The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About12 December 15, 2003 Plans and ProgramsRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION era PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMN MEETING AGENDA TIME: 12:00 P.M. DATE: December 15, 2003 LOCATION: Board Chambers, 1St Floor County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside *** COMMITTEE MEMBERS *** Dick Kelly/Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert, Chairman Frank Hall/Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco, Vice Chairman Shenna Moqeet/John Chlebnik, City of Calimesa Jeff Miller/Jeff Bennett, City of Corona Matt Weyuker/ Greg Ruppert, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe/Lori Van Arsdale, City of Hemet Percy L. Byrd/Robert Bernheimer, City of Indian Wells Frank West/Charles White, City of Moreno Valley Jack van Haaster/Warnie Enochs, City of Murrieta Ronald Oden, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch/Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District 1 Roy Wilson, County of Riverside, District IV Marion Ashley, County of Riverside, District V RECORDS *** STAFF *** Eric Haley, Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning & Policy Development *** AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY *** State Transportation Improvement Program Regional Transportation Improvement Program New Corridors Intermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare) Air Quality and Clean Fuels Regional Agencies, Regional Planning Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs Congestion Management Program 11.3tP.15 The Committee welcomes comments. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Board. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE www.rctc.org AGENDA * *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 12:00 p.m. Monday, December 15, 2003 BOARD CHAMBERS, 1ST FLOOR 4080 LEMON STREET, RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section 54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the clerk of the Commission at (909) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 5. PROPOSED FUNDING TRADE FOR STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP) REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RIP) FUNDS Overview This item is for the Committee to: Pg. 1 1) Approve removing Discretionary STIP projects programmed in fiscal years 2002/03 through 2004/05 from the STIP in the amount of $40,866,092, with the consent of the lead agencies, and substitute funding with TEA -21 STPL or CMAQ Reauthorization funds; Plans and Programs Committee Agenda December 15, 2003 Page 2 2) Approve TEA -21 Reauthorization STPL or CMAQ funds for STIP Discretionary projects already funded with local funds allowing the lead agencies to substitute a project for the same amount as the former STIP project; 3) Approve reprogramming Discretionary projects programmed beyond 2004/05 with TEA -21 STPL or CMAQ, if available, when project is within a year of the construction start date; 4) Approve a $15 million set aside of TEA -21 Reauthorization STP funds for a Rehabilitation Call for Projects; and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. 6. COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT 2004 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Pg.6 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve staff comments on the Draft 2004 Regional Transportation Plan; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 7. PRESENTATION: DRAFT SCRRA FARE POLICY PROPOSAL Pg. 1i Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the presentation on the status of the draft SCRRA fare policy proposal; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action 8. ALLOCATION OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS TO SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Pg.11 Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve a one-time allocation of $300,000 in Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to SunLine Transit Agency to cover increased operating costs; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. Plans and Programs Committee Agenda December 15, 2003 Page 3 9. FY 2002/03 TRANSIT OPERATORS' REPORT Overview This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive the FY 2002/03 Transit Operators' Report; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT Overview Pg. 13 This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to Commission activities. 11. ADJOURNMENT The next Plans and Programs Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 12:00 p.m., Monday, January 26, 2004, Board Chambers, 1St Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE Monday, November 24, 2003 MINUTES 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Plans and Programs Committee was called to order by Chairman Dick Kelly at 12:05 p.