Loading...
11 November 4, 1987 CommissionRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AGENDA 2:00 P.M., NOVEMBER 4, 1987 RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER 14TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 4080 LEMON STREET, RIVERSIDE 92501 Call to Order. Approval of Minutes. Public Comments. Consent Calendar. (All matters on the consent calendar will be approved in a single mothion unless a Commission member requests a separate action on a specific item.) A. Fiscal Audits (Commission Accounts, STA Account, SAFE Account). B. Quarterly Financial Report. Rideshare Efforts in Riverside County. Representatives from Riverside County and Commuter Computer' will be present to report on rideshare programs. RIVSAN Study Status Report and Initial Findings. Representatives of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will be present to present the material. Local Sales Tax for Transportation - Riverside County Board of Supervisors Request to Defer to November 1988. The Board of Supervisors has requested deferral of the ballot measure to November 1988. RCTC staff recommends no action on the request until February 1988. �- Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Program Amendments. 'A. Route 111 Widening (Palm Desert/Rancho Mirage). The Technical Advisory Committee and RCTC staff recommend revisions to the program as proposed by Palm Desert & Rancho Mirage. A memorandum with specific recommendations is included. B. Local Funding for Route 91 Preliminary Engineering. The Technical Advisory Committee and RCTC staff recommend revisions to the program to initiate preliminary engineering for a project on Route 91. An informational memorandum with recommendations is included. Proposed CTC Policy for Funding Airport and Port Access Projects. Representatives of SCAG will be present to present the material. An informational memorandum with a recommendation to oppose the policy as drafted is included. ▪ Legislative Items (SB 516 and AB 366). A memorandum recommending support of SB 516 and amendments to AB 366 (as enacted) is included. . Authorization for Staff Positions. A memorandum recommending authorization to recruit for additional staff positions is included. • Executive Director's Report. A. Request to Consider Consultant Assistance for Review of "Expenditure Plan". An informational memorandum requesting a special meeting to consider the proposal is included. B. Route 91 Ramp Metering. Caltrans decision to defer action on two proposed ramp metering projects will be reported. The need for a broader policy related to Route 91 metering prior to. the preparation of the RTIP will be discussed. C. Liaison with SCAG. The need for an identified SCAG liaison with RCTC will be discussed. D. Report on Schedule far November California Transportation Commission Meeting in Palm Desert. The arrangements for field trip, reception, and presentation during the meeting will be reported. . Adjournment. The next meeting of the Commission is scheduled for December 2, 1987 at 2:00 p.m. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADDITION TO AGENDA 2:00 P.M., NOVEMBER 4,,1987 RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER 14TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 4080 LEMON STREET, RIVERSIDE 92501 13. Discuss Proposed SunLine Transit Agency Short -Range Transit Plan Amendment. Staff of SunLine Transit Agency will be present to describe a proposed service change, which would require amendment to the Short Range Transit Plan. It was not possible to complete documentation needed by RCTC in time to mail out the agenda packet. A request will be made for a special joint meeting in Coachella Valley in mid -November for joint action on the proposal (SunLine would like to implement change in late November). 14. Adjournment. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting No. 14-87 October 7, 1987 . Call to Order. The meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Roy Wilson at 2:01 P.M. on Wednesday, October 7, 1987, at the 14th Floor Conference Room of the Riverside County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. Members present: Kay Ceniceros Jean Mansfield Susan Cornelison Roy Wilson Alternates present: Russell Beirich Ray Tanner Don Baskett At this time, Vice Chairman Wilson, on behalf of the Commission, welcomed Jack Reagan. Approval of Minutes. Commissioner Ceniceros stated that she was in attendance of the September 2, 1987 meeting but was not listed as present. M/S/C (TANNER/CSNICEROS) to approve the minutes of the September 2, 1987 meeting es corrected. Public Comments. There were no public comments. State Transit Assistance Program Amendment. Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director, said that in May, the Commission approved the State Transit Assistance Program for FY 1987-88 based on a statewide program of $27 million in the Governor's proposed budget. Unfortunately, in the final budget, the Governor reduced the statewide program and the estimated funding available for Riverside County is now only $296,332 rather than $997,901 as previously estimated. Included in the agenda packet is the revised FY 1987-88 STA Program recommended for approval. The amended program allocate $110,800 for capital projects and leaves $185,532 in additional funding for capital projects this year or to be carried over for programming next year. All operating assistance funds were deleted from the program. Staff recommended that the Commission approve the revised FY 1987- RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 88 State Transit Assistance Program for Riverside County. Staff advised the Commission that TDA funds are available to make up the loss of STA operating assistance funds for RTA and SunLine. In the Western County area, the Commission held TDA funds to cover the total amount of STA operating assistance and 10% of the federal operating assistance. In the Coachella Valley area, no TDA funds had been allocated for streets and roads to date. M/S/C (CORNELISON/CENICEROS) to approve the revised Riverside County State Transit Assistance Program for FY 1987-88. 5. Revised TDA Fund Allocation for Transit - Coachella Valley. Paul Blackwelder informed the Commission that this year, there are $3,509,028 in Transportation Development Act funds available for the Coachella Valley area. The Commission, at its meeting in June, allocated $2,776,082 for transit operating and capital assistance. Based on SunLine's amended Short Range Transit Plan and in order to offset the reduction in State Transit Assistance funds, an additional $481,858 in operating assistance needs to be allocated to SunLine. The total allocation for transit for the Coachella Valley area increases to $3,257,000, and leaving an unallocated balance of $251,088 that could be used for transit or streets and roads. Over the next five years, the five double-decker buses used for the Sun Special service in Palm Springs need to be replaced. The cost to replace the buses is approximately $30,000 each. The full-size buses used for fixed -route service are reaching their 12-year useful life. The vans and minibuses used for dial -a -ride and intervalley handicapped services all need to be replaced in the next three years. SunLine has requested that $239,452 of the unallocated balance of the TDA funds be reserved for future bus replacement needs leaving only $11,636 in TDA funds available for streets and roads in the Coachella Valley. Staff recommends that the entire balance of unallocated TDA funds ($251,088) be reserved for future bus replacement needs in the Coachella Valley. Commissioner Cornelison asked if reserving TDA funds would in any way endanger SunLine's position in being able to compete for federal funds. Also, she asked if the Coachella Valley cities are aware that there will be no TDA funds available for streets and roads f•or FY 1987-88. RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 Paul Blackwelder said that there is no danger related to competing for federal funds. In fact, the reserved TDA funds would be used for local match. The cities in the Coachella Valley and the County are aware that no TDA funds will be available for streets and roads as the SunLine budget was before the Coachella Valley Association of Governments' Technical Advisory Committee, composed of city managers and a County representative. AI/S/C (BASEETT/CENICEROS) to increase the TDA allocation for the SunLine Transit Agency in FY 1987/88 by $481,858 and that the remaining $251,088 in unallocated TDA funds for the Coachella Valley area be reserved for future bus replacement. 6. FY 1987/88 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Program. Paul Blackwelder said that there are $353,010 available in SB 821 funds for FY 1987/88. The SB 821 Evaluation Committee, consisting of members of the Commission's Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees, reviewed and ranked the project applications submitted. Included in the agenda packet is the priority list and the recommended allocations. The Committee recommended full funding for the top five ranked projects and partial funding for the sidewalk projects submitted by Banning, Indio and Moreno Valley. He recommended that the Commission allow those agencies receiving partial funding to make up the difference between the funds requested and funds recomended by either using additional local funds or by downscoping their projects. N/S/C (TANNER/CENICEROS) to approve the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Program recommended by the SB 821 Evaluation Committee and the option for Banning, Indio and Moreno Valley to either use additional local funds or downscope their projects to make up the difference between funds requested and funds approved. 7. SCAG "Prototype Transportation/Land Use Model Ordinance". Jack Reagan, Executive Director, said that the SCAG Prototype Transportation/Land Use Model Ordinance attempts to deal with traffic congestion and air pollution problems, and would provide local agencies with a tool to help mitigate the problems. The document could serve as a basis for the development of more localized ordinances appropriate to individual communities. Staff has reviewed the document and identified two problems. (1) The sections dealing with transportation mitigation fees recommends consideration of fees on commercial, industrial and high density residential RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 development and exempts single family homes. This recommendation is appropriate in areas that are job rich/housing poor to improve the job/housing balance. In areas that are housing rich and job poor, such as Riverside, the reverse would be more appropriate. (2) Another problem deals with the monitoring and enforcement of an ordinance once it is enacted. He noted the importance for local agencies to review the document and consider the development of transportation/land use ordinances as soon as possible. At this time, Jack Reagan introduced Betty Wirthman of SCAG. Betty Wirthman said that the SCAG Prototype Transportation/Land Use Ordinance was developed as a result of a concern that the region could face further sanctions in the form of withdrawal of federal highway, sewage treatment and other funds, if it does not meet its commitment to achieve the federal air quality standards. SCAG felt that getting letters of commitment from local agencies would help to prevent further EPA sanctions to the region. Given the growth increase that is expected in future years, serious problems will occur if the issues are not addressed now. Regarding the mitigation fees recommendation, the ordinance could be developed to be consistent with the local area's need. As far as monitoring implementation of the ordinance, SLAG is requesting that the cities and the County require the developer to have personnel responsible for implementation. However, on a regional scale, SCAG will be developing an overall monitoring process and will include all cities and counties participating in the program. SCAG will be developing an evaluation process but it will not be in place until the following year. She requested the