HomeMy Public PortalAbout11 November 13, 2019 Special Traffic Relief StrategyComments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission,
please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board.
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
Time: 11:30 a.m.
Date: November 13, 2019
Location: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administration Center
4080 Lemon St, First Floor, Riverside CA 92501
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Jan Harnik, Chair / Kathleen Kelly, City of Palm Desert
Michael Naggar, Vice Chair / Maryann Edwards, City
of Temecula
Larry Smith / Linda Molina, City of Calimesa
Wes Speake / Jim Steiner, City of Corona
Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs
Linda Krupa / Russ Brown, City of Hemet
Brian Berkson / Chris Barajas, City of Jurupa Valley
Victoria Baca / Carla Thornton, City of Moreno Valley
Scott Vinton / To Be Appointed, City of Murrieta
V. Manuel Perez, County of Riverside, District IV
STAFF
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY
Countywide Transportation Improvement and Traffic
Relief Plan and implementation ordinance
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
11:30 a.m.
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor
Riverside, California
In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed
72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be
available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon
Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission’s website, www.rctc.org.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal
Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance
is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance
is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in
assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting.
1.CALL TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4.PUBLIC COMMENTS – Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous
minutes or less. The Committee may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote
of the Committee, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of
items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce
the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. Also, the Committee may terminate
public comments if such comments become repetitious. In addition, the maximum time for
public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Speakers may not yield
their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be
distributed or presented to the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This
policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items.
Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters raised during
public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the agenda. Board members
may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent
agenda for consideration.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee – Special Meeting
November 13, 2019
Page 2
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after making a
finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to
the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding
an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the
Committee members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote.
Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
6. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES – SEPTEMBER 23 AND OCTOBER 28, 2019
7. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single
motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled
from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
7A. PUBLIC OUTREACH APPROACH FOR COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
Page 1
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve the proposed Public Outreach Approach for the countywide Traffic
Relief Plan (Plan); and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
8. PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH ON PRIORITIES FOR THE TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
Page 5
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive and file information on public opinion research on
priorities for the Traffic Relief Plan.
9. APPROACH FOR COACHELLA VALLEY COMPONENT OF THE TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
Page 11
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive, discuss, and provide input on the approach to
developing the Coachella Valley component of the draft Traffic Relief Plan.
10. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN INVESTMENTS
Page 14
Overview
This item is for the Committee to receive, discuss, provide input on, and consider approval
of investments in projects and services to be included in a draft Western Riverside County
component of the Traffic Relief Plan.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee – Special Meeting
November 13, 2019
Page 3
11. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended
and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission activities.
12. ADJOURNMENT
The next Traffic Relief Strategy Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 11:30 a.m.,
Monday, November 25, 2019, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center,
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
AGENDA ITEM 6
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITEE
Monday, September 23, 2019
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL
The meeting of the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee was called to order by Commissioner
Jan Harnik at 11:32 p.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative
Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501.
2. ROLL CALL
Members/Alternates Present Members Absent
Brian Berkson Victoria Baca
Jan Harnik
Larry Smith
Linda Krupa
Michael Naggar
Scott Matas
Scott Vinton
V. Manuel Perez
Wes Speake*
*Arrived after the meeting was called to order
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At this time, Commissioner Perez led the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee in a flag salute.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions at this time.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
September 23, 2019
Page 2
6. COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT & TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN: VISION,
GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director, provided background information on the Traffic
Relief Strategy Committee and invited Commissioners to provide their comments on their
goals, vision, and objectives for the committee.
Commissioner Michael Naggar stated it is essential the Committee look at future funding
and infrastructure from a countywide perspective and not get mired in politics. He
expressed his disappointment that the public is not there to participate in the future
funding discussion and as such, is hoping for good public outreach.
Commissioner V. Manuel Perez stated the Commissioners just need to do the work and
the public will come. He believes the purpose of the committee is to work through the
struggles and challenges to get to a tax measure that can be pushed forward to a vote.
Commissioner Linda Krupa stated the Commissioners need to work together on this and
look at it as a Countywide issue even though they each represent their own constituents;
noting that constituents from every city impact each other’s communities when they get
into their cars for travel. She agreed with her fellow Commissioners in removing the
politics and just getting the job done.
Commissioner Larry Smith stated he comes from a tax adverse community and his
community expects him to represent them in a way that reflects what is important to
them, however, he does not see another solution. He does not want to always have to go
to the taxpayers to fund projects that are absolutely important to move traffic through
the County, however if something is not done through the pass area at Interstate 10 there
is going to be another area like the traffic situation going through Corona. He stated he
sits on the committee with some reluctance, but understands and recognizes the absolute
importance of the Commissioners responsibility to mitigate traffic in Riverside County. He
commits to doing everything in his power to improve the traffic situation. He is not a big
tax person and wishes there was another solution, but until another solution is brought
forward he needs to be supportive of the things that the Commission has a responsibility
to do.
At this time, Commissioner Wes Speake arrived.
Commissioner Scott Matas stated he has served on the Commission for more than 10
years, and the staff has done a fantastic job of trying to move the County into the future
without money, which has been the toughest part. He noted he tries not to take things
personally, however there were some harsh comments made by the public at the last
meeting, which stuck with him. The Commission should not be ashamed for anything
they have done, and thinks the group of individuals who addressed the Commission could
be a strong advocate for their needs in their community but the Commissioners have to
serve the whole County. The Coachella Valley is fortunate as they are able to take a
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
September 23, 2019
Page 3
portion of the money that comes through and program it the way they want to, however
he feels it is important to sit on the Committee and help the rest of the County get through
some of the major issues that are going on the freeway and highway systems. He
referenced a congestion map that was shown to Commissioners at a prior meeting and
stated it is difficult to think how long solutions will take to build even if they were
programmed today. He noted the plans have always been there, and the question is
whether plans for the future can be found that can take the areas of congestion and make
them better for people to live. He does not know the answer but he is going to try and
that is why he is a part of this committee.
Commissioner Brian Berkson stated the Commissioners need to be cognizant of the
perspectives of their residents, meaning all County residents. When Commissioners are
sitting on the Committee, they are responsible for regional programming for countywide
transportation needs and need to look at it from the regional perspective. He stated the
residents of the region are looking for more lanes or better scenarios to get them from A-
Z without stealing what they have already paid for, which is what the perception is. He
stated this has to be dealt with regionally in a way that is fair for everyone so they do not
feel they are being ripped off by anyone. He stated he is also not a tax person, however if
the tax initiative is moved forward, he looks at is as giving the residents the opportunity
to weigh in and make the decision on a new tax. The State and Federal government have
not provided enough funding for the improvement deficit so there is no other choice
other than to pursue all perspective avenues and let the voters decide. He noted he is not
promoting a new tax, he is promoting options.
Commissioner Wes Speake stated when residents come in to speak it is indicative of a
problem, and the Commissioners are there to help solve those problems. He noted there
has been very little investment from the State and Federal government and the County is
left to fight for themselves, which the Commission has done a good job at. If the
Commission continues to make improvements, the way they have done and finish the
things they have been started there will be a lessening of the public complaining. It is not
a Corona problem or project, the western part of the County is fed by the 91 and the
southern part of the County is fed by the 15 and the projects need to be wrapped up.
Commissioner Jan Harnik expressed her appreciation to the other Commissioners for
their comments. She stated this has to be looked at holistically, and the ink lines on a map
mean little to community members as they travel throughout the region so this has to be
looked at as a regional plan. She noted 40 percent of the goods that come in through the
port go onto the 10 freeway. She looks at this as both as an opportunity to educate the
community members and give them an opportunity to vote, and also as an opportunity
to be proactive and get in front of some of the quality of life issues for the community
members. She stated there is work to do, let us keep the politics out of it and do the work
for our community members and for our County.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
September 23, 2019
Page 4
M/S/C (Matas/Perez) to:
1) Receive background information on the Traffic Relief Strategy
Committee;
2) Discuss the vision, goals, and objectives of the Countywide
Transportation Improvement &Traffic Relief Plan; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
7. ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director, provided an overview of the proposed
agreement with the University of California, Riverside School of Business to perform an
economic impacts analysis related to the investment of an additional sales tax for
transportation improvements in Riverside County. The study will analyze the benefits and
costs of implementing a transportation plan.
M/S/C (Perez/Matas) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 20-19-012-00 to University of California,
Riverside (UCR) School of Business, Center for Economic Forecasting &
Development (UCR Center) to perform an economic impacts analysis
related to the investment of an additional sales tax for transportation
improvements in Riverside County in an amount not to exceed $199,500;
2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
8. PROPOSED COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE
M/S/C (Vinton/Speake) to approve its meeting schedule as proposed.
9. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Lisa Mobley, Clerk of the Board, stated this item is for the Committee to select a Chair and
Vice Chair.
Commissioner Naggar nominated Commissioner Harnik as Chair, and Commissioner
Speake seconded. Commissioner Perez nominated Commissioner Naggar as the Vice
Chair, noting the entire county would be represented.
M/S/C (Perez/Smith) to appoint Commissioner Jan Harnik as Chair and
Commissioner Michael Naggar as Vice Chair.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
September 23, 2019
Page 5
10. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Commissioner Perez invited everyone to the McCallum Theater on Saturday, October 19
for the first annual Mariachi Gala, noting he dressed for the occasion. He noted he is trying
to establish bi-national and bilateral relationships with the County of Riverside and the
nation states of Mexico, particularly Jalisco and Oaxaca. He has been working over the
course of two years on these relationships and as a result of that work the Mayor and
Governor are coming with some of the best mariachi in the world for this free event.
Commissioner Smith stated after listening to the comments from the other
Commissioners that this Committee is the right place to be. There is sensitivity to the
potential impacts on people but he is serving with a strong group that recognizes and
understands that this in not just a government bureaucracy as they actually deliver
projects. He stated for the amount of money that is accumulated they deliver something
as a Commission that positively impacts people’s lives. They don’t always do it right or get
it perfect and sometimes it is difficult to keep up with demand, but he pledges his support
to do everything he can to improve traffic in the region even though he may face some
local resistance. Historically he has been a resistor in having anything to do with imposing
taxes upon people, but in reality, they are not imposing but telling people here is your
opportunity. He is going to be supportive of what the Committee can do together as a
group to improve the traffic situation in Riverside County. He thanked his fellow
Commissioners for their comments, as it is meaningful to know early on where everyone
is in order to move forward as a group.
