HomeMy Public PortalAbout01 January 31, 2019 Annual WorkshopRIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
www.rctc.org
WORKSHOP AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
January 31 – February 1, 2019
Temecula Creek Inn
44501 Rainbow Canyon Road
Temecula, California
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 you need special assistance 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.
THURSDAY, JANUARY 31, 2019
NOTE: COMMISSION MEETING TO RUN FROM 12:00 – 12:45 p.m.
Lunch 11:30 a.m. – noon
PUBLIC COMMENTS – Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may,
either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on
the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each
speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty
(30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not
yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the
Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items.
Under the Brown Act, the 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.
1:00 p.m. – 1:30p.m. WELCOME AND WORKSHOP OVERVIEW
Chuck Washington, Chair
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
1:30 p.m. – 1:50 p.m. DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES AND ITS IMPACT ON STATE GRANTS
Tom Kirk, CVAG Executive Director
(Receive an oral report)
1:50 p.m. – 2:10 p.m.
THE FIRST HALF OF 2019 – WHAT’S ON THE HORIZON?
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director
(Presentation Only)
2:10 p.m. – 2:40 p.m.
2:40– 3:00
3:00 – 3:45
PUBLIC TRANSIT ISSUES TODAY AND WHAT IS THE FUTURE (AGENDA ITEM
ATTACHED)
Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multi Modal Services Director
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive and file a report on the status of public transit; and
2) Direct staff to come back to the Commission by June 2019 with
recommendations on any funding formula adjustments or transit
policies that are needed to support public transit in Riverside County
(County).
BREAK
WHAT’S NEXT FOR EXPRESS LANES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY (AGENDA ITEM
ATTACHED)
Michael Blomquist, Toll Programs Director
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive study summary results and staff recommendations; and
2) Provide direction on staff recommendations.
3:45 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
BREAK
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND (AGENDA ITEM ATTACHED)
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive and file the RCTC Staff Insight Brief;
2) Commit necessary 91 Express Lanes toll revenue to fully fund the
15/91 Express Lanes Connector design-build phase;
3) Assign the Future Funding Initiatives ad hoc Committee to
thoroughly vet and make specific recommendations to the
Commission no later than July 2019 on the following:
a. Measure A Expenditure Plan Review and update;
b. 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan;
c. A new local funding measure for the 2020 general election;
and
d. Innovative financing of express lanes revenues.
5:00 p.m. – 5:15 p.m. WRAP UP AND NEXT STEPS
Chair Washington
5:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. BREAK
6:00 p.m. DINNER
6:30 p.m. Get on Board and Meet Metrolink’s New CEO
Presentation From Metrolink CEO Stephanie Wiggins
7:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT
9:00 A.M.
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2019
7:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. BREAKFAST
WORKSHOP OVERVIEW
January 31, 2019
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
1
22
Workshop Overview
Workshop Overview
3
Workshop Overview
4
Priorities: Project Delivery
Workshop Overview
5
Highways for National Defense
6
Challenges, Opportunities
Workshop Overview
7
We’re Growing!
Workshop Overview
8Photo Credit: The Press-Enterprise
Workshop Overview
Workshop Overview
9
10
Workshop Overview
11
$0
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
$160,000,000
Riverside County
Before & After SB 1 Local Streets and Roads Revenues
before SB 1 after SB 1
Workshop Overview
Workshop Overview
12
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
Coachella & Palo Verde Valleys
before SB 1 after SB 1
Workshop Overview
13
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
Western Riverside County
before SB 1 after SB 1
Workshop Overview
14
15
Workshop Overview
Workshop Overview
16
Workshop Overview
17
Workshop Overview
18
Workshop Overview
19
Workshop Overview
20
Workshop Overview
21
Workshop Overview
22
Workshop Overview
23
Tom Kirk
RCTC
January 31, 2019
Linking State Objectives Sounds Laudable…
Newsom leaps headfirst
into state housing crisis
CALmatters even if their voters don't like it. He announced that
commentary Attorney General Xavier Becerra was suing Hunting -
Dan Walters ton Beach for stubbornly refusing to meet housing
goals.
"The state doesn't tale this action lightly," Newsom
said, "The huge housing costs and sky-high rents are
Garvin Newsom began his governorship this month eroding quality of life for families across this state.
by promising to confront what he described as Cali- California's housing crisis is an existential threat to
M
tre. In 1997, my wife enrolled my two kids, Justin and
Kayla, in a new theater summer camp and it wasn't
long before Marsha and the kids Oland 8 at the time}
where voluntarily removing the old gymnasium floor
in the Frances S. Stevens School to make way for
what would become PCT's 215-seat sloped auditori-
um.
..Tustin and Kayla performed throughout elemen-
tary and high school. Marsha helped with costumes
and props and, a few years in, I joined the kids on
stage.
Theater is a magical place if you let yourself be en-
veloped by it. Our family -- and many others like ours
- have become part of the Palm Canyon Theatre_ We
are a part of its life's blood, as are many local families
including the Careys, Walkers, Van Dijks and others.
It all started with the first family of Palm Canyon
Theatre — the Laynes.
Legislative Platform:
Support maintaining the legislative intent
behind Senate Bill 1 (Statutes 2017), including,
but not limited to: Opposing efforts to tie
distribution of transportation funding to
ancillary policy matters, such as housing.
Cap & Trade
Affordable Housing and
Sustainable
Communities Program
EM-
$667
$41
Total $M
Statewide
So, how is RivCo doing in this housing-transport linked
program?
RivCo’s “Fair Share”
$667
$6
Total $M
Statewide ACTUAL SHARE
So, how is RivCo doing in this housing-transport linked
program?
$667
$0
Total $M
Statewide ACTUAL SHARE
In Coachella Valley
So, how is RivCo doing in this housing-transport linked
program?
Cap & Trade
Transformative Climate
Communities
Winners:
$70M to Fresno
$35M to LA & Ontario
TCC targets disadvantaged communities
Which we believed was great for the CV!(I know what you are thinking)
86 of 126 census
tracts
86 of 126 census
tracts
But, new math for disadvantaged communities
CalEnviroscreen
How is CalEnviroscreen scored?
Pollution
Burden
Population
Characteristics
Enviroscreen
Score
Let me demonstrate
86 of 126 census
tracts
8 of 126 census
tracts
TCC Planning $
$170K grant
Positioned for BIG
$$$$$$$
TCC Planning $
$170K grant
Positioned for BIG
$$$$$$$
Also can’t apply
Also can’t apply
No top 5%
New math isn’t working for CVAG
$200M total cost
$140M state & fed
funding
Not in top 25%
What if?
CalEnviroscreen Used
or
Affordable Housing
What if?
Why is this a pressing issue?
•Transport $ tied to housing
•Legislative interest
–Asm. Garcia and others
Legislative Platform:
Support maintaining the legislative intent
behind Senate Bill 1 (Statutes 2017), including,
but not limited to: Opposing efforts to tie
distribution of transportation funding to
ancillary policy matters, such as housing.
Shared goals & Objectives
Questions?
1
January 2019
•First Segment of Mid-County
Parkway
•Includes community and
environmental improvements
•Improves freeway access to and
from Perris and surrounding
communities
2
I-215 Placentia Interchange
January 2019
•Ongoing effort throughout the year
•Provides foundation to allow RCTC
to take positions on pending
legislation or regulation
3
Approval of Legislative Platform
January 2019
•Provides service on 91 Express Lanes to
Orange County
•171,000 Annual Boardings
•Round Trip Fare of only $3
4
One-Year Anniversary of Route 200
January 2019
•CTC Approved Awards on Jan. 29
•Riverside County Receives $27.4 million
•Six Projects Selected
•Additional Funding Available For Region
and From SB 821 Program
5
Active Transportation Grant Awards
February 2019
•Located Primarily South of the 91
•Among the first actions on the project
•I-15 on schedule for 2020 Opening
6
Sound Walls on I-15
February 2019
Seeking Funding for Event Trains &
Tier 2 Environmental Document &
Service Plan
7
State Grant Decision on Coachella Valley Rail
February 2019
•Park and Ride Expansion
•Additional Bus Bays
•Muffins with the Mayor
8
Riverside/La Sierra Metrolink Station Improvements
February 2019
•Start Funding Process for Following Year
•Collaborative Effort with Operators
9
Short Range Transit Plan Workshop
March 2019
•Comprehensive Outreach Effort
•Opportunity for public input and ideas
•Accessible through social media & website
10
March 2019
•Use of the facility continues to exceed
expectations
•Improved striping and access on both
ends
11
91 Express Lanes 2nd Anniversary
March 2019
•New location near 91 & I-15
•Will serve Express Lanes on both
facilities
12
91 Express Lanes New Customer Service Office
March 2019
•Update on Outreach and Presentations
•Return in May for Nexus Study
13
Truck Study Update
March 2019
•Seeking $75 Million in Federal Funding
•Strong Support from Neighboring
Agencies
•Comprehensive Improvements for the
Entire 91 Corridor
14
INFRA Grant Submittal
April 2019
15
RCTC VanClub 1st Anniversary
May 2019
16
Environmental Work Begins
May 2019
17
I-15 Railroad Canyon Interchange
May 2019
•Single Document for Future Planning
•Establishes Future Action for Regional
Transportation Plan
•Informs other Planning Efforts
18
Complete Long Range Transportation Plan
June 2019
•Sets Spending Plan for Coming Year
•Last of Multiple Commission
Presentations as Part of the Process
•Recipient of Multiple GFOA Awards
19
Adoption of FY 2019/20 Budget
June 2019
•Establishes service and funding plans for
all transit operators
•Subsequent changes in service require
Commission approval
•Heightened priority on cooperative
approach
•Study of service in Pass Area
20
Adoption of Short-Range Transit Plans
Spring 2019
21
Launch Design Build Procurement Process
•Received Funding from SB 132 (Roth &
Cervantes)
•Connects 91 Express Lanes to new I-15 Express
Lanes North of the 91
June 2019
•Transponders to be replaced
•Transitions to 6C technology
•Improves interoperability
22
Updating Transponder Technology
June 2019
•Annual Effort Between OCTA &
RCTC
•Updates Planned Projects in Corridor
•Required by State Law
23
91 Implementation Plan Update
Summer 2019
•Further Reductions in Sites
•Use Continues to Drop
•Lifeline service still needed
24
Call Box Optimization
Summer 2019
•Climbing and Descending Lanes
•$126 Million Project
•New Lanes Open to Traffic in 2021
•Requires Extensive Outreach
25
60 Truck Lanes Construction Begins
Summer 2019
•Updates Rail Corridor in Riverside
•Key Corridor for Metrolink Line
•Cooperation with Union Pacific and
Caltrans
26
Pachappa Bridge Construction Bids Opening
Summer 2019
•Opens for traffic in 2020
•Required cooperation with other
jurisdictions for interchanges
•Features intermediate access and
serves multiple communities
27
I-15 Express Lanes –50% Construction Milestone
THANK YOU
28
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2019
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: Lorelle Moe-Luna, Acting Multimodal Services Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Public Transit Today and Opportunities for Growth
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive and file a report on the status of public transit; and
2) Direct staff to come back to the Commission by June 2019 with recommendations on any
funding formula adjustments or transit policies that are needed to support public transit
in Riverside County (County).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
As a county transportation commission, two primary responsibilities relate to transit and include:
• Development and approval of short-range transit plans; and
• Coordination and approval of public transit service within the County.
The state of California (state) enacted the Transportation Development Act (TDA) in 1971 to
improve public transportation services and encourage regional transportation coordination and
to provide the primary funding source for transit services. As the regional transportation
planning agency, the Commission is responsible for approving TDA allocations to transit
operators based on anticipated revenues and the relative needs of the operators and
recommending potential productivity improvements. TDA funding is comprised of the Local
Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA):
LTF STA
Source of funds ¼ of one cent of the state’s
sales tax
Statewide sales tax on diesel
fuels and Senate Bill 1 funds
(beginning Fiscal Year 2017/18)
State distribution basis Returned to source Allocated on basis of population
and as a percentage of fare
revenues
Use of funds Operating and capital
purposes
Capital purposes
In November 2002, County voters approved the extension of Measure A (half-cent transaction
and use tax) for a 30-year period beginning in 2009 through 2039 (2009 Measure A) and an
accompanying Expenditure Plan. The 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan included funding for
public transit in the Western County and Coachella Valley areas of the County, with emphasis on
commuter rail and intercity bus services, ridesharing, and discount fares and transit services for
seniors and disabled persons.
This year marks the 10-year anniversary of the 2008 Transit Vision and 2009 Measure A. Both
documents are significant because one served as the blueprint for transit principles and priorities
and the other as one of the primary funding mechanisms to accomplish those principles.
10 Years Ago – 2008 Transit Vision
In June 2008, the Commission adopted the 2008 Transit Vision that laid the foundation for transit
service throughout the County with a theme and goals for the next 10 years. Developing the
2008 Transit Vision was a two-year process, beginning with a recommendation from a TDA
triennial performance audit and the Transit Policy Committee directing staff to work with transit
operators to develop a 10-year conceptual plan. The planning process included priority setting
with the Commission’s regional programs (rideshare and specialized transit) and the eight transit
operators in the County: cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley
Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and
Metrolink. The 2008 Transit Vision was also influenced by the adoption of the Riverside County
Coordinated Public Transit-Human Services Transportation Plan, which identified needs to
improve coordination between the public transit operators and non-profit human/health service
providers in order to provide increased mobility and cost-effective transportation options for
seniors, the disabled community, and low-income residents within the County.
