.?-& Approved as to Fonn. R. ZIEGLER, County Counsel THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMD~, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NUMBER:

Similar documents
15 1. John Yehall Chin Elementary Safe Routes to School Project;

PRESENTER: Chris Blunk, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer

REPORT TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL

Subject: Lifeline Cycle 4 Grant Funding

CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM & PLANNING COMMITTEE PLEASE NOTE CHANGE IN MEETING TIME AGENDA

REPORT TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY 399 Elmhurst Street Hayward, CA (510)

Planning Committee STAFF REPORT October 7, 2015 Page 2 of 6 Changes from Committee Background MTC began preparing its 2017 RTP Update earlier this yea

SAFETY, SECURITY, AND TRANSIT PLANNING AND OPERATIONS AGENDA

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

RESOLUTION NO. 18-XX RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

Appendix E: Grant Funding Sources

REPORT TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL

Grant: Safe Routes to Transit Initial Project Report for Ed Roberts Campus

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

Long Range Transportation Plan

CHAPTER 8 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Key Topics: Legislative Requirements. 2. Legislative Intent and Application to San Francisco

Memorandum. Date: RE: Plans and Programs Committee

County Executive Office/Legislative Affairs. County of Orange Report on Grant Applications/Awards

Memorandum. Date: RE: Plans and Programs Committee

SAFETEA-LU. Overview. Background

MEMORANDUM. February 12, Interagency Transit Committee Members and Interested Parties. Anthony Zepeda, Associate Regional Planner

LIFELINE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS

APPENDIX H: PROGRAMMING POLICY STATEMENT

City of La Palma Agenda Item No. 5

The next steps outlined at the end of this section are the key requirements as we can best envision them at this stage.

Memorandum. Date: To: Prospective Project Sponsors From: Aprile Smith Senior Transportation Planner Through: Subject:

Chapter 8. Glossary and Index. Chapter 8

Module 2 Planning and Programming

Welcome to the WebEx. The presentation for the 2018 Unified Transportation Program (UTP) Public Meeting will begin shortly.

Finance Committee October 18, 2011

LAP Manual 7-1 February 2014 Compliance Assessment Program Requirements

Citizens Advisory Committee May 23, 2012

Contents. FY 2014 YEAR END REPORT Kalamazoo Area Transportation Study

Memorandum. P:\Lifeline Program\2014 Lifeline Program\Call for Projects\LTP Cycle 4 Call - Memo.doc Page 1 of 7

City of La Palma Agenda Item No. 5

KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission

Understanding the. Program

APPENDIX 5. Funding Plan

AMENDED IN COMMITTEE 11/30/17 RESOLUTION NO

MOVE LV. Show Us the $ + Transportation Funding May 25, 2016, 12 PM MOVE LEHIGH VALLEY

RESOLUTION NUMBER 2877

CITY OF DANA POINT AGENDA REPORT FROM BRAD FOWLER, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING SERVICES

CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. John A. Russo City Manager. Date: May 7, 2013

MOBILITY PARTNERSHIP AGENDA

9 WHEREAS, Planning Code, Section provides for the imposition of interim zoning

RULES CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROGRAM

City of La Palma Agenda Item No. 12

POLICIES RELATING TO FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDING

Module 3 Advance Funding Agreements between the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and a Local Government (LG) for Transportation Projects

Contra Costa Transportation Authority STAFF REPORT October 19, 2016 Page 2 of 2 Background On July 20, 2016 the Authority approved Resolution G

Case 2:12-cv FMO-PJW Document 596 Filed 09/07/17 Page 1 of 46 Page ID #:9163 FILED CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Report to City Council RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCOPE OF USE FOR THE MORENO VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT BENEFIT CORPORATION

Date: June 27, Board of Directors. Neil McFarlane

Transportation Fund Sources Available to Units of Local Government

2018 Project Selection Process. Transportation Policy Board January 11, 2018

CHAPTER ONE PURPOSE AND NEED. 1.1 Context

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUSINESS MEETING ACTION ITEM

Climate Initiatives Program. Competitive Grants Guidelines METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD 777 North Capitol Street, N.E. Washington, D.C

Agenda Item No. October 14, Honorable Mayor and City Council Attention: David J. Van Kirk, City Manager

ATTACHMENT G-1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY REGIONAL ITS ARCHITECTURE CONSISTENCY SELF-CERTIFICATION FORM

Table to accompany Insight on the Issues 39: Policy Options to Improve Specialized Transportation

Federal Funding & Project Administration 101. Presented By: Kyle Johnson, P.E. (Bolton & Menk) Dan Erickson, P.E. (Metro District State Aid Engineer)

Please complete your phone connection now:

