HomeMy Public PortalAbout10 October 25, 1999 Plans and ProgramsRIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TI(
•
•
•
Records
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMN11 1 1 CC
AGENDA
TIME: 12:00 P.M.
DATE: Monday, October 25, 1999
LOCATION: Riverside County Transportation Commission Office
3560 University Avenue, Conference Room A
Riverside, CA 92501
q7397
Plans and Programs Committee Members
Roy Wilson / County of Riverside, Chairman
Robin ReeserLowe / City of Hemet, Vice Chair
Jan Leja / City of Beaumont
Robert Crain / City of Blythe
John Chlebnik / City of Calimesa
Eugene Bourbonnais / City of Canyon Lake
Doug Sherman / City of Desert Hot Springs
Percy Byrd / City of Indian Wells
Chris Silva / City of Indio
Frank Hall / City of Norco
Dick Kelly / City of Palm Desert
Will Kleindienst / City of Palm Springs
Al Landers / City of Perris
Bob Buster / County of Riverside
Eric Haley, Executive Director
Hideo Sugita, Director - Planning and Programming
Plans and Programs Committee
State Transportation Improvement Program
Regional Transportation Improvement Program
New Corridors
Intermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare)
Air Quality and Clean Fuels
Regional Agencies/Regional Planning
Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs
Congestion Management Program
Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please
complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Board.
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
MEETING LOCATION
3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 100, RIVERSIDE 92501
CONFERENCE ROOM A
PARKING IS AVAILABLE IN THE PARKING GARAGE
ACROSS FROM THE POST OFF/CE ON ORANGE STREET
MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1999
12:00 P.M.
•
•
AGENDA*
* Action may be taken on any items listed on the agenda.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (September 27, 1999)
Pg. 1
4. FOUR CORNERS TRANSPORTATION STUDY PROPOSED
RECOMMENDATIONS
Pg. 5
Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee
recommend that the Commission review and discuss the proposed
recommendations resulting from the Four Corners Transportation
Study efforts and consider taking action regarding the
recommendations including approving, receiving and filing, or
2
disapproving the recommendations to provide policy guidance to
staff and Commissioners representing the Commission on the Four
Corners Committees.
5. FY 1999/00 SECTION 5310 ALLOCATIONS
Pg. 31
Staff recommends that the Plans and Programs Committee
recommend that the Commission include the FY99/00 Section 5310
projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan.
6. FAMILY SERVICES ASSOCIATION OF WESTERN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY - REQUEST FOR MEASURE A WESTERN COUNTY
SPECIALIZED TRANSIT CAPITAL MATCHING FUNDS
Pg. 34
This request is in compliance with the RCTC adopted policies for the
Measure A Specialized Transit Program and a specific budget for
Section 5310 matching funds has been identified in the RCTC
program budget. There are adequate funds available and staff
recommends approval of this request.
7. RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
Pg. 36
The most recent rail operating reports and related materials are
provided as a side packet at Committee meetings. Staff will be
prepared to discuss these materials at the Committee's direction.
8. ADJOURNMENT
•
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 3
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
•
•
•
PLANS & PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
September 27, 1999
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Plans and Programs Committee was called to order by Chairman Roy Wilson at
12:04 p.m., at the offices of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, 3560 University,
Suite 100, Riverside, California, 92501.
Members Present: Members Absent:
Eugene Bourbonnais
Bob Buster
John Chlebnik
Frank Hall
Dick Kelly
Jan Leja
Robin ReeserLowe *
Chris Silva
Doug Sherman
Roy Wilson
Percy Byrd
Robert Crain
William Kleindienst
Al Landers
Arrived after start of meeting.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no comments from the public at this time.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (August 23, 1999)
M/SIC (Kelly/Silva) approve the minutes dated August 23, 1999 as submitted.
4. CETAP VISION PROCESS
Mel Placilla, Sverdrup, reported that there are 11 workshops scheduled over the next couple of
weeks throughout the County. The purpose of the workshops is share ideas. The vision ideas have
come from the stakeholders, the public and echoed the opinions shared in the poll that was recently
completed. It is important that this process is citizen and stakeholder driven. It needs to recognize
the diversity of the County. The plan should adjust to fit the future. The vision ideas include the
need to protect the high value environmental resources while also honoring private property rights.
By working closely with the cities it will enable a balanced transportation system with a series of
choices for people in the County as opposed to being predominated by a single mode. As a result
of the Integrated Plan communities will maintain their distinctive character, this was brought
forward as an important issue. People do not view themselves as living in Riverside County, but
as living in a particular area. New communities should serve as a model in terms of the quality and
efficiency that they are designed with to provide choices to people in terms of jobs located closer
to housing. Transportation corridors should unify communities rather than cut them in half, they
should provide connectivity within the communities as well as in the region.
.)r)0001
002
Plans and Programs Committee Meeting Minutes
September 27, 1999
Page 2
The integrated plan needs to encourage denser development and prevent sprawl, preserve corridors
as we move forward, provide a range of community design options, focus on high quality efficient
growth and develop a system of green belts and preserves. During the process 12 items came up
that will be discussed at the upcoming meetings. Those items include:
• Population growth and how it will affect the residents of the County.
