HomeMy Public PortalAbout02 February 23, 2009 Plans and Programs86499
RECORDS
•
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
DATE: Monday, February 23, 2009
LOCATION: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside
* * * COMMITTEE MEMBERS * * *
Chair
Vice Chair
•
Bob Botts / To Be Appointed, City of Banning
Karen Spiegel / Steve Nolan, City of Corona
Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet
Patrick Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells
Frank Hall / Malcolm Miller, City of Norco
Dick Kelly / Cindy Finerty, City of Palm Desert
Steve Pougnet / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs
Daryl Busch / Mark Yarbrough, City of Perris
James Potts / Jim Ayres, City of San Jacinto
•Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar
Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District I
Roy Wilson, County of Riverside, District IV
Marion Ashley, County of Riverside, District V
*** STAFF ***
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director
* * * AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY * * *
State Transportation Improvement Program
Regional Transportation Improvement Program
New Corridors
Intermodal Programs (Transit, Rail, Rideshare)
Air Quality and Clean Fuels
Regional Agencies, Regional Planning
Intelligent Transportation System Planning and Programs
Congestion Management Program
Comments are welcomed by the Committee. if you wish to provide comments to the Committee, please
complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board.
11.36.15
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
P L A N S A N D P R O G R A M S C O M M I T T E E
w w w . r c t c . o r g
A G E N D A *
* A c t i o n s m a y b e t a k e n o n a n y i t e m l i s t e d o n t h e a g e n d a
1 : 3 0 p . m .
M o n d a y , F e b r u a r y 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
B O A R D R O O M
C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r
4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , F i r s t F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e
I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e B r o w n A c t a n d G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n 5 4 9 5 7 . 5 , a g e n d a
m a t e r i a l s d i s t r i b u t e d 7 2 h o u r s p r i o r t o t h e m e e t i n g , w h i c h a r e p u b l i c r e c o r d s r e l a t i n g t o
o p e n s e s s i o n a g e n d a i t e m s , w i l l b e a v a i l a b l e f o r i n s p e c t i o n b y m e m b e r s o f t h e p u b l i c p r i o r
t o t h e m e e t i n g a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n o f f i c e , 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , T h i r d F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e , C A ,
a n d o n t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s w e b s i t e , w w w . r c t c . o r g .
I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e A m e r i c a n s w i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s A c t a n d G o v e r n m e n t C o d e S e c t i o n
5 4 9 5 4 . 2 , i f y o u n e e d s p e c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a C o m m i t t e e m e e t i n g , p l e a s e
c o n t a c t t h e C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d a t ( 9 5 1 ) 7 8 7 - 7 1 4 1 . N o t i f i c a t i o n o f a t l e a s t 4 8 h o u r s p r i o r t o
m e e t i n g t i m e w i l l a s s i s t s t a f f i n a s s u r i n g t h a t r e a s o n a b l e a r r a n g e m e n t s c a n b e m a d e t o
p r o v i d e a c c e s s i b i l i t y a t t h e m e e t i n g .
1 . C A L L T O O R D E R
2 . P L E D G E O F A L L E G I A N C E
3 . R O L L C A L L
4 . P U B L I C C O M M E N T S - E a c h i n d i v i d u a l s p e a k e r i s l i m i t e d t o s p e a k t h r e e ( 3 )
c o n t i n u o u s m i n u t e s o r l e s s . T h e C o m m i t t e e m a y , e i t h e r a t t h e d i r e c t i o n o f
t h e C h a i r o r b y m a j o r i t y v o t e o f t h e C o m m i t t e e , w a i v e t h i s t h r e e ( 3 ) m i n u t e
t i m e l i m i t a t i o n . D e p e n d i n g o n t h e n u m b e r o f i t e m s o n t h e A g e n d a a n d t h e
n u m b e r o f s p e a k e r s , t h e C h a i r m a y , a t h i s / h e r d i s c r e t i o n , r e d u c e t h e t i m e o f
e a c h s p e a k e r t o t w o ( 2 ) c o n t i n u o u s m i n u t e s . A l s o , t h e C o m m i t t e e m a y
t e r m i n a t e p u b l i c c o m m e n t s i f s u c h c o m m e n t s b e c o m e r e p e t i t i o u s . S p e a k e r s
m a y n o t y i e l d t h e i r t i m e t o o t h e r s w i t h o u t t h e c o n s e n t o f t h e C h a i r . A n y
w r i t t e n d o c u m e n t s t o b e d i s t r i b u t e d o r p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o m m i t t e e s h a l l b e
s u b m i t t e d t o t h e C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d . T h i s p o l i c y a p p l i e s t o P u b l i c C o m m e n t s
a n d c o m m e n t s o n A g e n d a I t e m s .
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
February 23, 2009
Page 2
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._
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 27, 2008
6. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Overview
This item is for the Plans and Programs Committee to conduct an election of
officers for 2009 - Chair and Vice Chair.
7. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda
after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the
item and that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to
the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires
2/3 vote of the Committee. if there are less than 2/3 of the Committee
members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote.
Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
8. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters on the Consent Calendar will be
approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate
action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be
placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
8A. COMMUTER RAIL PROGRAM UPDATE
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Receive and file an update on the Commuter Rail Program; and
2► Forward to the Commission for final action.
•
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
February 23, 2009
Page 3
9.
OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENT STUDY FOR THE ORTEGA HIGHWAY /
STATE ROUTE 74
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Receive and file the Operational Improvement Study for the
Ortega Highway / State Route 74; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
10. SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN BUDGET AND REVENUE ESTIMATE
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Receive and file the preliminary revenue estimate for the Short Range
Transit Plan (SRTP) budget process; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
11. LOCAL MATCH CONTRIBUTION FOR SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION PROJECT
APPLICATIONS TO THE MOBILE SOURCE REDUCTION REVIEW COMMITTEE
CALL FOR PROJECTS
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve a contribution in the amount of $50,000 of 1989 Measure A
Commuter Assistance reserves for a joint project application by the
cities of Corona, Moreno Valley, and Riverside for signal
synchronization; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA
13. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report
on attended and upcoming meetings/conferences and issues related to
Plans and Programs Committee Agenda
February 23, 2009
Page 4
Commission activities.
14. ADJOURNMENT
The next Plans and Programs Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at
1:30 p.m., Monday, March 23, 2009, Board Chambers, First Floor,
County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS SIGN -IN SHEET
FEBRUARY 23, 2009
NA
AGENCY
EMAIL ADDRESS
o6M
f
( j-NAl i N q
b,�Q�edc_ re Con
'� T
.k
A/ A
,i��� i ll
rzl�l-�-r_er�{
`144LL
1
okc_b
wINK
piek spy
6/.00140
6Ler,lti In v
-7--,.,o‘o
� 3€/sz°�
Co7.< _7 , >$7- ni/Z
*$ 0 /lc�s. z,
,jEs's .oLiN4
N
frkegAt�o��/FL/L€y eG
`/�
vi Mccd,�seavtoi kl,404.w
-0
fe . �4-G �
'i/6=
/JLZ 14----
1`AnA vAt "f17 ._'C�
►akt0-4-/urIQ-4 cot. s f"i
cp."; 4-74
avT
,Z4 .J c)79- c i vv 7 0
1 i t
(,� ISa
R`//r%%C,g
(-
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
February 23, 2009
County of Riverside, District I
County of Riverside, District IV
County of Riverside, District V
City of Banning
City of Corona
City of Hemet
City of Indian Wells
City of Indio
City of Moreno Valley
City of Norco
City of Palm Desert
Present Absent
/21:
City of Palm Springs
City of Perris
City of San Jacinto
City of Wildomar
AGENDA ITEM 5
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE
Monday, October 27, 2008
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Plans and Programs Committee was called to order by
Chair Frank West at 1 :30 p.m., in the Board Room at the County of Riverside
Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California,
92501.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
• 3.
•
At this time, Commissioner Robin Lowe led the Plans and Programs
Committee in a flag salute.
ROLL CALL
Members/Alternates Present
Marion Ashley
Bob Buster
Chris Carlson
Scott Farnam
Ginny Foat
Frank Hall
Dick Kelly
Robin Lowe
Eugene Montanez
Patrick Mullany
Frank West
Michael Wilson
Roy Wilson
Members Absent
Bob Botts
Daryl Busch
RCTC Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
October 27, 2008
Page 2
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — August 25, 2008
MIS/C (Lowe/Foat) to approve the minutes of August 25, 2008 as
submitted.
Abstain: Ashley
6. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions to the agenda.
7. AGREEMENT WITH CORNERSTONE STUDIOS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE COMMUTER RAIL
STATION REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst, provided a brief overview of the on -call design
and engineering services for the commuter rail station rehabilitation and
maintenance plan.
M/S/C: (M. Wilson/Ashley) to:
1) Award Agreement No. 09-33-009-00 to Cornerstone Studios to
provide on -call design and engineering support services for the
Commuter Rail Station Rehabilitation and Maintenance Plan
(Plan), for a not to exceed amount of $300,000;
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
8. NORTH MAIN CORONA SATELLITE PARKING AGREEMENT
Henry Nickel provided a brief overview of the proposed agreement with
Princeland Properties International, Inc. (Princeland) for satellite parking
spaces during construction of the North Main Corona parking structure.
In response to Commissioner Eugene Montanez's question regarding the
transition, Henry Nickel responded the transition will occur when the
Edwards Theater is closed at the end of this year. Staff is working with RTA
and Corona Cruiser to redirect those buses and notify passengers.
•
•
"
"
"
R C T C P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e M i n u t e s
O c t o b e r 2 7 , 2 0 0 8
P a g e 3
M / S / C ( L o w e / H a l l ) t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 0 9 - 3 3 - 4 7 - 0 0 b e t w e e n P r i n c e l a n d a n d
t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o p r o v i d e f o r o v e r 2 0 0 l e a s e d p a r k i n g s p a c e s
a s a s a t e l l i t e p a r k i n g l o t d u r i n g t h e r e m a i n i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n o f
t h e N o r t h M a i n C o r o n a p a r k i n g s t r u c t u r e c o n s t r u c t i o n f o r a n o t
t o e x c e e d a m o u n t o f $ 4 8 , 0 0 0 ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
9 . C O M M U T E R R A I L P R O G R A M U P D A T E
H e n r y N i c k e l p r o v i d e d a n u p d a t e o n t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m .
