HomeMy Public PortalAbout07 July 20, 2006 Transit Policy77455
RECORDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TIME: 10:00 a.m.
DATE: Thursday, July 20, 2006
LOCATIONS: Conference Room C, 5th Floor
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Riverside County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, Riverside
4th District, Riverside County (Teleconference Site)
73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 222
Palm Desert, CA 92260
*** COMMITTEE MEMBERS ***
Terry Henderson, City of La Quinta, Chairman
Frank West, City of Moreno Valley, Vice -Chairman
Roger Berg, City of Beaumont
John Chlebnik, City of Calimesa
Frank Hall, City of Norco
Daryl Busch, City of Perris
Steve Adams, City of Riverside
Jeff Stone, County of Riverside
John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside
Roy Wilson, County of Riverside
*** STAFF ***
Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director
Tanya Love, Program Manager
*** AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY ***
Review items and make recommendations to the Commission on the following:
• Policy directions to prepare for transit vision
and to bring regional perspective to transit
• Monitor transit implementation
• Performance of transit operators and its services
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.
11.36.39
RIVERSIDE COUNTY 'TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
10:00. a.m.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
CONFERENCE ROOM C
Riverside County Transportation Commission
4080 Lemon Street, 5th Floor, Riverside
and
4th District, Riverside County (Teleconference Site)
73-710 Fred Waring. Drive, Suite 222
Palm Desert CA 92260
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 Board 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 (Items not listed on the agenda)
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 18, 2006
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.)
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET
JULY 20, 2006
N ME l
to 411/1s
ZA
AGENCY
0/ A 71-4
ARCO
)116-71(>>
E MAIL ADDRESS
"..4yiri{y
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Transit Policy Committee was called to order by
Vice Chair Frank West at'10:06 a.m. in the Conference Room A, County of
Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside,
California, 92501.
Z.
TRANSIT POLICY COMMITTEE
May 18, 2006
Minutes
ROLL CALL
Members Present
Steve Adams
Roger Berg
John Chlebnik
Frank Hall
John F. Tavaglione
Frank West
Roy Wilson
Members Absent
Daryl Busch
Terry Henderson
Jeff Stone*
*Commissioner Jeff Stone assigned his proxy vote to Commissioner John
Tavaglione. A letter has been filed with the Clerk of the Board.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak'from the public.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/S/C (West/Adams) to approve the January 23, 2006 minutes as
submitted.
5. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
There was a revision and addition to the Agenda Item 7, "Productivity
Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2006/07 Performance Targets".
I
Transit Policy Committee Minutes
May 18, 2006
Page 2
6. PRESENTATION: WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCILOF .GOVERNMENTS'
TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Stephanie Wiggins,' Regional Programs Director, provided background
information on the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Demonstration
Project and introduced Susan DeSantis, consultant to Western Riverside
Council of Governments (WRCOG), to present the Community and
Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process , ,(CETAP) TOD
Demonstration Project and Doug Langille from IBI Group to present the
preliminary findings as it relates to the TOD. , Stephanie Wiggins stated that
WRCOG is working with the Commission, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA),
Caltrans :and local cities within the Western Riverside County to explore
opportunities associated with TOD.
Susan DeSantis presented the TOD study, highlighting the following areas:
• Involvement with the TOD study;
• Project goals;
• The market assessments for TOD study;
• Phase I of the study that included results of the survey research;
• Phase 11 beginning in the city of Corona and city of Perris that, entails
visioning workshops and demonstration projects;
• Phase Ili beginning in September or October 2006 andthat will involve
major community outreach; and
• final report and presentation of the TOD study will conclude at the
end of February,2007.
Doug Langille provided an overview on the following items:
• Transit element components on the TOD study;
• Policy issues as the study; moves forward; and
• Ranking of transit station analysis for the opportunities of
implementation.
At ;the request of Eric Haley, Executive: Director, Susan DeSantis provided
clarification of a transit user.
Eric Haley expressed concern about moving forward in reviewing'
development proposals for Downtown Riverside and La Sierra Stations as the
Commission has taken previous ,action for the development of these centers
that did not include the TOD study outcome.
Transit Policy Committee Minutes
May 18, 2006
Page 3
Susan DeSantis indicated that a meeting has been coordinated with city of
Riverside staff to discuss the opportunity and potential coordination efforts.
She stated that the Commission, RTA and Caltrans are partners in this effort
and are participating in the study.
Discussion continued regarding the various -types of TODs including
employment, high -density, neighborhood centers as well as activity -focused
centers.
Commissioner Robin Lowe expressed concernregarding consideration for the
geographical limitations of cities as it relates to the population requirement
for ridership within one -quarter mile of a TOD and stated that the
Commission needs to respect the local jurisdictions' land use decisions as
the TOD study proceeds.
Susan DeSantis responded that the cities are leading the planning efforts and
the study team is working with city staff and city councils to guide the study
process that takes place within each city. She stated that there are different
types of TOD and there will be prototypes for the Commission to review.
Commissioner Lowe said the study indicates there are thresholds and it
appears that the thresholds have already been decided.
In response to Commissioner Lowe's concern, Doug Langille stated those are
benchmarks. An analysis will be prepared` to address the different
community environments and desires, noting that no one TOD fits all
jurisdictions.
Commissioner -Roger Berg agrees with TOD and he said it would work well in
Riverside and Corona with the rail' locations and high scale development can
be created in those areas. However, Commissioner Berg would like more.
discussion about the premium bus service and believes that this service
would work better in some of the outlying, low density areas.
Tanya ' Loved Program Manager, said that the next presentation on the
agenda will provide some `'information about the premium bus service as one
of the conceptual plans that are being developed.
Eric Haley noted that this has been discussed with Orange County and
financial commitments have been made for premium bus service between the
Counties.
Transit Policy Committee Minutes
May 18, 2006
Page 4
M/S/C (West/Adams), to receive and file a; presentation on the Western
Riverside Council of Governments: Transit Oriented Development
Demonstration Project.
7. PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2006/07
PERFORMANCE TARGETS
Tanya Love provided an overview and background information on transit
accomplishments, performance targets, and operator oversight. She stated
that the Commission set aside $400,000 for premium bus services working
with Orange. County Transportation Authority (OCTA). She: discussedthe
transit operators' Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) that establishes
objective criteria for the operators to meet because there are mandatory and
discretionary targets. Also, all of the operators are using the web -based
TransTrack program that allows the operator to enter the information at its
site and Commission staff can download the information:
In response to Commissioner Berg's question regarding the difference in
hourly. costs, Tanya Love responded that it is dependent on the density of a
service area. Additionally, the Commission does not compare one operator
to another because of the differences in service area.
M/S/C (West/Chlebnik) to:
1) Approve Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) FY , 2006/07
performance targets for the farebox recovery ratio and
discretionary indicators;
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; and
Forward to the Plans and Programs Committee , for review and
approval..
8. CONCEPTUAL PLANS; PROPOSED TRANSIT OPERATING AND .CAPITAL.
NEEDS UTILIZING MEASURE A :AND .TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT
ACT FUNDING
Tanya Love provided an overview,; on the FY 2001/03 Triennial Performance
Audit recommendation and noted that six of the seven policy issues have
been completed since the establishment of the Transit Policy Committee in
May 2004 and in six of those policies are completed and she described each
Transit Policy Committee Minutes
May 18, 2006
Page 5
of the policies. She then discussed the 2009 Measure A and Transportation
Development Act (TDA) allocations for transit including the development of
the conceptual plans for the operators.
M/S/C (West/Chlebnik) to:
1) Approve the proposed conceptual plan template for identifying
operating and capital requests for four program areas in western
Riverside County, transit in Coachella Valley and Palo Verde
Valley;
2) Direct Commission staff to work with transit operators and
program staff to develop conceptual plans for Measure A and -
TDA funding; and
3) Submit the draft conceptual plans for discussion at the next
meeting of the Transit Policy Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Transit Policy
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 a.m. The next meeting is
scheduled to be held at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, July 20, 2006.
Respectfully submitted,
\t.X` 4 p . . �•\
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
"
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
D A T E ;
J u l y 2 0 , 2 0 0 6
T O :
T r a n s i t P o l i c y 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 :
C o n c e p t u a l P l a n s : P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d C a p i t a l N e e d s
U t i l i z i n g M e a s u r e A a n d 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 F u n d i n g
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 d i r e c t s t a f f t o w o r k w i t h t h e T r a n s i t O p e r a t o r s t o
r e v i e w t h e c o n c e p t u a l p l a n s w i t h a n e m p h a s i s o n i d e n t i f y i n g :
i
" P e r f o r m a n c e m e a s u r e s w i t h a f o c u s o n i m p r o v i n g m o b i l i t y ;
" N o n - M e a s u r e A a n d T D A f u n d s t h a t c a n b e l e v e r a g e d ; a n d
" C o o r d i n a t e d t r a n s i t n e e d s .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
A t t h e M a y 1 8 , 2 0 0 6 T r a n s i t P o l i c y C o m m i t t e e ( T P C ) , C o m m i s s i o n s t a f f w a s d i r e c t e d t o
w o r k w i t h t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s a n d p r o g r a m s t a f f t o d e v e l o p a t e n - y e a r c o n c e p t u a l p l a n
i d e n t i f y i n g o p e r a t i n g a n d c a p i t a l n e e d s u t i l i z i n g M e a s u r e A a n d 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 f u n d i n g . T h e i n t e n t b e h i n d t h e c o n c e p t u a l p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s i s t o l a y
t h ' e g r o u n d w o r k f o r c r e a t i n g a v i s i o n o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . T P C
m e m b e r s m a y r e c a l l t h a t t h e c r e a t i o n o f a t r a n s i t v i s i o n w a s o n e o f t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s '
m a d e i n t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s F Y 2 0 0 1 F Y 2 0 0 3 T r i e n n i a l P e r f o r m a n c e a u d i t ' .
S i n c e t h e M a y T P C m e e t i n g , p u b l i c t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s a n d C o m m i s s i o n s t a f f h a v e i d e n t i f i e d
6 8 p r o j e c t s a s t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r d e v e l o p i n g t h e c o u n t y - w i d e t r a n s i t v i s i o n . A t t a c h m e n t
1 p r o v i d e s a s u m m a r y o f e a c h o f t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t s a n d i d e n t i f i e s b o t h t h e
a p p o r t i o n m e n t a r e a a s w e l l a s t h e p u b l i c a g e n c y p r o p o s i n g t h e p r o j e c t s . A t t a c h m e n t ` 2 i s
a c o m p l e t e p a c k e t o f t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t s ( p r e p a r e d b y a g e n c y a n d p r o g r a m s t a f f )
t o g e t h e r w i t h a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e , p r o j e c t a n d o r s e r v i c e . A t t h e t i m e o f w r i t i n g t h i s
a g e n d a i t e m , C o m m i s s i o n s t a f f w a s i n t h e p r o c e s s o f r e v i e w i n g t h e d a t a a n d c l a r i f y i n g
' " C r e a t e a V i s i o n o f T r a n s i t S e r v i c e f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y : R C T C , w o r k i n g i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e
t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s ( i n c l u d i n g M e t r o l i n k ) , s h o u l d c r e a t e a v i s i o n o f t r a n s i t s e r v i c e f o r R i v e r s i d e ' C o u n t y t h a t
e n s u r e s t h a t t h e t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s p r o v i d e s e r v i c e s t h a t m e e t t h e c o u n t y ' s t r a n s i t n e e d s a n d a d h e r e t o
a p p l i c a b l e p e r f o r m a n c e s t a n d a r d s e s t a b l i s h e d i n s t a t e l a w a n d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n . T h e v i s i o n s h o u l d
i n c l u d e a p r o c e s s t h a t i n c l u d e s i n p u t f r o m t h e o p e r a t o r s , p u b l i c p o l i c y - m a k e r s , a n d c o m m u n i t y
s t a k e h o l d e r s . T h e v i s i o n s h o u l d p r o v i d e o v e r a l l p o l i c y d i r e c t i o n i n t h e p r o v i s i o n o f a c o o r d i n a t e d
c o u n t y - w i d e t r a n s i t s y s t e m . . . . "
projected costs between data in the summary sheet compared to data contained in the
back up documentation. Changes, if any, will be identified at the July TPC meeting. '
It should be noted that due to staffing changes, the city of Corona's Transit Services was'.
unable to provide its proposed projects; however, at the time of writing this staff report,
city staff was in the process of developing its plans. In addition, while Palo Verde Valley
Transit Agency (PVVTA) provided summary sheets of its proposed projects, PVVTA did.
not provide any supporting documentation; however, at the time of preparing this staff
report, it was in the process of developing a full packet.
The following summary chart provides the number of proposed projects, by agency
together with the projected costs of the projects for FYs 2009-2019:
Number of
Proposed
Apportionment Area/Agency or Program, Projects Projected Cost
Western Riverside
City of Banning/Pass Transit 11 $ 25,910,370
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit 6 $ 21,475,000
Riverside Special Services 5 $ 44,176,098
Riverside Transit Agency 12 $ 697,298,200
RCTC's Commuter Rail 6 $ 603,251,000
RCTC's Commuter Assistance Program 1 $ 28,645,661
RCTC's Specialized Transit Program 2 $ 35,000,000
Coachella Valley
SunLine Transit Agency 14 $ 557,387,735
Palo Verde Valley
Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 11
Total: All Apportionment Areas/All
Agencies 68
It was staff's desire to present to the TPC a consensus plan for the further development
of :the county -wide transit vision; however, with an average annual, need of $2.03.5
million per year between 2009-2019, it is unlikely that there will be adequate revenue
available to fund the proposed projects ,given current revenue . streams'. The staff
recommendation seeks to outline a framework to allow the transit operators to work
together with staff to present a consensus plan. At the TPC meeting, staff will provide
an overview of the proposed projects together with, an -overview of possible revenue
sources. .
Attachments:
1) Summary Spreadsheet
2) Conceptual Plans, By Agency/Program
2 Total transit funding for FY .2006/07' is $1:38.5-:million and includes all revenues not just`
Measure A and Transportation Development Act funding. In addition, funding for the :Commuter
Assistance' Program and Specialized Transit Program for FY 2006/07 is budgeted' at approximately
$4.5 million.
Summary: Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Needs
Measure A and Transportation Development Act Funding
FY 2008/09 - 2018/2019
TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED: ALL APPORTIONMENT AREAS"
APPORTIONMENT AREA/AGENCY
$ 2,034,686,559
Total Protected Cost
WESTERN RIVERSIDE Proposed Protects) Protected Cost (Bv Agency)
City of Banning/Pass Transit Operating - Fixed Route 15,133,500
Operating - Dial -a -Ride 1,713,506
Vehicles (Replacement) - Fixed Route 2,120,000
Vehicles (Replacement) - Dial -a -Ride 235,000
Capital Equipment 400,000
Corporate Yard Transit Division Improvements 400,000
Operating Costs - Fixed Route - Expanded Hours 1,735,070
Operating Costs -Dial-a-Ride - Expanded Hours 697,689
Vehicles (Expansion) - Dial -a -Ride 70,000
Pass Transit System Transit Center 2,500,000
CJ Off -hours and Out of Service Area Medical Transportation 905,605
Total: City of Banning/Pass Transit $ 25,910,370
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
Riverside Special Services
Operating• Fixed Route 12,000,000
Operating Costs = Dial -a -Ride 7,000,000
Vehicles (Replacement) - Dial -a -Ride 600,000
Capital Equipment 200,000
Farebox Supplement - Dial -a -Ride 75,000
Vehicles (Replacement & Expansion) - Fixed Route 1,600,000
Total: City of Beaumont/Pass Transit $ 21,475,000
Operating - Dial -a -Ride 35,476,098
Capitalized Preventive Maintenance _1,000,000
Vehicles (Replacement), Dial -a -Ride 7,400,000
Capital Equipment 150,000
Locator Equipment (MDC/AVL Update of Software Technology) 150,000
Total: Riverside Special Services $ 44,176,098
Conceptual Plans
Proposed Operating Capital Needs
As of 7/14/2006
1
APPORTIONMENT AREA/AGENCY
WESTERN. RIVERSIDE
Riverside Transit 4ency
RCTC's Commuter Rail
Proposed Protects)
Operating - Bus Rapid Transit
Enhanced Commuter Link - East Corridors
Enhanced Commuter Link - West Corridors
Operations/Maintenance Facility
Transit Center Enhancements
ITS for Contracted Route Operations .
Operating - Fixed Route and Dial -a -Ride
Capitallzed,Preventive Maintenance
Transit Center Maintenance
ATIS Software Maintenance
Revenue Vehicle Replacement
Vehicle (Expansion) —Fixed Route
Total: Riverside Transit Agency
Commuter Rail Station Operations and Maintenance
Future Metrolink,Service :Levels - Operating Costs
Future Metrolink Service Levels - Capital
Perris Valley Line
Commuter Rail Station Parking Expansion
Perris Valley Line Extensions to San Jacinto/Temecula
Total: RCTC's Commuter Rail Program
RCTC's Commuter Assistance Program Riverside County COmmuter Assistance Program
Total.: RCTC's Commuter Rail Program
RCTC's Specialized Transit Program Seniors and Low Income Veterans Ride Western Riverside Fixed Route
Services 'For Free"
MObllity Management Program .
Total: RCTC's Specialized Transit Program
Protected Cost
5,600,000
16,901,000
7,717,000
15,000,000
13,500,000
6,000,000.
