DOCSLIB.ORG

Superior Court of California County of San Bernardino New San

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Superior Court of California County of San Bernardino New San Superior Court of California County of San Bernardino New San Bernardino Court PROJECT FEASIBILITY REPORT SEPTEMBER 8, 2006 Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino New San Bernardino Court Project Feasibility Report Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................4 A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................4 B. STATEMENT OF PROJECT NEED ........................................................................................................................4 C. OPTIONS ANALYSIS..........................................................................................................................................5 D. RECOMMENDED OPTION ..................................................................................................................................6 II. STATEMENT OF PROJECT NEED ..............................................................................................................8 A. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................8 B. TRANSFER STATUS...........................................................................................................................................8 C. PROJECT RANKING...........................................................................................................................................8 D. CURRENT COURT OPERATIONS ........................................................................................................................9 E. DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS................................................................................................................................9 F. JUDICIAL PROJECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................10 G. STAFFING PLAN..............................................................................................................................................11 H. EXISTING FACILITY........................................................................................................................................11 III. OPTIONS ANALYSIS................................................................................................................................20 A. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................20 B. FACILITY OPTIONS .........................................................................................................................................20 C. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................................................22 D. FINANCIAL ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................................................24 E. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................................25 1. Finance Alternative 1: Partial Revenue Bond Financing.........................................................................26 2. Finance Alternative 2: Pay-As-You-Go....................................................................................................27 3. Finance Alternative 3: Private Financing/Lease Purchase......................................................................27 F. RECOMMENDED FINANCIAL ALTERNATIVE....................................................................................................28 IV. RECOMMENDED PROJECT ..................................................................................................................30 A. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................30 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................................30 C. SPACE PROGRAM ...........................................................................................................................................30 D. COURTHOUSE ORGANIZATION .......................................................................................................................32 E. SITE SELECTION AND REQUIREMENTS............................................................................................................34 1. Parking Requirements ..............................................................................................................................34 2. Site Program.............................................................................................................................................35 F. DESIGN CRITERIA ..........................................................................................................................................36 G. SUSTAINABLE DESIGN CRITERIA....................................................................................................................36 H. PROVISION FOR CORRECTION OF SEISMIC DEFICIENCIES AND DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY ............................37 I. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST ............................................................................................................................38 J. PROJECT SCHEDULE .......................................................................................................................................38 K. IMPACT ON COURT’S 2007–2008 SUPPORT BUDGET......................................................................................40 APPENDIX A...............................................................................................................................................................1 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE 2003 MASTER PLAN ........................................................................................1 APPENDIX B...............................................................................................................................................................1 B. OPTIONS ANALYSIS..........................................................................................................................................1 APPENDIX C...............................................................................................................................................................1 C. DETAILED SPACE PROGRAM ............................................................................................................................1 APPENDIX D...............................................................................................................................................................1 