Loading...
10 October 23, 2000 Plans and Programs5-7S--0‘f RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TIME: 12:00 DATE: Monday, October 23, 2000 Records LOCATION: Riverside County Transportation Commission Office 3560 University Avenue, Conference Room A Riverside, CA 92501 • • • COMMITTEE MEMBERS • • • Robin ReeserLowe/Lori Van Arsdale, City of Hemet, Chairman Percy Byrd/Conrad Negron, City of Indian Wells, Vice Chair Gerald Zeller/Brian DeForge, City of Beaumont Robert Crain/Gary Grimm, City of Blythe John Chlebnik/Gregory V. Schook, City of Calimesa Eugene Bourbonnais/Cora Sue Barrett, City of Canyon Lake Greg Ruppert/Jerry Pisha, City of Desert Hot Springs Jack van Haaster, City of Murrieta Frank Hall/Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco Dick Kelly/Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert Will Kleindienst/Deyna Hodges, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch/Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District Roy Wilson, County of Riverside, District IV ••• STAFF ••• Eric Haley, Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Director, Planning and Programming • • • AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY • ® • State Transportation Improvement Program Regional Transportation Improvement Program New Corridors Intermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare) Air Quality and Clean Fuels Regional Agencies, Regional Planning Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs Congestion Management Program Comments are welcomed by the Committee. if you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Board. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE http://www.rctc.org MEETING LOCATION 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100, RIVERSIDE 92501 *CONFERENCE ROOM A . PARKING /S AVAILABLE /N THE PARKING GARAGE ACROSS FROM THE POST OFFICE ON ORANGE STREET MONDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2000 12:00 NOON AGENDA* * Action may be taken on any items listed on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (September 25, 2000) 5. REVIEW OF 1-215 PROJECT COST INCREASE - OPTIONS Pg. 01 Overview This item is to seek Committee approval to: 1) Request Caltrans to participate in funding the cost increase on the 1-215 project in the amount of $7.5 million of ITIP funds; Plans & Programs Committee Meeting October 23, 2000 Page 3 8. STIP DISCRETIONARY FUNDING CALL FOR PROJECTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA Pg. 11 Overview This item is to seek Committee approval to release a call for projects • using the recommended evaluation criteria for programming 2000 - and 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) discretionary funds and forward to the Commission for final action. 9. 2000 STIP AUGMENTATION 2% PLANNING REQUEST Pg. 14 Overview This item is to seek Committee approval to: 1) Program 2000 STIP Augmentation 2% planning funds from both the Western County and Discretionary pots totaling $778,559, and a portion of the un-programmed balance of the 1998 STIP 2% discretionary planning funds totaling $221,441, for a total of $1,000,000 to be programmed for the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) planning effort and; 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. STATUS OF 2000 STIP AUGMENTATION SUBMITTAL Pg. 16 Overview This item is to seek Committee approval to receive and file the status of the 2000 STIP Augmentation Submittal as an information item and forward to the Commission for final action. MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COIVIIVIISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE Monday, September 25, 2000 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Plans and Programs Committee was called to order by Chairperson Robin Lowe at 1:00 p.m., at the offices of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 3560 University, Suite 100, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Eugene Bourbonnais Bob Buster * John Chlebnik Frank Hall Dick Kelly Will Kleindienst Robin Lowe Greg Ruppert Jack van Haaster * Gerald Zeller * Arrived late 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. Daryl Busch Percy Byrd Robert Crain Roy Wilson Michelle Cisneros, Accounting Supervisor, distributed the 2000-01 Budget, which was approved and adopted by the Commission at the June 14, 2000, meeting. • 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S/C (Kleindienst/Kelly) approve the minutes dated August 28, 2000 as submitted. 5. 2001 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE Chester Britt, SCAG Consultant, provided the Committee with an update on the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan. It is a twenty-year blue print of transportation in Southern California and covers six counties and 184 cities. The Regional Transportation Plan is required to obtain federal and state funding. Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming, advised the Committee that Shirley Medina, Program Manager, would be following the RTP development for RCTC. M/S/C (Bourbonnais/Zeller) recommend the Commission receive and file the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan Update. Plans and Programs Committee Minutes September 25, 2000 Page 3 9. FY 2000-01 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE PALO VERDE TRANSIT AGENCY Jerry Rivera, Program Manager, advised the Committee that the Government Service Agency is donating the vehicle for this program and that the requested $10,000 would be used to operate the vehicle for the balance of the year. Commissioner Chlebnik asked if it was necessary to limit this service to only veterans, or would it be possible .to provide transportation to others needing transportation to medical services in the Coachella Valley. Jerry Rivera responded that he did not believe this program would be limited to veterans only. Currently the proposed plan of operation would travel into the Coachella Valley twice a month and to Loma Linda once a month. If space were available he believed that the transportation of non -veterans would be considered. M/S/C Ivan Haaster/Kleindienst) recommend the Commission: 1) Amend thel FY 2000-01 Short Range Transit Plan for the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency to allow implementation of a pilot program for transportation of veterans from the Palo Verde Valley into the Coachella Valley and Loma Linda for medical needs; and 2) Allocate an additional $10,000 in Local Transportation Funds to pay for this pilot program. 10. RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager provided an update on the Rail Program as well as the effects of the MTA strike. Metrolink on -time performance has improved slightly. Due to the previous problems, Metrolink Board approved a 2 for .1 discount for Riverside Line holders. This is just a first step in addressing the UP performance. Commissioner Ruppert stated that Measure "A" is coming up for renewal in two years, taking into consideration the estimated population growth he asked if it would be feasible to consider a tax increase of 3/4 a cent, instead of Y2 a cent? Eric Haley, Executive Director, responded that per the Commissions direction, RCTC is forming focus groups after the November elections. These focus groups will discuss different options for tax extension, and attempt to discern the public's feelings on a tax increase. The areas of the state that have comprehensive programs do_ have a full penny tax. Santa Clara County, for instance, has 1/2 cent for transit and Y2 cent for roads, which were approved under majority vote items. Mr. Haley assured the Committee a tax increase would be tested. M/S/C Ivan Haaster/Ruppert) recommend the Commission receive and file the Rail Program Update as an information item. 11. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Plans and Programs Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 1:58 p.m. The next meeting will be held at 12:00 p.m., Monday, October 23, 2000 at the RCTC offices. Respectfully submitted, Traci R. McGinley Deputy Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Review of 1-215 Project Cost Increase - Options RECOMMEIVDA T/ON: This item is to seek Committee approval to: 1. Request Caltrans to participate in funding the cost increase on the I-215 project in the amount of $7.5 million of ITIP funds; 2. Request Caltrans to apply $20.0 million of the TCRP funds for the Route 91 Mary Street to the 91 /215/60 interchange to assist in addressing the I-215 cost increase; 3. Program $10.278 million of Route 91 Mary Street to Seventh Street project to the 1-215 cost increase; 4. Program the I-215 reserve funds of $729,000 of Western County formula funds from the 1998 STIP to address the 1-215 cost increase; 5. Program $11,451,000 of 2000 STIP Augmentation Western County Formula funds (total available $26, 493,930) to the 1-215 cost increase; and 6. Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND lIVFORMA T1ON: Following the September 13, 2000 Commission meeting the Chairman appointed the following members to an Ad Hoc Committee to review information related to a $48.958 million cost increase on the I-215 project. The Ad Hoc Committee members are: Dick Kelly, Ameal Moore, Tom Mullen, Kevin Pape, John Tavaglione, Frank West. The Ad Hoc Committee met twice first on September 27, 2000 with the second meeting on October 6, 2000. E 000001 Meeting with FHWA At the September 27th Ad Hoc Committee meeting, staff was directed to meet with Federal Highway Administration staff to explore the possibility of deferring a portion of the 1-215 improvement. On September 29th Caltrans and Commission staff met with FHWA senior staff and discussed what information would have to be provided to FHWA in order to provide justification for deferring a segment of work on the I-215 project. Caltrans is currently constructing a Measure A project on Route-60 from Valley Way to University Ave. This project is scheduled to be completed in the spring of 2001. If we are able to defer the 60/215 segment from the 91 /215/60 interchange to University Ave it would defer the additional auxiliary lanes supporting the freeway to freeway interchange transition on the 60/215and thus defer the immediate need to replace the overpass bridges at Blaine, Linden