HomeMy Public PortalAbout05 May 22, 2006 Plans and Programs Committee76954
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND. PROGRAMS COMMITTEE_
MEETING AGENDA I -
TIME: 12:30 P.M.
DATE: May 22, 2006
LOCATION: Board Chambers, 1" Floor
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside
RECORDS
*** COMMITTEE MEMBERS ***
Daryl Busch/Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris, Chairman
Mary Roche/Robert Bernheimer, City of Indian Wells, Vice Chairman
John Chlebnik/Shenna Mogeet/ Bill Davis, City of Calimesa
Mary Craton/John Zaitz, City of Canyon Lake
Jeff Miller/Karen Spiegel, City of Corona
Robin Lowe/Lori Van Arsdale, City of Hemet
Michael H. Wilson/Gene Gilbert, City of Indio
Frank West/Charles White, City of Moreno Valley
Frank Hall/Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco
Dick Kelly/Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert
Ronald Oden/Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs
Ron Roberts/Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula
Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District I
Roy Wilson, County of Riverside, District IV
*** STAFF ***
Eric Haley, Executive Director
Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director
*** AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY ***
State Transportation Improvement Program
Regional Transportation Improvement Program
New Corridors
Intermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare)
Air Quality and Clean Fuels
Regional Agencies, Regional Planning
Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs
Congestion Management Program
The Committee welcomes comments. if you wish to provide comments to the
Committee, please complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Board.
11.36.15
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
www.rctc:org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
12:30 P.M.
Monday, May 22, 2006
BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section
54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in. a Committee meeting, please
contact the Clerk of the Commission at /951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours
prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made
to provide accessibility at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS. (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda
after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate. _action on the
item and that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to
the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires
2/3 vote of the Committee. if there are less than 2/3 of the Committee
members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote.
Added items will be placed for discussion at. the end of the agenda.)
•
- Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
May 22, 2006
Page 2
6. CONSENT:' CALENDAR All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved
in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on
specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for.
discussion at the end of the agenda.
6A. FY 2006/07 MINIMUM FARE REVENUE RATIO : FOR RIVERSIDE
TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY.
Pg. 1
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Reaffirm the methodology used to, calculate the required ;fare.:
box recovery ratio and approve the FY 2006/07 minimum fare
revenue to operating expense ratio ' of 17.65% for Riverside
Transit Agency and 17.14% for SunLine Transit Agency, and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action. '
COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
Overview ,
This item is for the Committee to:
Receiveand file the Commuter Rail'; Program Update as
information item; and:
)` Forward:. to the Commission for final action.
7. 2006 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Adopt the 2006 congestion Management Program Update; and.
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
"
"
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e A g e n d a
M a y 2 2 , 2 0 0 6
P a g e 3
8 . P R O P O S E D M E T R O L I N K B U D G E T F O R F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
O v e r v i e w
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
P g . 5 7
1 ) A d o p t t h e p r e l i m i n a r y F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 M e t r o l i n k O p e r a t i n g a n d . C a p i t a l
B u d g e t ; a n d
2 ) A l l o c a t e R C T C ' s f u n d i n g c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a
R e g i o n a l R a i l ' A u t h o r i t y " i n a n a m o u n t n o t t o e x c e e d . $ 6 , 7 0 9 , 9 3 5
c o m p r i s e d o f $ 5 , 5 0 8 , 7 0 0 i n L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d s f o r t r a i n
o p e r a t i o n s a n d m a i n t e n a n c e - o f - w a y , a n d $ 1 , 2 0 1 , 2 3 5 f o r c a p i t a l
p r o j e c t s t o b e f u n d e d b y F T A S e c t i o n 5 3 0 7 f u n d s ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
9 . P R O D U C T I V I T Y I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M F I S C A L Y E A R . 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
P E R F O R M A N C E T A R G E T S
O v e r v i e w
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
P g . 6 2
1 ) A p p r o v e P r o d u c t i v i t y I m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m ( P I P ) F Y " 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s f o r t h e f a r e b o x r e c o v e r y r a t i o a n d d i s c r e t i o n a r y
i n d i c a t o r s ;
2 ) A p p r o v e a n i n c r e a s e i n t h e P I P F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s f o r t h e
o p e r a t i n g c o s t p e r r e v e n u e h o u r f o r t h e B a n n i n g M u n i c i p a l T r a n s i t
A g e n c y , C i t y o f C o r o n a , R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y a n d R C T C ' s
C o m m u t e r R a i l . P r o g r a m ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
May 22, 2006
Page 4
10. PALO VERDE VALLEY — FY 2006/07 UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS HEARING
Pg.75
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Reaffirm the Commission's definition of "Unmet Transit Needs" and
"Reasonable to Meet" standards;
2) Make a finding through Resolution No. 06-011 that based upon a
review of the requests for services received through the "Unmet Transit
Needs Hearing" process, review of existing services and proposed
'improvements to the available services, there are no unmet transit
needs which can be reasonably met in the Palo Verde Valley; and
3) , Forward to the Commission for final action..
11. FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/09 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Review and approve, in concept, the FY 2006/07 - FY 2008/09 Short
Range Transit Plans for the cities of Banning, Beaumont (collectively
Pass Transit `'System), Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit -
Agency, Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency and RCTC's
Regional Rail program, as presented; and
2) Forward to the Commissionfor final action:.
Pg. 82
12. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report
on attended ' and, upcoming meetings/conferences and issues . related to
Commission activities.
Plans and Programs_Committee Agenda
May 22, 2006
Page 5
13. ADJOURNMENT
The next Plans and Programs Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at
12:30 P.M., Monday, June 26, 2006, Board Chambers, 1st Floor, County
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
MINUTES
"
R I V E R S / D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
P L A N S A N D P R O G R A M S C O M M I T T E E
M o n d a y , A p r i l 2 4 , 2 0 0 6
M I N U T E S
. C A L L T O O R D E R
T h e m e e t i n g o f t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e w a s c a l l e d t o o r d e r b y
C h a i r D a r y l B u s c h a t 1 2 : 3 1 p . m . , i n t h e B o a r d . R o o m _ a t t h e C o u n t y o f
R i v e r s i d e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r , 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , _ F i r s t F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e ,
C a l i f o r n i a , 9 2 5 0 1 .
2 . R O L L C A L L
M e m b e r s / A l t e r n a t e s P r e s e n t
D a r y l B u s c h
B o b B u s t e r
J o h n C h l e b n i k
M a r y C r a t o n
G i n n y F o a t
D i c k K e l l y
J e f f M i l l e r
R o n R o b e r t s
M a r y R o c h e
F r a n k W e s t
M i c h a e l W i l s o n
M e m b e r s A b s e n t
F r a n k H a l l
R o b i n L o w e
R o y W i l s o n
3 P U B L I C C O M M E N T S
T h e r e w e r e n o r e q u e s t s t o s p e a k f r o m t h e p u b l i c .
4 . A P P R O V A L O F M I N U T E S - M a r c h 2 7 , 2 0 0 6 .
M / S / C I M . W i l s o n / R o c h e ) t o a p p r o v e t h e M a r c h 2 7 , 2 0 0 6 m i n u t e s a s
s u b m i t t e d .
"
Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
April 24, 2006
Page 2
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS '
Lathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director; requested -that the Committee 'add
"State Route 91%Green River Interchange Cost Increase" to the agenda as a •
late breaking item. This item arose after the agenda was posted and mailed;
and there is a need that this item be addressed by the Committee at this
time.
M/S/C (Roche/M. Wilson) to approve the addition of the :'State
Route 91/Green River Interchange Cost Increase" as Agenda Item.11.
. _ CONSENT CALENDAR
M/S/C (Craton/Roberts) to approve the following Consent 'Calendar,
items:
6A. FISCAL YEARS. 2006/07 AND 2007/08 CALL FOR PROJECTS:
MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM: WESTERN
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
1) Receive, and file a progress report on the Measure A Specialized
Transportation Program's Request for Proposals%Call for. Projects -
for the provision of specialized transportation services for
Western Riverside County residents; .and ,
Forward to the Commission for final action.
6B. RIVERSIDE', COUNTY 2006 TRANSPORTATION ':IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM FINANCIAL RESOLUTION ' . AND ADOPTION. OF
RESOLUTION NO. ,06-006, "RESOLUTION :CERTIFYING •,THAT THE
RIVERSIDECOUNTY HAS RESOURCES TO FUND PROJECTS IN
FISCAL YEARS`' 2006/2007 THROUGH 2O11/2012
TRANSPORTATION' IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND 'AFFIRMING
COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENT ALL PROJECTS IN THE PROGRAM"
1) ; Adopt the Riverside County '2006 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) Financial Resolution 06-006 for submittal to the
Southern California Association of .',Government's. (SLAG) . for
inclusion in the '2006 Regional Transportation. Improvement
Program .(RTIP); and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action. .
"
"
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e M i n u t e s
A p r i l 2 4 , 2 0 0 6
P a g e 3
7 . P R E S E N T A T I O N : P I E R P A S S
S t e p h a n i e W i g g i n s , R e g i o n a l P r o g r a m s D i r e c t o r , p r o v i d e d a b r i e f o v e r v i e w o n
_ t h e g o o d s m o v e m e n t d e b a t e t h a t h a s i l l u s t r a t e d t h a t R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y s e r v e s
a s a n e x t e n s i o n t o t h e P o r t s o f L o s A n g e l e s a n d L o n g B e a c h . S t e p h a n i e
W i g g i n s i n t r o d u c e d M i c h a e l F i s h e r f r o m C a m b r i d g e S y s t e m a t i c s , I n c . t o
p r o v i d e a s t a t u s r e p o r t o n t h e P i e r P a s s O f f P e a k P r o g r a m ( P i e r P a s s ) .
M i c h a e l F i s h e r , . C a m b r i d g e S y s t e m a t i c s , I n c . , p r o v i d e d b a c k g r o u n d
i n f o r m a t i o n a n d a n u p d a t e o n P i e r P a s s , h i g h l i g h t i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g :
" P i e r P a s s i s a s p e c i a l p u r p o s e e n t i t y c r e a t e d b y t h e m a r i n e . t e r m i n a l
o p e r a t o r s o f t h e P o r t s o f L o n g B e a c h a n d L o s A n g e l e s i n o r d e r t o
a d d r e s s v a r i o u s o p e r a t i o n a l i s s u e s a n d p r o b l e m s d o w n a t t h e p o r t s ;
" E x t e n d e d g a t e h o u r s ;
" . C o l l e c t i o n o f a t r a f f i c m i t i g a t i o n f e e f o r d a y t i m e p i c k - u p a n d d e l i v e r y ;
" C h a n g e s i n t e r m i n a l " g a t e t r a f f i c ;
" C h a n g e s i n t i m e p e r i o d s " o f t r u c k t r a f f i c ;
" O p e r a t i o n a l i m p a c t s ; a n d
C o m m u n i t y r e a c t i o n s . -
C o m m i s s i o n e r J e f f M i l l e r r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e a c t u a l n u m b e r o f u n i t s b e
i n c l u d e d f o r t h e c h a n g e s i n t e r m i n a l g a t e . t r a f f i c a n d r e q u e s t e d t h a t a
p r e s e n t a t i o n o n P i e r P a s s b e m a d e t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n .
M i c h a e l F i s h e r " n o t e d t h a t a n a t t e m p t i s b e i n g m a d e t o c o l l e c t i n f o r m a t i o n " o n
w a r e h o u s e o p e r a t o r s a n d l o a d e r s i n t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e t h a t a r e i n v o l v e d i n t h e
p r o g r a m a n d h o w i t i s a f f e c t i n g t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e .
C o m m i s s i o n e r M i l l e r r e q u e s t e d t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n a l s o b e p r o v i d e d t o t h e
C o m m i s s i o n . H e a l s o a s k e d t h a t t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n b e m a d e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e
i n t e r e s t e d c i t y c o u n c i l s .
C a t h y B e c h t e l c o n f i r m e d t h a t a p r e s e n t a t i o n o n P i e r P a s s w i l l b e m a d e t o t h e
C o m m i s s i o n . _
C o m m i s s i o n e r M a r y R o c h e r e q u e s t e d t h e d a t a o n h o u r l y t r u c k t r a f f i c r e f l e c t a
2 4 - h o u r p e r i o d . S h e t h e n a s k e d i f d a t a i s b e i n g c o l l e c t e d o n h o w f a r t h e
l o a d s a r e g o i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r t h e c i t i e s i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y .
Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
April 24, 2006
Page 4
Michael Fisher explained that information on a fraction of port traffic thatis
going to different locations has been collected. Unfortunately, it is unknown
how many•are actually involved in PierPass. Also, there is an issue of 'trucks'
that leave 'the ports and stop at a nearby location to transfercargo into other
•
containers.
In response to Commissioner Bob Buster's request to characterize the
additional costs of the program on average and the impact on operations if
shippers shifted their daytime operations into the nighttime/Michael'Fisher
responded that it varies greatly depending on the type of 'shipper: He also
noted that Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG) has
looked at how much of a container fee can be implemented before a shift of
traffic to other ports occurs.
At Chair Busch's request, Michael Fisher explained ,that the fee is being
collected and -dispersed solely for costs associated with the . impl'ementation
of PierPass.
In response to Commissioner Ginny Foat's
whether the program has impacted traffic
Fischer responded that there may not be
determine'if there has been an impact.
M/S/C (Miller/Roberts) to:
1) Receive -and file the presentation by Cambridge :Systematics,
Inc. on the PierPass OffPeak Program,,and
2) , ; Forward to the Commission for final action.
inquiry 'regarding Statistics as to
accidents "on the'1-710, Michael
enough history at this point to
AUTHORIZATION TOR RELEASE OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE
I-15 COMMUTER RAIL.' FEASIBILITY STUDY
Sheldon Peterson;_ Program Manager,' provided background information on ,
the Riverside CountyCommuter Rail Feasibility Study.', 'He then reviewed the
purpose, evaluation criteria, and goals and objectives of the',I-15 Commuter
Rail Feasibility Study along the 1-15,corridor from Corona to Temecula and
Temecula to San Diego.
"
"
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e _ M i n u t e s
A p r i l 2 4 , 2 0 0 6
P a g e 5
I n r e s p o n s e t o C o m m i s s i o n e r R o n R o b e r t s ' q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g S a n D i e g o
A s s o c i a t i o n o f G o v e r n m e n t s ( S A N D A G ) p o t e n t i a l l y f u n d i n g a p o r t i o n o f t h i s
s t u d y , S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n r e s p o n d e d t h a t S A N D A G h a s r e v i e w e d t h e s c o p e o f
w o r k . S t a f f h a s d e t e r m i n e d t o m o v e f o r w a r d a n d a s s u m e t h e c o s t s f o r t h e
i n i t i a l s t u d y a n d i n c l u d e S A N D A G i n t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n .
C o m m i s s i o n e r R o b e r t s n o t e d t h a t a c o n s i d e r a b l e a m o u n t o f w o r k h a s a l r e a d y
b e e n d o n e b y t h e C a l i f o r n i a H i g h S p e e d R a i l A u t h o r i t y .
S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h a t r e s e a r c h w i l l b e
u s e d a s p a r t o f t h i s s t u d y .
A t C o m m i s s i o n e r J e f f M i l l e r ' s r e q u e s t , S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n c o n f i r m e d t h a t ' s t a f f
w i l l w o r k c l o s e l y w i t h t h e c i t y . o f C o r o n a s t a f f o n t h i s s t u d y .
M / S / C ( M i l l e r / R o b e r t s ) t o :
1 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e r e l e a s e o f a R e q u e s t f o r P r o p o s a l f o r t h e p u r p o s e
o f p e r f o r m i n g a n 1 - 1 5 C o m m u t e r R a i l F e a s i b i l i t y S t u d y ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
9 . A P P R O V A L O F A L A M E D A C O R R I D O R E A S T ( A C E ) T R A D E C O R R I D O R R A I L
C R O S S I N G G R A D E S E P A R A T I O N P R I O R I T Y L I S T W I T H S W I T C H I N G
I M P A C T
S t e p h a n i e W i g g i n s , R e g i o n a l P r o g r a m s D i r e c t o r , p r e s e n t e d t h e g r a d e
s e p a r a t i o n p r i o r i t y l i s t a n d r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s i n c o r p o r a t i n g s w i t c h i n g
a c t i v i t i e s :
M / S / C ( M . W i l s o n / M i l l e r ) t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e t h e A l a m e d a C o r r i d o r E a s t ( A C E ) T r a d e C o r r i d o r R a i l
C r o s s i n g G r a d e S e p a r a t i o n P r i o r i t y L i s t i n c o r p o r a t i n g s w i t c h i n g
a c t i v i t i e s ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
April 24, 2006
Page 6 ,
10. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst, provided an update, on the Commuter. Rail
Program..
M/S/C (Miller/Roche) to:
Receive and file the Commuter 'Rail Program Update, as an
information item; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action:
11. STATE ROUTE 91 /GREEN 'RIVER INTERCHANGE COST INCREASE
Hideo Sugita, Deputy. Executive Director, reviewed the cost increase on the
SR-91/Green River Interchange project and the use of commercial paper to
fund the increase.
M/S/C (Miller/Roche) to:
1) Approve 'funding the $2,622,000 ' cost " increase on the
SR-91 /Green River Interchange project by increasing the,
commercial; `paper fund source from $10,898,400 to
$13,520,400 and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. COMMISSIONERS./ STAFF, REPORT
There were no comments from Commissioners or staff.
12. ADJOURNMENT
There .being no furtherbusiness forconsideration by; the• Plans and Programs
Committee, the meeting 'adjourned at 1:15 p.m. ' The next meeting of the
Plans and Programs ,Committee is scheduled for May 22, 2006 at
12:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer' Harmon
Clerk of the Board
AGENDA ITEM 6A
"
"
R I V E R S / D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
D A T E :
M a y 2 2 , 2 0 0 6
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
T a n y a L o v e , P r o g r a m M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
S t e p h a n i e W i g g i n s , R e g i o n a l P r o g r a m s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 M i n i m u m F a r e R e v e n u e R a t i o f o r R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t
A g e n c y a n d S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) R e a f f i r m t h e m e t h o d o l o g y u s e d t o c a l c u l a t e t h e r e q u i r e d f a r e b o x
r e c o v e r y r a t i o a n d a p p r o v e t h e f Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 m i n i m u m f a r e r e v e n u e t o
o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e r a t i o o f 1 7 . 6 5 % f o r R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y a n d
1 7 . 1 4 % f o r S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ; a n d
2 ) f o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( R T A ) a n d t h e S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( S u n L i n e ) s e r v e
b o t h u r b a n i z e d a n d n o n - u r b a n i z e d a r e a s o f R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . T h e r e f o r e , t h e i r
m i n i m u m r e q u i r e d f a r e r e v e n u e t o o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e r a t i o r e q u i r e d b y s t a t e l a w f a l l s
s o m e w h e r e b e t w e e n t h e 1 0 % r e q u i r e m e n t f o r n o n - u r b a n i z e d a r e a s e r v i c e s a n d 2 0 %
r e q u i r e m e n t f o r u r b a n i z e d a r e a s e r v i c e s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r
c a l c u l a t i n g t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e r a t i o . T h e m e t h o d o l o g y u s e d t o c a l c u l a t e ' t h e m i n i m u m
r a t i o r e q u i r e d w a s d e v e l o p e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n . P e r t h e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
D e v e l o p m e n t A c t , S e c t i o n 9 9 2 7 0 . 1 , C a l t r a n s m u s t r e v i e w a n d a p p r o v e t h e
m e t h o d o l o g y o n a n a n n u a l b a s i s . I n F e b r u a r y 2 0 0 6 , C a l t r a n s ' s t a f f c o n c u r r e d i n
w r i t i n g t h a t t h e m e t h o d o l o g y i s s t i l l a p p l i c a b l e . C a l c u l a t i o n s u s e d c o n s i s t o f t h e
f o l l o w i n g :
R = . 1 C n + . 2 C u
C n + C u
R = R e q u i r e d R a t i o
C n = C o s t s o f S e r v i c e s i n N o n U r b a n i z e d A r e a s
C u = C o s t s o f S e r v i c e s i n U r b a n i z e d A r e a s
The costs for new or expanded services are exempted from the calculation for the`
year of implementation plus two full fiscal years of operation. For FY 2006/07, RTA..
has three routes 'that .are exempt from the farebox recovery requirement` due to •
system changes. 'SunL.ine does not have any exempt :routes.
Using the above formula and the Short Range Transit Plans,' the minimum required
ratio calculation for FY 2006/07 is 17.65% for RTA and 17.14% for SunLine. This
means passenger fares should cover 17.65% and 17.14% of the actual 'cost to
operate services; the balance is paid using state, federal and local funding.
Upon adoption of the required ratio by the Commission,. the calculations, will be
forwarded to Caltrans. The ratios are then fixed for the year and cannot be changed.'
even though actual revenues and expenses may differ from the SRTP..:estimates.
Attachment: Rules and Regulations for Determining Required Fare Revenue
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR DETERMINING REQUIRED
. FARE REVENUE TO OPERATING COST RATIOS FOR TRANSIT. OPERATORS
SERVING BOTH URBANIZED AND NON -URBANIZED AREAS OF.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Based on the latest annually adopted Short Range Transit Plans for Riverside
County, the Riverside County Transportation Commission with the cooperation
of the transit operator will determine separately the operating cost of those
transit services provided in non -urbanized areas and the operating cost of those
services in urbanized areas.
A) For the purpose of this calculation, the operating cost in the urbanized
areas shall include the cost of fixed route lines, groups of fixed route
lines, and demand responsive service operating entirely within an
urbanized area. The operating cost in the non -urbanized area shall
include the cost ofall fixed route lines, groups of fixed route lines, and
demand responsive service operating entirely within a non -urbanized
area.
B1
For fixed route lines operating partly within an urbanized area and partly
within a non -urbanized area, the cost shall be apportioned to the
urbanized area costs and non -urbanized area costs in proportion to the
route miles in the non -urbanized area and the route miles in the urbanized
area.
C) For demand response systems serving both an urbanized area and a non -
urbanized area, the cost shall be apportioned to urbanized area costs and
,non -urbanized area costs in proportion to the population of the urbanized
area served and the population of the non -urbanized area served.
D) The costs of extension of public transit service pursuant to Section
99268.8 of the Public Utilities Code (PUC) shall not be included in any of
these calculations.
II. The required ratio of fare revenues to operating cost in compliance with PUC
Sections 99268.3 and 99268.4 shall be calculated as follows:
R = .1 Cn + .2 Cu
Cn+Cu
R is the required ratio
Cn is the operating cost in non -urbanized areas
Cu isthe operating cost in urbanized areas.
3
Annually, ,prior to the "beginning of the fiscal:, Year,. the Riverside County
Transportation Corninission shall calculatethe required revenue to .operating
cost ratio for each transit operator serving both urbanized and non -urbanized
areas and, submit this calculation to Caltrans.. Caltrans .sh`all approve; the
methodology used to calculate the blended fare box ratio -prior to -the beginning
of the fiscal year. Once approved, the ratio is not subject to change.
AGENDA ITEM 6B
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
May 22, 2006
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Henry Nickel, Commuter Rail Staff Analyst
THROUGH:
Sheldon Peterson, 'Rail Programs Manager
SUBJECT:
Commuter Rail Program Update
STAFF.RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Receive and file the Commuter Rail Program Update as an information
item; and
2) : Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
• IEOC Line Weekenet to begin service July 15r''
Beginning on Saturday July 15, 2006 IEOC service will begin operating between
San Bernardino / Riverside and Oceanside. The service will be as follows:
• Trains 858, 860, 857, and 859 will operate on both Saturdays and Sundays
between San Bernardino 1 Riverside and Oceanside.