The stakeholders identified services and projects that totaled over $2.6 billion over the next
10 years (2009 – 2019). The 2008 Transit Vision was based on five primary goals:
1. Increase Coordination with the Transit and Rideshare Community;
2. Remove Barriers to Transit Use;
3. Provide Efficient and Effective Transit and Rideshare Service;
4. Ensure Adequate Funding; and
5. Promote Energy Efficiency.
To carry out the plan, the 2008 Transit Vision allowed for the opportunity to review and assess
the allocation formulas for transit funds at the time. Recommendations were made to continue
with the LTF and STA distributions at the time and further allocate Measure A Western County
public transit funds to programs identified in the 2009 Measure A. Subsequently in October 2013,
the Commission approved a bus/rail funding split for the Coachella Valley in support of a rail
program. After a phase-in period of two years through FY 2015/16, the current Coachella Valley
funding split is 10 percent of STA funds for rail and 90 percent for bus. Thus, the current formulas
for LTF, STA, and Measure A are:
" L T F d i s t r i b u t i o n :
o P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y 1 0 0 % b u s
o C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y 1 0 0 % b u s
o W e s t e r n C o u n t y 7 8 % b u s / 2 2 % r a i l
" S T A d i s t r i b u t i o n :
o P a l o V e r d e V a l l e y 1 0 0 % b u s
o C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y 9 0 % b u s / 1 0 % r a i l
o W e s t e r n C o u n t y 7 8 % b u s / 2 2 % r a i l
" M e a s u r e A P u b l i c T r a n s i t A c c o u n t :
o C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y 1 0 0 % f o r s p e c i a l i z e d a n d p u b l i c t r a n s i t s e r v i c e
o W e s t e r n C o u n t y
�� C o m m u t e r R a i l 5 2 %
�� I n t e r c i t y B u s 1 3 %
�� S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t 1 6 . 5 %
�� S p e c i a l i z e d T r a n s i t ( C o n s o l i d a t e d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s A g e n c y ) 5 . 5 %
�� C o m m u t e r S e r v i c e s 1 3 %
A t t h e t i m e o f a d o p t i o n o f t h e 2 0 0 8 T r a n s i t V i s i o n , t h e C o m m i s s i o n a l s o a p p r o v e d a t i m e l i n e f o r
f u n d i n g f o r m u l a s t o b e r e v i e w e d i n F Y 2 0 1 8 / 1 9 f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n i n F Y 2 0 2 0 / 2 1 . S t a f f m o n i t o r s
a n d h a s o b s e r v e d t h a t t r a n s i t e x p e n d i t u r e s a r e o u t p a c i n g a n n u a l r e v e n u e s . O n e e x a m p l e o f t h i s
i s t h e i n c r e a s i n g o p e r a t i o n s a n d c a p i t a l n e e d s o f c o m m u t e r r a i l . A s a m e m b e r a g e n c y o f
M e t r o l i n k , t h e C o m m i s s i o n m a n a g e s W e s t e r n C o u n t y c o m m u t e r r a i l f u n d s . L T F f u n d s a r e u s e d
p r i m a r i l y f o r M e t r o l i n k o p e r a t i o n s a n d c a p i t a l , w h i l e M e a s u r e A f u n d s a r e u s e d t o s u p p o r t t h e
o p e r a t i o n s a n d m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e n i n e C o m m i s s i o n - o w n e d c o m m u t e r r a i l s t a t i o n s i n t h e
C o u n t y . T h e c o s t s f o r c o m m u t e r r a i l s e r v i c e s a r e n o t o n l y i n c r e a s i n g d u e t o e x p a n d e d s e r v i c e ,
b u t a l s o b e c a u s e t h e C o m m i s s i o n m a n a g e s a l m o s t d o u b l e t h e n u m b e r o f s t a t i o n s n o w t h a n i n
2 0 0 8 .
A c c o r d i n g l y , l o n g - t e r m s u s t a i n a b i l i t y o f f u n d i n g f o r c o m m u t e r r a i l n e e d s t o b e a d d r e s s e d w h i l e
a l s o c o n s i d e r i n g p u b l i c b u s a n d s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s i t n e e d s . I n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e a s s e s s m e n t o f
f u n d i n g f o r m u l a s , a r e v i e w o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n s t r a n s i t p o l i c i e s i s n e c e s s a r y t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e
u s e o f T D A a n d M e a s u r e A f u n d s p r o v i d e s s u f f i c i e n t f l e x i b i l i t y t o l e v e r a g e w i t h o t h e r f e d e r a l ,
s t a t e , a n d l o c a l s o u r c e s . S t a f f r e c o m m e n d s t h e C o m m i s s i o n d i r e c t s t a f f t o c o m e b a c k t o t h e
C o m m i s s i o n b y J u n e 2 0 1 9 w i t h r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o n a n y f u n d i n g f o r m u l a a d j u s t m e n t s o r t r a n s i t
p o l i c i e s t h a t a r e n e e d e d t o s u p p o r t p u b l i c t r a n s i t i n t h e C o u n t y .
W h e r e A r e W e N o w ?
T r e m e n d o u s s t r i d e s h a v e b e e n m a d e i n t h e l a s t 1 0 y e a r s t o e x p a n d t r a n s i t o p t i o n s i n t h e C o u n t y
c o n s i d e r i n g t h e G r e a t R e c e s s i o n i m p a c t e d t h e p r i m a r y o p e r a t i n g f u n d s o f L T F a n d M e a s u r e A
w i t h a d e c r e a s e i n r e v e n u e s o f a b o u t 1 9 p e r c e n t f r o m F Y 2 0 0 7 / 0 8 t o F Y 2 0 0 9 / 1 0 . D e s p i t e t h e s e
c h a l l e n g e s , s i g n i f i c a n t s e r v i c e s a n d p r o j e c t s i m p l e m e n t e d s i n c e t h e 2 0 0 8 T r a n s i t V i s i o n i n c l u d e
t h e f o l l o w i n g :
�� A n n u a l C o u n t y w i d e R e v e n u e S e r v i c e H o u r s i n c r e a s e d 3 2 p e r c e n t f r o m F Y 2 0 0 8 / 0 9 t o
F Y 2 0 1 7 / 1 8 .
�� O v e r $ 2 7 m i l l i o n h a s b e e n a w a r d e d s i n c e 2 0 0 8 t o s o c i a l s e r v i c e / n o n - p r o f i t a g e n c i e s t o
o f f e r m o r e c h o i c e s f o r s p e c i a l i z e d t r a n s i t u s e r s .
�� E i g h t n e w i n t e r c i t y e x p r e s s r o u t e s w e r e d e p l o y e d s i n c e 2 0 0 8 .
�� E x p a n s i o n o f 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 s u c h a s I E C o m m u t e r , a s e r v i c e t h a t o f f e r s
i n c e n t i v e s f o r r i d e s h a r i n g , a n d V a n C l u b , t h e W e s t e r n C o u n t y v a n p o o l p r o g r a m .
�� I n 2 0 1 6 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n c o m p l e t e d c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e P e r r i s V a l l e y L i n e a n d M e t r o l i n k
o f f i c i a l l y e x t e n d e d s e r v i c e t o f o u r n e w s t a t i o n s i n t h e C o u n t y .
�� R T A s R a p i d L i n k G o l d L i n e c o m m e n c e d i n 2 0 1 7 , s e r v i n g t h e d e n s e s t c o r r i d o r i n t h e C o u n t y
a l o n g U n i v e r s i t y a n d M a g n o l i a A v e n u e s , d e s i g n a t i n g i t t h e C o u n t y s f i r s t H i g h Q u a l i t y
T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r w i t h s e r v i c e l e v e l s o f a t l e a s t 1 5 - m i n u t e f r e q u e n c i e s .
�� I n t e l l i g e n t T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S y s t e m p r o g r a m s s u c h a s R T A s B u s W a t c h w e r e l a u n c h e d t o
p r o v i d e r e a l - t i m e b u s a r r i v a l i n f o r m a t i o n ,
�� I n 2 0 1 7 , S u n L i n e w a s o n e o f t h e f i r s t i n t h e s t a t e t o r e c e i v e c a p - a n d - t r a d e f u n d s f o r t h e
p u r c h a s e o f f i v e h y d r o g e n - p o w e r e d b u s e s a n d a h y d r o g e n - g e n e r a t i n g s t a t i o n f o r t h e
C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y .
�� I n 2 0 1 6 , P V V T A s t a r t e d t h e B l y t h e W e l l n e s s E x p r e s s , a s e r v i c e t h a t p r o v i d e s r e s i d e n t s
a c c e s s t o s p e c i a l i z e d h e a l t h c a r e p r o v i d e r s i n t h e C o a c h e l l a V a l l e y .
�� S i n c e 2 0 1 4 , M e t r o l i n k a d d e d t w o a d d i t i o n a l p e a k t r a i n s o n t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e - O r a n g e
C o u n t y a n d 9 1 L i n e s a n d n e w w e e k e n d s e r v i c e o n t h e 9 1 L i n e .
�� S p e c i a l e v e n t t r a i n s s u c h a s t h e F e s t i v a l o f L i g h t s , A n g e l s E x p r e s s , a n d f o o t b a l l t r a i n s w e r e
a l s o a d d e d w i t h s e r v i c e f r o m R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y .
�� I n 2 0 1 8 , t h e C o m m i s s i o n l a u n c h e d V a n C l u b , t h e f i r s t o f f i c i a l c a r p o o l n e t w o r k f o r W e s t e r n
C o u n t y .
�� N e w m a r k e t i n g p r o g r a m s w e r e d e p l o y e d b y M e t r o l i n k , S u n L i n e , R T A , a n d 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 , a n d R i v e r s i d e t o a t t r a c t n e w r i d e r s a n d g r o w t h m a r k e t
s e g m e n t s s u c h a s c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s a n d e x p r e s s b u s r i d e r s w i t h r e d u c e d o r f r e e f a r e s .
R i d e r s h i p T r e n d s
E v e r y y e a r t h e C o m m i s s i o n a p p r o v e s t h e P u b l i c T r a n s i t C o u n t y w i d e P e r f o r m a n c e R e p o r t , w h i c h
p r o v i d e s a c o m p r e h e n s i v e p i c t u r e o f v a r i o u s p e r f o r m a n c e i n d i c a t o r s a n d t r e n d s i n t h e C o u n t y .
T h e l a s t r e p o r t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t r i d e r s h i p i s c o n t i n u i n g t o d e c l i n e i n t h e C o u n t y a n d f a r e b o x
r e c o v e r y r a t i o s h a v e a l s o d r o p p e d a b o u t 4 p e r c e n t a g e p o i n t s f r o m 2 3 . 8 p e r c e n t i n F Y 2 0 1 4 / 1 5 t o
2 0 p e r c e n t i n F Y 2 0 1 6 / 1 7 . T h i s i s a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e i n c r e a s e i n o p e r a t i n g c o s t c o u n t y w i d e ,
p r i m a r i l y f o r l a b o r t o s u s t a i n e x i s t i n g s e r v i c e s .
D e c l i n i n g r i d e r s h i p h a s b e e n a n a t i o n w i d e t r e n d f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s n o w , i n c l u d i n g d o u b l e - d i g i t
r i d e r s h i p l o s s e s i n n e i g h b o r i n g 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 . T h e r i d e r s h i p d e c l i n e i n
R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y l a g g e d b e h i n d o t h e r m a j o r c i t i e s a n d o n l y i n t h e l a s t t h r e e y e a r s h a s i t b e c o m e
m o r e a p p a r e n t , n a m e l y f o r b u s o p e r a t o r s . F i x e d r o u t e b u s r i d e r s h i p d r o p p e d a b o u t 1 1 p e r c e n t
f r o m F Y 2 0 1 3 / 1 4 t o F Y 2 0 1 7 / 1 8 , a n d p u b l i c d e m a n d r e s p o n s e ( i . e . , D i a l - A - R i d e ) a l s o d e c l i n e d
about 7 percent during the same years. Since FY 2013/14, systemwide Metrolink ridership has
stayed relatively flat, but ridership in the County has increased about 9 percent.
The Southern California Association of Governments undertook a region-wide analysis of the
downturn in transit ridership in conjunction with the University of California, Los Angeles
Institute of Transportation Studies to determine the cause. The study evaluated various factors
within and outside of transit operators’ control, such as fuel prices, transportation network
companies (e.g., Uber, Lyft), and population changes. They concluded that traditional transit-
dependent riders who are now able to buy vehicles are not likely to return to transit. Instead of
working to gain back lost riders, they urge transit providers to focus on new riders and encourage
them to use transit sometimes for some trips.
Even before this study was published, most transit operators within the County began analyzing
the growth potentials within their own systems. For example, Corona Cruiser started a Free Fare
Program that provided special free fare days and days for targeted passengers, a Fixed Route
Training Program, and Summer Student Program. The city of Beaumont also initiated a three-
year Free Fare Program for college students, veterans, and travel training participants to market
the Pass Transit fixed and commuter routes. SunLine is also undergoing a Transit Network
Redesign effort that will simplify and consolidate routes for a goal of frequencies of 30-minutes
or less, implement new ride share-type programs, and launch a “Transit Ambassador” program
to focus on the customer.
Transit Opportunities – Preview of Long Range Transportation Plan
The Commission is embarking on its first ever countywide Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
The LRTP will be the opportunity to shape the vision for what an integrated transportation system
will look like in Riverside County in the next 20 years. The plan will take a comprehensive look at
state highway, local streets and roads, and transit projects. Although the plan is a 20-year
horizon, the next 10 years will be the focal point, and the transit component in particular will
highlight “transit opportunities” that can be combined with corridor projects to strengthen the
backbone of the regional transportation network. The long term vision will also establish a focus
on delivering existing services more efficiently.
Staff will come back to the Commission in the spring with an update on the LRTP. The study will
include an analysis of historical transit funding revenues and trend forecasts for operating and
capital programs. Study recommendations will allow the Commission and transit operators to
better prioritize and understand transit needs across the County.
Fiscal Impact
There is no financial impact for this report.
PUBLIC TRANSIT TODAY AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE FUTURE
Lorelle Moe-Luna, Multimodal Services Director 1
Outline
2
1. Basics
–RCTC’s role in public transit
–Who are the 8 Transit Operators?
2.2008 Transit Vision
3.Highlights of the last 10 Years
4.Ridership Trends
5.Opportunities for Future Growth
3
QUIZ
4
QUIZ
1.Who is the oldest transit operator?
a.Riverside Special Transportation
b.City of Banning
c.Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency
2.What percent of the population
utilizes public transit?
a.2%
b.10%
c.17%
3.Why were the STA, LTF, and Measure
A funding formulas established?
a.To leverage and/or maximize
other transportation funding
sources
b.To support the 2008 Transit Vision
goals
c.To increase coordination
between public transit operators
and social service/non-profit
providers
d.All of the above
4.What did the SCAG/UCLA study
determine to be the main reason for
the decline in ridership in recent
years?
a.Transportation Network Companies
(i.e., Uber, Lyft)
b.Quality and Quantity of Transit
Service
c.Rising Vehicle Ownership
d.All of the above
5.What is the average subsidy per
passenger for fixed-route bus and
demand response (i.e., Dial-A-Ride)?
a.Both are about $5.77 per passenger
b.$27.97 for fixed-route, $5.77 for
demand response
c.$5.77 for fixed-route, $27.97 for
demand response
6.Which mode/category has seen the
highest increases in ridership?
a.Commuter Bus
b.Dial-A-Ride/Paratransit
c.Commuter Rail
RCTC’s Role in Public Transit
5
•Primary responsibility of county transportation
commissions established in Public Utilities Code
1.Development and approval of short-range transportation
improvement program
2.Coordination and approval of public transit service within
County
•Transportation Development Act of 1971
–Transportation planning agency responsibilities
•Approve allocations to claimants based on analysis and
evaluation of anticipated amounts and relative needs of each
claimant
•Identify, analyze and recommend potential productivity
improvements
8 Transit Operators
6
Palo Verde Valley
Transit Agency
Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency
7
•Established in 1978
•Services the Palo Verde Valley
including the City of Blythe and
unincorporated areas of Mesa
Verde and Ripley.