and Iowa. This would defer, to a later date, approximately $30 million in project costs. Deferral does not appear to be a viable alternative. FHWA required Caltrans to perform an analysis of how the interchange would operate without the additional auxiliary lanes. In other words FHWA wants to assess when this section of the highway would breakdown (fall to level of service F). The preliminary assessment, while not complete at this time, does not support the deferral of this segment. It appears this segment, without the additional auxiliary lanes would fail in 2007 which is close to when the facility would be open for use. Funds Available to Address this issue From prior years there is $728,988 of funds reserved for 1-215 and $7,200,000 of funds which is committed to replace CMAQ funds on the project. The CMAQ funds are committed to the Route 60 HOV project from Redlands Blvd to the east junction 60/215 in Moreno Valley. This project is currently in environmental and preliminary engineering and the CMAQ funds are needed for Route 60 project delivery. While the 2000 STIP Augmentation provides $26,493,930 of new formula funds to the Western County Area, the Commission previously acted to commit these funds to the Route 91 Mary Street to Seventh Street project. It is important to note that the Commission committed all Western County formula STIP funds through the 2008 STIP for this project. Last but not least, the Transportation Congestion Relief Program (TCRP - Governor's program) has committed $40,000,000 to the Route 91 Mary Street to the Interchange project. Following the Ad Hoc Committee meeting on October 6th, Caltrans District 08 staff and Commission staff had a conference call with Caltrans Headquarters staff. The District staff had submitted a request for $20.137 million of discretionary Interregional program funds (ITIP) to assist with the cost increase. This request did not make the 000003 AGENDA ITEM 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Route 74 Reprogramming RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Committee approval to: 1) Reprogram $3.345 million of RIP funds from the Route 74 project to the Route 91 Auxiliary Lane project. 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the February 9, 2000 meeting the Commission acted to reprogram $3.345 of Regional Improvement program funds and $9.155 million of Measure A funds to the Route 74 project contingent on the receipt of discretionary Transportation Operations Strategy (TOPS) funds or State Highway Operations Protection Program (SHOPP) funds to replace the above noted funds on the Route 91 Auxiliary Lane project. This funding has been pending since July and Caltrans District 08 staff recently stated there is a very high level of confidence that SHOPP funds will be made available to the Route 91 Auxiliary Lane project. This will be confirmed by a California Transportation Commission (CTC) action on the SHOPP program at their November 1' and 2' meeting in San Diego. The auxiliary lane project is estimated at approximately $20 million and Caltrans District staff has requested that the Commission reassign the $3.345 million of RIP funds formerly scheduled to fund a portion of the Route 74 project back to the Route 91 Auxiliary Lane project. Staff recommends the Commission to make this reassignment in order to secure approximately $16.7 million of additional discretionary state funding. 000005 AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Ken Lobeck, Staff Analyst THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and.Programming SUBJECT: 2000 STIP Augmentation Formula Adjustment STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Committee approval of the adjusted SB 45 formula shares for the 2000 STIP Augmentation and forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The table below summarizes the 2000 STIP Augmentation funds presented to the Commission at its September 13, 2000 meeting. The formula shares are based on the June 15th, 1998 MOU between RCTC, CVAG, and WRCOG. 2000 STIP Augmentation -Unadjusted Total Available Discretionary Pot (24.20%) Formula Pot (75.80%) Western County (72.23%) Coachella Valley (26.39%) Palo Verde Valley (1.38%) 2000 STIP Augmentation $49,378 000 �'. yb .yE •" .f .:`�'4` _?fix•"- .� P/,bL ti_• Y:;: .;� --. ; :. k:::=> .. A'%rJ'Y : f` �S_ii- "- F'Co ,, we.e•••t Y':;w:- J.-: �+ �:���• ;}:Ci;i:�+M��-- 4�S]} i0'- = -- tea'. ...;: �� :. z •-__ - ' _ -v f �sT.J4 -0-� _ 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 5135,215 $0 $6,778,704 $1,838,356 Committed, Unprogrammed Balances from the 98 STIP $18,206,988 Available for Programming for 2000 STIP $57,142,715 $11,845,701 $26,493,930 $16,458,544 $2,344,539 i 000007 SB 45 Formula Allocation for the 2000 STIP Augmentation 2000 STIP Augmentation available for projects: $48,390,440 2000 STIP Augmentation Discretionary pot (24.20%1: $11,710,486 2000 STIP Augmentation Formula allocation (75.80%1: $36,679,954 Existing Share Adjusted Share Change Western Riverside County $26,493,931 $26,438,910 - $55,021 (72.23%) (72.08%) Coachella Valley $9,679,840 -$9,870,576 +$190,736 (26.39%) (26.91 %) Palo Verde Valley $506,183 $370,468 - $135,715 (1.38%) (1.08%) w n ''>' 9,954 $36 679 954 ,row :.: r:., Using the adjusted formula shares for the three County areas, the next table reflects the 2000 STIP Augmentation with the associated adjustments. 