• Trains 856 and 861 will operate Saturdays only between Oceanside and
Riverside.
- IEOC Line Weekend Schedule
• From San Bernardino
From Oceanside
STATION
857
Sat/Sun
859
Sal/Sun
861
Sat
STATION'
856
Sat
858
Sat/Sun
860
Sat/Sun
San Bernardino
7:30a
8:55a'
—
Oceanside
7:45a
2:50p
4:30p
Riverside Downtown
7:50a
9:15a
6:05p
San Clemente Pier
8:03a
3:09p
4:49p
La Sierra
8:01a
9:26a
6:15p
San Clemente
8:068
3:14p
4:54p
North Main Corona
8:10a
9:35a
6:22p
San Juan Capistrano
8:15a
3:23p
5:03p
West Corona
8:17a
9:42a
6:29p
Laguna Niguel
8:20a
3:28p
5:08p
Anaheim Canyon
8:36a
10:01a
6:48p
Irvine
8:29a ,
3:37p .
5:17p
Orange
8:43a
10:08a .
6:55p
Tustin
8:35a
3:43p
5:23p
Santa Ana
8:48a
10:13a
7:00p
Santa Ana
8:41a
3:50p
5:30p
Tustin
` 8:54a
10:19a
7:06p
Orange
8:46a
3:55p
5:35p
Irvine
9:01a
10:26a
7:13p
Anaheim Canyon
8:53a
4:02p
5:42p
Laguna Niguel
9:10a
10:35a
7:22p
West Corona
L9:12a
L4:22p
L6:02p
San Juan Capistrano
L9:16a
L10:41a
L7:27p
North Main Corona
L9:18a
L4 29p
L6:09p
San Clemente
L9:26a
L10:51a
L7:36p
La Sierra
L9:26a
L4:38p
L6:18p
San Clemente Pier
L9:31a
L10:56a
L7:39p
Riverside Downtown
9:50a
L4:49p
L6:29p
Oceanside
10:01a .
11:21a
8:12p
San Bernardino
-
5:20p
7:00p
L: Train may leave up to 5 minutes ahead of schedule.
In addition, new Metrolink weekend service will commence ,on the Orange,. County
Line June 3 2006.
Passenger Trips
Riverside Line
5,400
5,000
4,600
4,200
3,800
3,400
3,000
2,600
p ph o� p`' o4) ooA
� � 4' oy p6 00 .6 • cs)
P" caQ orY pe`' Sao
Month
Passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of April .averaged
4,524, which is up 637 ( + 16%) from the month of March:, The Line .averaged an
overall increase of 29, slightly more than a year ago 'April 2005. This' indicates a
near; total :recovery of ridership followingrecent drops during the `period of Union
Pacific's track repair operations.
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
Riverside Line
April on -time : performance averaged 98% inbound (+10% from March) and 92%
outbound (+20% ;from March). There were 13 delays greater than 5 minutes ;
during the month of April. The followin• were primary causes:.
Signals/Track/MOW.
Dispatching
Mechanical
Other
TOTAL
3
8
. 0
2
23%
62 %
0%
15%
6
"
"
i n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
I n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
4 , 6 0 0
4 , 4 0 0
a 4 , 2 0 0
4 , 0 0 0
c 3 , 8 0 0
* 3 , 6 0 0
3 , 4 0 0
3 , 2 0 0
s � s c r
P ���� c o o Q o c , ��o �� o e , . a : Q e
M o n t h
O r �
' C t ` a o ` O Q Q ��
P a s s e n g e r t r i p s o n M e t r o l i n k ' s I n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e C o u n t y ( 1 E 0 C ) L i n e f o r t h e
m o n t h o f A p r i l a v e r a g e d 4 , 3 6 8 , . a d e c r e a s e o f . 1 6 r i d e r s , s l i g h t l y l e s s t h a n t h e
m o n t h o f M a r c h . T h e . l i n e h a s i n c r e a s e d 1 5 % f r o m a y e a r a g o A p r i l 2 0 0 5 .
O n T i m e P e r f o r m a n c e ( 9 5 % G o a l )
I n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
1 0 0
m 9 5
c o 9 0
d 8 5
8 0
c o
a 7 5
7 0
0 0 0 - 0 0 o h o y A ` ' O h - p ` � o 0 0 0 0 0
P Q �� 0 ; N ��J c s S P J 0 g e l O o = 4 6 4 p e 4 ) a t e < g f a r ��Q r
M o n t h
A p r i l o n - t i m e p e r f o r m a n c e a v e r a g e d 9 5 % s o u t h b o u n d ( + 7 % f r o m M a r c h ) a n d 8 8 %
n o r t h b o u n d . ( + 1 % f r o m M a r c h ) . T h e r e w e r e 2 8 d e l a y s g r e a t e r t h a n f i v e m i n u t e s
d u r i n g t h e m o n t h o f A p r i l . , T h e f o l l o w i n g w e r e p r i m a r y c a u s e s :
S i g n a l s / T r a c k / M O W
D i s p a t c h i n g
M e c h a n i c a l
O t h e r
91 Line
2,800
2,600
m 2,400
2. 2,200
5 2,000
ae 1,800
1,600'
1,400
Passenger Trips
91 Line
oh Ah ph oh oh oy ph
P��v ��� ,ss' ,J� PJp, �eQ Oo� ‘4o, Oeu �ar
Month
Passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of April averaged 2,253, an
increase of 74 riders;a slight, increase over the month of March. The line averaged_
an overall increase of 336 (+ 18%) from a year ago April 2005:'
On Time Performance '(95%o,Goal)
100
m' 95
R 90
Y .
c 85
m
co
i 75
70
OSO�3
• • - �Jo. , .
91 Line
• 'Month
April on -time performance averaged 90%.inbound' (+5% from March) and' 89%
outbound(-3% from March): ' There were 19 delays greater than five minutes
during the month of April.? The following were primary causes:
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching '
Mechanical
Other
TOTAL
7
10
2
37 %
53%
10%
0% 1
AGENDA ITEM 7
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
May 22, 2006
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Technical Advisory Committee
Shirley Medina, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT:
2006 Congestion Management Program Update
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
11 Adopt the 2006 Congestion Management Program Update; and
2) Forward to the Commission. for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Congestion Management Program (CMP) was first introduced in 1991 under
Proposition 111 as a state directive for local governments to measure and mitigate
the impact of land use decision on streets, highways, and regional roadways. The
Commission serves as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) responsible for
the development and implementation of the CMP in Riverside County.
In 1996, an amendment was made to the CMP legislation changing the CMP from
a mandatory requirement to a voluntary .program. Therefore, RCTC modified the
document by combining elements of the state's CMP and federal Congestion
Management System (CMS) requirements. This. combination allowed the
Commission to implement a more streamlined program that focuses on enhanced
system monitoring.
The CMP is required to be updated .every two years. Part of this update process
requires staff to review traffic data to determine if any segments are operating at
Level of Service (LOS) "F" conditions. Under the federal Metropolitan Planning
regulations, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is required
to certify, that the county,transportation commissions are meeting the federal CMS
requirements through their respective CMPs and that they are consistent with the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
9
The CMP update was intended to be adopted by the Commission in December
2005. However, this year's monitoring effort required additional analysis as'further.
described in this item.
Riverside County 2006 CMP Update
As a result of the monitoring efforts for the 2006 CMP update, including a request'
from the Technical Advisory Committee to perform additional analysis on key areas
:experiencing congestion, staff identified seven segments that resulted in a LOS F'.
condition. These segments were further analyzed using a delay analysis
methodology called Floating Car Run (Attachment A), which is a more : refined'
methodology for calculating LOS.
The results of Floating Car Run analysis concluded the followings
• Four of the deficient segments located on 1-15_(S.B:.Co line to 1=215;and I
215 to SR' 79 So), 1-215 (SR 60 to Alessandro), ' and Alessandro (SR 91'to I-
215) Could be attributed to: construction- activities occurring ; along the
60/91 /215 Interchange and corridor improvement project.
Two ofthe deficient segments on 1-215 (Alessandro to SR 74) and SR 79l(,1-
15 to SR 74) were not found deficient as a result of the Floating Car Run.
• One segment on 1-215 (SR 74 to 1-15) remained deficient with ;no overriding
considerations.'
These segments will continue to: be closely monitored over the next 12 months to
determine if the LOS F is an average or temporary condition. If at the end of the -
12-month period these segments. -remain at LOS F, deficiency plans:'will be required
to identify 1) the cause of the deficiency; 2) measures to mitigate the 'deficiency;
and 3) cost,and schedule for mitigating the deficiencies. The responsible agency to`
prepare the'deficiency will be the local agency where the :deficient segment occurs.
If thedeficiency is on a' state highway system, RCTC will work with Caltrans and .
the local agency to, coordinate the development of a deficiency plan.,
With Transportation Uniform .IVlitigation Fee (TUMF). programs in -place in both
western county. and Coachella Valley, it is likely that these TUMF programs will
serve as deficiency plans since they consist of transportation improvement projects
that would' mitigate deficiencies along the CMP arterial 'systern and have the
potential to mitigate a deficiency along the state, highway system., The TUMF`
programs will: benefit the ;overall system as the TUMr program of projects is
implemented over time.
In conclusion, the Technical Advisory Committee and staff recommend that the
2006 CMP update is adopted at the June 2006 Commission meeting and that the
monitoring of the potential deficiencies continues in order to determine if these
conditions are temporary or permanent.
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Floating Car Run Analysis
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
11
ATTACHMENT A.
FLOATING CAR RUN DEFICIENCY ANALYSIS
Selected Se • ments of I-15/1-215/SR 79/Alessandro
Roadway
1-215
SR 79
Alessandro
Segment
S.B. Co_'Line
to 1.215
215 to
SR 79 South
SR 60'to
Alessandro
Alessandro
to SR 74
?7est
sto 1
1-15 to SR 74
Deficient Per Floating Car
Runs (YIN)
N (1)
Overriding
Considerations
(YIN)
Reason for Overriding Considerations
Diversion Due to
1-215 Construction
French Valley" ±
Interchange Improvement
Decrease In
Capacity Due
to 1.215
Construction
Diversion Due to Pf
1.215 Construction
(1) CombineD segments from 1-15 to Murrieta Hot Springs Road to achieve this result
Results of this monitoring process will be; provided to the TAC following the 12-month'
monitoring process or during preparation of the 2007 CMP Update:
12
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
•
13
"
2 0 0 6 R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y
T h e C o n g e s t i o n ' M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m ( C M P ) w a s f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e d " i n 1 9 9 0 u n d e r
P r o p o s i t i o n 1 1 1 . P r o p o s i t i o n 1 1 1 e s t a b l i s h e d a p r o c e s s f o r e a c h m e t r o p o l i t a n c o u n t y i n
C a l i f o r n i a . t o d e s i g n a t e a C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t A g e n c y ( C M A ) t h a t w o u l d b e
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e C M P w i t h i n c o u n t y b o u n d a r i e s .
T h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . C o m m i s s i o n ( R C T C ) w a s d e s i g n a t e d a s t h e C M A
i n 1 9 9 0 , a n d t h e r e f o r e , p r e p a r e s t h e C M P , u p d a t e s i n c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h t h e T e c h n i c a l ,
A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e ( T A C ) ; w h i c h c o n s i s t s o f l o c a l a g e n c i e s , t h e C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e ,
t r a n s i t a g e n c i e s , a n d s u b r e g i o n a l a g e n c i e s . C M P l e g i s l a t i o n i s p r o v i d e d i n A p p e n d i x ' 1 .
T h e i n t e n t o f t h e C M P i s t o m o r e d i r e c t l y l i n k l a n d u s e , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , a n d a i r q u a l i t y ,
t h e r e b y p r o m p t i n g r e a s o n a b l e g r o w t h m a n a g e m e n t p r o g r a m s t h a t w i l l e f f e c t i v e l y u t i l i z e
n e w t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n d s , a l l e v i a t e t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n a n d r e l a t e d i m p a c t s , a n d i m p r o v e
a i r q u a l i t y . A n u m b e r o f c o u n t i e s w i t h i n C a l i f o r n i a h a v e d e v e l o p e d a C M P w i t h v a r y i n g
m e t h o d s a n d s t r a t e g i e s t o m e e t t h e i n t e n t o f t h e C M P l e g i s l a t i o n .
T h e : R i v e r s i d e . C o u n t y C M P w a s s i g n i f i c a n t l y m o d i f i e d i n 1 9 9 7 t o f o c u s o n f e d e r a l
C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t S y s t e m ( C M S ) r e q u i r e m e n t s a s w e l l a s i n c o r p o r a t e e l e m e n t s
o f t h e S t a t e C M P r e q u i r e m e n t s . T h e 1 9 9 7 C M P a l s o f o c u s e d o n d e v e l o p m e n t o f a n
E n h a n c e d T r a f f i c M o n i t o r i n g S y s t e m i n w h i c h r e a l - t i m e t r a f f i c c o u n t d a t a c a n b e
a c c e s s e d b y ' R C T C t o e v a l u a t e t h e c o n d i t i o n o f t h e C M S , a s w e l l ' a s m e e t o t h e r
m o n i t o r i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s a t t h e S t a t e a n d f e d e r a l l e v e l s . T h i s m o n i t o r i n g e f f o r t w a s
c o m p l e t e d " i n 2 0 0 4 , w h i c h c o n s i s t e d o f i n s t a l l i n g S m a r t C a l l B o x e s ( t r a f f i c c o u n t e r s i n
C a l l B o z e q u i p m e n t ) a n d t r a f f i c c o u n t e r s a t C a l t r a n s ' T r a f f i c M a n a g e m e n t C e n t e r ( T M C )
s i t e s a l o n g t h e S t a t e H i g h w a y s y s t e m . M o n i t o r i n g o f t h e C M P s y s t e m o n l o c a l a r t e r i a l s
w i l l c o n t i n u e t o o c c u r t h r o u g h t h e : C o a c h e l l a _ V a l l e y A s s o c i a t i o n o f G o v e r n m e n t s '
( C V A G ) m o n i t o r i n g p r o g r a m a n d t h r o u g h l o c a l a g e n c y m o n i t o r i n g e f f o r t s , i n W e s t e r n
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y .
R C T C ' s a d o p t e d m i n i m u m L e v e l o f S e r v i c e ( L O S ) t h r e s h o l d i s L O S " E " . T h e r e f o r e ,
w h e n a C M P s t r e e t o r h i g h w a y s e g m e n t f a l l s t o " F " , a d e f i c i e n c y p l a n m u s t b e r e q u i r e d .
P r e p a r a t i o n o f a d e f i c i e n c y p l a n w i l l b e t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e l o c a l a g e n c y w h e r e t h e
d e f i c i e n c y i s l o c a t e d . O t h e r a g e n c i e s i d e n t i f i e d a s c o n t r i b u t o r s t o t h e d e f i c i e n c y w i l l a l s o
b e r e q u i r e d t o c o o r d i n a t e w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e p l a n . T h e p l a n m u s t c o n t a i n
m i t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s , i n c l u d i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e m a n d M a n a g e m e n t
( T D M ) s t r a t e g i e s a n d t r a n s i t a l t e r n a t i v e s , a n d a s c h e d u l e f o r m i t i g a t i n g t h e d e f i c i e n c y .
T o i n s u r e t h a t t h e C M P i s a p p r o p r i a t e l y m o n i t o r e d t o r e d u c e t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f L O S
d e f i c i e n c i e s , i t i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f l o c a l a g e n c i e s , w h e n r e v i e w i n g a n d a p p r o v i n g
d e v e l o p m e n t p r o p o s a l s , t o c o n s i d e r t h e t r a f f i c i m p a c t s o n t h e C M P S y s t e m . W h e n a
d e f i c i e n c y i s i d e n t i f i e d a s p a r t o f t h e C M P U p d a t e L O S e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s , f u r t h e r
P r e p a r e d f o r : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
P r e p a r e d b y : V R P A T e c h n o l o g i e s
" E S - 1
1 4
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
detailed analysis of LOS must be conducted to determine whether an actual deficiency
has occurred. The LOS analysis conducted as part of the CMP Update process is only.
considered to be . a "screening" level analysis, therefore additional, more detailed
assessment of a. potential deficiency would be required before a deficiency is formally
identified: Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s) will be made to insure that
appropriate data, geometrics, ;.counts and other related information :isapplied; to
calculate LOS::
During preparation of the"_2006 CMP, deficiencies were found on the CMP System
based upon this year's monitoring effort. These segments will continue, to be monitored
over the next 9 months to determine if the deficiencies reflect temporary or permanent
conditions. LOS ,."E"results were identified" and will ,also be monitored over .the next
several months to determine an average annual peak hour condition.' If it is determined
that deficiencies are permanent and not related to construction activities on the segment `
or anywhere else that could impact the segment or any other special ,circumstances a
deficiency plan will be required to address the deficiency.
OTHER' PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
This document is prepared to .address each .elements the State ,CMP legislation and
federal CMS requirements. ; Below, is a summary of each chapter, highlighting the
Riverside County CMP's approach in meeting the State CMP and federal CMS
requirements.
Chapter,I - Designation; of the CMP Lead Agency:
• ; The County Board . of , Supervisors, and a majority of cities:. representing = a, majority of
population in the incorporated area, must designate by resolution, a public agency to prepare
•
and adopt the Congestion Management Program.
The Riverside .County Transportation Commission 'vvas designated' as the; CMA . for
Riverside County on June 11, 1990..The County Board of Supervisors and a majority, of
the cities representing a majority of: the; population supported the designation.
Chapter 2 Designation' of the System of Highways and Roadways;
• The CMA must designate a system of highways and roadways to include, at a minimum,' all
state highways and principal arterials.
RCTC has designated, based upon a set of optional criteria referenced in: Chapter 2, a
system of Highways and Principal Arterials All State highways within Riverside County
have been included in accordance with CMP statutes,: and a set of Principal. Arterials
has been identified (reference Exhibit,2-1 and Table 2-1).
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
ES-2
15
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
Chapter 3 - Transportation Modeling:
The CMA is to provide a uniform database of traffic impacts `for use in a countywide
transportation computer model."
For purposes of this Program, the Commission has recognized use of the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG) :Transportation Model, the Coachella
Valley Area Transportation System (CVATS) sub -regional transportation model, and
local agency models to analyze traffic -impacts associated with development proposals
or landuseplans.
Chapter 4 - Multimodal System Performance Standards:
AB 1963 identifies requirements in CMP legislation including development of multimodal
system performance standards focusing on street and highway level of service and transit
standards. This Chapter therefore incorporates minimum standards for both these important
forms of transportation.
CMP Street and Highway Standards
The methodology for measuring LOS must be that contained in Circular 212 or the most recent version of
the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM); and traffic standards must be set no lower than LOS "E" for any
segment or intersection on the CMP system, unless the current LOS is lower (Le., F").
For purposes of this CMP, LOS analysis,for intersections and 'segments along the CMP
System of Highways and Roadways, under current or existing conditions, is required to
be developed using HCM-based methods.
Considering the transportation financing program. in Riverside County established
through Measure A, there are no advantages to set a higher minimum LOS standard
than required by CMP legislation, LOS "E". As a result, the minimum LOS standard for
intersections and segments along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways shall
be-"E" unless the intersection or segment had a lower LOS (LOS "F") in 1991 (reference
Table 4-1 and Exhibit 4-1). Such facilities' are exempt from CMP deficiency plan
requirements.
Public Transit/Alternative Mass Transit System Standards
Transit standards must be established for service frequency (i.e., headways), routing, and coordination
among multiple transit agencies operating within the CMP jurisdiction.
To meet the requirements of the Statutes, the performance measures outlined in the
Short Range Transit Plans prepared by transit agencies in Riverside County are
included in this chapter. In 2005, RCTC approved a Productivity Improvement Program
as part of a comprehensive effort to work with the county's eight public transit operators
to provide better service and improve efficiency and serves as performance targets in
which transit operators will strive to meet in developing its SRTP service and financial
plan.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
ES-3
16
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
Chapter 5 — Enhanced Transportation System Management Program:
♦ The CMP must include a, program to analyze the impact of land use decisions by jurisdictions
on the regional transportation system, including an estimate of costs to mitigate those
impacts.:
This element describes the traffic data collection process to assess land use decision "
impacts on the Congestion Management System. Under the ..= program,'RCTC, CVAG
and Caltrans would be the agencies in Riverside County responsible for the traffic count
data collection process. The count data can also be applied to comply with State and
federal Congestion Management Plan/Congestion Management System/Transportation
Management System (CMP/CMS/TMS) data collection requirements.'.,CVAG currently ;
has a Traffic Monitoring Program in place that addresses CMP System Monitoring
requirements in the Coachella Valley. RCTC has implemented the 'Enhanced Traffic
Monitoring- Program using Smart Call Box (SCB) and Caltrans' Traffic Management -
Center (TMC) equipment at selected sites along the State Highway system in Riverside
County. This system has resulted in significant increases in the number and location of
traffic counts along the CMP System.
Chapter LOS "DeficiencyPlans:
• AB 471 and AB 179.1 provide for the development of deficiency plans.. The bills statethat "a
city or county may designate individual segments or intersections as deficient when they do
not meet the established level of service standards, if •prior to the designation at a`noticed
public hearing, the city or county has adopted a deficiency plan".
Deficient segments or intersections will be identified through the biennial traffic
monitoring process." . i Vhen a deficiency is identified as part of the CMP Update LOS
evaluation process, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine
whether an actual deficiency has occurred. The LOS analysis conducted as part of the
CMP Update process is. only :considered to be a "screening level analysis, therefore
=additional, more detailed, assessment of a potential deficiency would be required before
a deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s), will;
be made to insure that appropriate data, geometrics, counts and other _related.
information is applied to calculate LOS.
The local agency where the deficiency is located will be responsible for the preparation
of the deficiency plan. ROTC will prepare deficiency.: plans on the State Highway
System when deficiencies are identified and will coordinate the development of the
deficiency plan with affected local jurisdictions.
Chapter 7 Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Air Quality:
• The CMP must include,altematives to single occupant auto use, such as transit, and, van and
carpooling; and must : promote strategies tomanage overall travel demand; such as a
jobs/housing balance,,; flextime, ;telecommuting and parking strategies. Local agencies must
also adopt'a transportation demand management (TDM)' ordinance to comply with CMP
statutes: "
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: 'VRPA Technologies
ES-4
2006 Riverside County Congesfion Management Program
RCTC will continue to work with local agencies toward development of transportation
demand management (TDM) strategies that reduce reliance on the single -occupant
vehicle. All local agencies in Riverside County have prepared and have adopted TDM
ordinances.
Chapter 8 - Capital Improvement Program (CIP):
• The CIP is a 7-year program; projects in the CIP may be incorporated into the Regional
• Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) for the programming of Flexible Congestion
Relief (FCR) and Urban and Commuter Rail funds; CIP Projects must maintain or improve
performance of the multi -modal system; and projects must conform to transportation -related
emission air quality mitigation measures.,
To comply with the statutes, the 2005 CIP incorporates all CMP'System projects listed
in the most recent TIP including STIP, Measure "A", Transportation Uniform Mitigation
Fee (TUMF), and other federally funded projects. To streamline this process, CIP
requirementsshall be the same as, and accomplished through the Regional
Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) development.
