Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
06 June 7, 2012 Commission
" " " R E C O R D S R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ( o m i s s i o n M E E T I N G A G E N D A T I M E / D A T E : 9 : 3 0 a . m . / T h u r s d a y , J u n e 7 , 2 0 1 2 - P L E A S E N O T E D A T E L O C A T I O N : B O A R D R O O M C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C e n t e r 4 0 8 0 L e m o n S t r e e t , F i r s t F l o o r , R i v e r s i d e i t e C O M M I S S I O N E R S . 4 4 C h a i r - J o h n J . B e n o i t F i r s t V i c e C h a i r - K a r e n S p i e g e l S e c o n d V i c e C h a i r - M a r i o n A s h l e y B o b B u s t e r , C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e J o h n F . T a v a g l i o n e , C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e J e f f S t o n e , C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e J o h n J . B e n o i t , C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e M a r i o n A s h l e y , C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e B o b B o t t s / D o n R o b i n s o n , C i t y o f B a n n i n g R o g e r B e r g / J e f f F o x , C i t y o f B e a u m o n t J o s e p h D e C o n i n c k / T o B e A p p o i n t e d , C i t y o f B l y t h e E l l a Z a n o w i c / J e f f H e w i t t , C i t y o f C a l i m e s a M a r y C r a t o n / B a r r y T a l b o t , C i t y o f C a n y o n L a k e G r e g P e t t i s / K a t h l e e n D e R o s a , C i t y o f C a t h e d r a l C i t y S t e v e n H e r n a n d e z / E d u a r d o G a r c i a , C i t y o f C o a c h e l l a K a r e n S p i e g e l / E u g e n e M o n t a n e z , C i t y o f C o r o n a S c o t t M a t a s / Y v o n n e P a r k s , C i t y o f D e s e r t H o t S p r i n g s A d a m R u s h / I k e B o o t s m a , C i t y o f E a s t v a l e L a r r y S m i t h / R o b e r t Y o u s s e f , C i t y o f H e m e t D o u g l a s H a n s o n / P a t r i c k M u l l a n y , C i t y o f I n d i a n W e l l s G l e n n M i l l e r / M i c h a e l W i l s o n , C i t y o f I n d i o F r a n k J o h n s t o n / M i c h e a l G o o d l a n d , C i t y o f J u r u p a V a l l e y T e r r y H e n d e r s o n / D o n A d o l p h , C i t y o f L a Q u i n t a B o b M a g e e / M e l i s s a M e l e n d e z , C i t y o f L a k e E l s i n o r e D a r c y K u e n z i / W a l l a c e E d g e r t o n , C i t y o f M e n i f e e M a r c e l o C o / R i c h a r d S t e w a r t , C i t y o f M o r e n o V a l l e y R i c k G i b b s / K e l l y B e n n e t t , C i t y o f M u r r i e t a B e r w i n H a n n a / K a t h y A z e v e d o , C i t y o f N o r c o J a n H a r n i k / W i l l i a m K r o o n e n , C i t y o f P a l m D e s e r t G i n n y F o a t / S t e v e P o u g n e t , C i t y o f P a l m S p r i n g s D a r y l B u s c h / A l L a n d e r s , C i t y o f P e r r i s S c o t t H i n e s / G o r d o n M o l l e r , C i t y o f R a n c h o M i r a g e S t e v e A d a m s / A n d y M e l e n d r e z , C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e A n d r e w K o t y u k / S c o t t M i l l e r , C i t y o f S a n J a c i n t o R o n R o b e r t s / J e f f C o m e r c h e r o , C i t y o f T e m e c u l a B e n B e n o i t / T i m o t h y W a l k e r , C i t y o f W i l d o m a r T o B e A p p o i n t e d , G o v e r n o r ' s A p p o i n t e e C o m m e n t s a r e w e l c o m e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n , i f y o u w i s h t o p r o v i d e c o m m e n t s t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n , p l e a s e c o m p l e t e a n d s u b m i t a S p e a k e r C a r d t o t h e C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d . Riverside County Transportation Connnission TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Office and Board Services Manager DATE: May 30, 2012 SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts of Interest Issues - Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda of June 7, 2012 The June 7, 2012 agenda of the Riverside County Transportation Commission includes items which may raise possible conflicts of interest. A RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past 12 months or 3 months following the conclusion from any entity or individual listed. Agenda Item No. 8F - Recurring Contracts for Fiscal Year 2012/13 Consultant(s) AMMA Transit Planning 393 Two Trees Road Riverside, CA 92507 Heather Menninger, Principal Bechtel Infrastructure 5257 Westview Drive Fredrick, MD 21703 Donald Marshall, President Best, Best & Krieger LLP 3750 University A venue, Suite 400 Riverside, CA 92501 Steve DeBaun, Partner Case Systems, Inc. 5 Goddard Irvine, CA 92618 Sebastian Gutierrez, President/CEO Epic Land Solutions, Inc. 2601 Airport Drive, Suite 115 Torrance, CA 90505 Holly Rockwell, President Fieldman Rolapp & Associates 19900 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 1100 Irvine, CA 92612 Dan Wiles, Principal and General Counsel Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. 555 South Flower Street, 41 s` Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Victor Hsu, Partner Geographics 4178 Chestnut Street Riverside, CA 92501 Dawn Hassett, Managing Partner GCAP Services, Inc. 3525 Hyland Avenue, #260 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Edward Salcedo, Jr., President JETT - Consulting Services (Formerly Bernard J. Arroyo) 13939 Barrymore Street San Diego, CA 92129 Barnard Arroyo, President Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3200 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5855 Greg Harrington, Partner Paladin Investigative Services, LLC P.O. Box 596 Cumming, GA 30041 Ron De Laby, President Trapeze Software Group, Inc. 8360 East Via de Ventura, Suite L-200 Scottsdale, AZ 85258 Rick Bacchus, President Agenda Item No. 8G - Agreement with PlanetBids for Online Vendor and Bid Management System Consultants) PlanetBids, Inc. Alan Zavian, President and CEO 5850 Canoga Avenue, Suite 301 Woodland Hills, Ca 91367 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 1:34 PM To: Tara Byerly Cc: Jennifer Harmon Subject: RCTC June Commission Agenda for !Pad Users Attachments: Conflict of Interest Form.pdf; Conflict of Interest Memo.pdf Importance: High Good Afternoon Commissioners, The June Commission Agenda for the meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 7 @ 9:30 a.m. for the IPad Users is available. PLEASE NOTE THE DATE. Please copy this link: http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/may-9-201 2.original.pdf In addition, attached is the conflict of interest memo and the form for your review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 6:46 AM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC June Commission Agenda Importance: High Good Morning Commission Alternates: Attached below is the link to the June 7, 2012 Commission Meeting Agenda. Please copy the link below and paste it into a web page http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/may-9-2012.original.pdf Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 attrq trf SUPERVISOR JEFF STONE THIRD DISTRICT June 4, 2012 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 RE: RCTC Meeting I will be unable to attend the above -reference commission meeting held on June 7, 2012. In my absence, I hereby designate Supervisor Buster to serve as my proxy vote for items on the agenda. Should you have any questions, please contact my office. Thank you. Sincerely, S Supervisor E RI%ERSIDF OFFICE 4080 LEMON SMITE, 5TH FLOOR Kn E.Rsow, CA 92501 (951) 955-1030 FAX:(951) 955-2194 DISTRICT OFFICE: FRENCH VALLEY 37600 SKY CANYON DRIVE, #505 MURRIETA, CA 92563 Ton FREE 1-866-383-2203 (951) 698-7326 • FAx: (951) 677-0669 www.supjeffstone.org VERNE LAURITZEN, CHIEF OF STAFF E-n1.vL: district3(a rcbos.org HEMEr OFFicE 43950 E. ACACIA, SCITE A HENIET, CA 92543 (951) 791-3490 FAX: (951) 791-3465 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9: 30 a.m. Thursday, June 7, 2012 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. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 2 Under the Brown Act, the Commission should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda 'that are not listed on the agenda. Commission members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -MAY 9, 2012 6. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13. 7. 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. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for. discussion at the end of the agenda. 8A. FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AND MEASURE A AUDIT RESULTS Page 5 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for the FY 2010/11. 8B. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Page 14 Overview This item is for the Commission to Resolution No. '12-017, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2012/13". Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 3 • 8C. ANNUAL INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 21 1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy"; and 2) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy: 8D. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Page 37 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2012. 8E. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 56 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2011. 8F. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 64 1) Approve the recurring contracts for FY 2012/13; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 4 8G. AGREEMENT WITH PLANETBIDS FOR ONLINE VENDOR AND BID • MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 71 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-19-091-00 with PlanetBids, Inc. (PlanetBids) for the use of the PlanetBids BidsOnline vendor and bid management system software for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed $65,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8H. STATE ROUTE 91 PROJECT AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES Page 84 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-31-081-01 Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-31-081-00, with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. (Parsons) to provide additional services for Phase 1 of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) widening and extension of the 91 Express Lanes in the amount of $18,434,545, plus a. contingency of $1,850,000, for a total amount not to exceed $20,284,545, and a total authorized contract value of $60,084,545; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 5 81. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 12-021 FOR COMMISSION ELECTION TO HEAR FUTURE RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND DESIGNATION OF COMMISSION'S GENERAL COUNSEL Page 90 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 12-021, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Designation of Commission's General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". 8J. STATE ROUTE 91 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE PROJECT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 93 1) Reprogram federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from construction savings to cover the increase in Caltrans' expenditures for the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) related to the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 06-31-062-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 06-31-062-00, to increase funding by the amount of $1,225,534 for the PS&E phase for the SR-91 HOV lanes project; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 6 8K. STATE ROUTE 60 TRUCK CLIMBING/DESCENDING LANE PROJECT - • PROJECT APPROVAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 95 1) Agree to sponsor the project approval and environmental document (PA&ED) phase of the State Route 60 truck climbing lane project; 2) Approve the programming of Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in the amount of $3,006,000 for PA&ED; 3) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-092-00 with Caltrans for the PA&ED phase for the SR-60 truck climbing lane project; 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute any future non -funding related amendments. 8L. CITY OF CORONA FUNDING REQUEST FOR FOOTHILL PARKWAY Page 120 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve programming $7 million of Western County's 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA) funds as local match to $7 million of Proposition 1 B State -Local Partnership Program (SLPP) formula funds for the city of Corona's (Corona) Foothill Parkway westerly extension project; 2) Submit the Foothill Parkway project nomination forms for SLPP funding of $7 million to the California Transportation Commission; 3) Approve Agreement No. 12-72-093-00 with Corona to program $7 million in MARA funds; 4) Approve reprogramming approximately $7 million of TUMF regional arterial funds from Foothill Parkway right of way phase to the construction phase; 5) Approve Agreement No. 06-72-540-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 06-72-540-00, with Corona to reflect the reprogramming of right of way savings to construction; and 6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 7 8M. FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 — FISCAL YEAR 2014/15 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Page 124 Overview This item is for the Commission to review and approve, in concept, the FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA), Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the Commission's Commuter Rail Program, as presented. 8N. FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Page 129 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2012/13 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program recommended funding of $1,389,433. 80. FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 134 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, to the existing Corona, Mira Loma, and Riverside buspools; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. 8P. CITY OF LA QUINTA'S AMENDED BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 141 Overview This item is for the Commission ` to approve the city of La Quinta's (La Quinta) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 8 8Q. IOWA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Overview Page 143 This item is for the Commission to allocate $500,000 in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to the city of Riverside (Riverside) to provide a match, if needed, in support of the Iowa Avenue grade separation project, 9. PROPOSED METROLINK BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 145 1) Adopt the preliminary FY 2012/13 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget with anticipation of a 5 to 9 percent fare increase;- 2) Approve the additional Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) service with an additional peak period round trip and expanded year round weekend service; and 3) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the SCRRA in an amount not to exceed of $7,575,300 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train operations and maintenance of way plus a contingency of $2,424,700 in LTF funds for new service options and $250,000 for capital projects to be funded by State Transit Assistance funds (STA). 10. STATE ROUTE 91 DESIGN -BUILD PROCUREMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 151 1) Authorize staff, subject to approval by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to issue a request for proposal (RFP) and future addenda for design -build services in accordance with Public Contract Code sections 6800 et seq. for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) to the four pre -qualified design -build teams; 2) Approve the selection criteria and process for selection of the pre -qualified firm providing the best -value to the Commission, otherwise known as apparent best value (ABV) proposer; • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 9 3) Authorize the Executive Director to select the three top -ranked ABV Proposers for design -build services, based on the criteria and selection procedures identified in the RFP and any addendum(s) thereto, and subsequently to conduct limited negotiations with the top -ranked ABV proposer; 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to negotiate with the second -ranked ABV proposer if negotiations fail with the top -ranked ABV proposer and with the third -ranked ABV proposer should negotiations fail with both the top -ranked and second -ranked ABV proposers; 5) Authorize the Executive Director to issue a request for a best and final offer (BAFO) to the proposers if found to be in the best interests of the Commission, to make changes to the RFP, solicit BAFOs from proposers, evaluate revised proposals, select an ABV proposer, negotiate with the top -ranked proposer and second and third -ranked if necessary, and make a recommendation of contract award based upon the revised proposals in accordance with 23 CFR Part 636; 6) Authorize the Executive Director to return to the Commission with a recommendation to award a contract for design -build services. The recommendation shall be accompanied by a written decision supporting the recommendation and stating the basis for the award; 7) Authorize the Executive Director to pay a stipend to unsuccessful proposers that meet the RFP criteria for stipend payment up to $650,000 per unsuccessful proposers or a total not to exceed of $2.6 million for all unsuccessful proposers after final action by the Commission on the RFP; and 8) Approve and find, based on the facts set forth in the staff report, that particular materials, products, or services that are elements of the proposed design -build services for the SR-91 CIP are to be designated in the RFP by specific brand names or trade names to match and be interoperable with other products used by the Commission and other related facilities as authorized by Public Contracts Code, section 3400(c). 11. RCTC 91 EXPRESS LANES TOLL POLICY Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 166 1) Adopt Resolution 12-019, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy"; and 2) Adopt the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Study (Traffic and Revenue Study). Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 10 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. 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. 14. CLOSED SESSION 14A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Existing Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9(a) Case Number(s): Case No. RIC 10013326, RIC 10013327, and RIC 1113896 149. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Property Owners: See the List Below Item APN(s) Property Owner(s) 1 327-200-001 327-020-009 Intex Properties Perris Valley, L.P. 2 31 1-100-021 County of Riverside 3 313-1 14-005 American Legion Perris Post 595 4 313-1 14-001 Jorge A. Caldera, Jorge A. & Aicantar, Maria 5 310-150-002 Sanchez, Orlando & Matilde 6 313-282-048 Sanchez, Apoliner & Florinda 7 313-272-009 Pentecostal Church of God 8 310-140-019 Munoz, Arturo & Isabel Gonzalez, Sal & Frances 9 310-160-065 Stamper, Richard & Marianne 10 247-170-024 Chapman Brothers Partnership 11 251-032-004 City of Riverside 12 251-060-016 251-070-006 Riverside City School District 15. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting and is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, July 11, 2012, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET JUNE 7, 2012 NAME GENCY E MAIL ADDRESS /0 aytee,546:2?6V-6-‘ b S' ./e 8�-,�u t 1J �� 0 `,7 e-ivci0 [ -K°5/-) _ Afo-vuo ; c..-- a7),) n s)rrn Jr Valle 1 n .7 -1,9 A A 4,--:3"-{° ,A------ A R- q.-. j vinci- frt /----ktm ffr etilizt 5 d A) Qt1 i -iq �� j. ? 1-z Skf 9 7-11v Ciitr,--11ht/S orAd 7 /Sa-uo c r %1 i✓Co II CrNanu . � t--v1 � .tom /) F C, (2A v -'%-j C7tv j � 7 ""rjC � c t) C >.‘.,› frea,-+_� C A ^ y d cF r-J )t=a - LIt-f} 7A-Aio wi v 62; As.e5.4 a t1 //s � ynvA� � ✓l. I �L� � � ---3 ‘, w /03 '7 ' _? v V ini° OL VILA --(_. ragno, t6vikAr, 04N ult2N l K. PPCUA 1 6 �•2_T v + /2 Di s-r-,.�, iiccr{ .sp ,L.. , s //4-r-tks , ' ' kt4:4— NI fi t a 1!0 4S. �. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL JUNE 7, 2012 Present Absent County of Riverside, District 1 Pf0 County of Riverside, District II O County of Riverside, District III O r. County of Riverside, District IV gr../ 0 County of Riverside, District V0 City of Banning 0 City of Beaumont 0 P City of Blythe O City of Calirnqisa ef 0 City of Canyon Lake O City of CatheOral City 0 City of Coachella � 0 City of Corona O City of Desert Hot Springs O City of EastvSle � 0 City of Hemet A 0 City of Indian Wells O X City of Indio � 0 City of Jurupt Valley � 0 City of La Quinta � 0 City of Lake Elsinore �' 0 City of Menifee � 0 City of Moreno Valley � 0 City of Murrieta O City of Norco'l . 0 City of Palm Desert � 0 City of Palm Springs,Qf 0 City of Perris ) 0 City of Rancho Mirage O City of Riversideir...,0 City of San J4cinto 0 City of Temecula 'X 0 City of Wildor{nar 71. 0 Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 ; 0 AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, May 9, 2012 CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair John J. Benoit at 9:32 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 Karen Spiegel led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Marion Ashley Ben Benoit John J. Benoit Roger Berg* Bob Botts David Bricker Daryl Busch Bob Buster Marcelo Co Mary Craton Kathleen DeRosa Ginny Foat Rick Gibbs Jan Harnik Terry Henderson Steven Hernandez Frank Johnston Andrew Kotyuk Darcy Kuenzi Bob Magee Scott Matas Glenn Miller Ron Roberts Adam Rush Larry Smith Karen Spiegel Jeff Stone Berwin Hanna John F. Tavaglione Douglas Hanson Ella Zanowic *Arrived after the meeting was called to order 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Joseph DeConinck Scott Hines Anne Mayer, Executive Director, presented a five-year service award to Ruby Arellano, Administrative Assistant. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 2 Chair Benoit and Anne Mayer presented RCTC Chairman's awards for the coordination efforts of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) and Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) applications, and the development of program and projects for the State Route 91 and Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Projects to the following staff: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director; Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer; Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director; Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director; Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager; David Thomas, Toll Project Manager; and Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager. Anne Mayer expressed appreciation to the Commissioners that volunteered their time to review the funding applications and traveled to Washington, D.C. with staff to support this project. Chair Benoit expressed appreciation to those involved in the lobbying efforts for this project. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 11, 2012 M/S/C (Zanowic/Stone) to approve the minutes as submitted. Abstain: Foat and Smith At this time, Commissioner Roger Berg arrived at the meeting. 6. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, presented the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13, and discussed the following areas: • Budget process; • FY 2012/13 Budget considerations; • Budget summary; • Sources by breakdown and comparison; • Expenditures by department; • Expenditures breakdown by department and comparison; • Functional expenditure breakdown and comparison; • Next steps. Chair Benoit commended Michele Cisneros for an outstanding presentation. " R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n " M i n u t e s M a y 9 , 2 0 1 2 P a g e 3 A t C o m m i s s i o n e r A d a m R u s h ' s r e q u e s t f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n , M i c h e l e C i s n e r o s p r o v i d e d a d d i t i o n a l d e t a i l s r e g a r d i n g T U M F r e v e n u e s . I n r e s p o n s e t o C o m m i s s i o n e r G i n n y F o a t ' s q u e s t i o n a b o u t t h e p r o j e c t s a n d o p e r a t i o n s f u n d i n g a l l o c a t i o n s f o r r a i l m a i n t e n a n c e a n d o p e r a t i o n s , M i c h e l e C i s n e r o s d i s c u s s e d t h e f u n d i n g d i f f e r e n c e r e l a t e d t o a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a R e g i o n a l R a i l A u t h o r i t y f o r n e w r a i l c a r s . A n n e M a y e r d i s c u s s e d t h e s o u r c e s o f f u n d i n g f o r t h e r a i l p r o g r a m f o r W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y , n o t i n g t h e r e i s c u r r e n t l y n o f u n d i n g s o u r c e f o r r a i l i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . S h e t h e n d i s c u s s e d t h e o p t i o n s t o d e v e l o p t h e s t a t e r a i l p l a n a n d s t a t e d s t a f f w i l l r e t u r n t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n w i t h a n u p d a t e . A t t h i s t i m e , C h a i r B e n o i t o p e n e d t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g a n d r e q u e s t e d c o m m e n t s f r o m t h e p u b l i c . N o c o m m e n t s w e r e r e c e i v e d f r o m t h e p u b l i c a n d t h e C h a i r a n n o u n c e d t h e c o n t i n u a n c e o f t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g o n J u n e 7 , 2 0 1 2 . M / S / C t o c o n t i n u e t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g f o r t h e p r o p o s e d B u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g o n J u n e 7 , 2 0 1 2 . 7 . A D D I T I O N S / R E V I S I O N S T h e r e w e r e n o a d d i t i o n s / r e v i s i o n s t o t h e a g e n d a . 8 . C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R C h a i r B e n o i t r e q u e s t e d A g e n d a I t e m 8 C , " C o n s t r u c t i o n C h a n g e O r d e r P o l i c i e s " , b e p u l l e d f r o m t h e C o n s e n t C a l e n d a r f o r f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n . M / S / C ( K o t y u k / H e n d e r s o n ) t o a p p r o v e t h e f o l l o w i n g C o n s e n t C a l e n d a r i t e m s : A b s t a i n o n 8 E : A s h l e y 8 A . R E V I S E D A B 1 2 3 4 R E I M B U R S E M E N T P O L I C Y 1 ) A p p r o v e t h e r e v i s i o n s t o t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n L e g i s l a t i v e B o d y R e i m b u r s e m e n t P o l i c y ; a n d 2 ) A d o p t R e s o l u t i o n N o . 1 2 - 0 1 4 , A R e s o l u t i o n o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n R e g a r d i n g t h e R e v i s i o n s t o t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n L e g i s l a t i v e B o d y R e i m b u r s e m e n t P o l i c y . Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 4 8B. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2012. 8D. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-31-080-00, a cooperative agreement between the Commission and the county of Riverside (County) related to the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP); and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8E. INTERSTATE 215 SCOTT ROAD TO NUEVO ROAD — UTILITY AGREEMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 1) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the utility agreements related to the Interstate 215 Scott Road to Nuevo Road Central widening project on behalf of the Commission; 2) Approve Agreement No. 12-31-082-00 with Caltrans for construction and maintenance of the Ethanac Overhead Bridge; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8F. AGREEMENT WITH HDR CONSTRUCTION CONTROL CORPORATION FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSTATE 215/BLAINE STREET TO MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD WIDENING PROJECT 1) Award Agreement No. 12-31-057-00 to HDR Construction Control Corporation (HDR) to provide construction management (CM), materials testing, and construction surveying services for the Interstate 21 5/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening project, in the amount of $242,055, plus a contingency amount of $24,206, for a total amount not to exceed $266,261; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 5 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. 8G. AMENDMENT WITH STV, INCORPORATED FOR FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION COORDINATION AND SMALL STARTS SUPPORT FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE 1) Approve Agreement No.. 08-33-069-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement 08-33-069-00, with STV Incorporated (STV) for additional assistance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) coordination and Small Starts program support for the Perris Valley Line project in the amount of $1 15,000, for a total contract amount of $315,709; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of thg Commission. 8H.PERRIS VALLEY LINE — UTILITY AGREEMENTS Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute utility agreements and utility service agreements related to the Perris Valley Line (PVL) commuter rail project on behalf of the Commission. 81. AMENDMENT TO RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2011 /12 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS 1) Approve modification to Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) FY 201 1 /12 capital improvement program to reflect an additional $2.065 million in Section 5309 State of Good Repair (SGR) program funds and $5,889,196 in FY 2010/11 Proposition 1 B Capital and Security grant funding; 2) Allocate $1 .305 million in Transportation Development Act (TDA) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 201 1 /12 Section 5309 program funds awarded to RTA for its paratransit revenue vehicle purchase and facility rehabilitation projects; 3) Approve modification to RTA's FY 2011/12 operating assistance funding by allocating up to $19,000 in 1989 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway funds to implement a temporary shuttle service Route 54 to support the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes construction project; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 6 4) Approve modification to SunLine Transit Agency's (SunLine) FY 201 1 /12 operating assistancefunding by reflecting a net increase of $83,698 resulting from an increase in federal Section 5307 funds ( + $1,026,623), reduction in projected farebox revenues (-$834,774), a decrease in fuel rebates (- $150,000), and additional Air Quality Management District (AQMD) grant funds ( + $41,849) for the special transit services for Coachella and Stagecoach Festivals; 5) Approve modification to SunLine's FY 201 1 /12 capital assistance funding by reflecting an additional $4,917,876 in federal Section 5308 Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) funds for fuel cell bus purchases and an additional $546,430 in Section 5307 funds for paratransit buses and facility improvement in lieu of TDA State Transit Assistance (STA) funds 6) Allocate $546,430 in STA funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 201 1 /12 Section 5308 program funds awarded to SunLine for the fuel cell buses; and 7) Approve amendments to RTA and SunLine's Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) to reflect the changes outlined above. 8J. AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION OF THE FREEWAY SERVICE • PATROL PROGRAM IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1); Approve Agreement No. 12-45-068-00 with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the operation of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in the amount of $1,653,564 in state funding for FY 2011 /12; and 2} Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8K. AMENDMENTS TO FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL AGREEMENTS 1) , Approve Agreement No. 1 1-45-146-01, Amendment No. 1 to. Agreement No. 1 1-45-146-00, with Pepe's to provide FSP services on Beat No. 4 in the amount of $800,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-45-134-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-45-134-00, with Pepe's Towing (Pepe's) to provide Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) services on Beat No. 18 in the amount of $1 15,000; 3) Approve Agreement No. 07-45-136-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-45-136-00, with Pepe's to provide FSP services on Beat No. 19 in the amount of $200,000; and Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 7 4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8L. FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL COST EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-45-079-00 with DKS Associates (DKS) to provide a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) cost effectiveness evaluation in the amount of $25,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8M. CITY OF RIVERSIDE'S AMENDED BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Approve the city of Riverside's (Riverside) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted. AGREEMENT WITH JACOBS PROJECT MANAGEMENT CO. FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSTATE 215 CENTRAL WIDENING PROJECT FROM SCOTT ROAD TO NUEVO ROAD, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS At this time Commissioner Ashley recused himself due to a conflict of interest. Lisa DaSilva, Capital Projects Manager, provided an overview for the agreement with Jacobs Project Management Company for construction management services and the cooperative agreement with Ca[trans for construction of the 1-215 Cenfral widening project from Scott Road to Nuevo Road, in the city of Perris. Commissioner Darcy Kuenzi expressed appreciation and support for the project and commended Commissioner Stone for spearheading the project. Anne Mayer discussed the Commission's funding approach for this project. and the final permit necessary in order to proceed with the project. In response to Commissioner Terry Henderson's question regarding project costs, Lisa DaSilva replied the current engineer's estimate for the construction phase is $95 million, with construction management costs at 14 to 15 percent. Anne Mayer explained it is typical as construction management costs to run between 10 to 15 percent depending on the complexity of the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 8 At Commissioner Henderson's request, Lisa DaSilva discussed the required permit from the Army Corps of Engineers and the process to acquire it. Anne Mayer stated the challenge is the California Transportation Commission (CTC) requirements for CMIA savings funding require all permits before funds are allocated. Therefore, the permit schedule has been accelerated from September to the beginning of May. Commissioner Henderson requested staff notify Commissioners when the permit is received. In response to Commissioner Rush's question about CMIA, Anne Mayer stated Riverside County has generated $65 million in CMIA savings, which went back into the statewide pool to be allocated for additional projects. She then discussed the CTC's adopted savings policy and criteria. M/S/C (Kuenzi/Spiegel) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 12-31-034-00- to Jacobs Project Management Co. (Jacobs) to provide construction; management (CM) services, materials testing, and construction surveying for the 1-215 Central widening project, Scott Road to Nuevo Road, in the city of Perris, in the amount of $11,807,334 plus a contingency amount of $1,192,666, for a total amount not to exceed $13 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work as may be required for the project; 4) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-078-00 with Caltrans for construction of the project; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the cooperative agreement and future non - funding related amendments to this agreement. At this time, Commissioner Ashley returned to the meeting. 10. UPDATE ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, presented the bill positions and an overview of state and federal legislative activities. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 9 In response to Commissioner Henderson's question regarding SB 1316 (Correa), Aaron Hake replied the bill became law in 2008, authorizing the Commission to collect tolls on SR-91 and creating the SR-91 Advisory Committee. Anne Mayer added AB 2405 (Blumenfield) would allow the state to step in on top of an already granted authority and dictate toll policy. She expressed concern that if zero or low emission vehicles do not have to pay at the gas pump and are exempt for the tolls, how do they pay for the use of the system which is another issue that has been raised. Commissioner Henderson replied this creates an argument in favor of a per mileage use tax, which she does not support. She then expressed concern for AB 1780 (Bonilla). Anne Mayer discussed the shift in financial responsibility, the arguments to support the bill and its goals. She noted the Legislative Analyst Office has weighed in on this issue in support. M/S/C (Henderson/Spiegel) to: 1) Receive and file an update on the state and federal legislation; 2)Adopt the following bill positions: a) AB 2405 (Blumenfield) -Oppose; b) AB 1780 (Bonilla)- Support; c) AB 2498 (Gordon) - Support In Concept; and d) SB 1549 (Vargas) - Support In Concept. At this time, Commissioner Kathleen DeRosa left the meeting. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 8C. CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDER POLICIES Per Chair Benoit's request, this item was pulled for further discussion. Anne Mayer explained there was extensive discussion about the Commission's change order process as a result of an item brought to the Commission in January to increase a contract amount for the SR-74 interchange project for approximately $1 million. She discussed the concerns raised for the change orders for the project. Marlin Feenstra, Project Deliver Director, provided an overview for the change order process to receive additional funding for construction Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 10 contingencies. He stated in the event there is no committee staff is proposing the Chair appoint an ad hoc committee to consider that item to allow adequate oversight and to keep these projects moving quickly to avoid additional costs to the Commission. M/S/C (Kuenzi/Spiegel) to: 1) Review the Commission's existing change order procedure; and 2) Require committee action when contract change orders exceed the previously -approved contingency. 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. Anne Mayer announced: Based on information from the Commission's database and working with local agencies, there is $654 million of projects recently completed or under construction in Riverside County with another $1 .6 billion of projects starting construction within the next two years. The May 21 Committees and June 7 Commission meeting agendas will be substantial. The regular meetings .were rescheduled due to the Memorial Day holiday and the Riverside County Board of Supervisor's public hearing on its budget. At this time, Commissioners Buster, Foat, Hanson, Kotyuk, and Miller Left the meeting along with the Caltrans District 8 representative David Bricker. 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Existing Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9(a) Case Number: Case No. RIC 1205364 The Commission authorized legal counsel to defend the Commission in this case. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 11 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Thursday, June 7, 2012, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, OU"4"'-1-4(._ Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 6 PUBLIC HEARING REVISION TO AGENDA ITEM 6 Additions are noted by Bold Italics, Deletions are noted by Strikethrough RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2012/13 This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2012/13 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. The budget process began in December 2011. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 14 were the basis of this budget. The goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications, and financial and administrative policies. On May 9, staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes, resulting in a net increase of $9,162,400 to the projected ending fund balance: Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2011 /12 Projected Amounts • Net increases in Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues, reimbursements and operating transfers in of $4,000,000, $2,000,000, $94,100, respectively, less net decrease of $3,674,500 in projects and operations expenditures after further review and analysis of department worksheets. Agenda Item 6 Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2012/13 Budgeted Amounts • An increase in Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues of $8,000,000 and $4,000,000 respectively, due to encouraging recent trends and stabilization of sales tax revenues; • A net decrease of $4,451,000 in federal and state reimbursements on the Perris Valley Line project as a result of the recent update to project funding; • A $240,300 increase in federal reimbursements on the Interstate 215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $450,000 increase in federal reimbursements in rail operations for reprogrammed federal grant funding; • A $42,500 increase in federal reimbursements for administration of the Measure A Western County Specialized Transit program; • A net decrease of $218,000 in operating transfers in related to revised Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) submissions; • A $44,200 increase in investment income as a result of a net increase in revenues; • A $193,800 increase in personnel salary and benefits due to filling the capital projects contract and claims manager position; • A $470,000 increase in professional services related to disclosure counsel services for the issuances of toll and sales tax revenue bonds, financial advisory services, various procurement services, and graphic design and printing services; • A net increase of $19,700 in support services related to Commission -owned station ground maintenance needs and travel costs related to the issuance of toll and sales tax revenue bonds after further review and analysis; • A $19,200 decrease in program management expenditures for Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) services based on a reconciliation to the proposed Bechtel contract amount; • A $777,600 increase in construction costs on the Perris Multimodal facility after further review of claims pending settlement; • A $920,000 increase in construction and construction management costs on the State Route 74 curve realignment project related to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $240,300 increase in construction and construction management costs on the I-215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $2,500,000 increase in construction costs on the Corona Foothill Parkway project after further review and analysis; • An increase of $163,000 in Measure A specialized transit expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; • A net increase of $1, 513,000 in LTF expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; Agenda Item 6 " A n e t d e c r e a s e o f $ 3 2 5 , 0 0 0 i n S t a t e T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e e x p e n d i t u r e s b a s e d o n r e v i e w a n d a n a l y s i s o f t h e S R T P s u b m i s s i o n s ; " A n i n c r e a s e o f $ 2 , 4 6 4 , 0 0 0 i n l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s e x p e n d i t u r e s d u e t o t h e r e l a t e d i n c r e a s e i n M e a s u r e A s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s ; " A $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 i n c r e a s e i n c a p i t a l o u t l a y e x p e n d i t u r e s f o r i n f o r m a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y e q u i p m e n t u p g r a d e s ; " A n e t d e c r e a s e o f $ 2 1 8 , 0 0 0 i n o p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r s o u t r e l a t e d t o r e v i s e d S R T P s u b m i s s i o n s . A p u b l i c h e a r i n g t o a l l o w f o r p u b l i c c o m m e n t o n t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t , a s r e v i s e d , i s r e q u i r e d p r i o r t o t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t . T h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g w a s o p e n e d a t t h e M a y 9 C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g . A f t e r t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g i s c l o s e d o n J u n e 7 , a d o p t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 w i l l f o l l o w . I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s f i s c a l p o l i c i e s , t h e b u d g e t m u s t b e a d o p t e d n o l a t e r t h a n J u n e 1 5 o f e a c h y e a r . A t t a c h e d i s t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 . T h i s d o c u m e n t c o n t a i n s t h e e x e c u t i v e s u m m a r y , a s r e v i s e d , t h a t w a s p r e s e n t e d a t t h e M a y 9 C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g ; t h e G a n n A p p r o p r i a t i o n s L i m i t ; t h e g u i d i n g p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d t o t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e b u d g e t ; a s u m m a r y o f t h e b u d g e t p r o c e s s ; f u n d b u d g e t s ; d e t a i l s o f p r o g r a m r e v e n u e s a n d o t h e r s o u r c e s ; d e b t ; d e p a r t m e n t b u d g e t s ; a c o m m u n i t y p r o f i l e ; a n d a p p e n d i c e s i n c l u d i n g a g l o s s a r y o f a c r o n y m s , f u n d i n g d e f i n i t i o n s , a n d p r o g r a m / g e n e r a l t e r m s . A s u m m a r y o f t h e p r o p o s e d B u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i s a s f o l l o w s : R e v e n u e s a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i n g s o u r c e s : S a l e s t a x e s - M e a s u r e A , L T F , a n d S T A R e i m b u r s e m e n t s ( f e d e r a l , s t a t e , a n d o t h e r ) T U M F O t h e r r e v e n u e s I n t e r e s t o n i n v e s t m e n t s 7 , 3 6 5 , 9 0 0 D e b t p r o c e e d s 1 , 2 / 1 0 , 1 7 2 , 0 0 0 T r a n s f e r s i n T o t a l r e v e n u e s a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i n g s o u r c e s 1 , 8 8 4 , 7 4 4 , 6 0 0 E x p e n d i t u r e s a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i n g u s e s : P e r s o n n e l s a l a r y a n d f r i n g e b e n e f i t s P r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s S u p p o r t s e r v i c e s P r o j e c t s a n d o p e r a t i o n s C a p i t a l o u t l a y F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 B u d g e t $ 2 1 1 , 2 1 2 , 5 0 0 9 3 , 7 5 8 , 4 0 0 5 , 2 5 7 , 3 0 0 8 8 2 , 8 0 0 7 , 2 6 5 , 9 0 0 1 , 2 2 0 , 1 7 2 , 0 0 0 3 2 6 , 0 9 5 , 7 0 0 1 , 8 6 4 , 6 4 4 , 6 0 0 6 , 9 7 1 , 1 0 0 1 4 , 3 6 1 , 2 0 0 5 , 3 4 6 , 3 0 0 4 6 4 , 2 4 6 , 8 0 0 4 4 7 , 7 0 0 A g e n d a I t e m 6 Debt service (principal, interest and costs of issuance) Transfers out Total expenditures ,and other financing uses Excess of revenues and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses 923,862,800 Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 143,413,000 326,095,700 960,881,800 903, 762, 800 556,693,300 1,480,556,100 $ 1,460,456,100 Attachment: FY 2012/13 Proposed Budget - Posted on the Commission Website Agenda Item 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2012/13 This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for .FY 2012/13; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; and 3► Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2012/13 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. The budget process began in December 2011. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 14 were the basis of this budget. The goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications, and financial and administrative policies. On May 9, staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes, resulting in a net increase of $9,162,400 to the projected ending fund balance: Adjustments to Fiscal Year 201 1 /12 Projected Amounts Net increases in Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues, reimbursements and operating transfers in of $4,000,000, $2,000,000, $94,100, respectively, less net decrease of $3,674,500 in projects and operations expenditures after further review and analysis of department worksheets. 1 Agenda Item 6 Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2012/13 Budgeted Amounts • An increase in Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues of $8,000,000 and $4,000,000 respectively, due to encouraging recent trends and stabilization of sales tax revenues; • A net decrease of $4,451,000 in federal and state reimbursements on the Perris Valley Line project as a result of the recent update to project funding; • A $240,300 increase in federal reimbursements on the Interstate 215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $450,000 increase in federal reimbursements in rail operations for reprogrammed federal grant funding; • A $42,500 increase in federal reimbursements for administration of the Measure A Western County Specialized Transit program; • A net decrease of $218,000 in operating transfers in related to revised. Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) submissions; • A $44,200 increase in investment income as a result of a net increase in revenues; • A $193,800 increase in personnel salary and benefits due to filling the capital projects contract and claims manager position; • A $470,000 increase in professional services related to disclosure counsel . services for the issuances of toll and sales tax revenue bonds, financial advisory services, various procurement services, and graphic design and printing services; • A net increase of $19,700 in support services related to Commission -owned station ground maintenance needs and travel costs related to the issuance of toll and sales tax revenue bonds after further review and analysis; • A $19,200 decrease in program management expenditures for Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) services based on a reconciliation to the proposed Bechtel contract amount; • A $777,600 increase in construction costs on the Perris Multimodal facility after further review of claims pending settlement; • A $920,000 increase in construction and construction management costs on the State Route 74 curve realignment project related to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $240,300 increase in construction and construction management costs on the I-215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $2,500,000 increase in construction costs on the Corona Foothill Parkway project after further review and analysis; • An increase of $163,000 in Measure A specialized transit expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; • A net increase of $1,513,000 in LTF expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; 2 • • Agenda Item 6 " A n e t d e c r e a s e o f $ 3 2 5 , 0 0 0 i n S t a t e T r a n s i t A s s i s t a n c e e x p e n d i t u r e s b a s e d o n r e v i e w a n d a n a l y s i s o f t h e S R T P s u b m i s s i o n s ; " A n i n c r e a s e . o f $ 2 , 4 6 4 , 0 0 0 i n l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s e x p e n d i t u r e s d u e t o t h e r e l a t e d i n c r e a s e i n M e a s u r e A s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s ; " A $ 1 5 , 0 0 0 i n c r e a s e i n c a p i t a l o u t l a y e x p e n d i t u r e s f o r i n f o r m a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y e q u i p m e n t u p g r a d e s ; " A n e t d e c r e a s e o f $ 2 1 8 , 0 0 0 i n o p e r a t i n g t r a n s f e r s o u t r e l a t e d t o r e v i s e d S R T P s u b m i s s i o n s : A p u b l i c h e a r i n g t o a l l o w f o r p u b l i c c o m m e n t o n t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t , a s r e v i s e d , i s r e q u i r e d p r i o r t o t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t . T h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g w a s o p e n e d a t t h e M a y 9 C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g . A f t e r t h e p u b l i c h e a r i n g i s c l o s e d o n J u n e 7 , a d o p t i o n o f t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 w i l l f o l l o w . I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s f i s c a l p o l i c i e s , t h e b u d g e t m u s t b e a d o p t e d n o l a t e r t h a n J u n e 1 5 o f e a c h y e a r . A t t a c h e d i s t h e p r o p o s e d b u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 . T h i s d o c u m e n t c o n t a i n s t h e e x e c u t i v e s u m m a r y , a s r e v i s e d , t h a t w a s p r e s e n t e d a t t h e M a y 9 C o m m i s s i o n m e e t i n g ; t h e G a n n A p p r o p r i a t i o n s L i m i t ; t h e g u i d i n g p o l i c i e s r e l a t e d t o t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e b u d g e t ; a s u m m a r y o f t h e b u d g e t p r o c e s s ; f u n d b u d g e t s ; d e t a i l s o f p r o g r a m r e v e n u e s a n d o t h e r s o u r c e s ; d e b t ; d e p a r t m e n t b u d g e t s ; a c o m m u n i t y p r o f i l e ; a n d a p p e n d i c e s i n c l u d i n g a g l o s s a r y o f a c r o n y m s , f u n d i n g d e f i n i t i o n s , a n d p r o g r a m / g e n e r a l t e r m s . A s u m m a r y o f t h e p r o p o s e d B u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i s a s f o l l o w s : F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 B u d g e t R e v e n u e s a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i n g s o u r c e s : S a l e s t a x e s - M e a s u r e A , L T F , a n d S T A $ 2 1 1 , 2 1 2 , 5 0 0 R e i m b u r s e m e n t s ( f e d e r a l , s t a t e , a n d o t h e r ) 9 3 , 7 5 8 , 4 0 0 T U M F 5 , 2 5 7 , 3 0 0 O t h e r r e v e n u e s 8 8 2 , 8 0 0 I n t e r e s t o n i n v e s t m e n t s 7 , 3 6 5 , 9 0 0 D e b t p r o c e e d s 1 , 2 4 0 , 1 7 2 , 0 0 0 T r a n s f e r s i n 3 2 6 , 0 9 5 , 7 0 0 T o t a l r e v e n u e s a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i n g s o u r c e s 1 , 8 8 4 , 7 4 4 , 6 0 0 E x p e n d i t u r e s a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i n g u s e s : P e r s o n n e l s a l a r y a n d f r i n g e b e n e f i t s P r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s S u p p o r t s e r v i c e s P r o j e c t s a n d o p e r a t i o n s C a p i t a l o u t l a y D e b t s e r v i c e ( p r i n c i p a l , i n t e r e s t a n d c o s t s o f i s s u a n c e ) 6 , 9 7 1 , 1 0 0 1 4 , 3 6 1 , 2 0 0 5 , 3 4 6 , 3 0 0 4 6 4 , 2 4 6 , 8 0 0 4 4 7 , 7 0 0 1 4 3 , 4 1 3 , 0 0 0 3 A g e n d a I t e m 6 Transfers out Total expenditures and other financing uses Excess of revenues and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 326,095,700 960,881,800 923,862,800 556,693,300 $ 1,480,556,100 Attachment: FY 2012/13 Proposed Budget - Posted on the Commission Website Agenda Item 6 Riverside County Transportation Commission June 7, 2012 Honorable Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California FY 2012/13 Budget Introduction Investing in the Future Thank you for your interest in the Fiscal Year 2012/13 budget for the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC). Budgets are often considered to be documents that look forward, providing forecasts of expected revenues and expenditures and chock full of graphs, charts, and financial data. While that's certainly true of RCTC's budget, the numbers and charts reveal a compelling story. It's a story of unprecedented investment in Riverside County's transportation future with even more to come in the future. Using a term like "unprecedented" isn't just hyperbole to get your attention. The fact is that this is the largest budget in RCTC's 35-year history. Thanks to our voter -approved Measure A sales -tax program, a recently approved $444 million federal Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan, and state bond funding, RCTC is poised to move forward on a number of major projects including the widening of State Route (SR) 91 and Interstate (I) 215 and the Perris Valley Metrolink extension. In addition to building our own projects, RCTC has been a conduit for financing a number of local projects as well. In just three years inclusive of 2011 through 2013, more than $2 billion in construction spending will be devoted to transportation projects constructed by RCTC, the County of Riverside (County), local cities, or the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The obvious reason for this commitment is to invest in a better transportation system resulting in better mobility, but we are also investing in Riverside County's future. It's .a future that should include more local jobs, new businesses being formed, employers moving to the area, and making it easier to access numerous locales that will appeal to visitors throughout the world. People Working — Building a Better Future Construction crews are becoming a common site in Riverside County, and additional work is slated for a number of freeway interchanges, freeway widenings, transit enhancements, and local street and road projects. The Commission and its project partners at Caltrans, local jurisdictions, and transit agencies are investing in transportation using a variety of local, state, and federal sources to build projects, plan and design new improvements, and get people working and contributing to the local economy. During FY 2012/13, the Commission will invest $371 million in capital projects that include highway, regional arterial, and rail projects. The Commission's overall budget will exceed $634 million and includes funding of transit operations, payments to cities and the County for street and road improvements, and management of smaller programs such as motorist and commuter assistance. The Commission's status has become somewhat unique in Southern California. As many transportation agencies have consolidated functions and grown in size, the Commission remains true to the original intent of the state of California (State) legislation that first created it —now operating with a staff of 42 budgeted positions. This maintains the original vision of the Legislature when it created the Commission in 1976. By doing so, the Commission remains effective in its role as a transportation planning and funding agency by maintaining. productive relationships with other agencies. For example, Measure A pays for a score of lesser -known projects that are extremely important to local residents. In FY 2012/13, the Commission will return $39 million in funding to local cities and the County for local streets and roads needs. The Commission also receives and programs funding from state and federal sources. This includes the State's Transportation Development Act program dollars that are allocated primarily to the County's major public transit providers. Measure A also pays its share by funding transit fare discounts and programs for senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means and by operating a commuter assistance program that provides traveler information and ridesharing assistance to employers and commuters. Maior Corridors Seeing Maior Investment 1-215: Construction crews are adding a new lane in each direction along a six -mile stretch of the southern segment of I-215—a project which is being funded through Measure A and state bond funding. This project will be open to traffic in the summer of 2012 and will be followed by a similar project along a 12.5-mile portion of the central segment of 1-215. Two projects were completed in the last fiscal year through the use of federal stimulus funding including an improved interchange at Clinton Keith Road and the interchange at 4ch Street and SR-74 in the city of Perris. At the northern edge of the 1-215 and SR-60, the East Junction carpool lanes connector project is underway. The Commission completed the project development for this effort, and Caltrans is responsible for the construction activities. Additionally, a new carpool lane is set to be added north of the 60/91/215 interchange all the way into San Bernardino County with construction planned for late 2012. The lead agency for this bi-county project is the San Bernardino Associated Governments. 1-10: Construction has been completed on rebuilt and expanded freeway interchanges at Palm Drive, Indian Canyon Drive, Bob Hope Drive, and Date Palm Avenue in the Coachella Valley. The completion of these projects in early 2012 marked the culmination of years of project development work to secure funding and environmental approvals by RCTC's partner agency, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. The completed projects were funded through a combination of federal, state, Measure A, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee funding. Two additional projects on Jefferson Avenue and Monterey Avenue are currently in project development. Caltrans and the County are the lead agencies for these projects. SR-91: Construction has begun on the addition of a carpool lane along a six -mile stretch of SR-91 through downtown Riverside. The project will not only widen SR-91 through downtown Riverside but will also rebuild and improve a number of interchanges and local connections with the freeway. Perris Valley Line: The Perris Valley Line project has received a favorable rating from the Federal Transit Administration and approval for a total of $75 million in federal Small Starts Program funding. In order to receive these dollars, the Commission has participated in a competitive process which has resulted in favorable reviews for the cost effectiveness of the Perris Valley Line project. The environmental work for the project will be completed in summer 2012. The total project budget for the Perris Valley Line is estimated at $247 million. The SR-91 Corridor Improvement Proiect in Corona: A Triumph of Teamwork In April 2012, the Commission learned that the final funding piece for the widening of the SR-91 freeway in Corona was in place with the award of a federal $444 million TIFIA loan from the United States Department of Transportation. This project will add two tolled express lanes and a general purpose in each direction of SR-91 between the Orange County line and 1-15. Additional project improvements will include enhanced transit service along the corridor, a collector -distributor lane system near the 1-15 and Main Street, and better connections between SR-91 and 1-15 including a direct connector to the Express Lanes from the northbound 1-15. The $1.3 billion project, which should break ground in 2013, is expected to generate 16,000 new jobs and will be the largest ever funded by the Commission. This year's budget reflects an ongoing investment in project development work which will include the acquisition of needed right of way. The approval of the TIFIA loan was made possible due to a cooperative effort that involved local officials, the business community, and Riverside County's Senate and Congressional delegations. Special recognition is merited for Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer as well as Congressional representatives Ken Calvert, Jerry Lewis, and Mary Bono Mack; business organizations such as the Monday Morning Group, Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, and Greater Corona Valley Chamber of Commerce; and regional coalitions including Mobility 21 and Inland Action. This widespread support combined with the work of RCTC's Commissioners resulted in the largest federal award that the Commission has ever received for a single transportation project. A Commitment to Riverside County Ensuring local funding for transportation will require ongoing outreach to the public and transparent oversight and management that ensures public confidence in the Commission's fiduciary, oversight, and visionary roles. This budget document is intended to demonstrate the Commission's commitment to the public as well as documenting the Commission's dedication to sound budget practices. This budget document is one of many ways the Commission works to ensure public accountability and full transparency of its actions. We welcome public input and participation and invite you to visit our website at www.rctc.org or to follow us on Twitter @RCTC. GFOA Distinguished Budget Award The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to RCTC for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, an operations guide, a financial plan, and a communications device. The award is valid for a period of one year only. The Commission believes that this budget continues to conform to program requirements, and it will be submitted to GFOA to determine the Commission's eligibility for another award. Acknowledgements The preparation of this budget has been a collaborative effort of the Commission's staff. The budget reflects the Commission's desire to communicate the components of the budget in terms that are easily understandable and supportable for the general public. Staff acknowledges and appreciates the guidance and leadership of the Board of Commissioners and the sense of renewal and commitment it has and continues to inspire. Signature on file Signature on file Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer TABLE OF CONTENTS COMMISSION INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Budget Overview Commission Personnel Department Initiatives Fund Balances Budget Comparative Operating and Capital Budget Budget by Governmental Fund Type Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Section 1: GUIDING POLICIES Commission Policy Goals and Objectives Financial and Administration Policies Policy Matrix Section 2: BUDGET PROCESS SUMMARY Budget Process Functional Organization Chart Staff Organization Chart Section 3: FUND BUDGETS Budgetary Basis and Fund Structure General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds Debt Service Fund Section 4: REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES Revenues and Other Sources Funding Sources Program Revenues Section 5: COMMISSION DEBT Debt Debt Capacity Analysis Debt Service Schedule Outstanding Debt and Debt Service Requirements Program and Geographic Debt Legal Debt Margin Section 6: DEPARTMENT BUDGETS Budget Comparison by Department 6.1: MANAGEMENT SERVICES Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications Finance 6.2: REGIONAL PROGRAMS Planning and Programming Rail Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Narrative discussion of the history of the Commission and list of principal officers Narrative overview of the operational and financial factors considered Summarized narrative overview, charts, and tables of sources and uses Personnel expenditures and full-time equivalents Major initiatives and summarized uses by department Projected fund balances by governmental fund type and program Schedule of budget by summarized line item Schedule of budget classified by operating and capital purposes Schedule of budget by governmental fund type Listing of budgeted capital project expenditures by program Narrative discussion of the appropriations limit Narrative description of policy goals and objectives Description of financial policies Linkage of policy goals to departmental goals and objectives Narrative description of various budget stages Organization chart by Commission functions Organization chart of budgeted staff Narrative description of budgetary basis and fund structure Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses by Measure A and non -Measure A special revenue funds Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses Narrative description of various revenues and other sources Schedule of funding sources by department/program Narratives of revenues by program Narrative discussion of debt programs Charts and accompanying narrative demonstrating debt capacity Schedule of debt maturities by year Description of outstanding debt and related debt service requirements as of June 30, 2012 Charts of debt service by program and geographic area Schedule of calculation of legal debt margin Schedule of revenues, expenditures, and other financing sources (uses) by department Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses 6.3: CAPITAL PROJECTS Capital Project Development and Delivery Location of Capital Projects Capital Projects Summary Section 7: COMMUNITY PROFILE Riverside County Demographics Statistical Information Commission Facts Section 8: APPENDICES Glossary of Acronyms Funding Definitions Program Terms General Terms Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Local map of major capital projects for current year Narrative description of each capital project Narrative discussion of Riverside County's community profile Charts of various demographic data Charts and tables of various statistical information Narrative overview of the Commission's programs and services Explanation of commonly used abbreviations Narrative description of various funding sources Description of Commission programs and related terms Commonly used terms in governmental accounting and finance Commission Introduction State of California (State) law created the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) in 1976 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County (County). The Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in the County. The governing body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 28 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Governor of California. The Commission is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and other agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non -motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and other transportation activities. The Commission serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter approved Measure A Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Measure A was originally approved by the County's electorate in 1988 and imposed a one-half of one cent transaction and use tax (sales tax) to fund specific programs that commenced in July 1989 (1989 Measure A). The 1989 Measure A was approved for 20 years and expired on June 30, 2009. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A beginning in July 2009 through June 2039 (2009 Measure A). Additionally, the Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists; the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service to assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods; and Inland Empire 511 (IE511), a traveler information system. These services are provided at no charge to motorists and are funded through a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations. The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. The TDA provides two sources of funding: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), which is derived from a one -quarter of one cent state sales tax, and State Transit Assistance (STA), which is now derived from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel. Prior to 2010, STA revenues included the tax on gasoline. Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the County. As the CMA, the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system. Riverside County Transportation Commission List of Principal Officials Board of Commissioners Name Title Agency Bob Buster Member County of Riverside, District 1 John F. Tavaglione Member County of Riverside, District 2 Jeff Stone Member County of Riverside, District 3 John J. Benoit Chair (Commission) County of Riverside, District 4 Marion Ashley 2nd Vice Chair (Commission) County of Riverside, District 5 Bob Botts Member City of Banning Roger Berg Member City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck Member City of Blythe Ella Zanowic Vice Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Calimesa Mary Craton Member City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis Member City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez Member City of Coachella Karen Spiegel Vice Chair (Commission) City of Corona Scott Matas Vice Chair (Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects City of Desert Hot Springs Committee) Adam Rush Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and Projects City of Eastvale Committee) Larry Smith Member City of Hemet Douglas Hanson Member City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller Member City of Indio Frank Johnston Member City of Jurupa Valley Terry Henderson Chair (Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects City of La Quinta Committee) Bob Magee Member City of Lake Elsinore Darcy Kuenzi Member City of Menifee Marcelo Co Member City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna Member City of Norco Jan Harnik Member City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat Member City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch Member City of Perris Scott Hines Member City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams Member City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk Vice Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and City of San Jacinto Projects Committee) Ron Roberts Member City of Temecula Ben Benoit Member City of Wildomar To be appointed Governor's Appointee Caltrans, District 8 Management Staff Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director Executive Summary Introduction The budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012/13 is presented to the Board of Commissioners (Board) and the citizens of Riverside County. The budget outlines the projects the Commission plans to undertake during the year and appropriates expenditures to accomplish these tasks. The budget also shows the funding sources and fund balances that will be used for these projects. This document will serve as the Commission's monetary guideline. To provide the reader a better understanding of the projects, staff has included descriptive information regarding each department and major projects. The discussion in each department includes a review of accomplishments, major initiatives, and key assumptions. Staff used the goals and objectives approved at the Commission meeting on March 14, 2012, to prepare this budget. In addition to the Commission's long-term goals and strategic plan, the short-term factors listed below were used to guide the development of the budget: Operational • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A. • Aggressively pursue completion of the environmental, design, and construction processes on the State Route (SR) 91, Interstate (I) 15, and 1-215 projects included in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Continue development of the SR-91 corridor improvement project toll program including executing toll program agreements with key partners, preparing requests for proposals for a design -build contract, and completing funding opportunities via the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan program. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in western Riverside County (Western County). • Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. • Work with local and regional agencies in developing resources for preservation and maintenance of the highways and regional arterials. • Continue cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regarding the Small Starts process to support activities for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension (Perris Valley Line) project. • Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving the County. • Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders with special transit needs. • Support cost controls and promote operating efficiency for transit operators. • Maintain effective partnerships among commuters, employers, and government to increase the efficiency of our transportation system by encouraging and promoting transportation alternatives. • Continue to provide a motorist aid system that ensures safety and convenience to freeway motorists. • Maintain an active involvement in state and federal legislative matters to ensure that the Commission receives proper consideration for transportation projects and funding. • Maintain close communication with Commissioners and educate policy makers on all issues of importance to the Commission. Financial • Fund administrative costs with allocations from Measure A, LTF, FSP, SAFE, and TUMF funds. • Maintain administrative program delivery costs below the policy threshold of 4% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2012/13 Management Services budget is 2.57% of Measure A revenues. • Maintain administrative salaries and benefits at less than 1% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2012/13 administrative salaries and benefits is .92% of Measure A revenues. • Continue to maintain prudent cash reserves to provide some level of insulation for unplanned expenditures. • Maintain current positive bond ratings with rating agencies. " M o v e f o r w a r d o n M e a s u r e A p r o j e c t s f o r h i g h w a y s a n d r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l s u s i n g s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s , T U M F r e v e n u e s , a n d s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l f u n d i n g a s w e l l a s f i n a n c i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s s u c h a s c o m m e r c i a l p a p e r , s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e b o n d s , t o l l r e v e n u e b o n d s , a n d f e d e r a l l o a n s . " L e v e r a g e a n d p r o t e c t p a s t M e a s u r e A i n v e s t m e n t s i n r a i l w i t h s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l f u n d i n g f o r a d d i t i o n a l r a i l i m p r o v e m e n t s , i n c l u d i n g t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e . " M a i n t a i n t h e f i n a n c i a l s o f t w a r e s y s t e m t o i n t e g r a t e p r o j e c t a c c o u n t i n g n e e d s a n d i m p r o v e a c c o u n t i n g e f f i c i e n c y . B u d g e t O v e r v i e w T o t a l s o u r c e s ( T a b l e 1 ) a r e b u d g e t e d a t $ 1 , 8 6 4 , 6 4 4 , 6 0 0 , w h i c h i s a n i n c r e a s e o f 2 7 9 % o v e r F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 p r o j e c t e d s o u r c e s a n d a 3 0 5 % i n c r e a s e o v e r t h e F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 b u d g e t . T o t a l s o u r c e s a r e c o m p r i s e d o f r e v e n u e s o f $ 3 1 8 , 3 7 6 , 9 0 0 , t r a n s f e r s i n o f $ 3 2 6 , 0 9 5 , 7 0 0 , a n d d e b t p r o c e e d s o f $ 1 , 2 2 0 , 1 7 2 , 0 0 0 . T h e p r o j e c t e d f u n d b a l a n c e a t J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 2 a v a i l a b l e f o r e x p e n d i t u r e s ( e x c l u d i n g r e s e r v e s f o r d e b t s e r v i c e o f $ 5 , 6 6 5 , 3 0 0 a n d a d v a n c e s r e c e i v a b l e o f $ 3 1 , 3 5 0 , 7 0 0 ) i s $ 5 1 9 , 6 7 7 , 3 0 0 . A c c o r d i n g l y , t o t a l f u n d i n g a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 b u d g e t t o t a l s $ 2 , 3 8 4 , 3 2 1 , 9 0 0 . T a b l e 1 S o u r c e s F Y 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 3 F Y 1 0 / 1 1 F Y 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 1 2 / 1 3 D o l l a r P e r c e n t A c t u a l R e v i s e d B u d g e t P r o j e c t e d B u d g e t C h a n g e C h a n g e M e a s u r e A S a l e s T a x $ 1 2 3 , 4 3 9 , 8 0 0 $ 1 2 4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 2 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 3 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 $ 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 6 % L T F S a l e s T a x 6 0 , 7 7 2 , 8 0 0 6 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 6 3 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 6 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 7 % S T A S a l e s T a x 9 , 5 3 7 , 0 0 0 1 4 , 0 7 3 , 6 0 0 1 4 , 2 1 2 , 5 0 0 4 , 6 7 5 , 5 0 0 4 9 % I n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l 4 0 , 5 6 9 , 0 0 0 4 8 , 6 6 7 , 6 0 0 5 0 , 5 7 6 , 0 0 0 9 3 , 7 5 8 , 4 0 0 4 5 , 0 9 0 , 8 0 0 9 3 % T U M F R e v e n u e 9 , 1 5 7 , 9 0 0 6 , 7 8 4 , 3 0 0 6 , 3 9 7 , 4 0 0 5 , 2 5 7 , 3 0 0 ( 1 , 5 2 7 , 0 0 0 ) - 2 3 % O t h e r R e v e n u e 2 , 3 2 1 , 8 0 0 5 9 2 , 4 0 0 4 5 0 , 8 0 0 8 8 2 , 8 0 0 2 9 0 , 4 0 0 4 9 % I n v e s t m e n t I n c o m e 4 , 5 2 4 , 2 0 0 1 , 8 2 4 , 0 0 0 3 , 3 9 1 , 1 0 0 7 , 2 6 5 , 9 0 0 5 , 4 4 1 , 9 0 0 2 9 8 % O p e r a t i n g T r a n s f e r s I n 1 8 5 , 3 5 4 , 8 0 0 1 6 9 , 7 3 9 , 1 0 0 1 6 6 , 3 4 3 , 4 0 0 3 2 6 , 0 9 5 , 7 0 0 1 5 6 , 3 5 6 , 6 0 0 9 2 % D e b t P r o c e e d s 1 7 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 3 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 , 2 2 0 , 1 7 2 , 0 0 0 1 , 1 8 2 , 1 7 2 , 0 0 0 3 1 1 1 % T O T A L S o u r c e s $ 5 9 6 , 1 4 0 , 3 0 0 $ 4 6 0 , 1 4 4 , 4 0 0 $ 4 9 2 , 2 3 2 , 3 0 0 $ 1 , 8 6 4 , 6 4 4 , 6 0 0 $ 1 , 4 0 4 , 5 0 0 , 2 0 0 3 0 5 % T h r o u g h F Y 2 0 0 5 / 0 6 , t h e C o u n t y h a d e x p e r i e n c e d s i g n i f i c a n t g r o w t h c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e n a t i o n a l e c o n o m i c e x p a n s i o n a n d a m p l i f i e d l o c a l l y b y c o m p e t i t i v e a d v a n t a g e s o f R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y o v e r n e a r b y c o a s t a l c o u n t i e s ( L o s A n g e l e s , O r a n g e a n d S a n D i e g o ) : ( i ) h o u s i n g t h a t w a s ( a n d r e m a i n s ) m o r e a v a i l a b l e a n d a f f o r d a b l e ; a n d ( i i ) p l e n t i f u l c o m m e r c i a l r e a l e s t a t e a n d a v a i l a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t l a n d a t l o w e r r a t e s . M o r e o v e r , b o t h t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n a c c e s s t o e m p l o y m e n t c e n t e r s i n L o s A n g e l e s a n d O r a n g e c o u n t i e s i m p r o v e d . R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ' s e c o n o m y t h r i v e d , r e f l e c t i n g t h e a r e a ' s c o m p e t i t i v e a d v a n t a g e s o v e r i t s n e i g h b o r i n g c o u n t i e s , l a r g e l y a s a r e s u l t o f t h e C o u n t y ' s c o n t i n u i n g a b i l i t y t o d r a w j o b s , r e s i d e n t s , a n d a f f o r d a b l e h o u s i n g a w a y f r o m t h e L o s A n g e l e s , O r a n g e , a n d S a n D i e g o c o u n t y a r e a s . A s a r e s u l t , t h e C o u n t y e n j o y e d a m o r e d i v e r s i f i e d e m p l o y m e n t a n d c o m m e r c i a l b a s e a n d a n i n c r e a s i n g s h a r e o f t h e r e g i o n a l e c o n o m y . T o d a y t h e e c o n o m y i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y r e f l e c t s t h e r e c e n t n a t i o n w i d e r e c e s s i o n , a s e v i d e n c e d b y h i g h u n e m p l o y m e n t ; l o w e r t o t a l p e r s o n a l i n c o m e a n d t a x a b l e s a l e s , r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g p e r m i t s , a n d t h e r a t e o f h o m e s a l e s a n d t h e m e d i a n p r i c e o f s i n g l e - f a m i l y r e s i d e n c e s ; a n d h i g h r a t e s o f d i s t r e s s e d p r o p e r t i e s . T h e i m p a c t o f t h e r e c e s s i o n h a s b e e n a m p l i f i e d i n t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e ( i . e . , R i v e r s i d e a n d S a n B e r n a r d i n o c o u n t i e s ) d u e t o i t s r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r g r o w t h t h r o u g h 2 0 0 6 a n d t h e r e l a t i v e l y l o w e r a v e r a g e i n c o m e l e v e l s w h e n c o m p a r e d t o c o a s t a l a r e a s . T h e s e f a c t o r s h a v e r e s u l t e d i n f l u c t u a t i n g M e a s u r e A a n d L T F s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s a n d d e c r e a s e d T U M F f e e s a s n o t e d i n C h a r t 1 ; h o w e v e r , t h e s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s a p p e a r t o h a v e s t a b i l i z e d s i n c e F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0 . Chart 1— Commission Sources Trend $1,400,000,000 $1,200,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $800,000,000 $600,000,000 $400,000,000 $ 200,000,000 i� FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 +Measure A Sales Tax f—LTFSales Tax —r1e—STASales Tax TUMF —)I- Federal, State, Local Revenues —0— Operating Transfers In —+—Debt Proceeds While economic reports indicate that the national recession ended in 2009 and economic growth has resumed, recovery in the local Inland Empire economy continues to be affected by the area's housing woes due to the exposure to the subprime mortgage market collapse several years ago. The economic outlook for the Commission in FY 2012/13 is encouraging with the stabilization of sales tax revenues; however, the state and federal budget issues continue to affect funding of the Commission's capital projects and programs. Should Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues decline again and the availability of federal and state revenues continues to be uncertain, the timing and scope of the Commission's projects and programs may be impacted. While the Commission's primary revenues are the Measure A and LTF sales taxes, other revenues and financing sources are required to fund the Commission's programs and projects as illustrated in Chart 2. Chart 2 —Sources: Major Categories Measure A Sales LTF Sales Tax Tax 3% 7% STA Sal es Tax 1% Intergovernmental 5% TUMF Revenue 0% Investment Income 1% The State Board of Equalization (SBOE) recently provided to cities and other agencies its projections that statewide taxable sales over the next fiscal year will increase 4%. However, given the tenuous local economy, the Commission is not basing its estimate of revenues on the SBOE's projection and will continue its conservative projection practices. After taking the state of the local economy and recent revenue trends into consideration, staff has projected that Measure A sales tax revenues of $132,000,000 for FY 2012/13 will increase by 3% from the FY 2011/12 revised projection of $128,000,000. At midyear the Commission will reassess sales tax revenue projections based on the economy and revenue trends. On behalf of the County, the Commission administers the LTF for public transportation needs, local streets and roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The majority of LTF funding received by the County and available for allocation is distributed to all public transit operators in the County, and the Commission receives allocations for administration, planning, and programming in addition to funding for rail operations included in the commuter rail Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). The LTF sales tax revenue received from the State is budgeted at $65,000,000, an increase of 3% from the FY 2011/12 revised projection of $63,000,000. STA funds generated from the statewide sales tax on motor vehicle fuel are allocated by formula by the State Controller to the Commission for allocations to the County's public transit operators; however, these funds have been subject to suspension in past years due to the State's budget issues. The STA transit allocation, which is based on recent State estimates, for FY 2012/13 is $14,212,500. Intergovernmental revenues include reimbursement revenues from federal sources of $73,151,900, state sources of $17,917,800, and local agencies of $2,688,700 for highway and rail capital, rail operations and station maintenance, commuter assistance, and motorist assistance programs as well as planning and programming activities. Reimbursement revenues vary from year to year depending on project activities and funding levels. As a result of an amended Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Commission will receive 48.7% of TUMF revenues (as updated by the most recent Nexus study). TUMF represents fees assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County. FY 2012/13 TUMF fees are expected to remain flat at $4,000,000 based on the weakened housing market in the Inland Empire, and additional TUMF zone reimbursements of $1,257,300 are expected for the 74/215 interchange project. Other revenue of $882,800 is projected to increase 49% from the prior year's budget of $592,400 primarily because of property management revenues generated from properties acquired in connection with the SR-91 corridor improvements project. Investment income is anticipated to increase in FY 2012/13 as a result of higher cash balances, although investment yields remain low. Staff continues to actively manage its resources and Make appropriate investments to maximize the return to the Commission without sacrificing security and affecting short-term cash requirements. Transfers in of $326,095,700 relate primarily to the transfer of available debt proceeds for highway and regional arterial projects; LTF funding for general administration, planning and programming, rail operations and station maintenance, and grade separation project allocations; approved interfund allocations for specific projects; and debt service requirements from highway, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects. Debt proceeds consist of the issuance of $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes and $1,120,172,000 in sales tax and toll revenue bonds as well as TIFIA loan proceeds related to the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Total uses (Table 2), including transfers out of $326,095,700, are budgeted at $960,881,800, an increase of 56% from the prior year budget amount of $615,387,900. Program expenditures and transfers out totaling $804,559,600 represent 84% of total budgeted uses in FY 2012/13. Program costs have increased by 49% from $539,143,400 in FY 2011/12. Table 2 — Uses FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12- FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials $ 300,680,000 $ 352,537,600 $ 296,779,100 $ 632,471,700 $ 279,934,100 79% Capital Local Streets and Roads 36,857,000 36,025,000 38,166,600 39,357,000 3,332,000 9% Commuter Assistance 2,831,900 9,386,400 4,391,400 4,190,100 (5,196,300) -55% Debt Service 123,364,100 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413,000 80,418,000 128% Management Services 8,394,000 13,249,500 17,564,100 12,909,200 (340,300) -3% Motorist Assistance 4,761,900 6,377,600 6,400,900 6,169,300 (208,300) -3% Planning and Programming 4,564,600 7,459,500 4,065,300 4,522,600 (2,936,900) -39% Public and Specialized Transit 64,024,400 105,858,700 73,559,300 103,295,600 (2,563,100) -2% Rail Maintenance and Operations 12,865,700 21,498,600 21,012,900 14,553,300 (6,945,300) -32% TOTAL Uses $ 558,343,600 $ 615,387,900 $ 524,903,600 $ .960,881,800 $ 345,493,900 56% Note: Management Services includes Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs and Communications, and Finance. Capital highway, rail, and regional arterials budgeted uses of $632,471,700, are 79% higher compared to FY 2011/12 'due to commencement of construction of the Perris Valley Line and significant right of way activities related to the SR-91 corridorimprovement project in addition to transfers out of debt proceeds from capital projects funds to finance 2009 Measure A Western County highway project costs. Debt Service of $143,413,000 has increased 128% as a result of the retirement of $120 million of outstanding commercial paper notes from sales tax revenue bond proceeds issued in connection with the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing. Commuter Assistance budgeted expenditures of $4,190,100 are 55% lower than FY 2011/12 due to a $5,000,000 budgeted transfer in FY 2011/12 to other rail projects to offset the multimodal benefits of the Perris Valley Line. Planning and Programming budgeted expenditures of $4,522,600 reflect a 39% decrease from the FY 2011/12 budget of $7,459,500 as a result of a decrease in jump-start funding disbursements for grade separation projects. The $6,945,300 decrease in Rail Department budgeted expenditures of $14,553,300 is primarily due to capital funding for new Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink) rail cars in FY 2011/12. Total uses included in the FY 2012/13 budget by major categories are illustrated in Chart 3. Chart 3 — Uses: Major Categories Planning and Public and Specialized Transit Programming Rail Maintenance and 0% 11�, Operations Motorist Assistance 1% Management Services 1% DebtService 15% Commuter Assistance 0% Capital Local Streets and Roads 4% f 2% Commission Personnel The Commission's salary and fringe benefits total $6,971,100 for FY 2012/13. This represents an increase of 6% or $394,200 over the FY 2011/12 budget of $6,576,900 (Chart 4). The increase relates to the addition of 1.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) for a capital projects toll program manager, a set -aside pool of 3% for cost of living adjustments, and 3% for merit -based salary increases. The Commission had not provided a merit -based salary increase since FY 2007/08. Chart 4 - Salary and Benefits Costs: Five Year Comparison $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 The FY 2012/13 FTE of 42.0 positions is comparable to the FY 2011/12 level (Table 3) and reflects a 1.0 FTE increase for the recruitment of a capital projects toll program manager. Management continues to be firmly committed to the intent of the Commission's enabling legislation that called for a small staff. Staff will continue to be provided the tools needed, including state of the art technology, to ensure an efficient and productive work environment. However, it must be recognized that small is not viewed in an absolute context; it is relative to the required tasks to be performed and the demands to be met. Table 3 - Staff Summary by Department FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Executive Management 0.3 0.2 0.3 Administration 4.3 4.5 4.6 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.0 2.3 2.0 Finance 6.2 6.9 6.7 Planning and Programming 5.2 4.8 4.7 Rail Maintenance and Operations 3.8 3.4 3.3 Public and Specialized Transit 2.6 2.6 2.4 Commuter Assistance 1.5 1.8 1.6 Motorist Assistance 0.9 0.9 1.2 Capital Project Development and Delivery 12.2 13.6 15.2 TOTAL 39.0 41.0 42.0 The Commission provides a comprehensive package of benefits to all permanent, salaried employees. The package includes: health, dental, vision, and life insurance, short and long-term disability, workers' compensation, tuition assistance, sick and vacation leave, retirement benefits in the form of participation in California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS), postretirement health care, deferred compensation, and employee assistance program. The compensation components are shown in Chart 5. Chart 5 — Personnel Salary and Benefits Other Fringes 1% Department Initiatives The preparation of each department's budget was based on key assumptions, accomplishments in FY 2011/12, major initiatives for FY 2012/13, and department goals and related objectives. Following are the key initiatives and summary of expenditures for each department (Tables 4 through 13). Executive Management • Continue project development and delivery as the key Measure A priority. • Ensure the SR-91 corridor improvement project environmental review will be completed along with advance right of way, solicitation of a design build team, and a federal loan from the TIFIA program. • Obtain approvals from the FTA, railroads, and community related to the development of the Perris Valley Line. • Advocate for state investments in transportation and approval of a federal transportation bill to fund needed transportation priorities in Riverside County and stimulate the local economy. • Maintain regional cooperation and collaboration as a significant effort consistent with the philosophy and mission of the Commission. • Enhance external communications with media, business and civic groups, and the community. • Maintain an effective mid -sized transportation agency with a small and dedicated staff. Table 4 — Executive Management FY 10/11 ' FY_11/12 - FY 11/12 FY 12/13 - Dollar ` Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 128,000 $ 83,600 $ 61,600 $ 120,600 $ 37,000 44% Professional 459,300 102,000 70,000 . 105,000 3,000 3% Support 38,900 58,700 54,100 57,600 (1,100) -2% TOTAL $., 626,200 $ 244,300 $ 185,700 $ 283,200 $ 38,900 16% Administration • Provide highouali'y support services to the Commission and to internal and external customers. • Continue to strengthen the electronic records management system. • Continue to provide timely communications to Commissioners with continued emphasis on the utilization of electronic mail. • Continue to update technology to streamline processes and provide easier access to Commission records. • Support and develop a motivated workforce with a framework of activities and practices that comply with employment laws and regulations. Table 5 - Administration Personnel Professional Support Capital Outlay Debt Service TOTAL FY 10/11 Actual $ 400,700 $ 97,000 558,400 29,000 25,300 $ 1,110,400 $ FY 11/12 Revised Budget 412,400 $ 132,000 670,800 20,000 FY 11/12 Projected 372,400 $ 100,900 586,200 5,000 FY 12/13 Dollar Budget Change 460,300 $ 47,900 114,500 640,600 140,000 1,235,200 $ 1,064,500 $ 1,355,400 $ Percent Change 12% (17,500) -13% (30,200) -5% 120,000 600% N/A 120,200 10% Legislative Affairs and Communications • Continue efforts to protect and seek greater state and federal investment in transportation infrastructure and goods movement. • Develop effective partnerships with transportation providers to communicate a unified message to Congress regarding mobility needs. • Advocate positions in the State Legislature and in Congress that advance the County's transportation interests, especially those related to the implementation of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Develop a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on federal transportation policies. • Continue to develop a broad public information program regarding the Commission's responsibilities and accomplishments through a variety of media formats and presentation opportunities. • Continue to place an emphasis on providing proactive public communications support related to major project development efforts. • Provide new Commissioner orientation meetings and other continuing education opportunities for Commissioners. Table 6 - Legislative Affairs and Communications Personnel Professional Support TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12' Actual Revised Budget 321,300 $ 437,100 $ 385,200 688,500 145,100 171,400 851,600 $ 1,297,000 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Projected Budget 367,500 $ 395,000 $ 420,500 687,500 170,100 188,000 958,100 $ 1,270,500 $ Dollar Percent ChangeChange (42,100) -10% (1,000) 0% 16,600 10% (26,5 -2% Finance • Continue appropriate uses of long- and short-term financing to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). • Apply the sales tax revenue forecast update to develop a financing plan to support the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan and CVAG highway and regional arterial projects. • Continue to support the financing efforts for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. " C o n t i n u e t o k e e p a b r e a s t o f G o v e r n m e n t a l A c c o u n t i n g S t a n d a r d s B o a r d ( G A S B ) t e c h n i c a l a c t i v i t i e s a f f e c t i n g t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s a c c o u n t i n g a n d f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g a c t i v i t i e s a n d c o n s i d e r e a r l y i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f n e w p r o n o u n c e m e n t s . " C o n t i n u e t o s t r e n g t h e n t h e e n t e r p r i s e r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g ( E R P ) s y s t e m t o b e n e f i t a l l s t a f f i n t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f a c c o u n t i n g a n d p r o j e c t i n f o r m a t i o n a n d a u t o m a t i o n o f a p a p e r l e s s w o r k f l o w s y s t e m . " C o n t i n u e t o i m p l e m e n t a c e n t r a l i z e d p r o c u r e m e n t s p r o c e s s i n o r d e r t o s t r e n g t h e n c o n t r o l s a n d e n s u r e c o n s i s t e n c y i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f p r o c u r e m e n t p o l i c i e s a n d p r o c e d u r e s a n d a d h e r e n c e t o a p p l i c a b l e l a w s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s . T a b l e 7 F i n a n c e P e r s o n n e l P r o f e s s i o n a l S u p p o r t C a p i t a l O u t l a y T r a n s f e r s O u t T O T A L F Y 1 0 / 1 1 F Y 1 1 / 1 2 A c t u a l R e v i s e d B u d g e t $ 7 7 8 , 2 0 0 $ 8 1 8 , 5 0 0 $ 4 , 4 8 3 , 5 0 0 3 , 9 5 6 , 0 0 0 5 4 4 , 7 0 0 5 6 9 , 0 0 0 2 4 , 7 0 0 1 2 9 , 5 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 $ 5 , 8 3 1 , 1 0 0 $ 1 0 , 4 7 3 , 0 0 0 $ F Y 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 1 2 / 1 3 P r o j e c t e d B u d g e t 6 5 9 , 3 0 0 $ 8 2 8 , 6 0 0 $ 4 , 1 1 6 , 8 0 0 5 7 5 , 7 0 0 4 , 0 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 3 5 5 , 8 0 0 $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 , 1 0 0 $ D o l l a r P e r c e n t C h a n g e C h a n g e 1 0 , 1 0 0 1 % 3 , 5 2 0 , 5 0 0 ( 4 3 5 , 5 0 0 ) - 1 1 % 6 5 1 , 0 0 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 1 4 % ( 1 2 9 , 5 0 0 ) - 1 0 0 % 0 % ( 4 7 2 , 9 0 0 ) - 5 % P l a n n i n g a n d P r o g r a m m i n g " M o n i t o r f u n d i n g a u t h o r i t y a n d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y r e l a t e d t o t h e S t a t e T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m ( S T I P ) a n d i m p a c t s o n t h e S T I P c a u s e d b y t h e s t a t e b u d g e t i s s u e s . " E n s u r e S T I P a n d P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B f u n d e d p r o j e c t s a r e a d m i n i s t e r e d a n d i m p l e m e n t e d c o n s i s t e n t w i t h C a l i f o r n i a T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( C T C ) a n d C a l i f o r n i a D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n ( C a l t r a n s ) p o l i c i e s . " C o n t i n u e t o s t r a t e g i c a l l y p r o g r a m p r o j e c t s a n d o b l i g a t e f u n d s i n a n e x p e d i t i o u s m a n n e r f o r t h e m a x i m u m u s e o f a l l a v a i l a b l e f u n d i n g , i n c l u d i n g m o n i t o r i n g t h e u s e o f s u c h f u n d i n g t o p r e v e n t f u n d s f r o m l a p s i n g . " F o c u s o n i n t e r r e g i o n a l c o n c e r n s a n d m a i n t a i n e f f e c t i v e w o r k i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n v o l v i n g v a r i o u s b i - c o u n t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s , i n c l u d i n g g o o d s m o v e m e n t . " C o o r d i n a t e p l a n n i n g e f f o r t s w i t h r e g i o n a l a n d l o c a l a g e n c i e s r e l a t i n g t o t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n s ( R T P ) a n d g r e e n h o u s e g a s r e d u c t i o n i m p l e m e n t a t i o n g u i d e l i n e s . " S e c u r e f u n d i n g t h r o u g h t h e f e d e r a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n b i l l f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t - r e l a t e d n e e d s . " M o n i t o r a n d t r a c k t h e T U M F r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l p r o j e c t s . " W o r k c o o p e r a t i v e l y w i t h m e m b e r a g e n c i e s t o c o n t i n u e t h e w o r k e f f o r t s o n t h e n e w C o m m u n i t y E n v i r o n m e n t a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A c c e p t a b i l i t y P r o c e s s ( C E T A P ) c o r r i d o r s . " C o n t i n u e t h e C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m ( C M P ) u p d a t e a n d t r a f f i c m o n i t o r i n g a l o n g u r b a n a n d r u r a l h i g h w a y s y s t e m s . " A d m i n i s t e r t h e S B 8 2 1 B i c y c l e a n d P e d e s t r i a n F a c i l i t i e s P r o g r a m . " M o n i t o r t h e P o r t o f L o s A n g e l e s a n d P o r t o f L o n g B e a c h ' s ( P o r t s ) p r o j e c t s f o r i m p a c t s o n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . T a b l e 8 P l a n n i n g a n d P r o g r a m m i n g P e r s o n n e l P r o f e s s i o n a l S u p p o r t P r o j e c t s a n d O p e r a t i o n s T r a n s f e r s O u t T O T A L F Y 1 0 / 1 1 - F Y 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 1 1 / 1 2 . . F Y 1 2 / 1 3 D o l l a r P e r c e n t - . . A c t u a l ' - R e v i s e d ' B u d g e t . . P r o j e c t e d - - - B u d g e t ' C h a n g e C h a n g e - . $ 8 1 7 , 6 0 0 $ 8 3 3 , 0 0 0 $ 7 8 8 , 6 0 0 $ " 8 3 5 , 8 0 0 $ 2 , 8 0 0 0 % 1 0 2 , 5 0 0 3 5 1 , 0 0 0 2 0 7 , 7 0 0 3 6 2 , 8 0 0 1 1 , 8 0 0 3 % 9 , 8 0 0 1 8 , 8 0 0 1 8 , 4 0 0 2 4 , 3 0 0 5 , 5 0 0 2 9 % 3 , 6 3 4 , 7 0 0 6 , 2 4 7 , 5 0 0 1 , 3 , E , 6 0 0 3 , 2 9 9 , 7 0 0 ( 2 , 9 4 7 , 8 0 0 ) - 4 7 % - 9 , 2 0 0 - - ( 9 , 2 0 0 ) - 1 0 0 % $ 4 , 5 6 4 , 6 0 0 $ 7 , 4 5 9 , 5 0 0 $ 4 , 0 6 5 , 3 0 0 $ 4 , 5 2 2 , 6 0 0 $ ( 2 , 9 3 6 , 9 0 0 ) - 3 9 % Rail Maintenance and Operations • Continue active participation in governance and operations of the Metrolink commuter rail system. • Continue the planning and implementation of capital improvements at the commuter rail stations in Riverside County, including the Perris Valley Line, security and rehabilitation projects, and parking requirements. • Continue to support activities related to the Perris Valley Line project and evaluate its operational impact. • Establish best approach to build, maintain, and operate cost effective and environmentally sustainable facilities that meet the public's transportation needs. • Continue coordination with CVAG, Amtrak and the State to focus attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between Coachella Valley, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin. Table 9 — Rail Maintenance and Operations FY 10/11 Actual Personnel $ 491,500 Professional 128,100 Support 1,209,200 Projects and Operations 11,021,600 Capital Outlay 15,300 TOTAL $ 12,865,700 FY 11/12 Revised Budget 494,300 $ 317,000 1,640,700 18,985,900 60,700 21,498,600 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Projected Budget 429,300 $ 496,700 $ 178,100 421,000 1,640,000 1,775,100 18,740,800 11,794,800 24,700 65,700 21,012,900 $ 14,553,300 $ Dollar Percent Change Change 2,400 0% 104,000 33% 134,400 8% (7,191,100) -38% 5,000 8% (6,945,300) -32% Public and Specialized Transit • Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs and monitor funding of these programs. • Implement the specialized transit funding allocations related to the second universal call for projects and monitor performance. • Continue long-range planning activities to ensure that anticipated revenues are in line with projected levels of service by transit operators. • Monitor public and specialized transit operators' performance through the TransTrack program. • Provide availability for local matching funds to Western County applicants seeking FTA Section 5310 federal capital grants. • Coordinate with operators on major capital purchases and investments into new rolling stock and other system improvements in order to maintain a viable on -hand reserve. Table 10 — Public and Specialized Transit FY 10/11 • FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Personnel $ 320,900 $ 361,900 $ Professional 129,600 187,300 Support 11,400 23,800 Projects and Operations 46,288,000 86,469,800 Transfers Out 17,274,500 18,815,900 TOTAL $ 64,024,400 $ 105,858,700 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 _ Dollar Percent Projected _ Budget Change Change 338,400 $ 326,200 $ (35,700) -10% 159,000 291,500 104,200 56% 10,400 18,900 (4,900) -21% 57,008,000 84,049,300 (2,420,500) -3% 16,043,500 18,609,700 (206,200) -1% 73,559,300 $ 103,295,600 $ (2,563,100) -2% Commuter Assistance • Improve the suite of services and outreach to rideshare participants and employer partners, including personalized information and electronic access and distribution. • Maintain and grow employer partnerships through value-added services and tools for ridesharing programs. • Maintain and operate a four -county ridematching database system with partner agencies. • Maintain long-term partnership with San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) to manage and implement a "sister" Commuter Assistance program for residents and employers in San Bernardino County. • Optimize park and ride facilities to support car/vanpool arrangements and facilitate transit connections. Table it - Commuter Assistance Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Transfers Out TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget 197,600 $ 230,700 309,100 2,079,000 15,500 2,831,900 $ FY 11/12 Projected 228,900 $ 264,800 $ 805,100 663,600 503,400 505,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 130,000 130,000 5,160,000 160,00.0 9,386,400 $ 4,391,400 $ . FY 12/13 Budget 218,900 $ 640,300 529,200 2,633,400 17,000 151,300 4,190,100 $ Dollar Percent Change Change (10,000) -4% (164,800) -20% 25,800 5% 74,400 3% (113,000) -87% (5,008,700) -97% (5,196,300) -55% Motorist Assistance • Assess opportunities for efficiency related to the call box program operations. • Maintain a high benefit -to -cost ratio related to the performance of the FSP program. • Operate and maintain the 1E511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards in partnership with SANBAG. • Enhance the 1E511 with more personalized traffic information services. Table 12 - Motorist Assistance Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change 103,800 $ 112,200 $ 196,900 $ 175,900 $ 63,700 57% 649,500 1,008,700 916,000 717,500 (291,200) -29% 435,600 599,300 587,900 874,600 275,300 46% 2,341,800 3,543,100 3,585,800 3,080,000 (463,100) -13% 1,231,200 1,114,300 1,114,300 1,321,300 207,000 19% 4,761,900 $ 6,377,600 $ 6,400,900 $ 6,169,300 $ (208,300) -3% Capital Project Development and Delivery • Continue project development, right of way, and construction activities on remaining 1989 Measure A projects including SR-74 curve widening, 74/215 interchange, SR-91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange, and 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors. • Continue project activities on the 1-215 bi-county highway and Perris Valley Line rail projects, which were included in both the 1989 Measure A and 2009 Measure A programs. • Continue project work on the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan projects, including the 91/71 connectors; the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor mobility improvement projects; SR-79 realignment; and Mid County Parkway. • Provide Western County TUMF funding and support to local jurisdictions for regional arterial project engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction. • Provide advance funding and support of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial projects. " D e v e l o p s t r a t e g i e s t o i m p l e m e n t a l t e r n a t i v e f i n a n c i n g s t r u c t u r e s i n c l u d i n g p u b l i c t o l l r o a d s . " M a i n t a i n a r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t p r o g r a m i n s u p p o r t o f c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s . " M a n a g e r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n s c h e d u l e s a n d b u d g e t c o n t r o l m e a s u r e s . " M a i n t a i n a n d m a n a g e t h e a c c e s s , u s e , s a f e t y , a n d s e c u r i t y o f C o m m i s s i o n - o w n e d p r o p e r t i e s i n c l u d i n g c o m m u t e r r a i l s t a t i o n s , p r o p e r t i e s i n a c q u i s i t i o n p r o c e s s , a n d i n c o m e - g e n e r a t i n g p r o p e r t i e s . T a b l e 1 3 C a p i t a l P r o j e c t D e v e l o p m e n t a n d D e l i v e r y F Y 1 0 / 1 1 A c t u a l P e r s o n n e l $ 2 , 3 0 8 , 9 0 0 P r o f e s s i o n a l 5 , 4 5 0 , 0 0 0 S u p p o r t 3 0 9 , 2 0 0 P r o j e c t s a n d O p e r a t i o n s 1 6 2 , 5 5 7 , 0 0 0 C a p i t a l O u t l a y 6 2 , 8 0 0 D e b t S e r v i c e 1 2 3 , 3 3 8 , 8 0 0 T r a n s f e r s O u t 1 6 6 , 8 4 9 , 1 0 0 T O T A L $ 4 6 0 , 8 7 5 , 8 0 0 F Y 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 1 1 / 1 2 R e v i s e d B u d g e t P r o j e c t e d $ 2 , 7 9 5 , 0 0 0 $ 3 , 0 2 6 , 5 0 0 9 , 6 0 1 , 5 0 0 6 , 2 0 2 , 2 0 0 8 1 3 , 0 0 0 4 5 9 , 2 0 0 2 3 5 , 5 3 7 , 4 0 0 1 8 6 , 0 5 5 , 2 0 0 1 7 6 , 0 0 0 1 7 7 , 0 0 0 6 2 , 9 9 5 , 0 0 0 6 2 , 9 6 4 , 0 0 0 1 3 9 , 6 3 9 , 7 0 0 1 3 9 , 0 2 5 , 6 0 0 $ 4 5 1 , 5 5 7 , 6 0 0 $ 3 9 7 , 9 0 9 , 7 0 0 F Y 1 2 / 1 3 B u d g e t 3 , 1 1 3 , 1 0 0 7 , 5 0 0 , 6 0 0 5 8 7 , 0 0 0 3 5 9 , 3 8 9 , 6 0 0 2 2 5 , 0 0 0 1 4 3 , 4 1 3 , 0 0 0 3 0 1 , 0 1 3 , 4 0 0 8 1 5 , 2 4 1 , 7 0 0 D o l l a r P e r c e n t C h a n g e C h a n g e 3 1 8 , 1 0 0 1 1 % ( 2 , 1 0 0 , 9 0 0 ) - 2 2 % ( 2 2 6 , 0 0 0 ) - 2 8 % 1 2 3 , 8 5 2 , 2 0 0 5 3 % 4 9 , 0 0 0 2 8 % 8 0 , 4 1 8 , 0 0 0 1 2 8 % 1 6 1 , 3 7 3 , 7 0 0 1 1 6 % 3 6 3 , 6 8 4 , 1 0 0 8 1 % F u n d B a l a n c e s T h e t o t a l f u n d b a l a n c e a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 2 i s p r o j e c t e d a t $ 5 5 6 , 6 9 3 , 3 0 0 . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s b u d g e t e d a c t i v i t i e s f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 a r e e x p e c t e d t o r e s u l t i n a $ 9 0 3 , 7 6 2 , 8 0 0 i n c r e a s e o f t o t a l f u n d b a l a n c e a t J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 3 t o $ 1 , 4 6 0 , 4 5 6 , 1 0 0 . T h e p r i m a r y c a u s e o f t h e i n c r e a s e i s r e l a t e d t o t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f f i n a n c i n g a c t i v i t i e s f o r t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t n e a r t h e e n d o f F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 . T a b l e 1 4 p r e s e n t s t h e c o m p o n e n t s o f f u n d b a l a n c e b y g o v e r n m e n t a l f u n d t y p e a n d p r o g r a m a t J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 3 . Table 14 — Projected Fund Balances by Governmental Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2013 Riverside County Transportation Commission $1,460,456,100' General Fund Special Revenue Funds Cgital Projects Funds - . Debt Seryice Fund . $13,665,600 $416,257,300 $1,025,826,700 $4,706,500 Management Services Planning and Programming Rail Maintenance and Operations Budget Summary $6,256,000 Measure A Westem County: 1,817,100 Bond Finandng 5,592,500 Commuter Assistance Economic Development Highways Local Streets and Roads New Corridors Public and Specialized Transit Rail Regional Arterials $2,363,800 12,914,000 3,572,000 120,431,800 1,300 40,940,900 8,852,200 60,246,600 30,602,500 Measure A Coachella Valley: Highways and Regional Arterial 1,417,600 Local Streets and Roads 1,600 Specialized Transit 1,103,800 Measure A Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads 600 Motorist Assistance 4,629,500 State Transit Assistance 43,456,700 Local Transportation Fund 69,912,800 TUMF: CETAP 15,096,700 Regional Arterials 712,900 Highways $ 1,025,826,700 The overall budget for FY 2012/13 is presented in Table 15 by summarized line items, Table 16 by operating and capital classifications, and Table 17 by governmental fund type. Highway, rail, and regional arterial program expenditures by project are summarized in Table 18. Table 15 — Budget Comparative by Summarized Line Item FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Bond Discount Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 123,439,800 60,772,800 17,735,600 17,811,800 5,021,600 9,157,900 2,321,800 4,524,200 240,785,500 5,868,500 12,115,400 3,571,400 15,686,800 10,554,500 27,545,300 24,414,800 16,272,900 44,663,000 58,516,500 459,500 36,857,000 8,638,600 227,922,100 109,607,200 11,296,300 1,493,100 122,396,600 147,300 $ 124,000,000 61,000,000 9,537,000 23,650,700 23,935,100 1,081,800 6,784,300 592,400 1,824,000 252,405,300 6,576,900 17,149,100 5,068,900 22,218,000 16,827,000 41,568,800 41,777,600 14,438,000 76,127,000 109,547,300 770,000 36,025,000 16,262,000 353,342,700 46,500,000 16,495,000 62,995,000 516,200 $ 128,000,000 63,000,000 14,073,600 24,393,600 23,250,200 2,932,200 6,397,400 450,800 3,391,100 265,888,900 6,505,300 13,034,800 4,607,000 17,641,800 14,057,700 27,796,100 30,670,100 11,000,000 54,535,100 77,193,600 280,000 38,166,600 17,409,200 271,108,400 FY 12/13 Budget $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 73,151,900 17,917,800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 318,376,900 Dollar Percent Change, Change' $. $ 8,000,000 6% 4,000,000 7% 4,675,500 49% 49,501,200 209% (6,017,300) -25%, 1,606,900 149% (1,527,000) -23% 290,400 49% 5,441,900 298% 65,971,600 26% 6,971,100 394,200 6% 14,361,200 5,346,300 19,707,500 16,586,500 24,312,600 127,024,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 97,239,000 800,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 464,246,800 (2,787,900) -16% 277,400 5% (2,510,500) -11% (240,500) -1% (17,256,200) -42% 85,247,200 204% 14,612,000 101% 33,349,500 44% (12,308,300) -11% 30,000 4% 3,332,000 9% 4,138,400 25% 110,904,100 31% 46,500,000 126,800,000 80,300,000 173% 16,464,000 16,613,000 118,000 1% - - N/A 62,964,000 143,413,000 80,418,000 128% 340,700 447,700 (68,500) -13% 372,021,300 (131,235,800) 185,354,800 (185,354,800) 170,000,000 (967,500) 169,032,500 37,796,700 551,567,900 $ 589,364,600 445,648,800 (193,243,500) 169,739,100 (169,739,100) 38,000,000 38,000,000 (155,243,500) 589,364,600 $ 434,121,100 $ 358,560,200 634,786,100 189,137,300 42% (92,671,300) (316,409,200) (123,165,700) 64% 166,343,400 (166,343,400) 60,000,000 60,000,000 326,095,700 156,356,600 92% (326,095,700) (156,356,600) 92% 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% N/A 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% (32,671,300) 903,762,800 1,059,006,299 -682% 589,364,600 556,693,300 (32,671,300) -6% 556,693,300 $ 1,460,456,100 $ 1,026,335,000 236% Table 16 — Operating and Capital Budget FY 2012/13 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way and Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) FY 12/13 Operating Budget $ 12,677,000 65,000,000 14, 212, 500 1,404,300 4,460,000 2,167, 300 768,700 FY 12/13 .. Capital Budget . $ 119,323,000 71,747,600 13,457,800 521,400 5,257,300 882,800 6,497, 200 FY 12/13 TOTAL Budget $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14, 212, 500 73,151, 900 17,917,800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 100,689,800 3,847,200 4,156,600 4,739,300 217, 687,100 3,123,900 10,204,600 607,000 318,376,900 6,971,100 14, 361, 200 5,346,300 8,895,900 7,048,200 60,000 96,989,000 760,000 10,811,600 9,538,300 24,312,600 126,964,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 250,000 40,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 19, 707, 500 16, 586, 500 24, 312, 600 127,024,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 97,239,000 800,000 39, 357,000 20,400,400 104,857,200 359,389,600 126,800,000 16,613,000 464, 246, 800 126,800,000 16,613,000 222,700 143,413,000 225,000 143,413,000 447,700 117,823,000 516,963,100 634, 786,100 (17,133, 200) 20,484,400 (20,082,300) (299,276,000) 305,611,300 (306,013,400) 1,220,172,000 (316,409,200) 326,095,700 (326,095,700) 1,220,172,000 402,100 1,219,769,900 1,220,172,000 (16,731,100) 920,493,900 903,762,800 Beginning Fund Balance 171,265,700 385,427,600 556,693,300 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 154,534,600 $ 1,305,921,500 $ 1,460,456,100 Table 17 — Budget by Governmental Fund Type FY 2012/13 General Fund $ 2,700,000 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 470,000 910,000 225,200 67,900 FY 12/13 Special Revenue Capital Projects Debt Service TOTAL Budget $ 129,300,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 69,699,900 17,007,800 2,463,500 5,257,300 882,800 2,071,000 $ - $ 5,103,600 $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 2,982,000 73,151,900 17,917,800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 23,400 7,265,900 4,373,100 3,350,800 2,687,300 3,328,500 6,015,800 1,394,800 12,939,700 760,000 305,894,800 3,620,300 11,673,900 2,017,800 13,691,700 15,191,700 23,993,500 127,024,800 29,050,000 106,452,400 84,299,300 40,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 5,103,600 319,100 3,024,100 3,005,400 318,376,900 6,971,100 14,361,200 5,346,300 19,707,500 16,586,500 24,312,600 127,024,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 97,239,000 800,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 15,094,500 445,809,100 3,343,200 120,000,000 433,000 464,246,800 6,800,000 126,800,000 16,180, 000 16, 613,000 205,700 120,433,000 22,980,000 143,413,000 242,000 447,700 24,666,800 463,363,100 123,776,200 22,980,000 634,786,100 (20,293,700) (157,468,300) 19,447,400 150,092,900 (72,300,900) (118,672,600) (19,974,600) (316,409,200) 136,889,600 (253,144,800) 1,220,172,000 19,665,800 326,095,700 (650,000) (326,095,700) 1,220,172,000 19,447,400 77,792,000 1,103,916,800 19,015,800 .1,220,172,000 (846,300) (79,676,300) 985,244,200 (958,800) 903,762,800 14,511,900 495,933,600 40,582,500 5,665,300 556,693,300 $ 13,665,600 $ 416,257,300 $ 1,025,826,700 $ 4,706,500 $ 1,460,456,100 Table 18 — Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs FY 2012/13 Description Projects and Operations Bechtel Program Management $ 7,442,800 SCRRA Program Management 1,028,600 TOTAL PROJECTS -GENERAL $ 8,471,400 Highway Engineering SR-60 Truck Climbing Lanes $ 3,000,000 91/71 Connectors 4,000,000 1-15 Corridor Improvements 8,000,000 1-215 Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1,000,000 1-215 Corridor Improvement Southbound Connector 750,000 Mid County Parkway 2,000,000 SR-91 Corridor Improvements 2,000,000 SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange 150,000 General 419,100 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY ENGINEERING 21,319,100 Regional Arterial Engineering Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects, including SR-79 realignment 1,952,000 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL ENGINEERING 1,952,000 Rail Engineering Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects SUBTOTAL RAIL ENGINEERING TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL ENGINEERING 1,041,500 1,041,500 $ 24,312,600 Highway Construction 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors $ 30,000 74/215 Interchange 1,820,000 1-215 Corridor Improvements (South and Central Segments)/I-15 to Nuevo Road 14,780,000 I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard Widening 1,990,300 I-15/Los Alamos Road Bridge Replacement 2,000,000 SR-74 Curve Widening 3,420,000 SR-91 Corridor Improvements 4,000,000 SR-91/1a Sierra Interchange 110,600 SR-91/Van Buren Interchange 3,184,300 General (details presented in Section 6.3 Motorist Assistance) 60,000 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION 31,395,200 Regional Arterial Construction Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects 29,746,000 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL CONSTRUCTION 29,746,000 Rail Construction Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects 64,996,000 North Main Corona Station Parking Structure 20,000 Perris Multimodal Facility 867,600 SUBTOTAL RAIL CONSTRUCTION 65,883,600 TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL CONSTRUCTION $ 127,024,800 Highway Design Build SR-91 Corridor Improvements TOTAL HIGHWAY DESIGN BUILD $ 29,050,000 $ 29,050,000 Highway Right of Way and Land 74/215Interchange $ 550,000 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors • 265,000 1-215 Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1,303,000 Mid County Parkway 20,000 SR-74 Curve Widening 310,000 SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street 38,200 91/71 Connectors 1,250,000 SR-91 Corridor Improvements 60,400,000 SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange 14,195,000 Coachella Valley MSHCP 3,024,100 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 81,355,300 Regional Arterial Right of Way and Land Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects 10,488,700 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 10,488,700 Rail Right of Way and Land Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects 17,632,500 SUBTOTAL RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 17,632,500 TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND $ 109,476,500 GRAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL PROGRAMS $ 298,335,300 Gann Appropriations Limit In November 1979, the voters of the State approved Proposition 4, commonly known as the Gann Initiative. The Proposition created Article XIIIB of the State Constitution, placing limits on the amount of revenue that can be spent by public agencies from the "proceeds of taxes." In 1980, the State Legislature added Section 7910 to the Government Code, providing that the governing body of each local jurisdiction must establish, by resolution, an appropriations limit for the following year. The appropriations limit for any fiscal year is equal to the previous year's limit adjusted for population changes and changes in the California per capita income. The Commission is subject to the requirements of Article XIIIB. Gann appropriations limits are calculated for and applied to the Commission. In accordance with the requirements of Article XIIIB implementing legislation, the Board approved Resolution No. 12-017 on June 7, 2012, establishing appropriations limits for the Commission at $348,861,382. The FY 2012/13 budget appropriated $255,940,300 in taxes for the Commission, falling well within the limits set by the Gann Initiative. Based on historic trends and future projections, it appears the Commission's use of the proceeds of taxes, as defined by Article XIIIB, will continue to fall below the appropriations limit. The calculation for the FY 2012/13 appropriations limit is as follows: 2011-2012 Appropriations Limit $ 332,891,501 2012-2013 adjustment: Change in California per capita personal income = 3.77% Change in Population, Riverside County = 0.99% Per Capital Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 3.77 + 100 100 1.0377 Population converted to a ratio: 0.99 + 100 = 1.0099 100 Calculation of factor for FY 2012-2013: 1.0377 x 1.0099 = 1.04797323 $332,891,501 X 1.04797323 = $348,861,382 2012-2013 Appropriations Limit $ 348,861,382 Source: California per capita income — California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County— California Department of Finance Riverside County Transportation Commission 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, encourage economic development, ensure improved system efficiencies, foster environmental stewardship, 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 2012/13 budget are identified below. While Riverside County grapples with the challenges of a weak real estate market, high unemployment, and a recovering economy, the need for better transportation remains a top public priority. The Commission is poised to address these challenges via the seven policy goals. In moving forward with an aggressive program of projects and services, the Commission will face the challenge of fluctuating Measure A, TUMF, 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, design, and construction processes on key components of the Western Riverside County 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 Riverside County Delivery Plan including executing toll program agreements with key regional and state partners namely Caltrans, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), toll operator, city of Corona, California Highway Patrol (CHP), and others. • Develop requests for proposals for SR-91 corridor improvement project design -build contract and pursue funding opportunities via the TIFIA loan program. • 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 1B 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. • Actively participate in the SR-91 Advisory Committee to facilitate near and long-term improvements to SR-91, enhance intercounty public transit options, and foster mobility improvements 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 1E511 system and focus commuter assistance and 1E511 outreach efforts under one brand. • Continue cooperation with the FTA regarding the Small Starts process to support the initiation of the Perris Valley Line commuter rail service in 2014. " C o n t i n u e t o w o r k w i t h t h e p u b l i c t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s t o c o n t r o l c o s t s a n d i n c r e a s e s y s t e m e f f i c i e n c i e s i n o r d e r t o a c c o m m o d a t e f l u c t u a t i n g r e v e n u e s f r o m l o c a l , s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l s o u r c e s . " C o n t i n u e t o d e v e l o p t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o f u r t h e r p r o m o t e s e a m l e s s i n t r a c i t y , i n t e r c i t y , a n d r e g i o n a l t r a n s i t c o n n e c t i v i t y f o r C o u n t y r e s i d e n t s . M i t i g a t e a n d A d d r e s s t h e I m p a c t o f G o o d s M o v e m e n t T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l w o r k w i t h f e d e r a l , s t a t e , a n d l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t s t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e m o v e m e n t o f g o o d s a n d s e r v i c e s t o , w i t h i n , a n d t h r o u g h t h e C o u n t y , r e c o g n i z i n g t h e v i t a l r o l e g o o d s m o v e m e n t m o b i l i t y p l a y s i n t h e e c o n o m i c h e a l t h o f t h e C o u n t y , t h e S t a t e , a n d t h e n a t i o n . " S e e k f u n d i n g a n d l o c a l a g e n c y c o n c u r r e n c e t o i m p l e m e n t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s a p p r o v e d , h i g h - p r i o r i t y r a i l r o a d g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n p r i o r i t y l i s t t o m i t i g a t e t h e i m p a c t o f i n c r e a s e d g o o d s m o v e m e n t d e m a n d s o n t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s y s t e m . " E n c o u r a g e C o n g r e s s t o c r e a t e a f e d e r a l f r e i g h t t r u s t f u n d , o r s i m i l a r p r o g r a m w i t h a d e d i c a t e d a n d f i r e w a l l e d r e v e n u e s t r u c t u r e , i n o r d e r t o t r e a t t h e n a t i o n ' s m u l t i m o d a l n a t i o n a l g o o d s m o v e m e n t n e t w o r k a s a s y s t e m r a t h e r t h a n i n d i v i d u a l p r o j e c t s . " R e m a i n c o m m i t t e d t o a r e g i o n a l a p p r o a c h r e g a r d i n g g o o d s m o v e m e n t i s s u e s i n o r d e r t o m a x i m i z e f u n d i n g f r o m s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l s o u r c e s t o g o o d s m o v e m e n t n e e d s i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . " C o n t i n u e w o r k i n g w i t h t h e P o r t s a n d r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o m m i s s i o n s t o d e v e l o p a f u n d i n g m e c h a n i s m f o r n e e d e d p r o j e c t s a n d m i t i g a t i o n o n a r e g i o n a l b a s i s . E n c o u r a g e E c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t T r a n s p o r t a t i o n d e c i s i o n s w i l l c o n s i d e r t h e e c o n o m i c b e n e f i t s d e r i v e d f r o m a n y i m p r o v e m e n t , a n d , w h e r e f e a s i b l e a n d p r a c t i c a l , w i l l p u r s u e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s t h a t e n h a n c e o r c o m p l e m e n t e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t . " C o m m i t t o s e e k o p p o r t u n i t i e s r e l a t e d t o t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o j e c t s t h a t w i l l c r e a t e j o b s a n d i m p r o v e t h e e c o n o m i c b a s e i n t h e C o u n t y . " S u p p o r t l o c a l a g e n c i e s i n t h e d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n o f i n t e r c h a n g e s t h a t a r e i n p r o x i m i t y t o r e g i o n a l e c o n o m i c c e n t e r s a n d d e v e l o p m e n t s . " S u p p o r t l o c a l p r o j e c t s , c o n s i s t e n t w i t h c o u n t y w i d e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n g o a l s , w h i c h e n h a n c e b u s i n e s s d e v e l o p m e n t , l o c a l e m p l o y m e n t , a n d a r e a t o u r i s m . E n s u r e I m p r o v e d S y s t e m E f f i c i e n c i e s T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l s e l e c t p r o j e c t s a n d a l l o c a t e f u n d s i n a m a n n e r t h a t w i l l i m p r o v e s a f e t y a n d r e d u c e c o n g e s t e d t r a f f i c c o r r i d o r s . " A d v o c a t e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d u s e o f a d v a n c e d t e c h n o l o g i e s f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a p p l i c a t i o n s t h a t a r e a f f o r d a b l e a n d p r a c t i c a l . " I n p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h S A N B A G , r e f i n e a n d e n h a n c e t h e 1 E 5 1 1 s y s t e m t h r o u g h t h e d e p l o y m e n t o f a n i P h o n e a n d A n d r o i d A p p , w h i c h w i l l m a k e r e a l - t i m e t r a f f i c i n f o r m a t i o n , r e a l - t i m e b u s a n d r a i l t r a n s i t t r i p p l a n n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d r i d e s h a r e i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e t o c o m m u t e r s f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f t r i p p l a n n i n g a n d r e d u c i n g c o n g e s t i o n . " A s s u r e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t r a n s i t p l a n n i n g t h r o u g h c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h t h e C o u n t y ' s e i g h t t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s , C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e , a n d a n n u a l S R T P p r o c e s s w i t h a g o a l t o w a r d p r o m o t i n g p r o g r a m p r o d u c t i v i t y , e f f i c i e n c y , a n d e f f e c t i v e n e s s . " P r o v i d e i n n o v a t i v e c o m m u t e r r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s t o r e d u c e s i n g l e o c c u p a n t v e h i c l e t r i p s a n d c o o r d i n a t e w i t h o t h e r r e g i o n a l r i d e s h a r e s e r v i c e p r o v i d e r s t o a d d r e s s i n t e r c o u n t y c o m m u t e t r i p s . " W o r k w i t h l o c a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s , C a l t r a n s , a n d t h e C H P t o c o n t i n u e e f f i c i e n t d e l i v e r y o f a c o m p r e h e n s i v e m o t o r i s t a i d s y s t e m w h i c h i n c l u d e s a n 1 E 5 1 1 t r a v e l e r i n f o r m a t i o n s e r v i c e , a c a l l b o x p r o g r a m , a n d a n F S P p r o g r a m , i n c l u d i n g t e m p o r a r y s e r v i c e s i n f r e e w a y c o n s t r u c t i o n z o n e s . " L e v e r a g e r e s o u r c e s t o i n c o r p o r a t e p a r k a n d r i d e f a c i l i t i e s a n d a d d i t i o n a l c o n n e c t i n g b u s s e r v i c e a t M e t r o l i n k s t a t i o n s t h a t m a y h a v e a v a i l a b l e c a p a c i t y . " C o n t i n u e w o r k i n g w i t h C a l t r a n s t o m o n i t o r t r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f f o c u s i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n d s o n c o n g e s t e d c o r r i d o r s a n d s y s t e m d e f i c i e n c i e s . " W o r k w i t h C a l t r a n s a n d r e g i o n a l a g e n c i e s i n d e v e l o p i n g r e s o u r c e s f o r p r e s e r v a t i o n a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e h i g h w a y s a n d r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l s . F o s t e r E n v i r o n m e n t a l S t e w a r d s h i p T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l a c h i e v e i t s m o b i l i t y g o a l s w h i l e p r o m o t i n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t e w a r d s h i p a n d p r o t e c t i n g t h e a r e a ' s n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a n d q u a l i t y o f l i f e . " C o n t i n u e w o r k i n g w i t h t h e W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y R e g i o n a l C o n s e r v a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( R C A ) , C a l t r a n s , a n d s t a t e / f e d e r a l r e s o u r c e a g e n c i e s t o i m p l e m e n t t h e M u l t i - S p e c i e s H a b i t a t C o n s e r v a t i o n P l a n ( M S H C P ) . " W o r k w i t h t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a A s s o c i a t i o n o f G o v e r n m e n t s ( S C A G ) , S o u t h C o a s t A i r Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t D i s t r i c t ( S C A Q M D ) , s u b - r e g i o n a l a g e n c i e s , a n d l o c a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s t o i m p l e m e n t a n R T P a n d s u s t a i n a b l e c o m m u n i t i e s s t r a t e g y t h a t m e e t s r e g i o n a l a i r q u a l i t y g o a l s , c o n f o r m i t y g u i d e l i n e s , a n d S B 3 7 5 g r e e n h o u s e r e d u c t i o n t a r g e t s f o r t h e S C A G r e g i o n . " S u p p o r t a v a r i e t y o f o u t r e a c h c h a n n e l s a n d e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s t h a t p r o m o t e t h e b e n e f i t s o f r i d e s h a r i n g , p u b l i c a n d s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s i t , r a i l , a n d a v a i l a b i l i t y o f c o m m u t e r r e s o u r c e s f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f r e d u c i n g v e h i c l e t r i p s a n d v e h i c l e m i l e s t r a v e l e d . " F a c i l i t a t e p r i v a t e / p u b l i c u s e o f c l e a n f u e l s t e c h n o l o g y . " C o n t i n u e t o d e v e l o p s u s t a i n a b l e a n d g r e e n c o m m u t e r r a i l s t a t i o n s a n d p r o v i d e u p g r a d e s a n d r e h a b i l i t a t i o n p r o j e c t s t o r e d u c e t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t o f t h e e x i s t i n g s t a t i o n s . S u p p o r t T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C h o i c e s t h r o u g h I n t e r m o d a l i s m a n d A c c e s s i b i l i t y C o u n t y r e s i d e n t s w i l l b e s e r v e d , w h e r e e c o n o m i c a l l y f e a s i b l e , t h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s a n d t r a v e l o p t i o n s t h a t c o n s i d e r t h e n e e d s o f a w i d e r a n g e o f c i t i z e n s . " W o r k w i t h t r a n s i t p r o v i d e r s a n d l o c a l s o c i a l s e r v i c e a g e n c i e s t o p r o v i d e s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o m e e t a b r o a d s p e c t r u m o f s o c i o - e c o n o m i c t r a n s i t n e e d s o f s e n i o r s a n d p e r s o n s o f l o w i n c o m e a n d / o r w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s . " L e v e r a g e c o m m u t e r a s s i s t a n c e a n d f r e e w a y s e r v i c e p a t r o l o u t r e a c h c h a n n e l s i n o r d e r t o i n c r e a s e t h e a w a r e n e s s o f a n d f o s t e r t h e u s e o f a l t e r n a t i v e c o m m u t i n g m o d e s . " I m p l e m e n t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s c o m m u t e r r a i l S R T P a n d S C R R A ' s p l a n f o r c o m m u t e r r a i l s e r v i c e s w i t h a n e m p h a s i s o n t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e , a n e x t e n s i o n f r o m R i v e r s i d e t o P e r r i s v i a M o r e n o V a l l e y . " A d v o c a t e f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n o f A m t r a k c o m m u t e r a n d / o r p a s s e n g e r r a i l s e r v i c e s t o t h e P a s s A r e a a n d t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . . " C o n t i n u e t o p u r s u e t h e g o a l s a n d o b j e c t i v e s a s o u t l i n e d i n t h e C o o r d i n a t e d P u b l i c T r a n s i t - H u m a n S e r v i c e s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n ( C o o r d i n a t e d P l a n ) f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y r e l a t e d t o a u n i f i e d , c o m p r e h e n s i v e b u t f l e x i b l e s t r a t e g y f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e d e l i v e r y t o a d d r e s s t r a n s p o r t a t i o n g a p s a n d / o r b a r r i e r s f o c u s i n g o n u n m e t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n n e e d s o f e l d e r l y i n d i v i d u a l s , p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s , a n d i n d i v i d u a l s o f l i m i t e d i n c o m e . " E n h a n c e s e c u r i t y , s u r v e i l l a n c e , a n d e m e r g e n c y r e s p o n s e c a p a b i l i t i e s o f C o u n t y t r a n s i t f a c i l i t i e s a n d r o a d w a y i n f r a s t r u c t u r e t h r o u g h p r o a c t i v e p l a n n i n g , i n t e r a g e n c y c o o r d i n a t i o n , a n d i n v e s t m e n t . P r i o r i t i z e P u b l i c a n d A g e n c y C o m m u n i c a t i o n s T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l p r o v i d e t i m e l y , i n f o r m a t i v e , a n d a c c u r a t e i n f o r m a t i o n t o e n c o u r a g e i n f o r m e d p u b l i c a n d a g e n c y p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s . " P r o m o t e a c l o s e w o r k i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h n e w s a n d c i v i c e n t i t i e s t o i n c r e a s e i n t e r e s t a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d r e l a t e d i s s u e s . " E n h a n c e t h e p r o v i s i o n o f p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h v a r i o u s f o r m s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( e . g . , w e b s i t e , a n n u a l r e p o r t , m o n t h l y n e w s l e t t e r , t e l e v i s i o n , S p e a k e r s B u r e a u , p r i n t m e d i a , r a d i o , e t c . ) . " M a i n t a i n a n o n g o i n g e f f o r t o f i n f o r m i n g R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y ' s C o n g r e s s i o n a l a n d S t a t e L e g i s l a t i v e 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. • Protect and enhance flexibility in the Commission's use of state and federal transportation revenue in addressing regional priorities and needs. • 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 18 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. Financial and Administration Policies Financial Planning Policies • Administrative costs, including salaries and benefits, shall be funded by allocations from Measure A, LTF, FSP, SAFE, and TUMF funds. • 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 required contribution 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 a 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 equal to or less than 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 during the budget preparation process 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 • Outstanding sales tax revenue bonds shall not exceed $975 million. • The Commission will maintain 2.0x debt ratio coverage on all senior sales tax revenue debt. " D e b t i s s u a n c e w i l l b e f o r m a j o r c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s i n c l u d i n g e n g i n e e r i n g , r i g h t o f w a y , a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n . D e b t s e c u r e d b y M e a s u r e A r e v e n u e s m a y b e u s e d t o a d v a n c e p r o j e c t s i n c l u d e d i n t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A e x p e n d i t u r e p l a n . " O p e r a t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s , i f a n y , m u s t b e p a i d f r o m c u r r e n t o n g o i n g r e v e n u e s a n d m a y n o t b e f i n a n c e d . " C o s t s o f i s s u a n c e , i n c l u d i n g t h e s t a n d a r d u n d e r w r i t e r ' s d i s c o u n t , w i l l n o t e x c e e d t w o p e r c e n t ( 2 % ) . " T h e C o m m i s s i o n m a y e n t e r i n t o i n t e r e s t r a t e s w a p s t o b e t t e r m a n a g e a s s e t s a n d l i a b i l i t i e s a n d t a k e a d v a n t a g e o f m a r k e t c o n d i t i o n s t o l o w e r o v e r a l l c o s t s a n d r e d u c e i n t e r e s t r a t e r i s k . " W h i l e i t i s t h e i n t e n t o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o e s t a b l i s h a c a s h d e b t r e s e r v e f o r l o n g t e r m b o n d i s s u a n c e , a s n e c e s s a r y , s u r e t y b o n d s c a n b e o b t a i n e d w h e n b e n e f i c i a l t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n . " A l l s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e d e b t m u s t m a t u r e p r i o r t o t h e t e r m i n a t i o n o f 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A o n J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 3 9 . E x p e n d i t u r e A c c o u n t a b i l i t y P o l i c i e s " E s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r i t i e s f o r p l a n n i n g a n d p r o g r a m m i n g o f c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s w i l l b e r e v i e w e d a n n u a l l y w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n . " A c t u a l e x p e n d i t u r e s w i l l b e c o m p a r e d t o t h e b u d g e t o n a t l e a s t a q u a r t e r l y b a s i s , a n d s i g n i f i c a n t d e v i a t i o n s w i l l b e a p p r o p r i a t e l y n o t e d , e x p l a i n e d , a n d j u s t i f i e d . R e s e r v e P o l i c i e s " T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l m a i n t a i n p r o g r a m r e s e r v e s i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h M e a s u r e A a n d T D A p o l i c i e s a n d g u i d e l i n e s . " T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l e s t a b l i s h a n d m a i n t a i n a t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r ' s r e s e r v e o f t e n p e r c e n t ( 1 0 % ) f o r t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y a n d P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y . A d d i t i o n a l l y , a t e n p e r c e n t ( 1 0 % ) r e s e r v e w i l l b e e s t a b l i s h e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d f o r e a c h o f t h e W e s t e r n C o u n t y t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s ( p u b l i c b u s a n d c o m m u t e r r a i l ) . C a s h M a n a g e m e n t a n d I n v e s t m e n t P o l i c i e s " W h e r e p o s s i b l e , t h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l e n c o u r a g e r e c e i p t o f f u n d s b y w i r e t r a n s f e r t o i t s a c c o u n t s . " B a l a n c e s i n t h e b a n k o p e r a t i n g a c c o u n t w i l l b e m a i n t a i n e d a t t h e a m o u n t n e c e s s a r y t o m e e t m o n t h l y e x p e n d i t u r e s . " I d l e f u n d s w i l l b e i n v e s t e d p e r t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s e s t a b l i s h e d i n v e s t m e n t p o l i c y e m p h a s i z i n g i n o r d e r o f p r i o r i t y : 1 ) s a f e t y , 2 ) l i q u i d i t y , a n d 3 ) y i e l d . " C a s h d i s b u r s e m e n t s t o l o c a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s a n d v e n d o r s / c o n s u l t a n t s w i l l b e c o m p l e t e d i n a n e x p e d i t i o u s a n d t i m e l y m a n n e r . A u d i t i n g , A c c o u n t i n g , a n d F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t i n g P o l i c i e s " T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l m a i n t a i n i t s f i n a n c i a l s o f t w a r e s y s t e m i n o r d e r t o i n t e g r a t e p r o j e c t a c c o u n t i n g n e e d s a n d i m p r o v e a c c o u n t i n g e f f i c i e n c y . " T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l i s s u e a C o m p r e h e n s i v e A n n u a l F i n a n c i a l R e p o r t ( C A F R ) i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e G A S B S t a t e m e n t 3 4 f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g m o d e l . " A n a u d i t i s t o b e c o n d u c t e d a n n u a l l y o n t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s a c c o u n t i n g b o o k s a n d r e c o r d s . A s l o n g a s t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s o u t s t a n d i n g b o n d s , a n i n d e p e n d e n t a c c o u n t i n g f i r m m u s t c o n d u c t t h e a u d i t . " T h e C o m m i s s i o n i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e n s u r i n g t h a t a u d i t s o f M e a s u r e A a n d T D A f u n d i n g r e c i p i e n t s a r e c o m p l e t e d a n d r e v i e w e d f o r c o m p l i a n c e a n d o t h e r m a t t e r s i n a t i m e l y m a n n e r . " A n i n t e r n a l a u d i t p r o g r a m w i l l b e m a i n t a i n e d t o i d e n t i f y i m p r o v e m e n t s i n c o n t r o l s a n d p r o c e d u r e s a s w e l l a s b e s t p r a c t i c e s . 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 Policy • 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. Linking Commission Policy Goals and Departmental Goals and Objectives The following matrix (Table 19) illustrates the linkage of the Commission's overall policy goals described in this section to the individual departmental goals and objectives included in Section 6. Table 19 — Relationship Between Commission and Departmental Goals Management Services Executive Management X X X . Administration Legislative Affairs & Communications X X X Finance Regional Programs Planning and Programming X X X Rail Maintenance and Operations X X Public and Specialized Transit X X Commuter Assistance X X Motorist Assistance . X X Capital Project Development & Delivery X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ^X X X X X X X X X Riverside Coon Transportation Commission Mtn ad Budget Process Summary The budget is the primary performance tool used to measure and control accountability of public agencies for taxpayer dollars. The budget communicates to all stakeholders (i.e., elected officials, regional agencies, and citizens) how the investment they made will be put to use by providing detailed information on the specifics of resource allocation and expenditures. Progress is monitored on a monthly basis, and revisions and updates are made as deemed necessary to reflect changing dynamics and accommodate unplanned requests. This results in a budget document that is useful and meaningful as a benchmark against which to evaluate government accomplishments and/or challenges and to assess compliance with fiscal accountability. Unlike many governments that provide direct services to the general public, the Commission has the overall responsibility of managing transportation planning and funding for Riverside County. As a result its budget, in terms of dollars, is comprised primarily of capital -related programs and projects; the operating component of the budget is related to multimodal programs (commuter and motorist assistance services, rail operations, and transit planning). Management services, which consist of executive management, administration, legislative affairs and communications, and finance, provide support to both capital and operating programs and projects. Chart 7 depicts the organization of the Commission's oversight and management functions. The budget process consists of six primary tasks conducted in phases throughout the fiscal year. Chart 6 illustrates the budget process for the development of the FY 2012/13 budget and monitoring of the FY 2011/12 budget. A summary of each task is described below. Chart 6 — Budget Process ID Task Name Duration 2011 2012 J I A I S I O I N I D J I F IMI A IMI J I 1 Short Term Strategic Direction Phase 140 days _ , — 2 Resource Identification and Allocation Phase 200 days 3 Needs Assessment Phase ' 120 days 4 Development and Review Phase 150 days 5 Adoption and Implementation Phase 45 days 6 Budget Roles and Responsibilities 365 days Short -Term Strategic Direction Phase The first phase of the budget process is to determine the direction of the Commission in the short-term and to integrate this with the Commission's long-term goals and objectives, including the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan as discussed in Section 6.3. Annually a workshop is held for the Board to evaluate and determine where the Commission plans to be and what it desires to accomplish over the next five to ten years. Annual reviews allow for timely responsiveness to any . significant political, legislative, or economic developments that may occur locally, statewide, or nationally. Staff then adjusts its course based on the long-term strategic direction of the policy makers. Staff convenes in early January to both assess actual results, compared to the current year budget, and map changes in strategy for the ensuing fiscal year by reviewing and, if necessary, redefining departmental mission statements and setting goals. Those goals, upon review by the Board, become the Commission's short-term strategic direction. Chart 7 — Functional Organization Chart FY 2012/13 Multimodal Programs Board of Commissioners Pol_Committrsjs • W RC Programs and Projects ERC Programs and Projects • Budget & Implementation Advgory_Committem •Technical Advisory .Citizens Advisory J Administration Executive Committee Legal Counsel Executive Management I Legislative Affairs & Communications Capital Project Development & DePvery Finance Resource Identification and Allocation Phase Simultaneous with the short-term strategic direction phase, staff focuses on what funding sources are available and what monies are estimated as carryover from the current year. Additionally, the Commission's fund balances, that is the excess of fund assets over fund liabilities, are analyzed for available appropriation in the following fiscal year. In actuality, resource identification occurs throughout the year, but it is finalized in the upcoming fiscal year budget. Amounts to be borrowed are determined as parts of the long-term strategic planning process, but such amounts are adjusted in the annual budget to reflect more current information. Needs Assessment Phase Staff and consultants evaluate what projects and studies need to be accomplished. Project priority and sequencing set in the long-term strategic plan are the top candidates for budget submission. However, priorities may have changed due to economic necessities or political realities, resulting in projects being rescheduled by acceleration or postponement. New projects may be added or existing priorities deleted based on Commission direction. Development and Review Phase Using all the data and information gathered from the previously mentioned stages, department managers submit their desired budgets to the Finance Department. The information, along with staff and overhead allocations, is compiled into a preliminary or draft budget. After review by the Executive Director and inclusion of the desired changes, the draft budget is presented to the Board for input. Adoption and Implementation Phase The proposed budget is submitted to the Commission at its May meeting. A hearing is scheduled to allow for public comment on the proposed budget. The Commission may choose, after public hearing, to adopt the budget or to request additional information and/or changes to the budget. The budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Upon adoption by the Commission, the budget is entered into the accounting system effective July 1 for the next fiscal year. Budget Roles and Responsibilities Involvement in the budget permeates all staffing levels, as presented in Chart 8, at the Commission from clerical support staff to policy makers. Each program manager develops a detailed line item budget that consists of the operating and/or capital components. Those budgets, by program, are submitted to the department director for review and concurrence. The department managers submit their budgets to the Chief Financial Officer by mid -March. The Finance Department compiles the department budgets. Both the capital and operating budgets are combined into the draft budget for the entire Commission. The Chief Financial Officer and Executive Director review the entire budget for overall consistency with both the short- and long-term strategic direction of the Commission, appropriateness of funding sources for the identified projects and programs, and reasonableness of the operating and capital budget expenditures. Expenditure activities of the funds are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level (General, Measure A, Motorist Assistance, LTF, STA, TUMF, Capital Projects, and Debt Service Funds) for each function (i.e., administration, programs, intergovernmental distributions, debt service, capital outlay, and other financing uses). These functions provide the legal level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount). Budget -to -actual reports are available to program managers and directors on a real-time basis through the ERP system for informational and management purposes, including identification and evaluation of any significant budget variations. During the fiscal year management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function or may provide support for supplemental budget appropriations requests. Supplemental budget requests require the authorization of the Commission. The Commission may take action at any monthly meeting to amend the budget. In some years, the Finance Department may compile miscellaneous requests and submit a budget appropriations adjustment at mid -year to the Commission for approval. Those budget amendments approved by the Commission are incorporated into the budget, as they occur, and are reflected in the CAFR in the final budget amounts reported in the budgetary schedules. Chart 8 — Staff Organization Chart FY 2012/13 Chief Financial Officer Procurement Administrator rt?ilfir •�I;1�ru�,T AccountingSenior Administrative Supervisor.: Assistant Accounting Administrative Assistant — Technician (2) (3) — Accounting Assistant — Accounting Clerk Senior Office Assistant Legal Counsel Board of Commissioners Executive Director Deputy Executive Director Multimodal Services Director rf nbSti r Staff Analyst Staff Analyst Project Development Director ��iiGi'l!rli7Tt. V-Eseia-cargir.brit � Senior, Staff Analyst, 'Staff Analyst Project Deli eryDirector Senior Staff Analyst Staff Analyst Toll Program Director Riverskle County Transportation Commission Fund Budgets Budgetary. Basis The Commission accounts for its budgeted governmental funds using the modified accrual basis of accounting and the current financial resources measurement focus. The basis of accounting is the same as the basis of budgeting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available to meet current year obligations. Revenues are considered to be available when they are guaranteed as to receipt, based on expenditure of funds (i.e., government matching funds), or certain to be received within 180 days of the end of the fiscal year. Expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred; however, debt service expenditures are recorded when the payment is due. Total sources and uses by governmental fund type for the FY 2012/13 budget are shown in Chart 9. Chart 9 —Total Sources and Uses by Governmental Fund Type FY 2012/13 ■ Total Sources 1% ■ Total Uses 2% 17 Total Sources 73% Q Total Uses 39% Fund Structure ■ Total Sources 1% ■ Total Uses 3% ■ General Fund ■ Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds ■ Debt Service Fund ■ Total Sources 25% ■ Total Uses 56% There are 27 funds (Chart 10) that account for the Commission's budgeted resources and are categorized into four governmental fund types: General fund, special revenue funds, capital projects funds, and Debt Service fund. All of the Commission's funds are budgeted. There are three funds reported in the General fund and 21 in the special revenue funds. Two capital projects funds are used to account for capital project expenditures financed with short - or long-term debt proceeds. In addition, the Commission has one Debt Service fund to account for debt -related activity. Chart 10 — Budgeted Funds Structure FY 2012/13 S ecjal ReVenue:Ftin . s , „ tapitajil:rgie0s;F.uridS • • :••• •:, Debt SerUace Fund • ".'.. ••••• „ • General Fund Overview The General fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities not legally required or designated by Board action to be accounted for separately. For many public agencies, the General fund is the largest fund; however, it is less significant for the Commission. The Commission's largest revenue source is Measure A, a locally levied sales tax that legally must be accounted for separately in special revenue funds. In addition to Commission administration and general operations, other General fund activities include commuter rail operations as well as planning and programming. The FY 2012/13 budget for the General fund is presented in Table 20, followed by a discussion of significant components of the budget. Table 20 - General Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 30/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Measure A Sales Tax $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 0% Federal Reimbursements 299,600 30,500 7,000 470,000 439,500 1441% State Reimbursements 2,012,700 663,000 484,000 910,000 - 247,000 37% Local Reimbursements 314,100 - 221,800 225,200 225,200 N/A Other Revenue 254,300 187,200 - (187,200) -100% Investment Income 62,500 66,600 48,900 67,900 1,300 2% TOTAL Revenues 5,643,200 3,647,300 3,461,700 4,373,100 725,800 20% Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits 3,227,700 3,304,600 2,856,900 3,350,800 46,200 1% Professional and Support Professional Services 2,530,800 2,563,500 1,740,000 2,687,300 123,800 5% Support Costs 2,737,900 3,141,000 3,052,600 3,328,500 187,500 6% TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 5,268,700 5,704,500 4,792,600 6,015,800 311,300 5% Projects and Operations Program Operations - General 1,630,700 1,465,900 1,405,800 1,394,800 (71,100) -5% Construction 500,000 - N/A Right of Way/Land 28,400 - - N/A Operating and Capital Disbursements 12,228,500 23,077,500 20,185,600 12,939,700 (10,137,800) -44% Special Studies 402,800 690,000 200,000 760,000 70,000 10% TOTAL Projects and Operations 14,790,400 25,233,400 21,791,400 15,094,500 (10,138,900) -40% Debt Service Principal Payments 23,200 N/A Interest Payments 2,000 N/A Cost of Issuance 52,200 N/A TOTAL Debt Service 77,400 - - N/A Capital Outlay 69,000 210,200 33,700 205,700 (4,500) -2% TOTAL Expenditures 23,433,200 34,452,700 29,474,600 24,666,800 (9,785,900) -28% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (17,790,000) (30,805,400) (26,012,900) (20,293,700) 10,511,700 -34% Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 18,053,000 30,955,100 27,552,700 19,447,400 (11,507,700) -37% Transfers Out (9,200) 9,200 -100% Net Financing Sources (Uses) 18,053,000 30,945,900 27,552,700 19,447,400 (11,498,500) -37% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 263,000 140,500 1,539,800 (846,300) (986,800) -702% 12,709,100 12,972,100 12,972,100 14,511,900 1,539,800 12% $ 12,972,100 $ 13,112,600 $ 14,511,900 $ 13,665,600 $ 553,000 4% The sources for the General fund (Chart 11) consist of allocations from Measure A sales tax revenues; various other federal, state and local reimbursements for planning activities and commuter rail station maintenance; investment income; transfers from LTF, TUMF, and motorist services for administration; transfers of LTF sales tax revenues for planning, programming, and monitoring (PPM) activities; transfers of LTF Article 4 allocations for commuter rail transit operations and capital; and other transfers for rail station maintenance of park and ride facilities. Chart 11— General Fund Sources FY 2012/13 Measure A Sales Tax 11% Federal Reimbursements 2% State Reimbursements 4% Local Reimbursements 1% Investment Income 0% Measure A sales tax revenues allocated for administration of $2,700,000 are unchanged from the prior year. The administrative allocation may be adjusted at mid -year based on required expenditures, but in no event will exceed four percent (4%) of total Measure A revenues (including administrative salaries and benefits). Federal reimbursements primarily represent funding for commuter rail station landscaping. State reimbursements include STIP revenues to fund PPM activities, which may vary annually. Local reimbursements represent reimbursements from other local agencies related to a portion of the security costs at the commuter rail stations. LTF sales tax revenues from the Local Transportation Fund, a special revenue fund, are allocated and transferred to the General fund for administration, planning and programming, and rail transit operations and capital for the following purposes: • Administration allocations from LTF sales tax revenues have remained unchanged at $700,000 in FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13. • Planning allocations are set by law at three percent (3%) of estimated LTF sales tax revenues. The FY 2011/12 revised budget of $2,139,000 includes the effect of the mid -year projection adjustment. This adjustment usually includes the unapportioned carryover amount, which is not determined until after the prior year's fiscal year end, and revised revenue projections. The FY 2012/13 budget for planning allocations is $1,950,000. • Transit funding for commuter rail, which is tied to sales tax revenues, is based on operating and capital needs to the extent that revenues and reserved fund balance are available. The FY 2012/13 budget includes $13,935,000 in LTF and $151,300 in Measure A Commuter Assistance allocations primarily to fund operating and capital contribution expenditures to SCRRA as well as rail ,station operations and maintenance. The FY 2011/12 budget was $21,728,000 and included a significant capital contribution for rail cars. • Allocations aggregating $4,453,900 for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects were included in the FY 2011/12 General fund revised budget. The FY 2012/13 budget includes LTF allocations of $1,774,700 for grade separation projects. Administrative transfers in from TUMF and motorist assistance of $936,400 in FY 2012/13 decreased from $1,934,200 in FY 2011/12. Chart 12 — General Fund Uses FY 2012/13 Personnel Salary and Capital Outlay Benefits 1% 14% Professional Services 11% Support Costs 13% General fund uses are depicted in Chart 12. Personnel salary and benefits expenditures increased 1% because of changes in FTE allocations, set -aside pool of 3% for cost of living adjustments, and 3% for merit -based salary increases. Professional and support costs increased 5% due to increased professional services required for administration, finance, and rail operations and support services for utilities, repairs, and maintenance at the commuter rail stations. Project and operations expenditures decreased 40%, primarily because the FY 2011/12 budget included $9,975,000 in rail capital contributions to SCRRA and $4,453,900 in allocations for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects. The FY 2012/13 budget includes no allocation for rail capital contributions and $1,774,700 for grade separation projects. Capital outlay expenditures decreased 2% due to the completion of the ERP system in FY 2011/12. Special Revenue Funds Overview The Commission's special revenue funds are legally restricted as to use for Measure A projects and programs, TUMF projects, motorist assistance services, and funding transit operations and capital in the County. The special revenue funds' budgets are summarized in Table 21, and individual budgets are presented in Tables 22 through 29 along with respective discussions. Table 21— Special Revenue Funds FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 Actual Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) FY.11/12 FY 11/12 Revised Budget Projected $ 120,739,800 $ 60,772,800 17,436,000 15,799,100 903,300 9,157,900 2,067,500 2,388,600 229,265,000 2,640,800 9,558,800 833,500 10,392,300 8,923,800: 27,545,300 23,914,800 16,272,900 44,634,600 46,288,000 56,700 36,857,000 8,638,600 213,131,700 78,300 226,243,100 3,021,900 43,290,600 (45,816,800) (2,526,200) 121,300,000 $ 125,300,000 61,000,000 63,000,000 9,537,000 14,073,600 23,620,200 21,404,600 23,272,100 22,766,200 1,081,800 2,710,400 6,784,300 6,397,400 405,200 450,800 1,406,900 1,286,000 248,407,500 257,389,000. 3,272,300 3,648,400 14,585,600 11,294,800 1,927,900 1,554,400 16,513,500 12,849,200 15,361,100 12,651,900 41,568,800 25,243,200 39,877,600 30,670,100 14,438,000 11,000,000 71,127,000 52,588,000 86,469,800 57,008,000 80,000 80,000 36,025,000 38,166,600 16,262,000 17,409,200 321,209,300 244,817,000 306,000 , 307,000 341,301,100 261,621,600 (92,893,600) (4,232,600) 110,624,300 94,964,000 (86,334,100) (58,842,700) 24,290,200 36,121,300 FY 12/13 Budget 129,300,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 69,699,900 17,007,800 2,463,500 5,257,300 882,800 2,071,000 305,894,800 3,620,300 11,673,900 2,017,800 13,691,700 Dollar Change Percent Change $ 8,000,000 7% 4,000,000 7% 4,675,500 49% 46,079,700 195% (6,264,300) -27% 1,381,700 128% (1,527,000) -23% 477,600 118% 664,100 47% 57,487,300 23% 348,000 11% (2,911,700) -20% 89,900 5% (2,821,800) -17% 15,191,700 (169,400) -1% 23,993,500 (17,575,300) -42% 127,024,800 87,147,200 219% 29,050,000 14,612,000 101% 106,452,400 35,325,400 50% 84,299,300 (2,170,500) -3% 40,000 (40,000) -50% 39,357,000 3,332,000 9% 20,400,400 4,138,400 25% 445,809,100 124,599,800 39% 242,000 (64,000) -21% 463,363,100 122,062,000 36% (157,468,300) (64,574,700) 70% 150,092,900 (72,300,900) 77,792,000 39,468,600 36% 14,033,200 -16% 53,501,800 220% 495,700 (68,603,400) 31,888,700 Beginning Fund Balance 463,549,200 464,044,900 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 464,044,900 $ 395,441,500 464,044,900 $ 495,933,600 $ - (79,676,300) (11,072,900) 16% 495,933,600 416,257,300 $ 31,888,700 a 7% 20,815,800 5% Measure A and LTF sales taxes, STA allocations, Western County TUMF, state budgetary allocations, and vehicle registration fees are all accounted for in the 21 special revenue funds. Federal, state, and local reimbursements and transfers in consisting principally of debt proceeds are used to supplement the Measure A sales tax revenues. Chart 13 illustrates the various special revenue fund sources. Chart 13 — Special Revenue Funds Sources FY 2012/13 Investment Income 1% TUMF Revenue 1% Local Reimbursements 1% State Reimbursements 4% The special revenue funds' resources are expended on County highway, rail, regional arterial, and new corridors engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction; local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction; economic development incentives; bond financing; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; education and incentive programs to encourage use of alternate modes of transportation; special social service transportation programs; public transit operations and capital needs; and motorist towing and freeway call box assistance. As shown in Chart 14, projects and operations expenditures represent the primary use of special revenue fund resources. Chart 14 — Special Revenue Funds Uses FY 2012/13 Transfers Out 14% Capital Outlay 0% Personnel Salary and Benefits 1%_ Professional Services 2% SupportCosts 0% fi Measure A Special Revenue Funds Of the special revenue funds, 16 are funded primarily with Measure A sales tax revenue which is allocated to the three geographic areas of the County (Chart 15). The Measure A funds are comprised of two 1989 Measure A and ten 2009 Measure A Western County operating funds, three 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley operating funds, and one 2009 Measure A Palo Verde Valley operating fund. Chart 15 — Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Geographic Area Palo Verde Valley 1% Since the 1989 Measure A terminated on June 30, 2009, the remaining 1989 Measure A Western County operating funds will be closed upon the completion of the specific highway and rail projects. With the commencement of the 2009 Measure A on July 1, 2009, the 14 operating funds will be in existence for the 30-year term. These funds account for all Measure A project and program expenditures and transfers of debt service for capital projects. The Measure A special revenue funds expend monies on capital construction and improvements to highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, new corridors, and local streets and roads. Funding is also reserved for commuter assistance, public and specialized transit, and economic development incentives programs as well as bond financing costs. The Commission is a self-help county, and, as such on major highway projects, the Commission supplements the State's spending. Upon completion of most highway projects, Caltrans takes over the maintenance and operations of the projects. All revenues from the Measure A sales tax have been pledged as security for the Commission's senior sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes. Debt service on the bonds is recorded in the Debt Service fund, and most of the resources for the cash payments are provided through transfers out by the Measure A special revenue funds for the 2009 Measure A bonds. Debt service for the commercial paper notes is recorded in a capital projects fund, as the notes will be paid from 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues or retired with proceeds from sales tax revenue bonds. Western County Measure A Operating Funds The Western County Measure A Operating special revenue funds account for Western County's approximately 76% share of the Measure A sales tax. As demonstrated in Table 22, most of the Commission's reimbursements flow through these funds, since the sales tax leverages state and federal dollars. Table 22 — Western County Measure A Operating Funds FY 2011— 2013 • FY 10/11 FY.11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget 'Projected Sources Measure A Sales Tax Bond Financing Commuter Assistance Economic Development Incentives Highways Local Streets and Roads New Corridors Public Bus Transit Rail Regional Arterials Specialized Transit Total Measure A Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads TOTAL Projects and Operations Capital Outlay - Transfers Out TOTAL Uses $ 7,334,500 1,358,300 1,086,600 27,708,300 26,350,000 10,051,000 1,385,400 5,541,700 8,149,500 2,309,000 91,274,300 17,436,000 12,362,200 151,500 2,664,900 1,372,300 1,318,200 32,006,500 158,585,900 2,340,100 8,457,200 397,200 6,321,500 20,734,500 21,262,800 16,272,900 27,142,500 4,345,800 56,700 25,829,000 121,965,700 78,300 26,889,400 160,127,900 $ 7,378,000 1,366,000 1,093,000 27,871,000 26,505,000 10,110,000 1,394,000 5,574,000 8,198,000 2,323,000 91,812,000 23,257,200 19,872,100 916,100 2,784,300 405,200 894,400 89,474,300 229,415,600 2,840,500 13,339,000 1,324,600 11,476,700 34,431,400 33,068,000 14,438,000 60,478,000 4,771,200 80,000 26,050,600 184,793,900 306,000 35,678,600 238,282,600 $ 7,621,000 1,411,000 1,129,000 28,790,000 27,380,000 10,444,000 1,440,000 5,758,000 8,469,000 2,399,000 94,841,000 21,404,600 19,176,200 2,101,700 2,397,400 450,800 666,000 89,345,400 230,383,100 3,254,100 10,158,600 964,400 8,806,600 20,175,800 27,134,300 11,000,000 39,758,300 3,752,800 80,000 26,925,600 137,633,400 307,000 36,065,000 188,382,500 FY 12/13 Budget $ 7,884,000 1,460,000 1,168,000 29,786,000 28,325,000 10,805,000 1,489,000 5,957,000 8,761,000 2,483,000 98,118,000 69,699,900 13,457,800 1,933,900 1,257,300 882,800 1,392,800 130,834,000 317,576,500 3,206,500 10,555,800 1,138,900 11,882,800 20,041,500 99,718,800 29,050,000 95,943,700 5,189,000 40,000 27,870,000 289,735,800 242,000 33,924,800 338,803,800 Dollar Percent Change Change . $ 506,000 7% 94,000 7% 75,000 7% 1,915,000 7% 1,820,000 7% 695,000 7% 95,000 7% 383,000 7% 563,000 7% 160,000 7% 6,306,000 .7% 46,442,700 200% (6,414,300) -32% 1,017,800 111% (1,527,000) -55% 477,600 118% 498,400 56% 41,359,700 46% 88,160,900 38% 366,000 13% (2,783,200) -21% (185,700) -14% 406,100 4% (14,389,900) -42% 66,650,800 202% 14,612,000 101% 35,465,700 59% 417,800 9% (40,000) -50% 1,819,400 7% 104,941,900 57% (64,000) -21% (1,753,800) -5% 100,521,200 42% Excess. (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (1,542,000) $ (8,867,000) $ 42,000,600 $ (21,227,300) $ (12,360,300) 139% The budgeted Western County Measure A sales tax revenues reflect a 7% increase compared to the prior year. Taxable sales changes between jurisdictions within the County periodically affect the geographic allocation formula from year to year. Federal reimbursements for highway and rail projects and the commuter assistance program, which are higher than the FY 2011/12 budget, relate to funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), FTA, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Surface Transportation Program (STP), and earmarks. The increase in federal reimbursements is primarily attributable to the commencement of construction on the Perris Valley Line project. State reimbursements are lower compared to the FY 2011/12 budget and reflect fluctuations in STIP and Proposition 1B funding for various highway and rail projects. Local reimbursement increases are attributable to the commuter assistance program and the Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. TUMF revenue represents reimbursements from TUMF zone funds administered by WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange construction and right of way acquisition. Other revenue is related to property management lease revenues, which increased as a result of properties acquired in connection with the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Investment income is higher compared to the prior year budget due to higher ending projected cash balances. As in prior years, a significant portion of transfers in consists of debt proceeds of $129,479,000 primarily from sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes to fund 2009 Measure A Western County highway projects. Other significant transfers in include funding from STA and debt service reserve funds aggregating $900,000 for rail capital projects and $455,000 for regional arterials in accordance with the 2009 Measure A related to a city not eligible to receive the local street and roads funds. Measure A Western County professional services expenditures in FY 2012/13 consist of general legal services for the various programs and capital projects, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects, other professional services for rail capital and commuter assistance projects, and liquidity facility and professional fees related to the Commission's debt programs. Reductions in liquidity facility fees for the commercial paper program and the variable rate bonds issued in 2009 (2009 Bonds) as a result of substituted or amended agreements, respectively, account for a significant portion of the 21% decrease in professional fees. Support costs comprise operations for the commuter assistance program and property management services. General program operations comprise the program management with outside consultants for the highway and rail capital and commuter assistance programs, permits required for capital projects, and subsidies and certificates for . the commuter assistance program. Such levels of operations typically fluctuate as project activities transition to another phase. Many of the Commission's Western County rail and highway projects funded by Measure A have been in the project development phase for several years and are now near or in the construction phase. Accordingly, engineering expenditures are expected to decrease 42%, while construction and design -build activities are anticipated to increase 202% and 101%, respectively. Projects still in the engineering and/or final design phase but at a decreased level of costs include the SR-91 and I- 15 corridor improvements, various Western County TUMF regional arterials, and Perris Valley Line. The 74/215 interchange and 1-215 corridor improvements south segment, which commenced construction in June 2010 and March 2011, respectively, will continue through FY 2012/13. Several Western County TUMF regional arterial projects will be under construction in FY 2012/13. After many years of project development, the Perris Valley Line project is anticipated to begin construction in FY 2012/13, subject to obtaining final environmental and FTA approvals. Major design -build activities related to the SR-91 corridor improvements during FY 2012/13 include the procurement of a design -build contractor; federal TIFIA loan application; utility and railroad agreements; and the agency, legal, financial, and engineering consultant staff to support these activities. Right of way acquisition is another major project activity for which the process can be lengthy. Significant right of way acquisitions will benefit the SR-91 corridor improvements, SR-91 HOV lanes, various Western County TUMF regional arterial, and Perris Valley Line projects. Operating and capital disbursements are comparable to the FY 2011/12 budget and relate to Western County intercity bus service and specialized transit expenditures funded by Measure A. Local streets and roads comprise turnback payments to local jurisdictions and increased as a result of the higher Measure A sales tax revenues. Capital outlay includes equipment and improvements for the rail and commuter assistance programs. Significant transfers out include funding for debt service payments of $16,000,000; reimbursements of $16,889,600 of commercial paper proceeds for the 91/71 interchange improvements and 1-215 corridor improvement —south and central segment projects; rail operating and capital needs of $151,300 from 2009 Measure A Western County commuter assistance funds; 1989 Measure A Western County highway fund contribution of $386,900 for a County TUMF project on SR-79; 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads fund allocation of $455,000 to 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterials fund; and $42,000 for CHP freeway service patrol on the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment project. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds These special revenue funds account for Coachella Valley's 23% share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 23 - Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Sources Measure A Sales Tax Highways & Regional Arterials Local Streets and Roads Specialized Transit Total Measure A Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Construction Operating and Capital Disbursements Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 14,299,400 $ 14,311,000 10,009,500 10,017,000 4,289,800 4,293,000 28,598,700 28,621,000 38,700 2,100 1,678,200 30,315,600 28,623,100 1,400 100 2,600 4,000 $ 14,783,000 10,345,000 4,435,000 29,563,000 25,800 29,588,800 1,900 3,000 FY 12/13 Budget Dollar Change $ 15,150,000 $ 839,000 10,604,000 587,000 4,545,000 252,000 30,299,000 1,678,000 12,600 10,500 30,311,600 1,688,500 2,700 3,500 Percent Change 6% 6% 6% 6% 500% N/A 6% 100 4% (500) -13% N/A 17,300 26,000 6,000 6,800 (19,200) -74% 1,631,100 N/A 3,773,000 4,343,800 4,256,900 4,500,000 156,200 4% 10,121,800 9,343,600 10,345,000 10,604,000 1,260,400 13% 8,638,600 16,047,000 17,409,200 20,400,400 4,353,400 27% 24,181,800 29,760,400 32,017,100 35,511,200 5,750,800 19% 2,869,200 - - (2,869,200) -100% 24,183,300 32,636,200 32,022,000 35,517,400 2,881,200 9% $ 6,132,300 $ (4,013,100) $ (2,433,200) $ (5,205,800) $ (1,192,700) 30% As shown in Table 23, overall budgeted Coachella Valley Measure A sales tax revenues increased 6% due to revised Measure A sales tax revenue projections. Taxable sales changes among the geographic areas impact the geographic allocation formula from year to year. The Coachella Valley operating and capital disbursements represent specialized transit funds distributed to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) for transit operations. Local streets and roads comprise turnback payments to local jurisdictions and are directly affected by changes in Measure A sales tax revenues. Regional arterial projects are highway and regional arterial projects managed by CVAG. Transfers out budgeted in FY 2011/12 were related to debt service for 2009 Measure A debt issued for CVAG highway and regional arterial and city of Indio local streets and roads projects under advance funding agreements. In order to be consistent with the accounting in the financial records, the classification of these debt service expenditures are reflected in projects and operations beginning in FY 2012/13. Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund This special revenue fund accounts for Palo Verde Valley's 1% share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 24 - Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY'11/12 FY 11/12 ' Sources Measure A Sales Tax Local Streets and Roads Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Local Streets and Roads TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses ' FY 12/13 Dollar Percent 'Actual ' Revised. Budget Projected Budget • Change Change $ 866,800 $ 867,000 $ 896,000 $ 883,000 $ 16,000 2% 200 - (200) -100% 866,800 867,200 896,000 883,000 15,800 2% 906,200 630,800 896,000 883,000 906,200 630,800 896,000 883,000 - 236,200 252,200 40% 252,200 40% (236,200) -100% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 906,200 867,000 896,000. 883,000 16,000 2% (39,400) $ 200 $ - $ - $ (200) -100% The Measure A sales tax revenues are affected by the impact of shifts in taxable sales changes on the geographic allocation formula as well as updated revenue projections. In the Palo Verde Valley as noted in Table 24, expenditures are for local streets and roads; however, transfers out in FY 2011/12 were related to debt service for the city of Blythe local streets and roads projects under an advance funding agreement. These debt service expenditures are reflected in projects and operations beginning in FY 2012/13 to be consistent with the financial records. Non -Measure A Special Revenue Funds The non -Measure A special revenue funds account for LTF disbursements; TUMF Western County project costs; motorist assistance expenditures for towing service, freeway call boxes, and 1E511 system operations; and transit disbursements from STA. These activities are budgeted in the LTF, TUMF, FSP and SAFE, and STA special revenue funds, respectively. Local Transportation Fund The LTF special revenue fund derives its revenue from one quarter of one cent of the state sales tax that is returned to source and provides for funding of public transit operations in the County, bicycle and pedestrian facility projects, planning, and administration (Table 25). Table 25 — Local Transportation Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 - Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources LTF Sales Tax $ 60,772,800 $ 61,000,000 $ 63,000,000 65,000,000 $ 4,000,000 7% Investment Income 359,800 297,500 251,600 347,800 50,300 17% TOTAL Sources 61,132,600 61,297,500 63,251,600 65,347,800 4,050,300 7% Uses Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements 37,363,800 57,887,300 46,548,300 60,505,300 2,618,000 5% TOTAL Projects and Operations 37,363,800 57,887,300 46,548,300 60,505,300 2,618,000 5% Transfers Out 16,434,500 17,877,900 15,483,500 18,359,700 481,800 3% TOTAL Uses 53,798,300 75,765,200 62,031,800 78,865,000 3,099,800 4% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 7,334,300 $ (14,467,700) $ 1,219,800 $ (13,517,200) $ 950,500 -7% The LTF sales tax revenue in FY 2012/13 is projected to increase 7% from the prior year. Investment income is expected to increase slightly due to higher ending projected cash balances in FY 2012/13. In FY 2012/13, approximately 82% and 18% of the LTF transit expenditures of $58,631,800 are for operating and capital purposes, respectively. LTF operating allocations consist of 78% to Western County, 20% to Coachella Valley, and 2% to Palo Verde Valley public bus operators. While LTF transit allocations are typically for operations, a significant portion is budgeted in FY 2012/13 for the Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) bus replacement program. The actual allocations will not be approved until July 2012. Other operating and capital disbursements include allocations for SB821 bicycle and pedestrian projects of $1,404,000 and planning and administration allocations of $469,500 to the County Auditor -Controller and SCAG. Transfers out include allocations to the Commission's General fund for planning and administration of $2,650,000, rail operations and station maintenance of $13,935,000, and grade separation projects of $1,774,700. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund The TUMF fund accounts for the Commission's share of developer fee assessments on new residential and commercial developments in Western County for regional arterials and CETAP corridors (Table 26). TUMF revenue is projected to remain unchanged due to the weak housing market. The transfers in for FY 2012/13 relate to funding from the 1989 Measure A Western County highways fund of $386,900 for the County's SR-79 regional arterial project and TUMF CETAP of $17,835,000 for the city of Temecula's regional arterial projects along 1-15. Table 26 — Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12. Actual Revised Budget Projected, Sources TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Right of Way/Land Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 6,493,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 695,100 426,000 83,700 8,699,300 20,000,000 16,313,400 24,083,700 195,600 317,000 452,000 333,600 600 3,700 243,200 315,300 6,810,800 7,137,400 1,020,900 6,809,600 17,492,100 10,649,000 215,000 FY 12/13. - Dollar Budget" Change 4,000,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 187,400 78,600 4,818,600 18,221,900 9,006,000 22,300,500 195,500 217,200 2,100 253,500 5,067,400 3,535,800 12,829,700 235,200 397,100 4,300 282,100 3,952,000 27,246,000 10,508,700 (5,100) (1,778,100) (1,783,200) Percent Change 0% N/A -6% -9% -7% (81,800) -26% 63,500 19% 600 16% (33,200) -11% (3,185,400) -45% 20,436,400 300% (140,300) -1% (215,000) -100% 25,567,000 421,700 26,636,900 25,126,300 27,619,900 53,400,500 21,686,400 5,619,900 27,721,100 41,988,800 18;445,100 61,070,500 16,862,500 67% (9,174,800) -33% 7,670,000 14% $ (10,323,500) $ (29,316,800) $ (18,715,100) $ (38,770,000) $ (9,453,200) 32% Personnel salary and benefits have decreased due to the allocation of FTEs, and professional costs have increased 19% due to legal services related to property acquisitions. Projects and operations costs increased 67%, as many regional arterial projects move into the right of way acquisition and construction phases. Approximately 67% of the projects and operations costs is attributable to programmed regional arterial projects, including the SR-79 realignment project. The remaining 33% relates to CETAP projects such as the Mid County Parkway preliminary engineering and right of way acquisitions. Transfers out represent administrative allocations of $610,100 to the General fund and CETAP funding of $17,835,000 for two city of Temecula regional arterial projects along 1-15, which are within the CETAP Winchester to Temecula corridor limits. Freeway Service Patrol Fund The FSP fund accounts for the state and local resources provided to cover the costs of servicing stranded motorists in covered service areas and construction zones by means of towing, changing tires, and providing fuel (Table 27). The State's funding share of $2,100,000 is unchanged from the FY 2011/12 budget. Local reimbursements of $85,600 are related to towing service in construction zones .for Caltrans or city construction projects, respectively, on County highways. Transfers in represent Commission match funds of $995,000 from the SAFE special revenue fund and reimbursements of $42,000 from the 2009 Measure A Western County highway funds for construction FSP service related to the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment. Table 27 - Freeway Service Patrol Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Sources State Reimbursements $ 1,808,900 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ Local Reimbursements 102,700 103,700 103,700 Other Revenue 100 Investment Income 1,700 3,200 700 Transfers In 906,600 1,150,000 800,000 TOTAL Sources 2,820,000 3,356,900 3,004,400 FY 12/13 Budget 2,100,000 $ 85,600 1,900 1,037,000 3,224,500 Dollar Change Percent Change 0% (18,100) -17% N/A (1,300) -41% (113,000) -10% (132,400) -4% Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 58,300 59,000 59,000 50,400 (8,600) -15% Professional Services 25,700 37,000 44,000 37,000 0% Support Costs 42,000 61,400 50,800 49,900 (11,500) -19% Projects and Operations Program Operations - General 2,243,300 2,888,500 2,888,500 2,910,000 21,500 1% TOTAL Projects and Operations 2,243,300 2,888,500 2,888,500 2,910,000 21,500 1% Transfers Out 150,400 176,300 176,300 174,800 (1,500) -1% TOTAL Uses 2,519,700 3,222,200 3,218,600 3,222,100 (100) 0% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 300,300 $ 134,700 $ (214,200) $ 2,400 $ (132,300) -98% Operating costs for towing services in FY 2012/13 are comparable to the FY 2011/12 budget. Transfers out are administrative allocations to the General fund. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund The SAFE fund accounts for the $1 per vehicle registration fee levied by the State on all registered vehicles within the County. It funds the installation and implementation of emergency aid call boxes located strategically on the highways throughout the County as well as the operations of the 1E511 system (Table 28). Table 28 - Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Sources Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Construction TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ - $ 1,628,000 649,100 32,100 2,309,200 45,400 623,900 393,600 98,500 363,000 1,300,000 62,000 23,800 1,748,800 53,200 872,000 537,900 $ - $ 1,490,000 505,000 13,700 2,008,700 137,900 872,000 537,100 FY 12/13 Budget - $ 1,450,000 444,000 21,100 1,915,100 125,500 680,500 824,700 654,600 697,300 110,000 60,000 Dollar Change (363,000) 150,000 382,000 (2,700) 166,300 72,300 (191,500) 286,800 Percent Change -100% 12% 616% -11% 10% 136% -22% 53% (544,600) -83% 60,000 N/A 98,500 1,080,800 2,242,200 654,600 938,000 3,055,700 697,300 938,000 3,182,300 170,000 1,146,500 2,947,200 (484,600) -74% 208,500 22% (108,500) -4% $ 67,000 $ (1,306,900) $ (1,173,600) $ (1,032,100) $ 274,800 -21% Local reimbursements represent the pass -through funds from SANBAG as its share of the 1E511 system operating costs and the recoveries from call box knockdowns, which service is provided by a collection agency. Personnel costs have increased $72,300 due to an increase in FTE allocations and salaries to manage the call box and 1E511 systems. The decrease in professional services is substantially offset by higher support costs due to increased 1E511 media ads. Projects and operations costs decreased as a result of the exclusion of the 1E511 Caltrans detection expansion project at the 60/91/215 interchange in FY 2012/13. The transfers out reflect a matching contribution to the State's contribution for towing services of $995,000 to the FSP special revenue fund and administrative allocations to the General fund of $151,500. State Transit Assistance Fund The STA fund accounts for the state budgetary allocation .of gas tax revenues designated for rail and bus transit operations and capital requirements (Table 29). The allocation is based on estimates of diesel fuel sales tax revenues provided by the Controller of the State of California, subject to an annual state budget appropriation. Due to the State's budget issues, the STA allocations were suspended periodically in prior years. Table 29 — State Transit Assistance Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources STA Sales Tax Investment Income TOTAL Sources - $ 9,537,000 $ 14,073,600 $ 14,212,500 $ 4,675,500 49% 212,100 102,000 140,800 216,200 114,200 112% 212,100 9,639,000 14,214,400 14,428,700 4,789,700 50% Uses Support Costs 300 - (300) -100% Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements 805,400 19,467,500 2,450,000 14,105,000 (5,362,500) -28% TOTAL Projects and Operations 805,400 19,467,500 2,450,000 14,105,000 (5,362,500) -28% Transfers Out 840,000 938,000 560,000 250,000 (688,000) -73% TOTAL Uses 1,645,400 20,405,800 3,010,000 14,355,000 (6,050,800) -30% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (1,433,300) $ (10,766,800) $ 11,204,400 . $ 73,700 $ 10,840,500 -101% Investment income is expected to increase because of higher cash balances due to continued state allocations. The operating and capital disbursements consist of allocations for bus capital purposes. In FY 2012/13, 76% of the allocations are in Western County, 21% in Coachella Valley, and 3% in Palo Verde Valley. Transfers out represent rail capital allocations to the General fund. Similar to the LTRallocations, the actual STA allocations will not be approved until July 2012. Capital Projects Funds Overview The capital projects funds account for all debt proceeds from commercial paper notes and sales tax revenue bonds (Table 30). Table 30 - Capital Projects Funds FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Local Reimbursements $ 2,304,900 $ - $ - $ - $ N/A Investment Income 1,814,200 168,800 1,950,300 5,103,600 4,934,800 2923% TOTAL Revenues 4,119,100 168,800 1,950,300 5,103,600 4,934,800 2923% Expenditures Professional and Support Professional Services 25,800 N/A TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 25,800 N/A Projects and Operations Engineering 2,552,900 319,100 319,100 N/A Construction 1,900,000 (1,900,000) -100% Right of Way/Land 5,000,000 1,947,100 3,024,100 (1,975,900) -40% TOTAL Projects and Operations 6,900,000 4,500,000 3,343,200 (3,556,800) -52% Debt Service Principal Payments 103,284,000 40,000,000 40,000,000 120,000,000 80,000,000 200% Interest Payments 4,942,900 225,000 11,000 433,000 208,000 92% Cost of Issuance 1,440,900 - N/A TOTAL Debt Service 109,667,800 40,225,000 40,011,000 120,433,000 80,208,000 199% Capital Outlay - - N/A TOTAL Expenditures 109,693,600 47,125,000 44,511,000 123,776,200 76,651,200 163% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (105,574,500) (46,956,200) (42,560,700) (118,672,600) (71,716,400) 153% Other Financing Sources.(Uses) Transfers In 103,284,000 6,442,700 29,038,700 136,889,600 130,446,900 2025% Transfers Out (137,859,800) (73,699,000) (64,349,000) (253,144,800) (179,445,800) 243% Debt Proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% Bond Discount (967,500) N/A Net Financing Sources (Uses) 134,456,700 (29,256,300) 24,689,700 1,103,916,800 1,133,173,100 -3873% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 28,882,200 (76,212,500) (17,871,000) 985,244,200 1,061,456,700 -1393% Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 29,571,300 58,453,500 58,453,500 40,582,500 (17,871,000) -31% $ 58,453,500 $ (17,759,000) $ 40,582,500 $ 1,025,826,700 $ 1,043,585,700 -5876% As illustrated in the following charts, capital projects funds sources primarily consist of debt proceeds and transfers in (Chart 16), and the significant uses of the capital projects funds are retirement of commercial paper notes and transfers out (Chart 17). In 2005 a commercial paper program was established to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition related to the 2009 Measure A projects. The commercial paper program anticipates the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds to refinance the outstanding commercial paper notes. In FY 2010/11, the Commission issued $150,000,000 in sales tax revenue bonds (2010 Bonds) to retire all of the outstanding commercial paper notes and fund 2009 Measure A highway projects. During FY 2011/12, the Commission projected the issuance of $60,000,000 in commercial paper notes. In FY 2012/13, the Commission .expects to issue $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes prior to the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing, which is expected near the end of FY 2012/13. This financing assumes the issuance of $512,300,000 in sales tax revenue bonds (2013 Bonds) and $163,750,000 in toll revenue bonds as well as a $444,122,000 TIFIA loan. Chart 16 — Capital Projects Funds Sources FY 2012/13 Investment1 Income \ 0% Transfers In 10% Transfers in represent bond proceeds of $120,000,000 to retire outstanding commercial paper notes and the reimbursement of $16,889,600 of commercial paper proceeds used on the 1-215 corridor improvement —south and central segment projects. Chart 17 — Capital Projects Funds Uses FY 2012/13 Projects and Operations 1% Commercial paper proceeds will continue to fund Coachella Valley land mitigation and a portion of the highway and regional arterial projects subject to an advance funding agreement with CVAG as well as debt service interest on outstanding commercial paper notes. In FY 2012/13, commercial paper and bond proceeds of $129,479,000 will be transferred out to the 2009 Measure A Western County Highway special revenue funds for capital projects. Additionally, $120,000,000 of bond proceeds will be transferred to retire commercial paper notes, and $3,665,800 of annual debt service payments received under advance funding agreements recorded in the capital projects funds will be transferred out to the Debt Service fund for the payment of debt. Debt Service Fund Overview Under the 2009 Measure A program, as amended by Measure K in November 2010, the Commission has the authority to issue sales tax revenue bonds subject to a debt limitation of $975,000,000. The, debt service fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities related to the sales tax revenue bonds debt incurred by the Commission (Table 31). The Commission's largest single expenditure is debt service. The debt agreements require the trustee to hold all debt proceeds and a portion of the sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate amounts. These monies are included in the restricted investments held by trustee in the capital projects funds and the Debt Service fund. Under the agreements, the Commission may use sales tax revenues for any lawful purpose related to the Riverside County TIP after the trustee has satisfied debt service requirements. In order to advance project development activities, the Commission established a commercial paper program in 2005. Periodically a portion of the commercial paper notes issued has been retired with sales tax revenue bonds. 'Table 31— Debt Service Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Federal Reimbursements $ $ - $ 2,982,000 $ 2,982,000 $ 2,982,000 N/A Local Reimbursements 1,499,300 - - N/A Investment Income 258,900 181,700 105,900 23,400 (158,300) -87% TOTAL Revenues 1,758,200 181,700 3,087,900 3,005,400 2,823,700 1554% Expenditures Debt Service Principal Payments 6,300,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 6,800,000 300,000 5% Interest Payments 6,351,400 16,270,000 16,453,000 16,180,000 (90,000) -1% TOTAL Debt Service 12,651,400 22,770,000 22,953,000 22,980,000 210,000 1% TOTAL Expenditures 12,651,400 22,770,000 22,953,000 22,980,000 210,000 1% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (10,893,200) (22,588,300) (19,865,100) (19,974,600) 2,613,700 -12% Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 20,727,200 21,717,000 14,788,000 19,665,800 (2,051,200) -9% Transfers Out (1,678,200) (9,696,800) (43,151,700) (650,000) 9,046,800 -93% Net Financing Sources (Uses) 19,049,000 12,020,200 (28,363,700) 19,015,800 6,995,600 58% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 8,155,800 (10,568,100) (48,228,800) (958,800) 9,609,300 -91% Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 45,738,300 53,894,100 53,894,100 5,665,300 (48,228,800) -89% $ 53,894,100 $ 43,326,000 $ 5,665,300 $ 4,706,500 $ (38,619,500) -89% Reimbursements consist of federal cash subsidy payments related to the 2010 Series B designated as build America bonds (BABs). The FY 2011/12 budget reflected such payments as offsets to interest expenditures. Transfers in represent the primary source of funding for the Debt Service fund (Chart 18). Transfers in consist of Measure A funds from the 2009 Measure A Western County Highways and Bond Financing; Coachella Valley Highways and Regional Arterials; and Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads special revenue funds for debt service payments on the sales tax revenue bonds. Chart 18 — Debt Service Fund Sources FY 2012/13 Investment Income 0% Debt Service fund uses (Chart 19) consist of debt service on the sales tax revenue bonds as well as transfers out of $650,000 from excess 1989 Measure A debt reserves to the 1989 Measure A Western County Rail Capital special revenue fund for a San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL) rail project. In FY 2011/12, such reserves were projected to be substantially transferred to 1989 Measure A special revenue funds for capital project purposes. Chart 19 — Debt Service Fund Uses FY 2012/13 Riverside County Transportation Commission Revenues and Other Sources Total revenues and other sources are budgeted at $1,864,644,600, and consist of Measure A sales tax of $132,000,000, (or 7% of total sources); LTF sales tax of $65,000,000 (or 3% of total sources); STA revenues of $14,212,500 (or 1% of total sources); federal revenues of $73,151,900 (or 4% of total sources); state revenues, including vehicle registration fees, of $17,917,800 (or 1% of total sources); TUMF of $5,257,300 (or less than 1% of total sources); debt proceeds of $1,220,172,000 (or 66% of total sources); transfers in of $326,095,700 (or 17% of total sources) and other revenues of $10,837,400 (or less than 1% of total sources). The specific revenue funding sources are shown in Table 32. Table 32 — Revenues and Other Sources FY 2012/13 Department/Program Measure A Management Services $ 2,700,000 $ Sales Tax LTF STA Federal State Local/Other Funding Sources - $ - $ - S - $ 31,100 $ 2,731,100 MEASURE A AND OTHER CAPITAL PROGRAMS Bond Financing 7,884,000 11,800 7,895,800 CETAP 2,075,100 2,075,100 Economic Development 1,168,000 17,800 1,185,800 Highways 44,936,000 21,248,600 12,977,600 7,908,400 87,070,600 Local Streets and Roads 39,812,000 - 39,812,000 New Corridors 10,805,000 203,700 11,008,700 Rail 5,957,000 50,499,000 480,200 786,100 57,722,300 Regional Arterials 8,761,000 2,155,800 10,916,800 REGIONAL PROGRAMS Public and Specialized Transit 8,517,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 42,500 613,500 88,385,500 Planning and Programming 910,000 9,000 919,000 Rail Station Maintenance/Operations 470,000 253,000 723,000 Commuter Assistance 1,460,000 891,800 1,476,800 3,828,600 Motorist Assistance 3,550,000 552,600 4,102,600 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Debt Proceeds - 1,220,172,000 1,220,172,000 Transfers In - 326,095,700 - 326,095,700 TOTAL Funding Sources $ 132,000,000 $ 65,000,000 $ 14,212,500 $ 73,151,900 $ 17,917,800 $ 1,562,362,400 $ 1,864,644,600 Revenues —Definitions and Background Measure A: Measure A is a one-half of one percent transactions and use tax that was first approved by Riverside County voters in 1988 and expired on June 30, 2009 after a 20-year term. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A through 2039. The 2009 Measure A is expected to raise more than $6.8 billion (in nominal dollars) during its lifespan. The amount raised by the Measure A levy has increased as the County and its economic base have grown during the past two decades, peaking in FY 2005/06 at $157 million. As a result of an economic slowdown, Measure A revenues decreased the, subsequent four years but have since stabilized. Measure A revenues are projected to approximate $128,000,000 and $132,000,000 in FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13, respectively. Measure A requires that all sales taxes collected may only be used for transportation purposes including administration and the construction, capital acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways, including state highways and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include expenditures for planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right of way acquisition. The Commission historically has obtained and updated Measure A revenue projections through a consultant for budget and strategic project planning purposes. The most recent economic forecast was completed in January 2012, and the Commission's sales tax services consultant provides Measure A revenue projections in connection with its quarterly sales tax analysis. Measure A revenue projections, based on such updates and other factors, for the next five fiscal years are presented in Chart 20 below. Chart 20 — Forecasted Measure A Sales Tax Revenues 2013 — 2017 $180,000,000 $160,000,000 $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $- J J i i • 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 The following additional assumptions were used in the development of the. Commission's revenue forecast for FY 2012/13: • The Inland Empire economy will continue its recovery through FY 2012/13. • The State does not change mix of items subject to the sales tax from what has been included historically. • The relative sales and property tax rates of Riverside and surrounding counties do not change from historical levels. • Internet sales will have minimal impact on revenue. The Measure A sales tax revenue projections are considered in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan financing strategy. Geographic Allocation - Riverside County is comprised of three geographic areas: Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The percentage of Measure A revenues allocated to each of these areas based on return to source is approximately 76% for Western County, 23% for Coachella Valley, and 1% for Palo Verde Valley (Chart 21). These percentages will experience some variations from year to year based on changes in levels of taxable sales among the geographic areas. Chart 21— Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues Palo Verde r Valley 1%- Program Allocation - The 2009 Measure A TIP defines the manner in which the sales tax revenues are to be spent, as presented in the Table 33. In Western County, public transit includes funding for specialized transit, commuter rail, intercity bus service, and commuter assistance. For the Coachella Valley, public transit includes specialized transit and public bus services. Table 33 - Program Allocation of 2009 Measure A Revenues Western County •Bond Financing - ^o •Economic Cevelohment ncenti,res - I�, •Highways - 30P; •Local Free.- and Roads - 29'; •New Corridors - 115; •PLIbilf TrallSr: - 1 .- •Rezonal Arterials -95 Coachella Valley •Highways and Regional Arterials - 50`'. •Local Streets and Roads - 35% • Fublic Transit. - 15'.5 Palo Verde Valley •Local Streets and Roads - 100% Local streets and roads allocations to the local jurisdictions within each geographic area are based on population (in Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling units (in Coachella Valley) and taxable sales. Based on the projected Measure A sales tax revenues of $132,000,000 for FY 2012/13, the geographic and program allocations are presented in Table 34.. Table 34 - Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues by Program FY 2012/13 Program Administration Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Total Administration $ 2,700,000 $ $ $ - $ 2,700,000 Bond Financing 7,884,000 - 7,884,000 Economic Development Incentives - 1,168,000 - 1,168,000 Highways 29,786,000 29,786,000 Highways and Regional Arterials 15,150,000 - 15,150,000 Local Streets and Roads 28,325,000 10,604,000 883,000 39,812,000 New Corridors 10,805,000 10,805,000 Public Transit 11,389,000 4,545,000 - 15,934,000 Regional Arterials 8,761,000 8,761,000 TOTAL $ 2,700,000 $ 98,118,000 $ 30,299,000 $ 883,000 $ 132,000,000 Local Transportation Fund: LTF, established in state law by the TDA, is funded through a one -quarter of one cent of the State's 7.25% sales tax. The intent of the legislation was to provide a dependable revenue stream for public transportation operations. Based upon an annual projection of LTF sales taxes that considers economic forecast revenue projections prepared by a consultant, local economic factors, and monthly receipt trends, the vast majority of LTF revenue in the County is allocated to the eight public transit operators, including the Commission for its share of Metrolink operations costs. Much like Measure A revenue, LTF had increased with the growth of the County and its economy until the recent economic recession and has stabilized in recent years. Revenues received from LTF are allocated for regional and local transportation planning, program administration, SB821 bicycle and pedestrian facilities projects, public bus transit, and rail transit, including the Commission for its share related to commuter rail operations in Western County. The Commission administers these funds on behalf of the County in a special revenue fund. State Transit Assistance: STA provides additional TDA state funding of transit operations and capital for urban counties, including the County's eight public transit operators. Due to the State's budgetary issues, it suspended the STA allocations for FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11; however, allocations were made and funded at the end of. FY 2009/10. Sales taxes on gasoline and diesel fuels have historically generated the STA funding; however, recent legislation eliminated the tax on gasoline. State Transportation Improvement Program: Administered by Caltrans, the STIP is funded through state and federal gas tax dollars and is California's primary transportation fund. Dollars are allocated to each county based on a formula that takes into consideration population and highway centerline miles. Actual programming decisions for 75% of STIP dollars are made by local transportation agencies such as the Commission. STIP reimbursement estimates are based on budgeted expenditures for specific projects with STIP allocations approved by the CTC. Proposition 1B: In November 2006, the voters in California approved Proposition 1B, which funds various transportation programs from bonds issued by the State. Programs that are funded include Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), transit capital, STIP supplement, and Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF). CMIA and transit capital revenues for certain highway and rail projects nominated by the Commission and approved by the CTC are included in state reimbursement revenues. Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Registration Fees: State law allows county SAFE agencies to impose a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations within the County to pay for call box purchases and operations; excess SAFE revenues may be used for 511 operations and as a match for FSP operations. The call boxes enable motorists to summon help should they encounter mechanical or emergency problems while on the road, whereas the 1E511 system provides real-time traffic and transit trip information available via the internet or telephone. Caltrans Freeway Service Patrol Allocations: Caltrans is the primary sponsor of the FSP and provides the majority of funding for the program, including towing services in construction zones. The State provides nearly 80% of the funding for the FSP program based on population, freeway miles, and level of congestion throughout the State. The Commission administers and implements the program along with the CHP and Caltrans. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality: The CMAQ program is federally funded and is targeted for transportation improvements in areas with air quality problems. This program pays for improvements that reduce congestion while improving air quality. The Commission has also used CMAQ dollars to include commuter assistance programs, signal interconnects, HOV lanes, and transit projects. CMAQ reimbursement estimates are based on budgeted expenditures for specific projects with CMAQ allocations. Federal Transit Administration: FTA funding is generally allocated annually by the federal government to urbanized areas and is based on calculated miles of service. On a reimbursement basis, the federal government provides funding for qualified capital investments in rail facilities, track, and vehicles. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee: In connection with the 2009 Measure A, the TUMF program was established in the Western County to provide additional funding for regional arterial projects. TUMF is administered by WRCOG. As a result of an MOU with WRCOG, the Commission will receive 48.7% of the TUMF revenues, which are divided equally between the regional arterial and CETAP programs. TUMF revenues maintained by WRCOG are allocated for regional. arterial zone improvements and regional transit facilities. TUMF revenue estimates are based on monthly receipt trends and consideration of local housing and commercial construction activity in the County. Rail and Highway Licenses: The Commission owns parcels of land and right of way for highway, rail, and regional arterial projects in selected areas throughout the County. The ownership provides licensing opportunities for fiber- optic cable, advertising signs, and business tenants. The amount of funding received from the licenses provides revenue to partially support the cost of owning and maintaining the Commission's land and facilities. Investment Income: The Commission has established a prudent investment policy for cash on hand that is intended to maximize return while providing absolutesafeguards on principal and liquidity, as noted in Section 1. Interest earnings on the State and County investment pools are estimated at an interest rate of .50%. The earnings on funds held by the trustee for debt service and projects are assumed to be at .50%. Program Revenues and Other Sources Revenues and other financing sources for FY 2012/13 are allocated to the various Commission programs as follows: Management Services The primary funding sources for management services are Measure A allocations of $2,700,000 as well as LTF allocation transfers in of $700,000 and administration funding transfers in of $936,900 from TUMF, SAFE, and FSP. Interest revenues in FY 2011/12 are $31,100. Bond Financing Measure A Western County revenues of $7,884,000 will be used to support bond financing costs. Interest revenues are $11,800. CETAP The Western County CETAP program will receive $2,000,000 from TUMF for development of new CETAP corridors. Additionally, other local revenues include $75,100 representing investment income. Economic Development In order to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate in the Western County area, Measure A Western County revenues of $1,168,000 will be used to create an infrastructure improvement bank to improve and construct interchanges, provide public transit linkages or stations, and make other improvements to the transportation system. Interest earnings are $17,800. Highways Funding for the highway program includes 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues of $44,936,000 for Western County highways and Coachella Valley highways and regional arterials programs. The 2009 Measure A Western County sales tax revenues will be used primarily for the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvements. Unexpended 1989 Measure A Western County revenues from prior years will be used on remaining projects such as SR-74 widening from 1-15 to 7th Street and curve realignment, 74/215 interchange, SR-91 HOV lanes, 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors as well as for pass -through funding to the city of Riverside for interchange improvements for SR-91 at La Sierra Avenue and Van Buren Boulevard. Federal funds for highways projects include $719,900 in demonstration funds for the 74/215 interchange, $8,321,800 in CMAQ funds for the SR-91 HOV lanes, $3,000,000 in CMAQ funds for the SR-60 truck climbing lane, $1,990,300 in STP funds for the I-215/Blaine Street project, $234,600 in STP funds for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors, and $4,000,000 in demonstration funds for the 91/71 interchange improvements. Other ' federal funds include $2,982,000 for BABs subsidy payments related to the 2010 bonds. State funds include STIP funding totaling $7,976,800 will be used for the 1-215 corridor improvements. The 1-215 corridor improvements on the southern segment will receive $5,000,800 in Proposition 1B CMIA funds. Additional local funding includes' $1,257,300 in TUMF zone reimbursements from WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange, $832,800 in lease revenues, $50,000 in carpool violations, $35,000 in local property management revenues, and interest revenue of $5,733,300. . In FY 2012/13, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes, $512,300,000 in sales tax revenue bonds, $163,750,000 in toll revenue bonds, and $444,122,000 in TIFIA loans to fund 2009 Measure A projects, particularly the SR-91 corridor improvement design -build project. Transfers in include $129,479,000 in bond and commercial paper proceeds to fund the 2009 Measure A projects, $19,665,800 to the Debt Service fund for Measure A Western County and Coachella Valley highways debt service, $16,889,600 to the commercial paper fund for project reimbursements, and $120,000,000 from sales tax revenue bond proceeds to retire the commercial paper notes. Local Streets and Roads Measure A allocations of $39,812,000 for the local streets and roads program are distributed to the cities and the County for local street repairs, maintenance, and construction. New Corridors To leverage local, state, and federal funding for four new transportation corridors identified through CETAP, Measure A Western County revenues of $10,805,000 will be available for environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and construction of these new corridors. Interest revenues of $203,700 are included in local revenues. Rail Unexpended 1989 Measure A Western County revenues will be used primarily for the Perris Valley Line and other rail capital projects. The 2009 Measure A Western County's public transit program allocated $5,957,000 for rail. FTA funding for the Perris Valley Line project consists of $44,509,100 from Small Starts, $4,989,900 from CMAQ, and $1,000,000 from Section 5307. State Proposition 1B transit allocations of $440,200 will fund the Perris Transit Center and station security projects. STIP revenues of $40,000 will fund the Perris Valley Line. Local revenues include investment income of $299,700, reimbursements of $436,400 related to the Perris Transit Center, and property management revenues of $50,000. Transfers in of $250,000 and $650,000 from STA and excess reserves, respectively, are for a rail project. Regional Arterials The Western County regional arterial program will receive funds from Measure A and TUMF in the amounts of $8,761,000 and $2,000,000, respectively. The new TUMF revenues along with unexpended TUMF revenues from prior years will be the primary source of funding TUMF regional arterial projects, including the SR-79 realignment. Other local revenues also consist of investment income of $155,800. Transfers in consist of $18,221,900 from 1989 Measure A Western County highways and TUMF CETAP as a match for TUMF regional arterial projects and $455,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads, in accordance with the 2009 Measure A, related to a city not eligible to receive those funds. Public and Specialized Transit LTF sales tax revenues of $65,000,000 are allocated primarily for public bus and rail transit operations and capital in the County. A small portion of these revenues is used for LTF planning and administration allocations as well as SB821 bicycle and pedestrian facilities grants. STA allocations of $14,212,500 are allocated to the County's public transit operators. For the FY 2012/13 budget, unexpended LTF and STA revenues from prior years will also be used to fund transit operations as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities grants. Under the 2009 Measure A, public transit funding of $8,517,000 has been allocated for Western County specialized transit and intercity bus services and Coachella Valley specialized and public transit services. Federal revenues consist of $42,500 in FTA Job Access and Reverse Commute (1ARC) Section 5316 funding. Local revenues represent investment income of $613,500. Planning and Programming Transportation planning studies are funded with an LTF off -the -top allocation transfer in of $1,950,000, or three percent of estimated LTF revenues. An LTF allocation transfer in of $1,774,700 will fund grade separation projects for the cities of Riverside and Corona and the County. STIP in the amount of $910,000 will fund PPM activities of the Commission and CVAG. Local revenues consist of investment income of $9,000. Rail Station Maintenance and Operations Rail operations, which include Metrolink operating and capital contributions, station maintenance, and support will be funded with LTF allocation transfers in of $13,935,000. A federal grant of $450,000 will fund landscaping at the stations, and a $20,000 federal grant will fund an intern. In addition to interest revenues of $27,800, local revenues include $210,000 in reimbursements primarily from SCRRA for security costs, $5,000 for Metrolink violators citations, and $10,200 for miscellaneous vending machine revenues. Other transfers in include 2009 Measure A Western County commuter assistance funding of $151,300 for maintenance of the park and ride facility at the Perris Transit Center. Commuter Assistance The Commuter Assistance program will receive funding of $1,460,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County public transit to assist in implementing services to commuters and employers in promoting use of alternate modes of transportation in Western County. The Commission will also receive CMAQ funds of $849,800 to support the commuter assistance program and JARC revenues of $42,000 for a ridesharing project in the Coachella Valley. Local revenues consist of other agency reimbursements of $1,412,500 for support of the San Bernardino commuter assistance program and regional ridematching as well as investment income of $64,300. Motorist Assistance SAFE is funded from $1,450,000 in revenues received through DMV registration fees, while Caltrans will allocate $1,700,000'in State highway account funds to cover the FSP, and $400,000 for special FSP services required for construction projects. The Commission will also receive local revenues of $429,000 to support SANBAG's share of the.1E511 system operations. Local revenues represent investment and other income of $23,600, cost recoveries of $15,000 from responsible parties related to call box knockdowns, and reimbursements of $85,000 from cities for potential FSP services required on highway construction projects. The State's FSP contribution is matched with an operating transfer in from SAFE of $995,000; the 2009 Measure A Western County highway program will transfer in $42,000 for construction FSP services related to the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment project. 11 Riverside County Tronspodation Commission 11 a Commission Debt The Commission's current debt under the 2009 Measure A has been incurred for highway, regional arterial, economic development, and local streets and roads projects for which title usually vests or, upon completion, will vest with Ca!trans or local jurisdictions. Future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments on the sales tax revenue bonds. Beginning in FY 2012/13, the Commission will also issue toll revenue bonds and obtain a federal TIFIA loan that will be repaid from toll revenues generated by the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, which is part of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Since these projects are not assets of the Commission for which the Commission will have operating responsibilities, except for the intangible rights to operate the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, future operating costs related to these projects cannot be determined and are not applicable. However, for toll and rail assets, operating budget impacts are considered in future project development. Table 35 presents a summary of the anticipated changes in the Commission's debt during FY 2012/13. Table 35 — Changes in Commission Debt Projected Balance Projected Balance July 1, 2012 Additions Reductions June 30, 2013 Commercial Paper $ 20,000,000 $ 100,000,000 $ (120,000,000) $ 2009 Sales Tax Bonds 168,200,000 (6,800,000) 161,400,000 2010 Sales Tax Bonds 150,000,000 150,000,000 2013 Sales Tax Bonds 512,300,000 512,300,000 Toll Revenue Bonds 163,750,000 163,750,000 TIFIA Loan 444,122,000 444,1.22,000 $ 338,200,000 $ 1,220,172,000 $ (126,800,000) $ 1,431,572,000 Commercial Paper In March 2005 the Commission established a commercial paper program to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition under the 2009 Measure A TIP. In October 2010 the Commission reduced the commercial paper program to $120,000,000. Maturities of commercial paper notes are rolled over to new issuances of commercial paper. Regarding the commercial paper notes, the Commission currently maintains a P-1 and an A-1+ rating from Moody's Investors Service (Moody's) and Standard and Poor's Rating Service (S&P), respectively. Interest payments are made from available commercial paper proceeds or sales tax revenues. Although the Commission issued $40,000,000 in commercial paper notes in February 2012, those notes were retired in March 2012. Currently there are no outstanding commercial paper notes; however, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $20,000,000 and $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes during FY 2011/12 and 2012/13, respectively, for capital project funding for a projected outstanding amount of $120,000,000 during June 30, 2013. All of the outstanding commercial paper notes are expected to be retired with proceeds from the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds in FY 2012/13. The Commission will pay $433,000 in estimated commercial paper interest payments during the year. Commercial paper debt service expenditures are reflected in the Commercial Paper capital projects fund. In April 2012 the Commission substituted irrevocable direct draw letters of credit and reimbursement agreements with The Bank of Tokyo -Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., acting through its New York Branch (Bank of Tokyo), and Union Bank, N.A. (Union Bank), following the expiration of the Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America) facility, as credit and liquidity support for the commercial paper notes. The letters of credit in the amount of $60,750,000 for each series of notes expire in October 2014. The costs for the liquidity support, which decreased significantly from the previous reimbursement agreement, are reflected in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. Sales Tax Revenue Bonds As a means to achieve a greater level of interest rate stability, the Commission entered into two interest rate swaps for a total notional amount of $185,000,000 at a fixed rate for 20 years effective October 2009; the counterparties pay the Commission a floating rate equal to 67% of the one -month London Interbank Offer Rate, or LIBOR. The counterparty for the first swap ($100,000,000 notional amount) at a fixed rate of 3.679% is Bank of America, and the counterparty for the second swap ($85,000,000 notional amount) at a fixed of 3.206% is Deutsche Bank AG (Deutsche Bank). As of June 30, 2013, the projected notional amounts for the Bank of America and Deutsche Bank swaps are $87,200,000 and $74,200,000, respectively. In connection with the commencement of the interest rate swaps in October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 in variable rate sales tax revenue bonds to retire outstanding commercial paper notes, refund bonds issued in 2008, fund a portion of the debt service reserve, and pay costs of issuance. The 2009 Bonds are secured by standby bond purchase agreements (SBPAs) with JP Morgan Chase Bank (JPMorgan), which expire in September 2014. In connection with the extension of the original SBPAs with JPMorgan in September 2011, the Commission obtained the release of the debt service reserve for capital project funding purposes and a reduction in the fee. The costs for these liquidity facilities are accounted for in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. For FY 2012/13, the Commission has budgeted debt service principal and interest payments of $6,800,000 and $6,649,000, respectively. In November 2010 the Commission issued $37,630,000 in fixed rate tax-exempt bonds (Series A Tax -Exempt) and $112,370,000 in fixed rate taxable bonds (Series B Taxable) designated as BABs under ARRA. The aggregate amount issued of $150,000,000 for the 2010 Bonds was used to retire approximately $103,300,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes, provide funds for 2009 Measure A Western County capital projects, and pay costs of issuance. A portion of the BABs were designated as recovery zone economic development bonds (RZEDBs). The Commission expects to receive a cash subsidy from the United States Treasury equal to 35% of the interest payable on the BABs or 45% of the interest payable on the Series B bonds additionally designated as RZEDBs. Estimated net debt service payments for the 2010 Bonds in FY 2011/12 are $0 for principal and $9,531,000 for interest payments, which are offset by the $2,982,000 cash subsidy payment. In connection with the SR-91 corridor improvement financing that is anticipated to be completed in June 2013, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $512,300,000 in additional sales tax revenue bonds. These 2013 Bonds are expected to have maturity dates through June 30, 2039. The Commission's has received long-term debt ratings of Aa1, AA+, and AA from Moody's, S&P, and Fitch Ratings, respectively on its currently outstanding sales tax revenue bonds. Toll Revenue Bonds and TIFIA Loan In April 2012 the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) announced that the Commission received an invitation to the 2012 TIFIA program, which, combined with the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) TIFIA grant received in December 2011, provided the final puzzle piece needed for the full funding of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. During FY 2012/13, the Commission will submit a TIFIA loan application for a projected loan of approximately $444,122,000. The TIFIA loan provides low cost subordinate financing secured by toll revenues to be generated by the RCTC 91 Express Lanes. Considered "patient financing", interest repayment can be deferred for up to five years from substantial completion of the project and principal repayment can be sculpted around the revenue stream supporting the senior debt toll revenue bonds. The maximum repayment term of the TIFIA loan is 35 years from substantial completion, which would approximate June 2051 for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. , Toll revenue bonds estimated at $163,750,000 will consist of current interest bonds (CIBs) and capital appreciation bonds (CABS). The CIBs, which are expected to comprise approximately 70% of the toll revenue bonds issued, are projected to have maturity dates through June 2034, while the CABS will have projected maturity dates through June 2051. In July 2010 the Commission authorized the issuance of up to $900,000,000 in toll revenue bonds in anticipation of the financing requirements for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Debt Capacity Analysis The Commission is legally prohibited from issuing additional sales tax revenue debt if its debt coverage ratio is less than 1.5 to 1 on all senior sales tax revenue debt. The Commission has adopted a higher standard of 2 to 1 as part of its debt management policy. As Chart 22 and Table 36 indicate, the Commission has successfully met its policy standard for sales tax revenue .debt issued under the 2009 Measure A, even in a declining sales tax revenue environment. The 1989 Measure A related debt consistently exceeded the Commission's standard, and coverage for the 2009 Measure A related debt of 6.6 is anticipated for FY 2012/13. Any coverage less than 2 to 1 would necessitate using other program funding to cover all debt service expenditures. Chart 22 — Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $- FY 2011/12 Table 36 — Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis Sales Tax Revenues Senior Debt Service Coverage Ratio - Senior Debt Long -Term Debt Rating Commercial Paper Rating Debt Service Schedule 9 Senior Debt Service MI Available Revenues FY 2012/13 _FY 11/17 FY 12/13 128,000,000 $ 132,000,000. 19,970,000 $ 19,997,600 6.4 6.6 . Aa 1/AA+/AA Aa 1/AA+/AA P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ Debt service requirements for the sales tax revenue bonds are based on amortization schedules for the 2009 Bonds and 2010 Bonds and include the BABs cash subsidy payments. Since commercial paper is expected to be refinanced with sales tax revenue bonds, debt service requirements for commercial paper are not included in Table 37; however, the debt service interest expenditures in FY 2012/13 for the commercial paper notes are estimated at $433,000. Table 37 — Commission Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year Principal Interest Subsidy Payments Net Debt. Service 2013 $ 6,800,000 $ 16,179,726 $ (2,982,113) $ 19,997,613 2014 7,100,000 15,912,326 (2,982,113) 20,030,213 2015 7,400,000 15,633,526 (2,982,113) 20,051,413 2016 7,800,000 15,356,926 (2,982,113) 20,174,813 2017 8,100,000 15,036,526 (2,982,113) 20,154,413 2018-2022 46,400,000 70,109,230 (14,910,563) 101,598,666 2023-2027 57,800,000 60,133,930 (14,910,563) 103,023,366 2028-2032 64,960,000 47,481,830 (14,910,563) 97,531,266 2033-2037 76,530,000 28,096,914 (11,358,688) 93,268,226 2038-2039 35,310,000 3,627,450 (1,632,353) 37,305,098 Total $ 318,200,000 $ 287,568,382 $ (72,633,294) $ 533,135,088 Outstanding Debt as of June 30, 2013 Under the provisions of the 2009 Measure A, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $975,000,000, reflecting an increase from the original authorization of $500,000,000 as a result of the voter approval of Measure K in November 2010. The following is a summary of debt issued and secured by 2009 Measure A revenues, receipt of which began in FY 2009/10: 2005 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and Series B: In February 2005, the Commission authorized a $200,000,000 commercial paper program. In March 2005, the Commission established the program for $185,000,000 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and B. In October 2010, the program was reduced to $120,000,000. The repayment of principal and interest on the commercial paper notes is secured by irrevocable direct draw letters of credit issued by Bank of Tokyo and Union Bank, and the Measure A sales tax revenues secure such repayment. Maturities of the commercial paper notes may range from one to 270 days, and interest rates are variable and dependent on current market conditions. The note agreements require the trustee to hold all note proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indenture. 2009 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A, B, and C: In October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refinance the 2008 bonds, retire a portion of the outstanding principal amount of the commercial paper notes and a portion of accrued interest on the notes, and fund a reserve fund. The bonds mature in annual installments ranging from $6,500,000 to $13,700,000 on various dates through June 1, 2029 with variable interest rates set on a weekly basis. The 2009 Bonds are integrated with the interest rate swaps, thereby creating synthetic fixed rate debt. The 2009 Bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures Debt service requirements for the 2009 Bonds are summarized in Table 38. Table 38 — 2009 Sales Tax Fiscal Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018-2022 2023-2027 2027-2029 Total Revenue Bonds Debt Service Requirements Principal $ 6,800,000 7,100,000 7,400,000 7,800,000 8,100,000 46,400,000 57,800,000 26,800,000 Interest $ 6,649,200 6,381,800 6,103,000 5,826,400 5,506,000 22,456,600 12,481,300 1,675,200 Total Debt Service 13,449, 200 13,481,800 13,503,000 13,626,400 13,606,000 68,856,600 70,281,300 28,475,200 $ 168,200,000 $ 67,079,500 $ 235,279,500 2010 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A Tax -Exempt and Series B Taxable: In November 2010, the Commission issued $150,000,000 principal amount of serial bonds to retire all of the outstanding principal amount of the commercial paper notes and fund project costs. The bonds mature in annual installments ranging from $12,105,000 to $17,980,000 on various dates from June 1, 2030 through June 1, 2039. Interest rates for the Series A Tax -Exempt and Series B Taxable bonds are 5% and 6.807%, respectively. The Commission expects to receive cash subsidies from the U.S. Treasury related to the Series B Taxable bonds. The 2010 Bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures. Debt service requirements, net of subsidy payments, for the 2010 Bonds are summarized in Table 39. Table 39 — 2010 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018-2022 2023-2027 2028-2032 2033-2037 2038-2039 Total Principal Interest Subsidy 9,530,526 $ (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 47,652,630 (14,910,563) 47,652,630 (14,910,563) 38,160,000 45,806,63.0 (14,910,563) 76,530,000 28,096,914 (11,358,688) 35,310,000 3,627,450 (1,632,353) Net Debt Service $ 6,548,413 6,548,413 6,548,413 6,548,413 6,548,413 32,742,066 32,742,066 69,056,066 93,268,226 37,305,098 150,000,000 220,488,882 $ (72,633,294) 297,855,588 The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds to the 2009 Measure A programs is presented in Chart 23. Chart 23 — Program Long -Term Debt Local Streets and Roads 1% The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds by the benefiting geographic area is presented in Chart 24. Chart 24 — Long -Term Debt by Geographic Area Palo Verde Valley 0% Coachella Valley 8% Outstanding Debt and Legal Debt Margin at June 30, 2013 A summary of the Commission's outstanding debt secured by Measure A sales tax revenues and related legal debt margin projected at June 30, 2013 is presented in Table 40: Table 40 — Legal Debt Margin 2009"Measure A Authorized Sales Tax Revenue Debt $ 975,000,000 2005 Commercial Paper Notes 2009 and 2010 Bonds 2013 Bonds 311,400,000 512,300,000 Total Outstanding Debt 823,700,000 Legal Debt Margin $ 151,300,000 Riverside County Transportation Commission t7N1u; Table 41— Budget Comparison by Department FY 2011— 2013 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Total Revenues Expenditures Management Services: Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications Finance Total Management Services Regional Programs: Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Regional Programs Capital Project Development and Delivery Debt Service: Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance Total Debt Service Total Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Bond Discount Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 10/11 Actual $ 123,439,800 60,772,800 17,735,600 17,811,800 5,021,600 9,157,900 2,321,800 4,524,200 240,785,500 FY 11/12 Revised Budget FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Projected Budget Change Change $ 124,000,000 $ 128,000,000 $ 132,000,000 $ 8,000,000 6% 61,000,000 63,000,000 65,000,000 4,000,000 7% 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,212,500 4,675,500 49% 23,650,700 24,393,600 73,151,900 49,501,200 209% 23,935,100 23,250,200 17,917,800 (6,017,300) -25% 1,081,800 2,932,200. 2,688,700 1,606,900 149% 6,784,300 6,397,400 5,257,300 (1,527,000) -23% 592,400 450,800 882,800 290,400 49% 1,824,000 3,391,100 7,365,900 5,541,900 304% 252,405,300 265,888,900 318,476,900 66;071,600 26% 626,200 244,300 185,700 283,200 38,900 16% 1,085,100 1,235,200 1,064,500 1,355,400 120,200 10% 851,600 1,297,000 958,100 1,270,500 (26,500) -2% 5,831,100 5,473,000 5,355,800 5,000,100 (472,900) -9% 8,394,000 8,249,500 7,564,100 7,909,200 (340,300) -4% 4,564,600 7,450,300 4,065,300 4,522,600 (2,927,700) -39% 12,865,700 21,498,600 21,012,900 14,553,300 (6,945,300) -32% 46,749,900 87,042,800 57,515,800 84,685,900 (2,356,900) -3% 2,831,900 4,226,400 4,231,400 4,038,800 (187,600) -4% 3,530,700 5,263,300 5,286,600 4,848,000 (415,300) -8% 70,542,800 125,481,400 92,112,000 112,648,600 (12,832,800) -10% 170,687,900 248,922,900 195,920,100 370,815,300 121,892,400 49% 109,607,200 46,500,000 46,500,000 126,800,000 80,300,000 173% 11, 296, 300 16,495,000 16,464, 000 16,613,000 118,000 1% 1,493,100 - - N/A 122,396,600 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413,000 80,418,000 128% 372,021,300 445,648,800 358,560,200 634,786,100 189,137,300 42% (131,235,800) (193,243,500) (92,671,300) (316,309,200) (123,065,700) 64% 185,354,800 (185,354,800) 170,000,000 (967,500) 169,032,500 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 156,356,600 92% (169,739,100) (166,343,400) (326,095,700) (156,356,600) 92% 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% N/A 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% 37,796,700 (155,243,500) (32,671,300) 923,862,800 1,079,106,300 -695% 551,567,900 $ 589,364,600 $ 589,364,600 589,364,600 556,693,300 (32,671,300) -6% 434,121,100 $ 556,693,300 $ 1,480,556,100 $ 1,046,435,000 241% Riversirde County Transportation Commission 1V1 ( j ,,, Executive Management Mission Statement: "To maintain the highest level of achievement and professionalism possible while managing the activities of the Commission with a small staff, complemented with consultants, to effectuate sound transportation policies and legislation compatible with environmental standards." Chart 25 — Executive Management Expenditures Executive Management has a budget of $283,200 (Table 42), an increase of 16% from last year's budget, for oversight of all Commission functions. The. increase is primarily related to personnel costs as affected by an increase in FTE allocations. Professional costs of $105,000 include legal fees and consulting services. Support costs include various membership dues and staff -related travel costs of $57,600. Table 42 — Executive Management Expenditure Detail FY10/11 FY11/12 FY11/12. FY12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget _ Projected Budget, Change Change . Salaries and Benefits $ 128,000 $ 83,6C0 $ 61,6C0 $ 120,600 $ 37,000 44% Professional Costs Legal Services 59,300 52,030 60,003 65,000 13,000 25% Professional Services -General 4C0,000 50,030 10,000 40,000 (10,000) -20% Total Professional Costs 459,303 102,000 70,000 105,003 3,000 3% Support Costs 38,900 58,7C0 54,103 57,600 (1,100) -2% TOTAL Executive Management $ 626,200 $ 244,300 $ 185,703 $ 283,200 $ 38,900 16% Executive Management_ Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.01 0.01 0.01 Deputy Executive Director 0.09 0.02 0.15 Executive Director 0.21 0.20 0.19 FTE 0.31 0.23 0.35 Department Budget Overview Department Description The Executive Director is responsible for and provides strong leadership in developing and implementing new strategies at the local, regional, and statewide levels to assure delivery of transportation improvements and programs throughout the County. Furthermore, Executive Management is committed to fostering a positive and supportive work environment for staff that emphasizes quality work and encourages teamwork and open communication, with a commitment to serving the public. This is accomplished through a productive and collaborative effort with the members of the Commission and the oversight of the Commission's Executive Committee. Key Assumptions • The Executive Director will play a prominent role with external audiences with an emphasis on working with Congress, the California Legislature, Riverside County business organizations, and Southern California transportation agencies and local governments regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation act and on advancing transportation policy in California. • Project delivery will be a top priority in FY 2012/13 as construction has commenced on the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector, SR-91 HOV lane project, and 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment. During the next fiscal year, construction will begin on the 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment, 1-215 bi-county project, SR-74 curve project and the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension. • Yet another component of project delivery will include the need to complete the environmental review process on a number of high -profile projects including the SR-91 corridor improvement project, Mid County Parkway, and SR-79 realignment. • The advancement of construction on a number of projects will require a requisite increase in public outreach to the media and local governments as well as the need for watchful oversight to make the most of lower construction and right of way costs. • The development of the Perris Valley Line project will mark Riverside County's first major rail expansion in more than 13 years and will require significant effort from the Executive Director to obtain approvals from the FTA, local railroads, and community. • The Commission will have a high profile throughout the State due to its procurement of a design -build contractor for the construction of the SR-91 corridor improvement project in Corona. • The Commission will play a leadership role in advocating for the approval of a federal transportation bill to fund needed transportation priorities in Riverside County with an emphasis on goods movement infrastructure, priority transportation corridors, and expansion of the federal TIFIA Program. Accomplishments FY 2011/12 saw extraordinary accomplishments at the Commission, placing it in the top tier of California transportation organizations. In several areas, the Commission stood by itself in successful advocacy, innovation, and leadership. • Completed construction on the 74/215 interchange in Perris, one of six major interchange projects in Riverside County to be funded through the ARRA program. • Awarded a $20 million TIFIA subsidy payment from the TIGER III program for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. The amount received was the largest grant award from the program in the entire nation. • Invited to apply for TIFIA loan for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. This represents the final piece needed for full funding of the project. The Commission was one of only five projects throughout the nation to receive TIFIA funding in the April 2012 selections. • Continued to implement components of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Completed construction on the 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment in Murrieta. • Continued progress on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process for the Perris Valley Line project, which included a number of public hearings and presentations to stakeholder groups, including the March Joint Powers Authority and the Riverside Unified School District. • Continued right of way acquisition for the SR-91 HOV lanes project in downtown Riverside, culminating in a contract award and start of construction in March 2012. • Guided the Commission through an uncertain economic environment with costs savings and successful adherence to limits on salaries and administrative expenditures. • Partnered with SANBAG to release a smart phone application to make the 1E511 system more accessible to motorists, transit users, and carpoolers. Major Initiatives FY 2012/13 will be a year of constant activity and will feature efforts to launch a number of projects while continuing to be challenged by a slow economy. In early 2012, Ca!trans began construction to add HOV lanes on SR-91 through downtown Riverside. The Commission played an active role in acquiring right of way for the project and will take a proactive role in public outreach and communications for the project. At the same time, a number of other planned improvements will continue through project development work with an eye on construction in the near future. This includes substantially completing environmental work on the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. The largest project currently in development is the SR-91 corridor improvement project through Corona, a $1.3 billion dollar effort that will add general purpose and express lanes to a 10-mile stretch of one of Southern California's most congested freeways. Environmental work on the project will be completed along with advance right of way acquisition and the solicitation of a design -build team. Financing the project has taken a major step forward thanks to the award of a $444 million TIFIA loan from the U.S. DOT. The project was one of only a handful to receive this type of funding and received funding on two separate occasions during FY 2011/12. On a larger scale, a major concern in moving forward is the state of California's financial position and commitment to funding infrastructure and transportation. The Commission will continue to take an aggressive and active role in advocating for state investments in transportation. The Commission is an active member of the Self -Help Counties Coalition (SHCC) and Mobility 21, and a major focus will be placed on advocacy for transportation in the state budget. Federal funding is also an important factor for the Commission's future, and the Commission will advocate strongly for the approval of a federal transportation bill. Congress's priorities will need to include funding for Positive Train Control and for goods movement and freight -related projects in Southern California. In Riverside County, goods movement investments will continue to focus on the need to complete highway/rail grade separation projects. The success of many of these efforts will rely on enhanced external communications. Media relations will continue to be a priority, and press releases will remain a major effort along with social media and the Commission's On the Move monthly newsletter and annual report. An expanding and systematic outreach to business and civic groups, focusing on Commission efforts in terms of funding, construction, and services, will be the central feature of the communications program. While actively participating in all of these major endeavors, the Executive Director will maintain and improve administrative efficiency and fiscally sound practices characteristic of the Commission. With a total of 42 budgeted staff positions, the Commission organization remains consistent with Commission direction. The Commission must continue to be competitive in the employment market and retain capable staff as well as attract high quality applicants. Staff training and development will continue, enabling our small and dedicated staff to enhance skills, productivity, and value. Our goal is to maintain the most effective mid -sized transportation agency in California. • Department Goals Maximize funding for transportation improvements in Riverside County through legislative advocacy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Implement the Commission's early development project priorities outlined in the recent Commission workshops, focusing on the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A, which will include an emphasis on project development for the SR-91 corridor improvement project and the Perris Valley Line. • Place an emphasis on initiating federally authorized and funded projects included within the new federal transportation bill and the Commission's ongoing project priorities. • Advocate federal appropriations for current projects and regional efforts to reduce the community impacts of rail goods movement. • Advocate for an increase in TIFIA funding with an emphasis on reaching financial close of a TIFIA loan for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Continue to advocate for federal investment in freight and goods movement infrastructure with the goal of mitigating community impacts while increasing capacity and local job creation and economic development. • Continue implementation of Transit Vision while addressing short- and long-term funding constraints. Focus on timely and effective completion of capital projects. