Loading...
09 September 3, 1997 Budget & Finance040914 /7( RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE (COMMISSIONERS MICHAEL BARRY, WILLIAM KLEINDIENST, JACK VAN HAASTER) 12:30 P.M. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1997 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. . 4. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS/FINANCIAL ITEMS. 5A. Proposed Analysis of the `Physics Alternative" Related to SCAG's Draft Regional Transportation Plan. Overview Staff is recommending that the Commission: 1) Authorize a budget adjustment and corresponding amendments to contracts with Valley Research and Planning Associates (49%) and TransCore (51 %) for proportionate shares of a total of $60,000 to provide technical modeling support for analysis of the "Physics Alternative" to SCAG's draft Regional Transportation Plan; and, 2) seek proportionate reimbursement of costs from other county transportation commissions within the SCAG region. 5B. Update on WRCOG: 1) Consideration of Functions and Relationships with Other Agencies; and, 2) Internal Administrative Matters; Relation to RCTC Support. Overview At the WRCOG Executive Committee on August 25th, two items were discussed that were of significance to RCTC: 1) Consideration of possible alignment of some current WRCOG functions to other agencies and the appointment of RCTC representatives to meet with WRCOG representatives to discuss the possible realignment of responsibilities; and, 2) Internal administrative matters such as a contract with RCTC for financial services and terminating WRCOG's office lease and the possibility of housing WRCOG staff at the RCTC offices. An additional item being presented to the Commission is the approval of additional $47,000 of LTF planning funds for WRCOG for the second quarter of FY 97-98. 5C. Direction to Advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) to Select a New Programmer to Maintain RCTC's Various Data Base Programs. Overview Staff is recommending that the Commission direct staff to move forward with a selection process that will identify an individual or firm that can continue maintenance and creation of RCTC databases on an as needed basis. Page 2 Agenda - Budget/Finance Committee September 3, 1997 5D. Performance Evaluation Proposal Review Committee Overview Staff is requesting direction on the composition of the Proposal Review Committee for the selection of a consultant(s) to conduct the Triennial Performance Audits. 5E. Quarterly Financial and Cost & Schedule Reports. Overview Presented are Combining Statements of Revenues and Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Unaudited) and the Highway and rail projects quarterly budget report for the Quarter Ending June 30, 1997. Also, attached is the cost and schedule status of the Measure A Contracts. The contracts are segregated by Measure A Plan category and includes Highway, Rail and other Plans and Programs. The cost information includes Commission authorized funds to date, contractual commitments to date, current monthly expenditures, and total expenditures to date. The cost and schedule reports are through the month ending July 31, 1997 prepared by Bechtel Civil, Inc. This item is for receive and file. 6. HIGHWAYS/LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS. 6A. Amendment to FY 1998-2002 Measure "A"Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for the City of Palm Desert. Overview The Measure "A" Ordinance requires each recipient of streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five-year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive disbursements for local streets and roads. Any subsequent additions, deletions, or substitutions to the Plan must also be approved by the Commission. The City of Palm Desert is requesting Commission approval to amend their previously approved FY 1998-2002 Plan. 6B. Cathedra/ City Route 111 Project CVAG Regional Arterial Program Loan. Overview Staff is recommending that the Commission approve programming an additional $ 1 million in Measure A Highway Funds for the Route 111 Tier II Highway Improvement for the Cathedral City Route 111 Project, subject to approval by CVAG to advance these funds to Cathedral City from either the CVAG TUMF/Regional Arterial Program or Commercial Paper and be reimbursed by the RCTC from the Measure A Highway Program in 1999 - 2001. Page 3 Agenda - Budget/Finance Committee September 3, 1997 7. RAIL. 7A. Award of Design Contract for Pedestrian Overcrossings and Station Electronic Surveillance Systems at the La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Rail Stations. Overview Will be provided at the Budget and Finance Committee meeting after the results of the selection panel are known. 7B. Direction to Advertise Plans and Specifications for Construction of Riverside Station South Side Platform and Pedestrian Overcrossing. Overview Staff is recommending that the Commission direct Staff to advertise the Southside Platform and Pedestrian Overcrossing for construction and bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. Final project award will be contingent upon finalization of all right-of-way • issues with adjacent property owners. 8. AIR QUALITY/CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 8A. Consultant Agreement with Gladstein and Associates /n Support of the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor Project. Overview The Commission's adopted FY 97/98 budget included an air quality goal to facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology. In support of that goal, one objective committed financial support and staff participation in the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor (ICTC) project to facilitate the location of clean fuel infrastructure and deployment of clean fuel equipment along designated corridors in Riverside County. Pursuant to the objective, staff recommends the allocation of $25,000 to Gladstein and Associates to implement specific work tasks as defined in the ICTC Phase II proposal. 8B. Enhanced Traffic Monitoring Program - Needs Assessment. Overview At the April meeting RCTC approved the replacement of the Congestion Management Program's (CMP) Land Use Coordination Element with an Enhanced Transportation System Monitoring Element. This item is a proposal to develop an Enhanced Transportation System Monitoring Element for the CMP to comply with federal planning and funding requirements. 10. ADJOURNMENT. MINUTES RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISS/ON 97-08 BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE August 6, 1997 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER. Commissioner Will Kleindienst called the meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee to order at 12:40 p.m. at the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100, Riverside, California 92501. Members Present Michael Barry Will Kleindienst 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. M/S/C to approve the meeting minutes of July 2, 1997. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. There were no public comments. 4. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS. There were no additions/revisions. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS/FINANCIAL ITEMS. 5A. Review of Audit Process. Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer, said that as instructed by the Commission, staff met with Sarah Anderson and Teresa Trevino, Ernst & Young to review the UCR audit study and develop recommendations for addressing the issues and concerns raised by Commission funding recipients. He then reviewed the suggestions of improvement to the audit process. If the Commission determine it appropriate that other cities/agency could perform their own audit, some suggestions to change the audit process are: 1) The city/agency auditors should be required to use the Transportation Development Act/Measure "A" Audit Program developed by RCTC; 2) RCTC or its representative should have the right to review the city/agency auditor work papers to ensure audit quality; 3) RCTC should require the city/agency auditors to continue with RCTC all issues noted during the management letter process; and, 4) the city/agency auditor should be an audit firm that meets RCTC's qualifications and standards. It appears that the internal audit function has outlived its usefulness and original purpose to follow up on audit findings and instances of noncompliance. Page 2 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee August 6, 1997 Commissioner Barry asked what qualifications of standards are and Dean Martin responded the qualifications of standards have not yet been developed. Teresa Trevino added that in regards to other auditors work, Ernst and Young would review the work papers to make sure that their audit procedures met Ernst & Young standards. M/S/C that the Commission: 1) Maintain the existing process for fiscal year ending June 30, 1997; .2) devise specific procedures, in cooperation with funding recipients, to allow recipients to conduct their own audits subject to meeting Commission requirements, to allow for greater local control of the audit process while satisfying Commission audit requirements; and, 3) implement these procedures beginning with audits of fiscal years ending June 30,1998. 5B. City of Perris Loan Documentation. M/S/C that the Commission approve the "Agreement for Advance of Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Funds" for the City of Perris in the amount of $ 1,900,000. 5C. City of San Jacinto Loan Documentation. M/S/C that the Commission approve the "Agreement for Advance of Measure "A" Local Streets and Roads Funds" for the City of San Jacinto in the amount of $ 1,300,000. 5D. Consultant Selection for the Triennial Performance Audit of the Riverside County Transit Operators and the Riverside County Transportation Commission. M/S/C that the Commission: 1) Circulate Request for Proposals to select a consultant(s) to conduct the Triennial Performance Audits for the Riverside County Transit Operators and the Riverside County Transportation Commission; and, 2) direct staff to approach the other SCRRA member agencies to solicit their support in the conduct of a performance audit for the SCRRA operation. 5E. Investment Report for Quarter Ending June 30, 1997. M/S/C that the Commission receive and file. 5F. Monthly Cost and Schedule Reports. Louis Martin, Bechtel Project Controls Manager, noted that the City of Murrieta loan is now been terminated and closed out. M/S/C that the Commission receive and file. Page 3 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee August 6, 1997 6. HIGHWAYS/LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS. 6A. Providing Construction Management Services and Construction Support Surveying for the Southside Platform, Pigeon Pass Park and Ride Lot, SR 91 Soundwalls, Yuma Landscaping, La Sierra and West Corona Pedestrian Crossings. Jack Reagan, Executive Director, stated that seven construction projects are scheduled to be started and completed over a period of twenty months beginning this fall. The Commission's construction program for Measure A funded projects directly contracted by RCTC will then be inactive for several years. Construction Management Services will be needed for each of the construction projects for the next two years. He then presented the following options for providing Construction Management Services as follows: 1) Use the design Consultant for Construction Management; 2) use the Request for Proposal Process for each project, or for all projects; 3) use Bechtel to provide these services; 4) look to other agencies such as SCRRA and the City of Riverside to assure responsibility for construction and management of these projects. Commissioner Barry asked staff to explain the staffing comparison cost of $1,683,169 to $2,013,213 and Jack Reagan responded that based upon assumption of what the staffing load would be, this is the staffing load required. It ends up being more person years because of the inability to balance the work load for both program managers and construction managers. Commissioner Kleindienst