The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About01 January 25, 1999 Amended Plans and Programs" " TIME: DATE: LOCATION: Bechtel RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTAT' {tr -AMENDED - PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 12:00 P.M. Monday, January 25, 1999 CONFERENCE ROOM A 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Plans and Programs Committee Members Supervisor Bob Buster, County of Riverside Supervisor Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Mayor Jan Leja, City of Beaumont Mayor Robert Crain, City of Blythe Councilmember John Chlebnik, City of Calimesa Councilmember Eugene Bourbonnais, City of Canyon Lake Mayor Pro Tern Doug Sherman, City of Desert Hot Springs Councilmember Robin Reeser Lowe, City of Hemet Councilmember Percy Byrd, City of Indian Wells Mayor Chris Silva, City of Indio Councilmember Frank Hall, City of Norco Councilmember Dick Kelly, City of Palm Desert Mayor Will Kleindienst, City of Palm Springs Mayor A. L. Landers, City of Perris PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE State Transportation Improvement Program Regional Transportation Improvement Program New Corridors lntermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare) Air Quality and Clean Fuels Regional Agencies/Regional Planning Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs Congestion Management Program Eric Haley, Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Director -Planning and Programming 04618:1 Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Commission. ' • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE CONFERENCE ROOM A 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100, RIVERSIDE 92501 MONDAY, JANUARY 25, 1999 12:00 P.M. AMENDED AGENDA· *Action may be taken on any items listed on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. 4. 1998 STIP AMENDMENT $15 MILLION EL NINO, REHABILITATION & ARTERIAL PROGRAM 5 . Staff and TAC recommend that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission eliminate the El Nino storm damage category from the $15 million call for projects and approve the list of arterial and rehabilitative projects for STIP funding. 1998 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission to program the entire amount of discretionary 1998 STIP amendment funds and the entire Western County formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds to Measure A projects, consider any programming recommendations coming from CVAG for the Eastern County projects and approve a combined planning, programming and monitoring program. 6. .PRIORITY RAIL PROJECTS FOR CALIFORNIA STIP AND FEDERAL PROGRAM Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission endorse the priority project lists developed by Metrolink and the Southern California Intercity Rail Group and actively advocate for STIP funding of the particular rail capital projects listed above; and And, that the Committee recommend RCTC's endorsement of Metrolink's federal funding request as listed in Attachment Ill. 7. CMAQ SET ASIDE FOR LNG LOCOMOTIVE 8. Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission set aside up to $300,000 of CMAQ funds to cover RCTC's share of costs for manufacturing a prototype LNG fueled locomotive. CONTRACTS/AGREEMENTS FOR CETAP Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission schedule, at minimum, two contract/agreement action items for the February 10, 1999 Commission meeting . . . : : : \ • • • RCTC Agenda Plans and Programs Committee January 25, 1999 Page 2 9. REGIONAL AIRPORT EXPANSION ISSUES AND OPTIONS Staff recommends that the Commission consider adoption of Resolution No. 99-01, Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Calling for the Development of a Regional Airport Plan for Southern California. 10. MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT ALLOCATION TO FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY 11 . Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission approve operating support for two vehicles to Family Service Association until such time that the Specialized Transit Analysis is complete and recommendations are provided regarding the future service levels for the Jurupa area, and amend the funding agreement with Family Service Association to include additional Measure A Specialized Transit funds of $4,375 per month to support the operating cost of this second vehicle in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. REAPPOINTMENT TO THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL (CAC/SSTAC) Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission reappoint five members to the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council, as well as, the appointment of an additional member. 12. METROLINK MONTHLY REPORT Presented is the Metrolink operating report for December, 1998, along with the most recent weekly updates to Board Members, for information, receive and file. 13. ADJOURNMENT. The next meeting is scheduled to be held at 12:00 p.m., on February 22, 1999 at the RCTC offices . " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Issues and Communications SUBJECT: Regional Airport Expansion Issues and Options The 1998 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) provides a long-range, coordinated approach to transportation improvements in the six-county SCAG region from 1998 to 2020. It identifies specific performance measures necessary to meet mobility, air quality and other regional goals. Among the various strategies addressed is aviation, highlighting the fact that the capacity of the existing airport system (100 million annual passengers) is projected to experience a shortfall of one-third by 2020. The SCAG Aviation Committee has been the focal point for regional discussion regarding airport expansion options and impacts. Aviation action steps defined in the RTP include the following: " Support expansion of capacity at major existing and potential regional airports to handle anticipated increases in both passenger and freight volume. " Mitigate effects of expanding existing airports and adding military air bases so that community impacts are minimized . " Maximize air passenger and air cargo utilization of outlying airports in less populated areas. " Create a task force to include elected officials from the Regional Council, airport operators and the airlines to further examine aviation issues. At the time the RTP was adopted in April 1998, it was noted that both LAX and El Tarro airports were in the process of developing master plans and had not completed capacity modeling analysis. As a result, passenger allocation numbers for the facilities were unconstrained. The RTP further noted that u " " " substantial growth constraints on these two facilities through 2020 would result in redistribution of air passenger demand to other airports in the regional system ... ". Today, the LAX Master Plan revision anticipates expanding its passenger activity from a current 60 million to 98 million passengers per year and its cargo activity from a current 1 . 7 million to 4.2 million tons per year. These projections reflect unconstrained growth which carry significant economic and environmental impacts not just to the surrounding communities of LAX but to the SCAG six county region given the number of subregional airports such as March Air Force Base and their potential ability to minimize the impacts of centralizing airport expansion. In response to the proposed unconstrained expansion of LAX, a coalition of South Bay cities was formed to broaden understanding of the wide-ranging impacts associated with the proposed LAX Master Plan and build a regional coalition of interests to ensure that the ATP action steps are fully met. The coalition is seeking region wide support of its goals through adoption of a resolution calling for the development of a Regional Airport Plan for Southern . : '.: " " " " California. The coalition is represented by Denny Zane of Gladstein and Associates who will be present at the Committee meeting to discuss the issues related to airport expansion and its resolution . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission consider adoption of a Resolution No. 99-01, Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Calling For a Regional Airport Plan For Southern California . " " " RESOLUTION NO. 99-01 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CALLING FOR A REGIONAL AIRPORT PLAN FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Los Angeles Department of Airports has initiated a revision of the Master Plan for the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) which anticipates expanding its passenger activity from a current 60 million passengers per year to an expected 98 million passengers per year and its cargo activity from its current 1 . 7 million tons per year to an expected 4.2 million tons per year; and, WHEREAS, expanding its passenger and cargo activity as proposal will greatly increase the number of flights and nearly double ground traffic going to and from LAX; and, WHEREAS, communities in the vicinity of LAX which already experience enormous adverse environmental impacts from operations of the airport can expect greatly increased noise and air pollution from overhead aircraft, greatly increased congestion and air pollution from ground traffic, especially from dramatic increases in the activity of diesel trucks around the airport; and, WHEREAS, airport officials estimate LAX improvements will cost as much as $1 2 billion, not including the costs of transportation improvemetns required to facilitate access to LAX which will paid for by regional taxpayers; and, WHEREAS, there are many other commercial airports in Southern California; some with significant histories as commercial airports, some recently converted to commercial or joint military and commercial airports; and, WHEREAS, several of these airports are located in areas of Southern California expected to experience the greatest growth in population and employment over the next twenty years, while LAX is near the communities ,expected to experience the least growth in the same period; and, WHEREAS, developing airport capacity near high growth communities rather than concentrating airport development at LAX may be an environmental superior, lower-cost and more equitable strategy for serving future growth in air commerce in Southern California; and, WHEREAS, the development of these regional airport resources will help spread jobs and economic development opportunities more equitable throughout the region, and reduce the public health and environmental burden on communities near LAX . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Riverside County Transportation Commission calls upon the communities of Southern California, including the City of Los Angeles, the Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura; the State of California; and our Congressional Representatives to join together in " " " developing the Regional Airport Plan for Southern California that constrains LAX to operate within the capacity of its existing facilities and develops the capacity of the many other commercial airports in Southern California to serve the expanding air commerce marketplace . ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 1 Qth day of February, 1999. ATTEST: Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Councilman Jack F. van Haaster, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission ' • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION -AMENDED - PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 12:00 P.M. DATE: Monday, January 25, 1999 LOCATION: CONFERENCE ROOM A 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 This is back-up information for agenda item #9 . " " " Making a Case for a Regional Airport Plan for Southern California Full Disclosure: AGENDA#9 The El Segundo community has concerns regarding the expansion of LAX Admittedly, the community of El Segundo has special reasons to be concerned about the proposed expansion of Los Angeles International Airport. We share our northern border with the airport. We also share all of the burdens associated with having the largest airport in California as our nearest neighbor -more than our fair share of airport related noise, traffic congestion, and air pollution. As you can imagine, we watch what goes on at LAX closely. When Los Angeles airport officials first released their plans for dramatically expanding activity at LAX, we asked the following questions: Is it Safe? Is it Fair? Is it Prudent? Is it Necessary? Should communities in the vicinity of LAX have to bear the burden of: " increased congestion in our skies; " increased noise from overhead aircraft and airport operations; " impossible congestion on our already over-congested surface streets and freeways; " significant increases in air pollution, especially from diesel trucks hauling cargo to and from the airport; " the excessive costs of building an expanded LAX . " " . when the growth in regional air traffic may be far better served at a lower cost by improving facilities at Southern California's other commercial airports. We think not. Here's part of the reason why . " Why Do We Need to Expand Airports At All? Regional Growth ! The current debate over expanding airport capacity is driven by projections for growth in demand for air commerce in Southern California over the next twenty years. New airport demand is largely a product of the projected 40% growth in population and even greater increase in employment in Southern California over that period. More new people more gainfully employed in Southern California means more people wanting to fly. It means more businesses engaged in commercial activity requiring commercial passenger or cargo services. It means more demand for goods from other countries, particularly Pacific Rim countries; perhaps, when the Asian economic crisis is over, there may be more demand for our goods as well. " The result: increased demand for commercial air flights, both passenger and cargo. We believe that an expanding air commerce marketplace can be good for our economies and good for our communities. Even so, the real issue remains: How do we b.e.s.1 meet this new demand for commercial air services? By expanding LAX as proposed? Or, By making better use of the many other commercial airports in Southern California? We believe that key issues in this discussion are, Where will growth in Southern California occur over the next twenty years? Are there airport resources located nearer these centers of growth that can more fairly capture the new air travel demand with less environmental burdens and at a " lower cost than endeavoring to capture most of this new demand at LAX? " " " Growth in population and employment is not evenly divided throughout Southern Calif omia. In fact: Regional Growth is Greatest in Areas Most Remote from LAX Subregion % increase in expected pop. expected total % increase in population mcrease pop. In 2020 employment North LA County: 169% 762,000 1,213,000 199% West Riverside 110% 1,225,900 2,340,800 174% County San Bernardino 82% 1,271,700 2,830,000 127% County Coachella Valley 81% 213,200 475,000 82% Total Growth in Areas 3,472,800 6,858,800 Remote to LAX As Projected in SCAG RTP Regional Growth Is Slowest Nearest LAX Subregion % increase in expected pop. expected total % increase in population mcrease pop. In2020 employment Gateway Cities 19% 386,500 2,368,600 40% South Bay Cities: 13% 106,600 925,600 36% Westside Cities: 11% 26,000 253,000 20% Total Growth in Areas 519,100 3,547,200 Nearest LAX As Projected in SCAG RTP Even in terms of raw numbers the growth is greater in areas farthest from LAX. " " " The Fact is: Areas of Southern California Once Thought of as Rural Will Soon be Very Urban Does it make sense to centralize our airport facilities at LAX while the population of Southern California becomes increasingly decentralized? We think not. We should remember that we are not planning our airports to meet today's needs; rather, we are planning for the growth expected in the next twenty years. Areas of Southern California which may seem remote and less developed now will become very urban during that time. Yet, the unfortunate truth is: There is no regional plan to develop existing airports in the high growth areas of Southern California. Until now, with the convening of the SCAG Aviation Subcommittee, there wasn't even a process to develop such a plan. Nevertheless, the local communities where these airports operate are energetically pursuing their own plans to develop their airports, in most cases with strong local political support and little opposition. Consider: In twenty years, the population in the Inland Empire -including the Coachella Valley -grows to nearly 6 million people. It will become one of the great urban areas of the nation. More people will live and work there than in the City of Los Angeles. This region has several existing airports to serve its needs, including, by their familiar names, March, Norton, George, Palm Springs, and Ontario airports. These airports need regional support to gain the resources they need for their development in order to give them a fair shot at a fair share of the air commerce marketplace. " " " Consider: In twenty years, the population of North Los Angeles County, including Santa Clarita, Palmdale and Lancaster, is expected to nearly triple. It will become an urban area of over one million people. Palmdale Airport "1ll be far closer to these population centers than LAX or even Burbank. This airport can serve passengers and cargo needs of the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley as well. High speed rail, should it occur and connect to Palmdale Airport will.clearly expand their potential marketplace. Consider: Even Orange County needs its own regional and international airport service. While its population will grow more slowly than other parts of the region, Orange County's employment base is expected to grow by nearly 70%. Airport planners see the growth in air traffic emanating from Orange County to be particularly significant. It makes no sense for Orange County residents and businesses to continue to seek their air commerce services at LAX, adding unnecessarily to the burdens experienced by LAX neighbors, when they could better be served in their own backyard. Consider: Ventura County will also experience very significant new growth, especially in terms of employment -again a key variable for airport planners. The newly developing commercial airport at Point Mugu can absorb much of this significant new opportunity with appropriate regional support. Again, it makes little sense for this region to continue to drive to LAX for all their air travel services when resources can be made available more locally . " All of these new growth communities have airports of their own to develop. These airports have runways; they have operators; and they often have strong community support. A primary barrier to success of these airports is competition for regional and federal ' transportation dollars and the perception among airlines that the region will let LAX expand indefinitely to capture new� growth in the marketplace. Only by developing a genuinely regional plan, a plan that requires active collaboration on the part of all our communities and recognizes that each county has the right -even the responsibility-to meet its own air travel needs, can we move forward with a future we can all live with in Southern California. Our point is a simple one: We should develop the existing airports where we expect our new growth to be before we further burden the residents of " communities near LAX. " We need the will and the mechanism to create a genuinely regional airport plan for Southern California, a plan that is safe, fair, prudent, and meets the needs of all the communities of Southern California . " Southern California Population & Employment Growth Projections " " & Airport Availability An increasingly decentralized region is proposed to be served by an increasingly centralized airport system, exacerbating the region 's already daunting congestion and air pollution problems . " " " " The subregions of Southern California with the fastest growing populations are those most remote from LAX, each of which has underutilized airports they wish to develop. Subregion Airports Population 1994 2020 Increase % North LA County Palmdale 451.4 1,213.4 762.0 169% West. Riverside March 1,114.9 2,340.8 1,225.9 110% San Bernardino Norton 1,558.3 2,830.0 1,271.7 82% George Ontario Coachella Valley Palm 262.0 475.2 213.2 81% Springs 3,386.6 6,859.4 3,472.8 102.5% The four fastest growing regions of Southern California have 6 under-utilized airports with commercial capacity. Their current combined population of nearly 3.4 million grows to over 6.8 million by the year 2020, a 100% increase . " " " " The subregions with the greatest projected absolute increases in population are also remote from LAX and have six underutilized airports. " The exception is the city of Los Angeles itself. However, much of the City of Los Angeles, the San Fernando Valley for example, is actually quite remote from LAX. Subregion Airports Population 1994 2020 Increase % San Bernardino Norton 1,558.3 2,830.0 1,271.7 82% George Ontario Los Angeles City LAX 3,656.7 4,890.9 1,234.2 34% West. Riverside March 1,114.9 2,340.8 1,225.9 110% North LA County Palmdale 451.4 1,213.4 762.0 169% Orange County John Wayne 2,595.1 3,244.6 649.5 25% El Toro " " " " The three slowest growing subregions of Southern California are the subregions closest to LAX. Subregion Airports Population . 1994 2020 Increase % Gateway Cities Long Beach 1,982.1 2,368.6 386.5 19% South Bay Cities 819.0 925.6 106.6 13% Westside Cities 227.0 253.0 26.0 11% The current combined 3 million population of these subregions is projected to grow approximately 17% to 3.5 million . I Los Angeles City LAX 3,656.7 4,890.9 1,234.2 34% The City of Los Angeles itself is projected to grow only by about 34%, much more slowly than the other parts of the region . " " " " The six fastest growing subregions in Southern California, as measured in terms of rates of employment growth, are also those subregions most remote from LAX. " Each of these subregions has one or more underutilized airport it wishes to develop. Subregion Airports Employment 1994 2020 Increase % North LA County Palmdale 139.6 416.9 277.3 199% West. Riverside March 278.6 762.8 484.2 174% San Bernardino Norton 486.0 1,103.4 617.4 127% George Ontario Coachella Valley Palm 108.5 197.9 89.4 82% Springs Ventura County PointMugu 282.5 485.5 203.0 72% Orange County John Wayne 1,262.4 2,116.6 854.2 68% El Toro " " " " Even when looked at in terms of employment growth in absolute numbers, the majority of the subregions expected to experience the largest increase in employment are remote from LAX. " These subregions also have underutilized airports. Subregion Airports Employment 1994 2020 Increase % Orange County John Wayne 1,262.4 2,116.6 854.2 68% El Toro San Bernardino Norton 486.0 1,103.4 617.4 127% George Ontario Los Angeles City LAX 1,705.1 2,209.3 504.2 30% West. Riverside March 278.6 762.8 484.2 174% Gateway Cities Long Beach 795.2 1,110.3 315.1 40% North LA County Palmdale 139.6 416.9 277.3 199% " " The communities closest to LAX will have the slowest rates of employment growth in the region. Subregion Airports Employment 1994 2020 Increase % Gateway Cities Long Beach 795.2 1,110.3 315.1 40% South Bay 408.9 554.5 145.6 36% Los Angeles City LAX 1,705.1 2,209.3 504.2 30% Westside Region 237.8 285.2 47.4 20% " " In absolute numbers, several of the subregions closest to LAX are projected to produce the fewest jobs. Subregion Airports Employment 1994 2020 Increase % South Bay 408.9 554.5 145.6 36% Arroyo Verdugo Burbank 277.8 410.2 132.4 48% Coachella Valley Palm Springs 108.5 197.9 89.4 82% Westside Region 237.8 285.2 47.4 20% " e ., , ·1 ~! ~I :1 .. ' ' :i :i 'l ,, ·' ,, ·i Southern California Regional Airports Employment Growth Rates Highest >80% by 2020 : • Lowest < 40% by 2020 : o.nt_~:::~~"·:::~~-:;•H·-~\ .. ..: ,,:,~N:-.\"'~;.:::.; ..... :t:J~ ~--: ~t . .,;o:r~-. ,.:~~.u--:~~n.:tf~-;'1 r".'·-------~----- . {~ l: " " I• i: r:I ro t~ ~~i ~: ,, lf !