Commissions's support of the concept and that the Commission encourage the cities and the county to participate in the program. Commissioner Ceniceros said that in terms of the sections of the report where fees are recommended on commercial and industrial development and not on residential development, again illustrates that SCAG is a Los Angeles focused organization and not a regional organization. Because SCAG is a multi -faceted organization, she understands that it is difficult to integrate transportation policy and air quality policy into land use policy. This document would be very useful because it provides opportunities to pick and choose what is appropriate at the local level. Commissioner Baskett said that if the Commission was to be responsible for implementation in Riverside County , he would hesitate to send a general recommendation for the approval of the ordinance without mentioning the concerns on mitigation fees and the problem with monitoring and RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 enforcement of the ordinance. He added that the Commission should continue to be involved in the development and coordination of the ordinance. Commissioner Ceniceros stated that it would be useful to identify what RCTC's proper role is beyond recommendation in concept. Also, it would seem that we would have to call on SCAG's resources as well as RCTC's and the County to sit down and determine which things are appropriate for each individual jurisdiction. She suggested that the issue be presented at the Mayors and Councilaens meeting, and to CVAG. Betty Wirthman said that SCAG has the resources to provide onsite technical assistance for cities. Jack Reagan agreed that for the Coachella Valley area, the Commission should forward the matter to CVAG. Betty Wirthman informed the Commission how involvement with local agencies was handled in the SanBAG area. She said that meetings were arranged with city managers and key directors of the various local jurisdictions at the SanBAG offices and SanBAG staff attended to provide input. She suggested doing the same thing in Riverside. Commissioner Beirich said that in reading the document, SCAG is asking the cities and the county to make the major commitment. He asked what the downside affect will be if a local agency preferred to take action on its own. Betty Wirthman said that the only downside affect is that cities and counties who chose not to send a letter will result in less letters to be received by EPA. From the number of letters, the EPA will decide what is being done in this region to address the problem of air pollution. Commissioner Beirich said that he understands that the issue of sanction is very critical in the urban area of Los Angeles but may be less critical here. The cities in the desert area may feel that they have less to lose than cities in other areas. He feels that there should be a product that is more salable to people in this area. Commissioner Cornelison asked if SCAG had received any assurances from EPA that sanctions would be held off during the process of implementing plans and ordinances. RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 Betty Wirthman said that she does not think that the EPA will order sanctions until five or six years from now. The plans and ordinances enacted now will improve the situation down the road. Jack Reagan, to address the concerns of the Commission, suggested an alternate staff recommendation. The proposed alternate recommendation was to transmit correspondence to the cities in the Western County area, CVAG and Riverside County indicating that RCTC is supportive of the concept of SCAG's Prototype Transportation/Land Use Ordinance, identify the two areas of concern as noted by staff, offer assistance to local agencies in developing ordinances that are most consistent with their local needs, and coordinate those efforts with SCAG. M/S/C (BASNBTT/CENICEROS) to: (1) Direct staff to send letters to the cities/County and to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments indicating that the Commission is in support of the concept of SCAG's Prototype Transportation/Land Use Ordinance and pointing out the concerns relating to transportation mitigation fees and monitoring and enforcement of the ordinance; (2) Offer assistance locally in developing an ordinance that is consistent with their local need; and, (3) Coordinate the efforts with SCAG. 8. CTC Meetings in Riverside County. Jack Reagan briefed the Commission on the two California Transportation Commission meetings scheduled to be held in Riverside County this fiscal year. The November meeting will be held in Palm Desert on November 19. On November 18th, a tour of Highway 86 and a reception for the CTC are being coordinated by the Highway 86 Improvement Association, the Auto Club, and CVAG. The second CTC meeting in Riverside County will be held in Riverside on January 20. The January meeting will be an excellent opportunity for the State Commission to observe the commute hour congestion on Routes 91 and 60, to present the basic elements of our 1/2 cent local sales tax proposal, and for the Coalition for Better Transportation to advocate making Route 91 a "shelf project". He encouraged Commissioners to attend the receptions and the meetings. Commissioner Ceniceros informed the Commission that Riverside County will have a measure regarding the Gann limit on the June ballot which could affect the local sales tax measure if it was decided to be placed on the ballot at RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 the same time. A request from the County for the Commission to delay placing the local sales tax measure from June to November 1988 is forthcoming. 9. Executive Driector's Report. A. Cajalco Parkway Study. Jack Reagan gave a status report on the Cajalco Parkway Study. Staff will be working with SCAG, Caltrans, and the County Road Department, the lead agency, to perform a broader analysis of the corridor in relationship to alternatives. SCAG will identify trip demands that exist on Route 91 under the existing socio-economic population/employment forecast for the year 2010. In addition, they will look at alternative improvements on Cajalco such as linking it to Route 91, continuing on through over the Cleveland National Forest to Orange County, or connecting only to Route 15 and what the impacts of each alternative is related to traffic congestion on Route 91. If the analysis shows that there is a need for some kind of corridor improvement, SCAG will program $100,000 in Overall Work Program so the County could proceed with a more detailed engineering analysis. B. D.J. Smith Associates Agreement. Because of a concern that the contract with D.J. Smith Associates may involve the Commission in a political campaign, the agreement with D.J. Smith Associates has been modified to insure this would not happen. The three elements of the contract are: 1) to assist the Commission in refining and defining the expenditure plan and ordinance that is required; 2) to assist staff in preparing an educational program; and, 3) to assist staff in developing a strategic plan that factors in the appropriate actions of the private and public sectors. C. AB 18 (Katz) Jack Reagan reported that the Governor vetoed AB 18. AB 18 proposed major restructuring of the roles and responsibilities of the LACTC, SCRTD, and SCAG. It also clarifies the role of SCAG and the county transportation commissions with regard to transportation planning and programming. With the bill being vetoed, the transfer of short range RCTC Minutes ctober 7, 1987 transportation planning and programming responsibility from SCAG to the county transportation commission will have to be addressed through a memorandum of understanding. A. AB 84 (Lancaster) AB 84 would require those counties with a county transportation commission to prepare a transportation improvement program. The TIP adopted by the commission must be consistent with the adopted RTP. Caltrans would have to prepare Project Study Reports (PSR's) for projects on the list. Future capacity increasing projects could only be added to the STIP only if PSR's are completed. He said that the bill fell short of allowing the commission to get projects shelf ready. . Closed Session - Personnel Matter. At this time, the Commission adjourned to closed session to discuss personnel matters. At 3:35 p.m., the Commission then resumed open session. M/S/C (CENICEROS/MANSFIELD) to: 1. Increase the Assistant Director's salary 5.54 and that this step be the 4th step of a 5 step range. 2. Provide the Assistant Director with a car allowance of $225/month. 3. Reclassify the Secretary position to a Executive Secretary position and increase the salary by 4*. 4. Grant the Assistant Director and Secretary a 4.54' cost of living increase, retroactive to the first pay period of July, 1987. . Authorization to Increase Professional and Clerical Staff. M/S/C (CENICEROS/MANSFIELD) to continue this item to the next Commission meeting. . Increase in Office Equipment/Furniture Expenditure. Jack Reagan said that the staff recommendation to increase office equipment/furniture expenditure was reviewed with the Budget Committee, consisting of Commissioners Clarke and Stuart, and they recommended approval. They also 8 RCTC Minutes October 7, 1987 recommended that the proposal to purchase two personal computers and printers, and a mobile cellular phone be discussed with the Commission. The proposal to purchase two personal computers and printers will enable each staff member to have its own computer at their work station. The cellular mobile phone will allow the director and the assistant director to be in contact with the office and with others while in the field. The recommendation is to increase the office equipment/furniture expenditure $4,510. The furniture increase is with the assumption of additional staff. M/S/C (MANSFIELD/TANNER) to approve the increase in office equipment/furniture expenditure as recommended by staff. 13. Miscellaneous Item. Jack Reagan distributed copies of a letter from Chairman Melba Dunlap to Assemblyman Steve Clute in response to a letter from Assemblyman Clute regarding the need for coordinated technical analysis and community backing for projects on Route 91. The letter advises Assemblyman Clute of the Commission position and what the Coalition for Better Transportation wants to accomplish on Route 91 in the short tern. 14. Adjournment. M/S/C (TANNER/CORNELISON) to adjourn the meeting at 3:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /ack Reagan Executive Director RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Audits Fiscal audits of the Commission's financial transactions, the State Transit Assistance Program account, and the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies have been completed by Thomas, Byrne and Smith. Copies of the audits are included in the agenda packet. The audits have found that all funds have been expended in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. The audit of the Local Transportation Fund will be completed next month. ECOMMENDATION eceive and file the fiscal audits of the Commission's accounts, the State Transit Assistance Program account, and the Service uthority for Freeway Emergencies account. B:nk Agenda Item No. 4A RCTC November 4, 1987 County of Riverside Office of County Auditor -Controller County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, llth Floor Riverside, CA 92501-3652 {714) 787-2975 Anthony J. Bellanca, CPA Auditor -Controller September 28, 1987 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4075 Main Street Suite 302 Riverside, CA 92501 Gentlemen: RECEIVED SEP 30 1961 Riverside County Transportation Commission The attached financial reports reflects the cash receipts and disbursements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Fund 4285 for the year ended 9-22-87 for 6/30/87. These reports were prepared from accounting records maintained by the Office of Auditor -Controller, County of Riverside. AJB:YR:dk 115P Attachment Sincerely, ANTHONY J. BELLANCA AUDITOR -CONTROLLER By: Yoko Reed, Deputy Auditor -Controller Agenda Item No. 4B RCTC November 4, 1987 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FUND 4285 FINANCIAL STATEMENT FOR YEAR ENDED 9/22/87 FOR 6/30/87 ash balance at 6/30/87 $ 51,020.96 isbursements: Regular salaries Retirement - PERS Group insurance-health/Life/Unemp. Communications Office expense Professional & special services Commissioners per diem Publication Transportation & Travel 1,256.84 716.16 115.13 263.24 193.75 8,164. 