The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/27/1990Incorporated April 18, 1989 City of Diamond Bar, California CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING Mayor - Gary H. Werner Mayor Pro Tem - John Forbing Councilwoman - Phyllis Papen Councilman - Paul Horcher Councilman - Jay Kim LOCATION: RAMADA INN, 259 GENTLE SPRINGS LANE BALLROOM Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 1990 MEETING TIME: 3:00 p.m. Robert L. Van Nort City Manager Andrew V. Arczynski City Attorney Lynda Burgess City Clerk Cops �i:stafieports or �ithecariiten documentation relating to each itemof kitsiness re #erred to on this agenda ifc:iri Isle in.tfle Cftice of Eliedy Glrk grid irevilal3lE for pa,blic irispeeticiri.If you hive questions ►egarding any; agenda item, e4ntact the Citylerk at {�14) s6o-2489 during busraes hP. ours City of Diamond Bar uses RECYCLED paper and encourages you to do the same. Next Resolution No. 79 Next Ordinance No. 13 CALL TO ORDER: 3:00 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Werner ROLL CALL: COUNCILMEN PAPEN, KIM, HORCHER, MAYOR PRO TEM FORBING, MAYOR WERNER 1. RESOLUTION NO. 90 - XX: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE EAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY - Continued from Regular Meeting of September 18, 1990. Recommended Action: Consider the proposed costs for the State -mandated Source Reduction and Recycling Element Preparation and Implementation (ESGVIWM-JPA and City) and approve one of the following options: a. Adopt Resolution No. 90 - XX approving the agreement for the East San Gabriel Valley Integrated Waste Management Joint Powers Authority and direct the City Manager as necessary; b. Retain a consultant to prepare the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and direct staff as necessary. 2. STUDY PROJECTS: a. COMPRESSED WORK WEER b. 57 CORRIDOR TRANSIT STUDY C. BUSINESS LICENSES d. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT - Verbal presentation by Planning Director e. COUNCIL STUDY SESSIONS - Verbal presentation by City Manager f. DISASTER PREPAREDNESS - Discussion g. STRATEGIC PLANNING CLOSED SESSION - Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9 - Personnel - Government Code Section 54957.6 ADJOURNMENT NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT Notice is hereby given that the City of Diamond Bar City Council, at their meeting of September 18, 1990, adjourned said meeting to September 27, 1990 at the hour of 3:00 p.m. at the Ramada Inn, 259 Gentle Springs Lane, Diamond Bar, California. Said adjournment was passed by the following votes: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Papen, Kim, Horcher and Mayor Werner NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Forbing (SEAL) TommyA. Nice, Deputy City Clerk City of Diamond Bar Dated: September 19, 1990 AGENDA NO. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AGENDA REPORT DATE: 09/13/90 MEETING DATE: 09/18/90 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council VIA: City Manager FROM: Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager via Troy L. Butzlaff, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Request for Proposal --Source Reduction and Recycling Element Preparation and Implementation ................. BACKGROUND: On September 4, 1990, the City Council directed staff to submit a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the preparation of a Source Reduction and Recycling Element as required by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). Attached hereto is a copy of those consultants to which the City has submitted proposals. The proposed East San Gabriel Valley Integrated Waste Management Joint Powers Authority (ESGVIWM-JPA) has submitted RFP's to an equal number of consultants. Both agencies' proposals are due by 3:00 P.M., September 17, 1990. Upon receipt of these proposals, staff will prepare a report for Council's information and review. The report, which will be made available on September 18th, will include a list of proposers, as well as, the costs associated with the preparation and implementation of a Source Reduction and Recycling Element for both the proposed ESGVIWM-JPA and the City of Diamond Bar RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council review and comment upon Proposals for the state -mandated Source Reduction and Recycling Element Preparation and Implementation (ESGVIWM-JPA and City). It is further recommended that the Council agenda the consideration of the SRRE proposal matter, for the September 27, 1990 regular