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Serve as the lead agency for the construction of the 1-215 corridor improvement projects. • Work closely with Ca!trans on construction of the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connector project in Moreno Valley as well as the SR-91 HOV lanes project in downtown Riverside and 1-215 bi-county project. • Ensure effective communication with the public regarding construction and project details throughout the county. • Embark on construction for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension. Support regional transportation solutions in cooperation with surrounding counties that are of benefit to Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Continue work on grade separation and rail capacity projects funded through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and TCIF as well as those called for in the Commission's $561 million Grade Separation Plan adopted in October 2006 and updated in 2009. • Work with neighboring counties regarding corridor improvements on SR-91 as well as on 1-15 and 1-215. • Maintain an effective working relationship with the agencies that comprise Metrolink to ensure that Riverside County commuter rail needs are served in an efficient, effective, and safe manner. • Partner with SANBAG to enhance and publicize the 1E511 system and work with agencies in San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles counties to provide effective, regional 511 traveler information services. • Play an active role in potential legislative efforts to revamp the implementation of intercity rail and commuter rail service in the Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) corridor. • Be an active participant in discussions involving high-speed rail —especially concerning connectivity investments in the overall rail system in Southern California. • Work toward advocating additional intercity rail service to the Coachella Valley. 11,0aintain effective working relationships with Commissioners to strengthen and expand the Commission's leadership in transportation policy decision -making at all levels of government. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Facilitate Commissioner participation at the regional, state, and federal levels to raise the interests of the Commission and seek favorable action. • Continue regular communication between the Executive Director, senior staff and the Commissioners. • Continue collaborative efforts with member agency staff regarding local priorities and funding challenges. While maintaining a relatively small staff, promote the Commission's effectiveness by improving and developing staff skills, using state-of-the-art working tools, and fostering an environment that encourages and rewards individual and team effort. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue to maintain a well -documented employee appraisal process that provides clear, understandable, and measurable performance criteria for all employees. • Maintain and encourage staff morale and effectiveness. • Retain quality staff as the economy improves. Develop the framework for a Commission culture that enhances productivity, encourages regular and open communication among staff, and promotes the mutual achievement of individual and organizational goals and objectives. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Conduct a semi-annual review of organization accomplishments as measured against planned objectives to determine progress in meeting those objectives and action steps needed. • Facilitate open communications and coordination between management, professional staff, and support staff through regular meetings. Executive Management Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimate FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Expenditures $417,425,900 $372,021,300 $358,560,200 $634,786,100 Staffing levels 39 39 41 42 Administration costs as percentage of expenditures 2% 2% 3% 3% Administration Mission Statement: "To provide quality and efficient services to the Board of Commissioners, staff, and external customers and to comply with applicable federal and state requirements." Chart 26 - Administration tDebtSzvice 10 )11 Professional Costs 9% Expenditures As noted in Table 43, the Administration Department's total budget is $1,355,400 for office operations including management of office space, lease, and equipment; records; Commission and committee meetings; and special events as well as for the clerk of the board and human resources functions. Salaries and benefits expenditures of $460,300 reflect an increase in FTEs. Professional costs of $114,500 cover various services including, but not limited to, Commissioners' per diem, legal fees, and consultant and other professional services. Support costs of $640,600 cover administrative overhead including office maintenance; information technology updates, support, and maintenance; and recruitments. Capital outlay of $140,000 reflects an increase due to information technology equipment upgrades. Table 43 - Administration Expenditure Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget - Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 400,700 $ 412,400 $ 372,400 $ 460,300 $ 47,900 12% Professional Costs Commissioner Per Diem 58,300 55,000 60,000 65,000 10,000 18% Legal Services 4,800 28,000 8,400 ',- 19,000- (9,000) -32% Professional Services -General 33,900 49,000 32,500 30,500 (18,500) -38% Total Professional Costs 97,000 132,000 100,900 114,500 (17,500) -13% Support Costs 558,400 670,800 586,200 640,600 (30,200) -5% Capital Outlay 29,000 20,000 5,000 140,000 120,000 600% Debt Service 25,300 - - N/A TOTAL Administration $ 1,110,400 $ 1,235,200 $ 1,064,500 $ 1,355,400 $ 120,200 10% Administration Staffing Summary Position - FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.12 0.10 0.25 Acconting Supervisor 0.00 0.00 0.01 Accounting Technician 0.03 0.05 0.00 Administrative Assistant 1.19 1.38 1.38 Office and Board Services Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Office Assistant 0.94 0.93 0.95 FTE 4.28 4.46 4.59 Department Budget Overview — Office Operations Department Description Office Operations oversees the daily maintenance needs of the Commission's office facility and staff; manages information technology and records management systems; oversees the office lease; purchases office supplies and equipment; posts public notices on the website and local newspaper and notices of project completion; maintains a safe working environment for Commission board members, staff, and consultants; and provides support services. Office Operations continues to operate with a small staff of six consisting of the Office and Board Services Manager, Senior Administrative Assistant, three Administrative Assistants, and Senior Office Assistant. Key Assumptions • Support is provided to 42 full-time Commission staff. • Requests for project proposals and project notices of completion are posted in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. • Information technology systems are upgraded and maintained to ensure efficiency. • An accurate and efficient records management system is maintained. • Requests for public records are responded to in accordance with the California Records Act. Accomplishments • Updated the web page in a timely manner for the postings of public notices. • Maintained efficient information technology infrastructure. • Maintained the electronic records management system to ensure accurate and efficient processing of incoming and outgoing correspondence and documents. • Maintained a disaster recovery plan to ensure uninterrupted Commission operations. • Responded to public records requests in accordance with the California Public Records Act. Major Initiatives The Commission will continue to maintain a robust electronic records management system. Achieving greater efficiencies and strengthening the Commission's records management processes and procedures,the system pertains to the management, storage, and accessibility of the Commission's actions and documents and the retention capability for incoming and internally created records. Office Operations will continue to provide high quality support services to the Board of Commissioners and to internal and external customers by providing a work environment that enhances the overall mission of the Commission. Department Goal — Office Operations Ensure quality service that demonstrates responsiveness and flexibility. and provides services at the most reasonable cost. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Support 42 full-time staff. • Provide accessibility to meeting agendas, legal notices, requests for proposal, and employment opportunities through the Commission's web page. • Continue to improve administrative efficiency through automation of records processing. • Provide a safe working environment with the maintenance of an injury and illness prevention program. • Post legal notices and requests for proposals on the Commission's web page and in the newspapers on a timely basis. • Provide office supplies, equipment, and services consistent with intended quality and capabilities at the most advantageous price afforded in the market. • Manage the Commission's information technology systems. Department Budget Overview — Clerk of the Board Department Description The Clerk of the Board provides support services to the Board of Commissioners and its alternates and for Commission and committee meetings. It serves as an important resource for the Commission and has the responsibility for recording, publishing, preserving, and filing meeting proceedings of documents acted upon by the Commission and its committees; posting legal notices; processing claims against the Commission; fulfilling requirements of the Commission and the committees as it relates to the Conflict of Interest Code; serving as the Filing Officer for Economic Interest and Campaign Disclosure statements and legal claims against the Commission; coordinating Commission special events and meetings; and performing all duties required by law, rules, or order of the Board of Commissioners. As such, this department has a direct link and responsibility to serving local taxpayers and the public while supporting the actions of the Commission. The need to be accountable to the public at large is further amplified by the need to comply with federal and state law requiring prompt responses to California Public Records Act requests. Key Assumptions • Staff support and meeting services are provided to 34 Commissioners and their alternates, the Commission, four established committees, and a number of ad hoc committees. • Monthly agenda packets and supporting documents are published and distributed in accordance with the Brown Act. • Officers and members of the Commission are kept informed by providing them with the most current and accurate data to assist them and facilitate their decision making responsibilities. • Frequent communication with Commissioners continues to provide news and updates on Commission items and transportation -related meetings. • Available technology is used to provide simplified access of agenda items and Commission actions to the public, local agencies, and staff. Accomplishments • Updated the web page and the bulletin board for the agenda, minutes, and supporting documents. • Posted legal notices in local newspapers and on the Commission's web page. • Regularly advised officers and members of the Commission and their staff on changes to Commission meetings and other transportation -related meetings. • Arranged Commission and committee meetings and special events of the Commission. • Processed and transmitted Commission -approved resolutions to appropriate agencies in a timely manner. Major Initiatives Each year, local agencies make changes to their appointments regarding their representation on the Commission. Staff will continue to make every effort to ensure that the newly appointed representatives, as well as their respective staff, are aware of operational policies of the Commission and other transportation -related meetings. There will be continued emphasis on the utilization of electronic mail with Commissioners for more efficient communications. Clerk of the Board staff will continue to provide high quality support services to the Board of Commissioners. Staff will also continue to update technology to streamline processes and procedures for easier access to Commission actions, minutes, resolutions, and ordinances, including electronic agenda distribution. Department Goals — Clerk of the Board Ensure coordination and documentation of Commission and committee meetings and provide public accessibility to agenda items as required by state regulations. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide accurate, high quality agenda packets for Commission and committee meetings. • Continue to provide support to Commission members, staff, and attendees of Commission and committee meetings. • Post meeting agendas and supporting documents in compliance with Brown Act requirements. • Maintain an accurate list of Commissioners and alternates and submit membership roster changes to the Secretary of State. • Maintain and .file all Commission and committee meetings and official records of the Commission. • Perform all duties within mandated deadlines. • Maintain and promote good Commission and staff relations. Facilitate access of information to Commission records. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Continue to respond to requests for records and information on a timely basis and in accordance with state law. • Continue to improve the Commission's recordkeeping practices by updating the electronic records management system. • Maintain Commission agreements, amendments, memoranda of understanding, resolutions, and ordinances. • Maintain a centralized database for Commissioners, agencies, and consultant contact information. • Coordinate special activities, meetings, events, and conferences as requested by the Executive Director and the Commission. Department Budget Overview — Human Resources Department Description Human Resources responsibilities include administering the recruitment, selection, and appraisal process; updating and conducting a biennial survey of comparable salaries and benefits; maintaining personnel policies and procedures; and scheduling periodic sessions for staff to review benefits and personnel rules and for supervisors to review the performance evaluation process. Key Assumptions • The use of consultant services for Human Resources administration is maximized. • The assessment of Human Resources practices and procedures will continue. " C o n t i n u o u s i m p r o v e m e n t i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h e m p l o y e e s r e g a r d i n g H u m a n R e s o u r c e s i n f o r m a t i o n w i l l b e a n o n g o i n g p r o c e s s . " C o m p l i a n c e w i t h s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l l a b o r l a w r e g u l a t i o n s i s a c h i e v e d . A c c o m p l i s h m e n t s " P r o v i d e d t h e a n n u a l B e n e f i t S t a t e m e n t t o a l l e m p l o y e e s . " R e g u l a r l y p r o v i d e d i n f o r m a t i o n t o e m p l o y e e s o n c h a n g e s t o h e a l t h i n s u r a n c e , 4 0 1 ( a ) d e f i n e d c o n t r i b u t i o n , 4 5 7 d e f e r r e d c o m p e n s a t i o n p l a n s , a n d t h e p e r s o n n e l p o l i c i e s a n d p r o c e d u r e s m a n u a l t h r o u g h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s i n t r a n e t . " R e c r u i t e d a n d f i l l e d o n e i n t e r n a n d f i v e f u l l - t i m e p o s i t i o n s . " H e l d t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s o n v i o l e n c e i n t h e w o r k p l a c e , . h a r a s s m e n t - f r e e w o r k p l a c e , a n d d r u g - f r e e w o r k p l a c e . " D i s c l o s e d e m p l o y e e s ' c o m p e n s a t i o n o n t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s w e b s i t e i n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e S t a t e C o n t r o l l e r ' s O f f i c e a n d C a I P E R S . " R e v i s e d t h e P e r s o n n e l P o l i c i e s a n d P r o c e d u r e s M a n u a l . " M a j o r I n i t i a t i v e s H u m a n R e s o u r c e s f o c u s e s o n m a n a g i n g e m p l o y e e s a n d c o n s i s t s o f a f r a m e w o r k o f a c t i v i t i e s a n d p r a c t i c e s t h a t s u p p o r t a n d d e v e l o p a m o t i v a t e d w o r k f o r c e w h i l e a t t h e s a m e t i m e c o m p l y i n g w i t h l e g i s l a t i o n a n d r e g u l a t i o n s t h a t g o v e r n t h e e m p l o y e r / e m p l o y e e r e l a t i o n s h i p . S t a f f w i l l u s e w r i t t e n p o s i t i o n d e s c r i p t i o n s a n d p e r f o r m a n c e e x p e c t a t i o n s i n o r d e r t o g i v e e a c h e m p l o y e e a c l e a r a n d c o n s i s t e n t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f w h a t i s e x p e c t e d . A d d i t i o n a l l y , s t a f f w i l l u t i l i z e q u a l i f i e d h u m a n r e s o u r c e s c o n s u l t a n t s t o a s s i s t i n e s t a b l i s h i n g g o o d h u m a n r e s o u r c e s m a n a g e m e n t p r a c t i c e s , b a s e d o n p o l i c i e s t o e s t a b l i s h p a r a m e t e r s f o r f a i r a n d c o n s i s t e n t d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , a n d t o i n s t i t u t e g o o d w o r k p l a c e p r a c t i c e s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p r a c t i c e i s t o c o n d u c t a c o m p e n s a t i o n p r o g r a m r e v i e w e v e r y t w o y e a r s t o e n s u r e f a i r c o m p e n s a t i o n i s e s t a b l i s h e d t o a t t r a c t a n d r e t a i n t h e m o s t q u a l i f i e d e m p l o y e e s . B e g i n n i n g i n F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n o p t e d t o p o s t p o n e t h e c o m p e n s a t i o n p r o g r a m r e v i e w d u e t o t h e s l o w d o w n i n t h e e c o n o m y a n d d e c l i n e i n s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l r e i n t r o d u c e t h e c o m p e n s a t i o n p r o g r a m r e v i e w w h e n t h e e c o n o m y i s s t a b l e . T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l p r o v i d e a o n e - t i m e 3 % c o s t o f l i v i n g a d j u s t m e n t a n d r e t u r n t h e m e r i t - b a s e d p e r f o r m a n c e r e v i e w s y s t e m t h a t w i l l p r o v i d e u p t o a 3 % a n n u a l m e r i t i n c r e a s e f o r s t a f f i n F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 . D e p a r t m e n t G o a l s H u m a n R e s o u r c e s A d m i n i s t e r h u m a n r e s o u r c e s p o l i c i e s , p r o c e d u r e s , a n d p r o g r a m s i n o r d e r t o a l i g n p e r s o n n e l l a w s a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p o l i c i e s w i t h c o n t i n u o u s i m p r o v e m e n t p r i n c i p l e s . ( P o l i c y G o a l : F i n a n c i a l & A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) O b j e c t i v e s : " R e v i e w a n d u p d a t e p e r s o n n e l p o l i c i e s a n d p r o c e d u r e s t o c o m p l y w i t h f e d e r a l a n d s t a t e r e q u i r e m e n t s . " P r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n t o e n h a n c e t h e e m p l o y e e ' s k n o w l e d g e o f c u r r e n t p e r s o n n e l p o l i c i e s a n d p r o c e d u r e s i n v a r i o u s f o r m s i n c l u d i n g e l e c t r o n i c a c c e s s , w o r k s h o p s , a n d p r i n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n . " E n s u r e t h a t e m p l o y e e p e r s o n n e l r e c o r d s a r e u p d a t e d t i m e l y f o r v a r i o u s p e r s o n n e l a c t i o n s . C o n t i n u e t o e m p l o y a n d r e c r u i t a d y n a m i c a n d t a l e n t e d w o r k f o r c e . ( P o l i c y G o a l : F i n a n c i a l & A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) O b j e c t i v e s : " M a i n t a i n a c o m p e n s a t i o n p r o g r a m t h a t e n s u r e s i n t e r n a l e q u i t y a n d e x t e r n a l c o m p e t i t i v e n e s s w i t h i n t h e p a y s t r u c t u r e f o r C o m m i s s i o n e m p l o y e e s . " E x e r c i s e c a r e i n m a k i n g h i g h - q u a l i t y , d i v e r s e a p p o i n t m e n t s . Develop people to be their best in order to meet the needs of the organization. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Build and maintain an effective performance system to include timely performance evaluations, personal development, and a supportive work environment. • Provide appropriate and timely training to meet the demands of the organization. • Foster teamwork through cooperative efforts and support for shared success. Understand and consistently deliver excellent customer service to all employees. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Focus on "employee as customer" and consistently strive to exceed expectations by supporting and maintaining individual respect, appreciation, management accessibility, and communication. Improve the quality of the work culture. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Develop and maintain a safe working environment. • Maintain a proactive employee relations process. • Promote a work/family balance. • Recognize and reward individual contributions, innovation, and learning from experience. Administration Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Employee rules/Benefits review sessions held 1 1 1 1 Recruitments 2 2 6 2 Positions filled 2 2 6 2 Legal notices 15 26 18 20 Commission/Committee/Ad Hoc meetings 46 55 50 52 Commissioners supported (including alternates) 59 59 61 61 Staff supported: Regular full-time Temporary/Seasonal 39 2 39 2 41 1 42 2 Legislative Affairs and Communications Mission Statement: "To strive to improve the mobility of Riverside County residents by working through the legislative process and by maintaining effective interagency relationships. This is supported by facilitating interactive communications with the public and transportation stakeholders through various outreach and media efforts." Chart 27 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditures The Legislative Affairs and Communications Department has a total budget of $1,270,500 (Table 44). Staffing costs make up 31% of the total department expenditures and reflect a decrease in FTEs from 2.27 to 1.97. Professional costs of $687,500 include legislative advocacy, graphic design, and website updates. Support costs of $188,000 are comparable to last year's budget. Table 44 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditure Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salariesand Benefits $ 321,300 $ 437,100 $ 367,500 $ 395,000 $ (42,100) -10% Professional Costs Legal Services 1,300 2,500 2,500 2,500 0% Professional Services - General 383,900 686,000 418,000 685,000 (1,000) 0% Total Professional Costs 385,200 688,500 420,500 687,500 (1,000) 0% Support Costs 145,100 171,400 170,100 188,000 16,600 10% TOTALLegislative Affairs and Communications $ 851,600 $ 1,297,000 $ 958,100 $ 1,270,500 $ (26,500) -2% Legislative Affairs and Communications Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.19 0.21 0.19 Community Relations Manager 0.06 0.10 0.15 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.01 0.00 0.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.69 0.70 0.65 Executive Director 0.02 0.00 0.05 Goods Movement Program Manager 0.00 0.30 0.05 Government Relations Manager 1.00 0.95 0.85 Procurement Administrator 0.00 0.00 0.03 Procurement Manager 0.03 0.01 0.00 FTE 2.00 2.27 1.97 Department Budget Overview Department Description Legislative Affairs Transportation issues and system enhancements affect a number of jurisdictions and stakeholders. Through increased participation, the Commission is able to play a stronger leadership role at all levels of government to advance its interests and policy goals. The importance of this is magnified when the Commission is seeking changes in law or needs legislative authorization to move forward with a specific project. The Commission's Legislative Affairs efforts focus on taking full advantage of opportunities at both thefederal and state levels when there is a potential impact to Commission programs. In doing so, the Commission maintains its role as a major legislative force and a statewide leader on a broad range of issues affecting transportation policy such as project delivery and enhanced funding. This requires the establishment and maintenance of ongoing communication with Riverside County's legislative delegations in Washington and Sacramento. The Commission accomplishes this via a combined effort that includes Commissioners, staff, and legislative consultants in the two capitals. The effort also requires working with other transportation agencies throughout the State in order to collaborate on issues of mutual concern. This cooperation takes place in a number of forums including a monthly meeting of transportation commission chief executive officers, a legislative roundtable of regional transportation advocates, Mobility 21, SHCC, and Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors (CAGTC). A chief concern continuing through FY 2012/13 will be the approval of a federal surface transportation authorization bill. This legislation will include changes in policy but will also set funding levels for major federal programs the Commission relies upon including CMAQ and STP. Ideally Congress will approve a multi -year bill rather than a short-term extension so that the Commission can be assured of federal funding levels during an extended period of time. In FY 2012/13, the Commission will advocate to protect transportation funding sources at both the state and federal level. The keys to the effort will be in warding off attempts to divert state transportation funding to close California's budget gap and to ensure that the state can meet its commitments on voter -approved Proposition 1B infrastructure bonds. In terms of federal action on specific. projects, the Commission will seek to reach financial close of the TIFIA loan it was selected to apply for in April 2012 related to the SR-91 corridor improvement project. The Commission's project was one of 26 letters of interest submitted for a total request exceeding $13 billion, and it was one of only five selected to submit a TIFIA loan application. Additionally, in late 2011, the Commission was awarded a $20 million TIFIA payment from the TIGER III program for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. More than 800 projects vied for TIGER III funding, making it one of the most competitive federal funding opportunities in recent history. The SR-91 corridor improvement project was one of only four projects nationwide that received the maximum award of $20 million from TIGER III. Together, these two funding decisions reflect the effectiveness of the Commission's legislative program on a national scale and the need to continue a strong presence in Washington for future actions the Commission will seek. As a long-term goal for the new authorization bill, the Commission will join with a number of other agencies to seek a more robust level of federal funding for programs such as TIFIA that can provide low-cost financing for major infrastructure projects. With the recent success of the SR-91 corridor improvement project in the TIFIA program, the Commission may consider future TIFIA financing for projects such as the 1-15 corridor improvement project. Regional and statewide rail issues will be on the front burner this year and could significantly impact the Commission's future plans for rail service in Riverside County. In Sacramento, there is much discussion about high-speed rail. as well as new governance for the LOSSAN corridor. These projects have a direct impact on the Commission's contractual rail rights between Fullerton and Los Angeles which were purchased in 1993. The Commission's interest is to ensure that its access and ability to provide commuter rail service to Los Angeles and Orange counties is not disrupted. Another rail -related issue is service operated by Amtrak to and from the Coachella Valley. The service is currently provided only a few times per week, and an expansion to daily service is warranted. The line is included in the state rail plan, but additional funding and cooperation with the freight railroad is necessary for the expansion to daily service. Communications The Commission is committed to communicating with and educating a broad arena of interested parties on the roles and responsibilities of the agency. An emphasis will continue to be placed on informing Riverside County residents and businesses about transportation projects and services and maintaining open communication with other transportation stakeholders. Various forms of media and communication tools are used in these outreach efforts with the overall objectives to provide accurate, informative, and easily accessible information; facilitate public participation in the Commission processes; and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. The Deputy Executive Director is responsible for communications with the news media and prepares text for Commission materials, presentations, and speeches. Along with the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director, Community Relations Manager, and individual project managers actively participate in public presentations at the local, regional, and state levels to represent the Commission's interests. Strong relationships with the news media are very important to ensure that the public is well informed regarding the Commission's progress in determining funding priorities, designing infrastructure improvements, and constructing projects. There are many points throughout these processes in which the public can and should play a role in shaping the future of the County's transportation network. Key Assumptions • The Government Relations Manager will oversee legislative affairs work efforts with guidance from the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director. • The annual report to the public will be distributed throughout the County. • The On the Move newsletter will be published and distributed electronically and posted on the Commission website. • The Speakers Bureau effort will continue to seek local community opportunities to expand outreach regarding the Commission's activities. • The Commission's website will be updated and refreshed on a regular basis. " A d d i t i o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s t o o l s a n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s w i l l b e e x p l o r e d f o r i n c o r p o r a t i o n i n t o t h e o n g o i n g p r o g r a m t o h e l p b u i l d p u b l i c a w a r e n e s s o f C o m m i s s i o n a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d i n g r a d i o , t e l e v i s i o n , s o c i a l m e d i a o u t l e t s s u c h a s T w i t t e r , a n d t h e i n t e r n e t . " T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l t a k e a l e a d e r s h i p r o l e i n f o r m u l a t i n g a c o u n t y w i d e d i r e c t i o n o n f e d e r a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c y . " P u b l i c o u t r e a c h w i l l t a k e a h e i g h t e n e d r o l e a s p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t a c t i v i t i e s a c c e l e r a t e o n p r o j e c t s s u c h a s t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t , 1 2 1 5 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t s , t h e 6 0 / 2 1 5 E a s t J u n c t i o n p r o j e c t , S R - 9 1 H O V l a n e s , P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e p r o j e c t , M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y , a n d S R - 7 9 r e a l i g n m e n t . " G o o d s m o v e m e n t w i l l r e m a i n a k e y p o l i c y p r i o r i t y f o r t h e C o m m i s s i o n , a n d t h e r e w i l l b e a n e m p h a s i s t o e n s u r e t h a t R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y r e c e i v e s s i g n i f i c a n t f u n d i n g f o r t h i s n e e d f r o m s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t s . " G o v e r n m e n t a l r e l a t i o n s w i l l a s s i s t t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n r e a c h i n g f i n a n c i a l c l o s e o n t h e f e d e r a l T I F I A l o a n t o c o m p l e t e f i n a n c i n g f o r t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t . " A n o t h e r p r i o r i t y i s t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s r i g h t s a n d i n t e r e s t s r e g a r d i n g p a s s e n g e r r a i l s e r v i c e i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . A c c o m p l i s h m e n t s " O b t a i n e d i n v i t a t i o n t o a p p l y f o r $ 4 4 4 m i l l i o n T I F I A l o a n f r o m t h e U . S . D O T f o r t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t . " O b t a i n e d a $ 2 0 m i l l i o n T I G E R T I F I A p a y m e n t t h a t w i l l p r o v i d e t h e b a s i s f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n o f t h e o v e r a l l f i n a n c i n g n e e d e d f o r t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t . T h e $ 2 0 m i l l i o n p a y m e n t p r o v i d e s a p o r t i o n o f t h e T I F I A l o a n f o r w h i c h t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s b e e n s e l e c t e d t o a p p l y . " P u b l i s h e d a f o u r - p a g e a n n u a l r e p o r t s u p p l e m e n t i n t h r e e m a j o r n e w s p a p e r s T h e P r e s s E n t e r p r i s e , D e s e r t S u n , a n d T h e C a l i f o r n i a n . " H o s t e d a n d m e t w i t h S e n a t o r B a r b a r a B o x e r a n d o t h e r k e y l e g i s l a t o r s o n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n n e e d s . " M e t w i t h a n d p r o v i d e d S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t t o u r f o r S e n a t o r D i a n n e F e i n s t e i n . " U p d a t e d t h e l o o k a n d f u n c t i o n a l i t y o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s w e b s i t e . " C o n t i n u e d e f f e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h t h e n e w s m e d i a r e s u l t i n g i n i n f o r m a t i v e c o v e r a g e r e g a r d i n g l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s a n d M e a s u r e A p r o j e c t d e l i v e r y . " P r o v i d e d e x t e n s i v e p u b l i c o u t r e a c h s u p p o r t a s p a r t o f t h e p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t p r o c e s s f o r t h e M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y , P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e , S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t , t h e 6 0 / 2 1 5 E a s t J u n c t i o n , a n d i m p r o v e m e n t s t o 1 - 2 1 5 . " C o n d u c t e d m u l t i p l e p u b l i c m e e t i n g s a s p a r t o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e v i e w p r o c e s s f o r a n u m b e r o f e f f o r t s i n c l u d i n g t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e , 1 - 2 1 5 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t , S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t , 7 4 / 2 1 5 i n t e r c h a n g e , a n d 9 1 / 7 1 i n t e r c h a n g e p r o j e c t s . " S u p p o r t e d t h e R a i l D e p a r t m e n t i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f v a r i o u s m a r k e t i n g m a t e r i a l s a n d a d v e r t i s e m e n t s i n c l u d i n g w e e k e n d a n d h o l i d a y t r a i n s e r v i c e s . " C o n t i n u e d t o t a k e a l e a d e r s h i p r o l e a n d c o l l a b o r a t e w i t h n e i g h b o r i n g c o u n t i e s , l o c a l b u s i n e s s l e a d e r s , M o b i l i t y 2 1 , a n d C A G T C o n m a n y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c y i s s u e s i n S a c r a m e n t o a n d W a s h i n g t o n . " C o n t i n u e d w o r k w i t h t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a N a t i o n a l F r e i g h t G a t e w a y c o l l a b o r a t i o n t o f o s t e r c o o p e r a t i o n , c o o r d i n a t i o n , a n d c o l l a b o r a t i o n t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e m o v e m e n t o f g o o d s t h r o u g h S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . " D e v e l o p e d n e w c o l l a t e r a l m a t e r i a l s f o r a n o v e r v i e w o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p r o g r a m s a n d p r o j e c t s a s w e l l a s c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s p l a n n e d f o r W e s t e r n C o u n t y , w h i c h a r e o f t e n d i s t r i b u t e d a t p u b l i c e v e n t s . " I m p r o v e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p h o t o l i b r a r y t o a s s i s t w i t h d o c u m e n t i n g t h e p r o j e c t d e l i v e r y p r o g r e s s o f t h e v o t e r - a p p r o v e d M e a s u r e A t a x p r o g r a m . T h e p h o t o l i b r a r y h a s b e e n u s e d t o d e v e l o p P o w e r P o i n t p r e s e n t a t i o n s , i n f o r m a t i o n b r o c h u r e s , a n d T I G E R g r a n t a n d T I F I A l o a n s u b m i s s i o n s . " M a i n t a i n e d a p r e s e n c e o n t h e s o c i a l n e t w o r k i n g s i t e T w i t t e r w h i c h c a n b e a c c e s s e d a t h t t p : / / t w i t t e r . c o m / R C T C . " H e l d w i d e l y a t t e n d e d e v e n t s f o r t h e 7 4 / 2 1 5 i n t e r c h a n g e c o m p l e t i o n a n d S R - 9 1 H O V l a n e s g r o u n d b r e a k i n g . " T o o k a n a c t i v e r o l e i n p r o v i d i n g c o m m e n t s a n d e n s u r i n g t h a t R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y p r o j e c t s w e r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e R T P . " A c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a r e g i o n - w i d e e f f o r t t o e x p a n d t h e r e a c h o f M o b i l i t y 2 1 , a S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a d v o c a c y g r o u p , t o t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e . T h e e m p h a s i s r e s u l t e d i n c o - h o s t i n g a m a j o r c o n f e r e n c e i n L o s A n g e l e s i n l a t e 2 0 1 1 . T h e c o n f e r e n c e w i l l t a k e p l a c e o n c e a g a i n i n A n a h e i m i n l a t e 2 0 1 2 . " U p g r a d e d a n e w C o m m i s s i o n e r o r i e n t a t i o n p r o g r a m t h a t b o l s t e r s C o m m i s s i o n e r k n o w l e d g e a n d p a r t i c i p a t i o n r e g a r d i n g C o m m i s s i o n p r o j e c t s a n d a c t i v i t i e s a n d w a s p r e s e n t e d t o e v e r y n e w C o m m i s s i o n e r . M a j o r I n i t i a t i v e s L e g i s l a t i v e A f f a i r s T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l c o n t i n u e t o a d v o c a t e s t r a t e g i c a l l y a n d e f f e c t i v e l y o n t h e p o l i c y i s s u e s d e s c r i b e d a b o v e i n W a s h i n g t o n a n d S a c r a m e n t o , u t i l i z i n g o u r c o n t r a c t a d v o c a c y t e a m s , c o a l i t i o n s , a n d p a r t n e r s h i p s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l s e e k t o b u i l d o n i t s r e c e n t s u c c e s s e s i n b o t h c a p i t a l s a n d c o n t i n u e t o m a i n t a i n a s t r o n g p r e s e n c e a s a r e s p e c t e d , k n o w l e d g e a b l e a n d e f f e c t i v e r e s o u r c e t o p o l i c y l e a d e r s a n d d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s . C o m m u n i c a t i o n s T h e C o m m i s s i o n p r o v i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e p u b l i c t h r o u g h v a r i o u s c h a n n e l s i n c l u d i n g : 1 ) p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t p u b l i c m e e t i n g s , c h a m b e r s o f c o m m e r c e , i n d u s t r y a s s o c i a t i o n s , a n d s e r v i c e c l u b s ; 2 ) p r o d u c t i o n a n d p r o v i s i o n o f r e s o u r c e m a t e r i a l s a n d f a c t s h e e t s ; 3 ) m a i n t e n a n c e a n d e n h a n c e m e n t o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s w e b s i t e ; a n d 4 ) d e v e l o p m e n t o f n e w s p a p e r p r e s s r e l e a s e s , r a d i o a n d t e l e v i s i o n i n t e r v i e w s , a n d c a b l e t e l e v i s i o n s p o t s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s l a r g e s t p u b l i c a t i o n e f f o r t t o p r o v i d e w i d e s p r e a d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f i t s p r o j e c t s a n d e x p e n d i t u r e s i s i t s f o u r - p a g e a n n u a l r e p o r t w h i c h h a s b e e n p u b l i s h e d i n t h r e e a r e a n e w s p a p e r s t h r o u g h o u t t h e C o u n t y . B r o a d d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e O n t h e M o v e , a n e - m a i l n e w s l e t t e r h i g h l i g h t i n g a c t i o n s o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d e m e r g i n g t o p i c s , w i l l c o n t i n u e a s p a r t o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s c o m m u n i c a t i o n s e f f o r t s . E f f o r t s w i l l c o n t i n u e t o u p d a t e a n d e x p a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s c o n t a c t d a t a b a s e i n c l u d i n g e - m a i l a d d r e s s e s i n o r d e r t o s u p p o r t d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n m a t e r i a l s . A c o n t i n u i n g e m p h a s i s w i l l b e p l a c e d o n p r o v i d i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n s s u p p o r t t o m a j o r p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t e f f o r t s i n c l u d i n g t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e , t h e M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y , t h e S R - 9 1 , a n d t h e 1 - 2 1 5 c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s . T h e n e e d f o r p r o a c t i v e p u b l i c c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d o u t r e a c h r e m a i n s i m p o r t a n t , a s t h e C o m m i s s i o n c o n t i n u e s t o m o v e f o r w a r d w i t h t h e d e l i v e r y o f t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A w o r k p r o g r a m . T h i s i s a n a r e a o f e m p h a s i s , a s t h e W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y D e l i v e r y P l a n p l a c e s t h e C o m m i s s i o n i n a h i g h - p r o f i l e r o l e t o d e l i v e r l a r g e - s c a l e h i g h w a y p r o j e c t s . T h i s w i l l r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n a l c o n t a c t w i t h t h e p u b l i c b y t h e C o m m u n i t y R e l a t i o n s M a n a g e r . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s o u t r e a c h w i l l i n c l u d e a p r o a c t i v e e f f o r t t o w o r k c l o s e l y w i t h v a r i o u s m e d i a f o r m a t s s u c h a s p r i n t , r a d i o , i n t e r n e t , a n d t e l e v i s i o n t o i n c r e a s e t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d i n t e r e s t i n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s a n d t o g e n e r a t e a h i g h e r l e v e l o f m e d i a c o v e r a g e . T o w a r d t h a t e n d , o p p o r t u n i t i e s w i l l b e i d e n t i f i e d f o r l i v e o r t a p e d i n t e r v i e w s a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n s t h a t s p e a k t o l o c a l r e s i d e n t s a n d e m p l o y e r s a n d t h e i r q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s . A p p r o p r i a t e f o r u m s m a y i n c l u d e c i t y c o u n c i l m e e t i n g s , l o c a l c a b l e t e l e v i s i o n , a n d r a d i o . N e w C o m m i s s i o n e r o r i e n t a t i o n m e e t i n g s w i l l b e p r o v i d e d b y t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r , D e p u t y E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r , a n d C l e r k o f t h e B o a r d i n i n d i v i d u a l i z e d s e t t i n g s . T o s u p p l e m e n t i n d i v i d u a l C o m m i s s i o n e r m e e t i n g s w i t h t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r , c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s a t t h e s m a l l g r o u p l e v e l w i l l a l s o b e p r o v i d e d t o C o m m i s s i o n e r s t h a t f o c u s o n t i m e l y i s s u e s . Department Goals Foster the Commission's full involvement and input in a broad range of local, regional, state, and federal government settings. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Participate in the SHCC; California Transit Association; Southern California Legislative Roundtable; League of Cities; Mobility 21; CAGTC; Southern California National Freight Gateway Collaboration; regional, state and federal transportation agencies; and community/business organizations to influence funding and policy decisions that impact Riverside County. • Maintain a leadership role in local and regional transportation venues related to project development efforts and current and emerging issues. • Provide leadership to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) to ensure that funding for air quality -related transportation improvements is fully distributed to Riverside County jurisdictions. • Work with SCAG, WRCOG, and CVAG to monitor and respond to transportation issues involving the implementation of SB375 on smart growth planning. • Continue regular meetings at the Executive Director/Chief Executive Officer level with transportation agencies throughout the region. • Conduct ongoing meetings and communication with transit providers in Riverside County, Implement the Commission's state and federal legislative program to, maximize flexibility in the use of existing transportation revenues by supporting legislation to protect and increase current funding levels, ensuring an equitable distribution of available resources, streamlining administrative procedures to reduce costs and time of project development, and accelerating the allocation and use of existing resources. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Coordinate legislative activities of federal and state legislative consultants and obtain monthly reports on activities performed. • Work with board members to establish policy positions, review and analyze legislation, visit with elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington, draft legislation, and maintain strong relationships with key decision -makers. • Provide regular updates to the Commission regarding state and federal government issues. • Effectively represent the Commission before the state and federal legislative bodies, the CTC, and other agencies in funding, programming, and policy matters. • Convene meetings with state, federal, and legislative staff members. Support the continuing education of Commissioners to increase their understanding of transportation -related issues at local, state, and federal levels to maximize the effectiveness of the Commission in affecting policy and funding actions. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Provide orientation training for new Commissioners. • Produce and distribute a monthly e-mail newsletter, On the Move, highlighting actions and activities of the Commission. • Provide periodic educational workshops or study sessions for Commissioners. Develop and maintain an information program which educates the public and other stakeholders on the roles and responsibilities of the Commission as it relates to accomplishments achieved through Measure A or other funding sources controlled or administered by the Commission. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Expand, maintain, and update information on the Commission's website including individual project websites and social media. • Annually produce a report that informs the public regarding Measure A progress and other Commission programs. • Issue news releases to the local media announcing significant achievements and providing information on Commission actions and activities. • Develop and maintain open lines of communication with news reporters to facilitate adequate and accurate news coverage. • Schedule periodic media information briefings or news conferences when a particular issue warrants it. • Expand the stock of video footage for use in production of cable television spots that feature transportation projects funded and/or implemented by the Commission. • Periodically use cable television and other forms of media such as internet sites and blogs, if appropriate, to communicate information to the public regarding the Commission's activities and services. • Coordinate and oversee message content of all Commission publications and communications to provide uniformity of message and direction. • Support the development and planning of projects in regard to public outreach and communication efforts. • Require the use of Measure A project/program signage by funding recipients to increase public awareness of Measure A accomplishments. • Continue to administer and expand the use of the Speakers Bureau to reach community members in service and other organizations. • Monitor and distribute media coverage from various outlets in the County and throughout the region to Commissioners and staff to enable them to closely follow transportation policy trends. • Provide oversight and coordination to Commission departments in the development of communications' materials. Foster and maintain effective communications with other agencies to heighten their understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Commission and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Assign designated staff members to attend other agency meetings and require staff to provide written/verbal communication on topics of discussion during regular staff meetings. Legislative Affairs and Communications Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Speakers bureau presentations 30 30 35 35 Legislative action submittals to Commission 9 9 9 9 Commissioner and state and federal legislator in -person meetings 55 55 45 50 Southern California legislative staff roundtables 9 9 8 8 Finance Mission Statement: "To safeguard the Commission's assets and maintain strong and prudent fiscal controls in investing, accounting, budgeting, procurements, and financial reporting including ongoing disclosure to all interested parties. Seek financing alternatives that complement the Commission's strategic direction." Chart 28 — Finance Salaries and Benefits 8% Pl.11111 Support Costs 7% Expenditures The Finance Department's total budget is $10,000,100 (Table 45) and reflects a 5% decrease over the prior year's budget. Department staffing costs will total $828,600, reflecting an increase of 1%. Professional costs of $3,520,500 include various services related to general and specialized legal, financial advisory, external and internal audits, debt management, CAFR and annual budget graphic design, and procurement. Support costs of $651,000 are 14% higher than the prior year's budget due to increased operations costs, including insurance and printing. A transfer out of $5,000,000 is related to funding a portion of the debt service interest payment from the 2009 Measure A Western County bond financing program. . Table 45 - Finance Expenditure Detail prim FY11/12 FY17/12 FY12/13 Della Parent Acted Revised Budget Projected Ductal Charge, Charge Salaries and Benefits $ 77$a0 $ 818533 $ 031300 $ 603 $ 7Ig1e0 1% Professional Costs Camissioner Per Clem Legal Services 34,730 A4.uitServiaes 401,E Hnaidal Adasay 1..1100 Prafessiael Services -General 4(81,5:0 Tod Professional Casts 448I5O Support Cc6ts 544,E Projects and Cperator s PrtgamCperations Endneerirg tea, Fight ofW3y Special Stucies - Cperalingand Capital Cisbuserrenls Tod Projects andCperadans - N/A Capital Cutlay 24XO 129,5Z0 4,000 (14531 -100 CebtService - N/A Trarisfers0.1 - 50:10:0 40371003 5033033 - CP/ TOTAL Rnance $ 50,100 $ 74474033 $ 153583:1 $ 21001103 $ (47Z933) N/A zom 3Ac o 231cco (34531 -13Y0 5(IVO) 44000 4E13003 (51CO3 -� 4850:0 8q0co 785yo 137,0:0 289% 113193) 1312011 Z€6%9D -14Y0 1SE6(CO 4M8C0 15211533 W4501 -11% 5E0,003 575700 E.MO ROOD 14''/o N/A N/A N/A _ wA N/A - N/A N/A Finance Staffing Summary Position FY.10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13' Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.86 0.90 0.75 Accounting Assistant 0.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Clerk 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Supervisor 1.00 1.00 0.99 Accounting Technician 1.97 1.95 2.00 Administrative Assistant 0.40 0.25 0.22 Chief Financial Officer 0.74 0.60 0.60 Executive Director 0.04 0.04 0.03 Procurement Administrator 0.02 0.05 0.04 Procurement Manager 0.09 0.05 0.00 Senior Office Assistant 0.04 0.05 0.04 Toll Program Director 0.02 0.00 0.00 FTE 6.18 6.89 6.67 Department Budget Overview Department Description Finance and Accounting Commission resources are allocated to assure financial stability and fiscal accountability. Finance activities include investing the Commission's cash resources, planning and directing financial transactions, and subsequent monitoring of legal and regulatory requirements. Adequate cash flow must be maintained while at the same time prudently investing idle funds. Borrowing needs are carefully planned using both short- and long-term debt. Once debt is issued, there are ongoing responsibilities including interaction with financial advisors, bankers, dealers and remarketing agents, underwriters, bond counsel, bond insurers, trustees, issuing and paying agents, arbitrage consultants, and rating agencies as well as providing regular and consistent information disclosure to investors. Fiscal accountability involves receiving all funds due the Commission, paying all Commission obligations, maintaining the general ledger, reporting regularly on the Commission's fiscal results, and preparing and monitoring the budget. Fiscal accountability requires the coordination of budget planning and monitoring and the accurate and timely accounting for all funding sources, including compliance with all applicable laws and regulations governing those funds. Accounting encompasses cash receipt and disbursement functions, maintenance of the general ledger including project cost accounting, payroll processing, quarterly and annual financial reporting, and retention of and coordination with independent auditors. The Commission also recognizes the importance of accountability for the organization. As a result, the Commission is highly regarded by individuals, peers, other organizations, and government officials at a local, regional, state, and national basis. A formal organizational accountability program was approved in January 2006 to address fraud risk, ethical conduct, financial and operational disclosure, and maintaining the public's confidence in the Commission. Accordingly, measures have been implemented based on a conceptual framework related to oversight, reporting, fraud, internal control, and ethics. Procurement Management In the management of the procurements and contracts process, the responsibility of the procurement management function is to ensure that the procurement policies approved by the Commission are followed and procurement procedures are updated as required. The function is responsible for the purchase of all goods and services, except for real property acquisition, in accordance with Commission policies and federal and state funding requirements to ensure the implementation of the Commission's projects and programs. This includes the administration of the Commission's disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) and small business enterprise (SBE) programs. Procuring goods and services for the Commission is a cooperative effort. All Commission staff involved in procurements for their projects and programs are responsible to employ sound judgment and appropriate standards of ethics and fairness to procure in a manner most advantageous to the Commission. The Procurement division also conducts a review of and updates insurance coverage for the Commission and its properties. Key Assumptions • The commercial paper program will continue as a short-term financing vehicle for the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan and Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial projects. • The sales tax revenue bond SBPAs and commercial paper program letter of credit facilities will be maintained with the current short-term ratings. • Proceeds from the sales tax revenue bonds will be used to fund 2009 Measure A capital projects. • The Commission will pay 100% of the annual required contribution related to postretirement health care benefits based on a new actuarial valuation. • Arbitrage calculations related to the outstanding debt issues will be performed by a consultant on an annual basis. • Directors and program .managers will continue to have adequate project budget and accounting information to make informed decisions. • Investments will be maintained primarily in state and local agency investment pools for short-term liquidity purposes; however, investments in mid-term treasury and federal agency securities may be made as available funds are identified and yields increase. The overall interest rate is conservatively projected to be .50%. • A revised, comprehensive procurement policies and procedures manual will be irwlemented. • A standardized procurement filing system will be developed and implemented and centralized procurement files will be maintained. • Procurement will conduct outreach activities to encourage DBE and SBE participation in various contracts. Accomplishments • Continued to institute new business processes in the finance department and provide customized reporting as a result of the implementation of Eden an ERP financial management system. • Conducted internal audit review of right of way activities. • Extended the term of the SBPAs with JPMorgan related to the 2009 Bonds through September 2014 at a reduced cost. • Substituted new letters of credit with Bank of Tokyo and Union Bank for the commercial paper program through October 2014 at a reduced cost. • Maintained Commission's AA rating related to sales tax revenue bonds. • Supported the continued development of a financing plan for the SR-91 corridor improvement project, including a presentation to Fitch Ratings for a preliminary rating assessment of a TIFIA loan. • Obtained financial reporting excellence award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) (19th year) related to the CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011. • Obtained GFOA distinguished budget award (16th year) for annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011. • Generated over $2 million in additional Measure A sales tax revenue since the engagement of a firm in January 2008 to provide sales tax audit services in order to detect and correct reporting errors. • Established project goals for the SR-91 corridor improvement and Perris Valley Line projects. • Implemented SBE program to encourage contractors to allow small business enterprise participation in contracts. • Participated in small business networking activities and met with potential DBE and SBE vendors. Major Initiatives Finance and Accounting The commercial paper program has been in place for over seven years and has provided short-term, advance funding for projects included in the 2009 Measure A and related Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. Commission management will .continue to consider appropriate uses of commercial paper to advance 2009 Measure A projects. The letters of credit supporting the commercial paper program expire in October 2014. In connection with the 2009 variable rate bonds, the Commission entered into SBPAs with JPMorgan, which were extended through September 2014. The Commission will monitor the credit quality of the banks providing these liquidity facilities for any actions which may affect the short-term ratings of the commercial paper program and 2009 Bonds. Staff continues to develop a comprehensive financing plan to support the highway and rail capital projects to be delivered through 2019 and to assess future financing requirements. This financing plan incorporates revised sales tax revenue forecasts as well as other potential federal, state, and local revenue sources, including tolls. Based on the updated cost estimates for these projects and identified revenues, potential project funding shortfalls may result in project deferrals or require alternative financing strategies. Financing alternatives to be considered include commercial paper, long-term bond issues to finance Measure A and toll projects, and federal loan programs. During FY 2012/13, the Finance Department and its finance consulting team will continue to support the TIFIA and toll revenue bond financing efforts for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Internal audit projects will continue to be developed as part of the organizational accountability program. An outcome of the projects will be operational solutions such as process improvements. The internal audit risk assessment and audit plan will continue to be updated periodically. To ensure that the Commission receives the proper of amount of Measure A sales taxes, the Commission will continue to engage a firm to conduct sales tax audit services. The firm will also provide quarterly sales tax analysis and reporting services, of which a summary report is presented to the Commission on a quarterly basis. The Finance Department will continue to keep abreast of GASB technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities. Various new standards will be considered for early implementation as part of the preparation of the CAFR for the year ended June 30, 2012. The Finance Department will continue the implementation of Eden, an ERP financial management software system that will integrate data processing across the Commission, automate administrative processes, and embrace data integration. The ERP implementation efficiency gains include an automated paperless workflow system, advanced project accounting, multi -year budgeting, multi -year contract management, grant tracking, and readily available scanned images that can be retrieved by all users. Procurement Management A centralized procurements process will continue to be implemented to manage requests for proposals, qualifications, invitations for bids, small purchases, and related contract administration issues. The Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual will be revised to reflect current best practices and applicable laws and regulations. Accordingly, the procurement system will strengthen controls to ensure consistency in the development and application of procurement policies and procedures and adherence to applicable laws and regulations, especially those related to federal and state grants. Procurement Management is responsible for developing, implementing, and monitoring DBE and SBE program requirements incoordination with contractors and other appropriate officials. Duties and responsibilities include establishing DBE attainment goals, monitoring reporting and utilization by contractors, gathering and reporting statistical data and other information as required, reviewing third party contracts and purchase requisitions for compliance with the program, ensuring that bid notices and requests for proposals are made available to DBEs and SBEs in a timely manner, reporting to and advising the Executive Director and Commission on DBE and SBE matters, and providing outreach to DBEs and SBEs to fully advise them of contracting opportunities. During FY 2012/13 the Commission will host and attend several outreach events in order to acquaint potential vendors with the Commission's procurement procedures and opportunities. Additionally it will implement an e-procurement solution for online vendor and procurement management. Staff also consults with the Commission's insurance broker in procuring competitive quotes, on an annual basis, for various insurance coverages secured by the Commission in order to provide cost effective solutions to meet its diverse insurance needs. Department Goals Protect the Commission's cash resources by regular monitoring of investment practices to ensure consistency with established investment policy. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Achieve a rate of return at least equal to the County of Riverside Treasury Pool rate. Manage the Commission's outstanding debt ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations and continued investor awareness and receptivity to the Commission's program. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide an annual update and review of the debt programs with one or more of the rating agencies no later than June 30, 2013. This will be accomplished by presenting the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing plan, including the investment grade traffic and revenue study, in order to obtain ratings for the sales tax revenue bonds, toll revenue bonds, and TIFIA loan. • Meet continuing disclosure requirements of the debt program. • Prepare arbitrage calculations as required. Ensure the Commission and funding recipients comply with Measure A and TDA laws and regulations as they relate to the annual financial and compliance audits as well as close cooperation and coordination with independent auditors. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Minimize the number of substantive management letter comments and compliance findings requiring corrective action by the Commission. • Maintain appropriate fiduciary review and monitoring procedures for Measure A recipient and TDA claimant audits. Maintain fiscal and budgetary control through monitoring of periodic results and ensuring consistency with the Commission's strategic direction. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Obtain the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the FY 2012/13 budget. • Facilitate a comprehensive budgeting approach that effectively involves management staff, requiring full accountability for all department expenditures. • Fund 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. Assure fiscal accountability for Commission funds with general ledger accounting and financial reporting consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Ensure proactive communication and timely responses to any noted errors, corrections, and budget transfers related to program management reviews of accounting and budget information. • Obtain an unqualified opinion on the basic financial statements. • Receive financial reporting excellence award from the GFOA related to the preparation and issuance of the CAFR. • Stay abreast of finance, accounting, and financial reporting developments by attending training and conferences in these general areas or in specialized areas applicable to job duties. • Update and maintain the fiscal policies and procedures manual. • Update and maintain complete accounting desk procedures manual for Eden implementation to facilitate cross training. • Assist local governments with Measure A funding by providing timely allocation of funds for eligible projects and financing opportunities to the extent funding does not impact other programs and is financially feasible and prudent. • Maintain financial software to reflect technical updates and current technology. Develop and maintain an organizational accountability program encompassing financial and operational functions. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Establish and implement measures related to oversight, fraud, internal control, and ethics. • Issue annual disclosure statements related to financial and operational responsibilities. • Develop an annual internal audit plan to include relevant internal audit projects and update business risk analysis at least on an annual basis. Procure goods and services from qualified consultants, contractors, and other vendors in accordance with laws and regulations at a competitive price. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Assist departments and programs to procure and obtain goods and services in a cost effective and efficient manner. • Ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with a comprehensive Procurement Policies Manual. • Ensure that agreements, amendments, and MOUs are entered into with appropriate legal considerations. • Process agreements, amendments, and MOUs in a timely and efficient manner. • Ensure that consistent procedures, processes, and tools are used for procurements. Review existing procurement policies and procedures. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Ensure that the procurement polices reflect Commission requirements and practices. • Segregate policies and procedures so that procedures can be easily updated without Commission approval. • Ensure that procurement policies and procedures reflect the requirements of the Commission's federal, state, and other funding sources. • Create an easy to read desktop quick procurement policies reference guide for use by Commission staff. • Maximize the value received for the Commission's expenditure of public funds. • Provide all vendors an equal opportunity to provide needed goods and/or services. Finance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual. FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 . Projected Sales tax revenue bond rating Aa1/AA+/AA Aal/AA+/AA Aal/AA+/AA Aa1/AA+/AA Commercial paper rating P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ GFOA Certificate of Achievement Awarded Awarded Awarded Awarded GFOA Distinguished Budget Award Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Invoices processed 5,700 5,620 4,100 4,900 Checks processed 3,700 3,731 3,100 3,400 Audit adjustments 0 0 0 0 Average yield on investments .50% .40% .50% .50% Payroll hours processed 87,000 82,646 72,700 77,700 Accounts receivable invoices processed 165 197 160 170 Agreements processed 250 235 180 200 River0de County Transportation Com mission Planning and Programming Mission Statement: "To exert leadership in transportation planning and the programming of funds to improve mobility, foster environmental stewardship, expedite project delivery, and form partnerships with regional, state, and federal agencies resulting in maximum return on local investment. Support a coordinated regional approach to solving transportation funding issues." Chart 29 - Planning and Programming Professional Costs 8% - Support Costs 1% Expenditures Planning and Programming expenditures of $4,522,600 have decreased 39% from last year's budget (Table 46). Salaries and benefits represent 18% of total expenditures. Professional services totaling $362,800 have increased 3% compared to the FY 2011/12 budget. Professional services include CMP implementation efforts, air quality analysis, project database management, local and regional planning activities, on -call goods movement consultants, and legal services. Projects and operations costs have decreased 47% due to a decrease in LTF disbursements of rail allocations related to grade separation projects in the cities of Riverside and Corona and the County. Table 46 - Planning and Programming Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services -General otal Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Construction Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements otal Projects and Operations ransfers Out FY 30/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar _ Percent Actual _ Revised Budget Projected Budget, _ Change _ _ Change $. 817,600 $ 833,003 $ 788,603 $ 835,800 $ 2,800 0% 8,400 5,700 88,400 102,500 9,800 14,000 500,000 390,300 2,730,400 3,634,700 490,030 5,742,500 6,247,500 9,200 21,500 329,500 351,0:0 18,800 15,000 200,000 610,000 2,850,600 2,689,700 3,050,600 3,299,700 188,80D 207,700 18,400 18,903 21,903 340,900 362,800 • 24,300 11,400 11,800 5,500 400 2% N/A 3% 3% 29% (15,0:0) -100% N/A 120,000 24% (3,052,800) -53% (2,947,800) -47% 9,200 -100% OTAL Plan= and Pro rammm $ 4,564,600 $ 7,459,503 $ 4,065,303 $ 4,522,600 $ 2,936,900 -39% Planning and Programming Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12' FY 12/13. Administrative Assistant 0.40 0.39 0.45 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.02 0.02 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.00 0.01 0.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.13 0.15 0.13 Executive Director 0.36 0.36 0.36 Goods Movement Manager 1.00 0.70 0.70 Planning and Programming Manager 0.96 0.95 0.95 Procurement Administrator 0.01 0.00 0.02 Procurement Manager 0.04 0.01 0.00 Project Development Director 0.17 0.13 0.06 Senior Staff Analyst 1.00 1.00 0.97. Staff Analyst 1.09 1.08 1.09 FTE 5.17 4.80 4.75 Department Budget Overview Department Description The Commission is responsible for short- and long-range transportation planning and programming. Short-range planning and programming involves the development of the five-year STIP and preparation of the five-year FTIP for Riverside County. These programming documents identify projects and their respective funding and schedules. The Commission's involvement with long-range planning efforts includes the coordination and input into planning efforts throughout the County and southern California region. These efforts involve participation in local, bi- county, and regional corridor studies, including the continued development of the CETAP corridors. Regional planning efforts are incorporated in the RTP (a 30-year transportation plan) developed by SCAG in conjunction with county transportation commissions, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, transit operators, and other interested parties. The Commission is responsible for approving projects for Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds in Western County and coordinating with Caltrans on the selection of Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds as part of the STIP approved by the CTC every two years. The Commission has delegated the authority to nominate projects for RIP funds in the Coachella Valley to CVAG. A MOU between the city of Blythe, representing Palo Verde Valley, and the Commission allows the city to trade RIP funds for local Measure A funds. In November 2006, Proposition 1B was approved by the voters of California, which provided $20 billion in transportation infrastructure funding. Various program categories were established including a $2 billion infusion into the STIP. Other competitive program categories included CMIA and TCIF; Riverside County was successful in receiving CMIA funding for the SR-91 HOV and 1-215 widening projects as well as TCIF funding for 12 grade separation projects and a ground access improvement project at the I-215/Van Buren interchange, which is currently beginning construction. The Commission is a member of the Southern California Consensus Group that developed and submitted project proposals for the TCIF program. As with the RIP and IIP funds, Proposition 1B funds are administered and allocated by the CTC. Given the current economic conditions, Proposition 1B funds have been the most reliable state funding source for transportation projects. Proposition 1B CMIA allocations are legislatively set to expire by the end of 2012; TCIF funds will expire on December 31, 2013, per CTC policy. State Local Partnership Program (SLPP) funding is another program authorized by Proposition 1B. A formula program has been established for transportation agencies that administer self-help transportation sales tax programs. SLPP funds must be programmed for construction and matched by the sales tax on a 50-50 basis. Projects nominated by the Commission for SLPP funding must request fund allocations from the CTC by June 2013. Programming specifically involves the development, review, and approval of projects for various funding programs. Additionally programming involves the monitoring of projects from project selection through construction close- out. In order to receive federal funds and approvals, all projects funded with federal and state dollars, or local projects that are regionally significant, must be included in the FTIP. SCAG is responsible for incorporating all six - county (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura) transportation improvement programs into one regional programming document and conducting a conformity analysis with the adopted air plans to ensure compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This FTIP update effort is performed every 18 to 24 months. Multiple amendments occur within the 18 to 24 month FTIP update cycle for minor project changes that do not affect the conformity analysis. The Commission is responsible for allocating the following local, state, and federal funding sources: Local Sources: • 1989 and 2009 Measure A • Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Program State Sources: • SB821 bicycle and pedestrian projects • RIP • Proposition 1B Federal Sources: • Congressional discretionary programs, such as ARRA • Transportation Enhancements (TE) • STP • CMAQ The Commission also serves as the CMA for the County and is responsible for developing and updating the CMP. The CMP was developed to meet state legislation and federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements, which includes an enhanced traffic monitoring system. The CMP's highways and regional arterials are regularly monitored to ensure that they are not operating at deficient levels [Level of Service (LOS) "F"]. If a deficiency occurs along the CMP system, a deficiency plan must be prepared that identifies mitigation measures and/or projects that will improve the LOS to "E" or higher. Partnership development, public and private, is critical to the Commission's continued success in affecting positive transportation decisions to meet future demands. Commission staff works in close coordination with its partners to advocate for federal, state, and local funding to improve mobility and mitigate the impacts of goods movement. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its efforts in working with transportation partners to streamline and improve project delivery. • Consultant contracts are maintained to provide assistance with the CMP, TUMF, air quality analysis, project database monitoring, and other related planning activities. • The Commission will utilize all available funding sources on transportation projects identified in the 1989 Measure A and the 2009 Measure A as well as other regional high priority projects, including TUMF regional arterial projects. • The Commission will continue participation in local, bi-county, and regional planning efforts representing the interests of the County. • The Commission will work with the CTC, Caltrans, and local project sponsors to implement projects funded with STIP-RIP, CMIA, and TCIF to ensure that the programming and timing of allocations are consistent with project schedules. • The Commission will continue to manage and host the project management database to improve efficiencies in monitoring projects and funding and in reporting to state and federal agencies. " T h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l c o n t i n u e t o a s s i s t l o c a l p r o j e c t s p o n s o r s w i t h t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l f u n d i n g a p p r o v a l s / o b l i g a t i o n s a n d o v e r a l l p r o j e c t d e l i v e r y . A c c o m p l i s h m e n t s " P r o c e s s e d 1 1 S T I P a l l o c a t i o n / e x t e n s i o n / a m e n d m e n t r e q u e s t s t o t h e C T C . " C o m p l e t e d t h e t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s a n d p r e p a r e d t h e d r a f t r e c i r c u l a t e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l d o c u m e n t a n d p r o j e c t r e p o r t f o r t h e m o d i f i e d M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y p r o j e c t . " C o m p l e t e d f o u r l o c a l a g e n c y a g r e e m e n t s a n d / o r a m e n d m e n t s f o r t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f T U M F r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l p r o j e c t s . " P r o c e s s e d o v e r 2 8 7 p r o j e c t a m e n d m e n t s i n t o t h e 2 0 1 1 F T I P . " P r e p a r e d a n d s u b m i t t e d t o S C A G t h e 2 0 1 3 F T I P f o r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y c o n s i s t i n g o f 3 4 8 p r o j e c t s . " C o o r d i n a t e d w i t h C a l t r a n s a n d p r o j e c t s p o n s o r s r e g a r d i n g t h e o b l i g a t i o n o f f e d e r a l a n d s t a t e f u n d i n g , m e t o b l i g a t i o n d e a d l i n e s , a n d p r e v e n t e d l o s s o f f u n d i n g t o R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . " M o n i t o r e d f e d e r a l f u n d i n g e x p e n d i t u r e s o f i n a c t i v e p r o j e c t s t o e n s u r e f u n d s a r e n o t d e o b l i g a t e d . " A d v i s e d l o c a l a g e n c i e s a n d c o o r d i n a t e d t h e u s e o f t o l l c r e d i t s a n d l o c a l m a t c h w a i v e r f o r C M A Q p r o j e c t s , w h i c h s a v e d t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d l o c a l a g e n c i e s u p t o $ 1 0 m i l l i o n i n l o c a l m a t c h f u n d s f o r f e d e r a l f u n d s ( S T P , C M A Q , a n d f e d e r a l e a r m a r k s ) . " R e v i e w e d a n d a p p r o v e d 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A m a i n t e n a n c e o f e f f o r t ( M O E ) b a s e y e a r l e v e l s f o r e a c h c i t y . " P r e p a r e d t h e 2 0 1 1 C M P U p d a t e f o r C o m m i s s i o n a d o p t i o n i n D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 1 . " U p d a t e d p r o j e c t l i s t f o r 2 0 1 2 R T P a n d p a r t i c i p a t e d i n S C A G ' s 2 0 1 2 R T P d e v e l o p m e n t , i n c l u d i n g s u b m i t t a l o f c o m m e n t s o n t h e d r a f t R T P . " C o m p l e t e d a r e c o n c i l i a t i o n e f f o r t t o e n s u r e a p p r o p r i a t e a c c o u n t i n g a n d p a y b a c k o f C o m m i s s i o n l o a n s t o C a l t r a n s . " M o n i t o r e d p o r t e x p a n s i o n p r o j e c t s f o r e a c h o f t h e P o r t s . " M o n i t o r e d T C I F p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t t o e n s u r e t i m e l y c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e 1 2 g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n s a n d a g r o u n d a c c e s s i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t t o i m p r o v e t h e I - 2 1 5 / V a n B u r e n i n t e r c h a n g e a s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e $ 1 6 2 . 7 m i l l i o n P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B T C I F f u n d s . O n e p r o j e c t ( C o l u m b i a A v e n u e i n R i v e r s i d e ) w a s c o m p l e t e d i n M a r c h 2 0 1 0 ; a n a d d i t i o n a l p r o j e c t ( M a g n o l i a A v e n u e i n R i v e r s i d e ) w a s c o m p l e t e d i n J a n u a r y 2 0 1 2 . T w o a d d i t i o n a l p r o j e c t s , A u t o C e n t e r D r i v e a n d I o w a A v e n u e , a r e p r o j e c t e d t o s t a r t c o n s t r u c t i o n b y J u n e 2 0 1 2 . T h e r e m a i n i n g s e v e n T C I F p r o j e c t s w i l l s t a r t c o n s t r u c t i o n n o l a t e r t h a n A u g u s t 2 0 1 3 . " S e l e c t e d f o u r c o n s u l t a n t s f o l l o w i n g a p r o c u r e m e n t f o r o n - c a l l g o o d s m o v e m e n t c o n s u l t a n t s e r v i c e s . " D e v e l o p e d t h e 2 0 1 2 G r a d e S e p a r a t i o n P r i o r i t y U p d a t e S t u d y f o r A l a m e d a C o r r i d o r E a s t p r o j e c t s . " C o n t i n u e d t o t a k e a l e a d e r s h i p r o l e a n d w o r k t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e f i v e - c o u n t y c o n s e n s u s w o r k i n g g r o u p , M o b i l i t y 2 1 , a n d S C A G ' s S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a N a t i o n a l F r e i g h t G a t e w a y C o l l a b o r a t i o n o n g o o d s m o v e m e n t i s s u e s . M a j o r I n i t i a t i v e s E a c h c o u n t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o m m i s s i o n t h r o u g h o u t t h e S t a t e i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o g r a m m i n g R I P f u n d s , w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s 7 5 % o f t h e t o t a l S T I P f u n d i n g a v a i l a b l e s t a t e w i d e f o r c a p i t a l e n h a n c e m e n t p r o j e c t s . T h e 7 5 % f u n d i n g l e v e l i s t h e n f u r t h e r d i s t r i b u t e d w i t h 6 0 % o f t h e f u n d s a l l o c a t e d t o S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a a n d 4 0 % t o N o r t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . A p o p u l a t i o n f o r m u l a i s t h e n a p p l i e d t o d e t e r m i n e c o u n t y f u n d i n g l e v e l s c a l l e d " c o u n t y s h a r e s . " T h e C o m m i s s i o n i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e n s u r i n g t h a t p r o j e c t s f u n d e d w i t h S T I P f u n d i n g a r e a d m i n i s t e r e d a n d i m p l e m e n t e d c o n s i s t e n t w i t h C T C a n d C a l t r a n s p o l i c i e s . I t i s t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p o l i c y t o s e t a s i d e 2 % o f f t h e t o p f o r s t a f f s u p p o r t t o c a r r y o u t S T I P P P M a c t i v i t i e s . T h e r e m a i n i n g R I P f u n d s a r e f u r t h e r d i s t r i b u t e d g e o g r a p h i c a l l y a m o n g W e s t e r n C o u n t y , C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y , a n d P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y p e r t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s i n t r a - c o u n t y S T I P f o r m u l a . T h e C o m m i s s i o n a l s o m a y c o n s i d e r a c a l l f o r p r o j e c t s f o r R I P d i s c r e t i o n a r y f u n d s . F e d e r a l T E f u n d s a r e a l s o a d m i n i s t e r e d t h r o u g h t h e S T I P . T E f u n d s a r e n o t s u b j e c t t o g e n e r a l f u n d d i v e r s i o n s ; h o w e v e r , T E f u n d s a r e a u t h o r i z e d e a c h y e a r b y t h e p a s s a g e o f t h e s t a t e b u d g e t . D r a f t f e d e r a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n b i l l s h a v e i n d i c a t e d t h a t T E f u n d s m a y b e d i s t r i b u t e d a n d / o r a d m i n i s t e r e d i n a d i f f e r e n t m a n n e r . S t a f f i s c l o s e l y m o n i t o r i n g t h e s e p r o p o s a l s . C M I A a n d T C I F f u n d s a r e m o n i t o r e d b y C a l t r a n s a n d t h e C T C . B a s e l i n e a g r e e m e n t s a r e d e v e l o p e d f o r e a c h p r o j e c t u n d e r t h e s e p r o g r a m s . A n y c h a n g e s t o p r o j e c t f u n d i n g , s c o p e , o r s c h e d u l e w i l l r e q u i r e a n a m e n d m e n t t o t h e b a s e l i n e a g r e e m e n t . T h e C T C a l l o c a t e s t h e C M I A a n d T C I F f u n d s , a n d t h e p r o c e s s f o r a l l o c a t i n g t h e f u n d s i s s i m i l a r t o t h e p r o c e s s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r S T I P f u n d s . TUMF funds are collected and administered by WRCOG. Approximately half of the TUMF funds collected are set aside for WRCOG's zone projects and regional transit facilities. After the deduction of an administrative fee, WRCOG provides the other half of the TUMF revenues to the Commission. These funds are further distributed to the Commission's TUMF CETAP Corridors and Regional Arterial Programs. In September 2004 the Commission established a 5-year program and approved the programming of 24 regional arterial projects. To date, $79 million of TUMF regional arterial funds has been programmed. Four projects have completed construction, two projects are currently under construction, and three projects are fully funded and will start construction in the next 3 to 4 months. Based on current schedules four additional projects will be ready to go to construction in FY 2012/13. Planning and Programming also manages the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Program. The expenditures for these regional arterial capital projects are included in the Capital Projects Department budget. Transportation Planning The Commission's role in planning throughout the year will involve working with SCAG, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, and the other county transportation commissions in the region on various planning efforts relative to the implementation of the 2012 RTP/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), corridor studies, goods movement studies, and efforts to update transportation computer models and project databases. In FY 2012/13 the Commission will continue its work efforts on the intracounty CETAP corridors. An updated environmental document and project report has been prepared for the Mid County Parkway to address changes made to the project limits, which are now between SR-79 and 1-215. It is expected that the draft document will be ready for public review and comment in summer 2012. Work on a portion of the north -south CETAP corridor is underway with the Commission's 1-215 south widening project and improvements to the French Valley Parkway interchange being led by the city of Temecula. Given funding constraints, work on the two intercounty CETAP corridors by the Commission is not expected in this fiscal year. The FY 2012/13 CMP effort will involve monitoring the CMP system and reviewing any new state and federal requirements. Transportation Programming As mentioned above, the Commission is responsible for allocating various state and federal funds. The funds are monitored to ensure that regulations are adhered to in order to prevent funds from lapsing. The following summarizes the status of these funding programs: Local Fundina Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Program Project monitoring of TUMF regional arterial projects by Planning and Programming staff will occur according to the agreements between local agencies and the Commission. In addition, Commission staff will work with local agencies regarding amendments to agreements and any issues regarding project delivery. To date, 23 project agreements have been executed totaling approximately $79 million of TUMF Regional Arterial funds. During FY 2012/13, a total of $39.6 million is anticipated to be reimbursed to local agencies using TUMF regional arterial funding. These project expenditures are included in the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Program A call for projects was initiated in a previous year for the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial program. Due to the economic downturn and limited funds available, the selection of projects was postponed. As fund amounts increase, this funding source will be reviewed for qualifying projects on a case by case basis. The Foothill Parkway project in the city of Corona is a project that will be presented to the Commission for approval of $7,000,000 of these funds and is included in the FY 2012/13 budget. 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads In order to receive Measure A local streets and roads funding, each year local jurisdictions are required to submit their 5-year capital improvement plans (CIPs) based on Measure A revenue projections. Additionally the local jurisdictions are required to submit an MOE certification consistent with adopted MOE guidelines and participate in the MSHCP and in the local agency's respective TUMF program, as applicable. Amendments to CIPs are processed administratively for minor changes that do not affect the total programmed amount or are within budget levels. Significant changes require Commission approval. State Funding STIP- RIP/IIP STIP funding continues to be unstable with a minimal amount of programming capacity resulting from the last two STIP cycles. Proposition 1B has provided funding for STIP projects and other bond program categories such as CMIA, TCIF, and SLPP. However, the State's declining revenues and budget impasses have limited the frequency and timing of bond issuances. The economic downturn has created an advantage for construction projects with a low bid environment. Cost savings for STIP and Proposition 1B projects have resulted in additional programming capacity, and the Commission will be prepared to apply for these additional funds. This year Commission staff will continue to deliver projects programmed in the 2012 STIP and work with local agencies to ensure that bond funds are allocated by the respective deadlines. 58821 Annually, the Commission releases a call for bicycle and pedestrian projects in April. These projects are funded by 2% of LTF revenues, as required by SB821. The Commission establishes an evaluation committee to rank eligible projects that meet the established criteria. Project recommendations are approved by the Commission in June of each year. The Commission approved eight projects in the amount of $1.09 million for FY 2011/12. The FY 2012/13 call for projects will have new funding of approximately $1.16 million available for award. These expenditures are included in the LTF special revenue fund, which is reflected in the Transit Department since this fund's activities relate primarily to transit funding. Federal Funding CMAQ STP, and TE The Commission is responsible for allocating CMAQ, STP, and TE funds to transportation projects. In 2003, the Commission directed staff to program SAFETEA-LU funds (CMAQ and STP) to projects that were impacted by the state budget crisis and/or the rise in construction material costs with the exception of the CMAQ funding that is apportioned to the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). The Commission delegates the selection of projects for CMAQ funds apportioned to the SSAB to CVAG. In 2007, the Commission approved 25% of future CMAQ and STP funds for grade separation projects approved in the Proposition 1B TCIF program. With the decline in State revenues over the past few years, the Commission has focused funds toward high priority regional projects that are ready for construction. Once Congress approves a new transportation bill, staff will present the Commission with a plan for programming these funds including funding options for the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan projects. TE funds are administered and programmed in the STIP by the CTC. Although TE funds are federal, state budget authority must be granted in order for the funds to be allocated by the CTC. If the state budget approval is delayed, the TE funds cannot be allocated until the state budget is passed. In 2005, the Commission approved 18 projects totaling $17.6 million. To date, 14 projects have been delivered, and the remaining four projects will be allocated between FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13. In FY 2011/12 the Commission partnered with Caltrans and wildlife agencies on a transportation enhancement project in the Santa Ana Canyon. The Commission approved use of regional TE funds for the improvement of the B Canyon .wildlife corridor, which is widely used by small to mid -sized mammals between the Cleveland National Forest, Santa Ana River, and the Puente -Chino Hills. Funding from the partner agencies is still being secured. Construction will be coordinated with construction of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. . Project Monitoring The high demand for reporting and monitoring the progress of projects is essential to prevent funds from lapsing. The programming project database, Fundtrack, allows for efficient monitoring of project schedules and funding. Local agencies have been provided access to project information as well as the capability to update their respective project information in a timely manner. The Programming Department provides assistance to the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department and local agencies by participating in regular project delivery team meetings and preparing and submitting requests for authorization (RFA)/allocation of federal and state funding. In addition, Programming monitors allocation and award deadlines, expenditures, and project closeouts of federal and state funded projects to prevent loss of funds. Regional Issues The Commission's work effort will remain focused on facilitating ongoing commitments as well as being responsive to various emerging issues. These include bi-county issues with the counties of San Bernardino, Orange, Imperial, and San Diego as well as goods movement. The Commission will continue working with partners from the Southern California Consensus Group. (Ports, Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority, SANBAG, OCTA, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Ventura County Transportation Commission, SCAG, and SCRRA) regarding goods movement issues. A priority will be to coordinate with legislative staff and advocacy groups such as Mobility 21 and CAGTC to secure funding through the federal transportation bill for goods movement -related needs such as the funding of Alameda Corridor East grade separations in Riverside County and/or the creation of a federal freight trust fund, or similar program with a dedicated and firewalled revenue structure, in order to treat the nation's multimodal national goods movement network as a system rather than individual projects. The Commission will continue to monitor the Ports' projects for possible impacts on Riverside County by reviewing agendas and requesting notices for projects under CEQA and the Brown Act. Department Goals Build upon relationships with local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate short- and long-range planning to ensure that transportation projects receive funding and approvals. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Work with CVAG, WRCOG, Ca!trans, transit operators, local agencies, and SCAG to coordinate project amendments to the 2012 RTP. • Provide the Commissioners information to assist in advocating Commission projects. • Continue CETAP intracounty corridor work. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP. • Maintain maximum flexibility in project selection in the next transportation bill to serve the diverse needs of Riverside County. Continue to seek a stronger role for county transportation commissions in state and regional transportation and air quality programs in order to direct funding for programs and projects that will improve air quality and mobility in Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Support efforts to seek additional funding at the local, state, and federal levels for projects that improve air quality. • Support ongoing efforts to regulate federal emission sources. • Support efforts that allow more flexibility in funding transit operating and capital costs. Continue implementation of the CMP in cooperation with SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, Caltrans, and local agencies and maintain federal certification for the CMP. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Implement the CMP to meet federal CMS requirements cited under the metropolitan planning organization (i.e., SCAG) planning regulations. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to SCAG and Caltrans for reporting on the Highway Performance Monitoring System. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to local agencies and other interested parties. • Continue monitoring the CMP system to ensure the minimum adopted level of service threshold is met. Continue working with Caltrans to monitor traffic conditions for the purpose of focusing transportation funds on congested corridors and system deficiencies. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Review Caltrans' Performance Monitoring System count data to infill segments that currently do not have Smart Call Boxes or loop detectors to monitor traffic. • Identify congested corridors for potential funding opportunities. Continue to advocate for jobs/housing balance and attracting high income jobs to Riverside County in addition to addressing intercounty congestion. (Policy Goal: Economic Development) Objectives: • Participate in ongoing studies and activities regarding the jobs/housing imbalance between Orange and Riverside counties and San Diego and Riverside counties. • Support the County interests pertaining to transportation planning as population, job, and housing forecasts are developed by SCAG and the State. Maintain Fundtrack project database to allow for efficient monitoring of projects and funding with the ability to share project information with local jurisdictions. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Maintain consultant contract to manage and host the Commission's web -based project management database. • Work with SCAG and other county transportation commissions to refine and maintain the SCAG regional database, including the coordination of the Commission's database with SCAG's FTIP database. • Coordinate with Caltrans to assure database compatibility and promote information sharing including timely reporting of fund obligation information. Ensure maximum funding and flexibility for projects funded with STIP-RIP, Proposition 1B, SAFETEA- LU, and future federal reauthorization funds. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Participate in statewide efforts to implement projects and fully utilize all available funds from Proposition 1B funding programs. • Work with Caltrans and the CTC to meet the intent of the CMIA and TCIF programs related to implementing projects within the timeframes specified in the baseline project agreements. • Advocate that regions which program local and federal funds to replace state funding due to the state budget shortfall (or limited allocation capacity) be given high priority for repayment when funds are available, or in future programming in the next STIP programming cycle. • Participate in various forums regarding authorization of the federal transportation bill to increase funding levels, streamline programming processes, and provide flexibility in obligating funds. • Support efforts advocating the continuation and protection of state transportation funding and the payback of loans taken from state transportation accounts. • Advocate that RIP county share reserves receive priority programming over counties that advance shares. • Continue to strategically program and fund projects in an effort to obligate and/or allocate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding. • Participate in Southern California Programming Roundtable meetings to ensure that 100% of federal obligation authority (OA) for CMAQ and STP funding is obligated within the SCAG region. • Continue to monitor project implementation through the use of milestone reporting on a quarterly basis to maintain maximum funding levels for projects and prevent loss of funds to Riverside County. Provide support to the Commission's Capital Project Development and Delivery and Finance departments to maintain project funding and schedules and minimize programming issues. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide input to the budget development process. • Attend regular meetings with the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. • Serve in an oversight role regarding project invoicing and close-outs. • Prepare project agreement summaries. • Coordinate project RFA/OA packages. • Monitor progress of project milestones and RFAs as they are processed through Caltrans Headquarters and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). • Prepare CTC allocation requests, extensions, and amendments for STIP and Proposition 1B funded projects. Provide assistance to local agencies to facilitate and streamline project delivery. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Communications) Objectives: • Continue coordination of TAC meetings. • Provide information regarding project programming data, including funding status, to project sponsors on a quarterly basis. • Provide local agencies with recommendations on project programming to minimize unnecessary requirements and delays. • Upon request, attend local agency project delivery team meetings to provide advice on programming issues. • Meet regularly with Caltrans local assistance staff to monitor project submittals and resolve project implementation and obligation issues. • Assist local agencies in preparing RFAs, STIP submittals, and inactive reporting justifications. Continue to work with state and federal agencies to streamline processes for funding and project approvals. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Communications) Objectives: • Maintain relationships with key staff at regional, state and federal agencies. " P a r t i c i p a t e i n S C A G ' s N a t i o n a l F r e i g h t G a t e w a y C o l l a b o r a t i o n t o d e f i n e a s y s t e m t h a t m e e t s t h e r e g i o n ' s l o n g - t e r m m o b i l i t y , s a f e t y , e n v i r o n m e n t a l , a n d e n e r g y n e e d s i n c l u d i n g d e v e l o p i n g a b r a n d s p e c i f i c t o g o o d s m o v e m e n t p r o j e c t s i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . " I d e n t i f y p r o b l e m a t i c a r e a s w i t h p r o j e c t d e l i v e r y a n d / o r p r o g r a m m i n g a n d w o r k w i t h f e d e r a l l o b b y i s t s t o d e v e l o p s o l u t i o n s f o r s t r e a m l i n i n g a n d c l a r i f y i n g p r o c e s s e s f o r t h e n e x t f e d e r a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n b i l l . " P a r t i c i p a t e i n r e g i o n a l , s t a t e , a n d f e d e r a l f o r u m s a d d r e s s i n g i s s u e s r e l a t e d t o p r o j e c t p r o g r a m m i n g , i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , a n d a i r q u a l i t y c o n f o r m i t y . F a c i l i t a t e d e v e l o p m e n t o f r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s o l u t i o n s t h a t b e n e f i t R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y , i n c l u d i n g i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B T C I F p r o j e c t s a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s G r a d e S e p a r a t i o n P l a n . ( P o l i c y G o a l s : G o o d s M o v e m e n t , I n t e r m o d a l i s m & A c c e s s i b i l i t y ) O b j e c t i v e s : " M o n i t o r p r o g r e s s m a d e i n c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e T C I F - f u n d e d p r o j e c t s t h r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h s t a f f f r o m p a r t n e r a g e n c i e s i n c l u d i n g C a [ t r a n s ; c i t i e s o f B a n n i n g , C o a c h e l l a , C o r o n a , a n d R i v e r s i d e ; a n d t h e C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e . T i m e l y c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e T C I F p r o j e c t s i s r e q u i r e d t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e r e g i o n ' s a b i l i t y t o d e l i v e r p r o j e c t s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e C T C ' s d i r e c t i o n w h e n t h e P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B f u n d i n g w a s a l l o c a t e d . " D e v e l o p a 2 0 1 2 G r a d e S e p a r a t i o n F u n d i n g S t r a t e g y , d u e t o t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f s e v e r a l g r a d e s e p a r a t i o n p r o j e c t s t o h e l p s e c u r e n e w s o u r c e s o f r e v e n u e f o r f u n d i n g s h o r t f a l l s . A D e t e r m i n e w h e r e f u t u r e e f f o r t s r e g a r d i n g a d d r e s s i n g R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y g o o d s m o v e m e n t i s s u e s w o u l d p r o v e m o s t e f f e c t i v e . ( P o l i c y G o a l : G o o d s M o v e m e n t ) O b j e c t i v e s : " I d e n t i f y d r i v e r s o f d e m a n d f o r g o o d s m o v e m e n t s e r v i c e s a n d p e r f o r m a n c e o f m o d a l s y s t e m s a n d s e r v i c e s a s w e l l a s p u b l i c b e n e f i t s , s p e c i f i c a r e a s o f i n e f f i c i e n c y , a n d t h e i m p a c t s o f g o o d s m o v e m e n t o n c o m m u n i t i e s . " I m p l e m e n t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 2 0 1 2 G r a d e S e p a r a t i o n F u n d i n g S t r a t e g y t h r o u g h c o o r d i n a t i o n o f a d v o c a c y e f f o r t s w i t h L e g i s l a t i v e A f f a i r s a n d C o m m u n i c a t i o n s . F a c i l i t a t e p u b l i c a n d p r i v a t e i n v e s t m e n t s i n c l e a n a i r t e c h n o l o g y i n s u p p o r t o f t h e b r o a d e r a i r q u a l i t y p r o g r a m s f o r S C A G , S C A Q M D , a n d R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y l o c a l e n t i t i e s . ( P o l i c y G o a l : E n v i r o n m e n t a l S t e w a r d s h i p ) O b j e c t i v e s : " M o n i t o r t h e i m p a c t o f A B 3 2 ( g r e e n h o u s e g a s e m i s s i o n r e d u c t i o n ) a p p l i c a t i o n t o C o m m i s s i o n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o j e c t s . " M o n i t o r t h e i m p a c t o f S B 3 7 5 ( g r e e n h o u s e g a s e m i s s i o n r e d u c t i o n ) f r o m l i g h t t r u c k s a n d a u t o m o b i l e s t h r o u g h t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e 2 0 1 2 R T P / S C S . " A c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e o n t h e M S R C ' s T A C t o e n s u r e e q u i t a b l e f u n d i n g i s a v a i l a b l e i n s u p p o r t o f c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s w i t h i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . P l a n n i n g a n d P r o g r a m m i n g P e r f o r m a n c e / W o r k l o a d I n d i c a t o r s F Y 1 0 / 1 1 E s t i m a t e d F Y 1 0 / 1 1 A c t u a l F Y 1 1 / 1 2 E s t i m a t e d F Y 1 2 / 1 3 P r o j e c t e d F e d e r a l p r o j e c t s m o n i t o r e d f o r o b l i g a t i o n a u t h o r i t y d e l i v e r y 3 5 5 9 6 1 6 5 T U M F R e g i o n a l A r t e r i a l p r o j e c t s m o n i t o r e d 2 4 1 5 1 5 1 3 T U M F a g r e e m e n t s / a m e n d m e n t s 4 5 5 2 F T I P a m e n d e d p r o j e c t s 1 8 0 2 2 6 2 8 7 3 6 1 S T I P / P r o p 1 B a l l o c a t i o n s , a m e n d m e n t s , a n d e x t e n s i o n s f o r : C o m m i s s i o n p r o j e c t s 6 9 1 7 L o c a l a g e n c y p r o j e c t s 9 6 1 0 1 2 Rail Mission Statement: "To develop and support passenger rail transportation options for increased mobility within Riverside County and the region." Chart 30 — Rail Salaries and Capital Outlay Benefits 1% 3% Expenditures Professional Costs 3% Support Costs 12% Rail expenditures of $14,553,300 include Metrolink operations and capital support as well as maintenance and operations of the five Commission -owned and operated commuter rail stations and the Perris Transit Center (Table 47). Professional costs, which include legal and consultant services, have increased 33% due to on -call rail consultants. Support costs, which reflect an increase of 8%, include station maintenance, media ads, printing services, and marketing incentives. Station maintenance includes property management, utilities, grounds maintenance, repairs, cleaning, and security services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations, adjacent parking structures, and the Perris Transit Center. The increase in support costs is primarily related to station repairs and rehabilitation. Certain rehabilitation costs were included in Capital Projects Development and Delivery in prior years. Projects and operations costs reflect an overall decrease of 38% and include an operating contribution of up to $10,000,000 to SCRRA for Metrolink operations, which includes new service and $250,000 to connect transit to RTA and Corona Cruiser buses. The Commission's commuter rail program intends to utilize existing mechanisms within Metrolink to assess and monitor operations and budget performance. Program operations relate primarily to station operations. Table 47 — Rail Expenditure Detail FY10/11 FY11/12 FY11/12 FY12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 491,500 $ 494,300 $ 429,300 $ 496,700 $ 2,400 0% Professional Costs Legal Services 91,603 118,000 118,020 123,003 5,000 4% Professional Services - General 36,500 199,000 60,100 298,000 99,000 50% Total Professional Costs 128,100 317,000 178,103 421,020 104,000 33% Support Costs 1,209,200 1,640,700 1,640,030 1,775,100 134,400 8% Projects and Operations Program Operations 1,511,000 1,450,900 1,405,800 1,394,203 (56,100) -4% Spedal Studies 12,500 200,000 150,003 (50,000) -25% Operating and Capital Disbursements 9,498,100 17,335,030 17,335,000 10,250,003 (7,085,000) -41% Total Projects and Operations 11,021,600 18,985,900 18,740,800 11,794,803 (7,1.91,10D) -38% Ca.italOutla 15,300 60,700 24,703 E5,700 5,003 8% TOTAL Rail Mai ntenance and 0 rations 12,865,700 $ 21,498,600 $ 21,012,930 $ 14,553,300 $ 6,945,300 -32% Rail Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.02 0.00 0.00 Administrative Assistant 0.09 0.07 0.12 Capital Projects Manager 0.00 0.00 0.40 Chief Financial Officer 0.03 0.02 0.04 Community Relations Manager 0.01 0.00 0.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.00 0.03 0.00 Multimodal Services Director 0.27 0.15 0.27 Procurement Administrator 0.76 0.85 0.30 Procurement Manager 0.61 0.56 0.12 Project Delivery Director 0.00 0.00 0.01 Rail Manager 1.00 0.90 1.00 Senior Office Assistant 0.02 0.02 0.01 Staff Analyst 1.01 0.80 1.04 FTE 3.82 3.40 3.31 Department Budget Overview -Rail Operations Department Description The Commission has directed efforts in the areas of regional commuter rail, intercity passenger rail, high speed rail, and capital improvements to support enhanced passenger and freight rail service. The entire program includes elements of planning, programming, commuter rail development and support, station and corridor management, mitigation of community and environmental impacts, legislative and regulatory advocacy, and construction of capital projects. Many elements are managed or supported by other Commission departments, legal counsel, and consultants. Departmental efforts contributing to the rail program are found throughout the budget document. Coordination and consultation also occur with a variety of public and private entities including the CTC, Ca!trans, California Public Utilities Commission, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), Federal Railroad Administration, FTA, Amtrak, environmental agencies, the University of California, transit providers, SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, San Diego Association of Governments, LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency, local governments, private freight railroads, businesses, and property owners. The Commission participates in the ongoing funding and governance of Metrolink through SCRRA, a joint powers authority consisting of the county transportation commissions' of Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties. The Commission holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member board. Commission staff serves on the five -county TAC which negotiates service and funding levels, based upon the County's established priorities. The TAC provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and Commission departments, and linkages to local communities. Of the seven commuter rail lines operated by Metrolink, three routes consisting of the Riverside, Inland Empire - Orange County (IEOC), and 91 Lines directly serve Western County. Unlike the other SCRRA member agencies, the Commission owns and operates the commuter rail stations serving Riverside County: Riverside Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, North Main Corona (Chart 31). The Commission is also the owner of and the operating partner with RTA at the Perris Transit Center, a multimodal transportation facility. Station operation and maintenance costs are included in the Rail Department budget with services currently coordinated by the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. New and ongoing construction projects at these stations are described in the capital budget managed by the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. Chart 31— Riverside County Metrolink Station Locations Riverside County Meirolink Service Regale, Or. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY1��_ PEOLEY STA I CORONA A CORONA EXISTING STATIONS 0 PROPOSED STATIONS **+*+*+ PH+Pfr METROLINK LINE +M+++Hiiii+++ PROPOSED PERRIS VALLEY LINE Key Assumptions RIVERSIDE PARK STATION MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE MORENO VALLEY PER • IS 6atleckb be. f ' SINK Ave. I4 ae¢a,ae_ • Metrolink's preliminary FY 2012/13 budget is adopted by the Commission and SCRRA. In the event that additional funds are needed during the budget year, a mid -year budget adjustment will be presented to the Commission for approval. • Ridership and fare revenues continue to grow slightly on the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines (Chart 32). • The Commission manages the station security guard contract. Estimated costs are based on the actual contract terms with a portion reimbursed by SCRRA. Chart 32 — Metrolink Average Daily Ridership 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 2011 Accomplishments 2012 2013 a 91 Line ■ IEOC ■ Riverside/LA • Gained ex-officio status on the LOSSAN board and now have a voice in the governance discussions taking place to establish local control for the Southern California intercity rail service. • Secured FTA Section 5309 grants for a commuter rail state of good repair project to fully fund the SCRRA 5- year capital plan that includes locomotive and rail car rehabilitation along with station and layover projects. • Continued to implement the recommendations of the comprehensive safety and security assessment and emergency response plan at the Metrolink stations. • Successfully transitioned and trained the new security guard contractor while implementing tougher standards and accountability in the security program. • Supported the holiday toy train event at the La Sierra and North Main Corona rail stations. The community continues to support this event with strong local participation. This event also generates needed donations for the Spark of Love Toy Drive for local charities. Major Initiatives Over the last 19 years, more than $110 million in capital improvements has been made in developing stations and securing access to support the Commission's commuter rail services operations. The development of the Perris Valley Line project and its operational impacts will continue to be pursued and evaluated, respectively. The four Perris Valley Line stations (see Chart 31) are currently at 90% design. In addition, plans are being pursued to expand peak period rail service on the IEOC and 91 lines to better meet the needs of Inland Empire commuters. Department Goals —Rail Operations Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside County. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Support improved Metrolink system safety and security initiatives. • Implement enhanced safety and security features at all stations. • Work with Metrolink staff to increase patronage on Riverside County lines. • Continue to expand service on Metrolink lines with increased train frequencies. • Coordinate with Metrolink staff to develop future service plans to best meet the needs of Riverside County residents. " C o n t i n u e t o m o n i t o r M e t r o l i n k ' s f i n a n c i a l p e r f o r m a n c e t o e n s u r e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f u n d s a r e u s e d e f f i c i e n t l y a n d r e s p o n s i b l y . M a x i m i z e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p u b l i c u s e o f r a i l - r e l a t e d i n v e s t m e n t . ( P o l i c y G o a l : I n t e r m o d a l i s m & A c c e s s i b i l i t y ) O b j e c t i v e s : " S u p p o r t t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r e f f o r t s t o e x p a n d a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d u s e o f c o n n e c t i n g t r a n s i t i n o r d e r t o i m p r o v e a c c e s s a n d r e d u c e d e m a n d o n p a r k i n g c a p a c i t y ; c o s t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t r a n s f e r s a r e c u r r e n t l y r e i m b u r s e d t o t h e t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d a r e b u d g e t e d . " E x p l o r e t r a c k r i g h t s o p p o r t u n i t i e s . " E x p a n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s w i t h t h e C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e P r o g r a m ' s p a r k a n d r i d e o p e r a t i o n s f o r t h e d e s i g n a t i o n o f s p e c i f i c c a r / v a n p o o l p a r k i n g a t c o m m u t e r r a i l s t a t i o n s w i t h a v a i l a b l e c a p a c i t y . " E x p a n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n t e r l i n e t r a v e l t h r o u g h c o o r d i n a t i o n o f s c h e d u l e s w i t h A m t r a k i n t e r c i t y a n d l o n g d i s t a n c e t r a i n s , s u c h a s t h e S u n s e t L i m i t e d , a n d o t h e r M e t r o l i n k l i n e s , i n c l u d i n g e n c o u r a g i n g j o i n t t i c k e t i n g o p t i o n s . I m p l e m e n t e n e r g y e f f i c i e n t s y s t e m s a n d g e n e r a t e r e v e n u e t o o f f s e t m a i n t e n a n c e c o s t s o f r a i l p r o p e r t i e s . ( P o l i c y G o a l : E n v i r o n m e n t a l S t e w a r d s h i p , F i n a n c i a l & A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) O b j e c t i v e s : " E x p l o r e t r a c k r i g h t s o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d p o t e n t i a l f o r j o i n t d e v e l o p m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s a t s t a t i o n s . " E x p l o r e t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n o f c e l l p h o n e t o w e r s a s a r e v e n u e s o u r c e t o o f f s e t o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . " E x p l o r e a d d i t i o n a l r e v e n u e p o t e n t i a l a t t h e r a i l s t a t i o n s . " E v a l u a t e a l t e r n a t i v e a n d e m e r g e n c y p o w e r s y s t e m s . D e p a r t m e n t B u d g e t O v e r v i e w - - R a i l D e v e l o p m e n t I n o r d e r t o e x p a n d p a s s e n g e r r a i l o p t i o n s t h r o u g h o u t t h e C o u n t y , t h e C o m m i s s i o n c o n d u c t s f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d i e s t o a s s e s s t h e v i a b i l i t y o f c o m m u t e r r a i l e x p a n s i o n . I n 2 0 0 5 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n c o m p l e t e d t h e C o m m u t e r R a i l F e a s i b i l i t y S t u d y t h a t e x a m i n e d t h e v i a b i l i t y o f e x t e n d i n g M e t r o l i n k c o m m u t e r r a i l s e r v i c e l a r g e l y w i t h i n e x i s t i n g r a i l r i g h t s o f w a y . T h e C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v e d t h e s t u d y a n d r e c o m m e n d e d a d v a n c e d s t u d y o f e x t e n s i o n s o n t h e S J B L t o H e m e t / S a n J a c i n t o a n d M u r r i e t a / T e m e c u l a . T h e n e x t p h a s e o f A l t e r n a t i v e s A n a l y s i s f o r t h e s e c o r r i d o r s w i l l b e p u r s u e d i n f u t u r e y e a r s a s f u n d i n g a v a i l a b i l i t y a l l o w s . S a n J a c i n t o B r a n c h L i n e T h e C o m m i s s i o n h o l d s t i t l e t o a n d m a n a g e s t h e 3 8 - m i l e S J B L ( C h a r t 3 3 ) a n d s e v e r a l a d j a c e n t p r o p e r t i e s , p r e s e r v e d f o r f u t u r e p a s s e n g e r r a i l s e r v i c e . B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n S a n t a F e ( B N S F ) R a i l r o a d h o l d s t h e f r e i g h t r i g h t s i n t h e c o r r i d o r , p r o v i d i n g s e r v i c e t o l o c a l s h i p p e r s , a n d p e r f o r m s m a i n t e n a n c e o n t h e l i n e . Chart 33 — San Jacinto Branch Line San Jacinto Branch Line SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY "- — u F RIVERSIDE NAPLP A fl PFSEPYE BASF / MathewO SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE r' �` `,�� CAN ANON EC FORE,6.. Perris Valley Line Small Starts Project MORENO VALLEY \ l E�enwndVaAay RErsxve Lake BEAUMONT SAN JACINTO HEMET BANNII In June 2000, the Commission allocated $20 million of Measure A funds for capital and operating expenditures related to the implementation of passenger rail service on the initial operating segment of the SJBL, known as the Perris Valley Line (see Chart 31). Project cost estimates have been revised and are now approximately $247 million. Staff is seeking a project construction grant agreement from the FTA Small Starts Program to fund $75 million of the project cost with the balance to be funded by other federal, state, and local funding sources, as illustrated in Table 48 and Chart 34. Since 2008, $75 million in Small Starts funding has been federally appropriated. Details on this capital project are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section. Chart 34 — Perris Valley Line Funding Chart Table 48 — Perris Valley Line Funding Plan Total Federal: STP $ 500,000 FTA 5307 26,157,000 FTA 5309 Small Starts 75,000,000 CMAQ 24,659,000 State: STIP 52,978,000 Proposition 18 State -Local Partnership Program 14,869,000 Local: Measure A 53,052,000 Total Perris Valley Line Project Estimate $ 247,215,000 The project has received FTA approval to begin project development and advance preliminary engineering. The NEPA draft environmental assessment was circulated for public review in 2004, and a new Supplemental Environmental Assessment was released in 2010 and again in 2012. The CEQA document was finalized in 2011. The Commission anticipates that the project construction grant agreement will be in place by October 2012 and construction will begin in late 2012. The FY 2012/13 budget in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section includes total expenditures of $87.9 million for the Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. The public outreach program for this project continues to be a priority with ongoing efforts to reach all the communities including residents,, businesses, and schools along the corridor. Passenger Rail to Coachella Valley In recent years the Commission has also focused attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin through advocacy efforts with state, federal, and local government entities and negotiation with the freight railroads. The Commission's current efforts include seeking capital and operating funds and coordinating with Amtrak and Caltrans. The Commission has worked closely with CVAG to update the feasibility studies to include current cost and travel time information. The Commission has taken additional efforts to advocate for service improvement of the Amtrak Sunset Limited to operate daily through this region. There has been enhanced coordination with CVAG, Amtrak, and the State on this project. High Speed Rail The Commission continues to play a proactive role in the development of a statewide, high speed passenger rail system, including routing of the backbone corridor through the Inland Empire with possible stations in the Riverside/Corona and Murrieta/Temecula areas. With the passage of Proposition 1A in November 2008, there is now a proposed funding mechanism to move the state high speed rail project forward. The CHSRA has begun work on a project level environmental assessment and corridor alignment study for the section between Los Angeles and San Diego via the Inland Empire. The Commission has directed the review to include an alignment alternative along 1-15 for analysis. The Commission has entered into an MOU to be supportive in the development of this high speed rail project and is participating in the Southern California Inland Corridor Group meetings. The Commission actively contributed to the development of the supplemental Alternatives Analysis released in spring 2012 and continues to coordinate local participation at Technical Working Group meetings attended by local stakeholders. Work on this effort has slowed down with the release of the latest business plan that extends the development of this Phase II section from Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire to beyond 2030. The Commission signed an MOU along with the other Southern California transportation entities and SCAG to commit $1 billion in unallocated Proposition 1A funds for early investment to be spent locally for rail transportation improvement projects. Key Assumptions • Project development on the Perris Valley Line will continue in FY 2012/13. • Construction may begin on the Perris Valley Line in FY 2012/13. Accomplishments • Having received a medium -high rating from the FTA on the Perris Valley Line in December 2007, continued project development activities including progress on environmental documents and the related public reviews. The project has now completed 90% design. • Established an on -call rail consultant bench to provide future rail study and service modeling services for the region. Major Initiatives As discussed above, project development and right of way acquisition related to the Perris Valley Line project is expected to continue. Following receipt of the project construction grant agreement which is anticipated during FY 2012/13, construction should begin shortly thereafter. Department Goals —Rail Development Identify and plan for capital improvements necessary to increase the scope, appeal, and reliability of commuter rail operations. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue efforts to fully fund the Perris Valley Line. • Finalize the station design elements for the Perris Valley Line. • Continue to review parking requirements and develop plans to address projected parking deficiencies. Maintain efforts with local agencies, other Southern California counties, and the state and federal governments to expand intercity passenger rail service into Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Continue to support and influence state efforts in the creation of a high speed passenger rail system along an Inland Empire alignment through coordination with state and local agencies. In addition, continue to identify and advocate for high speed rail funding to be spent on beneficial local rail projects in Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Rail Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Average daily ridership on existing commuter lines • Riverside Line 5,177 5,205 3,825 2,265 • IEOC Line 3,865 5,279 4,142 2,254 • 91 Line 2,289 5,456 4,073 2,465 Farebox recovery ratio • Riverside Line 59.0% 58.25% 29.49% 52.37% • IEOC Line 29.1% 58.33% 31.31% 49.74% • 91 Line 51.6% 56.12% 31.67% 45.06% Public and Specialized Transit Mission Statement: "To coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting compliance and improving mobility as well as program efficiency and effectiveness between transit operators. To maintain and enhance, as resources allow, mobility options for seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means through innovative solutions and better coordination of existing services." Chart 35 — Public and Specialized Transit Professional Costs Salaries and 0% Support Costs Benefits f 0% 0% Expenditures Public and specialized transit uses are budgeted at $103,295,600 for FY 2012/13, as presented in Table 49, and consist primarily of projects and operations costs as well as transfers out to Commission funds for administration, planning, and rail purposes. LTF disbursements consist of transit operating and capital allocations to public transit operators of $58,631,800, bicycle and pedestrian facilities allocations to cities and the County of $1,404,000, and planning and administration allocations to other agencies of $469,500. STA disbursements of $14,105,000 are primarily for bus capital purposes in Western County and Coachella Valley, as minimal fund balances for the Palo Verde Valley areas are projected to be available in FY 2012/13. Transfers out comprise $14,185,000 for rail operations and capital, $1,774,700 for grade separation projects, $1,950,000 for planning, and $700,000 for administration. The LTF transit allocations reflect the use of $13,517,200 in fund balances. Measure A disbursements include $2,460,000 for Western County specialized transit funding of the second year of the 2011 two-year call for projects. The majority of Measure A disbursements relate to 2011 Measure A public transit programs: $624,000 for Western County Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) allocations, $4,500,000 for Coachella Valley public and specialized transit, and $1,855,000 for Western County intercity bus services. The Western County allocations are disbursed monthly to RTA, the major transit provider in the Western County, while the Coachella Valley allocation is disbursed monthly to SunLine, the major transit provider in the Coachella Valley. Table 49 — Public and Specialized Transit Expenditure Detail FY 10/11 Actual Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations Transfers Out FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Revised Budget Projected Budget 320,900 $ 361,900 $ 338,400 . $ 326,200 $ 14,000 22,000 14,000 28,500 100,000 115,600 165,300 145, 000 163,000 129,600 187,300 159,000 291,500 11,400 23,800 10,400 18,900 46,288,000 46,288,000 17,274,500 TOTAL Public and S.ecialized Transit $ 64,024,400 $ 86,469,800 86,469,800 18,815,900 57,008,000 57,008,000 16,043,500 84,049,300 84,049,300 18,60'3,700 Dollar Percent Change Change (35,700) -10% 6,500 100,000 (2,300) 104,200 (4,900) (2,420,500) (2,420,500) (206,200) 30% N/A -1% 56% -21% 105,858,700 $ 73,559,300 $ 103,295,600 $ (2,563,100 -2% Public and Specialized Transit Staffing Summary Position Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Executive Director Multimodal Services Director Staff Analyst Transit Manager FTE Department Budget Overview Department Description FY 10/11 0.11 0.08 0.01 0.44 1.00 1.00 FY 11/12 0.05 0.08 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 FY 12/13 0.10 0.08 0.01 0.20 1.00 1.00 2.64 2.63 2.39 The Measure A specialized transit program provides a valuable service to the community by serving the needs of commuters, mainly seniors and persons with disabilities, whose transportation needs are not met by traditional services. Specialized transit operations are typically managed by social service and nonprofit agencies. The Commission also allocates funding, following a competitive call for projects, through the FTA Section 5310 program that is administered by Caltrans. This program provides funding to nonprofit transportation and social service agencies and public operators under special circumstances for the purchase of capital equipment. With the passage of SAFETEA-LU, the following are two relatively new federal funding sources for specialized transit services: • JARC (Section 5316) program provides funding for the development and maintenance of jobs access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non - peak hours as well as provide reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. • New Freedom (Section 5317) program provides funding for new public transportation services and alternatives for people with disabilities beyond the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. In accordance with the provisions of SAFETEA-LU, recipients under these programs must comply with all federal coordinated planning requirements to be eligible for funds. Projects selected for funding under these programs must be derived from a locally developed Coordinated Plan and must be developed through a process that includes representatives of the public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human service providers. The update of the Coordinated Plan was completed in April 2012, and the third Universal Call for Projects will be issued by December 2012. Approval of Measure A and JARC/New Freedom grant awards under the 2013 Universal Call for Projects will be obtained in April 2013 for the Coachella Valley and Western County applicants, and approved projects will begin provision of services on July 1, 2013. The Commission is responsible for short-range transportation planning and programming. Planning includes the development of the countywide SRTPs for eight public transit operators consisting of the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; SCRRA's Metrolink commuter rail; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency; RTA; and SunLine. The Commission assists in coordinating the annual development, review, and approval of the operator SRTPs and allocates Measure A, LTF, STA, and FTA Sections 5307, 5309, 5311, 5316, and 5317 transit funding resources to public transit programs. The Commission is responsible for the disbursement of Measure A, LTF, and STA funds, while federal transit funds are administered by the FTA. In partnership with the County's transit operators, the Commission coordinates the allocation of available Proposition 1B transit (capital and security) funding and ensures that proposed projects meet the mobility needs of the County. Proposition 1B funds are annually appropriated by the legislature and used for transit related capital purchases, infrastructure/facility improvements, and security enhancements. The Riverside County operators annually apply for Proposition 1B funds; however, due to the state's ongoing financial crisis, the release of funds is contingent upon available proceeds from future bond sales. The Commission has public transit operator oversight and fiduciary responsibilities to ensure that annual fiscal audits and a state triennial performance audit are conducted in accordance with TDA regulations. The Commission is also charged with annually reviewing public transit operator activities and recommending potential productivity improvements to lower operating costs. To ensure that specialized transit allocations are expended and required service goals are met in accordance with funding agreements, the Commission engages an audit firm to perform certain agreed -upon procedures for the Measure A specialized transit funding recipients, some of which also receive JARC and New Freedom funds. Key Assumptions • LTF, STA, and Measure A disbursements are based on projected. budgetary allocations but may be adjusted after the Commission approves actual allocations in July 2012. • Fluctuating LTF and Measure A revenues will require continued efforts to streamline operating expenses by all operators while maintaining efficiency and quality of service. • Transit Vision, adopted by the Commission in June. 2008, established a 25% allocation of 2009 Measure A Western County Specialized Transit funds to the RTA as the CTSA for Western County. Accomplishments • Oversaw the successful first year implementation of the new specialized transit services resulting from the 2011 Universal Call for Projects funding allocation process. • Received approval notification of 18 capital projects awarded to five successful Riverside County recipients of funding under the FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11 FTA Section 5310 program. Projects are derived from a locally- developed Coordinated Plan. • Incorporated FY 2010/11 Proposition 1B Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds with transit capital funding sources following Ca!trans' release of program funding covering a three-year period need for fiscal years 2010/11— 2012/13. • Approved allocation of FY 2010/11 Proposition 1B California Transit Security Grant Program —California Transit Assistance Funds for eligible transit safety and security projects identified by transit operators following release of program funding and guidelines by the Governor's Office of Homeland Security. • Completed the documentation of the Coordinated Plan 2012 Update as a result of five workshops and transit needs public hearings held in different areas of the County. Major Initiatives The Commission has long demonstrated a strong commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its 1989 Measure A Specialized Transit Program, the Commission provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators for the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Along with support of traditional dial -a -ride services, the Commission supports innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. The riders, many frail and elderly, have come to depend on these services that provide a higher level of assistance than can be provided by the public transit providers and/or operate in areas not served by public transit. As a result of the 2009 Measure A, these specialized transit programs will continue through 2039. In July 2012, 17 programs in Western County and four programs in Coachella Valley will begin their second year of specialized transit services under the 2011 Universal Call for Projects, including the non -emergency medical transportation component. Eleven of these projects are fully funded with Measure A funds, while the other 10 projects will be funded by a mix of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funds. As identified in the Coordinated Plan, the specialized transit projects approved for funding will require implementation and yearlong performance monitoring. In order to assure the availability of funds to support matching of FTA Section 5310 capital grants, $120,000 on an annual basis is budgeted for Western County applicants to meet the 11.47% local match requirement for such grants. Due to the recent fluctuations of Measure A and LTF revenues and STA funding from the state, staff will continue monitoring long-range planning activities to ensure that both anticipated revenues and on -hand reserves are properly utilized and in line with projected levels of service by the public operators. Staff will also work with the operators to plan and coordinate major capital purchases and investments into new rolling stock and other system improvements in order to maintain a viable on -hand reserve. Department Goals Provide timely information to the public regarding Commission -implemented projects and support public relations activities of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funded programs by grant recipients. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Complete implementation of projects under the 2011 Universal Call for Projects and begin application evaluation, funding award, and contract agreement execution processes for the third Universal Call for Projects to start on July 1, 2013. • Produce and distribute public information materials as needed including press releases, flyers, brochures, marketing materials, and newspaper ads. In addition, staff will also leverage the 1E511 traveler information system in order to more fully market the availability of specialized transit programs. Allocate Measure A Specialized Transit and federal funds to support services that will maintain and/or enhance mobility by alleviating transportation barriers for seniors, persons with disabilities, and the truly needy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Monitor performance of specialized transit grant recipients through analysis of their quarterly performance reports. • Support the FTA Section 5310, 5316 and 5317 grant processes to improve mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals of limited means by working with Ca[trans, public operators, and social service agencies to ensure a competitive process statewide for the allocation of federal transportation dollars for social service programs. • Provide technical assistance and program support to agencies offering specialized transit programs to ensure the maximum benefit of funding for improved mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means. • Seek Commission approval on funding allocations for the third Universal Call for Projects. Coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting program efficiency and harmony between transit operators as outlined in state law. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Review transit planning, resource allocation, and service implementation policy requirements including appropriate coordination of commuter rail, intercounty and intercity bus, local bus and paratransit, and social service transportation services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Assure the ongoing effectiveness of the SRTP process and work with the County's eight transit operators to assure productivity and efficiency as well as compliance with the productivity improvement program. • Coordinate regional transit connections among commuter rail, buses, and paratransit services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Monitor transit operators' quarterly capital grants reports. • Monitor transit operators' performance through analysis of their quarterly performance reports using the TransTrack computer -based tracking program. Continue to provide staff resources to assist and support the coordination of transit services within the County and throughout the State. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Communications) Objectives: • Participate and influence intercounty discussions between Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties regarding the enhancement of intermodal options. This includes additional transit services (rail and express bus) and rideshare services. • Regularly participate in meetings that focus on the coordination of transit services, such as the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, SunLine's Access Committee, RTA's ADA Committee, the Riverside County Foundation on Aging Board of Directors, the Older Californian Traffic Safety Task Force, and the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council. • Continue the development of a marketing and distribution network for communicating specialized transit mobility options to seniors, the disabled, and persons of limited means. Public and Specialized Transit Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected SRTPs submitted by operators and reviewed 8 8 8 8 SRTP amendments 3 0 3 3 Specialized Transit grants awarded 22 21 21 21 One-way trips provided by Measure A funded projects 151,000 105,320 150,000 200,000 One-way trips provided by JARC & New Freedom funded agencies 77,000 212,213 250,000 300,000 One-way trips reimbursed through the Western County Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project 70,000 69,242 75,000 80,000 Transit tickets provided through the Transportation Access Program 55,000 68,502 64,976 65,000 Clients served through Blindness Support Services 60 35 42 50 Commuter Assistance Mission Statement: "To encourage and promote transportation alternatives for commuters through employer partnerships, information services, technological innovation, and community outreach." Chart 36 — Commuter Assistance Transfers Out Salaries and 4% Benefits Capital Outlay 1 5% 0% Expenditures Commuter Assistance expenditures and transfers out total $4,190,100, which represents a 55% decrease from last year's budget (Table 50). Professional costs of $640,300 have decreased 20% over the prior year due to ,the completion of the MSRC eRideguide/transit itinerary project in FY 2011/12. Support costs totaling $529,200 include mail and printing services, computer and vehicle maintenance, communications, and other office expenditures. Projects and operations expenditures of $2,633,400 consist of park and ride lease payments of $115,000, regional transportation consultant services totaling $1,853,800 to manage and implement the program, and merchant vouchers valued at $664,600. Capital outlay expenditures include $17,000 to upgrade the hardware and network equipment which supports the regional rideshare database. Reimbursements from local county transportation commissions for regional rideshare services provided by the Commission are included in revenues to offset these expenditures. Transfers out consist of $151,300 to the General fund for costs related to maintenance of the park and ride facility at the Perris Transit Center. Table 50 — Commuter Assistance Uses Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change . Change Salaries and Benefits $ 197,600 $ 228,900 $ 264,800 $ 218,900 $ (10,000) -4% Professional Costs Legal Services 23,600 30,000 25,000 25,000 (5,000) -17% Professional Services -General 207,100 775,100 638,600 615,300 (159,800) -21% Total Professional Costs 230,700 805,100 663,600 640,300 (164,800) -20% Support Costs 309,100 503,400 505,000 529,200 25,800 5% Projects and Operations Program Operations 2,079,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 2,633,400 74,400 3% Total Projects and Operations 2,079,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 2,633,400 74,400 3% Capital Outlay 15,500 130,000 130,000 17,000 (113,000) -87% Transfers Out 5,160,000 160,000 151,300 (5,008,700) -97% TOTAL Commuter Assistance $ 2,831,900 $ 9,386,400 $ 4,391,400 $ 4,190,100 $ (5,196,300) -55% Commuter Assistance Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.12 0.15 0.15 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.01 0.01 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.57 0.65 0.58 Multi modal Services Director 0.17 0.25 0.27 Procurement Administrator 0.00 0.00 0.01 Procurement Manager 0.00 0.01 0.04 Staff Analyst 0.69 0.72 0.55. FTE 1.56 1.79 1.61 Department Budget Overview Department Description While much of the Commission's work is focused on increasing transportation infrastructure and capacity, there is significant value in ensuring that the transportation systems are used efficiently. To help foster more efficient use of these systems, the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program seeks to encourage Riverside County constituents and commuters to make a mode -shift decision away from single occupancy vehicle commuting and into alternative modes of transportation such as a carpool, vanpool, buspool, public bus, Metrolink, walking, bicycling, or telecommuting. The Commuter Assistance Program seeks to efficiently influence driver behavior by fostering a mode -shifting decision at both the employer and commuter levels via the following methods: • The provision of employer services to foster the implementation of employer -based mode -shift and rideshare programs; • The use of incentives both for beginning and then maintaining a mode-shift/rideshare arrangement; • Public information services including the dissemination of personalized commute options and traveler information to educate commuters of all travel options available and to foster congestion avoidance behavior when traveling; and • Leverage technology to deliver easy to use online resources and tools to more efficiently serve employer partners, their employees, and all other commuters. The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program was implemented as a specific requirement under Measure A to address congestion mitigation. While ridesharing has a beneficial impact on air quality, first and foremost, it is a strategy to improve mobility through increased use of alternative travel modes. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue to contract with a consulting firm to administer the Commuter Assistance Program. • Maintaining its long-term partnership with the Commission, SANBAG will contract with the Commission to manage and implement a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program for its residents and employers in San Bernardino County. • At the regional level, four county transportation commissions (Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Ventura) will contract with the Commission for the provision of regional ridematching database and network operations. Accomplishments • Maintained program participation levels during a period of economic downturn. • Developed a new and more cost effective ridematching system with new features that will launch in FY 2012/13. In addition, the new hosted rideshare system will no longer require hardware or a network administrator to maintain it. • Developed an 1E511 mobile application to provide mobile users with enhanced access to traffic, park and ride lots, rideshare, and rail and bus transit information. • Continued to operate the report card program for both program participants and employer partners which translates individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. This outreach is intended to recognize rideshare efforts and to motivate participants to continue ridesharing and/or grow employer program participation. • Continued to operate, maintain, and enhance the regional ridematching system on behalf of the five -county region. • Continued use of the Program Measurement Tool to evaluate program performance. • Continued to provide rideshare services to employers and commuters in the Coachella Valley, leveraging JARC funds which were secured for another two-year period. • Renewed leases for park and ride facilities with the following locations: Canyon Community Church of the Nazarene (Corona), Living Truth Christian Fellowship (Corona), Corona Friends Church (Corona), Elsinore Naval Military School (Lake Elsinore), Lake Elsinore Outlets (Lake Elsinore), Revival Christian Fellowship (Menifee), Mount San Jacinto College (San Jacinto), Hope Lutheran Church (Temecula), Orchard Christian Fellowship (Temecula), and the United Methodist Church (Temecula). • Continued partnering with the Rail Department to provide a permitted section of park and ride spaces in the city of Corona at the North Main Corona station. Major Initiatives A cornerstone of the Commuter Assistance Program is its continued partnership among commuters, employers, and government. The partnership, based on voluntary efforts, makes a collective difference in increasing the efficiency of our transportation system —local roads, freeways, commuter rail, and public bus. The combined effort results in less congestion, decreased vehicle miles traveled, and improved air quality. The major initiatives to continue these partnerships and efforts in FY 2012/13 are described below. Grow Employer Partnerships: Given that the highest percentage of rideshare arrangements is formed at work sites, voluntary employer participation is critical to addressing congestion and air quality goals; employers are the conduit to directly influencing their employees' personal transportation choices. The ongoing success of the core Western County rideshare program and the explosive success of the now five-year old Coachella Valley rideshare program demonstration is a testament to the significance of employer partnerships in the program's success. However, the current economic environment will pose challenges in terms of maintaining and/or growing these partnerships. Employer Transportation Coordinators (ETCs) have to do more with less. Delivery of value-added services and tools to make the ETC's job easier will be a critical motivation to continue the partnership. Roll Out New Program Tools: The Commission is continuously looking for opportunities to enhance the suite of services and outreach to both our program participants and employer partners to improve participation, partnerships, and program efficiencies. Commuter Assistance will launch its new ridematching software in FY 2012/13. As part of this effort, the program will feature brand new services, including state-of-the-art trip planning, individual user profiles, and a customizable employer portal for ETCs to more effectively manage their company's rideshare programs. Support Multimodal Travel: In addition to ridematching, information services, and incentives to facilitate ridesharing, the Commuter Assistance Program also implements park and ride facilities to support ridesharing efforts. The last Caltrans park and ride facility in Riverside County was built in 1999. The Commission leases park and ride spaces from property owners to supplement the network of park and ride spaces in Riverside County. A continued focus for FY 2012/13 will be to monitor and optimize the number of spaces leased and coordinate with ridesharers and transit and rail partners to identify areas where the lease program can help support car/vanpool arrangements as well as facilitate transit connections. Department Goals Operate a cost-effective Commuter Assistance Program within Riverside County that results in a demonstrable reduction in single occupant vehicle trips, thus assisting with congestion mitigation and improving air quality. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Continue to offer short-term incentives for commuters to try a transportation mode other than driving alone. • Continue to provide a rewards program for long-term ridesharers to encourage their continued use of alternative modes of transportation. • Ensure the effectiveness of the Commuter Assistance Program through program analysis and recurring assessments of participation and retention of ridesharers. The Commission will continue to look for ways to pare program costs without impacting service delivery or participation. • Explore opportunities to further enhance the 511 mobile application by integrating incentive enrollment and/or tracking. • Extend the mode-shift/rideshare incentive and services to the Coachella Valley using awarded 1ARC funds commencing at the beginning of FY 2012/13. • Increase participation and use of on-line service by employer partners to reduce administrative costs. • Optimize the number of park and ride spaces leased and address park and ride gaps in the system. • Assess vanpool program funding opportunities. Ensure the coordination of ridesharing programs throughout the Inland Empire and the southern California region. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue to administer a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program in San Bernardino County on a contract basis, thus expanding the reach and effectiveness of commuter programs throughout the Inland Empire area. • Continue to provide leadership with regard to the ongoing operation, maintenance, and enhancement of both the regional ridematching database and network. • Fund and participate in regional rideshare marketing programs to enhance awareness of and encourage participation in commute modes that provide an alternative to driving alone. • Coordinate with regional partners with respect to the implementation of ridematching alternatives. • Investigate the modification of the regional vanpool agreement with the regional partners in order to provide for more service availability and a revision to the current cost sharing formula. • Implement the revised Guaranteed Ride Home model that is more suitable to the region's interests. Strategically broaden the reach of the program to encourage the use of alternative transportation modesamongst all travelers and continue to grow the core target base of employers and their employees. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Communications) Objectives: • Develop and implement a rideshare brand strategy and streamlined communications plan anchored by the 1E511 system. • Develop and support on-line resources and tools for employers to more effectively manage and market their organizations' rideshare programs. • Continue the dissemination of the report card program for both program participants and employer partners that translates individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. • Publicize the participation of local employers in the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program through various media options. • Continue the operation of the Commuter Exchange vehicle to include 50 site visits for the FY 2012/13. • In partnership with the four county transportation commissions and others, utilize the regional ridesharing database and website, www.ridematch.info. Commuter Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 30/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Number of one-way single occupant vehicle trips reduced as a result of Rideshare Incentives 105,932 91,154 93,888 96,704 Number of Rideshare Plus Rewards Members 7,292 6,690 6,890 7,096 Number of incoming 1-866-RIDESHARE telephone calls 2,209 1,257 1,294 1,332 Number of services provided by Inland Empire Commuter Services to support employer trip reduction efforts at worksites: • Employers requesting survey services 159 . 149 153 157 • RideGuides produced 26,184 28,703 29,564 30,450 Number of events participated in by the Commuter Exchange in total, and as identified individually below: , • Public events 8 3 2 2 • Employer work sites 2 4 3 3 • Elementary schools 40 45 45 45 Motorist Assistance Mission Statement: "To improve safety, reduce congestion, and enhance access to traveler information for motorists through the provision of a comprehensive motorist aid system." Chart 37 — Motorist Assistance Salaries and Benefits 3% Expenditures Professional Costs 12% Motorist Assistance expenditures and uses are budgeted at $6,169,300 for FY 2012/13, or a decrease of 3% compared to the prior year budget (Table 51). Salaries and benefits reflect an increase of $63,700 primarily due to a change in the mix of FTEs. Professional costs of $717,500 decreased 29% due to the transition of 1E511 from implementation to operation and include legal services and contracted consultants to monitor the Commission's motorist aid programs and provide monthly operating and statistical reports for the program. Support costs of $874,600 increased $275,300, or 46%, primarily due to the 1E511 communication costs. Reimbursement from SANBAG for half of all 1E511 related expenditures is included in revenues. Budgeted expenditures for project operations include $2,670,000 in towing contract costs for the FSP program. Projects and operations costs have decreased 13% due to the exclusion of the 1E511 Ca!trans detection expansion project at the 60/91/215 interchange in FY 2012/13. Construction relates to call box removals. Transfers out represent SAFE's matching funds of $995,000 to state funding for FSP services and a $326,300 allocation for administrative costs. Table 51— Motorist Assistance Uses Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 103,800 $ 112,200 $ 196,900 $ 175,900 $ 63,700 57'/0 Professional Costs Legal Services 17,300 34,000 34,000 30,000 (4,000) -12% Professional Services - General 632,200 974,700 882,000 687,500 (287,200) -29% Total Professional Costs 649,500 1,008,700 916,000 717,500 (291,200) -29% Support Costs 435,600 599,300 587,900 874,600 275,300 46% Projects and Operations Program Operations 2,341,800 3,543,100 3,585,800 3,020,000 (523,100) -15% Construction 60,000 60,000 N/A Total Projects and Operations 2,341,800 3,543,100 3,585,800 3,080,000 (463,100) -13% iransfersOut 1,231,200 1,114,30Q 1,114,300 1,321,300 207,000 19% iOTALMotorist Assistance $ 4,761,900 $ 6,377,600 $ 6,400,900 $ 6,169,300 $ (208,300) -3% Motorist Assistance Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.05 0.10 0.03 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.01 0.01 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.42 0.34 0.42 Multimodal Services Director 0.12 0.10 0.26 Procurement Administrator 0.03 0.05 0.06 Procurement Manager 0.04 0.05 0.09 Staff Analyst 0.21 0.20 0.32 FTE 0.88 0.85 1.19 Department Budget Overview Department Description As a SAFE, the Commission is responsible for providing a motorist aid system for Riverside County. This system is comprised of three components: 1) call boxes, 2) FSP, and 3) an 1E511 traveler information system. The call box system allows motorists to call for assistance in the event of a mechanical breakdown, accident, or other emergency on the freeway. The FSP clears small debris on freeways and assists stranded motorists on the most congested Riverside County freeways by towing, changing flat tires, and temporarily taping cooling system hoses at no charge to the motorists. FSP service is also provided in construction zones through separate funding agreements with Caltrans to help mitigate congestion. The 1E511 system is a telephone and web -based service that delivers real-time traffic information, including incidents and travel times, bus and rail trip planning, and rideshare information. Key Assumptions • Annual maintenance costs are based on a flat -fee contract based on the number of call boxes. • Current percentage levels of vandalism, knockdowns, and miscellaneous repairs to call boxes will remain consistent with the past year. • The Freeway Service Patrol will continue as long as state funding support is available. • Tow truck contractor costs for the nine existing FSP beats are based on Commission -approved contracts. • In partnership with SANBAG, the Commission will maintain and operate the 1E511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards. • The Commission will maintain and operate an 1E511 system to be funded 50% by the Commission and 50% by SANBAG. The Commission's share of operating costs will be funded with SAFE revenues. • The Commission will enhance 1E511 with the roll -out of a more personalized traffic information service. Accomplishments • Performed a comprehensive assessment that identified additional call box reduction opportunities to improve program efficiencies and maintain an effective "safety -net" for stranded motorists. • Continued the "cost recovery" program for call box knockdowns in an effort to collect reimbursements from motorists involved in accidents that damage Commission property. • Achieved one of the highest benefit -to -cost ratios statewide for FSP in the latest Statewide FSP Management Information System Report. • Maintained competitive rates across all tow operators as a result of exercising option years with no cost increases and obtaining competitive rates for new tow contracts awarded. • Implemented a new digital radio system for FSP that addresses coverage gaps, significantly improves reception, and complies with the Federal Communications Commission's narrowband radio conversion regulation. " I m p l e m e n t e d e n h a n c e m e n t s t o t h e 1 E 5 1 1 s y s t e m i n c l u d i n g e n h a n c e d v o i c e r e c o g n i t i o n s o f t w a r e , r e v a m p e d i n t e r a c t i v e v o i c e r e s p o n s e ( I V R ) s c r i p t , a n d e x p a n d e d a c c e s s t o s y s t e m t h r o u g h l o c a l a g e n c y w e b s i t e s . " M i g r a t e d 1 E 5 1 1 t o a n e w I V R p h o n e p l a t f o r m f o r e x p a n d e d f u n c t i o n a l i t y a n d c o s t s a v i n g s . " D e v e l o p e d a n 1 E 5 1 1 m o b i l e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r A p p l e a n d A n d r o i d m a r k e t s , l e v e r a g i n g M S R C f u n d i n g . M a j o r I n i t i a t i v e s M a j o r M o t o r i s t A s s i s t a n c e i n i t i a t i v e s w i l l f o c u s o n s y s t e m e f f i c i e n c i e s a n d e v a l u a t i n g a n d / o r i m p l e m e n t i n g e n h a n c e d p r o g r a m s e r v i c e s o r c o v e r a g e . T h e c a l l b o x s y s t e m p r o g r a m h a s s e r v e d a s a " s a f e t y - n e t " f o r s t r a n d e d m o t o r i s t s i n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y s i n c e 1 9 9 1 . H o w e v e r , c a l l b o x u s a g e h a s d e c l i n e d o v e r t h e y e a r s w i t h t h e p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f m o b i l e p h o n e u s e . I n r e s p o n s e , c a l l b o x r e d u c t i o n s h a v e b e e n m a d e a n d u p o n a w a r d o f a n e w c a l l b o x m a i n t e n a n c e c o n t r a c t o r , a d d i t i o n a l r e d u c t i o n s w i l l b e m a d e b a s e d o n c a l l b o x r e m o v a l s i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e c a l l b o x r e d u c t i o n p l a n n i n g a s s e s s m e n t . I n a d d i t i o n , s t a f f w i l l f o c u s o n m a i n t a i n i n g a h i g h b e n e f i t - t o - c o s t r a t i o a n d s e e k o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o m a x i m i z e f u n d i n g t o n o t o n l y i m p r o v e t h e l e v e l o f s e r v i c e b u t t o p o t e n t i a l l y e x p a n d F S P c o v e r a g e a s w e l l . T h e C o m m i s s i o n , a l o n g w i t h i t s p a r t n e r , S A N B A G , w i l l c o n t i n u e t o o p e r a t e a n d m a i n t a i n t h e 1 E 5 1 1 s y s t e m . T h i s s y s t e m i n c l u d e s a w e b s i t e i n t e r f a c e a n d a n I V R t e l e p h o n e s y s t e m t h a t s e r v e s R i v e r s i d e a n d S a n B e r n a r d i n o c o u n t y r e s i d e n t s a n d c o m m u t e r s . W h i l e s e v e r a l e n h a n c e m e n t s h a v e b e e n m a d e t o t h e s y s t e m s i n c e i t s l a u n c h , n e w e n h a n c e m e n t s w i l l f o c u s o n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s e r v i n g m o r e p e r s o n a l i z e d t r a f f i c i n f o r m a t i o n s e r v i c e s s p e c i f i c t o a c o m m u t e r ' s r o u t e a n d t i m e o f t r a v e l . D e p a r t m e n t G o a l s P r o v i d e e f f i c i e n t d e l i v e r y o f a c o m p r e h e n s i v e m o t o r i s t a i d s y s t e m ( C a l l B o x , F S P , 1 E 5 1 1 ) a n d a n o u t s t a n d i n g l e v e l o f s e r v i c e t o t h e t r a v e l i n g p u b l i c . ( P o l i c y G o a l : M o b i l i t y , S y s t e m E f f i c i e n c i e s , F i n a n c i a l & A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) O b j e c t i v e s : " W o r k i n c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h C H P a n d C a l t r a n s t o i m p l e m e n t c a l l b o x r e d u c t i o n s i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e p l a n n i n g a s s e s s m e n t . " A l o n g w i t h S a n B e r n a r d i n o C o u n t y S A F E , c o n t i n u e t o m o n i t o r t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e c a l l a n s w e r i n g c e n t e r c o n t r a c t o r . " R e s e a r c h n e w t e c h n o l o g i e s t o s t r e a m l i n e F S P p r o c e s s e s a n d d e v e l o p n e w t o o l s t o a u t o m a t e t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f r e p o r t s t h a t t r a c k t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f F S P t o w o p e r a t o r s . " E v a l u a t e o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o p r o v i d e m o r e e f f i c i e n t F S P c o v e r a g e t h r o u g h c h a n g e s i n s e r v i c e d a y s , s e r v i c e h o u r s , o r n u m b e r o f v e h i c l e s a s s i g n e d t o e a c h b e a t ; p e r f o r m b u d g e t a s s e s s m e n t s t o i d e n t i f y p o t e n t i a l s e r v i c e e x p a n s i o n ( i . e . , h o l i d a y s e r v i c e , w e e k e n d s e r v i c e o n s e l e c t b e a t s ) o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h a t c a n b e s u p p o r t e d . " R e v i e w p r o p o s e d c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o j e c t s w i t h C a l t r a n s a n d l o c a l c i t i e s a n d c o o r d i n a t e t h e u s e o f t e m p o r a r y t o w s e r v i c e t o m i t i g a t e c o n g e s t i o n . " W o r k i n c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h t h e C H P a n d C a l t r a n s o n t h e T r a f f i c M a n a g e m e n t C e n t e r r e l o c a t i o n w i t h o u t d i s r u p t i o n t o F S P o r c a l l b o x o p e r a t i o n s d u r i n g t h e m i g r a t i o n . E n h a n c e a c c e s s t o r e a l - t i m e t r a v e l e r i n f o r m a t i o n . ( P o l i c y G o a l : S y s t e m E f f i c i e n c i e s , C o m m u n i c a t i o n s , O b j e c t i v e s : " D e v e l o p a c c e s s t o , o r d e l i v e r y o f , m o r e p e r s o n a l i z e d t r a f f i c i n f o r m a t i o n s e r v i c e s s p e c i f i c t o a c o m m u t e r ' s r o u t e a n d t i m e o f t r a v e l . " G r o w t h e n u m b e r o f u s e r s w i t h m o r e p e r s o n a l i z e d o f f e r i n g s , s e r v i c e s , a n d c o s t e f f e c t i v e m a r k e t i n g e f f o r t s . " C o n t i n u e t o r e f i n e a n d e n h a n c e 1 E 5 1 1 w e b c o n t e n t , a p p l i c a t i o n s , a n d o u t r e a c h . " C o n t i n u e t o l e v e r a g e e x i s t i n g r e s o u r c e s , s u c h a s t r a f f i c d a t a , p r o v i d e d b y C a l t r a n s D i s t r i c t 8 , e x i s t i n g I V R s o f t w a r e , a n d G o o g l e T r a n s i t t o m i n i m i z e c o s t s . " C o o r d i n a t e w i t h C a l t r a n s o n e x p a n d i n g t r a f f i c d e t e c t i o n a n d f e e d i n g t h a t t r a f f i c d a t a i n t o t h e 1 E 5 1 1 s y s t e m . " U t i l i z e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y a t t h e n e w C a l t r a n s D i s t r i c t 8 T r a f f i c M a n a g e m e n t C e n t e r t o e n h a n c e c o o r d i n a t i o n b e t w e e n C H P a n d C a l t r a n s o n t r a v e l e r i n f o r m a t i o n . M o t o r i s t A s s i s t a n c e P e r f o r m a n c e / W o r k l o a d I n d i c a t o r s F Y 1 0 / 1 1 E s t i m a t e d F Y 1 0 / 1 1 A c t u a l F Y 1 1 / 1 2 E s t i m a t e d F Y 1 2 / 1 3 P r o j e c t e d N u m b e r o f c a l l b o x e s 6 1 4 6 1 1 6 1 1 5 5 0 N u m b e r o f c a l l b o x c a l l s 5 , 7 0 0 5 , 2 5 1 5 , 0 9 4 4 , 9 4 2 N u m b e r o f v e h i c l e a s s i s t s 4 9 , 7 6 1 4 5 , 7 5 1 4 7 , 1 2 3 4 8 , 5 3 6 N u m b e r o f 1 E 5 1 1 p h o n e c a l l s 4 9 4 , 1 6 4 4 8 9 , 0 3 6 5 0 3 , 7 0 7 5 1 8 , 8 1 8 N u m b e r o f 1 E 5 1 1 w e b v i s i t s 2 0 6 , 1 4 8 2 4 4 , 2 7 7 2 5 1 , 6 0 5 2 5 9 , 1 5 3 Riverside County Transportation Conunissiorr Capital Project Development and Delivery Mission Statement: "To keep the Commission's contract with the voters of Riverside County by accelerating the planning, programming, and implementation of projects and programs in the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan, as enhanced by the Toll Program, to the extent that funds are available. To ensure that capital projects are environmentally acceptable, expertly designed, and implemented in a cost effective manner. To acquire and manage required right of way in the most economical, efficient, and timely manner." Chart 38 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Salaries and Professional Benefits Costs 0%N 1% il Expenditures The budgeted expenditures and transfers out total $815,241,700 to cover all of the Commission's major capital projects (Table 52). Personnel costs represent less than 1% of the budgeted uses. Professional costs of $7,500,600 are primarily related to general legal costs, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the toll program, debt management services, and BNSF services related to a rail capital project. Support costs of $587,000 consist primarily of services needed to maintain the Commission's real properties in a condition that complies with all local codes and regulations governing property maintenance. General project costs include $9,538,300 related to program management provided by Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel), SCRRA, and permits for highway and rail capital projects. Significant projects included in engineering expenditures of $24,312,600, are SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvements; 91/71 interchange improvements project; SR-60 truck climbing lanes; Mid County Parkway; SR-79 realignment; various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects; Perris Valley Line and other rail projects; and Coachella Valley highway projects subject to an advance funding agreement. Construction expenditures of $126,964,800, are primarily related to the 74/215 interchange, 1-215 corridor improvements —south and central segments, SR-91 Van Buren interchange, SR-91 corridor improvements, SR-74 curve widening, 1-15 Los Alamos Road bridge replacement, I-215/Blaine to Martin Luther King widening, various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, and Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. Design -build costs of $29,050,000 pertain to the SR- 91 corridor improvement project. Approximately 31% of the projects and operations costs represent right of way expenditures of $109,476,500 on significant projects including SR-91 corridor improvement project, SR-91 HOV lanes, 1-215 corridor improvements central segment, 91/71 interchange improvements, 74/215 interchange, SR-74 curve widening, Mid County Parkway, various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, and Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. Funding will also be provided for CVAG's MSHCP land mitigation acquisitions. Local turnback payments to cities and the County for local streets and roads repair, maintenance, and construction amount to $39,357,000, net of an allocation of $455,000 to the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial special revenue fund related to the ineligibility of city of Beaumont for its local streets and roads allocation. Disbursements to CVAG for the 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial program comprise substantially all of the regional arterial expenditures. Special studies of $40,000 are related to the SJBL. Operating and capital disbursements of $250,000 are related to Metrolink station rehabilitation costs. Rail capital equipment purchases for the station security project represent 100% of the capital outlay expenditures. Interest payments on outstanding commercial paper and the 2009 Bonds and 2010 Bonds .are approximately $16,613,000. Principal payments of $126,800,000 are related to the 2009 Bonds and retirement of all of the outstanding commercial paper notes. Significant transfers out include the following: • $129,479,000 in commercial paper proceeds to fund 2009 Measure A Western County and Coachella Valley highway projects such as the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects, 1-215 corridor improvements —south and central segment projects, and the 91/71 connector project; • $123,665,800 in debt proceeds and advance funding agreement payments received to fund debt service and retire outstanding commercial paper notes; • $17,835,000 from the TUMF CETAP reserves for two city of Temecula regional arterial projects along 1-15 and the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment project; • $16,889,600 from 2009 Measure A Western County highway funds to the Commercial Paper capital projects fund related to project reimbursements received from federal and state agencies; • $11,000,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County highway funds to the Debt Service fund; • $650,000 from 1989 Measure A excess debt service reserves for a rail project; • $610,100 from TUMF for administrative allocations to the General fund; • $455,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads to the 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial program for the city of Beaumont's local streets and roads allocation; • $386,900 from 1989 Measure A Western County highway reserves to TUMF regional arterial projects for a County project on SR-79; and • $42,000 for construction FSP service related to the 1-215 corridor improvement south segment project. Table 52 - Capital Project Development and Delivery Uses Detail FY14111 FY11/12 FY11/12 FY12/13 Dollar Percent Acid Revised Budget Projected Bucipt Charge Charee Salaries and Benefits $ 2,3L$900 $ 2795,000 $ 1024930 $ 3,113,103 $ 318100 11% Professional Casts CorrnissianerPer Diem 1,533 N/A Legal Services 1817,X0 5231933 3RE6,103 4,545200 (€8i330) -13% AucitSenrices 78900 52,000 2,933 65933 11,500 2N Frandal Ads isow 214X0 2,378000 401030 914020 0,4E50E0) -EN Professional Services- &neral 1,347,700 1,943)003 1,834,200 1,975900 35933 N Total Professional Costs 5,454000 9 (331,9:0 62132X0 7,500,E (2,103931 -2N Support Costs 304200 815020 458,2O 587,000 (22W331 -28'// Projects and Operations Program Clzerations 4,60Q700 9,259000 5395100 5535300 275300 3% Etneerire 27,545320 41935830 27,735100 24,312,ECO (17,255XO) -4N Construction 25914)800 41,777,600 3191100. 125964,8C0 85,187,20 MI% Design Build 16272,900 14,435030 11,OO = 29,0501003 14,612,000 101% Right ofWay and land 44,661000 X1127,003 54)535100 K9,475903 35349,500 44% Local Streets and Roads 35857,003 35025,003 351E5E00 35357,030 5332,000 9% Re®onal Arterials 8631600 1522,030 17,403,20D 24401400 4)135400 29% Spada) Studies 55XO 81030 &LOCO 41000(4g030) -W0 Operatirg and Capital asbusernents - • I4000 254030 N/A TotalProjects and Operatiors 162,557,033 225S7,400 1E5055203 3313E9,110 125262,203 53% Capital Outlay 6Z800 175003 177,030 225,00D *OM 2EP/o Debt Service 123,335E00 b2,995,000 62,% 000 145413,000 81414003 1 N Transfers Out 16584st100 139,639,7:0 135025,E00 301,015400 1b1,374700 118/0 TOTAL Capital Project DzveloprentandCelivery $ 4E4875i830 $ 457,S67,600 $ 397,909,700 $ 815241,7:0 $ 33,EE4100 81% Capital Project Development and Delivery Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.44 0.39 0.35 Capital Projects Manager 3.00 4.00 3.60 • Chief Financial Officer 0.12 0.26 0.24 Community Relations Manager 0.93 0.90 0.85 Deputy Executive Director 0.09 0.10 0.07 Executive Director 0.36 0.40 0.36 Goods Movement Manager 0.00 0.00 0.25 Government Relations Manager 0.00 0.05 0.15 Planning and Programming Manager 0.04 0.05 0.05 Procurement Administrator 0.18 0.05 0.54 Procurement Manager 0.19 0.31 0.75 Project Delivery Director 1.00 1.00 0.99 Project Development Director 0.83 0.87 0.94 Rail Manager 0.00 0.10 0.00 Right of Way Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Staff Analyst 1.00 1.00 1.03 Staff Analyst 1.00 1.20 1.00 Toll Program Director 0.98 1.00 1.00 Toll Project Manager 1.00 1.00 2.00 FTE 12.16 13.68 15.17 Department Budget Overview Department Description The primary responsibility of Capital Projects is the development and delivery of major highway and rail capital projects where the Commission is identified as the lead agency. The delivery of a capital project can include tasks such as feasibility studies, preliminary engineering, environmental clearance, final design, right of way acquisition, construction, and construction management. Funding is also provided through Capital Projects for local jurisdiction highway and regional arterial projects based on funding agreements with the Commission. Approximately 58% of the Commission's FY 2012/13 budgeted expenditures originates in this department managed by the Toll Program,. Project Delivery, and Project Development Directors responsible for the capital program. Capital Projects accelerates delivery of the Measure A, toll, state, and federally funded highway, regional arterial, and rail capital improvement projects throughout the County. Highway improvements currently in progress include the addition of mixed flow, carpool, and tolled express lanes; widening and realignment projects; and interchange improvements as well as a new CETAP corridor. Regional arterial capital improvements include funding for Western County TUMF regional arterial projects. Commuter rail capital improvements include the expansion of commuter rail service in Riverside County. This department also provides the necessary coordination between the Commission and Caltrans for the development of scope, cost, and project delivery schedules for Measure A projects that are funded by the STIP and Proposition 1B CMIA. The 2009 Measure A program includes funding to the incorporated cities and the County for local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction. The budgeted amount is set by formula established in the Measure A TIP. To be eligible to receive these Measure A funds, each city in the Western County and Coachella Valley areas and the County must participate in the TUMF program, which is administered by WRCOG in Western County and by CVAG in Coachella Valley. Additionally, for Western County jurisdictions, they must also participate in the MSHCP. Annually all cities and the County are required to submit a five-year CIP and meet an MOE requirement. Each jurisdiction's respective allocation is based on population (Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (Coachella Valley) and the amount of sales tax generated. The city of La Quinta does not participate in the Coachella Valley TUMF Program, and the city of Beaumont was determined to be in noncompliance with the Western County TUMF program. Accordingly, La Quinta's Measure A allocation is remitted to CVAG in lieu of the TUMF, and Beaumont's Measure A allocation istransferred to the Commission's 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial program. Given the support required to oversee and participate in the project development work, costs for Commission staff and related support have been included in this department budget. The projects identified in the FY 2011/12 budget funded by Measure A, TUMF, state, or federal funds as well as future toll revenues require the continued support of the Bechtel program management team which includes program managers, project engineers, construction engineers, inspectors, contracts administration, and support staff. Right of Way Acquisition and Support Services The primary goal of the Right of Way Management Division is to deliver right of way in the most cost effective manner and within project schedules, while adhering to federal and state regulations. Commission staff required to supervise and manage right of way services and related support for individual projects are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department budget. The Commission authorized the development of a Right of Way Acquisition Program in 2006. To implement the Commission's directive, staff procured the services of on -call right of way consultant services in the fields of title and escrow, right of way engineering and surveying, environmental assessment, appraisal and appraisal review, acquisition and relocation, feasibility studies and cost estimates, property management, and utility relocation. These consultants are managed and supervised by the Right of Way Management Division. Property Management The Commission strives to manage its real property with the objective of maximizing existing and future public transportation benefits, safety, and income by means of professional property management policies and procedures. This includes issuing licenses and rights of entry for authorized third -party uses, as well as investigating and resolving issues regarding uses that are not authorized by the Commission. On certain occasions, the Commission may also grant easements. General maintenance activities and security measures are also part of the property management scope of work on all Commission -owned properties. The demolition and clearance of structures and other improvements on acquired property, excluding commuter rail stations, is included in the property management function. Additionally, the Commission must manage real property acquired for a project until it is required for construction. Since 1990, the Commission has acquired property assets in the course of rail and highway project implementation. To date, the rail properties number over 225 parcels. The Commission acquired approximately 500 parcels for the SR-74 widening project (Segments 1 and 2), and most of these parcels, which were related to Segment 1, have been transferred to Caltrans. In addition approximately 100 properties have been acquired for the SR-91 HOV lanes, Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment, Perris Valley Line, and SR-60 HOV lanes/I-215 to Redlands Boulevard projects. Property acquisition for the SR-91 corridor improvement project began in 2010 with 12 properties acquired to date. These properties were acquired in fee, and some will be transferred primarily to Caltrans upon completion of the projects. Upon project completion, all remaining properties within every project are reassessed and deemed surplus when it has been determined that the continued retention of the property no longer supports the Commission's policy goals and objectives. Long -Term Strategic Planning Several years ago, the strategic plan for the 1989 Measure A highway program was updated and provided the guidance for completion of the 1989 Measure A highway projects. A significant effort was completed in December 2006 to develop an implementation plan strategy for the 2009 Measure A state highway program, with a focus on the first 10 years of the program through 2019. An objective -based assessment of the Western County portion of the 2009 Measure A TIP was completed along with the prioritization of the program of projects. Four highway corridors, 1-215, 1-15, 1-10, and SR-91, were selected as the priority focus for the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A program, and long-term development work was approved for large scale projects such as the development of the Mid County Parkway, realignment of SR-79, and the bi-county widening of 1-215 to San Bernardino County. Project development activities for these projects have been ongoing. As a result of the recession and related decline in Measure A revenues, staff commenced an update of project' costs and anticipated funding in mid-2009. After several months of review of funding issues with an ad hoc committee, an update and reprioritization of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan was presented to the Commission at its annual workshop in January 2010. Various actions were taken on the four priority highway projects (SR-91, 1-10, 1-15, and 1-215). Four of the 1-215 corridor projects were selected as a top priority (1-215 south and central segments, 1-215 bi-county gap closure, and French Valley interchange), while the 1-215 north segment was deferred to a later year. Preliminary engineering and environmental clearance activities for the 1-15 corridor project will be completed; however, final design will be deferred for a few years. A scope reevaluation and related project reassessment of this project is expected to be completed in summer 2012. The 1-10 truck climbing lanes project was deferred several years. The SR-91 corridor improvement .project will continue to move forward with a procurement of a design -build team and achievement of financial close expected in late FY 2012/13. For the strategic projects, preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will be completed for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment; right of way acquisition for Mid County will be considered for extraordinary acquisitions on a pay-as-you-go basis, while right of way acquisitions for SR-79 realignment will be suspended due to lack of available funding. Project costs and anticipated funding for these projects have been updated annually, and a status update has been included in each of the annual workshops in 2011 and 2012. Updated capital project implementation strategic plans are expected in 2019 and 2029, as required by the 2009 Measure A. CVAG has developed a strategic plan for Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial projects based upon a transportation project prioritization study that is updated periodically. The Perris Valley Line is the most significant rail capital project, and it was included in the 1989 and 2009 Measure A programs. Other rail capital projects are developed in coordination with SCRRA as well as the implementation of the Perris Valley Line. Four new Western County transportation corridors were identified through CETAP and are eligible for 2009 Measure A Western County new corridor and TUMF CETAP funding. Given the size and anticipated cost of these new corridors, they are moving forward on varied schedules with the work on the internal corridors, the Mid County Parkway and 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment to French Valley interchange, being the most advanced. Western County TUMF regional arterial projects were approved in 2004 based on a call for projects, which is discussed in the Planning and Programming Department in section 6.2 of this document. Additionally, the Commission will participate in the improvement of a wildlife corridor crossing under SR-91, B Canyon, in collaboration with Caltrans, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, U.S. National Forest, California Department of Fish and Game, and the Department of Parks and Recreation. The actual construction of this enhancement will be done subsequent to the construction on the SR-91 corridor improvement project. These strategic planning activities play a significant part of the Commission's annual budget process, in particular the capital budget. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its emphasis on the closeout of the 1989 Measure A program. • The Western Riverside County Delivery Plan serves as the basis for defining the 2009 Measure A project selection and prioritization. • Western County TUMF regional arterial projects are based on the list approved by the Commission in 2004. • Agreements for the advancement of 2009 Measure A funds have been obtained from CVAG and cities participating in the debt programs. The annual principal and interest payments for these loans will be deducted by the Commission from each agency's respective disbursements based on the terms of the loan agreements. • Highway project costs are based on engineers' estimates and scope agreements with Caltrans. • Construction projects are competitively bid to minimize costs. • All projects will be built to required standards. • All highway projects, with the exception of tolled express lane facilities, are transferred upon completion to Caltrans; operation of these facilities is the responsibility of Caltrans. Tolled express lane facilities, when completed, will be operated and maintained by the Commission for 50 years by agreement between Caltrans and the Commission. • The Commission will develop strategies to implement alternative financing structures including public toll roads. • 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial projects will be selected and programmed when revenues are at a level that can sustain reasonable cash flow to fund the construction projects selected for this program. • Development of the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway strategic projects through preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will continue. Accomplishments • Continued implementation of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Continued construction phase for 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment widening from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road and the 60/215 East Junction HOV project. • Completed the final design and right of way acquisitions, continued to perform utility relocations, and advertised and awarded the construction contract for the SR-91 HOV lanes project. " C o m p l e t e d f i n a l d e s i g n , r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n , a n d u t i l i t y r e l o c a t i o n s a n d i n i t i a t e d p r o c u r e m e n t f o r a c o n s t r u c t i o n m a n a g e m e n t t e a m f o r t h e S R - 7 4 c u r v e r e a l i g n m e n t p r o j e c t a n d t h e I - 2 1 5 / B l a i n e S t r e e t t o M a r t i n L u t h e r K i n g B o u l e v a r d w i d e n i n g p r o j e c t . " S u b s t a n t i a l l y c o m p l e t e d t h e f i n a l d e s i g n , r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n s , a n d u t i l i t y r e l o c a t i o n s f o r t h e 1 - 2 1 5 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t c e n t r a l s e g m e n t w i d e n i n g f r o m S c o t t R o a d t o N u e v o R o a d . " C o m p l e t e d t h e d e s i g n a n d r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n a n d u t i l i t y r e l o c a t i o n s f o r t h e I - 2 1 5 b i - c o u n t y H O V p r o j e c t . " B e g a n t h e p r o j e c t r e p o r t a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l p h a s e f o r t h e 1 - 2 1 5 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t s o u t h c o n n e c t o r s . " R e c e i v e d a $ 2 0 m i l l i o n T I G E R g r a n t a n d s e l e c t e d t o s u b m i t a n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a f e d e r a l f e d e r a l T I F I A l o a n u n d e r t h e U . S . D D T ' s T I F I A a n d T I G E R p r o g r a m s t o s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e n e f i t t h e f i n a n c i n g o f t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t . " E a r n e d a p r e l i m i n a r y i n v e s t m e n t g r a d e r a t i n g o f t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t f i n a n c i n g . " R e a c h e d a g r e e m e n t w i t h O C T A t o j o i n t l y o p e r a t e a n d m a i n t a i n t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s a n d w i t h C a l t r a n s f o r a 5 0 - y e a r l e a s e o f t h e S R - 9 1 m e d i a n t o a l l o w t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o o p e r a t e t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s w h e n t h e y a r e e x t e n d e d i n t h e f u t u r e . " M a d e s u b s t a n t i a l p r o g r e s s o n t h e p r o j e c t r e p o r t a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t u d i e s f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o j e c t s : �% S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t ( 9 6 % c o m p l e t e ) : i s s u e d t h e D r a f t E n v i r o n m e n t a l D o c u m e n t a n d c o n d u c t e d a p u b l i c h e a r i n g ; a n d �% 1 - 1 5 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t p r o j e c t ( 6 6 % c o m p l e t e ) . " C o m p l e t e d t h e p r o j e c t r e p o r t a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t u d i e s a n d s t a r t e d f i n a l d e s i g n f o r t h e 9 1 / 7 1 i n t e r c h a n g e i m p r o v e m e n t s p r o j e c t . " C o n t i n u e d c o n s t r u c t i o n p h a s e f o r t h e 7 4 / 2 1 5 i n t e r c h a n g e p r o j e c t . " I n i t i a t e d u p d a t e d t e c h n i c a l s t u d i e s a n d e n g i n e e r i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n s t o a d d r e s s t h e r e d u c e d p r o j e c t l i m i t s o f t h e p r o p o s e d M i d C o u n t y P a r k w a y p r o j e c t . " M a d e s u b s t a n t i a l p r o g r e s s r e l a t e d t o t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o c e s s f o r t h e S R - 7 9 r e a l i g n m e n t p r o j e c t . " C o n t i n u e d s u c c e s s f u l n e g o t i a t i o n s w i t h t h e F T A r e l a t e d t o t h e S m a l l S t a r t s f u n d i n g a u t h o r i z a t i o n f o r t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e . " M a d e s u b s t a n t i a l p r o g r e s s r e l a t e d t o t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o c e s s f o r t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e p r o j e c t . " C o m p l e t e d p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g a n d b e g a n a d v a n c e d p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g f o r t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e p r o j e c t . " S u p p o r t e d p u b l i c o u t r e a c h a c t i v i t i e s b y p r o v i d i n g g r a p h i c s f r o m t h e r i g h t o f w a y p r o j e c t m a n a g e m e n t d a t a b a s e f o r C o m m i s s i o n p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o f a c i l i t a t e p u b l i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f p r o j e c t i s s u e s . " D e c l a r e d p r o p e r t y n o l o n g e r n e e d e d f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p u r p o s e s a s s u r p l u s . M a j o r I n i t i a t i v e s F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 w i l l m a r k t h e f o u r t h y e a r a s t h e C o m m i s s i o n c l o s e s o u t t h e 1 9 8 9 M e a s u r e A p r o g r a m s a n d c o n t i n u e s p r o j e c t a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d t o t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A p r o g r a m s , o f w h i c h t h e h i g h w a y , r a i l , r e g i o n a l a r t e r i a l , a n d l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s p r o g r a m s r e p r e s e n t t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e f u n d i n g a l l o c a t i o n s . W h i l e m o s t o f t h e 1 9 8 9 M e a s u r e A h i g h w a y p r o j e c t s h a v e b e e n c o m p l e t e d , a f e w p r o j e c t s w i l l c o n t i n u e s u c h a s t h e S R - 9 1 H O V l a n e s f r o m A d a m s S t r e e t t o 6 0 / 9 1 / 2 1 5 i n t e r c h a n g e , S R - 7 4 c u r v e w i d e n i n g , 7 4 / 2 1 5 i n t e r c h a n g e i m p r o v e m e n t s , a n d 6 0 / 2 1 5 E a s t J u n c t i o n H O V l a n e c o n n e c t o r s . T h e 1 - 2 1 5 b i - c o u n t y H O V g a p c l o s u r e p r o j e c t a n d P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e r a i l p r o j e c t s w i l l c o n t i n u e , a s b o t h a r e a l s o i n c l u d e d i n t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A . V a r i o u s s t a g e s o f p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t w o r k f o r p r o j e c t s i n c l u d e d i n t h e W e s t e r n C o u n t y H i g h w a y D e l i v e r y P l a n w i l l c o n t i n u e i n F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 . D e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e c a p i t a l p r o j e c t s , i n c l u d i n g l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s f u n d i n g , t h a t a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 b u d g e t f o l l o w t h e P e r f o r m a n c e / W o r k l o a d I n d i c a t o r s . D e p a r t m e n t G o a l s B u i l d u p o n a n d s t r e n g t h e n t h e p a r t n e r s h i p w i t h C a l t r a n s t o w a r d t i m e l y d e l i v e r y o f i d e n t i f i e d M e a s u r e A , C M I A , t o l l p r o g r a m , a n d S T I P p r o j e c t s . ( P o l i c y G o a l s : M o b i l i t y , E n v i r o n m e n t a l S t e w a r d s h i p , E c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t ) Objectives: • Develop agreements with Caltrans and FHWA, as may be required, to finalize project scoping and cost issues for the STIP, federal demonstration, toll, and Measure A funded highway projects in Riverside County. • Meet the project milestones identified in the CMIA agreements between Commission, Caltrans, and the CTC. To the extent permitted by law, pursue reasonable involvement of local DBE and SBE firms in contract work. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Maintain and monitor goal for a minimum DBE participation in all federally funded contracts. Provide effective communication of project progress to the Commission board members, city councils, the County Board of Supervisors, Caltrans, CTC, FTA and FHWA. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Develop a strategy with Caltrans District 8 that would allow the Commission to advance specific projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan to take advantage of any unexpected state or federal funding which may become available through increased state or federal budget authorizations, federal stimulus, or potential loan programs to advance construction. • Conduct quarterly meetings with FTA and report on progress of Perris Valley Line project. Work with Caltrans and other agencies toward completion of preliminary engineering and environmental clearance of all projects. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Work with Caltrans, the County, and the cities in Riverside County to complete preliminary design and environmental clearance for Measure A projects that could be eligible to receive additional or early funding from various sources that could become available if a project is sufficiently developed. • Release for public review and comment the updated NEPA and CEQA environmental documents for the Perris Valley Line. • Release for public review and comment the NEPA and CEQA environmental documents for the 1-215 corridor improvement project southbound connector. • Circulate for public review the draft environmental document related to the SR-79 realignment project. • Release the recirculated environmental document for the modified Mid County Parkway project. • Complete the project approval and environmental document for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Initiate the project approval and environmental document of the SR-60 truck climbing lane project. Construct the highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Economic Development, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Complete construction of the 74/215 interchange project. • Commence and complete construction of the SR-74 curve realignment project and the I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening project. • Continue construction on the 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment, the first project in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan to reach construction. • Commence construction on the 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment between Scott Road and Nuevo Road. • Continue construction of the 60/215 East Junction HOV project. • Commence construction on the SR-91 HOV project and the 1-215 bi-county HOV project. • Complete the procurement of a design -build contractor to design and construct the SR-91 corridor improvement project. In coordination with the Rail Program Manager, construct capital improvements at existing commuter rail stations as identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Environmental Stewardship, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objective: • Continue advance preliminary engineering, complete environmental clearance and final design, and start right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line. Acquire right of way for rail and highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Acquire right of way for the following projects: SR-91 corridor improvement project, SR-74 curve realignment project, 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment, and Perris Valley Line. • Protect and maintain properties acquired for future projects. Identify alternative financing strategies in order to fully fund projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Continue the assessment and evaluation of available strategies. • Submit a TIFIA application and complete the application and negotiation process to obtain a federal loan under the U.S. DOT'S TIFIA and TIGER programs to benefit the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Location of Major FY 2012/13 Projects within Riverside County INSERT MAP HERE 1) SR-74 Construction for the curve widening on SR-74 from Calvert Avenue to California Avenue. 2) 74/215 Construction of the interchange. 3) SR-79 Realignment between Gilman Springs Road and Domenigoni Parkway including project study report, project report, and environmental document. 4) SR-91 (A) Construction of HOV lanes from Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange. (B) Final design for the 91/71 interchange improvements. (C) Preliminary engineering, environmental studies, and design -build procurement for toll and mixed flow lanes from SR-241 to Pierce Street. 5) Mid County Parkway 6) Perris Valley Line 7) Local Streets and Roads Preliminary engineering, project report, and environmental documentation for the project. Advanced preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line (Riverside -Moreno Valley -Perris) along the SJBL. Allocation of Measure A revenues to each city and the County to improve, maintain, and repair high priority local streets and roads. 8)60/215 9) 1-215 Bi-County HOV Gap Closure Project Construction of the East Junction HOV lane connectors. Construction and utility relocations for HOV lanes on the 1-215 from the 60/91/215 interchange to Orange Show Road in San Bernardino County. 10) 1-215 (A) Construction of the south segment from 1-15 to Scott Road. (B) Final design and construction for the central segment from Scott Road to Nuevo Road. (C) Construction of the I-215/Blaine to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening. 11) 1-15 Preparation of engineering .and environmental document for the addition of mixed flow, HOV, and tolled express lanes from SR-60 to I- 215 in Temecula. 12) SR-60 Truck Climbing Lane Begin project approval and environmental document of the truck climbing lane project. Capital Project Development & Delivery Performance/Workload Indicators FY 30/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Preliminary Engineering (project reports and environmental documentation) Contracts awarded 4 2 2 1 Plans, specifications, and estimates contracts awarded 1 1 2 1 Number of projects with active right of way acquisition 3 7 7 5 Construction awards 3 2 2 5 Highway and Rail project close-outs 2 1 2 3 License agreements managed 50 52 60 74 Appraisals and appraisal reviews completed 122 76 379 384 Capital Projects Summary The following is a summary of the capital projects included in the FY 2012/13 budget. Costs are, generally categorized by preliminary engineering, final design, right of way, construction, and design -build phases in addition to other project -related costs such as salaries and benefits, Bechtel project management, and legal fees. Western County Highway and Regional Arterial Projects SR-74/1-15 to 7`h Street (P003001) Complete right of way acquisition closeout for Segment II related to the realignment and widening of four -lane roadway between Wasson Canyon Road in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 38,200 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 20,400 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 74/215 Interchange (PO03015) Preliminary engineering began in 2006 and was completed in 2009. Final design was completed in 2009. Construction began in mid-2010 and is scheduled to be completed in 2012. The total project cost is estimated at $30 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,820,000 Construction $ 550,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 223,500 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds, TUMF zone contributions, ARRA funds, and a federal earmark. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR- 74 Curve. Widening (PO03009) Continue with right of way acquisition. Construction of the project should begin 2013. The total estimated project cost is $4.2 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,420,000 Construction/construction management $ 310,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 238,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-79 Realignment (PO03003 & PO05127) Perform realignment environmental and preliminary engineering services from Gilman Springs Road to Domenigoni Parkway. The total estimated project cost is $1.2 billion. The project is expected to be completed with the environmental phase in 2014. Initiation of subsequent phases will be dependent upon the availability of funding. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 1,300,000 Preliminary engineering $ 253,000 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact None; costs have been funded using TUMF regional arterial, federal earmarks, and SAFETEA-LU federal funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-79 Widening/Thompson to Domenigoni (PO05114) Provide funding and support to complete right of way for the widening of SR-79 to four lanes. Right of way acquisition should be complete in 2011/12. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 838,800 Construction $ 386,900 Right of way acquisition/support services Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the County of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $7.1 million. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (PO03026 & PO03028) Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental study, financing, property acquisition, and design -build contract procurement phases for the toll and mixed flow lanes project from SR-241 to Pierce Street, including tolled express lanes connectivity to 1-15 and improvements to the 15/91 interchange. The SR-91 corridor improvement project cost is estimated at $1.3 billion, and project development activities began in September 2007. The project is expected to be open to traffic in 2017. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 4,000,000 Construction $ 60,400,000 Right of way acquisition $ 29,050,000 Design -build $ 5,414,200 Other project -related costs, including toll feasibility work Project development costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds, including sales tax revenue bonds. Toll revenue bonds are expected to be issued in 2013 to provide project financing in addition to securing a federal TIFIA loan to complete the funding plan. Operation and maintenance of future tolled express lanes facilities are the responsibility of the Commission, while all other state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Preliminary estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $11,200,000. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 91/71 Interchange Improvements Project (PO03021) Continue final design for interchange improvements to the 91/71 interchange. The total estimated project cost is $114 million. Preliminary engineering began in February 2008. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 4,000,000 Final design $ 1,250,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 542,000 Other project -related costs Costs for final design and right of way acquisition will be primarily funded using Congressionally -designated federal funding remaining from previous area projects. The balance of funding will come from 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange (PO03005) Begin construction and complete right of way acquisitions. Preliminary engineering began in 2001. Construction of the project should be completed in the summer of 2015. The estimated total project cost is $273 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 150,000 Final design $ 14,195,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 777,300 Other project -related costs Final design costs will be funded using Letter of No Prejudice funds received and CMAQ with 1989 Measure A highway funds for local match. Right of way costs will be funded using STIP-RIP, Traffic Congestion Relief Program, CMAQ, and 1989 Measure A highway funds. CMAQ and CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1B will be used for construction activities. Caltrans is the lead agency. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-91/La Sierra Avenue Interchange (P003014) Provide funding and support to complete construction to widen and fully improve La Sierra Avenue from SR-91 to El Sobrante Road. The landscaping and plant establishment portion of the project is expected to be completed in mid-2013. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 110,600 Construction Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $27.2 million. N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. SR-91/Van Buren Boulevard Interchange (P003008) Provide funding and support for construction to widen and fully improve the interchange at Van Buren Boulevard. This project is expected to be completed in 2014. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,184,300 Construction Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $7.6 million. N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. I-15 Corridor Improvement Project (P003027) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies to add two tolled express lanes and one mixed flow lane in each direction from SR-60 to SR-74 and to add one HOV lane in each direction from SR-74 to 1-215. Preliminary engineering and environmental work started in April 2008. Project development beyond preliminary engineering for final design and construction is dependent upon the ongoing toll feasibility studies and are not currently budgeted. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 8,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 705,600 Other project -related costs, including toll feasibility work Project development costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. It is anticipated that toll revenue bonds will be issued in the future to provide project financing and secure a federal TIFIA loan to complete the project funding plan. Operation and maintenance of future tolled express lanes facilities are the responsibility of the Commission, while all other federal and state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Preliminary estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $15 million. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 1-15/Los Alamos Road Bridge Replacement (P003036) Provide funding and support to begin construction in 2013. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2014. The total project cost is estimated at $3.8 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Construction 2009 Measure A highway funds will be used for construction. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was approximately $2.9 million. The city of Murrieta is the lead agency for construction. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-60 Truck Climbing Lanes (PO03029) Begin preliminary engineering in 2013. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2020. The total project cost is estimated at $122 million. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 3,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 79,100 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact CMAQ will be used for preliminary engineering. Caltrans will be performing the preliminary engineering. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors (PO03017) Continue construction. Final design and right of way acquisition were completed in 2010. Preliminary engineering began in 2006. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2014. The total project cost is estimated at $42 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 30,000 Construction/construction management $ 265,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 68,000 Other project -related costs STP and CMAQ, with STIP-RIP and STIP-IIP for local match funds, will be used for construction. Caltrans is the lead agency for construction. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvements (South Segment)/1-15 to Scott Road (PO03022) Continue construction to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Final design began in 2008 and was completed in 2010. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2008. Construction is expected to finish in 2013. The total project cost is estimated at $33 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 6,320,000 Construction/construction management $ 581,700 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds and 2009 Measure A highway funds; CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1B bonds will be used for construction activities. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvements (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road (PO03023) Continue final design and right of way acquisition to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2011. Final design began in 2011, and construction will begin in 2013. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2016. The total project cost is estimated at $120 million. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 1,000,000 Final design $ 8,460,000 Construction/construction management services $ 1,303,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 1,464,100 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using CMIA, STIP-RIP, and 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvement Southbound Connector (P003031) Continue preliminary engineering, which began in 2010, to widen southbound connector to 1-15 with construction expected to be completed by 2019. The total project cost is estimated at $8.5 million. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 650,000 Preliminary engineering $ 100,000 Final design $ 166,200 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard Widening (P003035) Construction to widen the 1-215 from Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard. Total project cost is $2 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,990,300 Construction/construction management $ 137,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds and STP. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Mid County Parkway (P002302 & P005123) Perform activities related to the development of a recirculated project report and environmental document for a new corridor from 1-215 to SR-79. This phase is anticipated to be completed in FY 2012/13. Construction of this new facility will be completed over many years as funding becomes available and is estimated to cost $1.6 billion. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Preliminary engineering/environmental $ 20,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 380,700 Other project -related costs and uses Costs will be funded with TUMF CETAP funds and 2009 Measure A new corridor funds. N/A; responsibility for highway operations has not been determined. Various Western County Highway Projects (P623999) Provide funding and support for the engineering, construction, and right of way activities related to various Western County highway projects. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact S 100,000 Engineering Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects (P005102, P005103, P005105, P005106, P005107, P005108, P005113, P005115, P005116, P005118, P005119, P005120, P005128, P005128, P665102 & P725000) Provide TUMF funding and support for the engineering, right of way, and construction activities related to various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects approved by the Commission in September 2004 following a call for projects. Total project costs approved for TUMF regional arterial projects approximate $79 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 652,000 Engineering and design $ 28,907,200 Construction $ 10,101,800 Right of way acquisition $ 320,400 Other project -related costs None; costs will be funded using TUMF regional arterial funds with various local jurisdictions as lead agency for their respective projects. N/A; regional arterial operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects MSHCP Land Acquisition in Coachella Valley (P318100) Provide funding and support for the acquisition of land as mitigation for the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of future highway and regional arterial projects as required by 2009 Measure A under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. In September 2005 the Commission approved the advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds in the amount of $15.025 million for CVAG's land mitigation acquisitions. CVAG began expending these funds in FY 2008/09 following completion of federal permit and other matters. As of June 30, 2012, the projected remaining funding commitment for this project is approximately $0. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,024,100 Land acquisition Costs will be funded using debt proceeds as an advance of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds. N/A; land mitigation operations are the responsibility of CVAG. Various Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects (P563999) Provide funding and support for the Monterey Avenue corridor in Rancho Mirage and Jackson Street, Avenue 42, and Jefferson Street in Indio under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. In September 2005 the Commission approved the advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds in the amount of $28.275 million for nine regional transportation projects in the cities of Coachella, Indio, Palm Desert, and Rancho Mirage and the County. As of June 30, 2012, the projected remaining funding commitments for these projects are approximately $9 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Rail Projects $ 319,100 Engineering Costs will be funded using debt proceeds as an advance of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds with the cities or County as lead agencies for their respective projects. N/A; highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Ca!trans and the local jurisdictions, respectively. North Main Corona Station Parking Structure (P003808) Complete construction close-out of a parking structure at the North Main Corona station. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 20,000 Construction/support services $ 56,300 Other project -related costs 1989 Measure A Western County Commuter Rail funds. Operations of this parking structure will be the responsibility of the Commission. Annual operating costs are estimated at $300,000 to be funded with LTF. Perris Multimodal Facility.(P003816) Complete construction close-out of the Perris Transit Center. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 867,600 Construction/support services $ 90,200 Other project -related costs None; costs will be funded using Proposition 1B PTMISEA and a contribution from the 2009 Measure A Western County Commuter Assistance fund. Operations of this facility will be the responsibilities of the Commission and RTA, as defined in a cooperative agreement. Of the estimated $76,100 annual operating costs, the Commission will be responsible for approximately $31,000 to be funded by 1989 and 2009 Measure A Western County Commuter Assistance funds. Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects (PO03800, PO03823, PO03824, PO03825, PO03827, PO03828, PO03829, PO03830, PO03831, PO03832, PO03833, and PO03834) Continue advanced preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition and complete environmental clearance for extension of commuter rail services to Perris. Project commenced in December 2007 when the Commission received approval from FTA to move into project development. Other rail projects include adding a fourth main track between the Riverside Downtown station to the connector to the SJBL branch line at Highgrove as well as right of way acquisition. Expected completion date of the Perris Valley Line is November 2014 for a total project cost of $247 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Local Streets and Roads $ 7,500 Engineering/support services $ 1,034,000 Final design $ 64,996,000 Construction/support services $ 17,632,500 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 4,257,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using FTA and 1989 Measure A rail funds as well as proceeds from sales of surplus properties. Subsequent year costs will also include STIP funding. Rail station operations related to this project, which will be the responsibility of the Commission upon completion of the project, will be funded with LTF and property management fees. Rail service and capital operations will be the responsibility of Metrolink and will be funded by the Commission with LTF and STA based on an allocation determined by Metrolink. Annual station operations approximate $300,000 per station, or $1,200,000 annually in the aggregate for four proposed stations. Annually monitor the MOE requirements to ensure local agencies are expending funds according to the 2009 Measure A ordinance. Review local agency 5-year CIPs to ensure Measure A funds are expended on eligible local street and road projects. Western County Area Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Western County. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 425,000 0 120,000 135,000 2,936,000 681,000 1,297,000 1,424,000 895,000 1,123,000 2,830,000 1,660,000 482,000 1,069,000 5,340,000 619,000 2,197,000 440,000 4,061,000 591,000 Banning Beaumont Calimesa Canyon Lake Corona Eastvale Hemet Jurupa Valley Lake Elsinore Menifee Moreno Valley Murrieta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinto Temecula Wildomar Riverside County Commission Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Coachella Valley 28,325,000 Total Western County (455,000) Less: Allocation to Western County regional arterials $ 27,870,000 Total Western County, net All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Coachella Valley. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Palo Verde Valley Area Distribute local return funding for FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,128,000 Cathedral City 508,000 Coachella 369,000 Desert Hot Springs 197,000 Indian Wells 1,330,000 Indio 0 La Quinta 2,185,000 Palm Desert 1,648,000 Palm Springs 734,000 Rancho Mirage 1,271,000 Riverside County 1,234,000 CVAG (La Quinta allocation) $ 10,604,000 Total Coachella Valley All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. local streets and roads projects in Palo Verde Valley. $ 715,000 168,000 $ 883,000 Blythe Riverside County Total Palo Verde Valley All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Riverside County Transportation Commission 17 -) Community Profile Riverside County is the fourth largest county in California, stretching westward nearly 200 miles from the Colorado River and comprising more than 7200 square miles that include 28 incorporated cities. This includes the newly - incorporated cities of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley. Riverside County can trace its beginning back to 1893 when voters approved the formation of a new county. The area was carved from parts of San Bernardino and San Diego counties. In its 115 years of existence, the County's economy has diversified and prospered. Originally, Riverside County was a very agricultural area, known for a wide variety of crops grown on its fertile soils. The County remains a strong agricultural area, but it is increasingly becoming a leader in manufacturing, transportation, construction, and tourism. Demographics The success of the area has brought dramatic population growth to Riverside County (Chart 39). Since the 1980's, the County has been one of the fastest growing counties in the State. Chart 39 — Population — Last Ten Years 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 L 3 5 0 1 0 0 ti �p0 yp0 LO� 0 101 00 ry0�00 ry00 �00 ry01 ry0ti Source: California Department of Finance The available and affordable housing in Riverside County has attracted many people to the County (Chart 40); however, a housing slowdown has occurred in recent years primarily as a result of the effect of the subprime mortgages, ensuing credit crisis, and recession. Chart 40 — Home Price Advantage Home Value Advantage Riverside County and Southern California Markets (February, 2012) ■ Median Home Values ❑ Riverside County Advantage 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 Riverside Los Angeles San Diego Ventura Source: DataQuick News County Orange During the growth period, jobs also increased as many firms relocated to the area and moved away from older communities; however, the current economic slowdown has caused the County's unemployment rate to rise from its near all-time lows (Chart 41). Chart 41— Unemployment Rate (%) — Last Ten Years 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% O.t' OHO 01ti0 1ti ,10 ,10 ,y0 .ti0 .�0 .ti0,y0 Source: California Employment Development Department The overall economic outlook for Riverside County is expected to continue to improve in 2012 based on various economic forecasts. The area is preparing for its future as well in supporting better education. The County is home to a number of colleges and universities including University of California, Riverside. Retail Sales As a result of demographic changes and growth, retail sales in the County increased through 2006 (Chart 42 and Table 53); however, the effect of the recession on retail sales was noted in sales tax receipts beginning in 2007 through 2010. FY 2011/12 retail sales have shown improvements from these previous years. Chart 42 — Retail Sales (%) - $23 Billion — 2010 Data Apparel Stores 6.02 % Source: State Board of Equalization Household & Electronics 3.81% Building Materials 5.32% Table 53 —Riverside County Taxable Sales Apparel Stores General Merchandise Food Stores Eating & Drinking Household & Electronics Building Materials Automotive Other Retail Sales Total all other services & outlets Source: State Board of Equalization by Business Type (in 000's) 2010 1,391,174 $ 2,947,905 1,267,758 2,317,486 883,109 1,232,145 5,306,408 1,480,601 6,326,196 — Last Five Years 2009 1,293,271 2,855,733 1,251,220 2,266,853 858,098 1,237,518 4,749,994 1,442,875 6,272,315 2008 2007 2006 1,121,543 $ 1,171,013 $ 1,080,385 3,389,936 3,593,134 3,553,554 1,254,366 1,352,609 1,309,782 2,340,554 2,388,039 2,316,422 816,379 843,945 948,217 1,435,337 1,961,911 2,390,236 6,126,512 7,137,075 6,956,756 3,250,335 2,794,790 1,024,551 6,268,633 7,781,093 10,236,334 23,152,782 $ 22,227,877 $ 26,003,595 $ 29,023,609 $ 29,816,237 The 2010 taxable sales generation by jurisdiction in the County, including ranking compared to 2001, is presented in Table 54. Table 54 —Taxable Sales Generation by Jurisdiction in Riverside County for 20101 City of Riverside City of Corona City of Temecula City of Palm Desert City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Palm Springs City of Hemet City of La Quinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Indio City of Cathedral City City of Perris City of Menifee City of Rancho Mirage City of Norco City of Beaumont City of Coachella City of San Jacinto City of Banning City of Blythe City of Wildomar City of Desert Hot Springs City of Indian Wells City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake Incorporated Unincorporated county area Countywide California Source: California State Board of Equalization 1 Year represents most recent data available Taxable Sales (in 000's) $ 3,692,302 2,454,989 2,180,304 1,266,834 1,067,546 903,640 806,540 772,608 633,545 599,836 582,332 559,069 516,944 370,469 355,204 354,729 292,339 259,829 182,110 146,742 135,094 104,184 89,328 74,996 51,057 14,010 % of Total 15.9% 10.6% 9.4% 5.5 % 4.6% 3.9 % 3.5 % 3.3% 2.8 % 2.7% 2.5 % 2.4% 2.2 % 1.6% 1.5 % 1.5% 1.3 % 1.1% 0.8 % 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3 % 0.2 % 0.1% 2010 Rank 2001 Rank 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 11 8 9 9 8 10 14 11 13 12 10 13 7 14 15 15 N/A 16 16 17 12 18 20 19 18 20 21 21 17 22 19 23 N/A 24 22 25 23 26 24 27 25 18,466,580 4,686,200 79.8 % 20.2 % 1 1 $ 23,152,780 100.0 % $ 477,347,986 Measure A Sales Taxes Measure A is a one-half of one cent transaction and use tax for transportation improvements in Riverside County. The County had a 7.75% sales tax rate including the Measure A rate through March 2009, 8.75% from April 2009 through March 2011, and 7.75% thereafter (Table 55). Table 55 - Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates - Last Five Years Fiscal Year Measure A Direct Rate County of Riverside 2012 0.50% 7.75% 2011 0.50% 8.75% 2010 0.50% 8.75% 2009 0.50% 8.75% 2008 0.50% 7.75% Source: Commission Finance Department and California State Board of Equalization During the recent economic slowdown, changes have occurred in the economic categories in which the Measure A sales tax was generated (Table 56). General retail and transportation represented the two highest economic categories and more than 53% of sales taxes generated. Transportation has improved in recent years due to high fuel prices. 'Construction, which was comprised of the building materials wholesale and building materials retail segments, was a significant contributor but has continued to experience declines due to the lingering effects of the recession and housing slowdown. Table 56 - Sales Tax by Economic Category Economic Category 2008/4 2009/4 2010/4 2011/4 % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total General Retail 28.2% 30.9% 30.9% 29.9% Transportation 25.0% 22.8% 25.0% 27.1% Food Products 15.9% 17.8% 17.0.% 16.4% Business to Business 16.4% 15.2% 14.5% 14.1% Construction 12.3% 11.1% 10.5% 10.5% Miscellaneous 2.2% 2.2% 2.1% 2.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: MuniServices, LLC Each economic category consists of several economic segments, which provide additional information regarding economic activity in the County. In 2006 the top five economic segments consisted of auto sales -new, department stores, building materials wholesale, service stations, and restaurants. Over the next four calendar years, auto sales -new fell from the leading economic segment to fourth and building materials wholesale dropped to sixth, while department stores, service stations, and restaurants rose to the top three economic segments. The top five economic segments in 2011 with comparisons to previous years are presented in Table 57. Table 57 - Sales Tax by Economic Segment Top Five Economic Segments (Category) Service Stations (Transportation) Department Stores (General Retail) Restaurants (Food Products) Auto Sales - New (Transportation) Miscellaneous Retail (Miscellaneous) Source: MuniServices, LLC 2008/4 2009/4 2010/4 2011/4 % of Total . % of Total - -% of Total % of Total 11.2% 10.0% 11.6% 12.9% 11.6% 12.9% 12.6% 11.8% 9.9% 11.0% 10.7% 10.3% 8.9% 7.9% 8.4% 9.1% 6.1% 6.5% 6.7% 6.6% Commission Facts Programs and Services Measure A: The Commission administers Measure A, the local half -cent sales tax for new transportation projects in the County. Under Measure A, funding is used to improve highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, local streets and roads, transit and specialized transportation services including commuter assistance, economic development, new corridors, and Commission administration. Measure A expires in 2039. Transportation Development Act: The TDA is comprised of two elements: Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funding. The Commission administers the LTF one -quarter of one cent of the state sales tax on behalf of the County. STA is generated from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel and is allocated by the State to the Commission on the basis of population andas a percentage of transit fare revenues. TDA funding is allocated primarily to bus and rail transit operators for transit operating and capital needs. Additionally, LTF funding is available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, planning, and administration and allocated to the Commission and local jurisdictions in the County. Highways: The Commission assists with the planning and funding for highway improvements. Major current projects include: 60/215 HOV lanes connector, 74/215 interchange, SR-79 realignment, SR-91 corridor improvement project, SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange, 1-15 corridor improvement project, 1-215 corridor mobility improvement projects, and Mid County Parkway. State highway maintenance is generally the responsibility of Caltrans. Local Streets and Roads: The Commission administers funding to local jurisdictions to improve streets, intersections, signal coordination, and pavement. Local streets and roads maintenance is the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Commuter Rail: The Commission funds and oversees Metrolink rail services within the County. The Commission's three Metrolink lines are the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 lines. The Commission owns and maintains five Metrolink stations located at: ➢ Riverside Downtown Station, 4066 Vine Street, Riverside ➢ La Sierra Station, 10901 Indiana Avenue, Riverside ➢ Pedley Station, 6001 Pedley Road, Riverside ➢ North Main Corona Station, 250 E. Blaine Street, Corona ➢ West Corona Station, 155 S. Auto Center Drive, Corona Motorist Assistance: The Commission provides emergency call boxes through the SAFE and offers emergency towing services through the FSP. Commuter Assistance: The Commission provides a variety of rideshare services both to employers and commuters. Through voluntary participation, commuters and employers receive a direct benefit from their sales tax dollars, and the entire region benefits from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. Specialized Transit: The Commission maintains a strong commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provisions of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Glossary of Acronyms ADA — Americans with Disabilities Act ARRA* — American Recovery and Reinvestment Act BABs — Build America Bonds Bank of America — Bank of America, N.A. Bank of Tokyo — The Bank of Tokyo -Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., acting through its New York Branch Bechtel — Bechtel Infrastructure BNSF — Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Board — Board of Commissioners for the Riverside County Transportation Commission CABS — Capitalized Appreciation Bonds CAFR — Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CaIPERS — California Public Employees Retirement System • Ca!trans — California Department of Transportation CAGTC — Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act CETAP — Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process CHP — California Highway Patrol CHSRA — California High Speed Rail Authority CIBs — Current Interest Bonds CIP — Capital Improvement Plan CMA — Congestion Management Agency CMAQ* — Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality CMIA — Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (Proposition 1B funding category) CMP — Congestion Management Program CMS — Congestion Management System Commission — Riverside County Transportation Commission Coordinated Plan — Coordinated Public Transit —Human Services Transportation Plan County — County of Riverside CTC — California Transportation Commission CTSA — Consolidated Transportation Service Agency CVAG — Coachella Valley Association of Governments Deutsche Bank — Deutsche Bank AG DBE — Disadvantaged Business Enterprise DMV — Department of Motor Vehicles ERP — Enterprise Resource Planning ETC — Employer Transportation Coordinators FHWA* — Federal Highway Administration FSP — Freeway Service Patrol FTA* — Federal Transit Administration FTE — Full-time Equivalent FTIP — Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY — Fiscal Year GASB — Governmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA — Government Finance Officers Association HOV — High Occupancy Vehicle (Carpool Lane) 1 — Interstate 1E511 — Inland Empire 511 IEOC - Inland Empire —Orange County Metrolink Service IIP* — Interregional Improvement Program Inland Empire — Region covering Riverside and San Bernardino counties IVR — Interactive Voice Response JARC — Jobs Access Reverse Commute (FTA Section 5316) JPMorgan — JP Morgan Chase Bank LIBOR — London Interbank Offer Rate LOS — Level of Service LOSSAN — Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo, a rail corridor LTF* — Local Transportation Fund . Measure K — Increase of sales tax revenue bonds debt limit to $975 million approved by voters in November 2010 Metrolink — Operating Name for SCRRA (see SCRRA) Moody's — Moody's Investors Service MOE — Maintenance of Effort MOU — Memorandum of Understanding MSHCP — Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan MSRC — Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (AB 2766) NEPA — National Environmental Policy Act OA — Obligation Authority OCTA — Orange County Transportation Authority Perris Valley Line — Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project Ports — Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach PPM — Planning, Programming, and Monitoring PTMISEA — Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (Proposition 1B transit funding category) RCA — Regional Conservation Authority RCTC — Riverside County Transportation Commission RFA — Request for Authorization RIP* — Regional Improvement Program RTA — Riverside Transit Agency RTP — Regional Transportation Plan RZEDBs — Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds S&P — Standard & Poor's Rating Service SAFE — Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies SAFETEA-LU* — Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Sales Tax — Reference including transaction and use tax such as Measure A SANBAG — San Bernardino Associated Governments SB375 — Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg) California's Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act SB821 — Senate Bill 821 LTF Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds SBE — Small Business Enterprise SBOE — State Board of Equalization SBPAs — Standby Bond Purchase Agreements SCAG — Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SCRRA — Southern California Regional Rail Authority SCS — Sustainable Communities Strategy Series A Tax -Exempt— Series of tax-exempt bonds issued under 2010 Bonds Series B Taxable — Series of taxable Build America Bonds issued under 2010 Bonds SHCC — Self -Help Counties Coalition SJBL — San Jacinto Branch Line SLPP — State Local Partnership Program SR — State Route SRTP — Short Range Transit Plan SSAB — Salton Sea Air Basin STA* — State Transit Assistance State — State of California STIP* — State Transportation Improvement Program STP*, — Surface Transportation Program SunLine — SunLine Transit Agency TAC — Technical Advisory Committee TCIF — Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (Proposition 1B funding category) TDA* — Transportation Development Act TE* — Transportation Enhancements TIFIA — Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act TIGER — Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery TIP — Transportation Improvement Plan TUMF* — Transportation/Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (Western County/Coachella Valley) Union Bank — Union Bank, N.A. U.S. DOT — United States Department of Transportation Western County — Western area of Riverside County WRCOG — Western Riverside Council of Governments 1989 Measure A — Original 1/2 cent transportation sales tax measure approved by voters in November 1988 2009 Measure A — Extension of sales tax measure approved by voters in November 2002 which became effective upon expiration of original sales tax measure on July 1, 2009 2009 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series A, B and C issued in October 2009 2010 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series A Tax-exempt and Series B Taxable issued in November 2010 2013 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds anticipated to be issued in June 2013 * Additional information provided in Funding Definitions. Funding Definitions Federal Funding Sources Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act The TIFIA program provides credit assistance for qualified projects of regional and national significance that are critical improvements to the nation's surface transportation system. It is designed to fill market gaps and leverage substantial private and non-federal co -investment by providing supplemental and subordinate capital. TIFIA credit assistance is often available on more advantageous terms than in the financial market making it possible to obtain financing, in the form of a secured loan, loan guarantee, and/or standby line of credit, for needed projects when it might not otherwise be possible. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, ARRA is an economic stimulus package "intended to create jobs and promote investment and consumer spending" during the recent recession. It includes domestic spending in infrastructure with investment transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure providing long-term economic benefits. ARRA also created the Build America Bond program, which authorized state and local governments to issue in 2009 and 2010 such bonds as taxable bonds to finance capital expenditures for which would otherwise be financed with tax-exempt governmental bonds. State and local governments issuing BABs receive a direct federal subsidy payment for a portion of their borrowing costs on BABs equal to 35 to 45 percent of the total coupon interest paid to investors. The BAB program was intended to assist state and local governments finance capital projects at lower borrowing costs and to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 formula funds made available to urbanized areas for operating subsidies, capital projects and planning. Operating match is up to 50% of the net operating cost; capital and planning match is 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5309 discretionary funds generally provided to urbanized areas for funding new start rail projects, major bus fleet replacement, and transit facility construction. Matching ratios range from 50/50 to 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5310 funds made available to states for providing capital support to private non-profit and, in certain circumstances, public transit operators. This is a state administered discretionary program providing funds on an 88.53% federal and 11.47% local basis. Section 5311 funds provided to support rural transit operating subsidies and capital projects. Operating match is up to 50% of the net operating cost; capital match is 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5316 funds provided for the development and maintenance of jobs access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non -peak hours as well as supply reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. Section 5317 funds made available for new public transportation services and alternatives for people with disabilities beyond the requirements of the ADA of 1990. Federal Highway Administration In 1991, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) was approved by Congress to replace the former Federal Aid Urban/Federal Aid System funding programs. ISTEA was established as a six -year funding program and was reauthorized for another six years in 1997. This new transportation act was renamed as the Transportation Equity Act of the Twenty-first Century (TEA21) and was extended through August 10, 2005 when the President signed into law SAFETEA-LU. With guaranteed funding for highways, highway. safety, and public transportation totaling $244.1 billion, SAFETEA-LU represents the largest surface transportation investment in our nation's history. Under these programs the following fund sources are allocated to each county, and the Commission further allocates these funds based on federal provisions. Surface Transportation Program Funds allocated lay the Commission and administered by Caltrans that provide funding for local street and road improvements. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds allocated by the Commission for transportation related air quality improvement projects in air quality non -attainment areas. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. Safety projects can qualify for 100% of CMAQ funding. Transportation Enhancements The amount of funds made available under this program is 10% of the state apportionment of STP funds. Projects are qualified and prioritized by the Commission and submitted to the California Transportation Commission for inclusion in the State Transportation Improvement Program. The basic definition of a transportation enhancement project is an improvement that is over and above the base transportation project. Project categories are pedestrian and bicycle facilities, scenic or historic highways, scenic beautification, historic preservation, rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities, preservation of abandoned railway corridors, control/removal of outdoor advertising, archaeological planning and research, .and mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. State Local Funding Sources State Transportation Improvement Program The STIP consists of RIP and IIP funds. The RIP and IIP programs are mainly supported by Proposition 42 funding. The RIP component represents 75% of STIP funds available for capacity projects. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies are responsible for selection of projects proposed for RIP funds. The IIP component represents the remaining 25% of STIP funds available for capacity projects and Caltrans is responsible for the selection of IIP-funded projects. The Commission and Caltrans District 8 work closely in coordinating projects for these fund sources. Proposition 1B Program In November 2006, the voters in California approved Proposition 1B, which will fund various transportation programs from bonds issued by the state of California. Programs to be funded include CMIA, transit capital (PTMISEA), transit security (CTSGP-CTAF), STIP supplement, goods movement (TGIF), state -local partnership funds, and cities and counties. Transportation Development Act The TDA is comprised of two elements: LTF and STA funds. LTF funds are derived from 1/4 of one cent of the state sales tax and are returned to source. There are three areas of apportionment within Riverside County comprised of Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley (Blythe). The Commission administers the LTF on behalf of the County of Riverside. Funds are provided for program administration, Southern California Association of Governments regional planning, local transportation planning, and transit services in Western County and the Coachella Valley. In the Palo Verde Valley, funds support transit services and local street and road improvements. Funds are also provided to the County for local street and road improvements in unincorporated areas. Additionally, under SB 821, 2% of LTF funds are made available for bicycle and pedestrian projects. STA funds are generated from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel and are allocated by the state to the Commission based on population and as a percentage ' of transit fare revenue. The Commission has generally used these funds to support capital purchases and improvements as these funds have been subject to state budgetary actions. Local Funding Sources Measure A Measure A is a half -cent local retail transaction and use tax that was initially approved by the voters in November 1988 for 20 years (Ordinance 88-1) and extended in November 2002 for an additional 30 years (Ordinance 02-001), through June 2039, to help fund key transportation improvements in Riverside County. It provides funds to improve highways, regional arterials, and local streets and roads; to develop new transportation corridors; to expand commuter rail, public transit, specialized transportation services, and commuter programs; develop a program of economic incentives to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs; and support bond financing. These types of improvements are needed to maintain and improve the quality of fife in the County, reduce current congestion, and provide adequate transportation facilities to accommodate reasonable growth. Since existing state and federal sources provide only a limited amount of funding for a limited number of projects, Measure A will cover the shortfall for key projects with a funding source that is under local control. It will use the revenue generated in Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley to meet the unique transportation needs of each of those areas. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee The TUMF program was adopted by all local jurisdictions in the Western County area of Riverside County in July 2003. Under this program, which is administered by the WRCOG, fees are assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County to ensure that new development pays its fair share toward providing the needed infrastructure improvements on the regional system of highways and arterials. In accordance with the extension of Measure A in 2002 and an amended Memorandum of Understanding with WRCOG, the Commission shall receive 48.7% of the TUMF revenues to fund equally the regional arterial system and the development of new corridors. Program Terms The following explanations of terms are presented to aid in understanding the various program terms used and discussed in the narrative. Bicycle and Pedestrian LTF provides revenues for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and related right-of-way costs. Bond Financing In order to accomplish the construction of the highway and rail projects and implementation of the local streets and roads and other programs identified in the Measure A TIP as soon as possible, some level of borrowing will be required. A portion of the revenues generated in the Western County will be made available for this purpose. Commuter Assistance The purpose of this program is to provide short-term incentives to encourage single occupant vehicle drivers to use alternate modes of transportation including carpools, vanpools, bus pools, public bus, commuter rail, walking, and bicycling. Commuter•Rail Measure A provides operating and capital revenue for commuter rail service to Orange and Los Angeles counties. LTF provides revenue for commuter rail operations in Riverside County. These trains operate on existing railroad tracks parallel to major freeways. Commuter rail service provides a safe and reliable transit alternative to driving alone during the peak period. Plans to expand commuter rail service in Western Riverside County from Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley are currently underway. Economic Development Measure A will be used to create an infrastructure improvement bank to improve existing interchanges, construct new interchanges, provide public transit linkages or stations, and make other improvements to the transportation system in Western County. These incentives are intended to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate within the Western County area. Highways Measure A provides revenues to widen existing highways, expand interchanges, and improve remote freeways. These improvements are needed to control traffic congestion in Western County and improve access and safety in Coachella Valley. Costs of these improvements will be covered by funds from state and federal sources. Measure A revenue will be used to supplement —not replace —these other sources and to accelerate work on projects deferred for lack of funding. Local Streets and Roads Measure A provides revenues to local jurisdictions for the construction, repair, and maintenance of local streets and roads. The County and local cities are required to supplement those expenditures with other previously dedicated revenue sources to maintain road improvements at a level equal to or greater than the base year amount. LTF provides revenue for local street and road improvements in the Palo Verde Valley and unincorporated areas of the County. Metrolink The Commission's commuter rail program is part of the regional network operated by SCRRA operating under the name of Metrolink, a five -county joint powers agency composed of the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and Ventura. The purpose of this agency is to manage the operation and maintenance of commuter rail in the five -county metropolitan area. Motorist Assistance The Motorist Assistance program has three elements. The FSP is a special ,team -of tow trucks that travel on selected Riverside County freeways during peak commuter hours to assist drivers when their cars break down. Another element is the call box system, which installation and operation is made possible with revenue provided by the public. Call boxes are being provided by the Commission, which serves as the County's SAFE. The third element is the Inland Empire 511 traveler information system. One dollar per year from every motor vehicle registration pays for the call boxes and their operation and maintenance, 1E511 operations, and matching funds for FSP. New Corridors Four new transportation corridors were identified through the CETAP. Measure A and TUMF funds will be used for environmental clearance, right of way, and construction of these new corridors. Public Transit The Commission is the agency responsible for short-range transportation planning and programming and coordinating the operation of all public transportation service within the County. The Commission allocates and disburses TDA as well as Measure A funds to the transit operators for operating and capital purposes. Regional Arterials Measure A funds generated within the Western County and Coachella Valley areas are used for major regional road projects. The system is to be implemented with a mix of funding required from new development under a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee to be paid by developers from new development and from Measure A funds returned to the Western County and Coachella Valley areas. The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee schedule shall be established in order to generate at least the equivalent of Measure A funding toward the regional arterial system. Specialized Transit Measure A provides public transit revenues to improve transportation services for seniors, persons with disabilities and commuters. For seniors and persons with disabilities, it provides dial -a -ride cab service at night for emergency purposes, guarantees half-price bus fares, and assists centers with their transit programs. For commuters, it improves express bus service and expands ridesharing programs. In the Coachella Valley, revenues also are available for bus replacement and local bus service. Transportation Improvement Plan This plan also acts as the County's expenditure plan and was prepared by the Commission for the proposed 1/2% local retail transaction and use tax for transportation purposes to be collected. This was proposed by the Commission as a means to fill the funding shortfall to implement needed highway, regional arterial, economic development incentives, and new corridors; local street and road programs; commuter rail projects and operations; public bus transit and specialized transportation improvements; commuter assistance programs; and bond financing. General Terms The following explanations of terms are presented to aid in understanding the narrative discussions and illustrations included in this budget document and the terminology generally used in governmental accounting, auditing, financial reporting, and budgeting. Accountability The state of being obliged to explain one's actions, to justify what one does. Accountability requires a government to answer to its citizenry to justify the raising of public resources and the purposes for which they are used. Accounting System The methods and records established to identify, assemble, analyze, classify, record, and report a government's transactions and to maintain accountability for the related assets and liabilities. Accrual Basis of Accounting The accounting of the financial effects of transactions, events, and interfund activities when they occur, regardless of when cash is received or paid. Audit A systematic collection of the sufficient, competent evidential matter needed to attest to the fairness of management's assertions in the financial statements or to evaluate whether management has efficiently and effectively carried out its responsibilities. The auditor obtains this evidential matter through inspection, observation, inquiries, and confirmations with third parties. Balanced Budget The identification of revenues and other financing sources as well as available fund balances to fund operating and capital expenditures and other financing uses on an annual basis. Basis of Accounting A term used to refer to when the effects of transactions or events are recognized for financial reporting purposes. For example, the timing of recognition can be when the transaction or event occurs (accrual basis) or when cash is received or paid (cash basis). Bond A written promise to pay a specified sum of money (face or principal amount) at a specified date or dates in the future (maturity date), together with periodic interest at a specified rate. Bonds are primarily used to finance capital projects. Budget A plan of financial activity for a specified period indicating all planned revenues and expenditures for the budget period. Annual budgets are usually required by law and are essential to sound financial management. The Commission prepares an annual budget that is applicable to a single fiscal year. Budgetary Control The control or management of a government in accordance with an approved budget to keep expenditures within the limitations of available appropriations and available revenues. Budget Document The instrument used by the budget -making authority to present a comprehensive financial program to the appropriating governing body. Capital Outlay Expenditures resulting in the acquisition of or addition to the government's capital assets or assets to be transferred to Ca!trans, such as highway projects. Capital Project A long-term strategic project requiring relatively large sums of revenues, accumulated reserves, and/or financing to acquire, develop, construct, improve, and/or maintain a capital asset such as land, buildings, and infrastructure. Capital Projects Fund A governmental fund type created to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital projects. The Commission has two capital projects funds for Commercial Paper and Sales Tax Bonds to account for debt proceeds from 2009 Measure A commercial paper notes and 2009 Measure A sales tax revenue bonds related to highway, commuter rail, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects. Commercial Paper An unsecured short-term promissory note issued primarily by corporations with maturities ranging from two to 270 days. The credit risk of almost all commercial paper is rated by a rating service. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report A financial report that encompasses all funds of the government. In the financial section of the CAFR are the basic financial statements and required supplementary information as well as combining and individual fund financial statements, as necessary. The CAFR also contains introductory information and statistical data. Current Financial Resources Measurement Focus A measurement focus that reports on the near -term or current inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable financial resources. This focus is unique to accounting and financial reporting for state and local governments and is used for reporting the financial position and results of operations of governmental funds. Debt An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services. Debts of governments include bonds, time warrants, and notes. Debt Coverage Ratio The ratio of pledged revenues to related debt service for a given year. Debt Limit The maximum amount of outstanding gross or net debt legally permitted. Debt Proceeds The difference between the face amount of debt and the issuance discount or the sum of the face amount and the issuance premium. Debt proceeds differ from cash receipts to the extent issuance costs, such as underwriters' fees, are withheld by the underwriter. Debt Service Fund A governmental fund type created to account for the accumulation of resources for and payment of general long-term debt principal and interest. The Commission has one debt service fund for its sales tax revenue bonds. Expenditures Represents decreases in net financial resources on the transfer of property or services for acquiring an asset, service, or settling a loss. Financial Advisor In the context of the issuance of debt, a consultant who advises the issuer on any of a variety of matters related to the issuance. The financial advisor sometimes also is referred to as the fiscal consultant. Financial Audit An audit made to provide independent assurance whether the financial statements of a government are presented fairly in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Financial Resources Resources that are or will become available for spending and include cash, resources ordinarily expected to be converted to cash such as receivables, inventory, and prepaid assets. Fiscal Year For the Commission, the 12-month period that begins July 1 and ends June 30 of the designated fiscal or operating year for accounting and budgeting purposes. Fund A fiscal and accounting entity with a self -balancing set of accounts in which cash and other financial resources, all related liabilities, and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, are recorded and segregated to carry on specific activities or attain certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. Fund Balance The excess of a governmental fund's assets over its liabilities. Fund Type Any one of eleven classifications into which all funds are categorized in governmental accounting. Governmental fund types include general, special revenue, debt service, capital projects, and permanent funds. Proprietary fund types include enterprise and internal service funds. Fiduciary fund types include pension trust, investment trust, and private -purpose trust funds and agency funds. GASB 34 Statement No. 34 issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board that was implemented by the Commission in FY 2001/02. GASB 34 established new financial reporting standards for state and local governments. Under the new financial reporting model, governmental financial statements include basic financial statements that present both government -wide and fund financial statements and required supplementary information, including Management's Discussion and Analysis. GASB 45 Statement No. 45, Accounting for Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB), issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board implemented . by the Commission in FY 2007/08. GASB 45 requires recognition of postretirement health care costs on an accrual basis over a period approximating the employees' years of service and to provide information about actuarial accrued liabilities associated with these benefits and whether and to what extent progress is being made in funding the plan. General Fund The governmental fund type used to account for all financial resources, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. General Ledger A record containing the accounts needed to reflect the financial position and the results of operations of a government. In double -entry bookkeeping, debit balances equal the credit balances in the general ledger. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Minimum standards and guidelines for financial accounting and reporting. GAAP encompasses the conventions, rules, and procedures that serve as the norm for the fair presentation of financial statements. The GASB is the primary authoritative accounting and financial reporting standard -setting body on the application of GAAP to state and local governments. Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) Rules and procedures established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) for the conduct of a financial audit. There are ten basic GAAS, classified into three broad categories: general standards, standards of fieldwork, and standards of reporting. The Auditing Standards Board of the AICPA publishes Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS) and related interpretations to comment and expand upon these basic standards. Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) Standards established by the General Accounting Office (GAO) in its publication, Government Auditing Standards, for the conduct and reporting of both financial and performance audits in the public sector. GAGAS set forth general standards applicable to both types of audits and separate standards of fieldwork and reporting for financial and performance audits. The GAGAS standards of fieldwork and reporting for financial audits incorporate and build upon GAAS. Governmental Funds Funds generally used to account for tax -supported activities. The Commission's governmental funds are comprised of general, special revenue, debt service, and capital projects funds. Grant A contribution by a government or other organization to support a particular function or program. Independent Auditor An auditor meeting the independence criteria set forth in GAAS and GAGAS. Internal Audit An independent appraisal of the diverse operations and controls within a government entity to determine whether acceptable policies and procedures are followed, established standards are met, resources are used efficiently and economically, and the organization's objectives are being achieved. The term covers all forms of appraisal of activities undertaken by auditors working for and within an organization. Internal Control Policies and procedures established to provide reasonable assurance that specific government objectives will be achieved. Joint Venture A legal entity or other organization resulting from a contractual agreement and that is owned, operated, or governed by two or more participants as a separate and specific activity for the benefit of the public or service recipients and in which the government retains an ongoing financial interest or ongoing financial responsibility. The Commission is a member agency of Metrolink. Legal Level of Budgetary Control The level at which a government's management may not reallocate resources without special approval from the legislative body. Loans Receivable An asset account reflecting amounts loaned to individuals or organizations external to the Commission, including notes taken as security for such loans. Measurement Focus The objective of a measurement, that is what is being expressed in reporting a government's financial performance and position. A particular measurement focus considers not only which resources are measured (financial or economic), but also when the effects of transactions or events involving those resources are recognized (basis of accounting). The measurement focus of the Commission's government - wide and fiduciary fund financial statements is economic resources, whereas the measurement focus of governmental fund financial statements is current financial resources. Modified Accrual Basis The accrual basis of accounting adapted to the governmental funds' measurement focus according to which revenues and other financial resource increments (e.g., bond issue proceeds) are recognized when they become susceptible to accrual, that is when they become both "measurable" and "available to finance expenditures of the current period." Expenditures are recognized when the fund liability is incurred except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt and certain similar accrued obligations when due. The Commission's governmental funds are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Other Financing Sources Amounts classified separately from revenues to avoid distorting revenue trends that represent an increase in current financial resources. Other financing sources generally include general long-term debt proceeds, amounts equal to the present value of minimum lease payments arising from capital leases, proceeds from the sale of general fixed assets, and transfers in. Other Financing Uses Amounts classified separately from expenditures to avoid distorting expenditure trends and represent a decrease in current financial resources. Other financing uses generally include transfers out and the amount of refunding bond proceeds deposited with the escrow agent. Overhead Indirect costs that cannot be specifically associated with a given service, program, or department and thus, cannot be clearly associated with a particular functional category. Principal In the context of bonds other than deep -discount debt, the face value or par value of a bond or issue of bonds payable on stated dates of maturity. Program Group activities, operations, or organizgtional units directed to attaining specific purposes or objectives. Program Budget A budget wherein expenditures are based primarily on the functions or activities of a government rather than to specific items of cost or to specific departments. Purchase Order A document authorizing the delivery of specified merchandise or the rendering of certain services and the making of a charge for them. Refunding Bonds Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding. The proceeds of refunding bonds may be used to repay the previously issued debt (current refunding) or to be placed with an escrow agent and invested until used to pay principal and interest on old debt at a future date (advance refunding). Reimbursement Grant A grant for which a potential recipient must first incur qualifying expenditures to be eligible. Restricted Fund Balance Those portions of fund balance which are restricted for specific purposes by third parties or enabling legislation. Special Revenue Fund A governmental fund type used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. The Commission maintains special revenue funds for Measure A Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley; Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee; Freeway Service Patrol; Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies; State Transit Assistance; and Local Transportation Fund. Transfers All interfund transfers representing flows of assets between funds of the government without equivalent flows of assets in return and without a requirement for repayments. Trustee A fiduciary holding property on behalf of another. ._ an, _.- Budget Adjustments (Draft to Final) Fund Balance FY 2012/13 Ending Fund Balance (as reported 5/9/12) $1,471,393,700 Projected FY 2012 Adjustme nts: Increase in sales tax and reimbursements 6,094,100 Decrease in project operations 3,674,500 Budget FY 2013 Adjustme nts: Increase in Measure A sales tax revenues 8,000,000 Increase in LTF sales tax revenues 4,003,000 Decrease in federal and state reimbursements (3,718,200) Decrease in operating transfers in (218,000) Decrease in debt proceeds (20,000,000) Decrease In Investment income (55,800) Increase in salaries and benefits (193,800) Increase in professional costs (470,000) Increase in support services (19,700) Decrease in program management costs 19,203 Increase in construction costs (4,437,900) Increase in transit operating & capital distributions (1,351,000) Increase in local streets & roads distributions (2,464,000) Increase in capital outlay (15,000) Decrease in operating transfers out 218,000 FY 2012/13 Ending Fund Balance (per final budget 6/7/12) $1,460,456,100 RCTC aim 1 i ,eginninr Fund Ba ante • Pievenues $3131,376,%0 • Debt Proceeds $1,220,172,000 • TEM:A .in f.126,dlK,700 Iota" Estimated Expenditures/L.;5es •Eependiu.••• 1,373.300 • Debt Service $143,413,000 • }rarah+sOut S326,095.700 over 1 x urstrlluri`i/Users 'Ending Fund Balance FY 2012/13 i Funding Sources �C1 Revenues ClMeasure A Sales Tax U LTF Sales Tax [`r1 STA Sales Tax r -1 \ (O Federal reimbursements \ State reimbursements N O (1) Local reimbursements r•l TUMF U• (1} Other revenues Investment income CC Sources Debt proceeds Transfers in Total Revenues/Sources $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 73,151,900 17,917, 800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 1,220,172,000 326,095,700 $ 1,864,644,600 2 Funding Sources Com iarison ar �� a.daa+43�e+ea.rr FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY2012/13 Percent Actual Budget Projected Budget Change Measure A Sales Tax $123,439,800 $124,000,000 $128,000,000 $ 132,000,000 6% LTFSales Tax 60,772,800 61,000,000 63,000,000 65,000,000 7% STASales Tax 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,212,500 49% Federal reimbursements 17,735,600 23,650,700 24,393,600 73,151,900 209% State reimbursements 17,811,800 23,935,100 23,250,200 17,917,800 -25% Local reimbursements 5,021,600 1,081,800 2,932,200 2,688,700 149% TUMF 9,157,900 6,784,300 6,397,400 5,257,300 -23% Other revenues 2,321,800 592,400 450,800 882,800 49% Investment income 4,524,200 1,824,000 3,391,100 7,265,900 298% Total Revenues 240,785,500 252,405,300 265,8813,900 318,376,900 26% Debt proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,220,172,000 3111% Transfers in 185,354,800 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 92% Total Revenues/Sources $596,140,300 $460,144,400 $492,232,300 $1,864,644,600 305% Summary of Uses RCTC Total Expenditures/Uses $960,881,800 Management Services Expenditures $7,909,200 S1Y,HS,06D Transfers Out Uses $326,095,700 (38 /0 Capital Project Development and Delivery Expenditures S370,915,300 6 3 Management Services Expenditures/Uses Management Services FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget Executive Management S 626,200 $ 244,300 $ 185,700 $ 283,200 Administration 1,085,100 1,235, 200 1,064,503 1,355,400 Legislative Affairs and Communications 851,600 1,297,000 958,100 1,270,503 Finance 5,831,100 5,473,000 5,355,800 5,000,103 Debt Service 7L300' - - - Total Expenditures 8,419,300 8,249,500 7,564,100 7,909,200 Transfers Out - 5,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 Total Management Services $ 8,419,300 $ 13,249,500 $ 17,564,100 $ 12,909,200 Executive Management 4% Legislative Administration Affairs and Carnmun;:ati_ as 17% 16% Finance 63% Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Expenditures Transfers Out Total Regional Programs Rail Maintenance and Operations 13% FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget 4,564,600 $ 7,450,300 $ 4,065,300 $ 4,522,600 12,865,700 21,498,603 21,012,900 14,553,300 46,749,900 87,042,800 57,515,800 84,685,900 2,831,900 4,226,400 4,231,400 4,038,800 3,530,700 5,263,300 5,286,600 4,848000 $ 89,048,500 $ 150,571,600 $ 109,429,800 $ 132,730,900 Public and Specialized Transit 75% 4 Capital Program Uses RCTC Capital Program Expenditures/Uses FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget Salaries and benefits $ 2,308,900 $ 2,795,000 5 3,026,500 $ 3,113,100 Professional costs 5,450,000 9,601,500 6,202,200 7,500,600 Support costs 309,200 813,000 459,200 587,000 Projects and operations: Program operations 4,608,703 9,259,000 6,398,103 9,538,300 Engineering 27,545,300 41,568,800 27,796,100 24,312,600 Construction 23,914,800 41,777,600 30,670,100 126,964,800 Design build 16,272,900 14,438,000 11,000,000 29,050,000 Right of way and land 44,663,000 76,127,000 54,535,100 109,476,500 Local streets and roads 36,857,000 36,025,000 38,166,600 39,357,000 Regional arterials 8,638,600 16,262,000 17,409,200 20,400,400 Other 119,500 256,000 257,000 515,000 Debt service 123,338.800 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413,000 Total Expenditures 294,026,700 311,917,900 258,884,103 514,228,300 Transfers out 166,849,100 139,639,700 139,025,600 301,013,400 Total Capital Project Development & Delivery 5460,875,800 $ 451,557,600 $ 397,909,700 5 815,241,700 9 Capital Projects & Operations Expenditures Debt servke lax Professbnalcosts Prefects and Operations 44% Lodes and benefits 1% D% Engineering 3% Constructbn 16% Design build 4% Right of way and land 13% rocd nrr.raand raedr 5% xeliavl rrtenrr tx 5 RIFExpenditure Highlights Capital Project SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange 74 Curve and 74/215 Interchange SR-91, 1-15 and 1-215 Corridor Improvements r ws PARK � -- ti RIDE Functional Uses Breakdown lir ROTC Personnel Professional Support Projects and operations Capital outlay Debt service Total Expenditures Transfers out Total Expenditures/Uses Personnel, Professional, Support, and Capital Outlay $27,126,300 FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget $ 5,868,500 $ 6,576,900 $ 6,505,300 $ 6,971,100 12,115, 400 17,149,100 13, 034, 800 14, 361, 200 3,571,400 5,068,900 4,607,000 5,346,300 227,922,100 353,342,700 271,108,400 464,246,800 147,300 516,200 340,700 447,700 122,396,600 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413.000 372,021,300 445,648,800 358,560,200 634,786,100 185, 354,800 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 $557,376,100 $ 615,387,900 $ 524,903,600 $ 960,881,800 Projects & Operations Expenditures $464,246,800 Debt Service Expenditures $143,413,000 Transfers Out Uses • $326,095,700 6 Measure A Management ServicesR`TC Fr 12/13 Budget oP°.1. °O. 10 1 1 hi Salaries and Benefits 4 Administrative Costs 304. 13 Measure A administrative management services salaries and benefits Funding needs for projects and transit operators Sales tax and TUMF revenue trends Timeliness of federal and state reimbursements Close ',c hearing and adopt budget Review the final budget draft, close the public hearing, and adopt the final budget 7 AGENDA ITEM 8A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: RiversideCounty Transportation Commission FROM: Audit Ad Hoc Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010/11 Transportation Development Measure A Audit Results Act and AUDIT AD HOC AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for the FY 2010/11. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In May 2011, Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA) and Macias Gini O'Connell LLP (MGO) were selected to perform the financial and compliance audits and agreed -upon procedures (audits) of Riverside County's TDA claimants and Measure A recipients, respectively, except for the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and the city of Beaumont (Beaumont). The RTA and Beaumont audits were completed by their auditors. The FY 2010/11 audits represent the first year that TCBA and MGO performed these audits for the Commission. The firm and the other agencies' auditors have completed the audits of and issued the audit reports for the local governments, non-profit agencies, and transit agencies that received TDA and Measure A funds. The following is a summary of the 58 audits performed: Funding Type Type of Procedure TCBA (Western County) MGO (Eastern Other County & Auditors Riv. Co.) Total TDA Article 3 (bicycle and pedestrian projects) TDA Article 4 (transit) TDA Article 8 (local streets and roads) Measure A specialized transit Measure A local streets and roads Agenda Item 8A Financial and compliance audit Financial and compliance audit Financial and compliance audit Agreed -upon procedures Agreed -upon procedures 6 6 3 1 13 2 2 7 0 2 11 0 15 10 0 2 11 25 5 Following are highlights of the results of these audits: TDA Article 3 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects) • Ten jurisdictions have deferred revenues and/or fund balances aggregating $767,912 that has not been expended. Since funding is based on approved projects, remaining funds should be expended by June 30, 2012, or for completed projects, returned to the Commission. • One jurisdiction has a liability to the Commission for the return of $4,461 in excess funds following the completion of a project. TDA Article 4 (Transit) • All transit operators met the fare ratio requirement with the exception of one jurisdiction. This is the first year of noncompliance for the jurisdiction; noncompliance in each of the next two fiscal years may result in a penalty assessment. • SunLine Transit Agency had two material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting, one of which was also an instance of noncompliance, based on the audit of the financial statements. One of the material weaknesses related to the accounting for risk management activities: 1) workers' compensation liability and expenditures were understated by $494,671, and 2) a deposit with its risk management pool had been expensed as premium payments in prior years resulting in an overstatement of insurance expenses for each year the deposit was maintained. Therefore, net assets as of July 1, 2011, were understated by $681,339. Audit adjustments were recorded in the financial statements for these items, including a restatement of beginning net assets. The other material weakness and compliance finding was related to the understatement of federally reimbursed expenses in the amount of $791 ,272 in the schedule of. federal awards. The schedule was adjusted to reflect the correct amounts. TDA Article 8 (Local Streets and Roads) The city of Blythe (Blythe) has a fund deficit of $719,067, and the county of Riverside has a fund balance of $176,654. Article 8 funds have not been approved since 2007, as Palo Verde Valley TDA funds are used primarily for transit needs. In the Commission's most recent state triennial performance audit, a recommendation was made for the Commission to work with these agencies to resolve the use of the LTF funds in order to eliminate the need for the annual audits of these funds. Staff discussed this with Blythe and the county of Riverside and expects these funds to be closed as of June 30, 2012. Agenda Item 8A " M e a s u r e A S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t " F o u r a g e n c i e s d i d n o t m e e t t h e r e q u i r e d i n d i v i d u a l c a s h o r i n - k i n d m a t c h r e q u i r e m e n t ; h o w e v e r , t w o o f t h e s e a g e n c i e s d i d r e c e i v e c a s h a n d / o r i n - k i n d c o n t r i b u t i o n s , w h i c h i n t h e a g g r e g a t e e x c e e d e d t h e t o t a l m a t c h r e q u i r e m e n t . A t h i r d a g e n c y d i d n o t m e e t i t s t o t a l r e q u i r e m e n t b y $ 3 9 6 , o r . 3 p e r c e n t . " F o u r a g e n c i e s r e c e i v i n g M e a s u r e A a n d f e d e r a l f u n d s d i d n o t h a v e c e r t a i n w r i t t e n p o l i c i e s r e q u i r e d b y t h e f e d e r a l f u n d s ; h o w e v e r , n o i n s t a n c e s o f n o n c o m p l i a n c e w e r e n o t e d . " T w o a g e n c i e s h a d p o t e n t i a l e x c e s s f u n d s a p p r o x i m a t i n g $ 5 , 3 2 4 a s o f J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 1 , t h a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n m a y r e q u e s t b e r e t u r n e d . T h i s r e f l e c t s a s i g n i f i c a n t d e c r e a s e f r o m t h e F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0 r e s u l t s a n d i s d u e t o t h e c h a n g e i n f u n d i n g t o a r e i m b u r s e m e n t b a s i s a n d m o n t h l y r e p o r t i n g p r o c e s s . M e a s u r e A L o c a l S t r e e t s a n d R o a d s " O n e j u r i s d i c t i o n m e t i t s m a i n t e n a n c e o f e f f o r t ( M O E ) r e q u i r e m e n t u s i n g t h e p r i o r y e a r c a r r y o v e r , a s p e r m i t t e d u n d e r t h e M O E G u i d e l i n e s . " S i x c i t i e s h a v e f u n d b a l a n c e s t h a t a r e i n e x c e s s o f t h r e e y e a r s o f r e v e n u e s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n p o l i c y s u g g e s t s t h a t s u c h a m o u n t s s h o u l d n o t e x c e e d t h r e e y e a r s . " O n e c i t y a n d t h e c o u n t y h a v e r e c o r d e d o v e r h e a d e x p e n d i t u r e s t h a t w e r e n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e F i v e - Y e a r C a p i t a l I m p r o v e m e n t P l a n s ( C I P s ) s u b m i t t e d t o a n d a p p r o v e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n . T h e c i t i e s m a y s u b m i t a m e n d m e n t s t o t h e C I P s , w h i c h m a y b e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l y a p p r o v e d b y t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r . " T w o a d d i t i o n a l c i t i e s r e c o r d e d o v e r h e a d c o s t s i n e x c e s s o f 8 p e r c e n t o f r e v e n u e s . T h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s a p o l i c y t h a t o v e r h e a d s h o u l d n o t e x c e e d 8 p e r c e n t o f r e v e n u e s . " O n e c i t y d i d n o t a l l o c a t e i n t e r e s t i n c o m e t o t h e M e a s u r e A f u n d , w h i c h i s n o t i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p o l i c y . S t a f f i s i n t h e p r o c e s s o f r e s o l v i n g t h e s i g n i f i c a n t m a t t e r s . A t t a c h e d i s t h e s u m m a r y o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d t r a n s i t f u n d o p e r a t i o n s a n d r e l a t e d a u d i t r e s u l t s f o r t h e v a r i o u s t y p e s o f T D A ( A r t i c l e s 3 , 4 , a n d 8 ) a n d M e a s u r e A ( s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s i t a n d l o c a l s t r e e t s a n d r o a d s ) f u n d i n g . E a c h s c h e d u l e p r o v i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n f o r e a c h c l a i m a n t a n d r e c i p i e n t r e g a r d i n g t h e r e v e n u e s , e x p e n d i t u r e s / e x p e n s e s , a n d c h a n g e i n f u n d b a l a n c e / n e t a s s e t s f o r t h e y e a r e n d e d J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 1 , a n d o t h e r f i n a n c i a l a n d c o m p l i a n c e i n f o r m a t i o n . A t t a c h m e n t s : 1 ) F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e v e l o p m e n t A c t A r t i c l e 3 S c h e d u l e 2 ) F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e v e l o p m e n t A c t A r t i c l e 4 S c h e d u l e 3 ) F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e v e l o p m e n t A c t A r t i c l e 8 S c h e d u l e 4 ) F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 M e a s u r e A S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t S c h e d u l e 5 ) F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 M e a s u r e A L o c a l S t r e e t s a n d R o a d s S c h e d u l e A g e n d a I t e m 8 A ATTACHMENT 1• Transportation Development Act Article 3 Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2011 Desert Cathedral Hot Lake Rancho San County of Banning Beaumont City Springs Hemet Indio Elsinore La Quinta Mirage Riverside Jacinto Wildomar Riverside Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Article 3 $242,647 $ 84,588 $ 43,333 $ - $ 75,000 $ 92,240 $ 31,878 $81,472 $ 111,588 $ 119,470 $ 16,713 $ 79,626 $681,401 Other. - 11,805 - 37,371 - 57,350 - 181,023 - - Interest income 67 10 4 - - - - 111 - 4,323 Total revenues 242,647 84,655 55,148 - 112,371 92,244 31,878 138,822 111,588 300,493 16,824 79,626 685,724 Total expenditures 512,714 84,512 55,171 112,371 92,751 31,878 138,822 187,440 300,493 79,626 673,900 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (270,067) 143 (23) (507) (75,852) 16,824 11,824 Transfers in (out) 358,787 (15,755) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and transfers in over (under) expenditures 88,720 143 (23) (507) (75,852) 69 11,824 Prior period adjustment Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Deferred revenues at end of year Due to RCTC $ - $ - $ 333 (75,705) 30 $ 13,015 $ 143 $ 7 $ - $ - $ (174) $ - $142,142 $ 11,501 $ 3,091 $ 92,509 $ - $ 137,597 $ - $ (75,852) $ 92 - 26,290 - $ 161 $ - $ 38,114 - $ 115,067 $ - $107,134 $107,431 Source. 2011 Financial Statements Section 99234 5/7/2012 8 Transportation Development Act Article 4 Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2011 Banning Beaumont Corona • Riverside PWTA SunLine RTA Total operating revenues $ 120,261 $ 215,230 $ 329,830 $ 344,367 $ 78,756 $ 4,284,916 $ 9,410,428 Operating expenses: Depreciation and amortization Other operating expenses Total operating expenses Operating loss Nonoperating revenues (expenses) Grants: Local Transportation Funds 1,085,059 1,051,666 1,478,137 2,195,075 653,089 11,069,277 19,027,566 State Transit Assistance 795,980 733,305 16,257 111,762 8,641 152,379 499,326 Federal - - 527,418 33,575 9,484,886 18,917,380 Measure A specialized transit - - - 3,773,000 2,310,058 Propdsition 1B 45,389 28,530 35,000 48,198 56,723 847,120 291,000 Other - - - 1,818,821 4,077,551 Interest income 1,891 150 41,662 2,109 3,042 8,573 73,744 Interest expense - (17,954) - - (238,013) Transfers in (out) - - Gain (loss) on sale of property (4,778) - (8,969) 17,585 Other 92,809 - - 910,662 Total nonoperating revenue (expense) 1,928,319 1,813,651 1,566,278 2,959,417. 755,070 27,145,087 45,886,859 Net increase (decrease) 666,740 661,049 (182,089) (198,450) (12,879) 5,210,989 (498,121) Prior period adjustment 17,392 - (17,181) 681,339 Net assets at beginning of year 299,732 207,257 1,844,584 2,139,557 612,731 37,261,899 30,454,457 Net assets at end of year $ 983,864 $ 868,306 $ 1,662,495 $ 1,941,107 $ 582,671 $43,154,227 $ 29,956,336 138,061 134,452 228,567 560,866 69,924 4,566,134 9,630,139 1,243,779 1,233,380 1,849,630 2,941,368 776,781 21,652,880 46,165,269 1,381,840 1,367,832 2,078,197 3,502,234 846,705 26,219,014 55,795,408 (1,261,579) (1,152,602) (1,748,367) (3,157,867) (767,949) (21,934,098) (46,384,980) Deferred revenue at end of year: Operating $ 2,944 $ $ 77,653 $ - $ 39,219 $ 70,779 $ 4,004,399 Capital 95,313 142,018 276,844 1,655,593 444,797 3,887,289 9,228,885 Total deferred revenue at end of year $ 98,257 $ 142,018 $ 354,497 $ 1,655,593 $ 484,016 $ 3,958,068 $ 13,233,284 Required fare ratio Actual fare ratio 10.00% 10.00% 20.00% 10.00% 10.00% 17.97% 17.09% 9.90% 17.49/D 20.08 A 11.71 /0 11.30/0 19.83/0 27.52/0 Fare ratio compliance status Not Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Source: 2011 Financial Statements Note 1 The audits for RTA and Beaumont were completed by other auditors hired by each entity. Section 99260 ATTACHMENT 2 III 5/7/2012 ATTACHMENT 3 Transportation Development Act Article 8 Schedule Year ended June 30, 2011 Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Article 8 Other revenues Interest income Total revenues Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Transfers in (out) Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Prior period adjustments Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Source: 2011 Financial Statements • County of Blythe Riverside $ - 413,807 413,807 366,33E 1,151 1,151 47,469 1,151 47,469 1,151 (766,536) 175,503 $(719,067) $ 176,654 Note: Article 8 allocations for Western County and Coachella Valley ended in 1993 and 1987, respectively, as available LTF funds are now used to meet transit needs. Article 8 allocations for Palo Verde Valley are subject to an annual unmet needs hearing. City and County have been advised to clear deficit and spend fund balance, respectively, in FY 2011.in order to need for annual audit.) Section 99400 (a) 5/7/2012 10 Operating revenues: Measure A In -kind match Cash match: federal JARC/NF Cash match: other revenue Total operating revenues Operating expenses -in kind Operating expenses -salaries & benefits Operating expenses-nonpersonnel Operating expenses -administrative overhead Total operating expenses/capital expenditures Change in net assets Prior period adjustment Net assets at beginning of year Net assets at end of year Match requirement -cash Match requirement -in kind Actual match -cash Actual match -in kind Match requirement compliance status Source: 2011 Financial Statements ATTACHMENT 4 Measure A Specialized Transit Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2011 Boys & Girls Club of Blindness Southwest Care Support' County Care -A -Van Connexxus CASA Friends of Moreno Valley Inland AIDS City of Project" Norco" Independent Living Partnership` Riverside County Regional Medical Volunteer Center Center' $ 56,541 $ 189,058 27,105 94,234 39,806 195,192 190,581 411,355 137,104 39,360 14,117 190,581 (1,196) 1,196 $ - $ 27,105 244,735 1 12, 758 26,757 411,355 $ 340,378 57,773 37,109 83,034 518,294 57,773 319,040 145,068 521,881 (3,587) $ 227,253 22,970 11,925 95,134 357,282 5,877 $ 2,290 $ 22,970 154,312 153,535 26,465 357,282 $ 53,460 $ 59,685 330,651 5,623 30,000 384,111 95,308 330,651 5,623 49,184 87,297 4,276 384,111 92,920 2,388 $ 69,036 $ 78,591 40,490 26,141 •95,177 119,081 40,490 48,742 52,643 46,435 20,558 5,390 95,177 119,081 646 - $ 3,034 $ $ 485,492 $ 189,697 $ 199,673 779,786 100,872 118,784 48,385 216,766 19,642 1,313,663 525,247 320,187 779,786 100,872 163,206 413,306 56,936 365,041 111,941 137,156 17,180 28,399 1,325,213 525,247 323,363 (11,550) (3,176) (9,753) 1,934 9,753 $ (9,616) $ - $ (3,176) $ 242 $ 76,514 $ 113,208 $ 95,500 $ - .$ 30,000 $ 57,596 $ - $ 23,490 $ 105,353 $ 19,642 $ 38,033 $ 18,000 $ 61,792 $ 23,000 $ 252,000 $ 2,250 $ - $ 40,486 $ 182,615 $ - $ 83,697 $ 39,806 $ 195,192 $ 120,143 $ 95,134 $ - $ 30,000 $ 26,141 $ - $ 48,385 $ 216,766 $ 19,642 $ - $ 27,105 $ 57,773 $ 22,970 $ 330,651 $ 5,623 $ - $ 40,490 $ 779,786 $ - $ 100,872 In --kind not met; overall met Met In -kind not Not met by. mel: overall met total of S396 Met Met Not met Met Mel Met Met • Measure A Specialized Transit 5/7/2012 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Year ended June 39, 2011 Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Measure A Reimbursements Other revenues Interest income Other financing sources -transfers in Total revenues Expenditures and other financing uses, Construction and maintenance 339,320 1,211,427 582,000 3,592,324 2,744,022 - 164,800 1,893,292 178,371 998,726 Other - - 516,037 - - - Administrative overheadloverhead allocations/indirect costs 10,000 29,785. - 120,723 - Capital outlay 495,519 648,877 3,765.074 36.066 Debt service: Principal - - - - Interest - - - •Transfersout 369,616 • - 218,15'9 - 732,264 - 470,637 177,625 - Total expenditures and other financing uses 708,936 1,221,427 582,000 4,335.787 2,744,022. 1,164,914 164,800 5,779,089 910,635 1,034,792 959,391 7,497,668 489,321 838,132 229.482 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures and other financing uses (276,990) (308,792) (433,070) (1,181,311) (1,471,248) (321,877) 871,344 (1,905,456) 894,724 (464,725) (35,199) 6,345,291 57,883 1.449,364 191,193 ATTACHMENT 5 Banning Calimesa Lake Corona Hemet Lake Elsinore Menifee Moreno Valley Murrieta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinlo Temecula Wildomar $ 424,300 $ 117,995 5 143,616 $ 2,961,488 5 1,253,199 5 821,031 $ 1,022,477 $ 2,591.821 $ 1,644,293 5 558,904 $ 897,899 5 5,226,001 $ 532,244 $ 2,211.045 $ 420,539 792,100 - 1,147,057 - - 8,403,203 - - - - 2,145 1,393 38,893 - - - 136 7.646 2,540 5,314 190,843 19,575 20,613 13,667 95,862 161,066 11,163 26,293 213.755 - 14,960 76,451 Prior period adjustment/rounding Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year 431,946 912,635 148,930 3,154,476 1,272,774 843,037 1,036,144 3,873,633 1,805,359 570,067 924,192 13.842,959 547,204 2, 287,496 420,675 660,507 194,858 18,684 34,624 959,391 7.497,668 805 (135,042) • - 1,003,866 (28,242) 117,947 558,538 2 - - - 1,357,055 723.567 682.039 8,223.138 3,828,197 20,831 1,500.390 11,564,600 8,807,646 3,316,455 2.748,479 10,481,608 1,804,905 7,360,637 512,373 $ 1,080,870 $ 279,733 $ 248,969 $ 7,041,827 $ 2,356,949 $ 702,820 $ 2,343,492 $ 9,659,144 $ 9,820,317 $ 2,851,730 $ 3.271,818 $ 16,826,901 $ 1,862,788 $ 8.810,001 $ 703,566 Fund balance by year received: 2011 $ 431,946 $ 279,733 $ 148,930 $ 3,154,476 $ 1,272,774 $ 2010 369,041 - 100,039 2.777,172 1,084,175 2009 279,883 • 1,110,179 2008 &.Prior - Total fund balances by year received $ 1,080,870 $ 279,733 $ 2413,969 $ 7,041.827 $ 2,356,949 $ Cash and investments Amount of Excess MOE'at end of year MOE compliance status Source: 2011 Financial Statements Measure A Local Streets Roads 702,820 $ 1,036,144 $ 3, 873.633 $ 1,805.359 $ 570,067 $ 924, 192 $ 13,842,959 $ 547,204 $ 2,287, 496 $ 420.675 - 838,758 5,785.511 1,476,255 447.152 966,784 2, 983.942 459,220 1.915,487 282,891 468,590 2,394,502 726,730 1.380,842 856,364 3,052,874 - '4,144',201 ]1107,781 1.,554,144 • 702,820 $ 2,343,492 $ 9,659,144 $ 9,820,317 $ 2,851,730 $ 3,271,1318 $ 16,826,901 $ 1,862.788 $ 8,810,001 $ 703,566 $ 1,040,821 $ 357,319 $ 250,620 $ 6,737,603 $ 2,573,884. $ 645,582 $ 2,146,319 $ 9.881,746 $ 9,589,259 $ 2,738,989 $ 3,251.111 $ 9.412,305 $ 384,592 $ 8,424.175 $ 638,359 $ 3,323,113 $ 147,138 $ 55,201 $ 35,743,768 $ 13,560 $ 13,246,519 N/A $ 30,396,780 $2,190,279 $ 4,052,699 $ 14,441,243 $ 56,925.999 $ 16,232,036 $ 534,614 N/A Met Met Met Met Mel Met , N/A Met Met Met Met Met Met Met N/A 1 of 5/7/2012 12 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Year ended June 30, 2011 • Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Measure A Reimbursements Other revenues Interest income Other financing sources -transfers in coachella VElEy Coachella Valle -f .. Valley) -:I $ 978,548 $ 434.325 $ 300,041 $ 175,838 $ 1,080.074 $ 1,875,080.. E 1.390,267 $ 647,356 $ 476,891 $ 5,398,536 • 252,810 1,002,461 1.419.851 95,443 342,595 - 13,959 - - • 17,644 - 7,089 528 3,881 123,196 79,872 79,502 14,348 114,282 360, 388 - - - - - - Total revenues 1,352,895 441,414 300,569 175,838 1,336,765 3,000,737 2,907,634 822,301 833,834 5,512.818 • Expenditures and other financing uses: - Construction and maintenance 1,152,105 - 600,837 423,396 864,272 2,520,066 339,997 3,444,657 Other - 247 - - Administrative overhead/overhead allocations/indirect costs . - 44,425- Capital outlay - Debt service: Principal - - 386,683 - Interest - 230,584 Transfers out 161,502 500,000 - 167,000 - - 807,160 - Total expenditures and other financing uses 1,313.607 500,247 600,837 167,000 - 1,040,663 864,272 2,520,066 339,997 851,585 3.444.657 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures • and other financing uses 39,288 (58,833) (300.268) 8,838 296,102 2,136,465 387,568 482,304 (17,751) 2,068,161 Prior period adjustment/rounding Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Fund balance by year received: 2011 2010 (1) 111,059 (1) 2 (63,144) 6,187 - - (18,399) 507, 928 614,501 - 348,841 18,225,127 7.825,289 3,874,958 2,875,530 15,455,410 $ 20,888 $ 560,154 $ 314,232 $ 8,838 $ 644,945 $ 20,361,592 $ 8, 149, 713 $ 4,363.449- $ 2,857,779 $ 17.523,571 $ 20, 888 $ 441.414 $ 300,569 $ 8,838 $ 644,945 $ 3,000, 737 $ 2,907,634 $ 822.301 $ 833,834 $ 5, 512, 818 3,499,967 2,127,134 2,291,705 926,746 6,731,374 2009 2,433.714 2,554,832 1.249,443 736,064 5.279,379 .200&B Prior 11,427174 7;r 560;713` 361,135 Total fund balances by year received Amount of Excess MOE at end of year MOE compliance status Source: 2011 Financial Statements Measure A Local Streets Roads • 118,740 13,663 $ 20,888 $ 560,154 $ 314,232 $ 8,838 $ 644,945 $ 20,361,592 $ 8,149,713 $ 4,363,449 $ 2,857,779 $ 17,523,571 - $ 503,988 $ 250.382 $. 607,194 $ 20,078,640 $ 8,289.066. $ 4,170,504 $ 2.754,719 $ 17,508,868 $ 7, 064,370 $ 14,166,669 $ 1,355,427 $ 24.613.879. $ 47 216,366 $ 123,995,179 $ 41,258,816 $ 34,110,225. $ 5,048,000 N/A Met with use Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met N/A e'carprover 2 of 5/7/2012 • AGENDA ITEM 8Ei RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2012/13 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve Resolution No. 12-01 7, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2012/13". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make documentation used to determine the appropriations Limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit. Staff has performed the calculations necessary to determine the limit. The resolution and documents supporting the calculation are attached. The Commission chose to use the percentage change in the California per capital personal income and the population change within Riverside County as the factors in determining the appropriations limit. As required, the adoption of the Commission's FY 2012/13 Appropriations Limit was posted in the local newspaper. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 12-017 2) California Per Capital _Income and Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance Agenda Item 8B 14 RESOLUTION NO. 12-017 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 2012/13 WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution places an annual limitation upon appropriations from proceeds of taxes by each local government of the State of California; and WHEREAS, in 1988, pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution, the Riverside County Transportation Commission established its appropriations limit at $75 million for FY 1988/89 under ordinance No. 88-1; and WHEREAS Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make the documentation used in determining the appropriations limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 1 approved by the voters of the state effective June 6, 1990, beginning with FY 1990/91 and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Commission's Board of Commissioners is required to select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non-residential construction, and either the population change within the Commission or the population change within Riverside. County, as the two factors to be applied in calculating the appropriations limit for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, this Board wishes to select, as factors in determining the Commission's appropriation limit for FY 2012/13 the, percentage change in California per capita personal income and also the population change within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, this Commission has documented its calculations of the Commission's appropriations limit for FY 2012/13 and said calculations have been made available to the public at least 15 days prior to the adoption of this resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows: 1. For FY 2012/13, the factors selected for calculating the appropriations limit are (a) the percentage change in California per capita personal income, and (b) the population change within the County of Riverside. 2. The appropriations limit applicable to this agency pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution for FY 2012/13 are hereby established and determined to be $348,861,382. 3. A copy of the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for FY 2012/13 shall be affixed hereto and shall be available for public inspection. 4. Pursuant to Section 7910 of the California Government Code, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the establishment of the appropriations limit as set forth herein must be commenced within forty-five days of the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 2012. John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2012-2013 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2011-2012 Appropriations Limit $ 332,891,501 2012-2013 adjustment: Change in California per capita personal income = 3.77% Change in Population, Riverside County = 0.99% Per Capital Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 3.77 + 100 = 1.0377 100 Population converted to a ratio: 0.99 + 100 = 1.0099 100 Calculation of factor for FY 201 1-2012: 1.0377 x 1.0099 = 1.04797323 $ 332,891,501 X 1.04797323 = $ 348,861,382 2012-2013 Appropriations Limit $ 348,861,382 Source: California per capita income - California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County - California Department of Finance 17 " , L I S T b r r n i a . ` i + �� l l l i n o m _ D E P A R T M E N T T O F ^ M a y 2 0 1 2 D e a r F i s c a l O f f i c e r : E D M U N D G . , B R O W N J R . " G O V E R N O R S u b j e c t : P r i c e a n d P o p u l a t i o n I n f o r m a t i o n 9 1 5 L S T R E E T I F S A C R A M E N T O C A m 9 5 6 1 A - 3 7 0 6 �% w w W . o O r . c A . G O V A p p r o p r i a t i o n s L i m i t T h e C a l i f o r n i a R e v e n u e a n d T a x a t i o n C o d e , S e c t i o n 2 2 2 7 , m a n d a t e s t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i n a n c e ( F i n a n c e ) t o t r a n s m i t a n e s t i m a t e o f t h e p e r c e n t a g e c h a n g e i n p o p u l a t i o n t o l o c a l g o v e r n m e n t s . E a c h l o c a l j u r i s d i c t i o n m u s t u s e t h e i r p e r c e n t a g e c h a n g e i n p o p u l a t i o n f a c t o r f o r J a n u a r y 1 , 2 0 1 2 , i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a c h a n g e i n t h e c o s t o f l i v i n a , o r p r i c e f a c t o r , t o c a l c u l a t e t h e i r a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t f o r f i s c a l y e a r 2 0 1 2 - 2 0 1 3 . E n c l o s u r e I p r o v i d e s t h e c h a n g e i n C a l i f o r n i a ' s p e r c a p i t a p e r s o n a l i n c o m e a n d a n e x a m p l e f o r u t i l i z i n g t h e p r i c e f a c t o r a n d p o p u l a t i o n p e r c e n t a g e c h a n g e f a c t o r t o c a l c u l a t e t h e 2 0 1 2 - 2 0 1 3 a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t . E n c l o s u r e l i p r o v i d e s c i t y a n d u n i n c o r p o r a t e d c o u n t y p o p u l a t i o n p e r c e n t a g e c h a n g e s , a n d E n c l o s u r e I I A p r o v i d e s c o u n t y a n d i n c o r p o r a t e d a r e a s ' s u m m e d p o p u l a t i o n p e r c e n t a g e c h a n g e . T h e p o p u l a t i o n p e r c e n t a g e c h a n g e d a t a e x c l u d e s f e d e r a l a n d s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d p o p u l a t i o n s a n d m i l i t a r y p o p u l a t i o n s . P o p u l a t i o n P e r c e n t C h a n g e f o r S p e c i a l D i s t r i c t s S o m e s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s m u s t e s t a b l i s h a n a n n u a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t . C o n s u l t t h e R e v e n u e a n d T a x a t i o n C o d e , S e c t i o n 2 2 2 8 f o r f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t . Y o u c a n a c c e s s t h e C o d e f r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g w e b s i t e : " h t t p : i f w w . v . l e g i n f o , c a . g o v ; c a l a w . h t m i " c h e c k b o x : " R e v e n u e a n d T a x a t i o n C o d e ' a n d e n t e r 2 2 2 8 f o r t h e s e a r c h t e r m t o l e a r n m o r e a b o u t t h e v a r i o u s p o p u l a t i o n c h a n g e f a c t o r s a v a i l a b l e t o s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s t o c a l c u l a t e t h e i r a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t . A r t i c l e M U B , S e c t i o n 9 ( C ) , o f t h e S t a t e C o n s t i t u t i o n e x e m p t s c e r t a i n s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s f r o m t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t c a l c u l a t i o n m a n d a t e . C o n s u l t t h e f o l l o w i n g w e b s i t e : " h t t p : / / v i r r w . l e o s n t o . c a . g o v l , c o n s t i . a r t i c l e 1 3 B " f o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n . S p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s r e q u i r e d b y l a w t o c a l c u l a t e t h e i r a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t m u s t p r e s e n t t h e c a l c u l a t i o n a s p a r t o f t h e i r a n n u a l a u d i t . A n y q u e s t i o n s s p e c i a l d i s t r i c t s h a v e o n t h i s i s s u e s h o u l d b e r e f e r r e d t o t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c o u n t y f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n , o r t o t h e i r l e g a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , o r t o t h e l a w i t s e l f . N o S t a t e a g e n c y r e v i e w s t h e l o c a l a p p r o p r i a t i o n s l i m i t s . P o p u l a t i o n C e r t i f i c a t i o n T h e p o p u l a t i o n c e r t i f i c a t i o n p r o g r a m a p p l i e s o n l y t o c i t i e s a n d c o u n t i e s . R e v e n u e a n d T a x a t i o n C o d e S e c t i o n 1 1 0 0 5 . 6 m a n d a t e s F i n a n c e t o a u t o m a t i c a l l y c e r t i f y a n y p o p u l a t i o n e s t i m a t e t h a t e x c e e d s t h e c u r r e n t c e r t i f i e d p o p u l a t i o n w i t h t h e S t a t e C o n t r o l l e r ' s O f f i c e . F i n a n c e w i l l c e r t i f y t h e h i g h e r e s t i m a t e t o t h e S t a t e C o n t r o l l e r b y J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 2 . P l e a s e N o t e : P r i o r y e a r ' s c i t y p o p u l a t i o n e s t i m a t e s m a y b e r e v i s e d . I f y o u h a v e a n y q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h i s d a t a , p l e a s e c o n t a c t t h e D e m o g r a p h i c R e s e a r c h U n i t a t ( 9 1 6 ) 3 2 3 - 4 0 8 6 . A N A J . M A T O S A N T O S D i r e c t o r B y : M I C H A E L C O H E N . C h i e f D e p u t y D i r e c t o r E n c l o s u r e s 1 8 Fiscal Year 2012-2013 May 2012 Enclosure I A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost -of -living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their governing body. The cost -of -living factor provided here is per capita personal income. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage change to be used in setting the 2012-2013 appropriation limit is: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Year (FY) Percentage change over prior year 2012-2013 3.77 B. Following is an example using sample population change and the change in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 2012-2013 appropriation limit. 2012-2013: Per Capita Cost of Living Change = 3.77 percent Population Change = 0.68 percent Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio:. Population converted to a ratio: Calculation of factor for FY 2012-2013: 3.77 + 100 = 1.0377 100 0.68 + 100 = 1.0068 100 1.0377 x 1.0068 = 1.0448 19 Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Enclosure II Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2012 and Total Population, January 1, 2012 Total County Percent Change --- Population Minus Exclusions - Population City 2011-2012 1-1-11 1-1-12 1-1-2012 Riverside Banning 0.81 29,723 29,965 29,965 Beaumont 2.15 38,034 38,851 38,851 Blythe 0.98 13,201 13,330 20,400 Catimesa 1.11 7,910 7,998 7,998 Canyon Lake 0.78 10,606 10,689 10,689 Cathedral City 1.07 51,353 51,901 51,952 Coachella 1.37 41,339 41,904 41,904 Corona 0.96 153,047 154,520 154,520 Desert Hot Springs 1.32 27,277 27,638 27,638 Easlvale 2.80 54,090 55,602 55,602 Hemet 0.98 79,309 80,089 80,089 Indian Wells 0.90 4,990 5,035 5,035 Indio 1.62 78,817 78,065 78,065 Lake Elsinore 1.40 52,149 52,879 53,024 La Quinta 1.03 37,688 38,075 38,075 Menifee 1.83 79,139 80,589 80,589 Moreno Valley 1.05 194,451 196,495 196.495 Murrieta 0.90 104,051 104,985 104,985 Norco 0.78 22,837 23,015 27,053 Palm Desert 1.13 48,920 49,471 49,471 Palm Springs 1.00 44,829 45,279 45,279 Perris 0.97 69,506 70,180 70,180 Rancho Mirage 0.60 17,399 17,504 17,504 Riverside 0.80 306,010 308,452 308,511 San Jacinto 0.86 44,421 44,803 44,803 Temecula 1.81 101,255 103,092 103,092 Wildomar 0.94 32,414 32,719 32,719 Unincorporated 3.05 451,347 452,725 453,089 County Total 0.99 2,194,112 2,215,850 2,227,577 (') Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental institutions, state and federal correctional institutions and veteran homes. Page 1 20 AGENDA ITEM 8C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Annual Investment Policy Review BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy'; and 2) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section XIV of the Investment Policy requires an annual investment policy review and specifically states that the "Chief Financial Officer shall annually render. to the Board a statement of investment policy, which the Board must consider at a public meeting. Any changes to the policy shall also be considered by the Board at a public meeting." Based on a review of the Investment Policy approved by the Commission on May 11, 2011, and consideration of changes to the California Government Code as of January 1, 2012, staff in consultation with the County Treasurer's Office staff has determined that changes should be made to: 1) Define basis of percentage limitations applicable to an investment; 2) Provide flexibility for the Chief Financial Officer to act immediately regarding a security if a rating change brings it below a minimum specified rating requirement; 3) Specify a maximum maturity for municipal bonds; 4) Delete adjustable municipal notes and bonds which are generally covered by existing descriptions, as focus on long-term rates of issuer is similar to investor view of security; 5) Limit repurchase agreements to tri-party agreements for safety purposes and to minimize counterparty risk; Agenda Item 8C 21 6) Revise policy for time deposits in generic terms due to other available products; and 7) Delete reference to use of performance benchmark as Commission currently invests most of its cash with the Riverside County Investment Pool Fund due to low interest rate environment. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 12-016 2) Draft Investment Policy Agenda Item 8C 22 RESOLUTION NO. 12-016 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING THE REVISED INVESTMENT POLICY WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") currently retains the authority to add, delete or otherwise modify the Commission's policies and procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby adopts the Investment Policy, as revised on June 7, 2012, and attached as Exhibit A. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7`h day of June, 2012. John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 23 Riverside County lronsportotion Commission INVESTMENT POLICY Introduction The purpose of this document is to identify policies and procedures that enhance opportunities for a prudent investment program and to organize and formalize investment -related activities. II. Scope It is intended that this Policy cover all funds (except retirement funds) and investment activities under the direction of the Commission. III. Delegation of Authority Pursuant to the Commission's Administrative Code, the Board's management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated for a one-year period to the Executive Director who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. Subject to review, the Board. may renew the delegation of authority pursuant to this section each year. The Executive Director may delegate these duties to his designee ("Chief Financial Officer"). The Commission may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor. The advisor shall follow this Policy and such other written instructions as are provided. IV. Prudence All persons authorized to make investment decisions . on behalf of the Commission are subject to the prudent investor standard. Investments shall be made with care, skill, prudence and diligence under circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the Commission that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a Like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the Commission. Revised -May 11. _'Qi 1-,lune 7.201'_ 24 Authorized individuals acting in accordance with this Policy and written procedures and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion. V. Objective The Commission's primary investment objectives, in priority order, shall be: 1. Safety. Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the Commission shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure preservation of capital in the portfolio. 2. Liquidity. The investment portfolio of the Commission will remain: sufficiently liquid to enable the Commission to meet its cash flow requirements. 3. Return on Investment. The investment portfolio of the Commission shall be designed with the objective of maximizing return on its investments, but only after ensuring safety and liquidity. The Commission may from time to time sell securities that it owns in order to better reposition its portfolio assets in accordance with updated cash flow schedules, yield opportunities existing between market sectors, or simply market timing. VI. Investments California Government Code Section 53601 governs the investments permitted for purchase by the Commission. Within the investments permitted by Code, the Commission seeks to further restrict eligible investments to the investments listed in Section V1.1 below. Percentage limitations applicable to an investment, where indicated, ;apply atwill be based on the market values of investments as of the time of each purchase. Percentage holdings with any one non-U.S. Government issuer or non - Federal Agency issuer are further restricted to a maximum of 10% (direct and indirect commitments). Rating requirements where indicated, apply at the time of purchase. In the event a security held by the Commission is subject to a rating change that brings it below the minimum specified rating requirement, the Chief Financial Officer shall be authorized to act immediately and to notify the Board of the--eh-angeany actions taken in regards to the security. The Chief Financial Officer's course of action to be Revised Niar 1 1. 201 1 4;11e ?. 20 i 7 • 25 4-e-1-Ir ed--will then be docidcdvary on a case -by -case basis, considering depending on such factors as the reason for the rate drop, prognosis for recovery or further rate drops, and the market price of the security. 1. Eligible Investments A. U.S. Government Issues. United States Treasury notes, bonds, bills, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. B. Federal Agency Securities. Federal agency or United States government -sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government -sponsored enterprises. C. Municipal Bonds. Registered treasury notes or bonds of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California, payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by a state or by -a department, board, agency or authority of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California. Such securities must have a maximum maturity of five (5) years and ratings from at least two of three ratings as follows: "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by Fitch_Ratings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Registered general obligation treasury notes or bonds of any of the 50 United States. Such securities must have a maximum maturity ,of five (5) years and ratings from two of three ratings as follows: at least "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by Fitch Ratings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Adjustable rate regi.,tered treasury notes or bonds of any of tf e 5-0- 4-n i-tees--St a t c s , -in-c i-Eldi , p �► pie afef �t� t- f-t kie authority -of ---any- -of-the of-hor--^tea---U-n ted States, iA--adeii4on-to of -three -ratings -as -follows-: "P-1-" by-Me4dy-s-A-nvestor-s--Ser-vic-ep Revised May 1 t, 201 i tune ? 701 26 or "A 1 "try Standard & Poor's, or "F 1 " by FitchR9tings; or - as....o- herwi-se.--aporoVeo-try-44e-C—om ission-- Adiustable--rate-notes--or--bonds warrefi s,-er--ot-her--eviderees-o# indebtedness of any local agency within the State of California inritl-s n�ir.ErrzE 4Yi �4 r, " ' ther "P 1 by MoodysInvestor;; g-ervice, or- "A -1..=' by-_ -Standoff 8r--Poem, -er- „F 1 " evidences of indebtedness po yable solely out of the revenues from----a---r-eve-n .le-pr-odue-i-nQ----prop-erty awned, eo+}frolfed - or agene-y, or aut-horit-y-of-the-lec-al-ageheyT or ofany-foe-af-agency within this .)rate. Taxable or tax-exempt bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of any local agency within the State of California with a maximum maturity of five (5) years and minimum rating of either "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by Fitch_Ratings (the minimum rating shall apply to the local agency, irrespective of any credit enhancement), including bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by either the local agency, a department, board, agency, or authority of the local agency, or of any local agency within this state. Investments in municipal bonds are further limited to 15% of surplus funds. D. Tri-Party Repurchase Agreements. Tri-party prepurchase agreements are to be used solely as short-term investments not to exceed 30 days. The Commission may enter into tri-party repurchase agreements with primary government securities dealers rated "A" or better by two nationally recognized rating services. Counterparties should also have (i) a short-term credit rating of at least A-1 /P-1; (ii) minimum assets and capital size of $25 billion in assets and $350 million in capital; (iii) five years of acceptable audited financial results; and (iv) -) -a strong reputation among market participants. The following collateral restrictions will be observed: Only U.S. Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities, as described in V.1 A and B, will be acceptable collateral. All securities Revised May 1 . 201 1.1 tine ?_ 2012 27 underlying tri-party repurchase agreements must be delivered to the Commission's custodian or fiscal agent bank versus payment or be handled under a properly executed tri-party repurchase agreement. The total market value of all collateral for each to -party repurchase agreement must equal or exceed 102 percent of the total dollar value of the money invested by the Commission for the term of the investment. For any t:ri- party repurchase agreement with a term of more than one day, the value of the underlying securities must be reviewed on an on -going basis according to market conditions. Market value must be calculated each time there is . a substitution of collateral. The Commission, or its trustee, or designated custodian shall have a perfected first security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code in all securities subject to tri-party repurchase agreement. The Commission shall have properly executed a PSA agreement (or a similar agreement as may be determined by the Commission) with each counterparty with which it enters into a tri-party repurchase agreements. E. U.S. Corporate Debt. Medium -term notes, defined as all corporate and depository institution securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or depository institutions licensed by the United .States or any state and operating within the United States. Eligible investment shall be rated "AA" or better by one or more nationally recognized rating service. Investments in U.S. Corporate Debt are further limited to 20% of surplus funds F. Commercial Paper. Commercial paper rated in the highest category by one or more nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO). The entity that issues the commercial paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (1) or paragraph (2): (1)The entity meets the following criteria: (A) Is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. (B) Has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). (C) Has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated "A" or higher by a NRSRO. (2) The entity meets the following criteria: (A) Is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, Revised May .11, 203 1 Tune ?. 2012 28 trust, or limited liability company. (B) Has program -wide credit enhancements, including, but not limited to, over collateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond. (C) Has commercial paper that is rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 270 days maturity nor represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Investments in commercial paper are limited to a maximum of 30% of surplus funds. G. Banker's Acceptances. Banker's acceptances issued by domestic or foreign banks, which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. Purchases of banker's acceptances may not exceed 180 days maturity. Eligible banker's acceptances are restricted to issuing financial institutions with short-term paper rated in the highest category. by one or more nationally recognized rating service. Investments in banker's acceptances are further limited to 40% of surplus funds with no more than 30% of surplus invested in the banker's acceptances of any one commercial bank. H. Money Market Mutual Funds. Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that are money market funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment. Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80a-1, et seq.) and that invest solely in U.S. treasuries, obligations of the U.S. Treasury, and repurchase agreements relating to such treasury obligations. The Commission may invest in shares of beneficial interest issued by accompany shall have met either of the following criteria: (1) Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two nationally recognized rating services. (2) Retained aninvestment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience managing money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). The purchase price of shares of beneficial interest purchased pursuant to this subdivision shall not include any commission I Revised lay ! 1. u41 1 Jude 7. 11 29 that the companies may charge. Investments in Money Market Mutual Funds are further limited to 20% of surplus funds. I. Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund ("RCPIF"). The Commission may invest in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund. As on -going due diligence, the Chief Financial Officer shall obtain the information listed below: • A description of eligible investment securities and a written statement of investment policy. • A description of the interest calculation, the frequency of interest distributions, and the treatment of gains and losses in the portfolio. • A description of how often the securities are priced, how the securities are safeguarded, and the audit arrangements. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often they may invest, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed. • The composition of the investment fund for each reporting period. J. State of California Local Agency Investment Fund ("LAIF" ). The Commission may invest in LAIF. As on -going due diligence, the Chief Financial Officer shall obtain the information listed below: • A description of eligible investment securities and a written statement of investment policy. • A description of the interest calculation, the frequency of interest distributions, and the treatment of gains and losses in the portfolio. • A description of how often the securities are priced, how the securities are safeguarded, and the audit arrangements. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often they may invest, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • A fee schedule, and when `and how fees are assessed. • The composition of the investment fund for each reporting period. Revised May l I, 201 l.iune?. 20I2 30 K. Certificates of Deposit. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (NCD's): NCDs are. money market instruments issued by a bank. They specify that a sum of money has been deposited, payable with interest to the bearer of the certificates on a certain date. NCDs are issued by nationally or state chartered bank or state or federal savings and loan association. All purchases must be from institutions rated by a nationally recognized rating organization, as designated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The maturity of NCDs shall not exceed 180 days to maturity, and purchases of NCDs shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Commission's investment portfolio. NCDs shall be evaluated in terms of the credit worthiness of the issuing institution, as these deposits are uninsured and uncollateralized promissory mites. FDIC -insured Certificates of Deposit: The principal amount of the investment must be federally insured through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). No more than the prevailing FDIC insured coverage amount may be invested with any one deposit. Certificates of Deposit placed through the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS) shall be considered fully insured, assuming that the total amount invested with any participating bank is limited to the prevailing FDIC insured coverage amount. Interest on the principal must be paid to the Commission at least annually. The placement of Certificates of Deposit. with local banks that qualify in accordance with Government Code section 53601(h) is encouraged. The Commission, at its discretion, may invest a portion of its surplus funds in certificates of deposit at a commercial bank, savings bank, savings and loan association, or credit union using a private sector entity to assist in the placement of such certificates, provided that it complies with Government Code Section 53601.8. Such investments may not exceed in total twenty percent (20%) of the Commission's funds invested pursuant to Government Code Sections 53601 .8, 53635.8 and 53601, and shall have a maximum maturity of one year from the date of the deposit. Collateralized Certificates of Deposit: For investments . exceeding $100,000, there will be a waiver of collateral for the first $100,000 deposited and protected by FDIC insurance. The remainder of the deposit shall be fully collateralized by U.S. Revised May } 1, 20 l.tune. ?. 20I2 31 Treasury and Federal Agency securities having maturities less than five years. The District must receive written confirmation that these securities have been pledged in repayment of the time deposit. The securities pledged as collateral must have a current market value greater than the dollar amount of the deposit in keeping with the ratio requirements specified in Section 53652 of the Government Code. Additionally, a statement of the collateral shall be provided to the Commission on a monthly basis. Such investments may not exceed in total fifteen percent (15%) of the Commission's funds invested pursuant to Government Code Sections 53601.8, 53635.8 and 53601, and shall have a maximum maturity of one year from the date of the deposit. L. Time Deposits. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured money market savings accounts or time deposits which are deposited through depository institutions with each depository institution holding no more than the maximum amount of principal qualifying for deposit insurancewhich arc partieipant-----of-t-hp---McRey--Pillar e-t Insured Deposit ACCOLInt Service ("IVIMIDAS"}. 2. Eligible Investments for Bond Proceeds Bond proceeds , shall be invested in securities permitted by the applicable bond documents. If the bond documents are silent as to permitted investments, bond proceeds will be invested in securities permitted by this Policy. With respect to maximum maturities, the Policy authorizes investing bond reserve fund proceeds beyond the five years if prudent in the opinion of the Chief Financial Officer. 3. Ineligible Investments As provided in California Government Code Section 53601.6, the Commission shall not invest any funds in inverse floaters, range notes, mortgage derived interest -only strips or in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity. The purchase of any security not listed in Section V1.1 above, but permitted by the California Government Code, is prohibited unless the Board approves the investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the Board. 1 Revised tl,r ! }., 201 1 iune ?. 2012 32 VII. Maximum Maturities Maturities of investments will be selected to provide necessary liquidity, minimize interest rate risk, and maximize earnings. Current and expected yield curve analysis will be monitored and the portfolio will be invested accordingly. Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds. Where this Policy does not specify a maximum remaining maturity at the time of the investment, no investment shall be made in any security, other than a security underlying a repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, that at the time of the investment has a term remaining to maturity in. excess of five years, unless the Board has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the Board no less than three months prior to the investment. VIII. Performance Standards The Chief Financial Officer shall continually monitor and evaluate the portfolio's performance. A eomparison of the porgyfolio's perfor-manco against a perfernlance benchmark shall be included in the Chief Financial Af iecr's- goartfrrl-y- report, -Tkhe--G-h-+ef--Fieor-c+al---Qf-#iscr 1ia11- selee ar} benchmark. IX. Reporting The Chief Financial Officer shall prepare and provide to the Board and the Executive Director, within 30 days following the end of the quarter, a portfolio report, which includes the following information: • Type of investment • Name of issuer • Date of maturity • Date of purchase • Par value • Original purchase cost • Call date (if applicable) • Current market value of securities • Unrealized market value gain/loss • Coupon rate, if applicable Revised May } (. 201 Mine ?. 201 33 " Y i e l d t o m a t u r i t y " C r e d i t q u a l i t y , a s d e t e r m i n e d b y o n e o r m o r e n a t i o n a l l y r e c o g n i z e d c r e d i t r a t i n g s e r v i c e s , o f e a c h i n v e s t m e n t " A v e r a g e d u r a t i o n o f p o r t f o l i o " L i s t i n g o f a l l i n v e s t m e n t t r a n s a c t i o n s d u r i n g t h e q u a r t e r " A s t a t e m e n t t h a t t h e p o r t f o l i o c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e i n v e s t m e n t p o l i c y , o r t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e p o r t f o l i o i s n o t i n c o m p l i a n c e " A s t a t e m e n t d e n o t i n g t h e a b i l i t y o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o m e e t i t s l i q u i d i t y r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e n e x t s i x m o n t h s , o r p r o v i d e a n e x p l a n a t i o n a s t o w h y s u f f i c i e n t m o n e y s h a l l , o r m a y n o t b e , a v a i l a b l e . X . I n v e s t m e n t P r o c e d u r e s T h e C h i e f F i n a n c i a l O f f i c e r , a s . t h e B o a r d ' s d e s i g n e e , i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e n s u r i n g c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s i n v e s t m e n t p o l i c i e s a n d e s t a b l i s h i n g w r i t t e n p r o c e d u r e s a n d i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l s f o r t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e i n v e s t m e n t p r o g r a m . N o p e r s o n m a y e n g a g e i n i n v e s t m e n t t r a n s a c t i o n s e x c e p t a s p r o v i d e d u n d e r t h e t e r m s o f t h i s P o l i c y a n d t h e w r i t t e n p r o c e d u r e s e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e C h i e f F i n a n c i a l O f f i c e r . T h e w r i t t e n p r o c e d u r e s s h o u l d a d d r e s s : d e l e g a t i o n o f a u t h o r i t y t o s u b o r d i n a t e s t a f f m e m b e r s , c o n t r o l o f c o l l u s i o n , s e p a r a t i o n o f t r a n s a c t i o n a u t h o r i t y f r o m a c c o u n t i n g a n d r e c o r d k e e p i n g , w r i t t e n c o n f i r m a t i o n s o f t r a n s a c t i o n s , r e c o n c i l i a t i o n o f c u s t o d y s t a t e m e n t s , a n d w i r e t r a n s f e r p r o c e d u r e s a n d a g r e e m e n t s . A n i n d e p e n d e n t a n a l y s i s b y a n e x t e r n a l a u d i t o r s h a l l b e c o n d u c t e d a n n u a l l y t o r e v i e w i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l , a c c o u n t a c t i v i t y , a n d c o m p l i a n c e w i t h p o l i c i e s a n d p r o c e d u r e s . X I . A u t h o r i z e d B r o k e r D e a l e r s a n d F i n a n c i a l I n s t i t u t i o n s T h e C h i e f F i n a n c i a l O f f i c e r s h a l l m a i n t a i n a l i s t o f a u t h o r i z e d b r o k e r / d e a l e r s a n d f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h a r e a p p r o v e d f o r i n v e s t m e n t p u r p o s e s . . I t s h a l l b e t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p o l i c y t o p u r c h a s e s e c u r i t i e s o n l y f r o m . t h o s e a u t h o r i z e d i n s t i t u t i o n s a n d f i r m s . S e p a r a t e l i s t s s h a l l b e m a i n t a i n e d f o r b r o k e r / d e a l e r s a n d f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s a p p r o v e d f o r r e p u r c h a s e a g r e e m e n t s a n d t h o s e a p p r o v e d f o r t h e p u r c h a s e o f o t h e r s e c u r i t i e s . I f a n i n v e s t m e n t a d v i s o r i s u s e d , t h e y m a y u s e t h e i r o w n l i s t o f a p p r o v e d b r o k e r / d e a l e r s a n d f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s f o r i n v e s t m e n t p u r p o s e s . T o b e e l i g i b l e , a f i r m m u s t m e e t t h e f o l l o w i n g m i n i m u m c r i t e r i a : ( i ) a n i n s t i t u t i o n l i c e n s e d b y t h e s t a t e a s a b r o k e r - d e a l e r , o r f r o m a m e m b e r o f a f e d e r a l l y r e g u l a t e d s e c u r i t i e s e x c h a n g e , f r o m a n a t i o n a l o r s t a t e - c h a r t e r e d b a n k , f r o m a f e d e r a l o r s t a t e a s s o c i a t i o n o r f r o m a b r o k e r a g e f i r m d e s i g n a t e d a s a p r i m a r y g o v e r n m e n t d e a l e r b y t h e F e d e r a l R e s e r v e b a n k ; a n d ( i i ) a l l b r o k e r / d e a l e r f i r m s a n d i n d i v i d u a l s m u s t b e p r o p e r l y r e g i s t e r e d w i t h t h e 1 R e v i s e d M a y } ! . 2 0 l i u n e ? . 2 0 1 2 3 4 NASD and/or SEC to transact business in the relevant geographic locations and product sectors. In addition, counterparties for Repurchase Agreements shall be limited to primary government securities dealers rated "A" or better by two nationally recognized rating services. Counterparties shall also have (i) a short-term credit rating of at least A-1 /P-1; (ii) minimum assets and capital size of $25 billion in assets and $350 million in capital; (iii) five years of acceptable audited financial results; and (iv) a strong reputation among market participants. The Chief Financial Officer shall select broker/dealers and other financial institutions on the basis of the firm's expertise and credit worthiness. The Commission shall annually send a copy of the current investment policy to all dealers approved to do business with the Commission. Each broker dealer or financial institution that has been authorized by the Commission shall be required to submit and annually update a Broker/Dealer Questionnaire which includes the firm's most recent financial statements. The Chief 'Financial Officer shall maintain a file for each firm, approved for investment purposes, which includes the most recent Broker/Dealer Questionnaire. XII. Safekeeping and Custody To protect the Commission's assets, all securities owned by the Commission shall be held in safekeeping in the Commission's name by a third party bank trust department, acting as agent for the Commission under the terms of a custody agreement executed by the bank and the Commission. All securities will be received and delivered using standard delivery versus payment (DVP) procedures; the Commission's safekeeping agent will only release payment for a security after the security has been properly delivered. Physical delivery securities shall be avoided whenever possible, as book entry securities are much easier to transfer and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place. In addition, delivered securities must be properly safeguarded against loss or destruction. The potential for fraud and loss increases with physically delivered securities. XIII. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest The Commission adopts the following policy concerning conflicts of interest: 1. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Revised 4'lay 11 _ _'Q1 1 Tune 7. 201 35 2. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall ,disclose any material financial interest in any financial institution that conducts business with the Commission, and they shall further disclose any large personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the Commission's portfolio. 3. Officers shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the Commission. XIV. Investment Policy Review The Chief Financial Officer shall annually render to the Board a statement of investment policy, which the Board must consider at a public meeting. Any changes to the policy shall also be considered by the Board at a public meeting. Revised May ! }. 01 1 June ?. 2012 36 AGENDA ITEM 8D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 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 AN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2012. 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 March 31, 2012, is also attached for review. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 2) County of Riverside Investment. Report for the month ended March 31, 2012 Agenda Item 8D 37 Riverside County Transportation Commission Investment Portloii, Report Period Ended'. March 31, 2012 OPERATING FUNDS Crty National Bank Deposits County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Agency/Treasury Securities: Subtotal Operating Funds FUNDS HELD IN TRUST County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund. Local Transportation Fund . Subtotal Funds Held in Trust COMMISSION BOND PROJECT FUNDS/DEBT RESERVE US. Bank MoneyMarket Investment Agreements County of Riverside Pool investment First American Government Obligation Fund First American Treasury Obligations Fund • Held in Trust Subtotal Bond Project Funda/Debt Reserve TOTAL All Cash and Investments FAIR VALUE RATING MOODYS/FITCH COUPON PAR PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED S&P RATE VALUE DATE DATE MATURITY COST VALUE GAIN (LOSS) 1,469,558 A3/BBB+ N/A N/A 424,112,849 Aaa/MR1/AAAN1 N/A 0.49% 3,603,059 Not Rated N/A - N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 429,185,466 71,030,462 Aaa-MR1/AAAN1 N/A 049% 71,030 462 Aaa/AAAm Aaa/MR1/AAAN1 158 Aaa/AAAm Aaa/AAAm 158 4 500,216,086 N/A N/A 0.49 N/A N/A N/A Investment Transactions for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2012 Purchases: None Maturities: Par Value at Maturity Maturity Date Coupon Rate None SUMMARIZED INVESTMENT TYPE Banks 1,469,558 County Pool 495.143.311 County Pool investment - LAIF 3,603.059 Mutual Funds: CNI Charter US Bank Money Market First American Government Obligation Fund Sub • Total Mutual Funds Federal Agency securities Certificates of Deposit U.S. Treasury securities Corporate Note/Commercial Paper Investment Agreements 158 158 TOTAL E 500,216,086 38 Statement of Compliance Nature of Investments Operating Funds 82.88% Bond Projects 1.90% Debt Reserve 1.50% Trust Funds 13.72% County PooUlnvestment 1.56% All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on May l 1, 2011. ' The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by: Chief Financial Officer 39 " C o u n t y o f R i v e r s i d e T r e a s u r e r ' s P o o p e d I n v e s t m e n t F u n d 2 0 1 2 / l a r c h " M i x e d M a r c h " W e l l , h e r e w e a r e a t t h e e n d o f t h e 1 s t q u a r t e r , a n d i t s e e m s t h e r e i s n o c l e a r d i r e c t i o n f o r t h e e c o n o m y a s s o m e o f t h e i n d i c a t o r s c o n t i n u e t o b e m i x e d , p a r t i a l l y r e - l a t e d t o a m u c h w a r m e r w i n t e r a c r o s s t h e U . S . O u r s t o c k m a r k e t , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , h a s s e e n i t s b e s t r e t u r n s f o r t h e f i r s t t h r e e m o n t h s s i n c e t h e l a t e 1 9 9 0 ' s _ . T h e F e d m e t a t i t s r e g u l a r l y s c h e d - u l e d m e e t i n g o f M a r c h 1 3 t h a n d s a i d n o t h i n g w e w e r e n o t e x p e c t i n g t o h e a r . T h e y s t a t e d , " T h e u n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e h a s d e c l i n e d n o t a - b l y i n r e c e n t m o n t h s b u t r e m a i n s e l e v a t e d . H o u s e h o l d s p e n d i n g a n d b u s i n e s s f i x e d i n - v e s t m e n t h a v e c o n t i n u e d t o a d v a n c e . T h e h o u s i n g s e c t o r r e m a i n s d e p r e s s e d . I n f l a t i o n h a s b e e n s u b d u e d i n r e c e n t m o n t h s , a l - t h o u g h p r i c e s o f c r u d e o i l a n d g a s o l i n e h a v e i n c r e a s e d l a t e l y . T h e r e c e n t i n c r e a s e i n o i l a n d g a s o l i n e p r i c e s w i l l p u s h u p i n f l a t i o n t e m - p o r a r i l y . " T h e e c o n o m y i s s l o w l y m o v i n g i n t h e r i g h t d i r e c t i o n b u t i f y o u r e a d t h e t e a l e a v e s i n t h e F e d ' s s t a t e m e n t s , t h e r e i s m u c h r o o m f o r . d o w n s i d e r i s k , a n d , t h e m a s s i v e b u d g e t d e f i c i t a n d n a t i o n a l d e b t s t i l l n e e d s t o b e a d d r e s s e d . M o s t o f t h e r e c e n t e u p h o r i a i s d u e t o p o s i t i v e u n e m p l o y m e n t n u m b e r s , h o w e v e r , i f t h e y f a l t e r , i t c o u l d d e - r a i l t h e m o m e n t u m i n t h e s t o c k m a r k e t a n d c a u s e a f l i g h t t o s a f e t y i n b o n d s . T h i s h a s h a p p e n e d i n t h e l a s t f e w d a y s , t h u s f u r t h e r r a i s i n g t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f f u r t h e r s t i m u l u s b y t h e F e d , o n l y t o p l a c e o u r e c o n o m y b a c k o n l i f e s u p p o r t . I n a d d i t i o n , l e t ' s n o t f o r g e t , E u r o p e r e m a i n s u n s e t t l e d . T h e l a s t a c t i o n t h e y t o o k , O p e r a t i o n T w i s t , i s s e t t o e x p i r e i n J u n e . T h e l a t e s t n e w s w e h a v e b e e n r e a d i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t m a r k e t w a t c h e r s a r e l o o k i n g f o r a n o t h e r r e n - d i t i o n i n a n e f f o r t t o k e e p r a t e s l o w e r l o n g e r , a n d t o c o n t i n u e t o p u s h i n v e s t o r s i n t o t h e " r i s k o n " t r a d e . L e t ' s f a c e i t , A m e r i c a n s t e n d t o f e e l b e t t e r . i f t h e y h a v e a j o b , t h e i r 4 0 1 k o r r e t i r e m e n t p l a n s t a t e m e n t s d o n ' t s h o w i m p l o - s i o n , a n d t h e y c a n c o n t i n u e t o f i n a n c e p u r - c h a s e s o f r e a l e s t a t e a t h i s t o r i c l o w s . I t ' s a l l r e l a t e d a n d f e e d s i n t o o u r c o n f i d e n c e a s c o n - s u m e r s a n d p s y c h e a s t o h o w w e f e e l a b o u t t h e . e c o n o m y a s a w h o l e . W e w i l l c o n t i n u e t o r e a d t h e e c o - n o m i c t e a l e a v e s a n d w a t c h c l o s e l y a s t h e n e x t f e w m o n t h s w o r t h o f e c o n o m i c d a t a w i l l b e v e r y t e l l i n g o f w h e t h e r w e s e e t h e g r e e n s h o o t s o f a l a s t i n g s p r i n g o r c r a b g r a s s g r o w - i n g i n t h e g a r d e n . O u r h o p e i s f o r a m o d e s t a n d s u s t a i n a b l e r e c o v e r y s o t h a t m a r k e t s c a n r e a c t r e a s o n a b l y a n d s o w e c a n i n v e s t o u r d e p o s i t o r s ' f u n d s a c c o r d i n g l y . D o n K e n t T r e a s u r e r - T a x C o l l e c t o r C a p i t a l M a r k e t s T e a m T r e a s u r e r - T a x C o l l e c t o r D o r t K e n t A s s t . T r e a s u r e r - T a x C o l l e c t o r J o n C h r i s t e n s e n I n v e s t m e n t M a n a g e r G i o v a n e P i z a n o A s s t . : I n v e s t m e n t M a n a g e r A n g e l a T r e . s s l e r I n v e s t m e n t O b j e c t i v e s T h e p r i m a r y o b j e c t i v e o f t h e t r e a s u r e r s h a l l b e t o s a f e - g u a r d t h e p r i n c i p a l o f t h e f u n d s u n d e r t h e t r e a s u r e r ' s c o n t r o l , m e e t t h e l i - q u i d i t y n e e d s o f t h e d e p o s i t o r , a n d a c h i e v e a r e t u r n o n t h e . . F u n d s u n d e r h i s o r h e r c o n t r o l . R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R E A S U R E R ' S P O O L E D I N V E S T M E N T F U N D I S C U R R E N T L Y R A T E D : A a a - b f / M R 1 B Y M O O D Y ' S I N V E S T O R ' S S E R V I C E : A N D A A A / V I B Y F I T C H R A T I N G S M o n t h E n d M o n t h E n d B o o k P a p e r G a i n o r P a p e r G a i n B o o k Y r s t o M o d i f i e d M a r k e t V a l u e ( $ ) * V a l u e ( $ ) L o s s ( $ ) o r L o s s ( % ) ' Y i e l d ( % ) M a t u r i t y D u r a t i o n T h e T r e a s u r e r ' s P o o l e d I n v e s t m e n t F u n d i s c o m p r i s e d o f t h e C o u n t y , S c h o o l s , S p e c i a l D i s t r i c t s , a n d o t h e r D i s c r e t i o n a r y D e p o s i t o r s . 4 0 Current Market Date Economic Indicators Released on: Indicator 4/6/2012 Nonfarm Payrolls - M/M change 4/6/2012 Unemployment Rate Definition Counts the number of paid employees working part-time or full-time in the nation's business and government establishments. Measures the number of unemployed as a percentage of the labor force. Consensus Actual 201,000 120,000 8.3 % 8.2% 3/28/2012 Durable Goods Orders- Reflects the new orders placed with domestic M/M change 3/29/2012 Real Gross Domestic Product - Q/Q change 3/27/2012 Consumer Confidence 4/3/2012 Factory Orders - M/M change manufacturers for immediate and future delivery of factory hard goods. The broadest measure of aggregate economic activity and encompasses every sector of the economy. GDP is the country's most comprehensive economic scorecard. Measures,consunaer attitudes on present economic. condit©ns'aiiil expectations of future conditions. Represents the dollar level of new orders for both durable and nondurable goods. 2.9 3.0 % 70_9 ' 1.5% 2_2% 3.0% 1.3% 3J1b/2072 Stock Indices Consumer Price Index - MN change' The Consumer, Price Index is a measure of the average price level of a fixed basket of goods and services purchased by consumers;. Value Chan:e Dow Jones (DJIA) S&P 500 Index NASDAQ 13,212. 259.9=1';. 1,408.47 42.79 3/091-57 124.68 Commodities Nymex Crude Gold (USD/OZ) Value Chan e 103,02 $ (4,05) 1,668.35 S (28.50) U.S. Treasuries Fed Funds Tar• et Rate Current Fed: Funds Fed Move Probability for Probability for FOMC Date FOMC Date 04/25/12 06/20/12 Decrease to 0♦00% Increase to 0.25 % Increase to 0.50 % . Increase to 0.75% Increase to 1 % 440 %. 56.0 % 0.0% 0.0% 0`0% 41 55.3 % 0 3:41 0.0% 0.0% HIST ATE RANGE RICAL YIELD CURVE E}F2 ' — Yield (%) Change (%) 3-Month 6-Month 12-Month 2-Year 3-Year 5-Year 7-Year. , 10-Year 30-Year 0.07" 0.13 0.17 0.33 0,.50 1.04 1, 61 2.21 3.34 0.0`1) 0.01 {lfi1` 0.04 0.18 0.24 a40`` RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 41 2 " T I M M I " A A A R a t e d P r i m e I n s t i t u t i o n a l M o n e y - M a r k e t F u n d s F i d e l i t y P r u n e I n s t i 4 t h o n a l M M F F I P X X 0 . 2 0 % : F e d e r a t e d P r i m e O b l i g a t i o n s F u n d P O I X X 0 . 1 9 % : W e l l s F a r g o A d v a n t g e H e r i t a g e W F J X X M o r g a n S t a n l e y I n s t i t u t i o n a l P r i m e L i q u i d i t y F u n d T h e T r e a s u r e r ' s I n s t i t u t i o n a l M o n e y M a r k e t I n d e x ( T I M M I ) i s c o m p i l e d a n d r e p o r t e d b y t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r e a s u r e r ' s C a p i t a l M a r k e t s d i v i s i o n . I t i s a c o m p o s i t e i n d e x d e r i v e d f r o m f i v e A A A r a t e d p r i m e i n s t i t u t i o n a l m o n e y m a r k e t f u n d s . S i m i l a r t o t h e T r e a s u r e r ' s O f f i c e , p r i m e m o n e y m a r k e t f u n d s i n v e s t i n a d i v e r s i f i e d p o r t f o l i o o f U . S . d o l l a r d e n o m i n a t e d m o n e y m a r k e t i n s t r u m e n t s i n c l u d i n g U . S . T r e a s u r i e s , g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s , c o m m e r c i a l p a p e r , c e r t i f i c a t e s o f d e p o s i t s , r e p u r c h a s e a g r e e m e n t s , e t c . T I M M I i s c u r r e n t l y c o m p r i s e d o f t h e f i v e m u l t i b i l l i o n d o l l a r f u n d s l i s t e d t o t h e l e f t _ 1 . 0 0 % - 0 . 8 0 % - 0 . 6 0 % - 0 . 4 0 - 0 . 2 0 % - 0 . 0 0 % M a r - 1 1 M a y - 1 1 J u l - 1 1 S e p 1 1 P o o l Y i e l d T I M M I C a s h F l o w s M o n t h M o n t h l y R e c e i p t s M o n t h l y D i s b u r s e m e n t s D i f f e r e n c e R e q u i r e d M a t u r e d I n v e s t m e n t s A c t u a l I n v e s t m e n t s B a l a n c e M a t u r i n g A v a i l a b l e t o I n v e s t > 1 Y e a r 0 4 f 2 0 1 2 , F ' 0 4 / 2 0 1 2 0 5 ' 2 0 1 , 0 6 / 2 0 1 2 0 7 / 2 0 1 2 0 8 / 2 0 1 2 0 9 / . 2 0 1 2 1 0 / 2 0 1 2 1 1 / 2 0 1 2 . 1 2 / 2 0 1 2 0 1 / 2 0 1 3 ; 0 2 / 2 0 1 3 0 3 / 2 0 1 3 1 , 4 0 4 . 1 6 2 8 8 4 . 0 8 4 1 " 9 5 , 5 1 8 . 2 3 4 9 5 4 6 6 9 . 4 9 . 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 6 2 9 0 5 4 6 0 . 0 0 3 _ 7 3 3 . 6 4 1 , 0 3 5 ' 1 , 2 2 0 . 6 1 8 2 6 3 1 ` 7 1 1 . 3 3 7 5 . 0 8 2 6 . 9 2 6 7 6 8 0 0 . 0 0 9 3 0 . 0 0 0 0 , 6 7 0 . 5 2 8 9 6 3 ) ( 3 3 6 . 5 3 ) 3 . 5 ( 1 9 3 . 1 0 ) : ( 1 0 0 A 6 ) ( 1 5 7 A 3 ) 7 0 0 . 0 0 6 3 5 3 9 ) ; ( 4 7 0 . 0 0 ) 7 3 . 3 3 . ' 2 3 4 . 4 5 1 , 0 7 6 . 5 7 4 5 0 . 4 1 6 . 6 2 7 2 . 9 5 1 7 2 4 0 . 1 5 . 0 6 , 1 7 0 . 9 4 8 7 0 . 9 4 ��3 5 ��5 5 0 . 0 0 3 8 9 . 0 0 3 1 , $ K 6 6 2 9 4 . 5 0 2 3 , 0 2 2 5 . 7 2 1 4 $ 0 4 1 9 2 . 8 0 1 3 9 . 1 . 2 1 0 5 . 0 0 1 7 9 . 9 0 u T O T A L S 1 0 , 0 0 3 . 4 2 1 0 , 5 7 5 . 3 9 ( 5 6 7 . 1 7 ) 2 3 4 . 4 5 4 . 6 9 % 2 , 8 0 4 . 5 4 4 , 7 6 3 . 0 0 5 6 . 1 2 % 9 5 . 3 1 % A l l v a l e s r e p o r t e d i n m i l l i o n s ( , $ ) . " T h e P o o l e d I n v e s t m e n t F u n d c a s h f l o w r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e b a s e d u p o n a 1 2 m o n t h h i s t o r i c a l c a s h f l o w m o d e l . B a s e d u p o n p r o j e c t e d c a s h r e c e i p t s a n d m a t u r i n g i n v e s t m e n t s , t h e r e a r e s u f f i c i e n t f u n d s t o m e e t f u t u r e c a s h f l o w d i s b u r s e - m e n t s o v e r t h e n e x t 1 2 m o n t h s . R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R E A S U R E R - T A X C O L L E C T O R 4 2 3 Asset Allocation MMKT CALTRUST FND LOCAL AGCY INVST' DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNMA BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES FARMER MAC MUNI BONDS COMM PAPER NCDS Scheduled Scheduled 54,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00' 50,000.00 100,000.00 20,000.00 643,641.00 100,000.00 898,850.00 145,000.00 1,953,180.00 82,000.00 263,705.00 123,000.00 37,500.00 88,735.00 150,000.00 35,000.00 54,000.00' 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00 49,915.47 100,318.55 19,971.40 643,825.62 99,866.03' Market 35,000.00' 54,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00 49,930.22 100,283.00 20,000.00' 644,678.10 99,906.25' 899,788.64 901,614.08 144,752.28 144,921.96 1,954,615.24 1,955,197.79 81,861.43 81,906.25 264,019.44 264,382.22 122,751.08 123,000.00 37,502.38 88,970.55 149,730.70 37,589.06 88,970.55' 149,872.25 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.03 % 99,96 % 100.14 % 100.13 % 100.04 100.20 % 100.12% 100.03% 100.05 100.14% 100.20 % 100.23 100.00 100.09 % Yield 0.04 % .003 .003 0.38 % .003 0.09% .003 0.99% 8.214' 0.19% .858 0.22% .782 0.16% .302'. 0.76% , 1.230 0.14% .676 0.84% .854! 0.17% .535' 0.37%. .773 0.19% .762 0.62%'. 0.21 % 0.61 % 0.45 % 0.35 % 0.42 % at.+ .003 .003 .003 .003 8.214 .858 .782 .302 2.253 .676 2.366 .535 .965 .762 .915 1.034 .217.217 1.093' 1.093 .381 .381 .192 .192 r95171.00'. ,a 0 2,000,000 00 1,000,000.00 0 000 LOCAL AGCY MYST END DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BILLS Scheduled Book US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS Market FHLB DISC NOTES FNLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES MU'NI BONDS COMM PAPER SCHEDULED PAR 010 MMKT-1% GALTRUST FND - 1% LOCAL AGCY INVST FND - 1% DDA/PASSBK - 4% LOCAL AGCY OBLIG - O% US TREAS BILLS - 1% US TREAS BONDS - 2% FHLMC DISC NOTES - O% FHLMC BONDS - 13% FNMA DISC NOTES - 20/o ✓ r FNMA BONDS -- la% iYi FHLB DISC NOTES - 36/o ® FHLB BONDS - 39% o FFCB DISC NOTES - 2% o FFCB BONDS - 5% c FMAC DISC NOTES - 2% am FARMER MAC - 1%a mi MUNI BONDS - 2% ® COMM PAPER - 3% RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 43 " M a t u r i t y D i s t r i b u t i o n S c h e d u l e : P a ( 0 0 0 ' s ; M a s - 1 2 ' 2 M M K T C A L T R U S T F N D L O C A L A G C Y I N V S T F N D D D A / P A S S B K L O C A L A G C Y O B L I G U S T R E A S B O N D S F H L M C D I S C N O T E S F H L M C B O N D S F N M A D I S C N O T E S F N M A B O N D S F H L B D I S C N O T E S F H L B B O N D S F F C B D I S C N O T E S F F C B B O N D S F M A C D I S C N O T E S F A R M E R M A C M U N I B O N D S C O M M P A P E R 0 - 1 M o s 3 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ' . 9 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 8 9 , 1 2 1 . 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 9 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 1 4 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 2 3 , 8 1 0 . 0 0 9 4 0 , 2 9 5 . 0 0 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 7 5 , 0 0 0 A 0 5 , 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 7 4 , 2 0 5 . 0 0 4 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 7 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 1 6 5 0 0 . 0 0 3 4 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 6 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 3 2 , 5 8 5 . 0 0 8 5 , 9 9 0 . 0 0 7 8 , 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 - 3 7 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 - 2 5 , 8 5 0 . 0 0 5 5 , 7 4 5 . 0 0 5 , 1 4 0 . 0 0 ' 2 ; 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 0 0 0 . 0 0 , . 3 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 - 3 M o s Y E A R I N M A T U R I T Y H e r r M U M M O M 1 1 2 , 0 2 0 . 0 0 1 8 3 , 8 5 0 . 0 0 3 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 5 6 0 . 0 0 5 6 0 . 0 0 - 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 p 0 0 0 . 0 0 6 4 3 , 6 4 1 . 0 0 1 0 0 O O O A O 8 9 8 , 8 5 0 . 0 0 1 4 5 0 0 0 . 0 0 6 5 . 5 0 0 . 0 0 ; 1 , 9 5 3 , 1 8 0 . 0 0 8 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 2 6 3 , 7 0 5 . 0 0 - 1 2 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 3 7 , 5 0 0 . 0 0 8 8 , 7 3 5 . 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 M M K T S c h e d u l e d P a r C A L T R U S T F N D - S c h e d u l e d P a r L O C A L A G C Y I N V S T F N D - S c h e d u l e d P a r O D A / P A S S B K - S c h e d u l e d P a r L O C A L A G C Y O B L I G - S c h e d u l e d P a r U S T R E A S B I L L S - S c h e d u l e d P a r U S T R E A S B O N D S S c h e d u l e d P a r F H L M C D I S C N O T E S - S c h e d u l e d P a r f t I L M C B O N D S - S c h e d u l e d P a r - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F N M A D I S C N O T E S - S c h e d u l e d P a r F N M A - B O N D S - S c h e d u l e d P e r S e a l l o w t F N L B D I S C N O T E S - S c h e d u l e ! P a r F N L B B O N D S - S c h e d u l e d P a r F F C B D I S C N O T E S - S c h e d u l e d P a r F M B B O N D S - S c h e d u l e d P a r M O P F M A C D I S C N O T E S - S c h e d u l e d P a r y r F A R M E R M A C - S c h e d u l e d P a r r e i m m i M U N I B O N D S - S c h e d u l e d P a r m u m C O I a M P A P E R - S c h e d u l e d P a r R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R E A S U R E R - T A X C O L L E C T O R 4 4 Credit Quality Moody (000's) Aaa Aa1 Aa2 Aa3 NR 4,412,491.00 8,580.00 138,040.00 25,000.00 411,060.00 Bookx Market 4,414,999.91 4,418,857.39 8,580.27 8,580.27 137,829.42 137,999.26 25,225.75 25,225.75 410,813.46 411,149.06 <T/Bonk 100.09% 100.00% 100.12% 100.00% 100.08% old: 0.51 % 0.93 0.41 % 0.25 % 0.21 % Totals°:{000' 95,E 71..0 4,997;448 00.09 MOODY'S ® Aaa - 88% p Aa3 -1% lAal-O% NR-8% ! Aa2 -3% S&P ® AAA - 27% MEI AA- - 1% fAA+-64% MEI NR-8% ® AA - 0% S&P (000's AAA AA+ AA AA- NR 1,337,426.00 3,197,205.00 24,480.00. 25,000.00 411,060.00 w Book 1,340,489.61 1,343,226.38 3,196,439.71 3,197,730.26 24,480.2724,480.27 25,225.75 25,225.75 410,813.47, 411,149.07 ar KT%Sook � �YYe1�l 100.20 % 0.64 % 100.04%` 0.46% 100.00% 0.68% 100.00% 0.25% 100.08% 0.21% 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 45 Month End Portfolio Holdings CUSIP Description Maturity Maturity Date Coupon To Mat Par Value Book Value Market Price - Market Unrealized Modified Years To Value Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 1KT X ,X IX FIPXX GOIXX MVRXX FEDERATED PRIME WELLS FARGO HERITAGE BLACKROCK FIDELITY MMF FEDERATED GOV MORGAN STANLEY GOV CALTRUST FND CLTR CALTRUST SHT TERM FUND LOCAL AGCY 1NV ST FND LAIF LAIF : _. S DDA/PASSBK CASH UBOC MANAGED RATE LOCAL AGCY OBLIG LAO US DIST COURTHOUS 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 09- .108 .149 .151 .010 .047 097 .108 149 .151 .010 .047 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 30 000 000.00 0.00 .000000 0.00 .000000 0.00 .000000 0.00 .000000 5,000,000.00 100.000000 30 000 000.00 100.000000 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 0.00 0-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 000 .000 f100 .003 .003 003 .003 .003 .003 .003 .003 US TREAS BILLS 9127955Z0 U.S. TREASURY BILL US TREAS BONDS 912828PH7 912828NX9 912828PR5 912828QZ6 912828QK9 912828PR5 U.S. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND US. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND FHLMC DISC NOTES 3133%ZQ9 FHLMC DISC NOTE 3133%ZN6 FHLMC DISC NOTE IMMO. elan FHLMC BONDS 3137EACG2 FHLMC 3134G1GQ1 FHLMC 3134G1GQ1 FHLMC 31340 GQ1 FHLMC it1GQ1 FHLMC AC LI FHLMC 1SG0 FHLMC3.5YrNc6Mo 1WT7 FHLMC 3139G1XG4 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3137EACK3 FHLMC 2.2Yr 3137EACR8 FHLMC 3Yr 3137EACR8 FHLMC 3Yr 3134G1VG6 FHLMC 2Yr' 3134G2CL4 3137EACP2 3137EACL1 3134G2FT4 3134G2UP5 3134G2Y'K2 3134G2Y K2 3134G2Z14 3134G2ZN5 3137EACK3 3134G2YJ5 3134G2N81 3134G2N81 3134G2YJ5 3134G2T28 3134G2Q62 3134G2U91 3134G2T69 3134G2U42 3134G2 W 40 3134G2W40 3134G2W40 3134G2W40 3134G2W40 3137EACY3 3137EACY3 3134G2 W 99 3134G2W73 3134G2Y89 3134G2Y55 3134G22H4 3134G22H4 3134G22H4 3134G23J9 illG23M2 23M2 ACZO G3BQ2 3134G3BF6 FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 2Yr _ FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 2.25Yr FHLMC 5YrNc1 YrB FHLMC 2YrNc1 YrE FHLMC 2YrNc1YrE FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB FFI LMC 11 Mo FH LMC 3Yr FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 3YrNc6Mo6 FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2Yr _ FH LMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 3Yr FH LMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNd YrE FHLMC 3.5YrNc1 YrB FH LMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNc6IstoB FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FI-1LMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNc66.4o13 FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FH LMC 2Yr FHLMC 5YrNc1YrB FHLMC2Yr 04 O1/2012 .424 424 Nt AC . 21- 04/01/2012 .381 04 01/2012 092 .092 993 06/15/2020 .381 12:3k,- - 02/07/2013 .185 .185 '"WiEtiMiltintitiOttWit 08/31/2012 09/30/2012 01/31/2013 05/31/2013 02/28/2013 01/31/2013 07/20/2012 . 0718/2012 Pl�u" fit, 01/09/2013 08/28/2012 08/28/2012 08(28/2012 08/28/2012 10/28/2013 03/03/.2014 11/26/2012 10/29/2012 07/27/2012 02/25/2014 02/25/2014 10/30/2012 04/29/2014 11/30/2012 10/28/2013 08/13/2013 08/22/2016 09/06/2013 09/06/2013 09/06/2016 . 09/06/2036 07/27/2012 09/19/2014 09/29/2016 09/29/2016 09/19/2014 10/17/2014 10/03/2013 ' 10/13/2016 10/13/2016 10/15/2013 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 11/25/2014 11/25/2014 10/13/2016 10/18/2013 04/24/2015 10/25/201) 11/04/2013 11/04/2013 11/04/2013 11/15/2013 11/08/2013 11/08/2013 11/27/2013 11/28/2016.. 12/23/2013 - .375 .375 .625 .500 .625 62 342 ,327 .151 .181 .176 .199 ix 54,000,000 00 50,000,000.00 54,000,000.00 100.000000 544110 1**NOO 50,000,000.00 100.000000 inttaItMASIOMPIr- 200,000,000.00 200,000,000.00 560,000.00 ilk40Q0Matk 101. 560,000.00 100.000000 100.000000 50,000,000 00 49�915 465.28 99.860447 ASSESMOIN 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 45,000,000 00 .160 .160 10,000,000.00 .150 150 10 000,000 00 1.375 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .875 1.250 .515 .500 1.125 1.375 1.375 .625 1.350 375 .875 .875 1.750 .450 .450 1.000 1.125 1.125 .500 1.250 1.250 .500 .750 500 1.000 1.125 .375 .800 800 800 .800 .800 .750 .750 1.250 OO 1.000 .550 .700 .700 .700 .600 .630 .630 .375 1.375 .625 1.407 .709 .694 .732 .699 .937 1.250 .470 .500 .514 1.375 1.465 .650 1.160 .385 .790 .611 1.750 .450 .450 1.000 1.125 .203 .500 1.250 1.250 .599 .750 .520 1.010 1.156 .483 .800 .800 .800 .800 .808 .755 .761 1.250 .516 1.007 .550 .700 .700 .700 .600 .630 .630 .580 1.375 .626 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,0 30,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 14,121,00000 -11,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,0130,000.00 10,000,000.00 7,020,000.00 10,000,000-00 5,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 5,000,00000 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,00000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 • 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,0130.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,006,445.31 10,006,640.63 -10,047,265.63 10,042,187.50 10,047,265.63 45168,750.00 9,985,066.67 9�986k333 33 40 9,990,300.00 5,029,450.00 10,061,850.00 10,054,100.00 5,030,400.00 4,990,300.00 5,000,000.00 5,004,700.00 5,000,000.00 10,102,700.00. 5,000,000.00.. 9,973,100.00 4,998,000.00 5,027,800.00 14,118,881.85 11,022,330.00 5,028,775.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,086,400.00 10,000,000-00 10,000,000.00 7,020,000.00 9,970,700.00 5,000,000.00 4,998,000.00 4,997,500.00 4,992,500.00 14,%7,300.00 10,000,000.00 - 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 00 9,997,500.00 9,998,467.22 4,9913,300.00 5,000,000.00 4,998,437.50 4,998,750.00 5,000,000.00 5,030,00000 - 5,000,000.00 5,010,000.00 10,0.00,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 9,958,700.00 5,000000.00 9,999,800-00 100.090000 100.130000 100.350000 100.290000 100.370000 351TNQ,U0060= -. -.ail'ft ,� - 54,000,000.00 50,000,000-00 St 4 200 000,000 00 21111OO.Og e?; 560,000.00 0.00 .003 .003 0.00 0.00 0.00 49,930,223.64 14,758.36 AftligiWiEatisoggic .003 .003 4.221 003 .003 8.214 855 .858 em ,.. 15,013,500.00 7,054.69 .418 .419 10,011,000.00 4,359.37 .500 .501 10,035,000.00-12,265.63 .831 .838 10,029,000.00-13,187.50 - 1.162 1.167 10,037,000.00 -I 0,265.63 .914 .915 100.3500130 45,157 I r.00 11 250.00 .831 .838 100.000000 100.000000 100.875000 100.343750 100.343750 100.343750 100.343750 100.812500 101.343750 100.218750 100.031250 100.312500 102.125000 102.125000 100.250000 101.906250 100.156250 100.812500 100.656250 100.593750 100.000000 100.000000 100.093750 100.125000 100.312500 99.937500 100.187500 100.187500 99.937500 -100.031250 100.000000 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 99.625000 99.625000 99.625000 99.625000 99.625000 100.500000 100.500000 100.031250 100.031250 100.187500 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100,031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.437500 10).375000 10,087,500.00 5,017,187.50 10,034,375.00 10,034,375-00 5,017,187.50 5,040,625.00 5,067,187.50 5,010,937.50 5,001,562.50 10,031,250.00 5,106,250.00 10,212,500.00 5,012,500.00 5,095,312.50 14;143,069.06 13,089,375.00 5,032,832.50 10,059,375.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,004,687.50 10,012,500.00 10,031,250-00 9,993,750.00 10,018,750.00 7,033,162.50 9,993,750.00 5,001,562.50 5,000,000.00 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 15,004,687.50 9,%2,500.00 4,981,250.00 4,981,250.00 ' 4,981,250.00 9,%2,500.00 10,050,000.00 5,025,000.00 5,001,562.50 • 5,001,562.50 5,009,375.00 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 10,003,125.00 10,003,125.00 5,001,562.50 10,003,125.00 5,021,875.00 10,037,500.00 F - 14,933.33 .303 304 13,666.67 ,(� .298 .299 IM yy 97,200.00 -12,262.50 -27,475.00 -19,725.00 -13,212.50 50,325.00 - 67,187.50 6,237.50 1,562.50 -71,450.00 106,250.00. 239,400.00 14,500.00 67,512.50- 24,182.21 67,095.00 4,037.50 59,375-00 0.00 0.00 4,687.50 12,500.00 - 55,150.00 -6,250.130 18,750.00 13,162.50 23,050.00 1,562.50 2,000.00 4,062.50 9,062.50 37,387.50 - 37,500.00. -18,750.00- -18,750-00 -18,750.00 -35,000.00 51,532.78 26,700.00 1,562.50 3,125.00 10,625.00 1,562.50 1,562.50 1,562.50 1,562.50 3,125.00 3,125.00 1,562.50 44,425.00 21,87500 • 37,700.00 .763. .409 .409 .409 . .409 1.555 1.892 ..650 .575. .322 1.867 1.866 .580 2.033 .664 1.556 1.356 4 202 1.424 . 1.424 4.320 4.307 323 2.448 4.357 4 357 2.447 2.507 1.494 4.401 4.384 1,530 2.524 2.524 2.524 2.524 2.524 2.612 2.612 4.369 1.536 2.997 1.554 1.576 1.576 1576 1.608 1.588 1 588 1.650 4.477 1.713 .778 .411 .411 .411 .411 1.578 1.923 .658 .581 .323 1.907 1.907 .584 2.079 .668 1.578 1.370 4.397 1.436 1.436 4.438 4.438 .323 2.471 9.501 4.501 2.471 2.548 1.510 4.540 4.590 1.542 2.567 2.567 , 2.567 2.567 2.567 2.655 2.655 4.540 1.551 3.066 1.570 1.597 1.597 1.597 1.627 1.608. 1.608 1.660 4.666 1.732 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 7 46 Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Maturity Par Book Alarket - Market Unrealized Modified Years To CUSIP Description Date Coupon ToMat Value. Value Price "alue Gain/Loss Duration- Maturity 3134G31358 FH LMC 2YrNcl YrE 3134G3B58 FH LMC 2YrNc1YrE 3134G3BL3 FH LAIC 3YrNclYrB 3134G3BL3 FHLMC 3YrNclYrB 3134G3BL3 FH LMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3BL3 FHLMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3BL3 FHLMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3BA7 FHLMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3BL3 • FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3010 FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3DP2 FHLMC 3.5YrNcl YrB 3134G3EB2 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G3DY3 FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3EN6 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G2U42 FHLMC 1.5Yr 3134G3GG9 FHLMC 3YrNclYr13 3134G3GZ7 FHLMC 2YrNc1YrE 3134G3H D5- FH LMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3H D5 FHLMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3H D5 FHLMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3H Al FH LMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3H Al FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3HA1 FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3H Al FH LMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3MM9 FHLMC 2YrNclYrE . 3134G3MM9 FH LMC 2YrNcl YrE 3134G3LA6 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G3LZ1 FH LMC 2YrNc1 YrB 3134G3MY3 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G3MY3 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G3NC0 FH LMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3NL0 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3PD6 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3NS5 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G3QW3 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3QW3 -FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3RP7 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE -3134G3SH4 FHLMC 5YrNc1YrB 3134G3SS0 FHLMC 2.5YrNclYrE- 3134G3QW3 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3SB7 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G2U42 FHLMC 19Mo 3137EADD81 FH LMC 3Yr 3134G3SB7 FHLMC 2.16Yr 3134G31X9 FHLMC 3Yr FNMA DISC NOTES 313588M85 . FNMA DISC NOTE 313589AC7 FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA BONDS 31398AV90 FNMA 3YrNc2Yr. 31398A3N0 FNMA 31398A3A8 FNMA 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPE L7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPE L7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPE L7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3N0 FNMA 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPGA9 FNMA 3YrNc2Mo 3136FPEX1 FNMA 3.25YrNc6Mo 31398A3R1 FNMA 3.5YrNc6Mo 31398AH54 FNMA 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398AP71 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398AT77 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398AT77 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398A5Z1 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A5Z1 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPXX0 FNMA 4Yr 3136FPZD2 FNMA 4YrNc2Mo 3136FP6X0 FNMA 5Yr 3136FPUC9 FNMA 2Yr 3136FPUC9 FNMA 2Yr 31398A3K6 FNMA 4Yr 3136FRGK3 FNMA 3.25YrNc1YrE 31398A5W8 FNMA 3Yr 3136FPUC9 FNMA 2Yr 31398AVZ2 FNMA 5Yr • 3136FRKM4 FNMA 4.25YrNc1 YrE 31398A5Z1- FNMA 3Yr 31398A6F4 FNMA 1.75 Yr 12/06/2013 l2/06/2013 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2013 12/05/2014 12/19/2014 06/19/2015 06/30/2015 12/19/2014 06/30/2015 10/15/2013 01/09/2015 01/03/2014 01/24/2014 01/24/2014 01/24/2014 01/23/2015 01/23/2015 01/23/2015 01/23/2015 02/27/2014 02/27/2014 02/27/2014 02/21/2014 08/28/2015 08/28/2015 02/27/2015 02/24/2015 02/27/2015 . 03/21/2014 03/06/2015 03/06/2015 03/12/2015 03/28/2017 09/22/2014 03/06/2015 04/28/2014 10/15/2013 04/17/2015 04/28/2014 01/30/2015 11/01/2012 01/03/2013 1.050 .540 .625 .375 .375 .500 .375 .650 .140 , .190 - .700 .700 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .700 1.000 1.000 1.020 1.000 .875 1.000 .375 .850 .500 .600 .600 .600 .875 .875 .875 .875 .400 .400 .375 . .500 .650 .650. .550 .500 .550 300 .625 .625 .700 .700 • 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .700 1.000 1.000 1.020 1.000 .875 1.000 .400 .850 .500 .600 .600 .600 .875 :875 .875 .875 .400 .400 .394 .500 .650 .650 .567 .581 .594 .378 .625 .625 .650 .650 1.050 .540 .628 .427 323 .611 .460 .662 5,000.000 00 5,000,000_00 5,000,0(10-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000,00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 6,500,000.00 5,003,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000130 5,000,000.00 10,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000000.00 5,000,000.00- 5,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,997,700.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,0:0,000.00 6,500,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,996,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 4,988,000.00 4,993,500.00 9,984,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000LO 10,000,000.00 5,030,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,999,500.00 4,994,400.00 5,004,183.00 10,000,000.00 9,966,500.00 5,000,000.00 4,991,050.00 100.031250 100.031250 100.156250 100.156250 100.156250 100.156250 100.156250 100.093750 100.156250 100.062500 100.156250 100.125000 100.093750 100.062500 100.031250 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 100.000000 100.000000• 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 99.968750 100.000000 99.593750 99.593750 99.718750 99.593750 99.875000 99.875000 99.906250 99.906250 99.968750 99.843750 99.906250 99.906250 99,875000 100.031250 99.593750 99.875000 5,001,562.50 5,001.562.50 5,007,812.50 5,007,812.50 5,007,812.50 5,007.812.50 5,007,812.50 5,004,687.50 10,015,625.00 5,003,125.00 10,015,625.00 5,006,250.00 5,004,687.50 5,003,125.00 5,001,562.50 10,012,500.00 5,006,250.00 5,006,250.00 5,006,250.00 5,006,250.00 5,0130,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 00 6,500,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,996,875.00 5,000,000.00 4,979,687.50 4,979,687.50 4,985,937.50 4,979,687.50 4,993,750.00 9,987500.00 4,9)5,312.50 4,995,312.50 9,996,875.00' 4,992,387.50 4,995,312.50 4,995,312.50 4,993,750.00 5,001,562.50 9,959,375.00 4,993,750.00 5,000,000.00 4 998,250 00 99 968750 4,998,437.50 3 t y1,0400,i,1a, ;. �i,43,8?0a RIMI�1��M1Ol tl .....; Ee44,678og .140 50,000,000.00 49,935,444.44 140 50,000,00000 49 930 583.33 100,000100110 99.937500 49,968,750.00 99.875000 49,937,500.00 tailMOVO 1,562.50 1,562.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 4,687.50 '15,625.00 3,125.00 15,625.00 6,250.00 4,687.50 3,125.00 3,862.50 12,500.00 6,250.00 6,250.00 6,250.00 6,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 875.00 0.00 -20,312.50 -20,312.50 -11,562.50 -8,312.50 250.00 3,500.00 4,687.50 .4,687.50 -3,125.00 -7,812.50 -9,687.50 -4,187.50 -650.00 -2,620.50 -7,125.00 2,700.00 187.50 33,305.56 6,916.67 1.664 1.664 2.623 2.628 2.628 2.682 2.628 2.682 2.628 2.682- 1.662 1.682 2.628 2.682 2.666 2.721 3.148 3.219 3.197 3.249 2.672 2.721 3.197 3.249 1.530 1.542 2.729 - 2.778 1.744 1.762 1.800 1.819 1.800 1.819 1.800- 1.819 2.767 2-816 2.767 2.816 2.767 2.816 2.767 2.816 1.896 1.912 1.896 1.912 1.895 1.912 1.877 1.896 3.373 3.411 3.373 3.411 2.877 2.912 2.870 2.904 2.877 1.969 2.898 2.898 2.919 4.850 2.455 2 898 2.058 1.531 3.027 2.058 2. 2.797 588 .760 07/16/2013 1.300 1.317 - 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 100.281250 5,014,062.50 1.6,562.50 1.274 09/24/2012 ..625. .700 _ 5,000,030.00 4,992,300.00 100.250000 5,012,500.00 20,200.00 - A83 09/03/2013 1.050 1.05& 5,000,000.00 4,998,750.00 100.843750 5,042,187.50 43,43730 1.407 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.812500 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 1.424 09/09/2013 - 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 - 5,000,000.00 10).817_500 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 - - 1.424 - 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.812500' 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 1.424 09/09/2013 1..050 1.084 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 100.812500 5,040,625.00 45,625.00 1.423 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.812500 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 1.424 09/24/2012 .625 .704 5,003,000.00 4,992,000.00 100.250000 5,012,500.00 20,500.00 .483 09/17/2013 1.125 1.132 5,000,000.00 4,999,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 52,562.50 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.031250 10,103,125.00 103,125.00 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 51,562.50 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 ,5,000,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 51,562.50 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.W 5,000,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 51,562.50 1.445 09/20/2013 1.000 1.017 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 5625.00 1.455 - 12/17/2013 1:125 1.141 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 101.125000-5,056,250.00 58,750130 1-685 03/21/2014 1.350 1.350 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.468750 5,073,437.50 73,437.50 1.939 04/04/2012 1.000 110 10,000,000.00 10,088,900.00 100.000000 10,000,000.00 88,903.00 - .011 10/08/2013 - 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.187500 5,059,375.00 59,375.00 1.494. 10/08/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 - 5;0130,0130.00 101.187500 - 5,059,375.00 59,375.00 1A94 10/08/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.187500 5,059,375.00 59,375.00 1.494 06/22/2012 1.250 .. .348 - 10,000000.00 - 10,145;800.00 ' 100.250000 10,025,000.00 120,800M .227 07/30/2012 1.125 .403 10,000000.00 10,124,000.00 100.312500 - 10,031,250.00-92,750.00 .331 07/30/2012 1..125 .458 10,000,000.00 10114,300.00 100.312500 10,031,250.00.-83,050.00 .331 11/19/2013 . .800 .800 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.531250 10,053,12500 53,125.00 1.615 11/19/2013 .800 .800 - 5,000,000.00. 5,000,000.00 100.531750 5,026,562.50 26,562.50 1.615 11/26/2014 1.050 1.050 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.500000 10,050,000.00 50,000.00 2.600 12/03/2034 1.125 1.125 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.500000 10,050,000.00 50,000.00 2.616 02/04/2016 .561 .586 10,000,000.00 9,990,000.00 100.312500 10,031,250.00 41,250.00 3.810 10/30/2012 .500 .550 15,000,000.00 14,988,000.00 100.125000 15,018,750.00 30,750.00 .580 10/30/2012 .500 .557 10,000,000.00 9,991,000.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00 21,500.00 .580 03/14/2014 1.250 1.278. 5,000,000130 4,996,000.00 101,625000 5,081,250.00 • 85,250.00 1.922 07/25/2014 1.700 11700 5,000,000.00 - 5,000,000.00 100,093750 5,004,687.50 4,68750 2.256 12/18/2013 .750 1.194 5,000,000.00 - 4,941,950.00 1(0.687500 5,034,375.00 92,425.00 1.693 10/30/2012 .500 .473 5,000,000.00 5,002000.00 100.125000. 5,006,7_50.00 4,250.00 .581 03/13/2014 2.750 1.128 10,000,000-00 10,45-1,500.00 104781250 - - - 10,478,125.00 23,625.00 1.900 08/24/2015 2.000 2.000 5,000,000.00 5,0130,0130.00 100.21.8750 - 5,010,937.50 10,937.50 3.262 11/19/2013 $00 .870 5,000,000.00 - 4,991,250.00 100.531250 5,026,562.50 35,312.50 1.614 12/28/2012. - 375 .349 5,000,000.00 5,002,000.00 . 100.156250 5,007,812.50 '5,812.50 .739 1.685 1. 2. 2.912 1.973 2932 2932 2.948 4.995 2479 2.932 2.077 1.542 3.047 589 762 1.293 .485 1.427- 1.444 1.444 1.444 1.444 1.444 .485 1.466 1.466 1.466 1.466 1.466 1.474 1.715 1.973 .011 1-523 1.523 1.523 .227 .332 .332 1.638 1.639 2.658 2.677 3.849 .584 • .584 1-953 2.318 1.718 15 1 1. 745 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 47 8 Nvoivoi�lNn��r; �Q a� za$Mv$$e<8ve�Nv^iM.^D'$.ND�.ND.NDND.ND$N•D•.'^o,�F:$ •F, ^ N tl1 M M P P P P N n •lV •lV N '- e- N N N v N C • m C S< CI N C N N N .- ^ r- a a C? C C l^! N eV � N (V n • n n n n. •i- C! •Ci d� n n n n n n 0T7 '4 7 E pm M P Lf aN. N E g M N Np pNp V1 r. � m �1 T M Mil M s s C C a R N VM1 § R O LG b b n 5 .MO .Mo K. °6 C i g i i 4$ C R n.sb b� R n R i i .D n n .O y W ^W d g; 8 l 00 ' N FI N (+1 N o�S PLOT to M a Ma M V� ^ ,- fV [V '- ry N V lV < el lV < fV N N^^ '- a C R a< C N fJ C! r CJ N .� �- n n n n .� N N a' n n n n n a o N N N N N N .. n n ✓188O Y1 OO a 8808 R 8 OOOa R888.88888 p V88� 8.8888 8888888o88$RP,888$8�5iNOOERORE F,,OO�llR 8 pip RO QF?RO8OO ROOD OR yo$ �F,, R8y8 y8 y8� O.9R000.80O8pR pPp �t8N R O8O R GO �( M O M pF. a n N F .N- O M M^ O N Gp NN N CND- M M 8 N Of m M v Of v d S A P aND- N A N O ill ill A 0- `.° M� O M 2 d N O N aD .N- N N'* N O A N N N N ^ d8 N- M ill " O 2 O N Y�f Q� ' m q n ? V O O e O o rri cri Ki Nl ^ P e N e rN- N oD Nl n P P N cri W O Ol N P N N N.•+ O nV M .- .= .. n. .� nNl- Al nN- Q� V ^ Ol O O F. .O N. l�l l�l l+: lry r•+ d '+ '+ .O N rr Al v O m M S N M CD Vl .� O Ol Al .98888288N88$8$2888988188'18888"8888888888888N�8888888N�88�N�p88828RR8RN888R888.8�8598888854F1088888882.1pBQ�88R C^i O O O. .NO M P O f O M .ND .ND M0 No Nn O O O O M M O OQ m O O oNo- O tq h V1 r+ b O M O O o^0 .N- .N- u�'1 N N y�-� r O rvW CNO M Vt M O C=D O 1� O CND` d BsNosNs§sogaggagsssss§§??oa§ggs88os.00��os 888888s 8 88o88§so8a8888888^88gSgS88§8t18ogse<g88g88 Jl OO OO �/t N i!'i N O G N N N u-i V1 N V1 Vl p V1 N V1 V1 a C O N N u-i O O V1 N O VI ^ OO. O O N N O O N N u-i u-i OO u'i i!'i O i!'i V1 O V1 V1 ill ^ O N vl N N Vi V1 O J1 N V1 OO O N N N a? O u-i O V1 R N T N R< u'i N R$ R88�8"9888"9888R?�888'88888 888 m�E,?Jl OONo888$,888888EEEEIEE88F,88F$,��Q$8�8EL288� ,D � 5? � .+ N 4 O uuuuuN"''''''��11 � N ��(( ��(( 8888888888888888888888&&8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888&&888888&8&&88 8888888°8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 M8Ns8888a8888§ M g§8 88oaa§888M88888888a8888§888888§§§§8888888$8888$8§88§§§88M888888 N P O� N Jl N .li O O N N N N N Q N Q F, < N N a N vl O N N N O O C N O Q N O O O N ill O O N N N ill ill N O N N O N N O ul N N N O N N vl N u'i N O ill N ul O O ul N N Vi ill N O Vi O Vl Q N O N N J1 i!'i V1 $88$$$$8$8.8.8$$$$$$$$$$$88$$$88888888888.$ $$$$$8888888888.$ 8.88.$$$.888$$$$$$8888$8888888$$$$$ §gg§§§§§§§§§§§8§§1§§§§§§§§§§H§§§§g8§k§§§§§§§§§g8§§g§gg§§§§§g§§§§§ §§ M§ §§§§§§§§§k §§§§ 8888888gg8888888888888888888888888g88888g88888888888888888888888888888888888888888e<888888 ✓t O O Vl N V1 �l1 O O N N N N N ul ul vl < V1 V1 N V1 N vl O N N, u-i O O u"i N O N^ O OO O V1, �l1 O O N N N N N �/1 O i!'i N O u'i ^ O N Vi ill ^ O N N �/1 N O N i!'i N OO O N N N v1 V1 u1 OO u-i O N C N O V1 V1 V1 N N 0 8 " 4 288"885? 2R em$ M2P N 8 r N �^nss^ n��.... ������^^�8 �n��8 8 ^BNnn nnn a n n � .O .G n n� � d���� aD M n n 88g8ns8�eM§H "§oE$,5,1Eaa8m888��� 8§88§ i§§IIM�.���§���§�§§§H§§ �M§E§F4�������8���8M, N a M .D a .D N .D .D .D .D a. a s .D b .D .D .D .D a a a M a a M M a a .D M M M M M M .D a M M' M M .D .D .D a a a .O M N N N M M N N N M a M M a M M a a a N a M M M M M M M M a M M a N O O On ,9N N Mi-. O N N N N a M N ra- g N N N N O N O O N N N N N 0 0 0 0 7 N N N P O N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N n 0 0 0 0^^ 8 N O M \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ON N N \ N 0 0 0\ 0 0 0 O O n n n n n n n\\ n n ^. n N N n n n n n r- \ N. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 880000�$$$�8\`S8o88a'a'88` o �S\`a' ^000b'b'b^S"b"b' T m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m - m w w w w w w m m m m0 m m m m m m mmm m- m m m m ar w w r w w w w m w.m m m m m w o 0 o m o 0 0 0 o m m.m m o w o m m o o o m o 0 o m o 0 0�0 0 o m m o w o 0 0 0 o m m m w w o 0 0 0 o m o o m m w o mmm o =^ i-,,t, i;t:> � 222 r222222i,wit�=2r�rr272r222 LrM222i:i:2>:22' 'LLLL^rrrr22222i22ir^`r`Li^rn2 n ... .O .O .O .O .O r+ n n � n .- .O .G n .O .D .D .D •- •- N .D .O .O .O .O .D •- •- N N .D .D n .D n .y n .D Z N Z Z N Z Z Z Z Z Z Z o Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z - Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z'Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z r>•>->-, rrrrrnrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr>-rr>-rrrrrrrrrrrrr M N N M n M M M, M n N N M M. M F N N N N N M M M N M M N N N N M M N N N N N N N M N M N N N N N N N M M M M N M M M N N N M Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q .* Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q¢¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 L 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 zzzzzzzzz4zzLLzzyzzzzzzz4LL4zzzzzzzzzzzzEZEz4z4zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzLLzz4z4zzzzzzzzz LL LL LL LL LL LL' la. LL LL LL LL LLL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 4 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL L� LL LL LL LL L� L� 4 LL LL LL LL L� LL L� L� L� {i N M r- .D •D P O N n N � N N N N N N M '- N 0 0 N ry P P N p a Z� K X N� a� (O(��' �>�)) ((>�� ��Z)) � Q `D jam` ` ,� 'pD Q Z y�j � H p Z C C> o� o� s X "' 2 0' H Q { may 2 Q Q Q in LL 3� } a N Q Q QuutgggQ Q Q F- =_ LL � Uj LL� j �wj LL ( V7 (lJ7 (a7 l7 a S d 2 2 I;� ii C K ii 3 I,�- � �ND `l�• m 'O p X X m m N U Y O 6 0 6 y ig� H Ul N g � l J a U cIL w w w 4 ,i LL LL LL LL LL LL ii g Q' g g g 2 2 i5 i5 i5 6 O O - VI H �� .> N N m X N N= O O O t[ Q C, Q LL O� Q� u C C . 0 0. 6 O 'O LL C O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O uuuLL8LLLLl4uNuu uLLmLL LLLL mm uuu� LLLLAAAB`mA `mAPA uAAP.mA `mmmAAuuuuuuumu AAA AAuNAAAAAAA AA .D ,O .O TA N m .D m d .D .D � N N N ,O .D .D .D AAA �+N1 N .D .O � N AAA.D .D N .O m N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M. M M M M M M M M M t� M M M F, M M M M M CN^, m M Ml M M M M F, M M M M F, M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M n', M M M M M • M M M M to MMM M M F. M M M M M MMM M MMM M M F, M F, M MMMM MMM RNERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Maturity Par Book Market Market Unrealized Modified Years To CUSIP Description Date Coupon To Mat Value Value Price Value Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 3136FT2K4 FNMA 5YrNc1YrB 3136FT2K4 FNMA 5YrNcl YrB 3135GOJG0 FNMA 3YrNcl YrB 3135G0HG1 FNMA 3Yr 3135GOBR3 FNMA 1.4Yr 3135G0p3 FNMA 3YrNcl YrB FHLB D1SC NOTES 31338,4 ZN2 FH LB DISC NOTE. 313389C80 FHLB DISC NOTE 313384D71 FHLB DISC NOTE 313384F61 FHLB DISC NOTE 313389 M71 FH LB DISC NOTE 313385BD7 FHLB DISC NOTE FHLB BONDS 03/20/2017 03/20/2017 03/13/ 2015 03/16/2015 08/09/2013 03/26/2015 1.100 1.104 5,000,000.00 1.100 1.100 4,400,00000 .700 700 5,000,00000 375 .550 5,000,000.00 .500 330 5,000,000.00 .700 .725 5,000,000.00 4,996250.00 .844 .898;850r0,0,0.00 - 899,788,64058. 4,999,000 00 4,400,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,97 3,800-00 5,011,850.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 4,125.00 4.822 100.093750 5,004,687 50 4,687.50 4.842 4. 100.093750 S,W4,637.SU 4,637.50 2.914 2 99.250000 4,962,500.00-11,300.00 2.936 2. 100.250000 5,012,500.00. 650.00 1.350 1.35 100.375000 5,018,750.00 22,500.00 2.949 2.986 100,307513 ,901,614117657 ; -1;825 35, 99 2314 , 4.973 07/18/2012 .160 .160 10,000,000.00 9,985,15556 99.985000 9,998,50000 13,34444 .298 .299 08/21/2012 .200 200 30,000,000.00 29,939,500.00 99.976333 29,992,900.00 53,400.00 391 .392 08/28/2012 170 .170 20,000,000.00 19,965,716.66 99.975167 19,995,03333 29,316-67 410 411. 09/12/2012 .170 .170 10,000,000.00 9,982,811.11 99.963556 9,996,355.56 13,544.45 451 .452 10/31/2012 .170 .170 50,000,000-00 49,914,291.67 99.940833 49,970,416.67 56,125.00 .585 .586 01/28/2013 140 .140 25,000,000.00 24,964,805.56 99.875000 24,968,750.00 3,944.44 .828 .830 145,000,000..00 144,752,280.56, 9%946176, 144,927955.56,E ,, 1656751 ' ." „'.53.4 .555; 3133XVNT4 FHLB 3Yr 12/14/2012 1.750 1.612 5,000,000.00 5,020,050.00 101.062500 5,053,125.00 33,075.00 .693 .707 3133XWKU2 FHLB 2,5Yr 06/08/2012 1.375 1.212 5,000,000,00 5,017,100.00 100.218750 5,010,937.50-6,162.50 .188 .189 3133XXTU1 FH LB 2.25Yr 07/12/2012 1.260 1,260 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.312500 5,015,625.00 15,625.00 .280 .282 3133XYHD0 FHLB 06/14/2013 1.625 1.198 15,000,000.00 15,185,100.00 101.625000-15,243,750.00 58,650.00 - 1.184 1.205 3133702E7 FHLB 04/02/2012 .750 750 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 .005 .005 313370TA6 FH LB 3Yr 08/28/2013 .875 .851 5,0)0,000.00 5,003,500.00 100.781250 5,1139,062.50 35,562.50 1.396 1.411 313370T B4 FH LB 3Yr 07/29/2013 .850 .840 5,000,000.00 5,001,442.61 100.718750 5,035,93750 34,494.89 1316 1.329 3133XWKU2 FHLB 2Yr 06/08/2012 1.375 .642 10,000,000.00 10,126,900.00 100.218750 10,021,875.00-105,025.00 .138 .189 3133XXPV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 459 10,000,000.00 10,108,600.00 100.125000 I0,012,500.00-96,100.00 .131 .132 3133XX PV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .453 10,000,000.00 10,109,600.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00-97,100.00 .131 .132 3133XWKU2 FHLB 2Yr 06/08/2012 1.375 .370 5,000,000.00 5,081,600.00 100.218750 -5,010,937.50-70,662.50. .189 .189 3133XXPV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .342 10,000,000.00 10,119,200.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00-106,700.00 .131 .132 313371 PM2 FH LB 2.6Yr 06/26/2013 .500 .590 10,001,000.00 9,976,500.00 100.250000 10,025,000.00 48,500.00 1.229 1.238 3133XX PV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .445 20,000,000.00 20,206,000.00 100.125000 20,025,000.00-181,000.00 .131 .132 313371 UC8 FH LB 3.2Yr 12/27/2013 ..875 .934 10,000,000.00 9,982,000.00 101.093750 10,109,37500 127,375.00 1.718 1.742 3133XX PV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .485 10,000,000.00 10,095,500.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00.-83,000.00 .131 .132 313372KE3 FH LB 4Yr 02/04/2015 .471 .471 15,000,000_00 15,000,000.00 100.312500 15,046,875.00 46,875.00 2.828 2.899 3133XYVC6 FH LB 5Yr 06/18/2015 .974 .408 5,000,000.00 5,091,325.00 101.593750 5,079,687.50-11,637.50 3.172 3.216 3133XWKV0 FH LB 3Yr - 03/14/2014 2.375 1.404 5,000,000.00 5,140,200.00 103.843750 5,192,187.50 51,987.50 1.905 1.953 3133736HO FH LB 2.5Yr 09/26/2013 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.968750 5,048,437.50 413,437.50 1.471 1.490 313373A51 FH LB 3Yr 04/29/2014 1.350 .1.350 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.875000 10,187,500.00 187,500.00 2.031 2.079 3133XWBW8 FH LB 2.5Yr. 05/15/2052 1.210 .422 5,000,000.00 5,044,075.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00-37,825.00 .123 .123 313373CZ3 FH LB 3Yr 05/27/2014 1.500 1.500 - 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 102.218750 5,110,937.50 110,937.50 2.103 2.156 313373F98 FH LB 2.25Yr. 08/15/2013 1.000 1.000 7,500,000.00 7,500,000.00 100.937500 7,570,312.50 70,312.50 1.358 1.375 313373JR4. FH LB 3Yr 05/28/2014 1.375 1.419 10,000,000.00 9,986,700.00 102.125000 10,212,500.00 225,800.00 2.109 2159 313373RC8 FH LB 3.25Yr 07/30/2014 1.250 1.250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.687500 5,084,375.00 89,375.00 2.285 - 2.332 313373Y22 FHLB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 250 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 100.000000 35,000,000.00 0.00 .145 .145 313373Y22 FH LB 1Yr. 05/23/2012 .250 .230 10,000,000.00 10,001,985.40 100.000000 10,000,000.00-1,985.40 .145 313374285 FH LB 1Yr 05/29/2012 .230 .230 20,000,000-00 20,000,000.00 100.000000 20,000,000.00 0.00 ,161 313373537 FH LB 2.25Yr 08/28/2013 750 .671 5,000,000.00 5,008,850.00 100.593750 5,029,687.50 20,837.50 1.398 1. 313373Y22 FH LB 1Yr 05/23/2012 250 .234 5,000,000.00 5,000,800.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00-800.00 .145 .14 313373Y22 FH LB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 .203 13,810,000.00 13,816,07640 100.000000 13,810,000.00-6,076.40 .145 .145 3133XXPV3 FH LB 1Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .213 7,000,000.00 7,058,783.69 100.125000 7,008,750.00-50,033.69 131 .132 313374 EY2 FH LB 1Yr 06/20/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 ' 10,000,000.00- 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .221 .222 313374EY2 FHLB 1Yr 06/20/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00. 3,125.00 .221 .222 313374EY2 FHLB 1Yr 06/20/2012 250 -.250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.03.1250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 - .221 .222 313374EY2 FH LB 1Yr 06/20/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .221 .222 313374 EY2 FH LB 1Yr .06/20/2012 .250 .250' 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .221 .222 3133747C8 FH LB 3YrNc1 YrE 06/20/2014 1.000 1.000 5,990,000.00 5,990,000.00 100.125000 5,997,487.50 7,487.50 2.184 2.222 313374 EV8 FH LB 2YrNc1 YrB 06/28/2013 600 .600 5,000,000.00 5,000,000_00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 3,125.00 1.233 1.244 313374FU9 FHLB 3Yr 07/07/2014 .910 .910 10,000,000.00 10,000,0)0.00 100.937500 10,093,750.00 93,750.00 2.234 2.268 313374KV1 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 07/25/2012 .350 .360 5,000,000.00 4,999,500.00 100.000080 5,003,00000 500.00 - .317 .318 313374 N63 FH LB 2Yr 05/30/2013 .500 .500 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.250000 10,025,000.00 25,000.00 1158 1.164. 313374L81 FH LB 1Yr 07/06/2012 .270 .270 10,000,000.00 10,0o0,o00.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .265 .266 313374L81 FHLB 1Yr 07/06/2012 .270 .270 5,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50. .265 .266 3133XXPV3 FH LB 1Yr - 05/18/2012 1125 .223 5,000,000.00 5,038,900.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00-32,650.00 .131 .132 3133XXPV3 FHLB 1Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .214 10,000,000.00 10,078,600.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00-66,100.00 .131 .132 3133745V3 FH LB 1Yr 07/30/2012 .250 .255. 5,000,000.00 4,999,750.00 100.031250 5,001,56250 1,812.50 .331 332 3133745U5 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 08/10/2012 .350 .350 1,875,000.00 1,875,000.00 100.031250 1,375,585.94 - 585.94 .361 .362 3133745V3 FHLB 1Yr - 07/30/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .331 - .332 3133745V3 FH LB 1Yr 07/30/2012 .250 .264 5,000,000.00 4,99,3,274.10 - 100.03)250 5,001,562.50 2,288.40 .331 .332 3133745U5 FH LB 1YrNc3MoB 08/10/2012 .350 .350 625,000.00 625,000.00 100.031250 625,195.31 195.31 .361 362 3133745U5 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 08/10/2012 .350 .350 1,250,000.00 1,250,000.00 100.031250 1,250,390.63 390.63 .361 .362 313374YB0 FHLB 1Yr 07/25/2012 250 .274 10,000,000.00 9,997,573.00 100.031250 10;003,125.00 5,552.00 .317 .318 313374 Y61 FHLB 2Yr 08/28/2013 .500 .567 10,000,000.00 . 9,986,100.00 100.250000 -10,025,000.00 38,900.00 1.401 , 1.411 3133XYW B7 FH LB 1.75Yr 08/22/2012 .875 .311 10,000,000.00 10,059,900.00 - 100.281250 10,028,125.00-31,775.00 .394 - .395 3133755F0 FH LB 1Yr 07/30/2012 250 .304 20,000,000.00 19,989,319.60 100.031250 20,006,250.00 16,930.40 .331 332 3133756E2 FHLB 1Yr 08/24/2012 .310 310 20,000,000.00 - 20,000,000.00 100.062500 20,012,500.00 12,500.00 .399 400 3133756E2 FH LB 1Yr - 08/24/2012 .310 .259 16,700,000.00 16,708,491.95 100.062500 16,710,437.50 1,945.55 .399.400 313375A HO FH LB 1Yr 08/08/2012 .125 .241 9,000,000.00 8,989,650.00 100,000000 - 9,000,000-00 10,350.00 355 .356 313375BG1 FH LB 9Mo ' 05/11/2012 .200 .223 - 15,000,000.00 14,997,396.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 2,609.00 .112 112 313375BN6 FHLB 1Yr 08/16/2012 200 .200 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 377 .378 313374UA6 FHLB 11Mo 07/16/2012 .260 .183 5,040,000.00 5,043,528.00 100.031250 5,041,575.00-1,953.00 293 293 313375C62 FH LB 9Mo 05/15/2012 .130 .172 25,000,000.00 24,992,250.00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 7,750.00 .123 .123 313375FN2 FH LB 1Yr 09/14/2012 .240 .240 30,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 100.031250 30,009,375.00 9,375.00. .457 .458 313375EU7 FH LB 113Mo 06/07/2012 .160 .203 28,000,000.00 27,990,480.00 100.000000 28,000,000.00 9,520.00 .186 .186 313375K R7 FH LB 9Mo 06/07/2012 .150 .188 5,000,000.00 4,998,586.70 100.000000 5,000,000.00 • 1,413.30 186 .1136 313374VY3 FH LB 1.5Yr 01/29/2013 .375 .250 5,000,000.00 5,008,800.00 100.125000. 5,006,250.00-2,550.00 .826 .833 313375KR7 FH LB 9Mo 06/07/2012 .150 .193 10,000,000.00 9,996,8130.00 100.000080 10,000,000.00 3,200.00 .186 .186 313375C70 FHLB 1Yr 08/22/2012 .160 .203 10,000,000-00 9,995,800.00 100.000080 10,000,000.00 4,200.00 :394 010 313375M53 FH LB 1.5YrNc3MoB 03/27/2013. .375 .392 10,0)0,000.00 9,997,500.00 100-000000 10,000,000-00 2,500.00 .986 313375RP4 FH LB 1Yr 09/19/2012 .125 .215 5,000,000.00 4,995,500.00 100:000000 5,000,000.00 4,500.00 .470 313375 UB7_ FH LB 1YrNc3MoB 10/19/2012 .340 340 25,001,000.00 25,000,000.00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 0.00 .548 313374VY3 FH LB 1.2Yr 01/29/2013 '.375 .315 20,001,000.00 20,015,866.20 100.125000 20,025,000.00. 9,133.80 .826 .833 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 49 10 Month End Portfolio Holdi FA' O h Km O N O O O OP ',° P N O OT O 2 O 1 0 0 0 N n^ N n � O cT� T°? rn T aa} 'eG V o N N Q^ o o N N rn N T rn m m m N s; pp M p O P 7 N N N N N O V 7 h. O+ T O 8 N v O O, N D` 00 O 8 � °� N S �O n •q a .- N `r1' n `r1'. ° N `r1' �. �. i:. m ,N- is i:, is is ry m r., c ; 2S ry m oo ry o ao m �9i, ao ao � RR8888R8R8, 88888R8R8RR8RR888888.8881888QPR8.8R8888&3R88888R8R8888.88888,2888888�R8RRRRR4R88g a oul,o,mm,N e $,�80 . ^�� �8m o n o o� �� �� m� om o ���mmM �8 ��B�T �8s m mvaoc��a° agva°o m n m .O m T N to <- Ki m m [A e e -N N RR8888R8R8R8R88888R8R8RR8RR88,8888888,88888RR8,8,R88888PR88888R8R8,888888,88$88888,88R8RRRRR8R88R r°' �$R8 .° 8� ,N 888MN`�� N „io „i vi N o 00 �,nN�nNN '. o m8 N '< Nub^mm8�88m�o88o88888��8�8� 8 8�8m88a8�8nn88��M. a e�� �88OO8�88888888O88O8OOil8Oo8i88s888888888OO88O88888ml88go808O888888O8888"s88888gggggggg&8�� r. eo 0 oo,n eeeo 00 0 o,n ,n o,ri,rio,n,ri o,no o,n +io eF: 00 e0L4 i oone2. 000.e,I ao N ooe,,f o00 e o.vi o00 o eo a 00o a'a>v'a'v a'a'a'T ri o: T „0o8o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88gS�RR8R 8 8 RR R8� R gR R g8 g I g8R8 88 LZ `M^8^^ m�m� �� r� N�8M��mm8�^8��8m8M8�8� �mN�e��N�MN 8e82e 88888 8m8�,8doom8'S^'8o S^', 3= 888 S 8888 E E ..S o ..O"d^.oO8O"'^b'.8O888 ,8 �o n§US 1Vgg � 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888R"" " " 8RR 88.88.88.8888,828,8.8888888888,8,88888888888. 8,883R888888882P,888888888888,8$8.888,m888.888,$88,8,8888�888� `'888R8888R8488888888888888888888e888.888i6�`R88`R`RR88��a8°�`888��8888888�8:8$8888;8&888��°''RS8M &8&8Hl ri i8i8Vi88i888888888818Fi8W8fi8ssF8s8HM88N8fg888�8888888&88888888g8&888hg88 g t..ei O e O P e ,n ,. vi P O D, D, O ,n vi O ,n v) O e e O u'i O e u'i R O O D e O e e P .O N c oC e e e O vt .O O OO ,/t O O N O e O e 0 0 v1 O ,/1 0 0 0 e N T. vt N N T T v1 N e T 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 Rggggggggggggggggggggggg8g8g8gggg8ggggggggggggggggg88888888888888888888888888888888888888 ;.e0000eee,,;g 000e�;o�, ^o�;oo, �000000eo��;ooe.6F., eg 000eoe0000eoe0000eeeeeeeee,,ioe OoRa,r, n0ROoOOO^,84e'8OoO4OO,n,nO,nOB4n°'P.8n48°"'me�N44Lgr8882R82 RR44,o 0 0 do rn m ,/1 Q O O O O O O O O O O O O u'� u� O N O ,n O ,n O O O O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O R 8 ^^8N^ ^8 ^888&� 8T T. : N m T m M m M T m m N N. N^ N N n V� m, o,, ry [v T. N m n m m n m n rn m n n m rn rn N K N N N N N rry T N N T T m T m T K K- m m K m N K m m m m m m m m N N N K K K N N m N m N N m m N K N m K m m m m m m m T m m m m m mm n n C O C G O O O O O O O O O O O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . O.pp .P.pp p Np�� Q�Q�� ^ N O p Np�� aNa N� O NONN p Oppp 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0^ 7-^ \ ^ O O 8 O^ O 8 8 8 8 O 8 8 O O 8 0 0 0 O O 8 O O 8 8 8 8 O 8 O 8 r. 8 8 8 O O 8 8 O 8 O 8 O 8 8 8 O O 8 8 O 8 0 0 0 O O 8 O 8 8 8 O 8 g 8 O CO W W m m m CO W Lcl CO m d co ° CO ° m m° CO CO m m O W W O ° O G O O O O O L p O O O O O O 2 O O 2 P L< 755 LO m Z m .D m m L m m ,577,5 Z T, .°LO 2 Z L Z ` Z Z Z Z Z Z Z N ", Z o 0 0 o z o o o ,-Lneeeeeeeeer,,,,eeHe .-- _ __ .r__ .r^_ .^,r^`re__ .%r`,nr` . imm_ .r^`.%%,nr.`n.nN_m_%. D P mcommcommmmcommmmmmmmmoommmmoommmmmmcommmmmmmcommmmmmeommmmoommmcommmeommmcommmeommcommeommmcommcommeommmcomm xxxxxiiJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J) J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J LL LL LL LL LL LL L=i I=i LL LL LL LL LL LL = = I=LL = L=t 4 t=i. _ = W LL = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [t I=i [t [=i I=i [t [=i [t = _ _ [=i [=i [t [t [=i [Ti 4 [t [=i LL 4 [t = I=i L [=i I=i = LL 4 L=i = I=i I=i I=i [=i I=i LL L=i = I=i = I=i [=i I=i I=i = = I=i I=i I=i LL L=i ..� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL C,. LL LL LL LL LL LL O O m ,nc'""'SU ^o �� Cm V e � � ��88 � c �mm�mYp �Dwmm� �r"HH'"'QmCmm}F, 3 %<uc0_ ", r: r: '. `" " 1°r: n n n nn D Nn nn r t`n nt 222n n n 2n 2r: nN Nnn i22222hRh Dn n �'rm� rmn 'rmn cmnm of rmnmmcmn rmn m mmrn cmn mcmn cmn cmnM mcmn `22222 222 2222222m mmmK,m K,m K,mm mmmmKm i m c^nm r,m c^nrn r^nm m mr^n �rnmm m c^n rn 7n Mr;mmm mm m T, P.,, m m mr•=, rn c,m mM; mr•=,mmmmr+ m K, mr+ r^n RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Maturity Par Book Markel Market Unrealized Modified Years To . CUSI' Description Date Coupon To Mat Value Value Price Value , Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 313373464 FHLB 1Yr 02/08/2013 .170 .170 5,000.00000 5,000,000.00 99-968750 4,998,437.50 3133784 A6 FH LB 3YrNcl MoB 02/27/2015 .600 .600 5,000,00000 5,000,000.00 99.812500 4,990,625.00 313376UY9 FH LB 1.5Yr - 08/05/2013 .250 .250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.906250-4,995,312..50 3133784F5 FH LB 5YrNcl A4oB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 3,500,000.00 3,500,000.00 99.593750 3,485,781.25 3133784F5 FH LB 51'rNc1 A1oB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 6,50(7,00000 6,500,000.00 99.593750 6,973,593.75 3133784T5 FHLB 1.5Yr 08/09/2013 .250 .250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 313376VB8 FH LB 1.5Yr 07/30/2013 .250 .266 5,000,000.09 4,9'48,809.00 99.937500 4,996,875.00 3133784 N8 FH LB 1.5YrNc3kloB 03/08/2013 .200 .200 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 3133784 kl0 FH LB'I.5YrNcl Mob 03/08/2013 .210 .210 - 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 313378957 FHLB 1Yr 02/11/2013 .170 .170 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99-937500 4,996,875.00 313376Y P4 FH LB 5YrNcl ktoB 02/27/2017 1.000 1.000 5,500,000.00 5,500,000.00 99.281250 5,960,468.75 31337841'9 FHLB 5YrNc1MoB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.531250 . 4,976,562.50- 313378AC5 FH LB 3Yr 05/22/2015 .509 .500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.343750 4,967,187.50 313378A50 FH LB 5YrNcl kloB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.468750 9,946,875.00 313378CE9 FH LB 1.2Yr 05/07/2013 .260 .260 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 313378659 FH LB 1Yr 02/28/2013 .190 .219 5,000,000-00 4,998,550.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 3133781377 FH LB 1Yr 02/15/2013 .190 .219 5,000,000.00 4,998,550.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 313378CP4 FH LB 1YrNc6MoE 02/28/2013 250 .250 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100-031250 15,004,687.50 313378CP4 FH 1:B.1 YrNc6MoE 02/28/2013 250 - .250 20,000,000.00 20,0110,000.00 100-031250 20,006,250.00 313378DG3 FH LB 13Mo3Mo6 03/19/2013 .270 .270 10,000,00300 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 313378DB4 FH LB 2YrNcl kloE 03/12/2014 .500 - .500 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.000000 10,000,000.00 313378ED9 FHLB 1.5Yr 09/09/2013 .310 .310 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.968750 9,996,875.00 313378DG3 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 03/19/2013 .270 .270 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 313378 EN7 FH LB 5YrNc3114oB 03/15/2017 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.750000 4,987,500.00 3133783D1 FH LB 2YrNc 02/13/2014 .300 .379 '5,000,000.00 4,992,300.00 991343750 4,992,187.50 313378H79 FH LEI 1.5Yr 09/09/2013 300 .300 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 313376ZQ7 FH LB 3Yr 03/13/2015 .375 .551 5,003,000-00 4,973,550.00 99.187500 4,959,375.00 313378151 FH LB 2YrNc6MB 03/05/2019 .430 .430 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.937500 9,996,875.00 .313378KU4 FHLB2.5YrNc6k1oB 09/12/2014 .5130 .5130 51300,000.130. 5,000,000130 99.843750 4,992,187.50 - 313378KU4. FH LB 2.5YrNc6MoB 09/12/2014 -.500 '.500 5,0130,000.00 5,0)0,000.00 99.843750 4,992,187.50 313378ED9 FH LB 1.5Yr 09/09/2013 310 .291 - 5,000,000.00 5,001,450,00 99.968750 - 4,998,437.50 313378L25 FH LB 5YrNc3MoB - 03/29/2017 1.050 - 1.050- 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.906250 9,990,625.00 313378JN2 FH LB 1Yr 03/05/2013 .125 .228 5,000,000.00 .4,994,955.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 313378J N2 FH LB 3Yr 03/05/2013 .125 .213 5,000,000.00 4,995,700.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 313376ZQ1 FH LB 3yr- 03/13/2015 .375 .689 5,000,0)0.00 4,953,525.00 99-187500 4,959,375.00 313378P88 - FH LB 13MoNc1 MoB 04/15/2013 .300 .300 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 1001103000 10,000,000.00 313376YC3 FH LB 1Yr 02/06/2013 .150 -.250 10,000,000.00 9,991,100.00 99.937500 9,993,750.00 313378LW9. FHLB1.5Yr 09/12/2013 .280 .348 5,000,000.00 4,994,950.00 99.937500• 4,996,875.00 313378QE4 FHLB2YrNc7YrA 03/28/2014 .500 .500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.187500 5,009,375.00 3133767Z8 FH LB 1Yr 02/27/2013 370 .240 9,900,000.00 9,893,565.00 99.937500 9,893,812.50 313378BF7 - FH LB 1Yr 02/28/2013' .180 .240 10,000,000.130 9,994,400.00 99.968750 9,996,875.00 313378JN2- FH LB 1Yr 03/05/2013 -125 .254 5,000,000.00 4,993,850.00 99.906250 4,595,312.50 313378577 FH LB 5YrNc1MoB 03/27/2017 1.250 1.271 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 313378TF8 FH LB 1Yr 03 27/2013 250 258 30,000,00000 9,999,16400 100000000 10000000.�00 ., ., ., , .. ..:. ;i-,:'�2$, •' .'Wiz', `�;,'�'n�.$t1.00ai10 �u -', f15,2L3,''', ""11�Tt 1;..,,.. . �c.�ecr `: FFCB DISC NOTES 313312WG7 FFCB DISC NOTE 05/01/2012 .240 .241 • 7,000,000.00 6,983,01333 100000000 7,000,000.00 16,986.67 - ..085- .08 313313809 FFCB DISC NOTE 01/28/2013 -140 .140 25,000,000.00 24,964,805.56 99.875000 24,968,750.00 3,944.44 .828 - .830 313313BA5 FFCB DISC NOTE 01 25/2013 200 200 50000,00000 49913611.1.1 99.875000 49937500.00 _23,88889 820 .822 n,. �:.�,1;1�, ,1. �k� 111u '"fi'a'11$5, �T s r000.1 SS���k:!!�i<i 99-8 �r K &1��1ONAl, 0 0,.,.... _ :; FFCB BONDS 31331GNQ8 FFCB .04/24/2012 2.250 1.762 5,000,000.00 5,066,900.00 100.125000 - - 5,1306,250.00-60;650.00 .065 - .066 • 31331GYP8 FFCB 3Yr - 06/18/2012 2.125 2.210 5,000,0)0.00 4,988,000.00 100.406250 5,020,312.50- 32,31250 214 216 31331GYP8 FFCB 3Yr 06/18/2012 2.125 2.210 3,000,000.00 2,992,800.00 100.406250 - 3,012107.50 _ 19,387.50 .214 .216 31331GYP8 FFCB 3Yr 06/18/2012 2.125 1.374 8,500,000.00 8,637,785.00 100.406250 8,539,531.25 -103,253.75 .215 .216 31331JQU0 - FFCB 3Yr. 06/03/2013 1.600 .752 10,000,000.00 10,211,890.00 107.531250 10,153,325.00 58,765.00 1.156 1.175 31331JY56 FFCB 2Yr 11/02/2012 .400 .590 10,000,000.00 9,972,900.00 100.125000 10,012,500110 39,600.00 .589 .592 .31331J6A6 FFCB 3Yr 12/23/2013 1.300 1.300 5,000,000_00 5,000,000.00 101.375000 5,068,750.00 - '68,750.00 1.697 1.732 - 31331 J6A6 FFCB 3Yr - 12/23/2013 1.300 1.300 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.375000 5,068,750.00 68,750.00 1.697 1.732 31331J7A5 FFCB 1.5Yr - 07/10/2012 .500 .500 - 10,000,000.00 ' 10,000,000.03-100.093750 ' 10,009,375.00 9,375.00 - .276 - - .277. 31331 J7A5 FFCB 1.5Yr 07/10/2012 .500 .500 9,205,000.00 9,205,000.00 100-093750 9,213,629.69 8,629.69 .276 .277 31.331)6A6 FFCB 3Yr 12/23/2013 1.300 1.184 5,000,000.00 5,015,550.00 101.375000 5,068,750.00 53,200.00 1.698 1.732 31331KET3 FFCB 2.5Yr 09/23/2013 .980 _ 1.029 10,000,000.00 9,988;000130 100.843750 .. 10,084,375.00 96,375.00 - 1.463 1.482 31331KGN4 FFCB 3Yr D4/07/2014 1.400 1:400 - ' 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.593750 10,159,375.00 159,375.00 1.968 2019 31331KH V5 FFCB 5Yr 04/20/2016 .312 .324 10,000,000.00-. 9,995,000.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00 17,500.00 4.07.8 -4.058 31331KKT6 FFCB 1Yr 05/16/2012 210 .224 25,000,000.00 29,996,600.00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 - 3,400.00 .126 .126 31331KEV8 FFCB 1Yr 06/22/2012 .290 .294 5,000,000.00 5,002,450.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50-887.50 .227 .227 31331 KNH9 FFCB 1Yr 06/13/2012 .240- .240 20,0130,000.00 20,0130,000.00 100.031250 20,006,250.00 6,250.00 .202 .203 31331KPC8 FFCB 2.2Yr 08/20/2012 250 -.250 20,000,000.00 20,003,000.00 100.031250 20,006,250.00 6,250.00 .388 .389 31331 KQU7 FFCB 1.5Yr .01/07/2013 A00 .400 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.130. 100.125000 - 5,006,250.00 - 6,250.00 .764 .773 31331 KPD6 FFCB 2.5Yr 11/20/2013 .625 .700- 5,000,000-00 4,991,100.00 100.250000 - 5,012,500.00 21,400.00 1.621 1.641 31331KM41 FFCB 1Yr 06/01/2012 .210 .213 5,000,000.00 4,999,850.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 150.00 .170. .170 31331KMM9 FFCB 1.5Yr 12/03/2012 :350 .376 10,000,000.00 9,996,600.00 100.093750 10,009,375.00 12,775.00 .670 .677 31331 KMM9 FFCB 1.5Yr 12/03/2012 .350 .340 5,000,000.130 5,000,650.00 100.093750 5,004,68750 4,03750 .670 .677 31331 KUW8 FFCB 225YrNc3MoA 11/18/2013 .500 .522 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00. 99.906250 4,995,312.50 _-2,187.50 1.619 1.636 31331 KZJ2 FFCB 2Yr 09/23/2013 .350 .400 - 10,000,000.00 9,990,100.00 99.906250. _ 9,990,625.00- - 525.00 - 1.472 1.482 31331 KB82 FFCB 2Yr 10/03/2013 .350 .400 5,000;000.00 4,995,050.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 262.50 1.497 1.510 31331KZK9 FFCB 1.25Yr 11/23/2032 .240 .254 5,000,000.00 9,999,200;00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 2,362.5,0 .643 .649 31331 KK74 FFCB 3YrNcl YrA. 11/07/2014 .850 .850 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.156250 5,007,8,12.50 7,812.50 2,558 2.605. 31331 KK74 FFCB 3YrNc7YrA 11/07/2014 .850 .850- - 5,000,000.00 5,000,0)0.00 100-156250 5,1307,812.50 - 7,817_50 2.558 2.605 31331 K5K2 FFCB 2Yr 01/03/2014 .400 .420 6,000,000.00 5,997,600.00 99.812500 5,988,750.00-8,850.00 1.746 1.762 3133EACJ5 FFCB 1.5YrNc3MoE 08/07/2013 .180 .240 5,000,00000 4,595,500.00 99.750000 4,987,500:00-8,003.00 - 1.348 1.353 3133EADY1 FFCB 2YrNcl YrA 02/21/2014 .330 .380 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 99.562500 4,978,125.00-16,875.00 1.880 1.896 31331 KZFO FFCB 21 MoNc1 MoA 12/23/2013 .470 .471 2,000,000.00 3,999,980.00 99.781250 1,995,625.00-4,355.00 1.717 1.732 3133EAHP6 FFCB 3Yr 03 16/2015 520 598 5000,00000 4988,430.00 99250000 4962500.00 -25 00 2930 2.959 ;,1 �I �" i4 F i'� /. .100.55811'. ''- ; 'ar r..irs� -`� WiYgnititigikt ig FMAC DISC NOTES - 31315KWW6 FMAC DISC NOTE 05/15/2012 .210 210 25,000,00000 24,946,770.83 100.0000(10 25000,000.00 53,229.77 .123 31315KXU9 FMAC DISC NOTE 06/06/2012 .210 .210 20,000,000.00 19,957,416.67 100.000000 20,000,000.00 92,583.33 .183 .1. 31315KYT7 FMAC DISC NOTE - 06/29/2012 .220 .220 20,000,000.00 19,955,511,11 100.000000 20,000,000.00 49,988.89 .246 .297 -1,562.50 -9,375.00 -4,687.50 -14,218.75 -26,406.25 -4,687.50 -1,925.09 -1,562.50 -1,562.50 -3,125.00 -39,53125 -23,437.50 -32,812.50 -53,125.00 0.00 -112.50 -112.50 4,687.50 6,250.00 3,125.00 0.00 -3,125.00 3,125.00 -12,500,00 -112.50 -1,562.50 -14,175.00 3,125.00 -7,812.50 -7,812.50 -3,012.50 -9,375.00 357.50 -387.50 5,850130 0.00 2,650.00 1,925.00 9,375.00 247.50 Z475.00 1,462.50 8,125.00 836.00 ,, g4ta =' 852 2.875 1.342 4.782 4.782 1.352 1.327 .935 .935 .860 4.771 4.782 3.108 4.782 1.097 .915 .871 .915 .915 .%5 1.935 1.434 .965 4.821 1.859 1.434 2.925 1.917 2.429 2.429 1.434 4,853 .926 .926 2.923 1.035 .846 1.443 1.979 .904 .915 .926 4.821 987 .860 2 1 4: 4.918 1.359 1:332 .937 .937 .868 4.915 4.918 3)42 4.910 1.101 .915 .879 :915 •.915 .967 1.948 1.444 .967 4.959 1.874 1 A44 2.951 1.929 2,452 2.452 1.444 4.997 .929 .929 2951 1.041 .855 1.452 1.992 .912. .915 .929 4.99.2 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 51 12 Month End Portfolio Holdings CUSIP Description Maturity Maturity Date Coupon- To Mat Par Value Book Value Market Price Market . Value Unrealized Modified - Years To Gain/Loss Duration - Maturity i5KZ FO FMAC DISC NOTE 5KYW4 FN1AC DISC NOTE RMER MAC 31315PVU0 313'15PVU0 31315PV UO 31315PSH3 FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD §11501 07/11/2012 07/02/2012 • 4 MUNI BONDS 20775BND4 CI HFA 041042RK0 ARKANSAS ST 649791 EB2 STATE OF NEW YORK 801320AV4 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 677521 LG9 OHIO STATE GO 677521 LH7 OHIO STATE GO 880541QG5 STATE OF TENNESSEE 646039TR8 NEW JERSEY ST TRAN 05/10/2013 05/10/2013 05/10/2013 09 25/2073 �„ .. 210 210 8,000,000 00 7,982,966.67 100 000000 8,000,000.00 17,03133 210 210 50,000,000 00 49,908,416.67 100 000000 50,000,00000 91,583 33 ',2YR • .2I,2 wU = . i 31** .n0-v .-, 'Iu.04$ _-. ` 111(1 - �'11N:1040ci m . a £44.#e ifs .760 760 760 403 4OK 760 760 750 .403 5,0(10,000.00 5,00(1,000.00 12,503,000.00 15 000,000 00 �;81O0� 279 .254 '41 .279 .255 5,000,000.00 100.312500 5,015,625.00 15,625.00 1.098 - 1.110 5,000,000.00 100.312500 5,015,625.00 15,625.00 1.098 1.110 12,502,375.00 100.312500 32,539,062.50 36,687.50 1.099 1.110 15,00�0/000.00 100125003 15,018 750.00 18,750 00 1.063 1.068 T30't 3' lfD t:11r. >iFt1il :3:St .i.`r.'' EN*1 �. 1 Q'.. 10'13` 05/15/2012 2.180 2180 850,000.00 850,000.00 07/01/2012 1.250 1.240 - 1,440,000.00 1A40,273.60 09/01/2012 .650 .650 23,040,00000 23,040,000.00 06/29/2012 .270 .270 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 05/01/2013 740 .740 5,140,000.00 5,140,000.00 05/01/2014 1.190 1.190 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 08/01/2012 .500 .301 6,265,000.00 6,274,522.80 06/21/2012 2.000 .250 25,000,000.00 25,225,750.00 COMM PAPER - 36959HD46 GE CAPITAL CORP 36959HEF0. GE CAPITAL CORP 36959H FD4 GE CAPITAL CORP 36959H)57 GE CAPITAL CORP 04/04/2012 05/15/2012 06/13/2012 09/05/2012 100.000000 850,000.00 100-019000 1,440,273.60 100.000000 23,040,000-00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 100.000000 5,140,000.00 100.000000 - - 2,030,000.00 100.15211IA 6,274,522.80 100.903000 25,225,750.00 94 S; - �°4,MOSS l8897{J 9%4II 10041411111 1 .351 381 330 .331 29,946,625.00 49,894,444.44 34,948,345.83 34,941,287.50 y X7 AVM. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 .122 .250 .420 .244 1.075 2.045 336 .222 .123 .252 .422 .247 1.085 2.085 337 • .225 99.997917 - 29,999,375.00 99.969444 49,984,722.22 99.929028 34,975,159.72 99.751417 34,912,995.83 12BZ 52,750.00 90,277.78 26,813.89 :28,291.67 .011 .123. .202 .431 .011 .123 .203 .433 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 52 13 Full Compliance 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 MUNICIPAL BONDS (MUN U.S. TREASURIES LOCAL AGENC OBLIGATIONS "(LAO) FEDERAL AGENCIES COMMERCIAL" PAPER`"(CP) CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS (NCD & TCD) REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS (REPOy REVERSE"REPOS MEDIUM .tERM' NOTES "(MTNO) CALTRUST SHORT TERM FUND MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS (IviMF) LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) CASH/DEPOSIT. ACCOUNT Maximum Authorized Maturity % Limit 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS 30% 1 YEARS ..:_ NO LIMIT 92 DAYS 20 % 5 YEARS 30 NA NA NA NA NA AAA NA NA NA NA Quality Maximum Authorized S&P/ Maturity, % Limit Moody's 3 YEARS 15% - AA_ / Aa3/ AA- 5 YEARS 100% NA INVESTME NT GRADE 5 YEARS 100% NA 270DAYS hD°lo Al/P1/F1 1 YEAR 25% Al/Pl/Fl Combined 45 DAYS 04 max, Al/P1/F1' 25% in term' repo over.7' 60 DAYS 10 NA 3 YEARS 20 % AA/Aa2/ ; AA DAILY 1.0 NA LIQUIDITY DAILY 20% AAA by 2 LIQUIDITY Of 3 RATINGS DAILY Max $50 NA LIQUIDITY miIIion NA NA " NA , 1 Mutual Funds maturity may be interpreted as weighted average matnrihj not exceeding 60 days. z Or must have an investment advisor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of $500,000,000. 7 THIS COMPLETES THE REPORT REQUIREMENTS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 53646 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 53 14 AGENDA ITEM 8E RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2011. BACKGROUND INFORMATION; At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted an audit update, which reported findings that have been generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 222 businesses. Through Q4 2011 for October through December 2011, the SBOE has approved corrections for 156 of these accounts for a total sales tax revenue recovery of $2,016,315. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission would receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for the fourth quarter of calendar year 2012 for October through December 201 1 IQ4 2011). Most of the Q4 2011 Measure A sales tax revenues was received by the Commission in the first, quarter of calendar 2012, during January through March 2012, due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of the Q4 2011 report is attached and includes an overview of California sales tax receipts, local results, historical cash collections analysis, summary of the Agenda Item 8E 56 top 25 sales tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, sales tax by business category, economic trends for significant business category (general retail), and results. The following observations were noted in the Q4 2011 report: • Sales tax receipts for Riverside County were 10 percent higher compared to the Q4 2010, and slightly higher than the state. This supports the previous quarterly reports' analyses that an economic recovery statewide and locally is underway; however, the Commission should continue to be cautious as service stations is one of the top three economic segments throughout the state leading this recovery. A significant portion of this growth is attributable to the high fuel prices. • Taxable transactions for the top 25 tax contributors in Riverside County, which generated 23 percent of the taxable sales for the year ended Q4 2011, were comparable to the year ended Q4 2010. The top 100 tax contributors generated 37 percent of the taxable sales in Q4 2011 and Q4 2010. • For the fourth consecutive period, all economic categories experienced increases in the Q4 2011 benchmark year comparison to Q4 2010. Transportation had the largest increase at 19 percent, which was primarily related to the service station segment increase. Construction had the next highest increase at 9.9 percent, which was primarily related to a new business in the building materials -wholesale segment. The remaining four economic categories had increases ranging from 2.8 percent to 6.8 percent. General Retail 29.9 / 6.2 29.7 / 4.5 ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS 29.4 / 4.9 30.1 / 1.9 31.6 / 4.8 29.7 / 4.6 28.2 / 4.9 29.4 / 2.8 32.4 / 1.0 Food Products 16.4 / 5.6 19.1 / 5.4 19.8 / 6.2 16.9 / 2.2 16.5 / 4.6 19.6 / 5.6 16.7 / 4.8 18.6 / 2.8 30.4 / 4A Construction Transportation Business to Business 10.5 / 9.9 27.1 / 19.2 14.1 / 6.8 8.5 / 6.6 24.1 / 15.8 17.4 / 7.1 8.2 / 7.7 20.8 / 15.2 20.7 / 6.1 10.3 / 5.9 26.8 / 14.9 14.2 / 3.1 10.6 / 11.1 25.7 / 19.4 14.3 / 17.2 7.9 / 5.5 24.3 / 15.4 17.5 / 7.3 9:9 / 7A 28.1 / 18.3 15.0 / 3.9 12.0 / 3.5 29.5 / 12.4 9.4 / 11.5 8.6 / -3.3 21.7 / 16.6 5.8 / 0.9 Miscellaneous Total 2.1 / 2.8 100.0. / 9.8 1.2 / -1.2 100.0 / 7.8 1.1 / -1.7 100.0 / 7.6 1.6 / 6.7 100.0 / 5.8 1.3 / 18.6 100.0 / 10.8 1.1 / -6.0 100.0 / 7.7 2.1 / 5.4 100.0. / 8.5 1.1 / 12.7 100.0 / 6.4 1.1 / -28.3 100.0 / 4.2 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nurse y, and Misc. Retail Food Products:. Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and BuildingMaterials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales :Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales - - Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments • Eight of the top 10 segments (service stations, department stores, restaurants, auto sales -new, miscellaneous retail, building materials - wholesale, apparel stores, and food markets) sales reached a new high point during Q4 2011. • Service stations, department stores, and restaurants continue to represent the three largest economic segments for Riverside County, or 35 percent of Agenda Item 8E • 57 total sales taxes. Auto sales -new represents the fourth largest economic segment at 9.1 percent of total sales taxes. California Statewide ECONOMIC SEGMENT ANALYSIS S:F. Bay Area Sacramento ,a, Valley South Coa! ana pine h Coast Central toast Largest Segment Service Stations Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Service Stations Service Stations Restaurants % of Total / % Change 12.9 / 22.1 13.0 / 5.7 13.8 / 6.9 12.8 / 2.5 14.8 / 3.1 13.9 / 5.9 12.9 / 21.7 14.4 / 16.5 19.9 / 4.0 2nd Largest Segment Department Stores Department Stores Department Stores Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Department Stores Department. Stores Service Stations % of Total/ % Change n / 3.3 10.8 / 3.8 9.7 / 4.3 10.9 / 18.1 12.4 / 25.6 10.8 / 21.9 11.2 / 2.2 12.5 / 1.8 10.1 / 22.1 3rd Largest Segment Restaurants Service Stations Service Stations Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants Restaurants Mist Retail %of Total / %Change 10.3 / 5.3 10.8 / 22.2 9.3 / 23.6 10.4 / 1.0 96 / 4.0 10.5 / 4.2 10.6 / 4.8 9.7 / 2.0 10.1 / -0.9 During the review of the Q4 2011 detailed report with MuniServices, information regarding sales tax comparisons by city and change by economic category from Q4 2010 to Q4 2011 was provided, and is attached. Newly incorporated cities such. as Eastvale and Jurupa Valley will be listed when sufficient comparative information is available. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any adjustment to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios included with the complete report and recent trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Analysis Q4 2011.. 2) Sales Tax Comparison by City for Q4 2010 to Q4 2011 Agenda Item 8E 58 Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through March 2012 Sales through December 2011 (2011Q4) CAUFORNIA'S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK For the 4th Quarter of 2011, overall California sales tax receipts increased by 8.0% over the same quarter from the previous year, with Northern California reporting an 8.4% increase compared to 7.7% for Southern California. Receipts for the RCTC changed by 10.0% over the same periods. The state appears to be in a midst of a modest, drawn -out recovery. New -car dealerships sold 1.29 million new cars and trucks in 2011 - a 9.9% improvement over 2010. They should see an additional 8.5% growth in 2012. Though the construction, agriculture and food services industries have barely kept pace with inflation, high-technology industries, the professional services sector and a robust global demand for California's exports are primarily responsible for an economic growth rate that is now keeping pace with the, national rate. Senior Economist, Jerry Nickelsburg from UCLA predicts that California's employment growth will be 1.4% for 2012 and 2.1% for 2013. The state labor market should continue to improve, with a projected payroll growth of 1.2% for 2012 and 2.0% for 2013. Existing home sales were up in 2011 compared to 2010, but at the expense of falling prices. Though the state housing market is still struggling to regain price stability, foreclosure rates for the 4th Quarter of 2011 dropped to the second -lowest level in more than four years. The worst may be over for California. We can expect slow and steady growth as we rebuild a healthy, well-balanced economy. LOCAL RESULTS Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 402011 Receipts Net 402010 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $35,727,662 0 0 35,727,662 .00 (329,200) 35,398,462 32,194,968 10.0% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods $35,727,662 (1,927,672) www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 59 Page 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission Preliminary 4Q2011 Collections Projected 4Q2011 Late Payments Projected 4Q2011 Final Results Actual 402010 Results Projected Percentage Change HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER 33,799,990 735,180 34,535,170 31,996,447 7.9% $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $ 2 0,000 $1 5,000 $10,000 S5,000 SO (in thousaads of S) 3Q2009 4Q2009 1Q2010 2Q2010 3Q2010 4Q2010 1Q2011 2Q2011 3Q2011 4Q2011 Net Receipts -SHOE Admit' Fees Due $400 S350 $300 S250 in 0 $2 00 $150 $100 S50 So e 'CJ TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents sales from. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 22.8% of RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. BEST BUY STORES CARMAX THE AUTO SUPERSTORE CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES DESERT SUNLIGHT HOME DEPOT K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES VERIZON WIRELESS W.W. GRAINGER WAL MART STORES WALGREEN'S DRUG STORES www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 Page 2 60 " " R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n H I S T O R I C A L S A L E S T A X A M O U N T S T h e f o l l o w i n g c h a r t s h o w s t h e s a l e s t a x l e v e l f r o m s a l e s t h r o u g h D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 1 , t h e h i g h s , a n d t h e l o w s f o r e a c h s e g m e n t o v e r t h e l a s t t w o y e a r s . ( i n t h o u s a n d s o f $ ) �%4 Q 2 0 1 1 " H i g h " L o w $ 1 8 , 0 0 0 $ 1 6 , 0 0 0 1 S 1 4 , 0 0 0 ' $ 1 2 , 0 0 0 ' �% �% r $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 �% �% $ 8 , 0 0 0 $ 6 , 0 0 0 $ 4 , 0 0 0 $ 2 , 0 0 0 ' �% �% �% ' �% �% �% �% 1 1 �% �% �% ' �% �% �% �% �% �% �% �% �% 1 1 �% �% �% �% �% �% �% �% �% 1 S O 5 ` a ? . ��s � 1 ��. . o 5 ����s ������ ��1 + + b o a ����s a ��` t ���� ���� C 7 � �� ��` �� ��{ o a v ` ��` s 5 ` " { c o s { 4 � ��o ` a > ��+ l b R P 4 4 i o v ��o , s a g o P # t i i t 0 A N N U A L S A L E S T A X B Y B U S I N E S S . C A T E G O R Y ( i n t h o u s a n d s o f S ) 4 Q 2 0 1 1 V W � - 6 . 4 1 e k 0 3 r " . - - 3 Q 2 0 1 1 k t - . ` . 3 ! W . z a ' E M S * , 9 9 2 Q 2 0 1 1 5 _ : ! ` ��; ��: , 7 i g i 1 9 ' ����1 * . ` a t < . _ ��, : ����f ' b ? g f I Q 2 0 1 1 + , Y X i : 1 5 9 T ��4 ' 4 t � ����" � ����- ���� 4 Q 2 0 1 0 W r G A f f e i 6 V i V I O z - M M I N M E N I M M I ��- 2 Q 2 0 1 0 " F 2 7 C k r , i 1 0 s s 1 Q 2 0 1 0 ; d 6 " 8 5 0 ' . 2 : : t o m ; s ��I I M M I I M M I I H N I M E R I M M I N 1 1 1 . 1 e �� 4 Q 2 0 0 9 ��' - ' 4 0 6 2 % W - ������ 3 Q 2 0 0 9 ` ` ; ` 2 5 7 A 3 : r , t i . . y v - s $ 0 5 2 0 , 0 0 0 S 4 0 , 0 0 0 $ 6 0 , 0 0 0 S 8 0 , 0 0 0 S 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 S 1 2 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 4 0 , 0 0 0 1 = G I R e t a i l I M F o o d P r o d u c t s O T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I N C o o s t r o e t i o o r H u s i u e s s T o H n a i v e ' s M I N i s c e l l a w w w . M u n i S e r v i c e s . c o m ( 8 0 0 ) 8 0 0 - 8 1 8 1 6 1 P a g e 3 Riverside County Transportation Commission FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail S14,000 312,000 S10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 S2,000 $0 (in thousands of $) I �iI�l�llii'�1fi�! 0000000000000 00000000000000 CY s .. N s .. a a a a a a a a o o o' o N N N N es a a ee s FINAL RESULTS: July -September 2011 Sales Local Net Cash Collections Less: Pool Amounts Less: Prior Quarter Payments Add: Late Payments Local Net Economic Collections after Adjustments Percent Change from July -September 2010 Sales MUNISERVICES' ON -GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $157,479 Total to Date $1,557,126 $30,820,537 ($-329,200) ($1,482,078) $1,683,442 $31,351,101 UP BY 8.8% www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 page 4 62 ATTACHMENT 2 Southern California: Sales Tax Comparison -Oct-Dec 2010 Sales to Oct -Dec 2011 Sales - Juri r R diction �,,��d 4ANSPORTATlON AUTHORITY General Retail Food Products Trans, Const. Business to Business Misc. Oct -Dec 2011 Total Oct -., 2010 Total % Chg Largest Gain 2nd largest Gain largest Decline 2nd L., st Decline RCTC r 6,3% 7.9% 12.9% 27.2% 7.8% 70.0% 35,261,434 31,955,756 ,10.2%BIdg.Matls-Whsle AutoSaies - New Office Equipment Leasing IVERSIDE COUNTY Banning -4.8% 2.6% 13.0% -12.2% 49.2% -22.4% 383,414 360,263 6.4% Service Stations Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matis-Whsle Miscellaneous Other Beaumont -1.7% 0.0% 34.6% -5.9% -5.8% -19.5% 744,629 699,915 6,4% Service Stations Miscellaneous Retail BIdg.Matls-Retall Department Stores Blythe -3.5% 1.4% 8.5% 35.2% 102.9% 1.8% 360,614 316,261 14.0% Energy Sales Auto Sales - New Auto Parts/Repair Florist/Nursery Calimesa -27.4% 2.9% 23.9% 6.8% -35.5% 23.6% 144,918 136,159 6.4% Service Stations Liquor Stores Light Industry Apparel Stores Canyon Lake -29.5% 44.3% -70.5% 0.9% -60.7% -64.9% 31,687 38,405 -17.5% Restaurants Liquor Stores Auto Parts/Repair Department Stores Cathedral City -9.9% 5.4% 5.1% 22.6% 2.3% 9.4% 1,380,718 1,334,338 3.5%Auto Sales - New Food Markets Miscellaneous Retail, Furniture/Appliance Coachella 6.6% 4.3% 13.6% -11.9% 6.8% 26.3% 731,104 673,638 8.5% Service Stations Auto Parts/Repair BIdg.Matls-Whsle BIdg.Matls-Retail Corona 7.2% 1.5% 23.7% 11.9% 11.4% -12.6% 7,022,130 6,281,232 11.8% Service Stations BIdg.Matls-Whsle Office Equipment Food Markets Desert Hot Springs 2.9% 4.2% 128.6% 72.0% 29.1% 29.4% 271,173 189,181 43.3% Service Stations Restaurants Department Stores Food Markets Hemet -2.4% 1.6% 14.4% -5.8% 12.2% -9.9% 1,918,621 1,817,290 5.6% Auto Sales - New Service Stations Apparel Stores BIdg.Matls-Whsle Indian Wells 1.2% -7.1% -17.4% 7.4% 50.1% 1100.0% 92,603 97,241 -4.8% Recreation Products Light Industry Restaurants Food Markets Indio 9.4% 2.3% 11.8% 12.2% 10.8% -18.6% 1,449,739 1,326,643 9.3% Auto Sales - New Service Stations Health & Government Recreation Products La Quinta -2.5% 7,7% 27.3% -0.8% -1.2% -31.7% 1,293,724 1,245,909 3.8% Auto Sales - New Restaurants Department Stores Office Equipment Lake Elsinore 4,9% 13.0% 4.2% 0.7% 50.8% -18.3% 1,705,734 1,595,026 6.9% Department Stores Food Markets Miscellaneous Retail BIdg.Matls-Whsle Menifee 13.4% 1.9% 32.7% 3.1% 9,3% 48.6% 1,015,429 892,451 13.8% Service Stations Furniture/Appliance Energy Sales Food Markets Moreno Valley 2.2% 4.4% 15.2% -10.6% 31.5% -7.7% 2,753,800 2,581,905 6.7%Auto Sales - New Service Stations Bldg Matls-Whsle Department Stores Murrieta 5.5% 6.4% 20.8% -3.7% -3.2% -13.5% 2,362,691 2,210,500 6.9% Service Stations Auto Sales • New Furniture/Appliance BIdg.Matis-Whsle Norco 4.4% 2.8% 19.2% -0.9% 5.5% 24.6% 999,301 903,150 10.6% Auto Sales - New Service Stations Leasing BIdg.Matls-Retail Palm Desert 4.0% 13.5% -4.6% 22.9% 7.4% 2.6% 4,013,286 3,776,421 6.3% Department Stores Food Markets Furniture/Appliance Service Stations Palm Springs -5.6% 13.9% 19.7% 5.3% 10.6% 3.3% 2,377,238 2,206,222 7.8% Restaurants Auto Sales - New Furniture/Appliance Health & Government Perris 5.2% 0.6% 23.7% 1.4% -2.8% 5.9% 1,472,397 1,352,713 8.8% Service Stations Auto Sales - New Heavy Industry Chemical Products Rancho Mirage 25,4% 8.0% -8.0% 3.8% -32.1% -4.2% 730,492 700,603 4,3% Miscellaneous Retail Restaurants Light Industry Auto Sales - New Riverside 1.6% 2.4% 16.2% 26.3% 1,4% -7.0% 9,995,453 9,204,190 8.6% Auto Sales - New Bldg,Matls-Whsle Florist/Nursery Heavy Industry Riverside County San Jacinto -18.7% 3.2% 0.3% -1.6% 18.9% 13.6% 5.0% -14.3% 3.3% -35.9% -9.5% -38.7% 5,976,718 461,268 6,028,842 451,432 -0.9% Service Stations 2 2% Service Stations . BIdg.Matls-Whsle Florist/Nursery Department Stores Light Industry Miscellaneous Retail Food Markets Temecula 4.5 % -1,0% 19,3% 5.0% -0.6% 9.2% 5,766,047 5,389,771 7.0% Auto Sales - New Service Stations. Light Industry Food Processing Eqp Wildomar 1.3% 4.4% 16.8% 13.6% -1.9% -5.6% 287,645 262,958 9.4% Service Stations Food Markets Liquor Stores - Miscellaneous Retail 63 MuniServices, LLC AGENDA ITEM 8F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Marla Modell, Procurement Administrator Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Recurring Contracts for Fiscal Year 2012/13 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the recurring contracts for FY 2012/13; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As in previous years, the Commission annually evaluates existing contracts for professional services that are due to expire within the next fiscal year. These contracts may be placed on the calendar for a new procurement solicitation, allowed to expire because they are no longer required, or included in the annual recurring contracts list that is subject to Commission approval. Most contracts for professional services are subject to a competitive process. This year's list of recurring contracts includes consultants that are providing unique or specialized services and working closely with staff on long-term projects. Staff desires to retain a limited number of consultants on the recurring contracts list because of their historical knowledge, unique experience, and understanding of the Commission and specific Commission projects. Under limited circumstances, staff believes it is more efficient and cost effective to retain the consultants on the recurring contracts list rather than rebidding the services at this particular time. Approval of the recurring contracts list will allow the Commission to continue work on existing projects without interruptions and maintain consistency. The list of proposed recurring contracts for FY 2012/13, followed by a summary for each consultant supporting its inclusion on the recurring contracts list is as follows: Agenda Item 8F 64 Consultant Name Description of Services Budget FY 11/12 Budget FY 12/13 Dollar Change FY 12 - FY 13 AMMA Transit Planning (AMMA) Consultant support for administration of Specialized Transit Program under Measure A and federal programs $100,000 $100,000 $0 Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) Capital project program management services 6,444,000 7,442,800 998,800 Best, Best & Krieger LLP (BB&K) General legal services 2,325,000 2,258,100 (66,900) Case Systems, Inc. (Case) Call box maintenance 250,000 250,000 0 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. (Epic) Support services for property management of Commission -owned properties and related contracts 440,000 684,000 244,000 Fieldman Rolapp & Associates (Fieldman) Financial advisory services 180,000 650,000 470,000 Fulbright & Jaworski LLP (Fulbright) Disclosure counsel services 60,000 165,000 105,000 GCAP Services, Inc. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) support services 20,000 75,000 55,000 Geographies Graphic design and web services for Multimodal Services Department 750,000 1,229,500 479,500 Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (Orrick) Bond Counsel Services 190,000 550,000 360,000 Trapeze Regional rideshare software 60,000 45,000 (15,000) McGladrey & Pullen, LLP (McGladrey) Annual audit services 136,000 - 144,200 8,200 Total $10,955,000 $13,593,600 $2,638,600 Budget FY 11/12 Budget FY 12/13 5-Year Contract Bernard J. Arroyo (Bernard Arroyo►' Freeway Service Patrol and Call Box system consultant services $ 25,000 $25,000 $125,000 Paladin Investigative Services (Paladin)1 Call box recovery service 7,000 7,000 35,000 Total $32,000 $32,000 $160,000 'These are contracts with consultants providing specialized services on long-term projects at a fixed price. These contracts do not need to be negotiated annually as service level and pricing is not expected to change during the period of performance. Staff desires to enter into a five-year agreement with each of these consultants for the aggregate amount shown in the Budget FY 2012/13 area above. Agenda Item 8F 65 A MMA In February 2007, AMMA was selected under a competitive procurement process to provide consulting services for the development and implementation of the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated °Plan), as well as the nexus of the Coordinated Plan to the receipt of federal Jobs Access Reverse Commute and New Freedom grant funds. AMMA also guides staff regarding the grant application process for the Federal Transit Administration Section 5310 Elderly and Disabled Specialized Transit program. Additionally, AMMA advises staff regarding the management of operator reporting for the current Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects and assists in the development of the application and eligibility guidelines for the Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects pertaining to the next two-year funding cycle. Bechtel The Bechtel contract for FY 2012/13 reflects a 15 percent increase over last year, due to increases in staffing. Several of the Commission's projects, including the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP), Perris Valley Line (PVL), and widening projects on the Interstate 215 are entering the more labor-intensive design -build or construction phases, necessitating an increase in staffing to support this work. Bechtel is continuing program management and construction management activities of highway and rail projects for the 2009 Measure A program, as well as the wrap-up of delivery for the remaining projects for the 1989 Measure A program. Bechtel possesses the knowledge and background history of the Commission's capital projects, which is necessary to deliver the Commission's Measure A projects. The flexibility of obtaining additionalsupport from Bechtel as needed for specific project requirements is also important and avoids the need to increase Commission staff. BB&K The BB&K contract for FY 2012/13 reflects a decrease of 3% in legal costs. A high level of general legal services is generally required for capital project activities, including right of way, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial projects. The decrease is primarily attributable to the wrap-up and delivery of 1989 Measure A highway and commuter rail projects. In recent years, the Commission has engaged other legal firms for specific matters involving potential conflicts of interest as well as specialized legal services. Case Case (formerly Comarco Wireless Technologies) provides for routine corrective and preventive maintenance of call boxes, including knockdowns and vandalism. Case was selected as a result of a competitive procurement in 2001, in which it was the only responsive bidder. In addition, Case provided these services since the inception of the call box program. A competitive procurement is anticipated in FY 2012/13. Agenda Item 8F 66 Epic Epic was selected through a competitive procurement process for property management services, including reviewing the ownership of all Commission -owned properties; identifying, inventorying, and cataloging leases, licenses, easements, and encroachments on Commission -owned property; evaluating fair market value of the uses of Commission -owned property; establishing and maintaining a database to capture all of the Commission's property and contract information; marketing and selling excess land; and resolving complex title issues. Due to its accumulated knowledge and development of various property management projects, resources, and databases associated with the multitude of Commission -owned properties, including but not limited to those along the San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL), staff determined that Epic can most efficiently and cost effectively provide the services described above. The contract amount is anticipated to increase by $244,000, as some of the support activities that Epic is performing are related to the PVL project, which has critical tiineframes in FY 2012/13. Specific examples of PVL support activities include providing utility information for utility relocation efforts, researching street crossing rights, street vacations, and perfecting and correcting title issues such as Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway easement to fee conversions and land rights swaps with Ca!trans. In addition to an expedited schedule for PVL activities, the number of leases, licenses, easements, and encroachments on the SJBL has been found to be 1,030 instead of the 600 originally anticipated. The work on the SJBL tenant contracts will be expedited in order to more quickly reduce Commission liability and increase licensing revenues. In. FY 2012/13, Epic will continue to evaluate excess Commission properties for sales opportunities. Fieldman Fieldman was selected as the Commission's financial advisor in late 2003, following a procurement process, and has provided financial advisory services on general finance matters and specific financing transactions related to the 2009 Measure A program. Fieldman is significantly involved in the toll financing activities related to the SR-91 CIP that are expected to occur in FY 2012/13; these activities include the issuance of sales tax revenue and toll revenue bonds and the federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan. Based on current financing activities in progress, as well as Fieldman's knowledge and understanding of the Commission, staff determined it would be more efficient and cost-effective for continuity purposes to retain Fieldman. Staff intends to solicit new proposals for financial advisory services following the conclusion of the SR-91 CIP financing transactions. Fulbright In July 2009, the Commission awarded a professional services agreement to Fulbright for disclosure counsel services in connection with the Commission's 2009 bond issuance. The agreement has been periodically amended for the Commission's subsequent debt transactions. Staff has been satisfied with Agenda Item 8F 67 Fulbright's high level of service and recommends that Fulbright's agreement be amended to include disclosure counsel services related to the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds and toll revenue bonds in connection with the SR-91 CIP financial close. GCAP GCAP provides DBE program consulting and compliance services, including goal calculations, program development, and outreach to small and disadvantaged businesses. Since October 2011, GCAP has been assisting the Commission in the DBE calculation of contract goals and the development of its Small Business Enterprise (SBE) program to meet state and federal requirements. GCAP's level of effort is expected to increase in FY 2012/13 due to essential outreach services for the PVL project, the Commission's triennial DBE goal calculation, and the continued development and implementation of the Commission's SBE program. Geographics Upon the completion of a competitive procurement process in December 2006, Geographics was awarded a professional services agreement to support the Commission with the provision of graphic design and communications services, including but not limited to advertising design and production, website development, collateral and publication design, and media buys. These services are especially critical as it relates to multimodal services programs (commuter assistance, motorist assistance, rail, and transit) that account for a majority of the Commission's outreach. In addition, three mission critical projects are currently underway: • Transition of many aspects of the Commuter Assistance Program to an interactive, web -based environment hosted through the Inland Empire 511 (IE51 1) website; • Increasing deployment of 1E511 as the Commission's public face for multimodal services; and • Deployment of brand new region wide average vehicle ridership (AVR) calculation and commuter survey software for which Geographics provides programming and technical support. As architect of the 1E511 system, a technologically advanced and complex web environment, Geographics is uniquely able to advance the Commission's goals for this program. Additionally, as the Commission's consultant for the transition of the AVR and survey process from end of life software and hardware to a cloud -based environment with a cost-effective future, .Geographics' advice is critical to the program's success. Based on these required services, Geographics' contract for FY 2012/13 reflects an increase of $479,500. Since the Commission manages both the Riverside County and San Bernardino County Commuter Assistance and Agenda Item 8F 68 1E511 programs, San Bernardino Associated Governments will reimburse approximately 50 percent of the total Geographics contract cost for the related services that are provided to or otherwise benefit the San Bernardino County programs. Orrick Orrick was selected as bond counsel in late 2004, following a competitive procurement process and has provided bond counsel services in connection with the financings and other matters related to the 2009 Measure A program, including the SR-91 CIP. Orrick has a high level understanding of the Commission's 2009 Measure A program and related financings and has significant experience with other transportation agencies, especially self-help counties. Accordingly, staff determined that it would be more efficient and cost-effective to continue to retain Orrick in order to complete the SR-91 CIP financing activities. Staff intends to solicit proposals for bond counsel services following the completion of the SR-91 CIP financing activities. Trapeze An agreement for a ridematching software program for the Inland Empire was awarded to Trapeze in 2002 following a competitive procurement process. Subsequently, the software/License agreement was expanded to include Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura Counties functionality. The software has been customized over the past years in response to the unique regional air quality requirements. As a result of a recent procurement for a new regional rideshare software, this contract has been included in the recurring contracts for software maintenance services for a six-month period to facilitate a seamless transition due to the existing system's customization for the regional partnership. McGladrey In March 2008 following a procurement process, McGladrey was awarded a professional services agreement to perform the Commission's annual audits for a five-year period concludes with the completion of the FY 2011 /12 audit in November 2012. Due to the significant increase in finance activities in FY 2012/13 as a result of involvement in the SR-91. CIP design -build procurement and financing efforts, management determined that conducting a procurement for audit services during that period would create a significant strain on available resources. Additionally, the Commission's current debt indentures require the Commission to obtain a report and opinion of a nationally recognized public accounting firm, such as McGladrey. Based on McGladrey's knowledge and understanding of the Commission's operations and programs, it will be important to retain the firm as a result of these significant transactions. Agenda Item 8F 69 Specialized Services on Long -Term Projects for Multiple Year Contracts Bernard Arroyo The Commission has maintained an agreement with Bernard Arroyo since 2005, for various services relating to the motorist assistance programs. The contractor provides support for the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) electronic data collection system, including device -level user support; SQL database management; receiving,. processing, and tracking assist data; providing the assist data in monthly and quarterly operational reports; running data analyses on FSP beat efficiency; and running data analyses on call box productivity and effectiveness among other services. Bernard Arroyo has historical and relevant experience working on Commission projects. Staff recommends that the current contract be extended for a five-year period for a total not to exceed amount of $125,000, which reflects no change in the annual cost Accordingly, the FY 2012/13 budget is $25,000 with $100,000 for similar services in the subsequent four-year period. Paladin An important component of administering the call box program in Riverside County is the ability to recover costs for loss and damage, when possible. The Commission has maintained a professional services agreement with Paladin since 2009. Paladin renders cost recovery services resulting from damages caused by motorists and others to the Commission's call box system. There is no cost to engage in a contract with Paladin other than to pay 33 percent of any costs recovered. Staff recommends that the current contract be extended for a five-year period for a total not to exceed amount of $35,000, which reflects no change in the annual cost. Accordingly, the FY 2012/13 budget is $7,000 with $28,000 for similar services in the subsequent four-year period. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $13,625,600 Source of Funds: Measure A, TDA, TUMF, FSP, SAFE Fees, Interest, and Other Reimbursements Budget Adjustment: N/A GLA No.: Various Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1 14 Date: 05/14/12 Agenda Item 8F 70 AGENDA ITEM 8G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Marla Modell, Procurement Administrator Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer,. Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with PlanetBids for Online Vendor and Bid Management System BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-19-091-00 with PlanetBids, Inc. (PlanetBids) for the use of the PlanetBids BidsOnline vendor and bid management system software for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed $65,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. - BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Vendor and bid management system software, most often a web -based e-procurement application, became more prevalent in the late-1990s. These web -based applications streamline the complete bidding process and further enable the collection, analysis, and leverage of all aspects of vendordata, purchasing activities, and corresponding history. The Commission currently does not have a vendor and bid management system. DISCUSSION: Procurement staff currently relies on the Commission's website, project managers, and local print advertisement when soliciting requests for proposal (RFP), requests for qualifications (RFQ), and invitations for bids (IFB). As part of the Commission's efforts to administer and manage an efficient procurements process and conduct outreach to small businesses and disadvantaged business enterprises (DBE) for future Commission projects and programs, an off -the -shelf vendor and bid management system is anticipated to be a cost-effective solution. Agenda Item 8G 71 Staff researched available e-procurement solutions during the past few months by investigating what local cities and other transportation agencies are currently utilizing. Staff evaluated multiple software options and took part in demonstrations with BIDSYNC, eBid Systems, and PlanetBids. Staff also considered a bid and quote module available through EDEN, the Commission's financial management system. After evaluating the three demonstrations and comparing the EDEN module's available features against the minimum requirements available through the other three options, staff determined that PlanetBids provides a superior vendor and bid management system that meets the Commission's needs at a reasonable cost. Established in 1998 PlanetBids is a privately held company based in Woodland Hills, California. PlanetBids developed its productto help customers better connect with its current and potential vendors and conduct competitive purchases of goods and services efficiently and cost effectively. It provides a modular suite of leading web -based e-procurement solutions to state and local government agencies, educational institutions and private corporations. The following governmental agencies in Southern California currently use PlanetBids: • California State University Office of the Chancellor and campuses at Channel Islands, Northridge, and San Marcos; • Cities of Anaheim; Burbank, Chula Vista, El Cajon, Fontana, Garden Grove, Irvine, Lake Elsinore, La Mesa, Long Beach, Ontario, Pasadena, Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino, Santa Monica, and Temecula; • Coachella Valley Water District; • Metropolitan Water District of Southern California; • Orange County Fire Authority; • Orange Unified School District; • San Diego Association of Governments; • San Diego Metropolitan Transit System; • San Diego Regional Airport Authority; • San Diego Unified Port District; • Santa Monica College; • Southern California Association of Governments; and • Southern California Regional Rail Authority. The expected efficiency gains from PlanetBids BidsOnline include: • Vendor registration and profile management; • Greater outreach to vendors; • Bid document distribution, including automatic addendum notification and acknowledgments; • Custom email notifications; • Online question and answer management; • Secure e-bidding, including line itemization, calculation with net terms, etc.; • Robust reporting, analysis, charts, and audit trails; Agenda Item 8G 72 " S e a l e d b i d s / l o c k b o x ; " B i d s p e c i f i c a t i o n l i b r a r y ; a n d " R F P / R F Q / I F B e v a l u a t i o n t o o l s . B a s e d o n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d , s t a f f r e c o m m e n d s t h a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v e A g r e e m e n t N o . 1 2 - 1 9 - 0 9 1 - 0 0 w i t h P l a n e t B i d s f o r a t h r e e - y e a r t e r m , a n d t w o o n e - y e a r o p t i o n s t o e x t e n d t h e a g r e e m e n t , i n t h e a m o u n t o f $ 5 6 , 2 6 3 , p l u s e x t r a w o r k t o b e i d e n t i f i e d t h r o u g h f u t u r e t a s k o r d e r s i n t h e a m o u n t o f $ 8 , 7 3 7 , f o r a t o t a l a m o u n t n o t t o e x c e e d $ 6 5 , 0 0 0 . U p o n a p p r o v a l o f t h e a g r e e m e n t w i t h P l a n e t B i d s , e s t i m a t e d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i s s c h e d u l e d f o r t h e b e g i n n i n g o f F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 . F i n a n c i a l I n f o r m a t i o n Y e s F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 $ 1 5 , 8 7 5 I n F i s c a l Y e a r B u d g e t : N / A Y e a r : F Y 2 0 1 3 / 1 4 + A m o u n t : $ 4 9 , 1 2 5 M e a s u r e A , T D A , T U M F , F S P , S A F E N o S o u r c e o f F u n d s : F e e s , a n d I n t e r e s t B u d g e t A d u s t m e n t : N / A G L A N o . : 0 0 1 0 0 1 6 5 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 9 6 5 5 2 0 F i s c a l P r o c e d u r e s A p p r o v e d : \ 1 4 4 a , 1 D a t e : 0 5 / 1 0 / 1 2 A t t a c h m e n t s : D r a f t S u p p o r t S e r v i c e A g r e e m e n t A g e n d a I t e m 8 G 7 3 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street — 3rd floor Riverside, CA 92501 Finance/Procurement Marla Modell Procurement Administrator Net 30_ Days Le -air7ot eyPrr errem•a» SW.oliams Carirv:.cting EBtuyers 8 Sitppli€rrs ffic:ientlyi 5850 Canoga Avenue•8uiie 301•Woodland Hills•CA•91387.•818-992-1771 BIDSONLINETm SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT This SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), which describes the terms and conditions applicable to your use of the PlanetBids Online Support Services, is made and entered as of into as of the 7th day of June, 2012, by and between PLANETBIOS, INC., a California corporation, ("PlanetBids") and the following customer ("Customer') for the period from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2015. Customer shall have the option, in its sole discretion, to extend the term of this Agreement for two (2) additional one-year option periods, each to be exercised pursuant to an amendment to this Agreement. Customer Name: Street Address City, State ZIP Department: Principal Contact: Title: Term of Payment: THEREFORE, PlanetBids;and the Customer agree as follows: 1. PlanetBids Services Upon acceptance of this Agreement, PlanetBids shall provide the following Support,: Services to Customer, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. a) "Services" shag include the following: 1) use of the PlanetBids "BidsOnlineTm" Vendor and Bid management system for the purpose of vendor registration, posting and tracking Bid Requests and other information on Customer's website or private internet network, 2) up to two (2) licensed user access to and use of the BidsOnlineTm system by the Customer Procurement Department 3) ability to process and distribute Bid Requests to additionally available PlanetBids suppliers within their selected categories at no additional cost. b) PlanetBids shall have access and the right to market or otherwise promote any or all of its services to any vendor or supplier of Customer that registers with BidsOnlineTm via Customer's website. Planetbids will not sell vendor data to any third parties without a written consent from Customer. c) Internet related equipment by its nature, is not fault tolerant, but PlanetBids will use reasonable efforts to make the Services available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, • l ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 74 except for downtime for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, and will promptly investigate any technical problems that Customer reports. PlanetBids cannot, however, guarantee continuous service, service at any particular time or the integrity of data transmitted via the Internet. Further, PlanetBids shall not be responsible for the inadvertent disclosure, corruption or erasure of data transmitted, received or sorted on the BidsOnline"' system. d) PlanetBids may make improvements and/or amendments to the BidsOnline"' system at any time, and may provide other optional services, including enhanced versions of standard features or functions, for an additional fee as agreed in advanceby the Customer. Any and all relevant portions of these terms and conditions will automatically apply to all improvements, amendments and/or optional services as they, appear. e) PlanetBids represents that the Services will conform to the minimum specifications and standards of performance set forth in Exhibit "A" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference. . PlanetBids does not guarantee that use of the Services will produce any quotes, business opportunities orotherinformation '..helpful to the business of Customer, nor does it guarantee that any contact provided will be adequate or best suited .for any transaction. 2. Fees and Payments. a) Support Fees. Customer: agrees to pay to PlanetBids the total amount of $35,477.18 for the initial three (3) year term of this Agreement, vvhich fees shall be due and payable 30 days from the time of execution of thisAgreement, except as otherwise specified below, and include the following: 1), Set -Up Fee. Customer shall; pay a one-time set-up fee of $6,500.00 (discounted` from $7,500.00) for the .installation, configuration and testing of the BidsOnlineTm system link to Customer's website, plus administrator set-up and a one- time online user training up to two (2) users. Further details are available in Statement of Work (Exhibit "A"). (i) Acceptance Period. Customer shall be entitled to a thirty (30) day acceptance period to; test the BidsOnline system and ensure that the Services conform to the minimum specifications and standards of performance as set forth in Exhibit "A". The Set -Up Fee shall be due and payable ten (10) days following acceptance by Customer of the Services, and receipt by Customer of an invoice therefor from PlanetBids. 2) Service Fee Payment. Customer agrees to pay a service fee of $5,875.00 for the first year of the initial term of this Agreement, for the use of the BidsOnlineT"' system, which fee shall increase at the rate of three (3) percent increase per year. 3) Additional Add-on/Module. Customer agrees to pay a special service fee of $3,500.00 for the RFP Evaluation add -on module for the initial term of this Agreement. A onetime setup fee of $750.00 is waived. A three (3) percent increase per year applies to the Services Fee for the option terms. 2 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 75 b) Support Fees for Option Term. If the term of this Agreement is extended pursuant to Customer's exercise of one or both extension options, Customer shall pay the amount for the applicable option year as set forth in Table (A) below 30 days from execution of the amendment to extend the term of this Agreement. The total amount for the two (2) option terms shall not exceed $20,785.95. c) Total Support Fees for Initial and Option Term. The total not -to - exceed amount for the initial term of this Agreement, plus the two (2) option terms shall not exceed $56,263.13. Table (A) M© i.E 4 - SETUP YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 (Optional) YEAR 5 (Optional) , BidsOnlinen4 Vendor &, Bid Mgmt. • $ 6,500.00 $ 5,875.00 $ 6,051.25 $ 6,232.78 $ 6,419.77 $ 6,612.36 . RFP Evaluation Atld-on.„--,'•4 t $0.00 $ 3,500.00; $ 3,605.00 . $ 3,713.15 $ 3,824.54 $ 3,929.28 Sub -Total . $ 6,500.00 $ 9,375.00 $ 9,656.25 $ 9945.93 $ 10,244.31 $ 10,541.64 TOTAk $ 15,875.00 $ 9,656.25 $ 9,945.93 $ 10,244.31 $ 10,541.64 Additional Services; Fees. If requested by Customer, in writing, PlanetBids will provide any or all of the following additional services: " 1) Special customization work -up shall be provided at PlanetBids' current standard rates jursuart to an estimate provided by PlanetBids. 2) Training to Customer's designated risers, in addition to that provided pursuant to Section, 2(a)(1), is available as oftoday at the rate of $500.00 for up toy 3 hours online, or $1,47.5.00 for up to 3 hours per class plus reasonable „;travel, living, and parking`` expenses of the instructor, as applicable. 3) PlanetBids wilt record at no cost a back-up copy of all data appearing on Customer's wepsite on a daily basis. Services related to the retrieval or restoration of any;of; Customer's data from such back-up files are available at-PlanetBids current standard rates, which will vary depending onthe level of services required, but not less than $125.00 per hour. A late fee of 3% per month will be charged on the total amount due if payment,,is not received within the terms of this agreement. 3. Use of Services. a) PlanetBids is not responsible for the content and/or transactions on Customer's website. Notwithstanding the foregoing, PlanetBids reserves the right to monitor content that uses the Services and to remove content which PlanetBids reasonably determines to be offensive, harmful or otherwise in violation of its operating policies. 1) PlanetBids shall have the right to impose reasonable rules and regulations from time to time regarding the use of the Services, and shall promptly provide copies of any such rules to Customer. Customer agrees to comply with all such rules and regulations and with applicable laws, ordinances and regulations related to the use of Services and not make any unauthorized commercial use of the Services or of the PlanetBids name, marks or logos. Further, Customer agrees to not use the PlanetBids websites to (1) post information anonymously or under a false name; (2) post any unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, 3 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R1591.4-12 76 profane or otherwise" objectionable information of any kind, such as inducements to conduct that would constitute a criminal offense or give rise to civil or other liability. 2) If Customer uses standard identification codes, PlanetBids shall have the right to request for inspection an original copy of such codes and any necessary authorizations for use. If such identification codes are proprietary codes of third parties, such as NIGP, SIC or CSI, it shall be the responsibility of Customer to obtain the necessary licenses and Customer indemnifies and holds harmless PlanetBids from the unauthorized use or publication of any such identification codes with respect to the Services. 3) Customer represents and warrants (a) the information provided is current, complete and accurate, (b) that the person signing this Agreement is authorized to bind Customer, (c) Customer will update the information (including credit card information, if applicable) as required to keep such information current, complete and accurate. 4) In addition, Customer agrees to use information obtained through the Services only as necessary to the transaction of Customerand; shall not use the Services for the benefit of any third party. 5) Upon request,, provide PlanetBids with a record of all transactions and payments related to Bid Requests Made through the use of the Services. 6) It shall be the responsibility of Customer to collect and pay any taxes, duties, imposts tariffs that are aeable to =sales via the Services. b) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION 3(b), THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED "AS IS." PLANETBIDS MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT ; LIMITATION,_ IMPLIEDWARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A. PARTICULAR -:.PURPOSE, OR NONINFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORAOTH'ER VIOLATION OF RIGHTS, °EVEN IF PLANETBIDS HAS BEEN MADE AWAREAN ADVANCE OF, SUCH POTENTIAL RISK. FURTHER, PLANETBIDS DOES NOT. WARRANT OR MAKE ANY REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING THE ACCURACY, LIKELY RESULTS, OR RELIABILITY OF THE USE OF THE SERVICES OR SITES LINKED THERETO. NOTWITHSTANDING THE"FOREGOING, CUSTOMER SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT FOR CAUSE IF THE SERVICES ° DO NOT CONFORM TO THE MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT "A", IF THE SERVICES ARE FOUND BY A COURT OF— COMPETENT JURISDICTION TO INFRINGE ON THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF ANOTHER PARTY OR VIOLATE ANY OTHER RIGHTS, OR FOR ANY REASON SPECIFIED IN SECTION 4(a) OF THIS AGREEMENT. c) PlanetBids does not at any time come into possession of the products or services acquired through the Services and is not aware of the specific use to which those items will be put. In using the Services, Customer hereby releases PlanetBids and its agents, employees, and affiliates from any liability arising from any claims, demands, costs and damages (actual and consequential) of every kind and nature arising out of, or in anyway connected with, Bid Requests and uncompleted or completed transactions related to the Services. 4. Termination a) Termination For Cause. ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 77 1) This Agreement may be terminated by either party by providing the non - terminating party with no less than ten (10) business days written notice (and reasonable opportunity to cure) upon the occurrence of any breach of any material term or condition of this Agreement or any representation or warranty herein; 2) This Agreement may be terminated by Customer by providing PlanetBids with no less than ten (10) business days written notice (and reasonable opportunity to cure) upon the occurrence of any change or discontinuation in any aspect or feature of the BidsOnline' system; or 3) This Agreement may be terminated by Customer by providing PlanetBids with no less than ten (10) business days written notice (and reasonable opportunity to cure) upon the failure of PlanetBids to maintain its Internet website located at URL www.planetbids.com so that Customer may access the BidsOnline' system for more than ten (10) days within a thirty (30) day period. c) if this Agreement is terminated as set forth herein, Customer shall be entitled to a refund of a pro-rata share of the total fees paid by Customer for each full 12 month period remaining in the then -current term of this Agreement. 5. Confidentiality. PlanetBids shall take reasonable measures not to disclose website communications or information about its Customers, except to the extent that PlanetBids believes in good faith that:,,such action` is within the scope of the Services or reasonably necessary to (a) comply with the law or the directives of courts or governmental agencies; (b) enforce this Agreement;' (c) respond to claims of any third party; or (d) protect the legitimate interests of PlanetBids or its customers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, PlanetBids shall first provide Customer with ten (10) days advance written notice prior to disclosing any confidential information, pursuant to items (a), (b)r:(c) or (d) of the foregoing sentence. Notwithstanding the foregoing, all communications directed to �PlanetBiids via the website such as questions, comments, inquiries shall be deemed to be not confidential, unless specifically agreed otherwise in advance by PlanetBids or unless identified as confidential by Customer. Further, PlanetBids will have the right to use any Customer's name in connection with the advertising or promotion of the Services. 6. Copyright Protection. The BidsOnlineTm system and all materials appearing on the PlanetBids website are protected by worldwide copyright laws and related international treaties. None of the materials may be copied, reproduced, modified, published, uploaded, posted, transmitted, or distributed in any form or by any means other than as described herein. All rights not expressly granted herein are reserved. Any unauthorized use of the materials appearing on PlanetBids website may violate copyright, trademark and other applicable laws and could result in criminal or civil penalties. a) Customer shall not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, resell or exploit for any commercial purpose the Services, website content, the BidsOnlineTm system or any other PlanetBids tools. Customer shall not reverse engineer, decompile, or otherwise attempt to derive source code from any software or tools accessible or available through the Services. b) Special use requests should be sent to customerservice(u�PlanetBids.com. Permission to use shall be granted in the sole discretion of PlanetBids. 5 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 78 7. Security. (a) The PlanetBids ordering and posting processes are protected by the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocol, which encrypts your information and confirms the identity of the PlanetBids server before .allowing a transaction to .be completed. Firefox 3.5+ (or better) and Internet Explorer 8.0+ (or better) support the SSL protocol are acceptable, but we recommend that you use the latest browsers to ensure that you are protected by advances in security technology. For more detailed information, please refer to the PlanetBids Privacy Policy. (b) Password -protection techniques will be provided to restrict access under Customer's account to authorized individuals. REGISTRANT ACKNOWLEDGES, HOWEVER, THAT ACCESS RESTRICTIONS, BY THEIR NATURE, ARECAPABLE OF BYPASS AND PLANETBIDS DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE SERVICES CANNOT BE ACCESSED BY UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS. Customer shall at all times 'maintain as confidential its user names and passwords. If Customer is a corporation or other business entity, then it may allow employees to use its user name and password, but the Customer shall be responsible for all activity and charges incurred by such employees. Permitting third parties to use the Services is prohibited and a violation of this Agreement. (c) If a security breach occurs with respect, to any account, the Customer must immediately change its password and notify PlanetBids at customerservice(c�PlanetBids.com. Customer shall be liable any unauthorized use of t e _"Services until PlanetBids is notified _r the security breach. Other Provisions.` a) Notices. PlanetBids shall provide' notice to Customer via email, with a copy sent via certified U.S. Mail, to the address _provided on the membership registration or such other address provided by Customer to PlanetBids. Customer shall provide notice to PlanetBids via email to customerserviceCa)PlanetBids.corn, with a copy sent via certified U.S. Mail to the address,.on°the membership registration. Notices will be effective 6 hours after sending if sent via email (unless the sender;_ receives a response indicating that the message was undelivered) or 3 business days after the,_ mailing date, whether or not received. b) Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations without the prior written consent of the other party, and any such attempted assignment will be void. Subject to the above, this Agreement will be binding upon the parties' respective successors and permitted assigns. c) No Waiver. ' The failure of either party to exercise or enforce any right or provision under this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of such right or provision. If any. provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the parties nevertheless agree that the court should endeavor to give effect to the parties' intentions as reflected in the provision, and the other provisions of the these terms and conditions shall remain in full force and effect. d) Governing Law. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by laws of the United States of America and the State of California, excluding its choice of law rules and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court located in Riverside County, California. ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 79 e) Force Majeure. PlanetBids will not be liable in any amount for failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement if such failure is caused by Internet outages or delays, unauthorized access (hacking), earthquakes, communications outages, fire, flood, war, an act of God, or the occurrence of any other unforeseen contingency beyond the reasonable control of PlanetBids. f) Indemnification. Each party shall hold harmless, defend, indemnify and hold the other party and its officials, officers, employees, consultants, subcontractors and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons,; including wrongful death, arising out any gross negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of indemnifying party or its officers, employees, consultants, subcontractors and agents arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement,. g) Independent Contractor Status. The parties agree that PlanetBids is an independent contractor under this Agreement and will in no way be considered to be an agent, partner, joint venturer or employee of Customer. h) Attorney Fees. If either party commences an action against^ the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in;corinection with thrs Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shalt be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and all other, costs of such action. i) Counterparts. This Agreernent may be executed in counterparts and each such counterpart will be deemed an original 'copy of this Agreement,; when so executed and the counterparts will, when taken together, constitute and be one and the same instrument. j) Amendment or Modification. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written instrument signed by all parties or their, successors in interest. k) Authority. The individuals executing this Agreement for each party or entity are duly authorized representatives and each such individual has the requisite authority to enter into this Agreement on behalf of his or her principal. (Signatures on following page] ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 80 SIGNATURE PAGE TO BIDSONLINETm SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT AGREED effective as of the date first written above. PLANETBIDS, INC. CUSTOMER: By: By;; Alan Zavian, President & CEO John J. Benoit Chair (Date) ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 81 EXHIBIT "A" STATEMENT OF WORK FOR SETUP, IMPLEMENTATION AND TRAINING 1. BidsOnline TM Vendor and Bid Management Access Services: PlanetBids rate for maintaining the BidsOnline vendor and bid management system is based upon an unlimited number of monthly transactions (Bids) and up to two (2) registered users. BidsOnline Access Services include the following: • System Administration— PlanetBids will be responsible for system and data back-ups, disaster recovery, system reliability, availability, privacy, and security • Hosting Infrastructure — PlanetBids will be responsible for hosting BidsOnline, maintaining the network, hardware and software infrastructure • Customer Service — "Level 2" customer service is available from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. PST, Monday through Friday (see Help Desk definition below) • Account Management — PlanetBids will provide a dedicated Account Manager for post - sales support, BidsOnline system questions. " ,. • System requirement - Adobe Flash,�Player 11., 0+ is:required and available for free at www.adobe.com . 2. BidsOnline Set-up; Implementation and Training:_ • PlanetBids wilt initially load tap to two (21»sers, for Customer • PlanetBids will provide online; training for BidsOnline user administration BidsOnline set-up, implementation and training is further defined below: A. Initial program. definition The PlanetBids, implementationmanager will work with one (1) designated Customer project manager to develop a roadmap for system implementation. The implementation manager will define and present a, project management schedule to the Customer project manager. Customer will be required to submit information according with the project management schedule. Upon completion and review of the BidsOnline system by Customer, PlanetBids will train all assigned users on -site "at the Customer's training facility. B. System implementation and administration. PlanetBids will enter and configure Customer requirements into BidsOnline for up to two (2) users for Customer. The following implementation services will be provided: a. Setup PlanetBids portal and provide links for Customer to activate from its website . b. Online configured vendor registration form and ability to have vendors maintain their profiles. c. Complete management tools access to all users (i.e. buyers, project managers...). d. Customer specific database. e. Complete bid management from bid submission to awarding. 9 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 82 f. Electronic bidding - Vendors submit bid quotes/responses online; Buyers analyze bid responses and award. g. Daily backups. h. BidsOnline TM users and vendor support for the duration of the contract. 3. Professional Services PlanetBids will provide consulting services for custom reports or BidsOnline customizations, specific to Customer, not covered by this Statement of Work at an additional charge. Additional consulting services requested in writing by Customer will be billed at a rate of $125/hour, billed in 1 hour increments. No work will begin on professional services before a mutually agreed - upon statement of work is completed. All on -site travel expenses will be passed -through to Customer. No travel will be expensed without the prior approval of Customer's management. 4. Help Desk The PlanetBids Help Desk is available for "Level 2" support (as defined below) via our toll -free telephone number from 8:00am to 5;00pm PST, Monday through Friday. Email Support, support@PlanetBids.com as well as on-line help services are also available. Customer will be responsible for all "Level 1 support: • A level 1 support representative will attempt to answer mostaor all questions, including help to vendors with'simple problems "(edit prole, etc:). or general "how-to" questions (search functionality, bidding, etc.). More complex, technical questions should be directed to a PlanetBids level support representative.: A PlanetBids representative will; be responsible for "Level 2" support: • . A Level 2 support is more technical in nature. Level 2 questions may, for example, deal with Customer users`.(i.e. BidsOnline system administrative users including buyers, project administrators, etc.) or with, password issues requiring special assistance, or with possible product bugs or failures. In this case, some research and investigation may be required: 5. Additional Module(s,): The same terms and conditions outlined in this Exhibit A shall also apply to the RFP Evaluation Add -on module. 10 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 83 AGENDA ITEM 8H RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee David Thomas, Tall Project Manager Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 Project and Construction Management Services WESTERN RIVERS/DE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-31-081-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-31-081-00, with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. (Parsons) to provide additional services for Phase 1 of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) widening and extension of the 91 Express Lanes in the amount of $18,434,545, plus a contingency of $1,850,000, for a total amount not to exceed $20,284,545, and a total authorized contract value of $60,084,545; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Due to the passage of the 2009 Measure A extension in 2002, the Commission adopted the 2009 Measure A Western County Highway 10-Year Delivery Plan (10-Year Delivery Plan) in December 2006. In this action, the Commission also directed staff to proceed with development of a , project report/environmental document for all the new projects identified in the plan. The SR-91 corridor improvement project (SR-91 CIP) was included in the 10-Year Delivery Plan and given high priority by the Commission. In September 2007, the Commission approved an agreement with PB Americas and authorized staff to proceed with preliminary engineering/environmental services for the SR-91 CIP: This project report/environmental document is currently scheduled to be completed in the summer 2012. Agenda Item 8H 84 In October 2009, the Commission approved an agreement with Parsons to provide design -build services through final design and construction of the SR-91 CIP and authorized staff to proceed with the first work phase - Phase 1 Project and Construction Management (PCM) services - for a not to exceed amount of $39.8 million that includes a contingency amount of $4,260,701. These Phase 1 PCM services included working on interagency agreements, right of way acquisition, utility relocations, advanced final engineering, and procurement of a design -builder. The cost for the Phase 1 PCM Services was based upon a schedule duration of two years. Staff will negotiate a contract amendment with the PCM to provide Phase 2 services to deliver the SR-91 CIP through final engineering, construction, and toll operation start up.. Staff will return to the Commission with a contract amendment request to authorize staff to proceed with Phase 2 services. Structuring the work in two phases results in a key decision point for the Commission. Phase 1 covers all work necessary from the PCM prior to the sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds. The successful sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds is paramount in order to commence Phase 2 activities. Phase 2 contract authorization could be provided upon a successful sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds. A two-phase approach allows the Commission to control whether and when to begin Phase 2 activities. The initially assumed two-year duration for the PCM Phase 1 services was based upon the assumption, at that time, that the successful sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds would occur in fall 201 1 /winter 2012. There are several factors that caused this duration to extend approximately 18 months to the current scheduled date in .July 2013. Among these factors are: 1. Completing environmental approval for the project, which was initially scheduled for the spring/summer of 2011, but now scheduled for the summer of 2012; and 2. Success in obtaining an invitation for Transportation Investment Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) funding, which recently occurred on April 24, 2012, and was the trigger for finalizing the design -build procurement schedule. Staff, working with the PCM team, successfully continued to work beyond the initial two-year duration (approximately nine additional months), keeping within the Commission authorized agreement not to exceed amount. With the successful invitation for the Commission to apply for. a TIFIA loan to complete the required funding for the project, staff, on May 7, 2012, invited the four prequalified design - build firms to perform an industry review of the draft request for proposal (RFP) for the SR-91 CIP. This kicked off the process for the final selection of a design - builder for the SR-91 CIP. This process is currently scheduled to be complete in April 2013 with the award of a design -build contract by the Commission. The PCM Agenda Item 8H 85 " w i l l b e a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h i s s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , a n d t h i s w i l l b e a m a j o r p a r t o f t h e P C M s c o p e o f w o r k f o r t h e c o m i n g f i s c a l y e a r . T h e o t h e r m a i n P C M s c o p e o f w o r k e f f o r t s , o v e r t h e n e x t y e a r , w i l l i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g i t e m s : 1 . T h e c o n t i n u i n g w o r k e f f o r t i n v o l v e d w i t h r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n f o r t h e p r o j e c t ; 2 . C o o r d i n a t i n g w i t h t h e f i v e m a j o r u t i l i t i e s t h a t a r e i n c o n f l i c t w i t h t h e p r o p o s e d S R - 9 1 C I P i m p r o v e m e n t s f o r r e l o c a t i o n o f u t i l i t i e s a n d p r o c u r e m e n t o f l o n g l e a d i t e m s ; 3 . C o o r d i n a t i n g w i t h . t h e B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n S a n t a F e ( B N S F ) R a i l r o a d f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d m a i n t e n a n c e a g r e e m e n t s r e q u i r e d t o a l l o w a c c e s s o n t h e B N S F p r o p e r t y ; a n d 4 . C o n t i n u e d c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h t h e O r a n g e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A u t h o r i t y ( O C T A ) a n d i t s e x p r e s s l a n e t o l l o p e r a t o r , C o f i r o u t e , f o r p l a n n i n g o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s i n t e g r a t i o n w i t h t h e e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t y . T h e f o l l o w i n g l i s t i s t h e P C M ' s s c o p e s u m m a r y o f P h a s e 1 s e r v i c e s t o b e c o n t i n u e d t h r o u g h t h e e x t e n d e d P h a s e 1 d u r a t i o n : 1 . A g e n c y C o o r d i n a t i o n ( F e d e r a l H i g h w a y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , C a l t r a n s , C o r o n a , R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y , O C T A , r e s o u r c e a g e n c i e s ) ; 2 . R i g h t o f W a y A c q u i s i t i o n a n d M i t i g a t i o n P l a n n i n g ( r i g h t o f w a y e n g i n e e r i n g , a p p r a i s a l s , f e e a c q u i s i t i o n s , u t i l i t y e a s e m e n t s , r e l o c a t i o n s , e t c . ) ; 3 . R a i l r o a d A g r e e m e n t s a n d U t i l i t y R e l o c a t i o n ( a g r e e m e n t s , c o o r d i n a t i o n , a n d a d v a n c e d u t i l i t y r e l o c a t i o n p l a n s ) ; 4 . P r o c u r e m e n t o f D e s i g n - B u i l d e r ( i n d u s t r y r e v i e w , R F P , o n e - o n - o n e m e e t i n g s , a l t e r n a t e t e c h n i c a l p r o p o s a l s , d e s i g n - b u i l d c o n t r a c t p r o v i s i o n i n p u t , s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , c o n t r a c t n e g o t i a t i o n s , c o n t r a c t a w a r d p r o c e s s ) ; 5 . A d v a n c e d E n g i n e e r i n g t o S u p p o r t t h e R F P a n d A g r e e m e n t s ( P e r f o r m l i m i t e d , a d v a n c e d e n g i n e e r i n g i n s e v e r a l a r e a s i n c l u d i n g l o n g l e a d t i m e b r i d g e s , s u r v e y i n g , s t a g e c o n s t r u c t i o n , g e o t e c h n i c a l e x p l o r a t i o n s / r e p o r t s , e t c . p r i o r t o t h e p r o c u r e m e n t o f a d e s i g n - b u i l d e r . C o o r d i n a t e w i t h e x i s t i n g p r o j e c t a p p r o v a l a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l d o c u m e n t f i r m ( s ) a s n e c e s s a r y f o r i n f o r m a t i o n a n d e n g i n e e r i n g w o r k i n s u p p o r t o f t h e d e s i g n - b u i l d R F P ) ; 6 . P r o j e c t C o n t r o l s a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n P l a n n i n g ( s c h e d u l e , b u d g e t , d o c u m e n t c o n t r o l s y s t e m , f o r e c a s t i n g , r e p o r t i n g , p r o j e c t m a n a g e m e n t p l a n , p r o j e c t p r o c e d u r e s ) ; 7 . T o l l i n g T e c h n o l o g y R e q u i r e m e n t s a n d A g r e e m e n t s ( t o l l i n g m a n a g e m e n t p l a n , s y s t e m s i n t e g r a t i o n c o n t r a c t , b u s i n e s s r u l e s , o p e r a t i o n s a g r e e m e n t , e t c . ) ; a n d 8 . P u b l i c I n f o r m a t i o n / O u t r e a c h ( w e b s i t e s , p u b l i c m e e t i n g s , n e w s l e t t e r s , m e d i a r e p o r t s , c o m m u n i t y o u t r e a c h p r e s e n t a t i o n s , e t c . ) . A g e n d a I t e m 8 H 8 6 Staff recommends approval of Agreement No. 09-31-081-01 , Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-31-081-00, with Parsons to provide additional services for Phase 1 of the SR-91 CIP for an additional amount of $ 18,434,545, plus a contingency of $1,850,000 for a total amount not to exceed $20,284,545. This would bring the total authorized contract value to $60,084,545. Staff further recommends that the Commission authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission and authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency as may be required for the project. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year. FY 2012/13 FY 2013/14 Amount: $17,100,000 $3,184,545 Source of Funds: Measure A/debt proceeds Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 003028 81601 262 31 81601 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \11 Date: 05/10/12 Attachment: PCM Amendment No. 1 Budget Summary Agenda Item 8H 87 5/9/2012 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) SR91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PARSONS(PCM) LIMITED NOTICE TO PROCEED #6 BUDGET FINAL WBS Total Cost by Number Activity Description Hours Parsons GCAP Arellano HDR Southstar OPC Psomas Cofiroute Total Cost Task TASK 100 - Proiect Management 10101 Project Management - - Project Management 2,080 $ 689,260 $ 689,260 Admin Support 3,600 $ 292,395 - $ 292,395 10201 Project Support 0 5 - Safety 50 $ 8,165 $ 8,165 QA/QC 50 $ 8,165 $ 8,165 ....Insurance 0 $ - $ - Financing/ g/ Funding Support 320 $ 74,058 $ 74,058 Agency Support 520 $ 120, 345 $ 120,345 Right of Way Mitigation Coordination 0 $ - $ - Partnering 0 $ - $ - ProjectLaborAgreement 0 $ - $ - Process Improvement 0 $ - $ - Management Startup Support 0 $ - 5 11101 Risk Management 520 5 84,917 $ 84,917 11301 Policies, Plans and Manuals 1,300 $ 230,557 $ 230,557 15501 Community/Government Relations 1,380 $ 266,852 $ 266,852 15601 Labor and DBE Compliance 1,266 $ .142,224 _ _ $ 142,224 $. 1,916,938 TASK 200 - Planning & Design 20101 Planning and Design Management 2,080 $ 336,359 $ 336,359 202 01 Design Support Activities 2,637 $ 293,201 $ 293, 201 203 01 Structures (Bridges &_Retaining Walls) 100 $ 24,124 _ $ 24,124 204 01 Civil (Roadways and Drainage) 0 $ - - _ _ .$ - 205 01 • Traffic, MOT, ITS 100 $ 22,003 $ 22,003 20601 GeoTechnical Oversight _ 100 $ 14,846 - $ 14,846 207 01 ITS, Electrical, Lighting 0 $ - $ - 20801 Landscape and Aesthetics 100$ 24,124 $ 24,124 20901 Roadway Conditions 100 $ 31,812 $ 31,812 21001 Environmental 162 5 23,620 - $ 23,620 21101 Permits 320 $ 42,416 - - $ 42,416 21201 k Utility. Management 207 $ 21,950 ,$ 21,950 25101 Survey/ROW Engineering 6,372 $ 1,004,877 $ 1,004,877 25201 R/W Acquisition 49,474 $ 8,284,368 $ 8,284,368 • 25301 Utilities Planning 100 $ 20,113 $ 20;113 . 25401 Utilities Planning 0 $ - - 25501 Geotechnical 0 $ - . 25601 _ Civil (Roadways and Drainage) 270 _ _ _ _ $ 44,352 $ 44,352 25611 • Roadway Conditions _ - $ - 25701 _ Railroad Coordination 823 $ 160,327 $ 160,327 25801 ROW -Property Management 5,000 _ _ $ 482,080 $ as 2,086 25811 Property Management Costs 8,125 $ 475,304 $ 475,304 25821 Property Management Costs • Vendor $ 250,000 $ 250,000 25901 Design Management and Support 520 $ 110,034 $ 110,034 88 1 OF 10 LNTP 6 Budget - Rev 2 - FINAL.xlsx 5/9/2012 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (ROTC) SR91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PARSONS(PCM) LIMITED NOTICE TO PROCEED k6 BUDGET FINAL WBS Number Activity Description ,Hours Parsons GCAP Arellano HDR Southstar OPC Psomas Cofiroute Total Cost Total Cost by Task $ 11,665,911 TASK 300 - Tolling & Operations 30101 Tolling and Operation Planning 4,220 $ 669,011 $ 669,011 35101 Tolling and Operation. Planning 60 $ 109,044 $ 109,044 35201 Operations and Business Planning 354 01 Tolling and Operations Planning 974 $ 144,017 S 144,017 $ 922,072 TASK 400 • Contracts & Procurement 40101 Contract/Procurement Management 2,600 $ 419,070 - $ 419,070 40401 Request for Proposals(RFP) 880 $ 203,660 - $ 203,660 45301. Request for Proposals(RFP) 1,060 $ 224,240 $ 224,240 $ 846,970 TASK 500 - Proiect Controls 50101 Project Controls Management 2,080 $ 325,331 $ 325,331 50201 Cost Engineering 2,158 $ 183,704 $ 183,704 50301 Scheduling 1,040 $ 151,637 $ 151,637 50401 Document Controls Management 2,080 $ - 132,338 $ 132,338 50501 Cost Estimating 104 $ 21,505 $ 21,505 TASK 600 - Construction Management $ 814,514 60101 Construction Planning 2,080 $ 472,446 $ 472,446 60201 Field Services Support 1,040 $ 157,289 5 157, 289 60301 ROW Parcel Construction Mitigation 2,500 $ 539,252 $ 539,252 TASK 700 - Other Direct Cost S 1,168,987 ODC's $ 403,480 $ - 408 $ 4,320 $ 32,076 $ 2,664 $ 30,750 $ 154,220 $ 5,452 $ 633,370 - $ 633,370 Sub Total $ 6,021,040 $ 142,632 $ 271,172 $ 680,073 $. 22,777 $ 9,522,502 $ 1,159,097 $ 149,468 $ 17,968,763 4.0% b MC, 3.5 Suark Up (on OP%n others) _._. _._.._ _.___.. • $ _ 465,783 °"�4` r�.., za�.,li; � $ ,22E$03 �_...