noted that in the review of the two comparisons, it is appears that by having Bechtel provide the construction management service will keep RCTC costs down. Susan Cornelison, Program Manager, informed that Committee that in her conversation with SCRRA, they did not think there was anyway that an SCRRA contracted firm could compete with Bechtel on an hourly basis for the same amount of work because of the proximity. Steve DeBaun, RCTC Legal Counsel, said that the difference between the Bechtel contract with other standard contracts with the Commission is that the Bechtel contract has a liability cap. M/S/C that the Commission select Option #1 where Bechtel provides Construction Management Services as well as their Program Management Services for FY 1997- 1998 and take the following actions: 1) Award Amendment 1 to RO 9700 with Bechtel Infrastructure Corporation for an amount of $600,000 with $50,000 of additional extra work to increase their not to exceed contract value to $1,638,675 for FY 1997-1998 subject to RCTC Legal Counsel review; 2) award Amendment 5 to RO 9522 with the County of Riverside to provide Survey Services for RCTC construction projects in FY 1997-1998 for an amount of $237,915 with an additional contingency of $36,000 using a standard contract amendment for a new not to exceed contract amount of $1,178,912; 3) direct staff to identify a local firm or agency to provide material testing services for the construction projects and bring back a recommendation to the Commission. Page 4 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee August 6, 1997 6B. Approval of: 1) Revised Expenditure Plan for Highway 111 Projects in the City of Palm Desert; 2) MOU's for Funding and Joint Development of Highway 111 Improvements at Monterey, Portola, and San Pablo. M/S/C that the Commission: 1) Approve the Measure "A" expenditure plan change for Highway 111 such that Monterey is advanced from Tier II to Tier I and that both San Luis Rey and El Paseo/Cabrillo be moved back from Tier I to Tier II. There is no change to the total amount authorized for the City of Palm Desert for Highway 111 improvements under Measure "A"; and, 2) approve the three proposed memorandums of understanding for the funding and joint development of State Highway 111 improvements at Monterey, Portola, and San Pablo subject to RCTC Legal Counsel review and approval. 6C. Right -of -Way Acquisition for State Route 74 SHOPP Projects. Jack Reagan stated that staff met with Caltrans and the County of Riverside Real Property Division on July 29,1997 and determined that 40 parcels will be required. Staff is seeking an amendment to the County's contract to add $208,400; the amendment to include a 15% contingency of $31,260 to accelerate the acquisition of right-of-way for the State Route 74 SHOPP projects. M/S/C that the Commission award Amendment 8 to the County of Riverside to provide right-of-way acquisition services for State Route 74 between 1-15 and 7th Street in the City of Perris for a base amount of $208,400 and contingency of $31,260, subject to RCTC Legal Counsel review and approval. 6D. Approval of the Design Cooperative Agreement 8-1021 with the State for the Design of Soundwalls on State Route 91 between Magnolia to Mary Streets. M/S/C that the Commission approve District Agreement No. 8-1021 with the State for Design of the Phase I soundwalls on State Route 91 between Magnolia to Mary Streets subject to Legal Counsel review and approval. 7. TRANSIT/RIDESHARE/BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN. 7A. Report on Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funding Recipients in Western Riverside County. M/S/C that the Commission review the report and support the recommended improvements as noted. 7B. TRIP in the Coachella Valley. M/S/C that the Commission: 1) Allocate an additional $27,500 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds available in the Coachella Valley to the TRIP Program; and, 2) amend the FY 1998 SunLine Transit Agency Short Range Transit to program a total of $47,500 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit Funds to the TRIP Program. Page 5 Minutes - Budget/Finance Committee August 6, 1997 7C. FY 1997-98 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Funding Recommendations. M/S/C that the Commission approve the FY 1997-98 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program allocations as shown on Schedule I. 7D. FY 1996-97 SB 821 Program Extension for the City of Banning. M/S/C that the Commission grant the City of Banning a six-month extension to December 31, 1997 to complete their FY 1996-97 SB 821 sidewalk projects as requested. 8. RAIL. 8A. Purchase of Santa Fe Depot Site. This item was taken off the Budget and Finance Committee agenda. 8B. Request for Matching Funds for the Corona Depot. This item was taken off the Budget and Finance Committee agenda. 8C. Joint Use Agreement with City of Riverside for Properties Associated with the Proposed Southside Platform and Pedestrian Overcrossing. This item was taken off the Budget and Finance Committee agenda. 8D. Option for Programming Rail -Designated Federal Funds to Capita/ Projects. Susan Cornelison stated that she was prepared to bring to the. Commission a request to program $3.1 million of Federal Section 9 dollars designated for rail improvements to a project on the Union Pacific Line within Riverside County but this may not be necessary because train movement has been moved onto another line. She reserved the right to bring this item as a late breaking item to the Commission. 9. ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business tocome before the Budget and Finance Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:38 p.m. ectfully submitted, Y Clerk of Commission AGENDA ITEM #5A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Analysis of the "Physics Alternative" Related to SCAG's Draft Regional Transportation Plan At its April 9, 1997 meeting, the Commission approved comments on the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) Preliminary Draft Regional Transportation Plan The essence of the two most significant comments were generally as follows: (1) The RTP must be financially constrained to be consistent with the Federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), and the only alternative which meet that requirement is what SCAG staff referred to as the CTC's alternative. (2) ISTEA requires that the RTP conform with the Implementation Plan for attainment of air quality standards. None of the alternative plan proposals in the SCAG preliminary draft were forecast to meet this requirement. With respect to air quality conformity, we observed that any RTP vehicle emissions calculations which are based upon the transportation model which forecasts greater than the capacity of the transportation system cannot occur. We suggested that capacity constraints should be considered to then determine if a conformity finding might then be made. Our comments have since come to be referred to as the "Physics Alternative" and we have advocated that a technical analysis should be made of it. The issue was referred to a standing Transportation Modeling Task Force for consideration as one of a number of agenda items. I had advocated merely subtracting the "phantom trips" from the emissions calculations. The task force indicated that such an approach would not be acceptable to federal agencies; the data used for air quality analysis must be based on the output of the transportation model. I also suggested that the model might then be adjusted by reducing the assumed trip generating rates, but this too was rejected as being too arbitrary. A subsequent special meeting of a select number of the task force members was set. Technical staff of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) have been most supportive of the general intent of RCTC's comments in relation to recognizing the physical constraints of the transportation system. So, we scheduled a pre -meeting to determine if our respective technical experts could come to agreement on a method for analyzing the "Physics Alternative". The attachment entitled Addressing Residual Demand in Transportation Models, which was authored by OCTA staff following that pre -meeting documents the OCTA, RCTC, and SANBAG technical experts' commonly proposed methodology. In layman terms, the proposed methodology: (1) selectively focuses on strategies to squeeze as much capacity as reasonably possible out of the corridors where current assignments are too high; and then, (2) selectively reduces the assumed population and employment numbers for the areas related to such corridors until they are model results indicates they have achieved their designed capacity (i.e., assume either economic pressures would not support "over building" as a natural control or a moratorium on housing in some areas and jobs in others if market pressures are insufficient). I believe that in the short-term, such a methodology will result in an RTP alternative which meets the ISTEA mandates and, thus, avoid the imposition of federal sanctions to withhold federal transportation funds and other sanctions. In the intermediate - term, is will provide targeted information to county transportation commissions, cities, and counties regarding selected improvements that might be made to add system capacity withing financial constrains (i.e., toll roads or benefit assessment districts), selected transportation control measures within financial constraints beyond the assumptions used by the model (i.e., more ridesharing, transit, or telecommuting), and/or potential adjustments to growth policies balance modeled trip origins and destinations (i.e., job/housing balance). Another intermediate -term result would be more time to deal with adjustment to a technical process which yields results about future behavior based upon past and present behavior which are not sustainable. The special modeling task force was receptive to the approach, but SCAG does not have the time nor resources to devote to the analysis; their deadline for completing the technical analysis for release of a revised draft RTP is the end of August and they will be absorbed with supporting the review of their work products by stakeholders throughout the region. In response to such constraints, I suggested that if SCAG could make their computer resources at the Inland Office and model and corresponding data available to our consultants the county commissions might undertake the analysis during the RTP review period (60 + days). This approach is acceptable to SCAG. A project development team composed of our commissions modeling experts would guide the work, with lead responsibility vested with Ron Taira of OCTA. Consultant staff would be assigned to perform the actual work of model adjustments. RCTC has existing contracts with Valley Research and Planning Associates for Congestion Management Program activities, to which this directly relates, and TransCore for Intelligent Transportation Systems planning. Attached is a cost proposal fromVRPA prepared in concert with TransCore. The estimated total cost of the work is $53,856; adding approximately 10% rounded up to the nearest thousand brings the total requested budget authorization to $60,000: The proposed source of funds are Transportation Development Act, Planning Funds for FY 1997-98 which have been allocated but are not yet programmed. Since time is of the essence, I have authorized VRPA to proceed and have also executed a Single Signature Contract with TransCore to enable them to proceed with service outside the scope of our existing contract. This item requests additional budget authority to cover the work and corresponding authorization of contract amendments. I will seek subsequent approval of appropriate funding participation from the other transportation commissions, but even if such support is not forthcoming this work is critical to our Commission to provide assurance that federal funds may continue to flow as the result of an ISTEA conforming RTP. I also acknowledge that it would be appropriate for RCTC to pay for a greater