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. ROLL CALL Members/Alternates Present Marion Ashley Daryl Busch Bob Buster Percy L. Byrd Frank Hall Dick Kelly Robin Lowe Gregory V. Schook Roy Wilson Members Absent William G. Kleindienst Jeff Miller Jack van Haaster Matt Weyuker 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests from the public to speak. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — September 22, 2003 M/S/C (Lowe/Busch) to approve the September 22, 2003 minutes as submitted. Abstain: Byrd, White Plans and Programs Committee Minutes November 24, 2003 Page 2 5. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION'S SECTION 5307 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS FOR RIVERSIDE/SAN BERNARDINO, HEMET/SAN JACINTO, TEMECULA/MURRIETA, AND LOS ANGELES/LONG BEACH/SANTA ANA URBANIZED AREAS M/S/C (Lowe/Schook) to request the Commission to conduct a public hearing at its December 10, 2003 meeting for the purpose of approving the proposed Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Section 5307 Program of Projects for Riverside/San Bernardino, Hemet/San Jacinto, Temecula/Murrieta, and Los Angeles/Long Beach/Santa Ana Urbanized Areas. 6. FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION'S SECTION 5311 RURAL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM M/S/C (Lowe/Ashley) to: 1. Approve the proposed FY 2003-04 Federal Transit Administration's Section 5311 Program of Projects for Riverside County; and, 2. Forward to the Commission for final action. 7 AMEND THE COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM'S FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN TO REFLECT THE ALLOCATION OF MEASURE "A" AND LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS M/S/C (Lowe/Schook) to: 1) Allocate up to $2M in Measure "A" rail funding to the Commuter Rail Program for the lease of commuter rail cars and locomotives; 2) Reprogram $40,000 in Local Transportation Funds (LTF) from operating to capital to cover replacement costs of rail seat cushions; 3) Allocate $845,100 in LTF funds to complete the Pedestrian Over -Crossings at the West Corona and La Sierra Metrolink Stations as well as the construction and installation of Closed Circuit Television at the La Sierra, Pedley and West Corona Metrolink Stations; 4) Amend the Commuter Rail Program's FY 2003-04 Short Range Transit Plan to reflect these changes; and, 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. Plans and Programs Committee Minutes November 24, 2003 Page 3 8. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE M/S/C (Wilson/Lowe) to: 1) Approve the membership roster for the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC) effective January 2004; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 9. COMMUTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM RIDESHARE WEEK UPDATE M/S/C (Busch/Lowe) to: 1) Receive and file the Commuter Assistance Program Rideshare Week Update as an information item; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 10. 2003 BEACH TRAIN PROGRAM SUMMARY M/S/C (Lowe/Byrd) to: 1) Receive and file the 2003 Beach Train Program Summary Report as an information item; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 11. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE M/S/C (Schook/Ashley) to: 1) Receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information item; and, 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. 12. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT A. Hideo Sugita provided an update on the funding status of the SR 60/SR 91/1-215 Interchange Project. The Commission transferred $33.915 million to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). He informed the Committee that discussions of the GARVEE bond action by the State are ongoing. Commissioner Bob Buster asked if there were additional financial obstacles beyond the bond issuance for the project to begin Plans and Programs Committee Minutes November 24, 2003 Page 4 construction. Also, he requested information on right-of-way acquisition status as well as the initial impacts of construction on existing congestion. Hideo Sugita said that the bid opening is scheduled for December 4. It is anticipated that construction will begin early March. The right-of- way issues are ongoing and negotiations will continue. Staff will keep the Commissioner apprised of the construction status. Additional information will be available once a contractor has been selected. Caltrans will have the FastFax program as a way to inform elected officials, businesses, and motorists of planned construction activities, such as closures, and helpful commuting tips on various projects. B. Commissioner Robin Lowe noted that