Loading...
11 November 14, 2007 Commission• RECORDS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TIME: 9:30 a.m. DATE: Wednesday, November 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 2"d 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 Barbara Hanna / Brenda Sales, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Charles Grotke, City of Blythe John Chlebnik / Ray Quinto, 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 Alex Bias / Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, 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 / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert Ronald Oden / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris Gordon Moller / Alan Semen, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Dom Betro, City of Riverside Chris Carlson / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Mike Perovich, Governor's Appointee Anne Mayer, Executive Director Hideo Sugita, Deputy Executive Director Comments are welcomed by the Commission. If you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 82203 Riverside County Transportation Commission TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board DATE: November 14, 2007 SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts of Interest Issues - Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda of November 14, 2007 The November 14, 2007 Commission agenda of the Riverside County Transportation Commission includes items which may raise possible conflicts of interest. An RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past 12 months from any entity or individual listed. Agenda Item No. 7H: Amendment No. 6 and No. 7 with Stantec Consulting Inc. for the North Main Corona Parking Structure Consultant(s): Stantec Consulting, Inc. (formerly known as Gordon H. Chong & Partners and Chong Partners Architecture) 405 Howard Street, 5f' Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Michael Wilson, CEO Geoff Adams, Project Director Mechanical Design Studio 1777 Oakland Boulevard, Suite 110 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Dorel Anghel, Principal Melendrez 617 South Olive Street Los Angeles, CA 90014 YunSoo Kim, Associate 11.36.0 Ninyo & Moore 475 Goddard, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 Jalal Vakili, Principal Engineer O'Connor Construction Management, Inc. 8851 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 John Mauk, Estimating Manager OMB 8825 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Doug Kind, Project Manager Rich Hubble 700 Alta Vista Road Mill Valley, CA 94941 TMAD Taylor & Gaines 320 North Halstead Street, Suite 200 Pasadena, CA 91107 Ron Sheldon, President Walker Parking 150 Executive Park Boulevard, Suite 3750 San Francisco, CA 94134 Tom Wenner • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listedrpn the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, November 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 will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER • 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three 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 two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) 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. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 10, 2007 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 14, 2007 Page 2 6. 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 item 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 chanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 7. 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. RESOLUTION REGARDING REVISED APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-006, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Revised Annual Appropriations Limit". 7B. RESOLUTION REGARDING INVESTMENT OF MONIES IN THE LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND Page 8 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve Resolution No. 08-003, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize Investment of Monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) ". 7C. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 11 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended September 30, 2007. 7D. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Overview • Page 15 • This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2007. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 14, 2007 Page 3 7E. INTERFUND LOAN ACTIVITY REPORT Overview Page 17 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the lnterfund Loan Activity Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2007. 7F. REPROGRAMMING OF $796,000 IN SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM FUNDS FROM THE PERRIS BOULEVARD WIDENING PROJECT TO THE MASON STREET INTERCHANGE PROJECT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 19 1) Approve the reprogramming of $796,000 from an approved $3,184,000 of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds from the Perris Boulevard widening project in the city of Perris (Perris) to the Nason Street interchange improvement project in the city of Moreno Valley (Moreno Valley); 2) Amend the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) to reflect the required federal fund reprogramming action; and 3) Revise the Commission's Regional Arterial Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program to split the Perris Boulevard/Ramona Expressway to Cactus Avenue project and TUMF funding between both agencies based on an agreement between the cities of Perris and Moreno Valley. 7G. AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 25 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-45-037-00 with the city of Riverside (City) for Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) services during the construction of the La Sierra Avenue/State Route 91 interchange reconstruction; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 14, 2007 Page 4 7H. AMENDMENT NO. 6 AND NO. 7 WITH STANTEC CONSULTING INC. FOR THE NORTH MAIN CORONA PARKING STRUCTURE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 27 1) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-014-06, Amendment No. 6 to Agreement No. 03-31-014-00, to amend the scope of services and provide for reimbursable costs associated with previous amendments in the amount of $15,900; 2) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-014-07, Amendment No. 7 to Agreement No. 03-31-014-00, to provide for consultant support services during the construction phase in the amount of $560,021, with a 20-month extension to the agreement period; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 71. AGREEMENT FOR THE REVEGETATION ADJACENT TO STATE ROUTE 74 SEGMENT II FROM WASSON CANYON ROAD TO 7TH STREET IN THE • CITY OF PERRIS Page 34 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive bid award recommendations for revegetation adjacent to State Route 74 Segment II from Wasson Canyon Road to 7' Street in the city of Perris; 2) Award Agreement No. 07-31-069-00 for the revegetation adjacent to SR-74 Segment II, from 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7th Street in the city of Perris, to Pan American Landscaping for the amount of $45,500 plus a 9.8% contingency amount of $4,500 to cover potential change orders encountered during. the revegetation project, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $50,000; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 14, 2007 Page 5 7J. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Overview Page 38 This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. 8. AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX -LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE AT THE NORTH MAIN CORONA METROLINK STATION Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 08-33-022-00 to McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. for the construction of a six -level parking structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink station in the amount of $19,100,083 plus a contingency amount of $ 1,999,917 for a total contract authorization of $21.1 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 3) Authorize Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. 9. MULTI -COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT ACTION PLAN Overview Page 48 Page 52 This item is for the Commission to receive and file a presentation on the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan. 10. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview Page 85 This item is for the Commission to receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda November 14, 2007 Page 6 12. COMMISSIONERS 1 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. 13. CLOSED SESSION ITEMS A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director or Designee Property Owners — See List of Property Owners Item APN Property Owner(s) 279-240-001 279-240-008 279-240-009 2 79-190-034 1 282-040-003 Mike Kerr 279-030-003 Gary McMillan 279-030-004 279-030-005 279-030-006 279-030-008 14. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, December 12, 2007, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL NOVEMBER 14, 2007 Present County of Riverside, Distr'.ic County of Riverside, District II County of Riverside; District III County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District City of Banning City 'of Beaumont City of Blythe City=of; Calimesa: City of Canyon Lake City' of Cathedral ECit City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot_ Springs City of: Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of La Quinta City 'of Lake Elsinore City of Moreno Valley City of Murriete City of Norco City of Palm Deser City of Palm Springs City, of Perris .. City of Rancho Mirage City: of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula - Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 Absent RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET NOVEMBER 14, 2007 NAME R. 014 t g 4-rz_ `Z6i �tJ 7A- IT Z. AGENCY G rr� (ri-p{) rJ CA-0 YD ry AA 145 xfi. E MAIL ADDRESS bPPCoA r t 2..To atiAtuoiu \N S NOT C R C UL TED IJC1FUUTI AI{IST3CI1f11111T IV-1 TIC bGCIIR 'Jr ITIC KiJAKU DATE: !Nkei. kna /y ZU CHECK IF SUBJECT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS: % PUBLIC COMMENTS: AGENDA ITEM NO.: SUBJECT OF j% �® /� (AS LISTED ON THE AGENDA) _ AGENDA ITEM: /TP�%l t� O/.1 5 /( , bij.576i2 3 NAME: ✓! �� G! Z- F'e,fr-r PHONE NO.: 9S7 & 5 7- l fl ADDRESS: /6o% STREET ZoC �ll�0 kiiill-5 (fir 945�0 -7!%/ IP CODE REPRESENTING: Or. `-' e,41.9,3 e--41- PHONE NO.: NAMEOFAGENCY / ORGANIZATION / GROUP BUSINESS ADDRESS:Za4 A.42-/41PW.5i' /lvt oiW►• 47 / 1, s tL- STREET CITY ZIP CODE 5orne' Adair r°5,5 AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES I r ' V , , • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1. CALL TO ORDER MINUTES Wednesday, October 10, 2007 �F The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Terry Henderson at 9:30 a.m., in the Chancellor's Conference Room at the University of California @ Riverside, University Village, 1201 University Avenue, Room 207, Riverside, California. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Vice -Chair Bob Magee led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Steve Adams Marion Ashley Alex Bias Roger Berg Daryl Busch Bob Buster Chris Carlson John Chlebnik Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Eduardo Garcia Rick Gibbs Barbara Hanna Terry Henderson Dick Kelly Robin Lowe Bob Magee Jeff Miller Gordon Moller Michael Perovich Ronald Oden Ron Roberts Harvey Sullivan Frank West Roy Wilson Commissioners Absent Patrick Mullany Gregory Pettis Jeff Stone John F. Tavaglione Michael H. Wilson Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 2 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no requests from the public to speak. Chair Henderson announced that the Executive Committee met and interviewed for the Executive Director position.is A contract has been successfully negotiated and Chair Henderson asked Eric Haley, Executive Director, to announce the new Executive Director. Eric Haley announced that Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director, will become the new Executive Director effective October 25, 2007. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 M/S/C (Lowe/Carlson) to approve the September 12, 2007 minutes as submitted. Abstain: Moller and Sullivan 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Roy Wilson requested Agenda Item 7M, "State and Federal Legislative Update", be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Commissioner Bob Buster requested Agenda Item 7E, `Fair Isle Drive Metrolink Station and Box Springs Quarry Property" be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. M/S/C (Busch/Roberts) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain: Miller, Agenda Item 7L due to a conflict of interest. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 3 7A. AMENDMENT TO CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR INTERSTATE 215 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS — DESIGN SEQUENCING PROJECT FOR ADJUSTMENTS TO FUNDING PLAN 1) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-064-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 03-31-064 (Caltrar& No. 08-1207 A/1), to reflect adjustments in Measure A funding; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7B. REQUEST FROM THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS FOR ADDITIONAL FEDERAL FUNDS ON GENE AUTRY TRAIL WIDENING PROJECT Approve the increase of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds on the Gene Autry Trail widening project from $1.54 million to $4,038,020. 7C. FISCAL YEAR 2008-12 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITIES OF BEAUMONT AND LAKE ELSINORE Approve the FY 2008-12 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for local streets and roads for the cities of Beaumont and Lake Elsinore as submitted. 7D. FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 MEASURE A FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS FOR THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Approve .the amendment to the FY 2007/08 Measure A Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for local streets and roads for the city of Palm Springs as submitted. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 4 7F. PROPERTY TRANSFER AGREEMENT/MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH MARCH JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY AND LNR RIVERSIDE, LLC FOR THE MORENO VALLEY/MARCH FIELD METROLINK STATION 1) Approve the Agreement/MOU No. 08-33-031-00 with March Joint Powers Authority (JPA) and LNR Riverside, LLC (LNR) for the transfer of property for the Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink station; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf the Commission. 7G. AGREEMENT WITH SPOTLESS JANITORIAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE CLEANING AND GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FOR THE FIVE METROLINK STATIONS IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1) Approve selection of and award Agreement No. 08-24-023-00 to Spotless Janitorial Services (SJS) to provide cleaning and grounds maintenance services at the five Commission -owned Metrolink stations; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7H. NORTH MAIN CORONA SATELLITE PARKING AGREEMENTS 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-25-027-00 between Corona Community LLC and the Commission to provide for 300 leased parking spaces as a satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction; 2) Approve Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 08-25-025-00 between the city of Corona (City) and the Commission to provide for shuttle services to a leased satellite parking lot during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure construction; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 71. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 5 7J. ALLOCATION OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006/07 FOR THE RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Allocate $208,278 of FY 2006/07 Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to cover projects identified in the FY 2006/07 capital projects reconciliation. 7K. AMENDMENT TO THE PROJECT SCOPE AND A PROJECT BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WITH LIM AND NASCIMENTO ENGINEERING CORPORATION TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND COST ESTIMATE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSTATE 215/STATE ROUTE 60 EAST JUNCTION BETWEEN THE BOX SPRINGS OVERCROSSING AND DAY STREET UNDERCROSSING 1) Approve an amendment to the project scope (Attachment 1) for the 1-215/SR-60 East Junction project and increase of the project budget (Attachment 2) from $35.35 million to $55.742 million; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-31-039-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 07-31-039-00, with Lim and Nascimento Engineering Corporation (LAN) based on the negotiated project scope, schedule, and cost that is attached to this agenda item for a base amount of $1,533,452, plus 23.9% contingency amount of $366,548 to cover potential changes in scope for a total not to exceed amount of $1.9 million ($1 .682 million of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program funds and $218,000 of Measure A as local match), which addresses the additional design fees required for expansion of the original project scope to incorporate elements from the Caltrans design sequencing project and additional portions from the Segment • 7 project; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute necessary, non -funding related Caltrans cooperative agreements for the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 6 7L. AGREEMENT WITH PARSONS TRANSPORTATION GROUP TO PROVIDE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING SERVICES, PROJECT REPORT, AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO STATE ROUTE 91 IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION AND TO THE STATE ROUTE 71/91 INTERCHANGE FROM APPROXIMATELY % MILE WEST OF GREEN RIVER ROAD TO SERFAS CLUB',vDRIVE IN THE CITY OF CORONA 1) Award Agreement No. 08-31-015-00 to Parsons Transportation Group (Parsons) to provide preliminary engineering services for the preparation of Caltrans project report and environmental document (PR/ED) for the proposed improvements to SR-91 in the eastbound direction and to the SR-71 /91 interchange from approximately 'Y4 mile west of Green River Road to Serfas Club Drive in the city of Corona based on the attached project scope, schedule, and cost for the base amount of $4,605,852 plus a contingency amount of $650,000 (14%), to cover potential changes in scope for a total not to exceed amount of $5,255,852; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute necessary, non -funding related Caltrans cooperative agreements for the project; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. 8. AGREEMENTS FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, presented an overview of the Commission's Finance Department goal to develop and maintain an organization accountability program that will encompass financial and operational functions. She then presented the evaluation panel's recommendation for internal audit services and on -call internal audit services. M/S/C (Lowe/Miller) to: 1) Approve the selection process and award Agreement No.08-19-028-00 to KPMG LLP to perform internal audit services and on -call internal audit services; • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 7 2) Award Agreement No. 08-19-029-00 to Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. and Agreement No. 08-19-030-00 to Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. to perform on -call internal audit services; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 9. 2009 MEASURE A $300 MILLION WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL ARTERIAL CALL FOR PROJECTS Shirley Medina, Program Manager, presented an overview of the 2009 Measure A $300 million Western Riverside County Regional Arterial call for projects. The intent of this program is to fund capacity enhancements that are identified on the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program backbone network. Eric Haley, Executive Director, added that the Commission is financing the 30-year allocation utilizing commercial paper and the anticipated bond measure. He briefly discussed some of the evaluation criteria for the call for projects. Commissioner Robin Lowe noted that the Technical Advisory Committee will convene for evaluation in January 2008. She asked if these projects will be forwarded to the Plans and Programs Committee. Eric Haley stated that staff will follow precedent and forward the item to the appropriate committee. M/S/C (Moller/Hanna) to direct staff to release a call for projects for 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Regional Arterial funds in the amount of $300 million. 10. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION 7E. FAIR ISLE DRIVE METROLINK STATION AND BOX SPRINGS QUARRY PROPERTY Commissioner Bob Buster expressed support for the proposed Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station. He requested staff provide an update regarding the proposed Metrolink station locations along the Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 8 Perris Valley Line, including station type and ridership projections, which will be necessary to accommodate growth in Riverside County over the next 50 years. Eric_ Haley, Executive Director, discussed the Fair Isle Drive and Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink stationsG Staff is confident given the population growth in that area, both of these stations can be accommodated. He stated that approving the Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station does not preclude any future Metrolink stations in the University of California at Riverside (UCR) area. Additionally, the Highgrove Metrolink station proposal submitted by Barney Barnett was rejected by the Commission, the San Bernardino Associated Governments, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Staff will return to the Commission with the requested update. Commissioner Marion Ashley expressed support for the proposed Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station and enthusiasm for all the projects moving forward on this agenda. M/S/C (Roberts/Carlson) to authorize staff to negotiate with Stone Pacific Development regarding the development of a Fair Isle Drive Metrolink station. 7M. STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Commissioner Roy Wilson expressed concern for staff recommendation no. 1, "Adopt an oppose unless amended position on SB 974 (Lowenthal". He recommended the position of support with amendments. John Standiford, Public Affairs Director, replied that staff's primary concern is to ensure the Commission is a part of the decision making process when the revenue is generated either through a voluntary container premium or through a legislative bill. Commissioner Steve Adams expressed that SB 974 is subject to legal challenge and will never pass. He stated that Riverside and San Bernardino Counties are the most negatively impacted by goods movement. He believes the Commission needs to take the lead and work with San Bernardino County on a voluntary container premium that will directly benefit grade separation projects in the two counties. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 9 Commissioner John Chlebnik concurred with Commissioner Adams comments and expressed opposition to SB 974 unless the amendment language for this bill can specify with certainty the project priorities and funding. Commissioner Lowe expressed concern that SB 974 arbitrarily assigns a container fee. She agreed with staff's analysis because as the bill is currently written, the Commission's position is moot. She believes that a support with amendments position does not express a strong enough message to accomplish the needs of Riverside County. At Commissioner Mary Craton's request, Commissioner- Adams explained that the timeline to develop a voluntary container premium could be within one year and is paid for by the manufacturers, not the railroads. He stated that SB 974 is a tax on freight and subject to legal challenge. He expressed that Riverside County is in a desperate crisis situation and it is necessary for the Commission to take the lead on a voluntary container premium. Commissioner Buster requested discussion on Agenda Item 7M, recommendation no. 5, "Adopt a SUPPORT position of the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension". Eric Haley expressed understanding for Commissioner Adam's comments concerning SB 974 being subject to legal challenge. He explained that there was a list of priority projects in September 2007. However, Senator Alan Lowenthal came to an understanding with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and pulled the bill rather than amend it to approve that list of projects. Given that situation, he suggests the Commission remain engaged in the dialogue. Staff is also continuing the dialogue with the ports and has met with representatives of the ports to work on another list of priority projects. He recommended that the Commission remain engaged in both arenas regardless of any skepticism. Commissioner Wilson expressed support for a voluntary container premium, however, he believes that taking a parochial position opposing SB 974 would not be in the Commission's best interests. Commissioner Wilson moved to change recommendation no. 1 to support with amendments. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 10 Chair Henderson stated that the Commission needs to remain engaged in these discussions and believes that an oppose unless amended expresses a stronger message regarding Riverside County's needs. John Standiford stated that in terms of interacting with the legislators, it will be made clear that support will not be given for SB 974 unless it is amended. M/S/C (R. Wilson/Berg) to: 1) Adopt a SUPPORT WITH AMENDMENTS position on SB 974 (Lowenthal); No: Adams, Carlson, Chlebnik, Craton, Hanna, Henderson, Kelly, Lowe, Magee and Miller Commissioner Buster expressed concern that the Commission has not been kept abreast of the issues raised regarding the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension. He believes that the Commission should take a position that is in line with transportation needs and congruent with the Commission's responsibility to the environment. He requested staff provide an update on the recent issues raised regarding the toll road extension at a future meeting. John Standiford replied the staff report was released before the. Coastal Commission had met. The hearing has been continued until early next year. Commissioner Lowe explained that last week at the SCAG meeting, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) spoke against the Mid County Parkway (MCP) project and recommended that it be removed from the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). She expressed concern for this type of cooperation received from OCTA and requested Eric Haley to comment. Eric Haley replied that staff had discussions with SCAG staff and explained that the constrained versus unconstrained portions of the RTP needed to allow for a 30-year time frame, pointing out the presidential executive order supporting community and environmental transportation acceptability process (CETAP) corridors. He then discussed the impact such an action would cause and staff's plans to resolve the issue. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 11 Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director, explained that in discussions with OCTA, an OCTA technical staff was in attendance at the meeting that gave the appropriate technical answer. The funding was not in OCTA's long range plan, however, OCTA did not intend to imply that it did not support the SR-91 corridor or any of the Commission's projects. Commissioner Lowe noted Richard Dixon from Lake Forest was at the meeting in support of the Commission's projects. Commissioner Jeff Miller encouraged the Commission to support the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension. He expressed that it is important to note that the toll road itself does not disrupt the campgrounds or surfing opportunities. He discussed the community support, federal agencies approvals, and the project's regional importance. He expressed that the Commission needs to continue to work together with the Commission counterparts in Orange County and receive updates from the Coastal Commission as it moves forward. Commissioner Lowe concurred with Commissioner Miller's comments and expressed support for the toll road extension. Commissioner Buster expressed that he believes the Commission should express its concern for the damage that this extension could cause to the coastline. Commissioner Ron Roberts stated that the city of Oceanside has taken a position to oppose the extension. He also expressed concern regarding relationships within San Diego County and will abstain on recommendation no. 5, "Adopt a SUPPORT position of the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension", until additional information is received. Anne Mayer replied she does not believe that SANDAG has taken a formal position on the toll road extension. Eric Haley replied the city of San Diego has taken a formal position to oppose the extension. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 12 M/S/C (Miller/Adams) to: 51 Adopt a SUPPORT position of the SR-241 Foothill South toll road extension; No: Buster Abstain: Roberts M/S/C (Moller/Carlson) to: 2) Adopt proposed amendments to SB 974 and authorize staff to transmit the amendments to state leaders; 3) Approve a priority list of projects for funding by any container fee revenue; 4) Adopt an OPPOSE position on the following federal bills: a) S.2019 (Hutchison, R-Texas); b) H.R. 3510 (Peterson, R-Pennsylvania); 6) Receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Status Report. 11. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 11A. Commissioner Eduardo Garcia introduced the city of Coachella's newly appointed City Manager, Tim Brown, and the Assistant City Manager, Steve Brown. 11 B. Commissioner Dick Kelly thanked Chair Henderson for attending the dedication ceremony for the Portola Bridge, noting that it was fully funded with local funds. 11 C. Commissioner Bob Buster complimented the Commission on the interview process for the Executive Director position. He thanked Anne Mayer, Deputy Executive Director and Stephanie Wiggins, Regional Programs Director, for all their hard work and dedication to the Commission. Commissioner Roy Wilson concurred with Commissioner Bob Buster and complimented Eric Haley for building a strong organization. 11 D. Commissioner Bob Magee expressed his gratitude to Michael Perovich and Ca!trans staff for securing $120,000 for the signalization and street widening project at SR-74 and Grand Avenue. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 13 11 E. Eric Haley announced: • The signing ceremony for the cooperative agreement on goods movement will be held on Friday, October 12, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. in Los Angeles; • The Riverside Chamber Legislative SuMmit 2007 will be held on Friday, October 12, 2007, at 11:30 a.m.; • Nine events will be held between October 12 — 31, 2007, which include: Formal public hearings, Senate hearings and Assembly select hearings; • His retirement reception is being held at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, October 29, 2007, at the Mission Inn; • The Women's Transportation Seminar (WTS) is honoring him and Ginger Gherardi, Executive Director, Ventura County Transportation Commission, on October 22, 2007; and • The city of La Quinta and the Commission will be hosting the California Transportation Commission (CTC) meetings and reception being held on November 7 and 8, 2007. 11 F. John Standiford, Public Affairs Director, presented a Grade Separation video. 12. CLOSED SESSION 12A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director of Designee Property Owner Representative — Steve Ho[gate Item APN Property Owner(s) 430-130-056 430-130-063 430-130-064 1 430-130-065 She!bran Investments 430-130-066 430-130-067 430-130-068 There were no announcements from Closed Session items. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes October 10, 2007 Page 14 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting adjourned at 11:05 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., on Wednesday, November 14, 2007, in the Board Room at {{he County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. Respectfully submitted, )1-xv.`"-q4._ Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • i AGENDA ITEM 7A I! 1, RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee "� Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution Regarding Revised Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2007/08 BUDGET AND 1MPLEMENAT/ON COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 08-006, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Revised Annual Appropriations Limit". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make documentation used to determine the appropriations limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit. Staff performed the calculations necessary to determine the limit and presented the calculations to the Commission on June 13, 2007. During the FY 2006/07 audit, staff determined that the change in California per capita income was incorrectly calculated. Staff inadvertently used the United States per capita personal income column instead of the California per capita personal income column. The correction results in a decrease of $5,210,094 in the appropriations limit from $294,507,445 to $289,297,351. The revised appropriations limit has no effect on the FY 2007/08 budgeted expenditures. The resolution and documents supporting the revised calculation are attached. As required for public notice, the adoption of the Commission's Gann Appropriations Limit was posted in the local newspaper. Agenda Item 7A 1 Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 08-006 2) California per capita income - California Department of Finance 3) Population, Riverside County - California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit Agenda Item 7A • 2 • • • ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 08-006 "RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE REVISED ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT" �y WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution places an annual limitation upon appropriations from proceeds of taxes by each Local government of the State of California; and WHEREAS, in 1988, pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution, the Riverside County Transportation Commission established its appropriations limit at $75 million for fiscal year 1988/89 under ordinance No. 88-1; and WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make the documentation used in determining the appropriations limit available to the public fifteen days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 1 approved by the voters of the State effective June 6, 1990, beginning with fiscal year 1990/91 and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Commission's Board of Commissioners is required to select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in .the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non- residential construction, and either the population change within the Commission or the population change within Riverside County, as the two factors to be applied in calculating the appropriations limit for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, this Board wishes to select, as factors in determining the Commission's appropriation limit for fiscal year 2007/08 the percentage change in California per capita personal income and also the population change within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, this Commission adopted the appropriations limit for fiscal year 2007/08 on June 13, 2007; and WHEREAS, this Commission has documented its calculations of the Commission's revised appropriations limit for fiscal year 2007/08 and said calculations have been made available to the public at least fifteen days prior to the adoption of this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Boarfi of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows: 1. For fiscal year 2007/08, the factors selected for calculating the appropriations limit are (a) the percentage change in California per capita personal income, and (b) the population change within the County of Riverside. . 2. The appropriations limit applicable to this Agency pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution for fiscal year 2007/08 are hereby established and determined to be the revised amount of $289,297,351. 3. A copy of the documentation used in the determination of the revised appropriations limit for fiscal year 2007/08 shall be affixed hereto and shall be available for public inspection. 4. Pursuant to Section 7910 of the California Government Code, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the establishment of the appropriations limit as set forth herein must be commenced within forty-five days of the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED this 14th day of November, 2007. Terry Henderson, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 4 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2007-2008 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT (Revised) 2006-2007 Appropriations Limit $ 265,455,468 2007-2008 adjustment: Change in California per capita income = 5.47 percent Change in Population, Riverside County = 3.31 percent 5.47 + 100 = 1.055 100 3.31 + 100 = 1.033 100 1.055 x 1.033 = 1.089815 $ 265,455,468 x 1.089815 = $ 289,297,351 2007-2008 Appropriations Limit (Revised) $ 289,297,351 Source: California per capita income — California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit fG • • • PER CAPRA PERSONAL INCOME United California California %Change States %Chanae %of U.S. 1950 1,874 - 1,504 - 124.6% 1955 2,383 - 1,907 - 125.0% 1958 2,599 - 2,109 - 123.2% 1959 2,743 5.5% 2,209 4.796 124.2% 1960 2,826 30% 2,269 2.7% 124.5% 1961 2,881 1.9% 2,327 2.6% 123.8% 1962 3,005 4.3% 2,440 4.9% 123.2% 1963 3,102 3.2% 2,527 3.6% 122_8% 1964 3,275 5.6% 2,672 5.7% 122.6% 1965 3,413 4.2% 2,850 6.7% 119.8% 1966 3,656 7.1% 3,662 74% 119.4% 1967 3,874 6.0% 3,254 6.3% 119.1% 1968 4,201 8.4% 3,538 8.7% 118.7% 1969 4,529 7.8% 3,836 8.4% 118.1% 1970 4,810 6.2% 4,085 6.5% 117.7% 1971 5.034 4.7% 4,342 6.3% 115.9% 1972 5,454 8.3% 4,717 8-6% 115.6% 1973 5,944 9.0% 5,231 10.9% 113.6% 1974 6,552 10.2% 5,707 9.1% 114.8% 1975 7,129 8.8% 6,172 8.1% 115.5% 1976 _ 7,825 9.8% 6,754 9.4% 115.9% 1977 8,570 9.5% 7,405 9.6% 115.7% 1978 9,580 11.8% 8,245 11.3% 116.2% 1979 10,753 12.2% 9,146 10.9% 117.6% 1980 11,951 11.1% 10,114 10.6% 118.2% 1981 13,175 10.2% 11,246 11.2% 117.2% 1982 13,763 4.5% 11,935 6.1% 115.3% 1983 14,556 5.8% 12,618 5.7% 115.4% 1984 15,994 9.9% 13,891 10.1% 1151% 1985 16,956 6.0% 14,758 6.2% 114.9% 1986 17,668 4.2% 15,442 4.6% 114.4% 1987 18,549 5.0% 16240 5.2% 114.2% 1988 19,599 5.7% 17,331 6.7% 113.1% 1989 arc 20,585 5.0% 18,520 69% 111.2% 1990 21,638 5.1% 19,477 5.2% 111.1% 1991 21,750 0.5% 19,892 2.1% 109.3% 1992 22,492 3.4% 20,854 4.8% 107.9% 1993 22,635 0.6% 21,346 2.4% 106.0% 1994 b/ 23,203 2.5% 22,172 3.9% 104.7% 1995 24,161 4.1% 23,076 4.1% 104_7% 1996 25,312 4.8% 24,175 4.8% 104.7% 1997 26,490 4.7% 25,334 4.8% 104.6% 1998 28,374 71% 26,883 6.1% 105.5% 1999 29,828 5.1% 27,939 3.9% 106.8% 2000 r/ 32,458 8.8% 29,843 6.8% 108.8% 2001 r/ 32,859 1.2% 30,562 2.4% 107.5% 2002 d 32,769 -0.3% 30.795 0.8% 106.4% 2003 d 33,469 2.1% 31,466 2.2% 106.4% 2004 ri 35,380 5.7% 33,090 5.2% 106.9% 2005 ri 36,936 4.4% 34.471 4.2% 107.2% 2006 pr 38,956 5.5% 36,276 5.2% 107.4% arc Reflects Loma Prieta earthquake. h! Reflects Norlhndge earthquake. Note: Omits income for government employees overseas. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. htlix/Avww.bea.doc.govi ri pi Revised percapila estimates for 2000-2005 and preliminary estimates for 2006 were released March 27, 2007 The next slate annual personal income release is scheduled for September 20, 2007. Updated: March 27, 2007 Filename: bbpemap 6 / -G ATTACHMENT 2 • • • ATTACHMENT 3 Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Enclosure II Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions (') January 1, 2006 to January 1, 2007 and Total Population, January 1, 2007 Total County Percent Change - Population Minus Exclusions - Population City 2006-2007 1-1-06 1-1-07 a G 1-1-2007 Riverside Banning -0.17 28,321 28,272 28,272 Beaumont 21.22 23,304 28,250 28,250 Blythe 0.29 13,610 13,650 22,625 Calimesa -0.68 7,465 7,414 _ 7,414 Canyon Lake -0.40 11,013 10,969 10,969 Cathedral City 1.32 51,386 52,064 52,115 Coachella 8.57 35,449 38,486 38,486 Corona 0.35 145,659 146,164 146,164 Desert Hot Springs 6.23 22,163 23,544 23,544 Hemel 2.41 70,015 71,705 71,705 Indian Wells 0.88 4,899 4,942 4,942 Indio 6.94 72,142 77,146 77,146 Lake Elsinore 15.42 41,271 47,634 47,634 La Quinta 6.44 - 38,604 41,092 41,092 Moreno Valley 2.67 175,769 180,466 180,466 Murrieta 3.94 93,567 97,257 97,257 Norco -0.51 22,730 22,614 27,361 Palm Desert -0.25 49,879 49,752 49,752 Palm Springs 0.22 46,754 46,858 46,858 Penis 6.74 47,463 50,663 50,663 Rancho Mirage 0.96 16,783 16,944 16,944 Riverside 0.57 289,747 291,398 291,398 San Jacinto 9.80 31,280 34,345 34,345 Temecula 3.55 94,575 97,935 97,935 Unincorporated 3.65 519,243 538,171 538,288 County Total 3.31 1,953,091 2,017,735 2,031,625 (') Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters' residents in state mental institutions, and state and federal correctional institutions. Source: California Department of Finance 7 AGENDA ITEM 7B i i • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee ' Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution Regarding Investment of Monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve Resolution No. 08-003, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize Investment of Monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: LAIF began in 1977 as a voluntary alternative for California's local governments and special districts under the administration of the State Treasurer. The enabling legislation is Section 16429.1 of the California Government Code. At its April 10, 2002 meeting, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 02-013 to participate in LAIF. This resolution allowed the Commission another alternative as it invests its cash for safety, liquidity, and yield. Subsequently, on February 11, 2004, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 04-006 as a result of the new Chief Financial Officer. The resolution designated the Commission's Executive Director, Eric Haley, and Chief Financial Officer, Theresia Trevino, authorization to order the deposit or withdrawal of monies in the LAIF. The Commission's Executive Director Eric Haley will retire on December 31, 2007. Resolution No. 08-003 removes Eric Haley from the existing resolution and designates Anne Mayer as the Commission's Executive Director. Attachment: Resolution No. 08-003 Agenda Item 7B 8 • • • RESOLUTION NO. 08-003 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TO AUTHORIZE INVESTMENT OF MOKIES IN THE LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 730 of the statutes of 1976, Section 16429.1 was added to the California Government Code to create a Local Agency Investment Fund in the State Treasury for the deposit of money of a local agency for purposes of investment by the State Treasurer; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners does hereby find that the deposit and withdrawal of money in the Local Agency Investment Fund in accordance with the provisions of Section 16429.1 of the Government Code for the purpose of investment as stated therein is in the best interests of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, at 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA 92501, Telephone No. (951) 787-7141. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Commissioners hereby authorizes the deposit and withdrawal of Riverside County Transportation Commission monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund in the State Treasury in accordance with the provisions of Section 16429.1 of the Government Code for the purpose of investment as stated therein, and verification by the State Treasurer's Office of all banking information provided in that regard. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Riverside County Transportation Commission's Executive Director, Anne Mayer and Chief Financial Officer, Theresia A. Trevino, or their successors shall be individually authorized to �c order the deposit or withdrawal of monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission at its meeting on Wednesday, November 14, 2007. Terry Henderson, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 10 AGENDA ITEM 7C I E r. r -�� RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee ++ Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended September 30, 2007. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the first three months of the fiscal year, staff has monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The first quarter of the year is primarily directed toward completing end of the year activities. Staff expects most of the categories to present a more realistic outlook by the end of the second quarter. The operating statement shows the sales tax revenues for the first quarter at 8% of the budget. This is a result of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 33. GASB 33 requires sales tax revenue to be accrued for the period in which it is collected at the point of sale. The State Board of Equalization collects the Measure A funds and remits them to the Commission after the reporting period for the businesses. This creates a two -month lag in the receipt of revenues by the Commission. Accordingly, these financial statements reflect the revenues related to collections for July 2007. On a cash basis, the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues are 5% and 3% lower, respectively, than the same period last fiscal year. Receipts have decreased due to the effects of the softening of the housing market. Staff continues to monitor the trends in the sales tax receipts and will report to the Commission any necessary adjustments to the budget for sales tax revenue. Federal, state, and local government reimbursements and other revenues are on a reimbursement basis, and the Commission will receive these revenues as the projects are completed and invoiced to the respective agencies. Agenda Item 7C 11 The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues remitted to the Commission by Western Riverside Council of Governments only reflect one month of receipts. The July 2007 revenues of $1,648,376 were received by the Commission on September 13, 2007. At the time of the preparation of the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended September 30, 2007, staff was completing the reconciliation and posting of interest income. Interest will be correctly reflected in the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ending December 31, 2007. The expenditure categories are in line overall with the expectations of the budget. General administrative expenditures are higher due to a one-time payment in July for the Commission's FY 2007/08 general liability insurance. Office lease and utilities are slightly over as a result of the rent payment due by the V1 of each month. The October rent was paid on September 24, 2007. Capital outlay reports a negative actual amount. This resulted from the estimated expenditure accrual adjustment at June 30, 2007, for office improvements made but not yet invoiced. Staff will continue to monitor the revenues and expenditures and notify the Commission of any unusual events. Attachment: Quarterly Financial Statements — September 2007 Agenda Item 7C 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET VS ACTUAL 1ST QUARTER FOR THREE MONTHS ENDED 9/30/2007 DESCRIPTION Revenues Sales tax Federal, state and local govemment reimbursements Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Other revenues Interest Total revenues Expenditures Administration Salaries and benefits General legal services Professional services Once lease and utilities General administrative expenditures Total administration Programs/projects Salaries and benefits General legal services Professional services General projects Engineering Construction Right of way/Land Local streets and roads Regional arterial Commuter assistance LTF and STA distributions Motorist assistance Planning and programming services Property management Rail operations and maintenance Specialized transit Total programs/projects Intergovernmental distribution Capital outlay Debt service Principal Interest Arbitrage rebate tax Cost of issuance Total debt service Total expenditures Excess of revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources/uses Operating transfer in Operating transfer out Bond proceeds Payment to escrow agent Total financing sources/uses Net change in fund balances Beginning fund balance (July 1, 2007) Ending fund balance FY 2007/08 BUDGET $ 265,978,600 42,059,400 27,250,000 26,210,900 17,096,700 378,595,600 1,787,401 103,001 1,739,201 390,000 1,243,697 1ST QUARTER ACTUAL REMAINING BALANCE $ 22,129,064 $ (243,849,536) 149,17� t (41,910,221) 1,648,376' (25,601,624) 167,671 (26,043,229) 699,509 (16,397,191) 24,793,799 (353,801,801) 375,232 12,157 188,064 113,561 438,800 PERCENT UTILIZATION 8% 0% 6% 1 °% 4% 7% 1,412,169 21% 90,844 12% 1,551,137 11% 276,439 29% 804,897 35% 5,263,300 5,802,000 1,474,900 5,127,200 15,849,000 59,275,100 68,970,000 152,301,100 61,959,500 15,553,600 3,298,300 94,477,165 4,885,200 4,440,900 299,500 8,404,100 6,171,200 1,127,814 665,715 185,135 179,259 10,641 394,080 10,026,899 11,140,703 4,016,227 3,706,425 529,157 22,358,803 406,532 88,930 814 289,329 1,154,454 508,288,765 1,167,600 942,000 32,012,100 9,933,800 280,000 42,225,900 55,153,103 (32,100) 701,433 701,433 557,887,565 56,950,250 4,135,487 21% 5,136,285 11°% 1,289,765 13% 4,947,941 3% 15,838,359 0% 58,881,020 1 % 58,943,101 15% 141,160,397 7% 57,943,273 6% 11,847,175 24% 2,769,143 16% 72,118,362 24% 4,478,668 8% 4,351,970 2% 298,686 0% 8,114,771 3% 5,016,746 19% 453,135,661 11% 1,167,600 0% 974,100 -3% 32,012,100 0% 9,232,367 7% NIA 280,000 0% 41,524,467 .._, :2% 500,937,315 10% 079,291,965) 77,940,600 77,940,600 87,000,000 87,000,000 (32,156,451) 8,799,696 8,799,696 147,135,514 -18% (69,140,904) 11% 69,140,904 11% (87,000,000) 0°% N/A (92,291,965) (32,156,451) (87,000,000) 0% 60,135,514 35% 466,881,300 550,160,613 83,279,313 118% $ 374,589,335 $ 518,004,162 $ 143,414,827 138% 13 �V tl 2911,00'6 LS $ 1.0e'5L0'09 $ SOVOLS'l2 $ CZO'CLl $ CB£'£l P'99t $ 0•P'BOVIS S PS9'13PL'89 S 6L0'00E'01 $ 969'LB § 691,'SLB'E0L $ Lel'L BS'S S 00S'99L'4l $ 0016e61 Puny 6,0063 (LOOZ' L 4I6)pougleq puny BuluuiBe0 saauelrq puny ul e8ueN01e41 sesnryownos Bulaueu8 legal Waft Maa9111 al y11r111AM - epaaaad puce 09VPLB'l - OBL'008'9 Pe leyaur9 Bupela90 BOS'9Z 000.05Z ul tojeueu Oupuotl0 aempoana BIPPUPup Atop (IBL'BZL) (BSB'LLO'LL) (9OL'002'0 Z9V1 (09e'SOVP) (699'ete• tOVBSS'e !IL'ZLB'B 8£0'9£l BSZ'ZZZ't2 _ 909'899'9 9991,2 veVe 2'Zl 09Z 99P 849.298• CL9'00VOSS 8S0'9SZ'le BSS'LBL'BZ COVEN elL'BEVOSL 480'9Sl'6£) te9'111•813 (£910'LZZ'L) 91•6 (BbL'2LB'10 • 000'08L'11 009'6OL'8 499'00S"B 9091,2 08 L'SZS'B (l SVI39L'LC) Be PBLB (£80'LZVL) 919 (Be12L19e) 09t'098'99 109 9tt L ETV LOG BEV LOG E£9'lOL - ££0'1.OL 1001'BE) 50VCS['SS OSB'OSl' • BZE'BBZ 9LB 0£8118 tC9'900 E08'89E'ZZ LSL'BZS StV011i £ Lt2'01.0'0 £01'0e1'u 6B8'020'01. 0901,09 LP9'0L 89t'BLI SECSBL 212'009 OB9'eti'9 0 9'LB0'B IL09'O4£'Z) EBb'L eL£ O1.8'990 02V0E8'L 692.999'E tBV028 4t Lt2'LS BLOBS OLZ'8ES'LE ZLL'LB! CB I.C5'C99'SI. 09£'09 CS9'9S6'861 60908'9 9£0"990'B (1.8L'8314 1998Yt0'211 (LOVC111'9) tSZ'L (280'1•8(900 (8S9'bZE) Z9b'008'b (084'tift 102VOL1'91 000'OSL BEB'9£L 8SZ'EZZ'ZE COURSE'S OLIVE, SbS'9EL 8SZ'PZE'ZZ £B SLS'ZPVE 1300'BZB 000'000' L O99 B9V2 989'9L 891VeL evnllpuedts peps) eanuanm 9e60s3 sunppuodtta Ielo1 oop.a 111vP 11601 - eauenery yd iS00 • - sal Puppet pBuOgN • WOJONl 1Bd10uPd B00.109 pm 008'L (Mt l) (BBO'BE) two leBde0 • ucllnquuslP Ivry Owapnc6J0111 0BS'01•t'LI L9S'199 OBVZL9 s10a(ad6wet B01d 9,101 99t'990 - Bsuuy possatuads 02E'BBZ aauauelupw pup wallow/Et 1p9 • 4LB WsweBouew A41r001d • - oEB'98 saalrues Bul9wr1Beld put etputlVd 2C9'90b - poutomese lsuoyon • • euaUngPlelP V1S Pue dll 19L'629 e0uelslese ppou1w00 - - minus Ieu016ell Z0P'91•0'9 - e pea pup slaetlslpacy LZL'BLZ - - puey/Aem A New 1EV8SL'L - • 90117mlruo0 (20d9£t) 11uuosulBu3 20'01 swelad maw.° 9L9'901 699'Z 9a99 60eWe91en Ols60yad BZL'LB SPVP P90'29 sappues mawwauc0 Z5E'902 Lee'Ll 4£O'LZC eelpapq pug eaPPPS elaeladisu uBad OLB'LELS (BOE'b) OPO'£S OBVISLO'L 00 UP - t61'Lt 908'L 1.0 109'E11 SOP'S 0L0'901 • e90'801, (90E'O) OBB'9 060$131 LBl'Zl - LBS OLS'LL ZEZ'SL£ 99013l BC L'LS£ BBL'EBLS•Z 8P['018 trot' BBL 016 BBC'BOEL COWL 000'406'9 9S9'099't 8C6'SL 190'810'8 10951 001•11• 'e 009'689 0PCBL9 eeL'BBL 019 tB('OOL Lb8'L - i0L'0 ZSZ't 128'1S OEL'0l LSZ 9 l L9'L9l - - - - - - - O99'OC - lZVE£1 02C0390'I. 9!E'949'l - - - - CILl'84l - - - - - LBdBOI 989 990015L'59 $ S S - 5 $ 006'409'9 $ 059'609'9 $ 909'PL 5 090'1£0'1, 5 $ 99B'lLZ'9 1191.01 301A93S 111190096 N01100919N00 (dllnl) 30NVLSI09V aNOd A3l1VA A3l1VA A1N000 BAYS annd 0391109100 1.930 93dVd uttnoo 339 N0111/011191 11911V91 N0111119069NV91 1/113110V00 30936 N93109M /dS4 1V931130 10'01931911100 1493153M P190dINn 31V1S 1V001 OlVd NOI1V190dSNV91 V 39114V319 uottOmpupu Pet 1ew1 sem8puedxo oPoPAPIP0990 I0,eu40 tel91110 pus Pavel Paw° e1:101me9 lauals9gad mammas 9e0e1 IMOLA 918aueq pug sapeleS u09v131uiwpV eunllPUPdr3 SOMISAO115101 1esualts spnumuu royl0 I3Wn1) 99i u1.1181E1/ w uP911 uglePadeuml aluawpvngwppl luewuen06 pool pue pier yapped $ pal same PenueBP6 L00Z/OCI6 030N3 SNINONI 339ML 90d 9319V00 lSl ONnd AB S1011101/ A193191/I1O ® NOIS$1%W00 NOI1V141 A1NO003a1S93A19 • NOI1d190930 • • • IF AGENDA ITEM 7D • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee ' 4 Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Single Signature Authority Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2007. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all professional services and administrative contracts that have been executed for the first quarter ended September 30, 2007, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The unused capacity as of September 30, 2007, is $478,000. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report — September 30, 2007 Agenda Item 7D 15 CONSULTANT SINGLE SIGIIRE AUTHORITY AS OF September 30, 2007 ORIGINAL CONTRACT DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES AMOUNT AMOUNT AVAILABLE July 1, 2007 $500,000.00 AMOUNT USED AMOUNT REMAINING through June 30, 2008 Towa Reabroi-DeMorsl Inc. Michele Cisneros Prepared by Reviewed by Note: Shaded area represents new contracts listed In the first quarter. 16 22,000.00 $478,000.00 • REMAINING PAID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT 19,744.70 2,255.30 AGENDA ITEM 7E i I. RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee I,' Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Interfund Loan Activity Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Interfund Loan Activity Report for the first quarter ended September 30, 2007. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its April 14, 2004 meeting, the Commission approved the Interfund Loan Policy and adopted Resolution No. 04-009, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to Authorize lnterfund Loans". Subsequently, the Commission requested that the interfund loan activity be reported on a quarterly basis. The attached report includes all interfund loan activity through September 30, 2007. The total outstanding interfund loans aggregate $1,155,559 as of September 30, 2007. Attachment: Interfund Loan Activity Report Agenda Item 7E 17 • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Interfund Loan Activity Report For 1st quarter ended September 30, 2007 Loan Amount Repayment Amount Date of Loan of Loan Begins Outstanding Lending Fund Borrowing Fund Purpose of Loan April 2, 2003 $ 300,000 July 1, 2006 $ 21,390 1989 Measure A - WC Highway (222) 1989 Measure A - WC LSR (227) Advance to make repairs and improvements to Railroad Canyon Road Date Commission Approved March 12, 2003 March 4, 2004 275,000 July 1, 2009 275,000 1989 Measure A - WC Commuter 1989 Measure A - WC Highway (222)i Additional local match for the SR•71 December 10, 2003 Assistance (226) Widening/Animal Crossing Project June 30, 2007 453,056 July 1, 2009 453,056 1989 Measure A - WC Highway (222) 2009 Measure A - WC Highway Improvements (262) Advance 2009 Measure A 1-215 April 9, 2003 BiCounty project (Maximum loan available of $2 million) June 30, 2007 406,113 July 1. 2009 406.113 1989 Measure A - WC Highway (222) 2009 Measure A - WC Highway Improvements (262) Advance 2009 Measure A working June 13. 2007 capital Total $ 1,434.169 $ 1.155.559 18 • • • AGENDA ITEM 7F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee ; Technical Advisory Committee Shirley Medina, Program Manager Ken Lobeck, Senior Staff Analyst THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Reprogramming of $796,000 in Surface Transportation Program Funds from the Perris Boulevard Widening Project to the Nason Street Interchange Project BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the reprogramming of $796,000 from an approved $3,184,000 of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds from the Perris Boulevard widening project in the city of Perris (Perris) to the Nason Street interchange improvement project in the city of Moreno Valley (Moreno Valley); 2) Amend the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) to reflect the required federal fund reprogramming action; and 3) Revise the Commission's Regional Arterial Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program to split the Perris Boulevard/Ramona Expressway to Cactus Avenue project and TUMF funding between both agencies based on an agreement between the cities of Perris and Moreno Valley. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The cities of Perris and Moreno Valley currently have two projects programmed in the RTIP that will widen Perris Boulevard from two to six through -lanes between Ramona Expressway and Cactus Avenue. The projects are currently programmed in the RTIP in an unusual fashion due to one portion that was once State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funded. Agenda Item 7F 19 The projects will be reprogrammed in the RTIP to reflect the project limits properly within each city. The Perris widening segment will widen Perris Boulevard from two to six through -lanes from Ramona Expressway north to the city limits. Moreno Valley's widening segment also is two to six through -lanes and will be from its southern city limits north to Cactus Avenue. s Approximately 25% of the $3.184 million of the original STP funded portion for the overall Perris Boulevard widening falls within Moreno Valley. However, Moreno Valley does not intend to federalize its widening segment and will backfill the $796,000 with local funds. Per an agreement reached between the two cities, Moreno Valley is requesting $796,000 of STP be reprogrammed to its State Route 60/Nason Street interchange project. The Commission's Regional Arterial TUMF program currently has $1.260 million programmed for the environmental and design phases of work for the Perris Boulevard/ Ramona Expressway to. Cactus Avenue widening project. The project will now be split into two separate projects with the cities of Moreno Valley and Perris as the lead agencies for the segments in their specific jurisdictions. The TUMF funding programmed will be split between the two segments per the agreement reached between the cities. This request was presented at the October 15, 2007 Technical Advisory Committee meeting. Staff recommends support for the STP and TUMF reprogramming request enabling the projects to continue on schedule without further delays. Additionally, this recommendation allows the federal STP reprogramming to be applied to a geographically similar project that is already federalized. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: N/A Amount: $796,000 Source of Funds: Surface Transportation Program Budget Ad ustment: NIA GLA No.: N/A Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14.44,4.014,2, rno Date: 10/16/2007 Attachment Cities of Perris and Moreno Valley's Reprogramming Request Letters Agenda Item 7F 20 MEMORANDUM TO: _ _. F E HABIB MOTLAGH, CITY ENGINEER Ms. Shirley Medina, Program Manager Mr. Paul Blackwelder Riverside County Transportation Commission 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 FROM: Habib Motlagh, City Engineer DATE: October 3, 2007 RE: Perris Blvd. Rehabilitation — STPL & Regional TUMF This memo is to request your consideration and support of the Cities of Perris and Moreno Valley to change the lead agency role and limits of the above projects. The City of Perris is in support of Moreno Valley's request to approve separation of the two projects as follows: City of Perris will receive 75% of the currently allocated STPL funds to implement the improvements on Perris Blvd. as originally approved with the change of limits from Ramona Expressway to northerly city limit. The City of Perris's share is calculated to be $2.388 Million. The City of Perris requests that the Regional TUMF Grant for widening of Perris Blvd. is separated between the two cities with Perris receiving it's share of the allocated RCTC funds on the basis of mileage which is 22.22% of the total length. The City's share of PA8sED and PS8sE phase is 86,435 and $193,536 respectively. I understand that an agreement between City of Perris and RCTC will be required to formalize this. We trust that the above information is sufficient for RCTC to initiate the review and the approval process. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information. Cc: Richard Belmudez, City Manager Larry Gonzales, City of Moreno Valley DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING 170 WILKERSON AVE., SUITE D, PERRIS, CA 92570-2200 TEL: (951( 943-6504 - FAX: (951( 943-8416 21 Oct 04 2007 6:01PM City of Moreno Valley 951-413-3170 P-2 11. 0 R L' \ 0 October 4, 2007 Ms_ Shirley Medina, Program Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission ' 3560 University Avenue, Suite 100 Riverside, CA 92501 Public Works Department Capital Projects City Hall 14177 Frederick Street P.O. Box 88005 Moreno Valle)°,CA 925510S05 Tdepbooe: 951.4133130 FAX: 951.4133170 Subject; Project ID RIV011205 - Perris Boulevard Rehabilitation from Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "A° and Project ID RIV041044 - Perris Boulevard Widening from Ramona Expressway to Cactus Avenue (TUMF Project 5106) Dear Ms. Medina: As discussed during the September 5, 2007 meeting between the City of Moreno Valley (COMV), City of Perris (COP), and Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), COMV proposes that certain programming changes be made to the following projects: Project ID RIV011205: In Moreno Valley/Perris — Widen Perris Blvd 2 to 4 Lanes from Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain - Lateral 'A° (Approx. 2 Miles) This joint project currently has $3.184 million of STPL funds programmed, with COP as the lead agency. To date, a PES has been completed and approved. Due to recent development -driven improvements in COMV, approximately 25% of the project work remains to be done within COMV City Limits. In order to deliver the project more efficiently, COMV and COP propose to modify the limits such that the project title would read: In Perris Widen Perris Blvd 2 to 6 Lanes from Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "B" (Approx. 1 Mile). This restructuring of the project limits allows COP to solely manage the project and to construct ultimate width improvements within COP's jurisdictional boundaries. COMV requests that $796,000 (25% of the $3.184 million) be transferred to the following project At SR60 / Nason St IC Modify ! Reconstruct IC & Nason St from Elder to Fir: Realign EB, WB Exit plus EB & WB Entry Ramps, Add ES & WB Ramp 22 Oct 04 2007 6:01PM City of Moreno Valley 351-413-3170 p.3 Letter to Shirley Medina October 4, 2007 Page 2 HOV Lns, & Add Aux. Lanes (EA 32300). This- project is currenty in the right of way phase, with 95% PS & E completed -to date. This project already has federal funds and estimated construction costs have significantly increased; consequently, the additional $796,000 would greatly assist in the completion the interchange. �j $2.388 million (75% of the $3.184 million) would remain with COP for the widening of Perris Boulevard from Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral 13% which is fully located within COP city limits. COP proposes to couple the STPL funds with TUMF and local funds to widen Perris Boulevard to its ultimate street width. This is further explained below. Project ID RIV041044 — In Moreno Valley: Widen Perris Blvd 4 to 6 Lns (Ramona Expwy to PVSD-Lat A) & 2 to 6 Lns (PVSD-Lat A to Cactus Ave) Including Curb, Gutter, Sidewalks, Signals, & Medians (TUMF Project 5106) The existing agreement between COMV and RCTC allocates $389,000 and $871,000 of TUMF funds for the PA&ED and PS&E phases, respectively, for this joint project. hi order to deliver the project more efficiently, COMV and COP .propose to modify the limits such that the project title would read: In Moreno Valley: Widen Perris Blvd 4 to 6 Lns (PVSD tat B to PVSU-Lat A) & 2 to 8 Lns (PVSD Lat A to Cactus Ave) including Curb, Gutter, Sidewalks, Signals, & Medians. This restructuring of the project limits allows COP and COMV to solely manage the project within their own jurisdictional boundaries. The existing programmed project length is 4.5 miles, with 1 mile located in COP and 3.5 .miles iocated in COMV. The proposed fund split would be based on this ratio: 1 / 4.5 :(22.22%) of the TUMF funds to COP and 3.5 / 4.5 (77.78%) of the TUMF funds to COMV. In summary, two projects would remain. The first, located in COP (with COP as the lead agency), widens Perris Boulevard from Ramona Expressway to Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "B" (COP/COMV city limits) from 2 to 6 lanes (ultimate width) and is funded by STPL. TUMF, and local funds. The second, located in COMV (with COMV as the lead agency), widens Perris Boulevard from Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "6' (COP/COMV city limits) to Cactus Avenue from 2 or 4 to ti lanes (ultimate width) and is funded by TUMF and local funds. The end result is that between the two projects, Perris. Boulevard would be widened to its ultimate width from Ramona Expressway (in COP) to Cactus Avenue (in COMV). Because the two agencies would do their utmost to coordinate the scheduling of these two contiguous projects, which troth construct Perris Boulevard to its ultimate width, Logical Terrnini and Independent utility should not be a concern. As mentioned earlier, a third project, the SR-60Mason Street interchange, located in GOWN, is also furthered by the proposed additional infusion of STPL funds. The enclosed "redline" Project Report form for Project ID RIV041044 has already been faxed to RCTC to help effectuate the requested reprogramming. COP recently provided 23 Oct 04 2007 6:01PM City of Moreno Valley Letter to Shirley Medina October 4, 2007 Page 3 951-413-3170 P•4 RCTC with the redline Project Report form for Project ID RIV011205. All requested revisions have been coordinated between the two agencies. Should you have any questions, please call Larry Gonzales, Renior Engineer, P.E. at 951.413.3136. Sincerely, kp Chris Vogt ublic Works Director / City Engineer I LG/en Enclosures Redline Project Report for Project ID RIV041044 Exhibits "A' and '13" from TUMF Agreement for Project 5106 Redline 2006 RTIP with Approved Amendments 1-9 -- State Projects, Project ID 32300 c: Eric Tang, Cattrans, Local Assistance Engineer Sean Yeung, Caltrans, Chief, Local Assistance Prem Kumar, COMV, Deputy Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer Eric Lewis, COMV, City Traffic Engineer Hebb Motlagh, COP, City Engineer File wftc.aPPro1�apProt1PROJECTSLLany • 01.12566622 Pans OA Rehab From Ramona 6nress Wy to PV8D let A1ABencbslRCTC10I-125.66522 Parris Blvd. Rehab. r.11.415.7D125 Pans Blvd. hem Ramona to Cactus TUbW Lettorl.doc 24 • • • AGENDA ITEM 7G B • L • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee rs Jerry Rivera, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with. the City of Riverside for Freeway Service Patrol Services BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-45-037-00 with the city of Riverside (City) for Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) services during the construction of the La Sierra Avenue/State Route 91 interchange reconstruction; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Riverside County FSP program operates nine beats in Riverside County on segments of SR-60, SR-91, 1-15, and 1-21 5 with 20 roving tow trucks during the morning and afternoon commute hours. The FSP program is funded by the state of California (80%) and local Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) fee (20%). In addition, the Commission has entered into a cooperative agreement with Caltrans to provide construction FSP service on various freeways throughout Riverside County to assist in transportation system management efforts, provide traffic congestion relief, and expedite the removal of freeway impediments, all of which have the added benefit of reducing accidents and improving air quality in the construction zone. The City has begun construction on the La Sierra Avenue/SR-91 interchange improvements to reconstruct La Sierra Avenue from Indiana Avenue to Montlake Drive/Diana Avenue while enhancing the interchange's capacity and operation. The project is scheduled for completion in September 2009. The construction will Agenda Item 7G 25 require periodic night-time work, freeway closures, limited ramp closures as well as the elimination of the freeway shoulders during the duration of the project. The City is requesting that the Commission provide construction FSP services for the project. The Commission and California Highway Patrol staff met with City staff to review the project's requirements. Althrkugh it has not been determined if mid -day (8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) service would .be required for the duration of the project, an estimated 3,650.5 hours of service is being proposed to cover the 22-month construction period. The Commission's existing tow operator for beat no. 4, Armada Towing, would provide the service. The agreement will cover all costs associated with the additional service plus S% to cover the Commission's administrative overhead. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: NO Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: $72,310 (Exp) No FY 2007/08 $78,100 (Rev) Source of Funds: City of Riverside Budget Ad ustment: Yes Yes GLA No.: 201 45 81014 $72,300 201 45 41203 $78,100 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 10/15/2007 Agenda Item 7G 26 AGENDA ITEM 7H Ii • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee +4 Edda Rosso, Program Manager Richard Bryan, Bechtel Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment No. 6 and No. 7 with Stantec Consulting Inc. for the North Main Corona Parking Structure BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-014-06, Amendment No. 6 to Agreement No. 03-31-014-00, to amend the scope of services and provide for reimbursable costs associated with previous amendments in the amount of $15,900; 2) Approve Agreement No. 03-31-014-07, Amendment No. 7 to Agreement No. 03-31-014-00, to provide for consultant support services during the construction phase in the amount of $560,021, with a 20-month extension to the agreement period; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its September 11, 2002 meeting, the Commission approved an agreement with Gordon H. Chong & Partners to perform conceptual design and environmental services for a multi -level 1,000 stall parking structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink station for an amount of $316,798. The agreement was entered into on February 21, 2003, with a term completion of November 26, 2005. The initial agreement and amendment nos. 1 through 5 were issued to Gordon H. Chong & Partners (predecessor to Chong Partners Architecture, Inc) or Chong Partners Architecture, Inc., which was acquired by Stantec Consulting Inc. on September 14, 2007. Agenda Item 7H 27 The five amendments that have been issued to the agreement and approved by the Commission are listed in the table below. Amendment No. Date Entered Scope Amount Term Extension 1 11 /11 /03 Develop plan to increase the parlyipg capacity to 2,500 parking stalls using the entirety of the existing site. $77,390 None 2 01 /31 /06 Prepare final design plans, specifications and estimates for the project. $915,815 01 /31 /06 3 10/31 /06 Design additional elements such as lighting, expanded electrical service and security. $141, 225 01 /12/07 4 12/04/06 Revise Categorical Exclusion (CE). $19,804 01/26/07 5 02/21 /07 Extend the term of the agreement. No cost 12/31 /07 Amendment No. 6 to the agreement amends the scope of services and includes reimbursable costs associated with Amendment No. 3 and No. 4, in the amount of $15,900, without an extension to the contract period. Amendment No. 7 to the agreement is intended to provide for construction support services for 20 months, during the construction phase of the work, in the amount of $560,021 with a term extension to August 31, 2009. The current agreement status is that the previous work included in the initial agreement through Amendment No. 5 was completed for the amount of $1,422,765 out of a total authorized amount of $1,471,032 leaving $48,267 remaining. At this time, staff is recommending that the Commission approve Amendment No. 6 and No. 7, for a base amount of $575,921, which is within budget, and anew total not -to -exceed amount of $2,046,953. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09 Amount: $240,900 $335,021 Source of Funds: STIP and CMAQ Budget Ad ustment: No N/A GLA No.: 221 33 81102 P3808 $15,900 221 33 81304 P3808 $560,021 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \14,4,44,Litkiji, Date: 10/16/2007 Agenda Item 28 • Attachments: 1) Exhibit A Scope of Services for Amendment No. 6 2) Exhibit B Compensation and Time for Amendment No. 6 3) Exhibit A Scope of Services for Amendment No. 7 4) Exhibit B Compensation and Time for Amendment No. 7 Agenda Item 29 • ATTACHMENT 1 EXHIBIT A Scope of Services for Amendment No. 6 1. Provide for direct reimbursable costs associated with previous amendments to Agreement 03-31-014. 30 ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT B Compensation and Time The costs for the additional services included in Amendment 6 are as follows: �k 1. The direct reimbursable costs associated with Amendment No.3 are $14,000.00. 2. The direct reimbursable costs associated with Amendment No. 4 are $1,900.00 The total cost of Amendment No. 6 will be $15,900.00, without any increase in Contract time. 31 �a ATTACHMENT 3 EXHIBIT A Scope of Services for Amendment No.7 1. Bidding Support to include pre -bid meeting attendance, preparation of exhibits and displays, and formal responses to bidders' questions. 2. Construction Administration Support to include pre -construction meeting attendance, construction progress meeting attendance as needed, process contractor submittals and shop drawings, process and respond to Contractor's Request for Information, provide revised contract drawings and prepare final as -built drawings from contractor provided draft documents. 32 ATTACHMENT 4 EXHIBIT B Compensation and Time The costs for the additional services included in Amendment No. 7 are as follows: 1. Basic construction support services, as detailed in Exhibt'A, shall be $560,021.00, including reimbursable expenses. However, should the construction period be less than the forecasted twenty month duration, a reduction in total fee will be realized. Example : 0-4 month early completion result in an $16,410.00 per month savings. 5-8 month early completion result in an $17,860.00 per month savings. 2. The total cost of Amendment # 7 is $560,021.00 including a twenty month extension in Contract time. The revised -completion date will be August 31, 2009. 33 IL AGENDA ITEM 71 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee !J- Mark Massman, Bechtel Project Manager Erik Galloway, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement for the Revegetation Adjacent to State Route 74 Segment II from Wasson Canyon Road to Th Street in the City of Perris BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive bid award recommendations for revegetation adjacent to State Route 74 Segment II from Wasson Canyon Road to 7' Street in the city of Perris; 2) Award Agreement No. 07-31-069-00 for the revegetation adjacent to SR-74 Segment II, from 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7' Street in the city of Perris, to Pan American Landscaping for the amount of $45,500 plus a 9.8% contingency amount of $4,500 to cover potential change orders encountered during the revegetation project, for a total not to exceed contract authorization of $50,000; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 13, 2006 meeting, the Commission authorized staff to advertise to receive construction bids for the revegetation adjacent to SR-74 Segment II from 0.5 km east of Wasson Canyon Road to 7`" Street in the city of Perris. The overall objective of the Segment II revegetation work is the successful reestablishment of plant communities where they have been temporarily disturbed by the construction of the portion of the roadway project in Segment II. This revegetation project addresses the on -site mitigation measures, per special conditions under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act authorization, Nationwide Permit No. 14, the Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification, and the California Department of Fish and Game Section 1601 of the Fish and Game Code. Agenda Item 71 34 Construction of Segment II was completed and accepted by Ca!trans on October 23, 2006. The revegetation work for Segment II was to have been initiated as soon as possible during the winter months to assist in the reestablishment of the native plant communities. The project was advertised starting on December 20, 2006, with the bid opening on January 18, 2007. Four plan sets were sold and no bids were received on January 18, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. The project was re -advertised starting on January 24, 2007, with the original bid opening date set for March 15, 2007. The project was posted on. theb/uebook.com website and notification sent to landscape contractors in Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange Counties. The bid opening date was subsequently revised twice to May 2007, and August 2007, Addendum No. 1 and No. 2 due to the lack of sales of the bid package. Various contractors were contacted directly to generate interest in the project and during these discussions it was determined that the length of the plant establishment period was resulting in the lack ofinterest in the project. The contractors stated that it was very expensive for them to obtain the bonding to cover such a long period, and, due to the small size of the project, it was not financially feasible. The length of the plant establishment period was established by the regulatory agencies, which approved the Habitat Mitigation Monitoring program, and it could not be reduced or modified. Staff and legal counsel determined that modifications to the bonding requirements could be made to address the contractors' concerns. Addendum No. 3 was issued modifying the bonding requirements and extending the bid opening date to September 6, 2007. The project was reposted on theb/uebook.com and notifications were sent to over 200 landscape contractors in Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, San Diego, Imperial, Ventura, and Santa Barbara Counties. Seven plan sets were sold and one bid was received on September 6, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. Agenda Item 71 35 • • A summary of the bid received are shown in Table A: TABLE A Bid Summary Firm (In order from Low bid to High bid) Bid Amount Amount Over Low Bid Engineers Estimate r. $42,500.00 N/A 1 Pan American Landscaping 11261 Blix Street North Hollywood, CA 91602 $45,500.00 The bid was reviewed by staff and legal counsel, and all concurred that Pan American Landscaping's bid was the lowest responsive bid received for the project. A summary of the review of Pan American's bid and the responsiveness of the bid is detailed in Table B: TABLE B Bid Checklist Checklist Item Pan American 1 Bid Letter Yes 2 Schedule of Prices --- - Bid Sheet Completed Yes - Bid Item Comparison --- - w/Eng's Est Yes - w/other Bidders ---- - Balanced Bid Items Yes 3 Bid Bond Yes 4 List of Subcontractors None - Prime Performs > 50% Work Yes 5 Bidder Information Forms Yes - Reference Check Yes 6 Non -Collusion. Affidavit Yes 7 Evidence of Insurance To be provided with award 8 Was Bidder Responsive? Yes Agenda Item 71 36 Table C summarizes the costs associated with the revegetation project for the bid received: TABLE C Cost Summary ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION EnPieer's Estimate Pan American 1 Prepare Water Pollution Control Program $1,000.00 $1,000.00 2 Water Pollution Control $4,000.00 $3,000.00 3 Construction Area Signs $2,000.00 $2,000.00 4 Traffic Control System $2,000.00 $2,000.00 5 Revegetation (Grassland/Erosion Control) $18,500.00 $27,500.00 6 Plant Establishment Work $10,000.00 $7,500.00 7 Monitoring and Reporting $5,000.00 $2,500.00 TOTAL $42,500.00 $45,500.00 From staff and legal counsel's review of the bid received, staff recommends the award of Agreement No. 07-31-069-00 for the revegetation adjacent to SR-74 Segment II project to Pan American Landscaping in the amount of $45,500 plus a contingency amount of $4,500 to cover potential change orders encountered during the revegetation project. Therefore, the total contract authorization is $50,000. The standard Commission construction contract will be used, pursuant to legal counsel review. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2007/08 Amount: $50,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 222 31 81302 P3001 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Ni44,1tez,D7 Date: 10/16/2007 Agenda Item 71 37 AGENDA ITEM 7J r,. r,� • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst Sheldon Peterson, Program Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Commuter Rail Program Update STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Weekend Service Performance Q1/Q2 FY07 Passenger Trips IEOC Weekend Service a 0 2,800 2,400 2,000 1,600 1,200 800 400 0 01 �A 0A p1 0l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 1 �J� )��` �J� oe' J�p NO A z� e� eQA 0cow s eQA GSA 1 '•a 9, 9str, w N. ��P tihP .5 4fc' �y� titi ' y0 Daily passenger trips on the year-round IEOC Metrolink weekend service remained largely consistent through the first quarter. Service was annulled due to track work between Orange and Santa Ana stations in mid -September. Ridership is now recovering from the disruption. To date, the IEOC weekend service has provided 70,680 passenger trips since commencing September 15, 2006. This constitutes 51,748 additional trips resulting from year-round service compared to 18,932 Summerlink seasonal trips in 2005. The success of this service is due in large part to the coordinated initial marketing efforts among the Commission, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). Most all responsibilities for marketing of the service have transitioned to Metrolink, this has included revised seat drops, branding information, and a new Friend and Family Day Pass, debuting this fall. Agenda Item 7J 38 Toy Train Kicks off at North Main Corona on November 17 This year's Metrolink Holiday Toy Express will kickoff at Riverside's own North Main Corona station on November 17. As this year's host station, Commission staff will be working alongside Corona city staff and Metrolink to create a memorable event and accommodate the media and Vp Southern California Firefighters' Spark of Love Toy Drive, including approximately 15 fire trucks from across Southern California. The Commission will sponsor events including food and entertainment at each Riverside County station. Commissioners are welcome to attend and participate in the event. Metrolink's Holiday Toy Express has been delighting audiences for more than ten years, providing a free, enjoyable, community -based holiday experience for the people who live and work in the areas served by Metrolink. This year will be no different as the Holiday Toy Express travels to 50 cities throughout the Southland.. The Holiday Toy Express is a 450-ton Metrolink train decorated with giant glittering ornaments, animated displays, and more than 50,000 twinkling lights. November 17 November 24 2007 HOLIDAY TRAIN SCHEDULE Saturday i North Main Corona Riverside La Sierra Saturday Pedley 5:00 p.m. 5:45 p.m. 6:45 p.m. - 7:15 p.m. 7:45 p.m. - 8:15 p.m. 5:00 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. The train travels to Metrolink station cities throughout Southern California presenting a free live musical stage show at each stop; after the show kids of all ages have the opportunity to meet Santa and his friends after the show. The Holiday Toy Express supports the Southern California Firefighters' Spark of Love Toy Drive, which collects and distributes toys to needy children encouraging audience members to share their holiday spirit by donating a new unwrapped toy at the show. Agenda Item 7J 39 • Thanksgiving Day Service Metrolink will operate on an abbreviated schedule on Thanksgiving Day and Thanksgiving Friday as follows: IEOC Line 2007 THANKSGIVING DAY SERVIQV Special 4 round trip schedule. .'aT3>_._.� e C-4�:`?1 M871 M873 M875 M877 ' M870 M872 "s M874 M876 8:30 € 10:00 16:30 18:15 10:10 11:40 18:15 ' 20:00 i San Bernardino Line A regular Sunday schedule Antelope Valley Line a All Lines Riverside Line 6,000 5,600 a 5,200 v. 4,800 ✓ O 4,400 it 4,000 3,600 3,200 A regular Sunday schedule Full regular weekday schedule Passenger Trips Riverside Line 0'• UP Track Work p6 0 OrO 06 p1 p1 ;00 ;0O1 p1 07 p1 O�Q O°. ?k O� dad kee mac PQc �,zA ��� P��, �09. Month Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside line for the month of September averaged 5,263, an increase of 212, 4% more than the month of August. Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of 558 passenger trips. This is nearly 12% more than a year ago due primarily to 91 line passenger migration and strong on -time performance. Agenda Item 7J 40 Percentage On Time Performance (95% Goal) Riverside Line 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 0 Po 0b 'A0 Al p1 Ok 01 01 Month A� 01 01 �01 P coe September on -time performance averaged 96°% inbound (no change from August) and 99% outbound (+6% from August). There were 11 delays greater than five minutes during the month of September. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Line Passenger Trips Inland Empire Orange County Line 5,000 4,800 ii 4,600 F 4,400 `0 4,200 4! 4,000 3,800 3,600 p6 0° A`° `° k 0� p1 p1 Al AA 0A 0A gel 0�°, 4e� )o° <e' sec PQ� �a� �p� �o� Poi cep Month Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's 1E0C line for the month of September averaged 4,745, a decrease of 1 trip, no change from the month of August. The line has increased by 59 daily trips or 1 % from a year ago September 2006. Agenda Item 7J 41 • Percentage On Time Performance (95% Goal) Inland Empire Orange County Line 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 6) 5§3 00 00 1 O\ 6 o� 1 � � 1 �eQ o�ti dos Oed �a�A �e� ��� PQc �aap 'Jcp ,J�A PJ4 �e�o1 Month September on -time performance averaged 97% southbound (-2% from August) and 97% northbound (-1% from August). There were 15 delays greater than five minutes during the month of September. The following are primary causes: 91 Line Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations 2,800 2,600 to 2,400 .2. 2,200 F- 0 2,000 4i 1,800 1,600 TOTAL 3 1 0 Passenger Trips 91 Line 26% 8% 0% 66% 1,400 o`O QP Ao 0 0� 01 0� 6k 1 c0Q Oo 4 \-\ O�A )`1 Qe'' far PQ� � aA Month P `„ Daily passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 line for the month of September averaged 2,194 an increase of 81 trips, 4% more than the month of August. The line has decreased by 281 daily trips or -11 % from a year ago September 2006 due to the migration of riders back to the Riverside line. Agenda Item 7J 42 On Time Performance (95% Goal) 91 Line 100 rn 95 90 m 85 d 80 a 75 70 §3 p`o Q`o c§) A'\ 6 6 6 Al 'l 0 6 6 0eQ 0 \-\ OeG )ac �e'� far QQ� �a� ��� �J PJA ge9 Month September on -time performance averaged 97% inbound (-2% from August) and 97% outbound (no change from August). There were five delays greater than five minutes during the month of September. The following are primary causes: Signals/Track/MOW Dispatching Mechanical Operations TOTAL 2 0 0 3 40% 0% 0% 60% Connecting Transit Service Performance The Commission's role facilitating interconnectivity between Metrolink and connecting transit services is essential to ongoing viability of system. Such services address the needs of transit dependent riders as well as help mitigate congestion and the necessity for expensive parking capacity at our stations. The Commission is working to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of transit connections. In order to meet these requirements, the Commission has worked with Metrolink and local transit operators to offer connecting services to and from Riverside County Metrolink stations at no cost for those with valid Metrolink tickets. Within Riverside County, services include free transfers to routes operated by Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), RTA's Commuter Link service and Corona Cruiser. The following graphs show total monthly Metrolink transfer passenger trips on each of the three services. Agenda Item 7J 43 • • • Passenger Trips RTA Fixed Route 3,000 m 2,500 c F- 2,000 w 0 1,500 1,000 O'O OfO 00 6 6 6 6 5S\ 6\ O\ O\ O^ 5e� O�ti �°,' p,bcf )ar <<�e elan PQ� �aA°� ��� PJ� gm4 Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's connecting fixed routes (1, 3, 15, 16, 21, 29, and 38) totaled 2,156 for the month of September, a decrease of 810 trips, -27.31 % more than the month of August. Monthly trips decreased by 212 or -8.95% over the last fiscal year. RTA is currently researching an explanation for the decline. Passenger Trips RTA Commuter Link 7,000 6,400 m 5,800 F- 0 5,200 4,600 4,000 OHO }5§3 06 06 O, 01 0 50� �454 p��a� O'\ 01 oA O‘ PQ/ �aa �s> � POD c $2 Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on RTA's Commuter Link routes (202, 204, 206, and 208) totaled 4,065 for the month of September, a decrease of 1,069 trips, - 20.82% from the month of August. Monthly trips have increased by 410 or 1 1.22% over the last fiscal year. RTA is currently researching an explanation for the decline. Agenda Item 7J 44 Passenger Trips Corona Cruiser 700 600 o. 500 ►- 400 w 4t 300 200 100 Occ. CS° 06 06 6 O\ 01 6 01 6 O5 OA 01 .\4 O� ,sa� �e� mac PQ� tiS`a� JJ� �J� PJ� g0� Month Monthly Metrolink transfer trips on the Corona Cruiser totaled 462 for the month of September, an increase of 5, + 1 % from the month of August. Monthly trips have increased by 218 or 89.34% over the past fiscal year. This is partially attributed to the development and distribution of a promotional brochure in December and improved driver retention. Attachments: 1) Metrolink Average Weekday Passenger Trips 2) Metrolink Schedule Adherence Summary — Weekday Service Agenda Item 7J • 45 Os* W7MSAY Pneowl tom eW 8 %0 I%L L- %L %9 %ZL %9 %Z- %9- %L 90 deS en LO des e8ueU3 % %Z %b %0 %L %9 %Z %E %£ %0 LO Buy sn LO deS eeueyO % %Z £LE`Z4 176l'Z 94L'4 S19'9 £9Z'9 Z69 ZOO'ZL 64L'9 £90'4 L0 des %I.- LS£'14�' ELL'Z 44L'4 6L9'9 L90'9 089 4Z9'11. 4Z9.9 Z40'4 LOBnd %E- 099'14 EZO'Z 889'4 61.9'9 £60'5 999 Dal L£L'L 496'£ LOM %L- 688'Z4 8LCZ 914'4 L9L'9 Lbl'S OL9 4S6'll SS£'L 90L'4 LO unf %l L140£4 84E'Z £18'4 £89'9 LOE`S 9L9 SOCZL 8££'L £LZ'9 LOAeW %0 6S9'Z4 SLE'Z Len, 684'9 866'17 9L9 OLL'ZL EbE'L LLO'4 10AV %L £2.6'Z4 1.ln 8178'17 Z64'9 6Z6'4 £LL 1.9£'ZL 66Z'L 40L'4 LOaeW %£ 8O4'Z4 86Z'Z LOL'4 194'9 9Z8'4 8L9 ZZL'ZL 8LL'L 9£L'4 LOQad %6 960`L4 L4E'Z 1.0L'4 LE49 990'4 L89 Lee' LL 096'9 Z96'E LOuef %0 I.- Z48`1£ E89'L 40Z'4 1L8'9 08Z'b 9L9 9L6bL 499'9 ZZS'E 90OKI % I.- 981.`Z4 Z60'Z 9ZL'4 ZL9'9 OZO'S L49 LSO'ZI. Zbl.'L SE6'£ 90 noN %0 0£S`Z4 94Z'Z 9£9'4 1.99`9 096'4 OLL 1.6ZZL LSL'L OLO'4 90 PO %Z L9£`Z4 ,...: ,.. ,.., 9L4'Z .....:. 989'b ..._ 81.4'9 _ 90L'4 ,�. w Z99 a 80Z'ZL ZLL'L L£017 90 des ansnraW AvanoN - MOamm KNOW N331211H1 Sd12112139N3SMid Ava)133M 39V113AV MNI10AI13W • V Sep 06 Oct 06 METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE SUMMARY - WEEKDAY SERVICE Percentage of Trains Arriving Within 5 Minutes of Scheduled Time LATEST 13 MONTHS 98% 98% 96% 100% 98% 96% 94% 98% 94% 100%- 98% 96% 97% 99% 92% 98% 95% 96% 88% 68% 95% 95% 98% 95% 94% 96% 95% 94% 97%, 96% 95% 96% Nov 06 88% 89% 91% 92% 91% 91% 95% 96% 90% 91% 88% 89% 92% 87% 93% 93% 90°% 91% 91% Dec 06 Jan 07 Feb 07 Mar 07 Apr 07 97% 95% 99% 90% 97% 97% 97% 99% 99% 97% 95% 94% 96% 93% 97% 95% 83% 88% 93% 93% 97% 96% 97% 97% 97% 98% 97% 98% 99% 96% 98% 97% 28% 98% 100% 97% 97% 97% 99% 97% 86% 90% 91% 84% 88% 80% 98% 98% 99% 98% 90% 94% 92% 97% 95% 98% 93% 98% 96% 96% 98% 94% 90% 95% 94% 95% 94% 91% 92% 93% 98% 95% 97% 100% 94% 100% 92% 95% 100% 98% 95% 94% 95% 95% 96% 95% 94% 95% 97% 96% 95°% 95% 95% 94%a 96% May 07 Jun 07 97% 97% 99% 98% 94% 94% 97% 94% 98% 97% 98% 98% 99% 97% 100% 100% 98% 97% 98% 94% 97%, 95% 95% 96% 97% 93% 96% 94% 98% 96% 98% 99% 97% 96% 97% 97%, 96% 97% Jul 07 100% 98% 95% 90% an, 98% 96% 99% 97% 94% 91% 98% 98% 93% 96% 97% 96% 98% 96% Aug 07 Sep 07 99% 94% 95% 96% 91% 83% 92% 95% 98% 89% 92% 90% 97% 96% 99% 96%, 96% .93% 96% 99% 97% 95% 92% 94% 96% 95% 98% 96% 99% ,+.98% 97% 97% 96% 92% 94% 94% 94% 94% Peak Period Trains AnvIn Within 5 Minutes of Scheduled Time Sep e7 Trains 93% 92% 93% 97% 93% 85% 100% 95% 98% 99% 90% 98% 93% No adjustments Have been made for relievable delays. Terminated trains are considered OT if they wereorr8me at point of termination: Annulled trains are not Included In the on -time calculation. 98% 95% .. 97% 94%...... 