|
Post by nickv on Dec 2, 2008 23:57:18 GMT -8
Input Wanted: Exact Station Stop Ideas for CA HSR (Los Angeles-UC Riverside-San Diego Alignment)
An idea for the Temecula/Murrieta HSR Station
Hey everybody! I'm looking for some input and comments on establishing specific locations (beyond the proposed general station locations) for CA HSR train stations along the LAUS-San Diego portion of the line. I'm also looking for routing ideas for the HSR segment between Escondio and University City since the planned I-15 ROW was paved over by the I-15 Managed Lanes project according to various sources.
I've started to gather input for the Murrieta/Temecula Station. CA HSR Authority has indicated that this station will be located somewhere near the I-15 and I-215 interchange. Based on local feedback, I'm thinking that the CA HSR Murreita/Temecula Station should be placed directly next door to the proposed RTA Temecula Transit Center which is about 1 1/2 miles south of the interchange.
**See this PDF for a graphic illustration idea of the station and the following PDF for a conceptual map of the Temecula Transit Center/CA HSR station. The HSR station idea that I have will have three main entrances: One facing the RTA transit center and Jefferson Street corridor with a direct pedestrian connection the proposed TOD projects, one along Sanborn Avenue with connections to taxi services and drop off's and pick up's, and one at the parking garage. The station will feature spacious corridors with benches, a waiting area, multiple access points to train platforms, a full service ticket counter, paid and volunteer station ambassadors, and many automated ticket vending machines scattered around the station to reduce line waits. If anybody has any comments or additions, please post them here or send them to me.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Dec 3, 2008 6:55:02 GMT -8
Nick--please work with TTC to come up with a letter promoting such a "Union Station" for Temecula that will someday benefit the entire region.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Sept 12, 2009 9:12:46 GMT -8
CA HSR: LAUS - San Diego Alignment: Section Overview – 2008/09 TWG Alternatives
Work has begun to prepare a Project Level EIR/EIS and preliminary engineering for the San Diego-Inland Empire-Los Angeles alignment. View the 2008/09 TWG Alternatives here.
Official CA HSR Resources: Get up-to-date information on the San Diego-Inland Empire-Los Angeles high speed train alignment (view resources here).
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Sept 30, 2009 8:29:34 GMT -8
CA HSR: LAUS - San Diego Alignment: Project-Level EIR/EIS Public Scoping Meetings
View brochure here.
Work has begun to prepare a Project Level EIR/EIS and preliminary engineering for the San Diego-Inland Empire-Los Angeles alignment. View the 2008/09 TWG Alternatives here.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority), as the lead agency for the California Environmental Quality Act process, is issuing a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a project Environmental Impact Report/Statement (EIR/EIS) for the Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire Section of the proposed California High-Speed Train System (HST).
The NOP, NOI, public scoping meeting dates and locations are available here. Public comments may be submitted on the Authority’s website or by writing to:
Mr. Dan Leavitt, Deputy Director ATTN: Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire Section HST Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Rail Authority 925 L Street, Suite 1425 Sacramento, CA 95814
or via email with subject line “LA-SD HST Section via the Inland Empire” to: comments@hsr.ca.gov no later than November 20, 2009.
Inland Empire HSR Segment - Your Input wanted!
An idea for the Temecula/Murrieta HSR Station
I will begin preparations for a TTC ABIE report that will be submitted by the deadline, but here are some preliminary suggestions that I might include:
1. TTC ABIE map of a rail/bus network:
2. Retain the program-level alignment via the I-215 in lieu of the I-15 due to very high ridership projections at the program level proposed UC-Riverside station. Support the development of a connecting commuter/intercity rail spur via the I-15 connecting the Temecula/Murrieta HSR Station to Los Angeles with commuter rail service into Orange County.
3. Retain the program-level station at Ontario Airport; work with the local areas to institute rapid and/or express bus lines connecting the station to the Montclair TC to the west, Victorville DesertXPress Station to the north and the Corona Multi Modal Transit Center to the south.
4. Support a project-level station at San Bernardino Downtown either at the existing train depot or adjacent to the proposed Downtown multi modal transit center with direct connections to sbX rapid buses.
5. Support a station at UC-Riverside. Encourage the Authority to work with the university and convert existing university parking lots and undeveloped land into a hybrid HSR and Perris Valley Line Metrolink station with plentiful connecting bus routes and bus rapid transit service into Riverside Downtown. The parking lots would be replaced with hybrid parking/retail/office structures.