the public comment period for SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) closes in mid -January. She believes that there are elements of concern that require the Committee's review at its December meeting. C. Chairman Kelly noted that there is a SunLine Board meeting scheduled for November 22 which conflicts with the Committee meeting. As requested, staff will contact SunLine to determine any necessary schedule modifications. D. Due to the holidays, the Committee determined to reschedule its next meeting from December 22nd to December 15th 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Plans and Programs Committee, the meeting adjourned at 12:23 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled to be held at 12:00 p.m., Monday, December 15, 2003, in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Harmon Deputy Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: December 15, 2003 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: Proposed Funding Trade for State Transportation Improvement, Program (STIP) Regional Improvement Program (RIP) Funds TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve removing Discretionary STIP projects programmed in fiscal years 2002/03 through 2004/05 from the STIP in the amount of $40,866,092, with the consent of the lead agencies, and substitute funding with TEA -21 STPL or CMAQ Reauthorization funds; 2) Approve TEA -21 Reauthorization STPL or CMAQ funds for STIP Discretionary projects already funded with local funds allowing the lead agencies to substitute a project for the same amount as the former STIP project; 3) Approve reprogramming Discretionary projects programmed beyond 2004/05 with TEA -21 STPL or CMAQ, if available, when project is within a year of the construction start date; 4) Approve a $15 million set aside of TEA -21 Reauthorization STP funds for a Rehabilitation Call for Projects; and 5) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As reported at the December 10, 2003 Commission meeting, the 2004 STIP Fund Estimate provides only $2.3 million of new funding capacity for Riverside County. The 2004 STIP will include the carryover of 2002 STIP projects and requires re - spreading them into fiscal years 2004/05 through 2008/09. The 2004 STIP specifies how much we can program per fiscal year. The following is a comparison of the 2004 STIP programming "targets" per year versus 2002 STIP current programming levels: 1 (000's) 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 -- Total $95,091 2002 STIP $42,917 $30,191 $21,983 -- 2004 STIP $ 3,538 $34,225 i $28,953 $28,375 $2,340 $97,431 The vast majority of projects in fiscal years 2002/03 and 2003/04 were not allocated and are reflected under the 2002 STIP fiscal year 2004/05 column. The re -spreading would delay projects by approximately three years. The 2008/09 column represents our new capacity in the 2004 STIP. Programming Recommendations for STIP Discretionary Projects RCTC Staff and the Technical Advisory Committee are recommending that projects currently programmed in the 2002 STIP in fiscal years 2002/03 through 2004/05 be removed from the STIP, with the consent of the lead agency, and reprogrammed with TEA -21 Reauthorization Surface Transportation Program (STP) or Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funds (CMAQ), if applicable. It is uncertain when reauthorization of TEA -21 would occur. It is estimated that it could occur in Summer 2004 or after the November 2004 elections. Nonetheless, the benefits of TEA -21 Reauthorization funds are as follows: • Availability of this funding is highly likely to occur before STIP allocations • TEA -21 funds have less steps involved to obligate funds • Fewer time restrictions placed on the lead agency • Greater flexibility for amendments since the CTC is not directly involved Removing discretionary projects programmed in 2002/03 through 2004/05 will also enable those projects currently programmed in 2005/06 and 2006/07 to remain in these fiscal years in the 2004 STIP since they are within our programming target. Projects Recommended for Reprogramming with TEA -21 Reauthorization Funds: Agency Project Fundin Corona ATMS $ 1,989,792 Corona Lincoln Ave $ 671,000 Palm Springs _ Indian Canyon Dr widen. $ 2,198,826 Palm Springs Gene Autry RR Bridge $ 1,842,000 Riverside County Limonite Ave Widening $ 3,157,560 Riverside County Valley Wy/Armstrong widen. $ 1,564,000 Caltrans/RCTC/County Rt 79, Keller to Domenigoni $16,857,000 *Riverside County Van Buren Blvd Medians $ 1,323,000 *Temecula Butterfield Stage Rd. $ 2,720,000 2 *PalmDesert/Rancho Mirage **Corona Monterey Ave widening 1-15 Magnolia IC improve. $ 2,124, 914 $ 6,418,000 Total $40,866,092 *Projects that are being funded with local funds. Agencies will submit substitute projects for TEA - 21 