AGREEMENT No. 24-62-018-00
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER SB 821 BICYCLE AND
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM
(Transp01iation Development Act Atiicle 3; Senate Bill 821) This Funding Agreement ("AGREEMENT") is entered into as of ____ , 2023 ("Effective Date"), by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("RCTC") and City of Riverside ("RECIPIENT") . RCTC and RECIPIENT may be refeffed to herein individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Paiiies."
RECITALS
A. RCTC is a county transp01iation commission created and existing pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5.
B. Under RCTC's SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program ("PROGRAM"), cities and counties in the County of Riverside are notified of the availability of PROGRAM funding and a call for projects ("CALL FOR PROJECTS") is anticipated to be issued biennially by RCTC.
C. On Febrnaiy 6th, 2023, a CALL FOR PROJECTS was published by RCTC seeking applications for FY 2023/24 PROGRAM funding, which applications were reviewed in accordance with the applicable evaluation criteria included in the CALL FOR PROJECTS.
D. Based on the application attached as Attachment 1 and incorporated herein by this reference, RECIPIENT has been selected to receive PROGRAM funding for its proposed Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements Project ("PROJECT").
E. Funding for the PROJECT shall be provided pursuant to the tenns contained in this AGREEMENT and pursuant to applicable PROGRAM policies adopted by RCTC, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Attachment 2.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the preceding recitals and the mutual covenants and consideration contained herein, the Paiiies mutually agree as follows:
1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Paiiies acknowledge and agree that the above recitals are trne and c01Tect, and hereby incorporate those recitals by this reference into the AGREEMENT.
2. RCTC Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to distribute to the RECIPIENT, on the te1ms and conditions set fo11h herein, a sum not to exceed Six Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars and Fifty Cents ($671,887.50), to be used exclusively for reimbursing the RECIPIENT for eligible expenses as described herein ("FUNDING AMOUNT"). RECIPIENT acknowledges and agrees that the FUNDING AMOUNT may be less than the actual and final cost of the PROJECT, which final costs are the sole responsibility of RECIPIENT , and RCTC will not contribute PROGRAM funds in excess of 1 I 7336.00005141471305.2
the maximum authorized in this Section 2 unless othe1wise mutually agreed to in writing by the PARTIES . In the event the FUNDING AMOUNT is not fully utilized by RECIPIENT for the PROJECT, the unused FUNDING AMOUNT must be returned to RCTC within ninety (90) ninety days of a written request by RCTC unless RECIPIENT can demonstrate in writing, subject to written approval by RCTC in its sole discretion, the following: (i) valid reason for why PROJECT costs were significantly lower than the estimate included in RECIPIENT's attached application for funding, and (ii) written proposal for how any unused FUNDING AMOUNT will be used for a proposal to supp01t the PROJECT or other use that supp01ts the goals and requirements of the PROGRAM .
2.1 Eligible Project Costs. Reimbursement for PROJECT costs ("REIMBURSEMENT") may only include those items expressly allowed for under A1ticle 3 of the Transpo1tation Development Act (California Public Utilities Code section 99200 et seq.), which provides that funding shall be allocated for the constrnction, including related engineering expenses, of facilities based on the PROGRAM policies adopted by RCTC, provided that such items are included in the scope of work included in the application, attached as Attachment 1 ("SCOPE OF WORK"). All PROJECT costs not included in the SCOPE OF WORK and not expressly permitted under Alticle 3 of the Transpo1tation Development Act and the PROGRAM policies shall be considered ineligible for REIMBURSEMENT. In the event the SCOPE OF WORK needs to be amended, RECIPIENT shall submit a scope change request electronically via RCTC's online tracking and rep01ting system known as the Rivtrack system and accessible at https ://rivtrack .rctc.org / ("Rivtrack system"). The electronically submitted scope change request must include the reasons for the requested change and confomation that costs associated with the proposed amendment are eligible for PROGRAM reimbursement. Such request is subject to written approval by RCTC, in RCTC's sole discretion.
In the event of any ambiguity between this AGREEMENT, PROGRAM policies, and applicable law, the following order of precedence will govern: (1) applicable law; (2) PROGRAM policies; (3) this AGREEMENT. In the case of any conflict between this Agreement and any of its attachments, the body of this Agreement shall govern. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a conflict, the most stringent requirement shall govern, unless prohibited by applicable law or othe1wise agreed upon by RCTC.
2.2 Timing for Project Completion. In accordance with the PROGRAM policies attached hereto as Attachment 2, RECIPIENT has thi1ty-six (36) months to complete the PROJECT from the date of this AGREEMENT, unless othe1wise agreed to in w1iting by the PARTIES. If the PROJECT is not completed within 36 months, RCTC shall have the sole discretion to delete the PROJECT from the PROGRAM and reprogram the funding for future approved PROGRAM projects. RECIPIENT will not be reimbursed until the PROJECT is accepted as complete by RCTC following the submission of the PROGRAM funding claim f01m completed electronically via the Rivtrack system . In the event additional time is needed for the completion of the PROJECT, RECIPIENT may submit a time extension request electronically via the Rivtrack system. Before and after PROJECT photographs must be uploaded with the CLAIM FORM upon PROJECT completion, as well as copies of paid invoices and any other backup requested for repayment and audit purposes.
2.3 Increases in Project Funding. The FUNDING AMOUNT may, at RCTC's sole discretion, be augmented with additional PROGRAM funds and local agency match funds prop01tionate to the amounts included in Section 3 if there is a FUNDING AMOUNT balance and the RECIPIENT provides justification as to the reason for the funding 2 I 7336.00005\41471305.2
increase. Any such increase in the FUNDING AMOUNT must be approved in writing by RCTC's Executive Director and RCTC shall be under no obligation whatsoever to approve any increase in the FUNDING AMOUNT. No such increased funding shall be expended to pay for any PROJECT work already completed.
2.4 Cost Savings. In the event that bids or proposals for the PROJECT are lower than anticipated, or there are cost savings for any other reason, the FUNDING AMOUNT shall be reduced through an amendment to the AGREEMENT. RECIPIENT shall infmm RCTC of any cost savings and any cost savings shall be returned to RCTC or may be reprogrammed with written approval by RCTC for other RECIPIENT projects that align with the PROGRAM.
No PROGRAM funding may be used for projects not approved by RCTC. If RECIPIENT provides a local match commitment and there are cost savings on the PROJECT, RCTC will still be reimbursed at the matching ratio as presented in the Project application despite such cost savings in accordance with PROGRAM policies.
2.5 No Funding for Temporary Improvements. Only segments or components of improvements that are intended to fonn part of or be integrated into the PROJECT may be funded by PROGRAM funds. No improvement(s) which is/are temporary in nature, including but not limited to tempora1y lanes, curbs, or drainage facilities, shall be funded with PROGRAM funds except as needed for staged constrnction of the PROJECT.
2.6 Review and Reimbursement by RCTC. Upon submission into Rivtrack, of the final detailed invoice from the RECIPIENT clearly documenting work completed and c01Tesponding costs, RCTC may request additional documentation or explanation of the SCOPE OF WORK costs for which reimbursement is sought. Undisputed amounts shall be paid by RCTC to the RECIPIENT within thitty (30) days. In the event that RCTC disputes the eligibility for reimbursement of all or a p011ion of an invoiced amount, the Pai1ies shall meet and confer in an attempt to resolve the dispute. Additional details concerning the procedure for the RECIPIENT's submittal of invoices to RCTC and RCTC's consideration and payment of submitted invoices are set f011h in Attachment 2.
2.7 Recipient's Funding Obligation to Complete the Work; Limitation of RCTC Obligations. In the event that the PROGRAM funds allocated to the SCOPE OF WORK represent less than the total cost of the PROJECT, RECIPIENT shall be solely responsible for providing such additional funds as may be required to complete the PROJECT. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the safety of any work perfmmed under the SCOPE OF WORK, for the PROJECT, or at a PROJECT site. Fm1her, RCTC shall not be liable for any action of RECIPIENT or its contractors relating to the condemnation of prope1ty unde11aken by RECIPIENT or constrnction related to the PROJECT.
2.8 Recipient's Obligation to Repay Program Funds to RCTC. In the event it is detennined, whether through a post-completion audit or otherwise, the PROJECT was not completed in accordance with the PROGRAM requirements or this AGREEMENT, RECIPIENT agrees that any PROGRAM funds distributed to RECIPIENT for the PROJECT shall be repaid in full to RCTC. The Pai1ies shall enter into good faith negotiations to establish a reasonable repayment schedule and repayment mechanism which may include, but is not limited to, withholding of Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues, if applicable. RECIPIENT acknowledges and agrees that RCTC shall have the right to withhold any Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues due to RECIPIENT, in an amount not to exceed the total of the PROGRAM funds dist1ibuted to RECIPIENT, and/or initiate legal action to compel repayment, 3 I 7336.00005 \41471305.2
if the RECIPIENT fails to repay RCTC within a reasonable time period not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days , including any good faith negotiations , from receipt of written notification from RCTC that repayment is required due to failure to comply with the PROGRAM policies or this AGREEMENT.
2.9 Records Retention and Audits. RECIPIENT shall retain all PROJECT records in an organized manner for a minimum of three (3) years following completion of the PROJECT. PROJECT records shall be made available for inspection by RCTC upon request. If a post PROJECT audit or review indicates that RCTC has provided reimbursement to the RECIPIENT in an amount in excess of the FUNDING AMOUNT set fo1th in Section 2, or has provided reimbursement of ineligible PROJECT costs, the RECIPIENT shall reimburse RCTC for the excess or ineligible payments within thi1iy (30) days of notification by RCTC . This Section 2.9 does not supersede any rights or remedies provided to RCTC under Section 2.8 or applicable law.
3. Recipient's Local Match Contribution. RECIPIENT shall provide at least Six Hundred Seventy-One Thousand Eight Hundred Eighty-Seven Dollars and Fifty Cents ($671,887.50) of funding toward the SCOPE OF WORK, as indicated in RECIPIENT'S application attached as Attachment 1 and submitted to RCTC in response to its CALL FOR PROJECTS.
RECIPIENT costs related to (i) preparation and administration costs related to invoices, billings and payments; (ii) any RECIPIENT fees attributed to the processing of the SCOPE OF WORK; and (iii) expenses for items not included within the attached SCOPE OF WORK shall be borne solely by the RECIPIENT and shall not qualify towards RECIPIENT's local match requirement in this Section 3.
4. Tenn : The te1m of this AGREEMENT shall be from the date first herein above written until:
(i) the date RCTC formally accepts the PROJECT as complete, pursuant to Section 2.2; (ii) te1mination of this AGREEMENT pursuant to Section 14; or (iii) RECIPIENT has fully satisfied its obligations under this AGREEMENT . All applicable indemnification and insurance provisions of this AGREEMENT shall remain in effect following the te1mination of this AGREEMENT .
5. Recipient Responsibilities. RECIPIENT shall be responsible for all aspects of the PROJECT, in compliance with all applicable state and federal laws, including: (i) development and approval of plans, specifications and engineer 's estimate in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations and building codes; obtaining any necessary enviromnental clearances; right of way acquisition; and, obtaining all permits required by impacted agencies prior to commencement of the PROJECT; (ii) all aspects of procurement , contracting , and administration of the contracts and claims for the PROJECT; (iii) all constrnction management of any constrnction activities undertaken in connection with the PROJECT, including surveying and materials testing ; and, (iv) development of a budget for the PROJECT and SCOPE OF WORK prior to award of any contract for the PROJECT, taking into consideration available funding, including PROGRAM funds .
6. Indemnification. RECIPIENT shall defend, indemnify and hold RCTC, its officials, governing board members , officers, employees , agents, and consultants free and harmless from any and all claims , demands , causes of action, costs, expenses , liability , loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to prope1ty, persons or gove1mnent funding agency, including wrongful death ,arising out of or incident to any intentional or negligent acts, en-ors or omissions of the RECIPIENT , its officials, officers , employees, agents, consultants and 4 I 7336.00005\4 147 I 305.2
contractors arising out of or in connection with the perfonnance of this AGREEMENT, the PROJECT or the SCOPE OF WORK. RECIPIENT'S obligation to indemnify includes without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and reasonable attorneys ' fees, expe1t witness fees and other related costs and expenses of defense. RECIPIENT shall defend, at its own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants in connection with this AGREEMENT.
RECIPIENT shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants in any such suits, actions or other legal proceedings, including any settlement. RECIPIENT's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds. The indemnity obligation shall not apply to the extent of any negligence or willful misconduct of RCTC, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and consultants. This section shall survive the expiration or te1mination of this Agreement.
7. Expenditure of Funds by Recipient Prior to Execution of Agreement. RECIPIENT may commence the Project sta1ting July 1, 2023, and costs incuned following such date will be eligible for reimbursement under this AGREEMENT, provided they otherwise meet the requirements herein, and provided that this AGREEMENT is executed no later than October 1, 2023.
8. Compliance with Applicable Laws and Insurance. RECIPIENT agrees to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including public contracting laws, requirements for any local state or federal funding used, and records retention and performance repmting requirements concerning the SCOPE OF WORK and PROJECT, which applicable laws and regulations shall be passed on to contractors by RECIPIENT as applicable . RECIPIENT shall have the responsibility of making sure the approp1iate amounts of insurance are included in all applicable agreements for the construction of the PROJECT and RCTC shall be named as an Additional Insured on all insurance ce1tificates obtained for the completion of the PROJECT.
PROJECT insurance funds shall be looked to first for the repayment of any claims dete1mined to have merit.
9. Representatives of the Parties . RCTC's Executive Director, or his or her designee, shall serve as RCTC' s representative and shall have the authority to act on behalf of RCTC for all purposes under this AGREEMENT. RECIPIENT's representative shall be the individual identified in the Project application as RECIPIENT'S representative to RCTC.
RECIPIENT 'S representative, or designee, shall have the authority to act on behalf of RECIPIENT for all purposes under this AGREEMENT and shall coordinate all activities with RCTC concerning the SCOPE OF WORK under the RECIPIENT's responsibility.
RECIPIENT shall work closely and cooperate fully with RCTC's representative and any other agencies which may have jmisdiction over or an interest in the PROJECT.
10. Monitoring of Progress by RCTC. RECIPIENT shall allow RCTC's designated representative , or designee, to inspect or review the progress of the work at any reasonable time with prior written notice by RCTC. RCTC may request that the RECIPIENT provide RCTC with progress repmts concerning the status of the SCOPE OF WORK and PROJECT completion.
11. Binding on Successors in Interest. Each and every provision of this AGREEMENT shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the successors in interest of the Patties. Due to the 5 I 7336.00005 \41471305 .2
specific obligations contemplated herein, this AGREEMENT may not be assigned by any Party hereto except with the prior w1itten consent of the other Pat1y.
12. Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by RECIPIENT or any contractor shall be retained on an independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of RCTC.
Any personnel perfo1n1ing services on the PROJECT shall at all times be under the exclusive direction and control of the RECIPIENT or contractor, whichever is applicable. The RECIPIENT or contractor shall pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their perfonnance of services on the SCOPE OF WORK and as required by law. The RECIPIENT or contractor shall be responsible for all repo11s and obligations concerning such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance.
13. Conflicts of Interest. For the te1n1 of this AGREEMENT, no member, officer or employee of RECIPIENT or RCTC, during the term of his or her service with RECIPIENT or RCTC, as the case may be, shall have any direct interest in this AGREEMENT, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.
14. Tennination. This AGREEMENT may be te1minated for cause or convenience as fm1her specified below.
14.1 Te1n1ination for Convenience. Either RCTC or RECIPIENT may, by written notice to the other patfy, terminate this AGREEMENT, in whole or in pat1, for convenience by giving thi11y (30) days' w1itten notice to the other party of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof.
14.2 Effect of Te1n1ination for Convenience. In the event that RECIPIENT tenninates this AGREEMENT for convenience, RECIPIENT shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all PROGRAM funds provided to RECIPIENT under this AGREEMENT. In the event that RCTC tenninates this AGREEMENT for convenience, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the RECIPIENT PROGRAM funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from RECIPIENT regarding the SCOPE OF WORK for the PROJECT at the time of the notice of te1mination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 2.6, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information from RECIPIENT. This AGREEMENT shall tenninate upon receipt by the non-te1minating party of the amounts due it under this Section 14.
14.3 Tem1ination for Cause. Either RCTC or RECIPIENT may, by written notice to the other pat1y, terminate this AGREEMENT, in whole or in pat1, in response to a material breach hereof by the other Pa11y, by giving written notice to the other Party of such te1n1ination and specifying the effective date thereof. The written notice shall provide a thi11y (30) day period to cure any alleged breach. During the 30 day cure period, the Pat1ies shall discuss, in good faith, the manner in which the breach can be cured .
14.4 Effect of Tennination for Cause. In the event that RECIPIENT terminates this AGREEMENT in response to RCTC's uncured material breach hereof, RCTC shall, within ninety (90) days, distribute to the RECIPIENT PROGRAM funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from RECIPIENT regarding the SCOPE OF WORK for the PROJECT at the time of the notice of tennination. In the event that 6 l 7336.00005\41471305.2
RCTC terminates this AGREEMENT in response to the RECIPIENT's uncured material breach hereof, the RECIPIENT shall, within one hundred eighty (180) days, repay to RCTC in full all PROGRAM funds provided to RECIPIENT under this AGREEMENT. Notwithstanding termination of this AGREEMENT by RCTC pursuant to this Section 14.4, RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 2.6, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional infonnation. This AGREEMENT shall terminate upon receipt by the te1minating Paity of the amounts due it under this Section 14.4.
14.5 No Program Funding. In the event that RCTC dete1mines there are inadequate PROGRAM funds for whatever reason, RCTC shall have the right to immediately te1minate the AGREEMENT with w1itten notice to RECIPIENT. In the event that RCTC te1minates this AGREEMENT under this Section 14.5, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the RECIPIENT PROGRAM funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have been received from RECIPIENT regarding the SCOPE OF WORK for the PROJECT at the time of the notice of tennination; provided, however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 2.6, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional inf01mation from RECIPIENT.
14.6 Cumulative Remedies. The 1ights and remedies of the Parties provided in this Section 14 are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this AGREEMENT.
15. Notice. All notices hereunder shall be in writing and shall be effective upon receipt by the other Party. All notices and communications between the Parties to this AGREEMENT shall be addressed as set fo1th below and provided by any of the following methods (i) personally delivered; (ii) sent by electronic mail, with a subject line clearly identifying this AGREEMENT, read receipt requested, and a cc: provided to the identified staff; (iii) sent by first-class mail, return receipt requested; or (iv) sent by overnight express delive1y service with postage or other charges fully prepaid. Notwithstanding the foregoing, notices of dispute or te1mination sent by electronic mail must be followed by hard copy mailed notice to be effective. Notwithstanding the foregoing, invoices and requests for changes to the SCOPE OF WORK, shall be submitted through the Rivtrack system as specified in this AGREEMENT.
TO RCTC:
Anne Mayer
Executive Director
RCTC
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor
Riverside, California 92501
Phone: (951) 787-7141
e-mail: [email protected]
cc: [email protected]
TO RECIPIENT:
Mike Futrell
City Manager
City of Riverside
3900 Main Street
Riverside, CA 92522
(951) 568-5021
mfutrell@1i versideca. gov
Any paity may update its address and contact infonnation by providing written notice of the new info1mation to the other Patties in accordance with this Section 15. 7 I 7336.00005\4147 I 305.2
16. Prevailing Wages. RECIPIENT is ale1ted to the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1770 et§!§._., which require the payment of prevailing wages where the SCOPE OF WORK or any pmtion thereof is detennined to be a "public work," as defined therein.
RECIPIENT shall ensure compliance with applicable prevailing wage requirements by any person or entity hired to perform the SCOPE OF WORK or any po1tion thereof falling within the definition of "pub lic work." RECIPIENT shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, employees, consultants, and agents from any claim or liability, including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any failure or alleged failure to comply with California Labor Code Sections 1770 et seq. on the PROJECT.
17. Equal Oppo1iunity Employment. The Parties represent that they are equal oppo1iunity employers and they shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, sexual orientation, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-disc1imination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recrnitment or recrnitment advertising, layoff or termination.
18. Entire Agreement. This AGREEMENT embodies the entire understanding and agreement between the Patties pe1taining to the matters described herein and supersedes and cancels all prior oral or written agreements between the Patties with respect to these matters. Each Party acknowledges that no Patty, agent or representative of the other Patty has made any promise, representation or watTanty, express or implied, not expressly contained in this AGREEMENT, that induced the other Patty to sign this document. Modifications to this AGREEMENT shall be in the fotm of a w1itten amendment executed by authorized representatives of the Patties to be bound.
19. Governing Law; Venue and Severability. This AGREEMENT shall be governed by, and be constrned in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. If any po1tion of this AGREEMENT is found to be unenforceable by a comt of law with appropriate jurisdiction, the remainder of the AGREEMENT shall be severable and survive as binding on the Parties.
20. Attorneys' and Other Fees. If any legal action is initiated for the enforcement/interpretation of this AGREEMENT, or because of any alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this AGREEMENT, the successful or prevailing patty shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees, witness fees and other costs incutTed in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled as dete1mined by a comt of law or appointed decider under alternative legal proceedings.
21. No Third Patty Beneficiaties. There are no intended third patty beneficiaties of any tight or obligation assumed by the Patties.
22. Section Headings and Interpretation. The section headings contained herein are for convenience only and shall not affect in any way the interpretation of any of the provisions contained herein . The AGREEMENT shall not be interpreted as being drafted by any Patty or its counsel.
23. No Waiver. Failure of RCTC to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the ten11S, covenants or conditions in this AGREEMENT shall not be deemed a waiver of 8 I 7336.00005\41471305.2
such tern1, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any 1ights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power provided under applicable law.
24. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and eve1y provision of this AGREEMENT .
25. Counterparts. This AGREEMENT may be executed in any number of counterpmis, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all which together will constitute but one agreement.
26. F01m of Signatures. A manually signed copy of this Agreement which is transmitted by facsimile, email or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delive1y of an original executed copy of this Agreement for all purposes. This Agreement may be signed using an electronic signature.
27. Survival. All rights and obligations under this AGREEMENT that by their nature are to continue after any expiration or te1mination of this AGREEMENT shall survive any such expiration or te1mination.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
9 17336.00005\4147130 5.2
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
AGREEMENT NO. 24-62-018-00
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING UNDER SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
FACILITIES PROGRAM
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Pa11ies have caused this AGREEMENT to be signed by their duly authorized representatives as of the Effective Date.
RCTC RECIPIENT
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
By: ----- - --- -- By: ___ _ _ _____ _
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Name: ---- --- ---
Title: - - ---------
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
Best, Best & Krieger LLP
10 l 7336.00005\4147 l 305.2
ATTACHMENT 1
(RECIPIENT APPLICATION FOR FUNDING)
Attachment 1
l 7336.00005 \41471305.2
Questionnaire Tab
Emai l addr ess: pnit [email protected]
Project Name : Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicyc le Improvements Projec t Has thi s Project been previous ly awarded in a past SB 821 Cyc le? 0 No
Yes, in 17-18 FY Cycle
Yes, in 19- 20 FY Cyc le
Yes, in 21 - 22 FY Cycle
Lead Agency: Riverside, City of
Memorandum of Understanding
By Octobe r 1, 2023, award ees will execute the Project MOU w ith the Comm ission. To strea mlin e the proce ss, please provide the name and contact informati on or the individual who will be the signator y on the MOU.
This is typi ca lly the City Manag er, City Engineer, or Public Works Director.
MOU Signatory •
Mike Futrell
Email add ress: •
mfutrell @river sideca.gov
Project Contact Person
Title: *
City Manage r
Provide contact informa tion for Project 's conta ct person. This cou ld be the Publi c Works Director, the Project Manager , or othe r City/county Staff .