~ :• Southern California Regional Airports Population Growth Rates Highest >80% by 2020 : • Lowest < 20% by 2020 : , f :0 ~ k5*&*-~~~ft.;·!r~~~-~r5~.r:i?:~~;$~;;iI: ~ !"L.1:1; ~: .. ~9~.HA ~-~ ~r~~..;-::_~~::-'°· .... ~=-·t:::..,;_ " " C!tt-- 1 Bechtel ~RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTAl RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE TIME: DATE: LOCATION: MEETING AGENDA 12:00 P.M. Monday, January 25, 1998 CONFERENCE ROOM A 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Plans and Programs Committee Members Supervisor Bob Buster, County of Riverside Supervisor Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Mayor Jan Leja, City of Beaumont Mayor Robert Crain, City of Blythe Councilmember John Chlebnik, City of Calimesa Councilmember Eugene Bourbonnais, City of Canyon Lake Mayor Pro Tern Doug Sherman, City of Desert Hot Springs Councilmember Robin Reeser Lowe, City of Hemet Councilmember Percy Byrd, City of Indian Wells Mayor Chris Silva, City of Indio Councilmember Frank Hall, City of Norco Councilmember Dick Kelly, City of Palm Desert Mayor Will Kleindienst. City of Palm Springs Mayor A. L. Landers, City of Perris -----------.. ------------... ------ PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE State Transportation Improvement Program Regional Transportation Improvement Program New Corridors lntermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare) Air Quality and Clean Fuels Regional Agencies/Regional Planning Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs Congestion Management Program Eric Haley, Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Director -Planning and Programming Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to .the Clerk of the Commission. " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE CONFEREN.CE ROOM A 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100, RIVERSIDE 92501 MONDAY, JANUARY 25, 1999 12:00 P.M. AGENDA� *Action may be taken on any items listed on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS. 4. 1998 STIP AMENDMENT $15 MILLION EL NINO, REHABILITATION & ARTERIAL PROGRAM 5 . Staff and TAC recommend that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission eliminate the El Nino storm damage category from the $1 5 million call for projects and approve the list of arterial and rehabilitative projects for STIP funding. 1998 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission to program the entire amount of discretionary 1998 STIP amendment funds and the entire Western County formula share of 1 998 STIP Amendment funds to Measure A projects, consider any programming recommendations coming from CVAG for the Eastern County projects and approve a combined planning, programming and monitoring program. 6. PRIORITY RAIL PROJECTS FOR CALIFORNIA STIPAND FEDERAL PROGRAM Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission endorse the priority project lists developed by Metrolink and the Southern California Intercity Rail Group and actively advocate for STIP funding of the particular rail capital projects listed above; and And, that the Committee recommend RCTC's endorsement of Metrolink's federal funding request as listed in Attachment Ill. 7. CMAQ SET ASIDE FOR LNG LOCOMOTIVE 8. Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission set aside up to $300,000 of CMAQ funds to cover RCTC's share of costs for manufacturing a prototype LNG fueled locomotive. CONTRACTS/AGREEMENTS FOR CETAP Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee �recommend the Commission schedule, at minimum, two contract/agreement action items for the February 10, 1999 Commission meeting. RCTC Agenda Plans and Programs Committee January 25, 1999 Page 2 • 9. MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT ALLOCATION TO FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission approve operating support for two vehicles to Family Service Association until such_ time that the Specialized Transit Analysis is complete and recommendations are provided regardi11g the future service le.vels for the Jurupa area, and amend the funding agreement with Family Service Association to include additional Measure A Specialized Transit funds of $4,375 per month to support the operating· cost of this second vehicle in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. 10. REAPPOINTMENT TO THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICE TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL (CAC/SSTAC) Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission reappoint five members to the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council, as well as, the appointment of an additional member. 11 . METROLINK MONTHLY REPORT Presented is the Metrolink operating report for December, 1998, along with the most recent weekly updates to Board Members, for information, receive and file. 12. ADJOURNMENT. • The next meeting is scheduled to be held at 12:00 p.m., on February 22, 1999 at the RCTC offices . • " AGENDA ITEM 4 " " " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director .. SUBJECT: 1998 STIP Amendment $1.5 Million El Nino, Rehabilitation &:Arterial . . '. ' . Program At the December 9, 1998 meeting, the Commission approved issuing a call for projects for $15 million of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for storm damage, rehabilitation and arterial improvements. Staff issued a request for projects (RFP) to the Cities and County of Riverside on December 14, 1998. The deadline for project submittal(s) was at 5:00 p.m. on January 8, 1999. A total of 1 7 agencies met the deadline and submitted 44 projects for the rehabilitation and arterial improvements categories requesting a total of $93,029,813 in STIP funding. Three (3) agencies submitted El Nino projects requesting $2,246,882 in STIP funding. The total amount requested equaled $95,276,695 . Staff and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) met on January 1 3 following the Commission meeting to evaluate projects. The work to be accomplished was to reduce $95,276,695 of project requests into $15,000,000 of available funding. The first area of discussion was to address the "off the top" funding for the El Nino storm damage projects. The discussion surrounded the fact that in many cases there is a window of time which can extend upwards of 20 months whereby the storm damage projects could be funded by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Therefore, if the Commission funded these projects ~nd FEMA or FHWA came up with funding to support them in the future, the funded projects would technically be ineligible for reimbursement. This situation would create an awkward situation for the Commission because the Commission has a long standing policy to maximize the receipt of federal and state funds. The only other option staff and TAC could consider is to reserve an amount of the $15 million to address the submitted and qualified unfunded storm damage after the federal�� funding window closed. Staff and TAC determined that it would be best to recommend the Commission eliminate the El Nino category from the call for projects because there were more than enough projects to consider for rehabilitation and arterial improvements. Setting aside a reserve of funds would not support the 000001 .,·. California Transportation Commission and Caltran' s efforts to spend down the State • Highway Account balance nor would it put these funds to work as soon as possible. It is the recommendation of staff and the TAC that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission eliminate the El Nino storm damage category of the $15 million call for projects.· 1 7 agencies submitted 44 projects for rehabilitation and arterial projects for a total request of $93,029,813. Staff and the TAC determined th~t a re.asonable way ·to narrow the evaluation of project requests was to allow each agency. to identi~y their highest priority project. With the Commission structure i.n min.d, each agency·, with the exception of the County of Riverside identified their highest priority project. · The County was allowed to identify the highest priority project per supervisorial district, or 5 projects. This narrowed the field to 20 projects requesting $42,480,288 of ST!P funding . . Staff and the TAC applied 7 of the 8 Commission approved criteria assigning a low, medium and high point structure ( 1 ,2 or 3 points per criteria) and evaluated each of the 20 projects. The maximum points a project could receive was 21 . The 8th criteria "Geographic Balance" was withheld until after the projects were evaluated, scored and placed in rank order. The priority list, by evaluation score, left two obvious omissions from the distribution • of projects namely the Pass Area and the City of Riverside. Even though it was not necessary, because their project ranked well into the funding area, the City of Hemet staff offered to seek $400,000 of local funds to support their arterial widening and rehabilitation project on State Street with the knowledge that this could allow the funding line to be lowered resulting in an additional funded project. This contribution has since been confirmed and will be in writing the week ~f January 18th. Given the Commission's discussions prior to establishing the intra county formula, the list when viewed in terms of the Discretionary funds showed almost $2 million of discretionary funds going to the Coachella Valley area ($1,994,457 of $3,630,000 of .available discreti_onary funding). The project which was viewed as being funded with discretionary furids was the rehabilitation and widening of Washington Street which was the highest ranked project and is a joint submittal by the Cities of La Quinta, Indian Wells and Palm Desert along with the County as lead agency for the project. As a result of discussion between staff and the TAC on how to reach geographic balance , it is recommended that STIP funding for the Washington Street project be reduced by $1,000,000. The reduction of the Washington Street project and the· increased local contribution of $400,000 from the City of Hemet makes it possible to establish a reasonable geographic balance for the distribution of the funds by; • 000002 funding the highest scored Pass Area project (rehabilitation of Highland Springs Avenue -$446,320)~ and • " " " " " funding the City of Riverside's project (rehabilitation of Magnolia Avenue - $600,000), and the recommendation is consistent with the adopted Intra-county Formula by identifying the Palo Verde Valley Area formula share of funds ($156,906). STAFF AND TAC RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) 2) That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission eliminate the El N~no storm damage category �trom the $1 5 million call for projects. That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission approve the attached list of arterial and rehabilitation projects for STIP funding recognizing that the two actions listed below make it possible to establish a reasonable level of geographic equity by funding the Pass Area project which received the highest score in the evaluation process; funds the City of Riverside's project, and establishes a reserve of formula STIP funds for the Palo Verde Valley Area, consistent with the adopted Intra-County Formula for allocating STIP Regional Improvement Program funds: a) The City of Hemet has increased its local share for the State Street arterial widening and rehabilitation project by .$400,000 . b) The Washington Street widening and rehabilitation project STIP request is reduced by $1 ,000,000. F:\users\preprint\ 1999\February\Plan_Pro\STIP$15.wpd 000003 FY 1999 Call for Projects for El Nino Unfunded storm Damage, Rehabllltation and Arterial Improvements Projects: Amount Available $15,000,000 In STIP/RIP Disc $ <24.2%> w.c. 172.23%) c.v. (26.39%) score Agency Project Desc. Total Project STIP Req Local Match Type Match $3,630,000 $8,212,551 $3,000,543 16 county/PD/IW/La Rehab & wldem_ng of Washington st from SR 111 to countrv club Driv S5,061,000 S3,495,000 S1,566,000 County, O/AG & City s S3,495,000 14 Hemet Arterial Widenl ig & Rehab on state St b/W Chambers & Domenigonl P S1,662,000 S1,262,000 S400,000 Locals $1,262,000 14 Moreno valley Rehab Box Spri igs Rd from Morton to Day st. S1,290,000 $1,125,000 S165,000 Meas.A $1,125,000 14 Perris Rehab Ramona Expressway b/W 1·215 & Ryder S800,000 S650,000 S150,000 Meas. A S650,000 14 san Jacinto Rehab sandersnn Ave <ext of Hwy 79> from Ramona to Esplanade S750,000 S550,000 S200,000 Meas.A S550,000 14 county Rehab Reche e;,,nyon Rd from S.B. county Line to Reche Vista Drive S4,570,000 S3,930,000 $640,000 Meas A/State S $3,930,000 13 corona Rehab Pavement on North Main St & River Road S1,719,770 S1,335,757 S384,013 Meas. A/Gas Tax . $1,335,757 13 Palm Springs Rehab Palm Cyn Drive from Ramon to Alejo S717,106 S500,000 $217,106 Meas.A. S500,000 13 Temecula Rehab Jefferso i/Front st from no. city limits to Rancho ca Rd/Winche S1,100,000 S816,000 S284,000 Meas.A S816,000 12 Bannlng/Beaum Rehab Hlghlan< 1 Springs from sun Lakes to BrookSide S557,900 S446,320 S111,580 Local S&R S446,320 12 Riverside Rehab Magnolia Av.e. b/W La Sierra & van Buren S721,000 S600,000 S121,000 Locals S600,000 SUBTOTAL $18,948,776 $14,710,077 $4,238,699 TOTAL RECOMMENDED = $14,868,983 $11J,715,077 $3,995,000 12 Lake Elsinore Rehab Main St t rom 1·15 to Lakeshore Drive S600,600 S527,500 S73,100 Meas. A/Gas Tax S527,500 12 Murrieta Rehab Jefferso1 Avenue from corning to Murrieta Hot Springs Road S4,348,204 S2,000,000 S2,348,204 Meas. A/Gas Tax/Local Mit $2,000,000 12 county Rehab & construction of Newport Rd • Menifee Rd to Winchester