2 Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino New San Bernardino Court Project Feasibility Report D. RESOLUTIONS ..................................................................................................................................................1 3 Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino New San Bernardino Court Executive Summary I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Introduction This Project Feasibility Report for the proposed 36-courtroom New San Bernardino Court for the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino has been prepared as a supplement to the Judicial Council’s Five-Year Infrastructure Plan Fiscal Year 2007-2008. This report documents the need for the proposed new 36-courtroom facility, describes alternative ways to meet the underlying need, and outlines the recommended project. B. Statement of Project Need The Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino serves the residents of the City of San Bernardino and the surrounding communities of Redlands, Fontana, and Twin Peaks in nine separate facilities. These facilities poorly serve the growing needs of the superior court and the lack of consolidated facilities exacerbates the functional problems of the main court facilities. The nexus of court operations is located in the downtown court complex consisting of two facilities. The original courthouse is the historic San Bernardino Courthouse, which was constructed in 1926 as a county office and court facility and is a national historic registered property. The courthouse originally had two courtrooms and a boardroom; the historic courthouse now houses 15 marginal courtrooms. This facility was expanded in 1958 with the construction of the adjoining San Bernardino Courthouse Annex to the rear of the historic San Bernardino Courthouse. This facility, referred to as the “T-Wing”, was constructed as an office building for county agencies with no courtrooms. The “T-Wing” now houses 11 makeshift courtrooms. These facilities have significant security problems, are very overcrowded, have many physical problems, and prevent the court from operating a safe and efficient court facility. The recommended project—construction of a new 36-courtroom facility on a site near the historic San Bernardino Courthouse, will complement two projects funded by the county; the planned renovation of the historic San Bernardino Courthouse for nine civil courtrooms and the renovation of 303 Third Street for long-term use for two Assembly
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 5. Environmental Analysis
    5. Environmental Analysis 5. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 5.1 AESTHETICS Characterizing aesthetics and aesthetic impacts is highly subjective by nature. Aesthetics, as evaluated in this Section of the EIR, involves establishing the existing visual character including visual resources and scenic vistas unique to the City of San Bernardino, the SOI and the Arrowhead Springs area. Visual resources are determined by identifying existing landforms, natural features or urban characteristics; views of sensitive receptors (i.e., residential, schools, recreation areas, etc.); and existing light and glare (i.e., nighttime illumination). The aesthetic impacts of the proposed project are evaluated by determining the aesthetic compatibility of the proposed project with the surrounding area taking into consideration the visual qualities as well as the sensitivity of receptors to these features. 5.1.1 Environmental Setting 5.1.1.1 San Bernardino General Plan Update Visual Character The City of San Bernardino lies on a broad, gently sloping lowland that flanks the southwest margin of the San Bernardino Mountains. The lowland is underlain by alluvial sediments eroded from bedrock in the adjacent mountains and washed by rivers and creeks into the valley region where they have accumulated in layers of gravel, sand, silt and clay. This low lying valley is framed by the San Bernardino Mountains on the northeast and east, Blue Mountains and Box Springs Mountain abutting the Cities of Loma Linda and Redlands to the south, and the San Gabriel Mountains and the Jurupa Hills to the northwest and southwest, respectively. The Santa Ana River has a number of tributaries in the vicinity of San Bernardino that contribute flow to the main stem of the river including Lytle Creek, Cajon Creek, Warm Creek, East Creek and West Twin Creek (see Figure 3.1-2).
    [Show full text]
  • System-Wide Transit Corridor Plan for the San Bernardino Valley
    System-Wide Transit Corridor Plan for the San Bernardino Valley sbX E Street Corridor BRT Project Prepared for: Omnitrans Prepared by: Parsons Patti Post & Associates October 2010 This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 5 1.1 SAFETEA-LU ............................................................................................................ 6 1.2 2004 System-Wide Plan ............................................................................................ 7 1.3 Development of the E Street Corridor ....................................................................... 7 1.4 California SB 375 .................................................................................................... 17 1.5 San Bernardino County Long Range Transit Plan ................................................... 18 1.6 Regionally Approved Travel Demand Model ........................................................... 21 1.7 Roles and Responsibilities ...................................................................................... 21 1.8 Opportunities to Shape Development/Redevelopment ............................................ 21 1.8.1 Economic Development ............................................................................. 21 1.8.2 Transit-Oriented Developments ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ARRIVE CORRIDOR FINAL REPORT TOC:1 Table of Contents