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, thanked the Commissioners for volunteering to serve on
this very important Committee. She noted there is a lot of work ahead and it is important
that staff understands what the Commissioners think as they represent their communities
and the County as a whole. She encouraged Commissioners to reach out to her directly
with any questions, comments or concerns as the goal is to provide the Commissioners
with the data and information so they can make the policy decisions.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Traffic Relief Strategy
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 12:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Mobley
Clerk of the Board
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITEE
Monday, October 28, 2019
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL
The meeting of the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee was called to order by Vice Chair
Michael Naggar at 11:31 p.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501.
2. ROLL CALL
Members/Alternates Present Members Absent
Victoria Baca
Linda Krupa
Brian Berkson
Jan Harnik
Michael Naggar Scott Matas
Larry Smith
Jim Steiner
V. Manuel Perez
Scott Vinton
Clerk of the Board Lisa Mobley announced there was five members present, short of the
required six for a quorum. She noted the Committee could meet as a Committee of the
Whole wherein the Committee can discuss and forward items to the Commission for final
action, emphasizing no final action could be taken without a quorum. The Chair concurred
that they would meet as a Committee of the Whole.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At this time, Commissioner Larry Smith led the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee in a flag
salute.
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions at this time.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
October 28, 2019
Page 2
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – SEPTEMBER 23, 2019
As the committee was meeting as a Committee of the Whole since there was not an
established quorum, no action was taken on the minutes.
7. REVENUE ESTIMATE FOR COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT AND
TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, provided an overview of the purpose of a
revenue estimate, a historic perspective of Measure A revenue, and regional forecast
model trend factors. The sales tax revenue estimate recommended by staff is $8.6 billion
over a 30-year period.
Commissioner Linda Krupa requested clarification on the reason for revenue trends based
on age group. Ms. Trevino provided clarification on the reasoning behind the revenue
estimates provided.
M/S/C (Baca/Krupa) as a Committee of the Whole to:
1) Approve a revenue estimate to guide development of the Countywide
Transportation Improvement and Traffic Relief Plan (Plan); and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
8. TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN STRUCTURE: GEOGRAPHY AND EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director, provided geographic divisions and expenditure
categories recommendations for the countywide Traffic Relief Plan. The three geographic
subregions in the 1989 and 2009 Measure A expenditure plans were Western County,
Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The basis for the proposed geographic areas are
consistency with regional governance, sense of identity among residents, and the
residents’ desire to see revenues remain within their area and not sent to other parts of
the county as expressed in public opinion surveys. Proposed expenditure categories
include reducing congestion and connecting communities; improving safety and keeping
infrastructure in good condition; and supporting seniors, veterans, students, and
individuals with disabilities. Mr. Hake also requested feedback regarding the funding of
local streets and roads.
Commissioner Larry Smith discussed varying opinions on what a “good condition” road is.
He expressed the local needs basis being extremely diverse especially when it is
dependent on population base. For example, Calimesa is one of the smallest jurisdictions
in the region, however they have a large impact on infrastructure in comparison to the
size of their community due to Interstate 10 running through their community. Those who
cut through the community to bypass the I-10 will never buy enough coffee or gas to
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
October 28, 2019
Page 3
match the impact they have. He noted the same things happen in Banning and Beaumont
and there is some discussion of an I-10 bypass. To drill down locally in Calimesa, the
concern is there is nowhere to get off and nowhere to go so locally they are focusing on
how the traffic can be moved through the community. When it comes to local needs
based funds, he would like to see if they can broaden the scope of how local communities
can use money coming forward as they see best, as they may be able to get additional
buy in.
Commissioner Linda Krupa stated bringing money back into the community is paramount.
She noted obstacles in city versus county roads, that there are not enough Measure A
funds to improve the city streets. Perhaps if there was an option to tie a larger pot of
money through the county or RCTC that the City can contribute to that will improve the
street in its entirety regardless if it is a city street or county road. This would impact those
driving through the community as well as those living in the community.
Commissioner Victoria Baca concurred with both of her colleagues regarding the
deterioration local streets and roads, and expressed additional concern with the 60
freeway. She stated she has to sit for 20 minutes to get out of Moreno Valley, which in
addition to the delay also causes concerning pollution from all of the cars idling at the
bottleneck of the 60/215. She noted it is both a local and regional problem.
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, noted the Commissioners have pointed out the
challenges faced in trying to balance the varying needs throughout the County. She
discussed roadway pavement conditions and the Measure A allocations to the local
communities. She added SB1 is a fix-it first program and every community now receives
double the gas tax return that they received prior to SB1, and as such local road
maintenance is fairly well funded. The challenge are the transformational projects in local
cities that they would like to accumulate money for as most jurisdictions cant fund
projects on their own. She discussed the proposed expenditure categories capturing most
of the local needs. Additionally, she discussed the possibility of a competitive program
within the categories.
Commissioner Michael Naggar stressed the importance of inter-city collaboration and
encouraged the other commissioners to begin those conversations now.
Commissioner Krupa stated one of the basics of the conversation needs to be that this is
looking to the future and how it is going to impact future generations based on projected
growth within the County, noting the impacts of the housing needs.
Commissioner Smith expressed support for a call-for projects program that would allow
collaboration with other communities, which builds continuity within the region. He
noted Hemet and San Jacinto have worked together in the past on projects that impact
both communities. He stated the Commissioners are elected to serve locally but have to
think regionally.
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
October 28, 2019
Page 4
M/S/C (Baca/Smith) as a Committee of the Whole to:
1) Approve a revenue estimate to guide development of the Countywide
Transportation Improvement and Traffic Relief Plan (Plan); and Authorize
the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
9. USE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGIES
Marlin Feenstra, Capital Projects Delivery Director, provided a presentation on managing
congestion through technology. He showed examples of active traffic management
strategies such as dynamic lane use, speed control, dynamic junction control, motorist
information, part-time shoulder use, bus on shoulder transit signal priority, and adaptive
signal control or ramp meter control. The goals of active traffic management are to
increase throughput, increase safety, provide reliable travel times, reduce congestion,
provide information to motorists, improve work zone safety, reduce congestion related
pollution, and maximize the use of existing infrastructure.
Commissioner Larry Smith stated Commissioners who attended the League of California
Cities conference realize they are designing cities for future generations, noting an
example of a question asked regarding the addition of pickup/drop off pockets at main
thorough fares for rideshare services such as Uber and Lyft. Secondly, he noted the
importance of never opening or closing streets without making provisions for future
technologies, providing an example of fiber-optic lines being pulled under Ocean
Boulevard without disrupting traffic as years ago someone had the foresight to add extra
sleeves under the street while it was open. Commissioner Smith stated this will continue
to happen as we work towards connecting our communities and make them smart
communities. He referenced his earlier point of local jurisdictions having the ability with
additional Measure A funds to be able to expand themselves and this type of technology
is vital. A category is needed to think into the future especially if cooperation can be found
to connect modern technology of District 8 to what the local communities see as their
own important modern technology. This is an important discussion that needs to happen
with the entire Commission and ask where modern technology is taking us in alleviating
traffic situation and circumstances.
Commissioner Victoria Baca discussed an example in Los Angeles where technology is
used in the center lane to add an additional lane based upon the traffic needs depending
on the time of day. She would like to see if this can be used on the 60 freeway as in the
morning and afternoons most of the traffic is heading in one direction while the other
side of the freeway is clear. She expressed her support of the use of technology to
alleviate traffic.
Commissioner Michael Naggar noted there are strategies we might not be aware of yet
therefore it is important to maintain openness. He stated these meetings are the time
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Minutes
October 28, 2019
Page 5
and place to have the dialogue and make good recommendations to the entire board. He
stated it might behoove Commissioners to contact some of the big tech companies
involved in transportation such as Google, Tesla, or the auto manufactures to see what is
coming in the future and what their ideas are in an effort to plan for the future.
M/S/C (Steiner/Smith) as a Committee of the Whole to:
1) Receive and discuss information on the use of technology for Traffic Relief
Strategies; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
10. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
10A. DISCUSSION OF NEXT TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE AGENDA
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, stressed the importance of the next Traffic Relief
Strategy Committee meeting on November 25th, stating a draft plan will be brought
forward at the meeting where Commissioners can begin discussions on the projects and
programs to be included in the plan.
Commissioner Victoria Baca stated she will be unable to attend the meeting on the 25th,
however she would like to reschedule the meeting as it is important she participate.
Commissioner Michael Naggar stated this might require two meetings, as this is a lengthy,
important discussion.
Anne Mayer stated staff will conduct a quorum check to assess availability of
Commissioners in an effort to have as many Committee members in attendance as
possible.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Traffic Relief Strategy
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Mobley
Clerk of the Board
AGENDA ITEM 7A
Agenda Item 7A
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 13, 2019
TO: Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
FROM Cheryl Donahue, Public Affairs Manager
THROUGH: Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
SUBJECT: Public Outreach Approach for Countywide Traffic Relief Plan
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve the proposed Public Outreach Approach for the countywide Traffic Relief Plan
(Plan); and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
RCTC is drafting a Plan to help guide future transportation expenditures in Riverside County. The
schedule adopted by the Commission calls for the draft Plan to be presented to the public in
January 2020 for feedback through April 2020. RCTC will obtain this feedback using a variety of
tools, as outlined in the following proposed Public Outreach Approach. In the spring, staff will
present to the Commission the public feedback and other data to inform its decisions on the final
Plan and whether to place the Plan on the November 2020 general election ballot along with an
implementing sales tax ordinance. This decision is anticipated in June 2020. The Public Outreach
Approach is intended to have benefit to the public and the Commission regardless of whether
the final Plan is submitted to the voters or whether the voters approve the Plan.
Proposed Public Outreach Approach
In July, the Commission approved an enhanced public engagement program contract with
AlphaVu, a communications consultant. Budget and contract authority for all activities proposed
in the Public Outreach Approach has been approved by the Commission as part of this contract.
The purpose of this agenda item is to receive guidance on the specific strategies and tactics to
reach the public.
With the assistance of AlphaVu, staff recommends a multi-layered approach for gathering public
feedback between January and April 2020. All outreach efforts will be informational with the
intent of educating the public and encouraging public engagement about the Plan. Tentatively,
staff is planning to initiate public outreach activities following the January 8, 2020 Commission
meeting, when the draft Plan is likely to be placed on the agenda for public comment and
1
Agenda Item 7A
Commissioner discussion. Staff also recommends placing the draft Plan on the April 8, 2020
Commission meeting agenda to provide another opportunity for public comment and
Commissioner direction. The public will be able to submit comments through the spring and
leading up to the Commission’s decisions on a final Plan and whether to submit it to the voters.