One Bay Area Grant (OBAG): Local Program Development - Criteria ACTION ITEM

August 9, Re: DBE Program Triennial Goal Concurrence - Recipient ID #1674. Dear Mr. Smith:

FISCAL YEAR OVERALL WORK PROGRAM

RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the City of Cheyenne desires to participate in the Business Ready Community, Community Readiness Grants Program; and

City of Greenfield Arroyo Seco Groundwater Sustainability Agency. Meeting Agenda October 24, :00 P.M.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT FOR THE MADERA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

1221 Oak Street, Suite 536, Oakland, California Phone: Pleasanton District Office: Fax:

MAP-21: Overview of Project Delivery Provisions

CITY OF DANA POINT AGENDA REPORT

TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES (TA) SET ASIDE PROGRAM July 2016

INDEPENDENT AUDITING SERVICES

James Berg, Chief of Police Oliver Collins, Acting Captain, Operations Division

CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE

Overview of Local Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

WHEREAS, the Transit Operator provides mass transportation services within the Madison Urbanized Area; and

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

ATTACHMENT B. Opportunities to Implement Measure M Through New and Expanded State and Federal Transportation Funding Programs

MERGING OF CITY OF NOVATO AND CITY OF SAN RAFAEL POLICE CRISIS RESPONSE UNITS

LUZERNE COUNTY COUNCIL WORK SESSION February 07, 2017 Council Meeting Room Luzerne County Courthouse 200 North River Street Wilkes-Barre, PA

A. The term "Charter" means the Charter of the City and County of San Francisco.

A RESOLUTION. amended plans for the East End METRORail Expansion which resulted in the redesign

Lifeline Transportation Program Cycle 5 Guidelines

FISCAL & COMPLIANCE AUDITS

@Count Adminlstrato~s 51

MAP-21 and Its Effects on Transportation Enhancements

1 Introduction. 1.1 Specific Plan Background

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF STANISLAUS BOARD ACTION SUMMARY

Funding Safe Routes to School in California

Overview of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program

2018 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

J:\2006\Memo Items\7 - July 2006\Lifeline Transportation Program FY0607.doc Page 2 of 5

WELCOME TO THE KALAMAZOO AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Sources of Funding for Transit in Urban Areas in Texas Final report PRC

Transportation Alternatives Program Guidance

Sierra College ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE AP 5521

Transcription:

\ \ Approved as to Fonn DONNA -r R. ZIEGLER, County Counsel.?-& By: Deputy THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ALAMD~, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NUMBER: R- 201 6'-25 AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSIGNED TO THE METRO POLIT AN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM, COMMITTING ANY NECESSARY MATCHING FUNDS AND STATING ASSURANCE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT DESIGN PHASES OF CASTRO VALLEY ELEMENT ARY SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL, CREEKSIDE MIDDLE SCHOOL SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL, AND STANTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL WHEREAS, the County of Alameda is submitting an application to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for $1,025,000 in funding assigned to MTC for programming discretion, which includes federal funding administered by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and federal or state funding administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) such as Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) funding, Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)/ Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding, and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) funding (herein collectively referred to as REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING) for the Project Design Phases of: Castro Valley Elementary Safe Routes to School, Creekside Middle School Safe Routes to School, and Stanton Elementary School Safe Routes to School (herein referred to as PROJECT) for the Active Transportation Program (herein referred to as PROGRAM). WHEREAS, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (Public Law 112-141, July 6, 2012) and any extensions or successor legislation for continued funding (collectively, MAP 21) authorize various. federal funding programs including, but not limited to the Surface Transportation Program (STP) (23 U.S.C. 133), the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) (23 U.S.C. 149) and the Transportation Alternatives Program (TA) (23 U.S.C. 213); and WHEREAS, state statutes, including California Streets and Highways Code 182.6, 182.7, and 2381(a)(l), and California Govenunent Code 14527, provide various funding programs for the programming discretion of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA); and WHEREAS, pursuant to MAP-21, and any regulations promulgated thereunder, eligible project sponsors wishing to. receive federal or state funds for a regionally-significant project shall submit an application first with the appropriate MPO, or RTPA, as applicable, for review and inclusion in the federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and and WHEREAS, M,TC is the MPO and RTP A for the nine counties of the San Francisco Bay region;