• Community and neighborhood structure.
• Housing and how that should work in relation to the community, neighborhood
structure, housing and jobs.
• Transportation and defining the types of modes that they would like to see.
• Conservation, how we go about that, how it is paid for and how it coordinates with
all of the other issues.
• Air quality and how this part of the region can serve as a laboratory for testing and
encourage the rest of the region to deal with air quality issues.
• Jobs and the economy and how that works together in terms of the overall
community structure.
• Agricultural lands and focusing on smaller land areas that use less water and are
more high tech.
• Educational facilities and how they play a part in the community by developing
partnerships to prepare students for future jobs and the economy.
• How to integrate this plan to make sure that it works hand -in -hand.
Financial realities and what people feel should be done in terms of the program.
• Intergovernmental cooperation and sustaining this through an ongoing effort.
M/S/C (Chlebnik/Bourbonnais) receive and file the CETAP Vision Process report.
5. COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION ACCEPTABILITY PROCESS (CETAP) -
WORKING PAPER #1 OVERVIEW OF CANDIDATE CORRIDORS #2 DRAFT CORRIDOR
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Steve Smith of Transcore, RCIP (Riverside County Integrated Plan) Team Member, explained that
the CETAP Committee is moving at a rapid pace. Working paper #1 identifies 15 perspective
corridors; their definition of a corridor is an origin and destination point that people and goods travel
between. He then reviewed the information in the agenda packet that include maps and a text
overview of each corridor. He explained that when the first phase is completed, sometime around
the end of December, there will be a more detailed analysis phase on a selected number of those
corridors. There will then be a year and half of more intensive analysis of each of those promising
corridors and this would conclude a draft Environmental Impact Report that would be suitable for
Tier One evaluation. At their last meeting the CETAP Committee discussed additional transportation
alternatives that could be made available in those corridors identified to date.
Working paper #2 is the basis for making decisions on which corridors would be moved forward.
They are also looking at land use scenarios that would be investigated to determine the impact of
different alternatives of projecting land use into the future and its potential implication on the
transportation system. He added that they are continually looking for input and suggestions. The
criteria is being coordinated with the SCAG performance indicators that have been developed.
The following points were made during the deliberation of this item:
♦ Commissioner Bob Buster expressed concern that the location of a corridor between
Riverside and Orange County is not specified.
Plans and Programs Committee Meeting Minutes
September 27, 1999
Page 3
♦ Commissioner Dick Kelly requested consideration of a corridor between the Coachella Valley
and the High Desert Yucca Valley area. This community has been expanding and will
continue to grow in the future and should be considered in this program.
♦ Vice -Chair Robin ReeserLowe stated that this corridor was discussed at the last meeting of
the committee because it would be an alternative to the congestion through the pass on I-
15 North. Considerations regarding Camp Pendleton and the environment, in the addition
to the governmental restrain placed on any corridor to Orange County, were also discussed.
♦ Corky Larson, Executive Director Coachella Valley Association of Governments, requested
consideration of a corridor that would go through Blythe and off through the desert. When
using the criteria this area would fall off the list because it does not have that kind of
population or economic viability, but if you talk about routing trucks and autos out of a
congested area, it is certainly something that we should at least keep on the SCAG horizon.
♦ Eric Haley, Executive Director, stated that in conjunction with this process, several other
studies are dovetailing this same time frame. One of which was wrapped up several
months ago and that was the 71/91 Study that discussed a series of improvements and
inter -freeway connections at the 71/91 Interchange. That study, the SCAG Four -Corners
Study and a Congestion Pricing Study that also involves SCAG, UCR and the Commission,
are all looking intensively at the 91 corridor. These studies are not redundant, they are
nicely connected and we are essentially at the point of passing over the conclusions of all
three of those efforts into the CETAP process. There will also be an artificial constraint by
next April, if AB 1 155 is signed by the Governor, we will have to have a spending plan in
place which will anticipate some of these corridors financing options. He added that our
time frame, if we adhere to state requirements, is in the seven -month arena thus the need
for realistic options.
M/S/C (Chlebnik/Bourbonnais) receive and file this report on the Community Environmental
Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP).
6. POSSIBLE EXCHANGE OF FUNDS WITH SCAG FOR THE MAGLEV HIGHSPEED RAIL STUDY
M/S/C (ReeserLowe/Hall) recommend that the Commission approve an administrative action
to exchange up to $700,000 of SB 45 2% Planning, Programming and Monitoring funds,
on a dollar for dollar basis, with SCAG for FHWA Planning funds with the following
conditions:
• That the Commission require SCAG and Caltrans to provide the Commission
approval of the agreement which facilitates the access to FHWA Planning funds to
support CETAP either prior to or simultaneous with the transfer of availability of
Commission 2% Planning, Programming and Monitoring funds, retroactive to July
1, 1999.
• That the Commission authorize staff to amend the Activity Program for the SB 45
2% Planning, Programming and Monitoring funds to facilitate this action.