Rd < S12,399,000 S12,399,000 so s-12,399,000 12 county Rehab/Widening of Valley Way/Armstrong Rd· SR60 to Sierra Avenue S3,431,619 S3,201,619 S230,000 Econ Dev Agency $3,201,619 11 Beaumont Rehab Sixth St. b/W 1·10 & SR 60 S558,092 S558,092 so $558,092 11 county Rehab caJalco J oad from La Sierra to Kirkpatrick Rd S4,285,000 $3,840,000 S445,000 Meas.A $3,840,000 10 cathedral City Rehab streets (In cove Assessment District Area S3,605,000 S721,000 S2,884,000 Meas. A/Gas Tax/Assess S721,000 10 Norco Rehab Hamner Ave from 3rd st to Hamner bridge < no bridgework! S592,000 S592,000 so S592,000 9 Indio Rehab Indio Bl1 d from Jefferson to Hwy 111 S2,531,000 S2,531,000 so In-kind S2,531,000 TOTAL $51,299,291 $41,080,288 $10,219,003 corona storm Damage on Rincon b/W corvdon and Smith S449,119 S449,119 Moreno Valley storm Drain Ln 1 south of Nason & Alessandro Intersection *DSR fort S100,000 S100,000 county various storm i)amage S1,647,800 S1,647,800 Total stonn Related Projects $2,196,919 $2,198,919 Assumptions: -No funds are allocated for storm dam 1ge requests. -The Joint county, Palm Desert, Indian 'Yells and La Quinta project will Include a total of S1 .566 M In local funds. -The City of Hemet will provide S400,0(1() In local matching funds. P.V. (1.38%> $156,906 $156,906 <Reserved> 4':1"' 0 0 0 0 0 FY 1999 Call for Projects for El Nino Unfunded storm Damage, Rehabllltatlon and Arterial improvements Projects: Amount A\111llable $15,000,000 In STIP/RIP Amt.Avail Disc$ C24.2%J w.c. 172.21%1 • Agency Project Desc. Total Project STIP Reli1 Local Match Type Mateh f'15,000,000 $1,088,255 $1,982,175 corona storm Damage on Rincon b/w Corydon and Smith $449,119 $449,119 -Moreno Valley storm Drain Ln 1 south of Nason & Alessandro Intersection "DSR forth $100,000 $100;000 county various storm Damage $1;697,763 $1,697,763 Total storm Related Projects $2,246,882 $2,24&,iJ82 ·tl12,75S,118 Bannlng/Beaum Rehab Highland Springs from sun Lakes to Brookside $557,900 $446,320 $111,580 Local S&R $446,320 Beaumont Rehab Sixth St. b/w 1·10 & SR 60 $558,092 $558,092 so l $558,092 cathedral City Rehab streets on cove ASsessment District Area 12 copies! $3,605,000 $721,000 $2,884,000 Meas. A/Gas TaX/ASsess I . cathedral City Rehab Ramon Rd from Whitewater River Bridge to east city limits $4,143,000 $3,314,400 $828,600 ? .. cathedral City Rehab & Art Imp. 1cable & loop work! Perez Rd fr cathedral cvn to Date $570,000 $501,600 $68,400 ? corona Rehab Pavement on Sampson Avenue $943,014 $754,891 $188,723 Meas. A/Gas $754,891 corona Arterial Widening of El Cerrito Rd/Foothill Parkway $6,488,000 $3,310,500 $3,177,500 ? $3,310,500 corona Rehab Railroad street from west Grand to Auto center $1,462,893 $292,579 $1,170,314 Meas. A/Gas Tax $292,579 corona Arterial Gap Closure of Foothill Parkway b/w Lincoln & Green Riv 2.68m $20,310,579 $5,077,645 $15,232,934 Meas. A/Dev Fee $5,077,645 ·-corona Rehab Pavement on North Main st & River Road $1,719,770 $1,335,757 $384,013 Meas. A/Gas Tax $1,335,757 corona Arterial Widening of Main st from 3rd to Grand $5,615,000 $4,21C,OOO $1,405,000 ? $4,210,000 -corona · Reconstruct 1-15 Magnolla Ave interchange $7,598,110 $6,901,850 $696,260 Meas. A/State/Fed $6,901,850 corona Arterial Widening of Ontario Avenue from Compton to state $622,000 $34C,OOO $282,000 ? $340,000 Hemet Arterial Widening & Rehab on state st b/w Chambers & Domenlgoni Pk $1,662,000 $1,662,000 so Local Funded Dedication $1,662,000 lndlo · Rehab Indio Blvd from Jefferson to Hwy 111 $2,531,000 $2,531,000 so In-kind Lake Elsinore · Rehab Main st from 1·15 to Lakeshore Drive $600,600 $527,500 $73,100 Meas. A/Gas Tax $527,500 La Quinta Rehab Sb #2 lane of Washington st. from Ave 47/Hlghland Palms Ave $10,616 $11:,616 so Moreno Valley Rehab Heacock st. from Mariposa to Iris Ave and near Gentian $1,415,000 $1,221'.,000 $191,000 Meas. A $1,224,000 Rehab Heacock from Ironwood to Parkland .. Moreno valley $1,715,000 $1,494,000 $221,000 Meas. A $1,494,000 Moreno valley. Rehab Box springs Rd from Morton to Dav St. $1,290,000 s1.12~.ooo $165,000 Meas. A $1,125,000 • Moreno valley Rehab Frederick st. from cottonwood to centerpolnte $2,505,000 $2,20!:,000 $300,000 Meas.A $2,205,000 Moreno valley Rehab JFK Drive from Indian st to Perris Blvd. $1,035,000 s00~.ooo $153,000 Meas.A $882,000 ... Murrieta Rehab Jefferson Avenue from corning to Murrieta Hot Springs Road $4,348,204 $2,00C.,000 $2,348,204 Meas. A/Gas TaX/Local Mit $2,000,000 -Norco Rehab Hamner Ave from 3rd st to Hamner bridge 1 no brldgeworkJ $592,000 $592,000 so $592,000 .. Palm Springs Rehab Palm Cyn Drive from Ramon to Alejo $711,106 $50C,OOO $217,106 Meas. A. Perris· Rehab Ramona Expressway b/w 1·215 & Ryder $800,000 $65C.,ooo $150,000 Meas. A $650,000 Riverside Rehab Lincoln Ave from van Buren to Washington st. $893,500 . $700,000 $193,500 Local$ I $700,000 .. Riverside Rehab Washington st. from southerly city limits to overlook Parkway $591,500 $500,000 $91,500 Local$ $500,000 Riverside Rehab Main st from 3rd to northerly city limits $863,000 $70C,OOO $163,000 Local S ' $700,000 Riverside Arterial Widening of Arlington Ave b/w Monroe & Adams $1,214,000 SBOC,000 $414,000 Meas. A. $800,000 Riverside Rehab Alessandro Blvd. From canyon crest to easterly city limits $793,000 $600,000 $193,000 Local$ $600,000 Riverside Rehab Magnolia Ave. btw La Sierra & van euren $721,000 $60C::,OOO $121,000 Local$ $600,000 .• San Jacinto · Rehab Sanderson Ave lext of Hwy 791 from Ramona to Esplanade $750,000 $550,000 $200,000 Meas. A $550,000 .. Temecula Rehab Jefferson/Front st from no. city limits to Rancho ca Rd/Winches $1,100,000 $816!..000 $284,000 Meas.A $816,000 .. county/PD/IW/L Rehab & widening of Washington st from SR 111 to country Club Drive $5,061,000 S4.49~ .• ooo $566,000 In-kind county Rehab/Widening of valley Way/Armstrong Rd· SR60 to Sierra Avenue $3,431,619 $3,201,619 $230,000 Econ Dev Agency $3,201,619 county Rehab of eellgrave -Hamner Ave to Etlwanda Ave $1,245,000 $1,010,000 $235,000 Meas.A $1,010,000 .. county RehabReche canyon Rd from s.e. county Line to Reche Vista Drive $4,570,000 $3,930,000 $640,000 Meas A/State S $3,930,000 -county Rehab caJalco Road from La Sierra to Kirkpatrick Rd $4,285,000 $3,840,000 $445,000 Meas. A $3,840,000 county Rehab & Widening of Scott Rd· 1·215 & Winchester Rd ISR 791 $10,380,000 $10,380,000 so $10,380,000 county Rehab & construction of Newport Rd • Menifee Rd to Winchester Rd 1s $12,399,000 $12,39~,l)OQ so $12,399,000 county Rehab Gilman springs Rd from Bridge st to Sanderson Ave $1,585,000 $1,380,000 $205,000 Meas. A $1,380,000 county Rehab Alessandro Blvd. from Alexander st to M.v. city limits $1,125,000 $1,000,000 $125,000 Meas. A $1,000,000 county Rehab Llmonite b/w Hamner and Etlwanda $3,183,444 $2,960,444 $223,000 county EDA S $2,960,444 .. TOTAL REHABILITATION & ARTERIAL PROJECTS $127,606,547 $93,029,811 $34,576,734 $80,956,197 . ' TOTAL PROJ $129,853,429 $95,276,695 $34,576,734 .. • C.V. C2CU9%J $2,551,085 $721,000 •' $!,314,400 $501,600 $2,531,000 $10,616 $500,000 $4,495,000 $12,0n:,616 P.V. C1.S8%J $111,401 (Jor'o·'""" I}'· I}~) " AGENDA ITEM 5 " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program Amendment 11 At the December 9, 1998 meeting the Commission approved the following lntra-County Formula allocation of new programming capacity for the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). INTRA-COUNTY FORMULA APPLICATION 1998 STIP AMENDMENT (8's in millions) STIP/RIP Funds Available 2% Planning Funds Regional Rideshare Discretionary STIP 24.20% Subtotal STIP El Nino, Rehab & Arterials Formula STIP Western County 72.23% Coachella Valley 26.39% Palo Verde Valley 1 38%+ Distribution of EI Nino, Rehab & Arterial Funds: Discretionary 24.20% Western County 72.23% Coachella Valley 26.39% Palo Verde Valley 1.38% $50.333 ($1.007) $(1.220) ($11.642) $36.464 ($15.000) $21.464 $15.503 $5.665 $0.296 $3.630 $8.213 $3.000 $0.157�� This item will provide recommendations for the allocation the discretionary STIP funds $11.642 million; the formula STIP shares which are; Western County = $15.503 million; Coachella Valley = $5.665 milllion; and the Palo Verde Valley = $.0296 million. It is staff's recommendation that the full amount of discretionary STIP funds and the Western County formula share be allocated to the following Measure A projects in the following amounts: Route 91 - Mary Street to 7th Street $ 1.OM for Environmental $10.OM for PS&E Project Subtotal = $11.OM 00U006 Route 79 Newport Road to Keller Road $ 0.5M for Environmental $ 1.5M for PS&E $ 2.5M for R/W and Utilities $ 8.3M for Construction Project Subtotal $12.8M Route 91 Phase II Sound Walls & Auxiliary lanes $ 3.345M Construction Total Western County = $27..145M The Western County formula share ($15.503M) plus theSTIP discretionary share ($1 1.642M) is '$27.145M. The Western County funding recommendation will lead to the full delivery of the Newport to Keller Measure A project by 2003-04, complete the needed refinement for the environmental, preliminary studies and engineering for the Route 91 widening project from Mary Street to Seventh Street, and will complete the Route 91 Phase II soundwall project, required mitigation for the Route 91 HOV lanes previously constructed, and add auxiliary lanes between interchanges to improve traffic flow. At this time, CVAG has not taken formal action to- make a recommendation on the Coachella Valley or Palo Verde Valley STIP formula shares. CVAG may take action on all or a portion of their formula shares the evening of January 25, 1999 at their regularly scheduled Executive Committee meeting. Staff recommends, due to the deadlines established by the California Transportation Commission for the 1998 STIP Amendment that any recommendation(s) coming forth from the CVAG Executive Committee meeting be forwarded directly to the Commission's February 10 meeting agenda. If no recommendation is forwarded from the CVAG Executive Committee, staff recommends reserving the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for their use at a later date. With respect to the $1.007M of Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PP&M) funds, staff recommends the Commission to reserve the funds for a combined programming recommendation including previously programmed PP&M funds of $1.376M which is in the 1999-00 year of the STIP. The reason for this recommendation is to make programming recommendations for these planning funds consistent with the Commission's direction to allocate the funds in accordance with the adopted lntra- County Formula for allocating shares of STIP funds. (Commission action October 14, 1998) This will provide a short window of time to align the PP&M funds with RCTC and CVAG because the CTC is not meeting in April. In order to amend the STIP by the CTC's June 9th and 10th meeting staff estimates that the Commission will have to adopt recommendations on the PP&M program at our March 10, 1999 meeting. In order to 000007 " " 2) " meet this schedule Commission staff and CVAG staff will have to get this program recommendation in order as soon as possible. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission to program the entire amount of discretionary 1998 STIP amendment funds and the entire Western County formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds to the following Measure A projects in the following amounts: - Route 91 - Mary Street to 7th Street $ 1:0M for Environmental $10.OM for PS&E Project Subtotal = $11.OM Route 79 - Newport Road to Keller Road $ 0.5M for Environmental $ 1.5M for PS&E $ 2.5M for R/W and Utilities $ 8.3M for Construction Project Subtotal $12.8M Route 91 Phase II Sound Walls & Auxiliary lanes $ 3.345M Construction Total Western County = $27.145M That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission to consider any programming recommendations coming from the January 25, 1998 CVAG Executive Committee meeting for the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds. 3) Should no recommendation be forwarded from CVAG, then staff recommends the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission to reserve the respective Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula . shares of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for their future programming recommendations. 