Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 March 14, 2001 CommissionRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:00 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 LOCATION: Mission Inn - Music Room 3649 Mission Inn Ave. Riverside, CA 92501 Records Commissioners Chairman: William G. Kleindienst 1 s` Vice Chairman: John F. Tavaglione 2nd Vice Chairman: Ron Roberts 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 'ory V. Schook / John Chlebnik, City of Calimesa Altreu y.. remit;;, ;' Jack Wamsley, City of Canyon Lake Gregory S. Pettis / Sarah DiGrandi, City of Cathedral City Juan M. DeLara / Lupe Dominguez, 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 / Marcos Lopez, City of Indio John J. Pena / Ron Perkins, City of La Quinta Kevin W. Pape / Robert L. Schiffner, City of Lake Elsinore Bonnie Flickinger / Frank West, City of Moreno Valley Jack F. van Haaster, City of Murrieta Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco Dick Kelly / Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert William G. Kleindienst / Deyna Hodges, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Phil Stack / Harvey Gerber, City of Rancho Mirage Ameal Moore / Joy Defenbaugh, City of Riverside Patrick Williams / Chris Carlson-Buydos / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Anne Mayer, Interim 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 TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION www.rctc.org 9:00 A.M. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2001 MISSION INN, MUSIC ROOM 3649 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5A. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 01-001 ,"RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY TO ACQUIRE FEE AND EASEMENT INTERESTS IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BY EMINENT DOMAIN, IS NECESSARY FOR THE REALIGNMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF STATE ROUTE 74". Overview That the Commission: 1) Conduct a hearing to consider the approval of the proposed Resolution of Necessity, including providing all interested parties of the affected property, their attorneys, or their representatives an opportunity to be heard on the issues relevant to the Resolution of Necessity. 2) Make the following findings as hereinafter described in this report: (i) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project. (ii) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. (iii) The fee and easement interests to be acquired are necessary for the project. (iv) The offers of just compensation have been made to the property owners. 3) Approve Resolution No. 01-001, a Resolution of Necessity of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Declaring That The Acquisition of Fee And Easement Interests in Certain Real Property Located in Riverside County, California, More Particularly Described as APNS 347-100-003, 347-100-016, 347-110-004, 347-110-053, 347-130-009, 347-130-018, 347-130-019, 349-050-025, 349-050-026, 349-050-063, 349- 060-020, 349-060-022 & 24, 349-090-004, 349-090-008, 349-090-009, 349-100-004, 349- 100-032, 349-100-038, 349-400-001, 377-020-005, 377-020-021 & 22, 377-372-025 & 26, 377-372-029 & 31, 377-372-030 and 377-391-001 (Project Parcel 13492-1, 13494-1, 13505-1, 13506-1, 13506-2, 13508-1, 13510-1, 13519-1, 13519-2, 13526-1, 13526-2, 13527-1, 13528-1, 13528-2, 13547-1, 13551-1, 13555-1, 13555-2, 13560-1, 13560-2, 13574-1, 13576-1, 13576-2, 13577-1, 13577-2, 13580-1, 13580-2, 13580-3, 13583-1, 13583-2, 13584-1, 13586-1, 13588-1, 13601-2, 13602-1, 13602-2, 13603-1, 13603-2, Riverside County Transportation Commission March 14, 2001 Page 2 13607-1 & 13608-1), by Eminent Domain Is Necessary for the Realignment and Improvement of State Route 74 Between Dexter Avenue to Easterly of Wasson Canyon Road (Segment 1). 6. 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 subsequent to the posting of the Agenda. If there are less than 2/3 vote of the Commission members present, adding an item to the Agenda requires a unanimous vote. 7. 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. 7A. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Overview Receive and file the financial statements for the quarter ending December 31, 2000. 7B. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORTS Overview Receive and file the Investment Report for the quarter ending December 31, 2b00. 7C. QUARTERLY CALL BOX REPORT Overview _ Receive and file the operational statistics for the Riverside County Motorist Aid Call Box System for the quarter ending December 31, 2000. 7D. BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Overview Approve: 1) Transfer $6,500 in budget authority from the Finance department budget to Regional Issues department budget; and, 2) Increase by $72,000 the Salaries and Benefits budget for the Commuter Assistance Program. 7E. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview To: 1) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update; 2) Support AB 227 (Longville); and, 3) Endorse Congressional project funding request list. Riverside County Transportation Commission March 14, 2001 Page 3 7F. ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST UPDATE Overview Approve: 1) Scenario 2 which emphasizes the factors of delay and accident reduction; and, 2) The City of Banning's request to change their local ranking of Hargrave Street to 2"d and Sunset Ave to 1st. 7G. CETAP UPDATE AND AMENDMENT TO THE SCOPE OF WORK Overview To: 1) Receive and file the CETAP Update as an information item; and, 2) Approve the amended Scope of Work . 7H. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO ROUTE 91, FROM MARY STREET TO 7TH STREET Overview It is recommended that the Commission: 1) Concur with a Caltrans request that RCTC become the lead agency for preliminary engineering and environmental clearance, for proposed improvements to Route 91, from Mary Street to 7th Street, in the City of Riverside; 2) Prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP), for consultant services to provide preliminary engineering and environmental studies for proposed improvements to Route 91; 3) Form a selection committee, comprised of representatives from RCTC, City of Riverside, Bechtel, and Caltrans to review, evaluate, and rank all RFP's received; and, 4) After the evaluation process, negotiate a contract with the top ranked consultant(s) and return to the Commission with a contract recommendation. 71. SCOPE OF WORK FOR MEASURE "A" STATE ROUTE 60 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) LANE WIDENING PROJECT IN THE CITY OF MORENO VALLEY AS IT RELATES TO RAMP IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PERRIS BOULEVARD INTERCHANGE AND BRIDGE VERTICAL CLEARANCES Overview It is recommended that the Commission: • 1 ► Separate the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements from the State Route (SR) 60 HOV project, while coordinating the SR 60 HOV improvements so that there will be minimal throw -a -way costs when the future Perris Boulevard Interchange improvements are approved; Riverside County Transportation Commission March 14, 2001 Page 4 2) Assist the City of Moreno Valley to research alternatives to fund the preparation of a separate Project Study Report to serve as a funding document for future improvements to the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements; 3) Resolve the bridge vertical clearance scoping issue with minimal cost to the SR 60 HOV project to maintain project delivery and prevent loss of present CMAQ funds; and 4) Address as a separate project any major new scope issue that was not addressed in the Project Report as a separate project that can compete for funding based on priority, need and future availability of funds; and, 5) That the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements remain a top priority. 7J. SECURITY GUARD SERVICE CONTRACT Overview That the Commission: 1) Approve the results of the selection process to provide the Commission Security Guard Services for the RCTC Metrolink Stations; 2) Direct staff to negotiate the scope, schedule and cost with the top ranked firm to perform the required services (if negotiations fail with the top ranked firm, staff is authorized to go to the next firm on the list to negotiate a contract to perform the services); and, 3) Direct staff to bring back an authorization to award a contract to the firm with which negotiations are successful. 7K. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL SERVICE IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Overview That the Commission authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Freeway Service Patrol Beat Nos.1 and 2. 7L. RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Overview To receive and file the Rail Program Update as an information item. 7M. FIRST QUARTER/FY 00/01 TRANSIT OPERATORS' REPORT Overview It is recommended that the Commission receive and file the First Quarter FY 00/01 Transit Operators' Report as an informational item. • Riverside County Transportation Commission March 14, 2001 Page 5 • • • 7N. FY 00/01 SECTION 5310 MEASURE "A" SPECIALIZED TRANSIT MATCH FUNDS Overview That the Commission provide: 1) $21,200 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit funds as local match to Transportation Specialists, Inc. for the purchase of one modified van and one medium bus through the Section 5310 grant process; and, 2) $13,000 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit funds as local match to Anza Valley Community Services, for the purchase of one 24 passenger bus through the Section 5310 grant process. 70. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S (RTA) REQUEST TO USE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS FOR THE 1993 CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION FINAL PAYMENT AND TO SHIFT FUNDS FROM THE RIVERSIDE CNG FUELING STATION TO THE HEMET CNG STATION Overview That the Commission approve RTA's request to use Local Transportation Funds for the 1993 Certificate of Participation final payment and to shift funds from the Riverside CNG Fueling Station to the Hemet CNG Station. 7P. AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF CORONA'S FY 00/01 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN AND ALLOCATION OF LTF FUNDS FOR FIXED ROUTE SERVICE AND CNG REFUELING STATION Overview It is recommended that the Commission: 1) Amend the City of Corona's FY 00/01 Short Range Transit Plan to provide funds to cover the start-up costs of fixed route service and local match funding for a CNG refueling station; and, 2) Allocate 5166,111 in Local Transportation Funds (S98,835 for fixed route and $67,276 for CNG refueling station). 7Q. LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) UPDATE AND APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 01-002, "A RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AMENDING AND ADOPTING LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (PUB. RESOURCES CODE §§21000 ET SEQ) Overview It is recommended that the Commission adopt the 2001 updates to the Local Guidelines for Implementing CEQA and Resolution No. 01-002, "A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending and Adopting Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub Resources Code § §21000 Et Seq). Riverside County Transportation Commission March 14, 2001 Page 6 8. REPORT BY THE SALES TAX AD HOC COMMITTEE Overview 20 Minutes The Chairman and Ad Hoc Committee members will make a report and provide a recommendation to the Commission orr the extension of Measure "A". - 9. 2000 DISCRETIONARY STIP FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Overview It is recommended that the Commission: 10 Minutes 1) Earmark the RCTC SR60 Widening Project for full funding ($3,261,000) through the 2002 Discretionary STIP; 2) Earmark the Riverside County Newport Road project (in partnership with the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto) for $6,000,000 (75% of requested funding of $8,000,000) through the 2002 Discretionary STIP; and, 3) Support the 2000 Discretionary STIP funding recommendations as presented in the attachment. 10. 2001 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN - COMMENTS 10 Minutes Overview That the Commission: 1) Approve comments on the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan in coordination with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG); and 2) Authorize the RCTC Chair to sign a joint RCTC/CVAG/WRCOG submittal letter to SCAG. 11. MARCH JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY (JPA) REPORT 15 Minutes Overview Ken Delino, Executive Director of March JPA, will provide a report on current and future activities. 12. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Overview This item provides. the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/workshops and issues related to Commission activities. 14. CLOSED SESSION 1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9(a). Case No. RCV 049988 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission March 14, 2001 Page 7 2. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9. Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b). Number of Potential Cases: 1 15. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9 a.m., Wednesday, April 11, 2001, at UCR, Chancellor's Conference Room, 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside. • • URGENCY ITEM RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Lapsing State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Projects STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve: a) The lapsing of STIP funds for the Jefferson Street Improvement project and possibly the Fred Waring Improvement project due to incomplete federal environmental documents and STIP regulations for allocating funds; b) Reprogramming Jefferson Street and possibly Fred Waring Drive improvement projects in the 2002 STIP; and, c) That the lapsing funds do not count against the Coachella Valley Association of Government's (CVAG) 2002 STIP Formula share. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In October 2000, RCTC staff received from the CVAG their 2000 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) formula submittal which included the Jefferson Street Improvement project for $8 million and the Fred Waring Drive Improvement project for $2 million. The submittal included completed funding and fact sheets for each project as required by the California Transportation Commission (CTC). The funding and fact sheets provided by CVAG identified the two projects for programming in the current fiscal year, 2000/01. The projects were approved for inclusion in the 2000 STIP Augmentation at the December 2000 CTC meeting. In January 2001, RCTC staff contacted all agencies that had not yet requested project allocations for the FY 2000/01. Notice was given that, if project allocations programmed in the current fiscal year were not forwarded to the CTC by their June 2001 meeting, the funds would lapse into the next STIP cycle (2002) and credited to the county in which they originated. Projects programmed in FY 2000/01 needed to submit to Caltrans District 8 an allocation request by April 6, 2001, in order for Caltrans to process and schedule the allocation request for a vote at the June, 2001 CTC meeting. Last week, staff was contacted by the consultant working on the allocation request package for both Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive improvement projects. Upon reviewing the requisite information, it was realized that both projects had not completed the environmental documents under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Both projects have environmental documents completed and cleared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), however, since STIP funding consists of federal funds, a NEPA clearance is required. Project Status on Jefferson Street As previously mentioned, the Jefferson Street Improvement project has a cleared CEQA document. The time frame to convert a CEQA document to a NEPA document for this type of roadway project is approximately 12 to 18 months. Should the Commission approve the lapsing of funds and reprogramming of funds in the 2002 STIP, it is also proposed that STIP funding be used on the construction component only, as opposed to the current programming of the STIP funds for right of way and construction. The reprogramming of the funds on the construction component would simplify the process of acquiring right of way, due to the difficulty in estimating how long the acquisition of right of way will take. Project Status on Fred Waring Drive The environmental document for the Fred Waring project is currently under review by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). It is expected to have NEPA clearance in the next 4 to 6 weeks. Although the project may have a NEPA clearance soon, there is an issue with a requirement of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) that no constructioi activities occur within the channel between the months of June and October. It is the intent of the City of Palm Desert to have the project under construction no later than March 2002. Once the project receives NEPA clearance, the city will proceed with minor right of way acquisition and would be ready to allocate STIP funding for construction. Therefo plans to proceed with an extension request and will forward it to RCTC and Caltr 8 for approval at the June, 2001 CTC meeting. Should the CTC not approve the extension, then the funds will lapse and can be reprogrammed in the 2002 STIF case with the project on Jefferson Street. e, the city ns District allocation , as in the It should be noted that the STIP guidelines state that lapsing funds are available at the end of the programming cycle, which in this case would be in 2004. However the STIP guidelines also allow advancing projects in an effort to spend down current bala ces. The likelihood of advancing projects programmed in the 2002 STIP is quite high, so he money is expected to be available when needed for these projects. In regards to the RCTC intra-county formula, it has been past practice that all S identified in upcoming STIP cycles go through the intra-county formula split recommending that the lapsed funding ($8 million for Jefferson, and $2 milli• Waring) be taken "off the top" of the available funding amount identified in the Fund Estimate and not be included in the formula split. The funds would be repr specifically to the Jefferson Street project, and Fred Waring improvements shou deny the Fred Waring extension request. In order to ensure local agencies provide reasonable project readiness informati will conduct meetings with each implementing agency and Caltrans to determine project schedules prior to programming STIP funding. This will require timely su proposed STIP projects to RCTC. IP funding . We are n for Fred 002 STIP grammed d the CTC • n, RCTC ppropriate mittals of • AGENDA ITEM 4 • • MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION • • • MINUTES February 14, 2001 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Will Kleindienst called the meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to order at 9:10 a.m. at the University of California, Chancellor's Conference Room, 1201 University Avenue, Riverside, California 92507. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Daryl Busch Bob Buster Juan M. DeLara * Bonnie Flickinger Frank Hall John Hunt Dick Kelly William G. Kleindienst Anne Mayer Ameal Moore Tom Mullen Kevin W. Pape John J. Pena Gregory S. Pettis Ron Roberts Janice Rudman Greg Ruppert Robin Lowe Gregory V. Schook Phil Stack John F. Tavaglione Alfred Trembly/Jack Wamsley Placido L. Valdivia James A. Venable Patrick Williams Roy Wilson Arrived after start of meeting. Commissioners Absent Percy L. Byrd Robert Crain Jack F. van Haaster Mike Wilson At this time, Eric Haley presented a recognition to Joni Shay, who has been an employee of the Commission for five years. During this time, Joni Shay was promoted from Secretary to Executive Assistant. Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 2 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Kleindienst noted an amendment on the minutes to indicate that Commission Alternate Member Jack Wamsley was present at the last meeting. M/S/C (Tavaglione/Hall) to approve the minutes of the January 10, 2001 meeting as amended. 5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions/revisions. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (RWilson/Stack) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 6A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS (SANBAG) 2001/2002 STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM Approve the proposed 2001/2002 State and Federal Legislative Program. 6B. CONTRACTS COST AND SCHEDULE REPORT Receive and. file the Contracts Cost and Schedule Report for the month ending December 31, 2000. 6C. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the months ending November and December 2000. 6D. MID -YEAR PROJECTIONS Receive and file the information, as shown in the memorandum. 6E. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND (LTF) PROJECTION Approve the projected Local Transportation Fund (LTF) apportionments for Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley and Western Riverside County areas. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 3 • 6F. AMEND THE CITY OF BANNING'S SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN AND ALLOCATE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS 1) Amend the FY 00/01 Short Range Transit Plan for the City of Banning to secure additional funding to conduct a telephone survey of residents living in the Pass area as an addition to the transit study being conducted; and, 2) Allocate $12,093 in Local Transportation Funds to the City of Banning. 6G. RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S REQUEST TO USE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS AS THE LOCAL MATCH REQUIREMENT FOR A CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION PAYMENT Approve the Riverside Transit Agency's request to use Local Transportation Funds for a Certificate of Participation payment. 6H. AMEND SECTION 5307 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FOR SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Amend the Section 5307 Program of Projects to correct the line item for the Lease/Purchase of Replacement Transit Coaches from $413,924 to $452,000. • • 61. CANCELLATION OF BUS POOL AGREEMENT WITH RAYTHEON 1) Cancel the existing buspool agreement with Raytheon Corporation for the operation of a buspool between Riverside and Fullerton due to low ridership; and, 2) Provide 60 days' notice to current riders and the employer to allow sufficient time to identify, organize and establish other ridesharing transportation alternatives. 6J. AMENDMENT TO FY 00/01 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FOR COMMUTER RAIL Amend the Commuter Rail FY 01 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) and allocate $588,000 in Federal Section 5307 funds to provide the match for the purchase of seven additional Metrolink cars or two additional locomotives. 6K. APPROVAL OF CALTRANS' PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTAL NO. M008 FOR THE PEDLEY METROLINK STATION PLATFORM EXTENSION 1) Program Supplement No. M008 for the Extension of the Existing Emergency Platform at the Pedley Metrolink Station; 2) Amendment #1 to Contract No. RO- 9952 for PB Farradyne to develop a Final PS&E for the extension of the Emergency Platform at the Pedley Metrolink Commuter Rail Station for $62,000 plus a contingency amount of $10,000 (16.1 % - to cover potential changes encountered during design) for a total contract amount not to exceed $72,000; and, 3) Authorize the Chairperson to sign the Program Supplement and Amendment, subject to Legal Counsel review. Riverside County Transportation Commission _. February 14, 2001 Page 4 • 6L. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. RO-2128 TO STV INCORPORATED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PHASE I ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO THE SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE 1) Award Amendment #1 to Contract No. RO-2128 to provide additional photographing and mapping to support property management activities related to the San Jacinto Branch Line between the cities of Perris and San Jacinto for a base amount of $40,636. With additional extra work of $5,000. This additional cost will bring STV's total authorized contract value to $206,823 and total extra work value to $21,613 for a total not to exceed value of $228,436; and, 2) Authorize the Chairman, pursuant to Legal Counsel review, to execute the Contract on behalf of the Commission. 6M. 2001/02 BEACH TRAIN SEASON Approve the 2001/02 Beach Train Program, including the commitment to underwrite costs of service beyond fare revenues at a not to exceed cost of $35,000. 6N. RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file the Rail Program Update. 60. AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT NO. RO-2136 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPING FOR SOUND WALL NOS. 110, 121 AND 161 ON ROUTE 91 1) Award Contract No. RO-2136 for Landscaping of Sound Wall Nos. 110, 121 and 161 on Route 91, to Diversified Landscape Co., for $218,756.58 plus a contingency amount of $21,243.42 (10% - to cover potential change orders encountered during construction) for a total contract amount not to exceed $240,000.00; and, 2) Authorize the Chairperson to execute an agreement pursuant to Legal Counsel review. 6P. RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY TO CLOSE OUT CONTRACT NO. RO-9847 FOR PHASE I SOUND WALLS ON ROUTE 91 1) Concur with staff's recommendation for Claims resolution to close out Construction Contract No. RO-9847; and, 2) Authorize the increase of the project construction contingency, by $12,168.83, for Construction Contract No. RO-9847 from $153,514.00 (6%) to $165,682.83 (7%). The new not to exceed value of the contract will be $2,652,168.83. • 6Q. AWARD AMENDMENT #3 TO CONTRACT NO. RO-9954 FOR DESIGN SERVICES • ON STATE ROUTE 74 • 1 • Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 5 1) Amendment #3 to Contract No. RO-9954 with SC Engineering to perform miscellaneous design services related to the final design of Measure "A" improvements to widen State Route 74 between 1-15 and the City of Perris. Amendment #3 will increase the authorized value of the contract by $716,344 and will make an additional $250,000 of extra work available for future contingencies. This will bring the contract authorization to $3,460,263 with available extra work of $257,053 for a new contract not to exceed -value of $3,717,316; and, 2) Authorize the Chairperson to sign Amendment #3, pursuant to Legal Counsel review. • 6R. APPOINTMENT TO CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Appoint Mary Venerable to the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee for a one-year term ending in January, 2002. 7. HIGH SPEED RAIL John Barna, Deputy Director for the California High Speed Rail Authority, expressed his appreciation for including this item on the agenda and acknowledged the assistance provided by Eric Haley and Stephanie Wiggins. He reported that a "Programmatic Environmental Impact Report known as a Program Document to look at impacts and mitigation strategies. This is the first project to come along since SEPA NEPA were adopted and would impact almost every part of California, with the exception of some northern counties. The project is 700 miles long and basically impacts 28-29 million people. Consultants were retained to start the process. The corridor for this area would be a route from the Los Angeles Union Station past Ontario Airport, Riverside, Temecula, down the 1-1 5, and to the San Diego area. The Authority has initiated statewide series of town hall meetings. Two meetings will be scheduled in the Inland Empire. He urge input be received from staff and public agencies on the report especially as it relates to station locations. Their goal is to come back in 2002 with a draft project. He noted the importance of Riverside with regards to the high speed rail project especially with the increase in growth in the Inland Empire area. He expressed his appreciation for the help and guidance. Commissioner Robin Lowe thanked John Barna for his work on this highly viewed project. In response to Commissioner Tom Mullen's question as to where funding will be derived from for the project, John Barna stated that, at this time, it is still being determined as the Authority has decided that it is premature to locate full funding at this time. They feel that funding should not come at the expense of existing projects, as they desire the project to be a sotution, not a problem. Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 6 Commissioner Greg Schook asked John Barna had any ideas of what might be considered reasonable funding solution. John Barna stated that a funding possibility might be an increase in statewide sales tax, but could not be bonded against because it is long term. Another possibility is the reauthorization of TEA21 and other federal funds. An additional option would be private funds. This is an expensive proposition, but it will be "expensive" if it is not built, as well. Commissioner Bob Buster asked if electric is the selected option and John Barna responded that it will be electric, but it will not need much, about 110-120 megawatts per day. A dedicated energy source will be needed. If it is assumed that 1.5 million new homes are projected to be constructed by SCAG, new energy sources will need to be located. 7. RETROFIT SOUNDWALLS ON STATE HIGHWAYS Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive- Director, noted that the Commission does not have a retrofit policy or program at this time. SB 45 changed the distribution of federal and state transportation funds. Thus, retrofit soundwalls became an issue to be addressed at the local level and not at the State level. He informed the Commission that the federal definition of a retrofit soundwall is a noise barrier addressing freeway sound levels exceeding 67 decibels for residences predating the freeway. Also, the regulations restrict the use of federal funds to only retrofit walls. Years ago, soundwall retrofit was the responsibility of the State but they received low priority and did not receive consistent funding. The issues were that the State does not have authority over local land use decisions, any new construction enhancement must go through the environmental process and if there were freeway noise impacts, it requires local governments for a noise element to be included in their respective general plan. The following public comments were received: • Brian Floyd, Assemblyman Rod Pacheco's Office, indicated that their office had received a lot of calls regarding the need of soundwalls on Route 60 by the Jurupa Cultural Center, by he new Crime Lab and Substation in Jurupa and on Route 91 behind California Baptist University. Mary Burns, Jurupa Cultural Center, stated that the Cultural Center has existed for 35 years and that the freeway overcrossing causes a bridge effect. The Center is in great need for a soundwall and would appreciate being on the list for this need. She said that Former Assemblyman Steve Clute has previously promised the Center that a soundwall would be constructed. Jay Mark, California Department of Justice, Attorney General's Office, requested support for a soundwall behind their facility that is currently being constructed on Mission Avenue adjacent to the newv Sheriff's Station. Their facility is a $13 million facility which is scheduled to be completed and occupied at the end of May. The soundwall would provide security as well as safety for the facility. • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 7 Commissioner Jim Venable asked the length of the requested soundwalls and Hideo Sugita responded that anestimate has not yet been made. Commissioner Bob Buster stated that there are a number of issues that the Commission needs to determine. An ad hoc committee should be appointed to sort through the issues and number of information before making the choices. There is a need to do everything possible to avoid retrofitting soundwalls in the future and in order to do this, Land Use authorities should be encouraged to address this issue for future projects. Otherwise, requests from those whose projects were previously approved will increase and are now experiencing or expecting the noise and want to be bailed out. And there is no secured funding source. He expressed that it is difficult to explain that soundwalls will be built for new facilities when there are people and facilities that have been there for some time but do not currently have soundwalls. Eric Haley said that this is a very elastic, expensive obligation that is floating between Caltrans and the Commission. It used to be entirely the State's obligation, this is one of the rolls in SB 45 which was not firmly attached to either Caltrans or the Commission. It is an unfunded expanding mandate driven by growth and zoning. Hideo Sugita stated that one of the things mentioned by the Plans and Programs Committee was send to a letter to local governments because they have land use authority and express that this situation is before the Commission and to urge them that they begin reviewing noise impacts as it relates to improving new development. Commissioner John Tavaglione echoed Commissioner Busters concerns, specifically the three projects mentioned. The Cultural Center has been in existence for a number of years and traffic has increased. On the other hand, there are a number of residences adjoining the 60 Freeway. A priority has to be set and he believed that residences should have priority over any other facilities. He added that he was disturbed that the Sheriff Office would come in after the fact asking for a soundwall. When the facility was to be built, his office, as well as Economic Development Agency, asked if a wall was needed and they indicated that it was not needed. If a soundwall has be built for this facility, it should be funded by other sources but not have priority over residential. He feels the same way with the the Crime Lab. Because every time funding is used for any of these facilities, it would take away from residences and public schools. Commissioner Lowe added that these same issues are being faced as a result of the SCAG RTP. With due respect to the Department of Justice and the Sheriff Office, there should be conditions of approval when the facilities were built. She agreed with Commissioner Tavaglione that residences should have top priority that were already in existence prior to the building of the freeway. Anne Mayer, Caltrans, advised the Commission that Caltrans has criteria in place and work with RCTC staff in establishing a list of properties in need of soundwalls. Typically they Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 8 look at whether the wall will have an effective noise reduction for that particular property. Having an ad hoc committee to discuss the issues is a good idea and it would be a pro- active step for the cities to take a look at future land use and how it will impact those residents in 5-10 years. Many of the calls that Caltrans receives on a regular basis are from property owners who bought their homes several years ago, moved in next to a freeway and now they are concerned about the noise. Caltrans does not typically mitigate for commercial properties. It was determined that the Property Ad Hoc Committee would address this issue and develop recommendations. At this time, Commissioner John Hunt, Chairman of the Budget and Implementation Committee and deals with property issues, appointed himself and Commissioners Ameal Moore, Kevin Pape, Ron Roberts and John Tavaglione to the Property Ad Hoc Committee. 8. FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 AUDIT RESULTS REPORT Sally Anderson, Ernst & Young, briefed the Commission on the results of the audit, which were provided to the Commissioners as part of their agenda packet. There were no material weaknesses found in the internal control system, nor any reportable conditions. There are some areas noted as "non-compliance" issues. Items were noted on the Measure "A" and TDA expenses and compliance. It is their responsibility to the Commission when audits are done that funds have been allocated appropriately and have been spent within the TEA and Measure "A" guidelines and spent expeditiously. Included in the report is the list of cities with at least three years of unspent funds. She noted that the cities on the list have programmed the funds and explanations for the unspent funds range from delays as relates to environmental, right-of-way acquisitions, contractual, etc. Cities with deficit fund balances were reviewed as well, and they noted how those cities intend to fund the deficits. Overhead on projects were also reviewed, from a common sense reasonable standpoint, as the Commission does not currently have a policy on how that overhead should or should not be applied. Certain cities were noted that have allocated expenses on an estimated basis as opposed to an actual basis. Their recommendation is that the Commission should consider a policy on how overhead should be applied. Commissioner Tavaglione stated that the Audit Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the Ernst & Young's report and there was great concern with the list of agencies with unspent funds within the last three year period and how they may appear, as it may adversely affect the re -authorization of Measure "A". Sally Anderson explained that these items listed were not criticisms, but were items that the Commission previously requested to be brought forward. Richard Folkers, City of Palm Desert Director of Public Works, explained that environmental problems, contracts, etc., cause delays in the projects. The City of Palm • • • 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 9 Desert is concerned that the way this was presented makes the cities look bad and that they are struggling in order to construct these projects. Rick McGrath, City of Riverside Public Works Director,- explained that for the last eleven years, the City of Riverside primarily used their Measure "A" funds for arterial street widening or for highly visible projects. The problem has been that arterial widening projects, they receive a number of community input and they go through extensive review and environmental processes. The La Sierra project has gone through the environmental process due to residents request, they will have the electrical and telephone utilities underground. That set the project back one year. The Van Buren project is on schedule. For the first four projects, they will be spending over $10 million and some of the projects will take multiple years' funding. At the end of the Measure "A" period, the City of Riverside can present an extensive list of projects with over twenty arterial streets that be shown to the residents. Trent Pulliam, City of Moreno Valley Director of Public Works, indicated the situation is the same for Moreno Valley where projects are delayed for the reasons mentioned by other cities. He was present today to answer any questions regarding the City of Moreno Valley's submittal distributed at today's meeting. Commission Tom Mullen complimented the Committee for their review of the.audit results. He felt that the cities' response to the unspent funds were good reasons but urged the Commission not to change the policy. Commissioner Hunt explained that the Ad Hoc Audit Committee had no intent of bringing - this forward for any other reasons but to address the issues especially with the Commission to be addressing reauthorization of the measure. Commissioner Bonnie Flickinger added that Moreno Valley fully supports the auditors and the committee revealing these numbers. She was very interested in this as well. Commissioner Kelly stated that he hoped all of the cities were looking at these funds the same way as the City of Riverside. He said the Riverside is constructing projects that people can see and that they could be used when discussing Measure "A". Ivan Chand stated that staff will be coming back in April with a status report on what steps are being taken to address the concerns that Ernst & Young has presented. M/S/C (Mullen/Lowe) receive and file the Fiscal Year 1999-2000 Audit Results Report from Ernst & Young, LLP • Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 10 9. INLAND EMPIRE ANNUAL SURVEY John Standiford, Public Information Officer, said that the survey takes the pulse of Inland Empire residents on important issues and transportation tends to be one of those issues. He introduced Max Neiman, from the University of California@Riverside and is part of the Inland Empire Research Consortium. Max Neiman stated that the Annual Inland Empire Survey includes responses of more than 2400 residents in' Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. He noted that: 1) 54% of Riverside County respondents indicated they they are either very or somewhat likely to support new development fees to finance transportation projects, and 40.8% opposed; and, 2) 53.3% found carpool lanes very helpful in managing traffic problems. He then reviewed the response for other commuting and transportation, and environmental questions. Commissioner Buster asked about survey results on traffic congestion and support for continued growth and Max Neiman explained that there was a relation between growth and traffic congestion. Commissioner Lowe requested that in the future, if 50 individuals surveyed use a specific term, such as "atmosphere" in the survey, that it be further clarified or defined. M/S/C (Stack/Pettis) receive and file the 2000/2001 Inland Empire Annual Survey from the Inland Empire Research Consortium 10. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA None. 11. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Eric Haley noted that Stephanie Wiggins of RCTC was featured in the latest issue of the Inland Empire Business Press. Commissioner Phil Stack informed the Commissioners that the newly formed Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee's first meeting is being held at 12 Noon at the RCTC Offices and that he will be attending the meeting. At 11:03 a.m., Steve DeBaun announced the Closed Session item and the Commission adjourned to Closed Session. • • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission February 14, 2001 Page 11 12. CLOSED SESSION Conference with Real Property Negotiator Pursuant to Section 54946.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC - Executive Director or Designee Property Owners: See following list for property owners SR 74 RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONS ITEM APN PROPERTY OWNER 1 347-130-018 Bill E. and Rae Jean Long 2 349-060-013 George V. and Ekaterini A. Andrews, et al 3 349-060-029 Kimber L. Lawson 4 349-060-008 Eastern Valley Municipal Water District 5 349-060-009 James A. Gonzalez 6 349-050-025 James A. and Estela L. Gonzalez 7 349-100-037 Arturo Mendoza, et al ' The Commission reconvened at 11:15 a.m. Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel, announced that there was no reportable action for the Closed Session. 13. ADJOURNMENT With no other items to be discussed by the Commission, Chairman Kleindienst adjourned the meeting at 11:17 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9 a.m., Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at the Mission Inn's Music Room, 3649 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, Naty Kop nhaver Clerk of the Board • NAME RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMM/SS/ON COMMISSION MEETING J //x//0/ l SIGN -IN SHEET DATE: AGENCY \sc.).4 (‘.( )-1 .7) (/ (y) 12)CA Li /t/tefo -r- (c-eN s.L„ Otj 3eA__ •K6 -C/A,) � wvv-10,v Loa JVoRcv TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER 14.4. 313e100 / 31$ 8282 s ' Oc p / L93 . O Ps6 =J.ps75. 9Zz -.3 / 7' / 545-4563/ /7rs CO Y (qb9% zyy_>4s-i' —c Coo - 11 O - 0 3`t R. -7(00 -3z1-G' ) 7 9&.. 7)777-7(3/ % -7/ 4//,' 0// 73s -z / ($4,19) /ft- SS --/DID / Iit=/oi r RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: COMMISSION MEETING 0.://z7/0/ NAME AGENCY DM -R yL `e,g155,1 pH/L. ST,4Cie yam eQ 1 )V 2?e, f 7 Je, ltil t -U R/M 1-#171L iL(a yn SIGN -IN SHEET nec-Zie./5 erry of ped4MCNo mF 6cs di e ✓ersiJC'3 e `V2c' 1 fi TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER 9#1? -44/0€' • 3 z'1/ 6 %7376, 73Z, -// i 6s Z/ 5c6 i 73b-H3/o 333- �GS� ..3g3-60,?* i • i • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: SIGN -IN SHEET IF YOU WISH TO PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COMPLETE. AND SUBMIT A TESTIMONY CARD TO THE CLERK OF THE COMMISSION AGENCY TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER g,'11. (ctoe)(m-)1(3 /Ce1v?)6/4(-to37 o5 (q(922,-)- ( LN- /(ail b) vzi- 36 i� 9 ,5" 7 /613 /II c � K LC A -f) (),-'(c (' 49 G64K- 9:4 cial q- c, 1/41-1 Coy /A4 P6 mac, L M -Al L /1-M11.1711A-N t &Tre,) L nJ 2 • I/4 107v/4 Try ji0 / y ', Signing is not required eIV? 14 Pio- 4-Sf 60?5/t<-v 6 /! l 60'7 W-7018 13 -r 3 €- `7*t (--.1.4.-.:cFene + hc1 07-44 - x t- s / - Z (c 5 BrU T TY(L 3 a 3 fro, c,44-0,..? C-�„E, C 5 0 6 r / / r��✓�1�is�� r/4w 1 e Tki;) LCD- 115 -G 3C` 7.Wy-ziv v- / '>s' -'7//U 736 - c--le--zL 1 ijy S-1-‘ty)s 7j r g95 7c7- /3rSi RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: S1GN-IN SHEET • IF YOU WISH TO PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT A TESTIMONY CARD TO THE CLERK OF THE COMMISSION NAME LA RN N,ii1-JAt2-r c.Drr. (9csi - (Lt(44-12-)tst-toC Signing is not required AGENCY SC/41-QM TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER (909)396-Zf398 /3 %-3L39 (c)hs1- 69- ��� / 3S 2-‘ y-cc.Sar fq-/oa 7 / / • / / / / / / / / / / • AGENDA ITEM 5A • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Brian Cundelan, Project Coordinator THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution No. 01-001 "Resolution of Necessity to Acquire 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 117 Lake Elsinore to approximately 1,640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road (Segment 1)" STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Conduct a hearing to consider the approval of the proposed Resolution of Necessity, including providing all interested parties of the affected property, their attorneys, or their representatives an opportunity to be heard on the issues relevant to the Resolution of Necessity. 2. Make the following findings as hereinafter described in this report: (i) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project. (ii) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. (iii) The fee and easement interests to be acquired are necessary for the project. (iv) The offers of just compensation have been made to the property owners. 3. Approve Resolution No. 01-001, a Resolution of Necessity of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Declaring That The Acquisition of Fee And Easement Interests in Certain Real Property Located in Riverside County, California, More Particularly Described as APNS 347-100-003, 347-100-016, 347-110-004,347-110-053, 347-130-009, 347-130-018, 347-130-019, 349-050-025, 349-050-026, 349-050-063, 349- 060-020, 349-060-022 & 24, 349-090-004, 349-090-008, 349-090-009, 349-100-004, 349-100-032, 349-100-038, 349-400-001, 377-020-005, 377-020-021 & 22, 377-372-025 & 26, 377-372-029 & 31, 377-372-030 and 377-391-001 (Project Parcel 13492-1,13494- 1, 13505-1, 13506-1, 13506-2, 13508-1, 13510-1, 13519-1, 13519-2, 13526-1, 13526-2, 13527-1, 13528-1, 13528-2, 13547-1, 13551-1, 13555-1, 13555-2, 13560-1, 13560-2, 13574-1, 13576-1, 13576-2, 13577-1, 13577-2, 13580-1, 13580-2, 13580-3, 13583-1, 13583-2, 13584-1, 13586-1, 13588-1, 13601-2, 13602-1, 13602-2, 13603-1, 13603-2, 13607-1 & 13608-1), by Eminent Domain Is Necessary for the Realignment and Improvement of State Route 74 Between Dexter Avenue to Easterly of Wasson Canyon Road (Segment 1). 00 0.0.01-. BACKGROUND: 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 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road. Segment 2 is from approximately 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in Perris. Utilities such as Edison must move their facilities before roadway construction work is begun. Edison has estimated that this relocation could take approximately 3 months. The property must be obtained before relocation work can begin. The parcels were previously approved for acquisition by the Commission. The County of Riverside Real Property Department is acting as right-of-way acquisition agent for the Commission in the acquisition of the parcels. Offers of just compensation to purchase the parcels were prepared and presented to the property owners of record by letters on or before February 8, 2001, and offered to purchase the parcels for an amount not less than the approved appraisal of the fair market value of the properties. The offers have not been accepted to date, however negotiations are ongoing and will continue. The negotiations are not precluded by the holding of the hearing or the Commission's approval of a resolution of necessity. It may be necessary to acquire some or all of the parcels described in Exhibit "A" by eminent domain. The initiation of the eminent domain process is the approval of a resolution of necessity. Prior to approving a resolution of necessity, the Commission must give each person whose property is to be acquired, and whose name and address appears on the last equalized County Tax Assessor's roll, notice and a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard on: 1. whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project; 2. whether the proposed project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury; 3. whether the acquisition of the real property is necessary for the project; 4. whether the required offers to acquire the real property have been made. Note: The fair market value of the property is not an issue at the hearing. The notice must be mailed by first class mail and state the intent of the Commission to consider the approval of the resolution, the right of each person to appear and be heard on these issues, and that the failure to file a written request to appear will result in a waiver of the right to appear and be heard. The Commission must then hold a hearing at which all persons who filed a written request within 15 days of the date the notice was mailed may appear and be heard. The required notice was mailed to the property owners, identified in Exhibit "A", on February 27, 2001. 000002 DISCUSSION: The following addresses the four findings that are required for approval of the resolution of • necessity: (1) THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE PROPOSED PROJECT State Route 74 between Lake Elsinore and Perris is an older highway, which does not meet current design standards. Many of the horizontal and vertical curves along this route do not meet passing and stopping sight distance standards. Safe passing distances through this 8.5 -mile section is limited to 9 locations, constituting approximately one-half of the length. Left turns to private driveways and cross streets causes queuing of traffic in one direction until opposing traffic has passed. Shoulders are substandard and mostly unpaved, varying in width from 2 feet to 10 feet. The angle of intersection of the majority of the cross streets does not meet Caltrans or County standards. With increased traffic volumes over the past several years, safety has become a primary concern along this section of State Route 74. According to Caltrans records, over the last ten years there have been 39 fatalities and 716 injuries. • • A significant amount of public support for this project has been evident at RCTC commission meetings and has resulted in the acceleration of the implementation of the Route 74 widening project from 1-15 in Lake Elsinore to 7th Street in Perris. As a result of this public input, at the September 8, 1999 Commission meeting, the Commission established an Ad Hoc Committee consisting of Commissioners Gene Bourbonnais, Al Landers, Tom Mullen, and Kevin Pape to expedite improvement to Route 74. The Committee met on September 17, 1999 and reviewed project status for both the Measure "A" State Route 74 improvement project and the various Caltrans SHOPP (State Highway Operations and Protection Program) projects. The meeting was also attended by members of the public that are interested in accelerating improvements to this segment of Highway 74. After consideration of the information presented, the Committee members were unanimous in their desire to recommend to the Commission that it assist Caltrans with delivering the remainder of the Caltrans SHOPP projects combined with the Measure "A" improvement project within the limits of 1-15 and 7th Street on State Highway 74 with the intent of accelerating the construction of all improvements. At the October 13, 1999 RCTC meeting, the State Route 74 project was accelerated via approval of Agenda Item No. 9. (2) THE PROJECT IS PLANNED OR LOCATED IN A MANNER THAT WILL BE MOST COMPATIBLE WITH THE GREATEST PUBLIC GOOD AND THE LEAST PRIVATE INJURY The roadway realignment follows the existing alignment as much as practical. New realignment was necessary to meet current design standards. The project has been designed in such a manner as to create the optimum benefit to the existing community 000003 while affecting the least amount of property owners. (3) THE ACQUISITION OF THE PARCELS ARE NECESSARY FOR THE PROJECT The acquisition of parcels is required in order to provide the wider road and to conform to current horizontal and vertical design standards. Consideration was also provided to limiting the impact on adjacent properties. (4) THE OFFERS OF JUST COMPENSATION HAVE BEEN MADE An appraisal was prepared by Robert Shea Perdue & Associates to establish the fair market value of the fee and easement interests RCTC is seeking to acquire. The Commission reviewed the results of. the appraisal at the 11/8/2000, 12/13/2000, and 1/10/2001 Commission meetings and directed staff to transmit the approved offers of just compensation to the property owners . Offers of just compensation were made to the property owners to purchase the fee and easement interests as established by the approved appraisal and as required by Section 7267.2 of the California Government Code. Although negotiated settlements may still be possible for the property cited above, it would be appropriate to commence the procedures to acquire the fee and easement interests through eminent domain to ensure that access and the necessary fee and easement rights will be available to meet the critical time frames associated with the development of the project. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no new fiscal impact from this action. The Commission approved -the current budget for the subject State Route 74 widening project at the July 12, 2000 Commission meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Commission (1) received a Negative Declaration/Finding of No Significance (ND/FONSI), which was approved by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on July 25, 1994 and (2) prepared an Environmental Re-evaluation, because of the passage of time, which determined that a Supplemental ND/FONSI was not required and was approved by Caltrans and FHWA on October 20, 2000, to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: The notice of this public hearing was mailed on February 27, 2001 (15 days prior to meeting) to each property owner of record. _000004 EXHIBIT "A" • • CTPN = APN = • Item CTPN APN Grantor 1 13492-1 377-020-021 & 022 2 13494-1 377-020-005 3 13505-1 377-372-026 4 13506-1 377-372-025 _._..�.- 5 13506-2 377-372-025 6 13508-1 377-372 029 & 031 7 13510-1 377-372-030 13519-1 13519-2 10 13526-1 11 13526-2 12 13527-1 13 13528-1 14 13528-2 15 13547-1 16 13551-1 17 13555-1 18 13555-2 377-391-001 377-391-001 347-130-018 347-130-018 347-130-019 347 -130-009 347-130-009 347-100-016 347-110-004 347-110-053 347-110-053 Billy J. Van Meter, et.al. William G. & Roselyn J gHall � James & Ofelia McCall James & Ofelia McCall James & Ofelia McCall Rollin & Opal Forsyth Peter & Vaso Lembesis William T. Gaffer William T. Gaffey Bill E. & Rae Jean Long Bill E. & Rae Jean Long Sandra N. Sandar, a Widow Vlasio S. Andrews, et. al. Vlasio S. Andrews, et. al. North Peak Partners, L.P. North Peak Partners, L.P. Johnnie Williams, et.ux. Johnnie Williams, et.ux. 19 13560-1 349-400-001 20 13560-2 349-400-001 21 13574-1 349-060-020 22 13576-1 349-060-024 23 13576-2 349-060-024 24 13577-1 349-060-022 25 13577-2 349-060-022 26 13580-1 349-050-025 27 13580-2 349-050-025 28 13580-3 349-050-025 29 13683:1.- 30 13583-2 Frank Anzaldi, et. al. Frank Anzaldi, et. al. J. Kirk Harns Patricia K. Johnson Patricia K. Johnson Patricia K. Johnson Patricia K. Johnson James A. & Estela L. Gonzales James A. & Estela L. Gonzales James A. & Estela L. Gonzales 349-050-026 Jean & Nichole Yvonne Daum 349-050-026 Jean & Nichole Yvonne,Daum 31 13584-1 349-090-009 wJ � 32 13586-1 33 13588-1 34 13601-2 35 13602-1 36 13602-2 349-090-004 37 13603-1 349-100-032 38 13603-2 349-100-032 39 13607-1 40 13608-1 Joseph Saline, JR 347-100-003 Theodore L. Gamst, et. ux. 349-050-063 Jean L. Burbidge 349-090-008 Michael Contreras 349-090-004 Armin Altemus Armin Altemus William A. Lovell William A. Lovell 349-100-004 349-100-038 Caltrans Parcel Number Assessor's Parcel Number Jeffstra INC. Dao Hoa 000005 RESOLUTION NO. 01-001 • • • A RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DECLARING THAT THE ACQUISITION OF FEE AND EASEMENT INTERESTS IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS APNS 347-100-003, 347-100-016, 347-110-004, 347-110-053, 347-130-009, 347-130-018, 347-130-019, 349-050-025, 349-050-026, 349-050-063, 349-060-020, 349-060-022 & 24, 349-090-004, 349-090-008, 349-090-009, 349-100-004, 349-100-032, 349-100-038, 349-400-001 377-020-005, 377-020-021 & 22, 377-372-025 & 26, 377-372-029 & 31, 377-372-030 AND 377-391-001 (PROJECT PARCEL NOS. 13492-1, 13494-1, 13505-1, 13506-1, 13506-2, 13508-1, 13510-1, 13519-1, 13519-2, 13526-1, 13526-2, 13527-1, 13528-1, 13528-2, 13547-1, 13551-1, 13555-1, 13555-2, 13560-1, 13560-2, 13574-1, 13576-1, 13576-2, 13577-1, 13577-2, 13580-1, 13580-2, 13580-3, 13583-1, 13583-2, 13584-1, 13586-1, 13588-1, 13601-2, 13602-1, 13602-2, 13603-1, 13603-2, 13607-1 & 13608-1.), BY EMINENT DOMAIN IS NECESSARY FOR THE WIDENING, REALIGNMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF STATE ROUTE 74 BETWEEN DEXTER AVENUE AND APPROXIMATELY 1640 FEET EAST OF WASSON CANYON ROAD (SEGMENT 1) WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") proposes to acquire fee and easement interests in certain real property, located in Lake Elsinore and Perris, California, more particularly described as Assessor Parcel Nos. 347-100-003, 347-100-016, 347-110-004, 347-110-053, 347-130-009, 347-130- 018, 347-130-019, 349-050-025, 349-050-026, 349-050-063, 349-060-020, 349-060- 022 & 24, 349-090-004, 349-090-008, 349-090-009, 349-100-004, 349-100-032, 349- 100-038, 349-400-001, 377-020-005, 377-020-021 & 22, 377-372-025 & 26, 377-372- 029 & 31, 377-372-030 and 377-391-001 (Project Parcel Nos. 13492-1, 13494-1, 13505- 1, 13506-1, 13506-2, 13508-1, 13510-1, 13519-1, 13519-2, 13526-1, 13526-2, 13527- 1, 13528-1, 13528-2, 13547-1, 13551-1, 13555-1, 13555-2, 13560-1, 13560-2, 13574- 1, 13576-1, 13576-2, 13577-1, 13577-2, 13580-1, 13580-2, 13580-3, 13583-1, 13583- 2, 13584-1, 13586-1, 13588-1, 13601-2, 13602-1, 13602-2, 13603-1, 13603-2, 13607-1 & 1 3608-1), for purposes of the widening, realignment and improvement of State Route 74, between Dexter Avenue and approximately 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road (Segment 1), pursuant to the authority granted to it by section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, the Commission scheduled a public hearing for Wednesday, March 14, 2001, at 9:00 a.m., at the Mission Inn, Music Room, 3649 Mission Inn Avenue, Riverside, California, and gave to each person whose property is to be acquired and whose name and address appeared on the last equalized county assessment roll, notice and a reasonable opportunity to appear at said hearing and be heard on the matters referred to in section 1240.030 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; and 000006 WHEREAS, said hearing has been held by the Commission and each person whose property is to be acquired by eminent domain was afforded an opportunity to be heard on said matters; and, WHEREAS, the Commission may now approve a Resolution of Necessity pursuant to section 1240.040 of the California Code of Civil Procedure; NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSION DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure. There has been compliance by the Commission with the requirements of section 1245.235 of the California Code of Civil Procedure regarding notice and hearing. Section 2. Public Use. The public use for which the fee and easement interests are to be acquired is for the widening, realignment and improvement of State Route 74, between Dexter Avenue and approximately 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Road, pursuant to the authority granted to it by section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code. Section 130220.5 of the California Public Utilities Code authorizes the Commission to acquire by eminent domain property necessary for such purposes. Section 3. Description of Property. Attached and marked as Exhibit "A" are the legal descriptions and plats of the real property to be acquired by the Commission, which describe the general location and extent of the property with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. • Section 4. Findings. The Commission hereby finds and determines each of the following: (a) The public interest and necessity require the proposed project; (b) The proposed project is planned or located in the manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; (c) The property described in Exhibit "A" is necessary for the proposed project; and (d) Pursuant to section 1245.230(4) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, that either the offers required by section 7267.2 of the California Government Code have been made to the owners or owners of record, or the offers have not been made because the owners cannot be located with reasonable diligence. Section 5. Use Not Unreasonably Interfering with Existing Public Use(s). Some or all of the real property to be acquired is subject to easements and rights -of -way appro- priated to existing public uses. The legal descriptions of these easements and rights -of -way are on file with the Commission and describe the general location and extent of the easements and rights -of -way with sufficient detail for reasonable identification. In the event 000007 • • the herein described use or uses will not unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described real property subject to such existing public use(s) pursuant to section 1240.510 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Section 6. More Necessary Public Use. Some or all of the real property to be acquired is subject to easements and rights -of -way appropriated to existing public uses. To the extent that the herein described use or uses will unreasonably interfere with or impair the continuance of the public use as it now exists or may reasonably be expected to exist in the future, the Commission finds and determines that the herein described use or uses are more necessary than said existing public use. Counsel for the Commission is authorized to acquire the herein described real property appropriated to such existing public use(s) pursuant to section 1240.610 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Staff is further authorized to make such improvements to the real property being acquired that it determines are reasonably necessary to mitigate any adverse impact upon the existing public use. Section 7. Further Activities. Counsel for the Commission is hereby authorized to acquire the hereinabove described real property in the name of and on behalf of the Commission by eminent domain, and counsel is authorized to institute and prosecute such legal proceedings as may be required in connection therewith. Legal counsel is further authorized to take such steps as may be authorized and required by law, and to make such security deposits as may be required by order of court, to permit the Commission to take possession of and use said real property at the earliest possible time. Counsel is further authorized to correct any errors or to make or agree to non -material changes in the legal description of the real property that are deemed necessary for the conduct of the condemnation action or other proceedings or transaction required to acquire the subject real property. Counsel is further authorized to reduce or modify the extent of the interests or property to be acquired so as to reduce the compensation payable in the action where such change would not substantially impair the construction and operation of the project for which the real property is being acquired. Section 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon approval. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of March, 2001. William G. Kleindienst, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Riverside County Transportation Commission 000008 Definitions of Legal Rights to be Acquired • • • "Fee," also known as fee simple or fee simple absolute, refers to complete or absolute ownership of the property. "Temporary construction easement," refers to the right of plaintiff, its successors and assigns, to engage in construction and related activities for the project as referred to in the complaint, together with all necessary rights of ingress and egress to the easement area in connection with the exercise of any of the easement rights. Prior to termination of this easement, property owners shall not erect or construct, or permit to be erected or constructed, any building, structure or improvement on, over or under any portion of the easement, nor shall property owners plant any tree or trees or plant any other vegetation or flora on any portion of the easement except at the written consent of plaintiff. Plaintiff shall be entitled to trim, cut, or clear away any trees, brush, or other vegetation or flora from time to time as plaintiff determines in its sole discretion without payment of any additional compensation to property owners. No other easement or easements shall be granted on, under, or over this easement without obtaining the prior written consent of plaintiff. The duration of the rights under this easement shall not be for less than twenty four (24) months from the commencement of construction on the applicable parcel and not more than thirty (30) months of the date possession of the applicable parcel as authorized by court order. •• "Drainage easement," grants to plaintiff (including its successors and assigns), a permanent and perpetual easement, together with the right to forever maintain, improve, alter, relocate, inspect, occupy and use for the construction and maintenance of a slope, the protection and stability of the adjoining properties and drainage purposes related to the project or otherwise necessary for the protection of the property or adjoining properties, all as determined necessary by plaintiff together with all necessary rights of ingress and egress to the easement area in connection with the exercise of any of the easement rights. Property owners shall not erect or construct, or permit to be erected or constructed, any building, structure or improvement on, over or under any portion of the easement, or plant any tree or trees or plant any other vegetation or flora on any portion of the easement except at the written consent of plaintiff. Plaintiff shall be entitled to trim, cut, or clear away any trees, brush, or other vegetation or flora from time to time determined in its sole discretion without payment of any additional compensation. No other easement or easements shall be granted on, under or over the easement without obtaining the prior written consent of plaintiff. The existing ground elevations of the easement shall not be increased or decreased, without obtaining the prior written consent of plaintiff. R V LIT\KAR\604797 EXHIB[T_A PAGE_t EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the southwesterly one-half of the southwesterly one-half of Lots 1 and 2, in Block 15, as shown on the Map of the North Elsinore Tract, situated in the Unincorporated Territory County of Riverside, State of California, on file in Book 5, Page 105 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most southerly corner of said Lot 1, said corner being on the northwesterly line of Central Avenue (40.00 feet half width) [12.192 meters] as shown on said Tract, also known as State Highway 74; thence North 46°05'28" West along the southwesterly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 3.048 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 3.048 meters northwesterly of said northwesterly line, said point being on the northwesterly line of the Easement to the County of Riverside recorded February 20, 1991 as Instrument No. 56809 of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder, said point also being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 46°05'28" West along said southwesterly line of Lot 1 a distance of 5.181 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 8.229 meters northwesterly of said northwesterly line of Central Avenue; thence North 43°46'42" East along last said parallel line a distance of 48.419 meters to a point on the northeasterly line of said southwesterly one- half of the southwesterly one-half of Lots 1 and 2; thence South 46°10'15" East along said northeasterly line a distance of 5.181 meters to a point on said northwesterly line of the Easement to the County of Riverside; thence South 43°46'42" West along last said northwesterly line a distance of 48.426 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 250.9 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-28.4-13492 (13492-1) • This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional La d Surveyors A t. Signature Date: IMBIO' ' , L.S. 4430 XPIRES 9/30/01 M:\ 99138\SEG1\DEEDS\13492-1.DOC EXHIBIT_A PAGE_L. SCALER Is 500 NORTH ELSINORE TRACT BLOCK 15 M. B. 5/105 0 E om io 2 NA 12.192 m 15.240 m SHEET 1 OF 1 LOT 38 NE'LY LINE OF W'L SY /2 SW'LY /2 OF LOTS I & 2 LLA 3335 PARCEL B E m 5.181 m (40') 15.240 m LLA 3335 PARCEL A N tD .�1 z z E CD (50') m o m co zwrAd o'n Z N j W�zm 0Li >- z I - J z0 Q J0cr O cr - 0 w w z--Rr 1i M N46 05'28"W r 8.229 m SW'LY LINE LOT 1 LOT 8 5J81m TPOB E 0 POC (MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER LOT 0 8.229 m 0 o> w < z J J ic zuu Z U (50') W z w J Q CC 1— z U r- >- 2 EXISTING STATE LOT 37 CN MB 11 /96-98 LOT 36 LOT 35 PARCEL MAP ND, 1150-4 PMB 54/44 PARCEL 1 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L000089TO TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 731 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 960-1982 FAX. (909) 941-0691 AREA O(STRICT 06 COUNTY RRVERSOE ROUTE KLOPOST 74 27.9/32.0 PANEL Not 13492-1 SOU/RE FEET' 2.701 SOU/RE IEIER51 250.9 PARCEL 13492-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION Mil Rif A PAGE EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the northeasterly one-half of the southwesterly one-half of Lots 1 and 2, in Block 15, as shown on the Map of the North Elsinore Tract, situated in the Unicorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State -of California, on file in Book 5, Page 105 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most southerly corner of said northeasterly one-half of the southwesterly one-half of Lot 1, said corner being on northwesterly line of Central Avenue (40.00 feet half width) [12.192 meters] as shown on said Tract also known as State Highway 74; thence North 43°46'42" East along the southeasterly line of said Lot 1 and said northwesterly line a distance of 48.432 meters to a point on the northeasterly line of said northeasterly one-half of the southwesterly one-half of Lot 1; thence North 46°15'05" West along said northeasterly line a distance of 8.229 meters to a point on -a --- line parallel with and 8.229 meters northwesterly of said southeasterly line of said Lot 1; thence South 43°46'42" West along said parallel line a distance of 48.421 meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said northeasterly one-half of the southwesterly one- half of Lot 1; thence South 46°10'15" East along said southwesterly line a distance of 8.229 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 398.5 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-28.5-13494 (13494-1) • This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance wi Professiona Land Surveyors Date: M:\99138\GI\DEEDS\13494-1.000 EXHIB;T__A._ PAGER SHEET 1 OF 1 SCALE' 11 500 NE'LY %2 LOT 1 NE'LY 1.1NE OF NE'LY /2 SW'LY 1/2 OF LOT I NORTH rLS1NDRE TRACT BLOCK 15 M.B. 5/105 NE'LY 1/2 SW'LY 1/2 LOT 1 E isv S43. 