HomeMy Public PortalAbout09 September 18, 2000 Technical Advisory57300
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
• TIME:
DATE:
LOCATION:
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MEETING AGENDA*
10:00 A.M.
September 18, 2000
Banning City Hall
Civic Center, Large Conference Room
99 East Ramsey Street, Banning, CA
*By request, agenda and minutes may be available in alternative format; i.e. large print, tape.
Bill Bayne, City of Cathedral City
Dan Clark, City of Murrieta
Dick Cromwell, SunLine Transit
Louis Flores, Ca!trans District 08
Richard Folkers, City of Palm Desert
Bruce Harry, City of Rancho Mirage
Bill Hughes, City of Temecula
Mike Janis, City of Desert Hot Springs
George Johnson, County
Elroy Kiepke, City of Calimesa
John Licata, City of Corona
Rick McGrath, City of Riverside
Amir H. Modarressi, City of Indio
Bob Mohler, City of Palm Springs
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Dee Moorjani, City of Beaumont
Habib Motlagh, Cities of Perris, San
Jacinto, Canyon Lake
Craig Nuestaedter, City of Moreno Valley
Ray O'Donnell, City of Lake Elsinore
Steve 011er, RTA
Juan Perez, City of Hemet
Jim Rodkey, City of Blythe
Joe Schenk, City of Norco
Ruthanne Taylor Berger, WRCOG
Paul Toor, City of Banning
Chris Vogt, City of LaQuinta
Allyn Waggle, CVAG
Tim Wassil, City of Indian Wells
Byron Woosley, City of Coachella
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda.
Riverside County Transportation Commission
3560 University Avenue, Suite 100
Conference Room A
Riverside, California 92501
10:00 A.M.
Monday, September 18, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER.
2. SELF -INTRODUCTION.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — August 21, 2000
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS. (This is for comments on items not listed on the agenda.
Comments relating to an item on the agenda will be taken when the item is before the
Committee.)
5. CMAQ CLEAN FUEL OPPORTUNITY FUND UPDATE AND TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
FINDINGS (Attachment)
6. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STRATEGY PROGRAM = PRESENTATION BY CALTRANS
7. STATUS OF 2000 STIP AUGMENTATION (Attachment)
8. ALAMEDA CORRIDOR -EAST STUDY (Attachment)
9. SEPTEMBER 13, 2000 RCTC MEETING
10. OTHER BUSINESS
11. ADJOURNMENT (The next meeting will be October 16, 2000 in Riverside.)
MINUTES
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES
Monday, August 21, 2000
1. Call to Order
Chairman Bob Mohler called the meeting of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission (RCTC), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
to order at 10:08 a.m., at the offices of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission, 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100,
Conference Room A, Riverside, CA 92501.
2. Self Introductions
Members Present:
Others Present:
Dan Clark, City of Murrieta
Bruce Harry, City of Rancho Mirage
Bill Hughes, City of Temecula
Elroy Kiepke, City of Calimesa
John Licata, City of Corona
Bob Mohler, City of Palm Springs
Linda Nixon, City of Hemet
Craig Nuestaedter, City of Moreno Valley
Ray O'Donnell, City of Lake Elsinore
Kahono Oei, City Banning
Steve 011er, RTA
Chris Vogt, City of LaQuinta
Allyn Waggle, CVAG
Dale West, WRCOG
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC
Louis Flores, Caltrans
Eric Haley, RCTC
Henry Hogo, SCAQMD
Roldon Lopez, City of Indio
Shirley Medina, RCTC
Larry Rhinehart, SCAQMD
Marilyn Williams, RCTC
3. Approval of Minutes
M/S/C (Harry/Licata) approve the minutes dated July 17, 2000.
4. Public Comments
There were no comments from the public.
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
August 21, 2000
Page 2
5. SCAQMD Rule 1190 Series (Attachment)
Henry Hogo, SCAQMD was present to advise the committee on the recent
adoption of SCAQMD Clean On -Road Fleet Vehicle Rules over the past
year. In June 2000 the SCAQMD adopted Rule 1191 — Light and Medium
Duty Public Fleets; Rule 1192 — Transit Buses; and Rule 1193 — Refuse
Collection Vehicles. Rule 1186.1 — Less -Polluting Sweepers and a portion
of Rule 1194 — Commercial Airport Ground Access have been slated for
adoption this month. Mr. Hogo provided handouts for the Committee's
review and a presentation on these. A list of available alternate vehicles,
which meet state standards, can be found at www.ARB.ca.gov.