� �i�,W 38t390Q; $„ ;40,$58 $«s,`: : $,23. $_ 465,783 $_ 465,783 „9431 TOTAL Contract Value by Firm 110,552 $ 6,486,823 $ Mlle 271,172 $ 680,073_ $ 22,777 $ 9,522,502 $ 1,159,097 $ 149,468. $ 18,434,545 $ 18,434,545 89 2 of 10 LNTP 6 Budget - Rev 2 - FINAL.xlsx AGENDA ITEM 81 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 12-021 for Commission Election to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Designation of Commission's General Counsel STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 12-021, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions •of Necessity for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Designation of Commission's General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-91 CIP will widen the SR-91 through the County, extend the existing 91 Express Lanes from the Orange County line to Interstate 15, improve five local interchanges, reconstruct a portion of the 15/91 interchange, and provide other regular and express lane improvements within the SR-91 corridor. The Commission is acquiring the right of way necessary for the construction of the project. Under special legislation, the Commission has authority to grant Resolutions of Necessity along SR-91 within the project limits between SR-241 and 1-15. The project limits, however, extend along SR-91 further east of 1-15 and include segments along 1-15 north and south of SR-91. Therefore, there is a need to extend Commission authority to grant Resolutions of Necessity within these remaining segments of the project limits. By adopting Resolution . No. 12-021, the Commission agrees to follow all procedures for the resolution of necessity process as outlined in the Caltrans Right of Way manual, which requires condemnation evaluation and condemnation panel review meetings under certain circumstances, prior to seeking resolutions of necessity. Attachment: Resolution No.12-021 Agenda Item 81 90 RESOLUTION NO. 12-021 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ELECTING TO HEAR FUTURE RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR PROPERTIES BEYOND THE PROJECT LIMITS AND DESIGNATION OF . COMMISSION GENERAL COUNSEL TO PROCESS RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY PACKAGES FOR THE SAME WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") is empowered to acquire by eminent domain any property to carry out its powers or functions pursuant to Public Utilities Code section l 30220.5; WHEREAS, property may properly be acquired by eminent domain for the State Highway System pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 102; WHEREAS, RCTC's Measure A and State statute authorizes the construction of new lanes, connectors and related improvements on State Route 91 between Interstate 15 and the Riverside/Orange County line (the "State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project"), a project on the State of California Highway System, and State of California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") has authorized RCTC to perform right of way activities for said project; WHEREAS, all local public agency projects on the State of California Highway System, within the existing or proposed State of California rights of way are subject to the requirements of the State of California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") Right of Way Manual, and recent provisions to the Caltrans Right of Way Manual now require a local public agency to pass a resolution, by a four -fifths vote, making an election to hear all the Resolutions of Necessity for the project; and WHEREAS, RCTC will follow State statute requirements and the Caltrans Right of Way Manual processes in the issuance of the Notice of Intent to adopt a Resolution of Necessity and in the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity, and the RCTC General Counsel is designated to process and approve the resolution packages(s); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Riverside County Transportation Commission has approved, by a four -fifths vote, that it will hear Resolutions of Necessity associated with the construction of new lanes, connectors and related improvements for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project for properties within the project limits beyond the limits authorized by State statute. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Riverside County Transportation Commission designates its General Counsel to prepare, review, process, and approve the Resolution of Necessity packages for the project for properties within the project limits beyond the limits authorized by State statute. 91 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 2012. ATTEST: By: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board By: John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission 92 AGENDA ITEM 8J RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Manager Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project Cooperative Agreement Amendment WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Reprogram federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from construction savings to cover the increase in Caltrans' expenditures for the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) related to the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 06-31-062-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 06-31-062-00, to increase funding by the amount of $1,225,534 for the PS&E phase for the SR-91 HOV lanes project; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-91 HOV lanes project was awarded by Caltrans on March 8, 2012. The construction phase was funded with Proposition 1 B Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) and federal CMAQ funds. As a result of the low bid, construction savings resulted in the amount of $37,007,000 in CMIA savings and $9,352,000 in CMAQ savings. Project cost savings are returned back to the respective funding pots with the California Transportation Commission responsible for reprogramming CMIA savings, and the Commission responsible for reprogramming CMAQ savings. Caltrans recently finalized its expenditures for the PS&E phase, which Commission staff reviewed. Final expenditures for PS&E resulted in an increase to the current cooperative agreement in an amount of $1,225,534. The design cost increase was due to modifications to right of way, utility, and railroad requirements, and operational and safety improvements. Agenda Item 8J 93 Staff recommends approval of the cost increase and proposes to reprogram $1,084,965 CMAQ savings from the construction phase to cover the increase in the PS&E phase, and $140,569 of Measure A funds required to match federal CMAQ funds. The CMAQ funds are directly reimbursed to Caltrans; therefore, the financial impact to the Commission's budget will only reflect the Measure A match. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $ 140,569 Source of Funds: 1989 Measure A Western County Highway Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 003005 81 102 222 31 81 102 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \jinx 3 Date: 05/10/12 Agenda Item 8J 94 AGENDA ITEM 8K RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Patricia Castillo, Capital Projects Manager Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 60 Truck Climbing/Descending Lane Project - Project Approval and Environmental Document WESTERN RIVERS/DE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Agree to sponsor the project approval and environmental document (PA&ED) phase of the State Route 60 truck climbing lane project; 2) Approve the programming of Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in the amount of $3,006,000 for PA&ED; 3) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-092-00 with Caltrans for the PA&ED phase for the SR-60 truck climbing lane project; 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute any future non -funding related amendments. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2009 Measure A passed by voters in 2002 included a project to add a truck climbing lane on SR-60 in the Badlands area east of Moreno Valley. The 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan approved by the Commission in December 2006 did not include the SR-60 Truck Climbing Lane but did include the truck climbing lane project on Interstate 10 from the San Bernardino County line to SR-60. However, at the Commission workshop in 2011, staff presented traffic volume and accident rate comparisons between the two projects, demonstrating that there is a more urgent need for improvements to SR-60 in the Badlands area than to 1-10. 95 Agenda Item 8K In July 2011, Caltrans completed a project study report (PSR) that analyzes three alternatives for improving SR-60 in the Badlands area. The three alternatives and cost estimate ranges are: 1) Eastbound truck climbing lane only, plus standard shoulders at a cost of $40-42 million; 21 Truck climbing and descending lane plus standard shoulders at a cost of $74-82 million; or 3) Shoulder widening only, both directions at a cost of $49-57 million. At the February 2012 workshop, the Commission gave its approval to substituting the SR-60 truck climbing lane project for the 1-10 truck climbing lane project in the 10-year delivery plan. Currently, Caltrans District 8 is working on a proposed safety project within the same limits of the SR-60 in the Badlands project area that will widen the shoulders in the westbound direction to standard widths (5-feet inside shoulder and 10' feet outside shoulder), at a cost up to $27 million (construction cost). The project also has up to $2 Million available for the PA&ED phase. This project is scheduled to be under construction in early 2016. Given that the scope of the safety project is one of the elements of Alternative #3 as described in the PSR of the SR-60 truck climbing lane project, and the timing of the construction of this proposed safety project overlaps with the timing of the Commission's SR-60 project, and to reduce the impact to the travelling public, staff and Caltrans propose to combine the SR-60 truck climbing lane project with the safety project. Combining the projects would result in Caltrans being responsible for $27 million of construction costs, and the Commission responsible for the other $47-55 million of construction costs. It is anticipated that CMAQ funds would be used for all phases of this project. In view of the fact that one of the programming constraints of the safety project is that the project be ready to list by June 2016, the combined project also needs to be ready to list by June 2016. Reviews of the proposed schedule indicate that meeting this date is feasible. Staff is proposing that the Commission sponsor the combined project with Ca!trans District 8 taking the lead on the PA&ED phase. Caltrans' estimate to complete the PA&ED phase is $5,006,000, based on the following assumptions: • The scope of the project is based on the approved PSR, alternative 2. • The overhead rate, currently 32.52 percent, is used; this is subject to change each year based on audits of the Department's overhead costs. This has not changed significantly in recent years. 96 Agenda Item 8K • " T h e a n t i c i p a t e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l d o c u m e n t i s a n i n i t i a l s t u d y - e n v i r o n m e n t a l a s s e s s m e n t l e a d i n g t o a n e g a t i v e d e c l a r a t i o n / f i n d i n g o f n o s i g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t . C a l t r a n s w i l l c o n t r i b u t e u p t o $ 2 m i l l i o n a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e s a f e t y p r o j e c t , a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n w i l l b e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e b a l a n c e o f t h e c o m b i n e d p r o j e c t . S t a f f r e c o m m e n ' d s t h a t t h e C o m m i s s i o n p r o g r a m $ 3 , 0 0 6 , 0 0 0 i n C M A Q f u n d s . T h e i t e m a p p r o v e d b y t h e W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y P r o g r a m s a n d P r o j e c t s C o m m i t t e e i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e s t a t e w o u l d c o n t r i b u t e $ 2 m i l l i o n , b u t t h a t i s n o w c o r r e c t e d t o r e f l e c t p r o p o r t i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n b a s e d o n t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f c o s t a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e s a f e t y p r o j e c t i m p r o v e m e n t s , u p t o $ 2 m i l l i o n . T h i s h a s n o i m p a c t o n t h e C o m m i s s i o n b u d g e t b e c a u s e t h e f e d e r a l f u n d s p r o p o s e d f o r t h e p r o j e c t w o u l d f l o w d i r e c t l y t o C a l t r a n s . A t t a c h m e n t : D r a f t C o o p e r a t i v e A g r e e m e n t w i t h C a l t r a n s 9 7 A g e n d a I t e m 8 . K 08-RIV-60-22.2/26.5 EA: ON690 District Agreement 08-1543 Project Number 0800000537 Draft:-5/1;0/11 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT This agreement, effective on , is between the State of California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS; and: Riverside County Transportation Commission, a public entity referred to as RCTC. For the purpose of this agreement, the term PARTNERS collectively refers to CALTRANS and RCTC (all signatory parties to this agreement). The term PARTNER refers to any one of those signatory parties individually. RECITALS I . California Streets and Highways Code sections 114 and 130 authorize PARTNERS to enter into a cooperative agreement for performance of work within the State Highway System (SHS) right of way. 2. For the purpose of this agreement, addition of eastbound truck climbing lane and westbound truck descending lane, and upgrading existing inside and outside shoulder to current standards on State Route 60 (SR-60) between Gilman Springs Road (PM 22.2) and Jack Rabbit Trail (PM 26.5) will be referred to as PROJECT. All responsibilities assigned in this agreement to complete the Project Approval and Environmental Document will be referred to as OBLIGATIONS. This agreement outlines the terms and conditions of cooperation between PARTNERS to complete OBLIGATION for PROJECT. 3. Prior to this agreement, CALTRANS developed the Project Initiation Document. 4. The estimated date for OBLIGATION COMPLETION is December 31, 2025. 5. In this agreement capitalized words represent defined terms and acronyms. The Definitions section contains a complete definition for each capitalized term. 6. From this point forward, PARTNERS define in this agreement the terms and conditions under which they will accomplish OBLIGATIONS. RESPONSIBILITIES 7 RCTC is SPONSOR for 100% of PROJECT. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 98 District Agreement 08-1543 RCTC may provide 1QA for the portions of WORK outside existing and proposed SHS right of way. 9. CALTRANS and RCTC will each be a FUNDING PARTNER for this agreement. Their funding commitments are defined in the FUNDING SUMMARY. 10. CALTRANS is the CEQA lead agency for PROJECT. 11. CALTRANS is the NEPA lead agency for PROJECT. 12. CALTRANS is IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for PA&ED. SCOPE Scope: General 13. PARTNERS will perform all OBLIGATIONS in accordance with federal and California laws, regulations, and standards; FHWA STANDARDS; and CALTRANS STANDARDS. 14. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a PROJECT COMPONENT will provide a Quality Management Plan (QMP) for that component as part of the PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN. 15. Any PARTNER may, at its own expense, have representatives observe any OBLIGATIONS performed by another PARTNER. Observation does not constitute authority over those OBLIGATIONS. 16. Each PARTNER will ensure that all of its personnel participating in OBLIGATIONS are appropriately qualified, and if necessary, licensed to perform the tasks assigned to them. 17. PARTNERS will invite each other to participate in the selection and retention of any consultants who participate in OBLIGATIONS. 18. if WORK is done under contract (not completed by a PARTNER's own employees) and is governed by the California Labor Code's definition of "public works" (section 1720(a)(a)), that PARTNER will conform to sections 1720 — 1815 of the California Labor Code and all applicable regulations and coverage determinations issued by the Director of Industrial Relations. 19. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for each PROJECT COMPONENT included in this agreement will be available to help resolve problems generated by that component for the entire duration of PROJECT. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 2 of 22 99 District Agreement 08-1543 20. CALTRANS will issue, upon proper application, the encroachment permits required. for WORK within SHS right of way. Contractors and/or agents, and utility owners will not perform WORK without an encroachment permit issued in their name. 21. If any PARTNER discovers unanticipated cultural, archaeological, paleontological, or other protected resources during WORK, all WORK in that area will stop and that PARTNER will notify all PARTNERS within 24 hours of discovery. WORK may only resume after a qualified professional has evaluated the nature and significance of the discovery and a plan is approved for its removal or protection. 22. PARTNERS will hold all administrative drafts and administrative final reports, studies, materials, and documentation relied upon, produced, created, or utilized for PROJECT in confidence to the extentpermitted by law. Where applicable, the provisions of California Government Code section 6254.5(e) will govern the disclosure of such documents in the event that PARTNERS share said documents with each other. PARTNERS will not distribute, release, or share said documents with anyone other than employees, agents, and consultants who require access to complete PROJECT without the written consent of the PARTNER authorized to release them, unless required or authorized to do so by law. 23 If any PARTNER receives a public records request, pertaining to OBLIGATION`S, that PARTNER will notify PARTNERS within five (5) working days of receipt and make PARTNERS aware of any disclosed public records. PARTNERS will consult with each other prior to the release of any public documents related to the PROJECT. 24. If HM-1 or. HM-2 is found during a PROJECT COMPONENT, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for that PROJECT COMPONENT will immediately notify PARTNERS. 25. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, is responsible for any HM-1 found within the existing SHS right of way. CALTRANS will undertake or cause to be undertaken HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-I with minimum impact to PROJECT schedule. 26. If HM-1 is found within PROJECT limits and outside the existing SHS right of way, responsibility for such HM-I rests with the owner(s) of the parcel(s) on which the HM-1 is found. RCTC, in concert with the local agency having land use jurisdiction over the parcel(s), will ensure that HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-1 are undertaken with minimum impact to PROJECT schedule.) 27. If HM-2 is found within PROJECT limits, the public agency responsible for the advertisement, award, and administration (AAA) of the PROJECT construction contract will be responsible for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-2. PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 3 of 22 100 District Agreement 08-1543 28. CALTRANS' acquisition or acceptance of title to any property on which any HM-1 or HM-2 is found will proceed in accordance with CALTRANS' policy on such acquisition. 29. PARTNERS will comply with all of the commitments and conditions set forth in the environmental documentation, environmental permits, approvals, and applicable agreements as those commitments and conditions apply to each PARTNER's responsibilities in this agreement. 30. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for each PROJECT COMPONENT will furnish PARTNERS with written quarterly progress reports during the implementation of OBLIGATIONS in that component. 31. Upon OBLIGATION COMPLETION, ownership or title to all materials and equipment constructed or installed for the operations and/or maintenance of the SHS within SHS right of way as part of WORK become the property of CALTRANS. CALTRANS will not accept ownership or title to any materials or equipment constructed or installed outside SHS right of way. 32. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a PROJECT COMPONENT will accept, reject, compromise, settle, or litigate claims of any non -agreement parties hired to do WORK in that component. 33. PARTNERS will confer on any claim that may affect OBLIGATIONS or PARTNERS' liability or responsibility under this agreement in order to retain resolution possibilities for potential future claims. No PARTNER will prejudice the rights of another PARTNER until after PARTNERS confer on claim. 34. PARTNERS will maintain, and will ensure that any party hired by PARTNERS to participate in OBLIGATIONS will maintain, a financial management system that conforms to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and that can properly accumulate and segregate incurred PROJECT costs, and provide billing and payment support. 35. PARTNERS will comply with the appropriate federal cost principles and administrative requirements outlined in the Applicable Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements table below. These principles and requirements apply to all funding types included in this agreement. 36. PARTNERS will ensure that any party hired to participate in OBLIGATIONS will comply with the appropriate federal cost principles and administrative requirements outlined in the Applicable Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements table below. rinciples and Administration ..Requirements PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 4 of 22 101 " D i s t r i c t A g r e e m e n t 0 8 - 1 5 4 3 T h e f e d e r a l c o s t p r i n c i p l e s a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e q u i r e m e n t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e a c h o r g a n i z a t i o n t y p e a p p l y t o t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n . O r g a n i z a t i o n T y p e C o s t P r i n c i p l e s A d m i n i s t r a t i v e R e q u i r e m e n t s F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t s 2 C F R P a r t 2 2 5 O M B A - 1 0 2 S t a t e a n d L o c a l G o v e r n m e n t 2 C F R , P a r t 2 2 5 4 9 C F R , P a r t 1 8 E d u c a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t i o n s 2 C F R , P a r t 2 2 0 2 C F R , P a r t 2 1 5 N o n - P r o f i t O r g a n i z a t i o n s 2 C F R , P a r t 2 3 0 2 C F R , P a r t 2 1 5 F o r P r o f i t O r g a n i z a t i o n s 4 8 C F R , C h a p t e r 1 , P a r t 3 1 4 9 C F R , P a r t 1 8 C F R ( C o d e o f F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n s ) O M B ( O f f i c e o f M a n a g e m e n t a n d B u d g e t ) R e l a t e d U R L s : " V a r i o u s O M B C i r c u l a r : h t t p : / / w w w . w h i t e h o u s e . g o v / o m b / g r a n t s _ c i r c u l a r s " C o d e o f F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n s : h t t p : / / w w w . g p o a c c e s s . g o v / C F R 3 7 . P A R T N E R S w i l l m a i n t a i n a n d m a k e a v a i l a b l e t o e a c h o t h e r a l l O B L I G A T I O N S - r e l a t e d d o c u m e n t s , i n c l u d i n g f i n a n c i a l d a t a , d u r i n g t h e t e r m o f t h i s a g r e e m e n t . 3 8 . P A R T N E R S w i l l r e t a i n a l l O B L I G A T I O N S = r e l a t e d r e c o r d s f o r t h r e e ( 3 ) y e a r s a f t e r t h e . f i n a l v o u c h e r . 3 9 . P A R T N E R S h a v e t h e r i g h t t o a u d i t e a c h o t h e r i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d g o v e r n m e n t a l a u d i t s t a n d a r d s C A L T R A N S , t h e s t a t e a u d i t o r , F H W A , a n d R C T C w i l l h a v e a c c e s s t o a l l O B L I G A T I O N S - r e l a t e d r e c o r d s o f e a c h P A R T N E R , a n d a n y p a r t y h i r e d b y a P A R T N E R t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n O B L I G A T I O N S , f o r a u d i t , e x a m i n a t i o n , e x c e r p t , o r t r a n s c r i p t i o n . T h e e x a m i n a t i o n o f a n y r e c o r d s w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n t h e o f f i c e s a n d l o c a t i o n s w h e r e s a i d r e c o r d s a r e g e n e r a t e d a n d / o r s t o r e d a n d w i l l b e a c c o m p l i s h e d d u r i n g r e a s o n a b l e h o u r s o f o p e r a t i o n . T h e a u d i t i n g P A R T N E R w i l l b e p e r m i t t e d t o m a k e c o p i e s o f a n y O B L I G A T I O N S - r e l a t e d r e c o r d s n e e d e d f o r t h e a u d i t . T h e a u d i t e d P A R T N E R w i l l r e v i e w t h e d r a f t a u d i t , f i n d i n g s , a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s , a n d p r o v i d e w r i t t e n c o m m e n t s w i t h i n 3 0 c a l e n d a r d a y s o f r e c e i p t . U p o n c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e f i n a l a u d i t , P A R T N E R S h a v e 3 0 d a y s t o r e f u n d o r i n v o i c e a s n e c e s s a r y i n o r d e r t o s a t i s f y t h e o b l i g a t i o n o f t h e a u d i t . A n y a u d i t d i s p u t e n o t r e s o l v e d b y P A R T N E R S i s s u b j e c t t o d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n . A n y c o s t s a r i s i n g o u t o f t h e d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n p r o c e s s w i l l b e p a i d w i t h i n 3 0 c a l e n d a r d a y s o f t h e f i n a l a u d i t o r d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n f i n d i n g s . P A R T N E R S w i l l u n d e r g o a n a n n u a l a u d i t i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e S i n g l e A u d i t A c t o f O M B C i r c u l a r A - 1 3 3 . P A C T V e r s i o n 1 0 . 1 . 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 8 5 o f 2 2 1 0 2 District Agreement 08-1543 41. Any PARTNER that hires another party to participate in OBLIGATIONS will conduct a pre -award audit of that party in accordance with the Local Assistance Procedures Manual. 42. PARTNERS will not incur costs beyond the funding commitments in this agreement. If IMPLEMENTING AGENCY anticipates that funding for WORK will be insufficient to complete WORK, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY will promptly notify SPONSOR. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY has no obligation to perform WORK if funds to perform WORK are unavailable. 43. if WORK stops for any reason, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY will place all facilities impacted by WORK in a safe and operable condition acceptable to CALTRANS. 44. If WORK stops for any reason, each PARTNER will continue to implement all of its applicable commitments and conditions included in the PROJECT environmental documentation, permits, agreements, or approvals that are in effect at the time that WORK stops, as they apply to each PARTNER's responsibilities in this agreement, in order to keep PROJECT in environmental compliance until WORK resumes. 45. Each PARTNER accepts responsibility to complete the activities that it selected on the SCOPE SUMMARY. Activities marked with "N/A" on the SCOPE SUMMARY are not included in the scope of this agreement. Scope; Environmental Permits, Approvals and Agreements 46. Each PARTNER identified in the Environmental Permits table below accepts the responsibility to complete the assigned activities. Permit 404 USACOE Coordinate CALTRANS Environmental P`e.rmits, Prepare CALTRANS Obtain CALTRANS Implement CALTRANS Renew CALTRANS Amend CALTRANS 401 RWQCB NPDES S W RCB CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS FESA Section 7 USFWS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS FESA Section ]0 USFWS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS 1602 DFG CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 6 of 22 103 District Agreement 08-1543 Scope: Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) 47. CALTRANS is the CEQA lead agency for PROJECT. CALTRANS will determine the type of environmental documentation required and will cause that documentation to be prepared. 48. Any PARTNER involved in the preparation of CEQA environmental documentation will follow the CALTRANS STANDARDS that apply to the CEQA process including, but not limited to, the guidance provided in the Standard Environmental Reference available at www.dot.ca.gov/ser. 49. Pursuant to SAFETEA-L" U Section 6004 and/or 6005, CALTRANS is the NEPA lead agency for PROJECT. CALTRANS will assume responsibility for NEPA compliance and will prepare any needed NEPA environmental documentation or will cause that documentation to be prepared. 50. Any PARTNER involved in the preparation of NEPA environmental documentation will follow FHWA STANDARDS that apply to the NEPA process including, but not limited to, the guidance provided' in the FHWA Environmental Guidebook available at www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/index.htm. 51. CALTRANS will prepare the appropriate CEQA environmental documentation to meet CEQA requirements. 52. CALTRANS will prepare the appropriate NEPA environmental documentation to meet NEPA requirements. 53. Any PARTNER preparing any portion of the CEQA environmental documentation, including any studies and reports, will submit that portion of the documentation to the CEQA lead agency for review, comment, and approval at appropriate stages of development prior to public availability. 54. Any PARTNER preparing any portion of the NEPA environmental documentation (including, but not limited to, studies, reports, public notices, and public meeting materials, determinations, administrative drafts, and final environmental documents) will submit that portion of the documentation to CALTRANS for CALTRANS' review, comment, and approval prior to public availability. 55. CALTRANS will prepare, publicize, and circulate all CEQA-related public notices and will submit said notices to the CEQA lead agency for review, comment, and approval prior to publication and circulation. 56. CALTRANS will prepare, publicize, and circulate all NEPA-related public notices. CALTRANS will work with the appropriate federal agency to publish notices in the Federal Register. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 104 7 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 57. The CEQA lead agency will attend all CEQA-related public meetings. . 58. CALTRANS will plan, schedule, prepare materials for, and host all CEQA-related public meetings and will submit all materials to the CEQA lead agency for review; comment, and approval at least 10 working days prior to the public meeting date. 59. The NEPA lead agency will attend all NEPA-related public meetings. 60. CALTRANS will plan, schedule, prepare materials for, and host all NEPA-related public meetings. 61. If a PARTNER who is not the CEQA or NEPA lead agency holds a public meeting about PROJECT, that PARTNER must clearly state its role in PROJECT and the identity of the CEQA and NEPA lead agencies on all meeting publications. All meeting publications must also inform the attendees that public comments collected at the meetings are not part of the CEQA or NEPA public review process. That PARTNER will submit all meeting advertisements, agendas, exhibits, handouts, and materials to the appropriate lead agency for review, comment, and approval at least 10 working days prior to publication or use. If that PARTNER makes any changes to the materials, it will allow the appropriate lead agency to review, comment on, and approve those changes at least three (3) working days prior to the public meeting date. The CEQA lead agency maintains final editorial control with respect to text or graphics that could lead to public confusion over CEQA-related roles and responsibilities. The NEPA lead agency has final approval authority with respect to text or graphics that could lead to public confusion over NEPA-related roles and responsibilities. 62. The PARTNER preparing the environmental documentation, including thestudies and reports, will ensure that qualified personnel remain available to help resolve environmental issues and perform any necessary work to ensure that PROJECT remains in environmental compliance. COST Cost• General 63. The cost of any awards, judgments, or settlements generated by OBLIGATIONS is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 64. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, will pay all costs for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-1 found within the existing SHS right of way. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 8 of 22 105 District Agreement 08-1543 . 65. Independent of PROJECT, all costs for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-1 found within PROJECT limits and outside the existing SHS right of way will be the responsibility of the owner(s) of the parcel(s) where the HM-1 is located. 66. HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES costs related to HM-2 are CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT and CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL costs. 67. The cost to comply with and implement the commitments set forth in the environmental documentation is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 68. The cost to ensure that PROJECT remains in environmental compliance is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 69. The cost of any legal challenges to the CEQA or NEPA environmental process or documentation is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 70. Independent of OBLIGATIONS COST, CALTRANS will fund the cost of its own IQA for WORK done within existing or proposed future SHS right of way. 71. Independent of OBLIGATIONS COST, RCTC will fund the cost of its own IQA for WORK done outside existing or proposed future SHS right of way. 72. CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits to PARTNERS, their contractors, consultants and agents, at no cost. 73. Fines, interest, or penalties levied against a PARTNER will be paid, independent of OBLIGATIONS COST, by the PARTNER whose actions or lack of action caused the levy. 74. Travel, per diem, and third -party contract reimbursements are an OBLIGATIONS COST only after those hired by PARTNERS to participate in OBLIGATIONS incur and pay those costs. Payments for travel and per diem will not exceed the rates paid rank and file state employees under current California Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) rules current at the effective date of this agreement. If RCTC invoices for rates in excess of DPA rates, RCTC will fund the cost difference and reimburse CAL TRANS for any overpayment. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 9 of 22 106 District Agreement 08-1543 75. The cost of any engineering support performed by CALTRANS includes all direct and applicable indirect costs. CALTRANS calculates indirect costs based solely on the type. of funds used to pay support costs. State and federal funds are subject to the current Program Functional Rate. Local funds are subject to the current Program Functional Rate and the current Administration Rate. The Program Functional Rate and the Administration Rate are adjusted periodically. 76. If CALTRANS reimburses RCTC for any costs later determined to be unallowable, RCTC will reimburse those funds. 77. The cost to place PROJECT right of way in a safe and operable condition and meet all environmental commitments is an OBLIGATIONS cost. 78. Because IMPLEMENTING AGENCY is responsible for managing the scope, cost, and schedule of a project component, if there are insufficient funds available in this agreement to place the right of way in a safe and operable condition, the appropriate IMPLEMENTING AGENCY accepts responsibility to fund these activities until such time as PARTNERS amend this agreement. That IMPLEMENTING AGENCY may request reimbursement for these costs during the amendment process. 79. If there are insufficient funds in this agreement to implement applicable commitments and conditions included in the PROJECT•environmental documentation, permits, agreements, and/or approvals that are in effect at a time that WORK stops, each PARTNER implementing commitments or conditions accepts responsibility to fund these activities, as they apply to each PARTNER's responsibilities, until such time as PARTNERS amend this agreement. Each PARTNER may request reimbursement for these costs during the amendment process. 80. CALTRANS will administer all federal subvention funds identified on the FUNDING SUMMARY. Cost: Environmental Permits, Approvals and Agreements 81. The cost of coordinating, obtaining, complying with, implementing, and if necessary renewing and amending resource agency permits, agreements, and/or approvals is an OBLIGATIONS COST. Cost: Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 10 of 22 107 District Agreement 08-1543 82. The cost to prepare, publicize, and circulate all CEQA and NEPA-related public notices is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 83. The cost to plan, schedule, prepare, materials for, and host all CEQA and NEPA-related public hearings is an OBLIGATIONS COST. SCHEDULE 84. PARTNERS will manage the schedule for OBLIGATIONS through the work plan included in the PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN. GENERAL CONDITIONS 85. PARTNERS understand that this agreement is in accordance with and governed by the - Constitution and laws of the State of California. This agreement will be enforceable in the State of California. Any PARTNER initiating. legal action arising from this agreement will file and maintain that legal action in the Superior Court of the county in which the CALTRANS district office that is signatory to this agreement resides, or in the Superior Court. of the county in which PROJECT is physically located. 86. All OBLIGATIONS of CALTRANS under the terms of this agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the Legislature, the State Budget Act authority, and the. allocation of funds by the California Transportation Commission. 87. Any PARTNER performing 1QA does so for its own benefit. No one can assign liability to that PARTNER due to its IQA activities. 88. Neither RCTC nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS and/or its agents under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon CALTRANS under this agreement. It is understood and agreed that CALTRANS will fully defend, indemnify, and save_ harmless RCTC and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS and/or its agents under this agreement. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 108 11 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 89. Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RCTC and/or its agents under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon RCTC under this agreement. It is understood and agreed that RCTC will fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless CALTRANS and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RCTC and/or its agents under this agreement. 90. PARTNERS do not intend this agreement to create a third party beneficiary or define duties, obligations, or rights in parties not signatory to this agreement. PARTNERS do not intend this agreement to affect their legal liability by imposing any standard of care for fulfilling OBLIGATIONS different from the standards imposed by law. 91. PARTNERS will not assign or attempt to assign OBLIGATIONS to parties not signatory to this agreement. 92. PARTNERS will not interpret any ambiguity contained in this agreement against each other. PARTNERS waive the provisions of California Civil Code section 1654. 93. A waiver of a PARTNER's performance under this agreement will not constitute a continuous waiver of any other provision. An amendment made to any article or section of this agreement does not constitute an amendment to or negate all other articles or sections of this agreement. 94. A delay or omission to exercise a right or power due to a default does not negate the use of that right or power in the future when deemed necessary. 95. If any PARTNER defaults in its OBLIGATIONS, a non -defaulting PARTNER will request in writing that the default be remedied within 30 calendar days. if the defaulting PARTNER fails to do so, the non -defaulting PARTNER may initiate dispute resolution. 96. PARTNERS will first attempt to resolve agreement disputes at the PROJECT team level. If they cannot resolve the dispute themselves, the CALTRANS district director and the executive officer of RCTC will attempt to negotiate a resolution. if PARTNERS do not reach a resolution, PARTNERS' legal counsel will initiate mediation. PARTNERS agree to participate in mediation in good faith and will share equally in its costs. Neither the dispute nor the mediation process relieves PARTNERS from full and timely performance of OBLIGATIONS in accordance with the terms of this agreement. However, if any PARTNER stops fulfilling OBLIGATIONS, any other PARTNER may seek equitable relief to ensure that OBLIGATIONS continue. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 12 of 22 109 District Agreement 08-1543 Except for equitable. relief, no PARTNER may file a civil complaint until after mediation, or 45 calendar days after filing the written mediation request, whichever occurs first. PARTNERS will file any civil complaints in the Superior Court of the county in which the CALTRANS district office signatory to this agreement resides. The prevailing PARTNER will be entitled to an award of all costs, fees, and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees as a result of litigating a dispute under this agreement or to enforce the provisions of this article including equitable relief. 97. PARTNERS maintain the ability to pursue alternative or additional dispute remedies if a previously selected remedy does not achieve resolution. 98. if any provisions in this agreement are deemed to be, or are in fact, illegal, inoperative, or unenforceable, those provisions do not render any or all other agreement provisions invalid, inoperative, or unenforceable, and PARTNERS will automatically sever those provisions from this agreement. 99. PARTNERS intend this agreement to be their final expression and supersede any oral understanding or writings pertaining to OBLIGATIONS. 100. If during performance of WORK additional activities or environmental documentation is necessary to keep PROJECT in environmental compliance, PARTNERS will amend this agreement to include completion of those additional tasks. 101. PARTNERS will execute a formal written amendment if there are any changes to OBLIGATIONS. 102. This agreement will terminate upon OBLIGATION COMPLETION or an amendment to terminate this agreement, whichever occurs first. However, all indemnification, document retention, audit, claims, environmental commitment, legal challenge, and ownership articles will remain in effect until terminated or modified in writing by mutual agreement. 103. The following documents are attached to, and made an express part of this agreement: SCOPE SUMMARY, FUNDING SUMMARY. DEFINITIONS CALTRANS — The California Department of Transportation CALTRANS STANDARDS — CALTRANS policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the guidance provided in the Guide to Capital Project Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/guidance.htm. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 110 13 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) — The act (California Public Resources Code, sections 21000 et seq.) that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those significant impacts, if feasible. CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) — The general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CLOSURE STATEMENT — A document signed by PARTNERS that verifies the completion of all OBLIGATIONS included in this agreement and in all amendments to this agreement. COST — The responsibility for cost responsibilities in this agreement can take one of three assignments: • OBLIGATIONS COST — A cost associated with fulfilling OBLIGATIONS that will be funded as part of this agreement. The responsibility is defined by the funding commitments in this agreement. • PROJECT COST — A cost associated with PROJECT that can be funded outside of OBLIGATIONS. A PROJECT COST may not necessarily be part of this agreement. This responsibility is defined by the PARTNERS' funding commitments at the time the cost is incurred. • PARTNER COST— A cost that is the responsibility of a specific PARTNER, independent of PROJECT. FHWA — Federal Highway Administration FHWA STANDARDS — FHWA regulations, policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the guidance provided at www.fhwa.dot.gov/topics.htm. FUNDING PARTNER — A PARTNER that commits a defined dollar amount to fulfill OBLIGATIONS. Each FUNDING PARTNER accepts responsibility to provide the funds identified on the FUNDING SUMMARY under its name. FUNDING SUMMARY — The table that designates an agreement's funding sources, types of funds, and the PROJECT COMPONENT in which the funds are to be spent. Funds listed on the FUNDING SUMMARY are "not -to -exceed" amounts for each FUNDING PARTNER. GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) — Uniform minimum standards and guidelines for financial accounting and reporting issued. by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board that serve to achieve some level of standardization. See http://www.fasab.gov/accepted.html. HM-1 — Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law whether it is disturbed by PROJECT or not.. PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 14 of 22 111 District Agreement 08-1543 HM-2 Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law only if disturbed by PROJECT. HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES — Management activities related to either HM-1 or HM-2 including, without limitation, any necessary manifest requirements and disposal facility designations. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY — The PARTNER responsible for managing the scope, cost, and schedule of a PROJECT COMPONENT to ensure the completion of that component. IQA (Independent Quality Assurance) — Ensuring that IMPLEMENTING AGENCY's quality assurance activities result in WORK being developed in accordance with the applicable standards and within an established Quality Management Plan (QMP). IQA does not include any work necessary to actually develop or deliver WORK or any validation by verifying or rechecking work performed by another partner. NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) — The federal act that establishes a national policy for the environment and a process to disclose the adverse impacts of projects with a federal nexus. OBLIGATION COMPLETION — PARTNERS have fulfilled all OBLIGATIONS included in this agreement, and all amendmentsto this agreement, and have signed a COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CLOSURE STATEMENT. OBLIGATIONS — All responsibilities included in this agreement. OBLIGATIONS COST — See COST. OMB (Office of Management and Budget) — The federal office that oversees preparation of the federal budget and supervises its administration in Executive Branch agencies. PA&ED (Project Approval and Environmental Document) — See PROJECT COMPONENT. PARTNER — Any individual signatory party to this agreement. PARTNERS —The term that collectively references all of the signatory agencies to this agreement. This term only describes the relationship between these agencies to work together to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. It is not used in the traditional legal sense in which one PARTNER's individual actions legally bind the other partners. PROJECT = The undertaking to Adding eastbound truck climbing lane and westbound truck decending lane, and upgrading existing inside and outside shoulder to current standards on State Route 60 (SR-60) between Gilman Springs Road (PM 22.2) and Jack Rabbit Trail (PM 26.5) PROJECT COMPONENT — A distinct portion of the planning and project development process of a capital project as outlined in California Government Code, section 14529(b). PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 112 15 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 • PID (Project Initiation Document) - The activities required to deliver the project initiation document for PROJECT. • PA&ED (Project. Approval and Environmental Document) — The activities required to deliver the project approval and environmental documentation for PROJECT. • PS&E (Plans, Specifications, and Estimate) — The activities required to deliver the plans, specifications, and estimate for PROJECT. • R/W (Right of Way) SUPPORT —The activities required to obtain all property interests for PROJECT. • R/W (Right of Way) CAPITAL — The funds for acquisition of property rights for PROJECT. • CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT — The activities required for the administration, acceptance, and final documentation of the construction contract for PROJECT. CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL — The funds for the construction contract. PROJECT COST — See COST. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN — A group of documents used to guide a project's execution and control throughout that project's lifecycle. QMP (Quality Management Plan) — An integral part of the Project Management Plan that describes IMPLEMENTING AGENCY's quality policy and how it will be used. SAFETEA-LU — Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SCOPE SUMMARY — The attachment in which each PARTNER designates its commitment to specific scope activities within each PROJECT COMPONENT as outlined by the Guide to Capital Project Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/guidance.htm. SHS (State Highway System) — All highways, right of way, and related facilities acquired, laid out, constructed, improved, or maintained as a state highway pursuant to constitutional or legislative authorization. SPONSOR — Any PARTNER that accepts the responsibility to establish scope of PROJECT and the obligation to secure financial resources to fund PROJECT. SPONSOR is responsible for adjusting the PROJECT scope to match committed funds or securing additional funds to fully fund the PROJECT scope. If a PROJECT has more than one SPONSOR, funding adjustments will be made by percentage (as outlined in Responsibilities). Scope adjustments must be developed through the project development process and must be approved by CALTRANS as the owner/operator of the SHS. WORK - All scope activities included in this agreement. PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 CONTACT INFORMATION 16 of 22 113 District Agreement 08-1543 The information provided below indicates the primary contact data for each PARTNER to this agreement. PARTNERS will notify each other in writing of any personnel or location changes. Contact information changes do not require an amendment to this agreement. The primary agreement contact person for CALTRANS is: Rahguram Radhakrishnan, Project Manager 464 West 4th Street, 6th Floor San Bernardino, California 92401-1400 Office Phone: (909) 383-6288 Email: raghuram.radhakrishnan@dot.ca.gov The primary agreement contact person for RCTC is: Patricia Castillo, Capital Projects Program Manager 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 Office Phone: (951) 787-7141 Email: PCastillo@rctc.org PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 17 of 22 114 District Agreement 08-1543 SIGNATURES PARTNERS declare that: 1. Each PARTNER is an authorized legal entity under California state law. 2. Each PARTNER has the authority to enter into this agreement. 3. The people signing this agreement have the authority to do so on behalf of their public agencies. STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION APPROVED APPROVED By: Syed Raza By: Acting District 8 Director Anne Mayer Executive Director Date: CERTIFIED AS TO FUNDS: By: By: Lisa Pacheco Budget Manager Date: PACT Version 10.20110217 Date: Best, Best, and Krieger General Council Date: 18 of 22 115 08-RIV-60-22.2/26.5 EA:ON690 District Agreement 08-1543 Project Number 0800000537 SCOPE SUMMARY c o Q d 0 cn z J Q 0 re 100 Project Management X 2 160 Perform Preliminary Engineering Studies and Draft Project Report X 05 Updated Project information X 10 Engineering Studies X 15 Draft Project Report X 20 Engineering and Land Net Surveys X 30 Environmental Study Request (ESR) X 40 NEPA Delegation X 45 Base Maps and Plan Sheets for Project Report and Environmental Studies X 2 165 Perform Environmental Studies and Prepare Draft Environmental Document X -05 Environmental Scoping of Alternatives Identified for Studies in Project Initiation Document X 10 General Environmental Studies X 65 Paleontology(PIR/PER/PMP) X 15 Biological Studies X 20 Cultural Resource Studies X 05 Archaeological Survey X 05 Area of Potential Effects/Study Area Maps X 10 Native American Consultation X 15 Records and Literature Search X 20 Field Survey X 25 Archaeological Survey Report X 99 Other Archaeological Survey Products X 10 Extended Phase I Archaeological Studies X 05 Native American Consultation X 10 Extended Phase 1 Proposal X 15 Extended Phase I Field Investigation X 20 Extended Phase I Materials Analysis X 25 Extended Phase I Report X 99 Other Phase I Archaeological Study Products X 15 Phase II Archaeological Studies X 05 Native American Consultation X 10 Phase it Proposal X 15 Phase II Field Investigation X 20 Phase II Materials Analysis X 25 Phase II Report X PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 19 of 22 116 District Agreement 08-1543 99 Other Phase II Archaeological Study Products X 20 Historical and Architectural Resource Studies X 05 Preliminary Area of Potential Effects/Study Area Maps for Architecture X 10 Historic Resources Evaluation Report - Archaeology X 15 Historic Resource Evaluation Report - Architecture (HRER) X 20 Bridge Evaluation X 99 Other Historical and Architectural Resource Study Products X 25 Cultural Resource Compliance Consultation Documents X 05 Final Area of Potential Effects/Study Area Maps X 10 PRC 5024.5 Consultation X 15 Historic Property Survey ReporUHistoric Resources Compliance Report X 20 Finding of Effect X 25 Archaeological Data Recovery Plan/Treatment Plan X 30 Memorandum of Agreement X 99 Other Cultural Resources Compliance Consultation Products X 25 Draft Environmental Document or Categorical Exemption/Exclusion X 10 Section 4(F) Evaluation X 20 Environmental Quality Control and Other Reviews X 25 Approval to Circulate Resolution X 30 Environmental Coordination X 99 Other Draft Environmental Document Products X 30 NEPA Delegation X 2 170 Permits, Agreements, and Route Adoptions during PAGED component X 05 Required permits X 15 Railroad Agreements X 20 Freeway Agreements X 25 Agreement for Material Sites X 30 Executed Maintenance Agreement X 40 Route Adoptions X 45 MOU From Tribal Employment Rights Office (TERO) X 55 NEPA Delegation X 2 175 Circulate Draft Environmental Document and Select Preferred Project Alternative Identification X 05 DED Circulation X 10 Public Meeting X 10 Public Hearing X 15 Public Comment Responses and Correspondence X 20 Project Preferred Alternative X 25 NEPA Delegation X 2 180 Prepare and Approve Project Report and Final Environmental Document X 05 Final Project Report X 10 Final Environmental Document X 05 Approved Final Environmental Document X 05 Draft Final Environmental Document Review X 10 Revised Draft Final Environmental Document X PACT Version 10.20110217 117 20 of 22 " D i s t r i c t A g r e e m e n t 0 8 - 1 5 4 3 1 5 S e c t i o n 4 ( F ) E v a l u a t i o n X 2 0 F i n d i n g s X 2 5 S t a t e m e n t o f O v e r r i d i n g C o n s i d e r a t i o n s X 3 0 C E Q A C e r t i f i c a t i o n X 4 0 S e c t i o n 1 0 6 C o n s u l t a t i o n a n d M O A X 4 5 S e c t i o n 7 C o n s u l t a t i o n X 5 0 F i n a l S e c t i o n 4 ( F ) S t a t e m e n t X 5 5 F l o o d p l a i n O n l y P r a c t i c a b l e A l t e r n a t i v e F i n d i n g X 6 0 W e t l a n d s O n l y P r a c t i c a b l e A l t e r n a t i v e F i n d i n g X 6 5 S e c t i o n 4 0 4 C o m p l i a n c e X 7 0 M i t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s X 1 0 P u b l i c D i s t r i b u t i o n o f F i n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l D o c u m e n t a n d R e s p o n d T o C o m m e n t s X 1 5 F i n a l R i g h t o f W a y R e l o c a t i o n I m p a c t D o c u m e n t X 9 9 O t h e r F i n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l D o c u m e n t P r o d u c t s X 1 5 C o m p l e t e d E n v i r o n m e n t a l D o c u m e n t X 0 5 R e c o r d o f D e c i s i o n ( N E P A ) X 1 0 N o t i c e o f D e t e r m i n a t i o n ( C E Q A ) X 2 0 E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o m m i t m e n t s R e c o r d X 9 9 O t h e r C o m p l e t e d E n v i r o n m e n t a l D o c u m e n t P r o d u c t s X 2 0 N E P A D e l e g a t i o n X P A C T V e r s i o n 1 0 . 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 7 2 1 O f 2 2 FUNDING SUMMARY STATE CALTRANS SHOPP $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Subtotals by Component $5,006,000 $5,006,000 $5,006,000 344,788 • 08-R IV-60-22.2/26.5 EA: ON690 District Agreement 08-1543 Project Number 0800000537 Funds utilization will be based on a percentage split of 40% CMAQ and 60%, up to a maximum of $2 Million for SHOPP funds.. The SPONSOR is responsible for any additional funding needs. PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 22 of 22 119 AGENDA ITEM 8L. RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Technical Advisory Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: City of Corona Funding Request for Foothill Parkway TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve programming $7 million of Western County's 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA) funds as local match to $7 million of Proposition 1 B State -Local Partnership Program (SLPP) formula funds for the city of Corona's (Corona) Foothill Parkway westerly extension project; 2) Submit the Foothill Parkway project nomination forms for SLPP funding of $7 million to the California Transportation Commission; 3) Approve Agreement No. 1 2-72-093-00 with Corona to program $7 million in MARA funds; 4) Approve reprogramming approximately $7 million of TUMF regional arterial funds from Foothill Parkway right of way phase to the construction phase; 5) Approve Agreement No. 06-72-540-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 06-72-540-00, with Corona to reflect the reprogramming of right of way savings to construction; and 6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements. BACKGROUND INFORMATION; Corona's Foothill Parkway project is included in the Commission's Western County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial program. The project is concluding its right of way phase, and Corona is now requesting construction funding in the amount of $14 million. The TUMF regional arterial program identifies a total of $7..2 million available for the construction phase of this project. However, all available TUMF regional arterial funds have been fully programmed. Agenda Item 8L 120 Earlier this year, Corona staff notified Commission staff that the Foothill Parkway project would be ready for construction at the end of the calendar year. At the April 2012 Commission meeting, the Commission approved Foothill. Parkway as a candidate project for SLPP formula funds. SLPP formula funds can only be used for construction and are required to be matched by county half -cent transportation sales tax revenues, or Measure A in Riverside County. Staff recommends funding the $14 million needed to complete the funding of Foothill Parkway with $7 million of SLPP formula funds matched with $7 million of MARA funds. The city of Corona's local contribution, as required by the TUMF agreement, is $2.5 million, and approximately $7 million in savings from the right of way phase is recommended to be reprogrammed to construction. The right of way savings amount will be finalized upon the completion of right of way acquisition. The reprogramming of right of way savings to the construction phase and MARA funds would replace the TUMF regional arterial funds that were originally identified for the construction phase. MARA funds are part of the 2009 Measure A specifically identified for regional arterials such as those identified on the TUMF network. The Commission previously programmed $2 million of MARA funds. To date, MARA accumulated revenues available total approximately $20 million: The programming of MARA funds for Corona's Foothill Parkway project is consistent with the Commission's direction to review all available fund sources for Western County TUMF regional. arterial projects previously approved by the Commission that are ready for construction. Financial Information Yes FY 2012/13 $2,500,000 In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2013/14 Amount: $4,500,000 Source of 2009 Measure A Western County No Funds: Regional Arterials Budget Adjustment: N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 665102 81301 266.72 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Pai,davi � Date: 05/10/12 Attachment: City of Corona Request for Construction funding - Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project Agenda Item 8L 121 (951) 736-2266 (951) 279-3627 (FAX) Kip.Field@ci.corona.ca.us May 1, 2012 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 400 SOUTH VICENTIA AVENUE, P.Q. BOX 940, CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92879-0940 CITY HALL - ON LINE ALL THE TIME (http://www.discovercorona.com) Anne Mayer, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92502 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONSTRUCTION FUNDING - FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION PROJECT 4'04 Dear Ms. .yes: The Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project is nearly ready for construction and the City of Corona is requesting the assistance of RCTC to help secure the unfunded construction cost balance. Foothill Parkway is a TUMF regional arterial of critical importance to the City of Corona and the region. The City has been vigorously working on this project for the past several years. The Environmental Impact Report was completed and adopted on February 4, 2009, and the design is complete. The City is in the process of finalizing the necessary right-of-way acquisitions. If all funding were in place, the City could begin construction by the end of 2012. Based on our discussion with your staff, we were informed that State and Local Partnership Program funds (SLPP) and matching Measure "A" funds are potentially available for allocation to this project. The total construction cost is estimated at approximately $31 million, including construction support. Of the original $17.282 million TUMF allocation, $10 million has been appropriated to right-of-way acquisition, and $7.282 remains allocated, but not appropriated, to construction. We understand that any further appropriation of TUMF funds would have to be discussed with the Regional Public Works Committee. 122 It is anticipated that the City will have a fund balance of approximately $7 million at the completion of right -of --way acquisition, which could be utilized for the construction phase. In addition to the City's significant contribution of funds to the design and environmental phases, Corona's local contribution match for the construction is $2.518 million per the agreement. In order to construct the project as currently designed, the City of Corona is in need of an additional $14 million, provided that the remaining allocated TUMF regional funds are appropriated to the project. We look forward to working with RCTC on this request, and thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, /4 D.2_(;)" Kip D. Field, P.E. Public Works Director Cc: Karen Spiegel Shirley Medina Clint Herrera 123 AGENDA ITEM 8M " " R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N D A T E : J u n e 7 , 2 0 1 2 T O : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n F R O M : C i t i z e n s A d v i s o r y C o m m i t t e e / S o c i a l S e r v i c e s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n A d v i s o r y C o u n c i l J o s e f i n a C l e m e n t e , T r a n s i t M a n a g e r T H R O U G H : A n n e M a y e r , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r S U B J E C T : F i s c a l Y e a r 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 F i s c a l Y e a r 2 0 1 4 / 1 5 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n s C I T I Z E N S A D V I S O R Y C O M M I T T E E / S O C I A L S E R V I C E S T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A D V I S O R Y C O U N C I L A N D S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o r e v i e w a n d a p p r o v e , i n c o n c e p t , t h e F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 - F Y 2 0 1 4 / 1 5 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n s ( S R T P s ) f o r t h e c i t i e s o f B a n n i n g , B e a u m o n t , C o r o n a , R i v e r s i d e , P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( P V V T A ) , R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( R T A ) , S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y ( S u n L i n e ) , a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m , a s p r e s e n t e d . B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N : T h e C o m m i s s i o n , u n d e r s t a t e l a w , i s t a s k e d w i t h t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o i d e n t i f y , a n a l y z e , a n d r e c o m m e n d p o t e n t i a l p r o d u c t i v i t y i m p r o v e m e n t s f o r t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s . W h i l e r e v i e w i n g a n d a n a l y z i n g i n d i v i d u a l r o u t e p r o d u c t i v i t y r e m a i n s w i t h t h e t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s a n d t h e i r g o v e r n i n g b o a r d s , t h e C o m m i s s i o n h a s a f i d u c i a r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o e n s u r e t h a t t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s a r e u t i l i z i n g T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D e v e l o p m e n t A c t ( T D A ) f u n d s e f f i c i e n t l y a n d e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h t h e n e e d t o p r o v i d e h i g h q u a l i t y s e r v i c e . T h e S R T P s w e r e d e v e l o p e d t o m e e t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s P r o d u c t i v i t y I m p r o v e m e n t P r o g r a m ( P I P ) , w h i c h w a s a d o p t e d a s p a r t o f a c o m p r e h e n s i v e e f f o r t t o w o r k w i t h t h e c o u n t y ' s p u b l i c t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s t o m a i n t a i n f i n a n c i a l l y s u s t a i n a b l e t r a n s i t s y s t e m s t h a t m a x i m i z e p r o d u c t i v i t y a n d m o b i l i t y f o r r e s i d e n t s t h a t t r a v e l w i t h i n t h e r e g i o n . T h e S R T P s p r o v i d e a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f e a c h o p e r a t o r ' s p r o f i l e o f e x i s t i n g t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s a n d r i d e r s h i p , a n a n a l y s i s o f p o t e n t i a l t r a n s i t d e m a n d a n d p e r f o r m a n c e i n d i c a t o r s , a s w e l l a s a n a s s e s s m e n t o f o p e r a t i n g i m p r o v e m e n t s i n c l u d i n g c h a n g e s t o r o u t e s a n d s c h e d u l e s a n d c a p i t a l n e e d s f o r a p l a n n i n g p e r i o d o f t h r e e y e a r s . T h e S R T P p r o c e s s r e q u i r e s t h a t t r a n s i t o p e r a t o r s a d d r e s s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t h a t a r e m a d e b y r e g u l a r p e r f o r m a n c e a u d i t s . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e S R T P i s u s e d a s d o c u m e n t a t i o n t o s u p p o r t p r o j e c t s i n c l u d e d i n t h e r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n p r e p a r e d b y t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a A s s o c i a t i o n o f A g e n d a I t e m 8 M 1 2 4 Governments, the region's metropolitan planning organization, which also provides opportunities for Operators to be eligible for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grants to support operations and equipment needs. The Riverside County FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 SRTPs are comprised of plans that cover the county apportionment areas of Western Riverside, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. With a slight improvement in the economic outlook this coming fiscal year, the transit operators are focusing on initiating new enhancements in operating and capital improvements to meet the growing demand for transit services. This annual update aims to continue evaluating current transit service and performance measures to keep up with substantial increase in travel demand within the region as well as improving necessary access and mobility for the large segment of the county's elderly, disabled and lower -income populations. Staff is requesting that the SRTPs be approved in concept only, as requests for financial allocations will be made at the July Commission meeting. City of Banning The city of Banning (Banning) works closely with the city of Beaumont (Beaumont) to provide a seamless transit system for the residents of Banning, Beaumont, and the unincorporated areas of Cabazon, Cherry Valley, and the commercial area of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians reservation. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • Reinstate full Saturday and Sunday services on Routes 1, 5 and 6 with reduced headways; • In a cooperative effort with Beaumont, a comprehensive operational analysis (COA) of both cities of Banning and Beaumont will be conducted; • Purchase one fixed route coach bus for expansion and install auto display and enunciator equipment for fixed route fleet; and • Install six additional shelters and continue placement of bus stop signs to reduce number of flag stops. City of Beaumont Beaumont Transit provides both dial -a -ride and fixed route services and works closely with Banning to provide a seamless transit system in the Pass area. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • A COA study will be performed in a cooperative effort with Banning; • Increase service on current routes by adding additional buses at peak times and improve regional connectivity with San Bernardino County; • • 125 Agenda Item 8M " P u r c h a s e G P S s y s t e m f o r a l l v e h i c l e s c o m p a t i b l e w i t h B a n n i n g ' s s y s t e m t o t r a c k v e h i c l e l o c a t i o n s a n d i n s t a l l a d d i t i o n a l b u s s h e l t e r s a n d b e n c h e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e s e r v i c e a r e a ; " F i n a l i z e a s y s t e m w i d e m a p s h o w i n g a l l B e a u m o n t a n d B a n n i n g r o u t e s ; a n d " C o n t i n u e c o l l a b o r a t i v e e f f o r t s w i t h B a n n i n g t o i m p r o v e c o o r d i n a t i o n o f r o u t e s , s c h e d u l e s , p a s s e n g e r a m e n i t i e s , a n d f a r e s f o r s e a m l e s s t r a n s i t s e r v i c e i n t h e P a s s a r e a . C i t y o f C o r o n a T h e c i t y o f C o r o n a ( C o r o n a ) o p e r a t e s a f i x e d r o u t e s y s t e m k n o w n a s t h e C o r o n a C r u i s e r a n d a g e n e r a l p u b l i c d i a l - a - r i d e p r o g r a m . C o r o n a c l o s e l y c o o r d i n a t e s a l l t r a n s f e r s w i t h b o t h R T A a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s c o m m u t e r r a i l s e r v i c e s . P l a n n e d s e r v i c e s f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i n c l u d e : " P l a c e i n t o s e r v i c e t e n n e w r e p l a c e m e n t d i a l - a - r i d e b u s e s a n d o n e r e p l a c e m e n t C o r o n a C r u i s e r b u s ; " P u r c h a s e f o u r C o r o n a C r u i s e r b u s e s f o r r e p l a c e m e n t ; " P o t e n t i a l r e s t o r a t i o n o f s o m e S a t u r d a y t r i p s e l i m i n a t e d i n F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 w h e n t h e c i t y c u t u n p r o d u c t i v e s e r v i c e s t o r e d u c e c o s t ; " C o n d u c t a c o m p e t i t i v e b i d p r o c e s s t o s e l e c t t h e b e s t q u a l i f i e d c o n t r a c t o r t o o p e r a t e t h e c i t y t r a n s i t s e r v i c e . C u r r e n t c o n t r a c t w i l l e x p i r e i n O c t o b e r 2 0 1 2 ; a n d " P r o m o t e a l t e r n a t i v e m o d e s o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n b y i m p r o v i n g p e d e s t r i a n a n d b i c y c l e f a c i l i t i e s , i d e n t i f y n e w s i d e w a l k a n d i n - f i l l n e e d s a n d c o n t i n u e e x p a n s i o n o f b i c y c l e r o u t e n e t w o r k . C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l S e r v i c e s R i v e r s i d e S p e c i a l S e r v i c e s ( R S S ) o p e r a t e s a 2 4 - h o u r a d v a n c e r e s e r v a t i o n d i a l - a - r i d e f o r s e n i o r s a n d p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e R i v e r s i d e c i t y l i m i t s . T h e p r o g r a m s e r v e s a s a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o R T A ' s t r a n s i t s e r v i c e f o r s e n i o r s a n d p e r s o n s w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s u n a b l e t o u s e f i x e d r o u t e s e r v i c e . P l a n n e d s e r v i c e s f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i n c l u d e : " T h e n e w c o m p r e s s e d n a t u r a l g a s ( C N G ) v e h i c l e m a i n t e n a n c e f a c i l i t y w i l l b e o p e r a t i o n a l s t a r t i n g J u l y 2 0 1 2 . T h e f a c i l i t y i n c l u d e s s i x b a y s , a n o f f i c e , a n d a ' l a r g e s t o r a g e a r e a f o r p a r t s a n d e q u i p m e n t ; " I n s t a l l a d d i t i o n a l s l o w f i l l s t a t i o n s a t t h e R i v e r s i d e C o r p o r a t i o n Y a r d t o m e e t f u e l i n g d e m a n d ; " P u r c h a s e e i g h t p a r a t r a n s i t v e h i c l e s f o r r e p l a c e m e n t u s i n g f e d e r a l 5 3 0 7 a n d P r o p o s i t i o n 1 B g r a n t f u n d s ; a n d E x p a n d a n d m o d e r n i z e t h e o p e r a t i o n s f a c i l i t y t o i n c l u d e a l a r g e r d i s p a t c h c e n t e r a n d a s e p a r a t e c o n f e r e n c e r o o m . 1 2 6 A g e n d a I t e m 8 M Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency The PVVTA provides fixed route and a transportation reimbursement program for individuals who cannot ride the public bus system. The fixed route can deviate up to three-quarters of a mile away from the actual fixed route. Service is provided within the city of Blythe and surrounding unincorporated county areas in the Palo Verde Valley. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • Modify Blue Route 1 to add service to the new shopping center and to the Baldwin Senior Apartments and Casa Encinas every other scheduled hour; • Route 2 will provide extended route to the Palo Verde College only when school is open and continue the additional round trip on Route 3 to the California State Prisons; • Green Route 4 scheduled service will be reduced to 3 trips daily with timed transfers to other routes in the system; • Implement the PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride, a demand response service to address special times when community events require general public service that are not available on the existing fixed route system; and • Continue upgrade completion of the newly purchased transit facility. Riverside Transit Agency RTA provides local, intercity, and regional transportation services. As the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) for western Riverside County, it is responsible for coordinating transit services throughout the service area, providing driver training and assistance with grant applications. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: Update RTA's three-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and continue the procurement process for 85 heavy duty vehicles and paratransit vehicles for replacement; Conduct a COA study to review existing operational services and provide a strategic plan for service enhancements; No major service modifications in FY 2012/13 but additional vehicles will be deployed on Routes 1, 16 and 19. Service changes are planned in FY 2014 and 2015 to improve connectivity and meet ridership demand; Implement the county employee shuttle service (Route 54) for a full year and discontinue the UC-Riverside Bear Runner service (Route 53) due to low ridership; and Increase operating budget by approximately 7 percent over FY 201 1 /12 budget. • 127 Agenda Item 8M " " S u n L i n e T r a n s i t A g e n c y S u n L i n e i s t h e C T S A f o r C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y a n d i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r c o o r d i n a t i n g t r a n s i t s e r v i c e s i n t h e v a l l e y , w h i c h c o v e r s a s e r v i c e a r e a o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 , 1 2 0 s q u a r e m i l e s . S u n L i n e p r o v i d e s b o t h l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e s w i t h 1 1 f i x e d r o u t e s a n d d e m a n d r e s p o n s e d i a l - a - r i d e s e r v i c e s k n o w n a s S u n D i a l . P l a n n e d s e r v i c e s f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i n c l u d e : " I m p l e m e n t t h e n e w P a l m D e s e r t R i v e r s i d e C o m m u t e r E x p r e s s b u s s e r v i c e ; " F i n a l i z e p l a n t o e n h a n c e p e r f o r m a n c e o f P a l m D e s e r t L i n e 5 3 ; " C o m m e n c e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e n e w a d m i n i s t r a t i v e b u i l d i n g p r o j e c t i n T h o u s a n d P a l m s ; " I m p l e m e n t L i n e 8 1 i n t h e c i t y o f I n d i o t o o f f e r t r a n s i t s e r v i c e t o n e w r e t a i l a n d c o m m e r c i a l s t o r e s n o r t h o f I - 1 0 a n d r e a l i g n L i n e 8 0 b a s e d o n c o m m e n t s r e c e i v e d f r o m t h e c i t y t o p r o v i d e s e r v i c e t o u n s e r v e d a r e a s ; a n d " C o n t i n u e t h e T a x i V o u c h e r p r o g r a m i n C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y . C o m m i s s i o n ' s C o m m u t e r R a i l P r o g r a m T h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a R e g i o n a l R a i l A u t h o r i t y o p e r a t e s s e v e n c o m m u t e r r a i l l i n e s w i t h 5 2 l o c o m o t i v e s a n d 1 5 0 c o m m u t e r r a i l c a r s . T h r e e r o u t e s , t h e R i v e r s i d e t o L o s A n g e l e s L i n e , t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e t o O r a n g e C o u n t y L i n e ( I E O C ) , a n d t h e R i v e r s i d e t o L o s A n g e l e s v i a F u l l e r t o n L i n e ( 9 1 L i n e ) d i r e c t l y s e r v e w e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y w i t h c o n n e c t i n g s e r v i c e a v a i l a b l e t o d e s t i n a t i o n s o n t h e o t h e r f o u r M e t r o l i n k l i n e s . P l a n n e d s e r v i c e s f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i n c l u d e : " T h e F Y 1 2 / 1 3 o p e r a t i n g c o s t r e f l e c t s a $ 4 . 7 m i l l i o n c o s t i n c r e a s e d u e t o r i s i n g f u e l c o s t ; " P o t e n t i a l s e r v i c e i n c r e a s e o n 9 1 L i n e ; " I n c r e a s e s e r v i c e w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f a f i f t h I E O C L i n e w e e k d a y t r a i n a n d a d d i t i o n a l y e a r - r o u n d I E O C w e e k e n d s e r v i c e ; a n d . " C o n t i n u e d i s c u s s i o n w i t h M e t r o l i n k B o a r d a n d J P A p a r t n e r a g e n c i e s f o r t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a f a r e i n c r e a s e . A t t a c h m e n t s : F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 - F Y 2 0 1 4 / 1 5 O p e r a t o r S R T P s ( 7 ) P o s t e d o n C o m m i s s i o n W e b s i t e A g e n d a I t e m 8 M 1 2 8 PASSTRANSIT City of Banning/Beaumont SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents CHAPTER 1 - SYSTEM OVERVIEW 3 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS 4 RIDERSHIP DEMOGRAPHICS 5 FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT SERVICES 7 PARATRANSIT SERVICES 7 REGIONAL EXPRESS BUS SERVICE 8 FARE STRUCTURE 8 FLEET CHARACTERISTICS 10 FACILITIES 10 CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 11 FIXED ROUTE SERVICE 11 DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE 13 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 13 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS 14 MAJOR TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH 15 EQUIPMENT, PASSENGER AMENITIES AND FACILITY NEEDS 16 CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 17 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES 17 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTION 17 CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 19 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 19 FUNDING PLANS TO SUPPORT PROPOSED OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROGRAM 19 REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS 19 2 CHAPTER 1 - SYSTEM OVERVIEW The Pass Transit System is the result of a cooperative effort between the City of Banning (Banning Municipal Transit System) and the City of Beaumont (Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency). The Pass Transit System consists of two independent, but well coordinated, transit systems. The coordinated service area of Pass Transit includes the cities of Banning, Beaumont and Calimesa, the unincorporated areas of Cabazon and Cherry Valley, and the commercial area of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians Reservation. Both fixed route and dial -a -ride services are provided throughout the service area. There are three major thoroughfares passing through the Pass Area including Interstate 10, State Highway 60, and Route 79. Major employers within the area include the Casino Morongo, Lowe's Distribution Center, Beaumont and Banning Unified School Districts, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, 2nd Street Marketplace which includes the WalMart Supercenter, Desert Hills Premium Outlets, and several manufacturing companies. Pass Transit was created as a combined effort between Banning Transit System and Beaumont Transit System started in November 2004. Routes 1 and 2 were modified from the previous Banning Transit System Cabazon Route and Beaumont Transit System Route 1. Banning's Northern Route was renumbered Route 5 and Banning's Southern Route was renumbered Route 6. Beaumont's existing Routes 3 and 4 remained the same. A Memorandum of Understanding was developed to allow each city's Dial -A -Ride services to cross jurisdictional boundary lines so that a passenger did not have to transfer. A new joint Rider's Guide was developed, combined transfers and ten -ride ticket books were printed, buses and bus stop signs were decaled `Pass Transit' and fares were established to be the same for the convenience of riders. Within the service area of Pass Transit there are ten elementary schools, three middle schools, two intermediate schools and two high schools as well as one community day school, two alternative high schools, two adult education schools, one private school and Mt San Jacinto Community College Pass Campus. Four fifty-five plus communities and various mobile home parks are also served by Pass Transit, oftentimes providing a vital link to necessary medical services at the San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, as well as Beaver Medical Group, Loma Linda Medical Offices and Rancho Paseo Medical Group. 3 It should be noted that this Short Range Transit Plan incorporates the elements of the Pass Area Transit Plan that addresses service within the system's service area. Although the majority of this plan will be a joint effort, tables and charts will be submitted individually based on the stats of each system. Even though the two transit service providers operate closely in providing a seamless service to the residents of the Pass Area, the transit agencies are separate entities. Nothing in this document is intended to indicate anything more than a cooperative effort between the two transit systems. The two cities meet regularly to discuss the future of Pass Transit and several options are being explored at this time. Population Profile and Demographic Projections The latest available statistics from the California Department of Finance show residential population within Beaumont and the entire Pass Transit System's service area had a 13% increase from year 2009 (32,500) to year 2010 (36,877). The unincorporated area of Cherry Valley had a population of 6,362 residents in 2010. In 2008 and 2010, Beaumont was named the second fastest growing city in the State of California with a 224% increase from 2000 to 2010. This coincides with Riverside County being the fastest growing county in the state in 2010 with a 42% increase over the year 2000. The 2010 census indicated that the Beaumont community is ethnically diverse with a makeup of: Caucasian (63%), Hispanic (40%), Black (6%), Asian and Pacific Islander (8%), and all other races (16%). Senior citizens (age 65+) make up 11 % of the population, indicating a potential for growth in the demand for Dial -A -Ride services and a slight growth in Fixed Route services. Youth (age 18 and under) also make up a substantial portion of the population (30%). The 2010 census showed the median household income within Beaumont was $34,254, well below the national average of $41,994. This indicates the potential of an exceptional need for transit services. However, in 2007, the average home price was $322,500 noting a high percentage of two -income families and a much higher median household income than reported at the 2000 census. This translates to less of a need for transit services today than in previous years on much of Beaumont's system. Finally, it is important to note that Beaumont's Route 2 stretches into Cabazon and the City of Banning, where 14% of households are below poverty level, according to the 2000 census, indicating the presence of a number of transit dependent individuals specifically on that route. The 2010 United States Censuel reported that Banning had a population of 29,603. The population density was 1,282 people per square mile (494.8/km2). The racial makeup of Banning was 19,164 (64.7%) White, 2,165 (7.3%) African American, 641 (2.2%) Native American, 1,549 (5.2%) Asian, 39 (0.1 %) Pacific Islander, 4,604 (15.6%) from other races, and 1,441 (4.9%) from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race was 12,181 persons (41.1 %). 4 The Census reported that 28,238 people (95.4% of the population) lived in households, 254 (0.9%) lived in non -institutionalized group quarters, and 1,111 (3.8%) were institutionalized. There were 10,838 households, out of which 3,083 (28.4%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 5,106 (47.1%) were opposite -sex married couples living together, 1,488 (13.7%) had a female householder with no husband present, 592 (5.5%) had a male householder with no wife present. There were 700 (6.5%) unmarried opposite -sex partnerships, and 75 (0.7%) same -sex married couples or partnerships. 3,092 households (28.5%) were made up of individuals and 2,085 (19.2%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.61. There were 7,186 families (66.3% of all households); the average family size was 3.19. The population was spread out with 6,777 people (22.9%) under the age of 18, 2,730 people (9.2%) aged 18 to 24, 6,048 people (20.4%) aged 25 to 44, 6,387 people (21.6%) aged 45 to 64, and 7,661 people (25.9%) who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 42.3 years. For every 100 females there were 93.4 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 90.7 males. With the median household income being $36,268, and the median family income being $41,585 there is a significant need for public transportation within the City of Banning. Ridership Demographics This section provides demographic information that shows our passenger profile including the gender, age, ethnicity, and income of the riders. Data available is from ridership surveys taken from 2010 to 2011 for Beaumont. The majority of riders are female (62%). Eleven percent (11 %) of the riders are under 19 years of age. Eighty percent (80%) of the riders are of working age (19 to 60). Finally, nine percent (9%) of riders are over 60. The ethnic distribution of riders shows that a majority are Hispanic or Black with 40% of the ridership being Caucasian. 5 Ridership Ethnicity Indian, 2% Asian, 1% Hispanic, 43% Ethnicity Other, 1% White, 40% Black, 12% Thirty-nine percent (39%) of riders are employed either full or part time and sixteen percent (16%) are students. Retirees make up nine percent (9%) of the ridership while the unemployed are fifteen percent (15%) of total ridership. Income levels of bus riders are low. About seventy-three percent (73%) make less than $20,000 per year. Bus riders also are transit dependent and seventy-six percent (76%) of them do not have a car available for the trip they were taking. Approximately one-half of our riders use transit to get to their place of employment. It should be noted that of the riders that do own a vehicle, thirty-three percent (33%) of those ride the bus because driving is too expensive. Ridership Household Income Ridership Household Income 2% 46% ■ Under$10,000 ■ $10,001-$19,999 1:1$20,000 - $29,999 ■ $30,000 - $39,999 ■ $40p00-$49,999 ■ $50,000 - $74,999 ■ $75,000+ 6 Ridership Employment Status Additional ridership statistics: • Seventy-six percent (76%) of riders do not own a car. • Ninety-eight percent (98%) of riders walk 4 or fewer blocks to the bus stop. • Twenty percent (20%) of riders said they were using the bus to go to school. • Eighty percent (80%) of the riders are of working age (19 to 60). • Nine percent (9%) of riders are over 60. • Thirty-seven percent (37%) ride at least five (5) days every week. Fixed Route Transit Services The Pass Transit System operates eleven fixed routes, one express route and one commuterlink. Routes 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 17 and CommuterLink 120 are operated by the Beaumont Transit System. Routes 1, 5, and 6 are operated by the Banning Transit System. Routes 3 through 6 operate on one -hour headway. Routes 1 and 2 complement each other offering two-hour headway throughout the commercial areas of Beaumont, Banning, Cabazon, and the Morongo commercial development. Routes 7, 9, 10 and 17 offer limited services in the mornings and afternoons. Route 11 offers limited services in the mornings. Commuterlink 120 offers on demand limited service to the city of Calimesa and the San Bernardino Metrolink station three times per day. Fixed route service hours are: Monday — Friday Saturday and Sunday 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Limited service (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) is provided on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday, Presidents' Day, Veterans' Day, and the day after Thanksgiving Day. No service is provided on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Paratransit Services Dial -A -Ride provides service to seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals certified for complementary paratransit service under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Service hours for the dial -a -ride service are: Elderly and Disabled without ADA certification Monday - Sunday 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. Persons with ADA Complementary Paratransit Certification 7 Monday - Friday 6.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Through a cooperative memorandum of understanding, Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride operated by the Beaumont Transit system will provide its residents with service in Banning and within a % mile boundary of Route 2 in Cabazon. Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride operated by the Banning Transit System will provide its residents with service in the city limits of Beaumont (excluding Cherry Valley). Limited service (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) is provided on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday, Presidents Day, Veteran's Day, and the day after Thanksgiving Day. No service is provided on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Regional Express Bus Service Pass Transit began operating regional service on a limited basis in March 2012 and anticipates a growth in that service in the future. Additionally, passengers can use Day Passes to transfer between the Pass Transit System fixed routes and the RTA Line 31 to Hemet and Line 35 to Moreno Valley. There is a latent demand for better connections into eastern Riverside and San Bernardino counties for medical and social services as well as westward to the Palm Desert area for employment purposes. We look forward to working with SunLine as they implement a connector route from the desert communities. Fare Structure The fare structure was adjusted in April 2012 for the Pass Transit System. The current fixed route fare is $1.15 /one-way trip for general passengers. Student passengers pay $1.00/one-way. The fare is $.65/one-way trip for senior citizens and persons with disabilities. A zone fare of $.25 exists for travel between Banning and Cabazon/Morongo Reservation service areas. (The route is twice the length of any other route in the system. The zone fare helps to recover operating costs.) Passengers under 46" in height pay $.25. Ten -ride ticket books are offered for $10.35 each; senior citizens and persons with disabilities can purchase the books at a reduced cost of $5.85/10-ride book. Day passes are sold for $3.00 each; senior citizens and persons with disabilities can purchase the passes for $1.80. Monthly passes are $36.00; youth are $25.00; senior citizens and persons with disabilities are $21.50 each. In addition to those passes, a 10 tripper pass is offered for both dial -a -ride and youth passengers at a rate of $18.00 and $10.00 respectively. 8 Pass Area Transit Fare Structure FIXED ROUTE Fare Categories FARES Bone Faye H [ Dravei+�ersexact Day Pass fare d# caa>aaE orarearse cnan. 10-Tripper Punch Pass wrhee9eebus arrives. 10-Ticket Bank Monthly Pass General $1.15 $3.00 IVA S 1 D.35 530.00 Youth girrauee 1-12) $1 _CC $3.0D $1 D_DD MA 525.O0 Senior {65*)" SAM $'.50 IVA 55.8E 521 80 Disabled" $.155 $l.BC. NIA $5.85 $21_50 Child (45'13e ar [Mall $.25 NiA IVA MA K."A ZonerDeviations $.25 NIA t;1A WA f3:A GO PaSS I RIDE FREE "1fyou plan triuse asenorre- disableddisoourhtedfarer the bus. You vrstako show proper You musk shorn pope' ID ea=h time you boa id ID to purchase discounted passesrt+cket. Have exact Fare ready whey Dues arrives. Dial -A -Ride FARES I Drivers. cannot make chaise. Fare Cahegories Base Fare I 10-Ride Punch Card Dneuliray Companion P-CA {w11_Ie_}" No Shaw Child $2 00 $3.00 FREE $18.011 NIA FREE NIA NIA Dial -A -Ride is a transportation service for ADA, disabled and active adukts over 55 }ears of age. Reservations axe required 24-hours in advance and may be made by calling (951) 769-M32. •+If you plan to use a pCA (Personal Care Aden- dant) free fare, you must show proper II} each time you board the bus, COMM1tTERfE]CPRESS FARES Hare exact Farr ready wrnen bus arrives. Drivers annoy make change. Fare Categories Cnrernu#er Express Fare Fare 11Ro.ute 81 !Route 1201 General Youth Wake 1-12) Senior {e•5+}" dsabled" Child $3.0U $200 $2.00 $aCC $2.00 $2.5D $2.O0 $2.00 $2.00 S2.i]D Commuter and Express rout are regiana,i transportation services for a8 passengers. Reservations are required 24-hours in advance and may be- made by calling (951) 769-B530. •+If you plan to use a senior or disabled dis- counted Fare, you must show proper ID each time you board the bus. You must also show proper ID to purchase discounted pass ticketr, *Express Route 8 to be eliminated 9 Fleet Characteristics Pass Transit operates thirteen fixed route vehicles (eight in revenue service and five in reserve). Nine of the vehicles are CNG-powered, two are diesel -powered, and two are gasoline powered. All are equipped with bicycle racks and ADA compliant with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. The transit system also operates four Dial -A -Ride vehicles (three in revenue service and one in reserve). All are gasoline -powered. Three of the four vehicles are ADA compliant with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. Between Banning and Beaumont, four new unleaded buses were purchased in the last year and are currently in service. Two CNG vehicles were purchased this year and are also in service. The CNG buses are fueled at fueling stations located at the Beaumont Unified School District's transportation yard and at the City of Banning corporate yard. The fueling stations are currently the only CNG stations in the Pass Area large enough to meet the transit system's demand. The remaining two diesel -powered buses will be replaced with CNG within the next month. Purchase orders have been issued and staff is awaiting delivery. Facilities Administrative services for Beaumont are provided by staff from various City of Beaumont departments with the majority of operations located at the Transit Services yard. Effective July 1, 2011, all customer service type functions, including bus passes, maps and schedules, and general transit information are performed at the following locations with extended service hours at two of the locations: Beaumont Civic Center Hours: Monday -Thursday Friday 8:00am to 5:00pm 8:00am-Noon Beaumont Police Dept. Hours: Monday -Friday 7:00am-7:00pm Saturday and Sunday 7:00am-Noon Community Recreation Center Hours: Sunday -Saturday 6:00am-8:00pm Responsibility for overall administration of the transit system is provided by the City Resources Director. Maintenance of the vehicles is provided by Transit staff. Banning Transit System functions as a department within the City and utilizes existing facilities. Transit Administrative staff is housed at the City's Community Center located 10 at 789 North San Gorgonio Avenue, where bus passes are sold, schedules are available and all ADA applications are processed. Dispatch and general telephone information is also provided at the transit office within the Community Center. Banning Transit Office Hours: Monday — Thursday 8:OOam to 6:OOpm Friday 8:OOam to 3:OOpm The maintenance, parking, fueling of the buses, and storage of bus stop amenities are performed at the City's Corporation Yard located at 176 East Lincoln Street. Maintenance of the vehicles is performed by the Public Works Department, Fleet Maintenance Division. CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE Systemwide ridership for FY 2012 was 316,161. Estimated ridership for FY 2013 is projected at 328,428. Fixed Route Service The Pass Transit System operates eight fixed routes, one express route, and one commuterlink. Routes 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 17 and CommuterLink 120 are operated by the Beaumont Transit System. Routes 1, 5, and 6 are operated by the Banning Transit System. Routes 3 through 6 operate on one -hour headway. Routes 1 and 2 complement each other offering two-hour headway throughout the commercial areas of Beaumont, Banning, Cabazon, and the Morongo commercial development. Routes 7, 9, and 10 offer limited services in the mornings and afternoons. Route 11 offers limited service in the mornings. Commuterlink 120 offers on -demand limited service three times per day to the city of Calimesa and the San Bernardino Metrolink station. Route 1- Banning to Cabazon This route operates on two-hour headway and is complemented by an overlap with Route 2 along 75% of the route. Route 1 is the only service to the remote Esperanza & Elm area of southeastern Cabazon. The route also provides service to the residential areas of Cabazon, James Venable Cabazon Community Center, Casino Morongo, Desert Hills Premium Outlets and Cabazon Outlets, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue in Banning, and the commercial areas along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue in Beaumont. Route 2- Beaumont to Cabazon This route operates on two-hour headway and is complemented by an overlap with Route 1 that reduces headway on 75% of the route to one hour. The route provides service to the residential area along the western portion of Beaumont, the commercial areas along 6th Street, Beaumont Avenue, Oak Valley Parkway and Highland Springs 11 Avenue in Beaumont, including the Rite -Aid, Wal-Mart Supercenter shopping center, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street in Banning, the Cabazon Community Center, Casino Morongo, and Desert Hills and Cabazon Outlet Malls. Route 3- Beaumont High to Wal-Mart This route operates on one -hour headway and serves the residential areas of Beaumont (north of 1-10 freeway). It also serves the commercial areas of Beaumont including the Oak Valley and Wal-Mart Supercenter shopping centers and Beaumont High School. In FY 09 Beaumont improved Route 3 by making the routing more direct, eliminating fixed route service to most of Cherry Valley in favor of deviated service on demand and by adding routing through the Sundance development. A tripper bus has been added to accommodate for passenger increase during peak times. Route 4- Downtown Wal-Mart This route operates on one -hour headway and serves downtown Beaumont and the residential areas of the city of Beaumont including a small portion south of Interstate 10. In FY 10-11, Beaumont improved Route 4 by simplifying some routing while maintaining neighborhood coverage. It was determined that the best way to maintain the coverage is through a one-way loop which is not the most effective routing option for transit. Route 4 continues to serve the commercial and industrial areas of Beaumont. This route interlines with Route 11. Route 5- Northern Banning This route operates on a 75 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas of the City of Banning that lie north of the 1-10 freeway, Nicolet Middle School, Hoffer Elementary School, Banning Public Library, Coombs Intermediate School, Hammering Elementary School and the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue. Route 6- Southern Banning The route operates on a 75 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas south of the 1-10 freeway and the MSJC Pass Campus, a small residential section north of Ramsey Street at the east end of the City of Banning, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue, Banning High School, Smith Correctional Facility, apartment complexes in the south, and the Banning Municipal Airport. Route 7- Tournament Hills & Fairway Canyon This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30am and 8:OOam and again between the hours of 3:OOpm and 5:30pm. The route services the Rite -Aid shopping center, the Oak Valley community, the westerly portion of Interstate 10 more commonly referred to as the Tournament Hills area, Cherry Valley, the high school and commercial areas. A second bus in service was added to meet the growing demand of passengers on this route, allowing buses stopping at certain time points approximately every 15 minutes. 12 Route 8- Express Route This route is to be eliminated for FY 2012/13. Route 9- Seneca Springs to Cherry Valley This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30am and 8:OOam and again between the hours of 3:OOpm and 4:OOpm. The route services the southerly portion of Interstate 10, Loma Linda Medical Center, the Seneca Springs community, downtown, the middle schools and the high school. A tripper bus service has been added to meet the growing demand of passengers on this route. Route 10- Beaumont High to Downtown Beaumont This route interlines with Route 3 and operates on a one -hour headway during the hours of 11:OOam — 12:OOpm and then again between the hours of 2:OOpm and 3:OOpm. The route services the high school, two middle schools, Sundance, the Civic Center, Three Rings Ranch, community recreation centers and downtown. The route provides a direct link to child care facilities in Beaumont. Route 11- Banning to Pennsylvania This route interlines with Route 4 and operates on three-quarter hour headway between 6:30am and 7:20am. This route services the westerly portion of Banning more commonly referred to as "Midway", downtown Beaumont, Oak Valley and Beaumont High School. Route 17- Tournament Hills to Fairway Canyon This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30am and 8:OOam and again between the hours of 3:OOpm and 3:45pm. The route services areas west of the 1-10 in an area known as Tournament Hills, Brookside Elementary, the high school and jr. high, Rite -Aid and Noble Creek Park. A tripper bus service has been added to meet the growing demand of passengers on this route. Route 120- Commuter Link This route operates on one -hour headway as a modified on -demand commuterlink to shuttle passengers directly to the San Bernardino Metrolink station from Wal-Mart in Beaumont. This route was introduced in March of 2012. Dial -A -Ride Service Dial -A -Ride operates on a reservation system. Passengers are asked to call at least 24-hours in advance to schedule a pick-up. Key Performance Indicators The Riverside County Transportation Commission has adopted a Productivity Improvement Plan (PIP) for the transit and commuter rail operators of Riverside County. The PIP sets forth efficiency and effectiveness standards that the transit operators are to meet. Progress towards these standards is reported quarterly to the Commission. 13 Below is a table of the operating performance indicators adopted in the PIP and this plan's projections for FY 2011/12. Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency FY 2011 FY 2012 %Increase/ FY 2013 Audited Projected Decrease Planned Performance Statistics Unlinked Passenger Trips Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger Mile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue Mile 168,776 179,905 7% 184,337 • $77.99 ' $80.03 3% F $87.31 17.45% .- 16.47% -6% 4 1Q.00% $6.03 $4.39 -27% r $6.92 ✓ $2.96 P. $2.18 -26% $6.88 $64.38' $55.00 -15%> $78.58 t- $4.46, $3.26 -27% $6.88 .. c r. 10.7 9.10 -15% 11.4 .74 .74 00/0 .99 Banning Transit System Banning Transit System FY 2011 FY 2012 %Increase/ FY 2013 Audited Estimated Decrease Projected Performance Statistics Unlinked Passenger Trips 128,244 136,256 6% 144,091 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours • $92.64 - $85.24 -8%� $85.40 Farebox Recovery Ratio u 9.90%P 10.88% 10% R 10.59% Subsidy per Passenger f $8.71 $8.25 -5% , $8.13 Subsidy per Passenger Mile • $3.41x $2.89 -15% $2.63 Subsidy per Revenue Hour r, $83.47' $75.86 -9%' $76.35 Subsidy per Revenue Mile $5.18 - $3.19 -38% $4.89 Passengers per Revenue Hour 9.6 10.3 7% 4 9.4 Passengers per Revenue Mile .6� .43 -28%k .60 Productivity Improvement Efforts Pass Area transit has made a significant effort to improve productivity in the last two fiscal years and will continue to do so in the future, as evident by our passenger increase. Such notable improvements include fiscal responsibility, increasing passenger fares to meet increased operational costs for transit services, more efficient 14 data compilation, and combining staffing assignments to reduce personnel overhead. Beaumont and Banning have both been working to increase student ridership for elementary through college -level students. Effective July 1, 2011, the Beaumont Pass Transit began offering customer service type functions at three locations including: Beaumont Civic Center, Beaumont Police Department, and the Community Recreation Center. With the addition of two locations to serve the needs of our customers and the added benefit of operating hours early in the morning, later in the evening and over the weekend, we anticipate more effective communication with our passengers and are hopeful that we will continue to grow and expand our system. The Community Services Director of Banning regularly visits the Banning Senior Center and Nutrition Site providing information on the Fixed Route and Dial -A -Ride and answering any questions or concerns that current and potential passengers may have. In order to meet the PIP staff will review all routes to make sure that service is warranted and will eliminate any unproductive areas. Analyzing all routes and monitoring them for unproductive service areas continues to be an ongoing activity. Pass Area Transit is currently putting out to bid a Request for Proposals for a Comprehensive Operations Analysis to increase productivity and get a more extensive demographical analysis so that routes can be adjusted to meet the population's needs. Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Major trip destinations include the high school and middle schools, MSJC Pass Campus, commercial areas along Beaumont Avenue, 6th Street, 2nd Street Marketplace, Oak Valley shopping center, Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue; the Super Wal- Mart transfer point; area elementary, intermediate and high schools; Desert Hills Outlet Malls, Cabazon Outlet Mall, and Casino Morongo; Beaver Medical and the Highland Springs medical offices adjacent to the San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital and thrift store; Riverside County Department of Public Social Services; Banning Mental Health and public health clinic; and H.E.L.P. In August 2009, the Beaumont Unified School District terminated all transportation services to both middle schools and the high school forcing students to find alternate transportation. All of the routes that specifically accommodate student passengers are at capacity. A tripper bus was added to Routes 3, 9, and 17 to accommodate the overflow of passengers that travel on that route. A second bus was recently added to Route 7 to offer more time points and faster service for those passengers. Beaumont Transit staff is currently working closely with Beaumont Unified School staff in anticipation of an increase in elementary -aged passengers, should the school district terminate busing all home to school students in August 2012. Should that occur, staff anticipates an increase in service by approximately four routes and over 250 passenger trips per day. 15 Providing service to major employers, including Stater Brothers, Duraplastics, Wal-Mart Supercenter, Lowe's Distribution Plant, and Home Depot, was anticipated to increase ridership. Ridership has increased to the Wal-Mart Supercenter. Future warehouse distribution centers are anticipated in the next two years as well as the Mid -County Justice Center, staff will monitor these developments closely and plan route changes in accordance with work hours. Ridership to Home Depot and the Oak Valley shopping center has not increased as anticipated. The service to these centers and its utilization will be part of an ongoing system evaluation and monitoring. Finally, expanded outreach efforts to elementary -aged passengers, senior citizen organizations, schools and major employers are included in the plan for FY 2013. Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs The system's fixed route buses are equipped with passenger -operated bicycle racks. All revenue service vehicles are equipped with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. Eight vehicles are equipped with seatbelts. Bus stops in commercial areas are equipped with benches. Kiosks have been installed at all bus stop signs. Waste containers are available at many of the commercial bus stops. Flag down stops are utilized in a few of the residential areas of Beaumont. Currently, Beaumont Transit has bus shelters located at five of the most utilized stops. Six more bus shelters are to be purchased and installed in May 2012 with solar lighting. Upgrades to the remaining shelters including new glass, new mesh steel panels and new paint were performed in the past year. In April 2012, Banning Transit replaced 13 current shelters with new shelters that have the added amenity of solar lighting. In addition, a new shelter was placed at the MSJC Pass Campus. Bus benches have been replaced throughout town and new schedule kiosks are being installed as well. All bus stop amenities and a new shop truck were purchased with STA capital funds during FY 2011/12. Also purchased during FY 2011/12 were digital security cameras for all buses in the fleet and the necessary viewing equipment. This project was funded through Prop 1 B Security Funds. This past month, staff entered into an agreement with a GIS consultant to design a system -wide map to include all routes in the Pass area. We anticipate completion including printing and distribution by June 2012. At the end of 2010, staff completed training and implementation on Google Transit, with the assistance of RCTC staff. All bus stops and times are accessible via the web on Google Transit. 16 CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION Recent Service Changes New Service Routes In FY 2012, a new Commuterlink route (Route 120) was created to service passengers traveling to and from the San Bernardino Metrolink station. Routes 3, 9 and 17 added tripper buses during peak times. An additional bus was added to Route 7 which has increased time points for passengers. Route 25, a shopper shuttle with a 30-minute headway servicing local businesses during the holiday season was in service for 30 days and was well -received by passengers. Staff anticipates making this a permanent route in July 2012. Route 121, a modified on -demand shuttle to and from the Loma Linda Veteran's Hospital is also being considered for FY 2013. Route 6 was expanded in 2011 to accommodate the need for service to the MSJC Pass Campus. Survey and planning studies are scheduled for fall of 2012 to assess the need for additional hours of operation for this route based on the projected growth of students traveling to and from the campus. Pass Area Transit also now offers Sunday service. Staff continually reviews existing routes for productivity and for needed improvement to service. Future changes to routes will include adding a bus to existing routes during peak times to accommodate the growing number of passengers in certain identified areas. Marketing Plans and Promotion Efforts have been made to market the Pass Transit System over the past year and will continue in the coming year. These efforts include purchasing advertising on a map of the San Gorgonio Pass Area, distribution of route maps through the utility bills, delivering route maps to the library, chamber of commerce, local businesses and shelters. Route maps have also been placed on all of the buses in map holders. This past month, staff entered into an agreement with a GIS consultant to design a system wide map to include all routes in the Pass area. We anticipate completion including printing and distribution by June 2012. Kiosks have been installed at all bus stop signs with current maps and time points included. A sub -committee of the Transportation Now Chapter was created in 2009 to address marketing efforts to students in the Pass Area. From that sub -committee, a co- sponsored event between Banning, Beaumont, RTA and the Mt. San Jacinto Community College took place in August to market college students and encourage them to ride mass transit to and from the community college. With that, Pass Transit 17 followed RTA's lead and allowed all GoPass holders to ride Pass Transit free. Staff will continue to support this effort in the coming year. During school orientation, staff met with students and parents to educate them on their transit options in the Pass Area. We have been invited back for the coming school year and look forward to the upcoming events. In Beaumont, a scholarship program was implemented in January 2010 after we were contacted by a local family and the school district seeking assistance in transporting two students from the Banning Midway area to Beaumont High School. Staff met with the family and agreed upon a series of transit related assignments to be performed and completed in exchange for monthly bus passes. From that, a committee was formed to set criteria, receive applications, and monitor the progress of the recipients. Council formally adopted the program for the FY 2012 school year. Finally, providing Banning Pass Transit and Dial -A -Ride information on the local television channel, staff appearances at Banning Unified School District Back to School Nights and Open Houses, flyers and posters placed throughout the city and outside areas (Beaumont and Cabazon) serviced by the transit system and newspaper ads can all be utilized to educate the public about the Banning Pass Transit and Dial -A -Ride services available. The following marketing efforts will be undertaken to promote ridership growth. 1. Continue outreach programs to schools and at community events. 2. Attend senior community meetings to provide information. 3. Participate in the Mt. San Jacinto Jr. College GO -PASS Program to encourage ridership of college students. 4. Enclose flyers with transit information in city utility bills. Both cities' websites at www.ci.banning.ca.us and www.ci.beaumont.ca.us provide basic Pass Transit route and schedule information. Additionally, a link to Google Transit is on the web page. Transit staff is currently working to make information about routes and services more accessible. Customers can submit comments, complaints, concerns and suggestions through the city website. 18 CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS Operating and Capital Budget Although the State reduction in funding has adversely impacted our operating budget, staff feels confident that all of the following will greatly improve our operations and we will be able to meet the budget limitations set by the State: • Continue to concentrate on marketing the youth in the Pass Area to increase ridership • Re -organize routes to better accommodate ridership and reduce overhead costs • Offer more information on system routes with extended customer service hours The majority of the capital improvement projects were completed in the last year with the purchase of six new buses. We will continue to aggressively complete the final projects in the next year. Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program Capital projects are funded through STA funds and Proposition 1 B grants for both Banning and Beaumont. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements The American with Disabilities Act of 1990 The Dial -A -Ride services provide ADA complementary paratransit service for the fixed route services. The system uses a self -certification process with professional verification. The Pass Area Transit has allowed RTA to certify its ADA passengers and work under the umbrella of RTA's ADA policy as a provider of ADA paratransit. Title VI The Pass Transit System does not utilize federal funds for operating expenses. As such, Title VI requirements do not currently apply to the transit system. Alternatively Fueled Vehicles (RCTC Policy) The Pass Transit System operates CNG-powered buses on multiple fixed -routes. The balance of the system's revenue service vehicles is diesel and gasoline -powered. Future vehicle purchases will be in compliance with the RCTC and SCAQMD policies regarding alternative fuel transit vehicles. CNG fueling stations are available in both cities which will assist with expanded fueling needs and fast fueling capability. STA Compliance Both Banning and Beaumont do not utilize State Transit Assistance (STA) funding for operating expenses. As such, compliance with the Public Utilities Commission requirement is not applicable. 19 BANNING TABLES ��E M = o m R i w r s i d e ( o n l y T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n B u s ( M o t o r b u s ) / D i r e c t l y O p e r a t e d T a b l e 1 - F l e e t I n v e n t o r y F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n C i t y o f B a n n i n g A v e r a g e L i f e t i m e # o f L i f e t o D a t e M i l e s P e r A c t i v e A c t i v e # o f L i f e t o D a t e V e h i c l e M i l e s V e h i c l e A s O f L i f t a n d F u e l V e h i c l e s C o n t i n g e n c y V e h i c l e M i l e s t h r o u g h Y e a r - T o - D a t e Y e a r M f g . M o d e l S e a t i n g R a m p V e h i c l e T y p e F Y V e h i c l e s P r i o r Y e a r E n d M a r c h ( e . g . , M a r c h ) B u i l t C o d e C o d e C a p a c i t y E q u i p p e d L e n g t h C o d e 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 2 0 0 9 C M D M a l i b u 5 1 H G 1 0 4 , 3 3 8 7 , 0 0 9 7 , 0 0 9 1 9 9 8 E D N T r a n s m a r k 3 3 2 3 5 C N 2 0 2 9 5 , 9 5 5 2 8 3 , 4 5 9 1 4 1 , 7 3 0 2 0 0 1 E D N T r a n s m a r k 3 3 1 3 5 C N 1 0 4 1 4 , 6 5 8 4 3 6 , 4 6 7 4 3 6 , 4 6 7 2 0 0 4 E D N T r a n s m a r k 3 3 2 3 5 C N 2 0 5 9 4 , 8 0 6 6 2 3 , 8 5 9 3 1 1 , 9 3 0 2 0 1 0 E D N X H F 3 1 2 3 4 C N 2 0 4 4 , 3 4 9 1 1 2 , 0 2 3 5 6 , 0 1 2 2 0 0 2 F R D R a n g e r 2 0 1 2 G A 1 0 5 0 , 8 2 4 5 7 , 8 4 3 5 7 , 8 4 3 2 0 0 3 F R D R a n g e r 2 0 1 2 G A 1 0 4 2 , 7 4 3 4 5 , 8 3 1 4 5 , 8 3 1 2 0 1 0 F R D R a n g e r 2 0 G A 1 0 6 , 7 0 4 1 3 , 2 8 5 1 3 , 2 8 5 T o t a l s : 1 4 1 8 1 1 0 1 , 4 5 4 , 3 7 7 1 , 5 7 9 , 7 7 6 1 4 3 , 6 1 6 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r T M P a g e I o f 5 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 2 ��E M = o m R i w r s i d e ( o n l y T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n D e m a n d R e s p o n s e / D i r e c t l y O p e r a t e d T a b l e 1 - F l e e t I n v e n t o r y F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n C i t y o f B a n n i n g A v e r a g e L i f e t i m e # o f L i f e t o D a t e M i l e s P e r A c t i v e A c t i v e # o f L i f e t o D a t e V e h i c l e M i l e s V e h i c l e A s O f L i f t a n d F u e l V e h i c l e s C o n t i n g e n c y V e h i c l e M i l e s t h r o u g h Y e a r - T o - D a t e Y e a r M f g . M o d e l S e a t i n g R a m p V e h i c l e T y p e F Y V e h i c l e s P r i o r Y e a r E n d M a r c h ( e . g . , M a r c h ) B u i l t C o d e C o d e C a p a c i t y E q u i p p e d L e n g t h C o d e 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 2 0 1 0 E B C A e r o t e c h 1 6 1 2 5 G A 1 0 1 8 , 8 3 0 2 4 , 6 4 0 2 4 , 6 4 0 2 0 1 0 E B C E D N 1 6 1 G A 1 0 2 0 , 3 7 7 3 0 , 5 7 9 3 0 , 5 7 9 2 0 0 1 E D N A e r o t e c h 1 2 1 2 5 G A 1 0 2 2 4 , 4 7 4 2 3 2 , 9 5 8 2 3 2 , 9 5 8 2 0 0 3 E D N A e r o t e c h 1 2 1 2 5 G A 1 0 2 0 9 , 0 9 3 2 1 4 , 9 7 7 2 1 4 , 9 7 7 2 0 0 8 7 7 7 F o r d 1 4 1 2 6 G A 1 0 5 0 , 6 8 1 5 5 , 6 0 3 5 5 , 6 0 3 T o t a l s : 7 0 5 5 0 5 2 3 , 4 5 5 5 5 8 , 7 5 7 1 1 1 , 7 5 1 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r T M P a g e 2 o f 5 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 2 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Banning -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 5 5 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,220,116 $1,240,257 $1,260,587 $843,489 $1,310,135 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $133,374 $122,797 $133,643 $91,770 $138,780 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,086,742 $1,117,460 $1,126,944 $751,719 $1,171,355 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 127,932 128,244 131,834 102,192 144,091 Passenger Miles 342,161 327,258 340,578 261,056 445,041 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 14,468.1 13,387.3 13,574.0 9,896.9 15,341.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 233,761.2 215,531.2 219,100.0 234,971.1 239,460.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 244,325.6 224,148.1 228,265.0 239,332.5 268,924.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $84.33 $92.64 $92.87 $85.23 $85.40 Farebox Recovery Ratio 10.93% 9.90% 10.60% 10.88% 10.59% Subsidy per Passenger $8.49 $8.71 $8.55 $7.36 $8.13 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.18 $3.41 $3.31 $2.88 $2.63 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $75.11 $83.47 $83.02 $75.96 $76.35 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.65 $5.18 $5.14 $3.20 $4.89 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 8.8 9.6 9.7 10.3 9.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.55 0.60 0.60 0.43 0.60 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Banning -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 3 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,106,023 $1,111,207 $1,111,327 $719,104 $1,156,076 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $124,985 $114,215 $122,843 $82,742 $127,180 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $981,038 $996,992 $988,484 $636,363 $1,028,896 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 118,394 120,018 121,989 95,389 134,005 Passenger Miles 307,824 297,645 282,095 236,565 405,091 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 12,774.0 11,934.0 11,295.0 8,906.0 12,766.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 199,700.2 186,568.2 175,595.0 215,061.1 196,746.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 205,519.6 191,831.1 181,460.0 217,848.5 202,486.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $86.58 $93.11 $98.39 $80.74 $90.56 Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.30% 10.28% 11.05% 11.51% 11.00% Subsidy per Passenger $8.29 $8.31 $8.10 $6.67 $7.68 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.19 $3.35 $3.50 $2.69 $2.54 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $76.80 $83.54 $87.52 $71.45 $80.60 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.91 $5.34 $5.63 $2.96 $5.23 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.3 10.1 10.8 10.7 10.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.59 0.64 0.69 0.44 0.68 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Banning-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 2 2 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $114,093 $129,050 $149,260 $124,385 $154,059 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $8,390 $8,582 $10,800 $9,029 $11,600 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $105,704 $120,468 $138,460 $115,356 $142,459 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 9,538 8,226 9,845 6,803 10,086 Passenger Miles 34,337 29,614 58,483 24,491 39,950 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 1,694.1 1,453.3 2,279.0 990.9 2,575.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 34,061.0 28,963.0 43,505.0 19,910.0 42,714.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 38,806.0 32,317.0 46,805.0 21,484.0 66,438.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $67.35 $88.80 $65.49 $125.53 $59.83 Farebox Recovery Ratio 7.35% 6.65% 7.23% 7.26% 7.52% Subsidy per Passenger $11.08 $14.64 $14.06 $16.96 $14.12 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.08 $4.07 $2.37 $4.71 $3.57 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $62.40 $82.89 $60.75 $116.42 $55.32 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.10 $4.16 $3.18 $5.79 $3.34 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 5.6 5.7 4.3 6.9 3.9 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.28 0.28 0.23 0.34 0.24 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 IlllI= Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Banning -- 1 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Vehicles Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy BAN-1 Total 1 46,251 146,547 4,195.0 4,207.0 71,735.0 73,648.0 $425,467 $53,359 $372,108 BAN-5 Total 1 51,048 123,199 4,376.0 4,195.0 59,569.0 59,930.0 $391,472 $39,560 $351,912 BAN-6 Total 1 36,706 135,345 4,195.0 4,311.0 65,442.0 68,908.0 $339,137 $34,261 $304,876 BAN-DAR Total 2 10,086 39,950 2,575.0 3,810.0 42,714.0 66,438.0 $154,059 $11,600 $142,459 Service Provider Totals 5 144,091 445,041 15,341.0 16,523.0 239,460.0 268,924.0 $1,310,135 $138,780 $1,171,355 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page > of 2 11 IME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Performance I ndicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Banning -- 1 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Operating Operating Farebox Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Cost Per Cost Per Cost Per Recovery Subsidy Per Passenger Revenue Revenue Passengers Passengers Route # Day Type Revenue Hour Revenue Mile Passenger Ratio Passenger Mile Hour Mile Per Hour Per Mile BAN-1 Total $101.42 $5.93 $9.20 12.54% $8.05 $2.54 $88.70 $5.19 11.0 0.64 BAN-5 Total $89.46 $6.57 $7.67 10.10% $6.89 $2.86 $80.42 $5.91 11.7 0.86 BAN-6 Total $80.84 $5.18 $9.24 10.10% $8.31 $2.25 $72.68 $4.66 8.7 0.56 BAN-DAR Total $59.83 $3.61 $15.27 7.52% $14.12 $3.57 $55.32 $3.34 3.9 0.24 Service Provider Totals $85.40 $5.47 $9.09 10.59% $8.13 $2.63 $76.35 $4.89 9.4 0.60 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 2 of 2 TABLE 3A: INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTION Route 1 — Beaumont/Banning/Cabazon Pass Transit Route 1 provides service predominately along Ramsey Street & 6th Street between Beaumont City Hall, Banning and Cabazon, while serving the Casino Morongo, Cabazon neighborhoods and Cabazon shopping areas. This route operates on a two- hour and nine minute headway and is complemented by an overlap with Route 2 (operated by Beaumont Transit System) along 75% of the route. Route 1 provides service to the remote Esperanza and Elm area of Cabazon. The route also provides service to the residential areas of Cabazon, James Venable Community Center, Casino Morongo, Desert Hills Premium Outlets and Cabazon outlets, and the commercial areas along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue in Beaumont. This route provides riders access to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices within the City of Banning and the unincorporated community of Cabazon. Destinations on Route 1 include: K-Mart, Albertsons, Stater's, Food-4-Less, Wal-Mart Supercenter, Beaumont City Hall, Greyhound Crucero Agency, Amtrak California Thruway bus stop, Banning City Hall, The Gas Company, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Fox Cinemas, Banning Police Department, Desert Hills Premium Outlets, Cabazon Outlets, Casino Morongo and James Venable Community Center. Route 5 — Northern Banning This route operates on a 78 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas of the City of Banning that lie north of the 1-10 Freeway, the Riverside County Courthouse, the Banning Municipal Library, the Coombs Intermediate School, and the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue. This neighborhood feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Banning City Hall, Banning Police Department, Fox Cinemas, K-Mart, Albertsons, Stater's, Food-4-Less, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Walgreens Pharmacy, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Banning Chamber of Commerce, Riverside County Superior Court, Banning Public Library, Banning Community Center, Banning Senior Center, Repplier Park Aquatics Center, U.S. Post Office, and various other shopping and school locations within the community. Route 6 — Southern Banning This route operates on a 82 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas south of the 1-10 Freeway, a small residential section north of Ramsey Street at the east end of the City of Banning, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue, Banning High School, apartment complexes, the Riverside County Smith Correctional Facility, and the Mt. San Jacinto College. This neighborhood feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Banning City Hall, Banning Police Department, Fox Cinemas, Stater's, Food-4-Less, K-Mart, Albertsons, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Walgreens Pharmacy, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Banning High School, the Riverside County Smith Correctional Facility, The Banning Municipal Airport, U.S. Post Office, and various other shopping and school locations within the community. Route 5/6 Combo This route operates on a 102 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas south of the 1-10 Freeway, a small residential section north of Ramsey Street at the east end of the City of Banning, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue, Banning High School, apartment complexes, the Riverside County Smith Correctional Facility, and the Mt. San Jacinto College. It also provides service to the residential areas that lie north of the 1-10 Freeway, the Riverside County Courthouse, the Banning Municipal Library and the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue. This neighborhood feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Banning City Hall, Banning Police Department, Fox Cinemas, K-Mart, Albertsons, Stater's, Food-4-Less, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Walgreens Pharmacy, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Banning Chamber of Commerce, Riverside County Superior Court, Banning Public Library, Banning Community Center, Banning Senior Center, Repplier Park Aquatics Center, U.S. Post Office, and various other shopping and school locations within the community Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride is provided within the entire city limits of Banning and Beaumont and within a % mile boundary of Routes 1 and 2 services in Cabazon. The City of Banning provides the ADA certification for Pass Transit Dial -A -ride services operated by the cities of Banning and Beaumont. Seniors (age 60 years and older), persons with disabilities, and ADA eligible passengers are eligible for dial -a -ride throughout the entire service area. Service hours vary for non-ADA eligible passengers. These categories of passengers also are required to fill out a certification application to determine eligibility of service. Once certified, a card is issued to the applicant. General public passengers (ages 5 — 59 years) are not eligible for dial -a -ride service. The primary uses of Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride are for transportation to medical appointments, workshop programs for persons with disabilities, shopping areas, employment, and connections with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and Pass Transit Fixed Routes. Effective July 1, 2012 the Banning Pass Transit Combo Route 5/6 route will no longer be provided as we will return to offering three (3) routes, Route 1 Cabazon, Route 5 Northern and Route 6 Southern on Saturday's and Sunday's from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.. City of Banning FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure A Fare Box Other'2) FY 2012/13 Operating Assistance $1,310,135 $1,170,105 $138,780 $1,250 Subtotal: Operating $1,310,135 $1,170,105 $0 $0 $0 $0 $138,780 $1,250 F/Y 12-01 Subtotal: Capital $o $o $o $o $o $o $o Total: Operating & Capital $1,310,135 $1,170,105 $0 $o $o $0 $138,780 $1,250 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income 10.68821 % Revised 4/30/2012 Summary of FY 2012/13 Funds Requested.xls City of Banning FY 2013/14 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure A Fare Box Other'z FY 2013/14 Operating Expenses $1,348,145 $1,205,208 $141,687 $1,250 Subtotal: Operating $1,348,145 $1,205,208 $0 $0 $0 $0 $141,687 $1,250 No Requests Subtotal: Capital $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $1,348,145 $1,205,208 $0 $0 $o $0 $141,687 $1,2501 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income Revised 4/30/2012 Summary of FY 2013/14 Funds Requested.xls City of Banning FY 2014/15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure A Fare Box Other'z FY 14/15 Operating Expensed $1,384,122 $1,235,338 $147,354 $1,250 Subtotal: Operating $1,384,122 $1,235,338 $0 $0 $0 $0 $147,354 $1,250 No Requests Subtotal: Capital $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $1,384,122 $1,235,338 $0 $0 $o $0 $147,354 $1,2501 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income Revised 4/30/2012 Summary of FY 2014/15 Funds Requested.xls TABLE 6 — AUDIT Audit Recommendations (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/09) Action(s) Taken And Results 1. Banning Transit should implement the remaining three prior audit recommendations: ♦ Provide Passenger Mile data in TransTrack ♦ Continued Recruitment of Drivers • Provide incentives for drivers to maintain longevity Passenger Mile data in TransTrack was implemented in 2006 The hiring process for drivers has been greatly improved through developing better communication with Human Resources. Employee Recognition program is in place honoring employees at each 10 year mark. We also provide an excellent retirement package and recognize seniority for scheduling. 2. Develop and enforce employee policies and rules specific to providing consistent transit service. Policies and procedures have been updated as of October 2011. Safety and training meetings are held a minimum of eight times per year, at these meeting policies and rules and rules are reiterated. Drivers are required to strictly adhere to all guidelines and are individually monitored on a monthly basis by the Lead Driver Trainer. 3. Conduct daily reconciliation of farebox revenues with passenger counts. A procedure has been developed and implemented that allows for daily reconciliation of farebox revenues with passenger counts. IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/ 12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Banning Data Elements FY 2011/ 12 Plan FY 2011/ 12 Target FY 201 1 / 12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 131,834 Passenger Miles 340,578 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 13,574.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 219,100.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 228,265.0 Total Operating Expenses $1,260,587 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $133,643 Net Operating Expenses $1,126,944 Performance I ndicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 10.60% 1 > = 10.00% 1 10.88% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $92.87 <_ $82.23 $85.23 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $8.55 >_ $6.51 and <_ $8.81 $7.36 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $3.31 > _ $2.55 and <_ $3.45 $2.88 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $83.02 >_ $62.19 and <_ $84.15 $75.96 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $5.14 >_ $3.86 and <_ $5.22 $3.20 Better Than Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 9.70 >= 8.08 and <= 10.93 10.30 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.60 >= 0.50 and <= 0.68 0.43 Fails to Meet Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 5 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 1.1.1�� Bionide (war Trmsporrofian (omsrissiun FY 2012/ 13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: City of Banning All Routes Performance I ndicators FY 2010/ 11 End of Year Actual FY 2011 / 12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/ 13 Plan FY 2012/ 13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 128,244 102,192 144,091 None Passenger Miles 327,258 261,056 445,041 None Revenue Hours 13,387.3 9,896.9 15,341.0 None Total Hours 14,737.0 10,842.0 16,523.0 None Revenue Miles 215,531.2 234,971.1 239,460.0 None Total Miles 224,148.1 239,332.5 268,924.0 None Operating Costs $1,240,257 $843,489 $1,310,135 None Passenger Revenue $122,797 $91,770 $138,780 None Operating Subsidy $1,117,460 $751,719 $1,171,355 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $92.64 $85.23 $85.40 <= $86.73 Meets Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.75 $3.59 $5.47 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $9.67 $8.25 $9.09 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 9.90% 10.88% 10.59% > = 10.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $8.71 $7.36 $8.13 >= $6.26 and <= $8.46 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $3.41 $2.88 $2.63 >= $2.45 and <= $3.31 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $83.47 $75.96 $76.35 >= $64.57 and <= $87.35 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $5.18 $3.20 $4.89 >= $2.72 and <= $3.68 Fails to Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 9.60 10.30 9.40 >= 8.76 and <= 11.85 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.60 0.43 0.60 >= 0.37 and <= 0.49 Better Than Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Flan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 TABLE 9 - HIGHLIGHTS OF 2012/13 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN ■ Purchase and install auto display and enunciator equipment in fixed route fleet. ■ Purchase and install 6 additional bus shelters, benches and trash receptacles ■ Purchase one fixed route coach ■ Continue to install additional bus stop signs along routes 1, 5, and 6, thereby, reducing the number of flag stops. ■ Reinstate full Saturday and Sunday Service to three routes with reduced headway ■ Closely monitor service to the MSJC Pass Campus and address needs as necessary ■ The addition of an Administrative Transit Specialist position to increase the efficiency and reporting of data and financial tracking within the transit department ■ In a cooperative effort with the City of Beaumont, contracting for a Comprehensive Analysis of Operations of both services to increase productivity of overall services in the two cities and outlying areas (Cabazon and Calimesa) currently serviced by Pass Transit. ■ Closely monitor service to the MSJC Pass Campus and address needs as necessary ■ Continue working with the City of Beaumont staff regarding the coordination of routes, schedules, passenger amenities, and fares to ensure that Pass Transit is seamless and simple to use by Pass Area residents. BANNING TRANSIT SYSTEM/PASS TRANSIT FY 2008/09 Audited FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Estimate (Based on 3rd Quarter Actuals) FY 2012/13 Planned Systemwide Ridership 173,351 127,932 128,244 136,256 147,156 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours $88.15 $84.33 $92.64 $84.80 $86.34 BEAUMONT TABLES ��E M = o m R i w r s i d e ( o n l y T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n B u s ( M o t o r b u s ) / D i r e c t l y O p e r a t e d T a b l e 1 - F l e e t I n v e n t o r y F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n C i t y o f B e a u m o n t A v e r a g e L i f e t i m e # o f L i f e t o D a t e M i l e s P e r A c t i v e A c t i v e # o f L i f e t o D a t e V e h i c l e M i l e s V e h i c l e A s O f L i f t a n d F u e l V e h i c l e s C o n t i n g e n c y V e h i c l e M i l e s t h r o u g h Y e a r - T o - D a t e Y e a r M f g . M o d e l S e a t i n g R a m p V e h i c l e T y p e F Y V e h i c l e s P r i o r Y e a r E n d M a r c h ( e . g . , M a r c h ) B u i l t C o d e C o d e C a p a c i t y E q u i p p e d L e n g t h C o d e 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 2 0 0 2 B B B 3 5 2 3 4 C N 1 0 0 8 1 , 1 1 9 8 1 , 1 1 9 2 0 0 0 B B B C S R E 3 0 2 3 2 D F 1 0 2 8 9 , 4 9 3 3 0 0 , 9 9 7 3 0 0 , 9 9 7 2 0 0 0 B B B C S R E 3 0 2 3 2 D F 1 0 2 6 2 , 4 9 5 2 7 5 , 5 2 6 2 7 5 , 5 2 6 2 0 1 0 C M D G M C 5 5 0 0 2 8 2 3 2 G A 1 0 7 , 7 8 6 5 3 , 6 5 4 5 3 , 6 5 4 2 0 0 5 E D N 1 4 2 2 4 G A 1 0 2 0 7 , 5 3 5 2 1 5 , 4 1 9 2 1 5 , 4 1 9 2 0 0 1 G C C 1 4 2 2 4 G A 1 0 2 5 0 , 5 6 7 2 6 3 , 7 2 1 2 6 3 , 7 2 1 2 0 0 9 G M C C - 5 5 0 0 2 8 2 3 2 C N 1 0 4 2 , 4 6 7 5 3 , 8 7 6 5 3 , 8 7 6 2 0 0 9 S T R 2 8 2 3 2 C N 1 0 1 1 , 3 8 6 3 9 , 5 3 7 3 9 , 5 3 7 2 0 1 0 S T R 3 0 2 3 2 D F 1 0 8 , 9 9 4 3 7 , 1 5 9 3 7 , 1 5 9 T o t a l s : 2 3 7 1 8 9 0 1 , 0 8 0 , 7 2 3 1 , 3 2 1 , 0 0 8 1 4 6 , 7 7 9 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r T M P a g e I o f 5 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 2 ��E M = o m R i w r s i d e ( o n l y T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n D e m a n d R e s p o n s e / D i r e c t l y O p e r a t e d T a b l e 1 - F l e e t I n v e n t o r y F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 S h o r t R a n g e T r a n s i t P l a n C i t y o f B e a u m o n t A v e r a g e L i f e t i m e # o f L i f e t o D a t e M i l e s P e r A c t i v e A c t i v e # o f L i f e t o D a t e V e h i c l e M i l e s V e h i c l e A s O f L i f t a n d F u e l V e h i c l e s C o n t i n g e n c y V e h i c l e M i l e s t h r o u g h Y e a r - T o - D a t e Y e a r M f g . M o d e l S e a t i n g R a m p V e h i c l e T y p e F Y V e h i c l e s P r i o r Y e a r E n d M a r c h ( e . g . , M a r c h ) B u i l t C o d e C o d e C a p a c i t y E q u i p p e d L e n g t h C o d e 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 0 / 1 1 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 F Y 2 0 1 1 / 1 2 2 0 1 0 F R D F o r d E 4 5 0 1 6 2 2 4 G A 1 0 2 3 , 1 5 1 4 7 , 4 4 3 4 7 , 4 4 3 2 0 1 0 F R D F o r d E - 4 5 0 1 6 2 2 4 G A 1 0 2 1 , 2 1 9 4 0 , 0 8 9 4 0 , 0 8 9 2 0 1 0 F R D F o r d E - 4 5 0 1 6 0 2 4 G A 1 0 1 7 , 7 1 0 3 5 , 6 5 0 3 5 , 6 5 0 2 0 0 1 G C C F o r d E - 4 5 0 1 6 2 2 4 G A 1 0 2 4 8 , 6 9 1 2 6 3 , 6 4 6 2 6 3 , 6 4 6 T o t a l s : 6 4 6 4 0 3 1 0 , 7 7 1 3 8 6 , 8 2 8 9 6 , 7 0 7 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r T M P a g e 2 o f 5 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 2 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 12 13 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,336,326 $1,233,381 $1,402,000 $755,029 $1,417,500 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $257,420 $215,229 $190,983 $116,817 $179,280 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,078,906 $1,018,152 $1,211,017 $638,212 $1,238,220 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 141,629 169,665 181,418 134,932 184,256 Passenger Miles 293,736 345,935 226,535 272,059 367,291 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 16,840.6 15,856.4 15,756.0 12,197.1 16,215.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 235,662.0 228,901.0 226,535.0 181,987.8 233,134.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 249,998.0 243,657.3 241,379.0 198,228.8 256,919.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $79.35 $77.78 $88.98 $61.90 $87.42 Farebox Recovery Ratio 19.26% 17.45% 13.62% 15.47% 12.64% Subsidy per Passenger $7.62 $6.00 $6.68 $4.73 $6.72 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.67 $2.94 $5.35 $2.35 $3.37 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $64.07 $64.21 $76.86 $52.32 $76.36 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.58 $4.45 $5.35 $3.51 $5.31 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 8.4 10.7 11.5 11.1 11.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.60 0.74 0.80 0.74 0.79 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 6 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,192,951 $1,059,850 $282,000 $636,420 $1,026,100 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $226,148 $165,075 $19,556 $71,190 $102,610 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $966,804 $894,775 $262,444 $565,230 $923,490 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 119,177 112,034 21,167 79,816 106,159 Passenger Miles 251,077 236,436 44,360 167,339 218,907 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 15,611.6 13,808.9 3,727.0 10,371.1 13,730.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 209,050.0 192,974.0 44,360.0 150,532.8 189,496.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 218,409.0 201,618.4 46,946.0 156,541.8 198,390.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $76.41 $76.75 $75.66 $61.36 $74.73 Farebox Recovery Ratio 18.95% 15.58% 6.93% 11.19% 10.00% Subsidy per Passenger $8.11 $7.99 $12.40 $7.08 $8.70 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.85 $3.78 $5.92 $3.38 $4.22 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.93 $64.80 $70.42 $54.50 $67.26 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.62 $4.64 $5.92 $3.75 $4.87 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 7.6 8.1 5.7 7.7 7.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.57 0.58 0.48 0.53 0.56 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 9 7 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $143,375 $173,531 $1,120,000 $118,609 $391,400 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $31,273 $50,154 $171,427 $45,627 $76,670 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $112,102 $123,378 $948,573 $72,982 $314,730 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 22,452 57,631 160,251 55,116 78,097 Passenger Miles 42,659 109,499 182,175 104,720 148,384 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 1,229.0 2,047.5 12,029.0 1,826.0 2,485.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 26,612.0 35,927.0 182,175.0 31,455.0 43,638.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 31,589.0 42,038.9 194,433.0 41,687.0 58,529.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $116.66 $84.75 $93.11 $64.96 $157.51 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.81 % 28.90% 15.30% 38.47% 19.58% Subsidy per Passenger $4.99 $2.14 $5.92 $1.32 $4.03 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.63 $1.13 $5.21 $0.70 $2.12 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $91.22 $60.26 $78.86 $39.97 $126.65 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.21 $3.43 $5.21 $2.32 $7.21 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 18.3 28.1 13.3 30.2 31.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.84 1.60 0.88 1.75 1.79 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Beaumont -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 9 10 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $976,550 $889,114 $1,120,000 $559,930 $1,135,500 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $180,959 $194,706 $171,427 $98,289 $151,080 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $795,591 $694,408 $948,573 $461,641 $984,420 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 120,014 148,988 160,251 121,170 169,164 Passenger Miles 228,027 283,077 182,175 230,223 321,411 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 12,230.7 12,097.3 12,029.0 9,359.4 12,431.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 182,431.0 183,214.0 182,175.0 148,897.8 189,014.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 193,318.0 195,076.5 194,433.0 162,530.8 209,322.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $79.84 $73.50 $93.11 $59.83 $91.34 Farebox Recovery Ratio 18.53% 21.90% 15.30% 17.55% 13.30% Subsidy per Passenger $6.63 $4.66 $5.92 $3.81 $5.82 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.49 $2.45 $5.21 $2.01 $3.06 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $65.05 $57.40 $78.86 $49.32 $79.19 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.36 $3.79 $5.21 $3.10 $5.21 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.8 12.3 13.3 12.9 13.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.66 0.81 0.88 0.81 0.89 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Beaumont-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 3 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $359,776 $344,267 $282,000 $195,099 $282,000 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $76,461 $20,523 $19,556 $18,528 $28,200 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $283,315 $323,744 $262,444 $176,571 $253,800 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 21,615 20,677 21,167 13,762 15,092 Passenger Miles 65,710 62,858 44,360 41,836 45,880 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 4,609.9 3,759.1 3,727.0 2,837.7 3,784.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 53,231.0 45,687.0 44,360.0 33,090.0 44,120.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 56,680.0 48,580.8 46,946.0 35,698.0 47,597.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $78.04 $91.58 $75.66 $68.75 $74.52 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.25% 5.96% 6.93% 9.50% 10.00% Subsidy per Passenger $13.11 $15.66 $12.40 $12.83 $16.82 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $4.31 $5.15 $5.92 $4.22 $5.53 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.46 $86.12 $70.42 $62.22 $67.07 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.32 $7.09 $5.92 $5.34 $5.75 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.7 5.5 5.7 4.8 4.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.41 0.45 0.48 0.42 0.34 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Ill I= Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Beaumont -- 2 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Passenger Revenue Vehicles Passengers Miles Hours Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy BEA-10 BEA-11 BEA-120 BEA-17 BEA-2 BEA-3 BEA-4 BEA-7 BEA-9 BEA-DAR Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 15,141 5,969 252 15,156 32,167 25,932 32,968 25,147 16,432 15,092 28,768 11,341 479 28,796 61,117 49,271 62,639 47,779 31,221 45,880 448.0 156.0 199.0 477.0 3,829.0 2,704.0 3,413.0 788.0 417.0 3,784.0 448.0 217.0 309.0 682.0 4,023.0 2,895.0 3,545.0 1,132.0 580.0 4,108.0 4,896.0 2,867.0 5,220.0 9,213.0 68, 874.0 38, 776.0 37, 726.0 15, 536.0 5,906.0 44,120.0 4,896.0 3,368.0 9,684.0 12, 756.0 71, 896.0 40,018.0 38, 879.0 20,116.0 7,709.0 47, 597.0 $48, 000 $48, 000 $4,900 $78, 600 $254, 700 $234, 700 $254, 700 $126, 000 $85, 900 $282, 000 $9, 600 $9, 600 $490 $15, 600 $25,470 $23,470 $25,470 $25,200 $16,180 $28, 200 $38,400 $38,400 $4, 410 $63, 000 $229, 230 $211,230 $229,230 $100, 800 $69, 720 $253, 800 Service Provider Totals 13 184,256 367,291 16,215.0 17, 939.0 233,134.0 256, 919.0 $1,417,500 $179,280 $1,238,220 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page > of 2 IIIIIIIME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Performance I ndicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Beaumont -- 2 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile Farebox Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Cost Per Recovery Subsidy Per Passenger Revenue Revenue Passenger Ratio Passenger Mile Hour Mile Passengers Passengers Per Hour Per Mile BEA-10 BEA-11 BEA-120 BEA-17 BEA-2 BEA-3 BEA-4 BEA-7 BEA-9 BEA-DAR Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total $107.14 $307.69 $24.62 $164.78 $66.52 $86.80 $74.63 $159.90 $206.00 $74.52 $9.80 $16.74 $0.94 $8.53 $3.70 $6.05 $6.75 $8.11 $14.54 $6.39 $3.17 $8.04 $19.44 $5.19 $7.92 $9.05 $7.73 $5.01 $5.23 $18.69 20.00% 20.00% 10.00% 19.84% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 20.00% 18.83% 10.00% $2.54 $6.43 $17.50 $4.16 $7.13 $8.15 $6.95 $4.01 $4.24 $16.82 $1.33 $3.39 $9.21 $2.19 $3.75 $4.29 $3.66 $2.11 $2.23 $5.53 $85.71 $246.15 $22.16 $132.08 $59.87 $78.12 $67.16 $127.92 $167.19 $67.07 $7.84 $13.39 $0.84 $6.84 $3.33 $5.45 $6.08 $6.49 $11.80 $5.75 33.8 38.3 1.3 31.8 8.4 9.6 9.7 31.9 39.4 4.0 3.09 2.08 0.05 1.65 0.47 0.67 0.87 1.62 2.78 0.34 Service Provider Totals $87.42 $6.08 $7.69 12.64% $6.72 $3.37 $76.36 $5.31 11.4 0.79 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 2 of 2 sprimgenbe}i gm% Si/a103 M le MeawnS ZIOErears Palm% 0$ '0$ ()SLIMS 0$ 0$ 0$ 000'0914 05 IMILS `0094L9511$ -. 1e31dB0 V Sul;sled° :181•01 0$ • 0$ 0$ 0# 000'00i$ 0$ 000a01.1 "isndso :11101g1nS 000'OSit 000'051$ 10-£4 M equewenadwl Bullgur's 0$ OSL'14iS 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 08L'BaIs 009'L4104$ iW>eiBd° :111401gn$ NV MIS • /09eSLS'1.$ 00r'LWIS • sesuedr3 WowedO mho x0e e+ed V ann. Avinoeg HI dWd cVaslnid? Ell. dwd Vie 111 spun 40Proury fewi 40 JequinN MOW l IO* 11001.10S3(1 PO [OM euziorki Peraonbed epuria, ao AewwnS - ti elael mid pilau etuey Uo4S peisenbeti tpunj lali+ewumg SW4403 M 1110000ee9 40 kip SRTP FY 12-13 Table 4 -- Capital Protect Justification PROJECT NUMBER .FY 13-01 PROJECT NAME Building Improveinents PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project will include updating the transit office, shop area, bathrooms and driveway. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The transit office is over 60 years old. The mechanics are working in the elements as most of the shop is outdoors. The driveway is cracked and dangerous. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES {REQUESTED} STA Funds $150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER None slx•palsenbed sound b4/E40Z Rd }o kewwng Z40Z/ZZ/S pewied 0$ 000`5ti L$ 0$ as o$ 000`OOE$ 000`s0E` L$ 000`Ose L$ ismds3 le 6uge.aadp :isiol 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 000`OOS$ 0$ oonoss pude° :ielo;gns oo0`0o£$ 0onoE$ 40-174 Ad uolsuedxa Jo} sesng L adAi Z 0$ 000`544$ o$ 0$ o$ 0$ 000`90S' 4$ 000`0917' 4$ 6uROJed0 :10104C nS 000'gtI$ 000`50£'4$ 000'0517'4$ sesuadx3fiAimed° (0 Jaylp t xog aged y amseen Alp roaS 9 4 dad � (b3S1111d) g 4 dad VlS All sound }o lunowy lelol (4) JegwnN Ioefad lelldeD u00.10Sa❑ 100f0.1d ti LIE LOZ Ad ao} pa;sanbaa spund teuewuunS - L•S alqui. ueld pm' e6ueb po4s pa}senbad spund }o fuswwng 174/£I0Z Jed tuownseg ;o AID SRTP FY 12-13 TABLE 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY 14-01 PROJECT NAME Procure 2 Type VII Buses. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Type VI Buses are planned to be procured for expansion. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This type of bus is needed for utilizing on routes. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA Funds $300,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SMILIAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER None slx•pelsenbea spund 9 L/b LOZ Ad }o kewwnS ZLOZIZZ19 pasinad 0$ 00s`ipi.$ 0$ o$ o$ o00`OOS$ OOS`L.Z£` L$ 000`sul-$ leildeo'S BuReaado :lelol 0$ o$ 0$ o$ o$ aao`ooE$ o$ 000`oos$ isucle3 :ploygns 000`00£$ 00o'o0£$ L0-9 L Ad }uaweogldayuopugdxe Jo} sesng L adhl Z 0$ 009'L171-$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ o09`LZE'LS 000'9Lb`L$ 6ugwado :IelolgnS 009'Lb1-$ 009`LZE`L$ 000'SLb`1-$ sesuadx3 Bunmedo rm 191110 xog amA y ainsgayy AminoeS g L dad ('d3SIWld) g L dad ylS Ali spund }o lunowy Iglal (L) JaquinN 409Kud lellde0 uNdposea pafaad 9141KZ AA ao; paisanbaa spund ;o Anuwwns - Z'S alclel ueid aBugd boys palsanbad spund }a %gwwns 9 111740Z A3 wowneag ;o Apo SRTP FY 12-13 TABLE 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY 15-01 PROJECT NAME Procure 2 Type VII Buses. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Type VI Buses are planned to be procured for expansion and possible replacement. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This type of bus is needed for utilizing on routes. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA Funds $300,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SMILIAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER None CITY OF BEAUMONT TRANSIT SYSTEM SRTP 2012/13-2014/15 TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Audit Recommendations (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/09) Action(s) Taken And Results (1) 1. Need to ensure that the State Controller Reports are completed and submitted in a timely manner. COMPLETED Recommendation to implement policies and Procedures are in place to prevent further procedures to ensure that the State Controller delays in completion of these important Reports are prepared and submitted in a timely manner as required by PUC Section 99243. documents. (1) If no action take, provide schedule for implementation or explanation of why the recommendation is no longer relevant. IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/ 12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Beaumont Data Elements FY 2011/ 12 Plan FY 2011/ 12 Target FY 201 1 / 12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 181,418 Passenger Miles 226,535 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 15,756.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 226,535.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 241,379.0 Total Operating Expenses $1,402,000 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $190,983 Net Operating Expenses $1,211,017 Performance I ndicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 13.62% 1 > = 10.00% 1 15.47% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $88.98 <_ $62.88 $61.90 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $6.68 > _ $4.40 and <_ $5.96 $4.73 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $5.35 > _ $2.16 and <_ $2.92 $2.35 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $76.86 >_ $47.46 and <_ $64.22 $52.32 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $5.35 > _ $3.30 and <_ $4.46 $3.51 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 11.50 >= 9.18 and <= 12.42 11.10 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.80 >= 0.64 and <= 0.86 0.74 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 7 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 1.1.1�� Bionide (war Trmsporrofian (omsrissiun FY 2012/ 13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: City of Beaumont All Routes Performance I ndicators FY 2010/ 11 End of Year Actual FY 2011 / 12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/ 13 Plan FY 2012/ 13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 169,665 134,932 184,256 None Passenger Miles 345,935 272,059 367,291 None Revenue Hours 15,856.4 12,197.1 16,215.0 None Total Hours 17,330.2 13,462.7 17,939.0 None Revenue Miles 228,901.0 181,987.8 233,134.0 None Total Miles 243,657.3 198,228.8 256,919.0 None Operating Costs $1,233,381 $755,029 $1,417,500 None Passenger Revenue $215,229 $116,817 $179,280 None Operating Subsidy $1,018,152 $638,212 $1,238,220 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $77.78 $61.90 $87.42 <= $62.99 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.39 $4.15 $6.08 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $7.27 $5.60 $7.69 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 17.45% 15.47% 12.64% > = 10.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $6.00 $4.73 $6.72 >= $4.02 and <= $5.44 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $2.94 $2.35 $3.37 >= $2.00 and <= $2.70 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $64.21 $52.32 $76.36 >= $44.47 and <= $60.17 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.45 $3.51 $5.31 >= $2.98 and <= $4.04 Fails to Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 10.70 11.10 11.40 >= 9.44 and <= 12.77 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.74 0.74 0.79 >= 0.63 and <= 0.85 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Flan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Table 9 HIGHLIGHTS OF SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN • Complete a Comprehensive Operations Analysis in conjunction with the City of Banning, RTA and Sunline • Implement minor route changes to existing routes to increase service and improve customer service ▪ Increase bus service on current routes by adding additional buses at peak times • Increase service regionally to San Bernardino County • Purchase GPS system for all vehicles to track vehicle locations • Coordinate Tenant Improvements on existing Transit office • Install more bus shelters and bus benches throughout service area to improve and enhance service provided with the city of Beaumont • Expand outreach efforts to senior citizen organizations, schools and major employers • Finalize and print a system -wide map showing all Beaumont and Banning routes • Continue to work with the City of Banning to improve coordination of routes, schedules, passenger amenities, and fares to ensure that Pass Transit is seamless and simple to use by Pass Area residents Operating and Financial Data FY 08/09 Audited FY 09/10 Audited FY 10/11 Audited FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Planned Systemwide Ridership 98,039 141,629 168,776 179,905 184,256 Operating Costs per Revenue Hour $85.91 $79.35 $77.99 $80.03 $87.42 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan Fiscal Years 207 2/7 3-2014/7 5 CORONA "THE UK LE CITY' 1n<nforated Iu1y 13, 1896 May 24, 2012 Table of Contents Chapter 1 — System Overview Page 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Description of Service Area 1 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 4 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service 5 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure 6 1.5 Revenue Fleet 7 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities 8 Chapter 2 — Existing Service and Route Performance 2.1 Fixed Route Service — Route by Route Analysis 8 2.2 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance 8 2.3 Key Performance Indicators 8 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts 10 2.5 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth 10 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 10 Chapter 3 — Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes 11 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Route 11 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion 11 3.4 Budget Impact and Proposed Changes 12 Chapter 4 — Financial and Capital Plans 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 12 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program 14 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 14 Table 1 — Fleet Inventory 16 Table 2 — Service Summary 18 Table 3 — Route Statistics 21 Table 3A — Individual Route Descriptions and Area Served 23 Table 4 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 24 Table 5.1 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 26 Table 5.2 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 28 Table 6 — Progress Implementing Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations 30 Table 7 — Service Provider Performance Targets FY 2011/12 31 Table 8 — Performance Report FY 2012/13 32 Table 9 — City of Corona Transit Service Highlights FY 2012/13 33 Chapter 1 — System Overview 1.0 Introduction The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) sets the objectives and strategies for FY 2012/13 for the City of Corona Transit Service (CCTS) by evaluating current transit system performance, projected demographic changes, operating and capital funding needs, anticipated funding from federal, state and local sources and other factors to create a reasonable projection of conditions over the next three years (FY 2012/13 — 2014/15). To address rising costs and uncertain funding, the CCTS reduced service and raised fares on July 5, 2010. As anticipated, ridership has been impacted and remains approximately 8 percent below pre -service and fare change. An increase in students using transit services is partially offsetting ridership lost to service reductions and fare increase. 1.1 Description of Service Area The CCTS operates a general public, demand response Dial -A -Ride (DAR) and fixed route dubbed the `Corona Cruiser.' DAR service commenced in 1977 and provides curb -to -curb service throughout the City of Corona and neighboring county areas of Coronita, El Cerrito and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the City of Norco (Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Norco College). Door-to-door service is available upon request for riders certified under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Corona Cruiser fixed route began operating in 2001 and serves the city -center as well as commercial, retail and residential areas on the eastern and southern portion of the city. See service maps on the following pages: 1 Vlno3w31 O1 oy avoalroa 3015a3Na 01 4 N 00aON 01 Tin d3SInd3 MOH 3 l Aava3n OS A1Nnoo 30NO1VH0 a31N3J V NOIIV1..VH3a V O103a IOOHOS VNOLOJ NOIH 31tlI03Na31N] H IVAIdSOH d 30I11 @ Natld r IOOHOS 116IN33 NNIl0a1314 3JI110 .0d TOM AlIJ :SNOIIVNI1S34 21Vlfld0d dN3J3l 31,1I1 31118 a35IONJ vN02103 WI 314I1 O. N.M. VNONOJ 33In2135 AO SV.V A.M03 AavaNnos VNONOJ 1011I3 S3111021 lISNVlil N lano oils oo3soo a 3]IJ-V-7W ] MOH 0 1 1 1 1 OONON Ol 1 133211s N LO 1 .•416 1131 3031100 kmempaoo 1 1 onena3a�sd34d—Nv oovox nwo0 l 031.3 .n.s., ,� 3a1a q sn.a d 'S LI mg lIR lIo sO1N3:SNOILVNI1S3O HVlfldOd3OR1-V-lVIO VNONOD 31411 3r,e n3=.11n3 VHOYOJ iiiiMao., 03,. ass.sao.00noa TitgTtIgnri • -WM ON3J3l 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections The CCTS serves an ethnically diverse population of nearly 152,400 residents. The city encompasses 39 square miles. That diversity is reflected in the table below. City Population and Diversity !lir Population and Ethnicity Number Percent of Population Total Population 152,374 100% White 90,967 59.7% Some other race 27,732 18.2% Asian 15,085 9.9% Black or African American 8,990 5.9% Two or more races 7,771 5.1 % American Indian and Alaska Native 1,219 0.8% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 609 0.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census The table below lists rider characteristic for the DAR and Cruiser service. This data was compiled over the first nine months of fiscal year (FY) 2011/12. Rider Characteristics _ Corona Dial -A -Ride lir Corona Cruiser Senior / Disabled 82.2% General Public 39.6% General Public 11.3% Senior / Disabled 30.6% Metrolink Transfer 3.4% Student 16.5% Attendant (no fare) 2.3% Child 65.6% Child 0.8% RTA Transfer 6.0% Metrolink Transfer 1.6% 4 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service System -wide ridership in FY 2010/11 totaled 210,721. This represents an 8 percent decrease from the previous year's ridership of 229,820. As anticipated, ridership decreased following a service reduction and fare increase implemented July 5, 2010. Using ridership from the first nine months of FY 2011/12 as a basis for estimating year end ridership, ridership should increase by 1 percent over FY 2010/11. Ridership is projected to be stable for FY 2012/13 (0.4% increase). Corona Cruiser — Blue and Red Lines The Blue Line serves the McKinley Street retail area then travels on to Magnolia Avenue and Main Street to the River Road area. This route passes by many trip generators such as hospitals, medical facilities, public service agencies, library, civic center, and commercial/retail areas. This route also serves the unincorporated area of Home Gardens. The Red Line connects the residential areas of central Corona with commercial areas along Sixth Street and the Ontario Avenue/California Avenue retail area. The Red Line also covers South Corona along Ontario Avenue/Temescal Canyon Road to serve the county area of El Cerrito and The Crossings shopping complex at Cajalco Road/Temescal Canyon Road. The Cruiser schedule is: Blue Line Red Line Monday — Friday 6:42 a.m. — 7:09 p.m. 7:00 a.m. — 7:05 p.m. Saturday 8:52 a.m. — 3:50 p.m. 9:07 a.m. — 4:15 p.m. Sunday no service no service The Cruiser does not operate on the following holidays: New Year's Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Thanksgiving Day; and Christmas Day. Cruiser ridership totaled 152,568 during FY 2010/11. Using ridership from the first nine months of FY 2011/12 as a basis for estimating year end ridership, ridership should increase by 0.5 percent over FY 2010/11. Ridership is projected to be stable for FY 2012/13 (0.4% increase). This is the second year, the Cruiser began serving the Corona Transit Center, owned and operated by the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). The Corona Transit Center provides a safe and efficient transfer point between local and regional bus lines as well as regional commuter train lines serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties accessible via a pedestrian bridge to the adjacent North Main Corona Metrolink commuter rail station. To incentivize multimodal transportation, valid Metrolink pass -holders ride at no charge on Cruiser Blue and Red Lines to and from the Corona Transit Center. The CCTS and RTA have a reciprocal agreement that allows valid pass -holders a no -cost, one- way transfer between the Cruiser and RTA routes 1 and 3 at selected transfer points. Transfers between bus purveyors are an effective way to promote public transit as a low cost, eco-friendly and stress -free alternative to automobile trips. 11��111 �V METROLINK CQRo►v a CRUISER Alwereide Tranei! Agency 5 Corona Dial -A -Ride Dial -A -Ride provides service to the general public, seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals certified for complementary paratransit service under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Reservations can be made from one to fourteen days in advance; however, same day service may be accommodated if space is available. Dial -A -Ride provides curb -to -curb service throughout the City of Corona and neighboring county areas of Coronita, El Cerrito and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the City of Norco (Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Norco College). Door -to -Door assistance for ADA certified passengers is available upon request. Door-to-door service is available when: • Drivers can see the bus at all times; • The outermost door is within 150 feet from the bus; • Driver safety and security is maintained; and • Where a safe parking area is available. For individuals certified for ADA complementary service, service hours are expanded to match Cruiser hours. ADA complementary service also provides priority service for reservations made in advance (1 to 14 days). Trips are scheduled within 1 hour of the requested time. Voicemail message reservations are accepted for ADA clients on Sundays and Holidays for next day service. The Dial -A -Ride schedule is: General Public Monday — Friday 6:42 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. Saturday 8:52 a.m. — 4:15 p.m. Sunday no service ADA Complementary Paratransit 6:42 a.m. — 7:09 p.m. 8:52 a.m. — 4:15 p.m. no service Dial -A -Ride service does not operate on the following holidays: New Year's Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Thanksgiving Day; and Christmas Day. Dial -A -Ride ridership totaled 58,153 in FY 2010/11. Using ridership from the first nine months of FY 2011/12 as a basis for estimating year end ridership, ridership should increase by 2.7 percent over FY 2010/11. Ridership is projected to level off for FY 2012/13. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure The current fare structure appears on the next page. 6 Fare Structure Fare Type Corona Cruiser Cash -General $1.50 Cash-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $0.70 Cash -Child (46" tall or under) $0.25 Day pass -General $4.00 Day pass-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $2.00 15 day pass -General $25.00 $17.50 15 day pass -Student $17.50 $12.25 15 day pass-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $11.50 $8.05 31 day pass -General $50.00 $35.00 31 day pass -Student $35.00 $24.50 31 day pass-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $23.00 $16.10 Dial -A -Ride General $4.00 Senior/Disabled/Medicare $2.50 Child $0.50 Note: Medicare means Medicare Card Holder. Current Fare Structure implemented July 5, 2010. To incentivize the use of public transit as a viable alternative to automobile trips, the CCTS is using Air Quality Management District (AQMD) funds to subsidize multi -day passes (15 day and 31 day passes) on the Cruiser. The use of these funds allows the CCTS to reduce the cost of multi -day passes for Cruiser riders but enables the CCTS to recover an adequate fare. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The CCTS operates a fleet of 14 light and medium -duty transit buses. All CCTS buses are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement for accessibility and wheelchair securement. The Dial -A -Ride fleet consists of ten buses made up of six Goshen and four El Dorado National Type II gasoline -powered buses. Sufficient federal and state grant funds have been accumulated to purchase replacement buses in a single procurement. Ten replacement buses are scheduled to be delivered by June 2012. Four medium -size, medium -duty El Dorado National Type VII vehicles are used to operate Cruiser service. All four buses are powered with clean -burning compressed natural gas. Fire destroyed a fifth Cruiser bus in February 2011. A replacement bus should be delivered by fall 2012. Replacement of the four existing Cruiser buses is slated for spring 2013. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities The CCTS operates from a newer facility at 735 Corporation Yard Way. Transportation Concepts, the vendor retained to operate transit service, provides administrative and dispatching service from this location as well as fueling and vehicle parking. Maintenance is performed by a third party at an off -site garage. Chapter 2 — Existing Service and Route Performance 2.1 Fixed Route Service — Route by Route Analysis The CCTS operates the Cruiser along two fixed routes — the Blue Line and Red Line. As anticipated, the service reduction and fare increase has negatively impacted ridership. As the immediate impact of a fare increase diminishes, ridership will recover; conversely, ridership lost to the reduction in operation hours may not. Schedules that do not allow for a flexible start/finish time may preclude former patrons from using the Cruiser with a reduced operating day. These riders may not resume riding. Providing trips to and from area schools has softened the impact of a shorter operating day and fare increase. The state budget challenge has forced the Corona -Norco Unified School District to reduce their school bus program. Fortunately, the Cruiser is an alternative for some students. Students made up 8 percent of Cruiser riders in FY 2010/11. Students now make up 16.5 percent of Cruiser riders. 2.2 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance As with the Cruiser, ridership on Dial -A -Ride has declined. Early morning and later evening hours were eliminated as a cost saving measure. As such, Dial -A -Ride buses are no longer able to meet the early morning/later evening train schedule. As a result, trips to the city's two Metrolink Stations have declined by half. Despite the reduction in ridership, Dial -A -Ride continues to provide Corona's general public and senior and disabled residents with curb -to -curb service. Senior/Disabled riders make-up 82.2 percent of Dial -A -Ride riders, representing the largest group of riders on the system. General public and Metrolink riders make up 14.7 percent of DAR riders. Due to a higher fare ($4 instead of $2.50 for Senior/Disabled riders) the general public/Metrolink rider contributes 22 percent of fare revenue. 2.3 Key Performance Indicators The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) with fiduciary and administrative oversight of transit operators in Riverside County. Each year, the RCTC reviews and approves the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTPs) and allocates local, state and federal funding. To ensure productivity, the RCTC has developed and monitors eight performance indicators that measure productivity — some of these measures are operating cost, service hours and miles, passengers and revenues/subsides. There are eight performance indicators — one mandatory and seven discretionary. By statute, transit operators serving urban areas must recover a minimum of 20 percent of operating cost through fare revenue. Fare revenue include passenger fares, interest on investments, advertising revenue, local contributions and the proceeds from the sale of 8 surplus vehicles. A farebox recovery ratio below 20 percent endangers the receipt of local funding. Farebox recovery ratio is a mandatory performance indicator. Transit operators must meet at least four of seven discretionary performance indicators to remain in good standing. Through the first nine months of FY 2011/12, CCTS has met the farebox ratio and seven of seven discretionary indicators. These indicators are shown below. Key Performance Indicators Performance Indicators Year -to -Date Performance Mandatory: Farebox Recovery Ratio Discretionary: Operating cost per revenue hour Subsidy per passenger Subsidy per passenger mile Subsidy per hour Subsidy per mile Passengers per revenue hour Passengers per revenue mile 20.47% $63.75 $6.78 $1.60 $50.70 $3.90 7.5 0.57 Table 7, Service Provider Performance Targets Report shows greater detail on FY 2011/12 performance targets and actual performance by indicator. Table 8, SRTP Performance Report, provides a similar comparison for next year's performance. The Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride service meets seven out of seven discretionary key performance indicators; however, the plan for next year exceeds the target set for the Operating Cost per Revenue Hour. On a system -wide basis, the plan cost is estimated at $69.51 per revenue hour. Overall, FY 2012/13 is planning fewer revenue hours compared to the current year; this is not a reduction in service, merely a more concise budgeting of revenue hours. The proposed plan for FY 2012/13 estimates a reduction of 0.5% in Cruiser hours and 4.7% in Dial -A -Ride hours from the hours budgeted in the current fiscal year which will be sufficient to continue providing the same level of service. Operating costs have a fixed and variable component. The cost of revenue hours and fuel are the largest components of variable costs. Fixed costs typically do not vary with service levels. Administrative, utilities, rent, insurance, advertising/marketing and legal fees are examples of fixed costs. When service increases, fixed costs are spread over more revenue hours which lower the cost per revenue hour for the fixed cost portion of the operating budget. Conversely, when budgeted revenue hours are decreased, as they are proposed for FY 2012/13, fixed costs are spread over fewer hours which increase the cost per revenue hour. Of course there are break points when the magnitude of a service change requires a reciprocal change in fixed costs but no such change is occurring here. Simply put, the fixed cost portion of the 9 operating budget is distributed over fewer revenue hours, thus contributing to the increase in operating costs per revenue hour. 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts The fare and schedule change has had a positive impact on productivity. The fare change has increased revenues and assisted the CCTS meet the mandatory farebox recovery ratio. During FY 2009/10, fares collected from passengers made up 14% of the farebox recovery ratio. Through the first nine months of FY 2011/12, fares from passengers are projected to contribute 17.4% towards the mandatory farebox return. (Interest on Investments, bus shelter advertising revenues and a contribution from the City's General Fund make up the difference.) While reducing service impacted some riders by truncating operating hours (eliminating 13 of 64 weekday trips and 15 of 45 Saturday trips), the Cruiser trips eliminated were the least productive as measured by passengers per hour. Reducing less productive trips has increased productivity. Passengers per hour have increased 20 percent from 9 passengers per hour in FY 2009/10 to 10.8 during the first nine months of FY 2011/12. DAR productivity increased from 4 passengers per hour to 4.2 during the same period (5 percent increase). A continued effort to increase passengers per hour on Corona Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride service is an on -going goal. 2.5 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Major trip destinations within the city are the commercial/retail areas along McKinley Street and Sixth Street, The Crossing shopping area on Cajalco Road and Temescal Canyon, medical facilities along Magnolia Avenue, regional transit facilities along Sixth Street and Main Street, the Corona Public Library, Senior Center and civic center. Many Dial -A -Ride passengers use the service to get to daily work programs/care centers, doctor visits and Corona's two Metrolink Stations. Cruiser patrons use the service for work, shopping trips, making stops at pharmacies and grocery stores, and accessing restaurants and movie theaters. Historically, ridership on the Cruiser has been relatively stable while ridership on Dial -A -Ride continued to increase at a small yet steady pace. These trends have been interrupted by the fare and schedule change. Some riders may ride less frequently to compensate for increased fares while others may cease to ride at all. The CCTS does hope to gain back these riders over time. Likewise, the schedule change has impacted riders. The hope is that impacted riders are able to migrate from early morning and later evening trips eliminated on July 5, 2010, to mid -day service. 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs The CCTS continues to upgrade existing bus stops and add new ones to improve the convenience of riding buses for our patrons. Two bus stops along RTA's route 1 bus line will undergo upgrades to afford bus riders using mobility devices to access the stops. In response to requests, two stops will be added to Cruisers routes. Improvements in bus stop amenities create a more inviting environment that may encourage and attract new riders to the Corona Cruiser system. New shelters will be installed throughout the Cruiser service area and along both the Blue and Red Lines. In the spring of 2012, the CCTS purchased 26 bus shelters, benches and trash baskets. Site improvements to accommodate shelters and their installation are planned for the fall of 2012. 10 Chapter 3 — Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes To fill the gap between revenues and expenses, the CCTS implemented a fare increase to boost revenues and a service reduction to lower costs in July 2010. Trimming the least productive hours was a reasonable starting place. Early morning and later evening hours were less productive than mid -day hours. The service change eliminated the least productive weekday and Saturday hours. However, some productive Saturday afternoon hours were eliminated to balance revenue and expenses. Aligning Dial -A -Ride service hours with Cruiser hours also helped reduce operating costs. By statute, the CCTS must recover at least 20 percent of operating costs in passenger fares to maintain state funding. When passenger fares do not meet the required 20 percent requirement, the City of Corona's General Fund makes up the difference. Restoring some Saturday afternoon service may be considered when the City's General Fund becomes capable of sustaining additional funding to meet the required 20 percent recovery ratio (between operating cost and passenger fares) to accommodate the additional cost of Saturday service. CCTS staff wants to ensure that any increase in service is sustainable over the next several years. The CCTS will continue to look to a private sector firm to operate transit services, as opposed to City employees operating transit services, as the most cost effective way to provide bus service. The current five-year contract expires October 2012; CCTS will be looking for competitive prices to continue transit service from the next contract operator. The cost to provide transit service over the next five-year contract is a large factor in the City's ability to restore service lost in July 2010. 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Route Modifications Because of the service and fare changes implemented recently (July 5, 2010), no schedule or fare modifications are anticipated for FY 2012/13. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Increasing ridership is another way to augment passenger fares. The CCTS staff is looking at strategies to increase Cruiser ridership. These marketing strategies include: o Poetry on the Bus Program — in cooperation with Centennial High, Corona High and Lee Pollard High, CCTS conducted its fourth successful poetry contest inviting students to submit original poetry to be displayed on the interior of Cruiser buses. Selected poems are rotated each month. The program works as an outreach effort and marketing campaign at high schools while providing a creative outlet for students. Cruiser patrons are rewarded with expressive, introspective and entertaining poems to read and ponder during their time on the bus. o Art on the Bus Program — replicates the Poetry on the Bus Program but broadens it to include student artwork. This program has completed three annual cycles and incorporates artwork from high school -aged students. The success for the program to introduce students to public transit will ensure its continued success. o Distribute promotional items and route/schedule information at various community events such as — 4th of July Parade, Earth Day celebrations, Cinco De Mayo Parade and Festival, Senior Health Fair and the Mayor's Water Conservation Day Kick -Off. o Distribute recently developed promotional flyers promoting Cruiser service by highlighting businesses and schools served along the Red and Blue Lines. 11 o Providing travel training clinics at the Corona Senior Center and other community -based centers and housing developments. 3.4 Budget Impact and Proposed Changes As mentioned, declining revenues and increasing costs forced the CCTS to implement a fare increase and reduce the span of service. While CCTS passengers have been impacted, the goal throughout the process was to align revenues and expenses to provide as much service as possible to the most passengers. The fare and schedule change brought in balance revenues and expenses. These measures were taken in addition to cost cutting on departmental expenses such as conferences, training and equipment maintenance. Efforts to reduce costs in FY 2012/13 will not impact service hours nor increase fares. Chapter 4 — Financial and Capital Plans 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget To continue to provide Corona Cruiser fixed route and Dial -A -Ride service, the CCTS is proposing a balanced budget of $2,001,936 for FY 2012/13, representing less than a 2% increase over the current year budget. Retirement costs are driving the 3 percent increase in salary and benefit costs. Reductions in office supplies and equipment contribute to an overall reduction in the Materials, Marketing and Utilities category. The cost of gasoline is the cost driver in fuel cost; however, the replacement of 10 gasoline -powered buses with 6 gasoline -powered and 4 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)-powered buses tends to slow the increase in total fuel cost. Although miles per gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) units for CNG-powered buses is less than MPG for gasoline -powered buses, the cost of CNG is less than half the cost of gasoline. The overall cost to provide contracted transit service is estimated to increase slightly (0.2%) in FY 2012/13. The current five-year contract for transportation services expires in October 2012. While CCTS staff is hoping for competitive pricing in the next five-year contract, only when bids are received will the true cost of contracted transit service be known. Please see Budget by Item and Mode on the proceeding page: 12 Budget by Item and Mode Budget Item Mode FY2011/12 SRTp FY2012/13 Plan Variance $ % Sa la ries & Benefits Dia I -A -Fad e Cruiser Subtotal 175,998 179,966 3,968 2.3% 173,860 180,309 6,449 3.7% 349,858 360,275 10,417 3.0% Materials, Marketing and Utilities Dia I -A -Fad e 32,568 Cruiser 38,518 Fuel 32,323 37,962 (245) -0.8% (556) -1.4% Subtotal 71,086 70,285 (801) -1.1% Dia I -A -Fad e Cruiser Qabtotal 110,300 133,060 82,000 84,670 22,760 20.6% 2,670 3.3% 192,300 217,730 25,430 13.2% Contracted Transit Service Dia I -A -Fad e 685,420 672,123 (13,297) -1.9% Cruiser 666,000 681,523 15,523 2.3% Total 8.ibtotaI 1,351,420 1,353,646 2,226 0.2% Dia I -A -Fad e 1,004,286 1,017,472 13,186 1.3% Cruiser 960,378 984,464 24,086 2.5% Total $1,964,664 $2,001,936 $37,272 1.9% 13 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program The CCTS is proposing a funding plan that includes state funding (Local Transportation Fund) to support 80 percent of operating costs. The remaining 20 percent will be generated by passenger fares, bus shelter advertising and local funds. The CCTS plans on purchasing a new reservation and dispatch system in FY 2012/13. Funding to cover this capital purchase consists of State Transit Assistance and Proposition 1 B/Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement & Service Enhancement Program funding. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Half Fare During Non -Peak Hours According to federal statute, transit operators must allow 1) elderly persons, 2) persons with disabilities, and 3) Medicare cardholders to ride fixed route service during off-peak hours for a fare that is not more than one-half the base fare charged to other persons during peak hours. The base fare for Cruiser service is $1.50 during peak and non -peak hours. The fare for an elderly person (60+), a person with disabilities and Medicare cardholders is $0.70 throughout the service day. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) The ADA requires that complementary paratransit service be available to ADA certified persons during the same hours and days of operation available to Cruiser (fixed route) passengers. Complementary paratransit service must be provided within 3/4 of a mile of a fixed route. The CCTS operates a general population Dial -A -Ride that extends beyond the 3/4 mile corridor to the city limits, into the county areas of Coronita, El Cerritos and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the City of Norco (Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Norco College). When demand exceeds capacity, requests for service from ADA certified passengers receive priority. As such, the CCTS maintains zero denials for ADA certified passengers. Provision of Service - ADA complementary paratransit must be provided to an ADA eligible individual, including those with temporary eligibility, a personal care attendant (PCA) if necessary, and one other individual accompanying the ADA-eligible individual, if requested. Additional companions may be provided service, if space is available. Service also must be provided to visitors. Any visitor who presents ADA eligibility documentation from another jurisdiction must be provided service. Type of Service — The ADA specifies "origin to destination" service. In certain instances, this might require service beyond strict curb -to -curb. Door -to -Door assistance for ADA certified passengers is available upon request. Door-to-door service is available when: • Drivers can see the bus at all times; • The outermost door is within 150 feet from the bus; • Driver safety and security is maintained; and • Where a safe parking area is available. Fares — The ADA complementary paratransit fare cannot exceed twice the fare for a trip of similar length, at a similar time of day, on the Cruiser (fixed route system). No fares maybe charged for Personal Care Attendants (PCAs). ADA certified individuals are charged $2.50 per trip which is less than twice the fare for a trip on the Cruiser ($1.50 x 2 = $3.00). 14 Title VI In compliance with the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, no person on the basis of race, color, or national origin, is excluded from participation in, or is denied the benefits of, or is subjected to discrimination within the scope of services offered by the CCTS. Notification to passengers of their right to file a complaint is included on the City of Corona website and service brochures. Transportation Development Act Triennial Audit The CCTS underwent a Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Performance Audit in March 2010 covering fiscal years 2006/07 through 2008/09. Audit results suggest a continuing efficient operation meeting the major goals and objectives of the TDA program. Room for improvement is always paramount with the audit suggesting more scrutiny of performance data and continuity between National Transit Database and TransTrack/performance-based reporting. Federal Transit Administration Triennial Review The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) conducted a Triennial Review of fiscal years 2007/08 through 2009/10 in August 2011. Four of five corrective actions were closed out in five days. These actions ranged from including combining all federal funded equipment into a single list to adding language regarding door-to-door assistance to the City's web page and brochure to adding the term "Medicare Card Holder" to the fare structure on promotional materials. The fifth item, a maintenance monitoring plan, was submitted for FTA approval. National Transit Database The National Transit Database (NTD) approved CCTS' request to submit transit financial and performance data through a Small Systems Waiver starting in report year 2011; the waiver is available to transit providers operating 30 or fewer buses. (CCTS currently operates 14 buses.) The NTD closed out the annual report in early December 2011. Alternative Fueled Vehicles (RCTC Policy) The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) encourages all Riverside County transit operators to transition from diesel -powered transit buses to alternative fuel buses. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and liquefied natural gas (LNG) are recognized as preferred options. The CCTS currently runs a mixed fleet of gasoline and CNG-powered buses. Ten Dial -A -Ride buses are slated for replacement next year. As planned, four of these buses will be powered with Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). While gasoline is a recognized alternative fuel for demand response/Dial-A-Ride buses, the CCTS will integrate CNG-powered Dial -A -Ride buses with funding through the federal government's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) program. Replacement DAR buses will be arriving in May/June 2012. The CCTS anticipates replacing its Cruiser buses in 2013. Each bus will remain CNG-powered. 15 IMMO MM• Rioride {nmlr Trasp ention [omnissun Bus (Motorbus) / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Corona Year Built Mfg. Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active # of Vehicles Contingency FY Vehicles 2011/12 FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2006 EDN AeroElite 30 4 33 CN 4 0 585,345 682,171 170,543 Totals: 30 4 4 0 585,345 682,171 170,543 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 1 of I 5/21/2012 IMMO MM• Rioride {nmlr Trasp ention [omnissun Demand Response / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Corona Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2011/12 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2007 2005 2004 EDN EDN GCC AeroTech E-450 E-450 18 18 20 2 2 6 26 26 26 GA GA GA 2 2 6 0 0 0 271,904 393,681 1,341,935 318,928 438,473 1,459,690 159,464 219,237 243,282 Totals: 56 10 10 0 2,007,520 2,217,091 221,709 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 1 of I 5/17/2012 1.1.1 IlllllM• Biwride [Dump. Trasp ention [omnissun Table 2 -- City of Corona -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 11 11 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $2,031,211 $1,849,629 $1,964,664 $1,361,323 $2,001,936 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $422,981 $371,492 $392,933 $278,655 $400,388 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,608,230 $1,478,137 $1,571,731 $1,082,668 $1,601,548 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 229,820 210,721 212,207 159,682 213,700 Passenger Miles 976,002 893,263 959,718 677,654 900,891 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 34,372.8 28,526.8 29,571.0 21,353.0 28,800.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 442,700.0 364,347.0 375,552.0 277,906.0 378,308.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 475,072.0 401,454.0 397,630.0 303,515.0 412,953.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $59.09 $64.84 $66.44 $63.75 $69.51 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.82% 20.08% 20.00% 20.47% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $7.00 $7.01 $7.41 $6.78 $7.49 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.65 $1.65 $1.64 $1.60 $1.78 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $46.79 $51.82 $53.15 $50.70 $55.61 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.63 $4.06 $4.19 $3.90 $4.23 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 6.7 7.4 7.2 7.5 7.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.52 1 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.56 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I 1.1.1 EM• Bioride {bier Tmsp edion [omnissun Table 2 -- Corona -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 4 4 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,004,386 $907,827 $960,378 $672,611 $984,464 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $217,613 $182,526 $192,076 $139,735 $196,894 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $786,773 $725,301 $768,302 $532,876 $787,570 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 165,131 152,568 153,832 114,905 154,000 Passenger Miles 650,616 600,753 666,093 452,426 600,600 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 18,285.6 14,225.0 14,571.0 10,682.9 14,500.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 215,553.0 167,939.0 170,623.0 125,956.0 174,676.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 226,485.0 179,439.0 179,708.0 134,907.0 187,003.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $54.93 $63.82 $65.91 $62.96 $67.89 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.66% 20.11% 20.00% 20.77% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $4.76 $4.75 $4.99 $4.64 $5.11 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.21 $1.21 $1.15 $1.18 $1.31 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $43.03 $50.99 $52.73 $49.88 $54.32 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.65 $4.32 $4.50 $4.23 $4.51 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.0 10.7 10.6 10.8 10.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.77 0.91 0.90 0.91 0.88 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I IMO EM• Bioride firmer Trasp edion [omnissun Table 2 -- Corona-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 7 7 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,026,825 $941,801 $1,004,286 $688,712 $1,017,472 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $205,368 $188,965 $200,857 $138,920 $203,494 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $821,457 $752,836 $803,429 $549,792 $813,978 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 64,689 58,153 58,375 44,777 59,700 Passenger Miles 325,386 292,510 293,625 225,228 300,291 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 16,087.2 14,301.8 15,000.0 10,670.2 14,300.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 227,147.0 196,408.0 204,929.0 151,950.0 203,632.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 248,587.0 222,015.0 217,922.0 168,608.0 225,950.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $63.83 $65.85 $66.95 $64.55 $71.15 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.00% 20.06% 19.99% 20.17% 19.99% Subsidy per Passenger $12.70 $12.95 $13.76 $12.28 $13.63 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.52 $2.57 $2.74 $2.44 $2.71 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $51.06 $52.64 $53.56 $51.53 $56.92 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.62 $3.83 $3.92 $3.62 $4.00 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.0 4.1 3.9 4.2 4.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.29 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I MN NM= Biwrside 6urrtt Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Corona -- 3 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Vehicles Passengers Passenger Miles Revenue Hours Total Hours Revenue Miles Total Miles Operating Cost Passenger Revenue Net Subsidy COR-BLUE COR-DAR COR-RED Total Total Total 2 7 2 79,000 59,700 75,000 308,100 300,291 292,500 7,260.0 14,300.0 7,240.0 7,568.0 15,889.0 7,561.0 91,344.0 203,632.0 83,332.0 95,637.0 225,950.0 91,366.0 $492,927 $1,017,472 $491,537 $98,586 $203,494 $98,308 $394,341 $813,978 $393,229 Service Provider Totals 11 213,700 900,891 28,800.0 31,018.0 378,308.0 412,953.0 $2,001,936 $400,388 $1,601,548 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of 2 MN NM= Biwrside 6urrtt Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Corona -- 3 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Operating Cost Per Cost Per Revenue Hour Revenue Mile Cost Per Passenger Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Subsidy Per Revenue Hour Subsidy Per Revenue Mile Passengers Passengers Per Hour Per Mile COR-BLUE COR-DAR COR-RED Total Total Total $67.90 $71.15 $67.89 $5.40 $5.00 $5.90 $6.24 $17.04 $6.55 20.00% 19.99% 20.00% $4.99 $13.63 $5.24 $1.28 $2.71 $1.34 $54.32 $56.92 $54.31 $4.32 $4.00 $4.72 10.9 4.2 10.4 0.86 0.29 0.90 Service Provider Totals $69.51 $5.29 $9.37 20.00% $7.49 $1.78 $55.61 $4.23 7.4 0.56 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 2 of 2 Table 3A — Individual Route Descriptions and Area Serviced Line Route Description Area / Site Served Cruiser Red Line The Crossings shopping area at Cajalco Road and Temescal Canyon to the El Tapatio at West Sixth Street via downtown / Civic Center The Crossings shopping area, Taber Park and Ride, California Avenue Post Office, Centennial High, Corona Transit Center/North Main Corona Metrolink Station, City Library, Senior Center, Civic Center, Corona High and El Tapatio on west Sixth Street Blue Line Wal-Mart at McKinley Street west to River Run Apartments via Mountain Gate Park and downtown / Civic Center McKinley Street shopping areas, Magnolia Avenue, Centennial High, medical facilities, Senior Center, City Library, Corona Transit Center/North Main Corona Metrolink Station, Fender museum, north Main Street shopping area and restaurants Dial -A -Ride City-wide Demand response / reservation based service City-wide, neighboring county areas of Coronita, El Cerrito and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the city of Norco - Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Riverside Community College/Norco Campus 23 " u o y n q u i u o o A T ! 0 p u e 6 u p p a n p e i a l l a y s s n q a p n i o u i s a n u a n a i J a y 1 0 s a s s e d A e p - g l n w J e s i r u 0 e z m u e o u i o i s p u n l u o p o n p a i u o p e ! w e p u e u o g s e 6 u o 0 g g L Z g y s a p n l o u l 8 8 5 ` L 8 $ 0 0 8 ` Z L E $ - L 6 1 7 ` L 6 Z $ - E 0 5 ` Z 8 E $ 8 1 7 5 ` 3 0 9 ` 6 $ 9 E 6 ` 1 . 0 9 ` 3 l e l l d e 3 v 6 u g e a a d o a e l o l - - - L 6 1 7 ` L L Z - � 0 5 ` Z 8 E $ - 0 0 0 ` 0 0 9 $ ! R d e o : I e l o w s - - - L 6 b ` L l Z - E 0 4 ' Z 8 E 0 0 0 ' 0 0 9 - E 6 w a i s t y 0 l e d s i a p u e u m e n u a s % e s e g a m d - E l . A d 8 8 5 ` L 8 $ 0 0 8 ` Z I . E $ - - - - 8 1 7 5 ` 6 0 9 ` 6 $ 9 � 6 ` 6 0 0 ` Z $ G u g e i a d o : l e l o l g n s 8 8 5 ` L 8 0 0 8 ' Z L � - 8 1 7 9 ' 1 , 0 9 ' 1 , 9 E 6 ` 1 , 0 0 ` Z s e n u e n a b 6 w l e a a d 0 - � 1 , A d = . a a 4 3 0 , x o g a c e d v z n o u i p i e w e e u e 5 / e p i e A H - L 0 � 5 u o i l 0 a g b 3 S I W L d l e l i d e 0 9 6 d o a d d J 6 1 0 l l u n o a g 9 6 d a l , ' V I S A D s p u n d i e l o l ' o N l o a r a d u o n d u o s e a l o a r a d e u o a o o l o f q ! 3 � 1 . / Z 1 4 0 Z M a o } p a ; s a n b a H s p u n A } o / G e w w n s - 1 7 a l a e l Table 4 — Capital Project Justification Number: FY 13-1 Title: Dispatching and Reservation Software and Equipment Description: This project provides funds for: • Replace existing dispatching software and equipment. Justification: Upgrading the existing system is not feasible so replacement is required. Funding Source(s): Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement & Service Enhancement Program State Transit Assistance $ 217,497 $ 382,503 $ 600,000 25 Ta ble 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/ 14 City of Corona Project Description Project No. Total Funds OF STA Prop 1B Security C ISL,P Prop 1BCapital PTMISEA Section 5307- Riverside/San Bernardino UZA Fare Box* Other** FY 14 -Operating Revenues 2,082,013 1,665,610 325,312 91,092 Subtotal: Operating $2,082,013 $1,665,610 - - - - $325,312 $91,092 FY 14 -Purchase Land and Mobile- based Radio System FY 14 - 1 600,000 522,350 77,650 Subtotal: Capital $600,000 - $522,350 $77,650 - - - - Total: Operating&Capital $2,682,013 $1,665,610 $522,350 $77,650 - $325,312 $91,092 * IncludesAB2766 congestion and emission reduction fundsto incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes ** Other revenues include busshelter advertising and City contribution. Table 5.1 — Capital Project Justification Number: FY 14 - 1 Title: Purchase land- and mobile -based radio system Description: This project provides funds for: • Replace the existing land -based dispatch radio equipment and mobile radio system on- board buses. Justification: Communication between dispatch/management staff and buses/drivers in -route promotes the efficient use of available transit service. This is important for safety and security and extends the reach of supervision/management into the field. The existing system and equipment is in need of upgrading and replacement. Funding Source(s): Proposition 1 B / CTSGP $ 77,650 State Transit Assistance - $ 522,350 Total $ 600,000 27 Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/ 15 City of Corona Project Description Project No. Total Funds LTF STA Prop 1B security CTSGP Prop 1BCapital pTMIgA Section 5307- Riverside/&in Bernardino UZA Fare Box* Other** FY 15 - Operating Revenues 2,165,294 1,732,234 338,324 94,735 Subtotal: Operating $2,165,294 $1,732,234 - - - $338,324 $94,735 FY 15 - Purchase Rolling Stock (FY2010/11 & FY2011/12) FY 15 - 1 970,442 970,442 Subtotal: Capital $970,442 - - - 970,442 - - - Total: Operating & Capita l $3,135,736 $1,732,234 - - $970,442 - $338,324 $94,735 * IncludesAB2766 congestion and emission reduction fundsto incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes **Other revenues include busshelter advertising and City contribution. Table 5.2 — Capital Project Justification Number: FY 15 - 1 Title: Purchase of rolling stock Description: This project provides funds for: • Purchase rolling stock to address the potential expansion of the city's service area. Justification: The City of Corona may increase in physical size in the near future. The purchase of rolling stock to meet the future needs is planned here. Funding Source(s): Proposition 1 B/Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 Total $ 970,442 29 Table 6 — Progress Implementing Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations Audit Recommendation Action / Remedy Work with the contract operator to electronically submit the monthly performance report that is compatible with the City computer system (carry-over FY 2003/04-2005/06 audit). Change in contract operator is the next best opportunity to define and implement electronic submission of transit performance data. Contract renewal will occur in the fall 2012. Closer monitoring of performance reporting by contractor (FY 2006/07-2008/09 audit). On -going. Ensure National Transit Database and TransTrack performance data ties (FY 2006/07-2008/09 audit). On -going. 30 1.1.1 llllilili • Bioffide firmer Trmspnmtion [omnissun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Corona Data Elements FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 Target FY 2011/12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 212,207 Passenger Miles 959,718 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 29,571.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 375,552.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 397,630.0 Total Operating Expenses $1,964,664 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $392,933 Net Operating Expenses $1,571,731 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 20.00%1 >= 20.00% ( 20.47%1 Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $66.44 <= $65.32 $63.75 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $7.41 >= $6.02 and <= $8.14 $6.78 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.64 >= $1.42 and <= $1.92 $1.60 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $53.15 >= $44.03 and <= $59.57 $50.70 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.19 >= $3.46 and <= $4.68 $3.90 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7.20 >= 6.21 and <= 8.40 7.50 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.57 >= 0.49 and <= 0.67 0.57 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 7 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I 1.1.1 r Biwride [ounry Trmspnmtion (omrrissiun FY 2012/13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; City of Corona All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/13 Plan FY 2012/13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 210,721 159,682 213,700 None Passenger Miles 893,263 677,654 900,891 None Revenue Hours 28,526.8 21,353.0 28,800.0 None Total Hours 31,030.7 23,000.7 31,018.0 None Revenue Miles 364,347.0 277,906.0 378,308.0 None Total Miles 401,454.0 303,515.0 412,953.0 None Operating Costs $1,849,629 $1,361,323 $2,001,936 None Passenger Revenue $371,492 $278,655 $400,388 None Operating Subsidy $1,478,137 $1,082,668 $1,601,548 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $64.84 $63.75 $69.51 <= $64.87 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.08 $4.90 $5.29 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $8.78 $8.53 $9.37 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.08% 20.47% 20.00% >= 20.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $7.01 $6.78 $7.49 >= $5.76 and <= $7.80 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.65 $1.60 $1.78 >= $1.36 and <= $1.84 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $51.82 $50.70 $55.61 >= $43.10 and <= $58.31 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.06 $3.90 $4.23 >= $3.32 and <= $4.49 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7.40 7.50 7.40 >= 6.38 and <= 8.63 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.58 0.57 0.56 >= 0.48 and <= 0.66 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of 1 Table 9 — CCTS Highlights FY 2012/13 Operations o To ensure a least -cost operation, the City of Corona provides transit service by contracting with a private section company. In October 2012, the existing five-year contract expires. CCTS staff will put together bid documents, conduct a competitive bid process and select the best qualified and most responsible and responsive company to continue to provide CCTS patrons with safe, reliable and responsive transit service. o In FY 2010/11, the CCTS implemented a fare increase and reduced service to address an imbalance between decreasing revenues and increasing costs. Corona Cruiser bus trips were eliminated as a cost saving measure. CCTS staff may look for opportunities to restore some Saturday trips eliminated to reduce costs; however, financial sustainability would be a prerequisite to any potential restoration of a trip or trips. o Continue to work with the Corona Norco Unified School District to identify times and locations where the Corona Cruiser can transport students commuting between home and school if state funding for school busing is further constrained. o Promote alternative modes of transportation by improving pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Identify new sidewalk and in -fill needs as well as expanding the bicycle route network. Pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements make these modes of transportation a viable option to automobiles and improves access to public transportation. o Continue to survey bus stops for Americans with Disabilities Act compliance. Capital Projects o Test, accept and place into service ten new Dial -A -Ride buses. o Purchase and place one Corona Cruiser bus into revenue service. o Purchase four replacement Corona Cruiser buses. o Assemble bid documents and conduct a competitive bid process for a new scheduling and dispatch system. Performance Measures Fiscal Year 2008/09 Actual 2009/10 Actual 2010/11 Actual 2011/12 Year End Estimate 2012/13 Plan System -wide Ridership 229,866 229,820 210,721 212,909 213,700 Cost per Revenue Hour $57.62 $59.09 $64.84 $63.75 $69.51 33 Carr of RIVERSIDE 2012/13-2014/15 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS System Overview 1 Existing Service and Route Performance 3 Planned Service Changes and Implementation 6 Financial and Capital Plans 7 Table 1 - Fleet Inventory 9 Table 2 - SRTP Service Summary 10 Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics 11 Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 13 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-1 14 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-2 15 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-3 16 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-4 17 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-5 18 Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 19 Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 19 Table 5.1A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 14-1 20 Table 5.2A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 1 5-1 21 Table 6 - Progress to Implement Triennial Performance Audit 22 Table 7 - Service Provider Performance Targets Report 23 Table 8 - SRTP Performance Report 24 Table 9 - Highlights of 2012/13 - 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan 25 City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan I. SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Service Area Special Transportation, a section within the City of Riverside Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department, has been offering Paratransit services to the Riverside community since 1975. This dial -a -ride transportation service is provided within the 87.4 square mile incorporated city limits of the City of Riverside, shown below in Figure 1-1. Figure 1-1 RIVERSIDE NEIGHBORHOODS Lev tee» iejven5iul • 1.2 Population Profile According to the 2010 demographic data published by the United States Census Bureau, the population of the City of Riverside totals 303,871 residents. The senior population within the City of Riverside (those over 60 years of age) accounts for approximately 13% of the City population. Staff anticipates an increase in the senior population and in ridership due to the age demographics of the City. -1- City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Ridership has been trending upward for the past several years and continues to increase. 1.3 Paratransit Services Owned and operated by the City of Riverside, Special Transportation is an origin -to - destination rideshare transportation service. The service is limited to senior citizens (60 years and older) and persons with disabilities (disabilities require a physician's documentation). Operating hours for Special Transportation are Monday through Friday, from 8:00 am - 5:30 pm and 9:00 am - 4:00 pm during weekends and holidays. In order to reserve a ride, passengers must call Special Transportation's reservation phone number during the office hours of 8:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am - 3:00 pm on weekends and holidays. A message machine is available after business hours for cancellations. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure Fare for a one-way trip is $2.00 per passenger. Clients may pay their fare in cash at boarding time, or purchase tickets or a punch card in advance of their scheduled ride. A ticket may be purchased for $2.00 and is worth one ride; a punch card may be purchased for $40 and is worth 20 rides. There are no proposals for an increase in fares during fiscal year 2012/13. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The City of Riverside Special Transportation has been operating a fleet of 30 Paratransit compressed natural gas (CNG), alternative fuel, Type III vehicles. In the past, twenty-five Paratransit vehicles and twenty-five routes have typically met daily ridership demands. Special Transportation is preparing to expand its fleet by five vehicles and replace eight vehicles during the 2012/13 fiscal year. Although not assigned to a route and typically used as an alternative vehicle, Special Transportation also owns one Paratransit van equipped to hold 6 passengers and one wheelchair. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities Special Transportation facilities are located at the City of Riverside corporation yard. Included in the facilities are administrative office space, dispatch room, training and conference room, and parking space for transit vehicles. Special Transportation's vehicles are maintained in the City's fleet bay, which is used for all city vehicles. - 2 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Special Transportation is currently completing construction of a new CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility to be used primarily for maintaining Special Transportation's vehicles. Construction will be complete by June 2012. The facility will include 5 bays, an office, and an upstairs area for parts and storage. The facility will be outfitted with all safety equipment required to maintain alternative fuel vehicles. Following construction completion of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Special Transportation will begin to make progress on Special Transportation's Slow Fill Station Expansion project and Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion project. In order to meet fueling demands, Special Transportation staff anticipates installing five slow fill stations. The project will be funded by federal and local funds. Special Transportation was awarded Proposition 1 B funds to expand and modernize its operation facility. In-house City staff is currently working on the design of this project to include expansion of the drivers' break room and dispatch office. II. EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance Special Transportation served approximately 171,000 passengers during the 201 1 /12 fiscal year, representing a 6% increase from the previous fiscal year and 12% from the 2009/10 fiscal year. The number of passengers served represents the highest number served within the past six years. Ridership levels for the 2012/13 fiscal year are expected to increase. 2.2 Key Performance Indicators Special Transportation continues to meet its performance targets in eight critical areas. During fiscal year 201 1 /12, Special Transportation met its mandatory farebox recovery ratio target and met all targets in the seven discretionary performance areas, as shown in Figure II-1 . - 3 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Figure II-1 Performance Indicators Performance Scorecard' Mandatory: 1 . Farebox Recovery Ratio Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile Meets Target 2.3 Productivity Improvement Efforts Special Transportation strives to operate an efficient and effective service and continues to seek ways to decrease costs while maintaining high productivity. Specifically, staff has been focusing on implementing the most efficient routes possible in order to maintain or decrease operating costs. Special Transportation has taken the step to assign one dispatcher the task of analyzing routes every day in order to ensure that driver overtime costs are as minimal as possible. Special Transportation is currently in the process of hiring additional part-time drivers to meet the high ridership demand. Part-time drivers will be used mid -day during peak time, effectively shortening travel times between pickups and drop offs currently scheduled in routes driven by full-time drivers. Utilizing additional part- time drivers will allow for more effective scheduling and a decrease in overtime costs. 2.4 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Over Next Two Years Due to the demographics of the City and current trends, staff anticipates an increase in ridership in the next several years. Senior population within the City amounts to approximately 13% and residents nearing the age of 60 amount to 18% of the population, as shown in Figure II-2, leading staff to anticipate a higher demand for Special Transportation services in the future. ' Performance Scorecard based on FY 2011/12 3rd quarter data. - 4 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Figure II-2 25,000 N 20,000 c ar y 15,000 a L 10,000 z z 5,000 Q City of Riverside Age Demographics 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85 and Over Age Group 2.5 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs ■ Population Special Transportation is in the process of meeting its immediate equipment and facility needs by completing construction of a new CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility to be used primarily for maintaining Special Transportation's vehicles. Following construction completion of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Special Transportation will begin to make progress on Special Transportation's Slow Fill Station Expansion project. In order to meet fueling demands of an expanding fleet, Special Transportation staff anticipates installing five slow fill stations. Special Transportation will also utilize Proposition 1 B funds to expand and modernize its operation facility. The improved facility will include expansion of the drivers' break room, dispatch office and a reception area for passengers. In-house City staff is in the process of designing a more user friendly and efficient layout for employees and customers alike. - 5 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan III. PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Recent Service Changes Special Transportation did not implement any service changes during the 2011 /12 fiscal year. 3.2 Recommended Modification to Paratransit Services Due to peak ridership demand, Special Transportation will add four additional routes to weekday services. Adding four additional routes will allow Special Transportation staff to more effectively and efficiently serve its clients. In order to maintain its spare ratio, Special Transportation is expanding its fleet by five vehicles. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Although ridership has increased in record numbers, Special Transportation continues to promote its services. Special Transportation has installed advertisements on the back windows of several vehicles in order to market the services it offers. The advertisements include information such as the cost of fare and the phone number to call in order to make a reservation. Special Transportation regularly prints out flyers and brochures to distribute to the City's community centers and senior centers and also includes ads on other City publications such as the department's activity guide and senior guide. Staff makes an effort to be present at special events (wellness fairs, grand openings, concerts, etc.) to conduct outreach to the public and distribute promotional products. In order to obtain feedback on the services it offers to the public, Special Transportation staff is distributing the 2nd Annual Passenger Satisfaction Survey to its passengers during the fiscal year 2012 in order to obtain feedback regarding the transportation services it provides to the community. Survey categories included customer service, safety, ease of scheduling a reservation, and vehicle cleanliness. Staff will review and consider passenger feedback in making policy and operational changes. Results of the survey will be compiled by July 2012. 3.4 Budget Impact on Proposed Changes Special Transportation expects to maintain its farebox recovery ratio after adding four additional routes and will request additional maintenance funds from FTA in order to sustain the costs of maintaining additional vehicles. Special Transportation is required to maintain a 10% farebox recovery ratio. During the 2011 /12 fiscal year, Special Transportation maintained a 12.54% farebox recovery ratio. - 6 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan IV. FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget Special Transportation relies on Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to support its operating budget with the exclusion of the preventative maintenance budget. Special Transportation utilizes 5307 federal funds to fund the preventative maintenance of its fleet. Special Transportation's overall budget for the 2012/13 fiscal year has increased by 4% in comparison to the 201 1 /12 fiscal year, as shown in Figure IV-1. Special Transportation requested an additional $54,999 in LTF funds and $40,000 in FTA funds to cover increasing operating expenses. Figure IV-1 FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 Budget Item SRTP Plan Variance $ Amount % Salaries & Benefits 2,008,651 2,035,419 26,768 1% Materials & Supplies 225,435 241,911 16,476 7% Fuel 225,000 225,000 0 0% Maintenance 350,000 400,000 50,000 14% Contract Services 0 15,000 15,000 Other Expenses 369,931 387,814 17,883 5% TOTAL 3,179,017 3,305,144 126,127 4% Personnel costs, in the form of driver staff hours and related benefits, have risen due to increased ridership. Special Transportation will also be opening the new CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility and expanding its fleet, increasing facility and vehicle maintenance and repair costs. Software maintenance costs, for the RouteMatch software used in the dispatch office and in the mobile data computers located in every minibus, are increasing from the previous fiscal year. Lastly, Special Transportation is partially funding a contracted security guard for the 2012/13 fiscal year in order to enhance security of the parking lot and CNG Vehicle Maintenance facilities. - 7 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program Special Transportation will continue to take advantage of available grant opportunities, such as the California Department of Transportation Proposition 1 B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvements, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA), in order to support its capital programs. Special Transportation is applying for PTMISEA funds to purchase five replacement vehicles and supplement the existing capital budget for the Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion project. Special Transportation is also applying for Proposition 1 B Security Funds to install security lighting and cameras and using a combination of State Transit Assistance (STA) and 5307 federal funds to support the lease of a Xerox machine. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Special Transportation strives to remain compliant with all local, state and federal regulations. Staff stays abreast of legislative information and developments by attending workshops, trainings, and conferences which are frequently offered free of charge to transit operators. Special Transportation complies with FTA reporting requirements such as the submission of monthly and annual National Transit Database (NTD) reports. Special Transportation closed the annual NTD report for FY 2010/1 1 with no issues. Special Transportation completed its last FTA Triennial Review in 2009 with no deficiencies. The next FTA Triennial Review is scheduled for August of 2012. In accordance with the 2010 Transportation Development Act Performance Review recommendations, Special Transportation implemented a passenger satisfaction survey to distribute annually to its passengers. Additionally, staff is reviewing the possibility of terminating subscription service due to lack of public interest. Special Transportation received a satisfactory score on its 201 1 /12 California Highway Patrol Safety Compliance Terminal Inspection. In compliance with Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) requirements, Special Transportation purchases solely alternative fuel vehicles for its revenue rolling stock fleet. - 8 - IMME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Demand Response / Directly Operated Table Z - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Riverside Year Mfg. Model Built Code Code Lift and Seating Ramp Vehicle Capacity Equipped Length # of Active # of Fuel Vehicles Contingency Type FY Vehicles Code 2011/12 FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2008 2005 2007 2008 2008 2010 2011 CMD EDN EDN EDN FRD FRD FRD BU BU BU BU BU BU BU 7 12 14 14 16 16 16 1 2 5 1 8 10 4 15 25 25 25 25 25 25 GA CN CN CN CN CN CN 1 2 5 1 8 10 4 24,543 564,233 359,833 78,057 586,098 300,367 39,532 25,608 304,164 515,051 92,713 733,354 511,837 137,369 25,608 152,082 103,010 92,713 91,669 51,184 34,342 Totals: 95 31 31 1,952,663 2,320,096 74,842 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/2/2012 Page 9 IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Riverside -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 24 29 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $2,976,261 $2,941,368 $3,179,017 $2,192,579 $3,305,143 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $400,971 $344,366 $336,000 $274,913 $367,127 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $2,575,290 $2,597,002 $2,843,017 $1,917,666 $2,938,016 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 152,472 161,242 161,110 128,429 178,088 Passenger Miles 594,641 935,204 654,107 744,888 971,953 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 42,002.0 43,234.0 43,543.0 34,737.0 48,172.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 611,656.0 613,384.0 654,107.0 504,943.0 673,257.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 695,739.0 690,556.0 817,633.0 564,840.0 783,244.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $70.86 $68.03 $73.01 $63.12 $68.61 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.47% 11.71% 10.56% 12.54% 11.10% Subsidy per Passenger $16.89 $16.11 $17.65 $14.93 $16.50 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $4.33 $2.78 $4.35 $2.57 $3.02 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.31 $60.07 $65.29 $55.21 $60.99 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.21 $4.23 $4.35 $3.80 $4.36 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.26 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/16/2012 Page 10 ��E M = o m R i w r s i d e ( o n l y T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n D a t a E l e m e n t s T a b l e 3 - S R T P R o u t e S t a t i s t i c s C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e - - 4 F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 A l l R o u t e s R o u t e # D a y T y p e P e a k V e h i c l e s P a s s e n g e r M i l e s R e v e n u e H o u r s T o t a l H o u r s R e v e n u e M i l e s T o t a l M i l e s O p e r a t i n g C o s t P a s s e n g e r R e v e n u e N e t S u b s i d y R S S - D A R T o t a l 2 9 1 7 8 , 0 8 8 9 7 1 , 9 5 3 4 8 , 1 7 2 . 0 5 3 , 2 8 2 . 0 6 7 3 , 2 5 7 . 0 7 8 3 , 2 4 4 . 0 $ 3 , 3 0 5 , 1 4 3 $ 3 6 7 , 1 2 7 $ 2 , 9 3 8 , 0 1 6 S e r v i c e P r o v i d e r T o t a l s 2 9 1 7 8 , 0 8 8 9 7 1 , 9 5 3 4 8 , 1 7 2 . 0 5 3 , 2 8 2 . 0 6 7 3 , 2 5 7 . 0 7 8 3 , 2 4 4 . 0 $ 3 , 3 0 5 , 1 4 3 $ 3 6 7 , 1 2 7 $ 2 , 9 3 8 , 0 1 6 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r ' ? " 5 / 1 6 / 2 0 1 2 P a g e 1 1 ��E M = o m R i w r s i d e ( o n l y T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s T a b l e 3 - S R T P R o u t e S t a t i s t i c s C i t y o f R i v e r s i d e - - 4 F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 A l l R o u t e s R o u t e # D a y T y p e O p e r a t i n g C o s t P e r R e v e n u e H o u r O p e r a t i n g C o s t P e r R e v e n u e M i l e C o s t P e r P a s s e n a e r F a r e b o x R e c o v e r y R a t i o S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n a e r S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r M i l e S u b s i d y P e r R e v e n u e H o u r S u b s i d y P e r R e v e n u e M i l e P a s s e n g e r s P a s s e n g e r s P e r H o u r P e r M i l e R S S - D A R T o t a l $ 6 8 . 6 1 $ 4 . 9 1 $ 1 8 . 5 6 $ 1 6 . 5 0 $ 3 . 0 2 $ 6 0 . 9 9 $ 4 . 3 6 3 . 7 0 . 2 6 S e r v i c e P r o v i d e r T o t a l s $ 6 8 . 6 1 $ 4 . 9 1 $ 1 8 . 5 6 $ 1 6 . 5 0 $ 3 . 0 2 $ 6 0 . 9 9 $ 4 . 3 6 3 . 7 0 . 2 6 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r ' ? " 5 / 1 6 / 2 0 1 2 P a g e 1 2 City of Riverside FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1B Security Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other (') Local Transportation Funds $2,905,143 $2,538,016 $367,127 Operating Assistance Capitalized Preventive $400,000 $80,000 $320,000 Maintenance Subtotal: Operating $3,305,143 $2,618,016 $0 $0 $0 $320,000 $367,127 $0 Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion (2009/10) FY 13 - 1 $266,289 $266,289 Vehicle Replacement - Five Vehicles FY 13 - 2 $613,361 $613,361 (2010/11 - 2011/12) Special Transportation Security and Safety Improvements FY 13 - 3 $47,545 $47,545 (2010/11) Lease of Office FY 13 - 4 $20,000 $4,000 $16,000 Equipment Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion (2010/11 - 2011/12) FY 13 - 5 $100,000 $100,000 Subtotal: Capital $1,047,195 $0 $4,000 $979,650 $47,545 $16,000 $0 $0 Total: Operating 8 Capital $4,352,338 $2,618,016 $4,000 $979,650 $47,545 $336,000 $367,127 $0 -13- Revised 5/22/2012 Summary of FY 2012/13 Funds Requested.xls Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-1 PROJECT NAME: Operation Facility Modernization and Expansion PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To modernize and expand Special Transportation's Operation Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Staff would like to expand and modernize its current operations facility in order to accommodate a larger dispatch center, separate conference room, and a reception area for clients seeking to purchase bus passes. Expanding this operation facility will increase efficiencies within the transit operation and enhance passenger access. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): PTMISEA (2009/10) $266,289 STA $0 Total $266,289 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance - 14 - Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-2 PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (Five Vehicles) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): PTMISEA (10/11-11/12) $613,361 STA $0 Total $613,361 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance n/a PTMISEA (2009/10) Vehicle Replacement 475,000 CA-90- Y948-00 n/a Vehicle Replacement 475,000 Total $950, 000 - 15 - Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-3 PROJECT NAME: Security and Safety Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Lighting and security cameras. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation will install additional lighting and security cameras in order to enhance safety and security within the Special Transportation facilities. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B Security $47,545 STA $0 Total $47,545 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance -16- Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-4 PROJECT NAME: Lease of Support Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To lease support equipment (division Xerox machine). PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation would like to lease support equipment needed for operations (division Xerox machine). PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Sec 5307 $16,000 STA $4,000 Total $20,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance -17- Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-5 PROJECT NAME: Operation Facility Modernization and Expansion PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To modernize and expand Special Transportation's Operation Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Staff would like to expand and modernize its current operations facility in order to accommodate a larger dispatch center, separate conference room, and a reception area for clients seeking to purchase bus passes. Expanding this operation facility will increase efficiencies within the transit operation and enhance passenger access. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): PTMISEA (10111-11112) $100,000 STA $0 Total $100,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance n/a PTMISEA (2009/10) Operation Facility Modernization and Expansion $266,289 - 18 - City of Riverside FY 2013/14 and FY 2014/15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other (2) Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance Capitalized Preventive Maintenance $3,020,000 $450,000 $2,650,000 $90,000 $360,000 $370,000 Subtotal: Operating $3,470,000 $2,740,000 $360,000 $370,000 Paratransit Vehicles for Replacement - Seven Vehicles FY 14 - 1 $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Subtotal: Capital $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Total: Operating & Capital 1 $4,270,0001 $2,740,0001 $160,0001 I $1,000,000 $370,000 Table 5.2 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other (2) Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance Capitalized Preventive Maintenance $3,020,000 $450,000 $2,648,000 $90,000 $360,000 $372,000 Subtotal: Operating $3,470,000 $2,738,000 $360,000 $372,000 Paratransit Vehicles for Replacement - Seven Vehicles FY 15 - 1 $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Subtotal: Capital $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Total: Operating & Capital $4,270,000 $2,738,000 $160,000 $1,000,0001 $372,0001 -19- Revised 5/21/2012 Summary of Funds Requested FY 2013/14 FY 2014/15.xls Table 5.1A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 14-1 PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (Seven Vehicles) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Sec 5307 $640,000 STA $160,000 Total $800,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90- Y948-00 N/A Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 PTMISEA Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 Total $950, 000 - 20 - Table 5.2A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 15-1 PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (Seven Vehicles) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Sec 5307 $640,000 STA $160,000 Total $800,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90- Y948-00 N/A Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 PTMISEA Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 Total $950, 000 -21 - TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Recent Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/091) Action(s) Taken And Results To Date2 1 . Need to Conduct Surveys of Riders and Non -Riders on a More Frequent Basis Formal surveys of riders and non -riders have not been performed in the last few years. Although customer survey comment cards are available to all riders and are located in the Paratransit vehicles, the comment cards are strictly voluntary and do not necessarily capture key information that will assist STS in improving service. Surveys of both riders and non -riders may provide valuable input to the operator in order to address the needs of the community and to understand the rider's perception of the dial -a -ride service. As such, a more formal survey performed at least annually is warranted. Special Transportation staff now distributes annual surveys to its riders. Survey categories include safety, cleanliness, timeliness, and customer service. Complete. The 2012 Passenger Satisfaction Survey results will be completed in July, 2012. 2. Need to Publish Information Regarding the Availability of Premium Subscription Services Information regarding the availability of premium subscription services that provides unlimited rides for $90.00 per month is not disclosed in STS' brochure or on the City's webpage for Special Transportation. As an STS goal has been to offer a subscription service to riders that is both affordable and cost effective, it would be prudent to actively publish and market this information wherever possible to reach out to both riders and the general public. Staff is reviewing the possibility of terminating subscription service due to lack of public interest. In progress. I Triennial performance audit for FY 2006/07 through FY 2008/09 was conducted in FY 2009/10 and completed 6/30/10. 2 If no action taken, provide schedule for implementation or explanation of why the recommendation is no longer relevant. - 22 - r�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Riverside Data Elements FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 Target FY 2011/12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 161,110 Passenger Miles 654,107 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 43,543.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 654,107.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 817,633.0 Total Operating Expenses $3,179,017 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $336,000 Net Operating Expenses $2,843,017 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 10.56%I >= 10.00%I 12.54%I Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $73.01 <_ $66.79 $63.12 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $17.65 >_ $13.38 and <_ $18.10 $14.93 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $4.35 >_ $2.30 and <_ $3.12 $2.57 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $65.29 >_ $49.67 and <_ $67.21 $55.21 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.35 >_ $3.54 and <_ $4.78 $3.80 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.70 >= 3.15 and <= 4.26 3.70 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.25 >= 0.22 and <= 0.30 0.25 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 7 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager'"' 5/16/2012 Page 23 E Bioar,ide {oumir Tronsprrrorian {omsrissiun FY 2012/13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; City of Riverside All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/ 11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/ 12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/13 plan FY 2012/13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 161,242 128,429 178,088 None Passenger Miles 935,204 744,888 971,953 None Revenue Hours 43,234.0 34,737.0 48,172.0 None Total Hours 50,346.0 38,423.0 53,282.0 None Revenue Miles 613,384.0 504,943.0 673,257.0 None Total Miles 690,556.0 564,840.0 783,244.0 None Operating Costs $2,941,368 $2,192,579 $3,305,143 None Passenger Revenue $344,366 $274,913 $367,127 None Operating Subsidy $2,597,002 $1,917,666 $2,938,016 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $68.03 $63.12 $68.61 <= $64.23 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $4.80 $4.34 $4.91 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $18.24 $17.07 $18.56 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.71% 12.54% 11.10% >= 10.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $16.11 $14.93 $16.50 >= $12.69 and <= $17.17 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $2.78 $2.57 $3.02 >= $2.18 and <= $2.96 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $60.07 $55.21 $60.99 >= $46.93 and <= $63.49 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.23 $3.80 $4.36 >= $3.23 and <= $4.37 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.70 3.70 3.70 >= 3.15 and <= 4.26 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.26 0.25 0.26 >= 0.21 and <= 0.29 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/16/2012 Page 24 TABLE 9 — HIGHLIGHTS OF 2012/13 — 2014/15 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN ■ Proposition 1 B Security Grant — To enhance safety and security, Special Transportation is applying for almost $50,000 to install additional lighting and cameras in its parking lot and newly constructed CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility. Staff is also planning to purchase emergency response equipment. ■ Proposition 1 B Capital Grant — Special Transportation is applying for approximately $615,000 to purchase five 16-passenger Paratransit vehicles. ■ 2011/12 Annual Passenger Satisfaction Survey — In May of 2012, Special Transportation distributed a passenger satisfaction survey in order to obtain feedback regarding the transportation services it provides to the community. Survey categories included customer service, safety, ease of scheduling a reservation, and vehicle cleanliness. ■ Special Transportation Marketing and Advertisements — In order to increase ridership, Special Transportation installed advertisements of its services on the back windows of several minibuses. The advertisements contained a slogan and information regarding the City's transportation service. ■ Capital Projects — o CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility Construction — The construction of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility will be complete in June 2012. The facility is being constructed with 6 bays, an office, and a large, upper level storage area for parts and equipment. o Slow Fill Stations Installation — Following completion of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility Construction Project, Special Transportation staff will be installing additional slow fill stations at the City of Riverside Corporation Yard in order to meet fueling demands. Staff plans to install five slow fill stations during the 2012/13 fiscal year. o Vehicle Procurement and Delivery — Special Transportation will be replacing eight 16 passenger, Paratransit vehicles with grant funds received through the Federal Transit Administration and a Proposition 1 B capital grant. Vehicles will be delivered by the end of the 2012 calendar year. - 25 - o Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion - Staff is currently working on the design plan of modernizing and expanding Special Transportation's operations facility. Included in the Special Transportation's operation facility are administrative offices, dispatch room, and training and conference room. Expanding and modernizing the existing facilities will accommodate a larger dispatch center, separate conference room, and a reception area for clients seeking to purchase bus passes. Expanding this operational facility will increase efficiency within the transit operation and enhance passenger access. ■ Performance Target Report - Special Transit plans to meet the mandatory farebox recovery ratio target and meet five of the seven discretionary performance indicators in the FY 2012/13 (shown in Table 9-A). Transit operators are required to meet at least four of the seven discretionary performance indicators. Table 9-A Status Performance Indicators Performance Scorecard Mandatory :................................................................... Farebox Recovery Ratio :................................................................................................................................................................................. Operating Cost Per Revenue Discretionary Hour :....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Subsidy Per Passenger :................................................................................................................................................................................. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile :................................................................................................................................................................................. Subsidy Per Hour :................................................................................................................................................................................. Subsidy Per Mile :................................................................................................................................................................................. Passengers Per Revenue Hour Passengers Per Revenue Mile -26- Meets Target Fails to Meet Target :.......................................................................................................................... Meets Target :.......................................................................................................................... Fails to Meet Target :.......................................................................................................................... Meets Target Meets Target Meets Target Meets Target Operating and Financial Data for the past 4 years and for the 2012/13 fiscal year are shown below. Table 9-B Operating & Financial Data System wide Ridership Operating Cost per Revenue Hours FY FY FY FY 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011 /12 157,743 $71.17 152,472 $70.86 161,242 $68.03 171,239 $63.12 FY 2012/13 (plan) 178,088 $68.30 -27- PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY BLYTHE, CALIFORNIA Amerce The 8eautifu!...