• That this action is administrative and does not change the Commission's neutral
position on high speed rail technology.
Plans and Programs Committee Meeting Minutes
September 27, 1999
Page 4
7. ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATIONS TO CVAG AND WRCOG •
M/S/C (Kelly/ReeserLowe) recommend Commission approval of Local Transportation Fund
allocation of $168,609 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments and $350,000
to the Western Riverside Council of Governments to support transportation planning
programs and functions as identified in the attached work programs.
8. FY 2000-2006 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FOR THE PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY
M/S/C (Leja/Sherman) recommend that the Commission approve the fiscal year 2000-2006
Short Range Transit Plan for the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency as submitted.
9. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ALLOCATIONS FOR PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY
AND THE CITY OF CORONA.
M/S/C (Kelly/Silva) recommend that the Commission approve the FY 1999-2000 LTF
Allocations for Transit in Riverside County as shown on the attached table.
10. FY 1999-2000 STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE ALLOCATION AND RESOLUTION NO. 99-012 "A
RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO ALLOCATE
STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUNDS"
M/S/C (Hall/Chlebnik) recommend that the Commission approve the FY 1999-2000 State
Transit Assistance Fund allocations on the attached table and adopt Resolution No. 99-012.
11. RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
Eric Haley announced there will be meeting during the first week of October with representatives
from SCRRA, RCTC and Union Pacific to discuss the poor on -time service between here and Orange
County. Staff is also continuing to discuss with SCRRA the early implementation of mid -day service
between Irvine and Riverside and they hope to get this implemented by early fall of next year.
M/S/C (Kelly/Sherman) receive and file the Rail Program Update and forward to the
Commission.
12. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Plans and Programs Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:58 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Traci R. McGinley
Deputy Clerk of the Commissi
•
•
r)rl
•
• AGENDA ITEM 4
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISS/ON
DATE:
October 25, 1999
TO:
Plans and Program Committee
FROM:
Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Issues and Communications
THROUGH:
Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming
SUBJECT:
Four Corners Transportation Study Proposed Recommendations
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Commission review and discuss the proposed recommendations resulting
from the Four Corners Transportation Study efforts and consider taking action
regarding the recommendations including approving, receiving and filing, or
disapproving the recommendations to provide policy guidance to staff and
Commissioners representing the Commission on the Four Corners Committees.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Over two years ago, various city and county representatives informally met to discuss
transportation issues within an area bounded by SR 60 on the north, SR 91 on the
south, SR 57 on the west and 1-15 on the east. The name reflects the fact that the
area includes portions of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties.
The Four Corners discussions evolved into a formal transportation study effort funded
by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Orange County
Transportation Authority staff provides support services to both the Policy and
Technical Advisory Committees.
The study efforts acknowledge the significant congestion problems in the Four Corners
area given the peak period commute patterns of residents from the Inland Empire who
travel to work in Orange and Los Angeles Counties, which typifies the existing
jobs/housing imbalance. SCAG regional travel demand forecasts highlight that today's
congestion conditions will only be exacerbated to a point where volume demand
exceeds freeway capacity and creates nearly a 24 hour peak period demand sending
even larger volumes of traffic onto local streets and roads throughout the study area.
The Four Corners Statement of Need defines a number of objectives including: 1)
quantification of existing and future demand, traffic origin and destination patterns,
and current congestion conditions; 2) identification of physical, environmental, legal
and political constraints to possible improvement strategies; 3) establishment of a
multi -jurisdictional process that recognizes local issues and provides a forum for
consensus development of strategies; and 4) development of a comprehensive plan of
realistic strategies that relieve congestion on the study areas four major inter -county
1(lrinrl�
corridors and local streets and roads for inclusion in SCAG's Regional Transportation
Plan update.
To assist in the Four Corners effort, the firm of Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas
was hired to perform the analysis and modeling work required to define, quantify,
evaluate and recommend strategies as well as conduct and support local agency and
public input efforts. In addition, a separate consultant, JD Franz Research, conducted
a public opinion poll of over 650 residents within the study area and Riverside
residents east of the region. The poll was conducted to determine the: 1) extent of
congestion as an issue; 2) levels of support for proposed improvements; and 3)
acceptability of various impacts and funding sources.
Attached as Exhibit A are the proposed Four Corners strategy recommendations for
review, discussion and possible action by the Commission. The recommendations
were presented for action to the Four Corners Policy Committee on October 18th for
approval but action was deferred to allow agencies an opportunity to seek guidance
from their full bodies.
A representative of Parsons will be present at the Plans and Programs Committee
meeting to provide an overview of the recommendations and respond to questions.
The Commission may wish to consider the recommendations in context to the on-
going CETAP process and any potential conflicts that may evolve in priority and
funding commitments between the two processes given that the plan development
portion of the CETAP effort is not scheduled to be completed for another 18 months.