Marilyn Williams, RCTC advised the committee on the highlights of the
MSRC Work Program. The Air District approved the 2000/01 Work
Program on August 18, 2000. A brochure was made available to the
committee, which included information on available funding and a new
web address. Ms. Williams stated that this web site would be the quickest
and most direct access to the RFPs. The county has set aside an
estimated $600,000.00. In addition there is a competitive pot available
above and beyond the county funding. One-half of the competitive pot, a
total of $1.6 million will be made available to public agencies.
6. 2000 STIP Augmentation/Governors Initiative
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC, advised the committee that Caltrans is currently
developing a set of guidelines pertaining to this issue. Draft guidelines will
be discussed at a workshop scheduled to be held in Ventura. Ms. Bechtel
will keep the committee apprised as_to the final recommendation.
Eric Haley, RCTC advised the committee that there are three intertwined
issues involved and unfortunately they do not have the same timeframe.
1) The first issue is a by-product of the Governor's Initiative in which
RCTC made a commitment to credit to the Western and Coachella Valley
those funds that offset existing Measure A commitments. This includes
approximately $50 million dollars in this category. 2) The second issue is
the cost adjustments on the 60/91/215 project, which hopefully will be
dealt with through the ITIP. 3) Project 60 between Valley and Interstate
15 has a current shortfall of approximately $15 million. $25 million on a
$40 million dollar project has been received to date. Mr. Haley expects
the California Transportation Commission to give this extremely high
priority.
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
August 21, 2000
Page 3
Mr. Haley further advised it is favorable that the ITIP (Interregional
Transportation Improvement Program) funds will be used to match the
Governors projects, as these are not being matched by local funding.
In response to a question regarding the amount of discretionary funding
available under the ITIP, Mr. Haley responded that amount is an estimated
$360 million to $400 million, on a statewide basis. District 8 is seeking
one-third of the statewide allotment.
7. TOPS Presentation by Caltrans
This item has been continued to next month.
Eric Haley, RCTC advised the committee that TOPS is a key part in the
work taking place on the 91 Fwy. Mr. Haley added that an anticipated $12
million in TOPS funding may be made available to support the addition of
an axiliary lane on the 91 Fwy.
8. Conformity SIP Update (Attachment)
Shirley Medina, RCTC, provided the committee with an update on her
previous report concerning possible problems with the 1997 Ozone State
Implementation Plan -SIP, and the impacts that may have on the 2000
RTIP. Ms. Medina advised that the situation may not be remedied in time
to avoid an RTIP lapse date of September 30, 2000. Ms. Medina further
added that the Air Resources Board did in fact find a way to reinstate the
Inspection and Maintenance Program, while adding additional control
measures to the Ozone State Implementation Plan -SIP. These additional
controls •concern the Bus Fleet Program and the Motorcycle Emission
Program. Ms. Medina stated that the worst scenario expected could be a
RTIP lapse of two weeks to one month. If this does happen it is expected
that this lapse would only impact regionally significant projects, the main
one being the Galena Interchange, as it has not yet received
environmental clearance. Ms. Medina stated she would keep the
committee advised, as updated information regarding this situation
becomes available.
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC, added that any updated information would be
provided to the committee members via e-mail.
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
August 21, 2000
Page 4
9. Recommendation on Smart Call Box and TMC Enhancement RFPs
(Attachment)
Shirley Medina, RCTC advised the committee that two RFPs will be going
out for the Enhanced Transportation System Management Program for the
following purposes: 1) Caltrans TMC locations will be enhanced in the
urban areas, and 2) The installation of Smart Call Boxes in the urban and
rural areas. There were two separate RFPs for this and one bid for each
RFP has been received. Due to this, an evaluation committee was not
needed. A recommendation will be brought forward to the Plans and
Programs Committee to award contracts to Peek Traffic — Signal
Maintenance, Inc. and Comarco Wireless Technologies. The overall STIP
funding allocation for the project is $1.1 million.
