The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About08 August 7, 1991 Budget & Finance" " (.4 t. " , 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 053763 BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 7, 1991 12:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. FINANCIAL QUARTERLY REPORT. Staff Recommendation Receive and file. (Due to vacation schedules, the report will be passed out at the Budget and Finance Committee meeting.) 3. RCTC INSURANCE PROGRAM AUDIT Staff Recommendation Discussion and possible action. 4. CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR AGREEMENT RO-9013 - DKS ASSOCIATES. Staff Recommendation Approve the Contract Amendment in the amount of $148,949.36 for DKS Associates to complete the remaining scope of work presented in the attached proposal. This will increase the total approved base plus contingency amount to $1,295,154.36. There will remain $26,297.36 in unallocated extra work contingency to be used for extra traffic forecasts which may be needed. " 5. CAJALCO TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR STUDY - AUTHORIZATION FOR P&D TECHNOLOGIES TO BEGIN TIER I EIS PROCESS. Staff Recommendation Receive and review the information concerning the workscope and costs for the Cajalco Corridor. Approve P&D Technologies participation in the preparation of a TIER 1 EIS and associated traffic and engineering studies for purposes of preserving a transportation corridor between 1-215 and Orange County. The most critical segment that deserves immediate consideration for preservation is located between 1-215 and the Cleveland National Forest (CNF) boundary because it is under intense pressure from ongoing development. Consider a first phase study that would endeavor to protect this segment until the issues with the westerly portion through the CNF into Orange County are resolved. 6. TELECOMMUTING WORK CENTER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT. Staff Recommendation That the Commission approve: 1) an agreement with the Economic Development Partnership, Inc. to implement a Telecommuting Work Center in accordance with AB 3069 and AB 1065 and as directed by the Commission, and 2) funding in the amount of $100,000 from Measure A Rt. 91 HOV highway project funds. 7. STATE ROUTE 60 AND PIGEON PASS PARK AND RIDE LOT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN RCTC and CALTRANS. Staff Recommendation 1. RCTC approve the draft Cooperative Agreement between RCTC and Caltrans for the Route 60 Park and Ride at Pigeon Pass. This draft agreement is currently being reviewed by legal counsel but is similar to the recent agreement approved by RCTC for the Orange Street Park and Ride. 2. RCTC approve an amendment to contract RO-9002 with KaWES and Associates to complete the required design. The cost of these services is not expected to exceed $50,000. A definitive amount will be available at the RCTC meeting. " " " 8. CALIFORNIA SAFE EFFORTS TO ADDRESS HANDICAPPED ACCESS TO MOTORIST AID CALL BOX SYSTEMS. Staff Recommendation The Riverside SAFE enter into a contract with Techplan to provide telecommunication industry liaison and identification of alternative telecommunication access products, on behalf of the California SAFE Committee at a cost of approximately $15,000. This cost will be prorated between the SAFES on the basis of vehicle registrations. 9. CONTRACT WITH TECHPLAN CORPORATION AND THE ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE DAY-TO-DAY CALL BOX OPERATIONS SUPPORT Staff Recommendation 1) Approval to contract with Techplan to oversee the day to day call box system operation at a cost not to exceed $52,723, and 2) Approval to enter into an agreement with the OCTA to provide call box knockdown insurance recovery for the Riverside County call box system. 10. CONTRACT WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE CONSULTANT TO PERFORM A PHASE II DUE DILIG NCE AUDIT FOR COMMUTER RAIL STATIONS AT SERFAS CLUB DRIVE. PIERCE STREET AND VAN BUREN AVENUE (RUDICILL ST.) Staff Recommendation Approve the list of qualified Hazardous Waste contractors to perform Phase II Audit Services for RCTC. One of which will be selected to prepare the Phase II Due Diligence Audit Reports for the Serfas Club Dr., Pierce St. and Rudicill St. Sites at a proposed cost that would range between $30,000 and $65,000. A standard consultant agreement will be used for the contract. 11. ADJOURNMENT. :sc fr I " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION August 1, 1991 TO: Administrative Committee FROM: Dean Martin, Controller SUBJECT: RCTC Insurance Program Audit Advanced Risk Management Techniques has completed the RCTC general insurance review as requested by the Commission. They have issued a report that documents their conclusions and recommendations. A copy of that report is being forwarded with this agenda packet. A representative from ARMTECH will be present to discuss the findings in the report and their recommendations. Staff will also be prepared to advise the Commission as to which recommendations should be pursued and implemented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discussion and possible action. DM:sc " r. " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION August 1, 1991 TO: Administrative Committee FROM: Tom Horkan, Bechtel Program Management Staff THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Contract Amendment for Agreement RO-9013 - DKS Associates The Riverside County Transportation Commission approved Agreement No. RO-9013 at the March 14, 1990 meeting. This Agreement with DKS Associates was for traffic engineering and transportation planning services for the Measure A program. The original schedule called for completion of the project in January of 1991 for a budget of $996,700. The commission approved an extra work contingency amount of 15% of the base amount of the contract for a total approved budget of $1,146,205.00. Within Agreement RO-9013 DKS was to perform various tasks. Those tasks included: 1. Convert the RIVSAN model from the UTPS mainframe computer environment of SCAG-LA to a PC based system using the TRANPLAN software package. That system will be turned over to the SCAG Riverside office for use in transportation planning in the Inland Empire. 2. Assist SCAG in the updating of socio-economic data that drives the RIVSAN model. In this effort all of the existing land uses, general plans and significant specific plans were accumulated for the western areas of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The existing and future land use were then entered into the SCAG Geographic Information System (GIS). The traffic analysis zone system for the RIVSAN model was also updated as part of this effort and the new traffic analysis zones were digitized and entered into the same GIS system. The system now in place at SCAG LA will allow for more accurate socio-economic input to the RIVSAN model and an easier updating procedure for the model data when Census data becomes available, and future land use changes are made. rA " " Page Two August 1, 1991 Contract Amendment for Agreement RO-9013 " DKS Associates 3. Provide future traffic forecasts for all of the Measure A Highway and Interchange Improvement Program projects. These forecasts will be used by other consultants for construction impacts, environmental analysis, and engineering design of the Measure A projects. 