2000 STIP Augmentation - Adjusted Total Available Discretionary Pot (24.20%) Formula Pot (75.80%) Western County (72.08%) Coachella Valley (26.91 %) Palo Verde Valley (1.01 %) 2000 STIP Augmentation $49,378,00 ' = � �;4;,�_ �>:�"r".• • { "r ��0- w»f . ; >.. zri4 ':> •VA.� . , Less 2% Planning $987,560 $238,990 I $539,569 $201,440 $7,561 Available for Projects $48,390,440 $11,710,1-86 $26,438,910 $9,870,576 $370,468 Unprogrammed Project Balances from 98 STIP $8,752,275 $135,215 $0 $6,778,704 $1,838,356 Committed, Unprogrammed Balances from the 98 STIP $18,206,988 Available for Programming for 2000 STIP $57,142,715 $11,845,701 $26,438,910 $16,649,280 $2,208,824 000009 AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: d Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming SUBJECT: STIP Discretionary Funding Call for Projects and Evaluation Criteria TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Committee approval to release a call for projects using the recommended evaluation criteria for programming 2000 and 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) discretionary funds and forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the July 12, 2000 Commission meeting, the Commission directed staff to "move forward with the development of a call for projects. for the 2000 STIP Augmentation cycle identified by CTC recognizing the need to be flexible in order to accommodate the Governor's transportation program recommendations and any additional programming capacity which may result and forward to the Commission for final action." In response to this direction, staff has met with the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to review and recommend evaluation criteria. The TAC also decided that it would be beneficial to apply this next call for projects to the 2002 STIP discretionary funding so that a county wide list of priorities is established. This proactive approach would also benefit a timely submittal- of the required project information (i.e. project nomination sheets and Project Study Reports (PSR's) for the 2002 STIP submittal. The 2002 STIP Fund Estimate is scheduled to be released June 2001. Per the STIP Intra-County Formula Memorandum of Understanding, the discretionary pot is defined as follows: "24.2% of the SB 45 Regional Choice Funds which may be programmed at the discretion of RCTC for transportation projects throughout the County and without regard to the percentages set forth in Section 1, above. In programming these funds, RCTC may take into account one or more of the following: safety, congestion, economic development, and other special conditions which have arisen since the passage of Measure "A" 'in 1988." 000011 * No weighting is given. Criteria 1 through 8 have previously been approved by the Commission and successfully used in various calls for federal funding (i.e. STP and CMAQ). Criteria 9 and 10 were added by the TAC given the importance of local commitment, and projects that provide continuity to the overall transportation system. The Commission may want to consider whether project evaluation criteria should apply to other categories such as planning. 0000.1,3 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming . SUBJECT: Proposed Programming of State Transportation Improvement Program 2% Planning Funds STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Committee approval to: 1) Program 2000 STIP Augmentation 2% planning funds from both the Western County and Discretionary pots totaling $778,559, and a portion of the un-programmed balance of the 1998 STIP 2% discretionary planning funds totaling $221,441, for a total of $1,000,000 to be programmed for the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) planning effort and; 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The intra-county STIP formula includes a 2% set aside for planning activities. The total amount set aside for planning under the 2000 STIP Augmentation is $987,560. Applying the formula share, the break out is as follows: Discretionary Pot $238,990 Western County $539,569 Coachella Valley $201,440 Palo Verde Valley $ 7,561 Total Planning $987,560 In addition, there is an un-programmed 1998 STIP 2% discretionary planning fund balance of $491,946. 