It should be noted that the study recommendations reflect public input received from
various open houses held in the study area including the Corona/Norco area. To
support the Cities of Corona and Norco in seeking public input, the Commission helped
to sponsor a Four Corners Open House on September 30, 1999 by creating and
purchasing newspaper ads (see Exhibit B) as well as providing staff assistance at the
event. Although a formal presentation of the findings is not planned during the Plans
and Programs Committee meeting, the results of the public opinion poll are included
(see Exhibit C) as supplemental data. The poll information was solicited to assist
policy makers in their assessment of the recommended strategies.
•
•
•
►��$)00t_i
ATTACHMENT A TO AGENDA ITEM 4
•
•
• •
New Roads
Expr ess Bus Services
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Add La nes
Upgrade to Fre eway
11 1 fl 1 II Add Toll Lanes
17 Lrl `J Convert HOV Lanes to Toll Lanes
Interchange Improvements
HOV Interchange
Toll Connecto r Ramps
Q
CD
60
Lo s Angeles County
Brea
210
Orange County
Carbon
57
90
Placentia
55
57
o•
71
142
a•
Ly
Yorba Linda
8L
Q
10
Ontario
Chino
11111111
Chino
Hills
°C
oG
91
r
itaa
Ave.
•
1
1
60
•
Sch eisrna n
1 Fs 1
fit
1 la 1
Cor ona
W 1 la
5
Ave.
San Bernardino County
Riverside C ounty
Arlington A ve.
t� HE
100
FOUR CORNERS STUDY
Reco mmen ded Improvemen ts (Preliminary)
Figure
1
FOUR CORNERS STUDY
TRAVEL SPEED COMPARISONS - REC OMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
A .M . PEAK PERIOD - PEAK DIRECTION SPEED ON FREEWAY MAINLINE
_
r
y
is
c
\\
n
• •
E
3
0
45000
40000
15000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
FOUR CORNERS STUDY
VOLUME COMPARISONS - RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
A .M . PEAK PERI OD - TOTAL PEAK DIRECTION VOLUME
SR -57 north of Lambert Rd
1997
2020 RECOMMENDE D JOBS/HOUSING
BASELINE ALTERNATIVE SENSITIVITY TEST
60000
50000
40000
E
30000
0
20000
10000
SR -91 east of SR -241 (ETC)
1997
2020 RECOMM ENDED JO BS/HOUSING
BASELINE ALTERNATIVE S EN SITIVITY TEST
70000
60000
50000
E 40000
> 30000
20000
10000
0
1997
SR-60/SR-57 west of Grand Ave
2020
BASELINE
RECOMMENDED
JOBS/HOUSING
ALTERNATIVE SENSITIVITY TEST
SR -91 west of 1-15
40000
35000
30000
25000
1997
2020
BASELINE
RECO MMEN DED
J OBS/IIOUS NG
ALTERNATIVE SE NSITIVITY TEST
Octob er 6, 1999
DRAFT - 10/4/99
F our Corners Pr op osed Strategy
Recommended by Four Corners Technical Advisory Committee
Cost $
(Millions)
Rationale/Benefit
rExoand E xisting Cornd or Capacity
Add New Comdors
Improve Oos/Fix Bottlenecks
Balance Syst em/Reroute
Manage Demand/Shift to Transit
Use Innovative Financing
Notes
SHORT- TERM ACTIONS (Before 2010)
Freeways,
State Highways, To ll Roads, Streets
SR -91
M odify Lakeview/91 interchange to improve weave from Lakeview
to westbo un d SR -91 to southbound SR -55.
8 .0
X
Improves or eliminates weave for southbound Lakeview
to westbou nd SR -91 to southbound SR -55 travel
SR -91
Optimize capacity utilization of Express Lanes:
Encourage carpo oling and achieve greater use through modified
loll structures, provision of intermediate access, and
accommodation of o ccasion al users.
TBD
X
x
x
It is assumed Express La nes are priced to maximize allowable
return on investment rather than optimize traffic thr oughput.
The pr op osed strategy would operate lanes to result in optimal
thr oughput. In order of preference: (1) Support sale of SR -91
Express Lanes to non-profit organization or (2) Pursue cong estion
relief partnerships/strategies with toll road fra nchis e owner.
SR -91
Add auxiliary lanes on WB SR -91 between the truck scales and
Imperial Highway; add storage lane on EB SR -91 approaching
truck scales.
1 .0
X
Improve safety/operations - pending review of franchis e
agreement
Transit/Support Facilities
Bus
Add M etrolink rail feeder bus service from Chino to Chino
9.0
X
Encourages transit ridership - mode shift
Bus
Develop express bus service from Industry Metrolink
station to activity centers in Orange Co unty via SR -57
16. 0
X
Encourages transit ridership - mode shift. Assumes three new
morning and three evening trips over 20 years
Park/Ride
Develop new park and ride facilities and increase capacity of
existing facilities to support existing and future demand.
10.0
X
Encourages transit ridership - m ode shift.