4. Provide a comprehensive analysis of Park and Ride facilities, and projected need for Park and Ride sites in the Measure A Corridors. 5. Provide transportation modeling support using the RNSAN model for Air Quality analysis to be performed by SCAG. The air quality analysis will consider several alternatives to the Measure A Projects and present a comparison of the Measure A Plan and the various alternatives for affects on air quality in the region. 6. Provide transportation modeling and analysis to assist in establishing priorities for Measure A Project implementation using the RIVSAN model. The prioritization effort will be worked in coordination with the financial plan update being done by the Commission. Major tasks 1 and 2 have been completed. Task 2 was a critical work effort that had to be completed prior to work proceeding on tasks 3 through 6. This task was the first attempt by SCAG to incorporate an automated system that links land use and transportation modeling. While the results of the effort have been beneficial and will continue to assist SCAG. SANBAG and RCTC in transportation planning efforts in the future, the time frame to complete this effort was significantly longer than originally envisioned. Along with significant schedule delays, the amount of effort required by DKS to assist SCAG has been significantly beyond the budgeted amount. Given the current timeframe for completion of the above mentioned efforts, major tasks 5 and 6 will be performed by others. Task 3 results will provide traffic forecasts for all of the Measure A Highway Projects and Interchange Improvement Program projects. This effort will be significantly beyond the originally envisioned effort given the needs of the Project Development process for all of the Measure A projects. DKS is currently working on this task and results are being provided to the other Measure A traffic consultants. DKS will also be completing task 4 which will establish a prioritized need for establishing park and ride sites for all of Riverside County. " M " " Page Three August 1, 1991 Contract Amendment for Agreement RO-9013 - DKS Associates DKS Associates is requesting an increase in budget of $148,949.36 to complete the remaining efforts in tasks 3 and 4. This will require a contract amendment to be approved by the Commission in that amount. There will remain $26,397.36 in the extra work contingency amount of the original contract in case of additional forecasting need beyond the scope presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Contract Amendment in the amount of $148,949.36 for DKS Associates to complete the remaining scope of work presented in the attached proposal. This will increase the total approved base plus contingency amount to $1,295,154.36. There will remain $26,297.36 in unallocated extra work contingency to be used for extra traffic forecasts which may be needed. TH:sc h. ) ti " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION August 1, 1991 TO: Administrative Committee FROM: Mike Davis, Environmental Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Cajalco Transportation Corridor Study- Authorization for P&D Technologies to Begin TIER 1 EIS Process At the July 10,1991 Commission meeting, it was decided to postpone approval of P&D technologies contract to prepare a TIER 1 EIS for the easterly half of the Cajalco corridor between Interstate 15 (1-15) and Interstate 215 (1-215) pending further Commission review of additional information regarding the work scope and costs of implementing a greater analysis that would consider extending the corridor into Orange County. The information developed by P & D Technologies (not available in time for the Administrative Committee mail -out) includes the costs of the proposed Outside Widening Improvements to Route 91 and the individual segments of the Cajalco Corridor. This information may be used by the Commission to make a relative comparison of the potential costs and magnitude of effort associated with each alternative that is intended to relieve traffic congestion on existing Route 91. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive and review the information concerning the workscope and costs for the Cajalco Corridor. Approve P&D Technologies participation in the preparation of a TIER 1 EIS and associated traffic and engineering studies for purposes of preserving a transportation corridor between 1-215 and Orange County. The most critical segment that deserves immediate consideration for preservation is located between 1-215 and the Cleveland National Forest (CNF) boundary because it is under intense pressure from ongoing development. Consider a first phase study that would endeavor to protect this segment until the issues with the westerly portion through the CNF into Orange County are resolved. MD:sc a:n: " " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION August 1, 1991 TO: Administrative Committee FROM: Marilyn Williams, Senior Staff Analyst THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Teeecommuting Work Center Demonstration Project At the April Commission meeting; staff reported its efforts in amending AB 3069 authored by Assemblyman Clute to implement a Teeecommuting Work Center Demonstration Project. The clean-up legislation, AB 1065, has been moving slowly through the process as the State Legislature focused on the passage of the budget. AB 1065 is scheduled on the Senate Appropriations Committee agenda when it reconvenes in mid -August. The bill authorizes the establishment of work centers in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties and allocates $100,000 in state funds to both Counties if matched by their Commissions and private business. To meet that requirement, staff recommends that the Commission take action to approve funding in the amount of $100,000 from the Measure A Rt. 91 HOV highway project funds. It should be noted that the Rt. 91 Transportation Management Plan (TMP) prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. identified telecommuting as a viable off -site trip reduction measure. The significance of the demonstration project is two fold. First, a number of demonstration projects have focused on home based telecommuting wherein an employee works from his/her home via telecommunication tools, i.e., telephone, fax, and computer. Both the public and private sectors have implemented programs based on the successes of those demonstrations, although it has been the public sector who has most readily embraced telecommuting as a viable work strategy. Evaluation of a telecommuting work center is just beginning. The center concept simply overlays home based telecommuting with a traditional office environment. It provides office space with telecommunication services to multiply employers to provide a work location closer to their employees home than their normal work site. It is not a branch or satellite office of a single employer. Only two work center demonstration projects are underway in the states of Hawaii and Washington. Their primary users are public employees. The Riverside Work Center will serve the private sector to demonstrate the role telecommuting can play not only to address trip reduction and air quality requirements " " Page Two August 1, 1991 Telecommuting Work Center Demonstration Project such as Regulation XV but to support employer recruitment/retention