000014 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming SUBJECT: Status of 2000 STIP Augmentation Submittal STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Committee approval to receive and file the status of the 2000 STIP Augmentation Submittal as an information item and forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2000 STIP Submittal was due to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) on September 29, 2000. At the September 13, 2000 Commission meeting, the Commission approved for programming in the 2000 STIP four projects in the Coachella Valley and two projects in the Palo Verde Valley (one from the County of Riverside and one from the City of Blythe). All project sponsors were notified of the deadline to submit to RCTC their project nomination and fund sheets and Project Study Reports (PSRs) or equivalent. We received the required information from the County for a rehabilitation project on Lovekin Boulevard in the amount of $500,000. No other projects were submitted by the deadline. Therefore, the 2000 STIP submittal sent to the CTC dated September 28, 2000 consisted of the County of Riverside's project on Lovekin Boulevard. On October 12, 2000, we received from the City of Blythe the required project information for a rehabilitation and arterial improvement project for Hobsonway for $1.8 M. On October 16, 2000, we received the project information sheets for two of the Coachella Valley projects (Fred Waring Drive - Phase 1, $2.0 M, and Jefferson Street - North Phase, $8.0 M). The project information sheets are currently being reviewed by staff and will be forwarded to the CTC as soon as possible. The Western County STIP Submittal and STIP discretionary funding was placed on hold until resolution of the cost increase on the 60/91 /215 interchange and corridor projects. 100016 AGENDA ITEM 11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming SUBJECT: Transportation Specialists, Inc. - Jurupa Valley Senior Shuttle STAFF RECOMMENDATION This item is to seek Committee approval to: 1) Approve additional funding to Transportation Specialists, Inc. in the amount of $ 5,000 for FY 01 and $10,000 for FY 02; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On June 14, 2000, the Commission approved funding for the Jurupa Valley Senior Shuttle's West Loop, operated by Transportation Specialists, Inc. (TSI). An additional $52,500 was placed in contingency to cover the cost of expanded transportation services in the Jurupa area should the need arise. The shuttle is a grocery and nutrition service which operates on an advanced reservation system and provides deviated fixed route, curb -to -curb service to grocery' stores and nutrition sites throughout the Jurupa Valley. The shuttle provides a reliable and fully accessible mode of transportation, which in coordination with the Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) Dial -A -Ride, maximizes the available options for seniors and transit -dependent passengers residing in the Jurupa area. _ Originally, the proposed hours for the shuttle were 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. However, in an attempt to be more responsive to the FY 01 activities at the senior center, TSI has been providing services beginning at 9:00 a.m. so that the seniors can arrive at the center by 9:40 a.m. TSI has been able to absorb the added cost of running the extra hour, however, as the service continues to grow in popularity, TSI will not be able to continue to provide the "non -reimbursed" service after December 31, 2000, unless additional funding is received. For FY 01, funding for the Jurupa Valley Senior Shuttle is provided by a $20,000 Measure A grant and $20,000 (cash) provided by TSI. To continue operating the service from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, TSI is requesting additional funding in the amount of $5,000 for FY 01 and $10,000 for FY 02. 000017 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY2000-01 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Adjustment: No Fiscal Procedures Approved: Amount: $5,000 Date: 10/.17/00 000019 ATTACHMENT A • 7.040a4 Sefte yi ,firgesagartaeteze Seca 3730 Elizabeth Street O Riverside, CA 92506 (909) 686-1096 . FAX (909) 686-5382 September 22, 2000 Board of Directors Johnny Thomas, Chair Susan Divine, Vice Chair 'Iry Hendrick, Vice Chair Paul Zellerbach, Vice Chair Judith Wood, Secretary Ken Cohen, Treasurer Esther Velez Andrews Jane Block Norm Buchanan William Carter Pastor Bill Carter Gary Orso Ps..1 Jensen R ,nary Morgan Jeff Rajcic Barbara Tooker Corri Windsor -Stevens Linda Wray President / CEO Dom Betro, A.C.S.W. Locations Corona Lake Elsinore Mead Valley Murneta San Jac] Sun City Riverside 4 Rubidoux : -2- . C ,' Q E EtyA SEP 2 6 20W Tanya L. Love Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Tanya, 051.990 Re: Jurupa Senior . • Transportation Services As you are aware it has been ahnost three months since transportation services for Jurupa seniors was altered. During this period we have received numerous complaints and calls, summarized as follows: 1) The Jurupa "Shuttle" Service does not operate as a shuttle. The published locations are not consistently served and riders are placed on a "manifest log" — indicating more of a demand response approach (such as previously contracted with Family Service). 