Project Co ntact is the same as curre nt user
Project Contact Person: * Title: •
Philip Nitollama City Traff ic Engineer
Email add ress: • Phone Number : •
pnitollama @riversideca.gov ( 951) 568-5021
Project Overview
Project Type (check all that appl y)•
C!"J Bicyc le Projec t C!2 Pedestr ian Project Multi-use Trail Project Project Locate in a Disadvantage Com munit y, per SB- 535? • O Yes
No
Partial
Does the propo sed project incl ud e any of the following (check all tha t app ly)? • Curb
Gutter
Drivew ay Ramp
C!2 Project does not include any of the above
Non-Infra stru cture/Plan
Project Application Tab
Project Number: 000177 Agency: Riverside, City Project Name: Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Impro veme nts Project
Status: Submitted To RCTC
of
Project Type: Bicycle Project , Pedestrian Project
*,J;W<'t':'"' .. \-~c,7is;~•'(PJ.-:.,r•'l'1~~•1.;.;t-"\•--~--\t~,, ·~•'':-',:•ri!,'~:~~-!!,tf:.,~r~t:~rr10,),;'<•~V _'. ·,1)~;;~· ,"",;~-, ',,, .,:H1],_1:}•·:,\.;•r~'?i-l'. ~:\'':; ':,#, '',,:?:. !, .~''•r~:. ~::11:·,~:~J~ A.ScopeofWork(500Characters) .,,. , . ,,.1 .• .,,.,, .,, ".,, ,· , , • , • , .. , :, , • . -,1#! ,.'. ,. -;.~~1:,1~••~''r.~•,l'r'•/·;.', •,,',,, ~' • '.,,, ';,-., ',,:;.:, '•1· t ~• '.,r\'1!'•~•~ ,' 'I , . ", ' ,, , : J ' ' ' .. ;;:,~ ; '~ ',:.•~~[ The Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements Project proposes to insta ll High-Vi sibility Crosswa lks, accessib le pedestrian signal systems, Green Bike Lane Striping, RRFB's, LED Stop Signs, & signage/strip ing upgrade s at 24 prioriti zed intersect ion locations as ident ified in the Local Roadway Safety Plan, Riverside PACT Plan & public requests . The project benefits include improved connectivity, enhanced safety & mob ility, & encour age s a more act ive lifesty le via wa lking & biking. 495 of 500 Characters
Enter the project costs for PA/ED, PS&E, ROW, Construction and Local Match in the fields provided below . The gray fields contain formulas that wi ll ca lcu late the Total Project Cost, SB 821 Request, and the Percentage Splits.
JO% Programming Cap: $690,120.20 20% Programming Cap: $1,380,240.40 Agency Split% RCTC Split%
PA & ED: 0.00 Local Match: 671,887.50 50% Local Match : 671,887.50 50% PS & E: 96,000.00 SB 821 SB 821
Request: 671,887.50 50% Request: 671,887.50 50%
ROW: 0.00 100% 100%
Construction: 1,197,775.00
Admin istration: 50,000.00
Total Project 1,343,775.00 Cost:
For comp leted phases , pro vide supporting documentation such as copies of environmental clearance, title sheet of 100% plans with engineer's stamp , or right of way clearance and attach in section J.
Start End
PA & ED:
07/0 3/ 2023 06/28/20 24
PS & E: 07/03/2023 06/28/2024
ROW:
I I I f
Constructi on:
07/0 1/2024 03/31/2026
Clo seo ut:
04/01/ 2026 07/01/20 26
Describe the project background and the existing conditions of the larger project area and or project vic init y.
Discussion can include background informat ion on current road way configu ration, missing bike and pedestrian facilities , and imp ortance of project to local active transportation users. If possible, upload photographs of existing conditions.
Describe the project in its entirety. Include the purpose and need, benefit, and location of the project. Provide a map showing existing and proposed project improvements . If avai lable, upload typical cross-sections showing vehicular lane widths, active transportation facilities width , and any landscaping or lighting features in section J .
The City of Riverside is the 12th most populated city in the state of California with 317,257 residents and encompasses 81.5 square miles (Attachment A). Due to the city's large population, the city is divided into seven (7) Wards (or communities) (Attachment 8). The prioritized pede strian/ bicycle infra structure needs of eac h Ward are incorporated in the proposed citywide project with the purpose to promote safety for vulnerable road users at interse ctions and encourage multi-modal transportation in the community. There are 3 or 4 intersections location s for each Ward that are included in the Citywide Project with a total of twenty-four (24) prioritized intersection locations . The Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvement Project proposes to construct High-Visibility Crosswalks, upgrade Ped Push Button s, Green Bike Striping, RRFB's, Flashing LED Stop Signs, & sig nage/striping improvements at the following twenty-four (24) prioritized intersection locations : 1. Iowa Ave & Blaine St (signal) 2. Spruce St & Rustin Ave (Stop Sign Controlled) 3. Rustin Ave & Linden St (Stop Sign Controlled) 4. Chicago Ave & University Ave (Signal) 5. Watkins Dr & Knox Ct (Stop Sign Controlled) 6. Third St & Anderson Ave (Stop Sign Controlled) 7. Alessandro Blvd & Chicago Ave (Signal) 8. Van Buren Blvd & Jurupa Ave (Signal) 9. Van Buren Blvd & Arlington Ave (Signal) 10. Lincoln Ave. & Victoria Ave (Stop Sign Controlled) 11.
Wood Rd & Van Buren Blvd (Signal) 12. Orange Terrace Pkwy & Abrams Dr (Stop Sign Controlled) 13. Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhill Dr. (West) (stop Sign Controlled) 14. Adams St & Magnolia Ave (signal) 15. Van Buren Blvd & California Ave (Signal) 16. Van Buren Blvd & Indiana Ave (Signal)
17. Magnolia Ave & Tyler St (Signal) 18 Collett Ave & Polk St. (Stop Sign Controlled) 19. Magnolia Ave & Polk St (signal) 20. Tyler St & Hole Ave. (Signal) 21 Pierce St & Magnolia Ave {Signal) 22. Golden Ave & Cochran Ave (Stop Sign Controlled) 23. Sierra Vista & Gedney Way (s) (Stop Sign Controlled) 24. Rutland & Sylvan ((Stop Sign Controlled) Attachment C illustrates the citywide project improvement map that highlights the intersection locations, proposed improvements , and intersection radius buffers. Individual intersection improvements are summarized in Attachm ent D along with graphic photos of improvements for illustration purposes . A range of one to three safety countermeasures impro vement s are proposed for each indi vidual intersection as shown in Attachment D. Existing photo s, displaying current inadequate ped & bike infrastructure conditions, are shown in Attachment E. The 24 prioritized intersection locations were selected based on the City's Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), Riverside P.A.C.T. Plan, direct resident requests, adjacency to bus stops, and access to key destinations as tabulated in Attachment F. Excerpts from the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) are included in Attachment G and identify the needs/ benefits/ locations of thirteen prioritized intersections included in the citywide project along with ped & bike improvements that are consistent with the application . The LRSP included input from two stakeholder engagement meetings and the report 's findings are based on a citywide collision analysis for 5 years (July 2017-June 2022). The thirteen intersections selected for this project were part of the Top 20 highest crash intersection locations citywide plus one case study intersection . Attachment H includes excerpts from the Riverside P.A.C.T. document. P.A.C.T. = Pedestrian Target Safeguarding Plan, Active Transportation Plan, Complete Streets Ordinance & Trails Master Plan. The Active Transportation Plan specifically identifies the needs / benefits / locations of eight prioritized intersections included in the citywide project and proposed ped / bike improvements consistent with the grant application. The Riverside P.A.C.T. was established based on a comprehensive community engagement strategy and the report's findings are based on multiple years of pedestrian and bicycle collision analysis. The eight intersections selected were part of the community's request as well as pedestrian & bicycle collision history review. The City routinely receives a large amount of resident requests regarding pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure improvements which are documented in the service request formats. Attachment I include s eighteen of the prioritized intersections included in the citywide project with improvements consistent with the public requests. The City has attempt ed to accommodate the resident requests through various maintenance programs, capital improvement projects and grant pursuit opportunities. However, the improvements for these 18 intersections have not yet been constructed. In order to address the safety needs , infrastructure upgrade s and resident requests, the proposed improvements for the citywide project proposes to build a total of 62 high visibility crosswalks, 12 accessible pedestrian signal systems, 8 green bicycle striping improvements , 23 flashing LED solar powered stop signs, 1 flashing LED solar powered pedestrian warning sign, and signage / striping improvements at 2 intersection locations (see Attachment J for additional details regarding the safety benefits of the proposed improvements): Additional supporting information/ documentation for the citywide project includes: - The City executed a Complete Streets Ordinance No. 7569 to provide guidance on street character, connectivity, access for all users, development of continuous pedestrian paths ... and to require the roadways within the City be developed according to approved standards and design elements as set forth in the Complete Streets Ordinance . See Attachment K. - Riverside is generally considered a car-dependent City. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there are approximately 141,435 workers 16 years and over residing in the City of Riverside . Those who walk, bike, or take transit represent roughly 6.1 percent of the Riverside worker population, or approximately 8,628 people . The majority of workers (74.4 percent) drive alone . The rates of driving alone and walking to work in Riverside are similar to those of California as a whole, but public transit use (2.4 percent) and biking (0.7 percent) are considerably lower. The City of Riverside received a "Walk Score" of 42, which is considered "car dependent ". - Attachment L includes a Letter of Support from the City of Riverside Public Works Director indicating advocacy for the project. The City Council also approved the city's 50% local match requ irements (should the project be awarded) as indicated in the Meeting Agenda , Agenda Report, Attachments & Meeting Minutes. - The received Letters of Support for the proposed citywide pedestrian and bicycle improvements from the Riverside Unified School District (RUSD), Alvord Unified School District (AUSD) and the Riverside Bike Club as documented in Attachment M. - The City of Riverside's General Plan Circulation and Community Mobility Element (Attachment R) contain s multiple objectives supporting pedestrian and bicycling modes of transportation that will be satisfied with the proposed improvements of this grant including: Policy CCM-8.2: Promote walking and biking as a safe mode of travel for children attending local schools. Policy CCM-
10.5: Promote the health benefits of using a bicycle or walking as a means of transportation. Policy CCM -10.12: Encourage bicycling as a commute mode to school, work, etc. - An engineer's estimate for the citywide project total costs is calculated in Attachment Q and is equivalent to $1,343,775.00. Line item s include engineering design costs, construction administration / inspect ion costs, mobilization , water pollution control, traffic control, construction costs, and contingency costs.
Briefly summarize and list all the destinations served by the proposed project. Provide a project vicinity map identifying all the destinations served by the proposed project within a ¾ mile or a 2-mile radius . Destinations are schools or higher education facilities, comme rcia l centers, municipal or any other civ ic centers, medical facilities, and recreational cente rs.
For pedestrian projects, the destinations need to be within ¾ mile radius to be eligible. For bicycle or multi-use trail projects, destinations need to be within a 2-m ile radius. Each destination served will receive 2 points each .
On the map, provide a¾ mile buffer or a 2-m ile buffer surrounding the project site. Maps without the marked buffer will receive half of its eligible points.
The Citywide Project to improve twenty-four (24) prioritized intersection locations would serve many destinations, as demonstrated in the Destinations Served Map (Attachment N). A 3/4 mile radius has been shaded in red for all 24 prioritized intersection locations. An additiona l 2- mile radius has been drawn with a green line for intersections with Green Bike Lane Striping Improvements - Inter sections 1, 4, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15.
These eight locat ions are signalized intersections . The key destinations within a 3/ 4 mile radius of the project map include : Alcott Elementary Schoo l (649 students) Amelia Earhart Middle School (821 students) Arlanza Elementary School (455 students) Arlingotn High School (1,922 students) Arlington Heights Sports Park Arlington Plaza Benjamin Franklin Elementary School (772 students) Bergamot Park Bordwell Park Bryant Park Cal Baptist University (8,252 students) California School for the Deaf (318 students) Cast leview Elementary Schoo l (627 students) Castleview Park Cesar E. Chavez Community Center Challen Park Chemawa Middle School (800 students) Chicago Plaza Collett Elementar y School (544 students) Collett Park Don Derr Park Don Lorenzi Park Doty Trust Park El Dorardo Park Emerson Elementary School (611 students) Gage Middle School (933 students) Galleria at Tyler Harrison Elementary Schoo l (498 students) Harrison Park Highland Elementary School (613 stude nts) Highland Park Hillcr est High Schoo l (1,842 students) Hunt Park Hunt er Hobby Park Jackson Elementary School (669 students) Jefferson Elementary Schoo l (901 students) John F. Kennedy Elementary School (854 students) John W. North High School (2,227 students) Kaiser Permanente Medical Center La Sierra Academy (550 students) La Sierra High Schoo l (1,546 students) La Sierra Park La Sierra University (2,300+ students) Liberty Elementary School (592 students) Longfellow Elementary School (652 students) Mark Twain Elementary School (981 students) Martin Luther King High Schoo l (2,852 students) McAulifte Elementary Schoo l (587 students) Monroe Elementary Schoo l (582 students) Myra Linn Elementary Schoo l (476 students) Myra Linn Park Norte Vista High School (2,056 students) Orange Terrace Community Park Orangecrest Town Center Orrenma Elementary School (519 students) Parkview Community Hospital. Patterson Park Philip M. Stakoe Elementary School (618 students) Raincross High School (207 students) Ramona High School (2,078 students) Rancho Loma Park Reach Leadership STEAM Academy (621 students) Riverside Municipal Airport Riverside Polytechnic High Schoo l (2,468 students) Riverside STEM Academy (662 students) Riverwalk Dog Park Rutland Park Sherman Indian High School (220 students) Swanson Park Terrace Elementary Schoo l (733 students) Thundersky Park Tomas Rivera Elementary School (698 students) Twinhill Elementary School (431 students) University Heights Middle School (796 students) University of California , Riverside (26,000+ students) University Village Valley View Elementary Schoo l (668 students) Victoria Elementary School (479 students) Woodcrest Christia n School (609 students) Describe the extent to wh ich the proposed project will increase safety for the non-motorized public. Additionally , explain any safety enhancement features included in the project scope, such as rectangular rapid flashing beacons, bicycle box (see https://safety.fhwa dot.gov/provencountermeasures /). Includ e information about project characteristics such as: no existing shoulder within project limits , no existi ng/planned sidewalk or bikeway adjacent to the project, etc . Applicants may wish to consider including documented pedestrian/bicycle collision or injury history , most current and valid 85th percentile speed of motorized traffic in project limit s, photos of existing safety hazards the project will address, existing pedestrian/bicycle traffic counts , student attendance figures for schoo l served by project.
Additionally generate a collision heat map for the project site using co llision data from the last ten years. Heat map can be generated using the ATP Maps & Summary interface from TIMS (https://t ims.berke ley edu /) or Crossroads.
Upload map in section J.
The Riverside Citywide Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Project will improve pedestrian and bicycle safety at 24 prioritized intersection locations with proven safety countermeasures such as the installation of high-visibility crosswalks, accessible pedestrian sign al systems, green bicycle lane strip ing, rectangu lar rapid flashing beacons, flashing LED solar powered stop signs/ pedestrian signs, and signage / striping modifications. Estimated crash reduction benefits for each of the proven safety countermeasures are included in Attachment J and are explained here: High Visib ility Crosswa lks - increases the visibility to both drivers and pedestrians from farther away when compared to traditional traverse line crosswalks. This impr ovement repla ces existing two traverse line crosswa lks with high-visibility ladd er crosswalks or continenta l style crosswalks using thermoplastic materials. The FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures fact sheet estimates the safety benefits of high visibility crosswalks can potentially reduce pedestrian injury crashes up to 40%. See Attachment J. Accessible Pedestrian Signal Systems (APS) - provide essentia l information and safety to pedestrians with disabilities (blind, visually impaired, deaf) by alerting them to the status of the wa lk cycle via auditory, visua l and tactile cues. The proposed audible pedestrian push button systems (with the touch free wave feature) will replace existing standard , non-accessible, non-audibl e, non-vibrating and touch requir ed push buttons at existing signalized intersection crossings. The Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 21-06 indicates that the touch-free feature of the APS shall be installed and activated at pedestrian crossings as a public health safety enhancement and to minimize the spread of contact-re lated pathogens (such as the COVID-19 pandemic). The Public Right-O f-Wa y Guidelines (PROWAG) R209 indicates that the APS is an integrated device that communicates information about the WALK and DON'T WALK interval s at signalized intersection in non-visual formats (audible tones and vibrotactile surfaces) to pedestrians who are blind or have low vision. The FHWA Improving Safety For Pedestrians and Bicyclists Accessing Transit document also supports APS installation. The Local Roadway Safety Plan countermeasure toolbox identifies the accessible pedestrian signal system to provide safety benefits similar to the pedestrian countdown signal heads which have an estimated crash reduction factor of 25% for pedestrian & bike collisions. See Attachment J. Green Bike Lane Striping Improvements - are consistent with the FHWA proven safety countermeasures for installation of bicycle lanes, added as a counte rmea sure toolbox option in the LRSP, and listed in the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) to raise motorist and bicyclist awareness to potential areas of conf lict. This improvement will enhance the existing standard white longitudinal bike lan e lines (or in some location s no existing bike lane s) & bike symbols with green thermoplastic pavement markings at vehicle and bicycle high conflict zones and install new bicycle detector loops to improve bicycle passage at signalized intersections. The safety benefits are estimated to range from 30%-49% reduction in bicycle crashes for bicycle lan e additions per the FHWA Proven Safety Counterm easure fact sheet. See Attachment J. Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon Systems (RRFB's) - are utilized to enhance pedestrian conspicuity and increase driver awareness at marked crosswa lks. This improvement will replace existing static pedestrian crossing signs that do not flash and are not push activated systems . The FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures fact sheet estimates the safety benefits can reduce pedestrian crashes up to 47% and increase motorist yield rate s up to 98% for RRFB impro vements. See Attachment J. Flashing LED Solar Powered Stop Signs / Pedestrian Warning Signs - are considered to be consistent with flashing beacons from the systemic application of multiple low- cost countermeasures at stop -controlled inter sections per the FHWA proven safety countermeasures. This improvement will replace existing standard non-flashing static signs. Per the FHWA proven safety countermeasures for systemic application of multiple low- cost countermeasu res, the safety benefits are estimated to result in 10% reduction in fatal and injury crashes and have an average cost-benefit ratio of 12:1. See Attachment J. Signage / Striping Modifications - provide additional enhancements such as yield limit line s and advance pedestrian signage for existing marked crosswalks which are consistent with the CA Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (M.U.T.C.D.) Figure 38-17.
There are no existing yield lines, advance pedestrian signage or marked crosswalks for this improvement modification at two intersection loca tion s. This improvement presents new signage / striping enhancements for all roadway users. Per the FHWA proven safety countermeasures for systemic application of multiple low-cost countermeasures, the safety benefits are estimated to result in 10% reduction in fatal and injury crashes and have an average cost-benefit ratio of 12:1. See Attachment J. The City utilized the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) to obtain the pedestrian and bicycle injury coll ision histories for EACH of the 24 prioritized intersection location during the calendar years of 2011- 2022. Per the TIMS website, Year 2022 collision data is provisional. As shown in Attachment O - the pedestrian and bicycle collis ion totals for each of the 24 prioritized intersection locations are: 1. Iowa Ave & Blaine St (56 bicycle collisions, 76 pedestrian collisions) 2. Spruce St & Rustin Ave (33 bicycle collisions, 42 pedestrian collisions) 3. Rustin Ave & Linden St (46 bicycle collisions, 65 pedestrian collisions) 4. Chicago Ave & University Ave (74 bicycle collisions, 99 pedestrian collisions) 5. Watkins Dr & Knox Ct (7 bicycle collisions, 5 pedestrian collisions) 6. Third St & Anderson Ave (77 bicycle collisions, 99 pedestrian collisions) 7. Alessandro Blvd & Chicago Ave (5 bicycle collisions, 5 pedestrian collisions) 8. Van Buren Blvd & Jurupa Ave (9 bicycle collisions, 9 pedestrian collisions) 9. Van Buren Blvd & Arlington Ave (36 bicycle collisions, 66 pedestrian collisions) 10.
Lincoln Ave. & Victoria Ave (14 bicycle collisions, 14 pedestrian collisions) 11. Wood Rd & Van Buren Blvd (12 bicycle collisions, 25 pedestrian collisions) 12. Orange Terrace Pkwy & Abrams Dr (5 bicycle collisions, 9 pedestrian collisions) 13. Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhil l Dr. (West) (3 bicycle collisions, 6 pedestrian collisions) 14. Adams St & Magnolia Ave (55 bicycle collisions, 52 pedestrian coll isions) 15. Van Buren Blvd & California Ave (934 bicycle collisions, 1,023 pedestrian collisions) 16. Van Buren Blvd & Indiana Ave (39 bicycle collisions, 45 pedestrian collisions)
17. Magnolia Ave & Tyler St (61 bicycle collisions, 68 pedestrian coll isions) 18 Collett Ave & Polk St. (36 bicycle collisions, 37 pedestrian collisions) 19.
Magnolia Ave & Polk St (66 bicycle collisions, 84 pedestrian collisions) 20. Tyler St & Hole Ave. (58 bicycle collisions, 62 pedestrian collisions) 21 Pierce St & Magnolia Ave (23 bicycle collisions, 21 pedestrian collisions) 22. Golden Ave & Cochran Ave (48 bicy cle collision s, 43 pedestrian collisions) 23. Sierra Vista & Gedney Way (s) (5 bicycle collisions, 11 pedestrian collisions) 24. Rutland & Sylvan (28 bicycle collisions, 42 pedestrian collisions) The total cumulative number of pedestrian collisions is 1,987 collisions and the total cumulative number of bicycle collisions is 1,708 collisions as listed in Attachment 0. Given the disproportionate high number of pedestrian and bicycle collisions, the proposed safety countermeasure improvements are needed now. Without the proposed safety countermeasures, the pedestrian and bicycle collisions are not only anticipated to continue at the current crash rate but has the potential to increase in frequency and severity. The traffic collision summary table, crash map, and heat map for EACH of the 24 prioritized intersection locati ons are graphically presented in Attachment 0. The traffic collision summary table for each intersection includes a breakdown of pedestrian and bicycle collision reported and classified into fatal, severe injury, visib le injury, complaint of pain injury, and total collisions. Photos of existing conditions of the project are shown in Attachment E. As shown, the existing marked crosswalks are just traverse lines, static signs are not flashing, APS buttons require a touch act ivation and do not provide audible or vibrotactile features , and no green bike lan es/ no bike loop detectors . Student attendan ce figures for each schoo l served by the citywide project are listed in Section E of the Destinations Served Section of the grant application.
In a project vicinity map, identify all the bus routes, Metrolink stations, park-and-ride facilities, bicycle lane s, sidewalks or crosswalks improved by the proposed project within a ¾ mile or a 2-mi le radius.
For pedestrian projects, these amenities need to be within ¾ mile radius to be eligible. For bicycle or multi-use trail projects, amenities need to be within a 2-mile radius. Each amenity will receive l point.
On the map, provide a¾ mile buffer or a 2-mile buffer surround ing the project site. Maps without the marked buffer wi ll recei ve half of its eligible points. Upload map in section J.
Below, discuss how the project along with its nearby amenities encourage multi-modalism. Briefly summarize and list all the bus stops , Metrolink Stations , park-and-ride facilities, missing bicycle or sidewalks, or crosswalks enhanced by the proposed project and indicate if the items are existing or planned .
The Multimodal Access Maps for the Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements Project is included in Attachment P. By enhancing pedestrian and bicycle facilities with the proposed citywid e impro vements, each of the 24 prioritized intersection locations will impro ve access to Riverside's extensive multimodal system. The City is served by many Riverside Transit Agency route s and Metrolink Stations. Within a 3/4 mile radius, the 24 prioritized intersection locatio ns will serve a combined total of 387 RTA Bus Stop Locations across 15 RTA Bus Routes and two Metrolink Statio ns. A summary of routes and stops served by each locat ion is illustrated in Attachment P and consists of the following:
Prioritized Intersection Location s 1-6: 90 RTA Bus Stop Locations served along RTA Trans it Routes l, 10, 13, 14, 16, 22, 51, 56,204 and l Metrolink Station at Riverside-Hunter Park Metrolink Station. Prioritized Intersection Locations 7-8: 26 RT A Bus Stop Locations served along RT A Transi t Routes 10, 20, 22, and 51. Prioritized Interse ction Locations 9-11: 29 RTA Bus Stop Location s served along RTA Transit Routes 22 and 27. Prioritized Intersection Locations 12-17: 147 RTA Bus Stop Locations served along RTA Transit Routes l, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, and 27. Prioritized Intersect ion Locations 18-24: 89 RTA Bus Stop Locations served along RTA Transit Routes l, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 27,200 and l Metrolink Station at Riverside- La Sierra Metrolink Stat ion .
The Citywide Riverside Pedestrian and Bicycle Impro vements Project will encourage multi-modal transportation at the 24 prioritized inter section locations based on its proximity to the 387 RTA Bus Stop Locations whic h are served by 15 RTA Bus Routes and connection to 2 Metrolink Stations at Riverside- Hunter Park Metrolink Station and Riverside-La Sierra Metrolink Station. The proposed pedestrian and bicycle improvement s adjacent to the RTA Bus Stops and Metrolink sta tions encourage multi-modal transportation by improv ing the first and last mile connections of the trips and reducing the dependency of single-occupant vehicles while simultaneously promoting an active lifestyle. 10% Programming Cap: $690,120.20
Agency
Loca l Match: 671,887.50
SB 821 Reque st: 671,887.50
20% Programming Cap:
$1,380,240.40
Split% Match Points
50% 10.00
50%
100%
Match% Points
50% 10
45% 9
40% 8
35% 7
30% 6
25% 5
20% 4
15% 3
10% 2
5%
0% 0
Agency : Riverside, City of Population Equity Points
3.00 ~~' / ' ' ' ' ' . . ., , . ' . ' ' . . - , .,
.- J. Attachments · , • ·
1... c "",fl'{,~ j , l, •' t, ~'< •~I• ~, '!,.' 1• _.!. ,, , ;,,la ',, Upload attachments indicated from previous sections.