46'42"W in E � N . N to co z 8.229 mr 13494 w E om N • tD N• V' CO N43.46'42"E 48.432 m SW'LY LINE OF --� NE'LY '/2 SW'LY 1/2 OF LOT I LOT 1 M 12.192 m (40') POB (MOST S'LY CORNER OF 1 LOTNE 2) SW /2 15.250 m ') W z w J 1— z w U 5.240 m (50') 91- >- cc 1— (1) z (1) X w 7RA CT MAP NO 11223 MB 111/96-98 LOT 39 LOT 38 LOT 37 LOT 36 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00008970 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 331 EAST SFEL6Y STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAXi (909) 944-0691 AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE CLOPOST 14 21.9/32.0 PARCELrlbl 13494-1 SQUARE FEET/ 4,289 SQUARE IETERS& 398.5 PARCEL 13494-1 �r SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHIBIT "A" • • 1 Fee Being a portion of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 11210, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per Map filed in Book 85, Page 90 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most easterly corner of said Parcel 2, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said northwesterly line being the southeasterly line of said Parcel 2, thence southwesterly along said northwesterly and southeasterly line, South 43° 45' 45" West, 86.268 meters to an angle point in said Parcel 2, said angle point being the point of intersection of said northwesterly line of State Highway 74 with the northerly line of Conard Avenue, as shown on said Parcel Map; thence westerly along said northerly line of Conard Avenue, also being the southerly line of said Parcel 2, South 86° 22' 22" West, 10.338 meters to an angle point in said Parcel 2, said angle point being on the northeasterly line of said Conard Avenue (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map; thence northwesterly along said northeasterly line also being the southwesterly line of said Parcel 2, North 46° 15' 05" West, 3.300 meters; thence North 78° 44' 43" East, 8.927 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 5.180 meters northwesterly measured at right angles from said northwesterly line of said State Highway 74; thence northeasterly along said parallel line, North 43° 45' 45" East, 53.504 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 833.020 meters; thence northeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 02° 16' 27" an arc length of 33.065 meters to a point on the northeasterly line of said Parcel 2, said point being distant northwesterly thereon, North 46° 16' 15" West,' 5.836 meters from said most easterly corner; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line, South 46° 16' 15" East, 5.836 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 485.6 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74 and Conard Avenue). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-28.7-13505 (13505-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professio Act. Signature Dat HN IMBIORSKI, L.S. 4430 ICE EXPAf ES 9 0/01 M : 99138\SEG 'WEEDS \ 13 .DOC 1 EXHIBIT, PAGE to PARCEL 1 S46'16' 14"E 5.836 m POB SHEET 1 OF 1 S48' 30'42"E (R) SCALD 11500 E 0 N O ME M coin �w O tiM 04 � J N O C PARCEL MAP J 1 2 J 0 PMB 85/90 PARCEL 2 NE'LY LINE CONARD AVENUE SW'LY LINE PARCEL 2 5.180 m E O in 3 z CC E 03 N (MOST E'LY COR PARCEL 2) cc 13505-� 15.240 m 15.240 m (50') (50') .16 ti0 N46' I5'05"W - 3.300 m Q CONARD AVENUE >- LL1 LLI Q > H Q N J CD cr Z Z (/)1— x- 1- 0 J 0 co n LO 5-7 0 -J • • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALEORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEIA OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00008970 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. ol 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 9804982 FAX, (909) 941-0091 AREA 0(STRICT COUNTY ROUTE KILOPOST 08 RIVERSCE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Not 13505-1 SQUARE FEETI 5.227 SQUARE IETI:RSI 485.6 PARCEL 13505-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXhFigI�`.��T:4nel • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 11210, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per Map filed in Book 85, Page 90 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 1, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said corner also being on the southwesterly line of land granted to the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District per a Grant Deed recorded February 27, 1962, as Instrument No. 17835 of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder; thence northwesterly along the northeasterly line of said Parcel 1, also being said southwesterly line, North 46° 16' 21" West, 11.281 meters to a point on a non - tangent curve concave northwstedy_having a radius of 833.020 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 53° 10' 32" East; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 04° 39' 50" an arc length of 67.810 meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said Parcel 1, said point being distant northwesterly thereon, North 46° 16' 14' West, 5.837 meters from the most southerly comer of said Parcel 1; thence southeasterly along said southwesterly line, South 46° 16' 14" East, 5.837 meters to said most southerly corner, said corner being on said northwesterly line of said State Highway 74, said northwesterly line being the southeasterly line of said Parcel 1; thence northeasterly along said northwesterly and southeasterly line, North 43° 45' 45" East, 67.576 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 547.1 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-28.8-13506 (13506-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with e Profes ona - nd rveyors ct. Date: EXHIBIT. A . PAGE. M:\99118ASEG 1 WEEDS\13506-1.00C LAND GRANTED TO ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PER INST. NO 17835. 0. R. RECORDED FEBRUARY 27.1962 SCALD I t 500 POB (SE'LY COR SW'LY LINE OF PARCEL 1) INST. NO 17835.O.R. NE'LY LINE PARCEL 2 553'10'32"E (R) i PARCEL NAP 1 1 7 1 0 PMB 85/90 PARCEL 1 0 co J E 0 N 0 ri CC S48* 30'42'S (R) PARCEL 2 Lk Associated Engineers, Inc. sn Qn M SW'LY LINE PARCEL I S'LY CORNER PARCEL I 331 EAST S►ELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 11764 TEL C$01/ 960-41142 FAX c101114-0091 AREA DISTRCT COUNTY ROUTE. XLOPOST OS RIVERSIDE T4 YT.1/32.0 PARCEL. No,s 13506-1 SQUARE FEET, 5,889 SQUARE METERSe 547.1 44) cc SHEET 1 OF 1 CO N 1- 0 J • v J THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00008970 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. ..r PARCH. 13506-1 SKETpCH�., TO ACCOMPANYq,pUz �I I � SC YHE • • • EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 11210, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per Map filed in Book 85, Page 90 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 1, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said corner also being on the southwesterly line of land granted to the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District per a Grant Deed recorded February 27, 1962, as Instrument No. 17835 of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder; thence northwesterly along the northeasterly line of said Parcel 1, also being said southwesterly line, North 46° 16' 21" West, 11.281 meters to a point on a non - tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 833.020 meters, said point -being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, a radial line through said point bears South 53° 10' 32" East; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 02° 19' 56" an arc length of 33.910 meters; thence North 50° 50' 36" West, 15.874 meters; thence North 43° 43' 39" East, 35.000 meters; thence South 46° 18' 53" East, 3.905 meters to an angle point in said Parcel 1, said angle point being the most westerly corner of said land granted to the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District ; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly and southwesterly line, South 46° 16' 21" East, 8.529 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 490.6 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-28.8-13506 (13506-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with t Professional, nd Surveyor Signature Date: M :\99138 \SEG 1 \DEEDS\ 13506.2.DOC EXHIBITS PAGEJ.11. SCALE: 1:500 S46' 18'53"E 3.905 m N43'43'39"E LAND GRANTED TO ELSINORE VALLEY MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PER INST. NO 17835. O.R. RECORDED FEBRUARY 27.1962 POC (SE'LY COR PARCEL 1) 546'16'21"E 8.529 m TPOB N46' 16'2P'W 1.281m - N J Ztv la-? N 0 C• w0V 'JMQ coo_ —W oz N z J cc E O J N50' 50'36"W / 15.874 m / S50' 50'36"E (R)/ PARCEL MAP 11210 PMB 85/90 PARCEL I \ 553'10'32"E N 0 PARCEL 2 EXISTING STATE cc 15.240 m SHEET 1 OF i 0 (50') N r -- THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.000089TO TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Asaoclated EIdmen% k1C. 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL (909) 980-1982 FAX. (909) 941-0891 AREA DISTRICT 08 COUNTY RIVERSIDE ROUTE 74 KL0P0ST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL No.: 13506-2 SQUARE FEET$ 5.281 SQUARE 'ETERS: 4904 PARCEL 13506-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL ESCR I PT I ;N FXHIR1T EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Lot 3, Block 24 of the North Elsinore Tract, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Map on file in Book 5, Page 105 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, being a portion of land described in a document in favor of Opal M. Forsyth, recorded March 4, 1998, as Instrument No. 078359, of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most southerly corner of said Lot 3, said corner being on the northwesterly line of Central Avenue (40.00 feet half width) [12.192 meters] as shown on said Map, also known as State Highway 74; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 3, North 43° 45' 45" East, 4.197 meters; thence continuing along said southeasterly line, North 28° 04' 19" East, 119.467 meters to the most easterly corner of said document in favor of Opal M. Forsyth, said most easterly corner being the most southerly corner of land quitclaimed to Peter D. Lembesis, Trustee recorded August 25, 1999, as Document No. 1' 9-382343 of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder; thence northwesterly along the northeasterly line of said document in favor of Opal M. Forsyth, also being the southwesterly line of said land quitclaimed to Peter D. Lembesis, Trustee, North 46° 15' 42" West, 7.106 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 877.823 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 54° 10' 57" West; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 00° 08' 11" an arc length of 2.088 meters; thence South 35° 40' 53" West, 118.330 meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot 3; thence southeasterly along said southwesterly line, South 46° 16' 21" East, 22.491 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 1832.3 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.0-13508 (13508-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with •e Profession. Land Surve •rs t. Signature Date: M:\99138\SEG1\DE DSS13508-1.DOC 4430 EXHIBIT. PAGE..1ai._ I SHEET I OF I I 1 I\> PACEL MAP ND1992 PMB 122/44-48 -la 1 , =O 1 \ --C rn NE'LY LINE PER I PARCEL 4 INST. NO. 078359, 0. R. "J RECORDED MARCH 4, 1998 rA SW'LY LINE PER DOC. NO. 382343, 0. R. RECORDED AUGUST 25, 1999 N47� 4m"W N54 • I0'57" W (R) L.L.A. REC. JUNE 6, 1989 AS INST. NO. 184139 0. R. 0 w NORTH ELS]NDRE TRACT 3 LOT 3. BLOCK 24 f MB 5/105 SW'LY LINE LOT 3 MOST EASTERLY CORNER PER INST. NO. 078359,_ 0.R. RECORDED MARCH 4 1998 MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER PER DOC. NO. 382343. 0. R. RECORDED.JGUST 25. I 999 LOT 1 LOT 2 ALLAN STREET ( SE'LY LINE LOT 3 NW'LY LINE CENTRAL AVENUE 5 22.4911 m1E POB 12.192 mI 15.240 m (MOST S'LY COR (40') 1 (50') LOT 3) TRACT MAP ND,. 11283 MB 111/96-98 LOT 52 LOT 51 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00008970 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Aaaodated Engineers, inc. 334 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-4982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 AREA DISTRICT COMITY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 R)VERSDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL NoJ 13508-( SQUARE FEET( 19.723 SQUARE 1ET& 1.832.3 PARCEL 13508-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXf-VEM" AsclAgE1O1l_ • • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Lot 3, Block 24 of the North Elsinore Tract, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Map on file in Book 5, Page 105 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, being a portion of land described in a Quitclaim Deed in favor of Peter D. Lembesis, Trustee, recorded August 25, 1999, as Document No. 1999-382343, of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most southerly corner of said Lot 3, said corner being on the northwesterly line of Central Avenue (40.00 feet half width) [12.192 meters] as shown on said Map, also known as State Highway 74; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 3, North 43° 45' 45" East, 4.197 meters; thence continuing along said southeasterly line, North 28° 04' 19" East, 119.467 meters to the most southerly corner of said land described in said Quitclaim to Peter D. Lembesis, Trustee, said southerly corner being the most easterly corner of land describedin-a document in favor of Opal M. Forsyth, recorded March 4, 1998 as Instrument No. 078359 of Official Records in said Office of said County Recorder, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said southeasterly line, North 28° 04' 19" East, 8.000 meters; thence continuing along said southeasterly line, North 19° 58' 42" East, 20.366 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 877.823 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 52° 27' 00" West; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 01° 43' 57" an arc length of 26.544 meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said land described in said Quitclaim Deed to Peter D. Lembesis, Trustee said southwesterly line being the northeasterly line of said land described in an Instrument in favor of Opal M. Forsyth; thence southeasterly along said southwesterly and northeasterly line, South 46° 15' 42" East, 7.106 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 106.8 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.0-13510 (13510-1) This real property description has been prepared me, or under my direction, in conformance wit he Professior►zfl Land urve Date: M:\99138\SEGIWEEDS\13510-1.00C EXHIBIT__A PAGE"' SCALE: It1000 N52 27'00"W (R) A=01' 43'57" R=877.823 m L=26.544 m L 1 N54'I0'57"W R) i S46' 15'42"E 7.106 m NE'LY LINE PER INST. NO. 078359,0.R. TPOB RECORDED MARCH 4. 1998 SW'LY LINE PER DOC. NO. I999-382343, O. R. RECORED AUGUST 25. 1999 SE'LY LINE LOT 3 NW'LY LINE CENTRAL AVE NORTH ELSINORE TRACT LOT 3, BLOCK 24 MB 5/105 M0ST S'LY COR LOT 3 kik 338 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTAI O. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 9e0-'982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 Associated Engineers, Inc. AREA SHEET 1 OF 1 PARCEL MAP 1992 flib PMB 122/44-48 PARCEL 4 MOST EASTERLY CORNER PER INST. NO. 078359.0.R. RECORDED MARCH 4, 1998 MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER PER DOC. NO. I999-382343,0. R. RECORED AUGUST 25. 1999 —4 y ZE —c 12.(92 +5.240 m ■ (40') (50') DISTRICT 08 COUNTY RIVERSOE ROUTE IOLOPOST 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL NOa SQUARE FEET( SQUARE METERS( 13510-1 106.8 LOT 2 ALLAN STREET TRACT MAP NO., 11233 MB 111/96-98 LOT 52 LOT 51 • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.000089TO TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. PARCEL 13510-1 IF SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXti l�� I AESCPAPG-Vt • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Lot 1 of Tract No. 11283, situated in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per Map filed in Book 111, Pages 96 through 98 inclusive of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most northerly comer of said Lot 1, said corner being on the southeasterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Tract; thence South 19°58'42" West along said southeasterly line also being the northwesterly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 6.107 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 306.417 meters; thence southwesterly along said southeasterly and northwesterly line and said curve through a central angle of 10°05'33" an arc length of 53.972 meters to an angle point on the boundary of said Lot 1; thence South 12°11'02" East along the westerly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 2.492 meters; thence North 31°40'57" East, 52.554 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 60.960 meters; thence northeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 06°19'55" an arc length of 6.737 meters to a point on the northeasterly line of said Lot 1, said point being distant thereon South 46°18'53" East 9.802 meters from said most northerly corner; thence North 46°18'53" West along said northeasterly line a distance of 9.802 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 261.9 square meters. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.0-13519 (13519-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Signature Date: BIORS'I, L.S. 4430 /30/01 M A9913tASEG 1 W EEDS113 S 19- I.000 EXHIBITS PAGE SHEET 1 OF 1 Gv (S, F C'4 \C` 44, POB MOST N'LY COR. LOT 1 • PARCEL MAP N0, 19924 PJM,fl, '(S9, 122/44-48 Noe. • l� vo/9 �96i7 -46 Sy S . (A.1/�� kik Associated Engineers, Inc. 338 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 1(764 TEL. (909) 960-1982 FAX. <909) 941-0691 '\\'> AREA LOT 1 for SCALE' 1 50 TRACT NO, 11283 M, S, 111/9b.=98 OISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 06 RIVERSIDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Nos 13519-1 SQUARE FEET: 2.619 SQUARE IETER5I 261.9 LOT 2 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORMA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1985. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L000089T0 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. _ . V 411 PARCH. 13519-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHteikLAESCjt1P F I~T F'A t • • EXHIBIT "A" Drainage Easement Being a portion of Lot 1 of Tract No. 11283, situated in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per Map filed in Book 111, Pages 96 through 98 inclusive of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most northerly corner of said Lot 1, said comer being on the southeasterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Tract; thence South 46°18'53" East along the northeasterly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 9.802 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 60.960 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 51°59'08" West, said point also being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 06°19'55" an arc length of 6.737 meters; thence South 31°40'57" West a distance of 52.554 meters to a point on the westerly line of said Lot 1 distant thereon, South 12°11'02" East, 2.492 meters from the most westerly corner of said Lot 1; thence —South 12°11'02" East along said westerly line a distance of 6.922 meters io an angle point in said Lot 1, said point also being the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave southwesterly having a radius of 100.575 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 35°36'41" East, said curve being the northeasterly line of Allan Street (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Tract; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line also being the southwesterly line of said Lot 1 and said curve through a central angle of 08°03'17" an arc length of 14.139 meters; thence South 46°20'02" East continuing along said northeasterly and southwesterly line a distance of 11.655 meters; thence North 45°10'23" East, 9.883 meters; thence North 08°24'02" West, 36.744 meters; thence North 28°06'52" East, 29.568 meters to a point on said northeasterly line of Lot 1; thence North 46°18'53" West along said northeasterly line a distance of 6.771 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 1023.5 square meters. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00008970 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.0-13519 (13519-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Signature Date: 1, L.S. 4430 9/30/01 EXHIBIT_A PAGE_14.._ M:\99LM\SEG1W8E06\1W519 2.0OC OC M05T N'LY COR. LOT 1 SHEET I OF I { T ill TPOB PARDEL MAP N0, 19924 P,M�, a _:tiss 122/44-48 o \Bob ^r A. ��� F �F- iP sZ \r . o,� h too e4, re• ' lt C, t'` 1 4/ OO� 1j /6. (/ C:i t/ i. OQ 4/ A. 69 C. (s0, c) kV Cocsr Si C 2 //, / / w. 492 O 'E y(/tiF 0 Z 0 w 0 LOT I -1 3 TRACT NO. 11283 NJ„FJ„— __J 1 1/96-98 SCALE* 1500 LOT 2 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON TIE CA/FORMA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L000089 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL. DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 331 EAST S► ILEY STREET OKTARID. CA 11764 TEL. (909)180-1982 FAX, (909)141-0891 AREA OKTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST Ae RIVERSIDE 71 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Nag SQUARE FEET( SQUARE 1ETER& PARCEL 13519-2 °5t9-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHin5ft-AE2TAEIIA_ EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Parcel 3 and Lot "B" (Chris Circle) of Parcel Map 9985, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, on file in Book 46, Page 72 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 3, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 3, North 01° 33' 51" West, 35.466 meters; thence South 37° 02' 37" West, 10.305 meters; thence South 50° 01' 22" West, 48.298meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot "B", said southwesterly line being the centerline of said Chris Circle (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said southwesterly line also being a curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 60.954 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 70° 13' 53" West; thence southeasterly along said curve and said southwesterly and northeasterly line through a central angle of 04° 47' 02" an arc length of 5.089 meters; thence continuing along said southwesterly and northeasterly line, South 24° 33' 09" East, 9.898 meters to a point on said northwesterly line of said State Highway 74; thence northeasterly along said northwesterly line also being the southeasterly line of said Lot "B" and Parcel 3, North 65° 26' 52" East, 23.453 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 159.606 meters; thence northeasterly along said curve and continuing along said northwesterly and southeasterly line through a central angle of 06° 01' 52" an arc length of 16.801 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 1006.5 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74 and Chris Circle). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00009192 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.4-13526 (13526-1) • This real property description has been prepare • by, e, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surve Signature Date: 1, L.S. 4430 30/01 od EXHIBIT. PAGE_ SHEET 1 OF 1 SCALE! I:500 PARCEL 2 PARCEL 1 e-,*' 18.288 m (60') 9.144 m 9.144 m (30') rti PARCEL MAP 9935 PMB 46/72 4) ct- E'LY LINE PARCEL 3 PARCEL 3 13526-1 PARCEL 4 (SE'LY COR PARCEL 3) THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983 ZONE 6. MULTPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00009192 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEE DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO, CA 91764 TEL. 1909) 950-(962 FAX' 1909) 941-0691 AREA DISTRICT 06 COUNTY R1VERSOE ROUTE 74 KLOPOST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Ib� SQUARE FEET! SQUARE IEM% 13526-1 0,834 1,006.5 PARCEL 13526-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXh1/21539t2E.CIPAPGT°L • • • EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 9985, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of Califomia, on file in Book 46, Page 72 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 3, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map; thence northerly along the easterly line of said. Parcel 3, North 01° 33' 51" West, 35.466 meters; thence South 37° 02' 37" West, 10.305 meters; thence South 50° 01' 22" West, 25.243 to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing South 50° 01' 22" West, 13.193 meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said Parcel 3, said southwesterly line being the northeasterly line of Lots A, and C (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said Lots also known as Chris Circler said southwesterly line also being a curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 51.811 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 74° 00' 06" West; thence northwesterly along said curve and said southwesterly and northeasterly line through a central angle of 03° 03' 50" an arc length of 2.770 meters; thence North 50° 01' 22" East, 12.000 meters; thence South 39° 57' 06" East, 2.500 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 31.5 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of. this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00009192 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.4-13526 (13526-2) This real property description has been prepared by e, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional and Survey() Date: M: ‘9913ASEG l W EEDS\i2S26-2AOC EXHIBIT PAGE421.at SHEET 1 OF 1 PARCEL MAP 9985 PMB 46/72 SCALE: 11500 (SE'LY COR PARCEL 3) THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983 ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00009192 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engheer8, he. 331 EAST StQ.8Y STREET ONTARIO. CA W64 TEL (909I 9604962 FAX. (109) 941-0691 AREA DISTRICT 06 COII4TY WVERSOE ROUTE 74 KLOPOST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Nod SOUARE FEET* SQUARE 1ETER54 13526-2 $39 3F.6 PARCFI. 13526-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHI�Fi' DESCN6E23. • • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 9985, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per Map filed in Book 46, Page 72 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most southerly corner of said Parcel 4, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74 (50.00 feet half width), [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said northwesterly line being the southeasterly line of said Parcel 4, said northwesterly line also being a curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 159.606 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 30° 35' 00" East; thence northeasterly along said" curve and said northwesterly and southeasterly line through a central angle of 45° 03' 26" an arc length of 125.514 meters; thence continuing along said northwesterly and southeasterly line, North 14° 21' 34" East, 13.187 meters to the most easterly corner of said Parcel 4, said easterly corner being the southeasterly corner of Parcel 2 as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 68 of Records of Survey in said Office of said County Recorder; thence westerly along the northerly line of said Parcel 4, being the southerly line of said Parcel 2, North 89° 37' 24" West, 19.439 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 701.041 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 52° 19' 40" East; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 04° 12' 43" an arc length of 51.536 meters; thence South 18° 39' 24" West, 9.144 meters; thence South 37° 02' 39" West, 33.839 meters to a point on the westerly line of said Parcel 4; thence southerly along said westerly line, South 01° 33' 51" West, 35.466 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 3412.3 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00009192 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.4-13527 (13527-1) This real property description has been prepared by -, or under my direction, in conformance wit e Professiona and S rveyo c Signature Date: BIO' ''r , .S. 4430 LICE : EXP ' ES 9✓•0/01 M:N99138\SEG 1 WEEOS\135D-1 DOC EXFIIBITA_ PAGE SCALE: 111000 J1JSJ 24/62 N'LY LINE PARCEL 4 S'LY LINE PARCEL 2 PARCEL 2 MOST E'LY CORNER PARCEL 4 SE'LY CORNER PARCEL 2 PER RS 24/68 S52 '19'40"E (R) CHRIS CIRCLE PARCEL MAP 9985 PARCEL 3 PMB 46/72 PARCEL 4 POB (MOST S'LY COR PARCEL 4) './ 9 P ,\ SHEET 1 OF 1 0 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORMA COORDINATE SYSTE).1 OF 1983 ZONE 6. 64JLTPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00009192 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 334 EAST SIELBT STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 160962 f AXr(909) 44H)1191 O STRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 06 RIVERSIDE 74 27.1/32.0 AREA !ARCE1. No.6 SQUARE FEET/ SQUARE WIER& 1352T -I 36.730 3.4f2.3 PARCEL 13527-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, also known as Parcel 2 on a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 68 of Records of Survey in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 2", said corner being on the westerly line of State Highway 74 (50.00 feet half width), [15.240 meters] as shown on said Record of Survey, said westerly line being the easterly line of said Parcel 2, said corner also being the most easterly corner of Parcel 4 as shown on Parcel Map 9985, on file in Book 46, Page 72 of Parcel Maps in said Office of said County Recorder; thence northerly along said westerly and easterly line, North 14° 21' 34" East, 43.990 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 701.041 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 56° 35' 46" East; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 04° 16' 06" an arc length of 52.225 meters to a point on the southerly line of said Parcel 2, said southerly line being the northerly line of said Parcel 4; thence easterly along said southerly and northerly line South 89° 37' 24" East, 19.439 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 398.0 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00009192 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.5-13528 (13528-1) This real property description has been prepared by -, or under my direction, in • conformance with the Professional,• -nd rveyors Signature *I Date: M:\99138\SEG1\DEEDS113528-1.DOC EXHIBILA PAGE SCALE, 1,1000 CHRIS CIRCLE N'LY LINE PARCEL 4 S'LY LINE PARCEL 2 9-, krN 24/68 PARCEL 2 S56'35'46"E (R) SHEET 1 OF 1 0 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00009192- - TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. • Associated Engineers, Inc. 334 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO, CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAX, (909) 941-0091 AREA OtSTRICT oe COUNTY RIVERSIDE ROUTE 74 KLOPOST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Was SQUARE FEET( SQUARE &ETERS' 13W-1 4.284 398.0 PARCEL 13528-1 13528-1 EXHSKETCH TO ACCOMPANY �f �A�i��.�Z. EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of the Southwest Quarter of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, also known as Parcel 2 on a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 68 of Records of Survey in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 2, said corner being on the westerly line of State Highway 74 (50.00 feet half width), [15.240 meters] as shown on said Record of Survey, said westerly line being the easterly line of said Parcel 2, said corner also being the most easterly corner of Parcel 4 as shown on Parcel Map 9985, on file in Book 46, Page 72 of Parcel Maps in said Office of said County Recorder; thence northerly along said westerly and easterly line, North 14° 21' 34" East, 43.990 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 701.041 meters, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, a radial line through said point bears South 56° 35' 46" East; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 01° 52' 48" an arc length of 23.004 meters; thence radial to said curve, North 54° 42' 58" West, 1.500 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 699.541 meters, said curve being concentric with and 1.500 meters northwesterly measured along a radial line from said aforementioned curve, a radial line through said point bears South 54° 42' 58" East; thence northeasterly along said curve through a central angel of 01° 52' 48" an arc length of 22.955 meters; thence North 32° 19' 41" East, 4.596 meters to a point on said westerly line of said State Highway 74, being said easterly line of said Parcel 2; thence southerly along said westerly and easterly line, South 14° 21' 34" West, 4.861 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 37.9 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00009192 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-29.5-13528 (13528-2) • This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professi.nal L. nd Su yors t. Signature Date: M:\99138\SEG1 WEEDSU13528-2.DOC EXHIBIT... PAGE SHEET 1 OF I kii 33N EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAX1 (909) 941-0691 SCALE' 111000 U CC CC U 24/68 PARCEL 2 N'LY LINE PARCEL 4 S'LY LINE PARCEL 2 PARCEL MAP 9935 PMB 46/72 PARCEL 3 PARCEL 4 -\\ \-\`' P -l4) /1›, N32' 19'41"E 4.596 m 556'35'46"E (R) `P0 OF �yP 0oi°j4h / / S1421'34"W 4.861 m S56'35'46"E (R) e TPOB �P h vv • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00009192 TO OBTAN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. AREA DISTRICT 08 COUNTY RIVERSIDE ROUTE 74 KLOPOST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL No., SQUARE FEET, SQUARE ( TERS, 13521-2 408 37.9 PARCEL 13528-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EX HirgfFLADESC,�i, I pi I QNQ r�A�at �� F EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Parcel 4 and Crumpton Road as shown on Parcel Map No. 14064, situated in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, filed in Book 79, Page 66 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County recorder of Riverside County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel Map Boundary, said corner being at the point of intersection of the southerly line of said Parcel Map, also being the northerly line of the superseded State Highway (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters], Road 08-RIV-74, vacated by the California Highway Commission Resolution No. 532, recorded January 24, 1977 as Instrument No. 12339 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, .with the centerline of Crumpton Road (30.00 feet half width) [9.144 meters] said centerline being the east line of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian as shown on said Parcel Map, said southerly and northerly line also being a curve concave northerly having a radius of 209.310 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 07° 39' 39" East; thence westerly along said southerly and northerly line and said curve through a central angle of 05° 27' 27" an arc length of 19.938 meters; thence continuing along said southerly and northerly line, South 87° 47' 49" West, 25.550 meters; thence North 66° 03' 18" East, 20.170 meters; thence North 20° 57' 02" East, 51.515 meters to a point on the easterly line of said Parcel 4, said easterly line being the westerly line of said Crumpton Road; thence South 89° 20' 54" East, 9.144 meters to a point on the easterly line of said Parcel Map; thence southerly along said easterly line, said centerline and said east line of said Section 29, South 00° 39' 06" West, 53.499 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 1119.7 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74 and Crumpton Road). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.3-13555 (13555-1) This real prope description as been pre.ared by me, or under my direction, in conformance he Pro.' s'e'al L- • :. u 7 ._. Act. • Signature 1 :IO 1, .S. 4430 E EXPIRES 9/30/01 Date: EXHIBITS PAGE M:\99178 ,SEG 1 WEED51175551 AOC SCALE: 11500 NIT LINE 11ST. N0. [2339, 0.R RECORDED JAN. 24,1977 SEC. 29 T.5S. R.4W. S.B.M. PARCEL MAP NO, 140b-4 PMB 79/66 PARCEL 4 SUPERSEDED HWY STATE HWY R/W • p3em ‘4,C0 p\10 E n 587 25.550 mW L__ E'LY LINE PARCEL 4 w'LY LIIE CRUIIPTON ROAD y N OS�� S'(P,` �` 14 7--> G(' \NG P0B 6=05' 27'27" R=209.310 m L=19.938 m N'LY LINE OF DO' WIDE HIGHWAY CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALFORNIA PER DOCUMENT RECORDED 1-8-74 AS !(ST. NO.144255. OR & FINAL ORDER OF CONDO/UMW RECORDED 2-8-77 AS 1ST. N0. 21764. OR SHEET 1 OF 1 9.I44m (30') Z 0 1— � Q CC Cr • EAST L SEC. SEC. 28 T.5S. R.4W. S.B.M. R/W � OF 29 5p7_39'39„ 39'39"°31 SE'LY CORNER PUB 79/66 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. 411 Associated Engineers, Inc. 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 T. (909) 980-1982 FAX. (909) 941-0891 AREA OtSTR1CT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST OS R VERS1OE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Nat 13555-1 SQUARE FEET( 12.052 SQUARE IETERSt I,19.1 PARCEL 13555-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EX 1-VOLL,Ecit'IAPdtc:11. EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of Parcel 4 as shown on Parcel Map No. 14064, situated in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, filed in Book 79, Page 66 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County recorder of Riverside County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel Map Boundary, said corner being at the point of intersection of the southerly line of said Parcel Map also being the northerly line of the superseded State Highway (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters], Road 08-RIV-74, vacated by the California Highway Commission Resolution No. 532, recorded January 24, 1977 as Instrument No. 12339 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, with the centerline of Crumpton Road (30.00 feet half width) [9.144 meters], said centerline being the east line of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian as shown on said Parcel Map, said southerly and northerly line also being a curve concave northerly having a radius of 209.310 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 07° 39' 39" East; thence westerly along said southerly and northerly line and said curve through a central angle of 05° 27' 27" an arc length of 19.938 meters; thence continuing along said southerly and northerly line, South 87° 47' 49" West, 25.550 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 66° 03' 18" East, 13.170 meters; thence North 23° 56' 42" West, 8.000 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 8.000 meters northwesterly measured at right angles from said aforementioned line that bears North 66° 03' 18" East; thence southwesterly along said parallel line South 66° 03' 18" West, 17.000 meters; thence South 23° 56' 42" East, 6.472 meters to a point on said southerly and northerly line; thence easterly along said southerly and northerly line, North 87° 47' 49" East, 4.124 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 133.1 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.3-13555 (13555-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Signature Date: JAMES JOHN IMBIORSKI, L.S. 4430 LICENSE EXPIRES 9/30/01 M:\99138\SEG 1 WEED5\135SS-2.000 EXHIBIT, SCALE( 11500 S23' 56'42"E 6.472 m H'LY UtC MIST. N0. (2339, 0.R. RECORDED JAN. 24.1977 SEC. 29 T.5S. R.4W. S.B.M. PARCEL MAP NO J 1-406.4 PMB 79/66 566 000 • PARCEL 4 csi SUPERSEDED HWY STATE HWY R/W N23 56'42"W 8.000 m too 9.144 m (30') E'LY UNE PARCEL 4 N'LY LIE CROMPTON ROAD `0 -A --;>/ NG N'LY LINE OF 00' WIDE HIGHWAY CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CALFORNIA PER DOCUIEHT RECORDED 1-8-74 AS INST. N0.144255, OR & FIAL ORDER OF CONDEMAT(ON RECORDED 2-8-77 AS MST. N0. 21764. OR SHEET 1 OF 1 .144 m (30') Z 0 Cr CC U SEC. 28 T.5S. R.4W. S.B.M. R/W EAST LINE OF SEC. 29 SOT.39,39"E—t13-1 9,39jE(R) SE'LY CORNER PUB 79/66 • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, inc. 334 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 9(764 TEL (909) 980-1%2 FAX. (909) 941-0891 AREA 0(STRICT 08 COUNTY R,VFRS1 E ROUTE KLOPOST 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Na., 13555-2 SWAM FEET, 1.433 SQUARE METERS, 133.1 PARCEL 13555-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHI�I�L�iEscR GJ EXHIBIT "A" • • • Fee Being a portion of Lot 8, of Sunnyslope, as shown on a Map on file in Book 13, Page 619 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, said land being situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, also being a portion of the superseded highway, Road 08-RIV-74, vacated by California Highway Commission Resolution No. A-532, recorded January 24, 1977, as Instrument No. 12339 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said superseded highway being shown on a Map on File in Book 8, Pages 1 and 2 of State Highway Map Book in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, said portion also lying northwesterly of that certain strip of land (100.00 feet wide) [30.480 meters] conveyed to the State of California by Grant Deed, recorded November 19, 1974 as Instrument No. 148402 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of said Lot 8, said corner being the northwest corner of Section 28, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian; thence easterly along the north line of said Section 28, also being the north line of said Lot 8, North 89° 47' 01" East, 165.409 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said north line, North 89° 47' 01" East, 28.267 meters to the point of intersection with the northwesterly line of said (100.00 feet wide) [30.480 meters] strip of land conveyed to the State of California; thence southwesterly along said northwesterly line, South 54° 56' 57" West, 81.399 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 899.076 meters; thence continuing along said northwesterly line and along said curve through a central angle of 09° 29' 23" an arc length of 148.911 meters to the point of intersection with the west line of said Section 28, said west line being the west line' of said Lot 8, said west line also being the centerline of Crumpton Road as shown on Parcel Map No. 14064, on file in Book 79, Page 66 of Parcel Maps in said Office of the County Recorder; thence northerly along said west line and said centerline, North 00° 39' 06" East, 71.745 meters; thence perpendicular to said west line, South 89° 20' 54" East, 9.143 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 9.143 meters easterly measured at right angles from said west line; thence southerly along said parallel line, South 00° 39' 06" West, 23.000 meters; thence South 20° 09' 00" East, 14.000 meters; thence South 60° 34' 14" East, 5.621 meters to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 832.108 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 25° 53' 22" East; thence northeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 07° 46' 43" an arc length of 112.970 meters; thence North 56° 19' 54" East, 59.347 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 4415.2 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74 and Crumpton Road). M:\99138\SEG l\DEEDS\13560-1.DOC EXHIBIT__A PAGEV4 The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. • 08-RIV-74-31.4-13560 (13560-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Signature 4 Date: M : \9913EWEG I \DEEDS\ 1356a 1.DOC EXHIBIT_ PAGE. • • • SHEET 1 OF 1 • • TPOB SECTION 21 2J 20 P0C (NW'LY CDR LOT 8) SECTION 28 T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. 29 11 SUNNYSLDF MB 13/619 SDCo. N'LY LINE LOT 8 & SEC. 28 W'LY LINE LOT 8 & SEC. 28 S89* 20'54"E 9.143 m S60 34'14"E 5.621 m S20 09'00"E 14.000 m 500'39'06"W 23.000 m NO0'39'06"E 71145 m N00' 39'06"E' 121.081 m CRUMPTON ROAD PARCEL MAP ND . 1-4064 PMB 79/66 AREA 's 0 SCALE: 111000 52313_140"L0R) THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. kk Associated Engineers, Inc. 3311 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST cos RIVERSIDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL. Nos 13560-1 SQUARE FEET( 4T.525 SQUARE IETERS( 4,415.2 PARCEL 13560-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXI;1Mt AES93APG-V2e. EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of Lot 8, of Sunnyslope, as shown on a Map on file in Book 13, Page 619 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, said land being situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, also being a portion of the superseded highway, Road 08-RIV-74, vacated by California Highway Commission Resolution No. A-532, recorded January 24, 1977, as Instrument No. 12339 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said superseded highway being shown on a Map on File in Book 8, Pages 1 and 2 of State Highway Map Book in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, said portion also lying northwesterly of that certain strip of land (100.00 feet wide) [30.480 meters] conveyed to the State of California by Grant Deed, recorded November 19, 1974 as Instrument No. 148402 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of said Lot 8, said comer being the northwest corner of Section 28, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian; thence southerly along the west line of said Section 28, also being the west line of said Lot 8, South 00° 39' 06" West, 49.336 meters; thence perpendicular to said west line, South 89° 20' 54" East, 9.143 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 9.143 meters easterly measured at right angles from said west line, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence southerly along said parallel line, South 00° 39' 06" West, 23.000 meters; thence South 20° 09' 00" East, 14.000 meters; thence South 60° 34' 14" East, 5.621 meters to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 832.108 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 25° 53' 22" East; thence northeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 05° 27' 53" an arc length of 79.365 meters; thence Noffth 89° 20' 54" West, 79.103 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 1723.7 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.4-13560 (13560-2) This real property description has b by me, or under my direction, in conformance the Pr ct. �Nocv�cr�cu i i iasco z.00c EXHIBIT_.__ PAG SECTION 21 21 20 POC OMIT C0R LOT 8) Iti 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL (909) 980-f982 FAX (909) 941-Oe91 SECTION 28 T.5S., R.4W.. S.B.M. 22 29 Sat' 2YI6"E (R) SUNNYSLOP - MB 13/619 SDCo. LOT 8 N'LY LINE LOT 8 & SEC.28 W'LY LINE LOT 8 & SEC. 28 TPOB 49.336 m 11 y0G'P9<c ‘13 leAt .- of r qso p pfo yo (560-2) S60' 34'14"E 5.621 m S20* 09'00"E 14.000 m S00'39'06"W 23.000 m ---N S89 • 20'54"E 9.143 m NO0' 39'06"E TI. 45 m N00' 39'06"E 121.081 m CRUMPTON ROAD PARCEL NJAP NO J J -4obr4 PMB 79/66 Associated Engineers, Inc. ARgA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST Oe RIVERSOE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL No.0 135601 SQUARE FEET( 18,854 SQUARE METERS I,T23.7 E SHEET 1 OF 1 SCALE' Is 1000 A "ot�F'2 Vcastesplycf, Gi- (0,4(0.,054' Osp y�<�pJ` 9�� Jy9 1. 99 cctt9 0 fy • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. PARCEL 13560-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHI$I Qp L ES PAGEI� EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the southerly 374 feet of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the point of intersection of the south line of said Section 21, said south line being the south line of land conveyed to J. Kirk Harns by Grant Deed, recorded July 11, 1996 as Instrument No. 258912 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder with the northwesterly line of State Highway No. 395 (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Record of Survey, said State Highway also known as County of Riverside Highway as described in Book 437, Page 305 of Deeds in said Office of the County Recorder, also known as State Highway 74; thence northeasterly along said northwesterly line, North 54° 56' 57" East, 183.614 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 300.312 meters; thence northeasterly along said curve and continuing along said northwesterly line through a central angle of ---113° 10' 05" an arc length of 16.605 meters to the point of intersection with the northerly_ line of said land conveyed to J. Kirk Harns, said northerly line being parallel with and 113.985 meters northerly measured at right angles from said south line, said northerly line also being the southerly line of land conveyed to the County of Riverside by Grant Deed recorded, September 28, 1972, as Instrument No. 129978 of said Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence westerly along said northerly and southerly line, said parallel line and along the southerly line of land conveyed to Kimber L. Lawson by Grant Deed recorded October 23, 1989, as Instrument No. 367344 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, South 89° 47' 01" West, 29.437 meters; thence South 57° 29' 51" West, 42.558 meters; thence South 56° 19' 54" West, 165.541 meters to a point on the said south line of said Section and said land conveyed to J. Kirk Hams; thence easterly along said south line, North 89° 47' 01" East, 38.938 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 3925.1 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and — to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.6-13574 (13574-1) This real property .escription has been pr -par -d by me, or under my direction, in conformance wit,l�e P es- onal : nd S_.'e %s Act. Signature Date: M:%9913e1SCZ 1 W EEDS\1357 J)OC I, L.S. 4430 9/30/01 oa EXHIBIT_J PAG S'LY LINE INST. NO.129978, O.R. RECORDED SEP. 28. 1972 R,S, 24/77 SHEET 1 OF I SCALE= It 1000 R.S4 25/J9 SOUTH LINE — - SEC. 21 R J S o 43/35 RJS4 17/J3 S'LY 374' OF THE S 1/2. SW 1/4. SW 1/4, SEC. 21 T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. R,S., 16/2 S'LY LINE INST. NO. 258912.O.R. RECORDED JUL. 1.1996 PARCEL MAP 11475 PMB 57/65-66 SEC. 28 T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. kik 331 EAST SICLEY STREET ONTARIO,CA 9(764 TEL (9091980-1962 FAX, 19091941-0691 Associated Engineers, Inc. AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 MERSOE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Noy 13574-i SOME FEETI 42, SQUARE IETFR51 3,5254 PARCEL. 13574-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXH�fgut_ DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of Califomia, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of the East (90.00 feet) [27.432 meters] of said South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, described as Parcel 1 in a Grant Deed to Patricia K. Johnson, recorded July 10, 1998, as Instrument No. 284816 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Parcel 1, also being the easterly line of Parcel 2 of said Grant Deed to Patricia Johnson, South 01° 03' 03" West, 63.296 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said westerly and easterly line, South 01° 03' 03" West, 12.167 meters to the most southerly corner of said Parcel 2, said southerly corner being on a non -tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 306.408 meters, said curve being concentric with and 15.240 meters northwesterly, measured radial from the centerline of State Highway No. 395, as shown on said Record of Survey, a radial line through said point bears North 29°08' 09" West; thence northwesterly along the southwesterly line of said Parcel 2, also being the northeasterly line of land conveyed to Kimber L. Lawson by Grant Deed, recorded October 23, 1989, as Instrument No. 367344 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder North 29° 43' 22" West, 10.151 meters; thence North 57° 29' 51" East, 6.233 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 31.6 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. -Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.7-13576 (13576-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Profession. Land Survey.rs •, t. Signature 1, L.S. 4430 ICE s" EXP,IRES- 9/30/01 Date: EXHIBITS PAGE M:19913E:SEG 11OEEDS\135761 AOC G[/ SHEET 1 OF 1 N O Plc; Q0 r N POC iT.EAST LINE S% SW 1/4. SW'4,SEC. 21 5H., R.4M.. S.B.IL PARCEL 1 HST. NO. 284816. 0.R. RECORDED JUL 10.1998 PARCEL 2 FIST. NO. 284816, 0.R. RECORDED JUL. p.1998 NORTH LNE S 1474Sw 1/4. SW Y4 SEC. 21 el 9 TPOB NE'LY LlE P T. Na. 367344, O.R. RECORDED OCT. 23.1989 • SCALE: 11500 R,S, 16/2 d C \\ F�4/ y`T \ ). \\ 6' .tic 7 • OONNETHECAAUFORMA AND COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 19TANCES SHOWN ARE 83 TONE 6. MULTIPLYGT DISTANCES ST SHOWN. BY 1.0001084811. 16, 330 EAST SFELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA !1764 TEL (9091980-1982 FAXi (909) 941-0491 Associated Engineers, Inc. AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST OS RIVERS[3E 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL No 13576-1 SOME FEETs 340 SQUARE IETERSt 31.6 PARCEL 13576-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXE1r37tEjEcpAPGTEI�,_ • • • EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of the East (90.00 feet) [27.432 meters] of said South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, described as Parcel 1 in a Grant Deed to Patricia K. Johnson, recorded July 10, 1998, as Instrument No. 284816 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Parcel 1, also being the easterly line of Parcel 2 of said Grant Deed to Patricia Johnson, South 01° 03' 03" West, 59.096 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said westerly and easterly line, South 01° 03' 03" West, 4.200 meters; thence South 57° 29' 51" West, 3.179 meters; thence North 32° 30' 09" West, 3.500 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 3.500 meters northwesterly measured at right angle from said aforementioned line that bears South 57° 29' 51" West; thence northeasterly along said parallel line, North 57° 29' 51" East, 5.500 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 15.2 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.7-13576 (13576-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with t Professi.nal Land Surveyo . Act. Date: M A99138\SEG I WEED51135762.DOC EXHIBIT A PAGE 43 E— N 0 ,.,0 Q; 0 N EAST LINE S%SW'/�, SW /4. SEC. 21 T.94.. RAW., SJ3.Al PARCEL 1 NST. NO. 284816, 0.R RECORDED JUL. 10,1998 SOI' 03'03"W 013576-2 63.296 m 59.096 m R..S. 17/3 PARCEL 2 INST. NO. 284816, 0.R. RECORDED JUL 10, 1998 NORTH LNE S i/ SW '/ . SW /M SEC. 21 NE'Y LNE INST. NO.367344.O.R. RECORDED OCT. 23, 1989 SHEET 1 OF 1 SCALE' I(500 R,S 16/8 \17,04- • • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. ,JULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Ilik 3311 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 9(764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAX (909) 944-0891 Associated Engineers, Inc, AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 RIVERSOE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Noa 135T6-2 SQUARE FEET' 164 SQUARE OETiR&, 15.2 PARCEL 13576-2 �o 1 lit SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHIrESf�sCI§AFG1'$1. EXHIBIT "A" • • • Fee Being a portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of the East (90.00 feet) [27.432 meters] of said South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, described as Parcel 1 in a Grant Deed to Patricia K. Johnson, recorded July 10, 1998, as Instrument No. 284816 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Parcel 1, also being the easterly line of Parcel 2 of said Grant Deed to Patricia Johnson, South 01° 03' 03" West, 63.296 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said westerly and easterly line, South 01° 03' 03" West, 14.291 meters to a point on the northeasterly line of land conveyed to the County of Riverside by Grant Deed recorded September 28, 1972, as Instrument No. 129978 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line of said land, also being the southwesterly line of said Parcel 1, South 29° 20' 12" East, 4.261 meters to a point of intersection with northwesterly line of State Highway 395 (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Record of Survey, also known as State Highway 74, said northwesterly line being a non -tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 300.312 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 29° 20' 12" West; thence northeasterly along said northwesterly line and said curve through a central angle of 05° 26' 47" an arc length of 28.547 meters to a point on the east line of said South half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21; thence northerly along said east line, North 91° 03' 03" East, 21.577 meters; thence South 64° 28' 46" West, 9.138 meters; thence South 57° 29' 51" West, 23.106 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 559.0 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.7-13577 (13577-1) This real property description .s been pre; :rep by me, or under my direction, in conformance wi4' e Pri.siJ%al �. Su .-tv_•' Act. Signature N MBIO' S , S. 4430 EXPIES = 30/01 Date: MA99138VSEG3 DEEDS\135T7-1.000 EXHIBIT_ A PAGE SHEET 1 OF I. NOI' 03'03"E 2L577 m PARCEL 1 FIST. NO. 284816, 0.R. RECORDED JUL.*, 1998 SOI' 03'03"W 77.587 m 63.296 m R,S, 17/3 PARCEL 2 FIST. NO. 284816, O.R. RECORDED JUL 10, 1998 NORTH LFIE S/2SW1/4, SW « SEC. 21 135771 SCALE! 11500 16/2 • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. 111111 3311 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO, CA 9(764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAIL (909) 941-0891 Associated Engineers, Inc. AREA 0(STRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 RIVERSIDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL No. 13'577-1, SQUARE FEET, 6.017' SQUARE DETERS( 559.0 PARCEL 13577-1 SK TCH TO ACCOMPANY It Ex �'�S�d� �: EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the northwesterly corner of the East (90.00 feet) [27.432 meters] of said South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, described as Parcel 1 in a Grant Deed to Patricia K. Johnson, recorded July 10, 1998, as Instrument No. 284816 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence southerly along the westerly line of said Parcel 1, also being the easterly line of Parcel 2 of said Grant Deed to Patricia Johnson, South 01° 03' 03" West, 59.096 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING thence continuing along said westerly and easterly line, South 01° 03' 03" West, 4.200 meters; thence North 57° 29' 51" East, 8.821 meters; thence North 32° 30' 09" West, 3.500 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 3.500 meters northwesterly measured at right angle from said aforementioned line that bears North 57° 29' 51" East; thence southwesterly along said parallel line, South 57° 29' 51" West, 6.500 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. • Containing approximately 26.8 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. - -08-RIV-74-31.7-13577 (13577-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the ProfessjAnal Land SueY9rs Act. Signature Date: M:'i9913ASEc 1\DEID5\\13m-2.DOC IMBIORSKI, L.S. 4430 I R E8 9/30/01 EXHIBITS PAGE92 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALJ'ORNU COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983 ZONE 6. IMULTPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00010548 TO OBTMN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly corner of Parcel 24 as shown on.a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 77 of Records of Survey in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner being the southwesterly corner of land conveyed to James A. and Estela L. Gonzales, by Grant Deed recorded September 27, 1994, as Instrument No. 370856 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said comer also being on the north line of South Half of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21 as shown on said last mentioned Record of Survey; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 24, also being the westerly line of said land, North 00° 51' 07" East, 6.556 meters; thence North 67° 06' 12" East, 49.201 meters to a point on the easterly line of said land; thence southerly along said last mentioned easterly line, South 01° 59' 53" East, 13.249 meters to a point of intersection with the northwesterly line of State Highway No --395, (50 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said last mentioned Record of Survey, also known as State Highway 74; thence southwesterly along said northwesterly line, South 68° 08' 04" West, 3.285 meters to a point on the westerly line of Hammack Avenue (60 feet wide) [18.288 meters]; thence southerly along said last mentioned westerly line, South 00° 51' 07" West, 6.609 meters to a point of intersection with the northwesterly line of State Highway No. 395 (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said last mentioned Record of Survey, also known as State Highway 74; thence southwesterly along last said northwesterly line, South 68° 08' 04" West, 11.965 meters to a point of intersection with the southerly line of said land, said southerly line being said north line; thence westerly along said southerly and said north line, South 89° 41' 37" West, 31.629 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 673.8 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74 and Hammack Avenue). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.9-13580 (13580-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with t e Profession- Land Surve ,+rs t. Signature Date: \\ASSOC\ AEPCFIlfS\99138\SEG 1\DEEDS \1358O.1.DOC EXH I BIT_ PAG SHEET 1 OF 1 E E 0 0 EXISTING HAMMACK AVENUE (ROAD EASEMENT) E'LY LINE MST. NO. 370856, 0.R. RECORDED SEPT. 27. 1994 NW 1/4. SE I//, SW 1/4. SEC. 21, T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. SDI. 59'53"E ;� o 13.249 m S R/W W'LY LINE INST. NO. 370856. O.R. RECORDED SEPT. 27, 1994 E'LY LINE PARCEL 24 PER RS 24/77 R , S , 24/77 PARCEL 24 R/W \i '1 044 SCALE. 1 t 500 R,S, 17/J3 S 1/2. SE lib SW VI. SEC. 21, T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. R/W R„S, 16/2 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. • Lk Associated Engineers, Inc. 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL (909) 980-1982 FAX. (909) 941-0891 AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 RIVERSIDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Not 13580-1 SOUARE FEET. 7.253 SOUARE IETERSI 673.8 PARCEL 13580-1 J b r e SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY s EXHIP_`�ScPAE-E'.gh EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeasterly corner of Parcel 24 as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 77 of Records of Survey in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner being the southwesterly corner of land conveyed to James A. and Estela L. Gonzales, by Grant Deed recorded September 27, 1994, as Instrument No. 370856 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner also being on the north line of South Half of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21 as shown on said last mentioned Record of Survey; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 24, also being the westerly line of said land, North 00° 51' 07" East, 6.556 meters; thence North 67° 06' 12" East, 27.313 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 67° 06' 12" East, 9.000 meters; thence North 00° 51' 07" East, 1.500 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 1.373 meters northerly measured at right angles from said aforementioned line that bears North 67° 06' 12" East; thence westerly along said parallel line, South 67° 06' 12" West, 9.000 meters; thence South 00° 51' 07" West, 1.500 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 12.4 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of., this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.9-13580 (13580-2) • This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Survey. s : t. Signature Date \\ASSOMEPCTILFS\99138\SEG1\DEEDS113580-L000 EXHIBIT_A PAGE.5I E N00. 51'07"E L500 m 0 0 o a.. S00' 51'07"W 1.500 m R/W NW 1/4, SE 1/4. SW 1/4. SEC. 21. T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. 13580-2 W'LY LINE INST. NO. 370856, O.R. RECORDED SEPT. 27, 1994 E'LY LINE PARCEL 24 PER RS 24/77 R,S.. 24/77 PARCEL 24 NO051'07"E 6.556 m R/W Associated Engineers, Inc. 331 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO, CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-4982 FAX: (909) 941-0891 AREA DISTRICT 08 COUNTY RIVERSIDE ROUTE KLOPOST 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Nu SQUARE FEET. SQUARE METERS( 13580-2 133 12.4 SHEET I OF 1 SCALE, I1500 EL S.. 17/13 S (/2. SE 1/4. SW (/4, SEC. 21, T.55.. R.4W., S.B.M. R,S, 16/8 i e o_ cIN '. THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. PARCEL 13580-2 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXH 410 • EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 17, Page 13 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeasterly corner of Parcel 24 as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 77 of Records of Survey in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner being the southwesterly corner of land conveyed to James A. and Estela L. Gonzales, by Grant Deed recorded September 27, 1994, as Instrument No. 370856 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner also being on the north line of South Half of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21 as shown on said last mentioned Record of Survey; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 24, also being the westerly line of said land, North 00° 51' 07" East, 6.556 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 67° 06' 12" East, 27.313 meters; thence North 00° 51' 07" East, 36.094 meters; thence South 89° 41' 37" West, 25.006 meters to a point on said easterly and westerly line; thence southerly along said easterly and westerly line, South 00° 51' 07" West, 46.587 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 637.4 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.9-13580 (13580-3) • This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyor A Signature Date: I, L.S. 4430 ICEN r EXPIF3ES 2/30/01 7c7. M:\99138\5EG1\OEEDS\1358a3.DOC EXHIBIT_ PAGE SHEET I OF I E E CE EXISTING HAMMACK AVENUE (ROAD EASEMENT) NW 1/4, SE 1/4, SW 1/4, SEC. 21, T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. NO05I'07"E 36.094 m R/W 64 13580) %AO(31 W'LY LINE INST. 8 F NO. 370856, O.R. RECORDED SEPT. 27, (994 E'LY LINE PARCEL 24 PER RS 24/77 46.587 m S00' 51'07"W 53.144 m R,S.. 24/77 PARCEL 24 SCALE: 11500 R/W I, R.S, 17/13 R.S, 16/2 N_I. p0.4 .. r' r..1 op rs D -:'-r= 0 \e o in 7 POC N� �, a TN* lfl o..:_-. y S 1/2. SE 1/4. SW 1/4, SEC. 21, T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. 111616. 3311 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 Associated Engineers, Inc. T AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE 08 RIVERSIDE 74 KILOPOST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Noa 13580-3 SQUARE FEET( 1.124 SQUARE IETERS,i 1,033.5 PARCEL 13580-3 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGALDESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Parcel 25 shown on Record of Survey, situated in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, filed in Book 24, Page 77 of Records of Survey in the Office of the County recorder of Riverside County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly comer of said Parcel 25, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74 (50 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Record of Survey; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 25, said easterly line being the Center Quarter section line of said Section 21 as shown on said Record of Survey, North 00° 48' 23" East, 18.438 meters; thence South 65° 44' 14"West, 23.084 meters to the beginning of a non -tangent curve concave southerly having a radius of 60.960 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 00° 17' 34" East; thence westerly along said curve through a central angle of 26° 53' 37" an arc length of 28.614 meters to a point on the southwesterly line of said Parcel 25; thence southeasterly along said southwesterly line, South 23° 50' 23" East, 22.804 meters to a point on said northwesterly line of State Highway 74, said northwesterly line being the southeasterly line of said Parcel 25, said northwesterly line also being a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 857.911 meters, a radial line through said point bears South 23° 39' 57" East; thence northeasterly along said northwesterly and southeasterly line and said curve through a central angle of 02° 53' 23" an arc length of 43.270 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 916.1 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-32.1-13583 (13583-1) This real property description has been prepred y me, or under my direction, in conformance with a Pro fe3`siona(Lan cfiSury ct. Date: • M: \99138\SEG 1\DEEDS\13583-1.DOC EXHIBIT. PAGE THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY (.00010548 . TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement Being a portion of Parcel 25 shown on Record of Survey, situated in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, filed in Book 24, Page 77 of Records of Survey in the Office of the County recorder of Riverside County, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel 25, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74 (50 feet half width) [15.240 meters) as shown on said Record of Survey; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 25, said easterly line being the Center Quarter section line of said Section 21 as shown on said Record of Survey, North 00° 48' 23" East, 18.438 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 65° 44' 14" West, 15.000 meters; thence North 00° 48' 23" East, 3.50 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 3.170 meters northwesterly measured at right angles from said aforementioned line that bears South 65° 44' 14" West; thence northeasterly along said parallel line, North 65° 44' 14" East, 15.000 meters to a point on said easterly line and said Center Quarter section line; thence southerly along said easterly line and said Center Quarter section line, South 00° 48' 23" West, 3.500 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 47.6 square meters. The easement herein granted shall become effective upon the execution of this document and shall terminate on August 31, 2003 or upon filing of Notice of Completion, whichever first occurs. The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-32.1-13583 (13583-2) • This real property description ha been prepa -d b, me, or under my direction, in conformance wi :tit?- Prof t. Signature Date: M:\99138$SEGI\DEEDS\13583-2.DOC EX l B iT. PAGE.S2 26 P P�G�L 25 • A 1' OF Ep �� \pE coc uN ENEc°')° R S 2.4/77 SE 1/4. SW 1/4, SEC. 21 T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. S23'39'57"E (R) • 6 001' 6 r�' E � M • SHEET 1 OF 1 SCALES 111000 TPOB ozfk 00-k. 259• SE 1/4, SEC. 21 T.5S., R.4W., -S.B.M. THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTC14 OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 334 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO, CA 9064 TEL (909) 980-f982 FAX' (909) 94(-0691 AREA OfSTRICT COUNTY ROUTE oe R)VERSCE 74 KLOPOST 27.9/32.0 4 PARCEL Not 13583-2 SQUARE FEET( 512 SQUARE IETERS& 47.6 PARS. 13583-2 i SKETCH TO ACCOMPA Y t cap EsPA�FI��� II • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee That portion of Lot 14 of amended Tract No. 2686 in the County of Riverside, State of California, as shown by the amending map filed in Book 118, Pages 96 through 98 of Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said County, said lot also shown by the Record of Survey filed in Book 101, Pages 28.and 29 of Records of Surveys in said. office of the County Recorder; described as follows: BEGINNING at the Southwest corner of said Lot 14; thence North 00°48'23" East 19.240 meters along the Westerly line of said lot; thence North 65°44'16" East 77.204 meters; thence North 43°13'26" East 23.462 meters to the Easterly line of said lot; thence South 19°51'13" East 18.178 meters along said line to a tangent curve, concave Northwesterly and having a radius of 6.096 meters; thence Southerly and Westerly along said curve.through an angle of 83°44'23" a distance of 8.910 meters to the Southerly line of said lot; thence along said line the following two (2) courses: (1) South 63°53'08" West 68.718 meters to a tangent curve, concave Northwesterly and having a radius of 857.907 meters, (2) Southwesterly along said curve through an angle of 02°04'31" a distance of 31.074 meters to a point which a radial line bears South 24°02'21" East and to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Coordinates and Bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. 08-RIV-74-20.1-13584 (13584-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyor's Act. Signature Date Professional Land Surveyor EXHIBITS PAGE. OIST. COUNTY ROUTE POST 'ALE 1 AND SGT THOMAS J. OATMAN Exp. 09-30-04 NO 6933 of c N00 48'23"E 19.240m R=857.907m --= L=2' 04'31" L=31.074m N 0 LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR /-2.4-419/ DATE APPROVED -r J S J I J 4 W AMENDED _rRAD_r NO, 2cr c M.B. 118/96-98 LOT 14 R.S. 101/28-29 RB= S24.02'21"E N143. 13'26"E 23.462m •t$C 4 08 RIV. 74 20.1 rTh. rl ` LP CD :t'' F- cp� .\ ..,---' r. �- \--, -1) ACC, J l\A LOT 15 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:1000 EXHIBITS PAGEIQQ. • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 8902, situated in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of Califomia, per Map filed in Book 53, Page 7 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly comer of said Parcel 4, said corner being at the point of intersection of the center quarter section line of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, with the northwesterly line of State' Highway 74, (50.00 feet half width) [15.240 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map; thence northerly along the easterly line of said Parcel 4, also being said center quarter section line, North- 00° 32' 42" East, 24.235 meters to a point on a non -tangent curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 999.744 meters, a radial line through said point bears North 22° 39' 19" West; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 05° 20' 13" an arc length of 93.125 meters to a point on the westerly line of said Parcel 4, said westerly line being the easterly line of Lot B (30.00 feet wide) [9.144 meters] as shown on said Parcel Map, said Lot B also known as Rachel Way; thence souttetJ Tong said westerly and easterly line, South 00° 33' 27" West, 17.579 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 36.573__meters; thence southeasterly along said curve and continuing along said westerly and easterly line through a central angle of 31° 37' 14" an arc length of 20.184 meters; thence continuing along said westerly and easterly line, South 31° 03' 46" East, 0.009 meters to a point of intersection with the southerly line of said Parcel 4, said southerly line being the northerly line of said Lot B; thence easterly along said southerly and northerly line, South 77° 20' 02" East, 10.990 meters to a point of intersection with the southeasterly line of said Parcel 4, said point being on said northwesterly line of said State Highway 74, said point also being a point on a non -tangent curve concave northwesterly having a radius of 421.404 meters; thence northeasterly along said curve and along said southeasterly and northwesterly line through a central angle of 08° 23' 36" an arc length of 61.731 meters; thence continuing along said southeasterly and northwesterly line, North 48° 13' 12" East, 25.800 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 3213.3 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74 and Rachel Way). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010079 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-30.4-13547 (13547-1) This real property •escription has been pre•ared by me, or under my direction, in conformance wide Prof;.si•, al •d S Act. Signature D B • I, L.S. 4430 7,7 9/30/01 '�Gl 5" EXHIBIT._ PAG THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010079 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. • • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a portion of the Northeast One -Quarter of Section 29, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, situated in the City of Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California, said Section being shown on an official plat on file in the District Land Office of the Bureau of Land Management, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the point on the west line . of the East Half of the East Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Northeast Quarter of Section 29 distant thereon, North 00° 34' 07" East, 18.843 meters from a point of intersection with the northerly line of State Highway 74, 60.00 feet wide [18.288 meters] as described in a deed recorded, December 7, 1915, in Book 433, Page 54 of Deeds in the Office of the County Recorder of said County; thence southerly along said westerly line, South 00° 34' 07" West, 18.843 meters to said point of intersection on said northerly line; thence easterly along said northerly line, North 82° 17' 46" East, 65.807 meters to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 451.111 meters; thence continuing easterly along said northerly line and along said curve through a central angle of 09° 49' 13" an arc length of 77.320 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 49 12' 29" West, 32.248 meters; thence • North 75° 29' 58" East, 5.305 meters; thence North 01°59'49" East, 18.911 meters; thence North 74°32'26" East, 19.931 meters; thence South 55°01'58" East, 7.392 meters to a point on the east line of the West (150.00 feet) [45.720 meters] of the Northeast One -Quarter of said Northeast One -Quarter of Section 29; thence South 00°31'42" West, 40.342 meters along said east line to a point on said northerly line of State Highway 74, said point being on a non -tangent curve concave northerly having a radius of 451.111 meters, said curve being aforesaid curve, a radial line through said point bears South 18°21'44" East; thence southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 00°50'16" an arc length of 6.596 meters to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 974.7 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based_on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010079 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-30.7-13551 (13551-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with _ e Professional Land Surve s . t. Signature Date: I • , LS. 4430 E EXPIRES 9/30/01 M: t991384SEG BDEED51135 S 1-1 .DOC EXHIBIT PAG POC NE 1/4 SEC. 29 T.5S., R.4W., S.B.M. N82' 17'46"E 65.807 m P OR POSED Q 51 ATE Os( r -- 5T$ 45.720 m (150.00') EAST LINE OF THE WEST 150' OF THE NE 1/40F THE NE 1// OF SECTION 29 T.55.. R.4W.. S.B.MT----"\ 3551'1 S55' 01'58"E 7.392 m 1A. 19-912, 0‘" _S� ASE 59, 9� „E \ \\ .• • \,- \\� \-13 TPOB 3r N • M o Q SCALEI 111000 THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORWA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. Z 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY L00010079 TOOBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. 1111 Associated Engineers, Inc. 339 EAST S►£LBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 9(764 TEL. (909) 980-1982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 AREA DISTRICT O8 COUNTY RIVERSIDE ROUTE 74 KLOPOST 27.9/32.0 PARCEL. No.J SOME FEET' SOME *MASI 13551-1 J0,492 974.7 PARCEL 13551-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXI-hgPi.:6729stAnte4 • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee Being a. portion of the 'West one foot of Lot 9, of Record of Survey, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of California, per map on file in Book 15, Page 92 of Records of Survey in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southwest corner of said Lot 9, said corner being on the northwesterly line of State Highway 74, (60.00 feet wide) [18.288 meters] as shown on said Record of Survey, said line being a curve concave southeasterly having a radius of 882.290 meters, a radial line through said corner bears North 25° 32' 07" West; thence northeasterly along the southeasterly line of said Lot 9, said northwesterly line of State Highway 74 and along said curve through a central angle of 00° 01' 14" an arc length of 0.318 meters to a point on a line parallel with and 0.305 meters easterly measured at right angles from the wester!y.!ne of said Lot 9, thence North 08°49'21" West, 40.958 meters along said parallel line; thence South 54°37'08" West, 0.341 meters to a point on the westerly line of said Lot 9; thence South 08°49'21" East, 40.897 meters along said westerly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 12.5 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00009192 to.obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-30.2-13586 (13586-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional andSJrvey Date: M:\99138\$eG 1\DEEDS\13586.1.DOC EXHIBIT__ PAGE1gE SHEET 1 OF 1 LOT 1 SCALE+ 1+1000 LOT 10 W'LY LINE OF LOT 9 S54' 37'08"W 0.341 m • 1m c o� N25' 32'07"W (R) `^ POB 19.050 sP�/ N sto • • THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED c ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 6. MULTFLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00009192 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 3311 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 TEL (909) 980-1982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 AREA OISTR)CT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 RIVERSIDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL Noa 13586-1 SQUARE FEET: (35 SNARE IETERS+ 12.5 PARCEL 13586-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXHh���SC�AGI1�� EXHIBIT "A" • • • Fee Being a portion of Parcel 24, situated in the unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, State of Califomia, as shown on a Record of Survey on file in Book 24, Page 77 of Records of Survey on file in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the southeasterly corner of said Parcel -24, said corner being the most easterly corner of land conveyed to Lamar Rual and Kitty Ellen Gilland, by Grant Deed recorded March 1, 1995, as Instrument No. 64151 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner also being the most southerly corner of land conveyed to Jean S. Burbridge, by Grant Deed recorded December 9, 1983, as Instrument No. 255686, of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder, said corner also being on the north line of South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian as shown on said Record of Survey; thence northwesterly along the northeasterly line of said land conveyed to Lamar Rual and Kitty Ellen Gilland, also being the southwesterly line of land conveyed to Jean S. Burbridge, North 44° 08' 52" West, 12.674 meters; thence North 67° 55' 48" East, 9.730 meters to a point on the easterly line of said Parcel 24, said easterly line being the westerly line of land conveyed to James A. and Estela L. Gonzales by Grant Deed recorded November 25, 1997, as Instrument No. 370856 of Official Records in said Office of the County Recorder; thence southerly along said easterly and westerly line, South 00° 51' 07" West, 12.752 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 57.1 square meters. TOGETHER with fee interest, if any, appurtenant to the above -described property in and to the adjoining public way (State Highway 74). The bearings and distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Multiply distances shown by 1.00010548 to obtain ground level distances. 08-RIV-74-31.9-13588 (13588-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional -nd Surveyo,. Ac Date: M:\99138\SEG1\DEEDS113588-1.DOC EXHIBITA PAGE. SHEET 1 OF 1 A E Q EXISTING - HAMMACK AVENUE (ROAD EASEMENT) R/W N'LY UNE INST. NO. 370856, 0.R. RECORDED SEPT. 27,1994 E'LY LINE PARCEL 24 & INST. NO. 255686, 0.R. RECORDED DEC. 4.1983 R.S. 24/77 PARCEL 24 SOO' 51'07"W 12.752 m R/W NORTH LINE S 1/2 SE 1/4 SW 1/4 SECTION 21, SL'Y LINE I NST. • 64151 O.R. REC. MARCH I. 1995 SCALE: 1:500 \74 R.S.. 17/13 S �I/2. SE 1/4. SW 1/4. SEC. 21, T.5S.. RAW., S.B.M. R,S, 1b/a - �. THE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE CALFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983. ZONE 6. MULTIPLY DISTANCES SHOWN BY 1.00010548 TO OBTAIN GROUND LEVEL DISTANCES. Associated Engineers, Inc. 3311 EAST SHELBY STREET ONTARIO. CA 91764 T. (909) 980-1982 FAX, (909) 941-0891 AREA DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE KLOPOST 08 RIVERSIDE 74 27.9/32.0 PARCEL No 13588-1 SQUARE FEET: 615 SQUARE METERS: 57.1 PARCEL 13588-1 SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY EXI CIOrdgga$ 1 MI • • • THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY EXHIBIT A PAGE 69 • EXHIBIT "A" TemporaryConstruction Easement That portion of Lot 3 of amended Tract No. 2686, in the County of Riverside, State of California as shown by the amending map filed in Book 118, pages 96 through 98 of Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said County, said lot also shown by the Record of Survey filed in Book 101, Pages 28 and 29 of Records of Surveys in said office of the County Recorder; described as follows: COMMENCING on the Northwest corner of said Lot, said corner being on. a non -tangent curve, concave Northwesterly and having a radius of 380.964 meters, a radial line to said corner bears South 53°41'36" East, said non -tangent curve also being the Northwesterly line of said Lot; thence Southwesterly 19.538 meters along said curve through a central angle of 2°54'41" to a point which a radial line bears South 50°46'54" East and the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence Southwesterly 12.000 meters along said curve through a central angle of 1°48'17" to a point which a radial line bears South 48°58'37" East; thence South 48°58'37" East 2.500 meters; thence North 40°07'14" East 12.078 meters; thence North 50°46'54" West 2.500 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Coordinates and bearings are on California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. The rights acquired herein shall terminate on August 31, 20-03. 08-RIV-74-20.2-13601 (13601-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyor's Act. ""=n----- f::Z- Signature Professional Land Surveyor Date l�.Z¢—O/ EXHIBIT_i PAGE1O.. LAND / THOMAS J. OATMAN E xp. 09-30-04 No 4633 OF P.O.B. LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR DATE APPROVED P.O.C. NW COR LOT 3 R:- 380.964M =01' 48'17" L =12.000m GIST. COUNT v NWT( MST TALE 08 RIV. 74 20.2 4- r J E; J J J 4 J rl J 3-]\.A SECTION 2I R=380.964m =02 ° 54'41" L=19.538m -______ =_- N50 ` 46'54"W 2.500m RB=S48 58'37"E % = N40`07'14"E 12.078m CD S48. 58'37"E 2.500m TCE LOT 3 AMENDED -J r -\J"r NO, )�cc M.B. 118/96-98 R.S. 101/28-29 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:500 EXHIBIT_-- P EXHIIBTT "A" Fee That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter f Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, according to the Official Plat thereof, as described in two Deeds to Armin J. Altemus, both recorded on September 26, 1963 as Instrument Nos. 91663 and 91664.in the Official Records of Riverside County, described as follows: COMMENCING at a 1'4 Iron Pipe set by the County Surveyor of said County marking the Center East Sixteenth corner of said Section 21;. thence South 00°51'54" West 152.799 meters to the .POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 00°51'54" West 18.764 meters to the Westerly line of State Highway Rte. 74, formerly a County Road, being 60.00 feet (18.288 meters) wide as described in Deed to said County recorded on February 10, 1916 in Book 437, Page 205 of Deeds of said County; thence along said Westerly Line the following two (2) courses: (1) South 27°11'22" West 117.170 meters to a tangent curve, concave Westerly and having a radius of 165.699 meters (2) Southerly along said curve through an angle of 11°26'03" a distance of 33.067 meters to the North line of amended Tract 2686, filed in Book 118, Pages 96 through 98 of Maps, Records of said County; thence South 89°42'32" West 56.765 meters along said North line; thence North 47°31'22" East 9.492 meters; thence North 34°52'40" East 48.826 meters; hence North 43°34'59" East 79.036 meters; thence North 35°54'35" East 19.981 meters; thence North 41°23'07" East 41.436 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. "Coordinates and bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. 08-Riv-74-20.3-13602 (13602-1) This real property description has been prepared by me. or under my direction. In conformance with the Professlonol Lond Surveyors Act. Signature " Dote • Professional Laid Surveyor 7124-/9q EXHIBITA PAGE. 7a LAND THOMAS J.OATUAN`O Exp. 09-3O-00 No . 683} P� or cij -.1 I 1/4" I.P.; TAGGED "RIVERSIDE COUNTY SURVEY P.O.C. CE '/ COR. LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR 7 /z4 —N9 DATE APPROVED r . r) J R -! SECTION 21 INSTR. NO. 9/663 SEPTEMBER 26.1963 INSTR. NO. 9/664 SEPTEMBER 26.1963 i / NORTH LINE OF AMENDED TRACT 2686. M.B. 118/96-98 / e- sci ,oAD cc) / / / ct- 01ST. COUNTY ROUTE POST IRA 08 RV. 74 20.3 P / ki 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:1000 EXHIBIT. PAGE • • • EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement That portion of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 5 South, Range 4 West, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, according to the Official Plat thereof, of the land described in two Deeds to Armin J. Altemus, both recorded on September 26, 1963 as Instrument Nos. 91663 and 91664 in the Official Records of Riverside County, described as follows: COMMENCING -at a 114" Iron Pipe set by the County Surveyor of said County marking the Center East Sixteenth corner of said Section 21; thence South 00°51'54" West 100.498 meters to the Northeast corner of said land and the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 00°51'54" West 52.301 meters; thence South 41°23'07" West 2.821 meters; thence North 48°36'53" West 40.000 meters; thence North 41°23'07" East 37.224 meters to the Northerly line of said land; thence North 89°43'38" East 8.057 meters along said line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Coordinates and bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1_00010238 to obtain ground distances. The rights acquired herein shall terminate on August 31, 2003. 08-RIV-74-20.3-13602 (13602-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyor's Act. Signature 7�. Professional Land Surveyor Date /—Z¢—o/ EXHIBITA PAGE LAND 9 THOMAS J. OA THAN Exp 09-30-04 No 6633 OF CA\` o? 0 LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR /—y4--oi DATE APPROVED CE '/16 COR. II/4" I.P. TAGGED "RIVERSIDE COUNTY SURVEYOR" - P.O.C. N'LY LINE .1) rlL N89. 43'38"E �a ..'\• 8.057m 0602-2 TCE 541'23'07"W 2.821m INSTR. NO. 91663 SEPTEMBER 26, 1963 INSTR. NO. 91664 SEPTEMBER 26, 1963 O'ST. COUNT mWUTE POST I*( 08 RIV. 74 20.2 -r J I -J /J tJll J �JJ\IJj SECTION 2I ------ SO' 51'54"W 100.498m P.O.B. R.S. 101/28-29 i' STATE i� ' OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:500 • • EXHIBIT_ PAGE EXHIBIT "A" Fee That portion of Parcel 2 as described in Grant Deed to William Lovell recorded April 3, 1997, as Instrument No. 117920 in Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING on the Northerly line of said Parcel 2 and the Easterly Line of State Highway Rte. 74, formerly a county road, being 60.00 feet (18.288 meters) wide as described in deed to said County recorded on February 10, 1916 in Book 437, Page 205 of Deeds in the Office of the County Recorder of said County; thence South 27°11'22" West 2.638 meters along said Easterly line; thence North 39°57'12" East 3.066 meters to said Northerly line; thence South 89°42'33" West 0.764 meters along said Northerly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Coordinates and bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. 08-RIV-74-20.3-13603 (13603-1) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyor's Act. Signature �" v Professional Land Surveyor Date • f -z¢- o ff EXHIBIT_ PAGE. L LICENSED LAID SURVETOR. l- z4 --•v( 1 _ l 1 JJJJ DATE APPROVED J PST. COUNT, I ouT( POST rt( 08 RIV. 74 20.3 J J IIAJ J S J J J \J J SECTION 21 P.O.B. S27 ° II'22"W ,- 2.638m - S89° 42'33"W -- 0.764m N39 ° 57'12"E 3.066m PARCEL .2 PER INSTR. `717920 APR/L 3.1997 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION ANO HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:200 • EXHIBIT_A PAGE_11T • • • EXHIBIT "A" Temporary Construction Easement That portion of Parcel 2 as described in Grant Deed to William Lovell recorded April 3, 1997, as Instrument No. 117920 in Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, State of California, described as follows: COMMENCING on the Northerly line of said Parcel 2 and the Easterly Line of State Highway Rte. 74, formerly a county road, being 60.00 feet (18.288 meters) wide as described in deed to said County recorded on February 10, 1916 in Book 437, Page 205 of Deeds in the Office of the County Recorder of said County; thence South 27°11'22" West 26.796 meters along said Easterly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 27°11'22" West 8.255 meters along said Easterly line to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave Northwesterly and having a radius of 183.987 meters; thence Southwesterly 5.745 meters along said curve through a central angle of 1°47'21" to a point which a radial line bears South 61°01'17" East; thence South 61°01'17" East 10.195 meters; thence North 27°11'22" East 14.318 meters; thence North 62°48'38" West 10.100 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Coordinates and bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. The rights acquired herein shall terminate on August 31, 2003. 08-RIV-74-20.3-13603 (13603-2) This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyor's Act. Signature Professional Land Surveyor Date / 04 --Of EXHIBIT_..L�__. PAGE_,$ THOMAS J. OATMAN Exo 09-30-04 No 6533 OF CA LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR DATE APPROVED �. / c\,_j • ti ,' ��"ti N62' 48'38"W 1 4.� „co P F ; ti 10.100m GIST. WANT, MUTE POST ARE 08 RIV. 74 20.2 0��, \y> Q- / \C) ,`. POB POC PARCEL 2 PER INSTR. `117920 APRIL 3.1997 N27' II'22"E 14.318m S61' 01'I7"E I0.195m STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION ANO HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:500 EXHIBIT A-17A-617:7ei • • • EXHIBIT "A" Fee That portion of the land described in Deed to Jeffstra Inc., a Michigan Corporation, recorded on June 15, 1992 as Instrument No. 219263 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING at the Northwest Corner of said land; thence North 89°43'38" East 25.244 meters along the North line of said land; thence South 35°39'53" West 3.085 meters; thence South 26°36'44" West 29.651 meters; thence South 41°50'01" West 6.433 meters to the South line of said land; thence South 89°43'38" West 35.938 meters along said South line to the Southwest Corner of said land, said corner being on a non -tangent curve, concave Southeasterly and having a radius of 427.498 meters, a radial line to said corner bears North 50°20'30" West, said non -tangent curve also being the Southeasterly line of State Highway Rte. 74, formerly a County Highway, as described in said Deed; thence Northeasterly 18.137 meters along said non - tangent curve through a central angle of 2°25'51"; thence North 42°05'21" East 27.148 meters to the POINT OF BEGINNNING. Coordinates and Bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. 08-RIV-74-20.4-13607 (13607-1) This real property description hos been prepared by me. or under my direction. in conformance with the Professional fond Surveyors Act. Signature Professional Lan! Sirwyor Dote 717/9, EXHIBITS PAGE:$ THOMAS J. OATMAN E xG. 09-30-00 NO 6833 • ED LAW) SURVEYOR 7/z¢ / 99 DATE APPROVED -r J J CYST. stria I COUNTY RIV. R S J1V1J SECTION 21 35.938m S89° 43'38"W RB=N50 ° 20'30"W 0 N89° 43'38"E 25.244m --_ ROUTE 74 POST WE 20.4 3.085m S35° 39'53"W �FP iND �� o (\o INSTR. NO. 219263 JUNE 15 , 1992 6.433m S41° 50'01"W STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:500 EX H I B IT_A PA G E IL_ • EXHIBIT "A" Fee That portion of Parcel B as described in deed to Patty J. Wheeler recorded on April 22, 1996 as Instrument No. 143284 in Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING on the Southerly line of said Parcel B and on the Southeasterly line of State Highway No. 74, formerly a county road; being 60.00 feet (18.288 meters) wide as described in deed to said County recorded on February 10, 1916 in Book 437, Page 205 of Deeds in the Office of the County Recorder of said County; thence North 42°05'21" East 61.762 meters along said Southeasterly line to the Northerly line of said Parcel B; thence North 89°43'38" East 21.787 meters along said Northerly line; thence South 28°18'39" West 4.340 meters; thence South 40°30'41" West 55.238 meters to said Southerly line; thence South 89°43'38" West 25.244 meters along said Southerly line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Coordinates and Bearings are on the California Coordinate System of 1983, Zone 6. Distances and Stationing are grid distances. Multiply distances by 1.00010238 to obtain ground distances. 08-Riv-74-20.5-13608 (13608-1) This real property description has been prepared by me. or under my direction. In conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Signature Pro esslond [ono Swoyor Date 7/24-/ 99 EXHIBITg pgGE.$1_ LAND �O SG THOMAS J.OATMAN 511 Exp. 09-30-00 No. 6833 / 09-30-00 LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR /2i/9? DATE APPROVED T!L f J 4 \]\J J S J J J 1V1, SECTION 21 4z. Cx, t. N89° 43'38"E 21.787m -- 4.340m S28 ° 18'39"W PARCEL "B" - INSTRUMENT •143284 APRIL 22.1996 STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1:500 EXHIBIT.. PAaL -- ADDITION AL INFORMATION FOR ITEM 5A Riv ersideConntj' ransportation Commission Resolution No. 01-001 For State Route 74 Construction of Measure A widening pr oject (Portions of Segment 1) 2 Proposed Action • Approve the 4 necessary findings as discussed below • Adopt Resolution No . 01-001 A Resol ution of the Commission authorizing the acquisition of certain real property located in Riverside County by Eminent Domain for Construction of portions of Segme nt 1 of the Measu re "A" SR 74 wide ning project. Please note that the value of the property is not an issue at this hearing. INDEX OF SHEETS "PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTI AL NOT FOR PUBLI C INF ORMATIO N" STATE OF CALIF ORNI A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP OR TATION PROJECT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION ON REMAINING R/ W ACQUISITION EXHIBIT STATE HIGHWAY IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY IN AND NEAR LAKE ELSINORE FROM DEXTER AVE TO 0.5 KM EAST OF WASSON CANYON ROAD To a supplemented by st4►3OO re PIO ne d oted July . 1711 tai To Son J ' Juan Ca pistran o IOTH 5T ao ELZIINORE �• PARK RIDE ara 2n0 Oq NO SCALE The Con tro ctor sho l1 posse ss the Class Ior 510 55651 of Ilce nse as sp eCI71ed In the " No tice t0 Contr oc tor s— , g:\sr74\remove veg\rw shade. dgn Mar. 09, 2001 11:03 44 5 is • LAKE ELSIN ORE fM fiS4\ ,ti LAKE ELSINORE ry COUNTY APN 347-100-003 349-090-009 347-100-0,6 349-100-004 347-110-004 349-100 -032 347-1,0-053 349-100-038 347-130-009 349-400-001 347-130-0,8 377-020-005 347-130-019 377-020-021 349-050-025 377-020-022 349-050-026 377-372-025 349-050-063 377-372-.026 349-060-020 377-372-029 349-060 -022 349-060-024 349-090-004 349-090-008 Ep. eFDS EN v •NS p11GIN.L 5<. L[ NILL NCiCR S 377-372-031 377-372-030 377-391-001 SC ENGINEERING 06 C OUNT R I V Raul 74 ' rol.ct [..Rl n.. . 7.31. 1• •.o c1.11 InA1 .. KP 27.7/32 .5 .le" Aoor o.el 0 0.. ara s N[E ri efrl c , ate RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COA m0ISSION 3560 UNIVERSITY AVE SUITE 100 RIVERSIDE. CA 92501 SC ENGINEERING 3750 1E D7060 CANYON 8000 COR0 N4 . CA 11711 Controct NO . CU EA Project Description The Measure " A" State Route 74 realignment and widening project exte nds from Dexter Ave near I-15 to 7th Street in the City of Perris The Project will realig n and widen the highway to include two 12 foot lanes in each direction with a continuous 14 foot left turn lane and 8 foot shoulders The Project will be constructed in three phases 6 Project Phases • Vegetation removal to comply with en vironmental conditions imposed by the US Fish & Wildlife Service to minimize impacts to the California gnatcatcher • Segmen t I — construct between Dexter Ave and 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyo n Rd. • Segment II — construct between 1640 feet east of Wasson Canyon Rd. to '7th Street Existing Conditions of SR 74 • Older highway that does not meet current design standards • Has numero us non-standard conditions that include: No paved shoulders Insufficien t sight distance on curves No left turn lanes Highly skewed intersections Ten Year Accident History 716 injuries 39 deaths 9 Traffic • 1998 average daily traffic is 15,200 vehicles with a level of ser vice of "E" • Year 2020 average daily traffic is projected to be 58,300 with a le vel of service of "F" if the project is not constructed and "E" if the project is constructed. Environmental Review was performed to comply with both the Califor nia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental. Policy Act (NEPA). • Negative Declaration/Finding of No Significance (ND/FONSI), was approved by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on July 25, 1994 • Environmental Re-evaluation was approved by Caltrans and FHWA on October 20, 2000 and determined that a Supplemental ND/FONSI was not requ ired Necessary Findings 1. Whether the public interest and necessity require the proposed project. 2. Whether the proposed project is planned or located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good an d the least private injury 3. Whether the acquisitio n of the parcels is necessary for the project 4. Whether the required offer to acq uire the parcels has been made. 13 1. Whether the Public interest and necessity require the proposed project. • Public interest has bee n strong for this project and has res ulted in the Commission taking action to advance this project 4 years ahead of plan ned delivery • Present facility does not meet current design standards and with the proposed improveme nts will be made much safer. • Current facility will not accommodate projected traffic demands. 2. The Project is located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury. • Various alternatives were reviewed resulting in the preferred alter native to realig n and wide n the existing facility. • By using the existing alignment to the greatest extent possible, the need to acquire property and disr upt the environment and community were kept to a minimum. • Upgrading the facility to the latest design standards and realig ning su bstandard curves will provide for a safer facility. 3. The acquisitio n of the parcels is necessary for the project. • A good deal of effort has been expended to balance the project needs to widen the highway, realign curves, and meet current design standards while at the same time minimizing the need for property acquisition and environmental impacts. • The project avoided property improvements when possible. • The acqu isition of the parcels before you today are required for portions of Segment 1 that are necessary for U tility relocations in adva nce of the main project. 4. The offers of just compensation have been made. • Appraisals were prepared on our behalf by the County of Riverside and approved by Caltrans. • RCTC directed staff to issue offers for the subject parcels at the 11/8/2000, 12/13/2000 and 1/10/2001 Commission meetings. • Offers were issued to the owners of record no later than February 8, 2001. • Negotiations for a just settleme nt are contin uin g and will conti nue after this action by the Commission. • The parcels before you have not yet settled . 21 Parcel List Follows 22 Item 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Caltran's Parcel # 13492-1 13494-1 13505-1 13506-1 13506-2 13508-1 13510-1 13519-1 13519-2 13526-1 13526-2 13527-1 13528-1 13528-2 13547-1 13551-1 13555-1 13555-2 13560-1 13560-2 Assessor's Parcel # 377-020-021 & 022 377-020-005 377-372-026 377-372-025 377-372-025 377-372-029 & 031 377-372-030 377-391-001 377-391-001 347-130-018 347-130-018 347-130-019 347-130-009 347-130-009 347-100-016 347-110-004 347-110-053 347-110-053 349-400-001 349-400-001 Grant or Billy J. Van Meter, et.al. William G. & Roselyn J. Hall James & Ofelia McCall James & Ofelia McCall James & Ofelia McCall Rollin & Opal Forsyth Peter & Vaso Lembesis William T. Gaffey William T. Gaffey Bill E. & Rae Jean Long Bill E. & Rae Jean Long Sandra N. Sandar, a Widow Vlasio S. Andrews, et . al . Vlasio S. Andrews, et . al. North Peak Partners, L .P. North Peak Partners, L.P . Johnnie Williams, et .ux . Johnnie Williams, et .ux. Frank Anzaldi, et. al. Frank Anzaldi, et . al. 23 Item Caltran's Parcel # Assessor's Parcel # Gra ntor 21 13574-1 349-060-020 J. Kirk Harns 22 13576-1 349-060-024 Patrida K Johnson 23 13576-2 349-060-024 Patrida K Johnson 24 13577-1 349-060-022 Patrida K Johnson 25 13577-2 349-060-022 Patrida K Johnson 26 13580-1 349-050-025 James A & Estela L. G onzales 27 13580-2 349-050-025 James A & Estela L. Gonzales 28 13580-3 349-050-025 James A & Estela L. Gonzales 29 13583-1 349-050-026 Jean & Nichole Yv onne Daum 30 13583-2 349-050-026 J ean & Nichole Yvonne Daum 31 13584-1 349-090-009 Joseph Saline, JR 32 13586-1 347-100-003 Theodore L. Gamst, et . ux. 33 13588-1 349-050-063 Jean L. Burbidge 34 13601-2 349-090-008 N6chael Contr eras 35 13602-1 349-090-004 Armin Altemus 36 13602-2 349-090-004 Armin Altemus 37 13603-1 349-100-032 William A. L ovell 38 13603-2 349-100-032 William A. Lovell 39 13607-1 349-100-004 Jeffstra INC . 40 13608-1 349-100-038 Dao Hoa 24 Proposed Action • Approve the 4 necessary findings as discussed above • Adopt Resol ution No. 01-001 A Resolution of the Commission authorizing the acquisition of certain real property located in Riverside County by Emine nt Domai n for Construction of a portion of the Meas ure "A" SR 74 widenin g project. • AGENDA ITEM 7A • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission Receive and File the Financial Statements for the quarter ending December 31, 2000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the first six months of the fiscal year, staff has monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements show the revenues and expenditures incurred in the first six months of the year. Administration expenditures are 10% under budget. The primary reason for the Commission incurring less expenditures are cuts in consulting services and timing of invoices currcratly being processed. Staff has some legal invoices and invoices for consulting services that were processed in January. Debt Service is paid in December and June. Staff expects to incur all Debt Service expenditures as budgeted. Intergovernmental Expenditures are incurred early in the year and, as such, staff expects the expenditures to remain within the budget. Expenditures in the Program/Projects are below budget, however, these expenditures are related to progress on projects and staff expects that these funds will be spent as projects are completed. The Revenues are consistent with expectations and reflect the mid year revenue change in projections. Sales Tax revenues are consistent with budgeted expectations. Interest Income is significantly higher than expected due to the interest being earned on Construction bond funds which are going to be used for Route 79. Federal, State, Local and Other Government revenues are considerably less than projected and that is due to the nature of these revenues. These revenues are received on a reimbursement basis and staff expects to receive these revenues as the projects are completed and invoiced. Staff will continue to monitor the revenues and expenditures and notify the Commission of any unusual events. Attached is a report from Bechtel Corporation outlining the Budget Variance Explanations for the Highway and Rail programs. • Attachments 000009 Description REVENUES Sales Tax Revenues Meas ure A Other Sales Tax Revenu es Fed State Local & Other Gover n Interest Income Other Revenu es TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES ADMINISTRATION Salaries & Ben efits General Legal Serv ices Prof Serv ices (Excludes Legal) Office Lease/Utilities General Acisin Expenses TOTAL ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS/PROJECTS Salaries & Ben efits General Legal Services Prof Services (Exclude s Legal) General Projec ts Highway Engineering Highway Construction Highways ROW Special Studies Rail En gin eering Rail Construction Rail ROW Commuter Assistance Regional Arterial Streets & Roads Special Transportion\Trensit Project Operations/Maintenance Project Towing STA Distributions TOTAL PROGRAMS/PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE ' Principal In terest TOTAL DEBT SERVICE Intergove rn Distribu tion BUDGET 87,500,000.00 6,709,404 .00 24,831,958 .00 4,033,000.00 6,327,756.00 129,402,118.00 1,046,315.00 76,500.00 1,186,494 .00 210,000.00 780,476.00 3,299,785 .00 1,293,355.00 493,000.00 506,500.00 1,798,150.00 5,487,972.00 9,552,000.00 14,358,556.00 1,573,000.00 2,990,000.00 11,541,000.00 1,023,000.00 2,128,175.00 8,356,000.00 33,095,000.00 7,672,375. 00 2,811,249. 00 1,037,000.00 3,315,500.00 109,031,832.00 22,633,844. 00 12,743,938.26 35,377,782.26 620,000.00 •t verside County Transportatio n Com missio n BUDGET VERSUS ACTUALS-2nd Qtr F or Period Ending: 12/31/00 01/31/01 ACTUALS 43,741,375 .12 4,629,552.00 1,039,648.49 3,217,324 .74 1,724,661 .54 54,352,561.89 496,157.19 24,503.13 437,216 .51 114,119.35 219,903.74 1,291,899.92 608,575 .29 70,784 .21 122,268 .96 574,685.93 836,685 .87 1,577,180.16 517,526.00 393,614.96 99,976 .24 767,147.70 11,176.50 302,048.48 3,648,511.67 16,583,751.76 3,434,054.50 611,327.77 378,091.65 470,000.00 31,007,407.65 53,844.00 , 6,202,817.22 6,256,661.22 598,169.75 REMAINING BALANCE 43,758,624 .88 2,079,852.00 23,792,309.51 815,675.26 4,603,094.46 75,049,556.11 550,157.81 51,996.87 749,277 .49 95,880.65 560,572.26 PERCENT UTILIZATION 49 .99 69.00 4.18 79.77 27.25 42.00 47 .41 32.03 36.84 54.34 28.17 2,007,885.08 39.15 684,779.71 422,215.79 384,231.04 1,223,464.07 4,651,286.13 7,974,819 .84 13,841,030.00 1,179,385.04 2,890,023.76 10,773,852.30 1,011,h23.50 1,826,126 .52 4,707,488.33 16,511,248 .24 4,238,320 .50 2,199,921.23 658,908 .35 2,845,500.00 47.05 14.35 24 .14 31 .95 15 .24 16.51 3.60 25 .02 3 .34 6.64 1.09 14.19 43 .66 50.10 44.75 21 .74 36.46 14.17 78,024,424.35 28 .43 22,580,000.00 0.23 6,541,121.04 48 .67 29,121,121. 04 21,830.25 17 .68 96.47 000 000010 Descriptio n Capital Ou tlay TOTAL EXPENDITURES Other Financing So urces/Uses Operatin g Tran sfer In Operating Transfer Out Bond Proceeds Total Other Fin ancing Sources /Uses Excess(Deficiency)of Revenues And Other Financing So urces Over(Under)Expenditure An d Othe r Financing Uses Fun d Balance Ju ly 1, 2000 Fun d Balance Dec 31, 2000 000011 i BUDGET 46,500.00 148,375,899.26 35,526,025 .00. 35,526,025 .00 34,500,000 .00 34,500,000.00 15,526,218.74 ---_ 112,562,790.69 =a=saaaas 128,089,009.43 s sasaa=a=zzaxsza Riverside County Tra nsportati on Commission BUDGET VERSUS ACTUALS-2 nd 0tr For Period E nding: 12/31/00 01/31/01 ACTUALS 11,755 .67 39,165,894.21 23,451,198 .58 23,452,520.83 35,501,000 .70 35,499,678.45 50,686,346 .13 112,562,790 .69 163,249,136.82 -__=====sa es= === • REMAINING BALANCE 34,744.33 109,210,005.05 12,074,826.42 12,073,504 .17 (1,001,000 .70) (999,678.45) (35,160,127.39) a=asaaaa==za=aa= 0 .00 a====as=za=a=a== (35,160,127.39) a==a=aaaaaa=aUS= PERCENT UTILIZATION 25.28 26 .39 66.01 66.01 102.90 102 .89 326 .45 =sax=saas=aa=saa 100.00 ==sszza=za==saz= 127.44 000TA • Description REVENUES .. Sale s Tax Revenues Measure A Other Sales Tax Reve nues Fed State Local S Other G overn In terest Income Other Re ven ues TOTAL REVENUES EXPENDITURES ADMINISTRATION Salaries R Benefits Gene ral Legal Services Prof Serv ices (Exclu des Legal) Office Lease/Utilities Garters! Am ain Expen ses TOTAL ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS/PROJECTS Salaries R Benefits Gen eral Legal Services Prof Services (Exclude s Legal) General Projects Nlghway Engineerin g Nlghway Con struction Highways ROM Special Studies Rail Engin eering Rail Construction Raft ROW Com muter Assistance Region al Arterial Streets R Roads Sp ial Transportion\Transit Project Operation s Ma in tenance Proje ct Towing STA Distribution s TOTAL PROGRAMS/PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE Principal In terest TOTAL 0817 SERVICE In tergovern Distribution 000012 Ri versi 'ansp ortstion C ommission GALS eY FUND 12/31/00 Period Ending; 12/31/00 01/31/01 0008F • GENERAL STATEFUND COUNTY EASTERN WESTERN ESP/SAFE TRANSIT CVAG WESTERN COUNTY N iT COUNTY ASSISTANCE COUNTY COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION COMOININO PAPER DENT SERVICE TOTAL 1,500,000.00 0.00 30,446,554.22 11,794,820.90 4,629,552 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 629,552 .05 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 43,741,375.12 58,637 .32 98.42 (177,007 .47) 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 66,980.98 519,591 .47 i5f,730 .0099 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,629,552.00 213,310.4537 890,392 .359 1,456.741 66,354.09 238,985 .9) 1,687,585.24 568.137.79 0 .00 1,039,648.49 0.00 619,502.00 0 .00 5,604.17 398,845 .6) 3,217,324 .74 7,049,919.52 057 471.75 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 1,724,661.54 30,810,594.92 11,929,560.89 685,856.09 238 ,985 .91 1,687,585.24 573,741.% 466,355.48 29 398,845,61 54,352,561.89 40171. . 23,270 .05 1,233 08 0.00 0.00 0 .00 409,547.14 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 14,299 .04 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 496,157.19 409,542.21 6,847 .1404 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24,503 .13 207,272 .21 13,200.38 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 13,370 .33 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 437,216 .51 1,213,148.24 0.00 0.00 0.000 .00 114,119.35 65,381.35 0.000.00 0 .00 219,903.74 0.00 3%,070.51 41,730 .39 169,848,68 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 13,370.33 26,255 .28070,81 1,782 .50 42,746.43 925.41 0.00 0.00 1,608,899.92 99,418.63 21,975 .76 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19,411.66 874 .57 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 x,575.29 0 .00 544,747 .39 14,266 .68 0.00 0.00 0.000 .00 70,784 .91 0.00 0 .00 821,710 .65 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 122,268.96 0. 00 14,975.22 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 1,474,456 .16 102,724 .00 0 .00 0 .00 574,685.93 0. 00 0 .00 517,526 .00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 577,180.16 6 388,4901.00 0 .00 5,123.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 1,517,526,00 0 .00 99,976.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 393,614 .96 0. 00 0.00 767,147 .70 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 393,614.% 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0. 00 0.00 11,176 .50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 99,976.24 0.00 302,048.48 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 711,176,70 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 3,648,511.67 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 11,176 .50 0.00 12,178,621.79 4,405,129 .97 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 302,048 .48 1,D26,750. 00 0.00 s 7 ,621.50 1,093,000.00 0.00 0.000 .00 0.00 ,511.67 202,828.19 208,499.58000 0 .00 0 .00 50 0 .00 0 .00 16,583,731.76 0.001 378,091.65 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 3,371,91 .5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 611,327 .77 470,000.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 371,091 .65 3,155,492.25 652,079.88 17,450,302.57 9,279,532.9S 0.00 0 .00 470,000.00 470,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 598,169.75 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 ,... �o.od 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31,007,407,65 0.00 53 ,844 .00 0.00 6,202,817.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,256,661 .22 0.00 53,844.00 6,202,817,22 6,256,661.22 598,169 .75 Description Capital Outlay TOTAL EXPENDITURES Other Financing Sou rces/Use s Operating Tran sfer In Operating Transfe r Ou t Bond Proc eeds To ts( Othe r Financin g Sou rces /Use s Exce ss(De ficiency)of Rev en ues And Other Fina ncing Sou rces Over(Un der)Es pendlture And Other Fin ancing Use s Fund Balance July 1, 2000 Fund Balance Dec 31, 2000 000013 • Riv erside Canty Tra nsportation Commission ACTUALS 8Y FUND 12/31/00 F or Period Ending: 12/31/00 01/31/01 000BF 01ATE WESTERN WESTERN COUNTY GENERAL WESTERN EASTERN TRANSIT CVAG COUNTY COMMERCIAL COMBINING FUND ESP/SAFE COUNTY CO UNTY ASSISTANCE CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION PAPER DEBT SERVICE TOTAL 11,050.33 705 .34 0.00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 11,755.67 4,977,860.57 718,166.57 17,450,302.57 9,279,532 .95 470,000 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,270,031.55 39,165,894.21 920.20 213,050.82 4,644,033 .18 0 .00 1,979.66 213,079.32 14,100,611.84 3,575,021.34 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 (1,059 .46) (28.50) (9,456,578.66) (3,575,021.34) 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 18,593,194.38 23,451,198.58 0.00 507,561 .90 3,254,340.70 1,799,926 .07 0.00 23,452,520.83 0 .00 0.00 35,501,000.70 0.00 0.00 35,501,000.70 0 .00 (507,561 .90) 32,246,660.00 (1,799,926 .07) 18,593,194.38 35,499,678 .4 5 2,070,999 .49 239,276.68 3,903,713 .69 (904,993.40) 215,856 .09 (268,575.99) 33,934,245.24 (1,226,184 .11) 12,722,008.44 50,686,346 .13 4,119,643.22 2,604,003.41 35,465,719 .34 13,083,217 .43 4,688,899.87 8,359,031.13 34,131,796 .56 1,890,456.06 8,219,823.67 112,562,790.69 6,190,842. 71 2,843,280 .09 39,369,433 .03 12,178,224 .03 4,904,735.96 8,090,455.14 68,066,041 .80 664,271.95 20,941,832.11 163,249,136.82 • 2 111111tIOMMIMO • Budget Variance Explanations 2nd Quarter ending 12/31/00 • • Highway Engineering Route 74 - Final design activities have slowed down due to delays for environmental issues on gnatcatcher mitigation and water quality having to be performed for the Environmental Agencies. Route 79 - The allocated budget to cover the cost of performing environmental review of the landscaping for the Lamb Canyon project is still awaiting formalization from the Fish and Wildlife to complete the mitigation requirement to close out the project. Although the project study report .has commenced on the realignment project, progress has been slow. Environmental mitigation issues were just resolved in December 2000 which will allow ROW entry to properties to perform field studies to determine alignment and finalization of the PSR. The preparation of the Project Report will commence thereafter. This process has impacted invoice submittal. Route 60 - HOV 60/1-215 to Redlands Blvd project recently started, however sboping issues relating to clearances on existing overcrossings and improvements on the Perris Blvd interchange is delaying full design to proceed. Route 1 1 1 - Design activities for the Palm Desert projects have been delayed due to awaiting decision on the feasibility of the City assuming Hwy 1 1 1 design responsibilities from the State for all projects. Highway Construction Route 74 - Due to the on -going design and environmental issues, ROW acquisition just recently started and will cause a delay in the start of construction work until fall of 2001. Route 79 - County of Riverside has not made a decision on proceeding with constructing of right turn lanes on Gilman Springs Road. Route 1 1 1 - Although the Gene Autry Trail project in the City of Palm Springs and the Monroe to Rubidoux project in the City of Indio are near completion receipt of invoices for incurred expenditures are still pending. Cities have elected to submit at completion of the project. 000014 Rail Engineering Pedley Station - Determining communications requirement and the economicalfeasibility for the station to link to the Downtown Station for monitoring continues. Once an option is selected design can then proceed. Santa Fe Depot - Design activities will be limited to installing temporary lighting and a security system and boarding up the windows and entry areas until such time as a decision is made by the Commission on what the plan use for the building itself is going to be. San Jacinto Line - A design consultant has just been selected and would anticipate incurred expenditures late 3nd quarter. Tier II stations - final design cannot commence until the environmental document is completed by the City which is the lead agency and RCTC receives from BNSF station approval as it relates to the impact on rail freight traffic. Until such time as approval is given the consultants work will be limited and invoice submittal minimal. Rail Construction Rail construction for the Pedley station security system and emergency platform, the Santa Fe Depot, the San Jacinto branchline have not started due to the engineering issues mentioned above. Tier II station start of construction is now forecasted for FY2002. Special Studies The North/South corridor study final report has not been submitted by the consultant -alone with their invoice. SCAG will be performing the Countywide origin and destination study and no invoice. have been submitted as of this quarter.. Q00015 • AGENDA ITEM 7B • so • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Commission approval to Receive and File the Investment Report for quarter ending December 31, 2000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The County's Investment Report for the month ending December 31, 2000 is also attached for your review. Attachments 000016 All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ending December 31, 2000 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on November 12, 1998. The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by • • I nveetme n'- io R ep ort Period E nding De cember 31, 2000 OPERATIN G FUNDS R ATING PAR PURCHASE MAT URITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED M OOD YS/S8P/FITCH V ALUE D ATE DATE MARKET PRICE VALUE G AIN (L0SS) Ban k of Ame ric a 1888,339 AA1/AA- Ce sh with Co un ty Tre asu rer 147,270,687 A AA-MR1/AA Af -S1/AAN1+ Financial In vestor Trus t (FIT) 16, 178,820 AAA/AA A Highmark Mo ney Market (US Treas ury Ob F und) 1199,948 AA A/ AAA Age noy/Treeury 8sourltles : Fed Nat'l Mtg. A ssoc. *4,999,760 AAA/AAA 16,000,000 04/07/00 03/30/01 8 .86 % $4,999,760 16,004,888 14,938 Fed Ho rne Ln Ban ks 13,778,611 AAA/AAA 63,776,000 08/18/ 00 08/14/01 8 .90% 13,778,611 13,791,618 *13,006 Fed Horne Ln Mtg 61,994,800 AA A/AA A *2,000, 000 08/14/89 08/16/01 6 .8916 11,994, 800 11,998,1376 12,276 Fed Home Ln Ban ks *2,528,748 AAA/AAA 62,640,000 11/01/99 09/17/01 8.1216 12,628,748 12,638,413 19,886 Fed Nett Mtg As sn. Medium Tenn (Callable ) 12,297,844 AAA/AAA *2,300,000 02/23/99 02/26/ 02 6.86 % *2,297,844 *2,290,835 -17,009 Fed Na t'l Mtge Assoc. 12,000,000 AAA/AA A 12,000,000 03/ 09/99 03/08/02 6 .88 % *2,0 00,0 00 11,996,082 -14,938 Fe d Nat'l Mtge Assoc. 11,188,968 AA A/ AAA 11,183,000 12/07/00 02/22/01 8.43 % 11,188,968 11,171,733 14,776 Fed Horne Ln Banks Dis count Note 11,981,200 AAA/A AA *2,000,000 08/14/99 07/16/03 8.29% 11,961,200 *2,007,5 00 148,300 Sub -To ta l 174,083,282 *20,798,000 120,727,010 120 ,798,820 189,010 FUND S HELD IN TRUST Cash with Co unty: Loca l Tre neportatio n Fund 117,086,792 AAA-MR1/A AAf-S1/AA Av1 + Fire A merica n Treasu ry 12,731,199 AA A/AA A Su b -Total 119,798,991 COM MISSIO N BON D PROJECT FUNDS/DEBT RESERVE Miles tone Fu nd. $9,047,264 A AA /AA A First American Treasury 148,982,747 AAA /AAA U. S. Trea sury No tes 116,928,000 AAA/AAA M BIA Investmen t Agre eme nt *0 Sub -To tal 173,936,000 TOTAL 1187. 798,273 SUMMARIZED IN VESTMENT TYPE Bank s 1888,339 Cash with Cou nty 184,338,380 Mutual Funds: Fina ncial Investor Trust 16,178,820 Highmark 1199,948 First Ameri can Treasury 12,731,189 Milestone *9,047,254 S ub -Total Mutual Fu nd s - *17,155,218 Federal Agen cy Notes 120,727,810 U.S . Treasury Notes 184,889,747 I nvestme nt Agre ements 10 TOTAL 1187,798,273 Monthly Master Account Statement December 29, 2000 ACCOUNT 330072823-00 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 3560 UNIVERSITY PLACE RIVERSIDE CA 92501 FINANCIAL 1 NVESTORS TRUST Fund Performance as of 12/29/00 U.S. TREASURY MONEY MARKET (AM) SEC 7 DAY YIELD 5.96% 7 DAY EFFECTIVE YIELD r 6.14% SUBACCOUNT OPENING ENDING MONTHLY REINVESTED MONTHLY BALANCE TOTAL CREDITS TOTAL DEBITS DIVIDENDS BALANCE U.S. TREASURY MONEY MARKET (AM) 00 5,149,283.96 0.00 0.00 27,535.87 $5,176,819.83 5,149,283.96 0.00 0.00 27,535.87 S5,176,819.83 Total FIT Funds Investment 5,149,283.96 0.00 0.00 27,535.87 5,176,819.83 • aI RS1O Notes: ILPS Mutual Funds Services ponsor and Distributor GE Investments The Investment Management Arm al GE Investment Advisor 000019 • CD O O tD County of Riverside Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund Compliance Analysis and Investment Report December 31, 2000 Paul McD onnell - Treasurer/Tax Collector Kenneth C. Kirin - Assistant Treasurer D onald R. Kent - Chief Deputy Treasurer Treasurer's C ommentary "The FED's Big Surprise" For the first half of December, all eyes were glued to the news network:, as the 2000 presidential election finally ended up in the hands of the Supreme Court of the United States, resulting in a 35 day court battle victory for George W. Bush. As far as the FED g oes, the December 19th FOMC meeting resulted in a bias shift from inflation to weakness, but no change in rates . Normally, we do not comment on events outside of the recent month end, but, with a January 3rd intra-m eeting 50 bps. rate cut, we thought it appropriate to comment. The January 3rd surprise rate cut came on the heels of disappointing economic news on the National Association of Purchasing Mangers (NAPM) index, and, construction spending. Both indicators coupled with all other previous indicators to date suggested a rapid slowdown was turning to the talk of recession amo ng certain market observers. The surprise FED action was fuel enough to pro pel the NASDAQ to its largest single day advance, topping 3 billion shares traded . The other indices followed suit, although they did not enjoy quite the same percentage gains. Speculation had been mounting prior to the December meeting that the FED was behind the curve, and action was imminent . Market observers are continuing to look for more rate cuts of possibly 25-50 bps. at the next scheduled FOMC meeting on January 31st. At month's end, the overnight rate was 5. 00% (down 175 bps. from November), the 2 -year T -Note was yielding 5 .09% (down 51 the 30 year T -Bond was 5.45% (down 16 bps.). For De cember, the Pool experienced a 7 bps. increase in the month en continue to expect to see a decline in the Pool yield as so me of our older securities mature and we reinvest at the cu �� " Ritalei . Anothe r FED easing would, of course, accelerate that decline. Paul McDonnell Treasurer -Tax Co llecto r 144 L ?0 .), while Month -End Book Value Month -End Market Value* Paper Gain or (Loss) Percent of Paper Gain or Loss Yield Based Upon Book Value Weighted Average Maturity (Years) Effective Duration Market value does not include accrued interest. PORTFOLIO STATISTICS DECEMBER NOVE MBER OCTOBER $ 1,884,354,638 $ 1,884,413,227 $ 58,590 0. 00% 6.42% 0. 66 0. 26 $ 1,488,080,963 $ 1,484,826,949 $ (3,254,014) -0 .22% 6 .35 % 0.77 0 .53 $ 1,447,740,379 $ 1,436,721,766 $ (11,018,613) -0.77 % 6.33% 0 .72 0.53 SEPTEMBER $ 1,505,484,434 $1 $1,494,584,737 $1 $ (10,899,697) $ -0 .73% 6.30 % 0 .70 0 .54 AUGUST ,490,290,189 $ 1 ,478,296,388 $ 1 (11,993,801) $ -0.81% 6.19% 0.81 0 .62 JULY ,474, 752,647 ,462,680,142 (12,072, 505) -0 .83% 6 .17% 0.81 0 .63 i THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER'S POOLED INVESTMENT FUND IS CURRENTLY RATED: AAA/MR1 BY MOODY'S INVESTOR SERVICES AAAN1+ BY FITCH IBCA Co unty Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, 4th Floor - Capital Markets Riverside, CA 92502-2205 www.countytreasurer.org (909) 955 - 3908 i • Maturi 30 Days or Less 30 - 90 Days 90 Days - 1 Year 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years Over 3 Years Total: Treasurer's Pooled Investmen11111 td - Portfolio Characteristics December 31, 2000 Market Value 986,540,742 .23 152,691,961 .11 283,270,900 .00 245,837,601.85 215,772,022.10 300,000 .00 $1,884,413,227.29 • eo 00% So 00% 40 00% ]0 00% • 20 00% • ,000 % 000%: - 52 35% Maturity 8.10% 15.03% 13 .05 % 30 Days or Less 30 - 90 Days 90 Days - 1 Year 1 -2 Years 11 .45% 0.02 % 2 - 3 Years Over 3 Years Quality U. S. Treasury Federal Agency AAA A-1 and/or P-1 N/R Total: Market Value 252,265. 00 785,086,608. 95 58,160,350.00 1,016,114,003. 34 * 24,800,000.00 $1,884,413,227.29 Quality A-1 and/or P-1 53 92% AAA 3 .09% WR 1 32% U.S . Treasury 0 .01% Federal Agency 41.88% Sector Market Valu e U. S. Treasury 252,265. 00 Federal Agency 785,086,608.95 Cash Equiv. & MMF's 303,100,000. 00 Commercial Paper 736,114,003. 34 Medium Term Notes 5,060,350. 00 Negotiable CD's 30,000,000.00 Certificates of Deposit 18,000,000.00 O Local Agency O bligations 6, 800,000.00 To tal: S1,884,413,227.29 • Includes Repos •• Collateralized Time Deposits & Lo cal Agency Obligations Sector Medium Te rm Notes 0 27% Commercial Paper - 3908% .' Negotiabl e CD's 1.59 % Certiticates of Deposit 0 96% Cash Equiv. & MMF's 18.08% U.S. Treasury 0 .01 % Local Agency Obligations 0.36% Federal Agency 41 68 % R IVERSID E POR TFO LIO SIMULA TION Interest Rate Stress Analysis Interest rate stress analysis is used to show th e effect on market value, given a dramatic change in interest rates. The table to the right shows the change in market value for both an instantaneous change in rates (takes place in one day) and a change in rates that takes place over six months. Interest rates are assumed to move up or down 300 basis points (bp) in 50 bp increments. Next to the change in market value is the gain/loss column for each scenario. The gain or loss is calculated by subtracting acquisition cost from market value. There are other factors, but the major difference in the two scenarios is interest earned. If the change takes place over six months there is an additional six months interest income, plus interest on cash flows assumed to be reinvested at 6.44%. In addition, the portfolio would be six months shorter. • 1 Acquisition Cost $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 $1,884,355 Yield Change (bp) -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 1 Interest Rate Changes Take Place: 1 Instantaneous Over Six Months Market Value Gain/L oss Market Value Gain/L oss $1,894,052 $9,698 $1,929,313 $44,959 $1,892,571 $8,217 $1,932,232 $47,878 $1,891,114 $6,760 $1,934,921 $50,567 $1,889,687 $5,333 $1,937,247 $52,893 $1,888,208 $3,854 $1,939,439 $55,085 $1,886,538 $2,184 $1,941,496 $57,142 $1,884,413 $59 $1,943,479 $59,125 $1,881,572 -$2,782 $1,945,013 $60,659 $1,878,136 -$6,218 $1,946,199 $61,845 $1,874,171 -$10,183 $1,946,850 $62,496 $1,869,735 -$14,619 $1,947,201 $62,847 $1,864,875 -$19,479 $1,947,461 $63,107 $1,859,735 424,619 $1,947,678 $63,324 omittea . This analysis demonstrates that sharp moves of interest rates either up or down by 3% will not have a significant effect on this portfolio. • • • • COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW AND TREASURER'S POLICY The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund is governed by both State Law and County Policy. The County Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Governm ent Code . This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors . As of this month end, the County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund was in compliance with this more restrictive policy. Altho ugh we have been diligent in the prepartion of this report, we have relied upon numerous pricing and analytical sources including Bloomberg Market Database and Capital Management Sciences, Inc . FUND SERVICES ADVISORS, INC. (310) 229-9170 SUM MARY OF AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS Cal. Govt. Code Investment Category California G overnment Code Maximum Authorized % Quality( Maturity Limi S&P/Moodv's Maximum Maturity County Investment Policy Authorized % Quality S&P/Moodv's/Fitch Actual Riverside Portfolio % 53601(a) LOCAL AGY BONDS 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 15% / $150mm A/A2/A 0.00% 53601(b) U. S. TREASURY 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 100 % N/A 0.01% 53601(d) CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY DEBT 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 2.5% Investment Grade 0.36% 53601(e) FEDERAL AGENCIES 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 100% N/A 41 .66 % 53601(0 pas OF EXCHANGE 270 DAYS 40%' 180 DAYS 30% Al/P1/F1 0 .00% 53601(g) COMM. PAPER 180 DAYS 40% Al/P1 180 DAYS 40% Al/P1/F1 39 .06% 53601(h) CERTIFICATE & TIM E DEPOSITS 5 YEARS 30% 1 YEAR 20% max Al/P1/F1 1.59 % 53601(1) REPOS 1 YEAR NO LIMIT 31 DAYS 20% max A1/P1/F1 13.27 % 53601(1) REVERSE REPOS 92 DAYS 20% 60 DAYS 10% max N/A 0 .00% 53601()) M ED. TERM NOTES 5 YEARS 30% A 2 YEARS 10% max AA/Aa2/AA 0 .27 % 53601(k) M UTUAL FUNDS 90 DAYS 2 20% AAA/Aaa 3 I MMEDIATE 15% / $150mm AAA by 2 of 3 Rating Agencies 2.82% 53601(m) SECURED DEPOSITS (BANK DEPOSITS 5 YEARS NO LIM IT 1 YEAR 2% max . 0.96% 53601(n) MORTGAGE PASS -THROUGH SECURITY 5 YEARS 20% AA -SECURITY A - ISSUER N/A N/A 0 .00 % 16429 (1,2,3) LO CAL AGENCY INVESTM ENT FUNDS N/A NO LIMIT 3 YEARS 0% max 0.00 % 1 u„ .. ... ro D.—,. noc „r mi.s.e,,,,." may ho invwatxt with a ny nne rnmme rclal bank 0 100.00% 2 Mutua l Funds maturity may be Interpreted as weighted average maturity not excee ding 90 days Or must have an Investment Adv isor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of 5500,000,000. • • • • Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund December 31, 2000 PROJECTI ON OF FUTU RE CASH FL OW The Po oled I nvestment Fund cash flow req uir em ents are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model The Treasurer states that based upon projected cash receipts a nd mat uring investments there are sufficie nt f unds to meet fut ure cash flow disbursement requirements over the next 12 months. MO NTH MONTHLY RECEIPTS 01/00 1/2000 2/2000 3/2000 4/2001 5/2001 6/2001 7/2001 8/2001 9/2001 10/2001 11/2001 12/2001 Totals: 290 .9 378.7 302.1 678.9 353. 9 349. 4 312.2 467.6 373. 7 395. 3 418.7 481.2 4,802.6 MONTHLY DISBMNTS 586.9 341 .8 433 .9 350 .0 580 .4 404 .5 392.7 419.6 353.1 468. 5 436.3 489. 5 5257.2 REQUI RED DIFFERENCE MAT . INVEST BALANCE 19 .8 0 .0 36.9 0 .0 328.9 102 .4 47.3 0.0 48.0 68.6 0 .0 0 .0 0.0 -296.0 36 .9 -131.8 328 .9 -226.5 -55.1 -80 .5 48 .0 20 .6 -73.2 -17 .6 -8 .3 -454.6 276 .2 0 .0 94 .9 0 .0 0.0 0 .0 33 .2 0.0 0.0 4.6 17.6 8 .3 434.8 23.08% ACTUAL INV. AVAIL . TO MATURITIES INVEST >1 YR. 986.5 74 .6 78 .1 0.0 10.0 15.0 10 .0 8.0 50.0 66.0 80.0 45 .0 1423.2 1449.2 75 .54% 76.92% 24. Month Gross Yield Trends The yield history represents gross yields, administrative costs have not been deducted. Actual earnings on fund balances will be credited by the. Auditor -Controller based upon County Treasurer calculations. Portfolio yield generally lags current trends in short-term interest rates . Yields fluctuate with changing markets and past performance is not an indication of future results 675 650 6.25 6.00 5.75 5.50 5.25 5.00 4. 75 4. 50 Gross Yield Trends Feb - 00 Mar - 00 1 i I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 t 1 Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- N ov- Dec - 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 0. 30 Jan - 00 1 -1 1 t -4 1 1 1 1 1 Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec - 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 —4-- PORTFOLIO YIELD —U-- ALL TAXABLE AVER AGE 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0. 05 0. 00 -0.05 -0.10 -0. 15 -0.20 -0.25 -0.30 -0.35 -0.40 -0.45 24 Mo nth Yield Spread (Pool Yield vs . All Taxable Average) Average Spread = -2.9 BP Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan - 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 00 Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun - 00 00 00 00 00 Jul- Sep - 00 Oct- Nov- Aug - 00 00 Dec - 00 00 00 * The Money Fund Report""/ All Taxable Average is compiled and reported by iMoneyNet provider of independent analyses and info rmation to the financial servic es industry, with a Index tracks the yield of over 500 taxable money market funds across several categories, those funds on a monthly basis. For more information on the iMoneyNet, Inc. Index see • • , Inc. (formerly IBC Financial Data, Inc .) iMoneyNet, Inc . is a leading particular area of focus in money market mutual funds. The All -Taxable i.e. Treasury, Government, and Prime, and reports the average yield of www.ibcdata.conilindex.html • • CUSIP Par(S) Government Agency 31331HL8 31331HM 3 31331HM 3 31364KGT 31331 HM8 3133MB5G 31364F05 3133/ MZ0 3133MALK 31331RXU 31384F6U 31364GYN 313 A2SP 3133M5R3 31384GAV 3134A3S4 31364GBV 3133M5WY 3133M5YA 3133M5Y0 31384GDG 3133M84D 3133M6CN 312902JE 31364GGC 31331RK9 3133M 6J5 31384GHJ 3133M CKD 31364GHV 31364GJJ 3133M 8VS 31331.160E 3133M6T8 31364GKW 31384GMT 312902PH 20,000,000 00 5,000,000 .00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10.000,000.00 10.000,000 00 5.000. 000.00 5,000. 000. 00 5,000,000. 00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10.000,000.00 10,000.000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000. 00 9.000.000.00 10.000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000. 00 12. 000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000.000.00 10,000.000.00 10,000,000. 00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5.000.000.00 10.000.000.00 15.000,000.00 10,000,000. 00 10,000,000. 00 10100.000.00 15,000,000. 00 5.000.000.00 5,000,000.00 Tre asurer's Po oled Invest Fund - P ortfolio Holdings Report December 31, 2000 Issuer FEDERAL FAR M CREDIT BANK FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL FARM CR BANKS MTN FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN FEDERAL HOME LN M TG CORP FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL HOME LN BINS FEDERAL. HOME IN BKS FEDERAL NATL MTG A SSN FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL HOM E LN MTG CORP FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN FEDERAL FARM CR BANKS MTN FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL HOME LN BKS FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP • A cquhltlon Curre nt Curre nt Market' SJt99o. Mituritx C9lt P Value w/ o Accr la4 SiainCLes! YMMtt._' LIL Dnr• AmUk' 6.500 01/02/01 20.000 ,000 .00 99995 19,999 .000.00 (1,000.00) 7.150 0.01 0.01 8 .500 02/01/01 5,00 0.000.00 99960 4,999,000 .00 (1,000.00) 8.857 0.09 0.09 6 .500 02/01/01 10,000 .000 .00 99.980 9,998 ,000.00 (2,000.00) 6.657 0 .09 0.09 6.470 02/18/01 9,988 .900.00 100.102 10,010,200.00 21,300.00 5.551 0.13 0.13 8 .400 0301 /01 15,000.000.00 100.050 15.007.500 .00 7,500.00 6 .076 0 .17 0 .16 6.700 03/30/01 10,000,000.00 100.050 10,005,000 .00 5,000.00 6.477 0.24 0.24 5.960 06/1401 10.000,000 .00 100 .033 10,003.300 .00 3,300 .00 5.891 0.18 0.45 5 .360 08/29/01 5,000,000.00 99.749 4,987 ,450.00 (12,550 .00) 5 .877 0 .38 0 .49 6.825 07/2501 5,000,000.00 100.090 5,004.500.00 4,500 .00 6 .450 0.08 0.56 5.900 07127/01 5,000,000 .00 99155 4,997,750 .00 (2,250 .00) 5.969 0 .31 0.57 5.570 09/1401 10,000.000 .00 99 .776 9.977,800 .00 (22,400.00) 5.883 0.46 0.70 5.650 09/1701 10,001,582 .50 99.808 9,960,800 .00 (20,762.50) 5.913 0.45 0.71 5 .515 09/24/01 10,000,000.00 99.744 9,974 .400 .00 (25,600.00) 5.861 0 .49 0.73 5.520 09/2501 10.000.000 .00 99.791 9,979,100.00 (20,900.00) 5.799 0.47 0.73 5 .430 09/2801 10,000,000 .00 99.880 9,988,000.00 (32,000 .00) 5.961 0.53 0.74 6.280 10/05/01 9,993.750.00 100.053 10,005.300.00 11,550.00 6.192 0.15 0.76 5250 10,/0501 9,000,000.00 99.568 8,981,120.00 (38.880.00) 5.822 0.59 0 .76 5 .235 1022/01 10,000,000.00 99.534 9,953 .400.00 (46.600.00) 5.818 0 .62 0.81 5 .000 10/2301 10,000,000 .00 99 .413 9,941,300 .00 (58,700.00) 5 .735 0.78 0.81 5.280 10/2601 5,000,000.00 99.582 4,979.100.00 (20,900 .00) 5 .796 0.61 0.82 5.250 10/2601 10,000,000 .00 99.568 9,956,800.00 (43 ,400.00) 5.785 0.82 0.82 5.580 10 29/01 12,000,000.00 99 .789 11,974,680 .00 (25.320.00) 5 .832 0 .51 0 .83 5.200 114)5 01 10,000,000.00 99.533 9.953.300.00 (48,700 .00) 5.761 0 .65 0 .85 6.480 11/1501 5.000,000.00 100.072 5,003,800.00 3,600 .00 8.383 0.11 0.87 5. 260 11/15101 10,000.000.00 99 .645 9,964,500 .00 (35.500.00) 5.672 0 .60 0 .87 5. 440 11/1801 10,000,000.00 99.893 9,969 .300 .00 (30.700.00) 5.794 0.58 0.88 5.500 1123101 10,000,000.00 99.724 9.972,400 .00 (27,800 .00) 5.811 0.58 0.90 5.410 112301 5,000,000.00 99.628 4.961,400 .00 (18.600.00) 5.833 0.62 0.90 8.530 11/3001 5,000.000.00 100.291 5,014,550 .00 14.550 .00 8.191 0 .48 0 22 5.270 11/30/01 10,000,000.00 99.621 9,962,100.00 (37,900.00) 5.893 0.88 012 5.440 11/300 1 15,004,887.50 99.644 14,946,600 .00 (58,087.50) 5.837 0.83 0.92 5. 710 12/07/01 10,000,000.00 99.852 9,985,200.00 (14,800 .00) 5.889 0 .51 0.93 5.580 12/1001 10,000,000.00 99 .772 9.977.200.00 (22,800.00) 5.827 0.58 0.94 5.380 12/1401 10,000,000. 00 99 .643 9,964.300.00 (35,700.00) 5.785 0.64 0.95 52 50 12/144),1` 15,000,000.00 99.547 14,932 ,050.00 (87,950.00) 5 .739 0.69 0.95 5.500 01/02/02 5,000,000. 00 99.859 4,982,950.00 (17,050.00) 5 .853 0.64 1.01 6.900 01/14/02 5,000,000. 00 100.104 5,005.200.00 5,200.00 6.790 0 .08 1.04 000028 31364GPJ 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5 500 01/14/02 10,000.000.00 99.643 9,964,300.00 (35.700.00) 5 .855 0 .66 1.04 31364GNW 10,000,000 .00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5 500 01/15/02 10 .000,000 00 99.722 9,972.200 .00 (27,800.00) 5.774 0.62 1.04 31384GOG 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5 .400 01/22 ./02 10,000,000.00 99 .628 9.962,600 .00 (37,400.00) 5.763 0.67 1.06 3133M77B 5.000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5 .500 01 28/02 5,000,000.00 99.706 4.985,300.00 (14,700.00) 5.780 0.63 1.06 31331HP2 5. 000.000.00 FEDERAL FARM CR BKS 6 625 02/01/02 4,979,000.00 100 .936 5,048,800 .00 67,800.00 5 .720 1.01 1.09 3133M 7HC 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5.240 02/11/02 5,000,000.00 99.553 4,977,650.00 (22,350.00) 5.653 1 .05 1.12 3133M705 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5 .555 03/04/02 5,000,000 .00 99 .656 4,982,800.00 (17,200 .00) 5.852 0.69 1.17 3133M 7SR 5,000,000. 00 FEDERAL HOME IN BKS 5 .350 03/08/02 5,000,000.00 99 .653 4,962,850 .00 (17,350.00) 5.648 0.77 1.18 31364GYD 10,000. 000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5.950 03/13/02 10,000,000 .00 99.866 9.986,600.00 (13,400 .00) 6.057 0.56 1.20 3133M7W1 6,750,000.00 FEDERAL HO ME LN BKS . 5.655 03/15/02 6,750,000 .00 99 .697 6.729,547 .50 (20,452.50) 5 .909 0.68 1.20 3133M7WR 10,000. 000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5.720 03/18/02 10.000,000.00 99.737 9,973,700 .00 (28,300.00) 5.938 0 .65 1.21 3133M82V 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5.875 03/22/02 10,000,000 .00 99.833 9,963,300.00 (16,700.00) 6.009 0.60 1.22 31364GA3 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5.670 0327102 10,000,000.00 99 .704 9 ,970,400 .00 (29,600 .00) 5 .912 0.69 1.24 31384GB8 10,000,000. 00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5 .660 04/05/02 10,000 ,000.00 99.671 9,967,100.00 (32,900.00) 5 .925 0 .72 1.26 313646J9 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 5.630 04/24/02 10,000,000 .00 99.638 9.963,000 .00 (36,200.00) 5.911 0.75 1.31 3133M80X 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 5.785 0524/02 10,000,000 .00 99.735 9,973,500.00 (26 ,500 .00) 5.960 0 .71 1.39 3134A 3TF 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 5.960 08103/02 5,000 .000.00 99 .815 4,990,750.00 (9,250.00) 6.093 0 .65 1.42 31364G79 5,000,000. 00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN MTN 6.160 06/12/02 5,000,000.00 99.928 . 4 ,996,400.00 (3,600.00) 6.209 0.57 1.45 3134A3Utv1 5,000,030. 00 FEDERAL HOME L N 61TG CORP 6.160 08/14/02 5,000,600.00 99.945 4,997,250 .00 (2.750.00) 6 .217 0.55 1.45 31331R7E 15,000,000. 00 FEDERAL FARM CR BANKS MTN 6 .375 0621102 15,000,000.00 100.067 15,010,050.00 10,050.00 6.326 0.15 1.47 3133M8YW 5.000,000.00 FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS 6.035 08 21 102 5,000,000.00 100 .561 5.028,050 .00 28,050 .00 5.633 1.40 1.47 3133M 9ET 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS 6.450 0728102 10,000 ,000.00 100.001 10,000,100 .00 100.00 6.445 0.40 1.57 3133MBUE 250,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 7.030 08/01102 250,000.00 100 .677 251,692.50 1,892.'50 6.569 0.56 1.58 3133M9HC 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 6.250 06/02/02 5,000,000 .00 99 .947 4,997.350.00 (2,650.00) 6.280 0.52 1.59 3133M 9YL 5,000.000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 6.555 09/27/02 5.000,000.00 100.075 5,003,750.00 3,750.00 6.501 0.10 1 .74 312902JD 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN M TG CORP 6.750 11/15/02 5,000.000.00 100.095 5 .004,750.00 4,750.00 8 .690 0.09 117 3133MABH 5,000.000. 00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 6. 600 11/22/02 5,000,000.00 100.063 5,004,150.00 4,150.00 6.548 0.10 1.89 312902KB 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 6.700 12/02/02 10,000,000 .00 100 .092 10,009,200.00 9,200.00 6.644 0.09 1 .92 31364KZX 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL M TG ASSN 6.500 12/04/02 5.000.000.00 100.613 5 .030,650.00 30,650 .00 6.155 0 .93 1.93 312902M A 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 8. 930 12/09/02 10,000.000 .00 100.112 10,011,200 .00 11 ,200.00 6.865 0.08 1 .94 3133MCKP 2,265.000.00 FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS 6.500 12/11/02 2,265.000 .00 100.629 2,279.246.85 14,246.85 6.151 0.95 1.95 3133M CAS 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS 7.000 04/11/03 10.000,000 .00 100.036 10,003,600.00 3,600.00 6976 0.03 2.28 3133M8ND 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 7. 650 08/13/03 10,000,000.00 100 .807 10,080,700.00 80,700 .00 7 .282 0.45 2.45 3133MBWN 250,000. 00 FEDERAL HOM E LN BKS 7.050 08/14/03 250,000.00 102 .043 255,107 .50 5,107.50 6.191 1.51 2.62 312902M9 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN M TG CORP 7.050 0828103 10,000,000.00 100 .922 10,092,200.00 92,200 .00 6 .677 0.84 2 .66 31364KVL 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 7.050 09/19/03 10,000,000.00 100.748 10 ,074,800 .00 74,800 .00 6.739 0 .71 2.72 312902X8 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN M TG CORP 7.100 10/03/03 10,000,000. 00 100.003 10,000.300.00 300.00 7 .093 0.01 2.76 312902Y6 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 7.000 10/9303 5.000,000.00 100.253 5.012,650.00 12,650.00 6 .892 0.29 2.76 31290229 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HO ME LN MTG CORP 7. 100 10/17/03 104000. 000. 00 100.067 10,006,700 .00 6,700.00 7.067 0 .05 2 .79 3129022W 6,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 7.000 1110 303 6,000,000.00 100. 311 8,018,660.00 18,660.00 6.873 0.39 2.84 3133M CFV 7,870, 000. 00 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 7.000 11/14/03 7,870.000.00 100. 353 7,897.781.10 27,781 .10 , 6 .858 0.13 2.87 31364KYR 5,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 7. 000 11/17103 5,000,000.00 100.340 5,017,000.00 17,000 .00 6.884 0.44 2 .88 31364KYR 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 7.000 11/17/03 10,000.000.00 100.340 10,034,000.00 34,000.00 6.864 0.44 2.88 31364KYR 10,000,000. 00 FEDERAL NATL AUG ASSN 7.000 11/17/03 10,000,000.00 100.340 10,034,000.00 34,000.00 6.864 0.44 2.88 3129024W 7.000,000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 7.000 11/21/03 7,000,000. 00 100. 352 7,024.640.00 24,640 .00 6 .860 0.15 2.89 3129024W 10,000,000.00 FEDERAL HOM E IN MTG CORP 7. 000 1121103 10,000.000.00 100.352 10,035,200.00 35200.00 6.860 0 .15 2.89 4. 000029 • • • CUSIP Pir(SI Go vernment Agency Conrd 31364KZM 5.000.000.00 FEDERAL NAIL MTG ASSN 31364KZM 8,750,000 00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 3129024A 10,000.000.00 FEDERAL HOME LN MTG CORP 31364KZV 20.000.000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 31364KA 8 7,500,000 00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 31364KB8 15,500,000.00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 31331H5G 10,000.000. 00 FEDERAL FA RM CR BANKS 31364KF6 10,000,000. 00 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 3133MCPM 8.990. 000,QQ FEDERAL HOME LN BKS Treasurer's Po oled In vest. Fu nd - Portfoli o H oldings Report Dec ber 31, 2000 Sub -Total 785,125,000.00 Cash Equivalent & Mo ney Market Funds REPO 100,000,000.00 MORGAN STANLEY DEAN REPO 150,000,000. 00 MORGAN STANLEY DEAN NM 53.100. 000.OQ NM PRIME PORTFOLIO Sub -Total 303,100, 000.00 Collateralized Time Deposits 10.000.000.00 CITY NATIONAL BANK 8,000,000. 00 PROVIDENT BANK Sub -To tal 18,000.000.00 Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 30. 000, 000,OQ BANK OF AM ERICA NA 30,000.000. 00 Medium Term No tes 36962GUP 5.000. 000.00 GENL ELEC CAP CO RP MTN Sub -Total 5,000,000.00 Acqulakbn Currant Curr ant Market' Co MilitiaC .stit bits Vale w/o Accr t at, GIIOLLe!! 6 550 11/21/03 6.550 11/21/03 7.000 11/28/03 6 .750 12 103/03 6 .625 12/11/03 6.510 12/12/03 6 420 12/22/03 6.125 12/28103 6 .200 12/26/03 5,000 .000 .00 101.370 8 .750,000.00 101.370 10,000 ,000.00 100 .351 20.000.000.00 100 .642 7,500.000.00 100 .931 15.500,000 .00 100.355 10.000.000.00 100 .010 10,000,000.00 100 .020 8.990.000.OQ 99.915 785,092.900.00 0.000 01/03/01 100,000.000.00 100.000 0.000 01/04101 150,000.000.00 100.000 0.000 03/30/01 53.100.000 .OQ 100.000 303,100,000.00 0.000 05/01/01 10,000,000 .00 100.000 0. 