WHEREAS, MTC has adopted a Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) that sets out procedures governing the application and use of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and WHEREAS, the County of Alameda 1s an. eligible sponsor for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and WHEREAS, as part of the application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING, MTC requires a resolution adopted by the responsible implementing agency stating the following: the commitment of any required matching funds; and that the sponsor understands that the REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING is fixed at the programmed amount; and therefore, any cost increase cannot be expected to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and that the PROJECT will comply with the procedures, delivery milestones, and funding deadlines specified in the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised); and the assurance of the sponsor to complete the PROJECT as described in the application, subject to environmental clearance, and if approved, as included in MTC's federal Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); and that the PROJECT will have adequate staffing resources to deliver and complete the PROJECT within the schedule submitted with the project application; and that the PROJECT will comply with all project-specific requirements as set forth in,the PROGRAM; and that the County of Alameda has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective Congestion Management Agency (CMA), MTC, Caltrans. FHW A, and CTC on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHWA- and CTC-funded transportation and transit projects implemented by the County of Alameda; and in the case of a transit project, the PROJECT will comply with MTC Resolution No. 3866, revised, which sets forth the requirements of MTC's Transit Coordination Implementation Plan to more efficiently deliver transit projects in the region; and in the case of a highway project, the PROJECT will comply with MTC Resolution No. 4104, which sets forth MTC's Traffic Operations System (TOS) Policy to install and activate TOS elements on new major freeway projects; and in the case of an RTIP project, state law requires PROJECT be included in a local congestion management plan, or be consistent with the capital improvement program 2

adopted pursuant to MTC's funding agreement with the countywide transportation agency; and WHEREAS, the County of Alameda is authorized to submit an application for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT; and WHEREAS, there is no legal impediment to the County of Alameda making applications for the funds; and WHEREAS, there is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of the County of Alameda to deliver such PROJECT; and WHEREAS, the County of Alameda authorizes its designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution; and WHEREAS, MTC requires that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the MTC m conjunction with the filing of the application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Alameda is authorized to execute and file an application for funding for the PROJECT for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING under MAP-21 or continued funding; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda will provide any required matching funds; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda understands that the REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the project is fixed at the MTC approved programmed amount, and that any cost increases must be funded by the County of Alameda from other funds, and that the County of Alameda does not expect any cost increases to be funded with additional REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda understands the funding deadlines associated with these funds and will comply with the provisions and requirements of the Regional Project Funding Delivery Policy (MTC Resolution No. 3606, revised) and the County of Alameda has, and will retain the expertise, knowledge and resources necessary to deliver federally-funded transportation and transit projects, and has assigned, and will maintain a single point of contact for all FHW A- and CTC-funded transportation projects to coordinate within the agency and with the respective Congestion Management Agency (CMA), MTC, Caltrans. FHW A, and CTC on all communications, inquires or issues that may arise during the federal programming and delivery process for all FHW A- and CTC-funded transportation and transit projects implemented by the County of Alameda; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that PROJECT will be implemented as described in the complete application and in this resolution, subject to environmental clearance, and, if approved, for the amount approved by MTC and programmed in the federal TIP; and 3

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda has reviewed the PROJECT and has adequate staffing resources to deliver and complete the PROJECT within the schedule submitted with the project application; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that PROJECT will comply with the requirements as set forth in MTC programming guidelines and project selection procedures for the PROGRAM; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, in the case of a transit project, the County of Alameda agrees to comply with the requirements of MTC's Transit Coordination Implementation Plan as, set forth in MTC Resolution No. 3866, revised; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, in the case of a highway project, the County of Alameda agrees to comply with the requirements of MTC's Traffic Operations System (TOS) Policy as set forth in MTC Resolution No. 4104; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, in the case of an RTIP project, PROJECT is included in a local congestion management plan, or is consistent with the capital improvement program adopted pursuant to MTC's funding agreement with the countywide transportation agency; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda is an eligible sponsor of REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING projects; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda is authorized to submit an applica~ion for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there is no legal impediment to the County of Alameda making applications for the funds; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might in any way adversely affect the proposed PROJECT, or the ability of the County of Alameda to deliver such PROJECT; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Alameda authorizes its Director of Public Works or his designee to execute and file an application with MTC for REGIONAL DISCRETIONARY FUNDING for the PROJECT as referenced in this resolution; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution will be transmitted to the MTC in conjunction with the filing of the application; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the MTC is requested to support the application for the PROJECT described in the resolution, and if approved, to include the PROJECT in MTC's federal TIP upon submittal by the project sponsor for TIP programming. 4

THE FOREGOING was PASSED and ADOPTED by a majority vote of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors this 26th day of January, 2016, to wit: AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: Supervisors: Carson, Chan, Miley, Valle & President Haggerty-5 None None PRESIDENT, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS File No: 29748 ~~~~~~~~~- Agenda No_: _3_5 Document No: R-2016-25 I certify that the foregoing is a correct copy of a Resolution adopted by the. Board of Supervisors, Alameda County, State of California ATTEST: Clerk of the Board Board of Supervisors v:lagendalfom1s\resobak.doc