81 150.00 276.00 1,328.13 Total disbursements 12 464.06 Cash available for operations at 9/22/87 for 6/30/87 $ 38 556,90 (lJ OTE (1): Actual cash balance is $49,840.49. Accounts payable hich amounts to $11,283.59 will be paid in cash in FY 87-88. 115P RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director SUBJECT: Rideshare Efforts in Riverside County Staff has requested presentations to be made by the County of Riverside and Commuter Computer on the rideshare efforts in Riverside County. Steve Rathburn, Community Services Officer for the County of Riverside, will attend the meeting to report on the effectiveness of the County of Riverside's "Rideshare Days" exercise on August 4th and 5th. The Commission requested this report when they allocated $500 in July to the County for promotion of Rideshare Days. Attached are portions of a report from County staff to the Board of Supervisors regarding the exercise. Tad Widby, President of Commuter Computer, will attend the Meeting to present the results of a recent survey to evaluate their effectiveness in rideshare formation. The survey was initially intended to measure the effectiveness of Commuter omputer's overall operation. At the request of the Commission, a sample specific to the Riverside County area was included. to =How the effectiveness of their operation to form carpools in this County to be evaluated. The results of the survey were not vailable for mailing and will be presented at the meeting. 'ideshare efforts in Riverside and Orange Counties are the responsibility of separate agencies. Commuter Computer is esponsible for Riverside County. The Orange County Transit istrict is responsible for ridesharing in Orange County. With he unprecedented growth in congestion on Route 91 over the past everal years, the need for greater ridesharing is evident. We eve asked Commuter Computer to discuss recent efforts to build a ighly cooperative working relationship between the two agencies o increase ridesharing and reduce congestion along this corridor or commuters from Riverside County to Orange County employment enters. B:nk ttachment Agenda Item No. 5 RCTC November 5, 1987 RIDESHARE DAYS GENERAL SYNOPSIS Almost all of the County departments that are in the downtown rea cooperated with the County's Rideshare Program. The primary ifference in the degree of cooperation could be directly related o the amount of travel required for their departmental job equirements. First indications are that the County Employees have gotten hind the Smog Abatement Exercise with a new ferver this year. he parking lots that were closed only had a few stragelers that ere still parked there from the night before and the designated ots, (reserved for those Rideshare/Carpooling) were not verflowing. Actual participation came out to approximately 51% . The local business community has also jumped on board with ecurity Pacific Bank (Downtown) leading the way. Looking nitially as if over 75% of all Inland Division Employees at the owntown facility are participating, the Security Bank and it's mployees deserve special recognition for their total voluntary The City of Riverside joined us again this year as participants n this years Rideshare Days. The level of participation was set at pproxiametly 26%, a savings of 3301 miles driven daily. Other businesses and agencies that have voluntarily participated t a reduced level, are the Riverside Press Enterprise, County uperintendant of Schools Office and Pac Bell. (Point to note; this articipation is even more impressive because their offices lay utside the geographical boundaries set for the Rideshare Days. . The obvious benefit to the Rideshare Days is not the increased ount of available parking, but the note -able amount of reduced mmissions that were saved during the period. Total mileage saved uring the two period has been estimated at 20,230 miles. This is nclusive of all players, County, City, Security Bank as well as ther agencies asked their employees to cooperate with the "spirit" f the program. That amount of saved mileage equates to 339.85 unds of air -born pollutants and particulates that would otherwise ow be in our atmosphere causing irritation to us all. The accompanying booklet contains the Rideshare Days Workplan, e written communications utilized between departments, agencies d within these same departments and agencies. It also contains e forms used during the Exercise that provided the Exercise Team ith the high degree of accuracy in the reporting procedures. RAY HEBRARD County Fire Chief STEVEN C. RATHBONE SR Community Services Officer RideShare Exercise Manager COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE RIDESHARE DAYS ANALYSIS AUGUST 1987 Total Number of Participants: Total of Eligible Employees: (gay Shift Downtown minus those o f, Sick, Vacation, Working out o Town for the Day, etc.) P:rcent Participation: 50% Total 2 Day Participation: 777 Total 1 Day Participation: 61 THURSDAY FRIDAY 816 796 1624 1557 51% D=partments Achieving 50% Participation: 16 of 38 (42%) MODES Thursday Friday Carpool/Vanpool 642 638 B s 71 70 Walk 37 38 B ke 31 28 FACTORS P=rking Restriction 189 P ize Drawing 276 T-am Spirit 194 T ans. Assistance 50 N i:ER OF EMPLOYEES WILLING TO CHANGE TALTERNATIVE MODE OF DAILY TRAVEL W O NOW DRIVE THEMSELVES DAILY PACIFIC DANK P blic support to Rideshare days came from several organizations, h•wever the most active was Security Pacific Bank. Of 156 eligible employees, 127 participated in Rideshare. QE RIVERSIDE A cording to Bob Hoskins, Disaster Preparedness Officer, City of R'verside, approximately one—third (1/3) of the City's employees v•luntarily joined with the County and found alternative ways to w•rk during RideShare Days. V=hicular miles saved during the Rideshare. S:og Abatement Exercise 15,624 ( ounty Employees only) T•tal amount of pollutants saved from being e itted directly into Riversides air 262.47 pounds ( ounty Employees Only) 276 RIDESHARE: I AL.L.—STA.T2E3 uring the Ride -Share Days (SMOG ABATEMENT EXERCISE-1987) most organizations responded very well to the call to reduce traffic. However several individuals and organizations require special recognition. These are listed below: PACIFIC RANK r. Darell W. Choate, Senior Vice President and Mr. Bill lackman, Vice President. These gentlemen placed their rganization and their personnel in with the spirit of RideShare. ecurity Bank underwrote the cost of copying the paycheck fliers hat were placed in the pay envelopes for the County Employees. his saved the County of Riverside about $275.00. Security Bank hen gathered it's employees and made a great collective effort o reduce smog by having 81.4% of it's employees participate in he RideShare program. COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT rika Nemeth, Regional Transportation Coordinator, her immediate esponse to questions and materials support was invaluable. AIRLINES or their support and the donation of the Grand Prize, two irline tickets anywhere in the continental United States. onating the sum of $500.00 toward RideShare Days program. ssisting in RideShare by allowing County employess free rides uring the exercise. (Hopefully some will continue year-round.) .1,114 COMPUTER arla Newell, Inland Empire Account Executive, for her enormous mount of assistance in the acquisition of the prizes, the reation of the Departmental Coordiantors Manual, artwork on the aycheck fliers and the lobby display. Also Commuter Computer onated $250.00 into the prize fund for participants recognition. usan LeDuc, coordinated the VanPool meetings with County mployees. ibbie Hayslett, Senior Analyst, for his knowledge and ooperation of the County System. Also, it was through his fforts that the Grand Prize was acquired from American Airlines. EXPLORERS POST Alla RIVERSIDE P.D. EXPLORERS POST or their outstanding assistance during RideShare Days. They ere the young men and ladies helping to control County parking uring the exercise. Due to their efforts, no county paid mployees were were called away from their normal duties to help dminister the lots. (A considerable financial savings as ompared to past years.) A: far as outstanding departments, there were several that had o tstanding responses to the call: (�ept. Coordinator) PERCENTAGE QE PARTICIPATION C erk of the Board 100% (heri Andelkone) T.easurer—Tax Collector 97% ( ochelle Johnson) D-ta Processing 87X ( elly Hernandez) A ditor Controller 81X (-alph Hammock) C 0 81X ( ibbie Hayslett) E•onomic/Community Developement 80X ( im Tebbetts) Cc —unity Action 78% ( thony Blakely) Registrar of Voters 76% ( eri A. Farris) J. T. P. Dept 71X (S.lvador Rios III) As=essor 64X (T•m Wilks) Pe sonnel 66X (A a Vargas) P1=nning 60X (M'chael Harrod) Co. Clerk and Recorder 60X (H- 1da Camacho) Rod Dept. 55% (G=orge Rohrbach) Ri erside Municipal Court 52% (M-rti Schnitzer) Adm Agr Ass Aud Aut Avi Boa Bui Bui Cen Cle Co Co Coo Cor Co. Co Dat Dis DPS Eco Eme "ea J TP Law Mar Men Mun Off Per P1 Pro Pub Reg Roe She Tre Su Vet COUNTY DEPARTMENTS RIDESHARE 1987 nistrativek of Participation Office 81 cultural Commissioner 20 ssor 64 tor -Controller 81 motive Maintenance 12 tion d Of Supervisors 44 ding and Safety 25 ding Services 17 ral Mail Services 30 k of the Board 100 unications unity Action 78 erative Extension ner & Public Administrator Clerk & Recorder 60 ty Counsel 49 Processing 87 rict Attorney 49 omic And Community Developement 80 gency Service Div (Exercise Administrators) -- th 33 71 Librarian -- hall 3 al Health 43 cipal Court 52 ce on Aging -- onnel 66 ing 60 ation 41 is Defender 20 strar of Voters 76 & Survey 55 iff 6 surer/Tax-Collector 97 rior Court 5 ran Services 40 CITY OF EtIITIEFLBI7DE fNTER 0 '11(1•: AIF:AIC) it `O: A11 Department Heads FRQAl: L. L. Richardson, DATE: August 20, 1987 SUBJECT: "RIDESHARING DAYS" August 6 & 7, 198 The compilation of questionnaires for the••city,s•'pirticipation in "Ridesharing Days" has been completed. The following figures represent the;ar'esult of each department's participation over a two-day period. Only the downtown area was involved in the computation. Personnel driving city cars, uniformed police and`duty firemen were not included. Department Adm Svcs Cty Clerk Cty Manager Finance Fire Historic R Legal Library Mayor Park & Rec Planning Police Public Utils Public Works pment Number of Employees Partici- pating 12 7 19 12 40 11• 9 41 5 17 46 37 108 45 Number of Times Car- pool, Walk, Bus, etc. 11 7 9 0 24 11 6 41 4 4 19 21 40 17 Total. 409 214 ,,wish to thank each ridesharing ridesharing effort. Nueh, of Times Awn: Percent able'•to Par-• Partici- ticipa'te • 'pation 23 • , 48 14 50 38 24 23 0 80 30 21 18 86 10`. • 34 ..'a 52 33 48 40 12 .89 21 74 • 28 216 19 90 ':. 