000 08/02/01 8,000,000.00 100.000 18 .000.000 .00 0.000 01102/01 30.000 .000 .OQ 100.000 30,000,000.00 7.000 03/01/02 4.998.750. 0Q 101 .207 4.998.750. 00 5,068,500.00 8,642,475 .00 10,035.100 .00 20.128.400 .00 7,589.825.00 15,555,025.00 10 .001.000.00 10.002.000 .00 8.982.358 .5Q 785,066.808 .96 100,000 .000 .00 150,000,000.00 53.100.000 .OQ 303,100,000.00 10,000,000 .00 8,000,000.00 18,000,000 .00 30.000 .000.0Q 30,000,000 .00 5 .060.350.00 5,060 ,350.00 68,500.00 92,475.00 35,100.00 128 .400.00 69,825.00 55,025 .00 1,000.00 2,000.00 7 .641.501 (8,291.05) • 11d.MaL £ 6_Qlr._ Ave. L4fC 6.024 1 .88 6.024 1.88 6.882 0.16 6.502 1.00 6272 0 .96 6 .375 1.15 6.400 1.11 8.121 1.38 L211 1.42 2.89 2 .89 2.91 2 .92 2.95 2.95 2.98 2 .99 2,88 6 .211 0.54 1.47 6.640 0.01 8 .470 0.01 4.494 124 0.01 0.01 6.531 0.05 0.05 6 .234 4.;64 0.33 0.33 4,114 SLR 6.378 0.44 0.44 4.414 9.4.1 9.41 6.630 0 .01 0.01 61 .GOO .OQ ;t..84!! 1 .4$ 1.14 61,600.00 5 .906 1.09 1 .16 000030 Commercial Paper 69830JN2 28100LN3 922171N3 4820P2N5 4820P2N5 7403P0N9 30603ANA 069451N8 81217LNC 97342JWG 4820P2NH 7954 WONK 6933A2NN 30603ANP 7403P0NP 04800JN0 39789LN0 59018JNR 36959HNS 88267TN5 7954W0P5 8961J2P5 25.000,000.00 PANASONIC FNCE AMC INC 40,000.000.00 EDISON ASSET SECRITN 50,000,000.00 VARIABLE FUNDING CAPITAL COR 10.000,000 .00 JUPITER SEC CORP 30.000,000.00 JUPITER SEC CORP 31,000,000.00 PREFERRED RECEIVABLES FUNDIN 25.000,000.00 FALCON ASSET SECURIT 50.000.000.00 BARTON CAPITAL CORP 50.000,000. 00 MONTAUK FUNDING CORP 40.000,000.00 WINDMILL FUNDING CORP 10.000,000.00 JUPITER SEC CORP 30.000,000.00 SMITH BARNEY INC 40,000,000.00 PG&E CORPORATION 25.000,000. 00 FALCON ASSET SECURIT 19,000,000. 00 PREFERRED RECEIVABLES FUNDIN 50,000,000. 00 ASSOCIATES CORP NA 42.000,300. 00 G REYHAWK FUNDING LTD 50,000,000. 00 M ERRILL LYNCH AND CO 50.000,000. 00 G ENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL COR 25.000,000. 00 ONEOK INC 20,000,000.00 SM ITH BARNEY INC 30,000.000.OQ TRIDENT CAPITAL FINANCE INC 0 000 01702/01 24 ,981,805.58 99 927 0 000 01703701 39,827.133.33 99.068 0 000 01/03/01 49.950,000.00 99.900 0.000 01/05701 9.884,500 .00 98 .845 0.000 01705/01 29,642,500.00 98.808 0 .000 01/09/01 30,840,143.33 99.484 0 000 01/10/01 24,717,988.11 98 .872 0.000 01711/01 49,677,222.22 99.354 0.000 01/12/01 49.859,291.67 99.319 0.000 01/16/01 39,750,668.67 99.377 0 .000 01/17/01 9,882,686.67 98 .827 0.000 01/19/01 29,771,100.00 99.237 0.000 01/22/01 39,883,177.78 99.158 0 .000 01/23/01 24,751,750.00 99.007 0.000 0123701 18,829,316.67 99.102 0.000 0124701 49,479,875.00 98.980 0 .000 01/24/01 41,515,635.00 98.847 0.000 01/25/01 49 ,628,722.22 99.257 0.000 01 26/01 49,461,625 .00 96 .923 0.000 01/28/01 24,826,825 .00 99.307 0.000 02/05/01 19,831,061.11 99 .155 0 .000 02/05101 29 741 200 .0Q 99.137 Sub -Total 742.000,000. 00 Avera ge weighted days for commercial paper Lo cal Agency O bligations' Vault 8.500.000.00 EDA NAN Vault 300,000. 00 MARCH JPRA GAN Sub -Total 6,800,000, 00 U.S. Treasury 9128275X 250.000. OQ UNITED STATES TREAS NTS Sub Total 250,000.00 Grand -Totals 1,890275,000.00 17 .1 736,114,003.34 6.240 0320102 6.830 06/01705 6,500,000.00 300,000 .00 6.800,000 .00 100.000 100.000 6. 375 01/31/02 248,984.3@ 100 .906 248,984.38 1,884,354,637.72 24 .981,805 .56 39.627,133.33 49.950,000.00 9,884,500.00 29,642,500.00 30.840,143.33 24,717,986.11 49,677.222.22 49,859,291.87 39.750,666 .67 9,882,666 .67 29,771,100 .00 39,663,177 .78 24,751,750.00 18,829.318.67 49,479,875.00 41,515,635 .00 49.828,722.22 49,461,625.00 24,826,625.00 19 .831,081.11 29 741.200 .00 736,114,003.34 6 .500,000.00 300,000 .00 6,800.000.00 252285 ,00 252,265.00 1,884,413,227.29 ' The market vales and yield of short-term many marke t securities are based on purchase price. 2Effe ctive Average Dura tion price sen sitivity, write takdng In to consideration the pre , of �I berg called before m aturity. EAgadone have variable rah until principal ls returned at maturity, weighted by market value. 4 Local Agency O coupons, sp ud b the Pod 000031 • 3280,62 3,280 .62 58,589.57 6 .550 0.01 6.642 0.01 7 .207 0.01 6.877 0 .01 6.680 0.01 6.664 0.03 8.590 0.03 8.883 0.03 6.675 0.03 6 .641 0.05 8.843 0 .05 6.590 0.05 8.646 0 .06 6 .651 0.06 6.660 0 .06 6.604 0.07 6.632 0.07 6.569 0.07 6.607 0 .07 6.616 0.07 8.525 0.10 4.;:24 0 .01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 .01 0.02 0.03 0 .03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.06 0 .06 0.07 0.07 0 .07 0.07 0.07 0.10 6.66 0.05 0.05 5 .771 4.44 5.818 1 .15 1 .22 114 4A2 1.26 1 .36 LIU .1.0,2 1.Q4 5 .501 1.02 . 1.06 8.445 0 .26 p_65 • • • AGENDA ITEM 7C • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Call Box Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission Receive and File the operational statistics for the Riverside County Motorist Aid Call Box System for the quarter ending December 31, 2000. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the operational statistics for the call box system for the quarter ending December 31, 2000. There were a total of 10,274 calls during the quarter; 6,452 to Inland CHP and 3,822 to Indio CHP dispatch offices. This represents a decrease of 3,898 calls (-27.5%) in call box activity over the quarter ending September 30, 2000. The average calls per day were 112 for the current quarter versus 154 for the previous quarter. In comparing the quarter ending December, 2000 to December, 1999 call volumes, there has been a decrease of 3,433 calls (-25%) from last year to this year. All call box programs throughout the state have been experiencing a similar decrease in usage. The total number of call box calls for the Riverside County program since inception (May 1990) is 735,762. Attachments 000032 033888 • • Dec Nov Oct 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 Calls to CHP 4,000 5,000 6,000 RCTC 4th QTR 1999 4th QTR 2000 Difference Active Call Boxes 1,115 1,105 -10 Dec Totals Calls to CHP 13,707 10,274 -3,433 Oct - Dec Totals 4,238 112f 1999 0 2000 1 Calls/Box 12.3 9.3 -3.0 Chart Inland Call Boxes 1 �xNs atc r Indio Inland 4th QTR 1999 4th QTR 2000 Difference Indio 4th QTR 1999 4th QTR 2000 Difference 554 546 Call Boxes 561 559 -2 Calls to CHP 8,491: 6,452 2,039 Calls to CHP 5,216 3,822 -1,394 Calls/Box 15.3 11.8 -35 Calls/Box 9.3 6.8 -2.5 Inland' iejueo LIOjedSKI Aq siieo Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Page: 1 dHO of sips° jo AJewwnS apisaaniH 000z aapeno uij Data Source: AT&T Wireless 000033 4th Quarter 3:47 Average Call Lengths Oct -99 3:56 Nov -99 3:39 Dec -99 3:46 4th Quarter 3:29 Average Call Lengths Oct -00 3:32 Nov -00 3:26 Dec -00 3:29 'The amount of time each call box is authorized to use in one month without art additional charge from the cellular vendor 1,115 CaII boxes 117,075 Minutes 1,105 CaII boxes Call Box Cellular Minutes Allocated 117,075 minutes Used to call:.. CHP .. Maintenance ... Other Numbers 52,011 12,083 696 Cellular time used 64,790 Remaining 52,285 Cell Time used 55% 45% Remaining cell time 55% OM 45% L, 116,025 Minutes Call Box Cellular Minutes Allocated 116,025 minutes Cellular time used 49,804 Remaining 66,221 57% Cell Time used 43% 57% Remaining cell time 1999 CHP Close-up (4th QTR) Call Length Number of calls Percent 0 to 1 min 2,885 1 i 21% 1 to 3 min 4,040 3 to 5 min 2,989 29% 22% 43% 2000`CHP ;Close-up (4th QTR) Number of calls 0 to 1 min 2,394 1 to 3 min 3,215 3 to 5 min 2,299 Percent 23% Call Length 31% 22% 5 to 7 min 7 to 9 min 1,563 71 % 1,075 0 8% 5 to 7 min 1,080 7 to 9 min over 9 min 1,155 Q 8% over 9 min Total 13,707 calls 100% Total 1999 Maintenance Calls (4th QTR) Calls Expected* 33,450 Actual (��38,668j Too Many® 5,218 583 El 11% 7030 6% 7% 10,274 calls 100% 2000 Maintenance Calls (4th QTR) Calls Expected'® 33,150 Actual Too Many 1,293 'Call boxes are scheduled to Call Main enance every 3 days (10 times/month) Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Page: 2 90 episaanij 000z aapeno 11117 Data Source: AT&T Wireless • • • 000034 L } 20 15 -. ■ •2000 1999 .- 0 verage call: Cr 0 X .}-, 0 o b o b o b b o o b a b o P . & 4 W P y V V V O P '0 'O V a O M 0 N A O 'O P N N V N t. 4th QTR 1999 4th QTR 2000 CaII Calls to Avg Highway Boxes CHP Calls/Box CaII Calls to Avg Highway Boxes CHP Calls/Box RV -010 398 4,157 10.4 RV -010 398 2,934 7.4 RV -015 200 3,553 17.8 RV -015 200 2,691 13.5 RV -031 5 31 6.2 RV -031 5 17 • 3.4 RV -033 2 9 4.5 RV -033 2 20 10.0 RV -060 74 915 12.4 RV -060 72 768 10.7 RV -062 27 250 9.3 RV -062 27 189 7.0 RV -071 0 0 0.0 RV -071 0 0 0.0 RV -074 29 211 7.3 RV -074 29 207 7.1 RV -078 7 13 1.9 RV -078 7 3 0.4 RV -079 29 209 7.2 RV -079 29 208 7.2 RV -086 10 38 3.8 RV -086 10 51 5.1 RV -86S 14 69 4.9 RV -86S 14 73 5.2 RV -091 161 2,403 14.9 RV -091 155 1,791 11.6 RV -095 7 9 1.3 RV -095 7 7 1.0 RV -111 13 104 8.0 RV -111 12 69 5.8 RV -177 26 54 2.1 RV -177 26 30 1.2 RV -215 87 1,548 17.8 RV -215 87 1,117 12.8 RV -243 14 60 4.3 RV -243 13 62 4.8 RV -371 12 74 6.2 RV -371 12 37 3.1 unassigned 0 0 0.0 unassigned 0 0 0.0 Is TOTALS 1,115 13,707 12.3 TOTALS 1,105 10,274 9.3 Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Page: 3 Ilan apisaan!H Box Statistics by Highway 000g aavano ut� Data Source: AT&T Wireless 000035 TIME of day Calls to CHP 4th QTR 1999 2000 10pm - 11 pm 423 324 11 pm - 12am 303 213 12am - 1 am 269 183 1 am - 2am 195 150 2am - 3am 172 159 3am - 4am 163 139 4am - 5am 165 142 5am - 6am 293 250 TOTAL 1,983 1,560 Park N Ride 4th QTR 1999 2000 8 4 4 1 2 2 3 2 1 3 0 2 0 1 0 4 18 19 Average Calls / Day 4th Quarter 1999 2.9 2000 3.6 2.3 2.0 2.1 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.8 1.6 3.2 21.7 6am - 7am 7am - 8am 8am - 9am 9am - 10am 475 611 588 618 368 485 442 519 10am - 11 am 1 1 am - 12pm 12pm - 1 pm 1 pm - 2pm 683 746 773 980 512 549 605 663 TOTAL 5,474 4,143 3 11 5 2 6 6 7 9 8 4 20 19 11 11 11 11 84 60 5.2 6.7 6.4 6.8 7.5 8.2 8.5 10.7 60.0 2.7 17.1 4.0 5.3 4.8 5.7 5.6 6.0 6.6 7.3 45.4 2pm - 3pm 3pm - 4pm 4pm - 5pm 5pm - 6pm 6pm - 7pm 7pm - 8pm 8pm - 9pm 9pm - 10pm 976 926 1,008 886 833 596 570 455 667 703 703 671 589 490 430 318 TOTAL 6,250 4,571 21 19 14 24 24 7 11 13 19 14 23 20 7 5 14 2 130 107 10.7 7.3 1 10.1 7.7 11.0 7.7 9.7 7.4 9.1 6.5 6.5 5.4 6.2 4.7 5.0 3.5 4th QTR 1999 4th QTR 2000 I I I � L_ 68.5 50.1 RCTC TOTAL 13,707 10,274 232 186 150.2 112.61 RCTC TOTAL Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Page: 4 CD 1 CA CD 3 3 0 Sv .-t O O 000g iei eno uiv Data Source: AT&T Wireless • • • 000036 • 250 200 150 100 50 Previous PM Cycle Preventive Maintenance Visits Percent of System Visited Jan -00 252 23% Feb -00 33 Mar -00 3% 200 18% Apr -00 90 May -00 8% 205 18% Jun -00 201 Total 981 PM visits needed to be on schedule 186 / Month (17%) PM visits in the last 6 months 163 / Month (15%) 18% 88% AVG Number of Active Call Boxes (over the last 6 months) Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Most Recent PM Cycle Preventive Maintenance Visits Percent of System Visited Jul -00 245 22% Aug -00 0 0% Sep -00 359 32% Oct -00 50 4% Nov -00 244 22% Dec -00 208 19% Total 1,106 99% PM visits needed to be on schedule 185 / Month (17%) PM visits in the last 6 months 184 / Month (17%) AVG Number of Active Call Boxes (over the last 6 months) Riverside Preventive Maintenance 000z iei eno Page: 5 Data Source: Comarco Wireless 000037 sIIeo'so] 10 1ueoJad THIS REPORT COVERS THE INLAND DISPATCH CENTER ONLY A "lost call" occurs when a call box caller hangs up or "redials" before reaching a CHP operator. Note: "redialing", or pressing the call button a second time, disconnects the caller and reconnects them at the end of the queue (calls are answered by CHP in the order they are received.) 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% Aug '99 - CHP changed from the SR1000 ACD to the Meridian ACD. [Data was not provide by CHP from Aug - Dec 1999.] 6% ---U 4°0 2% - 0°0 t0 T � 8 s 8 8 8$ 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Aug -99 Sep -99 a) Oct -99 7a Z Nov -99 o CD Dec -99 Z NA NA NA NA NA Jan -00 9% Feb -00 16% Mar -00 11% Apr -00 9% May -00 Jun -00 12% 14% Jul -00 12% Aug -00 12% Sep -00 13% Oct -00 8% Nov -00 7% Dec -00 8% The length of time (in minutes) a motorist waited before hanoina uD or "rectia►inn" On hold Oct -00 • Nov -00 Dec -00 AVG <12 18% 15% 13% 15% <24 4% 5% 6% 5% <36 8% 6% 8% 7% <48 5% 7% 8% 7% <60 3% 4% 4% 4% <120 17% 20% 16% 18% >120 45% 42% 45% 44% Delay Oct -00 Nov -00 Dec -00 AVG Average 188 174 190 184 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Average time on hold before disconnecting <12 <24 <36 <48 <60 <120 >120 Seconds Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Page: 6 sis/CIauy apisaaniu 000z aaiano u�� Data Source: CHP ACD 00003g • THIS REPORT COVERS THE INLAND DISPATCH CENTER ONLY CHP considers a call to be "delayed" if the call is not answered within 12 seconds. A call must be answered for it to be a delayed call, otherwise it is a lost call. 70% 60% 50% 40% 30 - On Time Delayed 58% c co 7% Jan -99 79% 62 Feb -99 79% 62 Mar -99 80% 60 Apr -99 80% 65 May -99 80% 56 Jun -99 84% 83 z 0 8 8 8 8 8 1 u N C ry 8 $ z 8 8 8 8 5% 4% 3% 1 O 0 0 0 z Aug -99 NA NA Sep -99 a) NA NA Oct -99 z NA NA Nov -99 ai NA NA cn Dec -99 NA NA Jan -00 42% 44 Feb -00 49% 70 Mar -00 48% 55 May -00 53% 71 Jun -00 Jul -00 Aug -00 Sep -00 Oct -00 Nov -00 Dec -00 15% Answered in 12 424 <48''` 20 >120 Oct -00 58% 7% 4% 4% 3% 9% 16% Nov -00 60% 7% 5% 3% 3% 9% 14% Dec -00 56% 7% 5% 3% 3% 10% 16% AVG 58% 7% 5% 4% 3% 9% 15% 51% 45% 49% 44% 58% 60% 56% 67 '88 93 87 55 49 55 ACD Notes Aug '99 - CHP changed from the SR1000 ACD to the Meridian ACD. Criteria for the SR1000 % Delayed = call must be answered within 5 secs. Criteria for the Meridian % Delayed = 12 secs. Data not provide by CHP from Aug - Dec 1999. Note: Aug & Sep data was averaged using histoncal trends due to incomplete CHP source data. Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services Page: 7 Riverside Delayed Call Analysis 0003 iepen() uww Data Source: CHP ACD -000039 CALSAFE CALL BOX ACTIVITY REPORT 'CVRS Counties Sacramento San Joaquin Sutter Yubd Yoa 'MTC Counties Aiamega Comra Costa Marro Napa San Francisco San Mateo Santa Ciara Soiano Sonoma Ca1SAFF Members San Diego Riverside MTC CVRS Ventura Santa Barbara MTC' Santa Cruz Monterey San Luis Obispo Santa Barbara -w Ventura Call Boxes Dec 1,689 21% 1,105 13% 3,250 40% 1,288 16% 556 70/0 December 2000 Dec 7,185 3,493 Calls to CHP Calls / Box Year to Date Dec YTD 30% 104,660 30% 14% 49,818 14% 8,947 37% 127,134 37% 2,838 12% 40,969 12% 1,151 5% 331 4% 17,012 5% 4.3 62.0 3.2 45.1 2.8 39.1 2.2 2.1 31.8 30.6 ;total N '; 8,219 100% 24,214 100% 347,557 100% • 2.9 24.1 42.3 Produced by: TeleTran Tek Services 600 2% 7,964 2% Page: 8 1.8 Data Source: Cellular Tapes • 000040 • AGENDA ITEM 7D • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Ivan M. Chand, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Budget Adjustments BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve: 1) Transfer $6,500 in budget authority from the Finance Department budget to Regional Issues Department budget; and, 2) Increase by $72,000 the Salaries and Benefits Budget for the Commuter Assistance Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Item 1 Staff would like to transfer $6,500 in budget authority from the Finance department budget for Bond Counsel fees, that the Commission does not expect to incur, and increase the Regional Issues department budget for General Legal Services. The high budget expenditures in the Regional Issues, General Legal Services are due to two unknown work efforts at the time of budget preparation: 1) Establishment of an emissions standard for acquisition of urban transit buses including negotiations with RTA and revisions to the emissions standard resolution; and 2) Development of a Clean Fuels Opportunity Fund model MOU and revisions based on funding recipient input. To cover this need, staff is recommending this transfer. The transfer does not use any new revenues and maintains the overall expenditure budget at the same level. .000041 During the preparation of this year's budget, staff did not include a temporary employee hired late last year to market "Keys to the Future." Keys to the Future is funded through state dollars provided by Senate Bill 836 for voluntary rideshare programs for businesses with less than 250 employees. The program replaced the mandatory trip reduction mandates that had been administered by the AQMD. The entire cost of the employee's salary is reimbursed through the SB 836 program. Actual reimbursements are approved by the Regional Transportation Agencies Coalition Technical Advisory Committee. The employee is contracted for employment to that program for only 18 months. Staff is requesting an increase in the Salaries and Benefits of $72,000 to cover the cost of this temporary employee. This increase does not use any Measure "A" revenues. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y & N Year: FY 2000-01 Amount: $ 6,500 Amount: $72,000 Source of Funds: Measure "A" Budget transfer $6,500 Source of Funds: SB 836 Program $72,000 Budget Adjustment: Y Budget Adjustment: Y GLA No. Increase Dept. 65 - 65101, Decrease Dept. 19 - 65202 $ 6,500 GLA No. Increase Dept. 41 - 60001/61000 $72,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: February 12, 2001 000042 • AGENDA ITEM 7E • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Darren M. Kettle, Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE & STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update; 2) Support AB 227 (Longville); and, 3) Endorse the Congressional project funding request list. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • State Update On December 4, 2000, the Legislature commenced the first year of the 2001/2002 Legislative Session. Initial orders of business focused on the "swearing in" of the new legislature and the continuing education for the first-time elected members. The Legislature reconvened on January 4, 2001 and has devoted itself, along with the Governor, predominately towards addressing the State's electric utility crisis. Because of this crisis, transportation issues and policies have not received the attention that they have in the past. However, several transportation bills have been introduced and, in future updates, recommended bill positions will be forthcoming. As directed by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), staff and our state lobbyist will have identified an author to carry legislation that would not require a public agency that has initiated an eminent domain action to pay litigation fees for defendants who are determined to not have an interest in the property to be acquired. Staff will provide the name of the author and the bill number at the meeting. Staff has reviewed the following bill position with the Budget and Implementation Committee and theyrecommended approval: AB 227 (Longville) - Deletes the five-year sunset provision included in last session's AB 2928, dedicating the sales tax on gasoline to the Transportation Investment Fund. Staff recommends: SUPPORT. Staff analysis of AB 227 is as follows: 000043 Existing law requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts on a quarterly basis from the General Fund to the Transportation Investment Fund (hereafter the TIF) in the State Treasury. The Controller, for each quarter during the period commencing on July 1, 2001, and ending on June 30, 2006, is required to transfer specified amounts from the TIF to the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund in the State Treasury, to the Public Transportation Account, a trust fund in the State Transportation Fund, to the Department of Transportation, to the counties, including a city and county, and to the cities, including a city and county, for specified transportation purposes. This bill would extend, indefinitely, the period during which the Controller would be required to make the quarterly transfers from the General Fund to the TIF, and thereby would make an appropriation. Federal Update The 107th Congress convened and a new President was inaugurated in the month of January 2001. Members of Congress devoted most of their time to reorganizing both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Committee memberships have, for the most part been settled upon and, much to our disappointment, no member of the Inland Empire delegation to the House was appointed to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. On the positive side, President Bush nominated, and the Senate confirmed, former California House Member Norm Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. • On February 1, 2001, RCTC and SANBAG hosted a briefing for the transportation staff of the Riverside and San Bernardino County Congressional Delegation. RCTC and SANBAG staff provided presentations and answered questions on the numerous projects and transportation services in both counties. Later in February, several Congressional offices have requested that the Commission provide a list of projects for possible funding which had short turn -around times for implementation. Recognizing that the Congressional deadline for project requests was prior to the Commission's March meeting, staff presented the project request list to the Budget and Implementation Committee at their February 26, 2001 meeting, for their review and they endorsed the project request list. Attachments 000044 Summary Simple • • • Printed: 02/23/2001 AB 381 Pagan-Transsortstlon: ersnsN.erisntsd dewlopmena funding (ntroduosd:0212W2001) Summar Existing law establishes the Jabs -Housing Balance Improvement Account in the State Treasury and requires that all money in the account be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the Department of Housing and Community Development to make grants to local agencies, . cities, counties, and cities and counties relating to improvement of the balance between jobs and housing within the jurisdiction. of those entities, and for other, related purposes. This bill would require that an unspecified percentage of the money in the account be available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to the department for the purpose of providing incentives to local governments, local transit providers, private developers, and financial lenders for the siting and construction of transit -oriented and pedestrian -oriented development within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned transit station, as specified. AB 403 Bates - Transportation: funding: elderly persons (introduced: 02/20/2001) Summa Existing law requires. until June 30, 2006, or until another specified date. whichever date is later, that certain funds be transferred from the General Fund to the Transportation Investment Fund. The money in the Transportation Znvestment Fund is continuously appropriated for the purpose of making certain transfers, including a requirement that a specified percentage of the funds in the Transportation Investment Fund be transferred to cities, counties, and cities and counties, to be used only for street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair. as defined. This bill wbuld authorize the funds transferred as specified to cities, counties, and cities and counties to be expended, all or in part, to fund transportation services for the elderly, as defined, if all of certain conditions are met. The bill thereby would make an appropriation by expanding the purposes for which continuously appropriated funds may be expended. AB 405 Salinas - Transportation funding: Amtrak: bus feeder service: eramptions (introduced: 02/202001) 000045 Sumner Existing law prohibits the Department of Transportation from providing funding to Amtrak for the purpose of entering into a contract with a motor carrier of passengers for the intercity transportation of passengers by motor carrier over regular routes unless prescribed conditions are met, including a requirement that service be provided only for passengers on trips where the passengers have'bad prior •movement by rail or will have subsequent movement by rail, evidenced by a combination rail and bus one-way or roundtrip ticket Existing law exempts from the requirement, until a specified date, service provided for disabled passengers who rely substantially on the use of wheelchairs and travel by motor carrier over any regular route that operates on a particular portion of State Highway Route 17. This bill would expand the exemption without an expiration date to include carriers serving passengers who (a) have no service available other than the service provided by a carrier contracting with Amtrak; (b) are disabled and have no service available, other than provided by a carrier contracting with Amtrak, that is in compliance with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; or (c) are not served by a carrier, other.than a carrier contracting with Amtrak, that provides routes adequate to the passenger's needs. AB 411 Diaz - California Transportation Commission: needs assessment (introduced: 022412001) Sins Existing law imposes various duties and responsibilities on the California Transportation Commission with regard to transportation budgetary planning, and program manners. This bill would require the commission, in consultation with the Department of Transportation and regional transportation planning agencies, to prepare a statewide transportation needs assessment, as described, every 5 years. The bill would require the Commission to report to the Legislature on July 1. 2002, and on July 1 every 5 years thereafter. SB 346 Perata - Traffic Incident Management Program (Introduced: 0211012001) Summar Existing law contains provisions relating to the jurisdiction of law enforcement authorities to police and manage the scene of an accident. Existing law also establishes the California Traffic Safety Program, administered by the Governor, relating to, among other things, emergency services. This bill would require the Department of Transportation and the Department of the California Highway Patrol to establish a traffic incident management plan to respond to and restore traffic to normal conditions after a traffic incident occurs, and to minimize the delay caused by the resulting disruption to traffic flow, as prescribed, in the region designated by the Department of Transportation as District 4. SB 346 Psrata - Transportation: Ban Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority (1nvreduoed: 0212012001) Summer Existing law establiahes the San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Y Authority in state government and specifies the membership of the authority's governing board and the powers and duties of the authority, including a requirement that the authority prepare and adopt San Francisco Say Area water Transit Implementation and Operations Plan, to be submitted to the Legislature on an unspecified date. This bill would require the specified implementation and operations plan to be submitted to the Legislature on or before December 12, 2002. 000046 A8 321 Vargas-Transportstton: transit streets and highways: funding pnbeducsd: 02,11/2001) Summar (1) Existing law provides for the funding of transit and street and highway projects. The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes, among other things, a tax at a rate of 4 3/4% upon the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of, and the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property. This bill would require the State Board of Equalization, in consultation with the Department of Finance, to estimate the amount that is transferred to the General Fund under the Sales and Use Tax Law that is attributable to.revenue collected for the sale or lease of new or used motor vehicles. The bill would require the State Board of Equalization to inform the Controller, in writing, of the amount and would require the Controller, upon receipt of the notice, to transfer the amount to the Congestion Relief Transportation Trust Fund, which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws. - ACA 2 Vargas -Transportation: transit streets and highways: funding (Invodueset 02 1WW2001) Summar The California Constitution authorizes the revenues from taxes imposed y by the state on motor vehicle fuels for use in motor vehicles upon public streets and highways, over and above the costs of collection and refunds authorized by law, to be temporarily loaned to the General Fund only if a condition is imposed requiring that repayment of any loan be made in full to the fund from which it was borrowed (a) during the same fiscal year in which the revenues were loaned, except as specified, or (b) within 3 fiscal years from the date on which the loan was made. when either the Governor has proclaimed a state of emergency and declares that the emergency will result in a significant negative fiscal impact to the General Fund, or the projected aggregate amount of General Fund revenues for the current fiscal year, as projected by the Governor in a report to the Legislature in May of the current fiscal year, is less than the aggregate amount of General Fund revenues for the previous fiscal year as specified in the Governor's Budget es submitted in the current fiscal year. This measure would impose similar conditions upon a loan to the General Fund of funds in the Congestion Relief Transportation Trust Fund in the State Treasury, which fund would be created separately by statute. or the Transportation Investment Fund in the State Treasury, or any successor to either of those funds. This bill contains other related provisions. AB 227 LongvWe - Transportation: funding (ntroduosd: 02!13/2001) Summar Existing law requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts on a quarterly basis from the General Fund to the Transportation Investment Fund (hereafter the TIF) in the State Treasury The Controller, for each quarter during the period commencing on July 1, 2001, and ending on June 30, 2006, is required to transfer specified amounts from the T.F to the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund in the State Treasury, to the Public Transportation Account, a trust fund in the state Transportation Fund, to the Department of Transportation, to the counties, including a city and county, and to the cities, including a city and county, for specified transportation purposes. This bill would extend indefinitely the period during which the Controller would be required to make the quarterly transfers from the General Fund to the TIF, and thereby would make an appropriation. 58 171 McClintock - Highways: transporatlon gridlock emergencies (Inttoduoelt 02/03/2001) • 000047 Summar Existing law authorizes the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency, as defined, in an area affected or likely to be affected by the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property caused by condition such as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, drought, sudden and severe energy shortage, plant or animal infestation or disease, the Governor s warning of an earthquake or volcanic prediction, or an earthquake complications resulting from the Year 200D Problem, or other conditions, except as specified, which, by reason of their magnitude, are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of any single county, city and county, or city and require the combined forces of a mutual aid region or regions to combat. This bill would include a transportation gridlock emergency,_ which the bill would define, within the definition of .'state of emergency.' The bill would authorize a transportation gridlock emergency to be declared for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion on any highway or segment of highway for which the Department of Transportation has determined that the average daily vehicle hours of delay, excluding weekends, exceeds 3,000 vehicle hours. This bill contains other related provisions. A9 133 Alqulst - asgien& transportation plans (Introduced: 01/2342001) Summar Existing law requires designated transportation planning agencies to y: prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan that includes a policy element, an action element. and a financial element. This bill would authorize those agencies to also include other factors of local significance as an element of the regional transportation plan. AS 37 Strickland - Sales and use tames: essmpdons: gasoline and diesel fuel (introduced: 12iD4I2000) Summar The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a cax on the gross receipts 'from the Y 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. This bill would exempt motor vehicle fuel and diesel fuel from those taxes. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws. 000048 California's 44th Congressional District The Honorable Congresswoman Mary Bono • • • 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission respectfully requests federal funds in the amount of $2 million for design, engineering and environmental document preparation for a new interchange on the Interstate 10 freeway at Indian Avenue in the Coachella Valley. Due to increasing truck volumes and the fact that this interchange serves one of the primary gateways to tourist destinations in the city of Palm Springs including the Palm Springs Airport, this project has become one of the Coachella Valley's high priority infrastructure projects. The Indian Avenue interchange also serves as a cutoff for I-10 westbound traffic heading north to Highway 62 towards Twenty -Nine Palms and the Twenty -Nine Palms Marine Base. 2. RCTC also respectfully requests $10 million in federal funds to augment nearly $5 million in already committed local funds for engineering, design, environmental documentation and first phase right-of-way acquistion to realign segments of Highway 79 in the general vicinity of the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto. The total project cost to realign Highway 79 from the Ramona Expressway to the new Diamond Valley Reservoir south of the city of Hemet is $84.5 million. The total length of the realignment is approximately 15 miles and is the second of three segments that will connect the Temecula Valley in south Riverside county to the Interstate 10 Freeway in the Banning Pass. California's 43'd Congressional District The Honorable Congressman Ken Calvert 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission respectfully requests federal New Start program funds in the amount of $44.5 million to combine with local revenues of $18.5 million to construct a commuter rail transit line on RCTC owned right-of-way known as the San Jacinto Branch line. The requested amount will fund the upgrade of a rail line that that has the lowest speed rating issued by the Federal Railroad Administration. This first segment extends from downtown Riverside to Perris, and also includes the construction of 3 new commuter rail stations, and locomotives and passenger rail cars. The length of this segment is 19 miles. Later segments will allow service to the Hemet/San Jacinto area but are not part of this request. The Commission also respectfully requests $8 million in federal funds to augment $9.5 million in locally committed funds to reconstruct the Green River interchange on the 91 Freeway in the city of Corona. The factors of prolific residential, commercial, and industrial growth in the general area accompanied by extreme peak hour congestion on the 91 Freeway and proximity to the Highway 71 interchange have made the Green River Avenue interchange the most congested in the 43'd Congressional District. 3. Both the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the March Joint Powers Authority respectfully request $1.5 million in federal funds to initiate the development of a comprehensive study for ground access at March Air Reserve Base. This effort will be the first step towards developing a road, rail and air circulation program that will allow March to become a true economic development catalyst for western Riverside county. 000049 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COO iSION/SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVEFO ANTS POSITIONS 0 ATE LEGISLATION Legislation/Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Ad option AB 33 (Romero) In the event of a labor dispute, this bill would establish the LACMTA Labor Relations Trust Funds as a continuously appropriated fund in the State Treasury and would require the money in the fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor. Pending committee assignment . No position taken. AB 132 (Horton) This bill would amend the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act to provide that a public agency shop agreement may apply to management, confidential, or supervisory employees. Pending committee assignment . No position taken. AB 133 (Alquist) This bill would authorize RTPA's to include other factors of local significance as an element of the RTP. Pending committee assignment . No position taken. AB 227 (Longville) This indefinitely during Controller required quarterly the TIF, make bill would extend the period which the would be to make the transfers from General Fund to the and thereby would an appropriation. Referred to Assembly Transportation Committee, hearing date 3/19/01. Staff recommends: SUPPORT F:\users\preprint\js\legmat. doc 000050 Legislation/Author Description Bill Stat us Position Date of Board Adoption AB 257 (Longville) Existing law authorizes a county, and cities within the county, to create a service authority for freeway emergencies for the purpose of establishing and implementing an emergency motorist aid system on portions of the California Freeway and Expressway System located within the county in which the authority . is established . Existing law allows the authority to contract with the Department of the California Highway Patrol or a private entity to respond to those calls. This bill would make technical changes in that law. May be heard in Committee 3/17/01 . No position taken. AB 321 (Vargas) This bill would require the State Board of Equalization to inform the Controller of the amount and would require the Controller to transfer the amount to the Congestion Relief Transportation Trust Fund, which the bill would establish in the State Treasury. May be heard in Committee 3/22/01. No position taken. 000051 F:\users\preprin t\j s\legmat. doc • • • Leg's' `ion/Author Description 4/11 .: us Position - Date lard Ad .4)n AB 38 apan) • This bill would require that an unspecified percentage of the money in the account be available to the department for the purpose of providing incentives to local governments, local transit providers private developers and financial lenders for the citing and construction of transit- oriented and pedestrian - oriented development within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned transit station. Pending committee assignment. No position taken . • AB 403 (Bates) This bill would the funds transferred specified to cities, counties, and counties to be to fund transportation services for the as defined, if certain conditions met. The bill would make appropriation expanding the for which continuously appropriated be expended. authorize as cities and expended elderly, all of are thereby an by purposes funds may Pending committee assignment. No position taken. 000052 F:\users\preprin t\j s\legmat. doc Legislati on/Author Description AB 419 (Dutra) AB 631 (Oropeza) 000053 This bill would authorize, until January 1, 2010, certain transportation authorities to use a design -build process for bidding on transportation projects, including a requirement that certain information be verified under oath. Because a verification under oath is made under penalty of perjury, the bill would impose a state -mandated local program by changing the definition of a crime. This bill would require the CTC, in conjunction with the department and state's regional transportation planning agencies, to prepare and submit to the Governor a comprehensive statewide transportation needs assessment containing specified information regarding unfunded transportation needs every 5 years beginning on 12/103. This bill would require the needs assessment to include, to the extent possible, a list compiled by the department and the regional agencies participating in the needs assessment prioritizing their top 10 unfunded projects. Bill Status Position Pending committee assignment. No committee assignment. No position taken. Date of Board Adoption No position taken. F: \users\preprin t\j s\l egmat. doc • ' ' Le li on/Author Description sill tus Position Dat e oard Adan AB 71 havez) Existing law requires the DOT to develop contract specifications to conduct a statewide study of technically feasible and available cost-effective means to reduce 4- and 5 -axle truck traffic from congested urban freeways during commute hours. This bill would delete the provisions of the existing law. Pending committee assignment. No position taken. AB 860 ( McLeod, Negrette) This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to provide funding for a transportation project in the County of Los Angeles that will assist in the mitigation of traffic impacts due to the construction of the Alameda Corridor. No committee assignment. No position taken. AB 1039 (Oropeza) Existing law provides that in the SCAG region, the appropriate entities shall allocate up to 3/4 of 1 percent of annual revenues on or before each July 15, to the multi -county designated transportation planning agency for the transportation planning and programming Erocess. Existing law mits the allocation to $1 million per year. This bill would remove that limitation. No committee assignment. No position taken. F: \users\preprin t\j s\legmat. doc 000054 Legislation/Author Description Bill Status Position Date of Board Adoption AB 1091 (Pacheco) This bill would provide that any provision. contract for the construction, maintenance, or operation of a transportation facility, entered into between state entity and party, is void if the provision purports limit the authority state to exercise jurisdiction over highway system, other transportation system that is subject state jurisdiction, order to minimize competition with transportation facility . in a design, a private to of the its the state or any to in the Pending committee assignment. No position taken. . AB 1303 (Hollingsworth) This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature that alternative routes that may be used to travel from Riverside County to Orange County be evaluated and considered. Pending committee assignment. No position taken. 00005 F:\users\preprin t\j s\Iegmat.doc • • Le ' ` Lion/Author Description 'II tus Position Date oard . Ad . on AB 13 (Longville) This bill would create the Passenger Rail Improvement, Safety, and Modernization Program and would establish the Passenger Rail Improvement, Safety and Modernization Sub account in the Public Transportation account in the State Transportation Fund. The bill would annually appropriate $100,000,000, adjusted annually, from the General Fund to the Controller for transfer to the sub account . AB 1463 (Longville) Existing law requires a court in an eminent domain action to award the defendant his or her litigation expenses whenever the proceeding is wholly or partly dismissed or when the final judgment is that the plaintiff cannot acquire the property sought. This bill would specify that the court is required to award the defendant his or her litigation expenses whenever the proceeding is wholly or partly dismissed, provided that the defendant owned or had an interest in the property that is the subject of the litigation. May be heard in Committee 3/27/01 . .• No position taken. F:\u sers\preprin t\js\legmat. doc 000056 Legislation/Author AB 1587 (Pacheco) SB 10 (Soto) Description Bill Status SB 18 (Alarcon) This bill would authorize the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency during conditions of transportation gridlock, as defined. Existing law requires the DOT in consultation with the California Highway Patrol, to establish and administer a "Safe Routes to School" construction program pursuant to authority granted under specified federal law and to use federal transportation funds for construction of bicycle and pedestrian safety and traffic calming projects. This bill woulddelete an obsolete study and reporting provision and the January 1 2002 repeal date thereby extending the program indefinitely. Existing law provides for the membership of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. This bill would require that 6 of the members of the authority be elected and would otherwise substantially revise the membership of the authority. No committee assignment. No committee assignment. Re -referred to Assembly Transportation Committee 1/29/01. 000057 F:\users\preprin t\j s\legmat. doc • • Position Date of Board Ad option No position taken. No position taken . No position taken. Legir' tion/Author Description 'ill tus Position • Date Ward Adn SB 10 er • Existing law authorizes the establishment of a service authority and the importance of a $1 service fee in a county if the county board of supervisors, by a 2/3 vote, and a majority of the cities having a majority of the incorporated population within the county, adopt a resolution establishing the authority and the imposition of a service fee on vehicles as specified. This bill would limit the authority to suspend the service fee to abatement programs that have been in existence for at least 2 full fiscal years and would require every service authority that imposes a service fee to issue a fiscal yearend report, as specified, to the Controller on or before October 31 of each year. The bill would require each service authority that fails to submit the report by November 30 of each year to have its fee suspended for one year. To Assem y y Transportation Committee on 2/1/01. Set for hearing on 3/20/01. No position taken. • • F:\users\preprint\j s\legmat. doc 000058 Legislation/Author Descripti on Bill Status Position Date of B oard Adoption SB 127 (Johnson) Under existing law, certain local entities are authorized to use design - build procurement for specified types of projects . This bill would require the Legislative Analyst to conduct a study and report to the Legislature on the appropriateness of expanding the number of local government entities that may use design - build procurement . Pending committee assignment. No position taken . SB 171 (McClintock) SB This bill would authorize a transportation gridlock emergency to be declared for the purpose of relieving traffic congestion on any highway or segment of highway for the the DOT has determined that the average daily vehicle hours of delay, excluding weekends, exceeds 3,000 vehicle hours. Pending committee assignment. No position taken. 618 (Margett) Existing law requires that all transportation funds that are available to the state be expended according to specified priorities. This bill would repeal both of those provisions relating to the priority rankings of soundwall projects. Pending committee assignment. No position taken. 000059 F: \users\preprin t\j s\ le gmat. doc • • Legi-' tion/Author Description tus Position Date oard Ad on SB 75�lurray} Exi in I w re ires that Existing a requires a regional or local receiving an allocation from the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund certify that it will sustain its level of expenditures of transportation purposes at a level that is consistent with the average of its annual expenditures during the 97/98, 98/99, and 99/00 fiscal years. This bill would make technical, non -substantive changes in this provision Pendin c4p,11 g mittee assignment. No position t ken. a SB 790 (Karnette) This bill would specify that it is the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that removes restrictions on county share advances from the State Transportation Improvement Program process to promote efficient use of transportation funding. Pending committee assignment. No position taken. SB 829 (Karnette) This bill would delete the requirement that transfers be made from the TIF to the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund and would revise the percentages of the total in the TIF that would be required to be transferred to the Public Transportation Account, the department, and the cities, counties and cities and counties. Pending committee assignment . .. No position taken. F: \users\preprin t\j s\I egmat. do c 000060 Legislation/Author Description Position Date of Board SB 956 (Ackerman) ACA 2 (Vargas) 000061 F: \users\preprint\j s\leg mat. doc • Existing law provides for the funding of state, local, and regional highway projects . This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to appropriate $500,000,000 annually from the General Fund for the purpose of funding the annual maintenance cost of, and to begin to address a backlog in deferred maintenance for, local streets and roads. This measure would impose certain conditions upon a loan to the General Fund of funds in the Congestion Relief Transportation Trust Fund in the State Treasury, which fund would be created separately by statute, or the Transportation Investment Fund in the State Treasury, or any successor to either of those funds. Contains other related provisions. Bill Status Pending committee assignment. Pending committee assignment. No position taken. Adoption No position taken. • AGENDA ITEM 7F • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Refined RCTC Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor Grade Crossing Priority List PLANS & PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Commission approval to refine the grade crossing priority list as follows: 1) Adopt Scenario 2 which emphasizes the factors of delay and safety (accident reduction); AND 2) Approve the City of Banning's request to change their local ranking of Hargrave Street to 2' and Sunset Ave to 1st. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As a result of RCTC's involvement in the development of the Corridor Plan for the Alameda Corridor East(ACE)-Trade Corridor Steering Committee, a prioritized list of grade crossing improvements along the three main lines (UP Los Angeles subdivision, UP Yuma Main subdivision, and BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision) was developed with the involvement of the affected jurisdictions: Cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Coachella, Corona, Indio, and Riverside, and the County of Riverside. At its December 1 3th meeting, the Commission approved the preliminary prioritization of rail crossing improvements (Attachment A), and directed staff to refine the prioritization to incorporate consideration of emission reduction and noise reduction (train whistles) into the prioritization of improvements. The evaluation of additional factors is now completed. Prioritization of grade separation needs in Riverside County is now based on the following seven factors: • • Existing Vehicle Delay (1999) • Future Vehicle Delay (2020) • Accident Reduction (Safety) • Distance from other grade separations • Local ranking • Emission reduction • Noise reduction (impact on nearby residential areas) 000062 From the evaluation of these factors, the 59 rail crossings have been separated into five groups to indicate their relative priority for improvement. Those included in Group#1 and Group #2 are considered to be the high priority crossings for near -term improvement. In the original evaluation presented in December, a total of 19 crossings qualified for either the #1 or #2 priority group. Priority List Scenarios In the updated evaluation, two optional priority listings have been prepared. Scenario 1 presents the priority based on equal weighting of all seven evaluation factors. Scenario 2 puts greater weight on the first three factors (existing delay, future delay, and accident reduction (safety)). The accompanying table (Attachment B) shows the priority of each crossing in the original evaluation ; Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. (For the sake of simplicity, this table lists only those crossings which achieve either Group 1 or Group 2 priority in any of the three scenarios. Once the Commission approves a scenario, the entire list of 59 crossings will be updated to reflect new priority listing.) At the Plans and Programs Committee meeting held on February 26th, the Committee recommended Scenario 2, the list that puts greater weight on safety and delay. Request from the City of Banning As part of the local ranking criteria, each affected jurisdiction was asked to prioritize grade crossing improvements in their area. Attachment C is the City of Banning's original submission. Since the December approval of the prioritization list, the City of Banning has requested a change to their local priority ranking (Attachment D). If the City of Banning's request is approved (to switch local priorities between Sunset and Hargrave), it would have the following effects on priority: • Scenario #1, Sunset moves from Priority 3 to Priority 2 and Hargrave moves from Priority 2 to Priority 3; • Scenario #2, Sunset remains Priority 2 and Hargrave remains Priority 3. Once the revised priority list is approved by the Commission, it will be forwarded to the ACE Steering Committee for inclusion in the Corridor Plan that will be used to support a federal earmark in the re -authorization of TEA -21. • • • 000063 ATTACHMENT A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST -TRADE CORRIDOR GRADE CROSSING IMPROVEMENT PRIORITY LIST Approved 12/13/00 Rail Line Cross Street Jurisdiction Recommended Improvement 2020 Priority Group UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 50 Coachella Grade Separation 1 UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 48/ Dillon Rd Coachella/Indio Grade Separation 1 . BNSF (SB SUB) McKinley St Corona Grade Separation 1 :NSF & UP SB SUB, 3rd St Riverside - Grade Separation 1 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Chicago Av Riverside Grade Separation 1 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Columbia Av Riverside Grade Separation 1 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Iowa Av Riverside Grade Separation 1 BNSF (SB SUB) Mary St Riverside Grade Separation 1 UP (LA SUB) Riverside Av Riverside Grade Separation 1 BNSF (SB SUB) Magnolia Av Riverside County- Grade Separation 1 UP (YUMA MAIN) Hargrave St Banning Grade Separation 2 UP (YUMA MAIN) Sunset Av Banning Grade Separation 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Auto Center Dr Corona Grade Separation 2 UP (LA SUB Brockton Av Riverside Grade Separation 2 UP (LA SUB) Magnolia Av Riverside Grade Separation 2 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Spruce St Riverside Grade Separation 2 UP (LA SUB) Streeter Av Riverside Grade Separation 2 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Center St Riverside County Grade Separation 2 UP (LA SUB) Jurupa Rd Riverside County Grade Separation 2 UP (YUMA MAIN) Califomia Av Beaumont Grade Separation 3 UP (YUMA MAIN) San Timoteo Canyon Rd Calimesa Grade Separation 3 UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 52 Coachella Roadway Improvement 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Smith Av Corona Grade Separation 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Adams St Riverside Grade Separation 3 BNSF & UP (RIV) Cridge St Riverside Grade Separation 3 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Kansas Av Riverside Grade Separation 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Madison St Riverside Grade Separation •3 UP (LA A SUB) Palm Av Riverside Grade Separation 3 BNSF (SB SUB) T ler St Riverside Grade Separation 3 BNSF (SB SUB) Washington St Riverside Grade Separation 3 UP (YUMA MAIN) Broadway Riverside County Grade Separation 3 UP (LA SUB Rutile St Riverside County Roadway Improvement 3 UP (YUMA MAIN) 22nd St Banning Grade Separation 4 UP (YUMA MAIN) San Gorgonio Av Banning Grade Separation 4 UP (YUMA MAIN) Viele Av Beaumont Safety Upgrade 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Cota St Corona Grade Separation 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Joy St Corona Grade Separation 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Railroad St Corona Grade Separation 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Buchanan St Riverside Grade Separation 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Jefferson St Riverside Grade Se•aration 4 BNSF (SB SUB) Pierce St Riverside Grade Separation 4 UP (YUMA MAIN) Airport Road Riverside County Grade Separation 4 UP (LA SUB) Bellgrave Av Riverside County Grade Separation 4 UP (LA SUB) Clay St Riverside County Grade Separation 4 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Main St Riverside County Grade Separation 4 UP (YUMA MAIN) Pennsylvania Av Beaumont Grade Separation 5 UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 54 Coachella Safety Upgrade 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Radio Rd Corona Safety Upgrade 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Sheridan St Corona Grade Separation 5 :NSF & UP (SB SUB 7th St Riverside Grade Separation 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Gibson St Riverside Roadway Improvement 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Harrison St Riverside Grade Se•aration 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Jackson St Riverside Grade Separation 5 BNSF (SB SUB) Jane St Riverside Grade Separation 5 UP (LA SUB) Mountain View Av Riverside Safety Upgrade 5 :NSF & UP (SB SUB Palmyrita Av Riverside Grade Separation 5 UP (LA SUB) Panorama Rd Riverside Grade Separation 5 UP (YUMA MAIN) Apache Trail Riverside County Safety Upgrade 5 UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 66 Riverside County Grade Separation 5 000064 • RCTC GRADE SEPARATION PRIORITIES • Pri oritizati on Methodol ogy Factors Used in Prioritizati on 1999 Average Daily Vehicle Delay 2020 Average Daily Vehicle Delay Overall Accident Score (combination of frequency and severity) Adjacent Grade Separations Local Ranking Methodol ogy f or Measuring 1999 Average Daily Vehicle Delay: 1999 Average Daily Traffic volume and gate down time (through trains only) 2020 Average Daily Vehicle Delay: 2020 Average Daily Traffic volume and gate down time (through trains only) Overall Accident Score: Accident frequency multiplied by severity (train -involved accidents). Adjacent Grade Separations: Distanc e to nearest grade separation. Local Ranking: local agency ranking of priority. Ratin g Points 1999 Average Daily Vehicle Delay 5 > 30 veh hrs/day 4 > 20 veh hrs/day 3 > 15 veh hrs/day 2 > 10 veh hrs/day 1 > 5 veh hrs/day 0 < 5 veh hrs/day 2020 Average Daily Vehicle Delay >100 veh hrs/day > 75 veh hrs/day > 50 veh hrs/day > 25 veh hrs/day > 10 veh hrs/day < 10 veh hrs/day Overall Accid ent Score > 0.20 > 0 .15 > 0.10 > 0.05 > 0.00 0 Adjacent Grade Separations > 1 mile > 1/2 mil e > 1/4 mile < 1/4 mile Rating points for local ranking score were determined using the inverse of the local agency's ranking, factored up so that the highest priority pro ject received 25 points . Weighting Points Weighting points were applied to each evaluation factor so that each factor is weighted equally, with a maximum possible score of 500 points. The maximum possible total score is 2,500 points (500 for each factor) . Priority Gro upings The grade crossings were groupe d into five priority groupings based on their overall score. Delay Emissions Inputs 1999 Average Daily Vehicle Delay 2020 Average Daily Vehicle Delay Land use category and corresponding auto/truck mode split (SCAG 1984) State of California Total Vehicles by Classification Forecast for 2001 (Caltrans 1997) Idling Vehicle Emissions (EPA 1998) Delay Emission score s were based on sum of one fifth percentiles fo r each mobile source emission category scaled to 100 p oint score . Residential Noise Intrusio n Residential noise intrusion score is based of judgment of intrusion of noise from 100dB horn at 100 feet from source into residential areas surrounding rail crossing. Scores are a product of the proportion of residential landuses impacted by unacceptable noise levels, and the number of trains using each cro ssing. Scores are based on one fifth percentiles for noise intrusion scaled to 100 points. ACE Attach B .xis;Methodology;2/28/01 40 2/28/01 000065 ATTACHMENT B PRIORITY GROUPINGS (crossings with Priority #1 or #2) 3NSF Rail Line Cross Street Jurisdiction Original Priority Group (Equal Weighting) Scenario 1 (Delay & Safety) Scenario 2 BNSF (SB SUB) McKinley St Corona 1 1 1 UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 50 Coachella 1 1 1 UP (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 48/ Dillon Rd Indio/Coachella 1 1 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) 3rd St Riverside 1 1 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Chicago Av Riverside 1 1 1 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Columbia Av Riverside 1 2 2 BNSF & UP (SB SUB) Iowa Av Riverside 1 1 1 BNSF (SB SUB) Mary St Riverside 1 1 1 UP (LA SUB) Riverside Av Riverside 1 2 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Magnolia Av Riverside County 1 1 1 UP (YUMA MAIN) Hargrave St Banning 2 2 3 UP (YUMA MAIN) Sunset Av Banning 2 3 2 BNSF (SB SUB) Auto Center Dr Corona 2 2 2 UP (LA SUB) Brockton Av Riverside 2 2 3 UP (LA SUB) Magnolia Av Riverside 3NSF 2 1 1 & UP (SB SUB) Spruce St Riverside 2 2 1 UP (LA SUB) Streeter Av Riverside 3NSF & UP 2 1 2 (SB SUB) Center St Riverside County 2 3 3 UP (LA SUB) Jurupa Rd Riverside County 2 2�• 2 & UP (SB SUB) Kansas Ave Riverside BNSF 3 2 3 (SB SUB) Washington Ave Riverside UP 3 2 2 (YUMA MAIN) Avenue 52 Coachella UP 3 2 2 (YUMA MAIN) Cridge Street Riverside 3 3 2 000066 • • ACE Attach B.xls;Summary;2/28/01 Riverside Count transportation Commission • • ATTACHMENT C 052458 o5Z4 58 3560 University Avenue Suite 100 • Riverside, California 92501 phone: (909)787-7141 • fax: (909)787-7920 • www.rctc.org tz GRADE CROSSING PRIORITIZATION FORM CITY OF BANNING Overall Rankin • of Grade Crossin • Im • rovements RANK (1 = highest - 4 = lowest) CROSS STREET WRCOG CTP LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATION* List Key Factors Used in I Ranking** Rail Line: UP (Yuma Main) 2 Sunset Avenue Grade Separation a, b , c , f , g , 1 , 1 3 22nd Street Grade Separation a, b , c , f , i , j 4 San Gorgonio Ave Grade Separation a, b , c , i , j 1 Hargrave Street Grade Separation a , b , c , e , f , g , h , i , j attached Rail Crossing Analysis for additional detail **Factors Used in Ranking; a. reduced accidents b. c. improve emergency access d. e. cost-effectiveness f. g. impact on adjacent land uses h. i. emission reductions j. k. other reduced traffic delay capital cost economic benefits to surrounding area fuel savings ranked on CPUC Priority List ('00 -'01) Additional Comments: See attached comments. Contact Information Name Phone E-mail ri t vhanni noPhotmai 1 . com Kahono Oei (9U9) Y22-J1JU Submitted By Kahono 0ei Title Assistant City Engineer Fax (909) 922-3141 Signature Please submit form to Stephanie Wiggins at RCTC by Thu Date10-26-00 ay, November 9, 2000. 000067 The City of Banning is divided by I-10 and the railroad. The north side consists of a majority of commercial and residential zone areas, whereas the south side consists of industrial and residential zone areas. Hargrave Street is the main access road for the Industrial Park Area, City park, Animal Shelter, Wastewater Treatment Facility, Riverside County Road Camp, and the City Airport. Due to the increased railroad activity and future development in the vicinity, Hargrave Street/I-10, is experiencing increased traffic delays impacting the emergency services and economic benefits to the surrounding areas, and more traffic delays are anticipated in the future at the Hargrave Street Railroad Crossing. Currently, 8th Street (also known as Highway 243) is the only primary accessible road from the north to the south of the highway and railroad. In the event that an emergency occurs and the railroad crossings are occupied on Hargrave Street, San Gorgonio Avenue, 22nd Street and Sunset Avenue, the emergency services can only utilize 8th Street as a viable access. Moreover, motorists invariably utilize 8th Street as a primary access increasing the congestion on 8th Street when all the crossings are experiencing traffic delays, and seriously impacting the emergency services to the residential, commercial zone areas, and high school. Hargrave Street Crossing would serve as an essential emergency access and additional benefit for the residential and commercial zone areas. Hence, reducing traffic delays and ensuring improved emergency access to the surrounding areas. Railroad Data Information: Federal. ID No.: 7606955 PUC ID No.: 3568.8 000068 J e.tl U 1 l ruo11c: worms cngineerin� .7u5 �Gc-Oi'el ATTACHMENT D p. c • • • L ESTABLISHED 1913 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT January 31, 2001 CITY of BANNING 99 E. Ramsey St. • P.O. Box 998 • Banning, CA 92220-0998 • (909) 922-3130 • Fax (909) 922-3141 Ms. Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, California 92501 SUBJECT: Railroad Grade Crossing Priority List Dear Ms. Wiggins: Per our conversation yesterday, the City of Banning would like to request a change to the priority list for the Railroad Grade Crossing, which was submitted to your office in October 2000. The original priority list ranked Hargrave Street Grade Crossing as the first priority. However, in its place, the City would like to change the first priority to Sunset Avenue Grade Crossing. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at. (909) 922-3130. Sincerely Kahono Oei, Assistant City Engineer K.O:vep Copy: Paul Toor, Public Works Director File 000069 • AGENDA ITEM 7G • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: CETAP Update and Amendment to the Scope of Work PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Receive and file the CETAP Update as an information item; and, 2) Approve the amended Scope of Work. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Internal Corridors: The draft environmental process is underway for the two intra- county CETAP corridors (Banning/Beaumont to Temecula -Winchester to Temecula study area, and Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore). The NEPA/404 documents were submitted to the federal resource agencies for their review and we have.received comments and requests for additional information to assist them in their evaluation of our Purpose and Need statements, Evaluation Criteria and Initial Alternatives. This has been quite a complex process since we are requesting that the resource agencies change from their "usual" way of reviewing and commenting on the documents, which can take many months or years to render concurrence, to a much streamlined approach which we hope will allow a finding of concurrence on our documents by April 2001. We have had tremendous support from our local Caltrans office and the Federal Highway Administration through their participation in many meetings with the Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corp of Engineers. The current schedule has the draft Environmental Impact Report/Statement completed by the end of July 2001, with the "preferred alternative" selected for each corridor by December 2001. After the preferred alternative is determined, final EIR/EIS documents must be prepared and local hearings held prior to the rendering of a Record of Decision. Inter -County Corridors: Work on the Moreno Valley to San Bernardino County corridor is moving along very well. Through the assistance of the Bi-County Policy Committee and the Bi-County Technical Advisory Committee, eight alternatives are currently recommended for further examination. These alternatives include: ► Reche Canyon Rd. widening to Perris Blvd. (controlled access arterial only) ► Reche Vista/Perris Blvd to California/SR30 (tunnel) ► Reche Canyon to California/SR30 (tunnel) 000010 ► Pigeon Pass to Reche Canyon (controlled access arterial only) ► Pigeon Pass to Center Street or Main Street (controlled access arterial) ► 1-215/SR60 Interchange (Box Springs area) to California/SR30 (tunnel) ► 1-215/SR60 widening/frontage roads ► Transit options We are in the process of scheduling public scoping meetings to receive comments on the various transportation alternatives being considered for improved access along this corridor. We expect the public process will be similar to what was done for the two internal corridors with a workshop format followed to obtain many comments on the pros and cons for each alternative. The workshops will be held in early April; one in Moreno Valley and one in San Bernardino County. After this process is complete, the list of alternatives for further study will be refined and the Commission will be asked for their approval on which alternatives to include in the environmental process. The Orange County Transportation Authority has contracted with Spinner -Lamar and Associates to conduct a review of their transportation needs. They want to have public workshops in Orange County to obtain comments from their residents on transportation priorities. We have had preliminary discussions with their consultant and are working on scheduling a meeting to make sure the process moves forward in a coordinated fashion. Additionally, a Resource Management Plan is being developed for the Cleveland National Forest. We are working with the District Ranger to make sure they are aware of our study efforts. In order to keep our options open for a possible future new or improved corridor through the Cleveland Nation Forest, we will be required to make a formal submission of possible routes by July 2001. Scope of Work: When the original CETAP Budget and Scope of Work was approved by the Commission, $500,000 in contingency funds were budgeted since it was unknown at the time the actual number of transportation alternatives to be studied through this work effort. Sverdrup has reviewed the various tasks under CETAP and determined that the contingency funds are needed to complete environmental tasks for the internal corridors. (Note: the work effort for the external corridors was addressed by the Commission in September 2000). Key factors dictating the need to allocate the contingency for the environmental work include: 1) the total length of alternatives to be evaluated is approximately 100 miles, 2) there will be separate EIR/EIS documents for each corridor (to allow each corridor to have independent utility), and 3) the federal resource agencies' insistence that the formal NEPA/404 integration process be followed in addition to the integration efforts already implicit in the RCIP process. No additional funds are needed as the contingency amount was included in the originally approved budget. 000071 ATTACHMENT • • • Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents TASK 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS 6.3 CETAP Environmental Documentation (Internal Corridors: Banning/Beaumont to Temecula and Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore) The environmental documentation necessary for approval of the transportation improvement corridors proposed through the CETAP process under both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will be prepared in this task. The environmental documentation for the transportation corridors will be closely coordinated and consistent with the environmental documentation for the MSHCP and the General Plan Update. Based on our experience with similar projects, we propose to prepare two joint CEQA/NEPA documents (one for each of the two corridors within Riverside County). The documents will provide the basis necessary for selection of a preferred alternative within the Banning/Beaumont to Temecula Corridor and a preferred alternative within the Hemet to Lake Elsinore Corridor. The documents will provide documentation sufficient for preserving right-of-way for these corridors (either through dedications or outright purchase of land). The environmental analysis will be based on plans developed in Task 5. that will define a corridor centerline and an outside right-of-way line. Supplemental environmental documents will likely be required for construction level approvals. The work program for the CETAP environmental documentation must follow the NEPA/404 MOU Integration Process. This is a coordinated process involving Caltrans, FHWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the U.S. Environmental . Protection Agency (EPA) to ensure the integration of NEPA and Section 404(b)( 1 ) of the federal Clean Water Act. An interagency Memorandum of Understanding was adopted in 1994. The work effort involves early coordination with the Corps, USFWS, and EPA by Caftans and FHA, and requires that the Corps, USFWS, and EPA review and concur on a project's purpose and need, evaluation criteria, and alternatives before proceeding with an EIS document. The work effort to accomplish the NEPA/404 Integration Process is included within the work effort for each task below (e.g., additional effort required for concurrence on Purpose and Need is included in Task 6.3.4 [Screencheck EIR/EIS]). Work Completed as of 7/31/00: For each task below, a summary of work completed as of 7/31/00 is presented. In addition, substantial effort has been expended for meeting attendance, including RCIP team meetings, coordination meetings with Caltrans and/or RCTC, monthly CETAP Advisory Committee meetings, CETAP Working Group meetings, and several meetings with Caltrans, FHWA, and the federal resource agencies regarding the NEPA/404 Integration Process. 