10. Review of 2000 SIP/CMAQ Obligation of Projects —
Status of Projects Not Obligated Yet
Shirley Medina, RCTC, stated this item is an update regarding the Use It
Or Lose It provisions. As of May 2000, Caltrans identified a target amount
for obligating projects or funds would be reprogrammed; however, this
situation has been resolved. Riverside County has obligated in excess of
the targeted amount and will not lose any funding.
Louis Flores, Caltrans advised the committee that Caltrans Headquarters
plans to close all obligations as of September 8, 2000 in order to process
and submit these to the Federal Highway Offices by September 15, 2000.
Mr. Flores added that Caltrans will be shut down for an estimated three
days due to the move to their new location in San Bernardino. Mr. Flores
added that all obligations need to be submitted by September 1, 2000.
11. Other Business
11 a. CETAP Update
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC advised the committee regarding the Commission
action taken on CETAP. The Commission approved moving forward all
four corridors to Tier I Environmental Documentation. RCTC has been
asked to present funding availability and estimates at the September 2000
Commission meeting. District 8 recently submitted a federal grant for
Corridors and Borders funding totaling $5.5 million dollars in conjunction
with District 12 of Orange County to support RCTC's CETAP efforts on the
Technical Advisory Committee Minutes
August 21, 2000
Page 5
Orange County to Riverside County Corridor. Congressman Packard is
assisting with an appropriation of $1 million in Transportation and
Community and System Preservation Funds, and while this is not finalized
RCTC remains optimistic. Ms. Bechtel further added that the first meeting
with the Orange County elected officials would be held August 28, 2000.
The purpose of this meeting is to initiate discussion on the Riverside
County to Orange County Corridor Plan, at which time RCTC will request
funding assistance. A meeting with officials from San Bernardino County
is slated for September 2000 regarding the Moreno Valley to San
Bernardino•County Corridor.
Eric Haley, RCTC, advised members that RCTC is also seeking a Fair
Share per capita Allocation from the Western County cities across two
fiscal years to assist in the CETAP work efforts.
11 b. TAC Member Request
Craig Nuestaedter requested a model DBE Plan be made available.
Cathy Bechtel and Shirley Medina agreed to make this available to those
concerned.
11 c. Project Tracking
Shirley Medina, RCTC, announced that the promised Update Project List
would not be available for a few more weeks. RCTC is in the process of
hiring a new Staff Analyst to handle the Project Tracking Database and
other functions under the Planning and Programming Department.
12. Adjournment
There being no further business for consideration by the Technical
Advisory Committee the meeting -was adjourned at 11:50 a.m. The next
meeting is scheduled for September 18, 2000 at 10:00 a.m., at the offices
of the Banning City Hall, Civic Center, Large Conference Room, 99 East
Ramsey Street, Banning, California.
Respectfully submitted,
Shirley Medina
Program Manager
AGENDA ITEM 5
FAWN RiversideCounty
"transportation Commission
3560 University Avenue Suite 100 • Riverside, California 92501
phone: (909)787-7141 • fax: (909)787-7920 • www.rctc.org
DATE: September 18, 2000
TO: - Technical Advisory Committee
FROM: Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Issues and Communications
SUBJECT: CMAQ Clean Fuels Opportunity Fund Update and Technical Analysis Findings
At its July 2000 meeting, the Commission took action to award Congestion Mitigation/Air
Quality (CMAQ) funds in an amount not to exceed $1.75 M under the Clean Fuels Opportunity
Fund Call for Projects to the highest priority projects: Riverside County Waste Management
Department, Riverside Transit Agency, City of Banning, and City of Riverside. In addition, the
Commission approved all other recommendations as forwarded from the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) as follows:
1. Reallocate $90,000 from the Category 2 set -aside of $300,000 to Category 1 to provide
the needed balance to fully fund priority project #4.
2. Close the application period for Category 1 effective immediately.
3. Revise the Category 2 final application submittal date from August 14, 2002 to August
11, 2000.
4. Close the application period for Category 2 effective August 14, 2000.
5. Reallocate the remaining Category 2 set -aside of $210,000 to Category 1 assuming no
applications are received.
6. Award full funding to Category 1 priority project #5 - UCR/CE-CERT ($113,250) and
partial funding to project #6 - WRCOG (remaining balance of $96,750).
