HomeMy Public PortalAbout02 February 14, 2007 CommissionRECORDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
TIME: 10:00 a.m.
DATE: Wednesday, February 14, 2007
LOCATION: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside
Commissioners
Chair: Terry Henderson
1' Vice Chair: Jeff Stone
2nd Vice Chair: Bob Magee
Bob Buster, County of Riverside
John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside
Jeff Stone, County of Riverside
Roy Wilson, County of Riverside
Marion Ashley, County of Riverside
Brenda Sales / Barbara Hanna, City of Banning
Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont
Joseph DeConinck / Charles Grotke, City of Blythe
John Chlebnik / Bill Davis, City of Calimesa
Mary Craton / John Zaitz, City of Canyon Lake
Gregory S. Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City
Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella
Jeff Miller / Karen Spiegel, City of Corona
Hank Hohenstein / Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs
Robin Lowe / Marc Searl, City of Hemet
Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells
Michael H. Wilson / Gene Gilbert, City of Indio
Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta
Bob Magee / Robert L. Schiffner, City of Lake Elsinore
Frank West / Charles White, City of Moreno Valley
Rick. Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta
Frank Hall / Harvey Sullivan, City of Norco
Dick Kelly / Robert Spiegel, City of Palm Desert
Ronald Oden / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs
Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris
Gordon Moller / Alan Seman, City of Rancho Mirage
Steve Adams / Dom Betro, City of Riverside
Chris Buydos / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto
Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula
Mike Perovich, Governor's Appointee
Eric Haley, Executive Director
Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director
Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director
79735
Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please
complete and submit a Testimony Card to the Clerk of the Commission.
11.36.00
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTA TION COMMISSION
www.rctc.org
AGENDA *
*Actions may be taken on any item Listed on the agenda
10: 00 a.m.
Wednesday, February 14,. 2007
BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First. Floor, Riverside
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act' and ' Government Code Section,
54954 2, if special assistance is needed , to participate in a Commission meeting, please
contact the Clerk of the Board at. (951) 787-7141.. Notification of at least 48 hours prior
to meeting time willassist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to
provide accessibility at the meeting.
1. CALL TO ,ORDER
2. :. - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Each individual speaker is limited to speak five (5)
continuous minutes or less. " The Commission may,1 either at the direction of
the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this five minute time
limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number
of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each
speaker to three (3) continuous minutes. Also, the Commission may
terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers
may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair : Any
written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments
and comments on Agenda Items..
Under the Brown Act, . the Board should not take action on or discuss matters.
raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on
the agenda. Board members may refer such matters to : staff for factual
information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration:
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
February 14, 2007
Page 2
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 10,2007
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS - • The Commission 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 Commission subsequent
to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an itemm v :to the agenda
requires 2/3 = vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 : of the
Commission 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.
CONSENT CALENDAR All matters on the '!Consent`' Calendar will be
approved in a single motion unless a Commissioners) requests separate
action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be.
placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
7A. ORDINANCE NO 07-001 TO. AMEND' THE
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
This • .item is for the Commission to adopt .Ordinance: No. 07-001,
"An Ordinance Amending the Riverside -County Transportation
Commission Administrative Code", : to reflect changes related ' to the
Executive Committee and to addressing the ;Commission on agenda
items.
MID YEAR REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Overview
is item is for the Commission to.
prove the mid: -year revenue projections;
approve the budget adjustments to reflect lithe revised Measure A
revenues, of $3,000,000 and expenditures of $1,477,000; and
3) Approve the budget adjustments to.' reflect_ the;„ revised Local
Transportation Fund (LTF). planning revenues of „$371,803 and
expenditures of $371,803.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda .:
February 14. 2007
Page 3
2)
7C. FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 LOCAL : TRANSPORTATION FUND AND
MEASURE A REVENUE- PROJECTIONS
Overview
This item is for the. Commission to:
Page13
1) Approve the projections of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF)
apportionment for the Western Riverside County, Coachella
Valley, ,and Palo Verde Valley areas; and,
Approve the projections for Measure A and: related allocations.
7D. MID-YEARBUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
Overview
This itemis for the Commission to approve ,a $229,700 increase in
FY 2006/07 .expenditures for mid -year budget adjustments.
7E. PROPOSED AUDIT SCOPE FOR TRANSIT ' AND. 'TRANSPORTATION
AUDITS
Overview
This item is for the Commission to approve the proposed audit scope
for Measure A recipients and Transportation Development Act (TDA)
claimants..
7F. AMENDMENT TO ADVANCE OF FISCAL YEAR 2006/07 CITY OF
HEMET MEASURE A LOCAL STREET AND ROAD FUNDS
Overview
Page 24
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve, Agreement No. 06-31-068-01, Amendment No. 1 to
Agreement No. 06-31-068-00, to advance to the . city of Hemet
Measure A Local Street and Road funds in FY 2007/08 rather
than FY 2006/07; and
2) Authorize the Chair, . pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
February 14, 2007
Page 4
7G.... STATUS OF TOLL PROGRAM AND STRATEGIC. PARTNERSHIP
ADVISORY SERVICES AMENDMENT
Overview
:This item is for the Commission to:
eceiveand.; file summary of . 'Orange County ! Transportation
Authority (OCTA) goals to support Riverside County 1 O-Year.
Delivery Plan;
Support the continued coordination : with . OCTA . regarding its
goals, including conceptual approval!: of 'the`: Commissions fair
share of OCTA's expanded travel and revenue studies;
3) Receive and file report on status of legislative approval
4) Receive and file report on status of Corridor A analysis;
5) Approve a $750,000 contract increase for Strategic Partnership
Advisory Services and amendments, as' necessary, to Agreement
Nos. 06-66-026-00, 06-66-027-00 and 06-66-028-00, and
Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, toexecute
the agreements on behalf of the Commission.
7H. PROGRAMMING OF CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY
FUNDS. FOR THE NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK PARKING
STRUCTURE
Overview.
This item is. for ,the Commission to approve programming $15 million of
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to. the North Main
Corona Metrolinkparking structure.
71. FISCAL YEAR 2007 MEASURE A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR
LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF NORCO
tis item is '.for the Commission to approve the amendment to -; the
FY 2007 Measure A Capital Improvement Plan;'(CIP) for- Local. Streets
and Roads for the city of Norco as submitted.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
February 14, 2007.
Page 5
7J. ' EXTENSION FOR i EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT WITH
BRE PROPERTIES FOR JOINT DEVELOPMENT AT THE = LA SIERRA
METROLINK STATION
Page 43
Overview
This item is for the. Commission to:
1) Approve a six-month extension , for the . exclusive negotiating
agreement (ENA) with BRE Properties for joint development at the
La Sierra Metrolink station;
2) Direct staff to enter into discussions with BRE Properties
regarding an increase in the good -faith deposit up to an additional
$25,000; and
3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
7K. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Commuter Rail
Program Update as an information item.
7L. COORDINATED PUBLIC TRANSIT -HUMAN
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
1) . Approve Agreement No. 07-62-096-00 with A-M-M-A for the
development of a Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services
Transportation Plan for Riverside County; and.:
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
February 14, 2007
Page 6
7M..- STATE ROUTE 60 MIXED FLOW HIGH OCCUPANCY . VEHICLE LANE
MITIGATION PROJECTS
Overview
This item is for the Commission to receive and fife the recommended
list of : replacement transportation control measure (TCM) projects
necessary to provide mitigation for the SR60 high occupancy vehicle
(HOV) mixed lane demonstration project.
COACHELLA VALLEY AIR QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANT
This item is for the Commission to:
Accept the Coachella Valley Air Quality
funds;
Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel
review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission,
and.
Authorize a budget amendment to create additional spending
authority to accommodate the contract.
Enhancement Grant
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING NO» 07-31-097-00 FOR THE
FUNDING AND JOINT DEVELOPMENT'OF STATE HIGHWAY 111
IMPROVEMENTS FROM WASHINGTON STREET , TO . WEST CITY
LIMITS WITHIN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
lis item is for the Commission t
Approve memorandum of understanding
No. 07-31-09.7-00 for the funding reimbursement.
highway improvements within the city of La Quinta, and
Authorize the. Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, toexecute
the agreement on behalf of the Commission..
Riverside County Transportation Commission, Agenda
• February 14, 2007
Page 7
7P: 2007 STATE AND FEDERAL
PROGRAMS
Overview
This item is for the Commission to:
1)
LEGISLATIVE n PLATFORMS AND
Adopt the 2047 Legislative Platforms and Programs;
2) Receive and file the state and federal legislative status report, and
3) Approve the following bill positions:
a) SB 53 (Ducheny, D-San Diego) Support in Concept
b) SB 56 (Runner, R-Antelope. Valley) Support
AGREEMENT NO. 07-6, 5-105-00 WITH KLEINFELDER TO PROVIDE
SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL FIELD EXPLORATION, TESTING SERVICES
AND TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED IRVINE .: TO
CORONA EXPRESSWAY PROJECT
Overview
This item is for. the Commission
o.:
1) Approve the selection process and award Agreement
No. 0.7-65-1.05-00 to Kleinfelder to provide supplemental geotechnical
field exploration, testing g services andi technicalevaluations for the
proposed lrvine to Corona Expresswayproject:
2) Staff is currently negotiating the final scope .ofwork and it is
anticipated that the final project scope, schedule and cost will be
presented for Commission approval at, its meeting on Wednesday,
February 14, 2007.
9. PIERPASS PRESENTATION
Overview
This item is for the Commission to receive a j presentation by Bruce Wargo,
President and CEO, PierPASS.
10. STATE ROUTE 74 PRESENTATION
Overview
Thisitem is for the Commission to' receive a presentation by Caltrans
District 12 on the upcoming SR-74 safety improvement project.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
February 14, 2007
Page 8
APPOINTMENT OF A REPRESENTATIVE TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Page 82
This :item is ::for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake,
Hemet, Lake ;Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula to.
select their representative to the Executive Committee.
ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR'AGENIDA
13. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commiissioners and the Executive
Director to report . on attended meetings/conferences and any other items
related to Commission activities.
14 CLOSED ''SESSION ITEMS
NFERENCE : WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION
ursuant to subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54956.9
AAA Case. No. 72 199 01006 04 VIVID
AMS Case No. 1220032805
Case No. RIC 462975
'CONFERENCE. WITH .REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 i 8
'Negotiating Parties: RCTC - Executive Director or Designee
Property Owners - See tist of Property Owners
Item
APN
279-230-003
327.-2.10-006
430-130-056
430-1:.30-063
430-130-064
430-1' 30-065
430-130-4)66
430-130-067
430_130-068
''roperty Owner(s).
Liston Brick.Company of Corona
Edwin P' Jr. and Patricia L. Butler
Dolores A. Judy
Donald L and, Nellie'Grace Scales
Leland M and Ruth E. Zepede
Shelbran Investments, L.P.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda
February 14, 2007
Page 9
4
279-240-001
279-240-008
279-240-009
279-190-034
282-040-003
279-030-003
279-030-004
279-030-005
279-030-006
279-030-008
Mike Kerr
Gary McMillan
15. •ADJOURNMENT
The next Commissionmeeting is scheduled to be held at 10:00 a.m.,
Wednesday, March 14, 2007, Board Room, County of Riverside
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
ROLL CALL
FEBRUARY 14, 2007
County. of,River`side, ,District I"
County of Riverside, District II
County, of. Riverside,,District.I11
County of Riverside, District IV
County of Riverside, District V:
City of Banning
City of Beaumont
City of Blythe
City of Calimesa
City of Canyon Lake
Cty of;Cathedral Cityl���
City of Coachella
pity_ of, Corona
City of Desert Hot Springs
City of_Hemet'
City of Indian Wells
City of Indio _
City of La Quinta
City_ ofzLake :Elsinore
City of Moreno Valley
City of Murrieta_y
City of Norco
;City of P'aIrry Desert
City of Palm Springs
City of Perns
City of Rancho Mirage
City�ofi;'Riverside __F `
City of San Jacinto
;City of''Temecula
Present Absent
Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET
FEBRUARY 14, 2007
NAME
AGENCY
E MAIL ADDRESS
A.,- -„ __
/.f6(2-�
6.4-A.t,i,._,l�7/J _
4927
—1
F,�frN 4 /A} � 5 7-
f 4 jeEif/ O vG II
>(l&� r4`L c-
Alaecv
l C. K C-> l" fi 8--r •
0 cf 2it, � T 77-7/0-
3121 'u S &Y.
65.4ex 72 4 72- �f :IL_,.Mied7��_
YcJaz.,1..
/,4.42eY�,640a0 Kfz 4
lM lC �v Ca� (_4
/
0 / 7- y 0 r w /, J
( -k3T„p2[f
/_,ThECJC_,,-
or/
/6U✓
,24e2._,It>
(i-1,
arkt,e)C\rlen 1ac.,,v`DC�
�
c r�i 2,,, c,
fi.1 D eSew f
o
('' M:77- -
I
L cp, ----e o....- -_____
1'Y) ]P\ E: iieW3\tCA-1
r-,A1-4?k1,r�
S-ttVQ.✓4.^^�1�wn
ZC - al
.�� , /✓ G�
Re- / z_ -��,€,--�/-�-‹..,/
s
���
-1 s") gLeg»!1<
C}FL/MESA
6� �oNs MOLLS
�fkNC Ho � 1 (2.�
�
�%% 04- -- (,0 //t,4-17-N'
i^-I I:, c-J
4n 1 s 0 SN
R\ r �-a Vt
60 / -2,e, AA-1 L�4 e
/ei/A-.O !f%.v
91t `1 (�
vim Jcs�
C9ctCLij ti
,,,,/,Pr�i, re,�i
e I n s
° 'r 9
-u4, ,��� ppp e-'2
t
of
174
.0
RCTC Conflict of Interest Form
Purpose: This form is provided to assist members of the RCTC Commissioners in meeting requirements of
Government Code Section 84308 and 87100 in documenting conflict of interests as related to RCTC
Commission/Committee agenda items.
Instructions: Under certain circumstances, RCTC Commission may be required to disclose and disqualify
themselves from participating in, influencing, or voting on an agenda item due to personal income, real
property interests, investments, business positions, or receipt of campaign contributions. If applicable,
CommissionersI must personally state the following information, for entry into the public record, prior to
consideration of the involved agenda item(s) and turn in the completed form to .the Clerk of the Board
prior to ieavingjIthe meeting.
I. Board Member Information
Board Member Name
City/County Name
Meeting Date
-a-k-r-
II. Campaign ,'Contributions
zf`fy Is7
1. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from 2,.+ wog-, to—d qi3> -
n t;el-¢vc (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
and therefore I am abstaining from participation on Agenda item , Subject:
2. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
(Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
and therefore I ;fofam abstaining from participation on Agenda item , Subject:
3. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
(Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
and therefore I am abstaining from participation on Agenda item , Subject:
4. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
and therefore I am abstaining from participation on Agenda item
(Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
, Subject:
I11. Financial Interest
1. I have a financial interest of from/in
(State income, real property interest, Investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location]
and therefore I lam abstaining from participation on Agenda Item , Subject:
2. I have a financial interest of , from/in
j(State income, real property interest, InvestmeM or business position/ (Identify. name of company or property location)
and therefore I 'am abstaining from participation on Agenda Item , Subject:
IV. Signature
Board Member Signature: Date: 7-1l y 137
Please remember you must state the Information in o the public record prior to consideration of the involved agenda item(s) and
turn in the completed form to the • erk of the Bo • r prior to leaving the meeting.
11
RCTC Conflict of Interest Form
Purpose: This form is provided to assist members of the RCTC Commissioners in meeting requirements of
Government Code Section 84308 and 87100 in documenting conflict of interests as related to RCTC
Commission/Committee agenda items.
Instructions: Under certain circumstances, RCTC Commission may be required to disclose and disqualify
themselves from participating in, influencing, or voting on an agenda item due to personal income, real
property interests, investments, business positions, or receipt of campaign contributions. If applicable,
Commissioners must personally state the following information, for entry into the public record, prior to
consideration of the involved agenda item(s) and turn in the completed form to the Clerk of the Board
prior to leaving the meeting.
I. Board Member Information
Board Member Name
A%Z(oAvf�L���
II. Campaign 'Contributions
City/County Name
Q Cavu'1-7
Meeting Date
�- —(
1. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
and therefore 1 'am abstaining from participation on Agenda item_
2. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
j (Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
and therefore I 'am abstaining from participation on Agenda item , Subject:
3. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
/ L(. _L� i PIP F1/4,-z- L- kA ,
(Ode y the name of the company and/or Individual)
, Subject:6 k-ir"-- •
/���p ��Zcp�rv4.7�_t-
and therefore I .am abstaining from participation on Agenda item
4. I have a disqualifying campaign contribution of over $250 from
and therefore I am abstaining from participation. on Agenda item
(Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
, Subject:
(Identify the name of the company and/or Individual)
, Subject:
III. Financial Interest
1. I have a financial interest of , from/in
�i (State income, real property interest, Investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location)
and therefore I am abstaining from participation on Agenda Item , Subject:
2. I have a financial interest of from/in
(State income, real property interest, investment or business position) (Identify name of company or property location)
and therefore I am abstaining from participation on Agenda Item , Subject:
IV. Signature
Board Member Signature.
A
Date: -
Please remember you must state the information into the public record prior to consideration of the involved agenda itemis) and
turn in the completed form to the Clerk of the Board prior to leaving the meeting.
s
AGENDA ITEM 5
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TR. ANSPORTA T/ON COMMISSION
MINUTES
Wednesday, January 10, 2007.
1. CALL TO ORDER
The ,Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to .order by
Chair Terry Henderson at 10:07 .a.m., in the Board Room at the County .of
Riverside Administrative . Center, 4080. Lemon Street, : Riverside, California,
92501...
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At this time, Commissioner Chris Buydos led the Commission in a flag salute.`
3. ROLL CALL
Commissioners/Alternates Present
Steve Adams
Marion Ashley
Roger Berg
Daryl Busch:
Bob Buster
Chris'Buydos
Bill Davis
Kathleen DeRosa
Charles Grotke
Frank Hall
Barbara:. Hanna
Terry Henderson
Hank :Hohenstein
Dick Kelly
Robin :Lowe
Bob Magee
Jeff Miller
Gordon Moller
Ron Roberts
Patti Romo
Larry Spicer
Jeff Stone
John F. Tavaglione`
Frank West
Michael H. Wilson
Roy Wilson
John Zaitz
Commissioners Absent.
Eduardo Garcia
Rick Gibbs
Ronald Oden
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests from the public.to speak.
Chair Henderson presented Commissioner Marion Ashleywith a plaque on
behalf of the Commission in appreciation for his service and .commitment. as
the Commission Chair for 2006.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES , December 13, 2006
M/S/C (Lowe/Miller) to approve the December 13, 2006: minutes:.
Abstain: Buydos, 'Davis, DeRosa, Grotke . Moller, Spicer, Zaitz
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
Eric Haley, Executive. Director, noted that there was additional inforrnation
for Agenda ltem 8, "Potential Highgrove Metrolink Station".
CONSENT :CALENDAR
M/S/C (Hohenstein/Adams) to approve the following
items:
REPROGRAM $16.3 MILLION OF : TRANSPORTATION'' . CONGESTION
RELIEF PROGRAM FUNDS 'FROM THE STATE. ROUTE 91`
HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE STAGE 2 PROJECT ' (ADAMS STREET
TO 60/91 /215 INTERCHANGE) TO ° 'THE STAGE 1 PROJECT
(UNIVERSITY AVENUE TO':60/91 /215 INTERCHANGE)
Approve reprogramming $16.3 million of Traffic Congestion
Relief (TCR) funds from the SR 91' High, Occupancy Vehicle
'(HOV) lane . Stage' , 2 project (AdarYis\ ,Street to 60/91 /215
;interchange) to the-SR-91 HOV lane''S,tage 1' project (University
Avenue to 60/91 /215 interchange);
Authorize the Executive Director t0 'sign!' any agreements with
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) that :may
be necessaryto support this action
"
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 M i n u t e s
J a n u a r y 1 0 , 2 0 0 7
P a g e 3
7 B . M E A S U R E A F U N D I N G F O R S T A T E R O U T E 9 1 R E . - S T R I P E / A U X I L I A R Y .
L A N E P R O J E C T . I N T H E C I T Y O F C O R O N A
1 . ) A p p r o v e $ 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 i n M e a s u r e A f u n d s f o r t h e S R - 9 1
R e - s t r i p e / A u x i l i a r y ' l a n e p r o j e c t i n t h e c i t y o f C o r o n a f r o m t h e
9 1 / 7 . 1 i n t e r c h a n g e ~ t o S e r f a s C l u b D r i v e ;
2 ) ` A p p r o v e a n a d d i t i o n a l $ 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 i n M e a s u r e A : f u n d s i f
n e c e s s a r y b a s e d o n b i d o p e n i n g ;
3 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 = 3 1 - 0 7 6 - 0 0 w i t h : t h e : C a l i f o r n i a
D e p a r t m e n t o f : � T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ( C a l t r a n s ) t o r e f l e c t t h e a b o v e
f u n d i n g . a l l o c a t i o n ;
4 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 3 1 - 0 9 2 - 0 0 w i t h t h e O r a n g e , C o u n t y .
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( O C T A ) f o r i t s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e .
p r o j e c t ; a n d
5 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , . t o
e x e c u t e t h e a g r e e m e n t s o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n .
7 C . A W A R D F O R F R E E W A Y S E R V I C E P A T R O L T O w T R U C K S E R V I C E
1 ) A w a r d A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 4 5 - 0 9 0 - 0 0 ' t o P e p e ' s T o w i n g : f o r t o w ,
- t r u c k s e r v i c e : o n B e a t N o . . . 7 o f t h e F r e e w a y . S e r v i c e P a t r o l � ` ( ' F S P )
p r o g r a m a t a c o s t o f $ 4 8 . 5 0 p e r h o u r . p e r - t r u c k ; a n d
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w ` ,
e x e c u t e t h e a g r e e m e n t o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n .
7 D . C O M M U T E R R A I L : P R O G R A M U P D A T E
R e c e i v e , a n d f i l e t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l , P r o g r a m U p d a t e ' a s a n i n f o r m a t i o n
i t e m .
7 E . M E M O R A N D U M O F U N D E R S T A N D I N G N O . 0 7 - 6 5 - 0 8 7 - 0 0 O N .
I M P R O V E M E N T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N F A C I L I T I E S . P I G E O N P A S S .
A N D R E C H E C A N Y O N R O A D C O R R I D O R S
1 ) A p p r o v e M e m o r a n d u m o f U n d e r s t a n d i n g ( M O U )
N o . 0 7 = 6 5 - 0 8 7 - 0 . 0 o n I m p r o v e m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n F a c i l i t i e s
b e t w e e n . t h e S a n B e r n a r d i n o A s s o c i a t e d : G o v e r n m e n t s
( S A N B A G ) , 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 , t h e
c o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e , t h e . c o u n t y . o f S a n B e r n a r d i n o , , a n d t h e
c i t i e s o f C o l t o n , G r a n d T e r r a c e , L o m a L i n d a , M o r e n o V a l l e y ,
R e d l a n d s , 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
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r , , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , e x e c u t e
t h e M O U o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n .
Riverside County'. Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 4
AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR `. FINAL
DESIGN . ENGINEERING >SERVICES FOR THE 1-215/SR 74/"G" STREET
INTERCHANGE IN THE CITY OF PERRIS
Direct staff to develop and .advertise a request for proposals
(RFP) for consultant services to provide ,final design services for
the 1989 Measure A 1-215/SR=74/"G -`Street interchange
improvement., project;
Form a selection committee comprised of representatives from
,.the Commission, Caltrans, and city o'lf . Perris staffs to review,
evaluate and rank. all RFPs received;, and
Authorize staff to negotiate a contract, with the top, ranked
consultant and bring back a recommendation',to the Cornmission
for contract award.
7G. AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST,; . FOR PROPOSALS; FOR
ON -CALL RIGHT-OF-WAY PHASE I AND PHASE li ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT SERVICES
Authorize the issuance of a , re
4n=Call „Right -of -Way Phase
Assessment Services; and
Approve an amendment to the FY 2006/07::budget in the
':amount _ of .:$=100,000 for Phase I 'Environmental Assessment .
Services '.and. $100,000 ,for Phase Il ; EnviropMental `Assessment.,
. Services.
quest' for proposals (RFP) for
and Phase II Environmental
AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST ',FOR PROPOSALS FOR
ON -CALL RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR
COMMISSION RAIL AND HIGHWAY PROJECTS
uthorize the issuance of a: request .for proposals (RFP) for
A'
On -Gall Right -of -Way Property Management, , : Services for
Commission Rail and Highwayprojects; and
Approve an amendment to the FY i 2006/47 ILbudget in. the.
'amount of $1.00;000 for On Ca11 ° Property f Management
Services.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 5
71. AWARD OF AGREEMENTS ° TO ZAMISKI CONSTRUCTION AND
REAL ESTATE &. CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.. FOR PROPERTY
MAINTENANCE SERVICES
1) Award Agreement No. 07-51-089-00 to Zamiski Construction
and Agreement :No. 07-52-088-00: to Real Estate & Consulting
Services, Inc. to perform On -Call Property Maintenance
Services; and
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to Legal counsel review, to
execute the :agreements on behalf of the Commission.
STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE STATUS. REPORT
1) Receive and file the state and federal legislative status repor
and
Approve the following bill positions:
• SB .9 (Lowenthal, D-Long Beach) - MONITOR
• SI3 ,,19 (Lowenthal,. D=Long Beach) .— MONITOR
S6 45 (Perata, D-Oakland)- MONITOR
SB 47 (Perata, D-Oakland) - MONITOR
H.R.5576.:(Knollenberg, R-MI)::=°:MONITOR: -
. POTENTIAL HIGHGROVE METROLINK STATION
•
Leticia Pepper, representing University Neighborhood Association`, provided a
r
handout dated January 10th from which she read her comments in support of.
a Highgrove .Metrolink station., A copy. of this document was distributedto: .
the Commissioners.
Melanie Zimmermann, ;Highgrove resident, expressed support for a Metrolink
station in the Highgrove area. She provided a handout dated
January 24, 2006, that depicts traffic on . Prospect and Spring Streets in
Highgrove. A copy . of this document was , distributedto the Commissioners.
She does not believe that the county of origin should be an issue. She
suggested the Commissioners visit the specific site being suggested. She
requested that the :.Commission defer action on this item: for further
consideration.
Edward D.eMuth, Grand Terrace resident, expressed support .for a Metrolink
station in the Highgrove area. He requested that the .Comrnission ` defer`
action on this item.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 6
Kevin Dawson, representing University Neighborhood Association, expressed
support for a Metrolink station in the . Highgrove' area. `He, provided
background information on prior community meetings concerning the
proposed . Highgrove Metrolink station. He requested that the Commission
defer -action on ,this item to allow San Bernardino Associated, Governments
(SANBAG) to review and further explore this issue.,;;
Denis Kidd, Highgrove resident and member of Highgrove CSA 126 Advisory.
Board, also expressed support for a Metrolink station;; in the Highgrove area ,
and requested that the Commission defer action on this Item to allow
SANBAG to review. He read : correspondence ;written by Barney Barnett,
dated January .10, :2007 Why you should not stop the Highgrove Metrolink
Project. A copy of this document was distributed to the Commissioners.
Barney Barnett, Highgrove resident, expressed support .for ea Metrolink.station.
in Highgrove. He presented slides that included photos of a 35 acre property
in ' Highgrove that he believes would be an ideal l".location for aMetrolink
station. The slides also included, photos of .develo'prn'ent in the surrounding
:
area and the Burlington Northern Santa . Fe (BNSF) mainline. 1He: stated :that
he was :contacted.. by the property owner in October 2006, at` 'which time he
t °:
old the property owner persons other than developers werea interested
in the property. In speaking to the property owner again on January 9th, the
property owner indicated there had been no contact from the Commission.
Hethen requested that the Commission defer. action : on this item to allow
SANBAG to review.,
Anne .Wade -Hornsby; Grand Terrace resident, .expressed ';support for a
proposed Highgrove :Metrolink station and requested ` that the Commission
defer action on this item as she believes that the ridership statistics are not
accurate and do not reflect new, growth in the area.
Hugh J. Grant, Grand Terrace :,;resident, expressed support for :a proposed,
Highgrove ,`Metrolink station that he` believes would:benefit benefit: ;transportation
needs in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties -.He provided (background on
his previous.; education, employment and memberships to various' agencies.
He believes that the ridership, statistics are not 4 correct and ;questioned the
capital costs.:
Steve . DeBaun,, Commission legal counsel, explained that .the .Commission,
has, ,. not , had :formal communication with the property ,owner of the 35 acre.
property ` in Highgrove. There are specific requirements under estate and
federal law; that the: Commission must follow prior to purchasing property..
In this case, under federal law, the Commission does not have a project and
Riverside County Transportation_ Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 7`
therefore cannot ;approach the property owner and cannot take action .that
would appear to impair their property : rights relative to the. use, development
or sale of their property.
Stephanie Wiggins, : Regional Programs .Director, explained that the goal of
her presentation is to provide a -clear . and complete understanding to the
Commission about the challenges andopportunities associated with a
potential Highgrove Metrolink station. .She presented the prior decisions
made by the Commission, the associated tradeoffs and discussed the
following items:
•
•
•
Ridership forecasts and funding estimates;
Weekday train volumes;
Ridership forecast methodology;
Daily ridership: forecasts between ;2010 and 2030 for. ,a
Highgrove Metrolink _station, . including " county of origin and
compared to the five Commission -owned stations;
Capital and operating costs for a Highgrove station with eight
trains,
Comparison . of the number of weekday trains' , and ridership .
between a- Highgrove Metrolink station -::and the five,
Commission -owned Metrolink. stations,
Perris Valley Line (PVL) alternatives analysis in 2003;
PVL draft environmental document in 2004;
Train movements arbitration; i.
Breakdown of capital costs for an increase to 10 trains;
Daily ridership forecasts for 2030 for, :a Highgrove Metrolink
station compared to potential sites identified in the 2005 RC.TC
Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
SANBAG participation including - its current station policy,
agenda item for its January 18th.- Commuter Rail Committee
meeting, and correspondence from the Commission's executive
director; 7
Opportunity for other station locations .to serve the Highgrove
area;
Timeline of Commission actions on the proposed Highgrove
Metrolink station;
Summary of findings
Highgrove layover facility and
Tier. II station report, survey results and approval in _ 1999 that
included the evaluation " of three sites: and input from Barney
Barnett.
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007,
Page 8
In :summary, she stated the Commission has evaluated the feasibility of ,a
Highgrove Metrolink station on the BNSF main line at least four times over:
the last '13 years.. She noted that the issues have not changed substantially;
during that time: including low ridership forecasts and identification of other
sites i .that are more: cost effective, noting an increase in : capital costs
associated with developing a station on the BNSF segment between
Riverside; and Highgrove. She concluded by stating that as a result of the .
five findings. the .recommendation is to decline, development 'of a Highgrove
station on the. BNSF main Tine:
Commissioner. Roger. Berg explained that based on his review of this item,
the Metrolink system and. the impacts and benefits forthe entire region, he
believes; that a Highgrove station is : not beneficial,, and that the economic
benefit to the residents of 'Riverside County is in the San Jacinto Branch Line
(SJBL)He pointedout that there are ,a number>>of .areas that have and are
continuing to experience dramatic growth. However, that growth does not
necessarily warrant the :construction of a Metrolink station as : costs,
constraints, and ;economic :benefit must be ,considered. He stated that there
needs to: be an inter -county transportation system and planning for the: future
by extending; . Metrolink service to Perris, Hemet and Temecula to :reduce
traffic into Riverside. He explained that the Commission's ''goal is ` to build.
projects that provide the greatest benefit ; to the residents of Riverside
County. He 'noted the close proximity of two 'existing Metrolink, stations to
Highgrove in comparison to . a number of other cities in Riverside County .that
have :a considerably longer commute to reach a Metrolink station.
In response: to' Commissioner ; Steve Adams question : if San Bernardino
decides' to participate. in cost sharing for a Highgrove .Metrolink station and
how .that would impact the staff. , , recommendation, Stephanie Wiggins
responded thatbased on: successful ridership levels and ridership statistics at
the current ,stations and regardless of funding, the level of ridership at a
Highgrove Metrolink station is counter' to what; has been seen at other
Riverside County stations and therefore the staff ;recommendation' would not
change.
He-,thankedstaff,for the and st ated;, that, the Commission's goal
•, ;. p
is :to do what is best for the residents of Riverside' County. He reiterated his
question ,that if San _Bernardino does vote to share the: costs,' the
Commission' would re-evaluate this issue.
Chair Henderson replied that . it would , ' be
ommis`sion to consider at that time.
r
Riverside County Transportation Comrnission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page'9
Eric Haley responded that ifthere was a financial commitment from
San Bernardino County, staff would bring the issue back to the Commission.
He concurred with Stephanie Wiggin's position regarding the cost benefit of
this project, noting that he has received no encouragement from
San Bernardino County.
Commissioner` Adams responded that he has received negative responses
from the elected officials in the . San Bernardino County in this issue. He
recommended that if SANBAG .does :vote to participate, .' the Commission
should have .the option to re -address this issue.
Commissioner. ;Bob Buster thanked staff for the, presentation and pointed out
the importance of the history to understand the context. He stated that
there needs to bediscussions with SANBAG for the entire transportation
systern between the two counties, including the .role of commuter rail'` and
bus rapid transit and the reduction of commutes.- He submitted' that
commuter rail between Temecula to San Bernardino makes more sense for
the future and discussed the basis for that submission. He stated there . is.
some flexibility in determining a location for a station v_ site, citing,. the
La Sierra Metrolink station as an example. He requested SANBAG's analysis
of; a Highgrove station.:. He emphasized that discussion with SANBAG are.
critical for improvements along the corridor between the two, counties::.
Commissioner Bob Magee thanked the speakers for their ,presentations,
specifically Barney Barnett. He explained that each time .the .issue has been
raised since 2006, he has requested additional information from staff to
allow him to understand this issue and with the presentation today, he
believes he has been educated. He recognized _ the ° public request to defer
this item until after SANBAG's Commuter Rail Committee meeting on
January 18th. He discussed the complexity of the issue and considerations
that the Commission must take into account to . make a decision. He noted
that based on SANBAG's draft agenda item, it will not support a Highgrove.
Metrolink station. He concurred with Commissioner Adams' comments that
should SANBAG's _position change, the Commission need's to reconsider:. the
current recommendation. Therefore, based on the cost ,benefit that has been
presented, he cannot support a Highgrove Metrolink station at this time.
Commissioner Marion Ashley thanked the public speakers for standing up for
their .community and pursuing .this issue. He believes .that everyone agrees
on the need for the PVL to help relieve congestion. He :concurred with
Commissioner Buster's comments regarding moving forward with
improvements oncorridors between Riverside and San Bernardino. Counties
and communications with SANBAG. While he would like to see a Highgrove
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 10
Metrolink station, the facts presented :do not support one. He concurred
with Commissioners Adams and Magee's comments"'.`' that support
re-evaluation of this item if SANBAG decides to share :" in the costs of a
Highgrove'; station. He thanked staff for its detailed and well written report.
Chair Henderson thanked the residents for their appearance and their sincere
plea for "Highgrove Metrolink station. She stated that these decisions have
been.; made by the Commission and not by staff. She thanked Commissioner
Buster for his comments on reinvigorating discussions with San Bernardino
County. She 'believes ::that the only °-thing that works in public transportation
is frequency. When funds are. spread : too thin and lines "me'et .the needs of
few, it is notrepresentative of what" public: transportation can, do.
Commissioner Daryl Busch ; commendedstaff' for . its presentation and:.
expressed support for the staff recommendation.
Chair Henderson requested staff provide a copy of ` the timeline of
Commission actions on the proposed Highgrove Metrolink, :station to the
Commissioners.
/C (Busch/Lowe) to decline' development of a Metrolink commuter
rail station in the Highgrove area on the. Burlington Northern Santa- Fe
(BNSF).: main line.
o;: Buster
Abstain: Buydos
-ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
There were no items pulled from the consent calendar.
COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE ,DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Eric, Haley announced` .the 30-year anniversary of. Commission's first
meeting in January 1977 and provided historical information
Commissioner Robin Lowe discussed the Southern California
Association of :Governments' (SLAG); focus on the ,Regional Housing
,Needs : Assessment (RHNA) process..
Commissioner Jeff 'Miller provided an update on
Committee.'
"
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 , M i n u t e s
J a n u a r y 1 0 , 2 0 0 7
P a g e 1 1
1 1 . C L O S E D S E S S I O N I T E M
A . C O N F E R E N C E W I T H L E G A L C O U N S E L : E X I S T I N G L I T I G A T I O N
P u r s u a n t t o s u b d i v i s i o n ( a ) o f G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n 5 4 9 5 6 . 9
" A A A C a s e N o . 7 2 1 9 9 0 1 0 0 6 0 4 V M D .
. J A M S C a s e N o 1 2 2 0 0 3 2 8 0 5
C a s e N o . R I C 4 6 2 9 7 5
C O N F E R E N C E W I T H R E A L P R O P E R T Y N E G O T I A T O R
- P u r s u a n t t o G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n 5 4 9 5 6 . 8
N e g o t i a t i n g P a r t i e s : R C T : C E x e c u t i v e : D i r e c t o r o r D e s i g n e e
P r o p e r t y O w n e r s S e e L i s t . o f P r o p e r t y O w n e r s
I t e m
2
A P N
4 2 5 - 1 0 0 . 7 0 0 3
4 . 2 5 - 2 1 0 - 0 0 2
4 2 5 - 2 1 0 - 0 1 4
4 2 5 - 2 1 0 ) 1 6
4 2 5 - 2 1 0 - 0 3 6 `
4 2 5 - 2 1 0 - 0 3 7
4 2 7 - 2 . 1 0 - 0 3 5
4 3 1 - 2 2 0 - 0 2 8 .
4 3 1 2 3 0 - 0 2 2
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 3 3
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 5 1
4 3 . 1 . - 2 3 0 . 0 5 9
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 6 0
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 6 1
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 6 2
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 6 4
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 6 5
4 3 1 - 2 3 0 - 0 6 6
4 3 1 - 2 4 0 - 0 2 5
4 3 1 - 2 4 0 - 0 3 3
4 3 . 1 - 2 4 0 - 0 3 6
P r o p e r t y O w n e r ( s )
H o l g a t e / W a s t a l
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
.January 10, 2007
Page 12
425-210-043
425-210-044
425=220-025
425-220-026
427-200-045
427-200-046
427-200-048
427-200-049
427-200-051
427-200-052
42.7-21.0-032
427 210-036
427-21.0.-054
427-210=055
427-210-056
427-210-057
431=220-029
431-220-030
431-220-031
431-220-032
431 220-033
431-220-034
431-230-057
431-230-058
431-230-063
431=230-067
431-230-068
431-240-028
431-240-029
431_-240-034
431-250-019
43.1 250-025
4.31-240-035
431-250-026
425-210-017
425-210-021
425 2.10-022
425- 210-042
425=210-045
42.5-210-046
427-20'0-044
Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes
January 10, 2007
Page 13
• 12. ADJOURNMENT
There being .no further business for consideration by the Riverside County
Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 12:24 p.m. The next
Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 10:00 a.m., on Wednesday,
February 14, 2007, at the in the Board Room at the County of Riverside
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
AGENDA ITEM 7A
RIVERSIDE. COUNTY . TRANSPORTATION: COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation .Commission -
FROM:
Executive Committee
Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the .Board
THROUGH:.
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:•
Ordinance No. 07-001 to Amend the Commission's Administrative
Code
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to adopt Ordinance No. 07-001, "An" Ordinance
Amending. the .Riverside County Transportation Commission Administrative Code",
to reflect changes related to the Executive Committee and to addressing the
Commission on agenda items.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Executive Committee Membership
The Executive Committee was established in 1999 as a result of the reorganization
of the Commission. Since that time, the regular memberthat represents the cities
of Riverside, Corona, and Moreno Valley has rotated every two years between
these cities. This practice was based on discussions held between the
Commission, Western Riverside Council of Governments, and Coachella Valley
Association of Governments staffs at that time. However, this practice has not
been formalized in the Administrative Code that sets forth the manner in which the
membership of. the Executive Committee is comprised. Changes made to the
Commission's Administrative Code require adoption through Ordinance to reflect
those changes. The recommended. amendment will formalize this ,practice.
Addressing the Commission on Agenda Items
In reviewing the Administrative .Code, staff believes that Article IV, Section G of
the Administrative Code, "Addressing the Commission on Agenda Items', requires
revision. Staff has surveyed .similar agencies and determined that three minutes is
an appropriate length of time to allow a speaker to address the Commission..
Additionally, staff recommends reducing the maximum time .for public comment for
Agenda Item 7A
any individual item or topic from ninety (90) minutes to thirty .(30) minutes, unless
extended, ` by the Chair or majority vote of the ''Board. These time allotments are
within the typical range afforded to the public by similar agencies:
The Executive Committee . reviewed and approved these , amendments.. at Its
January 10, 2007 meeting.
Attachments:.
1) Proposed Revisions to the Administrative Code .
2) Ordinance No: 07-001::
Agenda (ter 7A
2
ATTACHMENT 1
3.(a) Executive Committee. There shall be created an Executive
Committee. Subject to supervision by the Commission, ;the Executive Committee shall
oversee staff functions; recommend staff positions, job descriptions and salaries; appoint,
contract with and determine the compensation of the; Executive Director; discipline,
review and terminate the Commission's Executive Director; and oversee ,administration
of the Commission's office. Decisions of the Committee shall be final .unless a member
of the Commission, within five (5) days of the date of the decision, requests that the
decision be .placed on the agenda of the next regular Commission meeting for
reconsideration.. Meetings of the Committee shall be held at 9:30' a.m.: on the day of the
Commission meeting or as otherwise required and at a place_ and ,time to be set by the .
Executive Committee, unless otherwise directed by the Commission
(b) The membership of the Executive .Committee shall be as
follows:.
(1) The Chair of the Commission.
(2) The Vice Chair of the Commission.
(3) The Second Vice Chair of the. Commission.
(4) The Past Chair of the Commission.
(5) A regular member of the Commission representing
one of the following cities: Riverside, Corona,
Moreno Valley.. Such regular :member shall be
appointed by majority vote of the member)
fepresenting rotate . each term among each of the
cities referenced in the previous sentence.
(6) A regular member of the Commission representing
one of the following cities: Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Hemet, Lake
Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula: Such . member or
alternative: member shall be appointed by majority vote of the members representing the
cities. referenced in the previous: sentence.
(7)
A regular member of the Commission representing
the following cities: Blythe, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells,
Indio, La Quinta; Palm Desert,; Palm Springs and Rancho Mirage. Such member shall .be
appointed by a majority ''vote of the members representing the cities referenced in the
previous sentence.
(8) Three members of the Commission ..who are
members of .the .,Riverside County Board of Supervisors. Such members shall be
appointed by the'Board of Supervisors.
(c) :.
affirmatives "yes" votes.