546,927,400
33,826,300
10,000,000
2,000,000
24,826,500
15,000,000
53,501,000
164,000,000
100,000,000
60,000,000
50,000,000
175,750,000
Total Protected Cost
(By Agency)
697,298,200
28,645,661
15,000,000
20,000,000
603,251,000
28,645,661
35,000,000
Conceptual Plans
Proposed Operating Capital Needs
As of 7/14/2006
2
•
"
A P P O R T I O N M E N T A R E A / A G E N C Y
C O A C H E L L A V A L L E Y
S u n L I n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
P r o p o s e d P r o t e c t s )
B u s R a p i d T r a n s i t / E x p r e s s B u s S e r v i c e / C o m m u t e r S e r v i c e s - C a p i t a l
B u s R a p i d T r a n s i t / E x p r e s s B u s S e r v i c e / C o m m u t e r S e r v i c e s - O p e r a t i n g
V e h i c l e s ( R e p l a c e m e n t ) - F i x e d R o u t e
C o m m u n i t y B a s e d S e r v i c e I m p l e m e n t a t i o n - C a p i t a l
C o m m u n i t y B a s e d S e r v i c e I m p l e m e n t a t i o n - O p e r a t i n g
F r e q u e n c y I m p r o v e m e n t o n L i n e 1 1 1 - C a p i t a l
F r e q u e n c y I m p r o v e m e n t o n L i n e 1 1 1 - O p e r a t i n g
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f M a r k e t - B a s e d S e r v i c e - C a p i t a l
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f M a r k e t - B a s e d S e r v i c e - O p e r a t i n g
D i s c o u n t S e n i o r F a r e s a n d A d d i t i o n a l S e r v i c e - O p e r a t i n g
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f S u b - R e g i o n a l S e r v i c e - C a p i t a l
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f S u b - R e g i o n a l S e r v i c e - O p e r a t i n g
T r a n s i t E n h a n c e m e n t P r o j e c t
T r a n s i t F a c i l i t i e s ( T r a n s f e r L o c a t i o n s , P a r k a n d R i d e L o t s a n d T r a n s i t C e n t e r s )
T o t a l : S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
P A L O V E R D E V A L L E Y
C T t P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y T r a n s i t A g e n c y O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e
O p e r a t i n g : D i a l - a - r i d e
V e h i c l e s ( R e p l a c e m e n t ) - F i x e d R o u t e
V e h i c l e s ( R e p l a c e m e n t ) - D i a l - a - R i d e
F a c i l i t y : R e l o c a t e C o r p o r a t e Y a r d
F a c i l i t y : C a p i t a l E q u i p m e n t
C N G F u e l i n g S t a t i o n
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e E x p a n d e d H o u r s
O p e r a t i n g : D i a l - a - R i d e E x p a n d e d H o u r s
V e h i c l e s ( E x p a n s i o n ) - F i x e d R o u t e
B u s S t o p A m e n i t i e s
T o t a l : P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y T r a n s i t A g e n c y
` D u e t o c h a n g e i n s t a f f , C i t y o f C o r o n a w i l l s u b m i t t h e i r t r a n s i t p l a n s a t a l a t e r d a t e .
P r o t e c t e d C o s t
1 2 , 6 4 8 , 1 5 0
1 0 9 , 3 0 5 , 0 0 0
1 3 , 9 1 2 , 9 6 5
5 , 0 5 9 , 2 6 0
4 0 , 9 3 0 , 3 1 0
7 , 1 6 7 , 2 8 5
1 0 2 , 1 4 6 , 7 8 0
2 , 5 2 9 , 6 3 0
5 7 , 2 5 5 , 0 0 0
4 6 , 8 4 5 , 0 0 0
1 1 , 3 8 3 , 3 3 5
1 3 6 , 2 0 5 , 0 2 0
1 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 1 , 3 8 6 , 5 0 0
2 , 8 3 6 , 4 2 5
7 8 1 , 8 5 0
3 8 7 , 2 0 0
1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
4 0 0 , 0 0 0
3 , 0 0 6 , 0 5 0
3 4 0 , 3 7 0
2 5 4 , 1 0 0
1 5 0 , 0 0 0
T o t a l P r o t e c t e d C o s t
( B y A g e n c y )
5 5 7 , 3 8 7 , 7 3 5
2 1 , 5 4 2 , 4 9 5
C o n c e p t u a l P l a n s
P r o p o s e d O p e r a t i n g C a p i t a l N e e d s
A s o f 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 6
3
Transit Policy Committee
July 20, 2006
Measure A and TDA Funding
Conceptual Plans:
Proposed Operating and Capital Needs
Triennial Performance
Audit Recommendation
Create a Vision of Transit Service for
Riverside County
4 The establishment of the
Transit Policy Committee
provides the institutional
means within RCTC to create
the vision.
process for input:
operators, public policy
makers and community
stakeholders
" $ 3 9 0 M W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e
�% C o m m u t e r R a i l
I n t e r c i t y B u s
$ 2 5 5 M V I O X i t r r u
�% S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t ( $ 8 5 M m i n i m u m t h r e s h o l d )
�% C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e ( $ 5 0 M m i n i m u m t h r e s h o l d )
" T D A F u n d i n g F o r m u l a
�% 7 8 % ( B u s ) 2 2 % ( R a i ! )
- T i m e l i n e t o r e v i e w i n F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8
- C h a n g e t o f o r m u l a , i f a n y , t o b e
i m p l e m e n t e d i n F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0
2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A F u n d i n g
" $ 1 8 8 M C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y
E x p r e s s e a s t - w e s t t r a n s i t r o u t e s
�% I m p r o v e / e x p a n d p u b l i c t r a n s i t a n d
s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s
D i s c o u n t f a r e s a n d e x p a n d e d s e r v i c e s f o r
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
�% B u s r e p l a c e m e n t a n d m o r e f r e q u e n t s e r v i c e
Palo Verde Valley
• Measure A funding was not identified in
2009 Expenditure Plan.. .
4 Conceptual planning will
focus on TDA funding
Conceptual Plans
(Financially Unconstrained)
1. Brief description of the proposed
transportation project
2. Goal/outcome
3. Evaluation criteria (how will agency
determine effectiveness of the project)
4. Geographical service area
5. Capital
Proposed Projects:
2009 - 2019
Number of
Proposed
Apportionment Area/Agency or Program Projects
Western Riverside
City of Banning/Pass Transit
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
Riverside Special Services
Riverside Transit Agency
RCTC's Commuter Rail
RCTC's Commuter Assistance Program
RCTC's Specialized Transit Program
Coachella Valley
SunLine Transit Agency
Palo Verde Valley
Projected Cost
11 $ 25,910,370
6 $ 21,475,000
5 $ 44,176,098
12 $ 697,298,200
6 $ 603,451,000
1 $ 28,645,661
2 $ 35,000,000
14 $ 557,387,735
Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency 11 $ 21,542,495
Total: All Apportionment Areas/All
Agencies (with the exception of City
of Corona) 68 $ 2,034,886,559
FY 2006/07 Funding
$2,034,686,559/10 years
$203.5M annual average
$138.5M
$ 4.5M
$143 OM
(All Transit Revenues)
(Commuter Assistance &
Specialized Transit)
FY 2006/07 Funding
Projected Revenue Compared to
Funds Requested (2009 — 2019)
Apportionment Areas
Western County
Commuter Rail & Public Bus
Proiected Revenue
Measure A TDA
$ 85,000,000 $ 1,010,840,431
Western County (Set Aside)
Commuter Assistance 16,666,667
Specialized Transit 28,333,333
Coachella Valley
Public Bus
Palo Verde Valley
62,666,667 277,051,941
Public Bus 20,808,341
Total_Proected
Revenue,
,095840,431
16,ii66,667
28,333,333
20;808,341
1,501,36 ,,380
Total Funds
Requested
Difference
1,392,310,668 $ (296,470,237)
28,645,661
35,000,000
(11,978,994)
(6,666,667)
557,387,735 (217,669,127)
21,542,495 (734,154)
$ 2,034,886,559 $ (533,519,179)
Highlights: Conceptual Plan
• Pass Area: Transit Center
• After hours and out of area medical
transportation
• Bus Rapid Transit
4 Western Riverside & Coachella Valley
• Commuter Link Service (Western Riv.)
4 East: 1-215 from Temecula to Riverside
3 West: 1-15 from Temecula to Corona
Highlights: Conceptual Plan
• Metrolink Services
-} Doubling of Current Services
• Perris Valley Line: Perris
• Extension of the Perris Valley Line
4 San Jacinto/Temecula
• Station Parking Expansion
• Transit Facilities (Bus & Rail)
Highlights: Conceptual Plan
ommu er ssts ance rogram:
- Rideshare Incentives
Employer Services
- Park and Ride Lots/Security
- Regional Rideshare Program
511 & Traveler Information Services
- Freeway Detection and Integration
• Specialized Transit Program:
Golden Passport and Patriot Pass Program
(Seniors and low-income veterans ride fixed route for
free)
- Mobility Management Program: Seniors & Low-
income veterans ride free, on -going niche -market
services
Summary
• Transit Vision
• Conceptual Planning
• Consensus Plan
• Leverage of Funds
• TDA & Measure A Funding (Western Riv.)
Formula: TDA
• Measure A $390M
— $50M Commuter Assistance
— $85M Specialized Transit
» Balance of $255M: Bus/Commuter Rail (?)
Staff Recommendation
Direct staff to work with transit operators
(and programmatic staff) to review
conceptual plans with a emphasis on
identifying:
• Performance measures with a focus
on improving mobility;
• Non -Measure A and TDA funds that
can be leveraged; and
• Coordinated transit needs.
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: City of Banning
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:
Project Name: Fixed Route Operating Costs (existing level of service)
Cost: $ 15,133,500.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: ten-year operating cost
Project Name: Dial -A -Ride Operating Costs (existing level of service)
Cost: $ 1,713,506.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing .
Time Line for Implementation: ten-year operating cost
Project Name: Replacement Vehicles for Fixed Route Service
Cost: $ 2,120,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: 1 - FY 2011, 2 — FY 2014, 2 — FY 2018
Project Name: Replacement Vehicles for Dial -A -Ride Service
Cost: $ 235,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: 1— FY 2010,1— FY 2015,1— FY 2016
Project Name: Capital Equipment (office, fleet, surveillance, etc)
Cost: $ 400,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: ten-year capital costs
Project Name: Corporate Yard Transit Division Improvements
Cost: $ 400,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: After FY 2010
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: $ See page 2
Measure A Funds Requested: $
TDA Funds Requested: $
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary Sheet
6
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: City ofBanning
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:
Project Name: Fixed Route Operating Costs - Expanded Hours
Cost: $ 1,735,070.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: seven-year operating cost beginning FY 2013
Project Name: Dial -A -Ride Operating Costs — Expanded Hours
Cost: $ 697,689.00
Indicate whether proposed projectisNew or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: seven-year operating cost beginning FY 2013
Project Name: Expansion Vehicles for Dial -A -Ride Service
Cost: $ 70,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation:' FY 2013
Project Name: Pass Transit System Transit Center
Cost: $ 2,500,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Yet to be determined
Project Name: Off -hours & Out of Service Area Medical Transportation
Cost: $ 905,605.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: estimated ten-year operating costs
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: $ 25,910,370.00
Measure A Funds Requested: $ 3,621,800.00
TDA Funds Requested: $ 22,188,570.00
As of 7/11/2006
Measure MIVA Summary Sheet
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 ( ' I A A )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e X
P a r a t r a n s i t D
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e O
P a r a t r a n s i t
T o t a l C o s t : $ _ 1 5 , 1 3 3 , 5 0 0 : 0 0
[ P r o j e c t N a m e : C i t y o f B a n n i n g F i x e d R o u t e O p e r a t i n g C o s t s ( e x i s t i n g l e v e l o f s e r v i c e )
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
C i t y o f B a n n i n g , P . O . B o x 9 9 8 , 9 9 E . R a m s e y S t r e e t , B a n n i n g , C A 9 2 2 2 0
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
C h r i s M i l l e n , C o m m u n i t y S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r , ( 9 5 1 ) 9 2 2 3 2 4 1 , c m i l l e n @ c i . b a n n i n g . c a . u s
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
P r o j e c t e d o p e r a t i n g c o s t s f o r P a s s T r a n s i t S y s t e m R o u t e s 1 , 5 , a n d 6 a t e x i s t i n g l e v e l o f s e r v i c e .
( E s t i m a t e d t e n y e a r o p e r a t i n g c o s t s u s i n g a 5 % p e r y e a r e s c a l a t o r . )
G o a l / O u t c o m e o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t :
S a f e , e f f e c t i v e , a n d e f f i c i e n t p r o v i s i o n o f f i x e d r o u t e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t h r o u g h o u t t h e C i t y o f B a n n i n g a n d
C a b a z o n .
E v a l u a t i o n C r i t e r i a ( I d e n t i f y L o w a g e n c y w i l l d e t e r m i n e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h i s p r o j e c t ) :
R i d e r s h i p a n d P I P p e r f o r m a n c e i n d i c a t o r s .
G e o g r a p h i c a l S e r v i c e A r e a o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
C i t y o f B a n n i n g , C a b a z o n , c o m m e r c i a l a r e a o f M o r o n g o R e s e r v a t i o n , a n d d o w n t o w n B e a u m o n t .
N u m b e r o f V e h i c l e s R e q u e s t e d ( i f a n y ) , i d e n t i f y i n g n u m b e r , e x p e c t e d m a k e / m o d e l a n d p a s s e n g e r
c a p a c i t y : I d e n t i f i e d a s c a p i t a l p r o j e c t
8
A s o f 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 1,713,506.00
IIPTOjeCt NaT11e: City of Banning Dial -A -Ride Operating Costs (existing level of service)
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Projected operating costs for Banning Dial=A-Ride at existing level of service. (Ten year operating costs
using a 5% per year escalator:)
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Safe, effective, and efficient provision ofparatransit service throughout the City of Banning and Cabazon
for the elderly, persons with disabilities, and ADA-certified passengers.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership and PIP performance indicators.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning, Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and destinations in Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/n3odel and passenger
capacity: Identified as capital project.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A TDA Summary of Proposed Project
9
Measure A and Transportation Development Act, (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $_2,120,000.00_
17)1'Oject Name: City of Banning Replacement Vehicles for Fixed Route Service
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey. Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Projected cost of replacement vehicles for existing fixed route service.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Safe, effective, and efficient provision of paratransit service throughout the City of Banning and Cabazon
for the elderly, persons with disabilities, and ADA-certified passengers.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership and PIP performance indicators.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning, Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and destinations in Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number; expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Five 35-foot transit coaches with two wheelchair tiedowns, lift/ramp, radio, and farebox,-two
driver relief vehicles (light weight trucks);and one supervisors van, wheelchair lift and tiedown egipped.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
10
Measure A and Transportation Development' Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Total Cost: $ 235,000.00
!Project Name: City of Banning Dial -A -Ride Replacement Vehicles
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey. Street, Banning; CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Projected cost of cutaway van for existing Banning Dial -A -Ride Service.
GoallOutcome of Proposed Project:
Safe, effective, and efficient provision of paratransit service throughout the City of Banning and Cabazon
for the elderly, persons with disabilities, and ADA-certified passengers.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership and PIP performance indicators.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning; Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and destinations in Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Three 12-passenger cutaway vans with 3 wheelchair tiedown stations, lift, radio, and farebcoc.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
11
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: S 400,000.00
Project Name: City of Banning Transit Capital (excluding vehicles)
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Projected ten-year capital expenses for bus stop furnishings, office furniture and egipment, vehicle shop
egipment, surveillance egipment, for the City of Banning's transit and dial -a -ride services.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Safe, effective, and efficient provision of fixed route service throughout the City of Banning and
Cabazon.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership and PIP performance indicators.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning, Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and downtown Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Vehicles are listed as a separate' capital project.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure Af1'DA Summary of Proposed Project
12
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital:: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 400,000.00
'Project Name: City of Banning Corporate Yard Improvements for Transit Services
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241,cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Transit System's portion of a renovation and new construction of the City of Banning Corporate Yard.
This is anticipated to not take place until after FY 2010: The design phase has not yet been initiated: The
project would include operations offices, additional vehicle parking (employee and transit vehicle), shared
restrooms, break room, classroom facilities. Other funding sources will be identified and solicited as the
project evolves.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
To have sufficient facilities to allow the effective and efficient operation of an expanded transit system.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership and PIP performance indicators.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning, Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and downtown Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Vehicles are listed as a separate capital project.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
13
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:`
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 1,735,070.00
[Project Name: City of Banning Fixed Route Operating Costs Expanded Hours
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Projected operating costs for expanded operating weekday hours (NI-F, 7:00 - 10.00 PM) Pass Transit
System Routes 1, 5, and 6. Implemented in FY 2013. (Estimated seven year operating costs using a 5%
escalator.)
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Safe; effective, and efficient provision of fixed route transit service throughout the City of Banning and
Cabazon.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):.
Ridership and PIP performance indicators.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning, Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and downtown Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Identified as capital project.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
14
Measure A and TransportationDevelopment Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route 0
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 697,689.00
'Project Name: City of Banning Dial -A -Ride Operating Costs -Expanded Service
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998,'99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Projected operating costs for Banning Dial -A -Ride expanded' service. Service expansion includes
additional service to meet demand of aging population and to provide complementary paratransit service
to expanded fixed route hours. (Seven year estimated costs using a 5Ver year escalator with service
starting in FY013.)
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Safe, effective, and efficient provision of paratransit service throughout the City of Banning and Cabazon
for the elderly; persons with disabilities, and ADA-certified passengers.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership and PIP performance indicators:
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning, Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and destinations in Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Identified as capital project.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
15
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t X
T o t a l C o s t : $ 7 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0
' P r o j e c t N a m e : C i t y o f B a n n i n g D i a l - A - R i d e E x p a n s i o n V e h i c l e
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
C i t y o f B a n n i n g , P . O . B o x 9 9 8 , 9 9 E . R a m s e y S t r e e t , B a n n i n g , C A 9 2 2 2 0
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
C h r i s M i l l e n , C o m m u n i t y S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r , ( 9 5 1 ) 9 2 2 - 3 2 4 1 , c m i l l e n @ c i . b a n n i n g . c a . u s
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t : .
P r o j e c t e d c o s t o f c u t a w a y v a n f o r e x p a n d e d B a n n i n g D i a l - A - R i d e S e r v i c e . ( I m p l e m e n t a t i o n y e a r : F Y
2 0 1 3 )
G o a l / O u t c o m e o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t :
S a f e , e f f e c t i v e , a n d e f f i c i e n t p r o v i s i o n o f p a r a t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t h r o u g h o u t t h e C i t y o f B a n n i n g a n d C a b a z o n
f o r t h e e l d e r l y , 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 A D A - c e r t i f i e d p a s s e n g e r s .
E v a l u a t i o n C r i t e r i a ( I d e n t i f y h o w a g e n c y w i l l d e t e r m i n e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h i s p r o j e c t ) :
R i d e r s h i p a n d P I P p e r f o r m a n c e i n d i c a t o r s .
G e o g r a p h i c a l S e r v i c e A r e a o f ' T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
C i t y o f B a n n i n g , C a b a z o n , c o m m e r c i a l a r e a o f M o r o n g o R e s e r v a t i o n , a n d d e s t i n a t i o n s i n B e a u m o n t .
N u m b e r o f V e h i c l e s R e q u e s t e d ( i f a n y ) , i d e n t i f y i n g n u m b e r , e x p e c t e d m a k e / m o d e l a n d p a s s e n g e r
c a p a c i t y : O n e 1 2 - p a s s e n g e r c u t a w a y v a n s w i t h 3 w h e e l c h a i r t i e d o w n s t a t i o n s , l i f t , r a d i o , a n d f a r e b o x .
1 6
A s o f 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: S 905,605.00
!Project Name: Off -Hour & Out of Service Area Medical Transportation
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Entail:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, cmillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
There is a need in the Pass Area for early and late transportation to and from the local dialysis center.