I n r e s p o n s e t o C o m m i s s i o n e r M o n t a n e z ' s q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g r i d e r s h i p ,
H e n r y N i c k e l s t a t e d t h e d e c r e a s e i n r i d e r s h i p i s a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e d e c r e a s e i n
f u e l p r i c e s .
M / S / C ( M . W i l s o n / A s h l e y ) t o :
1 ) R e c e i v e a n d f i l e a n u p d a t e o n t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
1 0 . S T A T E R O U T E 9 1 C O M M U T E R E X P R E S S B U S - R O U T E 7 9 4
B r i a n C u n a n a n , C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e M a n a g e r , p r o v i d e d a s t a t u s r e p o r t o n t h e
S t a t e R o u t e 9 1 C o m m u t e r E x p r e s s B u s - R o u t e 7 9 4 d e m o n s t r a t i o n p r o j e c t .
C o m m i s s i o n e r R o b i n L o w e r e q u e s t e d s t a f f t o r e p o r t b a c k t o t h e c o m m i t t e e o n
t h i s i t e m b e f o r e t h e e n d o f t h e p r o j e c t d e m o n s t r a t i o n .
M / S / C ( L o w e / M u l l a n y ) t o :
1 �% A p p r o v e c o n t i n u e d d e m o n s t r a t i o n f u n d i n g o f S R - 9 1 C o m m u t e r
E x p r e s s B u s - R o u t e 7 9 4 s e r v i c e u s i n g M e a s u r e A C o m m u t e r
A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m f u n d s i n a n a m o u n t n o t t o e x c e e d
$ 1 4 2 , 0 0 0 ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
RCTC Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
October 27, 2008
Page 4
11. UPDATE ON PORTS OF LOS ANGELES AND LONG BEACH'S EXPANSION
PROJECTS
Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager, provided an update on the Ports of
Los Angeles and Long Beach's expansion projects.
Commissioner Lowe recommended staff continue its efforts to communicate
the Commission's concerns to the ports regarding the expansion projects.
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, noted that there has been a significant
change in the Commission's relationship with the ports and staff is now
formally commenting on their EIS/EIRs. The Commission has extended an
invitation to both ports for their CEOs to join the Southern California CEO
Group in an effort to continue working to make sure the ports understand
the regional concerns.
M/S/C (Lowe/R. Wilson) to:
1) Receive and provide input on the San Pedro port's proposed
expansion projects; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no items on the consent calendar.
13. COMMISSIONERS / STAFF REPORT
13A. Anne Mayer announced:
• Public information meetings for Mid County Parkway project will
be held October 28-30 followed by public hearings on
November 6 and 12.
• The Commission will be hosting the California Transportation
Commission on October 29 and 30 in the County of Riverside
Administrative Center Board Room.
•
•
RCTC Plans and Programs Committee Minutes
October 27, 2008
Page 5
• 14. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Plans and Programs
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:06 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
•
AGENDA ITEM 6
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E
C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
D A T E :
F e b r u a r y 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
J e n n i f e r H a r m o n , O f f i c e a n d B o a r d S e r v i c e s M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
E l e c t i o n o f O f f i c e r s
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e t o c o n d u c t a n e l e c t i o n o f
o f f i c e r s f o r 2 0 0 9 - C h a i r a n d V i c e C h a i r .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e e l e c t i o n o f o f f i c e r s f o r t h e f u l l C o m m i s s i o n a n d i t s C o m m i t t e e s a r e h e l d o n a n
a n n u a l b a s i s . C o m m i s s i o n e r s F r a n k W e s t a n d M i c h a e l H . W i l s o n w e r e e l e c t e d a s
t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e ' s o f f i c e r s i n J a n u a r y 2 0 0 8 . O n c e t h e e l e c t i o n
h a s b e e n c o n d u c t e d , t h e n e w C h a i r a n d V i c e C h a i r w i l l i m m e d i a t e l y a s s u m e t h e
p o s i t i o n s .
P a s t C h a i r s o f t h e P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e a r e a s f o l l o w s :
2 0 0 8 - F r a n k W e s t , C i t y o f M o r e n o V a l l e y
2 0 0 7 - P a t r i c k M u l l a n y , C i t y o f I n d i a n W e l l s
2 0 0 6 - D a r y l B u s c h , C i t y o f P e r r i s
2 0 0 5 - M i c h a e l H . W i l s o n , C i t y o f I n d i o
2 0 0 4 - F r a n k H a l l , C i t y o f N o r c o
2 0 0 3 - D i c k K e l l y , C i t y o f P a l m D e s e r t
2 0 0 2 - D a r y l B u s c h , C i t y o f P e r r i s
2 0 0 1 - P e r c y L . B y r d , C i t y o f I n d i a n W e l l s
2 0 0 0 - R o b i n L o w e , C i t y o f H e m e t
A g e n d a I t e m 6
1
AGENDA ITEM 8A
"
"
R I V E R S I D E
C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
F e b r u a r y 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
H e n r y N i c k e l , S t a f f A n a l y s t
S h e l d o n P e t e r s o n , R a i l M a n a g e r
T H R O U G H :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m U p d a t e
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) R e c e i v e a n d f i l e a n u p d a t e o n t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
I n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e C o u n t y W e e k e n d S e r v i c e P e r f o r m a n c e
Q 2 & Q 3 F Y 0 8 / 0 9 M I N L a s t Y e a r
I E O C W e e k e n d P a s s e n g e r T r i p s + C u r r e n t Y e a r
2 0 0 0
1 6 0 0
1 2 0 0
8 0 0
4 0 0
0
o p ����' p �� p ` b ��p s t j b p ��p r p ��p ����p G p c A A ��A ��
������. 4 ��o e 6 G o A ����" o ' " o 0 ��������a
( o 6 , o " o ��r y ��q ? ` o ��
D a i l y p a s s e n g e r t r i p s o n t h e y e a r - r o u n d I n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e C o u n t y ( I E O C ) M e t r o l i n k
w e e k e n d s e r v i c e h a v e c o n t i n u e d t o g r o w i n t o t h e t h i r d q u a r t e r , p r o v i d i n g 2 , 4 5 3
p a s s e n g e r t r i p s q u a r t e r t o d a t e . T h i s i s a n i n c r e a s e o f 1 . 0 7 % o v e r t h e 2 , 4 2 7 t r i p s
p r o v i d e d a t t h i s p o i n t l a s t y e a r , a t t r i b u t e d t o i n c r e a s e d g a s o l i n e p r i c e s a n d c o n t i n u e d
p r o m o t i o n . T h e s u c c e s s o f t h i s s e r v i c e i s d u e i n l a r g e p a r t t o t h e c o o r d i n a t e d
m a r k e t i n g e f f o r t s a m o n g t h e C o m m i s s i o n , O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y
a n d S a n B e r n a r d i n o A s s o c i a t e d G o v e r n m e n t s . M o s t a l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r m a r k e t i n g
o f t h e s e r v i c e h a v e t r a n s i t i o n e d t o M e t r o l i n k ; t h i s h a s i n c l u d e d r e v i s e d s e a t d r o p s ,
b r a n d i n g , a n d c o n s o l i d a t i o n o f t h e v a r i o u s w e e k e n d s e r v i c e s u n d e r a s i n g l e
p r o m o t i o n a l u m b r e l l a .
A g e n d a I t e m 8 A
2
Riverside Line
e
a
F-
w
0
6,000
5,600
5,200
4,800
4,400
4,000
Passenger Trips
Riverside Line
02) c° r� �� <5' PI) soe oe o0 oa o0 00 o°)
�a� fed �`a PQ �a� ,>� P�0X ge`� oati 04 QQ,
Month
Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's Riverside Line for the month of January
averaged 5,366, an increase of 262, 5% more than the month of December.
Compared to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily increase of
183 passenger trips. This is nearly 4% more than a year ago.
100
m 95
m 90
o 85
o
• 80
N
a 75
70
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
Riverside Line
Ao 00 A' 0 Ao 0 o� ocb o° PR, Ao'
�a‘ Qe lac PQ� �,z;\ PJ� o f O0"c .o� OaG sac
Month
January on -time performance averaged 99% inbound (1 % more than December) and
97% outbound (2% more than December). There were five delays greater than five
minutes during the month of January. The following are primary causes:
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching
Mechanical
Operations
Agenda Item 8A
3
"
"
"
I n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
o
a
. `
F
0
4 t
6 , 0 0 0
5 , 6 0 0
5 , 2 0 0
4 , 8 0 0
4 , 4 0 0
4 , 0 0 0
P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
I n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
M o n t h
D a i l y w e e k d a y p a s s e n g e r t r i p s o n M e t r o l i n k ' s I E O C L i n e f o r t h e m o n t h o f J a n u a r y
a v e r a g e d 4 , 4 0 5 , a i n c r e a s e o f 1 6 0 , 4 % m o r e t h a n t h e m o n t h o f D e c e m b e r .
C o m p a r e d t o o n e y e a r p r i o r , t h e l i n e a v e r a g e d a n o v e r a l l d a i l y d e c r e a s e o f
4 6 2 p a s s e n g e r t r i p s . T h i s i s n e a r l y 9 % l e s s t h a n a y e a r a g o .