Title
Attachment C - Project Improv ement Map reduce file size.pd/ Attachment N - Destinations Served (Locations 1-5)_.pdf Attachment P - Multimodal Access Map_ .pdf
Attachment O - Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022 Crash Maps & Heat Maps Ind ividual Inter sections.pd/ Attachment L - City Letter of Suppor + City Council Meeting 4.18.23 - EXCERPTS - Agenda - Minutes - Report - Attachments_reduce_file_size .pdf
Attachmen t Q - Engineering Estimate - SB 821 FY 23-24 Riverside Citywide Bike & Ped Facilities_.pdf Attachment A - Riverside Demographics Info rmation - Population - Square Miles_reduce_file_size.pdf Attachment B - Riversidy Ward Map .pdf
Attachment D - Indi vidua l Intersect ion Improvements Summary reduced file size.pd/ Attachment E - Existing Condi tions Photos reduce file size.pd! Attachment F - Intersection Selectio n Summary.pd/
Attachment G - Riverside Loca l Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) Excerpts_.pdf Attachment H - Riverside P.A.C.T. Excerpts_reduce file size.pd/ Attachment I - Riverside Residents Requests_reduce file size.pd! Attachment J - Safety Countermeasure Impr ovement Benefits_reduce file size.pd! Attachment K - Complete Streets Ordinance - Ordinance 7569 - Signed 9.7.21.pdf Attachment M - Letters of Support - RUSD AUSD Riverside Bike Club_reduce file size.pd! Attachment R - Riverside Genera l Plan Circulation Element - Active Transportat ion.pd! Attachment s - Riverside Disadvantaged Community Map - SB 535.pdf Document Type
Project Background & Project
Description Map
Destinations Served Project Map
Multimodal Access Project Map
Safety Project Map
Commitment to Local Match
Project's Engineers Estimate
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
Title Sheet
rJ I certify that the information presented herein is complete and accurate .
Name: philip nito llama
Date: 04/27/2023
Title: Senior Management Ana lyst
Map Tab
Project Number : 000177 Age ncy: Riverside , City
of
Project Name : Riverside Citywide Pedestrian &
Bicycle Impro vements Project
Status: Submitt ed To RCTC
Project Type: Bicycle Project, Pedestria n Project
C, oak Quarry Golf Club
----
Grand, I errace
Reid ··/
Rark-Ruth H g
s UNNYs.LoP E r.ewis Center I
-----
- ® ~Th~-£ove Waterpark Belltown Cl ,,tJighgrove
OMA
lens
~ _ trn RTIIS I0E //
Jurupa Valley
~---- @ ;}1,
Ru □ rn o u x F. airmounf ,":;- ' I
,Park (8 '
Riversi8e · ERsrn.
'Box.l
MOI
Res-et PEl!JLE'i j/EA SiS IDf!. .
LA S IERRA
ACRES
,,,
--•-: 'ERSl!JE
AIRP ORT
A RLM-lZA.
CENTIZR , _
WO OD STR EETS!]
MAG.t40 l lA l,f!-.
/ V I CTO!ll
The H! Depotfcf'
RA 0 . • , ,. CASf BLANCA flA'/,'AR DE N
" - .r✓ fHLL-,,:,/
. ~
AR LIN! ,,,:.:/' P~ e.s~~~ tlA l
L. RA .., ~~I a at Tyler A RLINGTON
• ~ ARL IN GT ON IH; IG U TS
-. , i:lrk · .,,..,,. sou r 1
~- C~lifomia
__ LA s·1ERRA Citru" Sta~te
-:::,--- S OUTH <>
- Historic Park
Andulka Park ~
f ·sycamore
•
canyon
Wilderness .11
- Parl< ·'@
Costco Whc
SY(;M•W~" SYCAM
[CA!il't ,(!N p,.._RK CANl '{C
MI SS IO GROVE
CAH'J'•
SP,RIN
Orange, -Terrace
Co.unity ·
k ORANGECREST
Lake Hills
Reserve Park Woodcrest
Q El Sobrante
Go .;gle
Victoria Club
Golf Course
Le Conte Dr
olurn bia Ave
nia State Padcs,r: i , afeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, N l~AS,.; , US a , EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA
J ...
1 Riverside Plnza
•• ' ~
<r
~
~
C
-,:
~
0 Quarry Hill ~'°
California
School for the
Deaf
Arroyo Dr
Elsin or e Rd
010 1,rldge Rd
-----... ~--.,.---...
'
;
;
Canyon Crest
Country Club
C'oun ry Club Dr
aslleview Park
ansom Rd
0 '/,,
" ii w
Q
~
Metv;i\e 'O' ~
0 2
~ '½10';~ {;
9..,,
' '
•-. , -· •, ~ C'
City of Riverside, County of Riv:rs ide, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, ~afe~~eo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA; USGS, Bureau of Land Management , EPA, NPS, US '&~s Bureau, USDA Robe rts Ro
Kross R;J
Bert Rd
Gentl.in Ave
Hi scusAve
DaltH Ave
Martin LUU\'!r
King Hi gh
School
I
)
Cov.:-11 St
·'
, .
~ .
~ t
~ t
c) !
Kr,m1er!a Av~
Sen Cl.irk
Sherlf f Tra!nlng
Center
51 h St
Al r Forc.e
VUl.tge We~t
tlul thC enter
5th St
Gem
Gott
UC Riverside, City o f Riverside, Coumy of Riverside, California Stale Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of land Managemen t, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA Oft
Santa Ana River
Wildlife Area
,,,.,,, ..
"'"~
""'""';
~~ ~ 7'.:\_ '"
/ ~ ~
~-· .-o--
--- --,_...----
Jurupa /\"e.
·iverside
M nicipal
Al □ a rt
~~ityof
'o
Br.
~ o,, ~o,
~ty of Riverside, California State Parks'1/Esri, HERE, Garmin, Safe6raph:,,'1eoTechnologieJsrfil:1e? °\. METI/ NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Manag ement , EPA, NPS, 1 ~it,A
Hidden Valley
Golf Club
Le Conl e Dr
' / olunibL:1 Ave
•
~ity'ot iverside, County
~
~ . .
.,.,.,,. ~ m,rn;, '"" . ... _.,._ ,.~ ~,m., • .: .• , ~---"l~"' -~ ME-11~ASA, USGS, Bureau 0f ~an ~~•rt( EPA, NPS, US Censu:_Bureau, USDA /..: .. ,
1 Riversid e Plaza
Quarry Hill
Callfornla
School for the
Deaf
Ivy St
.. -----
-4 rroyo Dr
Elsinore {ld
o\O -orldg c Hd
Canyon Cres t
Coun try Club ,
C"oun ry Club Dr
a
.
A!/e/v;i\e 9 ' ~
0 2 <;
C'
City of Riverside, County of RiverSlde, Californ ia State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGra ~Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management , EPA, NPS"US C<l~s Bureau, USDA Cact u!i Ave
Rob ;ir1s Rd
IC1oss R:f
H, ~cus Ave
Blue Sky t
Bart Rd
G@ntlanAve
Martin Luth~r
King High
School
Lu r 111 Ave
(Ovt.' 11 St
e,nctark
Shvr1(f Tratnlng
c,n,er
5th St
Air Force
VlllageWe~t
HulrhCenier
c
Gen1
Golt
UC Riverside, City of Riverside Count of . . St!l 'it
GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NAS; USG/ B Riverside, California Stale Parks, Esri HERE G . , , ureau of land Management, EPA, NPS, US c'en::;~n~r~:';,~:6~ Oft
Santa Ana River
WUdllfe Area
c.~inp bell Ave
1,-o,,
'o•
f:J,jl'}d1 .
. ~
..
~'":" Oo
~ P;
~ty of Riverside, California State Parkso/Esri, HERE, Garmin, Safe6raph);,GeoTechnologie 1 s~
"\. METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of l and Managem ent, EPA, NPS, '1~~ Hidden Valley
Golf Club
• 880ft
-1>.,
·~ ..,,, __ -''<---
@
ATTACHMENT O - PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE COLLISION SUMMARY TABLE TDA Article 3 (SB821) Grant FY 23/24 - City of Riverside Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Project Pedestrian Collisions Bicycle Collisions Pedestrian & Bicycle Number Ward Location (2011-2022} 1 (2011-2022)
1 Collisions (2011-22)
1 1 1 Iowa Ave and Blaine St 75 56 131
2 1 Spruce St and Rustin Ave 42 33 75
3 1 Rustin Ave and Linden St 65 46 111
4 2 Chicago Ave and University St 99 74 173
5 2 Watkins Dr and Knox Ct 5 7 12
6 2 Third St and Anderson Ave 99 77 176
7 2 Alessandro Blvd and Chicago Ave 5 5 10
8 3 Van Buren Blvd and Jurupa Ave 9 9 18
9 4 Van Buren Blvd and Arlington Ave 66 36 102
10 4 Lincoln Ave and Victoria Ave 14 14 28
11 4 Wood Rd and Van Buren Blvd 25 12 37
12 3 Orange Terrace Pkwy and Abrams Dr 9 5 14
13 3 Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhill Dr {West) 6 3 9
14 5 Adams St and Magnolia Ave 32 33 65
15 5 Van Buren Blvd and California Ave 1023 934 1957
16 5 Van Buren Blvd and Indiana Ave 45 39 84
17 7 Magnolia Ave and Tyler St 68 61 129
18 6 Collett Ave and Polk St 37 36 73
19 6 Magnolia Ave and Polk St 84 66 150
20 6 Tyler St and Hole Ave 62 58 120
21 7 Pierce St and Magnolia Ave 21 23 44
22 7 Golden Ave and Cochran Ave 43 48 91
23 7 Sierra Vista Ave and Gedney Way {S) 11 5 16
24 6 Rutland Ave and Sylvan Dr 42 28 70
TOTAL 1,987 1,708 3,695
1 SOURCE: Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) - Pedestrian & Bicycle Collision Data Summary from 2011-2022 with a 250-foot radius from intersection.
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP ""
s,
>
" -g 10th SI
l 11:h Sl IZ_ r l~
Utory !
Crash Severity
■ Fatal
D Severe lnJury
- Other \/lsible Injury
_ Compl~int o! Pain -
Sp•Hh
H,P
Involved With Fatal Severe Inj ury Visible Injury
Bicycle
Pedestrian
I I
7 1 I
9 1
31 31
Complaint of Pain Total
23 56
28 75
6 , Iowa St & Blaine St (Intersection 1)
~o" <l C>
"vce:.. Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Crashes
0 ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP 1 Jo~n ~•. lklnl,
~hS:h,01
<
Crash Severity
■ Fatal
~ Severe Injury
- Other Visible Injury
_ Comp1a1nt of Pain
Involved With
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Columbia Ai.re~
0 Fatal Severe Injury
1 2
3 5
Visible Injury Complaint of Pain
14 16
20 14
A Spruce St & Rustin Ave (Intersection 2)
<I I>
Total
33 42
~□(/
'V'~- Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Cr.1shes
0 ) :. 13
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP Luther King--8!!!
# of CrJshes
Crash Severity Involved W1ith Fata~ Sever ,e llrnjury VJsiblle Injury Comtplla'int ,of IP.ain Total 0 Fatal
Severe Injury
Bicycle 1 0 21 24 46 _ other Visible lnJurv
= cornpla1nt oi Pain
Pede strian 3 10 29 I 23 65
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTA LS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP ~
'J, ,:,.•, 4
..
l+~J:bol\, ~ i.
olo -i .~-=u~;:, 1..,_ 'i"
~:nJ,:
;g MJS!SJCh u iu
~ Mlnerv~ Cl
i n Ath t11.1 {
w
, F.11 i ~
Jo ,~1 ~ 11th •
Pl
nlJ Ave
Crash Severity Involved With Fata! Severe Injury V1isible Injury Complaint of Pain ■ Fatal '.:::] Severe Injury
Bicycle 0 5 37 32 = othe r Visible lllJUry
= Comp1a,nt of Pain
Pedestrian 7 13 40 39
Chicago Ave & University St {Intersection 4)
Total
74 99
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Cr3shes
[,
Crash Severity
■ Fata,
- Severe Injury
Other Visible lnjUf'/
= Con1p1a1nt of Pain
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of Cr3shes
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Vis~ble Injury Complaimt of Pairn Total [,,
Bicycle 0 0 3 4 7
Pedestrian 0 2 2 5
Watkins Dr & Knox Ct (Intersection 5)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP :t.lcle
l
7T":i"l n , l ':J.0-1 !"fl· • ... ~---=- l{dS I- - -~
~ Mlsar;,UtiSt
• n : ~ M•nriotota St w
..5 - Kel l hSc
~ ( Jo J .
, • j ;; den
V -~·.
o • 1.1 S 1 •
Crash Se-verity
■ Fatal
Invo lve d With FataI
=::: Severe Injury
_ Other V1siDlc illJUry
= Comp laint or Pain
Bicyc le 0
Pedestrian 10
Unlve1SI
Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain
4 36 37
11 40 38
Third St & Anderson Ave (Intersection 6)
Total
77 99
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Crashes
[,
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP Crash Severity
■ Fatal
c.=: Severe Injury
- Othe r Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain
Cirnta'f,.-N
.,,,
'• "'''
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Bicycle 0 0 2 3
Pedestrian 0 3 1 1
Chicago Ave & Alessandro Blvd (Intersection 7)
Total
5 5
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map ''') . ' ,r,- /IJ
# of CrJshes
[,
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of Cr3shes
Crash Severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total [,
■ Fatal ,-b Severe Injury
Bicycle 0 2 5 2 9 Other Visible lnJurv
= Comp laint or Pain
Pedest rian 1 0 5 3 9
Van Buren Blvd & Jurupa Ave {Intersection 8)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP Bf Goodrich
,A.,ro1~•
\ \ \\ ~ , -,,
7~ 'c,
Crash Severity
Fatal
Severe Inju ry
I Otner Visible Injury
= Comp laint of Pain
!!.
C ;;
it{{
~·· :o,o-+-'-1
9# ,._,ro o06 o<
,""'l> o o,,,~
cf' (, \,,ft.
(, "o- ~\'\
nl,, ,
Jo ...
o>o
Q\~
've\',~o o(). o~
••' ,t'
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury
Bicycl e 2 4
Pedestrian 7 12
- --- ---- ~-- .J
Visible Injury Complaint of Pain
11 19
27 20
~Ag Van Buren Blvd & Arlington Ave (Intersection 9} <ID> Total
36 I
66 ·----- _ _!
ts ~
v Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Cr3shes
[,
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP fohUYJlorl
9\ mt-nl.lr,,
,,ch:,ol ,c.'-"
0 oublelle • Q.
•o,
# of Cr.is hes
Crash Severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Comp 1 laint of Pain Total II Fatal
Severe Injury
Bicyc le 1 0 10 3 14 Other Visible lnJurv
=- Comp1a1n1 of Pain
Pedest rian 2 0 8 4 14
.. ,/,.d Lincoln Ave & Victoria Ave (Intersection 10) <lo~ p ~ v Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP ,i
Hermosa S, ~ Bugte. ln ::
[! ~ OrrlekRd l
ii ' ::
~ ..
~
;;;
~ qottSI
1.t. is.
-,..- --v:1t1 8J£ dl\ld ..,...., ~=~---
M,.,it(n l.uJJ)er
\..:1t1ro4td 0,...4'rfln
0 s1 'fed.up Gtov
"
t,.11'1g Hqh .;; lombetlll* ;
l """"'' -.• Chmott ~
1 " Sta9..:::,.'> ci Q 101tmCt
I 5 . g .. C.lledonla Dr
Alderbrook O© i
.,,
! .t. 1 "'
l ;;;
Q ., Lt
:i'
Lu11n Ave
# of Crashes
crash severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visib.le Injury Complain t of ·Pain Total ■ Fatal
" severe Injury
= Other Visible Injury Bicycle D 1 7
= Coniplalnt of Pain
Pedestrian 1 2 10
4 I 12
12 25
·•···•·-- L_
[,,
~A(/ Wood Ave & Van Buren Blvd (Intersection 11) <IOC> /J ~ v Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP C111iJS Grovr Rd
:,
I
I
r- - -_J
I
I I
'~------ ___________ :
Oaylo11 St
~
~
.,:.
Crash Severity
■ Fatal
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total Severe Injury
other Visible lnJurv
Conip1a,n1 or Pain
Bicycle
Pedestrian
0 0
0 5 0
2 6
Orange Terrace Pkwy & Abrams Dr (Intersection 12)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map 5 9
# of Cr3shes
[,
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP lt!55 R;m,;h Rd
# of CrJshes
Crash Severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total [,
Fatal
Severe lnJury
Bicycle 0 0 3 0 1 3 Other Visible Injury
= Comp laint of Pain
Pedestr ian 0 1 0 5 1 6
A Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhill West (Intersection 13} ¥ Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP Shi!'rtn:Hl
Uunc,snl
.. 0- Corpoaton,
~ ..
lltdon
·~. '"" llnh :X.h.xii
# of Cr3 shes
Crash Severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injur y Comp,laint of Paiin Total [,
■ Fatal
;::::; Severe Injury
Bicyc le 0 19 13 33 Other Visible lnJUf'/
= Comp laint of Pain
Pedestrian 4 6 14 8 32
Adams St & Magnolia Ave {Intersection 14)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP Crash Severity
Fatal Involved With Fatal
Severe Injury
Bicycle 15 = Other Visible lnjurv
= Conipt aint of Pain
Pedestrian 78
P.."1.1te't'S\
-.i\~
~
Severe Injury
76 141
Visible Injury Complaint of Pain
459 384
422 382
~Ag Van Buren Blvd & California Ave (Intersection 15)
<101>
Total
934
1023
p ~
v Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Crashes
[,
CrJsh Severili'
■ Fatal
'.3 Severe Injury
-- Other Visible Injury
= Con1pIaI11I oi Pain
~"'~
..
lf ,t;'- vah Bt11'ri
11 / . i=~ .•· ~ 71 .,.1s;J
Involved With
Bicycle
Pedestria n
\ l_._ .......
Fatal
0 4
Ar~,uk:Jn
He19t-O
Sp;ut1P:1rl\
Severe Injury
4 7
ATTACHMENT 0- PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of Cr3shes
Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total
[,
15 20 39
12 22 45
Van Buren Blvd & Indiana Ave (Intersection 16)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP ~ ..
Cit
fr.Jlll"n ;_,,JI
P<wk ,;
i..t1al•1n
Eltl'111!'11bty
'..vt. Sr.hOOI
L
.
.
....
l-\11111\11lMT
.
~TY<1tts1
~'e,~o,e'-:
crash severity Invo lved With 1Fatal Severe Injury V1is1iiblle l njU11ry Comp ilairrt ,of Pa'in Tota ll Ill Fatal Severe lnJury
other Visible Injury Bicycle O 5 24 32 '61
Complaint of Pain
Pedestrian 5 2'1 68
Magnolia Ave & Tyler St (Intersection 17}
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Cr3shes
a
I
ATTACHMENT 0- PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of Cr3shes
Crash Severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Paiin Total [,
■ Fata1 r-, Severe Injury w Bicyc le 0 4 18 14 Other v1sible I llJUf"\/ 36 Complaint of Pain
Pedestrian 2 4 15 16 37
Collett Ave & Polk St (Intersection 18)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of Cr3shes
Crash Severity Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Total [,
■ Fatal
'" Severe Injury
Bicycle 0 5 30 31 66 Other Vlsible Injury
Complaint of Pain
Pedestrian 6 10 36 32 84
Magnolia Ave & Polk St (Intersection 19)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP Crash Severity
■ Fatal
" Severe In1ury
Other Visible Injury
= Comp1am1 or Pain
~, .... ,
,,,r-t1cc>
< ,; •'
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Bicycle 0 5 22 31
Pedestrian 4 9 29 20
Tyler St & Hole Ave (Intersection 20)
Total
58 62
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Crashes
[,
Crash Severity
■ Fatal -,
-.J Severe Injury
- Other Visible Injury
= Comp1a1n1 ot Pain
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of Cr3shes
Involved With Fatal Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Tota l Bicycle O 2 10 11 23
Pedestr ian 5 8 7 21 [,
Pierce St & Magnolia Ave (Intersection 21}
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map Crash Sever ity
Fatal
~ Severe Injury
Otner Vis101e In1ur1
Complain! or Pain
Involved With
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Fatal
0 Severe :injury
5 5
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP 19 19
Complaint of Paiira
24 18
Total
48 # of CrJshes
0 ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP :i~'f\l~
Ellm;um,y
School
CrJsh Severity lnvo'lved With Fatal
■ Fatal
L Severe Injury
Other visi ble 1niury Bicycle 0
Complaint of Pain
Pedestrian
C.,,11,:,11,urJ
S.:hool
Severe Injury V1isible Injury Comp'laint of Parin Tota l 3 1 5
5 4 11
Sierra Vista & Gedney Way (Intersection 23)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map # of Cr3shes
I
I
ATTACHMENT O - PED/BIKE COLLISION TOTALS, CRASH MAP, HEAT MAP # of CrJshes
crash severit y Invo lved With Fatal Severe Inj ury Visible Injury Complai nt o f Pain Total ■ Fatal
~ Severe lnJury
Other Visible injury Bicycle O 4 15 9 28
= Comp1a1n1 ot Pain
Pedest rian 2 7 20 13 42
-
I
Rutland Ave and Sylvan Dr {Intersection 24)
Traffic Collision Summary 2011-2022, Crash Map & Heat Map Cilv 0/ Arts&._ lnnorat ion .,
April 21, 2023
PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
Traf f ic 'En1:1ineering
TDA Atticle 3 (SB 821) Evaluation Committee
Riverside County Transp011ation Commission
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
Re: Local Match Funding for the Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements Project Dear SB-821 Evaluation Committee:
This letter is to confum that the City of Riverside Public Works Depai1ment has the local match funding requirement for its Riverside Citywide Pedestri an and Bicycle Improvements Project applic ation. On April 18, 2023, the Riverside City Council unanimously voted to approve up to $690 ,120 in local matching funds to serve as a 50% pai1icipation for the Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvement Project. I have verified the availability of the funds reflected in the Engineer ' s Estimate and have attached the Council Memorandum and Minutes as evidence of our agency's due diligence and commitment to fund our p011ion of the project should it be awarded . We appreciate your agency 's consideration to construct critical pedestrian and bicycle improvements for the Riverside community.
Please feel free to contact Philip Nitollama , City Traffic Engineer, should you have any questions at 951-568-5021 or via email at [email protected].
Sincerely ,
~/#;
Gil Hernandez, Pi:~
Public Works Director
3900 Main Street , Riverside, CA 92522 I Phone : (951) 826-5366 I Fax: (951) 826-2570 I RiversideCA.gov City of Riverside
City Council
Mayor
Patricia Lock Dawson
Councilmembers:
City ?)Arts &..,Innovation Agenda - Revised
Erin Edwards
Clarissa Cervantes
Ronalda Fierro
Chuck Conder
Gaby Plascencia
Jim Perry
Steve Hemenway
Meeting Date: Tuesday, April 18, 2023
Publication Date: Friday, April 14, 2023
3:00 PM City Hall - Art Pick Council Chamber
3900 Main Street, Riverside
Live Webcast at:
www.RiversideCA.gov/Meeting or
www.WatchRiverside.com
Originally Published: April 6, 2023
MISSION STATEMENT
The City of Riverside is committed to providing high quality municipal services to ensure a safe, inclusive, and livable community.
Face coverings are strongly recommended.
For virtual Public Comment, two options are available:
VIA TELEPHONE:
Call (669) 900-6833 and enter Meeting ID: 926 9699 1265 Press *9 to be placed in the queue to speak.
Individuals in the queue will be prompted to unmute by pressing *6 to speak.
VIA ZOOM:
Use the following link: https://zoom.us/j/92696991265
Select the "raise hand" function to request to speak.
An on-screen message will prompt you to "unmute" and speak.
Public comments are limited to 3 minutes.
Please follow along via the telephone or Zoom options above to ensure you call in at the appropriate time for your item(s).
Public comments regarding items on this agenda or any matters within the jurisdiction of the City Council can be submitted via the eComment feature at www.riversideca.gov/meeting until two hours before the meeting. Email comments to City_ [email protected].
City of Riverside Page 1
City Council Agenda - Revised April 18, 2023
7 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Audience participation is encouraged. Public comments are limited to 3 minutes. 25 To comment on the Consent Calendar and any matters within the jurisdiction of the City Council, you are invited to participate in person or call at (669) 900-6833 and enter Meeting ID: 926 9699 1265. Press *9 to be placed in the queue to speak.
Individuals in the queue will be prompted to unmute by pressing *6 when you are ready to speak.
To participate via ZOOM, use the following link: https://zoom.us/j/92696991265.
Select the "raise hand" function to request to speak. An on-screen message will prompt you to "unmute" and speak.
