Title
Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Fund: Fiscal Year 2024/25 Programming
End
FileID
File ID: 2024-01069
End
Location
Location: District 2, Represented by Councilmember Thao; District 4, Represented by Councilmember Valenzuela; District 4, Represented by Mayor Steinberg; District 5, Represented by Vice Mayor Maple; District 6, Represented by Councilmember Guerra; District 7, Represented by Councilmember Jennings, and District 8, Represented by Councilmember Vang
End
Recommendation
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution identifying projects to be funded with Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) funds (Fund 2036) in Fiscal Year 2024/25.
End
Contact
Contact: Lucinda Willcox, Assistant Director, (916) 808-5052, lwillcox@cityofsacramento.org; Greg Smith, Senior Engineer, (916) 808-8364, gsmith@cityofsacramento.org; Jose Sanchez, Streets Manager, (916) 808-2254, jsanchez@cityofsacramento.org; Department of Public Works
End
Presenter
Presenter: None.
End
Attachments
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Resolution Approving RMRA Projects
3-Exhibit A (RMRA List of Projects for FY2024/25)
End
Additional Description/Analysis
IssueDetail
Issue Detail: Pursuant to Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, prior to receiving an apportionment of formula-based Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Act (RMRA) funds from the State Controller, the City must annually submit to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) a list of projects proposed to be funded in part or whole with these funds prior to July 1st. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25, the City is estimated to receive approximately $13 million in RMRA funds, which is budgeted annually in the Transportation Corridor Program as part of the Capital Improvement Program.
Since available funding covers less than 20 percent of what is needed, resurfacing activities have been prioritized based on criteria adopted by the City Council. The list focuses on projects that achieve multiple objectives, including those that support improvements to address safety, support bicycle and pedestrian mobility, serve under-resourced areas, leverage or support outside funding, and improve streets with higher traffic volumes and bus routes. This analysis is included in more detail in the Background description.
The roadways listed below and described more fully in Exhibit A are proposed to be funded in whole or in part using the balance of past years’ RMRA funding and anticipated FY24/25 revenue. The plan may be amended by the City if necessary at any time without state action.
§ Downtown Mobility Project (under construction) (T15195000)
§ Lampasas Avenue and Rio Linda Boulevard Safety Project (T15205500)
§ Florin Road Vision Zero Safety Project (T15215800)
§ Broadway Vision Zero Safety Project (R15210000)
§ T Street Safety Improvements: 34th Street to Stockton Blvd (R15210000)
§ Franklin Boulevard Rehabilitation Project (R15200000)
§ Folsom Boulevard Safety Improvement Project (T15235500)
§ 21st Avenue Beautification Project (under construction) (T15235300)
§ Broadway Complete Streets Project Phases 1 and 2 (under construction) (T15175300)
§ Franklin Boulevard Complete Streets Project Phases 1 and 2 (T15165500)
§ Floodgate Modernization and Resilience Project
§ Carlson Avenue Roadway Rehabilitation
§ Pedestrian Crossing at R Street: 29th/30th Street (dern)
§ Broadway Complete Streets Phase 3 (T15245000)
§ Fruitridge Road Improvements (T15033600)
§ Pedestrian Crossings Enhancements (Main Avenue and Marysville Boulevard) (S15125500)
The following projects will use this funding for preliminary design only; this effort is intended to position these larger projects for future grant applications:
§ Marysville Boulevard Vision Zero Safety Project (T15216300)
§ El Camino Avenue Vision Zero Safety Project (T15216400)
§ Florin-Perkins Roadway Rehabilitation (R15200000)
§ Downtown Mobility Project Phase 2 (R15200000)
§ Elvas Avenue Cycle Track and Roadway Rehabilitation Project (R15200000)
The following project is a shared project with Sacramento County, as the roadway segment crosses from the city limits into the unincorporated county area. Funding will be proportionately shared between agencies. This project will be delivered by Sacramento County.
• Fair Oaks Boulevard, Howe Avenue to east of University Avenue
It often requires more than one fiscal year to complete a project and can take multiple years from initial planning to deliver more complex projects that incorporate safety improvements, road diets, new buffered bike facilities, or that leverage grant funds. Many projects that were included in last year’s programming are being carried forward for FY2024/25, including projects that will be under construction or completing construction later this Summer.
End
PolicyConsiderations
Policy Considerations: The recommendations meet the eligibility and outcomes specified in the State legislation governing the use of these funds. Recommended projects are consistent with the General Plan, Community and Specific Plans, Bikeway Master Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, and other transportation planning documents, as well as those included the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.