1 0 0
9 5
9 0
8 5
8 0
7 5
7 0
O n T i m e P e r f o r m a n c e ( 9 5 % G o a l )
I n l a n d E m p i r e O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e
) a ��A F E Z P . ����` p ��P 4 , " A A w , J c , Q w , J o e �� O ��o Q g p G \ o ��o o O o G A 0
M o n t h
J a n u a r y o n - t i m e p e r f o r m a n c e a v e r a g e d 9 6 % i n b o u n d ( 1 % m o r e t h a n D e c e m b e r ) a n d
9 5 % o u t b o u n d ( 4 % m o r e t h a n D e c e m b e r ) . T h e r e w e r e n i n e d e l a y s g r e a t e r t h a n f i v e
m i n u t e s d u r i n g t h e m o n t h o f J a n u a r y . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e p r i m a r y c a u s e s :
A g e n d a I t e m 8 A
S i g n a l s / T r a c k / M O W
D i s p a t c h i n g
M e c h a n i c a l
O p e r a t i o n s
6
4
1
4
4 0 %
2 7 %
6 %
2 7 %
T O T A L
4
91 Line
2,800
2,600
a 2,400
H
Is 2,200
2,000
1,800
Passenger Trips
91 Line
00 00 O'b 00 0 `b 0 O 0 `b A
Jam Ocr far �Qr �a;A •3P �JA Q� � e<O6 oer 414 pec'A �a°A
Month
Daily weekday passenger trips on Metrolink's 91 Line for the month of January
averaged 2,240, a increase of 50, 2% more than the month of December. Compared
to one year prior, the line averaged an overall daily decrease of 10 passenger trips.
No significant change from a year ago.
On Time Performance (95% Goal)
91 Line
100
R so95 ■.—■—■ .��..H
o 85
i 80
a 75
70
A )'a O 46C 4"1 ' PQ�O�a�O )\ 00 �JA PJOO GP' t]o'O 4)4 oocl
00��OAO
Month
January on -time performance averaged 95% inbound (no change from December) and
96% outbound (no change from December). There were nine delays greater than five
minutes during the month of January. The following are primary causes:
Agenda Item 8A
Signals/Track/MOW
Dispatching
Mechanical
Operations
4
4
0
0
50%
50%
0%
0%
TOTAL
•
•
5
"
"
A t t a c h m e n t s :
1 ) M e t r o l i n k A v e r a g e W e e k d a y P a s s e n g e r T r i p s
2 ) M e t r o l i n k S c h e d u l e A d h e r e n c e S u m m a r y W e e k d a y S e r v i c e
A g e n d a I t e m 8 A
udei0 <WM./A.91MM P°e Opel Imam any
%£
%Z
%0
%6-
%9
%4
%L
%9
%6-
%£
80 uer sn 60 uer
e6ue4o %
%E
%Z
%4
%9
%S
%6 .
%9.
%8-
%Z
809aa sn 60 uer
a6uey0 %
%8-
%0
%Z-
%L
%Z-
%L
886'£4
491'Z4
4E4'94
SS9'94
Z8£'L4
%9
°k l
%L
%£
%0
%L
lll'14
68Z`84
OE6'L4
£44'54
46L'44
064'44
8SE'E4
ZZ£'E4
06Z`Z
O4Z'Z
ZOS`Z
S44`Z
Z94'Z
E04'Z
l44'Z
l04`Z
s9n
69£'Z
004`Z
96£'Z
00£'Z
904`4
S8E'L
99£`S
96L
88l`£L
LSZ'9
LO£'4
60 uer
S4Z`4
SL6'9
40l `9
l£L
484'Z L
Z9L'9
9ZZ'4
80 aaa
LLL`4
08L'L
L04'9
66L
L9L'EL
OZO'L
Z54`4
BO noN
6Z0'S
L49`L
S6L
19L'£L
914 `L
9LZ'4
80 PO
L88'L
Z4£`9
86L
ZS8'£l
LZ9'L
09Z'4
80 des
£6L'9
498'L
L££'S
89L
8£S'£ L
2.1.
L lS'4
80 Bny
48l'S
4£0'8
SL9'9
908
Z46'L
999'4
801nf
ZZ£`S
9S8'L
9LS'9
46L
ZL6'£L
Z4L'L
L8£'4
oat.
I.LCL
69£'9
99L
££S'£L
L9Z'L
694'4
BO /Sew
800`S
£9l'L
9LL'S
LLL
9sz'£L
8E8`9
L4Z'4
80 Juv
496'4
£6l'L
OSL`9
09L
966'Zl
9LL'9
££Z'4
80 JeW
9L8'9
800'9
64L
4Z9'Z l
L99'9
8lZ`4
80 gad
L98`4
ZOO'L
£8 L'S
1.172.
E0Z'ZL
848'9
8L L'4
8o uer
•
031S(1f0V Ay0110H • MOONIM H1NOW:N3312(IHl
SdR112130N3SSVd AVam33M 30V):13AV NNIl02i13W
•
•
meN0141e4•10
rg6 I%98 %$6
%S6
%D6
%46
%96
%DB
%S6 %D6
%S6 %46
%E6 %S6
%S6 %96
%46 %96
%96
%96
%S6
%S6
%96
%LB
%46 %96
%S6 %96
%96 %96
%S6 %96
%96 %L6
%LB %96
%96 %96
%96 %96
%96 %S6
%89 %L6
%L6 %L6
%L6 %66
%Z6 %96
%96 %46
%ZS
%S6 %96
%46 %96
%46 "/oZ6
%Z6 %S6
%Z6 %86
%EB %96
%L6 %46
$4
'uopeinoleo awp-uo syl ul pepnloul;ou aye sure„ polouuy vagew .iol jo mod le aum-uo atom Amuj! 1O paieplsuoo peleumual
'SAepp aigenalla.1 Jo; apew uaacl aney slualu;sn(pe oN
%96 %E6
%46 %46
%L6 %Z6
%88 %46
%46 %S6
%SO %96
%S6 %46
%66 %00l %004 %00 L %96 °/ 46 °/
%16 %66
%S6 %86
%96 %66
%66 %96
%66 %66
%86
%66
%S6 %L6
%L6 %00L
%96 %96
%96 %48
%96 %96
%L6 %L6
%£6
%O6
%99 %99
%S9 %46
%O6 %86
/0
L9 °06 %96 %£6
° f o sme�1
Mig011atielMgfefiliEKKIVANS"x . ` e$100.47;Ni ..:.:c l A110.:9N"d/t Puued „ed (' c^ir� 60 us(' I
&Lou palnpagos Jo swum S uppim 8ulnuiy suleuj pound plead
%96 %Z6
%66 %96
%S6 %96
%96 %86
60 uef
BO 390
80 noN
90100
%86 %66
%96 %86
%96 %86
%96 %L6
%66 %66
%96 %96
%L6
%L6 %L6
%DB
%98 %96
%96 %S6
%46 %96
%LB %L6
%66 %66
%96 %96
%46 %96
%96 %96
%46 %96
%Z6 %16
%96 %96
%L6 %46
%Z6 %46
%E6 %96
%L6 %46
%96 %E6
%96 %96
%66 %96
%Z6 %86
%66 %OOL
%00 L %00 L
%66 %66
%46 %86
%S6 %96
%96 %S6
%46 %96
%96 %96
%Le %86
%99 %9B
%99 %98
%L6 %E6
%06 %Z6
%46 %Z6
%£6 %£6
%96 %£6
%L6 %96
%96 %L6
%L6 %96
%L6 %96
%86 %004
8o deS
90 Brit/
90 Pr
90 unf
90AeW
90 idv
%86 %86
%96 %66
%66 %86
%96 %f6
%96 %86
90 JEN
%96 %96
%66 %00 L
%L6 %46
%96 %L6
%L6 %Le
'w
%86 %96
SHINOW £L 1S31V1
mil M012040510 swum g ul43!M 601n!.uy su!e11;o eBewaaad
331A213S AVON33M - A21t/WWf1S 33143213HCIV 311103H3S >MI102113W
%96 %96
%96 %96
%96 %96
Y'rlow4f:ta a
fri130$:.
%96 %L6
%L6 %96
•
%00 L %66
%46 %L6
,14>kl� 13R1itla/�
•
90 clad
80 uef
YV403
AGENDA ITEM 9
"
f r I V E R S I D E
C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
M a r c h 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
C a t h y B e c h t e l , P r o j e c t D e v e l o p m e n t D i r e c t o r
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
O p e r a t i o n a l I m p r o v e m e n t S t u d y f o r t h e O r t e g a H i g h w a y / S t a t e
R o u t e 7 4
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) R e c e i v e a n d f i l e t h e O p e r a t i o n a l I m p r o v e m e n t S t u d y f o r t h e
O r t e g a H i g h w a y / S t a t e R o u t e 7 4 ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
I n D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 5 , t h e O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( O C T A )
a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v e d t h e l o c a l l y p r e f e r r e d s t r a t e g y a s p a r t o f t h e
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y / O r a n g e C o u n t y M a j o r I n v e s t m e n t S t u d y ( M I S ) . O n e o f t h e
r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o f t h e a p p r o v e d l o c a l l y p r e f e r r e d s t r a t e g y w a s t o s t u d y
o p e r a t i o n a l i m p r o v e m e n t s a l o n g t h e O r t e g a H i g h w a y .
T h e O p e r a t i o n a l I m p r o v e m e n t S t u d y ( S t u d y ) h a s b e e n c o m p l e t e d a n d w a s a
c o l l a b o r a t i v e e f f o r t b e t w e e n O C T A a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n , i n p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h
C a l t r a n s D i s t r i c t s 8 a n d 1 2 , a s w e l l a s o t h e r s t a k e h o l d e r a g e n c i e s . T h e s t u d y
p e r f o r m e d a h i g h - l e v e l o p e r a t i o n a l a n a l y s i s o f S R - 7 4 b e t w e e n A n t o n i o P a r k w a y i n
S a n J u a n C a p i s t r a n o a n d I n t e r s t a t e 1 5 i n t h e c i t y o f L a k e E l s i n o r e , a n d
r e c o m m e n d e d a p r i o r i t i z e d s e t o f i m p r o v e m e n t s t h a t s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d f o r m o r e
d e t a i l e d s t u d y b y t h e s t a k e h o l d e r a g e n c i e s .