funding. **Project currently programmed in 2006/07. However, this project will be ready for construction in Fall 2004. Projects Remaining in 2004 STIP: Aaenc Project Funding Current Program Year Riverside Van Buren Blvd widen. $ 3,465,000 2005/06, 2006/07 Riverside County Miles Ave/Clinton widen. $ 2,040,000 2005/06 Coachella Dillon Rd Grade $ 4,559,000 2006/07 Separation _ Coachella Dillon Rd widening $ 2,1 17,000 2005/06 Moreno Valley Perris Blvd. improvements $ 3,184,000 2005/06 Moreno Valley Reche Vista $ 1,967,000 2005/06 Realignment Murrieta 1-15 Calif. Oaks IC $ 7,366,000 2005/06, 2006/07 Total $24,698,000 The funding years in the 2004 STIP may change as a result of final recommendations for the 2004 STIP that will be submitted to the CTC and Caltrans on April 12, 2004. If the above recommendations are approved, the freed up capacity would be reprogrammed at the discretion of the Commission. If any of the above projects are eligible for Western County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program funds, consideration may be given to reprogram the projects with TUMF funds at a later time. Programming Recommendations for STIP Formula Projects Per the Intra-county STIP Formula, projects are selected and administered as follows: Agency Subregion CVAG Coachella Valley Palo Verde/County Palo Verde Valley Western County RCTC 3 The current 2002 STIP Formula projects are: Agency Project Fundin Caltrans/County Ramon Rd IC $22,000,000 Cathedral City Ramon Road Improv. $ 1,385,000 Desert Hot Springs Pierson Road Improv. $ 627,000 *Indio 1-10 Jefferson IC $10,710,000 *Palm Springs 1-10 Indian Ave IC $15,262,000 *Riverside County De Frain Blvd Improv. $ 810,000 Total $ 50,794,000 *Approved for 2002 STIP funds but not programmed in the 2002 STIP due to the state budget deficit. The above agencies will be reviewing current STIP Formula projects as they develop the 2004 STIP submittal, which is due in March 2004. They will have the option to consider alternative funding for Formula projects or maintain them in the 2004 STIP. For example, the City of Blythe decided to proceed with their STIP Formula project on Hobsonway using local funds since their allocation request was not granted by the CTC and was placed on the allocation pending list. The city has nominated another project for inclusion in the 2004 STIP. TEA 21 Reauthorization STP Call for Projects for Rehabilitation Projects At the September TAC meeting, TAC members stressed the need for funding rehabilitation projects with TEA -21 Reauthorization STP funds specifically for rehabilitation projects. Of issue is the fact that Proposition 42 funds are not scheduled to be available until fiscal year 2008/09. Staff reviewed past funding levels for rehabilitation projects using STP funds, which was $5.4 million annually with $1.2 million directed to the County for under 5,000 population areas based on pre-ISTEA funding levels. In an effort to sustain system preservation, staff is recommending a call for projects in the amount of $15 million to cover three fiscal years, 2004/05 through 2006/07. This recommendation was also approved by the TAC at their November 2003 meeting. Timing of the call for projects along with evaluation criteria will be reviewed and discussed with the TAC. Impact of Recommendations on TEA- 21 Reauthorization Estimated Funding Using current (fiscal 2002/03) apportionment levels as a basis for the next transportation bill, we estimate that $13.6 million a year would be available in STPL funds totaling $81.6 million over six years (2003/04 through 2008/09) and 4 $14.5 annually in CMAQ funds distributed to the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) totaling $87 million over the six year act. TEA -21 Reauthorization Funding Levels and Committed Funding Proposed Funding Alternative (000's) Future STPL Future CMAQ South Coast Air Basin Future CMAQ Salton Sea Air Basin Six Year TEA -21 Reauthorization Estimate $ 81.6 $ 87 $23.9 *SR 60 HOV - $(21) -- STIP $ (38.8) $ ( 2) **Corona ATMS -- Rehab Call for Projects $ (15.0) - -- Balance Remaining $ 27.8 $ 64 $23.9 *Commission approved on October 8, 2003. * *Commission approved on December 10, 2003. The remaining STPL and CMAQ balances will be programmed at the discretion of the Commission. It is proposed that these funds remain uncommitted as the Commission reviews funding needs of Measure "A" projects and other high priority projects in conjunction with the development of the 2004 STIP. 5 AGENDA ITEM 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 15, 2003 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Shirley Medina, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft 2004 Regional Transportation Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve staff comments on the Draft 2004 Regional Transportation