proportionate share of the costs since the time of other agencies' modeling staff will be dedicated to the project development team; RCTC has no such experts on staff and are dependent upon our consultants. Financial Assessment Project Cost $60,000 Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget FY 1997-98 TDA Planning Funds Year Included in Program Budget N Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Authorize a budget adjustment and corresponding amendments to contracts with Valley Research and Planning Associates (49%) and TransCore (51 %) for proportionate shares of a total of $60,000 to provide technical modeling support for analysis of the "Physics Alternative" to SCAG's draft Regional Transportation Plan; and, 2) Seek proportionate reimbursement of costs from other county transportation commissions within the SCAG region. Addressing Residual Demand in Transportation Models Issue: Travel demand models are developed from observed travel behavior data and assume that future trip making and travel behavior remains constant with time. The models estimate trips and travel based on input socioeconomic data assumptions independent of available capacity in the transportation system. This could result in a hypothetical imbalanced transportation system where demand far exceeds capacity. Such is the case with the current regional forecast, as indicated by the SCAG model. Demand cannot exceed capacity. As demand begins to exceed capacity, as under severely congested conditions, travel behavior will change from the norm. People will respond to congestion by forming carpools, switching to transit, telecommuting, working at home, changing travel time, etc. Additionally, market forces would change in response to severe congestion. Proposal: First, adjust model output to reflect changes in travel behavior resulting from severe congestion. Then, if any residual demand remains, identify the trip origins and destinations that contribute to the congestion and estimate the reduction in growth necessary to keep the demand in check with available capacity in the transportation system. The following is a detailed description of this two step process: Step 1: • Conduct a select link analysis on the PM -Peak congested network to identify corridors where demand exceeds capacity and determine origins and destinations of trips using these corridors. • Using the origins and destinations determined above, adjust the corresponding mode choice output trip table to reflect: - Increase transit ridership percentage to regional maximum (if transit is available). - Increase carpool equivalent to maximum occupancy within the region. - Increase telecommuting and work -at-home (get consensus on amount of increase). •, Convert the above trip table from productions/attractions to an origins/destinations format and to time -of -day (AM -Peak, Mid -Day, PM -Peak, Night). • Extend the PM -Peak period from 3-7 PM to 2-8 PM for trips using the congested corridors and convert the trip table, as above. • Replace the interchanges using the corridors with the extended peak trip interchanges. • It may be necessary to iterate through the process again, to address latent demand filling the freed up capacity. • Conduct a similar analysis on the other time periods. Step 2: • Conduct a select link analysis on the adjusted networks above and identify origins and destinations of trips using the over capacity corridors. • Using the above trip interchange, reduce growth in increments of approximately 5% until affected corridors are no longer over capacity. • Post the reduction in housing and employment on a TAZ map to illustrate to decision makers where changes in socioeconomic activities are likely to occur. This should provide a tangible, empirical data for more effective long-range local and regional planning. 03'7,133 .4." VALLEY RIwSEARCII AND PLANNING ASSOCIA TES Transportation Planning • Traffic Ettyincetitix/X11)4.1eltitg Intelligent 'Transportation Systems • Air Quality i'lanningUttialy'sis • Friirrlltttuweal Attalysis TO: Hideo Sugita FROM: Erik Ruehr- DATE: August 21, 1997 RE: SCAG Modeling Process - Physics Alternative This memorandum provides documentation of our discussion yesterday on scope and costs estimates for VRPA and TransCore to conduct a technical analysis of revising the SCAG modeling process to deal with trips over the capacity of the roadwa formal proposal, but is presented for your information.y system. This memo not a SCOPE OF WORK VRPA and TransCore will work on a time and materials basis with the SCAG model to identify taps over capacity of the roadway system, uSe peak spreading and mode split to reduce these trips to the extent possible, and identify where select socioeconomic adjustments may be needed in order to produce a realistic traffic forecast. We will follow the process outlined by OCTA titled "Addressing Residual Demand in Transportation Models" presented at our August 19 m SCAG. The work will start as soon as possible and conclude in mid -October. eeting at COST ESTIMATE VRPA Georgiena Vivian: 64 hours @ $125 $8 000 Erik Ruehr. 160 Hours @100 16,000 �itect EXpenc• VRPA Total: $26,400 itanscore Steve Smith: Sailendra Batmendakur, Direct man fires TransCore Total: 64 hours @ S150 256 hours @ S60 S9,600 15,360 2A96 S27,456 Central California: 171(c \l' jruuilc'r. sum. 10;; * 1•rc•.in t',\ !1;:7I ! • (:•n;p " 1 Plot: • 1• \\ (::'1'tl :'; 1 I':.,lt- r•tu.ul Southern er ou hernC n1iCrnia::id4.'• 1F...c:, (•r.arJl l 1p,h�. Ntou. �tt.i' ',Ili 1 c:1'1:'1!c•• Ic,it') -"*.''• I7r''•• t \\ 11 1't?'.Iic' (r.2 't!: ut.ul at ,.tar I. .a •two 11.11, l il, t.l'I Ii11- I •1..1 , ‘‘•, - 1 r•.li ltM,. AGENDA ITEM #56 • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Update on WRCOG: (1) Consideration of . Functions and Relationships with Other Agencies; and, (2) Internal Administrative Matters; Relation to RCTC Support During its August 25, 1997 meeting, the WRCOG Executive Committee considered two agenda items of significance to RCTC. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the direction from discussion of those items and suggest RCTC supporting actions. The first related to consideration of possible realignment of some current WRCOG functions to other agencies. Supervisor Jim Venable and the Mayors of cities located within the Third District met to discuss the possible realignment and made their report to the WRCOG Board. Included in the recommendations was a proposal for RCTC to assume responsibility for transportation planning matters in the western Riverside County area. The WRCOG proposed to designate a. Select Committee of their members to meet jointly with a similar RCTC committee. The Chairman should appoint representatives to meet with WRCOG. The second related to internal administrative matters. The WRCOG discussed and approved the following recommendations: 1. Negotiate a contract for financial services with RCTC. Dean Martin, RCTC Chief Financial Officer, had prepared the attached proposed cost for service which was accepted by the WRCOG Board. 2. Continue exploration of terminating the existing lease and proceed with RCTC as a viable option for at least temporary space. In order for RCTC to provide the desired space, one of the following two options would be required: a. Release. 682 sq. ft. of office space to the back; Naty Kopenhaver, Office Services Manager/Clerk to the Board, has negotiated a $1.25 per sq. ft./full service ($850/month, $8500/10 months) for the balance of the year. RCI is offerring the space at $1.25 per sq. ft. to assist the Commission in locating space to house WRCOG staff. The lease will have to be renegotiated, in conjunction with the Suite 300 space, for FY 98-99. The available space would accommodate 5 people and space for an additional 7 is available within RCTC's current office suite; OR b. Terminate the existing tenancy of Brown & Holmes Healthcare Group in the Commission's annex at 1746 Spruce Street. Since 30 days notice is required (current lease expires November 8, 1997), this option may not be viable if the WRCOG move is to occur very quickly. It would also cost RCTC more, since we would lose current rental revenues of $1, 500 per month or $18,000 per year. Although not specifically addressed during the WRCOG meeting, one additional issue which should be considered by RCTC is providing additional grant funding authorization to WRCOG for FY 1997-98 work activity. During its June 11, 1997 meeting, the Commission approved $47,000 of funding to WRCOG which was sufficient for the first quarter. If RCTC intends to provide additional funding support, that action should be taken during this meeting to provide WRCOG with assurance that it can meet its cash flow requirements. In light of the progress which WRCOG is making to functionally integrate its transportation programs with RCTC, I would support an additional $47,000 allocation. Financial Assessment Project Cost 1. $45,000 for additional personnel expense to support WRCOG accounting functions; 2. $8,500 for additional office space rent; and, 3. $47,000 for LTF planning funds to WRCOG for the second quarter of FY 1997-98. Source of Funds Funds to cover the additional accounting burden would come from WRCOG funds; Funds for office space rent and allocation of planning funds to WRCOG would come from budgeted but unallocated LTF funds. ,,+ }::':%C i:::i:•r{{vie'::.'•: 4 : n••Y :.::..}•:::: +i •.•x by .} : r.::: n•:.::::: r....... vv.} . :.,:}}.r.• }.:+v:v.:.. :..+.:�.•f}s..: r.•4k.: }.. .v:::::::::::: :v:::::.•; .....::... ....:.h:.::. ::•.vvv{! .... :. •. v... .....:..:.••v: •.v; ...:. r. r........ ...... . Jv:• �':... rh.}x � �, .:. r. .. :.v:. ..... .... iii:...............:.....::...:::h.:.. ''' ...................... . h..... 1't irk .} �•r�.:�. v.•.• :::i�vi ';:;,{'••::::.:....: r..8: yi}:•::::.r; .• : �}'ir•::.. {1i.'r r.....v...:{ •}..... i p rrh..... } .•r�k F•},.vk�}},{��'.v.�:^A. � • +vvv,• v,•{.: n:r:::::: x: }} :... F,h::. ..... .0 .;. .....+r.::.:•:::.r{::vv •}:::}}:•:{: •::v::;}•..: }{+.....:..:. .v.:....:.v...+frr N:•:...... ... ....v................. ......... iiiii. n :{�ri.:. ...'•ki} Included in Fiscal Year Budget N .. ... .... . .{......... Year Included in Program Budget N Year Programmed Approved Allocation N Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Y Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) The Chairman should appoint members to meet with the WRCOG Select Committee to consider functional responsibilities in relation to RCTC; 2) Approve RCTC providing accounting support services to WRCOG for reimbursement as proposed; 3) Authorize WRCOG to share space with RCTC for the balance of FY 1997-98, including rental of additional space at RCTC's current offices. No direct charge would be made to WRCOG, but incremental costs for additional space is proposed to be funded from budgeted but unprogrammed LTF planning funds for western county programs; and, 4) Approve an additional $47,000 of LTF planning funds for WRCOG for the second quarter of FY 1997-98. The WRCOG Overall Work .Program and Budget has already been submitted and I believe it sufficiently justifies the funding. Riverside County Transportation Commission Proposal to Provide Financial Management Services for the Western Riverside Council of Governments One time activities Establish account structure Design cost al °cation plan Design detail GLA Hrs. 16 Rate 97.91 Amt. 1,566.63 Hrs. 16 Amt. 1,566.63 Hrs. Amt. Hrs. Amt. 30 97.91 2,937.44 30 2,937.44 24 97.91 2,349.95 24 2,349.95 One time acti Mies 70 6,854.02 70 6,854.02 Ongoing activities Invoice Processing G/L Maintenar ce Audit Coordination 180 36 97.91 97.91 17,624.63 3,524.93 60 12 5,874.60 1,174.92 60.00 12.00 5,874.60 Financial Reporting Investments Budget Monitoring 40 97.91 3,916.40 1,174.92 60.00 12.00 5,874.60 18 18 9 97.91 97.91 97.91 1,762.46 1,762.46 881.23 6 6 3 587.46 587.46 293.73 6.00 587.46 40.00 6.00 1,174.92 3,916.40 587.46 6.00 3.00 587.46 293.73 6.00 3.00 587.46 293.73 Total ongoing 301 29,472.11 87 8,518.17 87.00 Total all activ ities 371 36,326.13 157 15,372.19 8,518.17 127.00 12,434.57 87.00 8,518.17 127.00 12,434.57 The above analysis involves