4) That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission combine the $1.007M of 1998 STIP Amendment Planning, Programming & Monitoring funds with the $1.376M of previously programmed 1998 STIP funds to make programming recommendations for these planning funds consistent with the Commission's direction to allocate the funds in accordance with the adopted lntra- County Formula for allocating shares of STIP funds. (Commission action October 14, 1998) F:\users\preprint\1999\February\Plan Pro\98STIPA.wpd 000008 AGENDA ITEM 6 • • " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Priority Rail Projects for California STIP and Federal Program ' Background: With the anticipated amendment, or augmentation, to the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the five Metrolink county partners and the seven county agencies which comprise the Intercity Rail Group have studied needs and developed lists of the most critical rail capital projects needed for system growth, reliability and coordination of services. The lists in Attachments I and II reflect the priorities adopted by each of those two governing boards. Staff is recommending that the Commission endorse these priority lists. And, as RCTC has particular interest in three of the projects listed, staff further recommends that the Commission actively advocate for STIP funding of the following: - Track Improvements at Bandini (located in L.A. County; system wide benefit). - Metrolink Rolling Stock (system wide benefit). - Colton Junction (located in San Bernardino Co.; benefit to Inland Empire Line). The Metrolink Board has also adopted a list of projects for which it will seek federal funding and is asking RCTC's endorsement of this list as well. (See attachment III) STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission endorse the priority project lists developed by Metrolink and the Southern California Intercity Rail Group and actively advocate for STIP funding of the particular rail capital projects listed above; and That the Committee recommend RCTC's endorsement of Metrolink's federal funding request as listed in Attachment III. 000009 looptotts !carat/ tit Iceeiwe'e s learszve it 1003'00018 I ydiuC9 q 4du' •(Aane•y soo+�rl.IaH) IOl-I :•tio uo,euela3 P13 4 1M/1 •M 4 AIId Melt= IR pane *P•ad *ma. (91 ri •us, wasam tap p •pmeldn chap uup! . It le-oplppe oil veva@ ems Ad •yp u! epu a real VLN visa mu. eeM Inge do Is aAapap 6.6 f+• Inman& all (Si wows Lwow AI Su!puM magpie ul OX nee eLortaid tegWll 'void WS (mixt It Am 1•xl wNd 000t70d e•PnPul W Vgpni irolcul•N u; eMAI. P•PulicIn AI.1 pew uP11 (►) u•eieV dfY013/1 PA 011Pe+o pe(aii APAllud (C) 'AN1 al c•Nxiluuao 9L91 aair se age pilau mule 7eAluv u+ap uo3ng3uaa mg lawny M 11P•(•ro filbUd MOON ! V11119i •us ep• fold all 1111.1 •91 (3 IC'OOtollol! I COOIC1191 I 1V101 i 00000ir'1! 00cmOTS mott►t 000'0050 000'9L lst ourgelZs! 090V307 t Ow "00613 000'00011 000'00ret env! er111I1 wot tLet oaOOO»e1 0000On 000'009t 020'ett 0s! 000'91Z01•! OW mitt 000 00001 c0D'astes 000'030'et sun ao alum 6e11 sa lu•A MOW/ Oe °oohs It 000'91.fitrt 000'9LOZef 000000 I it 000'00a-et 000111.4 . 000'000'10 030'5te cft 0000X11 000'00t'e! OOObSII't! =face&! toolieit acetate 000'959 Olt 000vocess 000'osu 000'00010 000'000'LIM ualeepi ugORp Oa�l 'pate alraiNUI AtyuN A1anµM plucke• sgul IaoPlump, leuole+nNM (11) ►Wel e113/4 spuaoaaduy Iwlasnpau (0) uuspepd.1(0wsesd PDV/wa eld rw •Aw •4M P Aeaee0u0 Pus gnu &rp m 1111N In^ k e11ua1leid 1 eeeld 134 ILINPV vga,•w PAPI1PV II mild •eMp•� •east012013 OuNob I enyd s•MPed dmw Isom Iluilow Mau 0I10001 olroos'la aoo'ste'l! •,�i.,,yUeA A11AMM it 1)P•Papol d0 01 *MPS S P WPM P•e0 iP3 P ugyuecet 0 000'009'11S 000'009'10 COO'0f6'013 000'Xiellt 000000 000'0511 c0O'0f1'Lt oaromess 000'000'et aa0'090'Lt 01111101 1 01111000 I 141I0001 I 00u11001 I 111/N51 0311311 IMII3A11f911d 0311 Ilvaaiens MARL 0301311-1N301aN3wV Mil ten 0 AU110I11/11I1M11VN V VINV0d11V0 NN3H11101 1107 031'OMd I 03113003M 1N110PY 31111 I AVC1111t30l 3dA1 1.7(3f0Rpd 1 — -- - - III 1133f 1110111d I I f Attachment I SCRRA INTERREGIONAIANTERCTTY PROJECTS PROPOSED FOR THE 1998 STIP AMENDMENT - REVISED 12/9/98 The first site seven projects in SCRRA proposed list for funding in the 1998 STIP Amendment total $2,3464 $28.SS.5 million. These are the projects staff recommends for endorsement by the Mcmber Agencies. It should be noted that for all the projects listed below, in some way, benefit accrues not only to the line on which the project is located, but to the entire Metrolink system. Each Metrolink equipment set does not remain on -one line, but during each day is cycled through to other lines. Thus, in increasing flexibility and reliability on one line, the project will also benefit all other Metrolink lines. In addition for example, projects located north of Los Angeles, such as a new crossover, will not only benefit Amtrak and Metrolink service north of Los Angeles, but will improve service south of Los Angeles, as a late train north of Los Angeles will not be able to maintain its schedule going south. 1. Three Miles Of Triole Track At Bandini $7.08 million This project is located in the City of Commerce and would build three miles of triple track between Fullerton and Los Angeles Union Station at Bandini starting at the currently proposed end of BNSF four track main line. It will provide an improvement which is essential if Metrolink and Amtrak are to increase the number of trains running in this corridor. The project total cost is $12 million: a I 6% contribution is assumed from BNSF and a 25% contribution from Amtrak. The project is located on the LOSSAN Corridor between San Diego and Los Angeles. This corridor is the second busiest in the United States. It is also located on Metrolink's Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton Line which is proposed to open FY 2002/03. This section of the corridor is very active: each day there are 21 Amtrak Intercity trains, 22 commuter rail trips and over 41 freight trips. Metrolink ridership on the Orange County Line has grown to over 5,000 daily trips. The corridor is now entirely owned by public agencies except the 25-mile section between downtown Los Angeles and Fullerton. This segment of the corridor is owned by the Burlington Northern:Santa Fe Railroad. Each Metrolink equipment set does not remain on one line, but during each day is cycled through to other lines. Thus, in increasing flexibility and reliability on the Orange. County and Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton lines, the project will also benefit all other Metrolink lines. The project will also benefit Amtrak service not only between San Diego and Los Angeles, but also north of Los Angeles, since a late Amtrak train south of Los Angeles cannot maintain its schedule north of Los Angeles to Santa Barbara or San Luis Obispo. Lastly, the project will benefit BNSF since it will permit better control of freight train movements as they go into and out of the Alameda Corridor which will soon be under construction. • UuQQ14 Attachment I • • • 2. Single Crossover between Van Nuys and Ravmer S.75 million This. project would provide a single crossover between the Van Nuys Station and CP Raymer, 2 miles west of the Van Nuys Station on the Ventura Line. This segment is double track, but there is currently only a full length passenger platform on one track and there is nowhere for trains to cross from one track to the other and allow trains to pass near the station. The project will increase flexibility and reliability for commuter, Amtrak Intercity and freight trains using this corridor since Metrolink dispatchers will be able to move UP freight traffic in and out of UP's GEMCO Yard and still maintain a high level of passenger rail traffic. Through this section of the corridor, there are 10 Amtrak.Intercity trains, 18 commuter nail trips and over 12 freight trips daily. The project total cost is S 1 million and a 25% contribution from Amtrak is assumed. 3. Upgrade Ticket Vending Machines to 10-Kev Pad Operation S 1.6 million This project will provide for new and/or upgraded passenger rail ticket vending machines (I'VMs) at Metrolink and Amtrak stations. The project benefits the entire Metrolink system, Amtrak Intercity service and has the potential to benefit other transit providers in the region. These new machines will be able to vend either Metrolink, Amtrak, and Coaster tickets. The machines will also have the potential to sell bus tickets. This means that fewer total capital costs for ticketing machines are needed and servicing costs are lowered and shared. The new machines will be able to vend different types of tickets. For example, they will not only vend tickets for a regular one-way, round-trip, 10-trip, or monthly pass for adult, student, handicapped, or off-peak fare, they will also allow someone to buy a ticket for a future date and several different types of tickets at once. They will vend interline tickets and be able to allocate the money collected to the different operators. For example, a person will be able to buy a single ticket allowing the user to travel from Riverside using Metrolink, then transfer to Amtrak to Santa Barbara, then return home —and do this so that both Metrolink and Amtrak get their share of the ticket • price. Similarly, commuters could purchase joint Metrolinlc and Coaster tickets transferring at Oceanside. This makes the entire passenger rail network in Southern California much more useable to many, many more travelers. Finally, the SB 457 study on ways to save operating costs in the San Diegan Corridor determined that one of the most productive cost saving measures is to introduce TVMs for Intercity Rail passengers. Savings come about by eliminating, over time, and as worked out with the union, station agents at lesser -used Amtrak stations, or at least the number of hours an agent needs to be present. In addition, almost half of the stations on the San Diegan route are unstaffed and the machines would allow Amtrak tickets to be purchased at these stations or when stations are closed. 000'012 Attachment I 4. Additional Metrolink Rolling Stock: Phue I $11.5 million The SCRRA vehicle fleet consists of 33 locomotives and 119 cars. Average daily ridership has reached over 27,600 in November 1998. Metrolinlc's ridership has . continued to grow at an impressive rate. However, future growth will be constrained by the lack of new equipment. In the 1998 SIP, SCRRA was awarded S35 tnillion in federal funds for new rolling stock. When combined with a prior state grant, we have sufficient funding for two locomotives.and 21-22 cars. Our projections of ridership demand show a need'for additional cars. Our request for S21.2 million in state funding has been split into two phases. It is assumed that the Phase I cars would be added to the current federal grant application and would add 7 cars to the order. We are requesting an additional 5 to 6 cars in Phase II. 5. Upgrde Crossover at CP Allen to 60 mph $.75 million In the FY 98/99 Capital Maintenance Budget, MTA funded the replacement of this crossover at $2 million. The MTA project will replace the power crossovers at CP Allen in kind with new turnouts and with new controls and signals. This interlocking was built by the Southern Pacific in 1968 and the track components are wom out and the signal controls arc obsolete. The work will consist of constructing a new set of crossovers just south of the existing location and placing them into service before retirement of the old ones. This construction method will minimize impacts to train service. The current crossovers allow for speeds of 30 mph, the replacement crossovers would allow higher speeds of 45 mph and the upgrade project would allow speeds of 60 mph. This will substantially reduce time impacts to commuter and Amtrak Intercity trains that have to use the crossovers in this high speed 79 mph territory. Through this section of the corridor, there are 10 Amtrak Intercity trains, 18 commuter rail trips and over 12 freight trips daily. The project total cost is S1 million and a 25% contribution from Amtrak is assumed. 6. Colton Crossint Grade Separation ;5. 000 million This project would grade separate the existing at grade crossing of the BNSF and UP main lines at Colton between Metrolink's San Bernardino and Riverside stations As freight traffic continues to increase, the at grade crossing becomes a serious bottleneck not only for freight trains, but also for Metrolink service. The Inland Empire to Orange County (WOO Line passes through the Colton Crossing, and grade separation would reduce delays and increase capacity on the line. The grade separation will also benefit the Orange County Line as many of the IEOC trains cycle through to the Orange County Line In addition, since the grade separation will reduce delays to BNSF and UP freight trains, the project will increase reliability and capacity on the Riverside (UP) Line and for the future peak direction service on the Riverside -Las Angeles via Fullerton Line. Currently on a daily basis, BNSF has about 4S trains, UP has over 20 trains, Metralink has 10 trains and Amtrak has 2 trains passing through the Colton Crossing in a north - • • 000013 Attacnmant t • • • south direction and UP has over 30 trains passing through the crossing in an east - west direction. The total project cost is S38 million and it is expected that the BNSF and UP will participate in the funding. 