system panels at various City-owned facilities. This project includes the installation of video cameras, upgrading analog security panels, and other various equipment upgrades to protect City assets.

PROJECT NAME: Security System Upgrade
PROJECT NUMBER: 54303.12
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 277 of 830 ends

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Information Technology Improvements

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 35,000 127,500 127,500 127,500 127,500 545,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 35,000 $ 127,500 $ 127,500 $ 127,500 $ 127,500 $ 545,000 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- 35,000 - - - - 35,000
Construction/Other - - 127,500 127,500 127,500 127,500 510,000 $ - $ 35,000 $ 127,500 $ 127,500 $ 127,500 $ 127,500 $ 545,000 *Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
City Hall cabling was completed in 2012 using CAT5E. The installation and setup of cabling throughout City Hall was inconsistent, leading to difficulty in tracing performance issues. Additionally, satellite facilities do not have network expandability for security cameras, security systems, etc.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
A structured connectivity system is a complete set of cabling and connectivity products that integrates voice, data, wireless, video, and other technology systems into a comprehensive infrastructure. This project will replace all City Hall cabling with CAT6A cabling with the creation of a Structured Cabling Systems standard. This standard will then be used at all satellite facilities replacing all CAT5E with CAT6A.

PROJECT NAME: Structured Connectivity System
PROJECT NUMBER: 54600.1
LOCATION: City Hall, Satellite Facilities
DEPARTMENT: Information Technology
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 278 of 830 ends

PARK

IMPROVEMENTS
31

Page 279 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
410,642 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,010,642 - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 410,642 $ 200,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 1,010,642 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 410,642 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,010,642 $ 410,642 $ 200,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 1,010,642 This project will revitalize parks, particularly those that have recently been funded for installation of new playground equipment. Amenities may include BBQ areas, shade covers, shelters, tables, signage, athletic courts and arena renovation. This is a multi-year approach to consistently upgrading the park system with consistent furniture, vinyl fencing and needed park equipment. FY 2024-25 includes new shade structures at Parmenter Park.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Citywide Park Enhancements
PROJECT NUMBER: 54410.5
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement and improvement of capital assets, which have not had any major enhancement or revitalization in more that 30 years. Upon completion, these improvements will enhance the stakeholder experience and strengthen public health and wellness initiatives.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 280 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 660,000 - - - 660,000
- - - - - - -
- - 75,000 - - - 75,000
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 735,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 735,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- 660,000 - - - 660,000
Construction/Other - 75,000 - - - 75,000
$ - $ - $ 735,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 735,000
This project will remove the existing structures that have met their useful life expectancy and create an ADA compliant space that meets all ASTM Safety Standards. The consultant will design two play structures–Play Structure 1 for 2-5 years with no climbing ladders and Play Structure 2 for 5-12 years.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Community Center Playground & Pour-In-Place Project PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Community Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 123.915.43120
132.940.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 281 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 1,000,000 - - - 1,000,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - 1,000,000 - - - 1,000,000
Construction/Other - - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000,000
A master plan will provide clear direction on how to develop the Event Center's property and facilities to meet the needs of the City and the community over the next 10 years an beyond. Staff along with the City's consultant will develop a plan based on logical priority of projects and a reasonable timeline. A subcommittee will review concept drawings then a financing plan will be developed.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Ingalls Event Center Master Plan
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43150
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 282 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 25,000 300,000 - - 325,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 325,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - 25,000 300,000 - - 325,000
Construction/Other - - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 325,000
This project will remove the current restroom at Neal Snipes Park. A new restroom would be installed to meet ADA compliance and offer park users a new facility.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Neal Snipes Restroom Upgrade
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Neal Snipes Park
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43115
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 283 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - 25,000 300,000 - 325,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ 325,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - 25,000 300,000 - 325,000
Construction/Other - - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ 325,000
This project will add much needed drainage and subgrade improvements to the park arenas. It will also include pipe panel upgrades, as well as lighting improvements.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Park Arena Renovations
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 284 of 830 ends

New

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 150,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 550,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 550,000 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - 150,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 550,000 $ - $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 550,000 This project is to replace and reapair the lights in our park system that have degraded over the years. This project include the replacmenet of poles, lighitng fixtures, sports lighting, and electrical wiring.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Park Lightpost Replacement & Repair
PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION: Norco Parks
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 285 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 20,000 200,000 - - 220,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 20,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ 220,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - 20,000 200,000 - - 220,000
Construction/Other - - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 20,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ 220,000
This project will revitalize all park signage in the park system.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Park Signage Project
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Various
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43150
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets. The current signs are faded and in need of upgrades.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 286 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 50,000 - - - 300,000 350,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ 350,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - 50,000 - - - 300,000 350,000
$ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ 350,000
This project will include new striping and slurry seal to extend the life of the existing pavement at Wayne Makin, Senior Center and City Hall, and Ingalls. FY 2024-25 will slurry seal Veterans Way from Gate 1 to the Arena level.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Parking Lot Slurry Seal Project
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets. This project is needed to preserve the life of the asphalt.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 287 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 600,000 - - - - 600,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - -
Construction/Other - 600,000 - - - - 600,000
$ - $ 600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000
This project will reconfigure the parking lot at Parmenter Park to meet ADA and NPDES requirements. This project was bid in FY 23/24 but was significantly over budget. This project will be in FY 24/25.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Parmenter Park Parking Lot Improvement
Project
PROJECT NUMBER: 54111.2
LOCATION: Parmenter Park
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure the timely replacement and improvement of infrastructure and addresses safety issues and ADA compliance.