The goal of the Public Outreach Approach is to reach as many residents as possible in Riverside
County and to gather data that will help Commissioners understand the projects and services
that are most important to residents. A broad spectrum of methods will be used to gather
information from the community, with several touch-points planned with seniors, veterans, and
individuals with disabilities. At the heart of the Public Outreach Approach is clear messaging and
a feedback tool. As much as possible, activities will be conducted in English and Spanish.
Outreach strategies include, but are not limited to, the following:
1) Comment tool: A tool will be created in both English and Spanish to gather feedback
about the projects and services that are included in the draft Plan. Residents will be asked
to identify the projects and services that are important to them from the draft list
proposed for the Plan. The listing of projects and services will include brief descriptions
for reference. Space will be provided for optional written comments. Some demographic
information, including the zip code of residence, will be collected to track the origin of
feedback from within the county.
2) Specialized Website: A website, trafficreliefplan.org, will include a description of each of
the Plan’s proposed projects and services with key areas also available in Spanish. A link
to the comment tool will be featured prominently, and website visitors will be
encouraged to provide their comments via the website.
3) RCTC.org Website: The Commission’s website will provide a link to the specialized
website described above, as well as a direct link to the comment tool. Visitors may choose
instead to use the rctc.org “Contact Us” button to submit comments. If so, these
comments will be captured and added to other feedback that is collected.
4) Emails and Blog Posts: The Commission will send emails to the subscribers of “The Point”
and prepare three blog posts related to the feedback effort. The blog posts will include
graphics and links to the specialized website, comment tool, and videos.
5) Social Media: Digital advertising and organic posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
will explain the Commission’s efforts to secure feedback and provide links to the website.
The posts will feature eye-catching graphics and videos to urge viewers to visit the
website, submit their comments, and promote the tool among their social media
networks. The Commission will produce approximately six social media posts to help
launch the specialized website and comment tool, followed by two to three posts per
week. During the final weeks of the public comment period, digital advertising and organic
posts will increase to approximately four per week to remind viewers to register their
comments and of the upcoming deadline. If residents submit questions in Spanish, staff
will respond in Spanish. Commission staff will monitor comments and questions on its
social media pages and respond and/or collect the information for reporting purposes.
2
Agenda Item 7A
6) Videos: As noted above, videos will be used to urge public feedback and direct viewers to
the website for feedback. Three videos of varying lengths (15 seconds, 30 seconds and
60 seconds) will be used for television, social media, posted to the website, posted to
YouTube, and included in presentations. Closed captioning will be provided in English and
Spanish.
7) News Media: Commission staff will issue news releases, radio spots, and opinion-editorial
pieces to news contacts across the Riverside County media market. Staff also will pursue
and respond to requests for television, radio, cable, and podcast interviews and is mindful
of the strong television market in the Coachella Valley. Whenever possible, staff will
provide opportunities to feature individual Commissioners. The focus of the news media
outreach is to build awareness of the Commission’s need for feedback and to promote
completion of the survey. The goal is to have 15 news stories run as a result of the
outreach effort.
8) Printed Piece/Direct Mail: Postcards printed in English and Spanish will be distributed to
specific neighborhoods and sent to community locations, such as city halls, libraries,
community centers, and senior centers. The postcards will direct readers to the
specialized website and comment tool, as well as the telephone feedback line (described
below).
9) Telephone Feedback Line: A call answering center will be used to capture calls from
residents, who wish to provide their feedback verbally. The call center representatives
will log comments from callers of multiple languages and refer callers to the website for
more information and to submit additional comments.
10) Tele-Townhall Meetings: Similar to the tele-townhall meetings conducted last spring, the
Commission will host four tele-townhall meetings to target geographical areas in
Riverside County. Commissioners and staff will field calls from residents and offer polling
options during the call to gather opinions from participants. An English/Spanish
interpreter will be available for each of the tele-townhall meetings.
11) Text Messaging: A text opt-in feature will allow residents to text a code and receive a
response text with a link to the specialized website and comment tool. Users can opt out
of receiving future text messages at any time.
12) Billboards: Roadside billboard advertising will be used to steer motorists to the website.
Messaging will be concise to be mindful of motorists.
13) Community Events: The Commission will host booths at approximately 20 community
events during the first quarter of 2020. Representatives will provide information about
the feedback effort and help booth visitors use the comment tool. Comment cards also
will be provided for those who prefer to comment in writing. Booth representatives will
be bilingual in English and Spanish.
14) Partner Toolkits: The Commission will compile a “toolkit” with a short news article
(available in English and Spanish), graphic images, and website links for cities, elected
officials, transit agencies and other key transportation partners to include in their
3
Agenda Item 7A
publications, websites, and email networks. Staff also will provide “talking points” to each
Commissioner to announce during their council meetings to encourage participation.
15) Presentations: Commission staff will make 25 presentations to stakeholder groups, such
as chambers of commerce, service clubs, transportation agencies, environmental
organizations, and others upon request. Commissioners may request staff to present to
key groups in their communities or may request staff assistance for Commissioners to
make their own presentations within their community. Staff is also available to present
to city councils at the request of Commissioners.
Staff will compile all feedback and provide in a staff report in spring 2020 so that Commissioners
can provide direction on any changes to the draft Plan for finalization by June 2020.
4
AGENDA ITEM 8
Agenda Item 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 13, 2019
TO: Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
FROM: Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Public Opinion Research on Priorities for the Traffic Relief Plan
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to receive and file information on public opinion research on
priorities for the Traffic Relief Plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
RCTC commissioned two statistically valid public opinion surveys in 2019 to understand the
priorities and attitudes of Riverside County residents towards transportation issues. Data from
these surveys provide useful context to the Committee’s decisions regarding what projects,
services, and other features should be included in the Traffic Relief Plan (Plan). The surveys also
provide a basis to determine whether the electorate in November 2020 might approve the Plan
and funding it through a sales tax ordinance. This item briefly summarizes the results of these
surveys.
Surveys
Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates (FM3) conducted the surveys as a subconsultant
to AlphaVu, the prime contractor for the Public Engagement Program approved by the
Commission in July 2018 and enhanced in July 2019. FM3 conducted a similar survey for RCTC in
2017 and has completed research on public policy issues for municipalities and school districts
throughout Riverside County in recent years. FM3 also has extensive experience conducting
public opinion research on transportation issues throughout the state of California.
Survey respondents received the surveys by email and by telephone. FM3 selected respondents
randomly and weighted the results to be representative of a likely electorate in November 2020
when the Plan may be placed on the ballot by the Commission. FM3 used industry best-practices
for public opinion research.
The first survey occurred in May and June of 2019 and was countywide in scope. In September
2019, FM3 conducted a second survey in four subregions of western Riverside County to achieve
a clearer picture of the priorities in those areas. Sub-regional research is discussed further,
below.
5
Agenda Item 8
Sub-regionalization
Survey results can be analyzed on a countywide basis as well as on a sub-regional basis to
understand more localized concerns. Given the size and diversity of Riverside County, staff and
consultants have invested a significant effort to ensure that the voices of each unique sub-region
of Riverside County can be heard in the results. Therefore, the information presented in this item
will provide both countywide statistics and sub-regional statistics.
In western Riverside County, the surveys were conducted according to six subregions, which
included cities and nearby unincorporated communities:
• Northwest County
o Cities of Corona, Eastvale, Jurupa Valley, Norco
• City of Riverside
• Moreno Valley/Perris
• Mid County
o Cities of Hemet, San Jacinto
• Southwest County
o Cities of Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Murrieta, Temecula, Wildomar
• San Gorgonio Pass
o Cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa
The Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley were combined into one subregion.
Subregions were created on a somewhat subjective basis according to geography and a general
sense of identity. Subregions also needed to consist of a large enough population to generate a
statistically meaningful sample size. Each set of sub-regional survey results has a different sample
size and a different margin of error (the larger the sample size, the lower the margin of error).
This does not mean that the results of each subregion are not valid; rather, it means that results
of each subregion are intended to convey priorities within the context of that subregion only and
not the entire county.
Priority Projects
The following are the top five projects according to voters countywide and within each subregion.
In some cases, the list of “top” priorities is greater than five.
Countywide
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 10, 15,
215, 60, 71, and 91 freeways
76
2 Improving on and off-ramps and bridges on the 10, 15,
60, 86, 91 and 215 freeways and highways
70
6
Agenda Item 8
3 Adding new exits and on-ramps to the 15 and 215
freeways
57
4 Connecting Temecula with other regions with rapid
commuter services
53
5 Improving safety and traffic flow of the area where the
10, 60, and 79 meet near Beaumont
50
The table above demonstrates the challenge of identifying a singular – or even two or three –
countywide priorities in a county as large and diverse as Riverside County. In general, the
county’s residents are most supportive of adding capacity of the major highways in Riverside
County, and improving the interchanges at these highways; however, the question posed to
residents bundles several routes together and it is possible that, individually, each of the routes
would score lower on a countywide basis given that many residents may only rely on one or two
of the routes in that list. Sub-regional results demonstrate that there are clear priorities specific
to each set of communities that may not appear on the “top” projects list on a countywide basis.
Coachella Valley
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Providing daily train service between the Coachella
Valley and Los Angeles with stops in the city of Riverside
and Orange County
78
2 Reducing bottlenecks and safety concerns on the 10
freeway and Highways 111 and 86
75
3 Improving safety and traffic flow of the area where the
10, 60, and 79 meet near Beaumont
67
4 Reducing holiday and festival-related traffic with
shuttles and public transit or rail options
64
5 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 10, 15,
215, 60, 71, and 91 freeways
60
City of Riverside
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 10, 15,
215, 60, 71, and 91 freeways
69
2 Improving on and off-ramps and bridges on the 10, 15,
60, 86, 91, and 215 freeways and highways
58
3 Upgrading and improving safety of Cajalco Road 52
4 Improving safety and traffic flow of the area where the
10, 60, and 79 meet near Beaumont
45
5 Constructing a new east-west highway connecting the
215 in Perris with Hemet and San Jacinto
43
7
Agenda Item 8
Moreno Valley/Perris
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Improving on and off-ramps and bridges on the 10, 15,
60, 86, 91, and 215 freeways and highways
87
2 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 10, 15,
215, 60, 71, and 91 freeways
79
3 Adding new exits and on-ramps to the 15 and 215
freeways
70
4 Improving safety and traffic flow of the area where the
10, 60, and 79 meet near Beaumont
69
5 Constructing a new four-lane Highway 79 to improve
traffic flow in San Jacinto, Hemet, and Winchester
66
Northwest County
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Improving traffic flow and safety on local roads such as
Magnolia Ave, Hamner Ave, Limonite Ave, and
Temescal Canyon Rd.