7. Extend Coast &dine at Burbank to Cr Lockhefd $ 1.875 million This project would extend the existing Coast Siding at Burbank on the Ventura Line from 4,000 to 8,000 feet and add power switches. / This added storage capacity along with the power switches will allow freight trains to use the siding and .be passed by passenger trains. This increases flexibility and reliability on this line for commuter, Amtrak Intercity and freight trains using the corridor. Through this section of the corridor, there are 10 Amtrak Intercity trains, 18 commuter rail trips and over 12 freight trips daily. The project total cost is $2.5 million and a 25% contribution from Amtrak is assumed. 000014 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INTERCITY RAIL GROUP ATTACHMENT 2 January 8,.1999 Joint Powers Board TO: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INTERCITY RAIL GROUP - 1/15/99 FROM: PROJECT ADMINISTRATOR SUBJECT: PROPOSED SCIRG STIP AMENDMENT LIST ISSUE: In order to meet the current CTC 1998 STIP amendment date for Project Study Report (PSR) submissions, the SCIRG needs to decide if it will propose a list of projects for inclusion in the 1999 intercity/interregional STEP amendment list. RECOMMENDATION: The Project Administrator proposes that: 1) the SCIRG Board approve the attached list of projects for inclusion in the 1998 STIP Amendment; and 2) comments be drafted for inclusion in the submittal recommending priority setting criteria including the provision of matching shares; and 3) the SCIRG Board endorse and request approval by the CTC of a "4%" level for intercity/interregional funds consistent with the 1998 STIP process. 4) the SCIRG Board members should individually and collectively advocate for this priority list. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority • Orange County Transportation Authority • Riverside County Transportation Commission San Bernardino Associated Governments • San Diego Association of Governments • San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Santa Barbara County Association of Governments • Ventura County Transportation Commission Southern California Association of Governments • California Department of Transportation 000015. " " SCIRG Proposed S1IP Amendment List January 8,1999 Page 2 BACKGROUND: The California Transportation Commission (CTC) is in the process of setting interim project evaluation criteria guidelines and establishing a fund estimate for a 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)-Amendment. The CTC is meeting on January 14, to adopt this item. As part of your adopted SCIRG FY '99 s consultants to begin �� of work, you directed staff and g preparation of a capital programming document for the corridor. Subsequent to that action, the CTC announced it would be considering a 1998 STIP Amendment. The result was the need to develop an SCIRG project list before an initial draft capital program is prepared by staff, the TAC and LSTS, your consultant. The TAC met a number of times to draft a list of projects for the Board's endorsement. All member agencies participated and considerable co resulting Iist (attached), staff and TAC believes is a rea��nable requ�� STIP e Amendment funds. SB45 identified a minimum of what is called the "2.25%" level for intercity rail projects in the State. Because rail carriers, such as Metrolink, are "interregional" in nature, not regional (and therefore not CTC broadened the definition to intercitylilnterregionalifying for eandnin theted e98 regional funds),led on the "4 % " level. Because of the substantial north/south needs for intercity projects and the a interregional needs, that "4%" level needs to be Further, $12.3 million already approved for track and for the STIP Amendment. Sacramento and Stockton should not count against this "4 % "improvementsements between level. The TAC with the cooperation of Amtrak, local agencies and railroads identified significant non -state fiords for many of these projects. Staff believes that this is a significant action -and should be highlighted as well as given credit when the CTC allocates funds for the STIP Amendment. The Board is requested to endorse the list for submission to the CTC, comm significant coordination efforts in terms of agencies and non -State funding and ur tithe the CTC to adopt the "4%" level of funding and exclude the $12.3 million Sacramento - Stockton project from the "4 %" level. The and advocacy actions needed to ensure this priority lis is fundeedbers should take those Attachment 0000:16 10 3 SD Southern CaStorni' Intend* imp Draft STIP Amendment Rap liary- Revnwt.•Nenttt.ry 1s!! Thee mites, third man at Bandi i $12,000 Replace Worn Timber Bridge No. S15.000 243 (San Diego Ricer) and add 2nd track Electronic Message S . wide and Install signs in Grover, Paso Robles and Guedalupe New and Machinesupgrade Ticket 10-Kay Pad 55,489 $2889 Amtrak Tickets d Mctrolnk Tablets Del Mar bluffs stabilisation along 319,700 S4,700 S15.000 NCTD tracks Single Crossover between Van NuYs and Raymer upgrade Crossover at CP Allen to Upgrade and rehabilitate sdrg, include); repleong rail, lies and switches at Gavels Extend Centralized Traffic Control Signal System from the north end to the south end of double tracks and replace crossover rear Orarff Road New San Dego Maintenance Facility (STIP415513SA) Subtotal Tier 1 11 . t , SB Install a 40-mph crossover treat benween double tracks at Montego Street 12 1 , SB Construct new siding with CTC and switches between Cal i long and Santa Barbara Construct Van Nuys Poking addition Oceanside Transrt Center Phases 1 and 2 - Add 450 Parkin; Spaces 16 1 L SD Extend double track. Including related CTC signal work between O'Neil and Flores (Grand Total 1,8I99 000017 S5,500 1. S2.500 ATTACHMENT 2 115'600 56,000 11,600 S3,000 S12,000 fi1P ($4.500) S1,875 S1,520 S2,500 $3,000 mgm50..maP-1a»lia "uoisuag3 qualm) all Jel PallWald& GAM spun) pue spurt' ts,elS 1NeN J4I W9i6le tou see► aid epoptd IT p� V1rieyl yOeorN element 10l leenbgi W IS eta (9) >fewuy er to PN s141 Palti VIA 'p&lad EMJI eys gel Apuq,o e&ia uog�q,de,dd& 19 eta 15) 0,) Femme � et papal w inueepe u spurq sees pace Mop al yid w pepeetbel uaaq sal aolpnle,d oN w awl V iipuN meal Aue W gopeu ss peso0&sd SA sem stets ul l►le ROCS (W velgUe1»3 sPuslPeN kegs eueiuod sot Peso eq es Well &pew ten Pek0d 111110091 OuNr,ewep ueS ,ot SPUN li V31 ul 110111►e 1S P e0pelldeude11 66 eVl 'Paled slIN Jel PeR gueu osle WNW CiIS P spleeJ 1uJ01 Pug *Prins Mid Pelee) sly of;Pug) d1S PQM ul uaNPu SC! Pilugem aptly suaWpuaery duS 966tey1 ytnn,yl &wry J01 spanbeu pesodo,d fe) l0'1 (I) OK COS X 9'01 OPIsleAIII monism Nape' lees GU 0'3 0 IS EC1 X en 0ulplewa© UllS (9'C) Peford lu1o0eW ou9ueWeA yes satau&ey Jegweyt Aa peleen6ea spatom Jou* is's! - - ern! mad *raga SOWN ele1311e001 WPCS _ 0014 Or6S '• KM SVOt 0911$ MO treat artist won, lviai Or' IS a AeIPA edelaWv (9) u0lsueN3 eulplS lsv AN4 • x Olt 00IS &pl uoelsAS saliRoed eee,osS um eulloll 00'it _ 00'ZS 09211 epleL+rsPAS ruelsAS euluelPect 106010 91 — 1 _. OW IS Orly 09'C1 aPleuwOsAS sagg3019114P1s1Ala1P11.epesldfl 91 WU CCU aria (dn) WgemN21 euiel ter pe ems rl 09 t: --- 0921 01'c= (dN etimeo 21 Aluno3 1/1 el Vita Neva CI quaw&eoidue Alpet43 sun eptuenRl 0011 01,29 00'0 eaquen egullelebeulPlS r9g0eWn13 Zs 09'C! 067S 09'£! e,np,aA ualPIS sAnN ue,A le seuopew I 1 epatuano,dWl Apede3 our' impraA 009It 001,It 0913 e9W3eiueS stuauwee0,dwlAPPSlawn 01 002S 00'91 0019 9Z'O! SCOTS 00'91$ 00'091 aAUM (►) Mawaeo,dwl4NRS Panel a Gore! (e) x 002S esi! ougueuueg ues (I;) suepo3 te Owls e °vet X °ell ora mamas ues , anlg eel&eW sal to e+•e >:e3 uo Sups 1 GM X 00'91 09'99 oulpuewee ues euouad 0 stem awls naN 0 Ot'11 X or 09'tt eulP,tweg ueS eulnno3 p epti wen In alellgld 9 er6S X 9L'69 09't IS eupeuree ues aapµwyl-euou,od Wiwi et 1100 ► Z129 x ZL21 Mai OYIP,euna ueS J0911100 011 ay ul eule!S C tsuarueeo,due Aspede3 awl oulp ewes less 00219 X 0021! 00'93 Alunoo &Oulu° uopellnd el le01111S U0P41 V1:Vast WU01IPPV e OE tat 00'9C1 00-901 OC'Ilt ePlmWalsAS (V) u0!1lslnbaV 1301S eulloa 1 a131 emebeS e0 AA /0 Ad 00 AA 61 AA 96 Ad (1) Isanbev spun3 ems paelezell spunA averS patlroylny IT Val palsenbea sPund Pea 61J0 moo Pajord gull slas(014 1 Pug l ugnA _ sleenbewsuopq,dosddy te,ePa3 pesodaud • (suolll uil) 9661 11, Jagwaua NOLLWRlOH1f1V 1031021d (INV ONIONf)3'1V2130312103 S153110311 d0 Sf11v1S A1R10H111V 11V21 1VN01032J V1N2103f1VO N213H1f10S • C7 — C. O O " AGENDA ITEM 7 " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA 770N COMM/SS/ON DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: CMAQ Set Aside for LNG 'Locomotive Background: For several years RCTC, along with the other Metrolink counties, has helped fund the research and development of a Liquid Natural Gas fueled locomotive engine. This effort, known as "GasRail USA," has also been supported by other a number of other sources, including the California Air Resources Board. The research resulted in successful test firings last year, with the next step being the manufacture of a prototype locomotive which would be put in demonstration service on Metrolink's Riverside Line. The necessary resources had been arranged, butlast fall the Congressional appropriation process moved 51 million from this effort to another rail project. The five Metrolink counties must make up the funding shortfall or lose this opportunity to build their clean -fuel locomotive. The logical source is Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ) funds available to each county. Some of the other counties have already begun their CMAQ call for projects and are submitting the locomotive construction for funding. The capital portion of RCTC's adopted Commuter Rail Short Range Transit Plan calls for retrofit of Metrolink existing diesel locomotives or replacement with LNG locomotives over the next several years using federal Section 5307 funds. A successful demonstration is necessary before that effort can begin. So that the deve-)opment and manufacturing process can proceed on schedule, staff is asking that the Commission consider the commitment of an advance set -aside of CMAQ funds for RCTC's share, in an amount not to exceed $300,000. Additional technical information will be available at the Committee meeting. i Project Cost - RCTC Share Source of Funds Financial Assessment $260,000 to $300,000 i CMAQ U00019 If approved, will be included in FY 2000 Budget STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee recommend the Commission set aside up to $300,000 of CMAQ funds to cover RCTC's share of costs for manufacturing a prototype LNG fueled locomotive. 