This project will be constructed in October - January to not impact youth sports.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 288 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - 25,000 300,000 - 325,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ 325,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - 25,000 300,000 - 325,000
Construction/Other - - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ 325,000
This project will include the replacement of the light standards throughout Pikes Peak Park.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Pikes Peak Park Lighting Upgrades
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Pikes Peak Park
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43150
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets. The new LED lighting system will include much needed security lighting for the park and would replace the dying infrastructure.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 289 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ 620,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 620,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 830,000 - - - - 830,000
- - - - - - -
- 277,400 - - - - 277,400
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 1,727,400 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,727,400
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - 1,727,400 - - - - 1,727,400
$ - $ 1,727,400 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,727,400
This project would replace the existing playground structure at Pikes Peak Park and would also include the addition of the PIP playground surfacing. The current system is not ADA Compliant and cannot be retrofitted to meet compliance standards. The playground is almost 20 years old and is the City's most heavily used park. The new playground will incorporate inclusive playground equipment and have a zip line and interactive features to inspire young minds.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Pikes Peak Playground Replacement Project PROJECT NUMBER: 4407.8
LOCATION: Pikes Peak Park
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43130
123.915.43120
141.915.43120
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 290 of 830 ends

New

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 60,000 - - - - 60,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ 60,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - 60,000 - - - - 60,000
$ - $ 60,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000
Landscpae the existing slope to prevent erosion from the Veterans Memorial Plaza to Parking Lot 3.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Park Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Veterans Memorial Landscaping Project
PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.940.43150
Total
This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 291 of 830 ends

Page Intentionally Left Blank
44

Page 292 of 830 ends

STORM DRAIN

IMPROVEMENTS
45

Page 293 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ 11,671 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 51,671
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- 270,000 - - - - 270,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 11,671 $ 310,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 321,671
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
11,671 15,000 - - - - 26,671
Construction/Other - 295,000 - - - - 295,000
$ 11,671 $ 310,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 321,671
132.910.43115
Grants
FUND NUMBER(S):
151.942.43130
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date
The project will include the installation of a clarifier for the Animal Shelter, along with necessary drainage improvements. The project will also include the addition of a trash enclosure with the reconfiguration of the back livestock pens, additional lighting and the repaving of the back parking lot.

This project aligns with Strategic Direction No. 5 to ensure timely preservation, replacement, improvement and acquisition of infrastructure and capital assets.

The project is currently in the design phase with RKA.

SB1 Roads & Maint
Total

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Storm Drain Improvements
Animal Shelter Parking & Drainage
4414.3
Animal Shelter
Facilities and Maintenance
Design/Engineering
Total
PROJECT NAME:

PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION:

DEPARTMENT:

Measure A
Other Sources
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Dev Impact Fees
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 294 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 100,000 - - - 100,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - - 100,000 - - - 100,000
$ - $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will upgrade the sump pump in the backlot of Fire Station 47.

The current sump pump is failing and is not built to the capacity needed to pump the water into the storm drain system. The back northwestern corner of the parking lot floods during rain events. This project also includes the construction of a larger catch basin.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Storm Drain Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Fire Station 47 Pump Upgrade - Backlot
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: 3902 Hillside Avenue, Norco
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 295 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 300,000 - - - 300,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other - - 300,000 - - - 300,000
$ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will consist of undergrounding the storm drain line at Ingalls Event Center that are on the north side of Veterans Way. The project would consist of a new drainage system that would be fille in to create 90 additional parking at the Event Center.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Storm Drain Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Underground Storm Drain Line
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Ingalls Event Center
DEPARTMENT: Facilities and Maintenance
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.910.43115
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 296 of 830 ends