review and supervision at a management level. It does not include clerical processing. No provision has been made for purchasing, contract administration, or budget preparation. Indicated hours are an estimate. Actual hours may be higher or lower than shown. Rate is calculated using the Commission's multiplier applied to the CFO's base hourly wage. fiusers/martinwd/budget98/rcogprop.wk4 AGENDA ITEM #5C RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Direction to Advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) to Select a New Programmer to Maintain RCTC's Various Data Base Programs RCTC currently has several data base programs that contain information to support various areas of responsibility. RCTC currently has data base applications supporting property licenses, document control, ride share tracking, and other miscellaneous programs. The programmer responsible for the majority of the above programs is currently unable to continue providing support to the Commission Staff. Staff is recommending that the Commission move forward with a selection process that will identify an individual or firm that can continue maintenance and creation of RCTC databases on an as needed basis. A brief scope of work for this effort is as follows: A. Provide a trained data base programmer that will act as a single point of contact for coordination of the various assigned tasks associated with maintenance of existing RCTC data base applications and the creation of new data base applications as directed by RCTC Staff. B. Creating or updating Foxpro code, menus and reports for the rideshare incentive tracking program, rail parcel tracking program, fixed asset tracking program, document tracking program and other database applications requested by RCTC Staff. C. Installation and update of the data base programs as requested by RCTC Staff. D. Training of RCTC Staff on the use of the programs. E. Maintaining and delivering of an up to date version of all programming materials and documentation, including source code, to RCTC at intervals or times requested by RCTC Staff. F. Provide telephone and site support as required. Financial Assessment Project Cost To be determined through the selection process Source of Funds `r,•i,:tiG:; L: rtitii�.{?^>?in•'•i..R 'C•::n,`.\^;> }�Y.?;:••L} •:.??':#: Measure "A" Financial Assessment Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission direct Staff to move forward with a selection process that will identify an individual or firm that can continue maintenance and creation of RCTC databases on an as needed basis. AGENDA ITEM #5D RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Program Manager THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Performance Evaluation Proposal Review Committee • The Commission currently has two Requests for Proposals out for bid. One to conduct the Triennial Performance Audit of the Commission and the second to conduct the Triennial Performance Audit for the Transit Operators. Bids are due on Friday, September 12, 1997. Previously, we have convened a policy level committee to select the consultant(s). Listed below are various options for the composition of the Proposal Review Committee: • Budget and Finance Committee (Commissioners Barry, Kleindienst, van Haaster) • Personnel Committee (Commissioners Buster, Clifford, Kelly) • Short Range Transit Plan Committee --This committee is comprised of one policy representative from each of the transit operators in the Western County and one representative from RCTC. Currently there are two Commissioners on this committee, Councilman Clifford representing the City of Riverside and Judy Nieburger, representing RCTC. If this committee is selected we would recommend the addition of a representative from SunLine Transit Agency. • Ad -Hoc Committee with one representative from each of the above committees. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Budget and Finance Committee provide direction to staff on the composition of the Proposal Review Committee for the selection of a consultant(s) to conduct the Triennial Performance Audits. AGENDA ITEM #5E RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: W. Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer Louie Martin, Project Controls Manager THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial and Cost & Schedule Reports Attached are Combining Statements of Revenues and Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Unaudited) and the Highway and rail projects quarterly budget report for the Quarter Ending June 30, 1997. Also, attached is the cost and schedule status of the Measure A Contracts. The contracts are segregated by Measure A Plan category and includes Highway, Rail and other Plans and Programs. The cost information includes Commission authorized funds to date, contractual commitments to date, current monthly expenditures, and total expenditures to date. The cost and schedule reports are through the month ending July 31, 1997 prepared by Bechtel Civil, Inc. Detailed supporting material for all contracts and Cooperative Agreements is available from Bechtel staff. Staff will be available at the meetings to answer any questions. Financial Assessment Project Cost Source of Funds n..r :......v.: :.,.4•.,:.. ....:::::.....:::::t•}:::vv,•.,:::::tt::::: x; v:: v.,v:• ...: ::•....... .:}v::::::::,..•::.v:..v•; :r:...'....... ....... n...,.. .::::}ti{ :::::•}v.}v.}vx++•};}'•}w•f v: rv}}}:.v:::.v:.: �....•.:. •:'f.•:•:•:}.•:... ::::................... . .. ............::::::::}:.v;•}}:4::+.•}:•:•:•}Y..:....... f . J.......v.,,......:: .. ..... ..A •.•:.., .....}r......::.•�::.: ::: rr.4::.v:::r},:......r:4 :fi:. n.: ........,........ ......... .:r... ..,.v: •:. .: •:r..{ {.:.... .. .. .......... ..•............. xv ....... .; :* .:, ...:.......... 4..:...:...::::: '... •.•.:::: '�:�i ,+ ...... }•.}.•:✓•:.... }..•y... f. .n ...:v {.•..r::.•.v: r;.,v ✓x: r..:.•4.{+'::: \::{ :•::.:::....:.,•::\w: .v.•.••::.: ti :........:... .:....... .............. .........rv.............. ..:.,v::;4,,•::::::::::::: .x. r ,....... z. Included in Fiscal Year Budget Year Included in Program Budget Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable X STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission receive and file Attachments O19'6S0'89 1"61'SOZ16 L661'0£aunf aOmvpe8 (Mad T8Z'96VSZI 18V961'SZT 9661 `T Anf-a3NIV'IVU QAIII3 Z££4Z9£`8 000`OOS`Z salaua8upuoO (6££17LL`8h) (L8016121,0 aNR LIQAIadxa (IIaQAtll)uaAO SaIIAtaAall QAIV (6S6`£96`SZ) (6S6`£96`SZ) (Sasa)saamaos ONIDNVAII3 Rama 0 (3no) ul saajsusa; 8upatadO spaaaoad 3QaQ (Sasa) Saaaaos ONIDNIVAII3Immo %9- (ZSZ`£8Z`bZ) (08£`0T8`ZZ) ZL8`ZL121 SauanaAladxa (uaama) Imo SaamaAaI %SL OiS'80Z'SZ Z£Z'£SS'ZOT ZZLISCLL SaIIIIimmaaxa'MIDI %S6 888`I1 8LL`911 0681,£Z ;Sumo puldu9 %£9 ZZL`ZIT 000170£ 8LZ`I6I (9OO11As)suopnqu;slQ puuaunuano8aa;uT %SL £661861,Z O910ZZ6`66 LOS`066`6L II %86 LT6`0£ 000'00£`I S.L'�afOiId/SI�IVIIOOI[d'IV LOy %06 98L`OiZ . , £8S'69Z'T s;uaulasmgslQ V.LS 0 60T 600 Z £Z£`86L`I 9ulboy r8 ausua;upry� `suo uaad (ZO£`TOO 869`ZS8`IZ 000` 'SZ`ZZ spool' 0 3aa(a /oZOT %06 68S`TLS P '8 souls 890`6£6`S 6Lb`L9£`S (TPs2I VIRIOS sapnlauNsuagrdsusa; roads °%OS 06I'ItrOZ £I6`S9T`Ob £ZetZ0`0Z pslsalmi psuol8ag /066 £66 ST S90`9Si`i ZLS`017i`T OVgAIVs sapnilaxa-aaus;slssu aa;nunuoO %££Z (0T9`Z8) 6S0`Z9 O mi O 699`hbT uopngla3uo de Vmps %8h LZL`TL9 991'0611 600819 MO1I Tlg2I %9I ££S`£TT 000`S£I L9eTZ pa ; Jll� uo ns suo %0SZ (£h8`6££) 000`£ZZ £68`LSS 8ulaaaul8ua URI %£6 80 0£Oh SLS`989`S LII`£8Z`S MO1I isbgBlg %86 60`861, 000`O66 Tt'8`ISh sawn 'wads SaegBlg %68 980`£6£`Z 9T9`SZ£11 0£9`Z86`II uopana3suoO LabgBlg 12/06S 80018S LIO`Z06`I 600IZ8 8upaaulgua � gby 8 TH%Z8 6Z6`6ZZ SZearT 966`Li0`i puaua a Eoad (S6Z99Z) OOS £99 S6L6Z6 as as paari p�%PS £66`917Z 09609£S L9h068Z (Taal puauaO sapnaxa) saaaas rucl3 d %86 9LS`6 6LL`LLP £0Z`8912 s;gauaq pus sales ' spartud/sunuac as %96 LS6`IOT h00 08S Z LPOILP`Z NOLLVILLSININIQV'IV.LO.L %TN S86601 OSVO£9 %L6 8Z6`9 � S96�OZS sasuadxa peagsanO�suopeaadO 0£8 80Z Z0I'ZOZ assail ammo %TOT (066) 000`OOI 6126`OO1 sa4uas pt alpu aO %LOT (S£I`9£) OT9`ITS SI2L`LPS (pan puauaO sapnilaxa) aalnaas psuolssaloaa 6/086 8Z9`ZZ PIT`6ZI`I 98109011 s;gauaq pus swops mol3ai3slulunPV SaIIInamadxa %66 8SZ`SZ6 ZS8`ZI,e6L 126S`LI8`8L Z0T (££0'T£I) 000'IZ£ 9 SaamaAau'IVIO.L % %986`LLT CEng', a:avowssaaaJul T88 9L8 Z S68 869 Z sana''a?I +aNlO VoLL SIZ`S66`i 917S`SL9`8 I££`089`9 sanuanagsluausuaanop Jaw yIwo-rams piapal /oS6 06Z`ILZ SZP'69£`S S8I`860`S sanuanagxnl sajnS.pysp %MI (OST`88£`I) 000 OOS 9S OSI`888`LS 'asnsoa —sanuana xvi saps ji ulaaxadn 8 aupgu ua� ;a$pn Tgn3aV SaflAiaAa2I NIV £12:60 L6-$nV-LZ mg(0-L6:a iI.4 L66I `0£ aun f aulPua asa i ao3 MOISSILIIIII03 NOIIV,12I0dSNVILL AINI(103 aQISIIaARI HILL 30 IVfI,i7V *SA TaOQfIR OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 27-Aug-97 For Year Ending June 30, 1997 Western 09:48 AM State Western County General Western Eastern Transit Coachella County Commercial Combining REVENUES SAFE / FSP County County Assistance Const. Const. Paper Total Sales Tar Revenues -Measure A 1,525,500 0 40,864,413 15,498,237 0 0 Other Sales Tar Revenues 5,098,185 340 0 0 57,888,150 Federu/, State,Locul &Other Governments Revenues 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,098,185 Other Revenues ,432 1,234,884 1,521,319 0 891,483 0 41,770 2,956,443 6,680,331 Interest Income 183.195 342,658 492,205 72,843 1,429,792 0 0 $5.885 712117 179,255 182,142 2,698,895 TOTAL REVENUES 902.441 58.657 3.196.199 1113147 100.292 6.452.033 7,183,971 1,812,974 43,170,793 17,830,470 950,140 3,196,199 1,434,172 3,238,877 78,817,594 EXPENDITURES Administration: Salaries and benefits 981,049 125,438 Professional services(Eacludes General Legal) 531,362 13,383 0 0 0 1,106,486 General Legal services 95,795 0 0 3,000 547,745 Office lease 5,155 0 100,949 1.58 12,144 Operations/Overhead 473739202,402 58 42.077 � 1,� TOTAL ADMINISTRATION COI 633 633 520.465 2,272,420 198,196 633 1,266 633 633 633 3,633 2,478,047 Capital Outlay 218,452 16,438 234,890 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 6,567,435 1,742,115 22,378,170 7,582,572 1,270,216 23,472,585 1,405,422 12,926,206 77,344,722 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Debt Proceeds Operating transfers in (out) (910,000) 0 (17,962,080 0 0 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES) ) (8,094,011) 0 92,132 0 910,000 (25,963,959� AND REVENUES OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES (293,465) 70,858 2,830,542 2,153,886 320 07 ( 6) (20,184,254) 28,750 (8,777,329) (24,491,087) Contingencies 250,000 10,000 490,000 0 0 500,000 1,000,000 250,000 2,500,000 FUND BAI.ANCE4uIy 1,1996 4192128 2325.167 18102.760 33386,188 1.432.881 32.493445 21.532,220 11.531,692 125.196181 FUND BALANCE -June 30, 1997 3.748.763 2,386.025 20.543302 35,540,074 1.112,805 11.808,891 20,560,970 2,504,363 98.205.194 Programs/Projects Salaries and benefits 47,069 421,134 Professional services(Ezcludes General Legal) 200,873 49,969 36,324 468,203 General Legal services 200,873 9,969 736,324 0 2,300 289,467 Projects -General 31 0 0 1,753,396 7,700 0 26,440 0 0 929,745 Highway Engineering 0 0 0 7,845 0 0 1,017,496 0 Highway Construction 6,769 0 0 297,336 464,127 52,778 821,009 Highway Special Studies 0 4,345 85,468 0 462,179 890,508 10,540,029 11,982,530 55,670 277,048 117 513 Highway ROW 0 0 0 1,610 0 451,841 Rail Engineering 0 0 0 109,966 0 0 2,794,842 48,543 2,329,766 5,283,117 Rail Construction 0 0 557,843 0 0 0 0 0 557,843 Rail ROW 0 0 21,467 0 0 0 0 0 21,467 144, SCRRA Capital Contribution 550 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 144,669 0 618,439 0 0 0 0 0 618,439 Commuter assistance -Excludes SANBAG 550 1,493 1,138,530 0 0 Regional Arterial 0 0 0 0 0 1,140,572 Specialized Transp/Trans(Includes SCRRA Rail) 2,687,200 0 1,230,280 1,143,712 0 19,881,011 0 0 20,024,723 Streets &Roads 0 0 11,230,280 1,449,999 0 0 0 0 5,367,479 Project Maintenance, Operations & Towing 604,423 1,193,894 6 0 0 0 22,254,000 STA Disbursements 0 0 0 0 0 1,798,323 TOTAI PROGRAMS/PROJECTS 0 4 0 4 1169.583 0 0 0 1169.583 3,885,285 1,527,481 22,377,537 7,581,307 1,269,583 