000020 ATTACHMENT • • SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY (METROUNI) LNG LOCOMOTIVE CONVERSION PROJECT ESTIMATED COSTS TO COMPLETE CONVERSION AND TESTING Task (1) Transient Development Engine Durability Locomotive Engineering Aux -Car Engineering Equipment Purchase Conversion Locomotive Testing Revenue Demonstration OCTA In -kind services $ s s $ $ s $ $ $ Material/Subs and Travel SwRI Labor (2) 39,500 40,000 688,500 429,000 296,000 54,000 264,000 40,000 15,000 $ 150,000 s 69,000 $ 58,000 $ 46,000 $ 26,000 $• 58,500 $ 52,000 $ 60,000 $ SCRRA Costs Total Task 500,000 TOTALS s 1,866,000 $ 519,500 $ 500,000 ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS A. Funding Needed to Complete Engine Development Onlv Expenses to Complete Engine Development SCRRA Operating Budget (available through 6/99) Contribution from OCTA as of January 1999 B. Funding Needed to Complete Entire Proiect Expenses to Complete Project Contingency (4.5%) OCTA In -kind Contribution (OCTA staff costs not charged to project) SCRRA Operating Budget (available through 6/99) Contribution from OCTA as of January 1999 AB 2766 (Available only if locomotive converted) CARB Diesel Emissions Grant Program (available May/June 99 7) (3) Match to Grant from SCAQMD (Available May/June 99) Needed to Complete Project $ s 189,500 109,000 S 746.500 $ $ s $ $ 475,000 322,000 112.5001 316,000 600,000' 15,000 $ 2.885.500 $ $ 474,500 (231,500) (243,000) Potential Sources to Meet Shortfall MTA Call for Projects VCTC Call for Projects (CMAQ) SANBAG (4) RCTC $ 2.885,500 $ 140,000 $ (15,000) $ (231.500) $ (243,000) $ (476,000) $ (1,000,000) $ (250,000) $ 810,000 Potential Funds Available from Member Agencies (270,000) (270,000) (270.000) (810,000) (1) Also includes in -kind contributions from Union Pacific Railroad including use of a tanker car, technical expertise on conversion; and staff to educate the public along operating rights -of -way. (2) SWRI - Southwest Research Institute located in San Antonio, Texas - is the technical consultant for the conversion (3) Funds currently available in this grant program are $25 million statewide. However, truck engine fines are likely to add another $20 million. (4) If SANBAG receives additional appropriations for the Redlands Extension, they may be able . to provide additional funds from the $996,766 originally programmed for the LNG project LERPScope.xls, TAC, 12/9/98 000021 AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Contracts/Agreements for CETAP The CETAP project requires the Commission execute a contract/agreement with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in order to facilitate the flow of SCAG planning funds to the Commission to support the CETAP project. Staff estimates approximately $350,000 to $400,000 of SCAG planning funds will be • available to support the CETAP project on an annual basis for a period of three years. The Commission previously approved $1.5 million of SB 45 State Transportation Improvement Program Planning, Programming & Monitoring funds to support the CETAP project. Additionally, the CETAP project will include all work associated with updating the County General Plan's Circulation Element. County staff has agreed to pay the Commission for all costs associated with updating the County's Circulation Element. There is a very constrained time line for reviewing consultant proposals, interviewing and developing a recommendation for consultant(s) selection and executing a contract with the selected consultant(s). The current time line has the County of Riverside making a consultant selection on February 16, 1999. Due to the Commission's meeting schedule, as well as the consultant selection schedule, staff proposes that the Commission make every effort to expedite the selection and contract for the recommended CETAP consultant. The current schedule is to review proposals and short list consultants for interviews by January 28_ 1999. If the schedule is maintained, consultant interviews will be conducted on February 3, 1999. The selection process may allow staff to bring recommendations forward to the Commission at the February 10, 1999 meeting. Due to the unusually aggressive time frame for reviewing proposals, interviewing and selecting consultant(s) to conduct the CETAP project, which will include the development of both a Western County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan and an update of the County's General Plan, staff recommends the following: 000.022 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission schedule, at minimum, two contract/agreement action items for the February 10, 1999 Commission meeting. The contract/agreements recommendations are: 1) That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission authorize the Chairman to execute a contract/agreement with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to facilitate. the flow of SCAG planning funds to support the Commission's CETAP planning project, subject to Legal Counsel review, and 2) That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission authorize the Chairman to execute a contract/agreement with the County of Riverside which secures the County's obligation to pay up front or reimburse RCTC in a timely fashion for work performed by the selected CETAP consultant to develop and complete the update to the County of Riverside's General Plan Circulation Element, subject to Legal Counsel review and subject to the amount of funds previously allocated by the Commission to support the CETAP planning project, and 3) Additionally, staff recommends the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission schedule an action item on the February 10, 1999 Commission meeting to provide for the possible selection of a recommended CETAP consultant and authorization for staff to negotiate a contract with the selected CETAP consultant (if a selection is made) and authorize the Chairman to execute a contract with the selected CETAP consultant subject to the level of previously allocated funds, including SCAG planning funds and County funds, subject to Legal Counsel review. F:\users\p reprint1999\February\Plan_Pro\CETAPSEL.wpd • 000023 AGENDA ITEM 9 • " " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Measure A Specialized Transit Allocation to Family- Service Association of Western Riverside County Specialized transit service levels in the Jurupa area were reviewed by the Commission earlier this year. Both the Riverside Transit Agency and Family Service Association of Western Riverside County have been operating in the area for a number of years serving seniors and persons with disabilities. In July 1998, the Riverside Transit Agency expanded their service level with the operation of an additional van in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. When the Commission was making its allocations of Measure A Specialized Transit operating funds for FY 1999 and FY 2000, it questioned whether Family Services needed to receive its previous level of funding support in light of the expanded service levels to be provided by RTA. Commission actions have approved funding for two vehicles through the end- of February 1999, with this dropping to support the operation of one van for the balance of FY99 and all of FY 2000. The Commission required that both RTA and Family Services submit ridership and cost information to assist staff in the determination of appropriate service and funding levels for the balance of the programming term. Earlier Commission action also directed that a detailed review of all specialized transit in the Western Riverside County be conducted to determine the effectiveness of our current Measure A program and to provide input to the Commission on whether current service levels were appropriate or whether service duplication was occurring. The Commission has secured a consultant with considerable experience in specialized transit programs to conduct this Specialized Transit Analysis. The consultants are in the process of doing -a thorough field review of all the non-profit transit providers receiving Measure A funds, including Family Service Association. Additionally, an on -board survey will be conducted on all the dial -a -rides in early February, including the RTA Jurupa Dial - A -Ride and Family Service, to obtain rider feedback on the efficiency and .effectiveness of the services. A community survey will also be conducted during the same timeframe to receive input on unmet needs of non -users. Due to the careful analysis that is underway by our consultants it appears that it would be premature to make changes to the service level of Family Service Association at this time. The results of the surveys will be compiled by the end of February, with the completion of the full study ready for Commission consideration in March/April. Staff 00004 is recommending that a status quo service level be continued for Family Service Association until the results of the full analysis are complete. The cost to support the operation of the second vehicle is $4,375 per month. Sufficient funds are available in the Specialized Transit budget to cover this cost. Financial Assessment Project Cost $4,375 per month Source of F• unds Western County Measure A Specialized Transit"Funds � .. ., �'•:{•'\. {:::i%:::��y.ii�:i'1� ..4. M'^•..'.:; .v,{{ xh: ::: :::•.: :nxF.:`S:T::y'?\:;:•}.il.•. .. .. ly w/ .;`:.... rX h�.'•++j{y:�.{.{,"'{S ',.r_,. . :; ::::Cv.."n:�YSY,:4:.ntti {.: '.:.. \`J' k\ \ �\ +w$� �4�: 41X� C:' i } �•: .iv:. .. ++'\{'S ♦....�. •'.\t h. �. 1. x�\U.. Included in Fiscal Year Budget Y Year Included in Program Budget Y Year Programmed 99 Approved Allocation Year of Allocation 99 Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission: 1) Approve operating support for two vehicles to Family Service Association until such time that the Specialized Transit Analysis is complete and recommendations are provided regarding the future service levels for the Jurupa area, and 2) Amend the funding agreement with Family Service Association to include additional Measure A Specialized Transit funds of $4,375 per month to support the operating cost of a second vehicle in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. F:\users\preprint11999\February\Plan ProUurupa.wpd 000025 " AGENDA ITEM 11 " " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: 1 Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director . SUBJECT: Reappointment to the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service . _Transportation Advisory Council (CAC/SSTAC) Membership terms of five of our members expire during the month of February. The. ordinance prescribing membership on the CAC/SSTAC states we should strive to attain geographic representation on the Committee as well as representation from a broad spectrum of social service and transit providers representing the elderly, persons with disabilities and persons of limited means. Following is information on the five members whose terms are due to expire: " Ace Atkinson from Area Board 12 has been a very active participant on the Committee and is an `advocate for persons with disabilities. Mr. Atkinson is active in transportation issues in both Riverside and San Bernardino counties. " Judylynn Gries of Transportation Specialist was recently elected Chairperson of CAC/SSTAC and previously served as Vice Chairperson. In addition, she has also provided assistance on the Section 5310 Local Review Committee. She has a long time interest in transportation issues in the County and desires to continue on the Committee. Milt Kandl resides in Sun City and represents the senior population. Mr. Kandl is an occasional rider of mass transit and regularly attends the CAC meetings. He is quite active in senior activities. " Michelle Rainer is employed by the Office on Aging and is familiar with a number of transportation needs voiced by seniors in the county through her work on the Riverside County Needs and Resources Assessment. " Fortunato Penilla is employed by Inland Regional Center which provides transportation services for the disabled in Riverside County. He is active in the Service Providers Association of Riverside County (SPARC), and has expressed an interest in continuing his work with CAC/SSTAC. .0000'26 In addition, a recommendation has been made from Supervisor John Tavaglione's office to appoint Edith F. Pinette to the Committee. See Exhibit A for a copy of Supervisor Tavaglione's recommendation and Exhibit B for a copy of Ms. Pinette's resume. Ms. Pinette .resides in the Jurupa area and depends entirely on RTA for transportation. Her experience as a user of mass transit would be helpful to CAC/SSTAC. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission reappoint Ace Atkinson, Judylynn Gries, Milt Kandl, Michelle Rainer and Fortunato Penilla to the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council, with their terms expiring in February 2002. In addition, staff requests that Edith Pinette be appointed to CAC/SSTAC with her term also expiring in February 2002. • 000027 Ara JOHN F. TAVAGUONE SECOND DISTRICT SUPERVISOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE siAFF RAPHAEL DE LA CRUZ. Sonar Lepanto Assay ANNE STEPHENS. LapssMN. Assisrant DONNA JOHNSTON. Board Assistant KAREN CHRISTENSEN. Adnun:naays Assistant January 5, 1999 RECEIVED JAN 0 7 iggg Eric Haley Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Ste. 100 Riverside, California 92501 Re: RCTC Citizens Advisory Committee Dear Eric: I am writing to recommend Edith F. Pinette for a position on the Riverside County Transportation Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee, as a representative of the -Second District. My staff has interviewed Ms. Pinette and feels that she would be an asset to the committee. Ms. Pinette is a resident of County Village, and depends entirely on RTA for transportation. We feel that her experience as a user of mass transit would be helpful to the committee. I would like to ask that this issue be taken up at the next regularly scheduled commission meeting on January 13. I have enclosed a copy of Ms. Pinette's resume for your reference. Should you have any questions prior to the commission meeting, please feel free to contact my office. Very truly yours, Tavaglione isor Second District 4080 LEMON STREET • 14TH FLOOR • P.O. BOX 1646 • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92502-1646 • (909 -955-1020 000028 EXHIBIT B 10311 South Lynn Circle Apt M Mira Lora, CA 91752 909-6814129 Edith F. Pinette Objective Qualifications 'Experience Education Seeking position as an administrative assistant utilizing computer skills in a progressive company where I can increase productivity and profitability Managed security and staffing for a large drug retailer Directed work flow, supervised and trained staff. Increased sales steadily every month for ten years. . Inventory control responsible for inventory and purchasing. 