CONSENT CALENDAR - Item# 27-37
All matters listed under the CONSENT CALENDAR are considered routine by the City Council and may be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless, before the City Council votes on the motion to adopt, Members of the City Council or staff request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
26 Announcement of Measure Z Funded Item No. 31
Attachments: Measure Z Photo
City Clerk
27 Minutes of April 4, 2023
Attachments : Minutes
28 Appoint Oscar Valadez to Transportat ion Board Citywide seat, Barbie T. Gomez to Commission of the Deaf Citywide seat, and Desiree N. Wroten to Budget Engagement Commission Ward 3 Resident seat (All Wards)
Attachments : Report
29 Correction to City Council minutes of February 21, 2023, to reflect the Amendment to the Agreement with Raincross Hospitality Corporation was removed from the agenda and forwarded to Financial Performance and Budget Committee (All Wards) Attachments : Report
Minutes 2-21 -23
City of Riverside Page 7
City Council Agenda - Revised April 18, 2023
Cooperative Purchasing for estimated amount of $4,81 4,000 plus interest from Water Field Account for Water Field and Operations divisions (All Wards) Attachments: Report
Public Works
Sourcewell Solicitation Process
Sourcewell Vehicle Purchase Agreeme nts
Presentation
35 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Riverside, California, authorizing the City Manager, or his Designee, to apply for, submit, and execute all required documents with the California Department of Transportation for not-to-exceed $3 million for the Clean California Local Grant Program for beautification efforts along Martin Luther King Boulevard between Kansas Avenue and Canyon Crest Drive - Waive further reading - Supplemental appropriation - Five affirmative votes required (Ward 2)
Attachments: Report
Resolution
Local Match Calculation Form
36 Fiscal Year 2023-24 Transportation Development Act Article 3, (Senate Bill 821) grant applications to Riverside County Transportation Commission for $1 ,380,240 with City-match of $1 ,380,240 for total project cost of $2,760,480 for concrete sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on Stover Avenue, installation of LED Stop signs, crosswalks, audible pedestrian push button systems and upgraded pedestrian ramps at various Citywide intersections (All Wards)
Attachments: Report
Stover Ave. Sidewalk Location Map
Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Project List
37 2023 Western Riverside Regional Arterials grant application to Riverside County Transportation Commission for $4,000,000 for plans, specifications , and estimates project phase for State Route 91 /Adams Street interchange reconstruction (Wards 4 and 6)
Attachments: Report
Location Map
COMMUNICATIONS
38 City Attorney report on Closed Session discussions
39 Items for future City Council consideration as requested by Mayor or Members of City of Riverside Page 9
D
CITY OF
RIVERSIDE
City Council Memorandum
City 1Arts &__Innovation
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 TO:
FROM:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023
WARDS: ALL
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF TWO FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 TRANSPORTATION ISSUE:
DEVELOPMENT ACT ARTICLE 3, SENATE BILL 821 GRANT APPLICATIONS
TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR
$1,380,240, FOR A TOT AL PROJECT COST OF $2,760,480 WITH REQUIRED
CITY MATCH, FOR CONCRETE SIDEWALKS AND PEDESTRIAN RAMPS ON
STOVER AVENUE, INSTALLATION OF LED STOP SIGNS, CROSSWALKS,
AUDIBLE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON SYSTEMS AND UPGRADED
PEDESTRIAN RAMPS AT VARIOUS CITYWIDE INTERSECTIONS (ALL WARDS) Authorize the submittal of two grant applications requesting up to $1,380,240 in grant funding for the Transportation Development Act Article 3 (Senate Bill 821) Grant Program offered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission to construct new concrete sidewalks and pedestrian ramps, new LED stop signs, new high visibility crosswalks, and new audible pedestrian push button systems Citywide. The total project cost is estimated at $2,760,480 which is two grant awards and required dollar-for-dollar City match funds.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the City Council:
1. Authorize the Public Works Department to prepare and submit a FY 2023/24 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (Senate Bill 821) grant application (Grant #1) to the Riverside County Transportation Commission in an amount up to $690,120 (with $690,120 in required City match funds) to construct new concrete sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on Stover Avenue from Fury Drive to Eagle Rock Drive; and
2. Authorize the Public Works Department to prepare and submit a FY 2023/24 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (Senate Bill 821) grant application (Grant #2) to the Riverside County Transportation Commission in an amount up to $690,120 (with $690,120 in required City match funds) to install LED Stop signs, high visibility crosswalks , audible pedestrian push buttons systems , and upgraded pedestrian ramps at various intersections Citywide.
FY 2023/24 TOA Article3/SB 821 Grant Application • Page 2 BACKGROU ND:
Transportation Development Act (TOA) Article 3, or Senate Bill (SB) 821, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program funding , is provided through a ¼ cent of the general sales tax collected statewide. The TOA provides two major sources of funding for public transportation: the Local Transportation Fund (L TF) and the State Transit Assistance (STA). The L TF provides funding for essential transit and commuter rail services , TOA Article 3/SB 821 , and planning efforts. Each year, 2% of the L TF revenue is made available for use on bicycle and pedestrian facility projects through the TOA Article3/SB 821 program. TOA Article 3/SB 821 is a discretionary program administered by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). The total amount available for programming in the 2023/24 TOA Article 3/SB 821 Call for Projects is an estimated $6,901,202. Each City/Agency is eligible to submit up to three applications. Each application is limited to a maximum request of $690,120, which is 10% of available grant funding. Total award to each City/Agency is limited to $1,380 ,240, or 20% of available funding. Both project applications require 1 :1 local match from the City.
The TOA Article3/SB 821 Call for Projects occurs on a biennial basis, with a release date on February 6, 2023, and a due date on April 27, 2023 . Per RCTC's TOA Article3/SB 821 adopted policies , awardees receiving an allocation have 36 months from award, defined as July 1 of the Call for Projects fiscal year cycle to complete construction. Eligible projects include:
• Construction , including related engineering expenses, of bicycle and pedestrian facilities , or for bicycle safety education programs;
• Maintenance of bicycling trails, which are closed to motorized traffic; • Maintenance and repairs of Class I off-street bicycle facilities only; • Restriping Class II bicycle lanes;
• Providing facilities for the use of bicycles that serve the needs of commuting bicyclists, including, but not limited to, new trails serving major transportation corridors, secure bicycle parking at employment centers, park and ride lots, and transit terminals where other funds are available; and
• Development of comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian plans (limitations apply) . Plans must emphasize bike/pedestrian facilities that support utilitarian bike/pedestrian travel rather than solely recreational activities.
DISCUSSION:
The Public Works Department is requesting authorization from the City Council to submit a grant application requesting a total of up to $690,120 in TOA Article3/SB 821 grant funding to construct new concrete sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on Stover Avenue from east of Fury Drive to west of Eagle Rock Drive (Attachment 1 ).
Additionally , the Public Works Department is requesting authorization from the City Council to submit a grant application requesting a total of up to $690,120 in TOA Article3/SB 821 grant funding to install solar-powered LED-flashing stop signs, upgraded high-visibility crosswalks, updated pedestrian ramps , audible pedestrian push button systems Citywide. A full list of project locations is shown in Attachment 2.
FY 2023/24 TOA Article3/SB 821 Grant Application • Page 3 The recommended streets and intersections are in close vicinity to local schools, parks, medical facility, the downtown area, employment centers, and commercial retail shopping centers and support requests from the community to improve these facilities and locations. If the projects are awarded, new sidewalks, stop signs, crosswalks, pedestrian ramps, and audible pedestrian push button systems are expected to improve sidewalk connectivity, enhance safety and mobility for residents, and improve public health by encouraging increased walking and a more active lifestyle.
The combined effects would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions as residents would be encouraged to walk for shorter trips.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This item supports Strategic Priority 6 - Infrastructure, Mobility, and Connectivity and aims to ensure safe, reliable infrastructure that benefits the community and facilitates connection between people, places, and information. The proposed TOA Article 3/SB 821 funded projects align with the goals below:
6.1 - Provide, expand and ensure equitable access to sustainable modes of transportation that connect people to opportunities such as employment , education, healthcare , and community amenities.
6.2 - Maintain, protect, and improve assets and infrastructure within the City's built environment to ensure and enhance reliability, resiliency, sustainability, and facilitate connectivity.
6.3 - Identify and pursue new and unique funding opportunities to develop, operate, maintain, and renew infrastructure and programs that meet the community's needs.
This project aligns with each of the five Cross-Cutting Threads as follows:
1. Community Trust - The proposed improvements are part of a more significant endeavor to improve the City's transportation network and quality of life for the residents and visitors.
The proposed project improvements are primarily based on residential service requests received by the Public Works Department.
2. Equity - Public Works strives to improve the City's roadway network to provide safe and reliable transportation in all areas of the City. The proposed project includes locations within all wards, many located in disadvantaged communities that will benefit from improved active transportation connectivity.
3. Fiscal Responsibility - The proposed pedestrian and bicycle improvement projects leverage various city funds to garner grant funding of an equal matching amount, doubling the budget for needed improvements to a total of up to $2,760,480 (which includes the agency maximum grant award of $1,380,240).
4. Innovation - The proposed LED Lit Stop sign improvements combine innovative solar technology with an updated traffic safety device element to increase compliance with stop signs and improve safety at the intersections.
5. Sustainability & Resiliency - The construction materials specified for the proposed projects meet or exceed industry standards and are expected to last well into the future.
FY 2023124 TOA Article3/SB 821 Grant Application • Page 4 The improvements will also promote a sustainable, healthy lifestyle by enhancing the safety and connectivity of walking paths and bikeways.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total estimated fiscal impact of this recommendation is up to $2,760,480 , which is comprised of $1,380 ,240 in RCTC grant funds over two awards, and an additional $1 ,380,240 in local matching funds to complete the TOA Article 3/SB 821 infrastructure improvements (Table 1 ).
Table 1 - Project Costs:
Project Name
TDA Article 3 (SB
821) Bicycle and
Pedestrian Grant Local Match Funds Total Project
Stover Avenue sidewalk
im rovements
Citywide LED Stop Signs,
High-Visibility Crosswalks ,
Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacons (RRFB), Audible
Pedestrian Push Button
Systems (APS) , & Green Bike
Lane Stri in
Program Funds
Requested
$690,120
$690 ,120
(50%) Cost
$690,120 $1,380,240
$690,120 $1,380 ,240
Estimated TOA Article 3 SB 821 Bic cle & Pedestrian Grant Pro ram Total : $2,760,480 If successful , the TOA Article 3 (SB 821) grant funding will be used for the construction of the pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure improvements.
Staff will return to Council if awarded the grant with a definitive recommendation for allocating matching funding , in the amount of up to $1,380,240 from potential funding sources, including bond proceeds , surplus reserves , Special Gas Tax, Measure A, or others as available .
Prepared by:
Certified as to
availability of funds :
Approved by:
Approved as to form :
Attachments:
Gilbert Hernandez, Public Works Director
Edward Enriquez, Interim Assistant City Manager/Chief Financial Officer/City Treasurer
Kris Martinez, Assistant City Manager
Phaedra A Norton , City Attorney
1. Stover Ave. Sidewalk Location Map
2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Project List
ATTACHMENT 2: PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFETY PROJECT LIST 5B821 Grant FY 23/24 - Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Ward Location Inte rsection Type Countermeasure 1 Countermeasure 2 Countermeasure 3 Iowa Ave and Blaine St Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System Green Bike lane Striping High Visibility Crosswa lk Spruce St and Rustin Ave Unsignalized Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Rustin Ave and Linden St Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibi lity Crosswalk Chicago Ave and University St Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System Green Bike Lane Striping 2 Watkins Dr and Knox Ct Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalk 2 Third St and Anderson Ave Unsignaliz ed Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Chicago Ave and Alessandro Blvd Signalized Audib le Ped Push Button System Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibility Crosswa lk Van Buren Blvd and Jurupa Ave Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibi lity Crosswalk Van Buren Blvd and Ar ling ton Ave Signalized Green Bike Lane Stripi ng High Visibility Crosswalk 3 Lincoln Ave and Victoria Ave Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs Raised Median Flashing Ped signs 4 Wood Rd and Van Buren Blvd Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System Green Bike l ane Striping High Visibility Crosswa lk 4 Orange Terrace Pkwy and Abrams Dr Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibi lity Crosswalk 4 Orange Terrace Pkwy and Sandhill Dr(\ Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalk Adams St and Magnolia Ave Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibi lity Crosswalk Van Buren Blvd and California Ave Signalized Aud ibl e Ped Push Button System High Visibility Crosswalk s Van Buren Blvd and Indiana Ave Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System High Visibility Crosswalk 6 Magnolia Ave and Tyler St Signalized Audi ble Ped Push Button System 6 Collett Ave and Polk St Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswa lk 6 Magno lia Ave and Polk St Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System High Visibility Crosswalk 6 Tyler St and Hole Ave Signalized Audib le Ped Push Button System High Visibility Crosswa lk 7 Pierce St and Magnolia Ave Signalized Audible Ped Push Button System High Visibi lity Crosswalk 7 Golden Ave and Cochran Ave Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswa lk 7 Sierra Vista Ave and Gedney Way (S) Unsigna lized Rectang ular Rapid Flashin g Beacon 7 Rutland Ave and Sylvan Dr Unsignalized Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalk City o/'Arts &__Innovati on
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023, 3 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT IN PERSOl'l/TELEPHO"'JE
ART PICK COUNCIL CHAM3ER
3900 MAIN STREET
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Sean Mill spoke regarding adopting a resolution opposing Assembly Bill 7 42. Jason Hunter spoke regarding newly adopted Code of Ethics and Conduct.
Councilmember Perry reported that the City submitted a letter in March to the Public Safety Committee at the State Assembly opposing Assembly Bill 7 42. The City Council Safety, Wellness, and Youth Committee will be reviewing Assembly Bills relating to public safety at the April 19, 2023, meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Councilmember Hemenway and seconded by Councilmember Perry to approve the Consent Calendar as presented affirming the actions appropriate to each item . The motion carried with Councilmembers Edwards, Cervantes, Perry, and Hemenway and Councilwoman Plascencia voting aye , Councilmembers Fierro and Conder absent.
MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of April 4, 2023, were approved as presented.
BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
T11e Mayor and City Council oppointed Oscar Valadez to the Transportation Board Citywide seat for a term through March 1, 2025, Barbie T. Gomez to the Commission of the Deaf for Cl term thot will be decided during the first meeting of the Commission, and Desiree N. Wroten to the Budget Engagement Commission Ward 3 Resident seat for a term through March 1, 2027.
CORRECTION TO MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 21, 2023
The City Council approved a correction to the minutes of February 21 , 2023,
Agreement with Raincross Hospitolity Corporation wos removed from the agenda and forwarded tc Financial Performance and Budget Committee.
FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 SIX MONTHS ENDli'lG DECEMBER 31 , 2022, CASH, INVESTMENTS, AND
DEBT REPORT
The City Council received and order ed filed Hie Fiscal Year 2022-23 six-mo nths ending December 31 , 2022, Cash , Inve stment s, and Debt Report. 108-310
City q/'Arts &_ Innovation
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023, 3 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT IN PERSON/TELEPHONE
ART PICK COUNCIL CHAMBER
3900 MAIN STREET
availability of budgeted funds; and (2) authorized the City Manager, or designee, to execute the individual purchase agreements, purchase orders, and all necessary documents as needed for these individual purchases with oll authority for such, including opprovol of minor and/or non-substantial changes, expiring on September 30, 2023.
CLEAN CALIFORNIA LOCAL GRANT PROGRAM - BEAUTIFICATION - MARTIN LUTHER KING/ KANSAS/CAt~YON CREST - SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION - RESOLUTION The City Council ( l J adopted a Resolution authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to apply for, submit, cmd execute all required documents with the California Department of Transportation for the Clean California Local Grant Program through June 30, 2026; (2) received a grant for Fiscal Year 2023-24 in the amount of $3 million, or the actual amount awarded, from the California Department of Transportation Clean California Local Grant Program; and (3) and upon grant award, authorized the Chief Financial Officer, or designee, to record an increase in revenue and an appropriation in expenditures in the amount of the grant award in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 California Department of Transportation Clean California Local Grant Program accounts; whereupon, the title having been read and further reading waived, Resolution No. 23980 of the City Council of the City of Riverside, California, Authorizing the City Manager, or his Designee, to Apply for, Submit, and Execute all Required Documents with the California Department of Transportation for the Clean California Local Grant Program for Beoutification Efforts along Mortin Lulher King Blvd. Between Kansas Ave. and Canyon Crest Dr., wa5 presented and adopted.
FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT GRANT APPLICATIONS - CONCRETE SIDEWALKS, PEDESTR1At'1 RAMPS, LED STOP SIGNS, CROSSWALKS, At--JD AUDIBLE
PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON - VARIOUS CITYWIDE INTERSECTIONS The City Council ( l J authorized the Public Works Department to prepare and submit a Fiscal Year 2023-24 Tronsporl'ation Development Act Article 3 (Senate Bill 821 J grant application (Grant # l) to the Riverside County Transportation Commission in an amount up to $690,120 (with $690,120 in required City match funds) to construct new concrete sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on Stover Avenue from Fury Drive to Eagle Rock Drive; and (2) authorized the Public Works Department to prepare and submit a Fiscal Year 2023-24 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (Senate Bill 821) grant opplication (Grant #2) to the Riverside County Transportation Con1mission in an amount up to $690,120 (with $690,120 in required City match funds) to install LED Stop signs, high visibility 108-312
City '!}Arts &..,Innovation
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023, 3 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT IN PERSOt~/TELEPHONE
ART PICK COUNCIL CHAMBER
3900 MAIN STREET
crosswalks , audible pedestrian push buttons systems, and upgraded pedestrian ramps at various intersections Citywide.
2023 WESTERt'-1 RIVERSIDE REGIONAL ARTERIALS GRANT APPLICATION - STATE ROUTE 91 /ADAMS STREET INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION
The City Council authorized the Public Works Department to prepare and submit a 2023 Western Riverside Regional Arterials grant application to the Riverside County Transportation Commission in an amount of $4,000,000 for the plans, specifications, and estimates phase of the State Route 91 / Adams Street Interchange Reconstruction.
COMMUNICATIONS
CITY A HORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSIONS
City Attorney Norton announced that the City Council authorized the initiation of litigation in the case concerning Sheila Simmons v. City of Riverside and no reportable action was taken on the other items during closed session.
ITEMS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
There were no requests made at this time .
The City Cou:1cil adjourned at 7:31 pm . in honor of Daniel "Danny" C. Garcia and Hunter Fisk.
Respectf
DON SIA GAUSE
City Clerk
108-313
SB821 FY23/24 BiCl£Cle and Pedestrian Facilities
Project Cost Estimate
No. Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
1 Enaineerina Desian 1 LS $96,000.00 $96,000 .00
2 Construction Administration 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Sub-Total: Administrative Items $146,000.00
INCIDENTAL ITEMS
3 Mobilization 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00
4 Water Pollution Control 1 LS $7,000.00 $7,000 .00
5 Traffic Control and Access 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Sub-Total: Incidental Items $107,000.00
CONSTRUCTION ITEMS
High Visibility Crosswalk (Includes removal of existing crosswalk and associated striping and pavement 6 legends, installation of thermopl astic ladder crosswalk or continental crosswalk with stop bar, and associated 62 EA $6,000.00 $372,000.00 strioina and cavemen! leaends l
7 Accessible Pedestrian Signal System (Includes removing existing buttons, installing APS buttons, installing 12 EA $21,000.00 $252,000.00 CCUl 8 Green Bicycle Striping Improvements (Signalized Intersection - Includes green thermoplastic pavement 8 EA $14,875.00 $119,000.00 markings, sharrows, conflict zones , signage , and bicycle detector loops) 9 Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon System (Includes foundation, pole, solar panel and power system, 3 EA $15,000.00 $45,000.00 push buttons) 10 Flashina LED Solar Powered Stoo Si!ln 23 EA $4,500 .00 $103,500.00 11 FlashinQ LED Solar Powered Pedestrian Warnina Sian 1 EA $4,500.00 $4,500.00 12 Sianaae/Striaina Modifications /Lincoln Ave and Victoria Ave) 1 EA $12,000.00 $12,000.00 13 Sianaae/Strioina Modifications /Sierra Vista Ave and Gednev Wavl 1 EA $7,500.00 $7,500.00 Sub-Total: Construction Items $915 500.00
TOT AL FOR ALL CONTRACT BID ITEMS $1,168,500.00
15% Contingency $175,275.00
TOTAL $1,343,775.00
ATTACHMENT D - INDIVIDUAL INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT S SUMMARY TDA ARTICLE 3 (SB821) Grant FY 23/24 - Riverside Citywide Pedestria n & Bicycle Improvements Project Intersect ion Location & Type
(Green= Signalized; Safety Safety Safety
Numbe r Ward Yellow= Stop Cont rolled) Countermeasure 1 Countermea sure 2 Countermeasure 3 1 1 Iowa Ave and Blaine St APS 1 Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibi lity Crosswalks 2 1 Spruce St and Rustin Ave RRFB
3 1 Rustin Ave and Linden St Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibil ity Crosswa lks 4 2 01'1icago Ave and ~niversity St APS Green Bike Lane Striping 5 2 Watkins Dr and Knox Ct Flash ing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalks 6 2 Third St and Anderson Ave RRFB
7 2 Alessandro Blvd1andl'Chicaga-Ave APS Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibility Crosswa lks 8 4 Lincoln Ave and Victoria Ave
Flashi ng LED Stop Signs & Signing/ Striping Mod High Visibility Crosswalks Ped Signs
9 3 Orange Terrace Pkwy and Abrams Dr Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visibi lity Crosswa lks 10 3 Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhill Dr (West) Flash ing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalks 11 4 Wead Rd and Van Bu~en Blvc!l APS Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibi lity Crosswa lks 12 3 Van Buren Blvd and Jurupa Ave APS Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibi lity Crosswa lks 13 4 Van Buren Blvd and Arlington Ave Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibility Crosswalks 14 5 Adams St and Magnolia Ave APS Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibility Crosswalks 15 5 Van Buren Blvd and California Ave APS Green Bike Lane Striping High Visibility Crosswalks 16 5 :V.an Burren,JBlvdlandlllndiana A11e APS High Visibility Crosswa lks 17 6 Rutland Ave and Sylvan Dr Flash ing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalks 18 6 Collett Ave and Polk St Flash ing LED Stop Signs High Visibility Crosswalks 19 6 Magnolia Ave and Polk St APS High Visib ility Crosswa lks 20 6 Tyler St and Hole Ave APS High Visibility Crosswa lks 21 7 Pierce St and• Magnalia Ave APS High Visibi lity Crosswalks 22 7 Golden Ave and Cochran Ave Flashing LED Stop Signs High Visib ility Crosswa lks 23 7 Sierra Vista Ave and Gedney Way (S) RRFB Signing/ Strip ing Mod 24 7 Magnolia Ave andlliyler St APS
I I Signalized Intersect ion I I Stop Controlled Intersection 1 APS = Audible Pedestrian Push Button System
Attachment D
High Visibility Crosswalk Improvement Example Photo
Existing Photo along Canyon Crest & UCR commercial village Attachment D
Green Bike Lane Striping Improvement Example Photos
Existing Photos at Linden & Canyon Crest
California MUTCD 2014 Edition
(FI-IWA's MUTCD 2009 Edition , including Revisions I & 2 , as amended for use in California) Figure 38-17 (CA). Examples of Crosswalk Enhancements at Uncontrolled Multilane Approaches
=E(~
~00~
:E .... .... ,:,
Chapter 3B - Pavement and Curb Markings
Part 3 - Markings
NOTE: Adequate visibility
should be provided.
November 7, 2014
ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 1 - Blaine St at Iowa Ave - Looking westbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalk, green bike lane striping & audible ped push buttons. (Top picture) Intersection 2 - Rustin Ave at Spruce St - Looking eastbound. Improvements include - rectangular rapid flashing beacons. 1 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 3 - Rustin Ave & Linden St - Looking eastbound . Improvements include - high visibility crosswalk, green bike Jane striping & flashing LED edge-lit stop signs. (Top picture) Intersection 4 - Chicago Ave & University St - Looking eastbound. Improve ments include -green bike lane striping & audible pedestrian pushbuttons.
2 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Phot os
Intersection 5 - Watkins Dr & Knox Ct - Looking northbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalk & flashing LED edge-lit stop signs. (Top picture)
Intersection 6 - Third St & Anderson Ave - Looking westbound. Improvements include - rectangular rapid flashing beacon 3 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 7 -Alessandro Blvd & Chicago Ave - Looking northbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalk, green bike lane striping & audible pedestrian pushbuttons. (Top picture) Intersection 8 - Lincoln Ave & Victoria Ave - Looking southbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks, raised median & flashing LED edge-lit stop signs and pedestrian signs. 4 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 9 - Orange Terrace Pkwy & Abrams Dr - Looking westbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & flashing LED-edge lit stop signs. (Top picture) Intersection 10 - Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhill Dr. (west)- Looking eastbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & flashing LED-edge lit stop signs.
5 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 11 - Wood Rd & Van Buren Blvd - Looking westbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks, green bike lane striping & audible pedestrian pushbuttons . (Top picture) Intersection 12 - Van Buren Blvd & Jurupa Ave - Looking southbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks, green bike lane striping & audible pedestrian pushbutton s. 6 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 13 -Arlington Ave & Van Buren Blvd - Looking northbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & green bike lane striping. (Top picture)
Intersection 14 -Adams St & Magnolia Ave - Looking eastbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks, green bike lane striping & audible pedestrian pushbuttons .
