Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout04 April 10, 2002 CommissionRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 10:00 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 Bechtel - Records LOCATION: CHANCELLOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM University of California @ Riverside 1201 University Avenue, Room 207 Riverside, California 92507 X59939 Commissioners Chairman: John F. Tavaglione 1' Vice Chairman: Ron Roberts 2"d Vice Chairman: Roy Wilson Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside James A. Venable, County of Riverside Roy Wilson, County of Riverside Tom Mullen, County of Riverside John Hunt / Jan Wages, City of Banning Placido L. Valdivia / Roger Berg, City of Beaumont Robert Crain / Gary Grimm, City of Blythe John Chlebnik / Jon Winningham, City of Calimesa Alfred W. Trembly / Jack Wamsley, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Sarah DiGrandi, City of Cathedral City Juan M. DeLara, City of Coachella Janice L. Rudman/ Jeff Miller, City of Corona Greg Ruppert / Matt Weyuker, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin ReeserLowe / Lori Van Arsdale, City of Hemet Percy L. Byrd / Robert A. Bernheimer, City of Indian Wells Mike Wilson /Gene Gilbert, City of Indio John J. Pena / Ron Perkins, City of La Quinta Robert L. Schiffner / Thomas Buckley, City of Lake Elsinore Frank West / Bonnie Flickinger, City of Moreno Valley Jack F. van Haaster / Warnie Enochs, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert William G. Kleindienst / Chris Mills, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Harvey Gerber, City of Rancho Mirage Ameal Moore / Joy Defenbaugh, City of Riverside Chris Carlson-Buydos / Jim Conner, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Anne Mayer, Director, Caltrans District #8 Eric Haley, Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Commission. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item fisted on the agenda 10:00 a.m. (Please Note Time Change) Wednesday, April 10, 2002 CHANCELLOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM University of Ca/ifomia Riverside 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside 1. CALL TO ORDER 2 ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.) 6. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 6A. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORTS Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Reports for the month ending February 28, 2002. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 2 6B. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Page 5 Overview This item is for the Commission to amend the Motorist Assistance budget for maintenance of equipment from $1,018,000 to $1,111,000. 6C. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 02-013, "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO AUTHORIZE INVESTMENT OF MONIES IN THE LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LA/F). " Page 6 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 02-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize Investment of Monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LA/F). " 6D. TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21' CENTURY (TEA 21) STATEWIDE REAUTHORIZATION PRINCIPLES Page 9 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the TEA 21 statewide reauthorization principles as developed by the CALCOG/CALTRANS TEA 21 Reauthorization Task Force. 6E. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 12 1) Support — AB 2809 (Longville) Support SB 1 Oxxx (Sher); and, 2) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 3 • 6F. PROPOSITION 42 REVENUE ESTIMATES Page 16 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Proposition 42 Revenue Estimates. 6G. STIP INTRA-COUNTY FORMULA ADJUSTMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve postponing this year's adjustment to February 2003 to coincide with the development of the 2004 STIP; and, 2) Amend the STIP Intra-county Formula MOU to adjust the percentages for the allocation of STIP funds to February of every odd year to coincide with the development of future STIPs. 6H. STATUS OF THE 2002 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Page 20 Overview Page 18 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program update. 61. ALLOCATION OF STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2% PLANNING, PROGRAMMING, AND MONITORING FUNDS FOR CETAP Overview Page 27 This item is for the Commission to allocate $721,809 in 2002 STIP 2% Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PPM) from the Western County formula pot for the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) planning effort. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 4 6J. FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SECTION 5310 PROGRAM AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 02-014, "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CERTIFYING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN." Page 29 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the FY 2002-03 FTA Section 5310 Riverside County project rankings as recommended by the Local Review Committee; 2) Include the projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan; and, 3) Adopt Resolution No. 02-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Project Consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan." 6K. FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM Page 34 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the release of a Call for Projects for the FY 2002-03 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program and notify the cities, the County, and local school districts of the estimated funding available for the fiscal year. 6L. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 02-65-944 FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 COMMUTER SURVEY Page 38 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve Agreement No. 02-65- 944, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement 02-65-943, between OCTA, RCTC, and SCAG to add $15,000, with RCTC paying $7,500 and OCTA paying $7,500 to cover an additional videotaping site and associated costs. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 5 6M. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Page 40 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. 6N. AWARD OF AGREEMENT NO. 02-25-059 TO TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY, INC. TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT THE FOUR METROLINK STATIONS AND ONE OFFICE BUILDING OWNED BY THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Page 57 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the Evaluation Committee's selection of Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. to provide landscape maintenance services for the Commission owned properties; and, 2) Award Agreement No. 02-25-059 to Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc., pursuant to Legal Counsel review. 60. CONSULTANT RANKING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROVISION OF PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES FOR THE PROPOSED PARKING STRUCTURE AT NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK STATION Page 83 Overview 1) Concur with the Selection Committee recommendations, for the ranking of Engineering Firms, as listed below, who responded to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for consultant services to provide Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies, for the proposed 1,000 space Parking Structure at the new North Main Corona Metrolink Station; and, Top Ranked Gordon H. Chong & Partners Second Owen Group Third DMJM + HARRIS Fourth Choate Parking Design Consultants 2) Direct staff to bring back a scope, schedule, and cost for approval after the State funding has been approved and the project scope has been finalized. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 6 6P. APPROVAL OF STATE ROUTE 74 TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT III AGREEMENT NO. 02-31-055 WITH THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL Page 86 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve entering into Agreement No. 02-31-055 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) for Traffic Enforcement Services during construction of Segment 1; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, on behalf of the Commission. 6Q. APPROVAL OF STATE ROUTE 74 UTILITY AGREEMENT NO. 02-31-044 WITH AT&T BROADBAND Page 92 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve entering into. Agreement No. 02-31-044 with AT&T Broadband defining the responsibilities for the relocation of cable television lines related to the RCTC Measure "A" widening of SR 74 between Lake Elsinore and the City of Perris. The RCTC cost is estimated to be $6,212.26; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, on behalf of the Commission. 6R. REQUEST TO AMEND CITY OF BANNING'S FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FOR PURCHASE OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT FORD RANGER PICKUP Page 103. Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Amend the City of Banning's FY 2001-02 Short Range Transit Plan authorizing the purchase of a Ford Ranger pickup; and, 2) Authorize the expenditure of $8,371 in Local Transportation Funds and $6,629 in State Transit Assistance funds, previously allocated to cover the cost. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 7 • • 7. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 02-25-050 WITH AMTRAK TO SERVE THE RIVERSIDE -DOWNTOWN STATION Page 104 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve Agreement No. 02-25-050, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, with Amtrak to serve the Riverside - Downtown Station. 8. EXPENDITURE PLAN FOR MEASURE "A" EXTENSION Page 106 Overview The Expenditure Plan for the Measure "A" extension is presented for review, discussion and adoption. 9. RCTC PUBLIC INFORMATION OUTREACH PROGRAM Page 125 Overview An oral presentation will be made before the Commission on a proposal for a revised and expanded information program to apprise the public on projects completed, in progress and planned to be built in the future. 10. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 11. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Overview Page 126 This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. Included in the agenda packet is a report by Commissioner Frank Hall on the APTA Legislative Conference. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda April 10, 2002 Page 8 12. CLOSED SESSION ITEMS Conference with Real Property Negotiator Pursuant to Section 54946.8 A. Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director or Designee Property Owners: See Following List of Property Owners SR -74 Right -Of -Way Acquisitions Item CPN APN Grantor 1 13896-1 342-240-024 Ethel May Hatcher 2 13897-1 326-240-031 lanthe M. Roberson Bentley - Johnson 3 13903-1 326-240-052 Michael B. & Bonnie S. Martin B. Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director or Designee Property Owner: White Rock Development Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment Item APN Grantor 1 377-373-008 White Rock Development 2 377-373-008 White Rock Development 3 377-373-008 White Rock Development 4 347-120-016 White Rock Development 5 347-120-016 White Rock Development 6 347-120-016 White Rock Development 7 347-120-016 White Rock Development 8 347-120-016 White Rock Development 9 347-120-017 White Rock Development White Rock Development 10 347-120-017 11 347-120-020 White Rock Development 12 347-120-020 White Rock Development 13 347-120-020 White Rock Development 14 347-120-020 White Rock Development 15 347-120-021 White Rock Development 16 347-120-021 White Rock Development 17 347-120-021 White Rock Development 18 347-120-021 White Rock Development 13. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 8, 2002, Chancellor's Conference Room, University of • California @ Riverside, 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside. AGENDA ITEM 4 • • Minutes RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chairman John Tavaglione at 9:00 a.m., in the Chancellor's Conference Room at the University of California at Riverside, 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent Daryl Busch Bob Buster Chris Buydos John Chlebnik Joy Defenbaugh Juan DeLara John Hunt William G. Kleindienst Dick Kelly Anne Mayer Tom Mullen John J. Pena Gregory S. Pettis Robin Lowe Ron Roberts Janice Rudman Robert Schiffner Harvey Sullivan John F. Tavaglione Alfred W. Trembly Placido L. Valdivia Jack van Haaster James A. Venable Frank West Mike Wilson Roy Wilson Percy Byrd Robert Crain Harvey Gerber Greg Ruppert Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 2 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests from the public to speak. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — February 13, 2002 M/S/C (Buster/M. Wilson) to approve the February 13, 2002 minutes as presented. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 02-012, "RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO ACQU/RE FEE AND EASEMENT INTERESTS IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, THAT IS NECESSARY FOR THE REALIGNMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF STATE ROUTE 74, BETWEEN DEXTER AVENUE IN LAKE ELS/NORE TO 7TH STREET IN PERR/S (SEGMENTS 1 AND 2) At this time Chairman Tavaglione opened the public hearing. Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel, explained the nature and scope of public hearing including the findings that the Commission is being asked to make prior to the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity. He stated that the cost for the properties is not the subject matter for this hearing. Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Board, stated that notices were mailed to the affected property owners and proofs of mailing of the notices of the hearing are on file. Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director, reviewed the State Route 74 project and each of the findings. The County of Riverside Real Property Department is acting as the right-of-way acquisition agent for the Commission in the acquisition of parcels. This presentation constitutes appropriate and adequate information for the Commission to affirm the required findings and approve the Resolution of Necessity subject to any comments from the public. Naty Kopenhaver stated that no written objections or letters were received from the affected property owners. One request to be heard was received from Lindy Lee Long, an affected property owner. Lindy Lee Long expressed her concern that community interests are not being met. She believes that SR 74 is being improved to benefit development interests. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 3 Chairman Tavaglione stated that the SR 74 realignment and improvement project has been discussed extensively by the Commission and the focus has always been on traffic safety and deaths, not development interests. There being no further requests to speak on this matter, Chairman Tavaglione declared the public hearing closed. M/S/C (MullenNenable) to: 1) Approve the following findings: a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project. b) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. c) The fee and easement interests to be acquired are necessary for the project. d) The offers of just compensation have been made to the property owners. 2) Approve Resolution No. 02-012, "Resolution of Necessity of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Acquire Fee and Easement Interests in Certain Rea/ Property Located in Riverside County, California, by Eminent Domain, that is Necessary for the Realignment and Improvement of State Route 74, between Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to 7t' Street in Perris (Segments 1 and 2) ", declaring that the acquisition of fee and easement interests in certain real property located in Riverside County, California, more particularly described as APNs 347-100-016 (Segment 1), 349- 080-021, 349-080-036, 349-080-046, 349-080-053, 349-080- 014, 349-080-058, 349-080-059, 349-080-009, 349-080-047, 349-080-002, 349-080-003, 349-080-001 (Segment 2) (Project Parcel Nos. 13547-1 (Segment 1), 13610-1, 13611-1, 2, 13612- 1, 13614-1, 2, 13615-1, 2, 13617-1, 13618-1, 13619-1, 13620- 1, 13621-1, 2, 3, 13622-1, 13624-1 (Segment 2)), by Eminent Domain is necessary for the Realignment and Improvement of State Route 74 Between Dexter Avenue and 7th Street (Segments 1 and 2). APN 347-100-016 (Parcel No. 13547-1, Segment 1) identified in this Resolution was previously included in Resolution No. 01-001. Resolution No. 02-012 incorporates an increase in the acquisition area due to updated property information from the County of Riverside. 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 4 7. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Bob Buster requested Agenda Item No. 71, "Recommendations for Station Management Strategic P/an"; be pulled from the Consent ,Calendar for discussion. M/S/C (Wilson/Buydos) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 7A. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 1) Support - Federal Bills HR 3694 and S 1917, Oppose - State Board of Equalization proposed Regulation 1533.2, Support - Policy position associated to pending State Legislation related to State Board of Equalization proposed Regulation 1533.2 on diesel fuel tax exemption for agriculture and food processing purposes, Oppose - SB 1262 (Torlakson); and, 2) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item. 7B. RIVERSIDE COUNTY 2002 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FINANCIAL RESOLUTION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 02-011, "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON CERTIFYING THAT THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY HAS RESOURCES TO FUND PROJECTS IN FISCAL YEARS 2002-2003 THROUGH 2007-2008 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND AFFIRMING COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENT ALL PROJECTS IN THE PROGRAM" Adopt Resolution 02-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying that the Riverside County Has Resources to Fund Projects in Fiscal Years 2002-2003 to 2007-2008 Transportation Improvement Program and Affirming Commitment to Implement All Projects in the Program" certifying that the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) submitted for inclusion in the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) FY 2002 through FY 2008 Regional TIP is financially constrained. 7C. TDA AND MEASURE "A" AUDIT RESULTS Receive and file the TDA and Measure "A" Audit Results Report. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 5 7D. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the months ending November and December 2001. 7E. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS 1) Adjust the STA budget to better reflect the expenditures in the capital and the operating budgets; and, 2) Adjust the Measure "A" Western County. Transit budget. 7F. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ending December 31, 2001. 7G. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORTS Receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Reports for the month ending January 31, 2002. 7H. SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM EXTENSION FOR THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE Grant the City of Riverside a six-month extension to October 31, 2002, to complete the Wells Avenue sidewalk project. 7J. LA SIERRA STATION EXPANSION 1) Amend the Commuter Rail Short Range Transit Plan and allocate $9 million for the acquisition of land and Phase 1 and 2 expanded La Sierra Station parking: $6.2 million in FTA Section 5307 funds, $1.8 million in STA funds, and $1 million in Measure "A" funds; and, 2) Approve in concept the partnership with Riverside Public Utilities to install a photovoltaic carport structure at the La Sierra Station. 7K. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR STATION GROUNDS MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT THE FOUR METROLINK STATIONS IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1) Authorize the release of a Station Grounds Maintenance Service RFP to provide services at the four Metrolink Stations in Riverside County; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 6 2) Approve the formation of an evaluation/selection committee, comprised of Commissioners Robin Lowe and Janice Rudman from the Plans and Programs Committee, a representative from SCRRA, and the City of Riverside, and two RCTC staff, to review, evaluate, and rank all RFP'S received, interview short listed firms, and recommend a firm; and, 3) Bring back to the Commission for final approval. 7L. ADVERTISE CONSTRUCTION BIDS FOR THE NEW NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATION 1) Authorize staff to advertise construction bids for the new North Main Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail Station; and, 2) Bring back to the Commission the results of the bidding for contract award to the lowest, responsive bidder. 7M. COMPARISON OF FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 AND FISCAL YEAR 2002- 2003 FIRST AND SECOND QUARTERS - PUBLIC BUS AND COMMUTER RAIL Receive and file the comparison of FY 01-02 and FY 02-03 first and second quarter ridership information for public bus and commuter rail. 7N. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. 70. TRANSIT OASIS STRATEGY Receive and file the Draft Transit Oasis Strategy. 7P. SPECIALIZED TRANSIT PROGRAM MEASURE "A" CALL FOR PROJECTS 1) Authorize staff to release the Measure "A" Specialized Transit two-year Call for Projects covering western Riverside County; 2) Review the criteria and identify additional services and/or population groups that may need specialized transit services through the Commission's Specialized Transit Program - Measure "A" Call for Projects; 3) Appoint Commissioner Alfred W. Trembly as the Commission representative to be seated on the Evaluation Committee; and, 4) Reserve $300,000 funding to support matching of Section 5310 federal capital grants program. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 7 • 7Q. MEASURE "A" PARK AND RIDE LEASE PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file the Park and Ride Lease Program Update as an information item. 7R. PURCHASE OF RIDESHARE MATCHING SOFTWARE • 1) Authorize the Chairman to execute Agreement No. 02-41-052, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, with Multisystems, Inc. for the purchase of rideshare matching software and on -call software support services in an amount not to exceed $140,000; 2) Approve a budget adjustment of $190,000 for the execution of this contract, the purchase of computer hardware to support the rideshare matching function and for minor computer programming to ensure Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) service to local employers; and, 3) Direct staff to issue solicitations for data entry services and mail house services to support rideshare matching. 7S. AWARD AGREEMENT NO. 02-31-051 TO DMJM +HARRIS FOR STATE ROUTE 60 HOV WIDENING PROJECT IN THE CITY OF MORENO VALLEY 1) Award Agreement No. 02-31-051 (Amendment No. 5 to RO-2042) to DMJM + Harris in the amount of $270,000 for additional engineering design, landscaping for soundwalls, and preparation of storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP); and, 2) Authorize the Chairman to execute the Agreement, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, on behalf of the Commission. 7T. ADDITIONAL LOCAL MATCH FUNDING REQUEST FOR THE STATE ROUTE 79 REALIGNMENT PROJECT IN THE VICINITY OF THE CITIES OF SAN JACINTO AND HEMET Approve $700,000 of Western County Formula SB 45 2% Planning, Programming and Monitoring funds to complete the local match requirement for the $4.5 million of TEA 21 Demonstration Project funding for the SR 79 Realignment Project. 7U. AWARD OF OFFICE SYSTEMS AND FURNITURE Approve the selection of Seal Furniture and Systems, Inc. for the purchase and installation of office systems and furniture. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 8 7V. ACQUISITION OF DIGITAL COPIER Approve to replace its Xerox copier with two Canon Image Runner 105 Digital copiers under a Municipal Lease Agreement. 7W. PURCHASE OF COMPUTER EQUIPMENT AND SOFTWARE Approve the purchase and installation of 37 workstations - computer equipment and software - from Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. at a cost not to exceed $81,896.94. 8. PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET Ivan Chand, Chief Financial Officer, reviewed the proposed Policy Goals and Objectives for FY 2002-03. Commissioner Tom Mullen stated that he supports the goods movement but wants to ensure that there is not an increase in traffic on any rail lines through Riverside County. He also urged the Commission to oppose the high-speed rail route from Los Angeles to San Jose due to Federal Administration budget cuts and because there is no benefit to the Inland Empire. In addition, he recommended SCAG advocate an Inland Empire high-speed rail route. Commissioner Robin Lowe concurred with Commissioner Mullen's statement and believes that we should include our intent to participate in Southern California congestion relief. She also recommended that greater specificity be given to the grade separation project list item. Eric Haley recommended that wording should reflect that the Alameda Corridor East funding list includes 37 of the top 100 projects in Riverside County which was adopted by all four counties. Commissioner Ron Roberts concurred with Commissioner Mullen's statement believes that a high-speed rail route from San Diego to March Air Reserve Base would serve a greater number of passengers on a considerably shorter route. Commissioner John Chlebnik stated that he believes it should be made clear that there are greater priorities to be considered before high-speed rail projects are considered for funding. Commissioner Will Kleindienst recommended adding the Commission's adoption of the resolution to support the Inland Empire Airports First movement to the Goods Movement section. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 9 Commissioner Roberts indicated that SCAG voted to merge the Southern California MAGLEV program with the California/Nevada system to work cooperatively for future funding and recommends this be added to the Commission's Goals and Objectives. Chairman Tavaglione requested staff make the requested modifications. M/S/C (Mullen/Kleindienst) to approve the proposed Commission's Policy Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Budget with the incorporated recommendations. 9. METROLINK RIVERSIDE LINE ON -TIME PERFORMANCE David Solow, Chief Executive Officer of SCRRA, briefed the Commission on the Metrolink Riverside line on -time performance, highlighting the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) delay characteristics such as maintenance, dispatching, and scheduling practices. He indicated that at the SCRRA Executive Board meeting held on March 8th, they agreed to begin the cure process. He then reviewed the arbitration process. Commissioner Bob Buster requested more details on the arbitration process and if there have been any cases where arbitration resulted in construction improvements to the rail line by the railroad. David Solow responded that he was not aware of any such cases and indicated that any estimation of the outcome would be speculation. Commissioner Roberts recommended gathering letters from Federal and State officials and send a delegation from Riverside County to the UPRR headquarters to express the extreme dissatisfaction with their service. Commissioner Joy Defenbaugh concurred with Commissioner Roberts recommendation and also indicated that her office has kept a log of the traffic delays and public complaints received about the Riverside line over the past four years. Commissioner Mullen also concurred with Commissioner Roberts recommendation and believes UPRR is an irresponsible corporation and needs to be confronted directly. Commissioner Lowe also concurred with Commissioner Roberts recommendation and asked that a paper be prepared to provide to our delegation on this issue. She also recommended resolutions be obtained from the cities and the county. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 10 Commissioner Robert Schiffner asked if SCRRA has developed a list of necessary improvements and related costs. David Solow indicated that they did not have a currently list of necessary improvements. Commissioner Kleindienst indicated he believes the Commission also needs to develop a solution it deems necessary to correct the problem. M/S/C (Lowe/Defenbaugh) to approve: 1) Receive and file the status report provided by SCRRA staff on the Riverside Line On -Time Performance; 2) Request that SCRRA pursue all available efforts to ensure the enforcement of priority treatment contained in the Riverside Operating Agreement with the Union Pacific Railroad Company; and, 3) Obtain resolutions from the cities, county, state, and federal officials and support a delegation to travel to UPRR headquarters to present the Commission's position. 10. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 71. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN Commissioner Buster expressed his concern that some of the cities in which stations are located responded that they did not have the available funds to assist in station operations. It is his understanding that cities and counties of other lines are fully responsible for station operations. Eric Haley noted in light of Proposition 42 and the renewal of Measure "A", staff is recommending that the station operations funding issue be tabled until resolution of both ballot measures in Winter 2003. M/S/C (R. Wilson/Buydos) to: 1) Finalize the Station Parking Expansion Plan, in priority order, to include: North Main Corona, La Sierra, and the Riverside - Downtown Station; 2) Forward the Station Operating Funding Deficit issue to the Strategic Development Transition Committee (as determined by the Commission) in Winter 2002 in conjunction with the review of the Local Transportation Fund 80/20 funding policy; and, 3) Establish the Rail Station Advisory Council. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes March 13, 2002 Page 11 • • 11. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR A. Commissioner Roy Wilson gave a brief report on the Unmet Transit Needs Hearing held in Blythe on March 8. B. Commissioner Lowe reported that SCAG is recommending $500,000 for CETAP efforts in their FY 2002-2003 budget. Also, the Regional Council increased the request for MAGLEV funds to $7 million. C. Commissioner Kleindienst requested a report of the estimated revenue that Proposition 42 willgenerate for the Riverside County by city. D. Eric Haley gave a brief report on the Proposition 42 vote statistics and estimated revenue. He also briefed the Commission on the license plate study that will be taking place on SR 91. 12. CLOSED SESSION ITEM Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9(a) Significant exposure to litigation to subdivision (b): Number of potential cases: 1 There were no announcements on the Closed Session item. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:00 a.m., on Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at the Chancellor's Conference Room, University of California at Riverside, 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside, California, 92501. Aspectfull`y�, submitted, 'C'L-Q-a_ ELL,- Nat Ko nha Clerk of the Board " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Louie Martin, Bechtel Project Controls Manager Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Contracts Cost and Schedule Reports BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Reports for the month ending February 28, 2002. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached material depicts the current cost and schedule status on contracts reported by projects, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission. For each contract and agreement, the report lists the authorized value approved by the Commission, percentage of contract amount expended to date and the project expenditures by route with status for the month ending February 28, 2002. Attachments 000001 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ROUTE 60•PROJECTS Final Design HOV 60/215 to Redlands Blvd, (2042) (30i{ 000�) 3� 'a{r��?It�"�•• i�• 1sfl7!t0'0?1iti •life`'!!! ?='liii''"?!!i: !!i .,•...•... :iii. ,iii. .:iii ROUTE 74 PROJECTS Engineering/EnvIron/ROW (R02041 9954,9966, (R02142) (R02141) (214 'r' 0)i(3001) ii i�'' ��16. �i . ...:. ... .... ..iiiliiii.,. ,,. iii • •': •,i: ROUTE 79 PROJECTS Engineering/Environ,/RO W (3003) Realignment study & Right turn lanes (R09961) f:f .• ,�• l:i?iii ROUTE 86 PROJECTS Avenue 58 to Avenue 66 (Segment 2) • Avenue 66 to Avenue 82 (Segment 3) • " (Caltrans Funded Projects) ✓4 ���; ??!?: : �•�� '111:1 •t•1, ;iii1,ii 1111.:. . .'[�i • 1;11'1 ROUTE 91 PROJECTS Soundwall design, ROW and construction (R09101 9337,9847,9861,9848,9832,9969,2043) (2058) (2144) (2136) (3600) Van Buren Blvd. Frwy Hook Ram p (R09535) Sndwall Landscaping (1,09933,9946,9945,2059) ,? .. :f'1, 1 .•'i . !tt t ,�. ,1'1pr''i �+,W: • t .,! ? • ..!!111,1 , � , , t , , . , , . , ,,,•n:pt:ttr:,:i:.:,p??itit?:f:;t:;;:;taa:::lit!!?!1111!? ROUTE 111 PROJECTS (R09219, 9227,9234,9623,9525,9530,9537,9538) 9540,9635,'9743,9849.9851,9857,9629i'�340: 1) f' 't!'''' '°?° a?i?? :111!!. •t? !;!: • :,' 1111?1111, 1111 t:t ti: U• . , , , , ..:}h:, ..�, . •� 111.1.11 Ali RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/ R OJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE C OMMISSI ON AUTHORIZED ALLOCATI ON $3,111,749 $15,011,132 :1011 3't $870,049 fii .!?i; $20,253,000 $33,860,000 $11,902,100 $2,954,000 $1,603,450 61aa $16,946,856 CONTRACTURAL C OM MITMENTS TO DATE 11111111 $3,021,891 $15,011,132 $770,049 iii $19,500,000 $33,760,000 $10,374,324 $2,954,000 $1,603,450 S3 I:�ii 77 $15,530,856 'i� D• 85• Page 1 of 3 % COM MITTED AGAINST AUTH. ALLOCATION 88.5% •j:' j1,i 97.1% 100.0% 96,3% 99.7 % 87.2% 100.0% 100.0% . .11.. 1..1,., •� 91,6% EXPENDITURE FOR MONTH ENDED 02/28/02 $171,586 17'1;x$6 $224,024 $38,068 11111111111111111111.......:011 Project Complete Project. Complete 11111111111111111111 ;t; $90,874 $0 $o $1,588 % EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE $1,313,295 $6,841,574 $500,619 $18,060,000 $31,013,510 $9,371,684 $2,109,519 $788,584 $14,052,042 :? iS'1+I+05S1?� 43,5% .iii•iii..:1il.. . • .. 1114 f 45.6 % iii . . iii .. ii, . ..,iii..,.... y 65,0% 1!111! • , . , 11111!11!!1,!, 1114.00 92.6% 91.9% 90,3% 71.4% 90,5% 00000 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE , COMMISSION • CONTRACTURAL %, COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES PROJECT AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS AGAINST AUTH. MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST DESCRIPTION ALLOCATION TO DATE ALLOCATION 02/28/02 TO DATE COMMITMNTS TO DATE 1-218 PROJECTS Prelim inary Engrg/Environ. (R09008, 9018) $6,726,504 $5,878,173 87,4% $5,704,897 , 97.1 % .. iiiii .,., ::I '127 : ••t• •1 �$i: iI?i;:.iii;•. , §;�`;.,�......... ..... ........._,...,,,,...,,, iI1• ?ii iii ,, • .,,.,:.•:�1..�:. , ..,.,.��•`•..� q. .�. .•tit .,. ,,, ;I;i=i{• 1111, ,,,,.•., iii ii, ..iii';;:{{i?iii{i{IIiII{i{{, ., ,,•, • b: ;. f.{•, ., :{:{:{:{iii ii ,.. . :.:.; .:. . •i{ r� , , �� t: •Ii :;:;:, a=,: ;li• i.:110 f iiiii :i:••;:,1, :::• '': obi ,. INTERCHANGE IMPROV. PROGRAM Yuma IC Landscaping (R09926,9946) $440,000 $400,000 90.9% $0 $312,519 78.1% , i• , •! ,! . ,j �A A' �{ 1;I=. •.t{, r;=r.., . +.©, . ill:l; 6•. •' . , .... ,•.: �•:•, � .. . ,.f•.•�,:.::::;:::;:i:;:i:;:i; {: {. :. :,{:_'="=ii:i; is{t iiiii?:iii='='='• •, :Iii? aa y �. i• y �.c•o �i T! .:. iiiii. . ;•;I:.!•:,: *a .:jl?:::',. `o�' n�' .+f'• •.:T�• . �, iiiii � 2 .... , iiiii:. :1=i=':Ill'=• 1111111° .,. , I e :I;i�:i;::I'r,Ii:Ali:i , .. � ... � � .. !ii iii l;;;?; {:;:{;{:{:::,,, ':1': .. ....1: �•�•... � . =?=iI?=!=ifi=?=�'' •' ?!:?: '•� � •. , iiiii?;;'?Il=!:, : . iiI•• i1'b' III.. >1 , .•i•'�' , PROJECT & CONSTR. MGMT SERV. (RO 2100.);.•.:.••:••• ••:•••• .t..• ,.•,,..,.• :•+ an••: • iiii•: •• •.•.i•n : ;• ••', • S 3. . , ?2i•t.i.•?!?{? :IS !•,• iii:;' !•• .{ . .i•, !' ! : !ii iii ,i,•!{ ,•I. •i: i iiiii iiiii i.: §��;7�:��44>€.,it•i=ai:t;:::I:`.f:.,,.•...,.. $2,300,000 iiiii: ;• •' i{!;. . t :•:r'•=•: a=•=' .;; !:{ s ' iI,••,I��►iiiii.+,.. 02,223,816 •:.i•:.i.. .:•:.5.:•:.:.:,f .: t •:•• : .; t;.y :i :. '' 1IQ:; s�.. .,,...•�S•,.•..••••.,,..,,,, 96,7% : •'•t•:•;•;•:•3•:•:•I ,;,=r',=:::_:_.,.. e' II!IfIIIIII. AS 0149,051 ,{ E?:?!?:i{:ii ' :1; W ., ...,.. ...,.,., $941,685 . •:•,,; :, •:.,•:•:•i•; , i' .. i : S i i . tk;;•;'! .;1;{::.:•.;=1;lt?: •.;•;. I:IR 1 , ••••• , iiiii, 42.3% • ,:•:;' iiiii„:•;,:.::;; !•' iiiii, ...•s t •;'! , .I. i;•• ,_:•: .,, I,•,.••,,•••.,l:i;:,,•••• •••,•: .. , • • , • ::•:•;•'•:•:• •, PROGRAM PLAN & SERVICES North/South Corridor study (R09936) 025,000 $25,000 100.0% ' 00 $0 0.0% •b4 ,• .I :t: :i :i , . t• S• :•S•:•:. :•1•:.: iii y�y�{ . :{; :ii •r:11 >��)���+,,':�••,••,• •......,.•.•.•,•, 1:=i�..,• .t, iiiii,• fi .i. � •..Iiiii.., iiiii :I;;::;•iii;111, I:•;' •i :i' �i•� � ............. •.'fii iii�iliiii!�i• :;i; {.,.;.. , .••,',.!':';,i::'.•. ..,.,s•.•„• ...•..• .• If': ,:,: i ' { ': {.,.;.,., iiii i , f. .11 y1? : ? i, . 'i::"•'• is• •• ", i'i : ii , ii: . •*. ,'•t e' :! �lf t • .. ,. .. ••i ..... . PARK- N-RiDE/INCENT. PROGRAM (RO 9859) (2101.2117) (9813) (2146) (9917) $2,100,814 $2,100,814 100.0% $129,945 $1,156,138 55,0% •i• .; ,.:•t,;.;,:.;••.:,:•:••.;,I• , .:,t•1•: i i{• It' • i ' t . is ►�jj }� ,': iiiii i;. i s :.! • 'i:. y?l'!�1.:�1•!'i:�,i �,I?1��,�T1•.:i::f::ii,.t:. , . ;1{t;:j t:. � , �;{:... � f:;:;;•::_:_•: i i iiii iRfi:l��il . � ..:I1.:7?.. .. iiiii ::ii:•::::: iiiii , •s iiiii .. �•i iiii. � . 'iii °4 :1111::::: iiiii.. � iiiii .;,i.:.;•h:.:.:,: •; •:.;:.;, •1•. •.••'. •$1• .�I .. • .. iii i i , .. .. .iiiii:?:E:E.;•,•,•,.,•,•••,•• .; iiiii:. i•:.t,•.;.;,:.AS•; :i:i=iiiii• ,�� •: � Ii a' j {{ .1•TT•T1:} •:::•;': ;d h,;•:•;•7a;: ., 7 I i•.•... , ; ; iiiii •0 4 :;• •tiii;Ilifi' I , . , . . COMMUTER RAIL Studies/Engineering $4,318,070 $3,925,518 90,9% 0440,186 $3,482,040 88,7% (RO 9420;9731,9832,9833,9844;9854,9956,2028) R02031,2027,2120,2029„2128,3800.3807) • Station/sIte Acq/OP Costs/Maint. Costs (0000,2026,2056,4003-4007,,4198, 4199) .;.t.:•t • •:•:.•i,:.; t ::::•t•1•:•;•: , l, •, iiiii i =i'' .t : 1. i• is •i'i I: 1t :I' :1 :iii : °i� ••, �/�L1�iy►�jJ.:y ,{!� {��[yq'�L't' i i! 'is: i . !1 'lii'i, il! �Y��i;�,�?{!7,i,3:1�N!!;i• l,i'• '••�i:+iiiii T:.tit •i,.al.,.i::. {.,.,..•{fi • !I••i . Ii $13,190,402 I; ., . f; ifi'iII' :as!tt�. ,.,.+.,� . I i Ia .. i .. , ii ii i $13,190,402 �i �j ,'� q��1� .4 QI 1i' !���1,7....,• 3{1•,..iig.,•.•.., . I1.. • 100.0°% :;:iii:{: i,.,., , •.•, •. b 8• F 7�M i�- ilii?Iii!ii:::1::;I;H;::.,. ..... ,..ii!1ii°• $178,120 : ili!IBi I•••.•� 1R t• $4{033,3591 iiii{:' ilS:�'� 9 iiiii • ••: '� t •P. .•, •�.'t•,•• .1 iiis•:•; , . , • .. I , .•.. • =30.6% ?iii;:;:• •, . ;i{iiiii , !; •� •f , i i, ,• t;;I;':';=t'?Ii" .fi t . ,•E .. i f t s t ,•.. : • . • . . '• :: .,�••,, ': ,;•; f.;,:::,:;:;_;;•;•h;•;• •:.I•s t; •:,h,•=s=•=:' =i=•:;ttl=i'{;1,tt,•. , .i:li•i iiiii !!;. iiiiii.l.;,: ,• •!: I . •:t: •fi,!!;,•t •,••,•I.•:t•'•;•!• ,,, .I.. ! 1. . {• i,. i •:.l;,l, •=t, .:t:, .f, ii,{?, 'i {:. i? :fi���+?4�i:•, Imo, , iiii,, .:fl{ f 1.,,:.1.:•:• :•t.i•:.:• .t...• •: •:•{ • 1• . .I�I�'e�. t��,lh� ';:s.••. 't=::;I•:; i;it1l1• °;Iii•:•. •• �3 6 1i i�• 4 . �' s .��� :: 1: I , 1 . !ii?i!,; • '1'!?iii{,.,,.,, iiiii : f•1 ::."ii, iiiii°. •. 1'+ ,. �1i � 1i!ii{i:,i•1.1•:::.:• .... , �• :::t::;::;::I;;•:• t;:•I:;:::; : ?•11:•:•;••,•• :; ,:S'i` �1�1 2•. . , .. , . �. a4#e. • 1::::;;::::11•;:::1;11 :,:::,',:iS , •., ?•:•:•t••,. .,SS''''` � . �, , , ..#00.14,40:5...1.:.1.;•: .;.;.;,;,: •:.:1:::•.1,1A4. ,,,:':;1100;'x; ,yi,:,t;i•::5;,': I i . , . i , iiiii t ............:• • ;. :i.b;, Page2of3 000a. " PROJECT DESCRIPTI ON CITY OF CANYON LAKE Rallroad Canyon Rd Improvements CITY OF CORONA Smith, Maple & Lincoln Interchanges & Storm drainage structure " I. i,. ,lf (1) T" t :��iiiii .. " . CITY OF PERRIS Local streets & road Improvem ents CITY OF SAN JACINTO Local streets & road Improvements CITY OF TEMECULA Local streets & road Improvements CITY OF NORCO Yuma WC & Local streets and road Imprmts CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Local streets & road Improvements CITY OF HEMET Local streets & roads Improvements },,," " " ilii :}(aaj::} , }:1:1 :::.:::11 :'''" :::;t" '" "  ,. 7. :,::: RCTC ME ASURE "A" HI GHWAY/LOCEETS & ROADS PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY PROJECT EXPENDITURE FOR TOTAL OUTSTANDING % LOAN BALANCE APPROVED MONTH ENDED MEASURE "A " L OAN OUTSTANDING TO" DATE AGAINST COMMITMENT 02/28/02 ADVANCES BALANCE COMMITMENT APPROVED COMMIT. $1,600,000 $5,212,623 1111111111111!7"" $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 $1,500,000 $730,000 111111111111111I111111111111!: t" :a tj 1jf 11ii. $1,600,000 1i1 f3fii} 1?i; OO)3" 1 1,11.. $5,212,623 fif iA1AH $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 $1,500,000 $730,000 ::: " :jt;::::t:::::;::::f:1:::i':::;: iii. ,.fii.. :i" .,iiiiii ." ?: ...,flfflf f. iiis:i; Iliii ,. ifffifl:,:ft" 1 , ," 1 .j;" 1." .. ,,;,, .i?: , . iii :j: y NOT E: E' (1) Loa n n against Interchange improvement programs. ������ .���� " All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets. :ifi' ." ��. '0f 11101111 $903,004 $3,164,138 $1,296,428 $886,750 $3,410,440 $1,432,101 $1,069,210 $0 , hI;��t yy ee .+1 f'" 1 1;1;1, ....:t: , , . ," " $0 $0 1,11`1 ,'`' ',' ,i 'i `' " t" " , t: :(. $0 56.4% 60,7% 66.9% $0 66.9% $0 $0 66,9% 66.9% $0 71.3% $0 0 .0% 1111 .. " ..if:, f��i , .......'f1��...i'.'.::����7 Page 3of3 Status asst: 02/28/02 000004 AGENDA ITEM 6B • " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Budget Adjustment BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to amend the Motorist Assistance budget for maintenance of equipment from $1,018,000 to $1,1 11,000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff is requesting a line item budget increase for equipment maintenance from $1,018,000 to $1,111,000 for the Motorist Assistance program. The increase is required to pay for "above contract" replacement parts that were discovered broken, chipped, or cracked during the call box upgrade project. The parts included 246 main housings, 228 front doors, and 149 back plates. Staff inspected the damaged inventory and verified the number of items. In addition, had the Commission not undertaken the refurbishment project, the maintenance crew would have noticed the damage during the semi-annual inspection of the boxes and we would have still incurred the replacement cost on a time and material cost basis. Sufficient balances are contained in the fund balance to cover this increase. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2001-02 Amount: $93,000 Source of Funds: Unreserved Fund Balance Budget Adjustment: GLA No.: 202-45-73301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 03/18/02 000005 " AGENDA ITEM 6C " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM" " Budget and Implementation Committee Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution No. 02-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize Investment of Monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)." BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 02-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize Investment of Monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)." BACKGROUND INFORMATION; LAIF began in 1977 as a voluntary alternative for California's local governments and special districts under the administration of the State Treasurer. The enabling legislation is Section 16429.1,2,3 of the California Government Code. It has been determined that the State of California cannot declare bankruptcy under Federal regulations, thereby allowing the Government Code Section 16429.3 to stand. This section states that "money placed with the State Treasurer for deposit in the LAIF shall not be subject to either: (a) transfer or loan pursuant to Sections 16310, 16312, or 16313, or (b) impoundment or seizure by any state official or state agency". The advantages of investing in LAIF are: 1. Investment objectives of the Pool focuses on Safety, Liquidity and Yield 2. Higher interest earnings through the pooling of funds for investment 3. No minimum investment period 4. Low and competitive administrative costs 5. Use of State's investment expertise and operations " Staff is recommending that the Commission adopt the Resolution to participate in LAIF. This will allow the Commission another alternative as it invests its cash for safety, liquidity, and yield. Attachment 000006 " RESOLUTION NO. 02-013 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO AUTHORIZE INVESTMENT OF MONIES IN THE LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 730 of the statutes of 1976, Section 16429.1 was added to the California Government Code to create a Local Agency Investment Fund in the State Treasury for the deposit of money of a local agency for purposes of investment by the State Treasurer; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners does hereby find that the deposit and withdrawal of money in the Local Agency Investment Fund in accordance with " the provisions of Section 16429.1 of the Government Code for the purpose of investment as stated therein is in the best interests of the Riverside County Transportation Commission. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Commissioners hereby authorize the deposit and withdrawal of Riverside County Transportation Commission monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund in the State Treasury in accordance with the provisions of Section 16429.1 of the Government Code for the purpose of investment as stated therein, and verification by the State Treasurer's Office of all banking information provided in that regard. " BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Riverside County Transportation Commission's Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer shall be individually authorized to order the deposit or withdrawal of monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission at its meeting on Wednesday, April 10, 2002. ATTEST: BY: BY: John F. Tavaglione, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission Naty Kopenhaver Clerk of the Board • mot. odor s AGENDA ITEM 6D • " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: FROM: THROUGH: Riverside County Transportation Commission Budget and Implementation Committee Darren Kettle, Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Transportation Equity Act for the 21St Century (TEA 21) Statewide Reauthorization Principles BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the attached TEA 21 statewide reauthorization principles as developed by the CALCOG/CALTRANS TEA 21 Reauthorization Task Force. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The current federal transportation authorization, or policy, act known as the Transportation Equity Act for the 21St Century, generally governs transportation policy from the time President Clinton signed the Act in June 1998 through the end of the federal 2002-03 fiscal year. While TEA 21 made significant gains over its predecessor legislation, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), including increased federal funding for transportation projects and the creation of the Corridors and Borders Infrastructure program, it neither adequately addressed how goods movement policy is integrated into our federal transportation system policy nor did it fund goods movement programs to a level that can seriously address a national problem. Debate has been underway throughout the State since early 2001 to develop a statewide consensus on TEA 21 reauthorization principles. The California Council of Governments (CALCOG) took the lead on this effort that has included local transportation agencies from across the State, including the executive directors of both SANBAG and RCTC, CALTRANS, and the Governor's Office with a goal of. arriving at a set of principles that are agreed upon by transportation interests throughout the state to show a unified California as we proceed through the national reauthorization debate. The consensus principles will provide staff with guidance through the TEA 21 reauthorization process and ensure a cohesive. California transportation community, a position that California has not experienced in the past several reauthorizations. 000009 " TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY (TEA 21) PRINCIPLES FOR REAUTHORIZATION California's transportation system is the gateway for the economic engines within the state that drive the national economy and for the largest proportion of the goods and services that link the United States with its global markets. The efficiency, security, and quality of California's transportation system directly affect the economic wellbeing of every other state in the nation. Reauthorization of TEA 21 provides an opportunity to strengthen transportation's key role in supporting national security and the global economic competitiveness of the United States in the 21st Century. The following are California's principles in furthering that goal: Funding " Increase funding levels by raising annual obligation limits and spending down the unobligated balances in the Highway Trust Fund. " Maintain the guaranteed funding levels and "firewalls" established in TEA 21 that match transportation expenditures to transportation revenues. " Retain the Revenue Aligned Budget Authority (RABA) mechanism, but distribute the proceeds consistent with the historical split of gas tax proceeds both to the Highway and Mass Transit Accounts. " Develop a mechanism to use available Highway Trust Fund balances to dampen the large swings in funding that could result from negative RABA adjustments. There should not be a major reduction in funding levels when Highway Trust Fund balances are high and can be used to mitigate negative RABA adjustments. " Allow for easier access to and/or flexibility in qualifying projects from approved Regional Transportation Plans for innovative financing. This effort would include the modification of regulations and/or incentives for innovative financing arrangements including increased capitalization of infrastructure banks, debt - financing flexibility, direct treasury financing, access to public -private joint ventures, and the broadening of eligibility rules of the innovative financing program. DRAFT Page 1 of 2 00P Qr Program Structure • Continue the basic program structure instituted by ISTEA that provides state, regional, and local officials the flexibility to allocate federal funds to a range of highway, transit, local road, and bicycle/pedestrian improvements based on needs. • Remove barriers to funding projects and programs that promote more efficient operation of the existing transportation system, such as deleting the three-year limit on the use of CMAQ funds. • Concentrate any increased funding in the existing highway and transit formula and capital investment programs. Refrain from creating any new discretionary programs beyond those currently authorized by law. • Provide for increased program capacity to support the safe and efficient movement of goods in corridors that are crucial to national economic security and vitality, and provide for the mitigation of congestion and environmental effects of such movements. Support this effort by using Highway Trust Fund dollars or other Federal funding sources for programmatic increases in excess of current authorizations. Equity • Ensure that California receives an increased share of highway funding based on its contributions to the Highway Trust Fund and preeminent role in the national economy. • • Oppose efforts to impose an arbitrary funding "cap" on the disbursement of formula or discretionary federal transit funds to any state. Expediting Project Delivery • Link permitting agency review and approval to environmental review processes for environmentally responsible and expeditious project delivery. Federal agencies should coordinate policy and share financial and staff resources to integrate and expedite use of authorized funds to meet local, state, and national transportation and environmental priorities. • Provide states with financial incentives such as enhanced and coordinated funding to assure the use of integrated review and planning procedures. • Pursue a California pilot program demonstrating coordination of effort and funding between the state and federal permitting agencies and regulatory structures. 0000 1 DRAFT Page 2 of 2 " AGENDA ITEM 6E " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM• • Budget and Implementation Committee Darren Kettle, Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Support — AB 2809 (Longville) Support - SB 10xxx (Sher); and, 2) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item. • • BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update The focus of the State Legislature continues to be the State budget crisis that the Legislative Analysts Office (LAO) has pegged as high as $17.5 billion. While the Governor's proposed 2002-03 budget identifies proposals that resolve $12.5 billion of the deficit, it will be necessary for the Governor's May Budget Revise or the Legislature to address the $5 billion shortfall. It is important to note, that the LAO has opined that several of the Governor 's revenue related proposals included in his "balanced" January 2002 budget, including increased federal assistance and a quick recession recovery that will yield increased personal income tax revenues, are extremely optimistic. What this may mean is that the $5 billion, which the LAO has identified that the Legislature may have to address, may be significantly higher. This is a daunting task for a Legislature that has, since the mid 1990s, only experienced a State budget that was realizing unprecedented revenue growth. On February 28, 2002, with Governor Davis' approval, the Commission on Building for the 21st Century released the Commission's report, Invest for California — Strategic Planning for California's Future Prosperity and Quality of Life. The 48 - member Commission that included appointed members from business, labor, the environmental community, academics, and governments, was created by the Governor and tasked to provide recommendations to the Governor and other public and private interests on how best to address the State's infrastructure challenges. One of the infrastructure areas addressed in the report is transportation and while many of the recommendations in this category are good ideas one 0bH012 recommendation in particular should give county transportation agencies cause for concern. Currently, under changes in State transportation funding law brought about by SB 45, county transportation agencies receive 75% of the available State transportation funds for local programming with the State receiving 25% of the funds for the State's Interregional program. The Commission recommendation is to change current law to increase the state's share of the transportation revenues from 25% to 50%. The Commission adopted State Legislative Program clearly directs staff to protect the principles of SB 45 including the 75/25 distribution of state transportation funds and should legislation be introduced to implement the Commission's recommendation, staff will communicate with the Inland Empire delegation accordingly. A follow-up item from the February Budget and Implementation Committee meeting is the State Board of Equalization (BOE) proposed regulation 1533.2, as recommended by the BOE's Business Tax Committee, to expand the exemption of paying diesel fuel taxes beyond the current exemption of direct farming activities to include transport of agricultural products to and from processing and distribution facilities. The BOE is scheduled to act on proposed regulation on March 27, 2002. However, since the February Budget & Implementation Committee meeting, two bills have been introduced that propose to clarify the diesel fuel tax exemption as it relates to the definition of farming activities in the event that the BOE does approve proposed regulation 1533.2. The bills are AB 2809 (Longville) and SB 10xxx (Sher). As the bills are identical, with the exception that AB 2809 includes an urgency clause, staff has prepared the single attached analysis that includes a recommendation to support the two bills. Federal Update Support continues to grow for H.R. 3694 and S. 1917, both dubbed the Highway Funding Restoration Act. On the House side, 301 of the 435 total members are co-sponsors of the House Bill and 65 of the 100 members of the Senate are co- sponsors of the Senate Bill. As Board members will recall, both of these measures propose to restore highway program funding from the $23.3 billion proposed in the President's budget to $27.7 billion, the level authorized for FY 2003 by TEA -21. State transportation officials continue to advocate restoring the funding to the FY 2002 $31.8 billion level but, it seems the consensus in both the House and Senate is to restore funding to the level authorized in TEA -21 for the coming fiscal year. On the Federal Appropriations request front, staff submitted completed Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee questionnaires for all projects as approved by the Commission at the February 13, 2002 meeting to appropriate House and Senate members during a Washington DC, trip in late February/early March. House Members must forward their project requests to Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Harold Rogers no later then March 26, 2002 for a project request to be considered by the subcommittee. The Senate Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee deadline is mid -April. t'srran.013 • Date of Analysis: March 20, 2002 Bill Number/Author: SB 10xxx (Byron Sher, D- Stanford) Introduced March 6, 2002 AB 2809 (John Longville, D -Rialto) Introduced February 25, 2002 • • Subject: Status: Summary: Both SB 10xxx and AB 2809 clarify, for purposes of the diesel fuel sales and use tax exemption, the definition of farming activities. SB 10xxx was heard in Senate Transportation Committee on March 14, 2002. AB 2809 hearing pending. The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a tax on the gross receipts from the sale in this state of, or