HomeMy Public PortalAbout06 June 2, 2006 SR-91 Advisory Committee76864 JH/EH/CB/JS
•
•
STATE ROUTE 97 ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Date:
Time:
Where:
Friday, June 2, 2006
9:00 a.m.
Orange County Transportation Authority - Headquarters
600 South Main Street, First Floor, Room 154
Orange, California
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Bill Campbell
Chairman
Jeff Miller
Vice Chairman
Bob Buster
Committee Member
Carolyn Cavecche
Committee Member
Richard Dixon
Committee Member
Michael Duvall
Committee Member
Frank Hall
Committee Member
Bob Magee
Committee Member
Curt Pringle
Committee Member
John Tavaglione
Committee Member
Ron Roberts
Alternate
Committee Member
Michael A. Perovich
Caltrans District 8
Cindy Quon
Caltrans District 12
Alan Wapner
SANBAG
For further information, please contact Wendy Knowles, Orange County Transportation Authority
Clerk of the Board, at (714) 560-5676.
HH.35.0
AGENDA
State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting
Orange County Transportation Authority Headquarters
600 South Main Street, First Floor - Room 154
Orange, California
Friday, June 2, 2006, at 9:00 a.m.
Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to
participate in this meeting should contact the Orange County Transportation Authority Clerk of
the Board, telephone (714) 560-5676, no less than two (2) business days prior to this meeting
to enable OCTA to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to this meeting.
Agenda Descriptions
The agenda descriptions are intended to give notice to members of the public of a general
summary of items of business to be transacted or discussed. The posting of the recommended
actions does not indicate what action will be taken. The Committee may take any action which it
deems to be appropriate on the agenda item and is not limited in any way by the notice of the
recommended action.
Public Comments on Agenda Items
Members of the public wishing to address the Committee regarding any item appearing on the
agenda may do so by completing a Speaker's Card and submitting it to the Clerk of the Board.
Speakers will be recognized by the Chairman at the time the agenda item is to be considered. A
speaker's comments shall be limited to three (3) minutes.
Call to Order
Chairman Campbell
Pledge of Allegiance
Committee Member Dixon
Special Calendar
1. Introduction of New Committee Members
2. Election of New State Route 91 Advisory Committee Chairman
3. Election of New State Route 91 Advisory Committee Vice Chairman
4. Committee Meetings Days and Times
Committee discussion regarding the meeting dates for 2006 as proposed (see
attached).
Page 1 of 3
Consent Calendar (Item 5)
All matters on the Consent Calendar are to be approved in one motion unless a
Committee member or member of the public requests separate action on a specific
item.
AGENDA
State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting •
5. Approval of Minutes
Of the November 18, 2005, State Route 91 Advisory Committee meeting.
Regular Calendar
6. Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project Update
Daryl Watkins, OCTA, Manager of Toll Road and Motorist Services
Overview
An update on the Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project and a
description of the Federal Highways Administration Value Pricing Project Grant
award are submitted for review.
Recommendation
Receive and file as an information item.
7. Riverside County - Orange County Major Investment Study Draft Action
Plan
Paul C. Taylor, OCTA, Executive Director of Planning, Development, and
Commuter Services
Overview
A draft three-year plan for actions following the recently completed major
investment study is presented for review, discussion, and potential action.
Recommendation
Approve the draft action plan and direct staff to forward the plan to the Riverside
County Transportation Commission and Orange County Transportation Authority
Boards of Directors for approval.
Page 2 of 3
AGENDA
State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting
Other Matters
8. 2006 Draft State Route 91 Implementation Plan
Kurt Brotcke, OCTA, Department Manager of Planning and Development
9. Riverside County Transportation Commission Strategic Partnership
Project Overview
Anne Mayer, RCTC, Deputy Executive Director
10. Proposal for Renewed Measure M
Paul C. Taylor, OCTA, Executive Director of Planning, Development, and
Commuter Services
11. Riverside Orange Corridor Authority Cooperative Agreement
Paul C. Taylor, OCTA, Executive Director of Planning, Development, and
Commuter Services
12. General Manager's Report
13. Committee Members' Reports
14. Public Comments
15. Closed Session
There is no Closed Session scheduled.
16. Adjournment
The next regularly scheduled meeting of the State Route 91 Advisory Committee
will be held at 9:00 a.m. on September 8, 2006, at the City of Corona, City
Council Chambers, 400 South Vicentia Avenue, Corona, California.
Page 3 of 3
Item 4
STATE ROUTE 91 ADVISORY COMMITTEE
PROPOSED 2006 MEETING CALENDAR
Date
Time
Location
September 8, 2006
9:00 a.m.
City of Corona
City Council Chambers
400 South Vicentia Avenue
Corona, California
December 1, 2006
9:00 a.m.
Orange County Transportation Authority
Headquarters — First Floor, Room 154
600 South Main Street
Orange, California
Item 5
Committee Members Present
Bill Campbell, Chair
Jeff Miller, Vice Chair
Bob Buster
Michael Duvall
Frank Hall
Bob Magee
Ameal Moore
Curt Pringle
Cindy Quon
John Tavaglione
Committee Members Absent
Art Brown
Carolyn Cavecche
Curt Pringle
Alan Wapner
MINUTES
State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting
Staff Present
Arthur T. Leahy, OCTA, Chief Executive Officer
Eric Haley, RCTC, Executive Director
Cathy Bechtel, RCTC, Division Head, Planning
Daryl Watkins, General Manager, 91 Express Lanes
Steve DeBaun, RCTC, Legal Counsel
Laurena Weinert, OCTA, Assistant Clerk of the Board
Mary Burton, OCTA, Deputy Clerk of the Board
OCTA and RCTC staff and members of the General Public
The November 18, 2005, regular meeting of the State Route 91 Advisory Committee
was called to order at 12:10 p.m. at the Orange County Transportation Authority
Headquarters, First Floor - Room 154; Committee Chairman Campbell presided.
Call to Order
Special Matters
There were no Special Calendar Matters.
Consent Calendar (Item 1)
1. Approval of Minutes
A motion was made by Committee Member Buster, seconded by Committee
Member Duvall, and declared passed unanimously by the Committee Members
present, to approve minutes of the State Route 91 Advisory Committee meeting
of July 15, 2005.
November 18, 2005
Page 1 of 3
Regular Calendar
MINUTES
State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meetings
2. Agreement for Operation and Management of the 91 Express Lanes
Daryl Watkins, General Manager of 91 Express Lanes, stated that on October
24, 2005, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Board of
Directors authorized the Chief Executive Officer to executean agreement
between the OCTA and Cofiroute USA, LLC, to operate and manage the 91
Express Lanes for a five-year term in amount not to exceed $30,800,854.
Committee Chairman Campbell stated that OCTA elected not to exercise a
12-month renewal option on the prior agreement and instead went out to bid.
The selection of Cofiroute will save nearly $1.15 million per year.
This was a receive and file as an information item, and no action was taken.
Other Matters
3. Possible Managed Lane Changes Considered in Major Investment Study
Daryl Watkins, General Manager of 91 Express Lanes, provided a preview of a
reversible lane concept for the State Route 91. The concept would extend the,
91 Express Lanes from the Riverside County line to the Interstate 15.
This item will be agendized for the next State Route 91 Advisory Committee
meeting.
4. 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy as it Relates to Hybrid Vehicles
Daryl Watkins, General Manager of 91 Express Lanes, provided a brief
presentation regarding Assembly Bill 2628, which allows certain hybrid vehicles
access to highway lanes or highway access ramps for high occupancy vehicles.
However, the state law does not address tolls.
Vice Chairman Miller stated that he received an email from Ron Santiago
regarding this issue.
A motion was made by Committee Chairman Campbell, seconded by Committee
Member Duvall, and declared passed unanimously by the Committee Members
present, to not change the current policy.
November 18, 2005 Page 2 of 3
MINUTES
State Route 91 Advisory Committee Meeting
5. General Manager's Report
Daryl Watkins, General Manager of 91 Express Lanes, introduced Pete Cruz
and Rico Bone lli from Macias, Gini and Company, LLP, who performs the
independent audits for the 91 Express Lanes annual financial report and
franchise agreement report.
Committee Chairman Campbell requested that when the audit report is available
to forward a copy to each Committee Member.
Mr. Watkins referenced the marketing package distributed to the Committee, and
stated that the 10th anniversary for the 91 Express Lanes is on December 27,
2005. He highlighted the 10th anniversary marketing program objectives.
6. Committee Members' Reports
There were no Committee Members' re
7. Public Comments
There were no public comments.
8. Adjournment
The November 18, 200-5, meeting of
adjourned at 12:20 p.m.
The next regularly scheduled meeting
will be held at 9:00 a.m. on Friday,
Meeting Facilities, Pinnacle Room,
California 92883-0620.
ATTEST
Bill Campbell
Committee Chairman
ports.
the State Route 91 Advisory Committee
of the State Route 91 Advisory Committee
March 3, 2006, at Eagle Glen Golf Club
at 1800 Eagle Glen Parkway, Corona,
Laurena Weinert
OCTA Assistant Clerk of the Board
November 18, 2005
Page 3 of 3
" F a
O C T A
I t e m 6
J u n e 2 , 2 0 0 6
T o : S t a t e R o u t e 9 1 A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e
F r o m : D a r y l W a t k i n s , G e n e r a l M a n a g e r , 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s
S u b j e c t : P e r f o r m a n c e M o n i t o r i n g a n d P r i c i n g P i l o t P r o j e c t U p d a t e
O v e r v i e w
A n u p d a t e o n t h e P e r f o r m a n c e M o n i t o r i n g a n d P r i c i n g P i l o t P r o j e c t a n d a
d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e F e d e r a l H i g h w a y s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n V a l u e P r i c i n g P r o j e c t G r a n t
a w a r d a r e s u b m i t t e d f o r r e v i e w .
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n
R e c e i v e a n d f i l e a s a n i n f o r m a t i o n i t e m .
B a c k g r o u n d
T h e O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( O C T A ) i n i t i a t e d t h e P e r f o r m a n c e
M o n i t o r i n g a n d P r i c i n g P i l o t P r o j e c t ( P M A P ) i n 2 0 0 4 t o e x p l o r e t h e b e n e f i t s o f
d y n a m i c p r i c i n g a n d t e s t i t s a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s . T h e O C T A
B o a r d o f D i r e c t o r s ( B o a r d ) a d o p t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g o b j e c t i v e s f o r t h e P M A P 3
p r o j e c t :
" P r o v i d e S t a t e R o u t e 9 1 ( S R - 9 1 ) c o r r i d o r u s e r s w i t h e n h a n c e d a n d
a c c u r a t e s p e e d a n d t r a v e l t i m e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s
a n d t h e g e n e r a l - p u r p o s e l a n e s .
" P r o v i d e c u s t o m e r s a v i s i b l e a n d c l e a r l i n k b e t w e e n t h e t o l l s t h e y p a y
a n d t h e i r t r a v e l t i m e a n d s p e e d e x p e r i e n c e d o n t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s .