efforts, reduce sick leave use, increase employee morale and productivity, reduce office space expansion requirements, and other problems/decisions faced daily by the business community. The legislation gives the Commission the lead agency role in developing and implementing the demonstration project. Given that telecommunication and business development expertise are key elements to the project, a partnership with Pacific Bell and the Economic Development Partnership, Inc. (EDP) appeared to be a natural combination. Both enthusiastically expressed their interest in participating and stafF has been working closely with them to formalize roles. To that end EDP has submittec : the Commission a draft proposal to implement the project. Staff is currently working with legal counsel to finalize an agreement between the Commission and EDP. The agreement will be available at the Committee meeting. PacBell has indicated they will contribute $50,000 in cash to the project toward the required public sector contribution. In addition, they have committed a range of in -kind services to support the project including staff time and materials in the areas of project development, marketing, telecommunications, vendor solicitation, and training and evaluation. An agreement to formalize PacBell's project participation will be presented at the September Commission meeting. PacBell will be at the August meeting to make a presentation to the Commission. The on -going project development meetings between the Commission, EDP and PacBell have established the importance of a Telecommuting Task Force to provide guidance to the Commission as lead agency. Commuter Transportation Services, Inc. (CTS) has been added to this core group. CTS will provide its expertise as the County's regional rideshare agency and more specifically will assistance in the areas of user training, and evaluation. CTS is playing the same role in the San Bernardino County project in an effort to ensure reporting continuity as required under AB 3069. It is expected that as other project sponsors/participants are identified they will join the Task Force. A very aggressive implementation schedule has been set for the Work Center. It is anticipated that the Center will open for business in October, 1991. EDP is in the process of identifying available office space, developing marketing materials, soliciting vendor contributions, recruiting for a project manager, planning a mini -conference for local officials and businesses, and supporting a PacBell sponsored kick-off marketing effort to Orange/Los Angeles businesses set for August 27, 1991. " " Page Three August 1, 1991 Telecommuting Work Center Demonstration Project STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Commission approve: 1) an agreement with the Economic Development Partnership, Inc. to implement a Telecommuting Work Center in accordance with AB 3069 and AB 1065 and as directed by the Commission, and 2) funding in the amount of 5100,000 from Measure A Rt. 91 HOV highway project funds. MW:sc • G� c " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION C' August 1, 1991 TO: Administrative Committee FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 60 and Pigeon Pass Park and Ride Lot Cooperative Agreement between RCTC and Ca!trans Ca!trans has recently worked out a cooperative arrangement with the City of Moreno Valley to construct a Park and Ride facility on State property at the Pigeon Pass Interchange with State Route 60 in Moreno Valley. Access to the lot has been provided for through conditions placed on the new Home Depot project by the City. Ca!trans has agreed to fund construction of the facility through unused Minor A funds and can proceed with the project quirky provided the design can be done. Ca[trans has asked for RCTC assistance with expediting the project design. Caltrans has submitted a draft cooperative agreement for RCTC review. Staff recommends that RCTC participate in the project by providing the required engineering design services. This will facilitate a near term needed improvement and take advantage of available state construction funds. The cost of these services is not expected to exceed $50,000. Staff has asked KaWES and Associates, one of our Route 91 design consultants, to provide a proposal to provide the design. We expect to have a final proposal before the RCTC meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. RCTC approve the draft Cooperative Agreement between RCTC and Ca!trans for the Route 60 Park and Ride at Pigeon Pass. This draft agreement is currently being reviewed by legal counsel but is similar to the recent agreement approved by RCTC for the Orange Street Park and Ride. " " Page Two August 1, 1991 State Route 60 and Pigeon Pass Park and Ride Lot Cooperative Agreement between RCTC and Ca!trans 2. RCTC approve an amendment to contract RO-9002 with KaWES and Associates to complete the required design. The cost of these services is not expected to exceed $50,000. A definitive amount will be available at the RCTC meeting. WRH:sc attachment " " " " " STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND MOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92402 T00 (714) 383-4609 July 25, 1991 Mark Massman, P.E. Project Manager Attention Bill Hughes Bechtel 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Mr. Massman: Attached for your review, is the draft Cooperative Agreement for the Route 60 Park and Ride Lot, District Agreement No. 8-678. It is our understanding that this will be submitted at the Riverside County Transportation Commission Board Meeting. Please be aware that the terminology in said Cooperative Agreement is considered by Headquarters as being "Boilerplate", therefore changes should be kept to a minimum. Attachment Very truly yours, c)/ Z/Z lam/ BOB HARVEY Senior, Transportation Planner " " a" 08-Riv-60-14.3 Park and Ride Lot District Agreement No. 8-678 DRAFT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO ON is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as "STATE", and RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION a body politic and a public corporation of the State of California, referred to herein as "COMMISSION" This is a Cost -Sharing Cooperative Agreement, not a Sales Tax Measure Project. RECITALS 1. STATE and COMMISSION, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 130 are authorized to enter into this Agreement. 2. STATE desires state highway improvements consisting of installing a Park and Ride Lot on State Route 60 at northwest quadrant of the Fredrick Street Intersection, in Riverside County, referred to herein as PROJECT. 3. In order to bring about the earliest possible completion of PROJECT, COMMISSION is willing to provide, or cause to be provided, all preliminary engineering services and a "Project Report" for PROJECT and to bear the full expense thereof. 4. STATE and COMMISSION desire to specify herein the terms and conditions under which PROJECT will be developed, designed and financed. SECTION I COMMISSION AGREES: 1. To provide all necessary preliminary engineering, including Project Report, Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) for PROJECT and to bear total expense thereof, estimated to be " " " " " 08-Riv-60-14.3 No. 8-678 2. COMMISSION, as part of its PROJECT design responsibility, shall identify and locate all utility facilities within the PROJECT area. All utility facilities not relocated or removed in advance of construction shall be identified on the PROJECT plans and specifications. 