There is also a need among the elderly and persons with disabilities for transportation to medical facilities
out of the Pass Area (Loma Linda, VA Hospital, Eisenhower Medical Center). These trips are either
outside of the regular service hours or outside of the regular service area for the dial -a -ride service. The
above funding is a placeholder amount for a yet to be developed service to meet this need:
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
The safe, effective, and efficient provision of paratransit service for the elderly and persons with
disabilities to and from medical appointment with a reasonable amount of waiting.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership, PIP performance indicators, and customer wait time.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
City of Banning; `Cabazon, commercial area of Morongo Reservation, and destinations in Beaumont.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), id.
capacity: Identified as capital project.
tifying number, expected make/model and passenger
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
17
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 2,500,000.00
'Project Name: City of Banning Pass Transit Transit Center
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Banning, P. O. Box 998, 99 E. Ramsey Street, Banning, CA 92220
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Chris Millen, Community Services Director, (951) 922-3241, emillen@ci.banning.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
The design, land purchase, and construction of a transit center in the Pass Area. The center would serve
as the regional transfer point and local Greyhound Station. Location will give consideration to the
potential of commuter rail service to the Pass Area. (Location yet to be determined.) Alternative funding
sources will be sought. This project is years from being initiated. However, it is anticipated that the
project will be started, and likely completed before FY 2019.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed. Project:
To have sufficient facilities to allow the effective and efficient operation of an expanded transit system.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Ridership, ease of travel to and through the Pass Area, and customer feedback.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Cities of Banning and Beaumont, Cabazon, Cherry Valley, and commercial area of Morongo Reservation.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Vehicles are listed as a separate capital project.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
18
Lv �� j
�:.1;5:'.'.�j;
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:
Project Name: Operating Costs Fixed Route F/Ys 09-19
TDA Funds Cost: $12,000,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: F/Ys 09-19
Project Name: Operating Costs DAR F/Ys 09-19
Measure A Funds Cost: $7,000,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: F/Ys 09-19
Project Name: DAR Replacement Buses F/Ys 09-19
Measure A Funds Cost: $600,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: F/Ys 09-19
Project Name: Purchase of Shop and Office Equipment F/Ys 09-19
TDA Funds Cost: $200.000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: F/Ys 09-19
Project Name: Farebox Supplement DAR services of Disabled and Seniors. F/Ys 09-10
Measure A Funds Cost: $75,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: F/Ys 09-19
Project Name: Capital Costs for Three Fixed Route Replacement Buses and
One Expansion Bus
TDA Funds Cost: $1,600,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: F/Ys 09-19
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: $21,475,000
Measure A Funds Requested: $7,675,000
TDA Funds Requested: $13,800,000
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/1'1)A Summary Sheet
19
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 12,000,000
Project Name: Fixed Route and Operating Costs FYs 2009-2019
TDA Operating Costs
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit 550 East 6`s Street Beaumont, CA. 92223
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Michael Pistilli, Transit Services Manager (909) 721-6810 e-mail; mpistilli@ci.beaumont.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Operating costs for Fixed Route F/Ys 2009-2010 to 2018-2019
Note: Costs estimated a 5% increase per year ( $11507,474) than rounded up to 12,000,000
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Operating Costs to provide service for the next 10 F/Y years
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Meets all established performance guidelines set by the TDA and RCTC.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Beaumont -Cherry Valley-Banning-Cabazon
Number of Vehicles Requested Operating Costs
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
20
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please cheek:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 7,000,000
Koject Name: Measure A DAR Operating Costs Mrs 2009-2019
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit 550 East 6t Street Beaumont, CA. 92223
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Michael Pistilli, Transit Services Manager (909) 721-6810 e-mail; mpistilli@ci.beaumont.ca.us
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Operating costs for DAR services for F/Ys 2009-2010 to 2018-2019
Note: Costs estimated a 5% increase per year ( $6,819,248) and than that total rounded up.
GoallOutcome of Proposed Project:
Operating Costs to provide DAR services for the next 10 F/Y years.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Meets all established peibrmanee guidelines set by the TDA and RCTC.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Beaumont -Cherry Valley-Banning-Cabazon
Number of Vehicles Requested Operating Costs
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
21
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 600,000
Project Name: Dial -A -Ride Replacement Buses for F/Ys 2009 to 2019
Measure A Funds
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Michael Pistilli, Transit Services Manager(909) 721-6810
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Replacement of DAR buses as required per life -cycle
Farebox Supplement Measure A
Goal outcome of Proposed Project:
To ensure that disabled and seniors have affordable transportation that enables them to make essential
trips for medical and shopping.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Meets all established performance guidelines set by the TDA and ROTC.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Beaumont -Cherry Valley -Banning
Number of Vehicles Requested Eight DAR 16 Passenger buses with Wheelchair lifts
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
22
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA) '
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 200,000
Summary of Proposed Project
Project Name:
Capital Costs for Shop and Office Equipment F/Ys 2009-2010 to 2018-2019
Agency Name and Address:
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Michael Pistilli, Transit Services Manager (909) 721-6810
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Capital Costs; Purchase of Shop and Office Equipment
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Purchase of Office and Shop Equipment
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):.
Meets all established performance guidelines set by the TDA and RCTC.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Beaumont -Cherry Valley-Banning-Cabazon
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passengers N/A
As of 7/11/2006
Measure Af 1'DA Summary of Proposed Project
23
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route Q
Paratransit Q
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 75,000
Project Name: Farebox supplement for Dial -A -Ride for Disabled and
Seniors for F/Ys 2009 to 2019
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Michael Pistilli, Transit Services Manager(909) 721-6810
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
DAR services to provide transportation to disabled and seniors citizens of the Beaumont, Cherry Valley
and Banning
Farebox Supplement Measure A
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
To ensure that disabled and seniors have affordable transportation that enables them to make essential
trips for medical and shopping.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Meets all established performance guidelines set by the TDA and RCTC.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Beaumont -Chevy Valley -Banning
Number of Vehicles Requested N/A operating costs
As of 7/11/2006
Measure Af 1"DA Summary of proposed Project
24
Measure A and TransportationDevelopment Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 1,600,000
Summary of Proposed Project
Project Name:
Capital Costs for Fixed Route F/Ys 2009-2010 to 2018-2019.
Agency Name and Address:
City of Beaumont/Pass Transit
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Michael Pistilli, Transit Services Manager (909) 721-6810
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Capital Costs; Three Replacement Buses Fixed Route and One Expansion Bus. Fixed Route Bus ,
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Replacement and Expansion of Buses; Fixed Route
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):.
Meets all established performance guidelines set by the TDA and ROTC.
Buses Replaced as per required life -cycle for Fixed Route Buses
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Beaumont -Cherry Valley-Banning-Cabazon .
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passengers
3 Fixed Route buses 35 passenger and One Expansion Bus 35 passenger
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
25
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: City of Riverside Special Transportation Services
Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:
Project Name: City of Riverside Special Transportation — Operating for FY 2009 — FY 2019
Cost: $35,476,098.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Fiscal Year 2009 — FY 2019
Project Name: Capitalized Preventative Maintenance
Cost: $1,000,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Fiscal Year 2009 — FY 2019
Project Name: (74) Paratransit Replacement Veheiles
Cost: $ 7,400,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New
Time Line for Implementation: Fiscal Year 2009 — FY 2019
X Existing
Project Name: Office Furniture, Computers, Radio Communications and Miscellaneous
- Equipment,
Cost: $ 150,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Fiscal Year 2009 — FY 2019
Project Name: Locator Equipment (MDC/AVL Update of Software Technology)
Cost: $150,000.00
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Fiscal Yer 2009 — FY 2019
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: $ 44,176,098.00
Operating for Fiscal Year 2009 — FY 2019: $ 36,476,098.00
Capital for Fiscal Year 2009 — FY 2019: $ 7,700,000.00
Measure A Funds Requested: $
TDA Funds Requested: $ 44,176,098.00
(Estimated)
TDA — Measure A — Project Summary Sheet
City of Riverside Special Transportation Services
26
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/ DA Summary Sheet
"
I
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t X
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
T o t a l C o s t : $ 3 5 , 4 7 6 , 0 9 8 . 0 0
F o r O p e r a t i n g f o r F Y 2 0 0 9 t h r u F Y 2 0 1 9
P r o j e c t N a m e : O p e r a t i n g C o s t s f o r t h e C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s F Y 2 0 0 9 F Y 2 0 1 9
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s : C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s 8 0 9 5 L i n c o l n
A v e n u e , R i v e r s i d e , C A 9 2 5 0 4
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
V i c t o r i a P a z , A d m i n i s t r a t i v e A n a l y s t , ( 9 5 1 ) 3 5 1 - 6 1 8 2 - v p a z @ r i v e r s i d e c a . g o v
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
T h e C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e o p e r a t e s a 2 4 h o u r a d v a n c e r e g i s t r a t i o n d i a l - a - r i d e f o r t h e e l d e r l y 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 . T h e C i t y h a s b e e n o p e r a t i n g t h i s s e r v i c e s i n c e J u n e o f 1 9 7 5 . T h e C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s s e r v e s a s t h e u m b r e l l a f o r A D A c o m p l e m e n t a r y s e r v i c e t o R T A ' S f i x e d r o u t e
s y s t e m .
G o a l / O u t c o m e o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t :
A s p a r t o f t h e g o a l s o f t h e p r o g r a m , i t i s o u r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o i m p r o v e m o b i l i t y w h i l e a d h e r i n g t o
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( R C T C ) o v e r s i g h t o n p e r f o r m a n c e . A s p a r t o f a
c o m p r e h e n s i v e e f f o r t t o w o r k w i t h R C T C t o i m p r o v e b e t t e r s e r v i c e a n d i m p r o v e e f f i c i e n c y t h e
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o i d e n t i f y , a n a l y z e a n d p l a n o n a c t u a l p e r f o r m a n c e i n d i c a t o r s w e r e r e v i e w e d w i t h o u r
a g e n c y m e e t i n g 8 o f t h e m a n d a t o r y t a r g e t s .
A s o f 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 6
, M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
2 7
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project): •
The City of Riverside Special Transportation is required to address recommendations that are required by
the Productivity Improvement Plan that mandates 8 target requirements ranging from operating cost per
revenue hour to fare box recovery ratio. Discretionary targets such as subsidy per passenger, subsidy per
passenger miles, subsidy per revenue hour, subsidy per revenue mile, passengers per revenue hour and
passengers per revenue mile which we have met todate.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
The City of Riverside operates within the 85.6 service area miles of the City of Riverside.
Number of Vehicles Requested_ (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
As of 7/11 /2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
28
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check.
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit
Total Cost: $1,000,000.00
For Fiscal Year 2009 thru Fiscal Year 2019
Project Name: Capitalized Preventative Maintenance for the City of
Riverside Special Transportation Services - Operatin
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address: City of Riverside Special Transportation Services — 8095 Lincoln
Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Victoria Paz, Administrative Analyst, (951) 351-6182-vpaz@riversideca.gov
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Capitalized Preventative Maintenance — Periodic scheduled maintenance in keeping the vehicles in good
and safe running condition. It includes weekly brake and tire inspection, regular preventative
maintenance checkups to reduce occasions of unscheduled maintenance.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Preventative Maintenance funds needs for the vehicle operations, repairs, and parts. Funds will be used
for maintaining the vehicles in good and safe running condition.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
29
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this, project):
The City of Riverside provides specific standards and procedures in maintenance and upkeep of vehicles.
The reporting and requirements standards are maintained in the Fleet Maintenance Division of the City of
Riverside related to vehicle repairs and maintenance.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
The City of Riverside operates within the 85.6 service area miles of the City of Riverside.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/'1'1)A Summary of Proposed Project
30
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route .❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑ .
Paratransit X
Total Cost: $7,400,000.00
Project Name: (74) Paratransit Replacement Vehicles throughout the FYI
2009 — FY 2019 for the City of Riverside Special Transportation
Services
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address: City of Riverside Special Transportation Services — 8095 Lincoln
Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Victoria Paz, Administrative Analyst, (951) 351-6182 — vpaz@riversideca.gov
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
The funds will be used to Purchase 74 paratransit, lift -equipped 12 passenger alternative fuel vehicles
with fareboxes, radios, tiedowns, and video cameras. RSS has made a serious commitment to using
alternative fuel vehicles to enhance air quality benefits and help in the achievement of air quality goals in
Riverside.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Provide reliable paratransit vehicles with lift -equipped 12 passenger alternative fuel vehicles with all
equipment items for the Seniors and developmentally disabled customers of the City of Riverside who
utilize the service within the City limits.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
31
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The City of Riverside provides specific standards for vehicles that are utilized by the. customers of the
City of Riverside that meet the standards and quality of reliable and safe equipment for the Seniors and
developmentally disabled customers of the City of Riverside.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
The City of Riverside operates within the 85.6 service area miles of the City of Riverside.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: -
(74) vehicles overall throughout FY 2009 - 2019 - Eldorado Aeroti - Alternative Fuel Vehicles - 12
Passenger, Lift -equipped with radios, tiedowns, and cameras.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure Af1'DA Summary of Proposed. Project
32
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Total Cost: $150,000.00
Project Name: Office Furniture, Computers, Radio Communications and
Miscellaneous Equipment for the City of Riverside Special
Transportation Services
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address: City of Riverside Special Transportation Services — 8095 Lincoln
Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Victoria Paz, Administrative Analyst, (951) 351-6182 — vpaz@riversideca.gov
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Purchase of chairs, desk and cabinets for the Dispatch Office, bookcases and various other furniture
replacement for Special Transits administration facility, includingradio communication, computers, etc.,
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Furniture replacement program to replace and add various pieces of furniture for the administration and
dispatch facility for Special Transit.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
33
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The City of Riverside provides specific standards and maintains adequate facility equipment for the
employees of the "Transit division.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
The City of Riverside operates within the 85.6 service area miles of the City of Riverside.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
34
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Total Cost: $150,000.00
Project Name: Locator Equipment (MDC/AVL/Update of Software
Technology for the City of Riverside Special Transportation Services
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address: City of Riverside Special Transportation Services — 8095 Lincoln
Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Victoria Paz, Administrative Analyst, (951) 351-61$2 - vpaz@riversideca.gov
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Locator equipment and upgrade the Software Technology for the City of Riverside Special Transportation
Services vehicle host system for security purposes for the paratransit fleet to ensure that the vehicles are
equipped with a locator device for the purposes of security for drivers and the passengers.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Ensure that the vehicles are equipped with a locator device for the purposes of security for drivers and the
passengers for the customers of the City of Riverside.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
35
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The City of Riverside provides specific standards and security for the passengers and employees of the
City of Riverside.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
The City of Riverside operates within the 85.6 service area miles of the City of Riverside.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project:
36
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
S U M M A R Y S H E E T
A g e n c y N a m e : R I V E R S I D E T R A N S I T A G E N C Y
S U M M A R Y O F P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T S :
P r o j e c t N a m e : B U S R A P I D T R A N S I T O P E R A T I O N S
C o s t : $ 5 , 6 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 2
P r o j e c t N a m e : E N H A N C E D C O M M U T E R L I N K W E S T C O R R I D O R S
C o s t : $ 1 6 , 9 0 1 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 5
P r o j e c t N a m e : E N H A N C E D C O M M U T E R L I N K E A S T C O R R I D O R S
C o s t : $ 7 , 7 1 7 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 1
P r o j e c t N a m e : R T A O P E R A T I O N S / M A I N T E N A N C E F A C I L I T Y
C o s t : $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 2
P r o j e c t N a m e : T R A N S I T C E N T E R E N H A N C E M E N T S
C o s t : $ 1 3 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 2
P r o j e c t N a m e : I T S F O R C O N T R A C T E D R O U T E O P E R A T I O N S
C o s t : $ 6 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : . 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 2
P r o j e c t N a m e : F I X E D A N D P A R A T R A N S I T R O U T E O P E R A T I O N S
C o s t : $ 5 4 6 , 9 2 7 , 4 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : _ N e w X E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
3 7
A s o f 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
Project Name: CAPITALIZED PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
Cost: $33,826,300
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: 2009-2019
Project Name: TRANSIT CENTER MAINTENANCE
Cost: $10,000,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: 2009-2019
Project Name: ATIS SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE
Cost: $2,000,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New Existing
Time Line for Implementation: 2009-2019
Project Name: REVENUE VEHICLE REPLACEMENT (40-FT AND 32-FT BUSES)
Cost: $24,826,500
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: 2011-2015
Project Name: (20) 40-FT. BUSES FOR EXPANSION
Cost: $15,000,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing:. X New
Time Line for Implementation: 2009-2012
Existing
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: S697,298,200
Measure A Funds Requested: $85,044,500
TDA Funds Requested: $612,253,700
Note: The above projects were proposed prior to the results of Comprehensive
Operational Analysis (COA) in FY 2007.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure ATIDA Summary of Proposed Project
38
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $5,600,000
'Project Name: Bus Rapid Transit Operations
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Bus rapid transit with limited stops and frequent service along the Magnolia Avenue/6th Street corridor
from downtown Riverside to Moreno Valley corridor.
GoallOutcome of Proposed Project:
Increase travel speed and service efficiency. Provide passengers with a high quality, rapid way to travel
by elevating public transit as a more competitive, more viable option to that of single occupant
automotive travel. The service is part of a comprehensive approach to enhancing service. The other
component is the installation of necessary infrastructure such as ATIS and stop upgrades to enhance the
BRT stations and transfer points of feeder bus routes.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The use of productivity improvement program (PIP) measurements will be utilized to determine service
effectiveness. In addition contributing cost factors will also be evaluated such as administration, outside
source contracts, infrastructure and other contributing to cost.
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
39
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Moreno Valley to Corona, Western Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
12 full size CNG buses
As of 7/11/2006
Measure Af1DA Summary of Proposed Project
40
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route 0
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $16,901,000
�'inject Name: Enhanced Commuter Link — West Corridors
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstaniey@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Bus Rapid Transit along the 1-15 corridor retrofitted for signal priority. Project includes AT1S upgrades
for efficient real time operation management and customer information.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Increase travel speed and service efficiency. Provide passengers with a high quality, express way to travel
by elevating public transit as a more competitive, more viable option to that of single occupant
automotive travel.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine. effectiveness of this project):
The use of the Productivity lmprovement Program (PIP) measurements will be utilized to determine.
service effectiveness. In addition contributing cost factors will also be evaluated such as administration,
outside source contracts, infrastructure and other contributors to cost.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
I-15 corridor from Temecula to Corona— This service is anticipated to be coordinated with the
development of Metrolink routes through the county.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
(10) 40-foot CNG buses
As of7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
41
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $7,717,000
'Project Name: Enhanced Commuter Link — East Corridors
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Bus Rapid Transit along the I-215 corridor in urban areas retrofitted for signal priority. Project includes
ITIS upgrades for efficient real time operation management and customer information.