In follow-up to the Commission's action, a letter dated July 13, 2000 (attached as Exhibit A) was
distributed to the CMAQ call for projects mailing list announcing the Category changes. Under
Category 2, one project was received from the County of Riverside in partnership with Costco
Wholesale and Southern California Edison Company. The $100,000 project entitled
"Electrification of Refrigeration Trailers at Costco Mira Loma Depot: A Project to Reduce Idling
Emissions from Diesel Trailers" is seeking $50,000 in CMAQ funding. The Commission's
technical consultant, Mr. Ray Gorski, is completing an analysis of the project and will report his
findings at the TAC meeting.
Under Category 3, two projects have been submitted to date: Riverside Community College and
Mt. San Jacinto Community College. Each is seeking $75,000 in CMAQ funding. Upon
completing the technical review of the proposed projects, RCTC Staff initiated individual
discussions with both entities to develop more specific work plans prior to bring forward the two
projects for TAC's review and action. Additional meetings are schedule for the week of
September 1 lth. Staff will report its progress in finalizing the work plans at the TAC meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: •
That the Committee evaluate projects brought forward by Staff upon completion of technical
analysis, and select projects to be forwarded to the Budget and Implementation Committee and
the Commission for their funding consideration.
Riverside County
` 1ransportation Cpnnmission
DATE: July 13, 2000
TO:
3560 University Avenue Suite 100 • Riverside, California 92501
phone: (909)787-7141 • fax: (909)787-7920 • www.rrtc.org
RCTC Member Agencies
Western Riverside County Local Jurisdictions
Western Riverside Council of Governments
Other Interested Organizations
FROM: Eric A. Hale �r ecutive Director
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program: Clean
Fuels Opportunity Fund Call for Projects dated
February 14, 2000
On February 14, 2000, the Riverside County Transportation Commission announced
the Clean Fuels Opportunity Fund Call for Projects.
At its meeting on July 12, 2000, the Commission took action to amend the Call for
Projects as follows:
1) Close the application period for Category 1 effective immediately given
that it is oversubscribed.
2) Change the final application submittal date for Category 2 from August
14, 2002 to August 11, 2000. If no further applications are received by
the new date, Category 2 set -aside funds totaling $210,000 will be
reallocated to Category 1.
At this time, Categories 3 and 4 are fully subscribed. Submitted projects are currently
under technical review and are expected to be forwarded to the Commission for final
action.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Ms. Marilyn Williams,
RCTC Director of Regional Issues and Communications at (909) 787-7141. Thank
you.
EH/MW/js
AGENDA ITEM 7
a Riverside County
ransportation Commission
DATE: September 12, 2000
TO: Technical Advisory Committee
FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager
SUBJECT: Status of 2000 STIP Augmentation
3560 University Avenue Suite 100 • Riverside, California 92501
phone: (909)787-7141 • fax: (909)787-7920 • www.rctc.org
Attached is the agenda item which will be discussed at the RCTC September 13, 2000
meeting. Staff will provide an overview of the discussion and actions taken on this
item at the TAC meeting.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 13, 2000
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Plans and Programs Committee
Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
2000 STIP Augmentation
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is to seek Commission approval to:
1) Amend the Ramon Road STIP Project to identify the project cost as S20.0M;
2) Program the STIP formula funds available in the Coachella Valley as outlined by
CVAG and detailed in the agenda item;
3) Reserve the STIP formula funds available in the Palo Verde Valley for projects
to be recommended by the City of Blythe and the County of Riverside;
4) Initiate project application for those TCRP projects for which RCTC is identified
as lead and to include all Riverside County TCRP projects in the Regional
Transportation Improvement Program.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At the July 2000 meeting, staff informed the Commission of the adopted 2000 State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Augmentation Fund Estimate which
provided new STIP programming capacity for the four-year period through FY 2003-
04. The Fund Estimate adopted by the California Transportation Commission (CTC)
in July has increased as a result of including revenues made available pursuant to AB
2928. The 2000 Revised STIP Fund Estimate identifies $49.378M of new
programming capacity available in Riverside County. Given prior unprogrammed 1998
STIP balances and the new funding capacity, available funding is as follows:
000226
Total
Available
Discretionary
Pot
(24.20%)
Formula Pot (75.80%)
Western
County
(72.23%)
T
Coachella
Valley
(26.39%)
i
Palo Verde
Valley
(1.38%)
2000 STIP Augmentation
$49,378,000
Less 2% Planning
$987,560
$238,990
$540,692
$197,548
$10,330
Available for Projects
$48,390,440
$11,710,486
$26,493,930
$9,679,840
$506,183.