000072 ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents 6.3.1 Initial Study/Notice of Preparation/Notice of Intent Environmental Constraints Identification: To assist in the initial screening of alternatives, LSA will identify potential environmental constraints within each candidate alternative for each corridor. This constraints identification will be based on evaluating a 1,000 foot cross section (500 feet on either side of the centerline) using preliminary mapping at 1: 12000 overlaid on an aerial photo base. The purpose of the constraints identification is to provide guidance to the project engineer on resources/structures that should be avoided to the greatest extent possible in developing the alignment for each alternative. Specific resources/structures to be identified include biological resources, waters of the United States, archaeological/historic sites, parks/recreation sites, and residential/non- residential structures. The RCIP Existing Setting GIS database will be used for this analysis. The product of this task will be a set of plots of each alignment with any resources/structures highlighted within the 1,000 foot cross section. Initial Study/Notice of Preparation/Notice of Intent: An Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (NOP) will be prepared for both of the CETAP corridors. The Initial Study for each corridor will describe expected issues and analysis to be provided in the EIR/EIS and the reasons for determining that certain environmental effects would not be significant. The NOP will indicate that an EIR/EIS is in preparation, and will request guidance from agencies and the public regarding the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the EIR/EIS. The NOP will include a brief description of the project, and will identify the process for completing the EIR/EIS as well as its relationship to the MSHCP EIR/EIS and the General Plan EIR. The draft Initial Study/NOP for each corridor will be submitted to RCTC for review and approval for distribution. Using RCTC's NOP distribution list, Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies (if any), and other interested parties that should receive the NOP will be identified. We will distribute and mail the required copies of the Initial Study/NOP, In addition to the NOP, a Notice of Intent (NOD will be prepared for FHWA to publish in the Federal Register. The NOI will contain a basic definition of the project study area and project alternatives. Concurrent with publication of the NOI, we will draft letters for FHWA's use in requesting participation by various Cooperating Agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Work Completed as of 7/31/00: Coordination with the County, RCTC, Caltrans, FHWA, and the federal resource agencies to initiate the NEPAJ404 Integration Process. Products include various iterations of letters and schedules for Caltrans' use in formally initiating this process. 000073 ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents 6.3.2 Scoping Meeting Formal scoping meeting(s) will be conducted to solicit from the public the scope of the significant issues that should be addressed in the EIR/EIS. The scoping meetings will be held early in the process prior to preparing the Administrative Draft EIR/EIS. 6.3.3 Technical Studies Although the EIR/EIS for each corridor will be a broad, corridor level document, certain technical studies will" be required to provide the basis for selection of a preferred alternative and compliance with NEPA requirements, including the following: Cultural Resources: For each alternative within each of the two corridors, records searches with the Archaeological Information Center at UC. Riverside will be conducted to determine the location of known archaeological sites and any prehistoric or historic resources that are listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Documentation for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act will be completed as part of this task. Section 106 compliance will be conducted applying a "phased" approach. The level of effort for this phase will include records searches for each alternative and field surveys to spot check areas in the vicinity of recorded sites or resources. New site record forms or updates to previous site records will be performed for a maximum of 500 affected sites. Detailed, 100 percent coverage field surveys would be conducted as part of the future construction level documents. We will assist Caltrans and FHWA in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to confirm the scope and extent of work to be covered in this initial phase. • Biological Resources: Information on biological resources from the MSHCP and the General Plan environmental setting will be incorporated into the two EIR/EIS documents as appropriate. Impacts to biological resources will be estimated based on the relationship of the CETAP corridor improvements to known biological resources. Impacts will be estimated through interpretation of aerial photography with overlays of the proposed alternatives in order to estimate the acres of sensitive habitats impacted. Windshield surveys will be conducted for each alternative. Detailed, 100 percent coverage surveys (including protocol surveys for any threatened or endangered species) would be conducted as part of the future construction level documents. We will assist Caltrans and FHWA in consultation with the USFWS and CDFG to confirm the scope and extent of work to be covered in this initial phase. Floodplain Evaluation: Information on floodplains from the General Plan environmental setting will be evaluated to determine potential floodplain encroachments. A Floodplain Evaluation form will be prepared for each corridor. 000074 ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents Hazardous Waste Records searches of agency databases will be conducted to determine whether any corridors would impact known hazardous waste sites. Field surveys will be conducted as appropriate to prepare a Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment for each corridor. Socioeconomics: A Background Socioeconomic Analysis will be prepared to determine potential socioeconomic impacts of the CETAP corridors, with an emphasis on compliance with Executive Order 12898 regarding Environmental Justice and Executive Order 13045 regarding Protection of Children. The Background Socioeconomic Analysis will provide a description of existing land use, housing, employment, and population conditions in the vicinity of the project alternatives. The impact analysis shall address the potential impacts on the residential population and local business community within the project impact area for each alternative, including land use compatibility impacts associated with the proposed improvements. Discussions on environmental justice, right-of-way displacements, relocation assistance, business impacts, neighborhood cohesion, and fiscal impacts (i.e., estimated loss of property tax and sales tax revenues) will be included. The analysis shall also address each alternative' s consistency with relevant local, regional, and state regulations and plans. Section 4(f): Information on public parklands and historic sites from the General Plan environmental setting will be evaluated to determine potential impacts to Section 4(f) resources. A draft Section 4(f) evaluation will be prepared for each corridor and incorporated into each EIR/EIS document . Air Quality: Regional air quality modeling will be prepared to determine if proposed improvements to CETAP corridors would result in any exceedance of State or federal ambient air quality standards. Up to three carbon monoxide (CO) hot spots will be analyzed for each alternative within each corridor. Noise: A noise study will be prepared for each corridor to document existing and future noise levels along each alternative route, with an emphasis on identifying impacts to sensitive receptors and estimating noise impact mitigation requirements. Visual: A preliminary visual analysis will be prepared to address potential visual impacts of the project alternatives within each corridor. A detailed visual analysis following the FHWA Visual Impact Assessment Guidelines for Highway Projects is not applicable at this stage of project development, but would be appropriate at the time a construction -level environmental document is prepared. The visual analysis for this stage of project development shall describe the existing visual characteristics of the area surrounding each alternative and shall identify any 000075 ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents significant visual resources. The potential visual impacts from implementation of project will be evaluated through the use of ground level photographs from viewpoints near the project site. Impacts shall be assessed in terms of modifications to landforms and other visual features, as well as any light and glare that may result from project implementation. This scope does not provide for the preparation of photo simulations that compare "with" and "without" project conditions. For each technical study, a stand alone technical report (draft and final versions) shall be prepared. Other technical evaluations such as public services/utilities and geology will be conducted on a cursory level based on General Plan environmental setting data. Detailed studies would be conducted as part of the construction level document for each corridor. Work Completed as of 7/31/00: Only a limited effort has been made to date to provide Sverdrup information on environmental constraints for use developing preliminary layouts of CETAP corridor alternatives. 6.3.4 Screencheck Draft EIR/EIS Appropriate environmental documentation pursuant to current CEQA and NEPA requirements will be prepared. Key inputs to the EIR/EIS will be generated during earlier portions of the work program. The environmental consequences of the proposed CETAP corridors will be analyzed, as follows: • Evaluation and analysis of specific characteristics of the County as they affect and will be affected by the proposed CETAP improvements. • Assessment of the environmental impacts that will be created by implementation of the CETAP projects based on established thresholds of significance. • Formulation of conceptual mitigation measures that can be effectively implemented. • The following CEQA mandated topics will be addressed: • Any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. • Unavoidable adverse impacts. • Cumulative impacts of the proposed CETAP projects, in conjunction with the implementation of the MSHCP and the updated General Plan. 000076 ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents These work efforts will be compiled into a Screencheck Draft EIR/EIS, along with analysis of topical issues required by CEQA, an introduction, and project description. NEPA requirements will be addressed as noted under the Technical Studies task. We are anticipating two Screencheck Draft EIR/EIS for each corridor will be prepared prior to public distribution of the Draft EIR/EIS for each corridor. Work Completed us of 7/31/00: Two deliverables have been completed under this task: completion of an environmental constraints analysis/identification at a broad corridor level for use in CETAP Working Paper No. 3 (November, 1999), and completion of a more focused environmental constraints analysis/ identification at an alternatives level for use in CETAP Working Paper No. 6 (May, 2000). The information from these analyses and the alternatives screening process will be incorporated into the Alternatives Section of the EIRIEIS for each corridor. 6.3.5 Draft EIR/EIS Following review and modifications to the second Screencheck Draft EIR/EIS for each corridor, a Draft EIR/EIS and Notice of Completion will be prepared and submitted to RCTC for review and approval to circulate. RCTC will submit the document to Caltrans for review and approval. Caltrans will, in turn, submit the Draft EIR/EIS to FHWA for approval to circulate. Following FHWA approval, the Draft EI1 VEIS will be circulated for public review to the agencies listed on the NOP distribution list (as updated). A Notice of Availability will be prepared for publication in the Federal Register (to be submitted by RCTC to Caltrans and then to FHWA). Draft notices for publication in area newspapers will also be prepared. Public hearings will be conducted during the public review period. We will attend public hearings to assist RCTC, County, and Caltrans staff. 6.3.6 Final EIR/EIS At the close of the public review period for the Draft EIR/EIS for each corridor, we will meet with RCTC, Caltrans, and County staff to review any comments on the Draft EIR/EIS that were received, and to discuss potential responses to these comments. Once draft responses to comments are completed, they will be submitted to RCTC, Cultruns, and County staff for review and comment. Agency comments will be incorporated into the Pre -Final EIR/EIS, which will also include the following. • Draft EIR/EIS • Technical appendices • Findings of Fact and (if needed) Statement of Overriding Considerations • Draft RCTC Resolution certifying the EIR and selecting a preferred alternative within each CETAP corridor 000077 ATTACHMENT • Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents • Draft Record of Decision (ROD) for use by FHWA • Draft Notice of Availability of Final EIR/EIS (for Federal Register publication) The Pre -Final EIR/EIS will be submitted to RCTC, Caltrans, FHWA, and the County for concurrent review. Once all comments are received, we will make revisions to produce a single check print of the Final EIR/EIS that will be circulated to RCTC, Culttans, and FHWA for approval. Following approval of the Final EIR)EIS, we will print up to 100 copies for distribution to agencies that submitted substantive comments on the Draft EIR/EIS. We will prepare draft transmittal letters for use by RCTC or Caltrans. Assumption(s): 1. Environmental documents for construction level approvals are not included within this work program. 2: The First Screencheck EIR/EIS for each corridor will be reviewed concurrently by RCTC, Caltrans, and the County. 3. The Second Screencheck EIR/EIS for each corridor will be reviewed concurrently by RCTC, Caltrans, FHWA (California Division Office, and FHWA Headquarters), and the County. 4. We will prepare and publish Notices of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR/EIS for each corridor in up to three area publications; RCTC, Caltrans, and FHWA will be responsible for getting the NOA published in the Federal Register. 5. Public Scoping meetings and public hearings to be coordinated by the public outreach consultant; we will provide 2 professional staff to attend up to 3 public scoping meetings and 3 public hearings on each El R/EIS as needed. 6. A single check print copy of the Draft EIR/EIS for each corridor will be submitted first to RCTC, who will then forward it to Caltrans, who will then forward it to FHWA. 7. Our level of effort is based on receiving no more than 50 substantive comments on each EIR/EIS that will need to be addressed in the responses to comments. 8. The Pre -Final EIR/EIS for each corridor will be reviewed concurrently by RCTC, Caltrans, FHWA (California Division Office, and FHWA Headquarters), and the County. 9. A single check print copy of the Final EIR/EIS for each corridor will be submitted first to RCTC, who will then forward it to Caltrans, who will then forward it to FHWA 000078 ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents 10. We will prepare a Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Final EIR/EIS for each corridor; RCTC, Caltrans, and FHWA will be responsible for getting the NOA published in the Federal Register. Product(s): • Draft NOP for review (5 copies x 2 corridors = 10 copies) • Draft NOP mailing list for review (one for each corridor) • Final NOP for mailing via certified mail (150 copies x 2 corridors = 300 copies) • Final NOP mailing list (one for each corridor) • Draft NOI for review (5 copies x 2 corridors = 10 copies) • Draft Letter to Cooperating Agencies for FHWA use • Draft and Final Technical Reports (5 copies each x 2 corridors = 10 copies) for biology, cultural resources, air quality, floodplains, hazardous waste, visual, socioeconomics, and Section 4 (f) • Screencheck EIR/EIS (30 copies x 2 corridors = 60 copies) and Technical Appendices (10 copies x 2 corridors = 20 copies) • Second Screencheck EIR/EIS (40 copies x 2 corridors = 80 copies) and Technical Appendices (10 copies x 2 corridors = 20 copies) with annotated comments so that the disposition of comments on the First Screencheck are clearly understood • Draft EIR/EIS (one final check print for agency signature for each corridor) • Draft EIR/EIS (200 copies for public review following approval to circulate for each corridor; 400 copies total) • Draft EIR/EIS Technical Appendices (50 copies x 2 corridors = 100 copies) • Updated NOP distribution list for use in Draft EIR/EIS distribution one for each corridor) • Draft and Final Notice of Availability for Draft EIR/EIS (one for each corridor) • Up to eight large (36" x 48") graphic displays for public hearings 000079 • • • ATTACHMENT Riverside County Integrated Plan Task 6.0 Revised December 13,2000 Environmental Documents • Draft Responses to Comments (30 copies x 2 corridors = 60 copies) • Pre -Final EIR/EIS (40 copies x 2 corridors = 80 copies) and Technical Appendices (10 copies x 2 corridors = 20 copies) • Final EIR/EIS (one final check print for agency signature for each corridor) • Final EIR/EIS (100 copies for distribution x 2 corridors: 200 copies) • Draft letter transmitting Final EIR/EIS to commenting agencies for each corridor • Draft and Final Notice of Availability for Final EIR/EIS for each corridor • Draft Record of Decision for FHWA use in publishing in Federal Register (one for each corridor). • Electronic flies of all preceding products • • 000000 • AGENDA ITEM 7H • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager - Karl Sauer, Bechtel Construction Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Request for Proposal (RFP) for Consultant Services to Provide Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Studies, for Proposed Improvements to Route 91, from Mary Street to 7th Street BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This item is to seek Commission approval to: 1) Concur with a Caltrans request that RCTC become the lead agency for preliminary engineering and environmental clearance, for proposed improvements to Route 91, from Mary St. to 7th St., in the City of Riverside; 2) Prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP), for consultant services to provide preliminary engineering and environmental studies for proposed improvements to Route 91; 3) Form a selection committee, comprised of representatives from RCTC staff, City of Riverside staff, Bechtel, and Caltrans staff, to review, evaluate, and rank all RFP's received; and, 4) After the evaluation process, negotiate a contract with the top ranked consultant(s) and return to the Commission with a contract recommendation. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • At its January 12, 2000 meeting, the Commission committed to support full funding for the widening of State Route 91 between Mary and Seventh Streets, in the City of Riverside. The estimated project cost was $170.7 million (current dollars). At the November 8, 2000 meeting, the Commission approved the cost increase for the 1-215 project. That action also affirmed that $20.0 million of TCRP and $15.0 million of Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds were available for the Route 91 project. 000081 The preliminary phase of the project is proposed to be funded with a portion of the $20.0 million of Transportation Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) funds available to the project. To move this project forward, Caltrans and Commission staff have agreed that the Commission be the lead agency for this project, and contract out for consultant services to provide preliminary engineering and environmental studies for the project. The scope of work is proposed to be in two phases. The first phase would be for the preparation of a Project Report and Environmental Document. The second phase would be for the preparation of a Final PS&E for the environmentally cleared project. Selection of the consultant will be in accordance with federal procurement requirements. It is estimated that the first phase services will cost approximately $2.0 million and would be funded by TCRP funds. The schedule for the selection process is proposed as follows: Calendar of Events Advertise Request for Proposals March 19, 2001 Request for Proposals Submittal Deadline April 12,2001 Shortlist top three (3) qualified firms April 27, 2001 Interview top three (3) qualified firms May 10, 2001 Committee Recommendation to Commission June 13, 2001 1 • 1 000082 AGENDA ITEM 71 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Scope of Work for Measure "A" State Route 60 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane Widening Project in the City of Moreno Valley as it Relates to Ramp Improvements to the Perris Boulevard Interchange and Bridge Vertical Clearances BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Separate the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements from the State Route 60 HOV project, while coordinating the SR 60 HOV improvements so that there will be minimal throw -a -way costs when the future Perris Boulevard Interchange improvements are approved; 2) Assist the City of Moreno Valley to research alternatives to fund the preparation of a separate Project Study Report to serve as a funding document for future improvements to the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements; 3) Resolve the bridge vertical clearance scoping issue with minimal cost to the SR 60 HOV project to maintain project delivery and prevent loss of present CMAQ funds; 4) Address as a separate project any major new scope issue that was not addressed in the Project Report as a separate project that can compete for funding based on priority, need and future availability of funds; and, 5) That the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements remain a top priority. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • At the July 1999 RCTC meeting, the Commission approved the FY 2000-2003 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program (see attached list). The number one ranked project on this list was the State Route 60 HOV Median 000083 widening project. This Measure "A" widening project is located between Day Street and Redlands Boulevard in Moreno Valley (see map attached). In order to stretch the availability of the CMAQ funds in the above call for projects, all of the approved projects were reduced by 6.4%. With this reduction, the SR 60 HOV project was reduced from $27,955,000 to $26,165,880. The funding for the project was also contingent on $7,240,000 of previously allocated CMAQ funds being made available from the 1-215 truck lane project. The 11.47% of local match was to be from Measure "A" funds. Current project funding is as follows: State Route 60 HOV Funding Status 1. Previous CMAQ moved from 1-215 truck lane $7,240,000 2. FY 2000-2003 CMAQ $26,165,880 3. Measure "A" $6,000,000 4. Total Funding Available $39,405,880 5. Current Estimate of Project Cost based on Caltrans Project Report $40,050,000 6. Current Funding Shortfall ($644,120) At the February 9, 2000 RCTC meeting, the Commission awarded a final design contract for the subject project to Holmes and Narver Infrastructure. The Commission directed that the Perris Boulevard ramp improvements were to be included in the design of the SR 60 HOV lane project. For the past year, staff has been working with Caltrans and the City of Moreno Valley to resolve scoping issues related to the SR 60 HOV project so that the project can move forward. Two scoping issues are currently preventing staff from making progress on project delivery. The first scoping issue is the inclusion of the Perris Boulevard ramp improvements. After a great deal of study relating to the various interchange alternatives that are possible, it has become apparent that any solution that will address the ultimate 2025 traffic congestion cannot be studied under a Negative Declaration/Finding of No Significant Impact due to the possible impacts to two businesses near the corner of Perris Boulevard and Elder Avenue. To perform a full Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Study (EIR/EIS) for this project will significantly delay the delivery of the SR 60 HOV lane project (18 - 24 months). The second problem related to scoping is the fact that several of the bridges, according to Caltrans, have vertical clearance problems. Vertical clearance is the smallest distance between the structure and highway and determines the largest vehicle that can safely pass under the structure. Caltrans uses the smallest point of vertical clearance regardless of what lane or portion of the shoulder on the highway that it occurs. • • • 000084 • • • The design standard for vertical clearance is 16'-9". The project limits include four overcrossings: Indian Avenue, Nason Street, Moreno Beach Drive, and Redlands Boulevard. With the exception of Nason Street, each of these over crossings are at least one foot below the desired level in one or both directions. The attached table shows both the existing and proposed clearance with the new HOV lane added. The table also shows three alternatives to address the problem: placing a crown in the HOV buffer between the HOV lane and the number one lane, lowering the freeway and replacing the over crossing. By stopping the project just short of Redlands Boulevard, this bridge can be eliminated from consideration at this time. Caltrans has also agreed to waive any improvements to Nason Street since the HOV project either does not govern the vertical clearance of .that structure or remains above 16'-0" in the worst case. This leaves Indian Avenue and Moreno Beach Drive for the project to address. Two alternatives to address the vertical clearance issue that would be acceptable to Caltrans at the remaining two structures are lowering the freeway as it passes under the structure or replacing the bridges. These alternative will add between $3 and $5 million to the project. RCTC staff and consultants are also looking into a lower cost alternative to address the vertical clearance problem where necessary. In this alternative, a crown is placed in the HOV buffer and sloping the highway down away from the structure, the vertical clearance will not be adversely impacted by the SR 60 HOV project. The cost to address this issue in this fashion can be done for a fraction of the cost of either lowering the freeway or replacing the bridge. This alternative however may not be the preferred alternative of Caltrans. The current Caltrans policy is that when a project is performed on a section of highway, any substandard conditions such as vertical clearances must be remedied. When Caltrans performed the project report for this project they did not include any costs for fixing the vertical clearance problem. RCTC funded the project based on the Caltrans Project Report cost estimate. Staff was not informed that RCTC would be required to fix the vertical clearance problem until the project design efforts were initiated. The final issue related to project delivery is that the bulk of the project funding is CMAQ funding that is subject to use it or lose it stipulations of AB1012. Increasing the scope of the project at this time by either keeping the Perris Blvd. ramp improvements in the project or replacing any of the potentially impacted bridges could result in project delays from the need to perform additional studies, obtain a more complex environmental clearance, and/or the need to obtain additional funding. In order to resolve the scoping issues related to this project, staff is recommending the following actions: 1. Remove the Perris Boulevard Interchange ramp improvements from the SR 60 HOV project. This project should be addressed under a separate set of documents. Staff will work with the City of Moreno Valley to identify a funding source for the project study report that can be used as a basis to obtain the remaining funds to 000085 construct the project. Staff will work with the City of Moreno Valley to assure that no throw -a -way costs are incurred with the SR 60 HOV project as it relates to the construction of the Perris Boulevard under crossing bridge. This could add an additional $2.5 million dollars to the cost of the SR 60 HOV project if it is determined that the current under crossing is insufficient and must be replaced. 2. Direct staff to work with Caltrans to resolve the vertical clearance issue with direction to keep the cost of the project within the general framework of the original Project Report. No bridges are to be replaced and no significant scope is to be added to this project to resolve the vertical clearance problem. 3. Any major new scope requests that are outside of the scope identified in the approved project report should be addressed with a separate project that can compete for project funding based on priority, need and availability of funds. 000086 State Route 60 • 60 / 215 to Redlands 4! VICINITY MAP • 000087 FY 2000-2003 PROPOSED CONGESTI ON MITIGATION AND AIR QUALIT Y PROGRA M 00 FOR THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN Funding Available = $43,631,366 (X) RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING: AGENCY PR ATTACHMENT II TOTAL . .,.vat -%%r 4 RCUe U LEJJ b.4% KEC OM'D $ CU MM . TOTAL SCORE 1 RCTC SR 60/Moreno Valley HOV Median Widening $27,955,000 $1,789,120 $26,165,880 $26,165,880 19- 2 County Valley Way EB Entrance & Exit Ramp Project " $3,507,000 $0 $3,507,000 $29,672,880 16 3 Corona Main StJSR91 IC & Circulation Improvements $1,766,600 $113,062 $1,653,538 $31,326,418 15 4 Riverside SR 91/La Sierrra Ave. IC Reconstruction $1,700,000 $108,800 $1,591,200 $32,917,618 14 5 Riverside Jurupa Ave. Underpass at Union Pacific RR $6,700,000 $428,800 $6,271,200 $39,188,818 14 6 County Rancho Calif. Rd l eft & right turn lanes $1,056,000 $0 $1,056,000 $40,244,818 13 7 Lake Elsinore Interconnect at Center/Collier & Collier/Riverside $759,500 $48,608 $710,892 $40,955,710 13 8 San Jacinto Signal at Ramona/E . Main/San Jacin./De Anza $210,000 $13,440 $196,560 $41,152,270 13 9 Beaumont Interconnect at I-10/SR79 $504,774 $32,306 $472,468 $41,624,738 12 10 Hemet Constructionof transportation/transit center $354,000 $22,656 $331,344 $41,956,082 12 11 Perris Traffic Signal at 4th St/Redlands Ave. $250,000 $16,000 $234,000 $42,190,082 12 12 Murrieta Traffic Signal at Jefferson Ave/Kalmia St . $71,715 $4,590 $67,125 $42,257,207 11 13 County Traffic Signal & Interconnect at Etiwanda Ave. $248,000 $0 $248,000 $42,505,207 10 14 So Cal Edison Zero Emissio n Mobile Industrial Equip Buydown $497,500 $31,840 $465,660 $42,970,867 10 15 Moreno Valley Traffic Signals along Nason Street $372,000 $23,808 $348,192 $43,319,059 9- 16 M urrieta Traffic Signal at Jefferson A ve/Murrieta Hot Spr . $61,215 $3,918 $57,297 . $43,376,357 9 17 Murrieta Traffic Signal at Adams Ave/Kalmia St. $71,715 $4,590 $67,125 $43,443,482 9 18 WRCOG Development of 2 Clean Cities Coalitions $158,589 $10,150 $148,439 $43,591,921 9 Original request was fo r S6,507,000. The Coun ty will phase this project, thereby re ducing required amou nt of CMAQ f unds . ,591,921 $43,591,921 Total Recommended 18 Pr ojects, 13 Agencies CM xis • SUMMARY OF VERTICAL CLEARANCE ANALYSIS O VERCROSSING VERTI CAL CLEARANCE ESTIMATED COST") PDT RECOMMENDATION Westbou nd Eastbound Lower SR60 5.1m Min VC Replace Overcrossi ng Exist Min Vert Clr(5) HOV ETW Exist Min Vert Clr(5) HOV ETW Std Crown Crown @ ETW Std Crown Crown @ ETW Indian Ave 4.744m(4) 4 .730m 4 .835m 4.718m(3) 4.828m 4.886m $1,400,000 $1,900,000 Pending (15' - 6 3/4") (15' - 6 1/4") (15' - 10 1/4") (15' - 5 3/4 ") (15' - 10 ") (16' - 0 1/4") Nason St 5. 098m(4) 4.912m N/A 4.742m(3) 5.056m N/A - - SR60 and OC to remain at existing (16' - 8 3/4") (16' - 1 1/2") (15'-6 3/4") (16' - 7") grade . Process Fact Sheet for nonstandard vertical clearance . Mo reno Beach Dr 4. 959m(4) 4.802m 4.958m 4.653m(3) 4 .812m 4.948m $1,900,000 $2,200,000 Pending (16' - 3 1/4" ) (15' - 9") (16' - 3 1/4") (15' - 3 1/4") (15' - 9 1/2 ") (16' - 2 3/4") Redlands Blvd 5. 006m(4) N/A N /A 4.748m(3) N/A N/A - - Terminate HOV lanes west of OC . (16' - 5") (15' - 7") SR60 and OC to remain at existing grade . Notes: (1) Cost includes construction and design. (2) The construction cost estimates for the Iowereing of SR60 at Indian Ave and Moreno Beach Dr were developed to a greater level of detail than the estimates for replacing the overcrossings. (3) Outside ETW (4) Inside ETW (5) Vertical clearance measurements were obtained at the inside and outside ETW along the east and west side of the existing bridges (total of four points). The vertical clearance value shown represents the minimum value of the four measured clearances. Vert Clr = Vertical Clearance Std Crown = Standard Cr own HOV - High Occupancy Vehicle ETW = Edge of Travel Way Min = Minimum VC = Vertical Clearance PDT = Project Development Team N/A = Not Applicable OC = Overcrossing 000089 oc vc_summary_rev3 3:1 1 PM 3/5/01 • AGENDA ITEM 7J • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Claudia Chase, Property Agent THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Security Guard Service Contract STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Approve the results of the selection process to provide the Commission Security Guard Services for the RCTC Metrolink Stations; 2) Direct staff to negotiate the scope, schedule and cost with the top ranked firm to perform the required services (if negotiations fail with the top ranked firm, staff is authorized to go to the next firm on the list to negotiate a contract to perform the services); and 3) Direct staff to bring back an authorization to award a contract -to the firm with which negotiations are successful. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In January 2001, the Commission approved and directed staff to prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) to provide Security Guard Services for the RCTC Metrolink Stations. The calendar of events was as follows: • RCTC Authorizes Release of RFP: Release RFP/Post on Website: Deadline for Bid Package Submittal: Short List Firms based on qualifications: Interview Firms: RCTC Commission Approval: Friday, January 12th Monday, January 15th Monday, February 12th Friday, February 16th Thursday, March 1St Wednesday, March 14 Staff received proposals from the following five (5) firms. All American Private Security Barry's Security Service, Inc. GHG Security & Investigations, Inc. The Wackenhut Corporation Western Area Security Services 0000J0 A selection panel was assembled which consisted of Commissioner Patrick Williams, Stuart Chuck of Metrolink, and RCTC staff members Jerry Rivera, Stephanie Wiggins and Claudia Chase. The selection panel, along with Commissioner Ron Roberts, reviewed the five (5) proposals and a decision was made to interview all five firms. The selection will be based on experience, knowledge of the Metrolink system, responsiveness and overall qualifications. Based on the results of the selection committee, staff recommends that a contract be negotiated with Western Area Security Services to provide security guard services for the Metrolink stations located in Riverside County. Staff will work with legal counsel to develop the contract. The negotiated scope, schedule and cost will be brought back to the Commission for the contract award. Staff seeks Commission approval of the Security Guard Service recommended by the selection panel. 000091 • AGENDA ITEM 7K • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request for Proposals for Freeway Service Patrol Service in Riverside County BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Freeway Service Patrol Beat Nos.1 and 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: • • The Riverside County Transportation Commission, in its capacity as the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), has operated a Freeway Service Patrol program on various segments or beats of county freeways since June, 1.993. The program provides roving tow truck service on a total of five beats (see chart below) during the morning and afternoon commute hours. The FSP program is funded by the State of California (80%) and local SAFE fees (20%). Funds are allocated to participating local agencies through a formula based on population, freeway lane miles, and levels of congestion. The FSP tow trucks remove disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents from the freeway to improve its flow and reduce pollution. Service patrol operators will change a flat tire, provide "jump" starts, provide a maximum of one gallon of fuel, temporarily tape cooling system hoses, and refill radiators. If the operator cannot get the vehicle moving, it is towed off the freeway to pre -designated drop locations where the motorist can make arrangements for further assistance. Currently, the program operates on the following beats: Beat No. #1 #2 #4 #18 #25 Freeway SR -91 SR -91 SR -91 I-215/60/91 1-15 Beat Limits From Orange Co. Lincoln Magnolia S.B. Co. 60/91/215 To Lincoln Magnolia SR -91/I-215 I-215/SR-60 60/215 No. of Trucks 2 2 3 3* 2 Total Amount Contractor State -80% Local -20% Hamner $132,443 $33,111 Hamner $132,443 $33,111 Hamner $185,503 $46,376 Pepe's $185,503 S46,376 Pepe's $109,397 $27,349 * One additional truck funded by separate contract with Caltrans for truck climbing lane. 000092 Four of the above five contracts are due to expire on June 30, 2001 (#25 expires 6/30/02). Of those four contracts, three of the beats (#1, #2, and #4) have existed since the program was implemented in June, 1993. Based on performance, these three contracts have been extended on an annual basis through RCTC's budget process. Beat #18 began operating two tow trucks on I-215/SR-60 in July, 1996. Two years later, the beat was expanded to cover the area from the interchange to the San Bernardino county line on 1-215 and one additional truck was added. Last December, another truck was added to beat #18 to provide service during construction of the truck climbing lane. The fourth truck is funded by a separate agreement with Caltrans. The agreement provides $80,000 for one truck, operating expenses and RCTC overhead charges for a fifteen (15) month period. Staff proposes to issue an RFP on two of the beats (#1 and #2) and extend the term on the other two beats (#4 and #18) for an additional year. Next year, staff would seek authorization to issue an RFP for the last two beats as well as beat #25 which is due to expire. This process would provide some stability to the program in that no more than half of the beats would be out to bid at any one time as well as provide the opportunity for "new" tow companies to submit proposals and compete with existing providers on a competitive basis. In an effort to better define the criteria to be used in the evaluation of the RFP's and reduce the potential for any protests, the following evaluation criteria has been incorporated into the attached RFP: Factor Points Qualifications of the Firm 25 Staffing & Project Organization 25 Work Plan 15 Cost and Price 25 Completeness of Response 10 Total 100 It should be noted that to submit a bid in response to the RFP, a firm must have a minimum of five (5) years' experience in operating a tow service and three (3) years' experience of CHP rotation tow service. It is CHP's belief that working in a dangerous freeway environment is completely different from operating on local streets and the safety factor is so much more significant that it is imperative that any proposer have CHP rotation tow experience. At the Budget and Implementation Committee meeting, Commissioner Ron Roberts was appointed to be a member of the RFP evaluation committee along with staff from RCTC, Caltrans, and the CHP. 1 000093 • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES REQUEST FOR BID PROPOSAL FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL TOW TRUCK SERVICE • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES LETTER OF INVITATION REQUEST FOR BID PROPOSAL Date: March 14, 2001 Attention: Potential Proposers Subject: Freeway Service Patrol Towing Services This Request for Bid Proposal (RFP) is being advertised by the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (Commission) to contract for towing services for the Freeway Service Patrol program. The Freeway Service Patrol program is funded by the Commission and the California Department of Transportation. (Caltrans) with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) providing daily field supervision and program management. The Commission in cooperation with Caltrans and the CHP will select one (1) company per beat (see Attachment "A-1" for beat descriptions) to serve as contractor for the service. In the event that necessary funding is not authorized through annual budget adoptions at the local and/or state levels, some or all of the beats may not be awarded and/or scope may be renegotiated. The Freeway Service Patrol removes disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents from the freeway to improve its flow. The Freeway Service Patrol tow trucks continuously patrol selected freeway segments during the morning and afternoon peak periods, Monday through Friday (with the exception of holidays listed on Attachment "A-4") assisting disabled motorists or those involved in minor accidents. At a minimum, Class A tow trucks as described under Scope of Service, Equipment Requirements on page SOS -3, will be dedicated during the Freeway Service Patrol's hours of operation. Where conditions permit, Freeway Service Patrol vehicle operators provide quick fix items such as one gallon of gasoline, change a flat tire, "jump" starts, tape or repair cooling system hoses and refill radiators. If the disabled vehicle cannot be repaired, it is towed to a CHP identified designated drop location. All Freeway Service Patrol services are provided free of charge to motorists. Operators involved in this program are not be allowed to accept gratuities, perform secondary towing and/or recommend second tow or repair/body shop businesses. Detailed information on the vehicle, equipment, and operator requirements as well as a back-up list implementation schedule are contained in the proposal. The attachments show the freeway segments LOI-1 covered by the Freeway Service Patrol, the minimum number of vehicles required for each beat, etc. The proposal process and terms and conditions will be in strict accordance with the following RFP Documents: -LETTER OF INVITATION -INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS -PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS -PART "A" - SCOPE OF SERVICES -PART "B" - CONTRACT AGREEMENT A "mandatory" pre -proposal conference will be held on March 26, 2001, at 10:00 a.m. PDT, in the Conference Room, at the Commission Office. Any written questions for the meeting must be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m. PDT on March 23, 2001. An original and four (4) copies of your proposal using the Proposal Forms and including all information required by the Proposal Documents must be addressed and delivered to the Commissi- on's offices at the following address, which is the address to be used for all communications in connection with this RFP: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, California 92501 Telephone No. (909) 787-7141 All proposals must be in writing, sealed, and labeled "Freeway Service Patrol". The Beat Number must also be indicated on the cover of the sealed package. All proposals must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. April 16, 2001, irrespective of postmark. No proposals will be accepted after 5:00 p.m. Postmarks will not be accepted. Proposals shall be valid for 90 days after the final proposal due date. The Commission reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive any informality or irregularity in any proposal received and in cooperation with the CHP and Caltrans, judge the merits of the respective proposals received. The selection, if made, will be made to the firm whose proposal is responsive to the Request for Bid Proposal and is to the best advantage of the Commission. If your agency is interested m submitting a proposal for the Freeway Service Patrol towing services, please contact the Commission at the above address or telephone between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday to receive a complete bid package. LOI-2 Jerry Rivera, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission • • LOI-3 • LOI-4 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES • INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS REQUEST FOR BID PROPOSAL • • I-7.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL/PERIOD FOR ACCEPTANCE RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS TABLE OF CONTENTS INSTR. PAGE NUMBER TITLE NUMBER I-1.0 EXAMINATION OF RFB DOCUMENTS I-2.0 INTERPRETATION OF RFB DOCUMENTS I-3.0 PREPARATION OF PROPOSAL I-4.0 MODIFICATIONS & ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS I-5.0 SIGNING OF PROPOSAL/AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE I-6.0 WITHDRAWAL, OF PROPOSALS I-8.0 BASIS OF AWARD I-9.0 TYPE OF CONTRACT TO BE AWARDED I-10.0 COMMISSION RIGHTS LAST PAGE ITP-1 ITP-1 ITP-1 ITP-1 ITP-2 TTP-2 ITP-2 ITP-2 ITP-2 ITP-2 ITP-3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES t • • INSTRUCTION TO PROPOSERS I-1.0 EXAMINATION OF RFB DOCUMENTS Proposer shall be solely responsible for examining, with appropriate care, the RFP Documents, including any Addenda issued during the proposal period, and for informing itself with respect to any and all conditions which may in any way affect the amount or nature of proposal, or the performance of the work in the event Proposer is selected. Failure of the proposer to so examine and inform itself shall be at its sole risk and no relief for error or omission will be given. I-2.0 INTERPRETATION OF RFB DOCUMENTS Proposer may request of the Commission in writing, prior to submission of proposal, clarifi- cation or interpretation of the RFP Documents. Where such interpretation or clarification requires a change in the RFP Documents, the Commission will issue an Addendum. Pro- poser shall acknowledge receipt of any and all Addenda in its Proposal Letter. The Commission shall not be bound by and Proposer shall not rely on any oral interpretation or clarification of the RFP Documents. I-3.0 PREPARATION OF PROPOSAL The proposal shall be formatted in accordance with the requirements specified herein. The proposal shall include copies of the Proposal Letter provided with the RFP Documents. Proposal Letter and forms shall be executed by an authorized signatory as described in I-5.0, "SIGNING OF PROPOSAL/AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE". All proposals shall be prepared by and at the expense of the Proposer. I.4.0 MODIFICATIONS AND ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS Proposer shall submit a proposal in strict conformity with the requirements of the RFP Documents. The proposal shall be complete in itself and shall be submitted within a sealed enclosure in accordance with I-7.0 "SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL/PERIOD OF ACCEP- TANCE" instruction herein. Unauthorized conditions, limitations or provisions attached to a proposal may render it invalid and cause its rejection. Alternative proposals will not be considered unless specifi- cally requested. Oral, telegraphic or telephonic proposals or modifications will not be considered. ITP-1 I-5.0 SIGNING OF PROPOSAL/AUTHORIZATION TO NEGOTIATE Each proposal submitted by Proposer shall be executed by Proposer or by its authorized representative. In addition, Proposer must identify those persons authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Commission in connection with this RFP. I-6.0 WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS A proposal may be withdrawn by the Proposer by means of a written request signed by the proposer or its properly authorized representative. Such written request must be delivered to the Commission's office prior to the date and time for submittal of proposals. I-7.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL/PERIOD OF ACCEPTANCE Each proposal submitted by Proposer shall be delivered to the Commission's office up to the date and time shown therein. It is the Proposer's sole responsibility to see that its proposal is received as stipulated. In compliance with this RFP the Proposer agrees, if its proposal is accepted within 90 days from the date specified in the RFP for receipt of proposals, to provide the services at the costs stipulated herein. I-8.0 BASIS OF AWARD Any contract resulting from this RFP will be awarded to that firm whose proposal meets the requirements of the RFP and is to the best advantage of the Commission. The Commission may request "short listed" proposers to present an oral briefing and discuss the merits of their proposal. However, the Commission is under no obligation to enter into discussion or conduct negotiations with a proposer, but can award a contract on the basis of the offer received. The Commission will evaluate each proposal according to how favorable the services offered are to the Commission in light of bid specifications and reasonableness of the cost proposal. The selected proposer may be required to participate in site visits or negotiations and to submit such additional cost, technical, or other revisions to their proposal as may result from negotiations. I-9.0 FORM OF CONTRACT TO BE AWARDED Under no circumstances will the contract price be exceeded without Commission approval. It is anticipated that the Commission will enter into a time and material contract. The contract agreement in substantial form is contained in Part "B" of this Request for Bid Proposal ("RFP"), subject to changes the Commission may make as it see fit prior to execution. I-10.0 COMMISSION RIGHTS The Commission may investigate the qualifications of any Proposer under consideration, re- quire confirmation of information furnished by a Proposer, and require additional evidence ITP-2 • • • of qualifications to perform the Work described in this RFP. The Commission reserves the right to: • • • 1. Reject any or all of the proposals for any reason. 2. Issue subsequent Requests For Bid Proposals. 3. Cancel the entire Request For Bid Proposal. 4. Remedy or overlook technical errors in the Request For Bid Proposal process. 5. Appoint evaluation committees to review proposals. 6. Seek the assistance of outside technical experts in proposal evaluation. 7. Approve or disapprove the use of particular subcontractors. 8. Establish a short list of proposers eligible for discussions after review of written proposals. 9. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the respondents to the RFB. 10. Solicit best and final offers from all or some of the Proposers. 11. Award a contract to one or more. Proposers. 12. Accept other than the lowest monetary offer. 13.. Waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals. This RFP does not commit the Commission to enter into a contract, nor does it obligate the Commission to pay for any costs incurred in preparation and submission of proposals or in anticipation of a contract. END OF INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS ITP-3 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS REQUEST FOR BID PROPOSAL RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE NUMBER TITLE NUMBER • SECTION 1 - PROPOSAL LETTER SECTION 2 - CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL PR-i PR -1 PR -3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS SECTION 1 - PROPOSAL LETTER PROPOSER JERRY RIVERA, PROGRAM MANAGER RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 In response to the Request for Bid Proposal ("RFP"), Beat No. , for the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol, we the undersigned hereby declare that we have carefully read and examined the RFP documents including any plans and specifications, attended the mandatory pre -proposal conference, and hereby propose to perform and complete the work as required in the Contract Documents. • • The undersigned agrees to make available the services at the costs indicated in its cost proposal if its proposal is accepted within ninety days from the date specified in the RFP for receipt of propos- als. If awarded a Contract, the undersigned agrees to execute formal Contract Documents which will be prepared by the Commission for execution, within 10 calendar days following acceptance of bid, and will deliver to the Commission prior to execution of the Contract the necessary original Certificates of Insurance. Incorporated herein and made a part of this Proposal is the Response Data and Proposal Forms required by Section 2 of the Proposal Requirements. Proposer represents that the following person is authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Commission in connection with this RFP: (Name) (Title) (Phone) The undersigned certifies that it has examined and is fully familiar with all of the provisions of the RFP Documents and is satisfied that they are accurate; that it has carefully checked all the words and PR -1 figures and all statements made in the Proposal Requirements; that it has satisfied itself with respect to other matters pertaining to the proposal which in any way affect the work or the cost thereof. The undersigned hereby agrees that the Commission will not be responsible for any errors or omissions in these RFP Documents. Proposer's Business Address and Telephone/Fax Numbers: BY: (Signature) (Type or Print Name) (Title) PR -2 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS • • • SECTION 2 - CONTENTS OF PROPOSAL 1.1 GENERAL FORMAT OF PROPOSAL Proposals shall be prepared on bound 8-1/2" x 11" paper, with all text clear of binding. Use, of 11" x 17" foldout sheets should be limited. Proposers shall include forms shown in Attachment "B". 1.2 PROPOSAL CONTENT A. Cover Letter B. Time and Material - Not to Exceed Proposal (T&M) (Attachment "B") As per Attachment "B", the proposer shall submit a Time and Material, Not to Exceed (NTE) proposal to perform all work specified in the Scope of Services. The proposal shall include proposer's hourly billing rates for each truck and shall answer all questions on the form. C. The proposal shall contain the proposer's Certificate of Acceptance of the Contract Agreement contained in Part "B". If the proposer requests any changds to this agreement, such requests must be included in the proposal submission or it shall be understood that the proposer accepts the agreement contained in Part "B" to this RFP in its entirety. D. List of Trucks to be acquired or currently owned (see Scope of Services, Equipment Requirements, page SOS -3) E. Letters of Reference (Operators should not seek references from the Commission, CHP or Caltrans.) PR -3 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES PART "A" SCOPE OFSERVICES REQUEST FOR BID PROPOSAL • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES REQUEST FOR BID PROPOSAL SCOPE OF SERVICES This Request for Bid Proposal (RFP) is being advertised by the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (Commission) to provide a Freeway Service Patrol service. The Commission is the short range transportation planning agency for Riverside County. The Commission has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to fund a peak hour freeway service patrol on selected freeway segments in Riverside County. Section 22520 (g) of the California Vehicle Code specifically authorizes the CHP to be responsible for freeway service patrols stopping on freeways for the purpose of rapid removal of impediments to traffic. Article 3, Section 91, of the Streets and Highways Code, states that Caltrans has responsibility to improve and maintain the state highways. Caltrans also has the responsibility for traffic management and removing impediments from the highways. If awarded a contract, the Contractor shall have 45 days after the notice to proceed in which to acquire the required equipment, have it inspected, hire and train drivers and be operable. Any company who cannot meet the 45 day operational requirement shall not be awarded a bid. CONTRACT REPRESENTATIVES: Caltrans and the CHP will jointly oversee the service. CHP is responsible for dispatch services to incident locations within the vehicle's patrol limits. The dispatching will be done in accordance with the contract for the service. A manual will be given to the successful Contractor explaining the types of incidents to which his/her operators may be dispatched. SERVICE LOCATIONS: The Freeway Service Patrol operates on selected freeway segments referred to as beats. Each beat has specific turnaround locations and designated drop locations identified by the CHP. Attachment "A" shows the specific limits, number of tow trucks, number of back-up trucks, hours of operation and tentative holidays on which the cost of each beat shall be based. The Commission reserves the right to add or delete holidays to the work schedule. Travel time to and from the beat will be at the expense of the Contractor. At any time during the contract's terms, the Commission reserves the right to adjust beat specifications to better accommodate demand for the service. These changes can occur during the course of the contract through written change orders. If warranted during the service hours of operation, the Contractor may be requested to temporarily reassign his/her Freeway Service Patrol operators/trucks to locations outside the assigned beat. SOS -1 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE: The purpose of the project is to provide for the rapid removal of disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents from the freeway. Where conditions permit, safe removal of small debris will be required. Contractor vehicles shall be exclusively dedicated to the service during the hours of operation. All vehicle maintenance activities shall be conducted during non -service hours. The Contractor's service patrol operators shall assist motorists involved in minor accidents and those. with disabled vehicles. They shall be responsible for clearing the freeway of automobiles, small trucks and small debris. When and where conditions warrant, service may be executed on the freeway shoulders. Where conditions do not warrant, operators will remove the vehicles from the freeway to provide service. The vehicles shall continuously patrol their assigned beat, respond to CHP dispatches for service, use the designated turnaround locations and use the CHP identified designated drop locations. Service patrol vehicle operators may be required to change flat tires, provide "jump" starts, provide one gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel, temporarily tape cooling system hoses and refill cold radiators. Operators may spend a maximum of 10 minutes per disablement in attempting to mobilize a vehicle. All Freeway Service Patrol services will be provided at no cost to the motorist. Service patrol operators will not be allowed to accept gratuities, perform secondary towing services, recommend secondary tows, or recommend repair/body shop businesses. To promote a safe work environment and to maintain a level of professionalism, the CHP has developed a set of Standard Operating Procedures for the FSP program that must be followed by the tow company and operators. Drivers found not to be complying with FSP procedures may be suspended or terminated and the oompany may be fined at the discretion of the FSP Field Supervisors. If a vehicle cannot be mobilized within the 10 minute time limit, it shall be towed to a designated drop location identified by the CHP. The motorist can request the Freeway Service Patrol vehicle operator to call the CHP Communication center to request a CHP rotational tow or other services. Freeway Service Patrol. operators shall not be allowed to tow as an independent contractor from an incident that occurred during the Freeway Service Patrol shift unless called as a rotation tow by CHP. If called as a rotation tow after a Freeway Service Patrol shift, the operator must remove all Freeway Service Patrol markings and change his/her Freeway Service Patrol uniform. There may be some instances where service patrol operators may be requested to provide assistance to CHP officers. Freeway Service Patrol operators shall follow the instructions of the CHP officer at the scene of any incident within the scope of the Freeway Service Patrol program. EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS: A. TOW TRUCK REQUIREMENTS: Vehicles will be exclusively dedicated to the Freeway Service Patrol during its hours of operation. The Freeway Service Patrol will utilize at a minimum, Class A trucks with a minimum gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds, dual wheel chassis and four (4) ton recovery equipment rating. All SOS -2 trucks and beds used in the Freeway Service Patrol program shall be less than five (5) years old and free of any physical damage. • • • Prior to commencement of service, the CHP will inspect each vehicle designated for the Freeway Service Patrol to ensure that it meets the vehicle specifications and to ensure that it meets or exceeds safety requirements. These inspections will occur prior to the start of service. Succeeding inspections will occur periodically as determined by the CHP. Any unsafe or poorly maintained vehicle(s) or improperly equipped vehicle(s) shall be removed from service or repaired as directed by the CHP, and the Contractor shall be fined at double the Contractor's hourly rate plus the loss of revenue for the down time. Documentation of the vehicle identification number and successful completion of the inspection will be kept on file at the CHP office and Contractor's base office. Spare vehicles will be required to complete the shifts of vehicles removed from service. The Contractor will be required to have a spare vehicle available for service at all times. Freeway Service Patrol vehicles bearing the service patrol title, logo, and vehicle identification number shall be painted white. There will be no color requirement for the trim. If trim is used, it shall be no greater than four (4) inches on the front and sides of the vehicle. No other accessory equipment shall be mounted or installed without prior CHP approval. This includes but is not limited to bras, chrome wheel covers or window tint. Each tow truck shall be equipped, as a minimum, with the following: o Wheel lift towing equipment, with a minimum lift rating of 3,000 pounds. All tow equipment shall include proper safety straps. o Boom with a minimum static rating of 5,000 pounds. o Winch Cable - 8,000 pound rating on the first layer of cable. o Winch Cable - 100 ft., 3/8 -inch diameter, with a working limit of 3500 pounds. o Towing slings rated at 3,000 pounds minimum. o Tow chains 5/16" alloy or OEM specs., J.T. hook assembly. o Rubber face push bumper. o Mounted spot light capable of directing a beam both front and rear. o Amber warning lights with front and rear directional flashing capability, with on/off switch in cab. o Public address system. SOS -3 o Power outlets ("hot boxes"), front and rear mounted, with outlets compatible to 12 volt booster cables. o Heavy duty, 60+ amp battery. o Radios with the ability to communicate with the Contractor's base office. o Programmable scanners capable of scanning between the 39 and 48 MHz used by the CHP. o Suitable cab lighting. o Trailer hitch capable of handling a 1 7/8 -inch ball and 2 inch ball. o One (1) 1 7/8 -inch ball and one (1) 2 inch ball. o Rear work lights. o Safety chain D -ring or eyelet mounted on rear of truck. o Motorcycle Straps (2) o Diesel fuel in plastic jerry cans (5 gallons) o Unleaded gasoline in plastic jerry cans (5 gallons) o Safety chains min. 5 ft. (2) o First aid kit (small 5" x 9") (1) o Fire extinguisher aggregate rating of at least 4-B,C units (1) o Pry bar - 36" or longer (1) o Radiator water in plastic container (5 gallons) o Sling crossbar spacer blocks (2) o 4" x 4" x 48" wooden cross beam (1) o 4" x 4" x 60" wooden cross beam (1) o 24" wide street broom (1) o Square point shovel (1) SOS -4 o Fuses (highway flares), 15 minute, or (36) Fuses (highway flares), 30 minute (20) o Cones 18" o Hydraulic jack, 2 -ton, floor - o Four way lug wrench (1 std.) o Four way lug wrench (1 metric) (6) (1) (1) (1) o Rechargeable air bottle, hoses and fittings to fit tire valve stems, 100 psi capacity (1) o Flashlight and spare batteries (1) o Tail lights/brake lights, portable remote (1 set) with extension cord o Booster cables, 25 ft. long minimum, 3 -gauge copper wire with heavy-duty clamps and one end adapted to truck's power outlets (1 set) o Funnel, multi -purpose, flexible spout (1) o Pop -Up Dolly, portable for removing otherwise (1) untowable vehicles o 5 -gallon can with lid filled with clean absorb -all (1) o Empty trash can with lid (5 gallon) (1) o Lock out set (1) Each Freeway Service Patrol truck will be required to have a tool box with the following minimum number of tools/supplies. A tool kit for small equipment items is required. The list may be supplemented at the Contractor's option and expense. o Screwdrivers -- Standard -1/8", 3/16", 1/4", 5/16" Phillips head - #1 and #2 (1 each, min). (1 each, min). o Needle nose pliers o Adjustable rib joint pliers, 2" rain. capacity o Crescent wrench - 8" SOS -5 o Crescent wrench - 12" (1) o 41b. hanuner (1) o Rubber mallet (1) o Electrical tape, roll (1) o Duct tape, 20 yard roll (1) o Tire pressure gauge (1) o Mechanic's wire (roll) (1) o Bolt cutters (1) The operator shall be required to complete a pre -operation inspection of the vehicle as well as inventory the required equipment prior to the start of each shift. An inspection/inventory sheet shall be completed by the operator prior to the start of each shift and be available for inspection. The sheets must be kept on file at the Contractor's office and available for CHP inspection upon request. Any item missing must be replaced prior to the start of the shift. All equipment stored on top of the truck shall be secured to the truck. B. SPARE VEHICLES: The Contractor shall be required to have one spare certified FSP tow truck available per beat. The spare vehicle should be used when a regular vehicle is unavailable. The spare vehicle shall be painted the required color with the required identification markings, title, logo. It shall meet all the vehicle equipment specifications. C. VEHICLE BREAKDOWN AND OTHER MISSED SERVICE: The spare vehicle must be in service on the beat within 45 minutes of the time a permanently dedicated vehicle must be taken out of service for any reason. The Contractor shall not be paid for the time period that the contractually required number of trucks is not m service. If a vehicle is not made available within the 45 minute time period, the Contractor shall be fined double the hourly contract rate in 1 minute increments until a replacement vehicle is provided. If a truck is not ready due to breakdown at the start of a shift, the fine time will be calculated at the start of the shift. If the entire shift is missed, Contractor shall be fined for the entire shift at three (3) times the hourly rate. Vehicle maintenance will be performed during non -service hours. D. VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION: It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to place detachable Freeway Service Patrol markings on each vehicle during the service hours and to remove the detachable markings immediately upon completion of each shift. The Commission will supply each contractor with the appropriate number of detachable markings for his/her beat(s). If a marking is lost or damaged, the Contractor shall be SOS -6 • • • responsible for the cost of the replacement markings. All Freeway Service Patrol markings shall be returned at the termination of the contract. The cost of any Commission and/or Caltrans/CHP supplied item and/or equipment not returned shall be deducted from the Contractor's final payment. Freeway Service Patrol markings as well as vehicle numbers shall be required on both sides of all trucks. The operator shall be required to keep the title and logos clean and in readable condition throughout the service patrol's operation. E. COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT: Each Freeway Service Patrol vehicle shall be equipped with radios to enable the operator to communicate with the CHP Communication Center. The communications equipment shall be supplied by the Commission. The Commission supplied communications equipment shall be in addition to the Contractor's shop radios. Programmable scanners capable of scanning between the 39 and 48 MHz used by CHP shall also be supplied by the Contractor and shall be installed in all vehicles. Each Freeway Service Patrol vehicle shall be equipped with shop radios to enable the operator to communicate with his/her base office. The shop radios shall be supplied by the Contractor. The service patrol vehicles shall be equipped with a public address system. The public address system shall have the capability for the driver of the disabled vehicle to hear instructions transmitted from the cab of the Freeway Service Patrol vehicle when the service patrol vehicle is adjacent to the rear of the disabled vehicle. The Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining the security of the vehicle communication equipment. The Contractor shall be liable for any damage other than normal wear and tear to the communication equipment. The Contractor shall also be liable for the full replacement value of the communication equipment installed in the trucks while in the care, custody and control of the equipment. The Commission shall deduct repair fees as well as the full replacement cost of any Commission equipment from any payment due to the Contractor under this agreement. The Commission supplied vehicle equipment shall be returned upon contract termination. The cost of any equipment not returned shall be deducted from the Contractor's final payment. F. VEHICLE OPERATORS: All potential vehicle operators shall be required to have a safe driving record and current Class C driver's license. All operators shall be 18 years of age or older. Potential operators shall be subject to driving record and criminal background checks through the California Highway Patrol. Potential operators shall be sufficiently experienced in the tasks of tow truck operations and proficient with all required Freeway Service Patrol equipment to provide safe and proper service. Any certified driver from other FSP areas will be evaluated on a case by case basis. All potential operators must be capable of demonstrating their tow operating abilities prior to formal CHP/Caltrans training. Additionally, the operators will be required to exercise good, sound judgement in carrying out their duties. SOS -7 Operators shall be required to inform the CHP Communications Center at any time he/she leaves the assigned beat for more than 10 minutes. This includes replenishing expendable items such as gasoline, fire extinguisher, breaks, etc. The operator shall be required to immediately notify the CHP Communications Center upon a tow truck breakdown. The Freeway Service Patrol operator shall be required to complete assist records for each incident. The CHP, Caltrans, and the Commission maintain strict drug and alcohol policies. Any Freeway Service Patrol vehicle operator found working under the influence of drugs or alcohol shall be dismissed by the Contractor immediately. The Contractor shall be responsible for providing a certified replacement driver for that vehicle. If a vehicle operator is convicted of a crime involving a stolen vehicle, stolen property, violence, drugs or moral turpitude, fraud related to the towing business, or misdemeanor or felony driving while under the influence of alcohol or a drug, the Contractor shall permanently remove that operator from duties under the FSP program. If an operator is charged with any of the above crimes, the Contractor shall immediately suspend that operator from duties under this program pending the outcome of the criminal case. If the operator is not convicted, or is ultimately convicted of a lesser crime not described above, the Contractor shall permanently remove that operator from duties under this program if, in the opinion of SAFE's Executive Director or designee, sufficient evidence is presented during the criminal proceedings to conclude there is probable cause to believe the operator committed the crime. All vehicle operators, including back-up drivers, shall be required to complete the CHP two-day training program which costs $50.00 per driver. No driver will be allowed to begin patrolling without attending the mandatory training classes. Any driver who is found on patrdl without completing the mandatory training classes may be prohibited from further Freeway Service Patrol service and the Contractor's contract may be terminated immediately. Mandatory CHP/Caltrans refresher training classes shall be scheduled during non -Freeway Service Patrol hours. A minimum of eight (8) hours refresher training per year shall be required. G. OPERATOR EQUIPMENT: It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to provide the operator with specified uniforms, shoes, and other equipment. The equipment includes navy blue jump suits or shirts and pants. If coveralls are worn they shall have two way zip front with heavy duty brass zipper. Coverall or shirt sleeves shall be half raglan type or set-in sleeve with pleated -action back. Long sleeves may have plain barrel cuff or be equipped with snap or button closure on wrist. The length of the sleeve on short - sleeve coveralls/shirts shall come to within approximately 1 inch of the inside forearm when the wearer's arm is bent at a 90 degree angle. The coveralls shall have shape holding sanforized waist banding with elastic inserts for trim fit. Legs shall be moderately tapered to avoid excessive fullness. H.D. Lee Company style No. 018-3041 (Navy Blue) or Commercial Uniform Co. style No. 201 (Navy Blue) or equal. All main seams shall be at least double stitched with good quality thread. SOS -8 Shirts or coveralls shall have one or two chest pockets. Single pocket coveralls/shirts shall have the chest pocket placed on the left. • • • The first initial of the first name and full last name shall be sewn above the right chest pocket so that it shall be clearly visible with the collar open. Letters shall not exceed /2 inch. A detachable metal nameplate may be worn in place of the embroidered name at the Contractor's option. A safety vest with reflective white stripes shall be worn. The safety vest shall be orange or lime - green in color. A small Freeway Service Patrol logo (patch) shall be sewn on the front of the safety vest over the left front pocket of the uniform. A large Freeway Service Patrol logo (patch) shall be sewn across the middle portion of the back of each safety vest. The name of the operator shall be displayed on the front of the safety vest over the right front pocket of the uniform. All Freeway Service Patrol operators shall wear general duty black work boots with protective steel toe. During cold weather, a navy blue sweater or sweatshirt may be worn under the uniform shirt/jumpsuit. A navy blue jacket may also be worn at the Contractor's option, if it meets all the uniform specifications. Rain gear shall be waterproofed material, yellow in color. Reflective 2" white tape shall be applied to both sleeve cuffs and both leg cuffs and across the upper back. Hats, if worn, shall be baseball type cap, navy blue in color. An "FSP" shoulder patch shall be sewn on the hat above the brim. No other logos/names shall be accepted. A sketch of the uniform is provided in Attachment "A-3". H. LOCAL OFFICE: The Contractor shall provide a local office for contract administration purposes. This office shall be staffed by either the Contractor or a person who has the authority to conduct business and make decisions on behalf of the Contractor. The office shall have business hours coinciding with Contractor's beat(s) hours of operation. Through the sheet shown on Attachment "A-2", the contractor shall designate representatives who will be available at the office during hours of operation to make decisions on behalf of the contractor. The office shall be established within close proximity to the Contractor's beat(s). The Contractor shall also provide telephone service through which he/she or a responsible representative who has the authority to conduct business and make decisions on behalf of the Contractor can be contacted during the non -service hours of operation for the length of the contract. During non -business hours, an answering machine provided at the Contractor's expense, shall be available to log calls, take complaints, etc. A fax machine shall be provided for invoicing and noticing purposes. SOS -9 I. PROPOSER QUALIFICATIONS: All potential proposers must have a business license, five (5) years' experience in operating a tow service, and at a minimum, three (3) years' experience of CHP rotation tow service. Additionally, the potential proposer must comply with all Federal, State and Local laws governing the operation of a tow service in the community in which the beat is located. J. PROPOSALS: An original and four (4) copies of each proposal must be provided. Attachment "A-1" shows each beat's required number of vehicles. The proposal price shall be based on an hourly cost for supplying the required number of Freeway Service Patrol vehicles and operators for the beat's hours of operation as described in Attachment "A-1" as well as for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, fuel (operating as well as for motorists), equipment, operating costs, insurance, overhead and incidentals as defined in the Request for Bid Proposal. The proposal price shall also take into consideration that operators are required and shall be paid by the Contractor for attending mandatory training classes and shall be required to respond to requests for service from CHP dispatchers and lend assistance to incidents encountered, whether or not it is at the end of his/her shift. All proposals shall be submitted on Attachment "B", Bid Proposal. Each proposal shall include the year, manufacturer, model, current mileage and vehicle identification number (VIN) of each truck that will be used for the project. The same information shall be provided for the spare vehicle. If a potential proposer does not own the vehicles but plans to acquire the vehicles, a statement as to how these vehicles will be acquired and the time line for acquisition shall be provided. Each proposal shall be accompanied with references from individuals, companies, law enforcement agencies, service clubs; etc., who are keenly aware of the proposer's experience and capabilities with regard to towing services. References from the Commission, CHP, Caltrans, banks, equipment suppliers, friends or relatives will not be allowed. K. PROPOSAL EVALUATION/CONTRACTOR SELECTION: 1. Evaluation Criteria. The Commission will evaluate the proposals received based on the following criteria: a. Qualifications of the Firm - 25 points Technical experience in performing work of a closely similar nature; experience working with public agencies; strength and stability of the firm; strength, stability, experience and technical competence of subcontractors; assessment by client references. SOS -10 b. Staffing and Project Organization - 25 points Qualifications of project staff, particularly key personnel and especially the Project Manager; key personnel's level of involvement in performing related work cited in -"Qualifications of the Firm" section; logic of project organization; adequacy of labor commitment; concurrence inthe restrictions on changes in key personnel. c. Work Plan - 15 points Depth of Proposer's understanding of Conunission's requirements and overall quality of work plan; logic, clarity and specificity of work plan: appropriateness of labor distribution among the tasks; ability to meet the project deadline; reasonableness of proposed schedule; utility of suggested technical or procedural innovations. d. Cost and Price - 25 points Reasonableness of the total price and competitiveness of this amount with other proposals received; adequacy of data in support of figures quoted; reasonableness of individual task budgets; basis on which prices are quoted. e. Completeness of Response - 10 points Completeness of response in accordance with RFP instructions; eXceptions to or deviations from the RFP requirements that the Commission cannot or will not accommodate; other relevant factors not considered elsewhere. 