23,471,952 1,404,789 12,922,573 74,440,507 LTF Disbursements 191,278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 191,278 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and changes in Fund balances- General, Special Revenue and Capital Projects Funds Budget Variance explanations For twelve months ending June 30, 1997 REVENUES Federal, State, Local and other Governments Revenues @ 77% Expected STA funds for the 3rd and 4th quarter have not been received. EXPENDITURES Highway Engineering @59% There is a total of $581K that several cities in the Coachella Valley have not billed for Route 111 design: Cathedral City for Date Palm, City of Palm Desert for Deep Cyn, San Pablo/San Luis Rey, Portola, Monterey, City of Indio for the Monroe to Rubidoux project. Highway Special Studies @48% Transcore is $124,000 behind in billing for the ITS strategic plan; the RT79 realignment study by CH2M Hill was late starting and we have not received their June invoice. The Corona Bypass study being performed by RBF & Assoc. was late in starting and we have yet to receive their June invoice. The San Jacinto Branch line study by Boyle Eng. was completed under budget. Rail Construction @ 16% It was anticipated that some rail construction on the southside platform at Downtown Riverside station would start prior to fiscal year end, but that did not happen. The City of Riverside was to relocate a water service line and that work has not yet been performed. Rail ROW @ 48% The acquisition of the Atco Rubber Bldg. for the Dwntwn Sta. has not been completed. General Legal Services @140% Overrun is due to on -going litigation not budgeted for Route 79 Lamb Canyon, Gilman Springs Grade Separation and Sanderson Ave. Bridge project right of way cases. Reimbursement by Caltrans is expected for all of these costs. In addition legal counsel was involved in the litigation of several construction claims. General Note: A number of the accounts now showing under budget will come in closer to budget once end of the year accruals have been posted. It is not anticipated that any of these will run over budget. 6L6''IS£610SZ$ LZL'068'S6$ £08'SLZ'L$ 685'OTO'9$ T36'SL8'TT$ T9'i+'T9Z'9$ £L8'TOZ'Ob$ L08' TSP I TT$ EZZ16£91Ti$ 9£1+' LZ6' ST$ 80T'£TVIVE$ eLZ'ESS'L$ LZT' St e' Z$ 000'LLE'T$ EZ9'ZTZ'S$ L66T'0£ zmnr num WM oz szunzxaNxdxa 6TS' OLZ' i+$ bfiS'T09$ T86'T6b$ OZ6' i7Z$ TZ6'EVZ$ LE9'SZ$ EEE'OZi7$ tiTZ'TOT$ 6L£'LS6$ E00'T$ L66T' 0£ mar DNIaNZ umuen0 uo3 xunzxaNxaxx 0'Z6 %8'66 %0'OOT %0'OOT %T'86 86'Z6 %6'L6 %T'86 %T'96 $I+' 08 %S'86 %0'OOT %0'68 8T'8 %0'OOT 68S Z98 TST'695'S9Z$ 8TZ'ETT'86$ 996'6ZS'L$ 068' 80ti 8$ 9£b'T601ZT$ SLT'Lteet TOS196£10b$ TE91bT9'tat 9T9'8Eb'9$ 9Eb1Z8T19TS VOT'TZ£'SE$ UT6'£8T'8$ TD9'TSV'£$ 000'LL£'T$ £Z9'ZTZ'S$ umuvna u03 aiva S30IOANI 30 u38WnN ummvn0 u03 aasszo0ua SZOIOANI a0 uzawnN vz-ruS' 8eZ$ T0810bE'86$ 996'6ZS'L$ 068'806'8$ 9EL16ZE'ZT$ OOS'088'8$ ZE8'vtz' Tb$ 6L9' 968' ns STT'OOL'9$ 8L0'STT'OZ$ 866'868'S£$ VT6'E8T'8$ Z66'8L8'£$ 00010001LT$ EZ9'ZTZ'S$ s�Ixzoz arvu umnrampo '0011a'INZONl / xaxu-N-MUVa 'Sons s mad NIMMOxa SZOIAIMS INSVIZDttNVK zoaroua MIVM0ud'AOIM II MN:VW/MINI szoaroua STZ-I T6 arznou SIOMOtta TTT amnou 98 3znou 6L aznou bL e7zA0u 09 3znOu vazaiuum 30 azxa VNOWO 30 41I0 NOIIVOO I'IY suit ISNIVDY ami amoo % mva oz szNMAIMaaaoo avunzovuINoo L666 `0£ 3NrI ONION3 U0RI3d 1210d32113Jane Aitaupcmo S1031'021d 1Ib21/AVMHOIH V 32111SV3W 01021 NOIsVOOTIV anrumunv NOISsxVINmo Noxzdxuosaa zoaroua %6'8L %9'48 %L'ZL % L'ZL %4'96 Mr66'' I' %0'00 L %£'86 %Z'ZO l %9'L6 %£'Z6 %0'8a,, %0'9z 91,0'LZ9114$ ZSZ'LZ$ SLS'09l' L$ L69'SZ4' L$ Wee L6'8$ 6693111$ 669'449'4$ 9E4'LZ6'S l$ 60Z'0$4`S£$ 100'000'a 601'OZ8'ZZ$ 160'00£'6$ 69£tL99`L$ 69£'LSS'L$ tit,' its 4l1'1L$ £;o L a6ed 60Z'9L$ 61L'63 0617'99$ 9L1 9$ 9L4'S$ 000`SLl$ 000'SL 1$ C60'10LS 6L4'S 1Z$ SZ£'S$ 68Z'99b$ on`LL$ l60'4$ 29L'9$ S9L'9$ %1'86 %TOO L %0'00l %0'001 %4'L6 %L'96 %1'96 %YOB • %4'09 Y.9'86 %0'00 L %8'L6 %0'001 %o•l U %0'00 L %0'001 %0'001 00'1.£9371•9371.$ OZZ'69l$ 000'00£'Z$ 3617 L9' L$ 0917'0£9'0 3 919`8£4'9$ 9 L9'8£4'9$ 9t1•`Z8L'9L$ 9£4'Z91'9L$ 1r01!41•Z£`9£$ 000`000'£$ 44L'4ZZ'£Z$ 09£'960'6$ 80s`£9Z'8$ 4 L6'£8l'8$ 169`6£$ L69'6£$ 00'6L9`9611 VL$ OZZ'69 t$ 000'00£'Z$ 36'4L9' L$ 80S'Z L8'0 L$ '91.14002'9$ S L 1 `OOL'9$ 81011 L`0Z$ 8L391 l'OZ$ 80611#8`9£$ OOOb00'£$ 8£9'Z9L'£Z$ 09£'960'6$ 116.18L8$ 416'£8 L'8$ L69.69$ L69'6£$ 31V0 Ol S1NN111WW00 31VO Ol L661. 'LE AInf N011V0011V 31V0 Ol N011V0011V 1SNIVOV 31V0-01 S321f1110N3dX3 030N3 1-11NOVI 'H111V 1SNIVOV S1N3111WW00 03ZINOH111V Saff1110N3dX3 % 210d 3811110N3dX3 03111W0100 % 1V21f110V211N00 NOISSIM100 31n021 A81210d3211360n8 91331'021d 11V21/AVMHOIH 32111SYMAI 31021 46 01n02) W018ns (9£L608) APn;s ssecIAG euwo0 (9ES6021) dwea )looH AMU 'mg uame uen (9ZE6021) Bulssamapun AeluNow (9ZL617Z96 'S 146 '90E6 ' 101608) simpuS gnlo se11aS '8 sIMPuS /AOH NeW o; 'BeW S1031021d 1,6 31n021 LLL 3 n021'lplazanS S£96 (8£96'L£96'0£96'9Z96'£Z9614£Z6'LZZ6 '61Z6021) S103f021d Lit 3111021 96 3,mom iviolans (E 1Z6 08) uol;e6g0N $ uol;orwsuo0 S1031‘021d 98 31n021 6L sino21 iv nanS (8ZL6021) Buluepon pa ia;sayoulM (Z£L6 'OEL6'ZZ96'6Z46'£Z46021) 'lo;d uoAue0 sgwei (6Z£6 '9£L6'L£E6'90E6 'Z0£6' 10£6' L L 1608) MO8rucupw3/Buuaaupu3 9103f021d 6L alma tL 31no21-1dtolsns (6£L6 'Z 10608) MO8 8 uol;one;suo3 swad;o Amo - weweadly and wedoo0 91331'021d PL 31n021 09 311021-1tr101ens (8£L60M) uBlseo lewd ;off apla ,u, Ted 9103f021d 09 31n021 NOI1dINOS30 103f0Nd %0'86 %0'96 %L'96 7.980 %9'96 %£'ZL %6'£S %£'86 %L'09 700'66 %0'6s %9'66'' %0•001 %E'66 %6'96 sac"' titan see 1£L'06$ S LZ'09E'S$ ZS0'bZb'L$ Z80 80'99 bbS'ZbZ$ Sb6'9E9'Z$ E69' 10Z'£$ 981.`SLSL N$ 991'SL6'11$ Z98"6ZI, L9 09 1'19Z'S$ 6bS'bL9$ ES 1 `b0Z' 1$ £ 9Z£'991717£$ Sb9'6b$ Ob0'E69'S$ £ 10 Z 86e8 iti'ss£`Z$ SLZ'9ZZ$ bZ9'9S$ b9b'L91$ fi*Z'9tiL$ 6i7V861$ csv'Zt$ E6b'ZL$ sn'ss$ 917e66$ 8E10898$ 91b'999$ OSL'OL$ 019' 1$ Ob 1'6$ %fr L6 %8'66 %9'66 %0'001 q%aOWL %0'001 %woo; %0'001 %0'001 %TOO l %VIM %1'96 %s Zs %b'Z6 %Ole %0'001 /06"4.6 %0roo 1 %0'001 %PIS 1,8r199`99Z$ 81'Z`£iV866 909`97S'Z6$ £ lb'b9S'S$ 996`8$S!:0 996'6ZS'L$ oss`sov`s$ 000'0Sb$ 6ZL`E99`Z$ 19l'SLZ'S$ 9Et7' 160'Z l$ 921 `L17re$ SL 1'00 l'9$ 000'069$ 000'LSZ' 1$ 609 96C'O S 9Ze'99b17s$ 000'09$ EL 1'9L9'9$ 809`stV'Z9Z$ 99E'9LL'Z6$ E 1171799'9$ 996'.6Zs'L$ 996'6ZS'L$ 000'0Sb$ 6ZL'E99'Z$ 19l'SLZ'S$ 9£L`6Z£'zI$ 9EL'6Z£'Z1$ oos'os8'aS 000'009`9$ OOS`EZO' 1$ 000'LSZ' 1$ Z£9'atz' ti$ 9ZE'99b17E$ 000'09$ b0S'9ZL'9$ 31V0 Ol S1NWlIM100 31VO Ol L661. 'It AInf N011V0011V 31V0 Ol N011V0011V 1SNIVOV 31V0-01 SM1111I0N3dX3 030N3 H1NOIN Hl(1V 1SNIVOV S1N3W11WW00 03ZRIOH1f1V S32111110N3dX3 % 2AOd M 1110N3dX3 031111 NN00 % lVaf110Va1N00 NOISSIM00 31noa A8 11i0d3211300n8 6103fOad AVMHOIH ..V.. 321nSV31/11 0101A SlVl01 111 [i:i31nWwoo 1V1oism (0ZL6 '0000'LE/9Z/OZ96 Z£/ l£/LZ/ lZS6 'bMON) sisoO •;uieIAVs1S00 dO/boy aNs/uogeig (1£L6'0076'OZb6 17ZE6 'EZE6 08) 6upeaul6u3/salpnis -viva tom WW00 01a'N'�lad 1V1018nS (ZbL6-017L6'ZlL6-10L6) (ssaiduwl `E l96 - 1096 '9Z96 '9Z96 '91176 OW WVtlOONd '1N30NI/30RI-N-HaVd 'SOAS V NV`►s10.1T400ad iVi018nS (LZL608 - ueld S11) APn3S leloadS (L00608) V0/I0.quo0 6ulddeiN (L0E6'6116'900602:1) se1PniS wei6oid S301A2136 V Ntlld WV210021d 131H0381V/10i8ns (00L608 n.41006908) 'Aa3S iWJW 103POad 131H038 ONVH02131N11V10113AS (9E960a) uol rupuo0 01 ewnA (1E960H) 3w6W Asuo0 01 ewnA (1076021) (3'8Sd) u61sea leU!d 01 ewnA INV/10021d 'AOadWI 3ONV143a31N1 irriViaten$ ( 600617006 021) AeM-10-346!8 (LZ96021)183039 (9106 '900608) 'ualnu3/6.0u3 fueulwllaid S1031'021d 96Z-1 NOI1dIa0S30 10310ad 46/lE/L0 Bu/pu3 •oyy snieJS • £ 10 £ abed 'S661 JegwenoN epino/V Jo Apo Aq pi ui pied seM lunowe sill quewaai6e soli Japun saouenpe snoonaid „y„ amseaoN leloi Gig sluesaidai'nue.1$ jo saouenpe oelol ... •sle6pnq yea/( leosg o; pomp.' iou pue pe.quoomero,ld oeioi Jo; 918 semen Hy swei6o.1d luawanoidwo a6uel iem isup6e ueoi (1) :310N %t�'tsr c £Z8`Zb8`£ZS %0'00l °k0"001 %0'00I %1'8 %l'9 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ :. 0$ Zf8 8861 a01e06034 0917'Ob914 Z01 11► 14 Z6l'81717' I$ 0$ 0$ SZ8 881. 8 £Z9`Ztrg$ £Z9'Z IZ'S$ 000110911.$ 000'009'I$ 000411£'4:$ 000'LL£'l$ a 0$ 0$ 0$ £Z9'Z IZ'S$ 000`0001; 000'009'1$ 000'0a0'a$ 000'000'L l$ S'IV1O1:: VN02100 AO A1.10 1V1018 ns aumoruls a6eupp waolS (I) se6ueyaialul uloaun o 'yaws VN02100 A0 A110 NV013>ivi NoAtoto 1V Olans (ZZb6021) sluewenoiduo pa uoi(ue0 peomea 10 uoporulsuo0 pue upsea leUld 3HV1 NOANVO d0 A110 NVO1 V13INHMAI 1b lans (pa;eunula1 pawawBy ueol) (b££6021) sluawanoudwl a6ueyalalul S 1Z-1/91-1 luawaai6y ueoi vanianW dO A110 '1.IWW00 03A021ddV 1N3W11NNN00 30NV1V9 S30NVAOV L661 ' LE APT 1N3W11WW00 NOIldINOS30 1SNIVOV 31110-01 emaNV1Sln0 NV01 .V. 3WSV3114 030N3 1-11NOW 03AONddV 103f0Nd S321n110143dX3 % omaNV1Sln0 1V101 210d 321n110N3dX3 1031'021d A81210d321Japans 81331'021d SOV021 V S13321181V001/AVMHOIH .,V» 32111SV3W 31321 AGENDA ITEM #6A RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to FY 1998-2002 Measure "A" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for the City of Palm Desert The Measure "A" Ordinance requires each recipient of streets and roads monies to annually provide to the Commission a five-year plan on how those funds are to be expended in order to receive disbursements for local streets and roads. The agencies are also required to submit the annual certification of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) accompanied by documentation supporting the calculation. The City of Palm Desert's Measure "A" Five -Year Plan was approved by the Commission at its July 9, 1997 meeting. Any subsequent additions, deletions, or substitutions to the Plan must be submitted to the Commission for approval. Therefore, the City is requesting an amendment to their Plan in order to include six projects carried over from FY 1996-97 to FY 1997-98. Financial Assessment Project Cost Source of Funds :.:}::::...:..... ......\ ::::.v .. :•{•;;:::u,}•};•}:S}i}:•}'r'?.;.:?: siv:•}}}:::•}.•:.. .....:. •.•:::::.v r.. n....... ..r:::::.:::v: ii: }::.::.x::::: ::::::.::::::..:::::::::...: m:n::::::::+.:::::::. .::::: :.:::: }:•}:•}:•}:•}:v.6:{.; •:.}}:• .:..:.;.........:r� : .. .... . :..: ;. ...�:r: :•}:•}:::.v::}::L{vv} ;: :i... ...•; ... .... .... .....: fi}• ;.;; . :......:..... rn .. r..:::ti.;.•::r•.}N.w::.:v.:•}v:::}::::. \....:..: •..; : .:.; . ..; ......... n........ ..\........... :....v. }. . • .;....:...;............ vr.{..::::.v.r .n........:.0. ;.. %: ......... }....... '•..... ....:;..........v ....v.:.... •:,h,.}'v:?�::::yr:.,:•.•.v:::: i.................::::: }r.+v::.. .....................�• . :?..v \.P........:... •:; }.'?