the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property. That law provides various exemptions from that tax, including an exemption for diesel fuel used in farming activities and food processing. These bills clarify, for purposes of the diesel fuel sales and use tax exemption, the definition of farming activities. AB 2809 would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. SB 10xxx, as a measure considered during an extraordinary session, is automatically an urgency measure. Staff Comments: The Board of Equalization is scheduled to consider proposed regulation 1533.2 on March 27, 2002. If adopted the action would cause serious and harmful reductions in public transit service across California. All of the revenue generated by the imposition of the sales tax on diesel fuel at the rate of 4%% is deposited into the Public Transportation Account (PTA). The potential action by the Board of Equalization would reduce PTA revenues by at least $50 million in the budget year, thus taking another $25 million. directly out of the State Transit Assistance Program (STA), leaving a statewide STA Program of only $90 million, which is nearly a 50% reduction . over the current STA Program. Riverside County transit operators would be impacted in FY 2003 in the aggregate in the amount of an estimated $630,000. k h y � 614 Over the year and half prior to the Proposition 42 revenue stream starts to come online, Riverside County transit agencies lose in excess of $1 million. The PTA is the state's one source of ongoing funding dedicated to local transit systems for their operations and capital needs and is a primary source of matching funds for federal funds such as Appropriations Committee earmarks or Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality and Federal Transit Administration formula funds. Additionally, the PTA supports the state's three intercity rail services. The PTA is already facing a severe shortage in revenues, and its capital programs are oversubscribed. With the passage of Proposition 42, the PTA starts to receive revenues from the sales tax on gasoline in fiscal year 2004 in the amount estimated at $120 million, 50% of which, or $60 million goes to the STA program to fund local transit with Riverside County's transit agencies share being $1.5 million. This amount continues to increase slightly each year through 2008. In 2009, Proposition 42 will be in full effect with estimated STA annual revenues at $3.8 million, increasing annually, to be shared by Riverside County transit agencies. Why should RCTC support the two bills? ■ The two bills clarify the true intent of the legislature and the Governor with the adoption and signing of the State 2001-02 fiscal year budget that "farming activities transport" was to be limited in scope to benefit the farming community specifically from farm or field to first point of distribution. Assuming the BOE approval of proposed regulation 1533.2, the BOE went well beyond legislative and gubernatorial intent as well as the BOE staff recommendation. ■ The two bills fix a raid on transportation dollars dedicated to transit that cost Riverside County transit operators an estimated $630,000 local 2003 and increasing annually from that point. • Riverside County transit agencies are studying new transit services that will require increased funding. Specifically, RTA is studying the implementation of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) from Moreno Valley through Riverside to Corona. BRT is a labor and capital intensive program that has proven highly successful in the San Fernando Valley and other suburban communities. Staff Recommendation: SUPPORT • • AGENDA ITEM 6F • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Darren Kettle, Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposition 42 Revenue Estimates STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Proposition 42 Revenue Estimates. BACKGROUND: On March 5, 2002, California voters overwhelmingly supported Proposition 42, a constitutional amendment to dedicate sales tax on gasoline to transportation programs, with nearly a 70% vote statewide. Proposition 42, initially, guarantees the funding allocations of the Traffic Congestion Relief Program included in AB 2928 and the 2001-02 State Budget and then, commencing with FY 2008-09, distributes the estimated $1.4 billion in revenues in the following fashion: • 20% to cities distributed by population • 20% to counties distributed based on registered vehicles and road miles • 20% to the Public Transportation Account to fund transit • 40% to the STIP to fund Regional and Inter -regional projects. Based on the $1.4 billion revenue estimate in FY 2008-09, Riverside County transportation interests can expect an estimated revenue stream over a 20 -year period beginning in 2008-09. Cities Banning 0.08% $6,090,124.00 Beaumont 0.04% $2,936,491.00 Blythe 0.07% $5,259,227.00 Calimesa 0.03% $1,822,695.00 Canyon Lake 0.04% $2,563,974.00 Cathedral City 0.16% $11,206,517.00 Coachella 0.08% $6,010,548.00 Corona 0.46% $32,946,052.00 Desert Hot Springs 0.06% $4,267,179.00 Hemet 0.21% $15,211,872.00 0' 0'11 Indian Wells 0.01% $1,010,124.00 Indio 0.18% $12,922,774.00 Lake Elsinore 0.11% $7,626,394.00 La Quinta 0.09% $6,607,234.00 Moreno Valley 0.51 % $36,776,443.00 Murrieta 0.16% $11,756,262.00 Norco 0.09% $6,211,868.00 Palm Desert 0.15% $10,626,899.00 Palm Springs 0.15% $10,999,672.00 $9,425,744.00 Perris 0.13% Rancho Mirage 0.05% $3,493,014.00 Riverside 0.93% $66,693,375.00 San Jacinto 0.09% $6,272,366.00 Temecula 0.22% $15,590,420.00 Riverside County Riverside County is estimated to receive $312 million over the 20 -year period beginning in 2008-09. Riverside County Transit Programs Proposition 42 generates an estimated $91 million for Riverside County Transit programs over the 20 -year period starting 2008-09. Using current RCTC apportionment areas and population based formulas, Riverside County transit apportionment areas are estimated to receive the following 20 -year revenues: Western Riverside Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley $70.5 million $19.4 million $ 1.1 million Riverside County Transportation Commission Based on current state transportation improvement program funding formulas including the 40%/60% north -south split and the 75%/25% Regional Improvement Program to Interregional Improvement Program as established in SB 45, RCTC can assume a 20 -year revenue stream from Proposition 42 totaling an estimated $519 million. • (1010017 AGENDA ITEM 6G • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM• • Plans and Programs Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: STIP Intra-county Formula Adjustment PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve postponing this year's adjustment to February 2003 to coincide with the development of the 2004 STIP; and, 2) Amend the STIP Intra-county Formula MOU to adjust the percentages for the allocation of STIP funds to February of every odd year to coincide with the development of future STIPs. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Per the STIP Intra-county Formula MOU, every two years, beginning February 2000, the percentages for the allocation of STIP funds shall be adjusted to remain consistent with the apportionment of Measure "A" funds. There is an inherent problem with the adjustment schedule because the STIP is required to be submitted to the CTC by December 15th of every odd year. Making the adjustment in February of every even year requires us to adjust the funding after the STIP has been submitted to the CTC resulting in project funds being increased or decreased, or balances being increased or decreased. In the case where project funding would change, an amendment to the STIP may be required. Based on the current apportionment of Measure "A" funds, the adjustment would be as follows: Subregion Current Split Feb. 2002 Adjustment Western Riverside County 72.08% 72.15% Coachella Valley 26.91 % 26.93% Palo Verde Valley 1.01 % .92% (qgi8 Staff is recommending postponing this year's adjustment to February 2003 to coincide with the development of the 2004 STIP, maintaining current project programming, and avoiding impacts to project costs included in the 2002 STIP submittal. Staff is also recommending that the STIP Intra-county Formula MOU be amended to reflect the date of the adjustment to occur in February of every odd year. • • AGENDA ITEM 6H • " " " I RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1 DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: FROM: THROUGH: Riverside County Transportation Commission Plans and Programs Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Status of the 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program update. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) was submitted to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and Caltrans on December 14, 2002. The submittal included STIP Intra-county Formula projects from the Palo Verde Valley and Coachella Valley, Discretionary projects approved at the November 2001 Commission meeting, and previously approved discretionary and formula projects. Project sponsors provided the requisite information for their respective project(s) including proposed project schedules. In the CTC's Annual Report - Issue for 2002, adopted on December 13, 2001, it was reported that of the total capacity for adding new projects to the STIP, over two-thirds of the new capacity was available in the last two years, FY 2005-06 and FY 2006-07. By statute, the amount the CTC programs in each fiscal year may not exceed the amount identified in the Fund Estimate. Project nominations for the 2002 STIP had over 60% of new funding proposed in the first two years. The CTC held a workshop on February 7, 2002 explaining the reasons why most of the available capacity was in the out years. Pre - SB 45, funding capacity was typically available only in the out years. Due to a high state cash flow in the first few years of the past two STIPs, capacity was available throughout the entire STIP period. The CTC requested counties to revise their project nominations moving back as many projects to the out years of the STIP in order to balance programming with expected annual revenue. The revised STIPs had to be submitted to the CTC on February 25, 2002. Riverside County project sponsors were contacted by RCTC staff between February 7th and 25th. The majority of the project sponsors decided to delay their respective projects by one year in order to cooperate and assist the programming capacity issue in the first three years of the STIP. The attached spreadsheet (Attachment A) identifies the recommended programming for the Riverside County 2002 STIP, which was submitted to the CTC on February 25, 2002. The spreadsheet is also a comparison of our original (December 14, 2001) submittal. On March 13, 2002, the CTC released their staff recommendations for Regional Improvement Program (RIP) and Interregional Improvement Program (ITIP) projects (Attachment B). The CTC staff recommendation approved our RTIP as submitted on February 25, 2002 with a few additional changes. Three projects (highlighted on Attachment A by arrows) that we had not recommended to be delayed were moved out one year. A couple of errors were also made on the CTC staff recommendation due to a misunderstanding on CTC staff's behalf. These errors occur in the "RTIP Notes" section one of which states that six of our projects will be programmed in FY 2002-03. This is incorrect as these projects will be "included" in the STIP during FY 2002-03 but "programmed" in FY 2005-06. The second error identifies four of our projects as not being included in the staff recommendations for approval into the STIP. We immediately notified CTC staff of this error and were told that a correction will be made to include these four projects in the 2002 STIP. The 2002 STIP is scheduled for adoption at the April 3-4, 2002 CTC meeting. There are opportunities to advance projects prior to the program year. At each CTC meeting there are several requests to advance projects, extend deadlines, and amend projects. The CTC reviews each request on a case by case basis. Therefore, there is opportunity to submit a request for advance allocation, however, CTC approval is not guaranteed. Another opportunity to advance a project is through AB 3090. AB 3090 allows local agencies to use their local dollars or other non-STIP fund sources to begin or complete a project and be reimbursed the fiscal year in which the funds are programmed in the STIP. This would require an agreement with the CTC (prior to the commencement of a project component) committing 1) the local agency to meet all state and federal requirements for project implementation; and 2) the state to reimburse the local agency. The impact of project delays to the ITIP will be problematic as we begin to move forward with Phase 1 of a new Metrolink station in the city of Corona on North Main Street. The station is scheduled for completion in October 2002. Phase II is the construction of a 1,000 space parking structure. The parking structure is proposed to be delayed by two years (to FY 2004-05 — 2006-07) as a result of the funding capacity issue. Therefore, staff will be reviewing the AB 3090 process as an option to continue with the original schedule (FY 2002-03 — 2004-05) since the demand for the parking structure will be realized shortly after the opening of the new station. • 000021 DIANNE,M( NNA, Chair R. K LINDSEY. Vice Chair 8088ALGENORTH Jai F. HALUSEY LAWRENCE LAWSON E. TORRES SENATOR KEVIN MURRAY. Ex Officio ASSEMBLYMAN JOHN DUTRA. Ex Officio DIANE C. EIDAM. Executive Director STATE OF CALFORNIA S Iq CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N Ski, MS -52 P. Q BOX QST3 SACRAMENTO CA 94273,0001 FAX (918) 553.2134 FAX (916)'6544394 • (916)654-4245 March 14, 2002 To: Chairman and Members, California Transportation California Department of Transportatin Commission Regional Transportation Planning Agencies County Transportation Commissions iECIE.11V MAR 18 2002 TRANSPORTATIONCOUNTY COMMISSION U3 GRAY DAVIS GOVERNOR 2002 STIP Staff Recommendations Enclosed are the Commission Staff Recommendations for the 2002 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). State law requires that the Executive Director of the Commission make the Staff Recommendations available to the Commission, Caltrans, •the adoption of a new STIP. The Commission has scheduled the adoption of th2002 s at least 20 days priorts Pril 3-4 meeting in Sacramento. STIP for its The 2002 STIP adds three new ro P gramming years, FY 2004-05 through FY 2006-07. Under the 2002 STIP Fund Estimate adopted in August 2001, the total capacity for adding new projects is $3.84 billion. Againstthis capacity, Caltrans and the state's regional transportation about $4.221 billion in new project funding. This means that the Commission a�oteincl have nominatedl project nominations and must make choices about the projects to be included. The Commission must also match project funding to the year -by -year STIP capacity identified in the Fund Estimate. The 2002 Staff Recommendations lay out a proposed STIP that conforms to the Fund Estimate includes $3.632 billion in project programming. That would leave $208 million reserved for STIP amendments and adjustments, including cost increases due to project rescheduling. The Staff Recommendations present a listing of all the concerns and unresolved issues identified by protects recommended, together with specific final STIP in April. The staff will present an update on these isse ues at lthe April meeti in adopting the 3-4 meeting. Sincerely, a.,et_e_e DIANE C. EIDAM Executive Director Wnclosure 01012 2 2002 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS - REGIONAL PROGRAM PROJECTS Does Not Include Interregional Share or Prior STIP Funding ($1,000's) Riverside County Share for 2002 STIP, Carryover Share Balance 26,383 4th Year Formula Share 84,977 2002 STIP F ormula Share 130,115 potential Total _ 241,475 Total Current County Share 156,498 2002 STIP APDE Share 34,366 2002 RTIP Proposele Inol_u • i • _P II Pro eat Totals b Fiscal Year Pro eot Totals b Com•onent A. ono Rte PPNO Pro act Total 1 Prior FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 R/W Const E & P PS&E RAW sup Con Eng I Cakrans 91 765 G reen River IC, aux Inc to Rt 71 RTIP TCR #64 3,889 I 0 0 3,889 0 0 01 0 3,889 0 0 0 0 Beaumont loo ??? 6th St Palm-H•Hand S•rIn •s Im•revs State onl 5951 0 0 595 0 0 01 0 595 0 0 0 0 Cathederal City loo 17? Ramon Rd, Date Palm -east limit, im • rovements 1 3851 0 0 0 0 1 385 01 0 1,385 0 0 0 0 Coachella gsep 7?? Olken Rd, UPRR grade separation 4,559 0 0 0 0 0 4,559 I 0 4,559 0 0 0 0 Corona be 7?? Magnolia Av, Rimpau-6th, im •rovements 6,418 0 0 0 0 0 6,418 0 6,418 . 0 0 0 0 Corona toe ??? Traffic mana,ements stem 1,990 0 0 1,990 0 0 01 0 1,990 0 0 0 0 Moreno Valle loc 77? Perris Blvd Im•rovements 3,1841 0 0 0 0 3,184 01 0 3,184 0 0 0 0 Palm Desert toe ??? Montere Av Dinah Shore -Gerald Ford, widen 2,1251 0 0 0 744 1,381 01 744 1,361 0 0 0 HH! .I j{ i lajafo 0 Qt0Ialola oo Palm Springs Ioc 7?? Indian Canyon Dr, Tramview-UPRR widen 2,1991 0 263 1,936 0 0 01 0 1,936 87 176 0 Perris toe ??? Nuevo Rd & Wilson Av Intorseo Improve (State only) 2451 0 245 0 0 0 01 0 245 0 0 0 Riverside Co loc ???. Limonite Av, Hamner-Etiwanda widen 3,158 0 0 0 3,158 0 0 0 3,158 0 0 0 Riverside Co lee 7?? Miles Av Clin ton St widen 2,040 0 0 0 0 2,040 01 0 2,040 . 0 0 0 Riverside Co Ioc 7?? Newport Rd, Menlfee- Rt 79, widen, new cent 6,000 0 0 0 6,000 0 0 0 6,000 0 0 0 Riverside Co be 7?? Van Buren BI Wash'n-Ora Terrace median tumouts 1 323 1 0 1,323 0 0 0 0' 0 1,323 0 0 0 Temecula loo 7?? Butterfield Stage Rd extension 2,720 0 0 0 2,720 0 0 I 0 2,720 0 0 0 Cakrans 79 66D New• ort Rd-Domenl•onl widen •hese 1 inor A 1 323 0 500 0 •823 0 0 0 823 600 0 �0 Caltrans 10 70 Ramon Rd Interch im •rovements 01 0 -18 538 18 538 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0' Corona OF Lincoln Av interim Im • rovements 01 0 •671 671 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 Cab ana 1210 HOV,TCL,ElCerra -t601- (Rt 21600rridor•) 01 0 •9,071 0 0 0 9,0711 10,326 0 1,085 0 1 1 Total Pro posed,2002 RTIP: 43,153 0 -25,949 27,61 9 13,445 7,990 20,048 11,070 30,235 587 176 1,085 0 ! Balance Remainin g (Advan ce) 113,345 APDE Total (Included In To tal Pro posed): 0 RTIP Note s Rt 91 Green River Interchange: !TIP also proposes $3,889. This is a cost increase: Project is alread re rammed for $11.46;. _ _ RTIP Identifies $119,787 in reservations for future programming. The Include: 81,402 1 Rt 91 HOV lanes. Construction e stimated In FY 05-06, to be pr• rammed In 2004 STIP. 10,010 1 Indio, Rt 10 Jefferson St Interchange, estimated • r- rammin• in FY 02-03 for FY 02-03. 15,300 1 Palm Springs, Rt 10 Indian Av interchange, estimated pro gramming in FY 02.03 for FY 02-03.__- �a 700 1 Palm Springs, Gene Autry Trail widening, estimated programmin • in FY 02-03 for FY 02-03. �- 8101 Riverside County, De Frain, tum lenes,_reheb, estimated programming in FY 02-03 fo r FY 02-03. 8,963 1 Riverside Co unty, Jerffersen St widen/bridge, estimated programmin • in FY 02-03 for FY 02-03. 2,602 RCTC planning, programming, and monitorin g, estimated programmin • in FY 02-03. The followln RTIP proje cts were identified as fro m an advance of future count share and are not Included In the Staff Re commendation. 7,366 Rt 15 Calif Oaks/Kelmia Interc hange Impro vs 1,967 Reche Vista Dr realignment ai• nets 2,117 Dillon Rd, Rt 65-Rt 10, widen 3,4651 Van Buren BI, Jackson St -Santa Ana River, widen California Transportation Commission • Page 33 of 66 • 3002 • " 2002 STIP STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS - ERREGIONAL PROGRAM PROJECTS Does Not Include County Sing Prior STIP Funding ($1,000's) County Agency Rte Project Totals by Flsca Year Project T otals by Component PPNo Project T otal Prior FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 . FY 07 R/W C onst E rE P PS&E Los Angeles Caltrans 5 2808A Rrvv Sup Con Eno Los Angeles Orange C o-Rt 605, widen, Interch's (IIP)(TCR #42) 17,000 0 17,000 0 0 0 0 17,000 0 0 0 Los Angeles Caltrans Caltrans 110 134 2961 Temple St access improv ement 2,000 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 2223 Hollywood Way interch, Burbank, incr (ITIP) 9,453 0 9,453 0 0 0 0 550 8,903 Los Angeles Caltrans 138 22208 175th St -Largo Rd (Seg 12)(ITIP) 10,000 0 0 0 0 Los Angeles Caltrans 406 0 0 10,000 0 0 600 9 400 0 0 0 Los Angeles Callrans 405 2333 Auxiliary lane, RI 10 -Waterford (IIP)(TCR #52) 13,538 0 3,736 9,802 0 Q 33,692 7 0 44 Madera Caltrans 99 2336 Rt 405/101 conn, gap closure, Inc/ (ITIP)(TCR #51) 3,788 0 0 3,786 0 0 0 0 3, 0 2,216 0 5410 Fwy conversion, Fairmead 40,560 0 4,100 0 36,460 0 0 3,810 33,120 0 0 Marin Caltrans 101 360F Novat o -Petaluma, widen to 6 In fwy (ITIP)(TCR #18) 11,600 0 290 3,340 Merced Caltrans 99 0 0 0 0 11,600 0 8,400 0 0 2,200 1,000 0 5401 Fwy cony, Madera Co -Buchanan Hollow (TCR #105) 17,668 0 17,668 0 0 0 0 17,668 0 0 Merced Caltrans 99 5479 Fw' conversion, Atwater OH -Arena Way 5,175 0 0 0 Merced 0 0 5,175 0 0 0 0 5,175 0 Q. Caltrans 99 5460 Fwy conversion, Arena Way -Dwight Way 5,071 0 0 M ono 0 0 5,071 0 0 0 0 5,071 0 0 0 Monterey Caltrans 395 241 Highpolnt curve corrections (ITIP) . 525 0 525 0 0 0 0 0 0 525 0 0 Napa/Solano Caltrans 156 57C 4 -lane exp wy, Castroville-Prunedale, R/W 1,506 -3,593 5,099 0 0 0 0 -275 0 5,099 0 0 Callrans 12 3670 Jamieson Cyn, widen (ITIP)(TCR.#157) 2,000 0 0 0 -2,579 -739 0 Nevada Callrans 49 4107 Widen, Wolf/Comble-grass Valley (HP) 8,375 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 Orange Caltrans 91 4671A WB drop lane restoration 0 8,378 0 0 0 2,680 0 0 4 795 900 0 Orange Yorba 7,935 0 7,567 0 0 388 0 0 6 179 310 1,058 20 368 Linda gw y 9655 Yorba Linda commuter rail station 5,000 0 0 0 750 4,250 0 Placer Callrans Placer Rocklin 65 145M Uncoin Bypass (ITIP) 78,205 0 0 0 0 0 78,205 0 0 4,250 72,105 0 0 750 0 0 0 0 6,100 Riverside Caltrans 80 151D 91 Sierra College BI interch mod (ITIP) 11,000 0 0 0 0 11,000 0 0 9,740 0 0 0 1,260 Riverside Caltrans 48W 91 76B Rt 91/71 EB/NB connector, RtW 20 0 0 20 0 0 0 1 0 0 0' 19 0 Riverside Riverside CT " Green River IC, aux Ins to Rt 71 (ITIP)(TCR #84) 3,889 0 145 3,744 0 0 0 0 1,512 0 0 145 gory 790 Corona Metrolljk station parking structure 11,000 0 0 0 500 1,000 9,600 9,600 0 2,232 Riverside SCRRA Sacramento Caltrans I1 MY 79E _50 6199C 2 cab cam ocomotives 12,000 0 0 0 , 0 12,09,0 0 0 9,500 12,000 600 -'0 1,000 0, 0 0 0 0 -1 HOV lank th-Sufuise BI, env (HP 50%) 2,500 0 2,500 0 0 0 ' San Benito Caltrans 70 Rt 152 Interchange (Casa de Pnrta) 2,600 ._ 0 0 0 2, ��0 0 ' o 0 San Bemardino Caltrans 10 354D 0 2, 40 0 Or- 0 01 0 0 2 800 0 0 San Bernardino Caltrans 15 178A Tippecanoe Av Interchange Improvs 2,500 0 0 2,600 0r 0 Or 0 0 . 2,,500 0 0 0 0 SB climb In, Afton -Basin (s of Baker) 19,869 0 250 0 19,619 0 0 200 17 060 San Bernardino Caltrans 58 215C 4 -In export', near Kramer Jct, R/W 0 0 50 2,559 San Bernardino Caltrans 58. ' 217F 4 -lane expressway, Hinkley, 19,882 0 8,000 0 0 0 11,882 9,337 " 0 0 8,000 2,545 0 San Bernardino Caltrans 138 239D near R/Wrincr Widening, 3,924 0 0 3 924 0 0 '. 0 3 454 0 0 0 470 0 San Bernardino LA Co -RI 15 (ITIP) 41,274 0 2,740 0 0 9,635 28,899 7,733 23,717 0 2,740 1,902 Caltrans 395 2608 Fwy, expwy, RI 15-Rt 58 (ITIP) 4,000 0 4 ' 5,182 San Diego 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,000 0 0 Callrans 15 228 SB aux lane, Los Penasqultos Bridge 4,700 0 4,700 0 San Diego Caltrans 0 , 0 0 0 .0 4,700 0 0 0 0 15 672 Managed lanes, mid segment (ITIP), debt service 17,400 0 0 San Diego Caltrans 0 5 ,800 5,800 5,800 0 17,400 0 0 0 0 15 672 Managed lanes, mid segment (ITIP)(TCR #83) 41,000 0 41,000 .0 0 0 0 0 39,300 San Diego . Caltrans 15 233A Aux Ins, M ira Mar Way -Mira Mesa BI 3,500 0 0 0 1,700 San Diego Caltrans 15 233.1 Northbound 0 3,500 0 0 0 0 0 2,700 0 0 0 800 lane, Poway Rd -Mercy Rd 4,000 0 4,000 0 0 0 01 0 4,000 0 0 0 0 San Diego Caltrans 905 374K O tay M esa, 6 -In fwy(Incr)(ITIP)(TCR #86) 8,000 43,700 0 51,700 0 0 0 -43,700 51,700 0 San Francisco Caltrans 101 619A Doyle Drive replacement (ITIP)(TCR #22) 0 0 0 28,000 0 28,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28,000 0 San Joaquin Caltrans 99 7673 Widen to 6 In fwy, Rt 4 -Hammer (IIP)(increase) 4,251 0 -15,225 19,476 0 0 0 0 4,251 0 0 0 " 0 0 San Joaquin Caltrans 205 7965B Widen 6 In fwy, Rt 5 -11th St (ITIP)(TCR #107) , 38,582 0 0 38,582 0 0 0 0 36,080 0 0 0 San Joaquin/Ala Caltrans 205 7861 Rt 205/580 truck bypass, env 930 _ 2,502 San Luis Obispo Caltrans 46 226A 4 -In expwy, Airport Rd-Shandon 0 930 0 0 0 0 0 0 930 0 0 0 (ITIP) 8,384 0 8,384 -28,703 28,703 0 0 8,384 0 0 0 0 ' 0 San Luis Obispo Caltrans 101 4856 South SLO Co op improvements, R/W (ITIP) 711 0 0 711 0 0 0 140 0 0 532 . 39 0 San Luls/Kem Caltrans 41 452 WB climbing lane near Co Line, env (ITIP) 3,930 0 0 3,930 0 0 0 0 3,430 0 0 0 500 San Luis/SE Caltrans 101 4459 Santa Maria River Bridge widening, env (IIP) 1,140 0 1,140 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,140 0 0 0 San Mateo Caltrans 101 700B Aux lanes, 3rd Av-M illbrae Av (ITIP) 10,880 - 469 -2,761 14,110 0 0 0 0 7,460 -469 -2,801 40 . 6,650 Santa Barbara Caltrans 101 4460 Santa Marla 6 -lane (ITIP) 261 0 -3,000 3,261 0 0 0 0 261 0 0 0 . Santa Clara . Caltrans 101 468E Aux lane NB. Rt 87 -Trimble Rd (TCR #5)(ITIP) 18,000 0 18,000 0 0 " 0 Shasta Caltrans 299 166A Buckhom Grade, realign (IIP)(98S-150) 3,146 0 3,146 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,625 0 13,531. 0 0 3,146 0 0 0 0 1,844 0 Shasta Caltrans 299 1668 Buckhom realign, seg 1A (valley)(98S-150) -6,828 -736 -6,092 0 0 0 0 -96 -5,360 0 -545 " " -95 Shasta Caltrans 299 166C Buckhom realign, seg 1B (foothill)(98S-150) -7,141 -703 -6, 438 0 0 0 0 -64 -5,739 0 -545 T732 " -699 -94 California Transportation Commission Page 2of3 3/13'2002 000024 Beaumont Cathedral C Coachella Corona • Corona Moreno Valle Palm Desert Palm S. 'n. Perris Riverside Coun • noose 2002 STIP REVISION FOR RI VERSIDE COUNTY Programming Recommendations Lead A li Location/Prose t PROPOSED RIP PROGRAM MING (000's) FY 02/03 FY 03/04 EC.124/12@ Fy 05106 FY Asm7 T OTAL Coma 2000 STIP, Dela s Included in 2002 STIP S ubmittal on Dec ember 14, 2001: Caltrans l-10 Ramon Rd IC PPNO# 7D Corona Lincoln Ave. Im •rovments, PPNO# O000F $ 18 67 $ 18 538 Total Delay Identified In Submittal: $ 671 $ 00 $ 19,209 2000 STIP, New Dela s an d Amendmen t Not Included in 2002 STIP Submittal on December 14, 2001: V� Hobsonwa Arterial Im • ovments PPNO# Onnnc t�� .... a . Total 2002 STIP, New Delays: 3430 $ 3,439 2002 STIP, Recommended Rev is ions to Decembe r 14, 2001 Submittal: Caltrans SR91/Green River Road IC' IC m, • ements On Sixth St M ulti -Modal Widens . Rehab. SO On Ramo n Road Arterial Im• . :ments At Dillon Rd/UPRR Constru ct Grade Se • : ration On Ma_nolia Av e, Co rridor Im.rovements Ph II Various locatio ns, ATM S On Perris Blvd. Arterial Im• •vements On Montere ,Av e. , Widen' On Indian Can on Dr. W On Nuevo Rd. Wilson, S • net - ch. SO On Umonite ve Widenin /Reconstruction Riverside Coun On Mes/Clint ion Widen and Brid a Constructio n Riverside Coun On New • . rt Rd Reconstruction/W idenin Riverside Coun On Van Buren Blvd Raised M edian/BusTu mout Temecula On Butterfield Sta. a Roa d Arterial Im.rovements Caltrans e n Rte 79 Widenin. MunletaAt California Oaks/I-15 Coachella On DIIIon Road Widenin. Moreno Valle On Reche Vista Drive, Reali nment/Si•nal Installs Riverside Van Buren Blvd., Widenin• Recommended 2002 STIP Programming: 671 Ori.inal 2002 STIP Submittal Recommendations Revised 2002 STIP Submita l Rec ommendations Difference of Fun d Chan. es 6--41•960 263 245 1,323 500 Bold amounts represent delay of funds. Strikethrough represents original proposed programming. . • Indian Wells STIP Amendment to reflect scope change with no impact on fundinc. $ $ 2,331 28 4 346 2 331 2,015 $ 3 889 $ 595 1,990 $ 1,936 .mod $ 25 $ 8,435 $ 19,263 8,435 $ 10,828 $----1(388 $ 3,184 744 $ 3,158 $ 2040 6 000 $ 2,720 $ 823 6--3,2.24 $-17 221 $ 18,890 1,385 $ 6,418 1,381 $ 5 897 $ 2,117 $ 1.967 $ 439 19,604 Delay by one year . Delay by one year . Delay by one year . Delay by one year. Request to amend & allocate at April 2002 CTC mtg. Request sent under separate cover. 3,889 Keep in 03/04. 595 Keep in 03/04, design commenc ed. Flooding/safety issue. Requesting State -only funds. 1,385 Delay by one year . 4 559 Delay by one year. Keep in 05/06. Delay by one year. Keep in 04/05. Delay 03/04 and 04/05 to 04&05 and 05/06. Keep In 02103, 03/04 to av oid crealon of bottle -neck due to adjacent projects underway: Keep in 02/03, design commenced/ready to construct. Requesting State -only funds. 3,158 Delay by one y ear. 2,040 Keep In 04/05 . Delay by one year, Keep in 02/03, design commenced. Safety Issue , Delay by one year . Keep design in 02/03, environmental c ommenced. Construction expected in 04/05. Shifting r/w and construction out one year. 117 Delay one year. 967 Delay one year . 