adjourned meeting (Strategic Planning Workshop). (Narrative continued on next page if necessary) FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Requested $ Budgeted Amount $ In Account Number: Deficit: $ Revenue Source: REVIEWED BY• ------------------ ----------------- Robert -------- ----Robert L. Van Nort Andrew V. Arczynski Terrence L. Belan r City Manager City Attorney Assistant City Manager CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Cnnfnmhor i cian ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS ? Allwest Environmental 303 Second Street, Suite 680 San Francisco, CA 94107-1317 Applied Geosciences 17321 Irvine Blvd _ Tustin, CA 92680 Applied Modeling, Inc. 23801 Calabasas Rd. Calabasas, CA 91302 Aqual Resources Inc. Mr. Robert Battey 2030 Addison St., #500 Berkeley, CA 94704 Black and Veatch 8400 Ward Parkway Kansas City, MO 64114 Bright and Associates 1000 Ortega Way, Suite A Placentia, CA 92670 Bryan A. Stirrat and Associates 1199 Fairway Dr., Suite 100 Walnut, CA 91789 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Contnmber 1990 ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Brown & Caldwell Consulting Engineering 150 South Arroyo Parkway P.O. Box 7103 Pasadena, CA 91109-7203 Brown, Vence & Associates (BVA) Mr, Michael Brown 120 Montgomery St., Suite 680 San Francisco, CA 94104 Cal Recovery Systems, Inc. Ms. Cheryl Henry (415) 232-0850 9/12/90 160 Broadway, Suite 200 Richmond, CA 94804 Camp Dresser and McKee 430 N Vineyard Suite 310 Mr. Richard Corneille (714) 984-9328 9/11/90 18881 Von Karmen, Suite 650 Ontario, CA 91764 Irvine, CA 92715 Charles Abbott Associates Mr. George Wentz (213) 377-3979 9/10/90 6866 Verde Ridge Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90274 CH2MHILL 2510 Red Hill, Suite A Santa Ana, CA 92705 Clements Engineers, Inc. Mr. Chip Clements (213) 469-5425 9/07/90 6290 Sunset Blvd., Suite 1223 Mr. Joseph Reisdorf Los Angeles, CA 90028 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING S2nntnmFhnr 100n ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS CMRR 1020 Wellington Rd, San Dimas, CA 91773 Converse Environmental Consultants 67 West Bellevue Dr. Pasadena, CA 91105 Dames and Moore Mr. Terry Clapham 665 Chesapeake Dr., Suite 360 San Diego, CA 92123 David H. Lara 751 South Amalia Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90022 Deloitte and Touche Mr. Gary Brayton 275 Battery St., Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94111 Earth Technology Corporation 1390 Alto Parkway, Suite 1200 Irvine, CA 92718 EBA Mr. Duane Butler P.O. Box 4600 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Cnntamhar i 00n ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Ecoserve Environmental Service 690-A Garcia Ave. Pittsburg, CA 94565 Ecosource International 921 Westwood Blvd., Suite 224 Los Angeles, CA 90024 EIP Associates 150 Spear St., Suite 1500 San Francisco, CA 94105 EMCON Associates 3300 N. Burbank Blvd. Burbank, CA 91504 EMSI 4765 Calle Quetzal Camarillo, CA 93010 Environmental Resource Corp. 2255 South Broadway, Suite 1 Santa Maria, CA 93454 ENSR Consulting and Engineering Mr. Wayne S. Akiyama (415) 748-6799 9/10/90 1320 Harbor Bay Parkway Alameda, CA 94501 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Qontnmhnr i acro ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Environmental Solution, Inc. Mr. Dan Evans (714) 727-7399 09107/90 21 Technology Dr. Irvine, CA 92718 Fichnter USA, Inc. Overlook 1 2849 Pages Ferry Road, NW, Suite 360 Atlanta, GA 30339 Freeman and Associates 3901 Macarthur Blvd., Suite 200 Newport Beach, CA 92660 GBB 2735 Hartland Road Falls Church, VA 22043 Geo -Resources Consultant Ms. Louise Vierra 851 Harrison St. San Francisco, CA 94107 Golder Associates 4201 Long Beach Blvd., Suite 400 Long Beach, CA 90807 Harding Lawson Associates (HLA) 15621 Red Hill Ave., Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92680 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Cnnfnmhnr 1 00ll ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Hawkins/Mark-Tell Mr. Shideler Harpe P.O. BOx 619008 Roseville, CA 95661-9008 HDR Engineering, Inc. Mr. Fred Rice 2415 Campus Drive, Suite 201 Irvine, CA 92715-1527 Hilton, Farnkopf and Hobson Mr. Robert Hilton 39350 Civil Center Dr., Suite 380 Fremont, CA 94538 John Carollo Engineers Ms. Susan McDonald 450 N. Wignet Lane Walnut Creek, CA 94598 John Hunter and Associates 877 South Rose Place Anaheim, CA 90701 Kleinfelder 17100 Pioneer Blvd, Suite 350 1370 Valley Vista, Suite 150 Michael Perry (714)396-1324 09/06/90 Artesia, CA 90701 Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Laidlaw Gas Recovery Systems 39889 Balentine Dr., Suite 275 Newark, CA 94560 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Cnntamhor i Qan ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Law Environmental 3420 N. San Fernando Rd., Suite 200 Burbank, CA 91504 Leroy Crandall and Associates 900 Grand Central Ave. Glendale, CA 91201 Lockman and Associates Ms. Michelle Leonard (213) 724-9999 9/13/90 249 East Pomona Blvd. Monterey Park, CA 91754-7291 The Mark Group Mr. I. Neal Grindheim 1241 E. Dyer Rd., Suite 130 Santa Ana, CA 92705-5605 MHB Technical Associates 1723 Hamilton Ave., Suite K San Jose, CA 95125 MUJU Environmental Technology 7255 Saroni Dr. Oakland, CA 94611 Nolte and Associates Mr. Robert Heinen 2950 Buskirk Ave. Walnut Creek, CA 94596 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING (Zantamhar 1991) ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS The PRA Group Mr. Rob de Winter 2495 Industrial Parkway West Hayward, CA 94545 Recovery Sciences, Inc. P.O. Box 2209 Del Mar, CA 92014 Resource Integration Systems, Inc. 425 N.W., 19th Ave. Portland, OR 97209 Resource Management Associates Ms. Janie Trombly (707) 257-7970 9/10/90 P.O. Box 3568 Napa, CA 94558 Resource Management International Mr. Mark White (916) 852-1073 9/7/90 P.O. Box 15516 Sacramento, CA 95852-1516 Resource Recycling Systems 310 Miller Ave Ann Arbor, MI 48103 RMT, Inc. Mr. Zorn Batchko (213) 450-5787 9/10/90 3250 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 370 Santa Monica, CA 90405 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING Contomhor 1 QQn ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Robertson and Cohoon 4300 Via Marisol, Suite 719 Los Angeles, CA 90042-5165 R.W. Beck Mr. Richard Gertman 1851 Heritage Lane, Suite 223 Sacramento, CA 95815 Roy F. Weston 1010 Galaxy Way, Suite 107 Concord, CA 94520 S.A. Associates Mr. Shahnawaz Ahmed (818) 445-1461 9/10/90 1130 West Huntington Dr., Suite 12 Arcadia, CA 91007 SAIC 10210 Campus Point Drive San Diego, CA 92121 Schaffer Dixon Associates 2500 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1111 Los Angeles, CA 90057 SCS Engineers Mr. Steve Hamilton 6761 Sierra Court, Suite D Dublin, CA 94568 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING GPntembew 199(1 ADDRESS FAX DATE CONSULTANT (If Different) CONTACT PERSON NUMBER CONTACTED COMMENTS Sound Resource Management Group 5025 California Ave, SW Suite 105 Seattle, WA 98136 Staal, Garner and Dunn 121 N. Fir, Suite F Ventura, CA 95826 Ultrasystems Mr. Peter Lewandoski (714) 833-3859 9/12190 16795 Von Karman Ave. Irvine, CA 92714 3E Engineering Mr. Tim Raibley 39350 Civil Center Dr., Suite 200 Fremont, CA 94538 3R Recycling Mr. Alan Milner P.O. Box 11217 Santa Rosa, CA 95406 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: - DATE: BACKGROUND: INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager via Terrence L. Belanger, Assistant City Manager Troy L. Butzlaff, Administrative Analyst Alternative Work Schedules August 6, 1990 The concept of an alternative work week originated in much the same way as the 40 hour work week -- in response to workers' demands for better quality of work life. Today, however, issues such as child care, traffic congestion, and air pollution have placed a whole new emphasis on alternative work schedules. To address these issues, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) have adopted a plan (South Coast Air Quality Management Plan) that sets forth a vast array of measures to bring the region into compliance with national air quality standards by. the year 2007. The plan calls for a significant reduction in vehicle emissions by implementing various alternatives to the typical 40 hour, 5 day work week. Local governments will be expected by July 1, 1990, to execute specific programs for their employees which will reduce work trips by 10 percent. The plan also requires that each local government submit programs to reduce their employee person trips by 12 percent by July 1, 1994, by 20 percent by 2000, and 30 percent by 2007. To reach these goals, local governments must adopt or amend trip ordinances by July 1, 1991, that call for alternative work schedules as a condition of business license renewal or as a permit condition for. new development. Although there is no known mandatory regulation of a]ternative work schedules, failure to provide accurate reporting. and compliance information may result in penalties as new regulations become available. ALTERNATIVE WORK SCHEDULES: Recent studies have shown that