(d) The term of the Executive Committee members, other than
the Chair and Vice Chair and the Second Vice Chair shall be two (2) years. At the end of
their 2-year term, Executive Committee members shall stand for reappointment as set
forth in Section H.3 (b).
(e) A member of the. Executive Committee may be removed by
majority vote of the Commission members responsible for his or her appointment. In the
event of a vacancy in the Executive Committee, the vacancy shall be filled as :set forth m
Section H.3.(b) above. The new member shall fill out the remainder of the ,term.
(f) An alternate member of the Commission, as appointed in
Article II.C:2, shall not assume' the duties of the regular member on the Executive
Committee when the regular member is absent. In addition, should a member of the
Actions of the Executive Committee shall require six (6)
Executive Committee resign or . otherwise leave the Commission, the vacancy shall be `
filled as set forth in Section H.3(b); above. The new member shall serve the remainder of
the unexpired term.
4
G. ADDRESSING COMMISSION ON AGENDA ITEMS. No person shall
address the Commission at any meeting until he or she has fast been recognized by the
Chair. The decision of the chair to recognize a person may be changed by vote of a
majority of the members of the Commission present at the meeting. Persons wishing to
address. the Commission shall fill out a speaker card and provide it to the Clerk of the
Commission prior to the start of the agenda item upon which he or she wishes to be
heard. The Chair may, in his or her discretion, direct the Clerk to accept speaker cards
filed after the start of the agenda item. Except as set forth below, when addressing the
Commission, each individual speaker will be limited to rive three continuous minutes or
less of public testimony. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by
a majority vote of the Commission, waive this five three minute time limitation.
Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speaker cards, the
Chair may, in his or her discretion, reduce. the time for each individual speaker to three
two continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any .
individual item or topic is ninety (9A) thirty (30) minutes, unless extended by the Chair or
majority vote of the Board. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the
consent of the Chair. The Commission may terminate public comments if such
comments become repetitious.
ATTACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO.07-001
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that it is now necessary to amend :its.
Administrative Code to reflect to reflect changes related to the Executive Committee and to
addressing the Commission on agenda items.;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby ordains
as follows:
Section l Article. III, ; Section H.3.(b)(5) of the Administrative Code is hereby
amended to read as follows: -
(5) A regular member of the Commission representing one of the following' .
cities: Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley. Such regular member shall rotate each term among
each of the cities referenced in the previous sentence.
Section 2. Article IV, Section G of the Administrative Code is hereby amended to
read as follows:
G. No person shall address the Commission at any meeting until he or she has
first been recognized by the Chair. The decision of the chair to recognize a person may be
changed by vote of a majority of the members of the Commission present at the meeting.
Persons wishing to address the Commission shall fill out a speaker card and provide it to the
Clerk of the Commission prior to the start of the agenda item upon which he or she wishes to be
heard. The Chair may, in his or her discretion, direct the Clerk to accept speaker cards filed after
the start of the agenda item. Except as .set forth below, when addressing the Commission, each
individual speaker will be limited to three continuous minutes or less of public testimony. The
Commission may., either at the direction of the Chair or by a majority vote of the Commission,
waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and
the number of speaker cards, the Chair may, in his or her discretion, reduce the time for each
individual speaker to two continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public
comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes, unless extended by the Chair or
majority vote of the Board. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of
the Chair. The Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become
repetitious.
Section 3. This Ordinance.: shallbe effective on February 14, 2007.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of February, 2007
ATTEST:
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
Ordinance No. 07-001
7
Terry Henderson, Chair
Riverside County Transportation Commission
AGENDA ITEM_ -713
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
February 1.4, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Mid -Year Revenue Projections
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION. -
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve the mid -year revenue projections;
2) Approve the budget adjustments to reflect the revised Measure A
revenues of $3,000,000 and expenditures of .$1,477,000; and
3) ` Approve the budget adjustments to reflect the revised Local
Transportation Fund (LTF) planning ` revenues of $371,803 and
expenditures of $371,803.
BACKGROUND. INFORMATION:
Prior to the beginning of the fiscal year, staff made projections regarding the
revenue received from Measure A and LTF funds for budget and apportionment
purposes, respectively. Staff has tracked these revenueson a monthly basis.
Current trends indicate that Measure A and LTF receipts are about 5.3% and 3.5%
higher, respectively, for the 'six months ended December 31, 2006 compared to the
same period. last year. Staff noted a significant decrease in year-to-year Measure A
and LTF receipts from November 2006 (15.6% for Measure A and 13.2% for LTF)
to December- 2006 (5.3% for Measure A and 3.5%. for LTF): Based on the
January 2007 estimates recently provided by the State Board of Equalization, the
year-to-year increases for Measure A and LTF rose slightly to 5.8% and 4.2%,
respectively. For FY 2005/06, Measure A and LTF receipts were about 15.4% and
14.9% higher, respectively, than the prior year of FY 2004/05.
While the Inland Empire's local economy has been perceived . as strong except for
the slowdown in housing, the significant changes within the current year as well as
compared to the prior years seem unusual and warrant further monitoring over the
next few months. Accordingly, staff has taken a cautious approach to this year's
mid -year projection analysis. Based on an emphasis on the trends of sales tax
receipts for the last six months and comparison to the UCLA Anderson Forecast
Agenda item 7B
completed in 2006, staff ..is recommending that the Commission increase the
current .year revenue projections as follows:'
FY 2006/07
Revenue
Projections
Measure A
LTF
Original
(January 2006)
$156,150,000
74,850,000
FY 2006/07 Revised for
Budget Mid -Year
Adjustment :.
$156,150,000 $ 159,150,000
74,850,000 74,850,000
'.Increase from`.
Budget
$ 3,000,000
For reference purposes, audited Measure A and LTF revenues: for FY 2005/06 were
$157,236,31.4 and $`74,673,605,, respectively. The FY 2006/07 ` Measure A
mid -year -projections reflect an approximate 1 % increase over the FY 200.5/06
actual revenues, while the FY 2006/07 LTF mid -year projections .are comparable to
the FY 2005/06 actual revenues. Additionally, the. UCLA Anderson ..Forecast
projected FY 2006/07 Measure A receipts of $159,693,000.
The increase in Measure A revenues has a direct effect on .the distributions to the
geographic areas . and related programs, especially local streets and roads (LSR).
Accordingly, in addition to .the revenue budget adjustments, Measure A °budget
adjustments are required for the LSR aggregating $1,175,000 as well as regional:
arterial expenditures of $302,000.
The LTF audit was completed and financial statements :; were issued in
November 2006. Staffhas revised the original projections to include the carryover
that is now available to the local governments and transit agencies amounting to
$12,39.3,440. The revised projections include a budget adjustment to Commission
Planning for $371`,803. The increase for SB 821 bicycle and pedestrian projects of.
$24.0,433 does not require 'a budget adjustment as such 'expenditures are made
from the LTF, which is an .unbudgeted fund of the Commission.
Upon Commission approval of this item, staff will provide,this'update,d information:
to the necessary local governments and transit: operators.
Agenda Item 7B
9
Financial Information
$3,000,000 sales tax
In Fiscal Year Budget:
N
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$1,477,000 LSR &
regional arterials
Source of Funds:
Measure A
Budget Ad ustment:
Y
Revenues:
227-71-40100 $ 890,000
Western County LSR sales tax
221-33-40100 367,000
Western County Rail sales tax
222-31-40100 856,000
Western County Highway sales tax
225-26-40100 56,000
Western County Special Transit sales tax
226-41-40100 56,000
Western County Commuter Assistance sales tax
254-71-40100 264,000
Coachella Valley LSR sales tax
252-26-401.00 75,000
Coachella Valley Special Transit sales tax
253-31-40100 113,000
Coachella Valley Highway sales tax
GLA No.:
255-72-40100 302,000
Coachella Valley Regional Arterial sales tax
233-71-40100
21,000
Palo Verde Valley LSR sales tax
$3,000,000
Appropriations:
227-71-86104 $ 890,000
Western County LSR
254-71-86104 264,000
Coachella Valley LSR
233-71-86104 21,000
Palo Verde Valley LSR
255-72-86405
302,000
Coachella Valley Regional Arterials .
$1,477,000
-
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\44zifc:03/1 t
Date:
1 /22/07
Financial Information
In. Fiscal Year Budget:
N
Year:
FY2006/07
Amount:
$371,803 sales tax
$371,803 planning
Source of Funds:
Local Transportation Fund
Budget Ad ustment:
Y
GLA No.:
106-65-40101
106-65-86205
$371,803
$371,803
LTF Planning. sales tax revenues
LTF Planning expenditures
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\liL,itivi
Date:
1 /22/07
Attachments: FY 2006/07 Mid -Year Revenue Projections for Measure A and LTF
Agenda Item 7B
10
"
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
M E A S U R E A D I S T R I B U T I O N P R O J E C T I O N
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 ( R e v i s e d 1 / 0 7 )
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7
R e v i s e d P r o j e c t i o n B u d g e t O r i g i n a l
M E A S U R E " A " P R O J E C T I O N $ 1 5 9 , 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 5 6 , 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 5 6 , 1 5 0 , 0 0 0
L E S S : A D M I N I S T R A T I O N 3 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 _ 3 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 3 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
T O T A L P R O J E C T I O N $ 1 5 5 , 6 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 5 2 , 6 5 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 5 2 , 6 5 0 , 0 0 0 -
L o c a l S t r e e t s C o m m u t e r S p e c i a l
& R o a d s H i g h w a y - R a i l A s s i s t a n c e T r a n s p o r t a t l o n
4 0 . 0 0 % 3 8 . 5 0 % 1 6 . 5 0 % 2 . 5 0 % 2 . 5 0 %
W E S T E R N C O U N T Y P O R T I O N $ 1 1 5 , 3 8 6 , 0 0 0 $ 4 6 , 1 5 4 , 0 0 0 $ 4 4 , 4 2 3 , 0 0 0 $ 1 9 , 0 3 9 , 0 0 0 $ 2 , 8 8 5 , 0 0 0 $ 2 , 8 8 5 , 0 0 0
B A N N I N G - - $ 8 1 2 , 0 0 0 _
B E A U M O N T _ - 5 4 6 , 0 0 0 -
C A L I M E S A 2 0 6 , 0 0 0 -
C A N Y O N L A K E S 2 7 2 , 0 0 0 -
C O R O N A 5 , 4 0 1 , 0 0 0 -
H E M E T - - 2 , 1 6 8 , 0 0 0 - -
L A K E E L S I N O R E - 1 , 2 3 7 , 0 0 0 -
M O R E N O V A L L E Y 4 , 7 0 4 , 0 0 0
M U R R I E T A 2 , 6 3 7 , 0 0 0
N O R C O 9 6 6 , 0 0 0
P E R R I S 1 , 3 8 6 , 0 0 0 -
R I V E R S I D E 9 , 9 6 7 , 0 0 0
S A N J A C I N T O - 7 5 3 , 0 0 0
T E M E C U L A 3 , 8 1 3 , 0 0 0 -
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y 1 1 , 2 6 6 , 0 0 0
A R E A T O T A L - $ 4 6 , 1 5 4 , 0 0 0 $ 4 4 , 4 2 3 , 0 0 0 $ 1 9 , 0 3 9 , 0 0 0 $ 2 , 8 8 5 , 0 0 0 $ 2 , 8 8 5 , 0 0 0
C I T I E S
L o c a l S t r e e t s R e g i o n a l S p e c i a l
R o a d s - H i g h w a y - A r t e r i a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
3 5 % 1 5 % 4 0 % - 1 0 %
C O A C H E L L A V A L L E Y P O R T I O N $ 3 9 , 1 6 8 , 0 0 0 $ 1 3 , 7 0 7 , 0 0 0 $ 5 , 8 7 4 , 0 0 0 $ 1 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0 $ 3 , 9 1 6 , 0 0 0
C A T H E D R A L C I T Y $ 1 , 7 9 2 , 0 0 0 -
C O A C H E L L A 5 2 0 , 0 0 0 -
D E S E R T H O T S P R I N G S 4 0 8 , 0 0 0
I N D I A N W E L L S - - 2 4 6 , 0 0 0
I N D I O - 1 , 7 1 3 , 0 0 0
L A O U I N T A
P A L M S P R I N G S 2 , 0 0 7 , 0 0 0
P A L M D E S E R T 2 , 8 2 8 0 0 0
R A N C H O M I R A G E 9 6 2 , 0 0 0
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y - - 1 , 9 2 1 , 0 0 0 -
C V A G 1 , 3 1 0 , 0 0 0
A R E A T O T A L _ $ 1 3 , 7 0 7 , 0 0 0 $ 5 , 8 7 4 , 0 0 0 $ 1 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0 $ 3 , 9 1 6 , 0 0 0 "
L o c a l S t r e e t s
R o a d s
1 0 0 %
P A L O V E R D E P O R T I O N $ 1 , 1 0 2 , 0 0 0 $ 1 , 1 0 2 , 0 0 0
B L Y T H E $ 8 5 2 , 0 0 0
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y - 2 5 0 , 0 0 0
A R E A T O T A L _ $ 1 , 1 0 2 , 0 0 0
N O T E S : E s t i m a t e f o r P l a n n i n g P u r p o s e s , s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e a n d r o u n d i n g d i f f e r e n c e s
1 1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND
FY 200612007 APPORTIONMENT (Revised 1/07)
Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned)
Est. Receipts
TOTAL
Less: Auditor
Less: RCTC Administration
Less: RCTC Planning (3% of revenues)
Less: SCAG Planning
BALANCE
Less: SB 821 (2% of balance)
BALANCE AVAILABLE BEFORE RESERVES
Less: 10% Transit Reserves
BALANCE AVAILABLE FOR APPORTIONMENT
APPORTIONMENT
Wester
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde Valley •
Population
Population %of Total
1,449,805
397,364
29,831
77.24%
21.17%
1.59%
1,877,000 100.00%
Budget
FY 2006/2007.
Projection
(revised)
$ 12,393,440 $
74,850,000
87,243,440
12,000
750,000.
2,617,303
123,500
83,740,637
1 674,813
82,065,824
8,206,582
$ 73,859,242
Revised Budget
FY 2006/2007
Apportionment
Budget
FY 2006/2007
Projection
(original)
Increase
- $ 12,393,440
74,850 000 0
74,850,000 12,393,440
12,000 ___0_
750,000 _ 0
2,245,500 _______371,8D3.
123,500 - 0
71,719,000 _:_. 12,921,63_T
1,434,380 240,433
70,284,620 11,781,204
7,028,462 1,178,120
63,256158 $ 10,603,084
Original Budget
FY 2006/2007
Apportionment
Increase
$ 57,049,280 $ 48,859,400 8,189,880
15,636,123 .. 13,391,433 2,244,690
1173,839 1,005,325 168,514
$ 73,859,242 _6 63,256,158 $ 10,603,084
ALLOCATION OF TRANSIT RESERVES (in accordance with Reserve Policy adopted January 12, 2005)
Weslem:
Rail - $1,394,538
Transit: -
RTA - - $4,200,960
Banning - - 136,523
Beaumont 120,002
Corona 182,836
Riverside 303,950
Subtotal Transit $4 944 271 4,944,271
Subtotal Western 6,338,809
Coachella Valley 1,737,347
-Palo Verde Valley 130,427
Total Reserves $8 206 582
NOTES: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change and rounding differences
Population Source: California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Une as of January 1, 2005, as adjusted for annexations
Allocation of Reserves: FY 2004105 SRTP Funding Notations Approved July 14, 2004
Rail Transit
22% 78%
$ 12,550,842 $ 44,498,438
•12
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Fiscal Year 2007/08 Local Transportation Fund and Measure - A
Revenue. Projections
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve the projections for Measure A and related allocations; and
2) Approve the projections of the Local Transportation- Fund. (LTF)
apportionment for the Western Riverside .County, Coachella Valley,
ry and Palo Verde Valley areas.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Measure_A
The Measure A :projection consists of revenues generated from the local half -cent
sales tax approved by the voters in November 1988. These Measure A funds are
principally used to fund highway, commuter rail, regional arterial, local streets and
roads, commuter assistance and specialized transportation projects needs in the
three geographic areas of Riverside County.
The Measure A projection for 'FY 2006/07 is $167,100,000 This projection will
become the basis for the preparation of the FY 2007/08 budget. The budget
process typically commences in January of each year following the development of
the Measure A revenue'projections. Additionally, the amounts for the local streets
and roads and regional arterial programs are usually provided to the "local
jurisdictions for planning purposes.
The attached Measure A , estimate of $167,100,000 is based on a revised
projection for FY 2006/07 of $159,150,000 . plus an increase of 5 %. After the
deduction for administration of $3.7 million which is approximately 2.2% of
Measure A revenues, the amount available for distribution to the three geographic
areas is $163,400,000, which is allocated as follows:
Agenda Item 7C
13
Geographic. Area
Western County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde Valley
Total
Amount
$ 121,199,000
41;020,000
1,181,000
$ 163, 400, 000
Upon Commission approval of this item, staff will provide this information to .the
necessary local jurisdictions and transitoperators for planning purposes.
Local Transportation Fund
The 'LTF projection consists of revenues generated from a quarter cent of the,
statewide sales tax. These LTF -funds are ;principally used to fund transit
requirements within the county of Riverside (County).The
Transportation Development Act (TDA) legislation that created LTF requires the .
County Auditor Controller to annually estimate the amount of revenues expected to
be generated from the sales tax. That estimate then becomes the basis : for
geographic apportionment and for claimant allocation through the Short Range
Transit PI'an (SUP) process`, which commences in. January for the next" fiscal` year. _
"While; the County is the taxing authority and maintains custodial responsibility: over:
the LTF revenues, the Commission by statute is charged with administration of the.
LTF funding process. The practice has therefore been for the staff to develop the
revenue estimate and then submit it to the County Auditor Controller for
concurrence. `' Once. the Commission and the County have agreed :on a revenue
amount, staff .prepares_ the statutorily required apportionment. Apportionment is
the process that assigns revenues to the three major geographic areas' (as defined
by TDA law) within the County. They are Western Riverside, Coachella Valley, and
Palo Verde Valley. The .revenues are divided based on the respective populations:
for each area. The apportionment occurs after off -the -top allocations for
administration (distributed to the County, Commission, and SCAG) and :set asides
for planning activities (3%) and bicycle and pedestrian projects (2.%).
Attached is the FY 2007/08 LTF apportionment based on a revenue :, estimate o
$77 840,000. The County has "reviewed the estimate . and ;,concurs with it. ' The
estimate is based on a projection for FY 2006/07 of $74,850;000 plus an increase
of 4%. After :the deductions ;for administration of $934,400 and set -asides of
$3,826,608, the amount available for apportionment is $73,078,992.':The balance
available for apportionment is as follows:
Agenda Item 7C
14
Apportionment Area Amount
Western County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde Valley
Total
$ 56,405,177
15,537,186
1,136,629
$ 73,078;992
In accordance with the Reserve . Policy adopted by the Commission on
January 12, 2005, a reserve of 10% for each apportionment area will be
established and set aside for FY 2007/08 for unforeseen cost increases or other
emergency. For the Western County apportionment area, a portion of the reserve
will be allocated to each of the transit operators; however, an allocation of $0 is
currently reflected pending completion of the FY 2004/05 transit and transportation.
audits. Upon receipt of the completed audits, the Western County transit operator
allocations will be adjusted. For public bus transit operators, the allocation of the
reserve is based on each operator's proportionate share of FY 2005/06 LTF
operating allocations. Operators may access reserve funds by amending their
SRTPs through the established amendment process.
Attachments:
1) Measure A Distribution Projection FY 2007/08
2) LTF FY 2007/08 Apportionment
Agenda Item 7C
15
"
"
M E A S U R E " A " P R O J E C T I O N
L E S S : A D M I N I S T R A T I O N
T O T A L P R O J E C T I O N
C I T I E S
W E S T E R N C O U N T Y P O R T I O N
B A N N I N G
B E A U M O N T
C A L I M E S A
C A N Y O N L A K E S
C O R O N A
H E M E T
L A K E E L S I N O R E
M O R E N O V A L L E Y
M U R R I E T A
N O R C O
P E R R I S
R I V E R S I D E
S A N J A C I N T O
T E M E C U L A
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y
A R E A T O T A L
R N 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 !
M E A S U R E A D I S T R I B U T I O N P R O J E C T I O N
F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 -
F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8
O r i g i n a l P r o j e c t i o n
$ 1 6 7 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0
3 , 7 0 0 , 0 0 0
$ 1 6 3 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0
$ 1 2 1 , 1 9 9 , 0 0 0
C O A C H E L L A V A L L E Y P O R T I O N S 4 1 , 0 2 0 , 0 0 0
C A T H E D R A L C I T Y
C O A C H E L L A
D E S E R T H O T S P R I N G S
I N D I A N W E L L S
I N D I O
L A Q U I N T A
P A L M S P R I N G S
P A L M D E S E R T
R A N C H O M I R A G E
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y _
C V A G
A R E A T O T A L
P A L O V E R D E P O R T I O N $ 1 , 1 8 1 , 0 0 0
B L Y T H E
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y
A R E A T O T A L
L o c a l S t r e e t s
8 . R o a d s H i g h w a y
4 0 . 0 0 % 3 8 . 5 0 %
$ 4 8 , 4 7 9 , 0 0 0 $ 4 6 , 6 6 2 , 0 0 0
$ 8 3 4 , 0 0 0
6 6 7 , 0 0 0
2 0 7 , 0 0 0
2 7 5 , 0 0 0
5 , 6 4 1 , 0 0 0
2 , 3 2 6 , 0 0 0 - ` (
1 , 3 4 5 , 0 0 0
4 , 9 7 9 , 0 0 0
2 , 8 9 7 , 0 0 0
1 , 0 2 3 , 0 0 0 -
1 , 4 9 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 , 1 0 8 , 0 0 0
8 2 9 , 0 0 0
3 , 9 6 1 , 0 0 0 ,
1 1 , 8 9 5 , 0 0 0
R a i l
1 6 . 5 0 %
$ 1 9 , 9 9 8 , 0 0 0
C o m m u t e r
A s s i s t a n c e
2 . 5 0 %
3 , 0 3 0 , 0 0 0
S p e c i a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
2 . 5 0 � %
$ 3 , 0 3 0 , 0 0 0
$ 4 8 , 4 7 7 , 0 0 0 $ 4 6 , 6 6 2 , 0 0 0 $ 1 9 , 9 9 8 , 0 0 0 $ 3 , 0 3 0 , 0 0 0 $ 3 , 0 3 0 , 0 0 0
L o c a l S t r e e t s R e g i o n a l
R o a d s H i g h w a y A r t e r i a l
3 5 % - 1 5 % 4 0 %
. $ 1 4 , 3 5 7 , 0 0 0 $ 6 , 1 5 3 , 0 0 0 $ 1 6 , 4 0 8 , 0 0 0
$ 1 , 7 9 3 , 0 0 0
5 8 8 , 0 0 0
4 5 2 , 0 0 0
2 7 2 , 0 0 0
1 , 8 0 9 , 0 0 0 . .
2 , 0 0 3 , 0 0 0
2 , 8 6 1 , 0 0 0
1 , 0 5 2 , 0 0 0
2 , 0 6 9 , 0 0 0
1 , 4 5 8 , 0 0 0
$ 1 4 , 3 5 7 , 0 0 0 $ 6 , 1 5 3 , 0 0 0 $ 1 6 , 4 0 8 , 0 0 0 -
L o c a l S t r e e t s
R o a d s
1 0 0 %
$ 1 , 1 8 1 , 0 0 0
$ 9 1 4 , 0 0 0
2 6 7 , 0 0 0
$ 1 , 1 8 1 , 0 0 0
N O T E S : E s t i m a t e f o r P l a n n i n g P u r p o s e s , s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e a n d r o u n d i n g d i f f e r e n c e s
J 9 2 0 0 7 \ 0 2 F e b r u a r y l 7 C J 1 2 . 1 T . R C T C . M e a s u r e A P r o j F Y 0 8 . x l s
S p e c i a l
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
1 0 %
$ 4 , 1 0 2 , 0 0 0
$ 4 , 1 0 2 , 0 0 0
1 / 3 1 / 2 0 0 7 3 : 3 3 P M
1 6
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y
L O C A L T R A N S P O R T A T I O N F U N D
F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 A P P O R T I O N M E N T
B u d g e t
F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8
P r o j e c t i o n
E s t i m a t e d C a r r y o v e r ( U n a p p o r t i o n e d ) $ 0
E s t . R e c e i p t s 7 7 , 8 4 0 , 0 0 0
T O T A L 7 7 , 8 4 0 0 0 0
L e s s : A u d i t o r 1 2 , 0 0 0
L e s s : R C T C A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 8 0 0 , 0 0 0
L e s s : R C T C P l a n n i n g ( 3 % o f r e v e n u e s ) 2 , 1 1 5 , 2 0 0
L e s s : S C A G P l a n n i n g 1 2 2 , 4 0 0
B A L A N C E 7 4 , 5 7 0 , 4 0 0
L e s s : S B 8 2 1 ( 2 % o f b a l a n c e ) 1 , 4 9 1 , 4 0 8
B A L A N C E A V A I L A B L E B E F O R E R E S E R V E S 7 3 , 0 7 8 , 9 9 2
L e s s : 1 0 % T r a n s i t R e s e r v e s 7 , 3 0 7 , 8 9 9
B A L A N C E A V A I L A B L E F O R A P P O R T I O N M E N T $ 6 5 , 7 7 1 , 0 9 3
A P P O R T I O N M E N T B u d g e t
P o p u l a t i o n F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 R a i l T r a n s i t
P o p u l a t i o n % o f T o t a l A p p o r t i o n m e n t 2 2 % 7 8 %
W e s t e r n 1 , 5 0 7 , 6 5 6 7 7 . 1 8 % $ 5 0 , 7 6 4 , 6 5 9 $ 1 1 , 1 6 8 , 2 2 5 $ 3 9 , 5 9 6 , 4 3 4
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y 4 1 5 , 2 9 4 2 1 . 2 6 % 1 3 , 9 8 3 , 4 6 7
P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y 3 0 , 3 8 1 1 . 5 6 % 1 , 0 2 2 , 9 6 6
1 , 9 5 3 , 3 3 1 1 0 0 . 0 0 % $ 6 5 , 7 7 1 , 0 9 3
A L L O C A T I O N O F T R A N S I T R E S E R V E S ( i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h R e s e r v e P o l i c y a d o p t e d J a n u a r y 1 2 , 2 0 0 5 )
W e s t e m :
R a i l $ 1 , 2 4 0 , 9 1 4
T r a n s i t :
R T A $ 3 , 7 5 9 , 2 8 5
B a n n i n g 1 3 3 , 3 5 6
B e a u m o n t 0
C o r o n a 1 7 6 , 7 3 3
R i v e r s i d e 3 3 0 , 2 3 0
S u b t o t a l T r a n s i t $ 4 , 3 9 9 , 6 0 4 4 , 3 9 9 , 6 0 4
S u b t o t a l W e s t e m 5 , 6 4 0 , 5 1 8
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y 1 , 5 5 3 , 7 1 9
P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y 1 1 3 , 6 6 3
T o t a l R e s e r v e s $ 7 , 3 0 7 , 8 9 9
N O T E S : E s t i m a t e f o r P l a n n i n g P u r p o s e s , s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e a n d r o u n d i n g d i f f e r e n c e s
P o p u l a t i o n S o u r c e : C a l i f o r n i a D e p a r t m e n t o f F i n a n c e , D e m o g r a p h i c R e s e a r c h U n i t a s o f J a n u a r y 1 , 2 0 0 6 , a s a d j u s t e d f o r a n n e x a t i o n s
A l l o c a t i o n o f R e s e r v e s : F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 S R T P F u n d i n g A l l o c a t i o n s A p p r o v e d J u l y 1 3 , 2 0 0 5
B e a u m o n t a l l o c a t i o n t o b e m a d e u p o n c o m p l e t i o n o f o u t s t a n d i n g a u d i t ( F Y 2 0 0 4 / 0 5 )
1 7
AGENDA ITEM 7D
"
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 ;
F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 2 , 0 0 7
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
F R O M :
B u d g e t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n . C o m m i t t e e
M i c h e l e C i s n e r o s , A c c o u n t i n g a n d H u m a n . R e s o u r c e s M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
E r i c H a l e y , , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
M i d - Y e a r B u d g e t A d j u s t m e n t s
B U D G E T A N D I M P L E M E N T A T I O N C O M M I T T E E A N D 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 s s i o n t o a p
p r o v e a $ 2 2 9 , 7 0 0 i n c r e a s e i n F Y 2 0 4 6 / 0 7
e x p e n d i t u r e s f o r m i d - y e a r b u d g e t a d j u s t m e n t s .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
S t a f f h a s p e r f o r m e d a r e v i e w o f e x p e n d i t u r e s f o r t h e s i x m o n t h s e n d e d
D e c e m b e r 3 1 2 0 0 6 a n d a n e s t i m a t e : o f f e x p e n d i t u r e s : f o r t h e r e m a i n i n g s i x m o n t h s : .
o f t h e f i s c a l y e a r e n d i n g J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 0 7 . A s a r e s u l t o f t h e r e v i e w , t h e f o l l o w i n g
m i d - y e a r b u d g e t a d j u s t m e n t s a r e p r o p o s e d .
A d j u s t m e n t 1 . - $ 5 5 , 4 0 0
T h e B e c h t e l c o n t r a c t f o r F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 c o n c l u d e d w i t h a $ 5 5 , 4 0 0 c a r r y o v e r
r e m a i n i n g f o r t h e w o r k e f f o r t o f t h e 1 0 - Y e a r D e l i v e r y P l a n f o r W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e
C o u n t y M e a s u r e A h i g h w a y p r o g r a m . T h e i n i t i a l p h a s e o f t h i s w o r k w a s c o m p l e t e d
a n d p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n t h e s e c o n d q u a r t e r o f F Y ' 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 . T h e
c a r r y o v e r o f $ 5 5 , 4 0 0 w a s n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e o r i g i n a l F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 b u d g e t ;
h o w e v e r , i t i s n e e d e d t o c o v e r t h e B e c h t e l c o s t s r e l a t e d t o t h e w o r k ` e f f o r t f o r t h e
p l a n . A d e q u a t e ` M e a s u r e A W e s t e r n C o u n t y h i g h w a y f u n d ' b a l a n c e ` e x i s t s t o
a c c o m m o d a t e t h i s b u d g e t a d j u s t m e n t .
A d j u s t m e n t 2 - $ 4 2 , 5 0 0
A r e c o m m e n d a t i o n m a d e a s a r e s u l t o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s l a s t ' 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 w a s t o c r e a t e a t r a n s i t v i s i o n f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . T o a s s i s t w i t h t h e t r a n s i t
v i s i o n i n g p r o c e s s , T r a n s p o r t a t i o n M a n a g e m e n t a n d D e s i g n ; I n c . ( T M D ) w a s h i r e d
O c t o b e r 3 1 , 2 0 0 6 t o p r o v i d e G I S s u p p o r t s e r v i c e s a n d a n a l y s i s . T h i s w o r k w a s
n o t i n c l u d e d , i n t h e o r i g i n a l F Y 2 0 0 6 / 0 7 b u d g e t . A d e q u a t e L o c a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
F u n d ( L T F ) f u n d b a l a n c e e x i s t s t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h i s b u d g e t a d j u s t m e n t .
A g e n d a [ t e r n 7 D
1 8
Adjustment 3 - $5`2,300
The FY 2006/07 budget included- theassumption that 439` :call boxes .would be
removed by. December 2006 as a result of decreased call box _ usage. :: The
contractor has not completed the entire call box removal project by>
December 2006 due to staff turnover. As a result, the remaining call boxes that
have not been removed will continue to incur equipment, maintenance and access
charges through `.June 30, 2007, which were not budgeted ` 'in FY 2006/07.
Adequate, Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) fund balance exists to.
accommodate this budget adjustment.
Adjustment 4 -. $56,000
The Commuter Assistance program contracted in March 2006 to promote rideshare
on a billboard located on . SR-91 in Corona from July 14, 2006to
November 21, 2006. The budget authority for this 'contract was included in the.
FY 2005/06 budget and was inadvertently not rebu.dgeted for FY 2006/07. Staff
is requesting' a budget adjustment for the FY 2006/07 rideshare media campaign.
Adequate Measure A Comrnuter Assistance Special Revenue fund balance exists to
accommodate this, budget adjustment.
Adjustment 5 $8,000
As a result of organizational changes related to human resources, additional training
and resources in human resources as well as communications with legal' counsel
have been required. These additional costs for human resources training,
membership dues, and legal services are estimated at $3,000.
Additionally, executive management felt that specific,; management :training 'for all
program managers as a, result of the effects of continuing organizational 'changes
was. appropriate. The Commission contracted with the University ,of California
Riverside (UC'R) to conduct a Leadership, Supervision and Management Principles
and Practices program. The program, which cost $10,000, examines the
challenges supervisors face in an increasingly complex organizational environment
and understanding organizational change and how to effectively manage ` the
change. While the FY 200.6/07 human resources budget included. $5,000.,for
training, a budget adjustment of $`5,000 is needed for the additional: training cost.
Adequate General Fund (GF) fund balance exists to accommodate both.. budget
adjustments totaling $8,000
Agenda item 7D
19
Adjustment 6 - $8,500
The Commission will be co -sponsoring a UCR conference, regarding the
Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), with the
Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and Western Riverside
County Regional. Conservation Authority (RCA). Adequate GF fundbalance exists
to accommodate this budget adjustment.
Adjustment 7 - $7,000
The original FY 2006/07 budget did not include legal . services for the additional
legislation needed to implement design -build contracting. Staff continues to work
with legal counsel onthis matter and will need additional budget authority to
continue this effort. GF fund balance exists to accommodate this budget
adjustment.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$229,700
Source of Funds:
Measure A, LTF, SAFE, FSP
Budget Ad ustment:
Yes
222-31-81001 P2802
$55,400 Program Management
106-62-65520
$42,500 Professional Services
202-45-73301
$30,700 Equipment Maintenance
202-45-81.01.5
$21,600 Access Charges
226-41-73704 P2108
$56,000 Media Ads
S-18-65101 P1001 01
$1,100 General Legal Services
GLA No.;
S-18-73113 P1001 01
$1,000 Membership Dues
S-18-73601 P1001 01
$400 Seminars/Conferences
S-18-73611 P1001 01
$100 Mileage Reimbursement
S-18-73620 P1001 01
$300 Lodging
S-18-73630 P1001 01
$100 Meals
S-18-73650 P1001 01
$5,000 Training
S-11-73601 P1001 02
$8,500 Seminars/Conferences
S-14-65101 P1001 02
$7,000 General Legal Services
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\p%€4,e44:41
Date:
01/22/07
Agenda Item 7D
20
AGENDA ITEM 7E
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Audit Ad Hoc Committee
Theresia'Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive. Director
SUBJECT:.
Proposed Audit Scope for. Transit and Transportation Audits ,
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, AUDIT AD HOC 'COMMITTEE AND
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
•
This item is for the :' Commission ' to approve the proposed audit scope for
Measure A recipients and Transportation Development Act (TDA) claimants.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its April 2003meeting, the Commission approved the selection of Caporicci and
Larson (C&L) to perform_ the Measure. A recipient and TDA claimants audits for the
Commission, excluding the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and city of Beaumont
who have selected their own auditors that have .met the ' `Comrnission's auditor
qualification criteria. These financial and .compliance audits cover the transit and
transportation operations the county of Riverside, the cities in the county, and
non-profit organizations receiving the Measure A and: TDA funds; however;
agreed -upon procedures have been performed for certain Measure A Specialized
Transit recipients based on cost-effectiveness considerations.
California. Code of Regulations Section 6664 requires a fiscal and compliance audit
for each claimant of TDA funds Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and
State Transportation Assistance Fund (STAF). The audit shall be conducted in
accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, and the claimants' financial
statements shall be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting"
principles. Furthermore, the audit is to be directed to determine compliance or
noncompliance with the TDA regulations. The TDA claimant audits that have been
performed includes transit operators (municipal operators, 'SunLine Transit Agency,
and Palo Verde Valley . Transit Agency) receiving Article 4 and STAF, Article 3
bicycle and pedestrian facility grant claimants, and Article 8 local street and road
funds` (currently available only in Palo Verde Valley area).
Agenda Item 7E
21
The 1989 Measure A requires fiscal audits of the local agencies , to ensure
enforcement of the maintenance of effortrequirements The 2009 Measure A
goals and objectives include a mandatory, annual financial audit of program
expenditures to ensure compliance with Measure A. Additionally, the taxpayer
accountability safeguards included in the 2009 Measure A describes compliance
requirements.
Over the past few years, the American; Institute of Certified Public. Accountants has
issued new auditing
standards - in response. to corporateaccounting andethics
scandals, many of which, included a focus on auditors and their work. These new
standards will become effective at various dates over the next two' years; they are
expected to significantly change how audits are performed in the following areas:
•
Audit documentation;
Understanding of internal control;
Audit 'evidence related to risk assessment procedures.
internal controls;
Audit risk and materiality;
Understanding the entity and its environment: and assessing: the risk� o
material misstatement; and
Performing audit procedures in response to
evaluating audit evidence obtained.
C&L has advised staff that these new auditing standards may significantly impact`
future audits of the specific transit and/or transportation funds being audited . for
TDA and Measure A purposes. Specifically, an extensive internal control evaluation
and testing at the entity level rnay :be required in orderto develop thebasis for: the
risk' assessment. ln. addition to..a potential increase in; the cost of ` the TDA and
Measure A audits, the additional efforts may be repetitive for the entity. being
audited since similar procedures will be performed by the entity's auditors.
There are several alternatives to address the impact of ;the new auditing standards,
as described below:
Require the entities to engage their auditors to perform a financial and
compliance audit of .the transit/transportation funds at their own cost
with ;specific; compliance requirements provided by the Commission;.
Same as above,. except that the Commission would .engage auditors to
perform agreed -upon procedures regarding compliance at its own. cost
Continue, to engage auditors to conduct financial and compliance
audits for each Measure A recipient and TDA :, claimant. at the
Commission's cost;
Agenda item 7E
22
Engage auditors to conduct financial and compliance audits for each
TDA claimant and to perform agreed -upon procedures for each
Measure A recipient, both at the Commission's cost.
The latter alternative may be possible if the Measure A audit requirements are
interpreted liberally, as the requirements are not as specific as the TDA audit
requirements. Based on a review of the 1989 Measure A and the 2009 Measure A
plans, it could be argued that the accountability focus is on the expenditure of
public funds and compliance with the provisions of Measure A. To some extent,..
this interpretation has been used in determining the audit scope for individual
Measure . A Specialized Transit recipients, which primarily consist of nonprofit
agencies.
Agreed -upon procedures, .as determined by staff, have been applied to some
agencies receiving only capital funds for specific projects as well as agencies
receiving smaller amounts of operating funds. Since the procedures to be
performed are developed by the' Commission and may be more focused, the
expenditure of Measure A funds and related compliance could be more directly
evaluated compared to an audit of an entity's financial statements. The difference
is a report on the results of agreed -upon procedures compared to an opinion on
audited financial statements as well as a report on compliance. Due to the number
of entities receiving Measure A funds compared to TDA funds, significant cost
savings could be realized with agreed -upon procedures for Measure .A compared to
full financial statement audits.
After consideration of the alternatives, staff proposes that the scope of services for
the TDA claimants consist of a financial statement and compliance audit while the
scope for Measure A recipients consist of agreed -upon procedures.
Agenda Item 7E
23
AGENDA ITEM -71F
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission .
FROM
Budget and. Implementation `Committee -
Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer
THROUGH:
_Eric Haley, Executive. Director -
SUBJECT.
Amendment to Advance of Fiscal Year 2006/07 City of Hemet
Measure A Local Street and Road Funds
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 06-31-068-01, Amendment No: 1 to
Agreement No. 06-31=068-00, to advance to the city of Hemet
Measure A Local Street and Road funds in FY 2007/08 rather than
FY 2006/07; and
2) . Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the
agreement on behalf of the Commission.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its June 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved Agreement
No. 06-31-068-00 for an advance of $2,126,000, including accrued interest, to
the city of Hemet (City) for its estimated Measure A Local Streets and Roads (LSR)
funding for FY 2006/07.
City staff had requested that disbursement of the advance be delayed from
September 2006 to a later date upon construction award for a city-wide repaving
project. Since the City is now in the process of soliciting construction bids, City
staff is requesting that the advance be delayed until FY 2007/08 and applied
against its FY 2007/08 Measure A LSR allocation. This would result in the
disbursement of the advance in September 2007 with repayment due by
September 30, 2008. Based on the FY 2007/08 Measure A revenue projection, it
is estimated that the City's share of FY 2007/08 . Measure A LSR funding is
$2,326,000. Any .amounts received over the $2,126,000 advance would be
disbursed to the City upon full repayment of the advance. In the unlikely event
that the FY 2007/08 Measure' A LSR allocations to the City are less than the total
advance, any balance due would be deducted from the FY 2008/09 Measure A LSR
allocations.
Agenda item 7F
24
Staff is in the process of preparing the amendment to the advance agreement,
which is subject to legal counsel review.
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Financial Information
Year:
FY 2007/08
Amount:
$2,126,000
Source of. Funds:
Measure A
Budget Adjustment:
N/A
GLA No
222-31-12401
Fiscal. Procedures. Approved:
\141,1,414.0
Attachment: City of Hemet Public Works Correspondence
Agenda !tern 7F -
25
Date:
1 /22/07
Jan 17 07 08:57a
p.2
•
•
Fmnl /10
OM= Of
PLIeLio wDRK3
January 17, 2007
510 E. FLORIDA AVENUE • HEMET. CALIFORNIA 92543 • (951)765-3879
Eric Haley
Executive Director
Riverside County Tra Ion Commission
4080 Lemon Street 3"Floor
t
Riverside, CA 92502-2208
Re: Request for Advance of FY07/08 Measure A Allocations
Dear Mr. Haley.
Thank you for approving the City's request to advance Measure A funds for this fiscal
year. The City of Hernetis currently solialing construction bids for its city-wide repaving
project_ The project will start construction in Spring 2007. As such, the City wdl already
have received much of its FY06/07 allocation before contractor invoicing wN occur.
Consequently, the City requests forgoing the advance of this year's allocation and
instead receiving an advance of its FY07/08 allocation.
As with the original advance, we understand approval of the Commission is needed,
principal and interest will be deducted from the FY07/08 allocation, and funds will not
ready for disbursement until September 2007, if approved.
Thank you for your cooperation and please contact me at (951) 765-3870 if you need
more information.
Sincerely, .
Mike Cow
Public Works Director/City Engineer
c: City Manager
Finance Director
26
AGENDA ITEM 7G
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Status of Toll Program and Strategic Partnership Advisory Services
Amendment
PUBLIC/PRIVATE FINANCING AND DELIVERY PLAN AD HOC COMMITTEE AND
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to
1) Receive and file summary of Orange County Transportation Authority
(OCTA) goals to support Riverside County 1.0-Year Delivery Plan;
2) Support the continued coordination with OCTA regarding its goals;
including conceptualapproval of the Commission's fair share of
OCTA's expanded travel and revenue studies;
3) Receive and file report on Status of legislative approval;
4) Receive and file report on status of Corridor A analysis;
5) Approve a $750,000 contract increase for Strategic Partnership
Advisory Services and amendments, as necessary, to Agreement Nos.