Unprogrammed Project
Balances from 98 STIP
$8,752,275
$135,215
$0
$6,778,704
$1.,838,356
Committed, Unprogrammed
Balances from 98 STIP`
$18,206,988
Avail. for 2000 Projects
$57,142,715
$11,845,701
$26,493,930
$16,458,544
$2,344,539
' Program commitments have been made to the 1-215 Project 0728,988), SR 91 Mary/Magnolia
($10.278M), and the 60/215 Truck Climbing Lane ($7.2M).
PROJECT FUNDING ISSUES
60/91 /215 Corridor
We have recently been informed of a major funding issue related to one of the
County's premier projects, the 60/91 /215 Corridor Improvements. The 1998 STIP
identifies a Regional Improvement Program construction cost of approximately $213
million, for the various corridor improvements (truck climbing lane, high occupancy
vehicles lanes, interchange improvements, direct connectors, etc.). Caltrans prepared
the project segments and budgets for programming in the 1998 STIP.
We have recently learned from Caltrans District 8 that projected costs on this project
have increased by approximately $49 million due to a variety of factors largely
attributed to increasing the scope of the projects and inflation related to schedule
delays. Additionally, the cost increases reflect new environmental requirements.
Caltrans is reviewing the project segments and their staff will be present to provide the
Commission with information related to scope and schedule -related increases and their
resultant impacts on costs.
The increase in scope and cost could potentially lead to the postponement of project
segments. This is not in the interest of Riverside County residents nor the traveling
public. Without complete funding through outside sources, reducing scope and cost
to within a deliverable budget and constructing the Measure A project remains the
bottom line goal.
000227
Recently we have had several meetings with District 8 staff to discuss options
available to deal with the escalated costs on the project. District 8 has included a
request for $20.137 M for the 60/91 /215 on the District's Interregional Transportation
Improvement Program (ITIP) priority list for the 2000 STIP Augmentation. Staff
believes that obtaining the ITIP funds for this project will be very challenging.
Assuming the receipt of all ITIP funds the proposed cost increase would still require
$28.821 M of additional STIP or local funds.
SR 74 & SR 91 Auxiliary Lane Projects
At the last Commission meeting in July, an action was taken to adopt a revised budget
of $51.3M for the SR 74 Measure A project between 1-15 and 7h Street in the City
of Perris. As you will recall, the project increases were due to right-of-way costs
related to environmental mitigation for the California Gnatcatcher, inclusion of design,
construction management, contingency and accelerating project delivery. Funding to
address the cost increases is dependent on receiving Traffic Operations Strategies
(TOPS) or State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) funding for the
SR 91 Auxiliary Lane Project. This would potentially allow the reprogramming of
$3.345M in RIP funds and $9.155M of Measure A funds from the SR 91 Auxiliary
Lane Project to meet the increased budget on the SR 74 project. We are still awaiting
confirmation of the TOPS/SHOPP funding. Should this funding not be forthcoming,
staff will have to determine another course to fund the balance of both the SR 91
Auxiliary Lane and Route 74 projects. This could exacerbate the funding issues for
consideration in the 2000 STIP Augmentation.
2000 STIP AUGMENTATION PROGRAMMING RECOMMENDATIONS
At the. Commission's July 2000 meeting, staff was directed to develop a call for
projects for the 2000 STIP Augmentation cycle. Given the project cost increases we
were recently informed about, a project call has not been released in order to give the
Commission the opportunity to consider the above project funding issues.
At the Plans and Programs Committee meeting there was significant discussion
regarding whether we should move forward with programming the Western County
formula funds and the Discretionary Program funds given the uncertainty of our
requests for ITIP and TOPS/SHOPP revenues and their effect on meeting the funding
needs for major County projects. On a vote of 8 ayes and 4 noes, the Committee
recommended holding off on any programming decisions for the Discretionary and
Western formula programs until we had confirmation on our efforts to secure ITIP and
TOPS/SHOPP funds to assist in the project cost increases.