the eight-hour day is no longer suited to the needs of the American work force. Demographic and economic changes have altered our daily work schedule. Among these changes are (Jerome M. Rosow and Robert Zager, "Punch Out the Time Clocks," Harvard Business Review, March -April 1983): • the increase in multiple -worker and dual -career families; • the high incidence of single -parent families; a the desire of older workers to reduce their hours while continuing to work; PAGE: TWO Memorandum to'Robert L. Van Nort Alternative Work Week • new employee expectations for greater participation, dignity, and self-fulfillment at work; • the heightened preference for leisure and further education; • the difficulty and high cost of commuting; and • increasing demands for higher productivity and fuller capital utilization. In 1980 U.S. Department of Transportation conducted a study on alternative work schedules. The study concluded that organizations which implemented flexible work schedules have (Marian Ott, et al. "The Behavioral Impacts of Flexible Working Hours." U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Snecial Programs Administration Report No. UMTA-MA-06-0049-79„-12 February, 1980.): • increased employee morale; • reduced employee absenteeism in more than 75 percent of the organization; • reduced tardiness 84 percent of the time; • reduced turnover over 50 percent of the. time; • reduced commuting trips over 75 percent of the time; and • increased productivity in almost 50 percent of the companies surveyed. Additionally,. alternativework schedules also have a direct positive impact on air.qudlity. Rescheduling improves traffic flow, increases vehicle speeds, reduces idling, and lessens the number of commuter trips on certain days of the week. COMPRESSED WORK WEER: The compressed work week concept was first used in the 1940s by oil companies which had very high start-up costs each day. Since then, the pioneers of the compressed work week have been small, non- union, non -urban manufacturing, service, and retail .companies. More recently this phenomenon has spread to' more urban and municipal agencies. PAGE: THREE Memorandum to -Robert L. Van Nort Alternative Work Week In local -level public administration jobs, 12.4 percent of full- time wage and salary workers were on compressed work schedules in 1977, while less than 1 percent of the employees in federal and state administrative positions worked compressed weeks (S.D. Nollen and V.H. Martin, Alternative Work Schedules: Part 2 and 3, New York: AMACOM, 1978). Currently, several large Los Angeles area organizations are experimenting with a compressed work week, including the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and Litton Industries. A compressed work week schedule permits employees to complete their required number of working hours in fewer days per week or pay period. The shortened work week and shifted hours help employees avoid rush hour traffic. Employees also have an additional day for leisure activities, personal business and family time. A compressed work week system consists of the following types: o Consecutive 4 -Day Work Week: Employees work 4 days per week, 10 hours per day. In the consecutive 4 -day plan, employees are divided into two groups. One group works Monday thru Thursday; the other works Tuesday thru Friday. • Nonconsecutive 4 -Day Work Week: The nonconsecutive 4 -day work week allows for days off other than Monday or Friday. Employees are divided into five groups and each group is assigned a different day off. • 9/80 Work Week: The 9/80 compressed work week is a biweekly program. Full- time employees work 9"days each biweekly pay period; 5 days one week and four days the other week. During this period employees report for eight 9 -hour days and one 8 -hour day. Employees may select either Friday or Monday as their day off. FLEX -TIME: Flexible work hour programs (flex -time) are a viable option to the compressed work week. First implemented by Messerschmitt, a German aerospace company in 1967, flex -time allows employees the option of varying their starting and ending times each workday. This allows employees to have some control over their professional schedules by being given the independence and encouragement to create their own hours. PAGE: FOUR Memorandum to Robert L. Van Nort Alternative Work Week In 1980, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that nearly 12 percent of all non-farm workers were on flexible work schedules (Jerome M. Rosow and Robert Zager, "Punch Out the Time Clocks," Harvard Business