•Operates 5 deviated fixed routes
known as “Desert Roadrunner,”
the Blythe Wellness Express, and
ADA paratransit service.
SunLine Transit Agency
8
•Established 1977
•Serves 9 Coachella Valley
cities and unincorporated
areas of Bermuda Dunes,
Desert Edge, Mecca, North
Shore, Oasis, Thermal, and
Thousand Palms
•Operates 16 “SunBus” fixed
routes, ADA paratransit
service known as “SunDial,”
and “SolVan” vanpool
program
Riverside Transit Agency
9
•Established 1977
•Service area includes 18 cities and
unincorporated areas of County Districts 1, 2,
3, and 5.
•Operates 48 fixed routes including 9
CommuterLinks and 1 RapidLink, and
Senior/ADA Dial-A-Ride
Corona Cruiser
10
•Established Dial-A-Ride in
1977, Corona Cruiser 2001
•Serves primarily Corona
city boundaries
•Operates 2 fixed routes and
Senior/ADA Dial-A-Ride
Riverside Special Transportation
11
•Established 1975
•Serves Riverside city of
boundaries
•Operates Senior/ADA
paratransit service only
Pass Transit
12
•Established 1973
•Serves primarily Banning
city boundaries
•Operates 3 fixed routes
and Senior/ADA Dial-A-
Ride
•Established 1975
•Serves primarily Beaumont
city boundaries
•Operates 8 fixed routes,
including 1 CommuterLink,
and Senior/ADA Dial-A-
Ride
Metrolink
13
•Established 1992
•Operates 3 Commuter Rail Services:
Inland Empire-Orange County,
91/Perris Valley Line, Riverside Line
•9 RCTC-owned stations: Corona West,
Corona North Main, Riverside La
Sierra, Riverside Downtown, Riverside
Hunter Park, Jurupa Valley Pedley,
Moreno Valley/March Field, Perris
Downtown, Perris South
8 Transit Operators
14
Palo Verde Valley
Transit Agency
•Combined service areas total over 3,700 square miles
•Total county population of about 2.4 million
About 2% utilize public transit
Specialized Transit Providers
15
•Friends of Moreno Valley Sr Ctr
•Independent Living Partnership
•Michelle’s Place Treatment Travel
Assistance
•Operation Safehouse
•Riverside Univ Health Medical
Center, Behavioral Health
•U.S. Vets
•Voices for Children•Boys & Girls Club
•Blindness Support Services, Inc
•Care-A-Van Transit
•City of Norco Parks & Rec
•Community Connect 211-Vetlink
•Community Connect
Transportation Access Program
•EXCEED
•Forest Folk, Inc
2008 Transit Vision
16
•Purpose –Foundation for a 10-year
conceptual plan of transit service
throughout the County
•5 Main Goals:
1.Increase Coordination with the
Transit and Rideshare Community;
2.Remove Barriers to Transit Use;
3.Provide Efficient and Effective
Transit and Rideshare Service;
4.Ensure Adequate Funding; and
5.Promote Energy Efficiency
2008 Transit Vision –Funding Formulas
17
Fund Source Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley
TDA –STA 78% bus
22% rail
90% bus
10% rail*
100% bus
TDA –LTF 78% bus
22% rail
100%bus 100% bus
Measure A 52% Rail
13% Intercity Bus
5.5% CTSA
16.5% Specialized Transit
13% Commuter Services
100% public transit &
specialized transit
N/A
*Approved by the Commission Oct 2013.
Other funding sources:Federal FTA funds, Cap and Trade, MSRC, city or college
programs, etc.
Primary State and Local Funding Formulas
10 Years Later
18
Annual Revenue Service Hours increased 32%
Over $27M awarded to social service agencies
for specialized transit programs
Expansion of 8 new intercity express routes
Start of RTA’s RapidLink Gold Line in 2017
Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension in 2016
Metrolink added 2 new peak trains, weekend
service, special event trains for the Festival of
Lights
Better technology for customers such as RTA’s
BusWatch and the SunBus Tracker
10 Years Later
19
Sunline awarded Cap-and-Trade funds for
hydrogen-powered buses and hydrogen-
generating station
IECommuter was started to match carpoolers
and offer incentives to rideshare
PVVTA started Blythe Wellness Express for
specialized healthcare access
New Vanpool Programs Created
–SunLine’s SolVan, RCTC’s
VanClub
Various marketing programs to
attract new riders and growth
markets
Ridership Trends -Bus
20
11,500,000
12,000,000
12,500,000
13,000,000
13,500,000
14,000,000
14,500,000
FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
Bus Fixed-Route Ridership
Riverside County
700,000
750,000
800,000
850,000
900,000
FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
Demand Response Ridership
Riverside County
•Ridership declined about 11% for fixed-routes, 7% demand
response since FY 2014
Why?
Ridership Trends -Rail
21
40,000
40,500
41,000
41,500
42,000
42,500
43,000
43,500
FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
Metrolink -Average Weekday Trips
Systemwide
•Overall has remained about flat since FY 2014.
•Metrolink ridership in Riverside County has increased about 9%
since FY 2014, as a result of the Perris Valley Line extension
3,000
3,100
3,200
3,300
3,400
3,500
3,600
3,700
3,800
3,900
FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018
Average Daily Boardings
Riverside County Metrolink Stations
Future Growth Opportunities
22
1.Focus on more cost efficient service
–A decline in paratransit is not a bad thing
–Fare analysis
–Travel training and specialized transit programs help
minimize cost of public transit service
–Reduce overlap in services/overhead
–Evaluate existing policies and funding formulas to provide
flexibility to transit operators for maximized growth
Future Growth Opportunities
23
2.Transit agencies are already “rethinking” the
way they deliver service to attract new riders
–Corona Cruiser offers special free fare days
–Beaumont’s Free Fare Program for college students,
veterans, and travel training participants
–SunLine’s Transit Network Redesign Plan
Future Growth Opportunities
24
3.Leverage other regional investments
–Major highway projects such as the 91 Express Lanes
–Metrolink’s SCORE program
–Future employment centers such as CARB that will increase
demand for more reverse commute service
Next Steps
25
•Incorporate the next Transit Vision into the Long Range
Transportation Plan (LRTP)
•The LRTP will:
–Shape a vision for an integrated transportation system in Riverside
County for the next 20 years, focus on the next 10 years
–Take a comprehensive look at state highway, local streets, and
transit projects
–Allow us and our local partners to better prioritize and compete for
grants with a more “multimodal” and “corridor” approach
•Update to be provided in the spring/early summer
Staff Recommendation
26
•Receive and file a report on the status of public transit; and
•Direct staff to come back to the Commission by June 2019
with recommendations on any funding formula
adjustments or transit policies that are needed to support
public transit in Riverside County
QUESTIONS
27
Agenda Item
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2019
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Next Generation of Express Lanes
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive study summary results and staff recommendations; and
2) Provide direction on staff recommendations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
At its January 2018 meeting, the Commission awarded a contract to HNTB Corporation to conduct
a toll feasibility study. Tolling continues to emerge as a strategy to manage congestion in key
corridors and generate revenue. This study’s purpose was to identify the most promising new
and/or expanded express lane facilities within Riverside County. The study evaluated the
feasibility to implement a potential express lane corridor relative to other express lane corridors
and compared corridors to each other on mobility benefits (e.g. vehicle throughput, time savings,
etc.), financial feasibility, connectivity to other express lane facilities and activity centers, project
implementation impacts, and other factors.
The Commission established its toll program in 2006. The primary activities of the toll program
included developing and operating express lanes within the SR-91 and I-15 corridors, and the
Commission augmented the organization with additional staff to deliver the projects and operate
the facilities.
The Commission opened its first tolled express lane facility in 2017 with the successful extension
of the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County. In FY 2017/18, the Commission’s 91 Express Lanes
provided 14.5 million customer trips and generated almost $48 million of gross revenue. The
Commission also significantly advanced its second tolled express lane facility, the 15 Express
Lanes from State Route (SR) 60 to Cajalco Road, by completing key procurements for tolling, final
design, and construction and project financing in 2017. The 15 Express Lanes from SR-60 to
Cajalco Road is currently under construction and planned to open in 2020.
Also in 2017, $180 million was made available through SB 132 to develop the 15/91 Express Lanes
Connector Project, which will provide the northerly express lane connector between the 91 and
Agenda Item
15 Express Lanes. This project is being developed and staff anticipates opening of this 15/91
Express Lanes Connector in 2022.
At its April 2018 meeting the California Transportation Commission authorized $50 million of
State Transportation Improvement Program funds for the project approval/environmental
documentation (PA/ED) work phase for the southerly extension of the 15 Express Lanes from
Cajalco Road to SR-74. This project will start the PA/ED phase in May with an expected contract
award for professional services.
Since the Commission awarded the toll feasibility study contract in January 2018, executive
management, staff, and HNTB Corporation worked through a series of workshops to:
- Identify key study criteria and assumptions;
- Perform a screening analysis to establish a tiered ranking of potential corridors;
- Perform a detailed analysis of the top tier potential corridors; and
- Establish the overall feasibility of each top tier corridor.
The study’s methodology and summary results for this year-long effort as well as staff
recommendations will be presented via a presentation for Commission consideration and
direction.
WHAT IS NEXT FOR
EXPRESS LANES IN
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Michael Blomquist, RCTC Toll Program Director
Greg Hulsizer, HNTB Project Manager
1
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Annual Workshop Meeting
January 31, 2019
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Today’s Presentation
JANUARY 31, 2019
2
•Commission’s January 2018 meeting
–Authorized staff to commence Next Generation Toll
Feasibility Study
–Return with study results and recommendation
•Current express lane program
•Should we develop more express lanes?
–Why?
–Where?
•Staff Recommendation
3
Current Express Lanes Program
The 91 Experience
4
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Why Pursue Express Lanes?
JANUARY 31, 2019
5
•Limited state and federal funding
•Erosion of the federal gas tax
•Significant but finite Measure A funding
•Continued increase in people, households, and jobs
•Very limited freeway expansion plans by State
–Operational improvements, maintaining the
existing system
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Trends: 2006 & Now
JANUARY 31, 2019
6
•Use of single-occupant vehicles
•Long-term jobs-housing imbalance
•Continued demand for less congested
alternatives
•Willingness of Riv. County residents to pay a
toll for travel benefits
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Should we Develop Express
Lanes?
7
•Deliver improvements sooner due to toll funding
•91 and 15 Projects toll revenue-backed financing
•91 Project = $598 million
•15 Project = $152 million
•Construct improvements not otherwise possible
•Portion of 91 corridor General Purpose lane improvements
•New express lanes in both corridors
•Express Lanes Have Brought $750 Million to Riverside
County
Next Generation of Express Lanes
New Choices for Solo Drivers
JANUARY 31, 2019
8
•Pay a toll for travel benefits
•Travel time certainty
•Travel time savings
•Use when you want
•Daily commuter
•Occasional/Weekend trip
•Critical trip
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Meet Measure A Voter Commitments
9
•Voter commitment
•I-15: one-lane/direction: SR-60 to San Diego County Line
•Projects underway
•I-15 Express Lanes (SR-60 to Cajalco): two lanes/direction
•I-15 Express Lanes So. Ext. (Cajalco to SR-74): two
lanes/direction
•Reduced Measure A contribution to I-15
•Spend on other Measure A projects
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Meet Other Transportation Needs
10
•Corridor improvements not in Measure A
•Recommended improvements to follow
•Surplus toll revenue
•Metrolink stations and service
•Freeway lanes and interchanges
•Recreational trail system
•Express lane improvements
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Capitalize on the Investments
Already Made
JANUARY 31, 2019
11
•$1.9 +/-billion investment made in 91 and 15 corridors
–Express lane backbone in place
–Toll building purchase for long-term operations
•Extend express lane network south and east
–More Riverside County residents can benefit
•Build on success
–91 Express Lanes successful opening
–15 Express Lanes to open next year
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Enables More Transit
12
•Express lane construction also provides transit
infrastructure
–No additional cost for express bus, van pool
•RTA express bus route 200 uses the 91 Express Lanes
–Operating since January 2018
•January: 385 boardings/day December: 625 boardings/day
(+62%)
•171,000 annual boardings
•RCTC van pool program
(VanClub)
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Improve All Lanes
JANUARY 31, 2019
13
•Allow Carpool and General Purpose lanes to work better
–Adds new lane capacity
•Every car in the express lanes = one less car in the GP lanes
–Raise occupancy requirement to 3+
•Ensures carpool demand doesn’t break down the carpool lane
–Variable tolls manage demand ensuring free-flow express lanes
•More cars moved, less congestion and delay in express lanes
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Degraded Carpool Lanes
14
•2017 Caltrans Report
–Degraded locations
•New express lane corridors
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Pays Operations & Maintenance Cost
JANUARY 31, 2019
15
•No unfunded obligations for RCTC or
Caltrans
–50-years of O&M costs paid via tolls
•Ensures well-maintained express lanes for
customers
–RCTC provides funding and ensure maintenance
–Both annual and long-term rehabilitation
maintenance
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Initial Backbone & the Network Expansion
JANUARY 31, 2019
16
•We’ve done this before
–2005-2006 toll feasibility work
•Prioritization of 91 and 15 corridors
–2009-2019 Delivery Plan
•Prioritization of Measure A projects
•Where should the expansion occur?