STREET

IMPROVEMENTS
49

Page 297 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 120,000 1,600,000 1,720,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 120,000 $ 1,600,000 $ 1,720,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 120,000 - 120,000
Construction/Other - - - - - 1,600,000 1,600,000
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 120,000 $ 1,600,000 $ 1,720,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: California Ave - North Ave to Eighth St
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: California Ave - North Dr to Eighth St
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 298 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - 150,000 1,900,000 - 2,050,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 1,900,000 $ - $ 2,050,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - 150,000 - - 150,000
Construction/Other - - - - 1,900,000 - 1,900,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 1,900,000 $ - $ 2,050,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: California Ave - Seventh St to Eighth St
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: California Ave - Seventh St to Eighth Street
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 299 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 150,000 1,900,000 - - 2,050,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 1,900,000 $ - $ - $ 2,050,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - 150,000 - - - 150,000
Construction/Other - - - 1,900,000 - - 1,900,000
$ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 1,900,000 $ - $ - $ 2,050,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of California Avenue from Sixth Street to Seventh Street
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: California Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: California Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 300 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 1,100,000 - 1,100,000
- - - - 500,000 - 500,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,600,000 $ - $ 1,600,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 150,000 - 150,000
Construction/Other - - - - 1,450,000 - 1,450,000
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,600,000 $ - $ 1,600,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Center Ave - Seventh St to River Dr
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Center Ave - Seventh St to River Dr
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 137.930.43160
132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 301 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
20,000 100,000 1,800,000 - - - 1,920,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 20,000 $ 100,000 $ 1,800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,920,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
20,000 100,000 25,000 - - - 145,000
Construction/Other - - 1,775,000 - - - 1,775,000
$ 20,000 $ 100,000 $ 1,800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,920,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Center Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St
PROJECT NUMBER: 54900.27
LOCATION: Center Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 302 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
80,000 120,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 80,000 $ 120,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 600,000 Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
Construction/Other 80,000 120,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,000 $ 80,000 $ 120,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 600,000 Design/Engineering
Total
PROJECT NAME:

PROJECT NUMBER:

LOCATION:

DEPARTMENT:

Measure A
Other Sources
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Dev Impact Fees
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrade Project
54900.22
Various
Public Works
132.930.43160
Grants
FUND NUMBER(S):
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date
This project will upgrade existing traffic signals to include new cabinet, LED signal lighting, LED safety lighting, traffic cameras, and backup batteries.

Many of the existing traffic signals on Sixth Street and Hamner Avenue do not have battery backup systems that allow the signals to function during power outages, which creates a public safety issue for motorists.

Upgrading the signals to include vehicle detection cameras would ensure that traffic can be managed more effectively and reliably than with traffic loops in the roadway. Adding LED light fixtures would allow for energy savings.

This work would be completed by the City's signal maintenance company.

SB1 Roads & Maint
Total

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 303 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 150,000 1,800,000 1,950,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,950,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 150,000 25,000 175,000
Construction/Other - - - - - 1,775,000 1,775,000
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,950,000
This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of Corona Avenue from Reservoir Drive to Second Street.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Corona Ave - Reservoir Dr to Second St
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Corona Ave - Reservoir Dr to Second St
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 304 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 2,200,000 - 2,200,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,200,000 $ - $ 2,200,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - 150,000 - 150,000
Construction/Other - - - - 2,050,000 - 2,050,000
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,200,000 $ - $ 2,200,000
This project will design and construct a grind and overlay of Corona Avenue from Sixth Street to Seveneth Street.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Corona Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Corona Ave - Sixth St to Seventh St
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

This project will not begin until after the new water mainline has been installed on this street.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 305 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - 1,500,000 - - - 1,500,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ - $ - $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - 125,000 - - - 125,000
Construction/Other - - 1,375,000 - - - 1,375,000
$ - $ - $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The pavement condition warrants a grind and overlay treatment.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Detroit Ave - Valley View Ave to I-15
PROJECT NUMBER: New
LOCATION: Detroit Ave - Valley View Ave to I-15
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 306 of 830 ends

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT JUSTIFICATION

PROJECT STATUS
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
100,000 62,000 2,000,000 - - - 2,162,000
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
$ 100,000 $ 62,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,162,000
Prior Years* 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Cumulative Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
- - - - - - -
100,000 62,000 50,000 - - - 212,000
Construction/Other - - 1,950,000 - - - 1,950,000
$ 100,000 $ 62,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,162,000
*Prior Years: Actual Incurred to Date

EXPENDITURE SCHEDULE BY FISCAL YEAR
Planning
Right-of-Way
Design/Engineering
Total
Total
The roadway is in very poor condition.

This project will begin after the storm drain improvements along the same alignment have been completed.

FUNDING SOURCES BY FISCAL YEAR
Dev Impact Fees
Grants
Measure A
Measure R
Operating Transfers
Other Sources
SB1 Roads & Maint
This project will reconstruct Hillside Avenue from Temescal Avenue to I-15 Freeway and will include curbs and gutters to help control surface runoff.

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – Street Improvements
PROJECT NAME: Fifth St - Temescal Ave to I-15 Fwy
PROJECT NUMBER: 54900.23
LOCATION: Fifth St - Temescal Ave to I-15 Fwy
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
FUND NUMBER(S): 132.930.43160
Not Started Design Bid Process Construction Completed

PRIORITIZATION LEVEL

PRIORITIZATION

Page 307 of 830 ends

Norco City CouncilJune 19, 2024

Norco City Council
June 19, 2024