2. Evaluation Procedure. An Evaluation Committee comprised of Commission staff, Caltrans staff and CHP staff will evaluate all proposals received in accordance with the above criteria. The evaluators in applying the major criteria to the proposals may consider additional sub -criteria beyond those listed. During the evaluation period, the Commission may interview some or all of the proposing firms. 3. Award. The Commission will evaluate the proposals received and will submit, with approval of the Budget and Implementation Committee, the proposal considered to be the most competitive to the Commission's Board for consideration and selection. The Commission may also negotiate contract terms with the selected Proposer prior to award, and expressly reserves the right to negotiate with several Proposers simultaneously and, thereafter, to award a contract to the Proposer offering the most favorable terms to the Commission. The Commission reserves the right to award its total requirements to one Proposer or to apportion those requirements among several Proposers as the Commission may deem to be in its best interest. In addition, negotiations may or may not be conducted with SOS -11 Proposers; therefore, the proposal submitted should contain Proposer's most favorable terms and conditions, since the selection and award may be made without discussion with any Proposer. 4. Notification of Award andDebriefing. Proposers who submit a proposal in response to this RFP shall be notified in writing regarding the firm who was awarded the contract. Such notification shall be made within five (5) days of the date the contract is awarded. Proposers who were not awarded the contract may obtain a prompt explanation concerning the strengths and weaknesses oftheirproposal. Unsuccessful Proposers who wish to be debriefed must request the debriefing in writing and the Commission must receive the request within three (3) days of notification of the contract award. SOS -12 FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL (FSP) • • • TOW TRUCK CONTRACT SCHEDULE RFP Issued Written Questions for Pre -Proposal Conference Pre -Proposal Conference Minutes from Pre -Proposal Conference Mailed to Short Mail List and Attendees Proposals Due, 5:00 p.m. Bid Opening, 5:00 p.m. Interagency Committee Evaluates Proposals Including Calling References & Site Visits Contractor Selection Recommendation Forwarded to Budget & Implementation Committee Contractor Recommendation Approved by Commission Notice to Proceed Issued to Contractors Contract signed by Contractors Truck Inspections Driver Training Communications Equipment Installation Start of Service END OF SCOPE OF SERVICES SOS -13 March 15, 2001 March 23, 2001 _March 26, 2001 March 28, 2001 April 13, 2001 April 13, 2001 April 16-18, 2001 April 23, 2001 May 9, 2001 May 11, 2001 May 31, 2001 3rd week in June 2001 3rd week in June 2001 4th week in June 2001 July 2, 2001 • • • ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT A-1 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL BEAT DESCRIPTION FSP Area Freeway Beat Boundaries # of # of One-way Morning Evening Beat Beat Trucks back-up Length Shift Shift Trucks in Miles 1 30 SR -91 Orange County line 2 1 5.4 0500-0830 1500-1900 to Lincoln Ave. 2 31 SR -91 Lincoln Ave. to Magnolia 2 1 5.1 0500-0830 1500-1900 • • ATTACHMENT A-2 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE FORM BEAT NUMBER: CONTRACTOR NAME: PRINCIPAL: (Print) (Signature) - (Date) ALTERNATE NO. 1 ALTERNATE NO. 2 ALTERNATE NO. 3 The above named individuals have read and understand the Freeway Service Patrol Contract. At least one of these individuals will be available at the contractor's office during Freeway Service Patrol hours of operation and normal business hours to make contractual decisions on behalf of the contractor. SOS -15 FSP UNIFORM REQUIREMENTS • FRONT • REAR ATTACHMENT A-4 PRELIMINARY LIST OF FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL HOLIDAYS Plan to submit your cost proposal to provide Freeway Service Patrol tow service during each weekday except for the following holidays: 2001-2002* July 4 Independence Day September 3 Labor Day November 22 Thanksgiving Day 23 Friday after Thanksgiving December 25 Christmas January 1 New Year's Day 21 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day February 18 Presidents' Day May 27 Memorial Day 2002=2003* July 4 Independence Day September 2 Labor Day November 28 Thanksgiving Day 29 Friday After Thanksgiving December 25 Christmas January 1 New Year's Day 20 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day February 17 Presidents' Day May 26 Memorial Day • 2003-2- O04* July 4 Independence Day September 1 Labor Day November 27 Thanksgiving Day 28 Friday After Thanksgiving December 25 Christmas January 1 New Year's Day 19 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day February 16 Presidents' Day May 31 Memorial Day *NOTE: Consideration is being given to provide service on certain "high traffic days" on/or following certain holidays (e.g. July 4th, Labor Day, Sunday following Thanksgiving Day, Memorial Day), in the afternoon, 4 hours each. • ATTACHMENT B • ATTACHMENT B RIVERSIDE COUNTY FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL BID PROPOSAL FORM BEAT NO: BEAT LOCATION: TOTAL NUMBER OF TRUCKS (not including back-up truck): NAME: TITLE: COMPANY NAME: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NUMBER: BUSINESS LICENSE NUMBER: LICENSE CLASSIFICATION: PROPOSAL: Your proposal should take into consideration all vehicles, equipment, opei&ting cost, insurance, training classes, personnel, tools, fuel (for motorist as well as vehicles) supplies, expendable items, incidentals, etc. Please refer to the Scope of Services to ensure that you have covered all possible costs in your proposal. 1. Cost Per Hour Per Tow Truck = $ 2. Cost Per Hour For Beat (#1 multiplied by two) = $ 3. Total Annual Cost For Beat - FY 2001-2002 (#2 x 1,906 hours) $ 4. Total Annual Cost For Beat - FY 2002-2003 (#2 x 1,906 hours) $ 5. Total Annual Cost For Beat - FY 2003-2004 (#2 x 1,914 hours) $ AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: DATE: • B-1 t"r1Vj.. I V* %.) Attachment B FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL BID PROPOSAL FORM FIRM NAME: BEAT # This form must be completed by owner or day to day operating manager and not by a consultant or employee. The purpose of this form is to ensure that you are aware of all costs of Freeway Service Patrol service and to simplify the selection panel's review of your proposal. (DO NOT SIMPLY SAY "REFER TO PAGE #XX) UNDERSTANDING OF CONTRACT TERMS: 1. Owners's Number Of Years Of Tow Truck Operations (5 years minimum): Years as Owner Years in Towing Business Current Number of Tow Trucks Operated 2. FSP Beat Operating Hours: Years in CHP Rotation Tow 3. Describe Activities Prohibited to FSP Contractors: 4. Describe FSP Contractor Duties on a Daily Basis: B-2 • • 1 1✓. 1 ilree Attachment B 5. How Frequently Will Your Trucks be Inspected by CHP? 6. What Tests Must an FSP Driver Pass Before Operating FSP Service? A. B. C. 7. What Does an FSP Driver Wear? 8. What Equipment is Found on an FSP Tow Truck? (attach separate list) 9. How Did You Calculate Your Hourly Costs? (attach time & materials & calculation) 10. What are the FSP Insurance Requirements You Must Meet? 11. How Many Back-up Trucks and Drivers Must You Have for this Beat? 12. Who May We Contact by Phone for References? (clients only) Client Agency Phone # • B-3 r1Lrr.. roar Attachment B 13. Additional Information May Be Attached. Name: Name of Assistants Completing Form: Date: B-4 • • • • PART "B" CONTRACT AGREEMENT between Contract No.: (hereinafter "Contractor") ) ) ) ) ) and ) Contract Amount: $ ) ) ) Riverside County Service Authority ) Term: / / through / / for Freeway Emergencies ) 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 ) Riverside, California 92501 ) (hereinafter "Commission") ) for [TITLE OF WORK] B-5 • • This Agreement is made and entered into as of this day of , 20_, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES, with offices in Riverside, California (hereinafter called "Commission") and (hereinafter called "Contractor"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Commission, a California County Transportation Commission, exists under the authority of Section 130050 et seg. of the California Public Utilities Code; WHEREAS, the Commission requires the services of a Contractor to provide the professional services as described in the Scope of Services; WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that Contractor is best qualified to perform the required services; WHEREAS, the Contractor is able and willing to perform the required services under the terms and conditions of this Contract; WHEREAS, the Commission is the short range transportation planning agency for Riverside County. It also programs federal, state and local funds. The Commission has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the.Califomia Highway Patrol (CHP) to fund a peak period freeway service patrol on selected freeway segments in Riverside County; WHEREAS, Section 22520 (g) of the California Vehicle Code specifically authorized the CHP to be responsible for freeway service patrols stopping on freeways for the purpose of rapid removal of impediments to traffic. Article 3, Section 91, of the Streets and Highways Code, states that Caltrans has responsibility to improve and maintain the state highways. Caltrans also has the responsibility for traffic management and removing impediments from the highways; NOW, THEREFORE, For the consideration hereinafter stated, the parties agree as follows: 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES CONTRACT REPRESENTATIVES: Caltrans and the CHP will jointly oversee the service. Both agencies will have responsibility for overseeing service performance and ensuring that the Contractors abide by the terms of the contracts. B-6 CHP is responsible for dispatch services to incident locations within the vehicle's patrol limits. The dispatching will be done in accordance with the contract for the service. A Standards Operating Procedures manual will be given to the Contractor explaining the types of incidents to which his/her operators may be dispatched. SERVICE LOCATIONS: The Freeway Service Patrol will operate on selected freeway segments referred to as beats. Each beat has specific turnaround locations and designated drop locations identified by the CHP. Attachment "A" shows the specific limits, number of tow trucks, number of back-up trucks, hours of operation and fiscal years 2002, 2003 and 2004 holidays for the Contractor's specific beat. The Commission reserves the right to add or delete holidays to the work schedule. Travel time to and from the beat will be at the expense of the Contractor. At any time during the contract's term, the Commission reserves the right to adjust beat specifications to better accommodate demand for the service. These changes can occur during the course of the contract through written change orders. If warranted and during the service hours of operation, the Contractor may be requested to temporarily reassign his/her Freeway Service Patrol operators/trucks to locations outside the assigned beat. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE: The purpose of the project is to provide for the rapid removal of disabled vehicles and those involved in minor accidents from the freeway. Where conditions permit, safe removal of small debris will be required. Contractor vehicles shall be exclusively dedicated to the service during the hours of operation. All vehicle maintenance activities shall be conducted during non -service hours. The Contractor's service patrol operators shall assist motorists involved in minor accidents and those with disabled vehicles. They shall be responsible for clearing the freeway of automobiles, small trucks and small debris. When and where conditions warrant, service may be executed on the freeway shoulders. Where conditions do not warrant, operators will remove the vehicles from the freeway to provide service. The vehicles shall continuously patrol their assigned beat, respond to CHP dispatches for service, use the designated tumaround locations and use the CHP identified designated drop locations. Service patrol vehicle operators may be required to change flat tires, provide "jump" starts, provide one gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel, temporarily tape cooling system hoses and refill radiators. Operators may spend a maximum of 10 minutes per disablement in attempting to mobilize a vehicle. All Freeway Service Patrol services will be provided at no cost to the motorist. Service patrol operators will not be allowed to accept gratuities, perform secondary towing services, recommend secondary tows, or recommend repair/body shop businesses. B-7 • • • If a vehicle cannot be mobilized within the 10 minute time limit, it shall be towed to a designated drop location identified by the CHP. The motorist can request the Freeway Service Patrol vehicle operator to call the CHP Communication center to request a CHP rotational tow or other services. Freeway Service Patrol operators shall not be allowed to tow as an independent contractor from an incident that occurred during the Freeway Service Patrol shift unless called as a rotation tow by CHP. If called as a rotation tow after a Freeway Service Patrol shift, the operator must remove all Freeway Service Patrol markings and change his/her Freeway Service Patrol uniform. There may be some instances where service patrol operators may be requested to provide assistance to CHP officers. Freeway Service Patrol operators shall follow the instructions of the CHP officer at the scene of any incident within the scope of the Freeway Service Patrol program. EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS: A. TOW TRUCK REQUIREMENTS: Vehicles will be exclusively dedicated to the Freeway Service Patrol during its hours of operation. The Freeway Service Patrol will utilize at a minimum, Class A trucks with a minimum gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds, dual wheel chassis and four (4) ton recovery equipment rating. All trucks and beds used in the Freeway Service Patrol program shall be less than five (5) years old and free of any physical damage. Prior to commencement of service, the CHP will inspect each vehicle designated for the Freeway Service Patrol to ensure that it meets the vehicle specifications and to ensure that it meets or exceeds safety requirements. These inspections will occur prior to the start of service. Succeeding inspections will occur periodically as determined by the CHP. Any unsafe or poorly maintained vehicle(s) or improperly equipped vehicle(s) shall be removed from service or repaired as directed by the CHP, and the Contractor shall be fined at double the Contractor's hourly rate plus the loss of revenue for the down time. Documentation of the vehicle identification number and successful completion of the inspection will be kept on file at the CHP office and Contractor's base office. Spare vehicles will be required to complete the shifts of vehicles removed from service. The Contractor will be required to have a spare vehicle available for service at all times. Freeway Service Patrol vehicles bearing the service patrol title, logo, and vehicle identification number will be painted white. There will be no color requirement for the trim. If trim is used, it shall be no greater than four (4) inches on the front and sides of the vehicle. No other accessory equipment shall be mounted or installed without prior CHP approval. This includes but is not limited to bras, chrome wheel covers or window tint. Each tow truck shall be equipped, as a minimum, with the following: • B-8 o Wheel lift towing equipment, with a minimum lift rating of 3,000 pounds. All tow equipment shall include proper safety straps. o Boom with a minimum static rating of 5,000 pounds. o Winch Cable - 8,000 pound rating on the first layer of cable. o Winch Cable - 100 ft., 3/8 -inch diameter, with a working limit of 3500 pounds. o Towing slings rated at 3,000 pounds minimum o Tow chains 5/16" alloy or OEM specs., J.T. hook assembly. o Rubber face push bumper. o Mounted spot light capable of directing a beam both front and rear. o Amber warning lights with front and rear directional flashing capability, with on/off switch in cab. o Public address system. o Power outlets ("hot boxes"), front and rear mounted, with outlets compatible to 12 volt booster cables. o Heavy duty, 60+ amp battery. o Radios with the ability to communicate with the Contractor's base office. o Programmable scanners capable of scanning between the 39 and 48 MHz used by the CHP. o Suitable cab lighting. o Trailer hitch capable of handling a 1 7/8 -inch ball and 2 inch ball. o One (1) 1 7/8 inch ball and one (1) 2 inch ball. o Rear work lights. o Thomas Brothers or other suitable map. o Safety chain D -ring or eyelet mounted on rear of truck. o Motorcycle Straps (2) B-9 • • • o Diesel fuel in plastic jerry cans (5 gallons) o Unleaded gasoline in plastic jerry cans (5 gallons) o Safety chains min. 5 ft: (2) o First aid kit (small 5" x 9") (1) o Fire extinguisher aggregate rating of at least 4-B,C units (1) o Pry bar - 36" or longer (1) o Radiator water in plastic container (5 gallons) o Sling cross -bar spacer blocks (2) o 4" x 4" x 48" wooden cross beam (1) o 4" x 4" x 60" wooden cross beam (1) o 24" wide street broom (1) o Square point shovel (1) o Fuses (highway flares), 15 minute (36) Fuses (highway flares), 30 minute (20) o _ Cones 18" (6) o Hydraulic jack, 2 -ton, floor (1) o Four way lug wrench (1 std.) (1) o Four way lug wrench (1 metric) (1) o Rechargeable air bottle, hoses and fittings to fit tire valve stems, 100 psi capacity (1) o Flashlight and spare batteries (1) o Tail lights/brake lights, portable remote with extension cord (1 set) o Booster cables, 25 ft. long minimum, 3 -gauge 1 B-10 copper wire with heavy-duty clamps and one end adapted to truck's power outlets (1 set) o Funnel, multi -purpose, flexible spout (1) o Pop-up dolly, portable for removing otherwise untowable vehicles o 5 -gallon can with lid filled with absorb -all o Empty trash can with lid (5 gallon) o Lock out set (1) (1) (1) (1) Each Freeway Service Patrol truck shall be required to have a tool box with the following minimum number of tools/supplies. A tool kit for small equipment items is required. The list may be supplemented at the Contractor's option and expense. o Screwdrivers -- Standard -1/8", 3/16", 1/4", 5/16" Phillips head - #1 and #2 o Needle nose pliers o Adjustable rib joint pliers, 2" min. capacity o Crescent wrench - 8" o Crescent wrench - 12" o 4 lb hammer o Rubber mallet o Electrical tape, roll o Duct tape, 20 yard roll o Tire pressure gauge o Mechanic's wire (roll) o Bolt cutters B-11 (1 each, min). (1 each, min). (1) (1) (1) • The operator shall be required to complete a pre -operation inspection of the vehicle as well as inventory the required equipment prior to the start of each shift. An inspection/inventory sheet shall be completed by the operator prior to the start of each shift and be available for inspection. The sheets must be kept on file at the Contractor's office and available for CHP inspection upon request. Any item missing must be replaced prior to the start of the shift. All equipment stored on top of the truck shall be secured to the truck. B. SPARE VEHICLES: The Contractor shall be required to have one spare certified FSP tow truck available for each beat. The spare vehicle shall be used when a regular vehicle is unavailable. The spare vehicle shall be painted the required color with the required identification markings, title, logo. It shall meet all the vehicle equipment specifications. C. VEHICLE BREAKDOWN AND OTHER MISSED SERVICE: The spare vehicle must be in service on the beat within 45 minutes of the time a permanently dedicated vehicle must be taken out of service for any reason. The Contractor shall not be paid for the time period that the contractually required number of trucks are not in service. If a vehicle is not made available within the 45 minute time period, the Contractor shall be fined double the hourly contract rate until a replacement truck is provided. If a truck is not ready at the start of a shift due to breakdown, the fine time will be calculated at the start of the shift. If the entire shift is missed, the Contractor shall be penalized for the entire shift at three (3) times the hourly rate. Vehicle maintenance will be performed during non -service hours. D. VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION: It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to place detachable Freeway Service Patrol markings on each vehicle during the service hours and to remove the detachable markings immediately upon completion of each shift. The Commission will supply each Contractor with the appropriate number of detachable markings for his/her beat(s). If a marking is lost or damaged, the Contractor shall be responsible for the cost of the replacement markings. All Freeway Service Patrol markings shall be returned at the termination of the contract. The cost of any Commission and/or Caltrans/CHP supplied item and/or equipment not returned shall be deducted from the Contractor's final payment. Freeway Service Patrol markings as well as vehicle numbers shall be required on both sides of all trucks. The operator shall be required to keep the title and logos clean and in readable condition throughout the service patrol's operation. E. COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT: Each Freeway Service Patrol vehicle shall be equipped with radios to enable the operator to communicate with the CHP Communication Center. The communications equipment shall • B-12 be supplied by the Commission. The Commission supplied communications equipment shall be in addition to the Contractor's shop radios. Programmable scanners capable of scanning between the 39 and 48 MHz used by CHP shall also be supplied by the Contractor and shall be installed in all vehicles. Each Freeway Service Patrol vehicle shall be equipped with shop radios to enable the operator to communicate with his/her base.office. The shop radios shall be supplied by the Contractor. The Freeway Service Patrol 'vehicles shall be equipped with a public address system. The public address system shall have the capability for the driver of the disabled vehicle to hear instructions transmitted from the cab of the Freeway Service Patrol vehicle when the FSP vehicle is adjacent to the rear of the disabled vehicle. The Contractor shall be responsible for maintaining the security of the vehicle communication equipment. The Contractor shall be liable for any damage other than normal wear and tear to the communication equipment. The Contractor shall also be liable for the full replacement value of the communication equipment installed in the trucks while in the care, custody and control of the equipment. The Commission shall deduct repair fees as well as the full replacement cost of any Commission equipment from any payments due to the Contractor under this agreement. The Commission supplied vehicle equipment shall be returned upon contract termination. The cost of any equipment not returned shall be deducted from the Contractor's final payment. F. VEHICLE OPERATORS: All potential vehicle operators shall be required to have a safe driving record and current Class C driver's license. All operators shall be 18 years of age or older. Potential operators shall be subject to driving record and criminal background checks through the California Highway Patrol. Any certified driver from other FSP areas will be evaluated on a case by case basis. Potential operators shall be sufficiently experienced in the tasks of tow truck operations and proficient with all required Freeway Service Patrol equipment to provide safe and proper service. All potential operators must be capable of demonstrating their tow operating abilities prior to formal CHP/Caltrans training. Additionally, the operators will be required to exercise good, sound judgement in carrying out their duties. Operators shall be required to inform the CHP Communications Center at any time he/she leaves the assigned beat for more than 10 minutes. This includes replenishing expendable items such as gasoline, fire extinguisher, etc., or when they are on a break. The operator shall be required to immediately notify the CHP Communications Center upon a tow truck breakdown. The Freeway Service Patrol operator shall be required to complete assist records for each incident. The CHP, Caltrans, and the Commission maintain strict drug and alcohol policies. Any Freeway Service Patrol vehicle operator found working under the influence of drugs or B-13 alcohol shall be dismissed by the Contractor immediately. The Contractor shall be responsible for providing a certified replacement driver for that vehicle. The Contractor shall permanently remove any operator convicted of a crime involving a stolen vehicle, stolen property, violence, drugs or moral turpitude, fraud related to the towing business, or misdemeanor or felony driving while under the influence of alcohol or a drug, from duties under the FSP program. The Contractor shall immediately suspend any operator charged with any of the above crimes from duties under this program pending the outcome of the criminal case. If the operator is not convicted, or is ultimately convicted of a lesser crime not described above, the Contractor shall permanently remove the operator from duties under this program if, in the opinion of SAFE's Executive Director or designee, sufficient evidence is presented during the criminal proceedings to conclude there is probable cause to believe the operator committed the crime. All vehicle operators including back-up drivers shall be required to complete the CHP/Caltrans two day training program which costs $50.00 per driver. No driver will be allowed to begin patrolling without attending the mandatory training classes. Any driver who is found on patrol without completing the mandatory training class may be prohibited from further Freeway Service Patrol service and the Contractor's contract may be terminated immediately. Mandatory CHP/Caltrans refresher training classes shall be scheduled during non -Freeway Service Patrol hours. A minimum of eight (8) hours refresher training per year shall be required. G. OPERATOR EQUIPMENT: It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to provide the operator with specified uniforms, shoes, and other equipment. The equipment includes navy blue jump suits or shirts and pants. If coveralls are worn they shall have two way zip front with heavy duty brass zipper. Coverall or shirt sleeves shall be half raglan type or set-in sleeve with pleated - action back. Long sleeves may have plain barrel cuff or be equipped with snap or button closure on wrist. The length of the sleeve on short -sleeve coveralls/shirts shall come to within approximately 1 inch of the inside forearm when the wearer's arm is bent at a 90 degree angle. The coveralls shall have shape holding sanforized waist banding with elastic inserts for trim fit. Legs shall be moderately tapered to avoid excessive fullness. H.D. Lee Company style No. 018-3041 (Navy Blue) or Commercial Uniform Co. style No. 201 (Navy Blue) or equal. All main seams shall be at least double stitched with good quality thread. Shirts or coveralls shall have one or two chest pockets. Single pocket coveralls/shirts shall have the chest pocket placed on the left. • B-14 The first initial of the first name and full last name shall be sewn above the right chest pocket so that it shall be clearly visible with the collar open. Letters shall not exceed 1/2 inch. A detachable metal nameplate may be worn in place of the embroidered name at the Contractor's option. A safety vest with reflective white stripes shall be worn. The safety vest shall be orange or lime -green in color.. A small. FreewayServicePatrol logo (patch) shall be sewn on the front of the safety vest over the left front pocket of the uniform. A large Freeway Service Patrol logo shall be sewn across the middle portion of the back of each safety vest. The name of the operator shall be displayed on the front of the safety vest over the right front pocket of the uniform. All Freeway Service Patrol operators shall wear general duty black work boots with protective steel toe. During cold weather, a navy blue sweater or sweatshirt may be worn under the uniform shirt/jumpsuit. A navy blue jacket may also be worn at the Contractor's option, if it meets all the uniform specifications. Rain gear shall be waterproofed material, yellow in color. Reflective 2" white tape shall be applied to both sleeve cuffs and both leg cuffs and across the upper back. Hats, if worn, shall be baseball type cap, navy blue in color. An "FSP" shoulder patch shall be sewn on the hat above the brim. No other logos/names shall be accepted. A sketch of the uniform requirement is shown in Attachment "A-3". H. LOCAL OFFICE: The Contractor shall provide a local office for contract administration purposes. This office shall be staffed by either the Contractor or a person who has the authority to conduct business and make decisions on behalf of the Contract as specified in the form on Attachment "A-2". The office shall have business hours coinciding with Contractor's beat(s) hours of operation. The office shall be established within close proximity to the Contractor's beat(s). The Contractor shall also provide telephone service through which he/she or a responsible representative who has the authority to conduct business and make decisions on behalf of the Contractor during non -beat hours. During non -business hours, an answering machine provided at the Contractor's expense, shall be available to log calls, take complaints, etc. The business office must also have a working fax machine to receive written notices and invoices. 2.0 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The period of performance shall be July 2, 2001 through June 30, 2004, unless the agreement is terminated as provided herein. B-15 • • • Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations to the extent that the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed by an excusable delay. Should Contractor's services be delayed by an excusable cause, Contractor's schedule for completion of tasks affected by such delay may be extended. Excusable delays are Acts of God or acts or failures to act of government agencies or Commission in either their sovereign or contractual capacities; fires, floods, other epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes; but, in every case, the failure to perform must be reasonably beyond the control, and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor. 3.0 PAYMENT A. Subject to the provisions set forth below for services satisfactorily performed hereunder, the Commission shall pay the Contractor on a Time and Materials basis a ceiling price NOT TO EXCEED DOLLARS ($ ). B. The Commission shall not be obligated to pay costs which exceed the ceiling price set forth above, except as provided in Articles 5.0 and 8.0. Contractor agrees to use its best efforts to perform the services and all obligations under this Contract within such ceiling price. C. For its performance of services, the Contractor shall be paid for labor expended directly in the performance of this service at the rates specified below. The Contractor shall not be entitled to reimbursements unless approved in advance in writing. SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES Classification Hourly Rate Contract - tow truck operators $ D. The compensation herein above specified will cover and include all applicable labor surcharges such as taxes, insurance and fringe benefits, as well as indirect costs, overhead, general and administrative expense, and profit. E. Fines for starting late: leaving early; taking more than 15 -minutes worth ofbreaks per 3 -hour shift; or being ordered out of service by a CHP or Caltrans supervisor for contract infractions shall be deducted from the Contractors's monthly invoice at double the hourly rate. F. Invoices for Contractor's services shall be submitted monthly on forms approved by the Commission. Invoices will be routinely verified by the CHP and Caltrans. To ensure prompt payment, most billing disputes may be resolved within ten (10) • B46 working days of written notice of dispute. However, at Commission's discretion, reconciliation of disputed fines that sum to less than 2% of the month's invoice may be corrected on the next month's invoice to ensure prompt payment of the major portion of the invoice. G. Records and Audit: The Contractor shall permit the authorized representatives of the Commission, and any other government agency to inspect and audit all records of Contractor relating to its and its subcontractor's performance under this Contract from date of Contract through and until expiration of three years after completion of the Contract. Contracts with the Contractor's subcontractors shall include such provisions for such audits, as applicable. For purposes of audit, the date of completion of the Contract shall be the date of Commission's payment for Contractor's final billing (so noted on the invoice) under this Contract, or a period of ninety days from the date of Commission's Notice of Final Acceptance. 4.0 COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES The Executive Director or his/her designee shall be the Commission's designated representative for the Contract. Representative shall manage all technical aspects related to the performance of this Contract. The Contractor shall make such oral or written reports to the Commission's Representative as he or she may request in addition to those specifically required elsewhere by this Contract. 5.0 TERMINATION A. The Commission may, by written notice to Contractor, terminate this Contract in whole or in part at any time, either for the Commission's convenience or because of the failure of the Contractor to fulfill its Contract obligations. Upon receipt of such notice, the Contractor shall: (a) immediately discontinue all services affected (unless the notice directs otherwise), and (b) deliver to the Commission all data, drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries and such other information and material as may have been accumulated by the Contractor or its Subconsultants in performing this Contract, whether completed or in process. B. If the termination is for the convenience of the Commission, the Commission shall pay Contractor the approved costs incurred prior to effective date of termination and other costs reasonably incurred by the Contractor to implement the termination. C. If the termination is due to the failure of the Contractor to fulfill its Contract obligations, the Commission may take over the work, and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise. In such case, the Contractor shall be liable to the Commission for any reasonable cost or damages occasioned to the Commission thereby. B-17 • • • D. If, after the notice of termination for failure to fulfill Contract obligations, it is determined that the Contractor has not so failed, the termination shall be deemed to have been effected for the convenience of the Commission. In such event, adjustment shall be made as provided in paragraph B of this Article. E. The rights and remedies of the parties provided in this Article are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Contract. F. Contractor, in executing this Contract, shall be deemed to have waived any and all claims for damages in the event of Commission's termination for convenience as provided in paragraph B of this Article. 6.0 CONTRACTOR STATUS/SUBCONTRACTORS A. The Contractor is an Independent Contractor. In the performance of the services to be provided hereunder, Contractor's relationship to the Commission shall be that of an independent contractor and not an employee, agent or other representative of the Commission. B. Assignment or Transfer: Services to be furnished hereunder shall be deemed to be unique personal services and except as herein provided, Contractor shall not assign, sublet, transfer or otherwise substitute its interest in this Contract or its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Commission. This consent shall in no way relieve the Contractor from his primary responsibility for performance of the work. Any such transfer without said consent shall be void and unenforceable. Any contract with a subconsultant shall require the subconsultant to comply with all applicable provisions of this agreement, including without limitation, Article 7 hereof. Commission reserves the right of prior approval of all Subconsultants and retains the right to request Contractor to terminate any subconsultant, for any reason deemed appropriate by the Commission, by so notifying Contractor in writing. Should said notification be submitted to Contractor, it shall terminate said subconsultant immediately. D. Commission shall have no liability to any subconsultant(s) for payment for services under this Contract or other work performed for Contractor, and any subcontract entered into by Contractor pursuant to the conduct of services under this Contract shall duly note that the responsibility for payment for the technical services or any other work performed shall be the sole responsibility of Contractor. • B-18 7.0 INSURANCE Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, or employees. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: Coverage shall be -at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). 3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant's profession. 5. On -hook Liability: Listed below are the insurance endorsement for the on - hook liability coverages which shall be required for tow truck services: Gross Vehicle Weight Less than 10,000 pounds 10 -20,000 pounds More than 20,000 pounds Coverage Per Accident $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $250,000 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 a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. g 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Errors and omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. • B-19 5. On -hook Liability: Listed below are the insurance endorsement for the on - hook liability coverages which shall be required for tow truck services: Gross Vehicle Weight Coverage Per Accident Less than 10,000 pounds $ 50,000 10 -20,000 pounds $ 50,000 More than 20,000 pounds $250,000 C. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retention: Any deductibles or self -insured retention must be declared to and approved by the Commission. At the option of the Commission, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self - insured retention as respects the Commission, its officials and employees, or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investiga- tions, claim administration and defense expenses. D. Other Insurance Provisions: The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The Commission, its subsidiaries, officials and employees are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor, products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the Commission, its subsidiaries, officials and employees. 2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Commission, its subsidiaries, officials and employees. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Commission, its subsidiaries, officials and employees. shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3. 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 subsidiaries, officials and employees. 4. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 5. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, retum receipt requested, has been given to the Commission. • B-20 E. Acceptability ofInsurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the Commission. Only admitted California carriers are acceptable to the Commission unless otherwise approved in writing by the Commission. F. Verifications of Coverage: Contractor shall furnish the Commission with certificates of insurance and original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the Commission before work commences. G. Liability and Indemnification: The Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the • Commission, and its subsidiaries, officers, employees, and agents, individually and collectively, to the maximum extent allowed by law, from and against all liability, claims, losses, actions, and expenses (including attorney's fees) on account of bodily injury to or death of any person (including employees of the parties to be indemnified) or for damage to or loss of use of property (including employees of the parties -to be indemnified) or for damage to or loss of use of property (including property of the Conunission) arising out of or resulting from the acts or omissions to act of the Contractor, its subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone of whose acts any of them are liable in the performance of the Work, whether occurring during the course of the contract or after its completion, unless caused solely by the negligence or willful misconduct of the parties to be indemnified. This indemnity shall survive termination ofthe Contract or final payment thereunder. This indemnity is in addition to any other rights or remedies which the Commission may have under the law or under the Contract. In the event of any claim or demand made against any party which is entitled to be indemnified hereunder, the Commission may in its sole discretion reserve, retain, or apply any monies due to the Contractor under the Contract for the purposeof resolving such claims,provided, however that the Commission may release such funds if the contractor provides the Commission with reasonable assurance of protection of the Commission's interests. The Commission shall in its sole discretion determine whether such assurances are reasonable. Claims against the parties to be indemnified, by any employee of Contractor, its subcontractors, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, shall not limit the Contractor's indemnification obligation, set forth above, in any way, by any limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for the contractor or its subcontractors under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts or other employee benefit acts or insurances. H. Damage Complaints: Upon receiving a damage complaint from a motorist assisted by the Contractor that the Contractor damaged their vehicle while lending assistance, B-21 • • • the Contractor shall notify the CHP regarding the nature of the damage complaint and its disposition. The Contractor shall reply to the motorist by telephone with 24 hours of receiving the damage complaint notification. If necessary, the Contractor shall send either his/her authorized representative or his/her insurance company representative to inspect the vehicle and complete an incident report within 48 hours after receiving the damage complaint. If the investigation shows that damage to the vehicle could have been caused by the Contractor, the Contractor shall negotiate in good faith to try and resolve the issue and shall report to the CHP the result of the negotiations. All complaints shall be resolved within a reasonable period of time after being received. Complaint Review Committee: The Freeway Service Patrol Technical Advisory Committee is hereby designated as the Damage Complaint Review Committee. The Technical Advisory Committee is composed of voting members from Caltrans, CHP and the Commission. If the Committee finds that justifiable complaints are not resolved within a reasonable time frame, it can recommend that payment to the Contractor in the amount of the damage claim be withheld. 8.0 REVISIONS IN SCOPE OF WORK A. Commission may, from time to time, make changes in Article 1 - Scope of Services under this Contract, through a Change Order. A Change Order shall not modify the overall purpose of this Contract. B. Extra Work: At any time during the term of this Contract, Commission may order Extra Work to be performed by Contractor. Extra Work is defined as work which was not contained in this Contract; is determined by the Commission to be necessary; and bears a reasonable relation to the work originally described in the Contract. C. Upon receipt of a Change Order approved by the Commission, Contractor shall continue performance of the Scope of Services as changed. Changes in the Scope of Services, and equitable adjustments in compensation and schedule shall be incorporated in written amendments to this Contract either prior to or subsequent to Commission's issuance of a Change Order. 9.0 RIGHTS IN TECHNICAL DATA A. All documents and materials prepared or developed by Contractor and its Subconsultants pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the Commission without restriction or limitation on their use and shall be made available upon request, to the Commission at any time. Original copies of such shall be delivered to the Commission upon completion of the work or termination of the work. The Contractor shall be permitted to retain copies of such items for the B-22 furtherance of its technical proficiency; however, publication of this material is subject to the written approval of the Commission. B. No material or technical data prepared by the Contractor under this Contract is to be released by Contractor -to any other person or agency except as necessary for the performance of the work. All press releases or information to be published in newspapers, magazines, electronic media, shall be distributed only after first being authorized by the Commission. 10.0 EEO/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/DBE In connection with the execution of this Contract, Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, age, religion, color, sex, or national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, or marital status. Contractor shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or handicapped status. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code Section 12900 et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (Cal. Admin. Code, Tit. 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.): The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code, Sec 12900, set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Administrative Code are incorporated into this Contract by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Contractor shall include the provisions of this Section in all of Contractor's subcontracts with respect to work under this Agreement, unless exempted by the Regulations. 11.0 PROHIBITED INTERESTS A. Contractor warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Contract and that is has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bonafide employee working solely for Contractor, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Contract. For breach of violation of this warranty, the Commission shall have the right to annul this contract without liability. B. Contractor agrees that, for the term of this Contract, no member, officer, or employee of the Commission, or of a local public body during his/her employment for one (1) year thereafter, or member or delegate to the Congress of the United States, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract, or to any benefit arising thereof. C. The employment by Contractor of personnel on the payroll of the Commission will not be permitted in the execution of this Contract, even though such employment B-23 • s • may be outside of the employee's regular working hours or on Saturdays, holidays, or vacation time; further, the employment by the Contractor of personnel who have been on the Commission payroll within one (1) year prior to the date of contract award, where such employment is caused by and/or dependent upon Contractor securing this or related contract with the Commission, is also prohibited. 12.0 NOTIFICATION All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of the terms of this Contract or changes thereto shall be effected by the mailing thereof by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, California 92501 Attn: Jerry Rivera, Program Manager 13.0 COMPLIANCE WITH LAW The Contractor shall familiarize itself with and perform the work required under this Contract in conformity with requirements and standards of the Commission, municipal and public agencies, public and private utilities, special districts, and railroad agencies whose facilities and services may be affected by work under this Contract. The Contractor shall also comply with all Federal, California and local laws and ordinances applicable to any of the work involved in this Contract. 14.0 _ DISPUTES In the event of a disagreement, or dispute arising between the parties under this Contract, the Commission shall, upon its own initiative or promptly upon the written request of Contractor, make a determination thereof and such determination shall be complied with pending judicial determination of the dispute. Pending final resolution of any dispute hereunder, Contractor shall continue diligently to perform the services under this Contract and in accordance with the Commission's decision or position concerning the disputed matter. 15.0 GOVERNING LAW The validity of this Contract and of any of its terms or provisions, as well as the rights and duties of the parties hereunder, shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 16.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT B-24 This Contract, and any attachments or documents incorporated herein by inclusion or by reference, constitutes the complete and entire agreement between the Commission and Contractor and supersedes any prior representations, understandings, communications, commitments, agreements or proposals, oral or written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed on the date shown below, but effective on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES CONTRACTOR By: By: William G. Kleindienst, Chairman REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED Tax I.D. No. FOR APPROVAL: Eric A. Haley, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Best, Best & Krieger Counsel, Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies B-25 (Title) • AGENDA ITEM 7L • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Stephanie Wiggins, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming SUBJECT: Rail Program Update PLANS & PROGRAMS COMMITTEE & STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission receive and file the Rail Program Update as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Riverside Line Weekday Patronage: Passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of January averaged 4,572, an increase of 5% from the month of December, due in large part to the holiday season. The Line has averaged an increase of 5% from a year ago, January 2000. Saturday Patronage: The on -time performance for the Saturday service fell from 100% during the month of December to 62.5% for the month of January. Poor operating times, on -time performance, and lack of awareness- have affected the ridership on this new service (high = 456 trips, low = 133 trips) over the last seven months. On February 10th, the operating times substantially changed and the long-awaited downtown Pomona station opened on the Riverside Line. Metrolink is launching an awareness campaign by including newspaper ads starting March 2nd which are projected to reach over 200,000 households. Riverside County papers include the Press -Enterprise, The Californian, and La Prensa. RCTC will assist in the promotion of the Weekend Service locally by performing outreach to community groups and integrating promotions in conjunction with the upcoming Beach Train Service. RCTC staff is also exploring the use of city utility stuffers as a means of advertising the service. Inland Empire - Orange County Line • Weekday Patronage: Ridership on Metrolink's Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Line for the month of January averaged 2,862, a 6% increase from the month of December, due in large part to the holiday season. However, this Line continues to grow averaging a 49% increase from January '00 to January '01. Increased ridership on this Line is due to the increase in gas prices, the addition of the mid -day train, marketing efforts, and increasing congestion on the 91 Freeway. 000094 New Feeder Service: The increase in ridership on the IEOC Line has resulted in an increased demand for parking spaces at our stations. Additional feeder service to the stations offers a more immediate relief to the current parking capacity issues. A ribbon - cutting ceremony will be held on Tuesday, February 27th at 1 1 a.m. at Corona City Hall to officially launch a new fixed route service which began earlier this month. The new shuttles provide frequent service to the West Corona Station as well as serving additional areas of the City. Special Trains /EOC Midday Train: The January 2001 average weekday trips of 2,862 on the IEOC Line continue to surpass the ridership performance target of 2,264. The demonstration period for the midday train began November 1999 and ends March 2001. These ridership numbers need to be sustained for the next 2 months in order for the Midday service to be included in the regular Metrolink budget for FY2001/02. 000095 Passangar Update February 2001 Inside this Issue 1 2 aS 4 More Ways to Get to Your Station Do You Transfer at Orange? Fill Out Survey Inside What is RCTC Doing About the La Sierra Parking Crunch? La Sierra Station Frequently Asked Questions Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Ave, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 (909) 787-7141/fax(909) 787-7920 www.n tc.org • Riverside & Inland Empire -Orange County Lines Passenger Update New Services Make Transit Stations More Accessible Riding a comfortable Metrolink train is only one component of your commute. Getting to work or returning home still requires you to travel to and from train stations. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is placing a high pnority on improving transportation services to our local train stations and the Commission has good news to share with you as we begin 2001. RTA Route 15 to Serve La Sierra Station Parking at the Riverside -La Sierra station continues to get tighter as many more people tum to Metrolink as their primary way of commuting to Orange County. Only a year ago, parking at La Sierra was easy. However in just one short year, Metrolink ridership has soared by more than 50 percent. Thanks to that growth, finding a space later in the morning can be a challenge. The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) is addressing the challenge by re-routing its existing Route 15 to serve the train station in the morning and the evening. The best news is that -10 -trip ticket and monthly pass holders ride for FREE. If you live in the La Sierra area or near the Gaileria at Tyler, this will put your mind at ease. Call RTA now for more information at 1-800-800-7821 or log onto their website at www.rta.com for schedule information. RCTC is currently working with RTA to offer express shuttle service to the La Sierra Station which is anticipated to begin within the next couple of months. SunLink Adds Service from Downtown Riverside Station to Cabazon Last year, SunLine Transit added SunLink Express Service between the Downtown Riverside Station and Palm Desert. The unique and comfortable superbuses enable Coachella Valley residents to use Metrolink and also provide a convenient way to travel to the desert from Riverside. Due to the success of the service, SunLink has added stops in Cabazon, and in Palm Springs. For more information, please call 1-800-347-8628 or visit the unique SunLink Superbus when it arrives at the Downtown station. 000096 Measure A In 1988, _ Riverside••:County voters approved_Measure: A an overwhelming margin Sow invest more than a - billion `- dollars over a 20 -year period #o improve transportation throughout the county. Voter approval of Measure A has enabled RCTC to fund many transportation improvements along freeways, local streets and roads, and commuter rail. Approximately $100 million in Measure A funds have been invested in rail service for Riverside County which includes Metrolink service and many station and rail line improvements. RCTC Rideshare Services Advantage Rideshare, Club Ride, Inland Empire Commuter Services and the Commuter Exchange are all ways RCTC provides commuter assistance to Riverside County residents and employers. Programs include incentives for new ridesharers including Metrolink users, carpoolers, vanpoolers, walkers, and bicyclists. Incentives are also available for long-term ridesharers. For more information, please nail,-- RCTC's Commuter Assistance - Program at (909) 341-9230.-..,_: „erside,ounty. nznsportation Comnassfow: • 000097 Pawnper Update Corona Adds Additional Shuttles to West Corona Station Many of you who live in Corona and pick up the train at the West Corona station already know about the city's Dial -A -Ride Shuttle service. The city has announced plans 'to begin new fixed route service this month. The new bus service will serve additional areas of the city and is a great altemative to driving to the station on the 91 Freeway or on nearby streets and roads. For more information, contact Anne Palatino at (909)736-2235. Overcrossings Near Completion The wait is almost over at the La Sierra and West Corona train stations. The pedestrian overcrossing structures at the two stations have been up for months and they are about ready to open. While the main structures were completed rapidly to avoid conflicts between the construction crews and trains, the interior work has been quite complex. Electrical and elevator work as well as the need to pass numerous local requirements has slowed work somewhat, but the good news is that both overcrossings will open in the next few months. The pedestrian overcrossings are being built to enhance safety and rail operations through the area. New Service - New Stations RCTC is planning to expand service in 2002 with the addition of a new line between Riverside and Los Angeles that would travel to Union Station through the City of Fullerton. That would allow riders to commute to Los Angeles, Fullerton, Norwalk, and Commerce from La Sierra, West Corona, and the new stations in Downtown Corona and Van Buren Boulevard. Currently, the only way to take the train to Los Angeles from Corona or La Sierra is to travel to Orange and transfer to a northbound Orange County line train. Already, there are plenty of Riverside County residents who are making that trip with the inconvenient transfer. While service to Los Angeles through Fullerton has been in Metrolink's long-term plans for many years, it still requires the financial backing and support of Riverside's transit agency partners in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. If you are currently making the transfer at Orange and heading north, or are otherwise interested in the service, we want to hear from you. Enclosed is a survey for commuters who transfer at Orange. Please complete the survey and retum it to RCTC. Your support of this service is important in convincing our neighboring agencies to move forward. • La Sierra Parking Crunch a Top Priority for 2001 Thanks to record ridership Wrowth, finding a parking pot at the La Sierra Metrolink Station can remind one of a shopping mall parking lot during the holiday season. Many of the new riders are using the La Sierra station. Late last year, the -Riverside. County Transportation Commission moved into action to try to plan improvements to address the La Sierra Station parking problem. The first thing the Commission needed was information, and almost 300 of you responded by completing a survey. illffortunately, some vious solutions to the problem are impossible to pursue. While there are vacant dirt lots next to the station, the land is not owned by RCTC. The nearby property is owned by the Riverside Community College District (RCCD), and the District is currently in the planning process to develop it. Even the actual station land is leased from the College District. More importantly, RCCD has not expressed any interest in a long-term lease or purchase of the nearby property. As a result, expanding the parking lot is impossible. The good news is that RTA has revised its existing Route 15 to serve La Sierra. The buses are timed to meet most incoming trains in the moming and evening and if .you live by the station, this is the best way to start and end your commute. For more information, please call 1- 800-800-7821. Another service that will begin in a few weeks is a preferred parking program for Metrolink users who carpool to the station. RCTC will be establishing a program which will include a special parking placard and reserved parking spaces for regular pass holders and 10/18/00 La Sierra Survey Results 10 -trip ticket holders who use the train frequently. For those of you who already carpool to the station, sign up today by calling Stephanie Wiggins at (909)787-7141. Finally, we urge every Metrolink user that currently uses the La Sierra station to consider the Downtown Riverside station. We found in the survey that there are many current riders at the La Sierra station who actually live closer to Downtown Riverside. There are plenty of advantages to using the Downtown Riverside Station. It's in the same fare zone, so it doesn't cost more to use it. Also, RCTC uses the same security company it uses at La Sierra to patrol the parking lot Downtown. And, if you are worried about finding a seat on the train, getting on the train just a few minutes earlier at the Downtown station will make it easier to find the spot that you want. Heaviest Used A.M. Train: #807, 6:36am Heaviest Used P.M. Train: #804, 5:03p Choice of Travel to Station: Drive alone 83% Dropped Off 10% Carpool 6% Walk 2% ' Would you consider using: A free shuttle bus near home? Carpool? Valet Parking? 43% Yes Stacked Parking? 36% Yes 74% Yes ri 59% Yes trA 25% No 41% No 57% No 74 64% No 000098 Passenger Lianas, FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) Regarding La Sierra Station Why has the parking problem deteriorated so quickly? The short answer is the success of Metrolink. In just one year, Metrolink ridership has jumped by more than 50 percent. For more than four years, there was a surplus of parking at the La Sierra station. When the station first opened some even questioned why so much parking was provided. Now, there is a need for more spaces. Whoeowns the La Sierra Station? All of the Metrolink stations in Riverside County are operated by the Riverside County Transportation Commission. In the case of La Sierra, the station is located on land leased from the Riverside Community College District (RCCD). The surrounding land is also owned by the College — not the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Wh can't the parkin a lot be expanded? The surrounding land is owned by the RCCD. The District has shown no interest in leasing additional land to the Riverside County Transportation Commission and is currently working on plans to build a mixed use development on the adjoining land. Are there other Metrolink stations with arkin • problems? Metrolink is gaining in popularity everywhere, which is causing parking problems in other areas too. Parking is scarce in Rancho Cucamonga, San Juan Capistrano, and Irvine. In Irvine, cars are stack parked by a valet, and in San Juan Capistrano commuters have to pay to park. 000099 Is there any way to bring a catering -truck or some other food .service to La Sierra Station? RCTC's lease with RCCD specifically prohibits any type of food service on the property. What can be done to improve the parking problems at La Sierra? First, we added a guard last November to monitor the parking lot at La Sierra to prevent people from using it as a park and ride given that two lots are located just a few minutes away at La Sierra University and the Tyler Mall. As a result of adding the additional guard, we have freed up 23 parking spaces for train commuters. Metrolink riders who carpool to the train station to use Metrolink are welcomed. We will continue to direct non-Metrolink carpoolers use the designated park and ride lots. Next month, the Riverside County Transportation Commission will be launching a number of efforts to temporarily alleviate the situation. First off, 35 parking spaces at the train station will be set aside for a new preferential carpool parking program for Metrolink riders. A survey of La Sierra station users indicated that few people carpool to the station; however many more are interested in doing so. Guaranteeing parking spaces for people who do carpool will serve as a reward and incentive to share a ride to the station. Also, RCTC is currently working with RTA to offer express shuttle service to the La Sierra Station which is anticipated to begin within the next couple of months. We continue to appreciate your patience as we attempt to try several solutions to alleviate the parking problem. • AGENDA ITEM 7M • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: First Quarter/FY 00/01 Transit Operators' Report PLANS AND PROGRAMS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To receive and file the First Quarter FY 00/01 Transit Operators' Report as an informational item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This report presents county -wide public transportation ridership, operating and financial information for the first quarter of FY 00/01, July 1 through September 30, 2000. An overview of the County's fixed -route and dial -a -ride ridership, operational, and financial data from FY 98/99 together with projected performance as outlined in each,operators Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) for FY 00/01. As part of the last Triennial Performance Audit, a Transit Operator Performance Improvement Program (PIP) was developed. As a result, eight performance indicators were established: 1) Operating Cost per Revenue Hour - should increase no more than CPI 2) Farebox Recovery Ratio - per RCTC policy and PUC requirements 3) Subsidy per Passenger - should increase no more than CPI 4) Subsidy per Passenger Mile - should increase no more than CPI 5) Subsidy per Revenue Hour - should increase no more than CPI 6) Subsidy per Revenue Mile - should increase no more than CPI 7) Passengers per Revenue Hour - % increase consistent with population growth or national average, whichever is greater 8) Passengers per Revenue Mile - % increase consistent with population growth or national average, whichever is greater. The first two performance indicators: Operating Cost per Revenue Hour and Farebox Recovery Ratio are mandatory per the Public Utilities Commission. For FY 01/02, transit operators will be instructed to prepare their SRTP's to meet a minimum of three of the remaining six performance indicators. This will assist staff with monitoring performance. 000100 Attachment 1 provides data and performance statistics for all eight of the public operators. It should be noted that not all of the operators are tracking all of the performance indicators since per the PIP, operators have the option of selecting three of the six indicators to track performance. Items not tracked are indicated with an "—"; items that don't apply or where information was not available are indicated by "N/A". It is anticipated that ridership reports will be presented to the Commission a minimum of twice a year. Information contained in the ridership report will assist staff in evaluating each operators' SRTP. Future operating reports will allow staff to compare one quarter against another to determine ridership levels, costs, etc. Staff recognizes that this report, to be effective, needs further development. Staff will work with the consultant conducting the current triennial performance audit to further develop some criteria to compare operating costs against the performance indicators listed above. Ridership and Operating Costs The total number of public transportation trips provided by the County's fixed route, dial -a -ride and SCRRA's Riverside Line and Inland Empire -Orange County Line Operators during the first quarter of FY 00/01 was 3,064,111. Of the 3,064,111 trips, 2,91 1,680 were fixed route (95%) and 152,431 were paratransit trips (5%). The operating cost per revenue hour for the fixed route services (excluding rail) ranged from $31.71 to $94.50. The average cost was $63.28. Operating costs for rail service, for this quarter, are not included as information was not available from SCRRA. It is anticipated that rail's operating costs will be included in the nezt quarter report. The operating cost per revenue hour for the paratransit services ranged from $14.76 to $48.46. The average cost was $32.09. The increased cost of fuels may have had a significant impact on operating costs. In addition, due to a shortage of drivers, some operators had to pay overtime to keep services operating. Through discussions with operators, staff was informed that the first quarter reports are not always a true picture of costs as some operators don't incur major costs until the second or third quarter of operation. 