Since we have not previously had a STIP Discretionary Program Call for Projects, staff
will continue to work with our Technical Advisory Committee to develop appropriate
000228
proposed criteria for the Commission's consideration so that we will be ready to
release a call for projects upon Commission direction.
Coachella Valley
We have been informed by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG)
that a Supplemental Project Study Report for the Ramon Road Interchange
Improvement Project, already in the STIP at $22.266M, has identified a more accurate
cost estimate of $20.0M. CVAG is requesting that this STIP project be amended and
the additional programming 'capacity made available by the revised cost estimate.
($2.266M) be added to their 1998 STIP unprogrammed balance ($6.779M), bringing
their unprogrammed balance to $9.045M. This total, coupled with their new 2000
STIP Augmentation formula funding capacity ($9.680M), results in $18.725M
available for programming in the Coachella Valley. CVAG has requested that the funds
be programmed on the following projects:
Mid -Valley Parkway (Dinah Shore), Date Palm to Bob Hope
Fred Waring Drive -Phase 1, Hwy 111 to Town Center Way
Jefferson Street -North Phase, Hwy 111 to Indio Blvd.
Fred Waring Drive -Phase 2, San Pasqual to Deep Cyn.
$6.0M
S2.0M
$8.0M
$2.725M
CVAG also submitted a list of projects for consideration for funding with the 2000
STIP Augmentation discretionary funds. However, as noted above, the Committee is
recommending that no programming decisions be made regarding the discretionary
program at this time.
Pala Verde Valley
The City of Blythe and the County of Riverside are working cooperatively to determine
their project funding priorities. They anticipate- providing direction on proposed
programming recommendations within the next few weeks.
TCRP Proiects
On July 6, 2000, Governor Davis signed AB 2928 which appropriates the funding to
implement the Governor's Traffic Congestion Relief Plan (TCRP), as well as SB 406,
which provided some amendments to the Governor's original plan. Five Riverside
County projects were identified for funding under this Plan. These projects are:
Riverside County Traffic Congestion Relief Plan Projects
TCRP
Funds
�00229
Total
Project
Project Lead
Riverside County Traffic Congestion Relief Plan Projects
SR91 HOV lane, Mary Street to 60/215 Jct.
540M
$170M
Caltrans or RCTC
SR91 Green River interchange improvements,
auxiliary lane addition, and connector ramp
$5M
$44M
Caltrans or RCTC
SR60 HOV lane, Valley Way to 1-15
$25M
MOM
Caltrans or RCTC
1-10 Palm Drive Interchange
$10M
51OM
CVAG
.I-10 Apache Trail interchange reconstruction
830M
$30M
Caltrans or RCTC
Pursuant to AB 2928, an application for funding must be submitted for each project
within two years to receive funding. The TCRP guidelines and application process is
currently available in draft format and is scheduled for adoption by the California
Transportation Commission at their September 28-29 meeting. While we are not yet
clear on all requirements, we are requesting RCTC approval to initiate project
application for those projects for which we are identified as lead and to include all
projects in our Regional Transportation Improvement Program.
000230
AGENDA ITEM 8
Riverside County
ransportation Commission
DATE: September 12, 2000
TO: Technical Advisory Committee
FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager
SUBJECT: Alameda Corridor East - Study
3560 University Avenue Suite 100 • Rn•rrcid , California 92501
phone: (909)787-7141 • fax: (909)787-7920 • www.rctc.org
Attached is the agenda item which will be discussed at the RCTC September 13, 2000
meeting. Staff will provide an overview of the discussion and actions taken on this
item at the TAC meeting.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
September 13, 2000
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Plans and Programs Committee
Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor Plan "
1
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Commission approve the:
1) Participation in a four -party Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor Steering
Committee; and
2) Allocate up to $25,000 to develop the Corridor Plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Alameda Railroad Corridor, currently under construction, is a major public works
project serving the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. It will consolidate all freight
train movements to and from the ports.over a 17 mile, fully grade -separated alignment
through several Los Angeles communities. Upon completion, the Corridor will
accommodate 100 trains a day, many approaching two miles in length. Though this
project mitigates rail freight impacts closest to the ports, communities farther east will
see increased rail traffic and grade crossing delays. Southern California counties and
SCAG have identified the eastern continuation of the major railroad corridors, past
Redondo Junction, as the "Alameda Corridor -East".