Review, March -April 1983). In May 1987, Management World reported that flex -time programs were increasing at a rate of 1.5 percent per year. Under flex -time, employees choose their arrival and departure times at and from work within limits set by management. Usually the organization establishes core hours --a midday period when all employees must be present --with . a flexible band at both ends of the working day. Flex -time is highly regarded as an employee benefit and morale builder. It has been successfully implemented at several large Los Angeles based organizations which include: TRW, Genisco Peripheral Systems, and Transamerican Life Corporation. POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES: Alternative work week schedules require management and employees to adjust certain attitudes and practices. Scheduling, supervision, and coverage are common concerns (See Attachment for a Summary of Potential Benefits and Obstacles). Although not all problems related to a particular alternative work week schedule can be solved simultaneously, occasional adjustments to management and staff practices and attitudes can overcome most obstacles. For example, if all employees must attend midweek staff meetings, then possible rotation of days off on a simple four-day work week is reduced and therefore some employees may not be able to participate in a four-day schedule. In such a situation, a 9/80 schedule may be a good substitution, expanding possibilities for rotating days off.while maintaining internal communications. Careful matching of organizational and employee needs and priorities best address the concerns which are vital if a alternative work week program is to succeed. Should you have any questions,. please let me know. TB: Attachment Alternative Work Week Program Summary FLEXIBLE:WORKING HOURS ......................... . .COMPRESSED WORK WEEK Potential Potential Potential Potential Benefits Obstacles Benefits Obstacles Reduced Employee Absenteeism Monitoring Employee Activities Reduced Employee Absenteeism Monitoring Employee Activities Misrepresentation of Work Hours Reduced Tardiness Lack of Fairness and Uniformity Better Office Morale Concern with Increased Employee Fatigue and/or Difficulty with Child Care i Better Office Morale Internal Communication and Recruiting Advantage Lack of Fairness and Uniformity Meeting Coordination Problems Recruiting Advantage Concern with Punctuality and Productivity Increase = Internal Communication and other such Standards of Meeting Coordination Problems Employee Conduct Longer Hours of Office Coverage Concern with Scheduling Last Fewer Interruptions During Early Concern with Punctuality and Due to Overall Increased Hours Minute Meeting Morning and Late Afternoon other such Standards of Employee Conduct Decreased Fuel Consumption Concern with Office Operation Longer Hours of Office Coverage Concern with Scheduling Last Settling into a Routine Schedule Due to Overall Increased Hours Minute Meeting More Commuting Choices Concern with Increased Overhead Reduced Staff Turnover Concern with Increased Overhead Costs for Extended Hours of Operation Costs for Extended Hours of Operation TB: 08/06/90 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR COMPRESSED WORK WEEK SURVEY AUGUST 22, 1990 CITY NAME TYPE OF PROGRAM SCHEDULE PARTICIPANTS COMMENTS Azusa 4/10 7:AM-5:30PM 300 Effective 816190. Monday -Thursday Brea 9/80 No Change N/A implementing Program. Buena Park 9/80 7:30AM-6:PM 380 Implementing Program. Monday -Friday Claremont Flextime No Change 180 Employees allowed to adjust schedule. City Manager is opposed to Compressed Plan. Corona (Pilot Program) 4/10 9/80 7:AM-6PM Monday -Friday 6 _ 9/80 is difficult to schedule.. Employees will be able to select program. Duarte 4/10 7:30AM-6:PM 43 No.Comments. Monday -Thursday EI Monte 9/80 7:30AM-5:30PM 300 Coverage difficulities. Monday -Friday County of Los Angeles 4/10 7:30AM-5:30PM 1550 Pilot Program. Department of Public WorksMonday -Thursday Irvine 4/10 9/80 8:AM-5:PM Monday -Friday 350 Nonmanagement employees are allowed to select program (subject to approval). Monrovia 9/80 7:AM-6:PM 103 Hard on staff. Coverage difficulities. Monday -Friday West Covina 9/80* 8:AM-5:PM 450 Implementing program. 