000101 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATI ON COMMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT • • Summary of First Quarter Information: July 1, 2000 Through September 30, 2000 Agency Name Fixed Route Operating Costs Per Re venue Hour Paratransit Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour City of Banning $51.50 $30 .40 City of Beaumont $31.71 $31.68 City of Corona N/A $32 .87 City of Riverside - Special Svs. N/A $22.87 Palo Verde Valley Transit N/A $14.76 . Riverside Transit Agency $75.41 $43.59 SunLine Transit Agency $94.50 $48 .46 Rail Service -- N/A To tal $253.12 $224.63 Average $63. 28 $32 .09 Note: "--" indicates information was not available from Metrolink . It is anticipated that inf ormation will be available for the second quarter. 2/16/01 1:11 PM Summary Page 000102 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO MMISSI ON TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF BANNING TR ANSIT PR OVIDER: CITY OF BANNING FY 98/99 Annual DATA ELEM ENTS - SYSTEM WIDE TOTAL Actual Unlinked Passenger Trips Passenger M iles Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Hours Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles Total Actual Vehicle M iles Collisions Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures ---- - ----- Total Valid Passenger Complaints Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Schedule d Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips Total Operating Expenses Total Passenger Fare Revenues Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE FIXED ROUTE FY 99/00 SRTP FY 00/01 Plan SRTP Plan F Y UU/U1 1st Quarter Actual 243,769 257,150 257,408 56,689 N/A N/A N/A N/A 10,793 10,710 11,406 2,602 183,422 183,141 170,374 37,726 188,460 186,680 175,287 38,966 1 0 0 0 0 4 29 0 0 5 N/A -- -- 22,819 N/A $472,380 $482,000 $515,944 $134,004 $103,994 $107,629 $110,907 $26,152 $368,386 $374,371 $405,037 $107,852 PARATRANSIT FY UU/U1' FY 98/99 FY 99/00 FY 00/01 1st Annual SRTP SRTP Quarter Actual Plan Plan Actual 8,407 1.1,000 9,100 2,206 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,629 2,200 2,200 587 25,033 33,000 29,500 7,854 26,550 34,949 31,373 8,278 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 N/A -- 2,005 N/A 1,943 $76,925 $95,339 $86,508 $17,843 $5,528 $6,710 $5,642 $1,347 $71,397 $88,629 $80,866 $16,496 SYSTE M WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 1st Quarter Actual 252,176 N/A 12,422 208,455 215,010 1 32 N/A N/A $549,305 $109,522 $439,783 268,150 N/A 12,910 216,141 221,629 0 0 0 577,339 114,339 $463,000 266,508 N/A 13,606 199,874 206,660 0 0 0 $602,452 $116,549 $485,903 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Farebox Rec overy Ratio Subsidy per Passenger ---- ----------- Subsidy per Passenger M ile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue Miles Revenue Miles Between Collisions % Trips On -Time Complaintsper 1,000 Passengers Total Miles Between Roadcalls $43. 77 22. 0% $1. 51 N/A $34.13 $2.01 22. 59 1.33 N/A N/A 0.00012 188,460 $45. 00 22.3% $1. 46 N/A $34.96 $2.04 24.01 1.40 183,141 0.00000 183,141 $45.23 21.5% $1.57 N/A $35.51 $2.38 22.57 1.51 170,374 0.00000 170,374 $51.50 19.5% $1.90 N/A $41.45 $2.86 21.79 1.50 37,726 0. 00009 9,742 $47 .22 7 .2% $8.49 N/A $43.83 $2 .85 5.16 0.34 N/A N/A 0.00036 26,550 $43.34 7.0% $8 .06 N/A $40.29 $2.69 5 .00 0.33 33,000 0 .00000 33,000 $39 .32 6.5 % $8.89 N/A $36 .76 $2 .74 4.14 0.31 29,500 0 .00000 29,500 $30.40 7.5% $7.48 N/A $28.10 $2.10 3.76 0 .28 7,854 96.7% 0.00045 8,278 $44 .22 19.9% $1.74 N/A $35 .40 $2 .11 20 .30 1.21 N/A N/A 0 .00013 215,010 Note: "-" no table in SRTP to note projected perfo rmance levels for the .categories. 000103 • • $44 .72 19.8% $1 .73 N/A $35 .86 $2.14 20.77 1.24 216,141 0.00000 216,141 $44.28 19.3% $1.82 N/A $35 .71 $2 .43 19.59 1.33 199,874 0.00000 199,874 58,895 N/A 3,189 45,580 47,244 0 4 6 24,824 1,943 $151,847 $27,499 $124,348 $47 .62' 18.1% $2.11 N/A $38 .99 $2.73 - 18 .47 ---------- - _ 1 .29 45,580 96 .7% 0 .00010 11,811 2/16/01 1:07 PM • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO MMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF BEAU MONT TRANSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF BEAUMONT DATA ELEMENTS - SYSTEM WIDE TOTAL Unlinked Passenger Trips Passenger Miles Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Hours Total Actual Vehicle Revenue M iles Total Actual Vehicle Miles Collisions Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures Total Valid Passenger Complaints Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips Total Operating Expenses Total Passe nge r Fare Revenues Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual 50,800 N/A 5,200 71,500 N/A N/A N/A N/A $275,000 820,000 $255,000 FIXED ROUTE FY 99/00 SRTP Plan 50,800 N/A 5,200 71,500 N/A N/A N/A N/A $275,000 $20,000 $255,000 FY 00/01 SRTP Plan 65,000 N/A 9,500 120,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A $395,000 $39,500 $355,500 F UUIU1 1st Quarter Actual 13,108 N/A 1,278 17,955 N/A N/A N/A N/A $40,511 $40,511 $5,988 $34,524 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger Mile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue Miles Revenue Miles Between Collisions % Trips On -Time Complaints per 1,000 Passengers Total Miles Between Roadcalls $52. 88 7. 3% $5. 02 $49.04 $3. 57 9. 77 0. 71 N/A N/A 0. 00000 N/A $52.88 7.3% $5.02 $49. 04 $3. 57 9. 77 0.71 N/A N/A 0.0.0000 N/A $41.58 10.00% $5.47 $37. 42 $2. 96 6. 84 0.54 N/A N/A 0.00.000 N/A $31 .71 14 .8% $2.63 $27.02 $1.92 10.26 0.73 N/A N/A 0.00000 N/A FY 98/99 Annual Actual 30,200 N/A 5,800 73,500 N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A $285,000 $31,500 $253,500 PARATRANSIT FY 99/00 SRTP Plan 30,200 N/A 5,800 73,500 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A N/A $285,000 $31,500 $253,500 FY 00/01 SRTP Plan 25,000 N/A 4,700 60,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A $220,000 $22,000 $198,000 FY UU/U1 1st Quarter Actual • 7,140 N/A 1,628 18,996 N/A N/A N/A N/A $51,576 $49.14 11.1% $8.39 $43 .71 $3 .45 $49 .14 11 .1 % 5.21 0 .41 $8.39 $46 .81 10 .0% $7,165 $44,410 $31 .68 $50 .91 $31.69 13 .9% $7 .92 $6 .22 N/A N/A 0.00000 N/A $43 .71 $3 .45 $42.13 $3 .30 5.21 0 .41 5 .32 0 .42 N/A N/A 0.00.000 N/A N/A N/A 0 .00000 N/A $27.28 $2 .34 4.39 0 .38 N/A N/A N/A 0.00000 N/A FY 98/99 Annual Actual SYSTE M WIDE FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan rY UWU1 1st Quarter Actual 81,000 N/A 11,000 145,000 N/A 0 0 N/A N/A $560,000 $51,500 $508,500 $50 .91 9 .2% $6 .28 $46.23 $3.51 7 .36 0.56 N/A N/A 0.00000 N/A 81,000 N/A 11,000 145,000 N/A 0 N/A 0 N/A N/A 560,000 51,500 $508,500 9 .2% $6 .28 $46.23 $3.51 7 .36 0.56 N/A N/A 0 .00000 N/A 90,000 N/A 14,200 180,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A 615,6-00 615,000 61,500 $553,500 20,248 N/A 2,906 36,951 N/A N/A N/A N/A $92,087 $13,153 $78,934 $43 .31 10 .0% $6 .15 $38 .98 $3 .08 6.34 0.50 N/A N/A 0.0.0000 N/A 14 .3% $3 .90 $27.16 $2 .14 6.97 0.55 N/A N/A 0 .00000 0 .00000 N/A 000104 2/16/01 1:07 PM RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO MMISSI ON TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRA NSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF CORONA DATA ELEMENTS - SYSTEM WIDE TOTAL Unlinked Passenger Trips Passenge r M iles Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Hours Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles Total Actual Vehicle Miles Collisions Total Revenue Ve hicle System Failures Total Valid Passenger Complaints Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips Total Operating Expenses Total Passenger Fare Revenues Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger Mile Subsidy per Revenue Ho ur Subsidy pe r Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue Miles Revenue Miles Between Co llisions % Trips On -Time Complaints per 1,000 Passengers Total M iles Between Roadcalls FY 98/99 Annual Actual FIXED ROUTE FY 00/01 FY 99/00 FY 00/01 1st SRTP SRTP Quarter Plan Plan Actual Not Applicable .. The City of Corona does not have fixed route service for this reporting p eri od. 1 I 1 Not Applicable. The City of Corona does no t have fixed route service for this reporting period. Note: Total Passenger Fare Revenues excludes Metrolink subsidies. 000105 • • PARATRANSIT FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 1st Quarter Actual 82,628 429,425 19,867 292,104 321,350 82,628 78,249 $530,616 $59,690 $470,926 104,000 434,000 20,800 344,000 416,000 104,000 $651,000 $119,000 $532,000 96,916 519,605 24,229 360,970 387,691 $792,150 $122,755 $669,395 21,586 91,388 5,208 78,402 84,546 2 9 6 22,479 20,264 $171,209 $41,784 $129,425 $26.71 11.2% $5.70 $1 .10 $23.70 $1 .61 4.16 $31.30 18 .3% $5.12 $1 .23 $25 .58 $1 .55 5.00 0.30 0.28 0.00053 0.00000 $32.69 15.5% $6 .91 $1.29 $27 .63 $1.85 4 .00 0 .27 0 .00000 $32.87 24 .4% $6 .00 $1 .42 $24 .85 $1 .65 4.14 0 .28 3.9201 95% 0.00028 10,354 TRANSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF CORONA SYSTE M WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY U0/U1 1st Quarter Actual 82,628 429,425 19,867 292,104 321,350 $530,616 $59,690 $470,926 $26 .71 11 .2 % • $5 .70 $23 .70 $1 .61 4.16 0 .28 0.00000 104,000 434,000 20,800 344,000 416,000 $651,000 $119,000 $532,000 $31 .30 18 .3% $5 .12 $25.58 $1.55 5 .00 0 .30 0 .00000 96,916 519,605 24,229 360,970 387,691 $792,150 $122,755 $669,395 $32 .69 15.5 % $6.91 21,586 91,388 5,208 78,402 84,546 2 9 6 22,479 20,264 $171,209 $41,784 $129,425, 32 .87 24.4 % $6 .00 $_27.63 $1 .85 4 .00 0.27 0.00000 $24 .85 $1 .65 4 .14 0 .28 2/16/01 1:07 PM 0 .00028 10,354 • RIVERSIDE C OUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF RIVERSIDE - SPECI AL SERVICES TRA NSIT PROVIDER: CITY OF RIVERSIDE' DA TA ELEMENTS - SYSTEM WIDE TOTAL FY 98/99 Annual Actual FIXED FY 99/00 SRTP Plan ROUTE FY 00/01 SRTP Plan F Y 00/01 1st Quarter Actual Unlinked Passenger Trips Passenger Miles Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Hours Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles Total Actual Vehicle Miles -------------- - ----- Collisions Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures Tota l Valid Passenger Complaints Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips Total Operating Expenses To tal Passenger Fare Revenues Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) N ot Applicable. • The City of Riverside - Special Services does not have fixed route service . PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger M ile Subsidy per Reven ue Hour Subsidy per Revenue M ile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue M iles Revenue Miles Between Collisions % Trips On -Time Complaints per 1,000 Passengers Total M iles Between Roadcalls Not Applicable. The City of Riverside - Special Services does not have fixed route service. PARATR ANSIT FY 98/99 Annual Actual 141,222 5.80,000 33,000 564,000 579,000 ---4 12 9 141,222 141,222 $1,009,164 $90,082 $919,082 FY 99/00 SRTP Plan 146,870 603,200 33,000 564,000 579,000 6 12 12 146,870 146,870 $1,355,200 $120,000 $1,235,200 FY 00/01 SRTP Plan 148,488 588,556 33,887 544,874 588,556 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $1,409,408 $144,000 $1,265,408 FY UU/U1 1st Quarter Actual 34,783 147,157 8,138 147,157 139,132 0 13 ---- 15 34,783 34,779 $186,137 $31,025 $155,112 $30.58 8.9% $6 .51 $1.58 $27.85 $1.63 4 .28 0.25 141,000 100% 0.00006 21,692 $41.07 8.9% $8.41 $2 .05 $37 .43 $2.19 4.45 0 .26 94,000 100% 0.00008 27,966 $41 .59 10 .2% $22.87 16.7% $8 .52 $2.15 $37.34 $2.32 4.38 0 .27 N/A N/A 0.00000 $4 .46 $1.05 $19 .06 $1 .05 4.27 0.24 147,157 100% 0 .00043 SYSTEM WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Pla n FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY UU/U1 1st Quarter Actual 141,222 580,000 33,000 564,000 579,000 4 12 9 141,222 141,222 $1,009,164 $90,082 $919,082 146,870 603,200 33,000 564,000 579,000 6 12 -- ---12 146,870 146,870 $1,355,200 $120,000 $1,235,200 148,488 588,556 33,887 544,874 588,556 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $1,409,408 $144,000 $1,265,408 34,783 147,157 8,138 147,157 139,132 0 13 15 34,783 34,779 $186,137 $31,025 $155,112 $30.58 8.9% $6 .51 $1.58 $27.85 $1 .63 4.28 0.25 141,000 100% 0 .00006 21,692 $41.07 8.9% $8.41 $2 .05 $37.43 $2.19 4 .45 0.26 94,000 100% 0.00008 27,966 $41 .59 10 .2% $8.52 $2 .15 $37.34 $2 .32 4 .38 0.27 N/A N/A 0.00000 $22 .87 16.7% $4.46 $1 .05 $19 .06 $1.05 4.27 0.24 147,157 100% 0.00043 000106 2/16/01 1:07 PM RIVERSIDE C OUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: PALO VERDE VALLEY TRA NSIT DATA ELEMENTS - SYSTEM WIDE T OTAL Unlinked Passenger Trips Passenger Miles Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Ho urs Total Actual Vehicle Revenue M iles To tal Actual Vehicle Miles Co llisions Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures Total Valid Passenger Complaints Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips Total Operating Expenses Total Passenger Fare Reve nues Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) 1 TRANSIT PROVIDER: P ALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT FY 98/99 Annual Actual FIXED ROUTE t -Y UU/U1 FY 99/00 FY 00/01 1st SRTP SRTP Quarter Plan Plan Actual PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger Mile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Ho ur Passengers per Revenue Miles Revenue Miles Between Collisions % Trips On -Time Complaints per 1,000 Passengers To tal Miles Between Roadcalls Palo Verde Valley does no have fixed r oute service. iii Palo Verde Valley does not have fixed route service PARATRANSIT FY 98199 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 1st Quarter Actual 18,900 48,900 6,200 48,900 48,900 18,900 18,900 $126,600 $21,600 $105,000 20,400 51,000 6,400 51,000 51,000 0 0 20,400 20,400 $142,100 $23,200 $118,900 21,300 63,000 8,100 63,000 63,000 5,584 2,176 17,363 0 $169,600 $24,200 $145,400 $32,125 $5,774 $26,351 _ $20.42 _17 .1% $5 .56 $2 .15 $16 .94 $2 .15 3.05 0.39 100% 0. 00000 $22.20 16.3 % $5 .83 $2.33 $18 .58 $2 .33 3 .19 0 .40 100% 0.00000 $20 .94 14 .3 % $6 .83 $2.31 $17 .95 $2 .31 2.63 0.34 0 .00000 $14 .76 18.0 % $4.72 $12.11 2 .57 0.00000 SYSTEM WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan rY uwui 1st Quarter Actual 18,900 48,900 6,200 48,900 48,900 0 -- 0 18,900 18,900 $126,600 $21,600 $105,000 20,400 51,000 6,400 51,000 51,000 0 20,400 20,400 $142,100 $23,200 $118,900 21,300 63,000 8,100 63,000 63,000 0 0 0 0 $169,600 $24,200 $145,400 5,584 2,176 17,363 0 0 0 0 0 $32,12-5- $5,774 $26,351 $20.42 17.1% $5 .56 $2.15 $16.94 $2 .15 3 .05 0 .39 100% 0.00000 $22.20 16 .3% $2 .33 $18 .58 $2 .33 3 .19 0.40 100% 0 .00000 $20 .94 14 .3% $6.83 $2 .31 $17 .95 $2.31 2 .63 0 .34 0 .00000 $14.76 18.0% $4 .72 0 .00000 00010'7 • • 2/16/01 1:07 PM • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION CO MMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT TR ANSIT PROVIDER: RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: RTA FIXED ROUTE DEMAND RESPONSE SYSTEM WIDE DATA ELEMENTS - SYSTEM WIDE TOTAL I -Y 98199 Annu al Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY UU/U1 1st Quarter Actual I -Y 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY UU/U1 1st Quart er Actual FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/U1 1st Quarter Actual Unlinked Passenger Trips 6,960,491 8,405,583 7,716,071 1,581,083 172,860 157,527 121,987 54,080 7,133,351 8,563,110 7,838,058 1,635,163 Passenger Miles 45,585,024 55,528,817 44,830,373 10,403,006 1,187,549 1,173,576 902,098 371,530 46,772,573 56,702,393 45,732,471 10,774,536 Total Actual Vehicles Reve nue Hours 275,098 441,280 310,834 87,960 64,189 49,680 46,018 23,937 339,287 490,960 356,852 111,897 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 4,409,633 6,592,897 5,411,755 1,314,296 913,722 723,407 504,326 381,433 5,323,355 7,316,304 5,916,081 1,695,729 Total Actual Vehicle M iles 4,956,759 7,033,044 5,942,107 1,417,480 913,702 723,407 504,326 381,433 5,870,461 7,756,451 6,446,433 1,798,913 Collisions 42 N/A N/A 7 3 N/A N/A 13 45 N/A N/A 20 Total Revenue Vehicle Syste m Failures 886 N/A N/A 147 N/A N/A N/A 58 886 N/A N/A 205 Total Valid Passenger Complain ts 575 N/A N/A 381 N/A N/A N/A 27 575 N/A N/A 408 Total Revenue Ve hicle Trips Schedule d 256,599 N/A N/A 57,651 N/A N/A _ - N/A 30,712 256,599 N/A N/A_ 88,363 Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips 241,203 N/A N/A 54,192 N/A N/A N/A N/A 241,203 N/A N/A 54,192 Tota l Operating Expenses $18,970,514 $25,766,501 $22,924,016 $6,633,170 $1,803,933 $1,614,384 $2,098,827 $1,043,504 $20,774,447 $27,380,885 $25,022,843 $7,676,674 Total Passen ger Fare Reve nues $3,834,562 $4,964,564 $5,422,755 $1,350,709 $113,451 $113,763 $151,359 $40,020 $3,948,013 $5,078,327 $5 ,574,114 $1,390,729 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $15,135,952 $20,801,937 $17,501,261 $5,282,461 $1,690,482 $1,500,621 $1,947,468 $1,003,484 $16,826,434 $22,302,558 $19,448,729 $6,285,945 PERFORMANCE STATISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $68. 96 $58. 39 $73.75 23.7% $2.27 $75.41 20 .4% - $3 .34 $0 .51 $60.06 $4.02 17.98 1.20 187,757 94. 0% 0.00024 N/A $28 .10 6 .3% $9.78 $32 .50 $45.61 $43 .59 $61 .23 $55.77 $70 .12 22.3 % $2 .48 $68.60 18.1% 7.0% 7.2 % 3 .8 % 19 .0% 18.5 % Farebox Recovery Ratio 20. 2% 19. 3% $3 .84 $18.56 $2.36 $2.60 $9 .53 $15.96 Subsidy per Passenger $2. 17 $2. 47 $0.36 $49 .59 $3 .16 21.02 1.34 , $0 .39 $45 .43 $3 .05 $0 .43 $54 .50 $0.58 $1 .42 $26 .34 $1.85 2.69 0 .19 304,574 N/A $1.28 $2 .16 N/A $0.37 $47.14 $3. 16 19.05 1.27 N/A N/A 0. 00000 $0.39 $56.30 $3.23 24.82 1.43 N/A N/A N/A N/A Subsidy pe r Passenger M ile $0.33 $56.18 $41 .92 $30 .21 $2 .07 3.17 0.22 $42 .32 $3.86 Subsidy per Revenue Hour $55.02 $3 .29 $3.71 $2.63 2.26 0 .14 N/A N/A 0 .00050 Subsidy per Revenue M ile $3.43 17 .44 21 .96 1 .32 14 .61 2 .65 0.24 Passengers per Revenue Hour _ 25. 30 0.96 1.17 N/A N/A 0 .00000 N/A Passenge rs per Revenue Miles 1.58 N/A N/A 0 .00000 N/A N/A N/A 0.00025 118,297 N/A 0 .00008 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Revenue Miles Between Collisions 104,991 N/A % Trips On -Time 94.0% 0.00000 N/A N/A N/A Complaints per 1,000 Passengers 0. 00008 N/A N/A N/A Total Miles Between Roadcalls N/A } i Note: Demand Response actual on -time revenue vehicle trips will be tracked during next quarter. 00010$ 2/16/01 1:07 PM RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COM MISSI ON TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Compared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: SUNLINE TRANSIT PROVIDER: SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY • DATA ELEM ENTS - SYSTEM WIDE TOTAL Unlinked Passenger Trips s_ Passenger M iles Total Actual Vehicles Reven ue Hours Total Actual Ve hicle Revenue M iles _ Total Actual Vehicle Miles Collisions - - - Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures To tal Valid Passenger Complaints Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips Total O perating Expenses Total Passenger Fare Revenues Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) PERFORMANCE STA tISTICS - SYSTEM WIDE Operating Cost Per Revenue Hou r Farebox Recov ery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger M ile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue Miles Revenue Miles Between Collisions % Trips On -Time Complaints per 1,000 Passengers Total Miles Between Roadcalls FY 98/99 An nual Actual FIXED ROUTE FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 1st Quarter Actual 3,682,003 23,519,470 115,658 1,844,061 1,924,522 2 115 554 128,532 121,334 $9,773,876 $2,132,004 $7,641,872 3,747,576 25,371,921 132,997 2,206,254 2,272,442 4 126 700 137,202 129,519 $10,598,540 $2,214,590 $8,383,950 3,901,063 835,225 25,416,618 5,6.83,825 147,789 32,501 2,308,503 516,242 2,545,553 540,769 6 4 126 55 594 129 143,060 36,399 135,907 35,078 $11,295,709 $3,071,466 $2,721,869 $499,039 $8,573,840 $2,572,427 $84. 51 21. 8% $2. 08 $0. 32 $66. 07 $4. 14 31. 84 2. 00 922,031 94. 40% 0.00015 $79. 69 20.9% $2. 24 $0. 33 $63.04 $3.80 28.18 1. 70 551,564 94. 40% 0.00019 $76.43 24.10% $2. 20 $0.34 $58. 01 $3.71 000109 • 26.40 1. 69 384,751 95. 00% 0. 00015 20,203 $94 .50 16 .2% $3 .08 $0.45 $79.15 $4. 98 25.70 1.62 129,061 96. 37% 0.00015 9,632 PAR ATRANSIT FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan I -Y uu/ui 1st Quarter Actual 78,537 1,005,763 27,928 538,437 633,384 64 _ 96 68,095 63,533 $1,405,861 $147,671 $1,258,190 $50 .34 10 .5% $16 .02 $1 .25 145 .05 $2.34 2.81 0 .15 269,219 93.30% 0.00122 87,454 1,545,110 29,358 568,055 659,055 6 72 120 76,272 71,162 11,556,460 $144,214 $1,412,246 106,160 2,310,832 41,992 1,048,472 1,112,104 6 72 134 106,239 99,067 $2,691,292 $219,131 $2,472,161 27,052 606,059 10,376 284,171 311,100 2 32 47 22,509 20,972 $502,872 $50,439 $452,433 $53.02 9 .3% $16 .15 $0 .91 $48 .10 12 .49 2.98 0 .15 94,676 93 .30 % 0.00137 20,370 $64 .09 $48.46 8.1% 10.0% $23 .29 $16/2 $1 .07 158 .87 $2.36 2 .53 0 .10 174,745 93.25% 0 .00126 15,445 $0 .75 $43.60 $1 .59 2.61 0 .10 142,086 93 .17 % 0 .00174 9,722 SYSTEM WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual 3,760,540 24,525,233 143,586 2,382,498 2,557,906 4 179 650 196,627 184,867 $11,179,737 $2,279,675 $8,900,062 FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 1st Quarter Actual 3,835,030 26,917,031 162,355 Z774,309 2,931,497 10 198 820 213,474 200,681 $12,155,000 $2,358,804 $9,796,196 4,007,223 862,277 27,727,450 6,289,884 189,781 42,877 3,356,975 800,413 _3,657,657 851,869 12 6 198 87 728 176 249,299 58,908 234,974 56,050 $13,987,001 $3,574,338 $2,941,000 $549,478 $11,046,001 $3,024,860 $77 .86 20 .4% $2.37 $0.36 $61 .98 $3 .74 26 .19 1.58 595,625 94 .02% 0 .00017 $74.87 19 .4% $2 .55 $0 .36 $60 .34 $3 .53 23.62 1 .38 277,431 94 .01% 0 .00021 $73 .70 21 .0% $2.76 10 .40 $58 .20 $3 .29 21 .11 1.19 279,748 94 .25% 0.00018 $83 .36 15.4% $3.51 10 .48 170 .55 13.78 20.11 1.08 2/16/01 1:07 PM • 133,402 95 .15% 0 .00020 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSP ORTATI ON CO MMISSI ON TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 98/99 Co mpared to FY 00/01 - First Quarter TRANSIT PROVIDER: RCTC - C OMMUTER RAIL TRA NSIT PROVIDER: RCTC COMMUTER RAIL 1 RIVERSIDE LINE FY 98/99 ' FY 00/01 1st Annual FY 99/00 FY 00/01 Quarter DATA ELEMENTS - SYSTEM WIDE T OTAL Actual SRTP Plan SRTP Plan Actual Unlinked Passenger Trips 928,670 1,042,867 1,172,146 264,208 Passenger Mile s _ 36 067,000 40,1.49,000 45 479,000 10,351,000 To tal Actual V ehicles Revenue Hours N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Actual Vehicle Revenue M iles 206,293 N/A 231,555 47,509,000 Total Actual Vehicle Miles N/A N/A N/A N/A Collisions N/A N/A N/A N/A To tal Revenue Vehicle Syste m Failures N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Valid Passenger Complaints N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled N/A N/A N/A N/A Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips N/A N/A N/A N/ A To tal Operating Expenses $9,740,000 $10,025,000 $10,765,000 " Total Passenger Fare Revenues w/ MOU* $4,953,000 $4,942,000 $5,780,000 $1,326,000 Net Ope rating Expenses (Subsidies) $4,787,000 $5,083,000 $4,985,000 41,326,000 PERFORMA NCE STATISTICS - SYSTE)VI WIDE TOTAL Operating Cost Per Revenue Ho ur Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidyper Passen ger Subsidy per Passen ger Mile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue M ile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passenge rs per Revenue M ile s Revenue Miles Betwe en Co llisions Trips On -Time Complaints per 1,000 Passengers Total M iles Between Roadc alls 50.9% $5.15 N/A $23. 20 N/A 4.50 0.00000 49. 3% $4. 87 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.00000 53.69% $4.25 N/A $21.53 N/A 5.06 0.00000 #VALUE! -$5 .02 N/A -$0.03 N/A 0.01 0.00000 IEOC LINE FY 98/99 Annual Actual 404,321 14,230 ,000 N/A 154,136 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $6,224,000 $2,453,000 $3,771,000 FY 99/00 SRTP Plan 505,050 13,636,000 N/A 174,462 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $6,505,000 $2,625,000 $3,880,000 FY 00/01 SRTP Plan 477,509 16,808,000 N/A 191,375 N/A N/ A N/A N/A N/A N/A $7,033,000 $2,610,000 $4,423,000 t -Y UU/U1 1st Quarter Actual 161,367 5,286,000 • N/A 45,266 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $738,000 40.4% $7 .68 37 .1 % #VALUE! $0.00 46 .4 % $6.42 45 .8% $5.79 39.4 % $9.33 N/A $24.47 WA 2 .62 0 .00000 $9.26 RIVERSIDE - SYSTEM WIDE FY 98/99 Annual Actual FY 99/00 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 SRTP Plan FY 00/01 1st Quarter Actual 1,332,991 50,297,000 N/A 360,429 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $15,964,000 $7,406,000 $8,558,000 1,547,917 53,785,000 N/A 174,462 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $16,530,000 $7,567,000 $8,963,000 1,649,655 62,287,000 N/A 422,930 N/A N/ A N/A N/A N/ A N/A 17,798,000 8,390,000 $9,408,000 425,575 15,637,000 N/A 47,554,266 N/A N/A N/A N/A WA N/A $2,064,000 -$2,064,000 N/A $22.24 N/A 2 .89 0.00000 N/A $23 .11 N/A 2 .50 0 .00000 N/A $0.00 N/A 3 .56 0.00000 N/A $23 .74 N/A 3.70 0.00000 N/A $51.38 N/A 8.87 0.00000 47 .1 % $5.70 N/A $22.24 N/A 3 .90 0 .00000 //VALUE! -$4 .85 N/A -$0 .04 N/A 0 .01 0.00000 * MOU: Maintenance of Way Reven ue "Expenditure information pending - should receive from SCRRA by next repo rting period. 000110 2/16/01 1:07 PM RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Program Manager - THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: FY 00/01 Section 5310 Measure "A" Specialized Transit Match Funds. PLANS AND PROGRAMS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Commission: 1) Provide $21,200 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit funds as local match to Transportation Specialists, Inc. for the purchase of one modified van and one medium bus through the Section 5310 grant process; and, 2) Provide $13,000 in Measure "A" Specialized Transit funds as local match to Anza Valley Community Services, for the purchase of one 24 passenger bus through the Section 5310 grant process. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Transportation Specialists, Inc. (TSI) was recently notified by Caltrans that they were approved for $84,400 in funding under the FTA Section 5310 program. Funding was approved to purchase one modified van and one medium bus at a total cost of $106,000. Anza Valley Community Services (Anza) was also notified by Caltrans that they were approved for $65,000 in funding under the FTA Section 5310 program to purchase one 24 - passenger bus. The Section 5310 program provides 80% of the cost of the capital project. TSI and Anza are requesting that the required 20% match ($21,200 for TSI and $13,000 for Anza) be funded from Measure "A" Specialized Transit funds available in the western Riverside County. TSI provides inter -city transportation services from the South county to cities north and to the Hemet/San Jacinto area. Anza provides services in the Anza, Aguanga, Hemet and Temecula areas. Senior citizens, persons with disabilities, veterans and the truly needy benefit from the transportation that is provided. • 000111 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Y Year: FY 2000-01 Source of Funds: Measure "A" Fiscal Procedures Approved: Amount: $ 34,200 Budget Adjustment: N Date: 2/26/01 000112 • • • AGENDA ITEM 70 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) Request to Use Local Transportation Funds for the 1993 Certificate of Participation Final Payment and to Shift Funds from the Riverside CNG Fueling Station to the Hemet CNG Station - STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Commission approve RTA's request to use Local Transportation Funds for the 1993 Certificate of Participation final payment and to shift funds from the Riverside CNG Fueling Station to the Hemet CNG Station. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) staff is in the process of reviewing the status of various grants received from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Part of the review process included an audit, by RTA staff, of remaining Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds on hand from projects approved in prior years.. As a result, RTA is requesting approval to move funds previously allocated from the completed projects to two specific projects: 1) In 1993, RTA purchased ten buses through the issuance of Certificates of Participation (COP) through the California Transit Finance Corporation. The principal amount of the COP was $3,400,000 and is scheduled to be fully paid in July, 2006. At the February 14, 2001, Commission meeting, RTA was authorized to use Local Transportation Funds as match to buy down the debt. Since that time, RTA has further determined that they can retire this debt, five years earlier than expected, if they make an additional payment of approximately $82,017. This will save RTA approximately $215,732 in interest payments; and 2) Shift approximately $60,000 in funding from Project No. 98L-RT09 from the CNG Fueling Station in Riverside to the Hemet CNG Fueling Station. No additional funds are required to complete the above projects. By allowing the transfer of these funds, RTA will be able to close out 16 open grant projects for which they have already received funding. RTA has committed that they will be more aggressive in the future in their purchase of equipment and implementation of activities so that the number of open grants are current. • Staff apologizes for the lateness of this agenda item. The request was received from RTA after publication of our Plans and Program Committee agenda. RTA staff will present this information to their Board at their Special Board Retreat scheduled for March 2, 2001. 000113 • AGENDA ITEM 7P • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to the City of Corona's FY 00/01 Short Range Transit Plan and Allocation of LTF Funds for Fixed Route Service and CNG Refueling Station PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Commission approval is recommended to: 1) Amend the City of Corona's FY 00/01 Short Range Transit Plan to provide funds to cover the start-up costs of fixed route service and local match funding for a CNG refueling station; and, 2) Allocate $166,111 in Local Transportation Funds ($98,835 for fixed route and $67,276 for CNG refueling station). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Implementation of Fixed Route Service During FY 99/00, the City of Corona completed a study to determine the feasibility of initiating a fixed -route community circulator and feeder transit system to supplement the City's Dial -a -Ride service and provide a link to services provided by the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and Metrolink. While the approved FY 00/01 Corona Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) included discussion of the proposed service, the final decision to implement the service was adopted by the City Council after the normal RCTC approval process of the SRTP and the City's adoption of its annual budget. As a result, the City's Public Works Department has been unduly burdened with the start-up costs of this system. Attachment 1 identifies, by line item, the costs associated with the start-up of the fixed route service. The City is requesting reimbursement of $98,835 in Local Transportation Funds (LTF). The City did include operating costs in its FY 00/01 SRTP. • 000114 The fixed route service, known as the "Corona Cruiser" started February 5, 2001, and after one week of service has shown an enthusiastic ridership. It is hoped that the service will attract new commuters that are currently driving alone, thereby having a positive impact on reducing the City's traffic congestion. Providing fixed route service, should alleviate the strain on the City's general public Dial -a - Ride system as ambulatory riders can begin using the fixed route system. It is anticipated that there will be a shift of riders who can access fixed route, from the demand/response mode, creating space on the Dial -a -Ride for those who truly need curb to curb service. Installation of CNG Refueling Station The City of Corona was successful in securing an MSRC grant in the amount of $166,176 to construct a public access CNG refueling station. The total cost of the CNG station is anticipated to be $332,353. The City budgeted a little over $98,900 as its' share of the station costs and is requesting $67,276 in LTF funds to cover the balance of the construction costs. Attachment 2 provides a breakdown of costs associated with construction. The station will be available 24 hours a day/7 days a week and will be located at the City's Corporate Yard. All five vehicles for the "Corona Cruiser" are CNG. In addition, the City has approximately 30 other CNG fleet vehicles that will use this station. Lastly, it is anticipated that the RTA will also use this station as an additional fueling site. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N . Year: FY 2000-01 Source of Funds: LTF County Fiscal Procedures Approved: Amount: $166,111 Budget Adjustment: N - funds held at Date: 2/26/01 0001"15 • FIXED ROUTE IMPLEIATI ON 'CORONA CRUISER' • ESTIMATED REVENUES UNIT COST QUANTITY EXPENDITURES FUND SOURCE Signs 4 -color $19.95/each 120/units $ 2,483 .25 Contingency Signs $145.00/each 4 $ 580.50 Poles & rivets $28 .00/each . 100/units $ 3,174 .32 Bus Graphics & Painting $2,500/each 5 buses $ 12,560.60 Bike Racks (includes installation) $596.00/each 5 buses $ 3,620 .00 (A -Z will provide free) 3 contingencies Installation from Corona Fleet 5 $ 1,464.71 Destination Signs $400.00/each 5 buses $ 1,840.48 Installation $395.00/each $ 2,123 .13 Printing of Destination Signs $ 521.56 Literature Racks for brochures $150.00/each 5 buses $ 750.00 + 3 contingencies $ 450.00 Benches $500.00/each (approx) 18 $ 9,000 .00 STA funds c/o $15,000 remainder $ 6,000.00 #57739230 42020 Kiosks $95. 00/each 117 $ 11,115.00 Bus Shelters $8,070 3 $ 24,210.00 Newspaper Ads $ 1,350.00 Direct Mail $.34 x 38,485 households $ 13,085.00 Tickets 10,000/qty $ 2,000.00 Bus Schedules 10,000/qty $ 3,800 .00 Ribbon -Cutting Ceremony $700 .00 Radio Announcements $ 4,000.00 Cable TV Video $ 5,000.00 Design Services (funded) $ 4,475 .00 Transit Study Balance Fund #668 Design Services (unfunded) $ 4,000.00 Contractor's Costs: $6,863 Public Works: Total Costs: $98,835 000116 CORONA PUBLIC ACCESS CNG FUELING STATION PROJECT BUDGET Budget Component MSRC Funds City Funds Design $16,151* $65,500 Site Acquisition -value Canopy $15,000 $17,250* Underground Utilities Construction $50,000 Fast fill dispenser $34,000 $34,000 Card Reader, Fuel Mgmt Terminal $11,000 Construct CNG Storage $32,353 $17,647 Contingency & Tax $8,823 $15,629 Mechanic Training $15,000 Total Costs $166,176 $166,177 Items with asterisk are city funded 000117 • • • P2001-09 Page 5 of 9 • AGENDA ITEM 7Q • RESOLUTION NO. 01-002 • • • A RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AMENDING AND ADOPTING LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (PUB. RESOURCES CODE §§21000 ET SEQ.) WHEREAS, the California Legislature has amended the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code §§21000 et seq) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs. tit.14,§§21000 et seq.) and the California courts have interpreted specific provisions of CEQA; WHEREAS, Section 21082 of CEQA requires all public agencies to adopt objectives, criteria and procedures for the evaluation of public and private projects undertaken or approved by such public agencies, and the preparation, if required, of environmental impact reports and negative declaration in connection with that evaluation; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission") wishes to adopt local guidelines for implementing CEQA that are consistent with the current provisions and interpretations of CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1. The Board of Commissioners adopts "Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001 Revision)." a copy of which is on file at the offices of the Commission and is available for inspection by the public. ADOPTED this 14th day of March 2001. ATTEST: Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Riverside County Transportation Commission William G. Kleindienst, Chairman 119a, Local Guidelines for Implementing the Staff Summary of the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) CEQA Evaluation Process • • (E) Staff Preparation of an EIR. 7.01 (1) If an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") is 7.03 required, the Commission as Lead Agency shall send a Notice of Preparation (Form "G") to all Responsible and any Trustee Agencies, and the Office of Planning and Research. A Notice of completion (Form "H") must be attached as a cover sheet when a Notice of Preparation is submitted to the Office of Planning and Research. Responsible and Trustee Agencies must respond within thirty (30) days. The Notice must be posted in the office of the Clerk for each county in which the project is located, within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt by the Clerk, and must remain posted for thirty (30) days. (2) Staff shall commence preparation of a Draft EIR 7.02, 7.04, 7.05, 7.06 (staff may begin work on it immediately without awaiting responses to the Notice of Preparation). If a Draft EIR, EIR or Focused EIR is prepared under a contract to the Commission, the contract must be executed within forty-five (45) days from the date the Commission sends the Notice of Preparation, unless an extension is mutually agreed upon by the Commission and project applicant. Early consultation ("scoping") is advisable during the drafting of the EIR with all Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies and interested individuals and organizations of which staff is reasonably aware. (3) Upon completion of the Draft EIR, Staff shall 7.17, 7.18 file a Notice of Completion (Form "H") with the Office of Planning and Research and give the required public Notice inviting comment upon the Draft EIR (Form "K") by mail to the last known names and addresses of all individuals and organizations who have previously requested such notice and by at least one of the following: (a) publishing once in a newspaper of general 7.17 circulation, or, if more than one area will be affected, in the newspaper of largest circulation from among the newspapers of general circulation in those areas; RCTC/RVPUB/556439 -X11- *2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the Staff Summary of the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) CEQA Evaluation Process (b) posting on and off site where the project 7.17 is to be located; (c) mailing to owners and occupants of 7.17 contiguous property. The Notice shall be posted in the Clerk's office 7.17 of each county in which the project is located within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt by the Clerk, and must remain posted for a minimum of thirty. (30) days. This begins the comment period, which will be at least thirty (30) to forty-five (45) days depending on the project. (4) The Board of Directors may at its discretion 7.22 conduct a public hearing on the Draft EIR no sooner than fourteen (14) days after filing of the Notice of Completion but before the expiration of the comment period. (5) Comments on the Draft EIR are evaluated by 7.23, 7.24 Staff, responses are compiled and a Final EIR is prepared. At least ten (10) days prior to certifying a Final EIR, the Commission must provide a written response to any agency which has made comments on the Draft EIR. (6) If "significant" new information is added to the 7.25 EIR or if the Draft EIR is so inadequate and conclusory that meaningful public review and comment were precluded, notice and consultation must be repeated. (7) Staff considers the Final EIR and makes a 7.26, 7.27, 7.28 recommendation to the Board of Directors regar- ding whether the Final EIR is in order and whe- ther it has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State Guidelines and the Commission's Guidelines. The Final EIR recommendations are presented to the Board of Directors which shall certify that the Final EIR is in order and has been completed in com- pliance with CEQA, the State Guidelines, and the Commission's Guidelines, or refer it back to Staff for further work. A mitigation monitoring or reporting program must also be adopted. RCTC/RVPUB/556439 -Xiii- °2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP • • • County DFG Handli ng Fee or Admi nistratio n Fee Department to Co ntact Pho ne number Address Amador No fee. Co unty Clerk 209/223-6468 Amador County Clerk's Office 500 Argo na ut Lane Jackson, CA 95642 El Dorado $35 .00, only when DFG receives a fee. County Clerk 530/621-5355 (Ask for Joanne) El Dorado Co unty Recorder Clerk's Office 360 Fair Lane, Building B Placerville, CA 95667 Fresno $25.00 only when DFG receives a fee. County Clerk 559/488-3003 Fresno County Clerk's Office Special Services Division 2221 Kern St. Fresno, CA 93721-2600 Humboldt $25.00 all situations. County Clerk 707/445-7593 Humboldt County Clerk's Office 825 Fifth Street, Room 108 E ureka, CA 95501 Imperial $25. 00 all situations. County Clerk 760/339-4427 (Ask for Angie or Celia) Imperial County Clerk's Office 940 Mai n Street, Office #202 El Centro, CA 92243-2865 Inyo No fee. Cou nty Clerk 760/878-0224 I nyo Cou nty Clerk's Office P. O. Drawer F [or] 168 N. Edwards Independence, CA 93526 Kern Currently no fee. County Clerk 661/868-3743 (Ask for Phyllis) Kern County Clerk's Office 1115 Tru xtun, First Flr . Bakersfield, CA 93301 Kings $25. 00 all situation s. Planning 559/582-3211ext. 2470 (Ask for Nancy or Sandy) Kings C ounty Planning Department 1400 West Lacey Blvd. Hanford, CA 93230 RCTC/RVPUB/556439 -xvi- ©2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP County DFG Handli ng Fee or Administratio n Fee Departme nt to Co ntact Phone number Address Lake $25 .00 only whe n DFG receives a fee. Community Devel opment 707/263-2221 (Ask for David, Rick or Danelle) Community Development Dept. Lake County 255 North Forbes Street Lakeport, CA 95453 Los Angeles $25 .00 all situations . Zo ning Permits 562/462-2057 (Ask for Gina) Los Angeles Clerk 12400 E. Imperial Highway, Room 2001 Norwalk, CA 90650 Mendocino $25.00 all situations . Cou nty Clerk 707/463-4371 (Ask for Cindy or Maryanna) Mendocino County Clerk's Office 501 Low Gap Road, R,. 1020 Ukiah, CA 95482 Modoc No fee. County Clerk 530/233-6200 (Ask for Maxine) Modoc County Clerk's Office P .O . Box 130 [or] 204 South Court Street Alturas, CA 96101 Mon o $25.00 all situations County Clerk 760/932-5241 (Ask for John) Mono County Clerk's Office P. O. Box 237 [or] Court H ouse, Mai n Street Bridgeport, CA 93517 Monterey $25. 00 only when DFG gets a fee. County Clerk 831/755-5450 Monterey County Clerk's Office Cou nty Court House 240 Church Street West Wing, Room 305 Sali nas, CA 93902 Napa $35.00 all situations. $35. 00 fee is waived if applicant is a government agen cy County Clerk 707/253-4247 707/253-4105 (Ask for Karen) Napa County Clerk's Office P .O. Box 298 [or] (better to use post office box) 900 Coombs Street, Room 116 Napa, CA 94559-0298 dor7/RVPUB/556439 • D2001 Best Best & Krieo ' P • • Cou nty DF G Handli ng Fee or Administration Fee Departme nt to Co ntact Phone number Address Nevada $25.00 all situations . County Recorder 530/265-1221 (Ask for Krista) Nevada County Recorder's Office 950 Maidu Avenue Nevada City, CA 95959 Oran ge $43.00 all situations. County Clerk 714/834-2461 EIR Clerk Ora nge Cou nty Clerk/Recorder 12 Civic Ce nter Plaza, Rm 106 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Riverside $78.00 all situations. C ounty Clerk File with Cou nty Clerk only if project is approved by Board of Supervisors . File with Board of Supervisors if project not yet approved 909/486-7013 (Ask for Barbara) County Clerk's Office Riverside County P.O. Box 751 Riverside, CA 92502-0751 Sacramento $25.00 all situations. County Clerk 916/874-6334 800/313-7133-0 For Marica 916/874-7091 Sacrame nto Co unty Clerk/Recorder's Office P. O. Box 839 [or] 600 8th Street Sacrame nto, CA 95812-0839 San Bernardino $35.00 all situations. Make check payable to County of San Bernardino. Clerk of the Board 909/387-3843 (Ask for John) Clerk of the Board County of San Bernardino 385 N. Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92415 San Diego $25. 00 for Notice of Determination. Coun ty Clerk ' 619/531-6059 ( Ask for We ndy) Attention: Wendy Chevalier San Diego Assessor/Recorder/Clerk P. O. Box 121750 San Diego, CA 92112-4147 [or] County Administratio n Center 1600 Pacific Hwy ., Room 260 San Diego, CA 92119 [all papers must be rec'd by 3:00] RCTC/RVPUB/556439 X2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Cou nty DF G Handli ng Fee or Admi nistratio n Fee Department to Contact Phone number Address San Luis Obispo $25 .00 all situations . County Clerk 805/781-5088 County Clerk's Office San Luis Obispo County 1144 Monterey Street Sa n Luis Obispo, CA 93408 Santa Barbara None . Cou nty does not collect fee . Pay directly to DFG . Clerk of the Board 805/568-2240 Clerk of the Board Santa Barbara County 105 E. Anapamu St ., Rm 407 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tehama $25.00 all situations. County Clerk 530/527-3350 Tehama Cou nty Clerk's Office P.O. Box 250 [or] 633 Washi ngton Street, Room 11 Red Bluff, CA 96080 Ventura $25. 00 for EIRs and Notice of Clerk of the Board 805/654-2251 Clerk of the Board Determinations only, and only if not a public agency project. No fee for Negative County of Ve ntura 800 South Victoria Avenue, LN 1920 Declarations. All must be submitted with the appropriate transmittal memorandum. Ventura, CA 93009-1920 Yuba $25. 00 only when County Clerk 530/741-6341 Yuba County Clerk's Office DFG gets a fee. (Ask for Francis) 935 14th Street _ Marysville, CA 95901 •(/RVPUB/556439 • 4'2001 Best Best & P Kri �T Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) General Provisions, Purpose and Policy LOCAL GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (2001 REVISION) 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS, PURPOSE AND POLICY 1.01 GENERAL PROVISIONS. These Local Guidelines ("Guidelines") are to assist the Commission in implementing the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). These Guidelines are consistent with the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA ("State Guidelines") which must be followed by state and local agencies in California. These Guidelines have been adopted pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21082. 1.02 PURPOSE. The purpose of these Local Guidelines is to help the Commission accomplish the following basic objectives of CEQA: (a) To enhance and provide long-term protection for the environment, while providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian. (b) To provide information to governmental decision -makers and the public regarding the potential significant environmental effects of the proposed project. (c) To provide an analysis of the environmental effects of future actions associated with the project to adequately apprise all interested parties of the true scope of the project for intelligent weighing of the environmental consequences of the project. (d) To identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. (e) To prevent significant avoidable environmental damage through utilization of feasible project alternatives or mitigation measures. (f) To disclose and demonstrate to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner chosen. Public participation is an essential part of the CEQA process. Each public agency should encourage wide public involvement, formal and informal, in order to receive and evaluate public reactions to environmental issues related to a public agency's activities. Such involvement should include, whenever possible, making environmental information available in electronic format on the Internet, on a web site maintained or utilized by the public agency. RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -1- ®2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) General Provisions, Purpose and Policy 1.03 APPLICABILITY. These Guidelines apply to any activity of the Commission which constitutes a "project" as defined in Guidelines Section 9.35. An Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") is required for each such project which may have a significant effect on the environment. When the Commission finds that a project will have no significant environmental effect, a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration rather than an EIR shall be prepared. An EIR serves several functions for the benefit of the Commission and the public. An EIR (1) identifies and analyzes the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, (2) identifies alternatives to the project, and (3) discloses possible ways to reduce or avoid potential environmental damage. These matters are to be evaluated by the Commission before the project is approved or disapproved. The EIR is an informational document. It should not be used to rationalize approval of a project. CEQA requires that decisions be informed and balanced. It must not be subverted into an instrument for the oppression and delay of social economic, or recreational development or advancement. Indications of adverse environmental impacts from the project which are identified in the. EIR do not necessarily require disapproval of a project. Rather, when an EIR shows that a project would cause substantial adverse changes in the environment, the Commission must respond to the information by one or more of the following methods: (a) Changing the proposed project. (b) Imposing conditions on the approval of the project. (c) Adopting plans or ordinances to control a broader class of activities to avoid the problems. (d) Choosing an alternative way of meeting the same need. (e) Disapproving the project. (f) - Finding that the unavoidable, significant environmental damage is acceptable pursuant to a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Although CEQA requires that major consideration be given to preventing environmental damage, the Commission also has an obligation to balance other public objectives for each project including economic and social factors. 1.04 REDUCING DELAY AND PAPERWORK, The State Guidelines encourage local governmental agencies to reduce delay and paperwork by, among other things: (a) Integrating the CEQA process into early planning review; to this end, the project approval process and these procedures, to the maximum extent feasible, are to run concurrently, not consecutively; RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -2- °2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Negative Declaration • • The Notice must also be posted in the office of the Clerk in each county in which the Project is located and must remain posted for a minimum of twenty (20) days, unless otherwise required by law to be posted for thirty (30) days. The Clerk shall post the Notice within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt. As stated in Guidelines Section 6.04, notice shall be given by mail to the last known name and address of all organizations and individuals who have previously requested such notice. In - addition, it must be given by at least one of the following procedures: (a) Publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by the proposed project. If more than one area will be affected, the notice shall be published in the newspaper of largest circulation from among the newspapers of general circulation in those areas. (b) Posting of notice on and off site in the area where the project is to be located. (c) Direct mailing to owners and occupants of property contiguous to the project, as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll. The Commission shall consider all comments received during the public review period for the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. Although the Commission is not required to respond in writing to comments it receives either during or after the public review period, the Commission may want to provide a written response to all comments if it will not delay action on the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, since any comment received prior to final action on the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration can form the basis of a legal challenge. A written response which refutes the comment or adequately explains the Commission's action in light of the comment, will assist the Commission in defending against a legal challenge. The Commission shall notify any public agency which comments on a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration of the public hearing or hearings, if any, on the project for which the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. 6.06 SUBMISSION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION OR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO STATE CLEARINGHOUSE. A Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for circulation in the following situations: (a) The Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is prepared by a Lead Agency that is a state agency. (b) The Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is prepared by a public agency where -a state agency is a Responsible Agency, Trustee Agency, or otherwise has jurisdiction by law with respect to the project. (c) The Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is for a project identified in State Guidelines Section 15206 as being of statewide, regional, or areawide significance. • RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -33- °2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Negative Declaration State Guidelines Section 15206 identifies the following types of projects as being of statewide, regional, or areawide significance and requiring submission to the State Clearinghouse for circulation: •Projects which have the potential for causing significant environmental effects beyond the city or county where the project would be located, such as: •Residential development of more than 500 units. •Commercial projects employing more than 1,000 persons or covering more than 500,000 square feet of floor space. •Office building projects employing more than 1,000 persons or covering more than 250,000 square feet of floor space. •Hotel or motel development of more than 500 rooms. •Industrial projects housing more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or covering more than 650,000 square feet of floor area. •Projects for the cancellation of a Williamson Act contract covering more than 100 acres. •Projects in one of the following Environmentally Sensitive Areas: •Lake Tahoe Basin. •Santa Monica Mountains Zone. •Sacramento -San Joaquin River Delta. •Suisun Marsh. •Coastal Zone, as defined by the California Coastal Act. •Areas within one -quarter mile of a river designated as wild and scenic. •Areas within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. •Projects which would affect sensitive wildlife habitats or the habitats of any rare, threatened, or endangered species. •Projects which would interfere with water quality standards. •Projects which would provide housing, jobs, or occupancy for 500 or more people within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant. A Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration may also be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for circulation if a state agency has special expertise with regard to the environmental impacts involved. When the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review, the public review period shall be at least thirty (30) days. When a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration is submitted to the State Clearinghouse, a Notice of Completion (Form "H") should be included as a cover sheet. Fifteen (15) copies of the documents must be sent to the State Clearinghouse for circulation. In addition to the printed copies, a copy of the document in electronic format shall be submitted on a diskette or by electronic mail transmission if available. A shorter review period by the State Clearinghouse for a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration can be requested by the decision making body. The shortened review period shall not be less than twenty (20) days. Such a request must be made in writing by RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -34- 4)2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP • • Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Negative Declaration • • Local agencies have the authority to levy fees sufficient to pay for this program. Therefore, the Commission can charge the project proponent a fee to cover actual costs of program processing and implementation. Transportation information resulting from the reporting or monitoring program required to be adopted by the Commission shall be submitted to the regional transportation planning agency where the project is located if the project impacts have statewide, regional or areawide significance according to criteria developed pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083. The transportation planning agency is required by law to adopt guidelines for the submittal of these reporting or monitoring programs, so the Commission may wish to tailor its submittal to such guidelines. 6.11 APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF PROJECT. At the time of adoption of a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, the decision making body may consider the project for purposes of approval or disapproval. Prior to approving the project, the decision making body shall consider the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with any written comments received and considered during the public review period, and shall approve or disapprove the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. In making a finding as to whether there is any substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, the factors listed in Guidelines Section 5.07 should be considered. (See Guidelines Section 7.29 for approval requirements for facilities which may emit hazardous air emissions near schools.) 6.12 RECIRCULATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION. A Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration must be recirculated when the document must be substantially revised after the public review period but prior to its adoption. A "substantial revision" is defined as a new and avoidable significant effect for which mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect to a level of insignificance. A "substantial revision" can also include when the Commission determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce the potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required. Recirculation is not required under the following circumstances: (a) Mitigation measures are replaced with equal or more effective measures. (b) New project revisions are added in response to written or oral comments on the project's effects identified in the proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration which are not new avoidable significant effects. (c) Measures or conditions of project approval are added after circulation of the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration which are not required by CEQA, which RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -37- ®2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Negative Declaration do not create new significant environmental effects and are not necessary to mitigate an avoidable significant effect. (d) New information is added to the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Declaration which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. If, after preparation of a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Commission determines that the project requires an EIR, it shall circulate the Draft EIR for consultation and review and advise reviewers in writing that a proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Declaration had previously been circulated for the project. 6.13 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION ON A PROJECT FOR WHICH A PROPOSED NEGATIVE OR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN APPROVED. Following consideration and approval of a project for which the Commission is Lead Agency, the decision making body shall order Staff to prepare and file a Notice of Determination (Form "F") which shall contain the following: (a) An identification of the project including its common name where possible and its location; (b) A brief description of the project; (c) The date on which the Commission approved the project; (d) The determination of the Commission that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; (e) A statement that a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA; and (f) The address where a copy of the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration may be examined. The Notice of Determination shall be filed with the Clerk of each county in which the project will be located within five working days of project approval. The Commission is encouraged to make copies of filed notices available in electronic format on the Internet. Such electronic notices are in addition to the posting requirements of the CEQA Guidelines and the Public Resources Code. The Clerk must post the Notice of Determination within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt. The Notice must be posted in the office of the Clerk for a minimum of thirty (30) days. Thereafter, the Clerk shall return the notice to the Commission with a notation of the period it was posted. The Commission shall retain the notice for not less than nine (9) months. If the project requires discretionary approval from any State agency, the Notice of Determination shall also be filed with the Office of Planning and Research within five (5) working days of project approval along with proof of payment of the California Department of Fish and Game fee or Certificate of Fee Exemption (see guidelines Section 6.17). Simultaneously with the filing of the Notice of Determination with the Clerk, Staff shall cause a copy of the Notice of Determination to be posted at the Commission office. When a request is made for a copy of the Notice prior to the date on which the Commission adopts the Negative Declaration, the copy must be mailed, first class postage prepaid, within five (5) days of the Commission's determination. If such a request is made following the Commission's determination, then the copy RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -38- °2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report 7. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 7.01 DECISION TO PREPARE AN EIR. An EIR shall be prepared whenever there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record which supports a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environ- ment. (See Guidelines Sections 9.35 and 9.37.) The record may include the Initial Study or other documents or studies prepared to assess the project's environmental impacts. 7.02 CONTRACTING FOR PREPARATION OF EIRs. If a Draft EIR, EIR or Focused EIR is prepared under a contract to the Commission, the contract must be executed within forty-five (45) days from the date on which the Commission sends a Notice of Preparation. The Commission may take longer to execute the contract if the project applicant and the Commission mutually agree to an extension of the 45 -day time limit. The Draft EIR, EIR or Focused EIR prepared under contract must be the Commission's product. Staff, together with such consultant help as may be required, shall independently review and analyze the Draft EIR, EIR or Focused EIR to verify its accuracy, objectivity and completeness prior to presenting it to the decision making body. The Draft EIR, EIR or Focused EIR made available for public review must reflect the independent judgment of the Commission. Staff may require such information and data from the person or entity proposing to carry out the project as it deems necessary for completion of the Draft EIR, EIR or Focused EIR. 7.03 NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF DRAFT EIR. After Staff determines that an EIR will be required for a proposed project, the Commission as Lead Agency shall prepare and send a Notice of Preparation (Form "G") to each Responsible Agency and Trustee Agency involved with the project, as well as the Office of Planning and Research. When submitting the Notice of Preparation to the Office of Planning and Research, a Notice of Completion (Form "H") should be used as a cover sheet. Responsible and Trustee Agencies have thirty (30) days to respond to the Notice of Preparation. The Commission shall send copies of the Notice of Preparation by certified mail or any other method of transmittal which provides it with a record that the Notice was received. The Notice must also be posted in the office of the Clerk in each county in which the project is located for thirty (30) days. The Clerk shall post the Notice within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt. At a minimum, the Notice of Preparation shall include: (a) A description of the project; RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -42- x'2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report (b) The location of the project indicated either on an attached map (preferably a copy of the USGS 15' or 7'/' topographical map identified by quadrangle name) or by a street address in an urban area; (c) The probable environmental effects of the project; (d) The name and address of the consulting firm retained to prepare the Draft EIR, if applicable; and (e) The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") list on which the proposed site is located, if applicable, and the corresponding information from the applicant's statement. (See Guidelines Section 2.04.) 7.04 PREPARATION OF DRAFT EIR. The Commission as Lead Agency is responsible for preparing a Draft EIR, and may begin preparation immediately without awaiting responses to the Notice of Preparation. However, information communicated to the Commission not later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the Commission's Notice of Preparation shall be included in the Draft EIR. 7.05 CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND PERSONS. To expedite consultation in response to the Notice of Preparation, the Commission as Lead Agency, a Responsible Agency, or a project applicant may request a meeting among the agencies involved to assist the Commission in determining the scope and content of the environmental information that Responsible Agencies may require. The Commission must convene the meeting as soon as possible but no later than 30 days after the request. Prior to completion of the Draft EIR, the Commission shall consult with each Responsible Agency and any public agency which has jurisdiction by law over the project. The Commission shall also consult with any city or county which borders the project or within which the project is located, unless otherwise designated annually by agreement between the Commission and any other city or county. The Commission may also consult with any individual who has special expertise with respect to any environmental impacts involved with a project. The Commission may also consult directly with any person or organization it believes will be concerned with the environmental effects of the project including any interested individuals and organizations of which the Commission is reasonably aware. The purpose of this consultation is to "scope" the EIR's range of analysis. For a project of statewide, regional, or areawide significance as defined in State Guidelines Section 15206, the Commission shall consult with transportation planning agencies and public agencies which have transportation facilities within their jurisdictions that could be affected by the project. Consultation shall be conducted so that the Commission may obtain information concerning a project's effects on major local arterials, public transit, freeways, highways, and rail transit service within the jurisdiction of a transportation planning agency or a public agency consulted by the Commission. A transportation planning agency or public agency which provides RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -43- °2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report information to the Commission shall be notified of, and provided with copies of, environmental documents pertaining to the project. The Commission as Lead Agency may charge and collect from the applicant a fee not to exceed the actual cost of the consultations. A Responsible Agency or other public agency shall only make comments regarding those activities within its area of expertise or which are required to be carried out or approved by it. These comments must be supported by specific documen- tation. Any mitigation measures submitted to the Commission by a Responsible or Trustee Agency shall be limited to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are within the Responsible or Trustee Agency's authority. Caltrans may require the Commission as Lead Agency to call at least one scoping session before an EIR is prepared for projects which may affect highways or facilities under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. For projects where federal involvement might require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") under the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), the Commission as Lead Agency shall consult with the appropriate federal agencies as provided in Section 15110 and Sections 15220-15228 of the State Guidelines. In addition, the Commission shall notify the appropriate federal agencies regarding any scoping meetings for proposed projects that require preparation of an EIS. 7.06 EARLY CONSULTATION ON PROJECTS INVOLVING PERMIT ISSUANCE. Where the project involves issuance of a lease, permit, license, certificate or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies, the Commission, upon request of the applicant, shall meet with the applicant prior to the filing of the application regarding the range of actions, potential alternatives, mitigation measures and significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIR. The Commission may also consult with concerned persons identified by the applicant and persons who have made written requests to be consulted. Such requests must be made not later than thirty (30) days after the Commission's decision to prepare an EIR. 7.07 AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN. When the Commission prepares an EIR for a project within the boundaries of a comprehensive airport land use plan or, if such a plan has not been adopted for a project within two (2) nautical miles of a public airport or public use airport, the Commission shall utilize the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook published by Caltrans' Division of Aeronautics to assist in the preparation of the EIR relative to potential airport or related safety hazards and noise problems. 7.08 GENERAL ASPECTS OF AN EIR Both a Draft and Final EIR must contain the information outlined in Guidelines Section 7.12. Each element must be covered, and when elements are not separated into distinct sections, the document must state where in the document each element is covered. RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -44- *2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report The body of the EIR shall include summarized technical data, maps, diagrams and similar relevant information. Highly technical and specialized analyses and data should be included in appendices. Appendices may be prepared in separate volumes, but must be equally available to the public for examination. All documents used in preparation of the EIR must be referenced. An EIR shall not include "trade secrets," locations of archaeological sites and sacred lands, or any other information subject to the disclosure restrictions of the Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250, et seq.). The EIR should discuss environmental effects in proportion to their severity and probability of occurrence. Effects dismissed in the Initial Study as clearly insignificant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed. The Initial Study should be used to focus the EIR so that the EIR identifies and discusses only the specific environmental problems or aspects of the project which have been identified as potentially significant or important. A copy of the Initial Study shall be attached to the EIR to provide a basis for limiting the impacts discussed. The EIR shall contain a statement briefly indicating the reason for determining that various effects of a project that could possibly be considered significant were not found to be significant and consequently were not discussed in detail in the EIR. The Commission should also note any conclusion by it that a particular impact is too speculative for evaluation. The EIR should omit unnecessary descriptions of projects and emphasize feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to projects. 7.09 USE OF REGISTERED CONSULTANTS IN PREPARING EIRs. An EIR is not a technical document that can be prepared only by a registered consultant or professional. However, state statutes may provide that only registered professionals can prepare certain technical studies which will be used in or which will control the detailed design, construction, or operation of the proposed project and which will be prepared in support of an EIR. 7.10 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. An EIR may incorporate by reference all or portions of another document which is a matter of public record or is generally available to the public. Any incorporated document shall be considered to be set forth in full as part of the text of the EIR. Where part of another document is incorporated by reference, that document shall be made available to the public for inspection at the Commission's offices. The EIR shall state where incorporated documents will be available for inspection. RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -45- 02001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report Copies of the Draft EIR shall also be made available at the Commission office for review by members of the general public. Any person obtaining a copy of the Draft EIR shall reimburse the Commission for the actual cost of its reproduction. Copies of the Draft EIR should also be furnished to appropriate public library systems. 