3,465 Shifting funds out one year . $ 4,559 $ $ 1,469 2,780 8,808 $ 16,560 $ 17,899 $ $ 18 890 $ 19,604 $ 8,808 $ 2,330 $ 1,705 $ 8,808 $ 6,000 $ 1,323 $ 2,720 $ 1,323 $ 7,366 6,418 1,990 3184 2,125 2,199 245 2 $ 58,068 $ 58,068 $ 58,068 000025 00052 Future 2002 STIP Amendments: Lead Agency Location/Protect PROPOSED RIP PROGRAMMING (000's) l=Y 02/03 FY 03104 FY 04/05 FY 05106 FY 06107 Tnrer Indio 1-10/Jefferson IC $ 10,010 P alm Springs 1-10/lndian Ave IC $ 15,300 Palm Springs '. Gene Autry Widening over Wash $ 700 Riverside County De Frain Improvements $ 810 Riverside County Jefferson Street/Bridge Widening $ 8,963 "ROTC 2% Planning, Programming, and Monitoring $ 1,400 $ 301 $ 301 $ 300 $ 300 Total $ 1,400 $ 301 $ 301 $ 36,083 $ 300 •• 2% PPM proposed funding is in addition to what is currently pr ogrammed in the 2000 STIP. Bold amounts represent delay of funds. Strikethrough re presents original proposed programming. • Indian Wells STIP Amendment to reflect scope change with no Impact on funding. • 000026 " AGENDA ITEM 61 " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT" ' Allocation of State Transportation Improvement Program Planning, Programming, and Monitoring Funds for CETAP 2% PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION; This item is for the Commission to allocate $721,809 in 2002 STIP 2% Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PPM) from the Western County formula pot for the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) planning effort. BACKGROUND INFORMATION; The Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) is the largest transportation planning effort undertaken by the Commission. The current budget for CETAP is $12.3 million to conduct the requisite planning on four priority corridors: Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore, Winchester to Temecula, Moreno Valley to San Bernardino County, and Riverside County to Orange County. The current total of committed funds for this project is $7.8 million. The table below outlines the various sources of revenue: RCTC STIP 2% PPM $2,500,000 SCAG Federal Overall Work Program $1,781,827 TCSP Federal Discretionary Program $1,370,000 State Planning Funds $ 882,000 Western Riverside County Cities $ 800,150 San Bernardino County and Cities $ 250,000 SANBAG $ 250,000 TOTAL FUNDS COMMITTED $7,833,977 While we have been successful in securing the needed funds to continuethis" important work effort to date, we are continually seeking revenues in order to complete the project. For FY 2002-03, we have anticipated expenditures of approximately $2.5 million. We have made initial contact with SANBAG to request 0 66027 i additional funding support for work required on the Moreno Valley to San Bernardino County corridor. Additionally we have requested continued SCAG Overall Work Program funding and anticipate requesting further support from the local western Riverside County cities. As you will recall, the Commission's intra-county STIP formula also applies to the 2% planning funds. The total amount set aside under the 2002 STIP western county formula pot for planning totaled $1,421,809. At the Commission's March meeting, $700,000 was allocated for additional work on the SR79 Realignment Study, leaving a balance of $721,809. Staff is recommending that the balance of the formula planning pot be allocated toward CETAP, bringing the Commission's direct support for this project up to a total of $3.22 million. Funds for planning projects are also available from the STIP discretionary pot, which totals $900,262. In the next month or so, staff will be assessing our planning needs and will propose projects for funding from the discretionary planning pot; additional funds for CETAP may be included on the list of proposed projects. • oos001281,�, " AGENDA ITEM 6J " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM• • Plans and' Programs Committee Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Section 5310 Program and Adoption of Resolution No. 02-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Project Consistency with Regional Transportation Plan." PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the FY 2002-03 FTA Section 5310 Riverside County project rankings as recommended by the Local Review Committee; 2) Include the projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan; and, 3) Adopt Resolution No. 02-014, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Certifying Project Consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan." BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The FTA Section 5310 program provides capital grants for the purpose of assisting private nonprofit corporations and public agencies, under certain circumstances, in providing transportation services to meet the needs of seniors and persons with disabilities for whom public transportation services are otherwise unavailable, insufficient, or inappropriate. The program provides funding for approved projects on an 80% federal / 20% local match basis. Section 5310 funds are awarded through a statewide competition with approximately $9.0 million available for programming during the FY 02-03 grant cycle. A Local Review Committee (LRC) in each county quantitatively evaluates all applications submitted for their area, ranks them, then submits the scores to Caltrans Headquarters for the statewide competition. The Commission has utilized a sub -committee of our Citizens Advisory 000029 Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council as the Local Review Committee for Riverside County. For FY02-03, the LRC was comprised of Grant Bradshaw, Riverside Transit Agency; Fortunato Penilla, Inland Regional Center; and Tanya Love, RCTC staff. We received requests for 26 projects for evaluation from 7 agencies in Riverside County. The LRC met and scored the projects on March 18. The listing of the final scores for each project are attached as Exhibit A. All applicants have been notified of the project scores and given the opportunity to appeal. The time line for this process is tight since Commission approved scores must be submitted to Caltrans by May 3. Since the Commission's May meeting is after that date, all approvals must be completed at our April 10 meeting. The Commission is also required to include the awarded projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan and certify by resolution that the projects are consistent with the local area regional transportation plan. • • 000030 " " " RESOLUTION NO. 02-014 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CERTIFYING PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN WHEREAS, the Local Review Committee of Riverside County ("Committee") is charged with reviewing applications for Federal Transit Act Section 5310 funding for transportation services to meet the needs of seniors and persons with disabilities for whom public transportation services are otherwise unavailable, insufficient or inappropriate; and WHEREAS, the Committee has received requests for 26 projects from 7 agencies in Riverside County; and and WHEREAS, the Committee has scored and ranked each such request; WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission"), as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency ("RTPA"), adopted the scores and ranking of the applications as determined by the Committee; and WHEREAS, the Section 5310 process, as interpreted in Federal Transit Administration Circular 9070.1 E, Section 5, requires the RTPA to include in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program each request awarded Section 5310 funding by Caltrans and to certify by resolution that the locally evaluated projects are consistent with the local area regional transportation plan. NOW, THEREFORE, the Commission does hereby certify and resolve as follows: Section 1. The Commission has determined that the locally evaluated projects approved by the Committee for Section 5310 funding (as described in Exhibit "A") are consistent with the Riverside County regional transportation plan. 1 Section 2. Each of the projects awarded Section 5310 funding by Caltrans will be included in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program adopted for Riverside County. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission at its meeting on Wednesday, April 10, 2002. BY: John F. Tavaglione, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: BY: Naty Kopenhaver Clerk of the Board " SECTION 53 , FY 02/03 PROPOSED REGIONAL PRI ORITY LIST FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY APPLICANT Angel View Crippled Children's Foundation, Inc. California Drug Consultants, Inc. dba Integrated Care Communities California Drug Consultants, Inc . dba Integrated Care Communities California Drug Consultants, Inc. dba Integrated Care Communities Community Partnership of the Desert Medium Bus PR OJECT TYPE* Medium Bus R Small Bus R Small Bus R Equipment N/A VIN QTY 06438 1 21978 1 03214 1 S/E N/A 1 Base Station - 3 Radios N/A 6 SECTI ON 1 SCORE 12 20 20 11 SECTI ON 2 SCORE 10 10 10 10 -SEI:II UN 3 SCORE 26 19 19 19 SECTION SEC1ION 4 SCORE 5 SCORE 29 10 30 10 30 10 30 10 14 9 24 27 10 Community Partnership of the Desert Equipment Exceed, A Division of Valley Resource Center for the Mentally Retarded, Inc. Exceed, A Division of Valley Resource Center for the Mentally Retarded, Inc. Foundation for the Retarded of the Desert N/A M odified Van and S/E Radio N/A 1 Base Station and 12 Radios; 1 Server, 2 workstations and one PASS software Program N/A 1 Modified Van and 1 Radio 11 9 9 6 24 29 27 10 30 10 Medium Bus S/E Minivan R N/A 1 Medium Bus and 1 Radio 08373 1 11 20 6 9 29 24 30 10 30 10 Foundation for the Retarded of the Desert Foundation for the Retarded of the Desert Sun City RHF Housing Inc. Transportation Specialists, Inc Transportation Specialists, Inc. Transportation Specialists, Inc. Transportation Specialists, Inc. Minivan R Minivan R 27812 1 32251 1 16 20 9 9 24 24 30 10 30 10 Minivan S/E Modified Van R Small Bus R Medium Bus R Medium Bus R N/A 1 53829 1 53828 1 25277 1 25276 1 9 8 20 20 20 * TYPE: "S/E" - Service Expansion; "R: - Replacement; and "OE" - Other Equipment 6 9 9 9 9 19 29 29 29 29 26 4 30 10 30 10 30 10 30 10 SCORE " PR OJE CT COST $56,000 $36,000 $36,000 $8,200 $336,000 $60,700 $48,500 $57,500 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000 $43,000 $47,000 $45,000 $56,000 $56,000 Total Funds Requested $1,014,900 4/2/2002 4:34 PM VV/J " AGENDA ITEM 6K " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric A. Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2002-2003 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the release of a Call for Projects for the FY 2002-03 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program and notify the cities, the County, and local school districts of the estimated funding available for the fiscal year. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Each year, 2% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenue is made available for use on bicycle and pedestrian facility projects through the Commission's SB 821 Program. This is a discretionary program administered by the Commission. There are three steps to carry out the program: 1. All cities and the County are notified of the SB 821 program estimate of available funding and are requested to submit project proposals. All school districts in the county are also notified and asked to coordinate project submissions with either their local city or the county transportation department. The Commission's SB 821 program policies, project application, selection criteria, and Caltrans' Highway Design Manual are also provided with the notification. 2. The Commission's SB 821 Evaluation Committee, comprised of members of the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee and Citizens Advisory Committee (3 each), meets to review and rank the project applications. using the evaluation criteria adopted by the Commission and recommends projects and funding amounts to the Commission for approval. 3. The Commission reviews the Committee's recommendations and approves a program of bicycle and pedestrian projects for funding. Based on LTF revenue estimates for FY 2002-03 adopted by the Commission on February 13, 2002, the 2% LTF funding for the SB 821 Program will be approximately $873,106. In addition to these funds, any unapportioned carryover (receipts of LTF revenue in excess of the FY 2001-02 apportionment) will not be known until the close of the fiscal year. Also, there may be an unidentified amount of carryover funds from projects in the current program due to unclaimed funds, actual claims coming in lower than the allocated amounts, or because time extensions were not requested and granted prior to the expiration of the funding authorization for FY 2001-02. Since these amounts are not known until after the awards for FY 2002-03 are approved, any excess funds are carried over to the following fiscal year (FY 2003-04) and made available for allocation to local agencies at that time. • • • SB 821 EVALUATION CRITERIA FACTOR MAXIMUM POINTS 1. USE 25 The extent of potential use of a bicycle or pedestrian facility is the most important factor. Emphasis of this factor helps ensure the greatest benefits will be derived from the expenditure of SB 821 funds. Relative usage is to be derived from analysis of trip generators and attractors adjacent to the project. 2. SAFETY 20 Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to correct current safety problems. • • 3. IMPORTANCE AS A TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to attract users who would otherwise use an automobile. 4. MISSING LINK, EXTENSION, OR CONNECTIVITY Points are awarded to projects that link existing facilities or are extensions of or potentially connect to existing facilities. 5. MATCHING FUNDS This factor is used to help ensure that there is local funding participation in the project - not just a application for "free" money. One point would be awarded for each 5% of total project cost that is financed by the local agency. 6. POPULATION EQUITY The purpose of this factor is to help ensure that one agency does not receive all the funds. The applicant receives the maximum 10 points if the amount of funds requested does not exceed what the applicant would receive if the funds were allocated by population. Year to year totals are recorded so that an applicant could build up a "credit". (Calculated by RCTC) 20 15 10 10 0036 7. PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY ENHANCEMENT 10 BONUS • The purpose of this factor is to enhance the physical accessibility of existing pedestrian projects. Applicant agencies may receive up to 10 "bonus" points for their project proposals which improve the physical access to existing facilities. RCTC: 4/12/95 000037 AGENDA ITEM 6L • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM• • Plans and Programs Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT• • Approval of Agreement No. 02-65-944 for the State Route 91 Commuter Survey PLANS AND PROGRAMS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve Agreement No. 02-65-944, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement 02-65-943, between OCTA, RCTC, and SCAG to add $15,000, with RCTC paying $7,500 and OCTA paying $7,500 to cover an additional videotaping site and associated costs. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Under single signature authority, the Executive Director has authorized the approval to enter into an agreement with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to conduct a Commuter Survey along SR 91 at or near the Riverside/Orange County line. OCTA and RCTC have agreed to participate in the cost of the survey at $50,000 each with SCAG responsible for procuring the consultant to conduct the survey. The purpose of the survey is to determine commuter travel patterns to assist in planning transportation improvements strategies to better manage travel within the corridor. The data will also be used to assist SCAG in updating Regional Transportation Plan model. The Technical Review Committee consists of staff from the above agencies including County of Riverside, Caltrans, City of Corona, Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The proposed methodology is to perform a video license plate survey, late March or early April, to capture eastbound and westbound vehicles between the hours of 4:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. The license plates will be read from the videotapes and the corresponding addresses will be obtained from the State of California's Department of Motor Vehicles database. Survey forms will be sent to all travelers (excluding heavy- duty trucks) requesting trip origin/destination, travel characteristics and demographic data. = 000038 The original site selected to perform the videotaping was at the Green River interchange because of the ability to capture the greatest amount of vehicles headed to and from Orange County. In order to set up the video cameras, generator, and associated equipment, a lane closure on the bridge would have been required due to the lack of shoulders and sidewalk on the bridge. A lane closure would severely impact commuters since the length of cueing is typically two miles at the Green River westbound on -ramp. Therefore, the Technical Review Committee concluded that this location would not be feasible. After reviewing several alternatives, it was decided to videotape at two locations instead of one, the Maple interchange and the Green River on and off -ramps (not the bridge). This will enable us to capture the greatest amount of trips with minimal impact to the commuters. The cost for the additional site is $15,000. OCTA has committed to pay $7,500.00 of the additional cost. The staff recommendation is to amend the contract increasing it by $7,500.00 for a total of $57,500.00 in order to minimize impacts to commuters. This project is not included in the FY 2001-02 budget, however, there are sufficient planning funds available to cover the cost of this project. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N Year: FY 2001-02 Amount: $57,500 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds Budget Adjustment: Y GLA No.: 102-65-81501 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 03/19/02 • T000039 AGENDA ITEM 6M • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002. TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Karen Leland, Staff Analyst Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • • Riverside Line Weekday Patronage: Passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of February averaged 4,635, a 1% increase from the month of January. The Line has averaged an overall decrease of 1% from a year ago, February 2001. February's on -time performance averaged 95% inbound and 81 % outbound. On March 18th, letters were mailed to all Commission members requesting their respective city and the county pass resolutions supporting Metrolink and the Commission's efforts to urge Union Pacific Railroad to improve the on -time performance of the Riverside Line. Inland Empire -Orange County Line (IEOC) Weekday Patronage: Ridership on Metrolink's Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Line for the month of February averaged 3,010; a 3% increase from the month of January. The Line has averaged an overall increase of 7% from a year ago, February 2001. 91 -LA The start date for this new service is Monday, May 6, 2002. Initially, the line will offer two peak period round trips and one mid -day round trip. A general awareness campaign to market the service will be held April -June 2002. It will include station cities outreach and events as well as a grand opening event with a VIP train from Riverside. Station Update Metro/ink Station Daily Activities: Daily activities/incidents occurring at Riverside County Metrolink Stations are obtained and submitted to RCTC by Western Area Security Services staff on a weekly basis. Attached is summary data compiled for the months of January and February, 2002. • METROLINK PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES February 2002 il(�111 METROLINK 000042 36,00 34,000 — 32,000 — 30,000 — 28,000 26,000 — 24,000 — 22,000 — 20,000 32,226 Et1 32,786 32,684 METAINK AVERAGE WEEKD AY P ASSENGER TRIPS 33,712 33,864 Feb -01 Mar -01 Apr -01 May -01 Jun -01 Jul -01 682 32, 41 32,255 Aug -01 32,933 32,908 Sep -01 Oct -01 Nov -01 [1=32 Holiday Adj--♦—UnadJ Avg 30,307 Dec -01 32,443 045eb02 u G METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERANCE Weekday Trains (Latest 13 Months) Dec 01 Jan 02 Feb 02 Mar 01 Apr 01 May 01 Jun 01 Jul 01 Aug 01 Sep 01 Oct 01 Nov 01 % Arriving Within 5 -Minutes Of Scheduled Time 000045 % Of Tr ains Delayed By Responsibility February 2002 SIG -Contractor 14 % SCRRA Passenger 7% 1% Other 5% 'Includes W eekend Service TRK-Contractor UPRR 23% BNSF 27% Vandalism 5% BMTC-MCH 17 % Includes W eekend Service % Of Trains Delayed By Responsibility 12 Month Period Ending February 2002 TRK-Contractor 1% SIG -Contractor 8% SCRRA 7% Passenger 2% Other 7% OP Agree 2% Law -Ent 0% Improv (SCRRA) 1% UPRR 25% • Vandalism 5% BMTC-MCH 11% BNSF 31% 00046 g " " PERFORMANCE CH ARTS -BACK-UP 11eIMETROLINK 000047 METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY P ASSENGER TRIPS THIRTEEN MONTH WINDOW - HOLIDAY ADJUSTED 32,226 3,697 5,215 9,909 437 427 4,669 4,597 3,545 5,421 9,785 420 4,682 3,702 5,551 10,117 457 4,802 3,493 5,862 10,244 482 4,799 3,416 5,489 9,848 456 4,690 3,315 3,323 5,423 5,463 9,679 9,503 469 435 4,638 4,566 3,558 5,170 10,032 452 4,651 3,500 5,169 10,025 477 4,654 3,144 4,898 9,391 452 4,223 3,566 4,813 10,086 480 4,596 % Change Feb 02 vs Jan 02 I % Change Feb 02 vs Feb 01 I 3,612 1%1 5,031 5%I 10,235 1%I 5%I 464 6% 4,635 1%I 5,668 5,978 5,925 5,999 5,896 5,853 5,879 5,940 5,867 5,939 5,369 5,865 5,882 0%1 4%I 2,817 2,866 2,804 2,974 2,983 2,838 2,833 2,923 3,081 91 97 102 110 105 3,007 2,733 2,930 3,010 92 105 102 122 137 3 %I 7% 97 107 109 2%1 20%I 32,786 32,684 33,712 33,864 32,682 32,341 32,255 32,933 32,908 30,307 32,443 32,978 -1% 2% 0% 3% 0% -3% -1% 0% 2% 0% -8% 2%1 2%I 7% 2% 000048 7 ADR MoNew.xls A " A vg Daily Riders 3500 3000 - 2500- 2000- 1500 1000 500 - [Note: Sept Includes LA. County Fair Riders San Bernardin Line Saturday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Avg Daily Riders 3500 f 3000- 2500- 2000 1500- 1000- 500 - (Note: Sunday Service Began 06125/00I San Bernardino Line Sunday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Nov Dec Jan Feb -02 000050 9 n9n9W KwnAWow vle Riverside Line Saturday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips 3500 3000 L 2500 - a) Ce 2000- >. p 1500 - cm Q 1000 0 Feb -01 Mar Apr Note: Service Began June 24, 2000 - Service Discontinued January 19, 2002` May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Jan Feb -02 00005 " METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE SUMM ARY Percentage of Trains Arriving Within 5 Minutes of Scheduled Time LATEST 13 MONTHS Feb 01 Mar 01 Apr 01 May 01 Jun 01 Jul 01 Aug 01 Sep 01 Oct01 Nov 01 Dec 01 Jan 02 Feb 02 99% 98% 97% 99% 100% 98% 98% 98% 100% 99% 97% 99% 99% 98% 99% 99% " 100% 100% 98% 100% 98% 99% 98% 99% 98% 100% 96% 97% 98% 99% 97% 98% 98% 96% 99% 97% 99% 100% 98% 97% 99% 99% 99% 100% 97% 97% 98% 99% 99% 100% 97% 97% 97 % 97% 98% 99% 96 % 95% 98 % 97% 97% 97 % 96% 94% 98% 96% 99% 98% 99% 98% 98% 97% 98% 97% 97% 96% 97% 97% 100% 98% 100% 98% 99% 99% 100% 100% 98% 99 % 99% 98% 100% 99% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 100% 98% 99% 100% 99% 99% 98% 91% 93% 85% 89% 95% 89% 93% 91 % 94 % 90% 97% 89% 94% 83% 89% 83% 91% 87% 74% " 80% 88% 92% 91% 90% 91 % 86% 95% 81% Peak Period Trains A rriving Within 5 Minutes of Scheduled Time Peak Period Trains W.:712k;:t riS��.k. ^ .�� .r.��,Uw h.8,?J����V 98% 100% 99% 95% 99% 97% 98% 100% 96% 80% 92% 98% 89% 98% E d 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. 88% 89 % 91 % 93% 86% " 94% 87% 88% 93% 94% 91% 92% 88% 83% 93% 94% 97 % 88% 91% 93% 97% 94% 91% 97% 95 % 98% 92% 92% 98% 99 % 95% 95% 92% 94% 95% 96% 95% 94% 93% 92% `'92% 97% 94% 98% 93% 93% 92% 95% 90% 98% 75% 95% 94% 96% 95% 82% 98% 95% 96% 96% 90% 100% 96% 96% 96% 91% 93% 96% 96% 96% 90% 98% 96% 95% 95% 95% 95% 96% 95% 96% 96% 91% 96% 95% 95% 89% 95% 96% 95 % 95% 83% 87% 95% 96% 96% 95% 95 % 96% 96% 96% 95% 92% 96% 96% 96% 73% 98% 96% . 96% 96% 85% 95% 95% 96% 96% 0% 0% 97% 94% 96% 000052 It CAUSES OF METROLINK DELAYS FEBRUARY 2002 PRIMARY CAUSE OF TRAIN DELAYS GREATER THAN 5 MINUTES CAUSE: VEN AVL SNB BUR RIV OC INL/OC R/F/L TOTAL % of TOT Signals/Detectors 2 6 6 0 1 1 1 0 17 15% Slow Orders/MOW 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 3% Track/Switch 0 1 0 2 4 5 0 1 13 12 % Dispatching 0 0 0 0 20 5 11 4 40 36% Mechanical 0 2 7 0 2 10 1 0 22 20% Freight Train 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Amtrak Train 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 3 3% Metrolink Meet/Turn 0 0, 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2% Vandalism 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 4% Passenger(s) 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2% SCRRA Hold Policy 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3% Other 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2% TOTAL 5 13 18 3 ; 29, 23 15 5 111 100% Saturday SNB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Saturday AVL 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Sunday SNB 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0000.53 •US.xls MINUTES LATE: NO DELAY 1 MIN - 5 MIN 6 MIN -10 MIN 11 MIN - 20 MIN 21 MIN - 30 MIN GREATER THAN 30 MIN ANNULLED • FREQUENCY OF TRAIN DELAYS BY DURATION FEBRUARY 2002 VEN AVL SNB BUR RIV OC IE/OC RIV/FUL 387 388 534 190 190 325 198 52 9 39 48 5 19 31 27 3 4 2 9 3 7 8 7 2 0 7 8 0 16 4 7 2 0 2 1 0 2 5 1 1 1 2 0 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 . 0 0 • TOTAL 2264 181 42 44 12 13 6 % of TOT 88.6% 7.1% 1.6% 1.7% 0.5% 0 .5% 0.2% TOTAL TRAINS OPTD TRAINS DELAYED >0 min TRAINS DELAYED > 5 mir 401 440 600 198 238 379 240 60 14 52 66 8 48 54 42 8 5 13 18 3 29 23 15 5 This summary excludes Saturday & Sunday Service. 2556 292 111 000054 100% 11.4 % 4.3% 13 0202FREQ.xls verside County ransportation Commission 1 - Standard Procedures 1A - RCTC Staff on Site 1B - Customer Assistance 1C - Ambassador on Site Daily Activity Report Riverside County Transportation Commision - Metrolink Stations Generated from 1/01/2002 to 1/31/2002 Total Riverside Pedley La Sierra W. Corona Total 1 2 2 1 6 30 34 30 31 125 24 6 12 7 49 55 42 44 39 180 2 - Criminal Incidents 2B - Vagrants / Trespassing 1 0 1 1 2E - Grafitti 0 0 1 0 3 1 Total 1 0 2 1 4 3 - Crisis Situations 3A - Medical / Fire Emergencies 1 0 0 0 1 3B - Police Emergencies 1 0 0 0 1 Total 2 0 0 0 2 4 - Maintenance / Repairs 4A - Lights 1 0 2 2 5 4B - TVM / Validator Machine 7 2 4 4 17 4C - Elevator 1 2 2 2 7 4D - Other 18 19 20 15 72 5 - Miscellaneous 5A - Miscellaneous Activity Total 27 23 28 23 101 6 4 29 5 44 Total 6 4 29 5 6 - Parked Ovemight 6A - Parked Ovemight 17 4 6 9 Total 17 4 6 9 7 - Overflow 7A - Overflow + detail 44 9 0 0 12 0 9 12 Total 0 0 12 0 8 - Parking Citations 8A - Parking Citations 66 0 3 2 12 71 Total 66 0 3 2 9 - Empty Spaces 9A - Empty Spaces 72 0 0 0 Total 72 0 0 0 71 72 72 • • Friday, March 15, 200 00 055 55 Daily Activity Report Riverside County Transportation Commision - Metrolink Stations Generated from 2/01/2002 to 2/28/2002 Riverside Pedley La Sierra W. Corona Total 1 - Standard Procedures 1A - RCTC Staff on Site 2 0 1 2 5 1B - Customer Assistance 28 28 26 28 110 1C - Ambassador on Site 26 6 11 8 51 2 - Criminal Incidents 2A - Burglary / Theft / Vandalism 2B - Vagrants / Trespassing 2C - Suspicious Behavior 3 - Crisis Situations Total 56 34 38 38 166 1 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 Total 3 3 0 0 6 3B - Police Emergencies 1 0 0 0 1 Total 1 0 0 0 1 • 6 - Parked Overnight 6A - Parked Ovemight 7 - Overflow 4 - Maintenance / Repairs 4A - Lights 0 0 0 10 10 4B - TVM / Validator Machine 6 3 4 5 18 4C - Elevator 1 0 0 2 3 4D - Other 14 18 13 17 62 5 - Miscellaneous Total 21 21 17 34 93 5A - Miscellaneous Activity 10 6 27 5 48 Total 10 6 27 5 48 22 4 7 8 10 Total 22 4 7 8 10 7A - Overflow + detail 0 0 11 0 11 8 - Parking Citations 8A - Parking Citations 9 - Empty Spaces 9A - Empty Spaces • Total Total 0 28 0 11 0 11 0 0 5 33 28 0 0 5 33 80 0 0 0 80 Total 80 0 0 0 80 Friday, March 15, 2002 000056 " AGENDA ITEM 6N " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: FROM: THROUGH: Riverside County Transportation Commission Plans and Programs Committee Claudia Chase, Property Agent Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award of Agreement No. 02-25-059 to Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. to Provide Landscape Maintenance Services at the Four Metrolink Stations and One Office Building Owned by the Riverside County Transportation Commission EVALUATION/SELECTION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the Evaluation Committee's selection of Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. to provide landscape maintenance services for the Commission owned properties; and, 2) Award Agreement No. 02-25-059 to Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc., pursuant to Legal Counsel review. BACKGROUND INFORMATION In November the Commission directed staff to prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) to provide landscape maintenance services for properties owned by RCTC. The proposals have been received and reviewed. The selection panel consisted of Commissioner Daryl Busch, Stuart Chuck of Metrolink, Tim Brown of the City of Corona, and RCTC staff members Karen Leland and Claudia Chase. On February 25, 2002, the evaluation/selection committee interviewed and ranked the short listed firms. The selection was based on experience, knowledge of the work to be performed, response time to emergency situations and overall qualifications. Based on the results of the interviews, Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. is the top ranked firm for the Landscape services RFP process. Negotiations with the selected contractor result in a monthly cost of $5,450.00 with an annualized cost of $65,400.00 per year to perform the maintenance services. The selection panel and staff recommend that an agreement be awarded to Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. The standard RCTC contract will be used. The term of the contract is for three years with two additional one-year options. 