2) Pick Up Drop Off Times at Senior Center are inconsistent and not per the orig-inal proposal. The "shuttle" often doesn't arrive for pick ups at the Smith Center until 1:30 PM, even though Seniors are ready for returns at 12:30 PM. Drop off's in the morning are earlier, around 9 am, then the proposed start time of 10 am. 3) RTA Dial -A -Rider Services are inconsistent We have had to pick up eight (8) stranded clients since July 1. These are clients who were not picked up by Dial -A -Ride after being transported to an appointment. In addition we receive many calls from seniors who are not able to get rides, or are bumped due to ADA priorities. In addition, I would also appreciate feedback on the amount of seniors.per hour being transported by TSI and RTA, as well as the amount of hours TSI is being reimbursed with Measure A funds.' (Note: As you recall TSI's original proposal indicated that they wouid transport an average of 7 clients per hour, for four hours per day.) Seniors in Jurupa have few options for other means of transportation. Thanks for your attention and feedback on these matters. Sierely, om Betro, A.C.S.W. President/CEO ON upervi sor Tavaglione — rd District Supervisor Buster — RCTC Planning Committee Transportation: Tanya Love 9-22-00 A United Way Ageney • FAMILY STRENGTH IS COMMUNITY STRENGTH Serving the Community Since 1953 *0 ■ ■ a 00 . is received for a particular location, the van does not stop. Passengers schedule both their desired arrival and departure times when making reservations. Time points for specific stops such as the Eddie D. Smith Nutrition Site and the DeAnza Stater Bros. are monitored continuously. A recent audit of time point pick- up and drops resulted in an on -time performance indite (with a window of five minutes) of 99.2%. Additionally, you have requested specific performance information, including the present Measure A funding,level and passenger per hour indite for TSI on the JVSS. TSI is receiving the amount approved by the RCTC in June-$20,000 per year, for a four hour -a -day service. As per our Measure A proposal budget, Measure A funds constitute approximately 50% of the- revenues required to operate the service. After only two months of service we are operating at an average ratio of 4.1:1 passengers per revenue hour. Individual hourly runs vary between 1.8 and 7.0 passengers per hour. JVSS's ridership (at system maturity) is estimated at 6.7 rides per hour. The JVSS, like all other services operated by our agency, is subject to on going monitoring of performance indices and measuring of numerous quality control standards. Like FSAWRC, we take all comments, complaints and suggestions very seriously and strive continually to make our transportation programs user friendly, timely, responsive and safe. Unfortunately, without having access to names, dates and details regarding your reported concems, it becomes difficult for us to address such issues. More appropriately perhaps, would be to refer individuals to TSI's Comment/ Complaint phone line (909.358.9175), where their questions and comments can be dealt with directly by our staff. We couldn't be more pleased with the responses received from passengers and Jurupa grocery stores alike for the JVSS. The DeAnza Stater Bros. even displayed our flyers in a special holder at each check stand for the first month of the service.. Several large mobile home parks have included either our flyer or an article in their monthly newsletter. Any ideas that you might have for JVSS information dissemination to Jurupa's seniors would be most welcome. And of course, our open invitation to distribute the center's nutrition site information on the van still stands. May I suggest that TSI be invited to do a short presentation during the nutrition hour at the center? I believe it would benefit all of the center's transit -dependent seniors (and staff) if TSI were to be given the opportunity to present an overview of the JVSS and how to book rides on the system. Perhaps a 15 minute presentation (during the nutrition hour) could be arranged in the near future? also understand that our flyers and brochures are being kept back in the FSAWRC transportation office. Might I suggest that this information be posted out in the reception area along with the other informational pieces for seniors? 000022 tho October 16, 2000 Mr. Dom Betro Family Service of Western Riverside County 3730 Elizabeth Street Riverside, CA 92506 RE: Letter of September 22, 2000, addrPgs d to Tanya Love Dear Mr. Betro: Riverside Transit Agency 1825 Third street P.O. Box 59968 Riverside, CA 92517 Phone:(909) 684-0850 Fax: (909)684-1007 I am in receipt of a copy of your letter to Tanya Love, Riverside County Transportation Commission. T also have a copy of the letter written to you from Judylynn Gres, - Executive Director, Transportation Specialists, Inc. Judylynn has responded to two of the issues raised in your letter, items one and two, I would like to take this opportunity to respond to item three: 3) "RTA Dial -A -Ride Services are inconsistent. We have had to pick up eight (8) stranded clients since July 1. These are clients who were not picked up by Dial - A -Ride after being transported to an appointment. In addition, we receive many calls from seniors who are not able to get rides or are bumped due to ADA priorities." I am also in receipt of a copy of the log that JOAnn Horchar faxed to Tanya Love on October 9, 2000, covering the period of July 3, 2000 through September 10, 2000. Although there were 15 complaints logged in July, there were only three in August Did one in September. This is noteworthy because the service was new in July and, as we all know, when new service begins there are snags and difficulties that need to be resolved. Our Paratransit/Dispatch Supervisor has researched the client histories for the months of their registered complaints. Attached please find a breakdown of their requests and the service provided. RTA, as a public transportation provider, strives to ensure our passengers' safe, reliable service. Thank you for your interest in assisting the community and bringing these issues to our attention. Sincerely yours, )64.4).a.