06-66-026-00, 06-66-027-00 and 06-66-028-00; and
6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the
agreements on behalf of the Commission.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its December 13, 2006 meeting, the Commission. `approved the 10-Year Delivery
Plan for the: Measure A Western Riverside County highway program. Extension of
the 91 Express Lanes to 1-15 and the construction of two high occupancy toll
(HOT) lanes in each direction on portions of 1-15 were significant projects within
the -program. Implementation of these projects is contingent upon legislative
approval and coordination with OCTA in addition to continuing technical and
financial analysis.
Agenda item 7G .
27
Coordination with OCTA
OCTA Board- of Directors approved goals to support the Commission's.:10-Year
Delivery Plan at its January 22, 2007 meeting. A copy of the action item is
attached for reference. These goals are intended to :establish the 'basis upon which:
y proposed P =.
its: staff: and SR-91 Advisor Committee members evaluate the ro osed express
lane extension. On February 2, 2007, the SR-91 Advisory Committee considered ,
the Express Lane extension. Issues of mutual concern such as legislativeapproval,
organization, operations and :revenue impacts were discussed..
Legislative Approval
Legislative approval is required to implement the delivery plan;. Staff, :working with
its advisors, has developed a strategy to seek legislative. authority. Efforts in the
next three months will concentrate on developing draft language for legislative
counsel review, coordinating with OCTA, continuing dialogue with legislative
members and engaging in statewide legislative discussions...
Status of .Corridor: A Analysis
Initial toll analysis on SR-91 included a four -lane viaductwithin:' the median:.
consistent with SR-91 Advisor Committee. direction regarding `Corridor A
y�.
alignments as developed within the Major Investment Study..:, (MIS). Financial
modeling indicated that, although there was significant demand; ;the :project , was
revenue negative requiring public subsidy of the capital costs. The 'Public/Private
Financing and 'Delivery Plan (PPF/DP) Ad Hoc Committee requested .further analysis
of additional. Corridor A alignments. The Corridor A study, will evaluate alignments,
environmental and right-of-way impacts, system integration and costs... A: final
report, including the viaduct option, is scheduled for completion _ in early:. April. A ,
summaryof the PPF/DP Ad. Hoc Committee's findings: and :.actions to date was.
included in the February 2, 2007 staff presentation to the SR-91 Advisory
Committee.
Implementation of Toll "Program
While the toll program is years away from construction, there ,are significant efforts
that must continue and/or be initiated. A formal implementation plan will be . .
prepared upon establishment of key policy decisions and indications,: of legislative
authorities. Staff has performed an initial assessment of short-term' issues." and
actions for the remainder .of this fiscal year. Staff recommends continuing the
services of its existing advisory team as it moves .into implementation. An increase
in contract authorizations of $750,000 is requested to perforrn the following
Agenda item 7G
28
1) SR-91 Express Lane Extension
a) Update project costs assuming design/build authority, inclusion
of 1-15 NB to SR-91 WB direct connector and transition lanes to
1-15.
b) Update cash flow projections and schedules:.
c) Update Financial Model.
2) 1-15 HOT Lanes
d) Re-evaluate demand model to determine need for capacity
expansion beyond HOT lanes.
e) Evaluate impact of general purpose expansion on toll feasibility.
f) Re-evaluate HOT lane phasing dependent upon demand results.
g) Update project costs to include addition of general purpose
lanes where needed.
h) Update Traffic and Revenue Studies.
i) Update Financial Model
3) Continue support of legislative effort.
4) Provide support for development of Toll Program Implementation Plan.
The implementation plan will include the program organization
structure, guiding policies and assumptions, risk management plan,
program and project schedules.
Results of continuing analysis and .efforts will be brought to the PPF/DP Ad Hoc
Committee for review, input and direction.
This contract authorization increase of ^$750,O0O brings the total cost to
$2,40O,O00. Sufficient capacity in the FY 2006/07 budget is available for these
contract increases. An oral report on the status of the toll program and the
strategic partnership was presented to the PPF/DP Ad Hoc Committee at its
January 22nd meeting.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Yes
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$750,000
Source of Funds:
Commercial Paper Proceeds
Budget Ad ustment:
No
GLA No.:
A303-66-65520 P8200 8X
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\ J �
Date:
1 /22/07
Attachment: OCTA Board Agenda Item
Agenda Item 7G
29
BOARD COMMITTEE TRANS1WITTAL
January 22, 2007
To: Members of the Board of Directors
tuli%
From: Wendy Knowles, Clerk of the Board
Subject: Riverside County Highway Plan to Extend 91 Express Lanes
Regional Planning, and Highways Committee January 15, 2007
Present:- Directors Amante, Cavecche, Dixon, Glaab, Green, Mansoor, Norby,
Pringle, and Rosen
Absent: None
Committee Vote
This item was passed by all Committee Members present.
Committee Recommendations (Reflects change from staff recommendation)
A. Provide guidance to staff and members of the State Route 91 Advisory
Committee in preparation for their meeting of February 2, 2007.
B Authorize the Chief Executive Officer to enter into a cost -sharing arrangement
with the Riverside County Transportation Commission to advance an interim
Riverside Freeway (State Route 91 ) improvement project; in an -amount not to
exceed. $250000, from 91 Express Lanes funds.
Approve "Revised Attachment B", which ` incorporates the Regional
Planning and Highways Committee's comments.
Orange County Transportation Authority
550 South Main Street / P.O. Box 14184 !Orange% California 92+863-15E 4 / (714) 560-OCTA (6282)
30 .
BOARD COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL`
Page Tvvo
Committee Comments
The Committee provided the following comments with respect to work :with; Riverside
County. Transportation Commission on; their 1 g-Year Delivery Plan;
Agencies "should explore use of reversible lane operations, similar to lanes in use
on interstate 15 in San Diego county, as part i of the next steps on 10-Year
Delivery Plan.
Efforts to secure the required legislative approval for extension of 91 Express
Lanes should also provide flexibility on uses of toll revenues to provide for
efficient connection between the two counties.
The "Revised Attachment B", reflects in bold the Committee's suggestions.
__ Orange County Transportation Authority
550 South Main Street /P.O. Box 14184 / Orange / Carus 92883-1584 / (714) 560-OCTA (6282).
31
REVISED ATTACHMENT B
Orange County Goals to Support Riverside County 10 Year Delivery Plan
1. Work with the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) to ensure
connection of their proposed general purpose lanes with Orange County
facilities. Consider additional lanes between the county line and the Foothill
Transportation Corridor (State Route 241), and coordinate with the planned
eastbound auxiliary lane project between State Route 241 (SR-241) and the
Corona Expressway (State Route 71).
2. Efforts to secure legislative approval to implement the RCTC plan for the
proposed extension of 91 Express Lanes should provide flexibility on uses
of toll revenues to provide for an efficient connection between the two
counties.
3. Consider additional lanes on the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County. Expedite
work on direct connectors between SR-241 and the 91 Express Lanes to
accommodate the demand due to proposed extension of the lanes. Coordinate
with the. FoothdUEastem Transportation Corridor Agency on a capital
improvement plan with funding from all agencies' toll revenues.
4. Assess the operational issues and demand implications of intermediate -access at
the County line where the current lanes end. The proposed lwo-tolr system
presents operational and demand opportunities to improve the overall throughput
of the corridor. Financialimplications must also be quantified and considered.
5. Study opportunities for reversible 91 Express Lanes in Orange and _ Riverside
counties, similar to lanes in use on Interstate 15 in San Diego County. This
may reduce costs and impacts with the proposed. 91 Express Lanes extension.
6. Integrate the concepts above with the Renewed Measure M program that calls
for up to four additional lanes between SR-241 and the County line.
7. Evaluate the feasibility of a combination of Riverside Freeway (State Route 91)
and other Corridor A alignment options that reduce impacts to the developed
portions of Corona and other cities.
8. Evaluate reversible lane configurations of Corridor A to further minimize impacts.
9. Expand the scope of the upcoming traffic and revenue forecast report (by
Vollmer Associates) to include an analysis of the RCTC program of projects and
the respective implementation timetable.
10.Inform the rating agencies as well as the company that insures the 2003
91 Express Lanes bonds (Ambac Assurance Corporation), and the 91 Express.
Lanes bondholders on the recent proposals, planned analysis and financial
impacts of the proposals, and commit to a full briefing on Vollmer Associates
traffic and revenue results.
11.Conduct a legal review and analysis on the ability to assign the rights of the
franchise agreement and the resulting implications to the Master Indenture of
Trust for the 91 Express Lanes Toll Road Revenue Refunding Bonds.
-32
To: Regional. Planning and Highways Committee
From. Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer
Subject: Riverside County Highway Plan to Extend 91 Express Lanes
Overview
The Riverside 'County Transportation Commission has adopted a 10-year
highway expansion plan that needs to be integrated with planning, financial,
and legislative commitments made by Orange County Transportation Authority
to relieve congestion along the Riverside Freeway (State Route 91) corridor.
Recommendations
A. Provide guidance to staff and members of the State Route 91 Advisory
Committee in preparation for their meeting of February 2, M07.
Authorize the Chief Executive Officer to enter- into : a cost -sharing
arrangement with the Riverside County Transportation Commission to
advance an interim Riverside Freeway '(State 'Route 91) improvement
project, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, from 91 Express Lanes
funds.
Background
Assembly Bill 1010 (Chapter 688, Statuteof 2002) enabled Orange County
Transportation Authority (Authority) to' acquire and operate the 91 Express
Lanes. Since its acquisition in 2003, the Authority has implemented
policies and projects to . reduce overall congestion along the Riverside
Freeway (State Route 91). In addition, the Authority in conjunction with the
Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC) and the Foothill/Eastern .
Transportation Corridor Agency (FIE TCA) has developed a comprehensive
plan for long -teen transportation solutions to ease the commute of
residents between the counties.
More recently, .RCTC has adopted a 10�-year (2009-2019). delivery plan focused
on implementing improvements- along State :Route 91 (SR-91) including an
Orange County .Transportation Authority
550 South Main Street/P.O. Box 14184 / Orange/ California 92863-15841(714) 560-AUTHOR(TY(6282)
33
Riverside County Highway Plan to Extend 91 Express Lanes Page 2.
extension of the 91 Express Lanes to the Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15). A =
more extensive discussion of the above was presented . to the Board of
Directors on January.8, 2007 (Attachment A).
Discussion
Staff has reviewed the RCTC 10-year delivery plan and identified the .following*
discussion issues with respect to planning, financial, and institutional:
coordination.
• The RCTC plan offers significant mobility improvements for the SR-91
corridor. The .-plan; calls for new general purpose lanes,: interchange
improvements, and an extension of the current 91 Express" Lanes to
Interstate. 15 (I-.15). T,h , ese projects need to be iritegrated with'
Orange County plans. 'in addition, the plan evaluated but does not
recommend an elevated, tolled viaduct, similar t& the SR-91 Major:
Investment Study Corridor concept, in the median of SR-91 from the
Foothill Transportation Corridor (State Route 241) tattle'I-15
With respect to financial considerations, the Authority has $18.3,510,000
outstanding in 91- Express Lanes bonds that are secured solely by: the
toll road's net revenues. The bonds were sold based. upon a :traffic and
revenue report prepared by Vollmer Associates in 2003.. Vollmer
Associates is currently updating their report, Which. is due early 2007'
An analysis of the RCTC delivery plan will be 'thoroughly evaluated by
Vollmer Associates to determine the financial impacts .to;.the 91 ,Express
Lanes.
■ Lastly, franchise rights purchased by: the Authority include an exclusive,
irrevocable right to develop and operate toll lanes in an area bounded by
two imaginary tines running a distance of 1.5. miles on either side of
SR-91 from 1-15 in Riverside County westward to ,the Orange County
boundary with Los Angeles County.
Staff' has prepared suggested Authority goals for:: discussion with RCTC to
advancethe proposed 1 0-year delivery plan (Attachment B): Following review
and action by theRegionalPlanning and Highways Committee, these goals will
be presented to the Authority Board of Directors on January 22, 2007, prior to
the next SR-91 Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for February 2, 2007.
34
Riverside County. Higliway'Plan to Extend 91 Express Lanes Page 3
Other Matters
The RCTC and the California Department of Transportation (Cal cans) are
advancing near -term interim solutions along SR-91. An immediate project to
relieve a bottleneck on SR 91 in the City of Corona is relocating the median
barriers and re -striping lanes. This project has been funded by Ca!trans at
$1 million and is ready to proceed. During the development of the project
scope it was determined that drainage improvements were needed to prevent
flooding ,in the median. Given the costs for the drainage improvements and the
rising cost of - construction materials, the engineer's estimate has increased
from $1 million to $1.5 million. As a result, Caltrans is on the verge of delaying
the project.
This project status was discussed at the last SR-91 Advisory Committee
meeting with a request for assistance. Accordingly, Authority and RCTC staff
are proposing to jointly fund the cost increase and keep the project on
schedule. The Authority share could be funded from 91 Express Lanes
proceeds. It is understood that upon opening of the construction bids,_ Cal ins
funds will be applied first, and RCTC and the Authority will equally fund any
overage up to a maximum of $250,000 each.
Summary
The Riverside County 10-year delivery plan will be presented at the next SR-91
Advisory Committee meeting. The Riverside County proposal adds needed
capacity to this corridor, and the proposed improvements will be integrated with:
Orange County plans and priorities. At the same time,. the Authority must
analyze the financial and operational issues and discuss specific operations
agreements with RCTC in conjunction with discussion regarding assignment of
the Authority's franchise agreement:
35
Riverside County Highway Plan to Extend 91 Express Lanes Page 4.
Attachments
Riverside County Highway Plan to Extend 91
Report, dated January 8, 2007
Orange County Goals to Support Riverside : County 10-Year Delivery
Plan
Kia Mortazavi
Director , Strategic. Planning
(714) 560-5741
36
Paul C. Tayl
Executive Director, Development
(71 4) 560-5431
AGENDAATEM. 7.H.
REVISED AGENDA ITEM 7H
Additions are noted by Bold Italics, Deletions are noted by Str-iket#fee§#
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Shirley Medina, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Programming of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds for
the North Main Corona Metrolink Parking Structure
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to approve programming $24.5 million of
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to the North Main Corona
Metrolink parking structure and proceed with an AB 3090 Agreement with the
California Transportation Commission to reprogram State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funding.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The North Main Corona Metrolink parking structure was approved in 2002 for
$11 million of STIP/IIP funds. To date, $1.5 million has been allocated for
environmental and design work. The remaining $9.5 million is programmed for
construction. The design phase included the development of plans for three
different parking structure configurations.
At its September 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved building parking
structure C at the North Main Corona station as it yielded the most number of
spaces at 1,443 (1,098 structure + 345 east lot) to meet the demand indicated in
the ridership forecast. Future plans for building parking structures A and B will be
brought back to the Commission at a later time.
The design phase is near completion and construction costs for parking structure C
are estimated at $29,592 million. Additional funds have been committed to cover
construction costs including Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307,
State Transit Assistance (STA), and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds.
However, $15 million is still needed to fully fund the project. In addition, the
$9.5 million of STIP-IIP funds are currently programmed in FY 2008/09. The
Governor's budget proposes to redirect these funds to other programs, which could
prohibit the Commission's ability to advance these funds.
Agenda Item 7H
Staff is proposing to program CMAQ funds to cover the funding gap and the IIP
funds in order to meet the current schedule for advertising this summer. The
project meets CMAQ eligibility requirements and is an excellent candidate for these
funds.
The programming of the North Main Corona parking structure is proposed as
follows:
Fund Source
Amount (000's)
STIP IIP
4-97600
FTA 5307
1,000
STA
3,524
LTF
568
CMAQ
24,500
a-I}-A00
Total
$ 29, 592
There are sufficient CMAQ funds from Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEALU) to cover this project. The Commission did
not commit all of the SAFETEALU funds in order to cover project cost increases
and/or projects that were delayed due to the state budget crisis. Therefore, the
programming of CMAQ funds for the North Main Corona parking structure is
consistent with the Commission's direction. CMAQ funds are required to be locally
matched at 11.47%. The local funding identified in the table above covers the
match requirement.
Upon approval by the Commission, staff will proceed with requesting an AB 3090
Agreement with the California Transportation Commission /CTC) to secure the STIP
funds and reprogram them onto another project to be determined later. Staff will
also amend the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) to reflect the
updated funding. Construction of parking structure C is anticipated to begin in
Winter 2008.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Year:
FY 2007/08
Amount:
$24,500,000
$15,000,000
Source of Funds:
Federal Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality (CMAQ)
Budget Adjustment:
N/A
GLA No.:
221-33-41403 P 3808
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\A„1"4":itilue
Date:
2/13/07
1 /22/07
Agenda Item 7H
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:.
Budget and Implementation Committee
Shirley Medina, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT•
•
Programming of Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds for
the North Main Corona Metrolink Parking Structure
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF. RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to approve programming $15 million of Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to the North Main Corona Metrolink
parking structure.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION;
The North Main Corona Metrolink parking structure was approved in 2002 for
$11 million of State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Interregional
Improvement Program (IIP) funds. To date, , $ 1.5 . million has been allocated for
environmental and design work. The remaining $9.5 million is programmed for
construction. The design phase included the development of plans for three
different parking structure configurations.
At its September 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission approved building parking
structure C at the North Main Corona station as it yielded the most number of
spaces at 1,443 (1,098 structure + 345 east lot) to meet the demand indicated in
the ridership forecast. Future plans for building parking structures A and B will be
brought back to the Commission at a later time.
The design phase is near completion and construction costs for parking structure C
are estimated at $29.592 million. Additional funds have been committed to cover
construction costs including Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307,
State Transit Assistance (STA), and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds.
However, $ 15 million is still needed to fully fund the project.
Staff is proposing to program CMAQ funds to cover the fundinggap since the
project meets eligibility requirements and , is an excellent candidate for CMAQ
funds.
Agenda Item 7H
37
The programming of the North Main Corona parking structure is proposed as
follows:
Fund Source
Amount (000`s)
STIP IIP
$ 9,500
FTA 5307
1,000
STA
3,524
LTF
568
CMAQ
15,000
Total
$ 29,592
There are sufficient CMAQ funds from Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEALU) to cover this project. The Commission: did
not commit all of the SAFETEALU funds in order to cover project cost increases
and/or 7.projects that were delayed due to the state budget crisis. Therefore, the
programming of . CMAQ funds for the North .Main Corona parking structure is
consistent with the Commission's direction.
Upon approval by the Commission, staff will amend the Federal Transportation
Improvement Program (FTIP) to reflect the updated funding. Construction of
parking structure C:is anticipated to begin in Winter 2008..
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Year:
FY 2007/08
Amount:
$15,000,000`
Source of Funds:
Federal Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality (CMAQ)
Budget Adjustment:
N/A
GLA No.::
221-3.3-41403 P 380,8
Fiscal Procedures. Approved:
\litm,Aii.' 1,04
Date:
1 /22/07
Agenda Item 7H
38
AGENDA ITEM 71
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Jerry Rivera, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Fiscal Year 2007 Measure A Capital Improvement Plan for Local
Streets and Roads for the City of Norco
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to approve the amendment to the FY 2007
Measure A Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for Local Streets and Roads for the
city of Norco as submitted.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Measure A Ordinance requires each recipient of local streets and roads monies
to annually provide to the Commission a five-year plan on how those funds are to
be expended in orderto receive its Measure A disbursements. In addition, the
cities in the Coachella Valley and the county of Riverside (representing the
unincorporated area of the Coachella Valley) must be participating in Coachella
Valley Association of Government's (CVAG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
(TUMF) program. The agencies are also required to submit an annual certification
of maintenance of effort (MOE) along with documentation supporting the
calculation.
The Measure A plan for the city of Norco was approved by the Commission at its
September 14, 2006 meeting. Any revisions to the adopted plan must be returned
to the Commission for approval. The city of Norco is requesting to amend its
FY 2007 Measure A plan to add one widening project, Second Street, 1-15 to
Corona, in the amount of $442,000 in order to utilize available 19976 bond
proceeds that were set aside for the Yuma interchange project area.
Attachment: Letter from the City of Norco with Revised FY 2007 Schedule
Agenda Item 71
39
CITY of NORCO
79170 Org. to TT
CITY HALL • 2870 CLAM( AVENUE • NORCO CA 92860 •, )951) 735-3900 • FAX (951) 270.5622
1
January 11, 2007
Theresia Trevino
Riverside County Transportation Commission
P.O. Box 12008
Riverside, CA 92502-2208
ECEUV
(
RPo�JAN 177 ZN0ii0YY7 �J
'TRA►ISPOR1ATIONC0 AISSION
Dear Ms. Trevino:
Pursuant to our conversation this morning, I am sending you a revised copy of the City
of Norco Five -Year Capital Improvement Program Measure "A" Fund. Also attached is
the City's original request for reimbursement Please submit your remittance to the City
of Norco, 2870 Clark Avenue, Norco, CA 92860. If you prefer, a wire may be submitted
as per previous instructions. .
If a wire is being sent, please notify myself or Olivia Hoyt at (951) 270-5652 upon
completion of the requested payment.
Sincerely,
Andy • oto
Director of Fiscal and Su • port Servies
ljk-63980
Enclosures: Revised Five -Year CIP Measure "A" Fund
Original request dated October 26, 2006
c: Bill Thompson
X.29.13
CITY COUNCIL
•
HARVEYSULLIVAN FRANK HALL - KATHYAZEYEDO HALCLARK HERE HIGGINS
Mayor Maya Pro Tom 'Council Mortar Council Member Cowl Monte
40
"
C i t y o f N o r c o , C a l i f o r n b
f 7 v e - Y e a r C a p i t a l i m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m
M e a s u r e ' A ' P r o j e c t s F u n d 1 3 7
F i s c a l Y e a r s 2 0 0 7 t h r o u g h 2 0 1 1 , , .
R E V I S E D
S o u r c e s o f F u n d s :
B e g i n n i n g F u n d B a l a n c e J u l y 1
M e a s u r e " A " R e v e n u e s
i n v e s t m e n t E a r n i n g s
t o t a l S o u r c e s o f F u n d s
U s e s o f F u n d s :
O v e r l a y :
V a l l e y V i e w A v e n u e - F i r s t t o S i e r r a a n d S i x t h t o R i v e r D r .
S i e r r a A v e n u e - F f f t h t o S i x t h S t r e e t s
T a l l y - H o L a n e - C o r o n a t o E n d o f C u l - d e - s a c
S m o k e w o o d D r . - S i e r r a t o W e s t e n d
S e v e n t h S t . - W o o d w a r d A v e n u e t o S i e r r a A v e
P e d l e y A v e n u e - S e v e n t h S t . t o E i g h t h S t . -
H i l l s i d e - S i x t h S t . t o R i v e r D r .
R o c k y V i e w
M i s c . P a v e m e n t O v e r l a y s
R e h a b a n d O v e r l a y .
W S R i v e r R o a d E a s t o f B l u f f S t B l u f f S t - R i v e r R d t o V i n e
W I S H i l l s i d e A v e b l w 2 n d a n d 3 r d S t r e e t
P a c e s P e a k - S b d t r t o M t S h a s t a
R i v e r D r . T e m e s c a l i o E i g h t h
C a n a r i a A v e . - F i r s t t o S e c o n d
R e s e r v o i r - C o r o n a t o T e m e s c a l
H i l l s i d e - S e c o n d T o T h i r d
G o l d e n G a t e C i r c l e
N o r m n i a n D r . F i h h S t . t o N o r c o D r .
P e r t c r i d g e - S e c o n d t o ' K i p s K r a m e r
R i d i n g R i n g , W e s t e r n , C a b a l l e r o s , I n d i a n H o r s e , R o a n C t
W e s t e r n A v e - F i f t h S t t o S o u t h E n d
3 r d S t - V a l l e y V w t o C o r o n a ; 3 r d S t - H i l l s i d e t o E n d ; R a q u e l
W i d e n S t r e e t s :
I H a m n e r A v e . @ S e c o n d S t r e e t 4 9 2 3 - 5 1 0 0 . 0 0 0
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 F Y 2 0 0 7 / 2 0 0 8 F Y 2 0 0 8 / 2 0 0 3 F Y 2 0 0 9 / 2 0 1 0 F Y 2 0 1 0 / 2 0 1 f
$ 2 . 8 4 0 . . 1 0 8
9 3 6 , 2 6 1
8 5 , 2 0 3
5 3 2 . 5 7 0
9 6 9 , 0 3 0
1 5 , 9 7 7
4 5 4 , 5 7 7 7 2 , 0 8 1
1 , 0 0 2 , 9 4 6 1 , 0 3 8 . 0 4 9
1 4 , 5 3 7 2 , 1 6 2
1 8 2 , 2 7 2
1 , 0 7 4 , 3 8 1
5 , 4 6 8
$ 3 , 8 0 1 . 5 7 0
1 , 5 1 7 , 5 7 7 1 , 5 0 2 , 0 6 1
1 . 1 1 2 , 2 7 2 1 , 2 6 2 , 1 2 1
F Y 2 0 0 6 / 2 0 0 7 F Y 2 0 0 7 / 2 0 0 8 . F Y 2 0 0 8 / 2 0 0 9 F Y 2 0 0 9 / 2 0 1 0 F Y 2 0 1 0 / 2 0 1 1
3 5 0 , 0 0 0
1 5 0 . 0 0 0
7 5 . 0 0 0
3 5 . 0 0 0
3 5 . 0 0 0
7 5 , 0 0 0
2 2 8 . 0 0 0
1 2 8 . 0 1 ) 0
1 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 5 0 . 0 0 0 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 2 5 0 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 2 3 - 2 5 0 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 2 4 1 5 0 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 8 -
4 9 2 2 - 2 5 . 6 0 , 0 0 0 -
4 9 2 2 - 1 8 2 7 5 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 5 1 7 6 , 0 0 0 -
4 9 2 2 - 1 7 - - " 4 0 0 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 1 1 - 2 5 . 0 0 0 :
4 9 2 2 - 2 6 2 0 0 . 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 1 2 1 2 8 . 0 0 0 -
4 9 2 2 - 2 7 1 5 0 . 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 2 8 7 0 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 2 - 2 9 3 5 0 , 0 0 0
4 9 2 1 - 6
4 9 2 1 4 1
4 9 2 1 . 6
4 9 2 1 - 8
4 9 2 1 - 8
4 9 2 1 - 6
4 9 2 1 - 8
4 9 2 1 - 6
4 9 2 1 - 6
1 2 7
4 1
1 8 0 , 0 0 0
City Morro, California
FIve-Year Capital Improvement Program
Measure "A" Projects Fund 137'
F7sosl Years 2007 through 2011
REVISED
FY 200612007 . FY 2007/2008 FY 2009 2009 - FY2009/2010 FY 20102011
Hamner Ave. .Hidden Valley 4923-6 50.000
ascend Street -1-15 to Corona (Memo only for Bond Reimbursement) 442,000
Street Reconstruction: .
: Sierra Ave. Fourth to Third Street
Crestview Ave. North to Sbdh St.
1 Misc. Reconatruction Projects
i -TUMF Projects Match -Hidden Valley
l River Drive - Center to Hillside
$Iulf Street = Vine to River Road
Traffic Signal Improvements:
Traffic Signal Improvements 4920-3 50.000 50,000
Fifth St. SignalImprovements 4920-4 50000 50,000
Sierra Ave. it Sixth St Street 4920-5 50.000
Street, Striping 4928-1 30.000 30,000
Miscellaneous Seal Coats 4924-1 50.000 50,000
Miscellaneous Pavement Repairs 4925-1 70,000 50,000 ,
Total Uses of Funds
; Ending Fund Balance June 30
4928 2 3.35 000 -
4928-3 554000
4928-5 200,000
4928-B -
4928-7 45000
4928-8 64.000
128
42
3.329,000
1.033,000
25,000 50.000 -
50.000 50.000 50;000 `
30,000 30.000. 30,000
50,000 50,000 50,000
50,000.. '50.000 50,000
1,430,000' 930,000 810,000
532.570 484,577 72.061. 182.272 452,121
AGENDA ITEM 7J
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRAI USPOR TA TION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
February.14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Extension for Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with BRE Properties
for Joint Development at the La Sierra Metrolink Station
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for Jhe Commission to:
1) Approve a six-month extension for the exclusive negotiating
agreement (ENA) with BRE Properties for joint development at the
La Sierra Metrolink station;
2) Direct staff to enter into discussions with BRE Properties regarding an
increase in the good faith deposit up to an additional $25,000; and
3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to. Legal counsel review, to execute the
agreement on behalf of the Commission.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its July 2006 meeting, the Commission awarded ENA No. 07-67-004-00, for
joint development at the La Sierra_ Metrolink station to BRE Properties for an .
180-day period. The ENA allows for the Commission to negotiate exclusively with
BRE Properties. Upon execution of the ENA, BRE Properties provided the required
$25,000 good faith deposit. The ENA expires on February 19, 2007.
Representatives from the Commission, BRE Properties, Best Best & Krieger, the
city of Riverside Planning and Redevelopment and Keyser. Marston Associates (real
estate financial advisory) have had several meetings to discuss various matters
regarding the . proposed project; however, critical issues related to the legal
framework and structure of the deaf to allow development of' both the public
parking and private development components of the project remain unresolved due
to the complexity. Commission staff and BRE Properties are requesting a
six-month extension of the ENA to provide additional time . to continue to resolve
these issues.
Agenda Item 7J
;Section 2a of the ENA. provides for an increase in the deposit up to an additional:
$25.,000' :upon agreernent between the Cornmission and the developer to "cover'
costs: and, expenses that: may exceed the initial good faith deposit.. Upon .extension
of the ENA, staff will enter into discussions with.
increase in the deposit.
Financial Information
In Fiscal .Year Budget:
N/A
Year:
N/A
Amount:.
N/A
Source of Funds:'.`
N/A
Budget' Adjustment:
N/A
GLA No.:
N/A
Fiscal Procedures Approved
Agenda Item 7J
44
Date:
01 /22/07
AGENDA ITEM 7K
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007 .
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, . Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Commuter Rail Program Update.
STAFF, RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission .to receive and file the Commuter Rail program
Update asan information item.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Inland Empire -Orange County ('1E0C) Weekend Service
Daily passenger trips on, ;the new year --round IE'O.0 Metrolink weekend service have
remained consistent since December. This expanded service provides both an
extension to ourexisting services for transit dependent riders and . existing
commuter passengers as well as a viable alternative to driving into Orange. County,
introducing entirely new users to the Metrolink .system.
Cumulative Passenger Trips
IEOC, Weekend Service .
First week of school
35,000
30,000
S. . 25,000
F 20000
c 15,000
4 10,000
5,000
0-
i\tO
To date, the IEOC weekend service has provided 30,565 passenger trips since
commencing July 15, 2006. This constitutes 11,633 additional trips resulting from
year-round service compared to last year's 18,932 Summerlink seasonal trips.
Growth of . the service reflects ongoing marketing efforts coordinated among the
Commission, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino
Association of Governments (SANBAG):
Agenda Item 7K
45
Riverside Line
5,400
5,000
4,600
T4200
c 3,800
3,400
3,000
2,600
UP Track Work
Passenger Trips
Riverside Line
o`°
Off, �rk< ' Fti<1
crP o`O o0 00 0`� � ; o�
vs? �a� �J� PO4 cool, \40J
Month
Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside line for the month of December
averaged 4,280, a decrease of 740, 15 % less than the month of - November.
Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily - increase of
32 passenger trips, nearly .`:1 % more than ayea'r ago', Dece.rnb`er 2005:
100
am 95
a� 90
85
as
80
a 75
70
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
UP Track Work
Riverside Line
n�0
OHO ot. A�o rO I 6 ro
A A�O
RI �`� �o�' �o` PJ�d°
�� of Dec,•
Month
December on -time performance averaged 86% inbound (-4% from November) and
90% outbound (-1 % from November). There were 29 delays greater' than five
minutes during the month of December. The following are primary causes:
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching
Mechanical
Operations
Agenda Item 7K
46
IEOCLine
5,000
4,800
4,600
4,400
4,200
4,000
3,800
3,600
Passenger Trips
Inland Empire Orange County Line
GAh
.Q0 ‘i:t .
w- fpp pp ,prO p6 P�o pro C
Month
Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's 1E0C line for the month of December averaged .
4,204, a decrease of :522 trips, 1 1 % less than the month of November. The Line
has increased by 552 daily trips or 15% from a year ago December 2005.
100
95
90
a) 85
d 80.
a 75
70
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
Inland Empire Orange County Line
�G�� A6 �a`"
T
pro _ pp Aro Epp pro ,p6 pro Aro
Pit `Sad�J� 0G� ,,,64 4000
Month
December on -time performance averaged 96'% southbound (-4% from November)
and 94% northbound (+7% from November). There were 36 delays greater than
five minutes during the month of December. The following are primary causes:
...�`:fz..��..
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching
Mechanical
Operations
�f�'Y
�. �$
•!
� k'
4
5
0
7
�.�`��.�f�:v�'.,vfi32
25%'
31 %
0%
44%
TOTAL
g•#�'
-,
s"y �l.�
, . r, ' s
jsz ,c� �k�1x
,
z�'w 3•�i�'y/r
�'� �
C.".�'�
�
x�
Agenda Item 7K
47
91 Line
2,800
2,600
u, 2,400
a.
2,200
c 2,000
u 1,800
1,600
1,400
Passenger Trips
91 Line
0 p`O. ,o`O ,06 00 o`O bo o`O
Month
Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's Metrolink's 91 line for the .month of December
averaged 1,883, a -:decrease.; of- 209 trips, 10% less than the :month of November.
The Line has increased by 82 daily trips or 5 % from a year ago December 2005. '
100
a> 95
a>. 90
.:3
co
80
a. 75
70
h
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
91 Line
o� , a�oo t-oo �o�o moo J\o�o
Month
December: on -time: performance averaged 98 % inbound (+ 5 % , from November) and
95 % outbound (+ 2 % : from November) . There were 13 delays greater than; five
minutes during the month of December.. The following are primary causes:
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching,
Mechanical
Operations
Attachments:
1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips
2) Metroiink Schedule Adherence: Summary - Weekday Service
Agenda Item 7K
48
ydeJO pull ijeiIInW Pus Mel stsPIN ehy
%Z
%9
%9 L
%'L
%Z
%Z-
% L'
%8
90 30a sn 94 39C
-96ue4o %
%0
%01-
o/° L L-
%L L-
%14-
%6-
off9-
90 noN 9A g0 asp
°Bugg J %
%
%0
"AZ
%L^
%0
%Z-
%tr
%£
L-
.%0 -
%6
Yo L-
Zt79`LE
99l'Ztr
089'Z$P
15£'Z'b
06£` 44'
906` 1b
060 Ztr
1791'Zt7
9614t,
9£6`6£
99e017
£V£`0SP
L96`9£
£98` L
Z60`Z .`
917Z Z
91b' Z
tZt7`Z
£9tr'Z
Z9£`Z
9Zb` Z
6LZ'Z
6L L' Z
E9trZ
466` 6
WW1,
bOZ' 1r
9Z1`b
9E9%7
999'tr
969'b
.179V -
179E`tr
Lev'tr
86£'b
b9E'ta
9L9'tr
6$Z'tr
Z99`£
119'9
Z/9'9
1.99`9
9 L1b`9
86£'9
9/9'9
EE9`9
09.9`9
98£'9
96 L `9
88Z'9
L81 `9
009 S •
08Z'tr.
OZO'9
09617
901`b
LOS`ti
9L17`b
SZ9`b
99L `b
6L5`tr
L88'£.
81.9`b
BrZ1'
9/9
/179
014
Z99
ZZ9
L£9
959
E99
Ltr9
L99
0179
£b9
£99
9/6'01.
L90`Z L
L6Z`ZL
90Z`ZL
£99' L L
199411
9S6'LL
9Z£'Z1
999' L L
Ltr6`LL
£69' Z 6
9L8` L b
£L6'LL
tr89`9
BIM
/91.`/
ZL L' L
81Z'L
69Z'L
Z6Z'L
89Z'L
917011
Z£8'9
96L'9
9tr6'9
ZL9'9.
ZZ9`£
996'E
010`V
L£0`b
0176'£
000`b
Z9 6'tr
bLZ'b
966`£
LS8`£
08L'£
Z06`£
917VE
90 oea
90 AoN
90 PO
901nf
90 unr
90 JEW
90 WA
90 uer,
50 oea
a31Snf Ob AvanoH - MOamm H1NOW N33.1?211H1
_Sh111.12i3ON3SSVd AVCDI33M_30"sqI3AV MNI1011131N
•
%t►6 %WI % 76 %E6 :' %96
W
%SS
%b6
%96 ..
°%96' °%86 •
°/%86 t%96:
%Pe
%96
•uogelnpieo eurp-uo 94 uI popnlousiou e?e sule4 p8hnuubLL ••uolteuguel go iulod ae.euug-uQ evane Aein 11 lO p�eplsuoo eue suite peieuiuua
•sAegep algenallal Jot epees useq eneq stuemen(pe oN
%S6°%06, .. %,16. . %g9 '1086 m. %96 %t+8 %96
%P6 "
%06 '
%-06
°%98
/°L6.._ . %96
emu pempaps eelnum S umm
°%96 °%L6
%t+6
°%S6 .
%S6
°%L6
supi ._
if) Oa
90 oel7
%l6
%16 %06 .
%£6 %£6
%L9 %Z6
%68 %99
516 °%06
%96 - : %86'. .
'/o1.6 %.16 ;<
%Z6 - %16
%69 %98
90 nON.
%96
%96 %L6
%96 %b6
°%56 %Se
%96
%SB
%66 %L6
%86 %001 '
%t6 %96
%tr6 %96
%96 %001
%S6
%V6 %56
%S6 %96 .
%98 %88
%96 %Z6.
%96 %86
%Z6 %66.
%t►6 %S6
%g6 %96
%86 °%96
90 lo0.
90 des
%b6
%S6 %V6
%S6 %Z6
%Z6 ToZ6
%96 %16
%96 °%56
%S6 %66:
%96 %t6
%£6' /°£6
%96 % /.6.
90 Bny .
%Se
%SB %t6
%Z6 %tP6
°%tr6 %06
°%LB %96
%96 %96
%P6 %96
%tr6 %b6
%96 %86
90 In
%£6
%£6 %b6
%L8 %88
%LB %t►8
%69 %tr6
%FS %SS
% 16 %86 •
%86 %96
%Se °%L6
%£6 946
90 un f.
%96
%S6 %96
%96 %£6
%£6 %96
°%Le %h6
%o 16 %t6
%S6 %S6
°%St %96
%96 %L6
°%S6 %86
90 AeW
°%b6
%£6 %96
%68 %06
%98 %96
°%b6 %06 '
%Z6 %86
%66 %001
%Se %66
°% 16 °%t6
°%56 °%86;
90 �dV
%£6
%£6 %£6
°/oZ6 %g9
°%LB ' %98'
°%56 %19
%2L %98
%001 %001
°%96 %Le
%£6 %g6
%L6 . %£6
90 JEW
%£6
°%Z6 %Se
°/(26 %t+6..
%69 %06
%l6 %S6
°/oL9 %£8
%L6 %66
%L6 %96.
°%£6 °%96
%96
%66 .
90 9ed
%Z6
%16 %£6
%O6 %06
%98 °/oZ6
%68 %£6.
%9L
%9L
%Le %86
%96 °%66
°% 16 %Z6
%Z6 • %96
90 uer
°%V6
%t6 %S6
%69 %L9
%06. °%06--
°%92 %16
%176 %L6
SH1N011 S1101V1
auwj1 pelnpeyoS;o septum 9 WON Buin»ni suM1 jo aDquaoaed
3011/1213S AVa>133M - Awnou s 39N3213HCV 3111031.19S MNI1ON13'IAI
%66 %00 t'
%tr6 %L6
%S6 %96.`
%96 %L6
SO a •
AGENDA ITEM 7L
"
R I V E R S / D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 2 0 0 7
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
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 :
E r i c H a l e y , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
C o o r d i n a t e d P u b l i c T r a n s i t - H u m a n S e r v i c e s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n
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 s s i o n t o
1 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 6 2 - 0 9 6 - 0 0 w i t h A - M - M - A f o r t h e
d e v e l o p m e n t o f a C o o r d i n a t e d P u b l i c T r a n s i t - H u m a n S e r v i c e s
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ; a n d
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e C h a i r , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o e x e c u t e t h e
a g r e e m e n t o n b e h a l f , o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
A t i t s J u l y 1 2 , 2 0 0 6 m e e t i n g , , , s t a f f w a s d i r e c t e d t o r e l e a s e a r e q u e s t f o r p r o p o s a l
( R F P ) t o d e v e l o p a C o o r d i n a t e d P u b l i c T r a n s i t - H u m a n S e r v i c e s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n .
T h e p l a n i s r e q u i r e d a s a r e s u l t o f t w o n e w f u n d i n g s o u r c e s m a d e p o s s i b l e t h r o u g h
t h e S a f e , A c c o u n t a b l e , F l e x i b l e , E f f i c i e n t T r a n s p o r t a t i o n E q u i t y A c t ( S A F E T E A L U ) :
1 ) J o b s A c c e s s . R e v e r s e C o m m u t e ( S e c t i o n 5 3 1 6 ) p r o v i d e s f o r m u l a '
f u n d i n g f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f j o b a c c e s s p r o j e c t s
t o t r a n s p o r t , w e l f a r e r e c i p i e n t s a n d l o w - i n c o m e i n d i v i d u a l s t o a n d f r o m
w o r k d u r i n g n o n - p e a k - h o u r s a s w e l l a s s u p p l y r e v e r s e c o m m u t e
o p t i o n s f o r w o r k e r s i n s u b u r b a n c o r e s ; a n d
2 ) N e w F r e e d o m s ( S e c t i o n 5 3 1 7 ) p r o v i d e s f o r m u l a f u n d i n g . f o r n e w
p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s a n d a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r p e o p l e w i t h
d i s a b i l i t i e s b e y o n d w h a t i s r e q u i r e d b y t h e A m e r i c a n s ' w i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s
A c t ( A D A ) .
' P r e v i o u s l y , F T A m a d e f u n d i n g a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e J o b s A c c e s s R e v e r s e C o m m u t e p r o g r a m t h r o u g h a
d i s c r e t i o n a r y p r o c e s s .
A g e n d a I t e m 7 L
5 1
The RFP was; distributed to approximately 66 firms. A total of four proposals were
received as a result. Consultant interviews were conducted on January 9, 2007::
The evaluation committee consisted of Eunice Lovi, SunLine Transit Agency,
Lorna Foster, Caltrans District 8, John Mason,Caltrans - (Sacramento) and
Tanya Love. The evaluation committee utilized the following criteria to evaluate
the proposals:
1) Qualification and experience of the firm;
2) Staffing and project organization;
3) Work plan;
4) Cost and price; and
5) Completeness of response.