D I S C U S S I O N :
T h e s t u d y p r o v i d e s a n o v e r v i e w o f t h e e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s a l o n g S R - 7 4 b e t w e e n
A n t o n i o P a r k w a y a n d t h e I n t e r s t a t e - 1 5 , a n d m a k e s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r p r o j e c t s
t h a t w i l l i m p r o v e i n t e r c o u n t y m o b i l i t y . T h e s e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e l i m i t e d t o n o n -
c a p a c i t y e n h a n c i n g i m p r o v e m e n t s d u e p r i m a r i l y t o r i g h t - o f - w a y l i m i t a t i o n s ,
g e o l o g i c c o n d i t i o n s , a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s e n s i t i v e s u r r o u n d i n g s . M o r e o v e r , t h i s
s t u d y p r o v i d e s a p l a n n i n g t o o l t h a t c a n b e u s e d b y O C T A , t h e C o m m i s s i o n , a n d
C a l t r a n s w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g o p e r a t i o n a l i m p r o v e m e n t s o n S R - 7 4 .
A g e n d a I t e m 9
9
The Study was developed under the review and guidance of a technical advisory
committee (TAC) that was composed of staff from OCTA, the Commission,
Caltrans Districts 8 and 12, the county of Orange, the Cleveland National Forest,
and the cities of Lake Elsinore and San Juan Capistrano. The TAC also provided
input to, and acceptance of, the recommendations presented in the Study.
Since SR-74 was originally constructed during the 1930s, the facility was
designed to the standards of the time and was intended for much lower volumes
than experienced today. Increasingly, SR-74 is being utilized as a work trip
facility, carrying commuters between Riverside and Orange Counties. One
particular section of SR-74, segment 5 in Orange County, has recently been
retrofitted to provide the maximum level of improvement feasible; however, more
improvements are recommended throughout the facility to enhance operations.
The Study divides SR-74 into 12 segments based on Caltrans' operational records
to analyze the facility. As noted above, Caltrans recently concluded
a project to enhance operations within segment 5; therefore, this segment was not
included in the analysis performed for this study. Traffic operations were analyzed
for the current traffic conditions using the Highway Capacity Manual methodology
for two-lane undivided highways. This methodology utilizes geometric features
and traffic demand factors, such as lane and shoulder widths, type of terrain,
number of intersections, and traffic volumes.
Based on this analysis, this study finds that the SR-74 study corridor is currently
operating at or very near its maximum capacity during peak hours. Due to these
conditions, if any incident occurs that slows traffic, it can have severe impacts to
the facilities throughput. Compounding this are such factors as reduced lane and
shoulder widths, lack of adequate turnouts and passing lanes; therefore, this study
recommends that the following improvements be considered:
• Add passing lanes at two to five mile intervals;
• Upgrade lanes and shoulders;
• Upgrade drainage systems;
• Add/upgrade metal beam guard rails (MBGR);
• Improve intersections that are at or near capacity;
• Remove sight obstructions;
• Improve lighting;
• Add recessed pavement markers;
• Add/improve rock catchments;
• Install/improve warning signs; and
• Provide adequate delineation.
A cost -benefit analysis of the recommended improvements was performed
in order to develop the project phasing strategy as shown in the table below:
•
•
•
Agenda Item 9
10
"
E c g i n E n d
P e s t
H k � M
� �
P r o p o s e d i
, e t e r o f -
��1 a n i t u c e
�� t
r : n g t h R a n : N s
n e i - ; C : c n s t
p l u s
S u p p o r t ;
O D
� � R i v e s 1 2
� �� R F t s 0 E D I E C I I
Q �� R ! k ��e e i f ��a 1 g g
� � L ����r " ��0 �
� � a - -
0 1 O i 1 1 1 5 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 N
6 r l t a 0 : 0 ����
7 i 1 � M I r u n I I I
M I N I M m a i d * E m m a
4 . 1 )
R O W a 7 M a k
1 0 , . 2 0
2 3 , 0 4 8
3 0 � 9 '
2 3 + 4 6 .
9 0 - 1 r 6
C O - " 1 3 0
3 5 5 . 4 1 5 1
� � � - - � - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 - � � - � - " 1 1 - - ��
� � � Q � � � � 0 � �
� Q � Q Q � � � � � �
� � � � � - � � � � �
� � � � 0 = 1 0 0 _ _ �
- - � � - - � 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - 1 M
� � � 0 � 1 1 1 1 1 Q � � � �
� � � � Q - � � - - Q
� � 1 5 1 � � � � � 1 1 1 1 - �
F i n a l l y , t h e S t u d y r e c o m m e n d s t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g a d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s b e c o n s i d e r e d
f o r m o r e d e t a i l e d s t u d y b y t h e s t a k e h o l d e r a g e n c i e s :
" F e a s i b i l i t y s t u d y f o r s p e c i f i c p a s s i n g l a n e l o c a t i o n s ;
" P r o j e c t i n i t i a t i o n d o c u m e n t s s u c h a s p r o j e c t s t u d y r e p o r t s . T h e s e p r e l i m i n a r y
e n g i n e e r i n g s t u d i e s w i l l e v a l u a t e t h e s p e c i f i c f e a s i b i l i t i e s , c o s t s , a n d s c o p e s
f o r p r o p o s e d i m p r o v e m e n t s ;
" E n v i r o n m e n t a l s t u d i e s f o r t h e p r o p o s e d i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t s ; a n d
" F i n a n c i a l a n a l y s e s t o i d e n t i f y f u n d i n g f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d
i m p r o v e m e n t s .
A t t a c h m e n t : O p e r a t i o n a l I m p r o v e m e n t S t u d y o f t h e O r t e g a H i g h w a y ( S t a t e R o u t e
7 4 ) i n O r a n g e a n d R i v e r s i d e C o u n t i e s E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y
A g e n d a I t e m 9
1 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2006, the Riverside County —Orange
County Major Investment Study (MIS)
recommended that operational
improvements to State Route 74 (SR-74,
also known as Ortega Highway) be identified
as a key strategic initiative for intercounty
mobility. The MIS also concluded that,
between Interstate 15 (1-15) (in Riverside
County) and Antonio Parkway/La Pata
Avenue (a few miles east of Interstate 5 in
Orange County), capacity improvements to
SR-74 are not feasible because of
environmental and cost constraints. To
respond to this recommendation, the
Orange County Transportation Authority
(OCTA) and the Riverside County
Transportation Commission (ROTC) jointly
initiated this Operational Improvement
Study. This is a high level study. Future
improvements to SR-74 will be subject to
more detailed project -specific. studies. A
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
composed of involved agencies was
assembled to review the study objectives
and provide guidance throughout the study
process.
Study Limits. The study limits are the SR-
74 Corridor between Antonio Parkway/La
Pata Avenue in Orange County and 1-15 in
Riverside County, totaling 30 miles in length.
(Ora -PM 2.6 / 16.6, Riv-PM 0.0 / 16.3)
Objective. The objective is to provide a
planning tool that can be used by the
involved agencies to consider how to
improve operations on SR-74.
Consensus -Building
This study was developed in coordination
with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
composed of representatives from:
• United States Department of Interior,
Cleveland National Forest,
• California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) District 8,
• Caltrans District 12,
• County of Orange,
• Orange County Transportation Authority
(OCTA),
• Riverside County Transportation
Commission (RCTC),
ES-1
• City of Lake Elsinore, and
• City of San Juan Capistrano.
This TAC provided review of, input to, and
acceptance of the proposed analysis and
recommendations included herein.
Background
SR-74 was constructed in the 1930s to
provide access from Riverside County to
recreational attractions —primarily, Lake
Elsinore, the San Juan Hot Springs, the
beaches in Orange County, and outdoor
recreation areas in the Cleveland National
Forest. The greater part of the study area is
two-lane undivided rural highway that is
rolling and mountainous. At the City of take
Elsinore, the highway changes to an urban
setting and has a four -lane configuration
with multiple signal or stop sign controlled
intersections. When the highway was
constructed, the current design standards
were not in existence. New improvements
will have to consider application of the
current standards when feasible.
Analysis Results
Segments. The SR-74 study corridor is
divided into twelve segments for analysis
and comparison, as shown in Figure ES-1.
The limits of these segments were based on
Caltrans' traffic operational records.
Segment 5. It should be noted that Caltrans
is completing an improvement project on
Segment 5 (EA 12-043214). The project
widens the existing lanes to 12 feet and
shoulders to 4 feet, places rumble strips in
the median, adds safety enhancements
(wire mesh system, rock catchment) to
reduce road closures due to rock slides,
improves motorists sight distances by
removing protruding rock walls, improves
drainage facilities into San Juan Creek,
improves turnouts and adds two new
turnouts. According to Caltrans, this project
has provided maximum level of
improvements feasible to this segment and
no further improvement will be necessary.
As a result, Segment 5 will not be included
in any of the analyses shown in this report.
13
"
"
"
F i u r e E S - 1 : S R - 7 4 S t u d A r e a S e m e n t M a p
C u r r e n t O p e r a t i o n s . T h e S R - 7 4 c o r r i d o r i s
a w i n d i n g m o u n t a i n o u s a l i g n m e n t w i t h
l i m i t e d p l a c e s f o r p a s s i n g , v e h i c l e t u r n o u t s ,
o r e m e r g e n c y c l e a r z o n e s . B e c a u s e o f t h e
c u r r e n t c o r r i d o r a l i g n m e n t a n d a s s o c i a t e d
c o n s t r a i n t s , t r a f f i c q u e u e s f o r m b e h i n d s l o w -
m o v i n g v e h i c l e s a n d d i s a b l e d v e h i c l e s ; s e e
F i g u r e E S - 2 . T r a f f i c o p e r a t i o n s w e r e
a n a l y z e d f o r t h e c u r r e n t t r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s
u s i n g t h e H i g h w a y C a p a c i t y M a n u a l ( H C M )
m e t h o d o l o g y f o r t w o - l a n e u n d i v i d e d
h i g h w a y s . T h i s m e t h o d o l o g y i n c o r p o r a t e s
g e o m e t r i c f e a t u r e s a n d t r a f f i c d e m a n d
f a c t o r s s u c h a s l a n e a n d s h o u l d e r w i d t h s ,
t y p e o f t e r r a i n , n u m b e r o f a c c e s s p o i n t s ,
t w o - w a y t r a f f i c v o l u m e s , t r u c k p e r c e n t a g e s ,
a n d d i r e c t i o n a l s p l i t s . T h e a n a l y s i s s h o w s
t h a t t h e e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t y i s o p e r a t i n g a t a
L e v e l o f S e r v i c e ( L O S ) E o r l e s s .