66
2 Eliminating traffic bottlenecks on the 15 southbound at
Ontario Ave and El Cerrito Road
64
3 Adding at least one lane in each direction to the 15
between Cajalco Road in Corona all the way past
Temecula to the San Diego County Line
60
4 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 91
from the 15 in Corona all the way to Pierce Street in
Riverside
60
5 Offering rapid commuter service from your community
to LA, Orange County, Riverside, Temecula, San
Bernardino and the Ontario Airport
55
Mid County
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Improving traffic flow and safety on local roads such as
Ramona Expressway, Florida Ave, Sanderson Ave,
Warren Road, State St, and Gillman Springs Road
78
2 Constructing a new four-lane Highway 79 to improve
traffic flow in San Jacinto, Hemet, and Winchester
73
3 Adding a new east-west highway connecting the 215 in
Perris with Hemet and San Jacinto
69
8
Agenda Item 8
4 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 15,
215, 60, and 91 freeways
67
5 Reconstructing the 10 and 79 interchange in Beaumont
to improve safety and traffic flow
65
Southwest County
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 15
freeway
74
2 Improving traffic flow and safety on local roads such as
Railroad Canyon, Bundy Canyon, Scott Road, Keller Road,
Clinton Keith Road, Murrieta Hot Springs Road,
Pechanga Parkway, and Jefferson Ave
72
3 Improving on and off-ramps on bridges on the 15 and
215Adding a new east-west highway connecting the 215
in Perris with Hemet and San Jacinto
69
4 65
5 Adding at least one express lane in each direction on the
15 freeway
60
San Gorgonio Pass
Most Important Projects % More Likely to Support the Plan
1 Improving all on and off-ramps and bridges on the 10
through Calimesa, Beaumont and Banning
72
2 Improving traffic flow and safety on roads connecting to
I-10
67
3 Improving traffic flow and safety on Oak Valley Parkway,
Gillman Springs Road, and San Timoteo Canyon Road
65
4 Easing local traffic congestion and relieving traffic on the
10 by adding another road from Banning to Palm Springs
61
5 Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 15, 215,
60, and 91 freeways
60
Frequency of Highway Use
The September 2019 survey added a question regarding how often respondents use each of the
major highways in Riverside County. FM3 and staff felt that this question may illuminate how
important each individual route was to residents of each subregion. Such data can inform
investments in roadway projects as well as multi-modal projects that facilitate improved mobility
along these corridors. Below is a table of the percent of survey respondents in each subregion
who use each route “frequently” or “occasionally,” combined:
9
Agenda Item 8
Area Route
10 15 60 71 74 79 91 215
Northwest 58% 89% 65% 59% 19% 12% 87% 46%
Mid 67% 67% 65% 23% 80% 82% 55% 79%
Southwest 37% 95% 42% 34% 48% 59% 68% 83%
Pass 94% 60% 78% 22% 37% 53% 65% 65%
Additional detail on these survey results will be presented as part of staff’s oral presentation to
the Committee.
10
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH:
PRIORITIES FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
,:q(eo Relief Strategy Committee
November 13, 2019
Public Opinion research: Priorities for Traffic Relief Plan
Surveys
• May/June — Countywide (1,511 respondents)
• September — Four western county subregions (5,255 respondents)
• Margins of error vary by subregion
• English and Spanish
• Online and Telephone
• Conducted by FM3
• Ascertain transportation priorities in each area of Riverside County
• Determine feasibility of a ballot measure
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 13, 2019
Western County Subregions
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 13, 2019
3
RIVERSIDE
RCTCCOUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Coachella Valley
In Coachella Valley, ensuring Coachella Valley gets its fair share; maintaining
highways, local roads and bridges are among the most important features.
(Coachella Valley)
(Ranked by (6 & 7) Very Important)
s (6-7) Very Impt. (5) Smwt. Impt. ■ (4) Neutral ■ (1-3) Not Too/Not at All Impt. • (8) DK
Ensuring that the Coachella Valley
gets its fair share of County
transportation funding
Maintaining local roads
Reinforcing highways, roads and
bridges from flooding, earthquakes and
natural hazards
Requiring all funds used to benefit
Riverside County residents
Keeping transportation infrastructure
in good condition
Requiring that decisions on how funding
for the Coachella Valley be used be
made by local leaders instead of people
in other parts of the County
Improving traffic flow
Requiring all funds to be controlled
locally
Mean
Score
6% 6.4
12%'
6%
6%
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.1
Q. 1 am now going to mention some features and provisions of the proposed Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after 1 mention each one, please tell me how important it is
to you that the feature or provision be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of 1-7, where 1 means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and 7 means it would be VERY
IMPORTANT. Split Sample
Measure Features: Coachella Valley, continued
(Coachella Valley)
(Ranked by (6 & 7) Very Important)
■ (6-7) Very Impt. (5) Smwt. Impt. ■ (4) Neutral ■ (1-3) Not Too/Not at All Impt. ■ (8) DK
Repairing potholes
Protecting streets, bridges, freeways
and highways from closures during
major storms
Creating local jobs
Creating economic growth
Requiring independent audits
Improving traffic safety
Earthquake retrofitting bridges and
overpasses
Discounting bus fares for seniors,
students, and veterans
Accelerating the completion of freeway
upgrade projects
^Maintaining local streets in every city
and unincorporated area
8
Mean
Score
6.2
6.0
6.1
6.0
6.3
6.0
6.0
5.9
6.0
6.0
Q. I am now going to mention some features and provisions of the proposed Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after I mention each one, please tell me how important it is
to you that the feature or provision be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of 1-7, where 1 means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and 7 means it would be VERY
IMPORTANT. ^Not Part of Split Sam.le
RESEARCH
In Coachella Valley, daily train service to LA; and reducing bottlenecks and safety
concerns on the 10, 111, 86, 60 and 79 are the most influential projects.
(Coachella Valley)
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. a No Diff./DK/NA
Providing daily train service between
the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles
with stops in the city of Riverside and
Orange County
Reducing bottlenecks and safety
concerns on the 10 Freeway and
Highways 111 and 86
Improving safety and traffic flow of
the area where the 10, 60 and 79
meet near Beaumont
Reducing holiday and festival -related
traffic with shuttles and public transit
or rail options
Total Total
More Less
Lkly. Lkly.
78% 9%
75% 8%
67% 9%
64% 13%
.74 Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects or services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the
s measure. Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH
Projects: Coachella Valley, Continued
(Coachella Valley)
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. M No Diff./DK/NA
Adding at least one lane in each
direction on the 10, 15, 215, 60, 71
and 91 freeways
Improving on and off -ramps and
bridges on the 10, 15, 60, 86, 91 and
215 freeways and highways
Building an alternative route to the 10
Freeway in the Coachella Valley from
the Beaumont -Banning Pass to Palm
Springs
Total Total
More Less
Lkly. Lkly.
60% 16%
59% 15%
58% 15%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects or services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the
w measure. Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH
RIVERSIDE
ROTCCOUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
� COMMISSION
Western County
In Western Riverside, all funds are used to benefit County residents;
improving traffic flow; and repairing potholes are among the most important
features.
(Western Riverside County)
(Ranked by (6 & 7) Very Important)
■ (6-7) Very Impt. (5) Smwt. Impt. ■ (4) Neutral ■ (1-3) Not Too/Not at All Impt. • (8) DK
Requiring all funds used to benefit
Riverside County residents
Improving traffic flow
w
RESEARC
Repairing potholes
Maintaining local roads
Keeping transportation infrastructure
in good condition
Creating local jobs
^Maintaining local streets in every city
and unincorporated area
Accelerating the completion of freeway
upgrade projects
^Upgrading freeways and highways
5%
Mean
Score
6.5
7% 6.3
111 6.3
6.2
6.2
6.0
6.0
6.1
6.0
Q. 1 am now going to mention some features and provisions of the proposed Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after 1 mention each one, please tell me how important it is
to you that the feature or provision be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of 1-7, where 1 means NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and 7 means it would be VERY
IMPORTANT. ^Not Part of Split Sample
RE
Measure Features: Western County, Continued
(Western Riverside County)
(Ranked by (6 & 7) Very Important)
■ (6-7) Very Impt. (5) Smwt. Impt. ■ (4) Neutral ■ (1-3) Not Too/Not at All Impt. • (8) DK
Synchronizing traffic signals
Reinforcing highways, roads and bridges
from flooding, earthquakes and
natural hazards
Earthquake retrofitting bridges and
overpasses
Improving traffic safety
Requiring public oversight
Creating economic growth
Requiring all funds to be controlled
locally
Improving specialized public
transportation services for seniors
veterans and the disabled
^Discounting bus fares for seniors,
students, and veterans
Mean
Score
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
6.0
5.8
6.1
5.6
5.6
Q. I am now going to mention some features and provisions of the proposed Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan Measure. Regardless of your opinion of the measure, after I mention each one, please tell me how important it is
to you that the feature or provision be included as part of the measure. We will use a scale of 1-7, where 1 means NOTAT ALL IMPORTANT to you that the feature or provision is included in the measure and 7 means it would be VERY
.;.1. IMPORTANT. ^Not Part of Split Sample
EARCH
�� R I V E R S I D E
R C T C B O U N T Y
T R A N S P O R T A T I O N
�� C O M M I S S I O N
C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e
P r o j e c t s
Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 10, 15, 215, 60, 71 and 91
freeways; improving on and off -ramps and bridges on the 10, 15, 60, 86, 91 and 215;
and upgrading and improving safety of Cajalco Road are the projects most likely to
lead voters to vote a potential measure.