„. p Susan J. Hafner General Manager Attachment cc: Supervisor John Tavaglione Tanya Love, RCTC 000024 Zoor ewoH ZL:ZL 09:11 OO:ZL 00/L/9 LOor u0113048 909P , 00:01. OS:60 OS:60 00/L/9 N3a peal ssouaulea SZ:80 00/1£!L Loor NVO awoH St:ZL 00/SZ/L LOOT NV3 gna/sielelS OS:OL 00/SZ/L N313 gnk1/0-101e1S 0£:90 00/SZ/L LOOT awoH ova ova OO:ZL 00/9L/L Zoor •gnwsualelS 09:60 SP:60 SP:60 00/9L/1 Loor • awoH OL:L L o0: L L o0: L L . 0o/L L/L LOOT gnkusie elS SIi:60 00:60 SZ:60 00/1 L/L Zoor ewoH OS:ZL SUL OP:ZL 00/0L/L ��8 ant 9Z:01 01:01 - OL:OL 00/01/L Zoor ewoH S9:90 S£:90 SV:90 00/9/L LOOT uoPloag 9090 9E:LO SZ:LO OE:LO 00/9/L IlamoH PeglV ' moys oN - L Aul item aup - L £o0r ewoH OS:91 SZ:SL SL:SL 00/ZL/L Zoor SN la ueS'ulw lsel ul Palleo aAey lsnw ZP:90 00:60 00/ZL/L meet/ kepi Zoor Loor SN awoH uem)I ££99 ' moys ON - L •dul AOM aup - L (sul66o0 ploueH SZ:O L 00/9 L/9 sem sap) 9 L:60 SO:60 0 L :60 00/9 L/9 sul6600 II!d 'suo!leljeoueo - £ •sdui puns palaldwoa - Z ZOOr NVa mid Wawa ay# aney lou p!p am AMR umn amyl 00:01 00/0/9 Zoor NVa awoH OE: L L 00/Z/9 Loor NVa az% n!a 90:0 L 00/Z/9 ZOOr awoH OE:ZL OO:ZL St: L L 00/9L/L Loor u013130.18 gogo OZ:60 OL:F- OZ:60 0/9L/L AGENDA ITEM 72 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: _ Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: CETAP CORRIDORS STATUS REPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Committee approval to.receive and file the CETAP Corridors Status Report as an information item and forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The evaluation of alternatives within the two intra-county CETAP corridors (Banning/Beaumont to Temecula, and Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore) is proceeding. Working Paper 7a (Evaluation of Initial Alternatives in the Banning/Beaumont to Temecula Corridor) and Working Paper 7b (Evaluation of Initial Alternatives in the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore Corridor) have been prepared and distributed to the CETAP Advisory Committee, city staff, and members of the Commission. These draft working papers provide information that can be used to help determine which of the alternatives in each corridor should be carried forward into the CEQA/NEPA (California Environmental Quality Act/National Environmental Policy Act) process for each corridor. A draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared for each corridor by approximately July of 2001, evaluating each of these alternatives in detail. An important part of making the decision. on which alternatives to carry forward involves input from the public. Three public meetings have been scheduled, as listed below. The meetings will be held from 4:00 to 8:30 on each of the dates. Interested citizens will be able to come and go as they wish, view the displays, and talk with project staff. There will also be three opportunities for discussion groups, focusing on the pros and cons of the various alternatives. The discussion group sessions will begin at 4:30, 6:00 and 7:30 p.m. on each of the three evenings. 000028 AGENDA ITEM 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: October 23, 2000 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning & Programming • SUBJECT: Rail Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION. - This item is to seek Committee approval to receive and file the Rail Program Update as an information item and forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: MTA Strike Update: As of Monday, October 16th, the MTA Strike has been in effect for 31 days. Ridership on Metrolink trains has been impacted by the strike. The attached Metrolink Performance Summary for the month of September illustrates that most of the lines with destinations in Los Angeles had a significant. ridership decrease. While the strike is underway, Metrolink continues to operate the "Red Line Special" bus service along two routes. There is no charge to riders for the bus service which operates Monday through Friday during the MTA strike. Also, Metrolink continues to accept all MTA bus and rail passes on its commuter trains for travel from its stations in the MTA service area. Riverside Line Weekday Patronage: Ridership on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of September averaged 4,100, a decrease of 1 % from the month of August. As has been previously reported to the Committee, this summer we experienced serious performance problems on the Line. Although the on -time performance has improved to 85 %, Metrolink staff continues to work with Union Pacific on strategies to address the problem. In addition, Riverside Line riders have been