    A DVANCED R EGIONAL R AIL I NTEG R ATED V I S ION E A S T THE A rr IVE CO rr IDO R FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 Prepared by: Gruen Associates HR&A Advisors, Inc. HDR Funding: The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant funds from the United States Department of Transportation and the State of California Department of Conservation. In addition, the work upon which this publication is based was funded in part through a grant awarded by the Strategic Growth Council under Grant Number 3010-541, and the San Bernardino Associated Governments. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The statements and conclusions of this report are those of the Consultant and not necessarily those of the Strate- gic Growth Council or of the State of California Department of Conservation, or its employees. In addition, the contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of SCAG or the San Bernardino Association of Governments (SANBAG). This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. The Strategic Growth Council, the California Department of Conservation, SANBAG and SCAG make no warranties, express or implied, and assume no liability for the information contained in the succeeding text. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................... 1:1 1.1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND................................................................................................. 1:2 1.1.1 Metrolink Commuter Rail – San Bernardino Metrolink Line.............................................. 1:2 1.1.2 Transit/Land Use Integration and Benefits......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Support Material Agenda Item No
    Support Material Agenda Item No. 17 Board of Directors Meeting November 4, 2020 10:00 AM MEETING ACCESSIBLE VIA ZOOM AT: https://gosbcta.zoom.us/j/99354182777 Teleconference Dial: 1-669-900-6833 Meeting ID: 993 5418 2777 CONSENT CALENDAR Transit 17. Task 3: Innovative Transit Review of the Metro-Valley Receive and file Task 3: Innovative Transit Review of the Metro-Valley Report. Task 3: Innovative Transit Review Report is being provided as a separate attachment. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND INNOVATIVE TRANSIT REVIEW TASK 3—INNOVATIVE TRANSIT ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS OCTOBER 1, 2020 This page intentionally left blank. CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND INNOVATIVE TRANSIT REVIEW TASK 3—INNOVATIVE TRANSIT ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SUBMITTAL (VERSION 2.0) PROJECT NO.: 12771C70, TASK NO. 3 202012771C70, TASK NO. 3 2020 DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2020 WSP SUITE 350 862 E. HOSPITALITY LANE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408 TEL.: +1 909 888-1106 FAX: +1 909 889-1884 WSP.COM This page intentionally left blank. October 1, 2020 Beatriz Valdez, Director of Special Projects and Strategic Initiatives San Bernardino County Transportation Authority 1170 W. Third Street, 1st Floor San Bernardino, CA 92410 Dear Ms.Valdez: Client ref.: Contract No. C14086, CTO No. 70 Contract No. C14086, CTO No. 70 WSP is pleased to submit this Draft Task 3 Innovative Service Analysis and Concepts Report as part of the Consolidation Study and Innovative Transit Review. Upon receipt of comments from SBCTA and your partners, we will prepare and submit a final version of this report. Yours sincerely, Cliff Henke AVP/Project Leader, Global ZEB/BRT Coordinator XX/xx Encl.
    [Show full text]
  • BUS BOOK MECH B 11/29/10 3:09 PM Page 1
    BUS BOOK MECH B 11/29/10 3:09 PM Page 1 C M Y CM MY CY CMY K BUSRoutes and Schedules Effective January 3,BOOK 2011 to May 2, 2011 RESOLVE TO RIDE. 1-800-9-OMNIBUS OMNITRANS.ORG Welcome Aboard! Table of Contents Pass Outlets 2-3 Expendios de pases Passes by Mail 96 Pases por correo Fare Information 4-6 Información del precio Calendar 3 Calendario How to Ride 7-10 Cómo Viajar Transfer Centers 11-13 Centros de transbordo Destinations 14 Destinos Telephone Numbers 15 Números de teléfono Bike & Ride 16 Pedalear y viajar Wheelchair Lift 17 Elevador para sillas de ruedas Route Maps & Schedules 18-91 Mapas y horarios de rutas Access, Omnilink 92 - 95 Access, Omnilink WHAT’S NEW NOVEDADES What’s new for January? Only minor changes to a few of ¿Qué hay de nuevo para enero? Solo cambios menores a our routes. Maps for Routes 3-4 and 82 will reflect minor algunos de nuestros recorridos. Los mapas de los changes in routing and service enhancements. recorridos 3-4 y 82 reflejarán cambios menores en los recorridos y mejoras del servicio. Routes 3-4 Run time changes to all days. Routing El horario del recorrido de las rutas 3-4 ha cambiado around the 4th Street Transit Mall has been altered and para todos los días. El recorrido por 4th Street Transit the time point has been moved to Court and E Streets. Mall ha sido modificado y el cartel con los horarios ha sido llevado a las calles Court y E Street.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Facilities Master Plan
    2016 Facilities Master Plan SBCCD Board of Trustees SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY COLLEGE John Longville, President Joseph Williams, Vice President SAN BERNARDINO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Gloria Macías Harrison, Clerk Donna Ferracone, Trustee Dr. Donald L. Singer, Trustee Dr. Anne L. Viricel, Trustee Nickolas W. Zoumbos, Trustee Beverly Rapouw, CHC Student Trustee Pablo Machado, SBVC Student Trustee SBVC-Main Campus 701 S Mt Vernon Ave. San Bernardino, CA 92410 September 12, 2016 DRAFT 3.2 Facilities Master Plan / San Bernardino Valley College Introduction PROCESS THE 5 STEPS The 2016 Facilities Master Plan was developed through a single team of educational and facilities planning an inclusive, participatory, and transparent process consultants. When it was practical, stakeholders were that engaged and sought input from the College’s engaged in joint educational and facilities planning 01 many constituencies. San Bernardino Valley College interviews and forums. Discussions were framed by a Council (Valley College Council)—which represents holistic perspective that acknowledges the connection PREPARE the committees within Valley College’s collegiate between the quality of the campus environment and the Planning began in fall 2015 with the consultation structure and includes faculty, staff, success of the students. development of the timeline of planning students, and administrators—played a key role as the activities. Measures of success for the working committee that participated most closely in the As part of the integration and alignment of long-range master planning process and outcomes development and review of this document. Additional planning across the district, a five-step facilities planning were gathered from stakeholders. venues for dialogue included one-on-one interviews, process was followed within the same timeframe at Educational and facilities planning presentations, open forums, community meetings, and both San Bernardino Valley College and Crafton Hills information was requested.