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
Total Total
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. No Diff./Don't Know More Less
Likely Likely
Adding at least one lane in each direction
on the 10, 15, 215, 60, 71 and 91 freeways
Improving on and off -ramps and bridges
on the 10, 15, 60, 86, 91 and 215 freeways
and highways
Upgrading and improving safety of
Cajalco Road
Improving safety and traffic flow of the
area where the 10, 60 and 79 meet near
Beaumont
*Constructing a new east -west highway
connecting the 215 in Perris with Hemet
and San Jacinto
69% 14%
58% 17%
52% 7%
45% 15%
43% 17%
c � 3 Q6a-m. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects or services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes
11 *•r on the measure. If the project or service makes no difference on how you would vote on this measure one way or another, you can tell me that too. *Asked in Western Riverside County Only (Split Sample)tAAsked in Western Riverside Only
RESEARCH
Projects: City of Riverside, Continued
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. • No Diff./Don't Know
Connecting Temecula with other regions
with rapid commuter services
Adding new exits and on -ramps to the
15 and 215 freeways
Providing daily train service between the
Coachella Valley and Los Angeles with stops
in the city of Riverside and Orange County
Improving traffic flow on the 60 and 91
freeways by converting the existing carpool
lane into an express lane
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
39% 20%
37% 20%
37% 21%
36% 45%
Q6a-m. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects or services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes
on the measure. If the project or service makes no difference on how you would vote on this measure one way or another, you can tell me that too. —Asked in Western Riverside Only
RIVERSIDE
ROTC COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Moreno Valley/Perris
Projects
Improving on and off -ramps and bridges on the 101 151 601 86, 91
and 215; adding at least one lane in each direction on the 10, 151 215, 601 71 and 91
freeways; and adding new exits and on -ramps to the
15 and 215 freeways are the projects most likely to lead voters to vote in support of the
measure.
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
Total Total
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. • No Diff./Don't Know More Less
Likely Likely
Improving on and off -ramps and bridges
on the 10, 15, 60, 86, 91 and 215 freeways
and highways
Adding at least one lane in each direction
on the 10, 15, 215, 60, 71 and 91 freeways
Adding new exits and on -ramps to the 15
and 215 freeways
Improving safety and traffic flow of the
area where the 10, 60 and 79 meet near
Beaumont
*Constructing a new four -lane Highway 79
to improve traffic flow in San Jacinto,
Hemet and Winchester
87% 5%
79% 10%
70% 11%
69% 12%
66% 15%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects or services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the
measure. If the project or service makes no difference on how you would vote on this measure one way or another, you can tell me that too. *Asked in Western Riverside County Only (Split Sample)/ —Asked in Western Riverside Only
R SEARCH
RESEARCH
Projects: Moreno Valley/ Perris, Continued
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. • No Diff./Don't Know
*Constructing a new east -west highway
connecting the 215 in Perris with Hemet and
San Jacinto
Upgrading and improving safety of
Cajalco Road
*Constructing a new east -west highway
connecting the 215 in Menifee with the 15
near Lake Elsinore
Providing daily train service between the
Coachella Valley and Los Angeles with stops
in the city of Riverside and Orange County
Connecting Temecula with other regions
with rapid commuter services
*Constructing a new six -lane highway
between Highway 79 in San Jacinto and the
215 in Perris
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
64% 21%
64% 9%
61% 19%
61% 15%
55% 20%
51% 24%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects or services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether knowing that this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on the
measure. If the project or service makes no difference on how you would vote on this measure one way or another, you can tell me that too. *Asked in Western Riverside County Only (Split SampleeAsked in Western Riverside Only
RIVERSIDE
RT+C COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Northwest County
Projects
Improving traffic flow and safety on local roads; eliminating traffic bottlenecks on the 15
southbound at Ontario Ave and El Cerrito Road; and adding at least one lane in each
direction on the 91, from the 15 to Pierce Street, and on the 15 between
Cajalco Road and the San Diego County line are the projects
most likely to elicit voter support for a measure.
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. E No Diff./Don't Know
^Improving traffic flow and safety
on local roads such as Magnolia
Avenue, Hamner Avenue, Limonite
Avenue and Temescal Canyon Road
"Eliminating traffic bottlenecks on
the 15 southbound at Ontario
Avenue and El Cerrito Road
Adding at least one lane in each
direction to the 15 between
Cajalco Road in Corona all the way
past Temecula to the San Diego
County line
Adding at least one lane in each
direction on the 91 from the 15 in
Corona all the way to Pierce Street
in Riverside
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
66% 10%
64% 11%
60% 13%
60% 13%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on
the measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH
Projects: Northwest County, Continued
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. • No Diff./Don't Know
Ottering rapid commuter service
from your community to LA,
Orange County, Riverside,
Temecula, San Bernardino and the
Ontario Airport
Increasing the frequency and
reliability of Metrolink trains
connecting Corona to Orange, LA,
Riverside and San Bernardino
^Improving the safety of
Cajalco Road
Adding one lane in each direction
on the 60 between Jurupa Valley
and Riverside
^Completing the Santa Ana River
trail through Norco, Eastvale, and
Corona
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
55% 17%
50% 15%
49% 14%
47% 16%
46% 17%
F M 3 Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on
the measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample
R--ESEARCH
RIVERSIDE
RCTC BOUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Mid County
Projects
^Improving traffic flow and safety on local
roads such as Ramona Expressway, Florida
Avenue, Sanderson Avenue, Warren Road,
State Street and Gilman Springs Road
"Constructing a new four -lane Highway 79
to improve traffic flow in San Jacinto,
Hemet and Winchester
"Adding a new east -west highway
connecting the 215 in Perris with
Hemet and San Jacinto
Adding at least one lane in each direction
on the 15, 215, 60, and 91 freeways
Reconstructing the 10 and
79 interchange in Beaumont to
improve safety and traffic flow
Improving traffic flow and safety on local roads; constructing a new four lane Highway 79 to
improve traffic flow in San Jacinto, Hemet and Winchester; and adding a new east -west
highway connecting
the 215 in Perris with Hemet and San Jacinto are the projects
most likely to draw voter support of a measure.
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
Total Total
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. E Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. E No Diff./Don't Know More Less
Likely Likely
78% 8%
73% 11%
69% 12%
67% 12%
65% 11%
Q. 1 would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be
unded b the measure makes ou more or less likel to vote es on the measure. ^Not Part o S.lit Sam.le
R E S E A R CH
Projects: Mid County, Continued
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. No Diff./Don't Know
Improving on and off -ramps and bridges
on the 10, 15, 60, and 215 freeways
Providing your community with rapid
commuter services to the City of Riverside,
and Orange and Los Angeles counties
Adding at least one express lane in each
direction on the 15, 215, 60, and
91 freeways
Constructing a new east -west highway
connecting the 15 near Lake Elsinore with
the 215 in Menifee
Providing your community with rapid
commuter services to San Diego County
Increasing the frequency and reliability of
Metrolink trains from Perris and Corona to
Orange, LA, Riverside and San Bernardino
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
59% 16%
59% 16%
49% 23%
49% 21%
48% 21%
45% 20%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be
unded b the measure makes ou more or less likel to vote es on the measure. Slit Sam le
RESEARC
RIVERSIDE
�T COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
Southwest County
Projects
Adding at least one lane in each direction on the 15 Freeway; improving
traffic flow and safety on local
roads; and improving on and off -ramps and bridges
on the 15 and 215 are the projects most likely to
lead voters to support a measure.
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
Total Total
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. • No Diff./Don't Know More Less
Adding at least one lane in each
direction on the 15 freeway
^Improving traffic flow and safety on
local roads such as Railroad Canyon,
Bundy Canyon, Scott Road, Keller
Road, Clinton Keith Road, Murrieta
Hot Springs Road, Pechanga Parkway,
and Jefferson Avenue
^Improving on and off -ramps and
bridges on the 15 and the 215
Adding at least one express lane in
each direction on the 15 freeway
Likely Likely
74% 8%
72% 8%
65% 11%
60% 17%
a 1 would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on
the measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH
u
RESEARC
Projects: Southwest County, Continued
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. m Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. is No Diff./Don't Know
^Constructing a new east -west
highway to connect the 215 in
Menifee with the 15 near Lake
Elsinore
Providing your community with
rapid commuter services to San
Diego County
Providing your community with
rapid commuter services to the
City of Riverside and Orange and
Los Angeles Counties
^Connecting the 15 and the 215 to
the French Valley Parkway
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
55% 16%
50% 18%
47% 20%
45% 15%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on
the measure. ^Not Part of Split Sample
RIVERSIDE
RT COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
San Gorgonio Pass
Projects
Improving all on and off -ramps and bridges on the 10 through Calimesa, Beaumont
and Banning; improving traffic flow and safety on roads connecting to I-10, and
improving traffic flow and safety on specific local roads are the projects most
likely to lead voters to support a measure.
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
Total Total
IIMuch More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. • Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. No Diff./Don't Know More Less
^Improving all on and off -ramps likely Likely
and bridges on the 10 through
Calimesa, Beaumont and Banning
Improving traffic flow and safety
on roads connecting to 1-10
^Improving traffic flow and safety
on Oak Valley Parkway Gilman
Springs Road, and San Timoteo
Canyon Road
Easing local traffic and relieving
congestion on the 10 by adding
another road from Banning to
Palm Springs
Adding at least one lane in each
direction on the 15, 215 60, and
91 freeways
72% 8%
67% 12%
65% 11%
61% 13%
60% 12%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on
.`•_ the measure. If the project or service has no effect on how you would vote on this measure one way or the other, you can tell me that too. ^Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH
RESEARCH
Projects: San Gorgonio Pass, Continued
(Ranked by Total More Likely)
■ Much More Lkly. Smwt. More Lkly. Smwt. Less Lkly. ■ Much Less Lkly. • No Diff./Don't Know
^Improving safety and reducing
delays by separating local roads
from railroad tracks in Beaumont
and Banning
^Reducing holiday and festival -
related traffic to Palm Springs and
the rest of the Coachella Valley with
shuttles and public transit or rail
options
Providing daily roundtrip passenger
train service from the Coachella
Valley to Los Angeles with stops in
the San Gorgonio Pass, the City of
Riverside and Orange County
Offering rapid commuter service
from your community to Riverside,
San Bernardino and neighboring
cities
Adding at least one ex�res_s lane in
each direction on the 15, 215, 60,
and 91 freeways
Total Total
More Less
Likely Likely
59% 13%
52% 17%
52% 20%
50% 18%
46% 20%
Q. I would now like to mention a detailed list of projects and services that could be funded by the measure. Please tell me whether or not knowing this project or service will be funded by the measure makes you more or less likely to vote yes on
the measure. If the project or service has no effect on how you would vote on this measure one way or the other, you can tell me that too. ^Not Part of Split Sample
Public Opinion research: Priorities for Traffic Relief Plan
Conclusions
• Coachella Valley: clear priority on local control and accountability,
new rail service, relieving bottlenecks on I-10, SR-86, and SR-111.