3. To apply for necessary encroachment permits for required work within STATE highway's rights of way, in accordance with STATE's standard permit procedures. 4. COMMISSION engineering personnel shall be available to STATE, at no cost to STATE, through completion of construction of PROJECT, to discuss problems which may arise during construction and/or to make design revisions or contract change orders. SECTION_I STATE AGREES: 1. To provide all necessary construction engineering services for PROJECT and to bear the total expense thereof. 2. To construct PROJECT by contract in accordance with the Plans, Specifications and Estimate prepared by COMMISSION and approved by STATE. 3. To pay an amount equal to 100% of the PROJECT construction costs estimated to be $300,000 but in no event shall STATE's total obligation for PROJECT construction costs, under this Agreement exceed the amount of $300,000; provided that STATE may, at its sole discretion, in writing, authorize a greater amount. 4. Upon completion of Park and Ride lot, STATE shall assume full ownership of said facility which includes all materials and equipment. STATE shall be responsible for the operation and maintenance of said facility. 5. To issue, at no cost to COMMISSION, upon proper application by COMMISSION and by COMMISSION's Contractor, the necessary Encroachment Permits for required work within the State highway's rights of way. 2 08-Riv-60-14.3 No. 8-678 SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. All obligations of STATE under the terms of this Agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources of the Legislature and the allocation of resources by the California Transportation Commission. 2. Should any portion of PROJECT be financed with Federal funds or State gas tax funds, all applicable laws, regulations and policies relating to the use of such funds shall apply notwithstanding other provisions of this Agreement. 3. COMMISSION will obtain the aforesaid Encroachment Permit through the office of STATE's District 8 Permit Engineer. Receipt thereafter by COMMISSION of the approved Encroachment Permit shall constitute COMMISSION's authorization from STATE to proceed with work which lies within STATE's rights of way or which affects STATE facilities, pursuant to work covered by this Agreement. COMMISSION's authorization to proceed with said work shall, however, be contingent upon COMMISSION's compliance with all provisions set forth in said Encroachment Permit. 4. If existing public and/or private utilities conflict with the construction of PROJECT, STATE will, at STATE expense, make all necessary arrangements with the owners of such utilities for their protection, relocation or removal. 5. Upon completion of all work under this Agreement, ownership and title to all Park and Ride, materials, equipment and appurtenances installed will automatically be vested in STATE. Upon acceptance of the facility, STATE shall be solely responsible for its operation and maintenance. 6. Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring .by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by COMMISSION under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. It is also agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, COMMISSION shall fully indemnify and hold STATE harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by COMMISSION under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction not delegated to STATE under this Agreement. 3 • • • " " " " 08-Riv-60-14.3 No. 8-678 7. Neither COMMISSION nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE.under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. It is also agreed, that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall fully indemnify and hold COMMISSION harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to STATE under this Agreement. 8. Prior to award of the construction contract for PROJECT, COMMISSION may terminate this Agreement by written notice. 9. COMMISSION's obligations under the terms of this Agreement shall terminate upon completion and acceptance of the PROJECT con struction contract by STATE or on , whichever is earlier in time. 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMISSIONDepartment of Transportation 08-Riv-60-14.3 No. 8-678 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION By Kay Ceniceros A. A. PIERCE Chairperson Acting Director of Transportation By Attest: Ken Steele, District Director Jack Reagan Deputy District Director Approved as to form and procedure Attorney, Department of Transportation Certified as to funds and procedure District Accounting Administrator 5 • • • r: } " " SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES " " August 1, 1991 TO: Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies FROM: Hideo Sugita, Assistant Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Caldornia SAFE Efforts to Address Handicapped Access to Motorist Aid Call Box Systems During the planning/specification development phase for every motorist aid call box system, handicapped access to call boxes has been examined. Due to the issue's complexity and the desire to develop a consistent state-wide solution(s), in 1989 it was determined that the issue of handicapped access be reviewed and recommendations developed through the auspices of the California SAFE Committee. The California SAFE Committee is an informal committee which is comprised of representatives from Caftans, the Califomia Highway Patrol and local SAFE staff members. The purpose of the committee is to share information (e.g. planning/engineering/equipment specification/CHP level of service etc.) and to address state-wide issues such as handicapped access, Caltrans/CHP Call Box Guidelines, etc., with consistent/compatible recommendations. The following is a brief overview of the California SAFE Committee efforts on this issue. (Executive Summary of the "Access for Persons with Disabilities to Motorist Aid Systems in California" is attached for your information) PHYSICAL ACCESS The first issue that arose was physical access to the motorist aid call box. The San Diego SAFE sponsored a study of their call box system with the intent of determining whether or not it would be feasible (both from a freeway environment and financial stand point) to make call box sites physically accessible to the mobility impaired (mobility impaired being defined as wheelchair users). In reviewing known regulations (State Building Code from the Office of the State Architect) the physical requirements for a public phone were incorporated into the call box specifications. The specifications use 54" from ground for the highest operable part of the " " Page Two August 1, 1991 California SAFE Efforts to Address Handicapped Access to Motorist Aid Call Box Systems call box and requires, at minimum, a 29" hand cord. The other physical access improvement which was added by the SAFES was to use a larger pad (a concrete pad is placed at the base of the call box for the user to stand on) from 36" x 36" to 48" x 48" (where possible, given the physical layout of the particular site) to allow easier access to the call box for wheelchair users. Additionally, the call box phone receiver is hearing