    [Show full text]
  • 100% Prior Year
    FOUND 73 PROJECTS 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program San Bernardino County- 100% Prior Local Highway, State Highway, Transit Including Amendments 1 - 32 (In $000`s) FTIP ID LEAD AGENCY COUNTY CONFORM CATEGORY MODELING AIR BASIN PROJECT COST RTP ID SYSTEM 200049 APPLE VALLEY San Bernadino NON-EXEMPT YES $46,477 200049 Local PRIMARY PROGRAM CODE PROJECT LIMITS FTIP AMENDMENT CAX65 - NEW BRIDGE: RS From TERMINUS OF YUCCA LOMA RD to TERMINUS OF GREEN TREE BLVD 19-00 DESCRIPTION MOJAVE RIVER BRIDGE CROSSING FROM TERMINUS OF YUCCA LOMA RD TO TERMINUS OF GREEN TREE BLVD ? INCLUDES WIDENING YATES RD. 2-4 LANES FROM .24 MILE NORTH OF CHINQUAPIN TO .02 MILES SOUTH OF FORTUNA (1.5 MILES) - PRE. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW 4 LANE BRIDGE-INCLUDES A BRIDGE OVER THE BNSF RR TO HESPERIA ROAD PHASE FUND SOURCE PRIOR 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 FUTURE TOTAL PE CITY FUNDS $563 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $563 PE DEVELOPER FEES $1,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000 PE STP LOCAL $2,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,800 ROW CITY FUNDS $200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200 ROW DEVELOPER FEES $175 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $175 CON CITY FUNDS $17,198 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,198 CON COUNTY $1,845 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,845 CON SBD CO MEASURE I $12,984 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,984 CON STATE LOCAL $9,712 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,712 PARTNER TOTAL TOTAL $46,477 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $46,477 FTIP ID LEAD AGENCY COUNTY CONFORM CATEGORY MODELING AIR BASIN PROJECT COST RTP ID SYSTEM 20150003 APPLE VALLEY San Bernadino NON-EXEMPT YES $14,129 REG0703 Local PRIMARY PROGRAM CODE PROJECT LIMITS FTIP AMENDMENT CAY76 - ADDING A LANE THROUGH A BOTTLENECK: GM From WESTERN TERMINIS OF YUCCA LOMA ROAD to APPLE VALLEY ROAD 19-01 DESCRIPTION IN APPLE VALLEY: YUCCA LOMA ROAD FROM EASTERN TERMINUS OF YUCCA LOMA BRIDGE TO APPLE VALLEY ROAD; WIDEN 2-4 LANES (INCLUDES APPLE VALLEY SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL ATP CYCLE 1 PROJECT 0540).