The following table provides a listing of each firm-, the proposed costs (labor _ and
expenses) together with the evaluation committee's ranking:
FIRM
A-M-M-A
Moore & Associates
PROPOSED COSTS
(LABOR & EXPENSES)
$99,974
$88,305
2
IBI Group
$99,150
Wilbur Smith .Associates
$ 119, 788
4
The evaluation committee recommends A-M-M-A be retained to develop the Public . .
Transit -Human Services Transportation Coordination, Plan for Riverside County due
to its experience in developing plans as well as the 'firm's familiarity . with the.
Commission's Specialized Transit program. A-M-M-A recently completed the
coordinated plans for San Luis Obispo, Ventura and ;San Diego and , is under
contract with Los Angeles to complete its plan requirements. _
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year ,Budget:
Y ._
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$99,974
Source of Funds:
Measure A Specialized Transit
Western County (50%)
Local Transportation Funds -Planning
(50%)
Budget Adjustment:.
•
N •
GLA No.:
106-65-81501 $50,000
225-26-81501 $50,000
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
' `10/
Date:
1 /22/07 ,
Agenda Item 7L
52
AGENDA ITEM 7M
REVISED AGENDA ITEM 7M
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Shirley Medina, Program Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Transportation Control Measure Replacement Projects for the
SR-60 Part-time High Occupancy Vehicle Conversion
Demonstration Projects
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to receive and file the recommended
Transportation Control Measure (TCM) replacement projects necessary to provide
mitigation for the SR 60 Part-time High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Conversion Lane
Demonstration Project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
SCAG's Energy and Environment Committee (EEC) recently released for public
review Caltrans' proposal to convert the HOV lane on SR-60 (between Day Street
and Redlands Blvd.) to operate as a mixed flow lane during off peak hours. This is
a demonstration project over a three year timeframe. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Transportation Conformity Rule requires federal projects that have
been included as Transportation Control Measure (TCM) in the Federal
Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) to undergo a substitution process in
the event projects are not implemented. Given that the emissions reductions for
the SR-60 HOV project has been accounted for in the regional transportation
conformity analysis, EPA is requiring that Caltrans follow the TCM substitution
process to address the increase in vehicular emissions resulting from the SR-60
HOV conversion from a full-time to part-time operation.
Caltrans has asked the Commission for assistance in identifying substitution
projects. The primary requirement for these projects is that they are not currently
identified as TCM's in the FTIP, fill the gap in the emissions levels caused by
converting the HOV lane from full-time to part-time, and would be implemented
during the same time frame of the conversion project.
Agenda Item 7M
Commission staff determined that a new FSP beat and expansion beat, currently in
the pipeline, could achieve the emissions needed. We contacted our on -call air
quality consultant, Ray Gorski, to conduct the air quality analysis for the TCM
substitution projects. His analysis was also part of the substitution report
submitted to SCAG and the results are noted below:
SR-60 Part-time HOV Facility Criteria Pollutant Shortfalls
Criteria Pollutant
Emissions
Shortfall
FSP Beats
Oxides of
Nitrogen (NO.)
Reactive Organic
Gas (ROG)
0.04 ton/day
0.01 ton/day
0.08 ton/day
0.38 ton/day
A summary of the FSP beats are noted below:
1. FSP beat: Beat No. 7
Freeway: SR-60
Boundaries: Main Street to Milliken Street
# of Trucks: 2
One-way length: 11.72 miles
Start date: March 5, 2007
2. FSP beat: Beat No. 19
Freeway: 1-215
Boundaries: Alessandro Boulevard to SR-74
# of Trucks: 2
One-way length: 10
Start date: July 2, 2007
NEXT STEPS:
SCAG recently posted the substitute projects in conjunction with the
announcement of the HOV Demonstration Project for a 30-day comment period.
On March 1, 2007, SCAG will ask the Regional Council to approve the TCM
substitution projects in support of the HOV conversion project. The TCM
substitution projects will be identified in the next FTIP Amendment put forth by
SCAG, which is anticipated to be federally approved by June 1, 2007. Pending no
other actions or comments by the federal agencies, the SR 60 HOV conversion is
scheduled to occur by June 30, 2007.
Agenda Item 7M
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISS/OIU
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Robert Yates, Program Manager
THROUGH;
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
State Route 60 Mixed Flow h .. Occupancy g p y Vehicle Lane
Hi
Mitigation Projects
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to receive and file the recommended list of
replacement transportation control measure (TCM) projects necessary to provide
mitigation for the SR-60 mixed flow high occupancy vehicle (NOV) lane
demonstration project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) Energy and Environment
Committee (EEC) recently released for public review, the California Department of
Transportation's (Caltrans) proposal for the HOV lane on SR-60 between
Day Street and Redlands Boulevard to operate as a mixed flow lane during off peak
hours. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has since expressed a .
concern about the increase in vehicular emissions . that may occurdue to this
conversion.
In order to alleviate this concern, Commission staff working in conjunction with
SCAG and Caltrans staff, have been coordinating on the selection of replacement
projects to act as mitigation. The primary 'requirement for these projects is that
they must be projects that are not currently identified as TCM's in the:
Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). `Selecting projects that meet
this requirement will allow the Commission and its partners to assign them to the
SR-60 mixed flow HOV demonstration project as it continues to move through the
public review and approval process.
DISCUSSION:
SCAG modeling of the SR=60 mixed flow HOV demonstration project indicates an
increase of 380 pounds ofadditional carbon monoxide (CO) per day and 80 pounds
of additional oxides of nitrogen (NOx) per day, resulting from the mixed .flow
operation of the HOV during off peak hours. After analysis and review of the
SCAG impacts and the list of potential projects, the following toolbox of projects is
Agenda Item 7NI
recommended_ by staff to be used in order to offset the above referenced impacts
as follows:
North Main Corona Parking Structure: Advancing this project for this
use and consideration of its 830 parking spaces ,would result in the
reduction of 310 lbs/day of CO and 32.4 lbs/day .of NOx..
Perris Park and Ride Facility: This project plans for the construction o
140 park and ride spaces and will be operated as a transit center in=
conjunction with Riverside Transit. Agency (RTA) bus activities.
Standard modeling practices indicate that it will provide_ a reduction of
39.8 -lbs/day of CO and 4.1 Ibslday pf NOx. This station isexpected
to be funded by RTA as well as in part from Commuter Assistance
Measure A reserves and the Commissions Rail Department. It will
continue to serve as a park and ride lot upon full build of, the station
for the anticipated. Perris Valley Line (PVL) Metrolink. ;
Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) 'Beat Expansion: Two new 'FSP beats
that are planned for implementation and. ,will! serve to provide a
reduction of 70 lbstday of CO and 14. Ibs/day of :NOx. These beats;
are as follows:
FSP Beat No. 7.
Freeway: SR-60
Boundaries: Main St. to Milliken St.
No. of Trucks: 2
One-way length: 11.72 miles
Start date:. March 5, 2007
FSP Beat No. 19
Freeway: 1-215
Boundaries: Alessandro Blvd. to SR-74
No of Trucks: 2
One-way length: 10
Start date: July 2, 2007
Intersection Signalization: This project intends that the
implementation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Calle' . Aurora
and Vista Conejo Drive/Krameria Avenue in the city of, Moreno Valley
and the concurrent elimination of the existing, stop signs will result in
the reduction of 76 lbs/day of CO and 27 Ibsklay of NOx.;
Agenda Item 7M
54
"
N E X T S T E P S :
S C A G w i l l p o s t t h e s e p r o j e c t s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e a n n o u n c e m e n t o f t h e H O V
d e m o n s t r a t i o n p r o j e c t . T h e r e w i l l b e a 3 0 - d a y c o m m e n t p e r i o d . O n
M a r c h 1 , 2 0 0 7 , S C A G w i l l a s k t h e R e g i o n a l C o u n c i l t o a p p r o v e t h e T C M
r e p l a c e m e n t p r o j e c t s a s p u t f o r t h b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n . a n d i t s p a r t n e r s a n d f o r w a r d
t h e m t o a p p r o p r i a t e f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s f o r a p p r o v a l . . U p o n a p p r o v a l b y t h e R e g i o n a l
C o u n c i l , t h e T C M r e p l a c e m e n t p r o j e c t s w i l l b e i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e n e x t . F T I P
a m e n d m e n t p u t f o r t h b y S C A G , w h i c h i s a n t i c i p a t e d t o o c c u r o n A p r i l 2 5 , 2 0 0 7 .
T h i s i s c o n t i n g e n t u p o n n o ' m a j o r c o m m e n t s b e i n g r e c e i v e d d u r i n g t h e p u b l i c
c o m m e n t o r f e d e r a l r e v i e w p r o c e s s . S C A G s t a f f e x p e c t s a p p r o v a l o f t h e F T I P
a m e n d m e n t t o b e m a d e b y J u n e 1 , 2 0 0 7 , w h i c h a t t h a t p o i n t , t h e T C M
r e p l a c e m e n t p r o j e c t l i s t a p p r o v a l b e c o m e s e f f e c t i v e . L a s t l y , b o t h t h e N o r t h M a i n
C o r o n a p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e a n d t h e t w o F S P b e a t s h a v e b e e n a p p r o v e d b y p r e v i o u s
C o m m i s s i o n a c t i o n s . T h e M o r e n o V a l l e y i n t e r s e c t i o n w i l l b e f u n d e d b y t h e c i t y o f
M o r e n o V a l l e y . T h e P e r r i s p a r k a n d r i d e f a c i l i t y w i l l b e f o r w a r d e d t o t h e
C o m m i s s i o n a t a f u t u r e d a t e f o r f u r t h e r a c t i o n .
A g e n d a I t e m 7 M
5 5
AGENDA ITEM 71W
"
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 :
F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 2 0 0 7
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
F R O M :
R o b e r t Y a t e s ; P r o g r a m M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
E r i c H a l e y , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . A i r Q u a l i t y E n h a n c e m e n t G r a n t
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 s s i o n t o :
1 ) ` A c c e p t t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y A i r Q u a l i t y E n h a n c e m e n t G r a n t f u n d s ;
2 ) A u t h o r i z e t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r , p u r s u a n t t o l e g a l c o u n s e l r e v i e w , t o
e x e c u t e t h e a g r e e m e n t o n b e h a l f o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ; a n d
3 ) A u t h o r i z e a b u d g e t a m e n d m e n t t o c r e a t e a d d i t i o n a l - s p e n d i n g a u t h o r i t y
t o a c c o m m o d a t e t h e c o n t r a c t .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
O n S e p t e m b e r 2 9 , 2 0 0 6 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 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 ( C A P )
r e s p o n d e d t o a c a l l f o r p r o j e c t s p u t f o r t h b y t h e c o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e E x e c u t i v e
O f f i c e f o r C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y A i r Q u a l i t y E n h a n c e m e n t P r o j e c t p r o p o s a l s . T h e C A P
r e s p o n s e t o t h e c a l l c o n s i s t e d o f a p r o p o s a l a n d w o r k p l a n d e s i g n e d t o i m p l e r n e n t
t h e $ 2 / d a y A d v a n t a g e . R i d e s h a r e i n c e n t i v e p r o g r a m i n t o t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y
r e g i o n . O n J a n u a r y 1 0 , 2 0 0 7 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n w a s n o t i f i e d b y t h e E x e c u t i v e
O f f i c e t h a t i t w a s s u c c e s s f u l w i t h i t s p r o p o s a l t o p r o v i d e t h e i n c e n t i v e a l o n g w i t h a
r e q u e s t t o e n t e r i n t o a g r a n t a g r e e m e n t t o a c c e p t t h e f u n d s .
D I S C U S S / O N :
T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s C A P w a s i m p l e m e n t e d i n W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y a s a s p e c i f i c
r e q u i r e m e n t u n d e r M e a s u r e A t o a d d r e s s c o n g e s t i o n m i t i g a t i o n . T h r o u g h t h e u s e
o f i n c e n t i v e s ( b o t h f o r b e g i n n i n g a n d m a i n t a i n i n g a r i d e s h a r e a r r a n g e m e n t ) , t h e
C A P s e e k s t o i n f l u e n c e d r i v e r b e h a v i o r b y m a k i n g a r i d e s h a r e d e c i s i o n a t t r a c t i v e t o
c o m m u t e r s .
W h i l e r i d e s h a r i n g d o e s h a v e a b e n e f i c i a l i m p a c t o n m o b i l i t y , i t a l s o h a s q u a n t i f i a b l e
a n d d e m o n s t r a t e d p o s i t i v e a f f e c t s o n a i r q u a l i t y . T h r o u g h t h e r e d u c t i o n i n v e h i c l e
t r i p s o b t a i n e d t h r o u g h r i d e s h a r i n g , a n a s s o c i a t e d r e d u c t i o n i n p o u n d s o f p o l l u t a n t s `
e m i t t e d i s a l s o r e a l i z e d . T h i s a s p e c t . o f t h e i n c e n t i v e p r o g r a m w a s t h e p r e m i s e
b e h i n d t h e s t a f f p r o p o s a l t o R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y f o r t h e g r a n t .
A g e n d a I t e m 7 N
5 6
While the Commission does makean effort to work with , Coachella Valley
employers; due to differences' in Measure A funding streams, the Commission is
not able to offer its $2/day Advantage Rideshare incentive program outside of:
Western 'Riverside: County. This leaves the CAP without a valuable toot in its quest
to foster ridesharingarrangements and reduce solo vehicle commuting habits in. the
Coachella Valley area.
With this grant and in coordination with Coachella Valley Association o
Governments ICVAG) and SunLine Transit Agency, staff intends to construct a
two-year demonstration project to develop a new employer marketing prograrn,
offering the $2/day 'Advantage Rideshare incentive to employees commuting in the
Coachella Valley. It is anticipated that with this effort, it will motivate 50 . new
Coachella Valley employers to work with the CAP. From this, it is expected that it
will gain approximately 400 new incentive program participants . (employee
commuters) who .are willing to rideshare in the Coachella Valley. The following
benefits are projected to be received as a result of this demonstration:
329 Vehicles Reduced
35,554 One-way Vehicle Trips Reduced
1,031,054 Vehicle Miles Saved
18,782 Pounds of Emissions Reduced
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$75 000
Source,. of Funds:
Riverside ,County `
Budget Adjustment:
° ' Yes.
226 41 81001 P2184
$37,500 Program IVlanagement
GLA No.
226 41 81030 P2184
$37,500 Certificates/Vouchers "and `Subsidies
226 41 41203 P2184`
$75,000 Local/Other Reimbursements
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\i/Date:
1/25./07
Agenda Item 7N
57
AGENDA ITEM 70
i
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Louie Martin, Project Controls Manager
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Memorandum of Understanding No. 07-31-097-00 for the Funding
and Joint Development of State Highway 111 Improvements from
Washington Street to West City Limits within the City of La Quinta
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve memorandum of understanding (MOU) No. 07-31-097-00 for
the funding reimbursement of state highway improvements within the
city of La Quinta; and
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the
agreement on behalf of the Commission.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its July 9, 2003 meeting, the Commission approved $12 million for the
Coachella Valley Measure A state highway program of projects and cash flow. As a
result, nine projects were programmed for funding under the Measure A Tier II SR-86
and Highway 111 projects. The city of La Quinta has submitted its request for
funding of the fifth of the nine projects, which is from Washington Street to the west
city limits.
Staff recommends approval of the MOU with the city of La Quinta, consistent with the
approved list of Tier II SR-86 and Highway111 project improvements.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
Y
Year:
FY 2006/07
Amount:
$321,255
Source of Funds:
Measure A CVAG Highways
Budget Ad ustment:
N
GLA No.:
253— 31-81301 P3415
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\ /teuez:Nit ULn
Date:
1/22/07
• Attachment: MOU with City of La Quinta
Agenda Item 70
58
"
A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 3 1 - 0 9 7 - 0 0
M E M O R A N D U M O F U N D E R S T A N D I N G
F O R T H E F U N D I N G A N D J O I N T D E V E L O P M E N T O F
S T A T E H I G H W A Y 1 1 1 I M P R O V E M E N T S
W I T H I N T H E C I T Y O F L A Q U I N T A
1 P a r t i e s a n d D a t e .
1 . 1 T h i s A g r e e m e n t i s . e x e c u t e d a n d e n t e r e d i n t o t h i s d a y o f , 2 0 0 7 ,
b y a n d b e t w e e n t h e R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N ( " R C T C " ) a n d
T H E C I T Y O F L A Q U I N T A ( " C I T Y " ) .
2 : R e c i t a l s :
2 . 1 , R C T C i s a 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 r e a t e d a n d e x i s t i n g p u r s u a n t t o
C a l i f o r n i a : P u b l i c , U t i l i t i e s C o d e S e c t i o n s 1 3 0 0 5 3 a n d 1 3 0 0 5 3 . 5 .
2 . 2 O n N o v e m b e r 8 , 1 9 8 8 t h e V o t e r s o f R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y a p p r o v e d M e a s u r e A
a u t h o r i z i n g t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f a o n e - h a l f p e r c e n t ( 1 / 2 % ) r e t a i l t r a n s a c t i o n s a n d u s e t a x ( t h e " t a x " ) t o
f u n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o g r a m s a n d i m p r o v e m e n t s w i t h i n t h e C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e , a n d a d o p t i n g t h e
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t P l a n ( t h e " P l a n " ) .
2 . 3 T h e P l a n a l l o c a t e s 2 0 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n . o f i m p r o v e m e n t s .
a l o n g R o u t e 1 1 1 f r o m R a m o n . t o I n d i o B o u l e v a r d i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y ( t h e " H i g h w a y 1 1 1
F u n d s " ) .
2 . 4 P u r s u a n t t o P u b l i c U t i l i t y C o d e S e c t i o n s 2 4 0 0 0 e t s e q . , R C T C i s a u t h o r i z e d t o
a l l o c a t e t h e p r o c e e d s o f t h e T a x i n f u r t h e r a n c e o f t h e P l a n .
2 . 5 T h e C i t y , R C T C a n d C a l t r a n s a r e p l a n n i n g c e r t a i n i m p r o v e m e n t s a l o n g S t a t e
H i g h w a y 1 1 1 w i t h t h e C i t y o f L a Q u i n t a .
2 . 6 R C T C h a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e i m p r o v e m e n t s r e f e r e n c e d i n S e c t i o n 2 . 5 a b o v e
a n d d e s c r i b e d m o r e f u l l y h e r e i n q u a l i f y f o r H i g h w a y 1 1 1 F u n d s :
2 . 7 R C T C i n t e n d s , b y t h i s A g r e e m e n t , t o p r o v i d e H i g h w a y 1 1 1 l F u n d s f o r t h e
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e s e i n t e r s e c t i o n i m p r o v e m e n t s , s u b j e c t t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s p r o v i d e d h e r e i n , a n d t o
p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e j o i n t d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e P r o j e c t , a s d e f i n e d h e r e i n .
R V P U B \ H S H A N E \ 7 2 4 4 1 6 . 3
5 9
Terms.
3.1 Description of Improvements. This- Agreement is intended to provide
Highway i l l Funds for design, construction and other services for authorized portions'of the Route
111 improvements currently being planned on Highway 111, from Washington Street to the West
City Limits, within the City of La Quinta (the "Project"). The Project is more, fully`described in
Exhibit "A attached hereto and, pursuant to Section 3.3 below; -,is subject to modification as
requested .by the City and approved by RCTC which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. It
is understood and agreed that the City shall expend Highway 111 Funds only as set forth in this
Agreement and onlyfor the Project. To this end, any use of funds provided pursuant to this
Agreementshall be subject to the review and approval of RCTC.
3.2 Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to provide to the City, on the terms
and conditions set forth herein, the maximum sum of Three Hundred Twenty -One Thousand Two
Hundred Fifty -Five Dollars ($321,255.00) for project development,, right of way acquisition, and
construction costs for the Project ("Total Funding Amount"). It is understood and agreed that 100%
of the proposed improvements will be installed within the existing State Tight -of -way. The Total
Funding Amount represents one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated Project Costs, as defined
in Sections 3.14.1 below, and the maximum amount of funding to beprovidedby RCTC for the
Project.
3.3 Responsibilities of Parties/Project Description. The responsibilities of the
City and RCTC with respect to this Agreement and the successful completion of the Project are
described in Exhibit `B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Changes to the
characteristics of the Project and any responsibilities of the City or RCTC may be requested in
writing by the City and are subject to the approval of RCTC's Representative, which approval will
not be unreasonably withheld.
3.4 Term/Notice of Completion. The term of this. Agreement shall be from the
date first herein above written until the date the City provides a written Notice of Completion to
RCTC, until termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section3.9 or until June 30, 2009, whichever
occurs first. All applicable : indemnification provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect
following .the termination of this Agreement.
3.5: RCTC's Representative. RCTC's Executive Director, or his or her designee,
shall ° serve as RCTC's Representative and shall have the authority to act on .behalf of RCTC for all
purposes under this Agreement. RCTC's Representative shall also review and give: approval;, as
needed, to the details of the City's work as it progresses.
3.6 The City's Representative. The City hereby designates, Tom, P. Genovese,
City Manager, or his designee as the City's Representative to RCTC. The City's Representative
shall have the authority to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this Agreement and shall
RVPUB\H S HANE\724416.3
2
60
"
c o o r d i n a t e a l l p h a s e s o f t h e P r o j e c t u n d e r t h e C i t y ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . T h e C i t y s h a l l w o r k c l o s e l y a n d
c o o p e r a t e f u l l y w i t h R C T C ' s R e p r e s e n t a t i v e a n d a n y o t h e r a g e n c i e s w h i c h m a y h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n
o v e r o r a n i n t e r e s t i n t h e P r o j e c t .
3 . 7 S t a n d a r d o f C a r e ; L i c e n s e s . . T h e C i t y a n d R C T C r e p r e s e n t a n d m a i n t a i n t h a t
t h e y s h a l l i m p l e m e n t t h e P r o j e c t i n a s k i l l f u l a n d c o m p e t e n t m a n n e r a n d s h a l l o n l y i n v o l v e i n t h e .
P r o j e c t p e r s o n s o r e n t i t i e s s k i l l e d i n t h e c a l l i n g ( s ) n e c e s s a r y t o p e r f o r m a l l s e r v i c e s , d u t i e s a n d
o b l i g a t i o n s r e q u i r e d t o f u l l y a n d a d e q u a t e l y c o m p l e t e t h e P r o j e c t .
3 . 8 . R e v i e w o f S e r v i c e s : T h e C i t y a n d R C T C s h a l l a l l o w R C T C ' s R e p r e s e n t a t i v e
a n d C i t y ' s R e p r e s e n t a t i v e , r e s p e c t i v e l y , t o i n s p e c t o r r e v i e w t h e p r o g r e s s o f t h e P r o j e c t a t a n y
r e a s o n a b l e t i m e i n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e t e r m s o f t h i s A g r e e m e n t a r e b e i n g m e t .
3 . 9 T e r m i n a t i o n .
3 . 9 . 1 N o t i c e . E i t h e r R C T C o r C i t y m a y , b y w r i t t e n n o t i c e t o t h e o t h e r p a r t y ,
t e r m i n a t e t h i s A g r e e m e n t f o r c a u s e i n w h o l e o r i n p a r t a t a n y t i m e , b y g i v i n g w r i t t e n n o t i c e t o t h e
o t h e r p a r t y o f s u c h t e r m i n a t i o n a n d s p e c i f y i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e d a t e t h e r e o f . U p o n r e c e i p t o f a w r i t t e n
n o t i c e o f t e r m i n a t i o n , R C T C o r t h e : C i t y , r e s p e c t i v e l y , s h a l l c e a s e e x p e n d i t u r e o f f u n d s w h i c h a r e
e x p e c t e d t o b e r e i m b u r s e d w i t h H i g h w a y 1 1 1 F u n d s p u r s u a n t t o t h i s A g r e e m e n t .
3 . 9 . 2 E f f e c t o f T e r m i n a t i o n . U p o n t e r m i n a t i o n b y R C T C o r t h e C i t y , R C T C
s h a l l p r o v i d e H i g h w a y 1 1 1 F u n d s t o w a r d s t h e P r o j e c t i m p r o v e m e n t s s a t i s f a c t o r i l y c o m p l e t e d
t h r o u g h t h e d a t e o f t e r m i n a t i o n . T h e C i t y s h a l l p r o v i d e d o c u m e n t a t i o n d e e m e d a d e q u a t e b y R C T C ' s
R e p r e s e n t a t i v e t o s h o w t h e P r o j e c t C o s t s i n c u r r e d a n d P r o j e c t i m p r o v e m e n t s a c t u a l l y c o m p l e t e d ,
p r i o r t o t h e d a t e o f t e r m i n a t i o n . T h i s A g r e e m e n t s h a l l t e r m i n a t e s e v e n ( 7 ) d a y s f o l l o w i n g r e c e i p t b y
t h e C i t y o f t h e w r i t t e n n o t i c e o f t e r m i n a t i o n .
t
3 . 9 . 3 C u m u l a t i v e R e m e d i e s . T h e r i g h t s a n d r e m e d i e s o f t h e P a r t i e s
p r o v i d e d i n t h i s S e c t i o n a r e i n , a d d i t i o n t o a n y o t h e r r i g h t s a n d r e m e d i e s p r o v i d e d b y l a w o r u n d e r
t h i s A g r e e m e n t .
3 . 1 0 P r e v a i l i n g W a g e s . T h e C i t y a n d R C T C a n d a n y o t h e r p e r s o n o r e n t i t y h i r e d t o
p e r f o r m s e r v i c e s o n t h e P r o j e c t a r e a l e r t e d t o t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f C a l i f o r n i a L a b o r C o d e S e c t i o n s
1 7 7 0 e t s e q . , w h i c h w o u l d r e q u i r e t h e p a y m e n t o f p r e v a i l i n g w a g e s w e r e t h e s e r v i c e s o r a n y p o r t i o n
t h e r e o f d e t e r m i n e d t o b e a p u b l i c w o r k , a s d e f i n e d t h e r e i n . T h e C i t y o r R C T C , a s a p p l i c a b l e , s h a l l
e n s u r e c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e s e . p r e v a i l i n g w a g e r e q u i r e m e n t s b y a n y p e r s o n o r e n t i t y h i r e d t o p e r f o r m
s e r v i c e s o n t h e P r o j e c t . T h e C i t y s h a l l d e f e n d , i n d e m n i f y ; a n d h o l d h a m i l e s s R C T C , i t s o f f i c e r s ,
e m p l o y e e s , c o n s u l t a n t s , a n d a g e n t s f r o m a n y c l a i m o r l i a b i l i t y , i n c l u d i n g w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n
a t t o r n e y s , f e e s , a r i s i n g f r o m i t s f a i l u r e o r a l l e g e d f a i l u r e t o c o m p l y w i t h C a l i f o r n i a L a b o r C o d e
S e c t i o n s 1 7 7 0 e t s e q . R C T C s h a l l d e f e n d , i n d e m n i f y , a n d h o l d h a r m l e s s t h e C i t y , i t s o f f i c e r s ,
e m p l o y e e s , c o n s u l t a n t s ; a n d a g e n t s f r o m a n y c l a i m o r l i a b i l i t y , i n c l u d i n g w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n
a t t o r n e y s ' f e e s , a r i s i n g f r o m i t s f a i l u r e o r a l l e g e d f a i l u r e t o c o m p l y w i t h C a l i f o r n i a L a b o r C o d e
R V P U B I H S H A N E 1 7 2 4 4 1 6 . 3
6 1
_Sections 1770 et seq..
3.11 Copies of Materials. Each party shall have the right to inspect and to obtain
for its record copies of all records and materials which may be prepared by the other party under this
Agreement.
Indemnification.
3.12.1 City Responsibilities. The City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless
RCTC,. its officers, agents; consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costsor
liabilityarising from or connected with all activities governed b this Agreement including all
� g g y g :g
design and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of
the City or its sub -consultants. The City will reimburse RCTC for any expenditure, including
reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by RCTC, in defending against claims ultimately determined to
be dueto negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City.
3.12.2 RCTC Responsibilities. RCTC agrees to indemnify and hold harmless ;
the City, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or
liability arising from or connected with, all activities governed by this Agreement including all
design and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of
RCTC or its sub -consultants. RCTC will reimburse the City for any expenditure, ,including
reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by the City, in defending against, claims ultimately de_ termMed to
be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of RCTC.
3.12.3 Effect of Acceptance. The City and RCTC shall be responsible for the
professional quality, .technical accuracy and the coordination of any services provided ,to complete
the Project. One party's review, acceptance or funding of any services performed by other party
or any other person or entity under this agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of
any rights the other party hereto may hold under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out
such :persons, or entities, performance. Further, the City shall be and remain liable to RCTC, .in
accordance with applicable law, for all damages to RCTC caused by the City's negligent'
performance of this Agreement or supervision of any services provided to complete the Project ,.In
addition, RCTC shall be and remain liable to the City, in accordance with applicable law, for all
damages..to the City caused by RCTC's negligent performance of this Agreement or supervision of
any services provided to complete the Project.
RV PUB1H SHANE17244 16.3
62
"
3 . 1 3 I n s u r a n c e . T h e C i t y a n d R C T C s h a l l r e q u i r e a l l p e r s o n s o r e n t i t i e s h i r e d t o
p e r f o r m s e r v i c e s o n t h e P r o j e c t t o o b t a i n , a n d r e q u i r e t h e i r s u b - c o n s u l t a n t s t o o b t a i n , i n s u r a n c e r o f
t h e . t y p e s a n d i n t h e a m o u n t s d e s c r i b e d b e l o w a n d s a t i s f a c t o r y t o R C T C a n d C i t y . S u c h i n s u r a n c e
s h a l l b e m a i n t a i n e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e t e r m o f t h i s A g r e e m e n t , o r u n t i l . c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e P r o j e c t , .
w h i c h e v e r o c c u r s l a s t .
3 . 1 3 . 1 C o m m e r c i a l G e n e r a l L i a b i l i t y I n s u r a n c e . O c c u r r e n c e v e r s i o n
c o m m e r c i a l g e n e r a l l i a b i l i t y i n s u r a n c e o r e q u i v a l e n t f o r m w i t h a c o m b i n e d s i n g l e l i m i t o f n o t l e s s
t h a n $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p e r o c c u r r e n c e . I f s u c h i n s u r a n c e c o n t a i n s a g e n e r a l a g g r e g a t e l i m i t , i t s h a l l
a p p l y s e p a r a t e l y t o t h e P r o j e c t o r b e n o l e s s t h a n t w o t i m e s t h e o c c u r r e n c e l i m i t . S u c h i n s u r a n c e
s h a l l -
3 . 1 3 . 1 . 1 N a m e R C T C a n d C i t y , t h e i r o f f i c i a l s , o f f i c e r s ,
e m p l o y e e s , a g e n t s , a n d c o n s u l t a n t s a s i n s u r e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e s e r v i c e s o n t h e
P r o j e c t a n d s h a l l c o n t a i n n o s p e c i a l l i m i t a t i o n s o n t h e s c o p e o f c o v e r a g e o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n a f f o r d e d t o
t h e s e i n s u r e d ;
3 . 1 3 . 1 . 2 B e p r i m a r y w i t h r e s p e c t t o a n y i n s u r a n c e o r s e l f
i n s u r a n c e p r o g r a m s c o v e r i n g R C T C o r C i t y , t h e i r o f f i c i a l s , o f f i c e r s ; e m p l o y e e s , a g e n t s , a n d
c o n s u l t a n t s ; a n d
3 . 1 3 . 1 . 3 C o n t a i n s t a n d a r d s e p a r a t i o n o f i n s u r e d p r o v i s i o n s .
3 . 1 3 . 2 B u s i n e s s . A u t o m o b i l e L i a b i l i t y I n s u r a n c e . B u s i n e s s a u t o m o b i l e
l i a b i l i t y i n s u r a n c e o r e q u i v a l e n t f o r m w i t h a c o m b i n e d s i n g l e l i m i t o f n o t l e s s t h a n $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 p e r
o c c u r r e n c e . S u c h i n s u r a n c e s h a l l i n c l u d e c o v e r a g e f o r o w n e d , h i r e d a n d n o n - o w n e d a u t o m o b i l e s .
3 . . 1 3 . 3 P r o f e s s i o n a l L i a b i l i t y I n s u r a n c e . E r r o r s a n d o m i s s i o n s l i a b i l i t y
i n s u r a n c e w i t h a l i m i t o f n o t l e s s t h a n $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 P r o f e s s i o n a l l i a b i l i t y i n s u r a n c e s h a l l o n l y b e
r e q u i r e d o f d e s i g n o r e n g i n e e r i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l s .
3 . 1 3 . 4 W o r k e r s ' C o m p e n s a t i o n I n s u r a n c e . W o r k e r s ' c o m p e n s a t i o n
i n s u r a n c e w i t h s t a t u t o r y l i m i t s a n d e m p l o y e r s ' l i a b i l i t y i n s u r a n c e w i t h l i m i t s o f n o t l e s s t h a n
$ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 e a c h a c c i d e n t . .
3 . 1 4 P a y m e n t o f T o t a l F u n d i n g A m o u n t .
3 . 1 4 . 1 R e i m b u r s a b l e P r o j e c t C o s t s . R e i m b u r s a b l e P r o j e c t c o s t s ( " P r o j e c t
C o s t s " ) i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g i t e m s : ( 1 ) f u n d s e x p e n d e d i n p r e p a r a t i o n o f p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g
s t u d y ; ( 2 ) f u n d s e x p e n d e d f o r p r e p a r a t i o n o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e v i e w d o c u m e n t a t i o n f o r t h e P r o j e c t ;
( 3 ) c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r i g h t - o f - w a y a c q u i s i t i o n , i n c l u d i n g r i g h t - o f - w a y e n g i n e e r i n g , a p p r a i s a l , .
a c q u i s i t i o n , l e g a l c o s t s f o r c o n d e m n a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s i f a u t h o r i z e d b y t h e C i t y , a n d c o s t s , o f
R V P U B \ H S H A N E \ 7 2 4 4 t 6 . 3
6 3
reviewing appraisals and offers for property acquisition; (4) costs reasonably incurred if
condemnation proceeds; (5) costs incurred in the preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates' ..
by consultants or staff; (6) staff costs associated with bidding, advertising and awarding of the.
Project construction contract; (7) construction costs, including change orders to construction
contract approved by the City and ROTC; and (8) construction management, field' inspection and
material testing costs. It is understood and agreed that these costs include costs already incurred by
the City towards completion of the Project. Project Costs are further described in Exhibit "C'
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
3.14.2 Excluded Project Costs. Project Costs shall not include the following
items which shall'be borne solely by the City without reimbursement: (1) City Project coordination
costs; (3) City costs attributed to the preparation of invoices, billings and payments; (4) any City
fees attributed to the processing of the Project.
3.14.3 CoSt/Funding Allocation PercentageDetermination. [Not applicable
to this Agreement:]
3.14.4 Payment. RCTC shall pay for Project Costs as they are incurred and
invoiced for design work, right-of-way services and any other services under its responsibilities,
which payments shall serve as a credit towards the Total Funding Amount: The City shall pay for all
Project contract costs and consultant and other costs for services under its responsibilities as they are
incurred and invoiced.
3.14.5 SB 300 Reimbursements. [Not applicable:]
3.14.6 Progress Reports. Either party may request the other party to inform it
of delays in the Project and provide it with any requested progress reports.
3.14.7 Reimbursement for Expenses. The City shall not be reimbursed for
any expenses unless authorized in writing by RCTC's Representative.
3:15 Change Orders. Any change orders in excess of ten thousand dollars
($10,000) must be reviewed and approved in writing by RCTC and, City.
3.16 Conflict of Interest: For the .term of this Agreement; no member, officer or
employee of the City or ROTC, during the term of his or her service with the City or ROTC, as the
case may be, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement; or obtain any present or anticipated
material benefit arising therefrom.
3,17 'Limited.Scope of Duties. RCTC's and the City's duties and obligations under
this Agreement are limited to those described herein. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the
safety of the Project Site unless it knows or should know of a dangerous condition or activity and
fails to report such condition or activity to the responsible party or otherwise make reasonable
R VPUB\H SHANE\724416.3
64
"
c o r r e c t i v e e f f o r t s . I n a d d i t i o n , R C T C s h a l l n o t b e l i a b l e f o r a n y a c t i o n o f C i t y o r i t s c o n s u l t a n t s
r e l a t i n g t o t h e c o n d e m n a t i o n o f p r o p e r t y u n d e r t a k e n b y C i t y f o r t h e P r o j e c t o r f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f
t h e P r o j e c t . _
3 . 1 8 B o o k s a n d R e c o r d s . E a c h p a r t y s h a l l m a i n t a i n c o m p l e t e , a c c u r a t e , a n d c l e a r l y
i d e n t i f i a b l e r e c o r d s w i t h r e s p e c t t o c o s t s i n c u r r e d f o r t h e P r o j e c t o r u n d e r t h i s A g r e e m e n t . T h e y
s h a l l m a k e a v a i l a b l e f o r e x a m i n a t i o n b y t h e o t h e r p a r t y , i t s a u t h o r i z e d a g e n t s , o f f i c e r s . o r e m p l o y e e s
a n y a n d a l l l e d g e r s a n d b o o k s o f a c c o u n t , i n v o i c e s , v o u c h e r s , c a n c e l e d c h e e k s , a n d o t h e r r e c o r d s o r .
d o c u m e n t s e v i d e n c i n g o r r e l a t e d t o t h e e x p e n d i t u r e s a n d d i s b u r s e m e n t s c h a r g e d t o t h e o t h e r p a r t y
p u r s u a n t t o t h i s d i s b u r s e m e n t s c h a r g e d t o t h e o t h e r p a r t y p u r s u a n t t o t h i s A g r e e m e n t . F u r t h e r , . e a c h
p a r t y s h a l l f u r n i s h t o t h e o t h e r p a r t y , i t s a g e n t s o r e m p l o y e e s s u c h o t h e r e v i d e n c e o r i n f o r m a t i o n a s
t h e y m a y r e q u i r e w i t h r e s p e c t t o a n y s u c h e x p e n s e o r d i s b u r s e m e n t . c h a r g e d b y t h e m . A l l . s u c h
i n f o r m a t i o n s h a l l b e r e t a i n e d b y t h e p a r t i e s f o r a t l e a s t t h r e e ( 3 ) y e a r s f o l l o w i n g t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h i s
A g r e e m e n t , a n d t h e y s h a l l h a v e a c c e s s t o s u c h i n f o r m a t i o n d u r i n g t h e t h r e e - y e a r p e r i o d f o r t h e
p u r p o s e s o f e x a m i n a t i o n o r a u d i t .
3 . 1 9 E q u a l O p p o r t u n i t y E m p l o y m e n t . T h e C i t y a n d R C T C r e p r e s e n t t h a t t h e y a r e
e q u a l o p p o r t u n i t y e m p l o y e r s a n d t h e y s h a l l n o t d i s c r i m i n a t e a g a i n s t a n y e m p l o y e e o r ; a p p l i c a n t o f
r e e m p l o y m e n t b e c a u s e o f r a c e , r e l i g i o n , c o l o r , n a t i o n a l o r i g i n , a n c e s t r y , : s e x o r a g e . S u c h n o n -
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s h a l l i n c l u d e , b u t n o t b e l i m i t e d t o ; a l l a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d t o i n i t i a l e m p l o y m e n t ,
u p g r a d i n g , d e m o t i o n , t r a n s f e r , r e c r u i t m e n t o r r e c r u i t m e n t a d v e r t i s i n g , l a y o f f o r t e r m i n a t i o n .
3 . 2 0 G o v e r n i n g L a w . T h i s A g r e e m e n t s h a l l b e g o v e r n e d b y c o n s t r u e d w i t h t h e
l a w s o f t h e S t a t e o f C a l i f o r n i a .
3 . 2 1 A t t o r n e y s ' , F e e s . I f e i t h e r p a r t y c o m m e n c e s a n a c t i o n a g a i n s t t h e o t h e r p a r t y
a r i s i n g o u t o f o r i n . c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h i s A g r e e m e n t , t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y i n s u c h l i t i g a t i o n s h a l l b e
e n t i t l e d t o h a v e a n d r e c o v e r f r o m t h e l o s i n g p a r t y r e a s o n a b l e a t t o r n e y s ' f e e s a n d c o s t s o f s u i t .
3 . 2 2 T i m e o f E s s e n c e . T i m e i s o f t h e e s s e n c e f o r e a c h a n d e v e r y p r o v i s i o n o f t h i s
A g r e e m e n t . .
3 . 2 3 H e a d i n g s . A r t i c l e a n d S e c t i o n H e a d i n g s , _ p a r a g r a p h c a p t i o n s o r m a r g i n a l
h e a d i n g s c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s A g r e e m e n t a r e f o r c o n v e n i e n c e o n l y a n d s h a l l h a v e n o e f f e c t i n t h e
c o n s t r u c t i o n o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a n y p r o v i s i o n h e r e i n .
3 . 2 4 N o t i f i c a t i o n . A l l n o t i c e s h e r e u n d e r a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e t e r m s o f t h e A g r e e m e n t o r c h a n g e s t h e r e t o s h a l l b e p r o v i d e d b y t h e m a i l i n g
t h e r e o f b y r e g i s t e r e d o r c e r t i f i e d m a i l , r e t u r n r e c e i p t r e q u e s t e d , p o s t a g e p r e p a i d a n d a d d r e s s e d a s
f o l l o w s :
C i t y o f L a . Q u i n t a R C T C
P . O . B o x 1 5 0 4 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 V P U B \ H S H A N E \ 7 2 4 4 1 6 . 3
6 5
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253=1504
ATTN: City Manager
4080 Lemon, 3rd Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
ATTN: Executive Director
Any notice >'so given shall be considered served on the other party three (3) days after deposit
in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the party at its
applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual`notice occurred
regardless of the method of service.
3.25 Conflicting Provisions: In the event that provisions of . any attached
appendicesor exhibits conflict in any way with the provisions ;set forth in this Agreement, the
language, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall control the actions and obligations
of the Parties and the interpretation of the Parties' understanding concerningthe performance of the
Services.
3.26 Contract Amendment. In the event that the parties determine.that the
provisions of this Agreement should be altered, the parties may execute a contract amendment to add
any provision to this Agreement, or delete or amend any provision of this Agreement. All such
contract: amendments must be in the form of a written instrument signed by the original signatories
to this Agreement, or their successors or designees.'
3.27 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between
the Parties relating to the °-subjectmatter hereof and supersedes any previous agreements or
understandings.
3.28 Validity of Agreement. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of
this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
3.29 Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by the City or any
Consultant shall be retained on an; independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of
ROTC. Any personnel: performing services on the Project, shall at all times be under the exclusive
direction and control of the City or consultant, whichever is applicable. The City or consultant shall
pay all wages, salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance
of services on. the Project and as required by law. The City or consultant shall be responsible for all
reports and obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes,'
income tax withholding, unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance.