Plan; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is responsible for developing the long range transportation plan covering the six -county region including Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties. Federal regulations require Regional Transportation Plans to be updated every three years. The current plan was adopted in 2001 and the 2004 RTP update is scheduled for adoption by the SCAG Regional Council in April 2004 with comments on the Draft due on January 16, 2004. The planning horizon for the 2004 RTP covers the years 2004 through 2030. The plan generally addresses three categories: 1) growth in population, employment and households; 2) preservation and expansion of the transportation infrastructure; 3) and funding to address transportation needs through 2030. The Draft 2004 Regional Transportation Plan was released in October 2003. Federal metropolitan planning regulations require RTP's to meet air quality conformity analysis. This analysis involves meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), a demonstration of financial constraint, and timely implementation of projects deemed air quality beneficial that are included in adopted air plans, also known as Transportation Control 6 Measures (TCMs). The above must be demonstrated in order to continue the flow of federal funds to the region. SCAG has determined that the Draft 2004 RTP meets the above conformity requirements. Numerous stakeholders have been involved in the development of the 2004 RTP update including the County Transportation Commissions, subregional agencies, transit operators, and local jurisdictions to name a few. RCTC staff has attended the various Task Force meetings over the three year development effort. The RTP includes projects in the current Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), identified as Baseline and Tier II projects, in addition to planned projects beyond the RTIP to the year 2030. Projects were submitted by RCTC including the Measure "A" Extension, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) programs, Alameda East Grade Separation Study, and long range transit plans. It should be noted that Riverside County has the second to the highest funding ($8.7 billion) available for 2004 RTP investments, with Los Angeles County having the highest amount ($12 billion). This is due to the inclusion of the Measure "A" Extension and adopted TUMF Programs in both the Coachella Valley and Western County subregions. Comments on the Draft RTP are divided into the categories in which RCTC is involved. Other areas such as Growth Forecasts and Aviation will be coordinated with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), and March JPA. SCAG released the Growth Forecast Appendix on December 8, 2003. Staff will work with CVAG and WRCOG and provide comments regarding the growth forecast at the January 14, 2004 RCTC meeting. The following are our comments to date on the 2004 RTP Update. These comments cover general areas. Minor comments suggesting language clarification and/or regarding corrections and clarifications to tables and exhibits are not included below, but will be provided to SCAG at the end of the public comment period. Operation Jumpstart — RCTC supports the removal of references to Operation Jumpstart (package of projects proposed for federal demonstration funds for pre - construction activities including MAGLEV, Grade Separations, Truck Lanes) as was approved by SCAG at their December 4, 2003 meeting. 7 High Occupancy Toll Lanes — CETAP Inter -county Corridors should not be referenced as High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. Identifying them as "Potential" HOT lanes is acceptable. Public Transportation System — Reference is made to "re -structuring service to ensure efficient utilization of available capacity". This needs to be expanded upon as to what re -structuring means and how it would be applied given the variations of transit service throughout the SCAG region. We need to make sure the RTP does not hold all counties to the same levels of "re -structuring" since each county is unique and has varied performance thresholds. Land Use - Transit Coordination/Other Transit Recommendations — This section, albeit beneficial for transit, does not have any mechanism in place to enforce many of the statements. We agree that the RTP should highlight the importance of linking land use and transit coordination, however, blanket statements that are not enforceable or applicable throughout the SCAG region should not be included so that the public is not misled. Transportation Demand Management — The general discussion under "Transportation Demand Management" Tacks definition of the various strategies that fall under this category. It is important that this section also identify who