7 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 15 - Van Buren Blvd & California Ave - Looking northbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & audible pedestrian pushbuttons. (Top picture) Intersection 16 - Indiana Ave & Van Buren Blvd - Looking westbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & audible pedestrian pushbuttons .
8 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 17 - Rutland Ave & Sylvan Dr - Looking northbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & flashing LED-edge lit stop signs. (Top picture)
Intersection 18 - Collett Ave & Polk St - Looking southbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & flashing LED-edge lit stop signs.
9 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 19 - Magnolia Ave & Polk St- Looking southbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & audible pedestrian pushbuttons. Note extra ped button at median refuge island. Adjacent to Kaiser Hospital {Top picture) Intersection 20 - Tyler St & Hole Ave - Looking southeast. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & audible pedestrian pushbuttons. Note median refuge islands at two corners. 10 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 21 - Magnolia Ave & Pierce St - Looking northbound. Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & audible pedestrian pushbuttons. (Top picture)
Intersection 22 - Golden Ave & Cochran Ave - Looking southbound . Improvements include - high visibility crosswalks & flashing LED-edge lit stop signs.
11 ATTACHMENT E
Existing Photos
Intersection 23 - Sierra Vista & Gedney Way {SJ - Looking southbound. Improvements include - rectangular rapid flashing beacons. {Top picture)
Intersection 21 - Magnolia Ave & Tyler St - Looking westbound. Improvements include -audible pedestrian pushbuttons. 12 ATTACHMENT F - INTERSECTION SELECTION SUMMARY
TDA ARTICLE 3 (SB821) Grant FY 23/24 - Riverside Citywide Pedestrian & Bicycle Improvements Project Intersection Location & Type Intersect ion Selection Summary (Green = Signalized; Local Roadway Riverside Resident
# Ward Yellow= Stop Controlled) Safety Plan P.A.C.T.1 Request Transit Stops Destination 1 1 Iowa Ave and 1Blaine St X X X X Commercial Retail
2 1 Spruce St and Rust in Ave X X University Heights School 3 1 Rustin Ave and Linden St X X Reach Leadership School 4 2 Ci:hicago,Ave,and University St X X X X Commercial Retail 5 2 Watkins Dr and Knox Ct X UCR, Riverside STEM Sch
6 2 Third St and Anderson Ave X X R.T.A. Office
7 2 ~lessandro [Blvd and 0hicago Ave X X X Castleview Elementary 8 4 Lincoln Ave and Victoria Ave X X X Gage MS, Raincross HS 9 3 Orange Terrace Pkwy and Abrams Dr X X X Franklin ES, Park, OTPCC 4 10 3 Orange Terrace Pkwy & Sandhill Dr (W) X Franklin ES, Park, OTPCC 4 11 4 Wood Rd and Van Buren Blvd X X X X MLK High Schoo l, Retail 12 3 Van Bur.en Blvd and Uurupa ~ve X X S.A.R.T.2 , Retail 13 4 Van Bur.en Blvd and Arlington Ave X X X R.M.A .3 , Retail 14 5 .llidams St and Magnolia Ave X Centra I Baptist Univ . 15 5 Van Bu~en Blvd and Califor.nla Ave X X X Commercial Retail 16 5 Vani Buren,IBlvc!t and ilndiana Ave X X X Commercia l Retai l 17 6 Rutland Ave and Sylvan Dr X X Terrace Elementary
18 6 Collett Ave and Polk St X X Collett Elementary
19 6 Magnolia Ave and Polk St X Kaiser Regional Hospital 20 6 Tyler St and Hole Ave X X Myra Linn Elementar y
21 7 Pie~ce St and Magnalia Ave i
X X X Comme rcial Retail
22 7 Golden Ave and Cochran Ave X McAu liffe Elementary 23 7 Sierra Vista Ave and Gedney Way (S) X Valley View Elementary 24 7 Magnolia Ave and Tyler St X X Commercial Retail
1 Riverside P.A.C.T. = Pedestrian Target Safeguarding Plan (PTS), Active Transportation Plan (AT Plan), Complete Streets Ordinance (CSO) & Trails Master Plan (TMP) 2 S.A.R.T. = Santa Ana River Trail
3 R.M.A. = Riverside Municipal Airport
4 OTPCC = Orange Terrace Park Community Center
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
PREPARED BY:
Kimley>>>Horn
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
1.:.,·;;ur;1.11 "":",#.;";,r •• >.r11,,1.-
'
fild.-,1 1rr'iT,11"I.'i
Pedestrian Violation
Not Stated
Other Than Driver
Unsafe Lane Change
Ped R/W Violation
Improper Passing
Other Hazardous Movement
Hazardous Parking
Following Too Closely
Impeding Traffic
Other Equipment
Other
Lights
Other Than Driver or PED
Brakes
Source: Riverside Crossroads Database (2017 - 2022)
7.5 Vulnerable Users
7 .5.1 Pedestrian Collisions
187
169
152
138
130
79 62
25 21
8 8
5 3
1 1
~ m
1.18%
1.06%
0.96%
0.87%
0.82%
0.50%
0.39%
0.16%
0.13%
0.05%
0.05%
0.03%
0.02%
0.01%
0.01%
509 pedestrian involved collisions occurred during the study period, resulting in 21 fatal collisions, 62 severe injuries, and 369 collisions with some form of reported injury or pain.
Figure 10 shows the locations of pedestrian collisions during the study period. This figure zoomed into each City ward is provided in Appendix A. The top 3 primary collision factors for these collisions were pedestrian violation (36.6%), pedestrian right-of-way violation (25.5%), and other improper driving (16.9%).
7.5.2 Bicycle Collisions
During the study period, 354 collisions involving bicycles were reported. Of these, 4 were fatal, 25 were severe injuries, and 277 were some forms of reported injury or pain. Figure 10 shows the location of bicycle collisions during the study period. This figure zoomed into each City ward is provided in Appendix A. The top 3 primary collision factors for bicycle collisions were drivers/bicyclists on the wrong side of the road (29. 7% ), drivers/bicyclists ignoring traffic signals and signs (17.4%), and automobile right-of-way violations (14.7%). 25 CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Eastvale
l ·''"
j ~~~~~
~
:;-
Legend
Bicycle and
Pedestrian Collisions
Bicycle
Pedestrian
i
~
-~1,
N
A
\_
Figure 10- Pedestrian & Bicycle Collisions (2017-2022)
~ ... , I
Glf'l'),Won
=
I
_PedfeyJUrUpn va1r2y
jl St
-1\lllfl!VII
Mou r.J,r.
26 .... i:tN ~!l
''i,11'.,, 11 1
..
Moreno Vall ei
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Table 6-- Analysis Results: Intersections (Top 20 Per Type) 2 Iowa Ave & W Blaine St 34 7 11 22 2 6 3 2
3 Von Buren Blvd & Arlington Ave 3/ 6 103 0.29 1142 3 2 6 32 I 60 17 20 43 4 10 0 5 4 2 42 2 7 5 4 Van Buren Blvd & California Ave 5 84 0.33 592 0 2 6 24 52 24 19 27 2 6 0 2 4 2 32 8 0 2 5 Van Buren Blvd & Jurupa Ave 3 80 7.J8 779 3 0 11 20 I 46 18 8 37 5 8 0 3 46 5 2 3 6 La Sierra Ave & Magnolia Ave 6 79 0.23 437 0 8 23 47 20 17 31 5 3 0 2 2 32 3 4 0 Chicago Ave & University Ave 2 79 0.29 367 0 5 15 16 I 14 31 3 5 0 2 5 22 0 4 2 8 La Sierra Ave & Indiana Ave 6 78 0.22 187 0 0 5 12 13 19 34 3 6 0 0 4 2 25 0 3 0 3 9 Alessandro Blvd & Chicago Ave 2 74 -0.03 870 4 3 22 11 22 29 2 8 '
0 2 0 2 33 2 8 0 5
10 Van Buren Blvd & Indiana Ave 5 55 0.21 355 0 3 21 41 13 13 34 3 0 0 0 32 2 0 2 11 0/ivewood Ave & 14th St 54 2.72 515 0 2 8 9 17 J8 18 2 5 0 2 2 ' 2 21 ' 3 5 0 5 12 Madison St & Indiana Ave 4 52 0.83 172 0 0 3 16 15 14 24 2 3 0 0 20 2 3 13 Iowa Ave & University Ave 2 52 0.19 301 0 2 11 12 15 21 0 5 ll 3 12 2 3 0 I 0 14 Tyler St & Hole Ave 5 51 0.20 234 0 0 10 15 25 12 14 2 3 0 2 25 0 0 15 Wood Rd & Van Buren Blvd 4 59 0.02 594 2 8 13 5 J8 17 5 3 2 3 5 19 3 0 5 15 Van Buren Blvd & Philbin Ave 5 58 0.23 183 0 0 5 15 19 12 15 3 0 5 21 3 3 28 CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
3 Adams St & Diana Ave 5 26 0.97 240 0 8 6 6 6 3 5 0 0 0 7 0 0 2 4 Jackson St & Audrey Ave 6 23 1.52 212 0 3 7 9 5 i 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 McMahon St & Arlington Ave 3 23 0.20 113 0 0 4 10 9 ~o 4 2 2 2 0 2 0 0 0 6 Jones Ave & Magnolia Ave 6 21 0.23 383 5 13 2 5 8 0 3 0 2 2 3 2 0 7 Pegasus Dr & Arlington Ave 3 21 0.25 111 0 0 4 10 7 ai 3 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 8 Tyler St & Hemet St 6 20 0.09 214 0 4 14 4 6 7 0 0 0 2 3 i 0 0 0 9 Harold St & Arlington Ave 6 19 0.21 93 0 5 5 9 5 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 10 La Cadena Dr W & Primer St 18 0.19 58 0 0 2 12 4 6 2 0 4 0 0 3 0 0 ' 2 11 Polk St & Collett Ave 6 17 0.18 77 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 0
12 Washington St & Lincoln Ave 4 17 0.24 211 0 0 6 10 11 3 0 0 0 7 0 0 13 Tyler St & Gould St 7 17 0.38 37 0 0 2 14 6 3 4 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 3 14 Lake St & Arlington Ave 7 17 ' 0.16 72 0 ' 3 5 9 5 4 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 15 Locust St & Mission Inn Ave 17 0.23 231 0 2 6 8 6 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 16 Mitchell Ave & Wells Ave 6 16 0.54 51 0 0 5 10 6 2 4 2 0 0 0 9 I 0 29 CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
8.2 Emphasis Areas
Emphasis areas represent crash factors that are common in the City and provide the opportunity to reduce the largest number of traffic injuries with strategic investment. Emphasis areas were developed by revisiting the vision and goals of this planning process and comparing them with the trends and patterns identified in the crash analysis.
8.2.4 Emphasis Area #1: Vulnerable Road Users (Pedestrians & Bicyclists) Description: Pedestrians and bicyclists are classified by Caltrans as vulnerable users, meaning they possess the highest potential for severe harm during a crash. This emphasis area is inclusive of wheelchairs and those on scooters and skateboards. These groups need appropriate infrastructure to travel to key destinations such as schools, workplaces, and core commercial areas. Of the 863 crashes involving vulnerable road users, 25 resulted in a fatal injury and 87 resulted in a severe injury. The City should aim to implement countermeasures to further protect these users from injury.
Goals for Emphasis Area #1:
• Improve active transportation infrastructure by adding pedestrian facilities, bike lanes, and other amenities to make it safer for employees and community members to get to key destinations such as school, commercial centers, transit centers, and recreation areas • Encourage healthier lifestyles through active transportation infrastructure • Apply for HSIP, ATP, SS4A, and other funding to implement countermeasures to address vulnerable road user crashes
Strategies for Emphasis Area #1:
• Provide outreach, education, and enforcement to encourage more separation between vehicular and pedestrian traffic
• Install high-visibility crosswalk markings at the intersection of key destinations • Ensure all signalized intersections have completed crosswalks • Provide dedicated pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure to and from bus stops • Install adequate street lighting and increase lighting levels in conflict areas • Widen street shoulders
• Provide signage (e.g., pedestrian crossing ahead) to help drivers expect to slow down for pedestrians and bikes
• Install bicycle lanes along key corridors
• Install bicycle storage facilities in public areas, such as parks and schools, to encourage bicycle use
• Install bicycle markings (including green paint in conflict zones) • Install bicycle detection with discrimination capability on key corridors 41 CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
• Install curb extensions
• Install ADA ramps
• Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) • Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled locations • Install audible pedestrian push button systems at signalized intersections • Establish rotating enforcement targets for high visibility campaigns • Work closer with local advocacy groups and bicycle clubs (such as the Inland Empire Biking Alliance and Riverside Bicycle Club) to assist in prioritizing bicycle improvements • Work with rail operators to improve safety at rail crossings These strategies will be implemented by the City, law enforcement, and community organizations. Funding sources for these strategies may include OTS, NHTSA, and SB1 grant programs.
8.2.1 Emphasis Area #2: Impaired Driving
Description: Impaired driving crashes are a high priority challenge area within the Caltrans SHSP. Caltrans defines these as crashes where any evidence of drug or alcohol use by the driver is present, even if the driver was not over the legal limit. 7.4% were reported as the driver being under the influence of alcohol or drugs. 6.74% of all fatalities and 14.07% of all severe injuries were attributable to impaired driving.
Goal for Emphasis Area #2:
• Reduce the number of crashes attributed to impaired driving • Identify hot spots and priority corridors for countermeasures to reduce impaired driving • Apply for funding to implement countermeasures to reduce impaired driving crashes Strategies for Emphasis Area #2:
• Authorize, publicize, and conduct sobriety checkpoints programs • Implement an impaired driving education campaign
• Develop educational programs targeting specific audiences based on age group • Additional enforcement presence
• Create effective media campaigns in both visual and print media These strategies will be implemented by the City, law enforcement, and community organizations. Funding sources for these strategies may include OTS, NHTSA, and SB1 grant programs.
42 CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
8.2.2 Emphasis Area #3: Intersection Improvements
Description: Collisions involved at intersections, interchanges, and other roadway access.
About 82% of total of collisions took place at or near intersections. 12.1 % of the fatal and severe injury collisions in Riverside took place at or near intersections, compared to 23.8% statewide.
Goal for Emphasis Area #3:
• Reduce the number of crashes at intersections, interchanges, and other roadway access.
• Identify hot spots and prioritize locations for intersection improvements. • Apply for funding and implement countermeasures to address collisions at intersections for improvement.
Strategies for Emphasis Area #3:
• Engineering improvements are not limited but could include:
o backplates with reflective borders
o left-and right turn lanes at two-way controlled intersections o protected left-turn movements
o battery back-up systems
o intersection safety lighting
o high visibility crosswalks
• Collaborate with Caltrans to prioritize safety at interchanges and promote walking and bicycling
These strategies can be implemented by the City with assistance from emergency services and community organizations. Funding sources for these strategies may include HSIP, OTS, and SB1 grant programs.
8.2.3 Emphasis Area #4: Aggressive Driving
Description: Aggressive driving, as defined by the Caltrans SHSP, includes several behaviors including speeding, tailgating, and ignoring traffic signals and signs. Aggressive driving behaviors ( unsafe speed or following too closely) accounted for 30 percent of collisions. 16 percent of these collisions resulted in a fatality, 28 percent of these collisions resulted in a severe injury, and 9 percent of these collisions resulted in some other form of injury.
Goal for Emphasis Area #4:
• Reduce the number of crashes due to aggressive driving in the City • Identify hot spots and priority corridors for aggressive driving • Apply for funding and implement countermeasures to address aggressive driving Strategies for Emphasis Area #4:
• Educational campaign to target aggressive drivers
43 Case Study. Sheet: Location :ff 5 · ..
,:, • ~, - '...o; , .hf - "'~
Project Name: Riverside LRSP
Agency Name: City of Riverside
Contact Name: Brett Craig, PE, TE, Senior Traffic Engineer Email: [email protected]
Prepared by: Kimley-Horn
Checked by: Jason Melchor, PE
Date: October 2022 FOUR-WAY-STOP
INTERSECTION
~:1~","---~t <"f:.':'.''f-,--,•--•f!:..'!r:,,r•• '>-1•~. ·1 ,t, i~~~,·~, ~ - 1 '<" 1 , .• , '', ,· 1 ~'\, , - , •, • •,/· \ • ) ~::tf_ \: Project Location, Description & Maps · .. ,.-. ,·. -.~ ___ .. _, .. ,,, .. ~::,".~- .. -:~<-<• -~-:-,~"'•·''-- , .. ~J Intersection : Victoria Ave & Lincoln Ave
Example of Similar Intersections: Victoria Ave & Maude St, 14th St & Pine St J s\; f @)_
•• I
. ,o <.';J Ji
"""e-.., ✓-
t.A!:l [ IIJII.
SOUTH
.,:• .t, J. Rlv0,lde
I '•oo ·,
,.., W000Sl RE£15
~· """''•
.,...,..
M•n flOUJ,
CEMTt R
e
~~ i
!
.,~-.i. ..
• * I
_f
e 1·
f r
ai,..,1;<;.1
UNI Vl ll :llTV
l ;
~
1 Broadsides
1 Not Stated
1 Vehicle-Pedestrian
Kimley>>> Horn
Collision Data Collision Data
Number of Approaches 4
Total Collisions 3
Total Entering Vehicles 25,524
Fatal and Severe Injury 1 Crosswalk Condition Fair
Collisions
Control Type Stop sign
Lighting Sufficient Lighting
Top 2 Collision Types (%} Broadside (33%)
Vehicle-Pedestrian (33%) Highest Posted Speed 25
Limit
Dark Collisions 3
Impaired Collisions 0
Free right turn SB
Pedestrians cross diagonally
• Victoria Ave (Frontage Rd) is underutilized
Potential Crash Reduction
Factor Countermeasures (LRSM/CMF ID}
Install pedestrian
crossing at 25%
uncontrolled (NS20PB)
locations
Close free right turn 5% and reconfigure
Close access to
Victoria Ave
frontage road to 5% allow for simpler
intersection
reconfiguration
Collisions Involved With
Vehicular Pedestrian Bicycle
0 1 1
20 Year Safety Safety Related B/C Total 20-Year Costs Benefit Ratio $567,725 $34,800 16.31
$114,210 $30,000 3.81
$114,210 $25,000 4.57
Kimley>>>Horn
;
Case Study Sheet: Location #5
' ,
lill!",'!'...~~~·'fht"'11("t•"i•, ?'-1'.'1~1•'J't';l~i:,'",ll""'.,,..__1 .... ~\ "J);·~, .,,.•ti•/' • ~ ~, , ':rt't'1•~•r"''1-.:"' • ·,.,,,,, - • 1·.'"t',•7~ ,;,,. •' · 1>ti•-•;• .. -r~_.••:,-1 • ~-;- •,,."~•!.,•;,,, · '· 1 ~~-.;.~ '-' ,-&1"'flo,~"# · Countermeasure Evaluation (continued) ·· · , · ·· - ·-·· · · · · ·. '1 Potential Crash Reduction 20 Vear Safety Safety Related B/C Factor Total 20-Vear Costs Countermeasures (LRSM/CMF ID) Benefit Ratio I nsta II intersection 40% $913,680 $25,000 36.55 safety lights (NS0l) I nsta 11 stop signs to 15% $342,630 $8,400 40.79 free right turns (NS06) Install LED stop signs 15% $342,630 $12,000 28.55 (NS08) Install curb 35% $794,815 $80,000 9.93 extensions (NS21PB) Kimley>>) Horn
Riverside PACT: Active Transpo rtat ion Plan
Photo Caption: Inter section of Brockton Ave, Magnolia Ave and Central Ave.
TYPOLOGY A. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
Common Challenges
• High vehicle speeds
• High vehicle volumes
• Free right-turn lanes
• Left-turn pedestrian
conflicts
• Cars stop too close to the
crosswalk
• Failure to yield to
pedestrians
Tools
• C urb extensions
• No right on red
• Crosswalks and curb
ramps
• High visibility crosswalks
• Slip lane removal
• Leading pedestrian
intervals
• Conflict markings
• S ignage and lighting
• Traffic circles
• Pedestrian Scramble
• Roundabout
• Flashing yellow arrows
• Advance limit lines
• Diagonal crosswalks
4-56
._ .. j
.. __ . ~~,:~
Identified Spot
Improvements
• Blaine St and Iowa Ave
• Chicago Ave and
University Ave
• Jurupa Ave and
Magnolia Ave
• Iowa Ave and W Linden St
• C hicago Ave and Central
Ave
• Madison St and Arlington
Ave
• Central Ave and Magnolia
Ave
• Wood Rd and Van Buren
Blvd
• Indiana Ave and La Sierra
Ave
Van Buren Blvd and
Arlington Ave
• Magnolia Ave and Van
Buren Blvd
• Magnolia Ave and Tyler St
Photo Caption: Inter section of El Cerrito Blvd and Canyon Crest Dr.
TYPOLOGY B. MAJOR STREET/MINOR STREET
Common Challenges
• Failure to yield to
pedestrians
Unmarked crosswalks
• Lighting
• High vehicle speeds
• High vehicle volumes
• Long blocks without
controlled crossings
• Left-turn pedestrian
conflicts
• Cars stop too close to the
crosswalk
Tools
• Curb extensions
• Signage and lighting
• Crosswalks and curb
ramps
• Pedestrian crossing
beacons at uncontrolled
crossings
• Conflict markings and
advance stop/yield
pavement markings
• Traffic circles
• Flashing yellow arrows
• Advance limit lines
• Diagonal crosswalks
Identified Spot
Improvements
• Rustin Ave and Blaine St
• 14th St and Victoria Ave
• Magnolia Ave and
Elizabeth St
4.57 Sec tion 4 .6: Network Rec omm end atio ns
• Fairmount Blvd and
Market St
• 14th and Olivewood Ave
• University Ave at entrance
to University Village
• El Cerrito and Canyon
Crest DR
• Rustin Ave and W Linden
St
• La Sierra Ave and Collett
Ave
• La Sierra Ave and
Cochran
• Van Buren Blvd and
Jackson St
• Campbell Ave and La
Sierra Ave
• Grammercy Pl and La
Sierra Ave
• La Sierra Ave and Minnier
Ave
• Washington St and
Victoria Ave
Photo Caption : University Ave and /-215.
TYPOLOGY F. FREEWAY INTERCHANGES
Common Challenges Tools
• High vehicle speeds • Marked crosswalks
• High vehicle volumes • S igns
• Drivers not expecting • Pavement markings
pedestrians • Sidewalks
• Missing sidewalks • Lighting
• Unmarked crossings • Slip lane removal
• Lighting • On ramp lane removal
• Limited alternative routes
4-61
Section 4.6: Network Reco mm enda tion s
Identified Spot
Improvements
• University Ave and 1-215
interchange
• Van Buren Blvd and
Indiana Ave
• Central Ave and SR-91
interchange
• Tyler St and Indiana Ave -
North
• Tyler St and Indiana Ave -
South
• Third St. and 1-215
ServReq
2437
Entered by
Jsharon
Primary Street f lowa ·
!First Name 1c1ara
!Last Name Card
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
She want's this intersection investegated.
She say's that there are too many grid
locks.
!Processed By I !Patricia Roberts
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
3/15/2005
Secondary Street l Blaine
Add
ICity I
~
ress
le
1267 C. Linden Street
Riverside
~ IZip 192507-
!Home Phon I (951) 276-4917
!Work Phone I
!Mobile Phone
Ass igned: I Patri~ia
-
[Disposition I !Modified I
Findings I
No action is taken at this time . Contact was made with R/P discussing the high volume of traffic traveling thru this intersection and the current Caltrans construction & detours . R/P's main concern is motorist's stopping for the signal light and blocking the crosswalk , including right-turn violators. R/P was advised to contact RSPD for enforcement (which RIP has previously done). Additionally an email was sent to Marva in Traffic advising her of prroblem. TC Report ran/attached.
DATES
I I
4/7/20051
!Reviewed By I ~ID-ia_n_e_H_u_g-ge_tt ____ _
I I
4/11/2005 1
!Approved by TE l~P-a-tti_C_a_s_til-lo------~
4/12/2005
ACTION
Click the one that best
applies
0 !Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
0 Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
0 Signal
;:,raewarK
ServReq
19717
Primary Street j sp~u-ce
!Last Name Offeney
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
Entered by
~: - SERVICE REQUEST
Secondary Street ] Rustin
ress Add
ICity I
~ le
300 Hillandale
_J IZip I
Ass igned: I D~~na
Findings I
!Home Phon I
!Work Phone I
!Mobile Phone
..
I Disposition I
Request Date
5/14/2019
(951) 781-5480
JModified I
SR# 1-129709775 Request for pedestrian
crossing light, flashing signal on Spruce x
Rustin.
Reviewed - per CTE will consider for future grant application project. msg . advising RIP.