RVPUBJH SHANE\?24416.3
Signatures on Following Page
66
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITY OF LA QUINTA
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
By By:
Terry Henderson, Chair Don Adolph, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Best, Best & Krieger
Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation
Commission
R VPl113111SHANE1724416.3
By:
Katherine Jenson, City Attomey
67
EXHIBIT "A"
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES
The proposed improvements include the construction of curb, gutter, and connecting pavement on
the north side of Highway 111 from Point Happy Entrance to West City Limits; the construction of a
median island with landscape and irrigation system; and the installation of rock fall stabilization
measures.
The following services will be provided, as necessary, to complete the improvements:
1. Completion of Project Development Activities in accordance with Caltrans Standards
and Project Development Guidelines.
2. Preparation of any needed environmental documentation in accordance with Caltrans
procedures and State and Federal statutes.
3. All needed right-of-way services and acquisition of property needed for
improvements.
4. Construction of improvements as shown in attached Exhibit "D".
RVPUB\H SHANE1724416.3
A-1
68
EXHIBIT "B"
RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTIES
RCTC SHALL:
Reimburse City for Project Costs up to the Total Funding Amount, as set forth in Section 3.2
of the Agreement. .
Arrive at appropriatefunding for overall Project, up to the Total Funding Amount, in
conjunction with City La Quinta prior to award of construction contract by the City.
CITY OF LA QUINTA SHALL:
Be responsible for design, environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, obtaining all
permits required by impacted agencies prior to start of construction.
Be responsible for the bidding, awarding, and administration of the construction contract.
Be responsible for all construction activities including inspection, survey and material
testing.
Arrive at appropriate funding for overall Project in conjunction with RCTC prior to award of
construction contract by the. City.
CHANGES IN RESPONSIBILITIES
The specific responsibilities of RCTC and the City as defined in this exhibit may be changed
pursuant to the terms of Section 3.3 of the Agreement.
R V PU BU-1 SHANS7244I 6.3
B-1
69
EXHIBIT "C"
IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICY FOR COST SHARING
Highway 111 Costs - Measure "A" Share
Measure "A" funds provided by RCTC pursuant to this Agreement may be used to fund any of the
permissible Project Costs, as more specifically set forth below, up to Total Funding Amount.
Measure "A" Highway funds may be used to pay for any and all improvements that occur as a result
of the widening of Route 111 for the Project. Those improvements might include, but not be limited
to, additional through lanes, acceleration tapers, deceleration lanes, bus turnouts, utility relocations,
street lighting, necessary landscaping to Caltrans Standards, traffic signal installations and
modifications, and necessary right-of-way acquisition and services. Right-of-way may be paid for
by the appropriate funds dependent upon area of the take, as described below.
The intersections between Highway 111 and the cross street may also be funded with Measure "A"
Highway funds. The dividing line between Highway 111 and the cross street is defined as the
projection of the Highway 111 right-of-way line across the cross street. In the event of an unclear
definition of right-of-way points, a line connecting the cross street beginning and end of curbs will
be drawn. If the parties disagree on a right-of-way projection the curb return limit will be used. The
lines will be used as a guide for the design engineer preparing the estimate to calculate appropriate
Highway 111 quantities and costs, and appropriate cross street quantities and costs.
Costs for the traffic signals that control Highway 111 and cross street may be paid entirely with
Measure "A" Highway funds regardless of pole locations in the Highway 111 or cross street defined
boundaries. Signalization, for other locations such as entrances to businesses on Highway 111 may
also be funded by Measure "A" Highway funds if warranted and agreed to by RCTC.
Cross Street Costs City Share.
The City will be responsible for funding any and all cross street improvements. The cross street
improvements would include any element of the project that is not included in the Highway 111
costs as defined above.
Landscaping
Landscaping will be in accordance with State and City standards and may be included in the cost
sharing in the appropriate Route 111 or cross street areas. Excessive landscaping will not be paid for
with the Measure "A" Highway funds. Excessive landscaping is a subjective measure, but the intent
is not to use Measure "A" Highway funds to pay for landscaping in excess of what is appropriate for
a typical highway project in the Coachella Valley using Caltrans landscaping design standards.
RVPUBWHANE17244163
C-1
70
EXHIBIT "D"
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS
In general the Project is envisioned to consist of the construction of slope stabilization measures and
rock fall protection devices, curb, gutter, median island, landscaping, and irrigation system, hauling
off of excess material, the installation of A.C. pavement, and signing and striping.
The following Project budget is anticipated:
Project. Activity
Estimated Cost
Construction:
$373,027.00
Engineering:
$63,720.00
Construction Engineering (Inspection/Testing/Survey):
$41,153.00
Sub -Total:
$477,900.00
Contingency:
$53,100.00
Total Estimated Cost:
$531,000.00
RVPUB\H SHANE17244163
D-1
71
AGENDA ITEM 7P
RIVERSIDE COUIV TY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Budget and Implementation Committee
Aaron Hake, Staff Analyst
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
2007 State and Federal Legislative Platforms and Programs
BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Adopt the 2007 Legislative Platforms and Programs;
2) Receive and file the state and federal legislative status report; and
3) Approve the following bill positions:
a) SB 53 (Ducheny, D-San Diego) Support in Concept
b) SB 56 (Runner, R-Antelope Valley) Support
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Annually, the Commission adopts its legislative platform for the state and federal
level. The platform is an opportunity for the Commission to voice its priorities and
concerns to decision makers in Washington, DC and Sacramento and is the basis
for the Commission's advocacy plans to enhance. mobility for the residents of
Riverside County.
This item contains staff's recommended legislative platforms for the state and
federal levels. This year's platforms build on previous Cornmission priorities,
reflecting the new environment in _ Sacramento following the passage of
Propositions 1 A and 1 B and also the Commission's adoption of the
10-Year Measure A Delivery Plan and toll road proposal on December 13, 2006.
The Commission's forefront messages to legislators will relate to the Commission's
ability to deliver highway capacity above and beyond what is promised in Measure
A via publicly -owned toll facilities on SR-91 and 1-15, funding and delivery of the
Perris Valley Line . (PVL) Metrolink extension, and increased funding to goods`
movement projects with an emphasis on grade separations.
Agenda Item 7P
To deliver these and other high -priority messages to decision makers. in the. state
and nation's capitals, staff has developed legislative programs that illustrate the
transportationneeds of Riverside -County.
Draft 2007 RCTC State and Federal Legislative: Platforms
State Legislative Platform
I. Support enhancements of transportation project delivery.
Receive 'legislative authority for the Commission to 'Own and Operate
toll facilities on the state highway system.
Receive legislative authority for design -build procurement for :the _PVL
Metrolink extension.
Receive legislative authority for the Commission and other regional
transportation agencies to use design -build contracting' for highway
projects.
Support measures by the state to streamline the environrnental
approval- process for transportation projects.`
II.: Support accountability and commitment to California voters.
Support transparency and accountability in the administration of
Proposition 1 B funding.
Support . allocation of Proposition 1 B based on objective criteria
focused. on congestion relief, benefits to the public, : and cost : vs.
benefit analysis oppose the earmarking of Proposition 1 B funding.
Meet the voters' expectations by fully funding Proposition 42 and
adhering; to the provisions of Proposition 1 A.
Support legislation to amend California eminent domain , law to more
fairly set awards in eminent domain lawsuits and .protect the ability to
acquire needed right-of-way for transportation projects.
III. Reduce congestion and harmful >emissions by supporting .funding' for alternate
transportation modes and air quality programs.
Support measures that assure a fair - share of , state revenues - to
intercity and commuter rail (provided by Amtrak, : Metrolink : or other
operators) in Southern California and Riverside County.
Continue to support AB 2766 vehicle license fee funding in the:.
South' Coast Air Basin to local jurisdictions and the '.Mobile Source Air
Pollution . Reduction Committee (MSRC); support . MSRC's role as " an
independent decision -making body.
Agenda Item 7P
73
"
S u p p o r t i n c e n t i v e s , : t o e m p l o y e r s t h a t e n h a n c e o r c r e a t e t r a n s i t
r e i m b u r s e m e n t o r r i d e s h a r i n g p r o g r a m s .
S u p p o r t i n c e n t i v e s f o r t a x p a y e r s w h o u t i l i z e . a l t e r n a t i v e f u e l s .
I V . S u p p o r t t h e C a l i f o r n i a : e c o n o m y a n d _ t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e ' s q u a l i t y o f l i f e
t h r o u g h i n c r e a s e d f u n d i n g f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t p r o j e c t s .
" 4 . S u p p o r t t h e B u s i n e s s , , T r a n s p o r t a t i o n & H o u s i n g A g e n c y a n d t h e
C a l i f o r n i a E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y ( C E P A ) i n t h e
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e S t a t e : G o o d s M o v e m e n t A c t i o n P l a n i n c o n c e r t
w i t h t h e S o u t h e r n , C a l i f o r n i a , M u l t i - C o u n t y G o o d s M o v e m e n t A c t i o n '
P l a n .
" S u p p o r t P r o p o s i t i o n 1 6 f u n d i n g a l l o c a t i o n s t o t r a d e c o r r i d o r s a n d
p r o j e c t s b a s e d o n c o n g e s t i o n , a i r q u a l i t y , h e a l t h , a n d s a f e t y d a t a .
S u p p o r t p e r m a n e n t i n c r e a s e s i n s t a t e e f u n d i n g l e v e l s a v a i l a b l e f o r g r a d e
s e p a r a t i o n s a n d , g o o d s m o v e m e n t m i t i g a t i o n p r o j e c t s .
V . S u p p o r t p o l i c i e s t h a t r e c o g n i z e a n d r e w a r d l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t s f o r c o m m i t t i n g
l o c a l d o l l a r s t o t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o j e c t s .
F e d e r a l L e g i s l a t i v e P r o g r a m
I . P r o t e c t a n d e n h a n c e c u r r e n t f u n d i n g l e v e l s f o r . . t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o g r a m s .
"
"
S u p p o r t e f f o r t s t o b r i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a p p r o p r i a t i o n s . t o a u t h o r i z e d
l e v e l s .
S e e k a f a i r s h a r e f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y o f a n y f e d e r a l f u n d i n g m a d e
a v a i l a b l e f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o g r a m s a n d p r o j e c t s .
S e e k a f a i r s h a r e a n d e q u i t a b l e r a t e o f r e t u r n f o r t h e s t a t e o f C a l i f o r n i a .
o f f e d e r a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n d i n g . W h i l e C a l i f o r n i a w i l l l i k e l y r e m a i n a
" d o n o r " s t a t e , e v e r y e f f o r t m u s t b e m a d e t o r a i s e t h e c u r r e n t
p e r c e n t a g e o f r e t u r n i n f e d e r a l t a x r e v e n u e s t h a t a r e g e n e r a t e d i n t h e
s t a t e .
S u p p o r t c o n t i n u e d f e d e r a l c o m m i t m e n t o f f u n d s t o s u p p o r t p u b l i c
t r a n s i t . a n d t o a s s u r e t h a t C a l i f o r n i a a n d t h e w e s t e r n s t a t e s r e c e i v e a
f a i r s h a r e o f t h e A M T R A K f u n d i n g r e s o u r c e s a s c o m p a r e d t o t h e
N o r t h E a s t C o r r i d o r .
S e e k s p e c i a l i z e d f u n d i n g f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t p r o j e c t s o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l
a n d n a t i o n a l . . s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a t a r e b e y o n d t h e f u n d i n g a b i l i t y o r
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f l o c a l a n d s t a t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o g r a m s a n d b u d g e t s .
S e e k f u n d i n g f o r a i r p o r t g r o u n d a c c e s s a n d o t h e r a i r p o r t d e v e l o p m e n t
n e e d s i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y .
A g e n d a I t e m 7 P
7 4
Seek a New Starts or Small Starts full funding grant agreement for the
PVL Metrolink extension via the Commission -owned San Jacinto
Branch Line (SJBL).;
Support local agencies seeking federal transportation funding in a
coordinated manner in order to maximize project funding from federal
legislation:
Protectand enhanceflexibility in use of transportation revenue.:
Support funding allocations for the New Starts and Small Starts
category within the :new highway authorization bill for projects` seeking
less than $ 100 million to enhance the opportunities for funding of the
PVL extension project.
Support tax benefits and/or incentives for transportation demand
management programs and alternative fuel .programs to promote the.
use of alternate modes of transportation.
Support . increased federal funding for Alameda: Corridor East (ACE)
improvements with a special emphasis on ensuring funding for
Riverside County rail grade separations.
Support legislation: that ensures coordination = -of transportation and
social service agency funding (i.e. Departments '' of. Aging,
Rehabilitation,'and Welfare).
Support legislative or administrative policies thatpromote a regional
approach to airport development and usage of March Air Reserve
Base, Southern California Logistics, Palm Springs International,
San Bernardino International, and Ontario International airports. .
III: Reduce or eliminate costly and duplicative administrative and regulatory
requirements.:
•
Support administrative or legislative action to ensure consistency
among .the federal.: and the states. congestion :management program;
requirements:
Monitor market -based:. congestion pricing ->measures regarding their ...
effectiveness to relieve traffic congestion, improve air quality .and/or
fund :transportation alternatives.
Support legislation and/or administrative reforms, to enhance highway
project delivery, such as simultaneous environmental impact :report .
(EIR) and engineering studies, and a reasonable level of contracting out.
of appropriate activities to the private sector.
Support legislation and/or administrative reforms that result in cost
savings to environmental clearanceprocesses for ' transportation
construction projects.
Agenda Item 7P
75
"
C o n t i n u e t o s t r e a m l i n e f e d e r a l r e p o r t i n g / m o n i t o r i n g . r e q u i r e m e n t s t o
e n s u r e e f f i c i e n c y a n d u s e f u l n e s s o f : d a t a c o l l e c t e d a n d e l i m i n a t e
u n n e c e s s a r y a n d / o r d u p l i c a t i v e r e q u i r e m e n t s .
S t a t e U p d a t e
A n n e M a y e r , _ D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r , t e s t i f i e d t o t h e S e n a t e C o m m i t t e e o n
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d . H o u s i n g o n J a n u a r y 1 7 , 2 0 0 7 , r e g a r d i n g " t h e f u t u r e o f
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . f i n a n c e i n C a l i f o r n i a , i n c l u d i n g p u b l i c - p r i v a t e p a r t n e r s h i p s a n d t o l l
f a c i l i t i e s . H e r . , t e s t i m o n y p r o v i d e d a h e l p f u l b a c k d r o p t o t h e L e g i s l a t u r e i n
d i s c u s s i n g : t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s n e e d f o r h i g h o c c u p a n c y t o l l l a n e l e g i s l a t i o n a s , w e l l
a s o p p o r t u n i t i e s . f o r a o t h e r c o u n t i e s t o u s e i n n o v a t i v e f i n a n c i n g t o d e l i v e r a d d i t i o n a l
h i g h w a y c a p a c i t y . O t h e r C o m m i s s i o n s t a f f a n d t h e . C o m m i s s i o n ' s l e g i s l a t i v e
a d v o c a t e , ; M a r k W a t t s , a c c o m p a n i e d A n n e M a y e r o n t h i s t r i p t o m e e t i n d i v i d u a l l y
w i t h m e m b e r s o f R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ' s l e g i s l a t i v e l e a d e r s h i p a n d k e y s t a f f .
S B 5 3 ( D u c h e n y , - D - S a n D i e g o ) S t a t e H i g h w a y s : P e r f o r m a n c e M e a s u r e s
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ' s S e n a t o r D e n i s e D u c h e n y h a s a u t h o r e d _ a b i l l t h a t r e q u i r e s
C a ! t r a n s t o e s t a b l i s h p e r f o r m a n c e m e a s u r e s . t h a t w i l l a l l o w t h e d e p a r t m e n t t o i s s u e
a n a n n u a l r a t i n g . o f t h e o v e r a l l q u a l i t y o f t h e " s t a t e h i g h w a y s y s t e m . C a ! t r a n s w o u l d
b e r e q u i r e d t o r e p o r t t o t h e L e g i s l a t u r e o n h o w r e s o u r c e , s t a f f i n g , a n d p r o g r a m m i n g
d e c i s i o n s i m p a c t t h e o v e r a l l c o n d i t i o n o f t h e s t a t e h i g h w a y s y s t e m i n t e r m s , o f
d i s t r e s s e d l a n e m i l e s , : b r i d g e c o n d i t i o n s , a n d L i f e : c y c l e c o s t s . S B 5 3 w o u l d r e q u i r e
C a ! t r a n s t o c o n s u l t w i t h a g e n c i e s s u c h a s t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n d e v e l o p i n g i t s
p e r f o r m a n c e m e a s u r e s . .
S t a f f r e c o m m e n d s t h e C o m m i s s i o n s u p p o r t t h i s b i l l i n c o n c e p t a s i t m o v e s t h r o u g h
L e g i s l a t u r e . S t a f f b e l i e v e s t h a t c a l l i n g a t t e n t i o n t o t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f r e s o u r c e ,
s t a f f i n g , a n d p r o g r a m m i n g d e c i s i o n s o n t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f C a l i f o r n i a ' s h i g h w a y s i s
a p o s i t i v e s t e p f o r C a l t r a n s a c c o u n t a b i l i t y a n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n d i n g a s a s t a t e w i d e
p r i o r i t y .
S B 5 6 ( R u n n e r , R - A n t e l o p e V a l l e y ) - H i g h w a y C o n s t r u c t i o n C o n t r a c t s : D e s i g n - B u i l d
D e m o n s t r a t i o n P r o g r a m : T r a n s p o r t a t i o n E n t i t i e s .
T h i s b i l l c r e a t e s a 1 0 - y e a r p i l o t p r o g r a m , a u t h o r i z i n g t h e C a l i f o r n i a 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 T C ) . t o s e l e c t a t o - b e - d e t e r m i n e d n u m b e r o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a g e n c i e s
t o e m p l o y d e s i g n - b u i l d - c o n t r a c t i n g o n a t o - b e - d e t e r m i n e d n u m b e r o f h i g h w a y ,
b r i d g e , o r t u n n e l p r o j e c t s . S B 5 6 s e t s f o r t h s p e c i f i c r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e p r o c e s s
t h a t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a g e n c i e s m u s t u n d e r t a k e t o u t i l i z e d e s i g n - b u i l d . T h e b i l l g i v e s
t h e C T C d i s c r e t i o n o n w h e t h e r c o n t r a c t s a r e a w a r d e d a c c o r d i n g t o . " b e s t v a l u e " . o r
l o w b i d . A p e e r r e v i e w c o m m i t t e e i s e s t a b l i s h e d t o m o n i t o r t h e p r o c u r e m e n t
p r o c e s s o f d e s i g n - b u i l d p r o j e c t s . a u t h o r i z e d b y t h i s b i l l , a n d e a c h t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
A g e n d a I t e m 7 P
7 6
agency ,is required to submit annual reports and analysis to the CTC :regardingits
experiences using: design -build. Transportation_ _ agencies are also . required to
implementa labor compliance program. The intent of the legislation ::is to,. examine .
the benefits and challenges of using design -build procurement, particularly relating
to the possibility of reduced project costs, expedited project delivery, ,or design
features that would not be achievable through design -bid -build procurement.
SB`56 provides a significant opportunity for transportation agencies in California to ,
apply design -build widely enough to demonstrate =Nits : potential 'benefits and ,
weaknesses as a tool for enhanced project delivery. The stringent process outlined
in the bill provides transparency and also begins to address labor concerns :raised
by opponents of design -build. While it is yet unknown how the transportation
industry willreact to SB 56, in light :of its potential to provide the Commission with,.
greaterflexibility to pursue the most efficient and cost effective project "delivery
mechanisms, staff recommends the Commission adopt a Support position .on
SB `56.
Federal Update
The Commission . will co -host :a reception in honor- of the new Speaker of the
House; Representative Nancy Pelosi, at the annual Legislative Conference of . the
American Public Transportation Association (APTA) on Tuesday, :. March 13, 2007,
in Washington, DC. This event is being co -sponsored by' several California
transportation agencies, with the Bay Area's Metropolitan, Transportation;
Commission (MTC) playing a lead role. Commissioners attending the APTA
Legislative Conference . are encouraged to attend this reception for an opportunity
to build relationships with California's congressional delegation and discuss the
Commission's federal priorities.
Attachments:
1) Legislative Matrix
2) State Legislative Program Brochure
3) Federal Legislative Program;Bruchure
Agenda Item 7P
77
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - POSITIONS ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION
STATE
LEGISLATION
SB 9
(Lowenthal)
This bill will be a vehicle for establishing a process for the selection
of transportation projects to be funded from the Trade Corridors
Improvement Fund (TCIF) of Proposition 1 B. The TCIF is a $2 billion
fund.
Introduced 12/04/06
Monitor
01/10/07
SB 19
(Lowenthal)
This bill will be a vehicle for establishing conditions and criteria for
projects. to be funded under the $1 billion account created by
Proposition 1 B dedicated to reducing emissions related to goods
movement.
Introduced 12/04/06
Monitor
01/10/07
SB 45 (Perata)
This bill will establish the application process for allocations from the
Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response ,:Account
from Proposition 1 B.
Introduced 12/22/06
Monitor
01/10/07
SB 47 (Perata)
This bill will establish the eligibility, matching fund requirements, and
application process for. Proposition 1 B funds under the $1 billion
State -Local Partnership Program. The State -Local Partnership
Program is to be administered by the California Transportation
Commission (CTC).
Introduced 12/22/06.
Monitor
01/10/07
SB 53
(Ducheny)
This bill requires Caltrans to establish performance measures 'that will
allow the department to issue an annual rating of the. overall 'quality
of the state highway system. Caltrans would be required to report
to the Legislature on how resource, staffing, .and programming
decisions impact the overall condition of the state highway system
(in, terms of distressed lane miles, bridge conditions, and life cycle
costs). SB 53 would require Caltrans to consult with agencies such
as RCTC in developing its performance measures.
Introduced 01/10/07
SUPPORT IN
CONCEPT
Pending
Commission
Approval
SB 56
(Runner)
This bill establishes a 10-year pilot program for design -build projects,
administered by the CTC.
Introduced 01/10/07
SUPPORT
Pending
Commission
Approval
F :\users\preprint\j s\legmat.doc
78
L4/0L/L0
ao1iuoW
•penssl s aodaa
mugs pue esnoH
-•uoisuaa.x3
Nu!onah! Gun Mellen sided eL.p. uorillw 0•6$ 6umntoul 'sloefoad
uopel odsuen Aluno0 eplsaanw aoj. uo!!!!w, g•g$ peumwoo a uieluoo
i!q sly. uo Keues`pue esnoH.ayl •eigwnloo j.o �dl� slCl
a pue Aaem n a �. �u y ,p :p y awdolanap pue 6ursnoH '�anseaal
'uopeliodsueal swewlaedaa suopepdoadde ayp.'si si41
MAI
-� '61equellou>1
•dal) 9Lgg'1:11H
N0I1 V7S1J37
7VY3O3.d
AGENDA ITEM 8
REVISED AGENDA ITEM 8
Additions are noted by Bold Italics, Deletions are noted by
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director
Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager
Gustavo Quintero, Bechtel Project Coordinator
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Agreement No. 07-65-105-00 with Kleinfelder to Provide
Supplemental Geotechnical Field Exploration, Testing Services and
Technical Evaluations for the Proposed Irvine to
Corona Expressway Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve the selection process and award Agreement
No. 07-65-105-00 to Kleinfelder to provide supplemental geotechnical
field exploration, testing services and technical evaluations for the
proposed Irvine to Corona Expressway project based on the attached
project scope, schedule and cost for a total not to exceed amount of
$6,158, 608.
2) Staff is currently negotiating the final scope of work and it is
anticipatod that the final prefect scope, schodulc and cost will be
February 11, 2007.
31 Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the
agreement on behalf of the Commission; and,
41 Authorize the Executive Director or his designee to approve optional
tasks as may be required for the project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In 2006, the Commission executed a cooperative agreement with the Orange
County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Foothill/Eastern Transportation
Corridor Agency (TCA) to develop and manage geotechnical feasibility studies for a
potential transportation and utility corridor linking Riverside and Orange Counties.
The purpose of the agreement is to jointly exercise the common powers of its
parties as the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority (ROCA). The Commission is
charged with administering the cooperative agreement and is responsible for the
receipt and expenditure of federal and state funds to accomplish the geotechnical
studies.
Agenda Item 8
This project was named in Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act (SAFETEA-LU) as a high priority project and received earmarks totaling
$ 15.8 million to "study and construct highway alternatives between Orange and
Riverside Counties, directed by the ROCA working with local government agencies,
local transportation authorities, and guided by the current Major Investment
Study." The first two years of available funding has been obligated totaling
$5,426,502; the balance will be available over the next couple of years.
On November 27, 2006, the Commission released a request for proposal (RFP) to
provide supplemental geotechnical field exploration, testing services, and technical
evaluations for the proposed Irvine -Corona Expressway.
The purpose of the project is to further define and evaluate site conditions that
affect the feasibility of transportation tunnel construction beneath the Cleveland
National Forest and geotechnical and hydrogeologic constraints affecting tunneling
methods, groundwater controls, impacts to groundwater resources, and
construction costs. The scope of the project is to drill five deep coreholes. All
coreholes will be drilled to a depth of about 100 feet below the invert of the
Irvine -Corona tunnel profile. The corehole depths will range between approximately
800 feet and 1300 feet deep with one corehole going to a depth of 2370 feet.
The total depth of corehole drilling is estimated to be approximately 6,856 feet. All
of the necessary geophysical logging and sampling will be conducted at each
corehole location in order to obtain the information that is required to determine the
tunnel feasibility beneath the Cleveland National Forest.
Calendar of Events
Distribution of RFP
Bidders Information Meeting (not mandatory)
Proposals were Delivered to RCTC prior to 2 p.m.
Short Listed Firms were Notified
Interviews of Short Listed Firms
Staff Recommendation to Commission
Selection Process
November 27, 2006
December 11, 2006
January 11, 2007
January 29, 2007
February 5, 2007
February 14, 2007
A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives from the
Commission, OCTA, the U.S. Forest Service (Cleveland National Forest),
Rahimian Management and Consulting (RMC) and Bechtel. Staff received proposals
from four firms. The selection panel reviewed the four proposals and due to the
quality of the proposals it was decided to short list three firms.
Agenda Item 8
REVISED AGENDA ITEM 8
Additions are noted by Bold Italics, Deletions are noted by Str-ikethr-eugh
RIVERSIDE COUNTY :TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County. Transportation Commission
FROM:
Cathy Bechtel, Project Delivery Director
Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager
Gustavo Quintero, Bechtel Project Coordinator.
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Agreement No. 07-65-105-00 with Kleinfelder to Provide
Supplemental Geotechnical Field Exploration, Testing Services and
TechnicalEvaluations for the Proposed Irvine to
Corona Expressway Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Approve the selection process ' and award Agreement
No 07-65-105-00 to Kleinfelder to provide supplemental geotechnical
field exploration, testing services and technical evaluations for the
proposed. Irvine to Corona Expressway project based on the attached
project scope, schedule and cost for. a total not to exceed amount of
$6,158, 608.
2) Staff is curFcFtly ncgotiating the final %mope of work and it is
ariticipated that the final yfetect scope, schedule, and cost will 'bc
prescntcd fer Commission ap-pfaval at its meeting on Wcdnesday,
Fcbruary 14,2007.
3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legalcounsel review, to execute the
agreement on behalf of the Commission and,
4) Authorize the Executive Director or his designeeto approve optional
tasks as may be required for the project.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In 2006, the Commission executed a cooperative: agreement with the Orange
County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Foothill/Eastern Transportation
Corridor Agency (T.CA) to develop and manage geotechnical feasibility studies for a
potential transportation and utility corridor linking Riverside and Orange Counties.
The purpose of the agreement is to jointly exercise the common _ powers of its
parties as the Riverside Orange Corridor Authority (ROCA). The Commission is
charged with administering the cooperative agreement and is responsible for the
receipt and expenditure of federal and state funds to accomplish the geotechnical
studies.
Agenda Item 8
This project was named in Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act (SAFETEA.-LU) as a high priority project and received earmarks totaling
$_ 15.8 million .to "study- .and construct highway alternatives between Orange and
RiversideCounties, directed by the ROCA working with local, government agencies,
local transportation authorities, and guided by the current Major Investment
Study.- The first two years of available funding , has been obligated totaling
$5,426,502; the balance will be available over the next couple of years.
On .November 27, 2006, the Commission released a request :for proposal (RFP) to
provide supplernental geotechnical field exploration, testing services;- and technical'
evaluations for the proposed Irvine -Corona Expressway.:;
The purpose of the project is to further define and evaluate site conditions .. that
affect the feasibility of transportation tunnel construction beneath the Cleveland
National Forest and geotechnical and hydrogeologic constraints affecting tunneling
methods, groundwater controls, impacts to groundwater resources, and
construction costs. The scope of the project is to drill five deep coreholes. All
coreholes will be drilled to a depth of about 100 feet below the invert of the
Irvine -Corona tunnel profile. The corehole depths will range' between approximately
800 feet and 1300 feet deep with one corehole going to a depth of 2370 feet.
The total depth of corehole drilling is estimated to be approximately 6,856 feet. All
of the necessary geophysical logging and sampling will be -conducted at each
corehole location in order to obtain the information that is required to determine the
tunnel feasibility beneath the Cleveland National Forest.
Calendar of Events
Distribution of RFP
Bidders -Information Meeting (not mandatory)
Proposals were Delivered to RCTC prior to 2 p.m.
Short Listed Firms were Notified
Interviews of Short Listed Firms
Staff Recommendation to Commission
Selection Process
Novernber 27, 2006
December, 11, 2006
January 1 1, 2007
January 29, 2007.
February .5, 2007
February 14, 2007
A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives from the
Commission, OCTA, the U.S. Forest Service (Cleveland ' National Forest),
Rahimian Management and Consulting (RMC) and Bechtel. Staff received' proposals
from four firms. The selection panel reviewed the four proposals and dueto the
quality of the proposals it was decided to short list three ,firms. :.
Agenda Item 8
The three firms each demonstrated capability of completing the proposed scope of
work. After careful evaluation of the personnel of the proposed project teams,
knowledge of the project and proposed project approach, the selection panel
ranked the three interviewed firms as follows:
Top Ranked
Kleinfelder
Second
URS
Third
CH2M Hill
After Kleinfelder, located in Diamond Bar, CA was selected as the top ranked firm,
its cost proposal was opened and used as a starting point in further negotiations.
Staff has been working with Kleinfelder and has come to an agreement with the
attached scope and schedule of services and respective costs.
Based on the results of the selection committee, staff recommends that Agreement
No. 07-65-105-00 be awarded to Kleinfelder to provide supplemental geotechnical
field exploration, testing services and technical evaluations for the proposed Irvine
to Corona Expressway project based on Staff is currently negotiating tho final the
attached project scope, schedule
and cost will-, , f sent el fcr Ce Ami ion It k6 m +,... , . in, a d...
February 14, 2007, for a total not to exceed amount of $6,158,608 to perform
the activities related to developing the geotechnical investigation.
A budget adjustment is required for this project. The Commission's local match
may be from a variety of sources such as Measure A and Local Transportation
Fund aTF) funds and will be determined during the project's duration.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
N
Year:
FY2006/07
Amount:
$6,158,608
Source of Funds:
SAFETEA-LU @80%
RCTC/OCTA @20 /o (Split 50/50)
Budget Adjustment:
Y
106-65-41203 P2310 $4,926,886 - federal revenue (other)
GLA No.:
106-65-41409 P2310 $ 615,861 - local agency revenue
106-65-81501 P2310 $6,158,608 - special studies expenditure
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\Abudavi {-
Date:
2/13/2007
Attachments:
1) Scope of Work
2) Cost Proposal
3) Proposed Schedule
Agenda Item 8
"
"
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 :
F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 2 0 0 7
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
F R O M :
C a t h y B e c h t e l , P r o j e c t D e l i v e r y D i r e c t o r
M a r k M a s s m a n , B e c h t e l P r o j e c t M a n a g e r
G u s t a v o Q u i n t e r o , B e c h t e l P r o j e c t C o o r d i n a t o r
T H R O U G H :
E r i c H a l e y , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 7 - 6 5 - 1 0 5 - 0 0 w i t h K l e i n f e l d e r t o P r o v i d e
S u p p l e m e n t a l G e o t e c h n i c a l F i e l d E x p l o r a t i o n , T e s t i n g S e r v i c e s a n d
T e c h n i c a l E v a l u a t i o n s f o r t h e P r o p o s e d I r v i n e . t o
C o r o n a E x p r e s s w a y P r o j e c t
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 s s i o n t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s a n d a w a r d A g r e e m e n t
N o . 0 7 - 6 5 - 1 0 5 - 0 0 t o K l e i n f e l d e r t o p r o v i d e s u p p l e m e n t a l g e o t e c h n i c a l
f i e l d e x p l o r a t i o n , t e s t i n g s e r v i c e s a n d t e c h n i c a l e v a l u a t i o n s f o r t h e
p r o p o s e d I r v i n e t o C o r o n a E x p r e s s w a y p r o j e c t .
2 ) S t a f f i s c u r r e n t l y n e g o t i a t i n g t h e f i n a l s c o p e o f w o r k a n d i t i s
a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e f i n a l p r o j e c t s c o p e , s c h e d u l e a n d c o s t w i l l b e
p r e s e n t e d f o r C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v a l a t i t s m e e t i n g o n W e d n e s d a y ,
F e b r u a r y 1 4 , 2 0 0 7 .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
I n 2 0 0 6 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n e x e c u t e d a c o o p e r a t i v e a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e O r a n g e
C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( O C T A ) a n d t h e F o o t h i l l / E a s t e r n . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n
C o r r i d o r . A g e n c y ( T C A ) t o d e v e l o p a n d . m a n a g e g e o t e c h n i c a l f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d i e s f o r a
p o t e n t i a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d u t i l i t y c o r r i d o r l i n k i n g R i v e r s i d e a n d O r a n g e C o u n t i e s .
T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e a g r e e m e n t i s t o j o i n t l y e x e r c i s e t h e . c o m m o n p o w e r s o f i t s
p a r t i e s a s t h e R i v e r s i d e O r a n g e C o r r i d o r A u t h o r i t y ( R O C A ) . T h e C o m m i s s i o n i s
c h a r g e d w i t h a d m i n i s t e r i n g . ; t h e c o o p e r a t i v e a g r e e m e n t a n d i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e
r e c e i p t a n d e x p e n d i t u r e o f f e d e r a l a n d . s t a t e f u n d s t o a c c o m p l i s h t h e g e o t e c h n i c a l
s t u d i e s .
O n N o v e m b e r 2 7 , 2 0 0 6 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n r e l e a s e d a r e q u e s t . f o r p r o p o s a l ( R F P ) t o
p r o v i d e s u p p l e m e n t a l g e o t e c h n i c a l f i e l d e x p l o r a t i o n , t e s t i n g s e r v i c e s , a n d t e c h n i c a l
e v a l u a t i o n s f o r . t h e p r o p o s e d I r v i n e - C o r o n a E x p r e s s w a y .
A g e n d a I t e m 8
8 0
Calendar of Events
Distribution of RFP
Bidders Information Meeting °(not mandatory)
Proposals: were Delivered to RCTC prior to 2 p.m.
Short . Listed Firms .were Notified
Interviews of Short: Listed Firms
Staff Recommendation to Commission
Selection Process
November 27, 2006
December 11, 2006
January 11, 2007
January 29, 2007
February 5, 2007
February 14, 2007.
A selection panel was assembled, which consisted of representatives .from the
Commission, OCTA, the U.S. Forest Service (Cleveland National Forest),.
Rahimian Management and Consulting (RMC) and Bechtel Staff received proposals
from four :.firms. The selection panel reviewed the four proposals- and due tothe
quality of the proposals it was decided to short list three firms.
The three firms each demonstrated capability of completing the proposed scope of
work. After careful evaluation of the personnel of the proposed project teams,
knowledge of the project and proposed project approach, the selection panel
ranked the three interviewed firms as follows:
Top Ranked
Kleinfelder
Second
URS
Third
CH2M Hill
Based on the results of .the selection committee, staff recommends that Agreement.
No. 07-65-105-00 be awardedto Kleinfelder to provide supplemental geotechnical
field exploration, testing services and technical evaluations for .the proposed . Irvine
to Corona Expressway project. Staff is currently negotiating the final scope of
work ;and it is anticipated that the final project scope, scheduleand cost will be
presented for Commission approval at its meeting on :. Wednesday,
February 14, 2007, to perform the activities related to developing the geotechnical
investigation.
Agenda Item 8
81
ATTACHMENT 1
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL
FIELD EXPLORATION, TESTING SERVICES AND TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS
FOR THE PROPOSED IRVINE-CORONA EXPRESSWAY PROJECT
1.0 ` ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT.MANAGEMENT
1.1 PROJECT STAFFING
Mr. Paul Guptill will be the Kleinfelder Team's Project Manager and RCTC's single -
point -of -contact and will commit the. majority of his time to the management of .the
project on a.monthly basis from Notice to Proceed to the completion of the project. Key
members of the Team, including our field staff, drillers, and subconsultants are also
committed to timely completion of their efforts on this project. Mr. Guptil'I will be
responsible for providing the project with qualified and experienced field and
professional staff, and coordinating the services of the Team members: .
1.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL
This task includes preparation of a focused Project Management Plan (PMP) and
coordination and administration of the project.
The PMP will include a detailed project budget and schedule to include all of the tasks
described in the Scope of Work: The PMP will be a working document, and each of our
key team members will be required to be familiar with its contents. The PMP
components will be supplemented with features that Kleinfelder believes add value to
the management function and enhance project control. These additional features will
include:
•. Creation of a list of tasks and subtasks, each of which will be assigned a unique
work breakdown structure (WBS) number.
• Inclusion of each _ identified WBS activity in a schedule with appropriate
durations to all other activities.
• Preparation, of a brief description of the work included within each WBS activity. .
• Preparation of a communication plan that indicates consultant and
subconsultant input requirements and .anticipated dates.
The schedule will include all of the activities,. start dates, activity durations, product
submittal dates, relationships among work tasks and float time. The project schedule
will be updated quarterly, or more frequently as required; and submitted to RCTC.
Kleinfelder will also provide the necessary project controls to. ensure proper financial
tracking and monitoring of the project. Budgets for each task within the WBS will be set
up and monitored using Kl'einfelder's Oracle real-time management software.
Page 1 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Kleinfelder's Project Manager will exercise the following project controls. with the
assistance of a project controls coordinator:
Monthly summary, worksheets will be prepared to compare anticipated to actual costs,
total earned value to date, and anticipated cost at completion.: Where significant trends
in work effort show "deviation from planned cost, schedule, or earned value, Mr. Guptill
will prepare a; mitigation plan to adjust shortfalls or to accommodate better than
anticipated success. Similar: worksheets will be prepared to track the, percentage of
project fees paid to Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DI3E) firms.
This task also includes:. submittal of monthly invoices to the RCTC Project Manager.
Prior to commencement of our work, Mr. Guptill and our project controls coordinator will
meet with: designated RCTC staff to discuss specific billing:; and 'reporting formats.
Invoices, accompanied by monthly :progress reports will be transmitted on the agreed -to
schedule. Progress reports will contain a description of schedule , or cost .mitigation:
measures that may be needed to maintain milestone schedule and budget. -
Assumptions: The scope of services covers the period March'16, 2007 through March
15, 2009.. Level of Project; Manager participation includes approximately 50 percent
during the first six months, 100 percent during the investigation and evaluation effort for
twelve months and approximately 50 percent during the last six months of .the project.
Level of Project Controls Coordinator is 10 percent for the first six months, 25 percent
during the next;12 months, and 15 percent for the final six months.
Deliverables: Draft and 'final Project Management `Plan (one reproducible and seven
copies); monthly progress reports.
1.3 AGENCY COORDINATION AND PROJECT MEETINGS
1.3.1. Agency Coordination
We anticipate that Kleinfelder will participate in informal ' meetings and coordinate with
other agencies including Metropolitan Water District (MWD)
Project Meetings
Kleinfelder will participate in a number of formal meetings throughout the duration of the
project. AS required in the RF:P Kleinfelder will prepare.; agendas and presentation
materials as required for the meetings. Minutes of each meeting will be prepared and
submitted to the RCTC Project Manager within five working days of each meeting.; The
meetings planned are as specified below:
Page 2 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
1.3.2 Project Coordination Meetings
Kleinfelder'sProject Manager will- attend coordination meetings throughout the 24-
month duration of the project. As discussed with RCTC Kleinfelder will attend monthly
meetings from Notice to Proceed through acquisition of the Special Use Permit (6
meetings), bi-weekly coordination meetings for 12 months (24 meetings), and monthly
meetings from then through completion of the contract (6 meetings). Our Project
Manager will attend each of these meetings with a project assistant to record meeting
notes for preparation of. Meeting Minutes:
1.3.3 ROCA Committee Meetings
Kleinfelder's Project Manager will participate in 6 ROCA` meetings throughout the
duration of the project.
1.3.4 Meetings with Local, State and Federal Agencies
Kleinfelder's Project Manager will participate in 10 meetings with local, state, and
federal agencies throughout the duration of the. project. Kleinfelder will provide a project
assistant torecord meeting notes for preparation of Meeting Minutes.
Assumptions: The scope of services covers the period March 16, 2007 through March
15, 2009. Informal agency coordination is anticipated to be conducted via telephone.
Formal project meetings are anticipated to be held at RCTC's offices and last 4 hours,
inclusive of travel time.
Deliverables: Meeting agendas, presentation materials and graphics, meeting minutes.
1.4 DOCUMENT CONTROL AND WEB -BASED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Document control can be accomplished using either a Kleinfelder file -transfer -protocol
(ftp) site or a project -specific Web -Based Management (VVBM) system.
14.1 Document Control
The Kleinfelder ftp site will .be established with assistance from ACT. The document
control system can be used to, store and catalogproject process documentation,
associated data, and new information developed during this project. ACT will update
and add project information and data throughout the project duration.
1.4.2 Web -Based Management (WBM) system.
Our Team member ACT specializes in the development and application of WBM
utilizing the e2020 system. The e2020 database management module can be used to
store, catalog, and link project process documentation, background documentation,
Page 3 of 21
Proposed_ Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
reference documents, associated data, and new information developed: during this
study. The e2020 system also contains a map module compatible with ESRI GIS to `
enhance the presentation, retrieval and reporting of information. Aerial photographs
can be superimposed on the corridor map displaying alignment, boring locations,
geologic formations, environmental constraints, and other project data.. Through linking .
the map information to their respective databases, data can easily be . retrieved by
clicking on the location marked on the map. The system can also be used to store and
monitor project calendars, :progress, schedule, submittals, reports, review comments,
p y _ p registered
s m .
and responses. The system wil
l provide notifications to re � istered users to alert the to the availability of new and updated information within the system. ` The Team document`
control administrator will maintain assignments of security,; and access ;rights to various
users. All authorized users can access, view, and download ,the >latest project
information through the website utilizing an internet connection at any location;
Assumptions: The scope of services covers the period March 16,.;2007 through March
15,. 2009. Kleinfelder personnel will coordinate with and provide reference materials
and .project documents (agendas, memos, reports, meeting minutes, . data etc._) to ACT
for uploading to the ftp site or project web page.