the formal and informal players (public and private sector agencies) are that participate in the TDM arena and what roles they play. The RTP does NOT take credit for their investments which in some cases is substantial. As the TDM section reads now, the onus is on the CTC's alone to provide TDM investments. We do not concur with the goals/recommendations in this section (e.g. 8,000 new carpools annually, increasing vanpools from 1,400 to 5,000) as the reality of achieving them is highly unlikely. The goals must be measurable and we do not believe that these goals can be measured. RCTC does not agree with programming local funds for our Commuter Assistance Program in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) as these funds are primarily local sales tax dollars and are not otherwise required to be included in the RTIP. 8 Further, the importance of Rule 2202 should be identified as a critical element of the region's TDM efforts since it has a large influence on its' regulated employers and accounts for a significant amount of investment made by employers, public and private. Aviation — As mentioned previously, RCTC staff will be meeting with March JPA on December 16th. The outcome of the meeting will be reflected in the final comments on the RCTC January Commission agenda. Additional comments will be incorporated will be provided to the Plans and Programs Committee/Commission as they become available. 9 AGENDA ITEM 7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 15, 2003 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Stephanie Wiggins, Rail Department Manager THROUGH: Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Presentation: Draft SCRRA Fare Policy Proposal STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive and file the presentation on the status of the draft SCRRA fare policy proposal; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: First established over 10 years ago, Metrolink fares today are primarily based on 1 1 -mile zones. Unfortunately, pricing inconsistencies have emerged as the system has expanded. Riverside County was recently impacted by the fare consistency issue with the opening of the North Main Corona (NMC) Station. As a result of requests from Riverside County riders, the Commission requested that Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) modify/discount the fare zone of the NMC Station so that the fares would be equivalent to the West Corona Station, located 3 miles west. The request was granted however, SCRRA indicated that a systemwide review of the fare policy would take place. Over the last nine months, the SCRRA has reviewed the current fare structure in anticipation of a new fare restructuring policy. Among the key elements for the restructuring are the impact to Riverside County riders, including ease of use, and outreach and education of incentive programs. Elizabeth Mahoney, SCRRA Market Development Administrator, will present the preliminary results of analyses options available to address current fare structure inconsistencies. 10 AGENDA ITEM 8 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION DATE: December 15, 2003 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager THROUGH: Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Development Policy SUBJECT: Allocation of Local Transportation Funds to SunLine Agency Transit STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Approve a one-time allocation of $300,000 in Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to SunLine Transit Agency to cover increased operating costs; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the June 11, 2003 Commission meeting, SunLine Transit Agency's (SunLine) FY 2003/04 Short Range Transit Plan was placed on hold pending the outcome of the internal audit currently being conducted. At that time, it was decided to provide funding to SunLine based on FY 2002/03 funding levels. However, due to increased costs in liability premiums, insurance claims, increased worker's compensation costs and health care premiums as well as some minor service adjustments to its transit operations, SunLine is requesting a one-time allocation of $300,000 in LTF funds over and above the FY 2002/03 funding level. In January, 2004 SunLine will implement a union agreement that was reached in FY 1999/00 which guarantees a six minute per hour layover (rest break) to its drivers. Approximately $100,000 is needed to cover the increased insurance costs and $200,000 is required to cover the costs of the transit service adjustments through April, 2004. SunLine staff projects that by that date, they will receive their FY 2002/03 Section 5311 operating funds to cover operating costs for May and June. There is adequate LTF funding available to cover the cost of this increase. The request for additional funding was approved by SunLine's Board of Directors at its December 3, 2003, meeting. 