19 816 _ fir 26' coordinator and participants Total Miles Saved by Rideshari nq Total Miles Normally Driven Percent of Miles Saved 164 440 37 70 128 55 46 492 9 0 353 0 318 1160 27 99 205 48 74 288 742 1634 60 112 81 881 205 1630 240 945 751 4122 451 1986 3301 14376 for their cooperation 26 45 54 9 13 25 18 23 23% in this LLR/pw RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Paul Blackwelder, Assistant Director SUBJECT: RIVSAN Study Status Report and Initial Findings he RIVSAN Transportation Study, a study to project traffic olumes for the year 2010 and to identify the deficiencies in the ighway and major arterial system for Western Riverside and San ernardino Counties, will be completed within the next 2-3 onths. A draft report will be distributed by SCAG, the lead gency for the study, to the cities and County for review and omment at the end of the month. The final study report will onclude a 6-year planning effort involving SCAG, the Commission, nd local agencies in both San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. CAG has prepared maps showing the projected traffic volumes and eficiencies in the system. Gil Hicks, the Project Manager from CAG, will attend the meeting to discuss the study findings egarding projected traffic volumes and system deficiencies as llustrated on their maps. A final report on the document will e presented to the Commission for approval after review and omment by local agencies. Bank Agenda Item No. 6 RCTC November 4, 1987 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request to Defer the Local Saba Tax for Transportation Ballot Measure from June, 1988 to November, 1988 The Riverside County Board of Supervisors, has requested that the ommission defer placing the proposed local sales tax for transportation measure on the ballot for Riverside County voters from the June 1988 election to the November 1988 election. Their concern is the ability of the Commission to analyze the results f the San Bernardino County election and to prepare and implement a successful educational program in the time remaining efore the June election. A copy of the request is attached. taff shares the County`s concerns and the clock is running. owever, the final decision on June 1988 versus November 1988 oes not have to be made until late February 1988. There is a reat deal of work yet to be done by both the Commission and the rivate sector to prepare for placing the measure on the ballot. ontinuing to focus our efforts on June, at least for the resent, will held to keep the momentum going that is needed to e ready to present this most important measure to the voters. ECOMMENDATION eceive and file the request from the Riverside County Board of upervisors to defer the local sales tax for transportation easure to November 1988 and consider the request when the final ecision is made by the Commission in February. R/PB:nk ttachment Agenda Item No. 7 ROTC November 4, 1987 �.^�� F t�i 'If l ••l ''i COITN i.. l t� RSIDE ctober 20, 1987 r. Jack Reagan, Executive Director iverside County Transportation Commission 075 Main Street, Suite 302 iverside, California 92501 ear Mr. Reagan: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WALT P. ABRAHAM 787.2010 MELBA DUNLAP 787.2424 KAY CENIC£ROS 787-2630 PATRICIA (CORKY) LARSON 787.2840 NORTON YOUNGLOVE 787.2950 RECEVED OCT 211967 Riverside County Transportation Commission s you know, the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County supports the placing f the Local Sales Tax for Transportation Revenue on the ballot. However, iven the time, required to analyze the results of the San Bernardino County lection and the"effort needed to prepare a successful educational program to ducate voters, it is requested that the Riverside County Transportation Commission consider postponing the election until November, 1988. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, W B J LT P. ABRAHAM, Chairman and of Supervisors OUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER • FOURTEENTH FLOOR • 4080 LEMON STREET • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Highway 111 Project Amendment (Palm Desert & Rancho Mirage) The Cities of Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage have requested amendments to the Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Program to reduce the local share and increase the federal share of funds for widening Highway .111 from four to six lanes between Bob Hope Drive and Town Center Way. The requested amendments are: A. Delete the Frank Sinatra Drive reconstruction project between Highway 111 and Morningside Drive in Rancho Mirage and transfer the $197,800 in FAU funds from this project to the Highway 111 widening project to reduce the local share for the City of Rancho Mirage. B. Decrease the local shares of the Highway 111 widening project for Palm Desert and Rancho Mirage by allocating the FY 1988 FAU entitlements of each of the cities to this project. The current cost estimate for the project is $2.327 million. FAU funds allocated to the project are $.875 million. The requested amendments would increase the federal share and decrease the local share of the project well within the minimum requirements of the federal program. Both the FAU Committee and the Commission's Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) have recommended approval of the proposed amendments. The City of Indian Wells voiced the only no vote on the Committee and the TAC. They have also submitted a letter opposing the widening project on the basis that this project will lead to the eventual widening of Highway 111 to six lanes throughout the entire city limits of the City of Palm Desert. The recently completed Coachella Valley Area Study by SCAG, CVAG and RCTC shows that Highway 111 will need to be widened to six lanes from Ramon Road in Palm Springs to Indio Boulevard in Indio. The study has been accepted by CVAG. The only local agency in the Coachella Valley opposed to widening Highway 111 to six lanes is the City of Indian Wells. The specific recommendations of the FAU Committee and TAC related to the proposal were as follows: 1. Palm Desert and Indian Wells should be able to used their 1986-87 unobligated balances and 1987-88 allocations (which should be known in November or December) toward the project. 2. The Frank Sinatra Drive project in Rancho Mirage should be deleted from the program as requested, with funding transferred to the Highway 111 project. 3. Caltrans contribution of the project costs should not be increased. Staff concurs with these recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Commission approve the amendments to the Federal Aid Urban Program as proposed by the FAU Committee and Technical Advisory Committee and direct staff to make necessary revisions to the Transportation Improvement Program. JR: nk FROM INFO ... T1 rrrrs, tD®sS®a2012v 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE:PALM DESERT, cALIFCRNIA 92260 TELEPHONE (619) 346-0611 October , i'987 . Mr. Jack Reagan RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 4075 Main Street, Suite 302 Riverside, CA 92501 SUBJECT: FEDERAL AID URBAN PROGRAM Dear Mr. Reagan: RECEIVED OCT 7 1987 Riverside County Transportation Commission At the present time, the City of Palm Desert is acting as the lead agency for a FALI project involving Caltrans District 8 and the City of Rancho Mirage on Highway 111 between Town Center Way and Bob Hope Drive in the two desert communities. FAU monies In the amount of $875,000 have been earmarked for this project and the Palm Desert City Council has inquired as to the advisability of using the fiscal year 1988 FAU dollars for this project. The project budget is attached for your information. The City of Rancho Mirage wishes to use any additional FAU dollars that they have available for reducing their local share of participation. Ken Rosenfield, Rancho Mirage City Engineer, and I would like to meet with you to discuss this matter at your convenience. It may be advisable for Jim Balcom, Chief of Local Assistance from District 8, to be present to explain to you the uniqueness of the project. Very truly yours, i hard J. Fo s, P.E. Director of Pu lic Works/City Engineer RJF/ms Enclosures cc: Ken Rosenfield Jim Balcom _Fr a j- ENGINEERIN Preliainar te. on: For: STATE HIWAY 111, FAU WIDENING PROJECT FUNDING -D I STR.I BU--Ii7N EXHIBIT "A" 08-Ra_v--i L L-4Cl. 0-41. 4 From El Paseo to Ocotillo Dr. Widen to Six Lanes Qom=2.0i�207,�300 22—Oct-87 Identifier: 627FAU$2.wk1 Di str i c 08 PSL4E Costs E City of Pale Desert, California (6191346-0611 Developed By: Project Associates International _..-.._... _ Pala Desert, CA. (619)341-0800 ----X .PALM .DESERT_ ?(- RANCHO_NiRAGE X _ CALTRANS _ FAU f Local FAU $209,061 n,_11011 _ ._w__t0 $184,400_ 10 $90,356 4911 atals $0 Local FAU : Local 10 $139,375 $0 _-----..10 ____ $O $0 $0 FAU Local $0 $69,686 $0 10 $0_ $0_ .__ $184,400 $0 $0 $0 $90,356 $0 $463,817 10 $139,375 10 $69,686 $0 $274,756 _. 0.001- _ __ 100.001 _ ._ . 0.001 28.81% , .. 0.001. .. -.__.. 14.401 - _ O. 00l 56. 791 ENGRG SUBT TAL 1483,817 CONSTRUCTIi : FAU Eligibl Roadway $578,525 $904,383 $192,843 Signals $296,475 $11,130__ $98,825 Non-FAU Par icipate $0 $53,488 $O Roadway Agency Subotals --_.__15.82i 1591,052 196,420 1295,522 1289,263 117,8009 _$0 $49,412_ 10_. _-_ $1.48,237______ $11,130 1200 $0 10 10 $53,288 4. 461 CONFT CTN SUBTOTAL 1111111 Agency Praj. Totals $875,000 $1,452,817 $291,668 $730,627 $145,832 $365,208 $437,500 1356,982 37.591 62.411 12.532 31.391 6.261 15.691 18.791 15.341 PROJECT TO L $2,327,817 Frc,j ec ■ : Rev Da e: Fievi si •n: Developed Fo : STATE H I WAY 111, FAU WIDENING PROJECT FUNDING D]:STRIBUTION C)8—R i v--1 1 1--40. C)-41 . 4 From E1 Pasea to Ocotillo D Widen to Six Lanes 8— 02-20..30 22—Oct-87 EXHIBIT "A" Identifier: 627FAU$4.wk:1 c 08 PS&E Costs Estimates Electric Utility Undergrounding City of Pala Desert, California (619) 346-0611 ITEM Developed By: Project Associates International Pale Desert, CA. (619)341-0800 TOTAL >( PALM DESERT -------)( RANCHO MIRASE >< CALTRANS FAU I Local ; FACE Local 1 FAU Local FAU Local 1GINEER1NG: eliainary onstruction, (I0%) E. h a. verhead, (49 ) ency Subtot is fiRfi SUBTOTA ]NSTRUCTION: NU Eligible padkay ignals )n-FAU Parti•ipate oadiay -- $0 $209,061 10 $184,400 10 $90,356 $0 $139,375 1O $0 $0 $0 $0 169,686 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1184,400 $0 $90,356 $0 $483,817 10 0.001 100.00% 0.001 $483,817 $139,375 28.81% $578,525 $904,383 $192,843 1591,052 1296, 475 f 11,130 $98, 825 $0---149, 412 $0 153,488 $0 1200 $0 gency Subtot Is $0 $69,686 0.00Z 14.401 $0 1274,756 0.001 56.791 $96,420 1295,522 $289,263 117,809 $0 $148,237 $11,130 10 10 153,288 • $875,000 1969,000 $291,668 47.451 52.55% —15.82% ONSTRUCTN SU:TOTAL $1,844,000 tl. Undergro ding 1591,252 $143,832 $295,522 32.06% 7.911 16.032 10 $828,096 $0 1552,067 $0 $276,029 $437,500 $82,226 23.73Z 4.46I 1O $O gency rroi. tale 1875,000 27.73% 12,280,913 — 1291,668 $1,282,694 $145,832 1641,237 $437,500 $356,982 4.622 20.321 72.27% 9.24Z 40.641 13.861 11.311 ROJECT TOTAL --� $3,155,913 Cag fIiidtmYetk 44990 ELDORADO DRIVE • INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA 92210 October 26, 1987 Jack Regan, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4075 Main Street, Suite 302 Riverside, CA 92501 Re: FAU Program and Project request from Palm Desert (61913462499 DICED OCT 26 1987 Riverside County Transportation Commission ear: Mr. Regan: The City of Indian Wells is concerned with the request made y the city of Palm Desert to obtain funding for the widening of ighway 111 within its jurisdiction. If the FAU funding is pproved as requested it will only facilitate the eventual idening of Highway 111 to six (6) lanes throughout the entire ity limits of Palm Desert. This could therefore establish a recident to which the City of Indian Wells cannot accept. For a long time, Indian Wells has been opposed to the idening of the highway within the City of Indian Wells to six (6) lanes as this would tend to encourage more traffic to tilized this route through our residential community rather than se alternative routes (i.e. Fred Waring Drive, Country Club rive, and Interstate 10) through the valley. We especially onsider Fred Waring Drive as a bypass to Highway 111. SCAG under took a study to assess the overall level of pro- ected deficiences in the valley and to develop a long range plan f improvements to accommodate projected growth. This study ncluded several• options to accommodate increasing traffic evels, including new streets, a mid -valley parkway and street mprovements. Highway 111 was discussed in this study and recom- ended to be widened to six (6) lanes throughout the valley. Indian Wells was strongly opposed to the recommendation made n the study regarding widing Highway 111 and expressed this to the oachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). Also, Indian ells through its General Plan is encouraging the use of other outes in lieu of Highway 111 to decrease traffic through our ity. Jack Regan, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission Page Two In evidence of the City's position we submit Resolution No. 82 -6, dated March 4, 1982, Resolution No. 87-58, dated July 2, 1987, and letter to Southern California Association of Governments, dated March 7, 1987. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, CITY OF INDIAN WELLS PRINCE E. PIERSON City Manager PEP:gpt Enclosures OM 3462450 aaL ndiart eab 44050 ELDORADO ORIVE INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA 022607497 March 27, 1987 M . Larry Fautz S•uthern California Association of Government S ite 1000 610 So. Commonwealth Avenue s Angeles, CA 90005 D ar Mr.-Fautz: The purpose of this letter is to communicate the City Indian W=11s1 comments on the draft Coachella Valley Transportation S udy recommendations submitted to the SLAG/PCTC/CVAG T ansportation Study Steering Committee at its March 25th m=eting. The following is a summary of the City's positions on t e proposed plan: 1. Per Resolution No 82-6 adopted on March 4, 1982, by the City �Council and submitted to you previously of the mend- ationithat Highway 111 be ion to twidened ire yto six lanes The City Council would like to re -affirm its opposition to this posed planpoAlso, judging sal and that ibyexisting development bted in the rin other cities, this does not seem to be a very realistic possibility in the future without a very significant expense. Besides Indian Wells, the likelihood that this proposal will be achieved within Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, and Indio is extremely slim. Other, more realistic alternatives should be investigated and proposed. 2. The plan proposes that the existing Del Safari Drive be widened to six lanes north of Country Club and two lanes south of Country Club. Also, the extension of Frank Sinatra Avenue is proposed to be four lanes wide from Cook to Del Safari. We at the City of Indian Wells do not think that this configuration is logical and could result in some bottlenecks regardless of the out- come of the Sunterra Project. We would be in favor of four lanes for Del Safari north and south of Country Club. The City would be in favor of the extension of Del Safari along the original "Kansas" alignment to connect with Gerald Ford Drive as a four lane street. 3. Fred Waring Drive should be recommended to be widened to four lanes from Indio to Highway 111 in Palm Desert. r. Larry Fautz outhern California Association of Government age Two Except for a small section in Palm Desert, this is already becoming a reality. 4. It is the understanding of the City that lines on the map are meant to be conceptual and not constitute exact right-of-way alignments and therefore may be deviated slightly, e.g. the extension of Eldorado between Fred Waring Drive and Avenue 42 may not be installed as a straight line or shown on the proposed map. However, there will be a relationship in some way between Avenue _ 42 and Fred Waring Drive. Please be advised of the above comments submitted to you or your use as requested. K/gpt nclosure Very truly yours, CITY OF INDIAN WELLS ?kiae? .rtu.JX-1 PAUL T.-KANEKO Planning Director . RESOLUTION NO. 87-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA STATING THE CITY'S POSITION ON THE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION ROUTES TO BETTER FACILITATE VALLEY TRAFFIC AS PRESENTED IN THE COACHELLA VALLEY AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY, PREPARED BY THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS, DATED MARCH, 1987 Area TTransportationtStudy, hasation been preparedlan iby theCoachella Southern Cali- f ornia Association of Governments and released for comment and adoption in March, 1987; and WHEREAS, the proposed plan recommended the widening of State Highway ill to six lanes through its entire length to Indio Boulevard, based and the future needs asssssment and subject to agreements between CALTRANS and the cities of the Coachella Valley; and from items existingEldorado terminationsat Fred Waring Drive as a two laned to be widened and/or anded road extending to Country Club Drive and to a four lane road to Frank Sinatra Drive; and WHEREAS, Fred Waring Drive is recommended to be widened to four lanes between Ramada Street (between Hidden Palms and Los Lagos) to Indio Boulevard in Indio; and WHEREAS, Country Club Drive is recommended for improvements to widen the length of the street to four lanes; and WHEREAS, the need for a mid -valley parkway through the valley has been established. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Indian Wells, that the following comments be transmitted to the Coachella valley Association of Governments for its information: SECTION 1. That the City of Indian Wells desires to retain its residential character and objects to the widening of Stata Highway 111, to six lanes, as recommended by the plan. increase thION 2twidening evolumeoftraffiState tHighway cnthehighw11 to six lanes ayresult ngnanwould in- crease over noise levels currently experienced in the area which would in turn adversely impact future "very low density residential" land adjacent to the highway. SECTION 3. That while the widening of Highway 111 would im- prove the flow of traffic passing through Indian wells, it is not the desires of the City to encourage travel on this roadway, but to divert through traffic to Fred warng Drive as a bypass to Highway 111.. SECTION 4. That traffic conditions on State Highway 111 could be greatly improved through the synchronization of traffic signals throughout the valley and is, therefore, supported by the City. SECTION 5. That interruptions in traffic flow on State Highway 111 could be minimized by limiting the number of access points onto the Highway, providing acceleration/deceleration lanes, left/right turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other roadway improvements. SECTION 6. That the study fails to explore all possible routes for an sast-west parkway and needs to consider every alternative (i.e., Kansas Street, Avenue 42/Bayley Lane, Fred Waring Drive, Gerald Ford Drive, Frank Sinatra Drive, Country Club Drive, etc.) prior to suggesting the widening of State Highway 111 to six lanes. Resolution No. 87-58 Page 2 SECTION 7. That previous plans for providing east -west valley parkways through the valley have been interrupted by permitting developments to occur in their proposed alignment. SECTION 8. That the City supports the major improvement of Highway 86 from Interstate 10 to the county line. SECTION 9. That the City is in favor of the proposed widening of Fred Waring Drive to a four lane street in all sections where it is currently only two lanes, as this is consistent with Policy 3.1.1. of the General Plan Circulation Element, which recommends establishing an improvement section for the roadway (i.e., width, number of lanes, bridges over the Whitewater Stormchannel in the cities of Indian Wells and Indio, etc.) SECTION 10. That the City is in complete support of the widening of Country Club Drive to four lanes from its intersection with Highway 111 in Rancho Mirage to Jefferson Street in Indio. SECTION 11. That the City agrees with the need of a mid -valley parkway and is in support of its alignment. SECTION 12. That provisions for improvements to Avenue 62 be included in the study to increase the width of the road to four lanes throughout its length. SECTION 13. That the Southern California Association of Governments be advised of these comments and reconsider their recommendation stated in the March, 1987 Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July, 1987 by the following vote: AYES: Arenstein, Aughtry, Conner, Manuel]. and Oliphant NOES: None ATTEST: PRIN... PIERS CITY MANAGER/CLERK 1 aC� RICHARD R OLIPHANT, MAYOR RESOLUTION NO. 82-6 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE CONCEPT OF A SIX LANE CONFIGURATION FOR STATE ROUTE 111 AS IT PASSES THROUGH INDIAN WELLS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Indian Wells recognizes the possible future need for additional improvement width along certain segments of State Route 111 within the Coachella Valley to accommodate projected increases in traffic; and WHEREAS, traffic congestion is presently not an ongoing problem but is confined to a relatively short tourist season, it is not appropriate at this time for planning to begin in order to implement such improvement expansion in transitory areas of congestion in order to accommodate present traffic or projected increases in traffic; and. WHEREAS, especially within the City of Indian Wells there has been demonstrated no immediate nor projected need for such expansion inasmuch as within the City State Route 111 is presently operating at a peak volume to capacity ratio of .29, thus providing ample room for expansson of use prior to any need for expansion of facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, CALIFORNIA, as follows: SECTION 1. The Citr of Indian Wells opposes the concept of actaon Splan and/or implement any expansion of the State Route 111 facility. SECTION 2. Due to the clean lack of any demonstrated need for anted State Route 111 facility through Indian Wells at the present or in the foreseeable future and due to the City's adopted policy of requiring a 50 foot landscape setback on all developments fronting on the highway that will not only beautify the highway right of way but also will allow expansion of the facility if at some distant future date it becomes necessary, there is no need to begin making provisions for such a widening at this time. PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of March. 1982 by the following vote: AYES: Oliphant, Pearce, Sheffet, Ure, Chilson NOES: NONE r(`+s dg...4111LSO FRANK CHILSON Mayor ATTEST: PRINCE £. PIERSON Ci4y Manager/Clerk F Riverside County Transportation Commission OM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director S BJECT: Proposal to Program FAU Urban Funds for Preliminary Engineering for a Route 91 Project C rrently commited projects on I-15, I-215, and Route 86 will a.sorb Riverside's "county minimum" requirement for the foresee- s le future. RCTC really has no flexibility to change its priorities to bring a project forward on Route 91; Congress has m=ndated completion of the Interstate system by 1992 and Route 86 w=s included in the last highway bill as a "Demonstration P oject". There is little likelihood that a project could be f nded on Route 91 for 12 years or more, unless the 1/2% sales t=x measure is approved by the voters. S an Oftelie, Executive Director of the Orange County Transporta- t'on Commission (OCTC), indicates they are willing to consider f nding an additional lane on Route 91 from the Orange County L'ne to Route 55, providing it would be linked to a project in Riverside County back to Corona or I-15. OCTC would prefer an e press lane (restricted to 2 or more passengers per vehicle). They could use existing local money (interest on Local T ansportation Funds which special legislation will allow them to use on highway projects). OCTC would look for a funding commitment fora linking project within two years, or they have o her priorities they would prefer to address. Q ven this situation, the most reasonable course of action for R TC would be to take action to get a Route 91 project "on the s elf" (i.e., completed preliminary engineering through environ- m-ntal certification and design engineering) in anticipation of v•ter approval of a sales tax measure.