93% 94% 01'40 AGENDA ITEM 8 11 r • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee ` Edda Rosso, Program Manager Richard Bryan, Bechtel Program Manager Stan Haas, Bechtel Project Coordinator THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement for Construction of a Six -Level Parking Structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink Station BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award Agreement No. 08-33-022-00 to McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. for the construction of a six -level parking structure at the North Main Corona Metrolink station in the amount of S 19,100,083 plus a contingency amount of $1,999,917 for a total contract authorization of $21.1 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its September 12, 2007 meeting, the Commission authorized staff to advertise for bids to construct the North Main Corona parking structure project. The new parking structure facility will accommodate 1,100 parking spaces. The project was advertised on September 17, 2007, with the bid opening on November 5, 2007. Four bids were received and opened on November 5, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. Agenda Item 8 48 A summary of the bids received are shown in Table A: TABLE A North Main Corona Parking Structure Project Bid Summary Firm (In order from Low Bid to High Bid) Bid Amount ` Amount Over Low Bid Engineer's Estimate $25,500,000 N/A 1 McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. $19,100,083 Lowest Responsive Bidder 2 Bomel Construction Company, Inc. $20,321,000 $1,220,917 3 ARB Structures, Inc. $20,449,149 $1,349,066 4 T. B. Penick & Sons, Inc. $20,769,000 $1,668,917 The bids were reviewed by staff and are currently under review by legal counsel. The McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. bid was the lowest responsive and responsible bid, pending legal counsel approval, received for the project. A summary of the review of the four bids received and the responsiveness of the bids are detailed in Table B: TABLE B North Main Corona Parking Structure Project Bid Checklist Checklist Item McCarthy Bonne! ARB Penick 1 Bid Letter yes yes yes yes Bid Comparison --- --- --- --- - w/Eng's Est yes yes yes yes - w/other Bidders yes yes yes yes 3 Bid Bond Included yes yes yes yes 4 List of Subcontractors yes yes yes yes Prime Performs > 30% Work yes yes yes yes Agenda Item 8 49 • 5 Bidder Information Forms yes yes yes yes - Reference Check yes n/a n/a n/a 6 Non -Collusion Affidavit yes yes yes yes 7 Evidence of Insurance to be provided with award to be provided with award ij to be provided with award to be provided with award 8 Was Bidder Responsive? yes yes yes yes Table C below summarizes the subcontractors listed by McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. TABLE C North Main Corona Parking Structure Project McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. Subcontractors Name Location Telephone License No. Type of Work Subcontract Amount Mountain Movers San Marcos (760)510-9019 767120 Site Clearing! Earthwork $176,000 Atlas -Allied, Inc. Anaheim (714)630-3633 437235 Site Utilities $258,000 Artarete of California Norco (951)371-7887 835257 Site Concrete $263,000 Sierra Landscape Palm Desert (760)328-8900 492839 Landscape & Irrigation $135,000 Foundation Piles Fontana (909)350-1584 360640-A Precast Driven Piles $980,000 Harris/Arizona Phoenix, Arizona (602)254-0091 C50-638636 Rebar &Post Tensioning $2,645,000 Structure Cast Bakersfield (661)833-4490 774870 Architectural Precast Panels 6'1,318,000 W.C. Brown Welding Rialto (909)421-7990 537342 Structrual Steel, Misc. Metals, Metal Deck, Ornamental Screens and Railings $1,025,000 Alonso Paintin g Spring Valley (619)660 5395 703657 Painting $291,000 Agenda Item 8 50 TABLE C North Main Corona Parking Structure Project McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. Subcontractors Thyssen Krupp Elevator Los Angeles (323)278-2843 651371 it Elevators $452,000 Deel Mechanical Gardena 1310)532-8870 352015 Plumbing $213,000 Retro Fire Protection Huntington Beach (7141842-5630 731 144 Fire Protection $148,000 Apollo Brea (7141256-8414 290194 Electrical $2,000,000 Based on staff's review of the bids received, and pending legal counsel approval, staff is recommending that the Commission award Agreement No. 08-33-022-00 to McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. for the' construction of the North Main Corona parking structure project in the amount of $19,100,083 plus a contingency amount of $1,999,917 for a total contract authorization of $21.1 million. The standard Commission construction contract will be used, pursuant to legal counsel review. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2007/08 FY 2008/09+ amount: $10,000,000 $15,000,000 Source of Funds: STIP, CMAQ, and FTA Budget Ad ustment: No N/A GLA No.: 221 33 81301 P3808 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \ ,mitt Date: 11 /06/2007 Agenda Item 8 51 AGEND !} A ITEM 9 fi • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Tanya Love, Program Manager i, THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file a presentation on the Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its January 12, 2005 meeting, the Commission approved participation in the development of a Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP) in order to form a consensus for an implementation plan for the region in partnership with the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura. The MCGMAP effort modeled goods movement growth trends, identified possible public -private partnerships, highlighted near to long term strategies, and developed a list of potential projects to be funded. Consultant staff from Wilbur Smith Associates will present the draft Executive Summary report for the MCGMAP at the November 14, 2007 Commission meeting. Attachment: Draft Executive Summary Agenda item 9 52 I). Prepared far: ; Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) Ventura CountyTransportation Commission (VCTC) California Department of Transportation(Caltrans) Districts 7,8,11 & 12 San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAL) Southern California Association of Governments. (SCAG) Prepared by: Wilbur Smith Associates, Inc. Arellano Associates Economics & Politics, Inc. George R. Fetty & Associates Gill V. Hicks & Associates, Inc. Jones &Stokes The RNO Group Sharon Greene &Associates Urban Solutions, LLC Introduction Purpose The Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan (MCGMAP or Action Plan) represents an unprecedented partnership between county, regional, and state transportation agencies to address the goods movement challenge faced by the Southern California counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Ventura, and Imperial (Gt:e Figure 1). Collectively, these counties comprise the United States' premiere international commerce gateway, handling 44 percent of the Nation's containerized imports. This preeminence reflects Southern California's competitive advantage derived from its unique combination of large deep -water ports, the California/Mexico border crossings, the West Coast's largest population concentrations, one of the Nation's largest densities of transloading, consolidation, and distribution warehouses, and intermodal facilities. The region also has unparalleled connectivity by all-weather Interstate freeways and transcontinental rail lines to all points within the United States. However, the rising tide of goods moving through the region imposes multiple mobility, environmental, and community impacts that degrade the region's quality of life and threaten the continued growth of the Southern California freight movement industry on which most of the nation relies. The MCGMAP identifies actions to be undertaken by the partner agencies, together with State and federal agencies and the private sector, to maintain Southern California's role as a center for international trade, commerce and manufacturing by planning for freight growth while simultaneously and aggressively mitigating environmental and local community impacts. The Action Plan sets forth a way to structure and understand the issues and defines actions that should be taken to address infrastructure needs, environmental concerns, and community impacts within the context of that structure. It incorporates and builds on existing studies and initiatives already in progress, and from them develops an integrated, comprehensive, regional approach. IllThis Executive Summary provides an overview of the region's goods movement challenges, the MCGMAP vision, principles, plan approach, and recommended actions. Also included are the lists of goods movement projects needed to maintain mobility in the face of forecasted demand. Specific and detailed information is contained within the topical chapters of the Action Plan. Additional information is also provided within the contents of technical appendices and memoranda (Tech Memos) prepared throughout the course of this effort, which are available on the project website (http://www.metro.net/mcgmap). Multi -County. Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary M'CGMAP -: The Master Plan for Goods Movement in Southern ;California The Action Plan is the master plan for goods movement in Southern California and is intended to be used as a guide in preparation of state, regional, and local transportation plans. The objectives of the MCGMAP are to develop strategies that:1) Address the goods movement infrastructure capacity needs of the region; 2) reduce goods movement emissions to help achieve air quality goals; and 3) improve the quality of life and community livability for Southern California residents. The Action Plan is regional in scope, so that the Plan's analyses of potential strategies and investments are at a corridor rather than a local or project -specific level. While detailed project -level analyses were not part of this effort, they are nevertheless critical and will beicbnducted as part of subsequent project development efforts. The MCGMAP is intended to be a living document that will be revised and updated when major changes occur and if resources are available. MCGMAP Partner Agency Roles Goods movement is a diverse industry with abroad and disparate group of public and private sector stakeholders, each with its own roles and responsibilities. The MCGMAP partners are the transportation and planning agencies that co -manage the development of the Action Plan: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Orange County Transportation Authority,Riverside County Transportation Commission, San Bernardino Associated Governments, San Diego Association' of Governments, Southern California Association of Governments, Ventura County Transportation Commission, and Caltrans Districts 7, 8, 11, and 12. The MCGMAP partners plan, fund, maintain, operate, construct and implement multi -modal transportation projects and influence the goods movement system through the regional planning and programming of funds to transportation projects. Other organizations, such as the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, have authority to plan and construct transportation and facility improvements within the Ports' jurisdiction, while the South Coast Air Quality Management District develops and implements plans to improve the region's air quality. Decisions regarding land use, arterial improvements and the permitting of warehouses and transloading centers are made by local municipalities. Regional, state, and federal agencies have varying regulatory authorities over the trucking and rail industries, but the MCGMAP partners have little ability to regulate the operations, business practices, or pollutant emissions of the private sector goods movement operators, and no authority to regulate shippers and ocean carriers. As a result, the MCGMAP partners have focused primarily on goods movement infrastructure while acknowledging the essential roles to be played by the regulatory agencies, the Ports Clean Air Action Plan, and public or private technology initiatives. Given their defined roles and responsibilities, the MCGMAP partners cannot fully implement many of the plan's recommended strate- gies on their own. Therefore, to fully realize the benefits of this plan, continued collaboration and consensus building among the MC- GMAP partners and other public and private sector stakeholders will be critical. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary MCGMAP - The Master Plan for Goods Movement in `Southern California Simultaneous and Continuous Improvement Figure 2: MCGMAP Simultaneous • An Overarching Strategy and Continuous Approach The vision of the Action Plan -a cleaner and healthier environment, alternative mobility strategies, and fair -share investment approaches - must be implemented through simultaneous and continuous improvement of the environment and infrastructure. Figure 2 depicts the concept and importance of a simultaneous and continuous approach. Environmental mitigation, including significant cleanup of emissions from ships, trains, and trucks, is critical to reduce the impact of existing and increased freight flows and to reach the region's air quality attainment targets. Expanded marine terminals, and inter -modal, rail, and highway infrastructure are needed to accommodate the growing freight volume. The freight growth that is accommodated through these actions provides the economic base for public and private investment in infrastructure and the environmental cleanup. The vision of the MCGMAP is to implement these elements in parallel - capacity, investment, and mitigation - each of which is necessary for the other to succeed. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary The project partners developed four core mandates and six implementation principles to provide the guiding framework for the develop- ment of the MCGMAP. CORE MANDATES ENVIRONMENT: Avoid, Reduce, and Mitigate Environmental, Community, and Health Impacts Environmental and community impacts must receive equal attention in the implementation of solutions. MOBILITY: Promote the Safe and Efficient Movement of All Transportation Modes and Reduce Congestion Existing and projected traffic growth will result in the significant deterioration of the region's highway and rail system's.performance ca- pabilities. The region's transportation system presents significant safety concerns for the public, particularly at -grade crossings and truck accidents, and increasing truck traffic in neighborhoods. ECONOMY: Ensure the Economic Well -Being of the Region and the State Goods movement is an important segment of the MCGMAP region and the U.S. trade economy. Goods movement and the associated in- dustries (e.g., logistics) provide direct and indirect benefits to the region's economy. Each new logistics job supports two new jobs in the economy. FUNDING: Secure the Region's Fair Share of Public and Private Funds for Investment in the Freight Transportation System Although the region's goods movement system serves markets within and outside of California, these markets and associated system us- ers are not paying their fair share to offset the costs of regional freight congestion and related health impacts. While still advocating for dedicated federal and state funding sources, user -based public -private funding arrangements must be a major component of the financing for critical projects. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary IMPLEMENTATION PRINCIPLES The MCGMAP builds upon the principles set forth in the Statewide Goods Movement Action Plan (January 2007). The following represent implementation principles specific to MCGMAP: 1. Guideline: The Action Plan is the master plan for goods movement in Southern California and is intended to be used as guidance in the preparation of state, regional, and local transportation plans. The Action Plan can also be a tool for local jurisdictions to make informed land use decisions. 2. Investment: Investments in goods movement infrastructure will be implemented on a simultaneous and continuous basis with invest- ments in environmental/community mitigation. 3. Cost Distribution: A fair share of the cost of the impacts of goods movement on transportation infrastructure, environment, and com- munities must be borne by those benefiting from it. 4. Management: The need for institutional mechanisms for financing or implementing projects, will be defined as such needs are clearly identified. S. Public Benefit: Projects supported by public/private partnerships and private projects supported by public funding should demonstrate a clear public benefit. 6. Land Use Compatibility: Partner agencies shall encourage land use decisions that will result in buffers - both open and developed - that separate goods movement infrastructure and sensitive receptors such as residential areas, schools, and hospitals. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary CHALLENGES FOR THE NATIONAL TRADE GATEWAY Currently, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles (San Pe- dro Bay ports) accommodate more than 40 percent of all international containerized cargo into and out of the U.S. and were ranked 5th in the world in 2005 (see Figure 3). All indications point to a future demand in international freight flows that will exceed even the most aggressive efforts by the ports, railroads, and transportation agencies to accommo- date it. Container volumes through the San Pedro Bay ports are projected to nearly triple from 15.7 million TEUs (twenty - foot equivalent units) in 2006 to 42.5 million TEUs by 2030. These forecasts are constrained by anticipated port capac- ity at a level, significantly below the TEU demand projected for the ports in federally sponsored analyses. A large portion of this trade is simply "through -traffic," degrading air qual- ity and impacting the region's quality of life, while providing limited economic benefit to the region. Approximately 77% of the container -based goods handled by the San Pedro Bay ports are consumed outside the Southern California region. Only 23°% are consumed within the region. Freight flowing through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which to- taled $256 billion in 2005, reaches every state in the conti- nental U.S. as shown in Figure 4. Figure 3: Major Container Port Gateways Major Container Port Gateway (2005) t j 25,000 w ✓ o 0 20,000 e - c 15,000 m c 0 w 10,000 a d z 5,000 2 c c Q 0 m n 0 a m 5th Largest: Globally ; rn Y at 0 z - c 0 0 it } IB 'Ul d g Z.- R 9 O t i U Trucks traversing the California/Mexico border crossing area utilize three primary ports of entry (POE) - Otay Mesa, Tecate, and Calexico East. Mexico is California's number one export market and is fastest expanding component of the San Diego regional economy. The Otay Mesa -Mesa de Otay Port of Entry is the busiest commercial border crossing between California and Mexico, handling more than 1.4 million trucks and $28.6 billion worth of goods in both directions in 2006. This trade represents the third highest dollar value of trade among all land border crossings between the United States and Mexico. Another $1.2 billion in merchandise and more than 140,000 trucks crossed at the Tecate -Tecate POE. For Imperial County, the Calexico East/Calexico II POE processed $11.3 billion in goods and 614,000 trucks in 2006. Nearly 80% of these truck trips stay within the state. Figure 4: Total Value of Containerized Trade Moving through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, 2005 Wore een Imports $2.88 Exposes SPA B Shona of Total 12% Southwest Imports $78.3 B Exports $11.7 B Share of Total 32.1% great Plains Imports $16.6 B Expects $2.7 B Shure of Total lS% South Central Imports $273 B Imports $325 B Exports $32R Exports$S.28 Share of Total 127% yore of Total 14.13% Source: Port of Los Angeles, Port of Long Beach, and Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority - [Peat Lakes Imports $45.6 8 Eepnts $8.1 B 'lure,ofTotal 21.0% Atlantic Seaboard Imports $23.8 B BePorta $2.18 Share of • - 3 38.1% Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary The region is faced with multiple mobility, environmental, community impact, funding, and economic challenges: Mobility Challenge - The study area's ports, airports, rail lines and inter -modal terminals have existing capacity constraints that undermine the efficiency and productivity of the system as a whole. Furthermore, the existing roadway and rail networks are reaching capacity. As a result, the system today is susceptible to disruptions to the movement of goods, causing delays that reduce the quality of services and increase costs to consumers. The mobility challenge is further exacerbated by the fact that the roadways, and rail networks that accom- modate the movement of goods are often the same as those utilized by motorists and passengers for the movement of people. Modeling for the SCAG region (defined as Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura, Riverside, and Imperial Counties) forecasts that truck vehicle miles of travel (VMT) will increase by over 110% by 2030, growing from a level of 22.4 million VMT in 2000 to 48.4 million VMT by 2030. Some freeways in the region currently handle up to 40,000 trucks per day, and it is projected that these freeways may have to handle up to 80,000 trucks per day by 2025. As a result of the growth in passenger and truck traffic, the highway system's performance will deteriorate significantly. In fact, average speeds will drop from 35.9 mph in 2005 to 31.9 mph in 2030, resulting an average of 5.4 million hours of delay daily for all traffic. Furthermore, freight rail volume is projected to increase from 112 trains per day in 2000 to 250 trains per day in 2025 along the BNSF and Union Pacific mainline rail network. The current and future mobility challenges for the region are daunting and require immediate action as well as proactive steps to address future needs. Environmental and Community Challenges - The goods movement system directly affects quality of life. This includes traffic congestion, truck intrusion into neighborhoods, safety, land use incompatibility, poor air quality and related health impacts, restricted mobility and delay at rail crossings, noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. The dimensions of these impacts are staggering when viewed within the context of Southern California's designation as a non -attainment region for air quality. The use of bunker and diesel fuels, predominantly for the transport of freight by ocean going vessels, is a large con- tributor to the deterioration of the region's air quality. Furthermore, new health studies are drawing ever stronger conclusions about the association of air pollution with public health effects such as asthma, reduced lung function, and cancer risk that target the most vulnerable in the port communities and around other logistics centers - children. Implications of these findings are reflected in the estimated public eealth impacts summarized by California Air Resource Board (CARB) in Table 1. Solving the challenge of moving freight is greatly complicated by the knowledge that failure to convert large proportions of the railroad en- gines and truck fleet to low -emitting or zero -emitting engines in the near future will result in missing the regional emission reduction targets needed by 2014 to meet the federal annual PM 2.5 standard, and by 2019 to meet the federal 24-hour PM 2.5 standard. Failure to meet the budget for the State Implementation Plan for air quality could result in a cessation of the flow of federal funds for highway projects. Thus, mobility and environmental challenges are heavily intertwined. Annual (2005) Health Effects of PM and Ozone Pollution from Freight Transport in California Health OutcomeCases 2005 Valuation per Year . ($Millions) • Suurce: CALTR QNS Dirtrict 7 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Funding Challenges- The goods movement system is significantly underfunded. Projects and programs identified in this Action Plan show funding needs on the order of $50 billion over the next 30 years. Despite accommodating most of the nation's international trade volumes, Southern California has received a dispro- portionately low share of federal and state funding for goods movement. More- over, the private sector's role in funding regional and nationally significant goods movement projects to date has been limited. Economic Challenges - Despite its impacts, international trade provides significant benefits to the region. The logistics industry provides both direct and indirect benefits to the region's economy. Economic studies show that logistics activity is responsible for $90.7 billion, or 6.6%, of the nearly $1.4 trillion in economic activity annually in Southern California. The indirect or induced impact repre- sents another $170 billion or 12.4%. Each logistics job supports 2.2 new jobs in the economy. This contribution to the economy is significant and is important to achieving the MCGMAP vision. Conversely, the economic benefits of goods movement can be negatively impact- ed by delays and congestion. At the Otay Mesa and Tecate international border crossings, inadequate and aging infrastructure and more stringent security re- quirements caused the U.S. and Mexico binational economy to lose $3.9 billion and about 21,900 jobs during 2007. The border delays in freight movement result in increased transportation costs and interruptions in manufacturing and delivery cycles. In order to maintain the economic vitality of the region, the economic benefits of goods movement must be leveraged and expanded. One of the challenges for the region is to translate a portion of these economic benefits into a stream of funding that addresses the infrastructure improvements made necessary by the increased movement of goods within and through Southern California. In addition, the eco- nomic growth attainable through increased logistics activity is needed to finance the cleanup of environmental problems that have been allowed to accumulate. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Multi -County Goods Movement ACtion Plan Draft Executive Summary 9 'Source: to€TRANS Currently, goods passing through the Southern California seaports and land ports of entry with Mexico belong to one of three modal "market segments":1) On -dock and off-dock/near dock; 2) distribution/delivery; and 3), transload. By identifying the modes of travel for goods, a market segmented approach can be developed that will allow for the region to better target improvements and funding sources for goods movement projects and associated environmental and community impact mitigation measures. Understanding the Market Segments . Figure 5 depicts the three primary market segments. Note that the specific percentages listed may vary on a daily basis and do not account for domestic goods movement, which represents a significant share of truck VMT in Southern California. - Direct Shipment from on-dockand.off-dock/near dock- Approximately 40%of containers passing through the Ports of Los Ange- les/Long Beach leave the region by rail utilizing either on -dock rail at the marine terminals or off-dock/near dock rail inter -modal facilities. These goods are destined for areas outside the MCGMAP region, including the central and eastern United States. As a result, funding sources for goods movement can be better targeted since the direct benefits to shippers and the nation can be clearly.shown. This includes additional state and federal goods movement funding, as well as container fees levied on shippers who receive direct benefits from improved efficiency of the goods movement system. - Transload- Approximately 37%of containers passing through the Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach are either trucked directly out of the region or leave the region after an intermediate stop at a warehouse or distribution center. These goods may arrive at the ports as a single container, be transported to an inland distribution center by truck, be broken down into smaller units while at a warehouse or distribution center, then loaded onto either truck or rail to be moved to their final destinations. Such goods use more specific routes through the MCGMAP region and provide better opportunities for targeting of specific routes, users, or impacts relative to local distribution/delivery. This includes truck replacement/retrofit programs, the development of separated corridors that move between clustered warehouse and distribution centers, and concepts such as inland ports and virtual container yards (yard operations to reduce the number of unproductive container truck trips). - Distribution/Delivery - Approximately 23% of containers passing through the Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach stay within the Southern California region, with the associated benefits and impacts. Because the origins and destinations for these goods are as dispersed as the people and communities that rely on them, the trucks transporting these goods use various roadways and routes for travel and blend into all other vehicular traffic within the region. Domestic goods movement, such as local delivery, construc- tion, manufacturing, and service/utility trucking exhibit similar travel patterns. Because the users and shippers of this modal market are so widely varied, it is difficult to target individual users for funding without ignoring other users. Traditional funding sources for roadway improvements and alternative funding approaches for roadway tolling or congestion pricing will be needed to address this market segment. �, 'ba"tli^�dV,'.�'�3`�`b i`e��4x .=�k2h�,xc'zs?�2-53# �,.fw.�.�l,is.... ..e.. :�i=i"�'2i^ 3'3'.^C3iti✓.34.� °w+SaC.'ki�{v%`. .�: • 70 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Understanding Freight Flows. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 11 12 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Action Plan Framework The MCGMAP is structured around tour sets of actions, each of which is related to a component or segment of the goods movement market. Pages 10 and 11 discuss the concept of market segmentation of the goods movement flows within and through Southern California. It is a concept for structuring the problem in a way that lends itself to more targeted and cost-effective solutions. The three basic market seg- ments of freight flows are:. • Direct intermodal rail shipment from on -dock and off-dock/near-dock to lo- cations outside the region • Transload (regional trips with an intermediate stopping point) • Local distribution/delivery by trucks The MCGMAP strategy distributes four "action sets" across the three basic market segments. This represents the basic structure upon which MCGMAP is built. The four action sets include: 1. Accelerate regional environmental mitigation 2. Relieve congestion and improve mobility 3. Improve operational efficiency 4. Develop equitable public/private funding strategy Table 2 illustrates the core elements of the MCGMAP strategy by identifying the types of actions appropriate to address the needs of each market segment. In some cases, such as the environmental strategies, similar actions cut across all the mar- ket segments, but the appropriate source of funding from which to draw resources may vary. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 13 FREIGHT MODAL MARKET SEGMENT Action Plan Framework ACTION 1-Accelerate Regional Environmental Mitigation Freight moves destined outside of Southern California (-52°0) - No Stops within Region -' Intermodal Rail" Freight moves destined outside of Southern Cali ornia (-25%) - With at Least One Stop within Region - "Regional Trucks" Local freight moves within Southern California (-23%) - Multiple S 74 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Action ,Plan Framework ACTION 2.- Relieve Congestion and Increase Mobility ACTION 3 - Improve . Operational Efficiency. is ... -" 4 ACTION 4 - Develop Equitable Public/ Private Funding Strategy Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 75 Accelerate Environmental Mitigation Goods movement imposes significant costs on community livability and the environment. Therefore, the MCGMAP partners consider air quality improvements and regional environmental mitigation an intrinsic part of a regional goods movement system. The Action Plan recognizes that a regional approach is necessary, with the focus on cleaning up emissions at the source (i.e. the powertrains of ships; locomotives, trucks, and harbor equipment) not one based simply on project -by -project mitigation.The simultaneous and continu- ous implementation of environmental mitigation strategies is a leading imperative for this ActkIn Plan and will require action at two levels: 1) Region -wide approaches; and 2) project -specific mitigation measures. Region -wide Approaches A systems approach is required to reduce the air quality, community and environmental impacts of goods movement flowing into and through the region. This approach has three components - acceleration of the funding and implementation of air quality plans already prepared, strengthening of fuel and engine standards, and institutional policies. • Acceleration of funding and implementation of air quality plans - Some of the nation's most aggressive clean air improvement plans are now in place in Southern California: the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Manage- ment Plan (AQMP), and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Emission Reduction Plan. The MCGMAP supports these plans and proposes to accelerate the implementation of the strategies in those plans. Accelerating the environmental cleanup from goods movement sources is one of the principle themes of the environmental actions in the MCGMAP. • Strengthening of fuel and engine standards - Regulations that promote the use of clean fuels and engine standards/technologies should be strengthened beyond those currently proposed. This will need to be supported by accelerated research and development of cleaner technologies by private industry, and by implementation assistance from state and federal regulatory agencies. These actions by pri- vate industry and regulatory agencies will allow regional and local strategies and incentive programs in the CAAP and AQMD to have greater effect. • Institutional policies - Cooperative and coordinated institutional and development policies enacted by local jurisdictions and the development industry could result in environmental and community benefits. Such policies could include: 1) Designating quiet zones for rail corridors; 2) amending zoning and land use regulations to better avoid non -compatible land uses (separating goods movement activities from residential areas; buffering); and 3) establishing mitigation banking and/or development of pooled funds for mitigation (e.g., land use changes, purchasing green space along freight corridors, diesel truck retrofits, funds for health clinics, etc.). The partner agencies have embarked on a collaborative effort with community stakeholders and the private sector to develop such guidelines (see first bullet under specific actions). Project Specific Mitigation Measures. While the proposed broader regional strategies will result in significant reductions in emissions for the study area as a whole, project spe- cific mitigation measures are often most effective at the local level, resulting in more tangible benefits for local neighborhoods and com- munities. Therefore, the Action Plan supports the use of project -specific revenue mechanisms to help fund mitigation efforts. Examples include: • Use of best available technology and best practices for project construction and operational impacts. • Compliance with natural resource statutes (e.g., federal and state Endangered Species Acts and Clean Water Acts, Migratory Bird Treaty Act) • Inclusion of "smart" design and good planning principles, such as landscaped buffering, noise barriers, exterior light shielding and positioning, separation of incompatible land uses, and wetlands protection. • 76 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Relieve Congestion and Improve Mobility Region -wide congestion relief and increased mobility cannot be achieved without significant investment in infrastructure, coupled with improvements in efficiency and productivity. Utilizing the market segmentation approach, various crucial capital improvements were iden- tified for each of the modes involved in the movement of goods. Increased Intermodal and Mainline Rail Capacity Increases in mainline rail capacity and on -dock rail improvements at the ports are critical to zne efficient transport of intermodal freight bound for destinations outside the region. The Action Plan recommends implementation of rail improvements in accordance with the San Pedro Bay Ports Master Plans as well as triple tracking the BNSF mainline from Los Angeles to San Bernardino and double tracking the two Union Pacific corridors. These improvements must be done in concert with the grade separations and safety improvements outlined in the multi -county Alameda Corridor East (ACE) Trade Corridor program. Implementing the mainline rail capacity enhancements together with the grade separation of railroad crossings can maximize efficiency and cost-effectiveness while also providing an opportunity to maximize funding from federal and state sources and accelerate the delivery of the needed improvements. Grade separation of the rail -to -rail Colton crossing as well as other rail -roadway grade separations near the the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, and San Diego, and at other key Los Angeles County locations are also critical. Improved Highways/Roadways The Plan recommends three tiers of highway actions. The first tier includes major improvements on roadways and bridges in proximity to the ports/border crossings and other major freight activity centers (examples include the Gerald Desmond Bridge replacement project, the SR-47 Expressway, 1-110 connectors, High Desert Corridor, SR-78 Brawley Bypass, and the San Diego Border Corridors). Tier two is comprised of corridor -level investigation of alternative technologies, separated mass flow appli- cations (e.g., the 1-710 Corridor Improvements) as well as dedicated freight guide- ways/truck lanes with the use of clean engine trucks and/or clean Long Combination Vehicles (LCVs), if such vehicles could be authorized to operate on dedicated facilities onCalifornia safely with minimal impacts on surrounding communities. Further con- ideration of LCVs will require a detailed analysis of potential capital and operational impacts. This tier focuses on new technologies as well as new application of methods not widely used in California. Consequently, these projects will require additional detailed analysis before they can proceed. Tier three projects encompass capital and operational improvements that in addition to assisting with the efficient movement of goods, are also beneficial to mixed flow traffic. Such improvements include modifica- tion of key freeway -to -freeway interchanges to alleviate operational and geometric bottlenecks, addition of auxiliary lanes, shoulder improvements and other safety and operational improvements on roadways heavily used by trucks. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 17 Any comprehensive strategy to address mobility, improve predict- ability and enhance safety needs to address system and corridor capacity. This includes improvements to the operational efficiency of the region's goods movement system. The operational efficiency of various segments of the goods movement system can be im- proved based on specific modal market segments. Improve Marine Terminal Productivity, Truck Turn Times, and Intermodal Operations In order to meet the future demand, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach will increase their operational productivity from the existing level of 4,700 TEUs per acre per year to almost 11,000 TEUs.per acre per year. 'The current focus is on increasing on - dock rail use and extending hours of operation to off-peak time periods (PIERPASS). Additional strategies include the transport of unsorted containers from the ports to inland railyards separated from residential areas for the creation of destination trains, as well as introducing new technologies such as optical character recogni- tion (OCR) and radio frequency identification tags'(RFID), and the evaluation of the feasibility of a virtual container yard to reduce the number of unproductive empty container truck trips. Improve Highway Operations Increased implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), weigh -in -motion (WIM) systems, highway pricing such as Open Road Tolling (ORT) collection systems, improved incident management, and enforcement of driver and operating restric- tions can improve highway operations. ITS solutions allow for truck routing, traffic control during construction or maintenance, as well as the shifting of truck movement to off-peak times. WIM bypass systems are an effective means of traffic management in the prox- imity of weigh stations. The system helpsmaintain normal traffic flow and prevents traffic backup onto the mainline freeway result- ing from commercial vehicles entering and exiting weigh stations. Open Road Tolling allows users to travel at highway speeds on the mainline while their tolls are collected electronically overhead, re- ducing congestion and travel times for passenger and commercial vehicles. California has established a statewide standard for use at all toll roads and bridges utilizing the "FasTrak" device. 78 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Develop Equitable Public/; Private: Funding 5040jy ,a s Funding and implementation of the recommended actions, projects, and programs and their associated mitigations will require a coordinat- ed effort by the private sector and public sector at all levels of government. It is critical that all beneficiaries of goods movement participate in funding infrastructure improvements as well as environmental mitigation. Beyond its value to the regional economy, the existing border crossings and commercial trade with Mexico are also critical to the regional and bi-national economies. Cross -border goods have origins and destinations to California/regional retail markets and manufacturers to shipping beyond California through the San Pedro Bay Ports and the Inland Empire Rail/Intermodal distribution centers. �} To illustrate the shortfall in public funding, the Alameda Corridor -East Trade Corridor, which would provide much needed grade -separation projects to reduce congestion and emissions throughout the region, has an 83%funding shortfall - $3.8 billion out of the $4.4 billion total. Maximize the Study Area's Fair Share of State and Federal Funds Federal assistance is essential to compensate for the disproportionate local and regional costs for the goods movement infrastructure (and associated regional environmental and community impacts and necessary mitigations) provided to the rest of the nation. The next national transportation funding reauthorization legislation must recognize the importance of funding a national goods movement system, establish appropriate levels of federal funding support, and provide further opportunity for flexibility in the use of federal funds. The four freight - related programs of key relevance are 1) Projects of National and Regional Significance, 2) National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program, 3) Freight Intermodal Distribution Pilot Program, and 4) Truck Parking Facilities Program. Though state and federal funds are needed, any funding for private infrastructure to increase capacity and facilitate the throughput of goods must ensure that public dollars are used in return for public benefits, not merely for benefits to the private logistics system. The development of public -private benefit as- sessments among the private beneficiaries and public agencies is one method to address this issue. Private Sector Contribution Recognizing funding shortfalls for infrastructure projects and the fact that private industry benefits from an improved goods movement system, the MCGMAP recommends efforts to secure private revenue sources including user fees. This could be done through pending leg- islative efforts or by other means such as ongoing efforts by the San Pedro Bay ports to negotiate cargo fees for infrastructure and environ- oental mitigation projects. The types of user fees that should be considered include congestion pricing, port -assessed cargo or container es, industry -supported programs similar to PIERPASS, and VMT-based taxes or gas taxes for trucks. The Action Plan addresses the need convert the value of improvements to the study area's goods movement system into revenue for improving infrastructure and mitigating impacts. Federal and state funds require local/private matching funds, thus private sector contributions will add strength to applications for leveraging federal and state funds. Stakeholders in San Diego and Baja California, Mexico are investigating the potential for use of public funds together with private financ- ing and toll fees for a new border crossing, highways, and federal inspection staffing at Otay Mesa East, California / Mesa de Otay II, Baja California. Similar pursuits for new border crossings or expansions are also projected along the Imperial County, California/ Mexicali, Baja California border. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 19 Figure 6: Map of Potential Future System Potential Future System Regional Mainline Rail Capacity Increase Dedicated Freight Guideway Extra -Regional Freight Link Airports" - On -Dock Rail New/Expanded Ports of Entry Gradt Separat 20 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Potential Future System Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary • This section summarizes the stakeholder outreach efforts of the MCGMAP project, which will conclude concurrent with all other project activities. Additional stakeholder outreach is planned to occur after the release of the Draft Action Plan and Executive Summary. This outreach will consist of public workshops within each of the project -partner counties. The purpose of these planned outreach activities will be to gather comments on the Draft Action Plan. These comments will then be compiled and topical responses provided in the Final Action Plan. lg Stakeholder participation was an essential component throughout the development of the MCGMAP. In doing so, the project partners attempted to reach as broad a cross-section of stakeholders as possible through the following outreach mediums: - Project Website; • Seven (7) Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) Meetings; • Two (2) Public Surveys; • Presentations to boards, committees and organizations; and • Ten (10) Public workshops. Two survey instruments were utilized and a project website (http://www.metro. net/mcgmap) was established to inform and engage stakeholders. Meetings and workshops were convened to gather input and share findings. The Stakeholder Ad- visory Group meetings were an important mechanism through which key stakehold- ers across region were informed and had an opportunity to vocalize concerns to the MCGMAP planners. Representatives from community advocacy and health organizations, air quality regulatory agencies, the ports, the trucking and railroad industries and other transportation agencies at all levels of government were invited to participate in the Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG) meetings. 4,dditionally, smaller one-on-one meetings were held with many of these groups to confirm data and obtain their individual perspectives on issues related to goods movement. Stakeholder Advisory Group meetings and county workshops (to be held in the Fall and Winter of 2007) will provide a forum for stakeholders to comment on the content of the action plan and to express concerns about the impact on local communities, air quality, the environment and the transportation system. In general, the stakeholders support a coordinated effort among the agencies and stakeholders to solve goods movement challenges facing the region. Stakeholders expressed the following specific concerns: • Having more aggressive environmental mitigation strategies to reduce current levels of goods movement impacts before any new infrastructure projects are built; • Dedicating new private/public funding sources to reduce health and environmental impacts of goods movement in the region; • Providing for more aggressive use of alternative fuels and alternative technologies to address goods movement impacts; • Questioning whether we need to meet unlimited goods movement demand - all costs and benefits should be studied first; and • Considering placement of limits on trade growth and diverting it to other ports and instead investing in clean industries as a more cost-effective approach. Some stakeholders indicated that re- gional environmental and commu- nity impacts must be addressed and mitigated to a level beyond existing air quality attainment goals. However, the authority to increase air quality attain- ment goals rests with regulatory agen- cies such as the SCAQMD. and CARB, not the MCGMAP partner agencies. For more information, please see Chap- ter 2 - Stakeholder Outreach in the Ac- tion Plan. 22 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary This section briefly describes the approach to evaluating goods movement projects and strategies. This approach included an analysis of three Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach container volume growth and two levels of infrastructure investment scenarios, a qualitative evalua- tion of goods movement projects/strategies, and a detailed analysis of twelve bundles of projects, including regional truck lanes. Analysis of growth scenarios Four scenarios encompassing three levels of Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach container volurdpgrowth and two levels of infrastructure in- vestment were analyzed to determine their economic impact. Table 3 provides a summary of the employment impacts of each scenario. In addition, an attempt was made to estimate the regional mobility impacts of the four scenarios; however, due to data limitations, the regional transportation demand model does not adequately project the linkage between regional truck trips and Port container volumes. Conse- quently, the model could only be used for scenarios land 4. 