" M a x i m i z e e f f i c i e n c y a n d v e h i c l e t h r o u g h p u t o f b o t h t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s
L a n e s a n d t h e g e n e r a l - p u r p o s e l a n e s .
" I m p r o v e r e l i a b i l i t y a n d c o n s i s t e n c y o f t r a v e l t i m e f o r c u s t o m e r s , i n c l u d i n g
r a p i d i n c i d e n t r e s p o n s e a n d d a t a s h a r i n g f o r t r a f f i c m a n a g e m e n t
p u r p o s e s .
" E s t a b l i s h a p r i c i n g s y s t e m t h a t c o n s i d e r s r e a l - t i m e c o n d i t i o n s o n t h e
9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s a n d t h e g e n e r a l - p u r p o s e l a n e s .
O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y
5 5 0 S o u t h M a i n S t r e e t / P . O . B o x 1 4 1 8 4 / O r a n g e / C a l i f o m i a 9 2 8 6 3 - 1 5 8 4 / ( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 0 - O C T A ( 6 2 8 2 )
Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project Update Page 2
The OCTA Board and the SR-91 Advisory Committee (Committee) directed
staff to provide periodic updates on PMAP3. The PMAP3 project team,
comprised of OCTA staff, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
staff, City of Anaheim staff, and toll road industry experts from Cofiroute USA
and IBI Group, developed the following deliverables in support of the
objectives:
• Concept of Operations
• Technology Assessment
• Travel Time and Speed -Monitoring System Functional Requirements
• Dynamic -Pricing White Paper
• Implementation Plan
• Pricing Research Study
• Travel Time Demonstration Study
• Application for participation in Federal Highways Administration (FHWA)
Value Pricing Program (VPP)
Following completion of initial concepts, OCTA submitted a proposal for grant
funding from the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) Value Pricing
Project (VPP). The project was suspended, pending notification of the VPP
grant awards. In the FHWA VPP proposal, OCTA estimated the total cost for
the PMAP3 deployment phase would reach $1,585,000, with $395,000
proposed from OCTA toll revenue funds and $1,190,000 in federal funds from
the VPP.
Concurrent with the PMAP3 effort, OCTA initiated an upgrade of the
91 Express Lanes Traffic Management System. The Traffic Management
System is an essential component of the performance -monitoring system of the
91 Express Lanes. The Traffic Management subsystems are aging and require
replacement to continue the current level of safety and service provided to
91 Express Lanes customers.
Discussion
On January 6, 2006, FHWA announced a grant award of $588,000 to OCTA for
participation in the VPP. Staff is currently working with Caltrans and the FHWA
grant administrator to define specific requirements for OCTA's participation in
the grant program. The VPP grant is restricted to provide a maximum of
80 percent of the estimated costs of the project. OCTA is eligible for
reimbursement of costs for initiating, planning, managing, operating,
monitoring, evaluating, and reporting on the PMAP project. Grant funds are
restricted from paying for activities conducted prior to approval for VPP
program participation.
•
•
Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project Update Page 3
As currently envisioned, there are two broad components of the PMAP3
system:
1. The travel time and speed -monitoring system focuses on enhancing the
traffic -monitoring and sensing capabilities of the 91 Express Lanes and
the adjoining main lanes. The system would greatly enhance the current
level of service offered to 91 Express Lanes customers as well as help
improve the vehicle throughput on the SR-91 corridor.
2. The dynamic -pricing system focuses on using real-time information from
the travel time and speed -monitoring system to set toll rates
dynamically. The pricing system, if implemented, would provide
customers a direct link between the prices they pay and their actual
experiences on the 91 Express Lanes.
The requirements for the travel time and speed -monitoring system will be
integrated with the Traffic Management System upgrades. Staff is pursuing a
multi -year, multi -phased approach to the Traffic Management System
improvements. This approach will enable better technical integration; ensure
compatibility of the hardware, software, and infrastructure required for PMAP3;
and will reduce procurement costs and risks associated with each effort.
The Board and Committee have found it prudent to move cautiously with any
proposed changes to the current pricing system. Once the travel time and
speed -monitoring system is operational, OCTA will use real-time data to
update the 91 Express Lanes traffic and revenue models and the
dynamic -pricing model. At that time, staff will present updated information to
the Board and the Committee for discussion and request a decision regarding
consideration of a dynamic -pricing system. Staff will continue to provide regular
project updates.
Fiscal Impact
The Board approved the Traffic Management System upgrade project in the
OCTA fiscal year 2005-06 Budget for Planning, Development and Commuter
Services Division, Account No. 0036-9027-B001-A86. The account is funded
through the SR91 Enterprise fund and the FHWA VPP grant.
Summary
This staff report provides an update on the PMAP3, a description of the FHWA
VPP Grant award, and discusses the next steps for the PMAP3 Project. OCTA
is updating the SR-91 traffic monitoring and reporting system. These
Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project Update Page 4
improvements will replace aging equipment and provide new systems that will
provide real-time information to SR-91 corridor commuters. A federal grant and
SR-91 toll revenues will fund these activities.
Attachment
None.
Prepared and Approved by:
Daryl Watkins
Manager, Toll Road and Motorist Services
(714) 560-5406
•
7.
Item 7
FA
OCTA
June 2, 2006
To: State Route 91 Advisory Committee
From: Paul C. Taylor, Executive Dire
Subject: Riverside County — Orange County Major Investment Study Draft
Action Plan
Overview
A draft three-year plan for actions following the recently completed major
investment study is presented for review, discussion, and potential action.
Recommendation
Approve the draft action plan and direct staff to forward the plan to the
Riverside County Transportation Commission and Orange County
Transportation Authority Boards of Directors for approval.
Background
The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), the Riverside County
Transportation Commission (RCTC), and the Foothill Eastern Transportation
Corridor Agency (TCA) have completed a major investment study (MIS) of
long-term alternatives for improving travel between Riverside and Orange
counties. The MIS recommends major improvements to the Riverside
Freeway (State Route 91) from the Costa Mesa Freeway (State Route 55) to
the Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15), a new elevated roadway (91 Viaduct)
within State Route 91 (SR-91) between the Eastern Transportation
Corridor (State Route 241) and Interstate 15 (1-15), and a technical study of a
new corridor south of SR-91 connecting Irvine to Corona (Irvine -Corona
Expressway). These efforts are collectively referred to as the Riverside
County -Orange County (RC-OC) Corridor. In addition, safety/operational
improvements are recommended for Ortega Highway (State Route 74) from
the future State Route 241 (SR-241) extension (Foothill South) to
Lake Elsinore.
Orange County Transportation Authority
550South Main Street/ P.O.Box 14184/Orange /California 92863-1584 / (714) 560-OCTA (6282)
Riverside County — Orange County Major Investment Study Page 2
Draft Action Plan
Over the next three years, a series of initiatives are planned to advance
RC-OC Corridor improvements. These initiatives involve follow-up on
short- and long-term improvements to the SR-91, continued technical
evaluation of an Irvine -Corona Expressway, and evaluating operational
improvements to State Route 74 (SR-74). The draft action plan is presented
below for review, discussion, and approval.
Discussion
The action plan below focuses on specific activities over the next three
calendar years starting in January 2006. Activities include:
■ Executing funding agreements between the agencies
■ Developing and finalizing a joint agreement and initiating Irvine -Corona
Expressway technical feasibility studies
■ Updating the SR-91 Implementation Plan
■ Initiating a SR-74 safety/operational study with the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)
■ Starting the 91 Viaduct conceptual engineering
■ Initiating a joint toll study with the TCA
■ Initiate SR-91 (SR-241 to the Corona Expressway [State Route 71]) final
design and related efforts
Each of these broad activities is further described below. A preliminary
schedule is included in Attachment A.
Funding Agreements between OCTA/RCTC. Cooperative agreements
between OCTA and RCTC to memorialize funding shares for SR-91 joint
projects spanning the counties are needed. These agreements will also outline
roles and responsibilities for design, right-of-way services, and other project
development tasks as appropriate. Schedule: Finalize by June 30, 2006.
Joint Powers Agreement and Irvine -Corona Expressway Feasibility Studies.
Federal legislation (Safe Accountability Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users, 2004) earmarked a total of $15.8 million to "study and
construct highway alternatives between Orange and Riverside Counties,
directed by the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority working with local
government agencies, local transportation authorities, and guided by the
current MIS. To secure these funds, a cooperative agreement for Riverside
Orange Corridor Authority development has been approved by OCTA, RCTC,
and the TCA. Water agencies have also been invited to join in the agreement.
The funds will be used to initiate technical studies of the conceptual
Irvine -Corona Expressway. For 2006, geotechnical investigation is
•
•
Riverside County — Orange County Major Investment Study Page 3
Draft Action Plan
recommended. Beyond 2006, preliminary engineering and seismic evaluation
may be recommended contingent on findings emerging from the geotechnical
study. Schedule: Finalize agreement by June 30, 2006, and initiate
geotechnical study by fall 2006.
SR-91 Implementation Plan. Assembly Bill 1010 (Correa, D-Santa Ana)
requires OCTA to annually issue a plan and a proposed completion schedule
for SR-91 improvements from 1-15 to State Route 55. This plan establishes a
program of projects eligible for funding by the use of potential excess toll
revenue and other funds. The plan needs to be updated to reflect recent policy
direction and potential project phasing. Schedule: Finalize plan by
June 30, 2006.
Ortega Highway Safety and Operational Study. The MIS recommends SR-74
operational/safety improvements. A joint study of SR-74 with Caltrans
Districts 8 and 12 is recommended focusing on the segment from the future
extension of SR-241 (Foothill South) to Lake Elsinore. This study will include
an amendment to the Master Plan of Arterial Highways to reduce future
capacity from four lanes to two lanes on SR-74 east of the future Foothill
South. Schedule: Initiate study by fall 2006 and complete by fall 2007.
91 Viaduct Conceptual Engineering. Conceptual engineering for the
91 Viaduct concept is recommended to gain a better understanding of impacts,
costs, and overall fit in the SR-91. Funding has not been identified for this
effort and is an action for 2006. Schedule: Complete 91 Expressway
conceptual engineering by 2007.
Joint Toll Study with Transportation Corridor Agencies. Carrying more traffic
on SR-241 is a key strategy if the 91 Viaduct moves forward. Timing of
planned widening and lane additions to the TCA system along with possible
adjustments in toll policies would need to be explored. Thetollstudy action
relates to identifying the specific revenue impacts to the TCA and the
91 Express Lanes with this concept. Schedule: Complete study by first half of
2007.
Complete SR-91 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Initiate Final Design.