    [Show full text]
  • San Bernardino County Shares Proposal to Lure Second Amazon Headquarters – San Bernardino Sun
    11/1/2017 San Bernardino County shares proposal to lure second Amazon headquarters – San Bernardino Sun NEWS San Bernardino County shares proposal to lure second Amazon headquarters Ontario International Airport in Ontario. File photo. By BRIAN WHITEHEAD | [email protected] | San Bernardino Sun PUBLISHED: October 31, 2017 at 6:42 pm | UPDATED: November 1, 2017 at 8:27 am San Bernardino County is ofcially in the running to land Amazon’s second headquarters. http://www.sbsun.com/2017/10/31/san-bernardino-county-shares-proposal-to-lure-second-amazon-headquarters/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_… 1/5 11/1/2017 San Bernardino County shares proposal to lure second Amazon headquarters – San Bernardino Sun A three-part proposal recently submitted to the online retailer touts the region’s workforce, schools, public transit and location. Such public gures as Rich Karlgaard, Forbes publisher, and Jack Dangermond, founder and president of Environmental Systems Research Institute, endorse the county in video testimonials. Letters of support from public agencies also were included as part of the application. In collaboration with the cities of Ontario and San Bernardino, the county’s Economic Development Agency craed the proposal in four weeks, ofcials said. A virtual “Story Map” offers Amazon an intimate look at the area. On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors got its rst look at the nished product. “I was so taken aback by the quality and the innovative use of technology and the great story this application tells about our county,” interim county CEO Dena Smith said before the presentation. “You knocked it out of the park,” Chairman Robert Lovingood said aer.
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Rail
    TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PASSENGER RAIL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TECHNICAL REPORT DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 3 ANALYTICAL APPROACH 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 STRATEGIES 27 NEXT STEPS 44 CONCLUSION 45 TECHNICAL REPORT PASSENGER RAIL DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT connectsocal.org EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM This Connect SoCal Passenger Rail report lays out a vision of passenger rail services for the SCAG Region for the next three decades. It demonstrates Passenger Rail the progress that has been made over the last two decades in terms of growing ridership, new rail services, capital improvements and new funding opportunities. It demonstrates the regional importance and significance of passenger rail in the SCAG region, and why growing rail services by increasing frequencies in underserved corridors, as well as establishing service in unserved markets, is crucial to the future mobility and sustainability of our region. The report highlights recent success in establishing new funding opportunities for passenger rail, including the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and Senate Bill (SB) 1. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service is benefiting from these new funding opportunities as well as recent institutional arrangements that establish local control for the service. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA) Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) program is an ambitious
    [Show full text]
  • Insights Into the Ancient, the Contemporary Insights Into The
    INSIDE: Coyote Baseball Coach Exercise, socialize in beauty Don Parnell’s main game: and style at new student Dedication rec center page 21 Page 26 Volume 15 Issue 2 Spring/Summer 2007 News for Alumni and Friends of the University Insights into the Ancient, the Contemporary CSUSB’S ROBERT V. FULLERTON ART MUSEum Career Training • Continuing Education • Lifelong Learning It’s now easier to come back to Cal State! With a new downtown San Bernardino location and more online programs, choose from a wide selection of classes in the following areas: ■ Continuing Education ■ Career Training ■ Degree Programs ■ Osher Lifelong Learning (in Palm Desert) CSUSB faculty, staff, Alumni Association and Retiree Association members receive a 10% discount on the course fees for Extension courses, seminars, workshops and re-licensing programs.* * See the College of Extended Learning Course Catalog for discount exclusions. Register online today at http://cel.csusb.edu Cal State San Bernardino Magazine is published by the Office EDItor of University Advancement at California State University, San Sid Robinson MANAgINg EDItor Bernardino for alumni, friends, parents and colleagues. It is pro- Sam Romero duced twice annually in the fall and spring quarters. Art DIrECTOR/grAPhIC DESIgN This publication is partially funded with non-state resources, Juliet Conlon including a grant from the CSUSB Alumni Association. Opinions ProDUCtIoN MANAgEr Alan Llavore expressed in Cal State SB Magazine do not necessarily reflect the SENIor WrItErS views of the editors or represent the official policy of California State Jiggs Gallagher University, San Bernardino. The editorial committee reserves the Joe Gutierrez DEPArtMENt EDItorS right to edit all submitted material.