Stu dy
New
Ro ad
Conduct detailed design alignment study of a new road
connecting Chino Hills with SR -57 through the Tonner Canyon area
to identify if there is a feasible alignment which:
- provides a minimum 2 lanes in peak direction during peak hours
- provides access to SR -57 at Brea Cyn Rd or Tonner Cyn Rd
- co nnects to bo th Grand Avenue and Eucalyptus Avenue
- min imizes visual and no ise impacts on Diamo nd Bar residents
- avoids Boy Scout camp facilities and activity areas
- accommodates wildlife migration corriodor
- does not connect to Valencia Avenue
1. 0
X
x
Relieves Grand Avenue and Diamond Bar B oulevard
Provides option to Carb on Canyon Road, SR -71 and SR -91
•
•
•
•
•
Four Corners Pr oposed Strategy
Recommended by Four Corners Technical Advisory C ommittee
DRAFT - 10/4/99
C ost $
(Millio ns)
Rati onale/Benefit
Expana Existing Corridor Capacity
Add New Comdors
Improve OpsiFix Bottlenecks
Balance System/Reroute
N
c
;a
1—
o
r
L
w
E
N
E
0
0
0
co
c
i
Use Innovative Financing
Notes
New
Arterial
Conduct feasibility and impact study of a new arterial corridor
linking Pine Avenue, Schleisman Avenu e a nd Arlington .
0 .5
X
Alternate route to SR -91 through Cor ona
Pro grams/Policies
Marketing
TDM
Develop a focused marketing effort to encourage carp ooling,
vanpooling, and transit ridership in the Four Corners area.
TBD
X
Encourage use of modes other than single occupant vehicl es.
Co ordin ate/improve existing efforts to reduce peak period travel
demands and increase mode shifts to transit and carpooling.
N/A
X
C oordinate transp ortati on demand managem ent efforts.
FSP
Implement more Freeway Service Patrols on Four Corners
free ways.
11 .0
X
Ensure adequate c overage of all facilities as the peak period
spreads to mitigate accidents and delays . Assumes
five vehicles operating eight hours per day during we ekdays.
Estimated Cost of Short -Term Improvements
56.5
LO NG-TERM
ACTIONS (2010-2020)
Freeways, State Highways, Toll Roads, Streets
SR -57
Add two lanes on SR -57 from SR -60 to SR -22. If new road is
developed through To nn er Canyon area, new lanes could
terminate in the north where road connects with SR -57
307.0
X
X
x
x
x
x
x
Provides corridor capacity. May be high occupany toll lanes
which could be funded fully, or in part, through toll revenues.
SR -60/57
Upgrade interchange to increase capacity and reduce weaving
and merging.
250.0
x
Improves conditions at conflluence of tw o major freeways
- allows truck bypass facilities - removes bottlenecks
and wea ving and expands capacity through busy interchange
SR -60
Develop HO V ramps at Grand Avenue/SR-60
6.0
X
Complete in association with 60/57 upgrade reducing we ave for
HOVs accessing the freeway at Grand Avenue .
DRAFT - 10/4/99
F our C orners Prop osed Strategy
Recommended by Four Corners Technical Advis ory Committee
Cost $
(Millions)
Rationale/Benefit
Expand Existing Corridor Capacity
Add New C orridors
�:
0
a)
c
a)
0
m
x
ii
w
n
U
v
2
E
Balance System/Reroute
Manage Demand/Shift to Transit
Use Innovative Financing
Notes
SR -71
Upgrade SR -71 to six -lane freeway from SR -60 to 1-10
60 .0
x
X
x
Removes b ottleneck on SR -71 - adds cap acity and provides
access tot -10 via SR -71 - reroutes trips from SR -60 to 1-10
SR -71
Upgrade SR -71 to six -lane freeway from Euclid to SR -91 pr oviding
25.0
x•
X
Removes bottleneck on SR -71 in Riversid e C ounty
SR -71/91
Upgrade existing interchange at SR -71 and SR -91
65.0
X
Improves operations at SR-71/SR-91 - reduces queuing/hackup
on SR -91 and SR -71
SR -91
Extend Express Lanes to 1-15
TBD
X
x
x
x
Expands capacity in Riverside County - balances existing SR -91
12 -lane configuration to 1-15 - coordinate with franchise ow ner
SR -91
Add two toll lanes between SR -241 and SR -71
70.0
x
X
x
x
Adds c apacity at signficant "choke point" - facilitates future
toll to toll connections on SR -91 at SR -241 and SR -71
SR -91/71
Add toll connector ramps at SR-91/SR-71
60.0
X
x
All ows option to mainline SR -91 and SR -71 - offers commuters
commuters choice for travel time savings
SR -91/241
Add loll connector ramps at SR-91/SR-241 (in RTP)
90 .0
X
x
Allows opti on to SR -91 and SR -55 - congested corridors
offers commuters choice for travel time savings
New Road
Develop new road from Chino Hills to SR -57 pursuant to
180.0
X
Tonner Canyon region road
Eucalyptus
Avenue
Widen Eucalyptus Avenue if needed, pursuant to results
of detailed alignment study.