OCTA will complete the SR-91 eastbound lane (SR-241 to State Route 71)
draft environmental document by the end of 2006. A portion of funding for the
final design of this project has been identified through Transportation
Congestion Relief Program funds allocated to RCTC. In addition, RCTC plans
to construct an additional lane in each direction, from Pierce Street in the
City of Riverside to the Orange County Line. Caltrans District 8 is in the
process of completing the required Project Study Report (PSR) for this project;
Riverside County — Orange County Major Investment Study Page 4
Draft Action Plan
availability of the final document is projected for June 2006. Schedule:
Complete PSR by June 2006. Complete eastbound Draft EIR by
December 2006. Initiate eastbound lane final design in first half of 2007
contingent on available revenue.
Finally, adding staff and project management resources to support the above
actions are also recommended in OCTA's Fiscal Year 2006-07 Budget. A new
OCTA project manager would be supported by one new senior analyst
position, one new administrative support position, and project management
consulting services. Schedule: Approve budget by June 30, 2006 (not shown
on Attachment A schedule).
Institutional Options by Corridor
Input from policymakers is critical in moving forward with this action plan.
Specific on -going input is needed on: (1) Irvine -Corona Expressway; (2) SR-91
improvements; (3) 91 Viaduct; and (4) SR-74 safety/operational improvements.
To date, the OCTA, RCTC, and TCA Boards of Directors have entered into an
agreement for continued study of the Irvine -Corona Expressway, and water
agencies are likely to enter into that agreement in the near future.
Many policy input options are possible on each of the remaining corridors
including continuing to move recommendations through the SR-91 Advisory
Committee, forming ad hoc subcommittees of the SR-91 Advisory Committee,
executing joint agreements with the involved agencies, and other potential
options. Unfortunately, no "one size fits all" for every corridor. The table below
presents a summary of some possible policymaking options for each corridor.
Staff is seeking input from the committee on a recommended approach for
each corridor.
ProjecVCorridor
State Route 91 Improvements
Policy
Input Options
SR-91 Advisory Committee
None
Governance
Issues'
91 Viaduct (elevated faality in SR-91)
Ortega Highway Safety
Improvements
SIR-91 Advisory Committee
Ad; Hoc Subcommittee of SR-91 Advisory
Committee including TCAs'
SR-91 Advisory Committee
Ad Hoc Joint Subcommittee (OCTA / RCTC
Boards) Working with Caltrans
TCA input and role
None
South.00 cities involvement, etc.
None
•
•
"
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y O r a n g e C o u n t y M a j o r I n v e s t m e n t S t u d y
D r a f t A c t i o n P l a n
P a g e 5
S u m m a r y
A d r a f t a c t i o n p l a n i s p r e s e n t e d f o r r e v i e w a n d i n p u t . I n s t i t u t i o n a l o p t i o n s a r e
a l s o p r e s e n t e d , a n d s t a f f i s s e e k i n g i n p u t o n r e c o m m e n d e d n e x t s t e p s b y
c o r r i d o r .
A t t a c h m e n t
A . P r e l i m i n a r y S c h e d u l e
P r e p a r e d b y :
K u r t B r o t c k e
M a n a g e r , P l a n n i n g a n d A n a l y s i s
( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 0 - 5 7 4 2
p p r o v e d b y :
P a u l C . T a y l o r , P . E .
E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
P l a n n i n g , D e v e l o p m e n t a n d C o m m u t e r
S e r v i c e s
( 7 1 4 ) 5 6 0 - 5 4 3 1
"
P r e l i m i n a r y S c h e d u l e
J a n 2 0 0 6
" S R - 9 1 I m p l e m e n t a t i o n P l a n
" F u n d i n g a g r e e m e n t s " F i n a l J P A g r e e m e n t
D e f i n e t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s
" D r a f t J P a g r e e m e n t "
" C o n t i n u e t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s
" I n i t i a t e S R - 9 1 ( 2 4 1 - 7 1 ) f i n a l d e s i g n
" C o m p l e t e t o l l s t u d y
"
- I n i t i a t e S R - 7 4 s t u d y
" I n i t i a t e t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s " C o m p l e t e S R - 9 1 E I R ( 2 4 1 - 7 1 )
I t o I I . 9 1 V i a d u c t , n e w c o r r i d o r ) " C o n t i n u e t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s
D e c 2 0 0 6
" C o m p l e t e S R - 7 4 a n d n e w c o r r i d o r t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s
" C o n t i n u e S R - 9 1 ( 2 4 1 - 7 1 1 f i n a l d e s i g n
" C o m p l e t e 9 1 V i a d u c t c o n c e p t u a l e n g i n e e r i n g
A
J a n 2 0 0 7
" G o / n o g o o n n e w c o r r i d o r p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g
" C o m p l e t e S R - 9 1 ( 2 4 1 - 7 1 1 f i n a l d e s i g n
" I n i t i a t e 9 1 V i a d u c t p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e n n g
J a n 2 0 0 8
D e c 2 0 0 7
D e c 2 0 0 8
V I N 3 W H O V I I V
Item 8
2006 Draft SR-91
Implementation Plan
Executive Summary
June 2, 2006
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
®Previous law authorized the Califomia Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) to enter into franchise
agreements with private companies to construct and
operate four demonstration toll road projects in Califomia.
This resulted in the development of the 91 Express Lanes
facility in Orange County. The four -lane, 10-mile toll road
runs along the median of State Route 91 (SR-91) in
northeast Orange County between the Orange/Riverside
County line and State Route 55 (SR-55). Since the 91
Express Lanes carried its first vehicle in December 1995,
the facility has saved users millions of hours of commuting
time.
While the 91 Express Lanes facility has improved travel
time along the SR-91 corridor, provisions in the franchise
agreement between Caltrans and the private franchisee,
the Califomia Private Transportation Company (CPTC),
prohibited Caltrans and county transportation agencies
from !adding transportation capacity or operational
improvements to the SR-91 corridor from Interstate 15 (1-
15) in Riverside County to the Orange/Los Angeles
Counties border through the year 2030. Consequently, the
public agencies were barred from adding new lanes,
improving interchanges, and adding other improvements
to decrease congestion on the SR-91 freeway.
Recognizing the need to eliminate the non -compete
provision of the franchise agreement, Govemor Gray
Davis signed Assembly Bill 1010 (Lou Correa) into law in
September 2002, paving the way for much -needed
congestion relief for thousands of drivers who use SR-91
to travel between Riverside and Orange Counties each
day. The bill allowed the Orange County Transportation
Authority (OCTA) to purchase the 91 Express Lane
franchise and eliminate the existing clause that prohibited
any capacity -enhancing improvements from being made
to SR-91 until the year 2030. The purchase agreement for
the 91 Express Lanes was completed in January 2003,
placing the road in public hands at a cost of $207.5
million. With the elimination of the non -compete provision
through AB 1010 and the subsequent 91 Express Lanes
purchase by the OCTA, Orange County and Riverside
County public officials and Caltrans Districts 8 and 12
have been working together on improvement plans for SR-
91.
AB 1010 also requires OCTA, in consultation with Caltrans
and the Riverside County Transportation Commission
(RCTC), to annually issue a plan and a proposed
completion schedule for SR-91 improvements from 1-15 to
SR-55. This plan establishes a program of projects eligible
for funding by the use of potential excess toll revenue and
other funds.
The 2006 SR-91 Implementation Plan describes projects,
implementation schedules, benefits, and costs for major
projects through 2030. Most of the projects identified in
this Implementation Plan are based on the recently -
completed Riverside County — Orange County Major
Investment Study (MIS). The projects are presented
based on potential implementation schedules and
priorities established in the MIS.
❖ The first set of projects will be completed by 2011 and
include five improvements at a total cost of
approximately $145 million. The projects include the
eastbound SR-91 lane addition from near Coal
Canyon Wildlife Crossing to SR-71, the Green River
Road interchange overcrossing replacement, safety
improvements at the truck scales, Express Bus
improvements, and Metrolink service improvements.
Most of these projects are in the process of
preliminary engineering, final design, construction, or
procurement and implementation.
❖ The next set of improvements includes four projects,
which would be implemented by 2015 at a total cost
of approximately $504 to $570 million. The first of
these projects includes the 5th lane project from SR-
241 to Pierce Street that will add a fifth general
purpose (GP) lane in each direction on SR-91,
interchange improvements at SR-71/SR-91, and
collector -distributor (CD) roads for eastbound (EB)
SR-91 to SR-71 and in both directions at 1-15. The
other three projects that will be completed in this time
frame include a westbound (WB) lane at Tustin
Avenue, a potential new interchange at Fairmont
Boulevard, and a potential reversible lane facility from
the County Line to 1-15. As an alternative to the
reversible lane facility, restriping of SR-91 could be
implemented in both directions from the end of the 2nd
1 2006 SR-91 Implementation Plan
HOV lane (near SR-71/SR-91) to near Pierce
Street to gain an additional lane. t
❖ Projects for implementation by 2020 include new
travel lanes between SR-55 and SR-241 and a
significant expansion of Metrolink service. OCTA,
RCTC, and Caltrans have completed the
preliminary planning on these projects to ensure
readiness when local, state, or federal funding
becomes available. Consequently, there may be
opportunities to advance these projects if
additional funding is made available. Projects for
implementation by 2020 are expected to cost
$470 million.
Projects for implementation by 2030 focus on
longer -lead time projects. This multi -billion
program includes five potential projects that
require a significant amount of planning, design,
and future policy and public input. In some
cases, these projects are alternatives to each
other, and not all five projects will be
implemented.
New to the 2006 SR-91 Implementation Plan is the
inclusion of traffic analysis for major capacity projects.
This analysis used the latest freeway operations
software model available from UC Berkeley and 2005
traffic data from Caltrans and Austin -Foust
Associates.2 This freeway operations model provides
a better depiction of actual travel delays experienced
by motorists compared to traditional travel demand
models. The model can be used to analyze freeway
bottlenecks sometimes neglected in traditional travel
demand models. This approach is especially important
given high SR-91 traffic volumes and the potential for
relatively few vehicles to significantly slow down traffic.
For example, a minor freeway merging area can cause
many vehicles to slow, cascading delay through the traffic
stream, and suddenly both speed and volume rapidly
decrease for major segments of the freeway.
Project project Summary
No.
By Year 2011
1 Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71
2 Green River Road Overcrossing Replacement
3 Safety Improvements at Truck Scales
4 Express Bus Improvements — Orange County to
Riverside County
5 Metrolink Short -Term Expansion Plan
Cost 0)
68.0
25.7
2.1
13.5
35.4
By Year 2015
6 Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction 365
East of SR-241, CD Roads at SR-71 /SR-91 and 1-15!
SR-91, and System Interchange Improvements
7 SR-91 WB Lane at Tustin Avenue 25 — 62
8 New Interdiange at Fairmont Boulevard 72 -101
9 SR-91 Reversible Lanes from County Line to 1-15 43
By Year 2020
10 Widen SR-91`between SR-55 and SR-241 by Adding 135
a 5e GP lane in Each Direction
11 Metrolink Service and Station Improvements ' 335
By Year 2030-and Post•2030
12 "SR-2411SR-91'Direct Connector
13 1-15/SR-91 Direct Connector
14
15
Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) foam SR-
241 to 1-15
4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor 8) from SR-241/SR- 5,700
133 to 1-15/Cajalco Road
16 Anaheim to Ontario International Airport High Speed - TBD
Rail
240
162
3,200
The operations analysis quantified travel time savings for
eastbound afternoon and westbound moming conditions
for the following major projects:
This restriping project may or may not be required based on
analysis of traffic operations after the 5th lane project and related
interchange improvements are implemented.