11 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: 200 3/04 Amount: $300,000 Source of Funds: Local Transportation Funds Budget Adjustment: No as funds are on deposit at the County of Riverside GLA No.: 601-62-86101 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ioxne25-.' Date: 12/8/03 12 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: December 15, 2003 TO: Plans and Programs Committee FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager Cathy Bechtel, Director of Transportation Planning and Policy Development THROUGH: SUBJECT: FY 2002/03 Transit Operators' Report STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Committee to: 1) Receive the FY 2002/03 Transit Operators' Report; and 2) Forward to the Commission for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Under Public Utility Code Section 99244, the Commission must annually identify, analyze, and recommend potential productivity improvements, which could lower the cost of transit operations. Part of that process includes the review of ridership data from the public operators. The attached report represents county -wide public transportation ridership, operating and financial information for FY 2002/03 for the eight public operators. As part of the Triennial Performance Audit, a Transit Operator Performance Improvement Program (PIP) was developed and includes the following eight performance indicators: 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 - percentage increase consistent with population growth or national average, whichever is greater; and 8) Passengers per Revenue Mile - percentage 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 2002/03, transit operators have prepared their SRTP's to meet a minimum of three of the remaining six performance indicators. 13 It is anticipated that two transit operators, the City of Beaumont and Riverside Transit Agency will not meet the state mandated fare box recovery ratio for FY 2002/03. Commission staff will provide additional information on actual fare box performance after completion of the FY 2002/03 financial audits. As outlined in the PIP, ridership reports are presented to the Commission a minimum of twice a year. Attachment 1 provides data and performance statistics for all eight of the public operators for the period July 1 through June 30, 2003. 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 as "Not Available" or "Not Applicable." The following table provides summary data on ridership and operating costs per operator: FY 2002/03 Summary of Ridership and Operating Costs July 1, 2002 - June 30, 2003 Operator Fixed Route Unlinked Passenger Trips Fixed Route Operating Costs per Hour Paratransit Unlinked Passenger Trips Paratransit Operating Costs per Hour Banning 213,015 $63.58 9,168 $44.18 Beaumont 66,836 _ $47.06 30,854 $51.18 Corona 102,687 $39.59 67,469 $40.59 Commuter Rail 2,248,269 Not Available* Not Applicable Not Applicable Riverside Special Services Not Applicable Not Applicable 160,472 $46.86 PVVTA 8,613 $26.07 21,472 _ $45.92 RTA _ 5,930,973 $73.91 218,399 $40.08 SunLine 3,448,011 $93.95 104,525 $56.94 Total/Average 12,018,404 (total trips) $57.36 (average cost) 612,359 (total trips) $46.54 (average cost) The total number of public transportation trips provided by fixed route (bus and rail) and paratransit for FY 2002/03 was 12,630,763. Operating cost per revenue hour for fixed route service (excludes the cost of commuter rail*) averaged $57.36 per hour. Operating costs ranged from a low of $26.07 (Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency) to a high of $93.95 (SunLine). Operating cost per revenue hour for paratransit services averaged $46.54. Costs ranged from a low of $40.08 (RTA) to a high of $56.94 (SunLine). Triennial Performance Audits for FY 2001 through FY 2003 are currently being conducted. Once completed, it is anticipated that a more in-depth ridership analysis will be provided to the Commission for review. *Operating costs per revenue hour information is not an appropriate performance indicator for the Commuter Rail program. Expenses incurred by Commuter Rail are driven by "train miles" or "hours of service" by the train crews, not by vehicle hours. During FY 2002/03, the average operating cost per train mile was $ 18.09. Attachment: Excel Spreadsheet - Data and Performance Statistics 15 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT Attachment 1 FY 2002/03 FIXED ROUTE - ANNUAL ACTUALS J uly, 2002 through June, 2003 Data Elements - System Wide Total City of Banning Transit City of Beaumont Transit City of Corona Transit Commuter Rail - Riverside Line Commuter Rail - IE0C Line Commuter Rail - 91 Line Palo Verde Valley Transit Riverside Transit