3. 0
X
x
Provides an alternative route to Carbon Canyon a nd SR -71, SR -91
Ne w Ro ad
Develop new road linking Arlington Avenue with SR -71 at Pine
93.0
X
Devel ops new east -west corridor parallel to SR -91
SR -83
Upgrade to six -lane arterial from SR -60 to SR -71
27.0
X
x
x
Provides more capacity and an option to SR -71
Transit/Support Facilities
Bus Develo p bus transit corridors i. e. from Chino to Ontario Airport
16.0
X
Encourages transit ridership - m od e shift
Programs/Policies
Other
Develop a package of incentives to increase emplo yment in the
Inland Empire and increase affordable housing in Los Angeles
and Orange Counties.
TBD
X
Encourage a more optimal jobs -housing balan ce to reduce
vehicle miles traveled.
Estimated Co st of Lon g -Term Improv emen ts
1,252. 0
•
•
•
•
•
•
F our C orners Prop osed Strategy
Recommended by Four Corners Technical Advisory Committee
DRAFT - 10/4/99
Rati onale/Be nefit
Cost $
(Milli ons)
E xpand Existing Corridor Capacity
Add New Corndors
Improve OosiFix Bottlenecks
Balance System/Rerout e
Manacle Demand/Shift to Transit
Jse Innovative Financing
Notes
_
_
_
Policy Recommendatio ns
Support strategies to improve increase
and Metrolink service including:
- more frequent M etrolink service
- additional co nnections at destinations
- do uble -tracking or triple -tracking M etrolink lines
- imple mentation of Riverside to Los Angeles Me trolink service
x
X
Encourage transit ridership with convenient service and
support facilities
Support greater invo lvement of the bu siness community in
transpo rtation planning.
X
Examine opportunities for p ublic - private partnerships
Support effo rts of state and local agencies to coopera tively
implemen t ITS strategies in a coordinated fashion
X
Optimize r oadway operations with enhanced tra veler
information, changeable message signs,
Work with SCAG to ensure demographic forecasts:
- are co mpatible with feasible transportation infrastructure
- reflect objectives to increase emplo yment in the Inland
Empire an d affordable housing in LA and O range counties.
X
etc.
Ensure realistic long-term travel demand f orecasts through
Four Corners area. RTP Growth Task Force is st udyi ng
soci oeconomic assumptions.
Support efforts of local agencies to co operatively implement signal
synchronization strategies in a coordinated fashion in the Four Corners area.
X
Optimize roadway operati ons
Support implementation of smart shuttles in the Four Co rners area in cases
where demonstrations show promise of effective transit service.
X
Encourage transit use
Support strategie s to encourage transit -oriented developmen t and mixed
use de velopment where practical and viable.
X
Encourage tra nsit use and a more optimal j obs -housing
balance
Support implementation of SR -91 auxiliary lanes between SR -241 and SR -71
X
Improve safety in the SR-241/SR-91/SR-71 area
Pending review of franchise agreement
Support arterial road improve ments such as street widenings, interchange
improvements, and signal synchronization programs.
X
Provide alternate routes al ong arterials and better access
to freeways
Support grade separation efforts to reduce delay at rail lines.
X
Eliminate conflict betw een street and rail lin es
Support development of high occupancy toll lanes as a means of speeding
up implementation of freeway improvements, managing demand,
encouraging carpooling and optimizing use of additional highway capacity.
X
x
x
Potential high occupancy toll lanes in Four Cor ners area
are on SR -57 from SR -60 to SR -22 and on SR -71 in Riversid e
County.
Work with county transportatio n commissions to update interco unty
bus plans and develop implementatio n strategies
X
x
Encourage high quality intercounty bus pla ns.
Encourage lo cal agencies to study and/o r update bike plans as related to
transit stations.
X
Examine the continuity of as -well as gaps in the bike lane
system focusing on areas feeding transit stations.
DRAFT- 10/4/99
Four Corners Proposed Strategy
Recommended by F our C orners Technical Ad visory Committee
Further Study
a) Evaluate Riverside -Orange County corridor improvement options in the context of future travel demands and the effect of transportation system
capacity on development potential in the Inland Empire. This could be accomplished through the Riverside County CETAP process
if it includes both Riverside and Orange County stakeholders in the process.
b) Evaluate potential usage and cost-effectiveness of Metrolink feeder service in areas not presently served such as between Chino and West Corona
and between Temecula/Murrieta and Corona.
c) Evaluate po tential usage and cost-effectiveness of express bus service between Chino/Chino Hills and the Irvine Spectrum/John Wayne area.
d) Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effe ctiveness of a park/ride facility near Imperial Highway/SR-91 with drop ramps to and from toll lanes .
e) Study the potential for ramps to/from SR -57 carpool lan es in Brea and Fullerton .
f) Study the feasibility of a Metrolink station near SR-71/SR-91.
g) Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of truck lanes on SR -60.
h) Evaluate high speed rail proposals in terms of cost-effectiveness, potential alignments, and stations.
I) M onitor SR-55/SR-91 inte rchange performance and analyze Caltrans Route Concept Plans f or additional capacity
and truck by-pass lanes.
j) Pending the outcome of the new Tonner Canyon area road alignment study, determine whether the extension of Valencia to Brea Canyon is needed.