2 This traffic data was then adjusted to future years to account
for regional population and employment growth as well as
potential diversion from other transportation corridors.
2 2006 SR-91 Implementation Plan
Eastbound lane addition from SR-241 to SR-71 by
2011 (Project 1).
❖ New lanes from SR-241 to 1-15 by 2015 (Project 6).
❖ New lanes from SR-55 to SR-241 by 2020 (Project
10).
❖ New capacity provided by "Corridor A" and "Corridor
B" by 2030 as suggested by the 2006 Riverside
County — Orange County Major Investment Study
(Projects 14 and 15).
The results indicate that improvements planned for 2015
will significantly decrease travel time and increase travel
speeds eastbound in the aftemoon. Overall peak hour
eastbound aftemoon travel time could drop from about
100 minutes today to about 20 minutes in 2015. Other
future improvements could further decrease travel time.
These improvements, plus planned widening of SR-91
between SR-55 and SR-241 by 2020, will help manage
CP�-��O"Nlq
91
•
the future growth in westbound moming travel. However,
westbound moming travel time remains worse than
Otoday's conditions even with these improvements. The
current design of the 91 /55 interchange limits the ability to
move traffic into north and central Orange County via SR-
55, and significant future vehicle delays may result without
major new interchange and downstream capacity or
diversion to other corridors.
120
100
BO
40
20
0
60
50
10
0
The introduction of Corridors A and B by 2030 offer the
potential capacity to manage future demand in both
directions. While both of these corridors are still concepts,
they provide significant relief to eastbound and westbound
traffic congestion in the future. Further feasibility studies
will determine if one or both concepts move forward in the
project development process. The charts below describe
the travel time and speed benefits by year including these
various project concepts.
Figure ES-1— Eastbound P.M. Peak Hour Average Corridor Travel Time
2011
a- 2011 - New EB lane from SR-241 to SR-71 (Project
1)
1 2015 - New lanes from SR-241 to 1-15 (Project 5)
2020 - New lanes from SR55 to SR-241 (Project 10)
2030 - Projects above in 2030
2030 A&B - Projects above plus Corridors A and B
from Major Investment Study (Projects 14 and 15)
s.
Projects are cumulative by year.
2015
2020
2030
2030 A&B
Figure ES-2 — Eastbound P.M. Peak Hour Average Corridor Speeds
Etlstop
2011
2015
2020
3 2006 SR-91 Implementation Plan
2030
2030 A&B
140
120
ie
c
E 100
m
E
m 80
it
9
C
O
60
3
9
0
x
Y
a 40
1
Q
20
0
40
35
30
s
n
E
125
w
9
C
= 20
O
Y 15
10
5
0
Figure ES-3 — Westbound A.M. Peak Hour Average Corridor Travel Time
Existing
Existing
2015
2020
2030
Figure ES-4 — Westbound A.M. Peak Hour Average Corridor Speeds
2015
2020
4 2006 SR-91 Implementation Plan
2030
2030 A8B
2030 A&B
"
2 0 0 6 D r a f t S R - 9 1
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n P l a n
E x h i b i t s
S R - 9 1 A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e
J u n e 2 , 2 0 0 6
Eastbound Lane Addition from SR-241 to SR-71
Project No: 1
Anticipated Completion: 2011
Project Cost Estimate
Capital Cost $ 50,400,000
Support Cost (25%) $ 12,600,000
RNV Contingency (10%) $ 5,000,000
Total Project Cost $ 68,000,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
Completed
2006-2007
2007-2009
2009-2011
Project Description
This project proposes capacity, operational, and safety improvements
to the eastbound (EB) lanes of SR-91 between the SR-241 and SR-71.
The purpose of this project is to provide an additional EB lane from SR-
w 241 to SR-71 and to widen all EB lanes and shoulders to standard
widths.lt would also remove the lane drop choke point east of SR-241
at Coal Canyon.
Key Considerations
F
Coordination with Green River Road Overcrossing Replacement
and Widening Project #2 will be required. Staged construction would
be required for all ramp reconstruction and freeway widening. Freeway
operations would most likely be affected by this project, however,
freeway closures are not anticipated. An EB concrete shoulder will be
constructed with a 12 foot width to minimize the impact of the Project
#6 lane addition in Segment 2.
i" Benefits
The lane a
between
re
tra
'project Schedule Ca!trans Equivalents:— - iv
reliminary Engineering = PID
Environmental = PA/ED
Design = PS&E
Eal
On / m Canyon Rd
On Off
ove weaving
as well as
the ` ' 1 mainline
uld be exiting at Green
-71.
Project Report and Environmental
Document are currently being prepared.
Coal Canyon
W�LC
LEGEND
Existing Highway
® Interchange/Ramp
County Line
taalni HOV or HOT Lane
Existing Lane
11111111 Project Improvement Lane
omm Existing Lanes Outline
Green River Rd
On Off
Off
On Off
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Green River Road Overcrossing Replacement
Project No: 2
Anticipated Completion: 2008
Project Cost Estimate
Capital Cost
Support Cost (25%)
Total Project Cost
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
$ 20,500,000
$ 5,200,000
$ 25,700,000
Complete
Complete
Complete
2006-2008
Abbreviations:
CD = Collector Distributo
FTR = Future
HOV = High Occupancy Vehic e
SHLD = Shoulder
Project Description
Improvements primarily consist of replacing the existing Green
River Road overcrossing with a new six -lane wide, 4-span
overcrossing to accommodate future widening of SR-91. The
interior spans will accommodate up to eight mainline lanes in
each direction including two HOV lanes. The exterior spans can
accommodate two lanes, either for auxiliary lanes or collector
distributor roads. Entrance and exit ramps will be realigned to
accommodate the new bridge, yet the interchange will retain its
current configuration. New signals will be installed at the ramp
intersections. Ramp and bridge improvements will be
constructed within existing right of way.
Key Considerations
Management of traffic during construction. Coordination may be
required with Projects #1, #6, and #9. Implementation of
reversible lanes Pr 'ect #9 may impact the project due to the
overcrossing_merd' olumn.
Ben fits
U imprtlevel of service at ramp and local street
at the interchange. Improvements will reduce ramp
end into the freeway's general purpose lanes,0
uting to congestion relief on SR-91.
•
rrent Status
Project is scheduled to begin construction in July/August 2006.
PRELIMINARY CROSS-SECTION
GREEN RIVER BRIDGE
NOTE: All dimensions in meters and are approximate
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Safety Improvements at Truck Scales
Project No: 3
Anticipated Completion: 2006
Project Cost Estimate
Capital Cost
Support Cost
Total Project Cost
$ 1,500,000
$ 600,000
$ 2,100,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering Complete
Environmental Complete
Design Complete
Construction Mid -Late 2006
Project Description
Improvements consist of improving existing shoulders, re -striping
existing lane lines, increasing illumination, and modifying signing
into and out of the truck weigh stations on eastbound and
westbound SR-91.
Key Considerations
City of Anaheim has requested to Caltrans that the scales be
moved. This relocation is a long-term project and would require
development of a new location. This proposal requires further
evaluation.
Benefits
Improvements are expected to reduce accidents.
Current Status
Caltrans h
to corppie
struction on the project and is anticipated
n in late 2006.
RQr,1A j
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Express Bus Improvements
Orange County to Riverside County
Project No: 4
Anticipated Completion: 2011
Project Cost Estimate
Total Capital Cost $ 13,500,000
Project Schedule
Galleria at Tyler to South Coast Metro
in Fall 2006
Galleria at Tyler to Irvine Business
Center/UCI in FY 2010/2011
Galleria at Tyler to North East Anaheim
and CSUF in FY 2010/2011
Galleria at Tyler to Anaheim Resort in
FY 2010/2011
FUL.LERTON
A
PLACENTIA
Project Description
OCTA, working with the Riverside County Transportation Commission,
and the Riverside Transit Agency, plans an extensive expansion of
express bus service between Riverside and Orange Counties.
Commuters lack direct transit connections to many Orange County
employment centers, and new express bus service will provide
connections to growing employment centers in Anaheim, Costa Mesa,
and Irvine.
Four express bus routes are planned from Riverside County to: South
Coast Plaza (54 miles); the northeast Anaheim Industrial Area and
California State University Fullerton (47 miles); Anaheim Civic Center,
Westem Medical Center, and Disneyland Resort (53 miles); and Irvine
Business Center and UCI (52 miles). Routes would run every 30 to 45
minutes in the peak period, and service will be tailored to match demand.
Implementation is planned to start in Fall 2006 with the Riverside County
to South Coast Plaza route. The other routes are planned for
implementation by Fiscal Year 2010/2011 contingent on future budget
authority.
Key Considerate
Servi cart.,? d with ,.,major physical improvements required.
Oppm •,cost =stlmat at $4.5 million each year. Costs will be
share aog nd Riverside Counties.
opment of Express Bus Services will contribute to congestion relief
on SR-91.
Current Status
OCTA is developing a procurement plan for bus purchases. Tyler and
Corona to South Coast Metro buses have been ordered, and the
cooperative agreement with Riverside County is being developed.
RBA LINOA
NE Anaheim Industrial Area
Anaheim Civic Center
-� Westem Medical Center
ORANGE ,'
Disneyland Resort
VILLA PARK
Fro NETER - ' TO South Coast -Metro {Ins&j
To IBC./ IX! {Inseti
Galleria at Tyler
i'
I
Canyon Community Church PNR
SANTA ANA
(Hutton Centre,.
COSTA
South
Coast Plaza
Irvine Business
Complex
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Metrolink Short -Term Expansion Plan
Project No: 5
Anticipated Completion: 2010
Project Cost Estimate
OCTA Project Cost $ 35,400,000
Project Schedule
To be completed by 2010
.'Trainsto
I Los Angeles
via Fullerton
_. Train to 7
Centre . South
:.Orange County
DAILY TRAINS
Year 2006:16
Year 2010:18
Project Description
OCTA, working with the Riverside County Transportation Commission,
San Bernardino Associated Governments, and the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), plans a short-term expansion of
train service from the Inland Empire to Orange County. More trains
are planned on the Inland Empire to Orange County (IEOC) line that
currently runs between San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange
Counties as well as the "91 Line" that goes from the Inland Empire to
Los Angeles via Orange County, paralleling SR-91.
Currently, 16 trains a day run on the IEOC line and nine trains on the
91 Line for a total of 25 daily trains. The short-term expansion adds
two additional IEOC trains and four additional 91 Line trains by 2010
for a total of 31 daily trains. The planned short-term expansion is
necessary to accommodate population and employment growth in the
region as well as make the current service more convenient.