Chapter 9 - CMP Conformance and Monitoring Process:
• RCTC must make a determination that its member cities and the county are conforming to
the CMP, including consistency with traffic LOS and transit performance standards; adoption
and implementation of a trip reduction and travel demand ordinance; and adoption and
implementation of a program to analyze land use impacts on the transportation system.
SCAG must also find the CMP consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan. •
The specific requirements of Conformance and Monitoring Process are . described in
Chapter 9.
Chapter 10 - CMP Development and implementation Update Process:
♦ This chapter focuses on the procedural, administrative, and coordination activities related to
CMP development, adoption, and update in accordance with CMP legislation.
The CMP includes a process that addresses each of the activities identified above
including CMP development, adoption, and update.
Environmental Assessment - The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
identifies the CMP as an exempt project. As a result, compliance with CEQA
requirements is no longer necessary.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
ES-5
18
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 1.
DESIGNATION OF THE
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT -AGENCY
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
According to CMP legislation (AB 471, AB 1791, AB 1963, and, AB.2419), the Riverside-°
County Board of Supervisors and a majority of cities representing :a majority of the
population in the, incorporated area, must designate by resolution, a,, publicagency to
prepare and adopt :a Congestion Management Program' (CMP). ;The Congestion
Management Agency (CMA) has the authority to monitor the County's and each
affected city's' compliance, with the adopted program. An amendment to the
Government 'Code requires the CMA to update and adopt,.the CMP; every two years
(biennially) consistent with development of the Regional Transportation Improvement
Program (RTIP). A copy of AB 2419 is provided as Appendix 1.
A key feature of ;AB 471 ;is the requirement that every urbanized county' with a
population of 50,000.or more must prepare and adopt a comprehensive CMP The
CMP represents,a.directive for local governments to measure and mitigatethe impact of
land use decisions on streets, highways, and regional transportation systems.
1n 1996, the State of California amended the CMP legislation to change the requirement
from mandatory to voluntary: However, federal Metropolitan Planning provisions require'
Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO) serving a transportation management area
(TMA) (i.e. area with a population over 200,000) to include a Congestion Management
System (CMS) component as part of their transportation.iplanning process.' Each of the
six counties in; the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region has
adopted and implemented a CMP. The Federal Highway `Administration (FHWA) .and ,
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) jointly determine if the MPO's: planning process
meets the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134.among other provisions. In the event,.that the
FHWA/FTA determines that the planning process in a TMA;does not substantially meet
the requirements, and do not certify. the process, they may withhold project and funding
approvals.
RCTC DESIGNATED AS THE CMA
On June 11, 1990, the, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) was
designated as the CMA for Riverside County by resolution ,from member agencies. The
Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and the Western Riverside
Council of .Governments (WRCOG) also supported the ..designation. It is : the
Commission's intent to continue working closely with WRCOG, CVAG, the cities and the
County, toward development, and implementation of an effective CMP.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: `.VRPA Technologies`
"
2 0 0 6 R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m
T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l c o n t i n u e t o d e v e l o p a n d b i e n n i a l l y u p d a t e t h e C M P t o c o i n c i d e
w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e S t a t e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m ( S T I P ) a n d
R e g i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m ( R T I P ) i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h l o c a l
g o v e r n m e n t s , A i r Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t D i s t r i c t s , a n d s u b r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g a g e n c i e s
( W R C O G a n d C V A G ) . T h e C M P m u s t a l s o b e s u b m i t t e d t o t h e M P O , w h i c h f o r
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y i s t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a A s s o c i a t i o n o f G o v e r n m e n t s ( S C A G ) .
S C A G i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d e t e r m i n i n g c o n s i s t e n c y o f e a c h C M P w i t h i n t h e S C A G r e g i o n
w i t h t h e R e g i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n ( R T P ) . a n d a i r q u a l i t y m a n a g e m e n t p l a n s .
T h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m c o m b i n e s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f
t h e S t a t e ' s C M P a n d t h e f e d e r a l C M S w i t h a g r e a t e r e m p h a s i s o n t h e C M S , r e s u l t i n g i n
a n e n h a n c e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n m o n i t o r i n g s y s t e m .
P r e p a r e d f o r : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
P r e p a r e d b y : V R P A T e c h n o l o g i e s
1 - 2
2 0
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 2
DESIGNATION OF THE CMP SYSTEM OF
HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS
STATUTORY 'REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089(a), referencedin AB 1963, requires development of a Congestion
Management Program (CMP) to establish traffic level of service (LOS) standards for a
system of highways and roadways designated by RCTC as the ..Congestion
Management Agency (CMA). This system must include, at a minimum, all state
highways and principal arterials, both new and existing facilities. Once designated,
components of the system cannot be removed.
Designated: System of Highways and Principal Arterials
♦ All State Highway facilities in Riverside County.
Consideration , may be given to the following conditions when designating Principal
Arterials:.
✓ Routes identified on ;Caltrans' "Functional .Classification System maps 'a
"Principal Arterials";
✓ Designated expressways; and
✓. Facilities linking cities/communities (interregional facilities), and major activity
centers (shopping malls, . activity centers, major industrial/business parks,
stadiums, etc).
2006 CMP SYSTEM UPDATE PROCESS
An update to the CMP System considers the optional criteria identified: above, including
arterial facilities added to the Federal Functional Classification' System. Local agencies
may nominate; arterials for inclusion on the CMP System . at any time. Nominated
arterials will be reviewed by the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for
approval and forwarded to the ROTC; Board for final approval.;
Exhibit 2-1 provides a graphic display of the CMP System of Highways and ,Roadways
in Riverside County. Based upon review of the revised Functional Classification System
and theconsiderations listed above, additional facilities were not designated as principal
arterials during; the 2006 CMP _updateprocess.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA''Technologies
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
0
a
a
a)
.0
0
6
Rincipal Arterials on CMRSgem
Hghrvays on CMP*tem
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
2-2 22
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
c
0
r
N
rr
N
E
N
'7 .
a
a
N
O
Prepared for Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
ahibit2-1 (cant).
•
2
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
2-4 24
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
TABLE 2-1
CMP SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS
"State Highways:
Facility Name
1. 1-10
2.1-15
3. 1-215
4. US 95
5. SR 60
6. SR 62
7 SR 71
8. SR 74 .
9. SR 78
10. SR 79
11. SR 86
12. SR 91
13. SR.111
14. SR 177
15. SR 195
16. SR 243
17. SR 371
Limits
San Bernardino Co. line to the Arizona State line'
San Bernardino Co. line to the San Diego Co: line
San Bernardino Co: line to 1-15
San Bernardino Co: line to 1-10
San Bernardino Co. linetol-10
San Bernardino Co. line to I-10
San Bemardino Co. line to SR 91
Orange Co. line to SR 111.
Imperial Co. line to'I-10
1-10 to San Diego Co. line
SR 111 to Imperial Co. line
Orange Co. line to 1-215.
1-10 to Imperial Co. line
SR 62 to 1-10
SR86toSR111
1-10 to SR 74
SR79toSR74
Principal Arterials= Western Riverside County:
Facility Name - -
1:' Alessandro Blvd.
2. Agua:Mansa Rd.
3.= Arlington Blvd. .
4. Armstrong. Rd:Nalley Way
5. Country Village Rd:
6: .La Sierra Ave.
7. Limonite Ave.
8. .Magnolia Ave_
9. Main St./FirstSt.
10. Market St./Rubidoux Blvd:
11. Seventh and University
12. Sierra Ave.
13. Etiwanda. Ave,
14. Van Buren Blvd:
♦ Principal Arterials
Facility Name
1.- Monterey Ave.
2. 'Ramon Rd.'
Limits
Intersection of Central, Arlington "& Chicago to 1-215
San Bernardino County Line to Market SL
Califomia to Intersection of Central,: Alessandro &
Chicago
Sierra Ave. to SR 60
San Bernardino County Line to SR 60
Arlington Blvd. to SR 91, •
San Bemardino County Line to Mission Blvd.
SR 91 to Market St.
San Bernardino County Line to Market St.
San Bernardino County Line to Magnolia Ave.
Market to SR 91
San Bernardino: County Line to
Valley Way/Armstrong Rd.
Limonite Ave. - San Bernardino County' Line
`San Bernardino County Line to'1-215'
-;Coachella Valley:
Limits
SR 111 to I-10
SR 111 to I=10
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
2-5 25
"
2 0 0 6 R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m
C H A P T E R 3
T R A N S P O R T A T I O N M O D E L I N G
S T A T U T O R Y R E Q U I R E M E N T S
S e c t i o n 6 5 0 8 9 . 3 ( c ) o f t h e G o v e r n m e n t C o d e r e q u i r e s t h a t R O T C , a s t h e C o n g e s t i o n
M a n a g e m e n t A g e n c y ( C M A ) , , i n c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a A s s o c i a t i o n o f
G o v e r n m e n t s ( S C A G ) , c i t i e s a n d t h e C o u n t y , d e v e l o p a u n i f o r m d a t a b a s e o n t r a f f i c
i m p a c t s f o r u s e i n a c o u n t y w i d e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n m o d e l . F u r t h e r , R C T C , i n c o n s u l t a t i o n
w i t h S C A G , m u s t a p p r o v e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o m p u t e r m o d e l s t h a t w i l l b e u s e d b y l o c a l
j u r i s d i c t i o n s a n d t h e c o u n t y t o d e t e r m i n e t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e i m p a c t s o f d e v e l o p m e n t o n t h e
c i r c u l a t i o n s y s t e m . L o c a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n m o d e l s s h a l l b e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e d a t a b a s e s
u s e d b y S C A G .
R C T C T R A N S P O R T A T I O N M O D E L I N G
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o m p u t e r m o d e l s a p p l i e d i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y i n c l u d e t h e C o a c h e l l a
V a l l e y A r e a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S y s t e m ( C V A T S ) M o d e l a n d t h e S C A G R e g i o n a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n M o d e l . U p d a t e s , e x p a n s i o n s , a n d e n h a n c e m e n t s o f t h e s e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
m o d e l s a r e : d o n e b y t h e r e s p e c t i v e a g e n c i e s :
D u r i n g 2 0 0 4 , S C A G a n d C V A G p r e p a r e d u p d a t e s t o t h e S C A G a n d C V A T S m o d e l s
b a s e d u p o n r e s u l t s o f a t r i p o r i g i n a n d d e s t i n a t i o n ( O & D ) s u r v e y c o m p l e t e d i n 2 0 0 1 a n d
n e w g r o w t h f o r e c a s t s d e v e l o p e d f o r t h e Y e a r 2 0 3 0 . L o c a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n m o d e l s a r e
a l s o d e v e l o p e d b y l o c a l a g e n c i e s t o d e t e r m i n e i m p a c t s o n t h e i r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m .
T R A N S P O R T A T I O N M O D E L I M P R O V E M E N T S
T h e S C A G m o d e l w a s l a s t c a l i b r a t e d / v a l i d a t e d ( r e v i s e d / u p d a t e d ) i n 2 0 0 4 a n d i s
a v a i l a b l e f o r u s e b y l o c a l a g e n c i e s i n r e v i e w i n g r e g i o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d e v e l o p m e n t
p r o j e c t s , o r p r o j e c t s t h a t g e n e r a t e g r e a t e r t h a n 5 0 0 p e a k h o u r . t r i p s t h r o u g h t h e
I n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l R e v i e w ( I G R ) p r o c e s s . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e S C A G m o d e l h a s b e e n
r e v i s e d t o u p d a t e t h e t r i p t a b l e s , s o c i o e c o n o m i c d a t a e s t i m a t e s a n d p r o j e c t i o n s , a n d
r e s u l t s o f t h e S C A G O & D S t u d y t h a t w a s c o m p l e t e d i n 2 0 0 4 . T h e C V A T S m o d e l i s a l s o
b e i n g r e v i s e d t o r e f l e c t t h e u p d a t e d i n f o r m a t i o n .
I n a d d i t i o n , S C A G h a s d e v e l o p e d a r e g i o n w i d e d e m o g r a p h i c d a t a b a s e s y s t e m t o c o l l e c t
a c c u r a t e d a t a f o r d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e R e g i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n ( R T P ) . B e c a u s e .
t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i s r e q u i r e d f o r a n u m b e r o f o t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n s , W R C O G a n d C V A G h a v e
t a k e n l e a d r o l e s i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a G e o g r a p h i c I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m ( G I S ) t o
m o n i t o r g r o w t h i n t h e C o u n t y s o t h a t s o c i o e c o n o m i c a n d , l a n d u s e d a t a b a s e s c a n b e
e a s i l y d e v e l o p e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d .
P r e p a r e d f o r : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
P r e p a r e d b y : V R P A T e c h n o l o g i e s
3 - 1
2 6
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
SCAG has developed model consistency guidelines to assist public agencies and traffic
engineering professionals with the development of local models that are consistent with
the SCAG regional transportation model. The objective of these guidelines is to comply
with CMP consistency requirements, improve communications between affected
agencies to simplify the exchange of data, and improve databases and modeling results
at both the local and regionallevel. A copy of the current Consistency Guidelines for
Transportation Modeling - Riverside and San Bernardino Counties is available at RCTC
or at the SCAG inland Empire Office in Riverside.
In 2004, ;the .County, of Riverside updated its General Plan. As part of this update,
planning for land, ,use, transportation corridors, and multi -species habitat. conservation
was incorporated into a process known as the Riverside County Integrated :Project
(RCIP)., This planning ,effort includes new land use plans, as well as improved
processes -for ,tracking land use changes. The updated information from the RCIP, has
been incorporatedinto the transportation models.
MODELING FOR CMP PURPOSES
During .implementation of the Riverside County, CMP, transportation computer models
are used for several purposes, including:
♦ Determining and monitoring traffic levels of service (LOS) for the current and future •
years;
♦ Analyzing the; impacts of 'land; use decisions resulting from the' IGR or CEQA
processes and when an LOS.deficiency occurs along the'CMP System; and
♦ Evaluating and prioritizing transportation improvement projects;': such as capital
projects, transit projects, Transportation ,'Systems Management (TSM)'.projects,
Transportation Demand Management. (TDM) strategies, .and other programs that
improvethe transportationsystern and air quality.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: ,VRPA-Technologies
3-2
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 4
MULTIMODAL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089(b)(2) of the Government Code states that the Congestion Management
Program (CMP) must contain a performance element that includes performance
measures to evaluate current and future multimodal .system performance for the
movement of people and goods. At a minimum, the .performance measures must
incorporate highway and roadway system performance andmeasures established for
the frequency and routing of public transit, and for the coordinationof transit service
provided by separate operators. The performance measures must also support
mobility, air quality, land use, and economic objectives, and must be used in the
development of the Riverside County Capital Improvement Program (CIP) required
pursuant to paragraph (5), deficiency plans required pursuant to Section 65089.4, and
the land use analysis program required pursuant to paragraph (4) of the Government.
Code.
According to AB 471 and AB 1791, traffic level of service (LOS) must be measured by:
a) Circular 212; b) the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM); or
c) by an alternative uniform methodology adopted by RCTC as the Congestion
Management Agency (CMA), which the Southern California: Association of
Governments (SCAG), determines is consistent with the HCM. In no case can the
standards established be below LOS "E" or the current level, whichever is farthest from
LOS "A"
RCTC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
This Chapter describes the multimodal system performance standards for Riverside
County in accordance with CMP legislation. Therefore, standards are presented in this
Chapter for the CMP System of Streets and Roads and for the Public Transit/Alternative
Mass Transit System:
CMP System of Streets and Highways
♦ Established Minimum Level of Service
With the intent of the legislation .in mind, the' RCTC Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) CMP Subcommittee approved a "two -tiered" approach to
establish the minimum LOS standard. Tier 1 involves the "locally established
minimum traffic LOS - or - ceiling," while Tier 2 involves the CMP minimum LOS
standard - or - "floor."
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
4-1 28
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
Most local agencies in, Riverside County and Ca!trans have adopted' LOS
standards of "C" or "D"`(representing the "ceiling" in Tier 2)in an effort to
maintain a desired LOS for the local circulation system. To address CMP
legislative requirements, and establish a minimum LOS along the .regional -
system of roadways and highways within the County (representing the `floor" in
Tier 2), RCTC approved a minimum traffic LOS standard of "E."
Exempt Facilities
Table 4-:1 and Exhibit 4-1 identify facilities (roadway segments. or intersections)
along the 'CMP System of Highways and Roadways that, had a LOS of "F" in
1991. As a result, these facilities continue to be "exempt" from CMP
requirements in accordance withCMPStatutes.
Methodology to Determine Level of Service
RCTC determined that the traffic LOS method that. incorporated :a "delay" .
analysis was the most applicable for CMP purposes.. Consideration of delay
through:HCM=based software programs provided a closer approximation of LOS
than under the Circular 212 or similar methodologies.
For -purposes of this Program, LOS analysis for intersections and segments
along the CMP. System of Highways and Roadways '(under current or existing
conditions),=should' be, developed or established' using the following HCM-based
methods in the order presented;
1. Segment .(freeway and .principal arterial) floating car .runs ,or stopped delay
LOS analysis at intersections;
Segment and intersection LOS analysis using HCM; and
Segment analysis using the Modified. HCM LOS Tables (or revised Florida
LOS Tables).
Staff continues to recommend the use of HCM methods through .applicable
software packages, applied to various types of facilities. (reference Table 4-2 --
LOS Methodology Applications). Appropriate defaults to be ! applied by local
agencies in their analysis of LOS are referenced in Appendix 2.
HCM-based methodologies' applied to calculate -LOS` for CMP' purposes will be
the responsibility of local agencies as new development: or land use plan;
revisions/updates; (reflective of specific development proposals) are considered.:
This process _ shall be consistent with the Enhanced Transportation System
Management Program described in Chapter 5.
'Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies;
"
b
1
A
A Q
W 0
W ��
C o
H
Q .
0 1
C D
C t . S
C r 1 3 0
A a
C D n
S
0 3
O N '
e V O
y ��
V a n B u r e n A v e
L i m o n i t e A
O n t a r i o
C r e s t m o r e A v e
O r a n g e S i
R a b i d . = ��' ��L i r a P i g e o n P a s s R d
B l v d
i ' M o o c e c R S t
P u n a B l v d
� l o a d e r A w e
T e n t e s c a l C a n y o n R d
L a k e S h o r e D r i v e
G n o m o n S t
G r a n d A v e
1 0 5 7
B o x i e r R d
C l i n t o n
K e i t h R d
A l l c s a n d r e B l v d
V a n B u r e n B l v d
R a m o n a
- ' E x p r o a a w a y
N u e v o R d
D S I
M u n d a n e H a t
S p r i n g s R d
6 , 6 8 7
1 g , 0 2 5 o W
C a l i f o r n i a A v e I O , 7 0 1
1 , 5 7 5
S a n d e r s o n
n v e 1 , 5 0
1 , 6 7 1
7 4 p
p a n n e R d
S i m p s o n A v e
! H a n d g u n H o t
S P r i n g a R a
R a m o n a
E x p r e s s w a y
2 L y o n A v e
R a n i . C a l i f o r n i a R d 1 , 6 4 8
2 7 6 4
P a l a R d
S a n l a e i m o A w e .
/ M e i n S i .
9 9 6 3
u n G o r g o n i o A v e
o l i o A v e . M o u n w i n A v e
H e m e t S t
1 , 5 6 5
W i l s o n V o l l e y R d
S a g e R d 4 7 9
6 0
4 9
M a r i o n R i d g e D r
5 8
T o S R l l l
A n n e . C o n t r e r a s R d �
5 7 2
4 6 7
6 8 9
2 0 0 6 - L e v e l o f S e r v i c e o n C M P S y s t e m i n W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e
L e e e n d
� L O S A , B , C , D , E , o f F d e s i g n a t i o n f o r s e g m e n t s b a s e d o n 2 0 0 5 C M P D a t a
X X X P e a k H o u r V o l u m e ( B o t h D i r e c t i o n s ) b a s e d o n 2 0 0 5 C M P C o u n t D a t a
1 1 1 . 1 1 N o t D e f l d e n t ( L O S ' E " o r B e t t e r ) P e r F l o a t i n g C a r R u n s
' _ D e f i c i e n t ( L O S ' F ' ) P e r F l o a t i n g C a r R u n s
( r e f e r e n c e T a b l e 5 - 1 _
WO &NO SOBZ uo paseq (suo:940 4108) 6umpAmoH.yeed
8180&NDS00Z uo paseq. wuewBee Jol uopeuBisep jJO.3'a'0'8'V SOl
[7 e3
%alloA °na p:3o°:;ul dW0 uo GOINGS larval - 900Z.
069`9
£0£"
600` I
ve noo+4wax -.
_ �L6§.`7
\ HU
V eleued q .. _
anQ
a 969`E `
- SZL`S
4£649-
PePV Li eV
6L8`9
4-0
969
uvi.umvw.o
we4Je lA
819`Z
ueRu 6 m ed
W16 ueeald 9
SEC` I
LSZ
L739`9
I94'1
6175 "
b
®b4£`8
54Z
971,05 0.1.10.14
aul'.�W�4+4L
1-9 o pel saua lieu)
sung pep &Joc d red (.d, SOl1 Iuapyaa
ele0 dWO SOOZ uo pawl (mamma tom ewepn ieaW )ieed XXX
eleO dWO SOOZ up pesep spuetaas iq uoyeu8!sep d'a'a'3'9'V SO1
, Pa�7
epsaankj we semuiaoN a wa[sAS dWD uo eanias banal - 900Z
[L9'� pb,,,
Pnlfl,
59 Z
. 1.01.1yyyb
4SeE
� Vb Pwm
Pala,
Ina
oy
`\ gJa
• aro
•
1
/
USA 0 Z
9uWa!A
pb ®<wa
W!9Su!reW
EWE
855'I ,
I IL'Z
Mr
eeroea
�5 "pneW
1.6
2
U' any
6a�6C`E \\ uoa:uffaV
Main 40 t
•
aplsianla �.
D£L'£
ZI4'£ 'e°"
6Ra .
69Z mC
Fa
ro
506' I
QO 'a'�"°tea •` a
SS`£ G°.
I, ti 60 4. A
i �� Is w.b so
sa" LZO,sW,.b
901$
6aJaweiso
9L1`£
\
a�tiiOnly7 L06`I . "L'I
and
.e$
i
808' I
n 8
`bOb'6 ugA Z95`t T
m c 4
ev
ZO 'L
�6
a. 2.
a
® £SS'8
• • •
o m
N
,O)
h O
E O
ou
0
wa
N 44
COtt
!e
to
c L
04
aN
G
0
k
d
4
N
M
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
TABLE 4-1
EXEMPT FACILITIES IN 2006
TATE HIGHWAYS
ON STATE ROUTE 60:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY LINE TO JCT 1-15
VALLEY WAY TO JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215
JCT SR 60 EAST TO PERRIS BOULEVARD
ON STATE ROUTE 71:
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LINE TO JCT SR 91
ON STATE ROUTE 74:
GRAND AVENUE TO LAKESHORE DRIVE
LAKESHORE TO'1-15
SANDERSON AVENUE TO CORNELL"STREET ,
CORNELL STREET TO HEMET AVENUE
ON STATE ROUTE 91:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY LINE TO JCT SR 71
JCT SR 71 TO MAPLE STREET
MAPLE STREET TO JCT 1-15
JCT"1-15 TO 0.6 MILE WEST OF MCKINLEY , '
0.6 MILE WEST OF MCKINLEY TO MAGNOLIA AVENUE
MAGNOLIA AVENUE TO 14TH STREET
14TH STREET TO JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215
ON I-215
EAST JCT SR 60 TO JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215
JCT SR 60/SR.91/1-215 TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LINE `
ON STATE ROUTE 111:
DISTRICT 11 BOUNDARY TO JCT SR 74
JCT SR 74 TO GENE AUTRY TRAIL
ti:ilLICJ_tV_1:IO: FAMML1*'ilaNkial11:191,]aKa1 Lki_
ON LA SIERRA AVENUE:
ARLINGTON TO GRAMERCY
ON VAN BUREN BOULEVARD:
,` NORTHERLY •CITY LIMIT TO JURUPA
JURUPA TO CENTRAL
. CENTRAL TO ARLINGTON
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
4-6 33
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
TABLE 4-2
HIGHWAY CAPACITYMANUAL BASED -
LEVEL.OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY APPLICATIONS.