DATES
!Processed By I l~D-aw- na_ F_u_ll_er ____ _
I I
6/27/2019 1
!Reviewed By I
I I I
!Approved by TE ~I ________ _
I I I
ACTION
Click the one that best
applies
0 lstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
Left
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
0 Other
@ Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
19498
Primary Street fspr~c~
!First Name 1Marty (Martha)
!Last Name Offeney
!Title I
brgan izatio1
Request
SR# 1-127884506 People don't "stop"
(don't see the signs or marking in the
street) and they run & turn right thru the
crosswalk @ Spruce St@ Rustin Ave.
Caller request blinking lights inset in the
street crosswalk make it more visible and
safer for the pedestrians.
!Processed By I
!Reviewed By I
SERVICE REQUEST
Secondary Street JRListin
Add ress
~
~
y
te
300 Hillandale Ct
D l Zip l
Ass igned: I Beth
Findings j
!Home Phon I
jwork Phone I
!Mobile Phone
!Disposition I
Request Date
3/12/2019
(951) 781-5480
!Modified I
This is an enforcement issue. Will request enforcement for cars not stopping at the stop sign .
DATES
I I I
I I I
JApproved by TE ~1---------~
ACTION
Click the one that best
applies
0 lstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
;:,1uewcflK
ServReq
16613
Primary Street j Spruce
!First Name IJoyce
jLast Name Bergbom
JTitle I
jOrganizatior
Request
SR#1-109177130- Requesting pedestrian
traffic signals or in pavement lighting
system. Cp is vision impaired and feels the
crosswalk on Spruce is not safe.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
4/26/2017
Secondary Street }"Rustin
ress Add
!City I
!Home Phan I (951) 522-6355
!work Phone I
~ te
LJ jZip I !Mobile Phone
Ass igned : ! Dawna !Disposition I !Modified I
Findings j
Discussed concerns . TC report reviewed. Existing high visibility yellow school crosswalk in place W leg, FYG Assembly B & advance warning Assembly D signs and SLOW SCHOOL LEGENDS in place. Reviewed - W .O. #6161 issued to add WB advance yield line and Yield Here to Pedestrians sign. E-mail to Call Center for Code Enforcement request for property owner removal of remaining tails weeds just at SW corner of vacant lot located on NE corner of Spruce & Rustin due to impact to visibility of pedestrians entering CW from N/S by WB traffic. Requested PD enforcement to address speeding . Advised R/P.
DATES
JProcessed By [ LID_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r ___ _ _ _
I I
5/4/2017 1
JReviewed By I
I I I
JApproved by TE !Gilbert Hernandez 5/4/2017 1
ACTION
Click the one that best
applies
0 I Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
Marking
ServReq
20885
Primary Stree t) Linden
!First Name !Muhammad
!Last Name Shamshiddeen
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
SR# 1-138986920 Requesting flashing
lights on existing stop signs on Linden &
Rustin.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
3/12/2020
Secondary Street !Rustin
ress Add
ICity I
!Home Phone ! (951) 965-8701
~ork Phone I
~ le
~ jZip I !Mobile Phone
Ass igned : JD.;wna !Disposition I !Modified I
Findings I
Reviewed - intersection is MWS controlled and equipped with both standard right side stop signs and 2nd signs within the centerline EB & WB for added driver awareness . Solar powered flashing stop sign test projects are allowing for assessment of effectiveness and longevity to determine if expanded use and/or pursuit of grant funding for these devices is recommended . To add location to list of potential future grant projects for consideration . Left msg . for R/P 5/19/20 .
DATES
JProcessed By I ~ID_a_w_na_ F_ul-le_r ___ _ _
I I
5/19/2020 1
!Reviewed By I
I I I
§ pproved by TE I~---------~ I I
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 !Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
0 Signal
::iiaewaiK
ServReq
20093
Primary Street r Rustin
!First Name !Muhammad
!Last Name Shamsid-deen
!Title I
lorganizatior
Request
Entered by
I=·
Requesting LED flashing stop signs at
Rustin and Linden.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
8/19/2019
Secondary Street ~ inde~
Address
!City I
!state !
Assigned:
Findings
Zip
JDawna
!Home Phone! (951) 512-2164
!Work Phone I
!Mobile Phone
!Disposition I JModified
Installed solar powered flashing stop sign test projects at California x Bolton and Lincoln x Monroe - will allow for assessment of effectiveness and longevity to determine if expanded use and/or pursuit of grant funding for these devices is recommended. Left msg. for R/P 8/22/19 .
DATES
jProcessed By I LID_a_w_n_a_F_u_ne_r _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 8/22/2019 1 JReviewed By I
§ pproved by TE ~' - ---------
ACT ION
Click the one that best applie~
@ Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signa l
Q Sidewa lk
ServReq
17102
Primary Street ]Chicago
!First Name I
!Last Name Resident
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
Concerns from wheelchair user regarding
crossing busy intersection because
vehicles often make right turns right in front
of him and is requesting intersection isgns
be noted in busines intersections with an
associated fine for improper right turns in
front of people in wheelchairs referred from
ADA Coordinator , Monique Gordon,
General Services.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
8/8/2017
Secondary Street ~Univ~rsity
ress !Home Phone!
~ark Phone I
te _J !Zip I !Mobile Phone
Ass igned : INath~n !Disposition I /Modified I
Findings I
SE advised no sign specificlly enforcing motorist interactions with individuals in wheelchairs and motorists are required to yield to all peds in crosswalks during walk phase and flashing don't walk interval. R/P added that he has a 15' flag posted on his wheelchair to increase visibility and is still narrowly missed and has witnessed near accidents with other pedestrians . TC reports reviewed. Reviewed - requested PD enforcement. Advised Monique 8/23/17 .
DATES
!Processed By I LID_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r _____ _
I
I
8/23/2017 1
!Reviewed By I
I I I
§ pproved by TE LI --------- -~
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 jstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping
@ Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
Marking
ServReq
21586
Primary Street ]watkins
[First Name [Enno
!Last Name Kloefkorn
~
IOrganizatior
Request
Entered by
.I•.
SR#1-147936119 - Requesting reqular
STOP signs be replaced with LED STOP
signs at intersection . RP claims that stop
signs are being ignored . (311 Note:
Entered SR for extra enforcement)
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
1/20/2021
Secondary Street fi<~ox
Address 225 Knox Ct. [Home Phone! (951) 788-7669
[City I Riverside !Work Phone I
[state I CA Zip !Mobile Phone
Assigned : JDawna [Disposition I [Modified
Findings
Per Call Center note PD enforcement already requested . Existing Stop Ahead signage and legends in place approaching MWS @ Knox. To consider location for potential future grant project as appropriate for upgrad e of existing standard stop signs on Watkins Dr. to flashing LED edge lit stop signs. Left msg. for R/P.
DATES
!Processed By I l~D-aw- na_ F_ul-le_r _____ ~ I 1/26/2021 ! [Reviewed By I
[Approved by TE LI _ ____ _____ _,
ACTION
Click the one that best applie,
@ Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
7027
Primary Street f"rhird
!First Name !Raymond
[Last Name Urias
!Title I
[Organizatior
Request
SRO#1-7418561 -Stop sign requested@
crosswalk in front of the RTA office , 1825
3rd Street. On 5/28 as I crossed the st
using the x-walk a car just drove right
through not slowing down at all. Later as I
waited for a bus I noticed that all vehicles
travel very fast only to stop a few hundred
ft away. I believe stop signs would increase
the safety to all pedestrians.
SERVICE REQUEST
Secondary Street [fAnderson
ress Add
ICity I
~ le
4815 Kingsbury
Riverside
EJ [Zip I
Ass igned : !Dawna
Findings I
!Home Phone!
~ork Phone I
[Mobile Phone
IT
[Disposition I
Request Date
5/29/2009
(951) 354-7899
!Modified
I
Discussed concerns and advised of upcoming RTA project which will install in-pavement lighting system at crosswalk . E-mail to PD.
DATES
!Processed By I Ll°_a_w_n_a_F_ul-le_r _ ___ _
I I
5/29/2009 1
[Reviewed By [
I I I
§ pproved by TE LI------ - - - -
ACTION
Click the one that best applieo
@ [Stop Sign [
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
Marking
ServReq
12700
Prima ry Street p;7iington
jFirst Name !Robert
!Last Name W ise
!Title I
IOrga nizatior
Request
Entered by
I•.
SR0 #1-77658363 - while trying to cross
crosswa lk from EB Arlington to Chicago the
ped cross is green same as the thru
signals & 2 nd lane of cars turning onto
Alessa ndro can't see pedestrians or
cyclists. Insta ll flashing cross wa lk lights o r
some thing.
SERVICE REQUEST
Secondary Street jAlessandro
ress Add
lcity 1
~ le _J jZip I
Ass igned : ;IDawna
Findings I
!Home Pho nel
!Work Phone I
!Mobile Phone
!Disposi tion I
Request Date
10/30/2014
(951) 826-2429
'Modi fied I
Discussed concerns. Reviewed - W.O. #5023 issued . Advised R/P .
DAT ES
[Processe d By [ LID_a_w_na_ F_ul-le_r ____ _
I
I
11/6/20 141
!Reviewed By I
I I I
§ pproved by TE !Gilbert Hernandez 11/6/2014
ACT ION
Click the one that best ap plie~
0 !Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 We ight Restriction
0 Schoo l Sign
0 Curve Wa rning
0 Crossi ng Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sigh t Rest riction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Othe r
0 Signal
~ •u~ "u"'
ServReq
13281
Primary Street]Lincoln
[First Name jKaren
!Last Name ~right
[Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
SR# 1-82983993 - Caller requesting a
cross walk at this location , Lincoln &
Victoria . There is no cross walk here and
his area is heavily populated with
recereational walkers / bikers . Please
install a cross walk .
!Processed By I IMonica Amir-Blake
!Reviewed By I
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
3/19/2015
Secondary Street jVictoria
Address 4137 Central Ave [Home Phone[ (951) 204-3252
[City [ Riverside [work Phone [
[state I CA Zip 92506- [Mobile Phone
Assigned: !Monica [Disposition [ !Duplicate I
Findings
Duplicate. See SR# 13277
DATES
3/19/20151
§ pproved by TE ~1----------~
ACTION
Click the one that best applies
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
13277
Primary Street plctoria
!First Name [Karen
!Last Name ~right
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
SR# 1-82989200 - Victoria and Lincoln,
requesting a crosswalk in this location.
~lso on Anna Street as well. (also see SR#
13281)
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
3/19/2015
Secondary Street funcoln
Address 4167 Central Ave jHome Phone! (951) 204-3252
!City I Riverside jwork Phone I
lstate I CA Zip 92506- !Mobile Phone
Assigned : '.IDawna !Disposition I [Modified
Findings
Discussed concerns . Reviewed - existing "Turning Traffic Must Yield to Pedestrians" sign in place.(also see SR# 13281).
DATES
!Processed By I ~l°_a_w_n_a _F_ul-le_r _ _____ ~
I 3/20/2015
1 !Reviewed By I
f pproved by TE ~1----------~
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
15140
Entered by SERVICE REQUEST I•- ·-
Primary Street JVictoria
!First Name jcindy
/Last Name Thompson
!Title I
/Organizatior
Request
WB Victoria crossing Lincoln needs a
crosswalk there as cars fly around the blind
corner on Lincoln towards Victoria referred
from the Mayor's Office .
Secondary Street l u ~coln
ress Add
lcity 1
~ te
[email protected]
__J !Zip I
Ass igned: ~Dawna I Nathan
Findings I
Reviewed - W.0 . #5707 issued.
DATES
!Processed By I ~ID_a_w_n_a -F-ul-le_r ____ _
I I
6/13/2016 1
!Reviewed By I
I I I
!Approved by TE !Gilbert Hernandez
I I
6/13/20161
!Home Phonel
r.,'1/ork Phone I
/Mobile Phone
!Disposition I
Request Date
6/1/2016
(951) 295-4528
!Modified I
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 !Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
20780
Primary Street ]Abra~s
!First Name !Marilyn
!Last Name Fernhol z
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
Entered by
~-.
Report of concerns regarding pedestrian
crosswalks and U-turns at intersection
raised at 2119 Orange Terrace community
meeting and per follow-up e-mail from RIP
to CTE.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
211912020
Secondary Street ]orange Terrace
ress Add
ICity I
[email protected] !Home Phone!
!Work Phone I
~ le _J JZip I !Mobile Phone (909) 240-6801
Ass igned : Fhanl Dawna !Disposition I !Modified I
Findings I
CTE forwarded RIP a link to the Riverside PACT planning survey to provide input regarding biking and walking in her neighborhood . Called RIP 2121 and she advised it was not a convenient time - e-mailed contact information and will discuss upon reply. Intersection is MWS controlled . Spoke to RIP - she indicated that croswalk concern is related to insufficient lighting at the intersection making it difficult to see pedestrians crossing at the intersection when dark and not motorists failing to yield to pedestrians. RIP requested in pavement lighted crosswalk on Orange Terrace - advised that those devices are utilized at uncontrolled crossings only and this intersectio n is MWS contro lled with marked crosswalks on S & E legs requiring all motorists to stop and yield ROW to pedestrians and motorists as appropriate . E-mail to Call Cente r requesting PU to review lighting conditions . Per Celine Aaravilla of PU she will discuss upcomng LED project with RIP (see Call Center SR 1- 138472533). RIP also indicated that U-turn concern involves EB motorists on Orange Terrace failing to yield ROW to stopped motorists on Abrams frequently with peaks when activities are occurring at the park and community center. RIP requests future consideration of installing a break in the cente r median to provide LT access to dw's @ community center.
Reviewed - not recommended . TC history requested . 5-year TC report reviewed - none of the 3 collision s shown involved a U-turn movement.
Reviewed - PD enforcement recommended. E-mail to Call Center requesting PD enforcement. Advised RIP.
DATES
!Processed By I ~ID_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r ______ ~ 2124120201 !Reviewed By I
!Approved by TE ~1----------~
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 !Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Hump s
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
12/20/2011
9732
Primary Street JVan Buren
!First Name JEric
!Last Name Lewis/ CTE
!Title I Chairman
lorganizatior Bicycle Advisory Committe
Request
Install approx. 300' missing bike lane on
EB Van Buren E/O Wood .
Secondary Street fwood
Address [email protected]
ICity I
lstate l Zip
Assigned :
Findings
Reviewed -W.O. #4118 issued .
DATES
!Processed By I LID_a_w_na_F_ul-le_r ___ _ _ _ ~ 12/20/2011 1 !Reviewed By I
!Approved by TE ILS-te_v_e_L-ib-ri-ng ___ _ __ __, 12/20/2011 1 !Home Phone !
!Work Phone I (951) 413-3149
!Mobile Phone
!Disposition I !Granted
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
10024
Entered by
~- ..
Primary Street JJurupa
!First Name !Alex
!Last Name Cummings
!Title I
lorganizatior
Request
SRO#1-44494313 - Bike trail detour near
Santa Ana River . mile 11 , markings need
to be painted on street for detour on
Jurupa/ Van Buren Blvd. People are driving
too close to bicycles on Jurupa where no
bike lane exists.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
3/30/20 12
Secondary Street !van.Buren
!Address !Home Phone!
!City I !Work Phone I
lstate l LJ l~Zi_P"----I--~ !Mobile Phone (603) 973-2502 Assigned: !Disposition I !Denied
Findings
Reviewed - no action recommended - temporarily signed. Advised R/P.
DATES
!Processed By I Ll°_a_w_n_a _F_ul-le_r ___ ___ ~ 3/30/20121 !Reviewed By I
§ pproved by TE '--I _____ ____ _
_:J
I
► I
- --
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq SERVICE REQUEST
9740
Primary Stree tJArlington
!First Name !Eric
!Last Name Lewis/ CTE
!Title I Chairman
lorganizatior Bicycle Advisory Comm itte
Request
Install 7-8' bike lanes & legends on
Arlington from Van Buren to Adams where
lane width permits, large R81's W/O
Adams & Monroe & E/O Van Buren &
Monroe, and 4" white edgeline 8' off curb
for parking lane on S/S Arlington E/O
Monroe in front of apts where road widens
with adjacent Bike Lane.
Secondary Street ~Van Buren
ress Add
ICity I
~ te
[email protected]
LJ JZip I
Ass igned : ~Dawna
Findings I
W.O. #4122 issued .
DATES
!Processed By I Ll°_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r ____ _
I
I
12/23/2011 1
JReviewed By J
I
I I
JApproved by TE LIS-te_v_e_L-ib-ri-ng ____ __ __J
12/23/2011 1
!Home Phone l
~ark Phone I
!Mobile Phone
!Disposition I
Request Date
12/22/2011
(951) 413-3149
jGranted
I
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 lstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
n c,, ___ ,
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
20905
Primary Streetp;n Buren
!First Name !Michelle
!Last Name Hickey
!Title I
lorga nizatior
Request
Entered by
J .
SR# 1-139451946 - Req to install larger
pedestrian pushbuttons at the intersection
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
5/19/2020
Secondary Street Jcalifornia
Address 9664 Estrellita St !Home Phonel (951) 359-6921
lcity I Riverside [wo rk Phone I
!state I CA Zip !Mobile Phone
Assigned: !Nathan / Da~ na !Disposition I JModified
Findings
CTE requested signal shop to investigate. Per 5/21 e-mail from Todd intersection has all ADA ped push buttons .
DATES
JProcessed By J LID_a_w_na_ F_ul-le_r ____ _ _ 5/21/20201 !Reviewed By I
jApproved by TE L'----------~
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
O Signa l
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
7725
Primary StreetJVan -Bure~-
IFirst Name !David
ILast Name Villa
!Title I
Jorganizatior
Request
SERVICE REQUEST
Secondary Street fcalifornia
ress Add
ICity I
~ te
5830 Crest Ave .
Riverside
E_J IZip 192503-
Ass igned : ro;=wna
Findings I
!Home Phone !
r,,York Phone I
!Mobile Phone
!Disposition I
Request Date
2/4/2010
(951) 351-0276
!Granted
I
Poor conditio n of crosswalks on Van Buren
& California - repaint.
Discussed concerns. Per Streets crosswalk at Van Buren & California to be refreshed.
DATES
/Processed By I ~ID_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r ____ _
I
I
2/17/2010 1
!Reviewed By I
I I I
~pproved by TE ~I ______ __ _
I I I
ACTION
Click the one that best applie ~
0 Jstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
2314
Entered by
)M
Primary StreetJRutland
!First Name IMs. Mary
!Last Name Herrera
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
Per SRO# 301 O -Requests stop ahead
sign for stop sign on Sylvan and Rutland.
Near Terrace Elementary. People
frequently ignore a fairly new stop sign.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
2/2/2005
Secondary Street ]sylvan
ress Add
ICity I
8480 Sylvan Dr.
Riverside
!Home Phone ! (951) 689-0767
~ork Phone I
~ le
~ JZip j92503- !Mobi le Phone
Ass igned: jDawna !Disposition I !Modified I
Findings I
Field inspection conducted 2/3/05 observed existing W17 Stop Ahead signage in place on SLS's on Rutland north of Sylvan across from 6690 Rutland and at Rutland side of 8795 Greenpoint. Rutland was recently resurfaced and accompanying STOP AHEAD pavem ent markings are in the process of being replaced. Per Louie Perez of Streets restriping and painting of pavement marking s will begin 2/3/05. Advised R/P 2/3/05.
DATES
!Processed By I ~ID_a_w_na_ F_ul-le_r ____ _
I
I
2/3/2005 1
jReviewed By I ~ID-ia_n_e_H_u_g_ge_t_t ____ _
I
I
2/4/2005 1
I
~ pproved by TE ~IP_a_tti_C_a_s_til-lo- --- --~
I
2/7/2005 1
ACTION
Click the one that best applieE
0 lstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
23526
Primary Street ]Collett
[First Name !Robert
[Last Name Costa
[Title [
IOrganizatior
Request
SR#1-164815741- Resident crossing guard
requesting flashing solar lights be installed
on stop signs at 4-way intersection .
Between 8am-9am, 1 pm to 3pm are peak
times. Concerned about accidents, kids
walking to and from school daily.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
10/10/2022
Secondary Street ! Polk
Address 4034 Grimsby Ln. [Home Phone[
[City I ~ark Phone I
[state I Zip JMobile Phone (951) 518-7978
Assigned : [Disposition I !Modified
Findings
Left msg . for R/P. TC history requested . To review . 5-yr TC history shows 16 total collisions (9 broadsides, 4 rear ends, 1 pedestrian involved , 1 sideswipe , and 1 head-on). See also related SR#23366 from resident with same last name at same address/ phone#- left 2nd msg. for R/P.
Intersection is MWS controlled and is included on list of potential future traffic signal project locations for consideration as funding becomes available. 3rd msg. left for RIP. E-mail to Call Center requesting PD enforcement of stop and failure to yield to pedestrian violations. Reviewed - CTE supports addition of advance Stop Ahead warning signs and pavement legends all directions - prior W .O. # 8556 issued (see SR #23366) .
DATES
[Processed By [ LID_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r _ ____ _ __, 1/10/20231 [Reviewed By I
[Approved by TE LI ___ ______ _
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
@ School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
23366
Primary Street !Collett --
!First Name llinda
!Last Name Costa
!Title I
!Organizatior
Request
SR#1-16356259 1 - Reques ting blinking
lights at the stop sign on Collett Ave & Polk
St.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
8/24/202 2
Secondary Street p;-;1k
ress Add
ICity I
4034 GrimsbyLane !Home Phone!
Rivers ide ~ ork Phone I
~ le
~
IZip 192505- !Mobi le Phone (951) 529-5474
Ass igned : fo"awna !Disposit ion I JModified I
Findings I
Left msg. for RIP. 5-yr TC history requested . T C history shows 16 total collisions (9 broadsides , 4 rear ends , 1 pedestrian involv ed, 1 sideswipe, and 1 head-o n). Left 2nd msg . for R/P. Intersection is MWS contro lled and is included on list of potent ial futu re traffic signal project locations for consideration as funding becomes available. 3rd msg . left for R/P. E-mail to Call Center requesting PD enfo rcement of stop and failure to yield to pedest rian violatio ns (see also SR#23526) . Reviewed - CTE supports addit ion of advance Stop Ahead warni ng signs and pavem ent legends all directions - W.O . # 8556 issued .
DATES
jProcessed By J l~D-aw- na- Fu_l_le_r --- - -
I I
1/10/20231
!Reviewed By I I I I
!Approved by TE !Philip Nitollama
~--- --- ---~
1/10/20 231
ACT ION
Click the one that best appliea
0 !Stop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
0 Red Curb
0 Weight Restrict ion
0 Schoo l Sign
0 Curve Wa rning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Hump s
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping
@Ot her
0 Signa l
Q Sidewa lk
Marking
ServReq
2364
Primary Street]Magnolia
!First Name !David
!Last Name Villa
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
SERVICE REQUEST
Secondary Street ~Pierce
ress Add
!City I
~ le
5830 Crest Ave.
Riverside
EJ jZip 192503-
Ass igned: jDawna
Findings I
!Home Phonel
!work Phone I
!Mobile Phone
!Disposition I
Request Date
2/15/ 2005
(951) 351-0276
!Granted I
Repaint faded existing crosswalks . Field inspection conducted 2/23/05 . W/O #1005 was issued to repaint faded existing white crosswalks (3 ea) at the north, south and west legs @ Magnolia & Pierce and faded LL at east leg.
DATES
/Processed By I ~ID_a_w_n_a_F_ul-le_r ____ _
I I
2/23/2005 1
!Reviewed By I I° ~-ia_n_e_H_u_g-ge_t_t - ----
I I
2/24/2005 1
§ pproved by TE ~IP_a_tti_C_a_s_ti_llo _____ _
I I
2/28/2005 1
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 lstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
23365
Primary Street JGolden
!First Name !Linda
JLast Name Costa
!Title I
IOrganizatior
Request
SR#1-163562540- Requesting blinking
lights at the stop sign on Cochran &
Golden. RP is a cross guard for nearby
elementary school and continues to see
vehicles go by stop sign without stopping .
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
8/24/2022
Secondary Street ]cochran
Address 4034 Grimsby Lane !Home Phonel
!City I Riverside ~ork Phone I
lstate I CA Zip 92505- !Mobile Phone (951) 529-5474
Assigned: !Dawna - - !Disposition I !Modified
Findings
Left msg. for R/P. Left 2nd msg . for R/P. 3rd attempt to contact R/P and R/P hung up on call. 4th attempt to contact R/P 12/20 msg . indicates voicemail is full thus unable to determine if concern is stop vioaltions on Golden or on Cochran and if motorists are failing to yield to pedestrians and/or crossing guard when in crosswalk. E-mail to Call Center requesting PD enforcement for reported stop vioaltions during Mc Auliffe Elementary start and dismissal. Intersection added to list for consideration of potential future grant project for possible upgrade to flashing LED stop signs on Golden at Cochran. TC history requested. TC report shows 4 totals collisions all in 2022 with 2 hit objects and 2 rear ends and no broadsides.
Reviewed - W.O . #8530 issued.