No t Reco mmended
a) Construct new road connecting SR -83 to SR -241
b) San Bernardino County - Riverside County toll corridor (SCAG Northern Transportation Corridor)
c) Corona bypass toll lanes
d) Extension of Orange County light rail from Brea to Industry
e) Peak hour bus lanes on Grand Avenue
f) Widen Carbon Canyon Road to add a reversible lane
• • •
ATTACHMENT B TO AGENDA ITEM 4
•
•
RCTC 4 corners ad.grk 9/23/991:30 AM Page 1
•
•
Make your voice heard. # 1f
The Cities of Corona and a
Norco invite you to an , 'g
Open House on how to
improve travel in the Four �«
;Comers area. The Riverside
County Transportation
Commission (RcTC) is par
tictpaling in a regional
3[tob. .' study x
� y
��
`The dour izIu
orners'Swdy focuses s,
q 'transportation improvements in t
:< rca bounded by four key freeways„"the 91, 57, 60 and 15.
about proposed alternatives and share:your comments.
ronsportation Ol
T ersday, SEA ::460pr 1
z`Cormai tilbr �.......,.
650 S. vain StrEEt, [orona
aoformation: 909136.ZZ35
100015
ATTACHMENT C TO AGENDA ITEM 4
•
• •
Four Corners Study
Public Opinion Poll
Key Findings
•
DRAFT
Fou r Corners Technical A dvisory Committee Meeting
October 4, 1999
DRAFT
Public Opinion Poll Conducted by
JD Franz Research
• Telephone Survey
• Ov er 650 Respo ndents
• Residents & Commuters of Four Corners
Region
• Supplemen tal Sample of Riverside
Cou nty Residents East of the Region
• •
•
• • AFT
Main Objecti ves
Determine:
yExtent of congestion as an issue
yLevels of support for proposed
improvements
yAcceptability of various impacts and
funding sources
• • EPA T
Freeways Used By Four Corners
Commuters
I-15
SR -91
SR -71
SR -57
10
20
0
30
40
50
60
D P FT
Is Traffic Co ngestion an Issue
in the Four Cor ners Region?
Maj or
Issue
77%
Minor
Issue
14% Not an
Issue
64)/0
Don't
Know
3%
•
•
•
•
•
DWFT
Is it Important for Governments to be
Doing Somethi ng About Traffic Issues?
Very
Important
79%
Somewhat
Important
18%
Not Very
Important
2%
Not At All
Important
1'%
DRAFT
How Would the Public Address
Transportation Issues?
6'Ex pand Freeways a nd Streets (16.8%)
6>Expand Public Transportatio n Service
(13.4%)
cf>More Carpool Lanes (9%)
PPrornote Carpooling (7.2%)
OBetter Rail Systems (6.1 %)
4i'Don 't Know (23.50
•
• •
D!1\FT
Freeway/Road Capacity Proposals
Receiving S upport Levels Above 3 .0:
.-+SR60/SR57 (3.50)
Bi-Truck lanes on SR6O (3.49)
B -*Widen SR91 (3.47)
J-SR91/SR71 (3.43)
Add lanes to SR57 (3.29)
P-kI\ew road from Grand to SR57 (3.28)
»-Widen Ortega Highway (3.22)
»-Convert SR91 toll lanes (3.22)
Widen major su rface streets (3.08)
L' �il I it {•
Freeway/Road Capacity Pioposais
Receiving Minimal or Low Support (Below 3.00)
Noll lane on SR57 (2.29)
extending SR91 toll lanes (2.91)
ex tendin g SR241 to SR83 (2.93)
r*Add a reversible lane on Carbon Ca nyon Road (2 .94)
Building ramps to connect toll lanes (2.96)
•
• •
•
•
Is Public Transportation the Answer?
• Receiving support above 3.00
Metro1ink Shuttle Buses (3.58)
Doubling Metrolink service (3 .53)
High-speed rail system (3.30)
*Express b us service on SR57 (3.20)
ii2 : f' Yf r .1 ti:'17 r./. . fi"II
F
1.1 Rai1 line parallel to S R57 (3.07)
• Minimal Support (below 3.00):
*Bus only lanes on Grand Avenue
(2. 80)
Pr:
How to Finance Improvements
Cliargi ng
Tolls
Gas Tax
Developer
Fees
Sales Tax
2 .24
3.06
3.29
2.94
1 2
3 4
• = never acceptable 4— ery acceptable
•
OTC:.
r
Proposals Supported More by the
Riverside County Supplemental Simple
Widen Ortega Highway
Extend SR91 Toll Lanes
Convert SR91 Toll Lanes
Widen SR91 in Riverside
SR91 Toll Ramps to SR241
Riverside Four
County Corners
53%
65%
79%
90%
61%
40%
47%
66%
73%
53%
• • •
•
•
Next Steps
• J.D. Franz Research will present findings to
Policy Committee on October l8th
• Final report will be available on October
18th
•
• AGENDA ITEM 5
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 25, 1999
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming
SUBJECT:
FY 1999/00 Section 5310 Allocations
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the Plans and Programs Committee recommend that the Commission include the
FY99/00 Section 5310 projects in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The FTA Section 5310 program provides capital grants for the purpose of assisting
private nonprofit corporations and public agencies, under certain circumstances, in
providing transportation services to meet the needs of seniors and persons with
disabilities for whom public transportation services are otherwise unavailable, insufficient,
or inappropriate. The program provides funding for approved projects on an 80%
federal/20% local match basis.