•*•f
o.
. U
W
o
- ..
cn
O
UN
= W
n m
LL H
2
J
WOE
O. -1
In Z.
2 Q
_
11
>-
V0
Z
Q co
O =
Er'.
_.
BASE YEAR *1
URBAN
Signalized Intersections
x
. x
x
Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4
Unsignalized Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4 .
x
Links, Expressways, & Arterials
x
x
x
Freewa Links, Ram •s, & Weavin• Sections
RURAL
Signalized Intersections .
x
x
x
x
x
x
Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4
Unsignalized intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4
x `
Links, Expressways, & Arterials
x
x
x
Freewa Links, Rams, & Weavin• Sections
FUTURE YEAR *2
URBAN
x
x
x
Signalized Intersections
x
x
x
Unsignalized intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4
Unsignalized Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4
x
Links, Expressways, & Arterials
x
x
Freewa Links, Rams, & Weavin• Sections
RURAL
Signalized Intersections
x
x
x
x
x
Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4
Unsignalized Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4
x
Links, Expressways, & Arterials
x
x
Freeway Links, Ramps, &Weaving Sections
x
x
NU 1 tJ:
*1 - Currentyeartraffic conditions
*2 - Future year (2030) traffic conditions'
*3 - Used as an example only, other HCM compatible software will also be accepted.
*4 - Results of analysis should be evaluated considering actual intersection conditions or 4-or
2-way stop or signal warrants.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
4-7 34
2006 Riverside County Congest/on Management Program.
The initial LOS analysis conducted as part of, the CMP Updateprocess " is .
considered to be a "screening" level analysis. "A more detailed assessmentis
conducted on key critical segments. If the analysis results in LOS deficiencies,
the LOS'analysis would continue on a quarterly basis °.to.determine the average
peak hour LOS and determine if the LOS deficiencies are due to temporary or
permanent conditions. Coordination with the affected local agency(s) also will be
made to insure that appropriate data, geometrics; counts and other related_
information is applied to calculate LOS.
2006 Level of Service (LOS) Results
-Coachella Valley
The Coachella :Valley Associated Governments (CVAG) has implemented a
Nalleywide traffic monitoring program over the '.past eight (8) years.
Information provided by CVAG indicated that there are no deficiencies in the.
Coachella Valley for 2006.
✓. Western Riverside County
Based on 'level of service calculations along the CMP system in Western
Riverside County using Caltrans and local agency counts, one (1) deficiency
was 'identified along Alessandro between SR 91- and .1-215.. , Discussion
regarding this deficiency is provided in. Chapter 5. There we're, no: other
deficiencies along the remainder of the local street and highway CMP System
in Western Riverside County for 2006.,
✓ State Highways -
Traffic count inforrnation was . collected from; the Caltrans 2004 ;Traffic
Monitoring Report and from existing Smart CaltlBoxes located along the State
Highway system. In addition, peak hour traffic counts were taken by VRPA
Technologies' in late summer and early fall 2006, the data was evaluated by
VRPA.Technologies using HCM-based LOS tables. Following `review of the.
initial screening results "by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC); floating
car runs were performed. along six major State Highway segments.
Results''of this process are provided i in Chapter 5°and indicate that two (2) of
the segments on 1-215 (Alessandro.' to SR 74 and SR 79, 1-15, to SR 74) are
operating at LOS "E" or better and therefore not deficient; and that two (2)
segments on 1-15 '(San Bemardino County Line to 1-215 and; 1-215, SR' 60'to
Alessandro) are operating at LOS "F", likely due to existing construction
activities. One (1) additional segment on 1-15'(1-215 to SR" 79 South) is
operating at LOS "F" but will likely be improved:: to LOS "E" or better once .
construction of the French Valley .Interchange is initiated 'and completed.
Finally,' one (1) segment on 1-215 (SR 74 West to 1-15) is operating, at LOS
"F", and likely' not due to construction activities.. Each, of these deficient '
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
4-8 35
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
segments will monitored using floating car runs over the next 9 months on a
quarterly basis to determine the LOS. Results of this monitoring process will
be provided to the TAC following the 12-month monitoring process or during
preparation of the 2007 CMP Update.
In addition to those segments operating at LOS "F", it will be important to also
closely monitor LOS "E" segments on a quarterly basis. Once a LOS "E"
segment falls to LOS "F" during the quarterly monitoring process; the
segment will be further analyzed'as to what the cause may be. If the LOS is
at "F" for more than one -(1) year and is the average annual peak hour
condition.. with no _extenuating circumstances causing the deficiency (e.g.,
construction, special event, etc), the local agency will be notified to prepare a
deficiency plan in accordance to Chapter 6.
Public Transit/Alternative Mass Transit Standards
♦ Statutory Requirements
Section 65089.(b)(2) of the Government Code specifically requires` development
of standards established for the frequency and routing of public transit, and for
the coordination of transit service provided by separate operators.
Public Transit and Alternative Mass Transit Facility Standards
RCTC, as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency, . is responsible for
planning and coordinating all public mass transit services within the jurisdiction of
the Commission and between the jurisdiction of other county commissions or
transit operators.. On an annual basis, transitoperators prepare a Short Range
Transit Plan (SRTP); which is a three-year document detailing the operating and
capital costs that are planned for transit services.Each operator adopts such a
plan and then provides quarterly data to RCTC regarding performance. Once the
SRTPs are approved. by RCTC, transit operators are charged with the
responsibility for providing the service levels and purchasing the capital
equipment identified in year -one of the SRTP. Once approved by RCTC, the
SRTPs must be amended if an operator wants to deviate from the original plan.
The Commission encourages all operators to coordinate public transportation
`services including routes, fare structure and transfer agreements as the overall
goal is the improvement of, public transportation services to the general public.
To assist with the coordination efforts, quarterly meetings are .held with the public
transit operators to ensure that efficient, .effective transportation services are
provided.
Public Utilities Code Section 99244 requires the Commission to annually identify,
analyze and recommend potential productivity improvements for transit operators
through the SRTP process. This process requires the transit operators to
address recommendations made through the triennial performance audit. In
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
4-9 36
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
2005, the Commission reaffirmed its commitmentto a Productivity ;Improvement,
Program (PIP), which was originally adopted in 1998 as part of a comprehensive
effort to work with the county's eight public transitoperators to provide better
service and improve efficiency. Table 4-3 details the performance targets as
identified in the PIP that transit operators will strive to •meet in developing its
SRTP service and financial plan:
TABLE 4-3
TRANSIT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE INDICATORS +
Performance Indicator
Method for Establishing
Performance Targets
1) Operating Cost per Revenue Hour
Increases no more than CPI
2) Fare Box Recovery Ratio
Per PUC;requirements and RCTC
policy
3) Subsidy per Passenger
+/- 15% variance
4) Subsidy per Passenger Mile
+/- 15 variance
5) Subsidy; per; Revenue Hour
+/- 15% variance
6) Subsidy per Revenue Mile
+/- 15% variance
7) •Passengers per Revenue Hour
+/- 15% variance
8) Passengers per Revenue Mile
+/- 15% variance°
9) ' Ridership growth
2% minimum growth annually
(Applies to Commuter Rail)
As' an alternative mode to the single -occupant vehicle, mass transit services
(commuter rail services) should be considered during the assessment of local
development proposal's that impact the Congestion IVianagement System and
during the development of deficiency: plans by local agencies. Further, future rail
passenger services should be considered as appropriate mitigation measures to
offset potential `deficiencies: If feasible, future transit and passenger rail facility
systems should be described as potential services thatcould reduce vehicle trips
and relieve congestion at or above the minimum LOSatandard .
RCTC CONFORMANCE AND MONITORING `PROCESS
It is the local agency's responsibility to ensure' implementation of development project `
mitigation measures identified rby,the: project proponent.' RCTC and focal agencies will
monitor .the implementation. !of deficiency plans that include transit and roadway
improvements intended to improve; traffic L:O•.S'.' If through the biennial traffic monitoring
process, the ,LOS along "a deficient arterial or highway facility -improves. to LOS "E" or
better, mitigation • measures that ,have not " been ,implemented as• :specified in the
deficiency plan, would no longer be required for CMP`compliance purposes., ;
Prepared for: Riverside County. Transportation Commission,
Prepared by: VRPA'Technologies
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 5
ENHANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089 (b)(4) of the Government Code requires that RCTC develop a program to
analyze the impacts of land use decisions. made by local jurisdictions on regional
transportation systems, including an estimate of the costs associated with mitigating
those impacts. In no case must the program outlined in this Chapter include an
estimate of the costs of mitigating the impacts of interregional travel, but it must provide
credit for local public and private contributions to improvements on regional
transportation systems. In the case of toll road facilities, credit must only be allowed for
local public and private contributions, which are unreimbursed from toll revenues or
other state or federal sources. RCTC must calculate the amount of the credit to be
provided.
RCTC ENHANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
The RCTC CMP Enhanced Transportation System Management Program was
designed to meet the federal Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) and
Congestion Management. System/Traffic .Management System (CMS/TMS)
requirements, as well as to monitor the CMP System of Highways and Roadways. A
review of Federal. CMS/TMS requirements is provided in Appendix 3. The intent of the
Enhanced Transportation System Management Program is to effectively identify those
facilities that have congestion problems, track the degree of congestion, and apply
evaluation criteria to the system so that federal and State funds are .targeted or
programmed to relieve the congestion.
The Enhanced Transportation System Management Program utilizes 'loop or pavement
sensors" currently installed along the State Highway system at call boxes and TMC
sites. Traffic counters were installed at these sites allowing RCTC and Ca!trans to
retrieve count data. Future plans are to retrieve speed, vehicle classification, and
turning movement data. The Enhanced Transportation System Management Program
will improve traffic monitoring for the CMP and other planning or technical purposes.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
5-1
38
2
O
Q.
d
E
ro
ea
C
O
y
d
C
O
U
w
C
J
O
V
a
m
co
0
0
N
swesoad Wild.BBBI 91661',-
wmi:sem X08. BsoUewg Bu8six3,-
(PBllaisul). sous „xo8 Mosl9„ uoliels woo maN_
(Pa11sisud sails xo8-IWO uewe m01.1 .
allt1S9 SON) San ,.x09 rilB.. 1101101S Wri90 maN '® (PallaisW3oN),aoilS xog IIgO iimuS maN,®
aN3J31
d 1.-s .
1181HX3
301SN3A121 NNaLS3JUl NI S311S NOIltl1N31A131dWl XOS 11V3121t/WS
C N
p Af
A O
E°c
O 43
c.1
a
ca
o�
Q. C
t0, 1
E ,.
as
_. .
m
•a
� rn
� co
O N
a
i
N
d
C
BISOB OI ION
S
3-
(Pallelsul) seHS „xog BoetB,. uogeyg lunoo meg
swei6ad 10M 6661 5 L661 e,q
wal sags xog Imo Pouig 6ugalx3 4bellalsul IoN) soUS „x08 xougl, uoI1e1S luno3 maN.
4N3931
6
(pe6enul) sagg xog 6e3 yewg mail O
(PallWsul 10N1 sun xog Ilea Limn maN
81-9
1181HX3
ATI1VA V1 13HOV00 N1 93119 NOIIVIN3W31d1/111 X09 -IWO 12iHWS
VHa uu9nld
zi9
O
co N O
E 0
V d
fi �'
oa
co
N
O. .q
C
Fe-- 416.
C d
Z0,
0
GI
b
i
O
� d.
M
6.
m
a
a
(Pe(Ie1su) soma ,.xoa sloelaa upoom moo meg
sw050.41 Med 6661.'8 2681.
1.04 semi xos Ilea liewa Buoslx3 ell?isul log) sags „xos.>loele„ uopels lunoo'meN
aN3J3l
(Pallelsul) sells xoe lleo yslug msN 0.
(Pelle;so' loN) samsxo8 Uewg moti
0 4-S
1181HX3
3a1S213AIH N2131SV3 NI S311S NOI1V1N3W3"IdWI,XOS -11t/P 12i�/WS
2y 2
i�l O
0
O
V
o
Tel 2,-
N.0
1..o
L-
b q
3q'
U
a
i
C
o
o.
4
L.
O
a'
w
C
01
d
co
ro
c
g.
O
a
ca
Ol
OJ
C
O
V
G
O
O
V
a
a
to
0
0
N
•
welsAS did uo salDlslalul Qf (leuopeJado Allel mu pallelsul) SONS OWl maN .
koPunoe A4un07 ePlsieru21 •- •...•• uia1.sAS dW3 uo sAom45IH +--�}—
(Polleloul loN) eallS MI. NON Al
CIN203l
Z-5
11fiIHX3
301Sl13AIN N2131S3M NI S311S NOI1d1N3IN31dWl 31N1
pnlB
suiad
QLV HI
1 alst Lied
any
1e[lua0 ■
sQ ou.u33 19
any
Nluanryn
00 011!p[sw08 �S
IS
Aarrom
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
TRAFFIC MONITORING'
State Highways;
The program involves the downloading of traffic count data from . Caltrans' Traffic
Management Center (TMC) sites and Smart Call Box (SCB) sites on a monthly basis. A
level of service analysis will be performed to determine -the condition- of the CMP
System. When a deficiency or LOS "F" is identified as part of the; CMP Update LOS
evaluation process, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine
whetheran actual deficiency has occurred.
Local Arterials
The program involves the continuation of the CVAG TrafficMonitoring Program in the
Coachella Valley, and: the local traffic counting efforts on behalf of. the local agencies in
Western Riverside. County.
To further insure that the CMP System is appropriately monitored to reduce the
occurrence of CMP deficiencies, proposed development projects can be evaluated' by
each affected., agency to determine potential impacts along the regional, sub -regional
and CMP Systems. As a result, such evaluation will reduce the incidence of LOS
deficiencies along the CMP System given that each local agency has established LOS
thresholds at higher levels. To insure that major- development projects and plans are
evaluated and reflected in the Southern California, Association' of Governments (SCAG)
Transportation Model and local models, local agencies are encouraged to work with
affected agencies to mitigate the impacts considering the California Environment Quality
Act (CEQA) ..
Monitoring of Potential Deficiencies
As a`result of the initial LOS 'screening ?analysis, five (5) LOS "F" segments,. along
Alessandro, SR 79, 1-15,' and 1=215 were identified using 'floating car runs. Floating ,car
runs provide the accurate measure of LOS. The runs were requested` by the Technical
Advisory .Committee (TAC) following initial LOS screening using counts and the
Modified HCM-Based LOS Tables presented by VRPA Technologies.
Table 5-1 illustrates that three of the segments are likely operating at LOS "F" due to
construction along the deficient segment or along another major freeway or interchange
projects in the vicinity. One of the segments on 1-15 (1-215 to SR 79 South) is operating
at LOS "F" but will be improved to LOS "E"•or better once the French Valley Interchange
improvement is constructed.. Each of these deficient .segments,. will continue to. be
monitored using .floating car runs over the next 9 months on a "quarterly basis to
determine the LOS.
Prepared for: Riverside County. Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
•
"
2 0 0 6 R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m
T A B L E 5 - 1
F L O A T I N G C A R R U N D E F I C I E N C Y A N A L Y S I S
R o a d w a y
1 . 1 5
S e l e c t e d
S e g m e n t
S . I i . C o , L i n e
t o I . 2 1 5
S e . m e n t s o f I - 1 5 / 1 - 2 1 5 / S R
D e f i c i e n t P e r F l o a t i n g C a r
R u n s ( Y I N )
Y ( S e l e c t e d S e g m e n t s )
7 9 / A l e s s a n d r o
O v e r r i d i n g
C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
( Y ! N )
Y
R e a s o n f o r O v e r r i d i n g C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
D i v e r s i o n D u e t o
1 . 2 1 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n
1 . 2 1 5 t o
S R 7 9 S o u t h
Y
Y
F r e n c h V a l l e y
I n t e r c h a n g e I m p r o v e m e n t
I . 2 1 5
S R 6 0 t o
A l e s s a n d r o
Y
Y
D e c r e a s e I n
C a p a c i t y D u e
t o I - 2 1 5
C o n s t r u c t i o n
A l e s s a n d r o
t o S R 7 4
S R 7 4 W e s t 1
t o ! - 1 5
1 - 1 5 t o S R 7 4
N
- -
Y
N ( 1 )
N
S R 7 9
A l e s s a n d r o
S R 9 1 t o 1 . 2 1 5
Y ( S e l e c t e d S e g m e n t s )
y
D i v e r s i o n D u e t o
1 - 2 1 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n
o m b i n e D s e g m e n t s f r o m I - 1 5 t o M u r r i e t a H o t S p r i n g s R o a d t o a c h i e v e t h i s r e s u l t
R e s u l t s o f t h i s m o n i t o r i n g p r o c e s s , w i l l b e p r o v i d e d t o t h e T A C f o l l o w i n g t h e 1 2 - m o n t h
m o n i t o r i n g p r o c e s s o r d u r i n g p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e 2 0 0 7 C M P U p d a t e :
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h o s e s e g m e n t s o p e r a t i n g a t L O S " F " f o r t h e r e a s o n s t a t e d a b o v e , i t w i l l
b e i m p o r t a n t t o a l s o c l o s e l y m o n i t o r L O S " E " s e g m e n t s o n a q u a r t e r l y b a s i s : O n c e a
L O S " E " s e g m e n t f a l l s t o L O S " F " d u r i n g t h e q u a r t e r l y m o n i t o r i n g p r o c e s s , t h e s e g m e n t
w i l l b e f u r t h e r a n a l y z e d a s t o w h a t t h e c a u s e m a y b e . I f t h e L O S i s a t " F " f o r m o r e t h a n
o n e ( 1 ) y e a r a n d i s t h e a v e r a g e a n n u a l p e a k h o u r c o n d i t i o n w i t h n o e x t e n u a t i n g
c i r c u m s t a n c e s c a u s i n g t h e d e f i c i e n c y ( e . g . , c o n s t r u c t i o n , s p e c i a l e v e n t , e t c ) , t h e l o c a l
a g e n c y w i l l b e n o t i f i e d t o p r e p a r e a d e f i c i e n c y p l a n i n a c c o r d a n c e t o C h a p t e r 6 .
P r e p a r e d f o r : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n
P r e p a r e d b y : V R P A T e c h n o l o g i e s
5 - 7
4 4
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 6
LOS DEFICIENCY PLANS;
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089(b)(:1)(B) of the Government Code specifically: states that the Level of
Service (LOS) standards established by RCTC, as the CongestionManagement .
Agency (CMA) in Riverside County, not be below LOS "E" or the current .level,
whichever is farthest from LOS "A". When the LOS on a segment or at en' intersection
fails .toattain the established 'level of service standard, a ,deficiency plan must ,be -
adopted pursuant to Section'65089.4.
In addition, Section 65089.4 requires a local jurisdiction to prepare a'deficiency plan
when highway or roadway LOS standards are not maintained on segments or
intersections of the designated system. The deficiency, plan must be adopted bythe city
or the "County at a',noticed, public hearing.
RCTC must calculate the impacts subject to exclusion (e.g. interregional travel),
pursuant to subdivision (f) of the Section, after consultation with the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG), Caltrans, and the appropriate air district(s). , If the
calculated' traffic LOS following exclusion of these impacts is consistent" with the LOS
standard, RCTC must, make a finding at a' publicly noticed meeting that no deficiency
plan is required and then notify the affected local jurisdiction. RCTC must be
responsible for 'preparing and adopting procedures :for local `,deficiency. plan
development and implementation responsibilities, consistent with the;, requirements of
this Section. The'deficiency plan -must include all of the required elements included in
(Appendix 1) of the CMP Legislation.
RCTC DEFICIENCY PLAN PROCESS
RCTC will prepare deficiency;. plans for deficient segments along the State Highway
System on behalf of local agencies. RCTC will coordinate development of such plans
with affected local agencies, WRCOG or CVAG, Caltrans, and the AQMD. These
agencies will have an opportunity to work with RCTC-during the development of a
deficiency plan, provide comments, and meet with other. affected agencies to discuss
issues prior to completion of a ,plan. To comply with the intent of the CMP legislation, a
deficiency plan prepared by a city, the County or RCTC must include the principal
elements specified in the CMP. Legislation "(reference .Appendix 1). To ;date, minimum
CMP Levels of Service have"been. maintained, therefore deficiency planshavenot been
required.
Prepared for: Riverside County .Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
6-1
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
PROCEDURE TO IDENTIFY DEFICIENT SEGMENTS
The procedure for identifying deficient segments or intersections along the CMP System
of Highways and Roadways is 'documented in Chapter 5, Enhanced Transportation
System Management Program. Deficient segments would be identified through traffic
monitoring. When a deficiency is identified as part of the CMP Update LOS evaluation
process, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine whether an
actual deficiency has occurred. The LOS analysis conducted as part of the CMP
Update process is only considered to be a "screening" level analysis,_ therefore
additional, more detailed assessment of a potential deficiency would be required before
a deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s) will
be made to insure that appropriate data, geometries, counts and other related
information is applied to calculate LOS.
CRITERIA TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation strategies that measurably improve the CMP System must be identified in the
deficiency plan. Such strategies would include capital improvement projects or other
measures that shift trips to alternative modes that may be included in or consistent with
local Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinances. Further, mitigation
measures should be developed considering both the existing and planned circulation
system and the highest peak hour trip estimates or forecasts.
Consideration of TDM measures under this process should focus on information
contained in the current Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) section regarding the
Congestion Management Program Linkage with the Air Quality Maintenance Plans
(AQMPs) and local government Transportation Control Measures (TCMs).
Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County TUMPPrograms
Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County local agencies and the County of
Riverside have adopted Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) programs. In
general, the programs impose fees on development specifically to address
transportation impacts on local arterials. The fees are then used for selected
transportation improvement projects along the adopted TUMF arterial network. The
Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) implements the TUMF program
in the Coachella Valley and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG)
implements the program in Western Riverside County.
If, during the annual LOS monitoring process, an intersection or segment along the
CMP system within the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) areas fall below
LOS "E," an evaluation of planned improvements necessary to mitigate the deficiency
must be undertaken. The adopted arterial programs would then be reviewed to
determine if the deficiency would be mitigated through the TUMF program and within a
reasonable timeframe. If an improvement project(s) is programmed that will mitigate the
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
6-2
46
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
deficiency, the arterial program would be considered as a deficiency plan for CMP
purposes. If projects in the arterial program do not meet the required mitigation for the
deficiency, then RCTC will work with the appropriate agency(s) to identify mitigation
measures. Agencies that do not participate in the TUMF programs would be required to,
prepare a deficiency plan in accordance with this chapter.
REVIEW OF DEFICIENCY PLANS
Deficiency Plans will be reviewed by the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). A
recommendation of approval or nonapproval of deficiency plans will be forwarded 'to the
RCTC Board for action. In accordance with Chapter 5 -:Enhanced Transportation
System Management" Program, mitigation measures must ,be identified to offset
deficiencies.. 'If the Board approves the deficiency plan, that plan will immediately
become affective.
