Loading...
09 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}