GoallOutcome of Proposed Project:
Increase travel speed and service' efficiency. Provide passengers with a high quality, rapid way to travel`
by elevating public transit as a more competitive, more viable option to that of single occupant
automotive travel.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The use of the Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) measurements will be utilized to determine
service effectiveness. In addition contributing cost fact ors will also be evaluated such as administrative;
outside source, capital and other contributors to cost.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
I-215 corridor from Temecula to Riverside: This service is anticipated to be coordinated with the
development of Metrolink routes through the county.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number; expected make/model and passenger -
capacity:
(10) 40-foot CNG buses
As of7/11/2006 6
Measure A/TDA SummaryofProposed Project
42
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $15,000,000
'Project Name: RTA Operations/Maintenance Facility
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
RTA,office facility improvements include the construction of a new Operations and Maintenance
building, expansion of bus parking, relocation of the bus wash and coin room, and repairs to pavement
and asphalt.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Reconfiguration of the facility provides greater efficiency, lower unit operation and maintenance, cost and
allows more effective growth.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Inspection checklist QA/QC process
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:-
N/A
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
N/A
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
43
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA) .
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route D
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit X -.
Total Cost: $13,500,000
Koject Name: Transit Center Enhancements
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Enhancement ofnine Transit Centers enhancements which includes landscaping, street scraping, and bus
shelters throughout Riverside, Corona, Temecula, Hemet, Moreno Valley; Banning/Beaumont, Norco,
Menifee, and Lake Elsinore.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Transit Center enhancements will improve the aesthetics and comforted in and around the transit center.
Resources also go to improving the safety and security of the center.
Evaluarion Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
QA/QC process
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside, Corona, Temecula, Hemet, Moreno Valley, Banning/Beaumont, Norco, Menifee, and Lake
Elsinore
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
N/A
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
i
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 6,000,000
Project Name: ITS for Contracted Route Operations
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
GIS unit would include state of the art technology that updates maps of the service area and locates
routes, stops, and other bus stop amenities:
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Allow staff to track trends and access information on routes and ridership easily and efficiently.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Performance measures.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:.
Western Riverside County Coverage
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
N/A
45
As of 7/11/2006
Measure Ail'DA Summary of Proposed Project
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit O
Total Cost: $546,927,400
Project Name: Fixed and Paratransit Route Operations
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:.
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, 'Lytle, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Operating assistance for fixed routes and paratransit services from 2009 to 2019.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Fully staff and train for the operational needs of fixed routes and paratransit services.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The use of the Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) measurements will be utilized to determine
service effectiveness. In addition contributing cost fact ors will also be evaluated such as administrative;
outside source, capital and other contributors to cost.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Western Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity.;
N/A
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
46
10
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit Q
Total Cost: $33,826,300
!Project Name: Capitalized Preventive Maintenance
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Preventative maintenance costs from 2009 to 2019.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Periodic preventive maintenance performed on RTA vehicles for operating efficiency.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine, effectiveness of this project):
Roadcall report
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
N/A
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
N/A
As of7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
47
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route 0
Paratransit 0
Total Cost: $10,000,000
'Project Name: Transit Center Maintenance
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email: `
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Maintenance of nine transit centers from 2009 to 2019.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Periodic clean up and maintenance of the transit centers including upgrades and improvements.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Maintenance schedule report.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside, Corona, Temecula, Hemet, Moreno Valley, Banning/Beaumont, Norco, Menifee, and Lake
Elsinore
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger`
capacity:
N/A
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
48
12
•
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating. and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $2,000,000
'Project Name: ATIS Software Maintenance
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
.Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
System maintenance from 2009 to 2019.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Periodic maintenance of the ATIS software including periodic upgrades,
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Maintenance schedule report.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
N/A
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
N/A
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
49
13
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $24,826,500
!Project Name: Revenue Vehicle Replacement (40-ft and 32-ft buses)
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Fleet Replacement
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
To replace old models having reached 12 year useful life or 500,000 miles.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness, ofthis project):
Vehicle Replacement Schedule
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Western Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
Purchase of (50) 40-ft. CNG buses and (13) 30-ft. buses
As of 7/11/2006 14
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
50
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: S15,000,000
Project Name_ (20) 40-Ft. Buses for Expansion
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside Transit Agency
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Mark Stanley, Director of Planning
951-565-5130
mstanley@riversidetransit.com
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
(20) 40-ft. buses for commuter link services to east and west corridors.
GoaUOutcome of Proposed Project:
Commuter link service for east and west corridors.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Short Range Transportation Plan
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Western Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
Purchase of (20) 40-ft. CNG. buses
As of 7/11/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
51
15
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
S U M M A R Y S H E E T
A g e n c y N a m e : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n :
C o m m u t e r R a i l D e p a r t m e n t
S U M M A R Y O F P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T S :
P r o j e c t N a m e : C o m m u t e r R a i l S t a t i o 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
C o s t : $ 5 3 , 5 0 1 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : _ N e w X E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
P r o j e c t N a m e : F u t u r e M e t r o l i n k S e r v i c e L e v e l s O p e r a t i n g C o s t s
C o s t : $ 1 6 4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : _ N e w X E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
P r o j e c t N a m e : F u t u r e M e t r o l i n k S e r v i c e L e v e l s C a p i t a l C o s t s
C o s t : $ 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : _ N e w X E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
P r o j e c t N a m e : P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e
C o s t : $ 6 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : N e w X E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 1
P r o j e c t N a m e : C o m m u t e r R a i l S t a t i o n P a r k i n g E x p a n s i o n
C o s t : $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X _ N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
P r o j e c t N a m e : P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e E x t e n s i o n s t o S a n J a c i n t o / T e m e c u l a
C o s t : $ 1 7 5 , 7 5 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
T O T A L : A L L P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T S : $ 6 0 3 , 2 5 1 , 0 0 0
M e a s u r e A F u n d s R e q u e s t e d : $ S e e N o t e
T D A F u n d s R e q u e s t e d : $ S e e N o t e
N o t e : E i t h e r f u n d s o u r c e c o u l d b e u s e d b a s e d o n a v a i l a b i l i t y o f f u n d i n g .
5 2
A s o f 7 / 1 2 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y S h e e t
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e X
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e X
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
T o t a l P r o j e c t C o s t : $ 5 3 , 7 0 1 , 0 0 0
T D A & M e a s u r e A R e q u e s t : $ 5 3 , 7 0 1 , 0 0 0
R C T C R a i l P r i o r i t y : 1
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t :
C o m m u t e r R a i l S t a t i o n O p e r a t i o n a n d M a i n t e n a n c e
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
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 , 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t . R i v e r s i d e C A 9 2 5 0 2
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n , P r o g r a m M a n a g e r , ( 9 5 1 ) 7 8 7 - 7 9 2 8 , s p e t e r s o n @ r c t c . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
T h e c u r r e n t f i v e R C T C C o m m u t e r R a i l S t a t i o n s r e q u i r e a s i g n i f i c a n t a m o u n t o f m a i n t e n a n c e a n d c a p i t a l
u p g r a d e s o n a n a n n u a l b a s i s . T h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y r a i l s t a t i o n s a r e a m a j o r c a p i t a l i n v e s t m e n t o f p a s t
M e a s u r e A f u n d s a n d i t i s c r i t i c a l t h a t t h e y a r e p r o p e r l y m a i n t a i n e d . F o r t h e r i d e r , t h e t r a i n s t a t i o n i s t h e
f i r s t p o i n t o f c o n t a c t a n d c a n i n f l u e n c e w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e y c h o o s e t o u t i l i z e M e t r o l i n k s e r v i c e . T h e t r a i n
s t a t i o n s a l s o s e r v e a s t r a n s f e r p o i n t s f o r m a n y l o c a l b u s s e s a n d t h e C o m m u t e r L i n k s e r v i c e . I n t h e m o s t
r e c e n t O n B o a r d S u r v e y , t h e r i d e r s l i s t e d p e r s o n a l s e c u r i t y a t t h e s t a t i o n a s a f a c t o r o f h i g h i m p o r t a n c e a n d
h i g h s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h o v e r 7 5 % r e s p o n d i n g f a v o r a b l y . T h e s a f e t y a t t h e s t a t i o n s i s o n e o f M e t r o l i n k ' s
c o r e s t r e n g t h s . A s e p a r a t e s u r v e y f o u n d t h a t t r a i n s a n d s t a t i o n s a r e t h e f i r s t t h i n g t h a t c o m e s t o m i n d
w h e n d i s c u s s i n g M e t r o l i n k w i t h p o t e n t i a l n e w r i d e r s . T h i s m e a n s a v i s i b l e , c l e a n , a n d i n v i t i n g s t a t i o n
w i l l b e o n e o f t h e l a s t i n g f i r s t i m p r e s s i o n s o f a p o t e n t i a l n e w r i d e r , T h e p o t e n t i a l r i d e r s u r v e y r e s u l t s
s h o w t h a t t h e n u m b e r o n e r e a s o n f o r n o t u s i n g t h e M e t r o l i n k s y s t e m i s t h a t t h e s t a t i o n s a r e t o o f a r f r o m
h o m e . T h i s s u g g e s t s t h e n e e d t o e x p a n d t h e n u m b e r o f s t a t i o n s a n d b r i n g s e r v i c e s f u r t h e r o u t i n t o t h e
c o m m u n i t i e s s u c h a s t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e . T h e r a i l s t a t i o n s r e q u i r e r e g u l a r o p e r a t i o n e x p e n s e s f o r
s e c u r i t y , m a i n t e n a n c e , u t i l i t i e s , c l e a n i n g , g r o u n d s m a i n t e n a n c e , a n d r e p a i r s . T h e c h a r t a t t a c h e d i d e n t i f i e s
t h e a m o u n t o f t h e c u r r e n t b u d g e t t h a t g o e s t o e a c h c a t e g o r y w i t h s e c u r i t y b e i n g t h e l a r g e s t p e r c e n t a g e a t
5 3 % .
T h e s t a t i o n s a l s o r e q u i r e o n g o i n g c a p i t a l i m p r o v e m e n t s o v e r t i m e , t h e s e c a n i n c l u d e e l e v a t o r
r e p l a c e m e n t , p a r k i n g l o t u p g r a d e s / r e s u r f a c i n g , r e p l a c e d I i g h t i n g , s e c u r i t y c a m e r a s , p l u m b i n g r e p a i r s ,
w i n d o w r e p l a c e m e n t , a n d a n u m b e r o f o t h e r p o t e n t i a l e x p e n s e s . R C T C c u r r e n t l y o p e r a t e s f i v e s t a t i o n s a t
a c o s t o f $ 1 . 6 M a y e a r a n d w i t h t h e e x t e n s i o n o f t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e t h e r e w i l l b e s i x m o r e s t a t i o n s
p h a s e d i n f o r a t o t a l o f e l e v e n s t a t i o n s . F o r t h e p e r i o d f r o m 2 0 0 9 t o 2 0 1 9 , o p e r a t i n g a n d m a i n t e n a n c e
c o s t s e s t i m a t e s a r e $ 4 6 , 8 8 2 , 0 0 0 w h i c h i n c l u d e s a 5 % a n n u a l e s c a l a t i o n . I n a d d i t i o n , i t i s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t
t h e r e w i l l b e a n a d d i t i o n a l o n g o i n g c a p i t a l c o s t f o r t h e s t a t i o n s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 6 , 8 1 9 , 0 0 0 f o r t h e s a m e
p e r i o d . R C T C r e q u e s t s t h a t b o t h t h e s e a m o u n t s a r e f u n d e d b y T D A a n d / o r M e a s u r e A f u n d s . A t t a c h e d
i s a s p r e a d s h e e t t h a t p r o v i d e s t h e d e t a i l e d e s t i m a t e s .
5 3
A s o f 7 / 1 2 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
Station Expenses FY 06 Budget
Repairs
3%.
Grounds
Maintenance
Station
7%
Cleaning
9%
Security
Guards
53%
Utilities
10%
Other
(Maintenance
, Supplies,
etc)
18%
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
To provide for well maintained commuter rail stations in order to attract and keep riders on the Metrolink
system. The stations should be clean, safe, and convenient to all users.
Evaluation Criteria (identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The effectiveness will be determined if the stations are continually in a;state of good repair and are safe
for the Metrolink patrons. This can be measured by the number of passenger complaints about the
stations or the number of criminal or safety incidents reported.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: N/A
Map of Current Stations
Riverside. County Metrolink Stations
• it. UP NUM!lmff
.1 "'**h HNSF MAIM ME
54
of 7/12/2006
Measure AffllA Summary of Proposed Project
® Measure A & TDA Proposed Project - RCTC Commuter Rail Stations Operations and Maintenance
Rail Station Operations Budget ('000s)
Assume 5% Growth
Current Stations FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19
Riverside Downtown $600 $630 $662 $695 $729 $766 $804 $844 $886 $931 $977
La Sierra $300 $315 $331 $347 $365 $383 $402 $422 $443 $465 $489
Pedley $300 $315 $331 $347 $365 $383 $402 $422 $443 $465 $489
North Main Corona $300 $315 $331 $347 $365 $383 $402 $422 $443 $465 $489
West Corona $300 $315 $331 $347 $365 $383 $402 $422 $443 $465 $489
Subtotal $1,800 $1,890 $1,985 $2,084 $2,188 $2,297 $2,412 $2,533 $2,659 $2,792 $2,932
Perris Valley Line Stations
6 Proposed Stations $1,500 $1,575 $1,654 $1,736 $1,823 $1,914 $2,010 $2,111 $2,216 $2,327 $2,443
Combined Total $3,300 $3,465 $3,638 $3,820 $4,011 $4,212 $4,422 $4,643 $4,876 $5,119 $5,375
Summary $46,882
Station Captial Improvements ('000s)
Assuime 5% Growth
i
Current Stations FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY19
Riverside Downtown $100 $105 $110 $116 $122 $128 $134 $141 $148 $155 $163
La Sierra $50 $53 $55 $58 $61 $64 $67 $70 $74 $78 $81
Pedley $50 $53 $55 $58 $61 $64 $67 $70 $74 $78 $81
North Main Corona $50 $53 $55 $58 $61 $64 $67 $70 $74 $78 $81
West Corona $50 $53 $55 $58 $61 $64 $67 $70 $74 $78 $81
Subtotal $300 $315 $331 $347 $365 $383 $402 $422 $443 $465 $489
Perris Valley Line Stations
6 Proposed Stations $180 $189. $198 $208 $219 $230 $241 $253 $266 $279 $293
Combined Total $480 $504 $529 $556 $583 $613 $643 $675 $709 $745 $782
Summary $6,819
55
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please cheek:
Operating: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route n
Paratransit ❑
Total Project Cost: $164,000,000>
TDA & Measure A Request: $164,000,000
RCTC Rail Priority: 2
Summary of Proposed Project:
Future Metrolink Service Levels — Operating Costs
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon St. Riverside CA 92502
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title,Telephone and Email:
Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager, (951) 787-7928, speterson&ctc.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
The demand for commuter rail will continue to grow in the future with rising gas prices and increasing
congestion and RCTC needs to be able to support a Metrolink system that will meet the demand. The
2009 Measure directly states that the current commuter rail service levels needs to double in the future.
For Riverside County this refers to Metrolink's Riverside Line, Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC)
Line, and 91 Line. In order to project the needs for future demand Metrolink has developed a
comprehensive Strategic Assessment that outlines dm expanded service levels, projected ridership,.
necessary capital and future operating costs for the next 25 years. The service level expansion thatis
anticipated to meet projected demand will require an increase in the annual operating subsidy from RCTC
to the Metrolink. The following tables illustrate the service level expansion as outlined in the Strategic '
Assessment.
Proposed Service' Levels'( Daily Trains)
Routes
2006
2010
2015
2020
% Increase
Riverside
1`2
12
22
40
233%
IEOC
16
18'
24
26
62%
91 Line
9
10
20
24
166%
Totals
37
40
66
90
153%
As of7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
56
Corresponding Average Train frequencies during Peak Periods (m nutesl
Routes
2006
2010
2015
2020
Riverside
60
60
20-30
20
IEOC
40-60
40-60
30-40
30-40
91 Line
90
90
40-60
40-60
The five Metrolink member agencies of LA Metro, OCTA, SANBAG, VCTC, and RCTC share the total
operating subsidy for the system. The subsidy is determined by subtracting the total revenues from the
total cost. The system has an impressive revenue recovery index that has been over 50% since FY 1996-
97. The remaining amount after the revenue is applied is divided among the member agencies based on
an allocation formula that incorporates a calculation of train miles, route miles, and other factors that
represent respective benefit of the service to each county. Historically, RCTC's share of the subsidy has
been roughly 8-9% of the total, and yet benefits with three routes serving the county residents and access
to the 514 mile system. The Metrolink Strategic Assessment service levels and costs assume the
completion of the 22 mile Perris Valley Line extension by 20I0. The Metrolink Strategic Assessment
provides subsidy estimates for the target growth years. Below is a table that escalates the costs between
those years to determine the overall growth in totalsystem costs, total member agency subsidy, and
RCTC subsidy. For the period between 2009 and 2019 RCTC will need approximately $164,000,000 in
direct operating subsidy. This will need to come from both TDA and Measure A funding.
Estimated Operating Subsidy based on Strategic Assessment
Fiscal Year
Total Member Agency
Total Metrolink Costs Subsidy Total RCTC Subsi
FY 2008/09
$ 152,249,998
$ . 70,620,848
$ 8,399,286
FY 2009/10
$ 166,869,000 ,
$ 75,178,273
$- ; 9,779,359
FY 20010/11
$ 183,092,333
$ 80,693,269
$ 10,996,864
FY 2001//12
$ 199,315,667
$ 86,208,265
$ 12,214,368
FY 20012/13
$ 215,539,000
$ 91,723,261
$ 13,431,872
FY 20013/14
$ 231,762,333
$ . 97,238,257
$ 14,649,376
"
FY 20014/15
$ 247,985,667`
$ ''"102,753,254
$ 15,866880
FY 20015/16
$""264,209,000
"
$ 108,268,250'
``
$' 17,385,506
FY 20016/17 '
$ ` 292,184,000`
$ 118,086,593
$ 18,904,131
FY 20017/18
$" 320,159,000
$ 127,904,936
$ 20,422,756
FY 20018/19
$ 348,134,000
$ 21,941,381
$ 137,723,279
2009-2019 Totals
$2,621,499,998
$1,096,398;482
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project: .
The goal is to provide for more frequent and reliable service along all of the existing Metrolink routes
servicing Riverside County in order to meet the projected demands. The Metrolink commuter rail system
provides an alternative to the typical commute. The current Metrolink system relives congestion by:
removing over16,000 auto trips per weekday and relieving 8.5% of traffic on parallel freeways. The
expansion would dramatically enhance these congestion benefits by providing a system with frequencies
of 20-60 minutes on all the routes which will encourage more riders to take advantage_ of the system. The
additional capacity will provide for significant growth in ridership for the three lines. This results' a .
ridership increase of 157% from 2006 to 2020. Based on the formula for comparing ridership to freeway
lanes in the Strategic Assessment, by 2020 the ridership on three Metrolink lines will have offset the need
for an equivalent 2.2 freeway lanes in the peak direction. In addition, the commuter rail operating subsidy
supports feeder service to Metrolink by paying for transfers for the Corona Cruiser & Dial a Ride and
RTA's CommuterLink and regular service to the stations. The table below shows the intermediate
ridership growth data from the Strategic Assessment.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/ TDA Summary of Proposed Project
57
Projected Ridership for the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Metrolink Lines.