E S - 2
O P f ; 8 A T I O i + A l . I h + 1
F i g u r e E S - 2 : T i m e S p e n t F o l l o w i n g S l o w e r
V e h i c l e s b y S e g m e n t
9 9 %
9 2 %
W 9 0 %
�� 6 e %
0
O . 8 e %
L L
t 8 9 %
S .
V l 9 2 %
" 8 0 %
a t 7 8 %
7 6 %
7 9 % -
2 0
9 6 7 8 B
S e g m e n t N o .
1 0 1 2
H o r i z o n t a l H i g h w a y C u r v e s . W i t h i n t h e
s t u d y a r e a , d u e t o t h e m o u n t a i n o u s t e r r a i n ,
h o r i z o n t a l c u r v e s a r e k e y p h y s i c a l
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e r o a d w a y . A t e a c h
h o r i z o n t a l c u r v e l o c a t i o n , t h e r o a d w a y
g e o m e t r y r e s u l t s i n a c o r r e s p o n d i n g
r e c o m m e n d e d s t o p p i n g s i g h t d i s t a n c e a n d
d e s i g n s p e e d ' . B a s e d o n t h e a s - b u i l t
t G e o m e t r i c f e a t u r e s a f f e c t i n g s i g h t d i s t a n c e s a n d
d e s i g n s p e e d s t y p i c a l l y i n c l u d e h o r i z o n t a l a l i g n m e n t ,
v e r t i c a l a l i g n m e n t , s u p e r - e l e v a t i o n , a n d h o r i z o n t a l
c l e a r a n c e s .
1 4
construction plans and photograph log,
Figure ES- 3 depicts the number of existing
horizontal curves and their corresponding
design speed ranges within each segment.
As can be seen, horizontal curves are
particularly prominent in Segments 4
through 9, which are in the mountainous
areas. Combined with restricted clearances,
the corresponding recommended highway
design speeds are significantly reduced in
the same mountainous segments?
Figure ES- 3: Number of Horizontal Curves &
Corresponding Recommended Design Speed
Ranges by Segment
30
• equal to or greeter than 45 mph
■ between 30 and 45 mph
•below 30 mph
1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 it 12
Segment No.
Lane and Shoulder Widths. The SR-74
roadway section within the defined project
study limits includes significant lengths with
narrow lane and shoulder widths. Currently,
the standard lane width for a two-lane
conventional State highway per Caltrans'
geometric standards is 12 feet, and the
standard right shoulder width is 8 feet.
These standards were not in existence when
the Ortega Highway was constructed. As
can be seen in Figures ES-4 and ES-6, the
narrow lanes and shoulders are more
prominent in the mountainous segments.
Fifty-seven (57) percent of the travel lanes
within the total study area include lane
widths that are less than 12 feet, and over
seventy-five (75) percent of shoulder areas
are less than 8 feet in width. Figures ES-5
and ES-7 summarize the lane and shoulder
width inventories respectively.
2 Caltrans' current design standard for two-lane
conventional highway in mountainous terrain specifies a
design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph).
ES-3
Figure ES-4: Existing Lane Widths by
Segment
■ 12-ft
■ 11-ft
• 1041
1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Segment No.
Figure ES-5: Lane Widths within Total Study
Area
12fi
43%
30%
Figure ES-6: Existing Shoulder Widths by
Segment
. 6.&ft
• 8-1t
n 6-ft
o 4-ft
• 2-ft
• oft
E
90%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2
3 4 6 7 8
Segment No.
9
10
11
Figure ES-7: Shoulder Widths within Total
Study Area
6-ft
0%
4-ft
7%
>8-ft
4%
0-ft
59%
12
15
"
"
"
A c c e s s P o i n t s . H i g h w a y a c c e s s p o i n t s
c r e a t e p o t e n t i a l t r a f f i c c o n f l i c t p o i n t s .
B e c a u s e o f t h e t o p o g r a p h y , m a n y a c c e s s
p o i n t s h a v e c h a l l e n g i n g g e o m e t r i c
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . A s a n e x a m p l e , i n t h e
p h o t o g r a p h i n F i g u r e E S - 8 , t h e c o n n e c t i o n o f
t h e s u b j e c t a c c e s s r o a d i s n o t p e r p e n d i c u l a r
t o t h e S R - 7 4 a n d t h e a c c e s s p o i n t i s l o c a t e d
a t a c u r v e , w h i c h c a n a f f e c t s i g h t l i n e s a n d
d r i v e r c o m f o r t .
F i g u r e E S - 8 : E x a m p l e o f A c c e s s t o O r t e g a
w i t h C h a l l e n g i n g G e o m e t r i c C o n d i t i o n s
F i g u r e E S - 1 0 : N u m b e r o f T u r n o u t s p e r M i l e
b y S e g m e n t
1 4
1 2
2
1 2 3 4 6
R i v e r s i d e
8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2
S e g m e n t N o .
S c o r i n g . B a s e d o n t h e t r a f f i c d a t a , p h y s i c a l
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , a n d m a i n t e n a n c e r e c o r d s ,
t h i s s t u d y a s s e s s e s t h e f i n d i n g s a n d
r e c o m m e n d s i m p r o v e m e n t s f o r e a c h S R - 7 4
s e g m e n t . A s c o r i n g s y s t e m w a s d e v e l o p e d
t o q u a n t i f y c o m p a r i s o n s . S c o r e s a r e s h o w n
i n " p o i n t s p e r m i l e " . S e g m e n t s s h o w i n g
h i g h e r s c o r e s w o u l d p r e s u m a b l y r e q u i r e
m o r e i m p r o v e m e n t s t h a n t h o s e s e g m e n t s
w i t h l o w e r s c o r e s .
F i g u r e E S - 1 1 s u m m a r i z e s t h e o p e r a t i o n a l
s c o r e s b y s e g m e n t .
F i g u r e E S - 1 1 : S c o r e S u m m a r y b y S e g m e n t
A s s h o w n i n F i g u r e E S - 9 , t h e d e n s i t y o f 1 2 0
a c c e s s p o i n t s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y p r o m i n e n t i n 1 0 0
S e g m e n t 7 .
F i g u r e E S - 9 : A c c e s s P o i n t s p e r M i l e b y
S e g m e n t
S e g m e n t N o
T u r n o u t s . T u r n o u t s a l l o w m o t o r i s t s t o l e a v e
t h e t r a v e l e d l a n e t o a l l o w i n g t h e m o t o r i s t s t o
s l o w o r d i s a b l e d v e h i c l e s t o p u l l o v e r a n d l e t
f a s t e r t r a f f i c p a s s , s o a s t o r e d u c e t r a f f i c
q u e u e s a n d d r i v e r f r u s t r a t i o n . F i g u r e E S - 1 0
s h o w s t u r n o u t s a r e m o s t n u m e r o u s i n
S e g m e n t s 6 a n d 8 .
E S - 4
1 2
3 4
8 ) e
S e g m e n t N o .
9 1 0 1 1 1 2
1 6
Environmental Constraints
SR-74 traverses portions of two major open
space areas: Casper Regional Park and
Cleveland National Forest. The area is very
hilly, with mid- and long-range mountainous
views. Towards the eastern extent of the
roadway segment, the road enters into the
urbanized area of the City of Lake Elsinore
and remains in an urban setting to from the
City of Lake Elsinore to the interchange with
the 1-15.
Habitat for Diverse Species. The
Cleveland National Forest lies within a
region recognized by Conservation
International as one of the world's
"biodiversity hotspots" (areas where
exceptional concentrations of endemic
species are threatened by loss of habitat).
The Forest provides habitat for federally
listed threatened and endangered animals
and plants.
While it is not completely financially
prohibitive to improve the highway within the
study area, any proposed improvements
should make the greatest effort feasible to
avoid impacts on sensitive habitats and
species and to avoid fragmentation of
conservation areas identified in the Central
and Coastal Subregion Natural Community
Conservation Plan (NCCP) and follow the
regulations and environmental review
processes of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) and the Califomia
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Environmental Constraints. The map on
the following page provides an overview of
the environmental constraints within the
study area.
ES-5
•
•
17
86
*US••vunatlwlllucam•O e[113
pua6al pue malnaanp • SIIIHMSuo3 IMuawuo AL13
.no!,^PS (.711I 3NYdWOD INC)
L
Ae6S 0{ wu pue aleWIXOJdde ale sr.me Su0o IE1LIBW11011NUa all) Jo Su01je00j
musty 0U1 lle 10U alg pue dp0 {LIau153a5Se (1CulWllald 10J a1C W40115 SiU16.115000 IELIEUN011A110 ay j
TRIO ani}eaaquaa-aad
gnns ergs ueappan!g
gwaS a0eg ued Immo ueaplSlaub
gm's uepedlu
300e3Neg1Ode!lurr!sag
puodMonresaypaleM MOO -
pueRsesO ange•UoN
PAPO/an0,0 -
spuelaal0 plaid
gmpS deS IelsePO ue6•0 11110
LIMN JalerNSafd balled Pue lelseo3
PuelPooM Me0 on Moo F��,n
IOJadag0
upgela6a6
Spurpm 0+00 H mV.Z.;
eBL�.=,
pRIB mega P•Old ePadY%l
MPH leo!lp0 Peol array
MN NV* Jetinnieu0 eldlome0 ',
SeaJV 2A*dONSIN Q
0•1V61S moods a@IlsuaS 90➢NNO •
Wed ___
swea1IS
luadlu0ll• to Jung am l e — I
luawu611y 1001oy
man 0
SIuieaISuo3 1e1110wuoainu3
•
s
•
•
•
improvements to Be Considered
Based on the assessments and discussions
presented herein, the following SR-74
improvements should be considered and
further developed:
• Add passing lanes at 2 — 5 mile
intervals;
• Upgrade lanes and shoulders3;
• Upgrade drainage systems;
• Upgrade metal beam guard rails
(MBGRs);
• Improve intersections with LOS E or
greater; and
• Remove sight obstructions, install/
improve -warning signs and provide
adequate delineation.