Key Considerations
Capital costs necesta
engines and
estimated a
se ice a
for I
Mat
this expansion includes the purchase of
erate the new service. OCTA costs are
he long-term plan (by 2030) adds more
a sld „s,'';_nt capital investment (see Project #11
Coord nation has been ongoing with the
n studies (see also Project #11).
:1es development of expanded Metrolink Service, which will
contribute to congestion relief on SR-91.
Current Status
Equipment procurement is underway.
DAILY TRAINS
Year 2006:25
Year 2010: 31
✓ New train engines and coaches
$35.4 million
R.
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Project No:
Anticipated Completion: 2015
Project Cost Estimate*
Capital Cost
Support Cost (25%)
RNV Cost
Total Project Cost
$ 287,800,000
$ 72,000,000
$ 5,200,000
$ 365,000,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
2006-2007
2007-2009
2009-2011
2011-2015
* Costs derived from Draft PSR dated
May 2006
Widen SR-91 by One GP Lane in Each Direction East of SR-2411 CD
Roads at SR-71/SR-91 and 1-15/SR-911 and System interchange Improvements
Project Description
The improvements primarily consist of constructing a new EB and VVB 5th general purpose (GP) lane, replacing existing and adding new auxiliary lanes, and new collector -distributor (CD) roads for
freeway -to -freeway connectors at SR-71 and 1-15. The project is planned to include space within the median for the planned 1-15 HOV direct connectors.
Key Considerations
Implementation of MIS Corridor A (Project #14) within the SR-91 median would involve the placement of columns (mainline and outriggers) and access from the SR-91 median tol-15, both of which
would require space within the SR-91 median in the Project #6 vicinity. Therefore, the loss of lanes during Corridor A construction could be two to. four lanes assuming that Corridor A occurred as a
separate project after completion of construction for Project #6. While Project #6 accommodates a total of two HOV direct connector lanes (Project #13), the four lanes for Corridor A atl-15 would require
space that will be occupied by SR-91 lanes. Project #6 improvements need to be coordinated with the Green River Road overcrossing replacement Project #2. In the future, restriping to non-standard
lane and shoulder widths could be accomplished to gain a 6th lane in each direction if needed. The reversible lane Project #9 could operate on SR-91 until traffic in both directions becomes more evenly
split, e which time, the possibility to restripe to a 6th lane in each direction would be beneficial.
The preferred PSR Alternative 4 includes a new direct connector flyover from EB SR-91 to NB SR-71 with modifications to the existing west to north and south to west connectors. Another alternative
(Alt. 3) includes an ultimate SR-71/SR-91 interchange concept with flyover connectors for all movements. Alternative 2 modifies the existing SR-71/SR-91 connectors, most notably.the- R-91 east to SR-
",
71 north connector which is improved from a radius of 35m to 45m. The four project (build) alternatives range in cost from $314,000,000 to $365,000,000.
Benefits
Will reduce congestion by providing additional capacity from SR-241 to Pierce St and by eliminating weaving conflicts on SR-91 at1-15 and SR-71 by the use of
Current Status
A PSR has been prepared by Ca'trans in preparation for initiating the environmental (PPJED) phase.
Existing bike lanes will be preserved
do
Weir Canyon. Rd Onypsum Canc/forf
On
. . .. . _.: ,...--",.........,..—„,„,„,. ,
v _.,z,, 011111141.11420.11Wati falibr
0.e-,
On Off
-
Off On
On
Lane shown is for EB
Lane Addition Project #1
Coal Canyon
VVLC Coun • Line Green River Rd
On Off
TA Ito
-,41r:g;„,
:445‘
Lanes shown are for the SR-71/SR-91 Interchange east to north
flyover connector for PSR Alternative 4, and includes a 3-lane
CD road from Green River Road, and the 5th EB GP lane
Off
5th GP lane is existing. Project widens all SR-91 lanes to full
standard lane and shoulder widths from SR-241 to SR-71
Auto Center Dr Maple St
On Off On Off On Off On On
On
Serfas Club Dr
Lincoln Av Main St
• , •
I
P
On Off
Lane shown is for EB 3-Lane CD Road
Green River On -Ramp. Connector from Main St
Joins SR-91 as a merge EB on -ramp braids to join
ramp SR-91 as a merge ramp
ff On On
12 Existing Lane
Auxiliary Lane
Existing Lanes Outline
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SR-91 WB Lane at Tustin Avenue
Project No:
Anticipated Completion: 2015
Project Cost Estimate*
Capital Cost
Support Cost (25%)
R/W Cost
Total Project Cost
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
$ 19.2M - 48.0M
$ 4.8M - 12.0M
$ 1.0M - 2,0M
$ 25.0M - 62.0M
Complete
2009-2011
2011-2013
2013-2015
* Costs are derived from the PSR dated
July 2004
LEGEND
s Existing Highway
awsia Interchange/Ramp
Existing Interchange
MiTa HOV or HOT Lane
17.;.;,1 Existing Lane
fi PSR Alt 2 Improvement Lane
® Existing Lanes Outline
Project Description
Four alternatives are included with various levels of improvements in the
Project Study Report (PSR), July 2004, On Westbound (WB) SR-91
Auxiliary Lane from the !Northbound (NB) SR-55/WB SR-91 Connector to
the Tustin Avenue interchange. Replacement of the Tustin Avenue
overcrossing and widening of the Santa Ana River bridge is required for
all alternatives.
Improvements for PSR Alternative 2 consist of adding a WB auxiliary
lane from the NB SR-55 to WB SR-91 connector to the Tustin Avenue
interchange and the continuation of a fourth general purpose lane
through the Tustin Avenue interchange (shown below). PSR Alternative 3
ncludes a WB collector -distributor (CD) road that begins east of SR-55
;with a WB Tustin Avenue exit "ramp" that bypasses the SR-551SR-91
interchange and then merges with the two lanes from NB SR-55 to form a
3-lane CD road to Tustin Avenue. Alternative 4 of the same PSR includes
a CD road that begins with the NB SR-55 to WB SR-91 connector and
includes an exit to Tustin Avenue. Alternative 4 also includes a two-lane
braided exit from WB S14 9 lustin Avenue.
Key Consid
addit`r taI right-of-way. City of Anaheim utilities
ity of the proposed widening section.
would reduce operational deficiencies for westbound SR-91
Used by weaving and merging between the SR-55/SR-91 connector
d the Tustin Avenue off -ramp. Each alternative contributes to mainline
capacity improvement through the Tustin Avenue interchange.
Current Status
The PSR was completed in July 2004.
Tustin Av
On Off
Off
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Lakeview Av
Off On
-'s
On Off t
New Interchange at Fairmont Boulevard
Project No: 8
Anticipated Completion: 2015
Project Cost Estimate (Option 1)
Capital Cost
Support Cost (25%)
Total Project Cost`
$ 57,500,000
$ 14, 500, 000
$ 72,000,000
Project Cost Estimate (Option 2)
Capital Cost
Support Cost (25%)
Total Project Cost*
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
$ 80,800,000
$ 20,200.000
$101,000, 000
2008-2009
2009-2011
2011-2013
2013-2015
*RAN cost is undetermined at this time
Project Description
A ; The project would provide a new connection to SR-91 at Fairmont
Boulevard. Two options are being considered as follows:
OPTION 1-
A new partial overcrossing at Fairmont Boulevard will provide northerly
access for Yorba Linda. No connection is proposed southerly into
Anaheim. On and off ramps will connect Fairmont Boulevard to eastbound
I (EB) and westbound (VVB) SR-91, relieving the parallel arterials of Imperial
t Highway (SR-90) and Weir Canyon Road.
OPTION 2 -
A new partial overcrossing at Fairmont Boulevard will provide northerly
access for Yorba Linda from the 91 Express Lanes. No connection is
proposed southerly into Anaheim. Drop ramps on the east side of the
overcrossing provide an entrance to the EB Express Lanes and an exit
from the VVB express lanes. Drop ramps on the west side may be
considered as well to provide a VVB entrance and an EB exit. Outside
!, widening of SR-91 and re -striping of the general purpose lanes is required
and contribute to higher project costs than for Option 1.
1. Key Considerations
j Toll collection for the drbp�ption 2, and traffic impacts to SR-91
I Express Lanes needs,l lered. Coordination with SR-91 EB and
VVB widening projei !mended. Interchange spacing and
weaving (to SR-5 es n\tb be evaluated for both options.
Widemngb�mainlinf091 is tided to accommodate Option 2 ramps.
LEGEND
® Existing Highway
® Proposed Interchange Ramp
...ww Existing Interchange
HOV or HOT Lane
7i Existing Lane
dffib Proposed Interchange
www Existing Lanes Outline
Fairmont BI
2006 SR-81 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
tettefit$
rchange is expected to relieve congestion at SR-90,
ienue, and Weir Canyon Road Interchanges. Additional
e ility with Option 2 is expected to increase utilization of the SR-91
ss Lanes and reduce congestion in the general purpose lanes.
Current Status
Ajoint traffic study is under way between OCTA and the City of Anaheim.
Ramps may be
considered
On
Fairmont 131
SR-91 Reversible Lanes from the County Line to 1-15
III Project No: 9
Anticipated Completion: 2015
Project Cost Estimate*
Capital Cost $ 41,600,000
Annual Maint. Cost (7 yrs)$ 1,400,000
Total Project Cost $ 43,000,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2011
2011-2015
"Costs derived from March 2006
report by DBR & Associates. Cost
excludes project support, R/W, toll
operations/equipment, and additional
lane for reversible operation.
Benefits
The moveable median will enable the
direction in both the a.m. and'¢ -
more than one GP lane. The tsp
needed.
R<_sa Lar>es ENTR
T be constructed as a?
required by Pr3'Y{6(
needed with,Prg 2 �E
improveni.
standards; p
ch;3re terisfit
exrte5a
Project Description
! Improvements primarily consist of constructing a seven mile long
reversible lane facility with a moveable barrier that would effectively
- add capacity between the Orange -Riverside County line and 1-15. The
project will effectively balance lanes during peak hours from the end of
- the SR-91 Express Lanes to 1-15. In addition, the elimination of median
columns at four overcrossing locations and construction of a direst
access ramp from 1-15 HOV lanes are included.