• Western County: sub -regions have distinct priorities; highway and
interchange improvements are important, as are specific roads that
carry a lot of traffic.
• Path Forward: support for certain types of projects makes voter
approval of a Traffic Relief Plan feasible
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE, NOVEMBER 13, 2019
30
AGENDA ITEM 9
Agenda Item 9
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 13, 2019
TO: Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
FROM Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Approach for Coachella Valley component of the Traffic Relief Plan
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to receive, discuss, and provide input on the approach to
developing the Coachella Valley component of the draft Traffic Relief Plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Transportation Governance Structure in the Coachella Valley
Long-standing transportation policy in Riverside County empowers the Coachella Valley
Association of Governments (CVAG) to establish many of the transportation funding priorities
and transportation policy decisions for that subregion. CVAG is specified in the 1989 and 2009
Measure A expenditure plan as the implementing agency for state highway and major regional
road projects. Interagency memoranda of understanding between RCTC and CVAG provide for
CVAG to be the responsible agency for implementing and administering the Transportation
Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program, advising RCTC on administration of other funding
sources and nominating projects to RCTC for inclusion in Riverside County’s share of the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). It is the observation of RCTC staff that these
governance policies have led to numerous positive outcomes including completion of many
significant transportation projects in the Coachella Valley. An important factor in this success is
the professional and collaborative relationship between RCTC and CVAG staff and their
respective governing boards.
CVAG is governed by an Executive Committee consisting of the mayor or an elected official
representing every city council in the Coachella Valley and the city of Blythe, all five County
Supervisors, and the Tribal Chairman from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. Once a year, the CVAG General Assembly – comprised of all
65 elected officials from the member jurisdictions – meets to approve the CVAG budget.
Transportation Project Prioritization Study
Every five years CVAG adopts a new Transportation Project Prioritization Study (TPPS). The latest
update, which was finalized in 2016, incorporated an Active Transportation Plan for the region.
11
Agenda Item 9
The TPPS is the guiding document for allocation of funding and regional transportation planning
as it evaluates and ranks projects. The TPPS has incorporated the same core criteria since 2005,
including roadway surface conditions, system continuity, level of service and accident rates. The
criteria for the TPPS are revisited every cycle by the CVAG Executive Committee with input from
technical experts representing member jurisdictions of the agency. After all the segments have
been analyzed, they can then be merged or divided into logical and feasible constructible
buildable projects. This is to provide the member jurisdictions flexibility towards how projects
tare planned and how they will compete for funding.
CVAG committees do not vote to add or remove individual projects to the TPPS. It has been
CVAG’s longstanding policy that all major projects are included in the TPPS. After vetting each
project through the established criteria, projects are assigned a total score and then are ranked.
Projects ranked at the top of the TPPS are generally given priority for funding. However, there
have been instances where projects ranked lower in the TPPS have been advanced for funding
due to extenuating circumstances, primarily to take advantage of one-time outside funds.
With needs exceeding available dollars, the TPPS provides an objective tool to judge where
resources should be focused in the Coachella Valley. As a whole, the TPPS reflects the values of
communities in the Coachella Valley.
Public Opinion
In a statistically valid public opinion survey of Coachella Valley voters conducted in May and June
of 2019, 85 percent of respondents said that “ensuring that the Coachella Valley gets its fair share
of County transportation funding” was “very important.” Additionally, 77% of respondents said
it is “very important” that the Traffic Relief Plan includes a requirement that “decisions on how
funding for the Coachella Valley be used be made by local leaders instead of people in other parts
of the County.” These results are consistent with previous public opinion research that
demonstrates that Coachella Valley residents have a strong sense of identity and are concerned
that their tax dollars be spent locally by the leaders closest to them.
Recommendation for Traffic Relief Plan
Consistent with the success that has been demonstrated, RCTC and CVAG are recommending to
the Committee that the new Plan be continue to follow the same model and that all funds
generated in the Coachella Valley be expended through CVAG according to a continued TPPS
process. According to CVAG staff, the next TPPS update could incorporate the expenditure
categories that are identified in the countywide Traffic Relief Plan.
Public opinion demonstrates strong support for funding decisions to be made by local leaders in
the Coachella Valley. Thus, RCTC is not the most ideal venue for funding decisions impacting the
Coachella Valley. CVAG is the agency best suited to administer the Traffic Relief Plan, given that
it represents all municipalities and unincorporated areas of the Coachella Valley, is multi-modal
in responsibility, and has a professional staff equipped to carry out the Plan.
12
Agenda Item 9
The TPPS process and criteria can be adjusted to account for the expenditure categories and any
other policies written to the Plan to ensure that funds are put to use according to the will of
voters.
Consistent with the Committee’s direction at its October 28, 2019 meeting, RCTC and CVAG staff
do not recommend a set-aside within the Coachella Valley for a direct allocation of funds to cities
and the County or Riverside for local streets and roads. Instead, it is recommended that the TPPS
continue to function as the mechanism to prioritize projects.
Understanding that the public may want to see specific projects that will be funded in the
Coachella Valley, using the TPPS as the decision-making mechanism does not preclude the Plan
from illustrating examples of priority projects that could or would be funded. For example, the
2009 Measure A expenditure plan states the following:
The Transportation Improvement Plan is designed to give flexibility to adjust to changing
circumstances and to:
• Improve Traffic Flow and Reduce Congestion on Highway 111
• Add/Improve Interchanges on Highway 86 and I-10
• Provide funding for Local Streets and Roads Improvements
• Improve Safety and Visibility at Major Intersections and Arterial Roads
• Reduce Congestion by Improving Major Roadways Identified as Important by Local
Governments in the Coachella Valley
• Provide Express East-West Transit Routes in the Coachella Valley
• Improve and Expand Public and Specialty Transit Service
Although the valley has changed in many ways since Measure A was written, the above language
still applies today. Durability through time is one of the tenets of the Plan structure adopted by
this Committee on October 28, 2019. Priorities that have emerged within the last few years that
could also be captured by the above approach could include:
• Improved mass transit such as daily rail service to and from the Coachella Valley;
• New technologies to reduce congestion and improve travel times;
• Projects that reinforce infrastructure from natural disasters; and
• Projects that address fundamental infrastructure gaps in disadvantaged communities.
CVAG Executive Director Tom Kirk will provide a verbal presentation to the Committee to discuss
these policy issues with Committee members.
Commission staff seeks the Committee’s direction on how the Plan should be implemented in
the Coachella Valley.
13
11
" R e t u r n t o S o u r c e /
F a i r S h a r e
" F l e x i b i l i t y
H o w i t C u r r e n t l y W o r k s f o r t h e D e s e r t
" R e t u r n t o S o u r c e /
F a i r S h a r e
" F l e x i b i l i t y
H o w i t C u r r e n t l y W o r k s f o r t h e D e s e r t
History of Partnership
But, Founded on Skepticism…
But, Founded on Skepticism…
Valley is STILL skeptical
Support fair share for CV85%
Support return to source77%
" R e t u r n t o S o u r c e /
F a i r S h a r e
" F l e x i b i l i t y
$ 3 B
$ 3 0 0 M
H o w i t C u r r e n t l y W o r k s f o r t h e D e s e r t
" R e t u r n t o S o u r c e /
F a i r S h a r e
" F l e x i b i l i t y
$ 3 B
$ 3 0 0 M
H o w i t C u r r e n t l y W o r k s f o r t h e D e s e r t
Valley is changing
Flexibility allows us to adjust to change
1994
Top
Ranked
Projects
Washington St. I/C
Bob Hope Dr. I/C 1994
Top
Ranked
Projects
Indian Ave I/C
Palm Dr / Gene Autry Trl I/C
1999
Top
Ranked
Projects
Monterey AveDate Palm Dr. I/C
Madison St.
2005
Top
Ranked
Projects
Hwy 111
Jefferson St. I/C
2010
Monroe St. I/C
Avenue 50
Jackson St. I/C
2016
2021
New
expenditure
categories
Approach for the Coachella Valley?
Follow
AGENDA ITEM 10
Agenda Item 10
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: November 13, 2019
TO: Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
FROM: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Western Riverside County Traffic Relief Plan Investments
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to receive, discuss, provide input on, and consider approval of
investments in projects and services to be included in a draft Western Riverside County
component of the Traffic Relief Plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The following actions by the Commission have guided staff in the preparation of the draft
Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan:
• January 31, 2019: Commission authorized exploration of a new local funding measure for
transportation in Riverside County and discussed myriad specific investments needed
throughout the county.
• July 10, 2019: Commission authorized staff to develop a Countywide Transportation
Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan (Plan) and implementation ordinance (Ordinance) for
potential presentation to Riverside County voters in November 2020.
• September 11, 2019: Commission adopted the schedule and development process for the
Plan that included Traffic Relief Strategy Committee review and recommendation of the
Plan in November 2019 followed by the Commission in December 2019.
• November 13, 2019 (anticipated): Commission approved a revenue estimate, geographic
divisions (Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley), and expenditure
categories to guide development of the Plan.
DISCUSSION:
Western Riverside County Traffic Relief Plan Investments
This staff report proposes potential investments in Western Riverside County projects and
services for Commission discussion and direction. The intent of this investment list is to help the
14
Agenda Item 10
Commission identify priorities in Western Riverside County that will form the assumptions and
scope of the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan (attachment 1). This
investment list is not intended to name every conceivable project or service. While the Western
Riverside County projects are but one component of the overall Plan, which also includes the
Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys, according to statute, the Plan must include some mention of
specific highway projects if the Plan and Ordinance are submitted to voters.
The Coachella Valley component of the Plan is being addressed concurrently as a separate item.
The Palo Verde Valley component will likely focus primarily on return-to-source funds or local
street and road improvements consistent with the existing Measure A sales tax program and will
be discussed at upcoming meetings with Palo Verde Valley representatives.
Stakeholder Input
Recent stakeholder input was used to help identify needs and priorities. Qualitative stakeholder
input was received via the #RebootMyCommute effort completed in early 2019 and the
comprehensive 2017 stakeholder outreach effort presented at the 2018 annual workshop.