aid compatible. There are several issues which make it difficult to provide physical access to call box sites: o The State Building Code issued by the Office of the State Architect, if applied to the freeway environment, would require at minimum, a 14' shoulder to allow a lift equipped van to drop its lift. o In today's urban setting, many freeway capacity improvements are constructed within the existing state right-of-way. This practice has been followed to maximize capacity while minimizing costs. In this setting, it is impossible, in most cases, to provide the required shoulder area to allow a lift equipped van to drop its lift. o Secondarily, even if SAFEs were to reconstruct those call box installations which have the requisite shoulder area to meet all physical access requirements, it would be a chance situation for a mobility impaired person to have their vehicle breakdown near a call box site which is physically accessible. o Reconstructing to provide physical access to all call boxes or retrofitting existing call box systems with other features such as telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) has been determined to be cost prohibitive. Please note the option for retrofitting call boxes should not be foreclosed because advancements in technology may yet provide an affordable device to provide remote access to the call box service. Very basically, accessing a call box in today's urban freeway environment is, at best, risky for able bodied individuals and is a potentially hazardous situation for those with mobility impairments and profound hearing loss. Therefore, examination of this issue shifted to reviewing possible means of providing the handicapped community access to the call box service. " " " " Page Three August 1, 1991 California SAFE Efforts to Address Handicapped Access to Motorist Aid Call Box Systems ACCESS TO CALL BOX SERVICE In reviewing the potential options for providing "access to the service" the California SAFE Committee reviewed possible "push button" solutions such as installation/retrofit of call boxes to have additional button(s) which would be available for use by the profoundly deaf. This proposal was dismissed because CHP requires "full duplex" voice communication (two way voice) with the person using the call box. This is necessary in order to allow CHP to determine the nature of the call in order to respond accordingly. The other potential draw back is that it (the button) might be indiscriminately used, particularly when CHP dispatch is flooded with calls (typically the a.m. and p.m. peak periods). The California SAFE report recommends that the most reasonable manner to provide service access to the mobility impaired (defined as Restriction 22 license holders) is through an independently powered cellular phone. It also recommends that the most reasonable manner to provide service access to the profoundly deaf is through the provision of a portable, battery powered telecommunication device for the deaf (TDD). Please note that all CHP dispatch offices are equipped with MD equipment. In order to better understand the California SAFE Committee position on. this issue, we provide the following: o Each SAFE has its own financing, based on a one dollar annual fee per registered vehicle. SAFEs, due to their respective county registered vehicle base and miles of highways to cover with call boxes have differing financial abilities to fund additional call box services. The report recommends solutions which go beyond the freeway environment. Both portable TDDs and independently powered cellular phones can be used almost anywhere. The only practical limitation is to use a cellular phone you must be in a cellular service area. o We are currently living in the age of the federal "Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)". While those SAFEs which had their programs out to bid prior to August 26, 1990 have an "escape dause" with regard to ADA, the California SAFE Committee has steadfastly held to the ideal that provision of handicapped access is not only important, it is a goal to be achieved. " " Page Four August 1, 1991 California SAFE Efforts to Address Handicapped Access to Motorist Aid Call Box Systems Given the limited ability for SAFEs to fully fund such a program we approached the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program (DDTP) of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and reviewed our report recommendations and suggested one alternative would be to review the capacity/capability of using the Deaf Trust Fund fee on telephones to address this issue. We explored this avenue because: 1) There was already a functioning equipment distribution program in place (including criteria through which eligibility can be determined), and 2) We found that the amount of the fee being collected was below the authorized level. In fact the amount of the fee could be increased by four cents per phone line and this would represent an increase in collection of 40% (an additional $20+ million annually). We, unfortunately, were unable to convince the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program or the phone companies to support this position. Their primary response was that the fee was collected state wide and the distribution of the funds/benefit would be back to those counties who opted to have a motorist aid call box program. Furthermore, the issue of call box accessibility appears to be of low priority to the handicapped community (most likely due to a lack of visibility). It is understandable, though never specified, there are basic needs of the handicapped community which have a higher priority and must be addressed before access to call box service becomes "a real" issue. Given the financial condition of today's economy and its resultant impacts on state and local govemment budgets, this is a difficult time to continue efforts to raise visibility of the issue and pursue program and funding participation with other agencies. Due to the proposed regulations from ADA the Califomia SAFE Committee views the recommendations proposed in the report "Access for Persons with Disabilities to Motorist Aid Systems in California" as potential solutions to the larger telecommunication services access issue which will have to be addressed. In other words, both the portable TDD and cellular phone can effectively be used outside of the freeway environment and should be considered as potential solutions for addressing a state-wide need to provide telecommunications service access to the handicapped community. The California SAFE Committee is committed to create visibility for this issue and bring our proposed recommendations before the handicapped community. We need to determine if there is support for the report recommendations and if so, can such support be mounted to develop a means to supplement, either whole or in part (with funding or program partnership with PUC and or the Department of Rehabilitation and SAFEs) to provide telecommunication services access for the handicapped. " " " " " Page Five August 1, 1991 California SAFE Efforts to Address Handicapped Access to Motorist Aid Call Box Systems Should a state-wide solution not be achieved, those SAFE programs that can afford to provide a means of access to the call box service will most likely do so. This will lead to a situation whereby numerous solutions may be implemented because, SAFEs much like people, are not created equally in terms of their financial capacity, and therefore individual SAFEs will select differing or no solution depending on affordability. This prospect has the potential of creating a non -uniform (county by county) and confusing situation for both the handicapped community and the call box agencies (SAFEs, CHP). Therefore, the California SAFE Committee proposes to move forward to: 1) Work with communication industry groups (industry liaison) to explore the most cost effective means to provide cellular radio and TDD equipment to program participants. This work will consist of identification of suitable equipment features and acquisition alternatives, such as state-wide bidding, industry donations of discontinued models, and similar strategies. 