$weef land Of Liberty? DESERT ROADRUNNER SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 - 2014/15 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1— System Overview Page Service Area 4 Demographics 4 Service Profile 4 System Map 5 Fare Schedule 6 Fleet & Maintenance 7 Chapter 2 — Services & Performance Blue Route 1 Blythe City Circulator 9 Gold Route 2 Palo Verde College Crosstown 10 Red Route 3 CA Prisons Express 11 Green Route 4 Rural Rider 12 Silver Route 5 Saturday Service 13 Desert Road TRIP 14 Blythe Mobility Management 15 PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride 16 Performance 17 Growth and Planning 18 Chapter 3 — Service Changes Route Changes and Modifications Promotions Chapter 4 — Finances & Capital Plans 20 21 Operating Budget 23 Capital Budget 23 Compliance Requirements 23 Data Tables (Start) 24 2 Chapter 1— System Overview 3 Service Area Geographically, the Palo Verde Valley is located approximately 170 miles east of Riverside along Interstate 10 at the Colorado River. The service area is primarily based within the City of Blythe, and the unincorporated Riverside County areas of Mesa Verde and Ripley. Also part of the greater area is the California State Prison facilities of Ironwood and Chuckawalla, approximately 20 miles west of the valley along Interstate 10. Demographics The valley's population is approximately 25,000 residents. Population growth in the valley is increasing at an average of about 2% per year. The valley is agriculturally diverse providing many outdoor jobs and direct support to the local community. Major employers include the California State Prisons Ironwood and Chuckawalla. Service Profile The PVVTA provides many transit options to serve senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and the general public. PVVTA services are known to the general public under the marketing name "Desert Roadrunner". PVVTA provides four deviated fixed routes in the Palo Verde Valley which serve Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde, Palo Verde College, California Department of Corrections facilities and limited service to Ehrenberg, Arizona. ADA Para -transit is also provided after hours on the Fixed Routes through route deviation requests. The routes can deviate up to 3/4 of a mile away from the actual mapped routes. Hours of operation for the Fixed Route system are: Monday -Friday from 5:00 am to 6:10 pm and 8:00 am to 3:00 pm on Saturday and limited holidays. Finally, Desert RoadTRIP provides transportation reimbursement to individuals unable to access PVVTA Fixed Route services. The PVVTA's transit services are contracted with Transportation Concepts of Irvine, California. Transportation Concepts has been providing transit service for PVVTA since October of 2003. PVVTA also has an agreement with the Independent Living Partnership to administer the Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project (Desert RoadTRIP) that has been in place since 1995. 4 "t1 ❑ *'.131 A 1.1 •-- §% ]I>]] v§%> >1119d 9H nc 3}Ik*1V1���51 ]n w]a% ztI � A .MO V:19 Ie % |71 w § ii y ¥ Sid j � 2 0 ]Olw]w 2 / aNVN�� O V V:iVe N OIM'4'J ,m _ X A ldld § u � :om:a ulos ,ems! idtt X m]1 £ I$] A.VAAVo1S NVH) 3nN3AV 9OL &MIN 111131SAS VlikAd m Pry 3 :13 ¥g m 393110 H3� olV d ■nfil AV 99 d • • |SNOSI d ✓ 7| ✓ E| § §■ - — gVDsoll N m Fare Schedule PVVTA's fare structure is sensitive to the local economy while attempting to maintain the mandated 10% Farebox Recovery Ratio. The schedule includes full fare and discounted ride tickets. PVVTA implemented a modest fare increase on July 1, 2010. In fiscal year 2014/15, staff may propose a base increase to the fare structure in order to maintain the Farebox Recovery Ratio. Prior to any proposed increases, PVVTA would hold a public hearing in order to receive public input on any change to the Fare Schedule. PVVTA Current Fare & Pass Schedule Fixed Route Cash Fare — Routes 1, 2, 4 General Public (ages 5-59 years old) $1.65 Seniors (ages 60 years or older) $0.80 Persons with Disabilities (with ADA or Medicare Card) $0.80 Children ages 5 and under* (first boarding with full fare adult) Free Children ages 5 and under* (second & third boarding with full fare adult) $0.80 * Free for the first (1) child, $0.80 for child 2 & 3 boarding with a fare paying adult; Full Fare for all other accompanying children. Additional Zone Fare for travel to and from Ehrenberg, AZ** $1.65 ** Does not include deviation fare, valid for all passengers traveling to & from Ehrenberg, AZ excluding ride- alongs. Fixed Route Cash Fare — Route 3 Express General Public, Seniors, & Persons with Disabilities Route Deviations (one way to or from route) Route Deviations — All Fixed Routes Route Deviations (one way to or from route) DV8 Card (8 one way deviation fares)*** ***Not valid for initial passenger fare, only for payment of route deviation fee. Fixed Route Go Passes 10-Ride Punch Pass S/D 10-Ride Punch Pass General Public 31-Day Pass Seniors 31-Day Pass Persons with Disabilities 10-Ride Punch Pass **** (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Ehrenberg, AZ) **** Does not include deviation fare, valid for all passengers traveling to & from Ehrenberg, AZ ride-alongs. 10-Ride Punch Pass 20-Ride Punch Pass General Public 31-Day Pass (Route 3 Express) (Route 3 Express) (Route 3 Express) $3.30 $0.80 $0.80 $6.40 $16.50 $ 8.00 $43.00 $28.00 $28.00 $33.00 excluding $ 33.00 $ 66.00 $120.00 Other Cash Fare — X-Tend-A-Ride General Public, Seniors, & Persons with Disabilities $5.00 6 Fleet and Maintenance PVVTA operates vehicles using Compressed Natural Gas, gasoline and diesel. The fleet consists of 6 active transit vehicles and 3 active support vehicles. Most of the vehicles are interchangeable between routes. When vehicles are retired, they are declared surplus property and sold at a city auction. PVVTA adheres to all Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and California Highway Patrol (CHP) mandated Preventive Maintenance Inspection criteria and is very proactive in maintenance efforts. Vehicle maintenance is provided under contract with the City of Blythe Central Garage. Emergency Reserve Fleet As PVVTA adds new vehicles into service, older units are rotated into an emergency contingency fleet that would be implemented only as needed for emergency and public safety use. With extreme heat conditions and remote location in the Palo Verde Valley, a reserve fleet would better prepare the community in times of power outages where these vehicles would be used to transport affected residents to cooling centers within the area. For other emergency events such as floods or the breakdown of larger passenger buses on Interstate 10 this fleet would be able to assist with a large movement of passengers to safety freeing up local law enforcement to better deal with the situation at hand. 7 Chapter 2 — Services & Performance 8 Blue Route 1 — Deviated Fixed Route City of Blythe Circulator Blue Route 1 serves the growing community of Blythe providing riders access to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices within the City of Blythe. Destinations on Blue Route 1 include: Blythe City Hall, Big Kmart, All Star Cinemas, Albertsons, Rite Aid, Palo Verde Hospital, Palo Verde Unified School District schools, Employment Development Department, Department of Motor Vehicles, Post Office, Blythe Central Garage and Public Works Department, California Highway Patrol, Senior Nutrition Program, Palo Verde Valley District Library, and various other shopping locations within the community The route can deviate for passengers up to 3/4 of mile with a 30 minute in advance reservation or upon boarding. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and Social Security (SSA) Transfer Center. Blue Route 1 operates deviated service in a clockwise loop type of route providing a 60 minute frequency with one bus, five days a week. Blue Route 1 operates from 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday -Friday. Services are not provided on the following days: Weekends and all Agency observed holidays. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 Make minor changes in frequency to unproductive areas this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2014 Analyze the feasibility of increasing frequency of headways, continue to monitor service. 2015 Implement an opposite bus on the same route in 30-minute headways during peak hours. PVHS41 10th Ave IN. BROADWAY Chanslorwa Barnard BALDI IN E -IIART11lI LL 12 >,5A Ho sonvay E1C1 NAB o � - _1Tr 0 14th Ave E 9 Gold Route 2 — Deviated Fixed Route Palo Verde College Crosstown Gold Route 2 provides riders access between the City of Blythe and Palo Verde College. Selected trips are provided to Ehrenberg, Arizona. This feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Blythe City Hall, All Star Cinemas, Big Kmart, Albertsons, Rite Aid, Palo Verde Hospital, Colorado River Fair, Employment Development Department, Blythe Recreation Center, Palo Verde Valley District Library, Palo Verde College Spring Street Campus, Palo Verde College main campus and various other shopping locations within the community. The route can deviate for passengers up to 3/4 of mile with a 30 minute in advance reservation or upon boarding. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and Social Security (SSA) Transfer Center. Gold Route 2 operates on a two way route providing a 60 minute frequency with one bus, five days a week. Gold Route 2 operates from 7:00 am to 6:10 pm Monday -Friday. Services are not provided on the following days: Weekends and all Agency observed holidays. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 Add a subscription only augmented service to address late night trip issues from the Palo Verde College. 2014 Implement any finding from 2013 analysis of late night trip issues from the Palo Verde College. 2015 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 6th Ave PVC ti L u Riverside c .67 K-MART o Hobsormay INTAKE MARINA SSA 1.41pm • EHRENBEI�G RIVIERA 10 Red Route 3 — Deviated Fixed Route CA Prisons Express The Red Route 3 provides premium commuter service between Blythe and Chuckawalla Valley & Ironwood State Prisons, Monday through Friday with three AM and three PM trips. This route serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to Mesa Drive then travels via Interstate 10 to the prisons. The Red Route 3 operates from 5:00 am to 7:30 am and again from 2:00 pm to 5:30 pm, Monday -Friday. Services are not provided on the following days: Weekends and all Agency or State observed holidays. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and Social Security (SSA) Transfer Center Special fares are charged on this route. All passengers pay $3.30 one way. There is 10 and 20 ride GoPasses available as well as a $120.00, 31-Day GoPass which gives unlimited rides on all Desert Roadrunner buses for the month. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 Possibly expand route service and schedule depending on availability of JARC Grant Funds. 2014 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2015 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 1-10 ir ani• OM t 0 1/a\ll .CA PRISONS 11 Green Route 4 — Deviated Fixed Route Rural Rider The Green Route 4 provides deviated fixed route service between Blythe, Ripley and Mesa Verde. This route serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to State Route 78 then travels South to Ripley and West to Mesa Verde via Interstate 10. The Green Route 4 operates five round trips 7:00 am to 4:00 pm Monday — Friday. Services are not provided on the following days: Weekends and all Agency or State observed holidays. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and Social Security (SSA) Transfer Center. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 Reduce service to three trips a day due to lack of ridership; continue to monitor service. 2014 Analyze the feasibility of increasing frequency, and continue to monitor service. 2015 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service. MESA S R-7 8 K-MART ID' co Ho sonwaY SSA cn RIPLEY 12 Silver Route 5 — Deviated Fixed Route Saturday Service The Silver Route 5 provides system -wide deviated fixed route service within the City of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Az. This route serves all major trip generating areas within the system on 90-minute headways. The Silver Route 5 operates 8:00 am to 3:00 pm Saturday and Agency observed holiday operating days. Services are not provided on the following days: Monday — Friday and all Agency observed non -operating holidays. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service under exemption. 2014 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service under exemption. 2015 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service under exemption. IVI ESA 4 RIPLEY Chath IV. BRC S. BROADWA 13 Desert Road TRIP Trip Reimbursement PVVTA's Desert RoadTRIP program currently provides reimbursement to individuals who do not have access to local transportation. Desert RoadTRIP will be marketed and promoted in conjunction with Independent Living Partnership to seniors (age 60 years or older), persons with disabilities and truly needy persons who live outside the service area, such as Lost Lake, resort communities along U.S. Highway 95 and Desert Center. Desert RoadTRIP participants can travel up to 460 miles a month, including using Greyhound (690 miles for a family). This equals $147.20 per month ($220.80 for a family per month). In Fiscal Year 2010/11, the TRIP program provided 28 valley residents with mileage reimbursement support for 477 one-way trips and 51,285 miles of escort assisted transportation to distant medical services for a total service cost of $8,947. This breaks down to a per one-way trip cost of $18.76 and a 17.4 cents per mile subsidy. Also in Fiscal Year 2010/11, PVVTA was required to implement and collect a fare for the Desert RoadTrip service in order to meet the required Farebox Recovery Ratio. A minimal fare of $5 per roundtrip was added to help maintain and meet the Farebox requirement of 10%. After analyzing the TRIP program, it was determined that the program was not meeting the required Farebox requirement, therefore, the Board approved implementing the $5 fare per one-way trip making that $10 per round trip. This change became effective in March 2012. Volunteer drivers will continue to be recruited in order to guarantee that Desert RoadTRIP users have escort transportation. PVVTA is also a partner in the Volunteer Driver Corps program. Desert RoadTRIP is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2014 Bring the service in house utilizing grant funding opportunities. 2015 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 14 Blythe Mobility Management Project JARC / New Freedom PVVTA/Blythe Mobility Management is an innovative approach for managing and delivering coordinated transportation services to customers, including older adults, people with disabilities, and individuals with lower incomes. In 2008, the Agency received funding from the FTA New Freedom and Job Access Reverse Commute grants as a direct result of needs identified in the RCTC Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plan. Mobility Management in essence is a one -stop shop to coordinate transportation service and information with human services needs. Together, Caltrans and PVVTA are working on extending the ongoing one-year agreement to the projected three-year plan first identified by the Agency through the RCTC Public Transit Human Services Transportation Coordination Plan completed in 2012. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 No proposed changes this fiscal year. 2014 No proposed changes this fiscal year; look for outside funding to sustain mobility management program beyond Federal funding cycles. 2015 Sustain program after JARC / New Freedom Funding Cycle is complete. 15 PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride Community -Based Service Link PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride is a demand responsive service to address special areas in time where community events require general public transit service that may not be available on the fixed route system. Events in the evening, on no service days, and beyond fixed route hours would be the primary focus of this new service. X-Tend-A-Ride will provide curb -to -curb service with an exclusive fare targeted to meet farebox performance requirements. During a pre -planned community event riders would be directed to fixed route service during regular operating hours then X-Tend-A-Ride would be available to provide service beyond regular operating hours. Similar trail service has been utilized for Sober Driver needs, added service to the local fair and special community events needing public awareness. PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride will not operate in place of fixed route services. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2013 Implement new service to known periods of time where services are needed. Staff will continue to monitor service for additional times the service is need or could be added to the fixed route system. 2014 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2015 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 16 Performance In FY 2011/12 PVVTA implemented major route changes system -wide. From those route changes, several enhancements and very few issues have developed. Services are now timed and revolve around a central hub location at the K-Mart Transfer Center making travel system -wide seamless and easy for most transit dependent riders. Issues have risen from extended routing to outlying areas where trips are very unproductive in ridership. At mid -year, Farebox Recovery was up by 2.88% in FY 2011/12 over FY 2010/11 due to pass sales for students and assisted income riders. Over the holiday month of December, ridership increase dramatically due to additional service placed on the fixed routes for holiday decoration viewing and services to community events over the season. This time of year is a double edged sword as the Palo Verde College extended winter break and rolled out the spring class session over many more weeks than in the past. This resulted in very poor ridership in the month of January primarily on the Green Route 4 and Gold Route 2 which directly services the Palo Verde College. Route 2 has regained strong ridership but may face the same ridership downfall over the summer months of FY 2012/13 due to a plan by the Palo Verde College to extend the summer recess an extra month in light of a college budget shortfall. Green Route 4, a Farebox exempt service, started off with promising ridership in FY 2011/12 but over the first year of exemption the route has had flat ridership numbers and has fallen into a negative performance trend. Key trip generators and demographics of the areas served by Route 4 show many riders have moved closer to the City of Blythe or have moved to the Coachella Valley to pursue better job opportunities and more affordable housing. Service on this route currently will be reduced in line with the demand for service. Staff as always continues to monitor and promote services in the Unincorporated Areas of Riverside County. 17 Growth and Planning In spite of the extended economic uncertainty some national chain businesses are moving into the service area. PVVTA through local and regional permitting review has implemented several proposed improvements to the system including rerouting of services to new trip generators, addition of new bus stop amenities and anticipated demand to new trip generating anchors in East Blythe spawning future planning for services along the Colorado River corridor. This growth of major shopping and eating areas in the east end of the service area was predicted and planned for FY 2007/08. Since the economic downturn planning for services have slowed down but PVVTA is ready and has had plans to address such growth. Another area of interest is the solar projects just west and south of the Palo Verde Valley. Transportation is a major key in balancing traffic flow and intrusion on several desert areas. With a minor increase of short -time workers and more permanent jobs once the solar fields are built, public transit will need to bridge the gap between the Palo Verde Valley, Desert Center, Chiriaco Summit and the Coachella Valley. PVVTA hopes that sometime soon Sunline and RCTC will look to partner to meet this growing need. Currently, PVVTA has assisted Salud and the Blythe Nursing Care Center with support from the Mobility Management Project. Assistance includes scheduling and management of trips which are primarily for medical appointments. PVVTA plans to continue to assist both medical and social service agencies locally by applying for 5310 vehicle(s) for use by these agencies. This vehicle would better meet the more non-traditional trip needs including medical trips to the Coachella Valley and work related training trips into Blythe from outlying areas. 18 Chapter 3 — Service Changes 19 Route Changes and Modifications Blue Route 1 will be routed by the Baldwin Senior Apartments and Casa Encinas every other scheduled hour. New routing will be added to a new shopping center near the existing route. Gold Route 2 will be scheduled to only make extended route trips to the Palo Verde College only when the College is open. Short turns and layovers will be made to prevent unproductive trips. Red Route 3 will continue the additional roundtrip to the California State Prisons added in FY 2011/12. Green Route 4 will have a schedule reduction to three trips daily, all timed transfers to other routes in the system. Silver Route 5 will continue weekend/holiday service and have routing to all major weekend trip generators system -wide. 20 Promotions The following marketing efforts will be utilized to promote ridership growth in FY 2012/ 13. 1. Continuation of the marketing program which includes brochures, flyers, advertisements in local newspapers, community transit fairs, participation in community events, and promotional materials. 2. Continuation of public outreach program, which includes meetings with schools, employers, senior service programs, persons with disabilities programs, social service agencies, the general public, city departments and other organizations that benefit from public transportation in the Palo Verde Valley. 3. Continuing the Mobility Training program to teach the public about public transportation, including those with disabilities. 4. Continue to offer information on Rideshare programs available to residents and visitors of the Palo Verde Valley. 5. Foster new partnerships with businesses through the Shop, Save and Get Home Free Program. 21 Chapter 4 — Financial & Capital Plans " O p e r a t i n g B u d g e t T h e P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y T r a n s i t A g e n c y ' s o p e r a t i n g b u d g e t f o r f i s c a l y e a r 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i s $ 8 8 5 , 7 9 9 w h i c h i s 8 % l e s s t h a n l a s t y e a r ' s o p e r a t i n g b u d g e t . T h e d e c r e a s e i s p r i m a r i l y d u e t o a c o r r e c t i o n i n t h e b u d g e t e d c o n t r a c t a m o u n t f o r t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o n t r a c t o r . T h e A g e n c y ' s b u d g e t i n c l u d e s o n l y t h o s e e x p e n s e s f o r t h e d a y t o d a y o p e r a t i o n s o f t h e T r a n s i t A g e n c y a n d t h o s e e x p e n s e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e J A R C a n d N e w F r e e d o m g r a n t s . E x p e n s e s w i l l b e m o n i t o r e d c l o s e l y t o m a k e s u r e t h a t t h e A g e n c y c o n t i n u e s t o o p e r a t e w i t h i n i t s b u d g e t a n d i s c o m p l i a n t w i t h t h e m a n d a t o r y 1 0 % f a r e b o x r e c o v e r y r a t i o . I n c l u d e d i n t h e F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 b u d g e t a g a i n t h i s y e a r i s t h e M o b i l i t y M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m . C a p i t a l B u d g e t T h e A g e n c y ' s c a p i t a l b u d g e t f o r F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 i s $ 3 3 6 , 7 2 8 w h i c h i n c l u d e s f u n d i n g f o r b u l k p u r c h a s e s o f b u s t i r e s a n d f i l t e r s f o r t h e A g e n c y ' s f l e e t w h i c h w i l l a l l o w q u i c k e r r e p a i r o f t h e b u s e s w i t h t h e s u p p l i e s a l r e a d y o n h a n d . P V V T A i s a l s o l o o k i n g t o p u r c h a s e t w o ( 2 ) s u p p o r t v e h i c l e s , a n d a d d i t i o n a l b u s s t o p a m e n i t i e s t o b e p l a c e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e C i t y . O t h e r c a p i t a l a c q u i s i t i o n s i n c l u d e t h e p u r c h a s e o f t h r e e ( 3 ) a l t e r n a t i v e f u e l e d C N G b u s e s , w i t h t h e f u n d i n g s o u r c e f o r t h e s e b u s e s c o m i n g f r o m P r o p . 1 B p r o c e e d s t h a t w e r e a l l o c a t e d t o t h e A g e n c y i n l a s t y e a r ' s b u d g e t . P V V T A i s a l s o l o o k i n g t o m o v e f o r w a r d o n a l o n g p l a n n e d C N G F u e l i n g F a c i l i t y a n d t h e r e f o r e h a s r e q u e s t e d $ 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 o f S T A f u n d s i n t h i s f i s c a l y e a r f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h a t f a c i l i t y . R e g u l a t o r y a n d C o m p l i a n c e R e q u i r e m e n t s P V V T A a d h e r e s t o a l l r e g u l a t o r y a n d c o m p l i a n c e r e q u i r e m e n t s a s m a n d a t e d b y R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n a n d o r o t h e r r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s , a s i t p e r t a i n s t o A D A , D B E , E E O , e t c . A T r i e n n i a l A u d i t w a s p e r f o r m e d f o r t h e p e r i o d o f J u l y 1 , 2 0 0 6 t h r o u g h J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 0 9 i n w h i c h t h e r e w e r e n o r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r i m p r o v e m e n t m a d e b y t h e a u d i t o r . P u r s u a n t t o t h e a u d i t p e r f o r m e d , P V V T A d i s c l o s e d t h a t t h e A g e n c y w a s o p e r a t i n g i n a n e f f i c i e n t a n d e f f e c t i v e m a n n e r . T h e r e w e r e n o s p e c i f i c i s s u e s i d e n t i f i e d t h a t n e e d e d i m p r o v e m e n t . 2 3 T Jo T &Bed HI.ZST OZI'69£'T 86£7£6I'I Z 6 6 L6T ztazta ii, ,,,,Ja6eueyy we:list/ea WE'IZT L90`9ZI 0 6T8`8tr 8Z.VZ SIS'L� OSZ'9bi 89£`£tr£ 951/9L t,Z£'TZT L90'9ZT 0 6T8`8*, 8L.6'Z STS`L£ OSZ'917T O£T`IIZ £IL`SSZ 89£'£bE• 9SV9L £Z9'£6 ££9'96 Ztpe6Z ZLL`8£I 09T`00Z LOZ`SEZ 9a117Z£ SZ8'i7L T i i NJ N3 ND b9 V9 V9 b9 AG V9 �a Ve 9Z 9Z 8T 8i 8T 5 Si 8Z 91 ZZ S ZZZ 600Z ZZZ 600Z as ZIOZ (RA ITOZ a114 DIOZ a?7d 600Z Clad TOOZ aaA £OOZ Na3 900Z Nag ZOOZ 0149 1700Z Zi/TTOZ A� Nouew "6'a) elect-ol.-AeaA JD sV al]lyan prow Jad salt W awl;a;IT 06ennd ZTITTOZ A.A tla.�eyl Onautl; saline} aPltlan Neu oa adl� TT/OTOZ Ad pua JeaA /olad selltl aPILIM a;ea o; a;rl ZT/TTOZ A ZT/TTOz ap03 saiNilan WA" A7ua6unuoa sapltlan liana 30 # ah!PV ;o # to6ual paddlriba ApaedeD aipltlan dwe21 &was pueTllF apOD lapCOW apop '6Jtn1 uol;epodsueu paseyaand / (sngaolow) sng A3ua6b }!sued Aallen apaaq oled weld ijsuati aBuem -nays £T/ZTOZ,�a �o uanul jeaki - T apgel uaisomuro) xopopods tok om} ops oo0 Riverflik (f3u Trmspodutin tssmcFisslan Table 2 -- Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet " /' '''' " ,' s ' , n 6 6 Data � � . � � ' ' '�✓, r � �� 'Financial � f n », . , > >. �i � .,� _ ,.,.. ,.,. a.. Total Operating Expenses $883,418 $723,718 $960,322 $575,290 $885,799 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $109,830 $81,798 $96,175 $66,372 $105,770 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $773,583 $641,920 $864,147 $503,918 $780,029 // Operating Characteristics ' ' ' ; Unlinked Passenger Trips 39,157 ` 37,117 42,812 32,687 44,459 Passenger Miles 422,873 336,651 470,932 359,557 488,873 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 9,829.0 8,551,0 11,032.0 6,661.0 11,028.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 173,465.0 154,348.0 184,379.0 136,383.0 185,431,0 Total Actual Vehicle Mites 205,441.0 187,533.0 216,468.0 167,551.0 224869.0 Performance Characteristics ' ' r.:. , " ; i �.., ,,:.; ' f Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $89.88 $84.64 $87.05 $86.37 $80,32 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12,43% 11.30% 10.01% 11.54% 11.940/G Subsidy per Passenger $19.76 ! $17.29 $20.18 $15,57 $17.54 Subsidy per Passenger Mlle $1,83 $1.91 $1.83 $1.92 $1.60 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $78.70 $75.07 $78.33 $76.40 $70.73 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4,46 $4.16 $4.69 $3,73 $4.21 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.0 4.3 3.9 4.9 4.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.24 TransTrac%Manager" 5[23/2012 Page 1 of P'r+'ensdc (big Tr;�,..p�l®iisrnfnmss%a�an Table 2 -- Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency - SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010117 Audited I FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics r r� � , / /-. .. ) -.� 3,.I...... <n .t""i jam... �i.>j.:,... `tzl:.: t ) i�4.... > ' i., 7{3w i.✓.f Peak -Hour Fleet 3 .,,i»a' „��;: y. ., ..,/ .>. ,j., 3 Financial Data >, ,, ,., ,r.,>. r ;'� .� .a.,s�,S �, r...c ,,... „r._ 3Z. .. �Y .� a lF >�.. ,,,� �1 ' \ {' �,. .,I,. ,. i.s ,%: ��� i z ��.. ;` N' �.,. 1 ., �. f,,.� >c ), a.., f ��z 1!I»\..;_ i 4 F.,l..�,._ Total Operating Expenses $44,783 $23,263 $429,299 $253,812 .�1,../ $390,858 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $7,077 $5,140 $43,431 $28,104 $45,677 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $37,705 $18,123 $385,868 $225,709 $345,181 Operating Characteristics f r ''i { ..�'.>l /. �.•,f „�. ... ..Il.l �.:.. ����x., '�.r..,. J �H Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,761 1,930 20,549 14,322 19,481 Passenger Miles 19,371 17,505 226,039 157,542 273,595 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 519.0 273.0 5,295.0 2,936.0 5,288.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 11,660.0 6,248.0 88,503.0 75,335.0 102,455.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 11,827.0 6,332.0 103,905.0 78,438.0 106,676.0 Performance Characteristics ,, j f <' i" Z ,, " ,l ", 5 ". Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $86.29 $85.21 $81.08 $86.45 $73.91 Farebox Recovery Ratio 15.800/0 22.09% 10.110/0 11.07% 11.680/0 Subsidy per Passenger $21.41 $9.39 $18.78 $15.76 $17.72 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.95 $1.04 $1.71 $1.43 $1.26 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $72.65 $66.38 $72.87 $76.88 $65.28 Subsidy per Revenue Mite (b) $3,23 $2.90 $4.36 $3,00 $3.37 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 3.4 7.1 3.9 4.9 3.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.15 0.31 0.23 0.19 0,19 rain rtours for Kau Moaes. [b} Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/23/2012 Page Y ofY PitOotauncariwinlo Table. 2 -- Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Nan -Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan - - Fleet Characteristics l> J:' J ? i l -5-- r _ i T 1'A -t 15 z z" / J ).t �) f . ) s / -.rr f l ,.r. ..�, ._ ,,.,/z, .,.r .,�.>), �,,...-/ ,z r... r,s.., zr>:..<\�!.,-,? ; �.. ��z_,.. { � ,3 f ?.,�.z.. ��rz Peak -Hour Fleet 3 .�... ., .. ., 3,..., , Data / / J J / J ,..,.... ..>/r.,...f.,/ t„ ,}JFinancial �/ /�I %/C J.{ ,-%r.).... )/) ,.l.. - A 2 ;.K., > C 3) % it Total Operating Expenses $838,636 $700,455 $531,023 $321,477 $494,941 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $102,753 $76,658 $52,744 $38,268 $60,093 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $735,883 $623,797 $478,279 $283,209 $434,848 1 J {_- ,/ { ? { J l ( 11 'r Operating Characteristics // f J a �< 5 /{ t r f r 3 1'` r s7 s ;.,........,,,. �,,. ..:,.✓.,. ,,. l..i ,n.,. ><. ,, ......... r unlinked Passenger Trips 37,396 35,187 22,263 18,365 24,978 Passenger Miles 403,502 319,146 244,893 202,015 215,278 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 9,310.0 8,278.0 5,737.0 3,725.0 5,740.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 161,805.0 148,100.0 95,876.0 61,048.0 83,026.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 193,614.0 181,201.0 112,563.0 89,113.0 121,193.0 Performance Gharackeri5kics r` / f j f ,, ,`j 1 / -j l `/ , r ' Y. Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $90.08 $84,62 $92.56 $86.30 $86.23 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12.25% 10.94% 9,93% 11.90% 12.14% Subsidy per Passenger $19.68 $17,73 $21.48 $15,42 $17,41 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.82 $1.95 $1.95 $1.40 $2.02 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $79,04 $75.36 $83.37 $76.03 $75.76 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.55 $4.21 $4,99 $4.64 $5.24 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.0 4.3 3.9 4,9 4,4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.30 4.30 rs ror Kan Modes. (n) oar Miles for Rai] Modes, TransTrack Manager'"' 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Table Z -- PVVTA-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan . Fleet Characteristics r ,r , '�� r� -. > - f z5.> ff ' ' > < �,-: Peak -Hour Fleet 6 6 Data ii-Financial n ,� I r ` r sr �,� � �'rE „ a. ,,..,. ' �� Total Operating Expenses $795,485 $723,718 $894,492 $575,290 .,..., $815,192 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $103,431 $81,798 $90,475 $66,372 $95,160 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $692,054 $641,920 $804,017 $508,918 $720,032 Operating characteristics x ? i f ..., ., ' ... unlinked Passenger Trips 38,443 37,117 42,812 32,687 44,459 Passenger Miles 422,873 336,651 470,932 359,557 488,873 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 9,432.0 8,551.0 11,032.0 6,661.0 11,028.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 168,967.0 154,348.0 184,379.0 136,383.0 185,481.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 200,835.0 187,533.0 216,468.0 167,551.0 227,869.0 Performance characteristics '�� , `' '� 3 �3 , •>'� Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $84.34 $84.64 $81.08 $86.37 $73.92 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.000/0 11.30% 10.11070 11.54% 11.67% Subsidy per Passenger $18.00 $17.29 $18.78 $15.57 $16.20 Subsidy per passenger Mile $1.64 $1.91 $1.71 $1.42 $1,47 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $73.37 $75,07 $72.88 $76.40 $65.29 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.10 $4,16 $4.36 $3,73 $3.88 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.1 4.3 3.9 4.9 4.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0,23 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.24 a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"" 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Table 2 -- PVVTA-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Fy 2011/12 Plan 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics ' ' /s Y ,. � ..,.A! Y >> 3r� , jl >'�./ ; Peak -Hour Fleet 3< '3 3/ Financia // r1 f r r z r c Total Operating Expenses $44,783 $23,263 $429,299 $253,812 $390,858 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $7,077 $5,140 $43,431 $28,104 $45,677 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $37,705 $18,123 $385,868 $225,709 $345,181 Characteristics / s s /Operating ,, / Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,761 1,930 20,549 14,322 19,481 Passenger Miles 19,371 17,505 226,039 157,542 273,595 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 519.0 273.0 5,295.0 2,936.0 5,288.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 11,660.0 6,298.0 88,503.0 75,335.0 102,455.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 11,827.0 6,332.0 103,905.0 78,438.0 106,676.0 Performance Characteristics //' , �. ,. / ' f, / t �'`' �� / i �; / ., � r Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $86.29 $85.21 $81.08 $85.45 $73.91 Farebox Recovery Ratio 15.800/0 22.090/0 10.110/0 11.070/0 11.68°/0 Subsidy per Passenger $21.41 $ 9,39 $18.78 $15,76 $17,72 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.95 $1.04 $1.71 $1.43 $1.26 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $72.65 $66.38 $72.87 $76.88 $65.78 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (6) $3.23 $2.90 $4.36 $3.00 $3.37 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 3,4 7.1 3,9 4.9 3.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.15 0.31 0.23 0.19 0.19 -- TransTrack Manager"" S/23/2012 Page 1 of Table 2 -- PVVTA-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan , FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet{ Characteristics s r / bk 2, F / / , -I r rt 3 r . J,f \ 4 z 3 i..., h� / I I{4 _. >S /y /r r ?) lz 1 ...PY /. A ,,.. ',' til. ' / ?„ /'/.„. yi.�{. Peak -Hour Fleet ,� 3 „ „ ., ,, r.%�' ... 3 F'nane ',1 1 , F'4 •• % L al Data /%/ /- / Z/ r Total Operating Expenses $750,702 $700,455 $465,193 $321,477 $424,334 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $96,354 $76,658 $47,044 $38,268 $49,483 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $654,348 $623,797 $418,149 $283,209 $374,851 Operating Characteristics / ` , , - , ' / ' ` ' j Unlinked Passenger Trips 36,682 35,187 22,263 18,365 24,978 Passenger Miles 403,502 319,146 244,893 202,015 215,278 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 8,913.0 8,278.0 5,737.0 3,725.0 5,740.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 157,307.0 148,100.0 95,876.0 61,048.0 83,026.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 189,008.0 181,201.0 112,563.0 89,113.0 121,193.0 Performance Characteristics ` ` ' ' " ' ` f r3z '' !/ f= r `'i Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $84.23 $84.62 $81.09 $86.30 $73.93 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12.83% 10.94% 10.11% 11.90% 11,66% Subsidy per Passenger $17.84 $17.73 $18.78 $15.42 $15.01 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.62 $1.95 $1.71 $1.40 $1.74 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $73.42 $75.36 $72.89 $76.03 $65.31 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.16 $4.21 $4.36 $4.64 $4.51 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.1 4.3 3.9 4.9 4.4 Passenger per Revenue Mlle (b) 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.30 0.30 a}Train Hours or Rail Modes. (b} Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"° 5/23/2012 Page lot 1 y"T °Bed ztazls is ,,..- a6etseyy.y.musNeil Cr) 6Z0'OSL$ OLL`sOT$ 66L'588$ O'698`LZZ O'I84`s0T 0'505'ZT O'8Z6'TT EL8`884 651417 9 sitgol Japlenm aacivag L66'65$ OT03 L09'OL$ Ef0'ZZ$ 9597$ 6881.Z$ b91'1018 ZZ£'£T$ 98b't11$ £89'08t$ T6L'SZ$ bLb'b0Z$ 1786'TZZ$ GGb'6Z$ DWISZ$ 89T1,6T$ Z69'SZ$ 098'6TZ$ O'LT6'L£ O'ST8'£8 O768%5 O'SLE'L£ O'OLZ'8 O'0Z6'9£ O'6E0'9b O'59Z'LS O'L86'9£ Appgns anuanaZl 4503 saiM Sa�IW AaN ia8uassed euileyadp 1e70l anuahaTi O.OZt, O'TSL`T O'6ZT'£ O'LZ8'£ O'8LE`E saaay 11401 Ae1RH9,9M IWO-V./AM 0'£LE bir+1Z E99'T 1 Aepuye5 5-V1AAd O'5451 599'£OT OZ6'17 1 Aepam 17-V1AM O'09L`Z SLE'61T ELT 'TT Z Aep4aan, E-V AM O'OLE'E 981,'81,T 869'ZT T AepNuaM Z-V1Md O'086'Z E06'56 508'ET T AemaaM T-V1AAd satloli sa��yl anuanag aafivassed 91a8uassed salVian adAl Sea # o1n021 dead s;uataala elea sa;nou liv ET/ZTOZ A.1 s -- Aatia5v apuegj AapeA arilap pled sysneJs aanozi GUMS u5tswilnl �a,yetastls:�;1 arena; upcnvq p}o Z abed ziaz/ezls „„-Fabeaew ypea1skeeg M bZ"0 0'6 TZ'b$ EL'OL$ 09'1$ b5'LS$ %1,61T Z6•63 8L'b$ ZE'08$ Sp7491J0pinoid aauuaS °/ ZO'ST Aep laaN1 '8VG-V I.Md OZ'0 S'i 997$ L0'55$ £0'T$ 52'ES $ %L.VTT L61,T$ TO'E$ EL'99$ AepJnEes S-VIAM ET'0 Z'£ bL'Z$ 8i'S9$ 86'0$ 95'0Z$ %£91T LZ'EZ$ 01'£$ OI'bL$ Aep aam b-7dAM btO 017 Z6'£$ 91,'59$ TS'T$ LT'9I$ %£9'IT 0E-8T$ bb'b$ 80'bL$ & aft £-tlaN1d £Z'O 8'E 88'E$ L13'59$ 6tr'T$ TZ'LT$ %£L'TT OS'6T$ 6£'b$ 791bL$ AeppatA Z-VIAM L£'0 91tr SZ'S$ 9T'59$ ZO'Z$ LO'trT$ %139'IT E6'ST$ 1,6'5$ 8L'EL$ Aeppam T-ILLA d DIM Jed Jad eiR4 Jabuassed olleb Jabuassed albs! anuanaTS Jnom anuanad sla6UaSSed siofiuossed anuaAaw 911U0Pa7l Ja6UaSSed aad APEs(Eng AJanoaaH Jad lsoj Jed ISO) .lad;SOD Jad APEsgnS Jed Aplsgns Jad APPInS xugaied Sugendo 6tine4adO aAAa, Aep # a;nOb sJoxeslpui aauewJoEJad sa;nob pn £T/ZTOZ 1.4 5 -- kluaBy msuea,. AalleA apiaA bled sinstleiS alno f d121S - £ Mel w- ?-11E0jr iltgAt aki4a19..¢p Lim TABLE 3-A INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS LINE ROUTE DESCRIPTION AREAS/SITES SERVICED FIXED ROUTE: Blue Route 1 Provides riders access to many civic locations within the City of Blythe. Blue Route 1 operates deviated service in a clockwise loop type of route providing a 60 minute frequency with one bus five days a week. Blue Route 1 operates from 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. Destinations on Blue Route 1 include: City Hall, Big K-Mart, Palo Verde Hospital, Employment Development Department, Palo Verde Unified School District, California Highway Patrol, DMV, Albertsons, Rite -Aid, Senior Nutrition Program, etc, Gold Route 2 Provides riders access between the City of Blythe & Palo Verde College and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona. Gold Route 2 operates on a two way route providing a 60 minute frequency with one bus, five days a week. Gold Route 1 operates from 7:00 am to 6:10 pm Monday through Friday. Destinations on Gold Route 2 include: Blythe City Hall, Big K-Mart, Albertsons, Colorado River Fair, Blythe Recreation Center, Palo Verde Hospital, Palo Verde Valley District Library, Employment Development Department, etc. Red Route 3 Provides premium commuter service between City of Blythe and the California State Prisons. Red Route 3 serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to Mesa Drive then travels via 1-10 to the prisons. This route operates Monday through Friday from 5:00 am to 7:30 am & 2:00 pm to 5:30 pm. This route serves four Park-N-Ride tots, travels down Hobsonway to Mesa Drive, then travels to the State Prisons, via Interstate 10. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe at two major transfer points. Green Route 4 Green Route 4 provides deviated fixed route service between Blythe, Ripley and Mesa Verde. This route operates five round trips from 7:00 am to 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday. This route will service four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to SR78 then South to Ripley and West to Mesa Verde via 1-10_ Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe at two major transfer points. Silver Route 5 This is a new route that will provide system -wide deviated fixed route service within the City of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona. This route serves all major trip generating areas within the system on 90-minute headways. This route will service the City of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona and will operate on Saturdays only. Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Short Range Transit Flan Fiscal Year 2012/13 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2012l13 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds l_TF STA Prop 1 B Capital dProp 1B Homeland Secutity Section 5316 JARC Section 5317 New Freedom Fare Box Other (2) Operating Assistance $ 885,799 $719,422 $45,455 $15,152 $ 84,910 $ 20,860 Subtotal: Operating $885,799 $719,422 $0 $45,455 $15,152 $84,910 $20,860 Bulk Vehicle TiresiFilters FY13-1 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Support Vehicles (2) FY13-2 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Remote Site Surveitlance FY13-3 $ 21,728 $ 21,728 Bus Stop Amenities FY13-4 $ 5,000 $5,000 CNG Fueling Facility FY13-5 $ 250,000 $250,000 Subtotal: Capital $336,728 $0 $315,000 $0 $21,728 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $ 1,222,527 $719,422 $315,000 $0 . $21,728 $45,465 $15,152 $84,910 $20,880 (1) Number should tte to Tabfe 4A - Capital Project Justification (2) Please identify source of "Other" funds. Other Funds Include: T.R.I.P. Revenue Newspaper Revenue Advertising Revenue p Charter Service Revenue Mc_ Revenues/Interest $ 1,395 $ 250 $ 3,000 $ 3,500 $ 12,715 $ 20,860 Revised 5/23/2012 Summary of FY 2012/13 Funds Requested.xls Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY13-1 PROJECT NAME: Bulk Tires, Filters, etc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase in bulk, tires, filters, etc. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) Bus tires, filters, oil, coolants, etc. will be purchased in bulk for the year. This will allow quicker repair of the vehicles with the supplies already on hand. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) $1.0,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE -- OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 12-1 Bulb. Tires, etc. $2,344.94 35 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY13-2 PROJECT NAME: Support Vehicles (2) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase two (2) transit support vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) PVVTA currently runs two transit support vehicles one is a 2004 model and the other a 2009. They both will need to be replaced this fiscal year. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) $50,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 36 Table 4A — Capital Project Justifieation PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-3 PROJECT NAME: Remote Site Surveillance Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase and install up to 6 remote access site specific surveillance cameras. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) This project will consist of purchasing and installing up to 6 remote access site specific surveillance cameras that would be able to record and be monitored by transit and local law enforcement agencies to detect and detour crime and other malicious traffic or criminal activity that would hinder the safe normal operation of transit and public safety assets within the City of Blythe. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) 21,728 Prop 1B Homeland Security Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # ROTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 37 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY13-4 PROJECT NAME: Bus Stop Amenities PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase bus benches which will be placed at bus stops throughout the Palo Verde Valley. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) This project has been an ongoing project. The Agency would like to continue with the placement of bus shelters and benches at our bus stop locations. These amenities will provide passenger comfort while waiting for the transit bus. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) $5,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant ## ROTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 38 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY13-5 PROJECT NAME: CNG Fueling Facility PROJECT DESCRIPTION Contribution towards the construction of a Compressed Natural Gas Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) There is a need for a CNG fueling facility in the Palo Verde Valley. PVVTA has explored many options in the past such as partnering with a private enterprise for the construction of such a facility and has concluded that it is in PVVTA's best interest to construct a facility that will meet the needs of PVVTA, therefore, PVVTA is now looking to move forward with this project in FY 2012/13. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) 250,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description LTF Unexpended Balance $35,348 39 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2013/14 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Capita[ Project Total Amount of Section 5316 Section 5317 Project Description Number (1) Funds LIT STA Prop 1B Capital JARC New Freedom Fare Box Other(2) Operating Assistance FY14 $ 938,209 $ 741,005 $66,400 $22,210 $87,457 $21,137 Subtotal: Operating $938,209� $741,005 $0 $66,400 $22,210 $67,457 $21,137 Bus Stop Amenities FY 14-1 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Bulk Vehicle Tires/Filters FY 14-2 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Red Route 3 Express Buses FY 14-3 $300,000 $300,000 Subtotal: Capital $325,000 $0 $25,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital I $1,263,209 $741,005r $25,000 $0 $366,400 $22,210 $87,457 $21,137 (1) Number should tie to Table 5.1 A - Capital Project Justification (2) Please identify source of "Other" funds. Other Funds Include: T.R.I.P. Revenue Newspaper Revenue Advertising Revenge Charter Service Revenue Misc. Revenues/Interest $ 1,437 $ 300 $ 3,000 $ 3,500 $ 12,900 $ 21,137 Revised 5/23/2012 Summary of Funds Requested FY 2013/14.x1s Table 5.1— Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY14-1 PROJECT NAME: Bus Stop Amenities PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase bus benches which will be placed at bus stops throughout the Palo Verde Valley. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) This project has been an ongoing project. The Agency would like to continue with the placement of bus shelters and benches at our bus stop locations. These amenities will provide passenger comfort while waiting for the transit bus. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED). $10,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 41 Table 5.1— Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY14-2 PROJECT NAME: Bulk Tires, Filters, etc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase in bulk, tires, filters, etc. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) Bus tires, filters, oil, coolants, etc, will be purchased in bulk for the year. This will allow quicker repair of the vehicles with the supplies already on hand. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) $15,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Un.expended Balance 42 Table 5.1— Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY14-3 PROJECT NAME: Replacement Bus Purchase PROJECT DESCRIPTION Expansion bus for the Red Route Express. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) Through the Public Transportation -Human Services Coordination Plan it was identified through participant testimony that the increase of capacity and expansion of service to the California Correctional Facilities (Chuckawalla and Ironwood) near Blythe and Palo Verde Valley would provide a greater opportunity for potentially new and existing employees to utilize public transportation in efforts to offset rising fuel prices and auto expenses while providing greater capacity for growth needs in employment at the Prisons and 'industry near the Blythe Airport. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) 300,000 JARC Grant Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED -- INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Bus Replacement Unexpended Balance $ 8,319 12-2 (STA) 14-3 (STA) Bus Replacement $87,589 43 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2014/15 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B Capital rop 1 B IHomeland Security Section 5316 JARC Section 5317 New Freedom Fare Box Other (2) Operating Assistance FY15 $ 966,628 $ 763,235 $68,900 $23,300 $90,005 $21,189 Subtotal: Operating $966,628 $763,235 $0 $68,900 $23,300 $90,005 $21,189 Bus Stop Amenities Bulk Vehicle Tires/Filters FY 15-1 FY 15-2 $ 10,000 $ 15,000 $ 10,000 $ 15,000 Subtotal: Capital $25,000 $0 $25,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $991,628 $763,235 $25,000 $0 $0 i $68,900 $23,300 $90,005 $21,189 (1 } Number should tie to Table 5.2 A - Capital Project Justification (2) Please identify source of "Other" funds. Other Funds Include: T.R.I.P. Revenue Newspaper Revenue Advertising Revenue Charter Service Revenue Misc. Revenues/Interest $ 1,479 $ 310 $ 3,000 $ 3,500 $ 12,900 $ 21,189 Revised 5/23/2012 Summary of Funds Requested FY 2014115.xis Table 5.2 — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY15-1 PROJECT NAIVIE: Bus Stop Amenities PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase bus benches which will be placed at bus stops throughout the Palo Verde Valley. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) This project has been an ongoing project. The Agency would like to continue with the placement of bus shelters and benches at our bus stop locations. These amenities will provide passenger comfort while waiting for the transit bus. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) $10,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND .RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 45 Table 5.2 — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY15-2 PROJECT NAME: Bulk Tires, Filters, etc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase in bulk, tires, filters, etc. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION (refer to Commission policy entitled "Justification Requirements for Capital Projects) Bus tires, filters, oil, coolants, etc. will be purchased in bulk for the year. This will allow quicker repair of the vehicles with the supplies already on hand. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) S 15,000 STA Funds PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended Balance 46 TABLE 6—PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Prior Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2006 — FY 2009) Pursuant to the audit performed, PVVTA disclosed that the Agency was operating in an efficient and effective manner and therefore, there were no specific issues that needed improvement. Action(s) Taken And Results (1) None required. (1) if no action taken, provide schedule for implementation or explanation of why the recommendation is no longer relevant. 47 IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtf Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/ 12 Short Range Transit Plan Review Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Data Elements FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 Target FY 2011 / 12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 42,812 Passenger Miles 470,932 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 11,032.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 184,379.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 216,468.0 Total Operating Expenses $960,322 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $96,175 Net Operating Expenses $864,147 Performance I ndicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio 1 10.01 % 1 > = 10.00% 1 11.54% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $87.05 <_ $84.05 $86.37 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $20.18 >_ $14.88 and <_ $20.14 $15.57 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.83 >_ $1.64 and <_ $2.22 $1.42 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $78.33 >_ $63.84 and <_ $86.38 $76.40 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.69 > _ $3.55 and <_ $4.81 $3.73 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.90 >= 3.15 and <= 4.26 4.90 Better Than Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.23 >= 0.22 and <= 0.30 0.24 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 6 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 FY 2012/13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Bate FY 2012/13 Plan FY 2012/13 Target plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 37,117 32,687 44,459 None Passenger Miles 336,651 359,557 488,873 None Revenue Hours 8,551.0 6,661.0 11,028.0 None Total Hours 9,515.0 8,237.0 12,505.0 None Revenue Miles 154,348.0 136,383.0 185,481.0 None Total Miles 187,533.0 167,551.0 227,869.0 None Operating Costs $723,718 $575,290 $885,799 None Passenger Revenue $81,798 $66,372 $105,770 None Operating Subsidy $641,920 $508,918 $780,029 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $84.64 $86.37 $80.32 <= $87.89 Meets Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $4.69 $4.22 $4.78 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $19.50 $17.60 $19.92 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.30% 11.54% 11.94% >= 10.00/0 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $17.29 $15.57 $17.54 >= $13.23 and <= $17.91 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.91 $1.42 $1.60 >= $1.21 and <= $1.63 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $75.07 $76.40 $70.73 >_ $64.94 and <= $87.86 Meets Target subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.16 $3.73 $4.21 >= $3.17 and <= $4.29 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 4.30 4.90 4.00 >= 4.17 and <= 5.64 Fails to Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.24 0.24 0.24 >= 0.20 and <= 0.28 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager"" 5/23/2052 Page 1 of3 TABLE 9 — HIGHLIGHTS OF SRTP PRESENTATION ■ Transit service continues to be provided by contract with Transportation Concepts. The Mobility Management Project is anticipated to renew current agreements with Caltrans to extend the project until 2013. ■ PVVTA will maintain current fare structure for services provided for FY 2012/13. ■ PVVTA Blue Route 1 will be routed by the Baldwin Senior Apartments and Casa Encinas every other scheduled hour and new routing will be added to a new shopping center near the existing route. PVVTA Gold Route 2 will be scheduled to only male extended route trips to the Palo Verde College only when the College is open. Short turns and layovers will be made to prevent unproductive trips. ■ PVVTA Red Route 3 will continue the additional roundtrip to the California State Prisons added in FY 2011/12. ■ PVVTA Green Route 4 will have a schedule reduction to three trips daily, all tinned transfers to other routes in the transit system. PVVTA Silver Route 5 will continue weekend/holiday service and have routing to all major weekend trip generators system -wide. ■ PVVTA plans to implement a new service to known periods of time where services are needed. This service will be the PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride which will be a demand responsive service to address special areas in time where community events require general public transit service that may not be available on the fixed route system. ■ The Agency will continue to place passenger amenities (e.g. benches, shelters) at strategic location that promote new ridership and continued use of services. ■ Agency management will continue to focus on system productivity, mindful to TDA and ..RCTC Performance Improvement Plan requirements relative to the Farebox Recovery Ratio. ■ The Agency purchased a new Transit Facility and will continue to complete the upgrades to meet the needs of the Transit Agency. Operating and Financial Data FY07-08 FY08-09 FY09-10 FY10-11 FYII-12 Projected FY12/13 Planned System -wide Ridership 45,790 54,940 39,1.57 37,117 42,81.2 44,459 Cost Per Revenue Hour $71.57 $81.54 $89.88 $84.64 $87.05 $80.32 Productivity Performance Summary: The proposed PVVTA FY12-13 SRTP, meets one of one mandatory indicator and meets 6 of 7 discretionary indicators. 50 �� a 4 . ��1 h O R T A N G E T R A 1 o w e r e d b y C l e a r s N a t u r a l G a s R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER 1: SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1 1.1 SERVICE AREA 1 1.2 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS 2 Population Profile — Rider Characteristics 2 Demographic Projections 3 1.3 FIXED ROUTE AND PARATRANSIT SERVICES 4 Fixed Route Services 4 Paratransit Services 5 Consolidated Transportation Services Agency 5 1.4 CURRENT FARE STRUCTURE 6 Cooperative Fare and Subsidy Programs 7 1.5 REVENUE FLEET 8 1.6 EXISTING AND PLANNED FACILITIES 8 Operational Facilities 8 Facility Modernization 9 CHAPTER 2: ROUTE PERFORMANCE & EXISTING SERVICE 10 2.1 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 10 Service Standards and Warrants 10 Productivity vs. Coverage Target 11 New Service Warrants 11 Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) 12 2.2 EXISTING FIXED ROUTE & DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE 14 2.3 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS 15 2.4 TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH MARKETS 15 2.5 TRANSIT CENTERS, EQUIPMENT AND PASSENGER AMENITIES 15 Transit Centers 16 Equipment and Passenger Amenities 18 CHAPTER 3: PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES 21 3.1 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES 21 3.2 PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES 22 3.3 MODIFICATIONS TO PARATRANSIT SERVICE 24 3.4 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTION 25 3.5 BUDGET IMPACT ON PROPOSED CHANGES 28 CHAPTER 4: FINANCIAL & CAPITAL PLANS 29 4.1 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET 29 4.2 FUNDING SOURCES FOR OPERATING & CAPITAL PROGRAMS 32 4.3 REGULATORY & COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS 33 i Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Tables: System Map Comparative Statistics Table 1 Fleet Inventory a. Motor Bus b. Demand Response Table 2 SRTP Service Summary a. Routes: All Routes (System -wide Totals) b. Routes: Non -Excluded Routes c. Routes: Excluded Routes d. Program: Directly Operated Fixed Routes e. Program: Contracted Fixed Routes f. Program: Dial -A -Ride g. Program: Taxi Excluded Routes for FY2012/13 SRTP Route Statistics Individual Route Descriptions Summary of Funds Requested for FY2012/13 Capital Project Justification Summary of Funds Requested in FY2013/14 Capital Project Justification for FY2013/14 Summary of Funds Requested in FY2014/15 Capital Project Justification for FY2014/15 FY2010 State Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations Service Provider Performance Target Report FY2012/13 SRTP Performance Report Highlights of SRTP Table 2A Table 3 Table 3A Table 4 Table 4A Table 5.1 Table 5.1 A Table 5.2 Table 5.2A Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Appendix A: Appendix B: Appendix C: Appendix D: Appendix E: Appendix F: RTA Fixed Route Maps Service Standards and Warrants Title VI Policy Limited English Proficiency Policy Public Hearing Policy Sustainable Funding Source Policy ii Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS 5307 Federal funds in urban areas (formula) 5309 Federal funds for capital investments (competitive) 5311 Federal funds in non -urbanized (rural) areas (formula) 5316 Federal funds for the Job Access and Reverse Commute Program 5317 Federal funds for the New Freedom Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ATIS Advanced Traveler Information System BRT Bus Rapid Transit CNG Compressed Natural Gas COA Comprehensive Operational Analysis CTSA Consolidated Transportation Services Agency DAR Dial -A -Ride Paratransit Services DBE Disadvantaged Business Enterprise EEO Equal Employment Opportunity FTA Federal Transit Administration FY Fiscal Year HSR California High -Speed Rail ITS Intelligent Transportation System JARC Job Access and Reverse Commute, also known as FTA Section 5316 LTF Local Transportation Fund MSJC Mount San Jacinto College NF New Freedom Program, also known as FTA Section 5317 OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority PIP Productivity Improvement Program RCC Riverside City College RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission RTA Riverside Transit Agency SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SGR State of Good Repair SRTP Short Range Transit Plan STA State Transit Assistance TDA Transportation Development Act TNOW Transportation NOW TUMF Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees UCR University of California, Riverside UPASS University PASS WRCOG Western Riverside Council of Governments Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) is created to inform RTA stakeholders of transit developments in western Riverside County. The plan is an overview of the status of the existing local and regional transit network and sets the framework for enhancements for the next three years for Fiscal Years (FY) 2013 to 2015. Upon approval by the RTA Board of Directors, the SRTP is submitted to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) for funding of operational expenses and capital projects. As the regional transportation planning agency, RCTC is responsible for coordinating the planning efforts in the county and submitting to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the metropolitan planning organization, a list of transportation projects in the region. This critical step is required for the inclusion of capital projects to receive state and federal funding; whereas, operational plans are primarily funded through local revenue sources. After a period of declining revenue streams and decreases in ridership, signs of recovery are beginning to take shape. The last three fiscal years brought about close evaluation of existing services which led to reductions and refinements of unproductive services. These efforts along with other cost cutting strategies have proven to be financially effective with the least impact on customers. The challenge to provide more transit service with less resources have not changed, but strategies such as improved on -time performance, streamlining of routes, utilizing technological advances, and strengthening community partnerships are key ingredients to not only maintain but grow the ridership base. In fact, in FY2012 monthly ridership hit record highs for more than half the year. In FY2013, service enhancements will be modest with a focus on planning and building capacity needs for the most impacted routes and areas. Other planning efforts will focus on the update of a system -wide comprehensive operational analysis (COA) and other transit studies that will provide strategic improvement plans for the next five to ten years. Total RTA revenues for FY2013 are budgeted at $77.3 million which includes $58.1 million in operating expenses and $19.2 million for capital improvements. The Operating Budget increase of $3.9 million, or seven percent over FY2012, is due to established rates for purchased transportation; demand growth for DAR; increased unleaded gasoline fuel costs; continuation of the Travel Training Program; completion of a COA study; and increased medical, pension, and workers' compensation benefits. The Capital Budget is decreasing $14.7 million (-43%) over FY2012 due to reduced funding requirements for facilities and the heavy-duty CNG bus fleet replacement. 1 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency CHAPTER 1: SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 SERVICE AREA RTA's service area is the second largest in the nation, encompassing approximately 2,500 square miles of western Riverside County. Included in the service area are eighteen (18) incorporated cities including Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Eastvale, Hemet, Jurupa Valley, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, Riverside, San Jacinto, Temecula, Wildomar, and unincorporated jurisdictions in the County of Riverside. Unlike other agencies of similar size, RTA is unique in that it provides service in both urban and rural areas. Urbanized and rural areas are defined by the United States Census Bureau (US Census) and are based on population size. The urbanized areas served by RTA are Riverside/San Bernardino, Hemet/San Jacinto, and Temecula/Murrieta. The map below illustrates RTA's service area and its neighboring counties. endora San Dimas La Veme - "' —Highland i,� Rancho Claremont Cucamonga Rialto Fontana San mentuar Uplana Bernardino Bloomi an Pomona Ontario-b— Diamona Bar Chino nr,y Scn.s Chino bills R.r.ervallir- • Cnrno a.. Sralr Pa. � orba Li naa Jcenha n V Ile PArk ige Noah Tustin .na Padley Riverside East,. H NO= ,.,,. Tiai Park LIrn,lone Caryen Re{r�nry�l Park 1 wr+r"d Ranch Irvine wwernes. pare * Lake Forest Santa taAana Mission wooerViejo ccazae . * Laguna Hills Lea Fbres F .., Laguna Niguel Gana Pak Margarna • Caesars Regmiel Pe San Juan Capistrano San Clemente San Onnhe Sraie aeacn Woedcreal Lekelaal Vine Terrace YLMOi r, Glen Avon nionprove rik3 Calimpr.A Rubiepos< Mira Loma - Cherry Valley Moreno Valley race Jon Air qest4,...! Base Lade Pena $tale ., ReireananArea Perna rs x Resenigl{ ukewew i� Num Pems Rls , Homeland Rare w. Santa Rasa Hrslwlr Aiea Fal Racoon Beaumont Banning C'haZ0" ban Jacinto Hemet Vase 'Asia Ease Hemel Pain Spnng 1 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 1.2 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS RTA is challenged by changing demographics in various communities and continues to be proactive by planning routes that are customer -oriented, viable, efficient, and cost- effective. By studying the characteristics of the riders, a better understanding is gained to more appropriately plan for and meet the needs of the transit market. Rider characteristics, along with demographic and population changes, are used to shape and strategize how resources will be allocated in future years. Population Profile — Rider Characteristics Bus passenger characteristics were developed from on -board surveys conducted in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Title VI Civil Rights Act of 1964 guidelines. A demographic summary of weekday RTA riders offered the following characteristics: Summary of Rider Characteristics General Demographics O Ethnicity: 39% Hispanic, 27% Caucasian/White, 23% African American/Black, 4% Asian/Pacific Islander, 2% Native American, 5% Other O Gender: 51 % Female, 49% Male O Median Age: 34.5 Income Level O Under $10,000: 29% O $10,000-$30,000: 28% O $31,000-$50,000: 12% O Over $50,000: 11 % O Not Working: 20% Bus Fare Categories O General: 69% O Youth: 10% O Disabled: 11 O Senior: 10% Number of Buses Used for Trip 72% of those surveyed used one bus to their end destination; 25% transferred 1 or 2 times; and remaining 3% transferred 3 or more times. Frequency of Use per Week O 5 or more days: 56% O 3-4 days: 24% O 1-2 days: 12% O Less than 1/week: 8% Customer Origins and Destinations O Home -Work Trips: 42% O Home -Social Trips: 11 O Home -Retail Trips: O Home -School Trips: 8% O Home -Medical Trips: 6% 9% Primary Language O English: 83% O Spanish: 16% O Other: 1 % Automobile Ownership O No: 75% O Yes: 25% Source: RTA Title VI Report (2010) 2 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Demographic Projections Demographic projections directly correlate to the allocation of future transit services. Demographic data such as population, employment, urban density, income levels, age distributions, and even legislative policies are the pinnacle variables that shape public transit in a community. Growth projections for the region are compiled by SCAG and the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) in collaboration with local jurisdictions. At the local level, jurisdictions have the ability to plan and revise land use and transportation characteristics to target a desired level of intensity for employment, housing, and commercial areas. The COA study completed in 2007 included a market analysis of existing and future demographic patterns from 2005 to 2015. The analysis considered population and employment growth projections, projected changes in urban density, job -to -worker balance, income levels, age distributions, and vehicle ownership. Findings from that study included: • The largest population growth areas are expected in the eastern areas of Hemet - San Jacinto, Perris-Menifee, and Banning -Beaumont. • The highest employment growths are anticipated in the Hemet -San Jacinto and Banning -Beaumont areas. • The job -worker balance is expected to improve as more employment opportunities are fostered resulting in a higher proportion of trips within western Riverside. • Commute patterns to neighboring counties are still expected to grow. • Urban intensification is projected to be the most noticeable in the Corona - Riverside corridor with minimum density levels of 15 jobs per acre. • Income levels, age distributions, and vehicle ownership were also profiled to provide an indication of transit needs. o Communities with higher retirement populations (Sun City, Hemet -San Jacinto, and Banning -Beaumont) and higher proportion of families with children (Moreno Valley, Perris, and Lake Elsinore) are projected to develop larger employment bases and population growth as a result of younger families taking advantage of the lower housing costs. o Communities that are more diverse and established with mixed age groups and household types such as Riverside and Corona present more possibilities for increasing choice riders. However, these projections were not reflective of the recent slowdown in the economy and its impact on transit. The projections will be reevaluated with the update of the COA, US Census 2010 data, and projections from the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy for 2012-35. 3 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency 1.3 FIXED ROUTE AND PARATRANSIT SERVICES RTA operates 36 regional, local, rural, and trolley service routes and eight CommuterLink express routes. Depending on the level of ridership in an area, a fixed route will either be directly operated or contract operated. A directly operated route is generally designed for higher density urban areas and is managed and operated in- house with larger vehicles. A contract operated route is generally found in suburban and rural areas and is operated by a third party with smaller vehicles. Refer to Table 3A for a complete listing of both directly operated and contract operated routes. Fixed Route Services A fixed route is a bus line that provides regularly scheduled service. RTA fixed routes may be categorized into five basic types: • Regional Routes: These routes comprise the backbone of the network between metropolitan areas along primary corridors. They may utilize the freeway system to travel between communities and it is not uncommon for regional service to travel through non -urban areas to link two urban areas. • Local Routes: These supplement regional routes by circulating through various neighborhoods and serving secondary corridors. Local routes also serve as feeders to regional and express routes by transporting customers within a community on shorter trips. Bus stop spacing is on average 1/4 mile apart, where curb and gutter improvements permit. • Rural Routes: These provide lifeline service that feeds regional routes. Rural routes are generally limited in operation and serve secondary corridors within non -urbanized areas. Given the growth of western Riverside County, rural route service is limited primarily to segments of Regional route service and less - populated areas between cities. • Trolley Routes and Special Service: These are intended to meet the needs of a specific market or community and often are designed as a circulator to serve targeted affinity groups with common travel patterns. • Regional Express Routes: These routes provide limited -stop service designed primarily to transport commuters over long distances to and from employment sites and provide connectivity to transit operations heading outside of western Riverside County such as Metrolink. Labeled as CommuterLink, these buses employ the freeway system to provide faster service and include customer amenities such as free Wi-Fi service. 4 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Paratransit Services RTA offers paratransit services known as "Dial -A -Ride" (DAR) to seniors (age 65 and above) and persons with disabilities. DAR is a curb -to -curb advanced reservation transportation service that travels to areas within three-quarters of a mile of an RTA fixed route, excluding express services. These areas are referred to as the "Dial -A -Ride service area" and trips must begin and end in the service area. If the trip starts or ends outside the service area, passengers must find a safe place within the service area to be picked up and dropped off to be eligible for service. DAR service is provided at times equivalent to local fixed route bus service in the area. RTA has two types of DAR service: • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Priority DAR Service RTA gives priority service to individuals who are certified under ADA law. Persons who are ADA certified are eligible for trips throughout the RTA service area that are within three-quarters of a mile of a fixed route bus service, excluding express routes, and during the hours of bus service operation. • Senior/Disabled DAR Service Seniors age 65 and above and persons with disabilities are eligible for local DAR service within a single city and within three-quarters of a mile during the hours of fixed route bus service operation, excluding express service. Transportation is provided only within the city in which the trip begins. Consolidated Transportation Services Agency RTA is one of two designated Consolidated Transportation Services Agency's (CTSA) in Riverside County, the other being SunLine Transit Agency in the Coachella Valley. RTA's role as a CTSA is to assist RCTC in coordinating public transit throughout the approximate 2,500-square-mile service area; provide driver training and technical workshops; and assist with preparing grant applications. In the cities of Corona, Beaumont and Banning, RTA coordinates regional services with the Corona Cruiser and Pass Transit. In the City of Riverside, RTA coordinates with Riverside Special Services, which provides ADA compliant service complementing RTA's fixed routes. Additionally, RTA staff periodically meets with social service providers, bus riders, and other advocates through forums such as RCTC's Citizens Advisory Committee, RTA's quarterly ADA meetings, Transportation Now (TNOW) committees, and surrounding regional transit operators. As the CTSA and a federal grantee, RTA receives FTA funds directly and is responsible for the provision and compliance of sub -recipients adhering to federal regulations and policies. RTA is assisting sub -recipients throughout western Riverside County with federal funds through the FTA Sections 5316 Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) and 5317 New Freedom Programs. The sub -recipients will continue to be assisted in FY2013 as awarded through RCTC's 2011 Specialized Transit Call for 5 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Projects or until previous funds are expended. The following is a list of the sub - recipients and approved projects: o Care -A -Van Transit, Inc. ("HOPE Bus") — Job Training/Employment Transport o Care Connexxus, Inc. — Driver Sensitivity Training o Riverside County Regional Medical Center — Medical Transport The FTA funds will be jointly administered by RTA, with RCTC providing the local Measure A match funds. These programs include specialized public transportation initiatives that are targeted to assist low income individuals, seniors, and persons with disabilities who require support beyond conventional public transit services to maintain their independence and mobility. 1.4 CURRENT FARE STRUCTURE In March 2009, a fare study was completed, resulting in the following fare structure approved and adopted by the Board of Directors which took effect June 28, 2009. FIXED -ROUTE FARES Fare Categories General Youth (grades 1-12)** Senior/Disabled** Medicare Card Holder Child (46" tall or under) Base Fares $1.50 $1.50 70¢ 70¢ 25¢ Day Pass* $4 $16 $50 7-Day Pass* 30-Day Pass $4 $16 $2 $16 $2 $16 N/A N/A $35 $23 $23 N/A COMMUTERLINK FARES COMMUTERLINK + LOCAL Fare Categories General Youth (grades 1-12)** Senior/Disabled** Medicare Card Holder Child (46" tall or under) Base Fares $3 $3 $2 $2 $2 Day Passes 30-Day Pass $7 $75 $7 $75 $5 $50 $5 $50 N/A N/A DIAL -A -RIDE FARES I Not accepted on fixed -route buses Fare Categories Senior/Disabled Medicare Card Holder Child (46" tall or under) Base Fares $3 $3 50¢ 10-Ticket Books $30 $30 N/A *Accepted as base fare. CommuterLink trips require an additional $1.30 (senior/disabled) or $1.50 (general) per trip. ** Proper identification is required at time of boarding. 6 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Cooperative Fare and Subsidy Programs RTA makes every effort to create partnerships that will improve service for customers by simplifying transfer agreements and developing fare programs that promote the use of public transit. RTA has transfer agreements with the following agencies: Metrolink, Omnitrans, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Corona Cruiser, and Pass Transit. Metrolink tickets and passes are accepted on RTA fixed routes that serve Metrolink stations during the period from one hour before to one hour after Metrolink's service hours and are valid on the day of travel. Fare media from Omnitrans, Corona Cruiser, and Pass Transit are accepted at transfer locations at the equivalent base fare rate, excluding CommuterLink service, on the day of travel. OCTA fare media is accepted for base fare on CommuterLink Route 216 at transfer locations in Orange County as well as La Sierra Metrolink between RTA Route 15 and OCTA Route 794. Current and retired employees as well as dependents of Omnitrans and OCTA are eligible to ride any local fixed route or CommuterLink in the RTA service area. RTA currently operates various cooperative fare and subsidy programs including: • University of California, Riverside - U-Pass Program, Route 51 Crest Cruiser • Riverside City College - Go -Pass Program • Moreno Valley College - Go -Pass Program • La Sierra University - U-Pass Program • California Baptist University - U-Pass Program • Mount San Jacinto College - Go -Pass Program • City of Riverside - City Pass for Employees • City of Temecula - Route 55 Temecula Trolley • County of Riverside - Route 50 Jury Trolley • RCTC - Route 54 County Administrative Center / Commerce St. Metrolink Parking Lot College and university programs allow students with a valid identification card from these campuses to receive unlimited access to any of RTA's fixed routes. These programs are funded by the institution or students. The City of Riverside subsidizes a fare program (City Pass) for its employees to ride the bus for free and serves as a pass outlet (Riverside Go Transit) for its residents by discounting 20 to 30 percent off on 7- day and 30-day passes, respectively. Other subsidized transit services include the trolley and shuttle routes which are funded by the university or local jurisdictions. 7 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency 1.5 REVENUE FLEET RTA's March 2012 fleet totals 178 vehicles for its fixed route services. The bus types consist of 94 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)-powered 40-ft. buses currently used for directly operated fixed routes; 84 smaller buses for contracted fixed routes which consist of 13 CNG 32-ft. buses; 61 Type II and VII vehicles; and 10 trolleys. RTA also has an additional 83 vehicles for operation of paratransit services, for a total of 261 revenue service vehicles. Refer to Table 1 for detailed inventory of the RTA fleet. The CNG 40-ft. buses used on directly operated routes generally cover more densely populated areas such as Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley, and Perris while the 32-ft. CNG buses and 22-ft. gasoline powered buses are typically used as local and express vehicles on contract operated fixed routes in less dense communities. All RTA vehicles comply with clean fuel policies and come fully equipped with ADA accessible wheelchair lifts, including the paratransit vans. In addition, all fixed route vehicles are equipped with bicycle racks. In FY2013, the directly operated service peak requirement is expected to reach 79 buses, an increase of about 1 bus at peak over FY2012 as a result of capacity enhancements on Routes 1 and 19. The contract operated peak requirement is expected to decline slightly from 59 buses in FY2012 to 58 buses in FY2013 as a result of services being transferred to SunLine Transit Agency for the operation of a portion of Route 210. The 40-ft. fleet is expected to remain at 94 while the contracted fleet is anticipated to be reduced to 78 vehicles from 83 vehicles as a result of the retirement of five 32-ft. CNG buses. 1.6 EXISTING AND PLANNED FACILITIES Operational Facilities RTA's primary facility is located in the City of Riverside and houses the Administration, Operations, and Maintenance departments with approximately 304 active employees on site. RTA's secondary facility, located in Hemet, opened in June 2000. It now has approximately 54 Maintenance and Operations employees assigned to the division. The Hemet facility is utilized for routes in the southern portion of the service area and maintains a portion of the CNG vehicle fleet. In FY2013, RTA's contracted fixed route service will continue to be provided by Empire Transportation and DAR service will continue to be provided by Southland Transit. Both companies have operating facilities located in Perris. Each contractor is responsible for housing, operating, and maintaining RTA vehicles. The DAR facility also houses the DAR reservation call center. RTA offers taxi overflow through Network Paratransit. 8 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Facility Modernization RTA is a recipient of Proposition 1 B funds, known as "The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of 2006." Proposition 1 B sets aside funds for two transportation improvement purposes: (1) Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) to fund capital projects that relate to infrastructure improvement and (2) California Transit Security Grant Program -California Transit Assistance Fund (CTSGP-CTAF) for transit system safety, security and disaster response capital projects. Approved projects include enhancements to the safety and security of operational and maintenance facilities, such as: • Security Lighting Upgrades • Walls and Fencing • Security Signage • Fire Alarm Enhancements • Facility Video Surveillance • Emergency Supplies In October 2011, RTA was notified it would be receiving funds under the FTA State of Good Repair (SGR) Bus and Bus Facilities Discretionary Program. $1.3 million will be allocated towards facility rehabilitation needs for the Riverside and Hemet divisions. These funds will be used towards rehabilitation needs such as concrete, flooring, painting, and roofing upgrades. 11111 �II 9 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency CHAPTER 2: ROUTE PERFORMANCE & EXISTING SERVICE 2.1 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS RTA evaluates and plans for its services using RTA adopted Service Standards and Warrants metrics and those set by RCTC's Productivity Improvement Program (PIP), which are both updated annually. Service Standards and Warrants Service Standards and Warrants were adopted in 2009 to set the requirements for a minimum level of service that respects quality design characteristics such as route structure, service area coverage, operating hours, and on -time performance. Since then, economic conditions have changed requiring that the standards be revised to maintain service stability and are revised as necessary. The same standards for considering service enhancements also provides an objective way to evaluate how fair and balanced service changes can be made. There are several factors that are typically considered when objectively measuring service performance. These factors, used in conjunction with the PIP measurements, help in determining whether service is cost effective. Summary of Service Standards and Warrants Population Density Density is determined by the number of people housed per square mile or the number of employees per square mile. RTA aims to serve at least 85% of all residences, places of work, high schools, colleges, and shopping centers with access to bus service. Route Classifications RTA service can be classified into five fixed route categories — regional, local, rural, trolley/special, and express. Complementary to the fixed route service is Dial -A -Ride. See Table 3A for the route classification of each route. Span of Service The span of service, the hours of operation, refers to the start and end time of a route. Depending on the route structure (i.e., regional, local, rural, express), the span of service will vary based on the demand in the community. Bus Stop Spacing Depending on the population density, bus stop spacing in urban areas usually averages about 1,500 ft. (.28 miles) to 2,500 ft. (.47 miles). As service approaches more suburban and rural areas, bus stop spacing may be limited to locations with accessible curb and gutters and sidewalks suitable for ADA compliance. On -Time Performance RTA requires that no bus shall leave a time point early, and should arrive at a time point no later than 6 minutes after the scheduled arrival time. This limit is appropriate for RTA's service area due to the average distance traveled by each route and the combined rural and urban areas. Headways (Frequency) Headways are the maximum interval between each scheduled fixed route bus (e.g., the bus runs every 30 minutes). Headways range anywhere from every 20 minutes to every 120 minutes, depending on the density, and are 10 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 aimed at operating in 20 minute increments for local, regional, and rural routes. Express and trolley routes may vary depending on demand. Transfer Wait Time In more urbanized areas such as downtown Riverside, transfer wait times will not be longer than approximately 20 minutes. In smaller urbanized and even in rural areas, the transfer wait time can reach up to 30 to 45 minutes depending on the frequencies of the routes in the area. Load Factor (Maximum Vehicle Loads) Depending on the bus, the maximum number of passengers should not exceed 150% of the seating capacity or the legal weight limit of the bus. Dial -A -Ride vehicles should not exceed 100% of the seated capacity. Source: RTA Service Standards and Warrants (2011) Productivity vs. Coverage Target To help improve effectiveness and efficiency, RTA sets a target for the productivity level of service to operate. In order to meet productivity requirements, while continuing to provide coverage to areas that would not be served if performance were the only factor, RTA has adopted standards requiring 60 percent of their fixed route service to perform up to productivity standards while the remaining 40 percent of fixed routes operate to maintain coverage. This means that service that exceeds performance standards enable a minimal level of operations in areas of need that do not meet performance standards. Given RTA's diverse and widespread service area, there are places that are being served based on the need to provide coverage. The 60/40 split establishes a benchmark for productive service to meet mandatory farebox recovery. However, it also allows for new service to be implemented following TDA guidelines for exemption based on performance standards within the year the service was implemented and the following two fiscal years. This objective also enables RTA to maintain highly productive service and still meet the requirements of Title VI. It is the policy of RTA to ensure compliance with Title VI so that no person shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin under any program or activity. New Service Warrants The Service Standards and Warrants are used as a measurement for the implementation of new service. PIP targets are updated annually and new service can be exempted from meeting the required criteria for up to two years plus the year of commencement. The performance of new service is evaluated during this initial period using the PIP and service standards. The objective is to give a route time to perform up to standards, or it may be discontinued. 11 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) Service productivity is measured against the PIP metrics implemented by RCTC in September 2005. Using the PIP as a guide, transit operators in Riverside County develop their SRTP and corresponding budgets using the following performance indicators: • Farebox Recovery Ratio • Cost Per Revenue Hour • Subsidy Per Passenger • Subsidy Per Passenger Mile • Subsidy Per Revenue Hour • Subsidy Per Revenue Mile • Passengers Per Revenue Hour • Passengers Per Revenue Mile The majority of PIP targets are established based on actual current fiscal year performance through the third quarter, with minor adjustments. The Cost Per Revenue Hour target is set by taking actual current fiscal year performance through the third quarter and multiplying it by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the end of the previous fiscal year. The Farebox Recovery Ratio target is set based on the projected budget for the succeeding fiscal year and consideration of the urban (20%)/rural (10%) service offering. DAR is set at 10%. All remaining targets are set on a plus or minus 15% of the current fiscal year actual performance through the third quarter. PIP implementation policies require mandatory compliance for the Farebox Recovery Ratio target plus attainment of at least four of the seven remaining discretionary indicators. For FY2013, RTA is budgeted to meet or exceed the mandatory farebox recovery ratio target, and four of the seven discretionary performance indicators at the system -wide level. The indicators not expected to be met based on the proposed budget are Cost Per Revenue Hour, Subsidy Per Passenger, and Subsidy Per Passenger Mile. The Cost Per Revenue Hour target is based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 1.76%. However, total operating costs are budgeted to increase seven percent over FY2012 budget due to revenue hours increasing by seven percent, as well as most other cost objectives exceeding CPI. Examples are medical benefits and unleaded gasoline. The PIP metrics that consider subsidy allow for a 15% increase over current fiscal year third quarter performance. The FY2013 budgeted subsidy is planned at a 19.5% increase over current FY2012 levels while Passengers and Passenger Miles remain relatively flat to forecasted FY2012 year-end levels. 12 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riuerside Transit Agency PIP Indicators Systemwide Systemwide FY12 FY13 YTD March Proposed Target Low End High End Farebox Recovery Ratio Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Subsidy Per Passenger Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Subsidy Per Revenue Hour Subsidy Per Revenue Mile Passengers Per Revenue Hour Passengers Per Revenue Mile 26.93% $80.73 $4.19 $0.60 $58.99 $3.52 14.10 0.84 24.54% $87.12 $5.02 $0.72 $65.74 $3.93 13.10 0.78 17.49% $82.15 $3.56 $4.82 $0.51 r $0.69 $50.14 $67.84 $2.99 $4.05 11.99 16.22 0.71 0.97 The increase in salaries and benefits over FY2012 budget is due to increased medical, pension and worker's compensation expenses. Purchased transportation growth is attributed to established contract rate increases and higher fuel costs. Other growth includes, but is not limited to, increased parts usage and the COA study. FY2012 Budget $ 54,140,203 Budget Changes from FY2012 Salaries & Benefits 1,674,879 Worker's Compensation 46,515 Purchased Transportation (rates, fuel) 1,218,939 Comprehensive Operational Analysis 400,000 Parts 449,306 Insurance / Other Expenses 143,626 Total Increases $ 3,933,265 FY2013 Proposed Budget $ 58,073,468 13 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency 2.2 EXISTING FIXED ROUTE & DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE In FY2012, RTA budgeted nearly 623,000 revenue hours for the operation of 10.5 million revenue miles. It is planned that FY2013 revenue hours will increase about seven percent system -wide. Compared to FY2012 budget, fixed route revenue hours will increase 3% and DAR service (including DAR Taxi) is estimated to increase 19%. Revenue miles are also projected to increase 1 % for fixed route services and 19% for DAR. Passenger growth has far exceeded expectations in the past fiscal year due to an increase in ridership at educational institutions, rising gasoline prices, a lower unemployment rate, and a slowly improving economy. Growth has been most evident on contract operated routes and CommuterLink services. System -wide passengers are projected to reach an all-time high in FY2012 with approximately 8.6 million boardings and are estimated to remain relatively flat for FY2013. 9,000,000 8,500,000 8,000,000 7,500,000 7,000,000 6,500,000 - Total Passengers by Fiscal Year FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 (Budget) (Budget) 14 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency 2.3 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS In the last three fiscal years, as revenues have declined, RTA has been able to balance its budget by concentrating service reductions and modifications on routes that are not meeting PIP targets, namely farebox recovery and passengers per hour. These two targets are key factors in evaluating unproductive service. The PIP summary directs staff to research and analyze unproductive routes more closely to determine whether segments or trips can be eliminated due to low ridership. This process has proven to be beneficial because it streamlines services, reduces expenses, and has the least impact on customers. 2.4 TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH MARKETS While RTA services are expanding among the public in general, continued efforts are made to increase and expand its commuter services as a market segment. Many customers value the amenities provided on CommuterLink routes such as the upholstered seating and wireless internet. To expand on this market base, RTA launched new express routes from San Jacinto/Hemet to Riverside and Escondido in summer 2009 and converted Route 149 into CommuterLink Route 216 in summer 2010. Another growth area is high school and college students. RTA is committed to working with school districts, colleges and universities to improve access to public transit. For high schools, RTA compiles and updates a database containing information on facility locations, bell schedules and district boundaries for routing and scheduling purposes. At the college level, RTA continues to develop and build relationships with college and university officials to improve transportation for their students. The Go -Pass and U-Pass programs have taken off and in FY2012 ridership from college students grew over 6%. Community routes such as circulators have also proven to be successful in some areas where density levels are higher and connectivity is provided to key trip destinations such as business and educational facilities and commercial/retail centers. Examples of these include Route 11 in Moreno Valley and Route 55 in Temecula, both of which are highly productive. As densities increase and communities are developed further, RTA is committed to working with local jurisdictions to create similarly viable transit options. 2.5 TRANSIT CENTERS, EQUIPMENT AND PASSENGER AMENITIES RTA seeks and receives a variety of funds to finance capital projects that enhance services for passengers. Capital projects are typically funded with approximately 20% coming from local sources such as Transportation Development Act (TDA), Measure A, or Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) while 80% is paid for with federal grants. 15 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Transit Centers Transit centers provide more than just a bus transfer stop. They can be large community -centered, multi -modal facilities where bus and rail passengers benefit from a selection of mobility choices. These modes of travel can include single -occupancy vehicles, carpools, vanpools, bicycles, pedestrian walkways, local and commuter express buses, light rail, and regional rail networks. Transit centers are generally owned by various public agencies and are well -situated for advancement of public -private investment partnerships leading to "transit -oriented" commercial and residential development. The following is a summary of the existing and planned transit facilities in the RTA service area: Perris Station Transit Center: Completed in January 2010, this transit center is located in the City of Perris at C St. and 4th St. (State Route 74) and has eight bus bays for bus service and is served by seven RTA routes. The facility will ultimately facilitate multi -modal transfers between Metrolink, RTA local and express routes, and park -and -ride patrons for the southwest region. Corona Transit Center: The transit center was opened in September 2010 and is located off Grand Blvd. and North Main St. and includes eight bus bays and a pedestrian bridge across the railroad tracks for direct access to Metrolink. Total project cost came under $8.0 million including the final engineering and design and extension of the pedestrian bridge. Downtown Riverside Transit Center: The current transit center is located between Fairmont Blvd. and Market St. off of University Ave. and Mission Inn Ave. RTA is working with the City of Riverside to evaluate other locations, such as a site off of Vine St., near the Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station, to remain in close proximity to employment and education centers. The transit center currently has eight bus bays, but relocation or renovation is expected to feature about 12 to 14 bus bays to serve as a primary connecting point for RTA's regional and local routes and future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service. The total project is 16 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency estimated to cost $7.5 million and will be funded by TUMF, TDA, and federal funds. Twin Cities Transit Center: This center is proposed to be located near the Temecula and Murrieta city boundaries and will feature 10 to 14 bus bays. The transit center will be a robust marshaling site for vanpools and regional express and local routes. BRT service from San Diego will also be considered to transport the large volume of commuters destined for San Diego County employment centers. Total cost for the project is estimated at $8.0 million and is expected to be completed in 2015. In FY2013, RTA anticipates conducting a site feasibility study that will work in conjunction with the findings from the Jefferson Avenue Corridor Specific Plan and Highway 395 Corridor Study to find an optimal location for the services to converge. Hemet Transit Center: The site of this transit center will be located adjacent to the proposed County Courthouse near State and Devonshire. A total of $1.4 million has been set aside for the project. Additional transit centers and smaller transfer nodes are being considered by RTA as needed to accommodate additional Metrolink stations along the future Perris Valley rail commuter line. Other locations along the Perris Valley Line that are being considered include the Moreno Valley -March Station and South Perris Station. RTA will continue to work with RCTC on creating multi -modal stations that will create transportation hubs that meet the capacity for transit service. The California High Speed Rail (HSR) Authority has recently approached RTA to coordinate early design concepts for potential bus connectivity. The HSR route will either travel through Riverside and Murrieta via 1-215 or through Corona and Murrieta via 1-15. Depending on the final design, passenger stations are contemplated for undetermined locations in Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley or the March JPA area and also near the Murrieta-Temecula interface. RTA will serve in an advisory capacity with HSR engineers to ensure that safe and convenient across -the -platform access between the rail line and the bus lines is provided. Station funding sources have not yet been identified. Other local transit centers and transfer nodes around the RTA service area will be considered as community -centered residential and employment densities increase and the need for centralized bus marshaling and transfer facilities become evident. RTA will partner with state, regional, county, and local planning agencies, as well as the private sector, to coordinate the design, funding and construction of these sites. 17 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Equipment and Passenger Amenities Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) In 2008, RTA launched the ITS project on its directly operated buses, which makes up about 60% of RTA's fleet. The ITS network brings functionalities that improve the operational workflow, both internally and externally. Sophisticated Automatic Vehicle Locator programs allow the bus Dispatch Center to track the location of every 40-ft. bus for schedule adherence. This feature greatly enhances schedule performance and monitoring of ridership patterns. The next phase of ITS will include the expansion to contract operated fixed -route services which is anticipated to occur in the 2013-2015 timeframe. Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) RTA has also introduced the ATIS technology with digital kiosks, known as SmartStops, which relay real-time arrival information on display at major transfer points. Currently, SmartStops are installed at heavily used bus stops in the cities of Riverside, Perris, Moreno Valley, and Corona. The next phase of the ATIS project will include querying and alerting of bus arrivals via text messaging, which is anticipated to occur in the 2013-2015 timeframe. The SmartStop technology is coupled with additional plans to continue an aggressive program to enhance transit amenities. Existing shelters are continuously refurbished and new benches, trash receptacles and kiosks have also been placed at many existing bus stops. Newer bus benches are designed to be graffiti resistant and discourage loitering. Furthermore, over 450 new bus turnouts have been installed since 2003 as a result of staff coordination with local developers. 18 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Future bus schedules will further benefit from enhanced signal priority technology planned for BRT service. A transmitter from the vehicle will allow the traffic signals along major streets to remain in "green" mode at busy intersections for several seconds longer, therefore allowing a late running bus to advance more quickly along its route to maintain on -time performance. RTA is working with the City of Riverside to deploy a demonstration program on the University Ave. and Magnolia Ave. corridors. This project is currently underway. Illuminated Bus Stops In FY2011, RTA purchased materials and supplies to expand and upgrade the bus stop system with additional security -enhancing illuminated bus stop devices which come equipped with downlighting. These features are push-button activated by the customer and allow drivers to recognize when a person is waiting at a bus stop at night. The downlighting safety feature and illuminated schedule provides bus scheduling information for easy visibility in a night time environment. Funding for the illuminated bus stops was received from Section 5311 ARRA funds. Over 30 bus stops in the system have received these devices. On -Board Security Cameras RTA utilized $60,000 from Proposition 1 B funds to add exterior side video cameras on all full-sized buses to enhance the Agency's ability to monitor and record activities occurring around the vehicles. These additional cameras have enhanced RTA's ability to investigate crimes and suspicious activities occurring at bus stops, transit centers and during travel on the road. The cameras provide a view of the street and all activities near the bus. When reports of crime or suspicious activities are received, RTA is able to aid law enforcement authorities by downloading the video which can be invaluable to the investigation and any subsequent prosecution. Revenue Collection Devices RTA recently installed electronic registering fareboxes on contracted fixed route vehicles which previously had old manual fareboxes. The upgraded fireboxes will increase revenue collection processing, decrease staff time in reconciling revenue, enhance ridership category counts and provide greater passenger convenience by issuing day passes automatically. The project cost $800,000 and was funded with Proposition 1 B. 19 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Bus Replacement Program The directly operated fleet has a Bus Replacement Program that includes the purchase of 94 new 40-ft CNG replacement buses for directly operated fixed routes. RTA's CNG buses, purchased in 2001 and 2002, are reaching the end of their useful lives as determined by the FTA. Replacing aging buses is critical in assuring the reliability of service and decreasing maintenance costs by reducing breakdowns and frequent repairs. The replacement buses will be powered by CNG and have state-of-the-art technologies to provide enhanced passenger safety, better fuel efficiency and decreased emissions. The replacement of these vehicles will be funded through LTF, STA, Proposition 1 B, and federal appropriations and grants. The contract operated fixed -route fleet was expanded in 2008 with the purchase of 19 Type VII vehicles which seats about 26 passengers compared to the previous Type II vehicles being used which seats about 12 passengers. In FY2013, the expansion will continue with the purchase of 21 Type VII vehicles which seat 28 passengers. These vehicles will replace 11 Type II vehicles being used that seat 12 passengers, and 10 CommuterLink Thomas vehicles that have reached the end of their useful life. Funding for these replacements will come from FTA Section 5307, Prop 1 B, and STA for a total estimated cost of $3.1 million. The DAR fleet will be updated with 38 new 12 passenger Type II vehicles to replace similar units that will reach the end of their useful life in FY2013. Funding for these vehicles will be provided by FTA Sections 5307 and 5309, LTF, and STA for a total amount of about $2.5 million. Bus Stop Amenities and Upgrades Bus stop amenities such as shelters, bus stop signs, benches, and trash receptacles will continue to be placed at the nearly 3,300 bus stops in the service area as is feasible. A priority list is based on ridership and safety criteria. RTA works with local jurisdictions to convert as many bus stops as possible to ADA- compliant status. Funds for a Bus Stop Upgrade Program are being sought from TUMF, STA, and federal appropriations. The project will include the installation of cement pads to make stops accessible for riders with disabilities, shelters for security and protection from the elements, and benches for passenger comfort. These upgrades will not only benefit current riders but will also serve as strong incentives for discretionary riders to adopt public transit as a mode of travel. 20 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riuerside Transit Agency CHAPTER 3: PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES 3.1 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES Since FY2009, a series of service modifications and reductions were made to enhance service efficiency and cost effectiveness. Each of RTA's seven main geographic areas underwent service changes that were impacted by scheduling and routing modifications. Summary of Recent Service Changes Service Area Recent Service Changes Corona- Norco — Riverside - Mira Loma and Vicinity The Corona - Norco - Riverside area comprises the majority of the urban population and since 2009, various schedules on local and regional routes have been improved for on -time performance and connectivity. Growing communities such as Eastvale led to the restructuring of Route 3 which was incorporated with portions of the former Route 38 to create a route connecting Eastvale, Norco, and Corona. Other changes included the elimination of Third St. on Route 14, the interlining of Routes 29 and 49, and the merge of Routes 14 and 25. Moreno Valley The Moreno Valley area has the second highest ridership in the system, next to the Riverside area. The transit network was restructured in 2009 to eliminate duplicated areas on Eucalyptus, Frederick, Cottonwood, and Perris Blvd and improve connections to neighboring communities in Riverside and Perris. The restructuring involved Routes 11, 16, 18, 19, 35, and eliminated the Route 17. The overall design of the area network utilizes the Moreno Valley Mall as an anchor point for connections and has timed transfers between Routes 11, 16, 18, and 19. Perris - Menifee In the Perris - Menifee area, the Perris Transit Center was opened in January 2010 and seven local, regional, and express routes were realigned to serve the new transfer location. During the same time, RTA also implemented weekend service on Route 41, which travels through Mead Valley, Perris, and Moreno Valley, with a grant from the federal JARC Program. Ridership in the Perris area has grown significantly as seen on the Route 19, which has one of the highest passengers per hour in the system, and the Route 22, which experiences maximum loads at local schools. Hemet - San Jacinto In the Hemet - San Jacinto area, funds received by JARC were used to add two new CommuterLinks, Routes 212 and 217 which originate in San Jacinto and travels to Riverside and Escondido, respectively. Both routes were started in 2009. Other JARC funds were used to increase the frequency on Routes 74 and 79 with the addition of another vehicle. The frequencies on each route reached 90 to 100 minutes and were improved to 60 to 70 minutes. JARC funding was selected for these routes due to the increasing demand for service from students and commuters traveling to and from the Hemet - San Jacinto area to Perris and Temecula. Service frequency was reduced on Route 42 on Saturdays beginning May 2010 due to low productivity. Lake Elsinore - Wildomar The Lake Elsinore - Wildomar area is primarily served by Routes 7 and 8 which have among the highest ridership for the contract operated fixed routes. Routes 7 and 8 were restructured to improve the staggered headways between the two local routes. Route 7 previously operated every 35 to 40 minutes and Route 8 operated every 90 minutes. Ridership statistics showed that Route 8 was more heavily used than Route 7 and the increasing traffic and overcrowding impacted 21 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency the on -time performance of the route. For the two routes to be more aligned with one another for transfers and connections, they were modified such that the Inland Valley Hospital segment was added on the Route 7 and eliminated on Route 8. This balanced the frequency on both routes to every 60 minutes and improved the connections between the two at the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center and with Route 22. Murrieta - Temecula In the Murrieta-Temecula area, RTA modified existing Routes 23, 24, and 79 and realignments were made to maintain service along the highest frequented corridors in May 2011. At that time frequencies were streamlined at 70 minutes for timed connections between the routes at County Center Drive. RTA also worked closely with the City of Temecula to integrate the Route 55 into the regular transit system as a result of excellent ridership performance. Banning - Beaumont In the Banning - Beaumont area, RTA has been working with Pass Transit to coordinate and improve service connections with other RTA routes in Moreno Valley and trip generators such as MSJC in San Jacinto. Service on Route 35 was enhanced with the addition of another vehicle to improve the frequency from 100 minutes to 60 minutes. Customers responded well to this change and growth on Route 35 has more than doubled since then. System -wide Beginning May 2010, service on four major holidays (New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, and Labor Day) were designated as non -service days. Thanksgiving and Christmas also are traditionally system -wide holidays. 3.2 PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES Service planning for the next three years is primarily modeled after recommended strategies by local service area as highlighted in the last COA study. The COA findings called for an increased emphasis on the local transit corridors, the existing and proposed transit centers, and primary connections to regional and intracounty services to employment centers, schools, and other areas with increasing density. Additional recommendations may be derived from new transit studies, customer comments, coach operator comments, public surveys, and other agencies or organizations. The service strategies, as depicted on the following page, address the market and demographic needs of each community and the types of improvements that could be made. 22 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Summary of Service Strategy by Service Area Service Area General Service Strategy Corona — Norco — • Focus on commuters with direct services connecting major residential and Riverside — employment areas as well as improved services connecting to transit Jurupa Valley and centers and Metrolink stations where regional and intracounty services are Vicinity available • Provide services to cover major schools including universities and colleges as well as connections at high and middle schools • Provide frequent services and transit priority measures on primary corridors Moreno Valley • Establish a base transit network serving major activity centers including schools, shopping centers, medical centers and the proposed Metrolink station • Connect Moreno Valley to UCR and Downtown Riverside as well as Perris with direct and frequent transit services • Provide transit service to future major developments at the March Air Reserve Base site Perris - Menifee • Connect all services at the proposed transit center, the future Metrolink station • Provide local service in the major residential areas connecting to major activity centers • Connect the local services to the regional and intracounty services at the transit center Hemet - San • Focus on internal transit connections between residential areas and major Jacinto activity centers • Provide continuous service on transit corridors connecting to major schools, shopping areas and medical facilities • Provide services to the new development area in north Hemet Lake Elsinore — • Focus on the intracounty connections to Perris and Murrieta/Temecula Wildomar • Interline the local circulator and intracounty routes to reduce transfer requirement Murrieta - • Focus on services to commuters, students and shoppers Temecula • Provide transfer connections between local circulators and express routes to better serve commuters • Provide service connections to high and middle schools • Local circulators and intracounty routes should provide combined frequent service on the major commercial corridors Banning - • The local service within Banning/Beaumont service area will continue to be Beaumont provided by Pass Transit • Intracounty services operated by RTA will connect to Pass Transit local routes Source: RTA COA (2007) Addressing these strategies will continue despite financial constraints. An emphasis will be placed on improving the existing service through improved scheduling and streamlining of routes. Schedule improvements will utilize ITS technology to improve clock -faced headways, frequencies, and timed connections to other routes. Streamlining, or route restructuring, will enhance service along major corridors and 23 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency arterials and reduce circuitous routing and duplicated service. These core objectives will in turn address the community demands for service to schools and employment centers. In FY2013, the commencement of a COA study will occur to identify service improvements and enhancements over the next five to ten years. The COA is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2014 and is set forth to meet the following objectives: • Complete a comprehensive analysis of the transit service provided — from service at each stop to examining the efficiency, logical construction, and ability to meet local and regional travel patterns. • Examine the existing and potential markets for transit services that will help increase ridership, farebox recovery, and market share. • Provide strategic plans for short-term and long-term planning initiatives that are sustainable both operationally and fiscally. • Develop a plan in alignment with policy initiatives that look to reduce vehicle emissions where mass transit can be shown to contribute significantly towards that achievement. • Prioritize transit capital needs such as fleet replacement, expansion, and facility upgrades. Major service modifications are not anticipated until findings from the COA study are completed; however, capacity building efforts on routes exhibiting high ridership growth will continue. Such efforts in the next fiscal year will include deployment of additional vehicles on Routes 1, 16, and 19 and possible transfers of contracted services with smaller buses to larger 40-ft. buses operated directly based on passenger demand. Planned service changes for FY2014 and FY2015 are to include modest enhancements pending future revenue outcomes and will focus on enhancing capacity, improving connectivity, and meeting demand on routes impacted by substantial growth. Such enhancements would include improving frequencies on routes over 60 minutes or expanding weekend service on routes that will complete the backbone of the network to close gaps between sub -areas. 3.3 MODIFICATIONS TO PARATRANSIT SERVICE The provision of ADA services remains a challenge as service requests continue to increase and the number of ADA-eligible riders continues to grow. From FY 2006 to FY2009, DAR ridership grew 66%. In comparison, during the same period fixed route ridership grew 21 %. This disparity is due in part to the maturing of the "baby -boomer" generation requiring paratransit services. Paratransit, or DAR service is provided exclusively for seniors, persons with disabilities and ADA-certified riders. A DAR Study was completed in 2009 and determined that, "If no change is made to RTA's existing policies and level of service, it is expected that DAR's ridership and associated operating cost will more than double over the next four fiscal years to reach 730 thousand passengers and $22.7 million, respectively, in FY2013." 24 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Given these findings, in September 2009, the Board of Directors authorized the implementation of the following policy changes that took effect January 2010. • Raise the senior age for DAR eligibility from 60 to 65 • Implement trip -by -trip eligibility enforcement • Shorten the reservations window from 7 days to 3 days • Enforce a strict % mile boundary policy for all passengers • Implement a new fare system model that would be based on the comparable fixed route model Following these policy changes, ridership growth slowed, and in FY2011 shifted downward by more than three percent over FY2010. In FY2011, efficiency in the number of Passengers Per Hour improved, resulting in an eight percent reduction in revenue hours over FY2010. As forecasted in the 2009 DAR Study, passenger counts leveled off for about a year following the policy changes then began to rise, but at a slower rate than in previous years. This projection is shown in ridership trends from the end of FY2011 through FY2012 when ridership began to increase on average of 16% per month from the previous year. In FY2012, further efforts to mitigate the increasing expenses in DAR service included the launch of a Senior/Disabled Travel Training Program and the establishment of a Medi-Cal Reimbursement Program. The Senior/Disabled Travel Training Program covers all aspects of public transit from training on how to use a bus schedule and map to overcoming physical and social barriers that may prevent passengers from using a fixed route bus. Participants benefit by developing a greater level of independence and increased mobility; ultimately bringing significant financial savings to the customer and RTA. During the first six months of this program, participants took nearly 1,500 trips on fixed route buses. The Medi-Cal Reimbursement Program is being developed in cooperation with the State Medi-Cal Program for paratransit trips taken to and from qualifying medical services. This program provides reimbursement of 50% of the net expenses associated with these trips and provides access to alternative sources of State and Federal funding for DAR services. 3.4 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTION A marketing and communications plan is developed to support the annual goals of RTA, while advancing the mission and vision of the organization. The plan seeks to address the following focus areas: • Increasing ridership • Increasing awareness of RTA services • Improving the image of RTA • Educating the public on the benefits of public transportation • Providing excellent customer service • Coordinating media and public relations 25 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency • Assisting with employee communications Developing marketing tactics to address these areas is accomplished by executing marketing and communications programs/campaigns targeted at existing and potential riders, commuters, the general public, elected officials, students, the business community, the media, non-profit organizations and employees. These marketing programs/campaigns will employ a mix of different media to reach the target audiences. Most residents of western Riverside County know RTA has a transit system, but for many that is all they know. Marketing efforts aim to build on the existing base of awareness by educating the general public about what transit services are available, how to get more information and how to access services. Service Adjustments RTA generally adjusts its service three times per year (January, May, and September) in conjunction with the proposed service changes. Timely and broad -based notification of these changes is important to our riders. Marketing promotes service adjustments through a variety of advertising methods to reach customers including rider alerts, press releases, website promotions, brochures distributed throughout the service area, newspaper ads, on -bus information and social media. Customer Information Materials RTA's goal is to make the transit system easier to understand and use through enhanced passenger information and signage. To the novice rider, using transit can be a confusing prospect. To be effective, RTA passenger information materials are easy to understand, accurate and up-to-date, readily available, attractive and inviting. Materials that are easy to read, readily available and attractive result in a much higher potential for someone new trying the system, while at the same time maintaining existing ridership. Public Speaking Opportunities Personal presentations are useful in reaching a variety of segments with customized, highly credible messages. Presentations to business and community leaders are used to educate these groups about the benefits that transit provides to the RTA community. Presentations at staff meetings for social service agencies or other gatekeeper organizations educate these individuals about what transit offers their clients and how they can help to encourage transit usage among their constituents. Presentations at senior centers or apartment complexes, college or school orientation programs, or to other groups of potential riders are used to show them how they can use the bus to gain or maintain independence or access job training opportunities. 26 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency Community Relations Many of RTA's strategies rely on working through local organizations and businesses to direct very specific promotional messages to constituencies with realistic potential for using some or all of RTA's transit services. Community -based marketing and partnerships with local businesses and public agencies of this kind can be both low-cost and highly effective. RTA often participates in community events and parades. In addition to its potential to attract new users, it also provides the opportunity to build on- going relationships with various constituencies. Website and Social Marketing The website provides an opportunity for RTA to publish information about our services and become accessible to anybody and anywhere, 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. RTA also utilizes social media including Facebook, Twitter and iAlerts. Social media provides an outlet for displaying who we are in new, free advertising format. Talking about RTA and providing the public information in an intelligent way via Twitter and iAlerts and a regularly updated Facebook raises RTA's profile and brand. There is no other low-cost promotional method available that can easily give RTA large numbers of visitors, some of whom may come back to our website or social media pages again and again. Customer Information Center The Customer Information Center provides phone information to our customers seven days per week. As call volumes fluctuate, RTA maintains staffing levels to adequately meet our customers' needs. With tools like Transtar, Google and Bing Transit trip planners, and Transit Master Bus tracking, agents are able to quickly and accurately answer all customer inquiries. Transportation NOW T-NOW was formed in 1992 as grassroots advocacy group comprised of enthusiastic public transit advocates. Members of T-NOW range from elected officials to community activists to everyday transit users who are committed not only to addressing regional transportation issues but meeting the needs of individual communities. There are five T-NOW chapters throughout the service area that include Corona/Norco District 2, Greater Riverside, Moreno Valley/Perris, San Gorgonio Pass Area, and Southwest Riverside. Each chapter meets monthly and sets goals and objectives relevant to their communities. 27 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency 3.5 BUDGET IMPACT ON PROPOSED CHANGES Economic forecasts play a pivotal role in the service planning process. Since FY2009, RTA has adjusted its service levels to adhere to budgetary constraints. Between FY2009 and FY2011, RTA reduced 87,000 annual revenue service hours in fixed route and DAR service to save $5.3 million annually. Planned service changes in FY2013 and beyond are contingent upon improved economic conditions and available revenue. Therefore, should funding be unavailable for larger planned projects, the implementation and service improvements in conjunction with it will be delayed until sufficient revenue is available. Any new service should also adhere to RTA's Sustainable Funding Source Policy that was approved in September 2010. The enactment of the policy provides a framework that assures that funding sources, particularly temporary financial assistance or "seed" money are utilized only on service that has a significant potential to be productive and financially sustainable when funding expires or is depleted. This encourages the use of new or expanded service to demonstrate that it is warranted by meeting productivity standards over an established period of time. See Appendix F for the Sustainable Funding Source Policy. 28 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency CHAPTER 4: FINANCIAL & CAPITAL PLANS The Agency's FY2013 budget reflects a strategy to sustain current levels of safe, reliable and effective public bus transportation service while considering the continued economic pressures that demand efficiency to the greatest extent possible and challenge compliance with the PIP. To that end, the Agency is planning for a service level that balances forecasted fiscal constraints with the varied profile of the service area as well as adjustments to record ridership demand and pre -positioning for future service. Staff remains fully committed to exploring all service and financial alternatives necessary to meeting the public transit needs of the citizens who live and work in Western Riverside County. Public transportation helps alleviate congestion, ensures mobility, promotes more livable communities, and assists with meeting additional needs that arise as a result of the ADA. 4.1 OPERATING & CAPITAL BUDGET The total Agency Budget for FY2013 is $77,284,721, with $58,073,468 projected for operating expenses and $19,211,253 projected for capital projects. Due to the prudence exercised over the past few years and the mildly improving economy, the Agency is expecting an overall operating budget increase over FY2012. As currently budgeted, total Agency operating expenses for FY2013 are $58,073,468 — an increase of $3,933,265 or seven percent over FY2012. The FY2013 capital budget represents a decrease of $14,754,800 or 43% over FY2012 levels. The significant reduction in the capital budget request is attributable to decreased funding requested for facilities and the heavy-duty CNG bus replacement. Operating Budget Profile o Operations ■ Maintenance Planning oAdministration $37,546,855 The proposed Operating Budget totals $58,073,468. Operations, at 64%, constitutes the largest component of the proposed budget while Maintenance makes up 17% of the total. Thus, combined Operations and Maintenance equate to 81 % of the budget. Planning and Administration combined make up the remaining 19% of the budget. 29 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 The operating budget contains five (5) major cost elements. The elements are: • Salaries and Benefits (47%), which are made up of wages and fringe benefits including Worker's Compensation and Other Post -Employment Benefits Annual Required Contribution (OPEB ARC). • Purchased Transportation (35%), which represents the resources required for contracted transportation services for DAR/Taxi Overflow and certain fixed -route services. • Materials and Supplies (7%), made up primarily of operating supplies including tires, parts, oil, and fuel for the operation, repair & maintenance of Agency vehicles. • Services (6%) include but are not limited to external auditing, legal, marketing, outside maintenance / custodial, armored transport, actuarial services, legislative consulting, trustee fees, and towing. • Other Expenses (5%) include but are not limited to provision for property and liability insurance, utilities, printing and publications, advertising and promotion, dues and subscriptions, and other miscellaneous expenses. A profile of proposed expenditures by cost element is shown below: $4,083,758 $3,179,444 $27,536,903 oSalaries & Benefits ■ Services oMaterials & Supplies o Purchased Transportation ■ Other Expenses 30 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Rieerside Transit Agency Capital Budget Profile The proposed FY2013 Capital Budget totals $19,211,253. Capital funding will be used for the purchase of critical items to maintain existing operations and service levels. The Capital Budget is a component of the comprehensive five-year Capital Improvement Plan including equipment and upgrade of agency infrastructure. FY2013 Capital Budget profile by project element is shown below: $24,200 $181,704_ $1,654,617 $17,350,732 ❑ Maintenance ■ Revenue Vehicles ❑Support Equipment ❑ Non -Revenue Vehicles Notable capital projects included in the proposed FY2013 budget include: • Funding for the replacement of the directly operated heavy duty CNG fleet • Purchase of spare parts for vehicle operation and maintenance including tire lease • Transit Enhancements • Critical maintenance and support equipment • Revenue vehicle replacement (7 non -heavy duty fixed route vehicles) • Non -revenue vehicle replacement (1 driver relief car) 31 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency 4.2 FUNDING SOURCES FOR OPERATING & CAPITAL PROGRAMS Funding for the Operating and Capital Budgets are generated from state, federal and local revenue sources. The chart shown below summarizes the allocation of each revenue source. Total Operating & Capital Revenues $77,284,721 Operating Revenues $58,073,468 Passenger Fares (Regular) $10,321,106 LTF Operating Assistance $29,339,165 Federal Operating Assistance $14,182,557 FTA Section 5307 $12,500,000 FTA Section 5311 $426,208 FTA Section 5309 $300,000 JARC (5316) / New Freedom (5317) $956,349 Other Local Revenues $1,255,000 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) $300,000 Measure A $2,675,640 Capital Revenues $19,211,253 Federal $5,429,287 FTA Section 5307 $5,429,287 Local Transportation Fund (LTF) $7,674,644 STA $6,107,322 The amounts depicted above do not include the "pass -through" funding for the social service programs that RTA will oversee on behalf of RCTC. 32 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 4.3 REGULATORY & COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS As a recipient of state and federal funding, RTA is required to comply with regulatory policies and procedures that are reviewed and audited regularly. Summary of Regulatory & Compliance Requirements Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Audit: Under the State of California, TDA provides two major sources of funding for public transportation: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and the State Transit Assistance Fund (STA). These funds are for the development and support of public transportation needs that exist in California and are allocated to areas of each county based on population, taxable sales and transit performance. The last TDA Triennial Audit was completed in June 2010 at which time RTA had no findings. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Triennial Review: The triennial review is a comprehensive review of compliance with FTA requirements that is conducted of Section 5307 grantees at least every three years. Even though the review is conducted of Section 5307 grantees, it addresses all FTA programs for which the grantee is the direct recipient of funds, including Sections 5307, 5309, 5310, 5316, and 5317 and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). It addresses the grantee's implementation of Federal requirements in 24 areas and its oversight of sub recipients, operations contractors, or lessees funded by these programs. The last FTA Triennial Review was completed in June 2010 at which time RTA had no deficiencies. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): The federal ADA Act of 1990 prohibits discrimination and ensures equal opportunity and access with persons with disability. Under the ADA Act, public transit operators are required to provide complementary paratransit service to persons who are ADA certified and are within three-quarters of a mile of a local fixed route bus during the hours of bus service operation. RTA remains fully compliant with all Federal ADA regulations and has had no ADA customers denied service on DAR. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program: The federal DBE Program seeks to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of FTA's Department of Transportation -assisted contracts in the Department's highway, transit, and airport financial assistance programs and to create a level playing field on which DBEs can compete fairly for Department of Transportation -assisted contracts. As of March 2010, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a new rule which established a three- year DBE goal. RTA's DBE Program was last submitted in August 2009 and will remain in effect through September 2012 and at which time the DBE Program will be resubmitted. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO): The Federal Transit Laws, 49 U.S.C. 5332(b), provide that "no person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any project, program or activity funded in whole or in part through financial assistance under this Act." This applies to employment and business opportunities and is considered to be in addition to the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The federal EEO Program is submitted to FTA every three years. The last submission was in February 2012. Drug and Alcohol Testing: Per the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 49, Part 40 & 655), RTA established a Drug & Alcohol testing policy in an effort to deter drug and alcohol use in the workplace. The policy establishes the circumstances in which applicants and employees are tested for 33 Short Range Transit Plan • FY2013-2015 Riverside Transit Agency drugs and alcohol in the workplace and the consequences when they test positive. The purpose of the policy is to prevent accidents, injuries, and fatalities resulting from the misuse of alcohol and prohibited drugs by employees who perform safety -sensitive functions. The Drug and Alcohol Report is in compliance with FTA and was last updated in October 2010. Title VI Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VI Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. Specifically, Title VI provides that "no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." (42 U.S.C. Section 2000d). RTA's Title VI Program to the FTA is submitted every three years. The last submittal was December 2010. See Appendix C for RTA's Title VI Complaint Investigation Procedures. Limited English Proficiency (LEP): FTA issued regulations based on the Executive Order 13166 to all transit operators to establish LEP policies and procedures that ensures that RTA publications are issued in English and any other languages used by a significant number of the general population in the service area as determined by periodic demographic assessments. RTA's LEP policy and procedures were adopted in April 2009 and submitted with the Title VI Program in December 2010. See Appendix D. Public Hearing Policy: U.S. Code Title 49 § 5307 under the Urbanized Area Formula Grant Program requires that transit systems maintain a process to solicit and consider public comments before raising fares or implementing major reductions in service. RTA's Public Comment Process for Fare Increases or Major Service Reductions was last revised in April 2009. See Appendix E. 34 ONTARIC 204 r , -204 Rt 204 continues to Montclair Transit Center. JURUPA MARLAY cC W 14 12 14 0 OSPECT O o a BARTON m Pettis Memorial VA Medical Center Loma Linda Medical Center < Rt 216 to Village < Rt 794 to South Coast Metro METROt1NK v m COMMERCE x POMONA 68TH ST Swan Lake MHP • LIMONITE 291M 3 EASTVAI 15 CITRUS z a 3 Norco City Hall 4TH Norco v Senior Center EAMPTON Norco College 3RD Corona City Hall • 91 GRAND 6TH ST CORONA Regional Medical Center 6th cc 0 v a PHILADELPHI Country Village t. 41Vt CC o5: GRANITE HILLS "' 21 1UF�eP MISSION BLVD MIRA LOMA ARLINGTON NORCO T Corona Transit Center HIDDEN VALLEY 6 Z 206 216 Corona Cruiser T — - - / `` 0 3 r 6TH ST ♦• • r� \ 8TH , r •` XL + r a •\ 3 —4 206 ' 1 t t Corona r Vintage Terrace Senior Community Canyon Community Church Park and Ride • • 1 • • 206 • LIMONITE antaAnaRi P 9 9 La Sierra University Q s 12 R �F 0 • o\\P • • A� JURUPA VALLEY The Pedley Metrolink Station w o� I METROLINK ARLINGTON GOULD» Fy HOLE HOME GARDENS CAJALCO • • • • • • • • • • • • • 206 • 9FJf UMON6 County COUNTY Mental FARM ealth Galleria at Tyler ]r 15 \gyp\PAP La Sierra TRe'uNK Metrolink 'er Station • • �99 • e s • Riverside Transit Agency • • T Downtown Terminal 9 y� �Fy T Galleria at Tyler Q 10 IEEE • • Q 10 ® 16 Ei EDI 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 v 14 29 49 216 m ARLINGTON oc" 9 P�F90SSF7! 12, CFHTFR 0 ST= SPRU 3RD o �a MASS. sTH Y�a oRD UNIVERSI `---204 l " 14 MET /4ry g 0 CENTRAL m .Brock Arcade ARLINGTON yo 9 F • Magnolia & Elizabeth IliOli®®m® 210- ut7 ♦�® 60 ML KING (�j �� ♦ m CENTER «MARLBOROUGH GRAND TERRACE HIGHGROVE BLAINE r nn o z m�BIGSPRINGS LINDEN MLK r s 22 20 20 RIVERSIDE 14 216 794 • Lake Mathews TEMESCAL CANYON • • 206 • System Map (951) 565-5002 www.RiversideTransit.com =R� Riverside Transit Agency Welcome aboard the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), your community transportation provider. The RTA operates 45 bus routes to provide you with safe, cost-effective and reliable service in western Riverside County. We hope that this System Map is useful to you in planning your trip. Should you need additional information, please call the Customer Information Center at 1-800-800-7821 or (951) 565-5002. Route Number Route Path 3:13:E1 Commuter Routing == Alternate Routing MAP NOT TO SCALE O Point of Interest Q Medical Facility 0 Transfer Point ,I?I, Metrolink Station Interstate n State Highway Main Road Water Riverside Trolley Rou ROUTE 50JuryTrolley Legend I Map not to scale © Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility OTrolley Stops 0 Y 0 m TEQUESQUITE Eden Lutheran Church Parking Lot United Methodist `o Church 11 TH ST. CC 14TH STREET T 10th & Main City Hall 10TH ST. Riverside O Community Hospital Calvary Presbyterian Church Parking Lot (nearest stop 14th & Magnolia) a J Z RICE TERRACINA I 208 210 Hall of Count JusticeAdminist alive Center Riverside County Court House 12TH ST. Physical Therapy & Sports Clinic RIVF�SIDI RCC T" Magnolia & Terracina 0®® 50 © 2012 Riverside Transit Agency. Effective Date: May 13, 2012 9,400 VAN BUREN CANYON CREST 14,:f 9y0'P0 27 MISSION GROVE `'208_ CENTRAL 'r/�9. o9Fc., LOCHMOo • • 21_ o SS`E a ♦♦♦ ,AP o �♦♦`` BOcri XSi Moreno.'s R — Valley • , Mall : r 16 18 19 LOMA LINDA OLD LAKE RD 18 rT Moreno Valley Mall El ALESSANDRO m Social • Security Office ~22 WOODCREST 8 206 CAIALCO e•coly *(209 o Q e 8 0 oQ��' • • • MARCH JPA ORANGETERRACE MARIPOSA 21 +4,94y94j MEAD VALLEY OLEANDER 3 m RIDER st Mead Valley Community Center 208 1 210 EUCALYPTUS 11 N\ All S8 MANZANITA IRONWOOD Sg\CH °F P�,r G O 35 HEMLOCK CO A s 27 VPNg�MEN 22 CC 41 OAKLAND ,,, MEADOWBROOK T Lake Elsinore Outlet Center llio • Outlet Center 8 8 MEI 206 RSNS�\LLEUSD `oc��F9 <� Lake Elsinore o� 206 • 9 MfR ♦♦♦♦. 8.91,r`oy City ♦♦♦ sG� oQo GR4H44\ Hall yU ♦ �1 z s'Dy ♦• � Senior LAKESHORED/l ♦♦♦• nln 22 SUR cq9 �09GF �xTEOLLEY E ROUTE 51 Crest Cruiser R University Village & Village Towers Apts lli0 16 lli®li®lli 1 Hi r hlander Shuttle 51 • T Q m Vassar • T Post Office Village Towers Apartments UniversityAv T Chicago &University llil11711i11' I ®®® Ili l M14.67 a 16 16 • • 51 v University Village UniversityAv. • T UCR 204 smoce$t • T Iowa & Blaine Hi hlander Shuttle Elil 208 210 RIVERSIDE T Chicago & Central EMI Legend I Map not to scale 0 Transfer Point and Information 0 Trolley Stops • • • Or • 10 25 51 8/aloe • Alt 51 • ante Ilsta UCR • • UCR T Canyon Crest & Central 16 • .41 206 74 22 o_ City Hall (F ALCO G \o LAKE ELSINORE • 0 CENTERPOINT NGATE a 18 27, 41 WESTON SUNNYMEAD FIR ° COTTONWOOD Canyon Lake RAILROAD • • 40 EUCALYPTUS ALESSANDRO 19 JFK CC RAMONA • BROWNA Medical Center JFK 010 • • • • • 41 20 Moreno Valley College MORENO VALLEY T Perris Station Transit Center SUN CITY Cherry Hills & Bradley El 40 61 El 208 QUAIL VALLEY Fire Station 40 ANYONco LAKE '044 Senior Assisted * Living • • County Administration Bldg EU Riverside County Administrative Center 0 METROLINK Riverside - 0 Downtown Metrol ink Station Commerce St Metrolink Parking Lot Legend I Map not to scale O Stops O Transfer to other RTA Routes • 40 0 Canyon Lake Gty Hall 40 Inland Valley Medical Center 19 208 MCCALL Murrieta City Hall Center 208 Loma Linda Medical Bldg ROHRABACHER • Walmart IMENIFEE 74 PIEDRA Mt San Jacinto Service to Loma Linda Medkal Center spring 2011 A HOT SPRINGS 208 T County Center Drive 24 79 FE 61 WINCHESTER MURRIETA 217 79 74 217 79 THOMPSON MAGDAS COLORADAS 79 TECHNOLOGY 217 79 YUCAIPA CALIMESA BEAUMONT Oty Hall 5, STAGECOACH PLAZA 79 31 COMMERCE WAY> SAN JACINTO T Hemet Valley Mall 42 COTTONWOOD FRUITVALE 33 LA DOMENIGONIPKWY AuLD Southwest Justice Center TEMECULA Promenade Mall OLD TOWN k0' 24 24 • 24 • Rt 202 continues to Oceanside Pechanga Resort • 74 33 11111 THORNTO MUSTANG 217 217 FRENCH VALLEY 79 T Mt. San Jacinto College Mt. San Jacinto College 74 tan 42 33 33 27 Soboba Casino VALLE VISTA THORNTON EAST HEMET Temecula Trolle Temecula Trolley • • County Center El 24 El 61 79 • Ysabel namett • • cc HARVESTONZLI • 55 Palm Plaza Shopping Center Extended Stay America Legend I Map not to scale 0 Transfer Point and Information 0 Trolley Stops • TOWNSHIP RD 4? Chaparral • Best Abbott Western • The Promenade at Temecula 55 VERLAND DR • TEMECULA Temecula Walmart 00 24 Great Oak HS Canyon Crest Towne Centre 202 76 217 Rt 217 continues to Escondido Transit Center Riverside Transit Agency FY 2011 /12 - FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Summary Comparative Statistics: FY2012 SRTP vs. Proposed FY2013 SRTP Unlinked Passengers Revenue Hours Revenue Miles Fare Revenue (1) Operating Expenses FY2012 I FY2013 FY2012 I FY2013 FY2012 I FY2013 FY2012 I FY2013 FY2012 I FY2013 Direct Operated Routes 1 1,691,121 1,787,493 56,654 59,737 619,953 623,471 $ 1,594,558 $ 1,749,004 $ 6,170,419 $ 6,580,581 10 227,326 231,088 13,662 13,521 166,009 161,957 $ 221,734 $ 226,952 $ 1,487,958 $ 1,489,412 11 161,789 166,096 9,596 9,551 126,907 126,154 $ 159,297 $ 166,113 $ 1,045,113 $ 1,052,321 12 261,054 266,284 14,543 14,481 175,184 174,534 $ 244,451 $ 251,585 $ 1,583,914 $ 1,595,670 13 264,283 267,656 15,016 14,968 177,832 173,909 $ 239,176 $ 250,178 $ 1,635,405 $ 1,649,200 14 227,724 226,647 14,542 14,454 186,852 185,926 $ 214,971 $ 221,525 $ 1,583,757 $ 1,592,607 15 422,609 417,398 18,240 18,213 222,105 220,619 $ 394,041 $ 398,239 $ 1,986,581 $ 2,006,140 16 531,488 634,855 23,018 26,430 267,233 306,777 $ 483,388 $ 600,255 $ 2,506,960 $ 2,911,465 18 189,388 187,821 9,460 9,447 130,828 120,825 $ 167,286 $ 176,345 $ 1,030,310 $ 1,041,007 19 455,156 599,177 15,027 19,657 199,703 253,004 $ 442,503 $ 601,454 $ 1,636,612 $ 2,165,545 20 302,179 303,837 15,936 15,831 250,446 250,148 $ 269,876 $ 278,254 $ 1,735,494 $ 1,744,384 21D 131,335 93,251 9,321 6,383 148,294 101,428 $ 134,776 $ 98,734 $ 1,015,146 $ 700,432 22 406,953 417,373 20,798 20,917 371,566 369,763 $ 398,285 $ 416,538 $ 2,265,096 $ 2,304,359 27 426,715 485,055 24,852 28,086 515,507 557,299 $ 434,567 $ 510,472 $ 2,706,669 $ 3,094,522 29 130,085 136,597 9,002 8,999 150,092 149,512 $ 122,787 $ 132,581 $ 980,442 $ 991,619 41D 48,656 57,874 2,416 2,939 40,506 48,031 $ 48,072 $ 55,976 $ 263,135 $ 323,539 49 233,257 216,874 9,006 8,963 111,783 111,321 $ 224,580 $ 214,640 $ 980,865 $ 987,546 54 14,031 25,530 468 1,277 3,781 10,322 $ 36,120 $ 89,390 $ 36,120 $ 140,554 204D 48,335 5,187 142,469 $ $ 80,719 $ - $ 571,016 206D 60,160 66,017 5,122 5,062 158,857 156,952 $ 159,322 $ 175,288 $ 557,902 $ 557,314 208D 28,566 2,210 54,559 $ $ 25,809 $ - $ 243,283 216 74,359 74,207 6,065 6,027 163,190 162,231 $ 291,369 $ 277,271 $ 660,530 $ 663,956 Total Direct Operated Routes 6,259,668 6,738,031 292,743 312,341 4,186,628 4,461,211 $ 6,281,159 $ 6,997,323 $ 31,868,425 $ 34,406,473 % Change - FY13 vs. FY12 7.64% 6.69% 6.56% 11.4% 8.0% Contracted Fixed Routes 3 92,504 90,097 9,517 9,500 130,453 122,555 $ 90,857 $ 91,584 $ 662,086 $ 676,528 7 112,060 126,093 9,804 9,782 147,396 146,376 $ 145,638 $ 160,079 $ 682,047 $ 697,411 8 121,207 135,865 9,807 9,768 188,242 187,498 $ 172,915 $ 184,548 $ 682,228 $ 696,370 21C 45,013 2,894 46,164 $ $ 47,660 $ - $ 207,261 23 72,574 83,534 10,025 9,974 144,028 145,198 $ 78,590 $ 91,912 $ 697,426 $ 710,997 24 69,959 73,648 8,856 9,006 119,783 134,245 $ 76,773 $ 80,365 $ 616,068 $ 642,000 30 79,084 75,696 7,440 7,345 89,987 88,840 $ 71,176 $ 73,107 $ 517,572 $ 523,415 31 107,446 127,172 7,803 9,881 143,608 173,447 $ 88,998 $ 129,080 $ 542,850 $ 704,275 32 147,864 107,279 9,721 7,422 128,619 88,453 $ 107,054 $ 105,037 $ 677,605 $ 529,049 33 33,801 39,648 4,580 4,572 63,821 64,440 $ 29,447 $ 37,380 $ 318,618 $ 325,602 35 59,379 71,042 6,613 6,535 169,623 167,643 $ 57,437 $ 72,406 $ 460,047 $ 465,430 40 20,853 25,995 3,174 3,294 71,292 58,953 $ 20,624 $ 28,478 $ 220,815 $ 234,614 41C 45,891 43,971 6,652 6,134 116,650 108,647 $ 62,012 $ 63,125 $ 462,777 $ 437,539 42 46,569 51,276 5,434 5,329 81,480 82,402 $ 40,962 $ 48,835 $ 378,040 $ 379,647 50 19,727 7,312 2,429 2,364 16,786 15,360 $ 154,497 $ 159,595 $ 169,004 $ 168,413 51 31,787 37,788 1,935 2,030 23,309 21,681 $ 122,174 $ 126,888 $ 135,285 $ 144,077 53 1,385 710 10,563 $ 43,163 $ - $ 49,633 $ - 55 30,000 28,116 1,221 1,172 15,785 15,208 $ 16,362 $ 16,361 $ 85,034 $ 82,751 61 47,071 61,491 6,137 6,274 115,694 114,343 $ 31,283 $ 64,141 $ 426,969 $ 446,798 74 105,311 126,318 10,254 10,135 185,045 184,074 $ 166,746 $ 225,258 $ 713,403 $ 721,751 79 75,360 87,404 10,781 10,676 187,250 187,884 $ 148,732 $ 172,525 $ 750,057 $ 760,281 202 19,412 23,558 5,574 5,411 148,410 146,428 $ 44,011 $ 53,154 $ 387,076 $ 386,602 204 41,460 - 5,248 - 144,151 $ 75,200 $ - $ 365,105 $ - 208 35,799 29,670 7,427 5,177 187,453 130,734 $ 58,413 $ 50,231 $ 516,726 $ 368,654 210 17,393 11,128 2,513 1,337 50,372 27,806 $ 44,594 $ 29,841 $ 174,864 $ 106,683 212 20,608 27,650 5,757 5,758 149,764 147,650 $ 192,863 $ 206,380 $ 400,507 $ 410,078 217 18,113 25,332 6,733 6,698 219,391 216,637 $ 211,565 $ 227,447 $ 468,450 $ 477,007 Sunline- Riv. Exp.l2i - - - - 0 - $ - $ - $ - $ 62,000 794(2) $ 129,100 $ 116,000 $ 129,100 $ 116,000 Total Contracted Fixed Routes 1,472,617 1,562,096 166,146 158,468 3,048,954 2,822,665 $ 2,481,187 $ 2,661,418 $ 11,689,394 $ 11,481,231 Change - FY13 vs. FY12 6.08% -4.62 % -7.42% 7.3% -1.8% TOTAL FIXED ROUTES 7,732,285 8,300,127 458,889 470,808 7,235,582 7,283,877 $ 8,762,346 $ 9,658,741 $ 43,557,819 $ 45,887,704 Change - FY13 vs. FY12 7.34% 2.60 % 0.67% 10.2% 5.3% 9:25 AM 5/23/2012 Riverside Transit Agency FY 2011 /12 - FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Summary Comparative Statistics: FY2012 SRTP vs. Proposed FY2013 SRTP Unlinked Passengers Revenue Hours Revenue Miles Fare Revenue (1) Operating Expenses FY2012 FY2013 FY2012 FY2013 FY2012 FY2013 FY2012 FY2013 FY2012 FY2013 Dial -a -ride Routes Banning/Beaumont 1,033 1,906 753 913 19,376 21,677 $ 3,931 $ 7,754 $ 47,752 $ 55,930 Lake Elsinore 9,162 13,990 5,280 7,610 108,832 157,669 $ 33,730 $ 48,170 $ 334,911 $ 466,278 Highgrove 5,235 5,809 3,222 3,468 68,832 74,473 $ 17,141 $ 30,394 $ 204,370 $ 212,507 Hemet & Homeland 73,832 90,368 27,173 32,534 479,224 577,542 $ 267,442 $ 294,473 $ 1,723,585 $ 1,993,385 Jurupa 11,089 12,990 5,819 6,683 109,747 130,779 $ 36,756 $ 43,587 $ 369,077 $ 409,469 Moreno Valley 69,985 88,628 29,377 34,674 544,968 621,883 $ 227,592 $ 263,296 $ 1,863,373 $ 2,124,501 Murrieta 35,604 43,795 19,083 22,989 366,451 444,284 $ 119,699 $ 144,375 $ 1,210,424 $ 1,408,530 Norco 21,725 25,312 7,342 8,960 142,798 169,532 $ 84,434 $ 91,741 $ 465,697 $ 548,954 Perris 33,507 41,173 16,389 20,614 351,174 449,079 $ 118,003 $ 137,600 $ 1,039,559 $ 1,263,020 Riverside 76,453 86,534 37,417 42,842 759,529 877,214 $ 271,896 $ 304,011 $ 2,373,344 $ 2,624,963 Sun City 14,379 15,462 8,146 8,877 169,089 184,063 $ 45,045 $ 49,270 $ 516,680 $ 543,929 Total Dial -a -ride Routes 352,004 425,967 160,001 190,164 3,120,019 3,708,195 $ 1,225,671 $ 1,414,671 $ 10,148,772 $ 11,651,466 % Change - FY13 vs. FY12 21.01 % 18.85 % 18.85 % 15.4 % 14.8 % Taxi Program Banning/Beaumont 218 139 169 103 5,945 3,274 $ 1,246 $ 948 $ 18,921 $ 10,832 Lake Elsinore 796 919 528 645 12,197 16,955 $ 4,416 $ 5,057 $ 41,549 $ 57,870 Highgrove 133 416 89 250 2,757 7,434 $ 799 $ 2,084 $ 8,930 $ 24,870 Hemet & Homeland 983 1,102 668 746 19,214 20,241 $ 4,083 $ 4,255 $ 62,972 $ 68,709 Jurupa 190 105 100 52 3,335 1,333 $ 933 $ 571 $ 10,695 $ 4,572 Moreno Valley 1,103 1,585 798 1,114 25,150 31,426 $ 5,718 $ 7,472 $ 81,281 $ 105,988 Murrieta 591 706 471 488 14,486 14,868 $ 2,972 $ 3,454 $ 46,989 $ 49,540 Norco 574 664 234 273 8,800 9,728 $ 2,402 $ 2,647 $ 27,749 $ 31,698 Perris 787 1,053 587 670 16,257 17,903 $ 3,384 $ 4,341 $ 53,608 $ 60,939 Riverside 908 1,736 536 944 17,269 26,573 $ 3,622 $ 6,180 $ 55,626 $ 89,653 Sun City 377 525 259 309 7,768 8,796 $ 1,875 $ 2,130 $ 25,292 $ 29,629 Total Taxi Routes 6,659 8,950 4,439 5,594 133,179 158,530 $ 31,449 $ 39,139 $ 433,612 $ 534,298 % Change - FY13 vs. FY12 34.41 % 26.01 % 19.04 % 24.5 % 23.2 % TOTAL DAR and TAXI SERVICE 358,663 434,917 164,440 195,758 3,253,198 3,866,726 $ 1,257,120 $ 1,453,810 $ 10,582,384 $ 12,185,764 Change - FY13 vs. FY12 21.26% 19.04% 18.86% 15.6% 15.2% GRAND TOTAL 8,090,948 8,735,044 623,330 666,566 10,488,780 11,150,602 $ 10,019,466 $ 11,112,551 $ 54,140,203 $ 58,073,468 Change - FY13 vs. FY12 7.96% 6.94% 6.31 % 10.9% 7.3% (1 Total Passenger Fare Revenue consists of cash fares, tickets, passes, subsidy agreements and Measure A. It does not include other local revenues. (2) RTA does not report passengers, hours and miles. 9:25 AM 5/23/2012 IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Bus (Motorbus) / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Built Mfg. Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active # of Vehicles Contingency FY Vehicles 2011/12 FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2001 NAB 40LFW15 2002 NAB 40LFW15 40 40 47 47 40 40 CN CN 47 47 0 0 23,112, 542 22,392,657 24,934,079 24,274,747 530,512 516,484 Totals: 80 94 94 0 45,505,199 49,208,826 523,498 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 1 of 3 5/10/2012 IMME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Bus (Motorbus) / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2011/12 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 1994 1996 2008 2008 2009 2011 2007 2003 2008 2003 2004 CCI CCI EBC EDN EDN SPC STR SVM SVM TBB TBB AH28 AH28 Aerotech EnAeroElit EnAeroElit SN28PLO Allstar ClassAmSer ClassAmSer SLF232G SLF232G 25 25 12 26 26 21 12 24 26 27 27 4 1 16 4 21 14 6 3 2 10 3 29 29 24 29 29 28 24 27 29 33 33 CN CN GA GA GA GA GA CN CN CN CN 4 1 16 4 21 14 6 3 2 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 741,578 218,541 2,560,141 671,793 2,442,480 0 1,466,352 460,178 110,713 4,052,663 1,110,941 1,035,044 234,472 3,147,306 873,734 3,550,981 501,581 1,635,186 553,593 188,180 4,194,133 1,211,900 258,761 234,472 196,707 218,434 169,094 35,827 272,531 184,531 94,090 419,413 403,967 Totals: 251 84 84 0 13,835,380 17,126,110 203,882 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 2 of 3 5/10/2012 Mmi � Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Demand Response / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2011/12 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2008 2009 2007 EBC EBC STR Aerotech Aerotech Allstar 12 12 12 5 54 24 24 24 24 GA GA GA 5 54 24 0 0 0 632,578 4,839,271 4,739,388 799,246 6,654,105 5,627,888 159,849 123,224 234,495 Totals: 36 83 83 0 10,211,237 13,081,239 157,605 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 3 of 3 5/10/2012 I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Riverside Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 l Peak -Hour Fleet 134 146 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $47,326,309 $45,604,814 $54,104,083 $37,630,549 $58,073,468 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $11,722,070 $12,504,724 $12,298,382 $10,132,955 $14,251,746 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $35,604,239 $33,100,090 $41,805,701 $27,497,594 $43,821,722 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 7,934,079 8,092,220 8,076,918 6,561,166 8,735,044 Passenger Miles 52,656,493 56,398,387 54,308,327 45,875,382 61,275,711 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 624,238.8 600,356.6 622,861.0 466,137.6 666,566.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 10,642,528.3 10,174,233.0 10,485,001.0 7,805,913.8 11,150,603.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 12,481,048.0 11,926,377.3 12,332,916.0 9,580,245.8 13,504,857.0 _ Performance Characteristics I Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $75.81 $75.96 $86.86 $80.73 $87.12 Farebox Recovery Ratio 24.76% 27.42% 22.73% 26.93% 24.54% Subsidy per Passenger $4.49 $4.09 $5.18 $4.19 $5.02 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.68 $0.59 $0.77 $0.60 $0.72 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $57.04 $55.13 $67.12 $58.99 $65.74 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.35 $3.25 $3.99 $3.52 $3.93 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 12.7 13.5 13.0 14.1 13.1 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.75 0.80 0.77 0.84 0.78 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 1 I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Riverside Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 l Peak -Hour Fleet 119 145 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $43,080,312 $41,316,403 $50,500,803 $35,116,733 $57,932,914 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $10,495,790 $11,063,332 $11,511,104 $9,431,774 $14,162,356 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $32,584,522 $30,253,071 $38,989,699 $25,684,959 $43,770,558 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 7,340,935 7,433,701 7,567,048 6,103,064 8,709,514 Passenger Miles 48,544,680 51,102,958 50,402,280 42,214,539 61,148,061 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 561,827.8 529,226.8 572,437.0 428,296.7 665,289.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 9,439,136.4 8,719,515.3 9,609,349.0 7,144,970.3 11,140,281.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 10,966,249.9 10,129,298.5 11,268,869.0 8,745,141.4 13,492,474.0 _ Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $76.68 $78.07 $88.22 $81.99 $87.08 Farebox Recovery Ratio 24.36% 26.78% 22.79% 26.86% 24.44% Subsidy per Passenger $4.44 $4.07 $5.15 $4.21 $5.03 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.67 $0.59 $0.77 $0.61 $0.72 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $58.00 $57.16 $68.11 $59.97 $65.79 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.45 $3.47 $4.06 $3.59 $3.93 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 13.1 14.0 13.2 14.2 13.1 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.78 0.85 0.79 0.85 0.78 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 1 I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Riverside Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 15 1 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $4,245,997 $4,288,411 $3,603,280 $2,513,816 $140,554 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $1,226,280 $1,441,392 $787,278 $701,181 $89,390 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $3,019,717 $2,847,019 $2,816,002 $1,812,635 $51,164 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 593,144 658,519 509,870 458,102 25,530 Passenger Miles 4,111,812 5,295,429 3,906,047 3,660,843 127,650 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 62,411.0 71,129.8 50,424.0 37,840.9 1,277.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 1,203,391.9 1,454,717.7 875,652.0 660,943.5 10,322.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 1,514,798.2 1,797,078.9 1,064,047.0 835,104.4 12,383.0 _ Performance Characteristics I Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $68.03 $60.29 $71.46 $66.43 $110.07 Farebox Recovery Ratio 28.88% 33.61% 21.84% 27.89% 63.59% Subsidy per Passenger $5.09 $4.32 $5.52 $3.96 $2.00 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.73 $0.54 $0.72 $0.50 $0.40 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $48.38 $40.03 $55.85 $47.90 $40.07 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.51 $1.96 $3.22 $2.74 $4.96 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.5 9.3 10.1 12.1 20.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.49 0.45 0.58 0.69 2.47 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 1 I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- RTA-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 l Peak -Hour Fleet 71 83 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $28,724,957 $26,833,799 $31,832,305 $22,157,520 $34,468,471 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $8,059,025 $8,664,267 $8,560,076 $7,050,528 $10,136,518 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $20,665,932 $18,169,532 $23,272,229 $15,106,992 $24,331,953 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 6,245,550 6,299,800 6,245,637 5,049,188 6,738,031 Passenger Miles 38,222,766 40,570,712 38,289,929 32,516,771 43,395,361 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 299,737.7 289,490.9 292,276.0 221,326.8 312,340.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 4,370,136.3 4,183,981.3 4,182,847.0 3,112,798.6 4,461,211.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 5,043,553.7 4,819,844.3 4,800,459.0 3,621,106.8 5,203,460.0 _ Performance Characteristics I Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $95.83 $92.69 $108.91 $100.11 $110.36 Farebox Recovery Ratio 28.05% 32.29% 26.89% 31.82% 29.40% Subsidy per Passenger $3.31 $2.88 $3.73 $2.99 $3.61 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.54 $0.45 $0.61 $0.46 $0.56 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $68.95 $62.76 $79.62 $68.26 $77.90 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.73 $4.34 $5.56 $4.85 $5.45 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 20.8 21.8 21.4 22.8 21.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.43 1.51 1.49 1.62 1.51 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of I I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- RTA Bus (Contract) -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 l Peak -Hour Fleet 63 63 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $9,499,052 $9,737,695 $11,560,294 $7,954,910 $11,303,233 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $2,443,011 $2,544,245 $2,352,086 $2,035,881 $2,545,418 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $7,056,041 $7,193,450 $9,208,208 $5,919,029 $8,757,815 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,350,071 1,462,330 1,472,617 1,231,519 1,562,096 Passenger Miles 10,260,540 11,932,613 11,596,078 10,049,195 12,748,328 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 164,214.7 164,232.2 166,145.0 123,357.9 158,468.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 3,109,354.3 3,070,908.0 3,048,955.0 2,284,765.4 2,822,666.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 3,644,105.7 3,627,796.2 3,650,614.0 3,064,445.4 3,681,412.0 _ Performance Characteristics I Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $57.85 $59.29 $69.58 $64.49 $71.33 Farebox Recovery Ratio 25.71% 26.13% 20.34% 25.59% 22.51% Subsidy per Passenger $5.23 $4.92 $6.25 $4.81 $5.61 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.69 $0.60 $0.79 $0.59 $0.69 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $42.97 $43.80 $55.42 $47.98 $55.27 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.27 $2.34 $3.02 $2.59 $3.10 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 8.2 8.9 8.9 10.0 9.9 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.43 0.48 0.48 0.54 0.55 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 1 I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- RTA-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 l Peak -Hour Fleet Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $8,626,427 $8,536,961 $10,148,772 $7,129,890 $11,651,466 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $1,077,849 $1,137,741 $1,225,670 $921,559 $1,414,671 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $7,548,578 $7,399,220 $8,923,102 $6,208,331 $10,236,795 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 331,238 322,611 352,004 274,730 425,967 Passenger Miles 4,084,165 3,806,810 4,340,220 3,241,814 5,026,403 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 155,669.2 141,996.6 160,001.0 117,994.7 190,164.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 3,028,273.3 2,786,202.2 3,120,020.0 2,312,919.7 3,708,195.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 3,658,624.3 3,345,595.5 3,748,664.0 2,799,263.6 4,461,454.0 _ Performance Characteristics I Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $55.42 $60.12 $63.43 $60.43 $61.27 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12.49% 13.33% 12.07% 12.93% 12.14% Subsidy per Passenger $22.79 $22.94 $25.35 $22.60 $24.03 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.85 $1.94 $2.06 $1.92 $2.04 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $48.49 $52.11 $55.77 $52.62 $53.83 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.49 $2.66 $2.86 $2.68 $2.76 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 1 I�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- RTA Taxi -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 1 Peak -Hour Fleet Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $359,998 $375,170 $433,612 $292,360 $534,298 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $26,309 $37,281 $31,450 $25,227 $39,139 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $333,689 $337,889 $402,162 $267,133 $495,159 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 7,220 7,479 6,660 5,729 8,950 Passenger Miles 89,023 88,252 82,100 67,602 105,619 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 4,617.2 4,637.0 4,439.0 3,458.2 5,594.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 134,764.4 133,141.6 133,179.0 95,430.0 158,531.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 134,764.4 133,141.4 133,179.0 95,430.0 158,531.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $77.97 $80.91 $97.68 $84.54 $95.51 Farebox Recovery Ratio 7.30% 9.94% 7.25% 8.63% 7.32% Subsidy per Passenger $46.22 $45.18 $60.38 $46.63 $55.33 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.75 $3.83 $4.90 $3.95 $4.69 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $72.27 $72.87 $90.60 $77.25 $88.52 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.48 $2.54 $3.02 $2.80 $3.12 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2010/12 — FY 2012/14 Short Range Transit Plan Table 2A — Excluded Routes Route # Mode (FR/DR) Service Type (DO/CO) Route Description Date of Implementation Exemption End Date 54 FR DO County Shuttle- County Administrative Center to Commerce St. Metrolink Parking Lot April 11, 2012 June 30, 2014 SunLine FR Agreement with SunLine Transit Agency Commuter- Palm Desert to Downtown Terminal via Banning/Beaumont and Moreno Valley September 9, 2012 June 30, 2015 Note: Excluded routes are new routes or new service extensions that are eligible for exemption from the farebox recovery requirements. MEI EM= om Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2012/13 All Routes Peak Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Route # Day Type Vehicles Passengers Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy RTA-0 Total $3,139,195 ($3,139,195) RTA-1 Total 14 1,787,493 8,969,259 59,737.0 63,131.0 623,471.0 724,235.0 $6,580,581 $1,749,004 $4,831,577 RTA-10 Total 5 231,088 1,159,085 13,521.0 14,337.0 161,957.0 177,782.0 $1,489,412 $226,952 $1,262,460 RTA-11 Total 2 166,096 835,013 9,551.0 9,885.0 126,154.0 136,231.0 $1,052,321 $166,113 $886,208 RTA-12 Total 4 266,284 1,338,261 14,481.0 15,082.0 174,534.0 190,674.0 $1,595,670 $251,585 $1,344,085 RTA-13 Total 3 267,656 1,344,259 14,968.0 15,447.0 173,909.0 185,797.0 $1,649,200 $250,178 $1,399,022 RTA-14 Total 3 226,647 1,139,330 14,454.0 14,972.0 185,926.0 196,876.0 $1,592,607 $221,525 $1,371,082 RTA-15 Total 4 417,398 2,092,804 18,213.0 18,651.0 220,619.0 226,928.0 $2,006,140 $398,239 $1,607,901 RTA-16/16E Total 6 634,855 3,185,471 26,430.0 27,124.0 306,777.0 322,809.0 $2,911,465 $600,255 $2,311,210 RTA-18 Total 2 187,821 943,848 9,447.0 10,009.0 120,825.0 136,519.0 $1,041,007 $176,345 $864,662 RTA-19 Total 4 599,177 3,007,228 19,657.0 21,052.0 253,004.0 301,586.0 $2,165,545 $601,454 $1,564,091 RTA-20 Total 6 303,837 1,527,139 15,831.0 17,684.0 250,148.0 296,773.0 $1,744,384 $278,254 $1,466,130 RTA-202 Total 3 23,558 609,142 5,411.0 7,015.0 146,428.0 208,452.0 $386,602 $53,154 $333,448 RTA-204D Total 3 48,335 628,355 5,187.0 5,695.0 142,469.0 149,733.0 $571,016 $80,720 $490,296 RTA-206D Total 5 66,017 858,221 5,062.0 9,451.0 156,952.0 294,945.0 $557,314 $175,288 $382,026 RTA-208 Total 4 29,670 747,683 5,177.0 6,396.0 130,734.0 190,973.0 $368,654 $50,231 $318,423 RTA-208D Total 1 28,566 371,358 2,210.0 3,609.0 54,559.0 104,343.0 $243,283 $25,809 $217,474 RTA-21 Total 1 93,251 469,288 6,383.0 6,702.0 101,428.0 112,874.0 $700,432 $98,734 $601,698 RTA-210 Total 1 11,128 280,427 1,337.0 2,955.0 27,806.0 70,097.0 $106,683 $29,841 $76,842 RTA-212 Total 3 27,650 696,779 5,758.0 7,173.0 147,650.0 199,408.0 $410,078 $206,380 $203,698 RTA-216 Total 3 74,207 1,007,850 6,027.0 6,540.0 162,231.0 167,683.0 $663,956 $277,271 $386,685 RTA-217 Total 4 25,332 638,368 6,698.0 7,696.0 216,637.0 293,318.0 $477,007 $227,447 $249,560 RTA-21C Total 2 45,013 306,087 2,894.0 3,100.0 46,164.0 58,524.0 $207,261 $47,660 $159,601 RTA-22 Total 3 417,373 5,678,939 20,917.0 23,353.0 369,763.0 446,359.0 $2,304,359 $416,538 $1,887,821 RTA-23 Total 7 83,534 565,502 9,974.0 12,543.0 145,198.0 262,740.0 $710,997 $91,913 $619,084 RTA-24 Total 3 73,648 497,403 9,006.0 10,261.0 134,245.0 191,717.0 $642,000 $80,365 $561,635 RTA-27 Total 7 485,055 6,647,275 28,086.0 30,673.0 557,299.0 636,589.0 $3,094,522 $510,472 $2,584,050 RTA-29 Total 2 136,597 686,210 8,999.0 9,367.0 149,512.0 159,678.0 $991,619 $132,581 $859,038 TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 6 MEI Illlllllll= Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2012/13 All Routes Peak Route # Day Type Vehicles Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy RTA-3 Total 3 90,097 612,657 9,500.0 10,571.0 122,555.0 173,990.0 $676,528 $91,584 $584,944 RTA-30 Total 2 75,696 499,942 7,345.0 7,467.0 88,840.0 93,644.0 $523,415 $73,107 $450,308 RTA-31 Total 1 127,172 859,666 9,881.0 10,634.0 173,447.0 209,309.0 $704,275 $129,080 $575,195 RTA-32 Total 1 107,279 725,005 7,422.0 8,133.0 88,453.0 117,284.0 $529,049 $105,037 $424,012 RTA-33 Total 2 39,648 269,606 4,572.0 5,072.0 64,440.0 87,046.0 $325,602 $37,380 $288,222 RTA-35 Total 2 71,042 483,082 6,535.0 7,061.0 167,643.0 193,703.0 $465,430 $72,406 $393,024 RTA-40 Total 3 25,995 176,765 3,294.0 3,515.0 58,953.0 68,047.0 $234,614 $28,478 $206,136 RTA-41C Total 2 43,971 296,798 6,134.0 6,852.0 108,647.0 141,201.0 $437,539 $63,125 $374,414 RTA-41D Total 2 57,874 289,370 2,939.0 4,354.0 48,031.0 99,378.0 $323,538 $55,976 $267,562 RTA-42 Total 2 51,276 342,013 5,329.0 5,724.0 82,402.0 97,826.0 $379,647 $48,835 $330,812 RTA-49 Total 2 216,874 1,089,148 8,963.0 9,321.0 111,321.0 123,285.0 $987,546 $214,640 $772,906 RTA-50 Total 2 7,312 49,719 2,364.0 2,740.0 15,360.0 32,440.0 $168,413 $159,595 $8,818 RTA-51 Total 1 37,788 256,958 2,030.0 2,162.0 21,681.0 27,470.0 $144,077 $126,888 $17,189 RTA-54 Total 1 25,530 127,650 1,277.0 1,529.0 10,322.0 12,383.0 $140,554 $89,390 $51,164 RTA-55 Total 2 28,116 191,189 1,172.0 1,938.0 15,208.0 49,927.0 $82,751 $16,361 $66,390 RTA-61 Total 1 61,491 418,139 6,274.0 6,502.0 114,343.0 122,776.0 $446,798 $64,141 $382,657 RTA-7 Total 2 126,093 852,999 9,782.0 10,285.0 146,376.0 169,887.0 $697,411 $160,079 $537,332 RTA-74 Total 3 126,318 858,962 10,135.0 10,770.0 184,074.0 206,959.0 $721,751 $225,258 $496,493 RTA-79 Total 4 87,404 594,348 10,676.0 11,217.0 187,884.0 202,743.0 $760,281 $172,525 $587,756 RTA-794 Total $116,000 $116,000 $0 RTA-8 Total 3 135,865 919,089 9,768.0 10,371.0 187,498.0 211,931.0 $696,370 $184,548 $511,822 RTA-Ba/Bea Total 1,906 22,493 913.0 1,232.0 21,677.0 25,938.0 $55,930 $7,754 $48,176 RTA-GT DAR Total 5,809 68,545 3,468.0 4,657.0 74,473.0 85,631.0 $212,507 $30,394 $182,113 RTA-Hemet Total 90,368 1,066,340 32,534.0 45,367.0 577,542.0 725,461.0 $1,993,385 $294,473 $1,698,912 RTA-Jurupa Total 12,990 153,282 6,683.0 9,357.0 130,779.0 158,766.0 $409,469 $43,587 $365,882 RTA-LakeEl Total 13,990 165,081 7,610.0 10,650.0 157,669.0 191,503.0 $466,278 $48,170 $418,108 RTA-MurDAR Total 43,795 516,779 22,989.0 31,019.0 444,284.0 539,103.0 $1,408,530 $144,375 $1,264,155 RTA-MV DAR Total 88,628 1,045,811 34,674.0 47,208.0 621,883.0 734,496.0 $2,124,501 $263,296 $1,861,205 TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 2 of 6 ��E M = o m B i w r s i d e 6 u r r t r . T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n D a t a E l e m e n t s T a b l e 3 - S R T P R o u t e S t a t i s t i c s R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y - - 7 F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 A l l R o u t e s P e a k R o u t e # D a y T y p e V e h i c l e s P a s s e n g e r s P a s s e n g e r R e v e n u e T o t a l R e v e n u e T o t a l O p e r a t i n g P a s s e n g e r N e t M i l e s H o u r s H o u r s M i l e s M i l e s C o s t R e v e n u e S u b s i d y R T A - N o / C o T o t a l R T A - P e r r i s T o t a l R T A - R i v D A R T o t a l R T A - S u n C i T o t a l R T A - T a x i B B T o t a l R T A - T a x i G T T o t a l R T A - T a x i H e T o t a l R T A - T a x D u T o t a l R T A - T a x i L E T o t a l R T A - T a x i M u T o t a l R T A - T a x i M V T o t a l R T A - T a x i N C T o t a l R T A - T a x i P e T o t a l R T A - T a x i R i T o t a l R T A - T a x i S C T o t a l S L - 2 1 0 T o t a l 2 5 , 3 1 2 2 9 8 , 6 8 0 8 , 9 6 0 . 0 1 2 , 7 4 4 . 0 1 6 9 , 5 3 2 . 0 2 2 8 , 0 8 2 . 0 $ 5 4 8 , 9 5 4 $ 9 1 , 7 4 1 $ 4 5 7 , 2 1 3 4 1 , 1 7 3 4 8 5 , 8 4 2 2 0 , 6 1 4 . 0 2 6 , 9 9 8 . 0 4 4 9 , 0 7 9 . 0 5 1 2 , 5 0 0 . 0 $ 1 , 2 6 3 , 0 2 0 $ 1 3 7 , 6 0 0 $ 1 , 1 2 5 , 4 2 0 8 6 , 5 3 4 1 , 0 2 1 , 0 9 9 4 2 , 8 4 2 . 0 5 7 , 4 1 4 . 0 8 7 7 , 2 1 4 . 0 1 , 0 4 6 , 9 7 4 . 0 $ 2 , 6 2 4 , 9 6 3 $ 3 0 4 , 0 1 1 $ 2 , 3 2 0 , 9 5 2 1 5 , 4 6 2 1 8 2 , 4 5 1 8 , 8 7 7 . 0 1 2 , 0 4 2 . 0 1 8 4 , 0 6 3 . 0 2 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 $ 5 4 3 , 9 2 9 $ 4 9 , 2 7 0 $ 4 9 4 , 6 5 9 1 3 9 1 , 6 4 2 1 0 3 . 0 1 0 3 . 0 3 , 2 7 4 . 0 3 , 2 7 4 . 0 $ 1 0 , 8 3 1 $ 9 4 8 $ 9 , 8 8 3 4 1 6 4 , 9 1 0 2 5 0 . 0 2 5 0 . 0 7 , 4 3 4 . 0 7 , 4 3 4 . 0 $ 2 4 , 8 7 0 $ 2 , 0 8 4 $ 2 2 , 7 8 6 1 , 1 0 2 1 3 , 0 0 5 7 4 6 . 0 7 4 6 . 0 2 0 , 2 4 1 . 0 2 0 , 2 4 1 . 0 $ 6 8 , 7 0 9 $ 4 , 2 5 5 $ 6 4 , 4 5 4 1 0 5 1 , 2 3 8 5 2 . 0 5 2 . 0 1 , 3 3 3 . 0 1 , 3 3 3 . 0 $ 4 , 5 7 2 $ 5 7 1 $ 4 , 0 0 1 9 1 9 1 0 , 8 4 7 6 4 5 . 0 6 4 5 . 0 1 6 , 9 5 5 . 0 1 6 , 9 5 5 . 0 $ 5 7 , 8 7 0 $ 5 , 0 5 7 $ 5 2 , 8 1 3 7 0 6 8 , 3 3 0 4 8 8 . 0 4 8 8 . 0 1 4 , 8 6 8 . 0 1 4 , 8 6 8 . 0 $ 4 9 , 5 4 0 $ 3 , 4 5 4 $ 4 6 , 0 8 6 1 , 5 8 5 1 8 , 7 0 4 1 , 1 1 4 . 0 1 , 1 1 4 . 0 3 1 , 4 2 6 . 0 3 1 , 4 2 6 . 0 $ 1 0 5 , 9 8 8 $ 7 , 4 7 2 $ 9 8 , 5 1 6 6 6 4 7 , 8 3 6 2 7 3 . 0 2 7 3 . 0 9 , 7 2 8 . 0 9 , 7 2 8 . 0 $ 3 1 , 6 9 8 $ 2 , 6 4 7 $ 2 9 , 0 5 1 1 , 0 5 3 1 2 , 4 2 6 6 7 0 . 0 6 7 0 . 0 1 7 , 9 0 3 . 0 1 7 , 9 0 3 . 0 $ 6 0 , 9 3 9 $ 4 , 3 4 1 $ 5 6 , 5 9 8 1 , 7 3 6 2 0 , 4 8 6 9 4 4 . 0 9 4 4 . 0 2 6 , 5 7 3 . 0 2 6 , 5 7 3 . 0 $ 8 9 , 6 5 2 $ 6 , 1 8 0 $ 8 3 , 4 7 2 5 2 5 6 , 1 9 5 3 0 9 . 0 3 0 9 . 0 8 , 7 9 6 . 0 8 , 7 9 6 . 0 $ 2 9 , 6 2 9 $ 2 , 1 3 0 $ 2 7 , 4 9 9 $ 6 2 , 0 0 0 $ 6 2 , 0 0 0 S e r v i c e P r o v i d e r T o t a l s 1 4 6 8 , 7 3 5 , 0 4 4 6 1 , 2 7 5 , 7 1 1 6 6 6 , 5 6 6 . 0 7 8 0 , 4 0 3 . 0 1 1 , 1 5 0 , 6 0 3 . 0 1 3 , 5 0 4 , 8 5 7 . 0 $ 5 8 , 0 7 3 , 4 6 8 $ 1 4 , 2 5 1 , 7 4 6 $ 4 3 , 8 2 1 , 7 2 2 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r ' " ' 5 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 2 P a g e 3 o f 6 MEI IlllM= Bivorside 6urrtr. Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile Cost Per Passenger Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Subsidy Per Revenue Hour Subsidy Per Revenue Mile Passengers Passengers Per Hour Per Mile RTA-0 RTA-1 RTA-10 RTA-11 RTA-12 RTA-13 RTA-14 RTA-15 RTA-16/16E RTA-18 RTA-19 RTA-20 RTA-202 RTA-204D RTA-206D RTA-208 RTA-208D RTA-21 RTA-210 RTA-212 RTA-216 RTA-217 RTA-21C RTA-22 RTA-23 RTA-24 RTA-27 RTA-29 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total $110.16 $10.55 $3.68 26.57% $2.70 $0.54 $80.88 $110.16 $9.20 $6.45 15.23% $5.46 $1.09 $93.37 $110.18 $8.34 $6.34 15.78% $5.34 $1.06 $92.79 $110.19 $9.14 $5.99 15.76% $5.05 $1.00 $92.82 $110.18 $9.48 $6.16 15.16% $5.23 $1.04 $93.47 $110.18 $8.57 $7.03 13.90% $6.05 $1.20 $94.86 $110.15 $9.09 $4.81 19.85% $3.85 $0.77 $88.28 $110.16 $9.49 $4.59 20.61% $3.64 $0.73 $87.45 $110.19 $8.62 $5.54 16.93% $4.60 $0.92 $91.53 $110.17 $8.56 $3.61 27.77% $2.61 $0.52 $79.57 $110.19 $6.97 $5.74 15.95% $4.83 $0.96 $92.61 $71.45 $2.64 $16.41 13.74% $14.15 $0.55 $61.62 $110.09 $4.01 $11.81 14.13% $10.14 $0.78 $94.52 $110.10 $3.55 $8.44 31.45% $5.79 $0.45 $75.47 $71.21 $2.82 $12.43 13.62% $10.73 $0.43 $61.51 $110.08 $4.46 $8.52 10.60% $7.61 $0.59 $98.40 $109.73 $6.91 $7.51 14.09% $6.45 $1.28 $94.27 $79.79 $3.84 $9.59 27.97% $6.91 $0.27 $57.47 $71.22 $2.78 $14.83 50.32% $7.37 $0.29 $35.38 $110.16 $4.09 $8.95 41.76% $5.21 $0.38 $64.16 $71.22 $2.20 $18.83 47.68% $9.85 $0.39 $37.26 $71.62 $4.49 $4.60 22.99% $3.55 $0.52 $55.15 $110.17 $6.23 $5.52 18.07% $4.52 $0.33 $90.25 $71.29 $4.90 $8.51 12.92% $7.41 $1.09 $62.07 $71.29 $4.78 $8.72 12.51% $7.63 $1.13 $62.36 $110.18 $5.55 $6.38 16.49% $5.33 $0.39 $92.00 $110.19 $6.63 $7.26 13.37% $6.29 $1.25 $95.46 $7.75 $7.80 $7.02 $7.70 $8.04 $7.37 $7.29 $7.53 $7.16 $6.18 $5.86 $2.28 $3.44 $2.43 $2.44 $3.99 $5.93 $2.76 $1.38 $2.38 $1.15 $3.46 $5.11 $4.26 $4.18 $4.64 $5.75 29.9 17.1 17.4 18.4 17.9 15.7 22.9 24.0 19.9 30.5 19.2 4.4 9.3 13.0 5.7 12.9 14.6 8.3 4.8 12.3 3.8 15.6 20.0 8.4 8.2 17.3 15.2 2.87 1.43 1.32 1.53 1.54 1.22 1.89 2.07 1.55 2.37 1.21 0.16 0.34 0.42 0.23 0.52 0.92 0.40 0.19 0.46 0.12 0.98 1.13 0.58 0.55 0.87 0.91 TransTrack Manager"' 5/10/2012 Page 4 of 6 ��E M = o m B i w r s i d e 6 u r r t r . T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s T a b l e 3 - S R T P R o u t e S t a t i s t i c s R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y - - 7 F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 A l l R o u t e s R o u t e # D a y T y p e O p e r a t i n g O p e r a t i n g F a r e b o x S u b s i d y P e r S u b s i d y P e r S u b s i d y P e r C o s t P e r C o s t P e r C o s t P e r R e c o v e r y S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r R e v e n u e R e v e n u e P a s s e n g e r s P a s s e n g e r s R e v e n u e H o u r R e v e n u e M i l e P a s s e n g e r R a t i o P a s s e n g e r M i l e H o u r M i l e P e r H o u r P e r M i l e R T A - 3 T o t a l R T A - 3 0 T o t a l R T A - 3 1 T o t a l R T A - 3 2 T o t a l R T A - 3 3 T o t a l R T A - 3 5 T o t a l R T A - 4 0 T o t a l R T A - 4 1 C T o t a l R T A - 4 1 D T o t a l R T A - 4 2 T o t a l R T A - 4 9 T o t a l R T A - 5 0 T o t a l R T A - 5 1 T o t a l R T A - 5 4 T o t a l R T A - 5 5 T o t a l R T A - 6 1 T o t a l R T A - 7 T o t a l R T A - 7 4 T o t a l R T A - 7 9 T o t a l R T A - 7 9 4 T o t a l R T A - 8 T o t a l R T A - B a / B e a T o t a l R T A - G T D A R T o t a l R T A - H e m e t T o t a l R T A - J u r u p a T o t a l R T A - L a k e E l T o t a l R T A - M u r D A R T o t a l R T A - M V D A R T o t a l $ 7 1 . 2 1 $ 7 1 . 2 6 $ 7 1 . 2 8 $ 7 1 . 2 8 $ 7 1 . 2 2 $ 7 1 . 2 2 $ 7 1 . 2 2 $ 7 1 . 3 3 $ 1 1 0 . 0 8 $ 7 1 . 2 4 $ 1 1 0 . 1 8 $ 7 1 . 2 4 $ 7 0 . 9 7 $ 1 1 0 . 0 7 $ 7 0 . 6 1 $ 7 1 . 2 1 $ 7 1 . 3 0 $ 7 1 . 2 1 $ 7 1 . 2 1 $ 7 1 . 2 9 $ 6 1 . 2 6 $ 6 1 . 2 8 $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 5 . 5 2 $ 5 . 8 9 $ 4 . 0 6 $ 5 . 9 8 $ 5 . 0 5 $ 2 . 7 8 $ 3 . 9 8 $ 4 . 0 3 $ 6 . 7 4 $ 4 . 6 1 $ 8 . 8 7 $ 1 0 . 9 6 $ 6 . 6 5 $ 1 3 . 6 2 $ 5 . 4 4 $ 3 . 9 1 $ 4 . 7 6 $ 3 . 9 2 $ 4 . 0 5 $ 3 . 7 1 $ 2 . 5 8 $ 2 . 8 5 $ 3 . 4 5 $ 3 . 1 3 $ 2 . 9 6 $ 3 . 1 7 $ 3 . 4 2 $ 7 . 5 1 $ 6 . 9 1 $ 5 . 5 4 $ 4 . 9 3 $ 8 . 2 1 $ 6 . 5 5 $ 9 . 0 3 $ 9 . 9 5 $ 5 . 5 9 $ 7 . 4 0 $ 4 . 5 5 $ 2 3 . 0 3 $ 3 . 8 1 $ 5 . 5 1 $ 2 . 9 4 $ 7 . 2 7 $ 5 . 5 3 $ 5 . 7 1 $ 8 . 7 0 $ 5 . 1 3 $ 2 9 . 3 4 $ 3 6 . 5 8 $ 2 2 . 0 6 $ 3 1 . 5 2 $ 3 3 . 3 3 $ 3 2 . 1 6 $ 2 3 . 9 7 1 3 . 5 3 9 6 1 3 . 9 6 9 6 1 8 . 3 2 9 6 1 9 . 8 5 9 6 1 1 . 4 8 9 6 1 5 . 5 5 9 6 1 2 . 1 3 9 6 1 4 . 4 2 % 1 7 . 3 0 9 6 1 2 . 8 6 9 6 2 1 . 7 3 9 6 9 4 . 7 6 9 6 8 8 . 0 6 9 6 6 3 . 5 9 9 6 1 9 . 7 7 % 1 4 . 3 5 9 6 2 2 . 9 5 9 6 3 1 . 2 0 9 6 2 2 . 6 9 9 6 1 0 0 . 0 0 9 6 2 6 . 5 0 9 6 1 3 . 8 6 9 6 1 4 . 3 0 9 6 1 4 . 7 7 9 6 1 0 . 6 4 9 6 1 0 . 3 3 9 6 1 0 . 2 5 9 6 1 2 . 3 9 9 6 $ 6 . 4 9 $ 5 . 9 5 $ 4 . 5 2 $ 3 . 9 5 $ 7 . 2 7 $ 5 . 5 3 $ 7 . 9 3 $ 8 . 5 2 $ 4 . 6 2 $ 6 . 4 5 $ 3 . 5 6 $ 1 . 2 1 $ 0 . 4 5 $ 2 . 0 0 $ 2 . 3 6 $ 6 . 2 2 $ 4 . 2 6 $ 3 . 9 3 $ 6 . 7 2 $ 3 . 7 7 $ 2 5 . 2 8 $ 3 1 . 3 5 $ 1 8 . 8 0 $ 2 8 . 1 7 $ 2 9 . 8 9 $ 2 8 . 8 7 $ 2 1 . 0 0 $ 0 . 9 5 $ 0 . 9 0 $ 0 . 6 7 $ 0 . 5 8 $ 1 . 0 7 $ 0 . 8 1 $ 1 . 1 7 $ 1 . 2 6 $ 0 . 9 2 $ 0 . 9 7 $ 0 . 7 1 $ 0 . 1 8 $ 0 . 0 7 $ 0 . 4 0 $ 0 . 3 5 $ 0 . 9 2 $ 0 . 6 3 $ 0 . 5 8 $ 0 . 9 9 $ 0 . 5 6 $ 2 . 1 4 $ 2 . 6 6 $ 1 . 5 9 $ 2 . 3 9 $ 2 . 5 3 $ 2 . 4 5 $ 1 . 7 8 $ 6 1 . 5 7 $ 6 1 . 3 1 $ 5 8 . 2 1 $ 5 7 . 1 3 $ 6 3 . 0 4 $ 6 0 . 1 4 $ 6 2 . 5 8 $ 6 1 . 0 4 $ 9 1 . 0 4 $ 6 2 . 0 8 $ 8 6 . 2 3 $ 3 . 7 3 $ 8 . 4 7 $ 4 0 . 0 7 $ 5 6 . 6 5 $ 6 0 . 9 9 $ 5 4 . 9 3 $ 4 8 . 9 9 $ 5 5 . 0 5 $ 5 2 . 4 0 $ 5 2 . 7 7 $ 5 2 . 5 1 $ 5 2 . 2 2 $ 5 4 . 7 5 $ 5 4 . 9 4 $ 5 4 . 9 9 $ 5 3 . 6 8 $ 4 . 7 7 $ 5 . 0 7 $ 3 . 3 2 $ 4 . 7 9 $ 4 . 4 7 $ 2 . 3 4 $ 3 . 5 0 $ 3 . 4 5 $ 5 . 5 7 $ 4 . 0 1 $ 6 . 9 4 $ 0 . 5 7 $ 0 . 7 9 $ 4 . 9 6 $ 4 . 3 7 $ 3 . 3 5 $ 3 . 6 7 $ 2 . 7 0 $ 3 . 1 3 $ 2 . 7 3 $ 2 . 2 2 $ 2 . 4 5 $ 2 . 9 4 $ 2 . 8 0 $ 2 . 6 5 $ 2 . 8 5 $ 2 . 9 9 9 . 5 1 0 . 3 1 2 . 9 1 4 . 5 8 . 7 1 0 . 9 7 . 9 7 . 2 1 9 . 7 9 . 6 2 4 . 2 3 . 1 1 8 . 6 2 0 . 0 2 4 . 0 9 . 8 1 2 . 9 1 2 . 5 8 . 2 1 3 . 9 2 . 1 1 . 7 2 . 8 1 . 9 1 . 8 1 . 9 2 . 6 0 . 7 4 0 . 8 5 0 . 7 3 1 . 2 1 0 . 6 2 0 . 4 2 0 . 4 4 0 . 4 0 1 . 2 0 0 . 6 2 1 . 9 5 0 . 4 8 1 . 7 4 2 . 4 7 1 . 8 5 0 . 5 4 0 . 8 6 0 . 6 9 0 . 4 7 0 . 7 2 0 . 0 9 0 . 0 8 0 . 1 6 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 9 0 . 1 0 0 . 1 4 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r " ' 5 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 2 P a g e 5 o f 6 ��E M = o m B i w r s i d e 6 u r r t r . T r m s p a t o f i a n { o m s r i s s i u n P e r f o r m a n c e I n d i c a t o r s T a b l e 3 - S R T P R o u t e S t a t i s t i c s R i v e r s i d e T r a n s i t A g e n c y - - 7 F Y 2 0 1 2 / 1 3 A l l R o u t e s O p e r a t i n g O p e r a t i n g F a r e b o x S u b s i d y P e r S u b s i d y P e r S u b s i d y P e r C o s t P e r C o s t P e r C o s t P e r R e c o v e r y S u b s i d y P e r P a s s e n g e r R e v e n u e R e v e n u e P a s s e n g e r s P a s s e n g e r s R o u t e # D a y T y p e R e v e n u e H o u r R e v e n u e M i l e P a s s e n g e r R a t i o P a s s e n g e r M i l e H o u r M i l e P e r H o u r P e r M i l e R T A - N o / C o T o t a l $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 3 . 2 4 $ 2 1 . 6 9 1 6 . 7 1 0 / 0 $ 1 8 . 0 6 $ 1 . 5 3 $ 5 1 . 0 3 $ 2 . 7 0 2 . 8 0 . 1 5 R T A - P e r r i s T o t a l $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 2 . 8 1 $ 3 0 . 6 8 1 0 . 8 9 % $ 2 7 . 3 3 $ 2 . 3 2 $ 5 4 . 5 9 $ 2 . 5 1 2 . 0 0 . 0 9 R T A - R i v D A R T o t a l $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 2 . 9 9 $ 3 0 . 3 3 1 1 . 5 8 % $ 2 6 . 8 2 $ 2 . 2 7 $ 5 4 . 1 7 $ 2 . 6 5 2 . 0 0 . 1 0 R T A - S u n C i T o t a l $ 6 1 . 2 7 $ 2 . 9 6 $ 3 5 . 1 8 9 . 0 5 % $ 3 1 . 9 9 $ 2 . 7 1 $ 5 5 . 7 2 $ 2 . 6 9 1 . 7 0 . 0 8 R T A - T a x i B B T o t a l $ 1 0 5 . 1 6 $ 3 . 3 1 $ 7 7 . 9 2 8 . 7 5 % $ 7 1 . 1 0 $ 6 . 0 2 $ 9 5 . 9 5 $ 3 . 0 2 1 . 3 0 . 0 4 R T A - T a x i G T T o t a l $ 9 9 . 4 8 $ 3 . 3 5 $ 5 9 . 7 8 8 . 3 7 % $ 5 4 . 7 7 $ 4 . 6 4 $ 9 1 . 1 4 $ 3 . 0 7 1 . 7 0 . 0 6 R T A - T a x i H e T o t a l $ 9 2 . 1 0 $ 3 . 3 9 $ 6 2 . 3 5 6 . 1 9 % $ 5 8 . 4 9 $ 4 . 9 6 $ 8 6 . 4 0 $ 3 . 1 8 1 . 5 0 . 0 5 R T A - T a x i J u T o t a l $ 8 7 . 9 2 $ 3 . 4 3 $ 4 3 . 5 4 1 2 . 4 8 % $ 3 8 . 1 0 $ 3 . 2 3 $ 7 6 . 9 4 $ 3 . 0 0 2 . 0 0 . 0 8 R T A - T a x i L E T o t a l $ 8 9 . 7 2 $ 3 . 4 1 $ 6 2 . 9 7 8 . 7 3 % $ 5 7 . 4 7 $ 4 . 8 7 $ 8 1 . 8 8 $ 3 . 1 1 1 . 4 0 . 0 5 R T A - T a x i M u T o t a l $ 1 0 1 . 5 2 $ 3 . 3 3 $ 7 0 . 1 7 6 . 9 7 % $ 6 5 . 2 8 $ 5 . 5 3 $ 9 4 . 4 4 $ 3 . 1 0 1 . 4 0 . 0 5 R T A - T a x i M V T o t a l $ 9 5 . 1 4 $ 3 . 3 7 $ 6 6 . 8 7 7 . 0 4 % $ 6 2 . 1 6 $ 5 . 2 7 $ 8 8 . 4 3 $ 3 . 1 3 1 . 4 0 . 0 5 R T A - T a x i N C T o t a l $ 1 1 6 . 1 1 $ 3 . 2 6 $ 4 7 . 7 4 8 . 3 5 % $ 4 3 . 7 5 $ 3 . 7 1 $ 1 0 6 . 4 1 $ 2 . 9 9 2 . 4 0 . 0 7 R T A - T a x i P e T o t a l $ 9 0 . 9 5 $ 3 . 4 0 $ 5 7 . 8 7 7 . 1 2 % $ 5 3 . 7 5 $ 4 . 5 5 $ 8 4 . 4 7 $ 3 . 1 6 1 . 6 0 . 0 6 R T A - T a x i R i T o t a l $ 9 4 . 9 7 $ 3 . 3 7 $ 5 1 . 6 4 6 . 8 9 % $ 4 8 . 0 8 $ 4 . 0 7 $ 8 8 . 4 2 $ 3 . 1 4 1 . 8 0 . 0 7 R T A - T a x i S C T o t a l $ 9 5 . 8 9 $ 3 . 3 7 $ 5 6 . 4 4 7 . 1 8 % $ 5 2 . 3 8 $ 4 . 4 4 $ 8 8 . 9 9 $ 3 . 1 3 1 . 7 0 . 0 6 S L - 2 1 0 T o t a l S e r v i c e P r o v i d e r T o t a l s $ 8 7 . 1 2 $ 5 . 2 1 $ 6 . 6 5 2 4 . 5 4 % $ 5 . 0 2 $ 0 . 7 2 $ 6 5 . 7 4 $ 3 . 9 3 1 3 . 1 0 . 7 8 T r a n s T r a c k M a n a g e r ' " ' 5 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 2 P a g e 6 o f 6 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2011 /12 - FY 2013/14 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE 3A: FY 2012/13 INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Route # Route Class Route Description Cities/Communities Served Connections Directly Operated Fixed Routes: 1 Regional From UCR and Downtown Riverside to Galleria at Tyler and Corona primarily via University Ave and Magnolia Ave Riverside, UC Riverside campus area, Arlington, Home Gardens, Corona Metrolink, Corona Cruiser, Omnitrans 10 Local From Big Springs St on Riverside's Northside to Galleria at Tyler primarily via Brockton St, Blaine St, Victoria Ave and Lincoln Ave Riverside, UC Riverside campus area, Casa Blanca, La Sierra, eastside of Riverside Omnitrans 11 Local Circulator routings between Moreno Valley Mall and March Air Reserve Base primarily via Frederick St, Ironwood Ave, Heacock Stand JFK Dr Moreno Valley, March Joint Powers area, March Air Reserve Base 12 Local From Stephens Ave and Center St on Riverside's Northside, through Downtown, then to Pierce St at Magnolia Ave via Magnolia Ave and California Ave Riverside, La Sierra, and northside of Riverside Omnitrans 13 Local From Spruce Stand Atlanta Ave to Galleria at Tyler in Riverside via MLK Blvd, Arlington Ave, Central Ave and Tyler St Riverside, Hunter Park-Eastside, Arlanza and La Sierra Omnitrans 14 Local From Galleria at Tyler to Downtown Riverside via Indiana Ave and Brockton Ave, then to Loma Linda VA Hospital via Fwy 215 and 10 Riverside, Casa Blanca, Highgrove, Grand Terrace, Colton, Loma Linda Omnitrans 15 Local From Downtown Riverside to Galleria at Tyler to Pierce St and Sterling Ave via Magnolia Ave, Arington Ave, La Sierra Ave and Indiana Ave Riverside, Arlanza and La Sierra Metrolink, Omnitrans 16 Local From Moreno Valley Mall to Main St and Russell St in Riverside via Day St, Sycamore Canyon Blvd, Box Springs Rd and University Ave Moreno Valley, Riverside, Canyon Crest, Riverside Eastside, UC Riverside campus Metrolink, Omnitrans 18 Local From RCC Moreno Valley campus to Moreno Valley Mall and Heacock via Sunnymead Ranch, Cottonwood St and schools along Frederick St, Perris Blvd, Pigeon Pass Rd and Kitching St Moreno Valley 19 Regional From Moreno Valley Mall to Perris Transit Center via Perris Blvd and Sunnymead Blvd Moreno Valley, Perris 20 Regional From Jurupa Ave and Birch St in Riverside to RCC Moreno Valley campus via Central Ave, Alessandro Blvd and Iris St Riverside, Moreno Valley, Mission Grove 21 1 Local From Galleria At Tyler in Riverside to Country Village in Mira Loma via Van Buren Blvd and Mission Blvd Jurupa, Glen Avon, Pedley, Riverside 22 Regional From the Lake Elsinore Outlet Mall to Downtown Riverside Terminal via Hwy 74, Old Elsinore Rd and Alessandro Blvd Riverside, Woodcrest, Mead Valley, Perris, Meadowbrook, Lake Elsinore Omnitrans 27 Regional From Florida Ave and Lincoln Ave in East Hemet to Galleria at Tyler in Riverside via Florida Ave, 215 Fwy and Van Buren Blvd Riverside, Woodcrest, Perris, Sun City, Menifee, Romoland, Hemet, Valle Vista 29 Regional From the Downtown Riverside Terminal to Hamner Ave and Limonite Ave in in Eastvale via Rubidoux Blvd and Limonite Ave Eastvale, Mira Loma, Pedley, Rubidoux, Riverside Metrolink, Omnitrans 41 1 Regional From the Mead Valley Community Center to Moreno Valley with stops at RCC Moreno Valley campus and Riverside County Medical Center Moreno Valley, Perris, Mead Valley 49 Regional From the Downtown Riverside Terminal to Country Village via Mission Blvd Mira Loma, Glen Avon, Rubidoux, Riverside, Jurupa Omnitrans 54 Local Downtown Riverside circulator between the Downtown Metrolink East Side Lot and the County Administrative Building Riverside Metrolink 204 Express From UC Riverside campus to Montclair TransCenter via Riverside Downtown Terminal, Country Village and Ontario Riverside, Ontario, Glen Avon, Montclair Metrolink, Omnitrans, Foothill Transit 206 Express From Promenade Mall in Temecula to Corona Metrolink Station via Fwy 15 with stops in Murrieta and Lake Elsinore Outlet Center Temecula, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Corona Metrolink, Corona Cruiser 208 Express From Promenade Mall in Temecula to Riverside Metrolink Station and Downtown Terminal via 215 Fwy with stops in Murrieta, Sun City, Perris, Moreno Valley Temecula, Murrieta, Sun City, Perris, Riverside, Moreno Valley Metrolink, Omnitrans 216 Express From the Downtown Riverside Terminal to Village at Orange via 91 and 55 Fwy Riverside, Corona, Orange Metrolink, Omnitrans, OCTA 1 This route has selected trips that are directly operated and contract operated. 2 Rural areas are those with less than 50,000 in population. Contracted Fixed Routes: 3 Local 10th St and Belle Ave in Corona via Main St and Hamner Ave to North Main Metrolink Station and RCC Norco campus, continuing to Eastvale Riverside, La Sierra, Norco, Corona, Eastvale, Mira Loma Metrolink, Corona Cruiser 7 Local Lake Elsinore Outlet Center, Downtown Lake Elsinore, Senior Center, Walmart shopping Center, Inland Valley Medical Center in Wildomar Lake Elsinore, Lakeland Village, Sedco Hills, Wildomar 8 Local From Lake Elsinore Outlet Center to Walmart on Railroad Canyon Rd via Grand Ave, Wildomar and Canyon Estates Dr Lake Elsinore, Sedco Hills, Wildomar Revised 4/24/2012 Table 3A Individual Route Description RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2011 /12 - FY 2013/14 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE 3A: FY 2012/13 INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Route # Route Class Route Description Cities/Communities Served Connections 21 1 Local From Galleria At Tyler in Riverside to Country Village in Mira Loma via Van Buren Blvd and Mission Blvd Jurupa, Glen Avon, Pedley, Riverside 23 Local From Inland Valley Hospital in Wildomar through Murrieta to County Center Dr in Temecula Murrieta, Wildomar, Temecula 24 Local Temecula circulator with stops at the County Center, Old Town, Library, Pechanga Resort and Temecula Walmart Temecula, Pechanga Community 30 Local Perris circulator serving the Perris Transit Center, Walmart and central part of the community Perris 31 Rural z Service from Banning to Hemet Valley Mall via Lamb Canyon, State St, Mt San Jacinto Community College Banning, Beaumont, Gilman Hot Springs, San Jacinto, Hemet Pass Transit 32 Local From Hemet Valley Mall to Mt. San Jacinto College via Downtown San Jacinto and San Jacinto Ave San Jacinto Hemet 33 Local From Super-Walmart and Hemet Valley Mall in western Hemet to east Hemet Hemet, East Hemet 35 Regional From Banning to Moreno Valley Mall with stops at K-Mart, Walmart on Moreno Beach Dr, senior center and Riverside County Medical Center Banning, Beaumont, Moreno Valley Pass Transit 40 Local From Walmart in Lake Elsinore to Cherry Hills Blvd in Sun City with stops in Canyon Lake and Quail Valley Menifee, Sun City, Quail Valley, Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore 41 1 Regional From the Mead Valley Community Center to Moreno Valley with stops at RCC Moreno Valley campus and Riverside County Medical Center Moreno Valley, Perris, Mead Valley 42 Local Estudillo Express - San Jacinto circulator with stops at Soboba Casino and various mobile home parks San Jacinto, Soboba Community 50 Trolley Riverside Jury Trolley Service Downtown Riverside, RCC Campus area 51 Trolley Crest Cruiser, a UCR to Canyon Crest circulator via Chicago Ave, Central Ave and Canyon Crest Dr Riverside, UC Riverside campus area 55 Trolley Temecula Trolley route, connecting Harveston community to schools, shops and other RTA routes Temecula 61 Regional From Sun City Shop Center to Promenade Mall area in Temecula with stops at Menifee Valley Medical offices, and Mt San Jacinto College Menifee campus Temecula, Murrieta, Menifee, Sun City 74 Regional From San Jacinto to Hemet, Sun City and Perris, serving Mt San Jacinto College, Hemet Valley Mall and Mt San Jacinto's Menifee campus, mostly via State St, Simpson Rd and Newport Rd San Jacinto, Hemet, Winchester, Menifee, Sun City, Perris 79 Regional From Hemet Valley Mall to Temecula City Hall via Winchester Rd (State Hwy 79). Also serves County Center Dr, Promenade Mall, Old Town Temecula and Temecula City Hall Hemet, Winchester, French Valley, Murrieta and Temecula 202 Express From Walmart in Murrieta and Promenade Mall in Temecula to Oceanside Transit Center Murrieta, Temecula, Fallbrook, Bonsai!, Oceanside Metrolink, NCTD (Bus, Coaster Rail, Sprinter Rail) 208 Express From Promenade Mall in Temecula to Riverside Metrolink Station and Downtown Terminal via 215 Fwy with stops in Murrieta, Sun City, Perris, Moreno Valley Temecula, Murrieta, Sun City, Perris, Riverside, Moreno Valley Metrolink, Omnitrans 210 Express From Banning and Beaumont to Downtown Riverside Terminal with stops in Moreno Valley and Riverside Metrolink Station Banning, Beaumont, Moreno Valley, Riverside Metrolink, Pass Transit, Omnitrans 212 Express From Hemet and San Jacinto to Riverside Downtown Terminal with stops at Perris and UC Riverside East Hemet, San Jacinto, Hemet, Perris, Riverside Metrolink, Omnitrans 217 Express From San Jacinto and Hemet to Temecula and Escondido Hemet, San Jacinto, Temecula, Escondido NCTD (Bus, Sprinter Rail), MTS (San Diego) 1 This route has selected trips that are directly operated and contract operated. 2 Rural areas are those with less than 50,000 in population. Contracted Paratransit Routes: Banning/Beaumont Curb -to -Curb Banning and Beaumont Lake Elsinore Curb -to -Curb Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, Quail Valley Highgrove/Loma Linda Curb -to -Curb Grand Terrace, Highgrove, Loma Linda, Colton Hemet Curb -to -Curb Hemet, Homeland, Romoland, San Jacinto, Valle Vista, Winchester Jurupa Curb -to -Curb Glen Avon, Belltown, Jurupa, Pedley, Rubidoux, Mira Loma (Country Village) Moreno Valley Curb -to -Curb Moreno Valley, March Air Reserve Base Murrieta/Temecula Curb -to -Curb Murrieta, Temecula Corona/Norco Curb -to -Curb Corona, Norco Perris Curb -to -Curb Perris, Mead Valley, Nuevo Riverside Curb -to -Curb Riverside, Canyon Crest, Arnold Heights, Orangecrest, Woodcrest Sun City Curb -to -Curb Sun City, Menifee Taxicab Curb -to -Curb within RTA service area Revised 4/24/2012 Table 3A Individual Route Description Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Riverside Transit Agency FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Final 5/24/12 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds LTF LTF Western County Reserve STA Measure A Operating Assistance Measure A Operating Assistance RCTC Reserves Section 5307 - Riv-San Bernardino Section 5307 - Temecula/ Murrieta/ Menifee Section 5307 - Hemet 2 Section 5307 Carryover 3 Section 5309 Carryover Section 5311 3 TUMF Carryover Section 5316 JARC Section 5317 New Freedom Farebox Other Revenue Operating Assistance 28,573,575 25,063,390 948,877 435,100 1,700,000 426,208 Operating Assistance - CTSA 624,000 582,000 42,000 GASB 43/45 ARC 1,050,000 1,050,000 OCTA 794 116,000 116,000 CommuterLink 212 & 217 839,534 258,432 121,615 380,048 79,439 Extended Fixed Route Service 782,002 239,293 112,608 351,901 78,200 County Shuttle Route 54 89,390 89,390 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 10,163,467 10,163,467 Travel Training 280,500 28,050 28,050 112,200 112,200 COA/BRT Study 3 800,000 200,000 300,000 300,000 Interest Income 65,000 65,000 Advertising Revenue 15,000 15,000 CNG Sales 175,000 175,000 Retiree Medical PAY Go 1,000,000 1,000,000 Vehicle Fuel 2 1,125,000 225,000 900,000 Capitalized Preventive Maintenance 6,875,000 1,375,000 800,000 3,150,000 1,550,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 5,500,000 1,100,000 3,000,000 1,400,000 Subtotal: RTA Operating 1 $58,073,468 $29,339,165 $0 $0 $1,998,540 $677,100 $3,800,000 $3,150,000 $1,700,000 $3,850,000 $300,000 $426,208 $300,000 $844,149 $112,200 $10,321,106 $1,255,000 Care Connmows, Inc -Travel Training 10,891 10,891 Riv Cty Regional Med Ctr-Med Transport 199,545 199,545 Subtotal: Soc Svcs Operating 4 $210,436 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $210,436 $0 $0 Subtotal: Operating $58,283,904 $29,339065 $0 $0 $1,998,540 $677,100 $3,800,000 $3,150,000 $1,700,000 $3,850,000 $300,000 $426,208 $300,000 $844,149 $322,636 $10,321,106 $1,255,000 Revenue Vehicles - DO Heavy Duty FY13-1 16,174,644 7,674,644 5,500,000 3,000,000 Revenue Vehicles - (7) COFR Aero Elite FY13-2 1,176,088 235,218 940,870 Non -Revenue Vehicles - (1) Support Vehicle FY13-3 24,200 4,840 19,360 Capital Maintenance Spares FY13-4 1,241,000 248,200 992,800 Capitalized Tire Lease FY13-5 263,617 52,723 210,894 TE - Bus Stop Amenities FY13-6 150,000 30,000 120,000 Support Equipment FY13-7 145,650 29,130 116,520 Information Systems FY13-8 36,054 7,211 28,843 Subtotal: Capital $19,211,253 $0 $7,674,644 $6,107,322 $0 $0 $5,429,287 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $77,495,157 $29,339,165 $7,674,644 $6,107,322 $1,998,540 $677,100 $9,229,287 $3,150,000 $1,700,000 $3,850,000 $300,000 $426,208 $300,000 $844,149 $322,636 $10,321,106 $1,255,000 1 Operating Expense budget does not include any GASB pre -funding, ARC only. 2 5307 estimated carryover from FY12 grant CA-90-Y954. 3 COA Study to use $600,000 of previously programmed 5309 and TUMF funds from Transit Enhancements Program of Projects. 4 Social Services Pass-Thru funds are exempt from Farebox and PIP calculations. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY13-1 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles - Heavy Duty Buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of 27 heavy duty buses to be used for directly operated fixed routes. These buses have estimated service life of 12 years or 500,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The new buses will replace the old NABI model buses that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 LTF (Western County Reserves) $ 7,674,644 STA $ 5,500,000 Sec 5307 Riv-San Bernardino $ 3,000,000 Total $ 16,174, 644 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC,Other Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-04-0154, Sec 5309 FY08 & FY12 STA, FY12 LTF, Prop1B, FET Credit, Other Replacement heavy duty 40-ft Buses $33, 871, 999 * As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY13-2 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Contracted Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (7) Aero Elite vehicles for use on contract operated fixed route service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace Type ll vehicles used for contract operated fixed routes. These vehicles have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 940,870 STA $ 235,218 Total $ 1,176,088 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC,Other Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-90-Y954, Sec 5307 FY08 & FY12 STA Other Replacement veh medium duty (11) $1,682,250 CA-90-Y866, Sec 5307 FY11 STA, Prop 18 E-Lo model vehicles (10) $1,531,840 Total $3, 214, 090 'As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION Replacement of support vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION FY13-3 Replacement Support Vehicles Replacement of (1) Honda Civic that has met its useful life requirement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 19,360 STA $ 4,840 Total $ 24,200 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-90-Y691, CA-90-Y954, Sec 5307 FY07 & FY12 STA Replacement Support Vehicles (12) $311,494 Total $311,494 * As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY13-4 PROJECT NAME Capital Maintenance Spares PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of spare parts for rolling stock under the bus maintenance program. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of vehicle parts based on projected needs whose individual costs meet the requirement for capital reimbursement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 992,800 STA $ 248,200 Total $ 1,241,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-90-Y866, Sec 5307 FY11 STA Capital Maintenance Spares $1,467,686 CA-90-Y954, Sec 5307 FY12 STA Capital Maintenance Spares $1,678,372 Total $3,146, 058 * As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION Capital cost of leasing bus tires. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION FY13-5 Capitalized Tire Lease As part of the Agency's maintenance program, tires are inspected and replaced based on tread wear and air pressure. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 210,894 STA $ 52,723 Total $ 263,617 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-90-Y954, Sec 5307 FY12 STA Capitalized Tire Lease $215, 692 Total $215, 692 * As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY13-6 PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enhancement of the bus stop system such as: installation of bus shelters and benches, kiosks, signage, and lighting to enhance security and safety of the riding public. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Enhancement of transit facilities promotes safety and security and encourages residents to use transit due to improved convenience while waiting for bus. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 1 20,000 STA $ 30,000 Total $ 150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED— INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-96-X043 ARRA Sec 5307 100% N/A T/E Bus Stop Amenities $89,172 Total $89,172 *As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/3-7 PROJECT NAME Support Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of maintenance items including, but not limited to, (2) vehicle jacks, (2) wheelchairs for operator training, (2) poinjar, (2) air compressors/generators, and floor scrubbers. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Miscellaneous maintenance and support equipment and improvements to support ongoing operations. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 64,520 STA $ 16,130 Total $ 80,650 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* CA-90-Y866, Sec 5307 FY11 STA Maintenance & Other Support Equipment $34, 817 Total $34, 817 * As of 5-18-12 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY13-8 PROJECT NAME Information Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of items including, but not limited to, computers/software, ITS system for fixed route vehicles, Hemet training room equipment, and Riverside conference room monitors. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Computers and software needed to replace old equipment, to improve Agency efficiency and technology. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2013 Sec 5307 $ 28,843 STA $ 7,211 Total $ 36,054 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance CA-90-Y691, Sec 5307 FY06 STA Information Systems $336,582 CA-90-Y781, Sec 5307 FY10 STA Information Systems $69,489 Total $406, 071 As of 5-18-12 Riverside Transit Agency FY 2013/14 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Measure A Operating Assistance Section 5307 - Riv-San Bernardino Section 5307 - Temecula/ Murrieta Section 5307 - Hemet/San Jacinto Section 5309 Section 5311 Section 5316 JARC Section 5317 New Freedom Farebox / Other FY 2013/2014 Operating Assistance 35,450,658 31,500,658 1,500,000 2,000,000 450,000 GASB 43/45 Pre -funding 1,200,000 1,200,000 OCTA 794 140,000 140,000 CommuterLink 212 &217 442,749 128,397 70,840 199,237 44,275 Extended Late Night Service 412,393 121,656 65,983 187,639 37,116 County Shuttle Route 54 109,200 109,200 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 9,500,000 9,500,000 Interest Income 50,000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 20,000 20,000 Cal PERS CERBT Reimbursement 800,000 800,000 CNG Sales 250,000 250,000 Capitalized Preventative Maintenance 7,500,000 1,500,000 6,000,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 5,625,000 1,125,000 1,500,000 3,000,000 Subtotal: FY13/14 RTA Operating 1 $61,500,000 $35,575,711 $0 $1,886,023 $7,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $450,000 $386,876 $0 $10,701,391 Revenue Vehicles - DO Heavy Duty FY14-1 2,550,356 2,550,356 Revenue Vehicles - (25) COFR FY14-2 4,335,000 867,000 3,468,000 Revenue Vehicles - (42) DAR FY14-3 3,436,125 584,141 2,851,984 Revenue Vehicles - (3) Trolleys FY14-4 649,500 129,900 519,600 Non -Revenue Vehicles - (7) Support Vehicles FY14-5 263,900 52,780 211,120 Capital Maintenance Spares FY14-6 1,540,255 308,051 1,232,204 Capitalized Tire Lease FY14-7 284,706 56,941 227,765 Revenue Vehicle Systems FY14-8 314,200 62,840 251,360 TE - Bus Stop Amenities FY14-9 150,000 30,000 120,000 Facility Maintenance FY14-10 97,475 19,495 77,980 Information Systems FY14-11 2,255,000 451,000 1,804,000 Subtotal: FY13/14 Capital $15,876,517 $2,550,356 $2,562,148 $0 $10,764,013 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital FY13/14 $77,376,517 $38,126,067 $2,562,148 $1,886,023 $18,264,013 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $450,000 $386,876 $0 $10,701,391 Operating Expense budget does not include any GASB pre -funding, ARC only. Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-1 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles - Heavy Duty Buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of heavy duty buses to be used for directly operated fixed routes. These buses have estimated service life of 12 years or 500,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The new buses will replace the old NABI model buses that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 L TF $ 2,550,356 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-2 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Contracted Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (25) Aero Elite vehicles for use on contract operated fixed route service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace (25) Type VII vehicles used for contract operated fixed routes. These vehicles have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 3,468,000 STA $ 867,000 Total $ 4,335,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-3 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Demand Response PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (42) paratransit vehicles for use on demand response service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace (42) Type ll vehicles used for demand response service. These vehicles have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 2,851,984 STA $ 584,141 Total $ 3,436,125 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED— INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-4 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Contracted Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (3) trolleys for use on contract operated fixed route service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace (3) trolleys used for contract operated fixed routes. These vehicles have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 519,600 STA $ 129,900 Total $ 649,500 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-5 PROJECT NAME Replacement Support Vehicles PROJECT DESCRIPTION Replace (7) support vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace (7) support cars and trucks that have met their useful life requirement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 211,120 STA $ 52,780 Total $ 263,900 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-6 PROJECT NAME Capital Maintenance Spares PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of spare parts for rolling stock under the maintenance program. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of vehicle parts based on projected needs whose individual costs meet the requirement for capital reimbursement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 1,232,204 S TA $ 308,051 Total $ 1,540,255 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-7 PROJECT NAME Capitalized Tire Lease PROJECT DESCRIPTION Capital cost of leasing bus tires for FY2014. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION As part of the Agency's maintenance program, tires are inspected and replaced based on tread wear and air pressure. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 227,765 STA $ 56,941 Total $ 284,706 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-8 PROJECT NAME Revenue Vehicle Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of camera system for Contracted Fixed Route vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Equipment placed in vehicles that do not currently have cameras will provide security enhancement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 251,360 STA $ 62,840 Total $ 314,200 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-9 PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enhancement of the bus stop system such as: installation of bus shelters and benches, kiosks, signage, and lighting to enhance security and safety of the riding public. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Enhancement of transit facilities promotes safety and security and encourages residents to use transit due to improved convenience while waiting for bus. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 1 20,000 STA $ 30,000 Total $ 150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-10 PROJECT NAME Facility Maintenance PROJECT DESCRIPTION Miscellaneous facility maintenance. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Facility maintenance and equipment and improvements to promote a safe and clean environment. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 77,980 STA $ 19,495 Total $ 97,475 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY14-11 PROJECT NAME Information Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of ITS system for fixed route vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Computers and software to improve Agency efficiency and technology. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2014 Sec 5307 $ 1,804,000 STA $ 451,000 Total $ 2,255,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance Riverside Transit Agency FY 2014/15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Measure A Operating Assistance Section 5307 - Riv-San Bernardino Section 5307 - Temecula/ Murrieta Section 5307 - Hemet/San Jacinto Section 5309 Section 5311 Section 5316 JARC Section 5317 New Freedom Farebox / Other FY 2014/2015 Operating Assistance 39,860,000 35,635,000 1,750,000 2,000,000 475,000 GASB 43/45 Pre -funding 1,200,000 1,200,000 OCTA 794 145,000 145,000 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 9,500,000 9,500,000 Interest Income 50,000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 20,000 20,000 Cal PERS CERBT Reimbursement 850,000 850,000 CNG Sales 250,000 250,000 Capitalized Preventative Maintenance 7,500,000 1,500,000 6,000,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 5,625,000 1,125,000 1,500,000 3,000,000 Subtotal: FY14/15 RTA Operating 1 $65,000,000 $39,460,000 $0 $1,895,000 $7,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $475,000 $0 $0 $10,670,000 Revenue Vehicles - (2) Trolleys FY15-1 440,000 88,000 352,000 Non -Revenue Vehicles - (4) Support Vehicles FY15-2 96,800 19,360 77,440 Capital Maintenance Spares FY15-3 1,540,255 308,051 1,232,204 Capitalized Tire Lease FY15-4 307,482 61,496 245,986 TE - Bus Stop Amenities FY15-5 150,000 30,000 120,000 Support Equipment FY15-6 62,500 12,500 50,000 Information Systems FY15-7 100,000 20,000 80,000 Subtotal: FY14/15 Capital $2,697,037 $0 $539,407 $0 $2,157,630 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital FY14/15 $67,697,037 $39,460,000 $539,407 $1,895,000 $9,657,630 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $475,000 $0 $0 $10,670,000 Operating Expense budget does not include any GASB pre -funding, ARC only. Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-1 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Contracted Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (2) trolleys for use on contract operated fixed route service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace (2) trolleys used for contract operated fixed routes. These vehicles have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 352,000 STA $ 88,000 Total $ 440,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-2 PROJECT NAME Replacement Support Vehicles PROJECT DESCRIPTION Replace (4) support vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace (4) support cars and trucks that have met their useful life requirement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 77,440 STA $ 19,360 Total $ 96,800 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance None Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-3 PROJECT NAME Capital Maintenance Spares PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of spare parts for rolling stock under the maintenance program. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of vehicle parts based on projected needs whose individual costs meet the requirement for capital reimbursement. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 1,232,204 STA $ 308,051 Total $ 1,540,255 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-4 PROJECT NAME Capitalized Tire Lease PROJECT DESCRIPTION Capital cost of leasing bus tires for FY2015. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION As part of the Agency's maintenance program, tires are inspected and replaced based on tread wear and air pressure. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 245,986 STA $ 61,496 Total $ 307,482 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-5 PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enhancement of the bus stop system such as: installation of bus shelters and benches, kiosks, signage, and lighting to enhance security and safety of the riding public. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Enhancement of transit facilities promotes safety and security and encourages residents to use transit due to improved convenience while waiting for bus. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 1 20,000 STA $ 30,000 Total $ 150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of maintenance and support equipment. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Miscellaneous maintenance and support equipment and improvements to support ongoing operations. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FY15-6 Support Equipment Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 50,000 STA $ 12,500 Total $ 62,500 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance* Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-7 PROJECT NAME Information Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of information systems equipment and software. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Improve Agency efficiency and technology. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2015 Sec 5307 $ 80,000 STA $ 20,000 Total $ 100,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Recent Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2009/10) Action(s) Taken And Results To Date No Audit Findings Table 6-Triennial Audit FY 2012-14 SRTP Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plan Review Riverside Transit Agency Data Elements FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 Target FY 2011/12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 8,076,918 Passenger Miles 54,308,327 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 622,861.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 10,485,001.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 12,332,916.0 Total Operating Expenses $54,104,083 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $12,298,382 Net Operating Expenses $41,805,701 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 22.73%I >= 17.04% I 26.93%I Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $86.86 <_ $80.72 $80.73 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $5.18 >_ $3.77 and <_ $5.09 $4.19 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.77 >_ $0.54 and <_ $0.74 $0.60 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $67.12 >_ $50.29 and <_ $68.05 $58.99 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $3.99 >_ $2.97 and <_ $4.01 $3.52 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 13.00 >= 11.39 and <= 15.41 14.10 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.77 >= 0.67 and <= 0.91 0.84 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager'"' 5/10/2012 Page 1 of I Min Illrr Rio3rldo (war Tronsprrrorian {omrrissiun FY 2012/13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; Riverside Transit Agency All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/13 Plan FY 2012/13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 8,092,220 6,561,166 8,735,044 None Passenger Miles 56,398,387 45,875,382 61,275,711 None Revenue Hours 600,356.6 466,137.6 666,566.0 None Total Hours 694,162.0 554,651.6 780,403.0 None Revenue Miles 10,174,233.0 7,805,913.8 11,150,603.0 None Total Miles 11,926,377.3 9,580,245.8 13,504,857.0 None Operating Costs $45,604,814 $37,630,549 $58,073,468 None Passenger Revenue $12,504,724 $10,132,955 $14,251,746 None Operating Subsidy $33,100,090 $27,497,594 $43,821,722 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $75.96 $80.73 $87.12 <_ $82.15 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $4.48 $4.82 $5.21 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $5.64 $5.74 $6.65 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 27.42% 26.93% 24.54% >= 17.5% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $4.09 $4.19 $5.02 >_ $3.56 and <_ $4.82 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.59 $0.60 $0.72 >_ $0.51 and <_ $0.69 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $55.13 $58.99 $65.74 >_ $50.14 and <_ $67.84 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $3.25 $3.52 $3.93 >_ $2.99 and <_ $4.05 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 13.50 14.10 13.10 >= 11.99 and <= 16.22 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.80 0.84 0.78 >= 0.71 and <= 0.97 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager"" 5/10/2012 Page 1 of 1 TABLE 9 — HIGHLIGHTS OF SRTP Operating & Financial Data FY2008/09 FY2009/10 FY2010/11 FY2011/12 Estimate FY2012/13 Planned Systemwide Ridership 8,326,764 7,934,079 8,092,220 8,714,258 8,735,044 Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $77.15 $75.81 $75.96 $80.73 $87.12 Recent Trends: • Since FY2009, RTA has saved over 70,000 fixed route revenue hours and $4 million in light of declining revenue sources. • A new fare structure was implemented in late June 2009 that increased the base fare from $1.25 to $1.50. • In January 2010, DAR policy changes took effect that raised the senior age eligibility from 60 to 65; implemented trip -by -trip eligibility enforcement; shortened the reservation window from 7 days to 3 days; enforced a strict % mile boundary policy for all passengers; and implemented a new fare system model that would be based on the comparable fixed route model. Proposed Service Changes for FY2013: • No new services will be added unless fully funded by grant monies or city sponsored revenues. • Service changes will focus on refining existing service through improved scheduling, streamlining, and better serving communities with the available resources. • A COA study will be conducted to review existing operational services and provide a strategic plan for enhancements to begin in 2014-15. Operating Budget ($58,073,468): • Increase of 7.3% over FY2012 budget. Variance analysis by cost element is provided below: o Salaries —1.5% increase. o Benefits —14.0% increase due to increases in Worker's Compensation and medical insurance costs. o Services —13.7% increase due to the Comprehensive Operational Analysis study. o Materials & Supplies —10.4% increase due to parts usage. o Purchased Transportation — 6.4% increase due to contracted rates and fuel. Capital Budget ($19,211,253): • RTA's 3-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is updated to reflect the current economic outlook and service needs with a focus on items which are mandatory to support our current service profile. FY2013 CIP projects are funded with Federal Section 5307, State Transportation Assistance (STA) and Local Transportation Funds (LTF). A summary by project element for FY2013 is shown below: o Revenue Vehicles - $17.35 million for 40 ft. buses and (7) Contracted Fixed Route buses o Non -Revenue Vehicles - $.1 million for (3) support vehicles. o Maintenance - $1.5 million for maintenance spare parts and tire lease. o Transit Enhancements - $.2 million for bus stop enhancements. 0 Support/IT Equipment - $.2 million for support, maintenance and IT equipment.. APPENDIX A: RTA FIXED ROUTE MAPS Routing and timetables subject to change. IO N UCR / Riverside Downtown Terminal to W. Corona Metrolink Station Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: RC( California Baptist University, Parkview Community Hospital, Galleria at Tyler, Kaiser Hospital, Corona. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Riverside Downtown Terminal Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 0 10 ®® ® 16 El 29 14 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 T Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station 0 16 208 210 T Brockton Arcade 0 10 m® RIVERSIDE T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®® 14 216 T 6th & Main 0© Corona Cruiser T 6th & Smith 0 La Sierra University Corona Cruiser West Corona Metrolink Station METIKINK 1 P, e Auto (enter Smim S� T 2 CivicCir. 5� fan Buren Note Riverside 3rd Downtown CD Terminal T Mission Inn 8 • Riverside City College 14th St. Adams Parkview Hospital 411 Gallena 4 at Tyler �ar 3 T T Corona Senior Ctr. Corona H.S. Central T Ramona H.S. 7 6 rr T a 9 4111. METROLINK Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station r Universi Blaine 10 /o 0 E m UCR UCR 0 16 IN 204 Hi r hlander Shuttle T Magnolia & 14th =Min Riverside Plaza - Arlington Madison California Baptist University Chemawa Middle School 0 Tiler 5 Kaiser la Sierra Hospital McKinley c s C C C L 50 RTA and Corona Cruiser honor each other's Day and 30-Day passes at shared stops. T La Sierra&Magnolia 0®® T Magnolia & McKinley 0 Corona Cruiser Legend I Map not to scale Q Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility cm= Alternate Routing RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 5 Routing and timetables subject to change. O Swan Lake/Pat's Ranch Rd to Belle & 10th Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Norco, Norco Senior Center, Norco City Hall, RCC, North Main Plaza, Corona. No service weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day,Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Swan Lake Dr EASTVALE E T 7 T Hamner & Limonite Limonite Ave 65th St. 68th St. Eleanor Roosevelt H.S. Citrus St • 6 CC 29 T 65th & Pat's Ranch Rd 29 Norco Library 6th St. DMV Post Office Lo 04' \°� City Hall Norco Senior Center Norco College 4 • North Main Plaza DPSS 5 5th St. 4th St. «Lampton 3rd St. 3rd St. 2nd St. Target Corona Crusier T Belle & 10th 8th St. Senior t Center V orona Crusier T Library Stan Reynold Pkwy m 1 Ontario 3 T North Main Plaza mAlu METROLINK 2 T W.Gran Corona Transit Center Corona Mall r T Main &6th Corona 3 Regional Medical 10th St Center Nv NORCO Legend Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information T Corona Transit Center 206 216 Corona Crusier Corona Transit Center Boarding Diagram 'Page 34 m RTA and Corona Cruiser honor each other's Day and 30-Day passes at shared stops. 6 RIVERSIDETRANSIT AGENCY 7 Lake Elsinore Outlet Center to Inland Valley Medical Center Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O, N Riverside Dr a Also serving: DPSS, Downtown Lake Elsinore, Senior Center. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. LAKE ELSINORE �1 L (bate 5 T Outlet Center El 8 206 Lake Elsinore Outlet Center DPSS 5� -re ah d,,9ke Senior Center Pie Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Northbound Only LAKE ELSINORE . Or or cap` T. • 3 T Malaga & Mission Trail 0 8 T Walmart 8 40 Walmart v� • Wi ld s edr e. Living 2 Le�iS� WILDOMAR T T Inland Valley Medical Center 0® T Palomar & Central era `Ck.- L�s��\\% ti ti �9 P Wild Hall s ty 8 T 1 ca O� Inland Valley Medical Center RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 Routing and timetables subject to change. O, N 4a • Ortega Highway Lake Elsinore Walmart to Lake Elsinore Outlet Center Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Stater Bros, Albertsons, Lake Elsinore Recreation Center. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Lake Elsinore Outlet Center l P r.4P Brasr ci P5� 9 Albertson 6 74 HS o Lake Elsinore Recreation Center Baldwin 4 NORE LAKE ELSINORE Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point © Transfer Point and Information ® Medical Facility ® Alternate Routing 7 T T Outlet Center 0 8 El 206 Chase Bank Albemons • 1 Z ti s l 4 d r 2 \4,7 a Mission Trail Library A do ". �f 5k 3 WILDOMAR T Railroad Canyon Rd Walmart T T Walmart 0 8 40 • Malaga & Mission Trail 0 15 8 T Palomar & Central 8 RIVERSIDETRANSIT AGENCY 10 Big Springs & Watkins to Galleria at Tyler Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. IO N Also serving: Downtown Riverside, Poly High, Gage Middle School, Notre Dame High, Calif. School for Deaf, Arlington High. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal p to ®® ®16El 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 29 ETEI 14 49 216 T Brockton Arcade 111117 10 14 • 7 T Iowa & Blaine 10 RTA >5� 8 °ay issionloAve es pve96e «Unive6nY �T Riverside Downtown Terminal Riverside Community d College 0 d liEl T 5 Brockton Arcade Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information T Galleria at Tyler Iilii7 10 111111111E1 ®®m 216 1 T Riverside Plaza 1 '"k =14 i, C0i9e T Q,,,p400 n5 ciN? Vs0 UCR 9 T County Administration Bldg 6 otre Dame H.S. Y Lei JQ 4 Hor, Calif. Sch. for Deaf Madison St Arlington �acksonStH.s. VanBpzenRio �Ileria at Tyler 2 3 Q F 10 54 208 210 I® Poly H.S. Target 6ageM.S. RIVERSIDE RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 19 11 Moreno Valley Mall/March ARB Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables Also serving: Sunnymead Middle School, Moreno Valley High School. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. subject to change. O T Moreno Valley Mall m Moreno Valley Mall Town Circle Towngate Blvd MORENO VALLEY T Alessandro & Frederick m March ARB City Hall Delays may occur due to construction on Ironwood Ave. Ironwood Ave «Counter -clockwise I Clockwise» Sunnymead MS Eucalyptus Ave Moreno ValleyHS Cottonwood Ave Alessandro Blvd Cactus Ave Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information Hemlock Post Office Sunnymead Blvd • Heacock & Sunnymead T Cottonwood & Heacock m T Alessandro & Heacock m 1FK Dr 1O 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY iz Stephens & Center to Pierce & Sterling - Riverside Information (enter (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables Also serving: Galleria at Tyler, DMV, Downtown Terminal, Salvation Army. No service on: New subject to change. Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. O T Main & Russell RIVERSIDF T Rivers de Downtown Terminal Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 = 10 Ella El 16 El 29 14 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 T Arlington & Streeter Ella T Van Buren & California Ella= County Mental Health 4 County Juvenile Courts T County Farm Rd Hole a°° 2 ♦ T G 1G O Kaiser Zd� Hospital P� ob, \e, P 14 5), 3 T Pierce & Sterling =Ella 216 16 Garner • Riverside Y Downtown Terminal T 8 nu T County Administration Bldg 1E1E1E1 10 208 210 Arlington �0 Juvenile Hall T Jurupa v Center 2 Interchange oakleColumbia lstst 0 Salvation Army «Mission Inn University t o 14th Riverside City College 5 T Galleria at Tyler = 10 la®® Janet 6oeske DMV Ctr. Sears Hardman Center Riverside Plaza a 14 216 a Tyler 6 T 7 T Jurupa FZd6`°r6 T Magnolia & Elizabeth =Ella 14 la 3 0 20 RIVERSIDE Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility m Alternate Routing RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 T T 13 Spruce & Atlanta to Galleria at Tyler - Riverside Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web she www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. IO N Also serving: Galleria at Tyler, DPS5 (Tyler office), Riverside Airport, RCC, RTA Headquarters. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Iowa & Spruce EMIR Westbound-- T Chicago & University QEM 14 16 El T County Administration Bldg EMIR 10 210 T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®EM El 16 El 1111 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 29 14 49 216 Riverside Downtown Terminal RCH .� T 14th & Magnolia 50 RIVERSIDE i Arlington & Monroe EM 15 T Colorado &Van Buren EMIR w Norte Vista H.S. o� P st Tye i2 �o Wells Intermediate School T Arlington&Tyler EMEM 4 DPSS a� Riverside Airport T o � P9 �o A (.e 'a\ o Sierra Middle School 0. patio 07 sO se Galleria a° at Tyler 3 54 208 v s -0 Obese C1\SS\o T 5 4 r v +T4 Riverside City College Riverside Plaza T CQ SQ\J Q° \'aSSaCh\\S Eastbound / O\pe John North H.S. 6 ry 90 oipts Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point 0 Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility ® Alternate Routing T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®EMm EMIR® 12 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 14 Galleria at Tyler to Riverside Downtown Terminal to Loma Linda VA Hospital Information Center (951)565.5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O Also serving: Galleria at Tyler, Riverside Auto Center, Calif. School for the Deaf, Riverside Medical Clinic, RCC. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. RTA DOES NOT SERVE MICHIGAN AVENUE. MICHIGAN AVENUE IS SERVED BY OMNITRANS' ROUTE 325. Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 COLTON T Michigan & Center Omnitrans 325 *0 . y•' � • • . 0 • •• • \v• ��S\O� 0 Q T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®®m ® 16 El 29 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 T Brockton Arcade 0 10 14 El Riverside Downtown Terminal • 4 T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®® ®®® 216 14 0 m T 3 • Galleria : at Tyler T 1 TAP 2 T California School far the Deaf Madison T T Loma Linda VA Hospital•VA Hospital Ptp59eCtMeT Loma Linda Medical Center ID WO1 14 Omnitrans 2,325 a LOMA• L I N.D'A .••••GRAND TERRACE 6 Loma Linda Community Hospital HIGHGROVE a� a L 1,00 5T pve 4I Iowa & Blaine 10 14 T University & Lemon 0 10 14 16 RIVERSIDE Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 113 15 Riverside Downtown Terminal to Pierce and Sterling Information (enter (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. IO N Also serving: Hardman Center, Riverside Airport, Metrolink, La Sierra, Cal. Paramedical College. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Riverside Downtown Terminal Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 0 10 El El ® 16 El 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 29 BEI 14 49 216 T 14th & Magnolia 0®® 50 Legend I Map not to scale Ip Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility MP Alternate Routing 6 T Arlington & Van Buren ®® Loma Vista Intermediate School . La Sierra Univ e Q�e<< T 5 Norte Vista High tC�o9Cp\ School F T La Sierra & Hole ®® Hole ` A Paramedical College SIERRA ld T La Sierra & Magnolia 0®® 1 La Sierra High School 44. A► d�a T 14 «o,6v4 �y Riverside Downtown ' Terminal �q\\\ T Brockton Arcade 0 10 m® RIVERSIDE w Riverside �ar, Airport c me 07 T K-Mart T Arlington & Monroe EN 15 �a Kaiser lospital La Sierra Metrolink Hole T 3 T Riverside City College + 10 RCH s Sears G� BGlP7 Galleria at Tyler 40 6° a"0 �c Arizona Middle School METROLINK .\ o �d O� 8 T d d T Hardman Center \� •• co : gaa 9y : 4 0s o'er • 0P Riverside Plaza 9 a o� Z Arlington & Streeter ®® T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®®m ®®I® S�els\CA 216 T La Sierra Metrolink OCTA 794 14I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Routing and timetables subject to change. 1 iO Riverside Downtown Terminal / Main & Russell to Moreno Valley Mall Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransitcom Also serving: Downtown, UCR, Canyon Crest Towne Center, Canyon Springs Plaza. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. MORENO VALLEY T University & Lemon 0 10 14 16 Orange Main T UCR 0 16 ia El 204 Hi r hlander Shuttle T �o S�-a Canyon Crest 4 Vine T Market Fairmount Park ■ y 2 UCR 3 t • Canyon Springs Plaza a „c c1° Canyon Crest Towne Center • • • Town Circle T • Day St. A o°s „e 5 T Moreno Valley Mall m Moreno Valley Mall T Riverside - DowntownMetrolinkStation 0 16 208 210 T Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station ul�«lu METROLINK Riverside Downtown Terminal Legend I Map not to scale 0 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information Amtrak RIVERSIDE T Riverside Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®®m ® 16 Ei 29 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 15 18 Sunnymead Ranch to Moreno Valley College Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Also serving: Moreno Valley Mall/Hometown Buffet, Canyon Springs High School, Sunnymead Ranch, Moreno Valley High School, Vista Del Lago High School, Riverside Community College. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. ♦ Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 19 208 210 Moreno Valley Mall y i • 6 Tow Old Lake Rd Sunnymead Ranch Vista Heights MS Canyon Springs HS 7,3 Centerpoint ate T 5N Moreno Valley HS Cottonwood T Cottonwood & Frederick m 18 5s T T Cottonwood & Heacock m 18 7 Manzanita x T Perris & Alessandro •'c Cottonwood MORENO VALLEY Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information O Medical Facility 4 18 19 20 T 1FK Mary McLeod Bethune School Cahuilla» Vista 3 Del Lago HS Gentian Iris 2 Moreno Valley 41lCollege Vista • Verde MS • • T Lasselle & Cahuilla m 161 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 19 Routing and timetables subject to change. O Moreno Valley Mall 7 • To Moreno Valley Mall to Perris Station Transit Center Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: March Mountain High School, RCC, Perris, Perris High School. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Circle T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 Centerpoint 19 208 210 6 Sunnymead Blvd T T Sunnymead & Heacock m 19 MORENO VALLEY T Perris & Ramona Expwy 19 41 T Ross/Lowe's/Starcrest 19 41 Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information © Medical Facility a Alternate Routing 2 March Mountain HS • . Ramona Expwy Morgan Ross/Lowe's/ Starcrest T Val Verde HS Perris Valley Spectrum Walmart T Valley Plaza Hospital 19 30 T 5 T Perris & Alessandro 18 19 20 Alessandro ORCRMC Moreno Iris Valley College 4 • 3 Perris d Plaza Perris Town Center PERRIS E San Jacinto ♦ Perris Station Transit Center El MEM 19 208 30 74 T Krameria T Moreno Valley College 0 18 19 20 Perris HS Temple Christian HS Orange Nuevo Jarvis Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 Perris Station Transit Center RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 117 zo Routing and timetables subject to change. Magnolia Center, RCR Med Ctr, MoVal Comm Hosp, Moreno Valley College Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgivi ng Day and Christmas Day. T RCRMC T Perris & Alessandro T Alessandro & Frederick m 20 T Central & Victoria Birch Victoria • Riverside — Plaza Magnolia Nason ■ Perris Indian Frederic Day St. ago �e55a� P 9�. Poly 9 HS Brockton Moreno Beach RCRMC Lasselle City Han Mission Grove Mission Grove Plaza Trautwein RIVERSIDE T Magnolia & Elizabeth 0®® 1 Kaiser Permanente Hospital • Moreno Valley College m ©Peninsula u q kop Moreno Valley College Kitching A v Indian Y MORENO VALLEY Social Security T Trautwein & Mission Grove Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility ® Alternate routing when school is in session 18 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 21 Galleria at Tyler to Country Village Information Center (951 )565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Also serving: Glen Avon Library and Van Buren. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Marlay Philadelphia T Cherry O FONTANA T Cherry & Mulberry Omnitrans 82 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Country Village 5 T JURU PA San Sevaine VALLEY MIRA LOMA Melba Dunlap Community Center & Library PEDLEY . T Country Village Eli 49 Ben Nevis GLEN AVON Mission Blvd. lumps Valley HS RIVERSIDE COUNTY Jurupa T Limonite 4 Glen Avon Library T Etiwanda & Limonite El Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility m Alternate Routing 29 Arlington T Arlington &Van Buren ®® uLrt�Lr METROLINK 0 3s 3N cbrupa Valley Spectrum T The Pedley Station 2 RIVERSIDE wdnaa T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®I® ®®® 216 R-Mart T California & Van Buren ®® G T Magnolia Califomia ■ 1 Galleria at Tyler RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 119 zz Riverside Downtown Terminal to Lake Elsinore Outlet Center Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables Also serving: Lake Elsinore, Mead Valley, Woodcrest, & Kmart. No service on: New Year's Day, subject to change. Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Downtown Terminal Mission In '3 University 10T O 9 T Riverside Downtown Terminal 1 10 12 13 14 15 16 22 29 49 204 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans 215 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 9coo d <O dG �A Alessandro ass . Van Buren MLK o HS g Mission Grove Plaza Social Security 0/fire 7 T nposa Markham Citrus Hill H.S. WOODCREST T Outlet Center El 8 El Lake Elsinore Outlet Center 206 Riverside Nichols 'i 6 8 T Legend I Map not to scale • Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information RIVERSIDI T Mission Grove at Social Security 20 T Trautwein&Van Buren ®® Oleander T Cajalco Rd & Clark St. EEO 41 T MEAD VALLEY LAKE ELSINORE 74 Central Meadowbrook 2 5 p Rider St a 0 m o� ✓ 74 Cajalco San PERRIS Jacinto Perris Station Transit Center 4 Ellis Nd °aio 4th 3 • T Perris Station Transit Center ®m 30 m 19 208 Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 20 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 23 Temecula - Murrieta - Wildomar Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Also serving: Inland Valley Reg. Medical Center, Rancho Springs Medical Center, Chaparral High School, County Center Drive. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Inland Valley Regional 0 Med Ctr <. T 9 WILDOMARP/7,„„'1° T Inland Valley Hospital 0® MURRIETA Clinton Keith 15 40 o Skyview cap Murrieta ' Ridge Amanda NHak Valley Apts©? � CaGf.Oak it0 li_ as y� •• L 4\ QkYJy Murrieta Senior[tr &City 9f Hall a7 ✓ 7 Pam. o� T Walmart 202 206 5 Walmart T Equity Dr&YnezRd 24 61 Rancho Springs Medical Center 79 T County Center Drive ®24® 61 79 T Hancock &Los Alamos 61 O: Vista Murrieta Qas°°a H.S. `\'\\ Los Alamos T Los Alamos & Whitewood En Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information O Medical Facility ® Alternate Routing 208 �c Palm Plaza 15 Library Court ocial Services < Promenade Mall vu G O- O, Nicolas Chaparral HS 79 Winchester TEMECULA 2 RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 21 24 Temecula to Pechanga Resort to Temecula Walmart Information (enter (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O, Also serving: County Center Drive, Temecula Schools, Temecula Stage Stop & Old Town. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Boll Qa. Business ¢y Ctr. is T County Center Drive ® 24 El Palm Plaza 61 79 Temecula Stage Stop 3 4 Old Town 6th Main 1st 0 Post office �P '. Court Social Service f F9G�2 .. . O� e- Temecula Plaza Solana T Equity Dr&YnezRd 121 24 61 79 Chaparral HS Promenade Mall Costco Temecula ES TownCtr. Target Rancho California Rancho Vista Temecula Stage Stop 24 79 79 m TEMECULA tpp•-•" Margarita Ma MS Temecula Library Palomar Village 6 Legend I Map not to scale 0 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information m Alternate Routing Temecula Valley HS Pauba Rd. YnezRd d 9� a 9a pP C/� d'9dA, l 2 Pechanga Resort Campanula 0 o� Temecula Walmart Vail Ranch a Red HawkPkwy « Peppercorn Nod"'" Great Oaks HS 22 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Routing and timetables subject to change. O ' Galleria at Tyler to Hemet Valley Mall and Florida & Lincoln Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Riverside National Cemetery, Perris High, & Valle Vista. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Sun City - StaterNons m 40 61 74 208 T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®® ®®® 216 Galleria at Tyler Tyle RIVERSIDE Van Buren WOODCREST Wood Rd MLK High 6 T Perris Station Transit Center 19 208 El ®® Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 Perris Station Transit Center c a. sun city g MENIFEE 3 Bradle SUN CITY Lyon Palomar Hemet Valley Mall o 0 74 Kirby T 2 Gilmore Lyon NB 30 74 T ROMOLAND Riverside National m Cem. SB Qett\5 T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®®m m 79 ®® tip 91 % Washington Trautwein T a ei o T Trautwein & Van Buren ®® z PERRIS Perris H.S. HEMET State San Jacinto 0 a��Qstss Soboba o Q,a 1 . Lincoln VALLE e VISTA Grant d T 8 Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information =WI Alternate Routing when school is in session RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 123 29 Riverside Downtown Terminal to Hamner & Limonite Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Also serving: Bel!town, Downtown Rubidoux, Rubidoux Academy, De Anza Plaza, Vons Shopping Center. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. • Hamne Pat's Ranch Rd T 65th & Pat's Ranch 29 T Limonite & Archer 29 PEDLEY Archer wB° ° Jurupa Valley _ station Spectrum o DeAnzaPlaza JURUPA VALLEY Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Alternate Routing Oss` Ri"RSIDE Riverside Downtown Terminal 6 Market Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 a�a �c Camino Real 9d PF n 5 T \ ,00 Nlestbo 1 T Riverside Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®® ® 16 El 204 208 210 29 I® 14 49 216 Omnitrans 215 2E T 2w EASTVALE a T Hamner & Limonite Collins 29 3 • nl= MIRA LOMA METROLINK Pedley The Pedley Rubidoux Academy RUBIDOUX T Mission & Rubidoux 29 49 24I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 30 Perris - Weston & Carter to Walmart Information Center (951)565.5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Weston San Jacinto 0 Also serving: Perris High School, Civic Center, Post Office, Library. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Ramona Expressway Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 T Perris Station Transit Center I®I® 30 Im I® 2 • Perris Senior • a ' Center A_ . San Jacinto Perris Station Transit Center 4th Placentia Walmart Nuevo Rd. Stater Bros. Bowen Center N Metz Civic Center !WB WB Library PERRIS Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility • Valley Plaza Hospital Orange Palley Plaza Doctors Hospital Perris HS Ellis San Jacinto 4,4 9y EB/WB • Post : Office 4th & Wilkerson 30 74 RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 125 Routing and timetables subject to change. O, N Beaumont/Banning to San Jacinto & Hemet Valley Mall Information (enter (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving:Walmart, Kmart, Riverside County Administration Complex, Mt. San Jacinto Community College. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. BEAUMONT/ BANNING Legend I Map not to scale QTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information tE= Southbound Only T Hemet Valley Mall m 79 ®® 0 Hemet Valley Mall T 1 42 MZ414: F�oltvalP 4:'4` 3 DPkO°sbieeAx �LathamAve Q v a y A. Th fi 2 Uty Hall T 79 4 Es/47 74- ede Axe County Complex H 0 lm Lamb Canyon T Sun Lakes Blvd. ®® Pass Transit T Mt. San Jacinto College Mt. San Jacinto Comm College SAN JACINTO T Buena Vista & Devonshire ®® m Acacia a Maybe? Ave m whikierAveve HEMET tefso°AVe 'stst T Walmart PassTransit Southbound Onlyz°dsr 5 .''' „�• ..e Kma • T q 6 `�' SUn7dkeTi F SB%a o Sun � Lakes Village 261 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 32 Hemet Valley Mall to Mount San Jacinto College Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O Also serving: Hemet Hospital. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. 9d/1"0/4„e4, T San Jacinto & Esplanade ®Jam T a_ Y E Devonshire Hemet Valley Mall/Sears Florida Ave. Hemet Valley Center Acacia T Hemet Valley Mall m 79 ®® HEMET Saoecrest an Jacinto 6 Chamber of HS City Commerce Monte - Ha"Vista MS Main St. IT Mt. San Jacinto College ®® 74 ®® Mt. San Jacinto Comm College Ramona Expressway 7th St. Menlo City Hall Latha Acacia MS Mayberry Stetson Esplanade Stater Brothers Super Walmart Main St. North Mountain MS 7th St. SAN JACINTO Valley Wide Teen Center Devonshire . • •+ T San Jacinto & Latham Florida Ave. Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information cuml, Alternate Routing RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 27 33 Hemet - Sanderson to East Hemet Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. i O T Florida & Stanford m® Also serving: Hemet Valley Mall, Hemet mobile home parks. No service on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Florida & San Jacinto ®®®® T San Jacinto & Oakland ®®® 74 N Lyon Ave a 3 T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®®m 74 79 ®® San Jacinto St • Stanford St d' Dartmouth MS Dartmouth St EAST HEMET S Columbia St San Jacinto St o N Buena Vista St N State St W Oakland Ave Kirby St Hemet Valley Mall Simpson Senior Center 5 Gilbert St HEMET LL S Lyon Ave 0 N Gilmore St 3 Sanderson Ave • Sanderson Ave a 0 3 Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information © Medical Facility Hemet HS / / IbE S State St S Lyon Ave T Sanderson & Thornton ®m Super Walmai S Cawston Ave 28 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 35 Beaumont/Banning to Moreno Valley Mall Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables Also serving: Walmart, Kmart, City Hall, Riverside County Regional Medical Center. No service subject to change. on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. IO N e�` Moreno�Q� Valley Mall T Moreno Valley Mall m 1 BEAUMONT/ BANNING '9 a �9s T Sun Lakes Blvd. ®® PassTransit Super Target Stoneridge 4, Shopping Center �i1d ..Q 2 60 T `0. Senior Center T Senior Center 19 4 60 Auto Mall Super Walmart yo 3 T CRMC a5` dye' � c .toe,? �a T RCRMC MORENO VALLEY 20 6 Kmart T sOb NV" SJO\Sun Lakes Village T Walmart PassTransit ®El Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information m Eastbound Only RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 29 40 Lake Elsinore to Sun City Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. ION Also serving: Lake Elsinore, Quail Valley, Canyon Lake, Sun City. No service on Weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Sun City - StaterNons m 40 61 7 StaterNons Center Bradley Rd Evans Senior s Sun City Center o Plaza a 3 SUN CITY Quail Valley Fire Station z Goetz Rd QUAIL VALLEY «Berea MENIFEE Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information Railroad Canyon Rd CANYON Main LAKE Gate C Z City LAKE ELSINORL Qe Walmart s v 0 v Albertson 30 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 47 Mead Valley Community Center to Moreno Valley College and RCRMC Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O Also serving: Rancho Verde High School, RCC MoVal, Riverside County Regional Medical Center. No service on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. MEAD VALLEY Oakxrood Rider St Mead Valley Community Center T Cajalco Rd & Clark St. ®m is T Lala Cajalco Rd. T RCRMC 20 41 MORENO VALLEY T Moreno Valley College 18 19 20 41 T Perris & Ramona Expy m 19 Ross/Lowers/ Ramona Starcrest Ex Val Verde H.S_ yy Starcrest_6- %i o 2 T Morgan St • Ross T Ross/Lowe's/Starcrest 19 41 RCRMC 1FK Dr Gentian Ave T • 7 6 Cactus Vista Del Lago H.S. • 3 Iris Ave Krameria Lasselle & Via De Anza Via De Anza Rider St h 4," 4 T 5 Moreno Valley College Rancho Verde H.S. PERRIS Legend I Map not to scale tO Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 31 42 Routing and timetables subject to change. IO San Jacinto - Hemet Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: San Jacinto, Soboba Springs MHE, Caravana ML, San Jacinto TP,Tradewinds ML, Grandview MHP, Las Casitas MHP, El Rancho MHE, Valley Hi MHP. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information Ramona Expy f, SAN f 1ACINTO 2 ooa `O fdldf','a A-J�/rO City < 4 Hall • • San Jacinto Community Center (*- g 5� 1� �P /4, fd P Soboba Rd Soboba Casino 6 0 • ©- Soboba Springs Mobile Home Estates Mobile Home Parks T San Jacinto & Esplanade >�Je ®m 42.!t 1r a� 6° 74 T CY�,oS 3 S f Super °•) Walmart dr40 r� 96e c z HEMET Hemet Valley Mall T. T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®® m 79 ®® 42 32 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 49 Riverside Downtown Terminal to Country Village Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables Also serving: Riverside, Rubidoux, Pedley. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, subject to change. Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. ION z 0 0 CC CC T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®®m I®16® 29 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 RUBIDOUX 1alleyRoy •S�QO Q z Q Jump '4,1, H Aquadic Park 4 z Camino Real Patriot W H.S. • Country Village & Marlay Omnitrans Count T �V yVillage Rd T Country Gbemet a Village a m 2 3 Pyrite PecleyRd -)0 0 G�. 4 T Eddie Smith Senior Center Rubidoux Academy RIVERSIDE Riverside Downtown Terminal o�P *5 \•# T �5 • Mission & Rubidoux Feispar GLEN AVO N COUNTRY VILLAGE T Country Village 49 29 49 Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 33 so Jury Trolley Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O, N Also serving: Jury Remote Parking to 12th & Main, Riverside County Courthouse. Runs Monday — Thursday Only. No service on the following holidays and court closure days: New Year's Day, MLK Day, President's Day, Cesar Chavez Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Market & 14th 0®® 11th St. 50 Tequesquite Eden Lutheran Church Parking Lot 0 m` United Methodist Church m 14th Street Riverside O Community Hospital Rice Calvary Presbyterian Church Parking Lot (nearest stop 14th & Magnolia) Terracina Ramona City Hall 10th St. 1 12th St. Riverside County Court House County Administrative Hall of Center Justice T 14th & Magnolia 0®® 50 Physical Therapy & Sports Clinic Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information O Medical Facility O Trolley Stops RIVERSIDE RCC T Magnolia &Terracina 0®® 50 34I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 51 Routing and timetables subject to change. O Crest Cruiser UCR - Canyon Crest Towne Centre Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. RUNS ON UCR ACADEMIC DAYS ONLY. SERVICE WILL END JUNE 8, 2012 AND WILL RESUME SEPTEMBER 24, 2012. T University Village& Village Towers Apts 0 16 IRIR Hi hlander Shuttle T Chicago & University 0® EMIRIR 16 7 • T • m ssarSC T Post Office Village Towers Apartments lIniversitYAv- MIKBIvci 1 T • • T University Village LniversitYAv. T UCR �prUceft 2 T Iowa & Blaine 10 8/a/ne UCR T • 0 16 FM 204 Highlander Shuttle T Canyon Crest &MLK (Lot 30) IR 208 210 16 T 4 RIVERSIDE T Chicago & Central EMIR Cen Legend I Map not to scale 0 Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information Q Trolley Stops ra, 6 a A • • Lot Crest Dr. • MLKBIv, Monte vista pia Pueblo 3 • • V UCR T Canyon Crest & Central IRIR 16 Canyon Crest Towne Centre . l 0 RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 135 53 Bear Runner UCR - Canyon Crest Towne Centre Information Center (951)565.5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O • • Q c, r Vassar RUNS ON UCR ACADEMIC DAYS ONLY. Runs Monday - Thrusday only. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Does not run Nov.11, 24-25, Dec.12-30, Jan. 16. SERVICE IS PROPOSED TO END JUNE 7, 2012. Post Office T Grand Marc EMIR Hi hlander Shuttle lversitY4v M1/(841 Q ;c Grand Marc 6 • T University Village • 3 ilniversityAv T UCR 0 16 EM IR 204 Hihlander Shuttle T Canyon Crest & MLK (Lot 30) EMIR 16 208 T 4 210 RIVERSIDE Central Legend I Map not to scale Q Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information 0 Trolley Stops • 5 Crest Dr. 41/(8/vd Stonehaven 8/ame$t Apts. Riverside Sports Center UCR T 7 0 _c Lot 24 a • Science Library Life Science Eucalyptu 3 Lot 6 60 T Canyon Crest & Central EMIR • 16 Canyon Crest Towne Centre 0 i fr 9 1 Q"°�S�a �SA 0 36I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Commerce St. Metrolink Parking Lot to County Administrative Center EVERYONE RIDES FREE No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Routing and timetables subject to change. Ira T County Administration Bldg ®® 54 20 Riverside County Administrative Center /gost 71hst METROLINK Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station RIVERSIDE hiss/• o��0 1 n4ke J Commerce St Metrolink Parking Lot/' m Q �r or �thst Legend I Map not to scale Q Stops Q Transfer to other RTA Routes 54 Monday through Thursday Only Hours of Operation Service Frequency 6:30 a.m. to 8:35 a.m. 11:30 a.m. to 1:37 p.m. 4:30 p.m. to 6:37 p.m. Every 15 minutes RTA RIDE GUIDE- MAY 13, 2012 137 55 Temecula Trolley EVERYONE RIDES FREE Information Center (951)565-5002 web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O Also serving: Chaparral High School,Ysabel Barnett Elementary School, Abbott, Promenade Mall, Harveston and County Center Drive. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. SERVICE WILL NOT OPERATE JUNE 18, 2012 AND WILL RESUME AUGUST 12, 2012. TEMECULA'P O'-D • T Equity Dr & Ynez Rd ®m® Ell 79 61 T County Center ® 24 III - �� �›- Ysabel Q� Barnett E.S. � a z a,17 9ry Equity Dr > C �Pe�C 61 79 NatvestorOt �Q reS o oe5\:64 5r "Township m m Chaparral The Promenade ` at Temecula •,Nl 9ry Palm Plaza Shopping Center Extended Stay America Ove��apdQ( Legend I Map not to scale Q Trolley Stops O Transfer to other RTA Routes Best Abbott Western Rustic Glen Dr 4sRd T Promenade Mall at P.F. Chang's ® 79 202 206 208 Ell Overland Dr M aot 9 P wy d� a 55 Temecula Trolley Weekday Service Only Hours of Operation 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. Service Frequency Every 15 minutes 2:30 p.m. to 4:15 p.m. Every 15 minutes 38 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 61 Sun City - Menifee - Murrieta - Temecula Information Center (951)565.5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O Also serving: Sun City Center, Loma Linda Medical Building. No service on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Chambers Ave BI d SUN CITY T Cherry Hills & Bradley I® 40 61 74 208 5 7 i 6 City Hall Newport Rd Senior Center a T MSJ 61 Countryside Marketplace O • MSJC C Menifee Menifee 74 Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility Ad/7MURRIETA o �d�fl ec Pa SOS ' �9�0` �JaS�' x 96eNO T Equity Dr &Ynez Rd I® 24 I® 79 61 2 Haun Rd Medical Facility Newport Rd La Piedra Keller Linnel 4 n ( Scott Rd 'Oo • 3 Clinton Keith T ° �r•`e� ospa �pSP\a� Domenigoni Pkwy MENIFEE Loma Linda Medical Center r Hancock & Los Alamos Rancho Springs Medical Center Murrieta Hot Springs Rd 61 9y d 90, ✓ PCounryry P ' • Tenter Dr °k 9�P TEMECULA County Services 11 T ■ s ,12 Promenade Mall Murrieta Hot Springs Rd T County Center I® 24 61 79 ,,Nee RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 39 74 San Jacinto - Hemet - Sun City - Perris Information (enter (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Mt. San Jacinto College 7 T a� Also serving: Hemet Valley Mall. No service on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Super Walmart T s San Jacinto a 3 0 State E . SAN JACINTO T Mt. San Jacinto College ®® 74 ®® ) Westbound only — Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Medical Facility T 4th & Wilkerson m 30 PERRIS Wilkerson 411 Perris CS 2 1i Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 Perris Station Transit Center Lyon T San Jacinto & Esplanade ®00 HEMET e Eastbound y Gilmore 6 T Kirby T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®®m m 79 EMI tin Hemet Valley Mall Sanderson ro Super Walmart a T T Sanderson & Thornton ®m 79 West Valley High School Warren T 1 5 WINCHESTER Winchester T Simpson &Winchester m 79 MENII L L Sun City Center, Chamber of Commerce, Library, Post Office 3 Sun City SUN CITY T Perris Station Transit Center i®® 19 30 74 208 T x T Antelope» Bradley T MSJC, Menifee m 61 o� Menifee T 4 3 Z T Cherry Hills & Bradley ® 40 61 m 208 Mt. San Jacinto College/ Menifee 40 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 79 Hemet -Winchester - Temecula Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. O Also serving: Hemet Valley Mall. No service on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Simpson & Winchester m 79 T Winchester & Simpson Winchester& Pourroy/Whispering Heights WINCHESTER T Equity Dr&YnezRd ® 24 Ei 61 79 MURRIETA 4, -toy T County Center Drive p'og,„ ®m® 61 79 Chaparral HS ac • County ‘-• • Center Dr o�c E4utty„ T �ecC �T 3 79 4 0 15 Rancho California' Temecula : Moreno 6t11Stage Stop ; 6th & Front 6th » main 2tA 5 T Promenade Mall T 8 7 T Sanderson & Thornton Si 74 79 son Super • Walmart • Mustang Benton Auld Magdas Coloradas French Valley Tt'oca�A�rport � y `. Nicolas West Valley High School T Nicolas & Winchester 79 T 74 Devonshire Florida Hemet • Valley Mall : HEMET • T Hemet Valley Mall m®®®m m 79 ®® FRENCH V A I I F y 6 Southwest Justice Center Sheriff Station T Promenade Mall at P.F. Chang's ® 79 202 206 208 Ell T r AA r C U 1 A T Temecula Stage Stop 24 79 Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 41 c Routing and timetables subject to change. Murrieta - Temecula - Oceanside Transit Center $3.00GEN. FARE EACH WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Walmart Ell 202 206 MURRIETA O RIVERSIDE COUNTY Murrieta Hotsprings c T 5 Walmart TEMECULA T Promenade Mall at P.F. Chang's ® 79 202 20 \e`�e5�e 6 z08 ® uabst ar Rancho California» SAN DIEGO COUNTY �¢1 Sao �L atiG94 Town�ntr 9P e l T Town Center North 202 NCTD Mission Seal OCEANSIDE Oceanside Transit Center taI T 76 z, 0 T Oceanside Transit Center 202 Coaster NCTD Gre hound Amtrak California The Sprinter/Metrolink COMMUL��� 76 Le,a0, M 'a T 3 a= s -s r� N o Promenade Mall Park -And -Ride Lot 19 "Nessie Burger Lot" FALLBROOK Legend I Maps not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information 0 Stop Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. �,Wi-Fi , // EQUIPPED / 6.4/ rapj...- Subject to interruptions 42 I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Routing and timetables subject to change. O> Riverside - Montclair Transcenter $3.0vn GEN. FARE EACH WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Down own Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 T Rive s'de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®®m ® 16 ®® 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 Downtown • Terminal = M Mission Blvd Fairmount Park 29 49 216 RIVERSIDE Country Village & Granite Hills Park- Market St s And - Ride c « Iowa RIVERSIVE UCR Extension T 1 — anyon Crest T UCR 0 16 El 204 Hi r hlander Shuttle COMMUL��� s Montclair Transcenter 204 Foothill Transit Omnitrans 65, 66, 67, 68, 80 rCLAIR Y 0 V 0 z Central 0 m z = m z Miliken Mor\tevksta Southbound Montclair Plaza TROLINK Montclair Transcenter l/EY EARIO Ontario Mills Mall T Ontario Mills Mall Mulberry Stop NB at Country Village Rd & Country Club Dr. Omnitrans 61 Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. Legend I Maps not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information EQUIPPED fame" Subject to interruptions RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 143 Temecula - Murrieta - Lake Elsinore - Corona Metrolink $3.0yGEN. FARE EACH WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS Routing and timetables subject to change. Hidden Valley Pkwy W. Grand • 4 I METROLINK Corona Transit Center No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. CORONA T Corona Transit Center 206 216 Corona Transit Center Boarding Diagram 'Page 34 Corona Crusier Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. 11 / ,Wi-Fi /0/�/EQUIPPED t eIle/ 'lbw" -Subject to interruptions LAKE ELSINORE.. T Outlet Center El 8 206 \S MURRIETA Murrieta"°.` d� o� Legend I Maps not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information COMMUL��� •2 0 Lake Elsinore Outlet Center Springs Rd . Walmart i.`oche ° d d TEMECULA Promenade Mall T Promenade Mall at P.F. Chang's ® 79 202 206 208 1161 T 1 44I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Temecula - Murrieta - Sun City - Perris - Moreno Valley - Downtown Terminal $ 3.00GEN. FARE EACH WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS Riverside Downtown Terminal UCR Lot 30 8• 6 • 7 T Rivers de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®® ® 16 El MLK Blvd Riverside - • "'"""K Downtown Metrolink Station 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 RIVERSIDI g Riverside - DowntownMetrolinkStation 0 16 208 210 Amtrak T Perris Station Transit Center ®m 30 74 29 liEl 14 49 216 Also serving: Riverside City Hall and County Administration Building. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Liverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram l Page 32 CommuterLink Downtown Riverside Routing 'Page 35 Moreno Valley Mall San Jacinto Perris Station Transit Center g Moreno Valley Mall 16 18 19 208 210 PERRIS «NB 4th 5I3 Perris station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 Legend I Maps not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information can Alternate Routing a MORENO VALLEY Routing and timetables P subject to change. SOP kNir McCall 5 SUN CITY _� 3 T Cherry Hills . T Cherry Hills & Bradley m 40 61 74 208 MURRIETA T Los Alamos & Whitewood 208 Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. COMMU,TIE,5. T Promenade Mall at P.F. Chang's ® 79 202 206 208 TEMECULA For Metrolink information, to go metrolinktrains.com or call 800-371-5465. MENIFEE i -Fi /��%/%� EQUIPPED rj/� Subject to interruptions Los Alamos \2 o, & Whitewood P�a�a re5`�`0 Promenade Mall RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 145 210 ION Routing and timetables subject to change. Banning - Beaumont - Moreno Valley - Riverside Metrolink $3.OvGEN. FARE EACH WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINN PASS Also serving: Riverside City Hall, County Admin. Building. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. B Ramsey & Sunset ' BANNING Stagecoach Plaza Shopping Center EAU mnr47 to Beaumont City Hall W Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. CALIMES" Legend I Maps not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Alternate Routing REDLANDS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY T Riverside Downtown Terminal 15 16 22 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 RIVERSIDE COUNTY RIVERSIDE Riverside • Downtown Terminal Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 CommuterLink Downtown Riverside Routing I Page 35 m Perris Blvd R Nason & Fir • • 210 Redlands Blvd • MORENO • Super VALLEY Target Eucalyptus Fir loop Nason St T Moreno Valley Mall m Moreno Valley Mall Frederick St Day St Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station T Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station 0 16 208 210 liEl Amtrak COMMUTER 46I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 13:lil_ Hemet - San Jacinto - Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station - Downtown Terminal O, N Routing and timetables subject to change. $3.00:MT FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS Also serving: Riverside City Hall and Riverside County Administration Building, M51C. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Downtown Terminal RIVERSID 4,r EIROIINK . Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station T Perris Station Transit Center ®® 30 m 19 208 • 3 Perris Station Transit Center Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 i —Fi *0/%e EQUIPPED %to, subject to interruptions COMMUL��� Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 CommuterLink Downtown Riverside Routing I Page 35 UCR Lot 30 T Rivers de Downtown Terminal p10®® I® 16 El 29 14 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 • Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station 0 16 208 210 Amtrak r ,� MORENO VALLEY PERRI ROUTE MAY BE DEVIATED DUE TO TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Legend I Maps not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 0 Additional Stops 74 Hemet Transit Depot T Mt. San Jacinto College ®® 74 ®® SAN JACINTO T Hemet Valley Mall m®®® m 79 ®® ' a 9`e Hemet Jlalley Mall •4\gok • tisFT ,a 7/ qD° 9,9,9�N , 42 HEMET Spa Mt San Jacinto College • ldf�dA F d� P • 1 RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 147 216 Heim Ave Meats Ave @ Chestnut Riverside Downtown Terminal to Village at Orange $3.00'114%1 FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS © = Stop © @ Katella T Village at Orange Also serving: Riverside, The Galleria at Tyler, Corona, and Village at Orange, Orange County. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. West Portion of 216 Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. Routing and timetables subject to change. 0 �r O/RANGE: Village at Orange East Portion of 216 T Corona Transit Center © 206 216 Corona Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 34 d r, )_ i CORONA Routing and timetables subject to change. Corona Crusier Corona Transit Center Continued below > Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 32 T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®®m ®®® 216 CORONA < Continued above T Rivers'deDowntown Terminal 0 10 ®®0 ® 16 ®® 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 tRIV Galleria at Tyler 29 49 216 T Market SIDE 91 10000000000001 Riverside Downtown Terminal 5 a� G 1 Legend I Map not to scale Fi EQUIPPED / Subject to interruptions COMMUTER O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information PR Park -And -Ride OCTA passes are only accepted on Route 216 in Orange County and have the value of a base fare ($1.50 for General/Youth and 70 cents for Senior/Disabled customers). 48 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 217 San Jacinto - Hemet - Temecula - Escondido GEN. FARE $3.v0 EACH WAY O Routing and timetables subject to change. Also serving: MSJC. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Legend I Maps not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information 0 Additional Stops MURRIET" 1s •2 ©Y 3 • County Center Drive Promenade 79 T Mt. San Jacinto College Hemet Valley Mall ®®®® ®® 74 79 �a 42 a a Thornton© Domeniyoni Pkwy .00 Mt. San Jacinto College a Hemet ,;, • . Valley • Mall Devonshire T 4 orida Esplande Lathan) 0 w .0 0 a INSET MAP ARE4 HEMET ISET MAP Y OJ Devonshire Hemet Valley Mall Hemet Transit Depot Florida Ave Promenade Mall at P.F. Chang's ® 79 202 206 208 MEI Mall T Equity Dr&YnezRd ®m® 79 61 ESCONDIDO 0 t TEMECULA Latham ROUTE MAY BE DEVIATED DUE TO TRAFFIC CONDITIONS T Escondido Transit Center NCTD The Sprinter Escondido City Hall Escondido Transit Center COMMUTER RTA RIDE GUIDE - MAY 13, 2012 49 794/ 794A La Sierra Metrolink or Canyon Community Church - South Coast Metro $4.50 wAY Routing and timetables subject to change. ION La Sierra Metrolink Station Route operated by OCTA. Also serving: Canyon Community Church Park and Ride and Hutton Centre. Runs Weekdays only. No service on: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. RIVERSIDE 15 Canyon Community Church Main Park and Ride INAHEIM ORANGE Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® 794A connection from Corona SANTA ANA Hutton Centre IRVINE South Coast Metro 50 1 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY APPENDIX B: SERVICE STANDARDS AND WARRANTS SERVICE STANDARDS WARRANTS Adopted January 2009 Revised May 2011 I. Purpose Service standards are resourceful for the planning and operation of an agency as it provides the foundation for route design and resource management. RTA recognizes the importance of evaluating its services and has conducted an extensive study on how its own service standards will be used through the use of reports and studies conducted by leading transportation research programs and other transit agencies. One of the most prominent transportation research bodies is the Transit Research Board (TRB). The TRB is a leader of transportation research and innovation. It is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council which is a private, nonprofit institution that is the principal operating agency of the National Academies in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. Among the many research programs that TRB administers are those funded by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) such as The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). FTA provides TCRP approximately $8 million annually to study operating problems and address them with approaches to help meet the demands placed on public transit systems. The results of this program have produced numerous studies and findings that are highly regarded and used in the transit industry, and are incorporated into RTA's Design Standards and Warrants. In June 2007, the Board accepted the Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) as a guiding document for service enhancements over the course of the next five to ten years. Among the strategies and recommendations included in the COA's Service Improvement Plan are "Service Standards" (Section 4.5). The service standards provided in the COA outline the recommended minimum levels of providing public transit with respect to design characteristics such as route structure, coverage, span of service, and on -time performance. Since the acceptance of the COA, service has been measured against the standards and was formerly adopted by the Board of Directors in January 2009. The service standards in the COA are based primarily on peer comparisons and stakeholder consultation along with the experiences of professional staff. However, while most standards are applicable others needed to be modified to reflect the demographics and characteristics in western Riverside County. As the transit agency with the second largest service area in the nation, it is necessary to have standards and warrants that better reflect the demographics and characteristics in western Riverside County, namely the differences in service levels for regional, local, rural, and express bus service which are not common to most transit operators and are unique to the region. Service standards are also used to evaluate numerous requests and proposals for service modifications that are received from a variety of sources including customers, employees, transit professionals and technical resources. With standards in place, a criterion is used to measure how and when service modifications will take effect. New 1 service warrants are also necessary for the design and implementation of new routes because it provides a rationale by which new services can be justified. Service standards and warrants, sometimes known as design standards and guidelines at other transit agencies, is different and independent of Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) Productivity Improvement Program (PIP). While PIP is an effective tool in the measurement of performance, its primary purpose is to determine financial viability of service. There are eight measures in the PIP, but there are two bellwethers of change that are more closely monitored, which are Farebox Recovery and Passengers per Revenue Hour. These are the primary measurements for determining service performance based on the PIP standards. Farebox recovery is the only mandatory target. For the other targets, the Agency must meet or exceed four of the remaining seven to continue receiving Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding as a transit commission requirement. The mandatory target, farebox recovery, is mandated by the State of California and requires that a transit agency maintain a minimum threshold to continue receipt of Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds. The farebox recovery ratio is a blended percentage based on a requirement for urbanized transit service to maintain a farebox recovery of 20 percent and rural transit service to maintain a farebox recovery of 10 percent. Each PIP target is updated annually with RTA's Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). In addition to these factors, service change recommendations are based on analysis inclusive of public comments, ridership data and operational characteristics. Productivity Improvement Program 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio Mandatory 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour 2. Subsidy Per Passenger 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile 4. Subsidy Per Hour 5. Subsidy Per Mile 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile Meet 4 out of 7 2 II. Service Standards There are several factors that are typically considered when objectively measuring service performance. These factors in addition to the PIP help in the determination of whether service is effective at meeting the common needs of the community. A. Population Density The level of service to provide is determined by the number of people to serve in a particular area. Population density can be measured in miles, by zip code, census zone, neighborhoods or any number of logical factors. Typically density is measured in the number of people per square mile since FTA recognizes coverage based on distance from service in miles. Density is determined in two fundamental ways-- number people housed per square mile or the number of employees per square mile. RTA staff works with city and county planners to estimate current and future density to properly plan for future public transportation access. A typical standard of route design is such that 85% of all residences, places of work, secondary and post secondary schools, shopping centers, and public facilities in the RTA urban transit service area are within a walking distance of 1,500ft. of a bus stop during the daytime Monday through Saturday. Area % of Fixed Route Distance Urban Non -Urban 85% 100% 1500 ft Undefined Western Riverside County is comprised of a highly diverse transit market. However, less than two percent of the 1.7 million service area population comprises the ridership of RTA. Further, when measured by census tract, about 23 percent of the over 2,500 square miles is designated by the Bureau of Census as urbanized area, or a "UZA" within western Riverside County. A large UZA consists of a population over 200,000 and in RTA's service area, the greater Riverside area qualifies. All small UZA's consist of a population over 50,000. The Hemet/San Jacinto area qualifies as a small UZA. When evaluating the density of an area the demand for service is also considered. Some areas have significant density but have little service demand. Automobile centric and higher income communities are but a few examples of areas that may have sufficient density with little demand for public transit. 3 B. Route Classifications Route Classifications help to define the type of service to operate based on the density of the area in which the service is routed. RTA service can be classified into four fixed route categories — regional, local, rural and express. Complementary to the fixed route service is paratransit service, also known as Dial -a -Ride. Regional route service is the backbone of the network as it operates between metropolitan areas on primary corridors and may utilize the freeway system to travel between communities. It is not uncommon for regional service to travel through non -urban areas to link two urban areas. Within a metropolitan area stops are spaced at urban intervals (based on the 1/4 mile walking distance of determining stop locations, see D. Bus Stop Spacing), which for RTA these routes serve a secondary purpose of transporting passengers locally. Local routes supplement regional routes by circulating through various neighborhoods and serving secondary corridors. A local route also serves as feeder routes to regional and express routes and transports customers within a community on shorter trips. Bus stop spacing is at urban service intervals. An exclusive Rural route serves as lifeline service that feeds regional service. The service is for the most part limited in operation and serves secondary roadways within non -urbanized areas. Given the growth of western Riverside County, rural route service is primarily limited to portions of Regional route service and areas between cities. Express routes provide limited stop service designed to transport commuters to and from employment sites and provide connections to service outside western Riverside County. Labeled as CommuterLink, these buses use the freeway system to provide faster service. Trolley routes and Special service are designed to meet the needs of a specific market or community and often are designed as a circulator to serve a targeted group with common travel patterns. Dial -A -Ride (paratransit) service complements fixed route service for customers who are physically challenged and are unable to navigate their way to a bus stop. DAR service is offered curb to curb within three-quarters of a mile of fixed -route service, excluding express routes. Passengers eligible for the service are seniors and those qualified under the ADA law. 4 When used effectively route classifications provide the community with a balanced service structure. The following table highlights the classification of each fixed -route: Directly Operated Routes 1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 27 29 41 49 216 206 Regional Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Regional Regional Local Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Express Express Contract Operated Routes 3 7 8 23 24 30 31 32 33 35 40 41 42 50 51 53 55 61 74 79 202 204 208 210 212 217 Local Local Local Local Local Local Rural' Local Local Regional Rural' Regional Local Trolley Trolley Trolley Trolley Regional Regional Regional Express Express Express Express Express Express Rural areas are those with less than 50,000 in population. C. Span of Service The span of service, the hours of operation, refers to the start and end time of a route. Depending on the route structure (i.e., regional, local, rural, express), the span of service will vary depending on the demand in the community. In urbanized areas, bus service is expected to start earlier and end later in the day; whereas, for local and rural routes, the demand for earlier and later service may 5 not be present. The days of operation also contribute to when bus service will be provided. In RTA's system, all fixed -routes are proposed to operate weekdays from at least 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and, depending on the density, can start as early as 4:00 a.m. and stay in service until 10:30 p.m. on weekdays under ideal times. Under the current economic conditions and to continue to provide customers with adequate service, the service hours for local routes are proposed to be curtailed. a. Weekday service standards for Locals: Local- Direct services are recommended to start between the hours of 4:30 a.m. to 6:30 a.m. and end between the hours of 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; Local — Contract services are recommended to start between the hours of 5:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. b. Saturday service standards for Locals: Local- Direct services are recommended to start between the hours of 5:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. and end between the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.; Local — Contract services are recommended to start between the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. c. Sunday service standards for Locals: Local — Direct service is recommended to start between the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:00pm to 8:00 p.m.; Local — Contract services are recommended to start between the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and end between the hours of 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Route Classification Weekday Start Range End Range Saturday Start Range End Range Sunday Start Range End Range Local - Direct Local - Contract Regional - Direct Regional - Contract Rural Express Trolley or Special BRT Dial -A -Ride 4:30 AM - 6:30 AM 5:30 AM - 7:30 AM 4:00 AM - 6:00 AM 5:00 AM - 7:00 AM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 8:00 PM - 10:00 PM 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM 8:30 PM - 10:30 PM 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM 5:30 AM - 7:30 AM 6:30 AM - 8:30 AM 5:00 AM - 7:00 AM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM 6:30 AM - 8:30 AM 6:30 AM - 8:30 AM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM 5:30 PM - 7:30 PM 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM Peak Hours Not Applicable Not Applicable Varies based on targeted market or community 4:00 AM 10:00 PM 5:00 AM 9:00 PM 5:00 AM 9:00 PM Based on hours of fixed -routes, excluding Express and BRT 6 Ridership on weekdays accounts for the majority of boarding activities and is mainly attributed to riders who utilize public transit for employment purposes. On weekends, the hours of service is reduced as demand is lower resulting from most people having a traditional weekday work schedule. For Regional routes such as RTA's Route 1 or 49, the service standard recommendations are as follows: a. Weekday service standards for Regionals: Regional- Direct services are recommended to start between the hours of 4:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 8:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.; Regional — Contract services are recommended to start between the hours of 5:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. b. Saturday service standards for Regionals: Regional- Direct services are recommended to start between the hours of 5:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.; Regional — Contract services are recommended to start between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. c. Sunday service standards for Regionals: Regional — Direct service is recommended to start between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.; Regional — Contract services are recommended to start between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Rural routes, primarily lifeline routes, are recommended to start between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and end between the hours of 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Rural areas those with less than 50,000 in population. Express routes operate during peak hours in the morning and evening to accommodate commuters. The hours of operation are adjusted based on peak direction commute patterns to meet commuter trains and regional employment centers start and end times. Ridership can necessitate modifications to the peak hours in order to accommodate additional service demand, such as seasonal weekday and weekend trips or overflow capacities. Trolley and Special routes operate based on the customer market base, whether it is aimed at transporting commuters or students and its days of operation may also vary depending on whether the demand for service is seasonal. Dial -A -Ride service coincides with the hours of fixed -route service. 7 D. Bus Stop Spacing Route coverage refers to the spacing distance between adjoining routes. This criterion is used to guide spacing between bus stops to maximize patron accessibility to transit service within the resources available. Depending on the population density, bus stop spacing in RTA urbanized areas usually averages about 1,500 ft. (.28 miles) to 2,500 ft. (.47 miles). As service approaches more suburban and rural areas, bus stop spacing may be limited to locations with accessible curb and gutters and sidewalks suitable for compliance with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). For express routes that travel longer distances, the number of bus stops will be limited and are located in cities and communities that will attract the greatest number of commuters traveling in the same direction. Density Characteristics Bus Stop Spacing Very High- Over 5,000 persons per sq mile (e.g., activity centers such as hospitals and universities) Density = 16-30 units/acre Every 1/8 mile to '4 mile High- 4,000 to 5,000 persons per sq mile (e.g., apartments, senior housing, offices, and commercial centers) Density = 8-15 units/acre Every % mile Medium- 2,000 to 4,000 persons per sq mile Density = 5-7 units/acre Every %mile to %mile Low or Rural- Less than 2,000 persons per sq mile Density = 1-4 units/acre Every 'A mile to 1 mile or more if outside development area Bus stop spacing has an impact on average speed of service. The more stops a bus makes the lower the average speed of travel. E. On -Time Performance On -time performance, also known as schedule adherence reporting, is the deviation of actual arrival and departure time from the timetable or schedule. On - time performance standards vary in the industry depending on the size of the transit operator, generally the larger the size of operations the more stringent the standard. (TCRP, 1995) Other factors such as density and route distances are also considered in setting an on -time standard. RTA is considered a medium size operator and requires that no bus shall leave a time point early, and should arrive at a time point no later than 6 minutes after the scheduled arrival time. This 6 minute window is appropriate for RTA's service area due to the average distance traveled by each route and the combined rural and urban areas. 8 Transit agencies typically set a standard in percentages of on -time arrivals that they desire to achieve as a measure of good service quality. Among medium size transit systems the typical desired level of on -time performances is between 80 to 95 percent. One theory in setting standards is to set targets. A desired standard may not be achievable within the first year or so given the starting point of the current conditions. An example is if on -time performance is 62 percent, achieving a standard of 90 percent maybe difficult within 12 months of operations without significant investment of resources. Setting a target below the standard, say of 80 percent, would act as a way to benchmark service improvements over the course of a 12 month period. To make gains towards improving on -time performance, agencies establish targets that demonstrate continuous improvements as they work toward standards. On -Time Performance Target On -Time 0 to 6 minutes Standard 90% Target 85% With the use of ITS software on -time performance is collected daily and measured monthly for all directly operated routes. Contracted service on -time performance is measured by supervisor surveys randomly each week. The average number of checks is 28.5 per day. Given the two different ways of collecting on -time performance data and blending the two types of operations, a standard of 85 percent or above is believed achievable. Using the theory of setting targets to reach a goal, the standard of 90 percent could be set with a first year target of achieving over 85 percent schedule adherence. Should the on -time performance of a specific route fall below the target of 85%, a schedule adherence analysis will be conducted to improve the running time. F. Headways Headway, also known as frequency, is the maximum interval between each scheduled fixed route bus (e.g., the bus runs every 30 minutes). Headways are essential to the quality of service. Studies such as RTA's COA have found that higher frequency headways correlate to higher ridership. However, this conventional theory is true if demand is supported by high density. In RTA's system, headways range anywhere from every 20 minutes to every 120 minutes, depending on the density and demand for service. As services are routed away from urbanized areas, maximum intervals are higher. 9 Clock -face schedules are an attribute of consistent headways and are intervals of 20 minute increments for the purpose of this analysis. RTA's COA study recommends that headways on most routes in the urban area be at intervals of at least 15 minutes. Based on financial and resource constraints, staff finds a closer match for headways to be at intervals of 20/40/60 minutes for Local route service. This means that all route schedules would operate at 20, 40, or 60 minutes. Regional service headways currently expand to every 100 minutes. Clock -face schedules can be a powerful marketing tool as the customer can depend on service coming at specific time intervals. Effort is given to timing transfers based on headway intervals. Route Class Freq in 20 min increments Target Local - Direct Local - Contract Regional Rural Express Trolley/Special BRT Dial -A -Ride 40/60 40/60 20/40/60 60-120 Varies Varies 10-15 N/A 40-70 60-90 20-100 60-120 Varies Varies N/A N/A G. Transfer Wait Time Transfer wait time is the time a customer has to wait for another bus route to arrive at a transfer point. The COA proposes that at timed transfer points, buses should be scheduled so that the wait time is not longer than 5 minutes for arriving buses or Metrolink trains. However, to more closely match the geographic and demographic demands of the system, timed transfers can vary depending on the distance and frequency of a route. In more urbanized areas such as downtown Riverside, transfer wait times will not be longer than approximately 20 minutes. However, in smaller urbanized and even in rural areas, the transfer wait time can reach up to 30 to 45 minutes depending on the frequencies of the routes in the area. For a regional route, RTA expects that transfer wait times should not exceed 20 minutes. For local and rural routes, transfer wait times should not exceed 30 to 45 minutes. For an express route, which is usually timed to train transfers, transfer wait time should not exceed 20 to 30 minutes. H. Load Factor The maximum vehicle loadings refer to the maximum number of passengers per bus, including standees. Depending on the bus, the maximum number of 10 passengers should not exceed 150% of the seating capacity or the legal weight limit of the bus. Load factors are based on the type of vehicle and service route classification type. RTA's fixed -route fleet consists of six types of vehicles each having varying standee limitations. The only service which should not exceed the seated capacity is on Dial -A -Ride vehicles. Bus Size/Route Max. Seated Classification Capacity Max. Standees 40-ft. (NABI) 30-ft. (Thomas) 29-ft. (Type VII) 27-ft. (E-Lo) 27-ft. (Trolley) 24-ft. (Type II) III. Productivity vs. Coverage Target 40 27 24 21 26/27 12 29 18 7 4 12/19 5 To help improve effectiveness and efficiency it is prudent to set a target for the productivity level of service to operate. In order to meet productivity requirements while continuing to provide coverage to areas that would not be serviced if performance were the only factor, peer agencies have adopted standards requiring 60 to 80 percent of their fixed route service to perform up to productivity factors and 20 to 40 percent of fixed route service operated as coverage routes to meet the standards. Currently overall RTA service is about 50/50 (productive/coverage). The service that exceeds performance standards enables the Agency to provide more effective and efficient operations in areas of need that do not meet performance standards. Given RTA's diverse service area, there are places that are being served based on the need to provide coverage. To maximize cost efficiency, a higher percentage of service should be designed to improve productivity and a smaller percentage of service designed based on coverage. With a greater percentage of service being productive affords the Agency the flexibility to sustain service based on coverage. The approved criterion for all new and existing service is for 60 percent to be productive and 40 percent to be based on coverage. This establishes the benchmark for productive service to meet mandatory farebox recovery. However, it also allows for new service to be implemented following TDA guidelines for exemption of inclusion and exclusion based on performance standards within the year the service was implemented and the following two fiscal years. This objective enables transit operators to maintain highly productive service and still meet the requirements of the Title VI Civil Rights Act of 1964. It is the policy of RTA to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so that no person shall be 11 excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of or be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. IV. New Service Warrants The Service Standards described herein are used as a measurement for the implementation of new service. PIP targets are updated annually and new service can be exempted from meeting the required criteria for up to two years. The performance of new service is evaluated during this initial period on whether or not it meets the Productivity or Coverage target. If a route fails to perform up to standards, it may be discontinued. 12 APPENDIX C: TITLE VI POLICY AND PROCEDURES RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY TITLE VI COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE (Approved 11/18/10) It is the policy of the Riverside Transit Agency, as a grant recipient of the Federal Transit Administration, to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 49 CFR, Part 21; related statutes and regulations to that end that no person shall be excluded from participation in or be denied benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, under any program or activity receiving financial assistance. Any complaint alleging that the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) has not complied with Title VI regulations may be reported through the RTA Customer Information Center at 1-800-800-7821. Any perceived discriminatory complaint will be handled by Human Resources. Human Resources Department will be responsible investigating the complaint and will request that it be followed -up in writing to the Chief Executive Officer, P.O. Box 59968, Riverside, CA 92517. The complainant may use the RTAs Title VI Complaint Form to submit their complaint, or if the form is not used, the written complaint must at a minimum, provide the following information: a) the specific act(s) of RTA's non-compliance in question; b) the date(s) of RTA's non-compliance in question; c) specify the reasons why the complaining party believes that RTA is not in compliance with the Title VI regulation(s) in question; d) the name and address of the complainant (and person discriminated against if different from complainant); and e) If applicable, the Title VI minority status of the complainant (or person discriminated against if different from complainant). f) Upon receipt of the written Title VI Complaint, the Chief Executive Officer will contact the Director of Human Resources to provide a summary of the complaint, and request an investigation of the complaint: The Director of HR will coordinate efforts into investigating the act(s) of non-compliance with Title VI regulations alleged in the complaint and preparing a written response. The written response will be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer within 10 business days from the date it is received by the Director of HR. Upon review of the written investigation submission and any independent investigation deemed appropriate conducted by the RTA, the Chief Executive Officer will either: a) render a decision which will be final, and advise all interested parties of this decision in writing; or b) at the sole election of the Chief Executive Officer, conduct an informal hearing at which the interested participating parties will be afforded an opportunity to present their respective position, including facts, documents, justification, and technical information in support thereof. • The parties may be, but are not required to be, represented by counsel at the informal hearing, which will not be subject to formal rules of evidence or procedures. • Following the informal hearing, the Chief Executive Officer will render a decision, which will be final, and advise all interested parties thereof in writing. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) TITLE VI COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE Parties dissatisfied with the final decision of the Riverside Transit Agency Chief Executive Officer, whether following review of the written submission or informal hearing, may submit their complaint to the FTA at the address below no later than 180 days after the date of the alleged discrimination, unless the time for filing is extended by FTA. Federal Transit Administration Office of Civil Rights Attn: Title VI Program Coordinator 400 7th Street SW Room 9100 Washington, DC 20590 COMPLAINT ACCEPTANCE Once a complaint has been accepted by FTA for investigation, FTA will notify the recipient or subrecipient that it has been subject to a Title VI complaint and ask the agency to respond in writing to the complainant's allegations. Once the complainant agrees to release the complaint to the recipient or subrecipient, FTA will provide the agency with the complaint. If the complainant does not agree to release the complaint to the recipient or subrecipient, FTA may choose to close the complaint. FTA strives to complete Title VI complaint investigation within 180 days of the date that FTA accepts the complaint for investigation. INVESTIGATION FTA will make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance review, report, complaint or any other information indicates a possible failure to comply with this part. The investigation will include, where appropriate, a review of the pertinent practices and policies of the recipient, the circumstances under which the possible noncompliance with this part occurred, and other factors relevant to a determination as to whether the recipient has failed to comply with Title VI. LETTERS OF FINDING AND RESOLUTION After the investigation has been completed FTA's Office of Civil Rights will transmit to the complainant and the grantee one of the following three letters based on its findings: a. A letter of resolution that explains the steps the recipient or subrecipient has taken or promises to take to come into compliance with Title VI. b. A letter of finding that is issued when the recipient or subrecipient is not found to be in noncompliance with Title VI. This letter will include an explanation of why the recipient or subrecipient was not found to be in non-compliance, and provide notification of the complainant's appeal rights. If applicable, the letter can include a list of procedural violations or concerns, which can put the recipient or subrecipient on notice that certain practices are questionable and that without corrective steps, a future violation finding is possible. c. A letter of finding that is issued when the recipient or subrecipient is found to be in noncompliance. This letter will include each violation referenced as to the applicable regulations, a brief description of proposed remedies, notice of the time limit on the conciliation process, the consequences of failure to achieve voluntary compliance, and an offer of assistance to the recipient or subrecipient in devising a remedial plan for compliance, if appropriate. APPEALS PROCESS The letters of finding and resolution will offer the complainant and the recipient or subrecipient the opportunity to provide additional information that would lead FTA to reconsider its conclusions. In general, FTA requests that the parties in the compliant provide this additional information within 60 days of the date the FTA letter of finding was transmitted. After reviewing this information, FTA's Office of Civil Rights will respond either by issuing a revised letter of resolution or finding to the appealing party, or by informing the appealing party that the original letter of resolution or finding remains in force. FTA strives to transmit these letters within 30 to 60 days of receiving the appeal. APPENDIX D: LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY (LEP) POLICY Riverside Transit Agency Limited English Proficiency Policy (Approved 4/23/09) Background: Executive Order 13166, "Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency," directs each Federal agency to develop and implement a system by which Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons can meaningfully access those services and published guidance for their respective funding recipients in order to assist them with their obligations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In response, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) published guidance requiring that DOT funding recipients take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of their programs and activities for LEP persons. I. Policy RTA is committed to taking reasonable steps to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful access to its services, including route information, telephone based customer service, instructional rider information, fare information, public meeting notices, applications for discounted fares and other customer -based materials. RTA shall base "meaningful access" on the following four factors provided in the DOT LEP Guidance document: 1. The number and proportion of LEP persons served or encountered in the eligible service population 2. The frequency with which LEP individuals come into contact with RTA's programs, activities and services 3. The nature and importance of the program, activity or service 4. The costs of implementation and the resources available II. Procedures 1. At each service change, RTA shall perform a Language Needs Assessment to determine the language demographics of its service area using one or both of the following methods: a. Use census data to identify the percentage of LEP persons by census tract. LEP persons will be defined as those who identified themselves in the census data as speaking English "less than well" or "not at all." b. Conduct a valid ridership survey to identify the percent of RTA riders that are LEP persons. 2. If the percentage of LEP persons in a particular census tract is significant or if the ridership survey shows a significant percentage of RTA's riders are LEP persons, RTA will identify the primary language(s) of those individuals and implement the following steps: a. All instructional and informational rider materials and passenger notices shall be translated into the identified language(s) and published in conjunction with the English versions. b. All public hearing notices shall be published in English in an English language newspaper and also published in the identified language(s) in newspapers that are published in the identified language(s), while following all requirements set forth in the RTA Public Hearing Policy. c. All public hearing notices shall contain the following verbiage in English and the identified language(s): Any Person who requires a translation into a language other than English in order to participate in this meeting should contact RTA at (951) 565- 5000, no fewer than two business days prior to this meeting to enable RTA to make reasonable arrangements to assure a translator at this meeting. d. The RTA Customer Information Center (CIC) shall strive to schedule at least one person capable of speaking the indentified language(s) at all times. e. Major parts of the RTA website shall be offered in English and the identified language(s). f Pictographs shall be used on the buses whenever possible to instruct and depict necessary information and procedures. g. Notices shall be posted on buses and in the RTA lobby that assistance is available at no charge in English and the identified language(s). h. Information displays at community events where it is likely that significant numbers of LEP persons will attend shall be staffed by at least one person fluent in the identified language(s) as practical. RTA printed information at the event shall be available in English and the identified language(s). i. All applications for discounted fares shall be in English and the identified language(s). j. All surveys shall be in English and the identified language(s). k. All Board of Directors agendas shall contain the following verbiage in English and the identified language(s): Any Person who requires a translation of the Board proceedings into a language other than English in order to participate in this meeting should contact the RTA Clerk of the Board, telephone number (951) 565-5044, no fewer than two business days prior to this meeting to enable RTA to make reasonable arrangements to assure a translator at this meeting 3. All Title VI complaint forms shall be available in English and the identified language(s). 4. On an annual basis, RTA staff shall evaluate the LEP policy and, if necessary, recommend to the Board any changes based on input from the following sources: a. Formal comments from the public b. Feedback from Board members, customers, community members and RTA staff c. Input and recommendations from federal and state officials d. Changes in regulations APPENDIX E: PUBLIC HEARING POLICY Riverside Transit Agency Public Hearings Policy (Approved 4/23/09) Background: The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) periodically makes changes to routing, timetables and fares. Because these changes can affect RTA customers, the Agency and the Board need to consider public input when deciding or approving these types of proposed changes. This creates the need for policy defining when and how public hearings will be held. I. Policy RTA will hold at least one public hearing, advertised for no fewer than 30 days prior, in order to receive public comments for: 1. All proposed fare changes 2. All routing and timetable reductions that exceed 25 percent of their current configurations All input received from the public shall be provided to the Board of Directors for their consideration in evaluating proposed changes. II. Procedures 1. All public hearings shall be held during a regular meeting of the RTA Board of Directors. 2. RTA shall advertise notice of public hearing in general circulation paper(s) no fewer than 30 days prior to the public hearing. 3. In addition to the public hearing, RTA may also offer a public comment period during which public comments will be accepted by any standard method of communication during public comment meetings or at RTA headquarters. 4. RTA staff will provide a summary of all public input received during the public comment period to the Board for their consideration in evaluating proposed changes. 5. The Board will vote on changes, and RTA will publicize their decision back to the public. APPENDIX F: SUSTAINABLE FUNDING SOURCE POLICY Background: Policy: Riverside Transit Agency Sustainable Funding Source Policy (Approved 09/23/10) Temporary transit operating funding is financial assistance or grants offered for transit operational purposes on a one-time basis with a fixed dollar amount or for a limited time period with a fixed end date. This funding may come from federal, state, local or private sources. The purpose of these funds is to supplement a transit system's regular operating funds to expand service or to assist the transit system's operating budget during economic downturns or revenue shortage periods. When the temporary operating funding expires or is depleted, the ongoing operating costs for the service paid for by the temporary funding must either be absorbed by the transit system into the general operating budget or the service must be discontinued if the budget cannot sustain it. For the purpose of this policy, service shall be defined to include entire routes, segments of routes, service frequency, individual trips, hours of operation, days of operation and service area. RTA is committed to ensuring that the services offered are efficient, economically sustainable and meet the requirements of the RTA Service Standards and Warrants, and that the RTA operating budget and service plan are built around solid financial forecasts, cost analyses and objective performance standards. Therefore, the following shall define how temporary operating funding may be used: Temporary operating funding may be used for sustaining service only if all of the following criteria are met: • Funding is available from non-RTA sources to sustain the new service for a minimum of five years of operations unless clear terms are established for end date of service. • New or existing service funded by the temporary funding meets all of the qualifications of the current warrants adopted by RTA. • Existing service whose continued operation is to be funded by temporary funding must meet an acceptable level of productivity standards.* • New service funded by the temporary funding must be projected to meet productivity standards when the temporary funding expires or is depleted.* • When the temporary funding expires or is depleted, sufficient funding can be identified in future Agency budgets or from other sources to continue the new or existing service. Temporary operating funding shall not be used for any of the following purposes at any time: • Funding unproductive service to prevent discontinuation. • Re -instituting discontinued unproductive service. • Providing substitute funding for unproductive service. *Productivity standards shall be determined according to the current RTA Standard and Warrants, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Performance Improvement Program (PIP) standards and State of California Transportation Development Act (TDA) farebox recovery requirements. SunLine Transit Agency SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1 SYSTEM OVERVIEW 2 1.1 Description of Service Area 2 Service Area Map 3 SunBus System Map 4 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 5 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service 5 Fixed Route Information 6 - 16 Paratransit Service 17 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure 18 1.5 Revenue Fleet 19 1.6 Existing Facilities and Planned Facilities 19 1.7 Taxi Administration 19 CHAPTER 2 EXISTING SERVICE and ROUTE PERFORMANCE 22 2 1 Fixed Route Service - Route by Route Analysis 22 2.2 Paratransit Service - System Performance 23 2.3 Key Performance Indicators 24 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts 24 2.5 Service Standards & Warrants 24 2.6 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Over Next 2 Years 25 2.7 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 25 CHAPTER 3 PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES and IMPLEMENTATION 32 3 1 Recent Service Changes 32 3.2 Recommended New Local Route 32 3.3 Service Modification & Adjustments 34 3.4 Marketing Plans and Promotion 34 3.5 Budget Impact on Proposed Changes 35 CHAPTER 4 FINANCIAL and CAPITAL PLANS 39 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 39 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital 40 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 40 FIGURES Figure 1.1 SunLine Transit Agency Service Area 3 Figure 1.2 SunBus System Map 4 Figure 2 SunBus Fare Structure 18 Figure 3 SunDial Fare Structure 18 Figure 4 Analysis of FY 2010/11 Performance Statistics 22 Figure 5 Fixed Route Service Annual Ridership Comparison 23 Figure 6 Comparison of SunDial FY 09/10 & FY 10/11 Ridership 23 Figure 7 SunDial Service Annual Ridership Comparison 23 TABLES Table 1 Fleet Inventory 20 - 21 Table 2 Ridership Data 27 - 31 Table 3A Individual Route Description 35 Table 3B FY 2012/13 New Route Exemption Sheet 36 Table 3C Data Elements and Route Statistics 37 - 38 Table 4 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 41 Table 4A Capital Project Justification for FY 2012/13 42 - 52 Table 4.1 Summary of Universal Call for Funding Requests for FY 2012/13 53 Table 5.1 Summary of Funding Request for FY 2013/14 54 Table 5.1.A Capital Project Justification FY 2013/14 55 - 62 Table 5.2 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 63 Table 5.2.A Capital Projects Justification FY 2014/15 64 - 71 Table 6 Audit Performance 72 Table 7 Service Provider Performance Target Report 73 Table 8 SRTP Performance Report 74 Table 9 Highlights of FY 2012/13 SRTP 75 INTRODUCTION The Fiscal Year (FY) 2012/13 through 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) sets the objectives for FY 2012/13 for SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) transit services and capital improvement plan for the Coachella Valley. The SRTP is developed within the context of the regional planning process aimed at implementing SunLine's participation in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan. The development of the SRTP is essential in that it enables staff to fulfill directions from SunLine's Board of Directors and the agency's mission. The FY 2012/13 through 2014/15 SRTP presents a strategic plan for service improvements and capital projects to achieve the objective of the mission statement. The SRTP will be submitted to the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) for approval, which will set the framework for requests for federal funds as required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The SRTP is a three-year capital and operating plan which is approved by SunLine's Board of Directors and RCTC. RCTC is responsible for oversight, funding and coordination of all public transportation services in Riverside County. Although the SRTP is a three-year plan, only the first year of the plan is funded with the remaining two years provided for planning purposes. The SRTP consists of information on SunLine's services and operating characteristics and the annual budget, which is incorporated in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP), State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP), and Federal Transportation Improvement Plan (FTIP). For FY 2012/13, SunLine plans to implement one significant new service initiative, a new regional Commuter Express route between Palm Desert and Riverside. This service will be operated in partnership with Riverside Transit Agency. The agency also plans to realign one existing route (Line 53) to improve coverage in Palm Desert and increase this line's performance. For the subsequent FY 2013/14 and 2014/15, SunLine continues to monitor predicted funding levels to determine when additional service can be provided on the best performing existing transit lines, consistent with the goals of the 2009 Comprehensive Operational Analysis study. For planning purposes, the SRTP reflects an increase in service levels commencing in FY13- 14. Implementation of these improvements will be subject to continued improvement in funding availability. Based on the 2010 census data, the population of the Coachella Valley within 0.75 miles of the SunLine transit route network grew from 216,374 in 2000 to 281,189 in 2010, a 30 percent increase, while the Coachella Valley's overall population grew by 39 percent in the same period. The agency finished FY 2010/11 with total passenger boardings exceeding four million for the first time in the agency's history. Projections by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) continue to suggest the population of the Coachella Valley will more than double the 2010 population to more than one million residents by 2035, with employment estimates also doubling by the same year. These factors all suggest a significantly larger future role will exist for SunLine in providing a valuable mobility alternative to the private car and to serve those reliant on public transit in the Coachella Valley. MISSION STATEMENT To provide safe and environmentally conscious public transportation services and alternate fuel solutions to meet the mobility needs of the Coachella Valley. 1 CHAPTER 1 — SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Description of Service Area SunLine is a Joint Powers Authority created in 1977 to provide public transit service to its member cities and unincorporated communities in the Coachella Valley. Member cities are Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Indio, Coachella, and the unincorporated communities are Thermal, Mecca, Oasis, Bermuda Dunes, and Thousand Palms. SunLine's Board of Directors consists of elected officials from each of the nine member cities and Riverside County, who provide policy direction to the General Manager and staff. The Board meets ten times per year and if necessary, may meet additional times to address pressing operational and budget issues. SunLine's service area is 1,120 square miles with transit service offered throughout the Coachella Valley. The Agency's service area is located approximately 120 miles east of downtown Los Angeles and 60 miles east of the Inland Empire cities of Riverside and San Bernardino. The service area is bounded by the San Gorgonio Pass on the west and the Salton Sea on the southeast. The SunLine Service Area is shown on page 3. SunLine's fixed route service, SunBus, consists of 12 routes connecting the Valley from Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs in the north west to Mecca and Oasis in the south east. Buses operate 363 days a year, with no service provided on Thanksgiving and Christmas. The span of service extends from 4:45 a.m. to 11:21 p.m. weekdays and 5:12 a.m. to 10:36 p.m. on weekends. Buses operate every 20 to 90 minutes, depending on the route and day of the week. Line 111 is the major trunk line that extends from Indio to Palm Springs, with all routes feeding to and from that route. A system map is shown on page 4 and service information on each route is discussed in Section 1.3 beginning on page 5. The most recent survey undertaken by the Agency highlighted four categories of fixed route riders: workers, students, seniors and visitors, of which seventy-one percent are employed or students. Seventy-nine percent of riders are low income, transit dependent, and use SunBus five days or more. The survey results indicated that the typical SunLine rider speaks both English and Spanish, has an average income of $20,000, and is between the ages of 23 to 65. School and work are the major trip generators, followed by shopping, medical care, and recreation. Most commuter trips within Coachella Valley are concentrated in the City of Palm Desert, with twenty-three percent of all work trips ending in Palm Desert. Data compiled for trip purposes show that commuting patterns are focused in Palm Desert with most passengers traveling from the cities of Cathedral City, Indio, La Quinta and Palm Springs to Palm Desert. There are also strong commuting patterns from La Quinta and Coachella to Indio, and from Desert Hot Springs to Palm Springs. Most commute trips in the system occur along Highway 111, with nearly all destinations served directly by Line 111. Lines 14 (Desert Hot Springs — Palm Springs) and Line 30 (Cathedral City — Palm Springs) are also key SunLine regional transit lines. 2 Agency Service Area SunLine Tran kiNf1031'd0:13dWl 1.1NrIOD 09310 NVS IN (45.2M AlNf1O3 3CIISIGAIU W4.5 wieT8r .. -; I ram. n UFRIDLI aitY Lvi-��tY� .3Huro p�7'3 a sa Oi 5 5'Z 0 eam puno3Amunwuao) luepuno8 AID IJom;aN aunun5 Sa(1I awil7SQzas eaad aoyuag au13ung 1 AlNrIOD ONJOHVNNTEI NVS �a,�y aaivas autZung Figure 1.2 System Map Effective January 1, 2012 HOTERT SPRINGS ROSA PAPAS SAN RAFAEL �WYp c7 nee STEVENS• z BARIST° 041 PALM SPRINGS MISSION LAKES 2" ST PIERSON HACIENDA PON ENGLISH WAY BUNCH PALMS PAUL VISTA CHINO CATHEDRAL CITY N A Saline Transit Agency THOUSAND PALMS ¢� 5CN wJ NO DINAH SHORE GERALD FORD = m D FRANK SINATRA RANCHO MIRAGE PALM DESERT CUSTOMER SERVICE SERVICIO AL PASAJERO 1.800.347-8628 www.sunline.arg TTYITDD Service Available \GERALD FORD r 0 a z a w 0 COUNTRY CLUB INDIAN WELLS AVE 47 siiiifillS System Map mapa del Sistema BERMUDA DUNES O N C p wa T w 6m MADRID W 0 MILES LA QUINTA TAMPICO Effective 1192 INDIO x AVE az o EBEKIBIELQWEB Transfer Location for Lines 80, 51. 90, 918111 6 AVE 54 COACHELLA VE 52 x xD '�AIRPD- N $� THERMAL OASIS e w AVE 70 S a D AVE 62 *con MECCA, THERMAL 5'" ST *HOME I FAM1AV Y � R MECCA 4 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projection A review of cities with the highest population increase from 2000 through 2010 indicates the City of Coachella grew by 79% followed by the cities of La Quinta, Indio, Desert Hot Springs, Rancho Mirage, and Indian Wells. According to the State Department of Finance data sources, more than 70,000 people moved to the aforementioned cities with the cities of Indio and Coachella gaining the most. Overall, the population in Coachella Valley continues to grow and this growth has helped SunLine achieve over 4 million passenger boardings in FY 2010/11 for the first time in the agency's history. 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service Fixed Route Service • Regional Services - These are highly traveled corridors that serve a variety of trip purposes and connect a variety of regional destinations. These 1- routes also comprise the backbone of the network O{ and may utilize the freeway to travel between communities. Examples include Line 111, which '- travels from Palm Springs to Indio, Line 14 between Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs, and Line 30 between Cathedral City and Palm Springs. Typically, the frequency of this type of service should be at least every 15 minutes with consistent service provided throughout the day. SunLine has a longer term goal of increasing the frequency of these three lines to every 15 minutes daytime weekdays. The agency hopes to achieve a shorter -term goal of every 20 minutes weekdays for Lines 14 and 30 during FY 2013-14 or FY 2014/15 (Line 111 already operates every 20 minutes weekdays). • Local Community -Based Services - These routes are established to provide benefits for one or more local communities and offer all -day circulation as well as connections to regional services. Lines 15, 24, 32, 53, 70, 80, 81, 90, and 91 are examples of this type of service. Community -based services are also referred to as local services. They have consistent service throughout the day, have frequencies of 60 minutes or better, and have frequent stops for passengers to access as many destinations as possible. A number of services (Lines 70, 80, and 81) are performing strongly both in terms of ridership and productivity (rides per hour of service), and are candidates for increased service levels (30 minute weekday) should funding become available during FY 2013/14 or FY 2014/15. • Market -Based Services - These types of services are tailored to serve specific segments at specific times of the day, including supplemental service such as school trippers. These routes have flexible routing and schedules, may vary throughout the day and week, and are tailored to specific market targets and defined market needs. An example of this service is the new Palm Desert - Riverside Commuter Express bus route proposed to be implemented in FY 2012/13. Information about each of SunLine's fixed route services, including both regional and local community -based services, are provided on the next several pages. 5 LINE 14: DESERT HOT SPRINGS - PALM SPRINGS Line 14 links the cities of Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs. The route connects to Line 15 (Desert Hot Springs), Line 24 (Palm Springs), Line 30 (Cathedral City/Palm Springs), Line 32 (Thousand Palms/Rancho Mirage/Palm Desert/Cathedral City/Palm Springs), and Line 111 (Highway 111). The route links riders with local shopping centers, middle and high schools, and other services within the communities of Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs. The route offers service to the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Employment Development Department, and a number of retail centers along the route. This route was very well used in FY 2011/12, requiring additional morning peak period supplementary trips. Line 14 operates on a 35-minute headway weekdays (plus 3 extra morning peak and one extra afternoon peak trips), and 20 roundtrips during weekends on a 45-minute headway. PALM CYN CALLE ENCILIA MISSION LAKES DESERT HOT SPRINGS PIERSON TWO BUNCH PALMS VISTA CHINO J J W W [I] Z TAHQUITZ w BARISTO RAMON W J Q o_ DILLON PA 10 O TIME POINT PALM SPRINGS 6 LINE 15: SPA CITY LOOP — CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS Line 15 was introduced in September 2010 to serve the community of Desert Hot Springs. It connects to Line 14 (Palm Springs/Desert Hot Springs) as well as links riders with local shopping centers, middle and high schools, and other services provided within the City of Desert Hot Springs. Line 15 offers service to the community center, K-Mart and the Stater Brothers stores. The route operates 21 trips on weekdays and 18 trips on weekends, operating on a 45-minute headway all week. TW❑ BUNCH PALMS DESERT HOT SPRINGS 0 TIME POINT i1 7 LINE 24: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Line 24 offers service in Palm Springs with connections available with Line 14 (Desert Hot Springs/Cathedral City/Palm Springs), Line 30 (Cathedral City/Palm Springs), Line 32 (Thousand Palms/Rancho Mirage/Palm Desert/Cathedral City/Palm Springs) and Line 111 (Highway 111). This route links riders to destinations such as the Desert Regional Hospital, Palm Springs International Airport, Palm Springs City Hall, Desert Highland Community Center, middle and high schools, and a number of retail outlets. Line 24 operates 19 roundtrips on weekdays and 17 roundtrips during weekends, with a 45- minute headway provided all week. 0 w o 4 > ROSA PARKS RD -C•A CIV A SAN RAFAEL VISTA CHINO STEVENS TACHEVAH Y Lu z E ›- z o 2 cA J O TIME PAINT a_ TAHQUITZ BARISTQ PALM SPRINGS J J W w Q LL J w U J w 8 LINE 30: CATHEDRAL CITY — PALM SPRINGS Line 30 is the system's most productive route, a key regional link between the cities of Cathedral City and Palm Springs. Within these communities, riders are able to access the city libraries, city halls, senior centers, the Palm Springs and Cathedral City high schools, and various commercial and industrial centers. Line 30 connects to Line 14 (Desert Hot Springs/Palm Springs), Line 24 (Palm Springs), Line 32 (Thousand Palms/Rancho Mirage/Palm Desert/Cathedral City/Palm Springs) and Line 111 (Highway 111). Line 30 operates a 30-minute headway weekdays and a 40-minute headway weekends. One extra morning and afternoon trip is added to this line to accommodate high numbers of school students traveling. TAHQUITZ BARISTD RAMON TC11 RAMON i Z w¢ w _I 7--Li- U Q_ U CC CC Uz CC Q � D < IZ PALM SPRINGS S 0 TIME POINT CATHEDRAL CITY 2 U DATE PALM DINAH SHORE vICTORIA 9 LINE 32: PALM SPRINGS - CATHEDRAL CITY - THOUSAND PALMS RANCHO MIRAGE - PALM DESERT Line 32 links the cities of Palm Springs, and Cathedral City with the community of Thousand Palms, and the cities of Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert. This line connects with Line 14 (Desert Hot Springs/Palm Springs), Line 111 (Highway 111), Line 30 (Cathedral City/Palm Springs), and Line 53 (Palm Desert). Riders can access the Palm Springs middle and elementary schools, and various retail centers along Ramon Road in Cathedral City. Routing over the Monterey/I-10 Interchange ensures access to Costco, Home Depot, Regal Cinemas 16 theater complex and service to the Agua Caliente Casino on Ramon Road at Bob Hope Drive. This route also provides service to the Eisenhower Medical Center, College of the Desert, and Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Line 32 operates weekdays on a 50-minute headway and weekends on a 70-minute headway. VISTA CHINO AVE 30 7 ..), 'A MISSION RAMON W L zN CA J PALM SPRINGS 0 TIME POINT MARAVILLA 2 J ri W o NA'A CATHEDRAL CITY THOUSAND o PALMS ipi) WJ _W RAMON c❑ RANCHO MIRAGE DINAH SHORE CC W a 0 m 0 m MONTEREY COUNTRY CLUB JOHN L SINN PALM HAHN DESERT z5 CY 01- HU W a W 1- z 0 FRED WAR#NG HWY 111 10 LINE 53: CITY OF PALM DESERT Line 53 provides service within the city of Palm Desert, which enables riders on the route to access College of the Desert, the McCallum Theater, Palm Desert City Hall, Kaiser Permanente, California State University San Bernardino (CSUSB), University of California Riverside, Palm Desert High School, Palm Desert library, and major shopping centers, including Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Line 53 connects with Line 111 at two locations; at Westfield Palm Desert Mall and on Highway 111 at Deep Canyon, as well as connects with Line 32 at Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Line 53 operates weekdays and weekends every 80 minutes. This line was created in September 2010 as a modified version of former Line 50, focusing on linking CSUSB with Palm Desert Mall directly via Cook Street. TOWN CENTER WAY HAHN PALM! DESERT GERALD FORD N V1 0 o U HOVLEY FRED WARING J m HWY 111 z Q u) INDIAN WELLS 0 TIME POINT 11 LINE 70: CITY OF LA QUINTA Line 70 offers bus service to the city of La Quinta and the edge of the cities of Palm Desert and Indian Wells, and the community of Bermuda Dunes. Riders are able to access the City Hall and senior center in La Quinta, local schools, and various retail shopping centers along Adams Street and Avenue 47. Connections can be made with Line 111 on Highway 111 at Adams Street. Line 70 operates a 45-minute headway weekdays and a 90-minute headway during weekends. Extra morning and afternoon trips are added to accommodate the high number of students utilizing this service. COUNTRY CLUB BERMUDA HARRIS LANE DUNES PALM DESERT INDIAN WELLS SINALOA °BRECON ASHINGTON TAM P ICO EISENHOWER BERMUDAS MADRI❑ N M ILES 0 BLACK HAWK WAY HWY 111 AVE 47 LA QUINTA LA QUINTA COVE O TIME POINT 12 LINES 80 and 81: LOOP ROUTES — CITY OF INDIO Lines 80 and 81 are loop routes that provide transit service to residents of the City of Indio, enabling them to access civic, educational, county offices, as well as public and social service offices. This includes John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, Riverside County Fair & National Date Festival, Employment Development Department, East Valley College of the Desert campus, Riverside County social services offices, Department of Motor Vehicles, Martha's Village & Kitchen, Coachella Valley Cultural Museum, Indio Senior and Teen Centers and library, local schools, and a variety of retail shopping centers within the community. Line 81 was introduced January 2012 as a variation on one of the two directions of the Line 80 loop route. Line 81 serves the new retail developments north of the 1-10 highway. At the same time, Line 80 was modified to service the Indio Senior and Teen Centers. Lines 80 and 81 connect to Line 90 (Coachella/Indio), Line 91 (Indio/Coachella/Thermal/ Mecca/Oasis) and Line 111 at the transfer location on Highway 111 at Flower Street in the City of Indio. These two lines each operate daily on 60-minute headways. INDI❑ N Y, O TIME POINT 13 LINE 90: CITIES OF COACHELLA AND INDIO Line 90 serves the cities of Coachella and Indio allowing passengers to access the Employment Development Department, City Hall in the City of Coachella, library, Police Department, the senior center, Boys & Girls Club, local schools and shopping centers. Connections to Lines 80 and 81 (Indio), Line 91 (Indio/Coachella/Thermal/Mecca/Oasis) and Line 111 (Highway 111) occur at the transfer location on Highway 111 at Flower Street in Indio. Line 90 operates weekdays and weekends on a 35-minute headway. Z U) Y U Q re w J u_ CALHOUN Q TIME POINT INDIO HARRISON COACHELLA AVE 53 IY w J 7- I - 14 LINE 91: INDIO — COACHELLA — THERMAL — MECCA - OASIS The Line 91 links the cities of Indio and Coachella with the unincorporated communities of Thermal, Mecca, and Oasis. Riders on Line 91 are able to connect to Lines 80 and 81, 90, and 111 at the transfer location on Highway 111 and Flower Street at Indio. This allows passengers to access employment sites, medical and shopping facilities. Line 91 also provides direct service to College of the Desert's East Valley Campus at Mecca. Line 91 operates a 60-minute headway weekdays and an 80-minute headway weekends. W a J LL INDIO AVE 50 HARRISON 1 sr ST AVE 54 SHADY LN THERMAL OASIS �� v Y ❑ J ❑ d a \\ COACHELLA AIRPORT BLVO jN S; f AVE 66 BUCHANAN AVE 62 MECCA DUROS MOBILE HOME PARK Q TIME POINT 15 LINE 111: INDIO — PALM SPRINGS KEY REGIONAL LINE Line 111 offers service along Highway 111 from Palm Springs to Indio, linking with the cities of Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and La Quinta. Line 111 enables riders to travel to destinations along the Highway 111 corridor and connects to all routes in the system except for Line 15. Connecting routes include Line 14 (Desert Hot Springs/Palm Springs), Line 24 (Palm Springs), Line 30 (Palm Springs/Cathedral City), Line 32 (Palm Desert/Rancho Mirage/Thousand Palms/Cathedral City/Palm Springs), Line 53 (Palm Desert), Line 70 (La Quinta/Indian Wells/Bermuda Dunes/Palm Desert), Lines 80 and 81 (Indio), Line 90 (Coachella/Indio), and Line 91 (Indio/Coachella/Thermal/Mecca/Oasis). This route links riders with major retail and commercial centers, recreational attractions, museums, educational and medical institutions, municipal and county services. Line 111 operates weekdays on a 20-minute headway and weekends on a 40-minute headway. STEVENS BARISTO VISTA CHINO z PALM a SPRINGS 0 TIME POINT TAHQUITZ CALLE ENCILIA RAMON E pA r ~J CY,Y r CATHEDRAL RAL �� RANCHO MIRAGE ANA hpfry PALM DESERT INDIAN 4_ WELLS =� LA as ❑UINTA 5 PALM DESERT Bus slaps A704 & MO at Hwy tit & La Duinta err Or are also served by AMTRAK INDIO INDIO 16 PARATRANSIT INFORMATION SunLine's paratransit service, SunDial, offers curb -to -curb service designed to meet requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and offers next -day complementary demand -response service to Coachella Valley residents unable to use fixed route service. All applicants must complete an application, describing in detail the nature of their mental or physical disability that would prevent a person from using regular fixed route service. Applicants must obtain a physician's (or approved health care professional's) statement and signature verifying their disability. Each applicant is notified in writing within twenty-one days upon review of their applications. Certified riders that have the required ADA Certification Identification Card are eligible to use SunDial for their transportation needs, including medical appointments, shopping, and other social activities. SunDial service is available within % miles on either side of the existing SunBus route network, and is available by advanced reservation. Reservation is based on fixed route service hours serving passengers' origin and destination. SunDial is provided 7 days a week, 363 days a year during the same hours as the fixed -route network. No service is provided on Thanksgiving and Christmas. Consolidated Transportation Services Agency [CTSA] As the designated CTSA, SunLine coordinates public transportation services throughout its service area, including providing mobility training and assisting with grant applications. Staff participates in meetings with social and human service agencies, bus riders, and other advocates through forums such as the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Committee, SunLine's Access Committee, T-NOW, and neighboring transit operators. As part of the Call for Projects issued in FY 2011, SunLine acts a pass -through for funding received from the Section 5316 (JARC) and Section 5317 (New Freedom) through the Federal Transit Administration awarded to RCTC's Rideshare program, and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Roy's Center Shuttle, Mobility Management, to offer specialized transportation service options to Coachella Valley residents. 17 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Modifications to Fare Structure SunLine's current fare structure consists of four fare categories: adult, youth, Senior (60+)/Disabled, and persons with disabilities who use SunDial. SunLine fixed route passengers pay the adult fare unless eligible for discounted fares which are available only to seniors, the disabled and youth. There are two fare payment options: cash and passes; with children 4 years and under riding free with an adult fare. In FY 2010/11, staff completed the fare study which examined if current fares should be increased. Figures 2 and 3 shown below highlight the current fare structure. FIGURE 2: SunBus Existing and Proposed Fare Structure TYPE OF FARE FARE CATEGORY FIXED -ROUTE FARES ADULT (18 YRS - 59 YRS) YOUTH (5 YRS - 17 YRS) SENIOR 60+/ DISABLED/MEDICAID Cash/Base Fare $1.00 $.85 $.50 Transfers $.25 $.25 $.25 Day Pass $3.00 $2.00 $1.50 31-Day Pass $34.00 $24.00 $17.00 10-Ride Pass $10.00 $8.50 $5.00 Coachella Valley Employer Pass $24.00 -- -- Commuter Express Single Ride (proposed) $6.00 -- $4.00 Commuter Express Day Pass (proposed) $14.00 -- $10.00 Commuter Express 30-Day Pass (proposed) $150.00 -- $100.00 Proposed Commuter Express fares are for trips between the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County on the proposed Riverside Commuter Express Service to be implemented in FY2012/13. These fares are subject to SunLine Board Approval following public hearings. FIGURE 3: SunDial Existing Fare Structure TYPE OF FARE (Only for ADA Certified Clients) SINGLE RIDE MULTIPLE RIDES (10-RIDE) Cash Fare - Same City $1.50 -- Cash Fare - City to City $2.00 -- 10-Ride Pass - Same City -- $15.00 10-Ride Pass — City to City -- $20.00 18 1.5 Revenue Fleet SunLine currently has 69 fixed route buses and 31 ADA paratransit vans. Additionally, there are 39 support vehicles used for various activities in support of transit services provided in the Coachella Valley. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities Operational Facilities SunLine's head office is located in Thousand Palms and houses the General Administration, Operations, Maintenance, Human Resources, and Planning Departments. SunLine staff is currently housed in a number of mobile home structures that date back to the mid-1980s. These structures have passed their useful life and are costly to maintain. SunLine has worked closely with the Riverside County Departments of Planning and Transportation to obtain necessary permits for construction of a new Administration Building. In conjunction with the new Administration Building at Thousand Palms, SunLine has funds to build a transit hub and Park and Ride facility for use by commuters traveling from the Coachella Valley to Western Riverside County on the proposed new Commuter Express service to be implemented in FY 2012/13. Future unfunded phases of the facility project would see new Operations and Maintenance facilities built. SunLine received American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds in FY 2009 to expand the maintenance facility in Thousand Palms and this work was completed in August 2011. The improvements add capacity to the maintenance facility allowing the staff to work on more than two buses at a time. During 2012/13, SunLine will study options to rehabilitate or replace the agency's Indio satellite operating and maintenance facility which is utilized for both fixed route and ADA paratransit vehicles. The key transfer point for passengers transferring among routes at Indio is located just outside of this facility. 1.7 Taxi Administration The SunLine Regulatory Administration (SRA), which is charged with licensing and regulating taxicab franchises and drivers in the Coachella Valley, also ensures residents and visitors are charged a fair and reasonable price. In addition, SRA is responsible for establishing and enforcing ethical standards maintained by the Franchising Board. Fleet Franchises Desert City Cab Yellow Cab of the Desert American Cab 19 r T .ggip 401tT trytcot T 4 69 69 L5Z Marl E4E'RE I TBEIrCC cit'eZT 430:6i E95911. STIVSB ZEl'$ Ea%EG Mil NT ELT tZtE ESOP RIK 1,58 zzat 101 OTVOT2 re BZErb$rE DZDr66 SS 2E9 Z ST TZ OZ. Z 6T t Ob OP ab Ob ¢b 4b OE 6E 6E 6E 62 LE ,ab D(E'V Ub dl Db dl .1)b n 2 CARES S9F 1�O ✓ A N ✓ A N ✓ A N IiC13 NO 3 tr00i 5 CO2 BaaZ 800� 6062 ZTaZ ZTiTTOZ kg (ipioN Wei} a4'44:1-01-Jaah a+4io'ir Jacl IN a �Ra Al a43.triwy ZTPIT UE 4� qmew IW al�Hah NeCI ZZ fear id pui sal% al al 14ah WWI a; ein ETFITOr p1a14NA Aoui7 Jo* WI= Jal 10113119eA GPAIVir J� w 01207 oat aPl4ah p J Inb3 A]Pede) (11.k1 ea E+apeeS pu a #p BP0') loP l4 aP'a5 .NM 1110k pia add AID 10 (#nc1.10:014) #rra AxiaPhr aunwis veid-,ate-ol a+d Er./e sie r� AA rral rr 4aaord - r airgpi w$u.ry««rzsii .liroyFsik Mel* qrSffirr T IR`LWE t,t, DE WW1 fJ LG9r5555 S 5 MT fJ 913e4 99S'9TT', G `ail DT�IGIET ET F dZ C, ? 9e: 92 fT t, dZ �T L F ZT KE11#l1N. FOILOR13V H7310t13V MO 3 Z'Il POM OTOZ MCI 3 Me Zi�iiOQ JL� a4'4C1-01--maJ4 0AlDV $d I IN easel pi ativ-muui UMW IA ga+vW lirmull IIV v17411ah ii10i01 dLA PUgPd WIFE gPFIlia'h %WI al. Nig rrirrOr rptir *Pia3 wPlIPA Jai "Al 11.3v37 igiWA' J° • tl1Ec� 1 �PIkl PEKki Inba (Run Pu a� Aped � p.eaps oP05 We) Wog pagededo AIDIfl asuocisu pueueci AI$pe 1.Ragq3l Bwpm s kri24 iia+l Ord - T ajrgel IDSSIMEWL141{DSMS1j11113yFISIM 1 CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE and ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Fixed Route Service - Route by Route Evaluation and Analysis Over the last five years, SunLine has made improvements to all fixed routes, including realigning existing routes and improving frequency to increase ridership. A review of the FY 2010/11 data indicates an increase over the same period for FY 2009/10. Service Efficiency and Effectiveness To determine the efficiency effectiveness of all routes, staff reviewed the year-to-date performance statistics for FY 2010/11 with data from TransTrack below that shows the most and least efficient routes. Factors used include passenger boardings, passengers per revenue hour, cost per passenger, passenger revenue per hour, and the farebox recovery ratio. FIGURE 4: Analysis of FY 2010/11 Performance Statistics LINES PASSENGER COUNT PASSENGER PER REVENUE HOUR COST PER PASSENGER PASSENGER REVENUE PER HOUR FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO 14 492,231 21.7 $4.34 $20.88 22.12% 15 66,680 14.9 $6.40 $14.19 14.94% 24 167,608 15.7 $6.02 $14.97 15.85% 30 732,610 34.2 $2.76 $32.83 34.78% 32 205,954 13.0 $7.25 $12.49 13.22% 50 10,566 5.3 $17.31 $5.33 5.81 °/a 53 39,159 8.6 $11.05 $8.17 8.60% 70 221,949 22.9 $4.12 $21.93 23.24% 80 224,290 20.8 $4.54 $19.84 21.02% 90 209,492 17.7 $5.34 $17.01 18.01 % 91 189,226 12.2 $7.74 $11.74 12.44% 111 1,485,253 25.1 $3.77 $24.08 25.50% As shown in the above table, Lines 50 and 53 were the least productive SunBus transit lines while Lines 14, 30, 70, 80, and 111 were the more productive lines. 22 FIGURE 5 below depicts a graph showing fixed route ridership comparison from FY 2007 through FY 2011. 420,000 350,000 280,000 210,000 140,000 70,000 0 FIXED ROUTE RIDERSHIP COMPARISON FY 2007 - FY 2011 JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN ❑ FY 2007 ❑ FY 2008 ❑ FY 2009 ❑ FY 2010 ❑ FY 2011 2.2 Paratransit Service — System Performance SunDial's paratransit services offered in the Coachella Valley continue to be well utilized for clients day to day activities, such as medical appointments, shopping, or for work. A total of 110,462 trips were made on SunDial in FY 2010/11 compared to 106,019 trips in FY 2009/10. Overall, ridership for the demand response and subscription continues to grow. FIGURE 6: Comparison of SunDial FY 2009/10 & FY 2010/11 Ridership SERVICE TYPE FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 PERCENT CHANGE SunDial 106,019 110,462 4.2% FIGURE 7 below compares usage of SunDial services from FY2007 through FY2011. 12,000 8,000 4,000 0 SUNDIAL RIDERSHIP COMPARISON FY 2007 - FY 2011 JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN ❑ FY 2007 ❑ FY 2008 ❑ FY 2009 ❑ FY 2010 ❑ FY 2011 23 Specialized Transit Service The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) received Section 5316 (JARC) funds to continue operation of a transportation program to serve homeless residents sheltered at the Roy's Desert Resource Center looking for employment. The Riverside County Transportation Commission [RCTC] continues to receive JARC funding to implement a Rideshare Program for the Coachella Valley. SunLine has also received JARC funds to implement the new Commuter Express route to the Pass Area. In addition, SunLine was awarded New Freedom funds to implement a Taxi Voucher Program for seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons with low income and this program commenced operation in November 2011. 2.3 Key Performance Indicators To ensure adherence to the Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) established by RCTC, SunLine continues to monitor and evaluate routes to assure compliance with key performance indicators. The performance indicators are tracked through a management performance tool called TransTrack, implemented by RCTC for all transit operators. Over the last five years, SunLine has consistently met all key performance indicators approved in the SRTP, including the mandatory target for the farebox recovery ratio. 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts Staff continues to work in coordination and cooperation with local jurisdictions on service related issues that affect transit services provided in the Coachella Valley. Staff will continue monitoring service routes using service warrants to further evaluate routes. In addition to concentrating on modifying and adjusting service routes, further analysis will be undertaken to review unproductive routes to determine if segments or trips of existing routes should be discontinued due to low productivity. 2.5 Service Standards and Warrants The following factors listed below are considered when analyzing new service proposals and requests, as well as evaluating existing service: Area Coverage: While most of the urbanized sections of SunLine's service area are adequately covered according to these standards, there are some areas which are served more intensely than others. When service is proposed, the new route should be evaluated based on its proximity to others, and the necessity of its implementation based on area coverage standards. Currently not served or underserved markets such as North Shore and Desert Edge/Sky Valley provide some potential new transit ridership but also significant additional operating costs each year, which must be funded. ADA paratransit service needs must also be addressed as part of any such new service planning. SunLine is currently working with the communities of Desert Edge/Sky Valley and North Shore to determine what transit service may be appropriate and sustainable in such small communities that are somewhat remote from the urbanized part of the Coachella Valley served by SunLine. A decision regarding the feasibility of any transit services for these areas (including sustainable new funding sources) will be reached in FY 2012/13. It is expected that an innovative approach to service delivery will be required to sustain such services. Market Area Characteristics: Staff also considers the density and demographic characteristics of a given service area as an important determinant for providing successful transit success. In tying area coverage standards to population and employment densities, SunLine recognizes the need to provide more service within more highly developed areas, and often considers this factor as part of the service development process. It is hoped that operating funding levels by 24 FY 2013/14 or FY 2014/15 may be able to support higher service levels for the best performing SunLine transit services. Transit -Dependent Populations: SunLine considers the effects of service changes on transit - dependent riders during service planning processes. While SunLine's current network serves most transit -dependent populations and their destinations effectively, we continue to examine transit -dependency when evaluating new service proposals. Special Market Needs: Staff often receives requests for new service when existing routes do not adequately address unique market opportunities. Short routes such as shuttles, for example, may better connect two or more high demand destinations; for instance, a transit center and an employment center, a senior center and a shopping complex; student housing and a university campus. They also provide local circulation between destinations in a single community with the service span and frequency tailored to these unique markets. Recommended Standards of Evaluating New Services: Once a route is implemented, performance monitoring begins immediately to determine if the route is reaching its desired potential and to meet performance standards. New service routes that do not meet minimum standards are subject to the same remedial actions as existing services and may consider evaluation points at both 6 months and one year, in order to evaluate how new service routes are progressing over time. The SunLine Board will be asked to adopt a new set of service standards for transit service performance in FY 2012/13. 2.6 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Markets over Next Two Years SunLine continues to evaluate, monitor and adjust transit service to best meet the travel needs of the residents of and visitors to the Coachella Valley. Given the ongoing economic conditions, SunLine is proposing one new Commuter Express service to Western Riverside County in FY 2012/13 and will continue tracking both existing service usage and new developments to ensure service is offered where the most need exists. Through the Agency's development review program, staff works in cooperation and concert with local jurisdictions to determine where new developments are occurring and what the associated transit service needs and opportunities are. As the Coachella Valley continues to grow, SunLine will assess areas in which additional transit could potentially be provided. Staff submitted a grant application in response to RCTC's Call for projects in FY 2010/11 and was awarded JARC and New Freedom funds to implement a commuter service from Palm Desert in the Coachella Valley to the Pass Area and Western Riverside County. This new service will be provided in partnership with Riverside Transit Agency. Additionally, given the lack of funding to provide school transportation service by the school districts in the Valley, SunLine will continue working with school districts to improve access to public transit and will work on coordinating school bell times for routing and scheduling purposes. 2.7 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs Passenger Amenities and Bus Stop Improvement Program SunLine has approximately 520 bus stops located throughout its service area which are cleaned and maintained on a regular basis. Since completion of the 2006 COA and 2009 COA Update, SunLine has made significant improvements to bus stops in the Coachella Valley. Currently 291 bus stops (56%) have a shelter shed, and a further 80 stops are planned to receive this facility by the end of FY 2012/13. This will mean over 70 percent of SunLine bus stops will have this facility. 25 Revenue Collection Equipment In 2010, SunLine installed electronic registering fareboxes on all fixed route buses. This has increased the agency's ability to collect more accurate revenue, decreased staff's time in reconciling revenue collected, and improved the accuracy of ridership counts. It has also enhanced passenger access to passes through allowing for their sale on -board buses. In addition to new fareboxes, one ticket vending machine (TVM) continues in operation at the key transfer location in Indio. A study of the success of the first TVM machine is proposed to be completed before a decision is taken regarding installation of additional ticket vending machines in the Valley. On -Board Security Cameras SunLine has interior and exterior video cameras installed on all fixed route buses to improve the Agency's ability to monitor and record activities inside and outside the buses that will enhance the safety and security of passengers. With these cameras, SunLine is able to investigate criminal and suspicious activities that may occur at bus stops, transfer locations and while the buses travel on the road. Furthermore, to enhance the safety of passengers on ADA paratransit vans, Smart Drive technology has been installed. This system enables monitoring, tracking and real-time data on activities occurring on these vans, which helps improve driver training and skills. In FY 2012/13, Prop 1 B Transit Security funds will be used to upgrade camera systems on all buses and vans. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) By the end of 2011, installation of ITS equipment on all fixed route and paratransit buses was completed, with installation on select support vehicles being completed in the first half of 2012. The equipment includes Automatic Passenger Counters, Automatic Voice Annunciators, Automated Vehicle Locaters, and Global Positioning Systems. Additionally, staff implemented scheduling software for fixed route planning. SunLine service information has been available in Google Transit for trip planning purposes since March 2012. Bus Replacement Program SunLine continues to replace ADA paratransit vans when they exceed 150,000 miles (approx. 3 years). The fixed route bus fleet will next be updated in 2018, when the 2006 Orion buses become eligible for federal funding for replacement (12-year lifespan). All SunLine vehicles (including support vehicles) are powered with compressed natural gas except for three Hydrogen fuel cell buses. Two agency trucks and four cars will be replaced in FY 2012/13. Facility Needs Staff continues to work on planning for the new Administration Building at SunLine's Thousand Palms site. A study will also be completed in FY 2012/13 to determine the future plan for the agency's satellite operating and maintenance facility at Indio. 26 Rire vde iou Rr irinporfution [umniss un Table 2 -- SunLine Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2O12/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2O11/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd gtrActual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics 1 Peak -Hour Fleet 65 71 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $21,259,128 $21,652,880 $22,177,354 $16,087,262 $22,177,354 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $3,864,911 $4,293,489 $3,966,728 $3,128,229 $3,945,888 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) S17,399.217 S17,359,391 $18,210,626 $12,959,033 $18,231,466 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 3,713,752 4,155,480 4,108,203 3,436,837 4,636,918 Passenger Miles 21,515,927 24,037,742 23,779,038 22,950,979 30,957,071 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours {a} 231,792.6 240,778.2 255,140,0 184,323.0 250,371.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (h) 3,141,757.0 3,228,900.0 3,256,835.0 2,504,606.0 3,424,636.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 3,476,566.1 3,549,956.7 3,593,824.0 2,759,302.1 3,776,168.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $91.72 $89.93 $86.92 $87.28 $88.58 Farebox Recovery Ratio 18.18% 19.83% 17.88% 19.45% 17.79% Subsidy per Passenger $4.68 $4.18 $4.43 $3.77 $3,93 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.81 $0.72 $0.77 $0.56 $0.59 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $75.04 $72.10 $71.38 $70.31 $72.82 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (h) $5.54 $5.38 $5.59 $5.17 $5.32 Passenger per Revenue Hour {a} 16.0 17.3 16.1 18.6 18.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile CO) 1.18 1.29 1.26 1.37 1.35 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. ``� Rivers de faulty fromporiaiion (oTErisinn Table 2 -- SunLine Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Routes FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 Audited Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 63 67 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $19,953,951 $20,793,532 $21,267,587 $15,566,124 $20,907,692 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $3,723,055 $4,192,549 $3,784,774 $3,076,541 $3,714,517 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) S 16,230,896 $16,600,983 $17,482,812 S12,489,582 S 17,193,175 Operating Characteristics r � ' Unlinked Passenger Trips 3,565,871 4,049,641 4,009,410 3,372,937 4,469,193 Passenger Miles 20,684,658 23,441,620 23,222,831 22,531,911 29,858,473 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 218,231.8 231,733.4 243,500.0 178,755.3 236,925.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 2,935,865.0 3,124,976.1 3,130,086.0 2,44-0,371.4 3,239,959.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 3,256,030.4 3,428,780.4 3,444,027.0 2,687,219.1 3,563,258.0 Performance Characteristics i _ Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $91.43 $89.73 $87.34 $87.08 $88.25 Farebox Recovery Ratio 18.65% 20.16% 17.79% 19.76% 17.76% Subsidy per Passenger $4.55 $4.10 $4.36 $3.70 $3.85 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.78 p.m $0.75 $0.55 $0.58 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $74.37 $71.64 $71.80 $69.87 $72.57 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.53 $5.31 $5.59 $5.12 $5.31 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 16.3 17.5 16.5 18.9 18.9 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.21 1.30 1.28 1.38 1.38 (a) Train Hours For Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. `II`� Pisers de (well lrursspenuiiun (osrm+sign Table 2 -- SunLine Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011/ 12 Plan FY 2011/ 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 2 4 Financial data I A Total Operating Expenses $1,305,177 $859,348 $909,767 $521,138 $1,269,662 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $141,856 $100,939 $181,953 $51,688 $231,371 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,163,322 $758,408 $727,814 $469,451 $1,038,291 Operating Characteristics _ I 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 147,881 105,839 98,793 63,900 167,725 Passenger Miles 831,268 596,122 556,207 419,068 1,098,598 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 13,560.8 9,044.8 11,649.0 5,567.7 13,446.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 205,892.0 103,923.9 126,749.0 64,234.6 184,677.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 220,535.7 121,176.3 149,797.0 72,083.0 212,910.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $96.25 $95.01 $78.16 I $93.60 $94.43 Farebox Recovery Ratio 10.86°ti 11.75% 20.00% 9.92% 18.22% Subsidy per Passenger $7,87 $7.17 $7.37 $7.35 $6,19 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.40 $1.27 $1.31 $1.12 $0.95 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $85.79 $83.85 $62.53 $84.32 $77.22 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.65 $7.30 $5.74 $7.31 $5.62 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 10.9 11.7 8.5 11.5 12.5 Passenger per Revenue Mlle (b) 0.72 1.02 0.78 0.99 0.91 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. Risrrside (awn/ irmspart ton (omrrission Table 2 -- SunLine-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics l l Peak -Hour Fleet 42 45 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $17,440,864 $17,816,114 $16,917,135 $13,066,033 $15,917,135 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $3,458,487 $3,882,023 $3,140,309 $2,844,117 $3,119,470 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $13,982,377 $13,934,091 $13,776,826 $10,221,917 $13,797,665 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 3,607,733 4,045,018 3,998,799 3,344,604 4,513,705 Passenger Miles 20,292,932 22,760,394 22,513,234 21,909,801 29,564,759 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 180,684.2 188,684.5 201,952.0 142,956.9 194,665.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 2,467,481.8 2,522,185.9 2,541,666.0 1,894,067.8 2,502,445.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 2,694,500.9 2,754,861.4 2,785,482.0 2,061,775.8 7,836,833.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour w $96.53 $94.42 $83.77 A $91.40 i $86.90 Farebox Recovery Ratio 19.82% 21.79% 18.56% 21.77% 18.43°/° Subsidy per Passenger $3.88 $3.44 $3.45 $3.06 $3.06 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.69 $0,61 $0,61 $0,47 $0.47 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $77.39 $73.85 $68.22 $71.50 $70.88 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.67 $5.52 $5.42 $5.40 $5.30 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 20.0 21,4 19,8 23,4 23.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.46 1.60 1.57 1.77 1.73 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. `I`� f1ionside lnuntr 1ru spalolion {omrrisinn Table 2 -- SunLine-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics r Peak -Hour Fleet 23 26 Financial Data gMill=f r 1 Total Operating Expenses $3,818,264 $3,836,766 $5,260,219 $3,021,2.29 $5,260,219 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $406,424 $411,466 $826,418 $284,112 $826,418 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $3,411,840 S3,425.300 $4,433,800 $2,737,117 $4,433,800 Operating Characteristics r r IF- I Unlinked Passenger Trips 106,019 110,462 109,404 92,233 123,213 Passenger Mifes 1,222,995 1,277,347 1,265,804 1,041,178 1,392,312 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 51,108.4 52,093.7 53,188.0 41,366.1 55,706.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 674,275.2 706,714.1 715,169.0 610,538.2 822,191.0 Total Actual Vehicle Mites 782,065.2 795,095.3 808,342.0 697,526.3 939,335.0 Performance Characteristics _ - _ _ Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $74.71 $73.65 $98.90 $73.04 $94.43 Farebox Recovery Ratio 10.64°10 10.72% 15.71% 9.40% 15.71% Subsidy per Passenger $32.18 $31.01 $40.53 $29.68 $35.98 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.79 $2.68 $3.50 $2.63 $3.18 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $66.76 $65.75 $83.36 $66.17 $79.59 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.06 $4.85 $6.20 $4.48 $5.39 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 (a) Train Hours For Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. CHAPTER 3 — PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Recent Service Changes SunLine currently operates 12 fixed route transit services mostly covering the urbanized area of the Coachella Valley, serving SunLine's nine member cities (Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage) as well as the unincorporated communities of Bermuda Dunes, Mecca, Oasis, Thermal and Thousand Palms. In FY 2010/11, SunLine served over 4 million passengers system -wide, with 4,045,018 boardings recorded on fixed route buses, and 110,462 rides by ADA paratransit clients. FY 2011/12 is on target to be around 10 percent higher than these numbers. Changes helping achieve this outcome were the Lines 80 and 81 Indio route restructure, two additional Line 14 a.m. peak trips, and a Line 70 extra p.m. supplementary school trip. 3.2 Recommended Short Term Service Improvements For FY 2012/13, the Agency intends to introduce one new route and modify one route. Details are provided below. Riverside Commuter Express Service: A Palm Desert to Riverside Commuter Express service is planned to commence in FY 2012/13, providing a key regional link to jobs, job services, and other services located in Western Riverside County. This service has funding from the FTA Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and New Freedom grant programs as well as the partnership between SunLine and Riverside Transit Agency. Each partner is sharing half of the operating costs. SunLine will upgrade existing buses for this service. RTA DOWNTOWN BUS STOPS & TERMINAL METROLINK STATION MC_g 10 9 8 RIVERSIDE MORENO VALLEY Proposed Stops 0 Palm Desert 0 Thousand Palms 0 Morongo Casino 0 Banning 0 Beaumont sillii ne.3 PROPOSED LINE '"�='=``"�°`�7`► fT' Palm Desert to Riverside BANNING BEAUMONT 0 Moreno Valley East 0 Moreno Valley Mall 0 UCR Q Metrolink Station CD RTA Downtown Bus Stops & Terminal MORONGO CASINO CABAZON N A THOUSAND PALMS PALM ❑ESERT 32 Palm Desert Line 53: Line 53 is currently SunLine's lowest performing route in terms of ridership and productivity (rides generated per hour of service). SunLine plans to restructure Line 53 in FY 2012/13 to improve its performance. Strategies proposed include restoring service to the Country Club Drive/Portola Avenue area of Palm Desert where many apartments and mobile homes are located, as well as rerouting the service to serve the Palm Desert Seniors Center (Joslyn Center Catalina Street). A possible extension of the route to Xavier School is also being studied. Coordinated operation of Lines 32 and 53 is being considered (each would operate every 60 minutes on weekdays). Line 53 service on weekdays and on weekends may also need to be revised with shorter operating hours and possibly revised days of operation. These strategies together are intended to bring this line up to a satisfactory service N performance. Future Year Priority Changes: PALM DESERT WN CENTER WAY ❑EEP CYN INDIAN WELLS Funding levels available for subsidizing transit operations are slowly improving, meaning SunLine is hopeful that sufficient operating funds may become available in FY 2013/14 or FY 2014/15 to support the following service improvements: • Line 14: Desert Hot Springs — Palm Springs O 20 minute instead of 35 minute weekday daytime service headways O 30 minute instead of 45 minute weekend service headways • Line 30: Cathedral City — Palm Springs O 20 minute instead of 30 minute weekday daytime service headways O 30 minute instead of 40 minute weekend service headways • Line 70: La Quinta O 30 minute instead of 45 minute weekday daytime service headways O 45 minute instead of 90 minute weekend service headway • Line 80/81: Indio O 30 minute instead of 60 minute weekday daytime service headway • Line 111: Palm Springs — Indio O 30 minute instead of 40 minute weekend headway These changes require increased funding (not yet available) to sustain their ongoing operation. Other Studies: 33 Coachella Area Route Restructuring SunLine planning staff is currently studying a restructure of Coachella area bus routes. The following concepts are being studied: o Line 90 revised routing to expand coverage to Avenue 54 and Avenue 52. o Line 91 terminate at Coachella o Line 111 extend from Indio to Coachella The restructure of Line 90 is not expected to require additional resources to operate a 40 minute service schedule for the expanded route alignment. The restructure of Lines 90 and 111 is based on having a new transit hub in Coachella. This project will take some years to be completed and will be included in a future SRTP. Desert Hot Springs Restructuring Study SunLine planning staff is investigating a restructure of its transit lines in the north section of Desert Hot Springs. As Line 14 continues to grow in ridership and service levels, Line 15 should extend to the Mission Lakes area to better match service level with potential demand. This project is still in the planning stages. On completion of analysis, a proposal will be developed for consideration in a future SRTP. Unmet Needs SunLine is studying potential service options for the small communities of North Shore and Desert Edge/Sky Valley, which were unmet transit needs noted during the Coordinated Plan process led by Riverside County Transportation Commission. These studies are ongoing and may result in service initiatives to be included in subsequent SRTP years. Other Proposed Schedule Changes In order to better match service headways for with ridership and for passengers transferring between lines, the following schedule changes are being investigated: o Line 24: Operate 40 instead of 45 minute service frequency o Public Holidays — operate weekend schedule on Memorial Day, July 4th, Labor Day, etc. 3.3 Longer Term Service Modifications and Adjustments In light of ongoing challenges with operating funding, staff plans to continue evaluating existing services for further modifications for approval by the Board of Directors, as set out in section 3.2 above. SunLine will also continue to use the PIP measurements and a proposed new set of Service Standards as guidelines to improve service efficiency and effectiveness. It is also important that SunLine continue investigating longer term options to provide 15 minute service on key routes such as Lines 30 and 111, as well as 30 minute service or better where warranted on SunLine's other transit lines. These improvements require significant additional new operating funding, which is not anticipated in the three years of this SRTP. 3.4 Marketing Plans and Promotion SunLine plans to promote and market existing service and new service routes implemented in FY 2012/13. The marketing plan will entail conducting more public outreach to businesses and schools along the routes, as well as advertise service in bus shelters, on the buses and on our website and promoting the Google Transit and Bus Tracker applications. Furthermore, staff intends to work more closely with businesses in the Coachella Valley to promote ridership, especially employees that use the Coachella Valley Employer Pass for their commuting needs. 34 3.5 Budget Impacts on Proposed Change In FY 2012/13, SunLine plans to introduce a Palm Desert to Riverside Commuter Express service. Based on the proposal for this service, the operating budget is approximately $300,000 per year. This will be funded by an estimated $50,000 in fare revenue, an average of $130,000 in grant funding (JARC/New Freedom) and approximately $120,000 in additional local funds, half of each coming from SunLine and its partner agency for this service, Riverside Transit Agency. The proposed changes to Line 53 would be cost neutral or reduce operating costs. Other subsequent proposed changes or those being studied are not yet funded, and would be listed in a subsequent SRTP. TABLE 3A - INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Line # Route Class Route Description / Cities Served Line 14 Regional Serves the Cities of Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs Line 15 Local Serves residents of Desert Hot Springs Line 24 Local Serves the City of Palm Springs Line 30 Regional Serves the cities of Palm Springs and Cathedral City Line 32 Local Provides service to the Cities of Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Thousand Palms, and Palm Desert Line 53 Local Service is provided to the City of Palm Desert Line 70 Local Service is offered to the Cities of La Quinta, Bermuda Dunes, Palm Desert, and Indian Wells Lines 80-81 Local Offer service to City of Indio Line 90 Local Offers service to the Cities of Indio and Coachella Line 91 Local Serves the Cities of Coachella and Indio, and the unincorporated communities of Mecca, Thermal and Oasis Line 111 Regional Service is provided to the Cities of Indio, La Quinta, Indian Wells, Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage, Cathedral City and Palm Springs Proposed New Routes Line 210 Express Proposed new Commuter Express bus service linking Palm Desert, 1-10 at Thousand Palms, Cabazon (Morongo Casino), Banning, Beaumont, Moreno Valley, and Riverside (joint service incorporated into existing Riverside Transit Agency Commuter Link Route 210). 35 TABLE 3B - FY 2012/13 NEW/EXISTING ROUTES EXEMPTION SHEET ROUTE # MODE SERVICE TYPE ROUTE DESCRIPTION DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION ROUTE EXEMPTION END DATE Line 15 FR Directly operated City of Desert Hot Springs September 2010 FY 2013 Line 53 FR Directly Operated City of Palm Desert September 2010 FY 2013 Line 210 FR Directly Operated Palm Desert — Riverside Commuter Express September 2012 (proposed) FY2015 36 99b'iEVE 3 888'sas'Et 45E'Ltrzz$ 0.89I'9LC'f 0.9E9'Kiq 0.59E'89E O'IZONE ILo'C56'OF 816'9591. IC sleiol iapinoid a3lnwas 008'£E4'4$ 814'9Z8$ 6I009L'5$ O'SEE`6£6 D'I6.11Z9 O'86L'Z9 0'90L'55 LTE'L6£'T £IZ'£ii 9L ie:ol tl'd0•Nf15 029'85s'T$ L£6'CCz$ L5S'9E81$ 07L6`LO£ P82Z'Z6z 0196'ST EY6T5'SI SL2'9251 TTI'£EZ E Ie101 I6•N[15 E29146 959'BLIS 8C2160 046L`64I 0'591'9 .i 0.5bi'ZI 0'5961I 581'005'T 280'6zZ z lelol 06-Nn5 981'SLzt L6L'49t Z96'6E£S 0.210'LS 0.84L'ES 0'605's O•fitb'S 080'299 T90'tOt 1001 18-Nn$ 890'9621 2Z01,Lt OTVOCES 0-09979 0'0081r5 01,25'5 0144'S IO£'609 C55'EZT 1001 00.19ns LEz'OIL4 itr8'C9iS 9L0'9L88 O's4L`Lbi 0'L9L'2Ei O'Strb'OI 0106'6 E68'599'I SE£'4St b lelol 4::C•Nn5 ;LE'LLE4 E60'E6S t9tr'S914 0.450`8L 0199'99 O'T90's 0199'S O29'SE£ OL2'IS I leiol ES•Nn5 I96'S£1,1$ 1,96'ZEE4 SEb'89CI$ O'C65'96Z 0.09era 0'9C8'LT 0'969'9T E4L'9T9'T TE8'96Z E 1QU L£•Nns ZOE'Z£I'TS SCO'£8z$ LL£'sTb'i$ 044£`L£Z O'8IL`90Z OZLI'£Z 1Y98L'I2 Z64'5treS 6£8'008 5 Rol 00Nn5 Z65'5I6 868'94IS 6641,685 O'L66`61,1 0'618`9EI 0.595'TI 0'Z88'OT 9EE'8CZ'I 99I'56I Z 100.1. 4Z-Nn5 Z2I'9ZES fiZE'Est I54'6CES 0.0E9`E9 0.9bi's5 O'CK'4 0.90z'Z 9t6'91I 0s8'LI Z 1001 OIZ-Nr1S 86L'6EES 6tr6$99 LbC'6244 0-9z2'IL 0'896'09 0168'S 01,55'S 098'549 5091t6 t ill Si-Nns IEZ'S2L'TS L49'EEE4 9L9'9S0'2$ O'ESZ`S4E 011•TeLOE O.ZE£'4Z Er860'E2 626'59b'E Osi'62S 9 Ie101 bT•Nns 9ES'S6T"4$ L9C'9664 96L'L6T'S$ 0'569`0LS 0.6004T8 0'EOL'Z9 0'9'15'09 LZO'569'OT 9L8'LE9'I 4T leiol IIT•Nn5 d pisgns anuanay ]so3 sailW sa194 3aN MU! 055ed OugeiadO 1e401 anuanay smog smog SallW leIcu anuanay -1a6uarsed sla6uassed n•P14aA lead atIA1 Fe0 # 07ng! 51U wal3 e3ea sa}nob Ilh' EVZS6Z AA g -- AUua6y ;sued auiiun5 sagsge45 ainoy d1215 - £ a19e1 g### i ogtwodacq 1pnl,Pw'9 1 mime 81.11 5f'1 5'61 7E 5$ Z874$ 65'0$ E6 E5 W064'41 84'6$ 86'9$ 85'88$ spial iapinoid a]lnias 53'0 L'Z 6£'S$ 65'6L$ 831$ 86'5£1 %SCSI 69'ZOE 06'9$ E61,6$ le:01. My0•1.1115 08'0 0'5T EE'S$ E6'OOI$ ZO'I$ 69'96 %ET'SI 88'L$ 82'9$ trE'SIT$ 1e101 I6M15 09'1 I'6I 6614 EL'65$ S6'OS ii'Et 9'066'61 06'ES 62'9$ 99'6L$ lErM 06-N[15 867 CBI ZI'5$ $L'OS$ Z6'06 ZL'Zt 9690'63 9E'f$ ££'9$ 1,419$ Ian_ 18-Nl15 O3'Z L'ZZ !CS'S 66'65$ LE'0$ O6'Z$ %00'0Z 001$ 6Z'9$ 33'89$ 1e101 OB•Nrs Z6'3 L'SZ LE'5$ £L'IL$ £6'0$ 6(26 96II'6T S6'E$ 69'9$ 6911B$ lelol OC•tins 5L'0 0'6 E6'5$ 66'59$ II'IS 9Z'L$ 9'066'63 80'6$ 609$ 98•39$ leiol ES•Nns 36'0 861 SL'S$ IO'96$ 6S'0$ ZS'5$ %6L'63 93'L$ T5'9$ Z6'5036 1e101 ZE•NI15 L8'E 8'9£ S6'S$ wisS ZZ'0$ I6'T$ 9w00'OZ LL'i$ 58"9$ 963,9$ 1ei01 0£•N[1S £6•T 6'LI EZ'S$ 91'59$ 95'0$ L9'f6 9'000.0Z 6514 45'9$ OZ'ZS$ pal 6Z-N[15 ZE'O vs I6'S$ ES'L6I$ 6L'Zt LZ•Sit 4y50'61 Ula 88'9$ IO'ZL16 Poi OIZ-Nn5 Z9.1 B'LS LS'S$ 81'19$ ES'06 SVCS %66'61 3£16 C6'9$ 86-9L$ ielc1 51-N05 ZL'3 6'LZ 39'5$ 69.6L$ 05'0$ 9Z16 %0Z'9T 68'E$ 69'9$ EI.69$ Ielol 63•NF15 007 0'LL S3•S$ EE'fi9$ 6E'0$ L575 0/06I'6I 8T'£$ LE'9$ OB'SBS leiol II3•Nns NM Jed inogaad Di !A anoq ellW ,a6uassed 014e11 ,a6uassed s+a6uassed sisSuassed anuanaa anuanaa ,a6uassed ,ad Aplsgns A,aAO]aa iad Ma ,ad Aplsgns ,ad ApisgnG ,ad Aplsgn5 xoga,e� allw anuanad iad lso] 6udie,adp inoH anuanaN adA1 Ae0 # Knott Jad lsa] Eopeiadp 5-103e71pul a7uew�oyad sa}nob Ilh' EVZIOZ Ai g -- AUua6y ;sued auliun5 sagsge45 ainoy d1215 - £ a19e1 .1,1=0) nyamsmi 11m},pva.lg 1immg BIM CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget For FY 2012/13, SunLine plans to use funding from various sources to operate its fixed route and paratransit services, including using Section 5307 funds apportioned by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for operating assistance, preventative maintenance, and transit capital projects. Other funding sources will include Proposition 1 B capital transit and transit security funds, State Transit Assistance (STA) funds, Local Transportation Funds (LTF), Measure A local funding, FTA Section 5311 rural operating assistance funding, Section 5316 JARC grants, and Section 5317 New Freedom grants. Other potential funding sources include revenue from SunLine's Bus Advertising program and a contribution from Riverside Transit Agency towards the operating costs for the Palm Desert to Riverside Commuter Express service. 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program For fiscal year 2012/13, the funding plan to support proposed operating and capital program will entail new funding requested for the fiscal year and may in future updates include carryover funds from prior years. The funding plan for operating assistance uses new LTF, Measure A, FY 2012 Section 5307 Operating Assistance and Preventative Maintenance funding, Section 5311 Rural Operating Assistance, Section 5316 JARC and Section 5317 New Freedom grants as well as other revenue (advertising, RTA subsidy) and revenue generated from passenger fares. The funding plan for capital improvement projects will comprise of new funding from FTA Section 5307 funds, and State Prop 1 B Security and STA funds. The funding plans to support the proposed operating and capital program are outlined below. 4.2.1 Operating Budget: The estimated operating budget plan, outlined in Table 4, consist of funds from various funding sources that include: • Estimated new Local Transportation funds (LTF) totaling $11,000,000 • Estimated Measure A funds totaling $4,500,000 • A total estimate of $264,566 from the Section 5311 funding program • Estimated Section 5307 funds for operating assistance and Preventive Maintenance in the amounts of $924,804 and $1,799,126 respectively • Revenues from the Bus and Bus Shelter Advertising Programs estimated at $50,000 • $61,597 contribution from Riverside Transit Agency for operating funding for proposed Palm Desert - Riverside Commuter Express service • Allocated Section 5316 JARC and Section 5317 New Freedom funds of $125,310 and $101,951, respectively for the Riverside Commuter Express service and the Taxi Voucher Program in the Coachella Valley. • A total of $3,350,000 in revenue estimated to be collected in passenger fares 39 4.2.2 Capital Improvement Program budget: The estimated capital improvement program budget shown in Table 4 includes funding from the following sources: • $440,000 estimated in new State Transit Assistance funds for FY 2012/13 • Estimated new Section 5307 capital assistance funds in the amount of $1,795,286 • Estimated amount of $394,714 in Prop 1 B Transit Security funding to be used in funding transit safety and security enhancement projects. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Americans with Disability Act (ADA) SunLine complies with ADA Regulations with accessible vehicles used for transit services and ADA paratransit vans. Supervisor vans are also equipped with wheelchair lifts. The agency continues to work with local jurisdictions to continue to increase the number of accessible bus stops in full compliance with ADA guidelines. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) In FY 2010/11, staff submitted its bi-annual DBE report to Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Staff is working on gathering information to develop and submit its DBE report to the Federal Transit Administration in FY 2012/13. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) SunLine complies with federal regulations pertaining to employment and submits its EEO Report every other year to the Federal Transit Administration. A report was submitted in 2011. Title VI SunLine's Title VI Report was updated and submitted to the FTA for the three-year required mandate for updating the report. The Board approved the FY 2010/11 Updated Report which has been approved by the FTA. Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Audit In FY 2009/10, RCTC commissioned Mayer, Hoffman and McCann PC to conduct the Triennial Performance Audit as required by TDA, with no findings resulting from this audit. The next audit is due in FY 2012/13. Federal Transit Administration Triennial Audit Staff completed the FTA FY 2010 Triennial Audit in June 2010. All recommendations and findings have been addressed and approved by FTA. The next audit is due in FY 2013. National Transit Database (NTD) Report and Sampling Staff completed NTD Section sampling in mid 2011. Next sampling will be required in FY 2013/14. SunLine is planning to run parallel sampling using manual samples and Automatic Passenger Counter (APC) data in order to gain approval to use APC data in future reporting. Alternative Fueled Vehicles SunLine conforms to RCTC Alternative Fuel Policy with all vehicles in the fleet using CNG fuels. The current fleet consists of 56 40-foot CNG buses, 3 40-foot Hydrogen Fuel Cell buses, ten 32-foot CNG buses, 31 22-foot paratransit buses, and 39 non -revenue CNG or electric vehicles. 40 I} 4 41001 veal sefinciui seed susula6vuuyy Repeonr awvFab °.]vA yo vlsusaPRJ Tit aPnlaul Pu PP stunoulu vsvul unpsJalo p JIMA assu sapesnld 13h0A1190 eweJasllaQ01 sP!VM -wsiSaid Jalpnon!WI La Z119 seed say uluipyp JPaA 01)0 ass spuny Lt£5 +'emu aui •Lee1aid ssaJdlr3 lapBWS000 v0Kien!u Ay [Wpm JaaA 15syy0 000'SLS my sold' LIpZ Jatlwv+`UH u! 6urpela iSafad at vnp wsetes9 -.NOMA I%el, 101 GUPuni y0 Jeeh a® Z114 6u1vp FaVF'S4Q•14 S! JihOhJleO 4L£0 uVese$ 'L L80'9l£5 wog ✓A JenC1RLIVP euF ul s! 6uIPury sseudx3 JvinulUoo pplaivri; aVl 51501111ulpy vurlun$ 51$1£5 AWN 'PaWu(1819ul MLI Pu Pajold 554ldx3 JaistuLuzo opisvinwi;e al aro ZL•LLJ,j aloe Pesnun L00.6 L15 sl JplPkWaP 9L£5 melon ANariOne %OOaJBy 969'LL Seaw Ol PSPaau SI Sines V aesSeaW aui P 0000845 'sure ssaude3 JalntuvAp] ap!slaAw Jay yltl uPe 165. L90 Pus 6uislPahpe 000000 sl anuanau ;ago anuanal alsy aawas vJ xwmau Jo1000000 • 000-06£'£0lo xosis s3 :apopul uopapPevo did PJ anuahau RPl luej0Y1 Val puarei allays Snld swled puesn vi Fe sieved JePS pue uOgeLS !ere uNluawapvidel Jay ZLOZ lusty -Limy' pails -was aweq sumieolddv lueL0 lee j ue03 Pue Jledeu po0V y0 ems y1 j 6v4atesu Jay ua91W l'ZS swuasvld sN1 'iselsases Palsw9sa 4L8'5£5ES al snslan pawsJ6PJd 00008E3 VIIM£L•ZL,Ri u! assI Flan sPun3d1S aeo4d seION • $ S S 41L'48£ S S- S 000.OZ5'L 4 000'OS£ 5 5 S- S 4LL'46Z'Z S 4LL'Y6Z'Z S RucleD ;Rwl woos, 5 000OL 5 - 5 000.06 s 0000s 4 11•£1•l5 luawd!nh38 51001 pouuuvKu!vyy 000'08 $ 000'0Z $ 000401 $ 000'00C $ OL•EL•-15 FPnls.Rafuns lspi i 00084 S 000'ZL $ - S 00055 S 000'09 $ 60•£1•15 I0l52n0Cienj aleda 000E0 5 000EZ $ - S 0005L1 S 000511 $ 130•El•15 uwlsfus vuoud iSsuuk McFl 00048 S 000LE $ - 5 000'50L S 00050L S 10•El•-IS 51PPIDld 11 000'08 $ 000'0Z $ - $ 900'001 $ 000.001 $ 90E1•15 alnpuinj pow) 000-09L 5 0000e $ - $ WOOOZ S 00000E 4 a0•El•i5 ivawaraudwl Fplpej 41L'46E S 5 • 5 - S 4LL'46E S 41L'Y6£ 4 40•81•15 sluauJ2oua4u3 dots lrsuvii WO OZL 5 000081 $ - S 000000 S 000006 5 50£1.•l5 6 snnadau pie,.., suevd pussrPµl 0009L1 S 00044 4 - S 0000ZZ S 0000EZ S ZO•E1•l5 NAM WA! PullsuPiseen soap$ tuarueosldau 0000e S 00001- $ - S Ow -as S Oa0'OS S w0•El•l3 uonerialutpu me 68£s MS IMPad LLES MS P2OPal 9135 aaS IPUBPai [v361.11d1 II5ueJ1 lend 9L d01d spunl 411n1e8 IIsuPJl 0iL 0049 80E5 188 PaPai L0E5 1a5 rEePoa JVROFIND 20E5 uo zes FJaaai yl8 sPun4 y1S Jeno/we ill !snowy Jaw/Lupo viol 5e1014 Jeriuks, tn04FL16 Furlowy 11101 JahOF11P) Huepnloul wnowy EPp1 N taal041 RII(1,2•7 iaueKlMl [20,0 001005£'£ LG. LLI 51.8•Le L50.61.1 901-09 S £5Z9 990-49Z 0 0 0E6£ZL'Z 000005Y 0 000000LL 50009L Z54910ZZ S 45£'LLLa Wilms* :rem 0 0 S O 0 0 9ZL'66L'L 0 0 9Z1 66L L S SLL'66E1 aluaualulSIN anl{vahakj 00005E£ S L65'1,11 S 51,8-LY S L50611. S SOL-09 S £5Z9 S 99S Y9Z S • S • 4 409}ZS S 0000054 S • S 00000011 S Z0609L 3 9Z£21 0Z S 9ZZ9L£0Z S aauels!ssy Suovia00 eSigvlei .annehaly Je1P0 L195 On NF0PB3 1BhOFJ112.3 81£3 aaS IekePea JOAO/J.1n LLE9 0e3 fw.Pe3 9L£0 10$ @-wix,A Ll£5 PBS lesvpei 80£3 /OS leJaPe3 suuni 10E5 peg JaAOlue3 L0£5 pus IeJePBi Velnseeyr ill Jemikuv, ill luriaui Jaeu ua, P101 spun; Junokre FnautlAa 1lalowy 1PF01 JaRwUlq Wipe !pup wnvwv left aauessissySueaadp 30LInos oNIpNn AEI 3aNVISISSV IVAIdVO PuO ONIlHlI3d0 ELIZLOZ A3 7 318tl1 • d1LIS E11Z10Z Aj AQN3OV 3m-ti s TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-01 PROJECT NAME Bus Rehabilitation PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funding would enable SunLine to rehabilitate old buses in its fleet due to fading of the painting and color scheme on the buses, as well as purchase other equipment to repair or rehabilitate buses. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Currently, there are a number of buses in the fleet with paint and colors on the exterior and interior that has faded. Rehabilitating the buses would restore the colors in the interior and on the exterior. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $40,000 $10,000 $50,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y876 SL11-01 Bus Rehabilitation $132,000 CA-90-Y913 SL12-01 Bus Rehabilitation $160,000 42 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-02 PROJECT NAME Purchase of replacement revenue and non -revenue vehicles PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase four (4) replacement CNG relief cars and two (2) replacement service trucks that have met their useful life based on federal guidelines. Carryover funds include purchase of replacement paratransit vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This continues SunLine's goal of replacing non -revenue vehicles in its fleet in adherence to federal guidelines on useful life expectancy of these vehicles. Purchasing the replacement buses during this fiscal year ensures that SunLine continues to replace older vehicles in the fleet to comply with federal and state laws in a timely manner. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $176,000 STA $44,000 TOTAL $220,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y913 SL12-02 7 Replacement Paratransit Vans $665,000 CA-04-0176 SL11-07 8 Replacement Paratransit Vans $937,500 43 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-03 PROJECT NAME Thousand Palms Yard Repaving PROJECT DESCRIPTION Complete a full repaving of the existing bus yard and staff car parking area at the Thousand Palms Operating Division which are over 20 years old and worn out, broken up and uneven, creating an operational safety hazard. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The project will fully repave the existing bus yard and staff car parking area at the Thousand Palms Operating Division, addressing a 20 plus year old, worn out, broken up and uneven pavement which has become a trip hazard for staff. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $720,000 STA $180,000 TOTAL $900,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 44 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER S L 13-04 PROJECT NAME Transit Stop Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enhance existing bus stops as recommended in the COA. Funding requested for transit enhancements will address FTA requirement to utilize 1 % of the Section 5307 apportionment on Safety and Security, as well as the one percent requirement for transit enhancements. Primary activity is the purchase and installation of new shelter sheds, including site improvements where required. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Continued improvements (primarily new shelter sheds) to bus stops for the safety and comfort of passengers as recommended in the Comprehensive Operational Analysis. The service area experiences extreme temperatures in summer months, making the shelter sheds a valuable addition to stop facilities. By mid-2013, 71 % of all stops will have shelter sheds installed and this funding should allow for over 85% of stops to have this facility. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Prop 1 B Security $394,714 TOTAL $394,714 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y913 (incl. Carryover FTA 5316) SL12-03 $65,678 CA-90-Y876 SL11-03 $240,000 CA-90-Y706 SL10-03 $826,599 45 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-05 PROJECT NAME Facility Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funds requested in this fiscal year will enable SunLine to improve existing facilities, including roof repair and replacement, new carpeting and blinds, and repair of parking facilities for staff use. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Project is necessary for facilities and ground improvements at Thousand Palms and Indio. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $160,000 $40,000 $200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y876 SL11-05 Facility Improvements $323,500 CA-90-Y913 SL12-05 Facility Improvements $550,000 46 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-06 PROJECT NAME Office furniture PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase new furniture to replace existing furniture for staff in various departments. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Continuation of the office furniture program to replace and add furniture as they reach the end of their cycle life. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $80,000 STA $20,000 TOTAL $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y876 SL11-08 Office Furniture $285,000 CA-90-Y913 SL12-07 Office Furniture $120,000 47 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-07 PROJECT NAME Information Technology System (IT) Projects PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase various IT equipment, software and hardware for existing agency system needs. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Use of IT equipment is critical to the daily functions staff performs and helps to streamline operations and reports for SunLine services. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $84,000 $21,000 $105,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y913 SL12-09 ITS and IT projects $500,000 SL12-12 ERMS Project $500,000 CA-90-Y706 SL10-06 ITS Equipment $75,430 48 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-08 PROJECT NAME Purchase New Agency Telephone System PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project will see the SunLine Transit Agency telephone system be replaced with a modern, state of the art system. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The existing telephone system is over a decade old and is hard to keep functioning due to availability of parts and the worn out equipment. The agency is at risk of this key system failing, resulting in severe disruption to agency communications and services. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $92,000 $23,000 $115,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 49 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-09 PROJECT NAME Purchase Spare Fareboxes PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase five (5) new fareboxes to act as spare units to allow existing units to be repaired. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The project will allow maintenance staff to better manage the Agency's fareboxes by allowing more time for repair of broken fareboxes without taking buses out of service. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $48,000 $12,000 $60,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance SL12-08 New Ticket Vending Machine $75,000 50 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-10 PROJECT NAME Rider Survey PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conduct a sample survey of SunLine Transit Agency riders to compile a profile of riders and how they use the system. It has been five years since the last survey (2008) and the economic climate has changed substantially since that time. The survey provides critical information in support of the agency's planning and marketing efforts. SunLine is requesting funding to complete this survey in the first half of calendar year 2013. The same project will include SunLine's collection of ridecheck data for NTD Section 15. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The requested funding will enable SunLine to work with selected consultants to design and conduct the survey and NTD Section 15 ridechecks. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $160,000 STA $40,000 TOTAL $200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y913 SL12-10 BRT, Indio Facility Studies $450,000 CA-90-Y913 SL12-08 Ticket Vending Machine Study $75,000 51 TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 13-11 PROJECT NAME Maintenance Tools & Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase major replacement tools, equipment and parts used in routine vehicle maintenance. The items to be purchased can include multi -meters, torque wrenches, impact sockets, software updates, service jacks, miscellaneous air and hand tools, and drill bits. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Equipment must be replaced to ensure proper maintenance of revenue service vehicles. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $40,000 $10,000 $50,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90-Y913 SL12-11 Maintenance Tools and Equipment $100,000 CA-90-Y876 SL11-09 Maintenance Tools and Equipment $157,800 52 SunLine Transit Agency FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4.1 - Summary of Universal Call for Projects Funding Request for FY 2012/13 Project Description - Operating Assistance Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds Local Match LTF STA Section 5307 Indio Cathedral City Palm Springs Section 5316 [JARC1 Section 5317 [NF1 Farebox Recovery Ratio Riverside County Transportation Commission - Rideshare $84,000 $42,000 $42,000 Coachella Valley Association of Governments $107,618 $53,809 $53,809 $0 Subtotal: Operating $191,618 $95,809 $0 $0 $0 $95,809 $0 $0 CVAG - Mobility Manager $9,060 $1,812 $0 $7,248 $0 $0 $0 Subtotal: Capital $9,060 $1,812 $0 $0 $0 $7,248 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $200,678 $97,621 $0 $0 $0 $103,057 $0 $0 SunLine Transit Agency FY 2013/14 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 - Summary Of Funding Request for FY 2013/14 DRAFT Marsh 20, 2012 Project Description Capital Project Number(1) Total Amount of Funds Total Carryover Amount LTF Carryover LTF STA Prop 1B Transit Security Prop1B PTMISEA Measure Section 5307 Indio/Cathedral City Palm Springs Carryover Section 5307 Indio/Cathedral City Palm Springs Section 5311 Section 5316 Section 5317 Other Revenue Farebox OPERA TING Operating Assistance $22,005,635 $0 $12,500,000 $o $4,423,740 $943,300 $0 $269,857 $100,030 $56,091 $111,597 $3,601,02C Preventive Maintenance $2,610,117 $0 $0 $0 $2610,117 $0 Subtotal: Operating $24,615,752 $0 $12,500,000 $o $0 $0 $4,423,740 $3,553,417 $0 $269,857 $100,030 $56,091 $111,597 $3,601,02C CA PITAL Bus Rehabilitation SL-14-01 $200,000 $40,000 $160,000 4 Paratransit replacement vans SL-14-02 $490,000 $490,000 $0 Transit Enhancement SL-14-03 $400,000 $320,000 $80,000 Facility Improvement SL-14-04 $200,000 $120,000 $80,000 Office Furniture SL-14-05 $100,000 $100,000 $0 IT Projects SL-14-06 $100,000 $100,000 $0 Maintenance Tools&Equipment SL-14-07 $100,000 $100,000 $0 Replacement Service Vehicles (6 trucks, 3 cars) SL 14-08 $304,000 $294,000 $100,000 Subtotal: Capital $1,964,000 $o $0 $0 $1,544,000 $0 $0 $0 $420,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o Total: Operating 8 Capital $26,679,762 $0 $12,600,000 $0 $1,644,000 $0 $0 $4,423,740 $3,973,417 $0 $269,857 $100,030 $56,091 $111,597 $3,601,020 Proposed Funding Details Target Budget Projected FY 13/14/LIE Projected FY13/14 5307 Preventive Maintenance Projected FY13/14 Farebox Revenue Projected FY13/14 Other Funds Projected FY13/14 Measure funds Projected FY13/14 Section 5307 Operating Funds Projected FY 13J14 Section 5311 Operating Funds Recommended FY 2013/14 NF Funds Recommended FY 2013/14 JARC Funds Estimated Operating Funding Total $24,615,752 (FY12-13 service level+Extra $1 633,090 in service)*1.02 (2 % increase overall) $ 12,500,000 Target amount. $ 2,610,117 Target amount. $ 3,601,020 [This number is from the projected farebox recovery ratio for FY 12f13 $3,350,000 +$251 020 from new services.] $ 111,597 [This includes estimated funds from the Bus&Bus shelter Advertising Programs$50,000, and RTA funding$61,597 for Riverside commuter service] $ 4,423,740 Astor FY12-13 + 2% $675,000 of this is needed to meet 17 B%farebox recovery. $ 949,900 Asfor FY12-13+2% $ 269,857 Asfor FY12-13+2% $ 56,091 [This includes 33% of one year of taxi voucher program funds (Inc!. admin) and $25,000 forthe commuter service to Riverside]_ $ 100,030 [This is for the proposed commuter service to Riverside]. $ 24,615,752 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 14-01 PROJECT NAME Bus Rehabilitation PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funds requested will enable SunLine to rehabilitate old buses in its fleet due to fading of the painting and color scheme on the buses, as well as purchase other equipment to repair or rehabilitate buses. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Currently, there are a number of buses in the fleet with paint and colors on the exterior and interior that has faded. Rehabilitating these buses would restore colors in the interior and on the exterior. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $ 160,000 STA $ 40,000 TOTAL $ 200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 55 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 14-02 ROJECT NAME Purchase four (4) replacement paratransit buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase four (4) replacement CNG buses to replace existing DAR vehicles in the fleet that have met their useful life based on federal guidelines. In 2004, staff implemented a bus replacement plan to replace buses in the fleet with excess mileage of over 150,000 miles and more than 4 years. The buses to be purchased will be 25ft, 30ft and/or 35ft. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This continues SunLine's goal of replacing buses in its fleet. As a result of the current buses having excess mileage of over 100,000, SunLine will replace DAR buses to ensure adherence to federal guidelines on useful life expectancy of vehicles. In FY 2010/11, SunLine purchased four DAR buses, which will reach over 150,000 miles by FY 2013/14. Purchasing the replacement buses during this fiscal year ensures that SunLine continues to replace older vehicles in the fleet to comply with federal and state laws in a timely manner. In FY 2014/15, and subsequent years, SunLine will purchase eleven (11) DAR replacement buses to ensure the fleet is kept in good condition and operated within the federal and state laws. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA $ 480,000 TOTAL $ 480,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 56 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL14-03 PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funding requested for transit enhancements which will address FTA requirement to utilize 1 % of the Section 5307 apportionment on transit enhancements. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Continued improvements to bus stops for the safety and comfort of passengers. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $ 80,000 STA $ 320,000 TOTAL $ 400,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 57 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER S L 14-04 PROJECT NAME Facility Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funds requested in this fiscal year will enable SunLine to improve existing facilities, including roof repair and replacement, new carpeting and blinds, and repair of parking facilities for staff use. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Project is necessary for facilities and ground improvements at Thousand Palms and Indio. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $ 80,000 $120,000 $ 200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 58 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 14-05 PROJECT NAME Office furniture PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase new furniture to replace existing furniture for staff in various departments. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Continuation of office furniture program to replace and add furniture as they reach the end of their cycle life. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA $100,000 TOTAL $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 59 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 14-06 PROJECT NAME Information Technology System (IT) Projects PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase various IT equipment, software and hardware for existing agency system needs. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Use of IT equipment is critical to the daily functions staff perform and helps to streamline operations and reports for SunLine services. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA $100,000 TOTAL $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 60 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 14-07 PROJECT NAME Maintenance Tools & Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase major replacement tools, equipment and parts used in routine vehicle maintenance. The items to be purchased include multi meters, torque wrenches, impact sockets, software updates, service jacks, miscellaneous air and hand tools, and drill bits. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Equipment must be replaced to ensure proper maintenance of revenue service vehicles. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA TOTAL $100,000 $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 61 TABLE 5.1.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 14-08 PROJECT NAME Purchase three (3) relief cars and six (6) service trucks as replacement vehicles PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase three (3) replacement CNG relief cars and six (6) replacement service trucks that have met their useful life based on federal guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This continues SunLine's goal of replacing non -revenue vehicles in its fleet in adherence to federal guidelines on useful life expectancy of these vehicles. Purchasing the replacement buses during this fiscal year ensures that SunLine continues to replace older vehicles in the fleet to comply with federal and state laws in a timely manner. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $100,000 STA $284,000 TOTAL $384,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 62 SunLine Transit Agency FY 2014f 15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 - Summary of Funding Request for FY 2O14f15 FINAL May 25, 2011 Project Description Capital Project Number(1) Total Amount of Funds Total Carryover Amount LTF Carryover LTF STA Prop 1B Transit Security Prop 1B PTMISEA Measure Section 5307 Indio/Cathedral City Palm Springs Carryover Section 5307 Indio/Cathedral City Palm Springs Section 5311 Section 5316 Section 5317 Other Revenue Farebox OPERATING Operating Assistance $22,406775 $0 $13,000,000 $0 $4,512215 $363,236 $0 $275,254 $0 $0 $50,000 $3,601,02C Preventive Maintenance $2 701 292 $0 $0 $2701,292 $0 Subtotal: Operating $25,100,067 $0 $13,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,512,215 $3,669,570 $0 $275,254 $0 $0 $50,000 $3,601,02C CAPITAL Bus Rehabilitation SL-15-01 $200,000 $40,000 $160,000 11 Paratransst replacement vans SL-15-02 $1,320,000 $1,320,000 $0 Transit Enhancement SL-15-03 $400,000 $320,000 Samoa Facility Improvement SL-15-04 $200,000 $120,000 Samoa Office Furniture SL-15-05 $100,000 $100,000 $0 IT Projects SL-15-06 $100,000 $100,000 $0 Maintenance Tools& Equipment SL-15-07 $100,000 $100,000 $0 Replacement Service Vehicles (6 oars) SL-15-03 $212,000 $112,000 $100,000 Subtotal: Capital $2,632,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,212,000 $0 $0 $0 $420,000 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $27,740,067 $0 $13,000,000 $0 $2,212,000 $0 $0 $4,512,215 $4,089,578 $0 $275,254 $0 $0 $50,000 $3,601,020 Service levels as for FY1 3-14, with JARUNF funding finished_ Proposed Funding Details Budget Target $25,108,067 FY13-14 ninth 2% cost increase Projected FY 14J151 LTF $ 13,000,000 Target amount. Projected FY14/155307 Preventive Maintenance $ 2,701,232 Target amount. Projected FY14115 Farebox Revenue $ 3,601,020 [This number is aster FY13-14. Projected FY14/15 Other Funds $ 50,000 [This Includes estimated funds from the Bus& Bus shelter Advertising Programs$50,000) Projected FY14115 Measure A funds $ 4,512,215 As for FY13-14 + 2% $325,000 of this is needed to meet 17.0% farebox recovery. Projected FY14/15 Section 5307 Operating Funds $ 968,286 As for FY13-14 + 2% Projected FY 14115 Section 5311 Operating Funds $ 275,254 As for FY13-14+2% Recommended FY14115 NF Funds $ Recommended FY14115 JAR Funds $ - Estimated Operating Funding Total $ 25,108,067 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 15-01 PROJECT NAME Bus Rehabilitation PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funds requested will enable SunLine to rehabilitate old buses in its fleet due to fading of the painting and color scheme on the buses, as well as purchase other equipment to repair or rehabilitate buses. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Currently, there are a number of buses in the fleet with paint and colors on the exterior and interior that has faded. Rehabilitating these buses would restore colors in the interior and on the exterior. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $160,000 $40,000 $200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 64 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 15-02 ROJECT NAME Purchase eleven (11) replacement paratransit buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase eleven (11) replacement CNG buses to replace existing DAR vehicles in the fleet that have met their useful life based on federal guidelines. In 2004, staff implemented a bus replacement plan to replace buses in the fleet with excess mileage of over 150,000 miles and more than 4 years. The buses to be purchased will be 25ft, 30ft and/or 35ft. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This continues SunLine's goal of replacing buses in its fleet. As a result of the current buses having excess mileage of over 100,000, SunLine will replace DAR buses to ensure adherence to federal guidelines on useful life expectancy of vehicles. In FY 2011/12, SunLine purchased thirteen DAR buses, which eleven are expected to have over 150,000 miles by FY 2014/15. Purchasing the replacement buses during this fiscal year ensures that SunLine continues to replace older vehicles in the fleet to comply with federal and state laws in a timely manner. In FY 2015/16, and subsequent years, SunLine will purchase eleven (11) DAR replacement buses to ensure the fleet is kept in good condition and operated within the federal and state laws. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA $1,320,000 TOTAL $1,320,000 65 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL15-03 PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funding requested for transit enhancements which will address FTA requirement to utilize 1 % of the Section 5307 apportionment for transit enhancements. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Continued improvements to bus stops for the safety and comfort of passengers. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 STA TOTAL $80,000 $320,000 $400,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 66 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER S L 15-04 PROJECT NAME Facility Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Funds requested in this fiscal year will enable SunLine to improve existing facilities, including roof repair and replacement, new carpeting and blinds, and repair of parking facilities for staff use. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Project is necessary for facilities and ground improvements at Thousand Palms and Indio. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES FTA Section 5307 $80,000 STA $120,000 TOTAL $200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 67 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 15-05 PROJECT NAME Office furniture PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase new furniture to replace existing furniture for staff in various departments. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Continuation of office furniture program to replace and add furniture as they reach the end of their cycle life. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA $100,000 TOTAL $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 68 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 15-06 PROJECT NAME Information Technology System (IT) Projects PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase various IT equipment, software and hardware for existing agency system needs. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Use of IT equipment is critical to the daily function's staff perform and helps to streamline operations and reports for SunLine services. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA $100,000 TOTAL $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 69 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 15-07 PROJECT NAME Maintenance Tools & Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase major replacement tools, equipment and parts used in routine vehicle maintenance. The items to be purchased include multi meters, torque wrenches, impact sockets, software updates, service jacks, miscellaneous air and hand tools, and drill bits. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Equipment must be replaced to ensure proper maintenance of revenue service vehicles. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA TOTAL $100,000 $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 70 TABLE 5.2.A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SL 15-08 ROJECT NAME Purchase four (4) relief cars and one (1) SUV car as replacement vehicles PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase four (4) replacement CNG relief cars, one (1) CNG SUV, and one (1) larger CNG sedan car that have met their useful life based on federal guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This continues SunLine's goal of replacing non -revenue vehicles in its fleet in adherence to federal guidelines on useful life expectancy of these vehicles. Purchasing the replacement buses during this fiscal year ensures that SunLine continues to replace older vehicles in the fleet to comply with federal and state laws in a timely manner. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) FTA Section 5307 $100,000 STA $112,000 TOTAL $212,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 71 TABLE 6 FY 2010/11 RCTCSINGLE AUDIT The FY 2010/11 RCTC Basic Financial Audit and Single Audit were both completed by Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP (MGO) accountants. There were two findings as shown below, for which actions have been taken by SunLine. These audits are consistent with Federal, State, and County audit requirements. Recommendations Actions Taken FY 2011 Single Audit Act Finding #1 We recommend that the Agency develop The Finance Department will record the and implement procedures to ensure change in the deposits held by the Public information is properly and timely Entity Risk Management Authority (PERMA) captured to reconcile and adjust its on a quarterly basis as determined in the claims payable and related expenses at PERMA financial reports. The Sunline staff year-end. In addition, we recommend will also request the status of claims payable that the Agency obtain the annual on a quarterly basis and record adjustments financial statements (or in the absence as necessary in the general ledger of the of such, request information from Agency. The Finance Department followed PERMA) to determine the Agency's previous auditor guidance on recording deposit with PERMA at year-end and PERMA entries in the SunLine financial properly reflect that amount in the statements. Agency's financial statements. FY 2011 Single Audit Act Finding #2 The Agency should develop and SunLine staff concurs with the implement procedures during its year- recommendation. The Schedule of end closing process to reconcile grant Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) will revenues recognized in the financial be prepared by the Accounting Manager and statements with federally reimbursable will be reviewed by the Director of Finance to expenditures reported in the SEFA to ensure that the information agrees to the ensure expenditures are appropriately captured in the year incurred. general ledger of the Agency. 72 muliewzo Rappind MANS +� Cy did 1DM EPSFY SZEPR30L[ )1-411:009P3 t t ENGIN 'ILElAUlti%d TAM VCREY WIT AA d A/MUMS KUIRLIMPId 1141l12DPMd sp7 'D� aamuuap.y an=n 2 Ja 3ro k 4sml7o Flaw PIY �74M 04.1i1 Mani t: 7 Lvi m} Pue 60'T +.< 9: 7 alhl;mai. „lad aillSu 9sEd t 1 ,,J 09.v 29-61 -> PrE K k1 ... of 9: rq.4 alua,R0 -EV s.01-1;12rd -} Mal21 Warr] 0.g$ 96-9im5 PR 0k'14 -•< $6'SS Rip/ AdADP:InE"S a-41 J u'0i# :1-61.$ EP girt 1615S't K' US -1112H Aid 41SCFS 1, '+m�1 ALL iiinA9 9S'0C t8'0$ E.} Pup 09'0$ -.< di'CEF aim] •Eala5512d AidADP:In9 'E am]. 44 LEE$ '914 m 0 PA? 51.T$ E. f+'+4 _Efumwd Jac' APra4-6 'Z ACOP1Marl 8Z'i&$ _8'iB m‘l. ?8'9EP rri-Rrir 8.id150]641144A40'T Amami! Ammo _ errI rAL I csi5EL[ --: FiX c[ IOM LOACCilim.+r+ d UrgePMINII raw:lavI lauuiruimoid liZe9966ii y+�►.10 ami i;euo2.12d Fu1 le;riiTa# sasdFg 6.1Fsitlo Fu1 0vae ee R14 PPlyPA Woo' FPI OV7'9Z'€ saw all-41Q 1 PpWI Wale leP1 O-CC 'SSZ %XI:14 aiva'atl amp.ti Wane Ia1 GeO'kela 14;I1111 -GAPsSRI aiW11' Sul Jth-oSSEd Pr4pIF11 1:1642.312611: 13}+►2+1+ El egea 01...1129A. aim* PAC linfloAti- Rea Dill •MIL VCITRIC kil *rift rarrez As] Lew €an:W .41 El+e40e13 EMU rea4aid u ¢Id arluir11 7+)4S rrirreir A4 msuurjmuprawJ 1in}tpsim "D134l 40uµ1 EW C SO M OZ .11.31 a0 81-1.121L07P a0 v wolP3 p.030115 om a�ol LEI (12 31145.4.1 °may yi45.41 coft y auuOWN aim]. s-sm44 alRl NI;EFl Mi2j Sri awl Nlaarj egi —} INA SRI 6E7: -} PA 'cm � scs6 - gu2dell-e 5cron - gu2 gig -e 1eirCI$ m'Y AV WM � 1.0.# a} PA Ora .-R RON G,:rd Vr661 -} GC C OS'OL G�s emu# 66-0 WES $t14 SF`$:11 661X16 in Wel .0 if 1toil MI ZZ1:6 Bg F$ LF'9# liri6$ tz L OELtL gni 0370 Z�-0 EU [MI 1i`$6 06-66i aIM1 mug..e`d Ad mated inni �DLS. 'd Ad 9ESed 44 wkip.wu -9.4 `f'pins rq,.l a ati _gad 4gm qi4 -05-0"E'd -9d .11024-5 .ACki 59ed Ald AP MPS iguassed D d rem &NAJD awl aid Ald Is.:Q fiu NAM r4•d PWWW -12d nia* kJ ;LI MI 99F'`La191 # E ECe695Z7 # 7 605SVL7 # APFGPS IMIVCJp 114-04 Waft WIVES 663,6arF# MBA%Aill 15LBESed 110b14 FGiLl'a# ZglrielY9L6 osir'ravIrs KIM &per RON Cr$9r911t C.Z0ZitaLt .E'151A'f MIMIIW41 zqW ErVirgrat MrpCS'-z Mega % 1p14y wiAli o zErl Ol5r'u inz Z Z GEEF'66( aJclq ILL EMI 7LC950 6/SOSeZZ ZFL'HO FZ wi•J J+C+ d EN" 9L6'9291$ 40210.2 OIWGGVI, salmi ed Silk�1. OWN _ aD1�1u wig 'el E[ JIZ'1 4Z JLi umili CialgiC AA �� wpi gtAil �3ewpa }a1rd am4Fa � k Ja R19 rrMTDZAl w4nokl 11V 1.1040.8 u rhu.101.1ad dill S -- $ ale! - E ZIOZ AA uauger. r using Wary Flam q TABLE 9 HIGHLIGHTS OF FY 2012/13 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN • Implement new Palm Desert - Riverside Commuter Express bus service. • Finalize plan to enhance performance of Palm Desert Line 53. • Continue working with local jurisdictions on bus stop improvements including procurement of more bus shelters. • Commence construction of the new Administrative Building project at Thousand Palms. • Continue new Taxi Voucher Program in Coachella Valley. Operating & Financial Data FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 3RD Quarter Actual FY 12/13 Year End Projection System Ridership 3,690,117 3,713,752 4,155,480 3,436,837 4,636,918 Cost Per Revenue Hr. $93.32 $91.72 $89.93 $87.28 $88.58 Comments: SunLine anticipates meeting all mandatory and discretionary targets for FY 2012/13. 75 ``` Riverside Cooney iionsparreRon Commission Commuter Rail Short Range Transit Plan FY 2012/13-2014/15 Draft Report May 22, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 — SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1 1.1 Description of Service Area 1 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 1 1.3 Fixed Route Services 2 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure 2 Ticket Types 2 Fare Increase 3 1.5 Revenue Fleet 4 1.6 Existing and Planned Facilities 4 Commuter Rail Station Management 4 CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 7 2.1 Fixed Route Service 7 Riverside Line 7 Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) Line 8 91 Line 9 2.2 Key Performance Indicators 10 Riverside Line 10 IEOC Line 10 91 Line 10 2.3 Productivity Improvement Efforts 10 2.4 Trip Generators and Projected Growth 11 2.5 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 12 Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) 12 Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project 13 CHAPTER 3 — PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 14 3.1 Recent Service Changes 14 3.2 Recommended Service Changes and Modifications 14 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion 15 CHAPTER 4 — FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 16 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 16 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Operating and Capital Program 16 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 16 Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VI 16 TDA Triennial Audit, FTA Triennial Audit, NTD 17 Alternative Fueled Vehicles 17 TABLE 1 - FLEET INVENTORY 18 TABLE 2 — SRTP SERVICE SUMMARY 19 TABLE 3 — SRTP ROUTE STATISTICS 20 TABLE 4 — SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED 21 TABLE 5 — SUMMARY OF FUTURE FUNDS REQUESTED 26 TABLE 6 - STATE TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT 29 TABLE 7 - PERFORMANCE TARGET REPORT 30 TABLE 8 - SRTP PERFORMANCE REPORT 31 TABLE 9 - SRTP HIGHLIGHTS 32 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS BNSF Burlington Northern -Santa Fe Railroad CETAP Community & Environmental Acceptability Process CMAQ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Funds EOM Extra -Ordinary Maintenance FTA Federal Transit Administration IEOC Inland Empire -Orange County Line LACMTA Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority LAUS Los Angeles Union Station LTF Local Transportation Funds MOW Maintenance -of -Way OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority PTC Positive Train Control PVL Perris Valley Line RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission RTA Riverside Transit Agency RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program SANBAG San Bernardino Associated Governments SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority SJBL San Jacinto Branch Line SR State Route SRTP Short Range Transit Plan STA State Transit Assistance Funds STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program Funds TVM Ticket Vending Machine UP Union Pacific Railroad VCTC Ventura County Transportation Commission r `� Riverside (ounly Tionsporlmion Commission CHAPTER 1 — SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Description of Service Area Currently, five of the 57 Metrolink stations are located in Western Riverside County. These five stations, Riverside -Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, and North Main Corona, are owned and maintained by RCTC. A ,.." MAP NOT TO VALI `y CY' ," 4 4,9 O .. R$ o''� e oe0� Q to ® ,* ,,,to- 4, Yy � 4y� 0 ST o kocPs" e *� Or merolinkirairu.com METROLINK METROMIR ROUTES .wddcpe Vdler Rim Inlmd Empie-Oranga Comfy Lint Orange Court, line Rimride line Son Bernardino line Yefmra (wily L:e 91 Lne Iki.erride-Fulerron{.41 4 Ral Transfer Stction t Men-olhk,'anmok Shored Sanon _ awmk Pacific krfliner Me.a RaiUMem Bm rSaor 15.2010 4" '410_, 4 * h� bhn'Nolne kse 4' 01' to Az "ok O RORINTE R To Trod& 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections Whether traveling to work, school, or one of Southern California's great recreational destinations, Metrolink trains provide a viable alternative to driving alone. Every day, thousands of Southern California residents park their cars and choose Metrolink to commute. The average Metrolink commute from Riverside County is 37 miles. Metrolink trains are also popular with schools throughout the region both taking students to classes and for field trips. The Metrolink rider profiles are updated every two years. The following is the latest socio-economic data collected in 2010: 1 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission Line Gender: Male Female Riverside Line 46% 54% IEOC Line 50% 50% 91 Line 50% 50% System -wide 50% 50% Ethnicity: Black 19% 11% 12% 15% Hispanic 27% 21 % 26% 24% Asian 21 % 10% 17% 15% Native Hawaiian 2% 1 % 2% 1 % American Indian 0% 1 % 1 % 1 % Caucasian (non -Hispanic) 27% 54% 39% 41 Other 3% 3% 4% 3% Median Income (2010) $85,526 $74,999 $82,895 $76,470 Full -Time Employed 85% 86% 86% 80% Automobile Available 92% 87% 83% 83% 1.3 Fixed Route Services Metrolink regularly operates Monday through Friday. Weekend service operates on a reduced frequency on the IEOC, Orange County and San Bernardino Lines on Saturdays and Sundays with extensions to the Riverside -Downtown Station. IEOC Line Weekend service began July 2006. There is limited service on New Year's Day on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Lines. Trains do not normally operate on the following major holidays: Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure Metrolink ticket prices are distance -based and calculated on the shortest driving miles between stations. Each station combination is uniquely priced, based on driving miles from one station to the other. A ride from Downtown Riverside to Los Angeles Union Station is a 59 mile one-way trip; a ride from Downtown Riverside to Irvine is a 40 mile trip. The distance charge is currently capped at 80 miles. This pricing program offers a fair and equitable pricing policy. Over time, Metrolink customers traveling the same distances will pay the same price, and short trips will cost less than longer trips. This year, due to board adjustments to ticket types, including proposed discontinuation of the 10-Trip Ticket, the system -wide average fare increase is 0%. The Metrolink ticket price consists of three elements: a base boarding charge, an additional increment related to the number of miles traveled, and finally a modest increment to permit Metrolink passengers to transfer without cost on selected connecting transit operators and a reduced rate on others. Ticket Types 2 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 There are five types of regular Metrolink tickets. Several ticket types have been discontinued in an effort to simplify operations and reduce costs. Specifically the ten trip ticket will be discontinued, eliminating the need and expense of ticket validating machines. One Way Tickets One-way tickets are valid for one trip only, defined as continuous travel away from the origin station to the destination station specified on the ticket. One-way trips must be completed within three hours after purchase of ticket on the day of purchase. The expiration time and date is displayed on the ticket. Types of One-way Tickets sold: Weekday, Youth Weekend, Military, and Senior/Disabled. r NM= Riverside Cooney iiumpure* Commission Youth: Child: Senior: Disabled: Student: Military: Discounts Ages 6 to 18 Weekdays -regular fare; Weekends, 25% off one way and round trip tickets Three children, age 5 or under, rides free with an adult using a valid ticket Age 65 and over with valid photo ID with date of birth; 50% off regular adult fare on one way and round trip tickets, 25% off monthly and 7-day passes With proper ID, 50% off regular adult fare on one way and round trip tickets, 25% off monthly and 7-day passes 10% discount on all ticket types with proper ID 10% discount on all fares with valid ID Round Trip Tickets Round trip tickets are valid for two trips only, from and to the origin station and the destination station marked on the ticket. The first leg of a round trip ticket is valid for three hours from purchase. The return ticket is valid for travel anytime on the same day as the first leg of the trip. Types of round trip tickets sold: Weekday, Adult Weekend, Youth Weekend, Senior/Disabled, and Military. 7-Day Pass Valid for unlimited travel during a seven-day period between station pairs starting on the day when the pass is purchased. Monthly Pass Monthly Passes are valid for unlimited travel between the origin station and destination station printed on the pass during the calendar month. Types of monthly passes: Adult, Senior/Disabled, and Student (sold only to participating schools through Metrolink's administrative office). $10 Weekend Pass Metrolink introduces the Weekend Pass for only $10 per person. This pass is good for unlimited systemwide travel after 7:00 p.m. on Friday until 11:59 p.m. Sunday. The Weekend Pass is accepted for free transfers to connecting transit services, except Amtrak. Sales begin at 7:00 p.m. on Fridays. Press "Special Ticket" on the TVM screen and then "$10 Weekend Pass" to purchase. Fare Increase Since Metrolink began operations in 1992, fares have increased as indicated in the following chart: 3 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 0% 513/0 0% 4% 4.5% 5.5% 3.513/0 5.5% 3.0% 6.0% 013/0 5-9% Historically, these fare increases have been across-the-board with all ticket types incurring the same price increase. For FY 2012/13 fares are anticipated to increase from 5% to 9%. In addition to adjusting fares in 2004 to keep pace with inflation, member agencies, including RCTC, also sought a rationalization of the fares charged for travel between the existing Metrolink zones. Over the years, unusual anomalies evolved where stations were placed into zones not necessarily based upon mileage issues but on other local issues. Zone fares were eliminated in July 2005 and replaced by a new fare structure that results in passengers being charged based upon the highway driving mileage between stations. Implementation of this structure was spread over 10 years to minimize financial impacts on individual riders whose particular trip may have been artificially kept low. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The Metrolink fleet is composed of 52 in-service locomotives and 180 commuter rail cars. 117 new cars are being delivered with incremental integration into the fleet through spring 2013. 1.6 Existing and Planned Facilities In planning for a successful commuter rail program in Western Riverside County, RCTC acquired properties for current and future passenger rail service. Commuter Rail Station Management Unlike the other SCRRA county agencies, the Commission owns and operates six rail stations serving Riverside County: • Riverside -Downtown • Pedley • Riverside -La Sierra • North Main Corona • West Corona; and • Perris Multimodal Facility (joint RTA/RCTC facility) 4 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly Tionsponmion Commission Riverside County Mel rolink Se no ice Pan' }� STATION NORTH MAIN CORONA STATION ""'"• ; � �"��RIVER$lOE•� WEST CpRO LA SIERRA sail DR STATION TdpNTfR PARK �STAiIOH �OTWITIOE DOWHTOINN STATION RIVERSIDE \ LAD �rtvs �e EXISTING STATIONS PROPOSED STATIONS METROLINK LINE H++rin+n++ PROPOSED PERRIS VALLEY LINE R MORENO vat ET KARCN REED STATION 4' PERMS STATION MOIRENO VALLEY PERRIS t% ,nik,.At • Ha PERRIS STATION Station operation and maintenance costs are included in the rail program budget with services coordinated by the Commission's staff. Parking is currently free at the stations. FY 2012/13 RCTC Station Budget Communications 1% General Supplies 1% Equipment Maintenance 4% Cleaning Internal & External 5% Repairs Grounds 11% Maintenance 7% Administration 7% 5 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside (ouniy iionspor mien Commission The station operating and maintenance FY 2012/13 budget totals $3,076,000 funded by Western Riverside County Rail Local Transportation Funds (LTF). The average budget including administration and management overhead is $512,666 per station. San Jacinto Branch Line »»SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE The Measure A program provides for Riverside County's participation in the creation of a regional commuter rail system. Though the primary goal was to provide service from Riverside to Los Angeles and Orange counties, the Measure A map included a possible internal element along the former Santa Fe Railroad's San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL). The SJBL corridor extends 38.3 miles between Highgrove and Hemet within Riverside County. The alignment roughly follows the Interstate 215 to Perris where it veers east, parallel to State Route 74 to Hemet and San Jacinto. As part of the regional acquisition of Burlington Northern -Santa Fe (BNSF) properties and use rights, RCTC purchased the 38-mile SJBL and adjacent properties in 1993 for $26 million using Western County Rail Measure A and state rail bonds (Prop 108 of 1990). BNSF retained exclusive freight operating rights, serving its customers along the line and maintaining the right-of-way until such time as passenger service is implemented. Engineering is currently underway for the Initial Operating Segment (IOS) of the SJBL for the Perris Valley Line. This Line would provide a connection from Moreno Valley's March Air Reserve Base and Perris to mainline rail services in downtown Riverside (see Section 2.5 for more details). 6 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Fixed Route Service The SCRRA operates seven commuter rail lines. Three routes, the Riverside, Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC), and 91 Lines, directly serve Western Riverside County, with connecting service available to destinations on the other four lines. Riverside Line This line extends 59.1 miles between the city of Riverside and the Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) along the Union Pacific (UP) Railroad alignment. The route roughly follows the Pomona Freeway corridor (SR60) through the cities and communities of Pedley, Mira Loma, Ontario, Pomona, Walnut, Industry, La Puente, Montebello, and Commerce. Existing stations include Riverside -Downtown, Pedley, East Ontario, Downtown -Pomona, Industry, Montebello/Commerce, and LAUS. RCTC, SANBAG, and the LACMTA jointly fund the line. Currently, five peak -period round -trips and one off-peak round-trip operate Monday through Friday. Daily peak -period AM boardings have averaged 2,170 during November 2011. Approximately 29.6% of the morning boardings occur at Riverside County's two stations on this line, Riverside -Downtown and Pedley.1 The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) fixed routes and Amtrak provide connecting transit service in Riverside County. The scheduled peak -direction trip time between downtown Riverside and LAUS varies between 83 and 88 minutes, including dwell time at intermediate stations. Riverside Line Line Opening: Route miles: Avg Trip Length (miles): Trains Operated/Day: Avg FY11/12 Weekday Ridership: June1993 59.1 39.3 12 5,279 FY12/13 Budget Operating Subsidy/Passenger Mile: Farebox Recovery: Revenue Recovery (MOW/ROW): $0.12 56.1 % 58.4% Current Stations Served Riverside -Downtown 4066 Vine Street Pedley 6001 Pedley Road East Ontario 3330 E Francis St Downtown -Pomona 101 N Main Street Industry 600 S Brea Canyon Rd Montebello/Commerce 2000 Flotilla St LA Union Station 800 N Alameda St ' Source: AM Peak -Period (Peak Direction) Boardings, November 2011 7 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r INEwr Riverside Cooney iiumpure* Commission Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) Line This line extends 100.1 miles between the city of San Bernardino, in San Bernardino County, and Irvine and San Juan Capistrano, in Orange County, with limited extensions in Oceanside. The alignment roughly follows the Riverside Freeway (SR91) along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) San Bernardino Subdivision in Riverside and Orange County. This commuter rail service to Orange County provides a transportation alternative in one of the busiest corridors in Southern California. The Line is a jointly funded project of the RCTC, SANBAG, and OCTA. When the service began in October 1995, it was the first suburb -to -suburb commuter rail line in the country. One station in San Bernardino County, four stations within Riverside County, eight stations within Orange County, and one station in San Diego County now serve the line. RCTC plans to add one additional peak round-trip for a total of five peak -period round -trips, and three off-peak round - trips operating Monday through Friday. Morning boardings averaged 1,711 during November 2011. Approximately 88.7% of the morning boardings occurred at Riverside County's four stations on this line, at Riverside -Downtown, Riverside - La Sierra, North Main Corona, and West Corona.2 IEOC weekend service began on July 15, 2006. This route was modeled after the successful RCTC-chartered Beach Trains. The service has been reduced to one round trip leaving from San Bernardino to Oceanside in the morning and returning in the afternoon on Saturday and Sunday. The trains make all IEOC stops, plus the San Clemente Pier. The current running time between downtown Riverside and Irvine is approximately 68 minutes. RTA, Corona IEOC Line Line Opening: October 1995 Route miles: 100.1 Avg Trip Length (miles): 33.8 Trains Operated/Day: 14 Avg FY11/12 Weekday Ridership: 4,142 FY12/13 Budget: Operating Subsidy/Passenger Mile: Farebox Recovery: Revenue Recovery (MOW/ROW): Current Stations Served: San Bernardino Riverside -Downtown Riverside -La Sierra North Main Corona West Corona Anaheim Canyon Orange Santa Ana Tustin Irvine Laguna Niguel San Juan Capistrano San Clemente San Clemente Pier* Oceanside *Weekends only $0.35 31.6% 33.7% 1204 West 3rd St 4066 Vine Street 10901 Indiana Ave 250 E Blaine St 155 S Auto Center Dr 1039 N Pacificenter Dr 194 N Atchison St 1000 E Santa Ana BI 2975 Edinger Ave 15215 Barranca Pkwy 28200 Forbes Rd 26701 Verdugo St 1850 Avenida Estacion Avenida del Mar 235 S Tremont Ave Dial -A -Ride, and the Corona Cruiser provide connecting transit service. 2 Source: AM Peak -Period (Peak Direction) Boardings, November 2011 8 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission 91 Line This route officially began operating peak -period service on May 6, 2002. The route extends 61.6 miles between Riverside and Downtown Los Angeles. The alignment roughly follows the Riverside Freeway (SR91) along the BNSF San Bernardino subdivision through Riverside County to Fullerton in Orange County where it continues northwest to downtown Los Angeles. Existing stations that serve this line include Riverside -Downtown, Riverside -La Sierra, North Main Corona, West Corona, Fullerton, Buena Park, Norwalk, Commerce, and LAUS. RCTC, OCTA, and the LACMTA jointly fund the Line. The service levels on this route are still developing. Currently, there are two AM peak -period trips from Riverside to Los Angeles with two PM peak period returns. There are two AM peak period trips from Los Angeles to Riverside with one PM peak period return and one mid day off-peak round-trip. This service operates Monday through Friday. Morning boardings averaged 1,036 during November 2011. Approximately 68.9% of the morning boardings occur at Riverside County's four stations on this line, at Riverside -Downtown, Riverside - La Sierra, North Main Corona, and West Corona.3 The peak -period running time between downtown Riverside and Los Angeles is approximately 90 minutes. RTA, Corona Dial -A -Ride, and the Corona Cruiser provide connecting service in Riverside County. 91 Line Line Opening: May 2002 Route miles: 61.6 Avg Trip Length (miles): 36.6 Trains Operated/Day: 9 Avg FY11/12 Weekday Ridership: 2,254 FY12/13 Budget: Operating Subsidy/Passenger Mile: Farebox Recovery: Revenue Recovery (MOW/ROW): Current Stations Served: Riverside -Downtown Riverside -La Sierra North Main Corona West Corona Fullerton Buena Park Norwalk Commerce LA Union Station $0.22 45.1 46.9% 4066 Vine St 10901 Indiana Ave 250 E Blaine St 155 S Auto Center Dr 120 E Santa Fe Ave Lakeknoll Dr & Dale St 12700 Imperial Highway 6433 26th St 800 N Alameda St Source: AM Peak -Period (Peak Direction) Boardings, November 2011 9 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsporrmion Commission 2.2 Key Performance Indicators RCTC will use the following performance indicators provided by SCRRA to measure the effectiveness of the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines: Riverside Line Indicator FY10/11 Audited FY11/12 Projected FY12/13 Plan Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,302,958 1,356,687 1,402,218 Subsidy/Passenger Mile $0.13 $0.12 $0.13 Farebox Recovery Ratio 58.8% 58.5% 56.1 Operating Expense/Passenger Mile $0.30 $0.31 $0.32 Operating Subsidy/Passenger $4.56 $4.78 $5.24 Operating Expense/Train Mile $81.28 $88.45 $95.53 Revenue Recovery 60.6% 60.4% 57.8% Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile (Assumes 5 car set) 64.97 57.89 58.37 1EOC Line Indicator FY10/11 Audited FY11/12 Projected FY12/13 Plan Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,083,785 1,110,973 1,139,347 Subsidy/Passenger Mile $0.41 $0.35 $0.35 Farebox Recovery Ratio 29.1 % 31.3% 31.7% Operating Expense/Passenger Mile $0.60 $0.52 $0.53 Operating Subsidy/Passenger $13.10 $11.73 $11.95 Operating Expense/Train Mile $73.97 $69.09 $72.84 Revenue Recovery 32.1 % 34.0% 34.1 % Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile (Assumes 4 car set) 29.26 26.40 26.53 91 Line Indicator FY10/11 Audited FY11/12 Projected FY12/13 Plan Unlinked Passenger Trips 552,896 579,250 633,511 Subsidy/Passenger Mile $0.21 $0.22 $0.24 Farebox Recovery Ratio 51.6% 49.7% 45.1 % Operating Expense/Passenger Mile $0.40 $0.45 $0.45 Operating Subsidy/Passenger $6.90 $8.06 $8.96 Operating Expense/Train Mile $61.01 $65.39 $73.12 Revenue Recovery 53.4% 50.9% 46.0% Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile (Assumes 4 car set) 35.18 29.17 34.19 2.3 Productivity Improvement Efforts Since the first three lines opened in October 1992, the system has experienced tremendous growth with operating levels and ridership greatly exceeding initial projections. However, forecasts for the coming fiscal year show the system's average 10 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission daily ridership will decrease due to extraordinary economic circumstances. Specifically, ridership has decreased significantly on the Inland Empire -Orange County Line, while operating costs have increased slightly. The overall effect is a reduction in performance in the short term. Category Goal FY 12/13 Targets Farebox Recovery Ratio 40% or higher >=40.00% Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour CPI increase <= $2,907.47 Subsidy Per Passenger $7.50 >= $6.93 and <= $9.37 Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.20 or less >= $0.20 and <= $0.26 Subsidy Per Hour $1,450 or less >= $1,407.05 and <= $1,903.65 Subsidy Per Mile $7.50 or less >= $7.48 and <= $10.12 Passengers Per Revenue Hour 180 >= 172.55 and <= 233.45 Unlinked Passenger Trips Min 2% growth >= 2,212,078 Passenger Miles Per Rev Car Mile 30 or more >= 30.52 and <= 41.30 2.4 Trip Generators and Projected Growth Feeder services to stations are vital to the success of commuter rail in Western Riverside County. Coordination and consultation with transit providers and local agencies is an ongoing process. Connecting transit to stations in Western Riverside County is provided by RTA, Corona Dial -A -Ride, and the Corona Cruiser. Once again, RTA, RCTC, and Metrolink continues to work together to increase awareness of the RTA bus connections at the RCTC Metrolink stations. Ads regularly appear in the RTA Ride Guide promoting free RTA transfers from Metrolink stations. The Ride Guide includes the five Metrolink stations in its Route Directory Listing. Additionally, Metrolink occasionally helps promote the RTA CommuterLink service in materials at the stations. F- 1 In addition to its fixed routes, RTA developed CommuterLink as a contracted service to address commuter needs. This express service provides transit to and from Riverside Metrolink stations and transit centers during peak commuting periods. The program aims to provide a viable transit alternative for commuters, helping mitigate congestion and pollution. The Corona Cruiser, operated by the City of Corona, provides a fixed route schedule but offers some route deviation with advance reservation. Buses run Monday through Saturday and serve most Metrolink trains at the North Main Corona Station as well as stops throughout Corona. In 2003, RCTC negotiated a master agreement with SCRRA covering all connecting transit services at Riverside County stations. Under the agreement, SCRRA agreed to reimburse connecting carriers for all arriving and departing Metrolink passengers using 11 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn the connecting services. With the agreement, Metrolink ticket holders can ride both fixed route and Dial -A -Ride services for free as they travel to and from a station in Riverside County. RCTC is assessing direct assumption of at least a portion of the share of connecting transit costs attributed to Riverside County transit operators. Feeder buses and transit services are also critically important at the destination end. For the IEOC route, dedicated OCTA shuttle buses meet all peak -period trains at Anaheim Canyon, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Some OCTA buses meet trains at all these stations as well as Laguna Niguel, San Juan Capistrano, and San Clemente. 2.5 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs Commuters boarding at RCTC Metrolink stations are provided with amenities that assist with their daily travel needs. Vending machines stocked with beverages and snacks are available at each station. Station facilities also include wireless internet access, bike lockers, designated parking for motorcycles and carpools. Furthermore, all stations are staffed 24 hours by contracted security guards, closed circuit television, and various safety and security enhancements such as fencing and gates. Amenities are also available onboard the train. All train cars are equipped with restrooms, and some of the newer cars contain hook-ups for laptop computer. Additionally designated bike cars and quiet cars have been added throughout the system Metrolink has developed the website www.metrolinktrains.com. This site provides passengers with enhanced features allowing for greater content functionality. Improvements include regular service updates on the homepage, improved content management functions, enhanced usability and a more consistent look and feel with features expected by our increasingly web savvy passengers. Additionally, passengers can now subscribe through Twitter to obtain service updates and plan their trips using Google Transit. Major needs, which continue to be the focus of RCTC attention for the SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15, include the following: • Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC); and • Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project. Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) In light of operational safety issues at Metrolink, staff determined that the best use of limited capital funds was to further fund Metrolink's expanded safety efforts. These funds will be dedicated to three projects at Metrolink. PTC will continue to be a priority for Metrolink and RCTC to the extent it affects operations within the Commission's jurisdiction and related projects. 12 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r INN= Riverside Cooney Ti [impure* Commission Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project From 1999 to 2000, funding commitments to the SJBL were sporadic. RCTC successfully implemented the SJBL in the Federal Transportation Efficiency Act for the Twenty -First Century (TEA-21), making it an eligible FTA New Start rail project. In 1998, Congress appropriated $500,000 to the SJBL. These funds have since been drawn down to conduct an Alternatives Analysis, "The San Jacinto Branch Line/I-215 Corridor Study." Through prior action, the Commission has allocated $20 million for the implementation of passenger rail service between Riverside and Perris on the SJBL. In June 2003, the Commission re -adopted the Locally Preferred Alternative as an IOS of the SJBL, the Perris Valley Line (Riverside -Moreno Valley -Perris) Metrolink extension of the 91 Line. This extension will consist of four peak -period round trips supplemented by a midday round trip. All trains will operate from Perris to Los Angeles via Riverside. The estimated cost to completely re -build the Branch Line, construct new stations and connection track is $247 million, for a start up of service by late 2014. Staff is aggressively seeking additional federal, state, and private sources to fund this project. RCTC has received approval from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to initiate project development. Under the Small Starts Program, this phase of the project will be funded by a combination of federal Section 5309 and local funds available to RCTC. At the conclusion of final design, RCTC will be seeking a Project Construction Grant Agreement (PCGA) from FTA to provide up to $75 million for the project. The entire amount has been set aside for RCTC in the Federal Budget. RCTC has identified sufficient local funds for its share of the project. Starting in FY 2012/13 capital activities associated with this project, identified in Table 4 are estimated at $218,598,000, which includes completion of preliminary engineering and final design, right-of-way acquisition, and completion of the environmental assessment. Funding for additional rail capital projects for the SRTP period are outlined in Tables 4 and 5 of this document. 13 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission CHAPTER 3 — PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Recent Service Changes New Metrolink schedules went into effect on January 9, 2012. This schedule change incorporated service adjustments approved by the SCRRA Board of Directors and included express service on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Lines and prior approved changes to weekend trains in response to seasonal demand. 3.2 Recommended Service Changes and Modifications The RCTC rail program consists of planning, programming, advocacy and implementation elements. This SRTP incorporates a variety of activities which support these elements. The FY 2012/13 Capital and Operating Plan reflects the efficiencies implemented since Metrolink's inception. Proposed service maximizes the use of existing rolling stock to relieve overcrowding. The FY 2012/13 proposed budget is under review by all of the member agencies and concurrence is anticipated by June 2012. Riverside Line Service Level Changes No change. 1E0C Line Service Level Changes One additional weekday roundtrip and continuation of seasonal weekend roundtrips. 91 Line Service Level Changes No change. 14 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn OPERATING SERVICE ASSUMPTIONS FOR FY2012/13 Line/Route Weekday Trains Saturday Trains Sunday Trains Riverside 12 Riverside -LA (UP) 4 Riverside -LA* 4 Riverside -LA* IEOC 3 San Bernardino - Irvine 2 San Bernardino - Laguna Niguel 2 San Bernardino - San Juan Capistrano 2 San Bernardino - Oceanside 1 Riverside - Irvine 3 Riverside - Laguna Niguel 2 Riverside - Oceanside 2 San Bernardino - Oceanside 2 San Bernardino - Oceanside 91/Riv-Ful-LA 9 Riverside -LA (BNSF) *Trains run via the San Bernardino Line The Commission's goal in participating in a regional commuter rail system is to provide useful transportation alternatives to its residents. To a large degree, this goal has already been achieved. Each morning, over 3,000 Riverside residents board one of 11 Metrolink trains headed for jobs in Orange and Los Angeles counties. These rail commuters also contribute to a reduction in freeway traffic, removing more than 1.5 lanes of peak hour traffic each morning and each afternoon. Notwithstanding this success, a commuter rail service is unlike most of the projects funded by the Commission. The complete benefits of the project are not fully realized upon completion of construction or initial implementation of service. The commuter rail service must increase frequency as the demand increases over time. This increase in service is constrained by the availability of rail vehicles, capacity on the railroad, and available funding. Currently, not all of the Riverside County routes operate at optimal service levels. Two of the three Metrolink lines do not even offer minimum basic coverage during peak travel times. The IEOC and the 91 Line do not yet provide half- hourly headways and thus, their attractiveness to residents and ultimately their ridership and revenue performance are compromised. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Metrolink will continue outreach to new residents through direct -mail campaigns to homeowners within the system's sphere of service in Riverside County. Additionally, Metrolink is developing a targeted marketing strategy with all its member agencies. RCTC has budgeted for targeted promotion of additional summer service starting July 7, 2012. 15 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission CHAPTER 4 — FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget This SRTP reflects the Commission's commitment to the commuter rail goals in the FY 2012/13 RCTC Budget: • Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside County; • Extend commuter rail service to Moreno Valley and Perris via the San Jacinto Branch Line; and • Maximize opportunities for public use of rail -related investments. Specific highlights of the FY 2012/13 Budget include: • Complete preliminary engineering and final design of the Perris Valley Line (Riverside - Moreno Valley - Perris) Metrolink extension project; • Increase operating subsidy due to increases in fuel and contractual costs. 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Operating and Capital Program With the passage of Measure A in 1988, $100 million was identified and committed to the development and implementation of a commuter rail system to serve Riverside County residents. The Rail Department uses LTF for operation as well as federal 5307, 5309 and state Proposition 1 B funds for capital. RCTC holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member Board. RCTC staff members serve on the five -county Technical Advisory Committee which negotiates service and funding levels based upon the counties' established priorities. Staff also provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and RCTC departments, and linkages to local communities. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Public participation regarding service levels is largely garnered through the bi-annual on -board survey. Public hearings are held prior to any service changes. Daily receipt of feedback from the public is sought through Metrolink's 1-800-371-LINK (5465) and website www.metrolinktrains.com. Additionally, RCTC maintains a customer service number (951) 778-1092, provides service updates through Twitter and receives comments through the www.rctc.org website. Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VI SCRRA is responsible for the regulatory and compliance requirements governing the use of federal and state funds in accordance with ADA and Title VI. Accordingly, RCTC is responsible for additional compliance requirements as relates to station facilities. All Metrolink trains and stations are accessible to persons with disabilities. 16 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r NM= Riverside Cooney iiumpure* Commission TDA Triennial Audit, FTA Triennial Audit, NTD The RCTC TDA Triennial Audit was completed in September, 2010. The last audit resulted in no findings as pertained to the Rail Program. The FTA Triennial Audit completed in August 2009 resulted in no findings for RCTC. NTD is reported annually by both SCRRA and RCTC. Alternative Fueled Vehicles Metrolink operates low emission diesel locomotives. These state of the art high - efficiency and low -emission locomotives greatly enhance the existing fleet. 17 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 TABLE 1 - FLEET INVENTORY L4io LI,-4seun Z4Z'89674 0 064 L4Z 6SZ waloy , apo3 aaanlelnueyy aayb aquasaa ❑ laalaS 944'7S E41'EZ9`4 OLZ ZE4 SS 0 OE OE 9131i3119 ZZZ 040Z VddN'1 VdOO'S dil ZO saAZ OE E88VV ward „apa3 aaanlelnuepy aay1O agposaa ❑ laalaS 94 V79 698'ZSE`4 OLZ 464 SS 0 SZ SZ 913A3119 ZZZ 040Z VddN'1, VdOO'S dd ZO saAZ SZ Z88VV ❑ laalaS 4S0`9Zl OL9'OLZ 0 4£4 S8 0 0 9 lawo3 1Sd EL64 Vfl'4- Vdll'L &I ZO saA Z 94 46ZSE ❑ laalaS SLZ`6b4 666'909 0 0 99 3a'10 0 0 E4 9£dW IdW 600Z Vd31,1'4 VdOO'S RI'40 saA'Z E4 OUSE ❑ laalaS SLZ`6b4 989`86 0 0 89 la'tr0 0 0 Z SEAN IdW 800Z VddN'tr VdOO'S lil 10 saA'Z Z 88Z9E OD ❑ laalaS ESS`86L Z9Z'9fiS OLZ RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 9E4 S8 0 44 44 913A3119 MEI 0 8664 VddN'tr VdOO'S dil ZO saA'Z 44 L8944 r ❑ laalaS 686'4E01 6ZZ'804 OLZ 644 S8 0 Z Z 913A3119 WO9 1,664 Vdd44'tr VdOO'S dil ZO saA Z Z 98914 ❑ laalaS 46E`944 E48`94 9 0 SS 3a'40 0 9 4 94d MO '9864 Vdd1,1'4 VdOO'S 1i1'49 saAZ 4 96L8 ❑ laalaS E64`L 4S ZLE'L84 9 0 SS da.40 0 9 1 IHd6S3 3WO 0 400Z 30Z VdOO'S RI 19 saAZ 4 V6La ❑ laalaS LLL`Z9S 6997SE`l OLZ 044 SS 0 SZ SZ 913A3119 WO9 0 ZOOZ 3O'Z VdOO'S dil ZO saA'Z 9Z MEI ❑ laalaS S89`1S9 LL£'649 OLZ 9E4 S9 0 Z4 Z4 913A3119 WO9 0 L664 Vd3N'7 VdOO'S &A'ZO saA'Z Z4 Z6L8 ❑ laalaS Z60'460'l Z44'£Z9`4 OLZ 644 SS 0 OE OE 913A3119 WO9 0 £664 VddN'tr VdOO'S dil ZO saA'Z OE 46L8 ❑ laalaS E64'ES 4' l 44£'9L67 OLZ 644 S8 0 SS 9S 913A3119 MEI 0 Z664 VddN'tr Vd00'9 dil ZO saA'Z 99 06L8 ❑ laa1a5969`64S 989`E6 9 0 SS da'40 0 9 Z IHd69d MO 0 9664 VddN'4 Vd00'9 RI 19 saAZ Z 68L8 ❑ laalaS 069`64a 44L'4LE 9 0 SS da'40 0 9 8 IHd6S3 3WO 0 9664 VddN'4 VdOO'S RI 19 saAZ a 88L8 ❑ laalaS 68E'OZ6 SS0'48Z 0 0 SS 3a'10 0 0 9 Hd6Sd OHO £664 VddN'4 VdOO'S RI 19 saAZ 9 L8L8 ❑ laalaS 98L`OL6 981'64L 0 0 9S 3a'10 0 0 94 Hd6S3 3WO Z664 Vd3N'1 VdOO'S RI'40 saA'Z 94 98L8 laal3 apoW aplyaq popad AllaedeO aplyaA uaylouV anpoV ayl 6uuna 6ulp1e15 a;alaa speddng aad sum saplyaq aw0461 9,111169 40ea4n11 saIIW lelol Flpedo0 (pal apo3 salolyaA salolL1GA laal3 ul aagwnN apo3 pungaa aunloelnuepy aoanog apo3 apo3 6ullea5 ul) yl6ual add' lan3 AouaOupca algssamv sap'yaA lapoW uaunloelnueW to ueaA to ueaA 6uipun3 dlysuauMO adFl alolyan 6oua6aaw3 (yay) anllay to Jo aagwnN 9664 aagwnN la la'd sal;plgesla yIIM sueauawv to aagwnN n l s a h d o u w >I f 1 y 6 laal3 laal3 '011Nd paleolpaa Iola' ui apiyaA salgyaq to aagwnN 1d :aowag 213 :epoyp (0n-H)luowsnul aplyeA anuanad :awery 1.1.1.103 Z4144fE 4 uolslnaa 4 40Z MA :Podaa y,up6;ep1 _egpfquoy;ny lied leuoWsh elwo4i1.0 waglnog :awary 6oua6y L9L6 :al a1N (0E-1:) Moluanul aloRRA anuaAwd • CO 96/17603-E6/Z60Z Ad d121S 11V 1 2131f1WWOO 01021 I� Rim rade(may Tromsp -Man{amiss-on Table 2 -- RCTC Commuter Rail -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $42,160,095 $43,220,5gf2 $45,509,70:1 $34,192,260 $40,604,900 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $17,173,434 $14,733,018 $20,437,400 $14,656,834 $19,250,900 Net CperatingExpenses(absides) $24,994,661 $28,487,574 $25,152,307 $19,535,376 $29,354,000 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 2,939,587 2,909,872 3,046,910 2,239,164 3,175,076 Passenger Miles 103,628,516 102,765,342 112,069,216 79,044,986 116,803,590 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 14,509.0 14,207.0 17,822.0 10,750.0 17,822.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 2,740,870,0 2,674,115.0 2,924,749,0 2,132,037.0 2,896,316.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 2,015,440.0 2,770,904.0 2,924,749.0 2,204,390.0 2,096,316.0 Performance Characteristics I I I Cper Ming Cost per Revenue Hour $2,906,34 $3,042.20 $2,558.06 $3,180.68 $2,727.24 FarebaK Recovery Ratio 40.72% 34.0D% 44.82% 42.87% 39.6Cr% Subsidy per Passenger 4 91 $9.79 .4.26 .4.72 $9.25 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.24 $:1,28 $0.22 $0,25 $0.25 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $1,722,70 $2,005.18 $1,411.31 $1,817.24 $1,547.07 Subsidy per Reverue Mile (b) $9,12 $10.65 $8.60 $9.16 $10.13 Passenger per Reverue Hour (a) 202.6 204.8 171.0 208.3 178.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.07 1.09 1.04 1.05 1.10 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. OT'T Z'8LT ET'03 CO'Cb9`T$ SE'0$ SZ'6$ °/o09'6E TESTS 8L'91$ VE'CZC`Z$ WW1 lapHOAd a)Was OS'T T8'0 OT'T 6'LLZ 6'17E1 &ELT 6E'8$ 6Z'T3 S0'03 L9TTS`T$ LC'917C `T $ 9Z'SEGI$ 6T'0$ TV'0$ SE'0$ St 'SS 66'ET$ ET'6$ %ZT'9S °I°Z6'ZZ %90'S17 EVET$ ST'81$ 09'91$ ET'63 S9'bT$ 0E'8T$ O['S66`E$ OE'99Z`Z$ 89'S88`Z$ le101 AIHTI-Dip J 1e401 J03I-J1JJ 1e401 T6-1lJa all4 Aad An0H Aad saa6uassed saa6uassed 0114 anuanaa 'ad Rppgn8 AnoH anuanaa Aad Rppgn8 allk Aa6uassed Aa6uassed 'ad RplsgnS 'ad RpisgnS ones RAanO3aa xogwel Aa6uassed lad lso0 allk anuanad xioH anuaeaa Aad 1903 6unend° lad 1903 6uneaad0 adtl Rep # aln021 sa01e0lpul a0uewao;Aad salnoa IIV ET IZT OZ Ad 9 -- Herd aalnwwo0 Diad Sag Sil PiS aviod dlll5 - E algal 000`17SE`63 006`0SE`61$ 006`b09`8b$ O'9[E`g68`Z O'9[E`968`2 0'2Z8`LT O'2Z8`LT 065`808`9TT 9L0`SLT`8 slelol aapkoad acuaag 008`5E6`51$ OOL`9LL`S$ OC6`ELC`6$ 00L`8EC`tr$ OOL`8EL`h$ 000`Sb`CT$ 00S` L9`OZ$ 00VSTS`OT$ O'S6Z`0[6 0' 501711 W' O'9[9`6LS 0' S6Z`OT 6 0' SOVIT b `T O'9[9`6LS O'SS0`S GEZT`6 O'h69`E O'SS0`S 0 CET `6 0.17179t Ea `COT `SS 916`605`8E Z66`98T `EZ 81Z`EOWT TTS`EE9 1e;01 ANT-1DH 1e401 J03I-J1JJ 1e+01 T6-J1JJ Rppgne laN anuanaa Aa6uassed lso0 6uneaad0 Sauk souk aruanaa snoH IP101 snoH aru an as sank Aa6uassed saa6uassed saplgap, 31ead adRl Re❑ # aino21 sluawa13 ele❑ salnoll I IV ET IZT OZ Ad 9 -- I ud aalnwwo0 Diad S MS/j S amou dais - E algal sualmr7 u!pwdcm,p Awn r) apn,e+Iy 1nEN� 310 tI RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 96/17603-El/Z60Z Ad d1bS 11V21 2j31f1WWOO 01021 RCTC Commuter Rail FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Project Description Capital Project Number(i) Total Funds LTF STA Prop 18 (Security) CMAQ Measure A STIP Section 5309 TE Grant Fare Box Other SCRRA Operating Expenses (4 $13,569,700 $7,573,300 $5,996,400 Transil Connections $250,000 $250,000 RCTC Rail Operations and Security`') $2,314,400 $2,084,400 $230,000 RCTC Station Maintenance(4) $1,756,000 $1,600,000 $156,000 Operating Contingency for additional service(5) $2,426,700 $2,426,700 OCTA/Metro/SANBAGShare of RN, 1E0C, 91 Trainsf6f $35,035,200 = $15,975,200 $19,060,000 Subtotal: Operating $20,316,800 $13,934,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,996,400 $386,000 State of Good Repair Project FY13- RCTC Share FY 13 -1 $250,000 $250,000 Rail Station Surveillance and Security Upgrades (11/12) FY 13 -2 $350,248 $350,248 Perris Valley Line FY 13 -3 $218,598,000 $49,528,000 $43,052,000 $52,978,000 $73,040,000 Station Transportation Enhancements FY 13 -4 $450,000 $450,000 Subtotal: Capital $219,648,248 $0 $250,000 $350,248 $49,528,000 $43,052,000 $52,978,000 $73,040,000 $450,000 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital I $239,965,048 $13,934,400 $250,000 $350,248 $49,528,000 $43,052,000 $52,978,000 $73,040,000 $450,000 $5,996,400 $386,000 (1) Number should tie to Table 4A - Capital Project Justification (2) Based on initial Metrolink Budget (3) Other: $20,000 In FTA pass through funds administered by SCAG per MOU; $210,000 pass through funds from SCRRA for armed guards at RDT Station (4) Other. $151,000 in Commuter Assistance pass through funds for Perris Station, $5,000 in vending machine revenue (5) Potential new IEOC Line peak period service, addition of year round IEOC Line Weekend trains, mid -year addition of 2 peak period 91 Line round trips (6) Reflects Total Expenses and Revenue for the Riverside, 1 EOC and 91 Lines ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13 - 1 PROJECT NAME: State of Good Repair Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The RCTC share of Rehab/Renovation Projects for FY13 include: • Rail Bridge Program — River Corridor • Rail Grinding Program — Systemwide • Passenger Signage Rehabilitation Program — Systemwide • MOW Facility — Systemwide • Augment On -Rail Equipment — Systemwide • Vehicles Non -Fed — Systemwide • Vehicles Fed — Systemwide • Rolling Stock — Systemwide • Complete Communication Plan — Systemwide • Rehab TVMs; plus related support and security systems — Systemwide PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: SCRRA rehabilitation/renovation projects are those projects that replace worn out assets with like or improved assets and thus extending the useful life of these capital assets. These recommendations are based upon tolerating only the most minimal & manageable risk of failure. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): STA $250, 000 Total $250, 000 22 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13 - 2 PROJECT NAME: Rail Station Surveillance and Security Upgrades PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: • Enhanced remote video surveillance capabilities to allow security personnel, law enforcement and first responders to better monitor and assess incidents at all stations existing and planned. • Limited and controlled access to stations and platforms in the event of a catastrophic accident or disaster. • Improved lighting and visibility to mitigate the potential of personal injury and criminal activity at the stations. • Battery backup systems to ensure visibility in the event of equipment failure or power outage. • Equipment to assist with evacuation and response in the event of a major incident or disaster. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by FY 2010 and FY 2011 Proposition 1 B Safety and Security funds to improve safety and security at all existing and planned Riverside County Metrolink stations. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B (Security Funds) $350,248 Total $350, 248 23 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13 - 3 PROJECT NAME: Perris Valley Line PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This FTA 5309 Small Starts project seeks to extend Metrolink service from Riverside to Moreno Valley and Perris via the Commission -owned San Jacinto Branch Line. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: In June 2003, the Commission re -adopted the Locally Preferred Alternative as an extension of Metrolink service from Riverside to Perris. This project cost is for engineering and construction. Start up of the service is projected for 2014. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): C MAQ $49, 528, 000 Measure A $43,052,000 STI P $52, 978, 000 FTA 5309 $73, 040, 000 Total $218,598,000 24 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r INN= Riverside Cooney Ti [impure* Commission Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13 - 4 PROJECT NAME: Station Transportation Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project will utilize Federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds to upgrade stations and maintain capital investments. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project will meet the needs of continued capital investment in the stations while preserving local fund sources for exclusive application to operations. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): TE $450, 000 Total $450, 000 25 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 96/17603-E6/Z60Z Ad d121S 11V 1 2131f1WWOO 01021 RGTC Commuter Rail FY 2013/14 and FY 2014/15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 -Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Funds Total Carryover Amount Total Funds w/o Carryover LTF STA Prop 1B (Security) Section 5309 Fare Box Other SCR RA Operating Expenses $6,298.221 S8,298,221 51 S6,296,220 Transit Connections $1 $1 S1 RCTC Rail Qperations and Security $241.501 S241,501 S1 $241.500 RCTC Station Maintenance $153,801 5163,801 51 $153,800 Subtotal: Operating S6,701,524 SO $6,701,524 $4 $O $O SD $6,296,220 5405,300 Rail Station Surveillance and Security Upgrades (11112) IFY 14-1 $350.000 S350.000 $350,000 Subtotal: Capital S350,000 $D S350,000 SD $0 $350,000 $D SD SD Total: Operating & Capital 1 47,051,524 $0 47,051,524 44 $0 5350,000 SO 46,296,220 4405,300 Table 5.2 -Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Funds Total Carryover Amount Total Funds w/o Carryover LTF STA Prop 1B (Security) Section 5309 Fare Box Other SCR RA Cperating Expenses $6,611,032 $6,611,032 51 S6.611.031 Transit Connections $1 Si S1 RCTC Rail Operations and Security $253.576 S253.576 S1 $253.575 RCTC Station Maintenance $171.991 S171.991 S1 $171.990 Subtotal: Operating 47,036,600 $0 47,036,600 S4_ $0 $0 $D 46,611,03I_ 5425,565 Rail Station Surveillance and Security Upgrades (12113) IFY 15-1 $350.000 5350.000 $350,000 Subtotal: Capital $350,000 SD S350,000 SO 50 r S350,000 SD SO.. SO Total: Operating & Capital 1 $7,386,600 $D S7,386,600 S4 $0 $350,000 $0 S6,6' 1,031 $425,565 ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 14 - 1 PROJECT NAME: Rail Station Surveillance and Security Upgrades PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: • Enhanced remote video surveillance capabilities to allow security personnel, law enforcement and first responders to better monitor and assess incidents at all stations existing and planned. • Limited and controlled access to stations and platforms in the event of a catastrophic accident or disaster. • Improved lighting and visibility to mitigate the potential of personal injury and criminal activity at the stations. • Battery backup systems to ensure visibility in the event of equipment failure or power outage. • Equipment to assist with evacuation and response in the event of a major incident or disaster. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by FY 2011 and FY 2012 Proposition 1 B Safety and Security funds to improve safety and security at all existing and planned Riverside County Metrolink stations. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B (Security Funds) $350,000 Total $350, 000 27 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 15 - 1 PROJECT NAME: Rail Station Surveillance and Security Upgrades PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: • Enhanced remote video surveillance capabilities to allow security personnel, law enforcement and first responders to better monitor and assess incidents at all stations existing and planned. • Limited and controlled access to stations and platforms in the event of a catastrophic accident or disaster. • Improved lighting and visibility to mitigate the potential of personal injury and criminal activity at the stations. • Battery backup systems to ensure visibility in the event of equipment failure or power outage. • Equipment to assist with evacuation and response in the event of a major incident or disaster. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by FY 2012 and FY 2013 Proposition 1 B Safety and Security funds to improve safety and security at all existing and planned Riverside County Metrolink stations. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B (Security Funds) $350,200 Total $350, 000 28 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 r `� Riverside Cooly iionsponmion Commission TABLE 6 — STATE TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Recent Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/094) Completion Details No findings N/A 4 Triennial performance audit for FY 2006/07 through FY 2008/09 was conducted in FY 2009/10 and completed 8/6/09. 29 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 W O 96/17603-E6/Z60Z Ad d121S 11V 1 2131f1WWOO 01021 Illilll P ■ N. _ Ri�grlde{oum}' Irrnp rmdonfommsmn Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plan Review RCTC Commuter Rail Data Elements FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 Target FY 2011/12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 3,046,910 Passenger Miles 112,069,216 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Train Hours 17,822.0 Total Actual Vehide Revenue Car Miles 2,924,749.0 Total Actual Vehide Train Miles Total Operating Expenses $45,589,703 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $20,437,403 Net Operating Expenses $25,152,300 Performance Indicators Mandatary: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 44.02% I >= 40.00% I 42.07% IMeet Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hcur $2,558.06 ¢ _ $3,050.90 $3,100.68 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $8.26 >_ $6.93 aril e= $9.37 $8.72 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.22 >_ $0.20 and e= $0.26 $0.25 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $1,411.31 :_ $1,407.05 and ¢_ $1,903.65 $1,017.24 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $8,60 >_ $7.48 and <_ $10.12 $9.16 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 171,C0 >= 172,55 and e= 233.45 208.30 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Reverue Mile 1.64 >= 0.92 and ¢= 1.24 1.05 Meets Target 8. Unlinked Passenger Trips 3,046,910 >= 2,212,078 2,239,164 Meets Target 9. Passenger Miles per Rev. Car Miles 38.32 >= 30.5? and e= 41.30 37.07 Meets Target N ote Must meet at least 5 out of 9 Discretionary Perform ance Indir_atcrs Productivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: 96/17603-E6/Z60Z Ad d121S 11V 1 2131f1WWOO 01021 �MN=� Rimridt tourer Irinp motion lomm ss un FY 2012/13 - Table S -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: ROTC Commuter Rai! All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/12 3rd Quarter Year-to-date FY 2012/13 Plan FY 2012/13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 2,909,872 2,239,164 3,175,076 >= 2,212,078 Meets Target Passenger Miles 102,765,342 79,044,986 116,803,590 None Revenue Hours 14,207.0 10,750.0 17,822.0 None Total Hours 15,900.0 12,021.0 17,822.0 None Revenue Miles 2,674,115.0 2,132,037.0 2,896,316.0 None Total Miles 2,770,804.0 2,204,398.0 2,896,316.0 None Operating Costs $43,220,592 $34,192,260 $48,604,9C0 None Passenger Revenue $14,733,018 $14,656,884 $19,250,9C0 None Operating Subsidy $23,487,574 $19,535,376 i29,354,000 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $3,042.20 0,180.68 i2,727,24 <_ $3,236,66 Meets Target Operating Cast Per Revenue Mile $16.16 $16.04 $16.78 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $14.85 $15.27 $15.31 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 34.0D% 42.87% 39.CO% >= 40.0% Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger $9.79 $9.72 $9.25 >_ $7.41 and e= $10.03 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.28 $0.25 $0.25 >_ $0.21 and ¢_ $0.29 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $2,005.18 $1,817.24 $1,647.07 >_ $1,544.65 and ¢_ $2,089.83 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $10.65 $9.16 $10.13 >_ $7.79 and ¢_ $10.53 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 204.80 208.30 178.20 >= 177.06 and <= 239.55 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 1.09 1.05 1.10 >= 0.89 and ¢= 1.21 Meets Target a) The Plan Perfcrmanee Scorecard cdumn is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. ram` Riverside (onniy iionspuru�ica [ommisyipn TABLE 9 — SRTP HIGHLIGHTS Specific highlights of the FY 2012/13 Commuter Rail Plans include: o The FY 2012/13 operating cost reflects a $4.7 million cost increase due to rising fuel cost; o Potential service increase on 91 Line; o Increase service with the addition of a fifth IEOC Line weekday train and additional year-round IEOC weekend service; and o Continue discussion with Metrolink Board and JPA partner agencies for the implementation of a fare increase Operating & Financial Data FY08/09 Audited FY09/10 Audited FY10/11 Audited FY11/12 Estimate FY12/13 Plan Systemwide - Riverside Ridership 3,120,423 2,939,587 2,909,872 3,046,910 3,175,076 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $630 $2,906* $3,042* $2,613* $2,727* *Calculation is now based upon train revenue hours only, not the previous combined car/train hour figure. 32 RCTC COMMUTER RAIL SRTP FY 2012/13-2014/15 AGENDA ITEM 8N RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2012/13 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program Funding Recommendations BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2012/13 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program recommended funding of $1,389,433. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Each year, 2% of the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenue is made available for use on bicycle and pedestrian facility projects through the Commission's SB 821 Program. This is a discretionary program administered by the Commission. There are three steps to carry out the program: 1. All cities and the County are notified of the SB .821 program estimate of available funding and are requested to submit project proposals. The Commission's SB 821 program policies, project application, and selection criteria are also provided with the notification. 2. The Commission's SB 821 Evaluation Committee, comprised of members of the Commission's Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees (3 each), meets to review and rank the project applications using the evaluation criteria adopted by the Commission. The applicants are invited to give a presentation of their proposals and to answer questions from the committee members. The evaluation committee recommends projects and funding amounts to the Commission for approval. 3. The Commission reviews the Committee's recommendations and approves a program of bicycle and pedestrian projects for funding. Upon receiving a funding allocation, agencies then have twenty-four months to complete the projects. 129 Agenda Item 8N DISCUSSION: In March 2012, staff notified the cities and the county that an estimated $1 ,160,010 would be available for programming in FY 2012/13 through the SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities program, which is included in the FY 2012/13 Commission budget. Proposals were due on May 8. The Commission received 30 project proposals, totaling $3,366,724 in SB 821 funding requests as attached. A diverse evaluation committee comprised of two members from the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and three members from the Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the proposals on May 15. Based upon the Commission's adopted scoring criteria, which is attached, the proposals were evaluated and ranked by members of the evaluation committee. Fourteen projects totaling $1,389,433 are recommended for funding as indicated in the attachment. The difference between the estimated funding available and the amount recommended for funding this year is due to the availability of an additional $229,423 achieved through cost savings on previously claimed projects. These cost savings have enabled the Commission to fund 14 projects 'instead of '12. Moving forward, additional project cost savings and returned allocations will be used to supplement the funding available for the FY 201 3/14 call for projects. Staff concurs with the evaluation committee's recommendation. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $1,389,433 Source of Funds: LTF Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 601 62 86106 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \lb,u44,0,1.tuvr Date: 05/17/12 Attachments: 1) SB 821 FY 2012/13 Recommended Funding 2) SB 821 Evaluation Criteria Agenda Item 8N Rank Agency RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2012/13 RECOMMENDED FUNDING. Project Description • ATTACHMENT 1 Total SB 821 Funds Recommended Cummulative Average Costs Requested Allocation Funds Allocated Score 1 Eastvale Orange Street Sidewalk Safety Improvements $160,300 $80,150 $80,150 S80,150 89.0 2 Perris Nuevo Road Pedestrian Bridge and Sidewalk 220,000 110,000 110,000 190,150 88.1 3 Riverside University at 1-215 Bike Lane Project 108,000 70,000 70,000 260,150 83.7 4 Hemet 2013 Missing Links Project 119,580 59,790 59,790 319,940. 83.4 5 San Jacinto San Jacinto Avenue/Ramona Expressway S/W 100,000 50,000 50,000 369,940 82.2 6 Riverside Canyon Crest Separated Bikeway Project 40,000 20,000 20,000 389,940 82.0 7 Wildomar Almond Street Sidewalk Route Improvements 243,700 158,400 158,400 548,340 81.6 8 Indio Monroe Street Sidwalk and Bike Lanes 168,000 84,000 84,000 632,340 80.6 9 Beaumont Cherry Avenue Sidewalk and Ped Bridge 301,685 150,843 150,843 783,183 79.2 10 Lake Elsinore Heald Avenue 87,500 43,750. 43,750 826,933 78.0 11 Riverside County Grant Street 254,000 154,000 154,000 980,933 77.2 12 Moreno Valley Citywide Sidewalks and Access Ramps 150,000 150,000 150,000 1,130,933 76.8 13 Riverside County Avenida Florencita 285,000 153,500 153,500 1,284,433 75,6 14 Banning San Gorgonio Avenue from Wilson to Roosevelt 140,000 105,000 105,000 1,389,433 75.4 16 Riverside County King Avenue 249,000 136,500 0 0 74.8 16 Lake Elsinore Mill Street 88,316 44,158 0 0 74.8 17 Banning Roberge Avenue from Ramsey to Nicolet 100,000 75,000 0 0 74.6 18 Desert Hot Springs Mesquite and Desert View Bicycle &Sidewalk. 99,996 99,996 0 0 74.2 19 Coachella ADA Rehab Project 467,525 383,526 0 0 73,6 21 Lake Elsinore Campus Way 60,704 30,352 0 0 73.4 21 Riverside Wheelchair Ramp Construction 250,000 125,000 0 0 73.4 22 Lake Elsinore Sumner Avenue 45,780 22,890 0 0 72.6 23 San Jacinto Chase Street/Ramona Expressway Sidewalk 80,000 40,000 0 0 70.6 24 Perrin Downtown Pedestrian S/W and Access Ramps 200,000 100,000 0 0 68.8 25 Palm Springs • Baristo Road Bike Lane Project 157,500 94,500 0 0 68,2 26 Coachella Bike Lanes Project 523,658 393,658 0 0 66.8 131 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FY 2012/13 RECOMMENDED FUNDING ATTACHMENT 1 Total SB 821 Funds Recommended Cummulative Average Rank Agency Project Description Costs Requested Allocation Funds Allocated Score 27 Rancho Mirage Highway 111 Sidewalk Construction Various 116,734 99,224 0 0 64.0 28 Corona Magnolia and E. Sixth Street Sidewalks 65,450 49,088 0 0 61.4 29 Murrieta Citywide Bicycle Loop Installations 99,800 79,840 0 0 60.1 30 Coachella Sidewalks Project 271,559 203,559 0 0 58.6 Totals 55,253,787 53,366,724 51,389,433 JLE: 5/17/2012 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SB 821 EVALUATION CRITERIA FACTOR 1. USE The extent of potential use of a bicycle or pedestrian facility is the most important factor. Emphasis of this factor helps ensure the greatest benefits will be derived from the expenditure of SB 821 funds. Relative usage is to be derived from analysis of trip generators and attractors adjacent to the project. 2. SAFETY Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to correct current safety problems. IMPORTANCE AS A TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE Points are awarded on the basis of a project's potential to attract users who would otherwise use an automobile. 4. MISSING LINK, EXTENSION, OR CONNECTIVITY Points are awarded to projects that link, are extensions of, or potentially connect to existing facilities. 5. MATCHING FUNDS This factor is used to help ensure that there is local funding participation in the project - not just an application for "free" money. One point would be awarded for each 5% of total project cost that is financed by the local agency. 6. POPULATION EQUITY The purpose of this factor is to help ensure that one agency does not receive all the funds. The applicant receives the maximum 10 points if the amount of funds requested does not exceed what the applicant would receive if the funds were allocated by population. Year to year totals are recorded so that an applicant could build up a "credit". (Calculated by RCTC) 7. PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY ENHANCEMENT The purpose of this factor is to enhance the physical accessibility of existing pedestrian projects. Applicant agencies may receive up to 10 "bonus" points for their project proposals which improve the physical access to existing facilities. RCTC: 04/12/1995 MAXIMUM POINTS 25 20 20 15 10 10 10 BONUS 133 AGENDA ITEM 80 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE:_ June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2012/13 Measure A Commuter Assistance Buspool Subsidy Funding Continuation Requests WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, to the existing Corona, Mira Loma, and Riverside buspools; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As part of the Measure A Commuter Assistance Program, the Commission provides funding support to buspools used by Riverside County residents for their commutes along the State Route 91 corridor. The Commission adopted the Measure A buspool subsidy in October 1990 and established a monthly subsidy rate of $1,175 or $25/seat/month in support of commuter buspool operations. In July 2004, the Commission set the subsidy rate at $35/seat/month ($1,645/month) to help offset increases to operational costs during the previous 14 years. To provide additional guidance, the Commission also established a minimum buspool ridership policy in June 1995. The policy. requires staff to report to the Commission when a buspool's ridership falls to 25 or below and to seek direction regarding the continuation of the buspool's subsidy. Like all commuter assistance incentives provided by the Commission to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation, the Measure A $35/seat/month subsidy is administered as a user end subsidy. The Commission's subsidy is an important factor that makes buspools an attractive alternative for these commuters with roundtrip commutes in excess of 100 miles. Also, the Commission's subsidy Agenda Item 80 134 remains cost-effective compared to the typical public transit subsidy rate of 83 percent. While the monthly cost of each buspool varies according to the number of route miles and the resulting negotiated service price, the Commission's monthly subsidy reflects a subsidy rate of 13 percent. Average Monthly Buspool �Fare .Per ;Rider $260.00 RCTC Subsidy Per Seat $35.00 13% Unlike some of the other Commission -approved ridesharing incentives that have a limited term, the buspool subsidy is ongoing. To renew its annual subsidy, an existing buspool is required to: • Request in writing, continuation of funding from the Commission for the new fiscal year; • Consistently meet minimum ridership requirements; and • Submit monthly ridership reports throughout the year. The three existing buspools have completed all the requirements for funding as set forth by the Commission including the submittal of monthly ridership reports and annual funding continuation requests. They have consistently exceeded the minimum ridership level of 25 riders per month and have collectively averaged 35 riders/month/buspool this current fiscal year. USpOOIS Average 'Faders/M©nt'�, Roundtrip rstan"ce Distance,, Anne^ei Miles Sau+rtd Anna! One- Way\ Reduced Corona 39 --- 134 mi 1,093,404 19,844 Mira Loma 29 — 123 mi 873,840 14,564 Riverside 38 --1 10 mi 1,314,773 19,536 Estimated Pounds of Emissions Reduced 31,138 Miles Saved 3,282,017 Trips Reduced 53,944 In reducing the number of vehicles on SR-91 during peak periods, the buspool program saved more than 3.2 million miles and 31,000 pounds of vehicle emissions in FY 201 1 /12. A fourth buspool, called Riverside 2, was formed in February 2012. Since it has not met the 25-rider minimum, the Riverside 2 buspool has not begun receiving the monthly subsidy from the Commission. The buspool coordinator anticipates achieving a minimum of 25 riders by July 2012, at that time it will be eligible to begin receiving the buspool subsidy. Agenda Item 80 135 The buspool subsidy proves to be an effective use of Measure A Commuter Assistance funds and a budget of $100,000 is proposed for FY 2012/13. Based on the established monthly $1,645/month per buspool subsidy policy, the funds will support the continuation of the three existing buspools, the new Riverside 2 buspool, and the possibility for one new start-up buspool. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $100,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 002109 81030 263 41 81002 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \)//t/4"444,34 Date: 05/10/12 Attachments: 1) Corona Renewal Request 2) Mira Loma Renewal Request 3) Riverside Renewal Request 4) Riverside 2 Startup Request Agenda Item 80 136 " " " m A R c i A T A R H A A S e n d c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s t o : 2 7 0 5 M o n s e r a t C i r c l e C O r o n a , C A 9 2 8 8 1 M a y 1 , 2 0 1 2 A t t n . : B r i a n C u n a n a n , C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e M a n a g e r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n P . O . B o x 1 2 0 0 8 R i v e r s i d e , C A 9 2 5 0 2 - 2 2 0 8 D e a r M r . C u n a n a n , I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( R C T C ) , I a m r e q u e s t i n g a n e x t e n s i o n o f f u n d i n g f o r t h e p e r i o d o f J u l y 1 . 2 0 1 2 t o J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 3 f o r t h e - C o r o n a " t o E l S e g u n d o C o m m u t e r B u s p o o l . I a m t h e b u s p o o l o p e r a t o r a n d c o o r d i n a t e t h i s b u s e , t - t 1 i - t e l e p e n t l e n t 1 : - . 1 i " 1 e n i t - T h e m o n t h l y c o s t t o o p e r a t e t h i s b u s p o o l f i o m O d y s s e y i s $ 2 6 7 . R C T C p r o v i d e s a S 3 5 m o n t h l y s u b s i d y p e r s e a t a n d t h e r e m a i n i n g S 2 3 2 i s p r o v i d e d b e t w e e n t h e r i d e r s a n d t h e i r e m p l o y e r s . T h e f o l l o w i n g i s t h e C o r o n a t o E l S e g u n d o B u s p o o l s c h e d u l e : A N I D e p a r t u r e A M A r r i v a l P r v l D e p a r t u r e P M A r r i v a l L i v i n g T r u t h P a r k & R i d e L o t E l S e g u n d o E l S e g u n d o L i v i n g T r u t h P a r k & R i d e L o t 4 : 5 0 a . m . 5 : 4 5 a . m . 3 : 3 0 p . m . 5 : 1 5 p . m . I n f o r m a t i o n o n t h i s b u s p o o l i s a v a i l a b l e w i t h r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s a t B o e i n g , R a y t h e o n , A e r o s p a c e C o r p o r a t i o n , a n d t h e , L o s A n g e l e s A i r F o r c e b a s e . E m p l o y e e s r e c e i v e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h d i r e c t m a i l i n g s , n e w s l e t t e r a r t i c l e s , a n d e l e c t r o n i c m e s s a g i n g f r o m t h e s e e m p l o y e r s . T h e s e e m p l o y e r r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s a l s o s h a r e t h i s i n t h r m a t i o n w i t h o t h e r l o c a l e m p l o y e e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r s . T h a n k y o u f o r y o u r c o n t i n u e d s u p p o r t o f t h i s s u c c e s s f u l b u s p o o l p r o g r a m . S i n c e r e l y , e i s M a r c i a P a s q u a r e l l a C o r o l l a B u s p o o l C o o r d i n a t o r " " " I l A R L A N A L P E R T S e n d c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s t o : 5 5 2 2 S u l p h u r D r . M i r a L o m a , C A . 9 1 7 5 2 A p r i l 3 0 , 2 0 1 2 A t t n . : B r i a n C u n a n a n C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e M a n a g e r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n P . O . B o x 1 2 0 0 8 R i v e r s i d e , C A 9 2 5 0 2 - 2 2 0 8 - D e a r M r . C u l l m a n , I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( R C I ' C ) , I a m r e q u e s t i n g a n e x t e n s i o n o f f u n d i n g f o r t h e p e r i o d o f J u l y 1 , 2 0 1 2 t o J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 3 f o r t h e " M i r a I . , o m a " ( M i r a L o m a / C o r o n a ) t o E l S e g u n d o C o m m u t e r B u s p o o l . I a m t h e b u s p o o l o p e r a t o r a n d c o o r d i n a t e t h i s b u s p o o l i n d e p e n d e n t l y f r o m a n y e m p l o y e r . T h e m o n t h l y c o s t t o o p e r a t e t h i s b u s p o o l f r o m T o u r C o a c h i s $ 2 5 4 . 0 0 p e r r i d e r . R O T C p r o v i d e s a $ 3 5 m o n t h l y s u b s i d y p e r s e a t a n d - t h e r e m a i n i n g $ 2 1 9 . 0 0 i s p r o v i d e d b e t w e e n t h e r i d e r s a n d t h e i r e m p l o y e r s . T h e f o l l o w i n g i s t h e M i r a L o m a / C o r o n a B u s p o o l s c h e d u l e : A M D e p a r t u r e A M D e p a r t u r e A M A r r i v a l P M D e p a r t u r e P M A r r i v a l P M A r r i v a l M i r a L o m a C o r o n a P a r k & R i d e L o t I . l S e g u n d o E l S e g u n d o C o r o n a P a r k & R i d e I . . o t M i r a L o m a ( M o n d a y T h u r s d a y ) ( F r i d a y ) 4 : 1 0 a . m . 4 : 1 0 a . m . 4 : 2 5 a . m . 4 : 2 5 a . m . 5 : 3 0 a . m . 5 : 3 0 a . m . 3 : 0 0 p . m . 4 3 0 p . m . 4 : 4 5 p . m . 2 : 3 0 p . m . 4 : 0 0 p . m . 4 : 1 5 p . m . I n f o r m a t i o n o n t h i s b u s p o o l i s a v a i l a b l e w i t h r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s a t R a y t h e o n , B o e i n g . A e r o s p a c e C o r p o r a t i o n , a n d t h e L o s A n g e l e s A i r F o r c e b a s e . E m p l o y e e s r e c e i v e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h d i r e c t m a i l i n g s , n e w s l e t t e r a r t i c l e s , a n d e l e c t r o n i c m e s s a g i n g f r o m t h e s e e m p l o y e r s . T h e s e e m p l o y e r r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s a l s o s h a r e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h o t h e r l o c a l e m p l o y e e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r s . T h a n k y o u f o r y o u r c o n t i n u e d s u p p o r t o f t h i s s u c c e s s f u l b u s p o o l p r o g r a m . S i n c e r e l y , I I a r l a n A l p e r t M i r a L o m a B u s p o o l O p e r a t o r " " C A T A L I N A F U E N T E S S e n d c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s t o : R a y t h e o n C o m p a n y 2 2 0 0 1 m p e r i a l H w y . P . O . B o x 9 0 2 B l d g . R 0 7 , M / S P 5 5 5 E l S e g u n d o , C A 9 0 2 4 5 - 4 5 0 1 A p r i l 3 0 , 2 0 1 2 A t t n . : B r i a n C u n a n a n , C o m m u t e r A s s i s t a n c e M a n a g e r R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n P . O . B o x 1 2 0 0 8 R i v e r s i d e , C A 9 2 5 0 2 - 2 2 0 8 D e a r M r . C u n a n a n , I n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n ( R C T C ) , I a m r e q u e s t i n g a n e x t e n s i o n o f f u n d i n g f o r t h e p e r i o d o f J u l y 1 , 2 0 1 2 t o J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 3 f o r t h e " R i v e r s i d e " t o E l S e g u n d o C o m m u t e r B u s p o o l . I a m t h e b u s p o o l o p e r a t o r a n d c o o r d i n a t e t h i s b u s p o o l i n d e p e n d e n t l y f r o m a n y e m p l o y e r . T h e m o n t h l y c o s t t o o p e r a t e t h i s b u s p o o l f r o m O d y s s e y i s $ 2 7 4 . 0 0 . R C T C p r o v i d e s a $ 3 5 m o n t h l y s u b s i d y p e r s e a t a n d t h e r e m a i n i n g $ 2 3 9 . 0 0 i s p r o v i d e d b e t w e e n t h e r i d e r s a n d t h e i r e m p l o y e r s . T h e f o l l o w i n g i s t h e R i v e r s i d e t o E l S e g u n d o B u s p o o l s c h e d u l e : A M D e p a r t u r e A M D e p a r t u r e A M A r r i v a l P M D e p a r t u r e P M A r r i v a l P M A r r i v a l G a l l e r i a a t T y l e r , R i v e r s i d e C o r o n a P a r k & R i d e L o t R a y t h e o n , E l S e g u n d o R a y t h e o n , E l S e g u n d o C o r o n a P a r k & R i d e L o t G a l l e r i a a t T y l e r , R i v e r s i d e 4 : 1 5 a . m . 4 : 2 5 a . m . 5 : 2 0 a . m . 3 : 0 0 p . m . 4 : 3 0 p . m . 4 : 4 5 p . m . I n f o r m a t i o n o n t h i s b u s p o o l i s a v a i l a b l e w i t h r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s a t R a y t h e o n , A e r o s p a c e C o r p o r a t i o n , a n d t h e L o s A n g e l e s A i r F o r c e b a s e . E m p l o y e e s r e c e i v e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h d i r e c t m a i l i n g s , n e w s l e t t e r a r t i c l e s , a n d e l e c t r o n i c m e s s a g i n g f r o m t h e s e e m p l o y e r s . T h e s e e m p l o y e r r i d e s h a r e p r o g r a m s a l s o s h a r e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h o t h e r l o c a l e m p l o y e e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o o r d i n a t o r s . T h a n k y o u f o r y o u r c o n t i n u e d s u p p o r t o f t h i s s u c c e s s f u l b u s p o o l p r o g r a m . S i n c e r e l y , C a t a l i n a F u e n t e s R i v e r s i d e B u s p o o l C o o r d i n a t o r SANDRA DALEY Send correspondences to: Raytheon Company 2000 E. El Segundo Blvd. El Segundo, CA 90245-4501 April 30, 2012 Attn.: Brian Cunanan, Commuter Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC), I am requesting funding for the period of July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013 for the "Riverside 2" to El Segundo Commuter Buspool. I am the buspool operator and coordinate this buspool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this Buspool from (Transportation Charter Service (TCS)) is $245.00. RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat and the remaining $210.00 is provided between the riders and their employers. The following is the Riverside 2 to El Segundo Buspool schedule: AM Departure AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival PM Arrival Downtown, Riverside Metro Station Corona Park & Ride Lot Raytheon, El Segundo Raytheon, El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Lot Downtown, Riverside Metro Station 4:50 a.m. 5:15 a.m. 6:30 a.m. 4:00 p.m. -5:10 p.m. -5:30 p.m. Information on this buspool is available with rideshare programs at Raytheon, Aerospace Corporation, and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and electronic messaging from these employers. These employers rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful buspool program. Since fly, Sandra Daley Riverside 2 Buspool Coordinator 140 AGENDA ITEM 8P RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: City of La Quinta's Amended Bicycle Transportation Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the city of La Quinta's (La Quinta) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: La Quinta's amended BTP was submitted to the Commission for certification that it complies with the requirements of the state's Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) program as required by state law. The state's BTA program may fund a maximum of 90 percent of the cost of eligible projects, and each jurisdiction is eligible to receive up to 25 percent of the funds available for any given year. La Quinta amended its BTP in March 2012. Accordingly, the Commission must reaffirm that the amended plan meets the requirements of the state's BTA program. La Quinta modified the BTP in order to utilize remaining grant monies from the state's BTA. Staff reviewed La Quinta's amended BTP and finds that it satisfies the requirements of the state's BTA program as specified by state law. There is no financial impact to the Commission, as the state's BTA funding is directed through the state to the city. Attachment: La Quinta's Amended BTP Map Agenda Item 8P 141 " " " C H A P T E R 4 : L O C A L B I C Y C L E P L A N S > " ' i t f " ' " " , P ' " ; . " " " . . " " . ; ' ' , " . " " " , " ' ' " - " " " " " . , , t ' " I A * ' I " " - , ; 7 4 . " L e g e n d P a l * 3 0 4 4 E X I S T I N G A N D P R O P O S E D B I C Y C L E F A C I L I T I E S C I T Y O F L A Q U I N T A ' , . . : : ; , : - . , : s a . t , , . . , i I i . i ' , . . . . : , " " : : , : : , . . . 1 : . i i . . . ? 4 3 , . , f l . 1 . . . t ' ` . . g , l , ' ' ' - - A - 1 , : . - - ; : t . , : . : - . - - - i I I : A . t r , 4 , , , , , - , I ' ^ o , , ^ A . ! e t , P . 4 1 , 1 1 - C V A G N o n - M o t o r i z e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n U p d a t e 8 2 AGENDA ITEM 8Q RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manader John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Iowa Avenue Grade Separation Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to allocate $500,000 in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to the city of Riverside (Riverside) to provide a match, if needed, in support of the Iowa Avenue grade separation project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission adopted a policy in 2001 to provide 10 percent in match funds in support of successful California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Section 190 grade separation projects provided that funding is available. To be eligible, projects must be included in the Commission -approved Alameda Corridor -East (ACE) Grade Crossing Priority list. Riverside was awarded $5 million in CPUC funding for the Iowa Avenue grade separation project and is requesting an allocation of $500,000 from the Commission to serve as match funds. The project does meet the Commission's eligibility requirement of having been awarded CPUC funds and is listed in the. Commission -approved ACE Grade Crossing Priority list. Opening of construction bids for the Iowa Avenue grade crossing is scheduled for May 22, 2012. Due to the favorable bid environment, the $500,000 in CMAQ funds may not be required as bids may come in lower than the engineer's estimate; however, in order not to delay the project, staff is requesting the CMAQ funding allocation as a back-up measure. Agenda Item 8Q 143 Proposed Iowa Avenue Grade Separation In April 2007, the Commission approved an off the top allocation of 25 percent of CMAQ and Surface Transportation Program federal funds for grade separation projects located on the ACE, subject to a use it or lose it provision. As shown on the following table, staff projects that approximately $21.2 million in CMAQ funding will be available for grade separation projects after approval of this allocation: CMAQ ESTIMATED BEGINNING BALANCE $48,070,041 Grade Separation/Goods Movement Amount Projects Allocated Magnolia Avenue Iowa Avenue Clay Street Avenue 66 Iowa Avenue $15,000,000' 3, 550,000' 7,500,000' 350,000' 500,000 Date Approved by Commission Action 12/2007 6/2011 6/2011 9/2011 Pending Estimated Balance $33,070,041 29,520,041 22,020,041 21, 670, 041 21,170,041! Once built,, the project will grade separate the existing Iowa Avenue/Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) at -grade crossing by constructing a four -lane roadway bridge over existing BNSF tracks. The at -grade crossing also carries Union Pacific Railroad freight and Metrolink trains. The total cost of the project is estimated at $32.2 million. There is no impact to the Commission's budget as CMAQ funding does not flow through the Commission. Agenda Item 8Q 144 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Metrolink Budget for Fiscal Year 2012/13 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the preliminary FY 2012/13 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget with anticipation of a 5 to 9 percent fare increase; 2) Approve the additional inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) service with an additional peak period round trip and expanded year round weekend service; and 3) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the SCRRA in an amount not to exceed of $7,575,300 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train operations and maintenance of way plus a contingency of $2,424,700 in LTF funds for new service options and $250,000 for capital projects to be funded by State Transit Assistance funds (STA). BACKGROUND INFORMATION Metrolink is the brand name for the services operated by SCRRA. By virtue of the SCRRA joint powers agreement, the five member agencies that comprise Metrolink must formally commit to fund their proportionate shares of commuter rail operating and capital costs. Each member agency must approve the budget before adoption of a final budget by the SCRRA Board, no later than June 30, 2012. Service and funding levels are limited by the policy and budget constraints of the member agencies and are negotiated each year. Agenda Item 9 145 FY 2011 /12 Metrolink Review The following is a review of Metrolink's FY 201 1 /12 activities: • Continued reorganization of staff including new chief financial officer, finance department staff, legal team, security department, and other changes; • Continued safety efforts to follow up on the Peer Safety Review recommendations; • Further developed the Positive Train Control (PTC) program with the progress being made by the vendor integrator contractor with target completion 2013; • Started successful Angels Trains/IEOC Friday night game service in April; • Expanded staffing and marketing initiatives with Wild at Work; and • Received further delivery and rollout into service of the new passenger rail cars. FY 2012/13 Looking Forward Looking ahead to FY 2012/13, Metrolink intends to: • Continue safety focus; • Add weekday peak period trains on the IEOC service and expanded year round weekend service; • Continue to push for expanded 91 Line service with two additional peak period round trip trains; • Implement the PTC program with target completion by 2013; and • Provide new leadership direction. Riverside County Service Impact Proposed for FY 2012/1,3 Three Metrolink commuter rail lines traverse Riverside County — the Riverside Line, the IEOC Line, and the 91 Line. Staff proposed and there is available funding for an additional weekday peak period round trip train on the IEOC line. In addition, there is a proposal to re institute the second year round 1E0C weekend train that was cut back to just running in summer months a couple of years ago to budget restraints. The anticipated costs to the Commission for the new IEOC trains are estimated at $225,000 and are included as part of the contingency. Also there is an effort by staff to develop a service option to use the newly purchased Commission -owned rail cars to expand the 91 Line service with four additional peak service trains. This proposal has the potential to greatly improve service for all Riverside residents and compliment the major SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project expansion project. Additional coordination still needs to take place between the member agencies and Burlington Northern Santa Fe with the objective of Agenda Item 9 146 starting this new service mid -year. While an estimate for such service on the 91 Line is not yet available, staff has included an amount in the contingency for this source. Commission's FY 2012/13 Operating Subsidy Obligation The proposed SCRRA request of the Commission is $7,898,500 for operations and maintenance of way, which represents a $753,800 increase or 10.55 percent over the FY 201 1 /12 SCRRA budget. This amount does not include the staff recommended 5 to 9 percent fare increase that is currently being discussed. Staff is projecting funding of $7,575,300 to coincide with a 7 percent fare increase. These amounts do not include the additionalservice that has been proposed. Therefore, staff recommends approving a budget of $10 million, which includes a contingency of $2,424,700 to include the full development of new service and allow flexibility to account for the unknown impacts of the fare increase. Once the fare increase and service plans are finalized, staff will fund the appropriate operating subsidy to SCRRA. As with past funding, the operating subsidy will be paid from LTF revenues allocated for rail operations. Operating Cost Overview The overall Metrolink FY 2012/13 operating budget is $194,019,900, which is $14.4 million or 8 percent greater than the FY 201 1 /12 budget. The following elements represent the various increases: • An increase in the operating contract expenses including a labor settlement, overhead and administrative costs, resulting in $3.2 million or a 7.3 percent line item budget increase over the previous year; • An increase in the cost and usage of diesel fuel resulting in a $4.7 million. or 20.9 percent line item budget impact over the previous year; • A $1 million increase in equipment maintenance with added positions and cleaning expenses; • An increase in the cost of transfers to other operators of $1.5 million primarily due to contract payment changes with LA Metro; • An increase in the agency's insurance program by $1 .2 million more than the prior year; and • An increase in indirect administrative expenses of . $2.2 million or 24.1 percent over the previous year budget. In addition, there is a $1 .3 million or 213.9 percent increase in professional services. These expenses are related to changes in funding of retirement obligations and increased consulting services. Regarding many of these issues above and given the overall financial picture of Metrolink and the partner agencies, there are a number of concerns. First, over the Agenda Item 9 147 past year through a number of audits, it has come to light that there are significant issues with SCRRA's capital grants oversight, financial procedures, and financial information system. In addition, there are concerns with tracking of inventory that required almost half of the inventory to be written off as of June 30, 2011. While efforts are underway to correct these issues, the Commission requires sufficient information in order to continue diligent oversight regarding the use of Riverside County's transportation funds. The oversight of the financial operations of SCRRA continues to be a significant concern. Capital Contribution The Commission's new capital and capital renovation obligation for FY 2012/13 is projected at $1,590,749. This is the recommended amount based on available matching funding from other member agencies. SCRRA proposed a larger annual amount for next year that included $30 million for Tier 4 locomotives. This is a multi -year project that will cost over $100 million, and upgrades to Tier 4 locomotives would not be considered the usual rehabilitation of locomotives. Commission staff feels it should be a stand-alone project and funded independently of the established rehabilitation program. Commission staff is working on completing a $10 million FTA Section 5309 grant application that will be -able to provide ongoing funding for the rehabilitation program and possibly, some of the locomotive program for the next several years. A majority of the FY 2012/13 obligation will be funded with FTA Section 5309 grant funds used for various projects including rehabilitation and renovation of rolling stock and track projects, ticket vending machine upgrades, and maintenance of way technology improvements. Some additional funding will be provided with STA funds as needed up to $250,000. As in past years, the federal funds will be claimed and received directly by SCRRA and will not pass through the Commission's accounting records. Summary Financial Subsidy Impact to Commission The SCRRA-proposed Commission operating subsidy is $7,898,500, which represents 4 percent of the $194,019,900 Metrolink operating budget. Using LTF funds, a total operating subsidy of $10 million, comprised of $7,575,300 plus a contingency of $2,424,700 for new service, is included in the proposed FY 2012/13 budget being presented to the Commission in June 2012 for approval. The total capital rehabilitation project subsidy of $1,590,749 will be funded with $1,340,749 of FTA Section 5309 funds that will not pass through the Commission along with $250,000 in STA funds, which are included in the Commission's proposed FY 2012/13 budget. Agenda Item 9 148 Systemwide In FY 2012/13, Metrolink will celebrate its 20' year providing Metrolink commuter rail service in Southern California. Opening with three lines and 12 stations in October 1992, the SCRRA today operates over 512 route miles on seven lines, serving 55 stations in six counties. Average weekday ridership is projected to total over 44,000 one-way trips, which is a relatively flat projection based on current trends. In 2004, the Metrolink Board approved a 10-year fare restructuring program that began July 1, 2005, and changed the method for calculating fares to one based on the driving mileage between stations. The 10-year fare restructuring program included an underlying average annual fare increase of 3.5 percent. This program along with the potential fare increase will be discussed at a May 30, 2012 Special Metrolink Board meeting and public hearing. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $10,250,000 Source of Funds: Operations - LTF Capital - STA Funds Budget Ad ustment: No GLA No.: 25.4199 86101 103 25 86101 $10,000,000 254199 86102 103 25 86102 $250,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \MBA jt � Date: 05/14/12 Attachment: SCRRA FY 2012/13 Budget Operating Subsidy Allocation by County Agenda Item 9 149 TABLE 3.8 FY 2012-2013 OPERATING SUBSIDY ALLOCATION BY COUNTY ($000s) Total FY 12-13 LACMTA Share OCTA Share RCTC Share SANBAG Share VCTC Share Expenses Train Operations & Services $121,229.4 $62,921.1 $28,008.5 $9,084.9 $15,845.8 $5,369.1 Maintenance -of -Way 27,686.1 16,008.9 5,767.9 669.4 3,547.2 1,692.6 Administration & Services 26,504.4 13,358.7 4,843.1 2,710.6 2,797.3 2,794.8 Insurance 18,600.0 9,945.2 3,902.6 1,430.0 2,619.9 702.3 Total Expenses Incl. MOW $194,019.9 $102,233.9 $42,522.1 $13,894.9 $24,810.2 $10,558.9 Revenues Gross Farebox 82,749.0 43,680.9 18,519.4 5,931.4 12.,077.9 2,539.4 Dispatching 2,762.9 1,480.8 907.5 - 47.0 327.6 Other Operating 670.0 348.6 145.1 64.9 83.5 27.9 Maintenance -of -Way 13,692.3 8,924.9 2,851.8 0.1 1,259.2 656.4 Total Revenues $99,874.2 $54,435.2 $22,423.8 $5,996.4 $13,467.5 $3,551.3 Total County Allocation $94,145.7 $47,798.6 $20,098.3 $7,898.5 $11,342.7 $7,007.6 FY 2011-12 Budget 81,151.3 40,063.7 18,230.0 7,144.7 9,552.2 6,160.7 Increase/(Decrease) 12,994.4 7,734.9 1,868.3 753.8 1,790.5 846.9 Percentage Change 16.01% 19.31% 10.25% 10.55% 18.74% 13.75% 24 6/6/2012 2012/ 13 Operating Budget • Avg. daily ridership 44,000 (Flat or 0% increase) • Operating budget $194 million (Up 8 percent, $14.4 million) • Approved 7% percent fare increase, will impact ridership • Peak period and weekend service increases for IEOC • Expanded service proposed for 91 Lines 1 6/6/2012 2012/ 13 Operating Budget • $14.4 million in net cost increases • $4.7 million - Fuel increase • $3.2 million - Train crew increase • $1 million - Train maintenance increase • $1.5 million - Connecting transfer increase • $1.2 million Insurance • $2.2 million - Administrative expense • $1.3 million - Professional services 2012/13 Service Expansion • New Sth Peak Period IEOC Train — Departs Riverside 7:00 a.m. arrive Laguna Niguel 8:25 a.m. — Returns Laguna Niguel 3:30 p.m. arrive Riverside 5:00 p.m. — Replaces off peak round-trip cut in 2010 with peak trains — First new peak train on the route since 1997 — Strong ridership potential, diverts traffic off 91 freeway • Weekend Service Increase for IEOC — Reintroduces 2'idyear-round trip that was cut in back 2010 • Enhanced Service Proposed for 91 Lines — Proposal for two new peak round trips to aid 91 freeway projects and reduce load factor on existing trains — Locomotive and cars have already been purchased 6/6/2012 Fare Increase • The planning process started late with no Metrolink direction, decision left to member agencies which developed the range. • Public comment open Apr 27, SNB Meeting May 29 • Public Hearing May 30 — (Approved 7 percent) • Initial proposed range from 5 to 9 percent • A 7 percent increase generates $4.5 million close to the $4.7 million increase in fuel costs Fare Increase • Riverside to LA fare change at 7 percent — Current $328 monthly pass would go up $23 — Current $23.50 round trip would go up $1.75 • Prior Year Increases Year 2002` 2003 Amount 5% None 3.5% 2005 4.5% 2006 5.5% Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 6% 2011 Non Amount 3:59b. 5.5% 3.596 T 6/6/2012 Metrolink Update • Continuing Agency Reorganization — Search for New CEO — New CFO, Legal Staff, Grants &Finance Department, Security Manager, etc. • Positive Train Control by 2013 • Bike Cars • Quiet Cars • Angels Trains -165 IEOC Riders • 10 Trips Tickets ended May 14 •.r.Yl vikll�b /3 Nag 4XPRE33 q�yill RCTC Impact • RCTC operating subsidy will depend on the amount of fare increase and timing of implementation • Budget proposes $7.57 million with $2.4 million for new If0C and 91 Line service and contingency • Additional SCRRA funding needs will come back to the Commission 4 6/6/2012 RCTC I m pact • RCTC Rehabilitation capital subsidy of $1.5 million is 4.9 percent share, funded with FTA funds and $250,000 of STA funds • Locomotive Rehab/Upgrade scenario unclear on funding. Will require future Metrolink Board Action to approve along with possible RCTC action. • Unique to Riverside, RCTC subsidizes the 5 Riverside County Stations at approximately $2.5 million a year 5 AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director Projects Committee THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 Design -Build Procurement WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize staff, subject to approval by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to issue a request for proposal (RFP) and future addenda for design -build services in accordance with Public Contract Code sections 6800 et seq. for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) to the four pre -qualified design -build teams; 2) Approve the selection criteria and process for selection of the pre -qualified firm providing the best -value to the Commission, otherwise known as apparent best value (ABV) proposer; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to select the three top -ranked ABV Proposers for design -build services, based on the criteria and selection procedures identified in the RFP and any addendum(s) thereto, and subsequently to conduct limited negotiations with the top -ranked ABV proposer; 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to negotiate with the second -ranked ABV proposer if negotiations fail with the top -ranked ABV proposer and with the third -ranked ABV proposer should negotiations fail with both the top -ranked and second -ranked ABV proposers; 5) Authorize the Executive Director to issue a request for a best and final offer (BAFO) to the proposers if found to be in the best interests of the Commission, to make changes to the RFP, solicit BAFOs from proposers, evaluate revised proposals, select an ABV proposer, negotiate with the top -ranked proposer and second and third -ranked if necessary, and make a recommendation of contract award based upon the revised proposals in accordance with 23 CFR Part 636; Agenda Item 10 151 6) Authorize the Executive Director to return to the Commission with a recommendation to award a contract for design -build services. The recommendation shall be accompanied by a written decision supporting the recommendation and stating the basis for the award; 7) Authorize the Executive Director to pay a stipend to unsuccessful proposers that meet the RFP criteria for stipend payment up to $650,000 per unsuccessful proposers or a total not to exceed of $ 2.6 million for all unsuccessful proposers after final action by the Commission on the RFP; and 8) Approve and find, based on the facts set forth in the staff report, that particular materials, products, or services that are elements of the proposed design -build services for the SR-91 CIP are to be designated in the RFP by specific brand names or trade names to match and be Interoperable with other products used by the Commission and other related facilities as authorized by Public Contracts Code, section 3400(c). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Early Development of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project Subsequent to public ownership of the 91 Express Lanes, Orange and ,Riverside Counties commissioned a major investment study (MIS) to identify a range of feasible alternatives that would improve mobility between the two counties. This study was initiated in June 2004 and completed in December 2005. Following the MIS, the Commission sponsored a project study report (PSR) to further develop and study the possible addition of one general-purpose lane in each direction. The PSR was approved by Ca[trans on December 4, 2006. Simultaneously, the Commission performed an independent feasibility study to determine the financial viability to construct tolled express lanes (TEL) on SR-91 in addition to the general purpose lanes proposed in the PSR. The Commission approved moving forward with environmental studies for TEL on SR-91 on December 13, 2006. The draft environmental document was released for a public review period on May 20, 2011. The public comment period was closed on July 11, 2011. Environmental approval is expected in summer 2012. 10-Year Delivery Plan Measure A was first passed in 1989 with an expiration date of 2009. In 2002, the voters approved a 30-year extension through 2039. At the same meeting in which the Commission approved moving forward with the SR-91 CIP environmental studies, the Commission adopted the Measure A Western Riverside County Highway 10-Year Delivery Plan (10-Year Delivery Plan). The 10-Year Delivery Plan calls for the development of TEL corridors within SR-91 and Interstate 15. Agenda Item 10 152 Selection of Contracting Method In order to achieve the benefits of the corridor improvements in a timely and most cost effective manner, the SR-91 CIP will be procured and contracted through a single private entity under a competitively bid, best -value, design -build procurement. The decision to proceed with this approach was driven in large part by the financing mechanism, as a design -builder provided fixed -price and schedule help in securing financing, through the sale of toll revenue bonds and obtaining a federal loan by providing cost and schedule certainty. Other benefits of the design -build approach include: • Single point of responsibility where the design -builder is responsible for both final design and construction of the SR-91 CIP; and • The design -builder assumes the greatest share of risk relating to final design; construction, delivery schedule, and utility relocation, therefore reducing the chance of cost overruns. Opportunities for innovation to reduce cost and schedule can be captured through: o Alternative technical concepts (ATCs) that generally include innovative technical solutions or approaches to perform the work offered during the procurement phase; and o Value engineering during final design and construction. Authority to Use the Design -Build Method of Project Delivery In March 2010, the California Transportation Commission approved the Commission's use of the design -build method of project delivery for the •SR-91 CIP under SB X2 4 and the statewide design -build pilot program. Separately, to minimize the litigation and delay risk of using design -build, the Commission also sought design -build authority through AB 2098 (.Miller), which was ultimately passed and signed into law on September 23, 2010. Project Scope Federal design -build contracting regulations allow proceeding with the design -build selection process before environmental approval provided that proposers are informed of the general status of the environmental review, do not assume an unnecessary amount of risk in the event the environmental process results in a significant change, and authorization to proceed with final design, and construction is not issued until environmental approval is granted. Accordingly, the Commission has developed a design -build scope of work consistent with the locally preferred alternative selected by the Commission on July 14, 2010. The SR-91 CIP is generally described as extending the existing 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County and the addition of a general purpose lane in each direction. More specifically the SR-91 CIP improvements include: Agenda Item 10 153 " E x t e n d i n g t h e e x i s t i n g 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s e a s t f r o m t h e O r a n g e / R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y l i n e t o 1 - 1 5 , a d i s t a n c e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y e i g h t m i l e s ; " A d d i n g a T E L d i r e c t c o n n e c t o r t o a n d f r o m 1 - 1 5 , s o u t h o f S R - 9 1 , a d i s t a n c e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h r e e m i l e s ; " A d d i n g a g e n e r a l p u r p o s e l a n e i n e a c h d i r e c t i o n f r o m t h e 7 1 / 9 1 i n t e r c h a n g e t o 1 - 1 5 ; " R e c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d g e o m e t r i c i m p r o v e m e n t s t o f i v e l o c a l i n t e r c h a n g e s w i t h i n t h e c i t y o f C o r o n a ( M a i n S t r e e t , G r a n d A v e n u e , L i n c o l n A v e n u e , M a p l e S t r e e t , a n d S e r f a s C l u b / A u t o C e n t e r D r i v e ) ; " A d d i t i o n o f a u x i l i a r y l a n e s a n d o t h e r o p e r a t i o n a l i m p r o v e m e n t s ; " I n s t a l l a t i o n o f a f u l l y a u t o m a t e d e l e c t r o n i c t o l l c o l l e c t i o n a n d e n f o r c e m e n t s y s t e m ; " R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f i m p a c t e d c i t y s t r e e t s , s o u n d w a l l c o n s t r u c t i o n , a n d a e s t h e t i c s i m p r o v e m e n t s . D e s i g n - B u i l d P r o c u r e m e n t T h e P r o c e s s T h e d e s i g n - b u i l d e r w i l l b e s e l e c t e d u s i n g a t w o - s t e p p r o c u r e m e n t p r o c e s s , a s a l l o w e d b y f e d e r a l d e s i g n - b u i l d c o n t r a c t i n g s t a t u t e s . T h e f i r s t s t e p c o n s i s t s o f s h o r t l i s t i n g o r p r e q u a l i f i c a t i o n b a s e d o n a r e q u e s t f o r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ( R F Q ) . I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h A B 2 0 9 8 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o l l o w e d a p r e q u a l i f i c a t i o n p r o c e s s . T h e s e c o n d s t e p w i l l c o n s i s t o f t h e r e c e i p t a n d e v a l u a t i o n o f p r i c e a n d t e c h n i c a l p r o p o s a l s i n r e s p o n s e t o a R F P . A w a r d w i l l b e b a s e d u p o n a b e s t - v a l u e d e t e r m i n a t i o n w i t h c r i t e r i a e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e R F P . I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e t w o - s t e p p r o c e s s , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a d d e d a n a d d i t i o n a l s t e p t o e n h a n c e t h e d e s i g n - b u i l d p r o c u r e m e n t . T h i s i n i t i a l s t e p a s k e d f o r s u b m i s s i o n o f a r e q u e s t f o r e x p r e s s i o n o f i n t e r e s t ( R F E I ) a n d w a s a n i n i t i a l o u t r e a c h e f f o r t t o i n f o r m a n d s o l i c i t i n t e r e s t f r o m t h e c o n t r a c t i n g c o m m u n i t y . T h e R F E I i s n o t a p r e r e q u i s i t e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e t w o - s t e p s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . T h e R F E I w a s i s s u e d o n J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 0 w i t h 1 7 r e s p o n s e s r e c e i v e d o n J u l y 1 2 , 2 0 1 0 . R e q u e s t f o r Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s V e r y s o o n a f t e r p a s s a g e o f A B 2 0 9 8 , s t a f f i s s u e d t h e R F Q f o r d e s i g n - b u i l d s e r v i c e s . O n O c t o b e r 2 1 , 2 0 1 0 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n r e c e i v e d f i v e s t a t e m e n t s o f q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ( S O Q s ) i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e R F Q . A s e l e c t i o n t e a m o f s t a f f a n d a g e n c y p a r t n e r s r e v i e w e d t h e S O Q ' s a n d p e r f o r m e d a c o m p r e h e n s i v e e v a l u a t i o n . O n J a n u a r y 5 , 2 0 1 1 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n n o u n c e d t h e p r e q u a l i f i c a t i o n o f t h e f o l l o w i n g f o u r d e s i g n - b u i l d t e a m s : A g e n d a I t e m 1 0 1 5 4 " " " " A t k i n s o n / W a l s h , a J o i n t V e n t u r e " T h e K i e w i t T e a m " F l a t i r o n / S k a n s k a / R a d o s , a J o i n t V e n t u r e " S h i m m i c k C o n s t r u c t i o n C o m p a n y , I n c . / O b a y a s h i C o r p . / F N F C o n s t r u c t i o n , I n c . A t t a c h m e n t 1 i n c l u d e s a c o m p r e h e n s i v e l i s t i n g o f t h e f o u r d e s i g n - b u i l d t e a m s . I n d u s t r y R e v i e w S t a f f w a i t e d t o s t a r t t h e s e c o n d s t e p u n t i l m o r e c e r t a i n t y w a s o b t a i n e d r e g a r d i n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l a p p r o v a l s a n d p r o j e c t f u n d i n g . O n M a y 7 , 2 0 1 2 s t a f f i s s u e d t h e d r a f t R F P t o t h e f o u r p r e - q u a l i f i e d t e a m s . T h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t e p , c a l l e d t h e i n d u s t r y r e v i e w , i s t o a l l o w t h e f o u r p r e - q u a l i f i e d t e a m s a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o c o m m e n t o n t h e d r a f t R F P b e f o r e f i n a l i z a t i o n . T h e d r a f t R F P i n c l u d e d t h e f o l l o w i n g d o c u m e n t s : " I n s t r u c t i o n s t o P r o p o s e r s " D e s i g n - B u i l d C o n t r a c t " T e c h n i c a l P r o v i s i o n s " R e f e r e n c e D o c u m e n t s I n d u s t r y r e v i e w o f a d r a f t R F P p r o v i d e s t h e C o m m i s s i o n t h e b e n e f i t o f t h e d e s i g n - b u i l d e r p e r s p e c t i v e a n d a f o r u m f o r d i s c u s s i o n o f a d e s i g n - b u i l d e r ' s i n n o v a t i v e a p p r o a c h e s . T h e i n d u s t r y r e v i e w p r o c e s s a l s o p r o v i d e s . a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r t h e d e s i g n - b u i l d e r s t o i d e n t i f y p a r t i c u l a r s p e c i f i c a t i o n s o r r e q u i r e m e n t s t h a t m a y d r i v e c o s t s h i g h e r , a n d / o r i d e n t i f y r e q u i r e m e n t s t h a t a r e p o t e n t i a l d e a l k i l l e r s o r t h a t m i g h t f o r c e o t h e r w i s e h i g h l y q u a l i f i e d d e s i g n - b u i l d t e a m s t o d r o p o u t o f t h e p r o c u r e m e n t . T h e i n d u s t r y r e v i e w p r o c e s s t y p i c a l l y r e s u l t s i n i m p r o v e d p r o c u r e m e n t d o c u m e n t s f o r a n o w n e r a n d r e d u c e d c o n t i n g e n c y p r i c i n g i n a d e s i g n - b u i l d e r ' s b i d . T h e i n d u s t r y r e v i e w p r o c e s s c o n c l u d e s u p o n i s s u a n c e o f t h e f i n a l R F P . D I S C U S S I O N ; I s s u a n c e o f t h e D e s i g n - B u i l d F i n a l R F P W i t h e n v i r o n m e n t a l a p p r o v a l e x p e c t e d t o o c c u r S u m m e r 2 0 1 2 , c o u p l e d w i t h t h e r e c e n t i n v i t a t i o n t o s u b m i t a f e d e r a l T I F I A l o a n a p p l i c a t i o n t h e f i n a l p i e c e t o c o m p l e t e l y f u n d t h e S R - 9 1 C I P s t a f f i s r e c o m m e n d i n g p r o c e e d i n g w i t h r e l e a s e o f t h e f i n a l R F P , s u b j e c t t o a p p r o v a l b y C a ! t r a n s a n d F H W A . A g r a p h i c i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h e s u b s e q u e n t t i m e l i n e , i n c l u d i n g r e q u i r e d C o m m i s s i o n a c t i o n s , i s d e p i c t e d i n A t t a c h m e n t 2 . A g e n d a I t e m 1 0 1 5 5 The final RFP will contain input from the design -build teams received through the industry review process in the form of written comments and/or meetings held with each design -build team. The comments received will be evaluated and incorporated as appropriate into the final RFP. Selection Process The process to determine the ABV proposer through a best -value design -build procurement for the SR-91 CIP has been established by the Commission and its consultants in accordance with federal requirements 23 CFR 636 and state requirements through AB 2098. Generally, under a best -value selection process, each proposer submits technical and financial proposals. The proposals are then evaluated and scored on three primary factors: 1) bid price; 2) proposed completion schedule; and 3) technical concepts and approach to the project. The weighting of each factor is determined prior to issuing the RFP. The scored factors are then combined using the predetermined weighting to derive the highest score and the ABV proposer. Specifically, the selection process commences once the Commission has received the proposals from the four pre -qualified firms. The steps to selection of the ABV proposer and the award of a design -build contract are as follows: 1) The proposals are received from the prequalified proposers and are logged in and stored in a secure location; 2) The proposals are then separated into two components, financial proposals and technical proposals, and provided to the financial proposal evaluation subcommittee (FPES) and technical proposal evaluation subcommittee (TPES), or subcommittees, for evaluation. Each of these subcommittees is made up of staff and other agency personnel with the appropriate experience; 3) The subcommittees each perform a responsiveness review of their respective proposals to ensure the proposers have met the requirements of the RFP, including organization, format, and inclusive of all the forms, as provided in the instructions to proposers (ITP); 4) Following the responsiveness review, each proposal is then evaluated against the pass/fail criteria identified in the ITP, which includes such criteria as company guarantees, proposal security, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise certification and adherence to the time for schedule completion. Proposals that meet the criteria move to the next step in the evaluation process. 5) The technical and financial proposals are then individually reviewed by advisory groups consisting of Commission staff and its consultants. The advisory groups provide the TPES and FPES a summary of their review findings; Agenda Item 10 156 6) Each of the subcommittees then performs its individual review and evaluation of the proposals and formulates its consensus subcommittee recommendations; 7) Individual subcommittee consensus recommendations are scored and combined based on the predetermined weighting of the bid price, proposed completion schedule, and technical concepts and approach to the project; and 8) The proposer with the highest ABV score is selected for final negotiations. If negotiations are successful a recommendation for award of a design -build contract is made to the Commission. Attachment 3 provides an overview of the proposal evaluation and selection organizational structure. Attachment 4 provides a flowchart of the selection process. Apparent Best Value Determination The best -value determination will be based on a 100 point scale. The price score will represent up to 80 points of the total score, and the technical score will represent up to 20 points of the total score. The determination of ABV shall be based on the highest total proposal score (TPS) computed based on the following formula: TPS (max.100 pts.) = Price Score (max. 80 pts.) + Technical Score (max. 20 pts) The price score will be calculated based on the following formula: Price Score = (APPVLow/APPV) * 80, where; APPVLow = Lowest Adjusted Proposal Present Value (APPV) submitted by any proposer as determined by its fixed price, discounted monthly using a discount rate of 4 percent, and making a .schedule adjustment of $95,000 per day times the number of calendar days difference between the number of calendars days shown in its proposal and the number of calendars days shown in the proposal with the shortest duration. APPV = Each proposer's APPV as determined by their fixed price, discounted monthly using a discount rate of 4 percent, and making a schedule adjustment of $95,000 per day times the number of calendar days difference between its proposal duration and the proposal with the shortest duration. Agenda Item 10 157 The technical score will be calculated based on the following formula: Technical Score = (TPES evaluation score/Highest TPES evaluation score for all proposers) * 20 The technical score calculation will be based on the TPES evaluation score for the technical proposal that is based on factors regarding a proposer's technical approach, project delivery approach, and quality management plan. Best and Final Offer The ability to issue a request for a BAFO is a common concept in design -build highway procurements and is specifically allowed under federal design -build procurement regulations (23 CFR Part 636). Although rarely used, having the ability to request a BAFO provides an option for the Commission to avoid delays that may occur during the procurement process. Typical examples that may trigger the issuance of a BAFO would include receipt of cost proposals that are all higher than the project budget and a determination that the RFP terms must be revised in order to clarify an ambiguity or to address changes in underlying circumstances. If used, a BAFO may be solicited at any time after receipt of proposals and prior to final award and shall follow the federal procedures for revised proposals. Stipend A stipend is an amount paid to unsuccessful but responsive proposers on design - build procurements. Stipends are commonly used by agencies nationally to reduce costs to industry for participation in design -build procurements and provide Proposers partial compensation for development of technical concepts and innovations. Stipends generally cover 20% to 40% of the proposer's cost to prepare a responsive proposal/bid and allow an agency to have the right to incorporate a, proposer's technical concepts and innovations into the project or elsewhere. Stipends have been found to also increase competition by allowing firms to participate due to lower proposal costs and enhance price competition by keeping proposers in the game. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), under- 23 CFR 636.112 .and 636.113 provide for federal -aid participation in stipends with certain stipulations. There is no fixed formula for stipends. Industry surveys reveal that stipends are typically found to be in the range of 0.01 % to 0.25 % of the design -build contract value. The proposed stipend for the SR-91 CIP of $650,000 per team is approximately .08% of the estimated design -build contract value. Staff recommends paying a stipend to the unsuccessful but responsive proposers for the following reasons: Agenda Item 10 158 " " " T h e S R - 9 1 C I P i s b e i n g p r o c u r e d u s i n g a d e s i g n - b u i l d m e t h o d o f p r o c u r e m e n t ; " F H W A r e c o g n i z e s a n d p a r t i c i p a t e s i n t h e c o s t o f s t i p e n d s ; " P a y m e n t o f s t i p e n d s i s a c o m m o n , n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e b y a g e n c i e s c o n d u c t i n g d e s i g n - b u i l d p r o c u r e m e n t s ; " E n c o u r a g e s c o m p e t i t i o n a m o n g t h e e n g i n e e r i n g a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n f i r m s ; " S i g n a l s t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s c o m m i t m e n t t o s u c c e s s f u l l y c o m p l e t e t h e p r o c u r e m e n t ; " P r o v i d e s f u r t h e r i n c e n t i v e t o t h e p r o p o s e r s t o i n n o v a t e a n d p e r f o r m a d d i t i o n a l e n g i n e e r i n g w o r k u p - f r o n t a n d a s p a r t o f t h e i r p r o p o s a l s ; " A l l o w s t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o u s e f o r t h e S R - 9 1 C I P a n y i n n o v a t i o n s o r t e c h n i c a l c o n c e p t s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e u n s u c c e s s f u l p r o p o s a l s ; a n d " R e d u c e s t h e c h a n c e o f p r o c u r e m e n t p r o t e s t s b y u n s u c c e s s f u l p r o p o s e r s b e c a u s e p r o p o s e r s w h o p r o t e s t a r e n o t a w a r d e d s t i p e n d s . P a y m e n t o f t h e s t i p e n d t o t h e u n s u c c e s s f u l . p r o p o s e r s w i l l b e m a d e i f t h e i r p r o p o s a l i s d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o b e r e s p o n s i v e , a c h i e v e s a p a s s i n g s c o r e u n d e r t h e c r i t e r i a i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e R F P , a n d a l l o t h e r c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e s t i p e n d a g r e e m e n t i n c l u d e d i n t h e R F P a r e m e t . P r o p o s e r s w i l l n o t r e c e i v e a s t i p e n d i f t h e C o m m i s s i o n w i t h d r a w s t h e R F P p r i o r t o t h e d u e d a t e . P a y m e n t o f t h e s t i p e n d w i l l b e m a d e o n l y a f t e r t h e d e s i g n - b u i l d c o n t r a c t h a s b e e n a w a r d e d t o t h e s u c c e s s f u l p r o p o s e r . B r a n d a n d T r a d e N a m e U s a g e T h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d C a l t r a n s c u r r e n t l y u s e c e r t a i n s o f t w a r e , e q u i p m e n t , a n d s e r v i c e s t o d e v e l o p a n d o p e r a t e t h e i r e x i s t i n g p r o j e c t s . I t i s i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e S R - 9 1 C I P t h a t t h e s o f t w a r e , e q u i p m e n t , a n d s e r v i c e s u s e d b y t h e d e s i g n - b u i l d e r b e c o m p a t i b l e a n d i n t e r o p e r a b l e w i t h t h o s e c u r r e n t l y u s e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n a n d C a l t r a n s . U s e o f i n c o m p a t i b l e p r o d u c t s a n d s e r v i c e s c a n l e a d t o i n c r e a s e d c o s t s , o p e r a t i o n a l d i f f i c u l t i e s , u s e r c o n f u s i o n , a n d i n e f f i c i e n c i e s . I n t e r c h a n g e a b i l i t y a n d c o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h s o f t w a r e , e q u i p m e n t , a n d s e r v i c e s i n u s e o n r e l a t e d f a c i l i t i e s w i l l m i n i m i z e d i s r u p t i o n t o t h e S R - 9 1 C { P , a g e n c i e s , a n d u l t i m a t e l y t h e t r a v e l l i n g p u b l i c . M a t c h i n g o f t h e e x i s t i n g s o f t w a r e , e q u i p m e n t , a n d s e r v i c e s l i s t e d b e l o w i s c r i t i c a l t o t h e e f f i c i e n t d e s i g n , c o n s t r u c t i o n , o p e r a t i o n , a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e p r o j e c t . C o m p u t e r S o f t w a r e " M i c r o s o f t W i n d o w s 7 ( o p e r a t i n g s y s t e m ) " M i c r o s o f t O f f i c e w i t h W o r d , E x c e l , O u t l o o k , a n d M e d i a P l a y e r " I B M L o t u s N o t e s " N o v e l l G r o u p W i s e D e s i g n S o f t w a r e A p p l i c a t i o n s " C i v i l d a n d W S P G W p r o g r a m s f r o m C i v i l D e s i g n C o r p " F H W A U r b a n D r a i n a g e D e s i g n p r o g r a m A g e n d a I t e m 1 0 " H Y - 2 2 ( d r a i n a g e o f h i g h w a y p a v e m e n t s ) " O N D R R A I N v 7 . 5 c ( h y d r a u l i c c a l c u l a t o r f o r o n s i t e d r a i n a g e ) " H E C - R A S 4 . 1 ( h y d r a u l i c s o f t w a r e ) " B e n t l e y M i c r o S t a t i o n C A D s o f t w a r e " A u t o d e s k C i v i l 3 D r o a d w a y d e s i g n s o f t w a r e " A u t o T u r n b y T r a n s o f t S o l u t i o n s " P r i m a v e r a s c h e d u l i n g s o f t w a r e " F H W A R e a l C o s t s o f t w a r e ( v e r s i o n 2 . 2 ) " G e o t e c h n i c a l s o f t w a r e g I N T ( v e r s i o n 8 o r h i g h e r ) S e i s m i c E q u i p m e n t / I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n S e n s o r s " V i b r a t i n g w i r e s t a i n g a g e : V C E - 4 2 0 0 b y G e o k o n , I n c . o r M o d e l E M - 5 b y R o c t e s t , I n c . " F o r c e b a l a n c e d a c c e l e r o m e t e r s : m a n u f a c t u r e d b y K i n e m a t i c " T i l t m e t e r s : M o d e l 8 0 0 - H t i l t m e t e r s w i t h h i g h - g a i n o p t i o n b y A p p l i e d G e o m e c h a n i c s , I n c . " H u m i d i t y m e t e r s : M o d e l H M P 4 5 A b y V a i s a l a , I n c . o r M o d e l H M P 4 5 C b y C a m p b e l l S c i e n t i f i c , I n c . F r e e w a y S e r v i c e P a t r o l " P e p e ' s T o w i n g " T r i - C i t y T o w i n g S c h e d u l e T h e f o l l o w i n g r e p r e s e n t t h e p l a n n e d p r o c u r e m e n t m i l e s t o n e s : M i l e s t o n e A c t i v i t y D a t e I n d u s t r y r e v i e w m e e t i n g s ( w i t h p r e - q u a l i f i e d t e a m s ) J u n e 4 - 8 , 2 0 1 2 I s s u e f i n a l R F P ( t o p r e - q u a l i f i e d t e a m s ) J u l y 2 0 1 2 O n e - o n - o n e m e e t i n g s A u g u s t - O c t o b e r 2 0 1 2 F i n a l R F P a d d e n d u m D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 2 P r o p o s a l d u e d a t e J a n u a r y 2 0 1 3 P r o p o s a l e v a l u a t i o n J a n u a r y - F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 3 S e l e c t i o n , n e g o t i a t i o n , a n d s t a f f r e c o m m e n d a t i o n F e b r u a r y - M a r c h 2 0 1 3 . C o m m i t t e e a n d C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v a l o f c o n t r a c t a w a r d M a r c h - A p r i l 2 0 1 3 F i n a n c i a l C l o s e M a y - J u l y 2 0 1 3 N o t i c e t o P r o c e e d f o r f i n a l d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n M a y - J u l y 2 0 1 3 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S : S t a f f r e q u e s t s C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v a l t o r e l e a s e t h e f i n a l R F P a n d f u t u r e a d d e n d a , f o r t h e S R - 9 1 C I P , s u b j e c t t o a p p r o v a l b y C a ! t r a n s a n d F H W A . A u t h o r i z a t i o n i s A g e n d a I t e m 1 0 1 6 0 also requested to approve the RFP selection criteria and process to select an ABV proposer, select the top three ranked best -value proposers, issue a BAFO (if required), conduct limited negotiations, return to the Commission with a design -build contract award recommendation, pay a stipend to the unsuccessful responsive proposers, and incorporate specific brand or trade names into the RFP. F inanc is l Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $2,600,000 Source of Funds: Measure A Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 003028 65520 262 Other) 31 65520 (Professional Services - Fiscal Procedures Approved: \44,,,dav-y''-�'0� Date: 05/10/12 Attachments: 1) Pre -Qualified Proposer Listing: SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project 2) Procurement Timeline - Commission Action Periods 3) Proposal Evaluation and Selection Organizational Structure 4) Selection Process Agenda Item 10 161 PRE -QUALIFIED PROPOSER LISTING: SR-91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Atkinson/Walsh, a.Joint Venture Major Participants/ Principal Participants Atkinson Contractors, LP Walsh Construction Company The Walsh Group Clark Construction Group, LLC Guy F. Atkinson Construction, LLC Other Team Members URS — URS is not a Principal Participant or Equity Provider (Designer) WKE, Inc. Tatsumi and Partners, Inc. Westbound Communications Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. The Kiewit Team Major Participants/ Principal Participants Kiewit Infrastructure West Co. Other Team Members HNTB Corporation — Not a Principal Participant (Designer) Brutoco Engineering and Construction, Inc Riverside Construction Company, Inc (RCC) Kleinfelder West, Inc. Iteris, Inc. Simon Wong Engineering Green Com, Inc. Fiat(i*O0Skanskalftados;a Joint Venture; Major Participants/ Principal Participants Flatiron West, Inc. Skanska USA Civil West California District Steve P. Rados, Inc. Other Team Members AECOM (Lead Designer) CH2M Hill Consensus Inc. Kimley Horn & Associates Diaz Yourman and Associates Leighton Consulting, Inc. Lin Consulting Wilson & Co. David Evans & Associates Civil Works Shimmck Construction Company, Inc./-Obayashi Corporation/ 'FBI)"-Construetiort,;lnc. Major Participants/ Principal Participants Shimmick Construction Company, Inc. Obayashi Corporation FNF Construction, Inc. Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc. MTS Engineers, Inc. BKF Engineers Faubel Public Affairs TransCore Ultrasystems Environmental Hatch Mott MacDonald 162 Environmental ApplavaE.Obtained r 25 Wks• -36 WEEKS Commission authorizes staff to: • Issue final RFP plus all future addenda • Approve the selection criteria and process for selection for the Apparent Best Value (ABV) proposer . Approve the use of specific brand and trade names in the final RFP = Negotiate with the ABV proposer . Negotiate with 2nd-ranked proposer if ABV negotiations fail • Authorize BAFO if in interest of commission • Return with a recommendation to award a contract for Design -Build services = Approve stipend to be paid to unsuccessful proposers 1 4 SELECT APPARENT i i3' EiE IVALug c a, PRCIPos:PR'' ° a 4= n I. f .� O i : o ca. c O¢ W i v m E • 7 V Q I v° > u(IS 2aIc w j a COMMISSION ACTION PERIOD •-6 WEEKS AWAfiD 7 rpwRACT ISStANTP:I m p s CN Q C Q V Commission authorizes staff to: • Award design -build contract . Issue Notice -To -Proceed (NTP) #1 . Issue NTP #2 subject to financial close ISSUE. I NTP #2 2 • 163 sueillea saosrhpd iepueui3 �Ageluasaideu to sluelinsuo3 V\IDd,.. luasa,Jda;ja ti (saaAoldw3 Apue2v) woe aagwavy a/NH aopaiK1 weiSoad Ilol :Jfetlp 3T/iLuLucognS sodaid. . OM 0111 NM NM Nod ;1,Joddns uawainaoad1�� raReuelAi s > s gol Ja2eueW luawainaoad topa.rjd 9ARnaex3 hrdaa D.I311 IOiD3Ula no3X3 saosIAPV lePueu�3 samlewasa.tdell letai sluelinstio.D IAIDd saArlewasa iday ao t" )Apleiauaj (saa/koldw3 loua2v) pued aagwaw aaaul a ai p lepueui3 la!gD %ijeuO (S3ct3) aa��aunS ampruls/uoRez!uaio uoilenien3 deb Prequalified Proposers. submit Proposals to RCTC ROTC separates. the Proposals into Price:. Proposals and Technical Proposals Financial Proposal Evaluation Subcommittee (FPES) Technical Proposal Evaluation Subcommittee (TPES) April 2012 • SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project SELECTION PROCESS P RCTC completes Pass/Fail 'Assess tentof I' Proposals': RCTC ------- request Clarifications` of Additional Information from Proposers' 165 select' Apparent Best Value' 013V)'proposal far Negotiation's and notify �nsuctessful Proposes,,' 6/6/2012 .53 1 FRox. RCTC State Route 91 Design -Build Procurement For the Riverside County Transportation Commission June 7, 2012 Benefits of Best Value .11 Design -Build RCM 1 pROJECT FC9w110 r Fixed lump sum pricing r T Securing financing Single point of responsibility Risk transfer r Innovation 1 6/6/2012 Design -Build Authority 1 pROJECT �rroam SBX24 , (Cogdill) AB 2098 (Miller) • Bill passed February 2009 ; • Statewide pilot program for design -build • CTC approval March 2010 • Bill passed September 2010 • SR-91 CIP: Project -Specific Authority • Governed by California and Federal regulations RCTC 2 ��A T w o - S t e p - ��D e s i g n - B u i l d P r o c u r e m e n t 9 1 P R C U E C T F A S T F O R W A R D S t e p 1 R F Q " 2 0 1 0 / 2 o n " F o u r p r e - q u a l i f i e d t e a m s P r e - Q u a l i f i e d T e a m s S h i m m i c k C o n s t r u c t i o n C o m p a n y , I n c . O b a y a s h i C o r p o r a t i o n F N F C o n s t r u c t i o n , I n c . " B i g g s C a r d o s a A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . " M T S E n g i n e e r s , I n c . " B K F E n g i n e e r s S t e p 2 R F P " B i d , s c h e d u l e , a n d t e c h n i c a l f a c t o r s A t k i n s o n C o n t r a c t o r s , L L P W a l s h C o n s t r u c t i o n C o m p a n y T h e W a l s h G r o u p C l a r k C o n s t r u c t i o n G r o u p , L L C " U R S K i e w i t I n f r a s t r u c t u r e W e s t C o . B r u t o c o E n g i n e e r i n g a n d C o n s t . , I n c . R i v e r s i d e C o n s t r u c t i o n C o m p a n y , I n c . " H N T B C o r p o r a t i o n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n S e l e c t e d d e s i g n - b u i l d e r F l a t i r o n W e s t , I n c . S k a n s k a U S A C i v i l W e s t S t e v e P . R a d o s , I n c . " A E C O M " C H 2 M H i l l -7. 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD Issue Draft RFP •Contract •Bidding instructions •Technical requirements Industry Review Engage Industry • Pre -qualified teams review and comment •1-on-1 meetings •Dialogue and receive input Finalize RFP RCT •Determine desired RFP changes •FHWA, Ca[trans Approval •Ready for final issuance Industry review will take approximately three months to complete uo!muxu) tegnindsigui Atom "gem mown mr- (n9b') amen Isaq luaaedde aye palms weal ipeaad lcia)uo l eo Rn ai pP8 @Inpa IDS oppaias Joj solopej OHYMaod Isx+d y x 3r CONCI L 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD Who Evaluates and Recommends Approval Financial Proposal Evaluation Subcommittee (FPES) Chair: Chief Financial Officer Three Member Panel (Agency Employees) FinancialAdvisorY Group RCTC Representatives PCM Consultants legal Representatives F inancial Advisors RCTC Commission RCTC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RCTC Deputy Executive Director& Procurement Manager Logistics Manager RCTC Procurement Support PCM RCTC Counsel RCT _'91!! Imes_. riverside Courdy Transporlarron FHWA Observer Technical Proposal Evaluation Subcommittee (TPES) Chair: Toll Program Director Five Member Board (Agency Employees) Technical Advisory Group RCTC Representatives PCM Consultants legal Representatives Financial Advisors Caltrans 6/6/2012 Proposal Evaluation Goal: Fair Competition RCM Technical Proposals Financial Proposals Separation of financial (bids) from technical proposals -Separate sealed financial proposal when submitted -Separate technical proposal Independent evaluations of each proposal Selection Formula: Highest Score Wins 1111 RCTC i pROJECT I Mir FORAWRO Total Proposal Score (max 100 pts) Price Score (max 80 pts) + Technical Score (max 20 pts) • Price Score = (Lowest Adjusted Price of Any Proposer / Proposer's Adjusted Price) X 80 Technical Score = (Proposer's Tech. Eval. / Highest Tech. Eval. of Any Proposer) X 20 Note: See the agenda report for a more co pIM1emigikWllbipilonitC dingidteAM adjust e4 1 6/6/2012 OP' 11111 Selection Formula: Schedule Adjustments 1 pROJEcT r.+s,aaaN,asu The selection formula adjusts the proposer's price by their proposed schedule. This benefits a proposer that proposes a shorter schedule. Proposer Schedule 1 Proposer's Days Price Proposed (a) A 1460 (4 Yrs) B 1550 S750,000,000 1700 S795,000,000 Schedule Days Difference from Lowest Proposal (b) D 90 $740,000,000 240 Value of Schedule Day (c) $95,000 $95,000 $95,000 Adjustment to Proposer's Price (d) =1b1 x (c) Proposer's Adjusted Price (a)+( d) 0 $795,000,000 $8,550,000 $758,550,000 $22,800,000 $762,800,000 Note: $95,000/day is the calculated value of the liquidated damage for late delivery of the project per the design -build contract. This amount is also used as the value of a schedule day in the selection formula. ..1111Pftb. OP' 11111 Selection Formula: Example RCTC 1 pROJECT PAST rown,rsO Proposer A Technical Score 85 Proposer's Price $795,000,000 $750,000,000 $740,000,000 Proposed Days Total Proposal Score Proposer Proposer 96.33 75 97.65 65 1700 94.85 Example Calculations for Proposer C Adjustment to Proposer's Price = (1700 days -1480 days) X $95,000/day= $22,800,000 Proposer's Adjusted Prim = $740,000,000+ $22,800,000= $782,800,000 Price Score = (5758,550,000 / $782,800,000) X 80 points max. = 79.55 points Technical Score = (65 / 85) X 20 points max. = 15.29 points Total Proposal Score = 79.55+ 15.29=14.85.golnts Note: Proposer B has the lowest Proposer's Adjusted Price at $758,550,000 2 6/6/2012 '1-1-1111` Best and Final Offer Benefit: minimize procurement delay Why use? bids > budget or clarify RFP terms Proposal Stipends: °P- What, Why, and When [tGSG 91 pROJECT 1 FASFNWUM What is it? • Amount paid to proposers to offset their costs to propose • Requires responsive proposals • Allowable under federal design - build guidelines Why should we offer one? • Encourages innovation and engineering for the proposal • Purchasing ideas and innovation from all unsuccessful teams • Reduces procurement protests • Signals Commission's commitment to award a contract When is it paid? • After: • Determination that the proposal is responsive • Proposal receives a passing score • All stipend agreement conditions are met • Design -build contract award 3 6/6/2012 ■1111Pli► Ow— ...71111111111 Proposal Stipends: How Much? 1 PROJEC3 rur rewo.aa Typical Design -Build Range' 0.01 % 0.25% 0.08%0.09% 0.13% o • co w E a• � O m t0 d 0 Source: Design -Build Institute of America (DBIA) Project Location D/B Cost Stipend 0 Gerald CA $750M $1M 0.13 Desmond Grand TX $850M $1M 0.12 Parkway (Toll Road) BART CA $850M $800k 0.09 SR•91 CIP CA $795M $650k 0.08 4 91 pR JE ir FAST FORWARD Commission Approvals COMMISSION ACTION PERIOD Environmental Approval Obtained —36 WEEKS FH WA Contract Concurrence 25 Wks. ISSUE FINAL RFP °a 0 4 Wks. 1 Wks. COMPLETE PROPOSAL EYAWATION io 0 C A? C > lL w U -C 7 a > F w COMMISSION ACTION # 1 Commission authorizes staff to: • Issue final RFP plus all future addenda • Approve the selection criteria and process for selection for the Apparent Best Value (ABV) proposer Approve the use of specific brand and trade names in the final RFP • Negotiate with the ABV proposer • Negotiate with 2nd-ranked proposer if ABV negotiations fail Authorize BAFO if in interest of commission Return with a recommendation to award a contract for Design -Build services Approve stipend to be paid to unsuccessful proposers 4 Wks. 2 Wks. ARV Protest Period SELECT APPARENT "Yj UE PROPOSER c O EA 7 V > w m Q � 0 w o Na Riverside Como Transportation Commission COMMISSION ACTION PERIOD AWARD CONTRACT CT ISSUE NTP 1 rn a)rn O N = E,-,- ,� E = E � 0 < 0 V —6 WEEKS Commission authorizes staff to: • Award design -build contract • Issue Notice -To -Proceed (NTP) #1 • Issue NTP #2 subject to financial close T Finan;:Al ISSUE NTP #2 May, 2012 6/6/2012 '11!�'` Procurement Schedule RCM 7i pRoJECT Fhir FtNwAAp Industry review meetings w/DB teams June 4-8, 2012 Issue final RFP July, 2012 One-on-one meetings with DB teams August -October, 2012. Proposal evaluation January -Feb., 2013 Proposal due date January 2013 Final RFP addendum December 2012 Selection, negotiation, staff recommendation February -March, 2013 Commission approval of DB agreement March -April, 2013 Financial close May -July 2013 State RouteQ Michael Blomquist, PE Toll Program Director 1 AGENDA ITEM 11 " " R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O M M / S S / O N D A T E : J u n e 7 , 2 0 1 2 T O : R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n F R O M : W e s t e r n R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y P r o g r a m s a n d P r o j e c t s C o m m i t t e e M i c h a e l B l o m q u i s t , T o l l P r o g r a m D i r e c t o r T H R O U G H : A n n e M a y e r , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r S U B J E C T : R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y W E S T E R N R I V E R S I D E C O U N T Y P R O G R A M S A N D P R O J E C T S C O M M I T T E E A N D S T A F F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : T h i s i t e m i s f o r t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o : 1 ) A d o p t R e s o l u t i o n 1 2 - 0 1 9 , " R e s o l u t i o n o f t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n R e g a r d i n g t h e R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y " ; a n d 2 ) A d o p t t h e R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s E x t e n s i o n I n v e s t m e n t G r a d e S t u d y ( T r a f f i c a n d R e v e n u e S t u d y ) . B A C K G R O U N D I N F O R M A T I O N : 1 0 - Y e a r D e l i v e r y P l a n a n d T o l l i n g D u e t o t h e p a s s a g e o f t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A p r o g r a m , i n D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 6 t h e C o m m i s s i o n a d o p t e d t h e 2 0 0 9 M e a s u r e A W e s t e r n C o u n t y H i g h w a y 1 0 - Y e a r D e l i v e r y P l a n ( 1 0 - Y e a r D e l i v e r y P l a n ) . T h e 1 0 - Y e a r D e l i v e r y P l a n c a l l s f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t o l l e d e x p r e s s l a n e c o r r i d o r s w i t h i n - S t a t e R o u t e 9 1 a n d I n t e r s t a t e 1 5 . D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e S R - 9 1 C o r r i d o r I m p r o v e m e n t P r o j e c t T h e S R - 9 1 C o r r i d o r I m p r o v e m e n t P r o j e c t w i l l w i d e n t h e S R - 9 1 t h r o u g h t h e c i t y o f C o r o n a , e x t e n d t h e e x i s t i n g 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s f r o m t h e O r a n g e C o u n t y l i n e t o 1 - 1 5 , i m p r o v e f i v e l o c a l i n t e r c h a n g e s , r e c o n s t r u c t a p o r t i o n o f t h e 1 5 / 9 1 i n t e r c h a n g e , a n d o t h e r r e g u l a r a n d e x p r e s s l a n e i m p r o v e m e n t s w i t h i n t h e S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r . D u e t o t h e h i g h p r i o r i t y o f d e l i v e r i n g t h e s e i m p r o v e m e n t s , t h e S R - 9 1 C I P i s b e i n g f a s t - t r a c k e d b y a d v a n c i n g s e v e r a l w o r k p h a s e s c o n c u r r e n t l y . T h e s e c o n c u r r e n t w o r k p h a s e s i n c l u d e p r e l i m i n a r y e n g i n e e r i n g , e n v i r o n m e n t a l p e r m i t t i n g , f i n a n c i n g , r i g h t o f w a y a c q u i s i t i o n , u t i l i t y a n d r a i l r o a d p l a n n i n g , i n t e r a g e n c y a g r e e m e n t s , a n d d e s i g n - b u i l d ( c o n t r a c t o r p r o c u r e m e n t a n d p l a n n i n g f o r f i n a l d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n ) . A g e n d a I t e m 1 1 1 6 6 Tolling Authority In September 2008 SB 1316 (Correa) was signed into California law. SB 1316 was jointly sponsored by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Commission and paved the way for each agency to advance its long-term plan for tolled express lanes within the SR-91 corridor. For OCTA, SB 1316 extended its existing franchise agreement to operate the existing 91 Express Lanes through 2065. For the Commission, SB 1316 provided the Commission with the state tolling authority needed ' by authorizing for 50 years the charging of tolls for use of tolled express lanes within the SR-91 corridor between the Orange/Riverside County line and 1-15. SB 1316 also gave the Commission the ability to sell toll revenue bonds, use of net toll revenue for other transportation purposes within the SR-91 corridor, and franchise agreement rights and responsibilities. In August 2009, the Commission obtained the federal tolling authority needed for the SR-91 tolled express lanes through the execution of a three -party agreement between the Commission, Caltrans, and the Federal Highway Administration. Orange Riverside Cooperative Agreement Executed in December 2011, the Orange Riverside Cooperative Agreement (ORCA) details how the Commission will develop and the Commission and OCTA will jointly operate and maintain an extended 91 Express Lanes system. Providing the users of the 91 Express Lanes a seamless experience when the express lanes get extended into Riverside County was an overarching theme in the ORCA. The ORCA details how many elements of the 91 Express Lanes will be shared between the agencies including the current operator of the lanes, marketing and customer service, " customer account revenues, operations and maintenance costs, the existing traffic operations center, and the existing customer service center. The ORCA also details certain key elements of the 91 Express Lanes for which each agency would retain the ability to determine independent of the other. The method to finance the project, current and future, will be determined separately by each agency. Similarly, each agency has the right to collect and retain tolls in their respective county. Lastly, each agency has the right to set its own toll policy. OCTA 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy OCTA adopted its existing toll policy approximately nine years ago in 2003 around the time when OCTA purchased the 91 Express Lanes from the original developer and operator. The existing policy has proven effective in meeting OCTA's stated goals of the 91 Express Lanes, which has long -served as the first, national example of variable pricing of toll express lanes. • • 167 Agenda Item 11 " R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y P o l i c y G o a l s T h e p r o p o s e d g o a l s f o r t h e R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y a r e a s f o l l o w s : " " " P r o v i d e a s a f e , a n d r e l i a b l e , p r e d i c t a b l e c o m m u t e f o r 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s c u s t o m e r s ; " O p t i m i z e v e h i c l e t h r o u g h p u t a t f r e e f l o w s p e e d s ; " . P a y d e b t s e r v i c e a n d m a i n t a i n d e b t s e r v i c e c o v e r a g e ; " I n c r e a s e a v e r a g e v e h i c l e o c c u p a n c y ; " B a l a n c e c a p a c i t y a n d d e m a n d t o s e r v e c u s t o m e r s w h o p a y t o l l s a s w e l l a s c a r p o o l e r s w i t h t h r e e o r m o r e p e r s o n s w h o a r e o f f e r e d d i s c o u n t e d t o l l s ; " G e n e r a t e s u f f i c i e n t r e v e n u e t o s u s t a i n t h e f i n a n c i a l v i a b i l i t y o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s ; " E n s u r e a l l c o v e n a n t s i n t h e f i n a n c i n g d o c u m e n t s a r e m e t ; a n d " P r o v i d e n e t r e v e n u e s f o r R i v e r s i d e F r e e w a y / S R - 9 1 c o r r i d o r i m p r o v e m e n t s . I n t h e f u t u r e t h e r e c o u l d b e y e a r s o f o p e r a t i o n w h e n , a f t e r a l l t h e c o s t s o f o p e r a t i n g , m a i n t a i n i n g , a n d f i n a n c i n g t h e l a n e s a r e p a i d , t h e r e r e m a i n s n e t r e v e n u e . P e r S e n a t e B i l l 1 3 1 6 , n e t r e v e n u e , i f a n y , s h a l l b e u s e d t o i m p r o v e t h e c o r r i d o r b y f u n d i n g o t h e r i m p r o v e m e n t s i n c l u d i n g l a n e a d d i t i o n s , i n t e r c h a n g e i m p r o v e m e n t s , t r a n s i t i m p r o v e m e n t s , e t c . r e s u l t i n g i n a m o r e e f f i c i e n t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r . A l l o c a t i o n o f f u t u r e n e t r e v e n u e , i f a n y , w o u l d b e t h r o u g h a n a c t i o n o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s p o l i c y g o a l s a r e v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l t o O C T A ' s s t a t e d g o a l s . O C T A a n d t h e C o m m i s s i o n s h a r i n g t h e s a m e t o l l p o l i c y g o a l s s u p p o r t s c o o r d i n a t e d r e g i o n a l o p e r a t i o n o f t h e l a n e s a n d a s e a m l e s s c u s t o m e r e x p e r i e n c e . T o l l R a t e s a n d D i s c o u n t s T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s w i l l u s e v a r i a b l e p r i c i n g p r i c i n g t h a t c h a n g e s b a s e d o n t h e d e m a n d f o r t h e e x p r e s s l a n e s o p e r a t i n g u n d e r t h e p r i n c i p l e o f s u p p l y a n d d e m a n d . T o l l s t o u s e t h e e x p r e s s l a n e s w o u l d v a r y b a s e d o n a c t u a l c o n g e s t i o n l e v e l s i n t h e c o r r i d o r w i t h h i g h e r t o l l s d u r i n g p e r i o d s o f h i g h e r c o r r i d o r d e m a n d a n d l o w e r t o l l s d u r i n g p e r i o d s o f l o w e r c o r r i d o r d e m a n d . T h e e x i s t i n g 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s o p e r a t e s u n d e r t h i s s a m e a p p r o a c h a n d h a s s e e n t o l l r a t e s r i s e a n d f a l l o v e r l o n g e r p e r i o d s d u e t o t h e g e n e r a l l e v e l o f t h e e c o n o m y , d r i v e r s ' p e r c e i v e d v a l u e o f t h e i r t i m e , t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s t o p a y f o r u s i n g t h e l a n e s , a n d o t h e r f a c t o r s . T h e R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y d e f i n e s s u p e r p e a k p e r i o d s o r p e r i o d s e x p e r i e n c i n g t h e h i g h e s t l e v e l o f t r a f f i c a n d c o n g e s t i o n a n d t h e s p e c i f i c A g e n d a I t e m 1 1 1 6 8 mechanism by which tolls_ will adjust during these periods. In general, traffic volumes are monitored for a 12-week period, and consistent occurrences of high or low peak hour traffic volumes are identified. Based on the actual traffic volumes observed, toll rates are raised or lowered incrementally. The goals for adjusting tolls in the super peak period are to: al reduce the likelihood of congestion by diverting traffic to other hours with available capacity; b) maintain free flow travel speed in the Commission's 91 Express Lanes; c) maintain travel time savings; dl accommodate projected growth in travel demand and; e) ensure that the Commission's 91 Express Lanes generate sufficient revenue to effectively operate the toll lanes and maintain a strong debt service position. Tolls for other periods outside of the super peak periods would also be based on actual congestion levels. A common measure of congestion, level of service, and the drivers' perceived value of their time would be used to establish tolls in non -super peak periods. The tolls in the non -super peak periods would increase once certain traffic volume thresholds are exceeded. Additionally, tolls in non -super peak periods would increase annually by an inflation factor detailed in the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy. Carpoolers with three or more persons, zero emission vehicles, motorcycles, disabled plates, and disabled veterans are permitted to ride free in the Commission's 91 Express Lanes during most hours. The exception is Monday through Friday 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. in the eastbound direction vvhen these users pay 50 percent of the toll. These toll discounts are identical to those Used by the OCTA. It is the intent of the Commission's toll policy to match the discounts OCTA provides to maintain consistent business practices for 91 Express Lanes' customers. Financing Requirements The proposed toll policy described herein and detailed further in the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy document was used to estimate toll rates and toll revenue for the duration of the 50-year period of operation. The estimated, annual toll revenue over the life of the Commission's 91 Express Lanes is a key output of the Traffic and Revenue Study. The annual toll revenue generated serves as a critical input to the Commission's SR-91 CIP financial model. This annual toll revenue plus many other factors are used to determine the amount of Measure A, toll revenue bond, and federal loan funds required to finance the project, and reach financial close. The toll policy proposed for adoption has a direct effect on toll rates, toll revenue, and the amounts of each of the three major fund sources required to finance the project. • 169 Agenda Item 11 " " T h e p r o p o s e d t o l l p o l i c y f u l l y s u p p o r t s t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p r o j e c t f i n a n c i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s t o b o t h i n i t i a l l y f u n d t h e p r o j e c t ' s d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n a s w e l l a s t h e 5 0 - y e a r o p e r a t i o n p e r i o d . T h e p r o p o s e d t o l l p o l i c y a n d t h e r e s u l t i n g t o l l r a t e s a r e e s t i m a t e d t o g e n e r a t e e n o u g h t o l l r e v e n u e t o p a y t h e n e c e s s a r y d e b t s e r v i c e p a y m e n t s a n d m a i n t a i n t h e r e q u i r e d d e b t s e r v i c e c o v e r a g e r a t i o s ( D S C R s ) i n t h e f i n a n c i n g d o c u m e n t s . I t i s r e c o g n i z e d t h a t m a i n t a i n i n g a s t r o n g d e b t s e r v i c e p o s i t i o n i s a r e q u i r e m e n t i n o r d e r t o s a t i s f y t h e c o v e n a n t s i n t h e f i n a n c i n g d o c u m e n t s a n d m e e t t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s f i d u c i a r y o b l i g a t i o n s . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e q u i r e m e n t t o m a i n t a i n D S C R s a n d t h e r e l a t e d t o l l r a t e s n e c e s s a r y t o m a i n t a i n D S C R s w o u l d s u p e r s e d e t h e s t a t e d t o l l p o l i c y f o r s e t t i n g a n d m o d i f y i n g t o l l s . T h i s s c e n a r i o w o u l d o n l y a p p l y w h e n t h e D S C R s , d e b t p a y m e n t s , a n d / o r b o n d c o v e n a n t s c a n n o t b e m e t a n d o t h e r r e a s o n a b l e m e a n s t o m e e t t h e s e f i d u c i a r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s h a v e b e e n e x h a u s t e d . S t a f f w o u l d r e t u r n t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n u n d e r t h e s e e x t r e m e c i r c u m s t a n c e s w i t h a c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e p o r t i n c l u d i n g t h e s t a t u s o f t h e f i n a n c i n g s , t o l l r e v e n u e s , p o s s i b l e c o u r s e s o f a c t i o n , r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s , e t c . C o m m i s s i o n a c t i o n w o u l d b e s o u g h t a n d r e c e i v e d p r i o r t o a n y c h a n g e i n t h e s t a t e d t o l l p o l i c y u n d e r t h e s e e x t r e m e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T i m i n g o f T o l l P o / i c y A d o p t i o n S t a f f i s p r o p o s i n g a d o p t i o n o f t h e R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y i n o r d e r t o s u p p o r t a l l f u t u r e p r o j e c t f i n a n c i n g a c t i v i t i e s a s d e s c r i b e d p r e v i o u s l y . T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s p r o p o s e d p r o j e c t f u n d i n g s o u r c e s a r e M e a s u r e A s a l e s t a x d o l l a r s i n c l u d i n g s a l e s t a x r e v e n u e b o n d s , t o l l r e v e n u e b o n d s , a n d a f e d e r a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n I n v e s t m e n t F i n a n c e I n n o v a t i o n A c t ( T I F I A ) l o a n . A d o p t i n g a t o l l p o l i c y i s n e e d e d i n a d v a n c e o f t h e T I F I A l o a n a p p l i c a t i o n s u b m i s s i o n p l a n n e d f o r J u l y 2 0 1 2 . A n a p p r o v e d T I F I A l o a n p l u s t h e s u c c e s s f u l f u t u r e s a l e o f M e a s u r e A a n d t o l l r e v e n u e b o n d s a r e e a c h a p r e r e q u i s i t e t o r e a c h i n g f i n a n c i a l c l o s e a n d h a v i n g t h e f u l l p r o j e c t f u n d i n g a v a i l a b l e . T h e r e f o r e , a d o p t i n g t h e t o l l p o l i c y n o w , p r i o r t o t h e T I F I A l o a n a p p l i c a t i o n s u b m i s s i o n , h e l p s m e e t b o t h t h e f i n a n c i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d t h e f i n a n c i n g s c h e d u l e . E x h i b i t V o f t h e R C T C 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s T o l l P o l i c y a t t a c h m e n t r e f l e c t s t o l l r a t e s t h a t w o u l d r e s u l t f r o m t h e p r o p o s e d t o l l p o l i c y i n t h e y e a r . o f p l a n n e d o p e n i n g ( 2 0 1 7 ) e x p r e s s e d i n 2 0 1 2 d o l l a r s . S t a f f p r o p o s e s t o r e t u r n t o t h e C o m m i s s i o n p r i o r t o t h e a c t u a l o p e n i n g o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s t o p r o v i d e a n u p d a t e t o t h e t o l l r a t e s f o r r e f e r e n c e . T h e u p d a t e o f t o l l r a t e s w o u l d b e b a s e d o n t h e n - c u r r e n t c o r r i d o r t r a f f i c c o n d i t i o n s a n d t h e t o l l p o l i c y a d o p t e d i n 2 0 1 2 . A g e n d a I t e m 1 1 1 7 0 Traffic and Revenue Study An integral part of determining the financial feasibility of a tolling project is the traffic and revenue study. The Commission, through its traffic and revenue consultant, has conducted several of these studies for the SR-91 CIP since the adoption of the 10-Year Delivery Plan to help guide the project development work and to support project decisions. As the project develops from its preliminary stages to more advanced definitions of scope, cost, and schedule, the Traffic and Revenue Study is updated to reflect both current project data as well as regional data that influence the traffic and revenue study results. Typically the last traffic and revenue study update is performed during the final stages of the project's development and prepared to support a project financing. The Traffic and Revenue Study is attached to this agenda report. Staff is seeking Commission adoption of this study to support upcoming project financing activities including submission of a TIFIA application, sale of Measure A and toll revenue bonds, and financial close. The Traffic and Revenue Study used the latest information related to traffic volumes, vehicle speed data, traveler origin -destination information, socio-economic trends, and land use planning to forecast future regional traffic growth. Additionally, a detailed micro -simulation traffic model was used to analyze traffic operations in the corridor and to assist with toll revenue forecasting. The study also analyzed different toll policies and the impact of those toll policies to corridor traffic and toll revenue. The toll rates and toll revenue estimates generated from the Traffic and Revenue Study support the project's financial model. The project's financial model can compare the impact of different toll policies to the available funding and therefore the financial feasibility of the project. Through this effort the Traffic and Revenue Study is a key tool to establish atoll policy. There is no fiscal impact related to the toll policy and the Traffic and Revenue Study. . Attachments: 1) RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy, dated May 9, 2012 2) Resolution 1 2-01 9 3) Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Study, dated May 9, 2012 (Posted on Commission's website) • • 171 Agenda Item 11 ATTACHMENT 1 RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy Adopted June 7, 2012 Goals The goals for the RCTC 91 Express Lanes toll policy are to: • Provide a safe, reliable, and predictable commute for 91 Express Lanes customers; • Optimize vehicle throughput at free flow speeds; • Pay debt service and maintain debt service coverage; • Increase average vehicle occupancy; • Balance capacity and demand to serve customers who pay tolls as well as carpoolers with three or more persons who are offered discounted tolls; • Generate sufficient revenue to sustain the financial viability of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes; • Ensure all covenants in the Financing Documents are met; and • Provide net revenues for Riverside Freeway/State Route 91 corridor improvements.' Definitions Exhibit I, "Definitions", clarifies terms used in this RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy. Super Peak Hours The toll adjustment goals for Super Peak hours are to: a) reduce the likelihood of congestion by diverting traffic to other hours with available capacity; b) maintain free flow travel speed in the RCTC 91 Express Lanes; c) maintain travel time savings; d) accommodate projected growth in travel demand and; e) ensure that the toll road generates sufficient revenue to effectively operate the toll lanes and maintain a strong debt service position. i As allowable under Senate Bill 1316. 5/09/2012 172 The toll for use of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes during a Super Peak hour shall be determined as follows: 1. Hourly, day, and direction traffic volumes will be continually monitored on a rolling 12 consecutive week period basis. The review period of 12 weeks may be reduced to a shorter period during times of abnormal travel patterns in the State Route 91 corridor. Such abnormal travel patterns shall include, but are not limited to, initial opening of the RCTC 91 Express Lanes and times of construction along State Route 91 or adjacent freeways or feeder routes. 2. Hourly, day, and directional traffic volumes of 3,128 or more will be flagged for further review. 3. If the hourly, day, and directional traffic volume is consistently at a level of Super Peak then the toll rate for that hour, day and direction may be increased. 4. The toll for that hour, day, and direction shall be increased, based on the average vehicle volume of the flagged hour, day, and direction identified per Section 2 above, as follows: (a) if the average flagged vehicle volume is 3,300 or more then the toll shall be increased by $1.00. (b) if the average flagged vehicle volume is between 3,200 and 3,299 then the toll shall be increased by $0.75. (c) if the average flagged vehicle volume is less than 3,200 then the toll shall not be changed. Six months after a toll increase, the most recent 12 consecutive weeks (excluding weeks with a Holiday or a major traffic anomaly caused by an accident or incident) shall be reviewed for the hour, day and direction that the toll was increased. If the traffic volume is less than 2,800 vehicles per hour, day, and direction in six or more of the weeks then the traffic volumes for that hour, day and direction for the 12 consecutive weeks shall be averaged. If the average traffic volume is less than 2,800 then the toll shall be reduced by $0.50 to stimulate demand and encourage RCTC 91 Express Lanes use. RCTC's Board of Commissioners and customers will be informed of a toll adjustment 10 or more days prior to that toll adjustment becoming effective. Non -Super Peak Hours Non -Super Peak hours will generally remain at fixed levels within a broad band of Levels of Service, increasing annually by the Inflation Factor. 05/09/2012 173 Vehicle volumes increasing from one Level of Service (LOS) to the next, would subject the toll rates to increase; the LOS for the Express Lanes are roughly defined as follows: LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E 0 to 800 vehicles 800 to 1600 vehicles 1600 to 2400 vehicles 2400 to 2800 vehicles 2800 to 3100 vehicles Toll rates will be adopted for each LOS reflecting the time savings value to the driver as traffic moves into the next level of congestion. All tolls shall be rounded up or down to the nearest 5-cent increment. Discount Vehicles with three or more persons (HOV3+), zero emission vehicles (ZEVs), motorcycles, disabled plates and disabled veterans are permitted to ride free in the RCTC 91 Express Lanes during most hours. The exception is Monday through Friday 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. in the eastbound direction when these users pay 50 percent of the toll. The exception that these users pay 50 percent remains in effect until such time as the Orange . County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) adopted toll policy for the 91 Express Lanes results in HOV3+ users using the OCTA 91 Express Lanes riding free all day, every day. It is the intent of RCTC to adjust its toll policy to match the HOV3+ discounts OCTA provides, subject to covenants in the Financing Documents and other financing requirements. Financing Requirements RCTC shall charge and collect tolls that generate enough revenue to maintain the Debt Service Coverage Ratios as required in the Financing Documents and to operate and maintain the RCTC 91 Express Lanes in a safe condition in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. RCTC recognizes that it must maintain a strong debt service position in order to satisfy the covenants in the Financing Documents. The requirement to maintain Debt Service Coverage Ratios and comply with Financing Document and other financing covenants will supersede the specific policies for setting and modifying tolls and discounts. Holiday Toll Schedules 05/09/2012 -3- 174 Holiday toll schedules are identified on Exhibit V and shall be adjusted by the Inflation Factor at the beginning of each Fiscal Year following the opening of RCTC's 91 Express Lanes. Interpretation . These policies are intended as guidance and may be amended or superseded at any time. 05/09/2012 -4- 175 Exhibit I Definitions Cash Available for Debt Service — for any Period, the excess, if any, computed on a cash basis, of: . (1) the amount of RCTC 91 Express Lanes cash receipts during such Period from whatever source, including, without limitation, toll receipts, transponder revenues, and investment earnings, excluding: - proceeds of insurance, — proceeds of debt service letter of credit or other amounts held in or disbursed from the payment account, the debt service reserve account, the coverage account and the major maintenance reserve account, and — the proceeds of any bonds or loans issued or executed to provide capital improvements to the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, over (2) All Operating and Maintenance Costs incurred during such Period and not deducted in the computation of Cash Available for Debt Service in a prior Period. In computing Operating and Maintenance Costs for any Period, an appropriate prorating will be made for expenditures such as insurance premiums and taxes that would be prorated if the computation were to be made in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Consistently — Any six weeks of twelve consecutive weeks, excluding any week that includes a Holiday or major traffic pattern anomaly caused by an accident or incident. Debt Service — for any Period, all payments of principal, interest, premiums (if any), fees and other amounts made (including by way of prepayment) or required to be made by RCTC during such Period under the Financing Documents (debt service payments related to RCTC's internal subordinated debt borrowings or application of revenues to pay RCTC's sales tax revenue bonds are to be excluded from these calculations). In computing Debt Service for any Period prior to the issuance of any additional financing, subject to the specific terms of the Financing Documents, RCTC will give pro forma effect to the transactions contemplated by the Financing Documents and the use of proceeds of the additional financing. In computing Debt Service for any prospective Period, RCTC will estimate in good faith such payments on the basis of reasonable assumptions. Such assumptions will include the absence of any waivers of or amendments to any agreements and the absence of any optional or extraordinary mandatory redemption of existing financings. 05/09/2012 -5- 176 Debt Service Coverage Ratio — defined specifically in the Financing Documents, which specific provisions control the implementation and setting of tolls and discounts, but generally, for any Period, the ratio of Cash Available for Debt Service for such Period to Debt Service for such Period. Financing Documents — the documents under which RCTC has issued toll revenue bonds or other financings, including financings with TIFIA, payable primarily from toll revenues. Fiscal Year — July 1 to June 30 Holiday — Any of the following holidays that occur or are recognized any day between Monday through Friday: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas. Inflation Factor - the product of the hourly toll for the immediately preceding fiscal year, times the CPI Index Adjuster for the prior fiscal year divided by the CPI Index Adjuster for the year immediately preceding such fiscal year, but in no case less than zero. Maximum Optimal Capacity — 3,400 vehicles per hour, per day, per direction in the RCTC 91 Express Lanes facility. Non -Super Peak — Hourly period that is not Super Peak. Operating and Maintenance Costs — defined specifically in the Financing Documents, but generally, all reasonable and , necessary expenses of administering, managing, maintaining and operating the RCTC 91 Express Lanes and in accordance with the operation and maintenance agreements. Period — the most recent twelve complete months. Super Peak — Hourly period, per day, and per direction with traffic volume use which meets or exceeds the Trigger Point. Trigger Point — 92 percent or more of Maximum Optimal Capacity (3,128+ vehicles per hour, per day, and per direction). Week— 12:00 a.m. Sunday to 11:59 p.m. the following Saturday. Some of the financial definitions will be modified to reflect the bond covenants in the bond financing documents. 05/09/2012 -6- 177 " E x h i b i t I I T o l l P o l i c y D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s C o n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r i c i n g i n S u p e r P e a k D e s c r i p t i o n / D e t a i l ' M o n i t o r a d j u s t e d h o u r l y , . d i r e c t i o n a l t r a f f i c f o r l a s t 1 2 c o n s e c u t i v e w e e k s ( e x e l u d e , d a y s / h o u r s w i t h h o l i d a y s m a j o r i n c i d e n t s , a c c i d e n t s ) F l a g i n d i v i d u a l a d j u s t e d h o u r s w h e n t r a f f i c v o l u m e i s 3 , 1 . 2 8 , , v e h i c l e s o r l e s s p e r h o u , , p e r d a y p e r d i r e c t i o n . D e t e r m i n e i f t h i s a c c l " s w f o r m a r e e } e 1 2 . w e i o f d X t a e t h e t r a # # 4 . u t ; : d a y a r i d z t f i e � ��7 . �� w e ��e �� p e r t o d �� , 1 t o l i , t l a y s , a c c i d e n t s , r r l e j o r . , i n c i d e n t s ) . - 7 - A T T A C H M E N T 1 0 5 / 0 9 / 2 0 1 2 Description /Detail Monitor adjusted hourly, directional traffic for last 12' consecutive weeks (exclude days/hours with holidays, major incidents, accidents) Flag individualadjusted hours when trafficvolume is-2,720 vehicles or less per fiour per;day per direction. Determine ifthis occurs six or more tunes in the.12 week period Average the traffic volume f_. the hour, day and direction for the.12week period (eicciuiie holidays, accidents, majti incidents). 05/09/2012 Exhibit III Adjusted Toll Rate Follow On Process (Super Peak Adjusted Rates Only) -8- Identify Patterns of Low Volumes for Adjusted Rates " E x h i b i t I V T o l l P o l i c y D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s N o n S u p e r P e a k P e r i o d s D e s c r i p t i o n % D e t a i l - M o n i t o r a d j u i f e d h o u r l y , , d i r e c t i o n a l t r a f f i c f o r l a s t 1 2 e b n s e c u t r v e m i m e k s ( e x c l u d e d a y s i h o u r s 4 t * h o l i d a y s , m a l b r l i c i d e M S , a c c i d e n t s ) . F l a i n d t v i d u a t . a d j u s t e d h o u r s r r ; f f i c " v o l u m e i s 3 1 2 8 a r d h h k ��; a l i e s p e r / l o u r p e r d a y , S e a t u u o t i p r t d D e t e r m i n e i f t h i s ' . t e u r s ' i l ) i i O t . i n o r e t i m e s i n t h e : 1 2 w e e k p e r i o d _ A y t r a $ e , . ' t t r a f f i c . , . a . . I l l d i r e c t i o 4 n p d { e z c k u t l e � ; : . ( ' ) T h e a c t u a l r a t e s s h o w n a r e t h e p r o j e c t e d r a t e s f r o m t h e 9 1 E x p r e s s L a n e s E x t e n s i o n I n v e s t m e n t G r a d e S t u d y . O n c e t h e f a c i l i t y i s o p e r a t i o n a l , t r a f f i c v o l u m e s w i l l b e m o n i t o r e d a n d r a t e s a d j u s t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . R a t e s s h o w n r e p r e s e n t p r o j e c t e d s c a l e o f t o l l r a t e s b y v o l u m e c a t e g o r y ( i n 2 0 1 2 $ ) . . 0 5 / 0 9 / 2 0 1 2 - 9 - 1 8 0 Exhibit V RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Schedule June 13, 2012 The charts below identify the toll schedule in effect as of opening year of RCTC's 91 Express Lanes once a steady state condition emerges after the initial opening ramp -up period. The assumed opening year is 2017 and the toll schedule rates are in current year 2012 dollars. The toll schedule below is provided only to illustrate the projected hourly toll rates that would result from implementing RCTC's toll policy. Prior to the first day of operation of RCTC's 91 Express Lanes, the toll schedule will be re-evaluated to reflect then -current corridor traffic information and presented to RCTC's Board of Commissioners for reference. In addition to the posted tolls, the RCTC 91 Express Lane toll policy allow carpoolers with three or more persons (HOV3+), zero emission vehicles (ZEVs), motorcycles, disabled plates and disabled veterans to ride free during most hours. The exception is Monday through Friday 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. in the eastbound direction when they pay 50 percent of the posted toll 05/09/2012 -10- 181 " " " R i v e r s i d e T o l l S c h e d u l e 9 1 E f f e c t i v e J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 R i v e r s i d e C a L i n e t o 1 - 1 5 a t O n t a r i o E x p r e s s " Y e a r 2 0 1 2 E ' s E a s t b o u n d S u n M T u W T h F S a t M i d n i g h t 1 : 0 0 A M 2 : 0 0 A M 3 : 0 0 A M 4 : 0 0 A M 5 : 0 0 A M 6 : 0 0 A M 7 : 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 1 0 : 0 0 A M 1 1 : 0 0 A M N O O N 1 : 0 0 P M 2 : 0 0 P M 3 : 0 0 P M 0 4 5 $ 1 5 5 e � $ 1 5 5 0 5 5 . ; $ 1 , 5 5 4 0 5 " $ 1 . $ 1 . 5 5 . " ' $ 1 . 5 5 . $ 1 , 5 5 : $ 1 : 5 5 $ 1 , 5 5 ? $ 1 : 5 5 $ 1 , 5 5 ' : " $ 1 - 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 . $ 1 . 5 5 . 1 : 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 ' - $ 1 5 5 . $ 1 . 5 5 = $ 1 : 5 5 $ f : 5 5 $ 1 : 5 5 $ 1 5 5 $ 1 5 5 $ i 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ . 1 , 5 5 . . $ 1 . 5 5 $ f 1 5 5 $ 1 5 5 $ f 1 5 5 $ ! 5 ' $ 1 . 5 5 $ 2 8 0 �� , . 0 . . $ 2 + . . : 8 0 �� $ 7 3 4 . $ $ 1 . 5 5 $ 3 . 7 5 , $ 3 - 5 $ 3 �� $ 3 7 5 a l l $ 2 . 8 0 r 1 S 5 $ 1 : 5 5 5 1 : 5 5 , $ 1 . 5 5 : 4 $ 1 . 5 5 : = s s O . - $ 1 5 5 . $ 1 . 5 5 5 5 $ 5 5 , $ 1 5 5 " 4 1 5 5 . �� $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 s $ 1 5 5 s ; $ 1 . 5 5 , $ 1 . 5 5 $ 2 8 0 , . 4 : 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 7 : 0 0 P M 8 : 0 0 P M 9 0 0 P M 1 0 : 0 0 P M 1 1 : 0 0 P M R i v e r s i d e T o l l S c h e d u l e E a s t b o u n d 9 1 E f f e c t i v e J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 R i v e r s i d e C o . L i n e t o M c K i n l e y S t r e e t E x p r e s s " Y e a r 2 0 1 2 S s S u n M o n T u e W e d T h u r F r i S a t M i d n i g h t 1 . 0 0 A M 2 : 0 0 A M 3 : 0 0 A M 4 : 0 0 A M 5 : 0 0 A M 6 : 0 0 A M 7 : 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 1 0 : 0 0 A M 1 1 : 0 0 A M N O O N 1 : 0 0 P M 2 : 0 0 P M 3 : 0 0 P M 4 : 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 7 : 0 0 P M 8 : 0 0 P M 9 : 0 0 P M 1 0 : 0 0 P M 1 1 : 0 0 P M $ 1 : 2 0 , $ 1 : 2 0 . . $ 1 . 2 0 ` : 1 2 0 _ 2 t i - $ f _ 2 t r . 2 0 < : - $ 1 . 2 , C 1 1 0 " $ 1 . 2 0 4 $ 1 4 e f - . 2 0 $ 1 . 2 U $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 , ; O 1 . 2 0 : ; 1 ' 2 0 $ 1 - ! $ 1 . 2 0 , $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 2 0 ` ; $ 1 : 2 0 $ 1 2 0 $ 1 : 2 0 $ 2 1 0 $ 1 2 0 $ 2 8 5 t . ' $ 2 . 8 5 S 2 8 5 P $ 2 5 2 8 5 - $ 3 , ' , $ 1 . 2 0 , ' , : , r t ? ( 1 . $ 2 , 8 5 4 1 , 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 2 0 : $ 1 2 � $ 1 $ 1 2 0 $ 4 9 . $ t 2 0 $ 1 : : 2 0 $ 1 2 0 $ 2 0 $ 1 2 1 2 0 $ 1 , 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 , ! $ 1 2 0 V A , : $ 1 2 0 - , $ 1 2 . . 3 1 . 2 0 $ 1 ; 2 0 $ f 2 0 R i v e r s i d e T o l l S c h e d u l e 9 1 E f f e c t i v e J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 1 - 1 5 a t O n t a r i o t o R i v e r s i d e C o . L i n e E x p r e s s " Y e a r 2 0 1 2 E ' s W e s t b o u n d T i m e S u n M o n T u e W e d T h u r F r i S a t M i d n i g h t 1 : 0 0 A M 2 : 0 0 A M 3 : 0 0 A M 4 : 0 0 A M 5 : 0 0 A M 6 : 0 0 A M 7 : 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 1 0 : 0 0 A M 1 1 : 0 0 A M N O O N 1 : 0 0 P M 2 : 0 0 P M 3 : 0 0 P M $ 1 : 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 ` 4 1 1 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 5 / . 5 5 . $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 5 5 : " ; $ 1 . 5 5 5 1 5 5 , $ 1 . 5 5 t ��i 5 5 - 4 3 . 7 5 $ 1 5 5 ' $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 1 5 . $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 1 5 5 , . ' $ 1 . 5 5 S f 5 5 � $ 1 . 5 5 . 0 7 5 $ 3 . 7 5 $ 1 e 5 5 $ 1 : 5 5 4 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 : $ 0 5 $ 3 . 7 5 $ 1 5 5 ' : $ 1 . 5 5 " $ 1 . 5 5 ` $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 : 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 4 . 4 ! $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 5 5 l f l d U 0 $ 4 ��; . $ 1 . 5 5 $ 1 5 5 s r 7 5 5 3 . 7 5 $ 3 . 7 5 $ 3 5 $ 1 5 8 0 $ 2 8 0 - . A t Z $ 0 x $ $ 1 ��5 5 h , $ 1 . 5 5 - $ 1 : 5 5 5 $ 1 5 5 ' g o $ 1 1 5 5 5 . , $ a 1 1 3 5 5 5 t $ 5 $ 1 : 5 5 $ f 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 2 . 8 0 $ 1 . 5 5 $ 5 $ 1 3 � Z O O ' : 1 5 5 1 5 5 1 $ 1 : 5 5 5 5 $ 1 5 4 4 ' 8 0 _ 2 8 ; $ 1 5 5 $ 1 5 5 $ 1 , 5 5 $ f 5 5 . a ' ' 2 8 0 1 . 5 5 $ 1 . 5 5 " $ 2 8 0 4 $ 1 ' 5 5 4 : 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 7 : 0 0 P M 8 : 0 0 P M 9 : 0 0 P M 1 0 : 0 0 P M 1 1 : 0 0 P M R i v e r s i d e T o l l S c h e d u l e W e s t b o u n d 9 1 E f f e c t i v e J u n e 1 , 2 0 1 7 M c K i n l e y S t r e e t t o R i v e r s i d e C o . L i n e E x p r e s s " Y e a r 2 0 1 2 E ' s S u n M o n T u e W e d T h u r F r i S a t M i d n i g h t 1 : 0 0 A M 2 : 0 0 A M 3 : 0 0 A M 4 : 0 0 A M 5 : 0 0 A M 6 : 0 0 A M 7 : 0 0 A M 8 : 0 0 A M 9 : 0 0 A M 1 0 : 0 0 A M 1 1 : 0 0 A M N O O N 1 : 0 0 P M 2 : 0 0 P M 3 : 0 0 P M 4 : 0 0 P M 5 : 0 0 P M 6 : 0 0 P M 7 : 0 0 P M 8 : 0 0 P M 9 : 0 0 P M 1 0 : 0 0 P M 1 1 : 0 0 P M $ 1 2 0 2 4 1 2 $ 1 2 0 - : $ 1 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 0 $ f i 2 0 , s , 2 . 1 0 . 4 1 3 5 $ 1 2 0 1 2 0 " " S 1 ' . 2 Q $ 1 2 1 0 $ 1 2 0 ; $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 2 0 . . . $ 1 , 2 0 ' $ f $ Z 4 1 , 2 0 $ 1 ' 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 1 2 0 $ 1 2 0 r $ 2 1 0 $ 2 , 0 , $ 1 2 0 ' $ 1 , 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 1 0 $ 1 2 0 : , r $ 2 1 0 $ 2 1 s t a . : $ 1 2 0 $ 1 $ 1 2 0 > ; $ 1 2 0 0 2 0 $ 1 0 " $ 1 . 2 0 1 2 o 2 0 ��S t 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 : 2 0 . ' $ 1 . 2 0 S r 2 o . . $ 1 . 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 1 - 2 0 1 = 2 f 1 - i 1 . 2 0 $ 1 . 2 0 2 . 1 0 " 2 . 1 0 0 5 / 0 9 / 2 0 1 2 - 1 1 - Exhibit VI RCTC 91 Express Lanes Holiday Schedule Riverside Toll Schedule Eastbound 91 Effective June 1, 2017 Express Riverside Co. Line to I-15 at Ontario " Year 2012 E's Weekday Weekend Midnight 1:00 AM 2:00 AM • 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8.00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM Riverside Co. Line to McKinley Street " Year 2012 S's Midnight 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9.'00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM Weekend Weekday $2.85 $2.85 $2,85. Riverside Toll Schedule Westbound 91 Effective June 1, 2017 Express 1-15 at Ontario to Riverside Co. Lane " Year 2012 S's Time Weekday Weekend Midnight 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4.00 PM 5:00 PM 600 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM $1.55 $1.ss 41.55 . $1-55:',; $1.55 $1.55 51.55 51.55 $1.55 , 51.55 McKinley Street to Riverside Co. Line " Year 2012 Vs Weekday Midnight 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3.00AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM NOON 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM Weekend (') The intent of the holiday schedule is to offer tolls that reflect holiday traffic patte ns. If Christmas, New Years or Fourth of July falls on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday, the regular Friday toll schedule will be used the day before the holiday. If the day after Christmas, New Years or Fourth of July is a Friday or Monday, it is assumed these are traditionally light traffic days, therefore., a reduced rate applies (Friday after Thanksgiving rate will be used). If Christmas, New Years or Fourth of July fall on Saturday, it is assumed the Friday before is a traditionally light traffic day; therefore the stated Christmas, New Years or Fourth of July holiday toll schedule applies- It is also assumed that the Thursday before is a heavy traffic day, therefore, the regular Friday schedule applies. When reduced rates apply, the weekend HOb3+ policy will be in effect. 05/09/2012 -12- 183 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. 12-019 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION • REGARDING THE RCTC 91 EXPRESS LANES TOLL POLICY WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") will soon embark on construction for the widening of State Route 91 through the City of Corona; WHEREAS, the Commission has received legislative and regulatory approval to build and operate a toll facility along State Route 91; WHEREAS, a significant portion of the project includes the addition of two tolled Express Lanes from the Orange County Line to interstate 15; WHEREAS, the Commission's toll facility will connect to the existing 91 Express Lanes which are operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority; WHEREAS, the Commission intends to work closely with the existing 91 Express Lanes regarding operations, enforcement and marketing matters; WHEREAS, the project requires significant financing to ensure the timely completion of this $1.3 billion, design -build project; WHEREAS, the success of the financing and future operation of the toll facilities requires an efficient and workable toll policy; and WHEREAS, the Commission currently retains the authority to add, delete, or otherwise modify its policies and procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows; Section 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby adopts the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy attached as Exhibit A. The details of the policy shall be approved by the Commission 184 during its actions on June 7 and shall be communicated to the financial community, toll facility users, and the general public. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this Th day of June, 2012. John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 185 Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study f Stantec May 9, 2012 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 Executive Summary Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) was retained by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) to examine the financial feasibility of extending the existing 91 Express Lanes in Orange County to the east approximately eight miles into Riverside County to the 1-15 interchange. As part of this study, which is of investment grade quality and is suitable for bond financing, the project team collected new traffic volume, speed data, and origin -destination information in the SR 91 corridor. These data were used to re -calibrate and validate the regional travel demand model (RivTAM) for the corridor. Updated socio-economic and land use projections were completed and incorporated into the model to forecast future traffic growth in the region. A detailed micro -simulation model was constructed to analyze the traffic operational impacts of the project and to assist in revenue forecasting. Finally, several toll policies were created and analyzed, with full traffic and revenue streams estimated for three different policies. Stantec had the overall lead for the Traffic and Revenue Investment Grade Study and was responsible for project management and coordination, calibrating and validating the regional travel demand model, constructing and calibrating a corridor micro -simulation model and forecasting the future gross toll revenues to be derived from the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension. Two firms assisted Stantec in this work effort: PB Consult Inc. ("PB") provided the socioeconomic and land use review of employment and household projections used in the traffic model and DKS Associates ("DKS") oversaw the data collection process and helped to summarize and analyze existing traffic volumes and speeds in the SR-91 study area. PROJECT DESCRIPTION SR-91 is the only major surface transportation facility connecting Orange and Riverside Counties and is the primary daily commuting route between the counties. The rapidly growing population, driving in part by the relatively affordable housing market in Riverside County, computed with increasing employment opportunities in Orange County, has resulted in a large number of Riverside County residents commuting to employment in Orange County. Based on long-term regional population and employment projections, this commute pattern is expected to continue and grow into the future. In addition, SR-91 is heavily used for goods movement from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to destinations in inland Southern California as well as other destinations across the United States. SR-91 currently has four general purpose (GP) lanes in each direction, with those lanes varying in width from 11 to 12 feet from the SR-241/SR-91 interchange in Orange County to the E.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY May 9, 2012 SR-91/I-15 interchange in Riverside County. Currently, there are two tolled Express Lanes (XL) in each direction on the SR-91 in Orange County that are heavily used by commuters, residents, commercial businesses, and others traveling to and from Riverside and Orange counties. The existing Express Lanes, operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), begin west of the SR-91/SR-55 interchange and terminate at the Riverside/Orange County line. This Project extends the Express Lanes to the east approximately eight miles into Riverside County to the 1-15 interchange. TOLL POLICY There are several methods to approach the setting of tolls for the RCTC SR 91 Express Lanes project. As part of this study, traffic and revenue streams were estimated for two different tolling policies: 1) implementing the existing OCTA toll policy and 2) implementing an "enhanced" toll policy that is based on the OCTA policy, but allows for the increase of off-peak toll rates once certain volume thresholds are exceeded. The enhanced policy is similar to the OCTA policy as it ties toll increases to traffic volumes, though it allows greater toll flexibility during non -peak periods. In addition, a sensitivity analysis was performed for a "revenue maximization" toll policy. TRAFFIC AND REVENUE ESTIMATES Utilizing the data and methodologies outlined throughout the following report, fifty year traffic and revenue streams were estimated for both the OCTA and enhanced toll policies. The detailed results are shown in ES-1 and ES-2 below. Both toll policies have similar patterns for traffic growth, with global corridor traffic growing by slightly more than 1 percent until 2035, when traffic growth slows to approximately 0.5 percent per year. Express Lane transactions grow by approximately 3 percent per year for the OCTA toll policy case versus approximately 2.6 percent in the enhanced case. This slight reduction in transaction growth can be attributed to the higher toll rates charged under the enhanced toll policy. The largest difference is in revenue growth, where the OCTA toll policy grows just under 4 percent per year, the enhanced toll policy leads to revenue growth of 6 percent per year. Again, this is attributable to higher toll rates during the shoulder and off-peak hours under the enhanced toll policy. The average toll rate in 2035 under the OCTA toll policy is $2.42 versus $3.59 for the enhanced toll policy. A decrease in transactions and revenue occurs in 2035 with the completion of the "Ultimate" project, which adds general purpose lane capacity to the corridor. E.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY May 9, 2012 Table ES-1 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, OCTA Toll Policy Fiscal Year Vie ekdayToII Transactions Weekday Express Transactions Express Weekday Average Toll Annual Toll Annual Market Share Revenue 08$'ss (2008Vs) Transactions sRevenue 085's Annual Revenue (Nominal Vs) 2017 9,100 2018 13,050 2019 20,450 2020 26.000 11,600 16,600 25,860 0 32.800 4% $2,705 $2.09 6% 529,038 $2.12 9% $46.785 52.20 11% $61.226 52.24 404,497 $844.462 51,101,886 5,335.303 $11.326.038 $15.012,114 6,652,650 $14.610,600 $19,984,000 8,483.050 519_016.600 S26.754,500 2021 ........................._28_6 00 2022 29.600 2023 30.600 2024 31,650 2026 32,750 2026 ......................._33850 2027 35,000 2028 36,200 2029 .37,450 2030. .........................38,750 2031 40.050 2032 41,400 2033 42.800 2034.........................44,2 50 2036 44,250 48.400 49,850 51,350 52,900 0 52.750 $68,410 571,040 $73, 686 0 $76.469 0 $79.392 $82.334 585,416 $88, 641 0 $92.009 0 $95.522 52.26 ................ $2.28 ................ $2.30 52.32 52.34 $2.36 ................ $2.38 ................ 52..4.0 52.42 52.44 3,362,900 $21,206.000 530,698,000 3,692,400 $22,132.000 $32,999.500 10,033,500 $23,099.000 $35,474.500 10,386,600 $24.108.000 $38,135.000 10.752.100 $25.160.500 $40.994,000 1.....11 :13 0,450 11,522.100 11,927,550 12,347,300 12.781.800 $26,259,600 $44.068,000 $27,406,500 547,372.500 $28,603,500 550.925,000 $29,853,000 $54.744,000 531.156.600 S58.848.000 $99,057 52.46 i 13,231,550 $32,517.000 563.260.500 .5102,739 $2.48 1 13,697,100 $33.937,000 568.004,000 5106,569 i $2.50 ' 14.179,050 $35A19.000 $73.103.000 5110.649 € 52.62 1 14,678,000 $36.966,000 $78.584,500 5106,904 52.43 14_646.400 $35.541.500 S77.726.500 2036 43,750 52,050 15% 5102.909 52.34 14.451,100 $33,836.000 $76.304.000 2037 44,250 52.600 15% 5106.379 $2.38 14,632,400 $34,870,000 580,995.000 2038 44,750 53,150 16% 5109.952 0 52.43 14,815,950 $35,935,500 $85.974.000 2039 d5,350 53,800 16% 5113,886 52.48 15,060,700 537,344,000 592,035.000 2040 45.950 54.460 16% 5117,932 52.63 15.303.100 $38,766.500 $98.394,000 2041 46.450 2042 46,950 2043 47.450 2046 48.450 65.000 55,556 56,050 56,600 0 57,150 .5121,842 52.58 i 15A84,150 $39,891,500 $104,287,000 $125,867 $2.62 1 15,667,300 $41,043,000 $110,532.500 5130.010 i 52.66 1 15,852,600 $42.240,000 $117.151.500 5134,275 i 52.71 1 16,040,100 $43,465.500 $124.166,500 5138,664 ' 52.76 16.229.850 $44,726.500 $131.602.000 2046 48,950 57,650 16% .5143,182 52.80 16A21.850 $46,024.000 $139A82,500 2047 49,450 58,150 16% .5147.832 $2.85 16.616,100 $47,359,500 $147.835.500 2048 49.950 58.700 16% 5152.617 52.90 16.812,650 $48.734.000 $156.690,000 2049 50,450 69,260 16% 5157.641 0 52.95 17.011.550 560,148.000 $166.073.500 2050 51,000 59.850 16% $162,769 53.00 17.212.800 561.603.000 $176.018.500 2051 51.550 60,500 17% .5168.091 53.05 17.409,400 $53,050,500 5186.382,000 2052 52,050 61.050 17% .5173.345 53.10 17,601,250 $54,488,500 S197.177.500 2053 52.550 61,600 17% .5178.747 53.14 17.795.200 $55.965,000 $208.596.500 2064 53,050 62:150 17% 5184,300 53.19 17.991.300 $57,482,000 $220,678,000 2066 53,550 62.700 17% $190,009 € $3.25 18.189.600 $59.040.500 $233,461.000 2056 54,050 63.250 17% .5195,878 53.30 i 18,390,100 $60,640,500 $246,981,500 2057 54,550 63,800 17% 5201.911 53.35 18,592,800 $62,284,000 $261,285,500 2058 55,050 64,350 17% 2069 56,550 64,900 17% 2060 56,050 65.450 17% 2061 56.550 2062 57.050 2063 57,550 2064.........................58.1.0.0 2066 58.800 66.000 17% ................................. i ............................. 66,550 17% 67,100 17% 67,700 17% 68.400 17% 5208,113 0 $214,487 € 0 5221,038 5227, 771 5234.691 0 5241,803 $249,329 i 0 0 5257.725 53.40 18,737.700 $63,972,50.0 $276,420,000 53.46 19,004.850 $65,706.600 $292,429,500 $3.61 19.214.300 $67.487.500 $309.366.500 53.57 ................ 53.62 $3.68 53.74 53.80 19A2 6.050 19,64 0,150 19,856,600 20,075,400 20.296.700 $69.316,500 $327,283,500 $71,195.500 $346,240.000 573,125,600 $366,294.500 $75,107,000 $387,507,000 577.143.000 $409.952.000 2066 59.500 69.150 18% 5266.356 53.86 20,520,450 $79.234,500 $433.698,500 2067 60,100 69,800 18% 5274.787 0 53.92 20,746,600 0 $81,382,000 $458.817.000 2068 q1 60,700 70:460 18% 5283,456 $3.99 5,243.813 $20.897,000 $121.347,876 E.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY May 9, 2012 Table ES-2 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, Enhanced Toll Policy Fiscal Year Vie ekdayToll Transactions Weekday Express Transactions Express Weekday Average Toll Annual Toll Annual Market Share Revenue 08$'ss (20085's) Transactions sRevenue 085's Annual Revenue (Nominal Vs) 2017 9,100 ............................................................. 2018 13,050 2019 20,450 2020 26.000 11,600 4% $2,705 $2.09 16,600 6% 529,038 i 52.12 25,860 9% $46.785 52.20 32.800 11% i 561.226 52.24 404,497 $844.462 51,101,886 5,335.303 $11.326.038 515.012,114 6,652,650 $14.610,600 $19,984,000 8.483,050 $19.016.600 526.754,500 2021 28.500 35.950 12% 569,097 52.29 9,343,100 $21A21.000 531,013,500 2022 29,350 36,900 12% 573,309 52.37 3,631,700 $22.799,500 $33,999.500 2023 30,250 37.900 12% 577.838 52.44 9.929.200 $24.266,500 $37.273.000 2024 31,150 38.900 13% 582.574 52.62 10,235_850 $25,828.000 $40.861.500 2026 32,100 39.950 13% 587.664 $2.61 10.552.000 $27.490.000 544.795.500 2026 ........................._33.100 2027 34.100 2028.........................3.6_..1.0.0 2029 36.150 41.000 42,050 43,160 ................... 44,300 13% $93,124 13% 598,834 13% 5104.806 i 0 14% 5111.201 52.69 $2.78 $2.87 52.96 2030 37,250 45.500 14% 5118,046 'E $- 3.06 10,877,950 1..1.: 21..3, 950 11,560,300 11,917.350 $29.259,500 $31,142.500 $33,146.600 535,279,600 549,109.500 $53.838.000 $ 59; 021,500 $64.704,500 12.285.450 $37.650.000 570.934,500 2031 38.350 46,700 14% 2032 39,500 47,950 14% 2033 40,7.00 49,260 14% 2034 41.900 60,660 15% 2035 41.800 50.300 15% 5125,200 53.16 i 12,664,900 $39,966,500 577.764.000 $132,851 $3.26 13,056,050 $42,538,000 585,250.500 5141,020 $3.36 13,459,300 $45,275.600 593.459.000 $149.662 € $3.47 13,875,000 $48,189,000 15102,457,500 5150.064 i 53.43 13.833.500 $47A23.000 $103.732.500 2036 41.300 2037 ........................41.700 2038 .........................42_100 2039 42,7.00 2040 43.300 49,600 50,050 50,600 0 51.150 51.800 .5148,003 5151.646 0 5156,365 0 $159,744 5164.224 53.35 13,660,100 $45,762,000 $103.195,500 53.40 13,819,250 $46,992.500 $109.149.500 $3.45 13,980,250 $48_256.600 $116.448,000 $3.53 14,192_600 $50,031,500 $123,302,500 53.60 14A02.850 $51.809.000 $131A93.500 2041 43.700 52,250 15% 2042 44,100 52,700 15% 2043 44,500 53,100 15% 2044 44.900 63,660 15% 2045 45.300 54.000 15% 5168,224 0 $172, 397 0 $176,474 0 $180,728 5185.070 $3.65 $3.70 $3.75 $3.80 ................ 53.86 14,561,450 $53,111,500 $138.843,600 14,721,800 $54,446,500 $146.603.500 14.883,900 $65,815,000 $154,797,000 15.047,800 $67,218,000 $163,448,500 15.213.500 $58.656.500 $172.584.500 2046 .........................45.700 2047 46,100 2048 46,550 54,400 ................... 54,800 .................... 55,300 15% 15% 15% .5189 501 5194,023 0 5198, 854 53.91 15,381,050 $60,131,000 $182,231,000 $3.96 15,550,450 561,642,600 5192.416.000 $4.02 15,721,700 $63,192,600 $203.171.500 2049 47.050 65,860 15% $204.001 5- 4.08 15.894,850 $64,781.000 i 5214.527.000 $66A09.500 $226.517.500 2050 47.650 56.500 16% 5209.701 54.13 16.069.950 2051 48,200 2052 48.600 2063 49,000 2054 49A 00 2055 49.800 57,150 57,600 58,060 .................... 58,500 58.950 16% 5215,464 0 16% 5220,850 0 16% 5226.356 16% 5231.984 16% 5237.736 16,241,200 $68,069,000 $239.142,600 16_408_450 s $69,759.500 5252A34,500 16.577.400 $71,492,000 $266.465,000 16.748,100 $73.268,000 $281.277,000 16.920.550 $75.087.500 $296.910.000 2056 50.200 2057 50,600 2068.. .........................51,000 ............................................................. 2059 51A 00 2060..........................551.800 16% 5243.614 0 16% 5249,623 0 16% 5256.763 16% 5262.039 16% i $268.452 $4.50 $4.57 $4_63 ................. $4.70 ................ 54.77 17,094,750 17,270,750 17.44 8.600 17,628,300 17.809.850 $76,952,000 $313A11,000 $78,863,500 5330,832,000 $80,822,500 $349,221.500 $82.830,000 $368.632.500 $84.887.000 $389.120.500 52,200 61.650 ................................:................................ 52.650 62.160 16% ............. 16% 5275,006 $4.83 5281.973 54.90 17.993.250 ................................ 18.178_500 $ 86.:99.5.000 589.155.600 2066 54,850 64.500 16% 5313,706 $6.19 18,939,000 $98.349.600 $538,317.500 2067 55,350 65.060 16% $321,809 $6.27 19_134,000 $100,792,000 $568,237,000 2068 111 55.850 65,600 16% 5330,095 55.34 4.832.760 $25.823.750 $149.954.750 2061 $410.747.000 2062 $433.576.500 2063 53.150 62.700 16% 5289.366 'E $- 4.98 18,365,700 591.370,000 $457.676.500 2064 53,650 63,250 16% 5296,926 $5.05 18,554,850 $93.633,50.0 $483,116,000 2065 54,250 63.850 16% 5305.224 55.12 18.745.950 $95.965.500 $509.970.000 E.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY E.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 TOLL POLICY 2 TRAFFIC AND REVENUE ESTIMATES 2 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.1 PURPOSE AND FOCUS OF THE STUDY 1.1 1.2 THE CONSULTANT TEAM 1.2 1.3 OVERVIEW OF THE REPORT 1.2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING 2.1 2.1 ROADWAY ALIGNMENT 2.1 2.2 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS 2.1 2.2.1 State Route 91 2.2 2.2.2 Intersecting Routes 2.2 2.2.3 Supporting and Competing Routes 2.4 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 3.1 TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3.1 3.1.1 Wavetronix Traffic Counts 3.2 3.1.1.1 Westbound Weekday Traffic Volumes 3.3 3.1.1.2 Eastbound Weekday Traffic Volumes 3.4 3.1.1.3 Friday and Weekend Traffic Volumes 3.7 3.1.2 Major Intersecting Roadways Volumes 3.9 3.1.3 PEMS Traffic Counts 3.12 3.1.4 OCTA Transaction Data 3.14 3.1.5 HOV Data 3.17 3.1.6 Balanced Flow Network 3.20 3.1.7 Origin Destination Survey 3.22 3.2 VEHICLE SPEEDS 3.24 3.2.1 Wavetronix Speed Data 3.24 3.2.2 BluFax Speeds 3.29 3.2.3 PeMS Speeds 3.33 4.0 SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES AND LAND USE 4.1 4.1 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS 4.1 4.1.1 Study Area Employment Summary 4.2 4.1.2 Study Area Household Summary 4.4 4.2 FORECAST METHODOLOGY 4.5 4.3 HISTORICAL DATA AND TRENDS IN THE STUDY AREA 4.11 4.3.1 Historical Study Area Employment Trends 4.11 i Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 4.3.2 Historical Study Area Household Trends 4.17 4.4 BASE YEAR 2010 ESTIMATES 4.21 4.5 EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS 4.23 4.5.1 Comparative Third Party Forecasts: Long -Term 4.23 4.5.2 Comparative Forecasts: Short -Term 4.25 4.5.3 Study Area Employment Forecast 4.27 4.6 HOUSEHOLD FORECAST 4.31 4.6.1 Study Area Comparative Forecasts 4.31 4.6.2 Study Area Housing Unit Forecasts 4.33 4.6.3 Study Area Median Household Income Forecasts 4.35 4.7 KEY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE STUDY AREA 4.36 4.7.1 Inland Empire Projects 4.38 4.7.2 Orange County Projects 4.40 5.0 TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL 5-1 5.1 MODEL EVALUATION 5-1 5.2 MODEL STRUCTURE AND PROCESS 5.3 5.3 TOLL DIVERSION MODEL 5.4 5.4 MODEL INPUTS 5.6 5.5 BASE MODEL YEAR INPUTS 5.6 5.6 FORECAST MODEL YEAR INPUTS, 2020 5.7 5.7 FORECAST MODEL YEAR INPUTS, 2035 5.7 5.8 MODEL TOLLS 5.8 5.9 CALIBRATION & VALIDATION OF THE MODEL 5.9 5.10DATA SOURCES 5.9 5.11CALIBRATION & VALIDATION PROCESS 5.10 6.0 MICRO -SIMULATION MODEL 6.1 6.1 OVERVIEW 6.1 6.2 METHODOLOGY 6.1 6.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS MODEL 6.2 6.3.1 Network Assumptions 6.2 6.3.2 Volume Assumptions 6.4 6.3.3 Car Following Model Parameters 6.15 6.3.4 Managed Lanes Coefficients and Tolls 6.15 6.3.5 Modeled Traffic Results vs. Actual 6.19 6.4 FUTURE YEAR MODEL ASSUMPTIONS AND RESULTS 6.23 6.4.1 Network Assumptions and Scenarios 6.23 6.4.2 Volume Assumptions 6.26 6.4.3 Car Following Model Simulation Parameters 6.28 6.4.4 Managed Lanes Coefficients and Tolls 6.28 6.4.5 Future Model Results, 2035 by 2020 Scenario 6.29 6.4.6 Future Model Results, 2035 by 2035 Network 6.41 7.0 MARKETSHARE ANALYSIS 7.1 ii Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 7.1 OVERVIEW 7.1 7.2 METHODOLOGY 7.1 7.3 EXISTING EXPRESS TRAFFIC VS GLOBAL V/C 7.1 7.3.1 Eastbound Express Traffic vs. Global Traffic 7.6 7.3.2 Congested Period Demand Estimation and Global V/C 7.9 7.3.3 Toll Curve Fitting 7.12 7.3.4 Toll Traffic and Revenue Forecast vs. Actual 7.15 7.4 APPLICATION TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY EXPRESS LANES 7.20 7.4.1 Lane Configuration Adjustment 7.20 7.4.2 Toll Adjustment 7.21 8.0 TOLLED TRAFFIC AND REVENUE ESTIMATES 8.1 8.1 TOLL POLICY 8.1 8.1.1 OCTA SR 91 TOLL POLICY 8.1 8.1.2 ENHANCED SR 91 TOLL POLICY 8.5 8.2 TRAFFIC AND REVENUE ESTIMATES 8.7 9.0 SENSITIVITY ANALYSES 9.1 9.1 REVENUE MAXIMIZATION 9.1 iii Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 List of Figures Figure 2-1 Map of Riverside County Express Lanes and Surrounding Area 2.1 Figure 2-2 Map of Intersecting and Supporting Roadways 2.4 Figure 3-1 Location of Wavetronix Count Stations 3.1 Figure 3-2 Daily Traffic Volume Recorded at Wavetronix Count Stations 3.3 Figure 3-3 Profile of Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91 (Westbound) 3.6 Figure 3-4 Profile of Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91 (Eastbound) 3.6 Figure 3-5 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, Between SR-241 and SR-71 3.7 Figure 3-6 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of SR-71 3.8 Figure 3-7 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, West of 1-15 3.8 Figure 3-8 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of 1-15 3.9 Figure 3-9 Weekday Traffic Volumes on 1-15, South and North of SR-91 3.10 Figure 3-10 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-71 3.11 Figure 3-11 Westbound Wavetronix and PeMS Data at Wavetronix Location 2 3.12 Figure 3-12 Westbound Wavetronix and PeMS data at Wavetronix Location 3 3.13 Figure 3-13 Eastbound Wavetronix and PeMS Data at Wavetronix Location 2 3.13 Figure 3-14 Eastbound Wavetronix and PeMS Data at Wavetronix Location 3 3.14 Figure 3-15 Westbound Weekday OCTA HOV and Toll Volumes and Wavetronix Total Volume 3.16 Figure 3-16 Eastbound Weekday OCTA HOV and Toll Volumes and Wavetronix Total Volume 3.16 Figure 3-17 Average Weekday Traffic East of SR-71 Broken into HOV and GP 3.18 Figure 3-18 Average Weekday Traffic West of 1-15 Broken into HOV and GP 3.18 Figure 3-19 Average Weekday Traffic East of 1-15 Broken into HOV and GP 3.18 Figure 3-20 HOV Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of SR-71 3.19 Figure 3-21 HOV Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, West of 1-15 3.19 Figure 3-22 HOV Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of 1-15 3.19 Figure 3-23 Existing Balanced Network 3.21 Figure 3-24 Distribution of Traffic on SR-91 at SR-71 Interchange 3.22 Figure 3-25 Distribution of Traffic on SR-91 at 1-15 Interchange 3.23 Figure 3-26 Distribution of Traffic Entering SR-91 3.23 Figure 3-27 Weekday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 3.25 Figure 3-28 Weekday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Eastbound) 3.25 Figure 3-29 Friday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 3.26 Figure 3-30 Friday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Eastbound) 3.26 Figure 3-31 Saturday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 3.27 Figure 3-32 Saturday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Eastbound) 3.27 Figure 3-33 Sunday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 3.28 Figure 3-34 Sunday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 3.28 Figure 3-35 Average Westbound Weekday Speeds at 7AM 3.30 Figure 3-36 Average Eastbound Weekday Speeds at 5PM 3.31 i Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 Figure 3-37 Average Speeds Between West of SR-71 and East of 1-15 3.33 Figure 4-1 Historical and Base Case Employment Frorecasts 4.2 Figure 4-2 Historical and Base Case Household Forecasts 4.4 Figure 4-3 Map of the Study Area 4.5 Figure 4-4 Map of SR-91 Corridor 4.6 Figure 4-5 Area of Focus for Socioeconomic Analysis 4.7 Figure 4-6 Illustration of the PB Land Use Forecast Model Methodology 4.9 Figure 4-7 Employment Growth by County, Change from 1990 Value 4.13 Figure 4-8 Orange County Job Growth by Industry, 1990 - 2005 4.14 Figure 4-9 Riverside and San Bernardino County Job Growth by Industry, 1990 - 2005 4.15 Figure 4-10 Study Area Residential Building Permit Issuance, 2005 - 2010 4.20 Figure 4-11 Compound Annual Growth Rate Comparison of Short Term Employment Forecasts 4.26 Figure 4-12 Comparison of Long -Term Household Growth Rates 4.32 Figure 4-13 Map of Inland Empire Developments 4.38 Figure 4-14 Map of Orange County Developments 4.41 Figure 5-1 Model Structure with Toll Diversion Assignment Model. 5.5 Figure 5-2 Count Locations 5.10 Figure 5-3 %RMSE Assignment Accuracy Guidelines 5.12 Figure 5-4 Enhanced RivTAM Model %RMSE Assignment Accuracy 5.13 Figure 6-1 Existing Conditions Micro simulation Model Study Area 6.2 Figure 6-2 Existing Conditions SR 241 to CL, EB GP Demand vs. Count 6.5 Figure 6-3 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, EB GP Demand vs. Count 6.5 Figure 6-4 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, EB GP Demand vs. Count 6.6 Figure 6-5 Existing Conditions 1-15 to McKinley Street, EB GP Demand vs. Count 6.6 Figure 6-6 Existing Conditions SR 241 to CL, EB Express Demand vs. Count 6.7 Figure 6-7 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, EB HOV Demand vs. Count 6.7 Figure 6-8 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, EB HOV Demand vs. Count 6.8 Figure 6-9 Existing Conditions 1-15 to McKinley Street, EB HOV Demand vs. Count 6.8 Figure 6-10 Existing Conditions SR 241 to CL, WB GP Demand vs. Count 6.9 Figure 6-11 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, WB GP Demand vs. Count 6.10 Figure 6-12 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, WB GP Demand vs. Count 6.10 Figure 6-13 Existing Conditions McKinley Street to 1-15, WB GP Demand vs. Count 6.11 Figure 6-14 Existing Conditions SR 241 to Green River Road, WB Express Demand vs. Count 6.11 Figure 6-15 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, WB HOV Demand vs. Count 6.12 Figure 6-16 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, WB HOV Demand vs. Count 6.12 Figure 6-17 Existing Conditions McKinley Street to 1-15, WB HOV Demand vs. Count 6.13 Figure 6-18 SR 91 Eastbound Toll Curves by Vehicle Class 6.17 Figure 6-19 SR 91 Westbound Toll Curves by Vehicle Class 6.18 Figure 6-20 SR 91 Eastbound General Purpose Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 6.20 Figure 6-21 SR 91 Eastbound Express and HOV Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 6.20 Figure 6-22 SR 91 Eastbound Travel Speeds, Model vs. Actual, 2-7 PM 6.21 ii Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 Figure 6-23 SR 91 Westbound General Purpose Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 6.22 Figure 6-24 SR 91 Westbound Express and HOV Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 6.22 Figure 6-25 SR 91 Westbound Travel Speeds, Model vs. Actual, 2-7 PM 6.23 Figure 6-26 SR 91 Eastbound, RivTAM Model Global Traffic vs. Actual Balanced Demand, 3-7 PM 6.27 Figure 6-27 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Eastbound from Green River Road to 1-15 6.29 Figure 6-28 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Eastbound from Green River Road to Ontario Avenue 6.30 Figure 6-29 Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2020 Network 6.33 Figure 6-30 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Westbound from 1-15 to Green River Road 6.34 Figure 6-31 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Westbound from Ontario Avenue to Green River Road 6.35 Figure 6-32 Westbound Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2020 Network 6.36 Figure 6-33 Express Lanes Toll Traffic, 2035 by 2020 Network 6.37 Figure 6-34 Express Lanes Revenue, 2035 by 2020 Network 6.37 Figure 6-35 Orange County Express Lanes Egress Area, 4:40 PM 6.39 Figure 6-36 Serfas Club Drive, 4:40 PM 6.39 Figure 6-37 Lincoln Avenue, 4:40 PM 6.40 Figure 6-38 1-15 Interchange, 4:40 PM 6.40 Figure 6-39 McKinley Street Approach, 4:40 PM 6.41 Figure 6-40 Eastbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network Scenario, Green River Road to 1-156.42 Figure 6-41 Eastbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network Scenario, Green River Road to Ontario Avenue 6.42 Figure 6-42 Eastbound Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2035 Network 6.45 Figure 6-43 Westbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, 1-15 to Green River Road 6.46 Figure 6-44 Westbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, Ontario Avenue to Green River Road 6.46 Figure 6-45 Westbound Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2035 Network 6.47 Figure 6-46 Express Lanes Toll Traffic, 2035 by 2035 Network 6.48 Figure 6-47 Express Lanes Revenue, 2035 by 2035 Network 6.48 Figure 6-48 Orange County SR 91 Mixing Area, 4:40 PM 6.50 Figure 6-49 Serfas Club Drive, 4:40 PM 6.50 Figure 6-50 Lincoln Avenue, 4:40 PM 6.51 Figure 6-51 I-15/SR 91 Interchange, 4:40 PM 6.51 Figure 6-52 McKinley Street, 440 PM 6.52 Figure 7-1 SR 91 Express Lanes Weekday Traffic, Fiscal Year 2008 7.2 Figure 7-2 SR 91 Express Lanes Tolls, Average Monday to Thursday, July 2008 7.3 Figure 7-3 SR 91 GP Lane Travel Time, SR 55 to County Line, July 2011 7.4 Figure 7-4 SR 91 GP & HOV Travel Time, County Line to McKinley Street, November 2010 7.5 Figure 7-5 Average Weekday General Purpose Volume per Lane 7.6 Figure 7-6 Eastbound Express Traffic (Full Toll and HOV3+) vs. GP Lane Traffic 7.7 Figure 7-7 Eastbound Express Traffic (Full Toll and HOV3+) vs. GP Lane Speed 7.7 iii Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 Figure 7-8 Eastbound Full Toll Traffic vs. GP Lane Traffic 7.8 Figure 7-9 Eastbound HOV3+ Traffic vs. GP Lane Traffic 7.9 Figure 7-10 General Purpose Lane Demand Adjustment 7.10 Figure 7-11 Akcelik Speed and V/C Curve 7.10 Figure 7-12 SR 91 Eastbound General Purpose Lane Capacity, Weekday, Friday, & Weekend 7.11 Figure 7-13 SR 91 Eastbound GP, Express, and Global V/C 7.12 Figure 7-14 SR 91 Eastbound Express Full Toll Traffic Market share vs. Global V/C Data Plot, Weekdays 7.13 Figure 7-15 SR 91 Eastbound Express Weekday Toll Curves 7.14 Figure 7-16 SR 91 Eastbound Express Weekday, Friday, and Weekend Toll Curves 7.15 Figure 7-17 SR 91 Express EB, Monday to Thursday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual 7.16 Figure 7-18 SR 91 Express EB, Monday to Thursday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual 7.17 Figure 7-19 SR 91 Express EB, Friday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual 7.17 Figure 7-20 SR 91 Express EB, Friday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual 7.18 Figure 7-21 SR 91 Express EB, Saturday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual 7.18 Figure 7-22 SR 91 Express EB, Saturday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual 7.19 Figure 7-23 SR 91 Express EB, Sunday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual 7.19 Figure 7-24 SR 91 Express EB, Sunday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual 7.20 Figure 7-25 SR 91 Express EB, Weekday Toll Curve, 4 GP/2XL vs. 5 GP/2 XL 7.21 Figure 8-1 SR 91 Express EB Tolls, 1997-1999 8.1 Figure 8-2 SR 91 Express WB Tolls, 1997-1999 8.2 Figure 8-3 SR 91 Express EB Tolls, 1997-2010 8.2 Figure 8-4 OCTA Toll Policy 8.3 Figure 8-5 OCTA Toll Policy 8.4 Figure 8-6 OCTA Toll Policy 8.4 Figure 8-7 OCTA Toll Policy vs. Enhanced Toll Policy 8.6 Figure 9-1 Traffic's Response to Toll Increases 9.1 Figure 9-2 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 9.2 Figure 9-3 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 9.2 Figure 9-4 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 9.3 Figure 9-5 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 9.3 Figure 9-6 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 9.4 iv Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 List of Tables Table 3-1 Average Traffic Volumes Recorded at Wavetronix Count Stations 3.2 Table 3-2 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91 (Westbound) 3.4 Table 3-3 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91 (Eastbound) 3.5 Table 3-4 Weekday Traffic Volumes on 1-15 3.10 Table 3-5 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-71 3.11 Table 3-6 Total Traffic, HOV Traffic, and Toll Lane Traffic 3.15 Table 3-7 Average Weekday HOV Volumes and Percent of Total Volume 3.17 Table 3-8 Average Weekday Speeds Recorded by BluFax (Westbound) 3.30 Table 3-9 Average Weekday Speeds Recorded by BluFax (Eastbound) 3.31 Table 3-10 Average Friday Speeds Recorded by BluFax 3.32 Table 3-11 Average Saturday Speeds Recorded by BluFax 3.32 Table 3-12 Average Sunday Speeds Recorded by BluFax 3.32 Table 3-13 Eastbound Weekday Speeds Recorded by PeMS on SR-91 (5AM - 10PM) 3.34 Table 3-14 Westbound Weekday Speeds Recorded by PeMS on SR-91 (5AM - 10PM) 3.35 Table 4-1 PB Study Area Employment and Household Forecast (Thousands) 4.1 Table 4-2 Forecast Methodology for Population Variables 4.10 Table 4-3 Forecast Methodology for Household Variables 4.10 Table 4-4 Forecast Methodology for Scholl Enrolement 4.10 Table 4-5 Forecast Methodology for Household Income 4.11 Table 4-6 Forecast Methodology for Workers 4.11 Table 4-7 Forecast Methodology for Employment Variables 4.11 Table 4-8 Total Employment Growth by County, 1990 - 2010 4.12 Table 4-9 Orange County Employment by Industry 4.16 Table 4-10 Riverside and San Bernardino County Employment by Industry 4.16 Table 4-11 Growth of Total Residential Building Permits in the Study Area 4.18 Table 4-12 Annual Building Permits Issued in the 6 County Area, 2005 - 2010 4.21 Table 4-13 2010 Base Year Total Jobs: EDD/PB vs. SCAG/OCP (thousands) 4.22 Table 4-14 2010 Base Year Households EDD/PB vs. SCAG/OCP (thousands) 4.22 Table 4-15 Comparisons of Long -Term Employment Projections (thousands) 4.25 Table 4-16 PB Employment Forecast by County (thousands) 4.28 Table 4-17 Employment by Major Category (in thousands) 4.30 Table 4-18 Comparison of Long Term Households Projections (thousands) 4.31 Table 4-19 Historical Study Area Median Home Prices 4.33 Table 4-20 PB Household Forecast by County (thousands) 4.34 Table 4-21 PB Median Household Income Forecast (Nominal Dollars) 4.36 Table 5-1 Model Evaluation Summary 5-2 Table 5-2 Toll Diversion Coefficients 5.6 Table 5-3 Relevant Network Improvements 5.8 Table 5-4 Volume/Count Assignment Accuracy Criteria by Functional Classification 5.12 Table 5-5 Enhanced RivTAM Model Volume/Count Assignment Accuracy by Facility Type 5.13 v Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 Table 5-6 Enhanced RivTAM Model Volume/Count Assignment Accuracy by Period 5.13 Table 6-1 SR 91, Existing Conditions Model Number of Lanes 6.3 Table 6-2 1-15, Existing Conditions Model Number of Lanes 6.4 Table 6-3 Micro simulation Model Existing Volume Sources 6.4 Table 6-4 SR 91 Eastbound Global (GP & HOV) Traffic Count vs. Estimated Demand, 1-8 PM 6.13 Table 6-5 Count vs. Estimated Large Truck and Bus Percentages 6.14 Table 6-6 Existing Conditions 0/D Demand Table, 2-7 PM 6.14 Table 6-7 Car Following Model Parameters 6.15 Table 6-8 SR 91 Eastbound Express Lane Tolls Modeled 6.17 Table 6-9 SR 91 Westbound Express Lane Tolls Modeled 6.18 Table 6-10 SR 91 Number of General Purpose Lanes 6.25 Table 6-11 1-15 Number of General Purpose and Express Lanes 6.26 Table 6-12 2035 by 2020 Network 0/D Matrix, 2-7 PM 6.28 Table 6-13 2035 by 2035 Network 0/D Matrix, 2-7 PM 6.28 Table 6-14 EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2020 Network 6.31 Table 6-15 (cont.) EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2020 Network 6.32 Table 6-16 Eastbound Express Lane VISSIM vs. Market Share Tolls, 2035 by 2020 Network 2-7 PM 6.34 Table 6-17 Express Lane Traffic and Revenue, 2035 by 2020 Network 2-7 PM 6.38 Table 6-18 EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, Ultimate 6.43 Table 6-19 (cont.) EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, Ultimate 6.44 Table 6-20 Express Lane Traffic and Revenue, 2035 by 2035 Network 2-7 PM 6.49 Table 7-1 Eastbound Weekday Full Toll Traffic and Revenue, Model vs. Actual, 2008 to 20097.15 Table 8-1 2035 EB Toll Schedule, OCTA Toll Policy (2008 $s) 8.5 Table 8-2 2035 EB Toll Schedule, Enhanced Toll Policy (2008 $s) 8.7 Table 8-3 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, OCTA Toll Policy 8.9 Table 8-4 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, Enhanced Toll Policy 8.10 Table 9-1 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, Revenue Maximization Toll Policy 9.5 vi Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 1.0 Introduction 1.1 PURPOSE AND FOCUS OF THE STUDY SR-91 is the only major surface transportation facility connecting Orange and Riverside Counties and is the primary daily commuting route between the counties. The rapidly growing population, driven in part by the relatively affordable housing market in Riverside County, coupled with increasing employment opportunities in Orange County, has resulted in a large number of Riverside County residents commuting to employment in Orange County. Based on long-term regional population and employment projections, this commute pattern is expected to continue and grow into the future. In addition, SR-91 is heavily used for goods movement from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to destinations in inland Southern California as well as other destinations across the United States. SR-91 currently has four general purpose (GP) lanes in each direction, with those lanes varying in width from 11 to 12 feet from the SR-241/SR-91 interchange in Orange County to the SR-91/I-15 interchange in Riverside County. Currently, there are two tolled Express Lanes (XL) in each direction on the SR-91 in Orange County that are heavily used by commuters, residents, commercial businesses, and others traveling to and from Riverside and Orange counties. The existing Express Lanes, operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), begin west of the SR-91/SR-55 interchange and terminate at the Riverside/Orange County line. This Project extends the Express Lanes to the east approximately eight miles into Riverside County to the 1-15 interchange. SR-74 (Ortega Highway), an alternate route, is located approximately 20 miles south of SR-91 and carries about 12,000 vehicles per day (vpd). In stark contrast, SR-91 is currently used by more than 280,000 vpd at the Orange/Riverside County line, and this volume continues to grow. At the same time, SR-91 operates at stop -and -go conditions during the lengthy morning (westbound) and evening (eastbound) peak travel periods in the corridor. Traffic is forecast to increase by approximately 30 percent by 2035, further exacerbating the already long travel times and congestion in the corridor between the counties. As part of this project, the following tasks were undertaken: • Collecting existing traffic volumes and speed data along the SR-91, SR-71, and 1-15; • Updating land use and socio-economic data for Riverside and surrounding counties; • Calibrating and validating the regional traffic model for the corridor under study; • Constructing a micro -simulation model to identify impacts to traffic operations; • Preparing traffic and revenue estimates for two toll policy alternatives; 1.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Introduction May 9, 2012 1.2 THE CONSULTANT TEAM Stantec Consulting Services Inc. ("Stantec") had the overall lead for the Traffic and Revenue Investment Grade Study and was responsible for project management and coordination, calibrating and validating the regional travel demand model, constructing and calibrating a corridor micro -simulation model and forecasting the future gross toll revenues to be derived from the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension. Two firms assisted Stantec in this work effort: • PB Consult Inc. ("PB") provided the socioeconomic and land use review of employment and household projections used in the traffic model. • DKS Associates ("DKS") oversaw the data collection process and helped to summarize and analyze existing traffic volumes and speeds in the SR-91 study area. 1.3 OVERVIEW OF THE REPORT The following is a brief description of the contents of each chapter before the detailed presentation of the technical material: • Chapter 2: Project Description and Setting - describes the SR-91 corridor in the context of its regional settings. • Chapter 3: Existing Conditions — summarizes the data collected on the SR-91, SR-71, and 1-15 including both traffic volumes and speeds. • Chapter 4: SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use - describes the assessment of the regional area's economy and the small area forecast of future year occupied households and employment. • Chapter 5: Travel Demand Model - explains the methodology used to forecast future toll traffic and revenue for the SR-91 corridor based upon an adaptation of the RivTAM traffic model and toll diversion equations. • Chapter 6: Micro -Simulation Model — details the calibration and construction of an existing and future year micro -simulation model to analyze traffic operational impacts of the project. • Chapter 7: Market Share Curves — presents the methodology behind using existing revealed preference data on the OCTA 91 Express Lanes to forecast Express Lane usage for the project. • Chapter 8: Traffic and Revenue Estimates: presents the methodology behind the toll policies analyzed and the resulting traffic and revenue forecasts. • Chapter 9: Sensitivity Analyses 1.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 2.0 Project Description and Setting 2.1 ROADWAY ALIGNMENT State Route 91 (SR-91) is an east -west limited access highway running from the 1-405 in Los Angeles, California at its western end to the interchange of 1-215 and SR-60 in Riverside County, CA on its eastern end. It connects to numerous other freeways in the Los Angeles area, including 1-5, SR-241, SR-71, and 1-15. The roadway provides a connection over the Santa Ana Mountains, and links the business centers of Los Angeles and Orange Counties to the residential areas of Riverside County. Additionally, the roadway provides a route via 1-15 to the resort area of Las Vegas and other weekend destinations to the east. Figure 2-1 shows the SR-91 corridor in a regional context and outlines both the existing and proposed 91 Express Lanes. Figure 2-1 Map of Riverside County Express Lanes and Surrounding Area � O £ le HeBre w"`�� 1 Fullerton SR-91 Anaheim a O Existing Express Lanes Orange County SR-55 WeM TUB. SR-241 SR-71 I-15 Proposed Express Lanes Riverside County 2.2 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS The transportation system in the SR-91 corridor consists mainly of freeways and signalized arterial roadways. A limited mass transit network is available. This section describes SR-91, the competing roadway network, intersecting routes, and the mass transit system. 2.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Project Description and Setting May 9, 2012 2.2.1 State Route 91 SR-91 is the only major surface transportation facility connecting Orange and Riverside Counties and is the primary daily commuting route between the counties. The rapidly growing population, driven in part by the relatively affordable housing market in Riverside County, coupled with increasing employment opportunities in Orange County, has resulted in a large number of Riverside County residents commuting to employment in Orange County. Based on long-term regional population and employment projections, this commute pattern is expected to continue and grow into the future. In addition, SR-91 is heavily used for goods movement from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to destinations in inland Southern California as well as other destinations across the United States. SR-91 currently has four general purpose (GP) lanes in each direction, with those lanes varying in width from 11 to 12 feet from the SR-241/SR-91 interchange in Orange County to the SR-91/I-15 interchange in Riverside County. Currently, there are two tolled Express Lanes (XL) in each direction on the SR-91 in Orange County that are heavily used by commuters, residents, commercial businesses, and others traveling to and from Riverside and Orange counties. The existing Express Lanes, operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), begin west of the SR-91/SR-55 interchange and terminate at the Riverside/Orange County line. This Project extends the Express Lanes to the east approximately eight miles into Riverside County to the 1-15 interchange. 2.2.2 Intersecting Routes State Route 91 is intersected at numerous locations in the study area. These intersecting routes range from limited access freeways to local collector roadways. Access to the express lanes will be provided only at its ends. Major intersecting roadways are described below and shown in Figure 2-2: 1. Green River Road is a 4-lane roadway with a diamond interchange at SR-91. To the northwest, Green River Road leads to a mostly residential and office developments. There is no outlet to the northwest on Green River Road. To the southeast, Green River Road turns eastward, and leads past commercial development towards residential areas and the City of Corona. 2. State Route 71 is a major limited access highway which leads northward from SR-91. A trumpet interchange provides the connection with SR-91. SR-71 leads to the northwest terminating in approximately 16 miles at 1-10. Traffic may use SR-71 between the SR-91 corridor and the areas of Burbank and Pasadena, CA. 3. Serfas Club Drive is a 4-lane roadway with a center turning lane. A diamond interchange is provided at SR-91. To the north, Serfas Club Drive becomes Auto Center Drive, and the area is 2.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Project Description and Setting May 9, 2012 characterized by heavy commercial and office development. To the south, the roadway leads to mainly residential areas. 4. Maple Street is a 4-lane roadway with a center turn lane. To the north it leads to an area of mostly office and industrial uses, and to the south, it becomes 6th Street and leads to residential and commercial areas of Corona. A combination of a partial cloverleaf diamond interchanges are provided at Maple Street. 5. Lincoln Avenue is a 4-lane roadway with a center turning lane. A partial cloverleaf interchange is provided at SR-91. To the north, Lincoln Avenue leads to an area of mostly office development. South of SR-91 are commercial and residential areas. 6. Grand Boulevard is a 4-lane roadway with a center turning lane. Ramps are provided to and from the west on SR-91. Grand Boulevard is a circular roadway, following a 2,300 foot radius around the central business district of Corona. In the future, this interchange will be eliminated, and access to SR-91 will be provided at the Lincoln Avenue and North main Street interchanges. 7. North Main Street is a 4 to 6 lane roadway with center medians and turn lanes. To the south, the roadway leads through the central business district of Corona. To the north of the highway, North Main Street is generally lined with strip retail development. 8. Interstate Route 15 is a major north -south interstate highway running from southern California to northern Montana. The highway is 4 lanes in each direction. A large interchange is provided between SR-91 and 1-15, with direct freeway to freeway ramps for most of the movements and a loop ramp for the southbound to westbound movement. Connections are proposed between the express lanes 1-15. To the north, 1 15 passes the city of Norco and travels across San Bernardino County, CA and into Nevada, towards Las Vegas. To the south, I- 15 provides a route to residential areas southeast of Corona, CA. The traffic on 1-15 in the vicinity of this interchange is described in 3.1.2. 9. McKinley Street is a 4-lane divided roadway with a partial cloverleaf interchange at SR-91. The area surrounding the interchange is mainly commercial, and the roadway goes to residential areas to the north and the south. 10. Pierce Street is a 4-lane roadway with a median and center turning lanes. Access is only provided to and from the west on SR-91. The area near the interchange is mostly commercial, with residential areas beyond that. 2.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Project Description and Setting May 9, 2012 Figure 2-2 Map of Intersecting and Supporting Roadways 2.2.3 Supporting and Competing Routes Due to the topography in the area of the project, there is no major competing route in the project corridor. The nearest route through the Santa Ana Mountains between Riverside County and Orange County at the western end of the study area is Carbon Canyon Road (SR- 142), approximately 8 miles to the north. 1-10 and SR-60 also provide east -west routes parallel to SR-91, however, they are over 10 miles north of the highway. The eastern portion of the highway corridor runs parallel to surface highways which may provide an alternate route. However, the geometry of these roadways and the development along them precludes them from handling a significant amount of the traffic using SR-91. Along the southern side of SR-91, Green River Road and Ontario Avenue provide access to the residential areas south of Corona, CA. Also parallel to SR-91 is 6th Street, which runs through the city of Corona. Traffic signals and development along the route lowers the viability of this road as an alternative route. 2.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 3.0 Existing Conditions 3.1 TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic volumes in the SR-91 corridor were determined from three main sources. First, Wavetronix radar counts were collected at 7 locations along the corridor. Wavetronix radar counts provide vehicle volumes and average speeds for each lane of the highway in 15-minute increments. It was decided that radar counts should be collected instead of using standard automatic traffic recorders (ATRs) since radar counts tend to gather more accurate traffic data during periods of intense traffic congestion, a major concern in this corridor, particularly during the peak time periods. In addition, radar counts provide both traffic volumes and speeds. Given that a correlation exists between a decrease in corridor speed and an increase in express lane volume, having accurate speed data is extremely beneficial. The radar counts were conducted between November 2, 2010 and November 18, 2010. The Wavetronix count locations are shown in Figure 3-1. Figure 3-1 Location of Wavetronix Count Stations Second, traffic count data were downloaded from the Caltrans Freeway Performance Measurement System (PeMS). PeMS is a database tool designed by the University of California at Berkeley that collects traffic data, including flows, speeds, and hours of congestion on California freeways. Third, traffic volume data were provided by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for the toll lanes along SR-91 in Orange County. These data provided the toll and the HOV-3+ volume in hourly increments for both directions of the highway. 3.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.1.1 Wavetronix Traffic Counts Radar traffic counts were conducted from November 2-18, 2010. At each location, one week of data was recorded. The Wavetronix counts showed the average 7-day traffic volume to be approximately 130,100 vehicles per day in each direction at the western end of the study area, between SR-241 and SR-71. Moving eastward, between SR-71 and 1-15, westbound traffic was recorded to be approximately 122,000 vehicles per day while eastbound traffic was heavier. At the Wavetronix station just east of SR-71, an average of 127,000 vehicles per day were recorded eastbound during the 7-day count. At the count station further east, just to the west of 1-15, 142,000 vehicles per day were recorded driving eastbound. East of 1-15, the traffic counts recorded an average of 104,000 vehicles per day eastbound and 107,000 vehicles per day westbound. Over the course of the week, the traffic volumes were heaviest on Friday and lightest on Sunday. The Tuesday to Thursday volumes were fairly consistent, and Monday had the lightest traffic volume on a weekday. Overall, the traffic volumes on Saturday were recorded to be higher than an average weekday, but lower than the Friday volume. A directional split can also be seen in the daily traffic volumes. The eastbound volumes are highest on Friday, and the westbound volumes on Sunday do not show as large a drop as is seen on the eastbound side of the roadway. Table 3-1 summarizes the daily traffic volumes recorded at each count location, and shows the daily traffic volumes as a percentage of the average 7-day volume recorded at each location (also see Figure 3-2) Table 3-1 Average Traffic Volumes Recorded at Wavetronix Count Stations 1. Between SR- 241 and SR-71 2. East of SR-71 3. West ofI-15 4. East ofI-15 Start and End Dates of Count Start End 11 /02 11 /0 8 Start End 11 /02 11 /0 8 Start End 11 / 12 11 / 18 Start End 11 /02 11 /0 8 a g 0 a W 7-Day Average Daily Volume 130196 127050 142479 103646 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 108,598 83.4% 113,683 89.5% 122,689 86.1% 89,723 86.6% 124,867 95.9% 120,336 94.7% 140,168 98.4% 100,852 97.3% 130,679 100.4% 123,515 97.2% 142,997 100.4% 97,117 93.7% 133,097 102.2% 127,391 100.3% 145,431 102.1% 106,232 102.5% 135,786 104.3% 126,982 99.9% 141,982 99.7% 110,465 106.6% 142,226 109.2% 140,206 110.4% 155,969 109.5% 112,164 108.2% 136,122 104.6% 137,237 108.0% 148,114 104.0% 108,969 105.1% Start and End Dates of Count Start End 11 / 12 11 / 18 Start End 11 /02 11 /0 8 Start End 11 /02 11 /0 8 Start End 11 /02 11 /0 8 .o c e 7-Day Average Daily Volume 130145 121435 122035 106827 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 117,182 90.0% 115,697 95.3% 122,950 100.7% 97,881 91.6% 130,141 100.0% 116,040 95.6% 113,551 93.0% 101,611 95.1% 129,467 99.5% 119,901 98.7% 117,541 96.3% 108,857 101.9% 132,434 101.8% 120,240 99.0% 115,029 94.3% 106,283 99.5% 134,772 103.6% 122,984 101.3% 121,470 99.5% 108,876 101.9% 138,121 106.1% 129,044 106.3% 130,202 106.7% 112,876 105.7% 128,899 99.0% 126,139 103.9% 133,504 109.4% 111,408 104.3% 3.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-2 Daily Traffic Volume Recorded at Wavetronix Count Stations as a Percentage of Average 7-Day Traffic Volume Recorded Percent of Average 7-Day Traffic Volume 120.0% • 115.0 % 110.0% 105.0% 100.0% 95.0 % 90.0 % 85.0% 80.0% Sunday Monday -Thursday Eastbound Friday • Westbound Saturday The Wavetronix traffic counts gave traffic volumes in 15-minute increments, allowing the distribution of traffic across the day to be analyzed. On Tuesday — Thursday, the traffic follows a directional pattern, with heavy westbound volumes in the morning and heavy eastbound volumes in the afternoon. 3.1.1.1 Westbound Weekday Traffic Volumes Westbound, the morning peak is most clearly defined on the western end of the study area, where traffic passes into Orange County. In the morning, traffic volumes build from east to west, reaching their highest values at the Wavetronix count station between SR-241 and SR-71. During the heaviest hour (7AM-8AM), approximately 7.8 percent of the daily weekday traffic passed by that station. At the western end of the study area, the heaviest westbound traffic is concentrated between 5AM and 9AM, with over a quarter of the daily traffic passes during those four hours. Upstream, at the Wavetronix station just to the west of 1-15, traffic volumes rise in the 4AM and 5AM hours and then drop by over 35 percent in the 6AM hour. This corresponds to a severe drop in speeds, as described in Section 3.2.1. This congestion may have constrained the traffic volume at this location. At the eastern end of the study area, east of 1-15, traffic was more uniform throughout the day, and the morning peak period was not 3.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 heavier than the traffic during the remainder of the day. A westbound morning peak can still be inferred at the eastern end due to the early hour at which traffic volumes begin to rise from the overnight low. For example, 5.8% of the daily traffic passed by this station during the 5AM to 6AM hour in the westbound direction, far higher than the 2.0% that passed by in the eastbound direction in the same hour (See Table 3-2 and Figure 3-3). A westbound afternoon peak was recorded at both ends of the study area. This peak remains well below the morning peak at the two western Wavetronix count locations. At the two eastern locations, it does surpass the morning peak, however the vehicle speeds described in Section 3.2.1 confirm that the most severe congestion occurs during the morning. 3.1.1.2 Eastbound Weekday Traffic Volumes In the eastbound direction there is a small morning peak and a heavy afternoon peak. The heaviest eastbound traffic occurs during the 3PM to 7PM hours (see Table 3-3 and Figure 3-4). Between SR-241 and SR-71, eastbound traffic volumes peak in the 6PM hour, and 7.4 percent of the daily traffic passed the Wavetronix count station in that hour. Moving east along the corridor, the afternoon peak occurs earlier in the day. The highest hour at the location just east of SR-71 is 5PM - 6PM, and the highest hour just to the west of 1-15 is 3P - 4PM. Table 3-2 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91(Westbound) Westbound 1. Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. East of SR-71 3. West of I-15 4. East of I-15 Dates 11/15, 11/17,11/18 11/2, 11/3, 11/4, and 11/8 11/2, 11/3, 11/4, and 11/8 11/2, 11/3, 11/4, and 11/8 Hour Start End 12:00 AM 1.00 AM 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 1,295 949 1.0% 0.7% 1,017 1,065 { 0.8% 0.9 % 1,191 946 1.0% 0.8% 906 687 0.8% 0.6% 2:00 AM 3.00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM _ 0.9% 1.5% 0.9% 2.1% _ 1,019_ 1,902 _0.9% _ 1.6% _ 695_ 1,380 _0.6% _ 1.3% 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 5,762 4.4% 5,777 4.8% 5,915 5.1% 4,335 4.0% 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7 00 AM 8.00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8 00 AM 9.00 AM 10:00 AM 11.00 AM 9,328 9,892. 7.0% 7.5 % 8,533 _ _ 7. I", 7, 6.1 % 6,322 4,076 5.4% 3.5% 6,258 4,756 5.8% 4.4% 10,375 9,469 8,400 r"rrir�ir�rrrr 7,193 7.8 % 7.1 % 7,640 6.4% 7,811 6.5 % ° 4,249 5,023 6,098 3.6 % 4.3% 5.2% 5,026 5,524 5,658 4.7 % 5.2% 5.3% _ 5.2% 5.5° 5.6% 5.4% 6,852 7,005 6.0 % 6.0 % 5,604 _ 5,937 11:00 AM 12.00 PM 12:00 PM 1.00 PM 6,536 6,195 6,326 5.3 % 6,966 5,892 4.9% 6,891 5.9% 6,035 1.00PM 2.00PM 6,285 4.7% 5,997 5.0% 6,873 5.9% 5,899 5.5% 2.00 PM 3:00 PM 6,306 4.8% 6,359 i 5.3% 7,157 iiiiiii 61 % 6.3% 6.3 % 6.2% 6,500 6,642 6,539 6,722 ,y, 6.1% 6.2% 6.1 % 6.3 3.00 PM 4.00 PM 4. • 6,659 I 7,390 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 7,173 _5,870 4,147 5.4% 5.4% _ 6,899 5.8% 6,495 I 5.4% 7,405 7,201 5.00 PM 6:00 PM _ 6.00 PM 7:00 PM 4.4% 3.1% 5,313 3,896 t 4.4% 3.3% 6,508 4,891 5.6% 4.2% 6,203 4,745 5.8% 4.4% 7.00PM 8.00PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 1 10:00 PM 11:00PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM . 11:00 PM ; 12:00AM 3,259 _ 3,050 2,413 1,718 2.5% 3,098 2.6% 3,873 3.3% 3.1 % 2.3% 1.5% 3,761 3,425 2,408 1,537 3.5% 3.2% 2.2% 1.4% _ 2.3% 1.8% 1.3% 2,757 2,059 1,162 2.3% 1.7% I 1.0% 3,593 2,660 1,748 12:00AM 11:59PM 132,449 100.00% 119,791 I 100.00% 116,898 I 100.00% 107,178 100.00% 3.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-3 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91 (Eastbound) Eastbound 1. Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. East of SR-71 3. West of I-15 4. East of I-15 Dates 11/2, 11/3, 11/2, 11/3, 11/15, 11/16, 11/17 11/3, 11/4,11/8 11/4, and 11/8 11/4, and 11/8 Hour Start End 12:00AM 1:00AM 1,708 1.3% 1,400 1.1% 1,798 1.3% 1,334 1.3% 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 1,093 0.8% 1,001 0.8% 1,161 0.8% 824 0.8% 2.00 AM 3:00 AM 932 0.7% 944 0.8% 1,009 0.7% 679 0.6% 3:00AM 400AM ---- 933 ------------ 0.7% -------------- 1,092 -----Z;f5 ---- 0.9% -------------- 1,161 ------------- 0.8% -----757. - 697 ------------- 0.7% ------------- 4:OOAM SOOAM 1,310 1.0% 2,153 1.7% 1,830 1.3% 1,017 1.0°/ 5:00 AM 6.00 AM 2,829 2.2% 3,880 3.1 % 3,893 2.7% 2,170 2.0% 6.00 AM 7:00 AM 5,065 3.9% 5,319 4.3% 6,259 4.4% 4,361 4.1% 7:00AM 8:00AM 6,524 5.0% 6,183 5.0% 7,571 5.3% 6,108 5.8% 8:00 AM 9:00 AM .,659 5.1% 6,523 5.2° 7,458 5.2% 5,368 5.1% 9.00AM 10,00AM 5,952 4.5% 5,857 4.7% 7,440 5.2% 5,112 4.8% 10:00 AM 1100 AM 5,509 4.2 % 5,750 4.6% 7,204 5.0% 5,206 4.9 % 11:00AM 12:00PM 5,671 5,877 4.7% 7,342 5.1% 5,412 5.1% 12:00 PM 1:00 PM _ ____ 6,152� _____4.3% ____ 4.7% 6,659 W 5.3% 7,783 5.4% 5,806 5.5% 1:00 PM _ 2:00 PM 6,980 5.3% 7,373 5.9% 8,370 5.9% 6,172 5.8% 2'00PM 3:00PM 7,512 6.0% 9,084 6.4% 6,830 6.5% 3.00 PM 4:00 PM : I : 6.5% 9,300 6.5% 7,121 6.7% 4.00PM 500PM 9,351 7.1% 8,101 6.5% 8,895 6.2% 6,988 6.6% 1111 500 PM 6:OO PM 9,332 7.1 % 8,322 6.7 % 762 6.1 % 7,020 6.6% 6.00 PM 7.00 PM 9,720 7.4% 8,315 [ 6.7% ,662 6.1% 7,021 6.6% 7.00 PM 8.00 PM _ MMERITT 6.3%41111 8,540 6.0% 6,134 5.8% 8.00PM _ 9.00PM 6,608 5.0% 4.5% 6,505 4.6% 4,906 4.6% 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 5,493 4.2% _5,646 5,034 a 4.0% 5,612 3.9% 4,182 4.0% 10:00 PM 11.00 PM 4,381 3.3% 3,555 2.9% 4,237 3.0% 3,288 3.1 % 11:OO PM 12:00 AM 2,745 2.1% 2,192 1.8% 2,989 2.1% 2,095 2.0% 12:00AM 11:59PM 131,107 100.00% 124,556 100.00% 142,865 100.00% 105,850 I 100.00% 3.5 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-3 Profile of Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91(Westbound) 1. SR-91 Westbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Westbound East of SR-71 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% J 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 3. SR-91 Westbound West of I-15 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 4. SR-91 Westbound East of I-15 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM Figure 3-4 Profile of Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-91 (Eastbound) 1. SR-91 Eastbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 3. SR-91 Eastbound West of I-15 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 2. SR-91 Eastbound East of SR-71 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 4. SR-91 Eastbound East of I-15 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM 3.6 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.1.1.3 Friday and Weekend Traffic Volumes On Friday, the overall traffic volume on SR-91 is higher than on the average weekday. In the eastbound direction, traffic volumes are higher in the midday time period, approximately from 9AM to 2PM, and in the late evening, after 7PM. While the overall daily volumes on Friday are higher than during a typical weekday, the maximum hourly volumes recorded on Friday are similar to the volumes recorded on typical weekdays. In the westbound direction, traffic volumes are similar in the morning period, but become higher for the remainder of the day. Saturday volumes recorded on SR-91 are heavier than the volumes recorded during the week, but the traffic is more evenly distributed throughout the day. As is typical for weekend traffic, the profile of traffic on Saturday does not show a large morning peak like found during the workweek. In the westbound direction, the peak Saturday volumes on the western end of the highway corridor remain well below the highest volumes recorded westbound during the morning peak period. In the eastbound direction, the maximum hourly volumes recorded on Saturday are similar to the maximum volumes recorded during the week. Sunday volumes on SR-91 follow a similar profile as Saturday volumes, with the daily totals being approximately 18 percent lower in the eastbound direction and 9 percent lower in the westbound direction. At the four count locations on SR-91, Sunday traffic volumes were generally much lower than Saturday volumes prior to 10 AM. For the remainder of the day, eastbound volumes remained approximately 10 — 20 percent lower on Sunday than on Saturday. Westbound volumes however reached similar levels on Sunday afternoons as they reached on Saturday afternoons. Figure 3-5 through Figure 3-8 show the traffic volumes at the four Wavetronix count locations by day of week. Figure 3-5 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, Between SR-241 and SR-71 Westbound Eastbound 12,000 10,000 y 8,000 E 0 > 6,000 ~ 4,000 2,000 0 i i i 2 2 a a a a a i i a a 2 a 2 a a a i a 0 0 •N-I 0 0 N 0 0 V Monday -Thursday 0 0 0 o co 0 0 O 0 0 N 0 0 V 0 0 Hour Start Friday - Saturday 0 0 W 0 0 O Sunday Traffic Volume 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 ,T;isoN(' , J - •, / a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 N 0 0 a Monday -Thursday 0 0 b 0 0 0 0 O N rl Hour Start 0 0 N O 0 V 0 0 Friday - Saturday 0 o W 0 0 O .Ni Sunday 3.7 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-6 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of SR-71 Westbound Eastbound Traffic Volume 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 • Q aaadddaQ Q Q Q Q 0 o o o 0 0 o O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o 0 N N O l0 oo O N 4 1p oo O N Hour Start - Monday -Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Traffic Volume 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 a a a a a a a a a a a 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N V lD co O N V to oo O N Hour Start Monday -Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Figure 3-7 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, West of 1-15 Westbound Eastbound 12,000 10,000 8,000 E 0 > 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Y • `• • a a a a a a a a a a d a 0 0 N 0 C - Monday -Thursday 0 0 W 0 O 0 Hour Start 0 N 0 V 0 0 07 0 o q Friday Saturday Sunday Traffic Volume 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 I\ Q 0 i i i Q Q Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 4 O o0 O Monday -Thursday 2 2 Q Hour Start 2 2 o o o o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O . W O N a a Q Friday - Saturday Sunday 3.8 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-8 Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of I-15 Westbound Eastbound 12,000 10,000 m 8,000 E > 6,000 ~ 4,000 2,000 0 a • a a a a a o o O O O o O 0 0 o O o r.i v io co 0 -Monday-Thursday a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 r v o of o Hour Start Friday Saturday Sunday 3.1.2 Major Intersecting Roadways Volumes Traffic Volume 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 a a a a a a a a a a d a 0 o o o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O .y N V . of O ▪ •,j1 r, V to co Hour Start Monday -Thursday a 0 O � Friday Saturday Sunday Two major roadways intersect with SR-91 in the study area, 1-15 and SR-71. Traffic on 1-15 follows a similar daily profile to traffic on SR-91, especially to the south of SR-91. Northbound traffic on 1-15 shows a similar pattern as westbound traffic on SR-91, and southbound traffic on 1-15 shares a daily pattern with eastbound traffic. In the northbound direction on 1-15, the typical weekday traffic is heavier south of SR-91, and overall vehicles exit 1-15 and join SR-91. The only time period when 1-15 northbound gains traffic from SR-91 is during the morning peak period from 5AM to 8AM. For the remainder of the day, and especially in the afternoon peak period, northbound traffic becomes lighter as the highway crosses SR-91. On 1-15 southbound, traffic peaks in the afternoon, with SR-91 adding traffic to the highway. In the heaviest hour of the afternoon, 4PM to 5PM, approximately 5,900 southbound vehicles were recorded north of SR-91 and approximately 6,900 were recorded south of SR-91. This pattern is fairly consistent throughout the day, and most prominent between 6PM and 10PM, when each hour, over 1,000 additional vehicles were recorded south of SR-91 than north of SR-91. Weekday traffic on 1-15 is summarized in Table 3-4 and Figure 3-9. On Friday, traffic is heavier on 1-15 than during the week, with the majority of the additional traffic during the midday and evening periods. On Saturday and Sunday, traffic is much lower on 1-15 to the north of SR-91, while to the south of SR-91, Saturday records a traffic volume higher than was recorded during the week. 3.9 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-4 Weekday Traffic Volumes on 1-15 Southbound Northbound South of SR-91 North of SR-91 South of SR-91 North of SR-91 Dates 11/15, 11/16, 11/17, 11/18 11/15, 11/16, 11/17, 11/18 11/15, 11/16, 11/17, 11/18 11/15, 11/16, 11/17, 11/18 Hour Start End 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 988 1.0% 774 1.0% 922 1.0% 695 0.8% 1:00 AM 2.00 AM 629 0.6% 500 0.6% 675 0.7% 502 0.6% 2:00 AM 3.00 AM 549 0.6% 488 0.6% 660 0.7% 462 0.6% 3:00 AM 4.00 AM 777 0.8% 743 0.9% 1,034 1.1% 609 0.7% 4:00 AM 500 AM _ 1,508 1.5% _ 1,746 2.2% 2,978 3.1% 1,441 1.7% 5:00AM 600AM 2,774 2.8% 3,159 3.9% 4,175 4.4% 4,232 5.1% 6:00 AM 7 00 AM-_ 3,953 4.1 % 3,243 4.0 % 4,753 5.0% 5,540 6.6% 7:00 AM 8.00 AM 5,312 5.4% 4,424 5.5% 6,040 6.3 % 6,261 7.5% 8:00 AM 9 00 AM 5,258 5.4% 4,507 5.6% 5,540 5.8 % 5,247 6.3% 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 4,808 4.9% 4,196 5.2% 5,128 5.4% 4,885 5.8% 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 4,783 4.9% 4,046 5.1% 5,102 5.3% 4,664 5.6% 11:00 AM 1200 PM 5,033 5.2% 3,994 5.0% 5,210 5.4% 4,657 5.6% 12:00 PM 100 PM 5,308 5.4% 5,428 5.7% 4,488 5.4% 1:00 PM 200 PM S,i - . A 4,623 5.8% 5,376 5.6% 4,536 5.4% 200 PM 300 PM in 6,367 6.5% 1' 6.6% ..1% 4,803 5.7% ___ 3:00 PM 4 400 PM 6,667 6.8 % 5,806 7.3 , 6,412 6.7% 4,937 5.9% 4.00_PM 500 PM 6,887 7.1 % 5,916 7.4% 6,588 6.9% 5,074 6.1 %0 S:OOPM 600PM li.w. 6,368 • 5,591 7.0% 6,228 6.5% 5,067 6.1 6:00 PM 700 PM 6 176 6.5% 5,027 6.3% 5,118 5.3% 4,286 5.1% 700 PM 800 PM 5.5% 3,460 4.3 % 3,751 3.9% 3,398 4.1% 800 PM 900 PM 4,365 4.5% 2,764 3.5% 2,995 3.1 % _ _ 2,711 _ 1 3.2% 900 PM 1000 PM 3,688 3.8% 2,397 3.00/ 2,637 2.8% 2,422 2.9% 10:00 PM 1100 PM 2,581 2.6% ______________ 1,738 2.2% _______ 1,880 _ 2.0% 1,646 ®_ 2.0% 11.00 PM 12:00 AM 1,615 1.7% 1,145 1.4% 1230 1.3% 1,097 I 1.3% 12:00 AM 11:59 PM 97,529 100.0% 80,069 100.0% 95,705 100.0% 83,658 I 100.0% Figure 3-9 Weekday Traffic Volumes on 1-15, South and North of SR-91 I-15 Southbound I-15 Northbound 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 12:00 AM AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 -South of SR-91 -North of SR-91 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 12:00 AM \ AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 -South of SR-91 -North of SR-91 3.10 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 SR-71 leads north from SR-91, and shows a clear southbound peak in the morning and a northbound peak in the afternoon. As with SR-91 and 1-15, overall traffic volumes are highest on Friday. Saturday and Sunday show lower volumes than during the week. SR-71 weekday volumes are summarized in Table 3-5 and Figure 3-10. Table 3-5 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-71 Southbound Northbound South of SR-91 South of SR-91 Dates 11/15, 11/16, 11/17, 11/18 11/15, 11/16, 11/17, 11/18 Hour Start End 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 262 0.7% 275 0.8% 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 181 0.5% 207 0.6% 2:00 AM 300 AM 147 0.4% 206 0.6% 300 AM 4:00 AM 253 0.7% 321 0.9% 400 AM 500 AM 656 1.8% 823 2.3% 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 1,862 5.0% 1,156 3.3% 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 2,829 7.6% 1,275 3.6% 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 3,073 8.3% 1,791 5.1% 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 2,829 7.6% 1,275 3.6% 9:00 AM 1000 AM_ rr 1,867 5.3% 10:00 AM 1100 AM 1,719 4.6% 1,657 4.7% 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1,606 4.3% 1,759 5.0% 1200 PM 1:00 PM 1,700 4.6% 1,823 y� 5.2% 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 1,809 4.9% 1,926 r� 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 1,942 5.2% ,155 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 2,042 5.5% ,448 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 2,223 6.0% 2,869 8.1% 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 2,486. 6.7% 1098 8.8% 600 PM 7:00 PM 2,223 6.0% 2,869 8.1% 700 PM 8:00 PM 1,472 4.0% 1,875 5.3% 800 PM 9:00 PM 1,256 3.4% 1,277 3.6% 900 PM 10:00 PM 1,018 2.7% 1,114 3.2% 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 836 2.2% 751 2.1% 11:00 PM 1200 AM 493 1.3% 464 1.3% 12:00 AM 11:59 PM 37,197 100.0% 35,278 100.0% Figure 3-10 Weekday Traffic Volumes on SR-71 SR-71 Sou hbound - AM 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 SR-71 Northbound 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 12:00 AM AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 3.11 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.1.3 PEMS Traffic Counts To verify the traffic volumes obtained by the Wavetronix traffic counters, and obtain traffic volumes for the ramps leading to and from SR-91, traffic data were downloaded from the Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS). PeMS is a basic system management tool that was jointly developed by Caltrans and the Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways at the University of California, Berkeley. PeMS provides historical and real-time traffic data from a consolidated database of information collected via Caltrans loop detectors in metropolitan areas of California. Traffic volume and speed data were obtained from the PeMS databases for the vehicle detector stations in the project study area for October and November. PeMS volumes at two locations nearby the Wavetronix count locations were obtained for an average Tuesday — Thursday in November 2010 and March 2011 to verify the Wavetronix data. These data are plotted in Figure 3-11 to Figure 3-14. As can be seen in the figures, the overall traffic volumes remained fairly constant when measured by the two sources, and from month to month. Figure 3-11 Westbound Wavetronix and PeMS Data at Wavetronix Location 2 Traffic Volume 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 �� Q a 3 3 3 ¢ d a a a a a 0 o o ~ Hour Start November 2010 Wavetronix -March 2011 PEMS -November 2010 PEMS 0 N 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 io ao 0 N 0 V 0 o co 0 0 0 ercentage of Daily Traffic 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0 % 1\6°\\ Q o clog ¢ o R ¢ ¢ o o o o o Q o O a o o a a o o 0 0 a o 0 a a . o o 0 0 0 CO O N N Hour Start V c0 0 November 2010 Wavetronix-March 2011 PEMS-November 2010 PEMS 3.12 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-12 Westbound Wavetronix and PeMS data at Wavetronix Location 3 8,000 7,000 6,000 E 5,000 0 > 4,000 F 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2 2 2 2 2 i a 2 2 2 2 a i Q ¢ a a Q Q a a d a Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 O 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 O 9 ti N a e CO 0 N N a . Co 0 N Hour Start November 2010 Wavetronix -March 2011 PEMS -November 2010 PEMS Percentage of Daily Traffic 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% a i a a Q a a a a CL a a o O o o o o o o o o o 9 9 9 0 9 9 0 0 0 9 9 V 10 00 O N V Co O Hour Start November 2010 Wavetronix -March 2011 PEMS - November 2010 PEMS a 0 eN-I a 0 Figure 3-13 Eastbound Wavetronix and PeMS Data at Wavetronix Location 2 Traffic Volume 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 �\ i 2 Q a O 0 0 0 2 2 i ¢ a ¢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 a 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 o o c O c N V U] CO O N V D CO O Hour Start �November 2010Wavetronix March2011PEMS •.November2010PEMS Percentage of Daily Traffic 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Q¢Q4Q aaaaaiaG s o o o 0 o o o o o o o o 0 9 9 9 9 9 O o 9 9 9 9 0 9 N N V b CO O N N V . CO O N ~ Hour Start November 2010 Wavetronix-March 2011 PEMS-November 2010 PE MS 3.13 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-14 Eastbound Wavetronix and PeMS Data at Wavetronix Location 3 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 r / r . 0, �: -' o o o o 0 0 0 0 v ,n ro o Hour Start 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 November 2010 Wavetronix-March 2011 PEMS November 2010 PEMS Percentage of Daily Traffic 10.0% 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% 2 2 2 2 2 2 a c ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ a o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • ry c o co o ry ry Hour Start d a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 ✓ �o CO a 2 0 0 0 0 o N November 2010 Wavetronix -March 2011 PEMS -November 2010 PEMS In addition to providing mainline traffic volumes, the PeMS data provided hourly volumes for many of the on and off ramps connecting to SR-91. 3.1.4 OCTA Transaction Data Traffic count data from the Orange County Transportation Authority were also available to Stantec for the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County, just west of the study area. These data provide toll road usage data for a comparable facility. Additionally, since there are no entrance or exit points between the end of the Orange County toll lanes and the count conducted for this project between SR-241 and SR-71, it is possible to compare the data from the two sources. In the toll lanes in Orange County, HOV-3+ are allowed to travel paying a reduced toll. As shown in Table 3-6 HOV-3+ traffic volumes peak at close to 600 vehicles per hour in both the AM and PM time peak periods. This represents about 6% of the total traffic in the corridor during those hours. Since there are no entrances or exits from the SR-91 toll lanes other than at its endpoints, the HOV-3+ volume on the roadway may be higher, with some high occupancy vehicles exiting prior to the terminus of the toll lanes and unable to use them. These HOV-3+ data are similar to the conditions in the proposed toll lanes in Riverside County, where vehicles with 3 or more occupants will also be allowed to ride for free. The OCTA transaction data also provides the traffic volume using the toll lanes. As shown in Table 3-6, and in Figure 3-15 and Figure 3-16 the toll traffic is highest during the morning and afternoon peak periods. In both directions, toll traffic appears largest when more than 6,000 vehicles per hour are using the corridor. As can be seen, traffic in the general purpose lanes reaches a limit during the peak periods while tolled and HOV traffic continues to grow. 3.14 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-6 Total Traffic, HOV Traffic, and Toll Lane Traffic at Eastern End of OCTA Toll Lanes (Average Weekday) Eastbound Westbound I Start End Total Traffic 1 HOV Toll HOT Traffic Total Traffic HOV Toll HOT Traffic 12:00 AM 1:00 1,708 10 31 41 1,295 3 9 12 1:00 AM 2:00 1,093 5 10 15 949 1 4 5 2:00 AM 3:00 3 6 10 1,128 2 5 7 _ 3:00 AM 4:00 _932 933 2 4 W_WW 5 1,978 24 24 48 4:00 AM 5:00 1,310 1 2 15 18 5,762 222 312 534 5:00 AM 6:00 2,829 17 76 93 9,328 509 1,247 1,756 6:00 AM 7:00 5,065 29 170 199 9,892 600 1,778 2,378 _ 7:00 AM 8:00 6,524 I 27 303 330 10,375 493 1,842 2,335 8:00 AM 9:00 6,659 36 329 365 9,469 223 1,633 1,855 9:00 AM __ 10:00 5,952 _ I 37 313 350 8,400 187 10:00 AM 11:00 _ 5,509 I 34 334 367 7,193 133 11:00 AM 12:00 5,671 e 1- 47 415 462 6,536 90 612 702 _ 12:00 PM 13:00 6,152 j 61 h 624 6,195 t 93 508 601 1:00 PM 14:00 6,980 823 938 6,285 83 486 569 2:00 PM 15:00 8,322 229 1,477 1,705 6,306 88 503 591 3:00 PM 16:00 8,89791 2,25. 2,74 6,554 111 564 675 4:00 PM _ 17:00 9,351 510 2,430 2,939 7,173 1 119 626 746 5:00 PM 18:00 9,332 497 2,437 2,934 7,174 126 585 712 6:00 PM 19:00 9,720 588 2,360 2,948 5,870 82 394 476 7:00 PM 20:00 8,945 361 4,147 I 51 159 209 8:00 PM 21:00 TV 212 lit 9 928 W 3,259 26 108 133 9:00 PM 22:00 5,493 167 407 574 3,050 20 76 96 10:00 PM 23:00 4,381 I 95 226 321 2,413 12 38 50 11:00 PM 0:00 2,745 j 34 80 114 1,718 6 15 20 12:00 AM 24:00 131,107 j 3,606 17,262 20,868 132,449 3,304 13,610 16,914 3.15 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-15 Westbound Weekday OCTA HOV and Toll Volumes and Wavetronix Total Volume 12,000 10,000 cu 8,000 1= > 6,000 u m L ~ 4,000 2,000 0 J a • a a a a a a a a a a a a a • a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 000000000000000000000000 N ci N M.. 4 .V. I... W 01 O • N M.. V.. ul0 .. W. al-O .. --� ci ci ci rl --I i--I HOV = Toll GP Traffic Total Traffic Figure 3-16 Eastbound Weekday OCTA HOV and Toll Volumes and Wavetronix Total Volume 12,000 10,000 w 8,000 1= 0 > 6,000 u L ~ 4,000 2,000 a • a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a d a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 0 000000000000000000000000 Nci c-I N M. 4 f. .. Cr; Oci ci Nc-I N. M.u'1... .. co- cm- HOV O Toll O GP Traffic Total Traffic 3.16 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.1.5 HOV Data At present, in Riverside County, high occupancy vehicles with two or more occupants (HOV-2+) are allowed to use an HOV lane on SR-91. The Wavetronix traffic counts provided traffic data on a lane -by -lane basis, making it possible to break out the percentage of traffic using the HOV lane. Since Riverside County allows vehicles with only two occupants to use the HOV lane, and there are more entry and exit points from the lane than the Orange County Express lanes, the HOV volumes are higher in Riverside County than in Orange County. Table 3-7 shows the HOV volumes at the three Wavetronix count locations on SR-91. As shown in the table and in Figure 3-17 through Figure 3-19, the HOV-2+ volume rises to over 1,000 vehicles per hour in the morning and afternoon peak periods. In the morning, almost a quarter of the traffic in the 6AM hour is made up of HOV vehicles at the count station to the west of I-15. The HOV traffic during the 6AM and 7AM hours makes up such a large percentage of the total traffic during those hours because the traffic in the general purpose lanes drops greatly, likely due conditions breaking down due to congestion. In the morning, the hour with the highest volume of HOV traffic is 5AM to 6AM. In the afternoon, the highest HOV volumes are in the 4PM hour. Just east of SR-71, over 17% of the total traffic is HOV vehicles between 3PM and 7PM. On Friday and Saturday, and Sunday, HOV traffic on SR-91 was heavier than during the week. On Sunday, HOV traffic westbound remained high, while eastbound HOV traffic was lower. HOV Volumes by day of week are shown in Figure 3-20 through Figure 3-22. Table 3-7 Average Weekday HOV Volumes and Percent of Total Volume Eastbound Westbound 2. East of SR-71 3. West ofI-15 4.East of1-15 2. East of SR-71 3. West ofI-15 4. East ofI-15 Start End HOV HOV % HOV HOV % HOV HOV % HOV I HOV % HOV I HOV % HOV HOV °A 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 32 2.29% 100 5.58 % 34 2.52% 41 4.06% 69 5.75 % 45 4.94% 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 19 1.92 % 81 7.01 % 13 1.58 % 45 4.18 % 56 5.87% 36 5.17% 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 25 m s 2.62% 81 7.99% _ 6 0.83% 49 4.30% m___mm® 62 6.06% m 42 6.01% 3:00 AM 4:00 AM__ 22 1.97% 88 7.61 % 5 _ 206 --- 7.99% 109 5.72% _ _ 84 --- 6.07% 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 52 _ 2.39./0 88 4.83% 10 1.02% 635 10.99% 512 8.66% 483 11.13% 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 145 3.72% 156 4.02% 51 2.35% 1,325 15.52° 1,166 1,233 19.71 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 273 5.12% 287 4.59% 189 4.34% 1,215 16.70% 979 _18.44% _ 24.02% 885 18.60% 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 306 4.95% 404 5.33% 335 5.48% 1,278 16.73% 20.92". 883 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 445 6.81% 380 5.09% 297 5.53% 1 904 18.00% 1,133 20.51% 9:00 AM 10.00 AM 357 6.09% 421 5.66% Jk_ 34111. 6.83 % 12.43% 982 10:00 AM 11.00 AM 374 6.50% 409 5.68% 282 5.41% 863 12.59% 711 10. 15% 900 16.14 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 412 7.01% 430 5.86% 303 5.60% 732 11.57% 620 8.90% 789 13.29% 12400 PM 1:00 PM 568 8.52% 470 6.04% 336 5.79% 648 10.99% 579 8.40% 751 12.44% 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 860 11.66% 629 7.52%----��491------7.95%� _ 669 11.16%--- 611 8.88% 834 14.14% 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 1,173 , 15.62% 871 9.58 4 707 10.36% 698 10.97% 620 8.66% 856 13.17% 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 1,431 17.76% 1,052 11.31% 922(� 766 11.50% 674 9.12% 1®' 13.50% 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 1,434 17.70% 1,163 13.07% 1,012 14.48% _ 764 11.07% 647 8.73% 849 12.98% 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 1,440 17.31% 1,141 13.03% 946 13.48% 663 -- 10.20%W 646 8.98% se 13.70% 6i)0 PM 7:00 PM 1,484 17.84% 996 IL50% 923 13.15% 556 10.47%592 9.10% 791 12.74% 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 1,073 13.74% 885 10.36% 777 12.66% 335 8.59% 361 7.37% 394_ 8 8.30% 8:00 PM _ 9:00 PM 483 1 8.55% 496 7.62% 551 11.24% 231 7.45% 256 6.61% 250 6.64% 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 380 7.54% 389 6.93 % 315 7.53% 18_2 6.61% 6.72% 208 6.06_% 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 181 5.09% 307 7.25% 207 -�6.31 % _ _ �120� W _ _ 5_82% _ _ _2_42_ 178 _ - 6.69% _ 143 _ _ 5.94%� 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 71 3.25 % 198 6.63 % 91 4.36% 61 5.25 % 123 7.02% 86 5.58% 12:00 AM 11:59 PM 13,036 10.5% 11,524 8.1% 9,152 8.6% i 14,208 11.9% 12,360 10.6% 14,470 13.5% 3.17 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-17 Average Weekday Traffic East of SR-71 Broken into HOV and GP Westbound Eastbound 12,000 10,000 8,000 E 0 > 6,000 ▪ 4,000 2,000 0 a a a a v c �WB HOV Hour Start MWB GP � WB Total 12,000 10,000 y 8,000 E > 6,000 4,000 - 2,000 0 a a a • a a EB HOV Hour Start D EB GP -EB Total Figure 3-18 Average Weekday Traffic West of 1-15 Broken into HOV and GP Westbound Eastbound 12,000 10,000 8,000 E > 6,000 �o 4,000 2,000 0 a a a • a a a d a a a a a v 8 • 8EEEEEEEE Hour Start DEB HOV OEB GP ..EB Total Figure 3-19 Average Weekday Traffic East of 1-15 Broken into HOV and GP Westbound Eastbound 12,000 10,000 „ 8,000 E > 6,000 ▪ 4,000 2,000 0 a a a a ¢ a n n a a n a 4 ▪ 4 DJ 2 �WB HOV Hour Start O WB GP . WB Total E 12,000 10,000 8,000 > 6,000 4,000 2,000 7t 2 a a EB HOV 2 2 2 i a a a a Hour Start O EB GP -EB Total 3.18 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-20 HOV Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of SR-71 Westbound Eastbound 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 E 1,200 0 > 1,000 rt 800 P 600 400 200 0 S 2 2 a a v ,o - Monday -Thursday a Hour Start Friday - Saturday d a a 3 Sunday 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 E 1,200 > 1,000 m 800 ~ 600 400 200 0 2 a a '• b 2 a Monday Thursday 2 a 2 F. 4 a a i Hour Start Friday - Saturday a a Sunday Figure 3-21 HOV Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, West of 1-15 Westbound Eastbound 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 E 1,200 > 1,000 m 800 ti 600 400 200 oa • I1 2 2 2 2 a a a a - Monday -Thursday a a d F. a a a a Q v m Hour Start Friday - Saturday Sunday 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 E 1,200 > 1,000 m 800 600 400 200 0 Monday -Thursday • ■ • 2 2 a a a i i a atc m ., r Hour Start Friday - Saturday F. d Sunday Figure 3-22 HOV Traffic Volumes on SR-91 by Day of Week, East of 1-15 Westbound Eastbound 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 E 1,200 0 > 1,000 tv 800 P 600 400 200 0 J" J $a .i .i a •i a •i a F F. F. F. F. F. F. - Monday -Thursday Hour Start Friday - Saturday Sunday 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 E 1,200 0 > 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 a a a a a4,4 Monday -Thursday � f � a a Hour Start Friday - Saturday Sunday 3.19 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.1.6 Balanced Flow Network A detailed and consistent set of traffic volumes was needed for model validation and to be used for the basis for post processing model volumes for mainline freeway and for on and off ramps. To provide this consistent set of traffic volumes from the available traffic counts, it was necessary to balance (or reconcile) the SR-91 mainline and ramp counts. This required making minor adjustments to the measured counts at some or all count locations. The two main reasons that the raw count data do not balance are: (1) The count data were collected on different count dates and represent an average over multiple days. There is considerable day to day variation in traffic volumes. (2) No data collection technology is 100% completely error free. The induction loops imbedded in the freeway and ramp lanes and the Wavetronix radar units, sometimes underestimate or overestimate traffic volumes by some minor fraction of the total traffic volume. The PeMS mainline and ramp counts and the Wavetronix counts were the main sources for this balancing algorithm. The main goal was to obtain a set of balanced volumes while minimizing the relative adjustment to the counts. In locations where count data were available from multiple sources, engineering judgment was used to select counts that were the most consistent with the counts obtained from neighboring upstream and downstream locations. The balanced network is shown in Figure 3-23. Of interest is the imbalance in daily eastbound versus westbound traffic volumes. While the western portion of the SR 91 corridor (west of Maple Street) shows even directional balance, the eastern portion of the corridor shows much higher eastbound than westbound volumes. This suggests that vehicles may be using local streets in Corona during the AM peak period to bypass congestion in the vicinity of the SR 91/1-15 interchange, instead accessing the SR 91 corridor via Maple Street or Lincoln Avenue. 3.20 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-23 Existing Balanced Network Green River Road SR--1 Auto Center Drive Maple Street Lincoln Ave nue 107,361 -.614 117,850 5,754 18,199 117,185 17,385 8,157 4,766 114,221 4.645 9,187 0,674 108,191 8,357 127,150 16,914 OCTA 20,868 Express Lanes 12,949 15,719 1,596 14,479 13,661 14,479 10,055 135,867 126,971 1 114,999 117,173 119,014 8,963 122,533 s,g76 SR-91 Riverside County 12.546 3,649 -.08 7,820 7,625 9,467 Balanced Volumes 0 600 6thStreet L3,456 =Volume in Mixing Area Main Street 1-Iz 1 ;19,539 ,!' 22,681 18,370 /89,874 � ' McKinley Street 20,510 15,140 / Pierce Street 77,412 1,234 =Ramp Volumes 56,789 =GP Lane Volumes Aven Gran( nd 25,354� v 15,311 Avenue 33,374.E , ^ 106,382 \ 10,123=HOVIane Volumes 9,977 107,361 8,172 / 113 66 i F-- ' 102,494 _ I. 10,974 14,479 , 10,055 _13.837 10,974 8,723 rillin 122,533 - ` 3,95( 124,509 'V v 90,457 9,920 �r 19,955 21,401 ` 16,650 / \ 6 ,77 12,576 76,544 4,502 11,346 29,763 ' 40,894." 3.21 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.1.7 Origin Destination Survey In order to verify the balanced flow network, an origin destination survey was conducted using BluFax detection devices to detect Bluetooth equipment in vehicles (Bluetooth is a wireless transmission standard commonly used between cellular telephones and hands free devices). Since Bluetooth transmissions can be uniquely identified, it was possible to track the movement of vehicles through the corridor with detection devices at strategic locations throughout the corridor. The Bluetooth detectors were located at the same locations as the Wavetronix detectors (See Figure 3-1) As can be seen in Figure 3-24 through Figure 3-26, the BluFax detection devices recorded very similar vehicle movements as are shown in the balanced network. Figure 3-24 Distribution of Traffic on SR-91 at SR-71 Interchange SR-91 EB to SR-71 Interchange SR-91 WB to SR-71 Interchange 100% m 90% c A L i 80% N 70% gL m 60% 0 a ¢a 50% 40% 0 30% m c 20% m i 10% 0% SR-91 EB to SR-91 NB SR-91 EB Across SR-71 ■ Bluefax ■ Balanced Network 100% a 90% c L i 8 0 % 11 c 70% c L ,y, 60% 0 a ¢a 60% m 40% `0 30% w m c 20% w a 10% 0% SR-91 WB to SR-71 NB SR-91 WB Across SR-71 ■ Bluefax ■ Balanced Network 3.22 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-25 Distribution of Traffic on SR-91 at 1-15 Interchange SR-91 EB to I-15 Interchange 100% ovo 90% c 80% v c 70% c L 60% 0 n a So% 40% 0 30% m c 20% a 10% 0% SR-91 EB to 1-15 NB SR-91 EB Across 1-15 SR-91 EB to 1-15 SB ■ Bluefax Balanced Network 100% m 90% Fs u � 80% c m - 70% c 60% G50% 40% O 30% v e co 20% a 10% 0% SR-91 WB to I-15 Interchange SR-91 W B to 1.15 SB SR-91 W B Across 1-15 SR-91 WB to 1-15 NB ■ Bluefax Balanced Network Figure 3-26 Distribution of Traffic Entering SR-91 SR-71 SB to SR-91 To SR-91 Westbound, West of I-15 100% 90% m 80% o' ▪ 70% c 60% • 50% m 40% m `w 30% w a 20% 10% 0% l SR-71 SB to SR-91 EB SR-71 SB to SR-91 WB ■ Bluefax ■ Balanced Network 100% .i 90% 6 - 80% 3 3 70% O1 60% z 0 50% z 40% a 30% m c 20% v d 10% 0% 1-15 NB to SR-91 WB SR-91 WB Across 1-15 1-15 SB to SR-91 WB ■ Bluefax Balanced Network 3.23 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.2 VEHICLE SPEEDS Vehicle speeds in the study area were obtained using three methods. First, at the 4 Wavetronix locations on SR-91 and the 3 locations on intersecting routes, speeds were collected at fifteen minute increments throughout the course of a week. Second, a set of detection devices, called "BluFax," were installed to monitor Bluetooth transmissions in the area. Third, speed data were available from the Caltrans PeMS system. 3.2.1 Wavetronix Speed Data The Wavetronix radar counts provided spot speed data for 15-minute increments. These data correspond to the volume data also recorded by the Wavetronix sensors. As shown in Figure 3-27 and Figure 3-28 during the average weekday, speeds on SR-91 deteriorated in the morning in the westbound direction and in the afternoon in the eastbound direction. In the morning, the most severe drop in speeds was at the Wavetronix location to the west of 1-15, where speeds fell below 20 mph from 6AM to 9AM. Congestion at this location was recorded for the majority of the day, with average speeds falling below 60 mph in the 4AM hour and remaining below 60 mph until the 6PM hour. At the other westbound locations, congestion was mainly limited to the morning peak period. At the count location west of SR-71, speeds fell below 35 mph in the 6AM and 7AM hours. East of SR-71 speeds were reduced in the morning time periods, however, severe congestion was not observed. In the eastbound direction on SR-91, on an average weekday, speeds fell below 40 mph between 2PM and 7PM at the location to the east of SR-71. Slow speeds were also recorded at the location between SR-241 and SR-71 in the eastbound direction. Further east, a drop in speeds was recorded in the afternoon; however the duration of the congestion was less severe On Friday, speeds recorded at the Wavetronix stations showed slightly less westbound congestion in the morning time periods. In the eastbound direction, congestion was generally more severe on the Friday when the Wavetronix counts were conducted. Eastbound on Friday, speeds dropped earlier in the day, fell lower and remained slow later in the evening than on the weekdays where the counts were conducted (see Figure 3-29 and Figure 3-30). On Saturday, westbound speeds were generally fast, with some congestion recorded between 1-15 and SR-71 in the afternoon hours. Eastbound on Saturday, speeds followed a similar pattern as during an average weekday afternoon, with congestion mainly concentrated between 2 PM and 7PM. Minimal congestion was recorded on Sunday, with a small drop in westbound speeds at the count location just west of 1-15 (see Figure 3-31 through Figure 3-34). 3.24 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-27 Weekday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 1. SR-91 Westbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Westbound East of SR-71 80 9 m 70 at 60 a' 50 40 a 30 a 20 1, 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - Genera l Purpose Speed _„\ 12,000 a 10,500 £ 0 9,000 > m 7,500 it d 6,000 4,500 a 3,000 `u 1,500 y 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic 80 9 m 70 H it 60 C 50 d 40 n30 a 20 y 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM • General Purpose Speed 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic 12,000 d 10,500 3 d a a m w l7 3. SR-91 Westbound West of I-15 80 a y 70 60 50 d 3 40 a 30 5 a 20 v 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - General Purpose Speed 12,000 10,500 £ 0 9,000 ±>FF 7,500 F d 6,000 4,500 a 3,000 `w 1,500 y 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic 4. SR-91 Westbound East of I-15 80 a °1 a 70 m 60 50 40 a 30 a 20 `w � 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - General Purpose Speed 12,000 10,500 0 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic a a' Figure 3-28 Weekday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Eastbound) 1. SR-91 Eastbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Eastbound East of SR-71 80 v w 70 N g 60 C 50 u 40 I30 a 20 `w y 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - General Purpose Speed 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12,000 10,500 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic 3. SR-91 Eastbound West of I-15 80 9 0 70 I? 60 R 50 v 40 a 30 5 a 20 v 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - General Purpose Speed 12,000 10,500 O 9,000 > 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic m a a `w r� 80 a 70 A 60 50 d d 40 a 30 a 20 d u 10 0 12:00 AM 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic 12,000 10,500 £ i w 0 n a' v 4. SR-91 Eastbound East of I-15 80 9 n 70 m 60 C 50 m ▪ 40 a 30 a' ▪ 20 y 10 l7 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM General Purpose Speed 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic 12,000 10,500 £ O > 0 n a d 3.25 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-29 Friday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 1. SR-91 Westbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Westbound East of SR-71 80 a 0 70 60 50 d 40 N °o. 30 a 20 m 10 0 • ♦ • • • • • 12,000 10,500 9,000 �>F 7,500 F w 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM "- General Purpose Speed "- General Purpose Traffic n o' `w {7 80 w 70 to 60 4 50 w 3 40 130 u _`20 w � 10 0 .. -.• . •♦ • • It.. •• i• • • • .• • • • • • • 1 �, ' 1. • • • • •• • I• • • 12,000 10,500 E 0 9,000 7,500 it d 6,000 4,500 °o a 3,000 _ 1,500 y l7 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM "' General Purpose Speed "' General Purpose Traffic 3. SR-91 Westbound West of 1-15 4. SR-91 Westbound East of 1-15 80 9 2 70 N m 60 R 50 40 0 30 a 20 10 0 • • • • • • • • _ .. • S. 0, •• • 1 • • •• \J- d .. • • • • •• •. • • • 12,000 N 10,500 3 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM --- General Purpose Speed "' General Purpose Traffic n w m w a a c 80 a E. 70 60 a 50 m 40 c. 30 0 20 c !7 10 0 0 • ,.• • 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM General Purpose Speed 12,000 10,500 E 7 9,000 7,500 H 6,000 4,500 °a a' 3,000 _ `w 1,500 y t7 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM "- General Purpose Traffic Figure 3-30 Friday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Eastbound) 1. SR-91 Eastbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Eastbound East of SR-71 80 • w 70 N m 60 a 50 40 n 30 a 20 y 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM "' General Purpose Speed - - - General Purpose Traffic • • h• • •• • •• • •..• • •• 12,000 w 10,500 O 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 n a c (7 80 a 0 70 tr. 60 a 50 40 °v 30 a 20 To 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - - - General Purpose Speed •• ••• ♦ • • 12,000 d 10,500 9,000 7,500 � d 6,000 4,500 a a 3,000 _ `w 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - - - General Purpose Traffic {7 3. SR-91 Eastbound West of I-15 4. SR-91 Eastbound East of I-15 80 a , 70 N to 60 50 m 5, 40 N o, 30 a 20 c y 10 0 • • • • • •. • ' J •. • • • • 12,000 d 10,500 O 9,000 7,500 it m 6,000 4,500 a 3,000 a c 1,500 y 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM General Purpose Speed "' General Purpose Traffic 80 9 w 70 N 160 50 w 3 40 N o, 30 , 20 y 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM . ; • • •`tr . • • • • 4:00 PM 12,000 N 10,500 9,000 7,500 H 6,000 4,500 °a 5 o. 3,000 T. c 1,500 y 8:00 PM 12:00 AM General Purpose Speed " - General Purpose Traffic 3.26 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-31 Saturday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 1. SR-91 Westbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Westbound East of SR-71 80 v 1 70 m 60 Q 50 40 N °o. 30 a 20 c 10 12,000 10,500 0 9,000 t 7,500 g c 6,000 �^ 4,500 0, 5 3,000 2 L 1,500 c l7 O 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic 3. SR-91 Westbound West of I-15 80 9 w 70 a it 60 R 50 m 40 N °a 30 n 20 110 1. f 12,000 10,500 9,000 7,500 a 6,000 4,500 E. 3,000 w 1,500 y t7 O 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic 80 a i 70 24 60 50 40 0 12,000 10,500 E 9,000 >° 7,500 m 6,000 m 4,500 0, 3 3,000 2 1,500 y 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic 4. SR-91 Westbound East of I-15 80 9 ., 70 m 60 3 50 A 40 N °o. 30 2 20 c 10 t� 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM f� 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12,000 10,500 0 9,000 7,500 g 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic a m Figure 3-32 Saturday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Eastbound) 1. SR-91 Eastbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Eastbound East of SR-71 80 a t 70 c m 60 ,1 So m 5 40 n 30 a 20 C y 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - General Purpose Speed 12,000 w 10,500 0 9,000 > 7,500 g w 6,000 4,500 $, 3,000 To d 1,500 y l7 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM -General Purpose Traffic 80 a i 70 m 60 C 50 w 40 d o, 30 3 2 20 c 10 12,000 u 10,500 E 9,000 7,500 a c 6,000 � w 4,500 g 3,000 d 1,500 y 0 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic 4:00 PM 3. SR-91 Eastbound West of I-15 80 a 70 n 60 G 50 40 0 30 2 20 w 10 12,000 a 10,500 m a a 9 3,000 2 1,500 y O 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Speed -General Purpose Traffic 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 4. SR-91 Eastbound East of I-15 80 a o. 70 '4 60 50 a 40 N n 30 a � 20 `w w 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM - General Purpose Speed V 12,000 10,500 9,000 u m 7,500 F 6,000 Li 4,500 g 3,000 2 1,500 y 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM -General Purpose Traffic 3.27 a _ 20 c 10 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Figure 3-33 Sunday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 1. SR-91 Westbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Westbound East of SR-71 80 a i 70 N 12,000 10,500 � 60 9,000 50 7,500 it y 'A40 6,000 0.30 4,500 a 3,000 4- 1,500 y 0 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - - General Purpose Speed - - - General Purpose Traffic 80 a y 70 N A 60 G 50 40 n30 n 20 m tl 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM General Purpose Speed 12,000 10,500 E O 9,000 > 7,500 it 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - - - General Purpose Traffic u a a' `w 3. SR-91 Westbound West of I-15 80 9 N 70 n 1, 60 50 d 5 40 a 30 5 e- 12,000 a 10,500 9,000 > 7,500 it 6,000 c � 4,500 a a 20 -�•3,000 a • ♦♦ `w y 10 • 1,500 y l7 0 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - - - General Purpose Speed - - - General Purpose Traffic • 4. SR-91 Westbound East of I-15 80 9 w 70 n.6 60 50 w 2 40 a 30 a _ 20 � 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM -' General Purpose Speed 12,000 W 10,500 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM General Purpose Traffic w 0 n a' c Figure 3-34 Sunday General Purpose Lane Speed and Volume (Westbound) 1. SR-91 Eastbound Between SR-241 and SR-71 2. SR-91 Eastbound East of SR-71 80 a 0 70 m 60 R 50 d 5 40 a 30 a , 20 y 10 0 12,000 10,500 0 9,000 > 7,500 it w 6,000 4,500 a a 3,000 T. 1,500 y 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - - - General Purpose Speed - - - General Purpose Traffic 80 4 L 70 n °1 60 50 w m 40 a 30 a _ 20 l7 • 12,000 10,500 E 0 9,000 > 7,500 d 6,000 9 4,500 a 3,000 a 1,500 y 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - - - General Purpose Speed - - - General Purpose Traffic 3. SR-91 Eastbound West of I-15 80 a a 70 N 60 m a So 40 o. 30 a 20 m y 10 l7 0 • 12,000 w 10,500 9,000 > 7,500 F 6,000 m � 4,500 a a 3,000 _ `w 1,500 � 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - ` - General Purpose Speed ` ` - General Purpose Traffic 4. SR-91 Eastbound East of I-15 80 a y 70 60 `w a' So 2 40 N a 30 u 20 `w y 10 0 12:00 AM 4:00 AM 8:00 AM 12:00 PM General Purpose Speed 12,000 a 10,500 O 9,000 7,500 6,000 4,500 3,000 1,500 0 4:00 PM 8:00 PM 12:00 AM - General Purpose Traffic t c S a 2 3.28 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 3.2.2 BluFax Speeds In order to supplement the spot speeds recorded by the Wavetronix detection devices, additional speed data were collected using detection devices called "BluFax" to detect Bluetooth equipment in vehicles (Bluetooth is a wireless transmission standard commonly used between cellular telephones and hands free devices). Since Bluetooth transmissions can be uniquely identified, it was possible to track the movement of vehicles through the corridor with detection devices at strategic locations throughout the corridor. BluFax detections provide the average travel time for vehicles between the detection stations, and provide a fuller picture of the travel speeds than the spot speeds recorded by the Wavetronix devices. On the weekday mornings, the BluFax speeds showed severe congestion through the interchange between 1-15 and SR-91. On SR-91 Westbound, speeds fell below 20 mph from the 5 AM hour to the 9 AM hour. Similarly slow speeds were recorded from 1-15 southbound to SR- 91 westbound, and the most severe congestion in the interchange was recorded on the ramp from 1-15 northbound to SR-91 westbound. Between 1-15 and the interchange with SR-71, speeds also became very congested in the morning peak period. Speeds were below 20 mph for three hours, from 6AM to 9AM. Moving to the western end of the study area, speeds became faster, with the average speed across the interchange with SR-91 staying above 25 mph for the entire day (see Table 3-8 and Figure 3-35). This level of westbound congestion is different than the SR 91 corridor in Orange County, where very little congestion occurs, even during the AM peak period. This suggests that the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes may offer greater time savings and therefore will generate increased traffic and revenue from the westbound Express Lanes compared to the Orange County 91 Express Lanes, where the eastbound traffic and revenue makes up the majority of the daily traffic and revenue. In the afternoon on weekdays, congestion was not recorded to be as severe as during the morning peak period; however, slow speeds were observed. The most severe congestion was observed at the SR-71 interchange in the, where vehicles traveling through the interchange on SR-91 averaged below 40 mph from 2PM to 8PM. East of this interchange, congestion was less severe, with speeds under 40 mph between 3PM and 7PM. At 1-15, the congestion begins to dissipate, and slow speeds under 40 mph were recorded for three hours of the day, from 4PM to 7PM (see Table 3-9 and Figure 3-36). While congestion exists in the eastbound direction, speeds in Riverside County are higher than those in Orange County. As noted above, this implies that the westbound Riverside County 91 Express Lanes may be as attractive as the eastbound Express Lanes, leading to more balanced directional traffic volumes compared to the existing 91 Express Lanes in Orange County where eastbound volumes are much higher. On Friday, as shown in Table 3-10, speeds recorded showed a similar pattern as the speeds recorded by the Wavetronix stations. Westbound speeds were slightly less congested in the morning, and similar throughout the remainder of the day. Eastbound speeds were slower in the afternoon, with congestion starting earlier and lasting later into the evening. 3.29 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 On weekends, as shown in Table 3-11 and Table 3-12, speeds recorded by the BluFax detection devices also showed a similar pattern as the speeds recorded by the Wavetronix stations. Westbound speeds were recorded with minimal congestion on Saturday and Sunday. Eastbound Saturday speeds were similar to eastbound weekday speeds, with congestion starting somewhat earlier. On Sunday eastbound speeds did not show congestion. Table 3-8 Average Weekday Speeds Recorded by BluFax (Westbound) Westbound Speeds I-15 hnerchange I-15 Int. to SR-71 Int. SR-71 Interchange I-15 SB I-15 NB I SR-9 1 WB SR-91 WB SR-71 SB to SR-91 WB to SR-91 WB to SR-71 NB to SR-91 WB 12D0 AM 1:00 AM 61.1 67.6 71.5 70.5 63.7 61.1 1:00 AM 2:00 AM l 58.: 6_6.0 70.3 70.4 64.5 FjW 53.7 2:00 AM _ 3:00 AM 57.2 61.5 66.0 69.7 69.9 65.4 56.4 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 58.0 62.1 66.7 70.0 69.9 62.1 59.1 4:00 AM _ 5:00 AM 56.9 42.0 66.0 69.3 71.2 62.8 I 61.7 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 20.1 10.0 16.9 111111111Miiiii 48.1 53.2 48.4 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8.2 6.0 7.9 13.9 30.9 42.5 33. 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 7.4 6.1 10.0 13.5 _ 29.4 43.6 31.3 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 8.7 r 6.4 10.0 17.7 44.8 49.3 40.6 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 17.3 11.3 11.4 "- rw32.4 - 60.7 56.8 56.7 10A0 AM 11:00 AM _ 48.5 19.6 40.3 67.2 59.6 60.7 56.6 iiir 31.8 65.2 65.5 60.6 62.3 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 70.2 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 58.3 46.3 66.5 65.8 70.9 60.7 62.9 1D0 PM 2:00 PM 56.7 511 64.7 66.0 70.8 61.3 61.9 200 PM 3:00 PM 59.2 _ 53.0 62.5 63.9 70.2 60.7 61.8 3A0 PM 4:00 PM9.2 50.8 66.7 69.2 _ 70.1 60.0�59.9 ' 4D0 PM 5:00 PM 8.7 48.4 66.4 67.8 70.2 60.0 59.0 500 PM 6:00 PM 58.1 49.5 65.5 68.4 68.8 59.0 59.5 6A0 PM 7:00 PM 58.0 54.6 65.5 68.6 69.8 ` 60.0 7:00 PM 8:00 PM _ 59.2 57.1 65.7 70.5 71.4 L 61.6 _60.5 62.9 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 60.8 58.9 66.1 71.5 71.8 64.2 62.1 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 60.2 59.9 67.2 72.0 71.7 62.9 6 62.9_ 10:00 PM I 11:00 PM 60.0 58.2 67.5 72.7 _ e �72.5 64.2 m 61.7 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 62.2 62.8 67.4 72.2 65.1 63.1 60.9 Figure 3-35 Average Westbound Weekday Speeds at 7AM 3.30 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-9 Average Weekday Speeds Recorded by BluFax (Eastbound) Eastbound Speeds SR-71 Interchange SR-71 Int. to 115 Int. I-15 Interchange SR-91 EB SR-71 SB SR-91 EB SR-91 EB to SR-71 NB to SR 91 EB to SR-91 EB I to I-15 SB to 1-15 EB 1200 AM 1:00 AM 63.0 63.6 64.9 67.0 72.0 L 64.2 65.8 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 60.7 m �- 61.6 a e 67.0 68.4 m 70.3 64.6 m m m 66.8 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 61.4 67.5 66.1 70.2 63.4 64.2 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 61.4 63.2 64.5 65.6 70.7 62.9 63.3 4:00 AM 5:00 AM - - �. 65.5 7_0.9_ 61.8 64.9 5:00 AM _ 6:00 AM 63.4 60.5 _66.6 68.1 67.6 73.2 60'5 A 65.2 6:00 AM _ 7:00 AM 59.0 55.1 68.0 67.9 73.3 59.7 i 59.9 7:00 AM I 8:00 AM 60.1 m 51.8 _ 68.2 65.6 m 71.2 55.3 I 6 63.6 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 59.1 50.4 64.6 66.4 73.2 57.5 57.0 9:00 AM _ 10:00 AM 59.2 53.3 67.6 66.8 73.6 ' 56.6 59.0 10:00 AM 11:00 AM v 58.7 58.1 67.2 65.1 72.0 55.7 58.7 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 59.5 56.5 66.7 64.4 70.1 1 54.5 56.9 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 58.0 57.3 66.1 63.5 70.1 54.7 57.0 100 PM _ 2:00 PM 58.1 46.4 61.9 60.5 69.7 54.8 57.8 200 PM 3:00 PM 40.2 37.4 43.5 66.0 49.6 53.3 300 PM 4:00 PM 1171- 12.2 32.0 42.2 50.6 5 54.7 400 PM 500 PM 10.1 27.5 25.6 49.1 I 5 51.8 500 PM 6:00 PM 11.3 30.1 21.7 46.3 50.4 600 PM 7:00 PM .. 12.4 .5 34.7 29.0 46.7 51.6 700 PM 8:00 PM 37.6 13.9� 35.6 41.8 54.6 51.8 55.3 800 PM 900 PM 53.0 -°1110Mr 56.' 56.0 69.2 8.7 900 PM 1000 PM 60.7 59.9 67.0 65.8 71.8 61.0 62.8 10:00 PM _ 1100 PM 61.0 60.8 _ 6_8.3 _ 67.2 _ 72.4_ 63.5 63.6_ 11:00PM _ 12:00 AM 60.5 61.0 ----67.2---- 68.0-----72.0-----63.7-- ----63.2 Figure 3-36 Average Eastbound Weekday Speeds at 5PM 3.31 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-10 Average Friday Speeds Recorded by BluFax Westbound Speeds Eastbound Speeds I-15 Interchange 115Int. to SR 71 In[. SR-71 Interchange SR-71 Interchange SR-71 Inn. to 115 Int.toSR-91 1-15 Interchange I-15 SB I-15 NB SR-91 WB SR-91 WB SR-71 SB SR-91 EB SR-71 SB I SR-9l EB SR-91 EB to SR-91 WB WB to SR-71 NB toSA-91 WB to SR-71 NB to SR-91 EB to SA-91 EB to I-15 SB to I-15 EB 1200 AM 100AM 100 AM 2:00 AM 62.1 63.1 62.3 66.2 64.8 71.1 70.9 70.7 68.8 60.6 61.3 58.2 58.2 46.. 60.6 62.8 I 70.7 62.7 70.4 74.3 73.1 63.5 67.0 63.0 65.0 20 AM 300 AM 61.1 68.1 71.6 70.3 69.5 55.8 70.0 61.4 69.0 65.4 70.0 60.5 66.5 300 AM 400 AM 58.2 589 14.8 59.5 44.8 ; I. 10.3 9 I 9 68.1 67.2 23.1 50.4 I fi� 0 70.9 70.2 16.5 55.0 18.4 27.2 67.1 70.3 71.5 62.9 62.4 1 65.4 64.2 58.9 62.7 62.7 62.7 65.3 58.6 55.0 59.6 55.6 66.8 I 66.7 68.6 68.1 68.8 67.5 65.2 68.4 72.5 69.6 _ 73.7 72.6 73.0 67.4 64 0 62.9 61.1 1 60.0 1 67.2 65.3 63.9 63.1 63.0 400 AM 50 AM 500 AM 600 AM _ 700 AM 800 AM _ 50.7 36.2 55.6 552 45.0 50.3 50.7 51.4 600 AM 66.8 700 AM _ 66.2 800 AM 9.00 AM 57.1 41.3 25.0 54.4 691 54.9 33.1 38.5 59.3 34.2 22.9 61.5 62.1 59.4 • 58.7 67.5 65.9 44.1 59.1 I 61.7 900 AM 10:00 AM 28.2 13.9 13.8 ..... qq.g 34.2 29.4 28.9 21.5 25.4 45.5 54.7 58.5 57.8 58.6 61.1 42.0 45.7 66.0 659 64.9 65.3 65.3 64.7 =3:= 1 64.5 i 67.2 1 67.7 1 66.8 I______------- 1 67.6 1 68.4 58.3 • 55.9 56.9 58.1 57.9 57.9 67.2 65.4 28.6 25.2 17,9 14.0 56.7 63.6 55.1 60.4 59.4 64.0 65.7 67.1 72.4 72.0 58.4 J 52.5� 47.3 i 47.6 48.9 47.247.2 ...y1 1_ 7.1 8.6 11.3 42.3 i 50.9 1 47.1 + 61.5 63.0 1 60.5 50.4 49.0 I 53.5 52.6 50.7 _ 26.1 31.7 T 32.2 52.5 54.3 1 51.8 1 63.7 64.7 100 AM__ 11.00 AM I100 AM 1200 PM 37.2 _ 5S0 i 59.2 57.7 57.1 56.3 56.6 55.3 55.3 57.2 b0.2 59.8 60.4 60.2 j 66.8 1 66.5 53.9 62.7 16.3 24.7 1200 PM 100 PM 68.8 fi95 59.7 59.5 61.2 56.7 56.9 12.4 1:00PM 2.0 PM _ 68.5 69.8 2:00PM 30 PM 67.3 68.4 59.1 57.0 59.6 59.3 , 59.2 r I 58.1 -4b_ 13.6 10.7 _ 9.2 8.4 16.2 8. 2 20.9 ..... 176...... 34.1 48.1 14.9 41.5 55.5 56.2 1 51.2 -----------------+ 60.4 59.5 I 67.4 16.9 16.5 20. 35.1 4.4 46.3 66.0 3:00PM 400 PM 67.7 65.8 66.7 68.4 7E0 71.8 72.4 72.9 fi8.9 67.7 4:00PM 50 PM 5:00 PM 600 PM 6:OOPM __ 70 PM 700PM 8.0 PM 68.8 71.3 71_3 58.6 62.1 62.9 60.9 63.2 56.6 59.9 60.4 1 62.1 1 61.7 8:OOPM 900 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 1000 PM _ 1100 PM _ 12:00 AM 1100 PM 73.8 72.6 64.6 I 65.9 60.8 57.7 1 67.9 66.8 Table 3-11 Average Saturday Speeds Recorded by BluFax Westbound Speeds Eastbound Speeds I-15 Interchange SR-71 Interchange SR-71 Interchange 1-15 Interchange 1-15 SB �®'. 1I 11 to SR-91 WB SR-71 SB SR-91 EB SR-91 EB SR ]I inn. to EB toSR-9l WB 71 Int5Inn. to SR-91 WB m SR71NB toSA-9l WB to SR-71 NB to SR-91 EBto I IS Int.SR-91 SA-91 EB to I-15 SB to 1-15 EB 1200 AM 100 AM 6191111311111174.2 72.2 58.9 t- 63.1 60.9 62.5 68.4 __ 69.0 ®� 66.6 I:00 AM 290 AM 60.2 62.6 68.5 75.0 73.0 63.0 1 59.1 58.- 62.5 1 70.6 70.0 71.1 ® 67.5 20 AM 300 AM 57.6 65.8 72.0 71.9 59.0 64.3 I 69.8 70.0 72.0 1111:5.1 68.3 30 AM 400 AM 60.0 60.3 68.0 60.7 1 68.8 71.3 73.7 71.6 71.1 63.7 I 59.3 65.4 61.6 60.4 68.3 68.9 66.9 74.0® 72.9 635 62.8400 63.8 AM_ 500 AM 62.3 67.6 50 AM 600 AM 56.5 60.5 64.6 71.9 71.4 62.6 1 61.3 63.2 60.3 1 68.7 67.9 -----74.2 ---- ------64.2 ---- 65.8 60 AM 7:00 AM 58.1 66.6 70.7 70.9 62.5 1 62.6 61.0 61.4 1 69.4 68.4 74.4 64.0 64.5 700 AM 8390 AM 62.3 _ _ 67.7 72.3 72.6 63.9 64.3 61.8 70.7 69.0 73.9 64.7 65.6 80 AM 900 AM 58.4 66.3 70.5 71.5 64.5 61.0 61.0 69.7 66.8 734 63.1 9:OO AM 10,00 AM 58.6 22.3 66_I 713 71.7 -61.7 626 65.0 r -j 59.4 59.4 1 67.8 61.0 723 53.6 56.1 1000 AM 11:00 AM 58.8 22.0 66.4 71.6 71.2 6,1,.,962.8 61.0 59.6 1 68.7 55.4 70.0 45.3 49.9 11O AM 1200 PM 58.8 21.4 66.3 69.7 70.4 t1 563.1 55.9 59.1 67.5 35.8 67.8 .1 46.9 12:00 PM 100 PM 58.2 I 21.6 � 69.9 70.4 53.6 I &I.0 56.3 � 62.0 30.2 67.4 .0 51.3 1:00 PM 200 PM _ 57.9 22.9 MOM 70.4 69.0 60.3 1 56.5 54.7 10.2 45.7 31.4 67.3 ..0 52.8 2:00PM 3.0 PM _ 58.8 20.8 65.7 674 'SW 57.4 , 53.0 34.0 8.8 28.3 32.0 634 48.3 52.7 3.00PM 400 PM 58.3 20.7 66.2 68.5 62.4 60.2 I, 522 28.6 8.6 23.7 31.0 68.1 50.3 56.1 4:00 PM SW PM 13.8 _ _____... .. .. ......__ _ 57.8 53.9 7.23.4 31.9 68.7 -" 57.1 5:00 PM 6.0 PM 41.2 41-2 48.5 13.8 48.5 43.8 43.8 58.3 58.3 57.1 i 53.9 13. 50.6 13.8 37.9 6:00 PM 700 PM 54.0 19.3 63.4 51.3 56.6 52.1 1 56.7 b36 42.7 10.5 9 37.3 65.2 53.0 7:00 PM 800 PM 53.8 37.8 61.6 61.9 62.6 59.1 1 59.2 57.7 21.3 61.1 66.4 48.2 52.5 8:00 PM 900 PM 59.0 56.2 I 66.9 71.3 70.9 62.6 63.6 60.4 59.8 68.0 66.4 71.6 59.8 I 62.3 9:00 PM 1000 PM _ 59.3 55.8 I 67.1 71.9 71.0 62.1 I 62.5 4, 59.0 57.1 67.5 65.1 _ 70.8 60.2 61.6 100 PM 1100 PM 60.3 54.8 1 67.4 71.6 70.6 62.6 63.0 60.4 59.7 66.3 64.6 70.2 61.0 61.9 110 PM 1200 AM 59.2 56.9 I 67.2 72.7 71.9 62.2 I 62.2 60.0 • 61.1 1 68.8 67.2 71.6 63.5 62.1 Table 3-12 Average Sunday Speeds Recorded by BluFax Westbolmd Speeds Eastbound Speeds 1-15 Interchange I ]Slut. to SR 7I Int' SR-71 Interchange SR-71 Interchange SR 71 Int. to I IS Int.to I-15 Interchange I -IS SB I I-15 NB I SA-9I WB SR-9l WB SR-71 SB SR-91 EB SR-71 SB SA-91 EB SR-91 EB to SR-91 WB to SR-91 WB to SR-71 NB to SR-91 WB to SR-71 NB to SR 91 EB SR-91 EB to 1-15 SB to I-15 EB 120 AM 10 AM 59. 67.7 74.3 72.4- 65.8 63.8 60.3 62.5 69.9 69.0 74.0 65.7 1 67.6 lO AM 20 AM 200 AM 300 AM 60.2 59.8 69.4 70.1 74.7 76.1 - - - 73.4 75.2 63.9 65.5 62.6 65.5 62.4 65.2 62.5 64.3 713 I 69.9 70.8 _ 70.0 76.4 74.7 66.2 66.2 68.4 63.8 61.8 30 AM 400 AM 56.6 60.4 _ 68.7 73.2 72.4 57.6 58.9 60.7 57.6 71.5 69.0 75.8 67.7 67.4 4:00 AM 500 AM 500 AM 600 AM _ .j1.1 _ _ 60.4 62.0 6 68.6 69.5 73.4 75.1 _ 71.4 73.9 62.5 66.8 63.7 50111 62.9 60.7 62.3 71.2 69.3 69.0 67.4 75.5 74.7 63.0 67.9 64.9 68.7 600 AM 700 AM 61.9 61.0 67.5 74.3 73.4 66.4 65.2 65.8 62.9 70.8 71.1 72.2 67.9 68.0 70 AM 800 AM 63.7 1 63.5 y 69.5 76.3 74.7 67.0 65.3 63.8 65.8 72.9 71.8 76.3 71.5 1 70.0 80 AM 900 AM 63.2 1 62.1 1 70.4 _ 77.4 75.4 65.7 66.0 63._0 64.9 72.5 71.8 76.9 69.0 71.2 900 AM 1000 AM _ 62.5 I__ 61.1 6 69.1 75.0 _ 73.8 61.3 65.8 62 7 62.2 72.0 70.6 76.9 66.8 I 66.6 100 AM 1100 AM _1 61.3 1 59.3 1 6 67.3 72.7 _ 71.8 63.5 66.0 61.4 63.9 70.8 68.8 75.6 64.6 66.0 11110 AM 1200 PM 00.8 56.8 1 6 67.5 72.2 _ 68.8 62.6 I 64.2 62.3 62.1 71.5 68.5 73.8 62.4 64.0 0 12PM 0 1PM _ 4 59.0 55.5 1 67.8 71.3 70.1 63.6 1 62.2 60.9 61.8 70.3 67.1 _ _ 73.4 _ 61.7 64.0 1:00 PM 20 PM 00.7 55.8 1 67.4 71.9 69.8 62.7 63.7 62.1 --- 62.0 70.8 66.4 72.4 60.7 1 62.2 2:00 PM 30 PM 59.4 55.7 j 67.4 71.3 70.7 62.1 62.8 61.9 61.5 70.5 67.4 72.9 60.1 I 63.0 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 58.1 ^ 06.8 71.0 70.0 64.0 63.6 63.4 60.8 70.9 67.8 73.9 62.0 b 64.5 4:00 PM 50 PM 56.5 19.3 6 65.9 68.2 70.0 63.4 61.1 62.9 60.8 70.3 _ 67.3 72.8 62.7 I 64.7 5:00 PM__ 60 PM 48.6 IS.0 5 57.1 56.3-11- 65.7 60.4 61.9 61.9 61.3 69.9 67.8 72.9 61.2 1 64.1 6:O0PM 700 PM 48.9 13.2 5 58.2 54.2 55.9 56.8 59.6 59.0 56.1 67.3 63.2 69.5 60.1 700 PM 800 PM 51.9 18.3 6 63.1 61.5 59.0 58.7 61.7 59.257.7 67.2 _ 64A 70.5 62.3�, 8:00 PM 900PM 58.2 f fi6_R 70.6 69.1_ 61.1 63.7 60.3 69.1 66.3 71.0 62.5 62.6 9:00 PM 1000 PM 58.6 54.5 i 07.1 71.8 _ 70.8 61.6 62.4 60.9 60.4 68.1 66.2 72.2 62.2 63.5 100 PM 1100 PM 59.2 i 58.3 1 68.4 74.0 71.2 62.7 65.2 60.9 69.7 67.7 72.8 63.8 65.4 110 PM _ _ 1200 AM 60.4 I ii=1 65.6 65.1 72.7 64.3 64.4 63.9 62.3 71.1 70.1 74.2 66.9 66.8 3.32 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 By adding together the total travel time recorded by BluFax from west of SR-71 to east of 1-15, the average speeds through the entire corridor could be found. These are shown in Figure 3-37. Figure 3-37 Average Speeds Between West of SR-71 and East of 1-15 Eastbound Westbound 80 70 60 E 50 > 40 30 20 30 0 ------ .- - �. i .i a .i a .i a evi .i a cd a a a a a o olN a -Monday-Thursday Hour Start Friday - Saturday Sunday 3.2.3 PeMS Speeds 80 70 60 E 50 40 F 30 20 10 0 a a a a a a22222 a a a a a a a Hour Start Monday -Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Speed data were also available from the PeMS program. Detectors were located approximately every half mile through the highway corridor. The average weekday speeds from the PeMS program for November 8 — 11, 2010 are plotted in Table 3-13 and Table 3-14. Each line in the tables represents a detector station, and each column represents a 15-minute increment. The height of each line in the tables is proportional to the distance monitored by each detector. As can be seen in the tables, congestion begins early in the morning, especially east of Maple Street. The eastbound congestion does not become clear until about 10 AM. In the afternoon, eastbound congestion begins to build starting at 2PM, and lasts until about 7:30. Congestion in the afternoon is concentrated between the SR-71 interchange and Lincoln Avenue, and between I-15 and McKinley Street. 3.33 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-13 Eastbound Weekday Speeds Recorded by PeMS on SR-91 (5AM —10PM) 3A46m6 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a ... it it d F. r. r. r. i i i i i i d i i i i i F. F. F. i i i i i i i i d d d a i i a a i 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 68 68 68 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 62 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 59 57 57 50 59 61 62 64 65 66 67 67 68 68 69 fie fie fie fie fie 68 68 69 69 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 67 67 67 66 66 65 65 65 65 85 85 64 64 64 65 65 8a 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 61 56 57 56 57 52 53 54 58 53 52 45 45 47 54 59 61 63 65 65 86 66 67 67 68 68 69 69 69 69 Orange Cc,ounty Line 86 87 87 87 87 86 87 87 87 67 67 67 67 68 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 83 83 63 63 83 62 62 62 62 62 61 60 60 59 58 56 57 58 59 60 62 6465 66 66 67 87 88 68 88 88 69 89 89 t0 SR-71 87 67 87 87 87 87 67 68 68 68 67 67 67 67 68 66 66 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 84 84 84 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 62 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 59 57 57 58 59 61 62 64 65 66 67 67 68 68 69 69 69 69 69 69 68 66 69 69 68 88 60 68 68 68 68 88 67 87 87 86 86 85 85 85 85 85 85 84 84 84 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 61 56 57 56 57 52 53 54 58 53 52 45 45 47 54 59 fit 83 65 65 88 88 87 87 86 66 69 69 69 69 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 60 60 60 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 62 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 59 57 57 58 59 61 62 64 65 66 67 67 68 68 be be be be fie fie SR_7 1 lnterchang 68 68 69 69 68 68 68 68 68 68 68 60 6] 6] 6] 66 66 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 fi4 fi4 65 65 69 64 64 64 fi4 64 64 63 63 6361 56 57 56 57 52 53 54 58 53 52 45 45 47 54 59 61 63 65 65 66 66 6) 6) fi8 fi8 fie fie fie fie 66 66 66 66 67 67 65 65 67 68 69 69 69 68 68 68 68 68 67 67 67 68 68 67 67 67 67 67 68 67 66 65 65 67 67 66 62 52 44 44 464443 41 46 48 50 51 55 60 63 63 65 be 69 fi8 3 64 fig 84 fi4 64 64 63 63 84 64 64 64 83 63 63 64 64 64 62 57 5a 53 56 56 57 56 5983 62 82 83 85 65 84 SR-7 1 to Maple 66 67 67 68 68 67 68 8 68 80 87 87 fi] 67 65 64 65 64 63 64 63 64 65 63 63 fit 64 64 63 63 62 61 61 61 60 758 52 47 40IMINntlidliggligligi 46 49 55 80 50 fit fi4 fib fib fib 68 68 69 Street Interchange 59 58 59 56 50 50 59 80 59 59 58 57 58 58 58 57 58 50 50 57 57 57 57 57 58 57 58 58 51 49 48 47 51 51 50 48 47 47 47 46 45 44 46 45 47 48 49 49 51 53 53 52 52 55 56 55 50 60 1. 58 59 60 60 60 60 60 60 6060 60 61 61 6262 62 60 60 59 59 58 59 58 58 59 59 58 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 60 59 59 60 55 44 42 20 43 48 47 48 48 53 56 56 . 62 61 61 Maple Street 65 66 67 67 66 67 66 67 87 87 87 88 67 68 66 65 64 64 64 63 63 64 64 63 63 62 59 57 58 83 82 63 82 63 61 55 48 112:11. 21 22 23 30 30 45 47 49 56 57 61 60 62 63 62 66 68 69 6 p. 69 70 70 70 70 69 69 69 70 70 70 70 70 70 69 69 70 69 fi3 6699 6]0 8 69 �? 69 667 66]0 700 61 70 70 68 66)8 66 59 54 4949 445 45 48 48-4= . 43 28 24 23 20 25 29 42 56 59 51 55 60 5] 5) 6i 63 88 6fi 8fi Maple Street U n tItIN O U N K li ti t$ U N N LI 60 r80 62 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 62 63 62 61 . 58 56 54 52 53 55 4 51 59 51 51 49 48 48 48 49 50 52 58 60 60 60 61 63 62 62 61 62 64 66 68 65 Interchange to Main O I 40 36 3] 36 36 35 35 34 36 39 39 40 40 42 45 45 48 51 54 60 62 fi) fi) 67 68 67 6067 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 68 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 66 65 66 65 65 66 66 66 67 67 68 66 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 Street Interchange 65 67 68 68 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 68 67 68 67 66 67 67 66 67 65 67 fi) fib 65 64 64 64 65 fib fib 67 65 65 64 61 ' 59 55 52 51 52 55 54 51 50 50 49 48 51 51 51 50 49 52 50 59 61 62 63 64 63 64 64 65 fib 68 69 69 75 ]6 ]6 ]B ]5 ]5 ]4 ]3 ]4 ]4 ]5 ]5 ]5 ]5 )4 )3 )4 )3 )3 )3 6] ]2 ]4 )1 6] 66 65 66 6] ]0 ]2 ]3 68 68 64 56 51 45 3] 36 38 46 42 45 38 35 34 33 30 3] 38 36 3d 31 36 49 57 59 60 63 62 64 65 67 71 75 76 76 Main Street 67 67 66 65 63 62 61 60 60 57 57 56 55 53 50 49 48 49 49 50 46 47 49 46 45 43 44 45 46 46 45 45 44 45 45 45 40 39 , 39 41 37 36 30 26 25 20 30 25 28 31 40 46 44 47 49 48 48 51 53 56 57 61 63 64 67 68 68 68 68 68 6/ 68 68 6/ 68 68 6/ 63 61 60 61 65 65 66 64 fi4 65 64 64 62 63 63 63 fi4 64 64 63 64 64 62 '-' 61 40 33 33 36 40 34 36 � 50 61 50 62 61 59 59 61 63 fi4 fi4 67 68 68 Mann Street 74 73 74 73 73 74 73 )4 73 73 73 72 72 70 69 68 68 69 69 69 69 68 69 69 69 70 fi9 fi0 6e 70 69 69 70 68 67 66 66 67 68 68 68 66 67 64 50 42 44 45 51 41 65 60 69 70 71 71 71 71 72 73 73 73 73 73 73 Interchange to McKinley Street 71 71 71 70 70 69 69 67 67 67 67 67 60 60 fi] fi) fi) 68 fi) 66 fi) fi) fi) 66 fi) 66 fib fi6 65 65 bfi 66 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 61 60 55 53 47 41 33 33 35 36 30 35 30 4] ,. ,. ., fi4 fi4 64 ,,, 65 65 fib ,,, fib fib fib ,,, fib 67 67 ,. 67 m Interchange; 11llOUgh 65 6 6g 69 fi9 69 6] 6] 6] fi] fi0 fi0 fi0 fi) fi) fi) fi6 fib fi5 fi5 fi4 64 64 65 65 64 64 64 62 6 6 64 62 60 61 6 6 62 9 51 35 28 25 20 29 33 32 40 46 60 65 65 65 66 66 66 fi6 67 bfi 67 67 68 68 I-15 Interchange 66 66 68 68 68 68 68 68 67 61 60 67 69 68 68 68 67 67 66 67 66 66 66 67 6 66 66 65 64 65 66 66 57 56 57 52 59 65 58 39 37 39 36 25 24 23 25 25 30 26 24 27 35 37 51 65 67 67 67 67 67 67 68 67 67 68 68 68 McKinley Street IL 55 55 56 56 57 57 50 56 52 50 56 50 57 55 50 55 55 54 54 54 53 54 54 54 54 54 53 53 54 54 53 43 48 46 44 48 53 47 33 33 36 30 22 21 20 23 23 27 24 22 24 29 31 43 53 54 55 54 50 50 50 50 55 55 56 58 55 68 69 68 69 69 68 68 65 66 63 64 67 68 68 68 68 68 69 68 68 68 68 69 68 68 69 be 60 60 69 fi0 67 67 64 64 63 65 67 65 59 60 60 53 47 49 49 48 47 53 54 55 55 55 57 60 64 65 65 65 66 66 68 68 68 69 69 69 70 East of McKinley Street 62 62 62 63 62 62 62 60 62 62 61 62 60 60 1 60 1 61 60 61 62 60 61 60 60 61 61 60 60 59 60 61 61 61 69 59 61 60 60 60 59 50 50 57 57 56 57 57 50 59 60 61 60 61 61 ' 60 61 60 60 60 61 61 3.34 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Existing Conditions May 9, 2012 Table 3-14 Westbound Weekday Speeds Recorded by PeMS on SR-91 (SAM —10PM) Location 7 7 a s a ��aaa��a��7 a s a s a a a 7 a 7a7aaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiaaiiiiiia`aaa``daaiiiiiiiiiiii a a a 36 29 36 51 53 53 51 59 46 43 42 54 62 56 55 56 63 65 66 65 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 58 57 64 64 66 67 67 67 67 67 59 57 56 50 42 31 20 27 30 30 25 23 21 23 32 41 53 61 66 67 67 67 68 68 66 67 67 67 68 East ofC McKinley 3fi 28 30 49 54 51 45 48 35 39 03 08 53 55 56 57 31 64 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 65 L57 53 M 64 67 67 67 68 67 58 56 56 48 41 28 26 25 28 30 27 25 23 24 34 61 52 57 61 66 68 63 67 68 68 67 68 68 67 68 Street 2 3d 46 52 47 45 40 37 38 48 53 55 57 58 58 59 63 65 65 65 64 . 65 65 65 81 62 51 63 64 64 63 64 65 64 63 62 63 62 60 59 58 55 52 51 49 47 43 46 51 55 58 61 62 64 85 85 55 86 87 86 67 66 67 67 .11 McKinley Street 0 30 25 24 21 20 20 21 31 33 27 28 33 43 45 52 55 55 56 55 56 55 56 54 54 55 56 57 56 56 57 57 57 58 57 57 57 57 58 58 57 55 49 46 46 45 50 51 52 52 52 53 54 55 55 56 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 McKinley Street Interchange to Main 2] 25 24 24 24 25 25 25 25 25 25 26 2] 2] 36 42 51 60 63 63 64 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 60 61 61 61 61 60 61 62 62 62 62 61 60 61 60 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 64 64 fi5 fi6 fi6 fi6 66 6] 6] 66 6] 66 Street Interchange; Through I-15 F Interchange 35 36 3] 36 35 35 36 36 37 37 36 36 37 38 38 40 42 49 53 61 61 61 60 60 59 61 61 60 60 54 52 52 52 57 59 60 61 60 60 59 60 59 60 59 58 60 60 61 61 fit 62 64 63 63 63 66 68 69 fib fib 69 68 68 66 65 66 Man] Street 34 22 21 23 22 22 22 21 21 22 26 22 23 23 25 27 29 33 37 45 52 57 61 61 60 61 60 61 62 61 50 50 50 50 51 58 62 62 62 62 62 61 63 64 63 63 62 61 63 64 64 65 63 64 64 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 66 65 65 64 65 64 37 29 25 26 25 24 23 22 22 24 26 24 24 26 26 29 31 34 38 44 50 56 59 60 59 59 59 60 60 59 52 49 49 50 50 56 60 61 61 61 61 60 62 63 62 63 62 61 62 62 62 63 62 62 63 63 64 64 64 64 63 63 64 63 63 62 63 61 Main Street Interchange to Maple 34 27 23 22 20 19 19 19 19 21 22 20 21 22 24 25 27 30 33 35 38 39 41 41 41 40 39 b 40 40 40 39 39 39 41 41 41 42 43 42 4 3 44 44 44 44 43 43 42 40 40 40 40 39 38 39 39 40 39 39 38 3 Street Interchange 56 53 51 48 46 45 44 44 44 46 48 46 48 48 49 50 52 54 56 57 59 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 59 59 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 55 48 4fi 60 65 5B 40 �• 34 31 29 29 30 35 39 34 3] 43 40 40 42 46-48-49 46 56 50 52 58 61 56 6] 60 ]3 61 ]6 52 ]6 61 ]6 61 ]6 62 ]6 61 ]6 62 10 62 61 fit fit 62 64 I6 ]6 ]6�6 64 >6 61 61 61 61 60 ]6 60 , 60 ]5 60 ]6 60 ]5 60 ]5 61 ]5 61 ]S 61 ]5 62 fit 52 53 54 ]5 ]S >6 76 76 64 76 64 76 65 ]] 64 ]] 65 ]] 65 ]] 65 ]] 65 ]] 65 ]] 65 ]] 65 >] 66 >] 66 >] 66 >] 66 '!] 3] 37 36 36 33 34 34 34 34 35 61 57 52 44 41 43 38 42 44 46 46 51 53 55 60 67 68 fig 70 69 70 69 70 69 69 70 70 70 70 69 70 70 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 68 68 62 62 67 68 69 68 69 69 70 70 71 71 ]1 ]1 ]1 ]1 71 71 71 71 71 62 60 56 51 48 48 46 47 48 51 51 50 51 53 53 54 56 58 58 61 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 66 65 66 65 66 66 66 65 65 65 65 65 65 66 66 66 66 66 66 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 43 33 30 31 27 28 31 38 35 34 35 40 41 42 45 40 47 52 56 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 59 58 59 58 58 59 59 59 56 58 59 60 59 59 60 62 61 60 60 60 60 61 62 61 61 61 61 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 62 61 61 61 61 Maple Streeet 60 61 62 63 Interchange t0 SI1, -% 1 6462 58 5452 53 52 52 55 57 56 57 57 58 60 60 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 65 65 64 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 66 65 66 66 65 66 66 66 66 65 66 66 66 66 66 65 65 66 64 55 49 46 50 48 48 55 58 56 60 60 . . 63 6467 70 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 70 71 71 71 71 71 70 70 71 71 71 70 71 71 70 71 70 71 69 69 70 69 70 70 70 71 71 71 ]'t 73 72 73 72 72 73 73 73 73 72 73 83 ._58 55 55 56 55 55 59 60 59J 61 61 63 63 62 62 63 . . . . . 80 64 64 64 64 84 84 64 64 64 63 64 64 64 64 64 M 64 63 84 64 65 64 64 65 64 64 65 65 65 66 Be Be 85 Be Be Be Be Be Be 65 67 67 67 68 67 67 68 68 68 68 68 68 67 67 66 66 fib 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 65 64 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 59 5] 5� 61 63 64 fib fib 67 67 68 69 69 69 69 69 70 70 SIZ_71 interchange 66 a67 67 67 66 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 66 65 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 61 60 60 59 58 56 57 58 59 60 62 64 65 66 66 67 67 68 68 68 68 69 69 69 SR-71 11.. to 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 68 68 68 67 67 67 67 66 66 66 65 65 64 64 64 62 64 60 64 65 64 68 64 68 65 67 65 67 64 67 64 64 64 64 64 67 67 68 66 67 64 67 64 68 64 68 63 68 63 68 63 88 62 68 63 67 63 87 62 87 62 88 61 87 61 e ] 60 59 57 57 58 59 61 6> 62 69 64 ]0 65 ]t 66 ]t 67 ]t 67 ]i 68 Y2 68 Y2 69 Y2 69 ]3 69 ]2 69 ]2 69 ]2 69 ]2 60 1.13 37 33 27 27 23 22 24 27 33 39 43 ■ 53 58 58 58 59 ' 6] 66 68 68 68 6] Orange i ne County Li `J 64 60 60 64 64 fi5 fi5 60 64 64 64 64 64 64 66 66 63 63 63 62 fi3 fi3 fi2 fi2 61 61 - 61 62 64 65 66 6] 6] 68 68 69 69 69 69 69 69 6] 6] 6] 6] 6] 6] 6] 68 68 68 6> 6> 6] 67 fi6 fi6 fi6 fi5 fi5 64 64 60 37 33 27 27 23 22 24 27 33 39 62 64 65 66 66 67 67 67 67 67 66 66 67 67 68 68 68 68 68 68 67 67 67 68 67 67 67 66 66 66 66 67 67 69 70 71 71 71 71 72 72 72 73 72 72 72 72 3.35 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 4.0 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use This section contains detailed forecasts and supporting commentary on socioeconomic trends in the six counties constituting the "Study Area" between 2010 and 2035 (the Forecast Period). The Study Area consists of Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside and Imperial counties as designated by the RivTAM/TransCAD traffic model. The forecast data developed by Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB Consult) are referred to throughout this section as the "PB Forecasts" or "Base Case" forecasts. 4.1 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS Employment' in the Study Area is forecast to grow by 2.0 million jobs, from 7.1 to 9.1 million during the Forecast Period, a compound annual growth rate of 0.98%. Households2 in the Study Area will grow by 1.2 million over the Forecast Period from 5.9 to 7.0 million, a 0.73% compound annual growth rate. Housing growth will closely track job growth region -wide, although constraints on housing production in certain high cost areas, including many parts of Orange County, will perpetuate localized jobs/housing imbalances. For instance, the relatively high cost of living in Orange County has caused many people with jobs there to seek lower cost housing options in places such as the Inland Empire 3. This relationship between Orange County and the Inland Empire, which results in the strong traffic demand in the SR 91 corridor, has developed over time and is expected to remain in the long-term. Table 4-1 presents Study Area employment and household forecasts. Table 4-1 PB Study Area Employment and Household Forecast (Thousands) 2010 ' 2015 ' 2020 2025 1 2030 I 2035 2010-2035 Employment I I I Total Employment 7,133 : 7,601 8,061 8,460 I 8,799 I 9,114 Incremental Growth Average Annual Growth CAGR [1] 468 94 1.28% ; 460 92 1.18% 398 80 0.97% 339 68 0.79% I I 315 63 0.71% I t I 1,980 79 0.98% Households I I I Total Households 5,880 ; 6,082 6,344 6,594 I 6,825 I 7,044 Incremental Growth Average Annual Growth 2 202 40 262 52 250 50 231 46 I 219 44 I t1,165 j 47 CAGR • 0.68% ' 0.85% 0.78% 0.69% 0.63% j 0.73% [1] Compound Annual Growth Rate "Employment, unless otherwise stated, refers to a comprehensive measure of non0farm at place wage and salary obs plus self employed (including proprietorships) and government workers. "Households," unless otherwise stated, refers to occupied dwelling units. 3 The "Inland Empire" is, generally, the western portions of Riverside and San Bernardino counties, including but not limited to the cities of Corona, Chino, Ontario, Riverside, and San Bernardino. 4.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 4.1.1 Study Area Employment Summary The California Economic Development Department (EDD) reports that the Study Area added approximately 56,400 jobs annually (on average) between 1990 and 2007.4 Between 2007 and 2009, the Study Area lost approximately 725,000 jobs, equating to around 10% of its total job base, bringing the total number of jobs down to approximately 7.1 million, a level not seen since 1999. The Base Case forecasts includes 79,200 new jobs per year added to the Study Area during the Forecast Period, a level of average long-term growth that is greater than that experienced before the 2008 recession. This growth is due in part to the recovery from the 2008 recession, but also will results from the diversity and expected continued growth of the various urban cores within the Study Area. Figure 4-1 shows historical Study Area employment and the Base Case employment forecast. The black line is the linear trend line of the historical data series. The figure shows that the Base Case forecast is not expected to "catch up" with the historical trend line within the Forecast Period. 10,000,000 9,500,000 9,000.000 8,500, 000 8,000, 000 7,500, 000 7,000,000 6,500, 000 6,000,000 • Figure 4-1 Historical and Base Case Employment Frorecasts !Forecast •Histori cal Linear (Historical) a� �'� tk Aso $ �� 9'} dtk 4� O< ,�d ,�'� tits �� ti� O 5, ti Cp g O 'jr be 4�. g \g Ng `L° tie f ti� �° ti° f ti° Q f' gory ry�'y rya') ,I9ry `ate ,0 00 Employment growth between 2010 and 2015 is forecast to be slower than the recovery periods that followed comparable recessions in the past due, in large part, to the following three characteristics of the 2008 recession; 4 California Employment Development Department Labor Market Information Division. 4.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 (i) The negative impacts that the recession has had on the credit markets, which will constrain business lending (especially for small businesses) in the short-term, (ii) Construction activity, which is typically one of the leading growth sectors in economic recovery periods, is expected to be slow for several years as markets stabilize and vacant residential and non-residential properties are absorbed, and (iii) The general trend of businesses doing more with less, including sharing work space and working from home, investments in computer technology and automation to reduce the number of workers, and outsourcing to reduce overhead and increase profits. The recovery from the 2008 recession is forecast to be anemic in the short-term, but will take hold between 2012 and 2014 when a period of stronger job growth is expected to begin and be sustained through 2020. In the longer -term, the forecasts reflect; (i) the diverse mix of employment in the Study Area, (ii) a continuing trend of higher growth in service and retail employment, (iii) continuing decreases in certain manufacturing categories, some of which are migrating within the Study Area to less expensive operating environments such as the Inland Empire, and (iv) a lower level of technical service jobs that are expected to continue moving off shore. The general slowing of job growth in the Study Area, especially after 2025, represents the maturing of the remaining high growth areas, while those areas of the Study Area that are currently mature, such as Los Angeles County, will continue to grow only through redevelopment to higher densities. Within the Study Area, the most significant employment growth is expected in the Inland Empire where Riverside and San Bernardino counties' employment is expected to grow at average annual rates of 2.14% and 1.61% respectively over the Forecast Period. Inland Empire job growth will result from two broad trends; 0) the need for nearby "population serving" jobs to serve large numbers of new residents, and (ii) the high cost of doing business in established Orange and Los Angeles county locations. Transportation and trade related jobs have for years accounted for much of the job growth in the Inland Empire as many distribution facilities serving Ontario International Airport and the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are located there. This industry will continue to be a significant contributor to Inland Empire job growth though changes to international shipping 4.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 routes, specifically those related to Panama Canal expansion efforts will temper growth in the long-term. 4.1.2 Study Area Household Summary Between 1990 and 2005, the Study Area added just over 50,000 new households per year on average. This trend is expected to continue in the future, as reflected in the approximately 46,600 annual households expected to be added during the Forecast Period. The PB forecast takes into consideration the current inventory of homes for sale, especially those in lower price point markets, which are expected to remain unsold until prices moderate and credit is extended to buyers. Growth during the 2010 to 2015 period is expected to be lower than the 2015 to 2020 period in light of the slow job recovery outlined above. Household growth will lag job growth between 2010 and 2015 as unemployed workers already represented in household numbers begin to find jobs. Overall, household formations reflect a higher number of employed persons per household in Orange and Los Angeles counties due to the higher proportion of dual income earning households and the daily in -migration of workers from surrounding counties. As noted in Figure 4-2, the Study Area is expected to keep pace with the historical trend between 2010 and 2035 despite starting from a slightly lower base. During the Forecast Period, the Study Area will add 1.7 new jobs per household, driving the overall jobs per household ratio up from 1.2 in 2010 to 1.3 in 2035. Figure 4-2 Historical and Base Case Household Forecasts 7,250,000 6,750,000 6,250,000 5,750,000 5,250,000 4,750,000 - Forecast � Histarical - Linear (Historical) Qs�Q Qs�*I' tr0? 01a �a� QQQ Q0, amp` OQ� a0� Ok4 Q�� deb` 4Kf ° O�� Q`1Q Q` 5. Q'L�` Q15) ti ►. ►� �. „s '1. °L YL ti ti ti 0, ti ti 4.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 While residential growth will continue to occur in higher priced areas like Orange County, the bulk of household formations will occur in the western portions of the Inland Empire where price points are lower than most Orange and Los Angeles county markets and reasonable commutes to Orange and Los Angeles county job centers remain possible. In the long-term, the majority of residential growth in Orange and Los Angeles counties will be through redevelopment. 4.2 FORECAST METHODOLOGY The socioeconomic forecasts developed by PB for the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivTAM) — defined Study Area (which includes the entirety of Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial counties) have specific content and geographical characteristics that are outlined in this section. The Study Area forecast discussed above is the aggregation of 5,531 individual traffic analysis zone (TAZ) forecasts 5. As such the disaggregated TAZ forecasts can be aggregated by county, city or Focus Area to aid in the analysis. The term "Focus Areas" refers to aggregations of TAZs assembled by PB that represent major projects or development areas that received additional attention in the modeling process due to their expected impact on SR 91 Express Lane traffic. Figure 4-3 is a map of the Study Area, showing the six counties represented. Figure 4-4 shows a blow-up of the SR 91 Corridor and major connectors. Figure 4-3 Map of the Study Area 5 Traffic analysis zones are geographical areas, subsets of Census Tracts, established based on traffic levels and generally bound by roadways. 4.5 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Figure 4-4 Map of SR-91 Corridor The forecast provides the socioeconomic inputs for 2,243 TAZs in Los Angeles County, 666 TAZs in Orange County, 1,900 TAZs in Riverside County, 402 TAZs in San Bernadino County, and 320 TAZs in Ventura and Imperial Counties. Together, the area comprising these 5,531 TAZs is referred to as the "Study Area" and is represented by the counties shaded in Figure 4-3. From the standpoint of traffic on SR 91, the most important portion of the Study Area is the area illustrated in Figure 4-5. The current and planned developments in these areas were given the most thorough review by the team. Areas that are far away from the SR 91 corridor, such as Ventura and Imperial counties were not reviewed with great detail and are not included in certain analyses detailed in this report. 4.6 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Figure 4-5 Area of Focus for Socioeconomic Analysis Nest oana Weru axe $ P"" ose nine ] , aP 2 MwB-Rowland as .r.�.. i ® o Pe��ewwn ben H a," WaINnN9"° �f fPLorenDO 0 ciamonu Ber Pomona ti'�wsw aMM c r O „. crow «ius �� • •• T cwnvcw 4 aw..cn. ,..a,c°wxcw siwv ean, O\ ar; g.wnPe,l �()CIA Express "'" Lanes AnalhOrn §R-9i Orange _ E.v U °aamMvry � oym -1"rxr Norm Omen V Santa Ana T Iln, 0 rvrvn+ a.P�' £ "`°-°° / tl Irvine S d f QI ria ;v c ceiw+ ��en e I{ • RCTC Express . Lanes Aw=a, Mw au tnn-a.w MaWi 9 mnn/w ©Glonaim We Lorna nine; vnaer nmr cm-m. caoke rt. .r swim van [ten. pi .Wo.... Riller540 Sri ..are `-�aa,unrlu W w air�+,q The specific analytical steps taken to complete the Base Case Forecasts were: • Reviewed Western Riverside County Council of Governments (WRCOG), Center for Demographic Research (CDR) Orange County Projections (OCP), Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and other regional planning agency forecasts to understand how each of those agencies expect long-term growth to occur. • Incorporated the WRCOG (RivTAM/TransCAD) TAZ structure and 52 model parameters into the PB socioeconomic forecasting model and performed tests to ensure that socioeconomic model outputs flow seamlessly into the traffic model. • Reviewed economic reports and forecasts from the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), UCLA Anderson School, Chapman University, California State 4.7 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 University (Fullerton), California Department of Finance, IHS Global Insight, Woods & Poole Economics, and other third party data sources to understand current National, State, and local trends in critical trip production and attraction variables of households and at -place employment. • Identified shifts in county and small -area development patterns that have occurred since the last adopted revisions of the WRCOG, OCP, and SCAG forecasts. • Established 2010 values for the 52 RivTAM/TransCAD model parameters at the TAZ level for use by Stantec in calibrating the traffic model. • Conducted interviews with local land owners, developers, real estate brokers, planning agencies and associations, and real estate development advisors. This interview program guided the land use team in uncovering issues that would impact future development in the Study Area, and confirmed focus area development potential. • Conducted field investigations of critical Focus Areas to update information on potential development capacity, entitlements, inventories, and constraints to development. These investigations supported adjustments to TAZ level allocations of new jobs and households. • Developed Study Area, county and Focus Area employment and household growth rates for the Forecast Period based on a review of historical trends from the California Employment Development Department, national and regional forecasts, economic reports, and first-hand information gathered through the interview process. • Identified candidate areas for redevelopment and infill development at higher densities and allocated development activity accordingly in later forecast years. • Using information generated through the preceding steps, prepared a Base Case forecast for the critical variables (Households and Jobs) at the Study Area, county, Focus Area, and TAZ levels. Figure 4-6 presents an overview of the PB land use model. 4.8 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Figure 4-6 Illustration of the PB Land Use Forecast Model Methodology 1 Integration of SLAG and RivTAM socioeconomic data Focus Area Adjustments • TAZ level field investigations/interviews • Project 1 TAZ reconciliation Regional Adjustments • Analysis of national, regional and local forecasts • Interview program • PB county and Focus Area capture rates PB TAZ LEVEL FORECAST Riverside Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) Inputs • 52 socio-economic parameters (primary inputs being households and at -place employment) The Base Case forecast assumes no major additions to the highway system in Orange County, specifically the southern extension of the Foothill Transportation Corridor. Additionally, no major east -west corridor between Orange County and the Inland Empire, such as an elevated highway in the SR 91 corridor or tunnel of similar capacity, is assumed to be built before 2035. The absence of these facilities has a dampening effect on the growth of new jobs and households in certain parts of the Study Area. The Base Case does assume RCTC and OCTA approved improvements to SR 91 as well as other network improvements included in the Stantec traffic model. 4.9 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 As stated above, the Base Case Forecast has been developed using the RivTAM/TransCAD model structure and provides inputs to the traffic model for all 52 socioeconomic parameters and 5,531 TAZs. Some forecast parameters are directly related to, and were therefore derived from, the primary forecast parameters (total at -place employment and households) while others were adopted from the SCAG base data. Table 4-2 through Table 4-7present each variable and the methodology used to determine its ultimate value. Table 4-2 Forecast Methodology for Population Variables Population Variables (7) Forecast Methodology Total Population = Residential population + group quarter population Group Quarter Population = Values adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Residential Population = Forecast of total households * household size Population by Age (4 Categories) = Total population * % by age category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data. Table 4-3 Forecast Methodology for Household Variables Household Variables (17) Forecast Methodology Total Number of Households = total households Forecast by PB Households by Household Size (4 Categories) = total households * share of households by category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Households by Age of Household Head (4 Categories) = total households * share of households by category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Households by Number of Workers (4 Categories) t —otal households * share of households by category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Households by Household Income (4 Variables) = total households * share of households by category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Table 4-4 Forecast Methodology for Scholl Enrolement School Enrollment (2) Forecast Methodology K-12 School Enrollment = % of population ages 5-17 enrolled in K-12 adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data * new age 5-17 population College /University Enrollment = % of population ages 18-24 enrolled in college adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data * new age 18-24 population 4.10 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-5 Forecast Methodology for Household Income Household Income (5) Forecast Methodology Median Household Income Real median household income growth factor as validated by third parry forecasts Median Household Income by Income Categories (4 Categories) = population growth * share of population adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Table 4-6 Forecast Methodology for Workers Workers (4) Forecast Methodology Total Workers = total workers adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data and adjusted to conform with long-term employment Forecast trends Workers by Earnings (3 Categories) = total workers * share of workers in each earnings category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Table 4-7 Forecast Methodology for Employment Variables Employment Variables (17) Forecast Methodology Total Employment = total employment Forecast by PB Employment by Industry (13 Categories) = total empmloyment * share of eployment by industry adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data Employment by Wage (3 Categories) = total employment * share of employment by category adopted from SCAG/WRCOG data 4.3 HISTORICAL DATA AND TRENDS IN THE STUDY AREA 4.3.1 Historical Study Area Employment Trends Employment in the Study Area grew from 6.9 million in 1990 to 7.1 million in 2010, corresponding to an average of 12,700 new jobs per year and a compound annual growth rate of 0.2%. This historical period takes into account the 2008 recession without the pending recovery and therefore paints a somewhat modest picture of the Study Area's employment growth and relative performance over the past 20 years. Some portions of the Study Area, specifically Los Angeles County and parts of Orange County, are indeed mature job markets that have experienced little growth in recent history; but overall, the Study Area has exhibited resiliency in post recessionary periods, the redevelopment of obsolete properties in mature areas, and steady growth in emerging submarkets. 4.11 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Removing the 2005 to 2010 period from the historical averages shows a better representation of the Study Area's performance in normal economic times. Between 1990 and 2005, the Study Average grew by about 56,200 jobs per year with the strongest growth in the 1995 to 2000 time period when the economy was recovering from a recession that occurred in the early 1990s. Table 4-8 shows that the vast majority of job growth during this time period occurred in the Inland Empire and Orange County. Los Angeles County, the most mature county in the Study Area, remained relatively steady at about 4.4 million jobs during this period despite significant job losses during the recessionary period of 1990 to 1995. The smaller counties of Ventura and Imperial grew at moderate rates, though their distant locations and relatively small size make them somewhat irrelevant to traffic levels in the SR 91 corridor. Table 4-8 Total Employment Growth by County, 1990 — 2010 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1990-2010 Los Angeles 4,494,000 4,066,000 i 4,418,000 4,366,000 4,079,000 Average Annual Growth -85,600 70400 I -10400 -57,400 -20,750 CAGR -2.00% 1.70% 1 1 -0.20% + 21,400 1,607,000 -1.40% -29,200 1,461,000 l -0 50% 9,750 -- Orange Average Annual Growth 1,266,000 -4,400 1,244,000 1 + 1,500,000 51,200 CAGR -0.30% 387,000 3.80% I I 508,000 1.40% 645,000 - -1.90% 577,000 0.70% Riverside 350,000 Average Annual Growth 7,400 2.00% 24,200 j 5.60% 27,400 4.90% -13,600 -2.20% 11,350 2.50% ME CAGR 447,000 1 483,000 {!II } 588,000 T T 633,000 Average Annual Growth 7,200 2 21,000 22,400 -13,400 9,300 CAGR 1.60% ---- 278,000 4.00% t I j 321,000 I 3.50% 343,000 -2.00% 321,000 1.80% Ventura 270,000 Average Annual Growth 1,600 8,600 i 1 4,400 -4,400 2,550 CAGR 0.60% 53,000 2.90% 55,000 1.30% 58,000 -1.30% 0.90% 59,000 Imperial 49,000 Average Annual Growth 800 400 600 200 500 CAGR 1.60% 0.70% } I I 1.10% -_ 0.30% 0.90% vr- Study Arc Total 6,876,000 Average Annual Growth -73,000 6,511,000 7,390,000 175,800 I I t 65,800 17,719,000 I -117,800 7,130,000 _ 12,700 CAGR -1.10% 2.60% 0.90% -1.60% 0.20% Source: California Employment Development Department / Labor Market Information Division Annual Averages, PB Analysis. Data adjusted for self employed persons. 4.12 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Figure 4-7 Employment Growth by County, Change from 1990 Value Percent Change from 1990 Value 200% 180% 160% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20 % 0% 1990 1995 Los Angeles Orange Ventura Imperial 2000 Year Riverside 2005 2010 Study Area Total San Bernardino While job growth in the SR 91 corridor has been healthy for the past 20 years, Orange County and the Inland Empire have very different employment compositions which stem from fundamental characteristics of each area and their respective stages of the socioeconomic lifecycle. The coastal areas make Orange County one of the most sought after places to live in Southern California, despite the relatively high cost. With many business owners and managers wishing to work near where they live, coupled with the presence of Santa Ana Airport (aka the John Wayne Airport), certain industry sectors have clustered around central and coastal Orange County, including many business services, financial services, education and health services, and leisure and hospitality services. Figure 4-8 shows that these four industries grew by 226,000 jobs between 1990 and 2005, representing over 70% of job growth in Orange County. 4.13 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Figure 4-8 Orange County Job Growth by Industry, 1990 — 2005 Government, Other 29 200 Leisure & 5ervices,12,400, Hospitality, 38,900 Educational & Health Services, 4 4,100, Professional & Business Services, 96,700 Construction, 36,000 l Wholesale Trade, 19,700 ::v: Retail Trade, 30,100 iTransportation, Warehousing & Utilities, 4,500 Information, 3,800 Financial Activities, 46,400 The Inland Empire experienced more diverse job growth between 1990 and 2005, but the strongest growth was focused in population serving employment. The four fastest growing job sectors between 1990 and 2005 in Riverside and San Bernardino counties (together) were professional and business services, government, retail trade, and construction, though these only accounted for 54% of total job growth over the 1990 to 2005 period. Manufacturing and transportation -related industries also grew significantly. These six industry groups are expected to experience the most growth over the Forecast Period as the populations of Riverside and San Bernardino counties continue to grow and generate demand for retail and service jobs, and companies requiring large floor plates, such as distributers and manufacturers, seek less expensive locations that are still within reasonable proximity to the port facilities in Los Angeles County. Figure 4-9 shows the Inland Empire industry growth distribution between 1990 and 2005. Notable is that it has more relatively equally sized pie pieces, compared to the Orange County chart above, which is dominated by a few large pie pieces. 4.14 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Figure 4-9 Riverside and San Bernardino County Job Growth by Industry, 1990 — 2005 Mining and Government, Logging, 100 Other 70,300 Services,16,600 Leisure & Hospitality, 46,900 Educational & Health Services, 50,500 Professional & Business Services, 74,100 Construction, 64,100 Financial Activities, 15,700 Manufacturing, 42,700 Wholesale Trade, 25,500 Retail Trade, 65,900 Transportation, Warehousing& Information, Utilities, 35,900 1,000 Understanding employment growth within Orange County and the Inland Empire between 1990 and 2005 is certainly important and will impact the magnitude and composition of growth programmed into the long-term forecasts. Equally important to the forecast, though more relevant to the short-term outlook, is how these industries were eroded during the 2008 recession. The 2008 recession was focused in real estate related industries but had far reaching impacts that were slightly different in the Inland Empire than in Orange County because of the industries represented in each, as outlined above. Table 4-9 shows annual job gains and losses by industry in Orange County between 2005 and 2010. The table is color -coded green, yellow and red to show when employment within a given industry grew, stayed the same, or declined, respectively, when compared to the previous year. For instance, almost every industry grew in 2005 (with the exception of Mining & Logging), but in 2006, Transportation, Warehousing, & Utilities; Information; Financial Activities; and Other Service all began to decline. In 2007, 2008, and 2009, the number of red colored cells dominates, showing the ripple effect of the contraction that initiated with the residential real estate market collapse. The most significant job losses in Orange County between 2007 and 2010 were in the construction (-41,000 jobs), manufacturing (-31,000 jobs), retail trade (-22,000 jobs), financial activities (25,000 jobs), and professional and business services (-37,000 jobs). These five industries accounted for 92% of job losses in Orange County during this time period. 