000057 Agreement No.: 02-25-059 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGREEMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES WITH TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY, INC. 1. PARTIES AND DATE. This Agreement is made and entered into this 10th day April, 2002, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("the Commission") and TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY, INC. ("Contractor"), a CALIFORNIA CORPORATION. 2. RECITALS. • • 2.1 Contractor desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional landscape maintenance services required by Commission on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Contractor represents that it is a professional contractor, experienced in providing landscape maintenance services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of Commission. 2.2 Commission desires to engage Contractor to render certain landscape maintenance services for the four Metrolink Commuter Rail Stations and one office building located at 1746 Spruce Street, Riverside, CA, all located in Riverside County ("Project) as set forth herein. 3. TERMS. 3.1 General Scope of Services. Contractor promises and agrees to furnish to Commission all labor materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately provide professional landscape maintenance services in connection with the Project, hereinafter referred to as "Services." The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state, and federal laws, rules and regulations. 1 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of three (3) years from the date of May 1, 2002 to May 1, 2005 ("Original Term"), unless earlier terminated as provided herein. The Original Term may be extended for two (2) successive one (1) year periods ("Extended Terms") upon the written consent of both parties prior to expiration of the Original. Term or the first Extended Term, as applicable. Contractor shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. 3.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements. All work prepared by Contractor shall be subject to the approval of Commission. 3.4 Substitution of Key Personnel. Contractor has represented to Commission that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Contractor may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence and experience upon written approval of Commission. In the event that Commission and Contractor cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, Commission shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause, pursuant to provisions of Section 3.14 of this Agreement. The key personnel for performance of this Agreement are as follows: Mow and Detail Crew, Irrigation Technician, and Supervisor. 3.5 Commission's Representative. Commission hereby designates Claudia Chase, Property Agent, or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement (Commissions Representative"). Commission's representative shall have the power to act on behalf of Commission for all purposes under this Agreement. Contractor shall not accept direction from any person other than Commission's Representative or her designee. 3.6 Contractor's Representative. Contractor hereby designates Victor Zamora, or his designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Contractor's Representative"). Contractor's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement. The Contractor's Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement. 3.7 Coordination of Services. Contractor agrees to work closely with Commission staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to Commission's staff, Contractors, and other staff at all reasonable times. 3.8 Standard of Care; Licenses. Contractor shall perform the Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner; consistent with the standard • 2 " " generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Contractor represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Contractor warrants that all employees and subcontractors shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Finally, Contractor represents that it, its employees and subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Contractor shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from Commission, any Services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Contractor's failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein, and shall be fully responsible to the Commission for all damages and other liabilities provided for in the indemnification provisions of this Agreement arising from the Contractor's errors and omissions. 3.9 Laws and Regulations. Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Contractor shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with Services. If the Contractor performs any work knowing it to be contrary to such laws, rules, and regulations and without giving written notice to Commission, Contractor shall be solely responsible for all costs arising therefrom. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its officials, directors, officers, employees and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations. 3.10 Insurance. 3.10.1 Time for Compliance. Contractor shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the Commission that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, Contractor shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section. 3.10.2 Minimum Requirements. Contractor shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Agreement by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Contractor shall also require all of its subcontractors to procure and maintain the same insurance for the duration of the 3 od g 0 Agreement. Such insurance shall meet at least the following minimum levels of coverage: (A) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version of the following: (1) General Liability. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); (2) Automobile Liability. Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto); and (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. (B) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Agreement/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the • required occurrence limit; (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and (3) if Contractor has an employees, Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers' Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Employer's Practices Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 3.10.3 Professional Liability. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and require its sub -Contractors to procure and maintain, for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Project, errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to their profession. Such insurance shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim, and shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. 3.10.4 Insurance Endorsements. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Contractor shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the Commission to add the following provisions to the insurance policies: (A) General Liability. The general liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the Services or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor's scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self- insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, and agents shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. • 4 " " (B) Automobile Liability. The automobile liability policy shall be endorsed to state that: (1) the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor or for which the Contractor is responsible; and (2) the insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents, or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Contractor's scheduled underlying coverage. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, and agents shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it in any way. (C) Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the. Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents for losses paid under the terms of the insurance policy which arise from work performed by the Contractor. (D) All Coverages. Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that: (A) coverage shall not be suspended, voided or canceled except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Commission; and (B) any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents. 3.10.5 Deductibles and Self -Insurance Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Commission. If the Commission does not approve the deductibles or self -insured retentions as presented, Contractor shall guarantee that, at the option of the Commission, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as respects the Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees and agents; or (2) the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and defense expenses. 3.10.6 Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in California, and satisfactory to the Commission. 3.10.7 Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish Commission with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting 5 coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the Commission. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the Commission before work commences. The Commission reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. 3.11 Safety. Contractor shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Contractor shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed. Safety precautions as applicable shall include, but shall not be limited to: (A) adequate life protection and life saving equipment and procedures; (B) instructions in accident prevention for all employees and subcontractors, such as safe walkways, scaffolds, fall protection ladders, bridges, gang planks, confined space procedures, trenching and shoring, equipment and other safety devices, equipment and wearing apparel as are necessary or lawfully required to prevent accidents or injuries; and (C) adequate facilities for the proper inspection and maintenance of all safety measures. 3.12 Fees and Payment. 3.12.1 Compensation. Contractor shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto. The total compensation shall not exceed $65,400.00 without written approval of Commission's Executive Director ("Total Compensation"). Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement. 3.12.2 Payment of Compensation. Contractor shall submit to Commission a monthly statement, which indicates work, completed and hours of Services rendered by Contractor. The statement shall describe the amount of Services and supplies provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the statement. Commission shall, within 45 days of receiving such statement, review the statement and pay all approved charges thereon. 3.12.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Contractor shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by Commission. • i t � 5 000063 6 " " 3.12.4 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, Commission may request that Contractor perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by Commission to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. Contractor shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from Commission's Executive Director. 3.13 Accounting Records. Contractor shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred and fees charged under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Contractor shall allow a representative of Commission during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 3.14 Termination of Agreement. 3.14.1 Grounds for Termination. Commission may, by. written notice to Contractor, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Contractor of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof. Upon termination, Contractor shall be compensated only for those services, which have been fully and adequately rendered to Commission through the effective date of the termination, and Contractor shall be entitled to no further compensation. Contractor may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. 3.14.2 Effect .of Termination. If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, Commission may require Contractor to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data, as defined below and other information of any kind prepared by Contractor in connection with the performance of Services under this Agreement. Contractor shall be required to provide such document and. other information within fifteen (15) days of the request. 3.14.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, Commission may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated. 3.15 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this. Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose: 7 CONTRACTOR: Tropical Plaza Nursery, Inc. 9642 Santiago Blvd. Villa Park, CA 92861-2521 Attn: Russell Bartolotta COMMISSION: Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Ave., Ste. 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Attn: Eric Haley Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 3.16 Ownership of Materials/Confidentiality. 3.16.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property. All plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, materials, data and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, prepared by or on behalf of Contractor under this Agreement ("Documents and Data"), shall become the property of Commission upon the completion of the term of this Agreement, except that Contractor shall have the right to retain copies of all such Documents and Data for its records. Should Contractor, either during or following termination of this Agreement, desire to use any Documents and Data, it shall first obtain the written approval of Commission. This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for Commission to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in the Documents and Data which are prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor under this Agreement ("Intellectual Property"). Contractor shall require all subcontractors to agree in writing that Commission is granted a non-exclusive and perpetual license for any Intellectual Property the subcontractor prepares under this Agreement. Contractor represents and warrants that Contractor has the legal right to license any and all Intellectual Property prepared or caused to be prepared by Contractor under this Agreement. Commission shall not be limited in any way in its use of the Intellectual Property at any time, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement shall be at Commission's sole risk. 3.16.2 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents and Data either created by or provided to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Contractor. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent 000065 i (tS i i i 8 " " " of Commission, used by Contractor for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Contractor, which is otherwise known to Contractor or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential. Contractor shall not use Commission's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.17 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate, or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement. 3.18 Attorney's Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and costs of such actions. 3.19 Indemnification. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold Commission, its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, Contractors and contractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement,. including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse Commission and its directors, officials, officers, employees, Contractors, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any received by Commission or its directors, officials, officers, employees,. Contractors, agents and volunteers. 9 3.20 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, or agreements. This Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties. 3.21 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. 3.22 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 3.23 Commission's Right to Employ Other Contractors. Commission reserves right to employ other Contractors in connection with this Project. 3.24 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties, and shall not be assigned by Contractor without the prior written consent of Commission. 3.25 Prohibited Interests. 3.25.1 Solicitation. Contractor maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Further, Contractor warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, Commission shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. 3.25.2 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of Commission, during the term of his or her service with Commission, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom. 3.26 Equal Opportunity. Contractor represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Contractor shall also comply with all relevant provisions of Commission's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related Commission programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted. • 10 " " " 3.27 Subcontracting. Contractor shall not subcontract any portion of the work or Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of the Commission. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement. 3.28 Prevailing Wages. By its execution of this Agreement, Contractor certified that it is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and 1770 et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000 et seq. ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on certain "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $ 1,000 or more, Contractor agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. The Commission shall provide Contractor with a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Contractor shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Contractor's principal place of business and at the project site. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Commission, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claims, liabilities, costs, penalties or interest arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws. 3.29 No Waiver. Failure of Commission to insist on any one occasion upon strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any rights or powers hereunder at any one time or more times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of such other right or power at any other time or times. 11 068 i IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TROPICAL PLAZA NURSERY, INC. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: John Tavaglione, Russell Bartolotta Chairman Market Manager Reviewed and Recommended for Approval: By: Eric Haley Executive Director Attest: Approved as to Form: By: Signature By: Best, Best & Krieger LLP Name General Counsel Title • iodri69 12 " EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS The Contractor shall provide at his own risk and cost all labor, materials, tools, equipment, transportation, hauling, dumping, fertilizers, insecticides, chemicals and other items needed to do landscape maintenance work as directed herein. The Contractor shall provide complete landscape maintenance of the properties owned and managed by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, including the Riverside Downtown Station, the La Sierra Station, the West Corona, the Pedley Station and an Office Building (referred to as the Annex). The maintenance shall include, but not be limited to pruning, mowing, shaping and training of trees, shrubs, and ground cover; removing and controlling weeds. The maintenance shall also include controlling plant diseases and pests; irrigation material; maintaining and repairing irrigation systems; removing trash and debris; and other maintenance required to maintain the work sites in a safe, attractive and useable condition. The Contractor shall maintain all plant material in good condition with horticultural accepted standards for growth, color, and appearance. A. SCHEDULING OF WORK 1) The Contractor shall accomplish all routine landscape maintenance required under this contract between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Property Manager may grant, on an individual basis, permission to perform maintenance at other hours. No maintenance functions that generate excess noise, which would cause annoyance to residents of any area, shall be commenced before 8:00 a.m. The Contractor shall establish a schedule of routine work to be followed in the performance of this contract. A copy of this schedule shall be provided to and approved by the Property Manager prior to the performance of any work required by these specifications, and any changes in scheduling shall be reported in writing; to the Property Manager. 2) The Contractor shall conduct the work at all times in a manner, which will not interfere with pedestrian traffic on adjacent sidewalks or vehicular traffic on adjacent streets. In addition, a special notification listing exact A-1 000070 starting date for. renovation, pruning and other infrequent operations shall be furnished to the Property Manager at least five (5) working days in advance of performing these operations. B. WORK FORCE 1) The Contractor is expected to improve upon the appearance of the landscaped areas. 2) The Contractor shall insure that all work is supervised by Contractor employed supervisory personnel who are technically qualified and possess management skills. 3) The Contractor shall insure that all work is performed by fully qualified, experienced personnel, directly employed by the Contractor. 4) The Contractor shall be responsible for the skills, methods, appearance and action of Contractor's employees and for all work done. The Contractor's employees shall be U.S. Citizens or legal residents. 5) The Contractor shall perform the work provided for in this contract under the direction of the Property Manager or his or her designated representative. The Property Manager or his or her representative may make inspections at any time and may request that the Contractor perform additional work or services to bring Contractor's performance to the level required by the agreement. C. MATERIALS 1) The Contractor shall submit a list to the Property Manager of all materials that the Contractor proposes to use in the execution of this work. The list shall include the chemical analysis, recommended usage and any other pertinent data by the manufacturer of the material. The Property Agent before use of any product shall approve such list. 2) The following shall apply to the material indicated: a. Fertilizers shall be complete, furnishing the required percentage of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potash to keep lawns, trees, shrubs and other plants in a healthy and vigorous growing condition. • 000071 A-2 " " " b. Insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and rodenticides shall be of the best quality obtainable, properly labeled with guaranteed analysis, and brought to the job site in the manufacture's original container. c. Tree stakes, tree ties and guy wires shall be of materials matching those existing in the work site or as specified by the Property Manager. d. Replacement trees, shrubs, ground cover and other plants shall be of a size, condition and variety specified by the Property Manager. e. The Property Manager prior to planting shall approve replacement plant materials. ROUTINE MAINTENANCE All routine maintenance shall be performed to the satisfaction of the Property Manager. Routine maintenance shall include but not be limited to the following services. A. GROUND COVER CARE 1) Edging and detailing a. Ground cover beds shall be maintained within their intended bounds, and edged or detailed every two- (2) weeks. b. Ground covers shall not be permitted to encroach into lawns, shrubs, adjacent desirable bare areas, wall fixtures, furniture, etc. All sites shall be cleaned following each edging/detailing, including streets (when applicable). 2) Fertilization All ground cover beds shall be fertilized using a complete or approved. fertilizer (such as, 16-6-8 Turf Supreme) four (4) times per year. The rate of application shall be two (2) pounds of actual nitrogen per 1,000 square feet. The Property Agent may request A-3 000072 proof of application in the form of empty fertilizer bags at any time. 3) Renovation All ground cover beds shall be thinned and pruned for the health of the planting and the appearance of the site, and at such other times when directed by the Property Manager. 4) Cultivation or Mulch All bare soil or open areas shall be either cultivated every two- (2) weeks or covered by a minimum of two (2) inches of mulch. 5) Replanting The Contractor shall be responsible for the complete removal and replacement of ground cover when necessary, as determined by the Property Manager. 6) Watering All ground cover shall be properly irrigated to maintain a healthy condition as determined by Property Manager. B. SHRUB CARE 1) All shrubs growing in the work areas shall be pruned as required, to maintain plants in a healthy growing condition and to maintain plant growth within reasonable bounds to prevent encroachment of passageways, walks, streets, view of signs or in any manner deemed objectionable by the Property Manager. Dead or damaged limbs or branches shall be made clean with sharp pruning tools with no projections or stubs remaining. Pruning shall be done in a manner to permit plants to grow naturally in accordance with their normal growth characteristics except box hedging may be required on some shrubs, as designated by the Property Manager. Shear hedging or severe pruning of plants, unless authorized by the Property Manager, shall not be permitted. Should the Contractor shear hedge or severely prune plants and disfigure or damage the plants, the Contractor shall be responsible to replace • A-4 000073 " those plants with like kind and size as determined by the Property Manager. 2) Fertilization " All shrubs shall be fertilized using a complete or approved fertilizer (such as, 16,6,8) four- (4) time per year. The rate of application shall be two (2) pounds of actual nitrogen per 1,000 square feet. 3) Watering All shrubs shall be properly irrigated to maintain a health condition as determined by the Property Manager. 4) Replanting The Contractor shall be responsible for the complete removal and replacement of shrubs lost when necessary, as determined by the Property Manager. C. TREE CARE Note: All trees up to fifteen (15) feet in height are included in routine maintenance. 1) Pruning a. All trees within the scope of work shall be maintained to keep the natural integrity and shapes of the trees. This work shall be accomplished in a manner, which will ensure that each individual tree is pruned. b. Regarding Rail Stations all trees should be pruned clear of the Rail right-of-way. c. In addition, the Contractor shall remove or prevent encroachment where it blocks vision or is considered undesirable by the Property Manager. Low branches overhanging sidewalks, shall be removed to a height of nine (9) feet above grade. Young trees needing pruning, training, and shaping to develop caliper and a strong structural A-5 64 074 framework shall allow low branching laterals and or appropriate sucker growth to remain on a continuing basis as needed according to the Property Manager. 2) Staking, Tying and Guying All trees requiring staking shall be securely staked at all times with approved stakes and rubber cinch ties. Robber hoses and wire will not be permitted. All stakes shall be set perpendicular to prevailing winds unless designated otherwise by the Property Manager. Tree stakes shall also be set a consistent distance away from the trunk of the tree (minimum six (6) inches) to reduce abrasion and cell elongation. The tops of all tree stakes shall be removed approximately three (3) inches above the highest tie to reduce abrasion of main or lateral branches of the tree. 3) Fertilization Alt trees shall be fertilized using a complete or approved fertilizer a minimum of one (1) time per year. 4) Watering All trees shall be properly irrigated to maintain a healthy condition as determined by the Property Manager. 5) Safety Hazard The Contractor shall bring to the attention of the Property Manager within twenty-four (24) hours any tree displaying, root heaving or girdling (either by roots or a foreign material), leaning, broken or hanging limbs, or any other reason posing a potential safety hazard. 