Key Considerations
Management of traffic during construction, toll collection and toll facility
design needs to be considered. The moveable median barrier will need
to be shifted up to four times daily. The project requires construction of
an additional general purpose (GP) lane (Project #6) prior to
implementation of the reversible lane concept. Costs exclude the lane
addition and any required toll collection infrastructure. The type of
managed lanes (HOT vs. free) needs to be determined for the
reversible lanes. Coordination is needed with Project #6 and the
upcoming Green River Road overcrossing replacement Project #2, and
will conflict with future HOV direct connector Project #13, which could
connector but only utilize one lane as
g the life of the project. Coordination is
_pending upon the length of the
ch m Mend from SR-241 to SR-71. Other design
re la ent requirements, and operational
require 'rther analysis and may significantly impact
trades in Orange County to continue in the peak traffic
sting reversible lanes will add capacity without widening by
efit for approximately 7 years until additional capacity will be
WEST EN `Ot `CORRIDOR (COUNTY LINE)
Moveable Barrier
.'cVREs5
‹.> rot LANE.:
` ,wJv
EAST END OF CORRIDOR (JUST EAST OF 1-15)
REVERSIBLE LANES -AM PEAK HOUR CONFIGURATION
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Widen SR-91 between SR-55 and SR-241
by Adding a 5th GP Lane in Each Direction
Project No: 10
Anticipated Completion: 2020
Project Cost Estimate
Capital Cost $100,000,000
Support Cost (25%) $ 25,000,000
R/W Contingency (10%)$ 10,000,000
Total Project Cost $135,000,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering Complete
Environmental 2014-2016
2016-2018
2018-2020
Design
Construction
u-
LEGEND
0000. Existing Highway
samis Interchange/Ramp
Existing Interchange
®o Proposed Interchange
HOV or HOT Lane
Existing Lane
Mint Project Improvement Lane
sem Existing Lanes outline
o O ff keviewOn
Project Description
This project proposes capacity and operational improvements to the
eastbound (EB) and westbound (WB) lanes of SR-91 between SR-55 and
SR-241. An additional westbound general purpose lane will be provided
between SR-241 and the Imperial Highway (SR-90) interchange. An
additional EB general purpose (GP) lane will be provided between SR-55
and SR-241. Existing auxiliary lanes would be replaced. Modification or
reconfiguration of the WB Lakeview Avenue on ramps may also be
considered to improve weaving issues to SR-55. Separating traffic is a
potential solution to the Lakeview Avenue merge issue.
Key Considerations
Coordination with the Fairmont Boulevard interchange project #8 will be
required. Staged construction would be required for all ramp recons,, -;lion
and freeway widening. Freeway operations would most likely be a=:
by this project, however, freeway closures are not anticipated.
Consideration for relocating the truck scales to a location outside th.:: :
91 Corridor between SR-55 and 1-15 is recommended, otherwise .
additional improvements ..equired to relocate the truck scale
auxiliary lanes to afOrnOd t a widening. The project benefits should
be studied in conji�'.,�. Plementation of MIS Corridors A and B.
Benefits'
SR-91 WB by eliminating the lane drop at the
s .Kling a continuous GP lane to SR-90. Alleviates
-91 EB by eliminating the lane drop for northbound SR -
by providing an auxiliary lane to Lakeview Avenue, and at SR-
roviding a continuous GP lane to Weir Canyon Road.
urrent Status
A PSR was completed in April 2004. Lakeview interchange
concept studies are ongoing and may affect project costs.
Fairmont Bl
On Off
■
Off On Off On On Ori Off On
Off
Off
NOTE: FAIRMONT BLVD IS CONTINGENT UPON IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT#8
Truck Scales Weir Canyon Rd
Gypsum
Canycl Rd
On Off
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Metrolink Service and Station Improvements
Project No: 11
Anticipated Completion: 2020
Project Cost Estimate
Total Cost $ 335,000,000
Project Schedule
To be completed by 2020
Benefits
Enables development of new Metrolink
iiiervices, which will contribute to tong
lief on SR-91.
Current Status
The proposed expansion is
Measure M renewal.
F: riaEaa"to`--:
Los 9age/es
i?a Fugartan-
Project Description
OCTA, working with the Riverside County Transportation
Commission, San Bemardino Associated Governments, and the
Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), plans an
extensive expansion of train service from the Inland Empire to
Orange County. More trains are planned on the inland Empire to
Orange County (IEOC) line that currently runs between San
Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange Counties as well as the "91.
Line" that goes from the inland Empire to Los Angeles via Orange
County, paralleling State Freeway 91.
Currently, 16 trains a day run on the IEOC line and nine trains on
the 91 Line. The long-term expansion plan builds on service levels
that will be implemented by 2010. The "2010" plan includes two
additional IEOC trains and four additional 91 Line trains for a total
of 31 trains a day. The long-term plan adds another 10 IEOC
trains and five 91 Line trains for a total of 46 daily trains. This
planned expansion is\necessary to accommodate population and
employment grlae region as well as make the current
service mo
Capitati #
{ track oksea
� r kit),
mertis,ssary for this expansion include a third
s of thl _ tl line in Orange, Riverside, and San
w crossovers at critical locations to allow trains to
er; new storage tracks in San Bernardino; parking
}ptiEs�at key stations; and purchase of engines and
es to operate the new service.
Key Considerations
The capital program is estimated to cost $335 million, and costs
would be shared by the member agencies of SCRRA.
DAILY TRAINS
Year 2010: 31
Year 2030:46
✓ New track and crossovers
✓ Expanded station parking
✓ New train engines and coaches
✓ $335 million
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SR-241/SR-91 Direct Connector
Project No: 12
Anticipated Completion: 2030
Project Cost Estimate
Capital Cost $ 177,800,000
Support Cost (25%) $ 44,400,000
R/W Contingency (10%) $ 17,800,000
Total Project Cost" $ 240,000,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
2023-2024
2024-2026
2026-2028
2028-2030
`Assumed as a 2-lane connector from
SR-241 to SR-91, ending near SR-71.
LEGEND
® Existing Highway •
www Intentwnge/Ramp
-.e County Line
HOV or HOT Lane
Existing Lane
Ow Project Improvement Lane
® Existing Lanes Outline
7.1 Project #6 improvements
Project #6 Lane
On '
Gypsum Canyon R� d
On
3 Project Description
The SR-241/SR-91 direct connector will carry northbound SR-241 traffic to
eastbound SR-91 Express Lanes and carry westbound SR-91 Express
• Lane traffic to southbound SR-241. Because the direct connector merges in
• the median of SR-91, outside widening of SR-91 and reorienting Gypsum
Canyon interchange is required. Costs may vary significantly, depending on
K the implementation of earlier projects.
Key Considerations
I Implementation of MIS Corridor (Project #14) may supersede the need for
• the direct connector improvements. Project #12 may become the first phase
of Corridor A, perhaps on a different alignment. The direct connector impact
on SR-91 will depend upon whether the connectors are 4-lanes (toll -to -toll)
or 2-lanes (HOV). The impact of the connector on the Express Lanes will
likely require the connector lanes to be extended along SR-91 some
distance, possibly to SR-71 relative to volume and capacity, that will require
r further evaluation. An optional project would include an extension of the
direct connector to and from SR-71. Toll collection issues will need to be
resolved. Widening to accommodate the direct connector would impact the
connectors to SR-71and theiertes added by Project #6. Costs are based on
a 2 lane connector to BR 9 ihding near SR-71 and will vary widely
depending on the kSy, �t tions noted.
Benefits
Improve
-carren
iria
;ISR-91
SR-91
rve HOV traffic.
Current Status
=241 and, South County for traffic that does not
9ilExpress Lanes, which also improves SR-91 WB by
-r toll users to weave across four general purpose
sting SR-241 connector. Alleviates congestion on SR -
by allowing SR-241 toll users to bypass the general
direct connector. In the long term, this connector would
Preliminary design concepts have been developed by TCA and Caltrans.
Off_ _ Coal Canyon County Line Green River Rd
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
i-15/SR-91 Direct Connector
•
Project No: 13
Anticipated Completion: 2030
Project Cost Estimate
Capital Cost $ 120,000,000
Support Cost (25%) $ 30,000,000
RAN Contingency (10%) $ 12,000,000
Total Project Cost $ 162,000,000
Project Schedule
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
2023-2024
2024-2026
2026-2028
2028-2030
Project #6 will be construct
with right-of-way allowaij
in the SR-91 median
connector columns between;
1-15 and Maple St
On
•
Auto Center Dr
Off
On
Serfas CEub Dr
LEGEND
Existing Highway
iwes Interchange/Ramp
wilwip Existing Interchange
HOV or HOT Lane
Existing Lane
Me Project Improvement Lane
Existing Lanes Outline
Maple St
Off
Project Description
The improvements primarily consist of constructing a new freeway -to -
freeway connector. The connector will carry northbound (NB) 1-15 High
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) traffic to westbound SR-91 and eastbound
SR-91 HOV traffic to southbound 1-15. Outside widening will be
required on 1-15. Project #6 is planned to include space within the
median for the flyovers to avoid outside widening on the SR-91 with
this project.
Key Considerations
Implementation of Major Investment Study (MIS) Corridor (Project
#14) may supercede the need for the direct connector improvements.
Project #6 will be constructed with right-of-way allowance in the SR-91
median for connector columns between 1-15 and Maple St. If Express
Lanes are extended into Riverside County, then this project may be
required due to additional weaving volumes (requires further study).
The need for a NB I-1 -HOV connector will also require further study.
-
Benefits
WilL,reduc
weaving_co
and
ion
HOV access.
roject is identified in the
Riverside County Transportation
Improvement Plan. Preliminary
design concepts are being
initiated by Caltrans.
Lincoln Av Main St
Off
Off On On
On Off On Off Off
m
On
viding additional capacity and eliminating
Off
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) from SR-241 to 1-15
Project No: 14
Anticipated Completion: TBD
Project Cost Estimate**
Capital Cost* $ 2,100,000,000
Support Cost (25%) $ 525,000,000
R/W Cost $ 575,000,000
Total Project Cost $ 3,200,000,000
Project Schedule
Conceptual Engineering
Preliminary Engineering
Environmental
Design
Construction
2006-2006
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
*Capital costs include $165M for
environmental mitigation and $470M
for mainline SR-133/SR-241
improvements
**Costs derived from Riverside County -
Orange County MIS, January 2006
Benefits
The project would provide significant
congestion relief by allowing vehicles to
bypass the at -grade freeway lanes and local
arterial interchanges between SR-241 and
1-15. Connections are provided directly
between SR-91, SR-55, SR-71, and 1-15.
Current Status
This project is identified in the Riverside
County - Orange County MIS as part of the
Locally Preferred Strategy to improve
mobility between Riverside County and
Orange County.
(
Project Description
The improvements primarily consist of constructing a new 4-lane
elevated expressway within the Santa Ana Canyon with freeway -to -
freeway connectors at SR-241, SR-71 and 1-15. The facility may
include managed lanes.
Key Considerations
Choice of alignment will be key to determining net capacity increase.
Implementation of Corridor may supercede the need for the direct
connector improvement Projects #12 and #13. Extensive right-of-way
will be required to implement the improvements. If Project #6 is
constructed and a 4-lane elevated facility is proposed within the
median of SR-91 through Corona, extensive freeway lane closures
would be required (thus reducing SR-91 capacity).
