HomeMy Public PortalAbout11 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 ' I f l " " l ' ' i
C O I T N i . . l t �� R S I D E
c t o b e r 2 0 , 1 9 8 7
r . J a c k R e a g a n , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
0 7 5 M a i n S t r e e t , S u i t e 3 0 2
i v e r s i d e , C a l i f o r n i a 9 2 5 0 1
e a r M r . R e a g a n :
B O A R D O F S U P E R V I S O R S
W A L T P . A B R A H A M
7 8 7 . 2 0 1 0
M E L B A D U N L A P
7 8 7 . 2 4 2 4
K A Y C E N I C � R O S
7 8 7 - 2 6 3 0
P A T R I C I A ( C O R K Y ) L A R S O N
7 8 7 . 2 8 4 0
N O R T O N Y O U N G L O V E
7 8 7 . 2 9 5 0
R E C E V E D
O C T 2 1 1 9 6 7
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
s y o u k n o w , t h e B o a r d o f S u p e r v i s o r s o f R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y s u p p o r t s t h e p l a c i n g
f t h e L o c a l S a l e s T a x f o r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n R e v e n u e o n t h e b a l l o t . H o w e v e r ,
i v e n t h e t i m e , r e q u i r e d t o a n a l y z e t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e S a n B e r n a r d i n o C o u n t y
l e c t i o n a n d t h e " e f f o r t n e e d e d t o p r e p a r e a s u c c e s s f u l e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m t o
d u c a t e v o t e r s , i t i s r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
C o m m i s s i o n c o n s i d e r p o s t p o n i n g t h e e l e c t i o n u n t i l N o v e m b e r , 1 9 8 8 .
T h a n k y o u f o r y o u r c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h i s r e q u e s t .
S i n c e r e l y ,
W
B
J
L T P . A B R A H A M , C h a i r m a n
a n d o f S u p e r v i s o r s
O U N T Y A D M I N I S T R A T I V E C E N T E R " F O U R T E E N T H F L O O R " 4 0 8 0 L E M O N S T R E E T " R I V E R S I D E , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 5 0 1
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