Year
Average Daily
Ridership
Increase
Equivalent
Freeway Lanes
2006
11,415
2010
12,857
12%
1.0
2015
21,230
65%
1.6
2020
28,646
35%
2.2
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The service will be evaluated using the Productivity Improvement Process criteria for Riverside County
transit operators. This includes analysis of the ridership growth, farebox recovery ratio, subsidy per
passenger mile, etc. The expanded service will be held to the same high standards that RCTC has for the
current commuter rail program, with a 40% farebox recovery ratio.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: N/A
Map of RCTC Routes
58
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/1'1)A Summary of Proposed Project
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating; Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Project Cost: $435,960,065
Measure A Request: $100,000,000
Federal, State or Private Funding: $335,960,065
RCTC'Rail Priority: 3
Summary of Proposed Project:
Future Metrolink Service Levels — Capital Costs
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon St. Riverside CA 92502
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager, (951) 787-7928, speterson@rctc.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
The demand for commuter rail will continue to grow in the future with rising gas prices and increasing
congestion and RCTC needs to be able tosupporta Metrolink system that will meet the demand. The
2009 Measure directly states that the current commuter rail service levels needs to double in the future.
For Riverside County this refers to Metrolink's Riverside Line, Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC)
Line, and 91 Line. In order to project the needs for fixture demand, Metrolink has developed a
comprehensive Strategic Assessment that outlines the expanded service levels, projected ridership,
necessary capital and future operating costs for the next 25 years. The future service level expansion that
is anticipated to meet projected demand will require a capital investment in rolling stock equipment, track
improvements, and facility upgrades. The capital projects will support the service level expansion
illustrated in the following tables.
Proposed Service Levels (Daily Trainsi
Routes
2006
2010
2015.
2020
%`Increase
Riverside
12
12
22.
40
233%
1E0C
16
1,8
24
26 .
62%
91 Line
9
10 ,
20
24
166%
Totals
37
40
66
90
153%
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A!1'DA Summary of Proposed Project
59
Corresponding Average Train Frequencies during Peak Periods (mmutesl
Routes
2006
2010
2015
2020
Riverside
60
60
20-30
20
IEOC
40-60
40-60
30-40
30-40
91 Line
90
90
40-60
40-60
The five Metrolink member agencies of LA Metro, OCTA, SANBAG, VCTC, and RCTC share the total
capital expenses for the system. The capital costs are divided by how they benefit each individual
Metrolink route. Capital costs are shared between certain member agencies and the capital funds are
leveraged between multiple counties. In addition, a member agency is not responsible for capital
upgrades to track that they do not benefit from. The total capital costs identified for the Strategic
Assessment identify $435,960,065 in capital expenses attributed to RCTC for the above service levels.
New rolling stock accounts for $112,062,265 and $323,897,801 is for track upgrades and facilities. For
the track upgrades $165,811,261 would be the potential RCTC cost for triple track of the BNSF from
Fullerton to Riverside. For the purpose of this exercise, RCTC Rail Department would like to request
$100,000,000 for the expansion of rail service frequencies on the existing rail lines for the period between
2009 and 2019_ The remaining needed funding could come from federal, state, or specialized public
private partnerships.
Examples of Estimated Capital Expenses
Proiect
Total Metrolink Total Member Agency
Costs
Costs
Rolling Stock
$ 702,653,015
$590,590,750
$112,062,265
Layover Facilities
$18,952,211
$15,538,663
$3,413,548 -
Riverside Line
Upgrades
$207,338,211
$158,574,337
$48,763,874
Sealed Corridor
$151,682,128
$134,964,155
$16,717,973
BNSF Triple Track
Fullerton - Riverside
$413,307,853
$247,496,592
$165,811,261
Eastern Maintenance
Facility (Colton)
$93,746,415
$78,795,314
$14,951,101
New Bridge across LA
River
$149,856,616
$125,956,808
$23,899,808
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Provide for more frequent and reliable service along all of the existing Metrolink routes' servicing
Riverside County in orderto meet the projected demands. The Metrolink commuter rail system provides
an altemative to the typical commute. The current Metrolink system relives congestion by removing
over16,000 auto trips per weekday and relieving 8.5% of traffic on parallel freeways. The expansion
would dramatically enhance these congestion benefits by providing a system with frequencies of 20-40
minutes on all the routes which will encourage more and more riders to take advantage of the system.
The additional capacity will provide for significant growth in ridership for the three lines. This results a
ridership increase of 157% from 2006 to 2020. Based on the formula for comparing ridership to freeway
lanes in the Strategic Assessment, by 2020 the ridership on three Metrolink lines will have offset the need
for an equivalent 2.2 freeway lanes in the peak direction. The table below shows the intermediate
ridership growth data from the Strategic Assessment.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure Al1'DA Summary of Proposed Project
60
Year
Average Daily
Ridership
Increase
Equivalent
Freeway Lanes
2006
11,415
2010
12,857
12%
1.0
2015
21,230
65%
1.6
2020
28,646
35%
2.2
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The service will be evaluated using the Productivity Improvement Process criteria for Riverside County
transit operators. This includes analysis of the ridership growth, farebox recovery ratio, subsidy per
passenger mile, etc. The expanded service will be held to the same high standards that RCTC has for its
current commuter rail program with a 40% farebox recovery ratio.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: Actual numbers not identified: Locomotives, bi-level coach cars, cab cars from
Bombardier/Rotem. Car capacity approximately 144 seats.
Map of RCTC Routes:
61
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit 0
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit O
Total Project Cost: $189,000,000
1VIeasure A Request: $60,000,000
State and Federal Funds: $129,000,000
RCTC Rail Priority: 4
Summary of Proposed Project:
Perris Valley Line
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon St. Riverside CA 92502
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager, (951) 787-7928, speterson@rctc.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Perris Valley Line — This will rneet the need directly stated in the 2009:Measure A program of expanding
commuter rail service to Moreno Valley and Perris to relieve congestion on I=215. This additional
funding will support the proposed commuter rail expansion from Riverside Downtown to South Perris
along the RCTC owned San Jacinto Branch Line. The 22 mile extension of the 91 Line service to Los
Angeles would include 8 daily trains along the corridor. Proposed station stops include South Perris,
Downtown Perris, Ramona; Alessandro (March JPA), UCR, Spruce Street (Hunter Park), and Downtown
Riverside. The current request is'for $60 M in Measure A with the remaining balance of'$129 M to come
from either state or federal sources.
GoallOutcome of Proposed Project:
This service would provide the -fast opportunities. for Riverside County residents to travel via train to
work destinations within Riverside County. The service is anticipated to provide an additional 6,200
daily trips to the Metrolink system by 2030.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The service will be evaluated using the FTA Small Starts Guidelines. This involves comprehensive
ridership determination, system user benefits per passenger mile, operating efficiencies, environmental
benefits, employment analysis, low income household access cost effectiveness, and land use
evaluations.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
62
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: 7 additional hi -level coach cars to supplement the existing Metrolink 91 Line service.
Bombardier/Rotem, capacity approximately 144 seats.
Proposed Route
63
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit D
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit D
Total Project Cost: $100,000,000
Measure A Request: $50,000,000
Private Partnership or State Funding: $50,000,000
RCTC Rail Priority: 5
Summary of Proposed Project:
Commuter Rail Station Parking Expansion
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon St. Riverside CA 92502
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager, (951) 787-7928, speterson@rctc:org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
With anticipated ridership growth in the Metrolink System there will be a need for expanded parking
facilities at several of the Riverside County stations. The projects include the North Main Corona,
Riverside Downtown, and La Sierra stations. Currently the demand for parking exceeds the capacity at
the North Main Corona station and soon at the Riverside Downtown Station. The fast phase of the North
Main Corona parking structure is currently in final design with a cost estimate of $30 M. The full build
out of the three structures could easily cost $100 M by the time they are completed. The current jump in
ridership is exceeding the current capacity at some of these stations and shows today's ridership higher
than the 2010 projections. In addition, the stations can be able to leverage their benefit as Park and Ride
facilities is sufficient capacity is available. The La Sierra station is a candidate for a public private joint
transit oriented development project that would likely require a parking structure paid for in part with
private funds. The following table compares the current demand and the Strategic Assessment estimates.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
64
Parking Needs Analysis
May-06
2015
Current
Capacity
Total
Trips
AM Peak
Boardings
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Total
Trips
AM Peak
Boardings
Surplus/
(Deficit)
(580)
153
Riverside
Downtown
815
2,436
1,218
(403)
2,789
1,395
Riverside -La
Sierra
1,067
1,644
822
245
1,829
915
North Main
Corona
586
1,530
765
(179)
1,909
955
(369)
TOTALS
2,468
5,610
2,805
(337)
6,527
3,264
(796)
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Ensure success of the Metrolink System by providing easy access to parking at the peak boarding stations. r
The proposed parking structures will meet the future demands of Metrolink patrons.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):.
Identify the most cost effective means to provide for additional parking at the existing commuter rail
stations, either by building parking structures or expanding surface level parking through property
acquisition. In addition, the effectiveness will be measured by the stations ability to meet ridership
growth demands over time.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity: N/A
As of 7/12/2006'
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
65
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route X
Paratransit ❑
Total Project Cost: $360,900,000
Measure A Request: $175,750 000
State or Federal Funds: $185,150,000
RCTC Rail Priority:'6"
Summary of Proposed Project:
Perris Valley Line Extensions to San Jacinto/Temecula
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon St. Riverside CA 92502
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager, (951) 787-7928, speterson@rctc.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
As identified in the Riverside County Commuter Rail Feasibility Study of 2005, the extension of
commuter rail service to San Jacinto and Temecula are both logical and feasible next steps. The
Metrolink potential rider survey results show that the number one reason for not using the Metrolink
system is that the stations are too far from home. This supports the need to expand the number of station
and routes to more residential areas in Riverside County. The proposed services would both eventually
include up to 16 daily trains. For the San Jacinto extension, the total capital costs are anticipated at
$111.5 million and only a half or $75,750,000 of the funds would be requested from Measure A. For the
Temecula extension along the 1-215 the total capital costs are anticipated at $249.4 million and only a
portion or $100,000,000 of the finds would be requested from the Measure A program. The balance of
funds would be sought from federal or state funding sources, such as the FTA New Starts or Small Starts
Program.
GoaUOutcome of Proposed Project:
The proposed service would provide for greater access to the rail network for the communities of Hemet,
San Jacinto, Murrieta, and Temecula. This would include operation of 16 daily trains from either San
Jacinto or Temecula to Riverside. Additionally it would provide for congestion relief on the I-215 and
would establish this route as a true Riverside County service with both origins and destinations within the
county. In 2030, the projected average daily ridership for the San Jacinto extension would be 1,338 trips
and the Temecula extension would be 2,166 trips.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure Af1'DA Summary of Proposed Project
66
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The service will be evaluated using the FTA New/Small Starts Guidelines. This involves comprehensive
ridership determination, system user benefits per passenger mile, operating efficiencies, environmental'
benefits, employment analysis, low income household access, cost effectiveness, and land use
evaluations.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity` Per extension - 1 Locomotive, S bi-level coach cars, and 1 cab car. Coach cars hold 144
passengers.
As of 7/I2/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
67
Route Map:
14
'41. 161
MTiR
▪ We;
• ' . sal
4VERaL
•
u.
ELSIN6PE
Riverside County
Feasibility Study 2005 Results
Potential Routes for Future Study
uce Streetirtustin
c I aj*.S. t !mkt 3
resswa
r South Perris
Newport Road
Or19
WRCOG
• • ia
CNALESA
Winchester Ro
ra iesec RIMELCINNIRMOS 11.C.Rielt HOV9.26
68
ij
n into
1164.1
port
'2006
:oject
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransif ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $ 28,645,661
'Project Name:
Riverside County Commuter Assistance Program'
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
RCTC
PO Box12008
Riverside CA 92502
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Robert J. Yates — Program Manager Commuter Assistance
951-7877905 ryates@rctc.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
implementation of the Measure A required Commuter Assistance/Rideshare program.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
Through a combination of information provision, education, outreach activities and incentives, the
Commuter Assistance Program seeks to foster a reduction in solo driver commuting in order to make a
positive impact on Riverside County Freeway congestion. See Attachment 1 for detailed program
information.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
The Commuter Assistance program is able to quantify vehicle miles reduced, vehicle trips reduced, tons
of pollutants reduced and the number of participants/commuters served The program will also make a
qualitative statement with regard to the effectiveness of its information and outreach programs, and the
ability of its traveler information services to impact congestion avoidance decisions:
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
69
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Western Riverside County and the Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
N/A
As of 7/12/2006
Measure AfTDA Summary of Proposed Project
70
"
Y e a r Y e a r 2 Y e a r 3 Y e a r 4 Y e a r 5 Y e a r 6 Y e a r 7 Y e a r 8 Y e a r 9 Y e a r 1 0 T O T A L
C A R R Y O V E R C A P S E R V I C E S
P r o g r a m A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 5 8 , 6 0 0 2 , 5 8 6 , 0 0 0
C o m m u t e r M o d e - s h i f t I n c e n t i v e s 5 1 8 , 5 0 0 5 4 2 , 2 0 0 5 4 5 , 9 9 3 5 6 9 , 8 8 0 5 8 6 , 4 7 9 6 5 6 , 3 6 1 6 7 5 , 2 6 9 7 1 4 , 9 9 7 7 3 5 , 5 8 4 7 7 7 , 0 6 9 6 , 3 2 2 , 3 3 1
E m p l o y e r S e r v i c e s 4 0 6 , 2 0 0 4 0 6 , 2 0 0 4 0 6 , 2 0 0 4 0 6 , 2 0 0 4 1 6 , 1 7 5 4 2 6 , 6 4 9 4 3 7 , 6 4 6 4 4 9 , 1 9 3 4 6 1 , 3 1 8 4 7 4 , 0 4 9 4 , 2 8 9 , 8 3 1
C o m m u t e r E x c h a n g e 8 9 , 0 0 0 8 9 , 0 0 0 8 9 , 0 0 0 8 9 , 0 0 0 9 2 , 1 7 0 1 4 5 , 4 9 9 9 8 , 9 9 3 1 0 2 , 6 6 3 1 0 6 , 5 1 6 1 1 0 , 5 6 2 1 , 0 1 2 , 4 0 3
L e a s e d P a r k a n d R i d e s 8 0 , 0 0 0 8 4 , 0 0 0 8 8 , 0 0 0 9 2 , 0 0 0 9 6 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 4 , 0 0 0 1 0 8 , 0 0 0 1 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 1 6 , 0 0 0 9 8 0 , 0 0 0
R e g i o n a l R i d e s h a r e 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 7 5 0 , 0 0 0
E X T E N D E D C A P S E R V I C E S
5 1 1 a n d T r a v e l e r I n f o r m a t i o n S e r 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
O n l i n e M o d e - s h i f t I n c e n t i v e s S e n 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 6 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 2 0 0 , 0 0 0
C a l l C e n t e r O p e r a t i o n s 5 0 , 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 5 2 , 5 0 0 5 5 , 1 2 5 5 7 , 8 8 1 6 0 , 7 7 5 6 3 , 8 1 4 1 5 , 0 0 0 5 0 5 , 0 9 6
F r e e w a y D e t e c t i o n a n d I n t e g r a t e 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
P a r k a n d R i d e S e c u r i t y 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
T O T A L S 2 , 6 9 2 , 3 0 0 2 , 7 2 0 , 0 0 0 2 , 7 2 7 , 7 9 3 2 , 7 5 5 , 6 8 0 2 , 8 4 1 , 9 2 4 2 , 9 3 2 , 2 3 3 2 , 9 2 2 , 3 9 0 2 , 9 8 4 , 2 2 9 3 , 0 2 7 , 8 3 2 3 , 0 4 1 , 2 8 0 2 8 , 6 4 5 , 6 6 1
V
"
J u l y 1 1 , 2 0 0 6
2 0 0 9 " M e a s u r e A " R e n e w a l
1 0 Y e a r C o n c e p t u a l P r o j e c t i o n o f N e e d s
R C T C C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m
M i s s i o n S t a t e m e n t :
" T h r o u g h t h e u s e o f a d v a n c e d t e c h n o l o g y t o i n c r e a s e a w a r e n e s s o f a v a i l a b l e
c o m m u t i n g c h o i c e s a n d t r a v e l a l t e r n a t i v e s , t h e R C T C C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e
P r o g r a m s e e k s t o e n h a n c e t h e q u a l i t y o f l i f e f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y r e s i d e n t s b y
m i t i g a t i n g t h e e f f e c t s o f t r a f f i c c o n g e s t i o n o n t h e i r d a i l y c o m m u t e a n d t r a v e l
a c t i v i t i e s . "
C A R R Y O V E R C A P S E R V I C E S
{ "
"
P r o g r a m A d m i n i s t r a t i o n & M a n a g e m e n t
C o m m u t e r M o d e - s h i f t I n c e n t i v e s
E m p l o y e r S e r v i c e s
" C o m m u t e r E x c h a n g e M o b i l e E d u c a t i o n
v e h i c l e
I " L e a s e d P a r k a n d R i d e L o t s
" R e g i o n a l R i d e s h a r e P r o g r a m
E X P A N D E D C A P S E R V I C E S
" 5 1 1 a n d T r a v e l e r - I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e s
" O n - L i n e M o d e - s h i f t I n c e n t i v e S e r v i c e s
" C a l l C e n t e r O p e r a t i o n s
" F r e e w a y D e t e c t i o n a n d I n t e g r a t i o n
" P a r k a n d R i d e S e c u r i t y
7 2
Y r 1 - 5
1 , 2 9 3 , 0 0 0
2 , 7 6 3 , 0 5 2
2 , 0 4 0 , 9 7 5
4 4 8 , 1 7 0
4 4 0 , 0 0 0
3 7 5 , 0 0 0
Y r 1 - 5
5 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 2 5 , 0 0 0
2 5 2 , 5 0 0
5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0
1 3 , 7 3 7 , 6 9 7
Y r 6 - 1 0 s h a r e
1 , 2 9 3 , 0 0 0
3 , 5 5 9 , 2 7 9
2 , 2 4 8 , 8 6 5
5 6 4 , 2 3 3
5 4 0 , 0 0 0
3 7 5 , 0 0 0
' Y r 6 - 1 0 '
5 0 0 , 0 0 0
7 5 , 0 0 0
2 5 2 , 5 9 6
5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
5 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 4 , 9 0 7 , 9 6 4
8 %
2 2 %
1 5 %
3 . 5 %
3 . 5 %
3 %
s h a r e
3 . 5 %
1 %
2 %
3 5 %
3 . 5 %
1 0 0 %
Issue:
Due to a myriad of reasons, RCTC cannot increase roadway capacity quickly
enough in order to keep pace with the demands put upon it by population growth
and the business environment. This creates an enormous amount of strain on
the roadway system which appears to the user as congestion.