6) Replanting The Contractor shall be responsible for the complete removal and replacement of any and all trees as necessary, as determined by the Property Manager, including but not limited to, girdling trees with string trimmers or tree ties, improper planting of new trees improper pruning techniques which disfigure or destroy the trees natural integrity and shape, or failure to detect and prevent treatable diseases and insect • 075 A-6 " " " infestations. Replacement shall be made by the Contractor in the kind and size of trees determined by the Property Manager. D. WEEDS, DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL 1) Weed Control All landscape and hardscape areas within the specified scope of work (including, but not limited to, shrub and ground cover, planters, tree wells, ornamental bark or rock areas, asphalt or concrete areas) shall be kept free of weeds at all times. The complete removal of all weed growth shall be accomplished on a continuing basis. Weeds shall be controlled by hand and approved mechanical or chemical methods. 2) Disease and Pest Control a. The Contractor shall regularly inspect all landscaped areas for presence of disease, insect or rodent infestation. The Contractor shall advise the Property Manager within four (4) days of disease when insect or rodent infestation is found, and the action to be taken. Upon approval of the Property Manager, the Contractor shall implement approved control measures, following all federal, state, county, and municipal laws, regulations and ordinances required for the approved work. b. Approved control measures shall be continued until the disease, insect or rodent is controlled to the satisfaction of the Property Manager. The Contractor shall utilize all safeguards necessary during disease, insect or rodent control operations to ensure safety of the public and the employees of the Contractor. E. IRRIGATION SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 1) General Responsibilities a. Irrigation shall be done by the use of automatic or mechanical sprinkler systems where available and operable; however, failure of the existing irrigation system to provide full and proper coverage shall not relieve the Contractor of the responsibility to provide adequate irrigation with full andproper coverage to all areas in the work site. A-7 -,0001176 b. c. Newly planted -trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall receive special attention until these plants are established. Adequate water shall be applied to promote normal healthy growth. Proper berms or basins shall be maintained during the establishment period. Any damages to public or private property resulting from excessive irrigation water or irrigation water runoff shall be charged against the Contractor's payment unless immediate repairs are made by the Contractor to the satisfaction of the Property Manager. 2) Operation of Automatic Irrigation Controllers Where the operation of automatic irrigation controllers is required, the Contractor shall: a. Not duplicate any code key furnished for access and operation of the controller. b. Surrender all keys at the end of the Contract period, or at any time deemed necessary by the Property Manager. c. Protect the security of the property by keeping controller cabinet and building doors locked at all times. d. Not use premises behind locked areas for storage of materials, supplies or tools, except as approved by the Property Manager. e. Program normal irrigation between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. 3) Water Conservation The Contractor shall turn off irrigation system during periods of rainfall and times when suspension of irrigation is desirable to conserve water while remaining within the guidelines of good horticulturally acceptable maintenance practices. When the Property Manager acknowledges the necessity to turn on the water once again, all controllers shall be activated within twenty-four (24) hours. Contractor shall perform all services in a manner which conserves the use of water whenever • 4000-'77 A-8 " possible to the extent that such conservation does not interfere with the Contractor's maintenance obligations. 4) Inspection and Reporting a. The Contractor shall physically inspect (by manual or semi- automatically running the Controller) the operation of all systems one (1) time per month. The Contractor shall maintain all sprinkler systems in such a way as to guarantee proper coverage and full working capability, and make whatever adjustments necessary to prevent excessive overspray/runoff into street right-of-ways or other areas not intended to receive irrigation overspray/runoff. b. A visual inspection of all irrigated areas shall occur, more often, but not less than one (1) time per week. All areas receiving marginal coverage shall be irrigated by a portable irrigation method. The Contractor shall furnish all hoses, nozzles, sprinklers, etc., necessary to accomplish this supplementary irrigation. Care shall be exercised to prevent a waste of water, erosion, and/or detrimental seepage into existing underground improvements or structures. F. GENERAL MAINTENANCE AND CLEAN-UP 1) The Contractor shall collect all clippings, trimmings, cuttings, rubbish and debris at all work sites and dispose of same in a lawful manner at the Contractor's expense. 2) All trash and debris shall be removed from all work sites as work is being performed. 3) The Contractor shall rake, hand remove, or vacuum leaves that are not absorbed by planting. This shall be done as often as required to maintain a neat appearance, or prevent plants from being smothered by seasonal leaf drop. 4) After heavy windstorms, the entire area shall be cleaned of litter, fallen branches, etc., which are in excess of normal amounts. 5) The Contractor shall keep sidewalks and paved areas in . the medians swept and cleaned of any dirt or soil that might be washed from adjacent slopes or planted areas. A-9 G. OTHER REQUIREMENTS 1) Replacement of Plant Material a. The Contractor shall notify the Property Manager within four (4) days of the loss of plant material due to any cause. b. The Contractor shall remove shrub or ground cover, which is damaged or lost due to any cause at no cost. The size and species of replacement shrubs or ground cover plants shall be consistent with the original landscape plan. The Property Manager shall approve any exceptions. c. In order to ensure maximum healthy growth and overall aesthetic appearance of planting in the work area, it may be desirable to replace certain plants. The Property Manager shall determine the necessity or desirability of such plant replacement. d. The Contractor shall replace, at Contractor's own expense, any ground cover, trees, shrubs, or other plant material requiring replacement through normal attrition or due to infestation or to negligence resulting from Contractor's failure to provide maintenance in accordance with the provisions of this agreement. It is the intention of the Property Manager to require a high level of quality in landscape maintenance compatible with standard practice. 2) Inspection The Property Manager or his or her designee shall inspect the work area to ensure adequacy of maintenance and that methods of performing the work are in compliance with the contract. However, this shall not be construed to relieve the Contractor of the duty to provide continuous inspection of the work area. The Contractor shall correct discrepancies and deficiencies in the work immediately as determined by the Property Manager. 3) Emergency Service Twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, the Contractor shall be able to receive and respond to the Property Manager or his or her o0oQ79 A-10 " " " designee's call for emergency service. Response time shall be less than two (2) hours to remove or eliminate a public safety hazard. Contractor shall provide the Property Manager with a local telephone number where Contractor can be contacted twenty -our (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week. 4) New maintenance Areas Additional routine maintenance may be required as set forth in the contract. Payment for add-on maintenance shall be based on the square footage of added area. EXTRAORDINARY MAINTENANCE Extraordinary maintenance may be required pursuant to the terms of the contract for landscape maintenance services. [ INSERT 1 A-11 0000 FM " " " EXHIBIT "B" SCHEDULE OF SERVICES INSERT B-1 000081 " " " EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION [ INSERT C-1 000082 " AGENDA ITEM 60 " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee BiII Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Consultant Ranking Recommendations for the Provision of Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies for the Proposed Parking Structure at North Main Corona Metrolink Station BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: • • 1) Concur with the Selection Committee recommendations, for the ranking of Engineering Firms, as listed below, who responded to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for consultant services to provide Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies, for the proposed 1,000 space Parking Structure at the new North Main Corona Metrolink Station; and, Top Ranked Gordon H. Chong & Partners Second Owen Group Third DMJM + HARRIS Fourth Choate Parking Design Consultants 2) Direct staff to bring back a scope, schedule, and cost for approval after the State funding has been approved and the project scope has been finalized. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Congestion along the SR 60 and SR 91 is projected to continue to increase which will likely stimulate a growing demand for Metrolink services in the future. To meet this projected demand and provide a level of service that encourages ongoing Metrolink ridership, the Commission requested that a Station Management Plan be developed. In May of 2001, the draft Station Management Plan, prepared by Carl Schiermeyer Consulting Services, was presented to the Commission. The following are some of the main highlights of the Plan: x_89 Over the next 10 years, Metrolink ridership is projected to grow 40% systemwide, with 110% growth on the two lines that directly serve Riverside County today, the Riverside and IEOC. In fact, in just the last 12 months, ridership on the two Lines has grown 36%. As a result, the parking space utilization rate at the Riverside County Metrolink stations is near 90%, which creates station capacity issues. The current parking situation at the Riverside -La Sierra station is one example of what lies ahead as a result of the success of Metrolink in this region. By 2010, 5 out of our 6 Metrolink stations are forecasted to have parking deficits. 1. Train operations are also expected to more than double by 2011 (from 25 daily trains to 54 daily trains). Access to Metrolink is an important issue for our customers. With too few parking spaces and not enough connecting transit service, getting to the train can be the toughest part of the trip. 2. In addition to ridership projections, related to existing service, and the subsequent parking demands, two additional opportunities will provide new sources of demand within the next 10 years, the expansion of commuter rail service to Perris on the San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL) and the development of transit oriented developments (TOD). In an effort to meet the future Riverside County Metrolink ridership needs, staff submitted an application for $11 million, in the 2002 Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP), to construct a 1,000 space Parking Structure at the proposed North Main Corona Metrolink station. The application was forwarded to Caltrans and made the Statewide Proposed Project Listing. The funding is scheduled to be presented to the CTC, for a vote of approval, in April of 2002. In anticipation of the CTC approval of the funding for the proposed North Main Corona Station Parking Structure, staff requested, and the Commission authorized, at the January 9, 2002 Commission meeting, to; 1) prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP), for consultant services to provide engineering and environmental studies for a proposed 1,000 space Parking Structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink Station; 2) form a selection committee, comprised of representatives from RCTC/Bechtel staff, City of Corona staff; Metrolink staff and Caltrans staff: 3) direct the selection committee to review, evaluate, rank all RFP=s received, develop a shortlist of the top ranked firms, and interview the shortlisted firms; 4) after the interviews and evaluation process the selection committee will rank the shortlisted firms; and 5) return to the Commission with a recommendation. 0-114rt18 • • • " The schedule for the selection process was as follows: Calendar of Events Advertise Request for Proposals January 21, 2002 Request for Proposals Submittal Deadline February 7,2002 Shortlist top three (3) qualified firms February 25, 2002 Interview top three (3) qualified firms March 11, 2002 Committee Recommendation to Commission March 25, 2002 A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives from RCTC, Bechtel, Caltrans, Metrolink, and the City of Corona. Staff received proposals from seven (7) firms. The selection panel reviewed the seven (7) submitted proposals and extended an invitation for oral interviews to four (4) firms. The four (4) firms each presented teams that would be capable of completing the proposed scope of work. After evaluating the proposed project teams, their knowledge of the project and proposed project approach, the selection panel ranked the four (4) interviewed firms as follows: " " Top Ranked Gordon H. Chong & Partners Second Owen Group Third DMJM + HARRIS Fourth Choate Parking Design Consultants, Inc. The funding is scheduled to be presented to the CTC as part of the 2002 STIP adoption on April 3-4, 2002. The pending CTC recommendation places the funds in the FY 2004-05. Staff is in discussions with Caltrans to identify a portion of the proposed state funds to support the environmental and design phase of the parking structure project. Staff will provide information to the Commission at the April 10t meeting summarizing the results of the CTC actions in the 2002 STIP adoption, and staff expects to be able to provide recommendations on how to proceed on the North Main Corona Parking Structure Project. 000085 " AGENDA ITEM 6P " " " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Dennis Mejia, Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT" " Approval of State Highway 74 Traffic Enforcement Agreement No. 02-31-055 with the California Highway Patrol BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve entering into Agreement No. 02-31-055 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) for Traffic Enforcement Services during construction of Segment 1; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The State Route 74 Realignment project is a Measure "A" Project from Dexter Avenue in the City of Lake Elsinore to 7th Street in the City of Perris. The project will be constructed in two segments. Segment 1 is from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment 2 is from approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in Perris. The Traffic Enforcement Agreement is based on the 1999 Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) agreement between the CHP and Caltrans for the CHP to provide traffic enforcement services during construction projects on state highways. These services include, but are not limited to: providing traffic breaks; traffic control services for lane and/or highway closures; stationary traffic enforcement patrols upstream of the work area; and circulating traffic enforcement patrols. The project special provisions shall specify which construction operations require the use of COZEEP services. The COZEEP program shall be administered by the construction resident engineer. Under the agreement, RCTC shall pay all costs for the CHP to furnish officers and patrol cars for use in the construction zones. RCTC costs are estimated to be $31,700. Attachment Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2001-02 Amount: $ 31,700.00 Source of Funds: Bond Reserves GLA No.: 222-31-81401 Budget Adjustment: N Fiscal Procedures Approved: � Date: 03/18/02 t 87 Agreement No.: 02-310055 CHP #0198-01/02 smv STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 25th day of October, 2001, by and between the State of California acting by and through the Department of California Highway Patrol, hereinafter called CHP, and Riverside County Transportation Commission, hereinafter called RCTC. WITNESSETH: By and in consideration of the covenants and conditions herein contained, CHP and RCTC do hereby agree as follows: 1. The CHP agrees to provide to the RCTC traffic control services during the State Route 74 Realignment Project. The project is from Dexter Avenue in Lake Elsinore to 7th Street in the City of Perris. 2. CHP agrees to provide services between February 2, 2002 through October 31, 2002. 3. At the request of RCTC, CHP Temecula Area Office will provide traffic officers with vehicles and io coordinate all traffic control. 4. The Contract Coordinators for this agreement shall be: CHP RCTC Temecula Area Office Executive Director Eric Haley Sgt. Chris Francescon 3650 University Ave., Ste 100 Telephone: (909) 506-2000 Telephone: (909).787-7910 5. The hours of duty performed by CHP officers under this agreement are those mutuall requesting yagreed upon by the CHP Coordinator and the re q g party. Any changes to the proposed plan such as additional hours, dates, and sites for traffic control can be requested and /or on an "as needed" basis and must be mutually agreed upon by the local CHP command and RCTC. 6. The law enforcement services to be performed by CHP officers under this agreement, including the standards of performance, discipline and control thereof, shall be the responsibility of the CHP. 7. The CHP and RCTC agree that in the event of an unforeseen emergency, this agreement may be terminated by either party without prior notice to the other party. 8. Should CHP officer(s) report to the assigned detail location and if for any reason CHP reassigns the officer(s) away from the detail, RCTC will be billed only for the officer(s) actual time incurred from CHP Area Office to the service location and for the time spent at the assigned detail location covered under this agreement. 0008$ Riverside County Transportation Commission CHP #0198-01/02 December 17, 2001 Page 2 9. The CHP and RCTC agree that this agreement may be amended by written mutual consent of both parties hereto. 10. In consideration of the above services and upon receipt of an itemized invoice, RCTC agrees to reimburse the CHP the actual costs in effect at the time services are provided. The following information is a cost estimate only: CLASSIFICATION OVERTIME RATE PER HOUR Sergeant $59.96 Sergeant M/C $62.11 Officer $49.31 Officer M/C $51.08 Vehicle Mileage Rate (per vehicle mile) $ .45 Motorcycle Mileage Rate (per motorcycle mile) $ .89 The total amount of the agreement shall not exceed Thirty -One Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty -Eight Dollars and Forty Cents ($31,738.40). 11. It is understood by RCTC that billing of CHP officer's time will be from portal to portal (CHP Area Office to the service location and return to CHP Area Office) except as specified in Paragraph 8. 12. Unforeseen events may require CHP personnel to expend hours in excess of the original estimate. 13. The CHP shall provide RCTC with an itemized invoice which details all of CHP's employee costs for the traffic control services performed under this agreement. The RCTC agrees to pay CHP within thirty (30) days after the date of the invoice. 14. OTHER REQUIREMENTS If the CHP uniformed employee has reported to the assigned location and has worked less than four (4) hours, RCTC agrees to pay every assigned uniformed employee a minimum of four (4) hours overtime. Exception: This does not apply to those cases when the hours worked are part of an extended shift. 06`0 0 89 " Riverside County Transportation Commission CHP #0198-01/02 December 17, 2001 Page 3 15. CANCELLATIONS a. RCTC will not be charged for cancellations made more than 24 hours prior to the scheduled assignment. b. RCTC agrees that if cancellation is made within 24 hours prior to the scheduled assignment and the assigned CHP uniformed employee(s) cannot be notified of such cancellation, a minimum of four (4) hours overtime will be charged for each assigned uniformed employee. c. RCTC agrees that if cancellation is made within 24 hours prior to the scheduled assignment and the CHP employee is notified of such cancellation, RCTC will only be charged a short notice cancellation fee of $50.00 per assigned CHP uniformed employee. 16. All cancellation notices to CHP must be made during normal CHP business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. III 7. CHP agrees to make reasonable efforts to notify CHP uniformed employees of the cancellation. 18. Except as provided in Paragraph 19, RCTC agrees that additional charges may be assessed for CHP supplies, additional equipment utilized, damage to property repaired or replaced at State expense, etc., which are directly related to the services provided herein. 19. No additional gifts, donations, or gratuities may be accepted by CHP employees on their own behalf, or on behalf of the Department, informal squad club, or other local funds. QOOO9O Riverside County Transportation Commission CHP #0198-01/02 December 17, 2001 Page 4 20. Each party shall be responsible for the negligence or misconduct of its own personnel. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Riverside County Transportation Department of California Highway Patrol Commission Contracts Officer Signature Date Department of California Highway Patrol Business Services Section Attn.: Contract Services Unit P. O. Box 942898 Sacramento, CA 94298-0001 Title 3560 University Avenue Ste 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Approved As To Form by: , County Attorney Authority: County Board of Supervisors Resolution required 000001 AGENDA ITEM 6Q • " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Erik Galloway, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT" ' Approval of State Route 74 Utility Agreement No. 02-31-044 with AT&T Broadband BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve entering into Agreement No. 02-31-044 with AT&T Broadband defining the responsibilities for the relocation of cable television lines related to the RCTC Measure "A" widening of SR 74 between Lake Elsinore and the City of Perris. The RCTC cost is estimated to be $ 6,212.26; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Measure "A" Strategic Plan includes improvements to SR 74, between 1-15 in the City of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the City of Perris, a length of approximately 8.5 miles. The improvements will widen the existing two lane roadway to four lanes with 8 foot shoulders and a continuous 14 foot paved median. The project is being designed and constructed in two segments. Segment 1 is from Dexter Avenue, in Lake Elsinore, to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment 2 is from approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in the City of Perris. The realignment and widening of SR 74 requires the relocation of existing utilities to accommodate the improvements. Relocation of the utilities is required prior to, or in conjunction with, the physical construction. This utility agreement with AT&T Broadband is for Segment 1. The agreement between AT&T Broadband and RCTC defines the responsibilities for each party in regards to the relocation of AT&T Broadband's utilities. The utility agreement is required for the right-of-way certification process to ensure that all utility work associated with the project will be completed prior to construction or provisions made for completion during construction. Right-of-way certification is required by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to document that the project js4 dy, 300092 for advertising and states that 1) real property interests have been, or are being secured, 2) physical obstructions including utilities and railroads have been or will be removed, relocated, or protected as required for construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed project, and 3) right-of-way acquisition and relocation assistance program requirements were conducted in accordance with applicable federal and state laws and procedures. Staff, Legal Counsel, and AT&T Broadband have been working to resolve the final language for the relocation of the cable television lines. The final cost estimate and cost share liability was determined by AT&T Broadband and submitted to RCTC on March 18, 2002. Legal Counsel incorporated the costs and final comments into the agreement and returned the final agreement to Staff on March 22, 2002. This agenda item is being brought forward at this time in order to keep the project on schedule. AT&T Broadband is scheduled to begin relocation of their utilities immediately following the completion of the relocation of the Southern California Edison (SCE) utilities which is currently ongoing. SCE is expected to complete their relocation work by April 12, 2002. COST ESTIMATE: Since AT&T Broadband has some prior rights, RCTC is required to pay for the portion of utility relocation where AT&T Broadband has prior rights. AT&T Broadband will pay for the portion where they do not have prior rights. AT&T Broadband estimated the total project cost to be $47,640.00 and has determined that RCTC's share of the project costs is $6,212.26 or (13.04% of total project cost). Staff has reviewed the cost estimate and concurs with AT&T Broadband's estimate. Attachment Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2001-02 Amount: $ 6,212.26 Source of Funds: Bond Reserves Budget Adjustment: GLA No.: 222-31-81401 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 03/25/02 • • !93 RCTC Agreement No. 02-31-044 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND AT&T BROADBAND UTILITY AGREEMENT FOR SR -74 SEGMENT 1 This Utility Agreement ("Agreement") is made this day of 2002 ("Effective Date"), by and between the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") and King Videocable Company locally known as AT&T Broadband ("AT&T Broadband"). RCTC and AT&T Broadband are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties." RECITALS A. RCTC, in cooperation with the State Department of Transportation ("State"), proposes to realign and widen State Route 74 ("Construction Project") from Dexter Avenue to 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road, also referred to as SR -74 Segment 1. B. AT&T Broadband owns and maintains cable television lines and appurtenances ("cable television lines") within the limits of RCTC's Construction Project which require relocation to accommodate RCTC's Construction Project. AT&T Broadband's cable television lines are located on shared utility poles owned by Southern California Edison ("SCE") and on shared utility poles owned by Verizon. C. AT&T Broadband agrees to relocate its cable television lines within the limits of RCTC's Construction Project pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement ("Project"). RVPLB\AYC'.629119 1 094 NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: TERMS 1.0 Work Performed by AT&T Broadband. In accordance with the Utility Verification, . Relocation Claim Letter and Utility Conflicts Notice dated July 10, 2001, AT&T - Broadband shall relocate its cable television lines as shown on the construction plans titled "AT&T Broadband Utility Relocation Plans" dated , attached hereto and which by this reference are made apart hereof ("Exhibit A"). AT&T Broadband shall coordinate the relocation of its cable television lines with SCE and Verizon's relocation of their own utility lines and poles. 2.0 Amendment, Modification, or Supplement. The Parties agree to review and abide by the provisions of this Agreement. Should the Parties believe that an amendment, modification, or supplement may be necessary to this Agreement, the Parties agree to confer and cooperatein good faith to make the necessary amendment, modification, or supplement. No amendment, modification, or supplement to this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by the Parties. Any valid amendment, modification, or supplement to this Agreement shall have no effect on any other provision of this Agreement, including all indemnity requirements. 3.0 Reimbursement of AT&T Broadband's Project Costs. 3.1 Definition of Project Costs. "Project Costs" shall include relocation and management costs. 3.2 Project Costs. RCTC and AT&T Broadband agree to share the Project Costs incurred pursuant to this Project. RCTC's share of estimated Project Costs to relocate AT&T Broadband's cable television lines from approximately engineer's station 29+00 to station 77+00 is $6,212.26, which is the sum of the estimated costs set forth in Section 3.3, subsection (A) (Relocation Costs) and subsection (B) (Management Costs) and as particularly described in "Exhibit B," attached hereto and which by this reference is made a part hereof RCTC's share of the Project Costs will be based on the following Formula ("Formula"): the number of utility poles used by AT&T Broadband that are located outside of the State's right-of-way (e.g., total of 3 poles) divided by the total number of utility poles used by AT&T Broadband that must relocated in connection with the Project (e.g., total of 23 poles). Therefore, AT&T Broadband will pay eighty six and ninety six one hundredths percent (89.96%) of all Project Costs and RCTC will pay thirteen and four one hundredths percent (13.04%) of all Project Costs. 