Loading...
06 June 2, 2006 SR-91 Advisory76864 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 • Fa OCTA Item 6 June 2, 2006 To: State Route 91 Advisory Committee From: Daryl Watkins, General Manager, 91 Express Lanes Subject: Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project Update 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. Background The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) initiated the Performance Monitoring and Pricing Pilot Project (PMAP) in 2004 to explore the benefits of dynamic pricing and test its applicability to the 91 Express Lanes. The OCTA Board of Directors (Board) adopted the following objectives for the PMAP3 project: • Provide State Route 91 (SR-91) corridor users with enhanced and accurate speed and travel time information for the 91 Express Lanes and the general-purpose lanes. • Provide customers a visible and clear link between the tolls they pay and their travel time and speed experienced on the 91 Express Lanes. • Maximize efficiency and vehicle throughput of both the 91 Express Lanes and the general-purpose lanes. • Improve reliability and consistency of travel time for customers, including rapid incident response and data sharing for traffic management purposes. • Establish a pricing system that considers real-time conditions on the 91 Express Lanes and the general-purpose lanes. Orange County Transportation Authority 550 South Main Street / P.O. Box 14184 / Orange / Califomia 92863-1584 / (714) 560-OCTA (6282) 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 • • • Riverside County — Orange County Major Investment Study Draft Action Plan Page 5 Summary A draft action plan is presented for review and input. Institutional options are also presented, and staff is seeking input on recommended next steps by corridor. Attachment A. Preliminary Schedule Prepared by: Kurt Brotcke Manager, Planning and Analysis (714) 560-5742 pproved by: Paul C. Taylor, P.E. Executive Director Planning, Development and Commuter Services (714) 560-5431 • Preliminary Schedule Jan 2006 • SR-91 Implementation Plan • Funding agreements • Final JP Agreement Define technical studies • Draft JP agreement • • Continue technical studies • Initiate SR-91 (241-71) final design • Complete toll study • - Initiate SR-74 study • Initiate technical studies • Complete SR-91 EIR (241 - 71) ItoII. 91 Viaduct, new corridor) • Continue technical studies Dec 2006 • Complete SR-74 and new corridor technical studies • Continue SR-91 (241-711final design • Complete 91 Viaduct conceptual engineering A Jan 2007 • Go/no go on new corridor preliminary engineering • Complete SR-91 (241-711 final design • Initiate 91 Viaduct preliminary engineenng Jan 2008 Dec 2007 Dec 2008 V IN3WHOVIIV 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 • 2006 Draft SR-91 Implementation Plan Exhibits SR-91 Advisory Committee June 2, 2006 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 • 2006 Draft SR-91 Implementation Plan SR-91 Advisory Committee June 2, 2006 m OCTA • Overview • Annual plan & schedule for SR-91 improvements required by AB 1010 • 2006 plan incorporates MIS direction plus preliminary traffic benefits • Preliminary schedules identified for most projects • Milestone years include 2011, 2015, 2020, and 2030 • Opportunities for project advancement 2 OCTA $ �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 • • Traffic Analysis • Operations model focused primarily on mainline traffic queuing • Shows benefits of major projects eastbound afternoon and westbound morning • Results presented for 2005 and interim years (2011, 2015, 2020, 2030) 7 OCTA • Assumptions • 2011 — New EB lane from 241 to 71 • 2015 — New lanes east of 241 • 2020 — ew lanes west of 241 • 2030 —All projects above • 2030 —All projects above plus Corridors A and B from MIS 8 m OCTA • Eastbound PM (travel time) PM Peak Hour Eastbound Travel Time (minutes) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Ali 11'II 1 f+ Illc„o 1 1 I�I �1 PI m s. #I .' Irl III m (III IIIII IIIII IIIIIII II ry III (III h II IIIII III (III°(IIIII IIIIIIII, S III { (III I� liI - INIIII (III (IIIII I Il111� II II TI"I IIIII', II'IIIIIIif _ nI III Ij r E Id I1.- _ III It it (III IIL4,1 a iu wl l �'ll� (IIIII IIIII ,:lIVI{ , _. ��!I II 1 �rry tll�'" _ NI IIIIIIII (IIIIIIIIIIIIII'( _ _ °',I (IIIII' '�i' (IIIIIIIIIII IIIII, II II II 1 I11 Ili h (III III III 1 IIIP (III li ill ,III 11:11 ('IIIIIII F (III III IIIIIIII I II (IIIII IIIII 11 '- II j Project Assumptions: 2011 -New EB lane from SR-241 to SR-71 (Project 1) �, 2015 - New lanes from SR-241 to 1-15 (Project 6) —_ i 2020 - New lanes from SR-55 to SR-241 (Project 10) iliilll�lll�j1,6124 IIIIIIIIIII I II II II�IIIViiI1l' IIIII ' 1411lIpIl I, ., "(IIIIII.,i1 1 IIi�111); 'a. IIIII 1 1 IIII'II,�'1 I1 gl�Illhll ' .uJ °' y MF F 2030 — All projects above in 2030 II " ` " 2030 A&B — All projects above plus Corridors A and B � = -' from Major Investment Study (Projects 14 and 15) t s" 1 Projects cumulative by IINI � I III FI (,III„ III III 1 III i I I d' „'' IiuIP�4� II q �, �11 IIIItiI4G ,INIIIII, ,II yI II I I II 1 I, h III (III Ilw Ir � ` ��� I IIII'i1� — IlllfNa� IIIII4Ii " IIIIIII I"` IIIII 1 (I jr {MIyI(III III{sIt IIIIIIIlIiII!�IiI'.,I4q�l"p,I1 are year. y4 a III '� Ili III IIIIIII (IIIII (III IIIII�ri F ;IN Fy III F1l {1Ii, i4l �I1II yI IIXIII'ilIkf.IiIiIII7�,ll� 1 f 11mI L-t II I , III I I'(, IIIIIIII"I' II'�II,II II IIIII' 1III Ii1-��I'�-�'I�- 'I r �yI riP�I,II II', 1 II.a{II,I I I(II 'Iid I1 I,III IIII I(Ii IIIIII'IIII llll,I ,I I1�IIIl' I.I!.I (I IIIIIIII I III I III(IIII III IIIIIIIIIIII ' r -I� `-4 I IIIIII I IaI I,III 11 IIIII I Ir i 1^OIIII Mol 1 •fl„ 'tom l I6�III(I I IIjIII�III I10 lI1lI , (+IIII I�II{�f'{�I1 I I il�1`,I1II1fv-k1`.' '( y161 hIIIIIII� III IIII IIII(I'IIIII IIlII IIl i(IIll�III II 1l i IIIIIIIII II I � ,I., ,79rvgI(II III III lI wII(IIIIIII-_'I''I� I��iIi IIIj IIIII Il III IIIIIIII;III (,I u'II II; I I I II,IL IF'p-I' III �I II 1 31I",.e III II II (III III _ _I I �II II II IIIII f i'II gr fly III 'III I 'III I Ili :III 'Il �V* 11 ��I ,' 1, 1 ::-.