More recent quantitative stakeholder data was received through the Spring and Fall 2019 public
opinion surveys presented concurrently with and separate from this item. Additionally, over the
last several months, instrumental input was also received from:
• The Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee,
• The Traffic Relief Strategy Committee,
• The Commission,
• City staff,
• County of Riverside staff, and
• Business and civic leadership groups.
Nature of the Plan
Based on feedback from Commissioners, this Western Riverside County component of the Traffic
Relief Plan (attachment 1) was created to identify a desired state of transportation in Western
Riverside County in the decades ahead. The plan is aspirational in nature, putting forth a future
vision and challenging goals to meet the long-term needs and desired transportation
improvements in Western Riverside County. The plan is comprehensive by addressing a wide
range of transportation needs: roads, passenger rail, bus service, trails, operations, maintenance,
services, technology, and incentives.
While a 30-year horizon was used for planning, revenue projection, and cost estimation
purposes, this Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan is not currently
intended to be constrained by a specific timeframe. Similarly, the listed investments totaling
$8.84 billion contained in attachment 1 exceed the projected $6.71 billion in Western Riverside
County revenues over 30 years from a new sales tax measure that could fund the Plan. Staff is
15
Agenda Item 10
seeking direction on the appropriate planning horizon and level of fiscal constraint for
investments.
Plan of Projects and Services
New Sales Tax and Existing Measure A Sales Tax Working Together
Some project investments shown in the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic
Relief Plan (attachment 1) are also planned projects from the existing Measure A sales tax
program. The intent of including these investments is to fully fund and/or accelerate those
projects which otherwise may take many years, if not decades, to complete. Similarly, some
existing services currently provided are also included in the Western Riverside County
component of the Traffic Relief Plan to ensure sustainable, long-term funding of these services
which may otherwise require reductions or elimination if new funding does not materialize. On
July 10, 2019 the Commission approved the 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway
Delivery Plan (attachment 2 map) that includes these planned projects from the existing Measure
A sales tax program and other current Measure A priorities.
Leveraging Other Fund Sources
Dollars shown in the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan (attachment
1) are the estimated investments needed from a new sales tax as part of a total investment need
for the project or service. For example, the total estimated cost of a local interchange investment
may be $50 million while the estimated investment portion from a new sales tax may be 80
percent of the total cost, or $40 million. The balance of funds needed to fully fund the local
interchange is expected to come from other fund sources.
Based on both historical funding and estimates of future funding, staff has roughly estimated the
potential availability of other fund sources to fully fund projects and services. Other fund sources
include existing Measure A sales tax, tolls, state and federal formula funds, state and federal
grants, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF), other local funds, etc.
General Categories and Call-for-Projects
Most entries in the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan reflect a
specific project or service based on input received identifying distinct needs. A number of entries,
such as street repairs, safety improvements, safe routes to school, and emerging technology, are
general in nature. These projects and services reflect general categories needing funding and
lend themselves to direct allocation to Riverside County cities based on their specific needs.
During its October 28, 2019 meeting, several members of the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
cited the benefits of designating some new sales tax funds to be directly allocated to cities
through a competitive call-for-projects. Therefore, funding allocations for these general
16
Agenda Item 10
categories of projects and services are expected to be implemented through competitive call-for-
project or competitive grant processes administered by the Commission.
Funding Operations and Maintaining Facilities
New passenger rail track and station improvements are included in the Western Riverside County
component of the Traffic Relief Plan. This initial capital investment is significant. One-time state
and federal grant and formula funding is often available to pay a portion of capital costs for new
projects – particularly passenger rail. However, state and federal funding for ongoing operations
and facility maintenance is usually much harder to obtain, if available at all.
It is financially responsible to adequately fund ongoing operations and maintain these facilities
that received the initial investments. Therefore, a substantial investment is currently reflected
in the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan to provide sustainable
funding for various operations and facility maintenance. In addition to new passenger rail track
and stations, investments are included for SR-79 and Mid-County Parkway highway maintenance,
subsidizing Metrolink passenger rail operations, maintenance of Metrolink stations, replacement
of Metrolink trains, and subsidizing bus operations.
Mitigating for Increasing Road Capacity
A recent California law change (SB 743) and implementing regulations now require using Vehicles
Miles Traveled (VMT) as the primary metric to determine the significance of transportation
impacts for land use projects during their environmental study phase of project development.
SB 743 triggered changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its statewide
implementation as well as California’s approach to meeting federal air quality conformity
standards.
Caltrans, as the lead agency for all highway projects, has opted in to also utilize VMT as the
primary metric to determine the significance of transportation impacts for highway projects that
add capacity. It is our understanding that Caltrans implementation of this new requirement will
be effective July 1, 2020, and will impact all projects starting the CEQA process after that date.
In addition, projects currently in the CEQA process but not yet approved could be impacted.
The impact of SB 743, new CEQA implementation guidelines, and the California State
Transportation Agency (CalSTA) policy objective to reduce VMT and greenhouse gas emission will
have a significant yet still unknown impact on how highway projects can be delivered in the
future.
For projects that add capacity and increase VMT, particularly general-purpose lanes, it will be
very challenging for RCTC to obtain state and federal project approvals. Mitigation for projects
that increase VMT may be possible to allow these projects to be developed while still complying
with CEQA and federal air quality conformity standards. Concepts such as VMT banking, transit
credits, pricing, and possibly other mechanisms could provide mitigation in the future. Therefore,
17
Agenda Item 10
the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan includes a significant
investment for mitigation for increasing road capacity to allow needed projects to move forward
in a timely manner.
Investing in the SR-60, SR-91, and I-215 Corridors
This draft does not include any new mainline highway investments for the SR-60, SR-91, and
I-215 corridors in the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan. Further,
except for the improvements on SR-91 (I-15 to Pierce Street) and I-215 (Van Buren Boulevard to
SR-60), the existing Measure A sales tax program does not include further improvements to the
SR-60, SR-91, and I-215 corridors. Staff is seeking direction from the Commission as to whether
SR-60, SR-91, and/or I-215 corridors should receive additional investment as part of a new sales
tax. If so, which corridors should receive the investment and for what type of improvement.
As additional background, three capacity-increasing projects on these corridors began
development earlier this year at the direction of the Commission after receiving the results of a
feasibility study on potential new express lane facilities. Subsequently, after hearing concerns
regarding the potential express lanes project on SR-91 through downtown Riverside, on
September 11, 2019, the Commission deferred approval of a funding agreement with Caltrans,
effectively putting all three express lane projects on SR-60, SR-91, and I-215 on hold indefinitely.
Emerging Technologies and Innovation
The multi-decade planning horizon for the Western Riverside County component of the Traffic
Relief Plan suggests that emerging technologies and innovation will have a positive and possibly
even a transformative impact to our transportation system. Whether better managing highway
congestion through more efficient lane usage and traveler information, or transforming 1st/last
mile transit connections, or even autonomous and connected vehicles, emerging technologies
and innovation will continue to shape our transportation future.
What is uncertain is when these impacts will occur and what specific technologies and
innovations will lead the way. It is important to embrace and plan for these inevitable changes.
A number of investments are included that allocate investment funds to emerging technologies,
upgrading existing technologies, fostering innovation pilot programs, and incenting new services
and development.
Investment Categories Going Forward
The Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan investment list is grouped by
similar projects and services for ease of discussion. The future Countywide Transportation
Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan will be represented in the following three categories recently
approved by the Commission:
• Reducing Congestion and Connecting Communities
18
Agenda Item 10
• Improving Safety and Keeping Infrastructure in Good Condition
• Supporting Seniors, Veterans, Students, and Individuals with Disabilities
Should both the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee and the Commission ultimately approve the
Western Riverside County component of the Traffic Relief Plan investment list, staff would
combine this effort with the other parts of the overall Countywide Transportation Improvement
& Traffic Relief Plan and present to the Commission for approval at the January 2020 Commission
meeting.
Attachments:
1) Draft Western Riverside County Traffic Relief Plan Investments
2) 2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan Map
19
Page 1 of 3
Investment
($2020)
Local Streets and Roads $1,535,000,000
1 Cajalco Road widening and safety enhancements (Temescal Canyon Road to I-215)
2 Ethanac Expressway (new east-west inter-regional highway)
3 I-10 Bypass (new east-west road connecting Banning to Cabazon)
4 Temescal Canyon Road widening (Tom Barnes Street to State Street)
5 Gilman Springs Road safety enhancements (SR-60 to SR-79)
6 Van Buren Boulevard (King Avenue to Bountiful Street)
7 Grand Avenue (Corydon Road to SR-74)
8 Clinton Keith Road (Leon Road to SR-79)
9 Sun Lakes Boulevard (Highland Home to Lincoln Street / Sunset Avenue)
10 Street repairs
11 Safety improvements
12 Traffic signal synchronization
13 Safe routes to schools
Local Interchanges, Bridges, On and Off Ramps $535,000,000
14 I-10 / Highland Springs Avenue
15 I-10 / Pennsylvania Avenue
16 I-10 / Morongo Parkway
17 I-10 / County Line Road
18 I-10 / Cherry Valley Boulevard
19 I-15 / Bundy Canyon Road
20 I-15 / Baxter Road
21 I-15 / Central Avenue (SR-74)
22 SR-60 / Potrero Boulevard
23 SR-91 / Adams Street
24 SR-91 / Tyler Street
25 I-215 / Keller Road
26 I-215 / Harley Knox Boulevard
27 Rancho California Road roundabouts
Highways $3,650,000,000
28 I-15 / French Valley Parkway phase 3
29 SR-79 Realignment
30 Mid-County Parkway
31 I-10 / SR-79 interchange
32 I-15 lane addition (San Diego County line to SR-74)
33 SR-91 lane addition (I-15 to Pierce Street)
34 I-215 lane addition (Van Buren Boulevard to SR-60)
35 Mitigation for increasing road capacity
36 Managing highway congestion through technology (active traffic management, smart freeways)
DRAFT Western Riverside County Traffic Relief Plan Investments
Dollars represent the estimated investment needed from a new sales tax as part of a total investment.