{•}:•}4}}:}v. ..;.. *i-.... ........... r......... ...............:v:::.v: Included in Fiscal Year Budget Year Included in Program Budget Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the amendment to the FY 1998-2002 Measure "A" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for the City of Palm Desert as submitted. SLZS 00£S SLZ$ xioM Isug!s o33eJZ 28 8tquaplM loans bL AsmgBiH 2S' I I IAvAilIS H 00£$ &Imam pans MIMI/ VINIOd alb anuQ BuusM paid OOZS notioauuooiaiul is loop `quo kuunoO `AnialuoW `BuusM paid uo uopuuquooO S1, OOZ$ SZI$ OOZS SZIS uoiidutaaJd IeuBls olueu paiennay AOU2 Jaur3 aprnoid AsM ezeid 0/3 I I I AMH Bo AnAtanup punoqul XeM auo applom 009$ 009$ sivautanoidutl IsuBrS oujeki, ag 8utuapm utoeridO O/M si"JlS MMS-uoN 28 I I I 'AMH uo uopeuquoo0 IsuBrS oljjsj1, VRAtt szeid 3o ise3 I I I lmH) AemanuQ saurd of suged . OOZ$ OOP` I $ 3IJOM iaauS pus !qua uuoiS oased l3 of I I I 'AmH - anuand olged uss pump JaismamiA of anuQ BuusM paid :peon uoituto daaQ 'ZI 'II '0I '6 '8 'L • '9 OOSS Inta!s oupui pus `lamas `Jai% anuand► el:410d of 1021is 1003 utog anuQ plod pimp IeuBls ail . ag 8uruapiM anuany up:410d ap III Xemrlg!H OOPS AVIJanO Ostia) 1 I I �(mH of (isaM) I I I Ainll IvanO nand I3 'S 'b OOZ$ OOI$ OOZ$ OOIS Jauso0 JO BuluaplM 8utuaputk iaans (sso00$) SQNn3 mod. aunsvami I (si000$) .LsoO 'Id. m I dd�I.L 133fOlId i anuany slouod pus anuQ BuusM paid 30JauJoO iseaquoN 'Ja sugnd phiog O/N 'and► mod in 866I-L66I A3 - I IIVHA NOISSIW 00 NOI.LVIII0dSVAIVILL�AINI103 �Q S2I�ARI ,SIIIiII'1/3I4bN .1.0afO2id 'Z 'ON W�.LI L66I `8Z AgW mica sio3llod 'f pJegom :411 !madam .L EMI ITIVd 3O AID :Satiety f7hz. ''p,.,a _Livyw/A7Va tt AGENDA ITEM #6B RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Cathedral City Route 111 Project CVAG Regional Arterial Program Loan The Measure A Highway Program contains $20 million for operational improvements on Highway 111 in the Coachella Valley. The total program was divided into two tiers of projects with $11 million approved through 1998. The estimated costs for the Cathedral City Route 111 improvements, three projects, was $9.3 million. The Commission allocated $4,596,000 from the Route 111 Tier I Highway Improvements. In order to allow Cathedral City to construct all three projects at the same time, CVAG agreed in 1995 to loan Cathedral City $4,740,000 from the Regional Arterial Program with repayment from the Highway Program beginning in 1999 when funding will begin to be programmed for the Route 111 Tier II Highway Improvements. The Commission approved this advance of funds from CVAG to Cathedral City. Revised estimates show the cost of the Cathedral City Route 111 Improvement Projects will be approximately $12 million. The reasons for the additional costs are identified in EXHIBIT B - AMENDMENT ONE which is attached. Cathedral City has requested CVAG to advance an additional $1 million from the Regional Arterial Program to be repaid from the Highway Program beginning in 1999 and no later than 2001. Measure A is a "return to source" program and the Strategic Plan has identified funding available for improvements along Route 111. The most recent funding estimates show that funding available for improvements on Route 111 will exceed the original estimate of $20 million. The additional $1 million requested for the Cathedral City project can easily be accommodated by the future additional revenues expected from the Highway Program. Cathedral City is scheduled to begin construction October 1, 1997 and complete the projects by July 1, 1998 if their request is approved by CVAG later this month. RCTC can provide the funds to Cathedral City through the use of Commercial Paper if CVAG does not have adequate funds in their TUMF/Regional Arterial Program. Financial Assessment Project Cost Source of Funds •,F,rk }}:;•tif:.v: v.•:: r} ;.;:•:�j}.,};.f::':f/:,r.;:i {'::•'.}}�;: �ti}}.};•Cv.S:n% : . . y }. v: :: f •: :. r fi. v'i•%J} ..} .. 'tip}�:•: CVAG TUMF/Regional Arterial Financial Assessment Included in Fiscal Year Budget N Year Included in Program Budget Year Programmed 1999 Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required N Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve programming an additional $1 million in Measure A Highway Funds for the Route 111 Tier II Highway Improvement for the Cathedral City Route 1 1 1 Project, subject to approval by CVAG to advance these funds to Cathedral City from either the CVAG TUMF/Regional Arterial Program or Commercial Paper and be reimbursed by the RCTC from the Measure A Highway Program in 1999 - 2001. CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY - RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) - CVAG REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT "STATE HIGHWAY 111 (FROM CATHEDRAL CANYON TO DATE PALM DRIVE AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE THIS AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE is made this day of _ of Cathedral City ("Agency"), Riverside County Transportatign Co ACVAG "RCTC")' and the Coachella Valley Association of Go ;; en This ainendment obligates and authorizes for expenditure, ad terms of the existing Reimbursement Agreement, executed Nov All other provisions are considered in force. Exhibit "A" - "Sco Reimbursement Agreement. CVAG will advance funds to Ag; •2;, > Under the terns of the Agreement executed November authorized for the "State Highway 111 (from Cathed >, of Cathedral City has requested that additional fund s' authorized for expenditure for the "State Highway 11 For further detail please see Amendment One.xhibi full repayment to C\G no later terms and condit'�'° �the ex'�$ .• , ,iCT^ RPpay:t:Pnt in CVAG: This 1$ �• r ar>�°:•,0 4"� oral affiance aga* future RCTC Measure"A" revenues. will commit State Highway Measure ay�`�eginning in the year 1999. RCTC guarantees a State Highway Measure "A" project. All other one. , by and between City tate Highway 111 Lead is joint powers agency, not previ _ "ed under the 95, Exhibit "BNAMI:timate of Cost". s" remain the same as in the existing ,teats S ; $.. 1 , 1 ' s previously obligated and Date F.,• aPf <$rive)" project costs. The City �t iiiivltto eV -tad, $1,000,000 be obligated and A � ,. ,� '`or _:.:. you to Date Palm Drive)" project. Previously b t ate 0 lig d,` , New obligation;er this Total amotiar' after Amendme riding fa^ year 2, `' a r ZN ment resimmal for eX illiture (Original Agreement) $ 4,740,000 1 t AM ° ibligated and authorized for expenditure to x) Post -its Fax Note 7671 RCTC Contract: cc/rctc/evag. 97-08 Amendment Number One eAwpAagree\amendkccruc.aml Page 1 7 D1 WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives on this date: ATTEST: CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY; By: By: By: George Truppelli, City Manager David Berry, Jack Reagan, Executive Director Patricia A. Larson, Executive Director :s RCTC By. Alex Cli CV f hairman Conuact: cc/rem/eves. 97-08 Amendment Number One c:lwplagreMame dlcerete.aRt1 Page 2 J EXHIBIT B — AMENDMENT ESTIMATE OF COST "STATE HIGHWAY 111 (FROM CATHEDRAL CANYO (FROM INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CITY OF DFSCRTPTION 1) Pro-rata portion of Bridge Construction 2) Bank Protection and Flood Control '3) Construction Management 4) Costs related to Traffic Control Requirements 5) Additional Right of Way Acquisition, Ac Legal costs related to settlements and b Total x w >kx oat - Previously Qbiigated and ��d (O�:_�'. � _ x= ent) New obli under 4 Project To e :<ytl x.•s.63»resat: • s�• • . .c:.. 18:ob 4A' 'sktkv, ONE I N TO DATE PALM DRIVE)" CATHiEDRAL CITY) Ham. ; aMOT INT r:.. 320,000 100,000 130,000 $1 (.1BQ = $ 4.7411., XX) $ L , 2 02) 4igated and authorized for expenditure L 5,7�0ao . _ B Contract: cchctckvag. 97.d8 Amendment Number One cAwptagreetamendtccrctc.r1 Page. 3 EXHIBIT C - AMENDMENT ONE UPDATED PROJECT SCHEDULE "STATE HIGHWAY 111 (FROM CATHEDRAL CANYON TO DATE PALM DRIVE)" PROJECT SCHRni TT P (FROM INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CITY OF CA 'Y) Start Construction Project Completion Contract: ca/rctc/cvag. 97-08 Amendment Number One c:l vplagmelamendlccretc.a#r1 Page 4 AGENDA ITEM #7A RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award of Design Contract for Pedestrian Overcrossings and Station Electronic Surveillance Systems at the La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Rail Stations At the April 1997 Commission meeting, RCTC adopted a plan for the expenditure of the remaining Proposition 108 and 116 funds that will expire in July of 1999 and under a separate item directed staff to proceed with the phased implementation of electronic surveillance systems at the Riverside County rail stations. Included in the funding plan for the Proposition 108 and 116 funds was the construction of pedestrian overcrossings and rail station security systems at. the La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink rail stations. The pedestrian overcrossings at the La Sierra and West Corona stations will be required prior to the BN&SF expanding their system to three (3) tracks through the stations. Having pedestrians crossing three active tracks is too great a safety concern to be adequately addressed by the existing at grade rubberized crossing that is protected only by flashing lights. If Proposition 108 and 116 funds are to be used to construct the overcrossings and satisfy the future requirement that we construct these overcrossings, then they must be constructed prior to July of 1999 when the funds will expire. At the July 9, 1997 RCTC meeting, the Commission directed Staff to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to engineering professionals that would be qualified to perform these preliminary and final design services for the above named projects. Staff has received proposals from 4 firms. The selection panel reviewed the proposals and short listed to three firms which was the maximum that the interview schedule would accommodate. The three short listed firms were F.R. Harris, W. Koo & Associates, and Carter -Burgess. The selection panel was composed of Mike McGinley of SCRRA, Bill Wilkman from the City of Riverside, Joe Palencia from the City of Corona, Walt Smith of BN&SF, George Boon from Caltrans, and Bill Hughes representing RCTC. The calendar of events was as follows: Distribution of RFP Proposals are Delivered to RCTC prior Interviews of Firms on Short List July 21, 1997 to 4 PM .. August 14, 1997 August 28, 1997 Since the interviews will be held after the agenda mailing, the results of the selection process will be presented at the Budget and Finance Committee meeting. Financial Assessment Project Cost To be provided at Budget & Finance Committee meeting. Source of Funds Measure "A", TDA x••. .:.?nv::.:.:rti•::.v •..`•... '•.:[..•:::::. .4S•:J/i .{.. • 'Y.4..�. .. ' 3.:. •{K :K „! ,'' : � :\V.. }� nF,.%:::•::,4,'..:.... ,�.�,,,,,.',.K${n.•{:'\........ •n \• .y Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Year Programmed Approved Allocation N/A Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required N Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Will be provided at the Budget and Finance Committee meeting after the results of the selection panel are known. AGENDA ITEM #76 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Direction to Advertise Plans and Specifications for Construction of Riverside Station South Side Platform and Pedestrian Overcrossino The Commission has previously authorized the expenditure of funds to design and construct a new 1,000 foot long South Side Platform, station track and pedestrian overcrossing at the Riverside Downtown Station. Attached for your information is a copy of the proposed layout plans depicting the station improvements. Staff has coordinated the proposed station improvements with all impacted agencies such as the City of Riverside, Metrolink, and the BN&SF Railroad. Staff and Legal Counsel have been working to finalize all right-of-way impact issues with adjacent property owners that include the Royal Citrus Company, Atco Rubber Company, and the City of Riverside. The long lead time items, which include: three number 15 switches for the station track improvements; 136 pound rail for the station track; and concrete rail ties, have been ordered through SCRRA and BN&SF to assure their availability in a timely manner to support the construction project. Funding for the project was discussed at the March 12, 1997 Commission meeting. Pursuant to prior agreements with the BN&SF and UP railroads, the UP Railway will provide $1,542,000 toward the project. The Commission directed that the remaining funding for this project would come from the current fund balances available from Proposition 108 and 116 which is $7,698,000 and $2,800,000 respectively. The combined UP and Proposition 116 & 108 funding provides a total of $12,040,000 that is available for this and future rail projects. An estimate of the current project cost is provided below. South Side Platform Project Estimate 1.0 Project Design (F.R. Harris) $775,000 2.1 Site Work, Drainage & Flagmen $590,000 2.2 Station Platform $585,000 2.3 Track work $1,790,000 South Side Platform Project Estimate 2.4 Landscaping & Fencing $ 65,000 2.5 Gage Canal Relocation $1,405,000 2.6 Pedestrian Bridge with Security Post $1,170,000 2.7 Utility Systems $270,000 2.8 Contractor Mobilization & profit $425,000 2.9 Construction Management $450,000 2.0 Subtotal Total construction $6,750,000 3.0 Right -of -Way $1,200,000 4.0 Recommended Contingency Total Funds Available $474,000 $12,040,000 Prop. 118 Funds Remaining After Project (Prop. 108 funds will be drawn down first) $2,841,000 Financial Assessment Project Cost $9,199,000 Source of Funds UP railroad, Proposition 108 and 116 funds }:•}}••::;:}} w•:• {:: r } •+:}'f,�••.,} /fx••;; f? rf .fir LY•, I: if{... \ s. n Y f: :.,.:.