The Governor's Transportation Congestion Relief Program (AB 2928) provides a total
of $273 million for grade separation projects on the Alameda Corridor -East to three
southern California counties; specifically, to the Orange County Transportation
Authority ($28 million), the San Gabriel Valley Council -of Governments ($150 million),
and the San Bernardino Associated Governments ($95 million). Specifically included
is a rail -over -rail separation project at Colton Junction, which RCTC has sought to
assist the development of intercity passenger rail service to the Coachella Valley. Prior
to the release of any funds, the legislation requires preparation of a Corridor Plan
within one year "by a team consisting of the lead applicants for those projects."
000218
The legislation further stipulates the Corridor Plan shall address "regional mobility
needs as well as regional, state, and national economic impacts of the corridor. The
plan shall also evaluate and assess the technical merits, determine the phasing and
delivery schedule, and identify a financing strategy for the proposed corridor
improvements."
Principals of the three named agencies have begun meeting to develop a scope of work
and agree on the logistics for completing the Corridor Plan within the one year time
period. Early in these discussions it was agreed to include the Riverside County
Transportation Commission as an ex-officio participant, as the -Trade Corridor passes
through Riverside County as well (see attached map).
Impact to Riverside County
The Ports of Long Beach & Los Angeles comprise the largest port complex in the
United States. The Ports today handle 1 /4 of all the US waterborne international
trade, primarily with Pacific Rim countries. They are already the busiest ports in the
US and in the next 25 years, business is projected to triple. The major obstacle to
meeting this challenge is transportation capability, not terminal capacity. Keeping pace
with the forecasted increase in trade means tripling today's train and truck volumes.
The train and truck volumes required to move cargo to and from the Ports are straining
the capacity of the road and rail infrastructure which currently serves the Ports. The
Alameda Corridor & improvements to the ACE Trade Corridor are needed to meet the
needs of increased train and truck volume while mitigating the adverse impacts of the
projected growth, including highway traffic congestion, air pollution, vehicle delays at
grade crossings, and noise in residential areas.
The Alameda Corridor and its eastern extensions are corridors with national economic
significance, worthy of federal, state and private investment. The 55 at -grade rail
crossings in Western Riverside County should be addressed within the region's
Corridor Plan, as well as Coachella Valley at -grade crossings. Though Riverside County
does not have any call on the Governor's currently proposed funding, the Corridor Plan
will be used to leverage additional investment from other funding sources, specifically
through possible funding in the 2003 re -authorization of federal transportation
legislation, TEA21.
Corridor Plan Development
With this in mind, RCTC's Executive Director attended an August 1 1 m meeting with
Business, Transportation, and Housing Secretary Maria Contreras -Sweet and Senator
Martha Escutia, Chair of the Senate Alameda Corridor Committee. As a result,
000219
Riverside County will be sitting on the Steering Committee and AB2928 trailer bill
language has been submitted amending us in the legislation.
It has also been recognized that the funding provided under .AB 2928 addresses only
a small portion of the region's rail crossing needs and falls far short of addressing the
broader infrastructure needs -and quality of life issues of the region. On a local and
regional level these issues include: interchange reconstruction needs and priorities; the
feasibility and desirability of separated truck lanes; airport ground access for freight;
possible rail/truck productivity enhancements; truck impacts on road maintenance
costs, and air quality issues. The response to these challenges can impact current.
operations and trends so as to change regional transportation demands and investment
priorities.
The development of the Plan will be directed by a Steering Committee composed of
Chief Executive Officers, or their designees, of the participating agencies. A phased
work program has been proposed to address the long-range issues while not causing
delay to the AB 2928 program. The attached work statement represents the current
outline for the Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor Plan. The Phase 1 work program
designed to meet the requirements of AB 2928 is estimated to cost $100,000, to be
funded equally by the four participating agencies. Advisory Committee members will
participate in the identification of funding sources and appropriate lead agency
responsibilities for completing the second phase.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: N Year: FY00/01 Amount: 525,000
Source of Funds: TDA-Local Transportation Funds
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
Budget Adjustment: Y
Date: 8/22/00
€ oo22o}