2) Identify alternative access products, including those technology applications which have been developed since 1990, to provide an analysis of acquisition costs, including call box modification (if required) and schedule constraints. Each system identified as a potential means to address the issue will be field tested to determine operational capabilities with respect to CHP dispatch equipment and call boxes. The California SAFE Committee has received and recommends approval of a proposal from Techplan Corporation to provide a report of this analysis at a cost of approximately $15,000. As with past practice, the cost of the report will be shared among the counties based on vehicle registrations. However, with staff serving as the committee chair, it is also practice for the chair to be lead on the contract work. The potential cost of this work to the Riverside SAFE will be approximately $1,500. Staff recommends the Riverside SAFE to approve a contract with Techplan Corporation to undertake the above noted analysis. This effort, should the desired state-wide solution not be achieved, will assist all SAFE agencies in providing a field tested menu of possible solutions for addressing handicapped access, as well as costs. Staff also recommends in order to move as quickly as possible on developing this report, charges to this contract be allowable beginning August 1, 1991. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Riverside SAFE enter into a contract with Techplan to provide telecommunication industry liaison and identification of alternative telecommunication access products, on behalf of the Califomia SAFE Committee at a cost of approximately $15,000. This cost will be prorated between the SAFEs on the basis of vehicle registrations. HS:sc attachment " " EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Motorist Aid Systems (call boxes) installed along selected freeways and highways in California provide two-way voice communications between motorists and the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Call box sites are located according to standards and guidelines established by Caltrans and the CHP, and within program funding constraints. The purpose of this study is to determine the feasibility of providing access to this service for specific groups of disabled persons, namely mobility impaired motorists (wheelchair users) and motorists with speech and/or hearing impairments. The study also examines the costs and possible funding alternatives. For the purposes of this study, and as directed by the California SAFE Committee, our consideration of "Mobility Impaired Persons" is limited, unless specifically noted, to disabled persons who are licensed to drive in California according to DMV code 22511 and holding Restriction 22 driver's licenses. (Restriction 22 licensed persons are restricted to driving vehicles equipped with full hand controls) Mobility impaired persons without driver's licenses and who use wheelchairs are assumed to be escorted by drivers who are not mobility impaired. A typical able-bodied user who experiences a vehicle break down can stop near a call box, or stop on the shoulder and walk to a call box site and contact the CHP for appropriate assistance. What may be considered routine (but still risky) for most able-bodied persons is a potentially hazardous situation for disabled persons (specifically mobility impaired persons) who break down along the freeway and need assistance. The motorist aid systems in California can be used by mobility impaired persons and speech and/or hearing impaired persons under the following conditions: O Mobility impaired persons must safely exit their vehicles in an extremely dangerous environment under less than ideal conditions. In many cases. vehicle width. wheelchair lift configurations and shoulder widths may prohibit exit from a vehicle and/or cause an immediate lane restriction along certain freeways. O Once outside their vehicles. wheelchair users must propel themselves along freeway shoulders which may not be adequate in an attempt to find a call box site with relatively easy access. " " Certain sites, by virtue of inherent and constrained site conditions, may not be easily accessible or convenient for persons in wheelchairs. " Once the wheelchair user has completed the call, he or she must complete the reverse trip to the disabled vehicle. O Mobility impaired persons not requiring wheelchairs may also experience difficulties in walking to a call box site. O Persons with speech and/or hearing impairments may require Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDDs) to effect two-way communications with the CHP. TDD's used at the call box must be portable (battery powered) and capable of being acoustically coupled to the handset. Recently installed systems in California comply with height and handset cord length requirements to accommodate persons in wheelchairs. Handsets are hearing aid compatible and provide an adequate interface with acoustical couplers on TDD equipment. The cellular communications network supports TDD communications between the call boxes and the respective CHP dispatch centers. Access to the Service vs Access to Individual Call Box Sites Providing convenient access for mobility impaired persons to motorist aid system call box sites can be expensive and in many cases, not feasible. While achieving access to individual call box sites may be possible, traveling to and from those sites poses significant dangers to persons in wheelchairs. An alternative to physical access for mobility impaired persons is "access to the service". Mobility impaired motorists who experience breakdowns can contact the CHP by using cellular radiotelephones and the mobile 9-1-1 service without leaving their vehicles. The response time is greatly reduced because mobility impaired persons do not have to exit and travel to sites which may or may not be convenient. According to an October 1989 study conducted for the State by Mr. R Nielsen, congestion is the leading transportation problem in California. Access to the service provides the capability of notifying the appropriate agency faster and clearing the freeway in significantly less time. 2 " " Concern for User Safety By taking advantage of access to the service, mobility impaired persons are not subject to the hazardous freeway environment and the chance situation of finding conveniently accessible call box sites. Access to the service, rather than physical access to the sites, keeps mobility impaired persons off dangerous shoulders and in their vehicles