Other miscellaneous items such as lighting,
recessed pavement markers, new MBGR
locations, and rock catchments should also
be considered whenever feasible. These
improvements are compatible with the long-
term system plans by the regional and local
transportation agencies.
Costs. This study developed order -of -
magnitude cost estimates for the proposed
improvements. Figure ES- 12 shows the
cost -per -mile data for each segment. Note
that these costs represent the upper end of
the cost range for each segment.
3 Whenever a major improvement project is proposed
on a State Highway System, full design standards must
be considered first. Deviation from the mandatory or
advisory design standards will need to be justified and
approved by the Department of Transportation. For
example, the Upper Ortega Highway Project justified for
a 4-foot shoulder width due to the high cost and
environmental impacts. Similar justification process will
apply to the other segments if application of full
standards is not feasible.
ES-7
Figure ES-12: Average per -Mile Cost of
Proposed Improvements by Segment
45
40
9 10 11
Segment No.
Cost -Benefit Analysis. This SR-74 study
performed a cost -benefit analysis for each
segment. The potential improvements
mentioned in the previous section would
improve the performance of the roadway,
and, as a result, would reduce the point
scores which represent the conditions of the
roadway in this study. More reduction in
points means better roadway performance.
The cost -benefit analysis is based on the
cost per point reduced within each segment.
Figure ES-13 summarizes the results.
Figure ES-13: Cost in $Million per Point
Reduced
2.50
2 3 4 6 l 6
Segment No.
9
10
11
This analysis provides a guide as to the
effectiveness of implementing the proposed
improvements. The lower the cost -per -
point -reduced value is, the more cost-
effective are the improvements within a
segment. The results were used as the
basis for project phasing. As can be seen
Figure ES-13, the most cost-effective
segment in orange County is Segment 1,
and in Riverside County, Segment 11.
12
19
"
"
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s
B a s e d u p o n t h e c o n c e p t u a l a n a l y s i s
c o n d u c t e d f o r t h i s s t u d y , i t i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t
t h e s t a k e h o l d e r p l a n n i n g a g e n c i e s c o n s i d e r
t h e i m p r o v e m e n t p r i o r i t i e s s u m m a r i z e d i n
t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p h a s i n g p l a n i n T a b l e
E S - 1 , a n d p e r f o r m t h e f o l l o w i n g a d d i t i o n a l
s t u d i e s :
" F e a s i b i l i t y S t u d y f o r s p e c i f i c p a s s i n g
l a n e l o c a t i o n s ;
" P r o j e c t I n i t i a t i o n D o c u m e n t s ( P I D s ) ,
w h i c h w i l l e v a l u a t e t h e s p e c i f i c
f e a s i b i l i t i e s , c o s t , a n d s c o p e o f t h e
T a b l e E s - 1 : P r o p o s e d I m p r o v e m e n
p r o p o s e d i m p r o v e m e n t s i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l
a n d p r e c i s i o n ;
" A n a l y s i s a n d r e s e a r c h t o d e t e r m i n e t h e
a m o u n t a n d a v a i l a b i l i t y o f f u n d i n g , a n d
t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f p r o p o s e d f u n d i n g
s o u r c e s ; a n d
" N E P A / C E Q A c o m p l i a n c e r e p o r t s .
I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t t h e s e p r o p o s e d
i m p r o v e m e n t s a r e b a s e d o n v e r y h i g h l e v e l
e v a l u a t i o n s . T h e f e a s i b i l i t y o f t h e i r f i n a l
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n w i l l b e s u b j e c t t o d e t a i l e d
a n a l y s e s a n d s t u d i e s .
P r i o r i t y
N o
1
S e g .
N o . :
1 1
C o u n t y
R i v e r s i d e
B e g i n E n d
P o s t P o s t M i l e M i l e
1 4 . 9 1 5 . 0
L e n g t h
( m i l e )
0 . 8
" O r d e r - o f -
M a g n i t u d e "
R n g e s
( C o n s t .
P l u s
S u p p o r t }
( S M i l l i o n s ) ,
1 0 - 2 0
, g
�� o
m ��
2 7 a ,
- -
c c
m
Q
P r o p o s e d
a ,
r s
R
�� ,
r - o
a
a
I m p r o v e m e n t s
o
n ,
` ����
d b s
o d o
E - ��
�
��
a
G
E
d
a T
v ��
E
m
- 0
��
m o
z 4 . 0 o
- '
S
P
7 . 3
0
c e
Q ,
'
'
'
��-
'
'
- - - - -
'
- - _ -
'
'
'
'
2
1 2
R i v e r s i d e
1 5 . 0
1 6 . 3
1 . 3
1 0 - 2 0
- -
'
3
8
R i v e r s i d e
6 . 9
8 . 7
1 . 8
4 0 - 7 8
' '
'
'
'
4
7
R i v e r s i d e
4 . 5
6 . 9
2 . 4
4 0 - 7 8
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
V
'
I
5
1
O r a n g e
2 . 6
5 . 2
2 . 6
2 3 - 4 6
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
-
6
4
O r a n
9 . 3
1 3 . 3
4 . 0
3 0 - 9 8
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
7
2
O r a n
5 . 2
8 . 1
2 . 9
2 3 - 4 6
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
- - - -
'
'
'
'
8
1 0
R i v e r s i d e
1 1 . 8
1 4 . 2
2 . 4
1 6 - 3 3
- -
'
'
'
9
6
R i v e r s i d e
0 . 0
4 . 5
4 . 5
9 0 - 1 7 6
'
'
'
'
'
'
1 0
3
O r a a
8 . 1
9 . 3
1 . 1
1 3 - 2 6
'
�
'
'
'
'
'
- -
'
1 1
9
R i v e r s i d e
8 . 7
1 1 . 8
3 . 1
6 0 - 1 3 0
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
- -
'
R o u t e T o t a l :
3 5 5 - 7 5 1 '
E S - 8
2 0
AGENDA ITEM 10
REVISED ATTACHMENT 2
(Revisions made in bold/italics and strikethrough)
Created: 2/12/2009
Panted: 2/23/2009 12:01 PM
B
ESTIMATED FUND BALANCES (RESERVE) BY APPORTIONMENT AREA
LTF, STA & MEASURE A
As-of-danuary-2908
Revised February 23, 2009
i
Western Riverside
Bus I Rail
Coachella
Valley
Palo Verde
Valley
Total
i
LTF FY 07/08 Operating Carryover as
of 6/30108
(Apportioned/Unallocated/Available) a 25,157,466 16,418,417 2,831,124 253,733
Estimated LTF FY 08/09 Apportionment
(revised 12/08)
LTF FY 08/09 SRTP Requests
Estimated Fund Balance (a+b-c)
44,660,740
b 35,193,720 9,926,434 12,495,644 901,277 58,517,075
c 34,529,041 9,296,100 12,823,846 834,999 57,483,986
25,822,146 17,048,751 2,502,922 320,011 45,693,829
STA FY 07/08 Carryover as of 6/30/08
(Apportioned/Unallocated/Available) d 9,778,623 5,614,589 4,547,274 * 60,374 20,000,860
C
e 6,679,203 1,858,614 2,212,810
133,307 9,783,961
Estimated STA FY 08/09 Allocation per
February2009 State Budget Revision a Z789,602 929,307 1,106,420 66,654 4,891,982
STA FY 08/09 SRTP Requests f 5,963,913 2,031,004 8,358,977 591,198 16,945,092
Estimated Fund Balance (d+e-f)
(Assumes all of FY 08109 STA allocation
per 1018108 funding level will be released) 6,604,312 4,512,892 (2,705,283)
(464,171) 7,947,750
MEASURE A Carryover as of 6130108 10.370,660
Amount to be Used for FY 08/09 Specialized
Transit funding
RTA FY 06 JARCMF local Match
Estimated Fund Balance
1,716,844
281,168
8,372,648
* SunLine's original FY 07/08 carryover increased by $4,020,564 after SunLine moved funding for bus replacement & ITS equipment
projects from STA to Prop 1B funding.
*' Reduced SunLine's FY 08/09 STA request by 5238,000 after notification that CW4 project using STA match will not be funded.
Note: Due to negative fund balance resulting from STA shortfall, SunLine will amend its FY 08/09 SRTP to modify & reduce capital
requests for FY 08/09.
C:ID000ME-llthyerry0.0CALS-11Temp\(Pgrpwlse1FY%200708RESERVEAVAILABLE2Feb09Revtals STA wtthSRTP Request(3)
AGENDA ITEM 10
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E
C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M I S S I O N
D A T E :
F e b r u a r y 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n B u d g e t a n d R e v e n u e E s t i m a t e
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) R e c e i v e a n d f i l e t h e p r e l i m i n a r y r e v e n u e e s t i m a t e f o r t h e S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t
P l a n ( S R T P ) b u d g e t p r o c e s s ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e m o n t h o f F e b r u a r y t r a d i t i o n a l l y s i g n a l s t h e s t a r t o f t h e b u d g e t i n g p r o c e s s f o r
t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p u b l i c t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s . T h e s e b u d g e t s a r e r e f l e c t e d i n w h a t i s
k n o w n a s a S R T P f o r e a c h p u b l i c o p e r a t o r . T h e S R T P p r o c e s s b r e a k s d o w n t h e
f u n d i n g b y s o u r c e f o r e a c h o p e r a t o r a n d d e f i n e s t h e n a t u r e a n d e x t e n t o f t h e
s e r v i c e t o b e p r o v i d e d .
D I S C U S S I O N :
O n F e b r u a r y 4 , 2 0 0 9 , s t a f f c o n d u c t e d t h e k i c k - o f f m e e t i n g f o r t h e F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0
S R T P b u d g e t p r o c e s s . D u r i n g t h a t m e e t i n g , s t a f f p r o v i d e d a r e v e n u e e s t i m a t e ,
w h i c h d e t a i l e d t h e f u n d s c u r r e n t l y k n o w n t o b e a v a i l a b l e f o r t r a n s i t o p e r a t i o n s a n d
c a p i t a l .