2030 Employment Change relative to impact (number °Hobs) Scenario? San Pedro Bay port growth of 42.5 million TEUs by 2030; SCAG 2004 Regional Transportation Plan baseline implementation San�eariBt Y 13tt gv%th�Ytio'fJsSiyCAG 2DUt1{gaR[lat-branePorat141,'i_-t'kanoaseAm ier ncar�pa,-- San Pedro Bay port growth of 33 million TEUs by 2030; SCAG 2004 Regional Transportation Plan baseline implementation ,:Ilk „'"'J.r`' 9--v'� ne ew%r....:niz:.r,-•rtm"u�zcx�ti Fe-r: Evaluation of goods movement strategies A qualitative evaluation of goods movement projects/strategies was also conducted. This analysis grouped a comprehensive list of 249 projects/strategies (the complete list is included in the Action Plan) into 15 categories of projects ranging from increased highway and rail capacity to changes in operational and institutional practices. The 15 categories of projects were then qualitatively evaluated using 26 evaluation criteria. For more detailed information on this analysis, please refer to Technical Memorandum 6A. One of the 15 categories, construction of dedicated truck lanes, was modeled using the SCAG Travel Demand Forecasting Model. This analysis modeled 12 bundles (nine dedicated truck lane bundles, bundles 2 through 9) and estimated potential cost which was kept constant at a cost per mile basis, quantified truck volumes, the number of hours of delay reduced for both autos and trucks, the number of warehouse acres in proximity to each corridor, the number of schools within 1/3 mile of the bundle, and the number of residential acres within 1/2 mile of the bundle. Results from this analysis are summarized in Table 4. When interpreting the analysis in Table 4, please note the following: • Due to the limitations of the analytical tools available, all bundles were modeled using a container forecast volume of 42.5 million TEUs by 2030. • All analyses were completed from a regional perspective. Analyses were completed with the understanding that further future de- tailed corridor -specific analyses would be required prior to project implementation. Future detailed analysis should quantify factors not included as part of this effort, such as design, right-of-way considerations including number of displaced properties, impact on commercial properties adjacent to corridors, etc. • The macro -level analysis of dedicated truck lane systems, advanced technology and other bundles rendered preliminary information that also warrants further investigation and outreach to affected communities to be conclusive. Further information about the scenarios, project bundles and other model criteria and findings can be found in Chapter 6 of the Action Plan and the technical appendices. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Table 4: MCGMAP Bundle Analysis Results Bundle Description DistanceReduction of Hours ofDelay (vs.. Schools* Residential* Warehouse* (mi) 2030 Baseline) (Acres) (Acres) Autos Trucks 1 Operational and safety N/A-42,000 improvements 5 1-710 to I-10 (WB) / SR-60 100.1 (EB) to 1-15 252,000 7 1-710 to SR-91 to 1-605 to 96.1 273,000 1-10 to 1-15 9 1-5 (U.S./Mexico Border to 204.6 112,000 Kern County) 11 Alternative technologies (e.g. Shuttle Trains, Mag- lev) between POLA/POLB and inland destinations N/A Note: 'Data does not include San Diego County information. 98,000 -1,000 81,000 83,000 122,000 23,000 N/A 77 57 78 N/A N/A 16,702 11,177 12,806 N/A N/A 6,767 2,691 3,054 N/A 24 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary Project Descriptions and Lists Project Identification Process In support of the actions and vision, and market segmentation approach, the partner agencies identified a regional and county specific list of projects or strategies, presented in Tables 5 and 6. Many of these projects can be implemented in the short-term while others require additional planning and project development. The projects on these lists are considered essential; neither list should be viewed as taking precedence over the other but rather as complementary efforts to address the effects of goals movement in the region. Given the multi county nature of this study, the majority of the regional and county Goods Movement Projects/Strategies wilt require coordination among the multi -county partners and stakeholders. Table 5, the "Regional Goods Movement Projects/Strategies' represents a short-term to long-term vision for improving the system with pri- mary focus on region -wide projects that provide environmental mitigation or ground access (rail, highway, and intermodal) improvements to and from the international gateways and the multi -county goods movement distribution centers and corridors (existing and proposed) within the Southern California region, (i.e., the San Pedro Bay Ports, the Port of Hueneme, Inland Empire Rail/Intermodal Facilities, the Al- ameda Corridor and the California/Mexico Ports of Entry). This system is also graphically depicted and further described in Pages 18 and 19. Table 6, the "County -Specific Goods Movement System Projects/Strategies' includes improvements that are located within a single county and connect with the regional goods movement system of corridors and distribution centers and the statewide goods movement system as identified by Caltrans. Table 6 comprises a list of efforts that 1) Support the regional projects in Table 5; 2) mitigate environmental and/or community impacts in a shorter horizon; 3) correct short-term system deficiencies; and 4) are recommended in advance or in conjunction with the regional projects based on local needs and project readiness. The County -Specific list, in essence, fills in the goods movement network. As can be seen in the two project lists, an investment of over $50 Billion over the next 25 years is necessary to accommodate the projected growth of freight within the region and to mitigate related impacts. This will require funding commitments from all levels of government as well as the private sector. In addition to this list, a series of actions focused on reducing congestion and environmental impacts are identi- fied in the Action Plan. Each of the County chapters also contains additional projects, strategies and vision for localized improvements identified for future implementation. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 25 Table 5: MCGMAP Preliminary Regional Goods Movement Projects/Strategies (REGIONAL AND COUNTY -SPECIFIC LISTS ARE BOTH CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY IN MCGMAP. MODES AND PROJECTS ARE NOT LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER. ALL PROJECTS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION UNLESS ALREADY COMPLETED.) Environmental mitigation or Mode/System Mainline capacity enhancements INTERMODAL GROUND ACCESS Intermodal Yards/Facilities ALTERNATl VE TECHNOLOGY Border Crossing Improvements $0 Time- /rame2 S, M M S Description • San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan Gateway Cities BNSF Mainline Grade Separations (on ACE list) • Reconnect Santa Paula Branch Rail Line I .. � • Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach Union Pacific Intermodal Container Transfer Facility Modernization4 :�-7 • Further investigation of Inland Port Strategy •Alameda Corridor SR-47 Expressway • 1710 Early Action Projects3 - City of Long Beach • SR-86 NAFTA Corridor Interchange Construction 2007 Costl Committed Funds (in millions) $2,067 $450 $300 $662 $500 $150 Total $38,826 B $2,433 B Notes:l. All figures include environmental mitigation costs. 2. S=Short-term (2007-201S); M=Mid-term (2015- 2025); L=long-term(post 2025). 3. Project must demonstrate regional public benefit to qualify for public funds. 4. Private sector fund sources. S. Requirelurlher analysis west of US-395, private sector primary fund source, with possible exception of short-term project to construct section between Phantom East and I-15 ($350 million) 26 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary :-1 Table 6: MCGMAP Preliminary County Goods Movement System Improvements (REGIONAL AND COUNTY -SPECIFIC LISTS ARE BOTH CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY IN MCGMAP. MODES AND PROJECTS ARE NOT LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER. ALL PROJECTS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION UNLESS ALREADY COMPLETED.) Mode/System County; RAIL Description, jhtnre�a%a nt wx 2007Cost' Time - (in millions) frame2 Mainline Capacity Enhancement SD INTERMODAL GROUND ACCESS:;- ?Aiite tricidat Maritime SD ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY • Construct Rose Avenue/UP Grade Separation • Nogales Street (LA Subdivision) grade separation project • Construct Coastal Rail Corridor • San Diego Port District Marine Terminal Ground Access • Wilmington ATSAC System in City of Los Angeles $1,350 S,M $822 S, M $7 TBD $75 M FREEWAY/HIGHWAY do VEN E`Jk LA LA �r1 LA LA L LA OR • Reconstruct US 101/Rice Avenue IC etiteeb3rCef • Reconstruct SR-91/1605 interchange • Reconstruct 1-605/1-10 interchange • 1-110 8th/9th Street Interchange - Add Auxiliary Lanes and Modify/Reconstruct Ramps (Two Projects) • Alameda Street Widening and Reconstruction in Los Angeles (101 Freeway to 7th Street; 1-10 to 7th Street) • 1-110 Connector Improvement Program (4 Projects) • 1-5 Reconstruct El Toro Road Interchange OR • 1-5 between the vicinity of El Toro "Y" to near SR-73 add new lanes in each direction Notes:l. All figures Include environmental mitigation costs. 2. SeShort-term (2007-2015): M=Mid-term (2D15-2025): L=Long-term (post 2025). $1,000 $315 S S TBD TBD TBD Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary 27 Table 6: MCGMAP Preliminary County Goods Movement System Improvements (Continued) (REGIONAL AND COUNTY -SPECIFIC LISTS ARE BOTH CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY IN MCGMAP. MODES AND PROJECTS ARE NOT LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER. ALL PROJECTS WILL REQUIRE FURTHER STUDY PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION UNLESS ALREADY COMPLETED.) Mode/System County. : FREEWAY/HIGHWAY (Continued) Description OR • 1-5 Northbound Extend Existing Truck Bypass Lane From Crown Valley to El Toro Road. Add Auxiliary lane where needed. OR • 1-5 Construct new interchange at Crown Valley (Saddleback) and reconstruct interchange at Avery Parkway with collector distributor road between Crown Valley and Avery OR •SR-57 Northbound From Orangethorpe to Lambert Road, Add Auxiliary Lane tx Sth through lane 2007CosN . Time - (in millions). frame' OR • SR-91 Westbound From SR-57 to 1-5 - Add General Purpose Lane Si $152 Auxiliary Lane OR • SR-91 Eastbound Add a Lane Between SR-55 (Lakeview and SR-241 and Westbound From SR-241 to Imperial Highway). �S�T'`c`—t"x"r.:.€,.�,a •= nk: �rem.•:re:,::�..acm yea.-war.•.«�... :.•._.,..._ RIV • SR-60/10 Truck Climbing Lane ,g $50 S RIV • 1-10/SR60 New Interchange Construction $100 L SBD • Interstatel0 Widening and Interchange Improvements (LA Co. $7005 Line to I-215) SD • 1-15 Widen/Managed Lanes St Operational Improvements (From SR-163 to SR-78) SD • San Diego International Airport Truck Access to 1-5 (Truck route/ Interchange improvements) Total $13,680.9 B Notes. 1. All figures include environmental mitigation costs. 2.5=5hort-term (2007-2015); M=Mid-term (2015-2025); L=Long-term (post 2025). 28 Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary The MCGMAP is not an end point. Rather, it is the beginning of a more comprehensive regional approach to keep freight moving within and through the region and to reduce the environmental and community impacts caused by the movement of that freight. Going forward, stakeholders will play an integral role in the next steps in the areas of partnership and advocacy, environmental and community impacts, mobility and funding. Based on feedback from stakeholders and Action Plan recommendations, the MCGMAP project partners are commit- ted to taking the following next steps: �f Partnership and Advocacy • Implement the Southern California National Freight Gateway (SCNFG) Cooperation Agreement among federal, state, regional, and other implementing agencies to maintain dialogue to address the challenges outlined in MCGMAP. • Request the incorporation of MCGMAP strategies and actions into other state, regional and local plans. • Continue to convene multi -county meetings to monitor the progress on the Action Plan and provide annual reports to the CEOs and to the boards of the partner agencies. • Support and propose legislation that:1) Provides funding mechanisms for goods movement projects/strategies; and 2) improves mo- bility and facilitates regional multi -county goods movement goals without undermining local community priorities and quality of life. • Support groups such as Mobility 21 and the Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors in developing dedicated federal and state goods movement funding sources. • Continue to work closely with all stakeholders including the Councils of Governments, community groups, environmental regulatory agencies and academia. • Seek goods movement and logistics industry involvement throughout planning and project development phases Environmental and Community Impacts • Through the SCNFG Cooperation Agreement and other related activities, develop a specific set of feasible actions to accelerate implementation of the strategies contained in the various air quality and emission reduction plans that are within the scope of respon- sibility of the project partners. - • In partnership with CARB, air districts, the logistics industry, and local governments, initiate an activity to generate public and/or 411 private funds to accelerate implementation of air quality improvement strategies being undertaken by these and other entities, includ- ing strategies. Examples may include: Container fees that provide a revenue stream to fund emissions reduction projects, impact fees paid by entities contributing to the goods -related air quality problem, supplemental transportation infrastructure project mitigation (to add to an air quality funding pool), mitigation banking, market -based strategies, and other vehicle -based fees commensurate with the impacts attributed to those vehicles. • Initiate the Environmental Justice Analysis and Outreach for the MCGMAP in Fall 2007. This effort will develop a guidebook for local jurisdictions and the private sector to use in avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating the effects of goods movement infrastructure and to assist local jurisdictions make informed land use decisions. Mobility • Initiate a study to investigate the linkage between industry supply chain trends and port_and trade related transportation patterns and movements. • Continue project development efforts, including planning, design, funding, and implementation, of the regional and county -specific projects listed in the Action Plan, including the mitigation of the impacts of those projects. • Initiate a Regionally Significant Transportation Investment Study (RSTIS) to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a Dedicated Freight Guideway System/Regional Truck Lanes (I-710 From Port of Long Beach to SR-60; East-West Corridor between 1-710 and 1-15; and I-1S to Victorville) inclusive of potential non -freeway implementation • Initiate localized studies, as appropriate Funding • Pursue new avenues of goods movement funding for projects, including the region's fair share of Proposition 16 Trade Corridor Im- provement Funds, other state appropriations, federal funds, and private sector contributions consistent with the impacts of the ben- efits they derive from the use of the transportation system • Continue fair share and user fee discussions with private sector stakeholders to seek their support in addressing goods movement impacts and filling funding gaps. Develop a clear and concise message on this subject and communicate this to the public, policy and funding decision makers at all levels of government • Establish structures to manage user fees and revenue that are acceptable to both public and private sector stakeholders. Multi -County Goods Movement Action Plan Draft Executive Summary • AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: November 14, 2007 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee 1 John Standiford, Public Affairs Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State and Federal Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the State and Federal Legislative Update as an information item. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Goods Movement Issue Receiving Widespread Attention California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency Secretary Dale Bonner signaled his intention to make goods movement an immediate priority for the state during the September 20 meeting of the California Transportation Commission (CTC). During that meeting, he requested that the CTC adopt a preliminary Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) program of projects as spelled out in Proposition 1 B by the end of the calendar year. Proposition 1 B provides $2 billion for goods movement related projects. Since the September 20 announcement, the pace of critical meetings and issues has increased rapidly. On October 12, Secretary Bonner participated in a signing ceremony with more than 20 agencies on a pact to work together to address Southern California's overall goods movement needs. The Commission approved the partnership agreement in July and Chair Terry Henderson was in attendance to sign it. Immediately after the signing ceremony, Secretary Bonner made his way to Downtown Riverside for the Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce Legislative Forum that also included presentations from Congressman Ken Calvert, Senator Bob Dutton and Assemblymen Kevin Jeffries and John Benoit. Business leaders who were in attendance were quite clear in their advocacy for grade separation funding for Riverside County, and Secretary Bonner noted the position without making a commitment. Agenda Item 10 85 What he did commit to was a series of public meetings throughout the state during the week of October 15 and ending on October 22. A San Bernardino meeting held on October 19 provided the Commission and local officials with an opportunity to re-emphasize the importance of grade separations in the area. Additional meetings on the topic were held in San Diego, Oakland, Long Beach, and Stockton. TCIF will be the main focus of attention at the CTC meetings on October 24 in Sacramento and November 7 in La Quinta. The current schedule calls for TCIF project submittals by November 26 and for the CTC to adopt a program in December with the objective to have funding set in the state budget for next year. Local legislators are also focusing their attention on the issue by conducting field hearings. United States Senator Barbara Boxer held a hearing in San Bernardino on October 10 regarding the impact of diesel emissions caused by freight movement. Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod has scheduled a meeting on the Colton Crossing on October 22 and the Select Committee on Inland Empire Transportation Issues, chaired by Assemblymember Wilmer Amina Carter, met on October 31. Federal Update While a Transportation Appropriations bill has been passed by both the House and the Senate, little action has taken place in order to appoint a Conference Committee to approve a final bill. The White House has already expressed its displeasure regarding all kinds of appropriations bills, which will likely result in an omnibus bill to keep the federal government running. Agenda Item 10 86 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AGENDA ITEM 10 s Angeles Mines I Opinion November 7, 2oo7 More bond money for SoCal As the state's import/export hub, Southern California deserves the lion's share of transportation funds. Last year, California voters approved nearly $2o billion in transportation bonds via Proposition 1B, trusting that state officials would spend it on the most worthwhile projects. That trust was eroded in February when the initial distribution of highway funds bypassed a critical widening project for the 405 Freeway and earmarked only 12% to Los Angeles County, which contains nearly a third of the state's population and has the nation's worst freeway congestion. The 405 money was eventually granted after a furious lobbying campaign, but now, as the time nears to pass out $2 billion for speeding cargo between the state's ports and distribution centers, there are troubling signs that L.A. and Southern California are about to be snubbed again. Today, the California Transportation Commission is slated to set the criteria for how the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund will be spent. Insiders have long complained that decision makers seem to be giving unreasonable weight to projects in the Bay Area and Central Valley, which play a tangential role in California's trade industry. Those complaints were justified last month when the state Business, Transportation and Housing Agency submitted its proposed criteria. The agency's proposal makes no mention of the comparative size of a region's ports or trade infrastructure. Its sole nod to regional fairness is a statement that funds should be distributed based on "reasonable geographic balance." As a source for this criterion, it cites a section of the government code created by Proposition 1B. But it ignores the immediately preceding subsection of the code, which states that funds should be allocated in a way that "balances the demands of various ports (between large and small ports, as well as between seaports, airports and land ports of entry)." Thus the agency is highlighting a part of the code that calls for spreading the money across the state, while forgetting about the part that calls for considering the size of an area's ports. The Los Angeles/Long Beach port complex is the largest in the nation. It handles more than 85% of the containerized cargo processed at California ports, and Southern California's road and rail network carries 75% of all cargo exported from the state. Trade is a key driver of our economy, but we pay a heavy price for all this activity. Not only do cargo trucks jam our freeways, but an estimated 1,200 Southern Californians die prematurely every year because of pollution generated by the goods -movement industry. By building more efficient rail networks and other projects, the bond money could help reduce that pollution. The state Transportation Commission isn't accustomed to allocating money for goods movement. Its usual job is to divvy up funds for roads and freeways, which it does based on a regional formula: 6o% goes to Southern California and 4o% to the north. Applying the same formula to trade infrastructure would make no sense. By rights, the trade corridor connected to the ports of L.A. and Long Beach should get 85% of the bond money, given that they move 85% of the goods. Anything significantly less would be inefficient and unfair. If L.A. gets stiffed again on ,transportation bond money, it will destroy voter confidence -- indeed, it would justify Angelenos never again supporting statewide infrastructure bonds. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is hoping to put a major water bond on the ballot, should make sure his appointees on the Transportation Commission understand how disastrous that would be. Coalition seeking transit money bonanza I San Bernardino County I PE.com I Southern Califom... Page 1 of 3 Coalition seeking transit money bonanza FIVE COUNTIES: Members want $1.7 billion in state bond funds assigned to Southern California. Ps Download story podcast 10:00 PM PST on Wednesday, November 7, 2007 By PHIL PITCHFORD The Press -Enterprise Five Riverside County railroad crossings are among the highest ranked transportation projects in Southern California, according to a preliminary list generated by a multi -county group seeking to attract hundreds of millions of dollars in state bond funds. Proposals from San Bernardino County, however, have not fared as well in early rankings from the Southern California Working Group. Most of San Bernardino County's projects ended at the bottom of the list of 42 projects based on how soon the rail improvements and freeway widenings can be built. The working group, made up of Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles and Ventura counties, is seeking to ensure that Southern California receives more than 80 percent of the $2 billion in upcoming trade corridor improvement money from Prop. 18. voters approved the measure in November. Such a $1.7 billion windfall would be a significant change in the way the state usually divides transportation money, with 60 percent in Southern California and 40 percent spent in the northern part of the state. Inland transportation officials stress, however, that the list is only the first attempt to quantify where state money should be spent. How soon an agency can start construction on a specific project is far from the only criteria that will be used, they say. "The fact that projects might be high or low on the list is not relevant at this point," said Deborah Barmack, executive director of San Bernardino Associated Governments. "That list is simply an illustration that will change." John Standiford, a spokesman for the Riverside County Transportation Commission, agreed, saying: "That is not a priority list." Both said the final rankings of such projects likely will change once the California Transportation Commission decides how much weight to give to as many as 15 factors, including air quality, noise and ability to reduce congestion. The state commission may examine the criteria for distributing the funds as it wraps up a two-day meeting today in La Quinta. Either way, however, some fear the Inland region will lose out in the funding race to larger counties, especially Los Angeles County, when funding decisions are made as soon as next month. "I think LA is going to play their trump cards," said Riverside City Councilman Steve Adams, a member of the county transportation commission. "When push comes to shove when the actual dollars are on the table, you're going to see LA break off on its own." http://www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE News_Local D_project08.40339f7.htm1 11/13/2007 Coalition seeking transit money bonanza I San Bemardino County I PE.com I Southern CaHorn... Page 2 of 3 If that is going to happen, it did not on Wednesday. Instead, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, sent a letter to the state transportation commission, urging the group to distribute the bulk of the bond money to Southern California. The approach favored by the five -county working group is 'persuasive and should, I hope, be determinative of the commission's direction," Nunez wrote. He was one of several Los Angeles area elected officials who threatened to withhold funding for transportation projects if his area was not treated fairly in the first round of Prop. 1B funding in February. The five counties are working together in hopes of bringing more than $1.7 billion of a $2 billion chunk of state bond money to Southern California. The state hopes to make decisions by the end of the year. The five -county alliance hopes the state will make broad decisions about how much money should be sent to the four eligible regions around the - others include San Diego, the Bay area and the Central Valley. They hope the decisions about how to spend the money sent to each corridor can be made by local agencies in each region. Reach Phil Pitchford at 951-368-9475 or ppitchfordftPE.com or visit his blog at www.PE.com/blogs/commuting Five counties, including Riverside and San Bernardino, are pushing for state bond money for 42 projects they say will help reduce congestion on area roads and railways caused by the transport of goods around Southern California. The types of projects and their rankings include: Railroad crossings 2. At Columbia Avenue, Riverside, Riverside County. 3. At Magnolia Avenue, Home Gardens, Riverside County. 7. At Sunset Avenue, Banning, Riverside County. 8. At Avenue 52, Coachella, Riverside County. 9. At Avenue 66, near Mecca, Riverside County. 11. At N. Milliken Avenue, Ontario, San Bernardino County. 15. At Iowa Avenue, Riverside, Riverside County. 16. at Streeter Avenue, Riverside, Riverside County. 26. At 3rd Street, Riverside, Riverside County. 27. At Riverside Avenue, Riverside, Riverside County. 30. At Madison Street, Riverside, Riverside County. 35. At Glen Helen Parkway, San Bernardino County. 36. At South Milliken Avenue, Ontario, San Bernardino County. 37. At Valley Boulevard, Colton, San Bernardino County. 38. At Palm Avenue, San Bernardino, San Bernardino County. Other projects 32. Freeway widening and interchange improvements, Interstate 10, San Bernardino County between Las Angeles County line and Interstate 215. 33. Reconstruction of 15/215 interchange, Devore, San Bernardino County. 42. Interchange improvements at Interstate 215/Van Buren Boulevard, March Air Reserve Base, Riverside County. http://www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE News_Local_D_project08.40339f7.html 11/13/2007 11/01/2007 0922 (FAX) 82103 AM/JS/SW 0432 Magnolia Avenue, Riverside, California 92504 November 1, 2007 Secretary Dale E. Bonner Business, Transportation, & Housing Agency State of California 980 9th Street, Suite 2450 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Secretary Bonner and Chairman Ghielmetti, 0 951.689.5772 951.351.1808 Q ealbaptiseedu Chairman James Ghielmetti California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) — Proposed Program and Process — Support for Southern California Worldng Group Recommendations On behalf of California Baptist University, I would like to express our support for the Southern California Working Group consensus efforts. The Southern California Working Group is a coalition of transportation interests that have actively worked to develop a Southern California Trade Corridor consensus approach for investing in goods movement infrastructure while protecting the quality of life for local residents. They recently submitted comments to the Business, Transportation & Housing (BT&H) Agency on their materials distributed October 10th that describe the process for selecting projects for the $2 billion Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF). California Baptist University supports the Southern Califomia Working Group's comments and recommendations, including Reasonable Geographic Balance, Screening Criteria, and Project Ranking. The Inland Empire's population is expected to double to 2.8 million by 2020. If transportation solutions are not developed, this would result in longer delays on the highways. Gridlock costs jobs and increases expenses. We understand that there are several challenges involved in solving California's transportation problems. A lack of state finding, expensive and time consuming planning process required for highway construction or building other transportation infrastructure. L.17.13 11/01/2007 0922 (FAIL) P.0021002 Page 2 November 1, 2007 California Baptist University is vested in Southern California transportation issues, we respectfully urge you to support the Southern California consensus approach and maximize the level of goods movement investment for this region. Sincerely, Ronald L. EMS, Ph.D. President cc: John Hummer, Deputy Secretary Goods Movement Don Perata, President Pro Tempore Senate Alan Lowenthal, Chair Senate Transportation & Housing Committee Pedro Nava, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee Senator Bob Dutton Assemblymemeber John Benoit Assemblymember Bill Emmerson Assemblymember Kevin Jeffries Anne Mayer, Riverside County Transportation Commission 11i02.(2007 09:06 CRPREE ESCROW a 7877920 N0.084 1202 ;,spree Ewa) ovember 1, 2007 6735 Brockton Avenue Riverside, CA 92506 pli1) 7784310. Far fast) 7711438D ecrerary Dale E. Bonner usiness, Transportation, ttr Housing Agency tate of. California !) 80 911' Street, Suite 2450 acremento, CA 95814 ear Secretary Bonner and Chairman Gkelmetti, Chairman James Ghielmetti California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 E: Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TGIF) - Proposed Program and Process - Support for Southern California Working Group Recommendations n behalf of Capree Escrow, Inc.. I would like to express our support for the Southern Californin Worlang Group consensus efforts. e Southern California Working Group is a coalition of transportation interests that have actively worked to develop a Southern ralifornia Trade Corridor consensus approach for investing in goods movement infmatntchue while protecting the quality of life for ocal residents. They recently submitted contents to the Business, Transportation & Housing (BT&H) Agency on their materials dinnbuted October 106 that describe the process for selecting projects for the S2 bi0ion Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIP). Capron Escrow, inc. supports the Southern California Working Group's comments and recommendations, including Reasonable °graphic Balance, Screening Criteria, and Project Ranking. he Inland Empire's .population is expected to double to 2.8 million by 202D, if transportation solutions are not developed, this would. esult in longer delays on the highways, Gridlock costa jobs end increases expenses. We understand that there ate several challenges evolved in solving California's transportation problems. A lack of state funding, expensive and time consuming planning process equired for highway construction or building other transportation infrastructure. pree Escrow, Inc. is vested in Southern Califomia transportation issues, we respectfully urge you to support the Southern California onsensus approach and maximize the level of goods movement investment for this region. merely, Sharon Tyrrell wrier John Hununcr, Pepin Secretary Goods Movement Don Puma, President pro Tempore Senate Alan Lowemhal, Chair Senate Transportation & Housing Camminee Pedro Nava, Chair Assembly Transponadon Committee Senator Bob Dutton Assembiymemeber John Benoit Amemblymember Bill Emmet -son Assemblymember Kevin Jeffries Anne Mayer, Riverside County Transportation Commission 11/06/2007 14:02 9516832670 RIVERSIDE CHAMBERS 0 Monday Morning PAGE 01/02 82166 AM/JS/SW 3985 University Avenue • Riverside, California 92501 (951) 683.7100 • Fax (951) 693.2670 OFFICERS Pecodent JorepbJ, KarNer Presidenr Ekes Maara McQxrrn vice Prerident GLriuLw r•_ .irterea'Y V7ce Proidrnt r jtiaSia G. Rah 4tinnry Ayr Flamm Th stner Rldvod /i. Ank 01liF.CTOaw LiPths Bwdry Harry W. (ld Jc Dr. Prelim A. Cdrdore paum41 N. 6nher /kaald O. Graeae Ur, latr4rarr 7: C:rruy tk Rid," J. Garr Aar k, rurard Nieirak H. rrekiwarr Thames 7: Haider, M.U. S Sere fahawa Rohn A. Kri gar Virtar Miceli Afield 074.4 RHO A, Reread k ndeII. Radfrea allege 1lf Rryo tonSord L. !Moron nr. Salaam,' 6. Raee& Ara h.' Atrariaaaa Kreern'th R •Samna Rarer /). iii ran illeddera F_ WDbb Jark v. 1Gyaa Norma YmaeRfaw I11ItEMORt F.MERITvi Areiar L. litrinaerta larva A. Ra6lpaan Barr It Siasteray *well WhQiaF Apron S. Wager, Sr, APPOINTED/MIMED Rra (.'al err November I, 2007 Secretary Dale E. Bonner Business, Transportation, Commission & Housing 980 96 Street, Suite 2450 Sacramento, CA 95814 Chairman lames Ghiehnetti California Tranaporartion 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Secretary Bonner and Chairman Ghielnaetti, RE: Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TC2) — Proposed Program and Process — Support for Southern California Worldng Group Reeommendedona On behalf of The Monday Morning Group of Western Riverside County, I would like to express our support for the Southern California Working Group consensus efforts. The Southern California Working Group is a coalition of transportation interests that have aetivelyworked to develop a Southern California Trade Corridor consensus approach for investing in goods movement irifasuvcture while protecting the quality of life for Local residents. They recently submitted comments to the Business, Transportation & Housing (BT&H) Agency on their materials distributed October 104 that describe the process for selecting projects for the 52 billion Trade Corridors Improvement Pund (Tan. The Monday Morning Group of Western Riverside County supports the Southern California Working Group's comments and recommendations, including Reasonable Geographic Balance, Screening Criteria. sad Project Ranking. The Inland Empire's population is expected to double to 2.8 million by 2020_ If transportation solutions arc not developed, this would result in longer delays on the highways. Gridlock costs jobs and increases expenses. We understand that there sre several challenges involved in solving California's transportation problems. A lack of state funding, etpenaive and Time consuming planning process required for highway Construction or building other transportation infrastructure. L.17.13 i 11/06/2007 14:02 9516832670 RIVERSIDE CHAMBERS D PAGE 02/02 Monday Mar 39A3 University Avenue • Riverside. California 92501 (951) 6113-7100 Page 2 November I, 2007 OFFICERS Pieddent is.. Leh f. kutbkr President Elea Mamie Mr(1nrev Yrce President Chritnaa 6: Singletary Viex Nowidanr C3strbia G Rath Sernr:vy K.ptrA. Mahan Traawrr Rirhaeuf ft Roth )lithel ORS G;rdv Bnaiky ikay ere nr; Anne rA. (:serious Llsrrald N. Ear, A m& A. irlime Lk: Line muy Y; Grnity Dr. Rkirerd f, Carr Nary k. rike d Mekoles H (SolduAere 7lranla. 7: Heiden, MfJ. S. Sat lames Itahrn A. Mete • View Miard !Lint 0.11WIly Randy A. Retard RondaR. Mrefrre C..+mke M. Rryrr & hew L linkmen Sr%rrarr G. Rorella Ain k' yparintaa lenntrdt a Simms Breen U, leaser f ferdh. F. WOO fork h. irryen Merkur Yormigio , 1)1101:cross F.MP.Ar us Artitir Liedeueedr fawn A, Rebhan ArmSia;lrer7 ((wog Wali nk Adri r .x Vetter..Sr 118Poramror.LEGT63 Ken Calurrt Fax (951) 663.2670 The Monday Morning Group of Western Riverside County is vested in Southern California transportation issues, we respectfully urge you to support the Southern California consensus approach and maximize the level of goods movement investment for this region. Since ly, seph resid Mahler Olin Hummer, Deputy Secretary Goods Movement Don Pent* President Pro Tampon Senate Alan Lowenthal, Chair Senate Transportation & Housing Committee Pedro Nava, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee Senator Bob Dutton Assemblymcmber John Benoit Assemblymember Bill Enunerson Assemblyaumber Kevin Jeffries Anne Mayer, Rivasi le County Tt•mtuportation Commission KERCHOLDINGS)LTD. 951 7045072 11102/07 03:52pm P. 001 October 30, 2007 KBR (Holdings) Ltd. LLC Global Business Strategists Secretary Dale E. Bonner Business, Transportation, & Housing Agency State of California 980 9`b Street, Suite 2450 Sacramento, CA 95814 82094 AM/JS/SW Chairman James Ghielmetti California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Secretary Bonner and Chairman Ghielmetti, RE: Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF)- Proposed Program and Process - Support for Southern California Working Group Recommendations On behalf of KBR (Holdings) Ltd. LLC, I would like to express our support for the Southem California Working Group consensus efforts. The Southern California Working Group is a coalition of transportation interests that have actively worked to develop a Southern California Trade Corridor consensus approach for investing in goods movement infrastructure while protecting the quality of life for local residents. They recently submitted comments to the Business, Transportation & Housing (BT&H) Agency on their materials distributed October 10th that describe the process for selecting projects for the $2 billion Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TGIF). KBR supports the Southern California Working Group's comments and recommendations, including Reasonable Geographic Balance, Screening Criteria, and Project Ranking. The Inland Empire's population is expected to double to 2.8 million by 2020. If transportation solutions are not developed, this would result in longer delays on the highways. Gridlock costs jobs and increases expenses. We understand that there are several challenges involved in solving California's transportation problems. A lack of state funding, expensive and time consuming planning process required for highway construction or building other transportation infrastructure. 5950 Intervale Drive • Riverside, California 92506-4006 • USA (951) 505-2990 • (951) 333-3020 • Fax (951) 784-8688 wwwicbdld.com L.17.13 KBR CHOLDINGS)LTD. 951 7945072 11/02/07 03152pm P. 002 Page 2 October 25, 2007 Our company is vested in Southern California transportation issues, we respectfully urge y.. to support the Southern California consensus approach and maximize the level • q gods movement investment for this region. Roderic O. Baliance Managing Director CC: John Hummer, Deputy Secretary Goods Movement Don Perata, President Pro Tempore Senate Alan Lowenthal, Chair Senate Transportation & Housing Committee Pedro Nava, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee Senator Bob Dutton Assemblymemeber John Benoit Assemblymember Bill Emmerson Assemblymember Kevin Jeffries Anne Mayer, Riverside County Transportation Commission 5950 Intervale Drive • Riverside, California 92506-4006. USA (951) 505-2990 • (951) 333-3020 • Fax (951) 784-8688 www.kerlid.com NOV-01-2007 THU 09:48 AM PROVIDENT BANK FAX Na 9517864725 P. 02/03 October 30, 2001 Secretary Dalo E. !loaner Business, Transportation, & Housing Agency State of California 980 9111 Street, Suitc 2450 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Secretary Bonner and Chairman Gidelmelti, l T1! PROVIDENT ••. Bank .►�T4 Chairman James Gltiehnetti California Transportation Commission 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: 'Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (Tan —Proposed Program and Process— Support. for Southern California Working Group Recommendations On behalf of Provident Bank, 1 would like to express our support for the Southern California Working Group consensus efforts. The Southutt California Working Group is a coalition of transportation interests that have actively worked to develop a Southern California 'trade Corridor consensus approach for iuvesting in goods movement infrastructure while protecting the quality of life for local residents. They recently submitted continents to the Business, Transportation & !lousing (1.11'&i l) Ageuey on their materials distributed October 10d) that describe the process for selecting projects for the S2 billion 'trade Condors improvement Fund (TC1F). Provident Crank supports the Southern California Working Group's continents and recommendations, including Reasonable Geographic Balance, Screening Criteria, and Project Ranking. The inland Empire:'s population is expected to double to 2.8 million by 2020. If transportation solutions are not developed, this would result in longer delays on the I ighways. Gridlock costs jobs and increases expenses. We understand than there are several challenges involved in solving Califontia'9 transportation problems. A lack of stale funding, ex pensive and time Consuming planning process required for highway construction or building; other transportation infrastructure. Pace 2, 9756 C05106 Avehue, Rive/5AM, CA 92500 Tel: (800) 442.5201 NOV-01-2007 THU 09:48 AM PROVIDENT BANK FAX NO. 9517864725 P. 03/03 October 25, 200 Provident Tank is vested in Southern California transportation issues, we respectfully urge yo!.t to smtitport the, Southern California consensus approach and maximize the level of goods movement investment for this region. Sincerely, Craig a Blundell President., Ct.O ce: John Hummer, Deputy Secretary Goods Movement Dort Malta, President Pro Tcmpor° Senate Alan Lowenthal, Chair Senate Transportation BSc }lousing Committee Pedro Nava, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee Senator Bob Dutton Asscnthlyntentcbor John Benoit Assenthlymember Dill limmerson Assemblymen her Kevin Jeffries Anne Mayer, Riverside County Transportation Commission November 7, 2007 - Speaker Nuiiez Calls on California Transportatio... http://democrats. assembly.ca.gov/members/a46/press/20071107AD4... SPEAKER FABIAN NUWEZ 46TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT For Immediate Release: November 7, 2007 Contact: Beth Willon Phone: (916) 319-2408 or (916) 524-6537 q,;O D Speaker Nunez Calls on California Transportation Commission to Recognize Size and Needs of Southern California Ports in Distributing Goods Movement Funds SACRAMENTO—Noting the fact that Southern California ports handle 90% of the state's containerized imports and 76% of the state's containerized exports should be the "elephant in the room" when it comes to funding decisions, Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-Los Angeles) today sent the following letter to the California Transportation Commission urging them to ensure Southern California is not shortchanged when the commission votes on distribution of goods movement funds from the state's infrastructure bonds: "Dear Chairman Ghielmetti and Members: "As one of the key architects of the infrastructure bonds approved by voters in 2006, I am writing to express my strong concern that Southern California's ports — which are of paramount importance to the state's international trade and economic development —not be shortchanged when it comes to the distribution of bond funding to improve goods movement in California. "The Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles handle almost 90 percent of the state's containerized imports and 76 percent of our containerized exports. Any criteria for distributing bond funds that ignores this elephant in the room is unfair and unwise and is certainly not what Southem California legislators intended when we supported the initiatives or what Southern California voters expected when they cast their ballots for the bonds. "Further, in addition to the overwhelming economic differential weighing in favor of Southern California on this issue, there are serious health and environmental imbalances that must be addressed as well. "Estimates show that as many as 1200 Southern Californians die prematurely every year because of goods -movement related pollution. While Southern California leaders are taking initiative to help combat this — witness the recent agreements by the cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles to reduce pollution by replacing old diesel trucks — they can't do it alone. This is especially true given the added difficulties Southern California faces by being a non -attainment zone under the Clean Air Act. The funding criteria approved by the commission must reflect the goods movement industry's unique health effects on Southern California. "Finally, I am in receipt of a letter sent to you by the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura Counties, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, Southern California Regional Rail Authority and the Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority. It is persuasive, and should, I hope, be determinative of the commission's direction. "I urge the Commission to honor their appropriate request that funds from Proposition 1 B go to areas with the greatest need and impacts. While a 60/40 south/north split may be a workable formula for ordinary transportation funding, when it comes to goods movement, the only formula that makes sense is Size + Volume + Impact = Need. "Sincerely, of 2 11/13/2007 3:20 PM November 7, 2007 - Speaker Ntuiez Calls on California Transportatio... http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a46/press/20071107AD4... "Fabian Ntfiez "Speaker of the Assembly Assemblymember Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara) an Ex-Officio member of the California Transportation Commission, presented the letter to commission members at their meeting today in La Quinta. The commission is expected to vote tomorrow on guidelines for goods movement funds from Proposition 1 B, one of the historic infrastructure bonds approved by voters in November 2006. Capitol Office: State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0046 — (916) 319-2046 — Fax: (916) 319-2146 District Office: 320 West Fourth Street, #1050, Los Angeles, CA 90013 -- (213) 620-4646 — Fax (213) 620-6319 Assemblymember. Nunez@assembly.ca.gov of 11/13/2007 3:20 PM