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Background
17
1. Purpose of the Study
2. Methodology and Results
3. Overall Feasibility Ranking
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Study Methodology
18
•Workshop-based Approach
•Four Tasks
1. Identify Key Criteria and Assumptions
2. Screening Analysis and Tiered Rankings of Potential Facilities
3. Detailed Analysis of Top Tier Facilities
4. Establishment of Overall Feasibility
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Key Criteria & Assumptions
JANUARY 31, 2019
19
Next Generation of Express Lanes
16 Potential Corridors
20
List of Corridors for RCTC Next Generation Tolling Study Length
(Miles)
1 NOT USED
2 I-15 Express Lanes (SR-74 to I-215)14
3 I-15 Express Lanes (I-215 to San Diego County line)9
4 I-15 Express Lanes (SR-60 to San Bernardino County line)2
5 SR-91 HOT Lanes (I-15 to SR-60/I-215)14
6 SR-60 HOT Lanes (I-15 to SR-91/I-215)12
7A SR-60 (SR-60/I-215 split to Theodore Street Interchange)10
7B SR-60 (Theodore Street Interchange to I-10)8
8 I-215 HOT Lanes (SR-60/SR-91 to I-10) (2 miles-Riverside, 4 mile-SB
County)6
9 I-215 (SR-60/SR-91 to SR-60/I-215 split)5
10 I-215 (SR-60/I-215 split to SR-74)12
11 I-215 (SR-74 to I-15)17
12 I-10 (SB County Line to SR-60)6
13 I-10 (SR-60 to SR-111)18
14 Mid-County Parkway (I-215 to SR-79)16
15 SR-79 (MCP to SR-74)7
16 SR-79 (SR-74 to I-15)11
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Top Tier Corridors
JANUARY 31, 2019
21
•91 Downtown Riverside
–SR-91 from I-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 Interchange
•60 Jurupa-Riverside
–SR-60 from I-15 to SR-91/I-215/SR-60 Interchange
•60 Riverside-Moreno Valley
–I-215/SR-60 from SR-91/I-215/SR-60 Interchange to Gilman Springs Road
•60/215 Riverside-Moreno Valley
–SR-60/I-215 from SR-91/I-215/SR-60 Interchange to Gilman Springs Road
–SR-60/I-215 East Junction to Van Buren Boulevard
Top Tier Corridors Map
22
Next Generation of Express Lanes
91 Downtown Riverside
JANUARY 31, 2019
23
•14 Miles (I-15 to SR-60)
–1 lane in each direction
−Convert 1-HOV to 1-EL
−Minimal R/W impacts
•Capital Cost: $184 million
Next Generation of Express Lanes
60 Jurupa-Riverside
JANUARY 31, 2019
24
•10 miles (I-15 to I-215)
−2 lanes in each direction
–Convert 1-HOV and add
1 lane for 2-EL in each
direction
•Capital Cost: $508 million
Next Generation of Express Lanes
60 Riverside-Moreno Valley
JANUARY 31, 2019
25
•5 miles (I-215/SR-60);10 miles
(SR-60)
−1 lane in each direction
−Convert 1-HOV to 1-EL in
each direction
•Capital Cost: $128 million
Next Generation of Express Lanes
60/215 Riverside-Moreno Valley
JANUARY 31, 2019
26
•5 miles (I-215/SR-60);10 miles
(SR-60); 4 miles (I-215)
−2 lanes in each direction portion
−1 lane in each direction portions
−Convert 1-HOV and add
1 lane for 2-EL in each
direction
•Capital Cost: $319 million
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Summary of Results
27
35-Year Net Revenue
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Financeability and Feasibility Ranking
JANUARY 31, 2019
28
Summary of Financing Results ($M)
91 Downtown
Riverside
60 Jurupa-
Riverside
60 Riverside-
Moreno Valley
60/215 Riverside-
Moreno Valley
Capital Cost (2018$)$184 $508 $128 $319
Capital Cost & O&M Reserve (2021$)$202 $544 $143 $347
Net Toll Revenue Bond Proceeds in 2020 $51 -$78 N/A $92 -$126 $284 -$388
Surplus / (Gap)$(151) -$(124)$(508)$(51) -$(17)$(63) -$41
Financing Feasibility % (Proceeds/Cost)25 -39%0%64 -88%82 -112%
RANKING CORRIDOR
1 60/215 Riverside-Moreno Valley
2 60 Riverside-Moreno Valley
3 91 Downtown Riverside
4 60 Jurupa-Riverside
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Overall Feasibility
JANUARY 31, 2019
29
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Overall Feasibility Weighting
JANUARY 31, 2019
30
Transportation
Mobility
35%
Financial Feasibility
30%
Connectivity
15%
Project Support
and Schedule
10%
Project Impacts
10%
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Overall Feasibility of Corridor Rankings
JANUARY 31, 2019
31
1
2
3
4
2
4
3
1
60/215 Riverside-
Moreno Valley
91 Downtown
Riverside
60 Riverside-
Moreno Valley
60 Jurupa-Riverside
Next Generation of Express Lanes
What Project East of 60/215/91 Interchange?
32
•“GOLD” = 60/215 Riverside Moreno Valley Express Lanes
–Capacity increase
•2 lanes/direction up to the 60/215 split
–I-215 improvement
•More benefit: SR-60 to Van Buren Blvd.
–Financially more feasible
•Most feasible out of all four corridors
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Next Step: Prepare Project Initiation
Documents
33
•Project Initiation Document = Project Study Report
–Establishes:
•purpose and need statement
•project scope
•cost and schedule
–Major work on the SHS requires Caltrans-approved Project Initiation
Document
–Meets statutory and CTC requirements for STIP-candidate projects
Project
Initiation
Document
Project
Approval/
Environmenta
l Document
Plans,
Specifications,
and Estimates
Construction
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Staff Recommendation
34
•Authorize staff to complete Project Initiation
Documents for:
–91 Downtown Riverside Express Lanes;
–60 Jurupa-Riverside Express Lanes; and
–60/215 Riverside-Moreno Valley Express Lanes
•Authorize the Executive Director to execute non-
funding agreements with Caltrans
•Direct staff to return with a contract award
recommendation for professional services to prepare
Project Initiation Documents
QUESTIONS
35
BONEYARD
36
Base Case Results
37
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Note:
−“35-Yr PV Debt Net Revs” calculation represents a high-level simulation of financing proceeds when introducing a 4.50% discount rate and 2.0x coverage level
−Does not represent a financing analysis
Equal Weighting
38
Next Generation of Express Lanes
Transportation
Financial Feasibility
Connectivity
20%
Project Support
and Schedule
Project Impacts
Top Tier Corridors
Next Generation of Express Lanes
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: January 31, 2019
TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission
FROM: Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Setting Priorities and a Vision for Riverside County’s Future
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Commission to:
1) Receive and file the RCTC Staff Insight Brief;
2) Commit necessary 91 Express Lanes toll revenue to fully fund the 15/91 Express Lanes
Connector design-build phase;
3) Assign the Future Funding Initiatives ad hoc Committee to thoroughly vet and make
specific recommendations to the Commission no later than July 2019 on the following:
a. Measure A Expenditure Plan Review and update;
b. 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan;
c. A new local funding measure for the 2020 general election; and
d. Innovative financing of express lanes revenues.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Commission staff prepared an insight brief (Attachment 1) describing the basis and need for the
Commission to take timely action to set priorities and a vision for at least the next ten years. The
white paper provides the rationale for the recommended near-term actions listed above.
Attachment 2 is a visual aid for the Western Riverside County projects discussed in the white
paper.
Prioritization of Coachella Valley projects and distribution of Measure A funds in that sub-region
occurs at the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) according to the
Transportation Project Prioritization Study and pursuant to a memorandum of understanding
between the Commission and CVAG. Therefore, the white paper by Commission staff refrains
from weighing in on prioritization of specific projects and funding allocations in the Coachella
Valley. Similarly, the city of Blythe and the County of Riverside prioritize Palo Verde Valley
projects. Nonetheless, the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys have a significant stake in
establishing a countywide vision for improved mobility and economic growth, as well as any
potential future funding initiatives.
The final and perhaps most fundamental material included in this staff report is Attachment 3, a
copy of the Measure A expenditure plan and ordinance approved by Riverside County’s
electorate in November 2002. The basis of most major decisions made by the Commission center
on Measure A, Riverside County’s 0.5 percent sales tax administered by the Commission.
At the workshop, staff will give an oral presentation on the recommendations set forth in this
staff report and welcomes a robust discussion by the Commission on setting priorities, a vision,
and a plan of action for Riverside County’s future.
Attachments:
1) RCTC Staff Insight Brief
2) RCTC-Led Projects (Western Riverside County)
3) Measure A Expenditure Plan and Ordinance
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TR A NSPORT A TION COMMISSION
STAFF INSIGHT BRIEF
2019 RCTCWORKSHOP
ATTACHMENT 1
Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop
1
RCTC Baseline and Priority-setting
It is time for RCTC to set priorities for the next ten years and establish a long-term vision for
mobility in Riverside County.
This opportunity is brought about by:
• The success of delivering priority projects from the first ten years of the renewed
Measure A,
• Progress of previously-deferred Measure A projects,
• Population and economic growth within Riverside County,
• Updated revenue forecasts for all sources of funding,
• 91 Express Lanes’ success and the potential expansion of toll facilities,
• New found stability and clarity of state funding and policy, and
• Review requirements within Measure A.
While there are many positive indicators for the next ten years, the facts also demonstrate that
expectations should be limited. Anticipated funding continues to fall short of capital project
needs. Rail and transit operations funding levels are unsustainable for current levels of service,
let alone expansion. Current Freeway Service Patrol levels will not be sustainable within a few
years. Congestion is hampering mobility on nearly every highway and regional arterial in
Riverside County.
RCTC must set priorities, establish a vision, and pursue new funding.
At the 2019 Commission Annual Workshop, staff seeks a vision and direction from the
Commission to address the challenges and opportunities for improved mobility in Riverside
County over the next decade and beyond.
Specifically, staff proposes assigning the Future Funding Initiatives ad hoc Committee to
conduct a thorough review of funding options, project priorities, and potential updates to
Measure A and make recommendations to the full Commission no later than July 2019. The ad
hoc committee was established several years ago to examine new funding initiatives; the
committee’s membership is geographically diverse and includes the Commission’s three
officers. After dialogue at the Commission Annual Workshop and receiving direction from the
full Commission, the ad hoc committee and staff can spend several months looking at data
regarding finances, project details, and public opinion to determine a prudent action plan.
Committing to such a review process now and setting a mid-2019 deadline for
recommendations is necessary:
• To meet the spirit and intent of the Measure A ordinance,
• To ensure feasibility of a local funding measure on the 2020 General Election ballot if
the Commission wishes to keep that opportunity open, and
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 2
• To ensure that priority projects continue to move forward without delay.
Measure A 2019 Expenditure Plan Review
The authors of Measure A in 2002 wanted to ensure that as the County grew and changed over
the 30-year life span of the measure, RCTC would be able to adjust the expenditure plan to
meet current and future needs.
The Measure A ordinance, Ordinance 02-001 reads as follows:
SECTION XIV. EXPENDITURE PLAN AMENDMENTS. The Expenditure Plan for
Measure “A” funds may only be amended, if required, in accordance with Public
Utilities Code section 240302, as amended. This section currently provides the
following process for amendment: (1) initiation of the amendment by the
Commission reciting findings of necessity; (2) approval by the Board of
Supervisors; and, (3) approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of
the incorporated population, unless such process is amended in a manner
consistent with State legislation.
Commencing in 2019 and at least every ten years thereafter, the Commission shall
review and, where necessary propose revisions to the Expenditure Plan. Such
revisions shall be submitted for approval according to the procedures set forth in
this Section XIV. Until approved, the then existing Expenditure Plan shall remain
in full force and effect.
Thus, it is time for RCTC to review the Measure A expenditure plan and, where necessary
propose revisions. The expenditure plan, which is attached to this report along with Ordinance
02-001, outlines several categories of funding, the amounts and percentages at which those
categories are to be funded, as well as differences in how funds are spent in the three
geographic sub-regions of the County. Upon initial review by RCTC Management, major
revisions to the expenditure plan do not appear warranted; however there may be nuanced
details that bear clarification and further examination to ensure the Measure A program is
fulfilling the needs of Riverside County today and in the decade ahead. Guidance from the
Commission is necessary.
2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan
To establish priorities and a strategic implementation plan for the first ten years of the renewed
Measure A, RCTC adopted a 10-Year Western County Highway Delivery Plan in 2006, nearly
three years prior to the renewed measure taking effect. Adopting this 10-year plan was
important because, different from the Coachella Valley where project priorities are determined
by the Transportation Project Prioritization Study, the numerous projects identified in Measure
A in Western County did not have such a criteria-based ranking.
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 3
RCTC has completed or has under construction the following projects in the 2009-2019 Western
County Highway Delivery Plan, adopted by the Commission in 2006 and updated in 2010
following the Great Recession (see Attachment 2 for a map of these projects):
91 Corridor Improvement Project
I-215 South: Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road
I-215 Central: Scott Road to Nuevo Road
I-215 Bi-County High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane addition
I-15 Express Lanes Project
During that time, RCTC also completed projects from the original 1989 Measure A program such
as the 60/215 East Junction and 91 HOV project in Riverside.
The 2009-2019 Western County Highway Delivery Plan also set out to achieve environmental
clearance of:
SR-79 Realignment, and
Mid County Parkway.
Both of these projects have received final environmental approval.
Finally, the 2009-2019 Western County Highway Delivery Plan established a broad goal of
protecting right of way for long-range mega projects such as SR-79 Realignment and Mid
County Parkway. While there is still more right of way to acquire for these projects, progress
has been made.
In the meantime, the I-10 Truck Lane identified in Measure A was deferred and the SR-60 Truck
Lane through the Badlands was accelerated and is now in the construction phase. Additionally,
the first construction package for Mid County Parkway, the I-215/Placentia Avenue
Interchange, is beginning procurement in 2019.
The I-15/French Valley Parkway Interchange led by the City of Temecula has remained a
priority, though it has encountered delivery and funding challenges over the last decade. The
project appears to be on track thanks in part to Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) infusing the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) with funding sufficient to move that project
forward.
In 2016 at the Commission Annual Workshop, the Commission voted to prioritize the following
projects deferred due to lack of funding during the Great Recession:
I-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension between Cajalco Road and State Route 74;
71/91 Interchange;
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 4
15/91 Express Lanes Connector; and
Continued progress and evaluation of CETAP and alternative corridors.
In 2017, the State Legislature and Governor approved a special appropriation in Senate Bill 132
(SB 132) of $180 million to construct the 15/91 Express Lanes Connector, along with special
legislation to accelerate the project through innovative contracting methods. The 15/91
Express Lanes Connector is on-track to complete construction by 2022, ahead of the June 30,
2023 statutory deadline to liquidate all $180 million in state funding. However, staff anticipates
an additional $35-55 million will be needed to fully fund the design-build phase. RCTC staff
intends to begin the design-build procurement phase in March 2019 with a contract award
expected in spring 2020.
Immediately following defeat of Proposition 6 in November 2018, RCTC released a procurement
for the project approval and environmental document phase of the I-15 Express Lanes Southern
Extension.