Potential considerations for co -locating the Maglev (see Project #16)
adjacent to Corridor A (and also SR-91) include providing a two -column
structure with a barrier between the trains and vehicles. Concepts for
CorridorA and Maglev withpth R-91 median could preclude future
opportunities for managed ire in the SR-91 median, such as
reversible lanes (P
at I-15/SR-91) to
columns located
highway
vod"uld;p
Shid 2 WB Lanes
direct connectors (such as for HOV
„yid be precluded by Maglev
ame median area. Caltrans and Maglev
, safety, and operations considerations
if shared use with a Maglev facility
to ownership) were pursued.
2 EB Lanes Shld
Elevated 4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor A) Cross -Section
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
4-Lane Facility (MIS Corridor B) from SR-241/SR-133 to
1-15/Cajalco Road
Project No: 15
Anticipated Completion: TBD
Project Cost Estimate**
Capital Cost* $ 4,334,400,000
Support Cost (25%) $ 1,083,600,000
R/W Cost $ 282,000,000
Total Project Cost $ 5,700,000,000
Project Schedule
Conceptual Engineering 2006-2008
Preliminary Engineering TBD
Environmental TBD
Design TBD
Construction TBD
*Capital costs include $281 M for
environmental mitigation
**Costs derived from Riverside County -
Orange County MIS, January 2006
LEGEND
;Existing Highway
Corridor B Representative
Alignment
NOTE: REPRESENTATIVE
•ALIGNMENT SHOWN FOR
ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
ONLY
Project Description
The improvements primarily consist of constructing a new 4-lane
highway facility through the Cleveland National Forest with freeway -
to -freeway connectors at SR-241/SR-133 and I-15/ Cajalco Road.
The facility may include managed lanes. The 4-lane facility would
essentially be a continuation of SR-133 on the west end, and Mid
County Parkway on the east end.
Key Considerations
Choice of alignment type will be key in determining the cost of
implementation (nearly full-length tunnel, or other facility type with
less tunneling). Determining groundwater levels will be key in
determining alignments and allowable depths for the tunnel portions.
Cost associated with Major Investment Study (MIS) Corridor B are
shown for the nearly full-length tunnel option. Extensive right-of-way
will be required to implement the improvements. Toll needs will also
require further study.
Benefits
The project wouy,
alternative rou4e k
allow vgthicles to t i
project wcta(to
---21tow for;,;
I�
� cant congestion relief by providing an
n Oran and Riverside Counties and would
R 91tween SR-241 and I-15. The
t SR-91 itraffiic during construction and would
selection for incident management,
R, and for continuity of the highway network by
and the Mid County Parkway.
tus
is project is identified in the Riverside County - Orange County
MIS as part of the Locally Preferred Strategy to improve mobility
between Riverside County and Orange County.
2006 SR-81 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Anaheim to Ontario International Airport High Speed Rail
Project No: 16
Anticipated Completion: Post-2030
Project Cost Estimate
To Be Determined
Project Schedule
To Be Determined
LEGEND
Existing Highway
High Speed Rail Representative
Alignment
LOS:'A,UIS COO IV
Project Description
Proposals for a new high speed rail corridor from Anaheim to Ontario are
included in this project. This project includes an altemative that would
use SR-91 right-of-way, or would be aligned adjacent to SR-91 right-of-
way, or could potentially be co -located with the Major Investment Study
(MIS) Corridor A (Project #14) alignment. Another alignment opportunity
is being investigated along SR-57, which is located west of SR-55.
Key Considerations
Altemative alignment impacts to SR-91 right-of-way envelope and/or
Santa Ana River are undetermined. The choice of alignment will
potentially impact MIS Corridor A (Project #14). Right-of-way will be
required to implement the improvements. Potential considerations for co -
locating the Maglev adjacent to Corridor (and also SR-91) include
providing a two -column structure with a barrier between the trains and
vehicles. Caltrans and Maglev highway R/W, maintenance, safety, and
operations considerations would -need to be analyzed if shared use with
a Maglev facility (presum er non -State ownership) were pursued.
See the MIS Corridorfor additional considerations.
Benefits
The proje
ge:701 i
nt Status
congestion relief by providing a direct high-
ction with Ontario International Airport for
gingers and business next -day deliveries.
ion on"SR-91 by providing additional capacity in the
Concept studies are currently underway.
REPRESENTATIVE ALIGNMENT SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY
2006 SR-91 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
"
2 0 0 6 D r a f t S R - 9 1
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n P l a n
S R - 9 1 A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e
J u n e 2 , 2 0 0 6
m
O C T A
"
O v e r v i e w
" A n n u a l p l a n & s c h e d u l e f o r S R - 9 1
i m p r o v e m e n t s r e q u i r e d b y A B 1 0 1 0
" 2 0 0 6 p l a n i n c o r p o r a t e s M I S d i r e c t i o n p l u s
p r e l i m i n a r y t r a f f i c b e n e f i t s
" P r e l i m i n a r y s c h e d u l e s i d e n t i f i e d f o r m o s t
p r o j e c t s
" M i l e s t o n e y e a r s i n c l u d e 2 0 1 1 , 2 0 1 5 , 2 0 2 0 ,
a n d 2 0 3 0
" O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p r o j e c t a d v a n c e m e n t
2
O C T A
$ �Ie1�4gnS
V'S£
S'£ 6
l'Z
L'SZ
0'89 $
(W$) ;so0
ue!d uo!suedx3 uual-po4S Nurkge
fyunoo ep!saan!a o} kuno0 a6uea0— s}uewenadwi sng ssadx3
seIeoS lon.11le wawanoadw! AeleS
luawaoe!daa 6u!ssanen0 peon{ JanN u99.19
lL-HS Li7Z-HS wal uo9!ppy euel punoglse3
l l0Z JeoA �8
AJewwns poroad •oN
pafoad
V.L30
114
•
0' 6L9$ - O'909$ le oaanS
0'Eb
0' 606 - 0'ZL
0'Z9 — 0'9Z
O'99E $
91,-101 aun kuno0 seuel eicpana2:1 66-21S 6
ruenalnog wewmed }e e6ueyaqu! ma 9
mow ugsnl )e euel gM 1.6- 1S L
6bZ-21Slelee] uogoea!Q yae3 u! aue-1 dJ au() Aq ueP!M 9
9 UM JeaA AB
(w$) ;sod
Raewwns ;oafoad •oN
loaf aid
•
v130
W
5
l
`7C1N11 V8'710A.
0'OL17
$ lelignS
O'9EE
O'9E6 $
(w$);soo
quawanoadwl uo4e}S Pue aopues Nu!lo len
uopana 143e3 u! auel dJ y,9 a 6u!PPd Ag PUe 99-21S ueemleg b6-2iS ueP!M
O101 aeaA A8
44
04
A.1BW ans pafoad •oN
}oa(oad
v.L0o 9
070£`6
Y'•emu-.M.wmw....ru. iwF" Su4
Est•asr1.rz-as of
i
dor\c...)
dNoao0
$ :moms
0 SL
O'OOL'9
O'OOZ`£
O Z94
0.017Z $
(W$) iso0
11e2i PaedS 46! H }mdny leuogewalul ouew() o; w!a4euy 94
peod oolefe0/94-1 ££4-2iS/147Z-2iS wo.g (8 aopuaoo SIW) N!1!oe3 auelt S4
94-1 q 147Z-2iS woo (V a0p41100 SIN) 41!1!oed auemp Paien013 t4
459440019e-110 46-213/94-1 £4
Jcpeuuo0Paa!0 46-2iS/117Z-8S Z4
OSOZ aeaA A8
iGewwnS pafoad •oN
loa(oad
" "
T r a f f i c A n a l y s i s
" O p e r a t i o n s m o d e l f o c u s e d p r i m a r i l y o n
m a i n l i n e t r a f f i c q u e u i n g
" S h o w s b e n e f i t s o f m a j o r p r o j e c t s
e a s t b o u n d a f t e r n o o n a n d w e s t b o u n d
m o r n i n g
" R e s u l t s p r e s e n t e d f o r 2 0 0 5 a n d i n t e r i m
y e a r s ( 2 0 1 1 , 2 0 1 5 , 2 0 2 0 , 2 0 3 0 )
7
O C T A
"
A s s u m p t i o n s
" 2 0 1 1 N e w E B l a n e f r o m 2 4 1 t o 7 1
" 2 0 1 5 N e w l a n e s e a s t o f 2 4 1
" 2 0 2 0 e w l a n e s w e s t o f 2 4 1
" 2 0 3 0 A l l p r o j e c t s a b o v e
" 2 0 3 0 A l l p r o j e c t s a b o v e p l u s
C o r r i d o r s A a n d B f r o m M I S
8
m
O C T A
"
E a s t b o u n d P M ( t r a v e l t i m e )
P M P e a k H o u r E a s t b o u n d T r a v e l T i m e ( m i n u t e s )
1 2 0
1 0 0
8 0
6 0
4 0
2 0
0
A l i 1 1 ' I I
1
f +
I l l c o
1
1
I ��I
��1
P I
m
s .
# I . '
I r l
I I I
m
( I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I r y
I I I ( I I I
h I I
I I I I I
I I I
( I I I � ( I I I I I
I I I I I I I I ,
S
I I I {
( I I I I ��
l i I
-
I N I I I I
( I I I
( I I I I I I
I l 1 1 1 �� I I I I T I " I
I I I I I ' ,
I I ' I I I I I I i f _ n I
I I I I j
r
E I d I 1 . - _
I I I I t
i t
( I I I
I I L 4 , 1
a
i u w l
l
��' l l ��
( I I I I I
I I I I I
, : l I V I {
, _ . ����! I
I I 1 ��r r y t l l ��' "
_ N I
I I I I I I I I
( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' (
_
_
� ' , I ( I I I I I '
' ��i ' ( I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I ,
I I I I
I I 1 I 1 1
I l i h ( I I I
I I I I I I 1
I I I P
( I I I
l i i l l
, I I I
1 1 : 1 1 ( ' I I I I I I I
F
( I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I
I I
( I I I I I
I I I I I
1 1
' -
I I
j P r o j e c t A s s u m p t i o n s :
2 0 1 1 - N e w E B l a n e f r o m S R - 2 4 1 t o S R - 7 1 ( P r o j e c t 1 )
��, 2 0 1 5 - N e w l a n e s f r o m S R - 2 4 1 t o 1 - 1 5 ( P r o j e c t 6 )
_ i 2 0 2 0 - N e w l a n e s f r o m S R - 5 5 t o S R - 2 4 1 ( P r o j e c t 1 0 ) i l i i l l l ��l l l ��j 1 , 6 1 2 4
I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I
I I ��I I I V i i I 1 l '
I I I I I '
1 4 1 1 l I p I l
I ,
. ,
" ( I I I I I I . , i 1
1
I I i ��1 1 1 ) ;
' a .