4/10** Monday -Friday *City Hall Employees. "Maintenance Maintenance Employ tb:08/22/90Compressed S. INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager SUBJECT: Brea/Diamond Bar Liaison Meeting Information DATE: September 24, 1990 Council Members Papen and Kim met with Council representatives from Brea on September 20, 1990. The attached agenda outlines the topics to be discussed. At the conclusion of the meeting, Brea had agreed (Councilwoman Clarice) to seek sub regional funding to assist Diamond Bar in the Foothill Transit District application on our behalf for the Diamond Bar/Fullerton via Brea Express bus route. Diamond Bar had agreed to recommend to the full City Council, participation in the 57 Corridor Transit Opportunities Study (under separate cover). Robert L. Van Nort City Manager RLVN:ch A 0 � AGENDAL7 NORTH ORANGE COUNTY MONORAIL / TRANSIT STUDY' BREA CIVIC CULTURAL CENTER SEPTEMBER 20, 1990 3:00 P.M. r� I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS - Frank Benest C off-+ T-6 �'•' r — S'%.�i L, f� G� rc ti u 77C II. CURRENT PROPOSALS FOR TRANSIT IN ORANGE COUNTY - Lew Garber III. TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY UPDATE - Lew Garber IV. REGIONAL NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR RTE. 57 CORRIDOR - Clarice Blamer V. SPECIFIC NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN NORTH ORANGE COUNTY CITIES AND DIAMOND BAR - Wayne Wedin VI. JOINT STUDY - Warren Siecke A. SCOPE B. COST C. BOUNDARY D. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS WCS/ds d3.50 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Robert L. Van Nort, City Manager SUBJECT: 57 Corridor Transit Systems Opportunities and Option Study DATE: September 21, 1990 Background: The electorate passed Prop(s) 108 and 116 to fund new or expanded rail (transit systems). There is currently no transit (rail) system proposed or that has been studied that links North Orange County with the San Gabriel Valley. Diamond Bar is at the crossroads, due its proximately of 57/60 merging freeways and the 10 less than two miles from the city limits. The proposed study will be the first step in a cooperative effort to bring to our area an alternative to the vehicle and bus systems. The cities of Brea, La Habra, Fullerton, Placentia and Yorba Lilnda are located in North Orange County. The City of Diamond Bar is located in eastern Los Angeles County north of Orange County. This study is proposed to focus on identifying opportunities and options for providing alternative travel modes for residents, employees, employers and visitors making trips to, within or between these six cities. The study will evaluate options within each of the six cities as well as for the total area covered by the six cities. Funding: The cost of the study is estimated at $90,000 with the City paying a pro -rata share. Recommendation: Concur with the Brea City Liaison Committee (Councilman Kim and Councilwoman Papen) and authorize participation in the 57 Corridor Study at a cost NOT to exceed $30,000 utilizing Prop A funds. rlvn:mrs TRANSIT SYSTEMS OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS STUDY September 15, 1990 PRELIMINARY WORK PROGRAM I. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY R f�The cities of Brea, La Habra, Fullerton, Placentia and Yorba Linda re located in North Orange County. The City of Diamond Bar is located in eastern Los Angeles County, north of Orange County. This study is proposed to focus on identifying opportunities and options for providing alternative travel modes for residents, employees, employers and visitors making trips to, within or between these six cities.! The study will evaluate options within each of the six cities as- -Well as for the total area covered by the six cities. There are several existing and planned transit systems in Orange County proposed by a number of agencies and which include bus, commuter rail, freeway based transitways and commuter lanes, fixed guideway, local circulators and a super speed train. The study will evaluate the potential for extensions of these systems to the six cities and the potential for the services in the six cities to feed into these regional and subregional transportation. systems. The objectives of this proposed study are: o To identify opportunities to interface with existing and planned transit systems and services in North Orange County and the -Diamond Bar area, in the vicinity of the six cities study area. +6 identify options for transit system improvements and services in the area covered by the six cities or in the individual cities in the study area. o To identify ways that jobs/housing balance rzlated commute trip these cities. II. PRELIMINARY WORK PROGRAM the t-ransit systems can improve the in the study area and to reduce work times for residents and workers in This study will be based on existing and planned land uses in the