DATES
!Processed By I ~'D_a_w_n_a_F_u_lle_r ______ ~ 12/22/20221 !Reviewed By I
!Approved by TE '~B-re_tt_c_r_a_ig------~ 1/3/20231
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 Stop Sign
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
0 Striping Marking
@ Other
0 Signal
Q Sidewalk
ServReq
22492
Primary Street Jsierra Vista
!First Name !Robert
ILast Name Vierra
jTitle I
[organizatior
Request
SR#1-154783916 - Request cross walk
installed at Sierra Vista from the 11600
block of Gedney. Children cross the street
to and from school.
SERVICE REQUEST Request Date
9/23/2021
Secondary Street ilGedney
ress Add
Jcity 1
11595 Flower St.
Riverside
!Home Phonel (951) 505-9041
~ork Phone I
~ le E_J IZip I [Mobile Phone
Ass igned : jDawna jDisposition I !Modified I
Findings I
Collision history requested . A.M . student pedestrian crossing count to be conducted per CTE due to proximity to rear access gate/path for Valley View Elementary. Count conducted 1/25/21. 5-yr TC history showed no collisions. Reviewed - installation of yellow continental school crosswalk on angle @ N leg to align with existing ADA ramps recommended per CTE (see SR#22548 & W.O . #8179) issued and intersect ion added to list of potential future grant project locations for possible upgrade to ped push button RRFB crossing. Advised RIP.
DATES
!Processed By I ~ID_a_w_n_a -F-ul-le_r ____ _
I I
2/4/2022 1
jReviewed By I I I I
jApproved by TE ~1------ ---~
ACTION
Click the one that best applie~
0 lstop Sign I
0 Speed Limit Sign
Q Red Curb
0 Weight Restriction
0 School Sign
0 Curve Warning
0 Crossing Guard Study
0 Speed Humps
0 Sight Restriction
0 Parking
@ Striping Marking
0 Other
Lr) c-, ___ ,
Q Sidewalk
Safety Benefits:
High-visibility crosswalks
can reduce pedestrian injury
crashes up to:
40°10
1 Intersection lighting can
reduce pedestrian crashes
upto:
42°10
2 Advance yield or stop
markings and signs can
reduce pedestr ian
crashes up to:
25o/o
3 For more information on this
and other FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasu res, please visit
https: // safety.fhwa.dot.gov /
provencountermeasures/ and
https: //safety.fhwa.dot.gov /
ped bike/step/docs/tech
Sheet VizEnhancemt2018.pdf.
FHWA-SA-2 7-049
Crosswalk Visibility
Enhancements
Poor lighting cond itions, obstructions such as parked cars, and horizontal or vertical roadwa y curvature can reduce visibility at crosswalks, contributing to safety issues. For multilane road way crossings where vehicle volumes are in excess of l 0,000 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT), a marked crosswalk alone is typi cally not sufficient. Under such cond itions, more substantial crossing improveme nts could prevent an increase in pedes trian crash potential.
Three main crosswalk visibility enhancemen ts help make crosswalks and the pedestrians , bicycl ists, whee lcha ir and other mobility device users, and transit users using them more visible to drive rs. These include high-visibility crosswalks, lighting , and signing and pavement markings. These enhancemen ts can also assist users in dec iding whe re to cross. Agencies can implement these features as standalone or combination enhancements to indicate the preferred locat ion for users to c ross.
High-visibility crosswalks
High-visibility crosswalks use patterns
(i.e., bar pairs, continental, ladder)
that are visible to both the driver
and ped estrian from farther
away compared to traditional
transverse line crosswalks. They
should be considered at all
midblock pedestrian crossings and
uncontrolled intersections. Agencies
should use materials such as inlay or
thermoplasti c tape , instead of paint
or brick, for highly reflective crosswalk
markings.
Improved Lighting
The goal of crosswalk lighting
should be to illuminate with positive
contrast to make it easier for a driver
to visually identify the pedestrian.
This involves carefully placing the
luminaires in forward loca tions to
avoid a silhouette effect of the
pedestrian.
Enhanced Signing and
Pavement Markings
On multilane roadways, agencies
can use "YIELD Here to Pedestrians"
or "STOP Here for Pedestrians"
signs 20 to 50 feet in advance of
a marked crosswalk to indicate
where a driver should stop or yield to
pedestrians, depending on State law.
To supplement the signing, agencies
ca n also install a STOP or YIELD bar
(commonly referred to as "shark 's
teeth ") paveme nt markings.
In-street signing, such as "STOP Here
for Pedestrians" or "YIELD Here to
Pedestrians" may be appropriate on
roads with two- or three-lane roads
where speed limits are 30 miles per
hour or less.
Source: FHWA
1 Chen. L .. C. Chen. and R. Ewing . The Relative Effectiveness of Pedest rian Safely Countermeasures at Urban Intersec tions - Lessons from a New York City Experience. (2012).
2 Elvik. R. and Voo, T. Handbook of Rood Solely Measu res. Oxford, United Kingdom, Elsevier, (2004).
3 Zeeger et al. Development of Crash Modi fication Facto rs for Uncon trolled Pedestrian Crossing Treatments, FHWA, (2017).
ZER~~¼E
AWESYSTEMISHOWWEGETll-lERt:
High Visibility Crosswalk Improvement Example Photo
er'
Existing Photo along Canyon Crest & UCR commercial village
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Citywide Countermeasure Toolbox
Crash Per Unit ID Potential Countermeasures Where to apply? Reduction Cost Unit Factor
S02 Improve signal hardware; lenses, back-plates Signalized intersections with significa nt broadside 15% $26,400 per intersection with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and and rear-end collisions due to signal visibility number
S04 Provide Advanced Dilemma Zone Detection Signalized intersections with significant right-angle 40% $76,800 per intersection system and rear-end collisions due to unsafe stopping
during yellow phases
S10 Install flashing beacons as advance warn ing for Locations with sight distance issues 30% $10,200 per beacon signalized intersections
S17PB 1 Install audible pedestrian push button systems Signal ized intersections with crosswalks 25% $11,000 Per intersection S18PB Install high visibility crosswa lk for signalized Signalized intersections with no marked crossing 25% $74,400 per intersection intersections and pedestrian heads, with significant turning movements
S21PB Modify signal phasing to implement a Leading Signa lized Intersections - especia lly those with 60% $45,600 per intersectio n Pedestrian Interval (LPI} high pedestrian activity
NS03 Install signals Unsignalized intersectio ns with significant collision 30% $378,000 per intersection activity where warra nts are met
NS05mr Convert intersection to mini-roundabout Intersections with lower vehicle speeds , with 30% $100,000 per location posted speed limits of 30 mph or less
NS06 Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or Unsignalized intersections with crash history 15% $8,400 per sign other intersection warning/regulatory signs showing running stop signs NS08 Install Flashing Beacons at Stop-Contro lled Unsignalized intersections with crash history 15% Intersections showing running stop signs $12,000 per beacon 1 This countermeasure typically covers pedestrian countdown signal heads, but can be also used for audible pedestrian push buttons ES-9
S16, Convert int ersection to ro und about (from signal) For HSIP Cycle 11 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility I Crash Types Addressed I CRF I Expected Life 90% I All I Varies I 20 years
Notes: This CM only applies to crashes occurring in influence area of the new roundabout. This CM is not intended for mini-roundabouts.
The benefit of this CM is calculated using Caltrans procedure. The CRF is dependent on the ADT, project location (Rural/Urban) and the roundabout type (1 lane or 2 lanes). The benefit comes from both the reduction in the number and the severity of the crashes.
General information
Where to use: ............................. .................................................... ....................................... .................................. ......... . ....................... ............................................... . ...... ...............................................................
Signalized intersections that have a significant crash problem and the only alternativ e is to change the nature of the inter section itself. Roundabout s can also be very effective at intersections with complex geometry and intersections with frequent left-turn movements .
... Why .it. works: ...... .......................... ,, .............................................................. ............. .................. ·····················································•·········•·························•········•·•·•········· . ..............................
The types of conflicts that occur at roundabouts are different from those occurring at conventional intersections; namely, conflicts from crossing and left -turn movements are not present in a roundabout. The geometry of a roundabout force s driver s to reduce speeds as they proceed through the inter section. This helps keep the range of vehicle speed narrow , which helps reduce the severity of crashes when they do occur. Pedestrians only have to cross one direction of traffic at a time at roundabout s, thus reducing their potential for conflicts . ... General .Qualities. (Time, .. Cost .and .. Effectiveness): ............................ ............................................................................................................................. .................... . ..............
Provision of a roundabout requires substantial project development . The need to acquire right-of -way is likely and will vary from site to site and depends upon the geom etric design. These activitie s may require up to 4 years or longer to implement . Costs are variable, but construction of a roundabout to replace an existing signalized intersection are relatively high. The result is this CM may have reduced relative-effectiveness compared to other CMs.
FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: I Crash Types Addressed: I All I CRF: I 35 - 67% S1 ?PB, Install pedestria n countdown signal heads
For HSIP Cycle 11 Call-for-projects
Funding Eligibility Crash Types Addressed I CRF I Expected Life 90% Pedestrian and Bicycle I 25 % I 20 year s
Notes : I This CM only applies to "Ped & Bike" crashes occurring in the intersection/crossing with the new countdown heads.
General information
Where to use: .................................... ............................................................................. ................................................................................... ........................................................................................ .......... ......
Signals that have signalized pedestrian crossing with walk/don 't walk indicators and where there have been pedestrian vs. vehicle crashes .
... Why .it. works: ..................... .................................. ................................................................. .......................................................................................................................................................... .
A pedestrian countdown signal contains a timer display and count s down the number of seconds left to fini sh crossing the street. Countdown signals can reassure pedestrian s who are in the crosswalk when the flashing "DON'T WALK" interval appears that they still have time to finish crossing. Countdown signals begin counting down either wh en the "WALK" or when the flashing "DON'T WALK" interval appears and stop at the beginning of the steady "DON'T WALK" interv al. These signals also have been shown to encourage more pedestri ans to use the pushbutton rather than jayw alk . . §.E!.':lf:r..a..1 .. 9':l.a..1.i~.i E!.5,J!_i.'!'.f:i .. <:.c:>~t .. ~.r:1~ .. ~.f.f.E!.~~i.\l.E!·~·E!5,.S.!_:.......... .... ............ .... .............. . ......... ............ . . .................. .. .... . ..... ....................... ........ ........ ...... . . ........ ..
Costs and time of installation will vary based on the number of inters ection s included in this strategy and if it requires new signal controller s capable of accommodating the enhancement. When considered at a single location, these low cost impro vement s are usually funded through local funding by local crews. However, This CM can be effectively and effici ent ly implemented using a systematic approach with num erous location s, resultin g in mode rate cost project s that are more appropriat e to seek state or federal funding.
FHWA CMF Clearinghouse: I Crash Types Addressed: I Pedestrian, Bicycle I CRF: I 25% 4/8/2022 Local Roadway Safety P a ge I 55
STATE OF CALIFORNIA• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS POLICY DIRECTIVE
TR-001 (REV 6/2021)
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS POLICY DIRECTIVE
JASVINDERJIT S. BHULLAR, DIVISION CHIEF (Signature)
SUBJECT:
Touch-free Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS)
DOES THIS DIRECTIVE AFFECT OR SUPERSEDE
ANOT HER DOCUMENT? ~YES □ NO
WILL THIS DIRECTIVE BE INCORPORATED IN A DEPARTMENT
MANUAL GUIDELINE OR STANDARD PLAN? ~YES □ NO
DIRECTIVE
NUMBER: PAGE:
21 - 06 1 of 3
DATE ISSUED: EFFECTIVE DA TE:
June 24, 2021 June 24, 2021
DISTRIBUTION
~ All District Directors
~ All Deputy District Directors - Traffic Operations
D Chief Counsel, Legal Division
Headquarters Division/Program Chiefs for:
~ Maintenance
~ Construction
~ Design
D Planning
D Safety Program s
~ Additional:
Amer ican s with Disab ilities Act Infrastructure Proaram
IF YES, DESCRIBE
Supersedes TOPD 12-01 and Memo "Installation of
Accessible Pedestrian Signals", dated
September 18, 2014
IF YES, DESCRIBE
Ca/trans Standards, Electrical Systems Design Manual
Touch-free Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) shall be installed and activated at signalized pedestrian crossings on the State Highway System (SHS) as a public health safety enhancement and to minimize the spread of contact-related pathogens.
STATE OF CA LIFORNIA• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS POLICY DIRECTIVE
TR-001 (REV 6/202 1) Pag e 2 o f 3
IMPLEMENTATION
Touch-free APS shall be installed at new signalized pedestrian crossings on the SHS for Capital projects, Encroachment Permit projects, and HM-funded projects.
When a touch-free APS is installed at an existing signalized pedestrian crossing, or in response to an ADA access request, on the SHS, all APS at that location shall be upgraded to Touch-free APS.
When performing maintenance and repair activities , Maintenance should consider using Touch-free APS.
Installation of touch-free APS should not require upgrading of other ADA components (e.g . curb ramps or sidewalks) unless those components are disturbed .
Unsignalized pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections (e.g. intersections with free-right turns) may remain unsignalized.
This guidance applies to Traffic Signals, In-Roadway Warning Lights, Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacons and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons.
Touch-free APS shall be installed at signalized pedestrian crossings on the SHS within project limits according to the following schedule:
• Capital Outlay Support (COS) projects that have a Ready to List (RTL) date on or after October 18, 2021
• Encroachment Permit projects that have been approved on or after October 18, 2021 • HM-Funded projects that have an RTL date on or after October 18, 2021 COS projects that are in Construction or have an RTL date before October 18, 2021 may adhere to this policy.
For adoption prior to October 18, 2021, the Office of System Management's Electrical non standard special provisions (NSSPs) for Touch-free APS shall be used.
DELEGATION
No new delegations of authority are created under this policy.
BACKGROUND
In response to a growing need to advance the implementation of public health safety enhancements, the California Department of Transportation has developed specifications for a Touch-free APS to minimize the spread of contact -related pathogens. The Touch-free APS allows the pedestrian the option to place a "call " to cross the street by either using the pedestrian push button or by waving their hand in front of the Touch -free APS.
Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (with SUP): CHAPTER R2: SCOPING REQUIREMENTS R208.2 Where Not Required. Detectable warning surfaces are not required at pedestrian refuge islands that are cut-through at street level and are less than 1.8 meters (6.0 ft) in length in the direction of pedestrian travel.
Advisory R208.2 Where Not Required. Detectable warning surfaces are not required at cut-through pedestrian refuge islands that are less than 1.8 meters (6.0 ft) in length because detectable warning surfaces must extend 610 millimeters (2.0 ft) minimum on each side of the island and be separated by 610 millimeters (2.0 ft) minimum length of island without detectable warning surfaces (see R305.1.4 and R305.2.4 ). Installing detectable warning surfaces at cut-through pedestrian islands that are less than 1.8 meters (6.0 ft) in length would compromise the effectiveness of detectable warning surfaces. Where a cut-through pedestrian refuge island is less than 1.8 m (6.0 ft) in length and the pedestrian street crossing is signalized , the signal should be timed for a complete crossing of the street.
R209 Accessible Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Pushbuttons R209.1 General. Where pedestrian signals are provided at pedestrian street crossings, they shall include accessible pedestrian signals and pedestrian pushbuttons complying with sections 4E.08 through 4E.13 of the MUTCD (incorporated by reference, see R104.2). Operable parts shall comply with R403.
Advisory R209 Accessible Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Pushbuttons. An accessible pedestrian signal and pedestrian pushbutton is an integrated device that communicates information about the WALK and DON'T WALK intervals at signalized intersections in non-visual formats (i.e., audible tones and vibrotactile surfaces) to pedestrians who are blind or have low vision.
R209.2 Alterations. Existing pedestrian signals shall comply with R209.1 when the signal controller and software are altered, or the signal head is replaced. 12 R21 O Protruding Objects.
R210.1 General. Protruding objects shall comply with the applicable requirements in R210.
----- ..... o.Ji------ll(o,.---------1.0,.---------------0)11----- Sidewalk Buffer
A buffer is a space provided between the pedestrian walkway and the vehicular travel lanes. This buffer enhances both pedestrian comfort and safety. Depending on the type of buffer, it can separate pedestrians from passing vehicles that can present issues such as large mirrors that overhang onto the curb, wind, and splashing water during rain events. The buffer can be landscaped with materials such as grass, flowers, shrubs, or trees, which also provide shade and visually narrow the roadway for drivers, potentially encouraging slower speeds (Ewing, n.d.; Landis et al., 2001). Similar to trees, on-street parking can also serve as a buffer between moving vehicles and pedestrians and can also encourage slower vehicular traffic.
Addit ional Sidewalk Considerations
There are several other additional considerations when designing sidewalks, including the following :
• Driveway crossing design is important for providing safe, accessible sidewalks. The full sidewalk width should be carried across driveways with minimal change in grade or cross slope. Reducing corner radii encourages drivers to turn more slowly, allowing them to see and stop for crossing pedestrians.
• Ample, consistent, and uninterrupted lighting creates a safe and secure environment for all pedestrians, including customers accessing transit (FHWA, 2021). The FHWA Lighting Handbook includes more information about lighting considerations for crosswalks and railroad grade crossings, among other locations (Lutkevich, McLean, and Cheung, 2012). The supplementary Informational Report on Lighting Design for Midblock Crossing illustrates lighting layouts at intersection and midblock locations (Gibbons et al., 2008). • Directional signage installed around heavily-used transit stops helps direct passengers to local points of interest. Signage scaled for pedestrians may be more easily seen by people walking .
Graphic elements can help pedestrians to better understand the intent , even those who cannot read English.
• Visual obstructions , such as parked cars, large shrubs, or utility boxes can impair the ability of drivers to see pedestrians at crosswalks. Avoiding installing these obstructions, or relocating them, will improve driver-pedestrian sight distance.
• Curb ramps and detectable warning surfaces are needed to provide an accessible connection between sidewalks and streets.
• Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) provide information on pedestrian signal phases to blind or low-vision pedestrians in audible and vibrotactile formats. These devices indicate when to cross at signalized intersections .
Bicyclist Facility Design
Planning and designing a comprehensi ve multim odal network to provide access to transit includes considering the variety of types of bicyclists, such as those shown in figure 6, and their needs. Bicyclist facilities that are designed to reduce level of traffic stress and serve the broadest population of rider through vehicle speed regulat ion and separation from traffic- have been shown to increase cycling Design and Operational Measures 54
Safety Benefits:
Bicycle Lane Additions can
reduce crashes up to:
49o/o
for total crashes
on urban 4-lane undivided
collectors and local roads.6
30°/o
for total crashes on urban
2-lane undivided
collectors and local roads.6
__ Separated bicycle laneJn Washington , DC.
Source: Alex Baca , Washington Area
Bicyclist Association
Separated bicycle lanes may
provide further safety benefits.
FHWA is anticipating completion
of research in Fall 2022.
For more information on this
and other FHWA Proven Safety
Countermeasures, please visit
https: 1/safety.fhwa.dot.gov /
provencountermeasures/ and
https:1/safety.fhwa.dot.gov/
ped bike/tools solve/docs/
fhwasa 18077 .pdf.
FHWA-SA-21-051
Bicycle Lanes
Most fatal and serious injury bicyc list crashes occur at non-intersection locations.
Nearly one-third of these crashes involve overtak ing motorists 1: the speed and size differential between vehicles and bicycles con lead to severe injury. To make bicycling safer and more comfo rtable for most typ es of bicyclists, State and local agencies should consider installing bicycle lanes. These dedicated faciliti es for the use of bicyc lists along the road way can toke several forms. Providing bicycle facilities can mitigate or prevent interactions, conflicts, and crashes between bicyclists and motor veh icles, and crea te a network of safer roadways for bicycling. Bicycle Lones align with the Safe System Approach principle of recognizing human vulnerability-where separating users in space con enhance safety for all road users.
Applications
FHWA's Bikewav Selection Guide and
Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks
into Resurfacing Proiects assist agencies
in determining which facilities provide
the most benefit in various contexts.
Bicycle lanes can be included on
new roadways or created on existing
roods by reallocating space in the
right-of-way .
In addition to the point stripe used
for a typical bicycle lone, a lateral
offset with pointed buffer con help to
further separate bicyclists from vehicle
traffic. State and local agencies may
also consider physical separation
of the bicycle lane from motorized
traffic lanes through the use of
vertical elements like posts, curbs, or
vegetotion. 2 Based on international
expe rience and implementation in
the United States, there is potential
for further safety benefits associated
with separated bicycle lanes. FHWA
is conducting research on separated
bicycle lanes, which includes the
development of crash modification
factors, to be completed in 2022 to
address significant interest on this topic.
I Thomas et ol. Bicyclist Crash Types on Notional.
State, and Loca l Levels: A New Look. Transportation
Research Reco rd 673(6). 664-676. (2019).
2 Separated Bike Lone Planning and Design Guide.
FHWA-HEP-15-025, (2015).
3 Park and Abdel-Aty. "Evaluation of safety effective
ness of multiple cross sec tiona l features on urban
arte rials". Accident Ana lysis and Preve ntion, Vol. 92, pp, 245-255, (2016).
4 FHWA Tech Advisory Shoulder and Edge Line Rumble
Strips, (2011 ).
5 Sandt et al. Pursuinq Equilv in Pedes lrion and Bicycle Plonning . FHWA. (2016).
6 Avelar et al. Development of Crash Modification
Factors for Bicycle Lane Additions While Reducing
Lane and Shoulder Widths. FHWA. (2021 ).
Considerations
• City and State policies may require
minimum bicycle lone widths, although
these con differ by agency and
functional classification of the rood.
• Bicycle lone design should
vary according to roadway
characteristics (e.g., motor vehicle
volumes and speed) in order to
maximize the facility's suitability for
riders of all ages and abilities and
should consider the travel needs of
low-income populations likely to use
bicycles. The Bikewav Selection Guide
is a useful resource.
• While some in the public may
oppose travel lone narrowing if they
believe it will slow traffic or increase
congestion, studies have found that
roadways did not experience on
increase in injuries or conges tion
when travel lone widths were
decreased to odd a bicycle lane.3
• Studies and experience in US cities
show that bicycle lanes increase
ridership and may help jurisdictions
better manage roadway capacity
without increased risk.
• In rural areas, rumble strips con
negatively Impact bicyclists' ability to
ride if not properly installed. Agencies
should consider the dimensions,
placement, and offset of rumble strips
when adding a bicycle lone.4
• Strategies, practices, and processes
can be used by agencies to
enhance their ability to address
equity in bicycle planning and
design. 5
ZER~~¼E
AWESYSTEMISHOWWEGE"TTH£111:
CITY OF RIVERSIDE
LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
Crash Per Unit ID Potential Countermeasures Where to apply? Reduction Cost Unit Factor
NS14 Install raised median on approaches for Unsignalized intersections where related or 25% $1,068 per LF unsignalized intersections nearby turning movements affect the safety and operation of an intersection
NS20PB Install pedestrian crossing at uncontrolled Unsignalized intersections with high pedestrian 25% $34,800 per intersection locations (new signs and markings only) activity where sufficient sight distance is available NS22PB Install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Unsignalized intersections and mid-block 35% $30,000 Per location (RRFB) pedestrian crossings
R08 Install raised median Locations with a high number of head-on 25% $1,068 per LF collisions
R14 Road Diet (Reduce travel lanes and add a two- Roadway segments with high number of 30% $79,200 per mile way left-turn and bike lanes) sideswipe collisions
R23 Install chevron signs on horizontal curves Roadway segments that have a significant 40% $2,400 per sign amount of collision activity at sharp curves .
R24 Install curve advance warning signs Roadway segments that have a significant 25% $2,400 per sign amount of collision activity at sharp curves .
R25 Install curve advance warning signs (flashing Roadway segments that have a significant 30% $12,000 per beacon beacon) amount of collision activity at sharp curves.
R26 Install dynamic/variable speed warning signs Roadway segments with a significant number of 30% $22,800 per sign collisions due to unsafe speeds.
R28 Install edge-lines and centerlines Roadway segments with collisions that resulted in 25% $100,800 per mile run-off-road right/left, head-on, or opposite-
direction-sideswipe .
R32PB Install bike lanes Locations with a high number of bicycle collisions 35% $76,800 per mile ES-10
II -NA C Ti I httpsH aacto.ocg/1
National Association of City Transportation Officials (https://nacto.org/) About News Programs & Initiatives Guides & Publications Conferences & Events 0 0
Quick Search
Links
Urban Bikeway Design Guide GUIDE NAVIGATION .-
( https :/ / nacto.o rg/ pub Ii cati on/u rba n-b i keway-d es ig n-g u id e/) PURCHASE GUIDE (HTTP,//ISLANDPRESS.ORG/BOOK/URBAN-BIKEWAY-OESIGN-GUIDE-SECONO-EDITION) Colored Bike Facilities
Bike Box - Portland, OR
( htt ps:/ / na cto.o rg/wp-co nte nt/ uploads/ ga 11 ery /2012_col o red bi kefac ii it ies/b i ke-box-11 oyd-blvd-po rt la n d_o r.j pg) Description
Colored pavement within a bicycle lane increases the visibility of the facility, identifies potential areas of conflict, and reinforces priority to bicyclists in conflict areas and in areas with pressure for illegal parking. Colored pavement can be utilized either as a corridor treatment along the length of a bike lane (https://nacto .org/cities-for-cycling/design guide/bike-lanes/) or cycle track (https ://nacto .org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/cycle-tracks/). or as a spot treatment , such as a bike box (https ://nacto .org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/intersection-treatments/bike-box/), conflict area, or intersection crossing marking (https ://nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/intersection treatments/intersection-crossing-markings/). Color can be applied along the entire length of bike lane or cycle track to increase the overall visibility of the facility. Consistent application of color across a bikeway corridor is important to promote clear understanding for all users.