In accordance with Section 65089.4(d), upon receipt of a deficiency plan from a local
agency, RCTC shall hold ;a.noticed public hearing within sixty (60) days.: Following the
hearing, the RCTC may ;either accept or rejectthe plan in its entirety. Further, the
Commission may not take action to amend the deficiency, plan if it finds that it ,is not
acceptable. If RCTC rejects: the plan, the plan must be forwarded to the affected local
agency indicating the reasons for rejection. RCTC would then meet and confer with the
affected local agency to identify revisions that would provide for an adequate, plan.
The affected local; agency may resubmit a corrected deficiency: plan and obtain approval
by RCTC prior to the next annual allocation of tax increment funds. If the local agency.
does not correct and resubmit the, plan, or receive approval prior to the next distribution
of funds, RCTC. must notify the State Controller to withhold such funds..,; CMP legislation
also requires RCTC to withhold Surface Transportation Program (STP)'`and Congestion.
Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds (allocated or programmed to facilities. "on" or
"off" the regional transportation system) from an agency that has been found in
nonconformance with CMP requirements, including development and implementation of -
deficiency plans.
If through the biennial; traffic nnonitoring process, the LOS along a deficient arterial :or
highway facility improves to LOS "E" or better, mitigation measures that have not been
implemented as specified in ,the. deficiency plan, would nolonger be required for. CMP
compliance . purposes.
In the eCoachella >Valley and in Western Riverside .County, any funds withheld from_a
jurisdiction due to noncompliance, will be returned to the subregion that it was taken
from`(CVAG or WRCOG) to implement the respective TUMF Regional Arterial Program.
<Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission.
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
6-3
47
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program. .
CHAPTER 7
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT/
AIR QUALITY
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section.65089(b)(3)(A) of the government code requires that RCTC prepare a CMP trip
reduction and travel demand element that promotes alternative transportation methods.
Such methods must include, but are not limited to, carpools, vanpools, transit, bicycles,
and park -and -ride lots; improvements in the balance _ between jobs and housing; and
other strategies, including, but not limited to, flexible work hours, telecommuting, and
parking management programs. CMP Legislation also requires consideration of parking
cash -out programs.
INTRODUCTION
RCTC has. facilitated theimplementation of a •number of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) projects independently through the Measure "A" Commuter
Assistance Programs. RCTC has also facilitated implementation of a number of TDM
projects in cooperation with Caltrans and local agencies in Riverside County and in
adjoining counties to achieve TDM objectives such as Park-N-Ride lots, commuter rail
stations, and rail and feeder services. Taken together, the individual programs and
projects constitute a broad base effort to reduce reliance on the single occupant vehicle.
CMP legislation requires each local; agency to adopt a TDM ordinance. RCTC has
prepared a model TDM. Ordinance that can serve. as a guide to local agencies in the
development of their own ordinance. The model ordinance focuses on capital facilities
that would encourage ridesharing and transit services.
This approach can be particularly effective in a rapidly growing County such as
Riverside. It should be noted that the model ordinance is simply a model to be used if
local agencies feel that it is suited to their own needs and requirements.. The Western
Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments (CVAG), in conjunction with local agencies, have also developed model
TDM Ordinances that meet the requirements of CMP legislation. The TDM Ordinance
developed by WRCOG includes lists of actions required for implementation of the Air
Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) for the Southern California region.
Prepared for: Riverside. County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
7-t 48
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 8
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089(b)(5) of the CMP Statutes requires that RCTC prepare a seven-year.
capital improvement program, developed using the performance: measures described in
paragraph (2) to determine effective projects that maintain or improve the performance
of the multimodal system for the movement of people and goods, and to mitigate
regional transportation impacts identified pursuant to paragraph (4). The program must
conform to transportation -related vehicle emission air quality mitigation measures and
include any project that will increase the capacity of the multimodal. system. " It is the
intent of the legislature that, when roadway projectsare identified in the program,
consideration is given for maintaining bicycle access and safety at a level comparable to
that, -which existed prior to the improvement or alteration. The capital improvement
program may also include safety, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects: that do not
enhance the capacity of the system but are necessary: to preserve the investment_ in '
existing facilities.
RCTC `CIP`PROGRAM
For purposes 'of this CMP -Update, the 2006 Capital Improvement Program- (CIP)
consists of STIP, Measure "A TUMF, and other federally funded projects programmed =
ion the GMP system. RCTC submits state andfederally funded projects to the Southern
California' Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in. the FTIP. 'Locally funded
non-regionallysignificant;projects-are not required to be included in the•FTIP.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission'
Prepared by:,'VRPA Technologies
8-1
49
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 9
CMP CONFORMANCE AND MONITORING
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089.3 of the Government Code requires RCTC to monitor the implementation`
of all elements of the Congestion Management Program (CMP). Ca(trans is responsible
for data collection and analysis on State highways, unless the agency designates that
responsibility to another entity. RCTC may also assign°responsibility of data collection
and analysis to other owners and operators of facilities or services if the responsibilities
are specified in its adopted program. RCTC must also. consult with Ca[trans and other
affected owners and operators in developing data collection and analysis ,procedures
and schedules prior to program adoption. At least biennially, RCTC must determine if
the County and cities are conforming to the CMP; including, but not limited, to all of the
following:
(a) Consistency with levels. of service standards, except as provided in
Section 65089.4.
(b) Adoption and implementation of a _ trip reduction and travel demand
ordinance.
(c) Adoption and implementation of a program to analyze the impacts. of land
use decisions, including the estimate of the costs.associated with
Mitigating these impacts.
(d) Adoption and implementation of'a deficiency plan pursuant to Section
65089.4 when highway and roadway level of service standards are not
maintained on portions of the designated system.
Section 65089.6 states that failure to complete or implement a CMP shall not give rise
to a cause of action against a city or the County for failing to conform with its general
plan, unless the city or the County incorporates the CMP into the circulation element of
its general plan.
RCTC CONFORMANCE AND MONITORING
In addition to conformity requirements referenced in specific sections of the Government
Code, the County and cities must work with the Congestion Management Agency
(CMA) to provide Level of Service (LOS) monitoring information along the CMP System.
This process is detailed in Chapter 5, Enhanced Transportation System Management
Program.
RCTC will continue to work with its Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to introduce
new or revised requirements. Additional CMP workshops, to be held at the request of
individual jurisdictions, offer the opportunity for planning and engineering staff to gain a
better understanding of the CMP in an informal environment.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
9-7
50
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
The following sections provide a description of the monitoring process .relative to
individual CMP requirements.
Consistency with LOS Standards
To simplify the process of collecting traffic counts from Caltrans and the local agencies,
RCTC has implemented the Enhanced Transportation System Management Program.
LOS calculations will primarily be based upon the newly installed traffic counting
equipment along the state highway system. Counts along the, local arterial system will '
be provided by the subregional agencies, affected local agencies, or ,from counts
conducted by RCTC. Currently, thirty-six (36) Smart Call 'Boxes (SCB) site's and
twenty-seven (27) Traffic Monitoring Center (TMC) sites have been installed to collect
traffic counts along the state highway system.
The Enhanced Transportation System Management Program. utilizes "loop or pavement
sensors" currently installed along the State 'Highway system at call boxes and TMC .
sites along the highway system. The program provides;. Caltrans and RCTC the: ability
to retrieve .real-time count information. Chapter 5 of this CMP > contains :a full
explanation of the SBC and TMC implementation program.
In. order to minimize' administrative requirements for traffic count data' and _traffic LOS
analysis, a database of key segments along the State Highway system has been
identified'. The links and intersections provide an adequate picture of the LOS on the
entire CMP System. Local agencies within the Western Riyerside County area will be
required to provide RCTC with .current traffic count data along. the CMP System local
arterials. CVAG .will provide itraffic counts for its regional arterial projects on the CMP
System: Caltrans, in accordance with AB 1963, is required to monitor the LOS along
the State. Highway facilities., ..Therefore, Caltrans will provide traffic counts or LOS
calculations along facilities where SCB or TMC counts are not available.
Adoption and. Implementation of Travel Demand. Management (TDM) Ordinances
RCTC has provided- a model` Transportation DemandManagement °'(TDM) :ordinance .:
that complies with CMP requirements. In addition, the County, WRCOG and'CVAG,. in
cooperation ;with (heir member .agencies, have developed model TDM ordinances.
Copies of these TDM' ordinances are on file at RCTC. All agencies in Riverside' County "
have adopted TDM ordinances.:::
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA' Technologies
9-2
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
PROPOSED PROGRAM TO MANAGE AND ANALYZE THE SYSTEM
To insure that the CMP System is appropriately monitored to reduce the occurrence of
CMP deficiencies, proposed development projects can be evaluated by each affected
agency to determine potential regional and sub -regional impacts along the CMP
Systems. As a result, such evaluation will reduce the incidence of LOS deficiencies
along the CMP System.
Local _agencies are encouraged to work with other- affected agencies to mitigate the
impacts considering California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
Intergovernmental Report (IGR) requirements to insure that major development projects
and plans are evaluated and reflected in the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) Transportation Model.
• When a LOS deficiency is identified as part of the CMP Update, further detailed analysis
of LOS shall be conducted tp determine whether an actual deficiency has occurred.
The LOS analysis conducted as part of the CMP Update process is only considered to
be a "screening" level analysis, and a ,more detailed assessment of a potential
deficiency would be required before deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with
the affected local jurisdiction(s) will be made to insure that appropriate data, geometrics,
counts and other related information is applied to calculate LOS.
TRANSPORTATION MODEL CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS
Some local agencies have or will be developing transportation models to analyze the
circulation system within their jurisdiction or for special transportation studies. RCTC,
SCAG, local agencies engaged in modeling, and representatives of consulting firms
working for local agencies, assisted in the development and update of Transportation
Model Consistency Guidelines. These guidelines are available at RCTC and at the
SCAG Inland Empire office in Riverside. RCTC will require that these guidelines be
followed during development of traffic models for all projects of regional significance.
The guidelines have several objectives; however, the primary objective is to insure that
the legislative requirements for transportation modeling and database consistency are
achieved. In addition, the guidelines have been designed to ease the transfer of
information from the regional and subregional models to local models and vice -versa.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
9-3
52
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
REQUIRED CMP UPDATES
The CMPs were required to be updated annually between' 1992 and'1995. -An
amendment to the CMP legislation changed the update to occur biennially. .Table 9-1
outlines the updates approved since inception:
TABLE 9-1
Year
CMP UPDATES SINCE INCEPTION
Adopted
Major Effort/Revisions
1992
The Commission originally adopted the CMP
December1992
_ 1993
The CMP was revised focusing on LOS evaluation
December 1993"
1994
The Commission updated Chapters 3 and 5 of the CMP
December 1994, .
1995
The CMP was revised and updated, primarily focusing
on Chapter 5, Land Use Coordination and the inclusion
' oflegislative amendments
December 1995`
1997 "
The CMP was thoroughly amended focusing on
replacement" of the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA)
process contained in the Land Use Coordination
Program (Chapter 5). .The TIA process was replaced
with the Enhanced Traffic Monitoring Program
December'1997.
1999
The CMP was revised' focusing on LOS evaluation
December 1999 : -
2001
Minorrevisionswere included in the update and RCTC
issued the RFP for the traffic counter installations at
Smart Call Box and Traffic Management Center Sites.
December 2001 '
2003
Th''e 2003 CMP. Update was focused on -continued
implementation of the CMP to meet Federal' Congestion
Management Systerri r(CMS) requirements. The traffic
counter installations project was nearing, completion:
Test runs were initiated.
December 2003 _•'
'
The required,2005 update is scheduled for adoption in May. 2006. The next update of
the CMP is required by December 2007.
SCAG CONSISTENCY REVIEW
The 2006 CMP will be reviewed by SCAG for consistency with the Regional
Transportation, Plan (RTP) and with CMPs ofadjoining counties (San Bernardino,
Orange, and Los Angeles 'Courities). Under the MPO planning regulations, SCAG is
required to certify that it meets federal CMS requirements, which includes a review and
consistency determination of all CMPs within the SCAG region:,
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
9-4
53
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
CHAPTER 10
CMP DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION/
UPDATE PROCESS
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS
Section 65089(a) of the Government Code requires that the Congestion Management
Program (CMP) must be developed, adopted, and updated biennially, consistent with
the schedule for the adoption and update of the Regional Transportation Improvement
Program (RTIP), for every county that includes an urbanized area, and must include
every city and the county. The CMP must be adopted at a noticed public hearing by
RCTC acting as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA). Development: of the CMP
mustalso be coordinated with the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG), regional transportation providers, local governments, Caltrans, and air districts.
Section 65089(b) also states that the CMP must contain all of the elements described
under Statutory Requirements in each Chapter of this CMP.
RCTC DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION, AND UPDATE PROCESS
As described above, Congestion Management Program (CMP) legislation requires that
the Program be developed, adopted, implemented, monitored, and updated biennially.
This chapter primarily focuses on procedural, administrative, and coordination activities
related to CMP development, adoption, implementation and _ update. To meet the
requirements of the legislation, the CMP shall be developed, adopted, implemented,
and updated in accordance with procedures described in the following sections.
CMP DEVELOPMENT
The CMP is developed to meet federal CMS requirements and also includes elements
of the State's CMP guidelines. State CMP statutes AB 471, 1791, AB 3093, AB 1963,
and AB 2419 (reference Appendix 1).
CMP ADOPTION PROCEDURE
The following procedure has been developed to outline the process toward preparation
and adoption of the CMP. RCTC staff shall coordinate the development of the CMP
with the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC).
♦ Local agencies should continue to monitor the CMP System. It is suggested that
the local agency collect ground counts at least every four (4) months to provide
for average annual traffic conditions.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
10-1
54
2006 Riverside County Congestion Management Program
Beginning in April of each odd numbered year, RCTC will obtain counts or LOS
analysis from Caltrans, CVAG, and local agencies.
In May of .each odd numbered year, RCTC must initiate a CMP update. RCTC
staff will review individual Chapters with the RCTC TAC, as necessary::`:
In October of each odd numbered year, RCTC must submit a Preliminary Draft of
the CMP to SCAG and the RCTC TAC CMP Subcommittee for review and
comment.
In November of each odd numbered year, RCTC staff will submit the Draft CMP
to the TAC for formal review and approval.
Between November and December of each odd numbered year, RCTC staff will
submit the Final Draft to the Commission for review and approval
CMP IMPLEMENTATION
The CMP is to be implemented and monitored in accordance with procedures described`
in Chapter 9 - CMP Conformance and Monitoring.
CMP UPDATEPROCEDURE
The CMP update process should be initiated at least 6 months prior to ;adoption.
Revision of the CMP may occur any time during the year to'address specific issues.
The update should include a thorough review of each Chapter or required element
contained in the current CMP: ''A suggested review process' follows:
♦ Legislative revisions or new: enactments to CMP, statutes should be thoroughly':
reviewed and incorporated into the CMP update.
♦ Review of the CMP System of Highways and Roadways should be undertaken
specifically' focusing on "Principal Arterials" to °determine if additional facilities
should be 'added. 'According to the CMP legislation,' facilities may only be added
to CMP system. All facilities included in the adopted CMP must be retained.
Reviewadjacent county CMP, Systems to determine if facilities were added or
are proposed for addition. Review and analyze any _additions" considering
SCAG's Consistency Guidelines on file at RCTC.
Review, in coordination with SCAG and local agencies, the existing and: future
year databases used for; transportation modeling purposes to insure consistency
in the development of: socioeconomic estimates and projections:
Prepared for: Riverside County' Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
10-2
2006 Riverside, County Congestion Management Program
Review the adopted CMP Minimum level of service (LOS) standard. The CMP
LOS standard can only be increased above the level identified in ,the adopted
Program.
Review LOS estimates to determine if the LOS along CMP facilities has dropped
below LOS "E".
♦ Document the purpose for, and status of, deficiency plans that may have been
prepared by local agencies during the previous year including proposed
mitigation measures.
Document segments or intersections that are at LOS "E", close to falling below
the adopted CMP threshold.
♦ Review the Productivity Improvement Program Transit System Performance
Indicators for any changes/updates. This effort will be coordinatedwith RCTC
staff responsible for development and adoption of the transit operators SRTPs.
• Document whether public transit or passenger rail service was identified as a
mitigation measure or potential mitigation measure in the development of
deficiency plans.
♦ Review the CMP Conformance and Monitoring Process to determine whether the
process is consistent with changes or revisions identified within other CMP
elements.
Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission
Prepared by: VRPA Technologies
10-3
56
a2k5/„1 V o
ate,-n-�
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
Plans and Programs Committee
May 22, 2006
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ CMP PURPOSE
• Directly link land use and transportation,
effectively utilize transportation funds,
alleviate traffic congestion and improve air
quality
i
e
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ 2006 CMP SYSTEM
Riverside CMP System
LEGEND
Dincoal AII611Os on CMP Sypem
HIgM ys CMP System
IN dal CMP System
Exhibit 2-1
W'F
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ 2006 CMP SYSTEM
Riverside CMP System (Western Riverside)
LEGEND
... Mrclpolalunoe en Gw System
Highways an CMP Ahem
SIN SW CMP system
Exhibit 2-1 (cord).
2
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
• 2006 CMP SYSTEM
Riverside CMP System (Coachella Valley)
Exhibit 2-1 (cord).
LEGEND
RI ipl Arterials on ON man
Ngmwyx on CMP Syeem
Irteu1W CMP System
SSG
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ 2006 CMP SYSTEM MONITORING
➢ CMP Street and Highway Monitoring
✓ The minimum level of service (LOS) is LOS "E" for any segment
or intersection on the CMP system, unless the LOS was "F" in
1991.
✓ To determine levels of service along the CMP System in 2005/06,
the following data was collected:
• Smart Call Box count data
• Recent traffic counts from local agencies
■ New traffic counts taken through VRPA
• Counts from Caltrans' monitoring report
■ Counts from CVAGs' monitoring report
y
■ Floating car runs along selected routes
3
2006 - Level of Service on CMP System in Western Riverside
LWOW
® .0
u.0 ... x�.w.�me.w.mm.;e. �mm r.�c.,�wdV
u.0 ...x.mwe.. ex,crMnalbnevi Zmrx.mgm.M.1
azu too eve.u.,..rm.,* o, genii mq,m.
q51 0 y PO
_ .
60
11
Q.
_
19
!•4mllnwnl�e
PTO 1�BB�
p
q� 3M1
iMV 0
`'
Y�R
Ay 1%.5
'ut
_ Riven :91
`, CNY Limit it M1
Arlin Arun 1]4r ,\`T
r
T,
n4.yI yy ` w- y -x.
Y
d. 60
, ,
-"�.; Sa4.. Blvd
-/ )
- 215
._�Blvd
91 --
2006 - Level of Service on CMP System In Northwestern Riverside
1.14=1
® .re. ®°:i. tilt.,, !""""m,
.wxe,rwam!m, m.mm.!e....:uw LW OM
6'_!'. ........,,,
4
2006 - Level of Service on CMP System In Coachella Valley
.,. re.Mir w.+.aen o.dms) 611005a6w
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ 2006 CMP SYSTEM MONITORING
➢ CMP Monitoring Results
✓ Based upon the capacity analysis of the CMP System, several
LOS deficiencies were identified when floating car runs were
conducted as a further check of potential LOS deficiencies
✓ Results indicated that several segments along major highways
are operating at deficient levels of service
10
I
5
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ 2006 CMP SYSTEM MONITORING
➢CMP Monitoring Results
Roadway
Its
I21S
SR 79
Alessandro
to SR 74
SRW
to34 41.5est
Deficient Per Floatiny Car
RWIS (YIN)
Overriding
Considerations Reasondor Overriding Considerations
(WS)
Alessandro
11
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
• 2006 DEFICIENCY PLAN PROCESS
➢ CMP Deficiency Plan Provisions
✓ When a LOS F is identified based upon capacity analysis, further
detailed review shall be conducted using floating car runs to
determine actual travel delay along a CMP facility
✓ Considering quarterly monitoring of travel delay using floating tar
runs, a determination will be made regarding the LOS condition.
If the results show a deficiency over the 12-month period, a
deficiency plan will be required
✓ The local agency where the deficiency is located will be
responsible for the preparation of the Deficiency Plan. RCTC
will prepare deficiency plans on the State Highway System
✓ If the Plan is not prepared or accepted by the Commission, the
local jurisdiction may lose federal funds as part of the federal
Metropolitan Planning Organization planning certification process
12
6
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
♦ 2006 DEFICIENCY PLAN PROCESS
➢ Required Components of a Deficiency Plan
✓ Identification of:
✓ The cause of the deficiency
✓ The impacts of those local jurisdictions that contribute to the
deficiency
✓ A list of improvements that would maintain the minimum level of
service, or measurably improve the multimodal system and contribute
to improvements in air quality
✓ The estimated costs of the improvements
✓ An action plan, including implementation strategies
➢ Reliance on TUMF Programs
✓ TUMF networks in the Coachella Valley and in Western Riverside
County could reasonably serve as a deficiency plan in and of
itself, depending on the location and nature of the cause of the
deficiency 13
2006 Riverside County
Congestion Management Program
• 2006 CMP - Next Steps
➢ Staff and TAC Recommendations:
✓ Approve the 2006 CMP Update and continue monitoring the
identified LOS deficiencies over the next 9-month period
✓ Monitoring results will be incorporated into the 2007 CMP Update
7
AGENDA ITEM 8
"
R I V E R S / D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a y 2 2 , 2 0 0 6
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n , R a i l P r o g r a m s M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
S t e p h a n i e . W i g g i n s ; R e g i o n a l P r o g r a m s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
P r o p o s e d M e t r o l i n k B u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 -
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A d o p t t h e p r e l i m i n a r y F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 M e t r o l i n k O p e r a t i n g a n d C a p i t a l
B u d g e t ;
2 ) A l l o c a t e � R C T C ' s f u n d i n g c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e S o u t h e r n " C a l i f o r n i a
R e g i o n a l R a i l A u t h o r i t y i n a n a m o u n t n o t t o e x c e e d $ 6 , 7 0 9 , 9 3 5
c o m p r i s e d o f $ 5 , 5 0 8 , 7 0 0 i n L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F u n d s f o r t r a i n
o p e r a t i o n s a n d m a i n t e n a n c e - o f - w a y , a n d $ 1 , 2 0 1 , 2 3 5 f o r c a p i t a l
p r o j e c t s t o b e f u n d e d b y F T A S e c t i o n 5 3 0 7 f u n d s ; a n d
3 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
B y v i r t u e o f t h e J o i n t P o w e r s A g r e e m e n t , t h e - f i v e m e m b e r a g e n c i e s , w h i c h
c o m p r i s e t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a R e g i o n a l R a i l A u t h o r i t y ( M e t r o l i n k ) , m u s t f o r m a l l y
c o m m i t t o f u n d t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n a t e s h a r e s o f c o m m u t e r r a i l o p e r a t i n g a n d c a p i t a l
c o s t s . ' E a c h - m e m b e r a g e n c y m u s t a p p r o v e t h e b u d g e t ' b e f o r e ' a d o p t i o n o f a f i n a l
b u d g e t b y t h e M e t r o l i n k B o a r d , n o l a t e r t h a n J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 0 6 S e r v i c e a n d f u n d i n g
l e v e l s a r e l i m i t e d b y t h e p o l i c y a n d b u d g e t c o n s t r a i n t s o f t h e m e m b e r a g e n c i e s a n d
a r e n e g o t i a t e d e a c h y e a r .