W i t h t h e s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l b u d g e t p r o c e s s a t a s t a n d s t i l l , s t a f f p r o v i d e d t h e
o p e r a t o r s w i t h a v e r y c o n s e r v a t i v e e s t i m a t e o f t h e a v a i l a b l e r e v e n u e f o r t h e n e x t
f i s c a l y e a r f o r b o t h o p e r a t i o n s a n d c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s . H i g h l i g h t s o f s o m e o f t h e
e c o n o m i c i m p a c t o n r e v e n u e s a r e a s f o l l o w s :
" F e d e r a l 5 3 0 7 f u n d s a r e c u r r e n t l y p r o v i d e d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n v i a a
c o n t i n u i n g r e s o l u t i o n , b u t o n l y i n t h e a m o u n t o f 4 3 % o f t h e o r i g i n a l
c o m m i t m e n t .
" T h e M e a s u r e A m i d y e a r r e v e n u e r e v i s i o n a p p r o v e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n
J a n u a r y r e s u l t e d i n a d e c r e a s e o f p r o j e c t e d M e a s u r e A r e v e n u e s f r o m
A g e n d a I t e m 1 0
2 1
$135 million to $126 million for FY 2008/09. The SRTP revenue estimate
provided to the operators indicated Measure A to be flat for FY 2009/10 at
$126 million.
• The Local Transportation Fund (LTF) midyear revenue revision was also
approved by the Commission in January and resulted in a decline in revenue
for the current FY 2008/09 from $67 million to $60 million. The SRTP
revenue estimate provided to the operators indicated that LTF would also be
flat for FY 2009/10, at $60 million.
• State Transit Assistance and Prop1 B bond funds were projected to be at zero
in the SRTP revenue estimate. This is a direct result of the state budget
crisis with both programs currently in a state of suspension.
Given the nature of the current economic climate, it is safe to say that the revenue
estimate provided to the operators was a very dire piece of information. This
information however, should not come as news. Back in November 2004 and
again in July 2005, staff presented to the Commission various scenarios, wherein
operating costs would eventually outstrip available revenues. The current
economic environment served to move up the date as to when this occurrence
would become reality.
The Commission also previously adopted a reserve policy in January 2005. This
policy intended that a 10% set aside would be established in order to deal with
unforeseen economic conditions and that certain guidelines would need to be met
in order for it to be accessed. The SRTP revenue estimate provided to the
operators excluded the 10% reserve in order to preserve a buffer in the case that
revenues continue to decline. Any operator wishing to access the reserve for
FY 2009/10 must by policy, file a request to amend its SRTP document and that
request would be reviewed by staff and forwarded to the Commission for action.
Lastly, while unallocated carryover fund balances exist, staff is recommending
prudence in how they are accessed and utilized. Given that the Commission finds
itself in a declining revenue environment, it will only be a matter of time before the
carryover balances are completely exhausted thus setting up an environment where
very difficult choices will need to be made. Staff has informed the operators that
should the operators wish to access the carryover balances and deficit spend (as
compared to available revenue), that these plans would be presented to the
Commission for action. This would be consistent with the reserve policy identified
above.
SRTP kick off was moved up by two weeks in order to allow both Commission
staff and the operators more time to deal with a constantly changing funding
environment. Staff expects that as the state and federal budgetary processes
Agenda Item 10
22
"
"
"
b e c o m e c l e a r e r , t h a t a d d i t i o n a l g u i d a n c e o n a v a i l a b l e r e v e n u e w i l l b e p r o v i d e d t o
t h e o p e r a t o r s .
C u r r e n t l y , t h e o p e r a t o r s a r e e x p e c t e d t o p r e s e n t i n i t i a l d r a f t s o f t h e i r S R T P
d o c u m e n t t o s t a f f o n M a r c h 1 3 , 2 0 0 9 . A t t h a t p o i n t , s t a f f w i l l b e g i n t h e r e v i e w
p r o c e s s a n d w i l l w o r k c l o s e l y w i t h t h e o p e r a t o r s t o r e f i n e t h e i r b u d g e t s . S R T P ' s
f o r a l l o p e r a t o r s w i l l b e p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n J u l y f o r f i n a l a p p r o v a l .
A t t a c h m e n t s :
1 ) F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0 S R T P R e v e n u e E s t i m a t e
2 ) E s t i m a t e d F u n d B a l a n c e s b y A p p o r t i o n m e n t A r e a
A g e n d a I t e m 1 0
2 3
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
FY 2009/10 REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR TRANSIT
Date Prepared: 2/1/09
Date Revised:
ATTACHMENT1
Page 1
REVISIONS TO PLANNING ESTIMATES:
ESTIMATES ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY -SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING.
STATE S LOCAL FUNDS
a«" -
i LUOA-N$Rt i i�0 0
Total
Western County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde
Valley
Attachme
Wee ntl
FY 2009/10 Estimated Apportionments(weedompopNraBon)
Bus Services: 78%
Rail Services: 22%
$ 50,562,943
$ 38,971,723
30,397,944
8,573,779
$ 10,881,971
$ 709,249
1A
Allocation of Transit Reserves
tft-*+.A;T-:*RN•J$rr.,;,..,� ,p,x .-
P2t � 1 a
§ 5,618,104
Banning
Beaumont
Corona
Riverside
RTA
RCTC's Commuter Rail
Total
$ 4,330,191
80,112
75,634
119,541
198,652
2,903,723
952,674
..
Western County
§ 1,209,108
Coachella Valley
$ 78,805
16
ak�nm.mi'.,.
rote
Palo Verde
Valley
FY 2009/10 Estimated Apportionments (based
on population estimates from DOF)
Bus Services: 78%
Rail Services: 22%
$ -
$ _
-
_
$ -
$ -
No current
release of
STA
estimate for
FY 09/10
.STATE"TKANSfTA551.4TA ��J1� (�$TA)'
(�Cr'9O/� NS
O77, iJASct>9(�i,EY,� `� r. ,.w; „.: -_
Total
Western Coun
County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde
Valley
Attachment/
Note
FY 2009/10 Estimates (based on operator revenues
from Annual Report)
TOTAL:
Banning
Beaumont
Corona
Riverside
RTA
RCTC's Commuter Rail
$ -
No current
release of
STA
estimate for
FY 09/10
_ .....__.. .-.... .... -. _____ r ..
III. MEASURE A FUNDS
v .a.w. _. s1'
�._
Total
Western County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde
Valley
Attachment/
Note
FY 2009/10 Estimated Apportionments
FY 2008/09 Mid -Year Adjustment
$ 4,408,000
(fBD)
N/A
$ 4 408:000
N/A
N/A
Cl
C2
TOTAL
$ 4,408,000
N/A
$ 4,908,000
N/A
.�+.
,a^T
a [ +atN'ff:'#`f:
Inv.Snr ..1.1.e'v��'Er'+;.S
IV. PROP I / PTMISEA (Currently Suspended)
Total
Western County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde
Valley
ua%.•
Amcnmeav
NOW
Prop 18 - Capital FY 08/09 Estimated Apportionments
Bus Services: 78%
Rail Services: 22%
$ -
$ _
$ _
$ _
$ _
_
Prop 1B-Security FY 08/9 Estimated Apportionments
Bus Services: 78%
Rail Services: 22%
$
_
_
TOTAL:
§ _
$ -
$ _
$ _
Population Source: California Department of Finance. Demographic Research Unit (1/1/081
Population Population %
1,609,588 77.08%
449,441 21.52e/
29,293 1.40%
Total 2,088,322 2100.00%
Area
Western Riverside
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde Valley
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRANSIT: REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR FY 2009/10
FEDERAL FUNDS
212/09: Amounts shown below
represeM 43%of Sec 5307 FY 09110
hording estimates. Estimated carry over
from FY 08109 wl0 be updated when
total funding becomes available.
Page 2
I. FEDERAL SECTION 5307 - RIVERSIDE/SAN
BERNARDINO UZA - BUS SERVICE
Palo Verde
Aw.hmew
-
Total
Western County
Coachella Valley
Valley
Note
FY2009/10 Estimated Federal Capital Assistance - Bus
$ 3,672,958
$ 3,672,958
NIA
NIA
Estimated Carry Over (FY 2008/09)
$
, „
m
TOTAL:
$ 3,672,958
$ 3,672,958
NOTE: Section 5307 Funds to be updated based on SCAG & SCRRA's split analysis for rail and bus.
II. FEDERAL SECTION 5307 - RIVERSIDEISAN
BERNARDINO UZA - RAIL
Total
Western County
Coachella Valley
Palo Verde
Valley
Attachment/
Nate
FY 2009110 Est. for Federal Capital Assistance - Rail
Estimated Carry Over (FY 2008M9)
$ 2,181,606
$ 2,181,606
WA
Coachella Valley
N/A
Palo Verde
Valley
ox
Attachment/
Nw
TOTAL:
III. FEDERAL SECTION 5307 - TEMECULA-
MURRIETA
$ 2,181,606
Total
$ 2,181,606
Western County
FY 2009/10 Estimated for Federal Capital Assistance
Estimated Carry Over (FY 2008/09)
1,237,730
$ 1,237,730
WA
Coachella Valley
N/A
Palo Verde
Valley
oa
ABaetm,entl
Note
TOTAL:
IV. FEDERAL SECTION 5307 - INDIO -
CATHEDRAL CITY - PALM SPRINGS
$ 1,237,730
Total
$ 1,237,730
Western County
FY 2009110 Estimated for Federal Capital Assistance
Estimated Carry Over (FY 2008/09)
$ 1,435,169
$
N/A
$ 1,435,169
-
N/A.