Deliverables: ftp site or WBM system project website and ongoing updates of project
information.
2.0 SPECIAL PERMIT ASSISTANCE
The objective of this task is to provide the necessary information and support for RCTC
to expeditiously obtain a Special Use Permit from the . USFS for ;the geotechnical field
investigation and groundwater assessment within the Cleveland National Forest. Two
main activities will need to be covered under this permit: 1') access to and drilling of the
exploratory boreholes, and 2) access to all water resource sites (up to. 50) for
irnplementation of the Groundwater Monitoring Program
,
Kleinfelder will assist RCTC and PMC to obtain a Special Use Permit from the USFS.
The first step will beto: assess the constraints and opportunities for implementing :the
geotechnical and groundwater resource assessments: We will 'utilize theconstraints
mapping and environmental information developed in the RC-OC MIS along with any
additional studies to identify the best locations for drilling 'sites and° lay -down areas in
the 'vicinity of the proposed corehole locations. Possible ``,routes to,: the proposed
coreholes and groundwater resource' sites will be analyzed and the best opportunities
selected. This information for both corehole drilling, and groundwater .assessment will
be included in .the proposed Operating Plan being prepared by RCTC and the PMC vvith
support from the Kleinfelder Team. This plan will include any requirements for
monitoring devices to be installed at groundwater- sources ` and . utilities and other
requirements associated with the field exploration. The Operating, Plan; will also .include
Page 4 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
descriptions of water resource sites, locations and assumed access methods for up to
50 locations.
The second step is for RCTC and the PMC to meet with the USFS to gain consensus
for the Operating Plan, including the locations of the boreholes, sources for groundwater
monitoring, and routes to those sources. Kleinfelder's Project Manager will. attend and
support these meetings, and :if necessary, conduct field reconnaissance to support the
plan or USFS requests, including support for environmental assessment conducted by,
others. During the development of the Operating Plan and ingaining consensus, the
Team will be available to meet with the USFS or other stakeholders in one-on-one
meetings to facilitate the Permit process. Our suggested approach is for RCTC to .meet
early and often with the USES in order to identify their priorities and concerns and
respond with adjustments to the Operating Plan, where needed.
In the event groundwater resource sites are located outside_ the boundaries of the
Cleveland National Forest, the RCTC and PMC will need to follow a similar approach,
providing an operating plan and supporting documentation to property owners to gain
access. This effort should be conducted in parallel with activities in pursuit of the
Special Use Permit from the USES, so that required changes are reflected consistently
in the development of the Special Use Permit. Kleinfelder's Project Manager will
support RCTC and PMC in these activities.
Assumptions: The scope of services covers the period March 16, 2007 through
October 1, 2007, the assumed date of Special Use Permit approval by the USFS. We
assume that the environmental habitat surveys of all corehole and groundwater
resource sites required prior to issuance of the Special Use Permit will be performed by
others. Documents required for issuance of the Special Use Permit (to be prepared by
others) include:
• Special Use Permit Application,
• Environmental Surveys
• Action Plan (Operating Plan)
• Fire Plan
• Collection Agreement between USFS and RCTC
• Mitigation and Site Restoration
• And others as required by USFS
Deliverables: Supporting materials (graphics, preferred boring locationsand lay -down
areas, preferred boring and groundwater resource access routes, field operations and
activities descriptions, meeting handouts, etc.) to obtain: Special Use Permit:
Page 5of21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
3.0 GEOTECHNICAL FIELD EXPLORATION AND TESTING SERVICES
3.1 EXISTING DATA SUMMARY REPORT
The Kleinfelder Team will identify and compile existing relevant ge'otechnical and
groundwater data and documents in support of the project.Existing data include
`reports and, documents prepared, for the RC-OC Major Investment Study, Metropolitan's
Central Pool Augmentation Project, and Tri-Tunnel Express Project. Other' data ',to be
researched and reviewed' will include recent and historical aerial photographs of the
project area, and other documents yet to be identified.
The Kleinfelder team will review the collected data and prepare a, Data ;and Information
Summary Report.
Deliverables: 1 electronic copy (CD/DVD) of existing relevant documents; Data and
Information Summary Report, 1 bound and 1 unbound camera-ready version and 1'
CD/DVD version.
3.2 FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM
3.2.1 Field Reconnaissance
Access . to the corehole sites will be evaluated during several days of , field
reconnaissance prior to permit submittal. Each site will be visited: on the ground .and,
locations confirmed by global position satellite coordinates. All access issues will be
reviewed: and summarized during the field reconnaissance. Final locations will be
prioritized for submittal to the USFS and other governing bodies based on topography,
density of brush, known habitat significance, required delivery and storage methods for.
water, space for the drilling equipment, and helicopter access. This effort will also
require, planning and coordination with the drilling subcontractors to make critical
planning decisions on water delivery and daily drill crew access;. Due to the remote .and
often pristine sites (no fire break access), meetings ;with the USFS will be included for
coordination and modifications to the field mobilization and staging :plans.
The corehole sites. planned for the investigation are located in rugged: terrain, and for
safety and access requirements, the site reconnaissance will be: performed by a:three
people: VVe anticipate that each site, will likely need to be visited 4 times during,: the
planning stage to` select: an appropriate site, coordinate with the drilling subcontractors.
and field- personnel, and meet with the USFS and RCTC personnel', Based' on the
difficult` access; we expect that three days will be required to visit the five corehole -sites.
Helicopter support will also .be provided if needed.
Assumptions: Three people for three days to visit five sites; four site visits per corehole'
site. Two meeting with USFS for planning of equipment mobilization.
Page 6 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Deliverables; Input to Field Exploration and Operations Plan
3.2.2 Field Exploration Plan/Technical Memorandum
A Field Exploration Plan/Technical Memorandum will be prepared to document all of the
proposed field activities, methods to be used, and the planned drilllocations and
depths. Information contained in this document will be used to assist RCTC and the
PMC with preparation of the Operations Plan for submittal with the USFS Special Use
Permit application. The plan will be submitted to RCTC for review and approval prior to
coring activities. Items that will be discussed in the Field Exploration Plan/Technical
Memorandum for each potential drill site include.
• Site Access
• Site Preparation
• Core Logging
• Core Retrieval and Handling
• Core Storage
Core Photography
• Erosion Control
• Site Equipment
• Security
• Drilling Procedures
• Drilling Fluid Additives
• Water Supply
• Restrictions Related to 'USFS Rules
• Cuttings and Drill Fluids Handling
• Plans for Completion of Each Corehole
• Observation Well Installation
• In -Situ Testing
• Field and Laboratory Testing
• Drill Site Restoration Plans
As part of this task, Kleinfelder will prepare a Health and Safety Plan (HASP) for its
employees and subcontractor personnel. The HASP will conform to the regulations,
requirements and restrictions of the USFS as well as contain considerations and
evacuation plans for rain (electrical storms), dense fog, snow, Santa Ana winds, high
fire hazards and other transient weather conditions that may affect drilling safety and
efficiency.
An addendum to the Special Use Permit will be a Fire Plan that outlines specific
restrictions of activities and requirements for equipment operations 'during the project.
In particularthis will require daily updates from the USFS Dispatch Center. for Project
Activity Levels (PAL) on a daily basis.. The Fire Plan will require one or more 'full time
Page 7 of'21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Fire Monitors to observe field activities and monitor compliance with the Fire- Plan
requirements: The requirements of the Fire Plan developed by the USFS specifically for
this project: will be incorporated in the Field Exploration Plan. Kleinfelder can provide the
Fire Monitors under optional task 3.2.9.
Assumptions:Field Exploration Plan/Technical Memorandum can not be finalized until.
after the conditions of the Special Use Permit are known.
Deliverables: Field Exploration PIanlTechnical Memorandum (one reproducible master
and 20 copies); Health and Safety Plan.
3.2.3 Corehole Drilling, Sampling and Logging.
Coreholes. five coreholes are planned for the project: The proposed coreholes are
identified as M1S-1, .MIS-2, MIS-3,: Alternate-3 and Alternate-4. All coreholes ,will be
drilled to a depth of about 100 feet below the invert of the Irvine -Corona .tunnel profile: .
except for Alternate- 4, which will be drilled to a depth of about 10,0' feet below the
approximate invert of the proposed CPA tunnel invert.
Access to Coreholes MIS-1, MIS-2 and M1S-3 will be by helicopter for all equipment and:
daily personnel access. The depth of these coreholes will be approximately 1,205,
1,191 and 1,260 feet, respectively, below the ground surface (bgs): The open areas
along the Main Divide Road- will be used for staging of equipment and water for delivery
to these remote sites. Where possible, a temporary water line will be constructed to
each of the drill .sites for a steady water supply from a .tank(s) placed at a higher:
elevation along the ridges. Additional water storage tanks dedicated to fire suppression
will also be established at each of the drill sites to meet USFS permit requirements for
fire suppression.
Corehole Alternate-3 is proposed east of the Main Divide Road, on a .;ridge intersected
by thetunnel: alignment: This corehole will be about 830 feet deep: Access.. to
Alternate-3 will be by helicopter,' with the staging area. along Main: Divide Road.
Corehole Alternate-4 . is proposed along the Main Divide Road where it intersects the
tunnel alignment at the drainage divide. This corehole will . be about 2,370 feet deep.
Access to Alternate-4 is by truck on Bedford Road` and. the .Main Divide Road: Field
equipment; supplies and water will be driven from Temescai Canyon to the. site along
the Main Divide Road. Daily personnel access will be. provided by helicopter.. Water
truck access and other drive -up access will be by Bedford; Road and Main Divide. Road.
The total: depth of coreholes is estimated to be approximately.6,856 feet:
All coreholes will be cored using a Diamond Core: Drill Rig' equipped with HQ3 drill rods
and core barrel: An HQ3 triple tube coring systern..will be used on both ,drill rigs HWT
casing will be used to over case the upper part of each borehole for 'stability: Corehole
Page 8 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway. Project
conditioning to retain drill fluid circulation or stabilize the borehole may require running
casing, drill additives, .or grouting problem areas and re -drilling. For the air-lift sites;
equipment will be moved with a medium-lifthelicopter;. an A -Star or Loma helicopter will
move cuttings, miscellaneous_ items and people. Drilling fluids and cuttings will be
collected as coring advances, then removed and disposed at a licensed disposal: facility
after being tested for potential contaminants, as necessary.
Corehole Sampling. The coreholes will becored continuouslyusing appropriate
methods and coring equipment to obtain maximum core' recovery for .logging.
Recovered core will be measured and logged' initially in the split core barrel ;lining or
core tray to observe and record initial spacing and condition of discontinuities for rock
mass characterization. Each core run will be photographed prior to transfer to wooden
core ° boxes for transport and storage, and each run depth interval will be numbered by
placing a labeled wooden or foam spacer at the top of each run. Core will be placed in
the core boxes with interlocking pieces of core fit together to restore the recovered core
length. If core is not recovered' due to poor quality or drilling conditions, the lost {core
location will be identified by spacers labeled "core loss. Core that is broken during
placement in the core boxes' will be marked. After each core box is filled and' labeled,
the core will again be photographed in natural light to document the condition of the
core and general appearance. The core boxes will be labeled with project' name,
corehole number, and depth interval contained in each box.`
Core Logging. Field logs will be prepared as the core is recovered, cleaned, and
placed in core boxes. Physical characteristics of the rock composition and
discontinuities for each core run will be recorded on core logs in accordance with the
International Society. of Rock Mechanics (ISRM) Rock Classification System. The log
sheet will record data according to ISRM Suggested Methods for Description of
Discontinuities in. Rock Masses. Discontinuity descriptions will include small scale joint
roughness measurements for each joint surface available for measurement and will be
assigned a Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC) value representing the degree of
roughness. The JRC values will be assigned in `accordance with ISRM guidelines and
summarized in table format. Thee field logs will include: driller and coring information
such as depth and duration of core run, drill fluid gains or losses, drilling conditions,
length of core runs, and rock quality designation :(RQD); descriptions of lithology,
mineral content, texture, and weathering/alteration; descriptions of discontinuities
including natural joints, foliation; shears and fracturing, orientation with respect to core
axis, frequency per foot, roughness, shape, and infilling; and other observations made
by the field geologist.
Assumptions: Drilling operations will be on a 10-day on, 4=day off schedule. Public
access to USFS Lands is available along . Bedford Road, a privately owned and
maintained road. Core boxes will be removed by -helicopter to a suitable loading area.
on an as needed basis determined by the field geologist. Site security will be provided
at each drill operation with one shift of night-time security during working days and 24-
Page 9 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
hour security during off, days. For safety reasons the security will include a two -person
crew per shift.
3.2.4 Core Evaluation / Core Photography
Core .boxes will be air -lifted to a staging area in Temescal Valley, because transport
along Bedford Road and Main Divide Road is too rough and will damage the ;core.
Long-term core storage will. be in a secure indoor location with . power supply,
Convenient.. to the. field program and agreed upon > with RCTC. The Core storage facility`
will. be approximately 5,000 square feet and will be leased :for.1`2 months. The core will
be transferred to RCTC at project completion.
The core- will be laid Out in long continuous rows at, the .core storage facility facility and.
evaluated in detail by senior professionals experienced in core: evaluation. The core will
be photographed in the core boxes in artificial light at the core storage facility. The
corehole field logs will be checked against the core for: quality control -purposes. ';Core
samples will be selected for point load testing at the core storage, facility. The core will
be, available for review by RCTC; USES. personnel, and the various. stakeholders:
Assumptions:Core storage is planned for one year at an: approximate. 5-,000- square
foot:. facility to be located nearby. After one year, RCTC will retain ownership of the
core, and will need to coordinate transfer of core to a long-term storage :facility.
Deliverables: Core photographs for 6,850 feet of core (approximately 450
photographs) will be uploaded to the ftp site or WBM site.
3.2.5 Corehole Video/Geophysical Surveys
Corehole Video Log/Acoustic ,Televiewer. Following completion of coring activities,
we .will perform a down -hole OTV' Survey. The main purpose ;of the survey is to obtain
in -situ orientations of rock discontinuities (joints, shears, bedding) and .observe aperture
and _filling of discontinuities in situ. Features such as lithologic,changes, joint systems,
bedding or other features can , also be viewed in situ :and correlated to "the core.': While
the OTV log is being run, a permanent continuous optical record is created that is ;
oriented with reference to North These digital logs will be :analyzed for, classifying rock
mass discontinuities, determining the strike and dip of the noted discontinuities and
compiling data,summaries of the digital optical logs.
The OTV "video camera operates both above and below water .under, artificial. light to
record. a 360-degree digital image of the borehole wall.. To prepare,the'corehole for use
of the OTV, clear water will be circulated through the open corehole to remove as many
cuttings as possible to . leave clear fluid so that there ,is minimal reflection off ` of
suspended particles*. If the water does not clearr up in ,part.,:of the corehole, we will use
an acoustic televiewer system (ATV), which provides similar data (image of borehole
wall), but the image: is collected as an acoustic reflection off of the sideof the corehole.
Page 10 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
The ATV system must be run below water and . can "see". through cloudy waterand
detect density differences (openings such as discontinuities, bedding differences, clay
seams) in the corehole wall. The image is not as clear as the optical method, but the
same structural data can be derived for discontinuity interpretation. The data
presentation and analyses are virtually the same as the OTV. The permanent OTV
and/or ATV record of the borehole wall will be provided digitally, and will be displayed in
hard copy as if the borehole were opened and laid flat.
Kleinfeider's geologist will review the OTV records to select discontinuities for
measuring strikes and dips. A computer program compatible with the OTV digital image
will be used to. pick "peaks and valleys" of the sinusoidal image.on the oriented OTV
records and convert the "image picks" to strike and dip of each discontinuity. We will
plot the orientations of the discontinuities on stereonets using the computer program
ROCKPACK III by C.F. Watts (2001). Stereonets provide a two-dimensional
representation of the three-dimensional discontinuity data. These stereonets can be
used for analyses related to tunnel crown stability and structural reinforcement needs
and for display on geologic plates summarizing the data.
The OTV survey will be conducted prior to performing other down -hole surveys. This
will allow selection of zones that should be tested for hydraulic conductivity based on
openness, evidence of water inflow, and general rock , mass character (fracture
spacing). It also allows us to select Zones that will. not damage the packers used for
hydraulic conductivity measurements due to sidewall roughness or voids. Performing
the OTV survey before the packer testing will also prevent altering the discontinuity
apertures of fillings by the packer test and will provide guidance with respect to
selecting zones for hydraulic testing:
Geophysical Surveys. Kleinfelder plans several geophysical surveys in each Borehole
to characterize the hydrogeologic regime along the tunnel alignment and analyze
differing hydraulic conditions at greater depths. In particular, recognition of separation
between upper and lower groundwater regimes: is critically important, because of the
large potential hydraulic head over the tunnel if the groundwater is one interconnected
system. We plan to run a suite of tests with down -hole geophysical tools to identify
entry points of formation groundwater and flow directions within the borehole (vertical
gradients). The geophysical tools proposed are Fluid Temperature, Fluid Conductivity,
and E-Log Gamma. The Fluid Temperature and Fluid Conductivity, especially when.
plotted together, can highlight anomalies in temperature or conductivity that result from
water entering the corehole through fractures. Such zones can be identified and viewed
with OTV. All of these data, when used together, provide corroborative evidence for
understanding the groundwater regime within the rock mass that the tunnel will
penetrate.
Assumptions: Corehole video log and geophysical activities includes approximately 2
weeks of time for field and senior geologists to collect the data in the field at five sites
(two days per site for set up, logging and break down). It also includes one week per
Page 11 of 21
Proposed .Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
hole for interpretation of the log and compilation of discontinuity data for use in
statistical analyses. We will also review the 4TV records to identify zones for hydraulic
conductivity testing. The logs will also be compared to the core contained in the core
storage area.
Deliverables: Video core log will be uploaded to the ftp site and WBM site.
3.2.6 Hydraulic Conductivity Testing
Hydraulic conductivity testing will be conducted using both single and dual packer
systems to isolate and straddle selected test sections, both during, and upon completion
of drilling as may be appropriate based on field conditions. The test' sections ;will be
selected during drillingbased on the general character of the 'core recovered (or lack of
core depending on ,degree of fracturing) and drilling characteristics such as lossof
drilling fluid or increase of drilling fluid (groundwater 'inflow, indicating increased
hydraulic conductivity or a vertical hydraulic gradient). Typically, single packers will be
used to test the bottom of the corehole below the packer between .core runs. In most
cases, test sections for dual packers will be selected after the completion of the;
corehole. Post -completion test sections will be selected based on the results of single
packer tests, the core log, and results of the video and geophysical logging. Tabulated
test results for packer .testing will include: elapsed time; gauge, and transducer
pressure;: meter, reading; water quality; and flow rate. The tabulated data will be used to
calculate. an"effective coefficient of permeability" of the rock mass at the test interval.
The packer` system will ,be lowered to the desiredtest., section and secured in place
using the inflatable packers. The effective length of the test section will vary depending
on ` the desired section for testing. For single packers, the test section can include
several hundred feet or be as short as five feet (e.g. during, drilling of CPA Borehole 13=1,
test sections ranged from 4.5 feet to 480 feet in length). For. the dual -packer test
apparatus, the test section can be no longer than the spacing between packers
(typicaliy 10 to 24 feet). ; After testing is completed, the packer(s) .will be deflated and
the assembly: will be moved:to the next test section or removed from the hole.
Results of the packer I permeability`"testing :(size of interval, time, amount of - flow,:
pressure) will be tabulated in individual summary sheets.' The data will be input;,into
spreadsheets for use in computing hydraulic conductivity for each test interval. The
results of the packer testing will be reported on the corehole log sheetsin terns of
hydraulic conductivity.
Assumptions:: Approximately 140 inflations are planned for all ' coreholes at
approximately 4 ;inflations per day.
Deliverables: Hydraulic conductivity for each :packer testing interval will be added to .
the corehole logs.
Page 12 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
3.2.7 Transducer and Well Installations
Kleinfelder has assumed a depth to groundwater of approximately 750 feet bgs. We
plan to install a total of 9 pressure transducers (vibrating wire) at 250-foot intervals
beginning at the bottom of each corehole, except for Alternate-4, which will have
transducers installed at 500-foot intervals. An open -screened monitoring well casing
will also beinstalled in a separate borehole drilled adjacent to each corehole. These
wells will be constructed in accordance with Water Well Standards; State of California
Bulletin 74-81 and Supplemental Bulletin 74-90, and all appropriate monitoring well,
installation permits will be obtained. The shallowest groundwater interval will be
measured in the open monitoring well casing instead of in the completed corehole. The
option of installing a multiple transducer string with two or more transducers was
evaluated but not preferred due to the small diameter of .the completed corehole and
expected difficulty of securing theentire string in one operation.. Instead, the drilling
subcontractor will install two or three separate pressure transducers, each with its
dedicated cable connection to the surface, in each completed borehole. Cables: will be
Kevlar supported to withstand the weight of the cable (in excess of 1,000-foot length).
An additional pressure transducer will be installed in each of the open monitoring wells.
This will result in`a total of 14 pressure transducers.
Assumptions: Pressure transducers are anticipated to remain in -place after
termination of our contract. Demolition of these wellsicoreholes is not included in our
scope.
Deliverables: Well construction details will be included- in the Geotechnical Data
Report.
3.2.8 Laboratory Testing
We will conduct.a laboratory -testing program designed to define the general rock mass
engineering properties throughout the depth of each corehole. Kleinfelder staff will
review the corehole logs and select core intervals for off -site laboratory testing.
Samples collected for testing will include both high- and low -strength samples to
represent the range of strengths encountered. Specialized testing may be required for
lower strength materials including clay gouge, sheared rock or weak rock. This diversity
of sample depths should represent a range of rock conditions roughly equivalent to the
conditions expected during .tunneling from a weathered rock portal to the heart of the
mountain. The depth interval of the core taken for testing will be 'recordedon log
sheets. Vacant spaces in core boxes caused by core removal for testing will be filled
with spacers labeled "lab test" at that depth. After testing, the core remains will be
placed back into the core boxes corresponding to the correct spacers.
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Our proposed testing program will include the following:
Field Unit: Weight/Moisture Content (100.tests)
Unconfined Compression (UC) (40 tests)
Confined Compression (CC, Hoek triaxial cells) (18 tests)
Direct Shear (18 tests)
Cerchar Abrasion Test (18 tests)
Brazilian Tensile Strength (18 tests)
Punch Test (18 tests)
Petrographic Analysis (18 tests)
Point Load Test (300 tests)
Rock samples :designated for testing will be shipped to Geo Test Unlimited (GTU) and
SubTerra Engineering, Inc., for specialized testing and rock thin sections. Kleinfelder
Team personnel will operate point load testing equipment at the core storagefacility so:
that; point load tests can be conducted on rock core shortly after recovery, prior to
sample moisture changes and sample degradation.
Assumptions Our assumed number of tests are presented. above.
Deliverables: Laboratory test results will be includedin the GDR.
32.9 Fire Monitor (Optional Task)
The U.S. Forest Service requires full time fire monitors on site during all field activities.
The fire monitors may be from RCTC or from the Consultant team: As an optional task,
Kleinfeld`er will provide full-time fire monitors during the field investigation. The fire
monitors will be responsible for monitoring daily weather and field conditions as they
pertain to the risk of fire hazard. We expect that two full=time, monitors' will be needed
due to the great spacing between sites.
ASSUMPTIONS:: USFS WILL REQUIRE NO MORE THAN TWO FULL-TIME FIRE MONITORS.
3.3 GEOTECHNICAL.DATA AND ASSESSMENT REPORTS
3.3 1: Geotechnical Data Analysis
Detailed analysis of the .collected data will be performed 'throughout and following
completion of thefield exploration program. The resulting data will be used to evaluate
key geotechnical conditions that affect the feasibility of the ,MIS tunnel alignment design
and construction. The analysis will include an assessrnent of i the rock 'mass
characteristics; including lithology, discontinuity conditions and orientations,; rock
strength; and groundwater conditions. The rock mass will be described in terms of
Rock Mass Ratings. The data analysis will support the Geotechnical Data and
Geotechnical Assessment Reports.
Page 14 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Assumptions: Analysis of .:corehole video/geophysical surveys and hydraulic
conductivity data is included in the scope of Subtasks 3.2.5 and 3.2.6, respectively.
3.3.2 Draft. Geotechnical Data Report
A draft Geotechnical Data Report (GDR) will be prepared summarizing the field
investigations, laboratory testing, methods utilized, and data collected for the project.
The draft GDR will include the following: 1) a discussion of exploration and . testing
methods, including conditions and difficulties encountered in the field or Laboratory that
affect results; 2) maps and figures as aids in documenting field exploration and testing;
3) presentation of all field data and laboratory test ` results data; 4) core logs; and 5)
summary tables and figures of laboratory and field test results. Summary tables and
figures in the GDR will include:
• Plots of fracture density, aperture size, hydraulic[ conductivity, JRC, point load
strength, and other key parameters versus depth of corehole;
• Stereonet plots of discontinuity poles for primary and secondary. joint/foliation
systems;
• Correlation plots of geophysical data, hydraulic conductivity;- strength data,
aperture size, and fracture density; M
• Summary plots of strength test data, including tensile strength, unconfined
compressionstrength versus depth and confined compressive strength versus
depth;
• Histograms of permeability, fracture density and orientation, strength data, and
other key parameters; and
• Summary tables of strength, permeability and discontinuity data, including
discontinuity characteristics (roughness, surface shape, orientation, spacing
aperture, filling etc.).
Assumptions: We assume that review comments on the Draft :GDR will be available
within 3 weeks of the submittal date.
Deliverables: Draft Geotechnical Data Report (one reproducible master and 20 copies).
3.3.3 Final Geotechnical Data Report
Comments from the draft GDR will be reviewed, and the document will be modified to
incorporate responses to the comments, as appropriate. The final GDR will be signed
and stamped by a.California Registered Civil or Geotechnical Engineer and a California
Certified Engineering Geologist.
Assumptions: We assume that addressing the review comments will not require any
additional field exploration activities. Final GDR will be submitted within 4 weeks of
obtaining RCTCs review comments on the Draft GDR.
Page 15 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Deliverables: Final GeotechnicalDataReport (20 bound final report copies, 1 unbound
camera-ready version and 1 CD/DVD of the final report).
3.3.4 Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
The information .contained in the GDR will be used toevaluate; the 'likely impacts. that the
rock mass and' groundwater 'conditions (perched, confined, artesian.:; conditions) may
have on the feasibility of the proposed tunnel line and grade: and .to assess the potential
effects- of 'tunnel construction, onthe groundwater and surface water regimes adjacent to.
the ' "project A draft Geotechnical Assessment ;Report (GAR) . will be prepared
characterizing the distribution of . rock and groundwater conditions. with 'respect t0 the
project: elements: Additionally, the GAR will discuss geologic hazards with respect to
the selected alignment in its entirety from the east portal to the west portal Further, the
feasibility of the proposed tunnel alignment and conceptualevaluation of the major,.
design features will be discussed.
The feasibility evaluation will .rely heavily on the expertise of our. tunneling experts, who
will be involved throughout the project from data collection through feasibility evaluation.
The tunneling feasibility evaluation team will review the project findings andproposed
design concepts and develop a list of key issues with recommendations for design
consideration to be presented in the GAR.
Assumptions we assurne .that review comments on the Draft. GAR will be available
within 4 weeks ofthe submittal date.
Deliverables: Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report (one reproducible master and 20
copies).
3.3.5 Final Geotechnical Assessment Report
Kleinfelder will review RCTC's comments on the Draft GAR, and Schedule a meeting, as
necessary, : to discuss the comments and achieve resolution"' The -Draft GAR` will be
revised, asappropriate, to address RCTC's review. comments. The Final GAR will be
signed and stamped' by a California Registered Civil or Geotechnical ° Engineer and a
California Certified Engineering Geologist.
Assumptions: Final GDR will be submitted within 4 weeks of obtaining. RCTC's review
comments on the Draft GDR.'
Deliverables: = Final Geotechnical Assessment Report (20 bound final report copies, 1
unbound camera-ready version and 1 CD/DVD of the final report):
Page 16 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
3.3.6 Technical Advisory Panel (Optional Task)
As an optional task Kleinfelder will convene a Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) of tunnel
engineering experts to identify, assess, quantify, and develop a response to risks
associated with tunneling within the proposed alignment.
Following the general guidance of the Caltrans Project Risk Management Handbook,
the TAP will develop a "Risk Registry" in which they will 1) identify project risks prior to
embarking on the 'project, 2) reevaluate these risks after the field and laboratory studies
have been performed, 3) categorize the risks according to the likelihood of occurrence,
and 4) evaluatethe potential consequences for each risk if it were to occur.
Additionally, the TAP will use the information from the Risk Registry to assist in the
preparation of a discussion of the various construction methods, their.advantages and
disadvantages to the project, and the potential impacts that need to be considered or
further evaluated. If requested by RCTC, the TAP will also address the RCTC, O-CTA
and the ROCA Board at meetings to brief decision makers about findings and respond
to questions of feasibility and project risk.
Assumptions: The TAP will consist of three members; each of which will make two
trips; one to visit the site and review the core at the core storage facility, and the second
to meet with the Kleinfelder Team to discuss their findings.
Deliverables: Technical Memorandum (one reproducible'master and 20 copies)
3.4 GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN AND REPORT
3.4.1 Develop Plan
A Groundwater Monitoring Plan will be prepared to document the location of the
groundwater resource sites to be monitored, the proposed access to the sites,` and the
activities that will occur as part of the monitoring program: Tasks, associated with
development of the Plan include:
• Review of the locations of the resources previously cataloged during the CPA
and MIS studies;
• Review of aerial photographsand search of public records for additional
resources relevant to the current alignment;
• Selection of the candidate sites to be monitored;
• Review of current access to those sites and their potential monitoring setups
during an aerial helicopter reconnaissance;
• Establish approximate coordinates of each resourcesite based on the aerial
photographic analyses, and past records of information gathering; and
• Discussion of the proposed monitoring activities atthe sites.
Page 17 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Assumption: The groundwater resource locations are not coordinate located and; need
to be cataloged;,, accordingly prior to field verification site visits.
Deliverables: Groundwater Monitoring Plan (one reproducible master and 20 copies): ,
3.4.2 Set Up & Initial Month Monitoring
The, candidate resource sites identified in Subtask 3.4.1-..will beyisited and evaluated for
monitoring suitability. For estimating purposes, 5.0 resource .=sites the 5 : new; core
borings, 11 private wells and 34:spring resources) have been assumed for monitoring,
but the actual number and type of resources monitored will be dependent on the results .
of this subtask. Those resources identified for long-term monitoring will be set up and.
the initial monthly water level or flow measurements obtained. ; Initial field water quality
measurements (including temperature, electrical conductivity, pH, Eh and dissolved ;
oxygen) will be completed at the spring sites. The 5 new core < borings will .be set-up.
with automated water level monitoring equipment (data loggers) with telemetered
access. The assumed 11 private wells will be set-up with automated water; level.
monitoring systems that will be downloaded during monthly site visits:' The initial flow
and field water quality measurement at the 34 spring resources will be takenby hand.
Water quality samples from six selected resource sites will be :collected and sent for
laboratory testing, as a means to better understandthe mountain's hydrologic system.
Each of the six collected samples will be tested in the laboratory for generalminerals,
trace metals, and stable isotopes of water (i.e., Deuterium and Oxygen-18). The water
characteristics from the six tested sites will be used to assess sources of recharge for
groundwater and its movement through the mountain.
The locations of each resource to be monitored will be determined utilizing Land
Surveyor grade global positioning -units (GPS) tied to existing control (if available). If the
survey control is not available, the approximate locations of springs and stream, flow .
monitoring points will be recorded with a hand-held GPS unit: , Digitalphotographs will
be taken at each monitoring site, and a brief site characterization will be recorded. .
Assumptions: Groundwater .resource sites will be limited to ,50 Minimal - site
enhancements will be required at spring sites to allow measurements of flow by hand
The timing of the surveyor visits to the sites will likely .follow the set up and initial month .
monitoring so that the sites and access to each has been verified in .the: field before the
survey crew mobilizes with the groundwater monitor crew for the second month of .
monitoring.
Deliverables: The results` of the initial water quality testing ;will be . presented in the
Groundwater Technical Memorandum.
Page 18 of 21
3.4.3 Progressive Monthly Monitoring
After the initial set-up and measurement, the water level data automatically recorded in
each of the 5 new core borings will be downloaded via phone weekly for the remaining
year. Each month :after the initial measurement, for the remaining year, the automated
water level measurements recorded in the monitored private wells will be will be
downloaded during site visits_ Each of the monitored spring or stream sites will be
visited via vehicle, helicopter and/or foot access once a month for the remaining year,
and field measurements of flow rates and water quality (including temperature, electrical
conductivity, pH, Eh, and dissolved oxygen) will be completed. Digital photographs will
be taken each month at each spring monitoring site, and a brief site characterization will
be recorded.
Assumptions: Due to the extreme difficulty for physical access to some .of the spring
sites, it is assumed that hiking to some of the sites may take a half day. Thus, for some
days of monitoring, only two or three sites may be. reached in . a single field day.
Implementation of the Groundwater Monitoring Plan will be performed by staff working
in pairs to enhance field safety and efficiency.
Deliverables: The results of the groundwater resource_ monitoring will be presented in
the Groundwater Technical Memorandum.
3.4.4 Groundwater Technical. Memorandum
The results of the current Groundwater Monitoring Program together with the results of
the previous effort performed by GeoPentech personnel in the Fate 1980s will be
summarized in a Groundwater Technical Memorandum (Report). The data collected
from the monitoring program will be used to develop a groundwater contour reap with
resource locations, illustrating groundwater elevations and potential flow directions
within the study area for both the wet and dry periods of the study. The report will
include a brief introduction and project description, discussion of field and laboratory
methods and results, and conclusions and recommendations. Field data sheets and
individual site photographs will be included as appendices to the document. ' Field water
quality and flow measurements will be summarized in spreadsheet format.
Not all of the five monitoring wells with vibrating Wire Piezometers will be constructed
twelve months in advance of the project completion date (March 15, 2009). Monthly
monitoring events for these wells will extend approximately three months beyond the.
project completiondate. Data from these later -events will be presented in a follow-up
memorandum or addendum to the Groundwater Technical Memorandum.
Assumptions: An addendum to the Groundwater Technical Memorandum will be
required to report the groundwater data collected after our contract completion date.
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Deliverables: Groundwater Technical Memorandum (Report) (20 :bound finalreport .
copies, 1 unbound camera-ready version and 1 CD/DVD of the report).
3.5 GROUNDWATER MODELING
A numerical . groundwater model will be developed: using available geologic :and
groundwater data to evaluate tunnel groundwater inflow .potential and the potential>
effect; that, alternative tunneling means and methods might haveon surrounding
groundwater resources. and tunnel progress. These :evaluations iprovide information to
make decisions regarding the feasibility of more efficient ` design and construction
approaches toward handling water inflow to the proposed tunnels, and thus minimizing:
or: avoiding groundwater resource impacts.
Based on the rock mass characteristics of the site, a commercially -available numerical
code such as FRAC 3DVS may be utilized to model the .site -specific groundwater
conditions. The FRAC "3DVS code has been used successfully for the Inland Feeder
Tunnels project. The results of the groundwater modeling will be incorporated in the
Geotechnical Assessment Report.
Assumptions: , Modeling will evaluate one or two construction methods and various
pre --excavation grouting conditions.
Deliverables: Groundwater model and various model run results will be incorporated
into the GAR.
3.6 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT (OPTIONAL TASK)
Biologists . have previously conducted initial biological Surveys of the :: springs and
streams _associated with the groundwater resources in the study area for MWD's CPA
tunnel alignment. ` Should RCTC need to address the biological : aspects of the
groundwater monitoring program for this project, Kleinfelder's biologists can: be called
upon to update and expand the existing catalog of . the, biological :elements at the
groundwater resource sites.
These elements include descriptions of the dominant plant species in both the overstory
and the, understory according to general plant communities classifications as described
by two ,, references published :by the California Department of Fish' and Game and
accepted by other regulatory, agencies: (1) the Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer
and Keeler -Wolff 1995) and (2) the Preliminary Descriptions .of the Terrestrial
Communities of California (Holland:: 1986). The analysiswill also address, both
vertebrate and invertebrate animal species.
Page 20 of 21
Proposed Irvine -Corona
Expressway Project
Aquatic biologists will visit each site twice during the contract period (in late Spring).
For each site we will:
• Provide photo documentation;
• Conduct a survey of three sites across the wetland area and record extent of
open water, submergent, emergent, riparian and/or upland vegetation. We will
also list any wildlife species noted during the visit.
• Provide a list of major plant species for each of the vegetation types above.
• Prepare a sketch of the extent of vegetation type at each site.
• Sample open water to identify invertebrate populations
• Prepare a technical memorandum documenting each wetland area including
photographs, vegetation maps, species list, transect results and a list of
invertebrates found at the site.
Assumptions: Biological Assessment will be performed at 34 spring resources by two
staff for safety purposes. Each resource site will be visited twice during the contract
period.
Deliverables: Biological Assessment Technical Memorandum (20 bound final report
copies, 1 unbound camera-ready version and 1 CD/DVD of the Technical
Memorandum).
4.0 QA/QC
Kleinfelder will provide Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) for the project.
QA/QC provisions, procedures, and protocols, consistent with our corporate quality
procedures and standards will be identified and documented in a QA/QC Plan.
All documentsprepared for submission to RCTC (inclusive of boring logs, figures,
calculations, etc) will be subject to QA/QC procedures that will be detailed in the QA/QC
Plan. Quality assurance audits will be conducted on a regular basis to assure
compliance with the QA/QC Plan and Project Management Plan.
Deliverables: Draft and Final QA/QC Plan (included as part of the PMP).
Page 21 of 21
ATTACHMENT 2
Irvine -Corona Expressway Cost Breakdown
- Task No. and Task Title
Labor Hours
Labor Cost
($)
Other Direct Cost
(5)
Subtotal
($)
Subtotal
23,015
S4.489,990.33
S1,312489.25
$5,1305.079.15
Task Descriptions
din, ;tSaiManagament '4`. z�
s-
1.1
1.2
Project Staffing
-
$229,829.88
Project Management and Control
1,556
$229,829.88
Project Management Plan
-
Coordination and Administration of the Project
-
1.3
Coordination with Other Agencies
80
$15,391.20
$2,522.00
$17,913.20
Project Meetings
-
Bi-Weekly Coordination Meetings with RCTC (36)
288
$38,026.08
$38,026.08
ROCA Committee Meetings (6)
24
$4,617.36
$4,617.36
Meetings with Local, Stale, federal Agencies (10)
40
$7,695.60
$7,695.60
1.4 'Document
Control and Web Based Management System
-
1.4.1 Document Control
488
$50,035.20
$50,035.20
$f0$0006-i -.
1.4.2-- Web -based Management Sy stem OPTIONAL TAs
$108,000.00
2.0 S,ecial Use Permit Assistance
160
$24,359.20
$485.00
$24,844.20
Xaskt37e
3.1
,ec-hntcal'iefidiit{iii'ati'aii:' dTe"sEir�iSeN es "
-
Existing Data Summary Data Report
160
$19,441.72
$1,250.00
$20,691.72
3.2
Field Exploration Program
-
3.2.1 Field Reconnaissance
312
$55,451.18
$5,975.00
$61,426.18
3.2.2 Exploration Plan
364
$48,293.48
$400.00
$48,693.48
3.2.3 Coreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging
-
$1,203,206.60
$839,820.00
$2,043,026.60
Personnel Mobilization and Setup
200
$30,303.60
$30,303.60
Coreholes MIS-1, MIS-2. MIS-3, ALT. 3
2,970
$402,374.70
$402,374.70
Corehole Alternate 4 to 2,370 feet
1,196
$108,681.94
$108,681.94
3.2.4 Core Evaluation/ Core Photography
768
$115,067.76
$67,500.00
$182,567.76
3.2.5 Corehole Video! Geophysical Survey:
276
$85,841.64
$15,110.00
$100,951.64
3.2.6 Hydraulic Conductivity Testing -
656
$133,589.84
$100.00
$133,689.84
3.2.7 Transducer and Wells Installations
244
$60,756.72
$49,758.00
$110,514.72
3.2.8 Laboratory Testing
120
$62,221.64
- $62,221.64
,3.2.9- Fire Monitor(OPTIONALTASK) - • ----!a -
r:
:„
3,380
`;$443,30000--
_$12,000.00
`- $455,300.00-
3.3
Geotechnical Data and Assessment Reports
-
13.3.1 Geotechnical Data Analysis
560
$71,586.60
$71,586.60
3.3.2 Draft Geotechnical Data Report
540
$80,782.40
$4,000.00
$84,782.40
,3.3.3 Final Geotechnical Data Report
346
$51,161.44
$4,000.00
$55,161.44
3.3.4 Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
640
$110,614.00
$6,544.00
$117,158.00
3.3.5 Final Geotechnical Assessment Report
330
$59,656.32
$4,000.00
$63,656.32
3,3,6. Technical Advisory Panel :(OPTIONAL TASK) -. - > �•
'
-:'
, '
-.
' '600
` I' $165,044.00
_ $2,544.00
_ $167,588.00:
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
-
3,4,1 Develop Plan
246
$27,833.42
$7,121.25
$34,954.67
3.4.2 Setup & Initial Month Monitoring
1,227
$147,980.53
$114,357.50
$262,338.03
3.4.3 Progressive Monthly Monitoring
1,896
$149,837.52
$51,500.00
$201,337.52
3.4.4 Groundwater Technical Memo
280
$38,572.88
$2,533.50
$41,106.38
3.5
Groundwater Modeling
620
$108,729.96
$8,000.00
$116,729.96
3.6
Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL TASK)
; ± ,.;;
- •'
- 554
i$110,337.36 ,
',$2,425.00
:' $11$762.36 .
540
$119,031.20
$2,544.00
$121,575.20
Administrative Fee on Subconsuhant Labor (5%)
$111,582.82
Administrative Fee on Laboratory Testing (3%)
$1,354.11
Total Cost Without Options, No Escalation
54,961,429
Cost for Options (Tasks 1,4.2, 3.2:9, 3.3.6, and 3.6) No Escalation .'..
''-
5843,650'...
Total Cost With Options, No Escalation
$5,805,079
Total Cost Without Options With Escalation
(3%effective 4-1-07;3%for 2008)
- $5,263,580
Total Cost With Options With Escalation
(3%:effective 4-1-07;, 3%for 2008)
56,158,608
aro]1ap1eµ19
St 610.509'5S
(u0114l9oe3 Ino416a) gad 1VL01
It 699 LS
-Trit-E-Wheal AO)e409811m a9d 9e0enc1c11.11pV
Z9Z09'LL LS
NS) 10991.9911u90O9u000us uo aed ozgocewuptl
e0e99drd 1e1019ns
69'699'ZO1'ZS
LI'89969S
90'091b5Y
09'696'6CS
WOO, 99L$ 00009'tact
no Dos tint
00'D09'But
on CesIBLS
OB LSO'92S
seLIi 969$ CO"609'99S 00'S09'I91
nano loryznoso19n9
96194
III
Oa
999
00ZZ OBLL
0091.