F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 N o t a b l e . A c c o m p l i s h m e n t s
" A d d i t i o n o f f o u r . 1 E 0 C m i d d a y t r a i n s u t i l i z i n g e x i s t i n g e q u i p m e n t . G r o w t h o n t h e
I E O C i s i m p r e s s i v e w i t h t h e l a t e s t A p r i l 2 0 0 6 r i d e r s h i p 1 5 % h i g h e r t h a n A p r i l
2 0 0 5 .
" S u c c e s s f u l d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f S u m m e r L i n k I E O C s e a s o n a l w e e k e n d s e r v i c e .
" A w a r d o f r a i l e q u i p m e n t c o n t r a c t t o R o t e m f o r t h e 8 7 n e w r a i l ' c a r s f o r d e l i v e r y
b e g i n n i n g D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 8 a p o r t i o n o n w h i c h w i l l s u p p o r t a d d i t i o n a l s e r v i c e o n
t h e I E O C , R i v e r s i d e , a n d 9 1 L i n e s .
5 7
Successful outreach and, passenger information that allowed for completion of a
major track restoration project with significant service disruptions along the
UP's RiversideLine.without a net loss of. riders based `on'April 2005 ridership. `.
Riverside County ,Service Impact Proposed for FY2006/07
Three. Metrolink commuter rail lines traverse Riverside County; the `Riverside Line,
the IEOC Line, and the 91 Line. The FY 2006/07 draft Metrolink'Budget proposes ;
the following:
• Riverside Line: No changes in regular weekday service or .weekend service via
extensions :onthe San Bernardino Line;
• IEOC -Line: No changes in regular weekday service, . addition of year round
weekend service with three round trips on Saturdays and two on Sundays.
• 91 Line: No changes in regular weekday service; and
• 5.5% average fare increase due to restructuring of fares from zone to -distance
based; calculation and rising. diesel fuel costs.
RCTC's FY06/07;OperatingSubsidy to Increase -18%
RCTC's; proposed funding obligation to SCRRA includes,$5,508,7,00 subsidy for_
operations and .maintenance -of -way which_ represents ,a $1,497,600 _increase over
the .FY 2005/06 budget. This is due primarily to two factors outlined below:
1. New year-round weekend IEOC service 0398 011)
Over the last 1.0 years, the Commission has chartered weekend trains during the
summer on the IEOC Line. • While this service is popular for recreational activities,
increasingly the 91 freeway ,is;congested on the weekend Lest summer, OCTA
and SANBAG joined, the, Commission and expanded the service to three,,round trips
for the summer monthsand:sharing in the costs of: the subsidy as a demonstration
of regional summer weekend service,. This, year the participating agencies have
agreed to take .the project .,a 'Step further and implement year ,round weekend
services on the IEOC route. The proposed[ service will begin July 15, 2006 and
offer two round; trips between San Bernardino and :Oceanside on Saturdays and
Sundays. : In addition,'.. there- will be a Saturday .round trip train originating in
Oceanside in .the .morning headed to Riverside:
2. Operating Cost Increases 01„099,589)
As with most transit agenciesnationwide,: the rapid rise in the; costs of ultra 'low
diesel fuel, as well as insurance, and other non -discretionary costs, hasincreased
the pressure for additional revenues. Other than the expansion of weekend service,
two areas stand out with dramatic cost increases from FY 2005/06'budget:
" U l t r a - L o w S u l f u r d i e s e l f u e l e x p e n s e s t o i n c r e a s e b y $ 3 . 8 m i l l i o n , 4 4 . 2 9 %
d u e t o t h e n e w b u d g e t e d p r i c e p e r g a l l o n o f $ 2 . 3 8 .
" I n c r e a s e s i n t h e c o s t . r i s k p r e m i u m s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p r o p e r t y i n s u r a n c e ,
$ 1 . 4 m i l l i o n o r 1 0 . 3 % o f t h e F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 b u d g e t i n c r e a s e .
" A n o t h e r c o s t c o m p o n e n t i m p a c t i n g t h e F Y , 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 b u d g e t i s t h e I E O C
s e r v i c e e x p a n s i o n o f f o u r m i d d a y t r a i n s o n J a n u a r y 3 , 2 0 0 6 . T h e
b u d g e t i m p a c t o f o p e r a t i n g t h e s e t r a i n s o v e r a c o m p l e t e 1 2 m o n t h p e r i o d
a l s o i n c r e a s e s t h e R O T C s u b s i d y w h e n c o m p a r e d t o F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 .
O f t h e F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 M e t r o l i n k s y s t e m w i d e o p e r a t i n g b u d g e t , 8 1 % o r , $ 1 0 9 . 4 m i l l i o n
i s p r o j e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e 4 . 4 % , a g r o w t h r a t e a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l t o t h e . ; r a t e . o f
i n f l a t i o n i n t h e : s o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a r e g i o n .
C a p i t a l C o n t r i b u t i o n
R C T C ' s n e w c a p i t a l a n d c a p i t a l r e n o v a t i o n o b l i g a t i o n f o r F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 i s p r o j e c t e d
a t $ 1 , 2 0 1 , 2 3 5 . P r o j e c t s i n c l u d e r e h a b i l i t a t i o n a n d r e n o v a t i o n a n d t h e r e p a y m e n t o f
a d v a n c e f u n d i n g o n t h e s y s t e m - w i d e p r o j e c t s o f K e l l e r S t r e e t a n d t h e M a i l . D o c k .
B o t h t h e K e l l e r S t r e e t s t o r a g e f a c i l i t y f o r t r a i n e q u i p m e n t , a n d t h e M a i l D o c k
r e s t o r a t i o n o f u n u s e d t r a c k f o r p a s s e n g e r s e r v i c e s , w i l l i n c r e a s e t h e a g e n c y ' s
o p e r a t i n g e f f i c i e n c y a n d . c a p a c i t y i n a n d a r o u n d L o s A n g e l e s U n i o n S t a t i o n ( L A D S ) .
S u m m a r y F i n a n c i a l S u b s i d y I m p a c t t o R C T C
T h e R C T C o p e r a t i n g s u b s i d y p r o p o s e d o f $ 5 , 5 0 8 , 7 0 0 r e p r e s e n t s 4 % o f t h e
$ 1 3 4 . 8 M i l l i o n o p e r a t i n g b u d g e t . T h e r e s u l t i n g c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s u b s i d y o f
$ 1 , 2 0 1 , 2 3 5 r e p r e s e n t s 0 . 3 % o f t h e $ 3 5 5 . 8 m i l l i o n c a p i t a l b u d g e t .
S y s t e m - w i d e
I n F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 , t h e S C R R A w i l l c e l e b r a t e i t s 1 4 t ' y e a r p r o v i d i n g M e t r o l i n k
c o m m u t e r r a i l s e r v i c e i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . O p e n i n g w i t h t h r e e l i n e s a n d 1 2
s t a t i o n s i n O c t o b e r 1 9 9 2 , . t h e S C R R A t o d a y o p e r a t e s o v e r 5 1 4 r o u t e m i l e s o n
s e v e n l i n e s , s e r v i n g 5 4 s t a t i o n s i n s i x c o u n t i e s . , A v e r a g e w e e k d a y r i d e r s h i p . i s
p r o j e c t e d t o t o t a l o v e r 4 3 , 0 0 0 o n e - w a y t r i p s , a n i n c r e a s e o f 7 % o v e r t h e c u r r e n t
y e a r B u d g e t . T h e r e s u l t i n g f a r e b o x r e v e n u e i s p r o j e c t e d a t $ 5 9 . 3 m i l l i o n o r 1 1 . 3 %
o v e r t h e c u r r e n t y e a r B u d g e t , d u e t o t h e c o m b i n a t i o n o f a p r o p o s e d a v e r a g e f a r e
i n c r e a s e o f 5 . 5 % , a s w e l l a s t h e i n c r e a s e i n r i d e r s h i p .
F a r e r e v e n u e s r e p r e s e n t 4 4 % o f . t o t a l o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e s . M e m b e r a g e n c y
c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f $ 6 1 . 2 m i l l i o n f o r o p e r a t i o n s r e p r e s e n t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 6 % o f t o t a l
o p e r a t i n g e x p e n s e s r e s u l t i n g i n . r e v e n u e r e c o v e r y i n t h e b u d g e t o f ' 5 4 % , o n e o f t h e
h i g h e r r e v e n u e r e c o v e r y r a t i o s a m o n g c o m m u t e r r a i l p r o p e r t i e s n a t i o n w i d e .
5 9
In 2004, the SCRRA Board'approved a 10-year fare restructuring program that '
-began July 1., 2005 and changed the method for calculating fares to one based on
the driving mileage between stations. The 10-year fare -restructuring program
included an underlying average annual fare increase of 3.5%. Due to increases in
fuel costs additional adjustments were made and the July 2006 fare increase will
be 5.5%.
The draft FY 2006/07 combined Metrolink Budget is $490:6'million The operating
budget is $134.8 million, an increase of 1 1 % from the 'current .year Budget,
comprised of $112.8 million for train operations and maintenance -of -way at $22
million. The capital budget is $355.8 million made ' up` of rehabilitation and
renovation at $77.3 million and a new capital projects budget of $278.5 million.
Approximately 58% of the Capital Budget, or $207,5 million, represents resources
to procure additional rolling stock.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget`:
Yes
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$5,508,700
No
FY 2006/07
$1,201,235.
Source of Funds:
LTF $5,508,700
Budget'
Yes
FTA Section 5307 $1,201.,235
"Adjustment:
$1,201,235
GLA No.:
$5,508,700 103-25-86101 P4199
$1, 201, 235 ': 221-33-86102 P3812
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
'\1,f,4,
Date::
5/16/06
Attachment: SCRRA FY ;2006/07 Budget,.0perating Subsidy Allocation by County
"
S C R R A F Y 2 0 0 6 - 0 7 B u d g e t
T A B L E 3 _ 7
O P E R A T I N G S U B S I D Y A L L O C A T I O N B Y C O U N T Y
( $ 0 0 0 s )
E x p e n s e s
T r a i n O p e r a t i o n s & S e r v i c e s
M a i n t e n a n c e - o f - W a y .
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n & S e r v i c e s
I n s u r a n c e
R e v e n u e s
G r o s s F a r e b o x
D i s p a t c h i n g
O t h e r O p e r a t i n g
M a i n t e n a n c e - o f - W a y
F Y 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 B u d g e t
I n c r e a s e / ( D e c r e a s e )
P e r c e n t a g e C h a n g e
$ 8 4 , 7 4 5 . 1
2 2 , 0 4 8 . 4
1 6 , 0 5 5 . 3
1 1 , 9 5 0 . 0
5 9 , 2 9 0 . 8
2 , 9 2 0 . 4
1 , 7 0 9 . 3
9 , 3 7 2 . 3
5 5 , 0 8 7 A
6 , 4 1 8 . 6
1 1 . 6 5 %
$ 4 4 , 5 5 8 . 6
1 3 , 1 0 9 . 2
8 , 5 5 4 . 4
6 , 3 8 2 . 3
5 1 8 , 2 7 5 . 4
4 , 1 7 5 . 7
2 , 8 0 7 . 5
2 , 0 7 9 . 1
5 7 , 2 4 1 . 4
6 4 4 . 7
1 , 4 3 3 . 7
1 , 0 6 9 A
$ 1 0 , 5 8 3 . 4
2 , 8 2 2 . 2
1 , 9 0 4 . 9
1 , 4 0 7 . 9
$ 4 , 0 8 6 . 3
1 , 2 9 6 . 6
1 , 3 5 4 . 7
1 , 0 1 1 . 4
3 1 , 3 9 6 . 4
1 , 4 9 7 . 3
9 0 6 . 2
5 , 8 8 1 . 6
1 2 , 5 9 0 . 0
9 2 4 . 3
3 1 6 . 0
2 , 0 4 1 . 7
4 , 7 0 0 . 5
2 7 . 3
1 5 2 . 7
8 , 5 7 5 . 5
8 6 . 0
2 2 9 . 2
9 7 5 . 3
2 , 0 2 8 . 4
3 8 5 . 4
1 0 5 . 2
4 7 3 . 7
3 1 , 6 5 7 . 3
8 , 3 3 7 . 8
4 , 6 3 3 . 9
6 , 1 7 1 . 5
4 , 2 8 6 . 9
1 , 2 6 5 . 6
3 , 1 2 7 . 8
8 7 4 . 8
6 8 0 . 9
4 6 9 . 5
4 . 0 0 %
3 7 . 5 1 %
1 8 . 8 8 %
1 1 . 0 3 %
1 0 . 9 5 %
6 1
AGENDA ITEM 9
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
May 22, 2006 ,
TO:
Plans and Programs. Committee
FROM:
Transit Policy Committee and Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director
SUBJECT:
Productivity Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2006/07
Performance Targets
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) FY 2006/07
performance targets for the farebox recovery ratio and discretionary
indicators as outlined in the attachments;
2) Approve an increase in the PIP FY 2006/07 performance targets for
the operating cost per revenue hour for the Banning Municipal Transit
Agency, City of Corona, Riverside Transit Agency and RCTC's
Commuter Rail Program as outlined in Table A; and '
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Commission's goal is to improve mobility while adhering to its transit oversight
responsibilities which consist of 1) Planning (AB 1246'— PUC 13030c); 2) Funding
(PUC 130250 — 1303061; and 3) Operator Oversight/Fiduciary Responsibilities.
The Transit Policy Committee (TPC) was created to discuss, develop,and submit
policy direction related to transit matters for Commission action. When the. TPC
was formed, several policy issues were identified including route productivity. The
PIP is a tool that transit operators can use to improve transit ridership and mobility
for the residents of Riverside County. TransTrack was designed to provide useful
interpretations of planned and actual operating service levels and will provide the
analytical tools necessary to assist with the ongoing issue of productivity as it
relates to the disparity between ridership and operating costs. 'Commission staff
will provide a status report at the Plans and Programs Committee as to action taken
by the TPC at its May 18, 2006 meeting.
Productivity Improvement Program Goals
For FY 2006/07, the Commission adopted the PIP as part of a comprehensive
effort to work with the county's eight public transit operators to provide better
service and improve efficiency. Under state law, the Commission is tasked with
62
the responsibility to identify, analyze and recommend potential productivity
improvements for transitoperators. The process requires the transit operators to
address recommendations that are made by .state -mandated performance audits.
The Commission' oversees transit service in Riverside Countyprimarily through the
approval of SRTPs, which detail the operating and capital costs that are planned for
transit services. Each operator adopts such a plan and then provides data to the
Commission on actual performance.
The following performance indicators are evaluated through the'PIP,process:
Mandatory Targets
Operating cost per revenue hour (tied to CPI)
Fare box recovery ratio (between 10% and 20%)
Discretionary Targets'
Subsidy per passenger(+/- 15% Variance)
Subsidy, per passenger mile (+/-. 15% Variance)
Subsidy per revenue hour (+/- 15% Variance)
Subsidy per revenue mile (+/ 15% Variance)
Passengers per revenue hour (+/- 15% Variance)
Passengers per revenue mile'(+/- 15% Variance)
Additional Discretionary Targets for Rail Program
Ridership growth: goal. of 2% growth
Passenger miles per revenue car: goal of 30passengers
per revenue. car mile
The performance'" indicators, are critical in ensuring that service can be maximized in
an efficient manner. More ,+importantly, the, PIP is a cooperative process 'between
the ,Commission' and the transit providers` to work together on approaches to
improve mobility in, anenvironment fraught vvith rising costs for, fuel, labor and
insurance:
TransTrack = .Transit Performance Manager Software .
While reviewing and analyzing' individual route productivity will remain with the
transit operators and their' governing boards, the Commission has a fiduciary
responsibility to ensure -that transit operators are utilizing': Transportation
Development Act (TDA) funds efficiently and effectively. ,In addition to
Bus operators can pick three otthe six discretionary: targets to meet. Two additional; performance
targets are approved for the Commuter Rail program, and as a`result, the rail program can select
three of eight discretionary targets:'
63
"
"
i m p l e m e n t i n g t h e P I P , t h e C o m m i s s i o n r e c e n t l y p u r c h a s e d a n d i m p l e m e n t e d
T r a n s T r a c k , a t r a n s i t p e r f o r m a n c e . m a n a g e r s o f t w a r e a p p l i c a t i o n a n d t r a i n i n g
p a c k a g e t o a s s i s t s t a f f i n c o m p i l i n g , - t a b u l a t i n g a n d , r e p o r t i n g t r a n s i t o p e r a t i n g
i n f o r m a t i o n f o r u s e i n t h e S R T P , m o n t h l y m a n a g e m e n t r e p o r t s , t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r
r e p o r t s a s w e l l a s a n n u a l r e p o r t s t o e x t e r n a l a g e n c i e s ( e . g . , S t a t e C o n t r o l l e r a n d
N a t i o n a l T r a n s i t D a t a b a s e r e p o r t s ) . T r a n s T r a c k w i l l a s s i s t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s s t a f f
a n d p o l i c y b o a r d i n r e v i e w i n g c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e P I P r e q u i r e m e n t s i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e
P U C a s w e l l a s s t a t e - m a n d a t e d r e q u i r e m e n t s t o e f f e c t i v e l y u s e T D A f u n d s .
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 P I P T a r g e t s : A l l O p e r a t o r s M e e t F a r e b o x a n d D i s c r e t i o n a r y T a r g e t s
T r a n s i t O p e r a t o r s t a f f a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e t a r g e t s .
U s i n g t h e P I P p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s ( b a s e d o n F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 t h i r d q u a r t e r a c t u a l d a t a )
a n d F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 p l a n n e d o p e r a t i n g l e v e l s ( p r e p a r e d b y i n d i v i d u a l o p e r a t o r s ) , a n
a n a l y s i s w a s c o m p l e t e d t o d e t e r m i n e c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e : m a n d a t o r y a n d
d i s c r e t i o n a r y p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s . T r a n s i t o p e r a t o r i n p u t w a s c o n s t r u c t i v e a n d l e d
t o e f f e c t i v e c o l l a b o r a t i o n i n c a l c u l a t i n g t h e p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s w h i c h - r e s u l t e d i n
1 ) a n i n c r e a s e i n t h e C o n s u m e r . P r i c e I n d e x . ( F o r p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s , t h e . C P I w a s
c a l c u l a t e d a t 3 . 6 i n D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 5 . ) I n M a r c h , t h e C P I i n c r e a s e d t o 4 . 1 % ; a n d 2 )
F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 t h i r d q u a r t e r a c t u a l d a t a w a s u s e d t o c a l c u l a t e . F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t s ( i n s t e a d o f p r o j e c t e d d a t a ) . A t t h e t i m e o f w r i t i n g t h i s s t a f f
r e p o r t , o p e r a t o r s w e r e p l a n n i n g t o m e e t t h e m a n d a t o r y f a r e b o x t a r g e t s a s w e l l a s
a m i n i m u m o f t h r e e o f t h e d i s c r e t i o n a r y t a r g e t s .
P e r f o r m a n c e T a r g e t I n c r e a s e R e q u e s t f o r O p e r a t i n g C o s t P e r R e v e n u e H o u r
A t t h e t i m e o f w r i t i n g t h i s s t a f f r e p o r t , f o u r o p e r a t o r s p l a n o n m e e t i n g t h e
m a n d a t o r y t a r g e t o f o p e r a t i n g c o s t p e r r e v e n u e h o u r ; h o w e v e r , S u n L i n e h a s
i d e n t i f i e d t h e c a p i t a l p u r c h a s e o f t e n e x p a n s i o n v e h i c l e s i n t h e i r S R T P f o r t h e
e x p a n s i o n o f s e r v i c e s o n i R o u t e s 1 4 , 1 5 , 2 4 , 3 0 , 7 0 , 7 1 a n d 1 1 1 . D u e t o
i n c r e a s e d o p e r a t i n g c o s t s f o r t h i s s e r v i c e e x p a n s i o n , S u n L i n e m a y a l s o n e e d t o
r e q u e s t a w a i v e r f o r t h e o p e r a t i n g c o s t p e r r e v e n u e . h o u r t a r g e t . C o m m i s s i o n s t a f f
w i l l p r o v i d e a v e r b a l r e p o r t o f t h e o n g o i n g d i s c u s s i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e s e r v i c e
e x p a n s i o n a t t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e m e e t i n g .
A n a d d i t i o n a l f o u r o p e r a t o r s h a v e , r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e o p e r a t i n g c o s t p e r r e v e n u e
h o u r p e r f o r m a n c e t a r g e t f o r . t h e i r a g e n c y b e a d j u s t e d a s i l l u s t r a t e d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g
c h a r t :
T a b l e A
O p e r a t o r
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 T a r g e t
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 S R T P
P l a n
B a n n i n g
$ 7 2 . 6 7
$ 7 5 . 6 5
C o r o n a
$ 5 1 . 4 7
$ 5 3 . 6 5
C o m m u t e r R a i l
$ 5 4 0 . 7 0
$ 6 0 5 . 0 5
R T A
$ 6 9 . 2 0
$ 7 2 . 7 3
% I n c r e a s e o v e r
F Y 0 6 / 0 7 T a r g e t s
4 . 1 0 %
4 . 2 4 %
1 1 , 9 0 %
5 . 1 0 %
6 4
Attached to this agendaitem is a systemwide performancereport (scorecard), ;by.
operator, identifying the mandatory and discretionary performance targets., The FY
2006/07'scorecard identifies the performance targets that each operator plans to
meet; operators also provided comments as to why they are requesting an increase
in the operating 'cost per revenue hour targets.
Ridership and. Operating Costs
The FY 2006/07`SRTPs estimate that $134,917,875 in funding'. is required to
support the operating and capital requests for the eight (8) public operators... The
following chart provides an overview of the costs together with projected ridership
levels by: appdrtionmentarea and transit operator:
AGENCY/APPORTIONMENT AREA
Operating
Capital`.:
Total Costs.
Ridership
City of Banning
$ 1,164,743
$ 34,950
$ _ 1,199,693:
205,000
City of. Beaumont
$ 1,200,000
$ 140,000'
$ 1,340,000
125,500
City of Corona
$ 1,802,500
$ 50,000
$ 1,852,500
217,400
Riverside Special Services
$ 2,626,840
•$ 1,920,000
$" .4,546,840
156,899
Riverside Transit Agency,
$ 43,665,697
$ 7,716,682
$ 51,382,379
7,142,589
Western County: , Bus
$ 50,459,780
$ 9,861,632
$ _ 60,321,412:
. 7,847,388
Westem 'County: Rail*
$ 33,191,600
$14,537,035
$ 47,728,635
2,874,486
WESTERN COUNTY: TOTAL
$ 83,651,380
$24,398,667
$ 108 050,047
10,721,874
SunLine Transit Agency
$ 19,050,505
$ 6,910,772
$ 25,961,277
3,500,429
COACHELLAVALLEY: TOTAL
$ 19,050,505
$ 6,910,772
,$ 25,961,277
3,500,429
Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency,
$ 824,606
$ 81,850
, $ 906,456
54,292
PALO VERDE VALLEY: "TOTAL
$ 824,606
$ 81,850
$ 906,456'
54,292
TOTAL: ALL APPORTIONMENT AREAS:
$ 103,526,491
$ 31,391,289
$ 134,917,780
14,276,595 .
*Commuter Rail's costs consist of RCTC's share of approximately $7'.1 M plus OCTA and
LA Metro's share of approximately $26M.. .