Given the scarcity of local transportation funding, nearly all projects are used to leverage and support state and federal grants. Potential new projects are evaluated based on the criteria in the Transportation Priorities Plan (TPP).
End
EconomicImpacts
Economic Impacts: These will be analyzed when construction contracts are awarded.
End
EnvironmentalConsiderations
Environmental Considerations:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Programming funding is an administrative activity and is not considered a project under CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 Cal. Code Reg. §15000 et seq.) § 15378 (b)(4). All projects using this funding will undergo appropriate environmental review prior to construction.
End
Sustainability
Sustainability: The City uses pavement mixes incorporating a mix of recycled materials when possible. In connection with pavement rehabilitation, the City will incorporate improved accessibility, active transportation improvements, and other complete streets components wherever feasible. Restoring roads before they fail reduces construction time which results in less air pollution from heavy equipment and less water pollution from site run-off.
End
Commission/Committee Action
Commission/Committee Action: Not applicable.
End
RationaleforRecommendation
Rationale for Recommendation: The California Transportation Commission requires a Resolution identifying annual plans for anticipated RMRA funds in order for the City to receive its apportionment of funds. With the condition of the city’s roadway network, the annual funding apportionment is about one-fifth the funding that is needed to maintain the average citywide pavement quality at its current level (fair), and about 15% of what is needed to bring the City’s pavement into a state of good repair.
Given the scarcity of funding relative to the need, these recommendations focus on major arterials and collectors that carry higher volumes of traffic and projects that also advance other City priorities, including improvements to corridors on the high injury network identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan, other safety efforts, traffic calming, or active transportation improvements. Most of these projects use this funding to leverage state and federal grants. Given the complexity of these projects, most take more than one year to complete. Projects that were included in previous years’ plans but are not yet completed are carried over to the proposed FY24/25 plan.
End
FinancialConsiderations
Financial Considerations: Based on available projections, $14.6 million in RMRA funds (Fund 2036) is budgeted as part of the proposed FY24/25 Capital Improvement Program in the Transportation Corridor Program (R15200000). This includes revenue in undesignated fund balance as well as current projected revenue.
Total costs for the projects listed in Exhibit A are estimated at approximately $93 million; approximately $30 million in RMRA funds will be needed for these projects, including past expenditures and anticipated needs in future years. The majority of other funding will come from state and federal grants. No contracts will be awarded unless funding is available to cover contract and staff costs.
End
LocalBusinessEnterprise
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.
End
Background
Background:
State Requirements: Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, was signed into law on April 28, 2017. Beginning on November 1, 2017, the State Controller deposited revenues from the increased fuel taxes into the newly created Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA). A percentage of this new RMRA funding is apportioned by formula to eligible cities and counties pursuant to Streets and Highways Code (SHC) Section 2032(h) for basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety projects on the local streets and roads system.
RMRA funds must be used for expenditure on basic road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, and on critical safety projects. Eligible uses include the following:
§ Road maintenance and rehabilitation
§ Safety projects
§ Railroad grade separations
§ Complete streets components (including active transportation purposes, pedestrian and bicycle safety projects, transit facilities, and drainage and stormwater capture projects in conjunction with any other allowable project)
§ Traffic control devices
§ Funds may also be used to satisfy a match requirement in order to obtain state or federal funds for projects.
SB 1 emphasizes the importance of accountability and transparency in the delivery of California’s transportation programs.
Prior to receiving an apportionment of RMRA funds from the Controller in a fiscal year, a city or county must submit to the CTC before the stated deadline a list of projects proposed to be funded with these funds. The list of projects must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement [SHC 2034(a)(1)].
The project list does not limit the flexibility of an eligible city or county to fund projects in accordance with local needs and priorities so long as the projects are consistent with RMRA priorities as outlined in SHC 2030(b) [SHC 2034(a)(1)].
The CTC will report to the Controller the cities and counties that have submitted a list of projects as described in SHC 2034(a)(1) and that are therefore eligible to receive an apportionment of RMRA funds for the applicable fiscal year [SHC 2034(a)(2)]. The deadline for submission to the CTC for fiscal year FY23/24 is June 30, 2023. The Controller, upon receipt of the report from the Commission, shall apportion RMRA funds to eligible cities and counties pursuant to SHC 2032(h) [SHC 2034(a)(2)].
For each fiscal year in which RMRA funds are received and expended, cities and counties must submit documentation to the Commission that includes a description and location of each completed project, the amount of funds expended on the project, the completion date, and the estimated useful life of the improvement [SHC 2034(b)].