With increased certainty regarding state funding levels, updated toll revenue forecasts for the
91 Express Lanes, and fresh revenue projections for Measure A, Local Transportation Fund
(LTF), and federal formula programs, RCTC can more accurately assess what a realistic 2019-
2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan can look like.
RCTC issued significant debt backed by sales tax revenues to finance the first ten years of
Measure A Western County Highway projects and habitat acquisitions to support
transportation projects. These debt issuances result in substantially all Measure A revenues for
western county highways being devoted to debt repayment, averaging $66.3 million annually
for the next decade. Additionally, about $919 million of the $975 million debt ceiling contained
in Measure A is has been used. These facts mean that there is limited opportunity to fund new
major highway projects in western Riverside County through 2029. Instead, such projects will
need to rely on a mix of Measure A New Corridors funds, Measure A Economic Development
Incentive funds, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee revenue, toll revenue, federal formula
funds, and competitive state and federal grants.
Candidate projects for the 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan could include, but
are not limited to:
I-15 Express Lanes Southern Extension: Cajalco Road to SR-74
71/91 Interchange
15/91 Express Lanes Connector
91 Corridor Operations Project
I-215 Box Springs Road to Nuevo Road
SR-71 Widening
I-10 Truck Climbing Lane
Mid County Parkway
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 5
SR-79 Realignment
Next Generation Express Lanes Projects, which is the subject of another workshop
report
In the aggregate, these example projects cost billions of dollars beyond what is anticipated to
be available to RCTC over the next 10 years, let alone additional projects not mentioned in
Measure A for which support has been voiced by Commissioners and/or constituencies around
the County.
Additional Projects, Services, and Operations
The following have been identified by Commissioners, stakeholders, or staff as worthy of
funding, and do not have an identified funding source:
Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Intercity Rail Service
Ethanac corridor
Cajalco Road corridor
I-10 Bypass
I-15 widening in Temecula
Rail service to San Jacinto and Hemet
Rail service to Temecula
Increased frequency of existing Metrolink routes, including reverse commute service
Other rail corridors
Freeway Service Patrol in the Coachella Valley
Interchange and bridge reconstructions throughout Riverside County
New interchanges throughout Riverside County
Grade separations throughout Riverside County
Funding Gap Analysis
The RCTC Strategic Assessment (2016) identified the total capital needs for highway and transit
infrastructure to meet the demand of Riverside County’s anticipated growth by 2039. The
Strategic Assessment also identified revenues estimated to be available during the same
timeframe from state, federal, and local sources to meet those needs. The analysis produced
an estimated funding gap between reasonably expected revenues and needed capital funding
of $15.9 billion. In 2017, the State Legislature and Governor approved new transportation
revenues which closed the estimated funding gap for Riverside County’s transportation capital
needs to approximately $12.6 billion.
More recently, initial financial analysis being conducted as part of RCTC’s Long Range
Transportation Plan has identified a $9.59 billion funding gap for highway projects through
2045. This gap is driven largely by the Mid County Parkway project between I-215 and SR-79
($1.69 billion) and SR-79 Realignment project ($1.52 billion), as well as a future east-west
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 6
corridor between I-15 and I-215 ($2.36 billion). These three projects aside, the highway funding
gap through 2045 is still $4.02 billion.
Assumptions about federal and state funding that were used to develop the Measure A
expenditure plan and the 2009-2019 Western County Highway Delivery Plan have not come to
fruition. While SB 1 is helpful, it came after several years of dramatic declines in state funding
and is focused mainly on repair of existing facilities, rather than building new infrastructure for
a growing economy such as Riverside County. Federal funding has remained flat and is held
afloat only by budgetary one-time “patches” that mask the structural insolvency of the Highway
Trust Fund. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, often called the “stimulus”
bill, contained only a small percentage of funding for transportation infrastructure and was
one-time funding. That bill did make significant investments in the I-10 interchanges in the
Coachella Valley. Congress and the President have yet to make progress on a long-sought
infrastructure bill.
Additionally, macroeconomic conditions including, but not limited to, cost escalation and
recessions, have widened the gap between what was forecast as feasible in 2002 and what
reality has borne out.
Strategies to Fill the Gap
New Sales Tax Measure
The preamble language to Ordinance 02-001, which was placed on the November 2002 General
Election ballot as Measure A, begins:
“The transportation system in Riverside County is rapidly deteriorating and our
population and economy are growing rapidly. Maintenance and repairs of existing
roadways and improvements to relieve congestion cannot be accomplished with
available funds. Without additional funds, the system will bog down and
pavement will crumble into permanent disrepair. State highway funds are
inadequate and competition for funds is increasing. Projects in areas where local
sales tax funds are available have been and will continue to be viewed much more
favorably in the selection process of the California Transportation Commission.
Local governments must either generate revenues to expand our system and
maintain our investments or watch the system collapse and endanger the health,
welfare and safety of all Riverside County residents.”
In 2019 in Riverside County, past is prologue.
In 2015, RCTC began examining the possibility of seeking voter approval for an additional 0.5%
sales tax to fill the funding gap in the Measure A program and to fund new priorities that have
emerged since the renewal of Measure A in 2002. In exploring this funding option, RCTC has
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 7
acknowledged that the state and federal governments cannot be relied upon to wholly fulfill
the needs and aspirations of Riverside County.
RCTC has modernized its public engagement efforts throughout Riverside County to receive the
input necessary to craft a transportation improvement plan that would earn voter confidence.
RCTC has also achieved the approval of the State Legislature and Governor to pursue an
additional 0.5% sales tax for transportation.
Revenue Potential: Significant
Initial estimates by the UC Riverside School of Business Center for Economic Forecasting &
Development demonstrate the potential for a new countywide sales tax measure for
transportation to yield anywhere between $3.1-$5.9 billion, depending on how the measure is
structured. This would close the capital funding gap identified in the Strategic Assessment
between 25-46% (Note: this figure does not include the expected long-term shortfall for transit
operations). No other potential future funding source was identified by the Strategic
Assessment that would raise this level of revenue. Potential sources also analyzed included
raising the federal gas tax, new development fees, and per-mile fees in addition to gas taxes. A
new measure would help in a meaningful way but is not the complete solution.
Legal Authority: Yes
RCTC obtained legal authority to administer an additional sales tax when Assembly Bill 1189 (AB
1189) (Garcia) was signed into law by the Governor in 2017. RCTC sponsored this bill. The law
allows RCTC to impose a total sales tax rate of up to 1% if approved by the electorate by a two-
thirds affirmative vote. The new measure authorized by AB 1189 is exempt from the state’s cap
on local-option sales taxes, meaning that the tax could go into effect in all jurisdictions in
Riverside County, including those where municipal sales taxes have recently been adopted.
Consistency with RCTC policy: Yes
The Commission has voted multiple times to pursue the option of a potential new sales tax
measure to close the funding gap to meet Riverside County’s infrastructure demands in the
coming decades. These votes occurred at the Commission’s Annual Workshops in 2016, 2017,
and 2018.
Feasibility: Possible
With legal authority in-hand and Commission policy favorable toward moving in the direction of
a new local funding measure, the primary remaining concern is voter sentiment. A two-thirds
“yes” vote (66.67%) of the electorate is necessary to achieve passage. Public opinion research
in 2017 demonstrated a maximum potential “yes” vote of 62% for likely voters in the 2020
General Election – 4.67% less than needed to pass in ideal conditions. In 2018, RCTC began a
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 8
multi-year comprehensive Public Engagement Program with one of its goals being to increase
awareness and education of Riverside County residents regarding transportation issues and to
develop a transportation improvement and funding plan that can achieve approval by 66.67%
of voters in 2020. RCTC staff and consultants are moving forward with the engagement
program and early results are encouraging, but too soon to measure. During 2019, the
engagement program will significantly increase its intensity and will include new research to
give Commissioners data to determine feasibility of a 2020 measure.
Risk: Medium
Given that success hinges on the political electoral environment heading into the 2020 General
Election, the most significant risks are political. Legal and technical risks are low, as statutory
authority to pursue this funding source is already secure and resources necessary to develop a
funding plan to place on the ballot are approved and budgeted. Many political risks are beyond
the control of RCTC and subject to national and state affairs. Local political dynamics – over
which Commissioners and colleagues have significant influence – will also play a major role in
success or failure of a new measure.
A risk inherent in pursuing any revenue source is macroeconomic conditions beyond RCTC’s
control. As seen during the Great Recession, sales tax receipts are vulnerable to dips in the
overall economy.
Innovative Financing
The current financial success of RCTC’s 91 Express Lanes and the hopeful success of the 15
Express Lanes opening in 2020 provide an opportunity for RCTC to use future anticipated toll
revenues to accelerate improvements on the SR-91 and I-15 corridors. With strong credit
ratings from the rating agencies, RCTC can use similar innovative financing approaches as those
RCTC used to finance the 91 Project and the I-15 Express Lanes Project within the boundaries of
state law. Given the systemic relationship between I-15 and SR-91 east of I-15, in that they
serve primarily the same commute and goods movement patterns, RCTC may wish to consider
obtaining legal authority for greater flexibility to allow 91 Express Lanes revenues to be
invested throughout the 91 and 15 corridor system.
Revenue Potential: Significant
Updated traffic and revenue analysis by Stantec Consulting presented at the Commission’s
December 2018 meeting demonstrates toll revenue from RCTC’s 91 Express Lanes will likely
continue to exceed original estimates made in 2012. Stantec forecasts for the “base case”
show an aggregate 10% increase in toll revenue through FY 2066, which is approximately $926
million more than anticipated when the 91 Project was financed. If RCTC constructs the 91
Corridor Operations Project (91 COP) by 2022, which is a new westbound lane between Green
River Road and SR-241, toll revenue will be reduced by approximately $166 million between FY
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 9
2022 and FY 2035 – accounting for a 2% reduction in revenue over the life of RCTC’s ownership
of the express lanes. Despite this expected drop in toll revenue, there remains a significant
amount of revenue expected to be available to fund future capital projects on the SR-91
corridor.
15 Express Lanes revenue is not expected to be as high as 91 Express Lanes revenue and
performance versus projections cannot be measured until the facility is open for an extended
period of time. Nonetheless, RCTC can begin exploring financing structures that would leverage
any future available toll revenue to partially fund priority projects on I-15, including the 15
Express Lanes Southern Extension between Cajalco Road and SR-74.
Legal Authority: Yes, with limitations
For the 91 Express Lanes, Senate Bill 1316 (SB 1316) (Correa) requires that toll revenue beyond
what is needed to pay debt obligations and operations and maintenance of the express lanes be
invested in capital or operations improvements to enhance mobility in the SR-91 corridor
between the county line and I-15. Financing such future toll revenues to accelerate
improvements to SR-91 between the county line and I-15 is a legally permissible action. Should
RCTC wish to use toll revenues to make improvements to SR-91 east of I-15 or on I-15 itself (or
on another route), changes to state statute would need to be approved by the Legislature and
Governor.
For the 15 Express Lanes, Assembly Bill 1954 (AB 1954) (Jeffries) provides similar legal
parameters for investment of toll revenues. The physical limits of improvements that could be
funded with toll revenues are the I-15 corridor between the San Bernardino and San Diego
County lines.
Consistency with RCTC policy: Yes
At its June 2012 meeting, the Commission adopted the following toll policy goals:
1. Provide a safe, reliable, and predictable commute for 91 Express Lanes customers;
2. Optimize vehicle throughput at free flow speeds;
3. Pay debt service and maintain debt service coverage;
4. Increase average vehicle occupancy;
5. Balance capacity and demand to serve customers who pay tolls as well as carpoolers
with three or more persons who are offered discounted tolls;
6. Generate sufficient revenue to sustain the financial viability of the Commission’s 91
Express Lanes;
7. Ensure all covenants in the financing documents are met; and
8. Provide net revenues for Riverside Freeway/SR-91 corridor improvements.
Feasibility: Possible
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 10
RCTC has financial advisory services under contract and will likely secure the interest of
underwriters for a potential financing without much difficulty. Rating agencies have
demonstrated confidence in the local economy with:
• Stable outlooks on RCTC’s sales tax revenue bonds, and
• A recent upgrade by S&P Global Ratings with a positive outlook and a stable outlook by
Fitch Ratings with an expectation of a positive revision based on current performance
on RCTC’s 91 Express Lanes toll revenue financings.
Stantec’s recent traffic and revenue study results only bolster RCTC’s case for additional
financing. While financial market conditions are always outside of RCTC’s control, with a
reasonably healthy economy forecast for the near future, a successful financing using the
boundaries of current law appears likely.
Risk: Low
Exploration of innovative financing itself carries low risk. For reasons previously mentioned,
such an exploration is likely to be well received by capital markets and Riverside County citizens
eager for congestion relief as soon as possible. Risks increase an unknown amount should RCTC
choose to explore a “system financing” where 91 Express Lanes revenue could be applied to the
I-15 corridor, and vice versa. Risks of pursuing such a financing would be political in nature, as
RCTC would need permission from the Legislature and the Governor. The degree of risk of such
a legislative pursuit is unknown at this time because the exact scope and objective has not been
fully defined by the financial and technical analysis which would need to take place first.
As with sales tax revenues, toll revenues are partially dependent on overall economic
conditions. Recessions can cause actual revenues to dip below assumptions integral to
financing. Issuing additional debt would inherently increase risks RCTC to meet its obligations.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the Commission assign the Future Funding Initiatives ad hoc Committee to
thoroughly vet and make specific recommendations to the Commission no later than July 2019
on the following:
• Measure A Expenditure Plan Review and Update,
• 2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan,
• A new local funding measure on the 2020 general election ballot, and
• Innovative financing of express lanes revenues.
Further, staff recommends the Commission make a policy vote to commit sufficient 91 Express
Lanes surplus revenues to fully fund construction of the 15/91 Express Lanes Connector, as this
DRAFT Staff Insight Brief, 2019 RCTC Workshop 11
project is about to begin design-build procurement and is a stated priority of RCTC and the
State of California. The exact amount of surplus toll revenues and mix of fund sources will be
dependent on the outcome of federal INFRA grant awards sought by RCTC for this and other
projects on the 91 corridor.