where they can safely initiate calls to the appropriate response agencies. If call box sites were initially designed and built (or modified) to provide safe and convenient physical access to mobility impaired persons, those persons would still be subject to a higher level of danger when they stop and attempt to wdt their vehicles and travel to nearby call box sites. By virtue of call boxes being installed along the freeways/highways, they are an invitation to be used by all motorists. However, any indication that particular call box sites are physically accessible by persons using wheelchairs could lead to dangerous situations for individuals attempting to reach those sites, and to litigation against any involved agencies in the event of a life - threatening incident. In the interest of providing the most convenient access for all users where feasible, site selection criteria should contain consideration for selecting sites where access is most convenient for all users. Although some sites may provide easier or more convenient access for mobility impaired persons, these sites should not be designated as "accessible" for physically disabled motorists. Considering all the factors that constitute final site selection. proposed site locations can sometimes be moved a minimal distance in order to provide more convenient physical access. These sites should not be construed as being "accessible" for physically disabled motorists, but only as "more convenient" for ALL users. For example, a site location may be adjusted slightly to avoid a high berm or a drainage trough, thus making it easier for anyone (including a wheelchair user) to have more convenient physical access to the site. Regardless of the degree of accessibility of call box sites, the issue of safety in the environment still prevails. It can be extremely difficult for a mobility impaired person to safely exit a mechanically disabled vehicle and traverse a freeway/highway shoulder to a call 3 " " box which may or may not have some degree of improved physical access. There is still greater danger in attempting to exit a vehicle and travel to a call box along a shoulder which may be sufficiently wide at one point and not at another. Speech and/or hearing impaired persons are also subject to the hazards of the freeway environment. In particular, hearing impaired persons may not have the ability to detect and monitor traffic through normal hearing as they walk along the shoulders in route to call box sites. Access -to -the -Service Program Costs The program would include between 5,000 and 10,000 mobility impaired participants and as many as 26.000 hearing and speech impaired participants. Specific eligibility would have to be determined, particularly for mobility impaired persons. For the purposes of this study, only Restriction 22 licensed persons would be considered eligible for access to service through cellular radiotelephones. This study presumes that persons licensed as such are wheelchair users. The speech and/or hearing impaired population is a much larger group of approximately 260.000. However, only 10% of that population is expected to take advantage of access to the service through the TDD program. Capital Cost Estimates Cellular Radiotelephones for Restriction 22 persons 1 $3.000.000 Portable TDD devices for speech and/or hearing impaired persons 2 $5,200.000 Notes: 1 - Assumes 75% participation (of 10.000) � $400/unit 2 - Assumes 10% participation (of 260.000) � $200/unit " " " Ongoing Cost Estimates Cellular Radiotelephone annual program administration 3 TDD device annual program administration 4 Notes: 3 - Assumes $100 per year per user 4 - Assumes $25 per year per user Conclusions $750.000 $650,000 O Vehicles can become disabled at any point along a freeway/highway. Drivers (mobility impaired or not) may not be able to stop at or near an available call box O Freeway shoulders are unsafe environments, particularly for mobility impaired persons O Mobility impaired persons can experience difficulties negotiating pathways near and around particular call box sites O Persons with speech and/or hearing impairments have different needs than mobility impaired persons O Access to the call box service (versus access to individual call box sites) can be provided for mobility impaired persons and for speech and/or hearing impaired persons Recommendations: 1. All SAFE agencies should continue to provide the most convenient physical access to call box sites wherever feasible. "Convenient physical access" implies that call box sites are located in areas and on topographies that minimize the hazards of use for all users in a freeway environment; in areas where ambient lighting exists; and in areas where access could be " " Unproved by minor position adjustments in topography selection. Convenient physical access should be considered as significant site location criteria. 2. Develop and specify standard statewide requirements for motorist aid systems to support TDD communications between call box units and respective CHP dispatch centers. 3. Request that all CHP dispatch centers immediately acquire TDD equipment and implement procedures and training to respond to call box calls initiated through TDD devices. 4. Pursue industry donation of cellular radiotelephones for use by Restriction 22 licensed persons. Phones can provide non- tariffed 9-1-1 service, or tariffed service at the discretion/expense of the user. Industry could provide the equipment, installation and maintenance service in exchange for potential service agreements with individual users, and possible tax deductions or tax credits. 5. Propose legislation (as an alternative to industry donation) designed to provide cellular radiotelephone procurement and continuous program administration. Propose separate legislation to allow possible tax credits for industry donations. 6. Request DMV to provide periodic data updates on Restriction 22 license holders. 7. Propose legislation to change current SB 460 specifications on TDD equipment from 'TDD" to "portable, battery operated TDD" equipment for eligible persons 8. Pursue funding to provide "portable, battery operated" TDD equipment as an add -on to the existing California Public Utilities Commission program directed by SB 460. This legislation would provide newer portable. battery operated units to replace existing non -portable units currently issued. 