•: is ti;::.:;ti;::+: -0: h.•`:•::.:::{;:.:} } } {.u{• . i4 ':n}:f++ti: .�:.:.: ..�...•:v.:. ..:....:fyQ}it{�'K.}. ir. ..... x......... ';te.::ti, ,, ,.... , r�.x.. f� .'t}.y • • r.,, :: ",..y ". , ;.,.. � L i .*.•yam, . , .i`vr +%. rv,;y., .,J,:{: 4 .� . li:.•'i•:•f:•{:•ri .' :: hY.•fff •.•.�•.�L. :v ....:.... n f.............:..... '•' ....{.......,:,:.. ....fit,... ,..,{}k; :, .. }{ ;. ' •°ix....• Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required N Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission direct Staff to advertise the Southside Platform and Pedestrian Overcrossing for construction and bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. Final project award will be contingent upon finalization of all right-of-way issues with adjacent property owners. H180N 3nai r H12:ION 103r08d Q 1 ,- 11 �- S>I0V211 aV 01S 3an1n -.IoNam Sl# � -1VNV3 021IISIX3 021IdVOSONY1 03S0dO21d ONIdVOSONVI 021I1SIX3 W21O.11Vld 14 OOOI M3N 11 c� LJ 15 3�d3t1r1 ONTO noH IIN:^,d 111131`3 �I II�111 d z 3 r1 t\\\\\ I I �8 ONIdVOSONVI 1NI0d 1081N0O 1nONan1 3anl3nals 0313100M 210 M3N AaVONnOB 133r021d X3V2Il 3anln3 H3Va1 03S0dO21d XOVal 021IISIX3 QH303Z L.� � luavauoRnV 110.1V IIOijBl El_ - i — IL---) [_ _ Z r—_ J 1 O L 0 o i r`-1 Ca w o° - _ J L� - , j -Li I J � ❑ Fgcg NISSO8383A0 NVI81S303d A 1-- V d 83M01 ONISS 1._ II1,]11F18 Z' n ;? Od7^;pH ONIdVOSONVI ONV VONnoe AaNOSVW NOVal NOIIVIS 'lddn d398,3d o % O1 1nONan 3N11 NIVW Sl 13A0 H1nOS M3N 0 X08 NI 1VNVO NOV81 N011V1S X3 AON30831413— IX L3�Idt'V'1 rt -u LLL}1L 1- C ELAI�- i 7113111 '311 3.3 7n]Hr_' NOVal N011 1 -1pi'I'3 Ol 1nONan1 3NIINIVIN 3anlOnalS 3ONV81N3 N011V1S ONIISIX3 a3M01 OI}JISSO8083A0 HO180N M3N f J �1 `r 01 siu�u.To� ruoi.�cscsu�zs, - Alunoa --- apisia�i rd:opisqlno ,lioilvls-ii*oluAvo(popisiaArg- [ �� 1 [ 1 3111 ,-=, AGENDA ITEM #8A RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Program Manager THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Consultant Agreement with Gladstein and Associates In Support of the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor Project Adopted as part of the Commission's FY97/98 budget under the Transportation Planning and Programming Department was an air quality goal to "facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology in support of the broader air quality programs of the Southern California Association of Governments, the South Coast Air Quality Management District and Riverside County local entities". This department level goal was established in support of the Commission's overall policy related to air quality improvement and a commitment to promote clean air standards. One of the three objectives detailed under the air quality goal reads, "Influence the development of the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor (ICTC) plan to facilitate the location of clean fuel infrastructure and deployment of clean fuel equipment along designated corridors in Riverside County and the greater region through financial support and staff participation". ICTC was initiated by Gladstein & Associates in January 1996 to develop alternative fuel infrastructure and facilitate the deployment of alternative fuel trucks to move freight between nonattainment areas and Clean Cities in the Western United States linking the areas 'of Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Sacramento, Salt Lake City and the San Joaquin Valley along 1-80, I-5/SR-99 and the 1-15. Scheduled as a 15 month project, the ICTC was funded by the United States Department of Energy, California Air Resources Board, South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Energy Commission, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), Southern California Association of Governments, Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District and Sierra Pacific Power Company. While RCTC was not a Phase I funder, staff participated in various activities as a stakeholder given our interests in the I-15 corridor and partnership with SANBAG to fund and develop the Inland Empire Clean Fuels Corridor. As the Commission will recall, the Inland Empire Clean Fuels Corridor project established fifteen electric vehicle charging station sites, three compressed nature gas sites and one liquefied compressed natural gas site. Through the Corridor project, RCTC and SANBAG worked to facilitate the development of alternative fuel stations to encourage the use of clean fuel vehicles by fleets and individuals. The stations were cited along designated corridors in the two county region to create and in -fill networks that would provide extended range for clean fuel vehicles. The RCTC/SANBAG partnership to foster the use of alternative fuels in the Inland Empire is closely tied to the ICTC tri-state goals. For example, the Corridor's LCNG station located at the United Parcel Service facility next to the Ontario International Airport is in the crossroads of the 1-15 and 1-10 corridors and provides an important link to ICTC's efforts along the 1-15 corridor. In order for this station, and other existing infrastructure, to become successful, continuing efforts are necessary to develop fleet use of the alternative fuel stations as well as identify future infrastructure needs to infill the network at the local and state levels. A proposal for Phase II of the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor has been prepared incorporating tasks specific to the interests of alternative fuel efforts in Riverside County. The total proposal is estimated at $292,964. For those work efforts related to Riverside County, staff is recommending that the Commission allocate $25,000 from Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds to Gladstein and Associates pursuant to the Phase II ICTC Scope of Work (see Attachment A). Funding for ICTC support was included in the adopted RCTC FY97/98 budget. Gladstein and Associates has secured commitments from various other local, regional, state and federal entities for the balance of the proposed ICTC budget. Pursuant to the FY 97/98 scope of work, ICTC will target its Riverside County work efforts along the I-15/SR-60/SR-215 and I-10/SR-86 corridors. Work tasks specifically related to the Commission's interests include 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.6, and 5.2 although benefit will be received from the other work task efforts as well. In addition, staff will -continue to play an active role in the ICTC as a stakeholder. Financial Assessment Project Cost $25,000 Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Transportation Development Act (TDA) Yes wki.•ti? That the Commission: 1) Authorize its Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to enter into a consultant agreement with Gladstein and Associates to implement the scope of work as defined in the Interstate Clean Transportation Corridor Phase II proposal; and, 2) approve the allocation of $25,000 from Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds for the defined scope of work to be implemented throughout FY97/98. AGENDA ITEM #86 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: September 3, 1997 TO: Budget and Finance Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Assistant Director of Planning THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Enhanced .Traffic Monitoring Program - Needs Assessment Background: At the April 1997 meeting, the Commission acted to replace the Land Use Coordination Element of the Congestion Management Program (CMP) with an Enhanced Transportation System Monitoring Element. The purpose of this action was to get out of the business of policing local agency land use decisions and develop a program to comply with federally required elements of the Congestion Management System (CMS). Simply stated, the Commission's consultant Valley Research and Planning (VRPA) has reviewed the federal CMS requirements and has developed a program proposal using Smart Call Boxes to collect traffic information on the CMP system. The CMP system consists of freeways and a few select regional arterials. The traffic data can be used as one of the criteria applied in selecting projects for funding (e.g. Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ) and Surface Transportation Program (STP)), establishing baseline information for transportation models, as well as, ensuring compliance with federal regulations which must be met to allow the continued flow of federal transportation funds. Attached is the Executive Summary of the Riverside County Enhanced CMP Traffic Monitoring Program - Needs Assessment. The Commission's consultant VRPA will be available to present the Needs Assessment and recommendations at the September 10, 1997 meeting. Financial Assessment Project Cost Up to $25,000 Source of Funds SAFE :....:.....:.:•rr:.:.:::{••v;,r,.; •ti:•: r::.:: r: \:::,;:.. n.:::] :v.� ...v F')+. v'. :iii } }}::.. v.:n:�:..::::}::::.{}}•{:?vx•]fi::: U•{..;}, },y� :::::.: �:::: •::::::::.. ........... ,....: }}.'+>i .. :......n....:+:.:::.;•.•.�:n.......::.+.p4}:�{:,.;.tir:++::::.::?{::•}ii}•}:•}.f::'.'+,i :. . ,..4::. .:;;• '••}: } �,��':':"'••.•.•.. .,,}:•Yw\'."}: ;.%p .. Vn ,�.•: { {l4''�. i :.k,.l }4 ...,}•: v: '•. { .. .iiiii.;,}.•L••; , �f.:: } , �C•v .•'.,yam. ,.. xi•.;r.•... rf;...h +CC.'r,'., 'isi p ,r,. h4 . ... .•'n \�•r ,gip}} rf ' , ., f A.. Included in Fiscal Year Budget N ..+:'•}.:k. {:fi ..:.?::'•.: {ti fi��•' Year Included in Program Budget N Year Programmed Approved Allocation N Year of Allocation 1997-98 Budget Adjustment Required Y• Financial Assessment Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: If the Commission approves the program in concept, staff recommends the Commission allocate up to $25,000 of unobligated SAFE funds to prepare a refined three year phased project plan to implement the Enhanced CMP Traffic Monitoring Program. The project plan will be brought back for Commission consideration. Attachment r-° RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENHANCED CMP TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM - NEEDS ASSESSME Riverside County Transportation Commission EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENHANCED CMP TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM - NEEDS ASSESSMENT PURPOSE The purpose of this Needs Assessment is to provide the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and other affected agencies with a clear understanding of the proposed Enhanced Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Monitoring Program in Riverside County utilizing Smart Call Boxes. The Monitoring Program has been developed following Commission direction approving replacement of the Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) process. The CMP Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) process has not been a useful or workable program, therefore an alternative program or process must be developed to specifically address federal Congestion Management System (CMS) and Traffic Monitoring System (TMS) requirements. Revision of the Riverside County's CMP Land Use Coordination Program by eliminating the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) process and replacing it with the proposed Enhanced Traffic Monitoring Program, will insure that Riverside County continues to comply with the federal monitoring requirements. Another purpose of this report is to identify the costs and benefits associated with the Enhanced CMP Traffic Monitoring Program. If the Program is applied correctly, it can be a very important tool which would utilize the existing Call Box infrastructure, thereby maximizing RCTC's investment in the County SAFE Program. It has been shown that utilizing Smart Call Boxes as an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technology, can provide for significant improvements in the amount and quality of traffic count data for transportation planning, engineering, and modeling purposes. Moreover, traffic count data management and results, as well as Level of Service (LOS) analyses can be directly linked to Smart Call Box monitoring efforts and transportation modeling programs