=�61 T` a I' �il I.1L "—, -7,11 i �L>.Y��I Existing 2011 2015 2020 2030 2030 A&B �l OCTA 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) • • • • Westbound AM (speed) 40 35 30 E a 25 o. C 0 O a 20 3 o' Y 15 to a a 10 5 0 W III n l I. I II 4,c w � �I - ;�II ! I YI1'I � 711 ��I !I'Il!'"' hill I'I''lll I''i 1, it q'illlll' hill l ' I I a IIII II I' II ill II';, r 1414,I1 l j' l u l l ll IIIII I I I III II IIIII I I _ !u I I I' l I '�I r i �i T �I11 i'' r '. IIIII pI 1 4' li!"I'44'1 lllhll I CIIINNII I� IIII 4 n INI I I'tl ry" p F 1 5" ,I c � III I� Y'I l I � 'y I III !hi: it MINI I{I�I ill��l;, I I I 111141II 1 11 II I 1. II;I�II'� IIIII I� $ 6 n 1 h!II III � _ — „Ill: I r `� �� '" ulllllluiii:� 1; I -f1RIppl Vj llldI.- " �llu' 4 u ,� - l —� _ •a r � S"I'llllllll II II'�il " 'I !IIII �- IIII, 1, '' " I Illllll IIIII,' IIII !. II -. �s--.� NII IIIII IIIII III I IiIIIIIIIIi ' 1 Illll'l,dll v .IIIII IIII 1 � .,,Fr � Il'lllll r�3 uV I llll.. -_ Lf F. *4I Ill ICI I'L.1 I IIIIII 'i�II, . Inl JII IIII II u'I !IIL4 Illllllll !II III I,Ylal ��w II"I III I' iPItl1o,Il,Il ll 111 : III : III I, '�: III I' .�i V"� u: l i ,, II 1 W �. I', ry III I. !IIIIII IIII NI I "I tl ,III ,:,I tll'I 1i II lil. l IIII"I aIll °Ill li!ll III III l 1 �I II !' IF lotlu III I'- NI !III II N'I 1 LI ,''mN I�Il 111,"I I IIII II II, 'I,I'III IIII III IIII: u II III III II,il I11�!II',i II II Ills i'I'.I, II II I'I ti'ILilll l III!,, I^rl'I gfae-' � 'r _ lr,lii'#� : i,� gull !Y Ii .k.. W z — III I'I k -'ic _ •�-�` "Illhllllll111 rlI 1 II III "I IIII 1.. IIIIIII I IIIIl 1I III II l if IIII I:1I1;�' _ MI�lllil �I'llilll�d I1111,N �I" I'I u� IIIIId. IIII III I!,hd II! II }lkllIF1 ,A IIV,L I4Y1'91'I�IIIa'Ikd,Iti'I Rli f I,� ,L i ",ia �.�llillIIlh illlNltlfi- ti I, II I �tIN4 it'll L: ry I: I� II 1I IIIIII N i , II '.�� III IIIII II'. I,'I II, III, IIII _ Ili I III 1y I T} II 1 a' { III III IIIII IIIIII 14 I -T IIIII III 'l HI'. I 1�11m r III III 4 K I F l u NFl . fi N4 r IIII I IIIII PI'll I. 'ullllll illli 'li , III IIII IIII IIII ' II I,If ii l F'l; u �. III �I : s I IIIII IIIIII IIII III I'll III III Ill IIIII 4 I' I III IIII IIIIII tl ". � IIy �t III I.' III IA IJ. -eAF NY IIII IIIII �'.: I� _ 7 A01!%P V N eullt Iu'I 'l lllll�u ! q IIII I�111x F N IIII I' Nlll!p,u, 'I r ;. 9 IIII 1, II'Ildlii 1 UII lh ll�l� III II IiIII'lu'', lllIllll il'�I lllllllF 4 ,uui :I'., �, u1 � - I'1 ,, IIII "1'- � HA ICI III9IPI�;,'1 r " ',9I:I !11 III' 1 �l ill 1., y_ '�` ilili IIII I IIIIII,I' u' lrl Il l u' Ii IIII !I'i,! 111111111 r m 1 ,� IIIIII �r,w� n III , a= d Y ,III, I,,I,�!' l li ll!il IIII IIII III li III I il I' 11 L ' Lhhh �k lllllll411111 III h ,I ,i1, �' III': gy II I,I NYNI iei�IIIIlI1 �_ I �, �I il!III IL, IIII " - .�..I I' IN �� a:L� A'u, _ ' I �'iiji �I11 ems' Ill >; .I ll I;'I . '�Ii,i litll III IIIIII � Existing 2015 2020 2030 2030 A&B r U2 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 • • Recommendations • Provide feedback today on preliminary SR-91 Implementation Plan • Direct staff to finalize plan for OCTA approval in June 2006 14 m OCTA ti • •