six city study area, existing transit systems, current Orange County and east Los Angeles County transit proposals, and projected travel characteristics within the study area. Based on this information, potential opportunities to provide a direct interface with transit systems for all levels of tripmaking will be identified. Information on. existing and planned land uses in the cities in the general vicinity of the six cities will also be collected and evaluated for possible intercity opportunities with cities other than the six cities in this current study effort. OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS STUDY September 15, 1990 Page 2 The scope of work for the study is described in detail below. A. Collect and Review Existing Land Use, Traffic and Demographic Data The purpose of this task will be to collect and review existing data on land use, traffic and demographics for each of the six cities and for the areas surrounding the six cities. This data will be supplemented with material from other agencies such as Caltrans, the Orange. County Transit District and the Orange County Transportation Commission, and their counterparts in Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, as appropriate. The types of information that will be collected include: 1. Current and planned land uses, including information on major activity centers, major employers, medium and high density residential areas and special generators. 2. Characteristics of the existing and planned circulation systems, including studies and data on existing traffic volumes, trip distribution, levels of service on area roadways and areas experiencing significant periods of congestion. 3. Community, city or areawide issues related to transportation services and facilities, including potential demand for these services and/or facilities, location/siting issues and environmental issues. B. Identify Existing and Planned Transit Systems This task will focus on collecting information on existing and planned transit systems and services in the six city area, and in the immediate vicinity of the six city area, that could potentially interface with services within the six city area. Information to be collected will include existing and planned service levels and facilities and service and operating characteristics for a wide range of transit services including: 1. Existing and planned transit services, including public and private bus and local trolley services. OCTD, the Southern California Rapid Transit District and the cities of Diamond Bar and Placentia, for example, would be interviewed to collect information on their services in the six city area. OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS STUDY September 15, 1990 Page 3 2. Existing and planned regional rail commuter services, including Amtrak services in the LOSSAN Corridor and other potential rail services and possible corridors for commuter rail service, such as the SPPR Corridor to Los Angeles. 3. Possible extensions of North Orange County/Los Angeles County transit proposals to the Central Orange County Corridor Fixed Guideway proposal. In addition, this conceptual system will be compared to previously considered fixed guideway alignments. in Orange County, notably the rail system evaluated in the early 1980s, focussing on the earlier alignment options in the north part of the County. 4. Freeway based transitways and commuter lanes on existing freeways serving the six city area and the surrounding cities, including the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5), Orange Freeway (SR 57) and the Riverside Freeway (SR 91) . In addition, -the conceptual studies being conducted for a new connection to Riverside County via Tonner, Carbon or Soquel Canyons or a similar alignment, will be reviewed for potential transitway, commuter lane or reversible high occupancy vehicle facilities. 5. Transit collector systems serving existing and planned rail, transitway, commuter lane and fixed guideway systems. 6. Local collector/distributor systems including people movers (Circulators). 7. Transit facilities.including park -and -rides and transit centers. 8. Planned high speed rail system between Las Vegas and Anaheim. 