Yucca
Valley
Twentynine Palms
RanchoMirage
Palm Springs
PalmDesert
La Quinta
Indio
Desert Hot Springs
Coachella
CathedralCity
Wildomar
Menifee
Eastvale
Temecula
CanyonLake
LakeMatthews
LakePerris
VailLake
NewportBeach
Murrieta
LakeElsinore
Laguna
Woods
Laguna
Niguel
Irvine
AlisoViejo
SanJacinto
San Bernardino
Perris
MorenoValley
Highland
Hemet
BeaumontBanning
Yorba Linda
Walnut
Upland
Tustin
Santa
Ana
SanDimas
Rialto
RanchoCucamonga
Pomona
Placentia
Ontario
Norco
JurupaValley
LaVerne
Glendora Fontana
DiamondBar
Corona
Claremont
Chino Hills
Brea
Anaheim
Riverside
Calimesa
Diamond ValleyLake
SAN BERNARDINO CO.
RIVERSIDE CO.
R
I
V
E
R
S
I
D
E
CO
.OR
A
NG
E
CO
.
RIVERSIDE CO.
SAN DIEGO CO.
SAN BERNARDINO CO.
RIVERSIDE CO.
133
241
142
259
71
1
55
66
57
76
30
91
74
74 74
60
90
22
5
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
210
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
10
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
15
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
10
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
405
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
73
371
111
243
247
74
62
79
79
38
15
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
60
91
15
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
60
215
INTERSTATE
CALIFORNIA
790510Miles
N
2
21
26
3
17
23
18
22
24
4
5
7
6
8
11
24
30 32
31
33
34
44
26
25
28
37
27
29
35
9
13
11528
27
10
1416
29
12 25
20
19
41
4243
COMPLETED PROJECTS Date of Completion Project Cost
WESTERN COUNTY
1
91 Project - added regular lanes, tolled express lanes and auxiliary lanes between the Orange County/Riverside County line and I-15
Spring 2017 $1.4 Billion
2 60/215 East Junction Project March 2014 $47 Million
3 74/215 Interchange Project March 2012 $20.6 Million
4 I-215 South Project September 2012 $29 Million
5 I-215 Bi-County Gap Closure June 2015 $170 Million
6 I-215 Central Project October 2015 $123.5 Million
7 I-215 Widening - Southbound - Blaine to Martin Luther King Boulevard September 2013 $2.8 Million
8 SR-74 Curve Widening June 2015 $5.6 Million
9 91/Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension June 2016 $248.3 Million
10 SR-91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project April 2016 $248 Million
UNDER CONSTRUCTION Estimated Date of Completion Estimated Project Cost
WESTERN COUNTY
11 I-15 Express Lanes Project 2020 $489 Million
12 60 Truck Lanes Late 2021 $138.4 Million
NEAR TERM Estimated Date of Completion Estimated Project Cost
WESTERN COUNTY
13 I-215/Placentia Ave. Interchange - Mid County Parkway Construction Package #1 Mid 2022 $58 Million
14 15/91 Express Lanes Connector 2022 $235 Million
15 71/91 Interchange Project Late 2022 $121 Million
16 91 Corridor Operations Project Late 2021 $43 Million
17 I-15/Railroad Canyon Interchange 2022 $45 Million
18 15 Corridor Operations Project TBD TBD
LONG TERM Estimated Date of Completion Estimated Project Cost
WESTERN COUNTY
19 SR-79 Realignment Project - Environmental work complete TBD $1.523 Billion
20 Mid County Parkway - Environmental work complete TBD $1.7 Billion
21 I-215 North - Box Springs Road to Nuevo Road TBD TBD
22 15 Express Lanes Southern Extension TBD TBD
23 I-15 Corridor Improvements: SR-74 to San Diego County Line TBD TBD
24 71 Widening TBD TBD
25 10/60 Interchange TBD TBD
26 10 Truck Lane TBD TBD
27 Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail TBD TBD
28 91 Ultimate Project TBD TBD
29 91 Improvements East of I-15 TBD TBD
RCTC-LED PROJECTS
ATTACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO. 02-001
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN
AND RETAIL TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ORDINANCE
PREAMBLE
The transportation system in Riverside County is rapidly deteriorating and our population and economy are growing rapidly. Maintenance and repairs of existing roadways and improvements to relieve congestion cannot be accomplished with available funds. Without additional funds, the system will bog down and pavement will crumble into permanent disrepair. State highway funds are inadequate and competition for funds is increasing. Projects in areas where local sales tax funds are available have been and will continue to be viewed much more favorably in the selection process of the California Transportation Commission. Local governments must either generate revenues to expand our system and maintain our investments or watch the system collapse and endanger the health, welfare and safety of all Riverside County residents.
Continuation of our one-half percent sales tax for transportation to supplement traditional revenues and revenues to be generated through locally-adopted developer fees and assessment districts for transportation improvements is the only way local governments can be sure the transportation system will serve the current and future travel needs of Riverside County. Collection of the one-half percent sales tax will commence upon the expiration of the existing tax.
The Riverside County Transportation Commission will continue to seek maximum funding for transportation improvements through State and federal programs. The Commission will not provide sales tax revenues to any city or to the County unless revenues currently used by that agency for transportation are continued to be used for transportation purposes.
The Riverside County Transportation Commission ordains as follows:
SECTION 1. SUMMARY. This Ordinance provides for the imposition of a retail transaction and use tax of one-half percent for a period of thirty (30) years, the authority to issue bonds secured by such taxes, and the administration of the tax proceeds and a county transportation expenditure plan.
SECTION II. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions shall apply in this ordinance:
A. Expenditure Plan. “The Expenditure Plan” means the Riverside County Transportation Commission Expenditure Plan (attached as Exhibit B) and adopted as part of this Ordinance including any future amendments thereto.
B. “County” means the County of Riverside.
ATTACHMENT 3
C. “Commission” means the Riverside County Transportation Commission s set forth in Sections 130053, 130053.5 and 130053.7 of the Public Utilities Code. D. “TUMF” means Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee. This fee is charged on new development by local governments to assist with the building and improvement of regional arterials. E. “MSHCP” means the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan currently under development by the County of Riverside. F. “Existing Tax” means the ½ % retail transactions and use tax adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 88-01. SECTION III. AUTHORITY. This Ordinance is enacted, in part, pursuant to the provisions of Division 25 (commencing with Section 240000) of the Public Utilities Code, and Section 7252.22 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. SECTION IV. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX. Subject to voter approval of the same, the Commission shall impose, in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of Riverside, a retail transactions and use tax (referred to as the Measure “A” fund tax) at a zero percent (0%) rate until the expiration of the Existing Tax. Thereafter, a tax shall be collected for a thirty (30) year period at the rate of one-half of one percent (0.5%). This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by law, including any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax. SECTION V. PURPOSES. Measure “A” funds may only be used for transportation purposes including the administration of Division 25, including legal actions related thereto, 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 the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of-way acquisition. SECTION VI. BONDING AUTHORITY. Upon voter approval of Measure “A” , the Commission shall have the power to sell or issue, from time to time, on or before the collection of taxes, bonds, or other evidence of indebtedness, including, but not limited to, capital appreciation bonds, in the aggregate principal amount at any one time outstanding of not to exceed $500 million, and to secure such indebtedness solely by way of future collection of taxes, for capital outlay expenditure for the purposes set forth in Section V hereof, including to carry out the transportation projects described in the Expenditure Plan. SECTION VII. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT. The Commission, by the enactment of this Ordinance, intends the additional funds provided government agencies by this Chapter to supplement existing local revenues and required developer improvements being used for transportation purposes. The government agencies shall maintain their existing commitment of local funds for street, highway and public transit purposes pursuant to this Ordinance, and the Commission shall enforce this Section by appropriate actions including fiscal audits of the local agencies.
The local cities and the County shall annually submit to the Commission a list of the proposed uses for these funds and a certification that the maintenance of effort requirement is being met. If in any fiscal year the maintenance of effort requirement is not met, the agency shall not be eligible for any Measure “A” funds in the following fiscal year. Such funds shall be distributed to the remaining local governments using the formula for the area. SECTION VIII. RETURN TO SOURCE. Funds for transportation purposes shall be allocated to the Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley areas proportionate to the Measure “A” funds generated within these areas. SECTION IX. ADMINISTRATION OF PLANS. The Commission shall impose and collect Measure “A” funds, shall allocate revenues derived, and shall administer the Expenditure Plan consistent with the authority cited herein. SECTION X. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. The Commission shall expend only that amount of the funds generated from Measure “A” for staff support, audit, administrative expenses, and contract services that are necessary and reasonable to carry out its responsibilities pursuant to Division 25, and in no case shall the funds expended for salaries and benefits exceed one percent (1%) of the annual net amount of revenue raised by Measure “A”. SECTION XI. ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT. The annual appropriations limit has been established pursuant to Ordinance 88-01 pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution and Section 240308(b) of the Public Utilities Code. The appropriations limit has and shall be subject to adjustment as provided by law. SECTION XII. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATES. Subject to voter approval, this Ordinance shall take effect at the close of the polls on November 5, 2002. SECTION XIII. ELECTION. The Commission requests the Board of Supervisors to call an election for voter approval of Measure “A ” (Exhibit A), which election shall be held on November 5, 2002. The election shall be called and conducted in the same manner as provided by law for the conduct of elections by a county. Pursuant to Section 240308 of the Public Utilities Code, the sample ballot to be mailed to the voters shall be the full proposition as set forth in the Ordinance, and the voter information handbook shall include the entire Expenditure Plan. Approval of the attached proposition, and the imposition of the Measure “A” retail sales and use tax described herein, shall require the affirmative vote of 2/3rds of the electors voting on the attached proposition at the election described in this section. SECTION XIV. EXPENDITURE PLAN AMENDMENTS. The Expenditure Plan for Measure “A” funds may only be amended, if required, in accordance with Public Utilities Code section 240302, as amended. This section currently provides the following process for amendment: (1) initiation of the amendment by the Commission reciting findings of necessity; (2) approval by the Board of Supervisors; and, (3) approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population, unless such process is amended in a manner consistent with State legislation.
Commencing in 2019 and at least every ten years thereafter, the Commission shall review and, where necessary propose revisions to the Expenditure Plan. Such revisions shall be submitted for approval according to the procedures set forth in this Section XIV. Until approved, the then existing Expenditure Plan shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION XV. SEVERABILITY. If any tax or provision of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that holding shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining Measure “A” funds or provisions, and the Commission declares that it would have passed each part of this ordinance irrespective of the validity of any other part. SECTION XVI. THE EXISTING TAX. Nothing in the ordinance is intended to modify, repeal, alter or increase the Existing Tax. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply solely to the retail transactions and use tax adopted herein, and not to the collection or administration of the Existing Tax. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Riverside County Transportation Commission at its meeting on Wednesday, May 8, 2002. By: John F. Tavaglione, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTESTED: By: Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission
Riverside County
Transportation Improvement Plan
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY BY
SUPPLEMENTING EXISTING FUNDS FOR TRANSPORTATION
Reduce current congestion and provide adequate transportation facilities to
accommodate reasonable growth in the future.
Provide funding for the adequate maintenance and improvement of local streets and
roads in the cities and unincorporated areas.
Enhance Riverside County’s ability to secure state and federal funding for
transportation by offering local matching funds.
PROVIDE FOR ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE EXPENDITURE OF TAX PAYER FUNDS
Provides for mandatory dedication of sales tax funds only for the transportation
improvements and programs identified in the Expenditure Plan and no other
purpose.
Provides for a mandatory, annual financial audit of program expenditures to insure
that all funds are spent in accordance with this voter adopted Plan and associated
legal ordinance.
Provides for a Maintenance of Effort requirement in funds made available to city
and county governments for local street and road programs to insure the new
money for this purpose is adding to current funding levels.
Provides for the strict limitation of administrative staff costs in implementing this
Plan, by limiting, in law, funds expended for salaries and benefits to no more than
one (1) percent of the annual net amount of revenues raised by Measure "A".
1
Provides for the Plan to be updated every 10 years for the period it is in effect to
insure that the changing needs and priorities of the county are met.
Provides for the mandatory termination of the tax in 2039, requiring additional
voter approval for extension at a County General Election according to state law.
PROVIDE FOR EQUITY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF MEASURE “A” REVENUES
Return funds to the Western County, Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley
proportionate to the funds generated in those areas.
Adopt a Transportation Improvement Plan, which address the unique needs of each
of the areas of the county.
Provide a reasonable balance between competing highway, commuter rail, transit,
and local streets and roads needs.
PROVIDE FOR LOCAL CONTROL OF THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
Provide for cost effective, local administration of the program through the existing
Riverside County Transportation Commission. No new agency would be required to
administer these funds.
Delegates appropriate administrative responsibility to the cities and the county and
other local agencies for local programs.
This TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN, which shall act as the County’s
Expenditure Plan, was prepared by the Riverside County Transportation
Commission for the purpose of extending the current ½ cent local transaction and
use tax for transportation to be collected for an additional 30 years, if approved by
the voters on November 5, 2002 – Measure “A”. This is proposed by the
Commission as a means to fill the funding shortfall to: implement necessary
highway, commuter rail, and transit projects; secure new transportation corridors
through environmental clearance and right of way purchases; provide adequate
maintenance and improvements on the local street and road system; promote
economic growth throughout the county; and provide specialized programs to meet
the needs of commuters and the specialized needs of the growing senior and
disabled population.
2
TAXPAYER ACCOUNTABILITY SAFEGUARDS
LEGAL DEDICATION OF FUNDS
Measure "A" funds may only be used for transportation purposes and described in
the local ordinance governing this program, including the construction,
environmental mitigation of transportation projects, capital activities, acquisition,
maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways, including state highways
and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include but
are not limited to expenditures for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering
and design costs, related right-of-way acquisition, and construction, engineering
and administration.
MANDATORY ANNUAL FISCAL AUDIT
No less than annually, the RCTC shall conduct an independent fiscal audit of the
expenditure of all sales tax funds raised by this measure. The audit, which shall be
made available to the public, shall report on evidence that the expenditure of funds
is in accordance with the Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan as
adopted by the voters in approving the sales tax measure on November 5, 2002.
In addition, the audit shall determine that Maintenance of Effort requirements, other
requirements regarding local government participation in Transportation Uniform
Mitigation Fee Programs, as well as requirements described in Section 5 of the Plan
entitled "Local Streets and Roads" have been complied with. The audit shall also
insure that no more than 1 (one) percent of total sales tax expenditures are used
for administrative staff salaries and benefits in implementing this Plan.
MANDATORY PLAN UPDATE AND TERMINATION OF SALES TAX
This Plan shall be updated by RCTC every 10 years that the sales tax is in effect to
reflect current and changing priorities and needs in the County, as defined by the
duly elected local government representatives on the RCTC Board. Any changes to
this Plan must be adopted in accordance with current law in effect at the time of
the update and must be based on findings of necessity for change by the
Commission. The sales tax authorized to be collected by the voters shall be
terminated on March 31, 2039, unless reauthorized by the voters to extend the
sales tax prior to the termination date as required under state law in effect at the
time of the vote for extension.