1989-1997 Rite Aid Corporation Security Coordinator (Bonded) ■ Managed facility security at Distribution Center ■ Managed contract security officers ■ Controlled incoming and outgoing shipment security. Ontario, CA 1986-1989 United Security Industries Los Angeles, CA Account Supervisor ■ Supervised security staff at a forty story high-rise office building. ■ Fire/Life Safety Director ■ Maintained records, wrote training manuals, and trained building personnel. 1984-1976 Boston Music Company Manager of Recorded Music Department ■ Sales: Increased sales steadily every month for ten years ■ inventory Control: Responsible for inventory and purchasing ■ Supervised staff. Computer Services and Training, Inc. Certificate - Micro Computer Operator MS Woni, Excel, Access, QuickBooks Completed courses at : The University of Maine, Orono, ME. Northeastem University, Boston, MA. John Bapst High School, Bangor ,ME. GED Scored in the top 8% for New England Boston, MA Rancho Cucamonga, CA • 000029 " AGENDA ITEM 10 " " " " " RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: January 25, 1999 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Metrolink Monthly Report Attached is the Metrolink operating report for December, 1998, along with the most recent weekly updates to Board Members. Among items of particular note is the appointment of David Solow (former Deputy Executive Director and acting Executive Director) to the position of Executive Director of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink). This action occurred, by unanimous vote of the Board, at Metrolink's special board meeting on Friday, January 8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission accept this item as receive and file. 000030 MI101113W11II 866L Jeclwa390 S31avWWf1S 33NVWaOda3d )1NI10a13W • • ��s " 66 L6 0 NOS V f YI V YI d f O N O,S V f f W V Y/ 3 f 0 NOS V i 4 S Iw r r�� 96 S6 V6 E6 Z6 f f W V Y1 j f O N O S V f f NI V W 3 f O N O S V f f W V W 3 f O N O S V f f MI V 13 f O N 0 7 uad0 aull 00/31 r uad0 aull O00 t axenbiwe3 31V0 Ol NOIld3ONl - Z1301\13SStLd AVCI>133M 39dZ13AV ANnOdlaW uadO aull Aid 9 0 - 000'� 000'9 - 000'6 6uluad0 pump - 000'ZL - 000'S l - 000'9l - 000' lZ 000 bZ - 000'LZ 000'0C 96-oaa Lt76'SZ 86-noN Z9£'LZ 96-130 t70£'9Z 86-dag 6Av (Peufl AeP!I011 86-6md 86-Inf 96-unf 96-K1V 86-JeiN 86-clad 86-uef L6-3aa t'lS'9Z 8SZ'9Z Zti9'9Z l86'9Z £1.t9Z Sd12i1 NJONBSSttd AdOD133M 39V1:19AV AN110a19W 6L8'VZ 00017l 000'9l 000'8l 000'0Z 000' ZZ 000't7Z 000'9r 000'8Z • • " tr. tolmow-JPetPua �L11:0 %l Zll %o %o %0 o to to %Z ZZl Rio l 9� %t OZ %b %9- %9E ! %9 L %9 sdul Amuoyy 10 % sdpl Ioo4oS AIIea 6nb :B6 Jagwaaaa - sdlil loogag %Z- %L %Z- ( %l L- I %ZL- I %L- I %Z %Z Vol %b L L6 oaa sit 86 000 a6ue40 % %9- %Z- (%0 96 noN sn 86 Oaa a6ueyo % %S' 6tr6`9Z LS 899`L E6L't7 E1.8'E 09E SZL'L [EWE ZZ9'E 86 oad %L �9E LZ 99 . L99' 6 8617'9 9E8'E EVE 6 LZ'8 L I.O't7 9 L9'E 86 AM %� t70E'9Z 9Z949Z ZS - 09L' L 9E019 008'� SOti ES8'L OL6'E 6ZVE 86 130 %0 LS LSLL 06L't7 LSL'E L8E EL9'L E68'E t7ZE'E 86 99S %L 9P9u9- LS 9LL'L 9WV tr1791E SOb - 9S9'L 9Z6'E LZE'� 86 6nv %L- L0e9Z Sb LL9' L 00L17 I/La L0, LZV L Z9L'E LIVE 86 1nf 86 unE %E' 069'9Z " - Et7 OZL'L LL917 0176'E 09E ESS'L 171.8'E Z9t7'� %Z- b1.9'9Z 6t7 89/1 L 999'17 t7E017 SVE St76'L 866'E L LL'� 86 kW %L -- L86'9Z 8t7 Z99'L E96't7 L9017 9LE 88L'9 Lt7O'ti 069'E 86 iciV %L Zt79`9Z t7t7 1.89' L 900'9 8L L'ti 9EE - -- 8Z8'L 096'E 909'E 86 Jen %Z- 89Z'9Z Eb LL9'L L1,6't, EEZ'ti L9E 8Z0'8 229'E LEVE 86 99d %L �LL`9Z 9t7 E09'L EZO'S 6L0'17 66E ----- 9L0'8 �ZL'17 -SZVE 86 uef %9- ow Joud 6L8 bZ ^V-1 Zt7 8�17' L 999'17 906'E LZE ~ Lt7S'L 8L8'� SL L'E L6 390 sn a6ueyo % W31SAS 1y101 /1Ind/nib{ 00 /dw3 lul Atunoo 96ueJ0 elope/kw swnl >uews rupewas ues Aailen adoiewv Aluno0 eJntuan <= 31f102i 031sn Od AVOI1OH - MOONIM H1NOW N331211H1 Sd1111213JN3SSVd AVC1)133M 30b213AV MNIIONI3W s V)INV 0031 Z L 961IW 6og1N►SJCZ IP 38a noN ll I/ Z PO das find Inf unf Aeiy /0/.9 idy Jew qa j NUef L6 300 %0 %0Z %Ob %09 %09 %OO I. quail painpayoS.10 sainumpg uNi!M 6u!Apiv smell uopaim-Need jo aun ifiunoo a6uwoiaaidw3 pualui 38O 0 noN • PO ' das 6ny Inf unf AeW LL9' L pa}snfpy Aep ioH - sdul Ja6uessed Alien a6eJand aun Alunoo abualpiaaidw pualui 0 00C 009 006 00ZL 009 0091 00LZ sdulie6uessed Apo 6ny • 1,5IMI1HSZ196194Z�1� oao noN PO. das clad awu. painpayog jo sainuml-S WPM 6u!Awv suieul Jo ok aovues Aepinies Gun ouip eweg ues 96Uef L6 oaa %0 %0Z %0V %09 %09 %00 L siapIN Me j Alum° •y sapnpui Was :aioN) clad 96Uef L6 3a0 sdul Je6uassed Allea a6eJand aovues Aepanies @Lin ouip ewa8 ues 0 009 000 0051. 000Z 009Z 000E siapp ARO 6AV tOIM'1VSZ L 88kWeO9VASISZ IP clad awl' pampa ps Jo sainum-g uppm Biopiy smell jo % i aoyues Aepanlas aun Callan adoialuy NUe(' L6 300 %919 "'"" ttA %0 %OZ %0k 0 %09 %09 %00 L 380 noN PO des 6ny Inf 9t71 OLZI l ord. 9i 1 A6/pirz Pegnuue 83IAI8s DV ] unr �teW �dy �eyy clad 96Uef L6 3a0 f Z>r l sdul Jabuessed Apo abeiany aovues Aepannas aun �Callan adoialub 0 009 OOOI 0091 000Z 009Z 000E sJapu Al!BCI 6AV • • I (s4lu01A1 £ l lsalel) /ISO suleil uonpana-51ead '130Padlead 30N3213HCIV 31f1031-10S MN1-10U131A1 b»Im'd10-)Iead1P01m9JEZ L1:o ti lArowei-1O1PiBog1MSJ£Zl.1:o 86 300 96 AoN auu painpayoS jo sainum-g umm 6uvq.uv % 86130 86 daS 86 6nV 86 Pr 86 unP 96 AM 86 AV 86 JeW 86 clad 86 per (anuoW £ }salel) suieal Aep leeM IIV 30N3N3HOV 31f103HOS wino nuts L6 oa0 I %0 %0Z %0P %09 %08 %00 6 • • • " IPIPP'40gPuI�g ILICLLIa /.6/ IsAs pj %Lt p0Y1p lol %I6 /A %A I%IL %9I1 /(11 :Ss WI PIol - Vlit-NA U" r *Pod o0.410314 + " olrwa DO uoilelrolso ouMl-uo 010 u! popnpu lou en sum!' pounuW uoyeuuual to luad le ouxl-uo VARA Aayl P !O Pomopisuoo ex sumo poleuuuol sAelap omenallei iol spew uaeq eneu swamp-10e oN %Z11 %1111 /.96 %L6 - olnoa AIZJ - { " stool ):ine %911 %P6 1 /.L6 " 41,6 Y.69 , V.66 olno?J EMS " elnoa lAV ! elrwa N3A atoll palnpayog Jo swum S uW1m 6u1n1y swell popad 4ead I .supul Poua.1 86 380 %68 %68 -- %06.____ %88 %L9 %98 %06 %06 %06 %Z6 %88 %96 %b6 suleJl IIV 1V101 %88 %68 %68 %SO %L9 %Z6 %LB %O6 %�9 %Z6 %68 %LB %06 %O6 %06 % l6 %99 %�6 %Z6 %�6 %98 %06 %96 %96 %66 %S6 Wn0 ul ��y31SAS 1V101 %b9 %�L %0S %68 %89 %99 %L9 %5L %0L %9L %ZS %ZS %Z8 %�8 %Z8 %Z8 %l8 %S8 %69 %6L %S8 %�6 %06 %d8 %0L %�9 " %06 %S6 %S6 %ZS %98 %56 %06 %08 %68 %08 %88 %Z6 %�6 %88 %69 %S9 %68 %l6 %98 %b6 %Z6 %98 %l8 %68 %06 %001 %b6 %Z6 %l6 %98 In0 ul VI/Ind/Ala %E6 %S6 %66 %06 %68 %ti6 ON OS 00/dwpuelul %66 %6L %96 % l6 %L6 %66 %69 %b6 %89 %58 %89 %6L %86 %68 %Z6 %Z6 lip ul L(lunoo e6ueio %E8 %08 %S6 %86 %99 %L9 %S6 %�6 %�6 %96 86 oaa %Z6 %�9 %L6 %L6 %06 %S8 %69 %�6 %66 %L6 86 AoN %Z6 %S6 %96 %96 %16 %l6 %88 %S6 %lL %E6 96100 %a %Z9 %L6 %86 %ti6 %176 %89 %E6 %LL %S8 86 daS %59 %98 %06 %66 %06 %Z6 %5L %66 %9L %S6 86 6ny %19 %ZL %96 %S6 %L9 %06 %98 %�6 %5L %06 96lo %6L %08 %�6 %96 %Z6 %�6 %Z6 %06 %99 %06 86 uor %EL %b9 %86 %96 %06 %Z6 %96 %L6 %�9 %06 96 AelAl %LL %08 %L6 %96 %56 %86 . %L8 %96 %6L %06 96 AV %16 %S9 %Z6 %96 %86 %86-- -%L8 %b6 %l6 %L6 96 Jell %S8 %06 %16 %E6 %16 %S6 %178 %S8 %�6 %b6 86 gad %06 %Z6 %86 %86 %L6 %L6 %86 %86 %L6 %66 86 uer %98 %99 %86 %96 %176 %b6 %96 %86 %L6 %86 L6 oad ln0 ul eplsiemu MO ul swnl >pew� In0 ul oupewat3 ues MO ul AalleA edoleluV MO ul Aluno0 einluan <= ainot! SHINOWCL1S31V1 atoll palnpaps swum g ulylIM 6ulnpiv suleal AeplaaM jo a6ewawad Al:WWWf1S 3aN3a3HaV 3ina3HaS miloa13W f� rxwsnvor eaWeocmisicLiv* 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z l 0 0 L lAV Ai -Runes l 0 0 l 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 0 8NS AepwnjeS 1 %00 L UM. %EZ %L %Z %E %t, l %L %Ll %9 %9l %ll %L %t7 ' 101 Jo % ZL Z L 8 lZ SE Bl 09 SE E El 1V101 ZZ 6E 69 6t7 Z l OL LZ OZ E 8l - _ 9------ OZ _— ZL L • l p 0 0 l 0 l l 0 l 0 0 0 p 0 e 0 0 Ol l 0 VZ 9 0 L l b 0 l 9 Zl E O l L E Z 17 l E t7 l St 6 0 Z Z 0 bl t? Z 01. l Z 0 E 0 0 0 0 t7 9 0 l 0 l 1/JR1 00/1N1 00 ARl une 8NS " lAV N3A S3111NIW B NVH1 831V3H0 SAV130 NIV2l1 JO 3Sf1V0 A8VWR1d 8661. aaquaaaaa SAV13a NN110H131N JO S3snvo 1V101 Ja410 Aollod ploH VLIHOS (s)Ja6uessed wsyepuen wn_uaaW Nulloilaw we�1 Ne.ijwy weal 146iaid leolueyoaw 6umedsip 4o1!MS/�loeJl M01/11/sialls0 moIS siopepa/sleu6iS :3Sf1V0 n (_n '= J • • • " I/ " MA*03adZw61a" tVa %00l 90� 6E9 aoimaS AepmleS sapnpxa tiewwns situ ZZ 6E 69 6ti Zl OL LZ OZ 89LZ l� E8 Ell lit OP EYl ZL 9d 99 61.Z 8Lb V9Z 96� ZL9 6E17 - - P6� uIw g < a3Ad130 SNIVIJ1 ww 0< 03.1V130 SNIb211 Old0 SNIVH.11H101 %L'0 %8'L %L'0 %S'� %L S %6'9L 10.110 17 09 OZ L6 LPL L�� 6ZLZ 1V101 0 L 0 0 0 0 L Z 9 � LL 14 Z 8 � t7 L ti Z ti L 9 L L L SL ZZ LL L OZ 6 9 6 LL ti� bl 9 9� bl 6 6 tib 1717 Z9 8Z �L 9V 9Z S� 9�L 90� �SL 9S� 6Zb L9� "8b� '` ruiAlb 30/31 30 AIN une 8NS - lAV N3A a311f1NNV NIW 0� NVH1 2i31d380 NIW OE -NIW LZ NIW OZ - NIL/ILL NM OL - NM 9 NIW 9 -NIW l AV13a ON 8661. aagw0300 NOIlb21flO A8 SAV130 NIVH1 JO.M3(103a3 :31V1 S3111NIW tl Aelap uiw (%L'9) Aeiap uiw 9-£ (%Z•9) Aelap uiw OZ-1 L (%5'£) awl uiw OZ < (%5'Z) I%6188 = sainuiw-5 ui1-11!AA 6uinwy suieal Aelap utw 0 (%6'91.) 266 !- Jeclwooaa �SNId?J1 AVON33M 11V) NolivNna A8 Spinal 30 1N3ON3d • • eMETROLINK SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTH JANUARY 11, 1998 TO: MEMBERS, ALTE FROM: DAVID SOLOW SUBJECT: WEEKLY PROGRESS: WEEK OF JANUARY 4 - 9 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT Member Agencies: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Ttansporta Authority. Orange County Transportation Authority Riverside County Transportanon Commission. San Bernardino Associated Governments. Ventura County Transportanon Commission. Ex Officio Member: Southern California Association of Governments_ San Diego Association of Grntmments. State of California. Metrolink started out the year with a good week operationally. Staff is visiting the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe in Ft. Worth to address the delays being experienced by the Inland Empire - Orange County trains and the Riverside via Fullerton trains. San Bernardino Line: Tuesday, the second afternoon train from Los Angeles was terminated at Rancho Cucamonga due to mechanical problems. The passengers were transferred to the third afternoon train, which arrived into San Bernardino 16 minutes late. Due to equipment turns, this delay cascaded to the second to the last train from San Bernardino to Los Angeles, which departed San Bernardino 84 minutes late, and the sixth peak period train, which departed Los Angeles 34 minutes late. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Signal Engineer Clayton Tinkham Retires More than 60 friends, family, and working partners of Clayton Tinkham celebrated a dinner in his honor on Friday, January 8, at the Casa Santa Fe banquet room at the Santa Ana station. Clayton was one of the pioneers at Metrolink, bringing the fruits of full careers at the Santa Fe Railway and Safetrans Systems, Inc. to our signal engineering group. In addition to his wide experience and technical expertise in past, present, and future railway signaling, Clayton is equally well known as one of the finest gentlemen and nicest people many of us have ever had the privilege to know. He plans to alternate between his Fullerton home and the "summer place" in his native Wisconsin. 700 S. Flower Street 26th Floor Los Angeles CA 90017 Tel [2131 452.0200 Fax [2131 452.0425 • ouua4,1 www.metrolfnktrains.com " " Weekly Progress: Week of January 4 - 9 January 11, 1999 Page 2 More Rail at Ravenna The "Rail Gang" of the C.A. Rasmussen has continued to replace rail between Vincent and Via Princessa. Because they were unable to come to agreement with their union, they have had to continue work on Saturdays, with bus service substituting for trains between Lancaster and Via Princessa for the middle of the day. Ribbon Rail Train The new rail for siding extensions and improvements was unloaded over the January 8-10 weekend. This work train utilized our two newest locomotives, 882 and 883, which were purchased from the group which had planned to operate the "Marlboro Express" promotional train. As they are not yet set up for passenger service, this was a good workout for them. No, they are not painted red and white, and the surgeon general's warning has been taken off. 000045