    [Show full text]
  • San Bernardino Associated Governments
    San Bernardino County Maglev to Las Vegas Los Angeles County San Bernardino County KENDALL RIVERSIDE Long Range Transit Plan 40TH RANCHO CUCAMONGA 15 215 Final ReportSIERRA TC STATE 20TH HIGHLAND 210 210 19TH DEL ROSA EUCLID ETIWANDA FONTANA E AYALA MILLIKEN HIGHLAND BASELINE PALM CARNELIAN BASELINE WATERMAN STERLING BOULDER UPLAND ARCHIBALD 9TH MEDICAL CENT ER CITRUS GREENSPOT CHURCH HAVEN SIERRA RIALTO 5TH 3RD Metro Gold FOOTHILL 2ND Line to RIALTO TC ARROW Pasadena G CHERRY 210 ARROWHEAD SAN BERNARDINO JERSEY ALDER MT MT VERNON MILL 2 SIERRA TC 2 TC MERRILL 2 RANCHO 6TH ORANGE VINEYARD MONTEVISTA STATE 38 4TH SAN BERNARDINO TIPPECANOE MOUNTAIN 10 MILL CREEK To Pomona RIVERSIDE CLEVELAND TC LUGONIA MONTCLAIR INLAND EMPIRE ONTARIO MILLS VALLEY G ALABAMA Transcenter PEPPER HOSPITALITY REDLAND S HOLT SP AIRPORT CALIFORNIA TC TC LA CADENA STATE ANDERSON CITRUS SANTA ANA TC 9TH CRAFTON CACTUS CAJON WABASH SAND CANYON MISSION 15 BARTON JURUPA LOCUST ONTARIO CEDAR COLTON WASHINGTON TC YUCAIPA BRYANT FRANCIS MT VERNON LOMA LINDA 2 MILLIKEN CYPRESS YUCAIPA CENTRAL PHILADELPHIA 2 MU LBERRY 10 60 215 AVENUE E WALNUT REDLANDS HAVEN GROVE GRAND TERRACE RAMONA RIVERSIDE ARCHIBALD CHINO TC Riverside County GRAND Replace RTA EDISON SANANTONIO Route 36 PEYTON CHINO HILLS CHINO In Association with KIMBALL GROVE Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. To Cal Poly To LimonitePatti Post & Associates Pomona Shopping Center Vision BRT Routes San Bernardino Avenue Vision Maglev TC Transit Center CHINO HILLS M.I.G. E Street Grand/Edison Avenues Vision Rail
    [Show full text]
  • The People Issue: Celebrating Our Riders
    5 6 JUNE | JULY 2017 DESTINATIONS CALENDAR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EVENTS AND DESTINATIONS TO REACH VIA METROLINK RECOGNIZING OUR & EVENTS For more events and destinations, go to: metrolinktrains.com/destinationsandevents CORPORATE PARTNERS ANGELS EXPRESS SUMMER SPECIAL RETURNS SAN CLEMENTE OCEAN FESTIVAL: JULY 15-16 CELEBRATING 25 YEARS OF SERVICE | 1992–2017 IT’S TIME TO TAKE THE KIDS TO THE BALLGAME ON THE ANGELS EXPRESS TRAIN! DON’T MISS THE GREATEST SHOW ON SURF AT THIS ANNUAL FESTIVAL. The Metrolink Corporate Partner Program (CPP) helps organizations offer transportation benefits to staff, saving the company and Kids ages 18 years and Focused on supporting employees money each year on their taxes. Over 160 organizations currently participate in this program, resulting in around 5,000 under can ride FREE on and promoting ocean people each month taking the train — saving money, arriving to work relaxed and helping improve the environment. Orange County Line Trains safety, the festival is THE PEOPLE ISSUE: 604, 688 or 606 from Los truly an athletic, fami- Of all our clients we have a select few that go above and beyond to transform their workplace into one that supports the use of public transit. Below we would Angeles, 609, 689 or 643 ly-centered event. From like to recognize three of our top corporate clients and their dedicated Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETCs) that administer the program at each site.* from Oceanside and IEOC the lifeguard games and n Metro has been part of CPP for 11 years and has provided Metrolink passes to 2,589 people this past year! Metro has a wonderful ETC, Terree Holman, who Line Train 741X from Perris – surf contests to sand CELEBRATING OUR RIDERS has supported this program for the past 10 years.
    [Show full text]