Over the last 121months, transit 'operators have initiated efforts to' address the rise
in operating costs ,and ;the need to increase ridership. SunLine Transit 'Agency
recently completed a Comprehensive .Operational Analysis (COA) 'designed to
identify service efficiency opportunities and increase ridership. Riverside Transit
Agency has initiated•their COA which is estimated to'be completed in the fall. In
addition; RCTC''s;' Commuter" Rail'Program through Metrolink is near. completion of a
30-Year Strategic Assessment Plan.
The next triennial performance audit (anticipated to take.,place in the fall of 2006)
covering FY .2003/04 through . FY 2005/06 ,will review the actual 'performance of
the transit operators and will provide a comparison of ,ridership areoperating
2 At the time of writing this staff report, requests for operating and capital funds were going. •
through a final review process by both' operator and Commission staff. Changes„if any, will be
identified at the June 2006. Commission meeting.
65
between audit periods. In the interim, implementation of the PIP and TransTrack
will provide essential tools to monitor service levels by providing objective criteria
for assessing productivity improvement opportunities including cost efficiencies.
FY 2006/07 Allocation of Funds
A more detailed funding request, by fund type, will be presented at the June/July
Commission meetings. In the interim, total funding information to support the
proposed operating levels and capital requests is provided in the following chart to
assist the policy board in reviewing the proposed increase . in the performance
targets.
Riverside County: FY 2006/07 Operating and Capital Costs
Other Revenues
$1,178,008
1%
TUMF (WRC)
$356,965
0%
Passenger Fares
$26,455,559 —
20%
Federal - Discretionary Funds
$1,814,299
1%
Federal - Formula Funds /
$19,229,054 —
14%
Additional Rail Cost
$19,038,400
14%
\` 1
Measure "A"
$4,504,186
3%
TDA (LTF & STA Funds)
$62,341,309
47%
Attachment: Systemwide Performance Report, by operator.
Passenger Fares
$11,334,159 - Public Bus Operators
$15,121,400 - Commuter Rail Operator.
66
Banning Systemwide Performance Targets
FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan Review
Data Elements
Unlinked Passenger Trips
Passenger Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Miles
Total Operating Expenses
Total Passenger Fare Revenue
Net Operating Expenses
Performance Indicators
FY 2006/07 SRTP
Plan (Proposed)
205,000
15,396
260,965
270,883
$1,164,743
$143,840
$1,020,903
FY 2006/07
Target*
FY 2006/07
Scorecard
Productivity
Performance Summary
Mandatory:
1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour
$75.65
$72.67
0
2.: Farebox Recovery Ratio:
12.35%
10.00%
J
Meets 1 of 2 mandatory
Indicators
Discretionary:
1. Subsidy Per Passenger
2. Subsidy Per Passenger Mlle
3. Subsidy Per Hour
$4.98
$66.31
$4.03-$5.45
$52.66-$71.24
J
4. Subsidy Per Mile
$3.91
$3.26-$4.41
J.;
5.. Passengers Per Revenue Hour
6. Passengers Per Revenue Mile
13.32
0.79
11.10-15.02
0.69-0.93
J
J
Meets RCTC PIP Program:
Meets 5 of 6 discretionary
indicators
Operator Comments
Waiver Requested. Operating cost/hr
above PIP target due to increase in
fuel costs, general liability insurance
and employee services.
Note: Must meet at least 3 out of 6 Discretionary Performance Indicators
Legend: J = In Compliance
0 = Not in Compliance
* Based on FY 2005/06 3rd quarter actuals
As of 5/16/2006
PIP Performance Targets FY06/07
Unlinked Passenger Trips
Passenger Miles
Total Actual .Vehicle Revenue Hours
Total Actual Vehicle = Revenue. Miles:
Beaumont Systemwide Performance Targets
FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan Review
FY•2006/07 SRTP
Plan (Proposed):
125,500
278,652
-21,000
278,652
Total Actual Vehicle Mlles
Total Operating Expenses .
Total Passenger Fare Revenue
Net Operating Expenses. -
Performance indicators:
283,000
$1,200095
$120,000
$1,080,095
FY 2006f07
Target"
FY2006/07
Scorecard
Productivity Performance
Summary'
Mandatory:
1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour
2. Farebox Recovery Ratio ,
Discretionary:.
1. Subsidy Per Passenger
2. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile
3: Subsidy Per Hour
4. Subsidy Per Mile
5. Passengers Per Revenue Hour_
6. _Passengers Per Revenue Mile_
$57.15
10.00%
$8.61
$3.88
$51.43
$3.88
5.98
0.45
$58.28
10.00%
$6.89-$9.32
$3.18-$4.30
$44.50-$80.21
$3.12-$4:22
5.49-7.43
. 0.38-0.52
Note: Must meet at least 3 out of 6 Discretionary. Performance indicators
•.Based on FY 2005/06 3rd quarter actuals .
J-
J
J
J-
J
Meets 2 of 2 mandatory
Indicators
Meets RC IM PIP Program:
Meet7
.6 of 6 discretionary
indlcatars•
Legend: J = In Compliance
O'=: Not in Compliance
Operator Comments
As. of, 5/16/2006
PIP Perfomence'Targets i@/07
"
R C T C C o m m u t e r R a i l P e r f o r m a n c e T a r g e t s
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n R e v i e w
D a t a E l e m e n t s
U n l i n k e d P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 S R T P
P l a n ( P r o p o s e d )
" 2 , 8 7 4 , 4 8 6
P a s s e n g e r M i l e s
9 9 , 4 1 6 , 3 1 3
T o t a l A c t u a l V e h i c l e R e v e n u e T r a i n H o u r
T o t a l A c t u a l V e h i c l e R e v e n u e C a r M i l e s
5 4 , 8 5 8
2 , 8 8 5 , 2 4 9
T o t a l A c t u a l V e h i c l e T r a i n M i l e s
T o t a l O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s
T o t a l P a s s e n g e r F a r e R e v e n u e
N e t O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s
P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s .
" 6 7 4 , 9 1 5
$ 3 3 , 1 9 1 , 6 0 0
$ 1 5 , 1 2 1 , 4 0 0
$ 1 8 , 0 7 0 , 2 0 0
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
T a r g e t "
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 .
S c o r e c a r d
P r o d u c t i v i t y P e r f o r m a n c e
S u m m a r y
M a n d a t o r y :
1 . O p e r a t i n g C o s t P e r R e v e n u e H o u r
$ 6 0 5 . 0 5
$ 5 4 0 . 7 0
0
2 . F a r e b o x R e c o v e r y R a t i o
D i s c r e t i o n a r y :
1 . S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r
4 5 . 5 6 %
$ 6 . 2 9
4 0 . 0 0 %
$ 5 . 6 9 4 7 . 6 9
J
J
2 . S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r M i l e
3 . S u b s i d y P e r H o u r .
$ 0 , 1 8
$ 3 2 9 . 4 0
$ 0 . 1 7 - $ 0 2 3
$ 2 4 6 . 9 3 4 3 3 4 . 0 8
J
J
4 . S u b s i d y P e r M i l e
$ 6 . 2 6
$ 5 , 9 7 - $ 8 . 0 8
J
5 . P a s s e n g e r s P e r R e v e n u e H o u r
5 2 . 4 0
- 3 6 . 9 1 - 4 9 . 9 3
J
6 . P a s s e n g e r s P e r R e v e n u e M i l e
1 . 0 0
0 . 8 9 - 4 . 2 1
J
7 . U n l i n k e d P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
8 . P a s s e n g e r M i l e s p e r R e v C a r M i l e s
2 , 8 7 4 , 4 8 6
3 4 . 4 6
2 , 6 7 9 , 0 1 5
3 0 o r m o r e
J
. J
M e e t s 1 o f 2 m a n d a t o r y
i n d i c a t o r s
M e e t s R O T C P I P P r o g r a m :
M e e t s B o f 8 d i s c r e t i o n a r y
I n d i c a t o r s
O p e r a t o r C o m m e n t s
W a i v e r r e q u e s t e d . O p e r a t i n g c o s t / h r
a b o v e P I P t a r g e t d u e t o a d d i t i o n a l
s e r v i c e s o n , t h e I E O C l i n e a n d c h a n g e
i n c o s t a l l o c a t i o n p l a n .
N o t e : M u s t m e e t a t l e a s t 3 o u t o f 8 D i s c r e t i o n a r y P e r f o r m a n c e
" B a s e d o n F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 3 r d q u a r t e r a c t u a l s
I n d i c a t o r s
L e g e n d : J = I n C o m p l i a n c e
0 = N o t i n C o m p l i a n c e
A s o f 5 / 1 6 / 2 0 0 5
P I P P e r f o r m a n c e T a r g e t s F Y 0 6 / 0 7
Data Elements
Corona Systemwide Performance Targets
FY 2006107 Short Range Transit Plan Review
FY 2006/07 SRTP
Plan (Proposed)'
Unlinked Passenger Trips
Passenger Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours
217,400
943,490
Total Actual:_ Vehicle; Revenue_ Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Miles
33,596
433,,220
460740
Total Operating Expenses_ ",,
TotalPassenger` Fare Revenue
Net Operating Expenses;
` ;$1 802,500
$234,100
$1,568,400
FY 2006/07
Target'
FY 2006/07
Scorecard
Productivity Performance
Summary
Performance Indicators
Mandatory:
1: Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour
2. Farebox Recovery Ratio
$53.65
12:99%
$50.54
20.00%
0
0
Fails 2 of 2 mandatory
Indicators a/
Discretionary:
1. Subsidy Per Passenger
2. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile
3. Subsidy Per Hour '.
$7.21
St.66
$46.68
$5.41-$7.31
61.24-$1.68
$35.75-$47.85
J
J"
J:
4. Subsidy Per Mile
5.' Passengers; Per Revenue Hour
6: Passengers -Per .Revenue Mile.
$3.62
-' 6.47
0.50
$2.64=$3:57
5.56.7.52'
0.43-0.59.
0
J
"Meets RCTC PIP Program::
Meets 5 of 6 discretionary
Indicators
Operator Comments
Waiver is requested for Operating
Cost/hour due to increasing cost
of fuel.
Although. Corona does not meet
the farebox recovery ratio, general
fund money will be used to •
supplement the farebox. (See
footnote below)..';
Note:. Must meet at (east 3 out of 6 DiscreGonaryPerformance Indicators '
Legend " d' ='In Compliance
0 =_Not in "Compliance-'
` Based on FY 2005/06 3rd quarter actuals .
City General Funds and otherpermitted revenues will be used to make up the difference to meet mandatory 20% Farebox Recovery; ratio.
As of 5/16/2006
PIP Performance Targets i/07
PINTA Systemwide Performance Targets
FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan Review
, Data Elements
Unlinked Passenger Trips
FY 2006/07 SRTP
Plan (Proposed)
Passenger Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Miles
Total Operating Expenses
Total Passenger Fare Revenue
Net Operating Expenses
Performance Indicators
54,292
211,392
13,953
211,392
237,450
$810,575
$84,500
$726,075
FY 2006/07
Target*
FY 2006/07
Scorecard
Productivity
Performance Summary
•
Mandatory:
1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour
_2. Farebox Recovery Ratio
558:09
10.42%
$59,581 J .
10.00°10 .- - J
Meets 2 of 2 mandatory
indicators
Discretionary:
1. Subsidy Per Passenger
$13.37
$8.23-611.13
0
2. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile
3. Subsidy Per Hour
$3.43
$52.04
$1.71-$2.32
$43.86459.34
0
J
4. Subsidy Per Mile
$3.43
$2.53-$3.43
J
5. Passengers Per Revenue Hour
3.89
4.53-6.13
0
6. Passengers Per Revenue Mile
0.26
0.26-0.35
J
•MestsRCTCPIP Program:
Meets 3 of,6 discretionary ,
indicators
Operator Comments
Note: Must meet at least 3 out of 6 Discretionary Performance Indicators
* Based on FY 2005/06 3rd quarter actuals
Legend: J = In Compliance
O = Not in Compliance
As of 5/16/2006
PIP Performance Targets FY 06/07
Data Elements
Unlinked Passenger Trips
Riverside Special_ Services Performance Targets
FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan Review
FY 2006/07 SRTP
Plan (Proposed)
156,899
Passenger Miles
Total Actual VehicleRevenueHours -
Total Actual -Vehicle Revenue Miles
647,955
_ 39,138
662;706
Total Actual Vehicle Miles
Total Operating; Expenses
Total Passenger. Fare Revenue
Net Operating Expenses
Performance indicators
692,925
$2,626,840
$263;000
$2,363,840
FY 2006/07, .
Target'
FY 2006/07
Scorecard'
Productivity Performance
Summary
Mandatory: -
Operator Comments
1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour
2. Farebox Recovery Ratio
$67.12
10.01 %
$67.98
10.00%
J
Meets 2 of 2 mandatory
indicators
Discretionary: .
1: Subsidy Per Passenger
2. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile
3. Subsidy Per Hour
4. Subsidy Per Mile
5. Passengers Per Revenue Hour .
6. Passengers Per Revenue Mile
$15.07
$3.65
$60.40
$3.57
4.01
0.24
$12.49-$16.90
$3.1 T-$4;29
$50.09-$6776
$3.03-$4.10
3.41-4.61
0.21-0.28
Note: Must meet at least 3 out of 6 Discretionary Performance Indicators.
•,Based on FY.2005/06 3rd-quarter actuals .
J_
J:
J
J-
J
Meets ROTC PIP Program:
Meets 6 of 6 discretionary
indicators
Legend: -'= In Compliance
0 = Not in•Conipliance
As of 5/16/2006
,PIP Performance TargetsFy /07
"
R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y P e r f o r m a n c e T a r g e t s
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n R e v i e w
D a t a E l e m e n t s
U n l i n k e d P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 S R T P
P l a n ( P r o p o s e d )
7 , 1 4 2 , 5 8 9
P a s s e n g e r M i l e s
T o t a l A c t u a l V e h i c l e R e v e n u e H o u r s
T o t a l A c t u a l V e h i c l e R e v e n u e M i l e s
T o t a l A c t u a l V e h i c l e M i l e s .
T o t a l O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s
T o t a l P a s s e n g e r F a r e R e v e n u e
N e t O p e r a t i n g E x p e n s e s
P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s
4 8 , 6 1 4 , 0 4 6
6 0 0 , 4 1 4
9 , 6 3 8 , 7 8 1
1 1 , 1 5 2 , 9 1 9
$ 4 3 , 6 6 5 , 6 9 7
$ 7 , 4 4 7 , 9 1 9
$ 3 6 , 2 1 7 , 7 7 8
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
T a r g e t *
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 "
S c o r e c a r d
P r o d u c t i v i t y P e r f o r m a n c e
S u m m a r y
M a n d a t o r y :
1 . O p e r a t i n g C o s t P e r R e v e n u e H o u r
$ 7 2 . 7 3
$ 6 9 . 2 0
0
2 . F a r e b o x R e c o v e r y R a t i o
1 8 . 1 3 %
1 7 . 6 5 % E l
F a i l s 1 o f 2 m a n d a t o r y
i n d i c a t o r s
D i s c r e t i o n a r y :
1 . S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r
2 . S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r M i l e
$ 5 . 0 7
$ 0 . 7 5
$ 4 . 0 7 - $ 5 . 5 0
$ 0 . 6 0 - $ 0 . 8 1
J
3 . S u b s i d y P e r H o u r
' $ 6 0 . 3 2
$ 4 6 . 4 5 - $ 6 2 : 8 5
J
4 . S u b s i d y P e r M i l e
$ 3 . 7 6
$ 2 , 8 8 - $ 3 . 9 0
J
5 . P a s s e n g e r s P e r R e v e n u e H o u r
1 1 . 9 0
9 . 7 1 - 1 3 . 1 3
J ��
6 . P a s s e n g e r s P e r R e v e n u e M i l e
0 . 7 4
0 . 6 0 - 0 . 8 1
M e e t s R C T C P I P P r o g r a m :
. M e e t s 8 o f 8 d i s c r e t i o n a r y -
i n d i c a t o r s
O p e r a t o r C o m m e n t s
R e q u e s t i n g a w a i v e r f o r O p e r a t i n g
C o s t / R e v H o u r t o r e s e t t a r g e t t o
p r o p o s e d $ 7 2 . 7 3 O C P R d u e t o
i n c r e a s e i n c o s t s i n e x c e s s o f C P I
o f 4 . 1 % . P a g e 6 a n d T a b l e 8 o f
S R T P i d e n t i f i e s t h e s e c o s t s . '
N o t e : M u s t m e e t a t l e a s t 3 o u t o f 6 D i s c e t l o n a r y P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s
* B a s e d o n F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 3 r d q u a r t e r a c t u a l s
a / B l e n d e d f a r e b o x c a l c u l a t i o n . T h i s f a r e b o x r a t i o d o e s n o t t i e t o S R T P T a b l e 3 :
L e g e n d : J = I n C o m p l i a n c e
0 = N o t i n C o m p l i a n c e
A s o f 5 / 1 6 / 2 0 0 6
P I P P e r f o r m a n c e T a r g e t s F Y 0 6 / 0 7
Data Elements
SunLine Transit Agency Performance Targets
FY 2006/07 Short Range Transit Plan Review
FY 2006/07 SRTP
Plan (Proposed)
FY 2006/07
Target`
FY 2006/07
Scorecard
Productivity Performance
Summary
Unlinked Passenger Trips
Passenger- Miles
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours.
Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles -
Total`Actual'Vehicle Miles
Total Operating Expenses
Total Passenger Fare Revenue
Net Operating Expenses
3,500,429
21,767,841
181,316
2A36;817
2,718,264
$19,090,505
$3 300,000
$15,790,505
Performance Indicators
Mandatory:'
Operator Comments
1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour
2. FareboxRecovery Ratio -
Discretionary:
$105.29
17.29%
$110.72
17.14%81
J
J
Meets 2 of 2 mandatory
'indicators
1. Subsidy Per Passenger
2. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile
3: Subsidy Per Hour
4. Subsidy .Per <Mile
$4.51
$0.73
$87.09
63.74-$5.06
$0.44-60.60
$76.44-$103:42
-_$5.61-$7.60
J
4
-5'Passengers Per RevenueHour
6. Passengers Per Revenue Mile
- 19.31
1A4
17.38-23.51
1.28-1.73
J.
Meats RCTC PIP. Program:
.Meets 5 of 6 discretionary
indicators
Note:' Must meet at least out of 6 Discretionary Performance Indicators
` Based on FY 2005/06 3rd quarter actuals
a/ Blended farebox calculation. This farebox ratio does not tie to SRTP:Table 3:
Legend_: 4 = In Compliance
0 = Not in Compliance -,
As of 5/16/2006
PIP Performance Targets F /07 • -
AGENDA ITEM 10
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
May 22, 2006
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation
Advisory Council and Tanya Love, 'Program Manager
THROUGH
Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director
SUBJECT:
Palo Verde Valley - ,FY 2006/07 Unmet Transit Needs Hearing
CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY COUNCIL AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Reaffirm the Commission's definition of "Unmet Transit Needs" and
"Reasonable to Meet" standards;
2) Make a finding through Resolution No. 06-011 that based upon a
review of the requests for services received through the "Unmet
Transit Needs Hearing" process, review of existing services and
proposed improvements to the available services, there are no unmet
transit, needs which can be reasonably met in the Palo Verde Valley;
and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State law requires that prior to making any allocations of Local Transportation
Funds (LTF) not directly related to public transit, the Commission must identify the
unmet transit needs in the area and determine those that are reasonable to meet.
At least one public hearing must . be heldto solicit commentson unmet transit
needs. The only area where this determination of unmet needs -is applicable is the
Palo Verde Valley where in prior years it was anticipated that not all funds would
be needed for transit. In the western County and Coachella Valley, all available
local transit funds are being used for transit service. In FY 2002/03, $566,282
was reallocated from transit to Streets and Roads. For FY 2003/04 and FY
2004/05, no LTF funding was allocated for Streets and Roads use as all available
funds were used for transit services in the Palo Verde Valley. Unfortunately,
although all available funds were spent on transit, 'ridership did not significantly
increase and resulted in lack of fare box compliance in FY 2003/04. In FY
2005/06 and FY 2006/07, it is anticipated that some funding may be available for
Street and Road purposes although the majority, of available funds will be spent on
operating and capital improvements for transit:
75
The Commission held a public hearing in Blythe on March":1, 2006. Commissioners
Robert Crain, Joseph' DeConinck; and Roy Wilson, together with Sherry
Thibodeaux, CAC/SSTAC member, and Les Nelson, City Manager, City of Blythe '
and General Manager, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency acted as. the hearing
board. Notice of the hearing was advertised in. the Desert Sun, Palo Verde Valley
Times and the Riverside Press Enterprise. Notices of the hearing were delivered
and posted at the Blythe Police Department, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency
Office, City of Blythe Administrative Offices, Palo Verde College and the Riverside
CountyDepartment of Public Social Services. Flyers in both 'English and Spanish
were posted on the transit vehicles and made available to the .riders. _A total of
three people testified at the hearing and one written statement was received
regarding transit service needs in the area.
Attachment 1 is a summary of the comments received. Staff worked with the city
of Blythe to determine what improvements were reasonable to meet based on the
projected productivity. Based on the public hearing, ,the following information
provides an update as to possible implementation of additional transit ,services in
the Palo Verde Valley.
■ Request for fixed route service on Saturday
A; written request was received for fixed route service on Saturday. It
should be noted that Saturday service is. provided from 8:00 a.m. to
3:00 p.m.
Requests for dial -a -ride transportation with a timely return trip home.
PVVTA staff met with the individual making this request to explain the
dial=a-ride scheduling process.. In addition, transit staff made a
notation on his computer scheduling screen to provide additional
assistance to the individual making this request.
Request for increased fixed route frequency on Hobsonway with" timed
transfers to Ripley
Transit staff is in the process of analyzing and developing a possible
route that :will provide more frequency along Hobsonway between
Lovekin ;and, Intake ,Boulevard: In the interim, transfers to and, ;from
Ripley from the fixed, route to dial' a -ride are made at various times
throughout the 'clay afthe Greyhound Transit Center.
■ Request for service to/from the Ripley Farm Labor Center
Riverside Housing Authority (RHA) is remodeling the Ripley Farm Labor:
,Center and as a result requested transportation for potential renters.
76
"
T h e h o u s i n g p r o j e c t w i l l n o t b e c o m p l e t e d u n t i l M a r c h 2 0 0 7 a n d s t a f f
i s w o r k i n g t o d e t e r m i n e t h e f e a s i b i l i t y o f p r o v i d i n g f i x e d r o u t e s e r v i c e ,
a s u b s c r i p t i o n s e r v i c e o r m o r e f r e q u e n t d i a l - a - r i d e s e r v i c e t o R i p l e y .
T r a n s i t s t a f f w i l l c o n t i n u e t o w o r k w i t h t h e R H A s t a f f t o d e t e r m i n e t h e
f e a s i b i l i t y o f m e e t i n g t h i s t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e q u e s t .