Section 5310 funds are awarded through a statewide competition with approximately
$9.4 million in federal dollars available for programming during FY99/00. The California
Transportation Commission (CTC) adopted the FY99-00 Program at their meeting on
August 18, 1999. They received a total of 124 applications representing 357 projects
totaling $16,359,373 in requests. Of those 357 projects, 221 will, be funded totaling
9,436,258. RCTC submitted the applications received from seven non-profit agencies
requesting $705,200 for 16 projects. Our non-profit agencies prepared excellent
applications and were awarded a total of $430,000 for 9 capital projects ($344,000 in
federal funds --80%).
The following agencies were successful applicants in the FY99/00 program:
Angel View 1 expansion vehicle $ 45,000
Care -A -Van Transit 1 expansion and 2 replacement vehicles $133,000
Transportation Specialists 2 expansion and 2 replacement vehicles $207,000
Family Services 1 expansion vehicle $ 45,000
TOTAL: $430,000
The Commission is required to include the awarded projects in the Regional
Transportation Improvement Plan.
100031
For the last several months, the CTC was researching the possibility of adopting a
biennial program cycle instead of an annual cycle. After further exploration, Caltrans
staff recommended that the process stay on an annual basis. To reach this conclusion,
a survey was sent to 132 applicant agencies and 43 regional planning agencies that
actively participated in the Program. Seventy-seven applicant agencies responded: 27
supported the biennial process, 24 agencies did not respond and 26 were neutral. A total
of 25 regional planning agencies responded: 16 supported the proposal, 4 opposed and
5 were neutral. Given the lack of consensus, the uneven workload at Caltrans that may
have resulted with an biennial program and the suggestion that some small non-profit
agencies possibly could not adjust to the two year cycle and actually may be forced out
of business, Caltrans staff recommended to continue with the annual process. This
recommendation was adopted by the CTC's at its annual meeting held in August, 1999.
4)110 32
OVERVIEW:
•
•
•
The FTA Section 5310 program provides capital grants for the purpose of assisting
agencies to meet the transit needs of seniors and persons with disabilities. The program
provides funding on an 80%federal/20%local match basis. The California Transportation
Commission awarded a total of $430,000 ($344,000 in federal funds) in capital projects
to Riverside County non-profit agencies in the FY 99-00 program.
livWW33
AGENDA ITEM 6
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 25, 1999
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH
Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming
SUBJECT:
Family Services Association of Western Riverside County -
Request for Measure A Western County Specialized Transit
Capital Matching Funds
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This request is in compliance with the RCTC adopted policies for the Measure A
Specialized Transit Program and a specific budget for Section 5310 matching funds
has been identified in the RCTC program budget. There are adequate funds available
and staff recommends approval of this request.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Family Service Association of Western Riverside County (Family Service) was notified
by Caltrans that they were approved for $90,000 in funding under the FTA Section
5310 program for FY 98/99. Equipment approved includes the replacement of two
para transit buses. The Section 5310 program provides 80% of the cost of the capital
project ($72,000). Family Service is requesting that the required 20% match
($18,000) be 'funded from Measure A Specialized Transit funds available in the
western Riverside County. Family Service's provides transportation in the
Jurupa/Rubidoux area to surrounding communities to senior citizens, persons with
disabilities, and the truly needy.
'00003.1
Financial Assessment
Project Cost
$ 18,000
Source of Funds
Included in Fiscal Year Budget
Measure A Western County Specialized Transit
Y
Year
Included in Program Budget
Y
Year Programmed
'99
Approved Allocation
Year of Allocation
'99
Budget Adjustment Required
N
Financial Impact Not Applicable
•
• AGENDA ITEM 7
•
THIS ITEM WILL BE PROVIDED BY WAY OF RAIL CLIPS
•
•
•
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
DATE:
October 25, 1999
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Rail Program Update
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The most recent rail operating reports and related materials are provided as a side
packet at Committee meetings. Staff will be prepared to discuss these materials at
the Committee's direction.
Of particular note this month:
1) On -time performance on the Metrolink Riverside Line has improved dramatically
since our meeting last month with Union Pacific's Vice President.
2) Metrolink will celebrate its seventh birthday on Tuesday, October 26, with a variety
of activities including recognition of the system's 35 millionth rider.
3) Mid -year adjustment to Metrolink operating schedules will occur on Monday,
November 15. The new schedules will be available at the meeting in Commissioners'
side packets.
4) Service augmentation:
Also effective November 15, a mid -day round trip between Riverside and Irvine is
being added to the Inland Empire - Orange County Line schedule.
100036