9. A review will be made of ordinance and regulatory requirements that may affect transit utilization, specifically land use and parking ordinances and policies and the South Coast Air Quality Management District Regulation XV related to employer based programs for the reduction of work trips. C. Develop Transit System Options and Opportunities Based on the information developed in Tasks A and B, possible transit systems opportunities in each of the six cities and OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS STUDY September 15, 1990 Page 4 for the total study area will be developed, focusing on those trips most effectively served by alternative travel modes and on the existing and plan-ned land uses in the study area. Three key determinants will be used in this analysis. The first will be the evaluation of the area travel patterns and key travel corridors in the six cities and -the overall area. The second will be identification of trip attractors and producers in the cities and the total area. Finally, possible alternative modes and transit systems will be identified. The information from this evaluation will be used to develop transit system options for the six cities and the overall area. The specific tasks that will be performed include: 1. Identification of system interface opportunities, both to systems outside the six city area and between the cities themselves. 2. Identification of satellite parking opportunities, supporting the potential higher occupancy transit systems. Parking will be needed at locations where a mode change is planned to occur and can be provided in publicly owned park-and-ride lots, leased park-and-ride lots and in privately owned parking areas shared among several uses. Areas of opportunities for satellite parking, particularly for longer commute trips destined outside the study area, may be outside the study area proper, and adjacent to freeway ramps or at existing or planned park -and -rides proposed by other agencies. 3. Opportunities for transit systems and service will be identified, based on the traffic and land use information and based on the potential needs identified in the study area. Opportunities may include connections (either rail or bus) to the Central Orange County Corridor Fixed Guideway, services on the freeway based HOV facilities (buses, carpools and vanpools), and connections within and between the cities in the study area via bus or a local collector such as a people mover. 4. Based on the opportunities identified in Task C.3, specific options for transit systems and service considerations for the six cities and areawide will be developed. D. Financial Considerations The purpose of this task is to identify comparative planning level costs for the transit systems elements identified in Task C and to identify possible funding sources. OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS STUDY September 15, 1990. Page 5 1. Preliminary conceptual planning level cost estimates for the transit systems and service options identified above will be developed based on existing experience in the industry and sound engineering and planning judgments. These costs will represent an order of magnitude of the possible costs and will be related to specific technologies where possible to provide the best costs possible for this level of study. 2. Potential sources of funding for the transit systems and service options will be identified including public sources and private sector sources. In particular, the role of the private sector in providing funds for capital and/or operating costs, and/or construction of facilities and stations will be explored, focussed on the types of land development proposed in the six cities. E. Study Report The purpose of this task will be to prepare draft and final reports summarizing the results of the study tasks and detailing the proposed transit system and service improvements. 1. Prepare Draft Study Report including the following: o Summary of Tasks I to IV. o Description of the transit options identified for each of the six cities and the total study area. o Future study elements for each of the six cities and the total study area. o An evaluation of the following transportation alternatives for the six city area: - Rail linkages to Los Angeles - Transit link to the Central Orange County Fixed Guideway System and Amtrak services in Orange County - Local transportation systems - Intercounty links via SR 57, Tonner Canyon, Carbon Canyon and Soquel Canyon. 2. Prepare the Final Study Report incorporating the comments OPPORTUNITIES AND OPTIONS STUDY September 15, 1990 Page 6 from the six cities on the Draft Report. AGENDA ITEM N0. 2d ORAL PRESENTATION TO BE GIVEN BY PLANNING DIRECTOR AGENDA ITEM N0. 2e ORAL PRESENTATION TO BE GIVEN BY CITY MANAGER AGENDA ITEM N0. 2f NO DOCUMENTATION AVAILABLE AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 q REPORT TO BE BAND DELIVERED PRIOR TO MEETING