Click on the images below to view 30 concepts of colored bicycle lanes. The configurations shown are based on San Francisco, CA, Portland, OR, and New York City examples.
Treatment details can be accessed below under design guidance.
Colored Bike Facility Benefits
• Promotes the multi-modal nature of a corridor.
• Increases the visibility of bicyclists.
• Discourages illegal parking in the bike lane. Read More+ • When used in conflict areas , raises motorist and bicyclist awareness to potential areas of conflict. Read Mor e+ • Increases bicyclist comfort though clearly delineated space. Read More+ • Increases motorist yielding behavior. Read More+
• Helps reduce bicycle conflicts with turning motorists. Read More+ Typical Applications
• Within bike lanes or cycle tracks .
• Across turning conflict areas such as vehicle right turn lanes. • Across intersections (https://nacto.o rg/treatme nts/intersection-treatments/i ntersection-crossi ng-marki ngs/), particularly through wide or complex intersections where the bicycle path may be unclear . Read More+ • Across driveways and Stop or Yield-controlled cross-streets . • Where typical vehicle movements frequently encroach into bicycle space, such as across ramp-style exits and entries where the prevailing speed of turning traffic at the conflict point is low enough that motorist yielding behavior can be expected .
• Color may be applied along an entire corridor, with gaps in coloring to denote crossing areas. Read More+ • Facility designers should match coloring strategy to desired design outcomes of projects . • May not be applicable for crossings in which bicycles are expected to yield right of way, such as when the street with the bicycle route has Stop or Yield control at an intersection .
Design Guidance
·•· -t.;.....,,.. l:IIO '"'""',..,,.----..i:" a. ■J • IJL_ 0 - "?~
'"""'"'~••1,,,..AA,,,: -:,;,A'•••;;,£~ • ..,~lli,i.lll
""t.-.1:IIO ~~ IUO; 11..J
.:.. ...... - - .. ,.. Q (http s://nacto .org/wp-
r~~ ... .-~_..:~~- ..... ~~~,., :--..-;.uoi~~~~--~ .
0 ::.:::-:.:.:.:::....
content/uploads/gallery/2012_guidance_images/2012guidance_coloredbikefacilities .jpg) Guidance for conventional bicycle lane s (https://nacto.org/treatments/bike-lanes/conventional-bike-lanes/), intersection crossing markings ( https://nacto .org/treatments/i ntersection-treatm ents/intersection -cro ss ing-markings/), and through bike lanes ( https ://n acto .org/cities-for-cycling/design-g u ide/i ntersection-treatments/through-bi ke-lanes/) may also apply.
• Required
• Recommended
• Optional
Required Features
Green Bike Lane Striping Improvement Example Photos
Existing Photos at Linden & Canyon Crest
Safety Benefits:
RRFBs can reduce
crashes up to:
47o/o
for pedestrian crashes.4
RRFBs can increase motorist
yielding rates up to:
98o/o
(varies by speed limit, number
of lanes, crossing distance,
and time of day) .3
RRFBs used at a trail crossing.
Source: LJB
For more information on this
and other FHWA Proven Safe
ty Countermeasures, please
visit https://safety.fhwa.dot.
gov /provencountermeasures/
and https ://safety.fhwa.dot.
gov/ped bike/step/docs/
techSheet RRFB 2018.pdf.
FHWA-SA-21-053
Rectangular Rap id
Flashing Beacons (RRFB)
A marked crosswalk or pedestrian war ning sign can improve safety for pedestrians crossing the road, but at times may not be sufficient for drive rs to visibly locate crossing location s and yield to pedestrians. To enhance pedestrian consp icuity and increas e driver awareness at uncontrolled, marked crosswalks, transporta tion agenc ies can install a pedestrian actuated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) to accompan y a pedestrian warning sign. RRFBs consist of two, rectangular- shaped yellow indicati ons, eac h with a light-emitting diode (LED)-array-based light source.1 RRFBs flash with an alternating high frequency when activated to enhance conspicuity of pedestrians at the crossing to drivers.
For more informat ion on using RRFBs, see the Interim App roval in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 1
Applications
The RRFB is applicable to many
types of pedestrian crossings but is
particularly effective at multilane
crossings with speed limits less
than 40 miles per hour.2 Research
suggests RRFBs can result in motorist
yielding rates as high at 98 percent
at marked crosswalks, but varies
depending on the location , posted
speed limit, pedestrian crossing
distance, one- versus two-way road ,
and the number of travel lanes.3
RRFBs can also accompan y school or
trail crossing warning signs.
RRFBs are placed on both sides of
a crosswalk below the pedestrian
c rossing sign and above the
diagonal downward arrow plaque
pointing at the crossing.1 The flashing
pattern can be activated with
pushbuttons or passive (e.g., video or
infrared) pedestrian detection, and
should be unlit when not activated.
1 MUTCD lnlerirn Apo rovo l 21 - RRFBs q i Crosswo lks
Considerations
Agencies should:2
• Install RRFBs In the median rather
than the far-side of the roadway
if there is a pedestrian refuge or
other type of median.
• Use solar-power panels to eliminate
the need for a power source.
• Reserve the use of RRFBs for
locations with significant pedestrian
safety issues, as over-use of RRFB
treatments may diminish their
effectiveness,
Agencies shall not:2
• Use RRFBs without the presence of
a pedestrian, school or trail crossing
warning sign.
• Use RRFBs for crosswalks across
approaches controlled by YIELD
signs, STOP signs, traffic control
signals, or pedestrian hybrid
beacons, except for the approach
or egress from a roundab out.
2 "Rectangu lar Rapid Flash Beaco n" in PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Counterrneasure Selection Systern. FHWA, (2013).
3 Fitzpatrick et al. "Will You Stop for Me? Roadway Design and Traffic Contr ol Device Influences on Drivers Yielding to Pedestrians in o Crosswalk with a Rectangu lar Rapid-Flashing Beaco n. " Report No. TTI-CTS-0010. Texas A&M Transportat ion Institut e, (2016).
4 NCHRP Research Repo rt 841 Developrnent of Crash Modification Factors for Uncontrolled Pedes trian Crossing Treatmen ts, (2017).
ZER~~¼E
AWESYSTEMISHOWWEGEllWERE
R920-E
Solar-Powered Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Data Sheet Rectangular rapid flas hing beac on s (RRFBs}
impro ve pedest rian safety by inc reasing
yi eld rates to 72-96% at cross w alks* :
~ The benchmark for RRFBs, the R920-E meets
MUTCD requireme nts, including IA-21, and is Buy
America compliant
~ Compact and lightweight solar engine
~ Audible pushbutton activation with all ADA
compliance features
~ Solar Power Report™ (SPR) prepared for every
location to ensure battery longevity
Superior Design andTechnology
The R920-E utilizes a self-contained solar engine
integrating the Energy Management System (EMS) with
an on-board user interface, housed in a compact enclosure together with the batteries and solar panel. M UTCD interim approval IA-21 flash pattern and multiple configurations enable the R920-E to handle all crosswalk applications.
Easy Installation
With its highly efficient and compact design, installation is quick and uncomplicated, dramatically reducing
installation costs. Retrofitting can be done where
existing sign bases are used to enhance existing marked crosswalks in minutes, and new installations can be
completed without the cost of larger poles, new bases,
and trenching.
Advanced User Interface
The R920-E comes with an on-board user interface for
quick configuration and status monitoring. It allows for simple in-the-field adjustment of flash pattern, duration, intensity, ambient auto adjust, night dimming, and many more. Settings are automatically sent wirelessly to all units in the system.
Reliable
Every solar-powered model is solar-sized by location to ensure year-after-year operation. Carmanah includes
a Solar Power Report to prove sustainability over a
12-month period.
' U.S. Department ofTransportation Federal Highways Administration, Publication No. FHWA-HRT-10-043 - " Effects of Yellow Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons on Yielding at Multilane Uncontrolled Crosswalks" carmanah.com
MUTCD
compliant
e
5-year limited
warranty
C carmanah®
Buy America
compliant
Solar-sized for
every location
1.844.412.8395 I [email protected]
Systemic Application
of Multiple Low-Cost Countermeasures
at Stop-Controlled Intersections
This systemic approach to intersection safety involves dep loying a package of multiple low-cost countermeasures, inc luding enhanced signing and pavement markings, at a large number of stop-contro lled intersect ions with in a jurisdiction . These countermeasures increase driver awareness and recognition of the intersections and potential conflicts.
There are several benefits to
systemically applying multiple
low-cost countermeasures at stop
controlled intersections, including ,
• Resources are maximized because
the treatments are low cost.
• A high number of intersection s can
receive treatme nt.
• Improv ements are highly cost
effective, with an average benefit
cost ratio of 12: 1, even assuming a
conservative 3-year service life.
Example of countermeasures on the
through approach.
Source: South Caro lina DOT
Example of counte rmeasures
on the stop approach.
Source: South Caro lina DOT
The low-cost countermeasures
for stop-controlled intersection s
generally consist of the following
treatments:
On the Through Approach
• Doubled-up (left and right),
ove rsized advance intersection
warn ing signs, with supplemental
street name plaques (can also
include flashing beacon).
• Retroreflective sheeting on sign
posts.
• Enhanced pavement markings that
delineate throug h lane edge lines.
On the Stop Approach
• Doubled-up (left and right),
oversized advance "Stop Ahead"
intersection warning signs (can also
include flashing beacon) .
• Doubled-up (left and right),
ove rsized Stop signs.
• Retroreflective sheeting on sign
posts.
• Properly placed stop bar.
• Removal of vege tation, parking, or
obstructi ons that limit sight distance.
• Double arrow warning sign at stem
of T-intersections.
Source: T. Le et al. "Safety Effects of Low-Cost Systemic Safety Improvements at Signalized and Stop-Contro lled Intersections," 96th Annua l Meeting of the Transportation Research Boord Paper Number 17-05379, January 2017.
ZER~~¼E
AW£SVSTEMISHOWWEGETlHERE
A\~ IL~)
TECHNOLOGIES CORP.
AV-2 00 SER IES:
EDE ANCED
TRAFF C SIG S
• MUTCD Compliant
• Improves Intersection
Safety
• Solar Powered
• Easily Installs on
existing sign posts
The Availed Technologies AV-200 LED Enhanced Sign has been designed from the ground -up to provide reliable year-round 24 hour operation . Built with industry leading solar and LED technology, it is equipped with :
• Ultra-efficient LEDs and Lenses,
• Integrated maximum power point tracking,
• High-efficiency monocrystalline 20W solar panel,
• The option of 84 or 144 watt-hours of battery capacity.
The AV-200 will operate in challenging solar conditions including cold temperatures , low sun hours , and partial shading. The compact, self-contained design allows for rapid installation on new or existing round, square, U-channel, or wood sign posts . www.availedtechnologies.com
California MUTCD 2014 Edition
(FHWA 's MUTC D 2009 Edit ion, including Rev isions I & 2, as ame nded for use in Cal ifornia) Figure 3B-17 (CA). Examples of Crosswalk Enhancements at Uncontro lled Multilane Approac hes
-...
Chapter 38 - Pavement and C urb Mark ings
Part 3 - Mark ings
* Optional
NOTE: Adequate visibility
should be provided.
Novembe r 7, 2014
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Ctn· A nrn: N1:-i's ("JFFirF
) 750 UNfVERSITY AVENUE
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
(95 1) 826-5567
ORDINANCE NO. 7569
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING CHAPTER 13.19 OF THE RIVERSIDE MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING
THE COMPLETE STREETS ORDINANCE
The City Council of the City of Riverside does ordain as follows :
Section 1: Chapter 13.19 is hereby added to the Riverside Municip al Code as follows:
13.19.010 - Purpose and intent.
The purpose and intent of this chapter is to provide guidance on street character, connectivity, access for all users, development of continuous pedestrian paths and urban trails/recreation opportunities, and the inclusion of public gathering spaces equitably placed throughout the City, and to require that roadways within the City be developed according to approved standards and design elements as set forth in the Complete Streets Ordinance.
13.19.020 - Complete Streets Ordinance.
The installation and development of parkway s, and streets or highways within the City shall be in accordance with the Complete Streets Ordinance and any revisions, amendments or modifications thereto as set f01ih by resolution adopted by the City Council." Section 2: The City Council has reviewed the matter and, based upon the facts and information contained in the staff repo1is, administrative record, and written and oral testimony , hereby finds that this ordinance is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060( c)(2), 15060(c)(3) and/or 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations , Title 14, Chapter 3, in that it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment nor have a significant impact on the environment, and is not a project as defined in Section 15378.
Section 3: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause publication once in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with Section 414 of the Charter of the City of Riverside. This ordinance shall become effective on the 30th day after the date of its adoption .
II
II
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
IO
I I
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 ADOPTED by the City Council this 7th day of September, 2021.
DONESIA GAUS
City Clerk of the City of Riverside
. • ,:,, 'I r--~k -,
---f cL ::-Cc:~--~-lt?- -?Q,L_<---.
PATRICIA LOCK DAWSON
Mayor of the City of Riverside
I, Donesia Gause, City Clerk of the City of Riverside , California , hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was duly and regularly introduced at a meeting of the City Council on the 17th day of August, 2021, and that thereafter the said ordinance was duly and regularly adopted at a meeting of the City Council on the 7th day of September, 202 I, by the following vote, to wit:
Ayes: Councilmembers Edwards, Cervantes , FieITo, Pe1Ty, and Hemenway and Councilw oman Plascencia
Noes: None
Absent: Councilmember Conder
Abstain: None
JN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Riverside, California, this 9th day of Septembe~ ~
DONESIA GA SE
City Clerk of the City of Riverside
27 CA2 l-0496
28 o n · A JTORNEY's OmcE
3750 UNIV[KS ln' ,\ VENUE
RIVESSID,. CA 92501
(95 1) 826-5567
\\Re-city law\cycom\ WP Docs\D02 7\P028\00593553. DOC
2 BOARD OF EDUCATION
Dr. Angelo Farooq, President I Mr. Dale Kinnear, Vice President Mr. Thomas R. Hunt, Clerk I Mr. Brent Lee, Member
Dr. Noemi Hernandez-Alexander, Member I Ms. Renee Hill, Superintendent April 10, 2023
SB-821 Grant Program Review Committee
eRUSD
RIVERSIDE UNIFIED
SCHOOLDISTRICT :
RE: Letter of Support for the City of Riverside's Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 (SB 821) Grant Application for Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Grant Application Dear SB-821 Review Committee,
On behalf of the Riverside Unified School District (RUSO), please accept this formal letter of support for the City of Riverside's TDA Article 3 (SB 821) Grant application for the Riverside's Citywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Project. Riverside's proposed project, as outlined in their application, will support our community's efforts to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety at intersections, increase public health by encouraging a more active lifestyle and reduce greenhouse gas emissions as residents are encouraged to walk & bike.
RUSO is committed to the health and safety of students. The Riverside Citywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Project, if successfully selected for an award, will result in the construction of high visibility crosswalks, green bike lane striping, flashing LED edge-lit stop signs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, and audible pedestrian push button systems at various intersection locations near schools in the City of Riverside where all students and their families have access to safe, convenient, and healthy multi-modal transportation options to and from school.
I applaud Riverside's efforts to promote safe opportunities for students and the community to walk and bicycle. We look forward to working more closely with Riverside on this important project. n rtin
Assis Superintendent of Operations
RIVERSIDE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
3380 14th Street
Riverside, CA 92501
(951) 788-7135
BUSINESS SERVICES
6050 Industrial Avenue
Riverside, CA 92504
(951 ) 352-6729
CENTRAL REGISTRATION CENTER
5700 Arlington Avenue
Riverside, CA 92504
(951) 352-1200
ALV D
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
April 5, 2023
SB-821 Grant Program Review Committee
RE: Letter of Support for the City of Riverside's Transportation Development Act (TOA) Article 3 (SB 821) Grant Application for Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Grant Application Dear SB-821 Review Committee,
On behalf of Alvord Unified School District (AUSD), I would like to express my support for City of Riverside's TDA Article 3 (SB 821) Grant application for the Riverside's Citywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Project. Riverside's proposed project, as outlined in their application, will support our community's efforts to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety at intersections, increase public health by encouraging a more active lifestyle and reduce greenhouse gas emissions as residents are encouraged to walk & bike.
AUSD is committed to the health and safety of students . The Riverside Citywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Project, if successfully selected for an award, will result in the construction of high visibility crosswalks, green bike lane striping, flashing LED edge-lit stop signs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, and audible pedestrian push button systems at various intersection locations near schools in the City of Riverside where all students and their families have access to safe, convenient, and healthy multi-modal transportation options to and from school.
I applaud Riverside's efforts to promote safe opportunities for students and the community to walk and bicycle. We look forward to working more closely with Riverside on this important project!
Sincerely,
Allan J. Mucerino
Superintendent of Schools
SCHOOL BOARD
JULIE A. MORENO
GEORGINA RAMIREZ
ROBERT SCHWANDT
LIZETH VEGA
CAROLYN M. WILSON
SUPERINTENDENT
ALLAN J. MUCERINO
9 KPC Parkway
Corona , CA 92879
P: (951) 509-5070
F: (951) 358-1502
a lvordschools .org
f @
@Alvord Unified
Dear SB-821 Review Committee,
On behalf of Riverside Bicycle Club, I would like to express my support for City of Riverside 's TDA Ariicle 3 (SB 821) Grant application for Riverside 's Citywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Project. Riverside's proposed project, as outlined in their application , will supp01i our community's efforts to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety at intersections, increase public health by encouraging a more active lifestyle and reduce greenhouse gas emissions as residents are encouraged to walk & bike.
The Riverside Bicycle Club is committed to the health and safety of the community. The Riverside Citywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Improvement Project, if successfully selected for an award, will result in the construction of high visibility crosswalks, green bike lane striping , flashing LED edge-lit stop signs, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, and audible pedestrian push button systems at various intersection locations in the City of Riverside where all residents and their visitors have access to safe, convenient, and healthy multi-modal transportation options to travel throughout the city.
I applaud Riverside's efforts to promote safe opportunities for students and the community to walk and bicycle. We look forward to working more closely with Riverside on this imp01iant project!
Sincerely,
~71~
Andrew Holybee
President
Riverside Bicycle Club
P.O. Box 55160
Riverside, CA 92517-0160
City of Riverside SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities Map
l ege nd
Ca!EnviroSrnee n .d.0 Resu lts
Ila. :;, 90 - IOO (Hi;••s: S,:,:,,, , ;
• ~ 80 - 90
> 70 - so
> 60 - 7:)
> 50 - 60
:.-., 30 - 40
.. >20 - 30
.. > IC- 20
.. 0 - i O (L,:,,.•,est S( c,re.s)
Ca lEnviroSc ree n 4.0 Hig h Pollution, low Popula tion .hSt
.oma
Galena 5l ¾ G,,1, ,,,51 1
Glen Avon
~f 'r~
a
Fal rmountPar1<
S!ntl 51
sathSt
60th Sl
Santa Ana River
WtldllfeArH
S6th Sl
Pedley Jurupa Valley
63rd St
JurupJ A111?
Di!W~y /111.i
C.:mtr;il AVI!
Siena Sl
C,1Ufornla
Citrus Staie
Hl~torlt Park
He rmos a Or
~~-0-========~
--..; "? 'Ian Bur!!.n Blvd W .t
. tJ55ft
7 ~,.
Sycamore
Canyon
Wilderness Park
0 "'
arch
Foride ro;;a !€ity of Riverside, Co Rive Ii ogie~J~~:
Arling t Ol'I Management EPA, NPS, USDA
ATTACHMENT 2
(PROGRAM POLICIES)
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ARTICLE 3 BICYCLE
AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM ADOPTED POLICIES
Transpmiation Development Act Policies
1. Up to 5% of Aliicle 3 appo1iionment can be used to supplement other funding sources used for bicycle and safety education programs; the allocation cannot be used to fully fund the salary of a person working on these programs.
2. Aliicle 3 money shall be allocated for the construction, including related engineering expenses, of the facilities, or for bicycle safety education programs .
3. Money may be allocated for the maintenance of bicycling trails, which are closed to motorized traffic.
4. Facilities provided for the use of bicycles may include projects that serve the needs of commuting bicyclists, including, but not limited to, new trails serving major transpmiation c01Tidors, secure bicycle parking at employment centers, park and ride lots, and transit te1minals where other funds are available.
5. Within 30 days after receiving a request for a review from any city or county, the transpmiation-planning agency shall review its allocations.
6. Up to 20 percent of the amount available each year to a city or county may be allocated to restripe Class II bicycle lanes.
7. A po11ion of each city's allocation may also be used to develop comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian plans. Plans must emphasize bike/pedestiian facilities that supp011 utilitarian bike/pedestrian travel rather than solely recreational activities; a maximum of one entire allocation per five years may be used for plan development.
8. Allowable maintenance activities for the local funds are limited to maintenance and repairs of Class I off-street bicycle facilities only.
RCTC Policies
1 . The SB 821 Call for Projects will occur on a biemlial basis, with a release date of the first Monday of every other February and a close date of the last Thursday of every other April, beginning in 2015.
2. If a project cannot be fully funded , RCTC may recommend paitial funding for award. To handle tiebreakers, RCTC will use, in tenns of priority , the safety question first then construction readiness.
3. Agencies awarded funds will not be reimbursed for any project cost overruns.
4. Agencies being awarded an allocation will be reimbursed in mTears only upon subnlitting adequate proof of satisfactory project completion. Claims need to Attachment 2
17336.00005\41471305 .2
include: the claim fonn, copies of paid invoices, a copy of the Notice of Completion (NOC), and photographs of the completed project.
5. The allocated amount represents the maximum amount eligible for reimbursement.
For projects completed under the allocated amount, the agency will be reimbursed at the matching ratio as presented in the application.
6. An agency will have thi1ty-six (36) months from the time of the allocation to complete the project. There will be no time extensions granted unless the reason for the delay can be demonstrated. Where substantial progress or a compelling reason for delay can be shown, the agency may be granted administrative extensions in twelve-month increments at the discretion of the Executive Director.
7. Any programmed and unused Atiicle 3 Program funds will be forfeited unless that agency can a) utilize the unused funds to complete projects that are the same or similar in scope and/or are contiguous to the approved project orb) apply the funds to a project previously submitted under an A1iicle 3 call for projects and approved by the Commission, subject to Executive Director approval.
8. Design and constrnction of facilities must confonn to the general design crite1ia for non-mototized facilities as outlined in the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.
9. Temporary facilities, projects in the bid process, or projects that are under constrnction will not be funded.
10. The SB 821 evaluation committee will be comprised of a minimum of five evaluators representing a wide range of interests; such as: accessibility, bicycling, Coachella Valley, public transit, and the region. Staff, consultants, and other representatives from agencies submitting project proposals will not be eligible to paiiicipate on the evaluation committee that year.
11 . Following each call, staff will monitor the equity of allocations to Coachella Valley versus Western Riverside County; the allocation should be relative to what the Coachella Valley's share would have been if dist1ibuted on a per capita basis (the percentage of funds applied for should also be taken into consideration). If the allocation is often found to be inequitable to the Coachella Valley, staff will recommend adoption of a new policy to correct the imbalance.
12. Certain costs at times associated with bicycle /pedestrian projects are not eligible when the benefit provided is not the exclusive use of bicyclists /pedestrians, such as: curb and gutter as part of roadway drainage system, d1iveway ramps installed across sidewalks, and where roadway design standards require a roadway shoulder width that is at least as wide as a standard bike lane.
13. For each Call for Projects, a city is eligible to submit up to three (3) applications, and the County of Riverside is eligible to submit up to two (2) applications per Supervisorial District.
14. Each application is limited to a maximum request of 10% of the ctment Call for Projects programming capacity .
15. Total award to one jurisdiction is limited to 20% of cmTent Call for Project's programming capacity .
16. Awarded agencies can commence reimbursable project activities on July 1 of the Call Attachment 2
I 7336.00005\41471305.2
for Project fiscal year cycle. E.g.: for FY 23/24 Call for Projects, reimbursable work stai1s on July 1, 2023.
17. Awarded agencies have until October 1 of the Call for Project fiscal year cycle to execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with RCTC. E.g.: for FY 23/24 Call for Projects, MOUs must be executed by October 1, 2023 Attachment 2
17336.00005\414 71305 .2