offered a discount on their December monthly pass. 000030 NNI1Q1113IAI 11II 000z Jagwa;dag sauvuouns 33NtlWaOda3d NNI10a131A1 eo ea ea Le oe se to E'tl Ze svrrwvriarallosvrrrivw4roNosvrrrdvwdroNosvrrwvwdrauosvrrwvWdrallosvrrwvYldrallosvrrwvwdrallosvrrvivwdrallo J 1• J I� Linda gen oo91 31ba Ol NOIld3ONl - Shcal a391\,13SS`dd AVCDI33M 30dit13Ad NNIIOHAW undo owl ono nio^b4N�3 undo Wllnm 000'E - 000'9 000'6 eupwda Puce - 000'ZL - 000'S4 -- 000'91 ~- 000' 2 — 000'n — 000'LZ — 000'0E 000'££ C� Cr) 0 0 0 c of aav t %0 r°/ol %L- %Z %E %Z %6 %1- %l %0 %0 %0 %0 I%0 68 0 0 0 0 061.10E 96E' lE ti10' 1.E 108.1.E 8£s'lE 686' LE 8SE`1.E OEl'6Z trbE'1Z %V %0 f01'J'�sESA %St %0 .0 %l ES %0 9 %0 0 sdpi 10 % sdpi lamps Ailea 6ny :00 daS-1;0110043S %L %Z 1%61 L i%0 %8- �• 1%1- V8 66 001 OOL Z6 VOL L9Z'6Z 6v618Z £v8'LZ 1701. £6 £6 GL 68 66 9L 9l9'Z 019'Z 1.ZG'Z £EVZ l0£'Z OZZ'Z O170'Z ZZ6' 1. LlL'l 01.61E £178' 1 1708' 1. £SS'G 890'9 818'G L99'G LLS'G t+ll'S 6LL'S UW9 £LL'G OO L'ti ££ l'ti %6 %G %L- 1%L- Vbs LLt7 L98' LOG' SE£'V 919'ti ti 1.9'b £691, l0G'ti £9£'ti 0917 Z9V £Sb 999' 9E9' 1.tis' 9l9'6 Z917 Lit J L8Z'6 L 1.0'6 GGt7 L89'8 89 L'S S l6'£ 6G£ 9L17'G II pevd 0 L£'ti 1.0n7 ZGb 9E8'8 86V 66L'9 B61.'S LZO't7 - ��pi5.1�111 8Gti :�u�rtl 191'9 °VIP %Z %9 66 dag sn 00 dag 011.1E40 % 00 find sn daS a6ue4a % 90n? OZ6'E 00 dag 17Z817 1.89.E 00 6ny- 1.1.6't ZZL'E 00Inr 900'G 6Z8'£ 00 unr Z6617 686.E 00 AeW 8L L'S OG 1'17 00 AV ZZO'S 866'E 00 JeW 969'17 6Z6'£ 00 clad LL9'17 99L'£ 00 uer ZZ£'b L£S'£ 66 oaa LOE't7 GV6'£ 66 noN VOZ't7 118'E . 66130 178tV G£8'E 66 dag .. .. }.'kp.'. �'J.tri:.,. 41��� i41:1#1.fik:w; :•......::;;:fr. .:,;.:: ausn OV AHallOH - MOaNIM H1NOW N331211Hl Sd12112130N3SSVd AVCD133M 30b213AV HN1102113W 9 00-das oo-env OOivif unp Aeyy �dy �eyy qe� 00-Uel, awil painpayos Jo sa}num1-9 uNi!M 6ulApiv smell 10 a3pues Aepimes eun ouipaewa8 ues Da0 �N 130 66-daS a%0'0 °%0'0Z %IMP °%0'09 %OW "%0'00 4 0 IsiaPia Jlej Aiuno3'Kl saPnPW IdaS :aiuN soi Jesuessed (pea 06weAv e3imas /tepanles aun ourP-Reune ueS S 00/K/90 ueBee e3yues Aepinies eun eppenl21.. 0o-des 00-Bev owe unf qaA 00-uef noN awa pappops jo sainum-g wyliM 6uvtpiv eopueS Aepan;eS eun episienm %1YOZ WAIF %CFOS %0"09 %0'00 G oo-des oo-onv ooinf tier �teyy �dy qej ceuer sdul Ja6uessed Allea a6r ^� eopueS AepanijeS eun _. Asienw noN 66 des -00S -000L 005G 000Z 00gZ 000E .000E siapiApa BAv dio-Wood 0/ 00 deg 00 OW 00 Iry IAelea alnulW 41lM BulAPJV Aelea elnulry-0 LIMM BulAPN %p 00 unf 00 AeW 00 idy 001 it 00 QaJ 00 Uer 66 080 66 AoN 66130 66 On d %Z6 %E6 %1.6 %b6 °USG (syium sups uopaga-Need 'pouadleed 33N3213HCIV 3ina3HaS mNnoanuu F2v Sep-`99 Oct 99 :11�i�ifiat ..:;jl•1:•s+�;: 97% 92% 97% 97% `: Anfeto�ia: Va�4ey: 98% 98% 95% 96% METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE SUMMARY Percentage of Weekday Trains Arriving Within 5 Minutes of Scheduled Time LATEST 13 MONTHS 96% ' 98% 97% • 98% Uir}5:' 98% 99% 97% 99% 80% 76% 83% 89% 83% 91% Nov 99 97% 96% 99% 97% 96%' 95% 99% 99% 86% 74% 81% h Dec 99 99% 98% 99% 97% 98% 95% 99% 100% 78% 80% 89% Jan 00 99% 96% 99% 98% 98% 98% 99% 97% 85% 79% 85% Feb 00 Mar 00 Apr 00 98% 97% 99% 97% 98% 98% 100% 98% 98% 96% 98% 99% 96% 96% 98% 97% 97% 98% 98% 98% 100% 99% May 00 Jun 00 Jul 00 Aug 00 Sep 00 98% 94% 98% 95% 99% 95% 97% 96% 99% 97% 95% 93% 95% 88% 95% 88% 98% 97% 96% 94% 92% 96% 95% 94% 97% 94% 95% 98% 98% 99% 98% j 97% 99% 99% 99% 100% 98% 97% 99% 99% 99% 99% Peak Period Trains Arriving Within 5 Minutes of Scheduled Time 99% 96% 100% 94% 99% 99% 99% 98% Trains Sep 00 Peak Period No adjustments have been made for relievable delays. Terminated trains are considered OT if they were 'on -time at point of termination. Annulled trains are not included in the on -time calculation. 0 0 92% 83% 83% 88% 83% 71% 83% 88% 94% 80% 83% 77% 73% 74% 58% 86% 77% 889i, 74% 93% 84% 82% 80% 95% unit'; iiFaliiif:EriipfC3C: 44,. �{ .1. i ; - : I i�►i1�iA!:; it i:c � :: :!... i - ;s; Tulsl:5 .. }p. i�t�:f; •i- [.. • k':: -• .�,•7'•f.:: 79% 91% 831Y.; 70% 100% 93% 92% 92 89% 93% 87% 86% 95% 82% 89% 84% 71% 93% 94% 95% 94 93% 92% 925' 81% 98% 93% 9170 92 85% 95% 93% 86% 88% 94% 95% 94 88% 97% 96% 76% 93% 95% 95% 93% 94% 94' 94' 89% 97% 96% 96% 93% 96% 97% 93% 70% 95% 95% 95% 95' 95% 98% 97% 95% 95% 95% 94% 95% 94% 95' 94' 89% 98% 95% 86% 98% 93% 91% 92' 78% 84% 93% 65% 90% 79% 91% 93% 62% 93% 91% 92% 87% 92% 89` 92' 89% 92% 96% 90% 88% 96% 93%, 95' I� �::; : ' ".i Rois�a.-. _;� ,, la��tita! fi+aa FtiviFol�I A a :i ` `]Telly i : T�t'IQo2tiil I•01$40! 75% 95% 90% j 95• �P 94% 96% 0% 0% 97% 93% OT-13Mo %E'S %TIN %00I 8£T E8b 865Z L ET 09 •avuag Apuns Pg Aepimeg sapnpxa Anununs spa 5I OE 5b Z 8 bZ L 517 2EI 89 LT 66 EL 9E up.0 g < 03AV130 SNIVU1 OVZ 08E OPZ 6EZ 09S 08b 66E ulua 0< 03AV130 SNIV81. Old° SNIV811V101 961'0 96V0 %V° %0'Z ` G*Z %E'E I 96b' T8 101 !o % IT iT TS 59 5b£ STTZ 1V101 0 0 0 0 0 i Z T i E I 0 i T 0 0 0 i 0 T E 0 Z 5 bi 8T T £ 9 Z £ L ET i 8T T b ST 9 OE ZOT EZ 5T T6 6b 6Z Lb 56T 8VZ ZLi ZZZ 19V LOb £9£ 1113/AlT3 00/31 00 AIII dna EMS lAV N3A 000Z aaquaaidaS Nouvana A8 SAV134 NIV2i1 30 AON3(1a383 OTITINNV NIW OE NVH1831V3E19 NIW OE • NIW TZ NIW OZ • NUN IT NIW OT • NM 9 NIW S • NM T AV130 OQI. :31V1 5310NIW