3.3 As used in Section 3.2, the following terms are defined as follows: RVPUBWY0629119 2 ' 095 " RVPUB\AYC`.629119 " (B) (A) Relocation Costs. RCTC shall reimburse AT&T Broadband for reasonable relocation costs incurred by AT&T Broadband to relocate existing cable television lines located outside of the State's right-of- way and as described in Exhibit B. All other cable television lines, poles, and appurtenant facilities will be relocated at AT&T. Broadband's expense. RCTC's share of estimated relocation costs is thirteen and four one hundredths percent (1304%) of the total relocation costs ($39,700.00). Therefore, RCTC's share of relocation costs is five thousand one hundred and seventy-six dollars and eighty- eight cents ($5,176.88). (B) Management Costs. RCTC shall reimburse AT&T Broadband for reasonable management costs incurred by AT&T Broadband pursuant to this Project and as described in Exhibit B. These management costs include (i) inspection costs and (ii) costs accrued by AT&T Broadband as a result of RCTC's request of July 10, 2001 to review, study, and/or prepare relocation plans and estimates for the cable television lines associated with Section 3.3 subsection (A) of this Agreement. RCTC's share of estimated management costs is thirteen and four one hundredths percent (13.04%) of the total management costs ($7,940.00). Therefore, RCTC's share of management costs is one thousand and thirty-five dollars and thirty-eight cents ($1035.38). 3.4 Reimbursement. RCTC shall reimburse AT&T Broadband the Project Costs described in Section 3.2 within 45 days of a presentation of an invoice as follows: (A) The invoice shall be signed by a responsible agent of AT&T Broadband and prepared on AT&T Broadband's letterhead, compiled on the basis of the actual cost and expense incurred. The invoice shall include copies of all (1) contractor invoices billed to AT&T Broadband, (2) materials invoices from vendors, (3) AT&T Broadband engineering labor hours and charges, and (4) AT&T Broadband inspection labor. AT&T Broadband will prepare and submit progress bills for costs incurred not to exceed AT&T Broadband's recorded costs as of the billing date. (C) The final billing shall be in the form of an itemized statement of the total costs charged pursuant to this Agreement, and less any amounts covered by previous progress billings. However, RCTC shall not pay bills, which exceed the estimated Project Costs as set forth above. If 3 P the accrued costs exceed the estimated Project Costs, an Amended Agreement shall be executed by the Parties to this Agreement prior to the payment of AT&T Broadband's final bill. Detailed records from • which the billing is compiled shall be retained by AT&T Broadband for a period of three years from the date of the final bill and will be available for audit by RCTC. 4.0 Timely Relocation of the Cable Television Lines. AT&T Broadband agrees to cooperate in good faith with RCTC to ensure timely relocation of the cable television lines. AT&T Broadband also agrees to relocate the cable television lines, located within the limits of RCTC's Construction Project, promptly after SCE or Verizon, as applicable, relocates its facilities but no later than April 30, 2002. 5.0 Proper Disposal of Utility Poles. Some or all of AT&T Broadband's cable television lines are located on shared utility poles owned by other utility companies, including SCE and Verizon. Should AT&T Broadband be the last utility company to relocate its lines on any shared utility poles pursuant to this Agreement, AT&T Broadband agrees to be responsible for the proper disposal of any and all remaining utility poles in compliance with federal and state laws. 6.0 Project Cancellation Procedure. If RCTC's Construction Project is canceled or modified so as to eliminate the necessity of work by AT&T Broadband, RCTC will notify AT&T Broadband in writing within a reasonable period of time and RCTC reserves the right to terminate this Agreement by Amendment. The Amendment shall provide mutually acceptable terms and conditions for terminating the Agreement. 7.0 Federal Aid Highway. It is understood that said highway is a Federal Aid Highway and accordingly, 23 CFR 645 is hereby incorporated into this Agreement. 8.0 Indemnification by RCTC. RCTC shall indemnify and hold AT&T Broadband, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liabilities, losses, obligations, judgments, or damages, including but not limited to property damage, bodily injury or death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, arising out of or incident to any negligent act or omission by RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers, or subcontractors pursuant to this Agreement made by RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers, or subcontractors. Indemnification by RCTC includes, without limitation, the payment of all penalties, fines, judgments, awards; decrees, attorneys' fees, and related costs or expenses, and the reimbursement of AT&T Broadband its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers for all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them. RCTC's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance RVPUBWYCb29119 4 • bb#Wobl proceeds, if any, received by AT&T Broadband, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. 9.0 Indemnification by AT&T Broadband. AT&T Broadband shall indemnify and hold RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and. harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liabilities, - losses, obligations, judgments, or damages, including but not limited to property damage, bodily injury or death, or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, arising out of or incident to any negligent act or omission by AT&T Broadband, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers, or subcontractors pursuant to this Agreement made by AT&T Broadband, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers, or subcontractors. Indemnification by AT&T Broadband includes, without limitation, the payment of all penalties, fines, judgments, awards, decrees, attorneys' fees, and related costs or expenses, and the reimbursement of RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and/or volunteers forall legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them. AT&T Broadband's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by RCTC, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. 10.0 Insurance. AT&T Broadband shall require its general contractor to include RCTC as an additional insured on any liability insurance which AT&T Broadband requires of its general contractor. 11.0 Notices. Notification under this Agreement, except for written notices required or authorized herein, may be made by telephone or such other means as mutually agreed to among the Parties. Any written notice required or authorized under this Agreement shall be delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, as specified below: To AT&T Broadband: Arnel Ganzon AT&T Broadband 1581 Commerce Street Corona, CA 92880 To RCTC: Eric Haley, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Any Party, may, by notice to the other Party, change the designation or address of the person so specified as the one to receive notice pursuant to this Agreement. 12.0 Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with RVPUBWYC`.629119 5 j,0,998 and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any lawsuit brought in connection with this Agreement shall be brought in the appropriate court in the County of Riverside, California. 13.0 Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If any legal action or other proceeding is brought in . connection with this Agreement, the successful or prevailing Party shall be entitled to - recover reasonable attorneys' fees and other related costs, in addition to any other relief to which the Party is entitled. 14.0 Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement and the Parties agree to execute all documents and proceed with due diligence to complete all covenants and conditions. 15.0 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and which collectively shall constitute one instrument. 16.0 Invalidity: Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall constitute in full force and effect. 17.0 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written statements or agreements between the Parties. 18.0 Signature Clause. The signatories hereto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. [SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE RVPUBWYC`.629119 6 Ooq099 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement was executed on the date first written above. • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY KING VIDEOCABLE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMPANY By: John F. Tavaglione, Chairperson Reviewed and Recommended for Approval: By: By: Eric Haley Executive Director Attest: Approved as to Form: By: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP RVPUBWYC.629119 7 Name Title 000100 RVPUBWY0,6291 I9 • EXHIBIT A AT&T BROADBAND UTILITY RELOCATION PLANS (Attach Plans] 8 EXHIBIT B PROJECT COSTS RELOCATION COSTS Quantity Description of work Unit Cost Total 23 Make Ready Engineering (per pole) 112.50 2,587.50 23 Make Ready Construction (per pole) . 112.50 2,587.50 23 Make Ready Permit (per pole) 50.00 1,150.00 15000 Strand Installation (per foot) 0.75 11,250.00 15000 Cable Overlash (per foot) 1.13 16,875.00 3 Remove & Replace Poles (per pole) 750.00 2,250.00 1 Relocate Power Supply - 3,000.00 3,000.00 Total: $39,700.00 MANAGEMENT COSTS Quantity DeseriptionofWork Unit Cost Total 1 Management 0.20 7,940.00 Total: $7,940.00 GRAND TOTAL: $47,640.00 Total Number of Poles: Number of Poles Outside the Right -of -Way: RCTC's percentage share of AT&Ts Relocation Costs: RCTC's Estimated Share of AT&T's Relocation Costs: (13.04% of $39,700) 23 3 3/23 or 13.04 % 55,176.88 RCTC's Estimated Share of AT&T's Management Costs: 51,035.38 (13.04% of $7,940) RCTC'S ESTIMATED SHARE OF AT&T'S PROJECT COSTS: $6,212.26 (13.04% of $47,640) RVPUB\AYC1629119 9 • ®001.02 " AGENDA ITEM 6R " " " " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request to Amend City of Banning's Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Short Range Transit Plan for Purchase of Capital Equipment  Ford Ranger Pickup PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Amend the City of Banning's FY 2001-02 Short Range Transit Plan authorizing the purchase of a Ford Ranger pickup; and, 2) Authorize the expenditure of $8,371 in Local Transportation Funds and $6,629 in State Transit Assistance funds previously allocated to cover the cost. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City of Banning (Banning) previously received funds to rehabilitate a dial -a -ride vehicle. All but $8,371 of the funds was spent on the rehabilitation. Since that time, Banning has carried the balance on its annual transit audit as "funds owed to other governmental agency." Banning is requesting authorization to amend its Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) and spend the funds to purchase a transit relief vehicle to assist with driver shift changes. If approved, Banning will purchase a Ford Ranger truck for the total cost of $15,000. The balance of $6,629 ($15,000 less $8,371) will be paid for out of State Transit Assistance Funds previously allocated to Banning. Banning's City Council is aware of staff's request and approved it at their February 26, 2002 Council Meeting. 000103 " AGENDA ITEM 7 " RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Approval of Agreement No. 02-25-050 with Amtrak to Serve the Riverside -Downtown Station PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve Agreement No. 02-25-050, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, with Amtrak to serve the Riverside -Downtown Station. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Riverside County has received numerous requests for Amtrak service. It has been, and continues to be, an important objective, and a benefit to our Riverside County residents. Today, limited Amtrak service (Sunset Limited and Texas Eagle) is available in the Coachella Valley, and the Riverside -Downtown Station serves as an Amtrak connecting bus stop to the San Joaquin train service. However, the Commission has continued to lobby for expanded service in the Coachella Valley and secure direct Amtrak train service at the Riverside -Downtown Station. Riverside -Downtown Station Years prior to the advent of Metrolink, the City of Riverside lobbied intensively for long distance Amtrak service. The City failed in its efforts because of the inadequacy of the tracks in the downtown area. When RCTC reached agreement with the Santa Fe in 1992, one of the items very high on our list was the effort to facilitate Amtrak long distance service to the residents. In fact, it continues to be a Department Goal specified in the Commission' s Adopted Budget. Santa Fe agreed that upon completion of certain track improvements and the pedestrian overcrossing, all Amtrak trains may stop to pick up and set off passengers at the Riverside -Downtown Station. The required track improvements and pedestrian overcrossing are now completed. Southwest Chief RCTC has invested over $34 million in the Riverside -Downtown Station in the hopes that it would serve as a major transportation hub serving both Metrolink and Amtrak trains. The Southwest Chief serves eight states from Illinois to California. Since the Southwest Chief already runs through the Station, it is a logic? ddittcp,j as the next step to expanding Amtrak service to Riverside County. 00010-4 In October 2000, the Executive Director wrote a letter formally inviting Amtrak to add the Riverside -Downtown Station to the list of daily station stops on the route of the Southwest Chief. Amtrak has informed us that they have received the necessary approvals from BNSF to serve the Riverside -Downtown Station. Upon recommendation by the Plans and Programs Committee and subsequent approval by the Commission, the Southwest Chief could begin serving Riverside as soon as April 29th RCTC and Amtrak will participate in joint marketing activities to increase public awareness and highlight some of our landmarks, such as the Mission Inn. In accordance with our current lease agreement for the Amtrak Bus stop, the amount of this lease would be $1 per year. • • • 000105 AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee John Hunt Tom Mullen, Chair Frank West Dick Kelly Ron Roberts Michael Wilson Will Kleindienst Jan Rudman Roy Wilson Robin Lowe John Tavaglione Anne Mayer, Ex Officio Ameal Moore Jack van Haaster SUBJECT: Expenditure Plan for Measure "A " Extension SALES TAX AD HOC RECOMMENDATION: The Expenditure Plan for the Measure "A" extension is presented for review, discussion and adoption. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission appointed a Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee in May 2000 and has met numerous times since then to develop an Expenditure Plan for the extension of Measure "A '; the 1/2 cent sales tax for transportation. Attached is the Expenditure Plan for a 30 -year extension of Measure "A"developed and unanimously approved by the Ad Hoc Committee at its meeting on March 13, 2002. This is presented to the Commission for adoption. The Expenditure Plan provides the blueprint ` for the use of $4.665 billion in revenues expected to be generated by extending the 1/2 cent sales tax for transportation approved by the voters in 1988 for an additional 30 years beginning in 2009 when the current Measure "A" expires. The basic principles used by the Ad Hoc Committee to develop the Expenditure Plan are as follows: • Measure "A" funds generated in the Coachella Valley Area, the Western Riverside County Area, and the Palo Verde Valley Area will be returned to those areas in which they are generated to fund the transportation projects and programs. Separate plans for each area were prepared to show how these funds would be used to meet their specific transportation needs. !106 (if; - Measure "A" funds will supplement and not replace existing federal, state and local funds used for transportation purposes and will be matched by additional local funding from new development. The Plan requires all cities and the county to meet a maintenance of effort requirement in order to be eligible to receive funds for local streets and road purposes. It also requires the cities and the county in the Coachella Valley area to continue their current Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program, and requires the cities and the county in the Western Riverside County area to implement a TUMF program, in order to be eligible to receive funding for local street and road purposes. The cities and the county in the Western Riverside County area must also participate in the Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Program (MSHCP). ♦ The Plan limits the use of Measure "A" revenues for administrative salaries and provides for public accountability. No more than 1% of the revenues received each year can be used for administrative salaries and benefits and, the Commission is required to conduct annual fiscal audits to make sure that Measure "A " revenues are used only for the purposes identified in the Plan. • The Plan recognizes that needs change over time and that high priority transportation projects, which were not identified during the development of this Expenditure Plan, will be identified in the future. In order to provide for funding to be available for these projects, no State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Discretionary funds were identified to fund the projects that are identified in the Plan and, the Commission is required to update the Plan every ten years, after it is approved by the voters. The Ad Hoc Committee and Commission staff used information from three different public opinion polls and extensive input from Caltrans District 08, the Coachella Valley : Association of Governments, and the Western Riverside Council of Governments' Technical Advisory Committee in the development of this Expenditure Plan. The attached Expenditure Plan attempts to reach a reasonable balance in the distribution of future Measure "A" revenues among the various types of projects and programs necessary to maintain the quality of life of residents throughout Riverside County and, to provide for their continued mobility in the future. The types of projects and programs vary considerably between the three County areas, from a local streets and roads improvement and maintenance program in the Palo Verde Valley to more complex plans which also include: new transportation 'corridors; improvements on the existing freeway and state highway system; development and construction of a coordinated regional arterial roadway system; expansion of transit services for commuters through additional rail and/or intercity bus alternatives; continued and expanded specialized transportation programs for • An r' 00010 " the elderly and persons with disabilities; and, ridesharing programs for commuters in the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County areas. " 000108 " Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY BY SUPPLEMENTING EXISTING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION Reduce current congestion and provide adequate transportation facilities to accommodate reasonable growth in the future. Provide funding for the adequate maintenance and improvement of local streets and roads in the cities and unincorporated areas. " Enhance Riverside County' s ability to secure state and federal funding for transportation by offering local matching funds. PROVIDE FOR ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE EXPENDITURE OF TAX PAYER FUNDS Provides for mandatory dedication of sales tax funds only for the transportation improvements and programs identified in the Expenditure Plan - and no other purpose. Provides for a mandatory, annual financial audit of program expenditures to insure that all funds are spent t in accordance with this voter adopted Plan and associated legal ordinance. Provides for a Maintenance of Effort requirement in funds made available to city and county governments for local street and road programs to insure the new money for this purpose is adding to current funding levels. Provides for the strict limitation of administrative staff costs in implementing this Plan, by limiting, in law, funds expended for salaries and benefitsto no more than one (1) percent of the annual net amount of revenues raised by Measure "A". Provides for the Plan to be updated every 10 years for the period it is in effect to insure that the changing needs and priorities of the county are met. 1 0 109 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 Provides for the mandatory termination of the tax in 2039, requiring additional voter approval for extension at a County General Election according to state law. PROVIDE FOR EQUITY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEASURE "A" REVS N UES Return funds to the Western County, Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley proportionate to the funds generated in those areas. Adopt a Transportation Improvement Plan, which address the unique needs of each of the areas of the county. Provide a reasonable balance between competing highway, commuter rail, transit, and local streets and roads needs. PROVIDE FOR LOCAL CONTROL _ OF THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Provide for cost effective, local administration of the program through the existing Riverside County Transportation Commission. No new agency would be required to administer these funds. Delegate appropriate administrative responsibility to the cities and the county and other local agencies for local programs. This TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN, which shall act as the County' s Expenditure Plan, was prepared by the Riverside County Transportation Commission for the purpose of extending the current %2 cent local transaction and use tax for transportation to be collected for an additional 30 years, if approved by the voters on November 5, 2002 — Measure "A" This is proposed by the Commission as a means to fill the funding shortfall to: implement necessary highway, commuter rail, andtransit projects; secure new transportation corridors through environmental clearance and right of way purchases; provide adequate maintenance and improvements on the local street and road system; promote economic growth throughout the county; and provide specialized programs to meet the needs of commuters and the specialized needs of the growing senior and disabled population. TAXPAYER ACCOUNTABILITY SAFEGUARDS LEGAL DEDICATION OF FUNDS Measure "A" funds may only be used for transportation purposes and described in the local ordinance governing this program, including the construction, environmental mitigation of transportation projects, capital activities, acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways, including state highways 2 t Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • • • and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include but are not limited to expenditures for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, related right-of-way acquisition, and construction, engineering and administration. MANDATORY ANNUAL FISCAL AUDIT No less than annually, the RCTC shall conduct an independent fiscal audit of the expenditure of all sales tax funds raised by this measure. The audit, which shall be made available to the public, shall report on evidence that the expenditure of funds is in accordance with the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan as adopted by the voters in approving the sales tax measure on November 5, 2002. In addition, the audit shall determine that Maintenance of Effort requirements, other requirements regarding local government participation in Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Programs, as well as requirements described in Section 5 of the Plan entitled "Local Streets and Roads" have been complied with. The audit shall also insure that no more than 1 (one) percent of total sales tax expenditures are used for administrative staff salaries and benefits in implementing this Plan. MANDATORY PLAN UPDATE AND TERMINATION OF SALES TAX This Plan shall be updated by RCTC every 10 years that the sales tax is in effect to reflect current and changing priorities and needs in the County, as defined by the duly elected local government representatives on the RCTC Board. Any changes to this Plan must be adopted in accordance with current law in effect at the time of the update and must be based on findings of necessity for change by the Commission. The sales tax authorized to be collected by the voters shall be terminated on March 31, 2039, unless reauthorized by the voters to extend the sales tax prior to the termination date as required under state law in effect at the time of the vote for extension. SPECIFIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY The Expenditure Plan Map illustrates the Western and Coachella Valley areas. The Western County area includes the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Riverside, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. It also includes the unincorporated communities of Jurupa, Mira Loma, Menifee, Wildomar, and Sun City and other more sparsely populated areas, and the reservations of the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians; the Soboba Band of Mission Indians, the Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians, the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the Morongo Band of Indians_ 3 MAI Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 1. STATE HIGHWAYS Many more state highway improvement projects are needed to deal with congestion and safety problems than existing state and federal revenues can fund. Projected formula funds from these sources over the 30 years is estimated to be $640 million and will fund less than %2 of the improvements needed and identified in the Expenditure Plan, which are estimated to cost $1.66 billion in current dollars. Measure "A" funds will supplement those funding sources by an estimated $1.02 billion and will cover the remaining costs estimated to accomplish these improvements. The Highway projects to be implemented with funding returned to the Western County Area by extending the Measure "A"Program are as follows: ROUTE LIMITS PROJECT EST. COST Reducing congestion on these routes will require that new transportation corridors are constructed See Section 2 91, 60, -15,& 1-215 Rte 91 Pierce Street to Orange County Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 161 91 /1-15 Interchange Add new Connector from (-15 North to 91 West $ 243 91/71 Interchange Improve Interchange $ 26 Rte 71 Rte 91 to San Bernardino County Line Widen to 3 lanes each direction $ 68 1-215 60/91/215 to San Bernardino County Line Add 2 lanes each direction $ 231 1-215 Eucalyptus Ave to 1-15 Add 1 lane each direction $ 210 1-15 Rte 60 to San Diego County Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 359 1-10 San Bernardino County Line to Banning Add eastbound truck climbing lane $ 75 1-10/60 Interchange Construct new interchange $ 129 Rte 60 Badlands area, east of Moreno Valley Add truck climbing lane $ 26 Rte 79 Ramona Expressway to Domenigoni Parkway Realign highway $ 132 $1.66 Billion* TOTAL • Includes $640 million in state and federal formula funds. • The Commission may add additional State Highway projects should additional Measure "A " revenue become available. to:00 If 4 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • 2. DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS State Routes 91 and 60 and Interstate Routes 15 and 215 cannot cost effectively be widened enough to provide for the traffic expected as Riverside County continues to grow. In addition to the specific highway improvements listed in Section 1 above, congestion relief for these highways will require that new north —south and east -west transportation corridors will have to be developed to provide mobility within Riverside County and between Riverside County and its neighboring Orange and San Bernardino Counties. Four new Transportation Corridors have been identified as necessary through the Community Environmental Transportation Approval Process (CETAP) currently underway. An estimated $380 million in Measure "A" matching funds to leverage local, state and federal funding will be made available for environmental clearance, right of way, and construction of these new corridors. 