I I I I I
1 1
I I I I ' I I , ��' 1
I 1
g l ��I l l h l l
'
. u J � '
y M F
F 2 0 3 0 A l l p r o j e c t s a b o v e i n 2 0 3 0 I I
" ` " 2 0 3 0 A & B A l l p r o j e c t s a b o v e p l u s C o r r i d o r s A a n d B
�� =
- ' f r o m M a j o r I n v e s t m e n t S t u d y ( P r o j e c t s 1 4 a n d 1 5 )
t
s " 1
P r o j e c t s c u m u l a t i v e b y
I I N I ��
I I I I F I
( , I I I
I I I
I I I
1 I I I
i I
I
d '
' ' I i u I P ��4 ��
I I q
��,
��1 1
I I I I t i I 4 G
, I N I I I I I ,
, I I y I
I I I
I
I I
1 I ,
h
I I I
( I I I
I l w
I r ��
`
������
I
I I I I ' i 1 ��
I l l l f N a ��
I I I I I 4 I i "
I I I I I I I I " `
I I I I I 1
( I j r
{ M I y I ( I I I
I I I { s I t
I I I I I I I l I i I I ! ��I i I ' . , I 4 q ��l " p , I 1
a r e y e a r .
y 4
a I I I
' �� I l i
I I I
I I I I I I I
( I I I I I
( I I I
I I I I I ��r i
F
; I N F y
I I I
F 1 l { 1 I i ,
i 4 l
��I 1 I I
y I I I X I I I ' i l I k f . I i I i I I I 7 ��, l l ��
1 f
1 1 m I
L - t
I I
I
,
I I I
I
I ' ( ,
I I I I I I I I " I '
I I ' ��I I , I I
I I I I I I I '
1 I I I
I i 1 - ����I ' ��- ��' I ��-
' I
r
��y I
r i P ��I , I I
I I ' , 1
I I . a { I I , I I I ( I I
' I i d
I 1 I , I I I
I I I I
I ( I i
I I I I I I ' I I I I
l l l l , I
, I
I 1 ��I I I l '
I . I ! . I
( I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I
I I I ( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
' r
- I ��
` - 4
I I I I I I I I I a I
I , I I I
1 1
I I I I I
I
I r
i
1 ^ O I I I I
M o l
1
" f l
' t o m
l
I 6 ��I I I ( I
I
I I j I I I ��I I I
I 1 0
l I 1 l I
,
( + I I I I I ��I I { ��f ' { ��I 1
I I i l ��1 ` , I 1 I I 1 f v - k 1 ` . '
' (
y 1 6 1
h I I I I I I I ��
I I I I I I I I I I I ( I ' I I I I I
I I l I I I I l i ( I I l l ��I I I
I I
1 l
i
I I I I I I I I I
I I
I
��
, I . ,
, 7 9 r v g I ( I I
I I I I I I
l I
w I I ( I I I I I I I - _ ' I ' ' I ��
I ����i I i
I I I j
I I I I I
I l I I I
I I I I I I I I ; I I I
( , I
u ' I I I I ;
I
I
I
I I , I L
I F ' p - I '
I I I
��I I I
1
3 1 I " , . e
I I I
I I I I
( I I I
I I I _
_ I
I
��I I
I I I I
I I I I I f
i ' I I g r
f l y
I I I
' I I I
I
' I I I
I I l i
: I I I
' I l
��V * 1 1
����I , ' 1 ,
1
: : - . = ��6 1 T ` a
I '
��i l
I . 1 L
" ,
- 7 , 1 1
i ��L > . Y ����I
E x i s t i n g
2 0 1 1
2 0 1 5
2 0 2 0
2 0 3 0
2 0 3 0 A & B
��l
O C T A
I
d
O
O
O
PM Peak Hour Eastbound Speed (mph)
N W A
O O O
O
O
O
O
("ads) Mid Punoqwei
\
•
•
ti
v
O
AM Peak Hour Westbound Travel Time (minutes)
A cn co O N A
O O O O O O
(ewe; lanesq)
•
" " "
W e s t b o u n d A M ( s p e e d )
4 0
3 5
3 0
E
a
2 5
o .
C
0
O
a 2 0
3
o '
Y 1 5
t o
a
a
1 0
5
0
W
I I I
n l
I . I
I I 4 , c
w
�� ��I
- ; ��I I
!
I
Y I 1 ' I
�� 7 1 1
����I
! I ' I l ! ' " ' h i l l
I ' I ' ' l l l I ' ' i 1 , i t q ' i l l l l l ' h i l l l
' I I
a I I I I I I I ' I I i l l I I ' ; , r
1 4 1 4 , I 1
l j ' l u l l l l I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I _
! u
I
I
I ' l I
' ��I
r i
��i T ��I 1 1
i ' '
r
' .
I I I I I
p I 1 4 ' l i ! " I ' 4 4 ' 1 l l l h l l I
C I I I N N I I
I ��
I I I I 4 n
I N I I I ' t l r y " p F 1 5 "
, I c ��
I I I
I ��
Y ' I l
I ��
' y
I I I I
! h i :
i t
M I N I
I { I ��I
i l l ����l ; ,
I I I
1 1 1 1 4 1 I I
1
1 1
I I I
1 .
I I ; I ��I I ' ��
I I I I I I �� $
6 n
1
h ! I I I I I
��
_ I l l :
I r ` �� ���� ' "
u l l l l l l u i i i : ��
1 ;
I
- f 1 R I p p l
V j
l l l d I . -
"
��l l u ' 4 u
, �� -
l
��
_
" a
r �� S " I ' l l l l l l l l
I I I I ' ��i l
" ' I ! I I I I
��- I I I I , 1 , ' ' " I I l l l l l l
I I I I I , '
I I I I ! . I I
- . ��s - - . �� N I I I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I
I i I I I I I I I I i
' 1
I l l l l ' l , d l l
v . I I I I I
I I I I
1 �� . , , F r �� I l ' l l l l l
r ��3
u V
I
l l l l . .
- _
L f F .
* 4 I I l l I C I
I ' L . 1
I I I I I I I
' i ��I I ,
. I n l
J I I
I I I I
I I
u ' I
! I I L 4
I l l l l l l l l
! I I
I I I
I , Y l a l
����w
I I " I I I I I '
i P I t l 1 o , I l , I l l l 1 1 1 :
I I I
: I I I I ,
' ��: I I I I '
. ��i V " �� u : l i
, ,
I I
1
W
��.
I ' ,
r y I I I
I .
! I I I I I I I I I I
N I I
" I
t l , I I I
, : , I
t l l ' I
1 i I I
l i l . l
I I I I " I
a I l l
� I l l
l i ! l l
I I I I I I
l 1 ��I I I ! ' I F
l o t l u I I I I ' -
N I
! I I I I I
N ' I 1 L I , ' ' m N
I ��I l
1 1 1 , " I
I
I I I I
I I I I ,
' I , I ' I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I :
u I I I I I
I I I I I , i l
I 1 1 ��! I I ' , i
I I I I I l l s
i ' I ' . I ,
I I I I
I ' I t i ' I L i l l l
l
I I I ! , ,
I ^ r l ' I
g f a e - ' �� ' r _ l r , l i i ' # �� :
i , �� g u l l ! Y
I i . k . . W
z I I I I ' I k - ' i c
_
" ��- ��` " I l l h l l l l l l 1 1 1 r l I 1
I I I I I
" I
I I I I
1 . .
I I I I I I I I I I I I l
1 I I I I
I I
l i f I I I I I : 1 I 1 ; ��'
_
M I ��l l l i l
��I ' l l i l l l ��d I 1 1 1 1 , N
��I " I ' I
u �� I I I I I d .
I I I I
I I I
I ! , h d
I I ! I I } l k l l I F 1
, A
I I V , L I 4 Y 1 ' 9 1 ' I ��I I I a ' I k d , I t i ' I
R l i f I , ��
, L
i
" , i a ��. ��l l i l l I I l h
i l l l N l t l f i -
t i I ,
I I I
��t I N 4
i t ' l l L :
r y
I :
I ��
I I
1 I
I I I I I I
N
i ,
I I ' . ����
I I I I I I I I I I ' . I , ' I
I I ,
I I I , I I I I
_ I l i I I I I 1 y I
T } I I
1 a ' {
I I I
I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I
1 4
I - T
I I I I I I I I
' l H I ' .
I
1 ��1 1 m
r
I I I
I I I
4
K
I F l u
N F l . f i
N 4 r
I I I I I
I I I I I
P I ' l l I .
' u l l l l l l
i l l l i
' l i
,
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
' I I
I , I f
i i
l
F ' l ;
u
��.
I I I
��I
:
s I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I ' l l
I I I
I I I
I l l
I I I I I
4 I ' I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I I I t l " .
�� I I y
��t I I I I . '
I I I I A I J . - e A F N Y I I I I
I I I I I ��' . :
I �� _
7 A 0 1 ! % P
V
N
e u l l t
I u ' I ' l
l l l l l ��u
!
q
I I I I
I ��1 1 1 x
F N
I I I I I ' N l l l ! p , u ,
' I
r
; .
9
I I I I
1 ,
I I ' I l d l i i
1 U I I
l h
l l ��l ��
I I I
I I
I i I I I ' l u ' ' ,
l l l I l l l l
i l ' ��I
l l l l l l l F
4
, u u i
: I ' . ,
��, u 1
��
- I ' 1
, , I I I I
" 1 ' -
�� H A
I C I
I I I 9 I P I ��; , ' 1
r
"
' , 9 I : I
! 1 1
I I I '
1
��l
i l l
1 . ,
y _
' ��`
i l i l i
I I I I
I I I I I I I , I '
u ' l r l
I l
l u '
I i I I I I
! I ' i , ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
r
m
1
, �� I I I I I I
��r , w ��
n
I I I
, a =
d Y
, I I I , I , , I , ��! '
l l i
l l ! i l
I I I I
I I I I I I I l i
I I I
I
i l
I '
1 1
L '
L h h h
��k
l l l l l l l 4 1 1 1 1 1
I I I
h
, I , i 1 ,
��' I I I ' :
g y I I I , I
N Y N I i e i ��I I I I l I 1
��_
I ��, ��I
i l ! I I I I L ,
I I I I
"
-
. ��. . I
I '
I N
����
a : L �� A ' u ,
_
' I ��' i i j i
��I 1 1
e m s ' I l l
> ;
. I
l l
I ; ' I
.
' ��I i , i l i t l l
I I I
I I I I I I
��
E x i s t i n g
2 0 1 5
2 0 2 0
2 0 3 0
2 0 3 0 A & B
r
U 2
Traffic Summary
• Project proposals provide congestion
relief
• Proposed EB improvements result in
future travel speeds better than today
• Westbound improvements limited by
55/91 interchange
13
OCTA
" "
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s
" P r o v i d e f e e d b a c k t o d a y o n p r e l i m i n a r y
S R - 9 1 I m p l e m e n t a t i o n P l a n
" D i r e c t s t a f f t o f i n a l i z e p l a n f o r O C T A
a p p r o v a l i n J u n e 2 0 0 6
1 4
m
O C T A
ti
•
•