7.18 SUBMISSION OF DRAFT EIR TO STATE CLEARINGHOUSE. A Draft EIR must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by state agencies in the following situations: (a) The Draft EIR is prepared by a Lead Agency which is a state agency. (b) The Draft EIR is prepared by a public agency where a state agency is a Responsible Agency, Trustee Agency, or otherwise has jurisdiction by law with respect to the project. (c) The Draft EIR is for a project identified in State Guidelines Section 15206 as being of statewide, regional, or areawide significance. State Guidelines Section 15206 identifies the following types of projects as being of statewide, regional, or areawide significance and requiring submission to the State Clearinghouse for circulation: •General plans, elements, or amendments for which an EIR was prepared. •Projects which have the potential for causing significant environmental effects beyond the city or county where the project would be located, such as: -Residential development of more than 500 units. •Commercial projects employing more than 1,000 persons or covering more than 500,000 square feet of floor space. 'Office building projects employing more than 1,000 persons or covering more than 250,000 square feet of floor space. •Hotel or motel development of more than 500 rooms. -Industrial projects housing more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or covering more than 650,000 square feet of floor area. •Projects for the cancellation of a Williamson Act contract covering more than 100 acres. •Projects in one of the following Environmentally Sensitive Areas: •Lake Tahoe Basin. •Santa Monica Mountains Zone. •Sacramento -San Joaquin River Delta. •Suisun Marsh. -Coastal Zone, as defined by the California Coastal Act. •Areas within one -quarter mile of a river designated as wild and scenic. •Areas within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. •Projects which would affect sensitive wildlife habitats or the habitats of any rare, threatened, or endangered species. RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -54- °2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report •Projects which would interfere with water quality standards. •Projects which would provide housing, jobs, or occupancy for 500 or more people within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant. A Draft EIR may be submitted to the State Clearinghouse where a state agency has special expertise with regard to the environmental impacts involved. - Where the Draft EIR will be reviewed through the State review process handled by the State Clearinghouse, use a Notice of Completion (Form "H") as a cover sheet. Fifteen (15) copies of the documents must be sent to the State Clearinghouse for circulation. In addition to the printed copies, a copy of the documents in electronic format shall be submitted on a diskette or by electronic mail transmission if available. 7.19 SPECIAL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR WASTE AND FUEL BURNING PROJECTS. For any waste burning project, as defined in Guidelines Section 5.09, Notice of Completion shall be given to all organizations and individuals who have previously requested notice. In addition, Notice shall be given by direct mailing to the owners and occupants of property within one-fourth mile of any parcel or parcels on which such a project is located. 7.20 REVIEW OF DRAFT EIR BY OTHER AGENCIES AND PERSONS. Upon the filing and posting of a Notice of Completion, Staff shall consult with and obtain comments from each Responsible Agency, Trustee Agency, and any other public agency having jurisdiction by law over resources which may be affected by the project. Those public agencies having jurisdiction by law over the project shall include, but are not necessarily limited to: (1) Any city or county bordering the project area; (2) Transportation planning agencies and public agencies with transportation facilities located within the project area; (3) The State Department of Water Resources, when a project is located within one mile of a facility of the State Water Resources Development System. Staff may also consult with and obtain comments from any person known to have special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved whose comments relative to the Draft EIR would be desirable. Staff may also consult with any member of the public who has filed a written request for notice with the Commission and any person whom the project applicant believes will be concerned with the environmental effects of the project. 7.21 TIME FOR REVIEW OF DRAFT EIR; FAILURE TO COMMENT. A period of between thirty (30) and sixty (60) days from the filing of the Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR shall be allowed for review of and comment on the Draft EIR, except in unusual situations. If a state agency is a Responsible Agency, or if the Draft EIR is submitted to the State Clearinghouse, the review period shall be at least forty-five (45) days. When a Draft EIR is RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -55- 02001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report • • There is no requirement that the reporting or monitoring program be circulated for public review; however, the Commission may choose to circulate it for public comments along with the Draft EIR. The mitigation measures required to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment must be adopted as conditions of project approval. The adequacy of a mitigation monitoring program is determined by the "rule of reason." This means that a mitigation monitoring program does not need to provide every imaginable measure. It needs only to provide measures that are reasonably feasible. This reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to assure compliance during the implementation or construction of a project. If a Responsible Agency or Trustee Agency has required that certain conditions be incorporated into the project, the Commission may request that agency to prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. The Commission shall also require that prior to the close of the public review period for a Draft EIR (see Guidelines Section 7.21), the Responsible or Trustee Agency submit detailed performance objectives for mitigation measures, or refer the Commission to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents. Any mitigation measures submitted to the Commission by a Responsible or Trustee Agency shall be limited to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are within the Responsible or Trustee Agency's authority. Transportation information resulting from the reporting or monitoring program required to be adopted by the Commission shall be submitted to the regional transportation planning agency where the project is located if the project impacts have statewide, regional or area -wide significance according to criteria developed pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083. The transportation planning agency is required by law to adopt guidelines for the submittal of these reporting or monitoring programs, so the Commission may wish to tailor its submittal to such guidelines. Local agencies have the authority to levy fees sufficient to pay for this program. Therefore, the Commission will charge the project proponent a fee to cover actual costs of program processing and implementation. The Commission may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to an agency or to a private entity which accepts the delegation; however, until mitigation measures have been completed, the Commission remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures occurs in accordance with the program. The Commission may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. "Reporting"is defined as a written compliance review that is presented to the Council or an authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. Reporting is suited to projects which have readily measurable or quantitative mitigation measures or which already involve regular review. "Monitoring" is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight. • RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -C2- 02001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report Monitoring is suited to projects with complex mitigation measures which may exceed the expertise of the Commission to oversee, are expected to be implemented over a period of time, or require careful implementation to assure compliance. At its discretion, the Commission may adopt standardized policies and requirements to guide individually adopted programs. Standardized policies or requirements for monitoring and reporting may describe, but are not limited to: (a) The relative responsibilities of various departments within the Commission for various aspects of the program. (b) The responsibilities of the project proponent. (c) Guidelines adopted by the Commission to govern preparation of programs. (d) General standards for determining project compliance with the mitigation measures and related conditions of approval. (e) Enforcement procedures for noncompliance, including provisions for administrative appeal. (f) Process for informing the Council and staff of the relative success of mitigation measures and using those results to improve future mitigation measures. When a project is of statewide, regional, or areawide importance, any transportation information generated by a program must be submitted to the transportation planning agency in the region where the project is located, as well as the Department of Transportation. 7.32 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION. Following consideration and approval of a project for which the Commission is the Lead Agency, the decision making body shall order Staff to prepare, certify and file, a Notice of Determination (Form "F") which shall contain the following: (a) An identification of the project by its common name where possible and its location. (b) A brief description of the project. (c) The date when the Commission approved the project. (d) Whether the project in its approved form will have a significant effect on the environment. (e) A statement that an EIR was prepared and certified pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. (f) Whether mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. (g) Whether findings and/or a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the project. (h) The address where a copy of the EIR (with comments and responses) and the record of project approval may be examined by the general public. The Notice of Determination shall then be filed, within five working days of the action, with the Clerk of each county in which the project will be located. The Clerk must post the Notice of Determination within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt. The Notice must be posted in RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -63- C2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report the office of the Clerk for a minimum of thirty (30) days. Simultaneously with the filing of the Notice of Determination with the Clerk, Staff shall cause a copy of such Notice to be posted at the Commission office. If the project requires discretionary approval from a state agency, the Notice of Determination shall also be filed with the Office of Planning and Research, within five (5) working days of project approval, along with proof of payment of the California Department of Fish and Game fee or Certificate of Fee Exemption (see Guidelines Section 7.35). The filing and posting by the Clerk of the Notice of Determination usually starts a thirty (30) day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA. If a Notice of Determination is not filed, a one hundred eighty (180) day statute of limitations will apply. When a request has been made for a copy of the Notice prior to the date on which the Commission certifies the Final EIR, such Notice must be mailed, first class postage prepaid, within five (5) days of the Commission's determination. If such a request is made following the Commission's determination, then the copy should be mailed in the same manner as soon as possible. 7.33 DISPOSITION OF A FINAL EIR. The Commission shall file a copy of the Final EIR with the appropriate planning agency of any city or county where significant effects on the environment may occur. The Commission shall also retain one or more copies of the Final EIR as a public record for a reasonable period of time. Finally, for private projects, the Commission may require that the project applicant provide a copy of the certified Final EIR to each Responsible Agency. 7.34 PRIVATE PROJECT COSTS. For private projects, the person or entity proposing to carry out the project shall be charged a reasonable fee to recover the estimated costs incurred by the Commission in preparing, circulating, and filing the Draft and Final EIRs, as well as all publication costs incident thereto. 7.35 FILING FEES FOR PROJECTS WHICH AFFECT WILDLIFE RESOURCES. At the time a Notice of Determination for an EIR is filed with the Clerk, a fee of $850 shall be paid to the Clerk for projects which will adversely affect fish and wildlife resources. These fees are collected by the Clerk on behalf of the California Department of Fish and Game ("DFG"). Only one filing fee is required for each project unless the project is tiered or phased and separate environmental documents are prepared. For projects where a Lead Agency and Responsible Agencies file separate Notices of Determination, only the Lead Agency is required to pay the fee. Note: The Clerk customarily charges a documentary handling fee for each project in addition to the filing fee specified above. Refer to the Index in the Staff Summary to help determine the correct amount. RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -64- 4'2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP Local Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (2001) Environmental Impact Report For private projects, the Commission shall pass these costs on to the project applicant. No fees are required for projects with a "de minimis" effect on fish and wildlife resources, or for certain projects undertaken by the DFG and implemented through a contract with a non- profit entity or local government agency. A project with a "de minimis" effect has no potential for adverse effect on fish and wildlife. This is an important exception. DFG considers the following projects as likely to have "de minimis" effects on fish and wildlife, depending on the specific facts of each project: (1) Projects which enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats and result in no accompanying adverse impacts to fish or wildlife; (2) Lot line adjustments; (3) Building remodeling; (4) Annexations; (5) Redevelopment on existing urban subdivisions with no wildlife habitat; (6) Infill of undeveloped lots; (7) Adoption of a General Plan, where CEQA requires a subsequent discretionary project approval before any physical change to natural habitat is permitted. If the Commission believes that a project will have a "de minimis" effect on wildlife resources, it should file the Certificate of Fee Exemption attached as Form "L". This form requires the Commission to set forth facts in support of the fee exemption. These facts should include: (1) the name and address of the project proponent; (2) a brief description of the project and its location; (3) a statement that an initial study has been prepared by the Commission to evaluate the project's effects on wildlife resources, if any; (4) a declaration that there is no evidence before the Commission that the project will have any potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources; and (5) a declaration that the Commission has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect contained in the regulations. A presumption of adverse effect occurs if the project has the potential for adverse effects on the fish and wildlife resources listed on Form "L". To rebut the presumption of adverse effect, the Commission should explain in the declaration why the project would not have an adverse impact on fish and wildlife and reference any supporting evidence. These findings should be made at the time of approval of the EIR and attached to Form "L" when submitted to the County. Two copies of Form "L" must be filed with a Notice of Determination in order to obtain the fee exemption. If the Commission believes that a project has been undertaken by the DFG, that the project's costs are payable from one or more of the sources indicated in the Fish and Game Code, and that the project is being implemented through a contract with a non-profit entity or a local government agency, the DFG filing does not apply. Since the DFG has not yet adopted regulations to govern this exemption, including a new "Certificate of Fee Exemption," the Commission may wish to use Form L and make appropriate modifications to reflect this exemption. RCTC/RVPUB/556438 -65- ®2001 Best Best & Krieger LLP ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISS/ON DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee SUBJECT: Measure A Extension Election and Time Line MEASURE A AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee recommends the following: 1) Set November 2002 at the General Election date for the extension of Measure A; and 2) Direct staff, under the guidance of the Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee, to develop a Draft Expenditure Plan by December 1, 2001; and 3) Set a Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee Workshop on updated polling data and candidate projects for June 4, 2001 at 10:00 a.m. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Following its Palm Springs Retreat on January 29th, the Commission authorized Chairman Will Kleindienst to appoint an Ad Hoc Committee of Commission members to guide the creation of a new transportation plan covering a minimum of thirty years. It was determined that an election date would be agreed upon, after consultation with major private sector supporters and prospective campaign consultants. The fourteen committee members met on Monday, March 12th and heard presentations from D. J. Smith and campaign consultant David Townsend; both participants in the very successful 1988 campaign establishing Measure A. Following discussion, the Committee unanimously recommended setting November 2002 as the election date. RCTC's Executive Director was instructed to work with D.J. Smith to refine and update project information and polling data in preparation for a workshop/meeting of the Sales Tax Ad Hoc Committee on Monday, June 4, 2001 at 10:00 a.m. The Committee established a target date of December 1, 2001 for the completion of a Draft Expenditure Plan for the new Measure A Sales Tax, spanning a time frame of at least thirty years. AGENDA ITEM 9 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Cathy Bechtel, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2000 Discretionary STIP Funding Recommendations PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Commission: 1) Earmark the RCTC SR 60 Widening Project for full funding ($3,261,000) through the 2002 Discretionary STIP; 2) Earmark the Riverside County Newport Road project (in partnership with the cities of Hemet and San Jacinto) for $6,000,000 (75% of requested funding of $8,000,000) through the 2002 Discretionary STIP;.and 3) Support the 2000 Discretionary STIP funding recommendations as presented in the Attachment. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On November 20, 2000, the Commission released a Call for Projects to program $11.8 million of 2000 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)/Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds available under the Commission's Discretionary program. Project applications were due on January 31, 2001. A total of 36 projects were submitted from 22 local agencies with requests totaling $62.7M in STIP funds. On February 12th the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) convened to evaluate the project applications. We had tremendous representation from our TAC members, with the County and every city participating in the evaluation. We started our day by reviewing the Commission approved criteria and confirming the scoring process to be used. The TAC had previously devoted an earlier Committee meeting to reviewing the process used for prior calls for projects, discussing how to improve the process to ensure fair evaluation of all projects, and providing clarity regarding the information needed to evaluate the applications. The TAC agreed to assign a zero, low, medium, and high point structure (0,1,2 or 3 points 0001'0 per criteria), as was done in the past. Additionally, all applicants had been required to identify their project priorities if multiple applications were submitted. All project sponsors were invited to attend the project evaluation meeting and requested to provide a brief overview of their project and answer questions from the Evaluation Committee. The TAC began the process of evaluating each agency's number one priority project. This was done as it was clear that there were insufficient funds available through this project call to meet all requests. At the end of the all day evaluation, there were five projects with a score of 16 or above, with funding requests totaling $7.323M. As had been previously discussed, Commission staff requested that the SR 60 Widening Project be removed from funding consideration under this call for projects and earmarked for funding under the 2002 STIP Discretionary Cycle. As you will recall, at their December 2000 meeting, the California Transportation Commission programmed $9.785M of Interregional Transportation Improvement Program funds for the SR60 HOV and Widening project from Valley Way to 1-15 (coupled with the $25M from the Governor's Traffic Congestion Relief Program-TCRP) on the condition that the RCTC commit the balance of funds needed to complete this project, $3,261,000. Due to the limited amount of funds available through this discretionary STIP cycle, it was understood that projects not funded in this cycle would remain eligible for consideration in the 2002 STIP. With the RCTC project removed from funding consideration, the remaining top four projects totaled $4.062M, leaving a balance of $7.738M available for programming. There were six projects which received a score of 15 points with their funding requests totaling $19.347M. After much deliberation on how to spread $7.738M and ensure viable projects, it was the unanimous vote of the TAC to recommend the following: ► The joint application from the County of Riverside, Hemet and San Jacinto to reconstruct and widen Newport Road between Menifee and Briggs Road requested $8M in STIP funds. The timing for the other phases on this project are such that a slight delay in receipt of these construction funds would not be detrimental to the project. As such, it was recommended that this project receive an earmark under the 2002 STIP Discretionary cycle (which is expected in Summer 2001) for 75% of the project cost, or $6M. This reduced amount is suggested in order to maximize the amount of funds available for programming of new projects in the 2002 STIP while ensuring sufficient funds to move the Newport Road project forward. ► The remaining five projects which received a score of 15 points are recommended for funding at 68% of their STIP request, which totals $7.715M. The representatives from the affected agencies (Corona, CVAG, Indian Wells, Riverside County, and Temecula) all agreed that additional matching funds or 000121 • • • slight project modifications could be done to allow the projects to be completed with the revised STIP allocations. At the end of the day there were some concerns raised that geographic balance may not have adequately been addressed since of the $1 1.8M available, 55% or $6,577,800 is being recommended for allocation to the Coachella Valley. When taking into consideration the recommendations for future earmarks totaling an additional $9,261,000 for Western County projects (total of $14,461,160 for W.C.), the percentage changes to 31% for the Coachella Valley and 69% for the Western County. At the Plans and Programs Committee, it was noted that approximately $35M is expected to be available under the 2002 Discretionary STIP cycle. Staff was directed to work with the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee to further refine the evaluation criteria to be used for the STIP CaII for Projects expected to be released in Summer 2001. We will work with the TAC over the next few months to refine the criteria and bring it to the Commission for final approval. 000122 • • • 21100 Discreti onary STIP Projects TAC Funding Recommendations Page 1 Su mmary Information: Number of Projects Submitted: 36 Number of Agencies Submitting Projec's: 22 Submitting Agency Projected Available STIP Funds: $11.8 milli on Total STIP Funds Requested: $62.7 million Total Project Costs: $155.6 million Project Title For joint pr oj ects, the lead submitting agency is listed first. Partners are listed next. STIP Funds Requested STIP Funds Recommend STIP Funds Accum Total Original Match .u. . h'er si de Coun/, ransporrallon Commis sion Orig Total Match Pr oject ° Total Score RCTC La SR 60 Widening - HOV & Mixed Flow from 1-15 to Valle W ay Rd Y $ 3,261,000 $ $ - $ 34,785,000 91% $ 38,046,000 Quinta Jef erson St Bridge Improvement, - Spanning th e Whitewater River Ge ie Autry Trail Railroad $ 963,000 $ 963,000 $ 963,000 $ 6,142,000 86% $ 7,105,000 18 Palm S • rin e s Bridge and Roadway Widening Nu,:vo Rd & Wilson $ 1,842,000 $ 1,842,000 $ 2,805,000 $ 789,000 30% $ 17 PdITis Rancho Ave Traffic Signal Installation and Interconnect $ 245,000 $ 245,000 $ 3,050,000 $ 105,000 30% 2,631,000 $ 16 Mirage/Riv County Rai non Road Widen to - 6 lanes from DaVall Dr. to L os Alamos Rd . $ 1,012,000 $ 1,012,00041% 4,062,000 $ 689,000 350,000 $ 1,701,00010 16 Coro na Lin coln Phase 1,2 Widen - Lincoln, Pomona, Sixth & Traffic Si Mod$ $ 987,000 E $ 4,733,160 $ 423,000 30% $ 16 CVAG/Riv Count /In dio Mile s Ave Clinton 671,16000 and St Widening/Bridge Construction Pr oject $ 3,000,000 $ 2,040,000 $ 6,773,160 $ 4,000,000 57 % 1,000,000 $ 7,000,000 15 Indian Wells Milos Avenue 4 -Lane Bridge Construction Riv Count Riv Count /Heme t/San Jacinto Project Rei:onstruct/Widen Valley $ 1,060,000 $ 720,800 $ 7,493,960 $ 9,540,000 90 % $ 15 Way/Armstro ng Road - SR 60 to Sierra Av e Rec onstruct/Widen Newport Road between $ 2,300,000 $ 1,564,000 $ 9,057,960 $ 1,085,000 32% 10,600,000 $ 3,385,000 15 Temecula Bannln ,x,t:'>r• ,� M enifee & Briggs Rds Bul:erfield Stage Road 4 $ 8,000,000 $ - $ $ 4,310,0007 35% $ 15 -Lane Arterial Extension Beltway Project Wil .on St Rehabilitation from Highland Springs Ave $ 4,000,000 $ 2,720,000 19,777,960 $ 11,777,960 $ 12,970,000 12,310,0007 15 $ 410,000 $ 4,700 76% 50% $ 16,970,000 $ 070,000 15 Cathedra,CI 'Rancho Mira; e to O mar St Eat t Palm Canyon Drive Hwy 111 Morenb;Vally ; , M$ and Perris Blvd Extension/Real $ $ 1,635,250 $ 43344,700 211 % $ 2,070,000 14 Muirleta'1n«;4 t nment Ph; Ise I Improve ments, 1-215 Clinton $ 2, 1,225,000 37% $ 3,350,000 14 •!4. .. .., at Keith Road IC 426,000• $ 4 1Norco $ 1157,000 30%1 $ 575,000 14 14 Insl all Left Turn Phase at Sixth Street and Sierra Ave ,750 Riverside/Rini Coun La Sierra Ave Widening $ 59,250 $ 19,250 3 $ $ 2,068,000 $ 887,000 30% % 75,000 $ 2,955,000 14 River River-Side Coun /Riverside. Var Buren Blvd Raised Median Construction Project $ 1,205,000 $ 520,000 30 % $ 14 San JaCintO:' ; ;: Es lanade Ave Santa and Fe Ave Traffic Signal Install/Interconnect $ 182,000 $ 78,000 30% 1,725,000 $ 14 Palm Desert Coo k Street Improvements $ 857,000 $ 367,000 31 % 260,000 $ 14 Riverside Coun Scc tt Road Reconstruction $ 4,400,000 $ 2,000,000 3% ,400,000 $ 13 M oreno Valle /Perris Per Blvd Widening Phase - I $ 2,856,000 $ 1,574,000 36% 6,400 ,000 $ 13 Desert Hot S • rin . s Hemet Pie. son Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation $ 318,000 $ 136,000 % 4,430,000 1211 .• -. BI he Sta e Rou te 74 Realignment and Improvement Proj ect Hot�so nway/Intake Blvd $ 1,950,000 $ 250,000 11 10% $ 454,000 $ Lake Elsinore Co rona .. (US 95) Signaliza tion Project Deign of Railroad Can yon $ 220,000 $ 0% 2,200,000 0 16 Road/I-15 IC Project $ 1,332,500 $ '120,000 $ 220,000 $ 1,170,000 6 5 M al inolia Ave at Rimpau Ave Intersec tion Circulation improvements p $ 332,500 Corona Rai road Street Pav ement Rehabilitation $ 30% 30% $ 475,000 Corona - Improvements New Traffic Signals $ 1,207,500 $ 517,50047,500 30% NE at the Top 7 Congested Intersectio ns $ 843,500 61 $ 361,500 30 % $ 1,725,000 $ 1,205,000 NE NE 000123 Agency Co rona . Project Title Lincoln Ave/W estbound Exit Ramp and Eastbound Ramps STIP Reg $ 714,700 Recommend Accum Tot Match $ 306,300 % 30% Pr oject C ost Score $ 1,021,000 NE Corona Sa pson Ave Pavement Rehabilitati on Improvements $ 339,000 $ 145,500 30% $ 485,000 NE Murrleta Ultimate 1-215 at Los Alamos Rd IC, Widen OC, Improve Diamond IC $ 4,776,000 $ 2,047,000 30% $ 6,823,000 NE Murrleta Ultimate Geometry, 1-215 at Clinton Keith Road IC $ 490,000 $ 210,000 30% $ 700,000 NE Norco "- Install Second Left Turn Lane at Second Street and Hammer Ave $ 250,000 $ - 0% $ 250,000 NE Riverside County Reconstruction and Widening of Lim onite $ 2,800,000 $ 1,690,000 38% $ 4,490,000 NE Temecula,,;, ;t 4!. .1-4,,,4';,.• I-15/SR79 South Ultimate Interchange Improvem ent Program $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 50% $ 9,000,000 NE T otal STIP Funds Requested: $ 62,674,700 Total Project Costs: $ 155,629,000 Notes: TAC Fun ding Re commen dations: 1. RCTC's project will be remo ved fron funding consideration from the 2000 Discretionary STIP call f or projects. It is recommended th at RCTC's SR60 Wid ening pr oject be earmarked for full funding ($3,261,000) through the 2002 Discretonary STIP. 2. La Quinta, Palm Springs, Perris and Rancho M irage pro jects are re co mmended to receive full funding as th ey received scores of "17" and "16"s . These four projects total $4,062,000. 3. Six projects re ceived a score of "15" The se six pro jects include Corona, CVAG, Indian Wells, Riverside County (2 projects), and Temecula . The remaining $7,773,800 is recommended to be split as fo llows: A. Riverside County's project (Construction of Newport Road): Defer to the 2002 Discretionary STIP cycl e with a guarantee of 75 % of th e requested STIP funding of $8,000,000. This results in a $6,000,000 earmark for Riverside Cowity's Newport Road project in the 2002 STIP Discretionary cycle. 8. The remaining five projects would receive 68% of their requested STIP funding amount and are listed below . The five projects total $7,715,000 . - Corona: Lincoln Ave Phase I and Phase 2 Improvements - $671,000. - CVAG: Miles/Clinton Ave Project - $2,040,000. - Indian Wells: M iles Ave Bridge -b720,000. - Riverside County: Co nstruction ()f Valley Way/Armstrong Road - $1,564,000. - Temecula: Butterfield Stage Road Extension Beltway Project - $2,720,000. 4. The recommende d e armarks to the 2002 Discretio nary STIP for RCTC (SR 60 Widening) and Riverside Co unty (Newport Road) total $9,261,000. 5. A "NE" listed in the Total Score colu.n n indicates the project was not evaluated. 000124 • 1 • • • • N s Corona Lincoln Phase 1 & 2 - Widen I. incoln, Pomona, Sixth & Traffic Signal Mod Co unty: Reconstruct Valley Way/Armstrong R oad Perris: Nuevo Rd & Wilson Ave Signal In stallation and Interconnect County/Hemet/San Jacinto: Recon struct/ Widen Newport Road 0 2000 Discretionary STIP TAC Rec ommended Project Funding Locations in Riverside C ounty N ote: Pr oject locations are appr oximate Palm Spri ngs: Gene Autry Trail Bridge and Roadway Widening IRa nch o Mirag e/County: Ram on Rd Wideni ng Indian Wells: Miles Ave 4 Lane Bridge Construction CVAG/CountyAndio Miles and Clinton Ave Widening/Bridg e C onstruction La Ou in ta: Jefferson St Bridge Improvement Temecula: Butterfield Stage Road - 4 Lane Arterial Extension Beltway Pro ject 30 60 000125 Agency CID IOWRt verst deCou nty Tra nspo rtation Commission 2000 STIP Discreti onary Funds - Pr ojected Funding Pot is $11.8 million TAC Recommended Project Fundi ng Project RCTC La Quinta Palm Springs Perris Rancho Mirage/Co unty Corona CVAG/County/Indio Indian Wells County County/Hemet/San Jacint o Temecula SR Widening - HOV & Mix ed Flow from I-15 to Valley Way Rd Jefferso n St Bridge Improvement, Spanning the Whit ewater River Gene Autry Trail Railroad Bridge and Roadway Wideni ng Nuevo Road & Wilson Ave Traffic Signal and Interconn ect Ramon Rd - Widen to 6 Lanes from DaVall Dr to Los Alamos Rd Lincoln Phase 1, 2 - Widen Lincoln, Pomona, Sixth & Traffic Sig Mod Miles Ave & Clinton St Widening/Bridge Construction Project Miles Ave 4 Lane Bridge Co nstruction Proje ct $ 720,800 R econstruct/Widen Valley Way/Armstrong Rd - SR 6010 Si erra Ave $1,564,000 R econstruct/Widen Newport Rd between Menifee & Briggs Rd Earmark ' Butterfield Stage Rd 4 Lane Arterial Extension Beltway Project $.222.0-02) $11,777,760 STIP Funding Earmark' $ 963,000 $1,842,000 $ 245,000 $1,012,000 $ 671,160 $2,040,000 'Notes: RCTC's (SR 60 Widening) project is recommended to be earmarked for full funding ($3.261.000) in the 2002 Discretionary STIP . Riverside County's (Newport Road) project is rec ommended to be earm arked in the 2002 Discretionary STIP with a guarantee of 75 % funding ($6,000,000). S AGENDA ITEM #9 February 12, 2001 Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Attention: Mr. Ivan Chand, Chief Financial Officer Suotect: FY 1999/2000 Measure A Fund Balance Dear Ivan: Public Works Department Administration City Hall 14177 Frederick Street P.O. Box 88005 Moreno Valley, CA 92552-0305 Telephone: (909) 413-3100 FAX: (909) 413-3170 Transmitted herewith is a copy of the City of Moreno Valley Measure A capital improvement program fund balance and budget for FY 99/00. This information is being provided :o the Commission to demonstrate that all of the funds are committed to specific capital protects. It is anticipated that substantial progress will be made on all of these projects over the rext few -nontns. Hopefully, this information will satisfy any concems the Commission may have about the Measure A fund balance repo'ted for Moreno Valley in the 2000 Ernst & Young annual audit. I will be present at the February 14 Commission meeting to answer any questions about this matter. Trent D. Pulliam, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer Attachment TDP:rlw V:\ADMIN.LCG\RCTC\Letters\Measure A.doc City of Moreno Valley Measure A Capital Improvement Program Fund Balance as of February 12, 2001 O ne World 06130100 Amou nt - On eWorld Busin ess FY 99-00 Expe nditures as Return To Carryov er to FY Fund Number Unit Project De scription Typ e B udget of 10/14100 Fu nd Balance 00-01 Fu nd 125 Measure A 125 56330 Annual Pavement Resurfacing CP 1,459,927 4,285 0 1,455,642 125 65320 Bicycle Lane CP 150,000 1,668 0 148,332 125 65420 Ironwood Ave Rehabilitation/Day St -Pige on Pass Rd CP 1,815,000 14,402 0 1,800,598 125 67420 San Michelle Road/Indian-Perris CP 150,000 0 0 150,000 125 75320 Barrier Rail Replacement Program CP 4,970 0 4,970 0 125 76220 Hea cock/Nan dina Improvements CP 50,996 0 50,996 0 125 77020 Street Lights Hemlock/Pigeon Pass-WB 60 Exits CP 2,125 0 2,725 0 125 82820 Box Springs Rd/M orton Rd -Day St. CP 1,290,000 1,040,662 249,338 0 125 82920 Rou te 60/Perris CP 10,622 723 9,899 0 125 84830 Slurry Seal Program CP 944,539 167,186 0 777,353 125 85020 Surface Recycling CP 127,497 106,339 0 21,158 125 86220 Heacock/Cactu s - Alessandro CP 3,993 0 3,993 0 125 86320 Graham/Ca ctus - Alessandro CP 26,126 0 26,126 0 125 89620 Locust/Redlands to 500 Feet East CP 124,602 0 124,602 0 125 89720 Rou te 60/Nason Interchange CP 1,367,749 33,727 0 1,334,022 125 89730 Na son/Alessandro to Fir Stre et Improveme nts CP 3,009,055 105,952 0 2,903,103 125 89830 Re dands Blv d. Storm Drain F CP 541,392 40,674 0 500,718 125 90720 PerrislDracae a - Bay CP 45,343 0 45,343 0 125 New Cross -Gutte r Elimin ation CP 0 0 0 0 125 New Iris Ave./Indian-Emma CP 0 0 0 0 125 New Eucalyptus Ave./Wic hita-660' East CP 0 0 -- 0 - 0 Total Fun d 125 11,124,536 1,516,618 517,992 9,090,926 2000 Discretionary STIP Project Submittals Page 1 Summary Informatio n: Projected Available STIP Funds: $11.8 million Number of Projects Submitted: 36 Total STIP Funds Requested: $62 .7 million Number of Agencies Submitting Projects: 22 Total Project Costs: $155.6 million Riv ersideCount y Transportation Commission Pro j Num Submitting Agency STIP Funds Reque sted T otal Project Cost Project Title (Listed alphabetically by submitting agency . For joint projects, the lead submiting ag ency is listed first. Partners are listed next and italicized.) 1 Banning $ 410,000 $ 820,000 Wilson Street Rehabilitation from Highland Springs Ave to Omar St 2 Blythe $ 220,000 $ 220,000 Hobsonway/Intake Blvd (US 95) Signalization Pr oject 3 Cathedral City/R ancho Mirage $ 1,635,250 $ 2,070,000 East Palm Canyon Drive and Hwy 111 4 Corona $ 987,000 $ 1,410,000 Lincoln Ave Phase 1 and Phase 2 Improvements 5 Coro na $ 332,500 $ 475,000 Magnolia Ave at Rimpau Ave Intersection Circulation Improvements 6 Corona $ 1,207,500 $ 1,725,000 Railroad Street Pavement Rehabilitation Improvements 7 Corona $ 843,500 $ 1,205,000 New Traffic Signals at the Top 7 Congested Intersections 8 Corona $ 714,700 $ 1,021,000 Lincoln Ave/Westbound Exit Ramp and Eastbound Ramps 9 Corona $ 339,500 $ 485,000 Sampson Ave Pavement Rehabilitation Improvements 10 CVAG/County/Indio $ 3,000,000 $ 7,000,000 Miles Avenue Project 11 Desert Hot Springs $ 318,000 $ 454,000 Pierson Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation 12 Hemet $ 1,950,000 $ 2,200,000 State Route 74 Realignment and Improvement Project 13 Indian Wells $ 1,060,000 $ 10,600,000 Miles Avenue Bridge 14 Lake Elsinore $ 1,050,000 $ 1,170,000 Design of Railroad Canyon Road/I-15 IC Project 15 La Quinta $ 963,000 $ 7,105,000 Jefferson Street Bridge Improvement, Spanning the Whitewater River 16 Moreno Valley/Perris $ 2,856,000 $ 4,430,000 Perris Blvd Widening - Phase 1 17 M oreno Valley $ 2,125,000 $ 3,350,000 Perris Blvd Extension/Realignment 18 M urrieta $ 416,000 $ 594,000 Phase 1 Improvements, 1-215 at Clinton Keith Road IC 19 M urrieta $ 4,776,000 $ 6,823,000 Ultimate 1-215 at Los Alamos Rd IC, Widen OC, Improve Diamond IC 20 M urrieta $ 490,000 $ 700,000 Ultimate Geometry, 1-215 at Clinton Keith Road IC 21 Norco $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Install Second Left Turn Lane at Second Street and Hammer Ave 22 Norco $ 59,750 $ 75,000 Install Left Turn Phase at Sixth Street and Sierra Ave 23 Palm Desert $ 857,000 $ 1,224,000 Cook Street Improvements 24 Palm Springs $ 1,842,000 $ 2,631,000 G ene Autry Trail Railroad Bridge and Roadway Widening 25 Perris $ 245,000 $ 350,000 Nuevo Rd and Wilson Ave Traffic Signal Installation and Interconnect 26 Rancho M irage/Co unty $ 1,012,000 $ 1,701,000 Ramon Road Stre et Improvements 27 ROTC $ 3,261,000 $ 38,046,000 State Route 60 Widening 2000 Discretionary STIP Project Submittals Page 2 (Listed alphabetically by submitting agency . For joint projects, the lead submiting agency is listed first. Partners are listed next and italicized .) iverside Count y rans portation Commi ssion Proj Submitting STIP Funds Total Project Num Agency Requested Pr oject Cost Title 28 Riverside/County $ 2,068,000 $ 2,955,000 La Sierra Ave Widening 29 Riverside CountylR iverside $ 1,205,000 $ 1,725,000 Van Buren Blvd Raised Median Construction Project 30 Riverside County $ 2,800,000 $ 4,490,000 Reconstruction and Widening of Limonite 31 Riverside County $ 2,300,000 $ 3,385,000 Reconstruction of Valley Way/Armstrong Ro ad 32 Riverside County/H emet/San Jacinto $ 8,000,000 $ 12,310,000 Construction of Newport Road 33 Riverside County $ 4,400,000 $ 6,400,000 Scott Road Reconstruction 34 San Jacinto $ 182,000 $ 260,000 Esplanade Ave and Santa Fe Ave Traffic Signal Install/Interconnect 35 Temecula $ 4,000,000 $ 16,970,000 Butterfield State Road Extension Beltway Project 36 Temecula $ 4,500,000 $ 9,000,000 I-15/SR79 South Ultimate Interchange Improvement Program To tals: $ 62,675,700 $155,629,000 2000 Discretionary STIP Schedule of Activities: M onday, February 12, 2001 - TAC Project Evaluations and Recommendations Monday, February 26 , 2001 - TAC Project Recommendations to Plans and Programs Committee Wednesday, M arch 14 2001 - Plans and Programs Recommendations to Commission/Commission Approval AGENDA ITEM 10 • • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: March 14, 2001 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Draft 2001 Regional Transportation Plan - Comments PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE & STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Approve comments on the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan in coordination with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG); and, 2) Authorize the RCTC Chair to sign a joint RCTC/CVAG/WRCOG submittal letter to SCAG. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As indicated at the January 2001 Board meeting, an update on the Draft 2001 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is presented to provide the latest information regarding finalization of the plan. This report includes information received from various on -going meetings taking place at the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) over the past weeks. The Draft 2001 RTP meets the federal requirements for fiscal constraint and air quality conformity. However, there is concern over the tenuous financial strategy developed to generate the necessary revenues to fund the plan. Further, when SCAG released the Draft RTP, staff had indicated that the Aviation alternative was still under development and that a decision on the preferred alternative would be forthcoming in March 2001. In addition, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) was expected to submit a new program of projects that would essentially replace the projects used in the initial conformity analysis. Recent developments have raised concerns with SCAG's ability to determine conformity of the final RTP. These developments include the following: 1) Inability to receive federal demonstration funds for MAGLEV 2) MTA's submittal of projects 3) State's Rejection of Community Economic Housing Department (CEHD) Adopted Housing Numbers 4) Aviation Alternative Scheduled for Selection in March, 2001. 5) Financial Strategy Support OOO12 MAGLEV SCAG applied for FY 2001 federal appropriation funds for environmental studies. Last month, the US Department of Transportation did not approve the MAGLEV project for funding. The Federal Highway Administration(FHWA) informally indicated that they would not support a conformity finding on the 2001 RTP based on the lack of funding identified for MAGLEV. SCAG contends that the conformity regulations allow projects in the RTP as long as funding of the project can be reasonably expected. SCAG is currently preparing an aggressive business plan and will continue to seek federal funding for environmental studies. Right of way and construction funding is proposed to be funded by the private sector. SCAG also indicated that without the inclusion of the MAGLEV project in the 2001 RTP, the region would not be able to achieve conformity due to the emissions reduction (2 tons per day) of this regional project. Again, SCAG has not received formal notification from FHWA on their intent to disapprove the RTP based on MAGLEV being financially unconstrained. Los Angeles MTA The MTA recently released their long-term strategic plan. This plan is more.focused on transit than in the past and also removes projects which SCAG staff supports as being critical to air quality conformity. These projects include the 1-710 gap closure, addition of mixed flow and High Occupancy Vehicle lanes, and MAGLEV. Further, funding of the SR 60 truck lanes were moved from financially constrained to unconstrained. MTA staff contends their focus on transit should offset the emissions loss of the highway capital projects removed from the RTP. SCAG will continue to work with MTA and perform model sensitivity runs on these critical projects to resolve the issues. Growth Forecast The State has rejected the CEHD housing numbers used in the growth forecast of the RTP. SCAG staff has indicated, thus far, that they will maintain the adopted CEHD numbers in the RTP. It is unknown at this time whether or not these numbers will be allowed by the federal agencies for inclusion in the RTP. The County of Riverside and several cities have joined efforts with the County of San Bernardino and several other local agencies to challenge the State's rejection of the CEHD adopted numbers. 000127 Aviation Alternative • • • The Aviation alternative was approved at the March 1, 2001 SCAG Transportation and Communications Committee (TCC) meeting. Draft Alternatives presented ranged from "No El Toro", "LAX Expansion up to 86 Million Annual Passengers (MAP)" and increases in MAP and air cargo at all the airports in the SCAG region including Inland Empire Airports at March, Palm Springs, and San Bernardino. SCAG staff also prepared a "decentralized" scenario which limits LAX to 78 MAP, El Toro at 29.7 MAP, March Global Port at1.7 MAP, Ontario International at 30 MAP, San Bernardino Airport at 1.8 MAP, and Palm Springs at 2.9 MAP. The SCAG decentralized scenario was approved by the TCC for inclusion in the 2001 RTP. This scenario limits LAX at 78 MAP, which will allow for growth to the other airports in the region. However, with El Toro at 29.7 MAP this would provide for modest increases to the Inland airports. Public comments at the March 1, 2001 TCC meeting expressed strong opposition of the LAX expansion. In addition, the conversion of the El Toro Base into a high passenger carrying airport was also opposed. Orange County representatives claimed that the surrounding communities would not support an airport at El Toro, and that John Wayne Airport could accommodate additional passengers. Further, Orange County representatives were concerned about their "fair share" of providing air travel to the region, and that having two airports in a limited geographical area is more than their fair share. The Inland Aviation Task Force recommended modifying the SCAG decentralized scenario to reduce March Global Port MAP to zero (0), and increase San Bernardino Airport slightly to 3.5 MAP in an effort to capture cargo activities at March Global Port. However, the recommendations could not be supported by SCAG staff since a technical evaluation would need to be performed. Financial Strategy Support Although the financial strategy developed by SCAG's Finance Task Force is commendable, it involves a concentrated public outreach and education process in order to receive support for: 1) Continuation of sales tax measures (requiring a two-thirds majority to pass) Ventura County currently does not have a sales tax measure, and because of the two- thirds majority requirement, does not believe that they could impose a sales tax in their County in the foreseeab/e future 2) Dedicating the use of sales tax on gasoline (extending the Governor's transportation funding program beyond its current sunset in 2006) This effort is currently in the form of an assembly bill (AB 227 - Longville) which is anticipated to be heard by the Assembly Transportation Committee late March at the '0.0128 earliest. RCTC is supporting this bill which will delete the five-year provision included in last session's AB 2928 and would extend, indefinitely, the dedicated use of sales tax on gasoline to the Transportation Investment Fund. 3) Alternative fuels tax Although it is recognized that alternative fuel use will increase in the future and the result will be a reduction of billions in transportation revenue for the SCAG region, there is concern that the implementation of a tax could slow the growth of alternative fuel usage. SCAG will need to study the implications of an alternative fuel tax and ways to implement a tax acceptable to the consumer. 4) Adjusting the state excise tax on fuel (by five cents between 2005 and 2010, and one cent annually thereafter This action is intended to ensure that the gasoline tax is consistent with inflation and historical increases. This effort would need statewide support which is a daunting task and could take years to be approved. However, in order to meet financial constraint and air quality conformity requirements, this step is necessary to explore as the SCAG region's population will increase significantly placing an overwhelming burden on the demand of an already severely congested transportation system. Comments are due on the 2001 Draft RTP on March 15, 2001. Staff is in the process of preparing comments and will forward them to the Commission at the March 14, 2001 meeting. 000129 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 2001 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Western Riverside Council of Governments Riverside County Transportation Commission ' u'ersideCounty ransportation Commission March 14, 2001 Mr. Mark Pisano Executive Director Southern California Association of Governments 818 west Seventh Street, 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Subject: Draft 2001 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Dear Mr. Pisano, On behalf of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), we thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft 2001 RTP. The Draft 2001 RTP is an improvement to the 98 RTP in part through its aggressive approach to involve the subregions, county transportation commissions, and other stakeholders in the identification of problems and solutions. The RTP process provides perhaps the best opportunity for the region to understand the transportation issues it faces in the future, identify transportation objectives to achieve, and the most cost-effective approach to achieve them considering other social, environmental goals and constraints. Our comments are as follows: Air Quality: The RTP as proposed meets the Air Quality requirements, however: A) If Maglev is omitted from the Plan and the MTA Board actions deliver projects other than what are in the RTP, the Plan will not meet the air quality conformity requirements. The draft RTP indicates that the Maglev program includes "interlinking" with the proposed California High Speed Rail System. What are the emissions reductions associated with the High Speed Rail System in the SCAG region? There is no other reference to the High Speed Rail System which the California High Speed Rail Authority received an additional $5 million from the Governor's Transportation Program last July for Tier 1 environmental impact statement . B) The RHNA debate with the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) could further exacerbate the area being out of conformance. The HCD continues to insist that our region is "short " on housing stock when all of the local agencies confirm the region has more than enough. By using an artificially high growth projection (that uses HCD's preferred numbers) the model will forecast an additional 1-2 tons per day of Reactive Organic Gas emissions and additional 2-3 ton per day of NOx from vehicles that are not in the current plan. In addition, it is our understanding that the housing contemplated by HCD could result in an additional 48 million vehicle miles traveled to the existing transportation system. SCAG needs to continue its challenge to the State numbers, as it is important that we utilize reality -based growth forecasts. Aviation: One of the primary goals of the 2001 RTP was to prepare a regional aviation scenario that met the goals of the SCAG RTP policies (#8, #18, #19, and #20) and served the best interest of the region. A) Additional analysis should be made regarding the feasibility, acceptability and market demand of Scenario 8. The citizens of Orange County are divided in their support for El Toro as a commercial airport. It appears that even proponents of an aviation facility at El Toro have tempered their plans for an airport that would serve less than 20 MAP. How realistic SCAG's scenario for nearly 30 MAP at El Toro is remains unclear. Likewise, the City of Ontario and surrounding communities do not support 30 MAP (as indicated in Scenario 8) at the Ontario airport. It is our understanding that these communities prefer to limit Ontario's capacity to approximately 20-25 MAP. Growth: The issue(s) surrounding the topic of growth, projections, allocations, the methodology and politics behind the derivation of regional forecasts are being addressed through a number of venues. Our concerns regarding growth remain largely the same and can be summarized for purposes of comments to the Draft 2001 RTP as follows: A) Artificially high housing forecasts exacerbate modeled air quality and mobility impacts. By inflating projected housing stock the model is forced to project people/households in a manor that will result in 263,200 additional vehicle trips and an additional 4.8 million vehicle miles traveled on the most congested routes. This forces the region to consider and program unnecessary improvements. Goods Movement: The Goods Movement section of the RTP emphasizes it's relative importance with respect to ports, rail and trucks, and their holistic economic impact to the region; 45% of the region's employment is made up of trade, transportation and manufacturing. The importance is further emphasized with the projected growth of freight movement through the region with emphasis on the Southwest Passage as critical to the movement of goods to the rest of the nation. A) Funding and Subregional Equity - In Technical Appendix E under Goods Movement, issues, implications and options were identified for the fourteen adopted GMAC focus areas. In regards to 1) Transportation Funding for Freight Movement and 2) Regional/Subregional Equity in Funding/Project Development the following was stated: Issues: "Since the SCAG region is a national gateway for cargo to and from the Pacific Rim, elimination of delays and bottlenecks impacting goods movement is in the national interest. A major issue here is how to develop adequate levels of federal funding to compensate the region of conveying goods to and from the rest of the country. Another major funding issue is that subregions that experience pass -through cargo need an equitable share of freight funding, so that they are not unduly burdened with traffic congestion, environmental, and road repair impacts." 1 Implications and Options: 'An equitable freight factor should be developed to facilitate obtaining new federal funds for cargo movement through our region with fewer impacts; further to allow us to monitor where funds are expended for goods movement within the region to ensure that all of the subregions that are either negatively impacted, or have economic development potential relating to goods movement, are fairly treated. Comment was made that since the region is a gateway for international trade and experiences heavy pass -through cargo, this should have major emphasis." The above statements were made by the Goods Movement Advisory Committee to emphasize the relevance and importance of the movement of goods across and through the region for the benefit of the region and the nation as a whole. This needs to be strongly emphasized in the 2001 RTP including an action statement, which appears to be missing, that pursues funding from the state, federal and private sectors and that is both adequate and equitable for the subregions. B) Truck Lanes - The SR 60 project is part of the Southwest Passage which is of national importance, yet the study ends at Interstate 15. While 70% of the cost of truck lanes is expected to come from local, state and federal sources, there is no apparent action to aggressively seek federal or state funding. The impacts extend beyond the Los Angeles subregion and benefits extend beyond the SCAG region. Further study beyond the Orangethorpe and ACE corridors is necessary as well as seeking an appropriate level of funding from sources outside of the SCAG region for these efforts. C) On page 84 of the draft RTP, under "Inland Ports and Inland Intermodal Terminals", a statement is made regarding increased trade volume and that the land in the Inland Empire could provide for sorting and storage of marine containers. It further states, that "shuttle trains could carry containers to the Inland Empire as a substitute for truck drayage, alleviating some truck traffic on east -west freeways or even avoiding the need for an SR -60 truck lane project." We strongly support the action statement to conduct a study of an inland port in the near term, so that the proposed truck lane on SR 60 can be either eliminated from the plan or considered for further study. D) Air Cargo - The draft RTP primarily focuses on the top eight priority areas pertain to goods movement; air cargo is the ninth on the list and therefore is not addressed in the goods movement section. It is, however, addressed in the aviation section which causes a disconnect between the relationship of air cargo to goods movement and the associated action statements. As an example, the action statement under "Air Cargo" supports the utilization and expansion of regional (outlying) airports and supports mitigating the impacts, without adequately emphasizing the need for further study regarding ground access. Action statements in the goods movement section support improvements for roadway access and neglects airport expansion. E) Rail Crossings - The RTP identifies the impacts, cost and need for at -grade rail crossing improvements from other studies, except for the Inland Empire (SanBAG, WRCOG and RCTC) studies. Without this information, the impacts of increased rail traffic beyond the Alameda Corridor East and Orangethorpe Corridors are misrepresented. The statement, "improvements to the main line railroad corridors will extend many of the benefits of the Alameda Corridor eastward, providing a conduit for Pacific Rim trade" appears short sighted. The improvements to the main line railroad corridors will result in increased rail traffic, which will negatively impact Riverside County and other subregions east of the Alameda Corridor East and Orangethorpe Corridors, if additional improvements are not made within these subregions. F) On page 81 of the draft RTP, last paragraph, please identify the limits of the UP Yuma Main Line as "extending east from Colton to Mecca in the Coachella Valley". Financing: To implement the 2001 RTP, as proposed, the region would need to generate approximately 40 billion additional dollars. SCAG's Long Range Finance Task Force should be commended for the work they did to identify strategies that could make the RTP whole. We support the following revised strategies per SCAG February 16, 2001 meeting: 1) Continue using revenues from the state sales tax on gasoline for transportation purposes (as implemented through the Governor's transportation funding program). 2) Continue local transportation sales taxes, where necessary. 3) Adjust the state excise motor vehicle fuel tax rate and use fees to maintain historical purchasing power. However, we have concerns regarding the following: B) In order to be successful with implementing strategies that may require legislation or a vote of the people, emphasis will need to be placed on education and outreach throughout the region and the State. Coordination will bee essential to gain the momentum needed for implementation. This should be address in the RTP. C) California is ranked 38th out of the 50 U.S. States in their gas tax rate and ranked 44th in comparison of gas tax revenues per capita. California is lagging behind other States in its gas tax rate and revenues based on population and/or registered drivers. The last gas tax rate adjustment was in 1994. An increase in the State gas tax is reasonable in order to provide an adequate source of revenue for the region and to keep pace with the rest of the country's tax rates. CETAP: The Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) effort underway in Riverside County has the potential to reduce freeway congestion, air quality impacts and improve the movement of goods and people across the region. New corridors linking Riverside County with Orange County and San Bernardino County as well as internal corridors are significant to economic development of Riverside County and have the potential to aid with balancing jobs and housing needs within the SCAG region. The value gained from a project of this magnitude is significant to the SCAG region as well as the Inland Empire and should be recognized in the RTP as being regionally significant, including actions and statements that indicate SCAG's ongoing support and funding for a Federally recognized streamlined environmental and transportation planning process. Strategic Arterial Improvements/Smart Streets: Van Buren Boulevard and Mockingbird Canyon should be removed from the list of projects as a "Smart Street" improvement. This particular improvement strategy is not supported by the jurisdictions. Minor Technical Corrections to Project List: • Page K-22, change description on Rte 74 from arterial improvements to" widen from 2 to 4 lanes." • On 1-215, 1-15 to S/O Newport, change description from "Add to HOV lanes" to "Add 2 HOV lanes and 2 mixed flow lanes". • Add Interchange Improvement on 1-10 and SR 60 Near Beaumont, year 2020, $10 million. • Page K-24, On I-10,Construct IC at 2.7 mi e of Dillon to 5 mi of Dillon"add "McNaughton IC" to description. Please do not hesitate to contact either Ruthanne Taylor Berger, WRCOG Deputy Executive Director at (909) 787-7985, or Shirley Medina, RCTC Program Manager at (909) 787-7141, if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. Sincerely, Supervisor Bob Buster, First District William G. Kleindienst WRCOG, Chair RCTC Chairman Public Funding Strategy Contin ue using revenues from the state sales tax on gasoline for transportation purposes (as implemented throu gh the Gov ernor's transportation fu nding program. Continu e local transportation sales taxes, where necessary. Adjust the state motor fuel excise tax a nd user -fees to maintain historical purchasi ng power . Strategy generates $24 billion in additional re venues . County Regional In Baseline Revenues Checkbook Billio ns (1997 Baseline Costs by County Dollars) Net Balance Public Cost of New RTP Projects Funding Shortfall Public Funding Strategy Imperial $0.78 $0.60 $0. 14 $0 .38 ($0.24) $0.24 Lo s Angeles (3) $65.27 $66. 47 ($1.19) $9.36 ($10.55) $10.55 Orange $17. 49 $17. 02 $0.46 $3.94 ($3.47) $3.47 (2) Riv erside $5.91 $6. 03 ($0.12) $4.26 ($4 .39) $4.39 San Bernardino $8. 01 $7. 71 $0.30 $5.20 ($4.90) $4 .90 Ventura $2. 49 $2.30 $0.19 $1.15 ($0.96) $0.96 (2) Total $99.96 $100.18 (1) ($0 .22) $24.29 ($24.51) $24 .51 1) Reductions in to tal baseline costs since the Draft 2001 RTP reflects various adjustme nts i ncluding the reassessment of RTIP cost estimates. 2) Does n ot include the ex ten sion of Measure M nor the imposition of a local tra nsportation sales ta x in Ventura Cou nty. 3) SCA G's numbers incorporate the L ACMTA's LRTP fina ncial forecast. • I-15 HOV and Mixed Flow • SR -71 HOV and Mixed Flow • I-215 HO V • I-10 Mixed Flow • Oran ge -Riverside Corridor MAGLEV • Maglev has a positive impact on transportation conformity • Maglev will continue to be in the plan for now Four Scenarios forwarded by the Aviation Task Force an d TCC have been evaluated, including the 98 RTP Baseline Scenario On March 1, 2001, the TCC recommended Aviation Scenario 8 as the preferred scen ario for the 2001 RTP. 2025 Aviation System Scenario 8 Scenario 8 Description What w ill the addition of H Toro have on Airport Systerris (with HSR) ability to meet future demand? BUR ELT SNA LAX LGB M arch ONT PSP PMD MUG SBD SCI Incent 9.41 29.71 8. 40 78. 00 3. 00 1.72 29.95 2 .85 1.73 0 .00 1.76 0.8 Yes High Speed Rail Yes Totals 167.3 SC8 Air Ca rgo (in thousands of tons) 73.21 1693.75 25.29 2975.75 62. 97 1079.46 2246 .04 19.92 124 .44 0.00 878.90 320.28 Yes Yes 9500 Scenario 8 Operations (in thousands) 112.03 321.10 120.70 660.34 43.62 44 .42 366 .38 44.81 28.44 0 .00 40.36 20.99 Yes Yes 1803 LRTP Proposes more Rapid Bus Corridors more reliance on smart shuttles — tran sit restructuring DRAFT 2001 RTP - CONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST Cou nty Ro ute Project Limits Descriptio n Year Public Cost Rev ised Public Cost Priv ate/Other Co st ARTERIALS RIV Arteria l Improvements / Ground Access Countywide Arterials/Interchange s 2025 $424,000,000 $424,000,000 $106,000,000 RIV Hamner Ave/Main St SB CL to Ontario A ve Smart Street 2015 $45,000,000 $45,000,000 RIV Limonite Ave/Rubidoux Blvd 11:. to Riverside Ave (via Agua Mansa) Smart Street 2020 $63,000,000 $63,000,000 RIV Magnolia Ave/Main St Ontario Ave to SB CL Smart Street 2015 $88,000,000 $88,000,000 RIV Van Buren Blvd/Mockingbird Canyon Rd Magnolia to Cajalco Rd. Smart Street 2015 $0 $0 GRA DE CRO SSINGS RIV 1 Grade Crossings Countywide Grade Crossings 2025 $672,000,000 $650,000,000 HOT LANES/TOLLWA YS RIV SR -91 (Riv/OC Corridor) Or Co Line to 1-15 Tollway: Mixed Flow Lanes 2020 $0 $0 $0 RIV Corridor Or Co Line to 1-15 Corridor 2010 $300,000,000 $700,000,000 HOV RIV 1-15 SB Co Line to SR -91 Freeway: HOV 2020 $43,000,000 $43,000,000 RIV 1-215 Ramc na Exwy to E Jct SR -60/I-215 Freewa y: HOV 2025 $41,000,000 $41,000,000 RIV 1-215 SR-60'1-215/SR-91 IC to SB Co Line Freeway: HOV 2025 $60,000,000 $60,000,000 RIV SR -60/I-215 SR -60/l-215 E Jct HOV Connector 2025 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 RIV 1-215 1-15 to s/o Nuevo Freeway: Mixed Flow & HOV 2025 $82,000,000 $82,000,000 RIV SR -71 SB Co Line to SR -91 Freeway: Mixed Flow & HOV 2015 $100,000,000 $100,000,000 MIXED FLOW RIV 1-15 SR -91 to SR -60 Freeway: Mixed Flow 2020 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 RIV 1-215 Eucalyptus to Columbia Freeway: Mixed Flow 2025 $0 $0 RIV 1-10 Monterey to Dillon Freeway: Mixed Flow 2010 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 RIV SR79 Ranona Expwy to Newport Rd Expressway: M ixed Flow 2010 $130,000,000 $130,000,000 RIV Riverside/San Bernardino Corridor San 3ernardino to Moreno Valley 2025 $500,000,000 $350,000,000 RIV Corridor Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore 2025 $750,000,000 $400,000,000 RIV Corridor Baniiing/Beaumont to Temecula 2025 $750,000,000 $650,000,000 O &M RIV Add. Operations & Maint. Countywide Roadway Operations & Maint. 2025 $210,000,000 $200,000,000 OTHER RIV Non -motorized Countywide Non -motorized 2025 $50,000,000 $50,000,000 Delete per c omments to SCAG on M arch 15th . Slight modification. Delete . Combine with pr oject bel ow as sh own . Revised as sh own . M ove to unco nstrained list. Revised per CETAP i<,eest cost analysis . Re vis ed per CETAP latest cost analysis . Re vised per CETAP latest c ost a nalysis. 1 of 2 3113!L001 DRAFT 2001 RTP - CONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST County Ro ute Pro ject Limits Descriptio n Year Public Co st Rev ised Public Co st Priv ate /Other Cost RIV Rideshare & Other Incentive Programs Countywide Rideshare & Other Incentive Pro. rams 2025 $22,000,000 $22,000,000 RIV Park and Ride Lot Expansion Countywide Park and Ride 2025 $25,000,000 $25,000,000 RIV ITS Countywide ITS 2025 $25,000,000 $25,000,000 TRANSIT RIV Metrolink Improvements Countywide Commuter Rail 2025 $184,000,000 $184,000,000 RIV San Jacinto Commuter Rail 12th & Vine to 4th & D St Commuter Rail 2010 $63,000,000 $63,000,000 RIV San Jacinto Commuter Rail 4;h & D St to 7th & State St Commuter Rail 2020 $63,000,000 $63,000,000 RIV Intercity Rail Col:on (SB Co. ) to Palm Springs Intercity Rail (AMTRAK) 2015 $150,000,000 TRUCK LANES RIV 1-15 SB Co Line to SR -60 Truck Lanes 2020 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 RIV SR -60 SB Co Line to 1-15 Truck Lanes 2010 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $4,590,000,000 $4,258,000,000 $996,000,000 Revise d Projected Revenues 2 of 2 $4,260,000,000 3/13/2001 A / !VL_7 1(1C rtes Ltitc i 1 i, LUU INSIDE THIS ISSUE FORGING AHEAD WITH SMART GROWTH RCIP tackles our nation's most important issue — land -use planning (cover page) RCIP UPDATES ON: MSHCP CETAP GENERAL PLAN (page 2) GOVERNMENT UPDATES ON: STATE Funding opportunities announced CITIES Shared commitment approved (cover page) DID YOU KNOW... Congestion vs. Cost (page 2) COMING EVENTS (page 2) K( 1 f>) 877-735-RCIP www.rcip.org CO(J,\ i I]it21L / l p' '7i1 p SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA wRcoe ASSOCIATION at GOVERNMENTS 11..sfrortritios 0n. 'sslon Smart Planning in Action By Congressman Ken Calvert ollsters and pundits have identified growth management as the single most important issue affecting our country today. This is because land -use decisions touch on an enormous range of public policies affecting virtually every aspect of our lives. There is growing perception that "sprawl" is invading our communities, depleting our natural and financial resources and ruining our quality of life. In fact, a recent poll by Smart Growth America indicated that 76 percent of Americans believe more needs to be done at the local level to plan for growth. At the same time in Riverside County, providing for economic development and adequate transportation corridors is becoming increasingly difficult. For this reason, Riverside County officials and stakeholders are forging ahead with an unprecedented planning effort that could enhance quality of life for generations to come. The Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) is seeking to address the area's future conservation, transportation and development needs. The RCIP has been hailed by policymakers, planners, environmentalists and developers as an innovative land -use model, largely because of the integrated (continued on page 2 — see Calvert) volume 01 issue 02 State Pacheco Pushes for RCIP Funds The California Depart- ment of Housing and Community Development has filed a Notice of Funding Availability for Inter - Regional Partnership (IRP) Grants Job-I-Iousing Balance. This program was enacted last year as part of the State Budget and was tailored (with the assistance of Assembly Member Rod Pacheco) to make RCIP eligible for additional funding. The award of IRP funds will be contingent on the successful completion of an application meeting specified criteria. Applicants are eligible to apply for a maximum grant of $515,000. Caiiletnia Department of Housing and inter -Regional Padnershrp Grants Job Housing Balance GRANT CHL Ci'. 1as Cities Cities to Help Fund CETAP Planning Activities Recently the Western Riverside Council of Governments Executive Committee unanimously approved a proposal for cities to contribute funds to ensure continued CETAP planning (continued en page 2 — see Government) MSHCP Update Supervisors Approve Conservation Study On December 19, 2000, the County Board of Supervisors approved a detailed conservation analysis for a proposal to acquire 153,000 acres of private land for a system of endangered species reserves. The study will pinpoint the number of rare plants and animals that would be protected and the cost. Preliminary estimates have identified coverage for 164 species and pegged the amount at about $1.5 billion.' CETAP Update Transportation Strategy Moves Forward Work is continuing on the development of a transportation strategy that can serve the current and future population of Western Riverside County. In November and December 2000, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and Board of Supervisors recommended the transportation alternatives be carried forward into the federal General Plan Update General Plan Elements Continue to Evolve The Planning Center is in the process of drafting the Open Space and Conservation Element and the Housing Element of the Countywide General Plan. Drafts of the Land Use and Safety Element and state environmental analysis and documentation process. Several alternatives have been identified for the corridor between Banning/ Beaumont and Temecula, and several have been identified for the corridor between Hemet and Corona/Lake Elsinore.* have been completed and are being reviewed by the County. The General Plan Advisory Committee will be spending the next few months providing input to these elements. Preparation of reports describing the 19 Area Plans approved by the Board of Supervisors last month is underway. When this task is completed, work on the Circulation Element will begin* Tuesday 3/6/01 9:00 am Meeting CETAP Advisory Committee Call 877-735-RCIP for location. 3/6/01 1:30 pm Meeting General Plan Advisory Comm. Call 877-735-RCIP for location. Thursday 3/8/01 1:00 pm Meeting MSHCP Advisory Committee Registrar of Voters, 2724 Gateway Drive, Riverside Government Updates (continued from cover puke) activities. The CETAP is the process to identify transit system improvements. The proposal would have cities contribute 1 per capita over a two-year period toward the planning process, which would bring in more than $800,000 for critical CETAP activities. The funding further increases the level of commitment for future transportation solutions by local jurisdictions, and adds diversity to the various funding sources for the effort. WRCOG is working to set meetings/workshops with all city councils in the sub -region to further discuss the RCIP — its individual components, implications for local jurisdictions, project milestones, etc. To set a workshop meeting date, please contact WRCOG staff at 909-787-7985. `+ Calvert: Smart Growth (continued from cover page) process and the stakeholder driven approach. Instead of pitting environmental interests, farmers and developers against each other in a struggle to carve out their own territory, RCIP attempts to unite these interests behind a common cause. I-Iowever, in order for this to work, stakeholders such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, nuist keep their commitments. The common cause is a land -use policy that maps out future transportation corridors and development needs around areas pre -selected for habitat conservation. By bringing competing interests to the table in pursuit of a common objective, RCIP will take less time, cost less money and produce less gridlock, financially viable, environmentally sound communities. 4 Zia\iu j<no fr In addition to affecting quality of life, traffic congestion leads to huge negative economic impacts. It costs the US $100 billion a year. In 1994, drivers in California's five most congested urban areas lost nearly 4,000 hours due to congestion and suffered an annual loss of over $14 billion in wasted time and gasoline. In 1996, congestion cost the average San Bernardino driver $1,090 (the highest in the nation), the average San Francisco Bay Area driver $950, the average Los Angeles driver $920 and the average San Jose driver $750.