3
SPECIFIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY
The Expenditure Plan Map illustrates the Western and Coachella Valley areas. The
Western County area includes the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon
Lake, Corona, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Moreno Valley, Riverside, Murrieta, Norco,
Perris, San Jacinto, and Temecula. It also includes the unincorporated communities
of Jurupa, Mira Loma, Menifee, Wildomar, and Sun City and other more sparsely
populated areas, and the reservations of the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians, the
Soboba Band of Mission Indians, the Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians, the Ramona
Band of Cahuilla Indians, and the Morongo Band of Indians.
1. STATE HIGHWAYS
Many more state highway improvement projects are needed to deal with
congestion and safety problems than existing state and federal revenues can
fund. Projected formula funds from these sources over the 30 years is
estimated to be $640 million and will fund less than ½ of the improvements
needed and identified in the Expenditure Plan, which are estimated to cost
$1.66 billion in current dollars. Measure “A” funds will supplement those
funding sources by an estimated $1.02 billion and will cover the remaining
costs estimated to accomplish these improvements.
The Highway projects to be implemented with funding returned to the
Western County Area by extending the Measure “A” Program are as follows:
4
ROUTE LIMITS PROJECT EST. COST
91, 60, I-15,
& I-215
Reducing congestion on these
routes will require that new
transportation corridors are
constructed
See Section 2
Rte 91 Pierce Street to Orange County
Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 161
91/I-15 Interchange Add new Connector from I-15
North to 91 West $ 243
91/71 Interchange Improve Interchange $ 26
Rte 71 Rte 91 to San Bernardino
County Line Widen to 3 lanes each direction $ 68
I-215 60/91/215 to San Bernardino
County Line Add 2 lanes each direction $ 231
I-215 Eucalyptus Ave to I-15 Add 1 lane each direction $ 210
I-15 Rte 60 to San Diego County
Line Add 1 lane each direction $ 359
I-10 San Bernardino County Line to
Banning Add eastbound truck climbing
lane $ 75
I-10/60 Interchange Construct new interchange $ 129
Rte 60 Badlands area, east of Moreno
Valley Add truck climbing lane $ 26
Rte 79 Ramona Expressway to
Domenigoni Parkway Realign highway $ 132
SUBTOTAL Measure “A” Funding
State & Federal Formula Funds $1.02 Billion
$0.64 Billion
TOTAL $1.66 Billion
The Commission may add additional State Highway projects, should
additional Measure “A” revenue become available.
An estimated 5% of the total cost for these highway projects ($83 million)
will be used for environmental purposes to mitigate the cumulative and
indirect impacts associated with construction of these projects.
5
2. DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS
State Routes 91 and 60 and Interstate Routes 15 and 215 cannot cost
effectively be widened enough to provide for the traffic expected as
Riverside County continues to grow. In addition to the specific highway
improvements listed in Section 1 above, congestion relief for these highways
will require that new north–south and east-west transportation corridors will
have to be developed to provide mobility within Riverside County and
between Riverside County and its neighboring Orange and San Bernardino
Counties.
Four new Transportation Corridors have been identified as necessary through
the Community Environmental Transportation Approval Process (CETAP)
currently underway. An estimated $370 million in Measure "A" matching
funds to leverage local, state and federal funding will be made available for
environmental clearance, right of way, and construction of these new
corridors. An estimated $70 million of these funds will be used to mitigate
the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of these
projects.
3. PUBLIC TRANSIT
The Transportation Improvement Plan will provide an estimated $390 million
to expand commuter rail, implement intercity bus services and to continue
and expand programs to assist the elderly, disabled and commuters.
A. Discount Fares and Transit Services for Seniors and Disabled Persons
Seniors and disabled persons are becoming an increasing percentage
of the population each year. They are currently charged a fare on
fixed route transit services that is one-half the normal fare for service
within the Western County area. In addition a number of specialized
transportation programs have been implemented which meet
specialized needs for transportation to medical services, social
service agencies and programs, shopping and other purposes that
cannot be met by conventional transit. A minimum of $85 million in
Measure “A” funds will be used to guarantee these services.
6
B. Commuter Rail and Intercity Bus Service
Metrolink has provided a viable alternative to the automobile for
thousands of daily commuters to Orange and Los Angeles counties
and reduces the demand on our freeways. The current service level
needs to double in the future and expansion of the system to
Moreno Valley and Perris is needed to relieve congestion on I-215.
In addition, an intercity express bus service that feeds the Metrolink
service and provides a reasonable alternative to the automobile for
daily commuters who travel within the region is needed. Measure
“A” funds will be made available for operations of these services and
to match federal funds for capital.
C. Commuter Services, Ridesharing, Vanpools, Buspools, Park-N-Ride
Commuter traffic created by Riverside County residents traveling to
jobs in neighboring Orange, Los Angeles, and San Bernardino
counties adds significantly to the peak hour congestion on the
freeway and highway system. A number of programs have been
implemented to assist commuters to share rides, reduce congestion,
and take advantage of travel in the “carpool” lanes. These programs
include; rideshare matching services; incentive programs; vanpool
“seed money”; buspool subsidies; and park-n-ride lot leasing. These
programs will become even more necessary in the future as traffic
increases. A minimum of $50 million in Measure “A” funds will be
used for this purpose.
4. REGIONAL ARTERIAL SYSTEM
The freeway and state highway system can no longer be expected to handle
the traffic demands for travel between and through the cities of the Western
County area, with the development projected for the future. A system of
regional arterials (major local roadways) with limited access, freeway
interchanges, grade separations, and coordinated traffic signals are needed
to supplement the highway backbone system. The Western Riverside Council
of Governments (WRCOG), in conjunction with the cities and the County,
has developed this system of roadways to meet this need. This roadway
system will be periodically updated by the Commission, or the Western
Riverside Council of Governments, to reflect actual development trends.
7
Funding to widen existing roads and construct new roads on this system will
be funded by an estimated $300 million in revenues generated by Measure
“A” and by matching revenues to be generated by the cities and County
implementing a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) administered
by the Commission or the Western Riverside Council of Governments
(WRCOG).
Examples of the roadways on the regional arterial system that may be
eligible to receive Measure “A” and TUMF funding for widening and other
improvements to increase capacity and traffic flow are:
• Van Buren Boulevard from I-215 to State Route 60
• Alessandro Boulevard from I-215 westerly to Central Avenue
• Central Avenue from Alessandro Blvd to Van Buren Boulevard
• Arlington Avenue from Central Avenue to Van Buren Boulevard
• Green River Road from Dominguez Ranch Rd to State Route 91
• Foothill Parkway from Lincoln Ave to Green River Road
• Scott Road from State Route 79 to I-215
• Clinton Keith Road from State Route 79 to I-215
• Date Street from State Route 79 to I-15
• State Route 79/I-10 Interchange Improvements and possible bypass to
I-10
• Ramsey Street from Banning City Limits to Field Road
• Ramona Expressway from San Jacinto to I-215
• Cajalco Road from I-215 to I-15
• Perris Boulevard from State Route 74 to San Bernardino Co. Line
• Pyrite Street from San Bernardino County Line to State Route 60
• Schleisman Road from San Bernardino County Line to I-15 and
Arlington Avenue
• Domenigoni Parkway from State Street to I-215
• Railroad Canyon/Newport Road from I-215 to I-15
The final scope and project limits of all improvements proposed for the
regional arterial system will be determined through noticed public hearings,
environmental clearance process, and agreement with affected agencies.
5. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS
The local street and road system is critical to the every day movement of
people within the cities and the county. This system is reaching “middle
age”, with potholes and is in need of continued maintenance and
rehabilitation. New local roads adjacent to new residential and business
developments will continue to be constructed and paid for by the developers.
8
Current resources, without the extension of the existing sales tax revenues
for transportation, cannot provide adequate funding to maintain the local
street and road system at the level necessary to adequately serve the public.
The Transportation Improvement Plan will provide an estimated $970 million
specifically for this purpose. The funds made available in the Western County
area will be distributed to the cities and the county by a formula based 75%
on proportionate population and 25% on revenues generated by Measure
“A”. In order to be eligible for these funds, each agency will be required to:
1) File a Five-Year Capital Improvement Program, updated annually, with the
Commission; 2) Participate in a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
(TUMF) Program to be developed and administered by the Commission or the
Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG); and, 3) Participate in
the Multi- Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) currently under
development by the County of Riverside by endorsing the Permit Application
and signing the Implementation Agreement.
The TUMF Program shall be adopted according to all applicable laws and
shall provide that the first $400 million of TUMF revenues will be made
available to the Commission to fund equally the: 1) Regional Arterial
System, as described above; and, 2) Development of New Corridors
(“CETAP”) described above.
6. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES PROGRAM
The need to attract new commercial and industrial development and jobs to
Riverside County to reduce the need for long commutes to Orange and Los
Angeles counties is important to the economic vitality and quality of life of
Western Riverside County. A greater jobs – housing balance is needed
immediately.
The Transportation Improvement Plan will provide an estimated $40 million
for this purpose. These funds 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. Given the limited amount of
funds available, the RCTC shall develop a program of competitive incentives
to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate within
the Western Riverside County area.
9
In particular, the highest priority for these funds shall be for use in attracting
key industrial development. For example, Western Riverside County through
the provision of a needed interchange or transit service as a part of an
overall package of incentives, could attract industrial development, which
may have otherwise located elsewhere in California, in the United States or
internationally.
7. BOND FINANCING
Construction of the highway and rail projects and implementation of the local
streets and roads and other programs identified in the Transportation
Improvement Plan are needed as soon as possible. In order to accomplish
this, some level of borrowing will be required. The Commission will
determine the extent of borrowing that is reasonable as the program is
implemented. Up to $270 million, 8% of the revenues expected to be
generated, will be made available for this purpose.
COACHELLA VALLEY AREA
The Coachella Valley area is located in the central part of Riverside County and
includes the cities of Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells,
Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage. It also includes
the unincorporated areas, and the reservations of the Agua Caliente Band of
Cahuilla Indians, the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, and the Torres Martinez
Desert Cahuilla Indians. The Transportation Improvement Plan is designed to give
flexibility to adjust to changing circumstances and to:
• Improve Traffic Flow and Reduce Congestion on Highway 111
• Add/Improve Interchanges on Highway 86 and I-10
• Provide funding for Local Streets and Roads Improvements
• Improve Safety and Visibility at Major Intersections and Arterial Roads
● Reduce Congestion by Improving Major Roadways Identified as
Important by Local Governments in the Coachella Valley
• Provide Express East-West Transit Routes in the Coachella Valley
• Improve and Expand Public and Specialty Transit Service
10
1. STATE HIGHWAYS AND MAJOR REGIONAL ROAD PROJECT
Fifty percent (50%) of the Measure “A” revenues will be used for State
highways and regional road improvements. The Transportation Project
Prioritization Study (TPPS), developed through the Coachella Valley
Association of Governments (CVAG), will function as the Plan for future
needs. Preventive maintenance of these Measure “A” funded arterials will
be allowed, if a majority of the Coachella Valley local governments give
approval.
The system improvements will be accomplished with a mix of Measure “A”
funds, state and federal highway funds, and the existing Transportation
Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) on new development.
This segment of the Measure “A” Expenditure Plan will be implemented
through the Coachella Valley Association of Governments.
2. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS
Thirty-five percent (35%) of the Measure “A” revenues will be returned to
the cities and the county in the Coachella Valley and shall be used to assist
with the funding local street and road improvements. These funds will
supplement existing federal, state, and local funds. Local street
improvements adjacent to new residential and business developments will
continue to be paid for by the developers.
Cities and the county in the Coachella Valley must participate in the
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program to assist in the
financing of the priority regional arterial system in order to receive these
funds. If a city or the county chooses not to levy the TUMF, the funds they
would otherwise receive for local streets and roads will be added to the
Measure “A” funds for the Regional Arterial Program.
Allocations of funds to the cities and the county will be based on a formula
weighted 50% on proportionate dwelling units and 50% on Measure “A”
revenues generated within each jurisdiction. A Five-Year Capital
Improvement Program for the use of these funds will be prepared and
annually updated with public participation by each city and the county.
11
3. PUBLIC TRANSIT
Fifteen percent (15%) of the Measure “A” revenues will be used to improve
and expand public transit and specialized transportation services.
A.
B.
C.
Discount Fares and Expanded Transportation Services for Seniors and
Persons with Disabilities
For Seniors (age 60 and older) and persons with disabilities, access to
healthcare, social services, shopping, and recreation is a key to quality
of life. Sunline Transit Agency offers a full array of public transit and
specialized transportation services at reduced prices to individuals in
these special groups. Measure “A” funds will guarantee discounts
continue for the next 30 years. Funds will also be used to expand
services to meet future needs of the growing population of the valley.
Specialized Transportation Services
In addition to providing SunBus public transit service, SunDial
paratransit service, and SunLink express commuter service to
Riverside, the Sunline Transit Agency offers specialized transportation
services to Coachella Valley residents and visitors. These services
include the Vets Express that provides free transportation to the
Veterans Hospital in Loma Linda; SunTrip, that enables those beyond
Sunline’s fixed route service area to receive reimbursement they can
pay to volunteer drivers; and SunRide that coordinates the
transportation services offered by many non-profit social service
organizations. All of Sunline’s vehicles operate on clean, alternative
fuels thereby preserving the environment and creating a healthier
community while increasing access. Measure “A” funds will assist
these and other types of specialized transportation services which may
be implemented.
Bus Replacement and More Frequent Service
Public bus transportation offers communities many benefits – reduced
traffic congestion, reduced wear and tear on roads, reduced parking
demand, and lower emissions. By providing access to schools, jobs
and shopping, it is also a vital force in economic development. This is
especially true in the Coachella Valley where nearly 75% of the 4
million annual SunBus riders take a bus to work and/or school. Public
12
transit buses have a 12-year life. Passage of Measure “A” will enable
Sunline’s fleet to be replaced as needed. Funds will also be used to
increase frequency of service, which is the single most important
factor in use of public transportation.
PALO VERDE VALLEY AREA
The Palo Verde Valley area is located in the far eastern part of Riverside County. It
is geographically separated from the Western and Coachella Valley areas. The
population within the area is relatively small, and significant growth over the next
30 years is not anticipated.