090Z
ZPSL
091
9LSZ 002 00C
u011ee91e9910 lq mnnH 10101009
.
OulloP9W 19994•090910
!sued xslnea loNulmel
LI o fdp
o v0v luul_
--
UPSLE
00PM.'ZS
'
OB'4L81044
OOS
09
-"'-' - .._.
SE'LES PLC
60L
09
9E
11•• a
-�...
00'006'LLS
001
001
919Ale0V oleo
00.005ZBS
DSC
OSL
RPM 099
Dasz9'zY
ff4- r, -= -Y::::1N5YllYN011d0}1900,99.91Y;1090Y410,109'9s
00 000
BCZLZ'901f
\99'
LSO Zf
91
81
Bupl Dory lmemPup s'f
ZS
09"6Lill•90 L£E
96
9
LE
unpuelowaluois19a9l1mempunol0 I'YC
p 9
00009ZS
OOLSE
09
L9C'LS
6'L9L'ZS
91
91
9
9
EPE
6w0110069W01119091
01S
OS'LSCbtLS
ISIZLV2613
192L251Lf
L9L'ZS
HI
_
B
9
S
6uymluow uµow leyul8dNaS 21E
V ORBS
SZ'Lit '1
OFS90'S25
Z'L9L'ZS
91
e
e
cold 0o119180 1 P C
Code?! Due umd 6Wm11011LmaVPunm0
9'E
00'69E'St LS
00'6PS'ZS
00 099'66S
DOZ
OOZ
1;04144 x- (MSY1.lVN00,1014euad/+ompyi90lu9001000 .. '9:9E'E
1lodaa 111eu9e899V Leo1c9oaWe0 loulf 9EC
a_,
HMCO'99S
00'000'PS
9'CZ9'9i$
PIZ
00
PZ
01
OE
09
06
00'9LL B$S
00 OPS'9$
Ott ZSS
000
COL
09
DK
06
oB
oe
1mdca 1.w1ma0e6V P21.041000%MO 0'C'C
09'996'ILI
00'000'PS
'SOUKS
0E9
09
Ot
09
CB
09
09
tludOa 010O1000,990100D leuld C'C'C
09'969 OLE
00'000Of
990E09S
DOS
COL
08
DO L
09
09
O9
1.100921 9100 1901049010e00910 LC'C
09'90S'LLS
095
OE
OB
DO
OB
C9l
00L
09
9101109V 0110100!99omoo0 L'E'E
s110m8191009e8991/ Due me0 loOlu94e19o0
E'C
00000Z1S
DD'OOCCO0$
000C
COE1
080E
N9ffi1VN011d0 01100rvatldlillkO,RB$"B'116Z0:
�Ir
00 "LE L'Set
09'PBO'LLS
Oil.
O9
9Z
9t
Buncol/ummo99l 9ZE
00'9GL'SOS
99 SLO'CES
99DM/ZS
60Z
09
OB -
OI
6L
S9o11e11ns011140M our loonosuul L'Z'E
00'COLS
6E"Z9L'L9Y
09'L29'99$
OZs
D9
091
OBL
09
0e
6u999111M1UnPu00 ollnewAN 9'Z'E
00'OL 1'91$
00'BE 1'19$
09'COL 'PCS
06Z
09
09
09
CO
9.40919 19019KeI F9PA 9096100 S'Z'C
96'99S'Z LS
00'00S L9S
09'92.6'LOLS
OZL
091
00Z
OZZ _
OZ1 -
lydµ6el09d 9100 N49901w39400 0'Z'E
00"LEL'991
09'09993
00Z
09
OE
OL
OZ
0P
09
001E01e1.1V elocµn0
OZ"SZ6'LE
DS'BOO '6BES
OCB'Z
06
OB
OP
099
0S9
00L
o6C
C"11V C-SIR Z-9111 L-991991099190
09'COCOC$
DO
1
09
oe
09
acos Duo uopex0190w I9uuouod
00'199'0E3
09"90i COE'lS
00"691'6LLS
6u6601'6011dwe5'60111p0'94.1090,00 E'Z'E
9L'999'SS
CO'000$
LCLICZK
OPC
09
11
06
Ob
09
oe
9C
091duoncoorb3 EZ'f
96'LSO 'LLS
00916SS-
OZ'666'LOS
OPE
00
OB
09
94419se1euuo4941PlNd
wuBmduoAenps3 PRA
Z'6
000SZ'IS
ZL'l01'6L5
09l
PZ
91
09
09
OL
Poch% oleo botoLns ele06u0as3
L'f
- _._. J
00"980$
OL 69E'PZS
091
OP
01
09
00u0t0itsV lluu9d ern to
0'Z
�D� P u•nvunZ.."t0'1
00'000'DOLS
NSY/1V401/JO 199199uwaueW eM'
orseD'os
1001uotun1
'
u9gslgµm091reDwcam ace P9u]u9wooa
YL
9'
OP
OD
OL9aPmb/Iµa19919441Lm
9C"LLB '14
9Z
(9)sOu909rv90111011640V0tl
HO"BZO'DLE
0Z
9L
bl
(9E) ]I]8V96usooRuo6ulµ000LwerM19
rDuAeo" 1dl
00"EZ9'LY
OL"t6C'SLY
OB
OB
ain uop1oopo
y0,x u0peulµ000
f'4
'
us0016V1e100
Uafud ow Jo u0Ae9uold
'
totl a/nion 10l0o]
- cold lueuwoluo0
99'6Z96EZ$
95S'L
910
096
oe Loot
IVAUD]We µ9watl0uvS t0olmd
Z'L
'
599P19199(µd
lvnlold l 1 ,0e,,.n lloPtl.1
tl l , LPpea
, _ ^ '3 9 l soon
eueANDe9O6n1
CL
�9a
'
6eDUad no
PM9µAs3
..,. ... Y
4A e.ry... E
_
I'll 4'^e.' �C�F"rcA
... 1
P
F^
g7'r'„.,
07;1
012.1
%'ILS
�4�p�i�����
� 1.
LiMtS
m
mULi
f+.v,.^.
rlrc
06011f
e
si
m9219
.rw%,:•
1 �11�
005949
{ 'w.f',
L'^✓ SI
m'0419
�i'AYB,r'
Oa'Wb
.+Nl
¢'SLIS
R.9
dl
L
EE'61f
�'I
lax.,
LIYR!
y H
�r�1a�IA
9LBOLI„w .l,l099.t
9LB6L!
1ls'Z
aatl
Y fiye','1 56
f n,},h'.' +.i ''£u.� `a7"` Pa6'� S'{r�i•li
`. ..*'� a9M0ZBIL .'�w" t•±19!1•0J .attic,
%OO L91 M'OL.W9tl aa,{
saMADDV 9 P991yanp
S
Cm
.S
0
s�
9
4r
g3
nu
°
E
^�'
$Q
=g
x
�f
3c
$
c
Fpp
Ig
cg
z!
.m
Da
8€
s8
^yo
oa
ma
03
a
v
°
2
p
I
v
6
t
2
4g
a
rff
�r
sY
A:
�R
F
1�°•id
3i^
iE�'
9i
�
"-x'
is
i41
Eg
g_
va
3
8�
R
}a$
A
^
g
IeS0dOJd ISO° ABPASsaJdx3 euOJOD-auinJI
Kieinfelder Expenses
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity_ .
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
3.2.7 Transducer and Wells Installations
Subtotal Task 3.2.7
3.2.8 'Laboratory Testing
Subtotal Task 3.2.8
3.2.9 Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK) I I I I 8 .. I Month j $1,500.00 1 $12,000.00
3.3
GDR and GAR
3.3.1
Geotechnical Data Analysis
3.3.2
Draft Geotechnical Data Report
Reproduction Fees (estimate)
20
Report .
$200.00
$4,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.2
$4,000.00
3.3.3
Final Geotechnical Data Report
Reproduction Fees (estimate)
20
Report
$200.00
$4,000.00
dot.dat inc pint logs and graphics
Subtotal Task 3.3.3
$4,000.00
3.3.4
Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
Reproduction Fees (estimate)
20
Report
. $200.00
$4,000.00
Air Fare
3
—
Costs
$500.00
$1,500.00
Per diem
6
Costs
$174.00
$1,044.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.4
, '$6,544.00
3.3.5
Final Geotechnical Assessment Report
Reproduction Fees (estimate)
20
Report
$200.00
$4,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.5
$4,000.00
3.3.6
Technical. Advisory Panet(OPTIONAL)
Air Fare
3
Costs
$500.00
$1,500.00
Per diem
6
Costs ,
$174.00
$1,044.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.6
$2,544.00
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1
Develop Plan
Helicopter
Mileage
Aerial Photos
Subtotal Task 3.4.1
3.4.2
Setup & Initial Month Monitoring
Private Well Equipment (datalogger)
Datalogger, modem, antenna, software, etc.
_
_ __ Helicopter
Field and Office Supplies
Cell Phone and Dedicated Phone Line
Water Quality Testing
Mileage
Subtotal Task 3.4.2
3.4.3
Progressive Monthly Monitoring
Helicopter
Field and Office Supplies .
Cell Phone and Dedicated Phone Line
—
-----
---__.---------------------------------
Mileage--._—.�—---------
------
Subtotal Task 3.4.3
3.4.4
Technical Memo 8 Meetings
Report Reproduction Supplies
Mileage for Meetings
Subtotal Task 3.4.4
•
3_5
Groundwater Modeling
Kleinfelder Expenses
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity 1 Unit 1 Unit rate 'Total
Quantity Unit Unit rate 1Totai
Task 1- Administration and Project Management 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1.1 1Project Staffing 1 I 1
1 { ` .,
1.2 Project Management and Control (
1
1.3
Coordination with Other Agencies
Si -Weekly Coordination Meetings
3600
miles
$0.49
$1,746.00
ROCA Committee Meetings
600
miles
$0.49 '
$291_00
Meetings with Local, State, Federal Agencies .:
_
1000
miles.
$0.49
$485.00
Subtotal Task 1`.3
-- --
— -
$2,522.00
1.4 Web -based System (OPTIONAL) 1
1
Task 2
----------1--
- Special Use Permit Assistance
.- - — _- _ --
1000
miles ---
_
$0.49---
— $485.00
Mileage
Subtotal Task 2.0 _ ,
$485.00
Task 3 - Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing 1
3.1
Data Collection
Mileage
200
' miles
$0.49 .
Reproduction Fees
1
Lump Sum
$250.00
$250.00
Aerial Photographs
1
Lump Sum
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.1
$1,250.00
3.2
Field Exploration Program
3.2.1.
Field Reconnaissance
Mileage
---
--
-
-----------
1200 _
1
1
_miles
Dap+ _
Estimate..
$0.49_
$4393.00
$1,000.06
_$582.00
_ _$4,393.00
$1,000.00
_-- ----
Helicopter
Video
Subtotal Task 3.2.1
-
$5,975.00
3.2.2
Exploration Plan
-- ------
Reproduction Fees
- --- p — -- -- _._ .--- -------- ----
dot,dat.inc log form
- ---
_
--- - _.
-- -- -
--- — ----
— 20^ _.
Each
_----------
$20.00 _
-----$400 _00
Subtotal Task 3.2.2
$400.00
3.2.3
Coreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Loggiqg
_
KA Moblization Mileage
1000
miles
$0.49 ;"
$485.00
Coreholes MIS-1, MIS-2', MIS-3, ALT. 3
—-------
---,
mileage
48000 '.
miles
$0.49
$23,280.00
4x4 Vehicle Rental and maintenance (2)
8
Month
$3,000.00
$24,000.00
Field Cameras (3)
8
Month
$150.00
$1,200.00
_____________
_�
Kleinfelderper diemj2 people @$174/dy
173
1
d
dam__
Lump Sum
Month
_$348.00
$4,-60.0-
$300.00
$60,20.4.00
$4,000.00
$3,600.00
_ _ misc field supplies
Satellite Radios (2)
12
Forest Service Required Equipment
i
Year :
$2,400.00
$2;400.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.3
$119,169.00
3.2.4
Core Evaluation! Core Photography
Digital Photography and digital prints
1
Lump Sum
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
Core Storage Facility rental
12
Months
$5,000.00
$60,000.00
Miscellaneous Costs
1
Lump Sum
.$2,500.00
$2,500.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.4
$67,500.00
3.2.5 (Corehole Video/ Geophysical Surveys
Subtotal Task 3.2.5
3.2.6 itlydraulic Conductivity Testing --- - - - - — -
Subtotal Task 3.2.6
----------
--
Kleinfelder Expenses
Irvine -Corona. Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Task 3.5
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Subtotal
3.6
(Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL) _
+I Mileage (50 site visits)
5000
miles
$0.49
$2,425.00
Subtotal Task 3.6
$2,425.00
4.0 lamx
Airfare TAP
3
cost -
$500.00
$1,500.00
Per diem TAP
6
day
$174.00
$1,044.00
Subtotal Task 4.0
$2,544.00
_
________
_—
Crux Labor.& Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity { Unit { Unit rate {Total
Quantity { Unit { Unit rate 'Total
Task 1 - Administration and Project Management 1J { J J J
1.1 - 'Project Staffing I J J { J J { J
1.2 'Project Management and Control I {
1.3 'Coordination with Other Agencies ) J J J
1.4 IWeb-based System (OPTIONAL) J J ( T J J
Task 2- Special Use Permit Assistance J J J J J J J J
Task 3- Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing J J J [ J J J
3.2
Field Exploration Program
3.2.1
Field Reconnaissance
3.2.2 jExploration Plan
3.2.3
Coreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging
Crux Drill -Mob"
1
Lum• Sum
$71,586.00
$71,586.00
Crux Drill Demob
1
Lump Sum
$18,100.00
$18,100.00
Drilling 0 - 250 feet
1000
Feet
$42.10
$42,100.00
Drilling 251- 500 feet
1000
Feet
$44.80
$44,800.00
Drilligg_501 _750 feet — -- — _
Drilling 751 -1000 feet
1000
Feet
$48.00
$51.70
$48,000_00
$42,911.00
830
Feet
Drilling 1000 -1250 feet
646
Feet
$56.10
$36,240.60
Drilling 1250 -1500 feet
10
Feet
$61.40
$614.00
Drill Standpipe Borehole
:
$76,000.00
Setup/ Tear Dow_n/MoveslWater System
Hole Conditionin. - -- -
140
• 0
Hours$33,600.00
. 0 0 0
-----$21,600.00
---------------------
--------_---------
Travel Time (2 crews)
150
Crew / Days
` 0 0
o .00
Extra men (4)
300
Days
i
Crux Project Manager
Crux Subsistence t8 me -- -- -
Water Truck (2)
75
Days
• i r r r
$45,000.00
i
150
_Man ! Da r�s$90.00s
y
$250.00
_
Grout Plant
75
$150.00
Helicopter
75
Days
$4,393.00
Road Access Development
1
Lump Sum
$5,000.00
Water System _
Cuttings Disposal
1
Lum_p_Sum
$16,000.00
$16,000 00
1
Lump Sum
$1,200.00R
Drill Muds/ Grout
1
Lump Sum
$8,000.00
u
g„s>
Security (on days 2 people/1 shift/day)
130
Days
'$1,000.00
$130,000.00
�
Security (off days 2 people/3 shifts/day)
52
Days
$2 00000.,'
$104,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.3$_R
i
$446,425.00
3.2.4
Core Evaluation/ Core Photography
Di ital Phot• • ra • h and di. ital . tints
1
Lum . Sum
$5 000.00
$5,000.00.
Core Storage Facility rental
12
Months
$5,000.00
$60,000.00
Subtotal
Miscellaneous Costs
Task 3.2.4
--------
----- ------ ----
1
---- _ ---
Lum Sum
$2,500.00
$2,500.00
—_-_---------
$67,500.00
3.2.5
Corehole Video/ Geo•h sical Surve s
Crux.Surpport of Geophysics
40
Hours
$240.00
$9,600.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.5
a ,:: 0
3.2.6
H draulic Conductivi Testin•
Crux Subsurface
Packer Test Hours150
Hours
$240.00
$36,000.00
-
Packer Inflations
--_ --Packer Rental (2 sets) ---- ---- ----
r r r r
$7,500.00$50.00
-
------$100.0 .
Ruen Drilling
Packer Test Hours
Subtotal
Packer Inflations •
Task 3.2.6
$100.00
$51,000.00
3.2.7 Transducer and Wells Installations —
Crux Labor & Direct Costs .
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs '
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Cruz Sub Crux Subsurface
VW Transducer/OB Well installation
120
Hours
$240.00
$28,800.00
Standpipe OB Well Materials
4
Borings
$3,500.00
$14,000.00
VW Transducer Materials . '
1
lump Sum
$18,450.00
$18,450.00
Subtotal Task 3.2J
_
$28,800.00
$32,450.00
3.2.8 !Laboratory Testing I
I I I I.'
3.2.9 , !Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK). I I I
F I I_ I
3.3
GDR and GAR
3.3.1
Geotechnical Data Analysis
3.3.2 ` 'Draft Geotechnical. Data Report T r I
} I + ' .
3.3.3 1Final Geotechnical Data Report T I I
( I ' I '
3.3.4 .1Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report T I I
I I
3.3.6 'Final: Geotechnical Assessment Report I j
1 I
3.3.6 (Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL) 1 I
I 1' I 1-
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1
Develop Plan
3.4.2 'Setup & Initial Month, Monitoring I I I
I
3.4.3 'IProgressive Monthly Monitoring 1 I:
' : I I I.
3.4.4 (Technical Memo &,Meetings I Ii
3.5 1Groundwater Modeling .' ( (
I j
3.6 jBiological Assessment (OPTIONAL) 1 I I
i:. I
4.0 'QAIQG
Ruen Labor and Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity
I Unit I Unit rate +Total
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate ITotal
Task 1- Administration and Project Management 1
1 I 1
1 1 1 1
1.1 PProject Staffing I
1 I 1
i I I . 1
1.2 'Project Management and Control 1
L ( 1
1 I 1 I
1.3 'Coordination with Other Agencies 1
1 1 1
1 I I I
1.4 'Web -based System (OPTIONAL) 1
1 1 1
I I 1 1
Task 2- Special Use PermitAssistance 1
1 1- 1
1 1 1 1
Task 3- Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing 1
1 1 1
1 1 I 1
3.1 'Data Collection I
1 1 1
I 1 1
3.2
Field Exploration Program
3.2.1 _
Field Reconnaissance
3.2.2 'Exploration Plan 1 '
1
3.2.3
Coreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging
Corehole Alternate 4
Drill Rigs Mob/ Demob
1
Lump Sum
$5,900.00
$5,900.00
Drill 0-1470 feet .
1470
Feet
$67.50
$99,225.00
Drill 1470 - 2370
900'
Feet
$67.50 .
$60,750.00
Setup! Tear Down, Conditioning
220
Hours
$210.00
$46,200.00
Water Tank
69
Days
$65.00'
Light Tower
Shift
$90.00
--
_ Grout Plant
69
Shift
$90.00
Supply Pump
69
Shift
$90.00
e'
helicopter support
$4
hours
$1,800.00
Wooden Core boxes, incidentals
1
Lump Sum
:$1 M5 00
,.
r
Water truck
69 .
Shift
$260.00
>gar.
-- - --
----- - Water truck mileage _.----- --
--
--------
---- ------
--- ------
------
Mile_
Per man-
$1.85
-- $95.00
.
------
Per diem (3 men)
_2750
220 .
� �s r
Extra Labor
690
per man
$57.00
$39,330.00��
Cuttings Disposal
1
Lump Sum'
$33,840.00
Extra Hole for 500 ft well
500
Feet
$67.50
$33,750.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.3
„
„
$258,006.00
3.2.4 'Core Evaluation/ Core Photography 1
1
3.2.5 .
Corehole Video! Geophysical Surveys
Ruen Standby
40
Hours
$185.00
$7,400.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.5}
3.2.6
Hydraulic Conductivity Testing
Ruen Drilling
Packer Test Hours
_
— 40
H
Hours
- Inflations
$210.00
_
$3,600.00
—----
-- ---- --
----------
-- --- -
-- --
Packer Inflations -----
$90.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.6
$3,600.00
3.2.7
Transducer and Wells Installations
Ruen Dril Ruen Drilling
_
,-- --_ - --
VW TransducerlOB Well Installation
Vibration Wire.Piezometers
hours
$210.00
1
Lump Sum
$17,308:00
$17,308.00
Standpipe OB Well Materials
Subtotal Task 3.2.7
$17,308.00
3.2.8 'Laboratory Testing 1
1
3.2.9 'Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK) t
1 I
I 1 1 I
3.3
GDR and GAR
3.3.1
Geotechnical Data Analysis
Ruen tabor and Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity .
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Quantity
, Unit
Unit rate
Total
3.3.2
Draft Geotechnical Data Report
Reproduction Fees (estimate).
dot.dat inc gint logs and graphics
Subtotal Task 3.3.2
3.3.3 (Final Geotechnical Data Report
3.3.4 'Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
1 j j
(- , .
3.3.5 'Final Geotechnical Assessment Report
1 1 (
] ' ,
3.3.6 (Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL)
-I- I (
( .. 1
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1
Develop Plan
3.4.2 'Setup & Initial Month Monitorinuc
- ( ( I
( (. (
3.4.3 'Progressive Monthly Monitoring L
( (
(.
3.4.4 'Technical Memo &Meetings
1 I I I
I- J j:.
3.5 'Groundwater Modeling
1 j ' 1
( ' . ' . 1
_
3.6 ' !Biological Assessment OPTIONAL
s (OPTIONAL)
1 I I
f 1 I j" .
4.0 'jQA/QC
T
Norcal Labor and Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity [
Unit I Unit rate [Total
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate 'Total
Task 1- Administration and Project Management I I
I I
1 I I I
1.1 ]Project Staffing I I
I I
I I- l
1.2 !Project Management and Control I 1
I
1 1 1 I 1
1.3 'Coordination with Other Agencies ] 1
1 I
I I 1 I
1.4 1Web-based System (OPTIONAL) (, '
1 I
1 1 I
Task 2- Special Use Permit Assistance I
I I
[ J I I I
Task 3- Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing
I I
1 I I I
3.1 )Data Collection I I
I '
I 1 ' I
3.2
Field Exploration Program
3.2.1
Field Reconnaissance
3.2.2 'Exploration Plan 1
I I
I I I I I
3.2.3 ICoreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging I I
I
I I 1 I I
3.2.4 Core Evaluation/ Core Photography I
I
3.2.5
Corehole Video/ Geophysical Surveys
Video/Geophysics Mobilization
5
Each
$1,850.00
$9,250.00
Geophysicist and Equipment
10
Days
$1,575.00
$15,750.00
per diem
15
Days
$174.00
$2,610.00
Temperature/fluid conductivity
_
5
Hole
$500.00
$2,500.00
E-1o9 probe
5
Hole
$500.00
$2,500A0
Heat Pulse flow meter probe
Hole
$600.00
Optivcal or Acoustic televiewer
5
Hole
$1,500.00
$7,500.00
-- ---
Norcal Data Analysis
1
Luml Sum_
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
-------------
--------------
---------------___---------------
-- -- - Crux Support of GeqphOcs--- --
RuenStandby
Subtotal Task 3.2.5i
$15,110.00
3.2.6 !Hydraulic Conductivity Testing I
3.2.7 . 'Transducer and Wells Installations I I
1
I I I I I
3.2.8 !Laboratory Testing I I
I
1 1 1 I I
3.2.9 !Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK) 1 I
I
I I I I I
3.3
GDR and GAR
3.3.1
Geotechnical Data Analysis
3.3.2 !Draft Geotechnical Data Report I
I { . I
1 ( I I
3.3.3 !Final Geotechnical Data Report I ]
1
I 1 I 1 1
3.3.4 !Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report I
( 1
I 1 I
3.3.5 !Final Geotechnical Assessment Report I I
I
T 1 I I 1
3.3.6 !Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL) I '
'
I I I I
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1
Develop Plan
3.4.2 !Setup & Initial Month Monitoring I 1
{
I 1 I I I
3.4.3 !Progressive Monthly Monitoring I I
[ I
1 I
3.4.4 !Technical Memo & Meetings I I
I
Norcal Labor and Direct Costs
rvine-Corona Expressway_
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate ITotal
Quantity I Unit `
Unit rate (Total
3.5 Groundwater Modeling
Subtotal Task 3.5 .
3.6 'Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL)
Subtotal Task 3.6
4.0 IQA/QG
Dot.Data Labor. and Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate ]Total
Quantity Unit j Unit rate {Total
Task 1 - Administration and Project Management I I ]
] ] _ I
1.1 {Project Staffing 1 T I .: ]
1 ] ] I '
1.2 {Project Management and Control 1 1 ] -1
I I ] I
1.3 !Coordination with Other Agencies . ] I I
1 ] I
1.4 {Web -based System (OPTIONAL) 1 I I ]
] ]
Task 2 - Special Use Permit'Assistance } ] ]
1 ] ] ]
Task 3 - Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing 1 I ] ]
J ] ] ]
3.1 {Data Collection I I
1 I+ ]
3.2 Field Exploration Program
3.2.1 Field Reconnaissance
3.2.2 Ex_pioration Plan
dot,dat.inc log form
12
Hours
$60.00
$720.00
Subtotal Task 3.2:2
'.
@•i
3.2.3 ICoreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging 1
3.2.4 !Core Evaluation! Core Photography 1 ] ] ]
I ] ] ]
3.2.5 !Corehole Video/ Geophysical "Surveys 1 ] ] ]
1 ] ] ]
3.2.6 !Hydraulic Conductivity Testing [ ) j
1 I I I
3.2.7 !Transducer and Wells Installations
Subtotal Task 3.2.7
3.2.8 !Laboratory Testing 1 ] ] ]
1 I ] ]
3.29 !Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK) 1 ] j ]
1 ] ] I
3.3 GDR and GAR
3.3.1 Geotechnical Data Analysis
3.3.2 Draft Geotechnical Data Report
dot.dat inc gint logs and graphics
200
hrs
$60.00
$12,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.2
$12,000.00
3.3.3 Final Geotechnical Data Report .
dot.dat inc gint logs and graphics
100
hrs
$60.00
$6,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.3
$6,000.00
3.3:4 Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
dot.dat inc gint logs and graphics
100
hrs
$60.00
$6,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.3.4
$6,000.00
".
3.3.5 Final Geotechnical Assessment Report
dot.dat inc dint logs and graphics. - _ -
Subtotal Task 3.3.5
_-- 40 --
-- hrs --
--- $60_00
$
$2,400.00
$2,400.00
-- ---- - --
---- --
-- - -
----------
—>
3.3.6 !Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL) 1 I
1
3.4 Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1 Develop Plan
3.4.2 'Setup &.Initial Month Monitoring 1 I " ]
1 ] I I
3.4.3 !Progressive Monthly Monitoring 1 ! I I
1 I I I
3.4.4 {Technical, Memo & Meetings 1 l ] I
1 1. i
Dot.Data Labor and Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs:
Quantity { Unit { Unit rate {Total
Quantity �: Unit { Unit rate {Total
3.5 (Groundwater Modeling
{ { {
3.6 )Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL)
r { {
a.o 1QA,QC
T�
Laboratory :Labor and Direct Costs.
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor_ Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity I Unit"
] Unit rate (Total
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate •1Total
Task 1- Administration and Project Management T
1 I I 1 ( 1
1.1 . !Project Staffing I I
1 1 I I I L
1.2 'Project Management and Control I
1 -1 I 1 I 1
1.3 !Coordination with Other Agencies 1 1
1. 1 I 1 I I
1.4 !Web -based System (OPTIONAL) I 1
I 1 I 1 1 I
Task 2- Special Use Permit Assistance I I
I 1 I 1 1 I
Task 3- Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing j 1
1 1 I 1 1 I
3.1 'Data collection ( 1
1 1 I I 1 1
3.2
Field Exploration Program
3.2.1
Field Reconnaissance
3.2.2 'Exploration Plan I I
I 1 T 1 I 1
3.2.3 ICoreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging I f
I 1 1 I
3.2.4Core Evaluation/ Core Photography I 1
{ I I I I
3.2.5 'Corehole Video/ Geophysical Surveys j ' 1
1 1. , I 1 I
3.2.6 'Hydraulic Conductivity. Testing I 1
1 1 I 1 1 I
3.2.7 'Transducer and Wells Installations j j
I
3.2.8
Laboratory Testing
Field Unit Weight/Moisture Content
100
each .
$43.25
$4,325-00
"
— —
_— Unconfined Compression (UC) __
-- 40
18
each
each
$225.00
$376.00
$9,000.00
$6,768.00
-
Triaxial Compression Strength
Direct Shear '
18
each
$388.00 "
$6,984.00
Cerchar Abrasion
18
each
$154.00
$2,772.00
Brazilian Tensile Strength
18
each
$90.00
$1,620.00
Punch Test
Point load
18
300
each
each
$201.00
$3,618 00
$6,000.00
$20.00
Petrographic Analysis
18
each
$225.00
$4,050.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.8
$45,137.00
3.2.9 'Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK) I 1
T
3.3
GDR and GAR
3.3.1
Geotechnical Data Analysis
3.3.2 'Draft Geotechnical Data Report 1. I I
I I 1 I 1
3.3.3 'Final Geotechnical Data Report I" I 1
1" I I 1 I
-I
3.3.4 (Draft Geotechnical Assessment "Report I 1
1 I 1 I 1
3.3.5 'Final Geotechnical Assessment Report j 1 1
1 I I I 1
3.3.6 'Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL) 1 1 1
1 I 1 1 1
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1
Develop Plan
3.4.2 'Setup & Initial Month Monitoring I 1 1
1 I. 1 I 1
3.4.3 IProgressive Monthly Monitoring I 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
3.4.4 !Technical Memo & Meetings 1 1 (
I 1 I 1 I
Laboratory Labor and Direct Costs
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task.
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity
3.5 !Groundwater Modeling
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
3.6 !Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL)
1
4.0 jQA/QC
I I l
91.189'9915
= 33d',unions
4a.149d0.0
SE'LtL'telS
68'/SiDLit
19191
XL Bonsai Nolw09.1 so dnp.ry
(11010091 a.sts99.11W90 so OmVery
09'9L1'LiS
(XC) PO91100.11seaneu0a0n5 u0 &very
SE LEL'96 LS
+.su9erd may OnS
6D 9LS'EVS1
De 410'Si
L9'OLO'ZBLS
>L'6CZ'9(S
95'LeL'699
94 zee 991
91"L LY9E9
91100/09911990109
LZO'S
094
0911
999
OZS
/ZI
1/1
9011e0919ee19M•1+0111.1019119
0u11019191Poxpunw9
lased W.W9tl IequV0.1
_._.....�
'
sass
((L1
hH t4��41�1¢1 nT -(Wd N ldA V� np110u0Utl9
H ,...rv:'. 1 .1 A... _. ...�
..>. ID.! ul ..,l I. OpIVOVAsa1
Ywey
-
fNAlesV NeS
911919 9NS
'
'
(MSV1 lVNO11d011u.u19sewY Pg901W9 9'C
00'00011
9Z 2[29019
4,09
OIL
O99
at
Eu119pow lW.yun010 Sf
OS'EES'LS
D9'(91 la
OIZ
DDl
09
OZ
01
OZ
0u1.191901U40a1 t t C
0000S LSS
D9"690'Lett
099'l
099
Wtt
09
Op
01910411019 AlUlucW e0/9991801d 9 V 9
OS'esteOLs
6S'090'LL9
teS
p9
SB
09Z
OZ
OZ4
ZI
—6sV.Iwoll41U01199199 L SW'S Z'9'C
SZ'424'LS
DS'S90'SZ9
OCZ
0
01
09
09
94
9L
9
11199111119110 4"a9
-
ua0.11pw u91d 0.VpIp1.F81.19.pullw0
p'9
-
IN9Y11VN011d011.U9d NO91nple 1999141.1 9'E'E
/Z'Kra
9C
OZ
94
1109911w9w99.wVIr+MP.P0 IssIA 9E'C
DV06S'Llt
09
OZ
0o
90491:1wew.99wY Ie09I10v1000 Veto /'6'6
/9'SS/'S9
9L
91
04
99d911 elep IegwP9100p Isola 999
09'E6ESt
01
OZ
O11
Modell 6190 IAu1P.P0p9e10 Z'C'C'
-
la�p+P
9U.L9p1®Iu1P9P99oaoV1901
f"E
,10)/0aVP••1i 6ZC
1NSN911dp)IOOwN.4d 6'i'9••IP•1A10ry00e19"L"C9C"S(Z'9t
:.19441V94
09
9z
9
8
9u9B101999M00..w1109u911 L'L'C
9EL
ODI
O2
9l
91111E
810990
201391.111
ro9Elb1
9E
DL
8
8
Mu0998nw400
v.lsnplS P'0!9Md0941 Pep1Ava4eP0
10"LEE'ES
94
MOWfim v
9'Z"C
//LZL'E9S
996
sa
09
098
09
94
19.
V.1N0119n1..39+00
•104•100
91
DZSZB Zt
M
01
L'SIVIV
t'1lV CSIW'DSIW'LSIW 9N0491011
--
'
up0eglNPry
00'OL2'Olt
eu!00o1'&NPw99'6991z1 4e191e10
"
Sett9oLea
94
B
ueidugw9gdz9 L'LC
29L
99'0l!'9S
zE
2E
al
94
wunflauuwey Fl9d 11111E
-
NWd
Z'C
-
0 Moss n$ Mooz3
VOtl.a Pep Newwn9 Moo *map
L'E
.
AY_...... ,. w+wnn«.nvwm.umlaa,r„marzmlw.rlr.aew�..nmw.,n.le9tP'�
909CPI99Y119u9d9.1119P9 S
0'Z
A NSYl lYN011d0 waW 9Waw9•eu9W p..13
S49Y'4
pe•01p..
-
--
w.yA51ew.90999m pus 10 o01u.wD000L
/.
`L
(04) c.9ua0V 1.9091019 19919
(BI98u 0m9.110 VOpY
-
-
(Ba) 01391.11069096009t soasupo.0 NLaeM-I9
•
-
cegPOry P91md
-
9M l111111110919119,003
9^`uoMUIwo-00
CI
10.Iwd9NI0 uaD94qpu9Solleu1lm000
---
...la 1919.9999991.41911149.1
91.w.P.Iwd
I9p1600 Outs109w9696e61PWmd
L'l
-I
80We1S PN0+d
1"1
'
--
. t.l 3 u_1 1 .. u.11. )..Iu1w.V.l'.%•'L
rvl... 9uopdP09.0 L991
T1roOl0.tlp
a.aw0.r3u00.1
IW010OS a0q.lF>-MS
M9.1 9d uneH PY9w9g
ix, EBl oly
0
4'
yy,�a'y',ui
»•
S�
-
y
�0'..�:'N
., �•
.Yi?"' tp k'"��.'�-B !�r. ;:Ln ?`I§�!1'.
settiodag
_s�-u"+9T�ld
zrM
11'WI
'941
II
el UV
909(.
a.Nl9
+4 w1+
.aeon
wMe+
mtl
X00'814 fi01•9.tlly
9.NNCpV»P094490
en n•a
yy
5 .
`c=
1 g
5
a
Lt
$
5
`:i
:F
a
En
i
.i.
`
y0
QQ
S'
4109199d090
Iesodald;so3 Aemssaidx3 euouo3-eulmi
GeoPentech Expenses
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity 1 Unit - Unit rate 'Total
Quantity 1 Unit 1 Unit rate'Total
Task 1-Administration and Project. Management '. 1 1 1 1 1 1
1.1 {Project Staffing 1: 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
1.2 'Project Management and Control I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1.3 'Coordination with Other Agencies
Subtotal Task 1.3
1.4 {Web -based System (OPTIONAL) I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
Task 2 - Special Use Permit Assistance
Subtotal Task 2.0
Task 3-Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3.1 [Data Collection
Subtotal Task 3.1
3.2
Field Exploration Program
3.2.1
Field Reconnaissance
Subtotal. Task 3.2.1
3.2.2 ', {Exploration Plan
Subtotal Task 3.2.2
3.2.3
Coreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging
Corehole Alternate 4
mileage
12000'.
miles
$0.49
$5,820.00
4x4 Vehicle Rental and maintenance (2)
6
Month
$1,500.00
$9,000.00
Field Cameras (1)
8
Month
$50.00
$400.00
mist field supplies
1
Lump Sum
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.2.3
$16,220.00
3.2.4 'Core
Subtotal
Evaluation/. Core Phot gfaphy_
-
-- --
--- -- rt
_- — -- - -
Task 3.2.4
3.2.5
'Corehole Video/ Geophysical Surveys
Ruen Standby
Subtotal Task 3.2.5
3.2.6 'Hydraulic Conductivity Testing
Subtotal Task 3.2.6
3.2.7 'Transducer and Wells Installations
Subtotal Task 3.2.7
3.2.8 'Laboratory Testing
Subtotal Task 3.2.8
3.2.9 'Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK) I [ 1 T T
3.3
GDR and GAR
3.3.1
Geotechnical Data Analysis
3.3.2 'Draft Geotechnical Data Report
Subtotal Task 3.3.2
3.3.3 'Final Geotechnical Data Report
Subtotal Task 3-3.3
3.3.4 {Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
Subtotal Task 3.3.4
3.3.5 iFinal Geotechnical Assessment Report _
------�--------- Reproduction Fees (estimate) -
----------
------------
---
dot.dat inc gint logs and graphics
GeoPentech Expenses
GeoPentech Expenses
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs ;
Quantity
Unit
Unit rate
Total
Quantity
Unit ,
Unit rate
Total
Subtotal Task 3.3.5
3.3.6 }Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL)
Subtotal Task 3:3.6
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report'
-
3.4.1
Develop Plan
_ Helicopter
8
hr
$750.00
$6,000.00
Mileage
250
"miles
$0.49`
$121.25
Aerial Photos
1:
Lump Sum
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
Subtotal Task 3.4:1
';
$7,121.25
3.4.2 "
Setup & Initial Month Monitoring
-
t`
Private Well Equipment (datalogger)
11
Each
$2,500.00
• $27,500.00
Datalogger, modem, antenna, software, etc:
5
Each
$6,900.00
$34,500.00
Helicopter
-
-
40
hr `
$750.00
$12,500.00_
$30,000.00
Field and Office Supplies
_
1
Lump Sum
$12,500.00
,Cell Phone and Dedicated, Phone Line
1
each
$125.00
Y$125.00
Water Quality Testing
_ .
6
each
$420.00
$2,520.00
Mileage.
2500
miles
$0.49,
$1,212.50
Subtotal Task 3.4.2
$108,357.50
3:4:3
Progressive Monthly Monitoring �
-
Helicopter
hr
$750.00
$33;000.00
Field and Office Supplies
1
Lump Sum
$5,000:00
$5,000:00
Cell Phone and Dedicated Phone Line
11
each
$125.00
$1,375.00
Mileage
25000
'miles
$0:49
$12,125.00
Subtotal Task 3.4.3
$51,500:OQ
3.4.4`
Technical Memo 8: Meetings
Report Reproduction Supplies
2
Lump SUM
: $1,000.00
$2,000.00
Mileage for Meetings
1100
miles
$0.485
' ' $533.50
Subtotal Task 3.4.4
_
$2,533.50
3.5
Groundwater Modeling . .
---=
Software Purchase, Com uter Code
--- -
--------�
-----
--------- --
1
-- - --
l um
$8,000.00
�. $8 000 00
$8,000.00
-:--------- ----
Subtotal Task 3.5.
--
3.6'" }Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL)
Subtotal Task 3.6
_
4.0 }QA/QC
Subtotal Task4.0
GeoPentech Expenses
96.9E5'0954
= 33i -rnoiens
.LOV
00110010LS
9129ES'zs2
10191.
ME) Dopey ido uOgel u0 doyen
9C-0)+W 9-1 ew!ue69119010 Do dnyvry
92 1DS'22
(k9Uogol+og91 rvnlwuw9n9 u9 dnyvN
00'000104
999u999319,91Pn9
02'SCO'OSS
22109162
92 SL4'65
49'919'a
R900+a9e1191o194S
9BV
99E
22
90
uOPwWssga Aq 9+n01191D1Vn9
"" _yv 1 49
F1i•A'llti tl M1{I } ikKh !df "1
1, 111 S'. v 6Y5 t ate- 1i6NT'
11_
u••ea
sIs,imyylea
a1!n 021
(Y9Y11YR011d0) µ9uieewev 194914919
90
T9iLapery+R9npuou091
09)1199ry S 90000119914991 91,2
Guy0Yw1S APP40W 4n199w9wd 211
-
994919441 won moo S omos L'YL
4991d919w0 1111
44941 Poe aeW ii 999DA+9leepml0
re
1)1121 040114O) 00499120991091194992991 1421
499oa µ.99944Y1oI440vµv01su1d 911
49.1 WowPo9Pov19.Yu4091aep YuO Ytt
v9doa R901w1uw91090RRd CCC
re':
49dea 91001?u40op901W0
ROOMY 919010e1090910e0 l'8'C
4w11149Mu9s»Y94e 9190 10+09491090
6'E
(NSY1lYa011010) rolluory oMi eze
29941919.04mow1 911
4u919119144199.09 w9+wnpsuul 211
5929914011999991919.9414 1'2'2
SAWIS t9919•400.0 P.M 6194e+b0 SIT
1Vtlu0vWVd IMAM 391o0 9L'C
1 RvuNV slo4vro0
-
E'1111 MIW'2•Slry •LSIry 9R9Yu90
uw941219W
NOW, 141194re2111114019104u90
Meld 401449dx3 zZ 6
eo9199104499421R9W ' 1'2'2
wub9W 0099+91943 MRd zE
499191)19190 Ammons 99900190093 re
wu9wi®Y..d. 99nIei uL
. ^r. ads
wnd.,<D p_oo201
00'000'BOLS
191999.
L'9'L
46Y11YNOI1d0 191 IuoWO.9410
02'5E0105Y
991
WE
Zl
Bt
sumnoM
µ+Wo0 µ991nz0 l9'L
1A9I094999109999109000 µ9utlm0
1 'l
'-
(OW 99194021I41e 1111S 1199141112999919
OD949µvry091494090 Y00a
189) 010tl DIAL vYunorri u90009,090 MLseM•IB
-
90u910ery I0
eo109199441110491 uRleulµ.00o0
81
999940400011901
ioN9ld o1p10 u0Py4g9d
.
1999 95
9Rd Iue1M0490pueRoid
le4uo0 Pue 049w112999E1 101d
L'l
WP9
S pelad
4'4
'
'y1WR
,. 0 :�, , 4911dQ911a9IEYliI
bs931w1i
sxuwrjro99.1
19JM9 Srogoy
1s S
Asu. eitl un aPN Limn
As ul
J 'b
a a�r�;i
I
';i dl.
