Loading...
03 March 10, 2010 Commission88775 RECORDS MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, March 10, 2010 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside 4. COMMISSIONERS .4's Chair - Bob Buster 1' Vice Chair - Greg Pettis rd Vice Chair - John J. Benoit Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / To Be Appointed, City of Blythe Ray Quint° / Jim Hyatt, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / Jordan Ehrenkranz, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral, City Eduardo Garcia / Steven Hernandez, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Steve Nolan, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Robin Lowe / Eric McBride, City of Hemet Patrick J. Mullany / Larry Spicer, City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller / Ben Godfrey, City of Indio Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Wallace Edgerton / Darcy Kuenzi, City of Menifee Bonnie Flickinger / Jesse Molina, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Malcolm Miller / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Richard Kelly / Jim Ferguson, City of Palm Desert Steve Pougnet / Ginny Foat, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Ron Meepos / To Be Appointed, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Steve Di Memmo / Vacant, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Scott Farnam / Bridgette Moore, City of Wildomar Raymond Wolfe, Governor's Appointee Comments are welcomed by the Commission. /f you wish to provide comments to the Commission. please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. 11.36.00 AMENDED AGENDA CORRECTION TO AGENDA ITEM 13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA * *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, March 10, 2010 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. /n 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. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, March 10, 2010 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. 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. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda March 10, 2010 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — FEBRUARY 10, 2010 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 unanimous 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 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. 7A. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Page 1 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Single Signature Authority Report for the second quarter ended December 31, 2009. 7B. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Page 3 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended December 31, 2009. 7C. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST POLICY FOR THE SR-91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Page 16 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the Conflict of interest (COI) policy for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP). 7D. 2010 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Page 25 Overview • This item is for the Commission to approve the 2010 Congestion • Management Program (CMP). • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda March 10, 2010 Page 3 7E. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES Page 114 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for a three-year period, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $950,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-048-00 with Lidgard and Associates, Inc.; b} Agreement No. 10-51-064-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants; c) Agreement No. 10-51-065-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malrn LLC; d) Agreement No. 10-51-066-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates, Inc.; e) Agreement No. 10-51-067-00 with Riggs & Riggs, Inc.; and f) Agreement No. 10-51-068-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years as applicable, on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda March 10, 2010 Page 4 7F. AGREEMENTS WITH QUALIFIED CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE • ON -CALL RIGHT OF WAY APPRAISAL REVIEW SERVICES FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES Page 117 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal review services for a three-year period, and two one- year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $500,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-051-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malm, LLC; b) Agreement No. 10-51-070-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates, Inc.; c) Agreement No. 10-51-071-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants; d) Agreement No. 10-51-072-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and e) Agreement No. 10-51-073-00 with Overland, Pacific & Cutler, Inc.; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years as applicable, on behalf of the Commission. 7G. FISCAL YEAR 2010 APPROPRIATIONS — ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST —AUTO CENTER DRIVE AND STREETER AVENUE GRADE SEPARATIONS Page 120 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Allocate $674,500 to the city of Corona (Corona) in support of the Auto Center Drive grade separation project; and 2) Allocate $674,500 to the city of Riverside (Riverside) in support of the Streeter Avenue grade separation project. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda March 10, 2010 Page 5 8. PROPOSED POLICY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 BUDGET Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the FY 2010/11 Budget. Page 123 9. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ON -CALL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISOR SERVICES WITH PB AMERICAS, INC. Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 132 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-027-20, Amendment No. 9 to Agreement No. 06-66-027-00, with PB Americas, Inc. (PB) for on -call strategic partnership advisor services to continue providing services for the proposed State Route 91 and Interstate 15 'corridor improvement projects in the amount of $648,355; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 10. AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 158 1) Receive and file a report on the status of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) projects; and 2) Approve allocating potential stimulus funding from the federal "Jobs Bill" to projects that are currently federalized and can meet deadline requirements for the first 50% of the funds, with first priority to State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) projects, second priority to state highway projects, and third priority to local road projects. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda March 10, 2010 Page 6 12. COMMISSIONERS / 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 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — INITIATION OF LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) Potential Number of Case(s): One 13B. .CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC Executive Director or Designee Property Owners — See List of Property Owners Item APN(s) Property Owner(s) 1 247-112-007 247 750 040 Citrus Business Park, LLC a California Limited Liability Company Rufus C. Barkley III 2 1 17-041-012 Oscar and Patricia Santos 14. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, April 14, 2010, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda March 10, 2010 Page 6 12. COMMISSIONERS / 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 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — INITIATION OF LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) Potential Number of Case(s): One 13B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Negotiating Parties: RCTC — Executive Director or Designee Property Owners — See List of Property Owners Item APN(s) PropertyOwner(s) 1 247 1 12 007 247 7150-040 Citrus Business Park, LLC a California Limited Liability Company Rufus C. Barkley III 2 1 17-041-012 Oscar and Patricia Santos 14. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, April 14, 2010, Board Room, County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET MARCH 10, 2010 N��NE , Is A EMAIL ADDRESS G. 141GEN�Y %a.Dvs-7.7 reo‘�(1- 6 cdz6 /,� ovnik%J l.-i- R.EN izc/2l- N --zz n4 Vw t 0 h/ % ►4-K-6- ( ( ft Ike.,r IQ 0-I-co . % o -I v 1( ' 4- � � 4 �� -- c., ■ s.1?.)\€.9sL. CarOYvt._ 04- Y G, t fe" G At -7-re--&-A-)5 CX2) K Tr? S C k D2A LGr /4 , `.lib/r-- R / Go `i;t/%\:fyra-- ,,-/k------- /57" 1' ; �c{, rr- W u�t i:a O f 1.� r s��.e � ��✓o C zi zr,� G,it � d y iw� «6 ��� to. I ' 4, 1-NN N\\\\,v LL013 57c, �' /yiy� s . 7 //CA T �S . AS RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL MARCH 10, 2010 Present Absent County of Riversl+ , District I County of Riverside, District II County -cif Riverside, District III _ County of Riverside, District IV County of Riverside, District City of Banning City of Beaumont` City of Blythe City of Cali a° City of Canyon Lake City of Cat edraI City City of Coachella City of -Corona } City of Desert Hot Springs City of Hemet . . City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of La auinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Menifee City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rartoho Mira? City of Riverside City of Sari Jacinto City of Temecula City of VVildomar,: Governor's Appointee, Ca!trans District 8 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON MINUTES Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Bob Buster at 9:31 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Ray Wolfe led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Altemates Present Marion Ashley Roger Berg Daryl Busch Bob Buster Mary Craton Joseph DeConinck Steve Di Memmo Scott Farnam Bonnie Flickinger Rick Gibbs Terry Henderson Steven Hernandez Darcy Kuenzi Robin Lowe Bob Magee Scott Matas 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Glenn Miller Malcolm Miller Patrick J. Mullany Greg Pettis Steve Pougnet Ray Quinto Ron Roberts Don Robinson Karen Spiegel Jeff Stone John F. Tavaglione Ray Wolfe Commissioners Absent Steve Adams John J. Benoit Jim Ferguson Ron Meepos Arnold San Miguel, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), announced SCAG will be hosting the Fourth Annual Compass Blueprint Recognition Awards Program on May 5. Applications are being accepted and the deadline for entries is Friday, March 12 at noon. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JANUARY 13, 2010 M/S/C (Stone/Spiegel) to approve the minutes of January 13, 2010, meeting. Abstain: Kuenzi and Pougnet 6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS There was a revision to Agenda Item 7G, "Amendments to Agreements for On -Call Internal Audit Services Including the Triennial Performance Audits for Fiscal Years 2006/07 through 2008/09". 7. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Ashley/Spiegel) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: 7A. PROPOSED COMMITTEE RESTRUCTURING 1) Approve the restructuring of the Budget and Implementation Committee; 2) Approve disbanding the Plans and Programs Committee; 3) Approve the formation of the Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee and the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee; and 4) Adopt Ordinance No. 10-001, "An Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending the Commission's Administrative Code", to reflect the changes to the committee structure. 7B. FISCAL YEAR 2008/09 COMMISSION AUDIT RESULTS Receive and file the FY 2008/09: 1) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR); 2) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Audited Financial Statements; 3) State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) Audited Financial Statements; 4) Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) Audited Financial Statements; 5) Compliance Report; 6) Commercial Paper Compliance Report; 7) Auditor Required Communications Report; • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 3 8) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Appropriation Limit Calculation; 9) Agreed -Upon Procedures Report related to the Commuter Assistance Program incentives; and 10) Management certifications. 7C. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 3 (Q3) 2009. 7D. ANNUAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND PLANNING ALLOCATION TO COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 Approve an allocation of Local Transportation Fund (LTF) planning funds totaling $260,015 to the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) to support transportation planning programs and functions as identified in the attached work program. 7E. AMENDMENT TO CALIBER PAVING AGREEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-24-063-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-24-063-00, with Caliber Paving, Inc. for the unanticipated increase in costs for the rehabilitation of the various Metrolink commuter rail station parking lots in the amount of $218,408, and an additional contingency of $40,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $1,049,293; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 7F. RESOLUTION NO. 10-005, CONSIDERING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKING RESPONSIBLE AGENCY FINDINGS, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND AN ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION, AND APPROVING THE FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION PROJECT Adopt Resolution No. 10-005, "A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Considering an Environmental Impact Report, Making Responsible Agency Findings, and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 4 and an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension, and Approving the Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project.' 7G. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES INCLUDING THE TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDITS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006/07 THROUGH 2O08/09 1) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-029-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-029-00, with Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA), to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audit of the Commission for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $30,000, and to increase the contract amount $200,000 for additional on -call internal audit services; and 2) Approve Agreement No. 08-19-030-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 08-19-030-00, with Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C., (MHM) to increase the scope of services to include conducting the state triennial performance audits of the Riverside County transit operators for FY 2006/07 through 2008/09 in the amount of $61,600, and to increase the contract amount $200,000 for additional on -call internal audit services. 7H. FISCAL YEAR 2010 APPROPRIATIONS — ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST Approve on a first -come -first -served basis, the allocation of $1.349 million in support of Alameda Corridor East (ACE) grade separations located in Riverside County. 8. EXTENSION OF THE COMMERCIAL PAPER PROGRAM STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer, provided an update on the extension of the commercial paper program, the resolution, and the amendments. M/S/C (Stone/Spiegel) to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 10-006, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of an Amendment to the Credit Agreement and Related Amendments to Certain Other Documents, a Supplement to the Offering Memorandum and the Taking of All Other Actions Necessary in Connection Therewith"; • • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 5 2) Approve the draft Amendment No. 1 to the reimbursement agreement dated as of March 1, 2005, by and between the Commission and Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America), relating to the Commission's Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 1; 3) Approve an amendment to the commercial paper dealer agreement between the Commission and Barclays Capital Inc. (Barclays) to reduce the authorized amount of Commercial Paper Notes, Series A from $110 million to $75 million and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 2; 4) Approve an amendment to the commercial paper dealer agreement between the Commission and Bank of America Merrill Lynch (Merrill Lynch) to reduce the authorized amount of Commercial Paper Notes, Series B from $75 million to $45 million and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the final Amendment No. 2; 5) Approve the draft supplement to the offering memorandum for the issuance of $120 million in Commercial Paper Notes, Series A and Series B and authorize the Executive Director to approve and execute the printing and distribution of the supplement to the offering memorandum; and 6) Approve the estimated costs related to the amendment of the letter of credit and authorize the Executive Director to execute related professional service agreements, as required. No: Pettis 9. FISCAL YEAR 2011 FEDERAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTS Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, presented Agenda Item 9, "Fiscal Year 2011 Federal Appropriations Requests" and Agenda Item 10, `2010 Federal Legislative Platform, highlighting the following areas: • Federal legislative update; • FY 2011 Appropriations funding requests; • Commission 2010 federal legislative platform; and • State legislative update. In response to Chair Buster's clarification on funding for the transit agencies, Anne Mayer, Executive Director, replied the exact amount of funding is uncertain. She explained that various transit agencies are heavily dependent on Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 6 state funding for all operations, noting that Riverside Transit Agency does not depend on state funding for its operations. She stated anything that happens to destabilize transit funding will have a ripple effect on all other programs. Staff is awaiting legislative language and working closely with the Commission's lobbyists, the Self -Help Counties Coalition, the League of California Cities, and other partner agencies. Commissioner Greg Pettis recommended the Interstate 10 corridor interchange projects be included in the appropriations requests made to Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. In response to Commissioner Terry Henderson's request for clarification regarding the regional fee to fund transit, Aaron Hake explained the state has the authority to grant the Commission authority to: 1) approve and implement a regional fee by a majority or 2/3 vote; or 2) present a regional fee to the voters for approval by a majority or 2/3 vote. Anne Mayer provided additional approval options to impose a regional fee. In response to Commissioner Roger Berg's request for clarification, Aaron Hake stated the Commission adopted the 2008 Grade Separation Funding Strategy: A Blueprint for Advancing Projects, which contains 20 priority grade separation projects throughout Riverside County. The earmark request is submitted to Congress along with those 20 priority projects. He explained the Commission will be able to award the funding to shovel -ready grade separation projects within those 20 priority projects for Riverside County. Commissioner Berg suggested the San Timoteo Canyon Road crossing to be added to the priority list of grade separation projects as it would help relieve traffic impacts for the cities of Beaumont, Calimesa, Moreno Valley, and Redlands. Anne Mayer stated the San Timoteo Canyon Road crossing is not one of the 20 projects adopted by the Commission and therefore not included in the grade separation package. She stated staff will include the San Timoteo Canyon Road crossing in the next update to evaluate impacts and benefits. Chair Buster requested clarification from Commissioner Berg that he was suggesting either the Live Oak Canyon Road crossing or the San Timoteo Canyon Road crossing. Commissioner Berg replied both crossings are severely impacted. • • • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 7 In response to Commissioner Ron Roberts' question on the demonstration project for the Coachella Valley passenger rail service and if the strategy will include Metrolink, Amtrak, or a combination of both, .Aaron Hake replied weighing those options will be part of developing the strategy and figuring out what will work best for federal funding. Commissioner Robin Lowe briefed the Commission on the League of California Cities legal staff opinion regarding transportation commissions and being granted the authority to tax. As a result, local agencies would have to raise the funds to convince the public that a tax is necessary, which she believes is a transfer of responsibility by the state. Commissioner Ashley concurred with Commissioner Lowe's comments that the state is abdicating its responsibility. He discussed the need to raise the Measure A bonding limit in order to deliver more projects, which will also require voter approval. He then expressed support for Commissioner Berg's suggestion to evaluate the San Timoteo Canyon Road crossing and further suggested working collaboratively with San Bernardino Associated Governments, Caltrans, and local jurisdictions to improve that corridor. M/S/C (Henderson/Craton) to: 1) Adopt the Commission's FY 2011 Federal Appropriations Requests; and 2) Include the Interstate 10 Corridor Interchange projects in the appropriations requests to Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. 10. 2010 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM M/S/C (Henderson/Craton) to adopt the Commission's 2010 Federal Legislative Platform. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA There were no agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. Commissioner Ray Wolfe discussed the opportunities Caltrans has evaluated to reduce traffic impacts related to the construction at the 10/60 interchange. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 8 Chair Buster expressed his gratitude to Ca!trans for looking at alternatives to resolve the area wide impacts of the interchange, although he understands there is a funding shortfall. At Commissioner Lowe's request, Commissioner Wolfe discussed the restoration project for SR-74 to Idyllwild related to the culvert. At Chair Buster's request, Commissioner Wolfe discussed the challenges of culverts in District 8, noting there are over 7,000 lane miles and more than 30,000 culverts of various sizes. Chair Buster expressed it is important for Commissioners to understand and communicate to their constituents regarding the issues with culverts, particularly during rain storms. 12B. Anne Mayer announced: • Caltrans•approved the project report and environmental document for the French Valley Parkway project; • The Federal Highway Administration obligated federal funding for the 74/215 interchange project. This project will advertise for construction next week. • The I-10/Bob Hope Drive/Ramon Road and 1-10/Palm Drive/ Gene Autry Trail interchanges groundbreaking event will be held on February 26 at 10:00 a.m.; and • The California Transportation Commission will be hearing the Commission's application for design -build authority for SR-91 corridor improvement project on February 24. At this time, Commissioners Rick Gibbs, Glenn Miller, Steve Pougnet, and Ray Quinto left the meeting. 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (c) Possible Initiation of Litigation: One Case There were no announcements from the Closed Session item. • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes February 10, 2010 Page 9 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:25 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, March 10, 2010, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, (_)W"^_ Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Matt Wallace, Procurement and Assets Administrator Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer 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 SingleSignature Authority Report for the second quarter ended December 31, 2009. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The attached report details all professional services and administrative contracts that have been executed for the second quarter ended December 31, 2009, under the Single Signature Authority granted to the Executive Director by the Commission. The unused capacity at December 31, 2009 is $422,088. Attachment: Single Signature Authority Report as of December 31, 2009. Agenda Item 7A 1 00'HO Z® Z4$ 00'ZL6'LL 00'Z16'LL Z Rq pamemou Is Fq paedadf, a�apeM ma4uaW I 600Z't£ legwaoso 40na41 WIMP:MU iNt10WV 03SI1 iNf10WV€ wel6ad 00'0 00'0091 00°0091 Jewell aildw3 puelul LLS elwo{0e0{o alelS coves 00'eoVa 00'Z{4'eZ 00'000'0099 suageogloads paed el8000 {o uolleledeld 03SI11Nf10WV 00A 4111Ig0111 1461eul IxeN: sou't An" 319V1IVAV iNnowv 1Nnom 1NNOWV OIVd 1Nf101/1V S301ALISS d0 NOIld1210930 1NviinsN00 1010111N00 lOVM1NO3 ONINIVW3M 1VNI01210 600Z `M 21381013034 AO SV AlINOHJAV 321f11VNDIS MONIS • • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Anne Hallberg, Accounting Supervisor Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended December 31, 2009. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The county of Riverside's Investment Report for the month ended December 31, 2009, is also attached for review. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Investment Report for the Quarter ended December 31, 2009 2) County of Riverside Investment Report for the Month ended December 31, 2009 Agenda Item 76 3 • • Nature of Invest re a nts Bond Projects 4.4146 Operating Funds 81.39 Ocbt Pocscrve 3.3 1 Trust Funds 10.89 Statement of Compliance All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended December 31, 2009 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on May 13, 2009. The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by. Chief Financial Officer 4 £64'114'464 $. 1V101 sluaw0016y luawlsanul ZLe'SLC6£ spun d lenlnn lelol-gns 44S'sse'£Z eZVOZte pund uopeeee0 luawwanoO ueouewV Isnd le&en Aauan lue8 sn :spun3 lenlnn aerEss's dlb'1 luewlsanul food Aluno0 899'L0e'0Se lood Awnoo ELS'4z8'l syue8 3dAl1N3V115RANI a3ZIaVWWns e ales uodnoo ale° *men Alunlen le enleA led •sagunlen ',seseymnd 600Z' LE +agwaoa0 pepu3 iapeno aql iol suouoesueJl luewlsanul £84'LL4'460 ZL8'SL vac V/N tuvvweeV 465'S9a'EZ stuewl6n731 pue gseO llV 1 giO1 anlasea lqa°/spun3 loelmd Puag Ielolgn5 punuope88g0 luawwano0 ueouawV 1slld luewlsanw food apvanla A puno0 sluawaeZy luawlsanul V/N WVVV/eey BZf'OZZ'bl laglen)(won>lag Sn 3A2,13S3a 1830/SONnd 103f06d °NOS NOISSIWWOO 81.4' l58'ES V/N NNMN/OALN-eey 6lb'1.98'E5 Ism/ W PIaH sPund MAWS pun3 uopepadsueu leool :pun3 luawlsanul pafood sdemseau Aluno0 15na1 NI 013H SaNnd ZOZ'PPP ZO0 spun j eulleladO lelomnS V/N pelea loN 08£'E9S'f (d1V11 eun3lue1.111sanul Aoue6y leool V/N INdVVVIlan/eey 66Z'9S6'96E punluawlsanul mood s/wnsewl Awno0 V/N .888/EV ELS'4Z6'1. sLsoda° Huee Kw:wry 41I0 saNn3 ON11Va3dO (SS01) 3nlVA 1500 AlIan1VW 31Va 31V0 31-11VA 31Va d9S14O11d/SA00001 an -pm a1V3 MVO 03ZI1V3aNn 13N1AVn 3SVHOand 010131A Al1an1VW 3sVH0and add NOdn00 ONI1Va 600Z 't£ Jagwaoa0 :papu3 pouad podaa oVjpOd Newlsanul uoisslwwop uopepodsueLl lµuno0 app.anla • • INCIPAL Quzp�r. _7redstrter--�px'�o11'e�ar oap :,Chr steto en .: �s2. t rolsurez-' C,@1IeCtAY`�� GxpvaneTt44 } I ' m6' t't?'f, Consumer Confidence (52.9 actualvs53 Unemployment Rate (10%actualvs. 10.2%stwey) Payrol change(-11K actual vs-125K survey) "The Tough Ten" December 2009 has come and gone and with its passing it ranks as the most challenging decade for the U.S. in recent memory. Let's recap for the sake of history and its effects on the financial mar- kets in which the Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund invests. It all started with the power debacle and the collapse of Enron and other energy giants. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was born and addressed the issues of corporate and accounting scandals which shook public confidence in the nation's securhies markets. Then, along came September 11'" 2001 which resulted in the worst terrorist attacks on American soil. The response was the U.S. military's Operation Enduring Freedom designed to annihilate AI- Claeda in Afghanistan and to root out the coward Bin Laden and his Taliban cronies. Soon thereafter, the U.S. launched shock and awe, invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein in its search for weapons of mass destruction; they were never found, but the citizens of Iraq no longer live under a ruthless dictator. We thank our troops for their bravery and honor those who have lost their lives fighting in the name of freedom. Aided by the 9/11 terrorist attacks and other contributing factors that began earlier in the decade, our economy succumbed to recession. With that, the Federal Reserve, led by then Chairman Greenspan, began its rate culling campaign. Several years of rising home prices, record setting global stock and commodity markets, and, easy credit all became the fuel for the perfect storm. Nnrt3t'rnC; trlari Value(1) Sit >-ri1 f;ran %/aline • Concerns about housing market slowdowns, which were the primary engine of growth this decade as well potential geopolitical crisis in oil exporting countries, and, perpetual budget and trade deficits all help to create a climate of ambiguity about the overall direction of the U.S. economy. In mid-2007 concerns of ongoing pressures in the sub -prime mortgage market and weakness in the housing sector of the economy came to pass. The Subprime Melt- down was born. During the recent housing boom, lenders doled out mortgages like candy to borrowers with poor credit histories, asking for little or no money down and requiring limited or no documentation of income. At the same lime, rising home values and law interest rates spurred consumers to take out home equity loans to purchase con- sumer products. They also encouraged borrowers to choose riskier adjustable rate and interest only loans to afford more expensive real estate. As Interest rates Increased, this house of cards began to fall. According to Bloomberg News, First American Corporation esti- mated in March of 2007 that $326 billion of adjustable -rate mortgages extended between 2004 and 2006 would lead to 1.1 million foreclo- sures over the next six to seven years. The problem is, 25% of our GDP is attributable to housing and related industries. Uh. Houston, we have a problem. :l'F. I G0r"iK ('rC) Y;eid(2) L{ Eif(r:�ilU 11 The Treasurer's Pooled Investment. Fund is composed of County, Schools, Special Districts and other Discretionary Depositors November 5,155,915,736.52 5,128,291,035.95 27,624,700.57 .j�-0"�i+4��y.. qi^ 1)i (p{I ., ;. I•p �,,,'i34 d:�. �h. �xr P �s ;'.�, cr .; ,. Se•tember 5,222,064,383.99 5,197,744,083.50 24,320,300.49 0.54% 1.16 1.06 1.03 0.47% 1.26 1.04 1.01 • f T'A o tiTv�v4'C The Fed maintained the target rate at a range of 0 to 25 bps. The 2 year T-Note was yielding 1.14% (up 47bps). while the 10 year T-Note was yielding 3.85% (up 64bps.) For December, the Pool had a decrease of 21bps. in the average monthly yield. 3Mo US Treasury Bill 6 M o US Treas ury Bill 0.06 0.20 0.05 2 Yr US Treasury Note 111 0.47 5 Yr US Treasury Note 2.69 0.68 10 Yr US Treasury Note 3.85 0.64 FED Fund Rate 025 - Crude Oil (barrel) Gold (Ounce) 79.36 1.94 1,096.95 t8280) [VI $ NIA 10,428.00 S&P 500 1,115,10 NASDAQ 2,269.15 715.72 58.02. 146.73 Pagel ector breakdown ash Equivalent M M F e•otiable CDs Market Va 507,054,000 0.05 0.20 M unicipal Bonds 134,846,1)2 0.66 2.03 Bond -U.S. Treasury TOTAL 1,024594,290 0.80 0.43 6,155,962,037 0.97 0.96 Credit Quality. AAA, 7.441To / f • Federal Ayency and U S. Treasury 8665°iL A-1 l P-1 or better, 007°A N/R . 5.73 • Maturity Distribution 40% 3556 30% 25% 20 % 15% 1 O% 5% 0% 30 days or 30 - 80 Days 90 Days - 1 1 - 2 Years 2- 3 Years Year Less • Over 3 Years 12 Month Gross Yield Trends' 4 3.6 3 2.5 2 1.6 1 0.6 0 0a0-08 Jan-09 Fab-06 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 sap-08 Oot-09 Nov-09 Deo-09 Cash Flows2 lluntb 01/2010 628.88 03/2010 80762 #00 •'14k OS/2(1 in 59253 WWWWITIt 07/2010 TAM 09/2010 11/2010 • 'I OTA1 S 735 29 J!f,' "/Olgt,4 566.39 7554 63 al,7Li3 Mon ie Di lie rr xl.a Di s 61« tS 1390.97 d y 995.86 13417 799.59 767.61 (762.09) (188.24) (740.17) (372,56) (233.20) z�rst,. (372 56) 1 r2eq«era c3 f. :ni evi 650.99 18824 37140 r�ms5f:..F 372.56 233.20 372 56 S969.51 15.00 6 L5.92 346.63 227.73� 9.82 8 t Treasurer's Institutional Money Market Index (Mall) is compiled and reported by the Riverside County Treas- urer's Capital Markets division. It is a composite index derived from the average of three multi -billion dollar AAA rated Prime (hinds that invest in a diversified portfo- lio of US. dollar denominated money market instruments including U.S. Treasuries, government agencies, bankers' acceptances, commereia! paper, certificates of deposits, repurchase agreements, etc.) portfolios that the Treasurer tracks. Further details available upon request. Current funds are ASTITGA, WFJXC (12/09), and MPFXX 'The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. Based upon projected cash receipts and maturing invest- ments, there are sufficient funds to meet future cash flow disbursements over the next 12 months. L 9Eed £La LYZ SOZ LOT 5L't 00'056'01 00'0561001 22'001 00'0000001 IaroSF'6) 0009r06e'r L9'66 00'0000001 502 l0'L 26'L 001 9L't CC1 Sri 001 Ft'L taonsc'e) 1001009101 (o0 /9001 00.09006r/ 00001.1,033`p0 00'ose'Oe61 1006 'CVO 00'0000001 0000000001 19.Oa 00'0000001 t2 ZLOZla1n 2L0L64ft 1 1L0GG01 a0er'2 0052'1 00921 00001 0921'1 W90111A92 10,111103113 VONA 03i 00'000'000's 00'000'000's J#" 00'000'000'9 Nva 1103110 via W99rYA5z niNtl9 1103a3W i 03i a 3 OAt9N1A2NNv51103a] Wav3033 011000'000'91 0111A2NNV91103a0 WaVi 03i 000000001 9NW9LEELC fa/Mtat55 622JLEELC 9L29Ler Le fftegg151501MON5 La* LCCIF ZZAV1Cfle 1,13 141 82'l 00009'5 00'000'5000 re•ea DO'0000990 LL021B216 00421 31AL NW NNV01103a] WaVA 03A 00'000'GOO DI Pi' L 1[1 YL'L Li C1'L OL't LP YY' O['L 221 92'1 2Z'1 90't 001 OL•0 LL'e 090 65'0 ss'a rs'o O5'0 600 rr'0 99 0 rra Fro L9'0 99'0 Uro L9'0 r2l s 'L 00'1 LL'0 (0000L £1 00'001 C) (DO'0o9Zu 00'000'r Z1Li) 0r00r[l 00001612 00'S90'061 00'OS290 000061V 00'O�W'60L 000OSLC 9110W9LL 00'005'96e9 00'006.96e•r 001009L96'r 005LE'0915 001109L101 09'000 0001 00'000'120'01 00'51 al'SI 000921909 OD'006'090'fit 001091009 1 _ 0005r 990'S 00005 1C01 OR0o9'z9L'rzz 1en0 DO'000000'S r6'eO 00'000'000.9 5L'ea 00'000000's 0510E 0009119C'9 SLYOL 00111'0941 tree 00'oo0'LLA'e SCOOL 00'0000001 WOOL 00000'000114 00'06161.29L e910L 00000.906Y L1'OOL 00000LL051. 9510 00125.61/5 L61304 95 591 00 5[001 00'0000001 r9569'919YEZ OL02/oN01 0L0L9W9 OLOffilJL 0L021NL 04021L1N LOL92f6 LL uaaaLre LO2I0219 OOVL'L 3s LalkA2 Nave 1103a0 Watl333A 00'0000009 0092E D OSL9'e 0006'f 0osL1 LOV0219 00SL t s 1102R2R OD98�0 101L559L/�91A1��9 o0po199 02 z 052L1 OS2t'L 000E'E 0092 Z 0000e�0 Z 00A49N1A2 NIV91103a0 WGI 03i 00 COO 0009 V OLNpN-L NNv5110383 wadi 03i 00'000 0005 NNtlB 1K1 an avA 03i 00000'0001 9Wne NNv911a3a]wHai 03i 00000058r 91WAZ>INtl131103a0 Nava 03A 00'000000'0 PAl0NU2 NNV51103a3 VtaVA 03A 00'0000001 Wf]Ni'I NNVB lg3a3Wadi 03i 00'000'000'9 003 0 A2 ANV8110383 Watli 03A 00'000'000'04 ANV8110380'911Vl 03A 00000'0091IL9Nq P NNuz N�nv�e 110383 wadi a3asa°°o�°'°>�°'s 8110a0 WA 03i 000000001 avi 03A Cene LeSLE CZneLe Le eznmeete 655ZLf lC Cavo9L ELf 99AALee LE $a%9lEELF 2R� . Z]MX9N2L924F rosOLEf IF goottow SAANO4FELe �yL'Ovz69tOF 1'. 3 1009keft e 93W9LEELE Gt��00 zno.A4 EELf �040:15 NUE2 Nava ino3a0 Wadi 03A 00 000 000'9 enM LfEtf .111A9�1 Nave 1103110019VA OSi 000000005 23013LeCLC NNV51103a0 Watli 03A • 93ii 00'000'009 9 00000'000'922 Pr £9'56999 00'005L961.2 51906 LL /09'169'YZ 00'0 L910L'LL 00000596er 5616 CrOa2Lr6'e1 OLOLLA1 OLOZNV9 2 Ler'0 00LL'0 s31ON 1mnian 1003a0 Wav3 00000'00012 10M 1Nn00S1003a0 W6V3 00000'000'0S OL3E t£EL[ rfnteCe LC £310N 1Nn09910 03a0 Nava- NOOL 0 '000'0•0' s 1k'17.'1% pis 20'0 20 0 900 L00 Mar 121 K l L r't 01'1 Lr't Or 1 irk Or LCO 90'0 MO 090 91/2/219 100000'21 lv L Or'L ZOO 2901,0LE 9l'L 9L'L LCO 191.9221 91.1 541 9L1 SL'L SLY 901 LO 901 LO 00L 001 99.0 00'51512 oonoonDO•cec aDaoro9o9r 00106511211C 00009'090'05 00'05t'160'SL 000909401L 000919L0'9L 00'009'0LO'OC 000021K0.3L 0000L'90 0000211•200L IN 00191 921fs OS Lrarrefe (52905'S) 00'00E'tf0'0 ocrooe1E0n 0010V9L002 001001000112 00.001 00 000'00019 2Ln04 L2�L'OOL 21001 ZI'OOl r0LC1'tR4Le 00'005'290'09 S2'90'L96'1t 09'2140261/1 21'oot aveol. nett r2.00l EL1261L01E 62001 00129066'6 y52'0y01r1 r21: iL yr�2yyoy�orll 1•50tL VF'ODL 00009'296'6 erroE'L9011 s[99909e0 Le'001 S1156100'0 16001 52106121102 mourn L LOZILCS L L001LE5 LLOGL L LOGLG5 L L0L921L L Lover/ 1021922 102J922 LWZILGI LOLLea OLO21LE2L 00'000'000'99r 000a0 1Nn033V119.0a3030911 00'00a 000'er 01/00 05L9'0 119010 y095�[v9{�v0yF OSLB 0 05/9'0 yy0�949'0 I osLro ar OSL9'D O9LB'0 OSL9'D orooa'000'sLc SON09 Aan5V3a1'811 0000000005 901105Aan5v3a.A S'n 00'000'000'sL SONGS AanSv3a1 's'n 000000005L sane nans.abi's'n o0aorooe's4 90N05 Aan9v3a1 5'n 00'0000000E sane AanstlaL 911 0o'00ovowo SONGS AanSv3al'Sr 00'000'000'C SONOS AansV3a1 ar 00'000'000'GL SONO9 Aansv3al s'n 000000000L SON05 Aansv3al'Sn 00'000'ODO'OL SONOB ansv3al'9n 00000 Do002 ONni 1010311110119 isnariv] • all] 303n avegigm asv0 Vi enNezen.6 Enaeze216 enez9z46 C 1=: 1VE . 63N929z LE (' 63N6Z92 La 11000- 63N0202L6 .-"�,e uti-'9 63NazetL6 y 504 LAfe23216 hfOM* LAf929Z16 040 CAf9292L6 501409 Aansvaeu S'n•ON09 m Oni1,1 'DAV nE vcuvNreaL Nat A IMALVIN NL1.InOJ NOI'km l,ln NV.1 .tlsN 6 969d 94'L 501 CS'S 04'1 5E1 Lo'L 001 L9 L [net 101 0,1 M'L eC LC't 501 f 301 SO'4 9E 901 r0 OE'L 00'0 o5'0 95'0 rB'90L'029 00'03911 100005'I31 00'0Sl' l0 1 'Sae 1 IOS'L6e'Eal 0L'1.0988/ SCn02'6L 00'L 00'V So'0 (012002'C21 INEWAIMMENIESSIMINIMENZIF 00'3/11T021L 00'059.510'S 00'039'S10'3 00059'Sl0'S 0000E 4106 00059L01.5 DO' 89'930'01 00'0S2'EE0'SL 00'005'0900S 00'005'2 0'ot 00'009We L 03'5'01 9E'911 L'!LL'0 LE'001 00'000'eL0'r LE00.�14 00'090'000'5 2L08 00000'900'0i 10001 00110D'00005 00'000'09L'St Do 0E0'999'04 ELM,. 05L01. 