Vision:
RCTC's efforts (in partnership with its sister agencies such as`CalTrans) to
mitigate roadway congestion depends in part on its ability to improve the
roadway systems' operating efficiency. The Commuter Assistance Program for
the previous 15 years has been highly successful in motivating solo vehicle
commuters to enter into a rideshare or mode -shift arrangement. These efforts
have had a demonstrable and quantifiable direct and positive impact in the
mitigation of traffic congestion (and air quality) through a reduction in solo vehicle
commuting:
With the renewal of Measure A, the Commuter Assistance Program intends to
build upon its success while expanding its reach in order to increase program
performance andinfluence more Riverside County residents (and employers) to
utilize more efficient modes of transportation.
Background:
The revised Commuter Assistance Program Mission Statement as outlined
above, uses the term "mitigate" when discussing the effects of traffic congestion
on our constituents' quality of life. Traffic congestion has a huge impact on all of
us who need to get to work, run errands, visit relatives and travel for recreational
purposes.
With the push towards theimplementation of the "09 Measure ARenewal", the
definition of "Commuter Assistance" is being expanded to more closely conform'
to emerging trends in the provision of public transportation and Transportation
'Demand Management (TDM) services. This programmatic expansion is
intended to multiply the effect of the Commuter Assistance Program TDM
services by taking advantage of new technology, the integration of real time
information resources (particularly at the roadway level) and the ability to
seamlessly connect service providers to commuters. As such, the RCTC
Commuter Assistance Program is moving beyond the simple mission of providing
"ridesharing" and "carpooling" resources, and into the realm of multi -modal
information provision for commute choices, real time travelerltraffic information,
commute altematives and mode -shift incentives.
73
By increasing the amount and quality of commuting and traveler information
available to, our constituents, whether they are traveling for work or pleasure, the
RCTC can more effectively and efficiently manage the transportation system.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Commuter Assistance Program continue to fund its
current "suite of services" consisting of mode shift incentives employer services,
outreach and education, park and ride lot implementation and regional rideshare
cooperation.
It is further recommended that the Commuter Assistance Program take
advantage of emerging trends in the provision of traveler information and
advanced technology so that it can provide real time roadway information as well
as on-line services to end user commuters. It is intended through this
recommendation that these new expanded services be included with the current
Commuter Assistance Program "suite of services" and that the funds necessary
to implement them be allocated from both Measure A and dedicated Commuter
Assistance Program reserves.
These new services are those listed as "Expanded Services" in the. Commuter
Assistance Program cost projection contained on the first page of this report.
They represent the recommended programmatic emphasis on the provision of
information and as such, cover not only the end product to the constituent, but
also the work necessary to support the end product.
A prime example of this is the integration of freeway detection installation into the
Commuter Assistance Program. The Commuter Assistance Program would not
be able to provide reliable real time travel information for the County's freeway
and highway system (including the planned regional 511 traveler information
service) without having adequate detection resources in place. Accordingly, the
Commuter Assistance Program seeks to work in partnership with CalTrans so
that we may continue to identify critical needs for detection, make assessments
and identify the resources in which to address them with.
The provision of detection also plays a role in the delivery of 511 services. As
511 is a SAFETEA-LU mandated requirement, it is up to the Commission to
identify through partnership efforts with its regional CTC partners, the most
efficient and economical means in which to deliver it.
Through the provision of multi -modal transit information, real-time freeway
conditions (travel speed, time, and incidents), real time ridematching, vanpool
and bus pool information as well as links to employer services, the Commuter
Assistance Program can now reach across all modes to constituents seeking
information on commute and travel alternatives and choices.
74
Additionally, given that congestion measurements play a huge part in the
calculation and allocation of state and federal funding streams, the additional
detection will also serve to ensure that the county receives its rightful allocation
of those funding resources.
In conclusion, with the continuance of Commuter Assistance Program carry over
services along with the performance anticipated from new services, the
estimated return on the requested Measure A investment for the first 10 years of
renewal for the program is as follows:
I 0 Year Performance Targets:
• 27.7 million One-vvay vehicle trips reduced
• 3360 Tons of pollutants removed from the air
• 150 rniles of new freeway detection installed and integrated to CalTrans
ATMS and the regional 511 system
• 9,000 Park N Ride spaces provided
• Security for Park N Ride lots provided
• 250,000 rideshareftransportation/511 calls managed
• 650 Commuter Exchange mobile education events performed
• 36,000 club ride participants enlisted
• 19,500 mode shift incentive program participants served
• 500,000 Riverside County residents targeted for direct media outreach
75
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
S U M M A R Y S K E E T
A g e n c y N a m 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
S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t P r o g r a m : W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e
S U M M A R Y O F P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T S :
P r o j e c t N a m e : S E N I O R S A N D L O W - I N C O M E V E T E R A N S R I D E W E S T E R N
R I V E R S I D E F I X E D R O U T E S E R V I C E S " F O R F R E E "
C o s t : $ 1 . 2 M t o $ 1 . 5 M a n n u a l l y
$ 1 2 M t o $ 1 5 M f o r 1 0 y e a r p e r i o d : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : N e w
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : F Y 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
P r o j e c t N a m e : M O B I L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T P R O G R A M
C o s t : $ 2 M a n n u a l l y
$ 2 0 M f o r 1 0 y e a r p e r i o d : 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : N e w a n d E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : O n - g o i n g f o r e x i s t i n g p o r t i o n o f p r o g r a m ; F Y 2 0 0 9 - 2 0 1 9 f o r n e w
p o r t i o n o f p r o g r a m : M o b i l i t y M a n a g e m e n t
T O T A L : A L L P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T S : $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0
M e a s u r e A F u n d s R e q u e s t e d : $ 3 5 , 0 0 0 , 1 1 0 0
T D A F u n d s R e q u e s t e d : $ N / A
7 6
A s o f 7 / 1 2 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / 1 ' D A S u m m a r y S h e e t
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e X
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
T o t a l C o s t : $ 1 . 2 M t o $ 1 . 5 M p e r y e a r
$ 1 2 M t o $ 1 5 M f o r 1 0 y e a r p e r i o d
P r o j e c t N a m e : S e n i o r s a n d L o w - i n c o m e V e t e r a n s R i d e
W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e F i x e d R o u t e S e r v i c e s ` f o r f r e e "
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
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
4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , T h i r d F l o o r
P . O . B o x 1 2 0 0 8
R i v e r s i d e , C A 9 2 5 0 2 - 2 2 0 8
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
T a n y a L o v e
T r a n s i t P r o g r a m M a n a g e r
( 9 5 1 ) 7 8 7 - 7 1 4 1
d o v e @ r c t c . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t : D e v e l o p " G o l d e n P a s s p o r t " a n d " P a t r i o t
P a s s p o r t " p r o g r a m .
G o l d e n P a s s p o r t P r o g r a m : W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e M e a s u r e A f u n d i n g w i l l s u b s i d i z e t h e c o s t f o r s e n i o r s
( a g e 6 0 a n d a b o v e ) t o r i d e f i x e d r o u t e s e r v i c e b y s u b s i d i z i n g t h e c a l c u l a t e d s e n i o r f a r e c h a r g e d b y w e s t e r n
R i v e r s i d e p u b l i c t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s .
P a t r i o t P a s s p o r t P r o g r a m : A l l h o n o r a b l y d i s c h a r g e d v e t e r a n s , r e s i d i n g i n w e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e , w h o s e
a n n u a l i n c o m e i s $ 2 2 , 0 0 0 o r l e s s w i l l b e a b l e t o r i d e f i x e d r o u t e t r a n s i t w i t h o u t p a y i n g a n y o u t o f p o c k e t
c o s t s a s w e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e M e a s u r e A S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t f u n d i n g w i l l s u b s i d i z e t h e c a l c u l a t e d v e t e r a n ' s
f a r e c h a r g e d b y w e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e p u b l i c t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s .
7 7
A s o f 7 / 1 2 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t .
Regardless of the program used: Golden Passport or Patriot Passport, western Riverside Measure A
Specialized Transit funding will pay the cost for individuals to ride fixed route service "for free" by
subsidizing the calculated fare charged by the transit operator. Public transit agencies eligible to
participate in these programs include: City of Banning, City of Beaumont, City of Corona, Riverside
Transit Agency and RCTC's Commuter Rail Program2.
GoaUOutcome of Proposed Project: These programs are a "win -win" for the senior, veteran and public
transit operators in that they:
1) Increase the mobility of seniors and veterans by covering the cost of fixed route services;
2) Eliminate the need for making advance reservations to ride dial -a -ride services;
3) Assist the public operators in enticing seniors and veterans away from the more
expensive (to operate) dial -a -ride system; and
4) Assist the public operator in meeting the state -mandated farebox recovery ratio as
Measure A funding is a local revenue source and not part of the Transportation
Development Act which establishes mandated farebox targets:
While Commission staff believe that these are worthwhile programs, it will be essential for the public
operators to develop an extensive senior/veteran travel training and outreach program as part of their
operating budgets supported by Transportation Development Act funding as seniors and veterans must
know how to ride the fixed route systems in order to take advantage of the program.
The estimated cost to operate the Golden Passport and Patriot Passport programs is $1.2M to $1.5M per
year for the first three years of operation; however, as the program becomes successful, the °cost to
subsidize the senior and veteran fare could exceed available funding. As a result, Commission and transit
operator staff will need to work closely on developing these programs to look at innovative program
delivery as well as cost containment.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project): The
evaluation criteria will be two fold: Working with western county transit operator staff:
1) Determine the number of senior and veteran riders that transfer from dial -a -ride to the
fixed route system; and
2) Determine the financial impact on farebox revenues.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project: Western Riverside
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any),. identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
Not Applicable.
Actual names of the programs will be determined at a later date.
2 Riverside Specialized Transportation Services is excluded from this list as they do not provide fixed route services.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
78
Measure and Transportation Development Act (TDA)'
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit X
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit D
Total Cost: $2M per year
$20M for 10 year period
Project Name: Mobility Management Program
Summary of Proposed Pro➢ect
Agency Name and Address:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
4080 Lemon Street, Third FIoor
P. O. Box 12008
Riverside, CA 92502-2208
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Tanya Love
Transit Program Manager
(951)787-7141
tlove(a�rctc.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project: Develop a mobility management program
utilizing public transit operators, non-profit and for -profit operators to improve the mobility of the
Westem Riverside senior, disabled and truly needy population.
See Attachment 1 for detailed information.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project: Increase the mobility of seniors, disabled and the truly needy
population by increasing transportation options.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
79
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project: Riverside County
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and passenger
capacity:
Not Applicable.
As of 7/12/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
80
Attachment 1
Mobility Management Program
"More than four in five (82%) of Americans age 65 or older worry that they will be
stranded and unable to get around when they can no longer drive"'
Aging Generation:
Longevity creates socioeconomic challenges and opportunities:
• Challenges in delivering transportation —not to mention health care,
food and other supplies to an aging population.
■ Opportunities are also great in that in the United, States, age 65+
consumers are the most affluent of any age segment with many
having multiple income sources. We know that senior markets vary
by, country, region, age, income and lifestyle. Consider Riverside
County's population when the original Measure A Expenditure Plan
was approved. Between 1980 and 1990, the .elderly population
(age 65 and over) in Riverside County grew from 97.1 thousand to
153.9 thousand, an increase of 58.5%. From 1990 to 2000, the
growth of the older population increased only by 27%. The slowing
trend is expected to continue until 2010, with a projected growth rate
of only about 1.3 percent a year, compared with the average annual
growth of 2.3 percent from 1950 to 1990. However, after 2010, the
survivors of the Baby Boom start to enter the 60+ age group. The
Department of Finance's Demographic Unit projects that by 2050,
Riverside County's elderly population is expected to reach 635,576
- an increase of 227% over a 50 year period from 2000 to 2050
More than ever, the Measure A Specialized Transit program will
play a significant role in providing_ transportation not only to the
elderly but disabled population as well.
Baby Boomers:
On a national level, the first wave of Baby Boomers will turn 60 during the period
between 2000 and 2010. Nationally, the number of people age 65 and over is
projected to increase from 39 million in 2010 to 69 million in 2030. The historical
trend of the older population growing at a faster rate than the total population will
continue into the 21st century. Population projections indicate an 18 percent
increase of the total population between 2010 .and 2030 but the older population.
will increase by 78 percent during this period.. This differentialgrowth will result
in nearly 1 in 5 Californians being 60 years of age or older by 2030. Thus, the:
share of the population age 65 and over would increase dramatically to about
I APTA's Passenger Transport. December 12, 2005.
81
20% percent of the total population compared to about 13 percent now.
Moreover, between 2030 and 2040, when the first of the Baby Boom generation
reaches age 85, the percent of elderly who are in the oldest age group will reach
14 percent. Many individuals in the oldest age group category have severe
chronic health problems that demand special attention, and as a result, the rapid
growth of this population group has many implications for families as well as
government at all levels.
Problem Statements:
• Specialized transportation needs in the Inland Empire are
incompletely met by existing public transportation structures;
• Specialized transportation needs cannot be addressed by any
single service system alone;
• Economic and social costs of these unmet needs grow as the
population increases (financial impact on first responders: police,
ambulance etc.); and
• New infrastructure is needed to enable agencies, organizations and
individuals to collaborate to better meet current and future
specialized transportation needs.
Vision:
• To improve mobility across Riverside (and San Bemardino
Counties) for those with specialized transportation needs:
0 Incremental approach:
• Western Riverside (with service provision to adjoining
counties)
• FY 2006/07 & FY 2007/08 Call for Projects
(included Non -Emergency Medical
Transportation Element)
• Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley (possibly part
of 30-year transit visioning through current Transit
Policy Committee process/discussions)
• San Bernardino county (potential joint effort with San
Bernardino Associated Governments)
• Development of a Transit Tec.hnical Advisory
Committee with membership consisting of public
transit operators, non-profit operators and for -profit
operators.
Commission staff is proposing that in addition to funding traditional public dial -a-
ride programs, that we continue the western Riverside Specialized Transit
Program's two-year call for projects to secure niche -market transportation
services for individuals too frail or elderly to ride typical public transit. In addition,
staff is recommending that we develop a Mobility Management Program
82
•
"
c o n s i s t i n g o f t h e G o l d e n P a s s p o r t a n d P a t r i o t P a s s p o r t p r o g r a m s t o g e t h e r w i t h
a n i n f o r m a t i o n r e f e r r a l a n d a s s i s t a n c e c o m p o n e n t . F o l l o w i n g i s t h e p r o p o s e d
s t r u c t u r e o f t h e M o b i l i t y M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m :
G o a l s :
�% T o c r e a t e a n i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t h a t p r o v i d e s a f o c a l p o i n t f o r f u n d i n g ,
o p e r a t i o n , i n f o r m a t i o n a n d e d u c a t i o n f o r a n d a b o u t 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 r e s o u r c e s ; a n d
�% T o c r e a t e m e c h a n i s m s t h a t c a n w o r k a c r o s s a n d b e t w e e n s e r v i c e
s y s t e m s t o h e l p a d d r e s s m o b i l i t y n e e d s t h a t f a l l o u t s i d e o r a t t h e
e d g e s o f e x i s t i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s .
O u t c o m e s :
�% C o o r d i n a t e 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 o f r a i l , e l d e r l y ,
d i s a b l e d a n d t r u l y n e e d y p o p u l a t i o n ;
�% M o r e f u l l y u t i l i z e e x i s t i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s o u r c e s ; a n d
�% M a k e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n m o r e a f f o r d a b l e t o v e t e r a n s , s e n i o r s , d i s a b l e d
a n d l o w - i n c o m e r e s i d e n t s .
8 3
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: SUNL.INE TRANSIT AGENCY
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:
Project Name: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)/Express Bus Service/Commuter Service - Capital Projects.
Cost: $12,648,150
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2010/2011
Project Name: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)/Express Bus Service/Commuter Service - Operating
Cost: $109,305,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: 4 New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2011/2012
Project Name: Bus Replacement Program — Capital Projects
Cost: $13,912,965
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New ; Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009/2010
Project Name: Community —Based Service Implementation — Capital Projects
Cost: $5,059,260
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing:i. New : Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009/2010
Project Name: Community —Based Service Implementation- Operating
Cost: $40,930,310
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New 4 Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009/2010
Project Name: Frequency Improvement on Line 111- Capital Projects
Cost: $7,167,285
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New 4 Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009
Project Name: Frequency Improvement on Line 111— Operating
Cost: $102,146,780
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New , 4 >Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary Sheet
84
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:.
Project Name: Implementation of Market -Based Service — Capital Projects
Cost: $2,529,630
Indicate whether proposed project is Now or Existing: 4 New. 4 Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009/2010
Project Name: Implementation of Market -Based. Service =Operating
Cost: $57,255,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: At New 4 Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009/2010
Project Name: Discount Senior Fares & Additional Service - Operating
Cost: $46,845,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New 4 Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009/2010
Project Name: Implementation of Sub -regional Service - Capital Projects
Cost: $11,383,335
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing:
Time Line for Implementation: FY2009/2010
New
4 Existing
Project Name: Implementation of Sub -regional Service -Operating
Cost: $136,205,020
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New
Time Line for Implementation: FY2009/2010
Project Name: Transit Enhancement Project— Capital Projects
Cost: $1,500,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New 4 Existing"
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2009
Project Name: Transit Facilities Project - Capital Projects
Cost: $10,500,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: I/ New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 2010/2011
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: $557,387,735
Measure A Funds Requested: $
TDA Funds Requested: $
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/MA Summary Sheet
85
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route O
Paratransit
Capital: Fixed' Route
Paratransit
Total Cost: $12,648,150
Project Name: Implementation of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on Highway
111 Corridor, Commuter Bus Service, and Express Bus Service on the
Interstate-10 Corridor.
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext.119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Projects:
Purchase thirty (30) 40ft, 45ft, and 60ft buses that will be utilized for BRT service, Commuter
bus service, and express service bus routes. Recommendation in the Comprehensive Operational
Analysis is proposing the implementation of these services to enhance existing transit service.
The methodology used in arriving at the cost is explained below.