,,pper�
FlY FY'43l ,y
•.
�r
9�i i�i•i`4_,
�9uond49sso
1(i I{:.�
99suW9j
29S
41'94{s
Po1s1S
Ttl
9Wf1PPYO D9e4+M0 %tll •VW eV
an INN1\
)
\
Le
31
3
u
a
E3
g
S
w
;
s+99uinu3l, nnsuo3 ny
esodo.id Iso3 ABM s dx3 euo�oo-auinJ
131; M'S1.1.$ '
= 33A-rnoigns
tlol.P.X.P9 suaeled
et 011C'611,9
1.1.1
(X£) 6unsol Noleloge-1 uo &open -
(%9) iogal saaWeS ePlslno uo &open
8L'689'SS
Ms) noel Jogal lueunsuoogns uo Ompepy
smadx31%01 anS
.
09'569' 119
..
- ..
-
_
-
'09'EZVLOIS
- +mooioge,IelolanS
96£
9ZC
Imp - Apse* /q tunas pnolgnS •
OZ
—
orvvr) V
Hsl'I:
00'ZL9`99
OZ
—
P oa
sl.G.V Me0
a11a1A a119
(NSVl IWN011dO) luotuasossV 1.1a1.1e 9'C
011llap0lry 4a1eMpueat0 it
s01.0ea14 g ouloyy 1e01u400l 6.6•E
6upe11ueW7G14WcW aMssau6wd C'6'C
-
-
-
-
- 6up011uoW 41uo1Y temul S OMeS Z'6'E
uBld Dolene0 VP'S
•
ueeea pue geld CupopuoW uneMpunoa0
6•E
00'0ZeS9S
00Z
DOZ
(NSVl'1VNOtldO) Iousd NosIAPV 1e01u40a1 9'C'C
.-
OD'66tt19
Oe
.. -
04
uodea {uewsseseV IaoW4oatoe0lewd SVC
00'914'81.9
09
09
uodaa luowssassV 1eo11.13a10a0 ue,0 rye
uodaa e1s0 1e0lu40a10a01euy E'c'E
tloargiwa aolu400loo0Imo Z'E'E
spAptuV era IaoN4oa1oa0 t'C'E
-
_
-
- . . pixies wowssessV pue e1e0 pguLtosloe0
-£•£
.
- ...
-
(NSVlOVN01140)...Pory alld 8'Z'C
Bensal Iu01e10ae1 9'Z'C
• _
- suonenelsul seem Pue ieonpsuell L're
15.0.1 FIN1PoPeo0 ollnalPAH WET
- -
-
sMuuns leopAwl.e0 /0aP1A o104ao0 S'Z'E
D9'LSZ'SS
91.
91
A4aa001011d ry 11.111 n3 e.1o0 6're
1, elewanV.s104a100
E'11V'E-SIW Z SIW t•SIW s8104.00
-
- --
-
-
u0nembaon
-
-
-
-
-tu16Bo, BuOawes TuNpO'solo4a* E'Z'£
-
•
..
. wad uollemldx3 sty
..
00'99Z'es
at
-
..
-
01..
aousselauu0oaa Neu 1•'Z'C
-
W.B.d uone1010x3 PIa1d
VC
neoaa ele0 fuewwn5 ma Bens1>nJ
l'C
, s:1JInAaS (iu1l5.a7, pue 1.10!leloll11x3.pp, calu4paloao �
1.1,,l
.0'Z
9011e1s1ssy lleuod asn mi.. S
aauemss V. lllulad .ut{I'{el.1ucl S.i>vie1
(N9V11VN011d0 el Sluewe:euenpeseq-a0m • vs, I.
Ioauo0 Wawnoo0 1'6' 1
-
- wanuis;taupe-cum poses Qom Pus lanuo0 uninuno00
El.
•
-
-
- (01) ealPuo6V IO+aPod',was l ., 411M ssuno.ri .
is) etrunoayy eeplwwoo Vooa
•
(90 010M IIaM stiuneeyy uonau1peop {1GbAn•te
ssunooly toa(a d
•
eslouo6Vse410411M11.00.lWa00
VI
1oa1041 NIP uanas1s114wPV Pus uollautP.00
_.
eelel 111ewo9sud sly loo(a•
1041100 put lU@We66Y91^) loafdd
Z
151,111.19 Iosleld
l'I..
{uawalGl'ue1N :7 oroJ,J pllt'. un Wit510!lilpV t )15,I
suopdposea heel
%0VBS1 ' M'DI •*MI ay
WNW
boob paid
@osuodx3
0...rx3 iogay
'wenng.rege'1
�etWans
w
4.el iad
tinc.H you
ulpes
-
.
9a9SL!
...
091rat
-
�tl
dnuea
Y
Ir
_ 1
N E
;
Howeloupe suolued
les0d0.11d4s03 AeMSSaadx3 euO.109-autn11
Fe Rata • 10.R "
Overhead +Additives
179.0014 .
Task Descriptions
l:.t1 Admini,tratiomand .reject Ma rrogement .
1.1 Project Staffing
Rate
Irvine -Corona Expressway Cost Proposal
017.aa
sue is
$128.64
Jacobs Associates
S247.91
Estimated Hours per Task
. Expenses`
sew i Leber Subtotal Labor_Expenses pest Costs
1.2 Project Management and Control
Project Management Plan
Coordination and Administration & the Project
1.3 Coordination wkh Other Agencies
Project Meetings
61-Weeky Coordination Meetings with RCTC (48)
ROCA Committee Meetings (8)
Meetings with Local, State, Federal Agencies (10Y
1.4 Document Controland Web Based Management System
.°
1.4.1 Document Control
1.4.2 Web -based Mena .ementS -m OPTIONAL TASK
Task 7 5pecial Ise Permit Assistance
2.0 $ • eclat Use Permit Assistance
Tusk 3 e,eotechnical Field,. Exploration and Testing Serviee5 _
3.1 Existing Data Summary Data Report
3.2 Field Exploration Program.
3.2.1 Field Reconnaissance
3.2.2 Exploration Plan
30
30 . $7,451.10
3.2.3 Coreholes, Drilling, Sampling, Logging '
Mobilization
Coreholea MIS-1, MIS-2, MIS-3, ALT. 3
3.3
3.4
Corehole Altemate 4
3.2.4 Core Evaluation/ Photography
3.2.5 Corehole Video/ Geophysical Surveys "
3.2.6 Hydraulic Conductivity Testing
3.2.7 Transducer and Wells Installations
3.2.8 Laboratory Testing
3.2.9 Fire Monitor (OPTIONALTASK)
Geotechnlcal Data and Assessment Report
3.3.1 Geotechnical Data Analysis
3,3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
Draft Geotechnical Data Report
Final Geotechnical Data Report
Draft Geotechnical Assessment Report
Final Geotechnical Assessment Report
3.3.6 Technical Advisory Panel (OPTIONAL TASK)
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4.1 -Develop Plan
3.4.2 Setup & Initial Month Monitoring
3.4.3 Progressive Monthly Monitoring
3A.4 Technical Memo & Meetings
3.5 Groundwater Modeling
3.6 Biological Assessment (OPTIONAL TASK)
Site Visits .
Pate Analysis
Re••rt
Gptional.Tjsks
C)ptiuriai-l"a..ks
r
16
80
40
' 200
II I
18 63,973.92
80 619,869.60
40 $9,934.8o
200 $49,874.00
20
20 $4,967.46
Technical Review Panel
SubTotal Nouns by Classification
SubTotal Labor Costs
Sub Total Expenses
388
$90,903A2
386
> $95 870.82
Total
Markup on Subconsultant Labor Labor (5%)
Markup on Outside Services Labor (5%):
Markup on Laboratory Testing (3%)
$4,793.54
$100,864.36
Jacobs Associates
St16TOTAL FEE =
$100,664.36
Z9.8£L'LLS
= 333 ivi018(IS
69919'u9319903
00'000.99
29'9C4'4LS
19101
(ME) bu119a1 3ioluone1 uo ampery
I%9110991 0009u9309990 uO anvery
09'L9C
(%SI1o9•1999911 9n.u9909S u9 dny.ry
'
O0'0009
9Oae 1999
Z929L1L99
99909'9L3
04'YI
89'4n£O
00ZZt5i
9lLBE49
:O99-1191.1993
OZ9
O/Z
OLi
Ob
B
uglnye.eto IA vnoH 4e191095
-
�._
r`y I.
5 [y 1Y
Kiel' e 4a�,.:, ,�0a .) IA �%', ',f OroC ova'
...
-
Y9.ey
g931e93 e3e0
vIR1A MIS
'
(N5911C'N011d0) Na.seeetl 1.91091%9 9'E
9Y9w9aary 191eMpunuO $£
-
- 0911e911 9Ouwryle]NV991 4'9'C
-
9vy0auOry NV9.9 luo9v vvuOOld
CO DIM
ZO ZSl'199
023
OLZ
OIL
ZC
099
9
999O191991 919991 I99913 dnlas
'
u4d dq•9a0 VI'S
'
Yo�9 ue1�99ry I14114.999wO
TE
I95V11VN011d011•ovd NmIdVV 1991949.1 WET
-
199•3 9lwuevavvtl 19O191991O90 Wand S'CE
"
19d93119ew9.1.91V 19:1911993190 IMO
"
tlOd•y 91e0 In1uu9u9.OF4d C'EE
Y0d9yeµ01W1O LE'E
9e9e933.199O9u0
19ounaslaypuee0
9aV W.eW019?uw991o•O
YO01NOIL
E'f
0
(NStl1ltlNOWoolO9o1+0091 err
typal 919+49'Z'C
'
9n9sueei
vW1911.pN9119MO9O001109.191 L'rC
-
9o9.a1N99]n0YO09/9uMH 97T
.
-
v1wm S'rE
-
1,111.W0o99rywH319,99 3
Ialds:O9WdN0Aa9u,39y90 9ZC
'
9919w99tl 9Wud'J
"
-
C'1ltl C3I91'E-3I91'1.9191.9119139.0
-
ud19e01O911
091 1691114993'9+1990.91999190 C"ZC
-
ued uoll> 9 i 93 VET
-
9]uvaleuuooaa plaid prC
-
19916a91 999u91 .3 PI la
l C
.
10013 9490 N999995 91.0 9119.1.3
II
OE
-. 1`P :'n)"Ole KgP1'.]I e9uunalutttAMM
apwel.p.V)I d.nPt. s
-
y
99V1l9I91O11d0 w%9luawa 1euerypwe9QaM
Zt''01
104900 e1.1991w0
ns/13 zugnuebauevypaeanVeMp9a1Wuo01uawnx0
9"L
---
1909e19990Y IueO11J'WIC '1v991 101196
o soue 999w9190 V30/d
I911 3109411M vOunagve uopeulP+OoO NMe•M-IB
-
9019188991Oa101d
-
99199991191110 1.191n 4o9e11191000
C'L
-
-
1991O1d 91410 uOOulg91.9V 1 u. onO9u1p1000
-
wild Wew•9vuen pplad
'
paws pug tuawaelauary tailed
rL
-
9919e191wl19d
L'4
-
unaH Pet
0993
-
Puc clogutswiwpV � L
.
eisontlnave34.91IOW
9%a't
9+.07-401
0 puler
Ewwm3 ao9./
inown5tl09.1
9d1
1.819b
ss�..33..yy�� .�,]
.`"'"�p9S;
9SLM'I9
E9
+...
.
a
} ti. 9 altt
,W. F
",1
.f
YWS
swi
ese
STO
aeons
9
1n03991. n9i tl
O0951
eaPtl •1,9911w10
9n nay
—w
'''
3 Z
3
0e
? 2
a-
'�
= u
s
a'
1°G'
rE
2 S
Z_
.Fi
3O
.
go
I
_
,
• wl'6unIruns 1=03
esodad }so° Aennssaidx3 euoaoo-auiAl
ACT Expenses
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate ITotal
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate ITolal
Task 1- Administration and Project Management I I I.
I I i
1.1 !Project Staffing I I I
I
.1
1.2 !Project Management and Control I I I I
1 I
1.3 ICoordinalion with Other Agencies
Subtotal Task 1.3
1.4
Web -based System (OPTIONAL)
ACT Info Management License & Support
18
Month
$6,000.00
$108,000.00
Subtotal Task 1.4
5108,000.00
_ 4.0_ 1QAIQC
Subtotal Task 4.0
----
- —----
-
------
.._...-----
ACT Expenses
®_ =�
=MEM M—_
® wnpuelowOLVRM1 o104061M0 U __
��� =OEM
11=1111=10 IIIIIIMIll
-- P••ea P06 aeld' WIN0ww9muPuaaKJld1111
II=MI0 .. - ..., liiiii�
11 90NE180 ® PadOH luea6sassy Ieuluyu01oe0 uma ®_
EMIEI 9mau6o 0 Pd.0 ema 1.R4o01oe010u1d ®mm'
1.44%ma itquvo SOum®—
EIIIIII®®�. M.. i. ®_
® suonmelsul 910M pus iwvnps ,.Eigl
=MEM 6066614M1PoPuop 06.a141 Ia-
1:21101=1111111 11MIIME
EZIMEIMIME1111111i=11111111MIM0 MMIM
E=IEZZM0 MIIMIM
1:1311311=IMEINEMIIIME=211111111111111111
1=10 =�
0 IIIIIIIIIIII
Lo/O�= EZIMMI
®�
L0/0 MO L02000 0 - • 0 ®_
���
Lofo6re6 ICCZ/8fE - -
°. , n e r..a7_9
1R 11 al l u uu P �ulds t I IB-0. 4 laa0 E.Msr'1
w ,uME
...k a ��y aa"'%"tlAuuud os0le: SZMsep
12:2031.3= •.
_®_ EM
�®
''®` 1E2EI®—
®_
=MIME ®_
11=11=1M13111
-------�-------5-�--- .. ®®
4" k' - {k+ty4 ...::rS°vrClu w B"tN to>Io dP nu a Ptl.t Ysul
F3u9L�.:4"�a��F"° w�l�u�l�af�?Sf[�fi� �':i'�tYt''::'a.i'�a�{C.i{'F�€i��i r��l,�'?$�5i�".E.,o. ".�'C.•i�6Y.s..��'":tTCSi�n"F`,J.1'��•d.CFr,:s±b�s��lhi4eR
60fL0/90
80/OVL0
90vulo
LO L0/01
600=2 LOOL'f914
Ionun Pus luaum00ueyy P0(ad
mnPueAouwW Wet M018uld ZL
kIVO Isuld'LL
ava 'ol
tla010u1d'6
mnpuvouwR 4a01 MO 46.10'6
MOO 11o10'L
8upop u18e8 9
hued 0811 Raod9'S
unld uo06+o1dx3'1
ueld Supaluon JelmepunaO.E
Paid 30eW0606 Wloo{ad.6
Paeaaid al eolloq .L
99110;99{{1N
----------1111111111---
E 1N31A1H31/111(
Coast Survey Expenses
Irvine -Corona Expressway
Task
Labor Expenses
Direct Costs
Quantity I Unit I Unit rate ITotal
Quantity I Unit 1 Unit rate 'Total
Task 1-Administration and Project Management I I I I I I
Task 2- Special Use Permit Assistance I I I I I I I I
Task 3- Geotechnical Field Exploration and Testing I I I I I I I I
3.4
Groundwater Monitoring Plan and Report
3.4,1
Develop Plan
Subtotal Task 3.4.1
3.4.2
Setup & Initial Month Monitoring
.... .. ..
expenses
1
Lump Sum
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
Subtotal
mileage___
Task 3.4.2
miles
$0.49
_ _. ....
.
_ _
- -- $6,OOo.00
3.4.3 IProgresslve Monthly Monitoring
Subtotal Task 3.4.3
3.4.4 'Technical Memo & Meetings
I
Subtotal Task 3.4.4
� _
I
Coast Survey Expenses
AGENDA ITEM 9
PRESENTATION
AGENDA ITEM 10.
PRESENTATION •
AGENDA ITEM 11
i
RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON
DATE:
February 14, 2007
TO:
Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM:
Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board
THROUGH:
Eric Haley, Executive Director
SUBJECT:
Appointment of a Representative to the Executive Committee
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Hemet,
Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula to select their
representative to the Executive Committee.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Appointment of a Representative to the Executive Committee
The membership of the Executive Committee shall be as follows: 1) The Chair of
the Commission; 2) The Vice Chair of the Commission; 3) The Second Vice Chair
of the Commission; 4) Past Chair of the Commission; 5) A regular member of the
Commission representing one of the following cities: Riverside, Corona,
Moreno Valley; 6) A regular member of the Commission representing one of the
following cities: Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Hemet, Lake Elsinore,
Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula; 7) A regular member of the
Commission representing the following cities: Blythe, Cathedral City, Coachella,
Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs and
Rancho Mirage; and, 8) Three members of the Commission who are members of
the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. Such members shall be appointed by
the Board of Supervisors. With the exception of the Chair, Vice Chair; and the
Second Vice Chair, the term of the Executive Committee members shall be two
years.
Due to a change in the Commission representative for the city of Banning, a
vacancy now exists on the Executive Committee. The following group of cities will
need to select a new representative: Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake,
Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. The
term for this position will expire in December 2008. This is in accordance to the
provision, under Section H3(b) of the Commission's Administrative Code.
Agenda Item 11
82
Riverside County is California’s fastest
growing big county at 2 million
people with housing growth ranked
fourth in the nation. If Riverside County
were a state, it would have a bigger
population than Idaho or Nebraska.
Riverside County is the major rail
and roadway freight corridor for the
second largest port in the nation.
Riverside County Transportation Commission
State Legislative Program
Transportation and mobility are
critical concerns, not just for us, but
for California
We need authority to:
• Own and operate public toll facilities
• Use design-build contracting
• Environmentally clear projects more efficiently
Rush hour in Riverside
County means 65% of all
freeways are operating
at Level of Service F.
That’s a failing grade in
any book. Riverside
County residents
already tax themselves
for transportation. Local
development pays its
own way through a
mitigation fee. Even with
federal and state help,
we still don’t have the
$8 to $13 billion it will
take to fix the problem.
We need better tools to deliver projects that relieve congestio
RCTC needs innovative tools to get gridlock under control and
implement projects faster. The challenge is enormous. It will
take $8-13 billion to construct all of the lane-miles of freeway
necessary to bring Riverside County freeways just above Level
Of Service “F” (LOS F) by 2030. Over 65% of all lane-miles in
Riverside County already operate at LOS F during peak periods.
Our residents, like all Californians, are demanding relief.
RCTC can deliver more lane-miles for commuters more quickly
with legislative authority to own and operate toll facilities on
the state highway system. RCTC is prepared to deliver toll
facilities on SR-91 and I-15 that will integrate with Orange
County’s 91 Express Lanes and provide a progressive leap
toward curing our highway system of its failures.
Design-build contracting streamlines project delivery. One
entity manages the design and construction of a project. This
is a departure from the traditional design-bid-build process
where separate entities may be responsible for each segment
of a project. Design-build fosters efficiency, centralizes
information, promotes communication, and minimizes risk.
Streamlining, coordination, and quality are hallmarks of
design-build.
RCTC supports design-build contracting that is open, fair,
competitive. The demand for transportation projects and
limited funding available to complete them means pu
agencies must get the best value for their money possible.
RCTC encourages Caltrans to move forward with accep
authority to approve federal environmental docume
A streamlined environmental clearance process means m
efficient delivery of projects.
RCTC calls on the Legislature to take proactive steps
give RCTC the ability to deliver urgently needed transporta
solutions to the public in the most efficient, responsible,
effective manner possible. We cannot wait any longer.
" R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y s i t s i n t h e c r o s s - h a i r o f i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a d e c o m i n g t h r o u g h
t h e P o r t s o f L . A . a n d L o n g B e a c h a n d o u r c o m m u n i t i e s a r e p a y i n g t h e p r i c e .
" $ 4 0 m i l l i o n m o r e f r o m t h e P U C S e c t i o n 1 9 0 g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n a c c o u n t p l u s $ 6 6 . 7 m i l l i o n o
P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B g o o d s m o v e m e n t f u n d s i s t h e s t a t e g o v e r n m e n t s f a i r s h a r e t o b u i l d t h e 1 8
m o s t c r i t i c a l g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n s i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y .
T o d a y , 1 0 0 m i l l i o n m e t r i c
t o n s o f t h e n a t i o n s
f r e i g h t t h u n d e r s t h r o u g h
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
n e i g h b o r h o o d s a 5 8 %
i n c r e a s e f r o m 1 9 9 7 t o 2 0 0 4 .
W e n e e d t h e s t a t e t o p a y i t s f a i r s h a r e t o h e l p u s p r o t e c t
our safety and quality of life—$96.7 million.
Riverside County residents subsidize the nation’s and
California’s economy with their health, their time, and their
quality of life. The Ports of L.A. and Long Beach are the nation’s
second busiest and total almost five times the amount of all 14
other California ports combined. Riverside County is at the
epicenter of problems created by this exponential increase.
RCTC calls on the Legislature to give us a way to a safer and
stronger community.
In September 2006 RCTC adopted a Grade Separation Funding
Plan that identifies 18 highest-priority grade crossings that
constitute a feasible blueprint for relief in our communities.
Local funders have committed $150 million to these projects
with as much as $67 million more on the way.
Today’s freight chokes local roads, inhibits emergency vehicles,
degrades air quality, and exposes the public to the dangers of
fast-moving trains. If Sacramento does its part to unburden our
communities, the results will be striking:
• 37 less hours of crossing gate “down-time” every da
Riverside County
• 36 fewer accidents per year
• 212.25 less tons of projected 2030 emissions per year
• 4,374.8 fewer hours of vehicle delay annually.
In real terms, our residents will have 4,374.8 more hours w
their families, participating in the economy, and be
members of our communities.
" C o m m u t e r s o n t r a i n s e q u a l c a r s o f f t h e f r e e w a y s .
" C a r s o f f t h e f r e e w a y s e q u a l s a f a s t e r r i d e f o r e v e r y o n e , c l e a n e r a i r , a h e a l t h i e r q u a l i t y o f l i f
a n d b e t t e r a c c e s s t o k e y j o b c e n t e r s i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a .
" R C T C s u p p o r t s s t a t e f u n d i n g f o r a d d i t i o n a l r a i l c a p a c i t y a n d r o l l i n g s t o c k f o r i n c r e a s e d
M e t r o l i n k s e r v i c e a n d A m t r a k s e r v i c e f r o m L o s A n g e l e s t o t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y .
R C T C i s m a k i n g
c o m m u t e r r a i l w o r k t o
r e d u c e c o n g e s t i o n . L i n e s
s e r v i n g R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
c a r r y a l m o s t 1 8 , 0 0 0
r i d e r s p e r d a y . M e t r o l i n k
e s t i m a t e s a l m o s t 3 %
r e d u c t i o n o n p a r a l l e l
f r e e w a y s f r o m M e t r o l i n k
s e r v i c e . P r o v i d i n g r a i l
s e r v i c e i s a n i m p o r t a n t
c o m p o n e n t o f b e t t e r
m o b i l i t y .
W e n e e d m o r e f u n d i n g f o r M e t r o l i n k a n d t r a i n s t o t h e d e s e
With one in three commuters from western Riverside County
traveling to jobs in other counties, more commuter rail benefits the
entire region. Riverside County residents can board Metrolink
trains at any of five RCTC owned and operated stations and travel
to Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Ventura counties
more quickly and more relaxed than driving on the freeway.
Today, 25% of all Riverside County working households have a
commute of 45 minutes or more one way. Metrolink helps improve
working residents’ quality of life.
The volatility of gasoline prices and worsening congestion has
driven a surge in Metrolink ridership. In Riverside County, parking
at many stations is beyond capacity by 6:30 a.m. RCTC is building
a new parking lot at the Riverside-Downtown station and design is
underway on a new state-of-the art parking facility at the North
Main Corona station.
RCTC is leading the charge to extend Metrolink to southwestern
Riverside County with the Perris Valley Line. Today residents on
the I-215 corridor are faced with Level of Service F (LOS F) at the
key junction where the I-215 meets the 60 freeway. The Perris
Valley Line will serve residents from the growing cities of Moreno
Valley, Perris, Murrieta, and Temecula by providing service f
south Perris to Riverside, taking pressure off the I-215 corridor
well as helping to serve local employment centers in Riverside
Corona, riders will be able to connect to popular Metrolink l
serving job centers in San Bernardino, Orange, and Los Ang
counties further reducing traffic on the crowded 91, 60 and
freeways. The Perris Valley Line has been partially funded by
STIP, and RCTC seeks additional state dollars for this pro
Service will begin by 2010.
RCTC has endorsed Caltrans’ California State Rail Plan for 200
to 2015-16, which proposes intercity rail service between
Angeles and the Coachella Valley, terminating in Indio.
Coachella Valley is developing rapidly and ridership potential a
this route is promising.
Further state investment in passenger rail service will
commuters what they are clearly demanding: more opti
Capital investment in new rail infrastructure and rolling stock
build on the momentum of Metrolink’s success and open the do
to faster commutes and greater mobility in Southern Californi
" E n h a n c e m e n t o f i n c e n t i v e s t o e m p l o y e r s w i t h t r a n s i t r e i m b u r s e m e n t o r r i d e s h a r i n g
p r o g r a m s w i l l e n c o u r a g e m o r e c o m m u t e r s t o g e t o u t o f t h e i r c a r s a n d i n t o o t h e r m o d e s o
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . L e s s s t r e s s f u l c o m m u t e s m a k e f o r h a p p i e r m o r e p r o d u c t i v e w o r k e r s .
" R C T C s u p p o r t s i n c e n t i v e s f o r t a x p a y e r s w h o u t i l i z e a l t e r n a t i v e f u e l s . A l t e r n a t i v e f u e l s
p o l l u t e l e s s a n d c a n i n s u l a t e c o n s u m e r s f r o m t h e v o l a t i l i t y o f g a s o l i n e p r i c e s .
T h e c o s t o f b u i l d i n g
r o a d w a y s c o n t i n u e s t o
s p i r a l u p w a r d s . T h e
t i m e l i n e s r e q u i r e d f o r
n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n
p r o j e c t s m e a n s w e a r e
a l w a y s b e h i n d t h e c u r v e .
W e c a n t b u i l d o u r w a y
o u t o f c o n g e s t i o n w i t h -
o u t a l s o e n c o u r a g i n g
a l t e r n a t i v e s t h a t p r o m o t e
f e w e r t r i p s a n d c l e a n e r a i r .
W e n e e d m o r e a s s i s t a n c e t o e n c o u r a g e a l t e r n a t i v e s .
Riverside County residents already tax themselves and impose
fees on new development to pay for transportation improve-
ments and there’s still not enough money to solve all our
congestion problems. Only Houston has worse air quality than
Riverside County. Alternative fuels and fewer trips mean
cleaner air and less congestion for everyone.
But Southern Californians have to be coaxed to make different
choices about the way they get to work. Incentives, especially
in a climate of volatile and seasonally higher gas prices, really
work in Riverside County, where many households have
stretched their budgets to buy their first affordable home.
Ridesharing incentives have a demonstrated track record in
Riverside County.
Transit service is also a new concept for most south
California residents. Forming a public transit habit ta
inducement. Once commuters try different ways of gettin
work, however, many of them like the benefits of saved t
and money and reduced stress and stay with the change.
In addition, for these same budget-conscious Riverside Cou
households, incentives that address the cost differen
between alternative fuel and conventional fuel vehicles wo
make clean fuel choices more accessible.
RCTC is working hard to
guarantee mobility for a
region that is critical to
California’s future.
With your help, we can succeed.
Riverside County Transportation Commission
(951)787-7141 • www.rctc.org
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor • P.O. Box 12008 • Riverside, CA 92502-2208
For more information contact:
John Standiford (951) 787-7969
Aaron Hake (951) 787-7965
If Riverside County were a state,
it would have a bigger population
than Idaho or Nebraska. At the rate
it’s growing, by 2020 Riverside County
will be more populous than Iowa,
Mississippi, Arkansas, or Kansas.
Riverside County is the major rail
and roadway freight corridor for the
second largest port in the nation.
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Federal Legislative Program
Transportation and mobility are critical
concerns, not just for us, but for the
country.
" R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y s i t s i n t h e c r o s s - h a i r o f i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a d e c o m i n g t h r o u g h
t h e P o r t s o f L . A . a n d L o n g B e a c h a n d o u r c o m m u n i t i e s a r e p a y i n g t h e p r i c e .
" $ 1 2 5 . 8 m i l l i o n i n d i s c r e t i o n a r y C o n g r e s s i o n a l f u n d i n g p l u s $ 6 0 m i l l i o n i n f o r m u l a f u n d s i s
t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t s f a i r s h a r e t o b u i l d t h e 1 8 m o s t c r i t i c a l g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n s i n
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y .
" T h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t h a s a l r e a d y r e c o g n i z e d t h e i s s u e b y n a m i n g t h e A l a m e d a
C o r r i d o r - E a s t a t r a d e c o r r i d o r o f n a t i o n a l a n d r e g i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e i n S A F E T E A - L U .
T o d a y , 1 0 0 m i l l i o n
m e t r i c t o n s o f t h e
n a t i o n s f r e i g h t
t h u n d e r s t h r o u g h
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
n e i g h b o r h o o d s
a 5 8 % i n c r e a s e f r o m
1 9 9 7 t o 2 0 0 4 .
W e n e e d t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t t o p a y i t s f a i r s h a r e t o
protect our safety and quality of life—$185.8 million.
Riverside County residents subsidize the nation’s economy with
their health, their time, and their quality of life. The Ports of L.A.
and Long Beach are the nation’s second busiest and bear the
brunt of burgeoning globalization. Riverside County is at the epi-
center of statewide problems created by this exponential
increase. RCTC calls on Congress to give us a way to a safer and
stronger community.
In September 2006 RCTC adopted a Grade Separation Funding
Plan that identifies 18 highest-priority grade crossings that con-
stitute a feasible blueprint for relief in our communities. Local
funders have committed $150 million to these projects with as
much as $67 million more on the way.
Today, almost 8 of every 10 freight cars that cross our streets are
bound for destinations beyond the southwest. They choke local
roads, inhibit emergency vehicles, degrade air quality, and
expose the public to the dangers of fast-moving trains. If
Washington does its part to unburden our communities, the
results will be striking:
• 37 less hours of crossing gate “down-time” every day in
Riverside County
• 36 fewer accidents per year
• 212.25 less tons of projected 2030 emissions per year
• 4,374.8 fewer hours of vehicle delay annually
In real terms, our residents will have 4,374.8 more hours w
their families, participating in the economy, and being mem
of our communities.
Form
Federal Funding Source Discretionary Fu
Appropriations $ 16.0
Projects of National & Regional Significance $ 77.8
Transportation & Community & $ 2.0
System Preservation
Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (CMAQ) - $ 3
Surface Transportation Program - $ 3
High Priority Projects $ 30.0
TOTAL $ 125.8 $ 6
Freight Destined for SouthWest 23%
Freight Destined for Rest of U.S. 77%
" M o r e t h a n h a l f o f t h e n a t i o n s f r e i g h t l e a v e s a n d a r r i v e s t h r o u g h w e s t c o a s t p o r t s .
" G o o d s m o v e m e n t i s a n a t i o n a l e c o n o m i c p r i o r i t y a n d w a r r a n t s p e r m a n e n t f e d e r a l f u n d i n g
" M o s t m a j o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o j e c t s h a v e a f i f t e e n t o t w e n t y y e a r t i m e l i n e , w e a l r e a d y h a v e
c r i s i s a n d m u s t a c t n o w .
O u r n a t i o n s a b i l i t y t o
p r o s p e r i n t h e g l o b a l
e c o n o m y m e a n s w e
m u s t b e a b l e t o m e e t
p r o j e c t e d d e m a n d s .
I f t h i n g s d o n t c h a n g e ,
w e w o n t b e r e a d y t o
s h i p a n d r e c e i v e t h r e e
t i m e s m o r e g o o d s 2 0
y e a r s f r o m n o w .
W e n e e d d e d i c a t e d f e d e r a l f u n d i n g f o r f r e i g h t p r o j e c t s .
The Ports of L.A. and Long Beach will be the nation’s key west-
ern portal as freight traffic triples over the next 20 years.
Riverside County is the conduit for freight from these ports as
it goes to and comes from the rest of the country.
Our railroads are short on capacity and trucks already clog our
congested freeways in unprecedented numbers. Businesses
throughout the U.S. rely on timely deliveries and flexible
inventories. If major investments are not made in goods move-
ment infrastructure our economy will suffer as goods crawl to
their destinations. Transportation projects take a long time to
plan, approve, fund, and build. If we wait, there will certainly be
a crisis.
Congress has approved limited funding for projects of natio
and regional significance related to goods movement, inc
ing the Alameda Corridor-East ($125 million in SAFETEA-
and Congress has recognized goods movement as a natio
priority by identifying the Alameda Corridor-East as a H
Priority Corridor.
RCTC supports a new funding mechanism dedicated to go
movement projects of national and regional significance.
" R C T C s u p p o r t s o p e n i n g t h e d o o r s t o m o r e p a r t n e r s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e
s e c t o r s t o s o l v e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c h a l l e n g e s .
" T a x c r e d i t s , p r i v a t e a c t i v i t y b o n d s , T I F I A l o a n s , a n d o t h e r m e c h a n i s m s w i l l s p u r p r i v a t e
s e c t o r i n v e s t m e n t i n i n f r a s t r u c t u r e .
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
r e s i d e n t s a l r e a d y
t a x t h e m s e l v e s f o r
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . L o c a l
d e v e l o p m e n t p a y s i t s
o w n w a y t h r o u g h a
m i t i g a t i o n f e e . E v e n w i t h
f e d e r a l a n d s t a t e h e l p ,
w e s t i l l d o n t h a v e
e n o u g h m o n e y t o b u i l d
t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t o u n c l o g
r o a d w a y s a n d g u a r a n t e e
g o o d s m o v e m e n t .
W e n e e d m o r e i n c e n t i v e s f o r p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t i n
infrastructure.
The private sector has a strong financial interest in the
efficiency of our nation’s transportation network. The move-
ment of goods and people translates into economic vitality.
Infrastructure is a large capital investment and the
overwhelming need for projects makes the costs prohibitive to
firms without significant financial incentives.
The private sector can be a powerful partner with the public,
working together to solve common challenges. RCTC supports
more tools to leverage private investment that can move
critical projects forward and deliver a win-win for the public and
private communities alike.
RCTC is working with policymakers in Sacramento to improve
state laws to bring more private dollars to California and
take advantage of public-private partnership provisions in
SAFETEA-LU.
" C o m m u n i t i e s t o b e s e r v e d a r e a m o n g t h e f a s t e s t g r o w i n g ( 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 ) i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n
P e r r i s ( 1 6 7 % ) , M o r e n o V a l l e y ( 4 1 % ) , M u r r i e t a ( 1 0 7 % ) , a n d T e m e c u l a ( 1 2 5 % ) .
" T o d a y s b u m p e r t o b u m p e r t r a f f i c c a n o n l y b e m o d e r a t e l y i m p r o v e d b y p l a n n e d h i g h w a y
i m p r o v e m e n t s .
" W i t h o n e i n t h r e e c o m m u t e r s f r o m w e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t r a v e l i n g t o j o b s i n o t h e r
c o u n t i e s , m o r e c o m m u t e r r a i l b e n e f i t s t h e e n t i r e r e g i o n .
" F T A s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n w i l l g i v e c o m m u t e r r a i l e x p a n s i o n i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t h e g r e e n
s i g n a l . C o n g e s t i o n r e l i e f h a s n o b e t t e r f r i e n d t h a n a n o t h e r M e t r o l i n k t r a i n t a k i n g 6 , 0 0 0 c a
o f f t h e f r e e w a y d a i l y .
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y s
p o p u l a t i o n w i l l g r o w t o
3 m i l l i o n b e t w e e n n o w
a n d 2 0 2 0 . M u c h o f t h i s
g r o w t h w i l l o c c u r i n
t h e a l r e a d y c o n g e s t e d
I - 2 1 5 c o r r i d o r .
W e n e e d f u l l - f u n d i n g f o r t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e M e t r o l i n k
extension to help cope with commuter traffic.
Today the I-215/SR-60 facility operates at Level of Service “F”
(LOS F) during peak hours, and despite planned highway
improvements through 2025, bumper-to-bumper traffic will
persist. Today, 25% of all Riverside County working house-
holds have a commute of 45 minutes or more one way.
The Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension will serve residents
from the growing cities of Moreno Valley, Perris, Murrieta, and
Temecula by providing service from south Perris to Riverside.
As well as helping to serve local employment centers in
Riverside and Corona, riders will be able to connect to popular
Metrolink lines serving job centers in San Bernardino, Orange,
and Los Angeles counties further reducing traffic on the crowd-
ed 91, 60 and 10 freeways. This congestion reduction will also
provide significant air quality benefits to one of the smoggiest
regions in the nation.
The Perris Valley Line will be a long-term component of the
Inland Empire’s economic engine.
" S R - 7 9 t o d a y m i x e s r e g i o n a l t r a f f i c w i t h l o c a l t r a f f i c .
" T h e r e a r e n u m e r o u s r e s i d e n t i a l a n d c o m m e r c i a l d i r e c t a c c e s s p o i n t s a l o n g t h e r o a d w a y .
" T h e g e o m e t r i c s o f t h e r o a d w a y d o n o t s u p p o r t t r u c k t r a f f i c .
" A c c i d e n t r a t e s a r e h i g h e r t h a n s t a t e a v e r a g e s f o r s u b u r b a n r o a d w a y s .
" R e a l i g n i n g S R - 7 9 t h r o u g h S a n J a c i n t o a n d H e m e t w i l l t a k e d r i v e r s o f f a s l o w , c i r c u i t o u s ,
a n d d a n g e r o u s r o u t e a n d o n t o a n e l e v a t e d , g r a d e - s e p a r a t e d h i g h w a y t h a t c a n h a n d l e t h e
g r o w t h i n t h e S a n J a c i n t o V a l l e y .
T h e S a n J a c i n t o / H e m e t
a r e a h a s 5 4 , 5 0 0 n e w
h o m e s e i t h e r u n d e r
c o n s t r u c t i o n o r i n t h e
p i p e l i n e . T h a t s a b r a n d
n e w c i t y o f 1 6 3 , 5 0 0
p e o p l e a c o m m u n i t y
t h e s i z e o f R a n c h o
C u c a m o n g a a n d b i g g e r
t h a n S a n t a R o s a ,
E s c o n d i d o , o r P a s a d e n a .
T h e o n l y r e g i o n a l r o u t e
n o r t h a n d s o u t h i s
c i r c u i t o u s a n d p a s s e s
t h r o u g h h i g h l y
d e v e l o p e d n e i g h b o r h o o d s .
W e n e e d $ 1 . 5 b i l l i o n t o r e a l i g n S t a t e R o u t e 7 9 .
SR-79 is the future of the San Jacinto/Hemet region. The pop-
ulation in this part of Riverside County is about to explode.
Today, SR-79 is more of an overloaded arterial than a highway.
RCTC needs to bring SR-79 into the future and pave the way for
mobility in this important region of Riverside County.
RCTC’s SR-79 Realignment Project is already in the project
approval and environmental document process.
RCTC secured $700,000 in Congressional funding for SR-79
realignment in FY 2006 appropriations. RCTC has committed
$132 million of local Measure A funds, plus TUMF dollars to the
project.
" E a s t - w e s t a r t e r i a l t r a f f i c c o n n e c t i n g S a n J a c i n t o , P e r r i s , a n d C o r o n a w i l l i n c r e a s e 2 0 0 % t o
5 0 0 % t o m o r e t h a n 1 0 2 , 0 0 0 t r i p s p e r d a y i n s o m e a r e a s u n l e s s w e d o s o m e t h i n g a b o u t i t .
" C o m m u t e r s a n d t r u c k s s h a r e t h e r o a d s w i t h s c h o o l b u s e s a n d l o c a l t r i p s .
" T h e M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y w i l l b e a n e w 3 2 - m i l e e a s t - w e s t l i m i t e d a c c e s s r o u t e f o r w e s t e r n
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t o r e l i e v e c o n g e s t i o n , i m p r o v e s a f e t y a n d h e l p a d d r e s s f u t u r e t r a f f i c
d e m a n d s .
T h e e a s t - w e s t 9 1 , 6 0 ,
a n d 1 0 f r e e w a y s w i t h i n
w e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e
C o u n t y h a v e s i g n i f i c a n t
g r i d l o c k . T h e r e i s n o
d i r e c t a c c e s s t o t h e m
f r o m t h e f a s t e s t g r o w i n g
a r e a o f t h e r e g i o n .
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y
r e s i d e n t s i d e n t i f i e d a
n e w e a s t - w e s t c o r r i d o r
a s a m a j o r p r i o r i t y .
R C T C o b t a i n e d a n
e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t r e a m -
l i n i n g a g r e e m e n t t o
m o v e i t f o r w a r d .
W e n e e d $ 3 b i l l i o n t o b u i l d t h e M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y .
The Mid County Parkway is one of four corridors included in the
Community Environmental & Transportation Acceptability
Process (CETAP) of the Riverside County Integrated Project
(RCIP), a countywide planning effort to ensure mobility, protect
the environment, and improve quality of life as the Inland
Empire continues to grow.
Mid County Parkway is one of seven high priority projects
initially identified by President George W. Bush’s Executive
Order 13274 for environmental streamlining. RCTC is working
with federal, state, and local agencies to deliver environmental
documents in a timely and efficient manner.
The project is in the final stages of the environmental process.
The estimated construction cost is $3 billion.
Congress must address the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund.
Timely action and wise policymaking could mitigate a future crisis and help ensure long-term stability of
this important funding source for highway projects. RCTC supports proactive measures taken by the federal
government to address this issue. Furthermore, RCTC encourages the federal government to prioritize
stakeholder participation in developing solutions.
Amtrak must continue to be funded.
Passenger rail service provides an alternative to highway driving. Congress must support the Amtrak system
and the choice it provides to the traveling public. Two Amtrak routes serve two Riverside County stations with
connector bus service to five cities. RCTC also supports new Amtrak service connecting Los Angeles to the
Coachella Valley.
RCTC is working
hard to guarantee
mobility for a region
that is critical to
California’s future.
Also on our radar —
Congress must reauthorize the CMAQ program.
Riverside County rivals the city of Houston for the worst air quality in the U.S. The CMAQ program is a key fundin
source for projects that improve mobility while improving the region’s air quality. CMAQ has helped build many
important projects in Riverside County including:
• SR-60 HOV lane extensions + Mixed-flow lanes
• SR-91 improvements
• East Junction (I-215/SR-60 in Riverside/Moreno Valley)
• Clean Fuel Opportunity Program
• Grade separations
Riverside County Transportation Commission
(951)787-7141 • www.rctc.org
4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor • P.O. Box 12008 • Riverside, CA 92502-2208
For more information contact:
John Standiford (951) 787-7969
Aaron Hake (951) 787-7965