1.1.'52 0l'LIl'LEL'OE C1'00L 90002'0000 09'80 00'000'000'SL 52'00L aOL Le'88 001 00'1 IWO 02E009 01.) 60'0 r9'0 09'0 91'0 91'0 8B'0 000 a '0 Sal 09'0 99'0 L9'0 950 330 59'0 WO 390 SS'0 9r'0 50'0 WO 11.0 wo 'o It WO CVO CC-0 ec0 al'0 19'1 9s•t Lo0 SC 20f 00.1 (0000L'00 (00'05911 000397 00'005'21 OD'05592 00'OOL'OL 000931 00'00E'D 00'009'091 00'0U8'92L (oo09E'99) SCYY9.119 00004'495'8 00110C'L98'8 00'05604 CS 00009.21001. 00'DOLY00'5 00'055920'S 00'0000/0's 00'059100'S 0000L400'9 00'0052L0OL 0000016e110 00'006'121'01 00008'12101 00'00842i 04 00009L00.9 00'0031C001. OP0001LV01 00'000000's 011189.4C9.914 rand Liree 00'DDde980 00000'00004 00'000000'S 00000000'r 54001 00'000'00001 60001, 00'000,'00000'555 CS'001 000000' 00'S 85'In 00000000S 30001 00000'0005 90'001 00'000'000'01 l . 0000$ 00'005868'r CI'001 00'000'000'01 ore0 rrn L9'E58'84 22101 2230 201 yxyil�'11011�L 9L'OOL 000001E60 00'002'096'o kk00��99YY0NN'5YYeYY9��6 00'0�® 9C001. 00110019013 S100L 0009r01(L0L 00'OM 00'000'0005 99YCSIZeLLr LOZ G9 �LOZ p99y LM6Ba Lana Latal 102/La9 L LOZJ9LIS 7 LLO LoLOZ LOUOUL LWOUI OLO2/00/2 OL02OE2L UL02/8221 DLOUGLL 0102/02/13 ULOa0FJ0 D102/000 010U8 e 01022 re Ol0U0GL OLOUBNL OLOZre LIL OL0232/ Dlozazre 010221181 mouure OLOUL n9 010UL1/9 OLOVE/9 0L02L919 Dt02lOGr 0002108E OS ET 0521 00010 0 L 0009'0 0540 D oo9e'o OOBB'0 Daso'o OOfo 0 > OOLr 0 0055'0 05 005Lo �0094'LL 005E L 00e1'E 00s�s 00 0529'0 0055'0 r0E. DOLs'a DDeL'o 000O E r0L0�y009Ey w 3400T oof 00S5'D 003 0050�4 OS OSLf1ri92D 00�0000 =N+ALNNb8 Ner013210H 03d 00000'5290L Nva NV013WOH 03d 00000000'S Nve Nv013WOH 03A 00000'0005 =N+A2 NNW; NVO13210H 03d 000000001 t11". " >ma Nv01380H 03i 00000000'0L NNV9 NW/13810H O3d 00000'0000s ,��4T1 NNtla Nv01 BACH O3d 00'000000'SL yy NNv8 NvOl yy3WOH 03A 00000'099'OL P'1�' �. ,A .�NgNva Nv0i i3r'010H�03A COOOp'000'.Sy2. �y II:FCi;::iriEF'1�, O .kS:fi"FL ...'*i.•`-..g'i.,G'� VIMIi_ NNV8 NV0131101103d 00000'000'0E 'ABN%[EIE =N,A51 mv5i NvOl 35(OH 03d00000'000'0L rABWXCC LE 6K4SAINOW4101(TeollWi4p EON-LNNve NVOl 31NOH 03A 00'000000'SL BNENVI[f LE lierdentir CidAd:;f MiiV�IONI GOWEONHNNVB NV013W01-1 03A 00000 UDO'OL Samoa LE rr'' I/32ANEELE -Fl """-TI"ctg! � CN3h%[LYC IOIN }0411140 ' i '{iiq 14 PO& liM(II'I'('III, C109XCCLf SOEOMELE rrnDixent "-g�44 El NV013WOH 03A 00000'000'S L811(SEa 111.0140 4. LoN9=NUS 2 NNVe NVOI 3WOH 03i 00000000 5 49leaCELE =W=N+At NNVE NVOD 3111014 03A 00000'0001 50VOXEEIC ....aNllCONNA'.� .1Ilt4II41�#`r i. .ram.,...._,...., NNVe Nv01 3130H 03d 00'0001000'0L a,'38 OIN90N-L NNV9 NV013w0H 035 00000000'01 Wita 9Wt =08119=29AL NNVe NVO13010H 03d 00000000'5 =WAE NNVB NVO13110H 03d 00'000000'S /mat{ NNva NVO133(011 03A 09000'0000L ve NvOl 31801-1 Cad 00'000000'5 500NXEE L( k= SOAIx[[lE SrAL%CC4C .VT9liti(5(0-0 5enLNEELE } Ol/9'9f0-40.i19 511.8.32E1[ OOHOX[[42L E 'IffI:'f/,K+ .#143V0.933 49"1xEELE NNVB NvOl 31.80H 03A 00'000'000'S NJUL NNVB NV013WOH 03d D0000'000'OL NNV9 Nt101 3WOH 03d 00'000'000'05 =rv+Az ilnve nvo13810H Dad 0000011000L ryrye( �WAZ NML9 NVOl3WOH 03d 00000'000'0L NNVS NvOl 3WOH 03d 00000'0000L =WAI NNb'9 NV013WOH 03d 00000'000'5 ON NNtle NVOl3wOH 033 00000'ODO'Ol NNV8 Nv013 WOH 0354�s0)00 00001- 1009 At NNVe NvOl 3W0H 034'0 000000'5 �• U10 159E92 8 �SeZ1N[E LE CC 9��1X99yyt``IXE�,Eyr.I,[,1 �i.�§i �.4,0#40 6ndlxff LC ;..yL5SEL BALE leAL6Ef F "fir INta SAZ XEEIE ^ 94. SA28xf ELf SAZHXEE LE 2050y, [.! 5d50 , Nve Mioi awoHH Dad- alrti EELE BO'E ore 2LZ l52 SS'2 LI'L 332 n2 Lt L9'i Bf'L SET V2YZ LIT 80'L 1 ann H SL2 LE'Z (00001n41 00'0000C 100'000'00 (00'00910 00'005'IL 00'005'LI 09899'St SOOT/mn'9 O 000'1880 00000'5200I. 00'00rY89r 00n04'wero 00009'2939 000091110.5 09'80a'Z65'9 [1111VA'IV e9'e8 0000000001 52'00l 00'000'900'0 69110 00'000'000'9 59'55 00000'000'5 SZ101, 00'0001981( 80'101 00000 090'S t . ml.l 03'000 09S 4 A �1 ]VIVA NlN10 SlOZ/OC/4 2IDUL193 AOL/54/L Zl00/94/L 240ZL81/9 ELMO r 21022/F MA LVIN 0052'2 0050'l 0055'L 00551 DMZ 0z 005 2'z 02 OGLE 2 (4 OIAL=N1 NVa 11(1380 Wtltl3033 00'000'00004 . f ' ::'Zr ONO 1103e0 WNVJ 033 00'000'00004 4=1(04 2).Nbe 110300 7}�'ldlkf.i4 n2049392 yLLE eitiaagam 9GE0lfELE vd 033 D0'0000005 9£ZOIESL E =N+4322 NNW(1103e0 WNVvgA 0331ii: 00'000'00000'S VCl:�J� 9EZO an E lir 'WAS W01311038019ab3 033 00'300'0005 93A9VSetE NNV31103a0 Wetld 03A 00000'000'5 9DNOl£FLE ,totsri OL=WAS NNVe1103a0 WtlVd 03d 000000051, OdNOtE£LE "i. .:,.,55- i:55115.E :''°1:Y'mA 1' �6.,. aL:': 'dr ^•i"(Pii_d61Til eb3 LIST > Non 1.11N.15Il1 y 9Eed Z4'L 00.2 C L't 901 OC'C L11. 901 9L'l 201 00'L 96'0 L9'0 LO'D L9'0 00'0 9E'0 eCL LW L91 90'C O CC•L 9e2 LPZ CLZ Eat OLT Z9 OLT Z92 OLD 906 ZO'0 906 29'L 00'0 OS'L 091 0099'0 00098'9CL 00'000VI 1060'9Z) CO'00`1K) 00'00t91 CC lSl CW699611 10'099'l �. O'0B9'll 100'0996 00'006'96 0000001001 00000'18001 0000 L'00'S 0000Z'SOl'01 00000'L8613 00000000'S 9Y91910e'CLZY O'OSP 906O 0005/906'O 00.19C12091 006000001 00004T006 00'099•LH!S W OOL arDDLTHI'S SI10L 00.000000'01 8606 0000 911096451 00000 LX109 5910L166TLW Le116 006000009 16'86 00000000'S L1966 000000009 09'66 000900009 00001 0000000DV DO ee 00.000.000DI CO'68 00'000.0009 9Z Z9'Z 092 KZ 09'2 2 99'2 902 £02 LET SLT OLT L51 961 LO't 95' 001 981 291 SL1 OWL �Let OWL Let t0'4 951 521 SL'L 0C't OWL 111 Bel SE'1 100'000'0YI 00600'00 Coo 'OS9'Ls) 00009LL 000005E 10005YCZ) 0000L'92 (000990 loan'ool �10060009) p00600e�691 00'OOL 4 00'0099'4 0000LC O'0112 000s0'/L 00'0009t5'r 00600020/ 03 09I'996'O 00000'190.01 D0'00050'04 006956/64 0690'110'S 00'009'996'6 00'00Ye561, 00'009'698 00'000'0955 0"00L'900.9 0699100'5 0.004'00'01 00001:0006 0 001.90'0L 00'090940'9 980904 • 1 921309 9zOL 12001. 0955 00'0000009 11'00L e'9e 999'0011 995 92"oDL 9968 00000600'9 006000009 00'000'000'01 00000000'9 00'099'9969 DO 000'MO 01 00000'000'S OL'8 Os'ae 00'05'05'04 60'04 0000000'S 900L 0000000'S 00000000'01. 5500000L 000006000L 00'000000'9 HOLM LLOZLUL 01.02216 O{022119 040L 040Zi g L10LZ9 1107.215 C10219L Z102LIlRL ZIOZO?le ZLOZ/ONe Z10LOl15 Z1°MLA 2I OLWO zwzrerLe MOMS MOS Ll9 ZLOZI Otlr 04gIO/Z4190p29L�Z uoLODD./ L P 1z2 LIOU UZI OZ151R1 L LOZ VOL 00/81/04 HOZi81N1 Have Lro£ L10E15424 HAZ21re tie 99'4 191 95'1 981 L1,1 O'999•T1 O'OSI'9 OVIIPTLWO 00 001 KM 9 9E601 00'000.0091, 80 OL 00'0909651, LS'{ K'4 991 Z91 L9'L Sz't OS'4 6/'L 090 /91 99'1 II OC'L O'0/'004 O'008'9L 10'005'011 00 09991 00005'95001 00'001'900's 00609 /96'11 O'OOYL 09 006S9'91.0'9 L5'004 50'001 yy9yy/y15y 06'00 06'OL 46'OL 00'0090565 00009'L991, 00'0000005 0000'00'5 0000'00'9 14012140 IIOLLtNI ItOLLLL t OZOILIL LLOLOL9 LL02191/9 0000 2 00 009/1 00091 00E91 3N-Z'1933'OLaoW- 3114i 00'000'000•S XL0WB0N1AE'1a30 019091-91Hi 0000000'SI aALON-A01633'01804N• 0114i 00'000'0001 1933'0160W• 91Hi 00'000'000'BL OBDAZ' L1833'018016-BIHi 00'000000'9 00900 01^180N090 1933 0190W - 91Hi 00'000'00M 00126 1a30 0l90w-elHi oo'OOo oOo'0z 0090C OINS MAZ'11430'01a0W- 91Hi DO'000'000'S 0000'1 0000 4 0090 z 009/1 00002 OOos'4 IIDo�als�L��'L OOSL' 005/' 005Z1 ostcl 09/9 L 5002 09CL L 000s'L IS:Ez NOLI'L 9 0090' 0090'L �000Z 1 0005 4 Ly0�0960• 009Z1 ooszl OSlf'L 051 L 00SC'1 009C1 09LC'L 0929'L OSZ L 00'000'e 102LVI. ovioyy 0MAD NNV9 NV013910H 03i 00'000'000'9 I0W90N,AZ MNV13 NVOl 31.10H 0 PAL 0NSZ'£NNV8 NVO13190H0 NtlB NV013910H 03 a 00100'000.5 i 00000000 sL i 00000000'9 Xl 0W90N•f NNtl0 NVO13910H 03i 000000009 NNV9 NVO13910H 03i 00900'000 01 001W80N9LZNNV9 NV013910H 03i 00'000'000'9 109190011ASL'ZNNVB NV013940H 03i 00000000'S •PANNE NIJtlB NVOl 39t0H 03i 00"00'00'S 0 90N-90 NNV9 NVOI 3910 03i 00 00 000 NV6 NVO13910H 03i 00000'000'OL L3J,nfNNVB NV013WOH 03i 0000060001 SZ NNV9 Ntl013910H 033 00'000'000'9 40MAE NNV3 NVO13110M 03i 00'000000'S NNV9 NVO13910H03i 0000000001 11109190N1A2NNV9 NV013WOH 03i 00'000'001 Z0W90WAZNNV8 919013WOH 03i 0000000/ NNV9 Nv013WOH 03i 00000'000L 0WZDN1A0NNVISNtl019 OH 09A 00000000/ lOWf0N1AZNNV6 NV013W01-1033 00'000'0001 40W80N+A2NNV8 N90134NOH 03i 00'000'00061 V9 NtlO13180H 03i 0 000'000OL NV9 NNV013WOH 03! co 000 000.oi 49511A2 MNV9 NVOI 31N0H 03i 00'000'000.5 * LOW L0MAZ NNV9 NV013WCH 133i 00'000'009V 9101119]N1A2 NNV9 NV0131NOH 03i 00000000'S NV8 NVO131NOH 03i 0000'000'04 NVE NV013910H 03i 00'000'000 S 0009"0 9103991f3N5'1NNVE Ntl0l 3WOH 03i 050000009 000E PAIN NV6 NV019 9, OM 990BX9Z{C 9MHtl3LElf 4ONBXCZLC VEMPOW 85A9XSZLE 99DALDEELE } LOVOx924E 3'0111011• 81H3. OlNi 44B33iilA:.XXE�LEEp,� 6F LOSULDA%ffLC NAXEDt£ 501DXEClE ALAXCC LC �3# ALAX[[LyE �0* YYam�{{ LIHAXEC{{L;;EYY (Tr�kJ1? �pEp9EE3HXCELE &uV. 002NXCELE :$9:4, 9/51X[E4C �:'1 1.4 ZOl9X9Z LE `~41 O9AAXCCLE OiNHi9C LC LMNAXML£ [xAnxfnE 'i 41144*�•. 601.. CX,1A%901C Kati L9AAXECIC Zt INWLX9840 L05AXECLE MOM L3PODELE 9N9AXCCI111. 9N9AXEELE 0301X[E LE ADO 09011XfflE 1 DM -MULE AtAlOtaf EH%1XCf L9 l 9fLDX[CLE 1121VetdtrOtOft ZSVMXE[LE .rid B5SIXECLC I ON 8901%991C 1111111E cN 1, IV!) Elr1OA 1X lvea llnlvn vuu•1 Ai IHn IVIV NOLD10 , NOILID11•5111 3 11V.1 ,11S03 5.5ed Ef'1 OC't Oil Z01 1C't 202E 022E 921 - Zl'L al 2ZL 00'0 L L't Li' l 00'Z LI. L Ill 002 ZL'L 80'l 00'Z wo edo 9fI Dt0 91.0 90'f OCO BL'9 600 620 1111111111190. CL1 692E CVO 020 99L COT 062 Sat 1,1'Z 9L2 99'Z WI 002 002 00/5L'9L 0020502E maim 00'OOE'OL 00001.82 00101.VZ 00001e1 00'00930Z EC• int EE'E92'SD E9266.691 - (00002291 (00209'Bf) 00'008t 00'05L11.0'5 00008/002 00006 M1 000002M2 0000'92001 0000 L'KO 21 0020✓600'5 00'00910Z'91 00'000'000'5 BOVC9YBL•91 00'000•4965Z 061002001/9 00201 EMI 01100Z296'6 00'00520DV 2200L 00'000'000'9 00050.500V 00 000'000'9 00'00000DV OVA1. 0000000021. 00'004 00'000'000'0 61.204 00'000000'S 6'101 00'0000005 00'001 00200'000'5 5826 96'99Cere'9L L981.L'1.085Z LC299.211'6L9 - Eta - - - 00.002086•6 woe 08001100001 00201 00,000'000S Z 4 IL., 0002'L l LOZlaL, 05LE't L LOUSLlr 05Z I:z IL00119 0000'Z L1DLLc 0000z LLOUZ/f 00002 1102U2 0000'Z 010D01/9 OSLE'L OLOvsIE 0050'E OLOLLLS 189,6r00558 0180W 1tlN 033 00000200'5 oA1/1896ELE ;�.Y 04 L0MVa60LC A 1 3rl i4 SAAV96ELE 6MAv66ELE E1A996ELf s:.-:�a(Y.0O00 8At0688AZ '005S a 01e081artg 09J GyDO 000'000 oL [lAtla6,EL•lo +ALON+AZ'005 '30558014y�1y �1y�033 D000y0�2�005� ^:.i.kR6kkMRkiNai-69ii6aBATi LoL 0vyAZ'00958 0180161 188 033 00'000 00'5 XL L3N8z'0055 0180811861 03d D0'000000'5 wmAi 0055v 9180w ltlry aid oo 000'000'aL 0160811W 03i D00000005 EWHd90L0 L018E0882'0035801810811w 03d 000080005L 5888d9E12 L0189898ki' 025d 0180111W 03i 000002025 nieveBELE '00558 0180181VN Dad • MBA 00.000200.91 00020 1Nn000l0 1980138101-1 03i 00'000'0005Z 20XLOCELE iN000510 NVOI 31808 03J -12181 00000269'9La 9L2 902 St'Z r9'Z 9L'L 092E L 2 1.9'E 21'2 992 092 0102 ZE2 9E2 522E 002 SL2 BO'Z CO2 102 1,00 961 002E La Le'L 90'L 6'L 6L'I. fl'1 09L IS 002 ZO'2 50'2 002 542 00'L 00'Z SO'1. t9L Ls'L 992E 693 L9'L 69'l 092E LC3 021 al 9CL 16'1 9L'L an erl 51'1 942E 6L'L Eun Dl'l 0133 19 DrL SO2 000092E 100'009'Y) 00006'6 00009'ZE 4I 00009 9E (002SZ'LL) 00'000VL 00 'OWE (00'00916 10000Y'Lr) 00 051a 00'002IC 00200920E 0000912 (0005E'5L1 0005L'LL 0000L'fl 0025811 Domf'6E 00001'CL 020051200'9 Oa'006'L66Y 00'006'BOO Ol 00'00Z'BZo'01 00'009L92 6 0000120001 000015005 009Z9'LLS'L 0005L296'6 08002510V OW009'90001 00'OOP 001 L 000099S.1 000911LO 00000 096'a 00'009900VL 00209120'5 0020L 29'88 00000.000's 00005'MB, 0L'OOL 00'003'000'01 62001 00 00000004 lD'Da 00'000'000'01 80'00L 00'000'500OL DL'ODL 00'000200'5 LL'OOL 00000209'1 09'06 00000.0002E LCOYL oo 000200.9 00'00 00'000'0002L LI BB 00'000'968'r 0C'6B 00'000'000'SL L168 al0000009 9E'ODl 89'86 00 000 000 5 0000000001 9E201 00'0005888 LS'OOt OD0000002 00'05V/10'S 92004 00'0092E8S 00'0512SD'S 90'LOl 0020r'5Z05 00'001'910V 9Z00L 00'000'000'5 00'00E290'SL v0'00L 0029L'a8ILL 92200E owoos'Laa'9 9200E 00'000'000'sL 00 OM 000'5 00008920'0 00'002000'0 00001'E10'5 3OlvA lc 9Z'00 L11VA 8033 EL02/6/L LLOZ/5/t1 ZLULL/01 u9uuDL pfi L L0090/8 ZLOUSZ/6 ZLOULL/8 MULLL8 ZIULLLr MUM ZIOZIfUL ZIOGOGI Li 0GLL/t OZIL UL 110U9L21 L LOZL91/01 L LOL5L/9 LLOLL ire LLOLBZ/9 OUL/9 uOZAZir 0091.12 u02ro1/C uOGe/E t 102lalC L Lroe 00/01 0000'Z OODD2'Z 0000'i Yifi+k;=. 0000 Z 00002E 00902 00052E 005 `0e'1 00502E 000S'4 OOOS'4 00002 005L2 05Z L't OOSZ'L +i 00002E 0!: 0000:Z 00501 05293 000n 05242E ��OgSD,ay�Elly Y19� y�O�1SEyfZ1D�IZ��� Enn2 amz ax0so'z 00502E 0050 Z 'z N[11NO1 f,4 .. 1833'0180w-91Hi 00'0000002L --- - - ZO3V3EEL0 '+ p1ry8.0801830'0180w- 991La 00L0.'000'000'01 {E�l>168222LLEE �T 'k ICA • :RaLRx M% t �.Yc�6 IELV J�=.:::M IL-A..If3.!NTW 610W00N+AE1830'018018- 611-8 00'000'000'5 { v9 i6xeLLE i?`x+;.:;a. ,-; ..-1116X6e4 018008 LE' a 3'0 ao •e1Hi 00'000'000' r L0.109+AE 1833 01808 • e11-8 00000000E 830 el elm V MAN1A03830'0180W - 91 H r5i6X9zL aE ik.i'ia:hi4191,C Oa96X9ZLE 00000'ODO'OL 9A36X9ZtE i EA06%DAtLLMC 11I1,t v3dBXBZ L£ E 100Y31[LE I'.lAi��LE' B8L X9X9Z LE _ SWH14.,10X92LE Mk'00 L OlBXDZLC r) iqrw'mwtl'(.IL 410 or2189Z LE :--6"_- LX09X921f i4�€3ztE 9nndexeaE 00 000'00021. 888189 AU L893 Vi8018 -918i 011000'000'0L 8AC'18330180W -9lHi 00'000'000'm 1830'01808A41 3'+9'.{k'•�41 1830'018081 -e11-1iy 00'0000'000'5 �00 A'ASiN000 w.. '918i �0.,0''.00.0000S'L 1839'018018 - BIHi 00000'000 AL 88, !'L'1890'0180W - Emu 00000000's XL+AL=N+AE �91808(•M83 00000000'01 l+A 1893 1a�30 1830 N+AZ 1833 0180w-518d 00000'000' 0101081 5118d�T{LD.�OG00000qy0¢0y0gq00q �SyLL f 18 e186 00oD '0ooD'aO0'50rra0's 60d6%a2l[ Bf1tl8XDZlE A00 +A521830018018 99p18A 000000005 ern9820tyE -33 018018 • 9lHi 00 000260 m sNdN 001.0 tkaAi{1'r� d:iiIlipee +AL8D8L5Z'21a30'01N0W• 01Hk 000000002L 9Z39x8Z LE Aa VAAR VIMI:00MA =WWI=MAZ 18 3'0J.80W-81H! 00000'000'5 5059XE2 Lf 1 ` airjA INA . 4000.` TitllwdRILIS-1X,40VarA*40004 1830 018011-918i CO 000'000'5 MID%SZ LC '1830'018018-91Hi 00'000'000'5 LZ583L0 LE XL LON'23830'0180W- e14d 00'000'000's L1a0X9Z'-E ... ,..".,..-_._... �-, iL,69110,6YW.l'EF*18l hTkt`-:::,;':'I-i.--,�.j44.ii 4: L LON-Z'183Y0180W- 1183 0029000o2L t185892LE L LON•L 3833'01810w• 911-Ii 00'000000'ot 99N9x9ZLE MOMIN V% .MtY,'F!1Z1.44itJ."t�s' I,11M11111 �4Ia0SQh * X.a4� LON•Z18309180W• 31Hi 00000'0000'SL q�ff reneyoz LLo C 1,40�'ie04414*4 etE.eal " trCe.4'.1�`"3'r '.!.� °r�'r,`41,RLI)I'ry.,VIlli'k itATv %4 LON-z 1833 018018-51Lu 00000'0005 veN9Xez LE 888 Latlosio 11V.1 1151.3 n L 98ed IWO WO 95ro not' on's 90'LC0'Z91191.1 IWO 19'0 Ce 0 CLro 99'0 99'0 950 9Sro zr'o z/ro O9'ZZZ16 tOOVS2'90 IYro1B'EZ 005191 00'06V011. 6V9 00000'629'6V �00�000'90ep2elrO 0001.I'LVCIVV everoe599rwe 09'L0121.011,9 929009001' 0913V iLPee zWe ss'o9i 1w'e/L99'ep Lwee o0'szeLowoo tij. 010UCU6 eOLO�iAZpILB� ° ew 91'D SC'0 SC'0 SL'D 9t'0 9C'0 910 LP910'9 05290Z1 0011001r9611. 00'000'206 CC 00•000 106'61. 99ro OS't LC'I ro'O IV 9ero ee'o 09'0 05.0 9p'o 0911 L£ro 6V'0 L£'0 S2'O 9E'0 CW1 013 LPL Oft 9V2 Vf'L sox se'1 Er'4 OWL 9C 0 900 00'0 VO'0 I00 100 9r'E 1SC sex 20'E CL2 morsel. L{916L019��i 01kL91 00'00RMIL9 00'000'121 09'51CL01 Wows's) SZ'OLO'LC 105 LEN21 00'090'592Y 00'096'991 00'05920921 00'000'ru I.- 00"090'2£ 00'009b2 OD'00i'4L canoe/ 00201.909V01 9COVt'L82'E 00'001'9L8 09111E'210e0 00'0 O'910N SZ'OL13'290'1, 00'09CELO'L oszeren 00.00LYLC'NL 00'00✓9911 00'000'L92'6E 00'009'r9Z'01 00'OSS BID L 00'000'9109 00'000'400'01 00'00960651 0011SS'ELL'S 00.002'944' Ct266 96'66 Eelewswer OS'!11'VL6'EC 9610 VI'011110'6/ 6r•C61•119•01 'CEO 0E906'L99'9 /1026 00000000'1 29101 00'000000'9 09101 00'069910'1 Z6'DOt 00000'SZO'V EEM1DL MO'000'ZOO 1 re'66 00000OS 08 001 00'00002,1 00'050ese'9LL SOSOL OW09 106'0 Z9'COL ODML'Llle 9920E OW00510063e 12004 00061/99e9 2E'004 00'000'186'9 10001 00009'6[e'e 00'001 000000000E 22•ZOL 00'059'21 CS 00'00L'SI CZ OL02AE/9 0102t915 DLO 95 IIOZIIIL t OZSNS 01ovt¢ 010210Ere 040Z sL S 0 02nR Z10iJ6119 L LOLA 9 210ZIGLL4 OM IN OLOVOL19 OLOLLR 0{0219UL olozFsul 009900 0002 0 0051'0 0501'0 00 0 9CO 0000V 000E'V �DD{1cDr�'c 001 �90p26�se1yy1'aas9 0009'' �01010�L991� 0020'9 0029'C OSL9'Z OSLL'f a05C2 OSZ $¢P',rtf 1),1 U 'seY a41iI40N e41 Nunoes a to upoomp Pad:Pow PLO Nu0N V41 pleV, ul atue4u uesZ elOL FOCIOVSQ10 a0ue4P Goad atlewoo;od ayj'uopelnd palypoyy p 'pod w PeoNs'wodneo VIVI eNeuen VAIN suousZA10 bua6V Nool E asps ;meal Aq pal40NAA'NunRw lv/lawny/ so poSpuurl Hun vveAlO/Vgwnu w9alal4 V0Q/enV 2 DO eseywnd uo paseq an sarysnaas laesaw dsuow w121-Y04e to Nag{ pue anlen laylew VIl 1 00'00D2ZONINN 00'000'000'OS9 91110 Aansv3aj 's'n avow 000'os S1V101 n$$ °sneeze I6 MV UI• tLW i, sdkt4$ 51119 AanSVOSIl 3'n 00'0000000S 2BnSetZ16 ��. 04i' . M I'CT M VV+I IV14140441ht 1110 AbnSV3211'S'n 00'000000'10 VLn982Z L6 3 3filftitilliMIGUNEREMIMINEN !'CA L 1 Wic oyes nensveol.e'n 00'000 o000s esnseLzte S1119 Aan5V1a1's'n 00'000'000'1E I1/01562E16 " .; ii' 309000 slam 811 3a1 s'n, OOoo,000 as 0011005OWC01 di WI•VVII LVASZAZLe 1118 /.an5V301 "5'n' 1181 123062011 �5LLOZ vwRev VdH1J o0�0oa 0o01 9JrvesLL02 -t IT'l NM Ci PkISd INOWN 9 6r VVW NO03 B SX%1"yNyyO° AN 0020000000 ty y y'y tr �SANZZ006.0V9 x Y990* �..1�1s e4N�1a�+M�i�ii��a�I, alibi H HZtkt4tl'I4[ 4.5.'.aP*44 VVV/vey 010151.13et 00310 NVS W000'000'1 21906EG62 eV 1S NOIONDISVNI 00'000 9V9 Bi91iTTw'v WFYYLL4ii W t d V0 NaH15 00'0005E0'V VVINV N3d'9%150a13 HOS 40 00'000'000'1. VyVlpV�Ry�eVV tllH1:0000i000'05L vvvlfvv Aa3110119 N09300 CO 000 0tr I 00'000'000'1/1 %NV/ sV e101 ery 38330 NH00 00'000'000 VVVIeeV dell V0183NV 30 NNV 100 000'000NC www06v dal). p 90812VEII rr V42E�0yy�0�0y9 l� e 9018NBSLNOSZLO 'Ey N tlY1 � ��6AO�1...n_L0990 gYdab56tti 50N00110dI01NnN • MIN tvaaozooz 6VV8g0S090 NNVB N01383r109 00'00000004 LWZV091/9 .. �...- .. 4AM 2911 dn0001110 00000000'L m _ CNVIN1C11 2011 venoNnd dnon= 00'0000005 SOVACIELI "4b' kitiiitikitii.�p04100g ti 1 �g st811: VVVIIeV d80 dVJ 30 00'000000'01 E9M0Z969E ,;d1001„ *..g1,0.EP.V i.' il'.i7 i.i.'ii i;Woo* VVV/seV 110180 4010H V10A01 00'000 000'0E afla e 1,10V/so0 AVNIVHIOH 18I1154810 00'000'0005 Z120p091/90 '`"il"'_.VY-t6?MAjikkOi€iiii''Ei- _., �i ,iZtLCX9htk9 VVVIeeIe AVVIVH1VH 38I1154439 00000'000'2 ZatlVOOVBO ..:g 100.0K«,1=9W--s -° : .. keenpage 931ON 010310301- ON111 21.9 001,1 IN Inv HIV[\Ills 110111.1 l lnl Vn NOIJ9 h111In LV1\ Na.9tuJ NOI1J111Jti1N mem, The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund was in FULL COMPLIANCE with the Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy. The County's Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. Investment Category AGENCY BONDS LOCAL AGENCY OBLIGATIONS � a i . °a :• BILLS OF EXCHANGE Maximum Maturity Authorized % Limit Quality S&P/ Moody's 5 YEARS NO LIMIT A/A2/A 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 270 DAYS 9.p 40% (1) CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS 5 YEARS 30% REVERSE REPOS 92 DAYS 20% CaITRUST SHORT TERM FUND SECURED BANK DEPOSITS 5 YEARS NO LIMIT LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUNDS N/A NO LIMIT Maximum Maturity 3 YEARS 3 YEARS 180 DAYS +i3`{ 1 YEAR 60 DAYS DAILY LIQUIDITY 1 YEAR 3 YEARS Authorized Limit Quality Actual Riverside S&P/ Moody's Porttolio 15%/ $150MM A/A2/A 1.70% 2.50% INVESTMENT GRADE 0.25% 30% A1/P1/F1 25% MAX A1/P1/F1 10% MAX BOARD APPROVED 0.88% i No more than 30% of this category may be invested with any one commercial bank r Mutual Funds maturity may be interpreted as weighted average maturity not exceeding 90 days 3Or must have an investment advisor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of5500,000,000. • THIS COMPLETES THE REPORT REQUIREMIDS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 53646 • Page • • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Conflicts of Interest Policy for the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the Conflict of Interest (COI) policy for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-91 CIP will widen SR-91 from the Riverside County line to Interstate 15 and extend the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. In October 2009, the Commission entered into an agreement with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. to provide project and construction management (PCM) services for design -build phase 1 of the SR-91 CIP. Included in the PCM scope of work is the procurement of a design -build team to perform final design and construction of the project. Purpose and Goals of Policy This COI policy prescribes the Commission's policy on conflict of interest relating to consultants participating or desiring to participate in the planning, procurement, design, construction, or development of the SR-91 CIP. The COI policy goals are as follows: • Protects the integrity and fairness of the planning, procurement, design, construction, or development of the SR-91 CIP; • Avoids circumstances where a consultant or proposer obtains, or appears to obtain, an unfair competitive advantage as a result of work performed by a consultant; • Provides guidance to consultants and proposers, or potential consultants and proposers, so they may assess, and make informed business decisions concerning their decision to provide services on the SR-91 CIP or to submit a qualification submittal and/or proposal related to the design, construction, or development of the project; and Agenda Item 7C 16 • Protects the Commission's interests and confidential and sensitive project - specific information. The policy provides general conflict of interest standards, a process to determine whether a COI exists and factors relevant to a COI determination. Attachment: RCTC Conflict of Interest Policy for the SR-91 CIP Agenda Item 7C 17 • DRAFT-1/25/10 RCTC Conflicts of Interest Policy for State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project Section 1. Purpose. This Policy prescribes Conflict of Interest policies applicable to private entities, including Consultants and Proposers, participating or desiring to participate in the Commission's planning, procurement, design, construction or development of the Project. A private entity's failure to comply with these standards of conduct may result in potential liability to the Commission and to the private entity's preclusion from participation in the Project. This Policy is intended to apply in the context of the Commission's development of the Project pursuant to a design -build contract or a public -private partnership. Section 2. Definitions. Section 2.1. "Affiliate" means with respect to any Consultant: (a) any member, partner or joint venturer of such Consultant; (b) any individual or entity that directly or indirectly controls, or is controlled by, or is under common control with, such Consultant or any of its members, partners or joint venturers; and (c) any other entity for which 20% or more of the equity interest in such other entity is held directly or indirectly, beneficially or of record by (i) such Consultant, (ii) any of such Consultant's members, partners or joint venturers or (iii) any Affiliate of such Consultant under clause (b) of this definition. Section 2.2. "Commission" means the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Section 2.3. "Conflict of Interest" means a circumstance arising out of a Consultant's existing or past activities, including past activities as a Consultant to or employee of the Commission, business interests, familial relationships, contractual relationships, and/or organizational structure (i.e., Affiliates, etc.) wherein (i) the Consultant is or may be unable to render impartial assistance or advice to the Commission, (ii) the Consultant's objectivity in performing the scope of work sought by the Commission is or might be otherwise impaired, (iii) the Consultant has, or is perceived to have, an unfair competitive advantage; (iv) the Consultant's performance of Services on behalf of the Commission does or may provide an unfair competitive advantage to a third party; or (v) regardless of whether accurate, there is a perception or appearance of impropriety or unfair competitive advantage benefiting the Consultant or a third party as a result of the Consultant's participation on the Project. Section 2.4. "Consultant" means any person or business entity (including any individual employee of such entity or any division and/or Affiliate of such entity) previously or currently retained, or in the process of being retained, by the Commission to provide Services in connection with the Project, including subconsultants and individual employees of subconsultants. Section 2.5. "Executive Director" means the executive director of the Commission or his or her designee. Section 2.6. "Policy" means this RCTC Conflicts of Interest Policy. Section 2.7. "Project" means the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project. 380785 I 18 DRAFT — 1/25/10 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rdFloor Riverside, CA 92502 Email: gmoore@rctc.org Disclosures will also be requested as part of any request for qualifications or request for proposals relating to the design, construction or development of the Project. The Consultant's Conflict of Interest disclosure obligation is ongoing. Consultants should undertake reasonable due diligence, including necessary conflict searches, to determine whether new actual, potential or perceived Conflicts of Interest arise. Due diligence should extend to investigation of past relationships and, if the Consultant is an entity, to officers or directors of the Consultant. If a Consultant becomes aware of an actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest at any time during its participation in the Project, the Consultant shall promptly disclose the matter to the Commission as described herein. Section 3.3.2. Failure to Comply. If a Consultant fails to comply with this Policy, including failure to comply with any mitigative measures imposed under this Policy, or otherwise fails to disclose an actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest, the Commission may, in its sole discretion: (A) Preclude and/or disqualify the Consultant and its Affiliates, including any Proposer with whom the Consultant is or had affiliated, from participation in the planning, procurement, design, construction and/or development of the Project, including any competitive process associated therewith; (B) Require the Consultant and its Affiliates, including any Proposer with whom the Consultant is or had affiliated, to implement mitigative measures; (C) Segregate or terminate the Consultant and its Affiliates, including any Proposer with whom the Consultant is or had affiliated, from planning, procurement, design, construction and/or development of the Project; and/or (D) Pursue any and all other rights and remedies available at law, in equity or set forth in any request for qualifications or request for proposals, which rights and remedies shall include the right to seek any and all direct or indirect costs and damages resulting from the Consultant's failure to comply with this Policy, including, but not limited to, costs resulting from third -party challenges to the procurement or the Commission's re -procurement of the Project. Section 3.4. Period in Which a Conflict of Interest Applies. If the Executive Director determines that the performance of Services by a Consultant creates an actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest, the provisions in this Policy and any decisions made by the Commission related to such Conflict of Interest (including prohibitions, mitigative measures, etc.) shall continue and apply for the duration of the planning, procurement, design, construction and development of the Project, provided that the Executive Director may, on a case -by -case basis and in his or her sole discretion, modify the length of this time period in writing if he/she determines that the modification is in the best interests of the Commission and the Project. . 380785 3 20 DRAFT — 1/25/10 Section 3.5. Application to New Firm. If a Conflict of Interest applies to an individual, the Conflict of Interest and prohibition with respect to the individual will not apply to the individual's new place of employment, unless the new employer is an Affiliate of the employee's previous employer. If the new employer is not an Affiliate of the previous employer and is otherwise eligible to perform Services for the Commission pursuant to this Policy and applicable law, the new employer will remain eligible despite the employment of the individual, but mitigative measures may be required of the new employer with respect to the employee. Section 3.6. Federal and State Requirements. Section 3.6.1. Federal and State Laws. For federal -aid projects and in certain other circumstances, the Commission must comply with the Federal Highway Administration's organizational conflict of interest regulations found in 23 CFR §636.116. The Commission must also comply with certain California laws and regulations, including, without limitation, Government Code §§1090 and 87100 et seq.. Nothing in this Policy is intended to limit, modify, supersede or otherwise alter the effect of those laws and regulations, and the Commission will apply this Policy consistent with those laws and regulations. Section 3.6.2. Limitations on Commission Consents and Approvals. To the extent that application of the federal and state laws and regulations described in Section 3.6.1 would preclude or limit participation by a Consultant or an individual with respect to the Project, then notwithstanding any other aspect of this Policy or any contrary decision by the Commission in response to an actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest under this Policy, such federal and state laws and regulations shall control and be determinative. Under no circumstances shall a decision, approval or consent by the Commission in response to a disclosure, request or actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest under this Policy be considered an opinion with respect to the applicability or effect of such federal and state laws or regulations, and Consultant shall bear all responsibility and liability for determining if a conflict under federal and/or state laws or regulations exist in relation to the Consultant's work or proposed work on the Project. Section 3.7. Binding Effect of Commission Decisions. The Commission shall not withdraw or amend a prior consent or approval granted to a Consultant under this Policy unless: (A) The application of the federal and state laws and regulations described in Section 3_6 requires the consent or approval to be withdrawn or amended; or (B) The Commission decides, in its sole discretion, to withdraw or amend the consent or approval based on factual circumstances that the Commission has been made aware of that were not disclosed when the Commission made its original decision, or factual circumstances that are new or have changed since the Commission made its original decision; or (C) The Consultant or Proposer team fails to comply with any mitigative measures imposed under this Policy. 380785 4 21 DRAFT— 1/25/10 Section 3.8. General Conflict of Interest Standards. Except as provided in Section 3.9 of this Policy, no Consultant that has previously provided Services or that is currently providing Services to the Commission with respect to the Project may be a Proposer or participate as an equity owner, team member, consultant, or subconsultant of or to a Proposer for the Project, or have a financial interest in any of the foregoing entities with respect to the Project. Section 3.9. Determination Regarding Provision of Services for the Project. Section 3.9.1. Discretion of the Commission. Unless otherwise indicated in this Policy, all approvals, actions or discretion under this Policy and with respect to an actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest shall be within the sole discretion of the Commission. Unless a particular decision regarding application of this Policy is referred to the Commission's Board of Directors by the Executive Director, the Executive Director retains the ultimate and sole discretion to act on behalf of the Commission hereunder and to determine on a case -by -case basis whether an actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest exists and what actions may be appropriate to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate any actual, potential or perceived Conflict of Interest. Section 3.9.2. Determination Process. In response to a disclosure under Section 3.3 above or information the Commission obtains independent of a Consultant, the Executive Director shall determine whether a Consultant has an actual. potential or perceived Conflict of Interest that the Executive Director determines should prevent the Consultant from (i) being a Proposer, (ii) participating as an equity owner, team member, consultant, or subconsultant of or to a Proposer for the Project, (iii) having a financial interest in any of the foregoing entities with respect to the Project or (iv) otherwise participating in the design, construction or development of the Project. Once the Executive Director makes this determination, he/she shall send the Consultant a written notice regarding the decision and, if participation is approved, whether the approval and participation is limited or subject to the Consultant meeting certain conditions. The Executive Director shall consider some or all of the following factors when making the determination: (A) Whether the Consultant will not, or in the case of the previous performance of Services did not, have access to or obtain knowledge of confidential or sensitive information, procedures, policies and processes that could provide, or could be perceived to provide, an unfair competitive advantage with respect to the procurement, design, construction or development of the Project; (B) Whether the data and information provided to the Consultant in the performance of the Services is either substantially irrelevant to the procurement for the Project or is generally available on substantially an equal and timely basis to all Proposers; (C) The type of Services at issue; (D) The particular circumstances at issue, including the Consultant's ability to effectively implement the safeguards described in Section 3.12, including an ethical wall, or to otherwise mitigate the Conflict of Interest in a manner satisfactory to the Commission; 380785 5 22 DRAFT -1 /25/10 (E) The specialized expertise, if any, needed by the Commission and Proposers to implement the Project; (F) The period of time between the previous work for the Commission and the potential Conflict of Interest situation; (G) Whether the Consultant's work for the Commission has been completed or is ongoing; (H) The potential impact on the procurement and implementation of the Project, including impacts on competition; (I) Whether, with respect to a Consultant's prior environmental services related to the Project, if any, a record of decision or finding of no significant impact has been issued for the Project; (J) Whether, with respect to a Consultant's prior traffic and revenue Services related to the Project, if any, the prior work will have no impact on the Projects plan of finance, on a Proposer's ability to obtain and close funding or on the potential sources of funding for the Project; (K) Whether the Executive Director believes that the Consultant's participation is in the best interests of the Commission; and (L) Any other factors or circumstances deemed relevant by the Commission. Section 3.10. Procurement and Financial Services. Independent of the process described in Section 3.9 a Consultant actively engaged and performing procurement services or financial services with respect to the Project may not be a Proposer or participate as an equity owner, team member, consultant, or subconsultant of or to a Proposer for the Project, or have a financial interest in any of the foregoing entities with respect to the Project. Section 3.11. Multiple Services. If a Consultant is providing more than one category or type of Services to the Commission for the Project (e.g., environmental services as well as procurement services) and there are differences in this Policy's considerations, standards, restrictions, limitations and outcomes applicable to those categories or types of Services, the standards, restrictions, limitations and outcomes applicable to a category that are more stringent will be applied (e.g., if a Consultant were only providing preliminary engineering services that have been completed, they may be approved to participate on a Proposer team, whereas, if they were also providing ongoing procurement services for the Project, they may not be approved to participate on a Proposer team). Section 3.12. Restriction of Services and Conditions to Approvals and Exceptions. In order to address actual, potential or perceived Conflicts of Interest, the Executive Director as part of providing his or her consent to the participation of a Consultant may, in his or her sole discretion: (A) Restrict the scope of Services the Consultant may be eligible to perform for the Commission or the Proposer team in order to further the intent and goals of this Policy; and 380785 6 23 DRAFT- 1/25/10 (B) Condition an approval, determination, or exception as the Executive Director determines appropriate to further the intent and goals of this Policy, including by requiring the Consultant or Proposer to implement certain safeguards, including: (i) The execution of confidentiality agreements satisfactory to the Commission, which may, among other things, include the segregation and protection of information obtained as a result of the Consultant's prior or ongoing work for the Commission or from former or current Commission employees; and/or (ii) The execution of ethical wall agreements satisfactory to the Commission, which segregate certain personnel from participation in the Project; and/or (iii) The execution of agreements satisfactory to the Commission regarding the dissemination of work product and materials created as a result of Consultant's prior or ongoing work for the Commission, including dissemination to the Commission and restrictions on dissemination by the Consultant to any Proposer team, including a team on which they intend to participate. Section 3.13. Provisions are Nonexclusive. The provisions in this Policy do not address every situation that may arise in the context of the Commission's planning, procurement, design, construction or development of the Project nor require a particular decision or determination by the Executive Director when faced with facts similar to those described in this Policy. In addition, additional policies, procedures and limits related to conflicts of interest or similar issues may be imposed by the Commission at any time with respect to the Project or any other Commission projects. 380785 7 24 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: 2010 Congestion Management Program TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the 2010 Congestion Management Program (CMP). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The CMP was initially mandated under Proposition 111 in 1990. The intent of the CMP was to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality decisions and programs. In 1996, legislation was passed to change the CMP from a state mandate to a voluntary program. However, federal planning rules require metropolitan planning organizations to demonstrate consistency of county CMPs with the Regional Transportation Plan. State statute also requires CMPs to be updated on a biennial basis. The federal Construction Management System (CMS) program has historically focused on traffic monitoring efforts to identify deficiencies and projects that could mitigate the deficiencies including Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)/Transportation System Management (TSM) projects, capital, and operational improvements for state highway and regional facilities. The state CMP looks at a broader approach in mitigating system deficiencies from capacity enhancement projects to Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to enhancing transit operations. Each congestion management agency throughout the state has tailored the CMPs to incorporate a combination of these program requirements to meet the respective needs for mitigating congestion and improving air quality. In Riverside County, the CMP effort primarily involves monitoring the CMP network on an annual basis to determine if there are deficient segments. A Level of Service (LOS) analysis is conducted and CMP segments operating at LOS "F" are reported as deficient. A deficiency plan is then required to be prepared that identifies mitigation measures including, but not limited to, capacity projects, TDM/TSM, and Agenda Item 7D 25 transit enhancements. If an improvement project is scheduled to be implemented on the deficient segment within approximately five to seven years, the project itself will serve as the deficiency plan. Other components of the CMP update involve reviewing and incorporating legislation and regulations at the state and federal levels, if any, that may pertain to the CMP. CMP LOS Analysis Results The CMP LOS analysis identified two CMP segments operating at LOS "F". The first segment is on Interstate 215 from the 15/215 interchange to Scott Road. The Commission is implementing a widening project along this segment, which is expected to fully mitigate the deficiency. Upon completion of the widening project the LOS will be re -analyzed to determine if a deficiency still exists. The second deficient segment is along 1-15 from Weirick Road (south of Corona) to the Riverside/San Bernardino County line. This segment could potentially be mitigated by the implementation of the State Route 91 Corridor improvement Project (CIP) and/or 1-15 CIP. The SR-91 CIP project scope includes improvements along 1-15 north and south of the 91/15 interchange to improve the connections and overall circulation of the interchange. The SR-91 CIP is scheduled to be implemented in 2012, and the 1-15 CIP is currently scheduled to begin after the completion of the SR-91 CIP. Chapter 7, TDM/Air Quality Chapter 7 was updated to reflect current TDM efforts undertaken by the Commission and other local agencies. This chapter was expanded to include a discussion regarding TDM strategies and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Compass Blueprint effort that several local agencies in Western and Eastern County participated in. Lastly, this chapter was updated to mention SB 375 requirements and its relationship to TDM efforts currently underway in Riverside County. Staff has presented the draft 2010 CMP to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and at its February 2010 meeting, the TAC recommended approval of the 2010 CMP. Deficiency plans are not being recommended at this time due to the fact that the projects scheduled to be constructed along the deficient segments are likely to mitigate the deficiencies; however, staff will continue to monitor these segments. Upon the Commission's approval of the 2010 CMP, staff will submit the document to SCAG. Attachment: 2010 CMP Agenda Item 7D • • 26 • 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program March 10, 2010 Prepared For: ersideCounly ransportalion Commission Riverside County Transportation Commission County Regional Complex 4080 Lemon Street, 3ro Floor Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Ph: (951) 787-7141 Fax: (951) 787-7920 Prepared By: �TiZPA _f -- 7crhn<alogioe�, Ire - VRPA Technologies, Inc. 4630 W. Jennifer, Suite 105 Fresno, CA 93722 Ph: (559) 271-1200 Fax: (559) 271.1269 27 28 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER DESCRIPTION PAGE Executive Summary ES-1 1 Designation of the Congestion Management Agency 1-1 2 Designation of the CMP System of Highways and 2-1 Roadways 3 Transportation Modeling 3-1 4 Muttimodal System Performance Standards 4-1 5 Enhanced Transportation System Management 5-1 Program 6 LOS Deficiency Plans 6-1 7 Transportation Demand Management/ 7-1 Air Quality 8 Capital Improvement Program 8-1 9 CMP Conformance and Monitoring 9-1 10 CMP Development and Implementation/ 10-1 Update Process Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 29 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE 2-1 Riverside CMP System 2-2 4-1 Level of Service on CMP System 4-3 5-1 Smart Call Box (SCB) Implementation Sites 5-2 5-2 Transportation Management Center 5-5 (TMC) Implementation Sites LIST OF TABLES TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE 2-1 System of Highways & Roadways 2-5 4-1 Exempt Facilities in 2007 4-6 4-2 Highway Capacity Manual -Based LOS Methodology 4-7 Applications 4-3 Transit System Performance Indicators 4-10 5-1 Floating Car Run Deficiency Analysis 5-7 9-1 CMP Updates Since Inception 9-4 Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. ii 30 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Congestion Management Program (CMP) was first established in 1990 under Proposition 111. Proposition 111 established a process for each metropolitan county in California to designate a Congestion Management Agency (CMA) that would be responsible for development and implementation of the CMP within county boundaries. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) was designated as the CMA in 1990, and therefore, prepares the CMP updates in consultation with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which consists of local agencies, the County of Riverside, transit agencies, and subregional agencies. CMP legislation is provided in Appendix 1. The intent of the CMP is to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts, and improve air quality. A number of counties within California have developed a CMP with varying methods and strategies to meet the intent of the CMP legislation. The Riverside County CMP was significantly modified in 1997 to focus on federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements as well as incorporate elements of the State CMP requirements. The 1997 CMP also focused on development of an Enhanced Traffic Monitoring System in which real-time traffic count data can be accessed by RCTC to evaluate the condition of the CMS, as well as meet other monitoring requirements at the state and federal levels. This monitoring effort was completed in 2004, which consisted of installing Smart Call Boxes (traffic counters in Call Box equipment) and traffic counters at Caltrans' Traffic Management Center (TMC) sites along the state highway system. Monitoring of the CMP system on local arterials will continue to occur through the Coachella Valley Association of Governments' (CVAG) monitoring program and through local agency monitoring efforts in Western Riverside County. RCTC's adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) threshold is LOS "E". Therefore, when a CMP street or highway segment falls to "F", a deficiency plan must be required. Preparation of a deficiency plan will be the responsibility of the local agency where the deficiency is located. Other agencies identified as contributors to the deficiency will also be required to coordinate with the development of the plan. The plan must contain mitigation measures, including consideration of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies and transit alternatives, and a schedule for mitigating the deficiency. To insure that the CMP is appropriately monitored to reduce the occurrence of LOS deficiencies, it is the responsibility of local agencies, .when reviewing and approving development proposals, to consider the traffic impacts on the CMP System. When a deficiency is identified as part of the CMP Update LOS evaluation process, further Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. ES-1 32 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program detailed analysis of LOS must be conducted to determine whether an actual deficiency has occurred. The LOS analysis conducted as part of the CMP Update process is only considered to be a "screening" level analysis, therefore additional, more detailed assessment of a potential deficiency would be required before a deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s) will be made to insure that appropriate data, geometries, counts and other related information is applied to calculate LOS. During preparation of the 2009 CMP, deficiencies were found on the CMP System based upon this year's monitoring effort. These segments will continue to be monitored to determine if the deficiencies reflect temporary or permanent conditions. if it is determined that deficiencies are permanent and not related to construction activities on the segment or anywhere else that could impact the segment or any other special circumstances a deficiency plan will be required to address the deficiency. OTHER PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS This document is prepared to address each elements the State CMP legislation and federal CMS requirements. Below is a summary of each chapter highlighting the Riverside County CMP's approach in meeting the state CMP and federal CMS requirements. Chapter 1- Designation of the CMP Lead Agency: • The County Board of Supervisors, and a majority of cities representing a majority of population in the incorporated area, must designate by resolution, a public agency to prepare and adopt the Congestion Management Program. The Riverside County Transportation Commission was designated as the CMA for Riverside County on June 11, 1990. The County Board of Supervisors and a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population supported the designation. Chapter 2 - Designation of the System of Highways and Roadways: • The CMA must designate a system of highways and roadways to include, at a minimum, all state highways and principal arterials. RCTC has designated, based upon a set of optional criteria referenced in Chapter 2, a system of Highways and Principal Arterials. All State highways within Riverside County have been included in accordance with CMP statutes, and a set of Principal Arterials has been identified (reference Exhibit 2-1 and Table 2-1). Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. ES-2 33 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Chapter 3 - Transportation Modeling: • The CMA is to provide a uniform database of traffic impacts for use in a countywide transportation computer model." For purposes of this Program, the Commission has recognized use of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) transportation model, the Coachella Valley Area Transportation System (CVATS) sub -regional transportation model, the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RIVTAM) Final Report (May 2009), and local agency models to analyze traffic impacts associated with development proposals or land use plans. Chapter 4 - Multimodal System Performance Standards: • AB 1963 identifies requirements in CMP legislation including development of multimodal system performance standards focusing on street and highway level of service and transit standards. This Chapter therefore incorporates minimum standards for both these important forms of transportation. CMP Street and Highway Standards The methodology for measuring LOS must be that contained in Circular 212 or the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM); and traffic standards must be set no lower than LOS "E" for any segment or intersection on the CMP system, unless the current LOS is lower (i.e., F ). For purposes of this CMP, LOS analysis for intersections and segments along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways, under current or existing conditions, is required to be developed using HCM-based methods. Considering the transportation financing program in Riverside County established through Measure A, there are no advantages to set a higher minimum LOS standard than required by CMP legislation, LOS "E". As a result, the minimum LOS standard for intersections and segments along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways shall be "E" unless the intersection or segment had a lower LOS (LOS "F") in 1991 (reference Table 4-1 and Exhibit 4-1). Such facilities are exempt from CMP deficiency plan requirements. Public Transit/Alternative Mass Transit System Standards Transit standards must be established for service frequency (i.e., headways), routing, and coordination among multiple transit agencies operating within the CMP jurisdiction. To meet the requirements of the Statutes, the performance measures outlined in the Short Range Transit Plans prepared by transit agencies in Riverside County are included in this chapter. In 2005, RCTC approved a Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) as part of a comprehensive effort to work with the county's eight public transit operators to provide better service and improve efficiency. The PIP identifies Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. ES-3 34 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program performance targets in which transit operators will strive to meet in developing its SRTP service and financial plan. Chapter 5 — Enhanced Transportation System Management Program: • The CMP must include a program to analyze the impact of land use decisions by jurisdictions on the regional transportation system, including an estimate of costs to mitigate those impacts. This element describes the traffic data collection process to assess land use decision impacts on the Congestion Management System. Under the program, RCTC, CVAG and Caltrans would be the agencies in Riverside County responsible for the traffic count data collection process. The count data can also be applied to comply with State and federal Congestion Management Plan/Congestion Management System/Transportation Management System (CMP/CMS/TMS) data collection requirements. CVAG currently has a Traffic Monitoring Program in place that addresses CMP System Monitoring requirements in the Coachella Valley. RCTC has implemented the Enhanced Traffic Monitoring Program using Smart Call Box (SCB) and Caltrans' Traffic Management Center (TMC) equipment at selected sites along the State Highway system in Riverside County. This system has resulted in significant increases in the number and location of traffic counts along the CMP System. Chapter 6 - LOS Deficiency Plans: • AB 471 and AB 1791 provide for the development of deficiency plans. The bills state that "a city or county may designate individual segments or intersections as deficient when they do not meet the established level of service standards, if prior to the designation at a noticed public hearing, the city or county has adopted a deficiency plan". Deficient segments or intersections will be identified through the biennial traffic monitoring process. When a deficiency is identified as part of the CMP Update LOS evaluation process, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine whether an actual deficiency has occurred. The LOS analysis conducted as part of the CMP Update process is only considered to be a "screening" level analysis, therefore additional, more detailed assessment of a potential deficiency would be required before a deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s) will be made to insure that appropriate data, geometrics, counts and other related information is applied to calculate LOS. The local agency where the deficiency is located will be responsible for the preparation of the deficiency plan. RCTC will prepare deficiency plans on the State Highway System when deficiencies are identified and will coordinate the development of the deficiency plan with affected local jurisdictions. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. ES-4 35 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Chapter 10 - CMP Development and Implementation Update Process: • This chapter focuses on the procedural, administrative, and coordination activities related to CMP development, adoption, and update in accordance with CMP legislation. The CMP includes a process that addresses each of the activities identified above including CMP development, adoption, and update. Environmental Assessment — The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) identifies the CMP as an exempt project. As a result, compliance with CEQA requirements is no longer necessary. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Mc, ES-6 37 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 1 DESIGNATION OF THE CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS According to CMP legislation (AB 471, AB 1791, AB 1963, and AB 2419), the Riverside County Board of Supervisors and a majority of cities representing a majority of the population in the incorporated area, must designate by resolution, a public agency to prepare and adopt a Congestion Management Program (CMP). The Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has the authority to monitor compliance with the adopted program. An amendment to the Government Code requires the CMA to update and adopt the CMP every two years (biennially) consistent with development of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). A copy of AB 2419 is provided as Appendix 1. A key feature of AB 471 is the requirement that every urbanized county with a population of 50,000 or more must prepare and adopt a comprehensive CMP. The CMP represents a directive for local governments to measure and mitigate the impact of land use decisions on streets, highways, and regional transportation systems. In 1996, the State of California amended the CMP legislation to change the requirement from mandatory to voluntary. However, federal Metropolitan Planning provisions require Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO) serving a transportation management area (TMA) (i.e. area with a population over 200,000) to include a Congestion Management System (CMS) component as part of their transportation planning process. Each of the six counties in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region has adopted and implemented a CMP. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) jointly determine if the MPO's planning process meets the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134 among other provisions. In the event that the FHWA/FTA determines that the planning process in a TMA does not substantially meet the requirements and do not certify the process, they may withhold federal project and funding approvals. RCTC DESIGNATED AS THE CMA On June 11, 1990, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) was designated as the CMA for Riverside County by resolution from member agencies. The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) also supported the designation. It is the Commission's intent to continue working closely with WRCOG, CVAG, the cities and the County, toward development and implementation of an effective CMP_ Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 1-1 39 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 2 DESIGNATION OF THE CMP SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089(a), referenced in AB 1963, requires development of a Congestion Management Program (CMP) to establish traffic level of service (LOS) standards for a system of highways and roadways designated by RCTC as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA). This system must include, at a minimum, all state highways and principal arterials, both new and existing facilities. Once designated, components of the system cannot be removed. Designated System of Highways and Principal Arterials: ♦ All State Highway facilities in Riverside County. Consideration may be given to the following conditions when designating Principal Arterials: ✓ Routes identified on Caltrans' "Functional Classification System" maps as "Principal Arterials"; ✓ Designated expressways; and ✓ Facilities linking cities/communities (interregional facilities), and major activity centers (shopping malls, activity centers, major industrial/business parks, stadiums, etc). 2010 CMP SYSTEM UPDATE PROCESS An update to the CMP System considers the criteria identified above, including arterial facilities added to the Federal Functional Classification System. Local agencies may nominate arterials for inclusion on the CMP System at any time. Nominated arterials will be reviewed by the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for approval and forwarded to the RCTC Board for final approval. Exhibit 2-1 provides a graphic display of the CMP System of Highways and Roadways in Riverside County. Based upon review of the revised Functional Classification System and the considerations listed above, no additional facilities were designated as principal arterials during the 2010 CMP update process. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2-1 42 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program r N 2 Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2-2 43 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Ethibit 2-1 (cont). w yQ 4 0 m To so- 0_ 6 0 rn S eteson CMD%faem Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2-3 44 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program w 6chibit 2-1 (cant). 4 Riverside CMP System (Coachella Valley) Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2-4 45 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TABLE 2-1 CMP SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS ♦ State Highways: Facility Name 1. 1-10 2. 1-15 3. 1-215 4. US 95 5. SR 60 6. SR 62 7. SR 71 8. SR 74 9. SR 78 10. SR 79 11. SR 86 12. SR 91 13. SR 111 / Highway 111" 14. SR 177 15. SR 195 16. SR 243 17. SR 371 Limits San Bernardino Co. Line to the Arizona State Line San Bernardino Co. Line to the San Diego Co. Line San Bemardino Co. Line to 1-15 San Bemardino Co. Line to 1-10 San Bernardino Co. Line to 1-10 San Bemardino Co. Line to 1-10 San Bemardino Co. Line to SR 91 Orange Co. Line to SR 111 Imperial Co. Line to I-10 1-10 to San Diego Co. Line SR 111 to Imperial Co. Line Orange Co. Line to 1-215 1-10 to Imperial Co. Line SR 62 to I-10 SR86toSR111 1-10 to SR 74 SR79toSR74 ♦ Principal Arterials - Western Riverside County: Facility Name 1. Alessandro Blvd. 2. Agua Mansa Rd. 3. Arlington Blvd. 4. Armstrong Rd.Nalley Way 5. Country Village Rd. 6. La Sierra Ave. 7. Limonite Ave. 8. Magnolia Ave. 9. Main St./First St. 10. Market SL/Rubidoux Blvd. 11. Seventh and University 12. Sierra Ave. 13. Etiwanda Ave. 14. Van Buren Blvd. Limits Intersection of Central, Arlington & Chicago to 1-215 San Bernardino County Line to Market St. Califomia to intersection of Central, Alessandro & Chicago Sierra Ave. to SR 60 San Bernardino County Line to SR 60 Arlington Blvd. to SR 91 San Bernardino County Line to Mission Blvd. SR 91 to Market St. San Bernardino County Line to Market St. San Bernardino County Line to Magnolia Ave. Market to SR 91 San Bernardino County Line to Valley Way/Armstrong Rd. Limonite Ave. - San Bernardino County Line San Bernardino County Line to 1-215 ♦ Principal Arterials - Coachella Valley: Facility Name 1. Monterey Ave. 2. Ramon Rd. Limits SR 111 to 1-10 SR 111 to I-10 " SR 111 in Riverside County is a designated State Route (SR) between 1-10 and Golf Club Drive and between SR 74 and the Imperial County Line. That section between Golf Club Drive and SR 74 was relinquished to adjacent jurisdictions. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2-5 46 • 47 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 3 TRANSPORTATION MODELING STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089.3 (c) of the Government Code requires that RCTC, as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA), in consultation with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), cities and the County, develop a uniform database on traffic impacts for use in a countywide transportation model. Further, RCTC, in consultation with SCAG, must approve transportation computer models that will be used by local jurisdictions and the county to determine the quantitative impacts of development on the circulation system. Local transportation models shall be consistent with the databases used by SCAG. RCTC TRANSPORTATION MODELING Transportation computer models applied in Riverside County include the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RIVTAM) and the SCAG Regional Transportation Model. The newly developed RIVTAM model was a multi -agency effort to develop a more detailed roadway network than the SCAG Regional Model. RIVTAM added 570 centerline miles of roadways to the network and incorporates all facilities in the Riverside County General Plan classified as Secondary and above. In addition, some Collectors were included, as necessary, to insure that all Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) are connected to the network of General Plan roadways. A Memorandum of Understanding has been approved by the Riverside County Transportation Department (RCTD), CVAG, WRCOG, and RCTC to establish roles and responsibilities for updating and maintaining the model including use of the model by the local agencies. The RCTD serves as the lead agency for RIVTAM. During 2008, SCAG prepared an update to the SCAG models based upon new growth forecasts developed for the Year 2035. The RIVTAM model is based on the SCAG 2008 model with refinements to reflect local conditions within Riverside County. Local transportation models are also developed by local agencies to determine impacts on their transportation system. TRANSPORTATION MODEL IMPROVEMENTS The SCAG model was last revised/updated (calibrated/validated) in 2008 and has been available for use by local agencies in reviewing regionally significant development projects, or projects that generate greater than 500 peak hour trips through the Intergovernmental Review (IGR) process. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 3-1 48 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program In addition, SCAG developed a regionwide demographic database system to collect accurate data for development of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP is the region's long range transportation plan that considers land use development patterns, transportation systems, population and housing needs to develop policies and strategies that will accommodate future growth and demand. Locally, WRCOG, CVAG, and the County of Riverside have taken lead roles in the development of a Geographic Information System (GIS) to monitor growth in the County so that socioeconomic and land use databases can be easily developed and maintained. SCAG has developed model consistency guidelines to assist public agencies and traffic engineering professionals with the development of local models that are consistent with the SCAG regional transportation model. The objective of these guidelines is to comply with CMP consistency requirements, improve communications between affected agencies to simplify the exchange of data, and improve databases and modeling results at both the local and regional level. A copy of the current Consistency Guidelines for Transportation Modeling - Riverside and San Bernardino Counties is available at RCTC or at the SCAG Inland Empire Office in Riverside. MODELING FOR CMP PURPOSES During implementation of the Riverside County CMP, transportation computer models are used for several purposes, including: ♦ Determining and monitoring traffic levels of service (LOS) for the current and future years; ♦ Analyzing the impacts of land use decisions resulting from the IGR or CEQA processes and when an LOS deficiency occurs along the CMP System; and ♦ Evaluating and prioritizing transportation improvement projects, such as capital projects, transit projects, Transportation Systems Management (TSM) projects, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, and other programs that improve the transportation system and air quality. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 3-2 49 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 4 MULTIMODAL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE STANDARDS STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089(b)(2) of the Government Code states that the Congestion Management Program (CMP) must contain a performance element that includes performance measures to evaluate current and future multimodal system performance for the movement of people and goods. At a minimum, the performance measures must incorporate highway and roadway system performance and measures established for the frequency and routing of public transit, and for the coordination of transit service provided by separate operators. The performance measures must also support mobility, air quality, land use, and economic objectives, and must be used in the development of the Riverside County Capital Improvement Program (CIP) required pursuant to paragraph (5), deficiency plans required pursuant to Section 65089.4, and the land use analysis program required pursuant to paragraph (4) of the Government Code. According to AB 471 and AB 1791, traffic level of service (LOS) must be measured by: a) Circular 212; b) the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM); or c) by an alternative uniform methodology adopted by RCTC as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA), which the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) determines is consistent with the HCM. in no case can the standards established be below LOS "E" or the current level, whichever is farthest from LOS "A". RCTC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS This Chapter describes the multimodal system performance standards for Riverside County in accordance with CMP legislation. Therefore, standards are presented in this Chapter for the CMP System and for the Public Transit/Alternative Mass Transit System. CMP System of Streets and Highways Established Minimum Level of Service With the intent of the legislation in mind, the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) CMP Subcommittee approved a "two -tiered" approach to establish the minimum LOS standard. Tier 1 involves the 'locally established minimum traffic LOS - or- ceiling,"while Tier 2 involves the CMP minimum LOS standard - or - "floor." Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Most local agencies in Riverside County and Ca!trans have adopted LOS standards of "C" or "D" (representing the "ceiling" in Tier 2) in an effort to maintain a desired LOS for the local circulation system. To address CMP legislative requirements, and establish a minimum LOS along the regional system of roadways and highways within the County (representing the "floor" in Tier 2), RCTC approved a minimum traffic LOS standard of "E." • Exempt Facilities Table 4-1 and Exhibit 4-1 identify facilities (roadway segments or intersections) along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways that had a LOS of "F in 1991. As a result, these facilities continue to be "exempt" from CMP requirements in accordance with CMP Statutes. • Methodology to Determine Level of Service RCTC determined that the traffic LOS method that incorporated a "delay" analysis was the most applicable for CMP purposes. Consideration of delay through HCM-based software programs provided a closer approximation of LOS than under the Circular 212 or similar methodologies. For purposes of this Program, LOS analysis for intersections and segments along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways (under current or existing conditions), should be developed or established using the following HCM-based methods in the order presented: 1. Segment (freeway and principal arterial) floating car runs or stopped delay LOS analysis at intersections; 2. Segment and intersection LOS analysis using HCM; and 3. Segment analysis using the Modified HCM LOS Tables (or revised Florida LOS Tables). Staff continues to recommend the use of HCM methods through applicable software packages applied to various types of facilities (reference Table 4-2 — LOS Methodology Applications). Appropriate defaults to be applied by local agencies in their analysis of LOS are referenced in Appendix 2. HCM-based methodologies applied to calculate LOS for CMP purposes will be the responsibility of local agencies as new development or land use plan revisions/updates (reflective of specific development proposals) are considered. This process shall be consistent with the Enhanced Transportation System Management Program described in Chapter 5. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program s una Je0 Duimu Jad luarapa _ suns Je0 6u geoid Jed Iu01011a0 WN '010100 0P1eJ.0 00H meed 900Z 910V46!0 eue.111e0 pus 1"0d611 Bupol!u011 OVAO'010000 0S10,1600Z > pSJeniy 19 Alur00 'ale° dW0 600Z uo paseq (suogoomo 4109) aw n10A J00H mead XX)r 01e0 d'MO 600Z u0 paseq qusw6es Jo) u00eu e,, cop j Ju' 3 '0 '0' B'tl 8Ol p U.ogn ePP9AH walsw ui weTs/GdWo uo ao!Al iansl - 600Z LZL Ofa 01 9 l 9 L£L ••J]J1uO')•YAYV SIS KI din umaa MV°IYA9J•1g YY 909'01 46. pa>s•9 PN A%IPA u°%!M ZIZ'I ISI.N. nnV olsPI IS u!ayy "AV YNIYPS UPS AYxnud>N WOIYOa L PN •IW 1u1 8Z8 Z 1 Pe a°uay g en,. y 4xeae entl u°Pdun 6£6 ZLI'Z .AV•Pw Y111°C OGO'Z 9898 0 0 OLO'L u� 051'S a •dLvds °q eaoump JS 0 Pagm>8 / col nn rn19 x.JnQ Ye A PI0 &Pn .:v.l1V fa J.e9 ZIZ'I unx°vunp °A^+ops Pest° Pa snAu•O learentei nv op is SO Pa wd uAng!d 76:vs e1u•.er QP..YrqnISux:_/T1 .1;/ __!p•ueml.aJ.) a�v uun9 Lop y4,9 O `. o co ,N O E G E t U y9ro • Q \J Val Q � a %a 3co U N a wy C Ol a i Q. d 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program *el'-�Pemuve�¢ sung 260 6u6sou wd A00000 _ 60011100606001i Ad 106106e010N® e100 dW06002 uo Paseq sNsm Oas.lq 006e061w d JO'6'0'O'B'tl SDI pl—W [ 0102.00 alpml m0H >hd I2002 B MAIO 6006100 Pus '1460N Summon ow* slunoo 01014 6002 apis anw to Auno0 'ste0 dW06002 uo Pasep(suopaviO 4106) e10010A mom Mead %%% AelleA eilayoeo9 ul wa}sfedWn uo aovuaS jo lanal - 600Z Z91' I a4o„cd.v „a 4LC'Z 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program sang no 6u InOld+ad loopy ea Boa luny tq Buoe0ld Ad PAPP0 ION 1111111 '00"00 o!yetl moN need BOOZ B MAKI sun4e0 Pue 'Pod Ba Nu 011=01 OVAO's1un0009nu Boot aP!s+oe!y to Llunoo 'plea &NO/OOt uo Paseq lB uoOOm!u aoal awnloA tnoN Baad XXX Blau dW0600Z u0 Paseq quew6as iol u0geuee013 dJO'3.0'O'6 'V 601 pua ri apisaanRA wa}sue 41-10N ui waistdW0 uo aovu 40!anal - 600Z ZLZ' 656`£ ,a u• as ro PAIS arnaOLLON Z4 pnlg O xng ea.mq is tona.y.m *Ay d.OB] 1.6 \\\ `\ . u2rpC 984t / re.M•ro ree..0a'M •99L'2 eV9 911'E 685'1 / -a / 894 Z 11.1 'AV SL8`f I RUM HID 1. eplydaAla 508`£ v m 88'E / 7 LS 'L E Q BOW �BBO4..,V 68I`h /Salatuaio Otte 5£0•Z 868I �v 5 814,2 oC a o b ,?� d P.' u0I uipy a��nOwt any 005`f It, A� sr 8fl'i Z91'I �y 0 EI8'1 m Oar o LK w ®0008°e4 ►�� rA S� < o a No 1.6 a 888'8 09 • 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TABLE 4-1 EXEMPT FACILITIES 1N 2009 STATE HIGHWAYS ON STATE ROUTE 60: RIVERSIDE COUNTY LINE TO JCT 1-15 VALLEY WAY TO JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215 JCT SR 60 EAST TO PERRIS BOULEVARD ON STATE ROUTE 71. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LINE TO JCT SR 91 ON STATE ROUTE 74: GRAND AVENUE TO LAKESHORE DRIVE LAKESHORE TO 1-15 SANDERSON AVENUE TO CORNELL STREET CORNELL STREET TO HEMET AVENUE ON STATE ROUTE 91: RIVERSIDE COUNTY LINE TO JCT SR 71 JCT SR 71 TO MAPLE STREET MAPLE STREET TO JCT 1-15 JCT 1-15 TO 0.6 MILE WEST OF MCKINLEY 0.6 MILE WEST OF MCKINLEY TO MAGNOLIA AVENUE MAGNOLIA AVENUE TO 14TH STREET 14TH STREET TO JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215 ON 1-215. EAST JCT SR 60 TO JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215 JCT SR 60/SR 91/1-215 TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY LINE ON STATE ROUTE 111: DISTRICT 11 BOUNDARY TO JCT SR 74 JCT SR 74 TO GENE AUTRY TRAIL 'RINCIPAL ARTERIALS — WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY ON LA SIERRA AVENUE: ARLINGTON TO GRAMERCY ON VAN BUREN BOULEVARD: NORTHERLY CITY LIMIT TO JURUPA JURUPA TO CENTRAL CENTRAL TO ARLINGTON Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 66 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TABLE 4-2 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL BASED - LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY APPLICATIONS r� a V c) x co EN 00 w< 0 G g gN 0--1 N$ 2a x re 00 ao 0 0 aw =E BASE YEAR *1 URBAN Signalized Intersections x x x Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4 Unsignalized Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls '4 x Links, Expressways, & Arterials x x x Freewa Links, Rams, & Weavin• Sections RURAL x x x Signalized Intersections x x x Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4 Unsignalized Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4 x Links, Expressways, & Arterials x x x Freewa Links, Ram•s, & Weavin• Sections FUTURE YEAR *2 URBAN x x x Signalized Intersections x x x Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4 Unsignalized Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4 x Links, Expressways, & Arterials x x Freewa Links, Rams, & Weavin• Sections RURAL x x Signalized Intersections x x x Unsignalized Intersections - 4-Way Stop Controls *4 Unsignaaed Intersections - 2-Way Stop Controls *4 x Links, Expressways, & Arterials x x Freeway Links, Ramps, & Weaving Sections x x NOTES: *1 - Current year traffic conditions *2 - Future year (2030) traffic conditions *3 - Used as an example only, other HCM compatible software will also be accepted. *4 - Results of analysis should be evaluated considering actual intersection conditions or 4-or 2-way stop or signal warrants. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 61 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program The initial LOS analysis conducted as part of the CMP Update process is considered to be a "screening" level analysis. A more detailed assessment is conducted on key critical segments. If the analysis results in LOS deficiencies, the LOS analysis would continue on a quarterly basis to determine the average peak hour LOS and determine if the LOS deficiencies are due to temporary or permanent conditions. Coordination with the affected local agency(s) also will be made to insure that appropriate data, geometrics, counts and other related information is applied to calculate LOS. ♦ 2009 Level of Service (LOS) Results ✓ Coachella Valley The Coachella Valley Associated Governments (CVAG) has implemented a valleywide traffic monitoring program over the past eight (8) years. Information provided by CVAG indicated that there are no deficiencies in the Coachella Valley for 2009. ✓ Westem Riverside County Based on level of service calculations along the CMP system in Western Riverside County using Caltrans and local agency counts, there were no deficiencies along local arterials included on CMPSystem in Western Riverside County for 2009. The 2007 CMP identified a deficiency along Alessandro between SR 91 and 1-215. It was noted that the deficiency was likely the result of the 1-215 corridor improvement project from the 60/91/215 interchange to the 60/215 East Junction. Given that the deficiency along Alessandro is no longer occurring, it has been concluded that the prior deficiency was indeed a result of traffic avoiding the construction activity along the 1-215 corridor. ✓ State Highways Traffic count information was collected from the Caltrans 2008 Traffic Monitoring Report and from existing Smart Call Boxes located along the State Highway system. In addition, peak hour traffic counts were taken by VRPA Technologies in late summer and early fall 2009, the data was evaluated by VRPA Technologies using HCM-based LOS tables. Following review of the initial screening results by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), floating car runs were performed along six major State Highway segments. Results of this process are provided in Chapter 5 and indicate that there are two deficient segments operating at "LOS" F. The first segment is on 1-215 (from 1-15 to Scott Rd). RCTC is the lead agency of a widening project along this segment, which will begin construction next year. It is likely that the LOS will be improved to LOS "E" or better once construction of the 1-215 is completed. Upon completion of the widening project the LOS will be re- analyzed to verify that the project mitigated the deficiency. Prepared for. Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 61 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program The second segment operating at LOS "F" is on 1-15 (from Weirick Road to East Jurupa St). This deficiency will likely be improved to LOS "E" or better once construction of the 1-15 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) is initiated and completed. Additionally, the SR 91 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) will also have a significant impact on the 1-15 as the project extends north and south of the I-15/SR-91 interchange along 1-15 to improve the interchange connections and overall circulation in the vicinity of the SR-91/I-15 interchange. The SR-91 CIP is scheduled to be implemented in 2014. In addition to those segments operating at LOS "F", it will be important to also closely monitor LOS "E" segments on a quarterly basis. Once a LOS "E" segment falls to LOS "F" during the quarterly monitoring process, the segment will be further analyzed as to what the cause may be. If the LOS is at "F" for more than one (1) year with no extenuating circumstances causing the deficiency (e.g., construction, special event, etc), the local agency and/or RCTC will be required to prepare a deficiency plan in accordance to Chapter 6. Public Transit/Alternative Mass Transit Standards ♦ Statutory Requirements Section 65089.(b)(2) of the Government Code specifically requires development of standards established for the frequency and routing of public transit, and for the coordination of transit service provided by separate operators. Public Transit and Alternative Mass Transit Facility Standards RCTC, as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency, is responsible for planning and coordinating all public mass transit services within the jurisdiction of the Commission and between the jurisdiction of other county commissions or transit operators. On an annual basis, transit operators prepare a Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), which is a three-year document detailing the operating and capital costs that are planned for transit services. Each operator adopts such a plan and then provides quarterly data to RCTC regarding performance. Once the SRTPs are approved by RCTC, transit operators are charged with the responsibility for providing the service levels and purchasing the capital equipment identified in year -one of the SRTP. Once approved by RCTC, the SRTPs must be amended if an operator wants to deviate from the original plan. The Commission encourages all operators to coordinate public transportation services including routes, fare structure and transfer agreements as the overall goal is the improvement of public transportation services to the general public. To assist with the coordination efforts, quarterly meetings are held with the public transit operators to ensure that efficient, effective transportation services are provided. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 11 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Public Utilities Code Section 99244 requires the Commission to annually identify, analyze and recommend potential productivity improvements for transit operators through the SRTP process. This process requires the transit operators to address recommendations made through the triennial performance audit. In 2005, the Commission reaffirmed its commitment to a Productivity Improvement Program (PIP), which was originally adopted in 1998 as part of a comprehensive effort to work with the county's eight public transit operators to provide better service and improve efficiency. Table 4-3 details the performance targets as identified in the PIP that transit operators will strive to meet in developing its SRTP service and financial plan: TABLE 4-3 TRANSIT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE INDICA Performance Indicator Method for Establishing Performance Targets 1) Operating Cost per Revenue Hour Increases no more than CPI 2) Fare Box Recovery Ratio Per PUC requirements and ROTC policy 3) Subsidy per Passenger +/- 15% variance 4) Subsidy per Passenger Mile +/- 15% variance 5) Subsidy per Revenue Hour +/- 15% variance 6) Subsidy per Revenue Mile +/- 15% variance 7) Passengers per Revenue Hour +/- 15% variance 8) Passengers per Revenue Mile +/- 15% variance 9) Ridership growth 2% minimum growth annually (Applies to Commuter Rail) As an alternative mode to the single -occupant vehicle, mass transit services (commuter rail services) should be considered during the assessment of local development proposals that impact the Congestion Management System and during the development of deficiency plans by local agencies. Further, future rail passenger services should be considered as appropriate mitigation measures to offset potential deficiencies. If feasible, future transit and passenger rail facility systems should be described as potential services that could reduce vehicle trips and relieve congestion at or above the minimum LOS standard. RCTC CONFORMANCE AND MONITORING PROCESS It is the local agency's responsibility to ensure implementation of development project mitigation measures identified by the project proponent. RCTC and local agencies will monitor the implementation of deficiency plans that include 'transit and roadway improvements intended to improve traffic LOS. If through the biennial traffic monitoring process, the LOS along a deficient arterial or highway facility improves to LOS "E" or better, mitigation measures that have not been implemented as specified in the deficiency plan, would no longer be required for CMP compliance purposes. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies ,6QP • 61 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 5 ENHANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089 (b)(4) of the Government Code requires that RCTC develop a program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on regional transportation systems, including an estimate of the costs associated with mitigating those impacts. In no case must the program outlined in this Chapter include an estimate of the costs of mitigating the impacts of interregional travel, but it must provide credit for local public and private contributions to improvements on regional transportation systems. In the case of toll road facilities, credit must only be allowed for local public and private contributions, which are unreimbursed from toll revenues or other state or federal sources. RCTC must calculate the amount of the credit to be provided. RCTC ENHANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The RCTC CMP Enhanced Transportation System Management Program was designed to meet the federal Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) and Congestion Management Systemrfraffic Management System (CMSTFMS) requirements, as well as to monitor the CMP System of Highways and Roadways. A review of Federal CMSlfMS requirements is provided in Appendix 3. The intent of the Enhanced Transportation System Management Program is to effectively identify those facilities that have congestion problems, track the degree of congestion, and apply evaluation criteria to the system so that federal and State funds are targeted or programmed to relieve the congestion. The Enhanced Transportation System Management Program utilizes 'loop or pavement sensors" currently installed along the State Highway system at call boxes and TMC sites. Traffic counters were installed at these sites allowing RCTC and Ca!trans to retrieve_ count data. Future plans are to retrieve speed, vehicle classification, and turning movement data. The Enhanced Transportation System Management Program will improve traffic monitoring for the CMP and other planning or technical purposes. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 5-1 62 nnsoAeox s 3- Fil -M sum6u.41 1011d 6661. 8 L661 w041 sans xo911e0 Yews &men 9:101101009 selIS „x013 110e19. 006019luno0 m0N !. 6 ; (6011010110 Ben x09 1100 /muss m6N O 01101001109) 00119 .x09 30019„ u0013S 1uno0 meN ®(15011m1eu! l0N) sells xo9 1100 Yews meN GN3031 V 1.5 1191HX3 341S213AI21 N2131S3M NI S311S N011b'1N3W31dWl X09 11VO 12it/WS • • • 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program SIVW11.10a s A- -m (Peligsul) %MS „xog goalg„ uo(le;S Woo maN i� (memo son xog Ilea News mog O swal6ad lolld 6661 F L661 y.e� UAW) same xog Imo Yews 6USslx3 ,C4 irlielsui }oN) seliS .xog 113e11 . WRVS 11.1n03 MON ©(Pallsisul ION) sg1S xo81R0 YewS meN 4N3J37 81:9 1181HX3 A311VA V 1'13H0V00 NI S31IS N011b'1N3W3'1dWl XOS TWO 12IVINS o c A o/" e U � c o chi t�~ oa Q c� .�.. b j ad. 13 O V �4 OI a o u; a ro 4 0 d ee' e 0 Ul N a 0 V .ti a) GI O n O N nwr oa.1011 S i 3 "11 LJ 5 rN 16 I (PEI1x1xL16 sellS x0811e011e1118 maN O Wal SETS x08 IWO pews 8011x1x3 .414011x4x110N) 001IS ..x08 Hoe18. uolle4S lunoO MON ® (Pauelsui ioN) song xo8 Ilex pews mery m 4N3031 sum80 1 loud 6661 '8 1861 (Pellelsul) a0118 „x08 60e18. u011e1s lunoo mow 3 L'S iiem3 30ISI13AIN MaLSV3 NI S311S NOIlbr1N3W31dW1 XOS TWO INVINS • NoN � .N 6, U C e o u ro Fm oQ o: a e Cr 6. �G' C a m ro UQ. y v7-3 d co w a o. • • a'I.ia al JCN S 3- F.+u1 `11' A -M AtoPunog Apf100 BPWeryll •.••— ulelsAS dP4J uo selolslelu1 m (leuolleledo AIInJ lou Peeelsul) sen JW1 meN weisAS &NO uo fAum48IH —V-- (Pelletsul loN) son JW1 NSN fa ON3931 Z-S 11$31HX3 3aIS213A121 N2131S3M NI S311S N011t/1N3W31dWl �Wl l J L., m m PAis swag ■ any IR4uaJ N Ja alsI u1e,4 JQ olluo9 13 an . .fuaan en "TIN IS W( P4III 9 vvtaulp 00 vinpmma8 veS IS Aalu!Jlafi ■ 1(1 0010. IS PP S 419 any 00110w03 aay 10 SID IS nm/ uloaurl scYag P I8 t PP2ICI 01dew • \ Amp • 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TRAFFIC MONITORING State Highways Monitoring the state highways for CMP purposes involves the downloading of traffic count data from Ca!trans' Traffic Management Center (VC) sites and Smart Call Box (SCB) sites on a monthly basis. A level of service analysis will be performed to determine the condition of the CMP System. When a deficiency or LOS "F" is identified as part of the CMP Update LOS evaluation process, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine whether an actual deficiency has occurred. The best approach to determine LOS along freeway segments is through the use of floating car runs on a quarterly basis. In 2009, floating car runs were conducted under the direction of RCTC's CMP consultant VRPA Technologies. Results of these runs are provided in Chapter 4. Local Arterials Local arterial monitoring involves the continuation of the CVAG Traffic Monitoring Program in the Coachella Valley and the local traffic counting efforts on behalf of the local agencies in Western Riverside County. To further insure that the CMP System is appropriately monitored to reduce the occurrence of CMP deficiencies, proposed development projects are evaluated by each affected agency to determine potential impacts along the regional and sub -regional Systems. As a result, these evaluations will likely reduce the incidence of LOS deficiencies along the CMP System given that each local agency has established LOS thresholds at higher levels. To insure that major development projects and plans are evaluated and reflected in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Transportation Model and local models, local agencies are encouraged to work with affected agencies to mitigate the impacts considering the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA). Monitoring of Potential Deficiencies As a result of the 2009 LOS screening analysis, two (2) LOS "F" segments along 1-15 and 1-215 were identified using floating car runs. Floating car runs provide the accurate measure of LOS (reference Table 5-1). The segment along 1-215 (1-15 to Scott Rd) is operating at LOS "F". It is expected however, that the segment will be improved to LOS "E" or better once the 1-215 widening project, from 1-15 to Scott Road, is completed. The segment along 1-15 (Weirick Road to Jurupa Street) is also operating at LOS "F". This segment is expected to be improved to LOS "E" or better once the 1-15 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) and/or SR-91 CIP are completed. Each of these deficient segments will continue to be monitored using floating car runs over the next 9 months on a quarterly basis to determine the LOS. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. 5-6 67 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TABLE 5-1 FLOATING CAR RUN DEFICIENCY ANALYSIS Cef ci ent Per Ficating Car Runs (YIN) Overriding Considerations {YIN) Reason for Overriding Considerations If the LOS is at "F" for more than one (1) year with no extenuating circumstances causing the deficiency (e.g., construction, special event, etc), the affected local agency will be notified that a deficiency plan must be prepared in accordance, with requirements set forth in Chapter 6. As a result, it will be important to continue to monitor the LOS along these segments on 1-15 and 1-215 to identify the LOS through the use of traffic counts or floating car runs on a quarterly basis in 2010 and 2011. It will. also be important to also closely monitor critical LOS "E" segments. Once a LOS "E" segment falls to LOS "F", the segment will be further analyzed as to what the cause may be. If the LOS is at "F" for more than one (1) year and is the average annual peak hour condition with no extenuating circumstances causing the deficiency (e.g., construction, special event, etc), the local agency will be notified that a deficiency plan must be prepared in accordance with requirements set forth in Chapter 6. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 5-7 68 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 6 LOS DEFICIENCY PLANS STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089(b)(1)(B) of the Govemment Code specifically states that the Level of Service (LOS) standards established by RCTC, as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) in Riverside County, not be below LOS "E" or the current level, whichever is farthest from LOS "A". When the LOS on a segment or at an intersection fails to attain the established level of service standard, a deficiency plan must be adopted pursuant to Section 65089.4. In addition, Section 65089.4 requires a local jurisdiction to prepare a deficiency plan when highway or roadway LOS standards are not maintained on segments or intersections of the designated system. The deficiency plan must be adopted by the city or the County at a noticed public hearing. RCTC DEFICIENCY PLAN PROCESS RCTC will prepare deficiency plans or identify mitigation strategies for deficient segments along the State Highway System on behalf of local agencies. RCTC will coordinate development of such plans with affected local agencies, WRCOG or CVAG, Caltrans, and the AQMD. These agencies will have an opportunity to work with RCTC during the development of a deficiency plan, provide comments, and meet with other affected agencies to discuss issues prior to completion of a plan. To comply with the intent of the CMP legislation, a deficiency plan prepared by a city, the County or RCTC must include the principal elements specified in the CMP Legislation (reference Appendix 1). To date, the CMP minimum Levels of Service threshold has been met, therefore deficiency plans have not been required. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. 6-1 70 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program PROCEDURE TO IDENTIFY DEFICIENT SEGMENTS The procedure for identifying deficient segments or intersections along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways is documented in Chapter 5, Enhanced Transportation System Management Program. Deficient segments would .be identified through traffic monitoring. When a deficiency is identified as part of the CMPUpdate LOS evaluation process, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine whether an actual deficiency has occurred or if the initial analysis identified a deficiency due to extenuating circumstances or faulty data. Therefore additional, more detailed assessment of a potential deficiency would be required before a deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s) will be made to insure that appropriate data, geometries, counts and other related information is applied to calculate LOS. If a deficiency is identified, affected agencies will be notified. A review of mitigation measures, including capital improvement, transit, and TDM projects, will be conducted to determine how the deficiency can be mitigated.. The recommended mitigation measure(s) will be reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). CRITERIA TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation strategies that measurably improve the CMP System must be identified in the deficiency plan. Such strategies would include capital improvement projects or other measures that shift trips to alternative modes that may be included in or consistent with local Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinances. Further, mitigation measures should be developed considering both the existing and planned circulation system and the highest peak hour trip estimates or forecasts. Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County TUMF Programs Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County local agencies and the County of Riverside have adopted Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) programs. In general, the programs impose fees on development specifically to address transportation impacts on local arterials. The fees are then used for selected transportation improvement projects along the adopted TUMF arterial network. The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) implements the TUMF program in the Coachella Valley and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) implements the program in Western Riverside County. If, during the annual LOS monitoring process, an intersection or segment along the CMP system within the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) areas fall below LOS "E," an evaluation of planned improvements necessary to mitigate the deficiency must be undertaken. The adopted arterial programs would then be reviewed to determine if the deficiency would be mitigated through the TUMF program and within a reasonable timeframe. If an improvement project(s) is programmed that will mitigate the Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 6-2 71 • 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program deficiency, the arterial program would be considered as a deficiency plan for CMP purposes. If projects in the arterial program do not meet the required mitigation for the deficiency, then RCTC will work with the appropriate agency(s) to identify mitigation measures. Agencies that do not participate in the TUMF programs would be required to prepare a deficiency plan in accordance with this chapter. REVIEW OF DEFICIENCY PLANS Deficiency Plans will be reviewed by the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). A recommendation of approval or nonapproval of deficiency plans will be forwarded to the RCTC Board for action. In accordance with Chapter 5 - Enhanced Transportation System Management Program, mitigation measures must be identified to offset deficiencies. If the Board approves the deficiency plan, that plan will . immediately become effective. In accordance with Section 65089.4(d), upon receipt of a deficiency plan from a local agency, RCTC shall hold a noticed public hearing within sixty (60) days. Following the hearing, the RCTC may either accept or reject the plan in its entirety. Further, the Commission may not take action to amend the deficiency plan if it finds that it is not acceptable. If RCTC rejects the plan, the plan must be forwarded to the affected local agency indicating the reasons for rejection. RCTC would then meet and confer with the affected local agency to identify revisions that would provide for an adequate plan. The affected local agency may resubmit a corrected deficiency plan and obtain approval by RCTC prior to the next annual allocation of tax increment funds. If the local agency does not correct and resubmit the plan, or receive approval prior to the next distribution of funds, RCTC must notify the State Controller to withhold such funds. If through the biennial traffic monitoring process, the LOS along a deficient arterial or highway facility improves to LOS "E" or better, mitigation measures that have not been implemented as specked in the deficiency plan, would no longer be required for CMP compliance purposes. In the Coachella Valley and in Western Riverside County, any funds withheld from a jurisdiction due to noncompliance, will be returned to the subregion that it was taken from (CVAG or WRCOG) to implement the respective TUMF Regional Arterial Program. Prepared for Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by:'URPA Technologies, Inc. 6-3 72 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER l TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT/ AIR QUALITY STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089(b)(3)(A) of the State code requires that RCTC prepare a CMP trip reduction and travel demand element that promotes alternative transportation methods. Such methods must include, but are not limited to, carpools, vanpools, transit, bicycles, and park -and -ride lots; improvements in the balance between jobs and housing; and other strategies, including, but not limited to, flexible work hours, telecommuting, and parking management programs. CMP Legislation also requires consideration of parking cash -out programs. INTRODUCTION There are effective ways of achieving trip reduction in Riverside County other than through the adoption of local agency TDM Ordinances, which was the focus of TDM efforts in the past. RCTC believes that there are other approaches that can be more effective and has facilitated the implementation of TDM projects through the Measure "A" Commuter Assistance Programs, and the implementation of a number of TDM projects (in cooperation with Caltrans and local agencies in Riverside County and in adjoining counties) to achieve TDM objectives. Such TDM strategies include the development of Park-N-Ride lots, commuter rail stations, and public transit feeder services. Taken together, the individual programs and projects constitute a broad base effort to reduce reliance on the single occupant vehicle in Riverside County. In addition to TDM, Transportation Systems Management (TSM) strategies also provide for smoother traffic flow, especially along congested streets and highways in the County. Types of TSM strategies already implemented in Riverside County include bus bays, signal coordination systems, signal preemption for transit vehicles, improved signal timing projects, ramp metering, and focused intersection improvements. A project underway in the Coachella Valley that integrates both TDM and TSM solutions is the Washington Street and Highway 111 Commercial Corridors TDIWTSM Study affecting the cities of La Quinta, Palm Desert, Indio, Indian Wells, and the County of Riverside. TSM and TDM alternatives are being analyzed to determine if there are other cost effective ways of easing future congestion along the Washington/Highway 111 corridors. These alternatives may reduce travel delays either through a more effective use of existing capacity, adding capacity (if feasible), through traffic synchronization, encouraging motorists to use transit, car/van pooling, use of other alternative modes and TDM measures, encouraging motorists to travel at less congested times, and/or encouraging pedestrian and bicycle usage. The Study will explore a number of transportation solutions and strategies for getting people where they need to go by auto, foot, bicycle, or bus, and it will provide a baseline of data and analysis for helping to make those decisions in the future. RCTC's approach to trip reduction and congestion relief through TDM and TSM can be particularly effective in a rapidly growing county such as Riverside. This chapter identifies the types of strategies that local agencies can also implement to achieve further reductions in trips and enhance traffic flow, especially along already congested CMP facilities and other major streets and highways. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES The intent of this section is to identify ways that local agencies can seek to maximize the efficient use and capacity of a roadway and/or transit facility, often with limited transportation resources. Developing a viable transportation system not only includes building new roadways and adding transit, but also involves managing the demand for travel on these systems. TDM is a term applied to a broad range of strategies that are primarily intended to reduce and reshape demand (use) of the transportation systems. TDM strategies are designed to make best use of existing transportation facilities and maximize future transportation investments. Using strategies that promote altemative modes, increase vehicle occupancy, maximize the efficient use of parking, reduce travel distances, and ease peak -hour congestion, TDM increases the efficiency and effectiveness of the transportation system. TDM includes programs and strategies to promote alternatives to driving alone or single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel. These include such activities as carpools, vanpools, transit, bicycles, park -and -ride bts, freeway service patrols, and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). These programs will improve air quality in the region and help meet the goals of the Air Quality Attainment Plans, as well as address climate change goals. It is important that RCTC, Ca!trans, and local govemments throughout the County consider the application of TDM strategies during preparation of transportation plans, circulation elements, and transportation corridor studies. Planning and preliminary engineering of major corridor investment projects in Riverside County present significant opportunities for the coordinated integration of TDM strategies. TDM is recognized as the quickest and least expensive component of transportation solutions, resulting in reduced construction impacts, increased use of new and existing transit services, and extension of the life of a roadway through reduced congestion. In addition, a basic tenet of TDM programs is developing partnerships between multiple organizations that have influence on commuting and travel habits, necessary to develop programs and policies that will reduce congestion and increase accessibility and mobility. The solutions to contemporary transportation problems can no longer be found solely in the construction of new or even wider roadways. The TDM strategy recommendations presented below have been drafted with an understanding that any viable solution must include the participation of all available players in the County. RCTC, local agencies, land developers, local employers and their employees, the transit agencies, as well as the general public all need to work together cooperatively to resolve the transportation related issues that are currently affecting, and will continue to affect, Riverside County's economic viability and environmental health. TDM strategies that can be effective in the region have been organized under the following five categories: • Enhance Vehicle Occupancy (carpools/vanpools/park-n-ride) • Shift auto travel to Transit (bus and rail system improvements) • Shift auto travel to Non -Motorized Transportation modes (bicycling and walking) • Shift travel demand to "nonpeak" periods or eliminate trips through Alternative Work -Hour Programs and Telecommuting • Maximize the efficient use of parking resources through Parking Management Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 14 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Recommended strategies within any of these categories should be used as individual TDM methods where appropriate, but will have the most significant impact when they are used in combination with other strategies from the same and other categories. As in architectural design, an effective TDM program appears like an information network, in that each element can be effective for some level of benefit, but when the elements are connected and combined, the result is powerful beyond the sum of its parts. One example of this reality is when a company offers a flex time work schedule to its employees who live within moderate distances. They may feel able to change their commute travel mode from a single occupant vehicle to walking or bicycling due the increased flexibility of starting times. The research suggests that for shorter commute distances, the vehicle trips for an employment site may be reduced by 1% to 9%. However, when that same employer also provides lockers and shower facilities, employees that begin their work commute from an even further distance may also feel comfortable with a walking or bicycling commute. The 'TDM web or net° becomes much wider in terms of capturing more mode shifting employees based on a .wider geographic scope. The actual trip reduction under the right conditions may be increased to as high as 30%. Following are some potential strategies: ♦ Complete Streets Analysis or Multimodal Level of Service (LOS): The modes analyzed in the multimodal LOS analysis should be dependent on the place type. For example, in most cases, rural inter -city travel need not look at pedestrian capacity. The plan should provide mitigation and a monitoring program to offset impacts to all modes through incident and demand management strategies. • Corridor Analysis: Corridor impacts to a mode may be mitigated by providing capacity on a parallel facility. For example, an impacted facility may lack pedestrian and bike facilities; however, a parallel bike/pedestrian path within the corridor could offset this deficiency. In addition, impacts to transit buses stuck in the same traffic congestion as single occupancy vehicles could be mitigated by the provision of a transit/High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane in the congested travel direction during peak periods. Additional mitigation for congestion could be through the provision of a freeway service patrol to rapidly clear traffic accidents and disabled vehides during peak periods. ♦ Multimodal Circulation Plans: At their next regularly scheduled update, local circulation elements should consider multimodal LOS standards. In addition to the road network, circulation plans should include bike, pedestrian, and transit networks. The bike/pedestrian/transit networks should provide for transit oriented development centers that could serve as transfer points and nodes for future express and/or regional service. The centers also should provide a connected network linking to the future High Speed Trains and passenger rail stations. These centers should be reflected in the Land Use Elements of local agency General Plans with higher densities and a mix of land uses that make for a vibrant pedestrian oriented destination. The centers should use multi -modal LOS standards within their boundaries to ensure capacity for bike, walk, and transit. Enhancing Vehicle Occupancy TDM strategies designed to increase vehicle occupancy including casual and organized ridesharing, have been categorized under the concept of Enhancing Vehicle Occupancy. It is interesting that when non- rideshare participants are questioned about why they do not consider ridesharing, they often indicate that they think it would be inconvenient. However, when ridesharers are asked about their experience, they indicate that it is more convenient than driving alone. In any case, the issue of ridesharing requires a match of people that reside in the same general area and work at the same location or in close proximity. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies �1� 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program The region can promote the activity through marketing the services of ridematching firms and encouraging local companies to make the rideshare services a part of their TDM program. If a group of employees are interested in forming a formal rideshare arrangement, local agencies should assist them in applying for funding or in connecting them to another appropriate agency. Perhaps the most significant deterrent to participating in a carpool of vanpool is the fear of not having a personal vehicle to use in case an emergency arises while at work. Local agencies in the region should develop a guaranteed ride home program for employees that participate in any alternative transportation mode, including walking or bicycling. RCTC, through Inland Empire Commuter Services (IECS), offers these services and more to local employers. By partnering with IECS, employers have access to rideshare marketing materials and services to extend to their employees at no cost such as region -wide ridematching, a guaranteed ride home program, and RCTC's Rideshare Incentive and Rideshare Plus Rewards programs. Transit System Improvements The region and its communities share a common goal of insuring transit services are available to provide greater mobility for its residents. The presence of viable and sustainable transit services is critical to ensure the economic viability and the region's general. well being. Transit system improvements that should continue to be implemented or researched include: ♦ Expansion of transit services, including additional regular or express service, Metrolink service, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems, and other similar transit services. ♦ Multi -modal transit centers linking altemative modes of transportation including transit, non -motorized transportation, rail, etc., allowing intercity and regional connections ♦ Provision of alternative methods of transportation for paratransit riders ♦ Provision of current schedules, rates (including procedures for obtaining transit passes), and routes of mass transit service to employment sites or service areas. ♦ On -site waiting and loading facilities for transit. ♦ Provision of a convenient and safe shuttle service to transport workers/patrons to and from their residences, a park -and -ride lot, or other staging area to a workplace/service area. ♦ A monthly transit or rail pass subsidy of 5l)°/u or the maximum taxable 'benefit limit, whichever is greater. ♦ Transit shelters along a designated bus route or posting a bond for future construction when the transit route is extended to an employment/service site. Credit is given when the transit shelter is constructed in conformance with city/county regulations and when the employment/service site is on, or adjacent to, an existing or planned bus route. Each of the local agencies in the County should work with affected transit providers to study transit enhancements and systems that will effectively reduce auto trips, especially along congested corridors. Non -Motorized Transportation Improvements Over the past several decades, walking and bicycling as a means of transportation and recreation have increased in popularity. This has led to a surge in the construction of trails and on -road accommodations for these modes of travel. While finishing the off -road trail system remains important, priorities in the region Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program area are shifting to maintenance of the existing system and the provision of on -road accommodations. RCTC fully supports safe and comfortable facilities that fit the needs of the County. The system of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including off -road trails and on -road accommodations, must continue to be designed for all users. The skill level and preferences of bicycle riders can vary greatly. Riders who use bicycles to commute to work are likely comfortable on the majority of roads, including those without designated bicycle facilities. However, the casual user may be uncomfortable on routes that do not include separate bicycle designations, and children are likely best suited by facilities that are separate from the road. There are several types of bicycle facilities that can accommodate the various types of bicyclists. While the system currently features predominately off -road trails, other type of accommodations will likely become more common in the future. All type of accommodations should be considered in the effort to provide the area with the best system of bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. The most common type of bicycle facilities are: ♦ Shared Use Path (Trail): These are generally referred to as trails or off -road accommodations. Shared use paths often serve corridors not served by roads, or where wide right of way exists next to the roadway, permitting their construction parallel to the road. Shared use paths generally do not allow motorized vehicles and can be utilized by bicyclists and pedestrians. ♦ Bicycle Lanes: Bicycle lanes are established by pavement markings and signage along streets where there is significant bicycle demand and the necessary street conditions to accommodate bike lanes. Bike lanes delineate the right of way by assigning separate lanes to motorists and bicyclists and lead to more predictable movements by each. ♦ Paved Shoulders: These are primarily implemented in rural areas, often on state and local highways. Paved shoulders provide a separated space for bicyclists, similar to bicycle lanes. ♦ Signed Shared Roadway: These roads are designated by bike route signs, generally either to provide continuity with other bicycle facilities (such as bike lanes) or to designate preferred routes through high - demand corridors. The purpose of signing the shared roadway is to indicate to bicyclists that there are advantages to using that particular route over others. Signage also alerts vehicle drivers that bicyclists are likely to be present. ♦ Shared Roadway (No Separate Bicycle Facility or Signage): Most minor residential streets would qualify as shared roadways as they have minimal and low -speed traffic and, therefore, do not need any bicycle designations or accommodations. There are many factors to consider when determining the best type of bicycle accommodation for a particular road, including traffic volume, speed limit, lane widths, parking, and so on. It should be kept in mind that many streets, especially low -volume residential ones, are safe for bicycling without any modifications. Arterials and collectors may be best suited by signage, wide outside lanes, or designated bike lanes. Shared use paths are best utilized along very busy roads or to serve recreation interests in areas away from roads. When planning for new facilities, the following issues should be considered: ♦ Sidewalk Connections: Many areas in the metropolitan area have gaps in the sidewalk system. This is especially problematic along bus routes as pedestrians can have difficulty reaching the transit stops. There are many benches along bus routes for people who are waiting to catch a bus, but there are many locations where these benches are in the middle of grass with no sidewalk connection. These locations need . to be improved. In addition, sidewalks are lacking in some of the metro area's commercial developments. While many of these improvements fall upon the local jurisdiction, RCTC has an interest in all areas of the region being properly linked by sidewalks. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 1$ 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ♦ New Development and Redevelopment Connections: It is vital to connect new developments and redevelopment to the existing trail system. RCTC supports and strongly encourages local agencies to incorporate connections to the trail system from future residential, commercial, and industrial subdivisions and redevelopments. To ensure connectivity, this process should begin at the planning phase of new development or redevelopment and continue through its full implementation. This approach will provide for enhanced non -motorized access throughout the system. ♦ Traffic Signal Design: Traffic signals are not always capable of responding to the presence of a cyclist. In areas where signals change due to the presence of vehicles, a bicyclist may have to wait an excessive amount of time for a green light or may cross on a red light. Where appropriate, new traffic signal detectors should be implemented to recognize the presence of cyclists and cyclists should be educated on how to utilize detectors so the signal will change for them. Also, crossing lights for bicyclists/pedestrians and motorists should be examined, particularly on busy roadways, to ensure minimal points of conflict between road users. • System Maintenance: While there are still trails to be built and on -road facilities to be designated or added, much of the existing system has been in place for many years. Maintenance of the existing system is becoming a critical issue as many trails will require significant resurfacing or reconstruction efforts in the coming years. Local jurisdictions will need to ensure that the existing system is adequately maintained. ♦ Bicycle Parking: Bike racks, lockers, or some other form of bicycle parking must be provided throughout the metropolitan area. While providing the route to get to a destination is often the primary consideration, bicyclists must have a place to secure their bikes once there. Areas that should provide bicycle parking include all public buildings, parks, transit stops, and places near businesses and multi- unit residential dwellings. • Bicycle Racks on Transit Buses: Bicycling and transit are two transportation modes that are often used on the same trip. Bicycle racks on buses increases the mobility of bicyclists as it enables them to travel across the metropolitan area. Transit agencies should have bike racks installed on all new bus purchases. ♦ Showers/Locker Rooms: Bicycling to work would likely be more attractive to people if they were able to shower or freshen up and change in comfortable facilities. Local agencies can work on providing shower and changing areas in public buildings and work with private employers to provide these facilities to encourage bicycling to work. Recently, there has been a movement to plan for and implement "Complete Streets". According to the Complete the Streets organization (www.completestreets.org), complete streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities must be able to safely move along and across a complete street. There are many benefits to complete streets, the most prominent being improved safety for all users. In addition, complete streets encourage other modes of travel besides personal automobile, thereby improving health, decreasing air pollution from emissions, and decreasing congestion. The design of a complete street can vary greatly, depending on the characteristics of the roadway. Local, residential streets that are low -speed and have low traffic volumes are likely already complete streets as they do not require separate accommodations for other modes of travel. Busier streets may require more infrastructure to make them complete. Items that could be part of a complete street include: • Sidewalks ♦ Bike lanes Prepared for: Riverside County Transporfation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies %J 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ♦ Wide shoulders ♦ Separate trails ♦ Crosswalk striping/raised crosswalks ♦ Median refuges/islands ♦ Bus pullouts/bus only lanes ♦ Audible pedestrian signals/countdown pedestrian signals The optimal design for a particular street will depend upon many factors, including its traffic volume, speed limit, lane widths, parking, and so on. Creating a complete and user-friendly system of bicycle and pedestrian accommodations involves more than trails, sidewalks, and on -road accommodations. To fully incorporate these modes into the region's transportation system, there are several important elements to consider. ♦ Education: Teach all road users about the rights and responsibilities of cyclists; create educational publications; promote bicycling to target populations; work with schools to establish bicycling skills curricula; establish adult bicycle education programs. ♦ Engineering: Accommodate bicyclists on all roadways; provide convenient and secure bicycle parking; ensure bike lanes and pathways form an integrated and contiguous network; fund on -road bicycle facility improvements in conjunction with roadway projects; coordinate with surrounding jurisdictions. ♦ Encouragement: Establish a centralized program for interaction with and education of the public; increase local coverage of bicycle events. ♦ Enforcement: Update city codes and zoning to ensure that the interests of bicyclists are incorporated into existing and future developments; enhance enforcement measures of traffic rules and regulations to both cyclists and motorists. ♦ Evaluation: Track bicycle ridership; track the number of roads that have on -road bicycle accommodations added. RCTC encourages each local agency to consider the elements noted above when designing new or improved transportation corridors, preparing transportation plans and circulation elements, developing a non -motorized transportation plan, or when reviewing new development proposals. Article 3 of the California Transportation Development Act establishes 2% of Local Transportation Funds to be made available to cities and the county to build facilities for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicyclists. Every April, the Commission releases a call for projects for pedestrian and bicycle facilities in which aniverside County jurisdictions are eligible to apply for funding. Alternative Work Schedulegrelecommuting Altemative work schedules (also known as variable work hours) are comprised of three different strategies: Flextime, compressed work weeks, and staggered shifts. The definition of each follows: ♦ Flextime —Employees work specified hours each week, but are given flexibility on when they arrive to work, take lunch, and leave work ♦ Compressed work weeks —Employees work more hours than typical, but work fewer days per week or pay period Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies gd 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ♦ Staggered shifts —Employees arrive and depart work at different times in shifts. Shifts may be staggered anywhere from 15 minutes to two hours In general, alternative work schedule strategies provide the following benefits: ♦ Reduce peak period congestion directly ♦ Make ridesharing and transit use more feasible ♦ Reduce parking lot and entrance/exit congestion ♦ Less employee stress/better productivity ♦ Facilitate better employee morale/retention ♦ Reduce tardiness ♦ Are economical to provide ♦ Can offer flexibility needed for other commute solutions ♦ Staggered hours allow for more coverage because of extended workday ♦ More flexibility for personal and work time ♦ Can offer flexibility needed for other commute solutions • Often reduces commute time by avoiding rush hour traffic • Less traffic congestion during peak hours • Better air quality from reduced congestion Studies have found that employees with flexible work schedules save an average of 7 minutes per day in commute time. Also, variable start times can reduce peak -period trips, particularly around large employment centers, and when combined, flextime and telecommuting can reduce peak -hour vehicle commute trips by 20-50%. While these programs are employer -based, local agencies can encourage or even require employers to participate. Local agencies should also develop a program to organize the enforcement of these programs as they are submitted by new developments. Telecommuting involves a situation where an employee is working anywhere but in his/her traditional office. A typical scenario involves employees working at home either full or part time, but they could also be working on travel assignments, at remote work centers, or on the road day-by-day. Telecommuting benefits include: ♦ Reduced parking needs ♦ Reduced office space needs and overhead costs ♦ Less employee stress/better productivity ♦ Better employee morale/retention ♦ Decreased absenteeism and sick leave ♦ More flexibility for personal and work time ♦ Higher productivity ♦ Less traffic congestion ♦ Better air quality ♦ Reduced fuel use ♦ Eligibility in the IECS Rideshare Incentive/Rideshare Plus Rewards programs Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies dis 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Altemative work schedules and telecommuting should continue to be highlighted as TDM plans and programs are required by local agencies during review of development and redevelopment proposals. Both of these TDM strategies have the greatest potential for significant trip reduction in the region. Parking Management Parking management is arguably the most effective method of encouraging people to shift to alternative modes of travel. A study of the effectiveness of parking management programs in Los Angeles found that charging for parking can decrease the number of individuals driving alone to work by as much as eighty percent (80%). Programs reaching that level of success may be rare, but a more typical reduction is assumed at closer to thirty percent (30%). Another study of parking costs in the Portland, Oregon area found that parking charges of just $40 per month could increase transit use by twenty percent (20%) in both the suburban and central business districts. When parking costs were increased to $80 per month, the increase in transit use rose by 35 to 40 percent (35-40%) (Peng, Zhongren, Kenneth J. Dueker, and James G. Strathman.1996). It is clear however, that Riverside County is unique in its characteristics that appear to demonstrate an unlimited amount of space to place parking and that space is available at a relatively low cost. Even though parking charges are not likely to produce changes in travel behavior at the same level in Los Angeles or Portland, Oregon, the management of parking can alter behavior and result in the reduction of vehicle trips. Parking management techniques include a range of practices, such as preferred parking spaces for high occupancy vehicles and alternative fuel vehicles, reduced parking charges for carpools and vanpools, shared parking facilities, daily rather than monthly parking charges, establishing parking maximums for new developments, and the taxing of parking facilities. As is the case with most other TDM strategies, parking management can be even more effective when combined with other TDM techniques such as free transit passes, cash -incentive programs, and the availability of high -quality transit service. Local agencies should consider these management strategies as new developments and redevelopment projects are proposed and reviewed. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT Transportation Systems Management (TSM) is defined as a program to reduce demand on, and increase the capacity of, the existing transportation system. Specifically, TSM is an integrated program that will optimize the performance of existing infrastructure through the implementation of systems, services, and projects designed to preserve capacity and improve security, safety, and reliability. TSM strategies include the following: ♦ 511 Traveler Information Service which provides Riverside County with real-time traffic information and commute alternatives by calling 511 or visiting ie511.org ♦ Ramp metering ♦ Congestion pricing + Changeable message signs ♦ Signal coordination + Roadway improvements ♦ Improved signal timing ♦ Other Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) improvements, such as detection and video surveillance ♦ Re-routing of traffic to less congested routes Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies 6-2 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ♦ Pedestrian facilities including restricted pedestrian crossings and consideration of pedestrian overcrossings ♦ Placement of transit stops and bus bays ♦ Corridor access improvements ♦ Advanced traffic signal timing programs, such as SCOOT (Split Cycle Offset Optimization Technique) or SCAT (Sydney Coordinated Adaptive Traffic) systems RCTC, Caltrans, and each of the local agencies within the County should consider the design and implementation of TSM improvements as they plan for and design street and highway improvement projects; especially along heavily congested streets and highways. The Inland Empire ITS Strategic Plan, approved by RCTC in 1998 provides a thorough discussion and assessment of the types bf ITS and TSM strategies that can improve traffic flow and relieve congestion. SCAG COMPASS BLUEPRINT The SCAG Compass Blueprint was enacted to encourage creative and sustainable development strategies that fit local needs and support shared regional values. The SCAG Compass Blueprint is regional in scope and supports the integration of land use, transportation, and resource planning. The planning process considers the "Three Es" of sustainable communities: prosperous economy, quality environment, and social equity. Blueprint planning is a comprehensive undertaking that requires innovation, collaborative planning, thinking on a macro scale, and a willingness to follow through to implementation. Through partnerships with local govemments, the SCAG Compass Blueprint serves communities by applying the best available tools to create successful examples to accommodate regional growth. A principal objective of the Compass Blueprint is to balance job growth with housing growth in order to reduce trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Local agencies in Riverside County that have completed or are currently working with SCAG on Compass planning include Cathedral City, Coachella, Corona, Desert Hot Springs, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Norco, Perris, Riverside, Munieta, and Temecula. Some of the various Compass -related projects in Riverside County that these and other agencies are currently implementing or will initiate shortly include the following: ♦ City of Corona Redevelopment Agency (RDA) - Land Use Infill Analysis, Market Feasibility ♦ Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) - Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Update ♦ Lake Elsinore - Design Standards and Visualization Products for the Planned Civic Center Development ♦ WRCOG - Conceptual Transportation Network and Scalable Implementation Strategy for Deployment of Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) in the Cities of Riverside, Corona, Norco, and Moreno Valley ♦ WRCOG — Study to examine Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) opportunities along major transportation corridors including the Mid County Parkway,1-15, and 1-215 ♦ WRCOG - 1-15 Interregional Partnership (IRP) with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). The Southem Califomia Association of Govemments (SCAG) to provide assistance to expand the study area and conduct smart growth analysis and prepare a transportation strategy implementation plan for 1-15 and 1-215 ♦ City of Cathedral City — To develop a corridor strategy that considers land use, infill scenarios, Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies �8� 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program transportation, and economic development while connecting various areas and linking existing plans within the City ♦ City of Moreno Valley — To explore Transit Oriented Development (TOD) opportunities around an emerging rapid transit line along Alessandro Boulevard, connecting a planned Metrolink station to Riverside County Hospital ♦ City of Desert Hot Springs — To develop a land use vision for the area adjacent to a conservation corridor area (the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan) that balances resource conservation and development SENATE BILL (SB) 375 SB 375 (Steinberg) is Califomia state law that became effective January 1, 2009. This new law requires Califomia's Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop regional reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Future growth and development in California and within the Riverside County region will be planned consistent with Senate Bill (SB) 375, which calls for the integration of transportation and land use and housing planning through the development of "Sustainable Community Strategies" (SCS). California's 18 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) have been tasked with creating SCSs and demonstrating actions necessary to attain the. proposed reduction targets by 2020 and 2035. SB 375 also establishes the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as one of the overarching goals of regional planning consistent with Assembly Bill (AB) 32. The transportation sector is the single largest source of GHG in California. The Califomia Air Resources Board (CARB) estimates that approximately 40% of the GHG statewide is transportation related. The efforts presented in this Chapter are consistent with the objectives of SB 375 by supporting sustainable community strategies for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, improving air quality, aligning planning for transportation and housing, and creating opportunities for the implementation of TDM and TSM strategies that reduce trips and vehicle miles traveled. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies ��1 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 8 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089(b)(5) of the CMP Statutes requires that RCTC prepare a seven-year capital improvement program, developed using the performance measures described in paragraph (2) to determine effective projects that maintain or improve the performance of the multimodal system for the movement of people and goods, and to mitigate regional transportation impacts identified pursuant to paragraph (4). RCTC CIP PROGRAM For purposes of this CMP Update, the 2010 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) consists of the STIP, Measure "A", TUMF programs, and other federally funded projects programmed on the CMP system. RCTC submits state, local and federally funded projects to the Southem California Association of Governments (SCAG) for inclusion in the FTIP. Locally funded non -regionally significant projects are not required to be included in the FTIP. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. 8-1 86 87 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 9 CMP CONFORMANCE AND MONITORING STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089.3 of the Govemment Code requires RCTC to monitor the implementation of all elements of the Congestion Management Program (CMP). Caltrans is responsible for data collection and analysis on State highways, unless the agency designates that responsibility to another entity. RCTC may also assign responsibility of data collection and analysis to other owners and operators of facilities or services if the responsibilities are specified in its adopted program_ RCTC must also consult with Caltrans and other affected owners and operators in developing data collection and analysis procedures and schedules prior to program adoption. RCTC CONFORMANCE AND MONITORING At least biennially, RCTC will determine if the County and cities are conforming to the CMP, including, but not limited, to all of the following: (a) Consistency with levels of service standards, except as provided in Section 65089.4. (b) Implementation of a program to monitor and evaluate the performance of the transportation system. (c) Adoption and implementation of a deficiency plan pursuant to Section 65089.4 when highway and roadway level of service standards are not maintained on portions of the designated system. In addition to conformity requirements referenced in specific sections of the Government Code, the County and cities must work with the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) to provide Level of Service (LOS) monitoring information along the CMP System. This process is detailed in Chapter 5, Enhanced Transportation System Management Program. RCTC will continue to work with its Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to introduce new or revised requirements. Additional CMP workshops, to be at the request of individual jurisdictions, offer the opportunity for planning and engineering staff to gain a better understanding of the CMP in an informal environment. 1) Consistency with LOS Standards To simplify the process of collecting traffic counts from Caltrans and the local agencies, RCTC has implemented the Enhanced Transportation System Management Program. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 9-1 88 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program LOS calculations will primarily be based upon the newly installed traffic counting equipment along the state highway system. Counts along the local arterial system will be provided by the subregional agencies, affected local agencies, or from counts conducted by RCTC. Currently, thirty-six (36) Smart Call Boxes (SCB) sites and twenty-seven (27) Traffic Monitoring Center (TMC) sites have been installed to collect traffic counts along the state highway system. RCTC will consult with Ca!trans for traffic count data along facilities where SCB or TMC counts are not available. The Enhanced Transportation System Management Program utilizes "loop or pavement sensors" currently installed along the State Highway system at call boxes and TMC sites along the highway system. The program provides Caftans and RCTC the ability to retrieve real-time count information. Chapter 5 of this CMP contains a full explanation of the SCB and TMC implementation program. 2) Program to Manage and Analyze the System To insure that the CMP System is appropriately monitored to reduce the occurrence of CMP deficiencies, proposed development projects can be evaluated by each affected agency to determine potential regional and sub -regional impacts along the CMP Systems. As a result, such evaluation will reduce the incidence of LOS deficiencies along the CMP System. Local agencies are encouraged to work with other affected agencies to mitigate the impacts considering. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Intergovernmental Report (IGR) requirements to insure that major development projects and plans are evaluated and reflected in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Transportation Model When a LOS deficiency is identified as part of the CMP Update, further detailed analysis of LOS shall be conducted to determine whether an actual deficiency has occurred. The LOS analysis conducted as part of the. CMP Update process is only considered to be a "screening" level analysis, and a more detailed assessment of a potential deficiency would be required before a deficiency is formally identified. Coordination with the affected local jurisdiction(s) will be made to insure that appropriate data, geometrics, counts and other related information is applied to calculate LOS. 3) Transportation Model Consistency Requirements Transportation Modeling Guidelines have been developed by SCAG to assist local agencies in developing transportation models to analyze the circulation system within their jurisdiction or for special transportation studies. These guidelines are available at RCTC and at the SCAG Inland Empire office in Riverside. In addition, the Riverside County Transportation Department will be working with RCTC, WRCOG, CVAG, and local agencies in developing transportation modeling guidelines for the RIVTAM model. RCTC will require that these guidelines be followed during development of traffic models for all projects of regional significance. The guidelines have several objectives; Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 9-2 89 2090 Riverside County Congestion Management Program however, the primary objective is to insure that the legislative requirements for transportation modeling and database consistency are achieved. In addition, the guidelines have been designed to ease the transfer of information from the regional and subregional models to local models and vice -versa. REQUIRED CMP UPDATES The CMPs were required to be updated annually between 1992 and 1995. An amendment to the CMP legislation changed the update to occur biennially. Table 9-1 outlines the updates approved since inception: The 2010 CMP update consists of monitoring the CMP System, and reporting the results of the analysis including deficiencies, and incorporating TDM and TSM efforts implemented by RCTC and local agencies. The CMP was originally planned for adoption in December 2009; however, the adoption was rescheduled to March 2010 to allow more time for review of federal congestion management system requirements and MPO CMP consistency requirements. SCAG CONSISTENCY REVIEW The 2010 CMP will be reviewed by SCAG for consistency with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and with CMPs of adjoining counties (San Bemardino, Orange, and Los Angeles Counties). Under the MPO planning regulations, SCAG is required to certify that it meets federal CMS requirements, which includes a review and consistency determination of all CMPs within the SCAG region. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 9-3 90 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program TABLE 9-1 Year CMP UPDATES SINCE INCEPTION Major Effort/Revisions Adopted 1992 The Commission originally adopted the CMP December 1992 1993 The CMP was revised focusing on LOS evaluation December 1993 1994 The Commission updated Chapters 3 and 5 of the CMP December 1994 1995 The CMP was revised and updated, primarily focusing on Chapter 5, Land Use Coordination and the inclusion of legislative amendments December 1995 1997 The CMP was thoroughly amended focusing on replacement of the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) process contained in the Land Use Coordination Program (Chapter 5). The TIA process was replaced with the Enhanced Traffic Monitoring Program December 1997 1999 The CMP was revised focusing on LOS evaluation December 1999 2001 Minor revisions were included in the update and RCTC issued the RFP for the traffic counter installations at Smart Call Box and Traffic Management Center Sites. December 2001 2003 The 2003 CMP Update was focused on continued implementation of the CMP to meet Federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements. The traffic counter installations project was nearing completion. Test runs were initiated. December 2003 2005 The 2005 CMP Update focused on a review of LOS and monitoring of various street and highway segments that were approaching deficient levels of service. Several segments were identified as deficient through the application of floating car runs. These segments fell deficient due to construction activity and road closures in adjacent areas. Continued monitoring of the segments has been undertaken and the segments continue to be deficient due to continued construction activity and road closures. May 2006 2007 The 2007 CMP Update also focused on a review of LOS and monitoring of various street and highway segments that were approaching deficient levels of service as referenced for 2005. Several segments were identified as deficient through the application of floating car runs. These segments fell deficient due to construction activity and road closures in adjacent areas. Continued monitoring of the segments was undertaken and two of the segments continued to be deficient due to capacity constraints. December 2007 Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 9A 91 • • 92 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program CHAPTER 10 CMP DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION! UPDATE PROCESS STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Section 65089(a) of the Govemment Code requires that the Congestion Management Program (CMP) must be developed, adopted, and updated biennially, consistent with the schedule for the adoption and update of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), for every county that includes an urbanized area, and must include every city and the county. Development of the CMP must also be coordinated with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), regional transportation providers, local governments, Caltrans, and respective air districts. RCTC DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION, AND UPDATE PROCESS As described above, CMP legislation requires that the Program be developed, adopted, implemented, monitored, and updated biennially. This chapter primarily focuses on procedural, administrative, and coordination activities related to CMP development, adoption, implementation and update. To meet the requirements of the legislation, the CMP shall be developed, adopted, implemented, and updated in accordance with procedures described in the following sections. CMP DEVELOPMENT The CMP is developed to meet federal CMS requirements and also includes elements of the State's CMP guidelines. State CMP statutes AB 471, 1791, AB 3093, AB 1963, and AB 2419 (reference Appendix 1). CMP ADOPTION PROCEDURE The following procedure has been developed to outline the process toward preparation and adoption of the CMP. RCTC staff shall coordinate the development of the CMP with the RCTC Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). ♦ Local agencies should continue to monitor the CMP System. It is suggested that the local agency collect ground counts at least every four (4) months to provide for average annual traffic conditions. ♦ Beginning in April of each odd numbered year, RCTC will obtain counts or LOS analysis from Caltrans, CVAG, and local agencies. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. 10-1 93 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ♦ In May of each odd numbered year, RCTC must initiate a CMP update. RCTC staff will review individual Chapters with the RCTC TAC, as necessary. ♦ In October of each odd numbered year, RCTC must submit a Preliminary Draft of the CMP to SCAG and the RCTC TAC CMP Subcommittee for review and comment. ♦ In November of each odd numbered year, RCTC staff will submit the Draft CMP to the TAC for format review and approval. ♦ Between November and December of each odd numbered year, RCTC staff will submit the Final Draft to the Commission for review and approval CMP IMPLEMENTATION The CMP is to be implemented and monitored in accordance with procedures described in Chapter 9 - CMP Conformance and Monitoring. CMP UPDATE PROCEDURE The CMP update process should be initiated at least six months prior to adoption. Revision of the CMP may occur any time during the year to address specific issues. The update should include a thorough review of each Chapter or required element contained in the current CMP. A suggested review process follows: + Legislative revisions or new enactments to CMP statutes should be thoroughly reviewed and incorporated into the CMP update. (Chapter 1, 2) + Review agency requests for adding road segments to the CMP System. According to the CMP legislation, facilities may only be added to CMP system. All facilities included in the adopted CMP must be retained. (Chapter 1, 2) . ♦ Review adjacent county CMP Systems to determine if facilities were added or are proposed for addition. Review and analyze any additions considering SCAG's Consistency Guidelines on file at RCTC. (Chapter 2) ♦ Review, in coordination with SCAG and local agencies, the existing and future year databases used for transportation modeling purposes to insure consistency in the development of socioeconomic estimates and projections. (Chapter 3) ♦ Review the adopted CMP Minimum level of service (LOS) standard. The CMP LOS standard can only be increased above the level identified in the adopted Program. (Chapter 4) Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 10-2 94 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ♦ Review LOS estimates to determine if the LOS along CMP facilities has dropped below LOS "E". ♦ Document the purpose for, and status of, deficiency plans that may have been prepared by local agencies during the previous year including proposed mitigation measures. ♦ Document segments or intersections that are at LOS "E", close to falling below the adopted CMP threshold. ♦ Review the Productivity Improvement Program Transit System Performance Indicators for any changes/updates. ♦ Document whether public transit or passenger rail service was identified as a mitigation measure or potential mitigation measure in the development of deficiency plans. ♦ Review the CMP Conformance and Monitoring Process to determine whether the process is consistent with changes or revisions identified within other CMP elements. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. 10-3 95 96 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program APPENDIX 1 CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENTS STATUTES REFERENCING CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS (AB 2419) Assembly Bill No. 2419 CHAPTER 293 An act to amend Sections 65082, 65089, and 65089.3 of, and add Section 65088.3 to, the Govemtent Code, relating to transportation. [Approved by Govemor July 25,1996. Filed with Secretary of State July 25, 1996.] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2419, Bowler. Transportation: congestion management programs. (1) Existing law requires the development, adoption, and updating of a congestion management program for each county that includes an urbanized area. Existing law requires congestion management programs to be incorporated into the regional transportation improvement program by December 15 of each odd -numbered year. This bill would provide that this incorporation requirement does not apply in those counties that do not prepare a congestion management program in accordance with existing law. (2) Under existing law, a congestion management program is required to contain specified elements. This bill would delete the trip reduction element and would make corresponding changes. (3) Under existing law, a congestion management program is required to be developed for specified counties and include every city and the county. The program is required to be developed and adopted by the county transportation commission or by another public agency designated by the county board of supervisors and the city councils of a majority of cities representing a majority of the population in the incorporated area of the county. This bill would make those requirements inapplicable in a county in which a majority of local governments, collectively comprised of the city councils and the county board of supervisors which, in total, represent a majority of the population of the county, adopt resolutions electing to be exempt from the congestion management program. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: SECTION 1. Section 65082 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65082. (a) A seven-year regional transportation improvement program shall be prepared, adopted, and submitted to the Califomia Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. Al-1 97 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Transportation Commission on or before December 15 of each odd -numbered year, updated every two years, pursuant to Sections 65080 and 65080.5 and the guidelines adopted pursuant to Section 14530.1, to include projects and programs proposed to be funded, in whole or in part, by funds which are any of the following: (1) For flexible congestion relief projects, as defined in Section 1642 of the Streets and Highways Code. (2) For urban rail transit and commuter rail projects. Major projects shall include an escalated current cost updated to at least November 1 of the year of submittal, and be listed by relative priority, taking into account need, delivery milestone dates, as defined in Section 14525.5, and the availability of funding. (b) Congestion management programs adopted pursuant to Section 65089 shall be incorporated into the regional transportation improvement program submitted to the commission by December 15 of each odd -numbered year. (c) The incorporation of the congestion management program into the regional transportation improvement program required to be submitted to the commission by December 1, 1991, may be delayed for a period not to exceed one year if an environmental impact report is required to be prepared for the congestion management program pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code, and the following conditions are met: (1) The agency, as defined by Section 65088.1, adopts written findings that the congestion management program cannot be incorporated into the regional transportation improvement program by December 1, 1991, due to the time required to prepare an environmental impact report pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (2) The agency adopts a schedule for development of the congestion management program that will result in its adoption no later than December 1, 1992, and submits a report to the Legislature by July 1, 1992, on the progress of complying with this section. (3) The agency, county, and cities take every action necessary to assure the congestion management program will be adopted by December 1, 1992. (d) If the incorporation of the congestion management program into the regional transportation improvement program is delayed pursuant to subdivision (c), both of the following shall apply: (1) Any project included in the state transportation improvement program or the traffic systems management program prior to December I, 1992, which is otherwise required to be included in the congestion management program, pursuant to subdivision (e), but which is not included in the congestion management program to be incorporated into the regional transportation improvement program pursuant to subdivision (b), shall be deleted from the state Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. Al-2 98 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program transportation improvement program or the traffic systems management program. (2) Local projects which are otherwise required to be included in the congestion management program, pursuant to subdivision (e), may be included in the regional transportation improvement program to be submitted to the California Transportation Commission by December 1, 1991. Any local project which is included in the regional transportation improvement program after December 1, 1991, but prior to December 1, 1992, which is otherwise required to be included in the congestion management program, but which is not included in the congestion management program to be incorporated into the regional transportation improvement program pursuant to subdivision (b), shall be deleted from the regional transportation improvement program. (e) Local projects not included in a congestion management program shall not be included in the regional transportation improvement program. Projects and programs adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be consistent with the seven-year capital improvement program adopted pursuant to paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089, and the guidelines adopted pursuant to Section 14530.1. (f) Other projects may be included in the regional transportation improvement program if listed separately. (g) Unless a county not containing urbanized areas of over 50,000 population notifies the Department of Transportation by July 1 that it intends to prepare a regional transportation improvement program for that county, the department shall, in consultation with the affected local agencies, prepare the program for all counties for which it prepares a regional transportation plan. (h) The regional transportation improvement program may not change the project delivery milestone date of any state project as shown in the prior adopted state transportation program without the consent of the department or other agency responsible for the project delivery. (i) The requirements for incorporating a congestion management program into a regional transportation improvement program specified in this section do not apply in those counties that do not prepare a congestion management program in accordance with Section 65088.3. SEC. 2. Section 65089 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65089. (a) A congestion management program shall be developed, adopted, and updated biennially, consistent with the schedule for adopting and updating the regional transportation improvement program, for every county that includes an urbanized area, and shall include every city and the county. The program shall be adopted at a noticed public hearing of the agency. The program Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. Al-3 99 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program shall be developed in consultation with, and with the cooperation of, the transportation planning agency, regional transportation providers, local governments, the department, and the air pollution control district or the air quality management district, either by the county transportation commission, or by another public agency, as designated by resolutions adopted by the county board of supervisors and the city councils of a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population in the incorporated area of the county. (b) The program shall contain all of the following elements: (1) (A) Traffic level of service standards established for a system of highways and roadways designated by the agency. The highway . and roadway system shall include at a minimum all state highways and principal arterials. No highway or roadway designated as a part of the system shall be removed from the system. All new state highways and principal arterials shall be designated as part of the system. Level of service (LOS) shall be measured by Circular 212, by the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual, or by a uniform methodology adopted by the agency that is consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual. The determination as to whether an alternative method is consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual shall be made by the regional agency, except that the department instead shall make this determination if either (i) the regional agency is also the agency, as those terms are defined in Section 65088.1, or (ii) the department is responsible for preparing the regional transportation improvement plan for the county. (B) In no case shall the LOS standards established be below the level of service E or the current level, whichever is farthest from level of service A. When the level of service on a segment or at an intersection fails to attain the established level of service standard, a deficiency plan shall be adopted pursuant to Section 65089.4. (2) A performance element that includes performance measures to evaluate current and future multimodal system performance for the movement of people and goods. At a minimum, these performance measures shall incorporate highway and roadway system performance, and measures established for the frequency and routing of public transit, and for the coordination of transit service provided by separate operators. These performance measures shall support mobility, air quality, land use, and economic objectives, and shall be used in the development of the capital improvement program required pursuant to paragraph (5), deficiency plans required pursuant to Section 65089.4, and the land use analysis program required pursuant to paragraph (4). (3) A travel demand element that promotes alternative transportation methods, including, but not limited to, carpools, vanpools, transit, bicycles, and park -and -ride lots; improvements in the balance between jobs and housing; and other strategies, including, but not limited to, flexible work hours, telecommuting, Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. A1-4 100 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program and parking management programs. The agency shall consider parking cash -out programs during the development and update of the travel demand element. (4) A program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on regional transportation systems, including an estimate of the costs associated with mitigating those impacts. This program shall measure, to the extent possible, the impact to the transportation system using the performance measures described in paragraph (2). In no case shall the program include an estimate of the costs of mitigating the impacts of interregional travel. The program shall provide credit for local public and private contributions to improvements to regional transportation systems. However, in the case of toll road facilities, credit shall only be allowed for local public and private contributions which are unreimbursed from toll revenues or other state or federal sources. The agency shall calculate the amount of the credit to be provided. The program defined under this section may require implementation through the requirements and analysis of the California Environmental Quality Act, in order to avoid duplication. (5) A seven-year capital improvement program, developed using the performance measures described in paragraph (2) to determine effective projects that maintain or improve the performance of the multimodal system for the movement of people and goods, to mitigate regional transportation impacts identified pursuant to paragraph (4). The program shall conform to transportation -related vehicle emission air quality mitigation measures, and include any project that will increase the capacity of the multimodal system. It is the intent of the Legislature that, when roadway projects are identified in the program, consideration be given for maintaining bicycle access and safety at a level comparable to that which existed prior to the improvement or alternation. The capital improvement program may also include safety, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects that do not enhance the capacity of the system but are necessary to preserve the investment in existing facilities. (c) The agency, in consultation with the regional agency, cities, and the county, shall develop a uniform data base on traffic impacts for use in a countywide transportation computer model and shall approve transportation computer models of specific areas within the county that will be used by local jurisdictions to determine the quantitative impacts of development on the circulation system that are based on the countywide model and standardized modeling assumptions and conventions. The computer models shall be consistent with the modeling methodology adopted by the regional planning agency. The data bases used in the models shall be consistent with the data bases used by the regional planning agency. Where the regional agency has jurisdiction over two or more Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. Al-5 101 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program counties, the data bases used by the agency shall be consistent with the data bases used by the regional agency. (d) (1) The city or county in which a commercial development will implement a parking cash -out program that is included in a congestion management program pursuant to subdivision (b), or in a deficiency plan pursuant to Section 65089.4, shall grant to that development an appropriate reduction in the parking requirements otherwise in effect for new commercial development. (2) At the request of an existing commercial development that has implemented a parking cash -out program, the city or county shall grant an appropriate reduction in the parking requirements otherwise applicable based on the demonstrated reduced need for pazking, and the space no longer needed for parking purposes may be used for other appropriate purposes. (e) Pursuant to the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 and regulations adopted pursuant to the act, the department shall submit a request to the Federal Highway Administration Division Administrator to accept the congestion management program in lieu of development of a new congestion management system otherwise required by the act. SEC. 3. Section 65089.3 of the Government Code is amended to read: 65089.3. The agency shall monitor the implementation of all elements of the congestion management program. The department is responsible for data collection and analysis on state highways, unless the agency designates that responsibility to another entity. The agency may also assign data collection and analysis responsibilities to other owners and operators of facilities or services if the responsibilities are specified in its adopted program. The agency shall consult with the department and other affected owners and operators in developing data collection and analysis procedures and schedules prior to program adoption. At least biennially, the agency shall determine if the county and cities are conforming to the congestion management program, including, but not limited to, all of the following: (a) Consistency with levels of service standards, except as provided in Section 65089.4. (b) Adoption and implementation of a program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions, including the estimate of the costs associated with mitigating these impacts. (c) Adoption and implementation of a deficiency plan pursuant to Section 65089.4 when highway and roadway level of service standards are not maintained on portions of the designated system. SEC. 4. Section 65088.3 is added to the Government Code, to read: 65088.3. This chapter does not apply in a county in which a majority of local governments, collectively comprised of the city Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. A1-6 102 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program councils and the county board of supervisors, which in total also represent a majority of the population in the county, each adopt resolutions electing to be exempt from the congestion management program. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. Al-7 103 • 104 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program APPENDIX 2 RECOMMENDED HCM-BASED LEVEL OF SERVICE PROGRAM DEFAULTS FACILITY TYPE URBAN Freeways Group 10] CHARACTERISTICS e my a } L I° m 1 C z � TRAFFIC ROADWAY s. 20 - a- o v- •_ E �.�.. n x- 1 :.: E `o u- .6 x 1 1 a. ‘ 1 n _n b =.9 e� 9 p 41. NEU E J t o f 3 as w • G g H s e' 2:C• 5 9 a k a = , st .Nii1"Oj 11t'.1 Nq b rip g 6 u` E. e- dp - - - a� 6 0 - r ro 12, II, F aa. E= -1 2 g a 7.7. a r._ 5 'a . 0 O 9 s A Y K alel Z ce dr 2 � b 5 L in L:i a C'." '" w v,7..P.r $ m r 'a VI ei ~ e 17 .e t, T 3W O of 3 5 31 E1 I'-1 �r�''"„Urt..�,cJ�`1' 60 Ga7--F.7=c-, 3=7j..a '�3'�4 ` �M11 Este '®:' 1E11111111MELs�1+�u^6 Sf�Et:Nm ..n��'c- E P;Ti,- c$o .� ® 0.080 Cra�' MET a"IIiL IIIECCe i ni-01A6,.,,i 1•,J'CI'�-crv'7iTS"SBs.�� ka Group 20 State Arterials Uninlerropled© 0.092 0.568 0 950 I 1 =�"-1��r'- 1101s sa.�' -a,3JEMES. �'4,.dr.,iE-77, .9, _ ICEICIM1111213 0 960 VIITICvTR �..3,a 7' :.,'a�=�`�Ar�. t 's C.vr`'"' 'Z5E3st'is"i NM0-092 �®' 11 '� `.` r 0.091 IMICEZE� NEW-„`� - ©i,'mi 71011 `�f�'6=a.=2.7 `s�2`�m'Er ,- 1111Em -v*r 0CELICE111031 2000 4 MMI0'E 0.093 ILEDIEEEIIIMIMEIIIIBINMEINEMILIMEMENIIIIMIIKEINIE111101 IIMMEllME a,1A UM Class l0 MINEMP©1111E1ICEE1110111111®IKII©00©000©IIKI 0 0.093 1:031102111UM®EM00011170000IEI'®' OHM 0.KA 0.926 MEZIEFAMIli111127=11161111EN1110111111MMAIIIIIIIEEL1 ©oI�� ®�©®00000©mom 092 7®�®EMp©O©00®©EECI -m 0.092 IMI'®NET®IE111©©00000©m"®' 0 0.092 LEIIIIMM1l ®0©®00000©�' '®' 0.002 CMCIMI:Il ®0000©000©m11!! 111120=-© -m IlonState Roadways 0.092 111111Mil 1.000 m0om0IMI000©1M 0 0.002 LEIICEIMMImoomo000o©1E01111# 3aLEINCE3MIEMmo©o0o0®o©mom -EENI TRANSITRMING Freeways _NM State Arterials Unlnterlupled0 ' 1' -�" CEI::11 mMEITW' 0.097 2000 � = ' ©© ®111111311MmIIMI ME 0 '>� `tL> 1& 7-71---411 Ga��','IMg 0E 568 0.950 ICU 0.097 0-568 1 • 1 ®' 1' [331:11 0.910 ®' P 7,1P1- m112Z ..17.. ,:Js.2M I j 1 MEMEI .-IL ` IENMEL s32 'i_,_L 9 t4ifi412a2y EMI 1 1' � 0.910 ®rc=411- �3:®tY2-7AIENEW ME1111111311313 0.010 IiiIIIIRECIUMMIZMIENOMENIIMMIE11111 7Mre ooso I 0 11'• 11:1113 0.910 ®' 000IZE000000IEEINIE1 0.004 1®.: 0.910 ®0©000000®1K 'ES Class 0MN m 1 ''" 1®" ' 1 ER11000m000©N12111©NE:1 MIIIIEEEICEEI 0.910 0:6711111EilliMENEZIMMIENIMONEMIENIMEIME3111111 Class lo Non.State Roadways Major Cily7Coanly IlLEMECEEICE3 0.910 ®' ®0©®00000©®' ®" 0 0.093 0.So 111111[16111KEQ©E:11Q13111511®0©®' 041 OEMEINEM 0.568 ''®®' 00©m' 000®0© IE 0.41 Other SignalizedPIMA RURAL UNDEVELOPED Freeways - Highways Level Terrain 11 m©R.�ajt�.���y�a''��i"}��t';'chA©IIINII � REAR©IE ��0���.5j �Mi ®' 1 1' a'dYl•A '�• •� '1 �1 OI ' ' 0.968 1 2.000 WM 0_100 0568 0.880 NEW1777C m GE Lam. %f.+_..: 301 at o `..t �©�.. LAIEM©ECK . . = '3 �MENMU .) f.LS IA ®' , {'-17,,: 7 glau©Cy �,. r17.4�ggn © 0.100 CM 0880 11 1... t:=EEMEa. E1©EME M6-1-TY amERI m 0.100 1®.. 0880 EMIl ,.?1 r---- ,'.'a'11113:11s"..::.olimpi aam ; 3, 4, mown ounteinous Terrain© 0.100 LEI 0.880 CMK �,26 1Mm=1E11011 vellEEZI 0 oleo gma 0080 2.000 y ®Mai®O q, g so:IMEI © 0.100 WEI 1 ::I .11 L-:LlaMig®ma�E:i'4 4-6 0.100 0.568 0.880 1,T00 L10.10O IUVA' Wif 45 49S•.. - - "rs0,04 Sfils4q SiSSI €ZS0s WI1 ;K.-f.- Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologiesm Inc_ A2-1 105 • • 106 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program APPENDIX 3 FEDERAL CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEWTRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (CMS/TMS) REQUIREMENTS Summation of FHWA/FTA Final Rule: Management and Monitoring Systems FINAL RULE IN GENERAL The Final Rule is effective January 21, 1997, making Congestion Management Systems (CMS) in Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) and traffic monitoring systems (TMS) mandatory. The Final Rule requires the Secretary of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration) to issue regulations for state development, establishment, and implementation of: ♦ BMS (Bridge Management Systems); ♦ CMS (Congestion Management Systems); ♦ IMS (Intermodal Management Systems); ♦ PMS (Pavement Management Systems); ♦ PTMS (Public Transportation Management Systems); and ♦ SMS (Safety Management Systems). All above management systems are optional [as of the 1995 National Highway Designation Act (NHS)], except for CMS and TMAs. In addition to the CMS, the development, establishment, and implementation of a TMS is required under the Final Rule. TMAs are defined as: "an urbanized area with a population over 200,000 (as determined by the latest decennial census) or other area when TMA designation is requested by the Governor and the MPO (or affected local officials), and officially designated by the Administrators of the FHWA and the FTA. The TMA designation applies to the entire metropolitan planning area(s)." Issues mentioned in the Final Rule concerning Federal Funds include: ♦ Federal funds may not be programmed in a carbon monoxide and/or ozone non - attainment TMA for any project that will result in a significant increase in SOV (single -occupant -vehicle) capacity unless the project is based on an approved CMS. Interim CMS procedures may be used to meet these requirements, until September 30, 1997. After this date, such projects must be based on a fully operational CMS; and Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. A3-1 107 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program • Amendments in the 1995 NHS Act allow a state to elect not to implement, in whole or in part, any one or more of the management systems (except for CMS in TMAs, and the TMS). In addition, the certification requirement was removed and the Secretary may not impose any sanction on or withhold any benefit from a state that elects to take this approach. Congestion management Systems (CMS) In all TMAs, the CMS shall be developed, established, and implemented as part of the metropolitan planning process in accordance with 23 CFR 450.3200 and shall include: ♦ Methods to: ➢ Monitor and evaluate the performance of the multimodal transportation system; • Identify the causes of congestion; ➢ Identify and evaluate alternative actions; ➢ Provide information supporting the implementation of actions; and ➢ Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of implemented actions. ♦ Definition of parameters for measuring the extent of congestion and for supporting the evaluation of the effectiveness of congestion reduction and mobility enhancement strategies for the movement of people and goods. ♦ Establishment of a program for data collection and system performance monitoring to: ➢ Define the extent and duration of congestion; ➢ Help determine the causes of congestion; and ➢ Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of implemented actions. ♦ To the extent possible, existing data sources should be used, as well as appropriate application of the real-time system performance monitoring capabilities available through Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies. • Identification and evaluation of the anticipated performance and expected benefits of appropriate traditional and nontraditional congestion management strategies that will contribute to the more efficient use of existing and future transportation systems based on the established performance measures. The following categories of strategies, or combination of strategies, should be appropriately considered for each area: ➢ Transportation demand management (TDM) measures, including growth, management, and congestion pricing; ➢ Traffic operational improvements; ➢ Public transportation improvements; Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. A3-2 108 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program ➢ ITS technologies; and ➢ Additional system capacity (where necessary). ♦ Identification of an implementation schedule, implementation responsibilities, and possible funding sources for each strategy (or combination of strategies) proposed for implementation. "Section 500.102 — Policy (1)) Whether the systems are developing under the provisions of this part or under the State's own procedures, the following categories of FHWA administered funds may be used for development, establishment, and implementation of any of the management systems and the traffic monitoring system; National highway system; surface transportation program; state planning and research and metropolitan planning funds (including the optional use of minimum allocation funds authorized under 23 U.S.C. 1570 and restoration funds authorized under Sec. 202 (f) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (Pub.L. 104-59) for carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 3070(1) and 23 USC 134(a)): congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program funds for those management systems that can be shown to contribute to the attainment of national ambient air quality standard; and apportioned bridge funds for development and establishment of the bridge management system. The following categories of FTA administered funds may be used for the development, establishment, and implementation of the CMS, PTMS, IMS, and TMS: Metropolitan planning; state planning and research, and formula transit funds." • Implementation of a process for periodic assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of implemented strategies, in terms of the area's established performance measures. The results of this evaluation shall be provided to decision makers to provide guidance on selection of effective strategies for future implementation. ♦ In a TMA designated as non -attainment for carbon monoxide and/or ozone, the CMS shall provide an appropriate analysis of all reasonable (including multimodal) travel demand reduction and operational management strategies for the corridor in which a project that will result in a significant increase in capacity for SOVs (adding general purpose lanes to an existing highway or constructing a new highway) is proposed. If the analysis demonstrates that travel demand reduction and operational management strategies cannot fully satisfy the need for additional capacity in the corridor and additional SOV capacity is warranted, then the CMS shall identify all reasonable strategies to manage the SOV facility effectively (or to facilitate its management in the future). Other travel demand reduction and operational management strategies appropriate for the Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Mc. A3-3 109 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program corridor, but not appropriate for incorporation into the SOV facility itself shall also be identified through the CMS. All identified reasonable travel demand reduction and operation management strategies shall be incorporated into the SOV project or committed to by the State and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for implementation. ♦ Compliance with the requirement that the planning process in all TMAs include a CMS will be addressed during metropolitan planning process certification reviews for all TMAs specified in 23 CFR 450.334. If the metropolitan planning process in a TMA does not include a CMS that meets the requirements of this Section, deficiencies will be noted and corrections will need to be made in accordance with the schedule established in the certification review. ♦ Federal funds may not be programmed in a carbon monoxide and/or ozone non -attainment TMA for any project that will result in a significant increase of SOV (single occupant vehicle) capacity unless the project is based on an approved CMS. interim CMS procedures may be used to meet this requirement, until September 30, 1997. After this date, such projects must be based on a fully operational CMS. Traffic Monitoring Systems (TMS) General Requirements ♦ Each state shall develop, establish, and implement, on a continuing basis, a TMS to be used for obtaining highway traffic data when the data are: ➢ Supplied to the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT); A Used in support of transportation management systems; ➢ Used in support of studies or systems which are the responsibility of the U.S. DOT; ➢ Supported by the use of Federal funds provided from programs of the U.S. DOT; ➢ Used in the apportionments or allocation of Federal funds by the U.S. DOT; ➢ Used in the design or construction of an FHWA funded project; or ➢ Required as part of a federally mandated program of the U.S. DOT: ♦ The TMS for highway traffic data should be based on the concepts described in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guidelines for Traffic Data Programs" and FHWA "Traffic Monitoring Guide (TMG)," and shall be consistent with the FHWA Highway Performance Monitoring System Field Manual. ♦ The TMS shall cover all public roads except those functionally classified as local or rural minor collector or those that are federally owned. Coverage of Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. A3-4 110 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program federally owned public roads shall be determined cooperatively by the state, the FHWA, and the agencies that own the roads. • The state's TMS shall apply to the activities of local governments and other public or private non -state governments entities collecting highway traffic data within the state of the collected data are to be used for any of the purposes enumerated in Section A of this subpart. ♦ Procedures other than those referenced in this subpart may be used if the altemative procedures are documented by the state to furnish the precision levels as defined for the various purposes enumerated in Sec. A of this subpart and are found acceptable by the FHWA. ♦ Nothing in this subpart shall prohibit the collection of additional highway traffic data if such data are needed in the administration or management of a highway activity or are needed in the design of a highway project. • Transit traffic data shall be collected in cooperation with MPOs and transit operators. ♦ The TMS for highways and public transportation facilities and equipment shall be fully operational and in use by October 1, 1997. Components for Highway Traffic Data Each state's TMS, including those using alternative procedures, shall address the following components: ♦ A state's TMS shall meet the statistical precisions established by FHWA for the HPMS. ♦ Continuous counter operations. Within each state, there shall be sufficient continuous counters of traffic volumes, vehicle classification, and vehicle weight to provide estimates of changes in highway travel patterns and to provide for the development of day -of -week, seasonal, axle correction, growth factors, or other comparable factors approved by the FHWA. As appropriate, sufficient continuous counts of vehicle classification and vehicle weight should be available to address traffic data program needs. ♦ Count data for traffic volumes collected in the field shall be adjusted to reflect annual average conditions. + Vehicle classification activities on the National Highway System (NHS). On a cycle of no greater than three years, every major system segment (i.e., segments between interchanges or intersections of principal arterials of the NHS with other principal arterials of the NHS) will be monitored to provide information on the Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. A3-5 111 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program numbers of single -trailer combination trucks, multiple -trailer combination trucks, two - axle four -tire vehicles, buses and the total number of vehicles operating on an average day. ♦ Vehicle occupancy monitoring. Such vehicle occupancy data shall be reviewed at least every three years and updated as necessary.. Acceptable data .collection methods include roadside monitoring, traveler surveys, the use of administrative records (e.g., accident reports or reports developed in support of public transportation programs), or any other method mutually acceptable to the responsible organizations and the FHWA. ♦ Field operations. (1) Each state's TMS for highway traffic data shall include the testing of equipment used in the collection of the data. (2) Documentation of field operations shall include the number of counts, the period of monitoring, the cycle of monitoring, and the spatial and temporal distribution of count sites. ♦ Source data retention. For estimates of traffic or travel, the value or values collected during a monitoring session, as well as information on the date(s) and hour(s) of monitoring, will remain available until the traffic or travel estimates based on the count session are updated. ♦ Office factoring procedures. (1) Factors to adjust data from short-term monitoring sessions to estimates of average daily conditions shall be used to adjust for month, day of week, axle correction, and growth or other comparable factors approved by FHWA. These factors will be reviewed annually and updated at least every three years. (2) The procedures used by a state to edit and adjust highway traffic data collected from short-term counts at field locations to estimates of average traffic volume shall be documented. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, inc. A3-6 112 2010 Riverside County Congestion Management Program MONITORING REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAVSTATE PROGRAMS REQUIREMENTS PROGRAMS CMS TMS HPMS CMP Monitor/Evaluate the Multimodal Transportation System X X Identify Parameters for Evaluating the Extent of Congestion X Evaluate the Effectiveness of Implemented Actions X Identify/Implement a Program for Data Collection X X X X Cover all Public Roads X Collect Transit/Traffic Data X X X Meet AASHTO and FHWA Standards X X Continuous Counter Operations (volumes, vehicle class, weights, and highway travel patterns) X X Short-term Traffic Monitoring Every Two Years X Short-term Traffic Monitoring Every Three Years (sample data) X X Vehicle Classification (single/multi-trailer truck, 2-axle, 4- axle vehicles, buses, totals) — Every Three Years, Every Major System Segment X X Vehicle Occupancy (reviewed every three years) X Testing/Documentation of Field Operations X X Factoring Procedures (reviewed annually and updated every three years) X X Interstate and State Highway System (Caltrans responsibility) X X X X Principal Arterials (CMA/local agency responsibility) X1 X X X Minor Arterials (local agency responsibility) X1 X X Collectors X' X X Recreational Routes X X All are eligible under CMS requirements depending on whether or not federal funds are to be allocated to the facilities. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies, Inc. A3-7 113 • • • RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreements with Qualified Contractors to Provide On -Call Right of Way Appraisal Services for Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Agricultural Properties WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal services for a three-year period, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $950,000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-048-00 with Lidgard and Associates, Inc.; b) Agreement No. 10-51-064-00 with Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants; c) Agreement No. 10-51-065-00 with Donahue Hawran & Maim LLC; d) Agreement No. 10-51-066-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates, Inc.; e) Agreement No. 10-51-067-00 with Riggs & Riggs, Inc.; and f) Agreement No. 10-51-068-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years as applicable, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Federal and state regulations require that before the initiation of negotiations with property owners, the public agency shall establish an amount that it believes is just compensation for the real property. The amount shall not be less than the approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property, taking into account the value of allowable damages or benefits to any remaining property. In order to comply with regulations, the Commission can either hire staff appraisers or establish a list of on -call appraisers. Staff recommends the latter. Agenda Item 7E 114 Procurement Process Staff determined the weighted factor method of source selection to be the most appropriate for this procurement, as it allows the Commission to identify the most advantageous proposal with price and other factors considered. Non -price factors include elements such as experience, qualifications of firms and personnel, and the ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 10-51-048-00. RFP No. 10-51-048-00 was released by staff and advertised on December 23, 2009. Staff responded to all requests for clarifications submitted by potential proposers prior to the January 26, 2010, deadline date. Fifteen firms — BTI Appraisal, Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC, Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, Keith Settle & Company Inc., Lidgard & Associates, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc., Reinhart-Fontes Associates Inc., Riggs & Riggs Inc., Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal, R.P. Laurain & Associates, Smothers Appraisal, Valentine Appraisal & Associates, Villegas Appraisal Company, and Warren H. Neville — submitted proposals prior to the stated deadline. Fourteen of the fifteen firms submitted responsive and responsible proposals. One firm was omitted from the competitive process for submitting a non -responsive proposal. The remaining firms' proposals were evaluated and scored, based upon the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission staff and a representative from Caltrans. The evaluation process was used to analyze the qualities of each submitted proposal according to the stated criteria and, based on that information, the evaluation committee made its selection decision. Because the on -call bench was limited to six firms under the terms of the RFP, the remaining firms, in ranking order, are as follows: Lidgard & Associates, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Donahue Hawran & Maim LLC, R.P. Laurain & Associates, Riggs & Riggs, Inc., and Hennessey & Hennessey LLC. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND DIRECTION: Cost/Price Analysis At its February 22 meeting, the Western Riverside County Projects and Programs Committee directed staff to re-examine the potential costs, fees and charges for this and a number of other items involving procurement for a reduction in the overall cost of the contract. The Committee's direction was based on the economic climate and challenges currently faced in Riverside County, which has led to employment losses, salary reductions, and significantly lower and more competitive bids on construction projects. Agenda Item 7E 115 During the presentation of the item before the Committee, staff failed to explain that the pricing achieved in this item was the result of a competitive bidding process that provided the lowest possible bids from a wide array of firms. The respective proposers' rates are considered fair and reasonable based upon adequate price competition in an open marketplace in which proposals from nine firms were rejected. Staff is confident that the identified firms will provide the Commission with an excellent level of quality at the best possible price. The purpose of this particular procurement is to provide the Commission with considerable flexibility in working with a variety of appraisers with different areas of expertise and knowledge. Establishing a bench of contractors also enables the Commission to react quickly, which will likely be necessary in readying future projects for construction. As a result, some of the cost proposals are based on job task basis where others are based on an hourly rate proposal. It will be the responsibility of the Commission's Right of Way Manager to select the proper contractor for the particular job and to do so in a cost-effective manner while ensuring that applicable state and federal procurement rulesare being followed. Adequate management and cost control will be a priority in ensuring the overall value of all the contracts and will be kept under the not to exceed amount. The total not to exceed amount for all six agreements for a three-year period of performance, and two one-year options, is $950,000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2009/10 Amount: $115,000 N/A FY 2010/11 + 835,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Lease Revenues Budget Adjustment: No 105 51 '81401 $ 70,000 105 52 81401 25,000 003001 81403 00062 0000 222 31 '81401 45,000 GLIProject Accounting No.: 003005 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 330,000 003009 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 95,000 003023 81403 00062 0000 262 31 81401 145,000 003823 81403 00062 0000 221 33 81401 190,000 005123 81403 00062 0000 210 73 81401 50,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: .\)U1.1,Au.,v,itb Date: 2/16/2010 Agenda Item 7E 116 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Min Saysay, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreements with Qualified Contractors to Provide On -Call Right of Way Appraisal Review Services for Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Agricultural Properties WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call right of way appraisal review services for a three-year period, and two one-year options to extend the agreements, in an amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $ 500, 000; a) Agreement No. 10-51-051-00 with Donahue Hawran & Malm, LLC; b► Agreement No. 10-51-070-00 with R.P. Laurain & Associates, Inc.; c) Agreement No. 10-51-071-00 with Mason & 'Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants; d) Agreement No. 10-51-072-00 with Hennessey & Hennessey LLC; and e) Agreement No. 10-51-073-00 with Overland, Pacific & Cutler Inc.; 2) Authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years as applicable, on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Code of Federal Regulations, 49 CFR Part 24, Subpart A, requires that review appraisers examine the presentation and analysis of market information in all appraisals and support the appraisers' opinion of value. The review appraisers develop, report, and recommend the amount believed to be just compensation for real property interests to be acquired by a public agency. Agenda Item 7F 117 Procurement Process Staff determined the weighted factor method of source selection to be the most appropriate for this procurement, as it allows the Commission to identify the most advantageous proposal with price and other factors considered. Non -price factors include elements such as experience, qualifications of firms and personnel, and their ability to respond to the requirements set forth under the terms of Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 10-51-051-00. RFP No. 10-51-051-00 was released by staff and advertised on December 23, 2009. Staff responded to all requests for clarifications submitted by potential proposers prior to the January 26, 2010, deadline date. Six firms — Donahue Hawran & Maim LLC, First Service PGP Valuation, Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc., and R.P. Laurain & Associates, submitted proposals prior to the stated deadline. Each of the six firms submitted responsive and responsible proposals. Accordingly, the firms' proposals were evaluated and scored, based upon the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP, by an evaluation committee comprised of Commission staff and a representative from Ca!trans. The evaluation process was used to analyze the qualities of each submitted proposal according to the stated criteria and, based on that information, the evaluation committee made its selection decision. First Service PGP Valuation was eliminated from the list of awardees based on its total evaluation score relative to the other proposers. The remaining firms are listed in ranking order, as follows: Donahue Hawran & Malm LLC, R.P. Laurain & Associates, Mason & Mason Real Estate Appraisers and Consultants, Hennessey & Hennessey LLC, and Overland Pacific & Cutler Inc. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND DIRECTION: Cost/Price Analysis At its February 22 meeting, the Western Riverside County Projects and Programs Committee directed staff to re-examine the potential costs, fees, and charges for this and a number of other items involving procurement for a reduction in the overall cost of the contract. The Committee's direction was based on the economic climate and challenges currently faced in Riverside County, which has led to employment losses, salary reductions, and significantly lower and more competitive bids on construction projects. During the presentation of the item before the Committee, staff failed to explain that the pricing achieved in this item was the result of a competitive bidding process that provided the lowest possible bids from a wide array of firms. The Agenda Item 7F 118 respective proposers' rates are considered fair and reasonable based upon adequate price competition. Staff is confident that the identified firms will provide the Commission with an excellent level of quality at the best possible price. The purpose of this particular procurement is to provide the Commission with considerable flexibility in working with a variety of appraisers with different areas of expertise and knowledge. Establishing a bench of contractors also enables the Commission to react quickly, which will likely be necessary in readying future projects for construction. As a result, some of the cost proposals are based on job task basis where others are based on an hourly rate proposal. It will be the responsibility of the Commission's Right of Way Manager to select the proper contractor for the particular job and to do so in a cost-effective manner while ensuring that applicable state and federal procurement rules are being followed. Adequate management and cost control will be a priority in ensuring the overall value of all the contracts and will be kept under the not to exceed amount. The total not to exceed amount for all five agreements for a'three-year period of performance, and two one-year options, is $500,000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/1 1 + Amount: $ 60,000 $ 440,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Lease Revenues Budget Adjustment: No GLlProject Accounting No.: 105 51 81401 $ 37,500 105 52 81401 12,500 003001 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 25,000 003005 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 175,000 003009 81403 00062 0000 222 31 81401 50,000 003023 81403 00062 0000 262 31 81401 75,000 003823 81403 00062 0000 221 33'81401 100,000 005123 81403 00062 0000 210 73 81401 25,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \144,,,,d,„ajw Date: 2/16/2010 Agenda Item 7F 119 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriations — Alameda Corridor Auto Center Drive and Streeter Avenue Grade Separations East — BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Allocate $674,500 to the city of Corona (Corona) in support of the Auto Center Drive grade separation project; and 2) Allocate $674,500 to the city of Riverside (Riverside) in support of the Streeter Avenue grade separation project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The FY 2010 consolidated appropriations bill identified funding in the amount of $1.349 million for grade separation projects, located in Riverside County, on the Alameda Corridor East (ACE). At its February 10, 2010 meeting, the Commission approved allocating the congressionally -directed funding on a first -come, first - served basis based on project deliverability - to support one of the 20 priority grade separation projects identified in the 2008 Grade Separation Funding Strategy: A Blueprint for Advancing Projects. Appendix B (attached) from the funding strategy provides a summary of the 20 priority projects including an overview of the funding and project status. City and county staff were subsequently notified of the availability of the funding. Corona and Riverside requested funding be allocated to partially support the right of way phase of the Auto Center Drive and Streeter Avenue grade separation projects, respectively. • Auto Center Drive project will construct a grade separation over Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway at an estimated cost of $32 million. The right of way phase of the project started in November 2009 and is scheduled to begin construction January 2011, with project completion scheduled for June 2012; Agenda Item 7G 120 • Streeter Avenue project will grade separate the existing Streeter Avenue/Union Pacific Railroad by constructing an underpass at an estimated cost of $36.8 million. The project started the right of way phase of work earlier this month and is scheduled to begin construction January 2012, with project completion scheduled for July 2013. Both projects will improve traffic flow, reduce air pollution, and increase safety by eliminating vehicle delays at the at -grade crossings. Both projects previously received Proposition 1 B funding through the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund. As a result, both projects must commence construction by December 31, 2013. Allocating the federal funding to assist with the right of way phase of these projects will greatly support the delivery of these two projects. These federal funds will flow directly through to Corona and Riverside and do not affect the Commission's budget. Therefore, there is no financial impact to the Commission's budget. Attachment: Appendix B — RCTC Grade Separation Funding Strategy - Summary Agenda Item 7G • 121 Appendix B RCTC Grade Separation Funding Strategy - Summary E t 1 ' RCTC priority Tier Crossing Total Project Cost Federal CPUC Voluntary Total Railroad Section Container Avail- Balance State total Contribution 190 Premiums Funds* Needed _ Proieet Status Funding Strategy Priority A 2 Auto Canter Drive/ BNSF $32.0 $8.30 $16.00 $2.70 - $5.0 - $32.0 - FD 3 Avenue 52/UP $17.3 $10.20 - $2.10 - $5.0 - $17.3 - CE PSR 4 Avenue 56/ Airport Blvd./UP $60.0 - $10.00 $50.00 - - - '.$60.0 - CE PSR (Eqv ) 3 Avenue 66/UP $33.5 - $10.00 $23.50 - - $33.5 - CE PSR (am) ° 1 Columbia Avenue/ BNSF & UP $34.1 - $BA0 $20.45 $2.60 $5.0 - $34.1 - C 1 Iowa Avenue/ BNSF & UP $32.0 $10.30 $13.00 $2.40 $1.30 $5.0 - $32.0 - PS&E 1 Magnolia Avenue/UP $51.2 - $20.00 $26.20 - $5.0 - $51.2 - 7IO976rD' % 1 Sunset Avenue/UP $36.5 $10.60 $10.00 $12.90 $3.00 - - ',$36.5 - PE I c e Funding Strategy Priority B 1 3rd Street/ BNSF & UP $40.2 $7.66 $17.50 $0.50 $2.00 $5.0 $7.5 .'.$40.2 - PE 2 Clay Street/UP 1 Magnolia Avenue/ BNSF $37.4 $81.8 $10.00 $15.00 $12.50 $1.18 $1.87 $5.0 $6.9 I$37A - $1330 $15.10 $4.09 $5.0 $28.9 '$81.8 - CE PSR (Eqv-) CE PSR (Eqv.) 1 Riverside Avenue/UP $30.3 $5.00 $8.50 $2.50 $1.30 $5.0 $8.0 $30.3 E 2 Streeter Avenue/UP $36.8 $7.80 $16.50 $2.20 $1.30 $5.0 $5.0 $36.8 E .y s Funding Strategy Priority C 3 Bel!grave Avenue/ UP $105.5 - - $1.00 - - $- $1.0 $104.5 CE PSR (Eqv.) 2 Center Street BNSF & UP $36.3 - - $0.50 - - $- $0.5 $35.8 CPU 1 Jurupa Road/UP $108.4 - - $12.00 $10.34 $5.0 $81.1 $108.4 - CE PSR (Rut.) 2 MaryStreet/BNSF $38.0 - - $2.25 - $5.0 $30.8. $38.0 - PE 1 McKinley Street BNSF $109.2 $0.40 - $1.50 - - $- $1.9 $107.3 CE PSR (Eqv.) 3 Railroad Street BNSF $30.0 - - $0.25 - - $- $0.3 $29.8 CE PSR (Eqv.) } 2 Smith Avenue/ BNSF $30.0 - - $0.25 - - S- $0.3 $29.8 CE PSR (Egv.) i TOTALS: S980.5 $85.3 $152.7 8179.5 $27-8 $60.0 S168.1 $673.3 $307.1 • Total available funds include unsecured funding including railroad contributions, CPUC Section 190 and voluntary container fees - (All dollars in millions. Slight discrepancies may occur due to rounding.) LEGEND CPU Conceptual Planning Underway CE PSR Conceptual Engineering PSR CE PSR (Eqv.) Conceptual Engineering PSR (or Equivalent) PE Preliminary Engineering E Environmental ROW&D Right of Way and Design C Construction PS&E Plans, Specifications and Estimate FD Final Design RCTC Grade Separation Funding Strategy 2008 122 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM:. Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Policy Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2010/11 Budget BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the FY 2010/11 Budget. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The initial step in the budget process is to develop policy goals and objectives for the next fiscal year that are consistent with the Commission's overall strategic direction. The goals and objectives for FY 2010/11 reflect the continuation of the transition related to the completion of the 1989 Measure A and commencement of the 2009 Measure A projects and programs. Most importantly, the adoption of the Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the annual fiscal budget provides an opportunity to match the Commission's spending priorities in a manner that implements the promises made to the citizens of the county of Riverside in both Measure A Expenditure Plans and that fulfills other Commission responsibilities. The Commission's seven long-term policy goals are: • Promote mobility; • Mitigate and address the impact of goods movement; • Ensure improved system efficiencies; • Foster environmental stewardship; • Encourage economic development; • Support transportation choices through intermodalism and accessibility; and • Prioritize public and agency communications. The Commission's Financial and Administration Policies are also included in the Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for the FY 2010/11 Budget. Attachment: Proposed Commission Policy Goals and Objectives for FY 2010/11 Budget Agenda Item 8 123 Commission Policy Goals and Objectives In addition to financial and administration policies, the Commission has seven long-term policy goals: promote mobility, mitigate and address the impact of goods movement, ensure improved system efficiencies, foster environmental stewardship, encourage economic development, support transportation choices through intermodalism and accessibility, and prioritize public and agency communications. For each of these policy goals, the objectives and initiatives that were considered in the framework of the work plan for the FY 2010/11 budget are identified below. While Riverside County grapples with the challenges of a declining real estate market, high unemployment, and an uncertain economy, the need for better transportation remains a top public priority that the Commission is poised to address via the seven policy goals. In moving forward with an aggressive program of projects and services, the Commission will face the challenge of lower Measure A and TDA revenues and uncertainty regarding the availability of federal and state transportation revenues. Due to the long-term nature of many of the Commission's programs, many of the policy goals' objectives and initiatives are ongoing from year to year. Promote Mobility The Commission, in cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies, will strive to create a transportation system that promotes efficient mobility both within the County and region. • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A and determine use(s) for any unexpended revenues. • Continue to aggressively pursue completion of the environmental and design processes on key components of the Western County Highway Delivery Plan, which includes the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvement projects. • Continue to develop the toll program consistent with the Western County Highway Delivery Plan including executing toll program agreements with key regional and state partners namely Caltrans, OCTA, toll operator, California Highway Patrol (CHP), and others. • Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. • Continue to work with state and federal agencies to fund and construct projects programmed in the STIP, Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), Proposition 1 B bond programs, and Measure A program as well as other high priority regional projects. • Maximize obtaining all available transportation funds and strategically program funds to meet funding deadlines and to prevent the lapse and loss of funds. • Maximize the effective application and use of Western County TUMF funds to deliver eligible Commission priority projects. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the TUMF Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in Western County. 124 • Actively participate in the SR-91 Advisory Committee and Riverside Orange Corridor Authority to facilitate near and long-term improvements to SR-91; enhance intercounty public transit options and foster the development of a new corridor between the two counties. • Advocate streamlining efforts at the state and federal levels that will reduce costs, time and delays currently associated with project delivery including, but not limited to, timely project reviews and approvals. • Continue to coordinate and provide public access to commuter information via the newly launched Inland Empire 511 system. • Continue cooperation with the FTA regarding the Small Starts process to support the initiation of the Perris Valley Line commuter rail service in 2012. • Continue to work with the public transit operators to reduce costs and increase system efficiencies in order to accommodate lower revenues from state and federal sources. • Continue to develop a vision of transit service to further promote seamless intracity, intercity, and regional transit connectivity for County residents. Mitigate and Address the Impact of Goods Movement The Commission will work with federal, state, and local governments to facilitate the movement of goods and services to, within, and through the County, recognizing the vital role goods movement mobility plays in the economic health of the County, the State, and the nation. • Seek funding and local agency concurrence to implement the Commission's approved, high=priority railroad grade separation priority list to mitigate the impact of increased goods movement demands on the transportation system. • Remain committed to a regional approach regarding goods movement issues in order to maximize funding from state and federal sources to goods movement needs in Southern California. • Continue working with the Ports and regional transportation commissions to develop a funding mechanism for needed projects and mitigation on a regional basis, including Riverside County. • Continue working with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), OCTA, SANBAG, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Mobility 21, and the Coalition for America's Gateway and Trade Corridors to encourage Congress to create a national goods movement program to treat the nation's multimodal national goods movement network as a system rather than individual projects. • 125 • • • Ensure Improved System Efficiencies The Commission will select projects and allocate funds in a manner that will improve safety and reduce congested traffic corridors. • Advocate the development and use of advanced technologies for transportation applications that are affordable and practical • In partnership with SANBAG, refine and enhance the recently launched Inland Empire 511 system, which will make real-time traffic information, real-time bus and rail transit trip planning information, and rideshare information available to commuters for the purpose of trip planning and congestionavoidance. • Assure the effectiveness of transit planning through coordination with the Transit Operators Working Group, Citizens' Advisory Committee, and annual SRTP process with a goal toward promoting program productivity, efficiency and effectiveness. • Provide innovative commuter rideshare programs to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and coordinate with other regional rideshare service providers to address intercounty commute trips. • Work with local jurisdictions, Caltrans and the CHP to continue providing a motorist aid system which includes a call box program and an FSP program, including temporary services in freeway construction zones. • Complete construction, in partnership with Caltrans and SANBAG, of the Inland Empire Transportation Management Center. • Leverage resources to incorporate park and ride facilities and additional connecting bus service at Metrolink stations that may have available capacity. Foster Environmental Stewardship The Commission will achieve its mobility goals while promoting environmental stewardship and protecting the area's natural resources and quality of life. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP. • Work with the SCAG, SCAQMD, sub -regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to implement an RTP that meets regional air quality goals and conformity guidelines. • Support a variety of outreach channels and educational programs that promote the benefits of ridesharing, public and specialized transit, rail, and availability of commuter resources for the purposes of reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. • Facilitate private/public use of clean fuels technology. • Address new state and federal mandates regarding greenhouse gas emissions, including coordination with local and regional agencies and participation in various forums to develop implementation guidelines. • Continue to develop sustainable and green commuter rail stations and provide upgrades and rehabilitation projects to reduce the environmental impact of the existing stations. 126 Encourage Economic Development Transportation decisions will consider the economic benefits derived from any improvement, and, where feasible and practical, will pursue transportation alternatives that enhance or complement economic development. • Commit to seek opportunities related to transportation projects that will create jobs and improve the economic base in the County. • Support local agencies in the design and construction of interchanges that are in proximity to regional economic centers and developments. • Support local projects, consistent with countywide transportation goals, which enhance business development, local employment, and area tourism. Support Transportation Choices through Intermodalism and Accessibility County residents will be served, where economically feasible, through the development of transportation alternatives and travel options that consider the needs of a wide range of citizens. • Work with transit providers and local social service agencies to provide specialized transit service to meet a broad spectrum of socio-economic transit needs of seniors and persons with disabilities. • Leverage commuter assistance and freeway service patrol outreach channels in order to increase the awareness of and foster the use of alternative commuting modes. • Implement the Commission's commuter rail SRTP and SCRRA's plan for commuter rail services with an emphasis on the Perris Valley Line, an extension from Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley. • Develop a long-range strategic plan for the provision of commuter and/ or passenger rail services in Western County or Coachella Valley. • Pursue the goals and objectives as outlined in the Coordinated Public Transit - Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated Plan) for Riverside County related to a unified, comprehensive but flexible strategy for transportation service delivery to address transportation gaps and/or barriers focusing on unmet transportation needs of elderly individuals, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited income. • Enhance security, surveillance, and emergency response capabilities of County transit facilities and infrastructure through proactive planning, interagency coordination, and investment. Prioritize Public and Agency Communications The Commission will provide timely, informative, and accurate information to encourage informed public and agency participation in the Commission's decision -making processes. • Promote a close working relationship with news and civic entities to increase 127 interest and understanding of transportation and related issues. • Enhance the provision of public information through various forms of communication (e.g., website, television, Speakers Bureau, print media, radio, etc). • Maintain an ongoing effort of informing Riverside County's Congressional and State Legislative delegations regarding County transportation issues. • Develop an effective long-range legislative strategy regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation bill to ensure that the federal government participates as a full partner in funding Riverside County projects that are of national and regional significance. • Advocate for sufficient funding for Riverside County transit and transportation projects from various federal and state revenue sources including, but not limited to, annual federal appropriations, economic recovery programs, STIP, and Proposition 1 B bond programs. • Seek legislative flexibility for innovative financing and delivery methods. • Maintain ongoing efforts to educate commuters, businesses, and the public regarding the Commission's toll planning efforts and specific project development efforts currently underway. 128 • Financial and Administration Policies Financial Planning Policies • The Commission shall budget no more than one percent (1 %) of Measure A sales tax revenues for administrative salaries and benefits. • Administrative program delivery costs will be budgeted at whatever is reasonable and necessary, but not to exceed four percent (4%) of Measure A sales tax revenues (inclusive of the one -percent salary limitation). • The Commission shall budget 100% of the annual requiredcontribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. • The Commission shall utilize unexpended 1989 Measure A funds only for projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A. Sales tax revenues from the 2009 Measure A shall be expended only for projects and programs included in the 2009 Measure A. • Amounts will be budgeted by fiscal year for multi -year projects based on best available estimates with the understanding that, to the extent actuals vary from those estimates and the project is ongoing, adjustments, will be made on an continual basis. • The fiscal capital budget should be consistent with the strategic plan and deviations appropriately noted, explained, and justified. • A balanced budget shall be adopted annually with operating and capital expenditures and other financing uses funded by identified revenues and other financing sources as well as available fund balances. Revenue Policies • Sales tax revenue projections will be revised semi-annually to ensure use of current and relevant data. Staff may adjust annual amounts to reflect the most current economic trends. • A strategic application of local funding sources will be used to maximize federal and state funding of projects. • Fiduciary responsibility regarding Western County TUMF revenues shall be exercised, and revenues will be allocated pursuant to Commission direction and the approved 2009 Measure A. Debt Management Policies • The Commission will maintain 2.0x debt ratio coverage on all senior debt. • Debt issuance will be for major capital projects including engineering, right of way, and construction. Debt secured by Measure A revenues may be used to advance projects included in the 2009 Measure A expenditure plan. • Operating requirements, if any, must be paid from current ongoing revenues and may not be financed. • Costs of issuance, including the standard underwriter's discount, will not exceed 129 two percent (2%). • The Commission may enter into interest rate swaps to better manage assets and liabilities and take advantage of market conditions to lower overall costs and reduce interest rate risk. • While it is the intent of the Commission to establish a cash debt reserve for long term bond issuance, surety bonds can be obtained when beneficial to the Commission. • All sales tax revenue debt must mature prior to the termination of 2009 Measure A on June 30, 2039. • The Commission will consider actions to lessen the restriction of the $500 million 2009 Measure A bonding cap, which could include the possibility of a future ballot measure to increase the cap. Expenditure Accountability Policies • Established priorities for planning and programming of capital projects will be reviewed annually with the Commission. • Actual expenditures will be compared to the budget on at least a quarterly basis, and significant deviations will be appropriately noted, explained, and justified. Reserve Policies • The Commission will maintain program reserves in accordance with Measure A and TDA policies and guidelines. • The Commission will establish and maintain a transit operator's reserve of ten percent (10%) for the Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley. Additionally, a ten percent (10%) reserve will be established and maintained for each of the Western County transit operators (public bus and commuter rail). • The Commission shall prioritize the use LTF reserves for the purpose of transit operations. • The Commission shall require that transit operators draw down their current capital projects list prior to requesting the use of reserves to match capital grants and have no more than a three year backlog of capital projects. Cash Management and Investment Policies • Where possible, the Commission will encourage receipt of funds by wire transfer to its accounts. • Balances in the bank operating account will be maintained at the amount necessary to meet monthly expenditures. • Idle funds will be invested per the Commission's established investment policy emphasizing in order of priority: 1) safety, 2) liquidity, and 3) yield. • Cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants will be completed in an expeditious and timely manner. 130 • • Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies • The Commission will replace its financial software system in order to better integrate project accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. . • The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with the GASB Statement 34 financial reporting model. • An audit is to be conducted annually on the Commission's accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds, an independent accounting firm must conduct the audit. • The Commission is responsible for ensuring that audits of Measure A and TDA funding recipients are completed and reviewed for compliance and other matters in a timely manner. • An internal audit program will be maintained to identify improvements in controls and procedures as well as best practices. Human Resources Management Policies • Commission staffing levels will be consistent with the intent of its enabling legislation, which envisioned a small, but effective staff. • Contract staff and consultants will be used to augment staff efforts as much as possible to support programs or workloads, which do not appear to be of a permanent nature. Information Technology Management Policies • Significant effort will be made to maintain efficient and cost-effective technology infrastructure by continuously upgrading network equipment and software to ensure quality performance, productivity, and connectivity among staff, other agencies, and the public. Network security will continue to be a top priority to maintain the integrity of the Commission's network and information. The following matrix illustrates the linkage of the Commission's overall policy goals described in this section to the individual departmental goals and objectives included in Section 7. Commission Policy Goals Goods System Em ironmemal Economic Intemrodallsm Management am Services MMobility Mom.ement Efficiencies Stewardship Development 8 Access bility Communications Administration • 'anage Executive Management X_ X _ _ _ X X Administration Legislative Affairs 8 Communications X -X - X X Finance X X X 'Regional Programs - _ _.X X Regional Issues Planning and Programming Rail Right of Way Management Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance ,Capital Project Development 8 Delivery Financial 8 131 Budget Policy Goals and Objectives Fiscal Year 2010/11 Development of Budget rtment Goals and Objectives ommission Policy Goals ion Commission Policy Goal Goods Movement Seek funding for priority grade separations 'ork with agencies to develop funding mechanism for: . l��n�in cmn�itted �° :. regna1 apprvah to �ariz furl dir Work with agencies to create national program for system network o Economic Developme Support (acal {projects that enhance business, employment and tourism upppl 1pcal' agenoy nterc1110rge . projects Seek opportunities to create jobs and improve economic base Intermodalism & Accessibility Work with agencies to provide specialized transit services Leverage o uter.a sistance-af d FSP outreach a r ren ss of on u de A F. Implement expansion of commuter rail system with PVL sue Coor t at d Plan 4goats and objectives forcomprehensive and fl xrble transportation sent ces st t gy Enhance security, surveillance and emergency response for transit facilities and infrastructure Communications Promote working relationships with news and civic entities Enhance public information delivery methods Inform state and federal legislative delegations Develop legislative strategies and advocate for sufficient federal and state funding Seek legislative flexibility for innovative financing and delivery methods Maintain outreach efforts for toll project planning and specific project development efforts Financial & Administration Policie Accounting • Revenue • Expenditure Accountability • Reserves • Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting ~inane Cash :and nves en Cana emen elp. Mann a en' F nan a� Pannr m Administration • Human Resources Management • Information Technology Management Integration of Policies Management: Services Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs & Communications Finance Regional Programs` Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit CommuterAssistance Motorist Assistance Capital Project Development& Delivery Next Steps Development of Budget Draft Proposed Budget Final Budget t�rnmr�sis�n c�c�s�� dub �ari�g and adcp#� b��ge�; RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Khalid Bazmi, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services with PB Americas, Inc. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-027-20, Amendment No. 9 to Agreement No. 06-66-027-00, with PB Americas, Inc. (PB) for on -call strategic partnership advisor services to continue providing services for the proposed State Route 91 and Interstate 15 corridor improvement projects in the amount of $648,355; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In March 2006, the Commission entered into an agreement with PB Consult Inc. (now PB Americas, Inc.) for the purpose of providing strategic partnership advisor services for innovative project financing and evaluation of potential toll road corridors in Riverside County. Project approval and environmental document work phase completion for the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects is scheduled for 2011 and 2012, respectively, under separate agreements with engineering firms. The continued services of PB are desirable to assist the Commission in successfully moving these projects forward into the design, construction, and operations phases. Some near term tasks of PB's scope of work include: • Perform Level 2 toll feasibility study for 1-15; • Assist in structuring of the project, procurement, project delivery, and financial approach; Agenda Item 9 132 • Assist with interaction with relevant state and federal agencies, including California Transportation Commission, Ca!trans, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and state and federal resource agencies; • Prepare and deliver workshops on tolling, public -private partnerships, project procurement approach and options, and risk issues and allocation to internal staff, the Commission, and other stakeholders; • Assist with project tolling and operations issues; • Assist in implementation planning for SR-91 and 1-15; and • Other project related tasks directed by the Commission. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND DIRECTION: During consideration of this item, the Western Riverside County Projects and Programs Committee directed staff to return to the contractor and renegotiate for a reduction in the overall cost of the contract. The Committee's direction was based on the economic climate and challenges currently faced in Riverside County, which has led to employment losses, salary reductions, and significantly lower and more. competitive bids on construction projects. Since this particular working relationship and contract has been in place since 2006, Committee members stated their concern that it was inappropriate to extend the contract at its current rate. The services outlined above will be provided by PB for $648,355. This represents a 30% (or$23,312) reduction in its profit from the original staff recommendation presented to the Committee on February 22, 2010. The revised cost represents a significant cost savings, as the vast majority of work performed as part of this agreement is unique to the consultant's experience and the project itself. As a result, the tasks called out in the scope of work cannot be easily performed by another competitor. Staff anticipates expending this amount by June 2011. This will bring the total contract amount to $3,010,788. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 Amount: $300,000 $348,355 Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A Highway Budget Ad ustment: No N/A GLA No.: 262 31 65520 P3028 $ 275,467 262 32 65520 P3027 $ 372,888 Fiscal Procedures Approved: Date: 02/10/2010 Attachments: 1) Draft Agreement No. 06-66-027-20 2) Scope and Fee Proposal Agenda Item 9 • 133 • • • ATTACHMENT 1 Agreement No. 06-66-027-20 AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO AGREEMENT FOR STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISORY SERVICES PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 9 to the Agree for ' egic partnership advisory services is made and entered into as of thi day o , 2010, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRAION ("Commission") and PB AMERICAS, INC. ("Consultant" 2. RECITALS 2.1 The Commission an dated Ma ell 24, 2006` adviso (the " 2.2 The Carr to the ing ,.ham issionattd the Co`a Ser e�ment, Pens; entered into an agreement 'dingstrategic partnership t"). rant have -entered into Amendment No. 1 d July 11, 2006 for the purpose of on for ongoing strategic partnership The Comnitheion aridthe Consultant have entered into Amendment No. 2 o the MastetAgreewrnt, dated November 8, 2006, for the purpose of oyiding add nal ce"mpensation for ongoing strategic partnership advr ry service. 2.4 The Cemmis__ and the Consultant have entered into Amendment No. 3 to the Mafer''Agreement, dated March 22, 2007, for the purpose of providing additional compensation for ongoing strategic partnership advisory services. 2.5 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into Amendment No. 4 to the Master Agreement, dated July 1, 2007, for the purpose of changing the billing rates being utilized by Consultant. 2.6 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into Amendment No. 5 to the Master Agreement, dated February 9, 2008, for the purpose of PB Americas, Inc. Amendment No. 9 (RCTC Doc. No. 06-66-027-20) Page 1 134 ATTACHMENT 1 extending the term of and to provide additional compensation for the continued provision of strategic partnership advisory services. 2.7 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into Amendment No. 6 to the Master Agreement, dated July 10, 2008, for the purpose of permit the San Bernardino Associated Governments to engage the services of the Consultant under similar terms and conditions provided to the Commission under the Master Agreement. 2.8 The Commission and Consultant have ed into Amendment No. 7 to the Master Agreement to effect n assignment of the Master Agreement by the Consultant to : ,ce ®entity. 2.9 The Commission and the Co to the Master Agreement, compensation for the con advisory services. 2.10 The parties now additional compens Partnership Advisor S 3. TERMS 3.1 nt have ente d January 14, 20� d provion of to Amendment No. 8 provide additional gic partnership o amend a Master Agreement to provide the c.°= ued provision of Strategic tion uh r the Master Agreement, as previously by incad Six Hundred Forty Eight Thousand, y-Five Do`lk4s 0648,355). ract vjiue for the Master Agreement, as heretofore of exceed Three Million, Ten Thousand, Seven Hundred 'Dollars ($3, 010,788) 3.3 Except Tided by this Amendment, all provisions of the Master Agreemerr heretofore amended by Amendments No. 1 through No. 8, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment. PB Americas, Inc. Amendment No. 9 (RCTC Doc. No. 06-66-027-20) Page 2 • • 135 • ATTACHMENT 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the Agreement on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Bob Buster, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: PB AMERICAS, INC. PB Americas, Inc. Amendment No. 9 (RCTC Doc. No. 06-66-027-20) Page 3 136 ATTACHMENT 1 Exhibit A (Attached) PB Americas, Inc. Amendment No. 9 (RCTC Doc. No. 06-66-027-20) 137 Attachment 2 Contract No: 06-66-027-00 Consultant: PB Americas, Inc. Strategic Partnership Advisor Task No. 9.1 & 9.2 Task Name: 1-15 Toll Feasibility Study and Strategic Consulting Services Task Order Summary Task Number 9.1: Continue ongoing strategic consulting services. Task Number 9.2: Perform a toll feasibility study for I-15. Subject to the terms of our engagement agreement, PB Americas will perform the tasks in the attached scopes of work for an estimated budget not to exceed $648,355. If additional amounts are required beyond the estimated budget amounts, PB Americas will provide written notice to RCTC and understands that such budget may only be increased in writing by ROTC. In recognition of the current economic conditions in Riverside County, the total price included here is based on a reduction in PB's fee from 10% to 7%. This reduced fee will remain in effect for twelve months from the date of execution of this amendment. After that period the 10% fee will be reinstated. Attachments Attachment #1 Attachment #2 Attachment #3 Attachment #4 Attachment #5 Attachment #6 Task 9.1 Scope of Work and Approach Task 9.1 Project Schedule Task 9.1 Estimated Man-hours, Billing Rates, and Detailed Cost Est. Task 9.2 Scope of Work and Approach Task 9.2 Project Schedule Task 9.2 Estimated Man-hours, Billing Rates, and Detailed Cost Est. Task Order Submitted By: March 2, 2010 Kent Olsen, Project Manager, PB Americas Date Task Order and Notice to Proceed Approved By: Title Date 138 Attachment #1 Scope of Work, Contract #06-66-027-00, Task #9.1 Task 9.1 - Ongoing Strategic Consulting Services Task 9.1.1 Support of CTC application for PPP Authority Participate in any negotiations with the California Transportation Commission for design -build authority for the SR-91 CIP. As follow-on work, if not selected for design -build authority, to assist RCTC in preparation of an application to the CTC for public private partnership (PPP) authority for projects (1-15 and SR-91), as requested. Prepare and/or review documentation related to CTC application(s) and attend meetings as requested by RCTC. Task 9.1.2 Ongoing Project Management/Support Coordinate PB activities between tasks and with the SR-91 PANED work and the 1-15 HDR PANED work and those of other studies to ensure that inputs needed from one project are provided to the appropriate party when needed. Participate in meetings and conference calls with RCTC staff and its other consultants as requested to allow coordination between PB Americas tasks and other RCTC consultants, studies and activities. This task also includes hours for administering the PB contract, including reporting, preparation of forecasts, and revisions to task orders. Task 9.1.3 Assist in Implementation Planning for SR-91 PB will provide assistance with activities related to implementation of SR-91 Express Lanes. These activities may include: • Assist in negotiations with OCTA for operations and maintenance of toll collection for the SR-91 Express Lanes extension. The agreement will need to be in place prior to closing financing for design and construction. This task may involve several meetings with OCTA and its contractor, Cofiroute, PB will attend the meetings with RCTC and review minutes for approval. PB will assist in the preparation of the cooperative agreement between RCTC and OCTA and propose appropriate revisions to the Cofiroute contract. PB will research actual traffic levels and performance achieved on the existing express lanes and propose performance measures to use in the new operations agreement. • PB will provide input on activities, schedules and costs necessary for project financing and for procurement of the design -build contractor and other consultants needed for a non -recourse toll financing of the express lanes. This task will also include identification of additional studies or engineering work needed to obtain competitive bids during the design -build procurement. This information will be coordinated with input from Parsons, Bechtel, KPMG, and Nossaman. • Assist in risk management activities as requested. Provide input on potential risks to scope, schedule and budget for SR-91. Identify and document risk mitigation approaches for projects being assessed. 139 Task 9.1.4 Assist in Implementation Planning for 1-15 PB will provide input on activities, schedules and costs necessary for procurement of the design -build contractor and other consultants needed for a non -recourse toll financing of the express lanes. This task will also include identification of additional studies or engineering work needed to obtain competitive bids during the design -build procurement. This information will be coordinated with input from Bechtel, KPMG, and Nossaman. PB will assist in risk management activities as requested and provide input on potential risks to scope, schedule and budget for 1-15. PB will also identify and document risk mitigation approaches for projects being assessed. Task 9.1.5 PPP Scenario — SR-91 Capital Cost Categorization PB will determine depreciation periods for each element of the capital cost for SR-91 to be used in the financial analysis for a public -private partnership scenario and provide the depreciation periods to KPMG. 140 Attachment #2 Project Schedule, Contract #06-66-027-00, Task #9.1 Task 9.1.1 Support of CTC application for PPP Authority Start Date (NTP) 03/1/2010 Estimated Completion Date 08/29/2010 Task 9.1.2 Ongoing Project Management/Support Start Date (NTP) 07/1/2010 Estimated Completion Date 06/30/2011 Task 9.1.3 Assist in Implementation Planning for SR-91 Start Date (NTP) 07/01/2010 Estimated Completion Date 06/30/2011 Task 9.1.4 Assist in Implementation Planning for 1-15 Start Date (NTP) 03/01/2010 Estimated Completion Date 02/28/2011 Task 9.1.5 PPP Scenario — SR-91 Capital Cost Categorization Start Date (NTP) 03/01/2010 Estimated Completion Date 06/01/2010 142 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06-66-027.00 • Task 9.1 - Ongoing Strategic Advisory Services (For an additional 12 month period) PB Americas, Inc. • Attachment #3 Estimated Man-hours, Billing Rates, and Detailed Cost Estimate, Contract 406-66-027-00, Task #9.1 March 2, 2010 PERSON HOURS Activity Olsen Dewey Schaufler Palmer Thomas Argabright Byrne TOTAL 9.1.1 CTC application for PPP authority 8 6 100 116 9.1.2 Ongoing project management and coordination 48 120 168 9.1.3 SR-91 Support 288 100 100 80 40 80 668 9.1.4 1.15 Support 48 48 96 9.1.5 PPP Scenario-SR-91 Capital Cost Categorization 8 20 40 40 108 TOTAL HOURS 400 100 20 316 120 140 80 1176 DIRECT LABOR PER HOUR' $126.73 $73.78 $76.48 $58.70 $77.92 $92.49 $61.84 DIRECT LABOR COST $50,694 $7,378 $1,530 $18,551 $9,351 $12,949 $4,947 $105,399 OVERHEAD RATE 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 OVERHEAD COST $78,829 $11,473 $2,379 $28,846 $14,540 $20,135 $7,893 $163,896 LABOR COST $129,523 $18,851 $3,908 $47,397 $23,891 $33,084 $12,641 $269,296 FEE @ 7% $9,067 $1,320 $274 $3,318 $1,672 $2,316 $885 $18,851 TOTAL LABOR COST $138,589 $20,171 $4,182 $50,715 $25,563 $35,400 $13,526 $288,146 EXPENSES City of Origin Nipomo, CA Denver, CO Number of trips 8 2 10 Airfare $1,000 $1,000 Hotel $800 $360 $1,160 Meals $200 $300 $500 Rental car/auto mileage/taxi/train $800 $300 $1,100 Reproduction 80 Telephone $0 Postage/express delivery $0 Other $0 TOTAL EXPENSES - - - $1.500 $0 $0 $1,960 - $0 $0 $0 $3,760 TOTAL COST $140,389 • $20,171 $4,182 $52,675 $25,563 $35,400 $13,526 $291,906 ncludes 1.25°l° markup to accountfor annual salary increases that will occur in August 2010. 144 Attachment #4 Scope of Work,. Contract #06-66-027-00, Task #9.2 Page 1 of 3 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION I-15 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Approach for Update of Toll Feasibility Study This is to describe the steps to be used in redoing the feasibility study for the I- 15 tolled express lanes. The original study performed in 2006 and 2007 and dated April 19, 2007 considered phased construction of two express lanes and one general purpose lane in each direction from the San Bernardino County line to SR-74 as Scenario 1. The study also looked at a second scenario to add two express lanes in each direction from SR-74 to the San Diego County line. The results of the study showed a large amount of Measure A funds needed to make the project work. Based on what has been learned from the SR-91 feasibility study updates, it is clear that the amount of the Measure A funding required is the key criterion for determining project feasibility. With that in mind the I-15 study update objective will be to identify the maximum "Initial Project" that can be financed with a reasonable amount of Measure A funds. Preliminary engineering and environmental studies on the I-15 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) started in 2008 on a project to add two tolled express lanes and one general purpose lane in each direction from the San Bernardino County line to SR-74 and one carpool lane in each direction from SR-74 to I-15/I-215 Interchange and that will remain the ultimate project. However, these studies can be modified to include a phased approach to construction starting with the Initial Project, phases added over time, and ending with the ultimate project. Proposed Approach On the attached map four alternative Study Areas are identified: • Study Area A — Add express lanes from Cajalco Rd. through the I-15/SR 91 interchange to Hidden Valley Parkway. • Study Area B — Add express lanes from Cajalco Rd. to SR-60. • Study Area C — Add express lanes from Indian Truck Trail Road to Hidden Valley Parkway. • Study Area D — Add express lanes from Indian Truck Trail Rd. to SR-60. 146 Page 2 of 3 For each of these Study Areas there are also three possible Scenarios; 1) add GP lanes at the same time, 2) add GP lanes five years later, 3) add GP lanes ten years later. Note that none of the Study Areas extend south beyond Indian Truck Trail Road. That limit was identified in the value analysis exercise as a likely southerly limit of the express lanes based on the forecast of traffic volumes. The north end limit at SR-60 will be kept as already defined by HDR in the ongoing preliminary engineering work. The southern limit near Indian Truck Trail Rd: will have to be located by HDR at a point that attracts customers and minimizes construction cost. For all of these Study Areas we will assume a stand-alone toll operations center and customer service center. This approach to analyze all of these options would require a lot of work since we need cost estimates, traffic model runs, traffic and revenue forecasts, and financial analysis for each option to get to a bottom line of Measure A funds needed. As results are obtained, the team will discuss the next steps before proceeding. In general the analysis will be performed in increments in the following order: 1. Study Area A, Scenario 1 (GP lanes at same time). If feasible, go to step 4, if not go to step 2. 2. Study Area A, Scenario 2. (GP lanes after 5 years). If feasible go to step 4, if not go to step 3. 3. Study Area A, Scenario 3. (GP lanes after 10 years). If feasible go to step 4, if not stop and discuss. 4. Study Area B, Scenario 1. If feasible go to step 10, if not go to step 5. 5. Study Area B, Scenario 2. If feasible go to step 10, if not go to step 6. 6. Study Area B, Scenario 3. If feasible go to step 10, if not stop and discuss — proceeding to step 7 will be considered 7. Study Area C, Scenario 1. If feasible go to step 10, if not go to step 8. 8. Study Area C, Scenario 2. If feasible go to step 10, if not go to step 9. 9. Study Area C, Scenario 3. If feasible go to step 10, if not stop and discuss. 10. Study Area D, Scenario 1. If feasible stop, if not go to step 11. 147 Page 3 of 3 11. Study Area D, Scenario 2. If feasible stop, if not go to step 12. 12. Study Area D, Scenario 3. If feasible stop, if not stop. For budget purposes, the total cost proposal should allow for [15] complete runs of the full feasibility process. The plan will be for RCTC to authorize an initial start of [3] runs and determine the next authorization after results are reviewed. 148 Attachment #5 Project Schedule, Contract #06-66-027-00, Task #9.2 ID 6 7 8 Task Name 41 10 3 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NTP Call l0 discuss assumptions I HOR Layout termini and access points RCTC/HDR/PB/Itens meet to confirm HDR Estimate Study Area A cost HDR Estimate Study Area B cost HDR Estimate Study Area C cast HDR Estimate Study Area D cast Rens Run traffic model for Study Area A, Scenario 1 (lens and PB review results Stantec prepare T8R forecast .. o t PB Estimate toll system costs, Study Area A PB Estimate rehab costs, Study Area A PB Estimate O&M Costs for Study Area A PB Assemble revenue and cost for Study Area A PB Transmit input to KPMG KPMG 8 PB Reconcile input KPMG Perform (manual analysis Conference call to present results 22 23 24 25 26 8 29 1 32 3 5 36 39 40 43 44 45 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 D Finish Predecessor 0 days:, Mon 2/1/10 1 day; Mon 2/1/10 2 10 days Mon 2/15/10 3 1 day Tue 2/16/10: 4 20 days Tue 3/16/10 5 20 dayss Fri 326/10','655r8 days 20 days 1, Wed 477I10'7SS*e days 20 days Tue 323/10 Mon 4/19/10 8SSt8 days 15 days Wed 2/17/10 Tue 3/9/10 5 5 days Wed 3/10/10 Tue 3/16/10 10 -- 15 days j Wed 3117/10',. Tue 4/6110', 11 6 days Wed 2i17/10 Wetl 224/10 5 8 days'. Wed 2/17/10Fri 226/10'5 3 days'.. Wed 4/7/10 . Fri 4/9/10 5,12 4 days Mon 4/12/10' Thu 4/15/10. 6,12,13,14,15 0 days Thu 4115/10 Thu 4/15110 16 7 days Fn 4/16/10 Mon 426/10 17 12 days, Tue 4/27/10 Wed 5/12/10', 18 l day Thu 5/13/10 Thu 5/13/10 19 Start Mon 2/1110'. Mon 2/1/10 Tue 2/2110' Tue 2/16110 Wed 2/17/10 Mon 3/1/10', Thu 3/11/10 NOTE THAT THE THREE SCHEDULES SHOWN BELOW ARE 0 days': Mon 2/1/10 TO SHOW TYPICAL FOLLOW-ON STUDY STEPS AND 0days Mon 211/10 DURATIONS -THE DATES SHOWN DO NOT APPLY 0 days Mon 2/1110 Study Area A, Scenario 2 Call to discuss assumptions 'tents Rum traffic model for Study Areas A2 & A3 Stantec prepare T812foretast PB Assemble revenue and rusts, Study Area A2 PB Transmit input to KPMG KPMG and P8 Reconcile input KPMG Perform financial analysts ----— �- Conference call to present results Study Area A, Scenario 3 Call to discuss assumptions .. _. __.. Stantec prepare T8R forecast PB Assemble revenue and cdsts, Study Area A3 S Transmit input to KPMG - — - -- KPMG and PB Reconcile input KPMG Perform financial analysis Conference call to present results Mon 2/1/10. Mon 2/1/10 Mon 2/1/10 36 days', Mon 3/1/10 Mon 0119/10', l day', Mon 3/1/10i Mon 3/1/10 10 days Tue 32/10� Mon 3/15/10 27 6 days Tue 3/16110 iii Tue 3/23/10'. 28 4 days Wed 324/10 Mon 3/29/10 29 0 days Mon 329/10'. Mon 3/29/10 ',, 30 4days Tue 3/30(10',, Fri 42110 31 10 days Mon 4/5/10 Fri 4/16/10 32 1 day Mon 4/19/10', Mon 4/19/10'33 22 days Mon 3/1/10 Tue 3/30/10 2 days Non 3/1/10 Tue 32/101 2 days! Wetl 3/3/10.' Thu 314/10 37 4 days Fri 3/5/ 10 Wetl 3/10/10 38 0 days Wed 3/10/10 Wed 3/10/10 39 3 days I Thu 3/11/10'. Mon 3/15/10' 40 10 days _ Tue 3/16/10'. Mon 329/10 41 1 day Tue 3/30/10 Tue 3/30/10' 42 ....... ...._ ..... ..... Study Area B, Scenario 1 57 days'. Thu 2/18/10 Fri 52/10''.. Call to discuss assumptions • 1 day Thu 2/18/10. Thu 2/18/10 hens run traffic modeller for Study Area 8, all Scenarios 15 days', Fri i7191101, Thu 3/11I10'. 46 Stantec prepare T8R forecast 14 days' Fri 3/12/10'- Wed 331/10', 47 PB Estimate toll systems cost for Study Area B - 6 days Fn 2/19i10 Fn 226/10 46 PB Estimate rehab costs for Study Area B 7 days Fri 2/19110 Man 3M/10 46 PB Estimate 08M Costs for Study Area B 3days Thu 4/1/10 W1146/10 48 P6 Assemble revenue and costs for Study Area 6 Scenario 1 4 days Tue 4/6/10 Fri 4/9110 48 49 50 51 PB Transmit input to KPMG - 0 days Fn 4/9110 Fn 4/9/10 52 KPMG and PB Reconcile input '. 7 days.. Mon 4/12I10'. Tue 4I20110.53 KPMG Perform financial analysts '. 12 days Wed 4I21110' Thu 5r6/10. 54 Conference call to present results 1 day Fn 517110 Fn 5/7/10 55 Project:1-15 Feasibility Study Schedule Date: Tue 22/10 Task Critical Task February 1/24 _. 'y 1/31 2/7 1,_2/14_L 221 Progress Summary Milestone Rolled Up Task • • • Rolled Up Critical Task Rolled Up Milestone 1March 228 Rolled Up Progress Split 3/14 3/21 3/28 _ I 414 External Tasks Propel Summary 4/11 4/18 425 Group By Summary Deadline Ma SI16_ Page 1 150 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06=66-027-00 Task 9.2 -1-15 Toll Feasibility Study All Firms Attachment #6 Estimated Man- hours, Billing Rates, and Detailed Cost Estimate, Contract #06-66-027-00, Task #9.2 March 2, 2010 '.. PERSON HOURS Activity - PB Amejricas Stantec Total 9.2.1 Project Management and Administration 22! 0 22 9.2.2 Study.Area A, Scenario 1. 9.2.2.1 Call to Discuss Assumptions 4 6 10 9.22.2 RCTCJHDRlPBllteris Meet to Confirm Termini and Ames% Points 6 0 6 9.2.2.3 hens and PB Review Traffic Model Results 18'. 0 16 9.2.2.4 Stantec Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast for Study. Area A, Scenario 1 3 124 127 9.2.2.5 PB Estimates Toll System Costs for Study Area A, All Scenarios 65'' 0 65 9.2.2.6 PB Estimates Rehab Costs for Study Area A, All Scenarios 21 0 21 9.2.2.7 PB Estimates O&M Costs for Study Area A, All Scenarios 66'' 0 66 9.2.2.8 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Study Area A, Scenario 1 10. 0 10 9.2.2.9 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 6 0 6 9.2.2_10 Conference Call to Present Results 6°, 6 14 9.2.3 Study Area A, Scenario 2 Call to Discuss Assumptions 10'.. 6 16 Stantec Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast for Scenario 3 54 57 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Scenario _ 14'. 0 14 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 6 0 6 Conference Call to Present. Results 7 6 .13 9.2A Study Area A, Scenario 3 40'. 28 68 9.2.5 Study Area,B, Scenario 2 40. 52 92 9.2.6 Study Area B, Scenario 3 40' 28 68 9.2.7 Study Area C, Scenario 2 - 40'.. 52 92 9.2.8 Study Area C, Scenario.3 40 28 68 9.2.9 Study Area D, Scenario 2 - 40, - 52 92 9.2.10 Study Area D, Scenario 3 40'' . 28 68 9.2.11 Study Area B, Scenario 1 Call to Discuss Assumptions 7 6 13 Stantec Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast Study Area B, Scenario 1 3 '.. 88 91 PB Estimates Toll System Costs for Study Area B, All Scenarios 43 0 43 PB Estimates Rehab Casts for Study Area B, All Scenarios _ 22' 0 22 PB Estimates O&M Costs for Study Area B, All Scenarios 49' 0 49 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Study Area B, Scenario 1 10. 0 10 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 6 0 6 Conference Call to Present Results 5 6 11 9.212 Study Area C, Scenario 1 - . 145 - 100 245 9.2.13 Study Area 0, Scenario 1 lap 70 215 TOTAL HOURS - - 984 740 1,724 TOTAL LABORCOST- $200,209 $149,480 $349,689 EXPENSES $2,880 $3,900 $6,760 _ TOTAL COST $203,069 $153,380 $356,449 152 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06-66-027-00 Task 9.2 - 1-15 Toll Feasibility Study PB Americas, Inc. March 2. 2010 PERSON HOURS Activity Olsen SchauoByrne Dewey PalmerPalme Thomas Bye TOTAL 9.2.1 Project Management and Administration 6 16 22 9.22 Study Area A, Scenario 1 9.2.2.1 Can to Discuss Assumptions 2 2 4 9.2.2.2 RCTC4IDR/PB/Itens Meet to Confirm Temuri and Access Points 4 2 5 9.2.2.3 Items aud PB Review Traffic Model Results 2 16 18 9.2.2.4 Staines Prepares Traffic end Revenue Forecast for Study Area A, Scenario 1 1 2 3 9.2.2.5 PB Estimates Tol System Costs for Study Area A, Al Scenarios 1 48 8 6 65 92.2.6 _ PB Estimates Rehab Costs for Study Area A, An Scenarios 1 2 8 10 21 9.2.2.7 PB Estimates O&M Costs for Study Area A, All Scenarios 2 36 4 24 66 9.2.2.8 PR Assembles Revenue and Costs for Study Area A. Scenario 1 ' 2 8 10 9.2.2.9 PB and KPMG Reconcile Maids 2 4 6 9.2.2.10 Conference Call to Present Results 2 2 2 2 8 9.2.3 Study Area A, Scenario 2 Cal to Discuss Assvnpluns 2 3 - 3 2 10 Stantec Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast for Scenario 1 2 3 PB Assembles Revenue are' Costs for Scenario 2 4 8 14 PB and KPMG Reconcile inputs 2 4 6 Conference Call to Resent Results 1 2 2 2 7 92.4 Study Area A. Scenario 3 8 5 9 18 0 0 40 926 Study Area B, Scenario 2 8 5 9 18 0 0 4o 9.26 Study Area B, Scenario 3 8 5 9 18 0 0 40 9.27 Study Area C, Scenario 2 8 5 9 18 0 0 4o 9.2.8 Study Area C, Scenario 3 8 5 9 8 0 0 40 9.2.9 Study Area D, Scenario 2 8 5 9 8 0 0 40 9.2.10 Study Area D, Scenario 3 e 5 9 18 0 0 40 9.211 Study Area B, Scenario 1 Can to Discuss Assumptions 2 3 2 7 Startles Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast Study Area B, Scenario 1 1 - 2 3 PB Estimates Tat System Casts far Study Area B, All Scenarios 1 30 4 8 43 PB Estimates Rehab Costs for Study Area 8. A8 Scenarios 1 3 8 10 22 PB Estimates 08M Costs for Study Area B, An Scenarios 2 20 3 24 49 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Study Area B, Scenario 1 2 8 10 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 2 4 6 Conference Can to Present Results 1 2 2 5 9.2.12 Study Area C, Scenario 1 12 52 13 58 10 0 145 9.213 Study Area D, Scenario / =42`-- 52 13 58 10 0 145 TOTAL HOURS 123 282 127 396 40 16 984 - DIRECT LABOR PER HOUR $125.17 $76.48 $72.87 $57.98 $76.96 $61.08 DIRECT LABOR COST $15.396 $21.567 $9,254 $22,960 $3,078 $977 $73,234 OVERHEAD RATE 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 1.555 OVERHEAD COST $23.941 $33.537 $14,391 $35,703 $4,787 $1,520 1113,878 LABOR COST $39,337 $55,105 $23,645 $56,663 $7,865 $2,497 $167,112 FEE @ 7% $2,754 $3.857 $1,655 $4,106 $551 $175 $13,098 TOTAL LABOR COST $42,090 $58,962 $25,300 $62,769 $8,416 $2,672 $200,209 EXPENSES City of Origin Nipomo, CA Denver, CO Number of hips 4 2 1 6 Airfare $1,000 $1,000 Hotel $400 $360 $750 Meals $100 $300 $400 Rental car/ado mileagediarrtrain $400 $300 $700 Reproduction $g Telephone $0 Postage/express delvery $6 Other $0 TOTAL EXPENSES $900 $0 $0 $1,960 $0 $0 $2,860 TOTAL COST $42,990 $58,962 $25,300 $64.729 $8,416 $2,672 5203,069 153 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06.66-027-00 Task 9.2 - 1-15 Toll Feasibility Study Stantec March 2, 2010 PERSON HOURS Activity Nielsten Abendschein Mar TOTAL 9.2.1 Project Management and Administration 0 9.2.2 Study Area A, Scenario 1 9.2.2.1 Cal to Discuss Assumptions 2 2 2 6 9.2.2.2 RCTC/HDR/PB9teris Meet to Confirm Termini and Access Points 0 9.2.2.3 Reds and PB Review Traffic Model Results 0 9.2.2.4 Stantec Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast for Study Area A, Scenario 1 � 20 32 72 124 9.2.2.5 PB Estimates ToN System Costs for Study Area A. A8 Scenarios 0 9.2.2.6 PB Estimates Rehab Costs for Study Area A, AN Scenados 0 9.2.2.7 PB Estimates O&M Costs for Study Area A All Scenarios 0 9.2.2.8 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Study Area A, Scenario 1 0 9.2.2.9 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 0 9.2.2.10 Conference Cal to Present Results 2 2 2 6 9.2.3 Study Area A, Scenario 2 Cal to Discuss Assumptions - 2 2 2 6 Stantec Prepares Traffic and Revenue Forecast for Scenado 6 16 _ 32 54 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Scenario 0 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 0 Conference Call to Present Results 2 2 2 6 9.24 Study Area A, Scenario 3 4 8 16 28 9.2.5 Study Area B, Scenario 2 4 16 32 52 9.2.6 Study Area B, Scenario 3 4 8 16 28 9.2.7 Study Area C, Scenario 2 4 16 32 52 9.2.8 Study Area C, Scenario 3 - 4 8 16 28 9.2.9 Study Area 0, Scenario 2 4 16 - 32 52 9.2.10 Study Area D, Scenario 3 4 8 16 28 9.2.11 Study Area B, Scenario 1 Cal to Discuss Assumptions 2 2 - 2 6 Stantec Prepares Traffic and RevenueForecastStudy Area B, Scenario 1 8 32 48 88 PB Estimates Toll System Costs for Study Area B. All Scenarios p PB Estimates Rehab Costs for Study Area B, AA Scenarios - p PB Estimates O&M Costs for Study Area B, All Scenarios 0 PB Assembles Revenue and Costs for Study Area B, Scenario 1 0 PB and KPMG Reconcile Inputs 0 Conference Call to Present Results 2 2 2 6 9.2.12 Study Area C, Scenario 1 12 36 52 100 9.2.13 Study Area D, Scenario 1 10 20 40 70 TOTAL HOURS 96 228 416 740 ALL-INCLUSIVE LABOR RATE $300.00 S210.00 $175.00 TOTAL LABOR COST $28,800 $47,880 $72,800 $149,480 EXPENSES City of Origin New York New York _ Number of trips 2 1 3 Airfare $1,600 $800 $2,400 Hotel $600 $300 ' $900 Meals $200 $100 $300 Rental car/auto mileage/taxi/train _ _ _ _ Reproduction __. _. _. $200 _..-__.__ $100 --_—_—_ __.____._ ___.__.._._—__ $300 $0 Telephone $0 Postage/express delivery _. Other 50 $6 TOTAL EXPENSES $2,600 $1,300 $0 $3,900 TOTAL COST $31,400 $49,180 $72,800 $153,380 154 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06-66-027-00 Task 9.2 -145 Toll Feasibility Study All Firms March 2, 2010 BUDGET , Activity PB Americas Stantec Total 9.2.1 Project Management and Administration $4,589 $0 ` $4,589 9.2.2 Study Area A, Scenario 1 $41,589 $28,060 $69,649 9.2.3 Study Area A, Scenario 2 $8,429 $13,500 $21,929 9.2.4 Study Area A, Scenario 3 $8,429 $5,680 $14,109 9.2.5 Study Area B, Scenario 2 $8,429 $10,160 $18,589 9.2.6 Study Area B, Scenario 3 $8,429 - $5,680 $14,109 9.2.7 Study Area C, Scenario 2 $8,429 $10,160 $18,689 9.2.8 Study Area C, Scenario 3 $8,429 $5,680 $14,109 9.2.9 Study Area D, Scenario 2 $8,429 $10,160 $18,689 9.2.10 Study Area D, Scenario 3 $8,429 $5,680 $14,109 9.2.11 Study Area B, Scenario 1 $28,866 $20,260 $49,126 9.2.12 Study Area C, Scenario 1 $28,866 $20,260 $49,126 9.2.13 Study Area D, Scenario 1 $28,866 $14,200 S43,066 TOTAL LABOR COST $200,209 $149,480 $349,889 EXPENSES $2,860 $3,900 - $6,760 TOTAL COST $203,069 $153,380 $356,449 • 155 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06.66.027.00 Task 9.2 - 1-15 TGII Feasibility Study PB Americas, Inc. March 2, 2010 BUDGET Activity Olsen Selmaner Dewey Palmer Thomas Byme TOTAL 9.2.1 Project Management and Administration $2,053 $0 $0 $2,536 $0 $0 $4,889 9.2.2 Study Area A, Scenario l $5,817 $17,981 $3,187 $9,828 $2,104 $2.872 $41,589 9.2.3 Study Area A. Scenario 2 $2,738 $1,045 $1,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $6,429 9.2.4 Study Area A. Scenario 3 $2,738 $1,045 $1,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $8,429 9,2.5 Study Area B. Scenario 2 $2,738 $1,045 $1,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $8,429 9,2,6 Study Area B. Scenario 3 $2.738 $1,045 $1,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $8,429 9.2.7 Study Area C, Scenario 2 $2,738 $1,045 $1,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $8,428 9.2.8 Study Area C, Scenario 3 $2,738 $1,045 51,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $8,429 9.2.9 Study Area D, Scenario 2 $2,738 $1,045 $1,793 $2.853 $0 $0 $8,429 9.2.10 Study Area D, Scenario 3 $2,738 $1,045 $1,793 $2,853 $0 $0 $8,429 9.2.11 Study Area B, Scenario 1 $4,105 $10.872 $2,590 $9.194 $2,104 $0 $28,886 9.2.12 Study Area C, Scenario 1 $4,106 $10,872 $2,590 $9,194 $2,104 $0 $28,866 9.2.13 Study Area O Scenario 1 $4,106 $10,872 $2,590 $9,194 $2,104 $0 $28,866 TOTAL HOURS $42,090 $58,962 $25,300 $62,769 $8,416 $2.672 5200,209 DIRECT LABOR PER HOUR $125.17 $76.48 $72.87 $57.98 $76.96 $61.08 OVERHEAD MULTIPLIER 2.555 2.555 2.555 2.555 2.555 2.555 FEE @ 7% 1.070 1.070 1.070 1.070 1.070 1.070 EXPENSES City of Origin_._ _ -- - ---- - --_- -- _ - - Nipomo, CA Denver, CO Number of trips 4 2 6 Airfare ------Hotel $1,000 $1,000 - $400 $360 $780 Meals $100 • $300 Sao Rental car/auto mileage/taxi/Iran $400 $300 $700. Reproduction $0 Telephone $0 Postage/express delivery $0 Other $0 TOTAL EXPENSES $900 $0 $0 $1,950 $0 $0 $2,860 TOTAL COST $42,990 $58,962 $25,300 $64,729 $8,416 $2,672 $203,069 156 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTRACT NO: 06.66-027-00 Task 9.2 -1-15 Toll Feasibility Study Stantec March 2, 2010 BUDGET Activity Nlelsten Abendscheln Mar TOTAL 9.2.1 Project Management and Administration $0 $0 $0 $0 9.2.2 Study Area A, Scenario 1 $7,200 $7,560 $13,300 $28,060 9.2.3 Study Area A. Scenario 2 $3.000 $4,200 $6,300 $13,500 9.2.4 Study Area A. Scenario 3 $1,200 $1,680- $2,800 $6,680 9.2.5 Study Area 8, Scenario 2 $1,200 $3,360 $5,600 $10,160 9.2.6 Study Area S, Scenario 3 $1,200 • $1,680 $2,800 $6,680 B.2.7 Study Area C, Scenario 2 $1,200 $3,380 $5.600 $10,160 9.2.8 Study Area C. Scenario 3 $1,200 $1,680 $2,800 HMO 9.2.9 Study Area D, Scenario 2 $1,200 $3,360 85,600 $10,160 9,2.10 Study Area 0, Scenario 3 $1,200 $1,680 $2,800 $5,680 9.2.11 Study Area B. Scenario 1 $3,600 $7,560 $9,100 $20,260 9.2.12 Study Area C, Scenario 1 $3,600 $7,560 $9,100 $20,260 9.2.13 Study Area D. Scenario 1 $3,000 $4,200 $7,000 $14,200 TOTAL HOURS $28.800 $47,860 $72,800 $149,480 ALL-INCLUSIVE LABOR RATE $300.00 $210.00 $175.00 EXPENSES City of Ongin New York New York Number of trips 2 1 3 Airfare $1,600 MO $2,400 Hotel $600 $300 $900 Meals $200 $100 $300 Rental car/auto mileage/taxi/train $200 $100 $900 Reproduction $0 Telephone $0 Postage/express delivery SO Other $0 TOTAL EXPENSES $2,600 $1,300 $0 $3,800 TOTAL COST $31,400 849,180 02,800 $153,380 157 • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: March 10, 2010 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive and file a report on the status of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) projects; and 2) Approve allocating potential stimulus funding from the federal "Jobs Bill" to projects that are currently federalized and can meet deadline requirements for the first 50% of the funds, with first priority to State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) projects, second priority to state highway projects, and third priority to local road projects. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: ARRA Project Status The ARRA provided Riverside County with approximately $73 million in funding. To date, all of the five interchange projects and two Transportation Enhancement (TE) projects have been obligated. Of these seven projects, five have been awarded and the remaining two projects will be noticed for advertisement this month. The ARRA highway and TE projects are listed below: Project Original ARRA $(000's) Revised ARRA $ (000's) Status I-10/Bob Hope Drive/Ramon Road IC $ 34,912 $ 23,509 Awarded 11/2009 1-10/Palm Drive/Gene Autry Trail IC $ 5,080 $ 10,965 Awarded 1/2010 1-10/Indian Canyon Drive IC $ 0 $ 5,518 Advertised 3/2010 I-215/Clinton Keith Road IC $ 10,000 No change Awarded 11/2009 SR-60/Valley Way IC $ 4,982 $ 3,868 Awarded 12/2009 74/215 IC $ 16,101 No change Advertised 2/2010 Palm Springs (TE), Gene Autry Trail landscaping $ 1,800 No change Awarded 9/2009 Riverside (TE), Alessandro Boulevard landscaping $ 400 $ 348 Awarded 10/2009 ote: The ARRA funds will continue to be revised as projects are awarded and closed out. Agenda Item 10 158 The first ARRA project awarded was the I-10/Bob Hope Drive/Ramon Road interchange. This project experienced a cost savings at time of award due to the low bid environment. Therefore, approximately $11 million was reprogrammed to the other 1-10 interchanges that were ready for construction, which were the 1-10/Palm Drive/Gene Autry Trail and 1-10/Indian Canyon Drive interchanges. ARRA savings that may result from low bids on 1-10/Indian Canyon Drive and 74/215 interchanges will be reprogrammed to other federalized projects that are ready for construction in their respective subregion. Proposed "Jobs Bill"/Stimulus II As previously reported, the proposed "Jobs Bill" may contain funding for transportation similar to ARRA. At the state level, the Legislature may consider bills that would address a "Stimulus II" and determine the funding distribution within the state. Detailed language on such legislation is not yet available, but Commission staff is working with the Commission's lobbyist and through the Self -Help Counties Coalition in responding to the various proposals that will be put on the table. Caltrans headquarters surveyed the regions for potential projects that could meet a deadline of having a fully executed contract within 90 days of the funds being apportioned. This requirement could be applied to at least the first 50% of the funding allocated to the states. The discussion among Caltrans and the regions has led to a general concurrence that 90 days is overly optimistic, as the process for obligating funds (submitting the request for authorization to Caltrans and Federal Highway Administration) is about a 90-day process in itself. Caltrans and other regional agencies are recommending reconsideration of this 90-day deadline; however, Congress appears to be insistent on such a rapid deadline without any regulatory or administrative relief. If the deadline remains as proposed, Commission staff will review projects that could potentially meet this deadline. Potential projects include two projects that are programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and are scheduled to request an allocation at the February and April 2010 California Transportation Commission (CTC) meetings. These STIP allocation requests will likely be deferred due to lack of STIP allocation capacity for the remainder of the fiscal year. Such projects include, but are not limited to, the 60/215 East Junction, 1-10/Date Palm interchange, and I-15/California Oaks Road/Kalmia Street interchange. If a "Stimulus II" bill is passed, Commission staff will recommend approving funds for federal projects that can meet the 90-day contract deadline and establishing priority in the following order: approved ARRA projects, STIP projects, state highway projects, and local arterial projects. If the state as a whole meets the 90-day contract deadline, other projects may be considered for the remaining half of the stimulus funding and brought to the Commission for approval. At the time this staff report was written, the passage of a "Stimulus II bill was very much in doubt. Agenda Item 10 159