- The state cannot fund such engineering work unless the project is in the STIP. Tie most expeditious way of moving a project on Route 91 would be t• commit local funding for the engineering. However, it would h=ve to be "real money"; we could not pledge anticipated sales t-x money. The most likely source of identifiable funds would be F U funds. A cording to Caltrans' PYPSCAN run on the project, engineering c•uld not begin until January 1989. The following is an estimate o" person year requirements per year based upon PYPSCAN; costs a e based upon the work being contracted out to an engineering consultant at $80,000/PY: P oject Development & Design - '88-89 3.60 PY $288,000 '89-90 5.85 PY $468,000 '90-91 11.67 PY $933,600 '91-92 6.38 PY $510,400 ructures Design '90-91 4.30 PY $344.000 $2,544,000 Agenda Item No. 86 RCTC. November 4., 1.987 Page 2 Caltrans Division of Special Funded Projects indicates that project development work could be accelerated from that indicated by PYPSCAN. With an accelerated program, FY 88-89 personnel requirements would be about 7 PYs for a rounded cost of $600,000. To achieve our objective to get the project started, it should not be necessary to program funding for all the engineering. Funding for the first year assuming an accelerated program ($600,000) should be sufficient. Further, it may not ever be necessary to actually expend FAU funds to get the engineering going on the project. By January 1989, we will know the outcome of RCTC's transportation sales tax measure. If voters reject the sales tax proposal, it would be possible to withdraw the FAU program obligation and reprogram the funds to another project. The benefit of this proposal is that it would get the project into the STIP as a special funded project, and gain a year or more in time. If voters do approve the transportation sales tax measure, the public will expect some action relatively quickly on this high priority route. RECOMMENDATIONS: During its meeting on October 26, 1987, the Technical Advisory Committee recommended a revision to the FY 88- =9 FAU program to pledge funding to initiate project development ork for Route 91. I recommend approval of this proposal as resented. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director; SUBJECT: Proposed California Transportation Commission Policy for Funding Airport and Port Access Projects Attached is a proposed policy for funding airport and port access projects to be considered for adoption by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) at their meeting in November. The CTC is accepting comments until November 19th. The proposed policy would require that airport or port authorities or developers of adjacent industrial or commercial properties provide significant funding participation for highway improvement projects which include features to improve access into the commercial airports or ports. The policy would require the amount of funding to be appropriate for the situation and that funding participation should be negotiated before a project can be submitted to the CTC as a candidate to be added into the State Transportation Improvement Program beginning in 1988. There are a number of problems with the policy as proposed. First, there is no objective threshold to determine the level of traffic requiring participation in funding or the appropriate level of participation. Second, the inference that funds are readily available to the airports is questionable. For instance, ticket tax revenues are limited to on -site improvements and landing fees are generally negotiated in long term contracts that are fairly rigid. Increasing these fees would be very difficult prior to the end of the contract term. Third, there are loopholes in the policy that would exclude improvements of access to major and small airports but not to medium size airports. SCAG will present these and other problems with the proposed policy to the CTC at their meeting in Palm Desert on November 19th. We have invited Eric Haley from SCAG to attend the RCTC meeting to discuss the policy and its problems. RECOMMENDATION Oppose the California Transportation Commission's proposed policy for funding airport and port access projects as it is currently written. JR/PB:nk Attachment Agenda Item No. 9 ROTC November 4, 1987 wILLIAM T. BAGLEY. Chairman J.T. (TOM) AWTHORNE, Vies Chairman JOE DUFF MARGIE W NDLEY STANLEY . NULETT k EVO KIAN Wi�.1AM E LEONARD Joe LEVY BRUCE NE ANDE ROBERT S IELSEN, Elea Diracior STATE OF CALIFORNIA moms DEUKMEJM GOVERNOR CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION October 5, 1987 1120 N STREET. P.O. BOX 942e73 SACRAMENTIO E42T3-0001 OM* 44e-1e90 TO: Airport & Port Districts Regional Transportation Planning Agencies Caltrans RECEIVED OCT 9 1987 Riverside County Transportation Commission The California Transportation Commission is considering a revised version of a policy that would require airports and ports to participate in the funding of projects that improve access to their facilities.• This proposed policy would make formal a de facto policy that the Commission has been following for at least the past three years. A copy of the revised draft for this proposed policy is attached. The Commission may make further changes in this proposed policy as a result of comments received by phone or in writing between now and its meeting on October 15, 1987, in Sacramento, or as a result of comments or discussion on the floor of the October meeting. The Commission has extended its adoption until its November meeting, and any comments received by the Commission office by November 9, 1987, will be considered and reported by staff to the Commission at the November meeting, before any action is taken. Sincerely, ROBERT S. NIELSEN Executive Director RSN:PH:K28 cv92:CV2 Attachment _ i COtiMENTS Revised 10/5/87 G-87-9 PROPOSED POLICY FOR FUNDING AIRPORT AND PORT ACCESS PROJECTS WHEREAS increases in traffic bound for =tor commercial airports and ports and adjacent industrial and commercial areas are typically an important factor in a need for highway improvements near those facilities, and WHEREAS the cost of highway thilitiiiii¢0/Ak4 improvements greatly exceeds the present levels of federal and state revenues coming into the highway program, and WHEREAS most major commercial airports and ports have access funds and user fee revenues that are much better able to needs of aiii their own facilities, WHEREAS new industrial and commercial developments are responsible for mitigating traffic impacts that would result development, and to Federal meet the and typically from their WHEREAS the Commission desires to balance the use of funds available for transportation with overall transportation priorities, and direct available funding toward meeting the most important needs of the public, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the California Transportation Commission, under current stringent financial conditions, expects significant funding participation lila from airport or port authorities or developers of adjacent industrial or commercial properties in the programming of highway improvement projects which include features to improve access into those commercial airports or ports, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission is open to funding arrangements that may include any mix of airport or port funds federal or local), assessments from nearby developed properties, or other kinds of local or private funding, in an appropriate amount for the situation, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that regions in their Regional TIPS and Caltrans in its PSTIP should negotiate such funding participation before bringing improvement projects forward as candidates foit to be added into the STIP in 1988 and future years, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission may waive this policy in any of the following circumstances; o For projects proposed to be funded entirely from sources outside the state highway program, o For projects for which the Commission can make a finding of overriding statewide economic importance, j - 2 - a For projects for which the Commission can make a finding that the airport or port access benefits are relatively minor and ancillary to the benefits for mainline highway traffic, or o In a case where the Commission can find that there are sufficient highway funds available to meet highway needs in a given year, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the California Transportation Commission will review this policy when a significant change in highway program revenges or the overall size of the state highway improvement program has been attained. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 0: Riverside County Transportation Commission ROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director UBJECT: Legislative Items - SB 516 and ikB 366 B 516 (BERGESON) his bill has been under consideration during the last two egislative sessions. it would provide legislative authority for altrans to contract out engineering work. Concessions have been ade to Caltrans career engineers to provide a formula for adding o state force in proportion to work that would be contracted ut. The bill did not succeed during the last session because of isadvantaged and Women Business Enterprise goals, added during onsideration by the Assembly, which were viewed as unreasonable o the Governor. wring recent hearings by the "Little Hoover Commission", the roblem of Caltrans' project delivery was examined. In large easure, this problem relates to Caltrans' inability to contract ut work. The attached material from Bruce Nestande of the alifornia Transportation Commission provides a more thorough xplanation of the need for SB 516. B 366 (BAKER) B 366 became law on September 10, 1987. It establishes a $50 illion State Highway Construction Revolving Account from which hose who are locally funding highway construction .projects may orrow for up to two years. The amendment which is needed is to dentify engineering as an eligible cost for such loans. This is articularly important to Riverside County in light of the roposal to use FAU funds to initiate preliminary engineering for project on Route 91. If we were able to borrow from this fund, t would then be possible to lessen the impact on more immediate AU funded local road projects. Agenda Item No. 10 RCTC November 4, 1987 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. SB 516 - Support efforts of Caltrans and the California Transportation Commission to provide Caltrans with more clear-cut authority to contract out engineering services. We should contact local legislators, particularly those in the State Assembly, to request that they support such a bill which is not encumbered with unreasonable MBE/WBE goals. 2. AB 366 - Initiate actions to amend this bill to identify engineering as an eligible expense to borrow against the State Highway Construction Revolving Account. We should ask our State Assembly and Senate representatives to work with Assemblyman William Baker toward such amendment. JR:nk WILLIMLA BAGLEY, Chairman J.T-(TOM) AWTHORNE, Vice Chairman JOE DUFF L MARGIE H NDLEY STANLEY .HULETT ' ' XEV • ' KIAN .IAM = LEONARD JOE LEVY BRUCE N ANDE ROBERT S STATE OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN GOVERNOR CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION NIELSEN, Exact Director 1120 N STREET, P.O. BOX 842873 SACRAMENTO 94273-0001 (ole) 446-tesio October 2, 1987 TO: Members of the Transportation Community • RECENTIT, OCT 9 1987 Riverside Cote. y Transportation Commission In the last days of the legislative session, Senate Bill 516 (Bergeson), a most critical bill for the transportation program, did not pass. As active participants in transportation, you will recognize the significance of this failure. We must assign the highest priority to early passage of this bill when the Legislature reconvenes in January. This measure must not be killed for the third year in a row. Please feel free to use copies of the attached paper wherever possible, particularly with your Legislator, in working toward passage of SB 516. Sincerely, L/ � BRUCE NESTANDE Commissioner BN:RIR:bpm:F26 b5:bpm6 Attachment c ng G:17'81;71 ,ai;r .cc:e.t? I ,4) o s sri �- c c lam •,..