Note: Sequential numbers and investment order are provided for ease of reference only and do not imply priority.20
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 2 of 3
Passenger Rail Transit Expansion $580,000,000
37 Railroad crossing safety improvements
Metrolink passenger rail service:
38 New 2nd main track from Moreno Valley to Perris
39 New 3rd main track from Highgrove to Colton
40 New 3rd main track from Riverside to Fullerton
41 New 4th main track and West Corona / Corona / La Sierra station improvements
42 Parking expansion at existing stations
43 New Perris-South station track and layover facility
44 Moreno Valley / March Field station ADA and access improvements
45 New train station, Ramona Expressway
46 New new low / zero-emission technology trains
47 Coachella Valley - San Gorgonio rail service: new San Gorgonio Pass station
48 Perris - San Jacinto rail service: full development and implementation of track and facilities
Separating Local Streets from Railroad Tracks $190,000,000
49 San Gorgonio Avenue
50 Hargrave Street
51 Pennsylvania Avenue
52 Bellegrave Avenue
53 Jackson Street
54 Mary Street
55 Spruce Street
56 Tyler Street
Bus Transit $285,000,000
57 New operations and maintenance facility for zero emission buses
58 New multimodal transit centers
59 Bus fleet electrification: replacement and expansion program
60 High quality transit corridor improvements to bus stops, transit signal prioritization, amenities
61 Expanded RapidLink service in Riverside, Moreno Valley, and Perris
62 Technology infrastructure modernization, intelligent transportation and traveler information systems
Regional Trails $170,000,000
63 Butterfield Ranch Trail / Southern Emigrant Trail (66.8 miles)
64 Santa Ana River Trail (25.7 miles)
65 California Riding and Hiking Trail (89 miles)
66 Juan Bautista de Anza Historical Trail (84.9 miles)
67 Salt Creek Trail (16 miles)
68 Public lands trail access
Note: Sequential numbers and investment order are provided for ease of reference only and do not imply priority.21
Page 3 of 3
Operations and Maintenance $1,090,000,000
Metrolink passenger rail service:
69 Existing station routine maintenance
70 Existing station capital reinvestment
71 New station routine maintenance
72 New station capital reinvestment
73 Annual capital subsidy (30 years)
74 Annual operating subsidy (30 years)
75 Maintenance of existing and new RCTC rail property
76 Maintenance and replacement of new low / zero-emission technology trains for the 91 / Perris Valley Line
77 Additional operations and maintenance due to Metrolink expansion (SCORE)
78 SR-79 Realignment roadway maintenance
79 Mid-County Parkway roadway maintenance
80 Freeway active traffic management technology operations and maintenance
81 Bus Service: annual operating subsidy (30 years)
Services $575,000,000
82 Motorist assistance: maintain existing and expand Freeway Service Patrol service
83 Commuter assistance: maintain existing rideshare, vanpool, and park and ride services
84 Commuter assistance: expand rideshare, vanpool, and park and ride services, pilot projects, incentives
85 Commuter assistance: park-and-ride lot development
86 Specialized transit: further subsidize fares for seniors, veterans, students, and individuals with disabilities
87 Bus/rail transit: further subsidize fares for seniors, veterans, students, and individuals with disabilities
88 Express bus: subsidize new service and increase frequency of existing service
Investments, Incentives, and Technologies $230,000,000
89 Metrolink passenger rail service: Station development incentives to encourage new amenities and services
90 Transportation investments supporting local and regional economic development
91 Emerging technology and other innovative programs
92 1st / last mile transit connections: incentives, subsidize existing / new services, innovation pilot programs
Total Investment $8,840,000,000
Note: Sequential numbers and investment order are provided for ease of reference only and do not imply priority.22
YuccaValley
Twentynine Palms
RanchoMirage
Palm Springs
PalmDesert
La Quinta
Indio
Desert Hot Springs
Coachella
CathedralCity
Wildomar
Menifee
Eastvale
Temecula
CanyonLake
LakeMatthews
LakePerris
VailLake
NewportBeach
Murrieta
LakeElsinore
SanJacinto
San Bernardino
Perris
MorenoValley
Highland
Hemet
BeaumontBanning
Yorba Linda
Walnut
Upland
Tustin
Santa
Ana
SanDimas
Rialto
RanchoCucamonga
Pomona
Placentia
Ontario
Norco
JurupaValley
LaVerne
Glendora Fontana
DiamondBar
Corona
Claremont
Chino Hills
Brea
Anaheim
Riverside
Calimesa
Diamond ValleyLake
SAN BERNARDINO CO.
RIVERSIDE CO.
R
I
V
E
R
S
I
D
E
C
O
.
O
R
A
N
G
E
C
O
.
RIVERSIDE CO.
SAN DIEGO CO.
SAN BERNARDINO CO.
RIVERSIDE CO.
133
241
142
259
71
1
55
66
57
30
91
74
74
74
60
90
22
5
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
210
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
10
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
15
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
10
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
405
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
73
111
243
247
74
62
79
79
38
15
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
60
91
15
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
60
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
790510Miles
N
17
27
19
20 22
34
24
28
16
15
8 14
29 2
24
30 32
31
33
34
44
26
25
28
37
27
29
35
5
3233
12
21
35
10
9
13A
25
3
11
26
31
6
18
1
4 30
7
23
41
4243
13
2019-2029 Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan
June 24, 2019
FULLY FUNDED Phase Sponsor
1 91 CIP Completion Design-Build RCTC
2 15 ELP Completion Design-Build RCTC
3 15/91 Express Lanes Connector Design-Build RCTC
4 60 Truck Lanes Construction RCTC
5 Mid-County Parkway: Placentia Interchange at 215 Construction RCTC
6 91 Pachappa UP Project: Railroad Realignment Construction RCTC
7 Mid County Parkway: Sweeney Grading Construction RCTC
8 15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension Environmental/ Design-Build Phase 1 RCTC
9 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes Environmental RCTC
10 71/91 Interchange Construction RCTC
11 91 Corridor Operations Project Construction RCTC
12 15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension -Advanced Operations Environmental to Construction RCTC
PARTIAL FUNDING AVAILABLE Phase Sponsor
13 Mid County Parkway:Right of Way and Environmental Mitigation ROW/Environmental RCTC
13A Mid County Parkway: Package 2 Design/Construction RCTC
14 15 Express Lanes Project Southern Extension Design-Build Phase 2 Construction RCTC
15 60/215 Riverside-Moreno Valley Express Lanes Environmental/ Design/Construction RCTC
16 215 Gap Project Environmental to Construction RCTC
17 Mid County Parkway: 215 Project, Nuevo to Alessandro Design/Construction RCTC
18 91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes Design/Construction RCTC
ASSIST WITH FUNDING – PARTNERS Phase Sponsor
19 Lake Elsinore: 15/Railroad Canyon Interchange (FullyFunded)Construction Lake Elsinore
20 RCTLMA: Cajalco Road Corridor Environmental to Construction County
21 Temecula: French Valley Parkway Phase 2 Environmental to Construction Temecula
NO ACTION – RCTC Phase Sponsor
22 Mid County Parkway: Packages 3 and thereafter Environmental to Construction RCTC
23 79 Realignment Design/Right of Way to Construction RCTC
24 15 Corridor (SR-74/Central to I-215)Project Study to Environmental RCTC
25 91 Corridor Ultimate Project: 71 to 241 Environmental RCTC
26 91 Corridor Ultimate Project: 15 to Pierce Street Project Study RCTC
27 10 Truck Climbing Lane Environmental to Construction RCTC
28 15 Corridor (I-215 to County Line)Project Study to Environmental RCTC
29 71 Widening Environmental to Construction RCTC
30 10/60 Interchange Environmental to Construction RCTC
31 215 Ultimate Widening Environmental to Construction RCTC
32 60 Jurupa Valley-Riverside Express Lanes Environmental RCTC
NO ACTION – PARTNERS Phase Sponsor
33 SBCTA: 15 Express Lanes Environmental to Construction SBCTA
34 RCTLMA: Ethanac Corridor Environmental to Construction County
35 Temecula: French Valley Parkway Phase 3 Environmental to Construction Temecula
••••
Attachment 2
23
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN INVESTMENTS
Traffic Relief Strategy Committee
November 13, 2019
1
Commission Action and Input Received
2
•Commission directed staff to prepare:
–Countywide Transportation Improvement & Traffic Relief Plan (Plan)
–Implementation ordinance (Ordinance)
•Stakeholder input
–General public
–Elected officials
–Agency staff
–Business/civic leadership groups
Nature of the Plan
3
•Desired state of transportation
•Aspirational
•Comprehensive
•Horizon
•Fiscal constraint
Investment List
4
•New sales tax and existing sales tax
•Other fund sources
•Operations and maintenance
•60, 91, and 215 corridors
Direction being sought
5
•Specific investment list items
•Planning horizon
–30 years or other
•Level of fiscal constraint
•Investments in 60, 91, and 215 corridors
–Which corridors?
–What improvements?
QUESTIONS, DIALOGUE, FEEDBACK & DIRECTION
6
7
8
9
10
Tara Byerly
From: Tara Byerly
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2019 1:03 PM
To: Tara Byerly
Cc: Lisa Mobley; Anne Mayer; JOHN STANDIFORD
Subject: RCTC: Traffic Relief Strategy Committee - Special Meeting - November 13, 2019
Good afternoon Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Members,
The November Agenda for the Traffic Relief Strategy Committee Special Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, November
13, 2019 @ 11:30 a.m. is now available.
Please copy the link:
https://www. rctc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Novem ber-Traffic-Relief-Strategv-Committee-Special-MeetinR.pdf
Let me know if there are any questions or concerns. Thank you.
Respectfully,
Tara Byerly
Deputy Clerk of the Board
Riverside County Transportation Commission
951.787.7141 W 1951.787.7906 F
4080 Lemon St. 3rd FI. 1 P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502
rctc.org
f IF in 0
i
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE SIGN -IN SHEET
NOVEMBER 13, 2019
NAME
AGENCY
E MAIL ADDRESS
V1 (Atak, ZZtak%--
Cr l4° l?it2Otll
V 1 6/0" �'�•aY
G015)1. L
,ar-DrJ
Ikk O ? P \
t/ r �
� cool x z
‘ P X-//) "-if
:9:6, -�-- k `C___
(AL,- � E:' � 1
NP\6471\
-"\--.
jZ0S.sc 11 se,h-d
at,tv).- )1X d r►.. -b.s
1. ('' tom 6 {,-1c_sd r,
_fir vPe �`f,lle�-
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRAFFIC RELIEF STRATEGY COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
NOVEMBER 13, 2019
Present Absent
County of Riverside, District IV Qr 0
City of Calimesa O
City of Corona ❑
City of Desert Hot Springs
City of Hemet 0
City of Jurupa Valley
City of Moreno Valley 0
City of Murrieta 0
City of Palm Desert 0
City of Temecula 0 0