6 ITY WAEMERGE • • NCIES SERVICE AUTHORFOR FREEWAY • • • August 1, 1991 TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: Riverside County Service Authority For Freeway Emergencies Hideo Sugita, Assistant Director of Planning and Programming Jack Reagan, Executive Director Contract with Techplan Corporation and the Orange County Transportation Authority to Provide Day -to -Day Call Box Operations Support Per the direction of the Executive Director staff, has worked with Techplan Corporation and the Orange County Transportation Authority to develop a services proposal to move the day-to-day operations of the call box program under an outside contract. The objective of this is to reduce the level of administrative staff time dedicated to the program. All financial responsibilities for the program will remain in-house. Staff, along with SANBAG, met with Techplan to develop a joint proposal to provide administrative and technical support services to both SAFEs. Please note the 5 tasks identified below are common to both SAFEs. Staff required Techplan to separate costs and billings for each county and San Bernardino has an additional task which involves development of a geographic based data system for the SANBAG SAFE project. Additionally, several of the tasks are at the SAFE Board's discretion and are marked accordingly. These tasks were included in the proposal in order to allow for additional system expansion or in -fills and potential changes in technology. TASK I (discretionary) o . Includes all work (survey, planning, certification and acceptance) for an additional 500 call boxes in Riverside County. " " Page Two August 1, 1991 Contract with Techplan Corporation and the Orange County Transportation Authority to Provide Day -to -Day Call Box Operations Support TASK II o Coordination of on -going construction removals and reinstalls. o Quarterly performance and billing audit of GTE's preventive and corrective maintenance records and procedures to verify charges billed to the SAFE. o Audit of other repairs (knockdowns, vandalism) to verify charges for services by GTE. Additionally, perform periodic examination of damaged and or salvageable components and report on the disposition of the parts. TASK III o Conversion of the cellular billing tape. This is the production of the monthly call box statistics and graphs. Techplan will provide both a separate and combined reports for each county. o Analysis of CHPs automatic call distributor data. This will be a process whereby the cellular billing tape data can be verified with CHP dispatch operations. The automatic call distributor (ACD) functions as a computer which assigns priority to incoming calls to CHP dispatch and also records time and length of all call box calls. This will be very helpful in assessing the level of CHP dispatch staffing which should be supported by SAFE funds. TASK IV (discretionarvl o New equipment evaluation. Techplan will test, evaluate and provide technical recommendations of new equipment (e.g. the interactive call box) as equipment becomes available from the vendor. o Digital cellular upgrade. Techplan will provide technical assistance and coordination for a future conversion from analog cellular to digital cellular. Should this conversion occur it will be supplied and perfomned by the SAFE's equipment contractor GTE. Page Three August 1, 1991 Contract with Techplan Corporation and the Orange County Transportation Authority to Provide Day -to -Day Call Box Operations Support TASK V o Preparation of Reports. Techplan will prepare monthly written reports for each county outlining system expansion, system status, operational statistics and trends, contractor performance and any other noteworthy conditions. The Orange County Transportation Authority staff has proposed to perform the service of following up on accident reports involving a call box knockdown to obtain insurance reimbursement. In some cases (when it is not a hit and run situation) SAFE can obtain reimbursement from motorist's auto insurance when a call box is involved and an accident report is filed by the CHP. OCTA staff has informed us they will perform follow up when there is an accident report and pursue collection through insurance, small claims court actions and collection agencies. The cost for this service will be 20% of recovered funds. OCTA has the only successful program for recovery of such accident losses and this being kind of an incentive based payment process, staff recommends entering into an agreement with the OCTA to perform this service for the Riverside SAFE. The cost of the total program proposed by Techplan is $52,723. Due to Task I and Task IV being somewhat discretionary (the Board would have to formally act to expand or in -fill the system/staff would have to exercise judgement to direct Techplan to evaluate technology changes) the total cost of the other services proposed is $18,858. Staff recommends approval of the entire package ($52,723) in order to have expedient response to any board action to in -fill or expand the call box system and to be positioned to receive evaluations and recommendations on any technology changes which may impact the program. Should this proposal be approved, staff recommends the contract begin in the month of August 1991. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) Approval to contract with Techplan to oversee the day to day call box system operation at a cost not to exceed $52,723, and 2) Approval to enter into an agreement with the OCTA to provide call box knockdown insurance recovery for the Riverside County loll box system. HS:sc 0 tti¢- " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION August 1, 1991 TO: Administrative Committee FROM: Mike Davis, Environmental Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Contract with Hazardous Waste Consultant to Perform a Phase II Due Diligence Audit for Commuter Rail Stations at Serfas Club Drive, Pierce Street and Van Buren Avenue (Rudicill St.) RCTC has previously authorized staff to proceed with investigation of the feasibility of acquiring several potential commuter rail station sites along the Route 91 corridor. Bechtel was requested to perform initial environmental screenings for each of the sites. Bechtel has completed Phase I Initial Site Assessments (ISA) for each of the three sites. This ISA consisted of a records and literature search, agency review, and cursory field survey. The ISA's indicate that there are indications of potential contamination on each of the sites and it was recommended that a follow-up Phase II "Due Diligence" subsurface exploratory audit be performed for each of the sites. The Phase II Due Diligence Audit will consist of soil sampling and testing program. It was subsequently determined that this Audit would need to be conducted by an independent contractor certified to prepare such reports. In response to this recommendation Request for Proposals (RFP) were sent to over 60 perspective bidders. From this solicitation only 12 proposals were received.These 12 proposals were screened by a selection committee comprised of RCTC, Bechtel and Ca[trans. As a result of the screening process a list of six (6) qualified hazardous waste contractors was established. The 6 contractors were personally interviewed by the selection committee and ranked as follows: 1. Tetra Tech, INC 2. BCM Engineers 3. A.L. Burke Engineers 4. Chambers Group, INC 5. Converse Environmental West 6. Ninyo & Moore " " Page Two August 1, 1991 Contract with Hazardous Waste Consultant to Perform a Phase II Due Diligence Audit for Commuter Rail Stations at Serfas Club Drive, Pierce Street and Van Buren Avenue (Rudicill St.) These 6 contractors will be called upon as necessary to prepare the required Phase II Audit reports for the 3 Commuter Rail Stations and other similar projects that could arise in the future. The Audit reports for the 3 Station Sites would range in cost between $30,000 and $65,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the list of qualified Hazardous Waste contractors to perform Phase II Audit Services for RCTC. One of which will be selected to prepare the Phase II Due Diligence Audit Reports for the Serfas Club Dr., Pierce St. and Rudicill St. Sites at a proposed cost that would range between $30,000 and $65,000. A standard consultant agreement will be used for the contract. MD:sc " " "