4.15 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-9 Orange County Employment by Industry Industry / Sector 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2007 - 2010 Growth % Growth Total Farm 6,000i 6,000 5,000 1,000 111,000 5,000 1,000 98,000: 4,000 1,0001 79,000: 4,000 1,000 70,000 -1,000 - -20.00% 0.00% Mining & Logging 1,000 107,0001 ti1,000 114,000 Construction -41,000 -36.90% Manufacturing 196,0001 196,000 194,000 93,000 187,000: 93,000 167,000: 31,000 32,000; 166,000: 86,000' 152,000: 30,000 29,000; 163,0001 85,000 151,000 -31,000 -16.00% Wholesale Trade 89,0001 90,000 -8,000 -8.60% Retail Trade 170,0001 173,000 30,000 34,000 148,000 111 173,0001 31,0001' 34,0001 137,000 294,000 -22,000 -12.70% Trans., Warehsng., Uhl. 31,000 30,000 27,000 -1,000 -3.20% Information 35,000 -7,000 -20.60% Financial Activities 149,000 _ 121,000: 113,000 112,000 -25,000 -18.20% Profess. & Buss. Services 284,000 286,000 257,000 257, -37,000 -12.60% Edu & Health Services 143,000 : 1 1 1 153,000 162,0001 162,0001 164,000 189,000 11,000 3,000 7.20% 1.60% Leisure & Hospitality 177,000 111 186,000 189,000 50,000 173,000 182,000 46,000 169,000. Other Services 52,000 51,000 168,000 51,000 171,000 46,000 -5,000 -6,000 -9.80% -3.50% Government 167,0001 165,000 Total Employment 1,607,0001 1,636,000 1,634,000 1,595,000 1,476,000: 1,464,000 -170,000 -10.40% Table 4-10 shows the same information and table format for Riverside and San Bernardino counties combined. The most significant job losses between 2007 and 2010 were in the construction (-59,000 jobs), manufacturing (-36,000 jobs), retail trade (-28,000 jobs), professional and business services (-23,000 jobs), and leisure & hospitality (-14,000 jobs) industires. These five industries accounted for 86% of job losses in Riverside and San Bernardino counties during this time period. Table 4-10 Riverside and San Bernardino County Employment by Industry Industry / Sector 2005 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Growth % Growth Total Farm 20,000 18,000 18,000 17,000' 16,000 17,000 -1,000 -5.60% Mining & Logging 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,0001 2,0001 2,000 - 0.00% Construction 134,000 139,000 122,000 99,000. 73,000 63,000� -59,000 -48.40% Manufacturing 131,000 134,000 128,000 116,000 96,000 92,000 -36,000 -28.10% Wholesale Trade 54,000 58,000 62,000 58,000 52,000' 50,000 -12,000 -19.40% Retail Trade 179,0001 187,000 191,000 182,000. 167,000 163,000 -28,000 -14.70% Trans., Warehsng., Util. 65,0001 69,000 75,000 76,000 72,000. 71,0001 -4,000 -5.30% Information 16,000 1, 100 16,001 16,0001 16,0001 16,000. - 0.00% Financial Activities 53,000i 56,000 54,000 50,000. 48,000. 46,000 -8,000 -14.80% Profess. & Buss. Services 144,000j 154,000 158,000 149,000 138,000. 135,000 -23,000 -14.60% Edu & Health Services 130,000 132,000 138,000 142,0001 144,000i 144, .. 6,000 4.30% Leisure & Hospitality 133,000L 139,000 144,000 142,000 133,000 130,0001 -14,000 -9.70% Other Services 45,000t 46,000 45,000 44,000 40,000. 39,000 -6,000 -13.30% Government 239,000 241,000 244,000 249,000 247,000'. 243,000 -1,000 -0.40% Total Employment 1,345,000 1,391,000 1,397,000 1,342,000 1,244,000 1,211,000 -186,000 -13.30% 4.16 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Comparing Table 4-9 and Table 4-10 reveals several key characteristics of each area. First, the greatest losses in both areas were in the construction industry. While this is not surprising given the root of the recession, the construction industry in Riverside and San Bernardino counties was much more severely hit, being virtually cut in half. This illustrates the fervor of speculative residential development that was occurring in that area during the mid 2000s. Orange County also lost a significant portion of its construction employment as residential and commercial development came to a halt in late 2007. As noted above, across the board construction employment declines were expected due to the nature of the 2008 recession. Looking at the next hardest hit industries in Orange County compared to Riverside and San Bernardino counties reveals the true difference between each individual micro -economy. Orange County lost 63,000 jobs in the business & professional and financial services industries combined, illustrating again that many higher paying jobs housed in office space were located and lost there. Many of these jobs were related to the residential real estate market collapse but also to general business and investment services and linked to the general business climate of the region. Conversely, the highest non -construction losses in Riverside and San Bernardino counties were in manufacturing and wholesale trade (combined to account for 48,000 lost jobs). These jobs are linked nationally and internationally and are perhaps less dependent on the regional recovery and more associated with national consumption trends and recovery. Another difference between the two areas, which is apparent from the color coding of Table 4-9 and Table 4-10, is that in Orange County, the 2008 recession began to take hold in 2006 and then spread to the various industries in 2007 and 2008. The Inland Empire counties began to lose jobs about one year later, and when job losses began, they were realized across almost every industry segment at the same time. This suggests that more Inland Empire jobs were directly linked to the real estate industry, which stopped growing abruptly in 2007 both locally and nationally. When development stopped, the ripple effect in the Inland Empire was immediate. It also suggests that the recovery will take hold in Orange County one to two years sooner than the Inland Empire, which was also the opinion of several of the industry professionals interviewed by the PB research team. 4.3.2 Historical Study Area Household Trends Historical residential building permit data from between 1995 and 2010 is shown in Table 4-11. Between 1995 and 2010 the Study Area averaged approximately 52,000 residential units per year with 47% of this building occurring in the Inland Empire counties, 30% in Los Angeles County, 16% in Orange County, and the remaining construction occurring in Ventura and Imperial counties. 4.17 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Residential permit issuance grew significantly each year between 1995 and 2004, even during the early 2000s when the short tech bubble -related recession occurred. Permit issuance in the Study Area peaked in 2004 and 2005 with over 90,000 permits issued for two years in a row. During each of these two years over half the building permits issued were in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The surge in housing production between 2002 and 2006, especially in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, was in large part attributable to favorable lending terms, most simply reflected in mortgage rates. After peaking in 1981, the average annual 30-year mortgage rate trended downward until reaching a 30 year low in 2003 at under 5.5%. This borrowing environment made homes more affordable despite robust annual price increases during the late 1990's through mid 2000's. Table 4-11 Growth of Total Residential Building Permits in the Study Area Year Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Ventura Imperial • Total Percent Change from Previous Year 1995 8,405 8,300 6,946 3,953 2,166 j 497 30,267 - 1996 8,607 10,207 7,499 5,014 2,353 j 331 34,011 12% 1997 10,424 12,251 9,784 5,593 2,316 j 327 40,695 20% 1998 11,692____ 10,101 12,493 6,113 3,182 1 394 43,975 8% 1999 14,383 1 12,348 I. 14,579 7,072 4,442 k 333 53,157 21% 2000 17,071 1 12,367 1 15,410 6,580 3,971 I 677 56,076 5% 2001 18,253 8,646 8,527 3,446 i 756 58,642 5% 2002 1 19,364 I-19,014 12,020 22,664 10,616 2,507 I 1,062 68,233 16% 2003 21,313 9,311 -r t 30,361 12,640 3,635 1,211 78,471 15% 2004 26,935 9,322 34,226 18,470 2,603 1 2,157 93,713 19% 2005 25,647 7,206 34,134 16,684 4,516 L 2,974 91,161 -3% 2006 26,348 8,371 25,211 13,872 2,461 1 1,850 78,113 -14% _2007 20,363 7,072 12,453 8,004 1,847 i 1,079 50,818 -35% 2008 - 13,704 1 3,159 1 5,919 3,182 842 41 464 27,270 -46% 2009 5,653 + 2,200 } 4,190 2,495 404 I 195 15,137 -44% 2010* 4,435 I 1,452 2,913 1,089 341 I 52 10,282 -32% Total 252,597 134,333 257,796 129,904 j 41,032 I 14,359 830,021 N/A Source: Construction Industry Research Board * 2010 Data through July only. Annual permit issuance began to decline significantly in 2007 and fell below the 15-year average in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. Before the residential production slow -down, many home owners' monthly mortgage payments began to increase due to their variable rate mortgage structures. When the full impact of the recession was felt and the unemployment rate increased to 15%, many homes were no longer affordable for their owners. Overbuilding of new homes for sale coupled with the growing inventory of homes for re -sale increased inventories far in excess of demand, causing prices to fall. With many desperate sellers and 4.18 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 very few buyers, a flood of home foreclosures began to impact lender balance sheets and caused the credit markets to tighten. While certain areas, including the Study Area, were more adversely impacted than others, it's important to note that this was a national phenomenon causing a national recession that has had a particularly hard impact on the Inland Empire due to the disproportionately large construction and transportation / distribution job sectors located there. New home production in many parts of the Study Area, but particularly in the Inland Empire, is currently stagnant and will remain so for several years until supply and demand come back into balance. However, the families that occupied the distressed houses or lost their jobs did not all simply leave. Despite financial burdens, most families remained in the Study Area, renting and living within reduced means, and will be there when the recession is over. As such, the number of households in the study area between 2007 and 2010 does not decline in a trend similar to jobs, though growth was certainly reduced during that time period. Trends in single and multi -family product types reflect the relative levels of maturity of each county, with more mature areas that are fully developed and space -constrained limited to higher density development. The split between single family detached and multifamily units built between 1995 and 2010 in the Study Area was approximately 70%/30% respectively, with over half of the total multifamily units in the Study Area built in Los Angeles County. Conversely, single family detached homes represented approximately 86% of the homes built in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, an area rich with undeveloped land. Orange County, which is running out of vacant land for development, falls between Los Angeles and the Inland Empire counties with approximately 60% of new homes built as detached units. 4.19 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Total Residential Building Permits Issued Figure 4-10 Study Area Residential Building Permit Issuance, 2005 — 2010 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 1 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010f E Single Family Year Multi -Family Total Source: Construction Industry Research Board (CRIB) f 2010 Numbers are annualized first 7 months of 2010 actual CRIB data. Table 4-12 presents detailed annual residential building permit data from between 2005 and 2010. The table shows annualized data for the first seven months of 2010 that indicate a slight rebound from 2009; the lowest production year shown. Interestingly, Figure 4-10 shows a more gradual decline in multifamily unit permits in 2007 and 2008 relative to single family units. This, among other reasons, is likely a result of builders being unable to halt the production of a large multifamily project as quickly as detached unit project. In many cases developers carried multifamily projects forward but converted condominium projects to apartments, for which there remained a relatively healthy market. 4.20 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-12 Annual Building Permits Issued in the 6 County Area, 2005 - 2010 Total Permits Issued (units) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010f Los Angeles Single Family 11,911 10,097 } 7,509 3,539 2,131 2,412 Multi -Family 13,736 16,251 I 12,854 10,165 3,522 5,191 Total 25,647 26,348 20,363 13,704 5,653 7,603 Orange Single Family ____ Multi -Family 4,058 3,148 3,735-I 2,182 I 4,890 _ 1,295 I 1,864 I 1,376 1,606 -- 4,636 824 883 Total 7,206 8,371 i 7,072 3,159 2,200 2,489 Riverside Single Family 29,994 20,692 I 9,763 3,815 3,431 4,281 Multi -Family 4,140 4,519 2,690 2,104 759 713 Total 34,134 25,211 I 12,453 5,919 1 4,190 4,994 San Bernardino Single Family 15,305 12,599 I 6,239 1,981 1,441 1,301 Multi -Family 1,379 1,273 1,765 1,201 1,054 566 Total 16,684 13,872 8,004 3,182 2,495 1,867 Ventura Single Family 2,593 1,560 736 354 231 209 Multi -Family 1,923 901 1,111 488 173 375 Total 4,516 2,461 1,847 842 404 585 Impe rial Single Family 2,722 1,631 670 233 183 89 Multi -Family 252 219 409 231 12 - Total 2,974 1,850 1,079 464 195 89 Total Study Area Single Family 66,583 50,314 27,099 11,217 8,793 9,898 Multi -Family 24,578 27,799 23,719 16,053 6,344 7,728 Total 91,161 78,113 50,818 27,270 15,137 17,626 Source: Construction Industry Research Board (CRIB) f 2010 Numbers are annualized first 7 months of 2010 actual CRIB data. 4.4 BASE YEAR 2010 ESTIMATES The California Economic Development Department (EDD) keeps data on actual historical at - place employment by county. These data, both annual and monthly through mid 2010, were used to establish an actual 2010 base year employment number for each county. These totals 4.21 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 were adjusted upward to account for self employed persons not captured in standard employment count methods used by the State. The percentage increases to account for self employed, ranging from 8% to 10%, were derived from historical data between 1980 and 2005 as reported by Global Insight. Establishing current employment counts for 2010 was critical because the adopted forecasts from SCAG are several years old and therefore do not properly reflect the 2008 recession 6. Table 4-13 shows 2005 to 2010 county -level employment data and compares the SCAG forecasts with those developed by PB using actual data from EDD for the 5-year period. The table shows that the 2008 recession resulted in 630,000 job losses in the Study Area between 2005 and 2010, and 1.2 million fewer jobs than were expected in the adopted SCAG forecasts. Table 4-13 2010 Base Year Total Jobs: EDD/PB vs. SCAG/OCP (thousands) 2005 2010 SCAG Change from 2005 CAGR 2010 EDD/ PB [Change from 2005 CAGR Los Angeles 4,394 4,550 155 1 0.7% 4,082 I -312 -1.5% Orange 1,616 1,755 139 1.7% 1,461 j -155 -2.0% Ventura 345 373 28 1.6% 321 j -24 -1.5% Imperial 58 73 15 4.8% 59 j 1 _ 0.3% Riverside 650 785 135 3.8% 577 -73 -2.4% San Bernardino 704 810 106 2.8% 633 ; -71 -2.1% Total Study Area 7,768 8,347 578 1.4% 7,133 -635 -1.7% Note: EDD/PB job counts include estimate of self-employed workers Table 4-14 shows the same comparison between the SCAG forecast and the EDD / PB forecast for households. While actual household growth in the Study Area was not as strong as predicted in the SCAG forecast, there was not as severe a difference as is outlined above for jobs. Between 2005 and 2010, the Study Area added approximately 194,000 households, over half of which were added to the Inland Empire counties. Table 4-14 2010 Base Year Households EDD/PB vs. SCAG/OCP (thousands) 2010 SCAG Change from • 2005 • CAGR EDD/ PB I Change from 2010 I 2005 L CAGR Los Angeles 3,211 3,356 145 0.9% 3,269 1 58 0.4% Orange 981 1,039 58 1.2% 1,000 I 19 0.4% Ventura 260 275 15 1.1% 269 1 9 0.7% f Imperial 45 57 12 4.8% 51 I 6 2.5% Riverside 612 721 108 3.3% 678 I 66 2.1% San Bernardino 576 637 61 2.0% 612 1 36 1.2% Total Study Area 5,686 6,086 400 1.4% 5,880 1 194 0.7% 6 WRCOG 2010 and OCP 2006 forecasts were combined with the SCAG data set which was approved in 2007. 4.22 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 4.5 EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS This section provides detailed information on the PB forecasts developed as inputs to the RivTAM model for the SR 91 Express Lane Extension traffic and revenue forecasting effort. As outlined in the methodology section above, PB uses third party forecasts to assist in developing its long-term forecasts at the county -level. A presentation of these forecasts is provided first, along with commentary on current economic trends and expectations that resulted in the PB forecast. While household and population counts are somewhat standard across forecasting platforms, most of the forecasts reviewed have varying "definitions" of employment that are not directly comparable. As such, we offer the following terminology to help clarify the dialogue that follows: • Wage & Salary: A widely used definition of employment used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) which reports payroll employment counts based on insurance claims. • Proprietors: Persons who own businesses but are paid by distributions from business revenue, and are not part of the payroll. • Self Employed: Persons who are contract employees, operate businesses as individuals or partners and are therefore not part of company payrolls. May be some overlap with Proprietors. Because of the differences in employment definitions and when the individual forecasts were developed, compound annual growth rates (CAGR) are displayed in the data tables to better capture each forecast's spirit. 4.5.1 Comparative Third Party Forecasts: Long -Term Global Insight Inc. Global Insight provides comprehensive economic and financial forecasts domestically and internationally. PB obtained Global Insight historical and forecast data from 1975 through 2035 at the county level for total employment, households and population. Historical employment data is from the establishment survey of the Bureau of Labor Statistics ("BLS") Current Employment Statistics ("CES") program, which reports non agricultural wage and salary employment. The main categories excluded from this program are military, proprietors, self employed and agricultural workers. Military employment is added into the total estimate presented herein which is obtained by Global Insight from the Bureau of Economic Analysis ("BEA"). The Global Insight employment forecast for the Study Area reports 6.7 million jobs in 2010 and forecasts employment to increase to 8.8 million jobs by 2035, a 1.09% compound annual 4.23 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 growth rate. The forecast predicts the strongest growth to occur between 2010 and 2015 at 1.80% followed by periods of lower growth ranging from 0.87% to 0.93%. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Caltrans provides long-term forecasts for various socio-economic variables. The primary data gathering source for employment is the California EDD Labor Market Information (LMI), and for households and population, the California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. The Caltrans employment forecast for the five county area totals 7.3 million jobs in 2010 and forecasts employment to increase to 9.3 million jobs by 2030, a 1.22% compound annual growth rate. The forecast predicts the strongest growth to occur between 2010 and 2015 at 1.44% growth, tapering off over the last 15 years of the forecast period, reaching a low of 1.07% between 2025 and 2030. Caltrans does not provide 2035 forecasts in their projections. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) SCAG is the regional planning agency that collects and assembles economic data from other more local planning agencies, including the OCTA and WRCOG. WRCOG produces independent forecasts for Riverside County and similarly, The Orange County Projections Series, produced by the Center for Demographic Research at California State University (Fullerton), produces a forecast of Orange County land use for the OCTA. All of these agencies use a similar methodology to prepare their forecasts, beginning with projections of population, employment and occupied households at the county level with jurisdictional input and approval by their respective technical advisory committees. After a series of reviews by the agencies and member jurisdictions, the forecasts are compiled and disaggregated to smaller geographic areas based on observed market considerations, land capacity and local policy considerations. Each agency model uses a different geographic distribution method, so conversion tables must be used to join the data sets for use in the various agency models. The WRCOG data for Riverside County was produced in 2010. The most recently approved OCTA series, OCP 2006, has a base year of 2003 and is currently incorporated in the SCAG RTP 2007 model. Woods and Poole (W&P) Woods and Poole provides independent economic and demographic projections through 2040. Woods and Poole employment is forecast in components using an establishment -based survey. This forecast is unique from the others as it includes self- employed workers (those with IRS Form 1099-MISC income) and farm employment. As a result of self-employed workers' inclusion in the W&P forecast, this source has a much higher forecast of employment than the other sources. 4.24 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-15 shows each of the employment forecasts described above along with the PB forecast for the Study Area. The PB forecast of Study Area employment in 2010 (7.1 million) is 10% lower than the most recently adopted SCAG forecast, and 3% lower than the 2008 Caltrans forecast. Table 4-15 Comparisons of Long -Term Employment Projections (thousands) Employment 2010 2015 , 2020 , 2025 2030 2035 Global Insight (1) 6,596 7,217 , 7,555 , 7,892 8,253 8,615 Caltrans (2) 6,812 7,418 7,965 8,540 9,074 9,540 SCAG (1) 8,267 8,727 , 9,096 9,458 9,824 10,198 W&P (3) 9,288 9,990 10,575 11,189 11,831 12,505 _ PB (3) 7,133 7,601 8,061 8,460 8,799 9,114 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2020 ' 2020 to 2025 ' 2025 to 2030 2030 to 2035 2010 to 2035 Incremental Growth Global Insight 621 338 336 361 362 2,019 Caltrans 606 547 575 534 466 _ 2,728 SCAG 460 369 362 366 374 1,931 W&P 702 585 613 643 673 3,216 PB 468 460 398 339 315 1,980 Average Annual Growth Global Insight 124 68 67 72 72 81 Caltrans 121 109 115 107 93 109 SCAG 92 74 72 73 75 77 W&P 140 117 123 129 135 129 PB 94 92 80 , 68 63 79 Compound Average Annual Growth Rate Global Insight 1.82% 0.92% 0.87% 0.90% 0.86% 1.07% Caltrans 1.72% 1.43% 1.40% 1.22% 1.01% 1.36% SCAG 1.09% 0.83% 0.78% 0.76% 0.75% 0.84% W&P 1.47% 1.14% 1.13% 1.12% 1.11% 1.20% PB 1.28% 1.18% 0.97% 0.79% 0.71% 0.98% (1) Total non -farm employment. (2) Total wage and salary employment. Includes farm employment. (3) Includes farm employment, self-employed and proprieters. 4.5.2 Comparative Forecasts: Short -Term Some of the third party sources listed above also provided detailed annual forecasts for the near -term. This perspective is especially important because the timing of the economy's recovery in the next five years will impact all future years of the forecast. Figure 4-11 compares the third party forecasts' growth rates between 2005 and 2015 with the PB forecast. The exhibit shows the substantial job losses between 2008 and 2010 with job growth expected in 2011. However, the forecasts have different growth profiles in recovery. The Woods & Poole 4.25 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 forecast (green line) expects a relatively sharp uptick in growth in 2011 followed by moderate growth in the following four years. The Global Insight and Caltrans forecasts (blue and red lines, respectively) have similarly shaped growth projections with the growth rate peaking in 2012. The PB Forecast (purple line) reflects expectations for a gradual recovery that stretches over several years with no substantial "peak after the trough." As discussed earlier, this "gradual" or "constrained" recovery will result from (among other things) real estate market distress that will limit construction industry activity for several years and limited small business growth stemming from the damage that mortgage defaults caused to the credit markets. Figure 4-11 Compound Annual Growth Rate Comparison of Short Term Employment Forecasts 3.0% 2.0% - - 1.0% 0.0% * 1.0h Z i f ?f -2.0% -3.0% Insight —Global —Caltrans VV&P -4.0% �y Forecast —PB -5.0/ -6.0 -1 .0% 4.26 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 4.5.3 Study Area Employment Forecast Total employment growth in the Study Area between 2010 and 2035 is projected to be 1.98 million jobs or an average of approximately 80,000 jobs per year (0.98% CAGR). Table 4-16 breaks this growth down by county. Orange County is expected to see moderate growth, adding 20,000 jobs per year on average between 2010 and 2035. This is a 25% slower pace than the average annual increases of 25,650 that were seen between 1985 and 2005. This level of employment growth is consistent with access constraints (i.e. transportation, land costs, etc.) to the county and jurisdictional development and entitlement caps on potential development activity. 4.27 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-16 PB Employment Forecast by County (thousands) Employment I. Imperial 2010 2015 2020 2025 84 2030 90 2035 95 59 66 76 Ventura 321 351 376 398 413 425 Los Angeles 4,082 4,267 4,396 4,488 4,550 4,601 Orange 1,461 1,594 1,706 1,799 1,884 1,966 San Bernardino 633 679 753 827 895 960 Riverside 577 645 755 864 966 1,067 Total Study Area 7,133 7,601 8,061 8,460 8,799 9,114 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2020 2020 to 2025 2025 to 2030 2030 to 2035 2010 to 2035 Incremental Growth Imperial 7 9 8 6 5 36 Ventura 30 25 21 15 13 104 Los Angeles 185 130 92 62 51 520 Orange 132 112 93 85 81 504 San Bernardino 45 74 74 68 64 326 Riverside 68 110 110 102 101 490 Total Study Area 468 460 398 339 315 1,980 Average Annual Growth Imperial 1 2 2 1 1 1 Ventura 6 5 4 3 3 4 Los Angeles 37 26 18 12 10 21 Orange 26 22 19 17 16 20 San Bernardino 9 15 15 14 13 13 Riverside 14 22 22 20 20 20 Total Study Areal 94 92 80 68 63 79 Compound Average Annual Growth Rate Imperial 2.40% 2.70% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 1.92% Ventura 1.79% 1.40% 1.10% 0.75% 0.60% 1.13% Los Angeles 0.89% 0.60% 0.41% 0.27% 0.23% 0.48% Orange 1.75% 1.37% 1.07% 0.93% 0.85% 1.19% San Bernardino 1.39% 2.09% 1.90% 1.60% 1.40% 1.68% Riverside 2.25% 3.20% 2.75% 2.25% 2.00% 2.49% Total Study Area 1.28% 1.18% 0.97% 0.79% 0.71% 0.98 The Inland Empire will experience the highest growth in jobs with compound annual growth rates of 1.68% and 2.49% over the 25 year period for San Bernardino and Riverside counties, respectively. The Inland Empire counties are expected to add approximately 33,000 new jobs annually between 2010 and 2035. This is 13,000 more annually than the average annual growth experienced between 1990 and 2010 as stated in Table 4-8, above, though the 1990 to 2010 average includes the substantial job losses resulting from the 2008 recession with no 4.28 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 accounting for recovery. Between 1990 and 2005, the Inland Empire counties averaged job growth of over 36,000 per year. Los Angeles County will add approximately 26,000 jobs per year, though it will grow at the slowest rate of the six counties in the Study Area, less than half a percent annually. Between 1990 and 2010, Los Angeles county job growth was cyclical but lost jobs on an annual average basis. With more diversity in its job base and major investments in transportation infrastructure, specifically transit, positive but moderate job growth is expected in the future. The shortage of developable land in Los Angeles County will limit the rate of job growth there, though it will continue to have the largest employment base in the region due to the established industries and national headquarters, airport and port facilities, location relative to the coast, and diverse housing stock. Developers will continue to seek out underutilized sites to redevelop into higher density properties, both residential and commercial. Transit oriented development around the rapidly developing transit system, as noted in the sidebar, is a relatively new trend in Los Angeles that will house a significant percentage of new development. Still, some Los Angeles County residents are expected to migrate east to Riverside or San Bernardino counties seeking lower costs of living. The strongest growth industries in Los Angeles are expected to be educational and professional services, as well as arts and entertainment. Orange County will see most of its long-term job growth in the same three categories as Los Angeles County but the fourth largest industry will be Finance, Investment, and Real Estate services (FIRE). Redevelopment of older residential and industrial properties in Orange County will be more geared towards new higher density residential space. Higher density office space will be developed in the medium and long-term, though there is a notable movement towards shared office space and working from home which will temper the demand for office space in Orange County and other parts of the Study Area. This trend and the significant inventory of vacant office space in Orange County will further constrain construction employment growth in the short to medium term. With relatively low real estate costs, lower wages, access to a growing international airport (Ontario), and available land for both commercial expansion and workforce housing options, certain types of businesses have blossomed in the Inland Empire or relocated there from more expensive coastal locations. Warehousing, manufacturing and distribution facilities have led Inland Empire job growth in the past decade as the ports in Los Angeles County created demand for major distribution facilities that could not be located near the ports due to high land costs. Because of the growth of population expected in the long-term, a more balanced mix of population serving (retail) employment is expected, though primary job growth will continue to be focused in the distribution, manufacturing, construction, and transportation sectors. 4.29 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-17 shows the PB forecast growth by county divided by each type of employment as defined in the RivTAM documentation. The top four employment categories in each county are highlighted, showing that while professional services, educational services, and tourism are expected to experience growth across the Study Area, each county has its own growth profile represented in the industries expecting moderate growth. As noted above, the Inland Empire counties expect higher than average retail, construction, and transportation jobs, while Orange County is expected to have a higher percentage of FIRE and other professional services jobs. Overall the Study Area's five highest growth industries will be educational services, professional services, retail goods, arts & entertainment, and construction, accounting for 77% of growth during the Study Period. Table 4-17 Employment by Major Category (in thousands) Imperial Ventura Los Angeles I San I Orange II 1 Riverside Bernardino I Total Study Area Agricultural 1,290, 4,410 -2,100 1,5501 1,6301 -7,860 -1,080 Construction 1,090t 5,420 22,730 29,4901 23,4201 66,840 _ 148,990 Manufacturing 2,450r 4,870 -46,640 9,790j 18,4501 19,830 8,750 Wholesale Goods 880 4,080 10,670 17,8801 21,570 20,170 75,250 Retail Goods �4� 40,320 34,060�y90,940 Transportation 2,530 820 5,800 8,6401 24,6301 28,160 70,580 Information 2801 3,010, 42,70(�--- - 10,9601 1,920E 10,650 69,520 FIRE 5201 9,490 12,510 49,2301 11,8101 21,630 105,190 Professional 2,010 23,020 131,460 164,9501 46,0601 65,970 433,470 Educational 6,770r 22,680 196,980 106,8801 92,1301 77,020 502,460 Arts & Entertainment 2,550t 10,910 83,280 57,2601 25,4901 40,410 219,900 Other Services 840 2,410 9,320 9,5801 6,8701 22,280 51,300 Public Administration 9,460 3,030 12,780 4,190j 5,1101 33,720 68,290 Total Job Growth 35,820 103,910 519,810 504,4601 326,2501 489,760 1,980,010 Percent of Total for County Agricultural 3.6% 4.2% -0.4% 0.3%1 0.5% -1.6% -0.1% Construction 3.0%r 5.2% 4.4% 5.8%j 7.2%r 13.6% 7.5% Manufacturing 6.8% 4.7% -9.0% 1.9%1- 5.7% 4.0% 0.4% Wholesale Goods 2.5% 3.9% 2.1% 3.5%1 6.6%f-- 4.1% 3.8% � Retail Goods 14.4% 7.8% 6.8% 14.5%} - - 18.6%J 11.5% Transportation 7.1%F _ 0.8% 1.1% 1.7%1 7.5%} 5.7% 3.6%_ Information 0.8%} 2.9%it 8.2°1 %1 0.6%} 2.2% 3.5% FIRE 1.5% 9.1% 2.4% �2.2_ 9.8%I 3.6% 4.4% 5.3% Professional 5.6%1- 22.2% 25.3% 32.7%I 14.1%t 13.5% 21.9% Educational 18.9% 21.8% 37.9% 21.2%1 28.2°/ 15.7% 25.4% Arts & Entertainment 7.1% 10.5% 16.0% 11.4%1 8.3% 11.1% Other Services 2.3% 2.3% 1.8% 1.9%1 2.1% 4.5% 2.6% Public Administration 26.4% 2.9% 2.5% 0.8%1 1.6% 6.9% 3.4% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%1 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 4.30 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 4.6 HOUSEHOLD FORECAST 4.6.1 Study Area Comparative Forecasts As in the employment forecast section, information on third party forecasts examined by PB to help guide its long-term county -level forecasts is presented first, followed by details on the PB forecast. The same four third party forecasts, Global Insight, SCAG, Woods & Poole, and Caltrans, which were surveyed for employment, were also surveyed for household forecasting purposes. Table 4-18 compares the growth rates from each source with the PB forecast from 2010 to 2035. Table 4-18 Comparison of Long Term Households Projections (thousands) Households 2010 i 2015 i 2020 2025 2030 2035 Global Insight 5,854 6,173 6,494 6,790 7,078 7,366 Caltrans 5,879 6,106 6,381 6,655 6,912 7,162 SCAG 6,086 + 6,473 6,839 7,155 7,448 7,709 W&P 6,027 + 6,410 6,786 7,140 7,468 7,770 PB 5,880 I 6,082 I 6,344 6,594 6,825 7,044 2010 to 2015 12015 to 2020 12020 to 2025 12025 to 2030 2030 to 2035 2010 to 2035 Incremental Growth Global Insight 319 + 321 1 296 288 288 1,512 Caltrans 227 I 275 275 257 250 _ 1,283 SCAG 387 I 366 t 316 293 261 1,623 W&P 382 j 376 1 355 328 303 1,743 PB 202 j 262 i 250 231 219 1,165 Average Annual Growth Global Insight 64 I 64 j 59 58 58 60 Caltrans 45 j 55 j 55 51 50 51 SCAG 77 j 73 63 59 52 65 W&P 76 j 75 j 71 66 61 70 PB 40 i 52 i 50 46 44 47 Compound Average Annual Growth Rate Global Insight 1.07% j 1.02% j 0.90% 0.83% 0.80% 0.92% Caltrans 0.76% 1 0.88% 1 0.85% 0.76% 0.71% 0.79% SCAG 1.24% 1.11 % 0.91 % 0.81 % 0.69% 0.95% W&P 1.24% + 1.15% { 1.02% 0.90% 0.80% 1.02% PB 0.68% I 0.85% I 0.78% 0.69% 0.63% 0.73% All of the forecasts reflect similar long-term annual growth rates over the Study Period, ranging from 0.79% to 1.02%. However, slight variation between five-year periods is apparent. For instance, the SCAG view is one of strong early growth that tapers off more substantially than 4.31 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 the other forecasts. Woods and Poole expects a similar recovery to that envisioned by SCAG, but with sustained growth in the latter part of the forecast. Global Insight and Caltrans both have relatively flat trajectories in their household growth forecasts, with Caltrans barely deviating from its long-term average growth rate. Figure 4-12 further illustrates this data comparison, showing the PB Forecast expectations for a slow recovery of household growth in the next five years, and the fastest growth of the Forecast Period occurring between 2015 and 2020. Figure 4-12 Comparison of Long -Term Household Growth Rates 1.4% ;; 1.2% cc t 2 0.0% Q d to 2 0.6% N i Q -15 3 0.4% 0 0.0% 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2020 2020 to 2025 2025 to 2030 2030 to 2035 Time Period Global Insight —Caltrans SCAG W&P APB The current recession was caused in large part by the overbuilding of residential real estate and speculative lending practices that together resulted in large inventories of empty new and resold homes. As is typical with economic models, when inventories build and demand declines, prices fall, as has happened in the Study Area over the past three years. The median single family home price in Riverside County increased substantially in the early and mid 2000s to a peak of over $400,000 in 2006 but declined sharply between 2007 and 2009 as a result of the 2008 recession. Home prices across the Study Area behaved similarly, though the most substantial percentage declines were realized in the Inland Empire, as shown in Table 4-19. 4.32 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-19 Historical Study Area Median Home Prices Median Price 2005 2006 1 2007 1 2008 2009 1 2010 1 2011(f) Los Angeles 487,000 523,000 E 5 550,000 1 470,000 I 3 305,000 1 3 332,000 I 342,000 Orange 595,000 643,000 t 6 644,000 628,000 I 4 423,000 I 4 481,000 I 5 502,000 Riverside 389,000 410,000 I 4 400,000 I 309,000 I 1 179,000 I 1 185,000 I 1 190,000 San Bernardino 325,000 365,000 I 355,000 I 283,000 1 155,000 I 146,000 I 160,000 Growth Rate 2005-2006 2006-2007 I 2007-2008 I 2008-2009 I 2009-2010 I 2010-2011 I 2005-2011 Los Angeles 7% 5% i - -15% } -35% ► 9 9% i 3% i -6% Orange 8% 0% I - -2% I -33% I 14% I 4% I -3% Riverside 5% -2% I - -23% I -42% 1 3% I 3% I -11% San Bernardino 12% -3% j -20% 1 -45% 1 -6% 1 10% 1 -11% Source: California Association of Realtors, PB Analysis f—Put definition of f notation. A chain of events must unfold before the Study Area housing market (and real estate market as a whole) gets back to a relatively balanced state of supply and demand. Many Study Area jobs are dependent on the construction and real estate industries. These sectors of the economy will be a drag on the overall recovery because home construction and related industry growth will not restart in earnest until people buy up the inventory of vacant houses. Because credit is tight and many people are still unemployed, it is expected to take 2 to 4 years for these inventories to be absorbed. Many families in the Study Area have been, and will continue to be, priced out of the Orange County market and are expected to seek more affordable living arrangements in other places such as the Inland Empire. This trend is expected to continue despite the price moderation that began in the 2007-2009 period for all counties. 4.6.2 Study Area Housing Unit Forecasts Table 4-20 presents the PB forecast of households. The Study Area is expected to add close to 1.17 million new households between 2010 and 2035, a compound annual rate of 0.73% over the Forecast Period. Growth is expected to be split between 663,300 single family dwelling units and 550,700 multifamily units. This mix reflects slowing of detached unit growth in Los Angeles and Orange counties, which will be replaced with a mix of higher density and infill residential development. Continued strong development growth in the Inland Empire counties is expected in the medium and long-term. 4.33 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-20 PB Household Forecast by County (thousands) HOUSEHOLDS 2010 2015 1 2020 1 2025 2030 2035 Imperial 51 58 66 73 78 82 - Ventura ,-- 269 284 297 308 318 328 Los Angeles 3,269 3,332 3,399 3,465 3,527 3,581 Orange 1,000 1,031 1,076 1,103 1,125 1,148 San Bernardino Riverside _ _ 612 1- 678 646 732 699 808 762 - 884 _ 818 959 872 ___ 1,033 Total Study Area 5,880 6,082 6,344 6,594 6,825 7,044 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2020 2020 to 2025 2025 to 2030 2030 to 2035 2010 to 2035 Incremental Growth Imperial 6 8 7 6 4 31 Ventura 15 13 11 10 10 59 Los Angeles 63 67 66 62 54 312 Orange 31 45 27 22 23 148 San Bernardino 33 53 64 56 54 260 Riverside 54 76 75 75 74 355 Total Study Area 202 262 250 231 219 1,165 Average Annual Growth Imperial 1.3 1.6 1.4 1.1 0.8 1.2 2.4 12.5 5.9 Ventura Los Angeles 2.9 _ 12.5 2.6 13.4 2.3 13.2 2 12.4 2.1 10.8 Orange 6.2 8.9 5.4 4.4 4.5 San Bernardino 6.7 10.6 12.7 11.1 10.7 10.4 Riverside 10.8 15.2 15.1 15.1 14.8 14.2 Total Study Area 40.4 52.4 50.1 46.2 43.8 46.6 Compound Average Annual Growth Rate Imperial 2.40% 2.70% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 1.92% Ventura 1.06% 0.90% 0.75% 0.65% 0.65% 0.80% Los Angeles 0.38% 0.40% 0.38% 0.35% 0.30% 0.36% Orange 0.61% 0.85% 0.50% 0.40% 0.40% 0.55% San Bernardino Riverside 1.07% 1.55% 1.59% 2.00% 1.76% 1.42% 1.28% 1.50% 1.42% 1.70% 1.80% 1.65% ____ Total Study Area 0.68% 0.85% 0.78% 0.69% 0.63% 0.73% About 52% of the new dwelling units forecast to be built in the Study Area will be located in the Inland Empire. These 615,000 new units represent close to 2.0 million people. Workers not employed in San Bernardino or Riverside counties will face heavy traffic while commuting to job centers outside the Inland Empire, choosing to commute in exchange for less expensive housing. Local development experts suggest that 1.5 to 2 hours is the maximum that commuters will regularly drive each way to get to work. This limits the area in the Inland Empire that can reasonably serve the Orange County job markets to the western portions in the 4.34 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 vicinity of Corona, Chino Hills, Ontario, and Riverside, depending on the use of tolled lanes. For instance, the drive from Irvine to Corona takes about 35 minutes using the toll roads or during low traffic times of the day, but during rush hour, this drive takes about 1 hour and 50 minutes. Faced with this tradeoff, many Orange County workers, especially those with higher incomes, will continue to seek housing options in Orange County, despite the higher cost. Orange and Ventura counties will grow at compound annual rates of 0.6% and 0.8%, respectively during the Study Period, though the product mixes of each county will be different. Because of the historic imbalance between residential and non-residential property development in Orange County, home prices have been driven up, as discussed above. This, coupled with the shortage of developable land in Orange County, will cause developers to build more multifamily structures and smaller detached units. Ventura County does not have the same constraints as Orange County and will see the majority of new residential development in single family structures. Following this continuum, Los Angeles County, the most developed of the six Study Area counties, should see the vast majority of the 312,000 dwelling units forecast to be built there between 2010 and 2035 in high density multifamily structures, generally at infill and redevelopment sites. 4.6.3 Study Area Median Household Income Forecasts Median household incomes for Study Area counties were calculated using the Global Insight median household income and Consumer Price Index (CPI) forecasts. PB deflated the median household income forecasts using the CPI forecast to establish a forecast of real median household income growth by county. These growth rates were then applied to the 2005 TAZ- level median household income data from SCAG to arrive at new projections for median household income. Table 4-21 provides the county -level median household income forecast including growth rates applied to each year in the forecast period. 4.35 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Table 4-21 PB Median Household Income Forecast (Nominal Dollars) 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Los Angeles 42,640 43,990 48,230 53,290 58,350 63,050 67,950 Orange 54,270 54,810 60,110 66,500 • 7 72,710 78,450 85,070 Riverside / San Bemardino 41,760 ---Y- 40,400 43,530 47,360 . 50,880 r 54,060 Y 57,630 Ventura 55,010 56,820 62,380 69,400 76,000 82,200 89,360 Imperial 29,230 29,620 31,040 33,510 ; 35,930 37,420 39,050 Real Growth Rate 2005-2010 2010-2015 2015-2020 2020-2025 • 2025-2030 , 2030-2035 : 2010-2035 Los Angeles 0.60% 1.90% 2.00% 1.80% 1.60% 1.50% 1.80% Orange 0.20% 1.90% 2.00% 1.80% 1.50% 1.60% 1.80% Riverside / San Bemardino -0.70% 1.50% 1.70% 1.40% 1.20% ; 1.30% 1.40% Ventura 0.60% 1.90% 2.20% 1.80% ; 1.60% 1.70% 1.80% Imperial 0.30% 0.90% 1.50% 1.40% 0.80% 0.90% 1.10% The table shows that median household income growth was relatively minimal (or negative) between 2005 and 2010 due to the 2008 recession but is expected to recover in the 2010 to 2020 period with 1.5% to 2% annual growth, depending on the county. Overall the Inland Empire is expected to see 1.4% annual real income growth while most of the other counties within the Study Area will experience slightly higher growth at 1.8%. 4.7 KEY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE STUDY AREA A critical element of the PB forecasting effort is to develop small area forecasts for groups of TAZs containing developments that will most directly impact traffic on SR-91. This is done by reviewing specific plans and interviewing planning staff and developers of properties to collect the most recent data available on how and when projects will evolve. Guidance from previous land use work performed by PB was combined with information acquired through current interviews and project plans to adjust TAZ-level job and household counts relative to those programmed in the base data. Jobs and households were adjusted downward in many of the TAZs representing major projects such as the Preserve, the New Model Colony, the Great Park, Tustin Legacy, and several Irvine Company projects as these had not kept pace with the expectations reflected in the base data. PB conducted field research in Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange counties. Using these data, Focus Areas, representing projects, groups of projects or potential redevelopment areas were identified, though the data obtained for each Focus Area varied significantly. In some cases, data were complete and up to date while in other cases data were scarce. To further categorize the review process, the following five examples are offered to characterize the materials produced from our field research. 4.36 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 • Actual Specific Plans — In some cases actual development plans (quantities and types of development) by project area or TAZ were provided by developers along with expected timing of construction. This was the goal of each interview but few projects had this level of data available. • Partial or Dated Plans — For many of the projects surveyed, especially residential projects that had to some degree been put on hold due to the market downturn, current plans were not available. Rather, estimates of build -out and locations were the best data available and some reliance on multiple sources and professional judgment was required. • Professional Judgment — In some cases, no current development plans were available for parcels that, because of their location and eligibility for development, were expected to be developed in the more distant future. In these cases, the MPO forecasts for the underlying TAZs were considered and in some instances modified based on professional judgment alone. • MPO Forecast Adoption — As with most of the TAZs in the Study Area, PB adopted the development allocations of some Focus Areas. In many cases, the development plans matched the data obtained in the field. However, there were instances where projects were planned or proposed but because limited information was available, no confirmation of the MPO's accuracy could be obtained. If the forecasts for these areas appeared reasonable, they were not adjusted. • Redevelopment Areas — In the long-term, certain areas of Orange County that currently contain older, lower density industrial or commercial space are expected to be redeveloped as the owners of that land move their remaining operations to lower cost locations. These areas are anticipated to accommodate growth in jobs and households, after the remaining vacant and developable land is absorbed. Development scenarios were calculated for these areas based on professional judgment and allocated in the later years of the forecasts accordingly to help avoid development being allocated where there was clearly no capacity. Assumptions for redevelopment participation, current FAR, future FAR, and development mix were applied to yield a reasonable estimate of additional jobs and households that could develop, and were generally programmed between 2025 and 2035. Considering the levels of development review outlined above, details of certain Focus Areas are presented in the following sections. These project descriptions present the most probable project outcomes given the available data and PB's understanding of development economics in the Study Area. While some of the Focus Area projects are ongoing, many have been put on hold for the past two to four years and are not expected to re-engage until late 2011, 2012 or 4.37 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 later. In most cases, overall development quantities have not changed, though the phasing of the projects and specific products built will be dictated by evolving market conditions. 4.7.1 Inland Empire Projects As noted above, the Inland Empire is where the majority of SR 91 traffic will originate, therefore the locations and timing of residential projects located there is a critical element in measuring the traffic levels on the express lanes. The most attractive residential sites are expected to be those that are closest to the SR 91 corridor and Orange County, which would provide the shortest commute for people traveling to the work centers there. In our field research, PB focused on the projects that would be built in this area and have identified some of the major projects on the map in Figure 4-13 and the paragraphs that follow. Figure 4-13 Map of Inland Empire Developments O a Placentia 0 i O GaMr Cek Claremani :a�< ." Q Uqaral.l iW r....a.re e�.mv c,, a n ♦ e1� Iry Rio awnemi E Ramona Ontarie Orange PMMOMI a°0° Bar N = wxnrr 0 `y s c..rovue • Bay 1 G? r, Varba Linda .4.F w « .a Colt Came Chino Hills Industrial O College Park aa. Pa. _* o 0 Cacamoitya Ontario Airport Development M j The New Model Colony u.� pl Fenian. 3 ., S r n.,/ I ; R; r. me.o I. Imlionmha " • •+ .».....a. w -.-DE•-.., iv ate. P CEElemme Qms rya © ! e m.e - e In _ Glenarx �.r., n..m,.a.,la n.M'n ® The Preserve o am t co.ona a rwRo Corona Industrial Development 5 � A. Loma s' Gedens El Ler. W „wP S W y .P1 To: Canyon O Crossing \i\ and March Air =R,I Force Base Development Woodmrsal E� 4.38 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Corona Industrial & Redevelopment: While most of the City of Corona is built to capacity, there are a few parcels along 1-15, south of SR 91, that remain for infill development. Many of these sites had been slated for development in the past decade but plans were abandoned at the outset of the 2008 recession. A variety of uses fit theses parcels which are positioned close to 1-15, but local development experts suggest that the most likely uses are small scale industrial development or flex business parks. Other areas on the north side of Corona along Main Street and Hamner Avenue are ripe for redevelopment, which is expected to occur in the latter portion of the Study Period. Redevelopment opportunities also exist, sporadically, along SR 91 in the City of Riverside. March Air Force Base: March AFB, located along 1-215 in Riverside County, is being redeveloped into a variety of land uses incluing industrial and warehouse space, residential space, and medical / hospital related space. The base has an enormous capacity for development but its location, roughly 20 miles east of Corona, makes it less attractive than other areas on the western borders of the Inland Empire. Our expectation is that very large warehouse and distribution centers will be developed there in the short and medium term due to the vast amount of available space. Residential and other commercial uses will be developed slowly over time after more attractive locations are absorbed. Over 20,000 new employees are expected to be located there during the Study Period with the majority of this development occurring after 2020. Canyon Crossing: Canyon Crossing refers to a collection of industrial and retail projects north of March Air Force Base along 1-215. Near the Moreno Valley Mall, there are several large parcels remaining for development into entertainment or office uses. Approximately 3,000 additional employees and 800 households are expected to be developed in this area, just south and east of the city of Riverside. Chino Hills Industrial: In the City of Chino Hills, several large industrially -zoned parcels exist and will be developed over the next 5 to 15 years with space large enough to house over 2,400 additional employees. College Park: College Park, located in the southeast portion of the City of Chino near the Chino Airport, will be the location of about 1,700 new households that will have very good access to SR 91 via SR 71. These homes are expected to be built between 2015 and 2025. No non- residential development is part of this project. The Preserve: The Preserve is a partially constructed development south of the Chino Airport and north of Pine Avenue in San Bernardino County. Like College Park, this development is in an attractive location relative to Orange County access and will be one of the first large developments in the Inland Empire to restart once the 2008 recession recovery begins in earnest. The remaining portion of the project includes 6,500 households and non-residential space to house 9,000 employees which will be built between 2015 and 2030. 4.39 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 The New Model Colony: The New Model Colony in San Bernardino County is an 8,200 acre area south of Ontario near the Riverside County line that is planned for 9 million new square feet of non-residential development and over 30,000 new dwelling units. This space is expected to house approximately 21,000 new jobs. This project is well located but the scale of development is too large to complete within the Study Period. By 2035, approximately 14,000 new employees and about 25,000 new households are expected. Ontario Airport Environs: The area north of the Ontario Airport is slated for heavy development during the Study Period. This area has the highest likelihood of becoming an office center due to its proximity to the airport, highway access to Los Angeles and Orange Counties, the significant selection of workforce and executive housing options and its central location in the developed portion of the Inland Empire. Development plans for this area have been developed by the City of Ontario but we feel it is unlikely that the area will be built to capacity by the end of the Study Period. We have programmed 19,000 new jobs and 6,800 households to be developed in this area by 2035. 4.7.2 Orange County Projects The northern half of Orange County is largely built to its current zoning capacity. Most new development will take place in the southern portion of Orange County, which has few large vacant parcels left to develop. However, those areas that are still available for large scale development are located within a relatively close proximity to SR 91 and the highways that feed it. As such, these developments will increase traffic on the SR 91 Express Lanes, especially the non-residential developments which many commuters will seek to access from Inland Empire residential areas. The map in Figure 4-14 shows some of the major projects which are described in the paragraphs that follow. 4.40 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Fo11010, Garden Grove .-simin.ter Anaheim ' w.rhwr V Fountain Valley �. . O Iaaau� an p Placentia orange Figure 4-14 Map of Orange County Developments ® Vila n w«s vi °,n,e"°`“ g Anaheim Stadium Area CIO wme Costa Maaa n .o-r,j., 0 John Wayne Airport Development/ IBC C;el Pore Northwood/ Woodbury Mountain Park Planning Area 1 Portola Springs Spectrum Entertainment Heritage Fields Spectrum 5 Peek, Ppce Pet. rp1-6 ";" • Baker Ranch/ r Nakase Nursery a t 1 an= { © s , O sr° i ryaA i O n.,a„ P.., atrut,a • Rancho Mission Viejo Home Corona r [...dens F ECep, °ems Pp � O sv O The Irvine Company (TIC) Spectrum 5: TIC has several projects planned for the area southwest of the interchange between Interstates 405 and 5, including the Planning Areas (PA) they've designated as PA 18, PA 34 and PA 39. This area, which was mostly vacant or used for agricultural and recreational purposes, has excellent highway exposure and is intended for a mix of residential, office, and commercial development. Irvine Company representatives expect just over 4,000 homes to develop in these areas between 2015 and 2030. Non- residential development to house approximately 2,000 additional employees will be developed there between 2020 and 2035. John Wayne Airport Area: The area to the south and east of John Wayne Airport is known as the Irvine Business Complex (IBC) and includes the TIC PAs 23, 29, and 36. Over the past few decades the IBC has developed into a major center for business, containing approximately 75,000 employees. This approximately 950-acre area is expected to add close to 20,000 new jobs by 2035, which will be housed in a mixture of high density office buildings redeveloped 4.41 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 from low density light industrial structures and a variety of infill opportunities. Additionally, as many as 4,000 high density residential units can be expected to be built in this area during the Study Period. Mountain Park: To the east of the SR 91/SR 241 interchange is a residential project called Mountain Park. The development plans for this area have been scaled down slightly from the Irvine Company's previous estimate to approximately 2,500 single family homes, with some multi -family development. Virtually all employment planned for the area has been removed from the plans. Baker Ranch & Nakase Nursary: Baker Ranch is located to the south of SR 241 in the vicinity of Bake Parkway. Just south of Baker Ranch is a large nursery that is expected to be developed into commercial uses at some point during the study period. Though no development plans are available for these areas, their location makes them prime for development of both residential and non-residential land uses. Together PB expects these areas to house approximately 5,000 jobs and 300 to 500 homes, though the majority of this development has been delayed until the end of the Study Period. Portola Springs: Surrounding SR 241 north of the Great Park is a large area that is expected to add both jobs and households during the Study Period. This area (TIC PA 6) is somewhat constrained in its expansion prospects because of the hilly terrain, especially to the east. Despite its geographic challenges, it is expected to expand to hold close to 4,000 additional households and 600,000 square feet of commercial and office development over the Study Period. Rancho Mission Viejo: Rancho Mission Viejo is a 23,000-acre area of Unincorporated Orange County approximately between the southern border of Rancho Santa Margarita and the Orange County/San Diego County border. Rancho Mission Viejo is approximately five miles due south of where SR 241 ends. Rancho Mission Viejo is planned for close to 5.0 million square feet of non-residential development with a considerable residential component as well. The PB forecast incorporates approximately 13,100 jobs by 2035. Based on conversations with Rancho Mission Viejo planners, the residential plan for the ranch is scaled at 14,000 units, about half single family and half multifamily. As many as 6,000 dwelling units will be in age qualified portions of the development. Planning Area 1: PA 1 is located on an unincorporated portion of Orange County, east of the intersection of SR 261 and north of Portola Parkway. This Irvine Company project is planned for a build -out of 3,900 homes by 2035. 4.42 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 SocioEconomic Variables and Land Use May 9, 2012 Northwood / Woodbury: To the east of where SR 261 and Interstate 5 intersect (PAs 5, 8 and 9), a collection of large Irvine Company projects are under development. Some of the only successful residential developments in Orange County right now are located in this area. This area will be developed with approximately 9,000 new dwelling units and a mix of commercial space that will house thousands of employees. The development program is expected to continue through 2035, though the non-residential portion is not expected to gain momentum until after 2020. Tustin Legacy Project: To the east of where SR 261 ends is the former Tustin Marine Base. The 1,600-acre Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin closed in 1999 and the City of Tustin is the lead local redevelopment authority. The specific reuse plan calls for a mix of low, medium and medium -high density residential development totaling approximately 2,100 dwelling units and 6.7 million square feet of non residential space, though there are other projects being developed around the fringe of the former air base. The Tustin Legacy project is one of the largest development projects in Orange County and, especially due to its central location, will have a significant impact on SR 91 traffic. Complete build -out of the Legacy Project is expected to take over 25 years. By the end of the Study Period, the area will house over 16,000 employees and several thousand households. 200 acres of land has been set aside for schools and parks. Heritage Fields: The former MCAS El Toro (now a Five Point Communities project called Heritage Fields) is located on the northeast side of 1-5, where 1-405 veers off to the west. Heritage Fields has been annexed by the City of Irvine for development into the "Great Park" which will add approximately 5,000 homes, 1.2 million square feet of non-residential space, and provide 4,000 acres of open space. This development is in addition to recreational and educational development that will be located at the Great Park. Developers expect to begin construction in 2012 with the first residential units being available in 2013. Non-residential development will follow. The project is expected to take at least 15 years to complete. Spectrum Entertainment: In the triangle formed by SR 133, Interstate 405 and Interstate 5 is a regional mall, a collection of office buildings, and some new rental residential development (PA 33). This area has several sizable vacant parcels that are planned for commercial building by various parties, including the Irvine Company. This development is underway and is expected to add 3,600 employees and as much as 1.8 million square feet of office space. Future non- residential development in neighboring PAs 31, 13, and 12 to the northwest will house an additional 15,000 employees. 4.43 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 5.0 Travel Demand Model The objective of the travel demand modeling process was the creation of a forecasting process that utilizes the best available data and modeling tools to estimate demand for the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. In preparation for model development and calibration, Stantec evaluated the various travel demand models available in the Southern California region and obtained extensive traffic, highway network and socioeconomic data for model input. 5.1 MODEL EVALUATION At the start of this project, three models whose geographic scope covered the Orange/Riverside County region in Southern California were evaluated for their appropriateness, robustness and accuracy for investment grade assessments: Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) v3.3; Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) in Tranplan; and Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) in TransCAD. Evaluation focused on recent development and calibration efforts, the geographic extents of the roadway networks, the detail reflected by the traffic analysis zone structure and the level of trip purpose and vehicle class stratification carried through the modeling steps. Table 5-1 on the following page details the findings of the evaluation of each model. The RivTAM/TransCAD was deemed the most appropriate base on which to build a robust model for developing traffic and revenue forecasts for the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. This model is the most recently developed and exhibits the most comprehensive and sophisticated modeling in the Southern California region. Additionally, the model is appropriately focused on the western, more densely populated portion of Riverside County, the location of this project's study corridor. Even so, some aspects of the model warranted additional refinement to build an investment grade forecasting model that satisfies the unique requirements of the project. It was determined that the model should be enhanced with the development of an intermediate forecast year with appropriate inputs, the integration of a toll diversion curve into the traffic assignment model, refinements to the roadway networks, and additional calibration and validation specifically focused on the project corridor. The enhanced model, as presented in this report, was subsequently deemed fit for the purpose of predicting future demand for the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. 5-1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 Table 5-1 Model Evaluation Summary Criterion OCTAM 3.3 RivTAM/Tranplan RivTAM/TransCAD Most Recent Development Year 2009 2007 2009 Time of Day Capabilities 4 assignment periods: AM peak, midday, PM peak, night 4 assignment periods: AM peak, midday, PM peak, night 4 assignment periods: AM peak, midday, PM peak, night Vehicle Class Stratification SOV, HOV2, HOV3+ SOV, HOV2, HOV3+ SOV, HOV2, HOV3+ Toll/free diversion is a nest within mode Toll/free diversion is a nest within mode Toll Diversion Capabilities choice; toll and free trips are assigned separately choice; toll and free trips are assigned separately None (4) Software Platform Tranplan 9.1 (with some Fortran) Tranplan 9.1 (with some Fortran) TransCAD 5.0 Trip Purposes within Trip Generation (1) HBWD, HBWS, HBU, SCH, HBS, HBSR, HBO, OBO, WBO, TRK, EXT HBWD, HBWS, HBU, SCH, HBS, HBSR, HBO, OBO, WBO, TRK, EXT HBWD, HBWS, HBSC, HBCU, HBSH, HBSR, HBSP, HBO, WBO, OBO, TRK, EXT (3) In trip generation, distribution and Separate Truck Trip Purpose Only in trip generation Only in trip generation assignment Geographic Extents 5 SCAG counties 5 SCAG counties plus northern San Diego 5 SCAG counties plus Imperial County, includes Eastern portions of San County Bernardino & Riverside Counties Zone System 3025 zones; 130 in Riverside County 4694 zones; 612 in Riverside County 5616 zones; 1807 in Riverside County Forecast Year Input Data 2005, 2035 (�) 1 2000, 2015, 2030 2007/2008, 2035 Stantec Experience Extensive Effectively same as OCTAM In Progress Notes: (1) (2) (3) (4) HBWD = Home -Based Work Direct trips (travel directly between home and work with no intermediate stop), HBWS = Home -Based Work Strategic trips (travel to an intermediate stop between home and work). HBWD and HBWS are stratified by 3 household income levels. HBSC = Home -Based School, HBCU = Home -Based College/University, HBS = Home -Based Shopping, HBSR = Home -Based Social/Recreational, HBSP = Home -Based Serving Passenger, HBO = Home -Based Other, OBO = Non -Home -Based Other -Based Other, WBO = Non -Home -Based Work -Based Other, TRK = Trucks (Light, Medium and Heavy), EXT = External. In OCTAM and RivTAM/Tranplan, TRK trips are not carried forward into distribution or assignment. Stantec has previously estimated input data for 2010 and 2020. Includes sub -model for seasonal travel in Coachella Valley area. Network has a Toll field used in a generalized cost calculation during assignment, but no toll/free path split is done in mode choice or assignment. 5-2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 5.2 MODEL STRUCTURE AND PROCESS With the use of the RivTAM modeling platform, the regional travel demand modeling process for this project is structured to leverage both the regionally focused planning procedures developed by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the Riverside County focused planning procedures developed by Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency (RCTLMA). The model is based on the conventional four -step approach to travel demand forecasting, which estimates person -trips generated by land use in each zone, distributes these trips between zones, splits the trips among available modes of transportation, and then assigns automobile trips to the highway network. The process is then repeated (with each iteration utilizing estimated speeds from the previous iteration) until the difference between subsequent assignments is negligible. This outcome is generally referred to as a state of network equilibrium. In the RivTAM model, this standard trip generation to traffic assignment "loop" is executed five times so that input speeds for trip distribution are in reasonable agreement with the highway speeds output from traffic assignment. For use in this project, the RivTAM model was used specifically to predict vehicular traffic within the project corridor for a variety of analysis years and time periods. The base model year for this project is 2010 and the forecast model years are 2020 and 2035. The inputs to the base model are developed to represent actual 2010 conditions. Inputs for the forecast year models are based on assumptions and estimates of future roadway improvements, changes in land use and other socioeconomic inputs, as well as other relevant parameters. For each model year, four specific time periods are modeled, representing peak period conditions as well as midday and night conditions. The hours included in each of these periods are as follows: • AM Peak Period: 6:00 AM — 9:00 AM • Midday Period: 9:00 AM — 3:00 PM • PM Peak Period: 3:00 PM — 7:00 PM • Night Period: 7:00 PM — 6:00 AM For each of these periods vehicle trips for several trip purposes and vehicle occupancy levels are estimated along with several groups of commercial vehicle types. The trip purpose categories provided by the model are as follows: • Home -Based Work Direct (HBWD) • Home -Based Work Strategic o Home -Based Intermediate (HBWS-HBI) o Intermediate -Based Work (HBWS-IBW) • Home -Based School (HBSC) • Home -Based College/University (HBCU) • Home -Based Shopping (HBSH) • Home -Based Serving -Passenger (HBSP) • Home -Based Other (HBO) • Work -Based Other (WBO) 5.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 • Other -Based Other (OBO) For each of the trip purposes above, trips are further stratified by auto occupancy categories: • SOV • HOV2 • HOV3+ Additional vehicle trip types estimated (or directly input into) by the model include: • Airport trips (stratified by the auto occupancy categories above) • Truck trips (stratified by Light, Medium, and Heavy) • Port Trips (stratified by Autos, Bobtails, Chassis, and Containers) 5.3 TOLL DIVERSION MODEL The RivTAM model implements tolls as a component of the generalized cost function, utilizing a toll -based time penalty on toll roads along with an estimated value of time to reflect the additional cost of tolled facilities in minutes. Additionally, tolled facilities in the RivTAM model are stratified by only two vehicle occupancy classes, namely single occupancy and HOV2+. Because the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County will be most attractive during the peak commuting periods, it was desired to stratify the toll model by trip purpose, as well as represent the tolling of SOV, HOV2, and HOV3+ vehicle classes separately. To improve the modeling of driver responses and provide full stratification by vehicle occupancy class, a toll diversion assignment model was added to the RivTAM model. The toll diversion model adopted for this project is based on a toll diversion modeling process utilizing a logit-based route choice model embedded within an equilibrium traffic assignment routine to calculate the percentage of tolled trips for a given origin/destination interchange and can be stratified as necessary. The original model was developed in 2001 for several trip purposes using stated preference data. Since its initial development, the model has been refined as it has been calibrated and applied successfully for tolling projects in other regions throughout the United States, including projects in Delaware, California, Texas, and Virginia. The structure of the toll diversion model is defined as follows: Toll Share = 1 / (1 + e") Toll Share = Probability of selecting a toll road e = Natural Logarithm U = "Utility" of Toll Route a * (TimeTR-TimeFR) + b * Cost = Toll road travel time in minutes = Nontoll road travel time in minutes = Toll in dollars = Coefficients TimeTR TimeFR Cost a,b 5.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 Figure 5-1 shows the general structure of the enhanced model, including the addition of the toll diversion assignment model. Figure 5-1 Model Structure with Toll Diversion Assignment Model. Roadway Network Socioeconomic Inputs Other Model inputs RivTAM Model in TransCAD (Toll Time Penalty) Aggregated Vehicle Trip Tables by Time Period HBW Trips SOV, HOV2, HOV3+ HBO Trips NHB Trips SOV, HOV2, HOV3+ SOV, HOV2, HOV3+ TRK Trips Roadway Network Toll Diversion Inputs Equilibrium Assignment with Toll Diversion i Non -Toll Skims Toll Skims Toll Diversion Model Equilibrium Traffic Assignment For the toll diversion assignment model, the detailed trip purposes carried through the RivTAM model were aggregated to four trip purposes, each representing distinct values of time and route choice behaviors: • Home -Based Work (HBW) • Home -Based Other (HBO) • Non -Home Based (NHB) • Truck (TRK) 5.5 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 Stantec has developed and refined toll diversion coefficients in the Southern California region as part of multiple studies throughout the past ten years. Initial coefficients from the toll diversion process have been refined based on regional income data and revealed preference data on the existing toll roads in the Southern California region. Table 5-2 summarizes the coefficients utilized for this study. Table 5-2 Toll Diversion Coefficients Trip Purpose a, time coeff (minutes) b, toll coeff (dollars) VOT ( 1989$/hour) HBW -0.100 -0.5832 $10.29 HBO -0.100 -0.7779 $7.71 N H B -0.100 -0.6806 $8.82 TRK -0.100 -0.3526 $17.02 5.4 MODEL INPUTS Inputs to the RivTAM model are currently developed for two model years, a 2007/2008 existing year and a 2035 forecast year. To develop the 2010 and 2020 model years, inputs to all steps of the model were updated to their corresponding 2010 and 2020 values as necessary. For many inputs it was deemed appropriate to interpolate between the 2007/2008 and 2035 RivTAM model years using an average annual growth rate. To prepare the roadway network, extensive modification was required to incorporate past and future planned roadway projects in and around the study corridor. The primary sources for network improvements were the 2010 SR- 91 Implementation Plan, the 2008 RTP Amendment 4, the 2008 RTIP, and freely available aerial imagery. 5.5 BASE MODEL YEAR INPUTS The 2010 base model year was selected as it is the most recent year for which socioeconomic, roadway network, and actual traffic count data is available. The inputs to the 2010 base model year were developed in part by pivoting off of both the 2007/2008 and 2035 RivTAM model year inputs. For many inputs, such as external trip tables, an average annual growth rate was calculated and applied to bring the inputs up to the 2010 model year. Updated socioeconomic inputs, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report, were developed by PB to reflect actual 2010 conditions. To prepare the 2010 roadway network, projects completed pre-2007/2008 and 2008-2010 roadway improvements were verified against completed project lists and aerial imagery. The 2007/2008 RivTAM roadway network was modified as necessary to represent 2010 conditions. Highway improvements throughout the region and localized improvements in the area 5.6 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 surrounding the study corridor were incorporated. Table 5-3 below details network improvements in and around the study corridor deemed important to the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County that were completed by 2010. 5.6 FORECAST MODEL YEAR INPUTS, 2020 The first forecast model year selected was 2020. As the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County is currently scheduled to open on in 2017, the 2020 model year allows for forecasting a post -ramp up condition, where fluctuations in driver's route decisions have leveled off and tolls have been adjusted to appropriate levels. As mentioned previously, the RivTAM model only provides 2007/2008 and 2035 model year inputs. As such, inputs for the 2020 model were developed in similar fashion to the 2010 inputs. For many inputs, such as external trip tables, an average annual growth rate was calculated and applied to bring the inputs up to the 2020 model year. Updated socioeconomic inputs, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report, were developed by PB to reflect forecasted 2020 conditions. To prepare the 2020 roadway network, the 2010 roadway network was modified to represent the most recent assumptions for expected 2020 conditions. Planned highway improvements throughout the region and localized improvements in the area surrounding the study corridor were researched and evaluated for their potential for completion by 2020. Projects of particular relevance to the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County were discussed with sponsoring agencies as appropriate. Table 5-3 below details network improvements in and around the study corridor deemed important to the extension of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County that are expected to be completed by 2020. Network modifications were made with consideration for roadway geometry defined in the 2035 RivTAM roadway network in order to maintain consistency between model years. 5.7 FORECAST MODEL YEAR INPUTS, 2035 The 2035 forecast model year was selected because the inputs are well defined in the RivTAM model. As such, many inputs to the 2035 model only required reasonableness checking. Updated socioeconomic inputs, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report, were developed by PB to reflect forecasted 2035 conditions. The 2035 roadway network provided with the RivTAM model was verified and updated as necessary to reflect the most recent assumptions for expected 2035 conditions. Planned highway improvements throughout the region and localized improvements in the area surrounding the study corridor were researched and evaluated for their potential for completion by 2035. Projects of particular relevance to the extension of the 91 Express Lanes 5.7 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 into Riverside County were discussed with sponsoring agencies as appropriate. Table 5-3 details network improvements in and around the study corridor deemed important to the SR- 91 Riverside County Express Lanes Project that are expected to be completed by 2035. Table 5-3 Relevant Network Improvements Network Improvement 2010 Base Network 2020 Base Network 2035 Base Network Additional Comments SR-91, add 1 EB GP, SR-241to SR-71 o x x Completed in 2010 after calibration data was collected. Makes 5 GP lanes. SR-91, add 1 GP, SR-55 to SR-241 o x x Makes 5 GP lanes. SR-91, add 1 GP, SR-71 to 1-15 SR-91, add C/D Road, Main to 1-15 o o x x x x Makes 5 GP lanes. SR-91, convert existing HOV lane to Express lane, add 1 Express lane per direction, Orange/Riverside County Line through 1-15 o x x 2 Express Lanes / direction, provides mixing area with Orange County Express lanes at Orange/Riverside County Line SR-91/ 1-15, add direct connector, west on SR- 91 Express lanes to/from south on 1-15 Express Lanes o x x Tolled direct connectors, 1 lane/direction. SR-91/ SR-71 Interchange & EB C/D Road o x x Completion based on a 2-year construction period following the SR-91 CIP completionin SR-91, add 1 WB GP, Tustin Ave o x x Makes 4 GP lanes. SR-91/ SR-241, add Direct Connectors to/from east on SR-91 o x x Tolled direct connectors, 1lane/direction. SR-91, add 1 GP, SR-57 to SR-55 o o x SR-91, Fairmont Blvd IC o o x SR-91, add 1 GP, SR 241 to SR 71 0 o x Based on meeting Measure A voter commitment by 2039. Makes 6 GP lanes. MIS Corridor A MIS Corridor B (Irvine -Corona Expressway) o o o o o o SR-241, Weir Canyon Interchange o o x Foothill South (construct) Foothill South (widen) o o x o x x 1-15, add 1 Express lane/direction, SR-60to El Cerrito o x x Based on 1-15 CIP phase 1. 1-15, add 1 GP lane/direction, SR-60to El o o o Based on 1-15 CIP phase 2 (completion by 1-15 / SR-91, add direct connector, west on SR- 91 Express lanes to/from north on 1-15 Express Lanes o o o Based on I-15 CIP phase 2 (completion by 2039). Mid -County Parkway, east of 1-215 o o x CETAP West, I-15 to 1-215 (formerly MCP from 1-15 to I-215) ° o x o x x 1-10, add HOV lane, I-605 to SR-57 1-210, LA County Line to 1-215 x x x Completed. SR-38, High Desert Corridor o o x o = not included in model year network x = included in model year network 5.8 MODEL TOLLS The 2007/2008 and 2035 RivTAM roadway networks contained tolls at all toll facilities covered by the model. In preparing both the 2010 and 2020 networks, the derivation of these tolls 5.8 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 could not be determined nor their values verified against toll schedules from prior years. To better represent the 2010 base year tolls, a model toll schedule was prepared based on actual toll schedules obtained for each of the toll facilities in the roadway network. For the future year 2020 and 2035 roadway networks, the long term growth rate of tolls was assumed to parallel inflation, and tolls at new toll facilities were based on previous studies of those facilities, comparable toll roads in the region, or tolls provided in the 2035 RivTAM roadway network. 5.9 CALIBRATION & VALIDATION OF THE MODEL A significant component of model development is the collection, collation and summarization of data representing existing conditions to compare against predictions from the model. This process, called calibration and validation, is essential to developing the model to an investment grade standard. Calibration and validation of the enhanced RivTAM model focused primarily on the study corridor with the objective of reasonably replicating 2010 demand in and around this corridor. Additional limited calibration was done with respect to time -of -day and vehicle occupancy. 5.10 DATA SOURCES To support the calibration and validation process, the extensive project specific data was collected. These data focused on: • Detailed highway volumes within and around the SR-91 corridor • Toll data and tolled traffic information for the toll diversion model • Origin -Destination flows through the project corridor • Travel time data in the project corridor The Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS) count database was examined as the primary source of traffic counts. PeMS provides automated daily counts on freeways across Southern California. A database of detector locations and quality was examined to find count locations in and around the study area with reliable and properly functioning detectors. While some locations had only one detector recording bi-directional traffic, most had two detectors each recording a single direction, and a few with locations with HOV lanes had four. This project's traffic data subcontractor (DKS) extracted data for these locations by 15 minute period averaged over all weekdays (excluding holidays) between mid -September and mid -November 2010. In addition, DKS took separate counts in early November 2010 at the seven locations shown in Figure 5-2. A complete summary of the data collected was detailed in Chapter 3 earlier in this report. 5.9 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 Figure 5-2 Count Locations 5.11 CALIBRATION & VALIDATION PROCESS To validate the assignment accuracy of the model, all available counts were aggregated by the four time periods defined by the model and posted to the appropriate links in the 2010 roadway network, and a toll diversion assignment was performed. It was found that on a daily basis the model was producing acceptable volume/count ratios, but that the model was not producing acceptable aggregate volume/count ratios by time period. A simplified approach was developed using trip table adjustment factors for each time period to bring the aggregate volume/count ratios by time period closer to acceptable levels. Early model runs also revealed that the model tended to overestimate the number of trips using HOV lanes in and around the study corridor. To bring aggregate HOV lane volume/count ratios closer to acceptable levels, an adjustment factor was applied to the HOV2 and HOV3+ trip tables to decrease the number of HOV trips in the model. The difference in trips was added back into the trip tables as SOV trips, such that the total number of trips was unchanged by trip purpose and time period. To further adjust the HOV lane volume/count ratios, the speed and capacity of the HOV lanes, initially determined by the RivTAM model, were reduced by 20% and 30%, respectively, to represent the additional impedance associated with weaving into and out of the HOV lanes, other access/egress restrictions and bus volumes. The above adjustments each improved the aggregate volume/count ratios of the 2010 assignment. It was decided to perform a more comprehensive and detailed adjustment of the trip tables, to reflect micro -level errors in the zone -to -zone trip tables that were preventing the assigned volumes from being close enough to the counts. This was done using a procedure that automatically adjusts a trip table in response to count data. The procedure utilized is called Adaptable Assignment (AA). This process has been documented in technical papers and has been used in several prior studies. 5.10 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 The adaptable assignment process iterates through the trip tables one O/D pair at a time, compares the total volume on the assigned route with the total of the counts on the assigned route and adjusts the number of trips for that O/D pair based on the volume/count ratio. A new assignment is performed using the adjusted trip tables, and the process repeated. For this project, the process was repeated for four iterations. Finally, the starting trip tables are subtracted from the final trip tables to derive a calibration adjustment table. For the forecast model years, the calibration tables are added to the trip tables produced by the model to produce the final trip tables that are used for assignment. The result of the calibration adjustments above is a model that reflects the most recent travel forecasting work in the region, has been enhanced with a state-of-the-art toll diversion model, and which matches the 2010 count data reasonably well. While there are no nationally accepted guidelines that define reasonably well quantitatively, the most recent and relevant guidance is found in the Federal Highway Administration's Travel Model Improvement Program document Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking, Second Edition, September 2010. This report says that the best indicators for judging assignment accuracy are the aggregate volume/count ratio and the percent root -mean -square error (%RMSE). The %RMSE is a more stringent statistic, as it treats all errors (high or low) the same and is based on the square of assigned volume vs. count difference. While this document does not provide a specific Federal standard on what level of accuracy is acceptable, it does summarize the %RMSE guidelines used in Ohio, Florida, and Oregon, as shown in Figure 5-3. This figure represents daily assignments. Table 5-4 presents aggregate volume/count accuracy criteria, stratified by facility type, from an earlier version of the FHWA report. 5.11 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 Figure 5-3 %RMSE Assignment Accuracy Guidelines Target %R I8E 100% 90% 80% TO% 60% 50% 4+0% .3-y0% 20% 10% 0% --• • Florida -Acceptable ■ Florida - Desirable Ohio Oregon ■ A. ■ + • ■ ■ • • • ■ ■ 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100 000 Mid -Point of Link Volume Group Sources: Ohio: Giaima, Gregory, Travel Demand Forecasting Manual 1-Traffic Assignment Procedures; Florida: FSI T I5-Cube Framework Phase II, Model Calibration and Validation Standards: Model Validation Guidelines and Standards, and Oregon: FSUTMS-Cuibe Framework Phase II, Model Calibration and Validation Standards, Draft Tecluaical Vlemorandu ra 1. Source of graphic: Travel Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking, Second Edition, prepared by Cambridge Systematics for FHWA, September 2010. Table 5-4 Volume/Count Assignment Accuracy Criteria by Functional Classification Functional Classification Volume/Count Error Freeway ±7°% Principal Arterial ±10% Minor Arterial ±15% Collector ±25% Source: Model Validation and Reasonableness Checking Manual, prepared by Barton-Aschman Associates and Cambridge Systematics for FHWA, February 1997. Figure 5-4 presents the %RMSE for link groups based on daily link volume for the enhanced RivTAM Model, along with a logarithmic trend line. It can be seen that for most link groups, %RMSE is in line with or lower than the levels depicted in Figure 5-3. One point, representing the HOV lanes has a high %RMSE, however, given the difficulties in forecasting HOV volumes detailed earlier in the chapter, this point is not considered problematic. 5.12 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Travel Demand Model May 9, 2012 Figure 5-4 Enhanced RivTAM Model %RMSE Assignment Accuracy 100% 90% 80%. 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%. 10% 0% `. • • • - - 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Mid -Point of Link Volume Group (000's) Table 5-5 presents the Volume/Count Error and %RMSE for the enhanced RivTAM model grouped by facility type. It can be seen that the Volume/Count Error in the enhanced RivTAM model is generally lower than the levels depicted in Table 5-4. Table 5-6 presents the Volume/Count Error and %RMSE for the enhanced RivTAM model grouped by time period. Table 5-5 Enhanced RivTAM Model Volume/Count Assignment Accuracy by Facility Type Facility Type Volume/Count Error %RMSE Freeway -3.8 % 9.6% Expressway -5.3% 13.7% HOV Lanes -0.3% 43.2% All Links -3.5% 13.3% Table 5-6 Enhanced RivTAM Model Volume/Count Assignment Accuracy by Period Time Period Volume/Count Error %RMSE AM Peak -0.7% 22.2% Mid -Day -5.2% 15.4% PM Peak -0.1% 22.7% Night -6.3% 16.4% 5.13 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 6.0 Micro -Simulation Model 6.1 OVERVIEW A micro -simulation model was created and used to model the future operations and potential traffic and revenue for the proposed Riverside County Express Lanes. Micro -simulation is a traffic modeling procedure that produces a highly detailed traffic simulation. Vehicles are individually loaded onto the highway network and their impact on traffic operations are simulated on a second by second basis. This chapter presents the overall modeling methodology, existing conditions model development and calibration, and use of the model to forecast future year 2035 PM peak period conditions. 6.2 METHODOLOGY PTV's VISSIM version 5.2 software was used to model the proposed Riverside County Express Lanes. The simulation was built to model the future year 2035 2 PM to 7 PM period. VISSIM's built-in managed use lanes model framework was used to forecast the demand for the proposed express lanes. Initially an existing conditions model was created and calibrated in an effort to prove the model's ability to accurately replicate existing conditions traffic during the 2 PM to 7 PM period. Highway network geometry was obtained from aerial photography available from internet maps and photographs supplied by Google and Microsoft's Bing.com and survey data. Origin and destination matrices were built from traffic data collected from the Ca!trans PEMS database, Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes traffic data obtained from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and counts independently conducted during November 2010 using Wavetronix and Blufax traffic count technology. The model was calibrated against traffic count data and travel time data also collected during November 2010. A future conditions model was created by modifying the existing conditions model's geometry based on information from drawings provided by the Project design team as well as knowledge of projects scheduled in the RTP and 2011 SR 91 Implementation Plan. Future traffic volumes were developed based on travel demand model forecasts for the year 2035. Operations were evaluated using model predicted travel time and throughput, and revenue was predicted by the software's built-in managed use lanes model. 6.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 6.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS MODEL The purpose of the existing conditions model is to create a model that can be expected to reliably depict future year conditions. This is accomplished by modeling the existing condition as surveyed in November 2010, using traffic count data, a set of origin -destination volumes, network characteristics, and driver behaviors that can replicate observed conditions. 6.3.1 Network Assumptions The existing conditions model replicates the SR 91 and 1-15 highway network as of November 2010, following cessation of construction of the SR 91 EB auxiliary lane between SR 241 and SR 71, but prior to its opening. The extents of the model, shown in Figure 6-1, are: • SR 91 west of Tustin Avenue • SR 55 south of SR 91 • SR 91 east of Pierce Street • 1-15 north of 2nd Street • 1-15 south of Cajalco Road Figure 6-1 Existing Conditions Micro simulation Model Study Area The network's western extents were chosen to be west of Tustin Avenue and just south of SR 91 on SR 55 because these locations serve as the two portals from which traffic can make the decision to use the Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes or the adjacent free general purpose lanes. Managed use lane decision coefficients for both the existing SR 91 Express Lanes and proposed extension into Riverside County were developed based on modeling of this decision. The eastern and southern extents of SR 91 east of Pierce Street and 1-15 south of Cajalco Road reflect locations where recurring PM peak period congestion is known to end. These locations 6.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 are local bottlenecks that cause recurring congestion and queuing that impact upstream segments of SR 91. The northern extent of 1-15 north of 2nd Street reflects the point at which the number of lanes on 1-15 north of SR 91 stabilizes at three lanes per direction. Table 6-1 lists by segment and direction the number of lanes coded for the general purpose lanes, SR 91 Express Lanes, and Riverside County HOV lanes. The number of lanes on freeways and ramps in the study area were identified using a combination of aerial photography from Google's Internet mapping website (maps.google.com) and Microsoft's Bing.com, traffic counts, and site visits. Table 6-1 SR 91, Existing Conditions Model Number of Lanes Segment EB GP EB HOWT WB GP WB HOWT SR 55 to Lakeview 6 2 5 1 Through Lakeview 5 2 5 2 Lakeview to Imperial 5 2 5 2 Through Imperial 4 2 4 2 Imperial to Weir 4 2 4 2 Through Weir 4 2 4 2 Weir to 241 5 2 5 2 241 to Gypsum West 4 2 4 2 Through Gypsum 4 2 4 2 Gypsum to 241 East 4 2 4 2 241 to CL 4 2 5 2 CL to Green River 4 2 (Start HOV) 6 1 Through Green River 4 2 6 1 Green River to SR 71 4 1 5 1 Through SR 71 4 1 4 1 SR 71 to Serfas Club 5 1 5 1 Through Serfas Club 4 1 4 1 Serfas Club to Maple 5 1 5 1 Through Maple 4 1 4 1 Maple to Lincoln 4 1 4 1 Through Lincoln 5 0 4 1 Lincoln to 2nd 4 1 4 1 2nd to Main St 4 1 5 0 Through Main St 4 1 4 1 Main St to 1-15 5 1 5 1 Through 1-15 3 1 3 1 1-15 to McKinley 4 1 4 1 Through McKinley 3 1 3 1 McKinley to Pierce Street 3 1 3 1 6.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-2 1-15, Existing Conditions Model Number of Lanes Segment SB GP NB GP North of 2nd Street 3 3 2nd Street to Hidden Valley Pkwy 4 4 Hidden Valley Pkwy to SR 91 4 4 SR 91 to Magnolia Avenue 5 4 Magnolia Avenue to Ontario Ave 4 4 Ontario Ave to El Cerrito Road 4 3 El Cerrito Road to Cajalco Road 3 3 South of Cajalco Road 3 3 6.3.2 Volume Assumptions For the existing model year, traffic counts over the period were collected to develop demand volumes. Demand volumes were created by combining entry ramp, exit ramp, and eastbound mainline count data on SR 91 west of SR 55 and on SR 55, and westbound mainline data from SR 91 east of 1-15, and from 1-15 direct connector data. Input traffic data came from a variety of sources as listed in Table 6-3. Table 6-3 Micro simulation Model Existing Volume Sources Location Data Source SR 91 Express Lanes OCTA transaction data SR 91 GP and HOV lanes, and 1-15 mainline Wavetronix and PEMS data SR 241 direct connector volumes TCA transaction and PEMS data SR 71 and 1-15 direct connector volumes Wavetronix and Blufax OD data All other ramps PEMS short term and long term count data As demonstrated in Chapter 3, the SR 91 eastbound general purpose lanes operate at conditions that exceed capacity during the PM peak period. To reflect the demand overcapacity condition, traffic demand exceeding traffic count levels were input into the micro -simulation model. The SR 91 GP lanes experience heavy congestion and queuing throughout the PM peak period (3-7 PM), and at certain locations during the 2-3 PM shoulder hour. Queues can be observed developing at various chokepoints; 1) the eastbound segment east of SR 241, 2) segments between SR 71 and 1-15, where the GP lanes drop from 5 to 4 lanes, along with weaving of vehicles entering and exiting via ramps, and vehicles weaving in and out of HOV lanes, and 3) through McKinley and Pierce Streets where the eastbound GP lanes drop from four to three general purpose lanes. 6.4 a Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 The aggregation of entry ramp, exit ramp, and edge of network mainline entry volumes resulted in a distribution of general purpose traffic demand from 2 PM to 7 PM that exceeds levels counted in the field. Figure 6-2 through Figure 6-5 compare eastbound GP lane counts and input demand. Figure 6-2 Existing Conditions SR 241 to CL, EB GP Demand vs. Count Difference, Model Count vs Input Volume 9,000 8,500 8,000 7,500 7,000 6,500 6,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 SR 241 to County Line, EB GP -DEMAND r—COUNT VOLUME ♦-- 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p Figure 6-3 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, EB GP Demand vs. Count 9,000 8,000 w E c 7,000 c 6,000 c 0 u 5,000 v 4,000 0 c °1 3,000 w `w 2,000 1,000 SR 71 to Serfas Club, EB GP DEMAND COUNT VOLUME • • 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p 6.5 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-4 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, EB GP Demand vs. Count 10,000 E 9,000 0 c 8,000 i c 8 7,000 d v 0 a 6,000 c a `w C 5,000 4,000 Main Street to 1-15, EB GP —i DEMAND COUNT VOLUME 1p-2p 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p Figure 6-5 Existing Conditions 1-15 to McKinley Street, EB GP Demand vs. Count 8,000 7,000 E g 6,000 5 a e � 5,000 a c 8 4,000 o 0 g 3,000 m u c m a' 2,000 a ac 1,000 1-15 to McKinley, EB GP DEMAND 4—COUNT VOLUME �r 1p-2p 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p Eastbound Express lane and HOV lane demand levels were set to match traffic counts. Figure 6-6 through Figure 6-9 demonstrate that at all four locations demand and counts match or are similar to each other. 6.6 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-6 Existing Conditions SR 241 to CL, EB Express Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 a 2,000 0 1,500 1,000 500 SR 241 to County Line, EB Express —I DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p Figure 6-7 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, EB HOV Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 v 2,000 £ 0 1,500 1,000 500 SR 71 to Serfas Club, EB HOV —DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME r===='"----4 1 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p 6.7 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-8 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, EB HOV Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 a 2,000 0 1,500 1,000 500 Main Street to 1-15, EB HOV —DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p Figure 6-9 Existing Conditions 1-15 to McKinley Street, EB HOV Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 u 2,000 £ 1,500 1,000 500 1-15 to McKinley, EB HOV —DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p The westbound general purpose and HOV lanes in Riverside County were observed to typically operate without congestion during the 2 PM to 7 PM period. Based on these observations, input demand should match or be similar to counted traffic levels. General purpose lane 6.8 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 demand and counts are within a small range of error at two critical locations, between SR 241 and Green River Road, and between 1-15 and Main Street. These locations are located at the western and eastern ends of the proposed Riverside County Express Lanes. Input demand at the location between SR 71 and Serfas Club Road exceed counted levels while the location east of 1-15 is below counted levels. Neither the over or underestimation are critical to the overall model calibration since the westbound lanes would still operate below capacity in both existing and future PM peak periods. HOV lane demand match or are similar to counts at all four locations. Figure 6-10 Existing Conditions SR 241 to CL, WB GP Demand vs. Count Model Count vs Input Volume 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 SR 241 to County Line, WB GP DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME �- _ 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p 6.9 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-11 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, WB GP Demand vs. Count Model Count vs Input Volume 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 SR 71 to Serfas Club, WB GP DEMAND COUNT VOLUME 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p Figure 6-12 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, WB GP Demand vs. Count Model Count vs Input Volume 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 Main St to 1-15, WB GP DEMAND tCOUNT VOLUME 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-13 Existing Conditions McKinley Street to 1-15, WB GP Demand vs. Count 8,000 7,000 w 6,000 E >0 5,000 a c > 4,000 C' o 0 u 3,000 w -o 0 i 2,000 1,000 1-15 to McKinley, WB GP DEMAND 4-COUNT VOLUME • • A-.-.-.-.-.-. Ir -em..........4 1p-2p 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p Figure 6-14 Existing Conditions SR 241 to Green River Road, WB Express Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 d 2,000 E 0 1,500 1,000 500 SR 241 to Green River Road, WB Express DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME .,, 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p 6.11 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-15 Existing Conditions SR 71 to Serfas Club, WB HOV Demand vs. Count Serfas Club to SR 71, WB HOV 3,500 3,000 - 2,500 2,000 a 1,500 1,000 500 -DEMAND —*—COUNT VOLUME 1 • 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p Figure 6-16 Existing Conditions Main Street to 1-15, WB HOV Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 w 2,000 £ 0 1,500 1,000 500 1-15 to Main Street, WB HOV —A—DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME • 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p 6.12 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-17 Existing Conditions McKinley Street to 1-15, WB HOV Demand vs. Count 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 a 1,500 McKinley Street to 1-15, WB HOV DEMAND tCOUNTVOLUME 1,000 • 500 2p-3p 3p-4p 4p-5p 5p-6p 6p-7p To ensure that eastbound input traffic demand did not over or under estimate actual demand, it is necessary to identify the hours preceding and following the first hour and last hour where congestion, and therefore demand exceeding capacity exists. From a review of traffic and speed data presented in Chapter 3, the 1-2 PM and 7-8 PM hours can be seen to have little to no congestion. Collectively, traffic counted during the 1-8 PM hours, and demand estimated during the same time period should match or be within a small percentage of each other. Table 6-4 compares total traffic counts with total estimated demand at four segments in the corridor, and demonstrates that estimated demand deviates from the overall counts by no more than 2.6, and is as close as 0.2 percent. Table 6-4 SR 91 Eastbound Global (GP & HOV) Traffic Count vs. Estimated Demand, 1-8 PM Segment I Count 241 to CL 62,013 SR 71 to Serfas I 56,186 Main St To 1-15 1 61,613 1-15 to McKinley ; 47,286 Estimated Demand % Difference 63,655 2.6% 56,313 0.2% 60,724 ---� -1.4% 48,268 2.1% Heavy Vehicle Distribution Wavetronix traffic counts classified vehicles into three size classes, small, medium, and large, which correspond to vehicle lengths (vehicles less than 30 feet are small, 30 to 40 feet are medium, and 40+ feet are large vehicles). The data demonstrate that the percentage of large vehicles traveling eastbound vary from 1.1 percent to 3.2 percent over the course of the 2 PM 6.13 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 to 7 PM period and across the four survey locations. Westbound percentages vary from 1.6 percent to 4.1 percent. The ranges of large vehicle percentages are relatively small and not expected to have significant impact on the simulation results. Therefore as a simplifying assumption, heavy vehicle percentages by direction were estimated for each hour and direction by averaging the percentages observed at each of the four count locations. Table 6-5 presents the hourly heavy vehicle percentages input for the eastbound and westbound directions. Table 6-5 Count vs. Estimated Large Truck and Bus Percentages Eastbound Westbound SR 241 to SR 71 to . SR 241 to SR 71 to Used in Green Serfas : Main St to 1-15 to Used in Green Serfas Main St to • 1-15 to Time simulation River Rd Club 1-15 McKinley simulation River Rd Club 1-15 . McKinley 2-3 PM 2.8% 3.2% j 2.1% • 3.2% 2.4% 3.3% 2.6% I 3.5% j 2.9% • 4.1% 3-4 PM 2.3% 2.8% I 1.7% ; 2.5% 2.1% 2.7% 2.2% I 2.9% { 2.5% ; 3.4% 4-5 PM 2.5% 3.0% I 1.3% 3.2% 2.5% 2.2% 1.9% 1 2.3% 1.9% 2.8% 5-6 PM 2.0% 2.5% 1 1.2% 2.3% 2.2% 1.8% 1.7% 1 1.9% 1.6% 1.9% 6-7 PM 1.6% 1.9% I 1.1% . 1.8% 1.6% 2.4% 2.4% I 2.5% I 2.1% ; 2.7% Origin and Destination Matrix Volumes for entry and exit ramps were developed from an hourly balanced demand origin and destination (0/D) matrix for the 2 PM to 7 PM time period. Using a matrix of 0/D patterns from the RivTAM travel demand model, 0/D trip matrices were developed from on/off ramps volumes for each hour. To better calibrate trip patterns on SR-91 near the 1-15 interchange, Blufax 0/D data was used as a target and 0/D seed matrices were adjusted to match those targets. Table 6-6 presents summary level 0/D volumes input into the existing conditions model. Table 6-6 Existing Conditions O/D Demand Table, 2-7 PM Origin/Destination West of ; SR-55 SR-55 B'twn SR-55 & SR-241 SR-241 ;Green River '. & SR-71 B'twn SR-71 & 1-15 1-15 North j 1-15 South East of 1-15 Total West of S R-55 6,650 8,600 11,100 i 200 ; 2,100 3,150 1,400 + 2,650 4,500 35,850 S R-55 10,500 8,250 0 3,500 2,900 2,050 2,700 5,550 29,900 B'twn S R-55 & SR-241 8,950 9,550 1,350 1,600 '. 4,650 1,400 1,000 850 2,200 29,350 SR-241 400 0 3,200 3,150 1,050 1,650 j 950 2,600 10,400 Green Riker & SR-71 1,400 1,600 2,500 900 1,950 2,550 + 3 300 j 2,400 1,450 13,600 131wn SR-71 & 1-15 2,350 1, 200 1,150 300 r 4,450 1,100 F 2,600 1 3,700 7,800 16,850 1-15 North 2,100 1,650 950 1,000 ; 300 2,750 11,400 13,400 5,700 33,550 1-15 South 2,500 1,900 850 750 ; 2,450 2,900 11,200 17,950 7,600 40,500 East of 1-15 4,350 2,700 850 1,350 ; 1,200 5,500 4,950 6,100 10,000 27,000 Total 34,850 24,500 29,350 4,750 ; 22,550 17,800 31,600 44,600 37,400 210,000 6.14 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 6.3.3 Car Following Model Parameters The simulation principally relies on the use of the freeway lane driving behavior (Wiedemann 99 car following model). The calibration procedure required modifications to VISSIM's default freeway driving behaviors. The use of default parameters would result in capacity above observed levels as well as unrealistic lane changing behavior. In conjunction with information from published simulation reports (Gomes, Horowitz, Path 2005), parameters were adjusted based on observations of throughput, travel speeds, and lane changing behavior. The following general parameters resulted in model results that were representative of observed conditions. Table 6-7 Car Following Model Parameters Parameter Link Type Basic Freeway Hard Curve Heavy Weave Headway (CC1, sec) 1.1 1.5 1.0 Following (CC4/5) -2.0/-2.0 -2.0/-2.0 -2.0/-2.0 Safety Distance Reduction Factor 0.30 0.60 0.05 Vehicle Diffusion (sec) 120 120 60 6.3.4 Managed Lanes Coefficients and Tolls Express lane traffic levels were forecast using Vissim 5.2's built in managed lanes decision model. The decision model assigns to each vehicle passing a managed lane decision point a probability of that vehicle using the Express Lanes. The probability is calculated using a Logit model of the form: 1'Olanaged) —1 where ea UMm7aged �a* UMannged +ea*U nmanaged —1 1+ ea*AU 1 A tthry= C ostCee cient * �Cost + ThneCoe cielir * i�ne The decision applies only to vehicles that are eligible to use the Express Lanes. Eligible vehicles were classified as any vehicle that is permitted to use the Express Lanes and also has an origin and destination that can be served by the Orange County Express Lanes without any back- tracking. For example any SOV, HOV2+, or bus, but not a heavy truck trip traveling from SR 55 to Serfas Club Drive would be subjected to the managed lanes decision. However a single occupant vehicle traveling from SR 55 to Weir Canyon Road would not be subjected to the decision, even though the vehicle could travel from SR 55 to Weir Canyon Road via the 6.15 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 eastbound Express Lanes, exit at Green River Road and use the westbound GP lanes to get to Weir Canyon Road. A set of coefficients were developed for each vehicle class using the eastbound SR 91 Express Lanes, and a separate set were developed for the westbound SR 91 Express Lanes. Coefficients were adjusted until simulated express lane volumes were close to actual observed levels. Figure 6-18 and Figure 6-19 show a managed use lane probability curve at a $2 toll and a $5 toll, for each direction and vehicle class. The eastbound toll curves show greater price sensitivity for SOV's, and reduced sensitivity for higher occupancy vehicles. Price sensitivity also declines as travel time savings from using the managed lanes increases. Westbound toll curves are more sensitive than eastbound curves are to price changes, but also assume the same reduced sensitivity at higher time savings and higher occupancies. Table 6-8 and Table 6-9 show toll rates used for the eastbound and westbound Express Lanes. 6.16 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-18 SR 91 Eastbound Toll Curves by Vehicle Class 100% 90% 9 80% 7 E 70% to 60% a 50% u 40% W 30% O `0 20 X 10% 0 SR 91 Eastbound SOV —$2 Toll —$5 Toll 0 20 30 40 Express Lane Travel Time Savings SOV Toll Curve 90% d 70% 60% a 50% u 40% W 30% O `0 20% X 10% 0% SR 91 Eastbound HOV3+ —$2 Toll —$5 Toll 0 10 20 30 40 Express Lane Travel Time Savings HOV3+ Toll Curve SR 91 Eastbound HOV2 —$2 Toll —$5 Toll 100% 90% go% 3 1 70% al c 6096 c 50% 4096 L 30% O `0 20% X 10% 0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Express Lane Travel Time Savings HOV2 Toll Curve SR 91 Eastbound Bus —$2 Toll —$5 Toll 100% - 9096 2 9 80% 1 70% c 60% n 50% 4096 to .0 3096 O `6 20% X 1096 0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Express Lane Travel Time Savings Bus Toll Curve Table 6-8 SR 91 Eastbound Express Lane Tolls Modeled Occupancy 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM SOV $4.15 $4.70 $8.70 $8.50 $4.05 HOV2 $4.15 $4.70 $8.70 $8.50 $4.05 HOV3 $0.00 $0.00 $4.35 $4.25 $0.00 Bus $0.00 $0.00 $4.35 $4.25 $0.00 6.17 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Westbound Coefficients and Tolls Figure 6-19 SR 91 Westbound Toll Curves by Vehicle Class 100% 90% 9 BO% • 0% 60% i 50% • 40% w 30% O `0 20% X 10% 0% SR 91 Westbound SOV —$2 Toll —$5 Toll 20 30 40 Express Lane Travel Time Savings 60 SOV Toll Curve 100% 90% E. 70% m 60% c 50% u 40% ID 30% 8 O "0 20% X 10% 0% 0 SR 91 Westbound HOV3+ —52 Toll —55 Toll 20 30 40 Express Lane Travel Time Savings HOV3+ Toll Curve 100% 90% 3 80% 70% 60% i 50% u 40% W 30% G O '6 20% X 10% 0% SR 91 Westbound HOV2 �52 Toll Toll 10 20 30 40 Express Lane Travel Time Savings 50 60 HOV2 Toll Curve 100% 90% 3 80% E. • 70% � 60% 50% m 40% w 30% O e 20% X 10% 0% SR 91 Westbound Bus —52 Toll —55 Toll 0 10 20 30 40 Express Lane Travel Time Savings 50 60 Bus Toll Curve Table 6-9 SR 91 Westbound Express Lane Tolls Modeled Occupancy 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM SOV $2.05 $2.05 $2.05 $2.05 $2.05 HOV2 $2.05 $2.05 $2.05 $2.05 $2.05 HOV3 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Bus $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 6.18 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 HOV lane traffic in Riverside County was modeled independently of the managed use lanes model. HOV Lane traffic in Riverside County was assigned using fixed percentages of global traffic as observed from traffic count data. Modeled HOV lane traffic levels were therefore not dependent on travel time savings, but instead were forced to match observed share of global traffic. 6.3.5 Modeled Traffic Results vs. Actual The existing conditions simulation model calibration process resulted in a good match to eastbound traffic counts and travel speeds, and a reasonable representation of westbound counts and speeds. The calibration process focused on obtaining a good match to eastbound general purpose lane and express lane conditions during the PM peak period on the basis of traffic counts and travel speeds. The performance of the westbound general purpose and express lanes were of lesser importance because this direction experiences light congestion during the PM peak period and is expected to continue to see light travel in the future. Therefore the reliability of the PM peak period contribution of the westbound elements to the Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes would be less critical. Using the coefficients and tolls presented, the managed use lanes model was able to produce traffic volumes that are similar to actual observed traffic levels. Traffic on the eastbound Express Lanes during the modeled period was similar to actual levels. Westbound levels did not match as well and overshot by a larger amount during the period. Eastbound general purpose lane, SR 91 Express Lane, and Riverside County HOV lane model volumes were similar to counted levels, and aggregate travel speeds in the corridor were similar to observed levels. Together, they demonstrate that the calibration process has resulted in the proper balance between input 0/D demand volumes, and link capacities. Car following model parameters and managed use lane coefficients are capable of reproducing observed traffic patterns. 6.19 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 GP Lane Volume 2-7 PM Figure 6-20 SR 91 Eastbound General Purpose Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Count Model 1 241 to CL SR 71 to Serfas Main St to 1-15 1-15 to McKinley St Figure 6-21 SR 91 Eastbound Express and HOV Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 15,000 a 12,000 n N a) 7 9,000 ar c fa J = 6,000 c fa ul ai L fx 3,000 0 Count Model 241 to CL SR 71 to Serfas Main St to 1-15 1-15 to McKinley St 6.20 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-22 SR 91 Eastbound Travel Speeds, Model vs. Actual, 2-7 PM 70 60 a 50 E v 40 v O. c 30 v E tic 20 10 0 EB SR 91 GP & Express, SR 55 to East of 115 Actual Avg Speed Model Avg Speed 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM Calibration results of the westbound facility demonstrated that the model did not match actual results as closely, but still are representative of observed conditions. General purpose lane model volumes are lower than observed between SR 241 and the County Line, and from 1-15 to McKinley Street. SR 91 Express Lane volumes were over -predicted by the managed use lanes model, and HOV lane volumes between 1-15 and McKinley Street were lower than observed, in line with the lower GP lane volume. Aggregate travel speeds on the SR 91 corridor were lower than observed. Since the westbound Riverside County Express Lanes are expected to make only a small contribution to total facility traffic and revenue during the PM Peak period, over or underestimation of traffic on the westbound facility is of lesser significance. 6.21 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-23 SR 91 Westbound General Purpose Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 40,000 35,000 30,000 2 a 25,000 N G! C m a (- 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 241 to CL ■ Count ■ Model SR 71 to Serfas Main St to 1-15 , 1-15 to McKinley St Figure 6-24 SR 91 Westbound Express and HOV Lanes, Model vs. Count, 2-7 PM 15,000 a 12,000 n N v c m = 6,000 -o c ro v �x 3,000 ■ Count ■ Model 241 to CL SR 71 to Serfas Iir Main St to I-15 1-15 to McKinley St 6.22 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-25 SR 91 Westbound Travel Speeds, Model vs. Actual, 2-7 PM 70 WB, east Actual Speed of 1-15 to SR 55 (mph) Model Speed 60 -� 50 _ 7 s a E 7; 40 a a a 30 E oa a Ln 20 10 0 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 6.4 FUTURE YEAR MODEL ASSUMPTIONS AND RESULTS Simulations of future scenarios model the 2035 condition before and after the GP lane improvements scheduled for completion by year 2035 (GP lane addition from SR 241 to SR 71 and 1-15 to Pierce Street). Both scenarios exclude Corridor A, the 1-15/91 HOT direct connectors to/from the north, and the SR 71/91 HOT direct connectors. The Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes are modeled as described in the "initial" condition in both the scenario prior to the year 2035 general purpose lane improvements (2035 by 2020 Network) and after year 2035 improvements (2035 by 2035 Network). The list below details the principal network assumptions in each scenario. 6.4.1 Network Assumptions and Scenarios The "2035 by 2020 network" scenario assumes the highway network for years from 2020 and 2034, while the 2035 network represents the highway network for years from 2035 to 2039. Both scenarios assume year 2035 trip levels. Two scenarios were modeled because in 2035, significant highway improvements would be made that would change travel patterns and express lane usage. 6.23 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 2035 by 2020 network From 2020 to 2035, the network is generally unchanged. Generally 5 general purpose lanes would be available between SR 241 and 1-15, and 3 to 4 GP lanes would be available east of 1-15. The following is a list of highway improvements that are included in the 2035 by 2020 network scenario: • Eastbound auxiliary lane between SR 241 and SR 71 completed in December 2010 • Fifth general purpose lane between SR 55 and SR 241 that is scheduled for completion in 2013. • Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes, two lanes each direction with direct connector ramps to and from 1-15 south of SR 91 but not I-15 north of SR 91. • SR 91/241 tolled direct connector • SR 71/91 general purpose lane connector improvement • Serfas Club Drive, Maple Avenue, and Lincoln Avenue interchange and ramp improvements • Includes Main street CD road improvements • Includes Phase 1 of the 1-15 Express Lanes between El Cerrito Road and the northern extent of the micro simulation study area (2nd Street) 2035 by 2035 Network The 2035 by 2035 network scenario adds several highway improvements scheduled for completion by year 2035. These improvements include: • Sixth general purpose lane between SR 241 and SR 71 in each direction • Additional general purpose lane in each direction of SR 91 between 1-15 and Pierce Street • CETAP corridor with direct access to the 1-15 general purpose lanes north and south of Cajalco Road. North facing ramps (CETAP WB to 1-15 NB, 1-15 SB to CETAP EB) are assumed north of Cajalco Road, and south facing ramps (CETAP WB to 1-15 SB, 1-15 NB to CETAP EB) are assumed south of Cajalco Road. Table 6-10 lists the number of lanes assumed in each scenario by segment of SR 91. 6.24 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-10 SR 91 Number of General Purpose Lanes Segment 2035 by 2020 Network 2035 by 2035 Network GP (EB/WB) Exp(EB/WB) GP (EB/WB) Exp(EB/WB) SR 55 to Lakeview 7/5 2/2 7/5 1/1 Through Lakeview 6/5 2/2 6/5 2/2 Lakeview to Imperial 6/5 2/2 6/5 2/2 Through Imperial 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Imperial to Weir 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Through Weir 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Weir to SR 241 6/6 2/2 6/6 2/2 SR 241 to Gypsum West 4/4 2/2 4/4 2/2 Through Gypsum 4/4 2/2 4/4 2/2 Gypsum to SR 241 East 4/4 2/2 4/4 2/2 SR 241 to County Line 5/5 3/3 6/6 3/3 County Line to Green River 8/8 0/0 9/9 0/0 Through Green River 5/5 2/2 6/6 2/2 Green River to SR 71 5/6 2/2 6/6 2/2 SR 71 Interchange 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 SR 71 to Serfas Club 6/6 2/2 6/6 2/2 Through Serfas Club 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Serfas Club to Maple 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Through Maple 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Maple to Lincoln 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Through Lincoln 5/5 2/2 5/5 2/2 Lincoln to Main 7/7 2/2 7/7 2/2 Through Main 6/6 2/2 6/6 2/2 Main to I-15 6/6 2/2 4/4 2/2 Through 1-15 3/3 0/0 5/5 0/0 1-15 to McKinley 5/4 1/1 5/5 1/1 Through McKinley 4/3 0/0 4/4 1/1 McKinley to Pierce Street 4/3 1/1 4/4 1/1 Through Pierce Street 3/3 1/1 3/3 1/1 In both the 2035 by 2020 network and 2035 by 2035 network scenarios, 1-15 improvements are limited to the addition of Express Lanes (two lanes per direction from Ontario Avenue to SR 91, and one lane per direction otherwise), and an auxiliary lane to accommodate Express Lane access from the Express Lane access point between Magnolia and Ontario, to Ontario Avenue, and from the 1-15 Express Lane southern terminus between El Cerrito and Cajalco Road, to Cajalco Road. Table 6-11 lists the number of lanes assumed on 1-15 in both scenarios. 6.25 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-11 1-15 Number of General Purpose and Express Lanes Segment 2035 by 2020 Network 2035 by 2035 Network GP (SB/NB) Exp(SB/NB) GP (SB/NB) Exp(SB/NB) 2nd Street to Hidden Valley 5/5 1/1 5/5 1/1 Through Hidden Valley 4/4 1/1 4/4 1/1 Hidden Valley Pkwy to SR 91 4/4 1/1 4/4 1/1 Through SR-91 3/3 1/1 3/3 1/1 SR 91 to Magnolia 5/4 2/2 5/4 2/2 Through Magnolia 4/3 2/2 4/3 2/2 Magnolia to Access Point 1 4/4 2/2 4/4 2/2 Access point 1 to Ontario 5/4 1/1 5/4 1/1 Through Ontario Ave 4/4 1/1 4/4 1/1 Ontario Ave to El Cerrito 4/3 1/1 4/3 1/1 Through El Cerrito 3/3 1/1 3/3 1/1 El Cerrito to Access Point 2 4/4 1/1 4/3 1/1 Access Point 4/4 1/1 4/3 0/0 6.4.2 Volume Assumptions Traffic levels in both scenarios assume year 2035 trips. Trip tables rely on the SR 91 mainline segment volume percentage traffic growth between the existing and future 2035 condition predicted by the RivTAM travel demand model. As an example, if the upstream segment grows 10% and the downstream segment grows 12%, the corresponding micro simulation input volumes were grown 10% and 12%, respectively. Then, both the on and off ramps were grown at the lower percentage, 10% in this case. Finally, one of the ramps was adjusted to account for the unbalanced segment growth (10 vs. 12%). Once ramp volumes were determined, a distribution model similar to that used for the existing condition was applied to create O/D tables, carrying all calibration adjustments from the existing year. In addition to the mainline traffic growth between existing and future years predicted by the RivTAM model, traffic was increased to reflect the expectation of fewer mainline bypass trips. In existing conditions, some motorists avoid segments of the heavily congested SR 91 freeway in favor of using local roads as bypasses. However the existing and future travel demand model forecasts do not see that level of bypass trips during the PM peak period as evidenced by difference in calibration levels. Figure 6-26 presents the percentage difference between PM peak period global traffic predicted by the 2010 RivTAM travel demand model and mainline demand compiled from existing ramp and mainline traffic counts. For the segments between SR 241 and the Riverside/Orange County Line, and through 1-15, the demand model differs from balanced demand by less than 2 percent. Both segments, and especially SR 91 from SR 241 to the County Line, serve as regional pinch -points where few or no 6.26 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 alternatives exist. However for locations between the County Line and 1-15, where vehicles are able to exit the SR 91 freeway and use local bypass links for their trips, the model overestimates freeway traffic. This data may be indicative of the demand model keeping trips on the SR 91 freeway where in reality vehicles may be exiting the road, or avoiding entering because of congestion. In the future, general purpose and Express Lane improvements would add capacity to the corridor, and it is assumed that the level of bypass trips will decline. Figure 6-26 SR 91 Eastbound, RivTAM Model Global Traffic vs. Actual Balanced Demand, 3-7 PM 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% -5% I no/ Through Green River Green River to SR 71 71 to Serfas Club Through Serfas Club Serfas Club to Maple Through Maple Maple to Lincoln Through Lincoln Lincoln to 2nd Through Main Main to 1-15 Ln c-I L 00 2 L H The future 0/D matrix assumes a lower growth rate for trips exiting the eastbound general purpose lanes and a higher rate of growth for trips entering the lanes. The net result is an increase in PM peak period eastbound mainline demand at a rate of 1.1 percent per year rather than 0.9 percent per year. Table 6-12 and Table 6-13 present 0/D matrices for the 2035 by 2020 network and 2035 by 2035 network scenarios. 6.27 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-12 2035 by 2020 Network O/D Matrix, 2-7 PM Origin/Destination West of SR-55 ; i SR-55 B'twn SR-55 & SR-241 ;Green River SR-241 I & SR-71 B'twn SR-71 & 1-15 1-15 North 1-15 South East of 1-15 Total West of SR-55 8,100 ; 9,750 12,400 50 ; 2,400 4,450 1,300 j 2,900 4,850 41,350 SR-55 12,850 i 0 10,400 0 i 3,200 3,950 3,550 2,800 6,350 36,750 B'twn SR-55 & SR-241 11,750 I 12,900 2,250 2,200 3,600 3,750 1,600 1,600 3,650 39,650 S R-241 900 50 4,950 0 I 4,900 2,250 1,550 + 1 1,350 4,900 15,950 Green River & SR-71 2,100 1,750 3,500 1,350 4,550 3,350 250 i 2,300 1,000 19,150 131wn S R-71 & 1-15 2,550 i 1,550 2,150 450 L t 7,150 1,250 3,200 6,050 11,700 24,350 1-15 North 1,950 ! 2,300 1,900 I 950 450 4,800 17,900 20,700 6,650 50,950 1-15 South 3,250 2,900 2,100 1,100 2,400 4,000 17,600 j 28,700 8,850 62,050 East of1-15 5,650 ' 4,450 2,200 2,100 ' 2,000 8,000 5,800 j 7,150 14,050 37,350 Total 43,450 j 31,200 39,650 6,100 j 28,650 27,800 46,950 j 66,400 47,950 290,200 Table 6-13 2035 by 2035 Network O/D Matrix, 2-7 PM Origin/Destination West of SR-55 SR-55 131wn SR-55 & SR-241 I Green River SR-241 & SR-71 B'twn SR-71 & 1-15 1 1-15 North i 1-15 South East of 1-15 Total West of S R-55 7,950 12,300 15,000 400 i 2,350 4,100 1,250 1 2,250 3,550 45,600 SR-55 12,200 0 6,550 0 i 3,550 3,950 1,700 4,400 8,250 32,350 B'twn S R-55 & S R-241 12,050 13,750 2,200 1,300 3,550 4,200 1,300 1,550 3,250 39,900 SR-241 900 100 3,900 0 6,350 2,600 2,200 + 1 1,650 3,350 17,700 Green River & SR-71 3,050 2,150 4,450 I 2,400 1,450 1 3,700 500 1 2,250 700 19,950 131wn SR-71 & 1-15 2,500 1,750 1,450 850 8,300 950 4,000 3,950 11,250 23,750 1-15 North 1,550 2,950 1,550 1,400 250 4,750 14,750 j 18,250 4,250 45,450 1-15 South 3,000 ! 3 3,150 1,450 1,050 ! 4,300 3,000 15,600 j 30,350 5,650 _ 61,900 East of 1-15 3,750 4,550 1,450 r 2,000 2,250 8,850 4,050 j 5,000 11,050 31,900 Total 43,200 I 36,150 36,550 7,400 i 30,100 27,250 41,300 j 64,650 40,250 286,600 6.4.3 Car Following Model Simulation Parameters Future year simulations use the same car following parameters developed in the existing conditions model. However individual links were re-classified as hard curves, heavy weaves, or basic freeway if warranted by observations of initial simulation results. Heavy weaving behavior was applied to links previously assumed as basic freeway if traffic growth resulted in high weaving activity and high congestion. For example, the westbound GP lanes approaching 1-15 and eastbound GP lanes approaching the SR 71 exit ramp are now classified as a "heavy weave" (slightly lower headway and more aggressive lane changing behavior) due to the increase in approach traffic and weaving. Such changes are believed to result in more realistic lane changing. 6.4.4 Managed Lanes Coefficients and Tolls Existing conditions managed use lane toll coefficients were used in the simulation of future traffic. Eastbound Orange County SR 91 Express Lane toll coefficients were used to model 6.28 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Riverside County's eastbound SR 91 Express Lanes and southbound 1-15 Express Lanes. Westbound Orange County SR 91 Express Lane coefficients were used to model Riverside County's westbound SR 91 Express Lanes and northbound 1-15 Express Lanes. Riverside County SR 91 Express Lane tolls from the enhanced toll case spreadsheet model were used for initial simulation tests, but were increased if demand was too high to ensure high travel speeds, or decreased if demand was lower than levels predicted by the market share model. Resulting rates are presented in the forecast results section of this chapter. 6.4.5 Future Model Results, 2035 by 2020 Scenario In the 2035 by 2020 network scenario, higher eastbound through tolls were required to keep express lanes demand at levels that would allow travel speeds to be maintained at high levels (greater than 45 mph). Eastbound traffic levels were limited to about 2,500 vehicles per hour during much of the PM peak period. Eastbound traffic on the RCXL mainline limited by capacity of the EB through movement, which was able to handle at most 1,700 vehicles per hour before operations deteriorated due to congestion and weaving. Overall EB express lane speeds from start to end were above 50 mph through the modeled period for both destinations except for the 5 to 6 PM hour where eastbound speeds declined to 49 miles per hour. Capacity of the eastbound through movement is heavily dependent on downstream operations east of the express lanes eastern terminus. Heavy congestion to the east due to HOV/HOT weaving and/or the eastbound lane drop east of McKinley could possibly degrade express lane speeds. Figure 6-27 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Eastbound from Green River Road to 1-15 SR 91 EB: Green River Road to 1-15 70 60 50 n 40 E a a 30 20 30 -mTime Savings —Target Speed -0-GP -E-Expres 24.4 2.4 a 13.4 ■ 3.7 \• 1 27.4 60 50 40 — E 30 E 204 10 6.29 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-28 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Eastbound from Green River Road to Ontario Avenue SR 91 EB: Green River Road to Ontario Avenue 70 60 50 . 40 E 0 ^' 30 20 10 Time Savings —Target Speed tGP Express 23.0 9.9 2.9 3.1 29.5 60 50 40 1, 30 E 20 r 10 0 Table 6-14 shows Express and general purpose lane speeds on the eastbound SR 91. Heavy congestion develops on the eastbound general purpose lanes, originating from the lane drop at McKinley and Pierce Streets. Congestion at these locations spills back on the general purpose lanes to Serfas Club Drive. Vehicles at the east end of the Riverside County Express Lanes occasionally experience congestion from vehicles merging in front of them to access the HOV lanes at McKinley, or from Express Lane vehicles merging into the congested general purpose lanes. Toward the end of the PM peak period, queuing from 1-15 SB spills back onto the SR 91 mainline and creates queues that spill back as far as Green River Road. 6.30 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-14 EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2020 Network Express Lanes Lake, 241 HOT through 55 to Gypsu HOT 241on- HOT end to SR70 NOV. through 15, e10 f D Lake, Lake, Imp°. Impala Imp°. Weir- Gypsu - on to HOT HOT End- HOT Green- HOVmi HOVmi - Serfas- Maple- HOVmix- Lincoln Main- 115o8- 15, w/o SB ON- HOVmix- McKinley McKinley HOVmix- Lanes 55 ew ew 1 I I -Weir Weir 24108 241 m 241on E. End mixing Green Narrow Green SR]i SR 71 SR]i x x Serfas Serf. Maple Maple HOVmix Lincoln Lincoln 2. 2. Main 115. 115SBon SB ON END HOVmix McKinley HOV HOV HOVmix Pierce Pierce Exit 2:05 PM 65 65 64 63 64 65 64 64 63 64 64 61 fit 60 61 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 60 62 61 59 59 59 60 57 56 52 58 57 59 59 48 53 41 58 30 58 58 49 2:10 PM 61 63 63 63 64 63 64 64 63 64 84 62 62 59 61 63 63 62 62 82 61 61 60 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 62 55 60 61 60 56 48 52 34 57 33 58 57 44 2:15 PM 82 63 83 84 83 63 60 83 62 81 61 80 61 59 60 82 63 62 62 62 82 62 81 63 83 61 80 80 80 60 62 59 60 58 80 58 47 52 39 58 48 56 58 43 2:20 PM 62 65 64 65 63 63 63 63 62 63 63 60 60 59 60 61 61 62 59 59 60 60 61 61 62 61 fii 61 62 61 fit 55 61 60 52 61 51 51 45 57 32 59 58 45 2:25 PM 62 65 64 62 63 63 64 64 62 63 63 59 61 59 61 61 fit 60 61 61 59 59 61 60 59 59 59 59 59 57 59 55 57 58 60 60 50 52 40 54 27 57 55 44 2:30 PM 85 65 63 62 62 63 63 62 64 62 62 59 61 59 60 82 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 80 61 81 58 58 61 59 60 51 61 57 57 57 47 52 41 54 31 59 58 47 2:35 PM 65 65 64 64 63 63 62 63 65 64 64 61 61 58 61 60 62 62 62 62 61 61 62 62 62 61 60 60 61 60 59 54 60 58 59 59 46 54 50 56 29 57 57 44 2:40 PM 64 64 63 63 63 62 64 63 64 63 63 62 62 58 61 61 62 60 60 60 59 59 60 61 60 61 fii 61 61 61 60 55 60 58 58 58 49 49 34 57 29 58 58 46 2:45 PM 64 64 64 64 62 63 64 63 63 63 63 60 62 59 61 62 61 63 62 62 62 62 60 61 60 57 62 62 60 59 54 49 58 59 57 57 47 52 40 57 33 59 57 46 2:50 PM 62 63 63 64 63 64 61 64 63 61 61 59 61 60 61 59 62 61 60 60 59 59 62 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 52 54 58 60 59 50 54 36 57 28 59 58 46 2:55 PM 63 65 64 63 63 62 63 63 63 63 63 62 61 59 61 62 63 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 59 62 59 59 59 58 54 46 58 60 55 58 45 49 38 56 25 59 58 46 3:00 PM 62 65 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 61 61 59 60 63 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 60 59 61 61 61 60 59 61 56 53 50 60 57 45 52 34 56 28 56 55 44 3:05 PM 83 64 64 63 64 84 63 83 64 62 62 81 62 80 60 81 61 62 60 60 81 61 81 60 61 61 81 81 61 59 62 56 59 59 57 59 47 52 35 57 27 57 57 42 3:10 PM 63 65 64 63 62 64 63 63 64 64 64 60 61 60 61 63 63 59 61 61 61 61 60 61 61 59 60 60 61 61 61 54 61 58 58 59 50 52 39 57 28 5a 52 44 3:15 PM 63 64 64 64 63 64 63 63 64 fi3 63 61 61 61 61 63 fi3 63 fi3 63 63 63 62 62 62 61 fii 61 61 60 fii 53 59 58 54 60 4] 53 36 56 28 55 52 41 3:20 PM 65 65 64 62 62 63 63 63 62 64 64 59 62 60 61 82 63 62 62 62 62 62 82 63 82 62 62 62 61 61 61 5558 59 58 57 49 31 40 57 29 58 56 45 3:25 PM 62 63 6462 64 63 64 64 63 63 63 61 61 60 60 62 63 62 62 62 61 61 60 60 61 60 61 61 62 61 63 56 60 59 56 59 45 22 33 55 30 54 53 46 3:30 PM 65 65 64 63 61 62 61 60 63 64 64 55 61 58 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 60 62 60 59 59 61 59 60 56 60 59 58 59 45 23 38 57 27 53 47 44 3:35 PM 64 64 63 63 63 64 63 61 62 63 63 60 61 59 61 62 63 63 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 60 61 61 60 61 62 53 60 58 58 60 48 22 34 57 31 53 58 44 3:40 PM 64 64 64 83 62 82 62 84 63 83 63 57 61 80 61 82 62 61 61 61 80 60 61 60 61 61 60 80 59 60 60 54 60 59 58 56 21 22 38 57 28 46 32 42 3:45 PM 62 63 62 63 63 62 60 60 63 fii 61 58 61 58 61 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 60 61 59 59 49 59 58 48 38 23 23 28 57 29 58 51 43 3:50 PM 62 63 63 fii 60 62 61 62 62 62 62 57 60 59 61 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 60 62 61 62 62 62 61 60 56 52 45 42 37 34 21 23 47 57 28 49 46 39 3:55 PM 80 64 62 62 60 80 61 81 60 61 61 53 59 59 61 81 63 60 60 60 61 61 59 59 61 60 60 80 60 61 61 53 49 40 18 18 24 24 39 56 30 49 42 43 4:00 PM 58 64 62 62 63 62 61 62 62 60 60 54 59 58 61 61 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 62 62 61 60 60 57 59 59 54 35 36 25 24 24 26 50 56 27 57 50 44 4:05 PM 62 63 60 62 60 fii 59 58 62 61 61 50 57 57 fii 62 63 61 63 63 61 fii 62 62 62 61 62 62 62 60 62 58 36 34 25 34 31 24 34 56 29 41 38 46 4:10 PM 62 64 63 62 64 63 61 61 63 62 62 44 45 58 61 63 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 62 62 62 61 61 60 60 61 57 42 46 39 31 24 24 40 56 28 37 39 39 4:15 PM 61 64 64 63 63 61 63 64 63 62 62 57 23 59 60 62 62 62 60 60 59 59 62 61 62 63 62 62 62 63 63 59 60 54 33 20 22 23 46 53 28 52 48 39 4:20 PM 62 64 64 63 63 63 62 63 61 62 62 60 32 56 60 62 63 62 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 62 fii 61 61 61 60 59 59 58 55 36 23 24 46 54 28 59 57 . 4:25 PM 61 65 64 65 63 62 62 64 63 62 62 60 59 59 60 62 63 62 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 61 62 62 61 61 66 57 56 56 60 55 23 23 43 57 29 59 51 43 4:30 PM 64 64 64 64 64 84 64 82 64 63 63 61 60 80 61 82 62 62 62 62 80 60 80 58 80 60 61 61 62 61 61 57 60 60 58 38 22 24 45 56 29 59 57 45 4:35 PM 64 64 63 63 62 62 63 62 63 64 64 60 56 59 61 61 61 61 60 60 60 60 61 61 60 62 61 61 61 61 62 49 59 56 46 25 26 25 44 54 30 55 59 48 4:40 PM 63 63 63 62 62 62 64 62 60 62 62 53 60 56 60 61 fii 60 62 62 60 60 62 61 61 fii fii 61 61 60 60 53 56 50 34 36 22 25 45 56 29 51 50 51 4:45 PM 63 64 63 62 63 63 62 61 62 62 62 59 60 58 60 82 62 61 59 59 59 59 80 80 60 61 59 59 59 60 61 57 59 47 21 20 28 25 35 56 28 58 58 47 4:50 PM 63 63 63 62 60 63 63 62 62 63 63 53 60 59 61 61 62 60 62 62 61 61 60 59 60 60 61 61 59 60 62 54 58 58 47 35 20 22 46 57 29 44 40 43 4:55 PM 61 64 64 63 63 62 62 59 60 62 62 54 60 56 61 61 61 61 fii 61 60 60 58 59 60 58 60 60 61 60 59 56 57 43 17 19 23 23 32 56 28 . 45 41 5:00 PM 61 61 60 59 60 61 62 62 63 63 63 55 40 57 61 58 60 58 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 59 60 60 59 58 59 50 37 37 24 29 23 23 39 56 2] 56 41 40 5:05 PM 81 64 80 82 61 82 60 81 61 80 60 54 22 58 61 81 61 61 61 61 59 59 58 58 81 59 58 58 81 59 47 33 40 40 23 19 21 24 53 57 26 59 56 44 5:10 PM 63 64 62 63 63 62 62 62 61 60 60 32 21 56 61 61 61 60 59 59 60 60 60 61 60 60 59 59 60 58 19 19 33 35 16 15 23 25 47 57 27 55 51 45 5:15 PM 65 65 64 fii 61 63 62 63 63 62 62 22 22 58 61 61 61 59 59 59 59 59 60 60 61 61 60 60 60 62 15 1] 21 26 18 20 21 24 49 55 31 57 58 50 5:20 PM 64 64 63 61 64 63 63 83 62 82 62 21 21 57 61 81 61 61 61 61 60 60 59 59 58 59 57 57 55 52 48 19 35 38 17 18 23 26 46 57 28 54 42 46 5:25 PM 63 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 23 22 58 60 62 62 62 61 61 60 60 59 60 59 59 58 58 59 59 58 24 37 38 21 25 23 23 39 57 25 56 50 50 5:30 PM 63 62 61 61 63 fii 63 63 63 54 54 22 21 55 fii 62 63 61 fii 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 61 60 fii 54 41 38 21 18 22 25 49 57 29 43 42 45 5:35 PM 64 65 62 64 63 58 62 62 62 29 29 21 20 56 61 60 61 60 61 61 59 59 59 61 61 61 62 62 61 62 61 58 59 55 28 22 24 21 36 56 31 58 51 49 5:40 PM 62 64 64 63 64 64 61 64 59 18 18 19 20 56 61 62 62 61 61 61 60 60 61 61 60 59 59 59 60 61 61 56 60 60 fii 54 20 27 38 55 28 59 58 49 5:45 PM 64 64 62 61 63 63 63 64 60 18 18 21 21 55 61 61 59 60 59 59 59 59 59 60 59 60 fii 61 61 61 62 59 59 59 59 60 39 31 33 57 27 58 58 46 5:50 PM 63 64 64 63 63 63 54 fii 54 18 18 22 21 58 61 61 63 62 60 60 59 59 59 60 60 59 59 59 61 60 59 56 56 59 58 58 42 21 33 54 27 41 37 42 5:55 PM 83 64 83 82 81 82 62 82 17 18 16 21 21 57 61 80 60 60 80 60 60 60 82 61 81 61 60 80 59 60 58 59 58 60 59 59 4722 31 57 27 34 41 36 6:00 PM 62 61 62 62 62 60 62 62 21 20 20 21 21 57 61 61 61 60 59 59 60 60 61 62 61 fi1 fii 61 60 58 60 56 60 55 59 55 51 22 33 56 29 48 50 38 6:05 PM 63 63 62 63 62 62 61 62 21 22 22 22 21 57 61 62 62 61 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 60 60 60 61 61 fii 56 59 55 59 58 34 27 34 57 31 59 51 42 8:10 PM 83 64 62 63 61 60 83 60 18 18 18 21 21 56 61 81 61 61 60 60 60 60 82 81 62 59 60 80 60 61 59 59 59 60 57 81 57 25 45 55 31 57 55 45 6:15 PM 63 63 62 61 61 62 62 21 18 20 20 21 21 56 60 61 62 61 60 60 61 61 60 59 60 59 59 59 61 61 60 51 60 59 56 60 62 34 63 55 31 58 56 47 6:20 PM 63 63 62 61 62 fii 60 21 18 19 19 22 21 52 61 61 63 61 60 60 59 59 61 59 59 57 60 60 60 61 62 59 60 59 59 57 62 63 55 57 32 57 56 55 6:25 PM 64 63 63 63 64 62 49 17 19 21 21 22 23 52 60 60 61 59 59 59 58 58 60 60 60 60 58 58 60 60 60 58 59 58 59 55 62 63 53 56 38 58 57 60 6:30 PM 63 63 82 83 82 62 18 22 24 24 24 22 20 53 61 59 61 61 60 60 62 62 61 61 60 59 60 60 81 61 60 55 60 57 57 57 64 63 60 54 62 58 58 80 6:35 PM 63 64 63 63 62 fii 21 25 25 24 24 21 22 57 61 60 61 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 59 60 60 60 60 61 59 58 59 58 60 56 64 64 54 56 62 51 58 60 6:40 PM 56 63 62 56 62 60 25 23 22 23 23 22 20 58 61 55 59 59 60 60 60 60 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 55 60 57 59 60 56 59 53 56 62 58 57 61 8:45 PM 64 64 62 62 61 60 22 23 23 23 23 22 23 52 62 49 57 59 60 60 58 58 59 59 61 56 58 58 58 59 57 47 59 59 56 58 59 59 61 56 57 55 58 56 6:50 PM 63 64 63 63 63 fii 23 22 30 29 29 22 21 52 62 56 57 60 58 58 59 59 59 57 58 57 58 58 58 55 35 43 60 59 59 57 52 49 30 56 59 55 55 57 6:55 PM 60 62 63 62 62 62 25 29 25 23 23 21 21 53 62 56 55 59 58 58 59 59 57 59 59 57 57 57 43 23 25 42 52 47 49 45 52 56 41 57 57 52 57 55 7:00 PM 60 62 62 60 62 46 30 22 22 24 24 22 21 52 58 57 59 60 59 59 59 59 56 58 59 57 47 47 28 28 25 42 52 53 54 60 48 51 35 56 55 56 56 48 Speed Legend, Red, <25 mph, Yellow, 25-50 mph, Green, 50+ mph 6.31 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-15 (cont.) EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2020 Network General Purpose Lanes Laken HOT WEST Gyp. 241on- HOT HOT SR7, HOVmi MainOD Mixing HOT Mix HOT Mix OF Tustin Laked LakeV Imperia hope:. hope. Weir- Gyp. - HOT HOT End- End- Green- SR71 CD HOVmi HOVmi - Serbs- Maple- Maple Lincoln- Main- On to 11.8en- Area w/o to HOVmix- GPLaney Tustin to 55 55 ew ew I I I -Weir Weir 241off 241 rn Mon End End Green Green Green Green SR71 off to On SR71 x x Serfas Serfas Maple Maple Lincoln Lincoln Lincoln 2nd 2nd Main Ex115off 15on I151.1on e1o15 McKinley McKinley McKinley HOVmix HOVmix Pierce Pierce Exit 2:05 PM 57 57 58 57 57 59 58 59 60 58 57 59 59 54 60 61 61 59 58 60 60 60 61 61 61 57 53 28 I 2:10 PM 58 57 58 58 58 60 59 59 60 58 58 59 58 57 59 61 61 59 58 59 60 59 60 60 61 59 47 29 2:15 PM 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 58 59 58 52 59 58 56 59 60 60 60 59 60 60 60 61 61 62 58 43 25 2:20 PM 57 57 58 58 59 60 59 59 60 58 58 58 59 55 59 60 60 60 59 60 61 60 60 60 61 59 35 28 57 57 2:25 PM 58 56 58 56 57 59 59 59 60 59 59 59 58 35 59 61 61 60 58 59 60 59 60 60 61 52 32 25 54 54 2:30 PM 58 58 58 58 58 60 58 58 59 59 57 58 58 34 59 60 80 58 59 59 80 60 60 80 61 59 3 26 53 53 2:35 PM 58 56 58 57 57 59 58 59 60 60 58 59 57 27 58 61 61 59 59 59 60 60 61 61 61 59 27 25 33 33 2:40 PM 58 57 57 58 58 60 59 59 59 59 57 59 58 26 58 61 81 80 59 80 80 60 60 60 81 60 22 26 31 31 2:45 PM 57 57 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 58 59 58 24 59 61 61 60 3 60 3 60 61 61 61 52 22 26 49 49 2:50 PM 57 56 58 58 58 60 3 3 60 59 58 59 59 24 60 61 61 59 59 56 60 80 61 81 62 54 23 23 52 52 2:55 PM 58 56 57 58 58 59 58 59 59 58 58 58 48 25 59 61 61 60 59 60 61 60 60 60 61 44 23 28 53 53 3:00 PM 58 57 58 58 58 60 59 59 59 56 58 58 26 25 59 60 80 60 59 80 80 60 61 81 81 26 24 26 52 52 3:05 PM 58 57 58 58 59 60 59 59 59 60 58 59 23 24 60 60 60 3 50 59 59 59 60 60 60 22 22 29 37 37 3:10 PM 58 55 59 58 59 60 59 59 60 60 58 53 19 25 60 61 81 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 61 21 24 25 23 23 3:15 PM 58 55 59 58 58 60 58 59 60 59 54 16 20 26 61 61 61 60 59 60 60 60 61 61 61 22 22 26 45 45 3:20 PM 57 57 59 57 58 59 58 58 60 59 17 16 21 25 60 61 61 61 60 57 61 61 62 62 62 23 22 25 53 53 3:25 PM 58 55 58 58 58 60 59 59 59 52 16 17 21 24 60 60 60 60 60 61 62 61 62 62 62 21 23 25 55 55 3:30 PM 58 53 58 58 58 60 59 59 60 22 16 17 21 24 58 61 61 60 59 61 61 61 62 62 61 27 23 28 49 49 3:35 PM 58 56 59 58 58 60 59 59 60 20 16 15 19 26 59 61 61 60 60 60 61 61 62 62 62 43 23 26 52 52 3:40 PM 58 56 59 58 58 60 59 59 60 19 14 15 18 25 60 61 61 61 60 60 61 61 62 62 62 59 23 25 51 51 345 PM 57 51 59 58 59 60 60 59 60 17 16 15 18 23 58 61 61 60 60 60 62 62 62 62 63 61 23 28 53 53 3:50 PM 58 55 59 59 59 60 59 59 61 17 14 15 17 . 59 61 61 60 60 60 61 61 62 62 62 60 51 26 55 55 3:55 PM 57 51 58 58 58 59 59 59 60 13 14 15 17 23 59 61 61 60 60 59 60 61 62 62 62 61 58 26 56 56 4:00 PM 58 55 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 12 13 14 17 23 58 61 61 60 59 61 61 61 62 62 63 61 61 33 58 58 4:05 PM 55 56 59 56 58 60 59 60 60 12 13 15 17 23 57 61 81 81 61 59 62 62 62 62 62 61 60 29 61 61 4:10 PM 57 54 58 58 58 59 58 58 49 11 12 13 16 22 58 61 61 61 60 53 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 31 61 61 4:15 PM 57 55 59 57 58 59 59 58 12 11 13 14 17 24 59 60 60 60 59 59 62 62 62 62 63 61 61 28 80 60 4:20 PM 57 55 58 57 58 59 58 58 11 10 12 13 15 23 56 60 60 60 60 61 62 61 62 62 62 59 60 29 60 60 4:25 PM 57 54 57 57 57 59 58 58 11 11 12 13 16 23 59 60 60 60 60 60 61 81 62 62 63 60 61 29 60 60 4:30 PM 57 55 58 57 58 59 58 58 11 11 13 14 17 23 60 61 61 61 3 3 61 61 62 62 63 61 62 31 42 42 4:35 PM 57 53 58 57 58 60 58 59 12 12 12 13 16 23 59 61 81 81 80 57 81 61 62 62 62 61 62 34 18 18 4:40 PM 56 55 59 58 57 60 58 31 11 11 13 14 16 25 56 60 60 60 60 58 62 60 61 61 62 61 61 21 15 15 4:45 PM 58 56 59 57 58 60 59 14 11 12 13 13 16 23 58 60 80 60 60 60 82 62 62 62 63 60 37 14 14 14 4:50 PM 55 55 59 57 58 60 58 14 12 10 13 14 16 24 59 61 61 61 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 48 17 16 15 15 4:55 PM 58 56 59 59 58 59 26 16 11 11 13 14 16 23 56 61 61 61 59 61 fii 62 62 62 57 18 18 18 15 15 5:00 PM 57 56 58 58 58 60 14 15 12 12 13 15 16 24 57 61 61 61 60 61 62 62 62 62 23 18 20 20 31 31 5:05 PM 57 56 59 58 58 60 14 16 12 12 13 15 17 24 58 61 61 58 60 60 62 62 62 62 18 18 21 24 49 49 5:10 PM 57 56 60 59 59 43 15 15 12 11 14 14 16 24 56 81 61 60 60 60 62 62 58 58 22 19 21 25 53 53 5:15 PM 57 54 58 58 58 12 14 18 12 12 13 14 15 23 58 61 61 60 59 58 62 62 62 62 24 24 24 28 54 54 5:20 PM 58 54 60 57 58 14 16 18 12 12 14 14 17 23 57 61 61 60 60 59 61 61 61 61 32 22 25 26 59 5:25 PM 58 55 59 56 26 14 16 17 12 12 14 14 16 22 58 60 3 61 59 60 61 62 62 62 60 22 23 22 48 5:30 PM 58 53 58 27 16 15 17 18 12 13 13 14 15 24 55 61 81 60 59 61 82 62 62 62 62 48 23 28 17 5:35 PM 58 48 59 20 17 15 16 20 12 11 13 14 15 2A 56 61 61 61 60 58 62 61 61 61 63 60 22 19 15 5:40 PM 58 54 55 20 17 17 17 19 11 11 13 14 16 22 56 61 81 80 60 60 82 61 62 62 82 44 18 15 22 5:45 PM 58 52 18 21 18 22 17 18 11 11 13 14 16 22 55 61 61 59 59 54 61 61 62 62 57 16 19 19 18 5:50 PM 58 48 20 21 20 21 17 17 12 11 12 13 15 22 58 61 81 80 80 58 81 81 62 82 24 17 17 17 14 5:55 PM 58 55 25 24 19 15 15 15 12 11 13 13 16 24 57 61 61 60 60 57 62 61 61 61 17 1fi 18 19 36 6:00 PM 58 52 47 22 16 18 14 17 12 12 13 14 16 23 57 61 61 60 60 55 62 61 42 42 20 20 23 24 2 6:05 PM 58 55 59 21 19 16 15 18 11 12 14 14 16 23 57 61 61 60 60 61 62 62 20 20 25 23 22 22 1 6:10 PM 58 58 57 23 17 14 17 17 12 11 13 14 16 24 56 61 61 61 80 81 82 62 24 24 25 20 13 11 1 6:15 PM 58 57 60 17 16 14 15 17 11 11 13 14 15 23 56 60 60 60 59 60 62 62 55 55 18 12 13 13 1 6:20 PM 58 58 59 19 17 14 28 17 12 12 13 14 17 23 52 61 81 80 60 59 62 62 12 12 14 14 15 15 1 6:25 PM 57 58 59 19 16 17 42 16 11 11 13 14 17 23 52 60 60 61 59 58 62 47 14 14 14 16 14 13 1 1 6:30 PM 58 58 59 26 20 16 19 18 11 11 14 14 18 23 53 61 61 61 60 60 61 14 13 13 13 13 12 10 9 6:35 PM 58 56 59 22 19 18 15 17 11 13 14 14 18 23 57 61 61 61 60 61 26 14 12 12 12 11 9 8 9 6:40 PM 58 57 59 43 20 25 15 18 11 11 13 14 17 23 58 61 61 61 61 58 13 12 11 11 9 8 10 11 9 6:45 PM 58 58 60 60 46 21 15 18 12 11 13 14 17 22 52 62 62 62 61 40 11 10 8 8 12 13 10 12 20 0 6:50 PM 58 58 59 59 59 15 16 18 12 11 11 14 19 22 52 62 62 61 58 10 10 9 10 10 11 12 20 22 46 fi 6:55 PM 58 57 59 59 59 27 23 19 11 12 12 14 18 24 53 62 62 43 12 13 10 11 14 14 20 26 34 25 28 8 7:00 PM 58 57 59 59 59 54 17 18 11 12 14 14 18 23 52 58 58 10 10 12 15 17 18 18 22 51 62 33 28 B 58 61 58 81 55 55 49 61 49 62 45 61 43 61 42 60 44 61 43 60 45 61 46 61 45 60 40 60 42 59 45 61 45 62 45 62 45 60 46 62 45 61 4) 62 46 62 4) 62 45 61 50 62 52 63 50 62 49 62 43 40 30 28 22 24 16 1) 18 14 13 21 18 2) 3) 32 43 60 46 63 62 48 38 48 50 35 23 19 15 14 18 23 12 10 14 12 11 9 18 2 1 1 1 1 1 22 1 41 1) 1 31 2 38 3 52 51 47 45 46 48 53 49 53 44 3 32 37 49 51 51 47 43 43 48 52 50 51 48 33 306M 42 44 53 51 50 42 44 47 52 49 50 45 48 33 41 43 53 3 52 41 37 51 51 48 51 41 32 33 43 45 53 52 49 35 26 50 52 49 51 29 27 30 37 44 50 50 46 39 30 47 52 50 52 29 31 32 41 47 53 50 49 34 22 46 54 50 53 27 29 28 39 44 52 51 48 43 35 49 49 45 41 24 29 34 42 46 50 51 51 45 42 47 52 47 26 28 33 32 37 46 50 49 44 42 45 50 54 50 22 27 28 31 43 46 52 49 46 42 40 45 49 45 28 24 25 29 40 46 51 52 47 41 36 45 52 48 20 24 28 30 42 44 51 51 52 45 42 47 52 34 19 26 27 31 36 42 50 51 53 46 49 50 52 22 20 24 28 32 37 44 53 50 46 41 42 47 53 21 19 26 28 30 39 41 53 51 51 28 27 49 31 20 20 29 29 27 42 45 49 50 43 23 25 45 22 20 20 27 3 29 42 46 49 50 48 22 26 45 23 21 21 25 27 30 44 44 53 49 47 20 25 46 22 18 18 30 31 33 39 44 52 49 46 21 26 21 22 21 20 31 28 31 36 42 51 49 45 17 24 26 23 19 20 29 29 31 38 43 48 49 48 19 25 21 23 19 20 28 28 32 40 39 51 50 21 17 23 24 24 20 20 31 3 30 35 43 53 48 15 17 23 24 26 24 22 25 27 30 39 44 52 32 14 17 24 31 24 20 20 27 29 32 44 46 52 25 16 21 22 24 24 19 19 30 28 33 39 39 50 19 16 17 18 22 23 20 20 27 28 29 35 39 32 15 14 16 15 23 24 18 21 26 28 28 39 45 13 16 14 17 18 23 23 17 18 29 28 35 42 43 14 14 15 17 16 22 24 21 21 27 29 31 40 45 23 17 14 16 16 26 25 20 19 30 3 31 40 48 23 18 15 19 19 22 25 21 20 24 29 34 46 51 17 37 14 16 16 28 25 17 19 30 28 30 42 47 17 46 48 17 18 20 22 19 21 28 29 32 45 43 20 46 50 15 15 23 23 19 20 31 28 28 44 41 29 3 32 16 18 23 23 18 19 26 27 29 34 40 43 24 14 16 16 21 24 18 20 29 26 29 33 44 49 21 14 15 15 23 25 19 19 27 27 27 45 45 37 20 14 16 16 21 24 20 19 25 31 32 48 50 21 15 15 17 16 23 26 1) 19 29 28 33 48 46 12 13 14 17 16 23 23 18 21 23 25 25 47 50 13 18 14 17 17 22 25 18 1) 25 29 31 41 45 14 20 15 17 12 24 21 16 36 29 31 32 42 49 23 37 14 16 16 20 27 36 32 25 28 30 42 49 23 43 15 17 19 39 31 10 19 25 27 29 38 46 25 37 14 19 21 42 21 19 19 24 27 29 42 42 13 44 29 20 21 47 22 19 18 24 27 32 37 36 10 40 62 18 23 51 22 20 20 29 29 35 3 38 11 37 59 46 33 34 27 24 22 28 31 32 37 42 10 42 61 53 54 57 25 17 22 27 31 34 39 45 12 48 64 61 59 62 34 35 32 29 31 35 38 42 11 41 59 62 55 62 63 59 33 31 32 34 44 55 11 40 62 62 54 62 63 61 64 47 38 38 54 60 ) 16 57 55 46 64 63 64 64 63 62 59 59 60 17 26 55 60 52 64 64 65 65 62 62 61 59 60 27 24 57 50 54 56 59 57 62 60 62 62 61 fii 12 3 58 54 54 59 59 57 57 55 57 54 49 56 18 27 46 42 46 52 49 56 59 60 59 52 57 57 27 27 35 20 26 52 56 54 57 54 52 48 51 55 30 32 23 23 27 48 51 51 55 50 55 46 45 48 Speed Legend, Red, <25 mph, Yellow, 25-50 mph, Green, 50+ mph 6.32 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Traffic on the Riverside County eastbound express lanes are approximately 2,500 vehicles per hour from 2 to 6 PM, and then increase to above 3,100 vehicles from 6-7 PM. Congestion on the eastbound general purpose lanes increase during the last hour due to heavy queues from congestion on 1-15 Southbound, and increase the demand for the Riverside County Express Lanes. Tolls for the eastbound through movement were elevated above market share model levels for the 3 PM to 4 PM hours to maintain traffic at levels that would maintain free flow. Tolls charged by the VISSIM model for the through movement average $9.54 in the 2-7 PM period, while the market share model averages $5.12. Conversely, tolls for the movement to Ontario Avenue averaged $1.75 in the VISSIM model as opposed to $6.61 in the market share model. Tolls were reduced to stimulate demand for the movement. 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 - 500 2-3 PM Figure 6-29 Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2020 Network Eastbound RCTC Express Lanes Distribution ■ RCTC 91 XL RCTC 91 XL, through ❑ RCTC 91 XL, to 15 SB 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 3,132 1,612 1,347 6-7 PM 6.33 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-16 Eastbound Express Lane VISSIM vs. Market Share Tolls, 2035 by 2020 Network 2-7 PM From To Eastbound Through Toll Charged (Toll Vehs) Eastbound to Ontario Toll Charged (Toll Vehs) Volume Weighted Average Toll Charged (Toll Vehs) Vissim T&R model Vissim I T&R model Vissim T&R model 2:00 PM ' 3:00 PM $3.47 $3.47 $1.25 I $4.48 $2.70 $3.83 3:00 PM ' 4:00 PM $7.00 $4.54 $1.50 j $5.86 $5.16 $5.03 4:00 PM ' 5:00 PM $9.50 $5.87 $2.00 j $7.57 $6.77 $6.48 5:00 PM ' 6:00 PM $14.50 $5.87 $2.00 j $7.57 $8.61 $6.49 6:00 PM . 7:00 PM $13.25 $5.87 $2.00 $7.57 $7.82 $6.48 Average 2-7 PM $9.54 $5.12 $1.75 i $6.61 $6.21 $5.66 The micro simulation model predicts the westbound express lanes would have light traffic and no operational problems. Speeds on both the general purpose and express lanes between the eastern terminus at 1-15 and western terminus at Green River Road would be near 60 miles per hour throughout the PM peak period. 2 Figure 6-30 035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Westbound SR 91 Westbound: 1-15 to Green Time Savings Target Speed from 1-15 to River Road -40-GP Express Green River Roa 60 50 40 .17., a 30 .c m 0 g 20 10 70 60 _ • 50 a 40 £ v w a 30 V1 20 10 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.2 0 0 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM d 6.34 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-31 2035 by 2020 Network Scenario, Westbound from Ontario Avenue to Green River Road SR 91 Westbound: Ontario Avenue to Green River Road Time Savings Target Speed —0—GP -Express 70 r 60 - 50 40 .7 c = m 30 c m '^ £_ 20 1- 10 60 50 .....,-- , ■ :• a 40 £ 0 w a 30 vl 20 10 0.5 0.9 0.9 1.4 1.1 0 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 0 Traffic on the westbound express lanes ranges from above 800 to just below 1,100 vehicles per hour. A greater share of traffic would originate from the mainline on SR 91, with a minority from the 1-15 south direct connector ramp. 6.35 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Figure 6-32 Westbound Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2020 Network Westbound RCTC Express Lanes Distribution ■ RCTC 91 XL RCTC 91 XL, through ❑ RCTC 91 XL, via 15NB 1,079 948 972 794 835 603 640 808 447 578 , 289 226 317 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM Revenue Forecast The VISSIM micro simulation model predicts total 2-7 PM toll traffic lower than predicted by the market share model, but revenue that is slightly higher. In the micro simulation model, higher tolls were charged for vehicles traveling through on SR 91 past 1-15. These higher rates support higher revenue at lower toll traffic levels. 6.36 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-33 Express Lanes Toll Traffic, 2035 by 2020 Network 4,500 4,000 3,500 = 3,000 0 2 �, 2,500 a N F 2,000 s m 1,500 1,000 500 0 Riverside County Express Lanes Toll Traffic Y 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM Visslm T&REnhanced Figure 6-34 Express Lanes Revenue, 2035 by 2020 Network $25,000 $20,000 N e $15,000 0 0 ry m $10,000 c m a $5,000 $0 Riverside County Express Lanes Revenue 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM —4—Vissim fT&R Enhanced 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 6.37 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-17 Express Lane Traffic and Revenue, 2035 by 2020 Network 2-7 PM SR 91 Eastbound From To Revenue, 2010$'s Average Toll Charged* Total Express Traffic Vissim T&R model Vissim I T&R model Vissim ' T&R model 2:00 PM ' 3:00 PM $6,368 $8,448 $2.70 $3.83 2,491 2,471 3:00 PM • 4:00 PM $11,643 $11,993 $5.16 r $5.03 2,471 2,952 4:00 PM : 5:00 PM $14,448 $15,315 $6.77 $6.48 2,439 3,121 5:00 PM • 6:00 PM _ $19,588 $15,708 $8.61 1 $6.49 2,576 3,169 6:00 PM • 7:00 PM $19,967 $15,631 $7.82 $6.48 2,888 • 3,135 Total 2-7 PM $72,013 $67,094 $6.21 $5.66 12,865 14,848 SR 91 Westbound From To Revenue, 2010$'s Average Toll Charged* Total Express Traffic Vissim T&R model Vissim T&R model Vissim • T&R model 2:00 PM . 3:00 PM $1,178 $1,265 $1.37 $1.50 1,117 • 981 3:00 PM ; 4:00 PM $1,246 $2,003--_$1.98 1 $2.21 _ 832 • 1,065 4:00 PM ; 5:00 PM $1,342 $2,663 $2.01 f $2.21 931 • 1,400 5:00 PM . 6:00 PM $1,137 $2,832 $2.01 $2.20 877 1,487 6:00 PM ; 7:00 PM $860 $1,007 $1.40 $1.50 924 ; 834 Total 2-7 PM $5,762 $9,769 $1.75 $1.92 4,681 ; 5,767 SR 91 EB&WB From To Revenu,2010$'s Average Toll Charged* Total Express Traffic Vissim T&R model Vissim T&R model Vissim ; T&R model 2:00 PM • 3:00 PM $7,546 $9,712 $2.35 } $3.18 3,608 3,452 3:00 PM . 4:00 PM $ $12,889 $13,996 $4.46 $4.18 3,303 4,017 4:00 PM ; 5:00 PM $15,789 $17,978 $5.63 I $4.82 3,370 4,521 5:00 PM ; 6:00 PM $20,725 $18,540 $7.29 I $4.80 3,453 4,656 6:00 PM • 7:00 PM $20,827 $16,637 $6.58 I $5.14 3,812 3,969 Total 2-7 PM $77,775 $76,863 $5.21 . $4.46 17,546 20,615 * Average Toll charged excluding HOV3+ vehicles which are assumed toll free. 6.38 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-35 through Figure 6-39 illustrate traffic conditions predicted by the micro simulation model at various segments of the corridor at 4:40 PM. Figure 6-35 Orange County Express Lanes Egress Area, 4:40 PM Figure 6-36 Serfas Club Drive, 4:40 PM 6.39 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-37 Lincoln Avenue, 4:40 PM Note: GP Congestion near Lincoln Avenue Figure 6-38 1-15 Interchange, 4:40 PM Note: Congestion from 91 EB to 1-15 SB 6.40 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-39 McKinley Street Approach, 4:40 PM Note: Congestion east of the 91 XL where corridor narrows 6.4.6 Future Model Results, 2035 by 2035 Network Results of the 2035 by 2035 network scenario show that congestion still occurs on SR 91 east of 1-15 and on 1-15 SB, but to a lesser degree. The decrease in congestion can be attributable to a shift in travel patterns induced by the addition of CETAP. The reallocation results in more balance between demand and capacity. Additional GP lane capacity from the addition of GP lanes east of 1-15 also improves congestion levels. To the west, between SR 241 and SR 71, an additional lane allows greater throughput from Orange County but does not translate to increased Riverside County congestion or Express demand because of the improvements in capacity and volume shifts. Travel Speeds and Traffic The greatest travel time savings are realized by Riverside County Express Lane users that are using the eastbound to I-15 southbound direct connector. Toward the end of the simulation period, the express lanes offer nearly a 20 minute time advantage over the general purpose lanes due to congestion on 1-15 southbound. Express lane users traveling through on the eastbound express lanes realize little time savings but would travel at speeds that are 10 miles per hour faster than the general purpose lanes. 6.41 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-40 Eastbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network Scenario, Green River Road to 1-15 SR 91 Eastbound: Green River Road to I-1S 70 60 50 • a 40 E o. 30 20 10 Time Savings Target Speed -0-GP-FExpress 3.5 0 _ a a a a a a n ry m a Figure 6-41 Eastbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network Scenario, Green River Road to Ontario Avenue SR 91 Eastbound: Green River Road to Ontario Avenue 60 50 40 L El 20 10 70 60 50 a 40 £ w o. 30 20 10 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.6 Time Savings Target Speed -0-GP -0-Express f ■ ■ ■ �■ 18.4 19.0 2.0 12.9 3.1 60 50 40 " m 30 m 20 10 0 The speed diagram shown in Table 6-18 show less congestion than predicted in the 2035 by 2020 network scenario. Queues form to the east of 1-15, east of the express lanes eastern terminus, but the queues do not extend past 1-15. High entry volumes from Maple and Lincoln Avenue result in low speeds on the general purpose lanes but for only a short distance. The Riverside County Express lanes experience fewer instances of low speeds due to the queuing east of 1-15. 6.42 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-18 EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, Ultimate Eastbound Express Lanes —I Lakeui 241 HOT 55 to Gypsu HOT 241on- HOT end to yQx LakeN LakeN de Impede ImpeImpede Weir- Gypsu - on to HOT HOT End- HOT teneE 55 I I -Weir Weir 24108 241 241— Entl End miziig Green Nancw G 2:05 PM 2:10 PM 2:15 PM 2:20 PM 2:25 PM 2:30 PM 2:35 PM 2:40 PM 2:45 PM 2:50 PM 2:55 PM 3:00 PM 3:05 PM 3:10 PM 3:15 PM 3:20 PM 3:25 PM 3:30 PM 3:35 PM 3:40 PM 3:45 PM 3:50 PM 3:55 PM 4:00 PM 4:05 PM 4:10 PM 4:15 PM 4:20 PM 4:25 PM 4:30 PM 4:35 PM 4:40 PM 4,45 PM 4:50 PM 4:55 PM 5,00 PM 5:05 PM 5:10 PM 5:15 PM 5:20 PM 5:25 PM 5:30 PM 5:35 PM 5. PM 5:45 PM 5:50 PM 5:55 PM 6:00 PM 6:05 PM 6:10 PM 6:15 PM 6:20 PM 6:25 PM 6.30 PM 6.35 PM 6.40 PM 6:45 PM 6:50 PM 6:55 PM ]:00 PM L Green SR]1 SR ]i SR71- HOVmI HOVmI HOVmI SR]1 Serfas Snr. Serbs- Mapl Maple- HOVmix- HOVmix Lincoln Incol Lincoln - Ai Mal through through McKinley 15, wlo 15, el o HOVmix, to HOVmix- .. .... SB ON SB ON HOVmix alo 15 KA 14I iov PAW I H411/ I Plomo P�>r�> 8,4 114. Main 115oR- 115SB 64 65 63 63 63 63 62 64 63 63 63 61 61 62 61 62 64 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 63 62 62 62 63 63 62 63 53 60 61 61 54 51 31 58 54 49 54 47 63 65 63 64 62 64 64 63 63 63 63 57 60 62 60 62 63 62 62 62 63 63 62 62 63 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 58 61 60 59 55 57 56 58 52 54 47 49 65 66 64 64 64 63 62 63 63 64 64 60 61 61 60 64 64 63 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 63 62 62 59 61 58 61 53 52 47 58 54 50 50 47 64 64 64 63 64 64 64 63 64 63 63 59 61 62 61 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 64 63 63 62 62 62 63 63 62 60 62 58 60 56 66 44 57 54 55 51 47 64 64 64 64 63 64 63 61 62 63 63 59 61 61 61 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 61 63 62 62 62 63 61 62 56 61 60 58 52 49 43 58 56 66 51 49 65 65 64 64 62 62 62 63 63 64 64 60 61 62 61 61 61 61 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 63 62 62 62 63 62 62 61 61 61 59 54 53 37 58 53 48 51 49 65 65 64 64 63 63 63 63 64 62 62 60 61 61 60 63 63 62 61 61 62 62 62 61 61 62 62 62 60 60 61 60 61 60 60 59 52 52 44 58 53 55 52 46 63 65 64 63 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 59 62 62 61 63 63 61 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 63 63 63 61 61 62 57 60 59 56 54 52 49 57 53 55 53 47 63 65 64 63 64 64 61 63 65 63 63 61 61 62 61 62 63 62 62 62 63 63 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 62 63 62 60 62 58 59 53 51 41 59 55 60 47 48 64 64 64 63 63 63 63 62 63 64 64 61 60 61 61 62 63 61 62 62 62 62 61 62 62 60 62 62 62 63 62 61 58 58 58 59 55 54 49 54 53 45 44 48 63 65 64 63 63 62 63 63 62 63 63 60 61 62 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 61 61 62 62 62 61 59 61 61 59 52 51 39 58 54 57 54 49 63 64 63 62 63 63 64 64 63 63 63 59 59 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 61 60 61 60 61 61 60 60 60 60 60 59 58 58 54 51 38 5] 52 57 57 48 63 64 64 63 63 61 63 63 64 63 63 59 60 62 62 63 63 62 60 60 60 60 61 57 62 60 61 61 62 62 61 61 60 61 60 57 54 52 43 58 49 46 53 45 63 65 65 64 63 63 60 62 62 62 62 60 61 61 61 64 64 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 61 59 62 62 59 60 55 60 57 54 43 57 52 50 41 49 63 64 64 63 63 64 63 64 64 63 63 60 60 61 60 59 62 59 60 60 59 59 58 62 61 61 62 62 63 63 63 63 61 61 61 60 52 52 44 58 53 56 58 48 64 65 64 63 64 63 63 63 62 63 63 59 60 61 61 61 63 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 63 61 62 62 60 62 61 61 61 60 56 58 52 52 35 56 53 55 57 50 63 64 64 64 63 62 63 63 63 63 63 59 61 61 60 63 62 61 61 61 59 59 61 59 62 60 60 60 60 60 61 62 59 58 57 60 54 48 36 58 53 44 41 45 63 65 64 63 64 63 61 63 62 63 63 60 61 60 61 62 63 61 62 62 62 62 59 60 59 61 61 61 61 62 62 61 58 60 59 57 49 47 38 54 52 44 37 45 64 64 63 64 63 64 63 64 63 63 63 61 62 60 60 62 62 60 59 59 59 59 61 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 59 61 56 58 60 59 52 47 35 55 50 48 41 45 64 64 60 63 63 63 62 62 63 63 63 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 60 60 62 60 60 61 61 61 56 61 61 61 55 53 60 56 50 50 36 5] 51 46 42 42 63 fi5 64 63 64 62 62 59 62 61 61 59 60 60 61 62 63 62 59 59 61 61 60 62 62 60 62 62 62 62 63 63 54 58 61 60 51 49 34 52 50 42 44 46 64 64 60 63 63 63 63 62 64 62 62 55 59 61 60 60 61 61 61 61 60 60 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 61 61 62 58 59 59 57 51 49 42 56 46 44 51 46 64 fi4 64 64 63 63 64 64 62 63 63 59 61 59 60 61 62 60 60 60 60 60 59 60 61 61 59 59 56 61 60 61 57 57 54 60 49 48 33 58 53 49 48 46 65 fi5 64 64 64 63 63 62 63 62 62 57 60 60 60 63 63 62 61 61 60 60 62 61 61 61 61 61 60 57 58 60 50 58 58 59 51 48 40 56 47 42 41 44 64 fi4 64 63 64 64 64 65 64 64 64 61 62 59 60 62 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 62 60 61 61 61 62 62 61 60 57 59 59 58 52 50 37 56 49 55 50 46 64 fi5 64 63 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 60 61 60 61 63 63 61 62 62 62 62 61 60 61 61 60 60 60 61 60 60 59 60 60 60 52 50 41 56 30 52 40 40 66 fi5 64 64 64 63 64 63 62 63 63 59 61 59 60 62 62 62 61 61 62 62 61 61 60 62 60 60 60 59 61 60 54 55 60 61 54 48 34 57 32 58 54 47 64 fi4 63 64 64 63 62 63 62 61 61 53 59 59 60 62 63 61 62 62 62 62 62 61 61 62 61 61 61 62 61 60 59 60 59 58 52 50 31 56 24 60 59 48 63 65 64 63 63 60 64 64 63 63 63 58 61 60 61 61 63 62 61 61 61 61 62 59 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 57 60 59 57 53 54 36 56 26 58 49 46 64 65 64 63 64 63 62 62 62 62 62 59 60 59 61 61 61 61 60 60 60 60 61 60 61 61 60 60 62 62 62 60 59 60 60 60 51 52 36 54 21 60 59 52 fit 65 64 64 62 62 64 63 64 63 63 60 62 57 61 60 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 60 61 59 61 55 53 39 55 27 59 58 48 fi5 fib 63 63 61 63 64 61 63 62 62 59 59 60 61 62 62 61 61 61 60 60 60 62 61 fit 61 61 fit fii 61 60 fie 54 60 Sfi 54 52 34 Sfi 27 59 55 45 65 65 64 63 63 63 61 63 63 63 63 59 60 Sfi 60 60 62 61 62 62 fii 61 61 61 61 fii 61 61 fit fii 62 61 fie fii 59 59 53 54 44 55 25 59 57 44 64 fib 63 62 62 63 63 62 63 63 63 59 61 58 61 62 63 61 61 61 60 60 60 60 61 fii 61 61 61 60 61 58 57 58 59 58 53 50 46 57 23 60 59 46 63 fib 64 63 64 60 62 63 63 62 62 59 61 60 61 62 63 61 62 62 fii 61 62 61 61 60 61 61 61 62 61 62 52 56 61 60 55 52 38 57 24 59 57 49 63 fib 63 62 61 62 64 64 63 62 62 58 61 59 61 61 62 61 60 fie 62 62 62 62 61 fii 62 62 61 fii 60 61 55 55 59 58 55 53 36 5] 24 58 58 49 64 65 63 63 63 62 63 62 62 60 60 59 61 59 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 60 60 60 59 60 61 61 58 60 59 60 59 59 58 58 Sfi 55 36 Sfi 25 58 57 44 64 65 64 64 64 65 63 62 63 63 63 57 57 58 60 63 64 63 62 62 62 62 60 61 60 60 59 59 58 58 59 60 59 57 58 60 52 54 39 Sfi 23 55 58 50 64 fi4 61 62 61 62 63 62 62 64 64 60 30 58 60 63 63 63 62 62 fii 61 63 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 59 61 62 fii 60 59 54 53 43 5] 23 52 37 44 65 65 64 60 64 63 63 63 63 62 62 59 41 58 60 62 62 61 61 61 60 60 60 60 61 fii 61 61 62 fii 61 62 60 60 61 61 51 51 38 5] 24 60 56 46 64 65 64 64 64 60 64 61 62 62 62 58 24 59 fit 62 63 63 62 62 fii 61 62 61 62 62 62 62 fii 62 60 60 60 60 60 59 52 52 34 5] 21 54 53 51 fii 63 63 63 63 61 63 63 63 62 62 58 40 59 fit 62 63 fit 60 60 fii 61 60 60 60 60 59 59 57 59 61 61 59 fii 60 60 52 52 39 56 22 54 51 48 63 6d 62 62 63 61 60 63 61 62 62 60 35 59 fit 63 63 63 63 63 60 60 61 60 59 59 62 62 62 fii 61 61 59 59 59 60 58 57 34 5] 20 60 58 53 64 fid 63 63 63 62 62 55 62 60 60 57 18 59 fii 61 63 62 61 fii 62 62 62 62 63 62 61 61 61 fii 61 60 60 62 60 58 55 54 39 55 21 60 59 47 63 fid 63 62 62 63 62 62 62 62 62 53 18 58 60 62 62 62 61 fii 60 60 61 60 62 62 62 62 62 fii 61 61 60 59 61 61 53 52 40 5] 22 58 58 47 64 fid 64 63 63 63 60 62 61 61 61 51 20 58 60 63 62 fii 61 61 61 61 62 60 61 61 62 62 62 fii 62 62 61 59 62 62 46 46 35 58 21 60 54 52 63 fid 63 62 64 64 62 64 63 63 63 29 18 58 61 61 61 61 60 60 62 62 62 60 60 60 60 60 61 60 61 59 59 61 58 60 48 50 38 56 23 57 56 51 64 fi4 64 63 63 63 62 62 61 63 63 32 18 59 61 63 63 61 61 61 61 61 59 62 60 61 61 61 60 60 59 60 60 59 62 61 54 51 36 49 19 60 57 54 84 65 63 64 63 62 64 63 63 60 60 27 19 60 61 62 63 62 62 62 61 61 62 62 61 62 61 61 62 61 62 62 60 61 57 56 53 49 36 58 25 59 58 46 63 65 64 63 64 64 64 64 62 62 62 40 18 59 61 62 64 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 61 62 60 60 61 60 62 61 61 60 60 60 54 55 38 5] 24 56 52 48 64 65 65 65 64 64 63 62 63 63 63 52 18 58 60 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 63 62 62 61 61 63 62 61 61 60 60 58 59 54 53 38 55 21 53 47 48 64 65 63 64 64 65 64 64 65 64 64 61 19 59 61 62 61 61 60 60 59 59 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 60 60 59 59 61 61 50 51 31 5] 25 43 45 50 64 64 63 62 63 62 65 63 62 65 65 59 36 60 61 62 62 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 59 61 61 58 60 60 61 58 58 60 61 55 52 38 56 20 49 35 50 64 64 64 63 63 62 62 62 62 61 61 56 60 59 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 60 60 60 62 60 60 61 61 59 61 60 61 60 61 60 58 36 56 21 60 60 46 65 66 65 63 64 64 62 63 62 61 61 58 62 59 61 61 62 61 60 60 61 61 61 62 60 60 62 62 62 61 59 61 60 59 61 60 59 60 36 56 22 57 58 55 63 65 64 65 64 63 64 64 63 63 63 60 62 59 61 60 62 61 59 59 60 60 61 60 60 60 61 61 61 59 60 60 57 61 62 61 56 51 38 55 20 60 57 57 64 66 65 64 65 63 63 65 65 64 64 61 62 59 61 61 62 60 61 61 61 61 61 60 61 60 61 61 60 59 61 61 58 58 57 60 51 50 37 5] 18 59 56 60 64 65 65 64 64 63 63 65 64 64 64 61 61 59 60 62 63 61 62 62 61 61 62 61 62 62 62 62 62 60 61 59 59 60 60 58 49 60 36 51 19 56 52 56 65 65 65 6463 63 64 62 62 83 63 61 61 80 61 61 61 62 80 60 61 61 82 82 82 62 63 83 61 60 61 60 61 61 60 59 42 44 33 54 18 60 59 52 63 65 65 65 64 64 63 63 63 62 62 58 60 61 61 63 62 63 62 62 62 62 60 62 60 60 60 60 60 61 61 62 56 69 61 59 51 49 33 53 23 49 39 52 Speed Legend, Red, <25 mph, Yellow, 25-50 mph, Green, 50+ mph 6.43 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-19 (cont.) EB HOT and GP Lane Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, Ultimate Eastbound General Purpose Lanes Laken HOT WEST 55- - Gypsu 241on- HOT HOT SR71- HOVmi MainCD Mixing HOT Mix HOT Mix OF Tustin Laken Laken Impena Impena Imperia Weir- Gypsu - HOT HOT End- End- Green- SR]i CD HOVmi HOVmi - Serfas- Maple- Maple- Uncoln- Main- Onto 1155Bon- Area to to HOVmix- °PLaneg Tustin to 55 55 ew ew 1 1 1-Weir Weir 241off 241 m 241on End End Green Green Green Green SR71 off to On SR71 x x Serfas Serfas Maple Maple Lincoln Lincoln Lincoln 2nd 2nd Main Ex115o8 15on 115NBon 0015 McKinley McKinley McKinley HOVmix HOVmix Pierce Pierce Exit 2.05 PM 2.10 PM 2:15 PM 2:20 PM 2:25 PM 2:30 PM 2:35 PM 2:40 PM 2:45 PM 2:50 PM 2:55 PM 360 PM 365 PM 3.10 PM 3.15 PM 3.20 PM 3.25 PM 3.30 PM 3.35 PM 3:40 PM 3.45 PM 3.50 PM 3.55 PM 4:00 PM 4:05 PM 4:10 PM 4:15 PM 4:20 PM 4:25 PM 4:30 PM 4:35 PM 4:40 PM 4:45 PM 4:50 PM 4:55 PM 560 PM 5:05 PM 5:10 PM 5:15 PM 5:20 PM 5:25 PM 5:30 PM 5:35 PM 5. PM 5:45 PM 5:50 PM 5:55 PM 660 PM 665 PM 6:10 PM 6:15 PM 6.20 PM 6.25 PM 6.30 PM 6.35 PM 6.40 PM 6:45 PM 6:50 PM 6:55 PM ]:00 PM 57 54 57 58 58 59 58 59 59 57 57 58 58 60 62 61 61 60 59 60 60 59 60 60 61 60 60 60 42 42 47 60 57 48 57 58 58 58 59 59 60 59 58 59 59 60 62 60 60 60 59 60 58 59 60 60 61 59 60 56 41 41 46 61 57 54 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 58 60 61 60 60 59 58 59 60 59 60 60 60 58 60 46 35 35 45 60 56 51 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 58 57 59 58 59 62 61 61 60 60 60 60 59 60 60 61 60 60 25 38 38 45 60 57 44 57 58 58 58 59 58 60 58 58 58 59 60 61 61 61 60 59 59 59 60 60 60 61 60 60 53 37 37 45 61 57 38 57 58 58 59 59 59 59 58 58 58 59 59 62 61 61 60 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 60 60 55 33 33 45 60 58 49 55 58 59 58 59 59 60 59 58 59 59 60 61 60 60 60 58 59 58 58 59 59 60 59 59 54 42 42 46 61 57 52 58 58 58 59 58 59 60 59 58 58 59 59 62 61 61 60 60 61 61 60 61 61 61 60 60 28 41 41 49 61 56 52 57 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 58 59 58 58 62 61 61 60 58 59 59 59 60 60 61 60 60 32 43 43 56 62 57 48 58 58 58 59 58 58 59 59 58 58 58 59 61 61 61 60 59 60 59 58 59 59 60 59 60 38 41 41 50 82 57 51 56 58 58 59 59 59 60 57 57 58 57 59 62 61 61 60 59 60 60 59 60 60 61 59 60 24 44 44 50 82 57 44 58 58 59 59 59 59 60 58 59 59 59 60 61 61 61 80 59 57 60 59 60 60 61 60 60 42 40 40 53 61 58 48 58 58 59 59 58 59 59 59 58 58 58 59 62 62 62 60 58 57 60 59 61 61 61 58 61 59 41 41 48 61 57 38 58 58 58 59 59 58 59 58 58 58 57 58 61 61 61 80 59 61 60 60 61 61 61 59 61 53 41 41 49 62 57 42 58 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 57 59 61 60 60 60 59 60 59 59 60 60 61 58 59 47 42 42 48 61 57 39 58 57 58 59 59 59 59 58 57 57 53 59 61 61 61 61 60 60 60 59 60 60 61 59 60 48 42 42 49 62 58 39 58 58 58 58 59 58 59 60 58 58 55 57 61 60 60 60 58 58 60 59 60 60 61 56 60 26 43 43 51 61 58 39 59 58 59 59 59 59 59 58 57 58 54 58 60 61 61 61 60 61 60 60 60 60 61 54 59 25 39 39 58 62 57 38 58 58 58 59 59 59 60 58 58 57 55 59 60 60 60 60 58 60 59 60 60 60 61 59 60 25 44 44 60 62 57 37 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 59 58 58 57 58 61 61 61 60 59 57 60 59 60 60 60 58 48 27 44 44 56 61 57 40 57 58 58 59 59 59 60 58 58 58 56 59 60 61 61 60 60 60 60 59 60 60 61 57 37 27 44 44 59 61 57 37 58 58 58 59 57 58 59 59 59 59 54 59 61 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 60 23 26 44 44 51 61 57 40 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 58 57 58 56 59 59 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 58 22 26 37 37 53 61 58 41 59 59 59 59 59 59 60 60 58 59 57 57 60 60 60 60 59 58 60 59 60 60 61 59 22 25 38 38 51 61 56 38 58 58 58 59 58 59 59 59 58 59 56 56 59 60 60 61 60 54 60 60 60 60 61 60 23 25 38 38 48 61 57 37 58 58 58 59 58 58 59 59 58 58 56 52 60 61 61 61 59 60 60 60 60 60 62 59 20 23 44 44 51 62 54 42 57 58 58 59 59 59 60 59 58 57 56 29 59 60 60 60 60 60 61 60 60 60 62 59 22 25 45 45 53 61 56 47 57 58 58 58 57 58 59 58 58 58 55 26 59 60 60 61 60 58 60 59 60 60 60 58 24 24 44 44 54 63 52 43 57 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 57 51 30 26 60 61 61 60 60 61 60 60 60 60 61 59 22 26 48 48 50 62 53 51 57 58 58 57 59 58 59 58 58 20 28 26 59 61 61 60 59 57 60 59 60 60 61 60 37 25 44 44 49 61 57 38 58 58 58 59 58 59 59 58 57 20 26 27 57 61 61 61 60 60 60 59 60 60 60 60 60 25 42 42 55 62 58 38 58 58 58 59 58 58 60 59 22 19 24 27 60 61 61 61 59 60 60 60 60 60 61 60 61 26 42 42 55 62 57 34 58 58 59 59 58 58 59 59 16 19 30 27 56 60 60 60 59 59 60 60 fii 61 61 60 60 42 45 45 56 62 57 34 59 59 59 60 59 59 60 59 20 20 25 26 58 61 61 61 60 61 61 60 60 60 61 58 61 58 43 43 54 fii 50 31 56 58 58 59 58 59 60 59 19 20 27 26 60 61 61 61 59 60 60 60 fii 61 62 60 61 fii 43 43 51 62 36 37 57 58 58 59 58 58 60 58 17 17 24 27 59 61 61 60 58 61 60 60 fii 61 61 61 61 59 45 45 52 fii 57 44 57 58 58 59 58 58 59 56 17 19 23 27 59 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 fii 61 62 61 61 60 42 42 53 62 57 40 58 59 59 59 59 59 60 19 18 20 30 27 58 60 60 60 59 57 60 60 fii 61 61 60 61 60 50 50 51 62 57 40 58 59 59 59 59 59 60 21 20 22 36 26 58 60 60 60 59 61 60 60 60 60 61 60 61 59 43 43 55 62 58 39 59 58 59 59 59 59 60 22 18 19 25 25 58 60 60 60 59 60 60 59 60 60 61 59 60 60 42 42 54 62 56 46 58 59 59 59 59 59 60 20 18 18 24 27 59 61 fit 80 60 59 61 fit 60 60 61 60 61 60 41 41 49 fii 57 40 57 58 59 59 59 58 60 20 16 19 24 28 59 61 fit 61 59 fit 61 61 fii 61 62 60 61 62 39 39 49 62 58 36 58 59 59 59 59 59 60 18 17 17 25 26 59 61 fit 61 60 fit 62 fii fii 61 62 61 61 fii 46 46 50 56 56 36 58 59 59 59 59 60 60 38 17 18 25 26 59 61 fii 61 60 fii 61 fii 61 61 62 60 62 82 53 53 44 36 58 38 59 58 59 59 59 59 60 58 18 20 27 25 58 60 fie 60 60 58 61 fii 61 61 62 61 61 80 46 46 47 62 57 41 59 58 59 59 59 60 60 81 17 20 25 25 58 60 fie 61 60 fii 61 61 61 61 61 60 60 58 47 47 53 62 58 37 58 58 59 60 59 59 60 60 18 20 28 27 58 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 62 60 61 61 48 48 54 62 58 38 59 59 59 59 59 59 60 60 18 20 24 26 59 61 81 61 59 81 61 61 61 61 61 60 61 60 53 53 59 62 58 42 59 59 59 80 60 60 60 60 18 19 26 26 60 61 81 61 60 81 60 80 60 60 62 60 61 61 48 48 59 63 58 48 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 19 20 27 24 59 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 60 61 56 45 45 59 63 58 48 58 59 59 60 60 60 61 61 60 21 27 27 58 60 60 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 62 61 61 56 43 43 56 62 58 47 59 59 59 60 59 60 60 61 60 55 27 25 59 61 61 61 60 58 61 60 60 60 61 59 61 60 41 41 48 62 58 43 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 60 59 60 39 26 60 61 61 62 61 81 61 61 61 61 62 60 61 60 47 47 56 58 58 43 59 59 59 59 59 60 61 60 60 60 59 27 59 62 62 61 60 61 62 61 62 62 62 61 62 61 45 45 46 46 58 44 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 60 59 60 61 31 59 61 61 61 60 61 61 61 62 62 62 60 62 61 25 25 30 35 58 46 58 59 59 60 59 60 60 60 60 60 59 61 59 61 61 61 60 62 61 62 62 62 62 61 62 56 21 21 32 26 58 42 58 59 59 59 59 60 61 60 60 60 60 61 59 61 61 61 59 59 61 60 60 60 61 60 57 22 28 28 47 50 58 47 56 58 59 60 59 59 60 60 60 60 59 61 59 60 60 61 60 61 62 61 62 62 62 60 46 23 30 30 46 62 58 51 58 59 59 59 58 59 60 61 60 59 58 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 62 61 62 62 62 60 55 25 32 32 44 62 58 56 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 59 60 59 60 61 61 61 61 59 60 60 60 61 61 62 61 61 23 38 38 51 62 tCWt 4 tt• g gg4 �81Eg4ggS Ta! �xNNNxxxxgxvx�xxxexx�e��xg�x 51 54 56 54 51 48 50 52 48 54 52 46 47 51 54 52 55 57 56 54 53 41 52 45 44 49 54 55 55 53 52 54 53 52 48 54 53 41 47 54 56 55 56 56 57 51 54 49 54 49 43 47 52 53 52 52 49 56 55 57 51 56 54 46 49 54 53 53 54 53 50 48 50 43 53 50 49 49 52 54 52 52 52 56 53 52 44 53 51 40 46 52 54 53 54 52 54 50 50 48 53 54 42 47 53 54 51 53 51 55 55 55 53 55 52 44 48 49 53 53 55 54 56 52 52 49 53 51 45 48 50 51 49 52 51 55 53 51 49 54 54 43 49 53 53 53 54 51 54 48 49 44 52 52 44 48 53 54 53 54 52 57 54 54 47 49 50 41 45 54 55 55 57 54 58 54 53 50 52 51 44 49 52 52 53 52 52 59 56 58 50 53 52 42 48 53 56 53 52 52 54 50 53 45 53 52 45 50 53 52 50 54 48 55 50 50 44 53 52 40 45 52 53 50 49 47 48 49 51 43 52 51 40 45 55 56 54 52 47 51 46 48 42 50 51 43 45 53 53 51 50 50 56 54 48 45 51 46 42 42 54 54 50 51 49 45 46 49 45 50 50 40 46 52 51 49 51 49 50 47 50 39 46 47 42 46 52 53 49 49 48 50 47 49 44 53 48 37 46 51 54 52 51 48 48 45 49 38 47 36 39 44 52 55 53 52 50 52 48 51 44 49 18 40 46 52 53 52 52 50 52 52 50 44 30 19 40 40 52 54 53 54 48 50 50 51 47 32 17 45 47 54 55 55 52 50 47 44 51 39 24 19 43 48 52 52 50 53 54 53 54 54 27 26 18 42 46 55 53 50 51 52 56 54 53 25 21 15 47 52 51 53 53 55 53 57 55 47 20 27 20 42 48 53 55 54 54 52 57 53 25 29 27 19 39 45 54 54 53 53 54 58 55 47 24 25 18 37 44 52 53 52 53 50 56 53 51 22 23 19 41 46 55 56 54 55 52 48 47 52 26 24 17 44 49 53 55 55 55 53 58 55 55 19 24 17 44 49 53 55 56 56 55 57 53 56 21 25 18 45 44 53 56 52 52 54 59 58 56 22 23 1] 42 50 53 53 55 54 53 58 55 55 21 23 18 38 44 53 53 48 51 51 56 54 54 25 24 19 39 46 47 51 52 52 52 49 49 51 24 21 15 4651 41 55 53 52 52 58 54 53 18 22 15 50 48 36 58 57 58 57 60 56 57 18 20 13 51 53 32 54 54 55 54 fii 59 58 ifi 21 18 39 47 31 51 52 53 52 53 49 51 21 22 15 44 47 33 50 46 46 46 52 52 53 18 21 15 49 52 32 52 50 48 50 56 53 54 19 23 16 47 51 34 53 53 54 51 51 50 50 18 19 13 49 54 51 54 53 53 49 56 52 40 22 25 17 45 46 53 54 52 54 55 58 57 24 20 24 it 48 48 47 53 51 54 53 59 54 45 18 21 16 44 48 40 51 45 50 51 57 53 52 22 25 18 46 50 44 56 54 55 52 53 48 51 22 20 10 52 50 41 61 59 60 58 62 61 60 15 21 15 40 46 33 57 58 59 60 61 62 62 20 22 12 56 55 30 51 52 56 51 57 54 57 16 20 12 52 57 33 56 53 51 50 44 51 50 16 18 11 57 60 32 47 45 49 50 60 57 32 14 19 11 54 56 48 49 45 42 44 47 42 21 13 18 13 49 52 52 52 49 51 49 53 27 13 1] 23 14 51 52 Speed Legend, Red, <25 mph, Yellow, 25-50 mph, Green, 50+ mph 6.44 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Eastbound express traffic flow is presented in Figure 6-42 and remains at approximately a 2,500 vehicle per hour rate throughout the PM simulation period. Demand for the eastbound to southbound movement grows as congestion on 1-15 southbound increases. By 5 PM, demand for the south connector exceeds demand for the eastbound through movement. 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Figure 6-42 Eastbound Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2035 Network SR 91 Eastbound Riverside County Express Lanes Traffic RCTC 91 XL RCTC 91 XL, through ❑ RCTC 91 XL, to 15 56 2,479 2,553 2,466 2,520 2,279 1,624 1,628 363 940 1,2231,235 1,225 1,302 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM The westbound Express Lanes offer little time savings for users traveling from east to west although speeds are 10 miles per hour higher than experienced on the general purpose lanes. For motorists traveling via 1-15 northbound, northbound to westbound connector would save more than 9 minutes at the peak due to increased congestion on 1-15 northbound. 6.45 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-43 Westbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, I-15 to Green River Road SR 91 Westbound: 1-15 to Green River Road =Time Savings Target Speed -6-GP Express 70 60 60 50 40 �_ E m - 30 E m vi a+ 20 r - 10 t � 50 s Q- ✓ 40 E m cr. 30 vl 20 10 0.1 1.1 2.0 1.9 0.1 0 FL FL crl N i a M a n C c. a I!1 1 a n l0 0 Wes Figure 6-44 tbound Speeds, 2035 by 2035 Network, Ontario Avenue to Green River F SR 91 Westbound: Ontario Avenue to Green River Road .Time Savings —Target Speed tGP r-Express 70 60 ■- 60 - 50 - 40 C no 30 5 fa fa vta m E -20p 10 • ■ ■ ■ 50 o. 40 E .a v S. 30 i. v 20 8.5 9.3 10 2.9 ! 5.8 d a m , 0 a m N i F a C Ill c_ a ,6 0 oad Traffic on the westbound express lanes ranges from just under 900 vehicles per hour to nearly 1,200 vehicles per hour. Movements from the east to the west remain a larger contributor than the south connector. 6.46 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Figure 6-45 Westbound Express Lanes Distribution, 2035 by 2035 Network SR 91 Westbound Riverside County Express Lanes Traffic 1,009 664 2-3 PM ■ RCTC 91 XL RCTC 91 XL, through ❑ RCTC 91 XL, via 15NB 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM Revenue Forecast The VISSIM micro simulation model predicts total 2-7 PM toll traffic and revenue that are similar to market share model forecasts. Micro simulation model toll traffic is 10 percent lower than predicted by the market share model, while revenue is approximately 3 percent higher, again buoyed by higher toll rates. 6.47 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-46 Express Lanes Toll Traffic, 2035 by 2035 Network Riverside County Express Lanes Toll Traffic 4,500 4,000 3,500 3 3,000 0 x y 2,500 a N 2,000 's > 1,500 1,000 500 0 2-3 PM 4— $20,000 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM —IP—Vissim T&R Enhanced Figure 6-47 Express Lanes Revenue, 2035 by 2035 Network Riverside County Express Lanes Revenue $18,000 T $16,000 m � $14,000 c $12,000 $10,000 0 N y $8,000 a $6,000 e $4,000 $2,000 $0 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM —i—Vissim —A—T&R Enhanced Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Table 6-20 Express Lane Traffic and Revenue, 2035 by 2035 Network 2-7 PM SR 91 Eastbound From To Revenue, 2010$'s Average Toll Charged* Total Express Traffic Vissim T&R model Vissim T&R model Vissim I T&R model 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 3:00 PM L 4:00 PM $5,043 $11,498 $8,257 $11,842 $2.27 $5.09 $3.86 $5.05 2,349 2,470 I 2,404 r 2,849 4:00 PM 5:00 PM $15,192 $15,489 $7.49 $6.51 2,299 3,037 5:00 PM 6:00 PM $16, 705 $15, 689 $8.81 $6.52 2,168 3,083 6:00 PM 7:00 PM $15,951 $15,735 $8.84 $6.52 2,117 3,020 Total 2-7 PM $64,389 $67,012 $6.50 $5.69 11,403 14,393 SR 91 Westbound From To Revenue, 2010$'s Average Toll Charged* Total Express Traffic Vissim T&R model Vissim T&R model Vissim I T&R model 2:00 PM 3:00 PM $1,427 $1,101 $1.46 $1.50 1,018 861 3:00 PM 4:00 PM $1,559 $1,353 $1.47 $1.51 1,102 1 1,044 4:00 PM ,,- 5:00 PM $2,025 $2,242 $1.54 $2.21 1,385 L 1,197 5:00 PM 6:00 PM $1,949 $2,431 $1.53 $2.20 1,341 1,292 6:00 PM 7:00 PM $1, 258 $857 $0.98 $1.50 1,347 723 Total 2-7 PM $8,217 $7,983 $1.40 $1.78 6,193 5,117 SR 91 EB &WB From To Revenu,2010$'s Average Toll Charged* Total Express Traffic Vissim T&R model Vissim T&R model Vissim T&R model 2:00 PM 3:00 PM $6,470 $9,358 $2.02 $3.25 3,367 L 3,265 3:00 PM 4:00 PM $13, 057 $13,194 $3.94 $4.07 3,572 L 3,893 4:00 PM 5:00 PM $17,217 $17,731 $5.15 $5.12 3,684 I-4,234 5:00 PM 6:00 PM $18,654 $18,119 $5.88 $5.02 3,509 4,375 6:00 PM 7:00 PM $17,209 $16,592 $5.58 $5.47 3,464 h 3,743 Total 2-7 PM $72,606 $74,994 $4.50 $4.62 17,596 I 19,510 Average Toll charged excluding HOV3+ vehicles which are assumed toll free. Figure 6-48 through Figure 6-52 illustrate traffic conditions predicted by the micro simulation model at various segments of the corridor at 4:40 PM. Traffic is lighter than shown in the 2035 by 2020 Network scenario. 6.49 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-48 Orange County SR 91 Mixing Area, 4:40 PM Figure 6-49 Serfas Club Drive, 4:40 PM 6.50 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-50 Lincoln Avenue, 4:40 PM Figure 6-51 I-15/SR 91 Interchange, 4:40 PM 6.51 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Micro -Simulation Model May 9, 2012 Figure 6-52 McKinley Street, 4:40 PM 6.52 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 7.0 Marketshare Analysis 7.1 OVERVIEW This chapter discusses the development of a set of "market share curves" which model the revealed preference of Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes full toll paying users. The existing Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes are located immediately west of the western terminus of the proposed Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes. They would be separated only by an approximately 1.5 mile mixing zone, between SR 241 and Green River Road, and would operate with similar operational policies. Both roads would charge most users variable tolls, tied to congestion, and both roads would serve travelers commuting between Orange and Riverside Counties. Because of their similarities, behaviors exhibited by users of the existing SR 91 Express Lanes are expected to be similar to behaviors of future potential users of the proposed Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes. 7.2 METHODOLOGY The market share curves are built from a compilation of traffic, speed, and income data collected in 2008 and 2009. General purpose lane hourly traffic and speed data from the PEMS database, and SR 91 Express lanes hourly traffic and toll data obtained from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) were compared against each other to develop relationships between global traffic demand (the combination of general purpose and Express Lane traffic), and demand to use the existing SR 91 Express Lanes. Income stratification as reported in the 2009 SR 91 Express Lanes customer satisfaction survey were used to support estimation of the toll elasticity of demand. The result is a set of curves that predict express lane toll vehicle usage given a global volume to capacity (V/C) ratio, and a toll expressed as a cost per mile of travel. 7.3 EXISTING EXPRESS TRAFFIC VS GLOBAL V/C Selection of an Analysis Direction Market share relationships observed on the eastbound SR 91 Express Lanes were chosen to be the basis for future market share of both directions of the Riverside County Express Lanes. Westbound SR 91 Express Lanes market share data were not used. Figure 7-1 demonstrates the difference between SR 91 eastbound and westbound express traffic. On average from July 2007 to June 2008, eastbound weekday traffic peaked at approximately 3,000 vehicles per hour while westbound traffic peaked at approximately 2,200 7.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 vehicles per hour. Full toll paying traffic eastbound was 2,500 vehicles per hour at the intraday peak, and westbound toll traffic reached a high of 1,600 vehicles per hour. The difference in demand is also expressed by the difference in tolls charged. During July 2008, the full toll from Monday to Thursday averaged more than $8.00, while westbound tolls were less than $4.50. Figure 7-1 SR 91 Express Lanes Weekday Traffic, Fiscal Year 2008 DEB All Express - - EB Full Toll t—WB All Express - - WB Full Toll 3,500 3,000 2,500 ti - > r , r _ \ \ , 2,000 F 1:12,500 r " / / / 1 1 1 . x W 1,000 r / / \ \ \ \ r / 1 , 1 / / ` \ \ r r \ \ \ 500 I . 4 - r _ \ \ \ r• - \ \ \ 0 —I �. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 aaaaaaaaaa2 2 a a a a a a a a a a a a a s o 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o O O o o O o o N .--I N M V if1 Cs; I� idOl O N .--I :1M 7 it1 l0 I� COO Hour Beginning 7.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-2 SR 91 Express Lanes Tolls, Average Monday to Thursday, July 2008 $9.00 $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 I I I I I I - Eastbound t Westbound ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ¢ • ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 0 0 o o o o o o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 N e-I N M 6-; l0 R 66 01 O rl ci c-I a a a a a a d a d d a d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N c-I N M a &i 6 r W Cr; O c-I e-I rl ci Hour Beginning The difference in traffic and tolls is in part attributable to differences in general purpose lane travel times. Peak period travel times on the eastbound and westbound general purpose lanes in Orange County differ substantially. While westbound is the peak travel direction during the AM peak period, and the eastbound is the peak travel direction during the PM peak, travel times can be over twice as high in the eastbound direction. In a recent survey of travel times, which already include the additional eastbound general purpose auxiliary lane between SR 241 and SR 71, eastbound motorists required more than 35 minutes to travel eastbound from SR 55 to the County Line, but the reverse trip during the morning rush hour required less than 15 minutes. During free -flow periods, travel time was just under 9 minutes. In addition to differences in the intensity of congestion, the eastbound lanes experienced congestion throughout the 3.5 hour PM survey period while the westbound lanes were congested for 2 hours. Additional data as shown in Chapter 3 show that the eastbound lanes are congested for 4 to 5 hours, and the westbound lanes experience about 3 hours of congestion. Figure 7-3 illustrates the weekday peak period travel times observed in July 2011. 7.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-3 SR 91 GP Lane Travel Time, SR 55 to County Line, July 2011 40 35 — �EB GP WBGP — _Free Flow Travel Time 30 w 25 c .E 20 ai E d e 15 r 10 5 0 a d a a oo m v '-n `.° N.'o r•-. 00 o a o va m m Time Riverside County SR 91 travel time data recorded in November 2010, which aggregate travel time on the general purpose and HOV lanes, show that both directions experience intense congestion, and duration of congestion comparable to that on the eastbound Orange County SR 91 GP lanes. The westbound lanes are congested for well over 4 hours, and motorists experience travel times of over 35 minutes. Eastbound, congestion lasts for more than 5 hours, although travel times are lower, reaching a maximum of 20 minutes. The data presented in Figure 7-4 aggregate both GP and HOV lane travel times. GP lane only travel times are likely higher than presented. Orange County SR 91 eastbound Express Lane market share relationships are expected to better reflect decisions to use the Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes better than westbound market share relationships. 7.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-4 SR 91 GP & HOV Travel Time, County Line to McKinley Street, November 2010 EB GP WB GP —Free Flow Travel Time 45 40 35 if 30 3 0 e .E 25 d r 20 Ti 15 10 5 0 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 2-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7-8 PM Time Selection of Analysis Point Market share analysis was conducted for the single most congested segment of the roadway. Where the road is most congested, bottlenecks form and users experience substantial delay. It is expected that travelers' decision to pay a toll to use the Express Lanes would be largely due to the congestion experienced at the road's bottleneck location. An analysis of average weekday traffic data on SR 91 show that on a per lane basis, the eastbound lanes between SR 241 and the Orange and Riverside County Line show the greatest congestion, and in the westbound direction, the segment between Imperial Highway and Weir Canyon Road has the greatest per lane volume. Daily traffic levels per lane are illustrated in Figure 7-5. 7.5 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-5 Average Weekday General Purpose Volume per Lane 7.3.1 Eastbound Express Traffic vs. Global Traffic Eastbound curves were developed from year 2008 and 2009 traffic and speed data collected from PEMS (GP lane traffic and speed) and from the Orange County Transportation Authority (SR 91 Express traffic). During the period from mid-2009 to mid-2010, construction of the eastbound auxiliary lane from SR 241 to SR 71 caused higher than normal congestion on SR 91 EB and boosted express lane traffic. Data from this period were not used because they are not believed to be indicative of typical conditions. Both GP and Express Lanes data were analyzed on an hourly basis, removing the impacts of holidays and days with atypical travel conditions. Express lanes traffic demonstrates a strong direct correlation with GP lane traffic, and was used to build the market share curves. Figure 7-6 shows that as GP lane traffic rises, express lane traffic also rises. However, as the GP lanes approach and exceed capacity, GP lane traffic flow declines while express lane traffic continues to increase. A comparison of express lanes traffic and GP lane speed, presented in Figure 7-7 also demonstrate correlation, but by inspection, it can be seen that there is greater correlation between GP lane traffic and Express traffic. 7.6 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-6 Eastbound Express Traffic (Full Toll and HOV3+) vs. GP Lane Traffic 3,500 3,000 0 M s 2,500 2 2,000 a 42 1,500 `oa w v g 1,000 0 w O, 500 H 0 • • • • •• : S.. • capacty v • • • • • • •• •is : y itT• 9 :V ••• • • • • • .r� ,. • �• •' • • • • •• • _ • • • • • • N • � S � • . • • • • • • /•• .. • • • • • • • , -.� • • ' :..• • ' . • • • • ••�-'•fir • •r►•�yif• i •• M •w•t • •� •/ • • • • • . fr. •• 1 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 GP Lane Count Figure 7-7 Eastbound Express Traffic (Full Toll and HOV3+) vs. GP Lane Speed 3,500 • • ' •• •• • • •• • • • • • • •• •• •• •• .. 1; • • ••• .• •S•••• • . • •• :• • • ••• • • • •' • • • 3,000 • • ••_ '• •• •• , f f••• ` •' •••• • • •• ' 2,500 E . . .. • •••.• .' 0 • •. • • • • > 1- • • • • • • • 0 x 2,000 • •, • •• •• • • • . • H ` • •• • • • • •• • •• • • •• • • ' a • . • • • • • • • • •• W •' • • •. . • ' 1,500 • • ' • •• • 7 a • • • • • . ' • • m W •r .. •.' •• •• •'• •: •' • hI •• •••••• 1 • • ••. ••• '• ••- •• • • •'• .• • • • • • • 1,000 x N •• • • • • A w•••: : _1i• .' ••.••• • . s. ••• • • •�.s.•• . • •.:• • . + • • ♦. s d, rs 4../•s017'« . • •. • •• 6 ! r- . • 500 • 1 i� ' • • . • • f�i•r�•�,' • M• .•Ar•1•• • • • 40 30 20 0 10 0 80 70 60 50 GP Lane Speed (mph) 7.7 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Express lane traffic data were further disaggregated into full toll paying and vehicles that travel for free or pay a 50% discounted rate from 4-6 PM (generally registered HOV-3+ carpools, and will be referred to as "HOV-3+"). HOV-3+ express lane users travel toll free during all hours except from 4-6 PM when they pay a 50 percent discounted toll. By the time the Riverside County Express Lanes are scheduled to be open for operations in 2017, it is expected that the toll for HOV-3+ vehicles will be eliminated entirely. The significant difference in tolls charged HOV-3+ and full toll vehicles today, and expected to be charged in the future suggests that the decision and revealed behavior of full toll traffic and HOV-3+ traffic should be considered separately. Figure 7-8 shows the relationship between full toll and GP lane traffic, while Figure 7-9 compares HOV-3+ traffic on the SR 91 Express lanes and GP lane traffic. Full toll traffic maintains a strong correlation with GP lane traffic. While HOV-3+ traffic also demonstrate some correlation, the data show distinct levels of HOV-3+ utilization at common GP lane traffic levels, and suggest factors other than tolls or congestion are responsible for HOV-3+ demand levels. Figure 7-8 Eastbound Full Toll Traffic vs. GP Lane Traffic 3,500 • 3,000 , • ---- 1 • • • 1 2,500 I •• •• •• • • 1 >° •J •� •1 • • •• {•�• ' • ti• 'O.' 68, • I • • GP Lanes over TD capacity 1 • . r•»...., I • •-4• • i „ z,000 .t• O. • • W • 1V $ • C • • • •'• • •• • a 1,500 , • • • S•h•Jt: •• •• • • • • • • • • • •• • cn 1,000 • • •• • • • • � •• •• ♦I •. •• ••• • ; •��•• • • 1 • 500 • • •• • • • �• _ ( • • • � • of ••• • , ••• • • • �•• • • • • • • 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 GP Lane Count 7.8 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-9 Eastbound HOV3+ Traffic vs. GP Lane Traffic SR 91 Eastbound Express HOV3+ Volume 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000\. � 6,000 GP Lane Count .. • s✓ • 4 • ,r•E•• • • •i.t:• . '' .. :I.:. �, .'.` ! °.;_' •.4atam w�� ; i ' a:*?.1' ." i •:•,41 ••.•C'oe : • • I: • • e •• ` y•� ..I • e - '- �• y�• • 41 4_`�• •.. _ . • 7,000 8,000 9,000 7.3.2 Congested Period Demand Estimation and Global V/C Available count and speed data were converted into market share and a demand based global V/C ratio. GP and Express Lane data demonstrate that at the highest levels of Express Lane usage, GP lane traffic counts show flow that is lower than exists during shoulder hours. During these hours, demand is overcapacity, and the GP lanes are constrained by high volumes, high weaving, and potentially downstream bottlenecks. The low traffic counts do not show the high demand that exists during these times of day. GP lane traffic counts were converted to an equivalent demand based on capacity and speed data. If data points that show traffic lower than counted in shoulder hours and congested speeds, they are increased above capacity, effectively creating an equivalent GP lane demand level. Increases were based on the Akcelik speed flow curve, speeds reported by the PEMS database, and capacities observed from count data. 7.9 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-10 General Purpose Lane Demand Adjustment 9,000 8,000 0 7,000 L a L6,000 5,000 u° a `m 4,000 a 0 a ' 3,000 a v 2,000 t7 1,000 0 —GP Count - - - Demand Adjusted GP Volume —SPEED aaaaaaaaa a 0o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri i6 a 6 c6 On in aaaaaaaaa o 0 o o o o o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o o o ry ni c vi CO a 0 00 0 0 0 0o ai o 80 70 60 — E 50 w a w 40 w a 30 a' 20 10 0 Figure 7-11 Akcelik Speed and WC Curve 80 70 60 50 30 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d O O O O O O GP Lane V/C m O m O 0 0 Global V/C was calculated using a general purpose lane capacity of 7,800 vehicles per hour, or 1,950 per lane. Count data were analyzed over the two year period from 2008 and 2009, prior to the start of construction of the SR 91 eastbound auxiliary lane project, which is known to have degraded corridor capacity and boosted SR 91 Express Lane volume. Capacity for purposes of the market share curve analysis was identified as the point where flow reached a maximum and speeds degraded well below free -flow levels. The data shown in Figure 7-12 illustrates GP 7.10 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 lane count and speed data for weekdays, Fridays, and weekends, and shows that the general purpose lanes were not able to consistently process more than approximately 7,800 vehicles per hour. Figure 7-12 SR 91 Eastbound General Purpose Lane Capacity, Weekday, Friday, & Weekend 80 70 60 ; 40 ()I 30 20 10 0 • •� ;••• ti•• • • • ;•„ ' ••• ••• As t • •. j d• S . • 3 'tt'.• •.. • :• .• •yw•'• . . •.tt'• • •. • • • ••� �� .� •♦ '� ' hK' r/' ., •� •{••�tyIt •i $� t • ••• .•• ... • � ••• ' • • } • . t• •: • . • • •• � •• • .• •••0 • • 7• ;• • • • .• • •••; ••i, • • s• � .. • '• • • • Weekday, Friday, Weekend —Capacity = 7,800 vehs/hr • • • ' • • % •• ' 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 General Purpose Lane Volume (vehicles /hour) 9,000 Capacity of the SR 91 Express Lanes was assumed at 4,200 vehicles per hour, or 2,100 vehicles per lane. Tolls on the 91 Express Lanes have historically limited demand to levels that maintain free flow, and therefore lower than capacity. Capacity is assumed higher than on the general purpose lanes because of the lack of entry or exit ramps and lack of trucks, both elements that reduce freeway capacity. On a global (general purpose and express lanes combined) basis, capacity of the SR 91 at the SR 241 to County Line bottleneck was assumed to be 12,000 vehicles per hour. Global V/C's were calculated by dividing the global demand (Akcelik curve adjusted GP lane count plus express lane count) per hour by the global capacity. Figure 7-13 illustrates GP, Express, and Global V/C for each hour of a typical weekday in 2009. 7.11 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-13 SR 91 Eastbound GP, Express, and Global WC —GP v/c —HOT v/c —Global V/C 1.10 1.00 0.90 0.80 u > 0.70 0 io ac ..' 0.60 u a a 0.50 u 0 E 0.40 3 > 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a d a a a a a a d a a o o o o o co co o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o .. .-I .N. M Vl0 I• CO Cr; O .-I .. .-I .. M V Cr; n CO OO . rrlc--, Hour Beginning 7.3.3 Toll Curve Fitting Toll curves representing historical prices charged were fitted through the resulting global demand and toll market share data points. The data were segmented into eastbound weekday (Monday to Thursday), eastbound Friday, and eastbound weekend (Saturday and Sunday), and further segmented by price. Figure 7-14 shows some sample data points for weekdays through which are the basis for the construction of weekday toll curves. 7.12 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-14 SR 91 Eastbound Express Full Toll Traffic Market share vs. Global V/C Data Plot, Weekdays 30% 25% 5% Global vs Toll Marketshare • - • X x - • + X • • _•�' Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group Price Group 1 / $1.23 2 / $1.90 3 / $2.85 4 / $3.87 5 / $4.16 6 / $4.86 7 / $5.62 8 / $8.21• 9 / $8.59 10 / $9.30 1 + •K ' + •f + ..'�• . .,• •••fi _ « • • at , , x• y �C x + te + I .. • u � „ ' ,,„j.� A x < • ♦ • • ��♦ ♦ ♦ • • .% . .. I4 5.1 'r.. � . • • • al.*♦ ♦ ;sal - ♦ ♦ ♦ .. ♦' • . o o v O o 0 0 0 N O V N o o o o O O m m a o O � O N O N O O O O i0i1 v ul .n io n n CO co rn a, o 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O e-I Global WC Curves representing unique prices from $1.25 to $10 were fit through available data points. For each price, the data were available for only a limited range of global v/c levels. For example at $1.25, data exist only from the 0.05 to 0.45 range. To create a continuous curve for all V/C values from 0 to 1.30, market shares were estimated for ranges not represented by data. The estimation process relies on data available at higher or lower global V/C's but at other prices. Elasticity of demand to different prices was calculated and extrapolated for lower and higher prices. At low global v/c's, it is expected that drivers would be far less willing to pay the tolls that are charged during the most congested times of day (currently nearly $10). To express a reduced willingness to pay, price elasticity in the low congestion range was generally in the elastic range. For higher tolls and the lower end of global V/C, toll traffic would decline by a percentage greater than that of the price increase. However at high global v/c's, most toll curves show an inelastic response to price increases, but transition from inelastic to elastic as prices increase. For example, for a 0.95 global V/C, toll curves change from inelastic to elastic at the $20 toll level. Effectively this price represents a revenue maximizing toll. The maximizing level was derived from analysis of the income distribution and reported versus actual time savings of SR 91 Express Lanes users. The result was a set of curves representing prices from $1.25 to $32.00 for global V/C's from 0 to 1.30. Figure 7-15 presents sample toll curves for a $1.25 and $5.60 price (year 2008$'s) for eastbound traffic on a typical weekday. 7.13 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-15 SR 91 Eastbound Express Weekday Toll Curves 30% Global vs Toll Marketshare O 25 % —$1.25Toll —$5.60Toll 20% w `m r .. i 15% 1C0 C 12 10% 5% 0% OOLn OOO O O � , -I N N M M V V n LD lD lD ^ n 0o 0o al al O O .-i . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .--I rl c-I GlobalV/C Friday toll curves predict lower traffic than the weekday curves do in the 0.30 to 0.75 global v/c ranges. At the 0.60 v/c point, for a toll cost of $3.65, Friday toll traffic was approximately 6% of global traffic while typical weekday share was approximately 8%. Weekend toll curves are similar to weekday levels from the 0.00 to 0.50 global v/c ranges. For higher global v/c's, weekday toll curves predict more traffic than weekend toll curves. At the 1.00 global v/c level, weekday curves predict approximately 22% toll market share, while weekend curves predict just over 20%. The weekend curve represents lower demand on weekends, likely from a combination of lower value of time, fewer eligible users, and reduced expectations for high and persistent congestion. 7.14 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-16 SR 91 Eastbound Express Weekday, Friday, and Weekend Toll Curves 30% 25 % a 20% `m r ul a, Y (C i 15% tu_ m H O ~ 10% 5% 0% -Weekday -Friday Weekend i00 010 020 030 040 050 060 070 080 090 100 110 Global V/C 7.3.4 Toll Traffic and Revenue Forecast vs. Actual Collectively the toll curves are able to replicate actual full toll traffic and revenue with a reasonable range of precision. Using the weekday (Monday to Thursday), Friday, and weekend full toll traffic curves, predicted full toll traffic over a full week was 2.6% higher and revenue was 0.9% lower than actual levels. Weekend traffic and revenue were over -predicted by 7% and 6% respectively, while weekday and Friday traffic and revenue were within 3% of actual. Table 7-1 Eastbound Weekday Full Toll Traffic and Revenue, Model vs. Actual, 2008 to 2009 Actual I Marketshare Model % Difference Weekday Toll Traffic I 17,899 18,318 -I$86,083 2.3% Weekday Toll Revenue $87,217 -1.3% Friday Full Toll Traffic 20,163 20,122 -0.2% Friday Full Toll Revenue $111,865 $109,378 -2.2% Weekend Full Toll Traffic 8,937 J 9,566 7.0% Weekend Full Toll Revenue $21,385 $22,676 6.0% Week Full Toll Traffic 109,632 112,526 2.6% Week Full Toll Revenue $503,505 $499,063 -0.9% 7.15 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 On an hourly basis, average weekday traffic and revenue follow actual hourly trends. Weekday toll curves over -predict AM traffic and revenue levels and slightly under -predict PM peak period traffic and revenue. Friday toll curves also over -predict AM peak period traffic and revenue, and under -predict late evening levels. PM peak period traffic and revenue are on average on par with actual results. Weekend toll curves generally over -predict both traffic and revenue on average Saturdays and Sundays, resulting in traffic and revenue 7% and 6% higher, respectively. However the absolute volume and revenue differences are small compared to weekday and Friday levels, and the curves do a good job of following the intraday changes in actual traffic and revenue. Figure 7-17 SR 91 Express EB, Monday to Thursday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual 2,750 2,500 2,250 2,000 1,750 u w 1,500 m c 1,250 1,000 750 500 250 0 -o-Actual Toll Volume -0-Modeled Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a a a a a a a a a a a o o o o 0 o o o o o 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 0 o o o o o o o 0 o o o o o N ,Li N tM a Ln l0 � 00 Ql o , , N ,Li N M V ll1 l0 h W Cr; 0 ,Li ,-1 .--1 c-1 .-1 ,--1 .--1 Hour Beginning 7.16 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-18 SR 91 Express EB, Monday to Thursday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual $22,500 $20,000 $17,500 $15,000 w d $12,500 z o $10,000 i- $7,500 $5,000 $2,500 $0 tActual Toll Revenue tModeled ■ ■ ■ ■ a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ry .1 ry m v Cr; rn o m v Cri oo rn o .� � ti ti ti ti ti Hour Beginning Figure 7-19 SR 91 Express EB, Friday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual 2,750 2,500 2,250 2,000 1,750 g 1,500 A f H 1,250 1,000 750 500 250 0 12:00 tActual tModeled ,. AM 3:00 AM 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM 6:00 PM 9:00 PM Hour Beginning 7.17 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-20 SR 91 Express EB, Friday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual u 3 1 w cc —0—Actual tModeled $27,000 $24,750 $22,500 $20,250 \ $18,000 $15,750 $13,500 $11,250 $9,000 $6,750 $4,500 $2,250 $0 12:00 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ AM 3:00 AM 6:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM Hour Beginning 6:00 PM 9:00 PM Figure 7-21 SR 91 Express EB, Saturday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual —*—Actual (Modeled 2,750 2,500 2,250 2,000 1,750 w £ i 1,500 > 1,250 " 1,000 750 'ONI\ 500 250 0 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a a a a a a a a d a o_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO.. ry ,Li ry m CA 65 n oo a;o ti ry .i ry m a n oo m 0 .-- ,-1 r ti ti ti N Hour Beginning 7.18 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-22 SR 91 Express EB, Saturday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual $25,000 $22,500 $20,000 $17,500 m 2 $15,000 v w z $12,500 LL $10,000 $7,500 $5,000 $2,500 $0 —0—Actual tModeled Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a a a a d a a a a d 0- 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. CO.. l0 I� W Ol O .--I N c-I N M 7 CA 6I� W 6O e-I Hour Beginning Figure 7-23 SR 91 Express EB, Sunday Full Toll Hourly Volume, Modeled vs. Actual —0—Actual tModeled 2,750 2,500 2,250 2,000 1,750 w £ c 1,500 > 1,250 12 LL 1,000 750 500 250 0 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q d d a a a a a a a d a n- o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N c-I Ai M Cr; 6I� Or; Cr; O c-I N ,LiN M V V1 6I� COO1 O . a -I rl c-I c-I rl .--I Hour Beginning 7.19 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 Figure 7-24 SR 91 Express EB, Sunday Full Toll Hourly Revenue, Modeled vs. Actual $25,000 $22,500 $20,000 $17,500 a 'c $15,000 s $12,500 z $10,000 $7,500 $5,000 $2,500 $o tActual (Modeled ........................ ........................ ■■■■ ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ .. E= ■■■■ ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ ....... ........................ ........................ A INNINNIMMET rrr2=0111 Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a d o o o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 c-I rl cy c-I Hour Beginning a a d a a a d a a a o 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 o o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 o 0 N M 4 Cr; CO Q1 c-I c-I 7.4 APPLICATION TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY EXPRESS LANES To apply the existing SR 91 Express Lanes market share curves for the Riverside County Express Lanes, it is necessary to modify the toll curves to reflect the adjacent lane configuration and future toll structure. The Riverside County Express lanes would be located adjacent to general purpose lanes that would be 5 lanes wide at their most congested locations, while the existing SR 91 Express Lanes are adjacent to 4 lane wide GP lane segments. Tolls are assumed to be initially pegged to the distance of the facility, and the RC Express Lanes would be approximately 2 miles shorter in length. 7.4.1 Lane Configuration Adjustment A set of toll curves reflecting a 5 general purpose lane and 2 Express Lane configuration was developed for application to the Riverside County Express Lanes. In the existing condition, the Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes generally account for one-third of the corridor's capacity (2 lanes out of the total 6 GP and Express). In the future, GP lane additions in both Orange and Riverside County will increase capacity by 1 to 2 GP lanes. It is believed that if the Express Lanes represent a lower percentage of corridor capacity (about 29% in a 5 GP and 2 XL case, and 25% in a 6 GP and 2 XL case), the shape of the market share curves should be changed to reflect lower toll market shares for the same level of global V/C and price. The downward adjustment maintains the GP and Express Lane volume per lane ratios inherent in the market share curves, 7.20 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Marketshare Analysis May 9, 2012 but ultimately lowers the level of the curves. Representative weekday toll curves for a 5 general purpose lane and 2 Express Lane configuration and a 4 general purpose and 2 Express Lane configuration are shown in Figure 7-25. Figure 7-25 SR 91 Express EB, Weekday Toll Curve, 4 GP/2XL vs. 5 GP/2 XL - 25% 20% . -4 GP, 2 XL —5GP, 2XL a 15% t in a s `m g 0 ~ 10% 7 Y. 5% 0% , 0 00 0 10 0 30 0 40 20 0 0 50 0 Global WC 60 0 70 0 80 0 90 1 00 1 10 7.4.2 Toll Adjustment The market share curves are applied to the Riverside County Express Lanes on a toll per mile basis. The Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes are approximately 10 miles in each direction and tolls range from $1.30 to $9.50. Each toll curve developed represents the full toll traffic market share for a unique toll charged. The proposed Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes are overall shorter than the Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes. The extended lanes would span about 7 miles from the western ingress/ egress west of Green River Road to the eastern ingress/egress at 1-15. Trips starting or ending at the southern ingress/egress on 1-15 would travel about 10 miles on the Express Lanes. To account for the RC XL's shorter trips, market shares are assumed to apply on a toll rate per mile basis. That is, the market share for a given v/c level and $5 toll on the Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes will also be used on the Riverside County Express Lanes but the toll charged would be 50 cents per mile. For a 7-mile trip, the Riverside County Express Lane charge would be $3.50 while a 10-mile trip would still be $5.00. 7.21 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 8.0 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates 8.1 TOLL POLICY There are several methods to approach the setting of tolls for the RCTC SR 91 Express Lanes project. As part of this study, traffic and revenue streams were estimated for two different tolling policies: 1) implementing the existing OCTA toll policy and 2) implementing an "enhanced" toll policy that is based on the OCTA policy, but allows for the increase of off-peak toll rates once certain volume thresholds are exceeded. The enhanced policy is similar to the OCTA policy as it ties toll increases to traffic volumes, though it allows greater toll flexibility during non -peak periods. 8.1.1 OCTA SR 91 TOLL POLICY We began by reviewing and implementing the toll policy begun and being used for the OCTA SR 91 project in Orange County. Historically, when the SR 91 project was owned and operated by private owners from 1995 to 2002, tolls were increased in response to general traffic demand in the corridor. The level of tolls roughly matched the level of traffic demand on the Express lanes, as shown in the following charts: Figure 8-1 SR 91 Express EB Tolls, 1997-1999 15 Minute Volume 900 600 700 600 Sao 400 300 200 100 Time of Day Traffic Profile - 91 X Eastbound r\ \.7 t 0 *rr .._ I , -._. I I 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 19:00 20:00 22:00 0:00 Time of Day Feb.1997 i—Jan.1999 — - -Jul. 1999 8.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Figure 8-2 SR 91 Express WB Tolls, 1997-1999 15 Minute Volume 900 800 700 son 500 thin 300 200 100 0 0:00 2:00 4:00 Time of Day Traffic Profile - 91 X Westbound I I I 1 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:o0 18:00 Time of Day 20:00 22:00 0:00 - Jul-97 - Jul-98 — - -Jul-99 Tolls were set to match this pattern, but were then changed as the value of the lanes became more apparent, as the private owners were attempting to judge what level of toll was appropriate for each time period. Figure 8-3 SR 91 Express EB Tolls, 1997-2010 $10.00 59.00 58.00 $7.0D $6.00 'u 55.00 s U c 00 5s.o0 52.00 50.1M 5R 91 Eastbound: Wednesday Tolls a o 1 t o f /a 6 6 • f • k yy�� T�+=, xx n 2 1 I ii I b ya a e EC a s . r s r 12a la 2a 3a 4a 5a 6a 79 8a 99 10a lla 12p 1p 2p 3p 4p 5p 6p 7p 8p 9p 10p llp Hour Beginning — 0—O rig 9 Jan-97 —oc— Apr-98 — 0— Ja rr99 — Ma rOD � Nrn-01 + Ja n-04 + • 1 u1-06 # Ott-06 ----Jul-D7 •-•—J u1-08 --•--Ort-09 —)i—Jul-l0 8.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Of particular interest is the increase in tolls in the off peak period, for example the middle of the night, which began at $0.25 in 1995 and quickly increased to $1.00 by March of 2000. The acquisition of the privately owned facility by OCTA in 2002 changed the nature of the toll policy. The focus by OCTA was on peak period "throughput" of traffic, rather than revenue producing potential and as such, their toll policy reflected this interest. OCTA set up a 12 week rolling period of backward looking review of traffic volumes for each of the 168 hours per week, but only would change tolls if hourly traffic met certain traffic volume thresholds, as indicated in the chart below. All other periods were only increased by cost of living adjustments annually. Figure 8-4 OCTA Toll Policy Toll Policy I1ionitoring Process Monitor hourly, day of week and directional traffic for last 12 consecutive weeks (exclude dayshmucs with holidays, major inc ideas, and ac cidetvs) Flag hours when traffic vo hune is 3,128 or more vehicle 6 p er hour, per day, per direction. Determine if this occurs six or more times in the 12-we ek period. Average the traffic vobane for the flaggedhours . Increase Hourly Toll $1.00 Molitor Traffic 12 Rolling Weeks Average Hi0.1 ohune Hours Increase Hourly Toll $0.75 Hold Adjusted Rate Constant for 6 months R Do Not Increase Hourly Toll i E Lan; Follow Adjusted Toll Rate Follow On Process The results of this change in toll policy changed how tolls increased over time, with a greater emphasis on peak periods than previously. As a result, the relative shape of the toll rate curve became somewhat out of sync with the traffic demand as demonstrated by the following chart. 8.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Figure 8-5 OCTA Toll Policy 1,999 3,999 2,500 2,999 1,594 1,999 594 4 91 Express Lanes Toll Rates vs Traffic s IN IN i To II ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Traffic _1111111 i i • a Da Ln Co 0 !�' ▪ a ▪ a ▪ a o 0 ▪ 0 ▪ ▪ 0 0 0 0 '-' ^' 0 ▪ 0 ▪ 0 ▪ • 0 ▪ 0 0 0 0 o o N O 0 0 0 c c c c o 0 O C 6 o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 O 0 > > > > > > > 7 7 0 0 c c c S8.90 $7.94 SELL • s5.U4 Sa.94 S390 S2.90 51.00 S4.94 Toll rates have the same sharp peak as they did in the 1990s, when traffic also demonstrated a very sharp peaking pattern. The good news for OCTA is that the toll policy has met its objectives of focusing on peak period growth, such that the peak hours have shown the lowest growth of any hourly period during the typical weekday. Figure 8-6 OCTA Toll Policy 91 Express EB Growth, 2001-2010 430 4.00 3.50 U i 3.1X7 =u tig i 2.50 q ■bff-Peak ■Peak i 2.4(1 c 1.5D i 100 030 0.00 I , 8 8 8 g g g 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 g g Y K K K E.K K K E s A Y , 5 K 5 5 K K 5 K s v z 8.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Applying the OCTA toll policy to our 2035 traffic forecasts results in a toll schedule as shown in Table 8-1 below. Table 8-1 2035 EB Toll Schedule, OCTA Toll Policy (2008 $s) Time Sun Mon - Thurs Fri Sat 12:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 1:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 2:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 3:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 4:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 5:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 6:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 7:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 8:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 9:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.70 10:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.70 11:00 AM $1.70 $1.10 $1.10 $1.70 12:00 PM $1.70 $1.10 $1.70 $1.70 1:00 PM $1.70 $1.70 $2.50 $1.70 2:00 PM $1.70 $2.50 $3.35 $2.50 3:00 PM $1.70 $3.35 $4.20 $2.50 4:00 PM $1.70 $4.20 $7.15 $2.50 5:00 PM $1.70 $4.20 $8.10 $2.50 6:00 PM $1.70 $4.20 $8.70 $2.50 7:00 PM $1.70 $3.35 $3.35 $1.70 8:00 PM $1.70 $1.70 $3.35 $1.70 9:00 PM $1.70 $1.10 $2.50 $1.70 10:00 PM $1.10 $1.10 $1.70 $1.70 11:00 PM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 8.1.2 ENHANCED SR 91 TOLL POLICY A variation of the base toll created reflects the ability of the Express Lanes to capture greater revenue potential than implied in the OCTA Toll Policy by moving rates upward each year at their value points, rather than at prescribed formulas. This allows a greater toll rate and generates additional revenue compared to the OCTA Toll Policy, as demonstrated in Figure 8-7. 8.5 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Figure 8-7 OCTA Toll Policy vs. Enhanced Toll Policy 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 it2,000 i 1,500 1,000 500 0 50.000 HOT Traffic vs. Toll Rate Charged • 2008 EB HOT TRAFFIC VS TOLLS - DATA ■ Base Tall • Enhanced Toll ,2, , M, , . .;- is - - - • , i• _ , I . $0.100 50.200 50.300 50.400 $0.500 50..0 50.700 $0.800 $0.900 $1.000 Toll per MI a (2008$'s) As the chart above demonstrates, over time, as traffic grows in the shoulder and off-peak hours, the rates charged under the existing OCTA toll policy (shown in blue) fall below the potential value of the trip at various traffic levels (shown in red). The enhanced policy allows for the adjustments of these rates on a yearly basis as necessary to more closely replicate traffic volumes. As an example, using the OCTA toll policy a rate per mile of approximately $0.30 would be charged for the HOT traffic volume of 2,500 in the chart above compared to almost $0.50 per mile under the enhanced toll policy. 8.6 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Applying the enhanced toll policy to our 2035 traffic forecasts results in a toll schedule as shown in Table 8-2 below. Table 8-2 2035 EB Toll Schedule, Enhanced Toll Policy (2008 $s) Time Sun Mon-Thurs Fri Sat 12:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 1:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 2:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 3:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 4:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 5:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 6:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 7:00 AM $1.10 $1.70 $1.70 $1.10 8:00 AM $1.10 $1.70 $1.70 $1.70 9:00 AM $1.10 $1.70 $1.10 $1.70 10:00 AM $1.70 $1.70 $1.70 $2.50 11:00 AM $1.70 $1.70 $1.70 $2.50 12:00 PM $2.50 $1.70 $2.50 $2.50 1:00 PM $2.50 $2.50 $3.35 $2.50 2:00 PM $2.50 $4.20 $4.90 $3.35 3:00 PM $2.50 $5.55 $7.15 $3.35 4:00 PM $2.50 $7.15 $7.15 $4.20 5:00 PM $2.50 $7.15 $8.10 $4.20 6:00 PM $2.50 $7.15 $8.10 $3.35 7:00 PM $2.50 $5.55 $5.55 $2.50 8:00 PM $2.50 $2.50 $4.90 $1.70 9:00 PM $1.70 $1.70 $3.35 $1.70 10:00 PM $1.10 $1.10 $1.70 $1.70 11:00 PM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.70 Of particular interest in the toll schedule above is the difference between the shoulder and off- peak rates between applying the OCTA toll policy versus the enhanced policy. While overnight rates are the same, some hours vary quite dramatically. For example, the 4-5PM hour under the OCTA policy would result in a toll rate of $4.20 as toll volumes do not exceed the 3,200 volume threshold for an increase. This same hour under the enhanced toll policy results in a toll rate of $7.15. 8.2 TRAFFIC AND REVENUE ESTIMATES Utilizing the data and methodologies outlined throughout this report, fifty year traffic and revenue streams were estimated for both the OCTA and enhanced toll policies. The detailed results are shown in Table 8-3 and Table 8-4 below. 8.7 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Both toll policies have similar patterns for traffic growth, with global corridor traffic growing by slightly more than 1 percent until 2035, when traffic growth slows to approximately 0.5 percent per year. Express Lane transactions grow by approximately 3 percent per year for the OCTA toll policy case versus approximately 2.6 percent in the enhanced case. This slight reduction in transaction growth can be attributed to the higher toll rates charged under the enhanced toll policy. The largest difference is in revenue growth, where the OCTA toll policy grows just under 4 percent per year, the enhanced toll policy leads to revenue growth of 6 percent per year. Again, this is attributable to higher toll rates during the shoulder and off-peak hours under the enhanced toll policy. The average toll rate in 2035 under the OCTA toll policy is $2.42 with total annual transactions of 14.6M and total revenue of $35.5M versus an average toll rate of $3.59 for the enhanced toll policy with total annual transactions of 13.8M and total annual revenue of $47.4M (2008 $). A decrease in transactions and revenue occurs in 2035 with the completion of the "Ultimate" project, which adds general purpose lane capacity to the corridor. 8.8 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Table 8-3 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, OCTA Toll Policy Fiscal Year Weekday Toll Transactions Weekday Express Transactions Express Market Share Weekday Revenue 08$'s Average Toll (2008$'s) Annual Toll Transactions Annual Revenue 08$'s Annual Revenue (Nominal Vs) 2017 9,100 11,600 4% $2,705 $2.09 404,497 $844,462 $1,101,886 2018 13,050 16,600 6% $29,038 $2.12 5,335,303 $11,326,038 $15,012,114 2019 20,450 25,850 90/0 $46,785 $2.20 6,652,550 $14,610,500 $19,984,000 2020 26,000 32,800 11% $61,226 $2.24 8,483,050 $19,016,500 $26,754,500 2021 28,600 36,050 12% $68,410 $2.26 9,362,900 $21,206,000 $30,698,000 2022 29,600 37,150 12% $71,040 $2.28 9,692,400 $22,132,000 $32,999,500 2023 30,600 38,250 13% $73,686 $2.30 10,033,500 $23,099,000 $35,474,500 2024 31,650 39,400 13% $76,469 $2.32 10,386,600 $24,108,000 $38,135,000 2025 32,750 40,600 13% $79,392 $2.34 10,752,100 $25,160,500 $40,994,000 2026 33,850 41,750 13% $82,334 $2.36 11,130,450 $26,259,500 $44,068,000 2027 35,000 42,950 13% $85,416 $2.38 11,522,100 $27,406,500 $47,372,500 2028 36,200 44,250 14% $88,641 $2.40 11,927,550 $28,603,500 $50,925,000 2029 37,450 45,600 14% $92,009 $2.42 12,347,300 $29,853,000 $54,744,000 2030 38,750 47,000 14% $95,522 $2.44 12,781,800 $31,156,500 $58,848,000 2031 40,050 48,400 14% $99,057 $2.46 13,231,550 $32,517,000 $63,260,500 2032 41,400 49,850 15% $102,739 $2.48 13,697,100 $33,937,000 $68,004,000 2033 42,800 51,350 15% $106,569 $2.50 14,179,050 $35,419,000 $73,103,000 2034 44,250 52,900 15% $110,549 $2.52 14,678,000 $36,966,000 $78,584,500 2035 44,250 52,750 15% $106,904 $2.43 14,646,400 $35,541,500 $77,726,500 2036 43,750 52,050 15% $102,909 $2.34 14,451,100 $33,836,000 $76,304,000 2037 44,250 52,600 15% $106,379 $2.38 14,632,400 $34,870,000 $80,995,000 2038 44,750 53,150 16% $109,952 $2.43 14,815,950 $35,935,500 $85,974,000 2039 45,350 53,800 16% $113,885 $2.48 15,060,700 $37,344,000 $92,035,000 2040 45,950 54,450 16% $117,932 $2.53 15,303,100 $38,766,500 $98,394,000 2041 46,450 55,000 16% $121,842 $2.58 15,484,150 $39,891,500 $104,287,000 2042 2043 46,950 55,550 16% $125,867 $2.62 15,667,300 $41,049,000 $110,532,500 47,450 56,050 16% $130,010 $2.66 15,852,600 $42,240,000 $117,151,500 2044 47,950 56,600 16% $134,275 $2.71 16,040,100 $43,465,500 $124,166,500 2045 48,450 57,150 16% $138,664 $2.76 16,229,850 $44,726,500 $131,602,000 2046 48,950 57,650 16% $143,182 $2.80 16,421,850 $46,024,000 $139,482,500 2047 2048 2049 49,450 49,950 50,450 58,150 58,700 59,250 16% 16% m-- 16% $147,832 $152,617 $157,541 $2.85 $2.90 $2.95 , 16,616,100 16,812,650 r - 17,011,550 $47,359,500 $48,734,000 $50,148,000 $147,835,500 $156,690,000 ------- _______ $166,073,500 2050 51,000 59,850 16% $162,769 $3.00 17,212,800 $51,603,000 $176,018,500 2051 51,550 60,500 17% $168,091 $3.05 17,409,400 $53,050,500 $186,382,000 2052 52,050 61,050 17% $173,345 $3.10 17,601,250 $54,488,500 $197,177,500 2053 52,550 61,600 17% $178,747 $3.14 17,795,200 $55,965,000 $208,596,500 2054 53,050 62,150 17% $184,300 $3.19 17,991,300 $57,482,000 $220,678,000 2055 53,550 62,700 17% $190,009 $3.25 18,189,600 $59,040,500 $233,461,000 2056 54,050 63,250 17% $195,878 $3.30 18,390,100 $60,640,500 $246,981,500 2057 54,550 63,800 17% $201,911 $3.35 18,592,800 $62,284,000 $261,285,500 2058 55,050 64,350 17% $208,113 $3.40 18,797,700 $63,972,500 $276,420,000 2059 55,550 64,900 17% $214,487 $3.46 19,004,850 $65,706,500 $292,429,500 2060 56,050 65,450 17% $221,038 $3.51 19,214,300 $67,487,500 $309,366,500 2061 56,550 66,000 17% $227,771 $3.57 19,426,050 $69,316,500 $327,283,500 2062 57,050 66,550 17% $234,691 $3.62 19,640,150 $71,195,500 $346,240,000 2063 57,550 67,100 17% $241,803 $3.68 19,856,600 $73,125,500 $366,294,500 2064 58,100 67,700 17% $249,329 $3.74 20,075,400 $75,107,000 $387,507,000 2065 58,800 68,400 17% $257,725 $3.80 20,296,700 $77,143,000 $409,952,000 2066 59,500 69,150 18% $266,356 $3.86 20,520,450 $79,234,500 $433,698,500 2067 60,100 69,800 18% $274,787 $3.92 20,746,600 $81,382,000 $458,817,000 2068 g1 60,700 70,450 18% $283,456 $3.99 5,243,813 $20,897,000 $121,347,875 8.9 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Tolled Traffic and Revenue Estimates May 9, 2012 Table 8-4 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, Enhanced Toll Policy Fiscal Year Weekday Toll Transactions Weekday Express Transactions Express Market Share Weekday Revenue 08$'s Average Toll (2008$'s) Annual Toll Transactions Annual Revenue 08$'s Annual Revenue (Nominal Vs) 2017 9,100 11,600 4% $2,705 $2.09 404,497 $844,462 $1,101,886 2018 2019 13,050 20,450 16,600 25,850 6%_ 9% �� $29,038 $46,785 $2.12 $2.20 5,335,303 6,652,550 $11,326,038 $14,610,500 $15,012,114 $19,984,000 2020 26,000 32,800 11% $61,226 $2.24 8,483,050 $19,016,500 $26,754,500 2021 28,500 35,950 12% $69,097 $2.29 9,343,100 $21,421,000 $31,013,500 2022 29,350 36,900 12% $73,309 $2.37 9,631,700 $22,799,500 $33,999,500 2023 30,250 37,900 12% $77,838 $2.44 9,929,200 $24,266,500 $37,273,000 2024 31,150 38,900 13% $82,574 $2.52 10,235,850 $25,828,000 $40,861,500 2025 32,100 39,950 13% $87,664 $2.61 10,552,000 $27,490,000 $44,795,500 2026 33,100 41,000 13% $93,124 $2.69 10,877,950 $29,259,500 $49,109,500 2027 34,100 42,050 13% $98,834 $2.78 11,213,950 $31,142,500 $53,838,000 2028 35,100 43,150 13% $104,805 $2.87 11,560,300 $33,146,500 $59,021,500 2029 36,150 44,300 14% $111,201 $2.96 11,917,350 $35,279,500 $64,704,500 2030 37,250 45,500 14% $118,045 $3.06 12,285,450 $37,550,000 $70,934,500 2031 38,350 46,700 14% $125,200 $3.16 12,664,900 $39,966,500 $77,764,000 2032 39,500 47,950 14% $132,851 $3.26 13,056,050 $42,538,000 $85,250,500 2033 40,700 49,250 14% $141,020 $3.36 13,459,300 $45,275,500 $93,459,000 2034 41,900 50,550 15% $149,562 $3.47 13,875,000 $48,189,000 $102,457,500 2035 41,800 50,300 15% $150,064 $3.43 13,833,500 $47,423,000 $103,732,500 2036 41,300 49,600 15% $148,003 ' $3.35 13,660,100 $45,762,000 $103,195,500 2037 41,700 50,050 15% $151,646 $3.40 13,819,250 $46,992,500 $109,149,500 2038 42,100 50,500 15% $155,365 ' $3.45 13,980,250 $48,256,500 $115,448,000 2039 42,700 51,150 15% $159,744 $3.53 14,192,600 $50,031,500 $123,302,500 2040 43,300 51,800 15% $164,224 $3.60 14,402,850 $51,809,000 $131,493,500 2041 43,700 52,250 15% $168,224 $3.65 14,561,450 $53,111,500 $138,843,500 2042 44,100 52,700 15% $172,307 $3.70 14,721,800 $54,446,500 $146,603,500 2043 44,500 53,100 15% $176,474 $3.75 14,883,900 $55,815,000 $154,797,000 2044 44,900 53,550 15% $180,728 $3.80 15,047,800 $57,218,000 $163,448,500 2045 45,300 54,000 15% $185,070 $3.86 15,213,500 $58,656,500 $172,584,500 2046 45,700 54,400 15% $189,501 $3.91 15,381,050 $60,131,000 $182,231,000 2047 46,100 54,800 15% $194,023 $3.96 15,550,450 $61,642,500 $192,416,000 2048 46,550 55,300 15% $198, 854 $4.02 15, 721, 700 $63,192, 500 $203,171, 500 2049 47,050 55,850 15% $204,001 $4.08 15,894,850 $64,781,000 $214,527,000 2050 47,650 56,500 16% $209,701 $4.13 16,069,950 $66,409,500 $226,517,500 2051 48,200 57,150 16% $215,464 $4.19 16,241,200 $68,069,000 $239,142,500 2052 2053 48,600 57,600 16% $220,850 $4.25 16,408,450 $69,759,500 4$252,434,500 $71,492,000 $266,465,000 49,000 58,050 16% $226,356 $ $4.31 16,577,400 2054 49,400 r 58,500 16% $231,984 $4.37 16,748,100 $73,268,000 $281,277,000 2055 49,800 58,950 16% $237,736 $4.44 16,920,550 $75,087,500 $296,910,000 2056 50,200 59,400 16% $243,614 $4.50 17,094,750 $76,952,000 $313,411,000 2057 2058 2059 50,600 51,000 51,400 59,850 60,300 60,750 16% 16% 16% $249,623 $255,763 $262,039 $4.57 $4.63 $4.70 17,270,750 17,448,600 117,628,300 $78,863,500 $80,822,500 $82,830,000 $330,832,000 $349,221,500 $368,632,500 2060 51,800 61,200 16% $268,452 $4.77 17,809,850 $84,887,000 $389,120,500 2061 52,200 61,650 16% $275,006 $4.83 17,993,250 $86,995,000 $410,747,000 2062 52,650 62,150 16% $281,973 $4.90 18,178,500 $89,155,500 ' $91,370,000 $433,576,500 $457,676,500 2063 53,150 62,700 16% $289,366 $4.98 18,365,700 2064 53,650 63,250 16% $296,926 $5.05 18,554,850 $93,639,500 $483,116,000 2065 54,250 63,850 16% $305, 224 $5.12 18,745 950 $95, 965, 500 $509, 970, 000 2066 54,850 64,500 16% $313,706 $5.19 18,939,000 $98,349,500 $538,317,500 2067 55,350 65,050 16% $321,809 $5.27 19,134,000 $100,792,000 $568,237,000 2068 q1 55,850 65,600 16% $330,095 $5.34 4,832,750 $25,823,750 $149,954,750 8.10 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY 91 9.0 Sensitivity Analyses 9.1 REVENUE MAXIMIZATION The theory of toll pricing relates to the traditional supply -demand relationships seen elsewhere in economic literature. As prices rise, demand drops. At the critical price point, demand produces a maximum amount of potential revenue. As shown in this example, traffic declines as prices rise in a continuous albeit non -linear fashion. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure 9-1 Traffic's Response to Toll Increases $0.25 $0.50 $0.75 $1.00 $1.25 $1.50 $1.75 $2.00 (Traffic In this example, a toll rise from $0.25 to $0.50 produces a 20% decline in traffic demand. At various points along this curve, the traffic multiplied times the toll rate produces the revenue for the policy. 9.1 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Sensitivity Analyses May 9, 2012 Figure 9-2 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Ln o Ln o Ln o Ln CO Ln O Ln N Ln O N Lf1 n O (NJ Ln I� Ln O N Ln N r) N N N N cr.)M M M (Traffic Revenue In this example, $0.25 *100= $25, $1.00 *72= $72 and $2.00 *46= $92. At low end of the curve, revenue increases at nearly linear rates with increased toll rates Figure 9-3 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln N Lf1 N O N Lf1 n O N Ln � O N Ln n O O O r-I r-I r-I r-I N N N N M M M M V). i/T i/T . /T t/T i/T V1- V1- 1/1- V). V1- V) i/T t/T {/T Traffic Revenue 9.2 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Sensitivity Analyses May 9, 2012 As rates increase, revenue increases begin to slow. Figure 9-4 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 ir1 o Ln o v1 o in o in o in o Ln 0 Ln N In O N O N u1 h O N u1 n O O O i--I r-I r-I r-I N N N N (Y1 M M M i/T in- t/T i/T VT i/T VT i/T i/T i/T in in- --1 Traffic —A—Revenue As rates approach optimal, revenue increases are nearly zero, and the curve become flat. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure 9-5 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves u 1 O u1 O Un O Vn O Ln O in O U1 O u1 N I� O N 1.11 I, O N u1 I� O N in I� O O O r-I r-I r-I r-I Ni N Ni N M M M M i/T ;/T i/T i/T i/T i/T i/T i/T 1.4 i/T {/T t/T i/T t/T if) Traffic —A—Revenue 9.3 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Sensitivity Analyses May 9, 2012 As rates go beyond optimal, revenues decline. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure 9-6 Typical Traffic vs. Revenue Curves Ln o U1 0 o n o LC) o Ln o U1 o U1 N Ln I� o N U1 I� O O N LIi 1� M M M rri in in- in- in- in- in- in- i/} in- in in- in in- in- i/} �i Traffic —A—Revenue From a planning perspective, one may ask, Where is the Optimal point on the revenue curve? • A: Point of highest revenue, the maximum revenue point, or • B: Optimal Toll, appoint slightly below the highest point which reflects the nature of the forecasting process and provides a "cushion" in the forecast. We have applied this concept to the RCTC SR 91 Express lane project to create a revenue maximization toll policy. The revenue maximization toll policy has a similar pattern for traffic growth, with global corridor traffic growing by slightly more than 1 percent until 2035, when traffic growth slows to approximately 0.5 percent per year. Express Lane transactions grow by approximately 3 percent per year Revenues grow at about 6 percent per year until 2035 and 2 percent per year after 2035. The average toll rate in 2035 under the revenue maximization toll policy is $7.09 with total annual transactions of 11.5M and total revenue of $81.5M (2008 $). A decrease in transactions and revenue occurs in 2035 with the completion of the "Ultimate" project, which adds general purpose lane capacity to the corridor. 9.4 Stantec RIVERSIDE COUNTY SR-91 Sensitivity Analyses May 9, 2012 Table 9-1 Traffic and Revenue Estimates, Revenue Maximization Toll Policy Fiscal Year Weekday Toll Transactions Weekday Express Transactions Express Market Share Weekday Revenue 08$'s Average Toll (20085's) Annual Toll Transactions Annual Revenue 08$'s Annual Revenue (Nominal $'s) 2017 7,400 9,900 3% $4,950 $4.43 328,768 $1,457,514 $1,901,674 2018 2019 10,600 16,600 14,150 22,050 5%_ 8% $52,877 $84,667 $4.50 $4.65 4,338,732 5,415,850 $19,535,986 $25,169,000 $25,892,826 $34,425,000 2020 21,250 28,100 10% $110,062 $4.74 6,903,650 $32,741,000 $46,063,000 2021 23,500 30,950 10% $123,778 $4.85 7,602,550 $36,855,500 $53,359,500 2022 24,300 31,850 11% $131,071 $4.99 7,845,500 $39,179,500 $58,426,000 2023 25,100 32,750 11% $138,644 $5.14 8,096,250 $41,650,000 $63,973,500 2024 25,950 33,700 11% $146,791 $5.30 8,355,000 $44,276,500 $70,048,000 2025 26,850 34,700 11% $155,536 $5.46 8,622,000 $47,068,500 $76,699,000 2026 27,750 35,650 11% $164,617 $5.62 8,897,550 $50,036,500 $83,981,500 2027 28,650 36,600 11% $174,045 $5.79 9,181,900 $53,191,500 $91,955,000 2028 29,600 37,650 12% $184,146 $5.97 9,475,300 $56,545,500 $100,685,500 2029 30,600 38,750 12% $194,948 $6.15 9,778,100 $60,111,000 $110,245,500 2030 31,600 39,850 12% $206,162 $6.33 10,090,600 $63,901,500 $120,713,500 2031 32,650 41,000 12% $218,142 $6.52 10,413,050 $67,931,000 $132,175,000 2032 33,750 42,200 12% $230,916 $6.72 10,745,800 $72,214,000 $144,724,000 2033 34,850 43,400 13% $244,179 $6.92 11,089,200 $76,767,500 $158,465,000 2034 36,000 44,650 13% $258,310 $7.13 11,443,600 $81,608,500 $173,511,500 2035 36,500 45,000 13% $258,743 $7.08 11,506,800 $81,495,500 $178,304,500 2036 36,450 44,750 13% $253,939 $6.97 11,435,300 $79,739,000 $179,808,500 2037 36,550 44,900 13% $258,254 $7.07 11,526,250 $81,459,000 $189,197,500 2038 36,650 45,050 13% $262,639 $7.16 11,617,900 $83,216,000 $199,076,500 2039 36,900 45,350 13% $268,674 $7.28 11,753,750 $85,519,500 $210,743,000 2040 37,150 45,650 13% $274,761 $7.39 11,886,700 $87,825,500 $222,897,500 2041 37,250 45,800 13% $279,325 $7.49 11,973,200 $89,624,000 $234,286,000 2042 37,350 45,950 13% $283,963 $7.58 12,060,350 $91,459,000 $246,255,500 2043 37,450 46,050 13% $288,676 $7.68 12,148,150 $93,332,000 $258,837,500 2044 37,550 46,200 13% $293,466 $7.78 12,236,550 $95,243,000 $272,061,500 2045 37,650 46,350 13% $298,332 $7.89 12,325,600 $97,193,000 $285,961,000 2046 37,750 46,450 13% $303,278 $7.99 12,415,300 $99,183,500 $300,571,500 2047 37,850 46,550 13% $308,302 $8.09 12,505,650 $101,214,500 $315,928,000 2048 37,950 46,700 13% $313,409 $8.20 12,596,650 $103,286,500 $332,067,500 2049 38,050 46,850 13% $318,597 $8.31 12,688,300 $105,401,500 $349,033,000 2050 38,400 47,250 13% $326,006 $8.42 12,780,650�$107,560,000 $366,866,500 2051 38,900 47,850 13% $333,881 $8.51 12,900,200 $109,736,500 $385,517,500 2052 39,300 48,300 13% $340,083 $8.58 13,047,450 $111,931,000 $405,023,500 2053 39,700 48,750 13% $346,364 $8.65 13,196,400 $114,169,500 $425,517,500 2054 40,100 r 49,200 13% $352,726 $8.72 13,347,050 $116,453,000 $447,049,500 2055 40,500 49,650 13% $359,168 $8.80 13,499,400 $118,782,000 $469,670,000 2056 40,900 50,100 13% $365,693 $8.87 13,653,500 $121,158,000 $493,436,500 2057 2058 2059 41,300 41,700 42,100 50,550 51,000 51,450 13% 13% 14% $372,300 $378,992 r $385,768 $8.95 $9.03 $9.10 13,809,400 ! 13,967,050 T 14,126,500 $123,582,000 $126,053,500 '-$128,574,500 $518,408,000 $544,639,000 $572,197,500 2060 42,500 51,900 14% $392,629 $9.18 14,287,800 $131,146,500 $601,153,000 2061 42,900 52,350 14% $399,578 $9.26 14,450,900 $133,769,500 $631,571,500 2062 43,300 52,800 14% $406,614 $9.34 14,615,850 $136,445,000 $139,174,000 $141,957,500i$732,378,000 $663,529,500 2063 43,700 53,250 14% $413,739 $9.41 14,782,700 $697,104,500 2064 2065 44,100 53,700 14% $420,953 $9.49 14,951,450 44,400 54,000 14% $427,291 $9.58 15,122,150 $144,797,000 $769,438,500 2066 44,700 54,350 14% $433,713 $9.66 15,294,800 $147,693,500 $808,375,000 2067 45,100 54,800 14% $441,186 $9.74 15,469,400 $150,647,500 $849,279,500 2068 q1 45,500 55,250 14% $448,753 $9.82 3,911,500 $38,415,125 $223,063,375 9.5 Riverside County Transportation Commission pJE7 FAST FORWARD RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy for the Riverside County Transportation Commission June 7, 2012 saes puoq pue uo!leoudde vijii In jssanns :pa[wd anseaj Alie pueuH ueid iepueuu s,uoiss!wwo3 aLp Jo luaipalOui AaN :uope[o.ad anuanaa liol Apms (i pue 1) anuanaa pue Dujea1 aoj sise8 :salea Hol. .2uiysHgelsa sapnpui ADiIod !pi Independent Toll Policy 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD Shared with OCTA • Operator contract and major vendors • Marketing and customer service • Customer account revenues • O and M costs • Traffic operations and customer service centers Riverside County Transportation Commission Exclusive to RCTC • Project financings • Right to collect and retain tolls • RIGHT TO SET TOLL POLICY saaloodaeo pue saaAed aoueleg 1 Aouedn000 alDigan ssaDOd DU el squeuanoo puoq leaW a Aijl!gein lepueu4 u!gsns suoile0Hgo lgap laaW sluawl!wwoD iepueuH squawanoadw! aopp.loo amind lndOnonn aioNan az!wgdo awwwo3 aawolsn3 JORIJOD 9 OJE T FAST FORWARD Variable pricing Formula - driven Basic Elements • Time of day and day of week pricing based on actual congestion levels • Hourly price changes published on web page, corridor signs, and other locations • Prices automatically adjusted quarterly based on pre -defined formula • Toll rates go up and down based on market demand experienced over prior 12-week period • Rates are not subsidized by the Commission, users pay full fare • HOV 3+ ride free during most periods �%r 9 1 p O J E f i F A S T F O R W A R D T h r e e T o l l P o l i c i e s A n a l y z e d E x i s t i n g O C T A P o l i c y ( b a s e c a s e ) E n h a n c e d P o l i c y ( p r o p o s e d C o m m i s s i o n p o l i c y ) R e v e n u e M a x i m i z a t i o n P o l i c y ( s e n s i t i v i t y c a s e ) R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y T r a n s p o r l a l i a n C o o n " E x a c t m a t c h t o c u r r e n t O C T A p o l i c y " B a s e d o n O C T A t o l l p o l i c y , s a m e r a t e s d u r i n g p e a k p e r i o d s " H i g h e r t o l l r a t e s d u r i n g o f f - p e a k , b a s e d o n t r a f f i c v o l u m e s " B e t t e r m a t c h e s p r i c i n g t o m e e t d e m a n d " T o l l r a t e s s e t t o m a x i m i z e r e v e n u e " A n a l y z e d a s a f i n a n c i a l s e n s i t i v i t y c a s e t o s u p p o r t f i n a n c i n g " S e r v e s a s c o n t i n g e n c y f o r c a p i t a l m a r k e t s AAUPlibk :101 p JE 7 FAST FORWAI Toll Policy Monitor= Process Monitor hourly, day of week and directional traffic for lest 12 consecutive weeks (exclude days►houus with holidays ,major inc iderds, and ac cidents) Flag lours when traffic volume is 3,128 or more vehicks per hour, per day, per direction. Determine if this oc curs six or more times in the 12-week period. Average the traffic volume for the flagged hours. Increase Hourly Toll $1.00 iiiir Avera ge High Volume Hours i Yes Increase Hourly Toll $ 0.75 Hold Adjusted Rate Constant for 6 months Yes Riverside Comely Transportation Commission 31 E:prev a Lane a Do Not Increasei__ Hourly Toll Follow Adjusted Toll Rate Follow On Process 6/6/2012 ••� Tolls vs. Express Lanes IPPP— Traffic - 2000 RCTC 91 pROJEC.r RkL,.A100410 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 — 2,500 2,000 1,500 1.000 500 — 0 91 Express Lanes Toll Rates vs Traffic --Trier ,1 1.111_,JI N W A 0, T V 00 V F' N W A V, RNV 00 N8 it 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a 0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 0 3 t 3 3 3 3 $8.00 f $7.00 1 $6.00 $5.00 - $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $orio Tolls vs. Express Lanes r \ Traffic - 201 RCLIE CT 1 re�vrcaw►w 91 Express Lanes Toll Rates vs Traffic 4,500 4,000 3,500 r 3,128 vehicles 3,000 2,500 2,00 3,5500 11111 I l Toil moo 500 ' • • ' ' r Traffic El 0 - N W P .7 10 ▪ 1+ N 8 ▪ ▪ 8 8 8 8 3 8 8 8 8 8 'o g 8 8 E S S C S 3 CC i i i S E 1 i $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 h • $2.00 $.00 - $0.00 V OC 9? " 8 8 8 8 8 1 6/6/2012 .41111111111111_ 11111116. "Alb 91 Express Lanes Traffic Growth lit ROC pROJEcT a FAS!' CC4,011:1: 2 2 4.50 4.00 3.50 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 91 Express EB Growth, 2001-2010 2 91 PROJECT FAST FORWARD HOT Traffic vs. Toll Rate Charged 2008 EB HOT TRAFFIC VS TOLLS - DATA ■ Base Toll • Enhanced Toll • t 0 - t ASIi i, t� 1+ :1•g 1 I • a # i I 1 s • f e P II , ! t 1 � i.' - • ' i Zj It ' , • `' :. " • * .i I i • I a : $0.400 $0.500 $0.600 Toll per Mlle (204)86's) Riverside Coady Transportation Commission FAST FORWARD Description / Deur I Monitor adjusted hair kr, directional traffic far last 12 consecutive weeks (eat ude Reis/hours with holiday; major incidents accidents) FMB ndiv idual adjusted hours when traffic volume s5,118 vehicl sor *sots hour, pa day per direction. Determine if this occurssar or more times in the 12 week period Average thetraffic volume for the hots, de/ and erection for the 12 week period (etclude holidays accidents, major incidents). SetToll Category A S155/$120 SetTo. I Catepry B S2.80 / $2.10 MankorTraffic fIf Rate Charged, hold AdjustedRateConsant SetTonateeong S3.75 / 5285 y' i FOIowAdjustedToll Race Follow Cm Process Set TollCace{oryD $470 /$160 —J nom -- 15 wide. County Transportation Commission 6/6/2012 A•rwk. OCTA Tolls vs. Express Lanes Traffic RCTC 1 pROJ1=L., MU AC NUM 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 3,128 vehicles 2,800 vehicles 2,400 vehicles 1,600 vehicles 91 Express Lanes Toll Rates vs Traffic Toll two 600 vehicles j _________!______________ '- I Traffic 500 1111111 o - iC+ N W A {n pT pV W S. p N W p O. p Op) .p0 f` :' 8 0 0 0 a O O O 8 a O O O a a a O a a O a a$ O -$5.00 $4.00 $3.00 _ $ 2.00 $1.00 50.00 Allow OCTA vs. Enhanced 1 PROJECT FA17F911.0.10 OCTA Policy - 2035 EB Rates Time Sun Mon- Thurs Fd Set 12:00 AM $110 St 10 $110 $110 1:00AM Si 10 $110 Si 10 $110 2:00AM $1.10 St 10 $110 51.10 3:00AM SI 10 SI 10 $110 S1.10 4:00AM SI 10 $110 $110 $1•10 5:00AM 5110 $110 5110 St. 10 690 AM St 10 $110 SI 10 Si 10 7:00AM 5110 S1.10 $1.10 $110 8:00AM Si 10 SI 10 5110 $110 9:00AM Si 10 $110 St 10 $1.70 10:00AM S1. 10 $1.10 St 10 $1.70 11:00AM SI 70 $1.10 $110 S1.70 12:00PM $1.70 $110 $1.T0 $1.70 1:00PM St. TO $170 $250 $170 2:00PM St.70 S250 53.35 1250 3:00PM 51.70 $335 S420 $250 4:00 PM SI 70 S420 S715 $250 5:00PM SI 70 $4.20 SS 10 $250 8:00PM Si 70 $420 $870 S250 7:00PM St. 70 5335 $3.35 St.70 690PM $1.70 SI 70 S335 $1.70 9:00PM $1.70 St 10 S250 5170 10:00 PM $1.10 St 10 5t 70 $1.70 11:00PM SI 10 SI 10 SI 10 $110 Enhanced Policy - 2035 EB Rates Time Sun Mon -Thurs Fri Sat 12:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 1:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 2:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 3:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 4:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 6:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1..10 $1.10 6:00 AM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 7:00 AM $1.10 $110 $1.20 $1.10 9:00 AM $1,10 St 4$14 $1.70 9:00 AM $1.10 $1. $1.10 $1.70 10:00 AM $1,70 $1.70 p.m WM 11:00 AM $1.70 31.70 $1.70 $2.50 12:00 PM $7:6n $1.70 $2.50 $2.50 1:00 PM $2.50 $2.50 $3.35 $2.50 2:00 PM $2.50 $4.20 $4.90 $3.35 3:00 PM 116150 67,11if 531 4:00 PM OA $i.1$ 37.15 $4.28 6:00 PM $2.50 S7.15 *MO $4.20 6:00 PM �3.30 7:00 PM la �-'� g; ,� �� 9:00 PM UM $2.50 $4.90 $1.70 9:00 PM $1,70 VIM OA $1.70 10:00 PM $1.10 $1.10 31.70 31.70 1100 PM $1.10 $1.10 $1.10 $4.70 1 6/6/2012 2 6/6/2012 41 -74111111 Annual Revenue ROTC 91 ROJECT fair.0w.kaaa $ $ Annual Revenue (2008 Vs) —Base —Enhanced 100.1:00.000 $80,000,000 -. . _ _ • S60.000.000 $44000.000 -..-- ._ _. .___.___ 520.000,000 SO 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2011 2056 2061 Toll Policy Revenues RCTC 1 PR�cx nsr rcKemm Annual Revenue (2008 Vs) —Base —Enhanced —Max 000 000 x� 000 _ _ _ — 000 000 - - 300 - — ]00 .. _ _ —_ 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061 3 6/6/2012 ,w RCTC Proposed Toll Policy 71 xhlnmwa Meets Goals • Customer focused • Optimizes corridor performance • Financial obligations • Balances competing goals Consistent with existing system • Congestion pricing • Basis for rate changes • Lanes access and discounts • Meets customer expectations Ai Proposed Path Forward it ROTC J MST reo r•a Commission • Adopt the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy today SR-91 Advisory Committee • August 3rd presentation to RCTC/OCTAjoint committee • Share similarities and differences of toll policies TIFIA application • Late -August application submittal • Basis for toll revenue and financial plan 4 6/6/2012 SR-91 Corridor State Route Michael Blomquist, PE Toll Program Director 5