The Palo Verde Valley is served by Interstate 10 which provides adequate
connections to the more westerly portions of Riverside County and easterly to
Arizona. Increasing transit needs can be adequately met using existing revenue
sources available for that purpose. The greatest need for the Palo Verde Valley is
additional funding to adequately maintain and rehabilitate local streets and roads.
All of the funding generated by Measure “A” returned to the Palo Verde Valley is to
be used for local streets and roads. Funds shall be distributed to the City of Blythe
and the County of Riverside by formula. The formula distribution is based 75% on
proportionate population and 25% on sales tax revenues generated in each area.
MEASURE “A” REVENUE ALLOCATIONS
($ millions)
Western County Area
Highway Improvements $1,020
New Corridors $ 370
Commuter Rail / Intercity Bus/ Specialized $ 390
Transit/ Commuter Services
Regional Arterial Projects $ 300
Local Streets and Road Improvements $ 970
Bond Finance $ 270
Economic Development Projects $ 40
TOTAL $3,360
Coachella Valley
Highways and Regional Arterials $ 628
Local Streets and Roads $ 439
Specialized and Public Transit $ 188
TOTAL $1,255
Palo Verde Valley Area
Local Street and Road Improvements $ 47
TOTAL $ 47
13
Click on Link to View
2002 MEASURE “A” MAP
14
GENERAL PROVISIONS OF
THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN
1. BASIS FOR REVENUE ESTIMATES
Federal and state participation for highways, commuter rail, new corridors,
and major non-highway roadway improvements is assumed to be $40 million
per year allocated biannually by the California Transportation Commission
through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. The
Riverside County Transportation Commission currently programs 24.2% of
these funds on a discretionary basis for projects. This practice will be
continued in order to fund major improvements that will arise and have not
been anticipated by this Transportation Improvement Plan.
Measure “A” revenue estimates have not been adjusted to reflect inflation.
It is assumed that inflation revenue increases will be offset by inflation costs
to deliver the projects. “Real Growth” is assumed to parallel countywide
population growth. Based upon these factors Measure “A” revenues over
the 30-year period are assumed to be about $4.665 billion.
2. BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATES
All cost estimates for highway projects were developed by Caltrans based on
a specific scope of improvements and are based on 2001 values. Future
costs may increase due to inflation or other factors beyond the control of the
Commission. The 2001 costs estimates are to be used to determine the
proportionate distribution of funds to the categories of projects and programs
identified in the transportation program.
3. STATE HIGHWAY AND MAJOR ARTERIAL PROGRAMS
A. Eligible state highway project costs include preliminary engineering,
environmental clearances, design engineering, project management,
right of way acquisition and long-term leases and construction.
Measure “A” funds are intended to supplement and not replace
existing federal and state sources. If it is determined by the
Commission that Riverside County is not receiving its fair share of
existing funds, sales tax funds may be directed to other types of
transportation needs.
15
B.
C.
A.
B.
C.
D.
The actual scope of the highway, and major arterial projects to be
implemented is to be determined through a prioritization process,
required environmental analysis, and full consideration of reasonable
alternatives. Public participation during the environmental analysis
process is required.
The Commission shall establish a “State Highway Account” for
funding capital expenditures for state highway improvements.
4. PUBLIC TRANSIT
Eligible programs include: special discount fares for the elderly and
persons with disabilities; funding for computer assisted rideshare
programs; commuter incentive programs; “seed” programs to
encourage the creation of vanpools and buspools; bus capital
replacement and additional bus service in the Coachella Valley; and
capital and operating assistance for commuter rail expansion and
intercity bus service implementation in the Western County area.
Western County area commuter rail services are anticipated to
continue to be operated by Metrolink on existing rail lines to Los
Angeles, Orange and San Bernardino counties. Increasing the level of
services will require negotiation of the appropriate agreements with
the railroads and appropriate cost sharing between the counties
served. Extension of service to the Moreno Valley area and the City
of Perris is anticipated to be along the San Jacinto Branch Line owned
by the Commission. Measure “A” funds will be used for operating
costs and to match federal and state funds for capital improvements.
Western County area intercity bus express services to be implemented
are intended to specifically target commuters and provide a viable
connection to the Metrolink service and transportation between and to
key employment centers within the region.
The Commission shall establish a “Public Transit Account” for funding
these programs. The Commission shall determine which public
transportation or specialized transportation services operators, and
carpool/vanpool facilitating agencies, shall receive funding assistance.
The Commission may directly provide or operate these services and
programs if it is determined that they are the most appropriate agency
to do so in the Western County area. In the Coachella Valley area, the
services will be provided by the SunLine Transit Agency. Based on 30
year funding estimates, the amount of funds should be $340 million
for the Western County and $188 million for the Coachella Valley
area.
16
5. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS PROJECTS
A.
B.
C.
D.
Eligible local street and road project costs include any environmental
review and mitigation, engineering, right of way acquisition and,
capital or maintenance cost. Decisions on projects are to be made by
local jurisdictions, but subject to capital Improvement requirements.
Annual population estimates used for the distribution formula for the
Western County and Palo Verde Valley areas shall be from the State
Department of Finance. Dwelling unit estimates used for the
distribution formula in the Coachella Valley shall be from the Riverside
County Planning Department. Actual State Board of Equalization retail
sales transactions shall be used for the formula in all three areas. The
County Planning Department shall estimate the share for each of the
unincorporated areas for the three areas, from the total retail sales
transactions for the total unincorporated area.
The Commission shall assure the cities and the County are in
compliance with maintenance of effort requirements before allocating
funds for local streets and roads. Further, the Commission shall not
allocate funds to an individual city or the County for local streets and
roads within the Western County and Coachella Valley areas unless
the local agency is certified by the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments or in the Western County Area by the Commission or the
Western Riverside County Association of Governments as applicable,
to be a participant in the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
(TUMF) program necessary for the implementation of the Regional
Arterial Program in their area. The cities and the county in the
Western County Area must participate in the Multi Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) by endorsing the Permit Allocation and
executing the Implementation Agreement with the resources agencies
in order to be eligible to receive local streets and roads funds.
Funding which is not allocated to a city or the county because it is not
a participant in the TUMF program in the Coachella Valley area and the
TUMF and the MSHCP in the Western County area shall be allocated
to the Regional Arterial Program in the geographic area in which the
city or portion of the county is located.
17
18
6. FUNDING FLEXIBILITY AND BONDING TO EXPEDITE PROJECTS
The Commission may make maximum use of available funds by temporarily
shifting allocations between geographic areas and transportation purposes.
However, the proportionate shares for areas and purposes over the 30-year
period may not be changed without an amendment of the Transportation
Improvement Plan as required by law. Shifts may not be made without
previous consultation with the affected agencies and two-thirds majority
approval of the Board of Commissioners.
The Commission may also use bonds to speed implementation of some
projects. Bonding will not be used without first determining that the benefits
of an accelerated program outweigh the additional cost of interest on
borrowing funds.
7. INFORMING THE PUBLIC OF LOCAL FUNDING SUPPORT
All state highway, commuter rail, and regional arterial projects using $1
million or more of sales tax revenues shall be signed to inform the public that
local voter approved revenues are being used to support the project.
8. SEVERANCE PROVISIONS
If any provision of this Transportation Improvement Plan is for any reason
held invalid and unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that
holding shall not effect the validity or enforceability of the remaining
provisions, and the Commission declares that it would have passed each part
of the Plan irrespective of the validity of any other part.
1
Priorities for 2019 & Beyond
Aaron Hake, External Affairs Director
Priorities for 2019 & Beyond
2
How
What
Why
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
The next CARB?
3
Why
4
2019 Measure A Review
2019-2029 Western County Highway
Delivery Plan
New Projects, Programs, Initiatives
Beyond Measure A
What
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
Claremont
Upland
ona
Ontario
Chino Hills
IDCorona ur
guns
nods
■
Aliso
Viejo
Laguna
Niguel
Norco
m
Fontana
Rialto
Riverside
Lake
Matthews
�Lak-
Elsinore
RIVERSIDE CO. SAN DIEGO CO. ' Temecula i Lake
Vail
Perris
Canyon
Lake
.133
Wildomar
Murrieta
Highland
Lake
Perris
Menifee
Calimesa
end
Lake
Banning
San
Jacinto
Beaumont
5 10
Miles
6
Status Quo/Reduce Expectations
Innovative Finance (Express Lanes)
Embrace New Technology
Next Gen Express Lanes
New Measure (2020)
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
How
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
7
The Financial Climb
$3-6 billion Countywide*
Western County Highway :
$4+ billion in RCTC led-projects
Existing WC Highway sources:
~$936 million (23%) thru 2029
73% restricted use
8
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
•62% YES vote possible (ceiling) –2017 public opinion research
•Need 66.67% (gap of 4.67%)
•Public Engagement Program is in motion, ramping-up
•Public sentiment towards RCTC remains positive
On the Path to 2020
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
1/1 1/22 2/12 3/5 3/26 4/16 5/7 5/28 6/18 7/9 7/30 8/20 9/10 10/1 10/22 11/12 12/3 12/24
9
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
On the Path to 2020
10
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
To maintain feasibility of a 2020 measure, affirmative
Commission action is necessary:
2020 is Now
Timeline Action
January 2019 (Today)Assign ad hoc to recommend priorities and
whether to pursue a 2020 measure
January-July Public Engagement Program
Public Opinion/Stakeholder Research
July Ad hoc recommendation to Commission +
Commission vote
July-December*Draft Expenditure Plan development,
testing, review
December 2019*Commission GO or NO GO decision
January 2020-June 2020**Final Expenditure Plan development
July 2020**Commission vote to request BOS set election
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
11
2019 Measure
A Review
10 Year
Western
County
Highway Plan
2020 New
Measure
Innovative
Finance
Review
Priorities &
Funding
Strategy
Recommend to Commission
Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc Committee
By July 2019
Countywide Countywide
Countywide
Priorities for 2019 & Beyond
How
What
WhyToday
By July 2019
By July 2019 Ad Hoc Commission
Ad Hoc Commission
Commission
When Who
PRIORITIES FOR 2019 & BEYOND
Recommendations #1 and #3
13
1.Receive and file RCTC Staff Insight Brief
3.Assign the Future Funding Initiatives Ad Hoc
Committee to thoroughly vet and make specific
recommendations to the Commission no later
than July 2019 on the following:
a)Measure A Expenditure Plan Review and Update
b)2019-2029 Western County Highway Delivery Plan
c)A new local funding measure for the 2020 general
election
d)Innovative financing of express lanes revenues
Priorities for 2019 and Beyond
Recommendation #2:
14
2.Commit necessary 91 Express Lanes toll
revenue to fully fund the 15/91 Express
Lanes Connector design-build phase
QUESTIONS
15
Riverside County
Transportation
Commission Workshop
January 31, 2019
1
Metrolink
In Riverside
County
•Three lines serving
the county
•51 trains providing
service in the
county
•10 stations
•Riders connect to
LA, San Bernardino,
Orange and San
Diego counties
2
Riverside County Metrolink Riders
Age of riders
•63% ages 35-64
Gross annual household income
•Over 50% between $60,000 -$149,999
Riverside County residents per line
•Riverside –35% of riders; IEOC –56%; 91/PV –73%
Ethnicity by highest percentage
•RIV –35% Asian; IEOC –40% Caucasian; 91/PV –31% Caucasian
90% of trips are for work
•90% have access to a personal vehicle
Riverside County residents mainly travel to LA (8.6%) or OC (8.4%)
•1.6% of all Metrolink riders travel to Riverside County 3
Riverside County
Rider
Demographics
•Average ridership
length is 5.2 years
•Average miles
between origin &
destination:
•RIV (50.2 mi)
•20-Minute Savings
•91/PV (47.8 mi)
•9-Minute Savings
•IEOC (27.7 mi)
•16-Minute Savings
•Most riders live
near service areas
4
Metrolink’s
importance in
Riverside County
•4th largest county in
California
•Steady growth
affordable housing
and jobs
*Projected 2025 Jobs/Housing
Balance in the SCAG region from
Study on Jobs/Housing Balance.
April 2001
5
Metrolink’s
importance in
Riverside County
•Metrolink connects
to jobs, housing &
entertainment
•Provides relief for
the 91 and other
crowded freeways
6
Riverside County New Rider Prospects
Riverside county rider feedback
•54.9% rank Metrolink overall as “Good,” followed by “Excellent” at 25%
•Riders would like reduced fares, more mid-day service and more reliable train arrival times
•71% take Metrolink to avoid traffic
7
SCORE
Program
•10 year, $10 billion
plan to improve
Metrolink
•More frequent,
reliable train
service across the
region
•Supported by SB1
and TIRCP grants
KEY
at least 8 trains per hour
at least 4 trains per hour
at least 2 trains per hour
at least 1 trains per hour
Express Overlay / LOSSAN (1 per hour)
To Be Determined
Irvine
Riverside
San Bernardino
Oceanside
Santa Clarita
Antelope Valley
Perris
Pomona Valley
San Gabriel Valley
Corona
Orange
Ontario
San Clemente
San
Fernando
Valley
Laguna Niguel
LOSSAN
LOSSAN
Redlands
8
$1.5 Billion
secured
$875 Million
grant award from
the California Transit
and Intercity Rail
Capital Program
7 Projects
total in Riverside
County
9
Riverside –Downtown Station improvements
•Project will install additional center platform, a pair of tracks on the SE
side, extension of pedestrian overpass and new elevator
•Project benefits include increased capacity and better connectivity
between IEOC & 91/PV Lines
•$26.48M fully funded by TIRCP and FTA grants
10
SCORE improves
Metrolink
system for the
future
•Improves and adds
tracks for more,
reliable train
service
•Options for
dedicated freight
tracks to protect
trade corridor
•Upgrades crossings,
enhancing safety
and enabling more
Quiet Zones
11
Metrolink
leads the
nation with
PTC
•Positive Train
Control (PTC) is life-
saving rail
technology
•First passenger rail
in the nation to
operate PTC across
entire network
•One of four in the
nation to meet
federal PTC deadline
Dec. 31, 2018
12
13
Key Riverside
County Initiatives
•Special train
service to Festival
of Lights
•2016 Opening of
the Perris Valley
Extension
14
Future
Opportunities
Improve partnership with
Union Pacific and other
freights
•Address Riverside Line
reliability concerns
Leverage the affordable
housing in Riverside
county, along with job
centers in LA County
Add train service to special
events in Riverside County
•Train service to Coachella
Music Festival
15
Metrolink
powered by
clean tech
•Safer, cleaner and
more power
•Up to 85%
reduction in PM
and NOx exhaust
emissions
•64% more
horsepower
compared to Tier 0
•Seven currently in
revenue service
16
Any
Questions?
17