PS: The current cost of purchasing a bus is estimated at $405,000, which has been adjusted
for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI of 4.1 %. The cost ofpurchasing a
bus in 2009 dollars is estimated at $421,605, and then multiplied by the number of buses to be
purchased Total capital cost requested for the thirty buses is estimated at $12,648,150.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
86
GoaUOutcome of Proposed Project;
This goal and outcome of the proposed projects will enhance the existing regular service
currently operated in the Valley and will provide better and faster service for current riders and
residents that may be interested in using faster transit service. The proposed new services will
reduce the travel time for riders using the system for their mobility needs for work and school,
and for commuter service.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Continued maintenance program /Preventive maintenance
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley/Selected areas in the Counties of riverside and San Bemardino.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
The number of vehicles requested is ten (10), which will be a combination of 40ft, 45ft and 60ft,
buses. The expected make of the vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger capacity in the
40ft buses is 45, the passenger capacity in the 45 ft buses is 50, and the passenger capacity in the
60ft buses is 55.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
87
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e 0
P a r a t r a n s i t 0
T o t a l C o s t : $ 1 0 9 , 3 0 5 , 0 0 0
P r o j e c t N a m e : I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f B u s R a p i d T r a n s i t ( B R T ) o n H i g h w a y
1 1 1 C o r r i d o r , E x p r e s s B u s S e r v i c e o n t h e I n t e r s t a t e - 1 0 C o r r i d o r , a n d
C o m m u t e r S e r v i c e t o A r e a s o u t s i d e o f C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y .
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
3 2 - 5 0 5 H a r r y O l i v e r T r a i l
T h o u s a n d P a l m s , C A 9 2 2 7 6
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
E u n i c e L o v i , D i r e c t o r o f P l a n n i n g
7 6 0 - 3 4 3 - 3 4 5 6 , e x t . 1 1 9
e l o v i @ s u n l i n e . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t s :
A s p a r t o f t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e O p e r a t i o n a l A n a l y s i s ( C O A ) c o n d u c t e d t o e x a m i n e a n d p r o v i d e
r e c o m m e n d a t i o n t o i m p r o v e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y , t h e C O A a l s o r e c o m m e n d e d
l o n g r a n g e s e r v i c e p l a n s i n t h e P r e f e r r e d S e r v i c e P l a n ( P S P ) . T h e P S P r e c o m m e n d s e s t a b l i s h i n g
a H i g h w a y 1 1 1 B R T s e r v i c e , i m p l e m e n t i n g a n I n t e r s t a t e 1 0 ( 1 - 1 0 ) r e g i o n a l e x p r e s s b u s r o u t e ,
a n d c o n t i n u e d m o n i t o r i n g o f g r o w i n g a r e a s a n d i m p l e m e n t t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o s e r v e t h e d e n s e
a r e a s . A s p a r t o f t h e p r o c e s s , S u n L i n e w i l l c o n d u c t s t u d i e s t o e v a l u a t e a n d 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 i m p l e m e n t i n g t h e B R T s e r v i c e o n H w y . 1 1 1 a n d e x p r e s s b u s s e r v i c e a l o n g 1 - 1 0 .
T h e C O A a l s o r e c o m m e n d s i m p l e m e n t i n g e o n u n u t e r b u s s e r v i c e t o a r e a s o u t s i d e o f C o a c h e l l a
V a l l e y , s u c h a s M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n s i n t h e c o u n t i e s o f R i v e r s i d e a n d S a n B e r n a r d i n o , a n d C a b a z o n
O u t l e t S t o r e s .
P S : T h e t o t a l o p e r a t i n g c o s t i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 1 0 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 i n 2 0 0 7 d o l l a r s , w h i c h h a s b e e n
a d j u s t e d f o r i n f l a t i o n b y m u l t i p l y i n g t h a t a m o u n t b y 4 . I % ( c u r r e n t C P I ) . T h e o p e r a t i n g c o s t i n
A s o f 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t .
8 8
2009 dollars is estimated at $10,930,500, and then multiplied by the total number of years of
the Conceptual Plan, which is 10 years. The total operating cost requested is $109,305,000.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed projects will enhance the existing regular service
currently operated in the Valley and will provide better and faster service for current riders and
residents that may be interested in using faster transit service. The proposed new service will
reduce the travel time for commuters working outside the Valley and will help reduce congestion
on the freeways. Implementation of these new services will help improve the air quality in the
Valley and the region.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Evaluate ridership by conducting ride checks and monitoring the route to ensure it meets criteria
that will be used in developing the parameters for the service. SunLine will also conduct surveys
and talk to passengers on how to improve the service.
Geographical Service Area of Transportatign Project:
Coachella Valley/Counties of Riverside and San Bernardino.
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
The number of vehicles requested is sixty (60) and will be a combination of 40ft, 45ft and 60ft
buses. The expected make of the vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger capacity in the
40ft buses is 45, the passenger capacity in the 45 ft buses is 50, and the passenger capacity in the
60ft buses is 55.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure AtEDA Summary of Proposed Project
89
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e C I
P a r a t r a n s i t O
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e
P a r a t r a n s i t
P r o j e c t N a m e : B u s R e p l a c e m e n t P r o g r a m ]
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
T o t a l C o s t : $ 1 3 , 9 1 2 , 9 6 5 '
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
3 2 - 5 0 5 H a r r y O l i v e r T r a i l
T h o u s a n d P a l m s , C A 9 2 2 7 6
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
E u n i c e L o v i , D i r e c t o r o f P l a n n i n g
7 6 0 - 3 4 3 - 3 4 5 6 , e x t . 1 1 9
e l o v i @ s u n l i n e . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
P u r c h a s e t h i r t y - t h r e e ( 3 3 ) 3 0 f t a n d 4 0 f t b u s e s t h a t w i l l b e u s e d i n r e p l a c i n g b u s e s i n t h e f l e e t t h a t
a r e c l o s e t o m e e t i n g t h e i r u s e f u l l i v e s a s d e f i n e d b y f e d e r a l g u i d e l i n e s . I n 2 0 0 5 , S u n L i n e
i m p l e m e n t e d a B u s R e p l a c e m e n t P r o g r a m t o r e p l a c e v e h i c l e s i n t h e f l e e t t h a t h a v e m e t t h e i r
u s e f u l l i v e s a n d a s t h e y a g e . S u n L i n e w i l l c o n t i n u e t o r e p l a c e t h e s e b u s e s a n d w i l l u s e t h e m o n
a l l r o u t e s t h a t s e r v e t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y .
P S : T h e c u r r e n t c o s t o f p u r c h a s i n g a b u s i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 4 0 5 , 0 0 0 i n 2 0 0 7 d o l l a r s , w h i c h h a s
b e e n a d j u s t e d f o r i n f l a t i o n b y m u l t i p l y i n g t h a t a m o u n t b y t h e c u r r e n t C P I o f 4 . 1 % . T h e c o s t o f
p u r c h a s i n g a b u s i n 2 0 0 9 d o l l a r s i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 4 2 1 , 6 0 5 , a n d t h e n m u l t i p l i e d b y t h e n u m b e r
o f b u s e s t o b e p u r c h a s e r ) T h e t o t a l c a p i t a l c o s t r e q u e s t e d f o r t h e b u s e s i s e s t i m a t e d a t
$ 1 3 , 9 1 2 , 9 6 5 .
G o a U O u t c o m e o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t :
T h i s g o a l a n d o u t c o m e o f t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t e n s u r e s b u s e s p r o v i d e s e r v i c e o n t i m e , a n d a l s o
e n s u r e s t h a t s e r v i c e o f f e r e d i s s a f e a n d t h e v e h i c l e s w e l l m a i n t a i n e d .
A s o f 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
9 0
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Continuous maintenance of buses
Preventive maintenance
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger . The replacement vehicles will comprise of 30ft and 40ft, low -floor buses.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
91
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t O
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e A l
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
T o t a l C o s t : $ 5 , 0 5 9 , 2 6 0
P r o j e c t N a m e : I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f C o m m u n i t y - B a s e d S e r v i c e r o u t e s ,
i n c l u d i n g n e w r o u t e L i n e 1 5 a n d e x i s t i n g r o u t e s , L i n e s 2 4 , 8 0 , a n d 9 3 .
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
3 2 - 5 0 5 H a r r y O l i v e r T r a i l
T h o u s a n d P a l m s , C A 9 2 2 7 6
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
E u n i c e L o v i , D i r e c t o r o f P l a n n i n g
7 6 0 - 3 4 3 - 3 4 5 6 , e x t . 1 1 9
e l o v i @ s u n l i n e . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t s :
P u r c h a s e t w e l v e ( 1 2 ) 3 0 f t a n d 4 0 f t e x p a n s i o n b u s e s t h a t w i l l b e u t i l i z e d o n t h e C o m m u n i t y - b a s e d
b u s s e r v i c e r o u t e s a s p a r t o f t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o u t l i n e d i n t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e O p e r a t i o n a l
A n a l y s i s ( C O A ) . R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s i n t h e C O A p r o p o s e s i m p r o v e m e n t s t o e x i s t i n g r o u t e .
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h i s n e w t y p e o f s e r v i c e i s i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e s e r v i c e w i t h i n v a r i o u s
c o m m u n i t i e s t h a t m a k e u p t h e c i t i e s i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . T h e i m p r o v e m e n t s i n c l u d e
i m p r o v i n g t h e f r e q u e n c y o n L i n e s 2 4 , 8 0 a n d 9 3 a n d i m p l e m e n t i n g a n e w r o u t e , L i n e 1 5 i n t h e
C i t y o f D e s e r t H o t S p r i n g s . A d d i t i o n a l C o m m u n i t y - B a s e d s e r v i c e r o u t e s w i l l b e d e t e r m i n e d a n d
i m p l e m e n t e d a s S u n L i n e m e e t s w i t h o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s a t a f u t u r e d a t e .
P S : T h e c u r r e n t c o s t o f p u r c h a s i n g a b u s i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 4 0 5 , 0 0 0 , w h i c h h a s b e e n a d j u s t e d
f o r i n f l a t i o n b y m u l t i p l y i n g t h a t a m o u n t b y t h e c u r r e n t C P I o f 4 . 1 % . T h e c o s t o f p u r c h a s i n g a
b u s i n 2 0 0 9 d o l l a r s i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 4 2 1 , 6 0 5 , a n d t h e n m u l t i p l i e d b y t h e n u m b e r o f b u s e s t o b e
p u r c h a s e d T h e t o t a l c a p i t a l c o s t r e q u e s t e d f o r t h e b u s e s i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 5 , 0 5 9 , 2 6 0 .
A s o f 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
9 2
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures SunLine provides service to areas in the
Valley with increased demand for more transit service, as well as improve and reduce the travel .
time for riders who currently ride the Lines 24, 80 and 90 for their mobility needs.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Preventive maintenance and continuous maintenance of buses assigned to the route_
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
Number of vehicles requested is twelve (12), which will be a combination of 30 ft and 40 ft
buses. Although six of the requested vehicles will be utilized for Lines 15, 24, 80 and 93; the
remaining six will be used for additional Community -based service routes.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
93
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:''
Operating: Fixed Route -
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit ❑
Total Cost: $40,930,310
Project Name: Implementation of Community -Based Service routes,
including new route Line 15 and existing routes, Lines 24, 80, and 93.
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency,
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Projects:
This project entails implementing new Community -based service routes, as. well as improving
existing routes that have been reclassified as Community -based service routes.
Recommendations in the Comprehensive Operational Analysis include implementing a new
Community -based service route, Line 15 in the City Desert Hot Springs. In addition, three
existing routes have been reclassified as Community -based services, which include Lines 24, 80
and 93. Additionally, SunLine will be working all the cities within Coachella Valley interested in
implementing Community -based service routes.
Line 15:
The new Line 15 will act as a feeder route for the Sub -regional service route Line 14. The route
was designed by the City of Desert Hot Springs staff with the assistance from SunLine. The
route will operate along Hacienda Avenue. The Preferred Service Plan (PSP) recommends
operating the route on a 30 minute headway and will require one bus for the service.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
94
Line 24:
As part of the recommendations in the PSP, the existing Line 24, which has been streamlined and
combined with Line 23 will operate as a Community -based service that will serve the
communities of Palm Springs and Cathedral City. Line 24 is designed to provide improved and
better service to the residential areas currently served and to new higher density residential
developments along Sunrise Way. The PSP recommends operating the route on a 30 minute
headway. and will require two (2) vehicles.
Line 80:
Line 80 will. continue to operate along the same routing in the City of Indio ; however, the route
has been streamlined and will now operate bi-directionally. The reconfigured route will also
serve neighborhoods and businesses along Arabia and Oasis Streets. The PSP includes operating
the route on a 30 minute headway and will require two (2) buses.
Line 93:
Line 93 is one of two new routes recommended in the PSP to replace the existing Line'91, which
will be discontinued when the PSP is implemented. Line 93 will operate between Mecca, Oasis,
and the Torres -Martinez Indian Reservation. The new route is designed to provide better service
to residents in these communities and will offer bi-directional service along the designated
condor_ The PSP recommends operating the route with on a 60 minute headway and will
require one (1) bus.
PS: The total operating cost for the existing routes listed is estimated at $3,931,827 in 2007
dollars, then adjusted for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI of 4.1 %.
The operating cost in 2009 dollars is estimated at $4,093,031, and then multiplied by the total .
number of years for the Conceptual Plan, which is 10 years. The total operating cost
requested is estimated at $40,930,310.
GoallOutcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures SunLine provides service to areas in the
Valley with increased demand for more transit service, as well as improve and reduce the travel"
time for riders who currently ride existing routes for their mobility needs.
Evaluation Criteria (identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Evaluate ridership on the route
Conduct ride checks along the route
Monitor route performance on a daily basis
Conduct surveys and talk to passengers on how to improve service
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Projects
Coachella Valley
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
95
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
Number of vehicles requested is twelve (12), which will be a combination of 3011 and 40 ft
buses. Although six of the requested vehicles will be utilized for Lines 15, 24, 80 and 93, the
remaining six will be used for additional Community -based services that will be implemented in
FY 2009/2010. The expected make of the vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger
capacity in the 40ft buses is 45, with the passenger capacity in the 30ft buses listed as 26.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/MA Summary of Proposed Project
96
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed -Route "0
Paratransit O
Capital: Fixed Route
Paratransit D
Total Cost: $7,167,285
Project Name: Frequency Improvement on Line 111 (Highway 111 Corridor
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Purchase seventeen (17) 40ft expansion buses that will be utilized on Line 111 as part of the
proposed improvement along the route. As part of the recommendations in the Comprehensive
Operational Analysis, Line 111 will be improved to operate on a 15 minute frequency. This will
require using 17 buses to ensure that service is operated on -time, especially during peak hours.
The additional vehicles will ensure that the proposed frequency improvement is achieved and
enables passengers to get to their destinations on time.
PS: The current cost ofpurchasing a bus is estimated at $405,000 in 2007 dollars, which has
been adjusted for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI of 4.1 %. The cost
of purchasing a bus in 2009 dollars is estimated at $421,605, and then multiplied by the
number of buses to be purchased The total capital cost requested for the buses is estimated at
$7,167,285.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
97
Goal/Outcome of Proposed. Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures route performs efficiently, as well as
improves on -time performance. The improvement will reduce the travel time and will encourage
more residents in the Coachella Valley to ride the bus to their jobs along the Highway 111
Corridor.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Continuous maintenance of the buses
Preventive maintenance
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
98
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route AI
Paratransit ❑
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit, <❑
Total Cost: $102,146,780
'Project Name_ Frequency Improvement on Line 111 (Highway 111) Corridor
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
This project entails improving. service operated along the Highway 111 Corridor. This project is
part of the recommendations in the Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) conducted by
SunLine to evaluate and improve existing transit service provided in the Coachella Valley. As'a
result of the comprehensive analysis of the existing transit service, a Preferred Service Plan
(PSP) was developed, which classified the existing routes into four categories. The new service
classifications are Regional, Sub -regional, Community -based, and Market -based. Line 111,
which has been reclassified as a Regional service, is one of 12 routes that will be improved to
enhance transit service in the Valley.
The current Line 111 route operates on a 25 minute headway on weekdays and 44 minutes
headway on weekends. The proposed project would improve headways from the current
weekday and weekend headways to a 15 minutes headway on weekdays and weekends. Over
time, SunLine will improve the headway to 10 minutes. Additional improvements on Line 111
include extending the route to the City of Coachella and will serve the College of the Desert.
Line 111 offers service from Palm Springs to Indio along Highway 111 and serves. as the main
trunk line within SunLine's bus system. Riders using other routes serving different segments of
the Valley including Desert Hot Springs, Palm Spring, Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage, Indio,
As of7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
99
Cathedral City, Indian Wells, and La Quinta connect with the Line 111 at various locations along
the route. This routes links and connects SunBllS riders with major commercial and retail
businesses, recreational attractions, museums, educational facilities, medical institutions, and
municipal offices.
PS: The operating cost is estimated at $9,812,370 in 2007 dollars, which has been adjusted for
inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI of 4.1 %. The operating cost in 2009
dollars is estimated at $10,214,678, and then multiplied by the total number ofyears of the
conceptual Plan, which is 10 years. The total operating cost requested is estimated at
$102,146,780.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures route performs efficiently, as well as
improves on -time performance. The improvement will reduce the travel time and encourage
more residents in the Coachella Valley to ride the bus.
Evaluation. Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Evaluate ridership on the route
Conduct ride checks along the route
Monitor route performance on a daily basis to ensure bus is performing on time
Conduct surveys and talk to passengers on how to improve service.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
Number of vehicles requested is 17 and will include 40ft buses. The expected make of the
vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger capacity in the 40ft'buses is 45.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/1'1)A Summary of Proposed Project
100
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route
Paratransit D
Capital: Fixed Route Al
Paratransit
Total Cost: $2,529,630
[Project Name: Implementation of Market -Based Service Routes
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Projects:
Purchase six (6) 25ft, 30ft and 32ft expansion buses that will be utilized for the market -based
service routes as part of the recommendations outlined in the COA. Recommendations in the
comprehensive Operational Analysis proposes implementation of market -based routes to provide
service to seniors or persons with disabilities needing transportation service for medical or social
activities within the various communities in cities in the Coachella Valley.
PS: The current cost ofpurchasing a bus is estimated at $405,000, which has been adjusted
for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI of 4.1 %. The cost of purchasing a
bus in 2009 dollars is estimated at $42, 605, and then multiplied by the number of buses to be
purchased The total capital requested for the 6 buses is estimated of $2,529,630.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures SunLine provides service to areas in the
Valley with to meet mobility needs of seniors and persons with disabilities living in various
segments of the Coachella Valley.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
101
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project): .
Continued maintenance of vehicles
Preventive maintenance
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
Number of vehicles requested is six (6) which will be a combination of 25ft, 30ft and 32fft buses.
All vehicles will be utilized for Market -based services that will be implemented at a future date.
The expected make of the vehicles will below -floor buses. The passenger capacity in the buses
is 26 to 30 passengers.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
102
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please cheek:
Operating: Fixed Route 4
Paratransit
Capital: Fixed Route CI
Paratransit D
Total Cost: $57,255,000
Project Name: Implementation of Market -Based Service Routes
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Projects:
This project entails implementing one of two new service types recommended in the Preferred
Service Plan as a result of the Comprehensive Operational Analysis conducted to evaluate and
provide recommendations to improve transit services in the Coachella Valley. The Market -based
service will be designed in conjunction with and assistance from staff of local jurisdictions. The
Market -based services will include services designed to serve seniors, persons with disabilities
and school districts, as well as work with social service agencies to coordinate transportation
service to serve the need of those that have mobility challenges.