P r i o r t o a l l o c a t i n g a n y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e v e l o p m e n t A c t ( T D A ) f u n d s f o r S t r e e t a n d
R o a d p u r p o s e s , t h e C o m m i s s i o n m u s t a d o p t b y r e s o l u t i o n a f i n d i n g t h a t t h e r e a r e
n o u n m e t t r a n s i t n e e d s t h a t c a n b e r e a s o n a b l y m e t b y e x i s t i n g o r p r o p o s e d s e r v i c e
c o n t a i n e d i n t h e S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . T h e C o m m i s s i o n
p r e v i o u s l y a d o p t e d a d e f i n i t i o n o f " U n m e t T r a n s i t N e e d s " a n d " R e a s o n a b l e t o
M e e t . " T h e d e f i n i t i o n s a r e a s f o l l o w s :
" U n m e t T r a n s i t N e e d s a r e , a t a m i n i m u m , t h o s e p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o r
s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s t h a t a r e i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e R e g i o n a l S h o r t
R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n R e p o r t , a n d t h e R e g i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n ( R e g i o n a l
M o b i l i t y P l a n ) t h a t h a v e n o t b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d o r f u n d e d . "
" R e a s o n a b l e t o m e e t s h a l l i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s : c o m m u n i t y .
a c c e p t a n c e , t i m i n g , e q u i t y , e c o n o m y ( b o t h s h o r t t e r m a n d l o n g t e r m ) , a n d
c o s t e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n c l u d i n g t h e a b i l i t y t o m e e t t h e r e q u i r e d f a r e b o x r a t i o s . "
I n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e U n m e t T r a n s i t N e e d s H e a r i n g w a s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C A C / S S T A C
a t i t s M a y 1 0 , 2 0 0 6 m e e t i n g . A f t e r r e v i e w o f P V V T A ' s S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n ,
m e m b e r s o f C A C / S S T A C r e c o m m e n d e d a p p r o v a l o f t h i s a g e n d a i t e m a n d c o n c u r r e d
t h a t t h e r e w e r e n o u n m e t t r a n s i t n e e d s w h i c h c a n b e r e a s o n a b l y m e t i n t h e P a l o .
V e r d e V a l l e y .
A t t a c h m e n t : R e s o l u t i o n N o . 0 6 - 0 1 1
S u m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s
7 7
"
R E S O L U T I O N N O . 0 6 - 0 1 1
R E S O L U T I O N O F T H E R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
A D O P T I N G A F I N D I N G T H A T T H E R E A R E N O U N M E T T R A N S I T N E E D S T H A T A R E
R E A S O N A B L E T O M E E T I N T H E P A L O V E R D E V A L L E Y A R E A
W H E R E A S , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s i d e n t i f i e d t h e t r a n s i t n e e d s o f r e s i d e n t s i n
t h e P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y a r e a , i n c l u d i n g t h e n e e d s o f s e n i o r s , p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s
a n d t h e t r a n s i t d e p e n d e n t ; a n d
W H E R E A S , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s h e l d a p r o p e r l y n o t i c e d p u b l i c h e a r i n g o n
M a r c h 1 , 2 0 0 6 , a n d s o l i c i t e d w r i t t e n c o m m e n t s , t o g a t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n t o a s s i s t i n
i d e n t i f y i n g u n m e t t r a n s i t n e e d s i n t h e P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y a r e a ; a n d
W H E R E A S , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s d e f i n e d " U n m e t T r a n s i t N e e d s " a s , a t a
m i n i m u m , t h o s e p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o r s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s t h a t a r e
i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e R e g i o n a l S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n R e p o r t , a n d t h e R e g i o n a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n ( R e g i o n a l M o b i l i t y P l a n ) t h a t h a v e n o t b e e n i m p l e m e n t e d o r
f u n d e d ; a n d
W H E R E A S , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s d e f i n e d " r e a s o n a b l e t o m e e t a s i n c l u d i n g
t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s : c o m m u n i t y a c c e p t a n c e , t i m i n g , e q u i t y , e c o n o m y ( b o t h s h o r t
t e r m a n d l o n g t e r m ) , a n d c o s t e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n c l u d i n g t h e a b i l i t y t o m e e t t h e
r e q u i r e d f a r e b o x r a t i o s ; a n d
W H E R E A S , p u r s u a n t t o C a l i f o r n i a P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s C o d e s e c t i o n 9 9 4 0 1 . 5 , t h e
C o m m i s s i o n h a s c o n s u l t e d w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y
C o m m i t t e e / S o c i a l S e r v i c e s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d v i s o r y C o u n c i l r e g a r d i n g t h e t r a n s i t
n e e d s o f t h e P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y a r e a ; a n d
W H E R E A S , a n a n a l y s i s o f t h e e x i s t i n g p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s ( D i a l - A -
R i d e a n d F i x e d R o u t e ) i n t h e P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y h a s b e e n c o m p l e t e d a n d w i t h t h e
p l a n n e d i m p r o v e m e n t s t h a t w i l l b e , i n c l u d e d i n t h e F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n , w a s f o u n d t o b e a d e q u a t e t o m e e t t h e
n e e d s o f s e n i o r s , p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s , t h e t r a n s i t d e p e n d e n t a n d t h e g e n e r a l
p u b l i c .
7 8
NOW, THEREFORE; the Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby
resolves: .
That the Commission adopts the finding that there are no unmet transit
needs in the Palo" Verde Valley area of Riverside County that are reasonable to
meet.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of June 2006.
Marion Ashley, Chair
Riverside ° County Transportation Commission
Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board
Riverside County Transportation Commission
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 U N M E T T R A N S I T N E E D S H E A R I N G
B l y t h e C i t y H a l l
M a r c h 1 , 2 0 0 6
S u m m a r y o f O r a l T e s t i m o n y a n d S t a f f R e s p o n s e s
N A M E
S U M M A R Y O F
C O M M E N T S
S T A F F R E S P O N S E
W i l l i a m B r o o k s
R e s i d e n t , .
B l y t h e ; C a l i f o r n i a
R e q u e s t e d f i x e d r o u t e
s e r v i c e o n S a t u r d a y
F i x e d r o u t e s e r v i c e i s
p r o v i d e d o n S a t u r d a y
f r o m 8 : 0 0 a . m . t o 3 : 0 0
p . m .
J a m e s W . C u r r e n t
R e s i d e n t ,
R i p l e y , C a l i f o r n i a .
W a n t s d i a l - a - r i d e
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h a
t i m e l y r e t u r n t r i p h o m e
T h e D i a l - a - R i d e
c o m p u t e r s c h e d u l i n g
p r o g r a m w a s n o t e d w i t h '
a s c r e e n p r o m p t t o
p r o v i d e M r . C u r r e n t a
r e t u r n r i d e i n a t i m e l y
m a n n e r . S t a f f h a s
s p o k e n w i t h M r . C u r r e n t `
a n d t o g e t h e r c a m e u p
w i t h a b e t t e r s c h e d u l e f o r
h i s t r i p s o n t h e D A R .
M a r y o n D e n t o n
R e s i d e n t ,
B l y t h e , C a l i f o r n i a
W a n t s i n c r e a s e d f i x e d
r o u t e f r e q u e n c y o n
H o b s o n w a y w i t h t i m e d
t r a n s f e r s t o R i p l e y .
S t a f f i s i n t h e p r o c e s s o f
a n a l y z i n g a n d d e v e l o p i n g
a p o s s i b l e r o u t e t h a t
w o u l d p r o v i d e m o r e
f r e q u e n c y a l o n g
H o b s o n w a y b e t w e e n
L o v e k i n a n d I n t a k e B l v d .
C u r r e n t l y t r a n s f e r s t o a n d
f r o m R i p l e y f r o m t h e f i x e d
r o u t e t o D i a l - A - R i d e a r e
m a d e a t v a r i o u s t i m e s
t h r o u g h o u t t h e d a y a t t h e
G r e y h o u n d T r a n s i t
C e n t e r .
I f a n e w r o u t e i s
d e v e l o p e d a s o u t l i n e d
a b o v e i t c o u l d
i n c o r p o r a t e t r i p s t o R i p l e y
p r o v i d i n g f i x e d r o u t e
s e r v i c e t o R i p l e y .
1
8 0
NAME °
SUMMARY OF
COMMENTS
STAFF RESPONSE '. ''
Diana Weller .
Riverside Housing
Staff'has met with Ms..
Resident,
Authority is remodeling
Weller about the
Indio, California
the Ripley Farm Labor
transportation needs in
Center and as a result,
wants transportation for
Ripley. She has ,
submitted a list of 36 . ..;
the 76 rental units.
names that currently',,
need better .
transportation to Blythe._
The housing;' project will ;
not be completeduntil .
March 2007 and staff is
working to determine the
feasibility of a fixed route:
.service to Ripley,'a , _
subscription service, Or,
more frequent Dial -A- ,
Ride servicethrough
scheduling. Future
meetings are planned
with Ms. Weiler and the
Ripley CSA on
addressing the
transportation needs in
that area.
" A G E N D A I T E M 1 1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
May 22, 2006
TO:
Plans and Programs Committee
FROM:
Citizens' Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation
Advisory Council and Tanya Love, Program Manager
THROUGH
Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director
SUBJECT:
FY 2006/07 - FY 2008/09 Short Range Transit Plans
CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION
ADVISORY COUNCIL AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Review and approve, in concept, the FY 2006/07 - FY 2008/09 Short
Range Transit Plans for the cities of Banning, Beaumont (collectively
Pass Transit System), Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit
Agency, . Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency and
RCTC's Regional Rail program, as presented; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Riverside County FY 2006/07 - FY 2008/09 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP)
cover the three apportionment areas of the county and are comprised of plans for
the municipal operators, the Palo' Verde Valley Transit Agency, the Riverside
Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency, and RCTC's Regional Commuter Rail
program. The SRTPs were prepared by the transit operators (bus and commuter
rail) using the Commission's Productivity Improvement Program which established
mandatory and discretionary performance targets for the operators to meet in order
to ensure that transit services in Riverside County are maximized.
Although the SRTPs provide the basis for allocation of funds for both operating and
capital costs, staff is requesting that the plans be approved in concept only as
requests for' financial , allocations for FY 2006/07 will be made at the July
Commission meeting.
82
The following provides'6 summary of the SRTP service highlights proposed ,in the
FY 2006/07 through FY 2008/09 SRTPs
City of Banning and City of Beaumont (Pass Transit System)
Previously, the ' Commission approved funds to evaluate the development of ' a
regionalized transit system in the Pass Area based on geographic rather than city
boundaries. The concept was based on the idea that the Banning Municipal Transit
System and the; Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency (two ,independenttransit
systems) would be coordinated to present the appearance of a single trarisit-system
to customers 'and 'the public.
The coordinated service area of Pass Transit includes the cities of Banning; .and
Beaumont, the unincorporated areas of Cabazon and ` Cherry Valley, and the
commercialareaof the Morongo Band of Mission, Indians Reservation. 'Both fixed
route and dial--a-ride services are provided throughout the Pass Area.;;
A result of the Pass Area Transit Study is the closer coordination of service
between the Banning Municipal Transit System.and the Beaumont Municipal Transit
Agency. As the Pass. Transit 'System continues to evolve, it is anticipated that
adjustments intended to improve service will continue and be reflected in future
plans. While .,the new Pass Transit System is a single seamless transit system:to
the public, it is two independent transit systems operated by two different
administrators and overseen by two different policy boards: When the Pass Area
Transit Plan was adopted it was anticipated that at some 'future ;date, the two
systems would combine into a, single system (single administrator and single policy
board): During FY 2006/07, transit staff will continue researching and, developing
the proposal to combine the two transit agencies into a single agency.'Proposed
changes will be presented to, the Commission for final review.
In addition_ to the potential merger,' following are the highlights of the SRTP for the
Pass Transit System:
• . Both dial -a -ride, and'.fixed route services will continue ,to be provided
seven days a week. 'Service will be. provided: from 6:00 a.m. to" 7:00
p.m: which reflects an increase in service hours;
• Implementation of the Commercial Trunk . Line in the ` Pass Area
connects the two fixed route systems together and provides services
from Beaumont/Cherry Valley to Banning/Cabazon;
• -Implementation[ ..of new- Pass Transit Guide;
• Completion of the implementation of the new Pass Transit Graphics on :-
buses in order to provide branding of the bus fleets ,for the cities of
Banning and Beaumont Transit System;
83
"
" A n o u t r e a c h t o m a j o r e m p l o y e r s i n t h e P a s s A r e a w a s i n i t i a t e d i n
M a r c h 2 0 0 6 w i t h t h e o p e n i n g o f W a l - M a r t i n B e a u m o n t . T h i s p r o g r a m
o f f e r s f r e e p a s s e s t o e n c o u r a g e e m p l o y e e s t o t r y ' t a k i n g t h e t r a n s i t
s y s t e m t o w o r k . T h e o u t r e a c h t o W a l - M a r t e m p l o y e e s w a s s u c c e s s f u l
w i t h r o u g h l y . . 2 0 % o f t h e f r e e p a s s e s b e i n g u s e d . T h i s o u t r e a c h
p r o g r a m w i l l c o n t i n u e i n F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 ;
T h e c i t y o f B e a u m o n t h a s c o n t i n u e d i t s o u t r e a c h p r o g r a m t o s c h o o l s ;
B a n n i n g w i l l b e g i n a s i m i l a r o u t r e a c h p r o g r a m i n F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 ; a n d
" I n a n a t t e m p t t o m a k e t h e t r a n s i t s y s t e m e a s i e r t o u s e i n F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7
t h e c i t y o f B a n n i n g w i l l p o s t r o u t e s c h e d u l e s a n d s y s t e m m a p s a t b u s
s t o p s t h r o u g h o u t t h e c i t y .
C i t y o f C o r o n a :
T h e c i t y o f C o r o n a ( C o r o n a ) o p e r a t e s a g e n e r a l p u b l i c d i a l - a - r i d e p r o g r a m a s w e l l a s .
f i x e d r o u t e s e r v i c e s k n o w n a s t h e " C o r o n a C r u i s e r . " C o r o n a c l o s e l y c o o r d i n a t e s a l l
t r a n s f e r s w i t h b o t h R T A a n d R C T C ' s C o m m u t e r R a i l s e r v i c e s .
F o l l o w i n g a r e h i g h l i g h t s o f C o r o n a ' s s e r v i c e s f o r F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 :
" C o r o n a w i l l c o n t i n u e t o m a i n t a i n c u r r e n t l e v e l s o f s e r v i c e , b u t
c o n s i d e r i n g r o u t e c h a n g e s i f n e c e s s a r y , t o b e t t e r s e r v e t h e
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n n e e d s o f r i d e r s ; a n d
�% A s y s t e m w i d e o n - b o a r d t r a n s i t s u r v e y w i l l b e c o n d u c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e
i f t h e r e i s a n e x i s t i n g d e m a n d f o r S u n d a y s e r v i c e .
C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l S e r v i c e s :
R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l S e r v i c e s ( R S S ) o p e r a t e s a S e n i o r s a n d P e r s o n s w i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s
d i a l - a - r i d e p r o g r a m . . S e r v i c e i s p r o v i d e d w i t h i n t h e R i v e r s i d e c i t y l i m i t s . T h e s p e c i a l
s e r v i c e s p r o g r a m f u n c t i o n s a s a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o R T A ' s f i x e d r o u t e s y s t e m f o r
s e n i o r s a n d p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s u n a b l e t o u s e f i x e d r o u t e s e r v i c e . A l l s e r v i c e s
o p e r a t e d b y R S S a r e c l o s e l y c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h R T A .
F o l l o w i n g a r e t h e h i g h l i g h t s o f s e r v i c e s p l a n n e d f o r F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 :
E f f e c t i v e J u l y 1 , 2 0 0 6 , a p a s s e n g e r f a r e i n c r e a s e w i l l b e m a d e a s
f o l l o w s :
o $ 2 . 0 0 f o r s e n i o r / d i s a b l e d ; a n d
o $ 1 7 5 . 0 0 m o n t h l y f a r e f o r s u b s c r i p t i o n s e r v i c e
T h e f a r e i n c r e a s e i s n e c e s s a r y t o k e e p u p w i t h r i s i n g f u e l c o s t s a s w e l l
a s t o m e e t t h e s t a t e - m a n d a t e d f a r e b o x r e c o v e r y r a t i o o f 1 0 % ;
8 4
A new scheduling/dispatching software will !be; fully implemented in FY
2006/07. The new software and technology •will increase passenger
ridership and improve efficiencies of service; and
A marketing outreach campaign to educate and promote service to
senior centers and complexes will continue during the fiscal year.'
Palo Verde Valley: Transit Agency:
The .Palo Verde .Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA) provides a multitude of services
including fixed route, dial -a -ride, and a transportation reimbursement program (for
individuals that cannot ride the public bus system). Service is.provided within the
city of Blythe and surrounding unincorporated county areas in the Palo Verde
Valley.
Following are the highlights .of PVVTA's services:
PVVTA's service is known as the Desert Roadrunner ;and operates,.:
three deviated fixed routes and a general "public/ADA parat"ransit
service. Transit service continues to be provided by contract with
Transportation Concepts;
Growthin ridership is projected at 2%;
To meet farebox requirements, a fare increase will be implemented on
both dial -a -ride and fixed route;
-Some emphasis mill be placed on situating passenger amenities. (e.g.
benches, shelters; trash receptacles) at strategic locations;
Transit management will focus on system productivity, mindful of
Transportation ; Development Act requirements relative 'to ,' farebox
recovery ratio and operating cost per revenue hour; and
Agency 'will actively continue to pursue additional funding for a
Compressed Natural Gas ICNG) fueling station, in partnership with the
city of Blythe and county of Riverside.
Riverside Transit Agency:
The Riverside Transit :Agency (RTA) provides 'both local and regional transportation.
services. RTA is the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency for western
Riverside Countyand is responsible for coordinating transit services throughout the
approximately 2,500 square- mile service area, 'providing driver training; and
assistance with: grant applications.
"
T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e h i g h l i g h t s o f R T A ' s . p r o p o s e d s e r v i c e f o r F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 :
�% R T A w i l l c o n t i n u e t o m o n i t o r r i d e r s h i p . F r o m F Y 2 0 0 1 / 0 2 t o F Y
2 0 0 3 / 0 4 , R T A e x p e r i e n c e d a g r o w t h i n r i d e r s h i p ; f r o m F Y 2 0 0 3 / 0 4 t o
F Y 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 , s y s t e m w i d e r i d e r s h i p " d e c l i n e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 % f r o m
7 . 5 m i l l i o n t o 7 . 3 m i l l i o n ' r i d e r s . S y s t e m w i d e r i d e r s h i p i n F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6
i s e x p e c t e d t o c o n t i n u e i t s d e c l i n e , ' f a l l i n g b y a p p r o x i m a t e l y 6 % .
V a r i o u s e x t e r n a l . a n d i n t e r n a l f a c t o r s s u c h a s a f a r e i n c r e a s e , w e a t h e r
p a t t e r n s , e m p l o y m e n t r a t e s , a n d s e r v i c e l e v e l s a r e c u r r e n t l y b e i n g
s t u d i e d b y R T A s t a f f .
" F o r F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 , R T A i s p r o j e c t i n g a 3 % i n c r e a s e i n r i d e r s h i p b a s e d o n
s e r v i c e e n h a n c e m e n t s ;
�% P r o p o s e d s e r v i c e c h a n g e s i n c l u d e :
1 ) D u e t o l o w p r o d u c t i v i t y , t h e f o l l o w i n g r o u t e s w i l l b e
d i s c o n t i n u e d i n J a n u a r y 2 0 0 7 :
�% R o u t e 3 6 : B e a u m o n t / B a n n i n g / C a l i m e s a ;
" R o u t e 6 1 S u n C i t y S c o o t e r ; a n d
" R o u t e 2 0 4 : ` . R i v e r s i d e - M o n t c l a i r T r a n s c e n t e r c o m m u t e r
r o u t e ,
2 ) S e r v i c e m o d i f i c a t i o n s w i l l b e m a d e o n t h e f o l l o w i n g r o u t e s :
�% R o u t e 1 : M a g n o l i a C o r r i d o r ( s e r v i c e " i n c r e a s e - 8 t r i p s
d u r i n g p e a k p e r i o d s ) ;
�% , R o u t e 1 8 A : . M o r e n o V a l l e y . M a l l t o R C C / M o r e n o V a l l e y
c a m p u s ( 1 5 % s e r v i c e r e d u c t i o n ) ;
" T a x i o v e r f l o w : 3 0 % r e d u c t i o n d u e t o e f f i c i e n c y
i m p r o v e m e n t . b y n e w d i a l - a - r i d e c o n t r a c t o r ( S o u t h l a n d
T r a n s i t )
3 ) I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a n e w s e r v i c e : t h e H a r v e s t o n C o m m u n i t y i n
T e m e c u l a w i l l c o m m e n c e J a n u a r y 2 0 0 7 .
" O p e r a t i n g b u d g e t r e f l e c t s a 6 . 9 % i n c r e a s e o v e r p r o j e c t e d F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6
y e a r - e n d a c t u a l ; a n d
�% C a p i t a l b u d g e t i n c l u d e s t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f 2 3 p a r a t r a n s i t v e h i c l e s .
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y :
T h e S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( S u n L i n e ) p r o v i d e s b o t h l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s w i t h 1 2 f i x e d . r o u t e s a n d d e m a n d , r e s p o n s e d i a l - a - r i d e
s e r v i c e s k n o w n a s S u n D i a l . S u n L i n e i s t h e C o n s o l i d a t e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e
A g e n c y a n d i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r c o o r d i n a t i n g t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s i n . t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y .
S u n L i n e ' s s e r v i c e a r e a c o n s i s t s o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 , 1 2 0 s q u a r e m i l e s .
8 6
Following are the: highlights of SunLine's proposed FY 2006/07 SRTP:
• .Resources in FY 2005/06 were dedicated to the completion of a
Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA). When feasible, the
results of the recently completed study will be implemented in FY
2006/07. . Recommended service improvements, .as a ,result of the:
COA, will bebrought forward for review and consideration;
• Install more bus shelters at existing 'bus stops as well as adding new
transit' amenities such as bus benches to improve and enhance. transit
services provided in the Coachella Valley;
• Work with local jurisdictions to improve existing bus stops as "well as
to develop new bus stops throughout the valley;
Begin environmental assessment, preliminary and final 'engineering for
new administrative building;
• Evaluate existing plans and determine need to .develop new strategies
on how best to work with human service agencies to begin working
on coordinated transportation plan; and
• Research and explore the possibility of establishing a Pass Program for
college and university students in the valley.
SunLine has identified the: capital purchase of ten expansion` vehicles, in their SRTP;
however, at the time of writing this agenda item, Commission and! SunLine staffs
were in the process of identifying the actual dollar amount needed to operate the
additional services proposed` to be provided .on Routes 14, .15, 24, 30, 70, 71 and
1 1 1 Commission staff will provide a verbal report as a result of those discussions
at the Plans and Programs Committee meeting.
Regional Commuter Rail:
The Southern California Regional -Rail Authority operates seven :commuter rail lines
with 39 locomotives and 1'55 commuter rail cars. Three routes, .the Riverside to
Los Angeles Line; the r'Inland ` Empire to Orange County' Line (IE0C), and the
Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton Line (91. tine) directly; ,,serve western
Riverside County with connecting service available to destinations on .the other four
lines.
Following are the highlights of the Commuter Rail's FY 2006/07 SRTP:
Continued '-implementation - of the revised fare structure with :an j
average 5.5% fare increase in FY 2006/07;
Preliminary engineering and environmental 'clearance of the Perris
Valley Line (Riverside — Moreno Valley — Perris) Metrolink extension
project;
87 •
" I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f i n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y y e a r - r o u n d w e e k e n d
t r a i n ; a n d
" A 1 7 . 5 4 % ( $ 8 2 2 , 1 9 6 ) i n c r e a s e i n R C T C o p e r a t i n g s u b s i d y d u e t o
s e r v i c e e x p a n s i o n , i n c r e a s e s i n f u e l c o s t s , p r o p e r t y l i a b i l i t y c o s t s , a n d
m a i n t e n a n c e o f w a y c o s t s .
A t t a c h m e n t s : S R T P ' s
8 8