-- = YE5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WILLIAM . BAGLEY, Chairmen aT. (10k8 NAWTNORNE, Visa Chairman JOE DUF EL MARGIE ANDLEY `1NLEY .HULETT KE RK1AN WILLIAM LEONARD JOE LEY BRUCE N STAMM ROBERT ' NIELSEN, Exec. Director 1120 N STREET, P.O.80x 942373 SACRAMENTO 94273-0001 (91 e144e-1e90 THE NEED FOR CALTRANS CONTRACTING OUT SB516 - SENATOR MARIAN BERGESON by Bruce Nestande GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN GOVERNOR I 1983, at the beginning of the Deukmejian Administration, the f=deral and state transportation revenue for capital outlay w=nt from $600 million to $900 million annually. Since that y=ar there has been a steady infusion of dollars available for c-pital construction from a number of new "non-traditional" f ding sources. T pr as a se new funding sources include federal demonstration jects, local county sales tax programs, local single -project essment districts, and local developer -funded projects plus enewed emphasis on state -funded projects. Th-refore, in four years, several billion dollars of new money ha = been infused into the system. Initially, the Department of Tr=nsportation (Caltrans) effectively geared up to meet the sh=rp increase in new money. But without any institutional al erations regarding the sufficiency of project development ty•e personnel, they are simply unable to maintain that high le el of activity over the long term. An added dilemma is a fa t that; Caltrans will begin to lose half its 1,649 registered engineers and some of its most experienced staff over the next tw-lve years. Beyond that, replacement of retiring engineers co ld be difficult because fewer students are enrolling in engineering, and Caltrans is not the drawing card it was during th heyday of freeway building. No withstanding this availability of new dollars, it should be no ed that the state system remains severely under -funded based on what needs to be done in developing an adequate transportation system. However, at the present time we don't ha a the personnel to remain current with the work generated by th infusion of new funds present since 1983. Fo C pr co pr that reason, in 1984, the California Transportation ission, along with many local government officials and vate sector organizations began to mobilize support for tracting out Caltrans peak workload projects to qualified vate sector businesses. Senator Marian Bergeson first introduced a contracting out bill i1986, with Administration support. It has died in two cnsecutive legislative sessions. Essentially, SB516 allows a s able state employee workforce to accommodate the traditional wrkload. However, the bill provides for an expeditious p ocedure to contract out whenever the Caltrans Director d=termines that the department is inadequately staffed to carry opt the department's project delivery schedule in a timely and e fective manner. We are unequivocally past that point now, a d private sector contracting out is still being debated and d layed by the California Legislature. P esent law theoretically allows for contracting out, but the 1 w is vague, cumbersome to execute, and once an agreement to cntract out is obtained, it is challengeable in court. B=sically, with certain rare exceptions, all work for the state m st be performed by state civil service employees. It is p edictable that state employee unions do not support contracting out work to the private sector, and most every a tempt to contract out has been challenged in court. T erefore, the ability for Caltrans to contract out project d velopment work with the private sector is of critical iportance. At the present time there is approximately $1 b llion dollars in the bank, and each passing year, without the agility to contract out, approximately $300 million goes u spent, road projects are delayed, costs escalate because the p ogram year is delayed, and the result is fewer projects will new be completed due to the increased cost of programmed but d-layed projects. T e sad result is that as much as we need more dollars to keep e en with our traffic demands, it makes little sense to seek ✓ Venue enhancements when you can't spend efficiently dollars t at are currently available. Contracting out will resolve t at dilemma. I addition to addressing a current crisis of predictable p oject delays, the concept of private sector contracting out o ght to be encouraged throughout government. The state workforce is not sufficiently flexible to direct its resources i specific areas to accommodate an intensified work effort. Aso, you can't staff up Caltrans quickly to meet unexpected p ak workloads. I the policy option to hire additional state personnel to meet a peak work load were adopted, you must then commence costly a d disruptive layoffs when you return to a more normal work 1•ad. However, in most local communities, private consultants c=n generate a sufficient number of engineers, architects, d signers, surveyors, planners, and environmental specialists t• meet local project demands. -2- should be noted that in addition to the hundreds of millions o dollars which go unspent each year because of an i sufficient number of project development personnel, C=lifornia stands to lose additional millions of Federal liars to other states. The 1987 Federal Highway Act provides g eat opportunity for "bonus" Interstate Discretionary f nding. However, to compete for these funds, the Federal ✓ les require that an applicant be project ready. It is very d'fficult to be project ready for "bonus" highway dollars t.taling $400 million without the provisions of contracting out ( B516) enacted into law. I 's a significant legislative failure that this critically i portant statewide transportation legislation has died twice i the legislature. There was not one feature in SB516 that w•uld preclude Caltrans Director, Leo Trombatore, from a• inistering the provision of contracting out, and get some n eded projects onto a more acceptable time schedule. E ery day of delay exasperates the problem. Every county will b impacted because the State Transportation Improvement Plan (.TIP) reflects each county's transportation plan. L-t's do our part to end this senseless waste of resources. I 's impossible to accept as public policy a revenue shortage of crisis proportions, yet be unable to spend efficiently the & liars we currently possess, or could obtain. SB516 is a critical link in providing Caltrans the statutory authority to et irregular demands created by the complexity and ltiplicity of today's highway funding problems. Ch. 505 — 2 — CHAPTER 505 An act to add Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 2560) to Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code, relating to state high- way funding, and making an appropriation therefor. [Approved by Governor September 10, 1987. Filed with Secretary of State September 10, 1987.] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 366, Baker. State Highway Construction Revolving Account. Under existing law, the Department of Transportation is not authorized to advance money in the State Transportation Fund to local entities for construction of improvements to,the state highway system. This bill would create the State Highway Construction Revolving Account in the State Transportation Fund, and would continuously appropriate all money in the account to the department for advances to counties and cities for costs of construction of improvements to the state highway system that would benefit the local community. The bill would specify related powers and duties of the department and terms and conditions of any such advance. The bill would transfer $50,000,000 from the State Highway Account in the State Transportation Fund to the State Highway Construction Revolving Account. Appropriation: yes. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 2560) is added to Division 3 of the Streets and Highways Code, to tead: CHAPTER 15. STATE HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION REVOLVING ACCOUNT 2560. The State Highway Construction Revolving Account is hereby created in the State Transportation Fund. All interest earned on funds in the account or earned on advances from the account pursuant to Section 2561 shall be deposited in the State Highway Account until the time the total deposits of interest earned on funds in or advances from the State Highway Construction Revolving Account equal the amount transferred to the State Highway Construction Revolving Account by the statute enacting this chapter. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, all money in the account is continuously appropriated to the department for carrvinv mit tba nuirrusee, , c .i,:e clues and counties for all or a portion of the cost of construction of improvements to the state highway system that are already programmed in the adopted state transportation improvement program ,and that would benefit the local community. A city or county may apply for an advance pursuant to this section on behalf of a special district, subject to Section 2564. All advances shall be subject to .the terms and conditions of an advance agreement between the department and local agency. The agreement shall include a requirement that the improvement shall _ be subject to review and approval by the department, that the time for repayment of the advance be Iimited to no longer than 24 months, and that the payment of interest beat the rate being eamed by the Pooled Money Investment Account at the time of the advance. 2562. All requests for advances and agreements shall be approved by the commission before being processed by the department. 2563. All direct expenses of the commission and the department in administering this chapter shall be funded from the State Highway Construction Revolving Account. ' 2564. If an advance is not repaid by a city or county within the time agreed upon, the Controller shall withhold the apportionments to the city or county under Sections 2104, 2106, and 2107 and credit these apportionments to the advance until it is repaid in accordance with the tering and conditions of the agreement. SEC. 2. Section 2565 is added to the Streets and Highways Code, to read: 2565. The commission' shall develop and adopt guidelines and procedures for implementing the loan program in cooperation with the department. SEC. 3. The sum of fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) is hereby transferred" from the State Highway Account in the State Transportation Fund to the State Highway Construction Revolving Account in the State Transportation Find. O RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Riverside County Transportation Commission, Personnel Committee ROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director UBJECT: Request Authorization to RecrOt for Staff Positions In order for RCTC to fulfill its existing and new responsibilities, some additional staff support will be needed. ew responsibilities include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) program, and assumption of some Transportation Development Act (TDA) administration responsibilities to be transferred from the Southern California Association of overnments (SCAG). In addition, RCTC staff will have to perform additional work to refine the "Preliminary Expenditure Plan for a Proposed 1/2 Cent Local Sales Tax Measure", and to assure that a campaign organization is accurately reporting the content of that Plan. For now, I believe that one (1) additional professional staff position should be authorized. I propose to initiate recruiting for a high level staff analyst ($.3250 to $4000/mo. ) so that the position may be filled no later than January 1, 1988. In addition, I propose to secure the services of a part-time Clerk Typist (1/2 tine) to help deal with the increasing office work load. Compensation for this position should be $9.00/hour. Attached is a proposed "Organizational Chart" and a "Matrix of Staff Assignments" which shows the proposed responsibilities of existing and proposed staff. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that these additional positions be approved and that I be authorized to initiate recruitment. The target date for filling the positions should be January 1, 1988, or perhaps earlier if necessary to secure the services of the most qualified applicants. JR: nk Agenda Item No. 11 RCTC November 4, 1987 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PROPOSED STAFFING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR i ASSISTANT DIRECTOR EXECUTIVE SECRETARY F(PaEN' PIST ERK rt Time) i RIYBRSIDR COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MATRIX OF STAFF ASSIGNMENTS Proposed Jack Paul Proposed Naty Part-time Reagan Blackwelder Analyst Eopenhaver Typist/Clerk SCAO Overall Work Program Items Long Range Planning Support Regional Transportation Plan 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Coachella Valley Transportation Study 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Riverside/San Bernardino Traffic Model 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Routes 91/218 Study 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Cajalco Corridor Study 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Short Range Planning A Programming Short -Range Transit Plan 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Regional Transportation Improvement Program 1,2,3 4 4 n/a n/a Federal Aid Urban Program 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a UMTA Formula Programs (9 8 18) 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a SB-821 Program 1,2,3 4 4 n/a n/a Other Required RCTC Work Items Sales Tpx Expenditure Plan 1,3 2,3 4 n/a n/a Transportation Development Act Admin. 