PS: The total operating cost of the Market -based services is estimated at $5,500,000 in 2007
dollars, which has been adjusted for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI
of 41 %. The operating cost in 2009 dollars is estimated at $5,725,500, and then multiplied by
the total number of years of the Conceptual Plan, which is 10 years. The total operating cost
requested is estimated at $57,,255,000.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure AnDA Summary of Proposed Project
103
GoalfOutcome of Proposed Project:.
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures SunLine provides service to areas in the
Valley with increased demand for more transit service, as well as improve and reduce the travel
time for riders, especially seniors and persons with disabilities.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Evaluate ridership on the route
Conduct ride checks along the route
Monitor route performance on a daily basis
Conduct surveys and talk to passengers on how to improve service.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity.
Number of vehicles requested is six (6) which will be a combination of 25ft, 30ft or 32ft buses.
All vehicles will be utilized for the Market -based services that will be implemented at a future
date. The expected make of the vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger capacity in these
buses is 26 to 30 passengers.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
104
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit
Capital: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit
Total Cost: $46845,000
roject Name: Continued Provision of Discount Fares For Seniors &
isabled, and additional Transit Service
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
This project entails offering discount fares to seniors and the disabled who use SunLine services,
as well as improve and add more service. As part of the Comprehensive Operational Analysis
(COA) that was completed by SunLine; the existing paratransit service was also evaluated to
determine if the existing service is efficient and cost effective. The recommended changes to
improve the paratransit service as changes are implemented on the fixed routes. Additionally, in
January 2006, SunLine restructured its fares to ensure the agency continues offering discounted
fares to seniors and persons with disabilities. SunLine will utilize the funds requested to
implement subsidized service for seniors and persons with disabilities.
PS: The total operating cost is estimated at $4,500,000 in 2007 dollars, which has been
adjusted for inflation by multiplying that and then multiplied by the number of years of the
conceptual Plan, which is 10 years. The total operating cost requested is estimated at
$46,845,000.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure Af1'DA Summary of Proposed Project
105
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures SunLine continues to offer discount fares
to seniors and persons with disabilities, as well as provide service to areas in the Valley with
increased demand for more transit service. It will also provide newly defined service that will
enhance paratransit service offered to seniors and the disabled.
Evaluation. Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Offer discounted fares
Provide additional service or offer different type of service that meets their mobility needs.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
106
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating Fixed Route 0
Paratransit
Capital: Fixed Route
Paratransit ❑
Total, Cost: $11,383335
Project Name: Frequency Improvement., for Sub -regional transit services,
including Lines 14, 30, 32, 53, 70, 90, and 92.
Summary of Proposed_ Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver. Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
Purchase twenty-seven (27) 30ft and 40 ft buses that will be utilized on the sub -regional bus
service routes as part of the recommendations outlined in the COA. Recommendations in the
Comprehensive Operational Analysis propose improvements to and implementation of realigned
routes to enhance existing services. The improvements include increasing frequencies on Lines
14, 30, 70, 90, and 92, as well as implementing new routes, Lines 32 and 53.
PS: The current cost ofpurehasing a bus is estimated at $405,000 in 2007 dollars, which has
been adjusted for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI of 4.1%. The cost
of purchasing a bus in 2009 dollars is estimated at $421,605, and then multiplied by the
number of buses to be purchased. The total capital cost requested for the buses is estimated at
$11,383,335.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure AfEDA Summary of Proposed Project
107
GoallOutcome of ProposedProject:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures route perform efficiently, as well as
provide service to areas in the Valley with increased demand for more transit service. improves
on -time reduce the travel time and will encourage more residents in the Coachella Valley to ride
the bus. This will also help reduce the air quality in the Valley.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Preventive Maintenance
Continued maintenance Conduct ride checks along the route
Monitor route performance on a daily basis
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
Number of vehicles needed requested is twenty-seven (27), which will be a combination of 30ft
and 40ft buses. The expected make of the vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger
capacity in the 40ft buses is 45, with the passenger capacity in the 30 ft buses is 26.
As of.7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
108
"
i
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i x e d R o u t e '
P a r a t r a n s i t 0
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e . D
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
T o t a l C o s t : $ 1 3 6 , 2 0 5 , 0 2 0 '
P r o j e c t N a m e : F r e q u e n c y I m p r o v e m e n t f o r S u b - r e g i o n a l t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s ,
i n c l u d i n g L i n e s 1 4 , 3 0 , 3 2 , 5 2 , 7 0 ; 9 0 , a n d 9 2 .
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
3 2 - 5 0 5 H a r r y O l i v e r T r a i l
T h o u s a n d P a l m s , C A 9 2 2 7 6
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
E u n i c e L o v i , D i r e c t o r o f P l a n n i n g
7 6 0 - 3 4 3 - 3 4 5 6 , e x t . 1 1 9
e l o v i @ s u n l i n e . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
T h i s p r o j e c t e n t a i l s i m p r o v i n g t h e s u b - r e g i o n a l s e r v i c e s o p e r a t e d i n v a r i o u s p a r t s o f t h e
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . T h i s p r o j e c t ' i s p a r t o f t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s i n t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e O p e r a t i o n a l
A n a l y s i s ( C O A ) t h a t w a s c o n d u c t e d b y S u n L i n e t o e v a l u a t e a n d i m p r o v e e x i s t i n g t r a n s i t s e r v i c e
p r o v i d e d i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . A s a r e s u l t , a P r e f e r r e d S e r v i c e P l a n ( P S P ) w a s d e v e l o p e d ,
w h i c h r e c l a s s i f i e d t h e e x i s t i n g r o u t e s i n t o f o u r t y p e s o f s e r v i c e s . T h e n e w s e r v i c e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s
a r e R e g i o n a l , S u b - r e g i o n a l ; C o m m u n i t y - b a s e d , a n d M a r k e t - b a s e d . L i n e s 1 4 , 3 0 , 3 2 , 5 3 , 7 0 , 9 0 ,
a n d 9 2 h a v e b e e n r e c l a s s i f i e d a s s u b - r e g i o n a l s e r v i c e s , a n d h a v e a l l b e e n r e d e s i g n e d t o f e e d i n t o
L i n e 1 1 1 , w h i c h i s t h e t r u n k r o u t e o p e r a t i n g a l o n g t h e H i g h w a y 1 l 1 c o r r i d o r . A l l t h e r o u t e s
e x c e p t f o r L i n e 3 0 h a v e b e e n r e d e s i g n e d a n d r e r o u t e d t o s e r v e a r e a s t h a t h a v e g r o w n a n d n e e d
m o r e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e :
L i n e 1 4 :
L i n e 1 4 i s p r o p o s e d t o o p e r a t e a l o n g t h e s a m e a l i g n m e n t a s i t c u r r e n t l y d o e s w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n
o f s e r v i c e o n H a c i e n d a A v e n u e , e a s t o f P a l m D r i v e , w h i c h h a s b e e n d e s i g n a t e d a s a C o m m u n i t y -
b a s e d s e r v i c e . T h e P S P r e c o m m e n d s a n a l i g n m e n t o n B a r i s t o R o a d b e t w e e n S u n r i s e W a y a n d
A s o f 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A n D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
1 0 9
Farrell Drive as opposed to Tahquitz Canyon Way. The Line 14 route currently operates on a 50
minute headway on weekdays and 75 minutes headway on weekends. The proposed project
would improve the route to have a 30 minute headway on weekdays and 60 minutes headway on
weekendss. The PSP for Line 14 would require four additional buses.
Line 30:
Line 30, which is the most productive route in SunLine's system has also been reclassified as a
sub -regional service route. This route provides service to the communities of Palm Springs and
Cathedral City. There are no recommendation in the PSP to alter the route as it exists. The only
changes recommended for the route is to increase the frequency on the route to 15 minutes all
day. The proposed PSP for Line 30 will require seven (7) additional buses.
Line 32:
Line 32 is a new route which was designed to replace Lines 31 and 50, and will provide service
connections to residents in the communities of Palm Springs, Thousand Palms, Cathedral City,
Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert; The new route will serve the Westfield Shoppingtown on
Town Center Way in Palm Desert and will also serve the emerging retail and commercial
businesses along Monterey Avenue. The PSP recommends operating the route on a 30 minute
headway and will require six (6) buses.
Line 53:
Line 53 will operate mainly on Cook Street and will partially replace Line 50, which will be
discontinued. In addition, the route has been redesigned to serve the University of California,
Riverside (Palm Desert Campus branch) and California State University, San Bernardino (Palm
Desert Campus branch) on Cook Street, .as well as serve the College of the Desert and will
terminate at the Westfield Shoppingtown on Town Center Way. The PSP recommends a 30
minute headway, which will require two (2) buses.
Line 70:
Line 70 will continue to provide service along the same routing it currently operates and will
serve the communities of La Quinta and Bermuda Dunes. The PSP recommends modifying the
route to serve the emerging retail and commercial businesses on Highway 111 near Adams .
Street_ Additionally, the route will be expanded to serve more areas within the community. of
Bermuda Dunes. The reconfigured route is designed to operate on a 30 minute headway and will
require three (3) buses.
Line 90
As a result of the recommendations in the COA, the PSP recommends streamlining the existing
Line 90 to service the communities of Coachella and Indio. The route has also been extended
south of the current terminal in Coachella and north through downtown Indio. The PSP
recommends operating the service on a 30 minute headway and will require three (3) buses to
run the service.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
110
Line 92:
Line 92 is one of two routes designed to replace current service on Line 91. The new route
configuration will provide bi-directional service in the communities of Mecca, Thermal and
Coachella, and will provide improved and better service in Mecca and Thermal, as well as serve
the Mecca Family Medical Health Center. Proposed headway in the PSP would require 30
minutes to operate the route and will. take two (2) vehicles to run the service.
PS: The current operating cost is estimated at $13,084,055 in 2007 dollars, which has been>
adjusted for inflation by multiplying that amount by the current CPI at 4.1 %. The operating
cost in 2009 dollars is estimated at $13,620,502, and then multiplied by the number of years of
the Conceptual Plan, which is 10 years. The total operating cost requested is estimated at
$136,205,020.
Goal/Outcome of Proposed Project:
This goal and outcome of the proposed project ensures the routes perform efficiently, as well as
provide service to areas in the Valley with increased demand for more transit service. It will
improve on -time performance, reduce the travel time, and will encourage more residents in the
Coachella Valley to ride the bus.
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Evaluate ridership on the route
Conduct ride checks along the route
Monitor route performance on a daily basis
Conduct surveys and talk to passengers on how to improve service.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
Number of Vehicles Requested (if any), identifying number, expected make/model and
passenger capacity:
Number of vehicles requested is twenty-seven (27), which will be a combination of 30 ft and 40
ft buses. The expected make of the vehicles will be low -floor buses. The passenger capacity in
the 40ft buses is 45, with the passenger capacity in the 30 ft buses listed as 26.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
111
"
i
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d
C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
P l e a s e c h e c k :
O p e r a t i n g : F i s t e d R o u t e Q'
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
C a p i t a l : F i x e d R o u t e
P a r a t r a n s i t Q'
T o t a l C o s t : $ 1 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
' P r o j e c t N a m e : T r a n s i t E n h a n c e m e n t P r o j e c t
S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
A g e n c y N a m e a n d A d d r e s s :
S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y
3 2 - 5 0 5 H a r r y O l i v e r T r a i l
T h o u s a n d P a l m s , C A 9 2 2 7 6
P r i m a r y C o n t a c t P e r s o n , N a m e , T i t l e , T e l e p h o n e a n d E m a i l :
E u n i c e L o v i , D i r e c t o r o f P l a n n i n g
7 6 0 - 3 4 3 - 3 4 5 6 , e x t . 1 1 9
e l o v i @ s u n l i n e . o r g
B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e P r o p o s e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P r o j e c t :
P u r c h a s e o n e h u n d r e d ( 1 0 0 ) b u s s h e l t e r s a n d t h i r t y - f i v e ( 3 5 ) b e n c h e s f o r p l a c e m e n t a t b u s s t o p s
l o c a t e d t h r o u g h o u t S u n L i n e ' s s e r v i c e a r e a . R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s i n t h e C o m p r e h e n s i v e
O p e r a t i o n a l A n a l y s i s ( C O A ) i n c l u d e i m p r o v i n g a n d e n h a n c i n g b u s s t o p s i n t h e s y s t e m . A s a
r e s u l t , S u n L i n e h a s c o m p l e t e d a n i n v e n t o r y o f t h e b u s s t o p s a n d w i l l b e s e l e c t i n g b u s s t o p s
w h e r e b u s s h e l t e r s a n d b u s b e n c h e s c a n b e i n s t a l l e d .
P S : T h e c a p i t a l c o s t o f t h e t r a n s i t a m e n i t i e s i s e s t i m a t e d a t $ 1 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 .
G o a l l O u t c o m e o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t :
T h i s g o a l a n d o u t c o m e o f t h e p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t w i l l e n h a n c e a n d i m p r o v e t r a n s i t s e r v i c e , a s w e l l
m a k e t h e b u s s t o p s m o r e c o m f o r t a b l e f o r b u s p a t r o n s w h o u s e t h e b u s s e r v i c e . I t a l s o p r o t e c t s
p a s s e n g e r s w a i t i n g f o r t h e b u s e s f r o m i n c l e m e n t w e a t h e r i n t h e V a l l e y .
A s o f 7 / 1 4 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A / T D A S u m m a r y o f P r o p o s e d P r o j e c t
1 1 2
Evaluation Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
Continuous maintenance and monitoring of bus shelters to ensure there are no graffiti on them.
Geographical Service Area of Transportation Project:
Coachella Valley
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
113
Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and
Capital Projects
Please check:
Operating: Fixed Route ❑
Paratransit D
Capital: Fixed Route 4
Paratransit
Total Cost: $10,500,000
Project Name: Transit Facilities Transfer Locations, Park & Ride Lots
and Transit Centers.
Summary of Proposed Project
Agency Name and Address:
SunLine Transit Agency
32-505 Harry Oliver Trail
Thousand Palms, CA 92276
Primary Contact Person, Name, Title, Telephone and Email:
Eunice Lovi, Director of Planning
760-343-3456, ext. 119
elovi@sunline.org
Brief Description of the Proposed Transportation Project:
As part of the recommendations in the Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA), the
Preferred Service Plan proposes a number of transit facilities throughout various locations in the
Valley. These facilities may include transit centers, transfer locations, and Park and Ride Lots
that may be utilized by StmLine passengers and commuters where they can park their vehicles
and board the buses that will serve these facilities. SunLine will conduct a Site Selection study
to assist in determining the best possible location to construct these facilities. As part of the
process, SunLine will be working with Caltrans and the local jurisdictions, and will seek funding
from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in addition to funding requested from the
Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) to construct these projects. The locations
for these facilities will be determined later. -
PS: The capital cost for the construction of the transit facilities is estimated at $10,500,000.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
114
oatiOlitcome of Proposed Project:
and outcome of the proposed project will enhance and improve transit service, as well
6: age more residents in the Valley to use the services SunLine provides. It is also intended
age residents in Coachella Valley who currently commute outside the Valley to their
_ioh, in other parts of the County in Single Occupant Vehicles (SOV) to ride commuter bus
,e that will be implemented. This will also help to improve the air quality in the Valley and
region as more residents choose to ride public transportation; thereby, reducing the number of
0v on the freeways.
on Criteria (Identify how agency will determine effectiveness of this project):
C tOf ridership by conducting ride checks and continue to evaluate the service. Conduct
surveys: and talk to passengers on how to improve service.
mgraphical Service Area of Transportation Project:
crc helia Valley.
As of 7/14/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary of Proposed Project
115
.N
"
M e a s u r e A a n d 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 )
P r o p o s e d T r a n s i t O p e r a t i n g a n d C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s
S U M M A R Y S H E E T
A g e n c y N a m e : P A L O V E R D E V A L L E Y T R A N S I T A G E N C Y
S U M M A R Y O F P R O P O S E D P R O J E C T S :
P r o j e c t N a m e : F i x e d R o u t e - E x p a n d e d H o u r s
C o s t : $ _ 3 , 0 0 6 , 0 5 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : A f t e r 2 0 0 7 - E i g h t y e a r s o p e r a t i n g c o s t .
P r o j e c t N a m e : D i a l - A - R i d e E x p a n d e d H o u r s
C o s t : $ 3 4 0 , 3 7 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w _ E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : A f t e r 2 0 0 7 - E i g h t y e a r s o p e r a t i n g c o s t .
P r o j e c t N a m e : E x p a n s i o n V e h i c l e s F i x e d R o u t e
C o s t : $ 2 5 4 , 1 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : X N e w E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : F Y 0 8 - 1 , F Y 0 9 - 1
P r o j e c t N a m e : B u s S t o p A m e n i t i e s
C o s t : $ _ 1 5 0 , 0 0 0
I n d i c a t e w h e t h e r p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t i s N e w o r E x i s t i n g : _ X N e w E x i s t i n g
T i m e L i n e f o r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n : . F Y 0 6 , F Y 0 8 , F Y 1 0 , F Y 1 2 , F Y 1 4
1 1 6
A s o f 7 / 1 3 / 2 0 0 6
M e a s u r e A I T D A S u m m a r y S h e e t
Measure A and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
Proposed Transit Operating and Capital Projects
SUMMARY SHEET
Agency Name: PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY `
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED PROJECTS:
Project Name: Fixed Route Operating Cost (Existing Level of Service)
Cost: $ 11,386,500
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: - New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Ten year operating cost.
Project Name: Dial -A -Ride Operating Cost (Existing Level of Service)
Cost: $ 2,836,425
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: Ten year operating cost.
Project Name: Replacement Vehicles — Fixed Route
Cost: $_781,850
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: New. X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 09-1, FY 10-2, FY 11-1, FY 13-1
Project Name: Replacement Vehicles —Dial-A-Ride
Cost: $_387,200
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: _ New X Existing
Time Line for Implementation: FY 08-1, FY10-1, FY12-1
Project Name: Relocate to PVVTA Corporate Yard — New Facility
Cost: $ 1,000,000.
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: After 2008
Project Name: Capital Equipment for Corporate Yard
Cost: $_1,000,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: After 2008
Project Name: CNG Fueling Station
Cost: $ 400,000
Indicate whether proposed project is New or Existing: X New _ Existing
Time Line for Implementation: After 2007 — Match for $600,000 in Grant Funds
TOTAL: ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS: $_21,542,495
Measure A Funds Requested: Not Applicable
TDA Funds Requested: $ 2E542,495
As of 7/13/2006
Measure A/TDA Summary Sheet
117