Palo Verde
Valley
ot
Attachment/
Note
TOTAL:
r
V. FEDERAL SECTION 5307 - HEMET/SAN
JACINTO UZA
$ 1,435,169
Total
Western County
$ 1,435,169
Coachella Valley
FY 2009/10 Estimated for Federal Capital Assistance
'Population under 200,000
Estimated Carry Over (FY 2008109)
$ 763,156
-
$ 763,156
-
WA
r r
.�,... , �
Coachella Valley
N/A
, uu
Palo Verde
Valley
D5
A1feeM1iiiiit/
Not.
TOTAL:
"� Q) 9r' I r i t `-ic4 c
...a.,� �',`st._.x.�.z�.....-�Sx,uaa�
VI. FEDERAL SECTION 5309 FIXED GUIDE WAY
MODERNIZATION
$ 763,156
..e «��u,
.i..m'` .5�-vim'=)�.t
Total
$ 763,156
3w: �'xs ._�,
Western County
FY 2009/10 Estimated Federal Assistance - Rail
Estimated Cany.Over (FY 2008109)
$. -
-
WA
N/A
oe
TOTAL:
$ -
$ -
NOTE Estimated Ca Over based on SCRRA s spreadsheet. Sec 5309 FY 09/10 allocation based on Fed Re • ister.
VII. FEDERAL SECTION 5311
Total
Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Attaon,,,ov
(61.7%) (38.3%) Valley Note
FY 2009/10 Estimated Federal Assistance
Estimated Carry Over (FY 2008/09)
$ 755,213
$ 465,966
$ 289,247
N/A
TOTAL:
755,213
S 465,966
$ 289,247
D7
25
ATTACHMENT 2
Created 2/12/2009
A
B
C
Printed 2/18/2009 4:18 PM
ESTIMATED FUND BALANCES (RESERVE) BY APPORTIONMENT AREA
LTF, STA & MEASURE A
As of January 2009
Westem Riverside
Coachella
Palo Verde
Total
Bus Rail
Valley
Valley
LTF FY 07/08 Operating Carryover as
of 6/30/O8
(Apportioned/Unallocated/Available) a 25,157,466 16,418,417 2,831,124 253,733
Estimated LTF FY 08/09 Apportionment
(revised 12/08)
LTF FY 08/09 SRTP Requests
Estimated Fund Balance (a+b-c)
b 35,193,720 9,926,434 12,495,644
c 34,529,041 9,296,100 12,823,846
25,822,145 17,048,751 2,502,922
44,660,740
901,277 58,517,075
834,999 57,483,986
320,011 45,693,829
STA FY 07108 Carryover as of 6/30108
(Apportioned/Unallocated/Available) d 9,778,623 5,614,589 4,547,274 60,374 20,000,860
Estimated STA FY 08/09 Allocation per
10/8/08 State Controller Letter a 5,579,203
STA FY 08/09 SRTP Requests
Estimated Fund Balance (d+e-f)
(Assumes all of FY 08/09 STA allocation
per 10/8/08 funding level will be released)
1,858,614
2,212,840
133,307 9,783,964
f 5,963,913 2,031,004 8,358,977 " 591,198 16,945,092
9,393,913
5,442,199 11,598,883►
(397,517) 12,839,732
MEASURE A Carryover as of 6/30/08 10,370,660
Amount to be Used for FY 08/09 Specialized
Transit funding
Estimated Fund Balance
1,716,844
8,653,816
• SunLine's original FY 07/08 carryover increased by $4,020,564 after Sunline moved funding for bus replacement & ITS equipment
projects from STA to Prop 16 funding.
• Reduced Sunline's FY 08/09 STA request by $238,000 after notification that CMAQ project using STA match will not be funded.
Note: Due to negative fund balance resulting from STA shortfall, Sun Line will amend its FY 08/09 SRTP to modify & reduce capital
requests for FY 08/09.
V:12009103 March1Plans&Prograrns110.A2.ry.FY 0708RESERVEAVAILABLE STA withSRTP Request(3)
26
AGENDA ITEM 11
"
"
"
R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N
D A T E :
F e b r u a r y 2 3 , 2 0 0 9
T O :
P l a n s a n d P r o g r a m s C o m m i t t e e
F R O M :
R o b e r t Y a t e s , M u l t i m o d a l S e r v i c e s D i r e c t o r
T H R O U G H :
J o h n S t a n d i f o r d , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r
S U B J E C T :
L o c a l M a t c h C o n t r i b u t i o n f o r S i g n a l S y n c h r o n i z a t i o n P r o j e c t
A p p l i c a t i o n s t o t h e M o b i l e S o u r c e R e d u c t i o n R e v i e w C o m m i t t e e
C a l l f o r P r o j e c t s
S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N :
T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i t t e e t o :
1 ) A p p r o v e a c o n t r i b u t i o n i n t h e a m o u n t o f $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 o f 1 9 8 9 M e a s u r e A C o m m u t e r
A s s i s t a n c e r e s e r v e s f o r a j o i n t p r o j e c t a p p l i c a t i o n b y t h e c i t i e s o f C o r o n a , M o r e n o
V a l l e y , a n d R i v e r s i d e f o r s i g n a l s y n c h r o n i z a t i o n ; a n d
2 ) F o r w a r d t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r f i n a l a c t i o n .
B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N :
T h e c i t i e s o f C o r o n a , M o r e n o V a l l e y , a n d R i v e r s i d e h a v e c o l l e c t i v e l y s e l f - f i n a n c e d
a p p r o x i m a t e l y $ 2 2 m i l l i o n o f a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s i g n a l s y n c h r o n i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s a n d n o w
d e s i r e t o l e v e r a g e t h i s i n v e s t m e n t b y i n s t a l l i n g a m o r e c o m p l e x i n t e r c o n n e c t e d t r a f f i c
s i g n a l s y n c h r o n i z a t i o n s y s t e m . T h i s i n t e r c o n n e c t e d s y s t e m w i l l a l l o w t h e c i t i e s t o w o r k
c o o p e r a t i v e l y a n d s y n c h r o n i z e t r a f f i c s i g n a l s o n m a j o r a r t e r i a l s t r e e t s a c r o s s a l l t h r e e
j u r i s d i c t i o n s . S y n c h r o n i z e d s i g n a l s y s t e m s h a v e b e e n p r o v e n t o m a k e t h e o p e r a t i o n o f
s i g n a l s m o r e e f f i c i e n t , w h i c h i n t u r n a l l o w s f o r m o r e e f f i c i e n t u s e o f t h e r o a d w a y
c a p a c i t y , a d e c r e a s e i n t r a v e l t i m e s a n d a d e c r e a s e i n h a r m f u l v e h i c l e o r i g i n a t e d
p o l l u t a n t s .
D I S C U S S I O N :
I n F e b r u a r y 2 0 0 9 , t h e M o b i l e S o u r c e R e d u c t i o n R e v i e w C o m m i t t e e o p e n e d a " c a l l f o r
p r o j e c t s " f o r i t s L o c a l G o v e r n m e n t M a t c h p r o g r a m , w h i c h i n c l u d e s I n t e l l i g e n t
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S y s t e m s i n f r a s t r u c t u r e a n d s i g n a l s y n c h r o n i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s . T h e c i t i e s
h a v e i n d i c a t e d a n i n t e r e s t i n b e i n g a b l e t o c o m p e t e f o r t h e s e f u n d s a n d a r e r e q u e s t i n g
t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s a s s i s t a n c e i n p r o v i d i n g p a r t o f t h e r e q u i r e d l o c a l m a t c h .
W h i l e a n a r g u m e n t c a n b e m a d e t h a t a n i n t e r c o n n e c t e d a n d s y n c h r o n i z e d s i g n a l
s y s t e m a c r o s s t h e t h r e e c i t i e s w o u l d s e r v e a l l c o m m u t e r s a n d n o t s i m p l y t h o s e t h a t
r i d e s h a r e , s t a f f w i t h l e g a l c o u n s e l c o n c u r r e n c e a l s o b e l i e v e s t h a t a n a r g u m e n t c a n b e
m a d e t h a t u s e o f C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e f u n d s f o r t h i s p u r p o s e w i l l a l s o d i r e c t l y a f f e c t
t h o s e w h o r i d e s h a r e o r u s e t r a n s i t a n d t h u s r e m a i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i n t e n t o f
M e a s u r e A .
A g e n d a I t e m 1 1
2 7
The argument to support this contention is based on the following three elements of
traffic congestion and signal synchronization:
• Carpools/vanpools as well as buses currently do not use fixed and dedicated
guideways on arterial streets in Riverside County, which means that they are just
as much subject to the negative effects of traffic congestion as are solo vehicle
drivers. As such, poorly timed signals at major intersections resulting in high
levels of congestion and reduced levels of service (LOS) during rush hour have
the same impact on ridesharers and transit users as it does on solo vehicle
drivers.
• Since carpool or high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, which directly benefit
those using alternative transportation are relegated to the freeway system, the
harmful effects of arterial street traffic congestion actually serves as a
disincentive to rideshare or use transit as once on arterial streets, commuters
using alterative transportation modes have no perceived advantage over solo
vehicle drivers.
• Lastly, an interconnected multi -jurisdictional traffic signal system serves as a
pre -cursor infrastructure to the eventual deployment of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
projects. BRT has been proven to attract solo vehicle drivers to transit and
therefore leads to an increased LOS for the roadway(s) on which it is deployed.
The first sentence regarding commuter assistance in the Measure A reads that "A
systematic program will be implemented that encourages the use of commuter bus, car
pools and van pools to make our existing highway system work better during congested
rush hour periods" .
The three reasons spoken to the above all apply to a systematic program of
improvements that would benefit ridesharing and transit use by increasing system
efficiency and accordingly, point to the conclusion that this proposed project does
meet the spirit and intent of Measure A. Accordingly, staff is recommending that the
Commission provide $50,000 in 1989 Measure A Commuter Assistance funds as a
portion of the required local match.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget:
No
Year:
FY2009/10
Amount:
$50,000
Source of Funds:
Measure A Commuter Assistance
Budget Adjustment:
yes
GLA No.:
226 41 81030 2199
Fiscal Procedures Approved:
\Y��svy-te„
Date:
2/12/09
Agenda Item 11
•
28