to significantly reduce staff operational costs. Having access to continuous and accurate data, as compared with incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated traffic data (manual or extrapolated counts from year to year counts or from three year count census programs), provides a more efficient and accurate means of enhancing transportation planning and engineering studies and developing and updating transportation models. ENHANCED TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM COMPONENTS AND COSTS Enhanced CMP Traffic Monitoring Program - Costs/Benefits Analysis RCTC has deployed a network of Smart Call -Box traffic counters that collect traffic count information on a 24 hour -per -day, 7 day -a -week basis within Riverside County. Efforts to streamline the CMP have led to opportunities to integrate this count data with other sources of traffic count information thereby benefiting all users of the data. Traffic counts are currently collected by Caltrans, SCAG, the County of Riverside and other cities within Riverside County. The combination of providing ready access to traffic count information, and actively working to coordinate traffic count programs, should decrease total expenditures to acquire this information while improving accessibility to the data. A review of existing traffic monitoring programs in the County, the traffic counter infrastructure, travel demands, count equipment and staff operations has been conducted considering the integration of Smart Call Box technologies as an ITS application (as described in the Inland Empire ITS Early Deployment Plan). It has been 1 Malley Research and Planning Associates RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENHANCED CMP TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM - NEEDS ASSESSMENT Riverside County Transportation Commission shown, through the cost/benefit analysis(referenced below), that significant long- and short-term advantages prevail with the use of Smart Call Boxes along CMP facilities. In order to establish the CMP Traffic Monitoring Program, it was necessary to define a system of roadway links on which data will be collected. Due to the limited availability of traffic count data, it is envisioned that the Phase 1 of the Traffic Monitoring Program will include a minimal system of roadway links (901inks or stations) on which limited data will be collected. Later on, the Program can be expanded to include additional roadway links (2901inks or count stations), more frequent count intervals, and the collection of additional data. Specifically, the following Phase 1 and Phase 2 Program components have been identified to meet federal Congestion Management System (CMS) and Traffic Monitoring System (TMS) requirements: Phase 1 (Minimum) System ♦ Monitor each CMP roadway link between intersections/interchanges with other CMP roadways. ♦ Count each location once per year. ♦ Collect twenty-four hour counts, by direction. ♦ Estimated number of count locations: - Caltrans: 60 - City of Riverside: 15 - Riverside County: 15 - Coachella Valley: Retain existing count program. Phase 2 (Ultimate) System ♦ Monitor freeways at all links between interchanges. Where the number of general purpose through lanes changes between interchanges, create a new link where the lane change occurs. ♦ Monitor arterial roadways between intersections/interchanges with other CMP roadways, except that new links will be added when any of the following roadway characteristics change: - Number of general purpose through lanes - Divided/Undivided characteristic of the roadway - A significant change in traffic levels (5,000 ADT, unless otherwise determined) ♦ Count each location quarterly (four times per year). ♦ Collect twenty-four hour counts by direction. ♦ Estimated number of count locations: - Caltrans: 200 - City of Riverside: 30 - Riverside County: 50 - Coachella Valley: 10 The cost/benefit analysis provided in the Table on Page 3 examines the Capital and Operational costs associated with utilizing conventional type permanent and temporary traffic counters (hose counters, card counters and permanent count equipment) versus a program focusing on the utilization of Smart Call Box technologies. From a capital costs standpoint, 90 permanent and temporary counters under Phase 1 and 290 counters under Phase 2 are assumed to be purchased. A Smart Call Box Program has also been estimated considering 80 Smart Call Boxes (ten Smart Call Box sites currently exist in Riverside County) under Phase 1 and 280 Smart Call Boxes under Phase 2. The scenarios are meant to reveal the operational advantages of Smart Call Boxes as traffic monitoring devices in contrast to the conventional methods currently used by various agencies. The cost/benefit analyses is considered to be "a worst case scenario' since it is likely that costs will be reduced given the availability of existing loop detectors along the Congestion Management Program (CMP) System. Referencing the Table, the Proposed Smart Call Box Program will result in significant cost savings (on an annual or ten year basis), especially for those costs associated with count program operations. The Proposed Smart can Box costs in all cases (Capital Acquisition and Operations) are lower than providing an Enhancing Traffic Monitoring Program utilizing conventional counter equipment. These costs savings are primarily due to: 2 Valley Research and Planning Associates RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENHANCED CMP TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM - NEEDS ASSESSMENT Riverside County Transportation Commission TABLE 7 SUMMARY OF CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLES 1- 4" CAPITAL COST OPERATIONAL COSTS (10 YEARS) TOTAL COSTS (10 YEARS) Total Capital Costs from Table 1: Existing Quarterly Count Program — 50 Permanent and 40 Temporary Stations $821,000.00 TOTAL OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLE 1: EXISTING QUARTERLY COUNT PROGRAM — 50 PERMANENT STATIONS AND 40 TEMPORARY STATIONS $1,504,000.00 $2,325,000.00 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS FROM TABLE 2: EXISTING QUARTERLY COUNT PROGRAM — 290 STATIONS $3,116,000.00 TOTAL OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLE 2: EXISTING QUARTERLY COUNT PROGRAM , — 290 STATIONS $4,854,000.00 $7,970,000.00 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS FROM TABLE 3: PROPOSED QUARTERLY TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 90 SMART CALL BOXES $880,000.00 TOTAL OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLE 3: PROPOSED QUARTERLY TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 90 STATIONS $54,200.00 $934,200.00 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS FROM TABLE 4: PROPOSED YEAR-ROUND TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 290 SMART CALL BOXES $3,080,000.00 TOTAL OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLE 4: PROPOSED YEAR-ROUND TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 290 STATIONS $177,200.00 $3,257,200.00 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS FROM TABLE 5: PROPOSED YEAR ROUND TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 90 SMART CALL BOXES $880,000.00 TOTAL OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLE 5: PROPOSED YEAR ROUND TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 90 STATIONS $594,200.00 $1,474,200.00 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS FROM TABLE 6: PROPOSED YEAR ROUND TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 290 SMART CALL BOXES $3,080,000.00 TOTAL OPERATIONAL COSTS FROM TABLE 6: PROPOSED YEAR ROUND TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM — 290 STATIONS ......... -.--.-- $1,917,200.00 $4,997,200.00 ociates Note: *1. Capital and Operational costs are approximate estimates only. Cost of maintenance is not included. ♦ a one-time materials and installation fee; and ♦ reduced staff time utilized for Smart Call Box operation and count data processing. The Smart Call Box Program should be implemented in increments of thirty (30) call boxes each year. This is a manageable number of boxes that can be adequately installed and operated without compromising the quality of the Program. Vehicle Occupancy and Classification Programs In addition to the requirement for traffic counts along the Congestion Management Program (CMP) System, federal Congestion Management System (CMS) and Traffic Monitoring System (TMS) statutes require that High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes must be monitored to determine the average vehicle occupancy, and vehicle classification data (especially the percentage of truck traffic) must be monitored along the State Highway System. 3 Valley Research and Planning Associates RIVERSIDE COUNTY ENHANCED CMP TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM - NEEDS ASSESSMENT Riverside County Transportation Commission These monitoring efforts must be undertaken every three (3) years. The costs to implement these programs are provided below: Phase 1 Cost Estimate ♦ $0.00 - RCTC would rely on available vehicle occupancy and classification data currently collected by other agencies. Phase 2 Cost Estimate ♦ Vehicle Occupancy Program at $34,600 over a ten year period and $87,000 to implement the Vehicle Classification Program over a ten year period. Traffic Count and Level of Service Information Server Program Finally, staff has developed work activity and costs associated with improving the Smart Call Box Count Manager Software developed by Valley Research and Planning Associates (VRPA) that has been developed to process Smart Call Box count data once it is downloaded. In addition, costs and work activity necessary to place Monitoring Program results (traffic counts and Level of Service information) on the World -Wide -Web in a graphic format have been developed for Phases 1 and 2 and include: Phase 1 Cost Estimate ♦ Four person weeks or $8,000.00 Phase 2 Cost Estimate ♦ Six person weeks and Hardware and Software or $26,500 FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM There are several funding sources that can be targeted to fmance Proposed Enhanced Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Monitoring Program components and include: ♦ SAFE Program Funds - Such funds can only be applied to implement the Smart Call Box infrastructure and provide for Program operations over the ten year period; ♦ Surface Transportation Program (STP) Funds which can be utilized to fmance count equipment and program operations; and ♦ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Funds which can also be applied to purchase counter equipment and implement traffic monitoring programs. RECOMMENDATION The Assessment has shown that there are significant long-term and short-term advantages by utilizing Smart Call Boxes. Utilization of existing infrastructure to streamline the installation of Smart Call Boxes and thereby reduce Capital Costs is highly recommended. With an extensive inductive loop infrastructure currently in place, savings in Capital Costs are likely. Smart Call Boxes are typically an extension of existing count programs, so phased implementation is recommended. Moreover, the Smart Call Box employs computer technology for speedy data conversions and archiving, resulting in greatly reduced staff time spent collecting and managing data. Year-round count data is also extremely vital in properly generating model output and Level of Service (LOS) estimations that reflect existing conditions. More importantly, Smart Call Box implementation means that RCTC, Caltrans, and other agencies will have a working motorist aid infrastructure (with call boxes) and an established ITS backbone that can be integrated with other transportation management and information technologies. It is recommended that RCTC approve the further deployment of Smart Call Boxes to support traffic monitoring in concept. Finally, it is recommended that RCTC work closely with other interested/affected agencies to implement an on- going vehicle occupancy and classification program that meets federal requirements. 4 VaUey Research and Planning Associates