Agency SunLine Transit Agency Total - All Pro viders UnllnktrdPassenger Trips 213,015 66.836 102,687 1,001,680 795.511 391,078 8.613 5,930,973 3,448,011 12,018,404 Passenger Miles -- - 334,340 41,006,501 25,675,405 12,842,656 29,224 33,688,029 24,996.575 138,570,730 Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Hours 10,502 8,112 14,871 19,362 16,905 11,327 2,695 311,758 147 .082 542,614 To tal Actual Vehicle Revenue M iles 151,916 106,281 185,139 178,741 199 .803 141,057 48,061 4 ,784,265 2,272,529 8,067.732 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 156,420 -- 242,278 - - - 46,778 5,274,200 2,335,585 8,017,261 Collision s 0 - 1 -- -- - -- 15 4 20 Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures 61 -- 16 -- -- - - 886 232 1,195 Total Valid Passenger Complaints 17 •- 6 - -- -- -- 549 390 962 Total Re venue Vehicle Trips Scheduled 82,530 -- 10,834 - -• -- 4.532 282,367 158,821 548,784 Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips 49.921 -- 9.340 - -- -- 4.532 260,061 149,693 473,547 Total Operating Expenses $667,682 $381,770 $588,787 $10,836,700 $7,962,700 $1,896,200 570,247 $.23,043,205 $13,817.,783 359,265.074 Total Passenger Fare Revenues $96,936 $21,223 $57,017 $5,640,072 $4,163,583 $1,490,633 $5,661 34,427,672 $2,602,137 $18,504,934 Nat Operating Expenses {Subsldies} 6570,746 $360,547 5531,770 $5,196,628 33,799.117 5405.587 564.586 $18.615,533 $11.215,646 640,760 ,140 Performance Statistics - System Wide Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $63.58 447,06 539.59 $559.69 5-471.03 5167,41 $26,07 573.91 893.55 Fare box Recovery Ratio 14. 52% 5 .56 % 9.68 % 52 .00 % 52.30% 78 .50% 8.06% 19 .21% 18 .83' % Subsidy per Passenger $2.68 55 .39 65,18 $4.89 54,78 $1.04 37.50 33.14 $.3.25 Subsidy per Passenger Mile - -- $1.59 $0.13 60.15 60 .03 $7.50 $0.55 $0.45 Subsidy per Revenue Hour $54. 35 $44.45 335.76 -- - -- $23.97 $59.71 $75.25 Subsidy per Revenue Mile $3.76 $3.39 $2.87 - -- -- -. 33.69 $4 .94 Passengers per Revenue Hour 20. 28 8.24 6.91 29.07 19.01 2.88 3 .20 19.02 23,44 Passengers per Revenue Miles 1,40 0.63 4.55 -- -- -- -- 1.24 1.52 Revenue Miles Between Collisions 151,396 - 185,139 - -- -- -- 318.947 568.132 % Trips On -Time - -- 86 .21 % 94.00 % 91.00 % 92 .00 % -- 92.20% 94.2553 Complaints per 1,000 Passengers 0.01% -- 9.01 % - - -- -- 0.01% 0.01 5' Total Miles Between Road calls 2,5E4 -• 11,571 -- - -- -- 5.953 10,067 1' 39:29 AM RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSIT OPERATOR RIDERSHIP REPORT FY 2002/03 ADA/PARATRANSIT - ANNUAL ACTUALS July, 2002 through June, 2003 Data Elements - System Wide T otal City of Banning Transit City of Beaumont Transit City of Corona Transit City of Riverside Specialized Transit Palo Verde Valley Transit Riverside Transit Agency SunLine Transit Agency Total - All Providers Unlinked Passenger Trips 9,168 30,854 67,469 160,472 21,472 218,399 104,525 612,359 Passenger Miles - 290,002 679,127 10,475 2,190,542 2,210,617 5,380,763 Total Actual Vehicles Revenue Hours 2,050 6,464 13,949 38,741 5,999 109,898 46,978 224,079 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 35,955 75,037 220,158 665,783 37,759 2,008,435 821,799 3,864,926 Total Actual Vehicle Mlles 37,951 238,198 675,704 46,108 2,008,435 928,891 3,935,287 Collisions 0 1 2, -- 2 0 5 Total Revenue Vehicle System Failures 6 5 33 -- 99 48 191 Total Valid Passenger Complaints 3 -- 17 0 -- 71 189 2801 Total Revenue Vehicle Trips Scheduled 8,480 37,602 167,515 10,858 217,004 96,737 538,1961 Total Actual On -Time Revenue Vehicle Trips 8,396 32,608 160,405 9,815 202,894 89,643 503,7611 Total Operating Expenses $90,559 $330,831 $566,135 $1,815,492 $275,502 $4,404,828 $2,674,776 $10,158,123 Total Passenger Fare Revenues $7,425 $30,242 $85,305 $169,964 $28,337 $156,473 $248,487 $726,233 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $83.134 $300,589 $480,830 $1,645,528 $247,165 $4.248.355 $2,426.289 $9,431,890 Performance Statistics - System With Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $44.18 $51 .18 $40 .59 $46.86 $45 .92 $40.08 $56.94 Firebox Recovery Ratio 8.20% 9.14% 15.07% 9 .36% 10.29% 3.55% 9.29% Subsidy per Passenger $9.07 $9.74 $7.13 $10.25 $11.51 $19.45 $23.21 Subsidy per Passenger Mile -- -- $1.66 $2.42 $1.94 $1,10 Subsidy per Revenue Hour $40. 55 $46.50 $34 .47 $42.48 $41.20 $38.66 $51.65 Subsidy per Revenue Mile $2.31 $4.01 $2,18 $2.47 -- $2 .12 $2.95 Passengers per Revenue Hour 4.47 4.77 4.84 4.14 3.58 1.99 2.22 Passengers per Revenue Miles 0.25 0.41 0.31 0.24 - 0.11 0.13 Revenue Miles Between Collisions 35,955 - 220,158 332,892 1,004,218 821,799 % Trips On -Time 98.00% - 86.72% 95.76% 93 .50% 92.67% Complaints per 1,000 Passengers 0. 03% --i 0.03 % 0 .00% 0.03% 0.18% ,Total Miles Between Road calls _ 33,369 --I 44.032 20,175 20,287 19,352 12/8/20039:29 AM