Roadway Conditions
The City prepares a report every two years that assesses its overall pavement conditions and estimates funding implications. The most recent report is from August 2022. The City is in the process of updating its Pavement Conditions Report and it should be available later this Summer. The City’s current Pavement Condition Index (PCI), which measures pavement conditions on a scale of 1 to 100 reports a citywide average PCI of 56, which is considered “fair.” In 2022, the citywide deferred maintenance backlog was estimated at approximately $298 million in needed repairs, an increase of 30% since 2020. With only 15% to 20% of the annual funding stream available that is needed to adequately address roadway rehabilitation, at current investment levels, the unfunded backlog is expected to continue to increase exponentially. It is estimated to reach about $1 billion in ten years with a projected average citywide PCI of 42. The 2024 update will likely show a larger unfunded backlog.
The primary mechanism to address street maintenance has been the state gas tax. In 2017, the State increased the statewide gas tax for the first time in nearly 25 years in response to a statewide crisis in poor pavement conditions on state highways and local streets throughout the state. With the gas tax formerly set at a flat rate that was not indexed to inflation, by 2017 the amount of gas tax generated statewide had about half the spending power it had in decades earlier, which was manifested in gradual disinvestment in pavement maintenance. Many counties and jurisdictions implemented local funding measures to support pavement maintenance to help offset some of the loss in spending power. Sacramento County voters approved a countywide transportation sales tax measure (Measure A), which provided additional funding for street maintenance among other transportation expenditures.
The City of Sacramento has some of the oldest roads in the state, with a roadway network developed over the last 150-plus years. Decades of inadequate investment in pavement maintenance has resulted in thousands of miles of needed roadway rehabilitation and overall pavement conditions that are in a steep decline.
The additional funding from the 2017 gas tax increase may have been in time for those communities with newer streets or those that were able to devote sufficient local or federal funding for pavement rehabilitation to offset the loss in gas tax availability. For those communities, the new revenue was in time to alter the trajectory of deteriorating PCI and allow for gradual improvement. Unfortunately, for many of those communities with older infrastructure that that did not have sufficient street maintenance funding in the decades before 2017, pavement conditions have declined to a level that requires more annual funding than is currently available from the increased gas tax revenues or is foreseeable from other local, state, and federal sources in order to alleviate the ongoing decline in pavement conditions.
The amount needed annually by the City to arrest the steep decline is five times the amount it currently receives. In 2022, the report estimated that over $58 million would be required annually over the next ten years to remain at the current average PCI of 59, and over $97 million annually to bring the network into a state of good repair (average PCI of 75). This amount is expected to be greater with the 2024 report.
Roadway Selection
With limited funding compared to the need, it is necessary to prioritize where the funding will be spent. Other than those recently constructed, nearly every roadway in the City would benefit from some kind of pavement treatment. In order to identify which roadways should be selected for treatment, City staff use the criteria in the Transportation Priorities Plan (TPP) with the intent to combine pavement rehabilitation with other needed corridor improvements, including safety and active transportation improvements. Wherever possible, funding is used to leverage or support grant funds or other efforts or to complete preliminary design efforts to make projects more attractive for future grant funding efforts.
In order to apply funding to reach the highest number of users, roadways were selected that carry the highest traffic volumes, particularly where safety improvements and/or active transportation improvements are key elements. As a result, arterials and collectors were prioritized over residential streets. Roadways with the highest costs in frequent emergency repairs may be selected as rehabilitation can reduce local costs associated with having to frequently fill potholes or make other repairs.
In order to maximize the benefit to those roadways with higher volumes and those that support grant efforts, no new residential neighborhoods are included in this fiscal year’s plan. Based on adopted criteria, it is expected that this trend will continue.
Residential streets comprise over 63 percent of the city’s total lane miles, and almost all of the residential streets in the City warrant some kind of pavement treatment, from preventative maintenance in newer areas to many older neighborhoods with very aged pavement, as well as many neighborhoods with impacts from a variety of underground utility work (i.e., gas, electric, water, sewer, and telecommunication agencies and companies installing or repairing underground infrastructure). While there is clearly community demand and an identified need for repairs on residential roadways, there is just not adequate funding to address residential road repair. The estimated need to bring the city’s residential streets alone into a state of good repair is $52 million annually for the next ten years. Even if the city were to alter its funding criteria and no longer address pavement rehabilitation on more heavily travelled corridors, it could still only address one to three residential neighborhoods per year with available funding.
End