3. PUBLIC TRANSIT The Transportation Improvement Plan will provide an estimated $340 million to expand commuter rail, implement intercity bus services and to continue and expand programs to assist the elderly, disabled and commuters. A. Discount Fares and Transit Services for Seniors and Disabled Persons Seniors and disabled persons are becoming an increasing percentage of the population each year. They are currently charged a fare on fixed route transit services that is one-half the normal fare for service within the Western County area. A minimum of $85 .million in Measure "A " funds will be used to guarantee that this reduced fare is continued for the next 30 years. In addition a number of specialized transportation programs have been implemented which meet specialized needs for transportation to medical services, social service agencies and programs, shopping and other purposes that cannot be met by conventional transit. B. Commuter Rail and Intercity Bus Service Metrolink has provided a viable alternative to the automobile for thousands of daily commuters to Orange and Los Angeles counties and reduces the demand on our freeways. The current service level needs to double in the future and expansion of the system to Moreno Valley and Perris is needed to relieve congestion on 1-215. In addition, an intercity bus service that feeds the Metrolink service 5 [ Q,QR4 13 Riverside County Transportation improvement Plan April 10, 2002 and provides a reasonable alternative to the automobile for daily commuters who travel within Riverside County is needed. Measure "A " funds will be made available. for operations of these services and to match federal funds for capital. C. Commuter Services, Ridesharing, Vanpools, Buspools, Park -N -Ride Commuter traffic created by Riverside County residents traveling to jobs in neighboring Orange, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino counties adds significantly to the peak hour congestion on the freeway and highway system. A number of programs have been implemented to assist commuters to share rides, reduce congestion, and take advantage of travel in the "carpool"l anes. These programs include; rideshare matching services; incentive programs; vanpool "seed money" buspool subsidies; and park -n -ride lot leasing. These programs will become even more necessary in the future as traffic increases. 4. REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM The freeway and state highway system can no longer be expected to handle the traffic demands for travel between and through the cities of the Western County area, with the development projected for the future. A system of regional arterials (major local roadways) with limited access, freeway interchanges, grade separations, and coordinated traffic signals are needed to supplement the highway backbone system. The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), in conjunction with the cities and the County, has developed this system of roadways to meet this need. This roadway system will be periodically updated by the Commission, or the Western Riverside Council of Governments, to reflect actual development trends. Funding to widen existing roads and construct new roads on this system will be funded by an estimated $300. million in revenues generated by Measure "A" and by matching revenues to be generated by the cities and County implementing a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) administered by the Commission or the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). Examples of the roadways on the regional arterial system that may be eligible to receive Measure "A" and TUMF funding for widening and other improvements to increase capacity and traffic flow are: • Van Buren Boulevard from 1-215 to State Route 60 • Alessandro Boulevard from 1-215 westerly to Central Avenue • Central Avenue from Alessandro Blvd to Van Buren Boulevard 6 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • Green River Road from Dominguez Ranch Rd to Route 91 • Foothill Parkway from Lincoln Ave to Green River Road • Scott Road from State Route 79 to 1-215 • Clinton Keith Road from State Route 79 to 1-215 • Date Street from State Route 79 to 1-15 • SR 79/1-10 Interchange Improvements and Possible Bypass to 1-10 • Ramsey Street from Banning City Limits to Field Road • Ramona Expressway from San Jacinto to 1-215 • Cajalco Road from 1-215 to 1-15 • Perris Boulevard from State Route 74 to San Bernardino' Co. Line • Pyrite Street from San Bernardino County Line to State Route 60 • Schleisman Road from San Bernardino County Line to 1.15 and • Arlington Avenue • Domenigoni Parkway from State Street to 1-215 • Railroad Canyon/Newport Road from 1-215 to 1-15 5. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS The local street and road system is critical to the every day movement of people within the cities and the county. This system is reaching "middle age", with potholes and is in need of continued maintenance and rehabilitation. New local roads adjacent to new residential and business developments will continue to be constructed and paid for by the developers. Current resources, without the extension of the existing sales tax revenues for transportation, cannot provide adequate funding to maintain the local street and road system at the level necessary to adequately serve the public. The Transportation Improvement Plan will provide an estimated $970 million specifically for this purpose. The funds made available in the Western County area will be distributed to the cities and the county by a formula based 75% on proportionate population and 25% on . revenues generated by Measure "A". In order to be eligible for these funds, each agency will be required to: 1) File a Five -Year Capital Improvement Program, updated annually, with the Commission; 2) Participate in a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program to be developed and administered by the Commission or the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG); and, 3) Participate in. the Multi- Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) currently under development by the County of Riverside by endorsing the Permit Application and signing the Implementation Agreement. The TUMF Program shall be adopted according to all applicable laws and shall provide that the first $400 million of TUMF revenues will be made available to the Commission to fund equally the: 1) Regional Arterial System, as described above; and, 2) Development of New Corridors ("CETAP") described above. 7 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 6. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES PROGRAM The need to attract new commercial and industrial development and jobs to Riverside County to reduce the need for long commutes to Orange and Los Angeles counties is important to the economic vitality and quality of life of Western Riverside County. A greater jobs — housing balance is needed immediately. The Transportation Improvement Plan will provide an estimated $80 million for this purpose. These funds will be used to create an Infrastructure Improvement Bank to improve existing interchanges, construct new interchanges, provide public transit linkages or stations, and make other improvements to the transportation system. Given the limited amount of funds available, the RCTC shall develop a program of competitive incentives to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate within the Western Riverside County area. In particular, the highest priority for these funds shall be for use in attracting key industrial development. For example, Western Riverside County through the provision of a needed interchange or transit service as a part of an overall package of incentives, could attract industrial development, which may have otherwise located elsewhere in California, in the United States or internationally. 7. BOND FINANCING Construction of the highway and rail projects and implementation of the local streets and roads and other programs identified in the Transportation Improvement Plan are needed as soon as possible. In order to accomplish this, some level of borrowing will be required. The Commission will determine the extent of borrowing that is reasonable as the program is implemented. Up to $270 million, 8% of the revenues expected to be generated, will be made available for this purpose. COACHELLA VALLEY AREA The Coachella Valley area is located in the central part of Riverside County and includes the cities of Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage. It also includes the unincorporated areas, and the reservations of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, and the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. The Transportation Improvement Plan is designed to give flexibility to adjust to changing circumstances and to: Wm% 8 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • Improve Traffic Flow and Reduce Congestion Highway 111 • Add/Improve Interchanges on Highway 86 and 1-10 • Provide funding for Local Streets and Roads Improvements • Improve Safety and Visibility at Major Intersections and Arterial Roads • Reduce Congestion by Improving Major Roadways Identified as Important by Local Governments in the Coachella Valley • Provide Express East-West Transit Routes in the Coachella Valley • Improve and Expand Public and Specialty Transit Service 1. STATE HIGHWAYS AND MAJOR REGIONAL. ROAD PROJECT Fifty percent (50%) of - the Measure "A" revenues will be used for State highways and regional road improvements. The Transportation Project Prioritization Study (TPPS), developed through the Coachella Valley Association pf Governments (CVAG), will function as the Plan for future needs. Preventive maintenance of these Measure 'A" f unded arterials will be allowed, if a majority of the Coachella Valley local governments give approval. The system improvements will be accomplished with a mix of Measure "A" funds, state and federal highway funds, and the existing Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) on new development. This segment of the Measure 'A" Expenditure Plan will be implemented through the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. 2. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS Thirty-five percent (35%) of the Measure 'A" r evenues will be returned to the cities and the county in the Coachella Valley and shall be used to assist with the funding local street and road improvements. These funds will supplement existing federal, state, and local funds. Local street improvements adjacent to new residential and business developments will continue to be paid for by the developers. Cities and the county in the Coachella Valley must participate in the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program to assist in the financing of the priority regional arterial system in order to receive these funds. If a city or the county chooses not to levy the TUMF, the funds they would otherwise receive for local streets and roads will be added to the Measure "A " funds for the Regional Arterial Program. Allocations of funds to the cities and the county will be based on a formula weighted 50% on proportionate dwelling units and 50% on Measure "A" revenues generated within each jurisdiction. A Five -Year PIP 0 9 000117 000118 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 Improvement Program for the use of these funds will be prepared and annually updated with public participation by each city and the county. 3. PUBLIC TRANSIT Fifteen percent (15%) of the Measure "A" revenues will be used to improve and expand public transit and specialized transportation services. A. Discount Fares and Expanded Transportation Services for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities For Seniors (age 60 and older) and persons with disabilities, access to healthcare, social services, shopping, and recreation is a key to quality of life. Sunline Transit- Agency offers a full array of public transit and specialized transportation services at reduced prices to individuals in these special groups. Measure "A" funds will guarantee discounts continue for the next 30 years. Funds will also be used to expand services to meet future needs of the growing population of the valley. B. Specialized Transportation Services In addition to providing SunBus public transit service, SunDial paratransit service, and SunLink express commuter service to Riverside, the Sunline Transit Agency offers specialized transportation services to Coachella Valley residents and visitors. These services include the Vets Express that provides free transportation to the Veterans Hospital in Loma Linda; SunTrip, that enables those beyond Sunline' s fixed route service area to receive reimbursement they can pay to volunteer drivers; and SunRide that coordinates the transportation services offered by many non-profit social service organizations. All of Sunline' s vehicles operate on clean, alternative fuels thereby preserving the environment and creating a healthier community while increasing access. Measure "A" f u nds will assist these and other types of specialized transportation services which may be implemented. C. Bus Replacement and More Frequent Service Public bus transportation offers communities many benefits — reduced traffic congestion, reduced wear and tear on roads, reduced paring demand, and lower emissions. By providing access to schools, jobs and shopping, it is also a vital force in economic development. This is especially true in the Coachella Valley where nearly 75% of the 4 million annual SunBus riders take a bus to work and/or school. Public transit buses have a 12 -year life. Passage of Measure "A"will enable 10 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • Sunline' s fleet to be replaced as needed. Funds will also be used to increase frequency of service, which is the single most important factor in use of public transportation. PALO VERDE VALLEY AREA The Palo Verde Valley area is located in the far eastern part of Riverside County. It is geographically separated from the Western and Coachella Valley areas. The population within the area is relatively small, and significant growth over the next 30 years is not anticipated. The Palo Verde Valley is served by Interstate 10 which provides adequate connections to the more westerly portions of Riverside County and easterly to' Arizona. Increasing transit needs can be adequately met using existing revenue sources available for that purpose. The greatest need for the Palo Verde Valley is additional funding to adequately maintain and rehabilitate local streets and roads. All of the funding generated by Measure "A"returned to the Palo Verde Valley is to be used for local streets and roads. Funds shall be distributed to the City of Blythe and the County of Riverside by formula. The formula distribution is based 75% on proportionate population and 25% on sales tax revenues generated in each area. Western County Area MEASURE "A " REVENUE ALLOCATIONS ($ millions) Highway Improvements $1,020 New Corridors $ 380 Commuter Rail / Intercity Bus/ Specialized $ 340 Transit/ Commuter Services Regional Arterial Projects $ 300 Local Streets and Road Improvements $ 970 Bond Finance $ 270 Economic Development Projects $ 80 TOTAL $3,360 Coachella Valley Highways and Regional Arterials Local Streets and Roads Specialized and Public Transit TOTAL Palo Verde Valley Area $ 628 $ 439 $ 188 $1,255 Local Street and Road Improvements $ 47 TOTAL $ 47 11 000119 Major Highway and Commuter Rail Projects Under the New Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan 0 •••• ••••• 00011 INTERCHANGE COMMUTER RAIL MAJOR ARTERIALS FREEW AYS/HIGHWAYS BUNT BANNING Sg,TSHOT CATHEDRAL CITY RANCHOppMIIRAAG DESE ✓Ac�Nr o AT S TN 74002 iverside County, ra nsportati on Commission Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • • • GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1. BASIS FOR REVENUE ESTIMATES Federal and state participation for highways, commuter rail, new corridors, and major non -highway roadway improvements is assumed to be $40 million per year allocated biannually by the California Transportation Commission through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. The Riverside County Transportation Commission currently programs 24.2% of these funds on a discretionary basis for projects. This practice will be continued in order to fund major improvements that will arise and have not been anticipated by this Transportation Improvement Plan. Measure "A" revenue estimates have not been adjusted to reflect inflation. It is assumed that inflation revenue increases will be offset by inflation costs to deliver the projects. 'Real Growth" is assumed to parallel countywide population growth. Based upon these factors Measure "A" revenues over the 30 -year period are assumed to be about $4.665 billion. 2. BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATES All cost estimates for highway projects were developed by Caltrans based on a specific scope of improvements and are based on 2001 values. Future costs may increase due to inflation or other factors beyond the control of the Commission. The 2001 costs estimates are to be used to determine the proportionate distribution of funds to the categories of projects and programs identified in the transportation program. 3. STATE HIGHWAY AND MAJOR ARTERIAL PROGRAMS Eligible state highway project costs include preliminary engineering, environmental clearances, design engineering, project management, right of way acquisition and long-term leases and construction. Measure "A" funds are intended to supplement and not replace existing federal and state sources. If it is determined by the Commission that Riverside County is not receiving its fair share of existing funds, sales tax funds may be directed to other types of transportation needs. The actual scope of the highway, and major arterial projects to be implemented is to be determined through a prioritization process, required environmental analysis, and full consideration of reasonable alternatives. Public participation during the environmental analysis process is required. 000121 13 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 C. The Commission shall establish a 'State Highway Account for funding capital expenditures for state highway improvements. 4. PUBLIC TRANSIT A. Eligible programs include: special discount fares for the elderly and persons with disabilities; funding for computer assisted rideshare programs; commuter incentive programs; teed" programs to encourage the creation of vanpools and buspools; bus capital replacement and additional bus service in the Coachella Valley; and capital and operating assistance for commuter rail expansion and intercity bus service implementation in the Western County area. B. Western County area commuter rail services are anticipated continue to be operated by Metrolink on existing rail lines to Los Angeles, range and San Bernardino counties. Increasing the level of services will require negotiation of the appropriate agreements with the railroads and appropriate cost sharing between the counties served. Extension of service to the Moreno Valley area and the City of Perris is anticipated to be along the San Jacinto Branch Line owned by the Commission. Measure "A " funds will be used for operating costs and to match federal and state funds for capital improvements. C. Western County area intercity bus services to be implemented are intended to specifically target commuters and provide a viable connection to the Metrolink service and transportation between and to key employment centers within Riverside County. D. The Commission shall establish a Public Transit Account" for funding these programs. The Commission shall determine to which public transportation or specialized transportation services operators, and carpool/vanpool facilitating agencies, shall receive funding assistance. The Commission may directly provide or operate these services and programs if it is determined they are the most appropriate agency to do so ,in the Western County area. In the Coachella Valley area, the services will be provided by the Sunline Transit Agency. Based on 30 year funding estimates, the amount of funds should be $340 million for the Western County and $188 for the Coachella Valley area. 14 000122 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 • 5. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROJECTS A. Eligible local street and road project costs include any environmental review and mitigation, engineering, right of way acquisition and, capital or maintenance cost. Decisions on projects are to be made by local jurisdictions, but subject to capital Improvement requirements. B. Annual population estimates used for the distribution formula for the Western County and Palo Verde Valley areas shall be from the State Department of Finance. Dwelling unit estimates used for the distribution formula in the Coachella Valley shall be from the Riverside County Planning Department. Actual State Board of Equalization retail sales transactions shall be used for the formula in all three areas. The County Planning Department shall estimate the share for each of the unincorporated areas for the three areas, from the total retail sales transactions for the total unincorporated area. C. The Commission shall assure the cities and the County are in compliance with maintenance of effort requirements before allocating funds for local streets and roads. Further, the Commission shall not allocate funds to an individual city or the County for local streets and roads within the Western County and Coachella Valley areas unless the local agency is certified by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments or in the Western County Area by the Commission or the Western Riverside County Association of Governments as applicable, to be a participant in the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program necessary for the implementation of the Regional Arterial Program in their area. The cities and the county in the Western County Area must participate in the Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) by endorsing the Permit Allocation and executing the Implementation Agreement with the resources agencies in order to be eligible to receive local streets and roads funds. D. Funding which is not allocated to a city or the county because it is not a participant in the TUMF program in the Coachella Valley area and the TUMF and the MSHCP in the Western County area shall be allocated to the Regional Arterial Program in the geographic area in which the city or portion of the county is located. • 6. FUNDING FLEXIBILITY AND BONDING TO EXPEDITE PROJECTS The Commission may make maximum use of available funds by temporarily shifting allocations between geographic areas and transportation purposes. However, the proportionate shares for areas and purposes over the 30 -year period may not be changed without an amendment of the Transportation 15 000121 Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan April 10, 2002 Improvement Plan as required by law. Shifts may not be made without previous consultation with the affected agencies. The Commission may also use bonds to speed implementation of some projects. Bonding will not be used without first determining that the benefits of an accelerated program outweigh the additional cost of interest on borrowing funds. 7. INFORMING THE PUBLIC OF LOCAL FUNDING SUPPORT All state highway, commuter rail, and regional arterial projects using $ 1 million or more of sales tax revenues shall be signed to inform the public that local voter approved revenues are being used to support the project. 8. SEVERANCE PROVISIONS If any provision of this Transportation Improvement Plan is for any reason held invalid and unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that holding shall not effect the validity or enforceability of the remaining provisions, and the Commission declares that it would have passed each part of the Plan irrespective of the validity of any other part. • • s 16 000124 " AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: April 10, 2002 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee SUBJECT: RCTC Public Information Outreach Program An oral presentation will be made before the Commission on a proposal for a revised and expanded information program to apprise the public on projects completed, in progress and planned to be built in the future. • • 000125 AGENDA ITEM 11 • • " MEMO Date: March 20, 2002 To: RCTC Commission From: Frank Hall, RCTC C issioner and City of Norco Councilman Subject: APTA Legislative Conference Washington, DC March 10-13, 2002 Sunday, General Session, "Window on Washington" Media commentators Clarence Page and Claire Shipman discussed current conditions in Washington, DC, pointing out that federal requests for funding today probably should also include an anti-terrorist element to get any attention. Monday, Opening General Session Norman Mineta, U.S. Secretary of Transportation, noted that public transit use nationwide increased 2% last year and is up 23% over the last six years. He discussed TEA 21 and transit's contributions since September 11 particularly in New York and at the Winter Olympics. He congratulated APTA on its (PT)2 public information and advertising program. Senator James Jeffords (Independent -Vermont) spoke for some time but did not say anything of note. "Transit Partners & Coalition Building" Speakers included Representative Earl Blumenauer (Democrat -Oregon), Thomas Donahue, President & CEO of U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Dr. T. Peter Ruane, President & CEO of American Road & Transportation Builders Association. They pointed out that all transportation modes are equally important and that the public needs many choices in transit and transportation methods. As an example, the situation following September 11th was noted, when all airplanes were grounded and the public forced to find alternative modes of transportation. Other points made were: " A healthy economy depends on workers getting to work. " Coalitions with non -typical transit partners are needed to establish a broader transit support base. Page 1 of 3 0001.26 " Alternate methods of financing need to be developed, particularly in light of higher vehicle mileage requirements, reducing income from gas taxes. " Highways, especially off -freeway routes, have been allowed to deteriorate nationwide and must be brought back to a standard that does not unduly wear vehicles. "Meet the New FTA & FHRWA Administrators" Jennifer Dom, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, and Mary Peters, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, both from the U.S. Department of Transportation, were the speakers. They noted that public transit provides the public choices, that transportation options are absolutely necessary, and that we must get away from dependency on fuel based taxes. They also noted the following points that should be included in any funding request: " Safety considerations " Positive effects on economy " Environmental considerations " Congestion management " Positive business connections and support "Understanding the Authorizing & Appropriations Processes" Panelists included: " Peter Rogoff, Clerk, Subcommittee on Transportation, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Senate " Marjorie Duske, Legislative Director, Office of Representative Martin Olav Sabo, U.S. House of Representative " Joyce C. Rose, Professional Staff Member, Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives The panelists discussed the declining Transportation Trust Fund amounts more than appropriation procedures. Gas tax revenues are lower due to less vehicle and gasoline use. "TEA 03" bill is already being worked and should be watched closely. Two points that were repeatedly emphasized for any local group promoting a project: 1. Secure broadbased support for project from many diverse groups, particularly business organizations. 2. Make sure Senator or Congressman receives credit and is included in dedication ceremonies (also mention in news articles is important). 000127 2 .r4re2of3 On Tuesday and Wednesday I joined the delegation from RTA and visited Congressional and Senate offices. I discussed and left a copy of the RCTC appropriation requests with each of the following: Congressional Representatives Personally Met With Title Ken Calvert Ken Calvert Jeannine Campos Congressman Communications Director Darrell Issa Darrell Issa Josh Brown Congressman Legislative Assistant Mary Bono Chris Foster Legislative Assistant Jerry Lewis Elizabeth Kavalich Sr. Legislative Assistant Senators Barbara Boxer Carmen Bendixen Legislative Correspondent Dianne Feinstein Matthew Miller Legislative Assistant Riverside County Transportation Commission 2002-03 Federal Appropriation Request List Project Amount Requested (in millions of dollars) CETAP Riverside/Orange County Corridor 5 Inland Empire Transportation Management Center 3 Ramsey Street Extension 5 I-10/Jefferson Street Interchange 2 I-10/Lane Addition Monterey to Jefferson Street 3 Bus Rapid Transit Demonstration Project 5 San Jacinto Branchline Commuter Rail 5 BNSF & UP/3rd Street Grade Separation 2 UP/Avenue 48 & Dillon Road Grade Separation 2 I-15/Date Street Interchange 3 SR 91/Van Buren Boulevard Interchange 3 SunLine Transit Facility Expansion 2.5 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus Purchase 1 Corona Multimodal Center 3 Bus Stop Solar Power and Security Lighting 1 Riverside Transit Center 4 Temecula Transit Center 3 Total $52.5 Page 3 of 3 000128