1 2,9 4 n/a Service Authority for P Emergencies 1 2,3 4 n/a n/a Intergovernmental Coordination 1,3 4 4 4 n/a Administration General Administration 1,3 Budget Preparation 1,3 Bookkeeping 2 General Office Support 1 - Policy Direction 2 - Supervision 3 - Primary Work Responsibility 4 - Support Work Responsibility 4 4 4 n/e 4 n/a 2,3,4 4 2,3,4 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO: FROM: Jack Reagan, Executive Director SUBJECT: Request for Consideration t Retain Consultant to Review the "Expenditure Plan" Assumptions of Revenues and Estimated Highway Cost Estimates Riverside County Transportation Commission Attached is an October 20, 1987 letter from D.J. Smith recommending that RCTC retain a qualified consultant to review Caltrans' estimates of project costs and revenue estimates shown in the preliminary "Expenditure Plan". In response to the proposal, I performed some additional preliminary analysis which indicates that State and Federal revenue estimates may be overestimated. This analysis was based upon assumptions that additional sales taxes would be generated to reflect inflation and project costs would increase from inflation, but Federal and State highway revenues would remain constant. More in-depth analysis performed by a qualified consultant could show a range of revenue assumptions which RCTC might use to revise and finalize the "Expenditure Plan". The San Bernardino Association of Governments had Arthur Young and Company perform such analysis, but commissioned the study too late to really make any change to the Plan to be before their voters on November 3rd. Such analysis would be more timely for u6. D.J. Smith's letter speaks to problems with cost estimates in other parts of the State. Here in Riverside County, we have seen major differences between the initial highway project cost estimates used for the preliminary "Expenditure Plan" and subsequent Project Study Reports done by Caltrans. Some of the later estimates were sufficiently different to cause staff to question which numbers are more reliable for o-ur planning purposes. In the event RCTC's proposed 1/2% transportation sales tax measure is taken to the voters, the State highway projects are the only projects which will be specifically identified. RCTC will be held politically accountable by the voters to deliver the identified program - which it will not be able to do if the estimate of revenues are too high and estimates of project costs are too low. I agree that RCTC should consider retaining a consultant or consultants to review both the revenue and highway project cost estimates. Staff will prepare an estimate of consultant costs by the November 4, 1987 meeting. Staff will also review options for selecting such qualified consultant(s) quickly. The information is needed in January if revisions to the preliminary "Expenditure Amanda Ltiam Nn 19A Plan" are to be made in February. Even if the measure is deferred until the November 1988 ballot, it is essential to determine the final "Expenditure Plan" as soon as possible; uncertainty regarding projects which may reasonably be funded with the assistance of 1/2% sales tax funds would detract from early campaign efforts when presentations are made to community groups. RECOMMENDATION That the Commission schedule a special meeting later in November to act upon the proposal to retain a consultant to review the "Expenditure Plan" assumptions of revenues and estimated highway cost estimates. JR: nk D. J. SMITH ASSOCIATES goosatellits9 So a oese4sso enlal R.eiQlfiond RECEIVED OCT 221987 Riverside County Transportation Commission October 20, 198 Mr. Jack Reagan Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commis 4075 Main Street, Suite 302 Riverside, California 92501 Dear Jack: HOTEL SENATOR BUILDING • SUITE 401 1121 L STREET • SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 TELEPHONE (916) 446-5508 700 YGNACIO VALLEY ROAD • SUITE 320 WALNUT CREEK,CAUFORNIA 94596-3822 TELEPHONE (415) 947-1966 TO FROM INFO 9 _ _-- ProQrar rr.:,;v ; ; sereta , � 1 COMMENTS Pursuant to our recent meeting in R vets 8, 1987, I would like to follow up with a zga mmendation regarding the need for verification of various a -ring cost estimates on the major projects to be included in the Riverside County transportation sales tax expenditure program. Based on my experience working on sales tax expenditure programs for other counties, and the actual costs that major projects come in at when they have actually gone to the final design and engineering phase, I would strongly recommend that the Riverside County Transportation Commission consider hiring an engineering consultant to provide an objective review of the cost estimates for the major projects expected to be included in the Riverside County expenditure program. As you know, both Alameda and Santa Clara Counties are now experiencing cost increases over the original estimates in the 20 to 40 percent range. Obviously, this becomes of major concern when voters have been promised delivery of specific projects and federal, state and local sources to make up the difference between the original estimate and the current cost are simply not available. I propose that you consider a consultant that is familiar with the concept of value engineering, major highway cost estimates, as well as the cost of construction support activities such as preliminary planning, environmental clearances; engineering design and construction supervision. They should also be very aware of, and experienced in the current Caltrans methods for constructing major projects and allocating costs for those projects. It would obviously be important that this firm have actual experience in the planning, design and construction of major highway projects, whether here in California or elsewhere in the United States. AC1 Mr. Jack Reagan October 20, 1987 Page Two I would also recommend that a Construction Advisory Committee be established by the Commmission in order to work with the engineering consultant. The membership of this Construction Advisory Committee, to be chaired by you, should consist of Caltrans, the transit district, and public works staff from each of the cities and the County, who are experienced in engineering cost estimates. Finally, I would also recommend that I work with you and the Construction Advisory Committee to review the revenue estimates used to fund the expenditure plan. We should consider a range of conservative to liberal assumptions and scenarios in order to give the Commission the best possible advise relative to availability of funding. If you feel this recommendation should be pursued, I would suggest that it be implemented as soon as possible so that the expenditure plan developed and adopted by the Commission is as realistic as.possible. As always, please contact me if you have questions regarding this recommendation, or anything else. Sincerely, . Smith DJS/jf The Sachems- Bea Final • WedaaedaY, October 14,1867 s ter me 2 counties warn By Laura Mem Bee Capitol Bureau OAKLAND — Officials in two of the three counties that have raised sales taxes to build new highways said Tuesday that costs of ma- jor projects have more than doubled and that most are running behind schedule be- cause of miscalculations by the state Depart- ment of Transportation. They also warned their colleagues in oth- er parts of the slate — like those in Sacra- mento County — that they may face the same problems if they go forward with plans to put sates tax increases on the ballot in hopes of getting new highways. During a joint hearing of the Assembly Transportation Committee and the slate's watchdog agency, the Little Hoover Commis- sion, officials in Santa Clara and Alameda counties said the costs of some projects more than doubled after voters approved sales tax increases. Officials from Fresno County, the third county to raise its taxes, were not asked to testify. "Our lush is on the line — those of us who went out and sold this (tax increase); Hay- ward Mayor Alex Giuliani told lawmakers and commission members. "We are coming to you, hat in hand, and saying we need your support to deliver these projects in our coun- ty. Otherwise, we will be history." He noted that the Deukmejian administra- tion, in a departure from the past policy of paying for roads with gasoline taxes, has been urging counties to raise the state's 6- cent sales tax to pay for new highways. But he warned that Caltrans would have to change its ways if it expects "this experi- ment" In highway financing to succeed. Caltrans Director Leo Trombatore said he's already doubled the pace of construc- tion In the last tour years and would consid- er any proposals to further speed up hiehwav orniects_ The department's own studies, however, show about 60 percent of highway projects paid for by local sales taxes and developer fees are behind schedule. They also show about 40 percent of those financed by gaso- line taxes are -missing deadlines. Trombatore said cost estimates rose be- cause of changes in projects sodght by local officials and because the Legislature elimi- nated a Caltrans program to keep potential project estimates up-to-date. He said neither Santa Clara nor Alameda counties gave Cal - trans enough time to update their estimates and, as a result, it later had to Increase the price tags for certain projects. Atter the hearing, Trombatore said Cal - trans might have the same difficulty in esti- mating the cost of projects proposed for Sacramento County because local officials have not yet determined the highways they would build if voters approve a tax increase intended for the June ballot. Despite Trombatore's explanations for Caltrans' delays and faulty estimates, Little Hoover Commission Chairman Nathan Sha- pell said it was "ridiculous" that the depart- ment couldn't move faster to build new highways. He promised to press for a meet- ing with the governor to seek changes in Cal - trans' operations. "The state's highways are in a crisis and good speeches are not going to solve the problem," he said. Assembly Transportation Committee Chairman Richard Katz said the state is "on the brink of mobility disaster" and called Caltrans a "major roadblock" to solving the state's traffic woes. "We don't need rationalizations and ex- cuses," said the Sepulveda Democrat. "We need highways." Katz has proposed a $1.5 billion bond issue to build new highways, and Gov. Deukmeji- an has proposed $2.3 billion in bonds for the same purpose. But Katz said neither bond proposal should move forward unless Cal - trans can speed up its highway construction program. However, Assemblyman Rusty Areias, D Los Banos, said Caltrans is not to blame. He said the department Is short-handed because of Deukmejian's efforts to limit the number of state employees. "Caltrans works with an administration that has asked it, In effect, to go out and slay a dragon with a broken sword," he said. Trombatore said Caltrans tried to expand its work force by using .private engineers to do its work. But a bill allowing such "con- tracting out" did not move out of the Senate this year because it contained minority hir- ing goals that were opposed by Republicans. "In contrast with some reports of delays, 1 believe Caltrans has done very well this year," he said. "Caltrans produced $504 Mil- lion of projects.... These accomplishments are an appropriate measure of Caltrans per- formance." E For Your Information t" Q ter,„. Go�QLlMEivs 0