Work with the local communitites and establish a screened, landscaped and beautifully designed elevated rail structure through Canyon Crest Heights that would help address local residents' concerns regarding back yard privacy, the beauty of their neighborhood and property values, and thus counter NIMBY arguments.
Any local funding for the already proposed Metrolink UC-Riverside station (or track/ROW improvements for the entire Perris Valley Line corridor for that matter) could also be considered as money invested into the statewide project, and would therefore expedite the project-level process.
Bus connections between ARTIC and Riverside: Expand transit via SR-91 with 15 minute rush hour service and 30 minute off-peak service between ARTIC, Corona, Riverside Downtown, and the UC-Riverside Station from early morning to late night with owl service. Reinstate (if cancelled) OCTA owl service in Orange County at ARTIC.
6. With the support of the UCR station over the Moreno Valley station, encourage the development of an RTA rapid bus for the I-215 corridor for fast local connections between the UCR and Murrieta stations with major stops at the Moreno Valley Multi Modal TC and Perris Multi Modal TC.
7. Support one regional multi modal transit station for the Temecula/Murrieta area that would facilitate California HSR, future Metrolink trains, and connecting RTA bus lines.
Since the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), has planned to develop a transit station in the area of Jefferson Avenue and the proposed French Valley Parkway within the City of Temecula, the CA HSR Authority should consider relocating the Murrieta station 2 miles south to the RTA facility, or RTA should relocate the bus station north to the proposed program-level station area.
Funding for the RTA transit center could also be considered as local money invested into the statewide project, and would therefore expedite the project-level process.
8. Support the project-level proposal for the Escondido station, which would be located adjacent to the Escondido multi modal Transit Center. Suggest public/private partnerships with TOD developers for the added construction costs of tunnels.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Sept 30, 2009 11:50:02 GMT -8
I admit to being entirely torn between the alternative between Ontario and Corona (the more densely populated? the quickest?), vs. including Riverside. The San Bernardino hookup looks more problematic on a variety of levels--speed, operations.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Oct 1, 2009 14:41:10 GMT -8
I had a chance to watch parts of an archived video (160 mb, mp4) of the CA HSR Board Meeting in August. Chairman Curt Pringle asked about the extra travel time needed should a HSR station be placed in San Bernardino; this is yet to be determined, however the regional program manager estimated 5 extra minutes for a travel time between LAUS and San Diego at 1hr 23mins. Few of the board members advised the regional program manager that excessive travel trip time would negate ridership. These are sound arguments; local officials are even looking into developing a separate spur so that the skip stop express trains will not be impacted at all according to the news media. I'll keep a watch on this.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Oct 1, 2009 17:17:35 GMT -8
Thanks, Nick. I fear a potential "groupthink" that gets everyone on board with too many stops...only to discover that the majority of riders will start getting pissed off with a lengthier ride and with too many stops.
A spur at Ontario Airport (or something like it) might just be the best of all alternatives, but at this early juncture I really don't know what the "best" route/operational approach is...and I suspect no one else does, either.
If there are a heckuva lot of San Bernardino/Riverside commuters who want on board, then I say accommodate them...but there are a whole lotta folks who want as nonstop a trip as possible. Five minutes here and there can and will add up.
At this immediate time, my gut tells me (of course, I'm biased as a L.A./Orange County-focused commuter) to go with Ontario to Corona to Temecula to San Diego...and with a spur from Riverside and San Bernardino.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Oct 1, 2009 18:37:03 GMT -8
The HSR system will have express skip stop trains that will not stop at some stations as well as local trains; a concept very similar to the Shinkansen system in Japan. Former HSR Chairman Quentin Kobb explains this during an interview (forward to 4:00):
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Oct 2, 2009 6:21:28 GMT -8
Good point, Nick--and from a P.R. viewpoint I would strongly recommend a focus of referencing (and emulating) that Shinkansen system as much as possible, because even those who question this project will have a hard time opposing that venerable system.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Oct 27, 2009 12:22:55 GMT -8
CA HSR: LAUS - San Diego Alignment: Draft of TTC ABIE Comments to Be Submitted to CA HSR Authority and all other Relevant Transportation Agencies
Work has begun to prepare a Project Level EIR/EIS and preliminary engineering for the San Diego-Inland Empire-Los Angeles alignment. View the 2008/09 TWG Alternatives here.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority), as the lead agency for the California Environmental Quality Act process, is issuing a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a project Environmental Impact Report/Statement (EIR/EIS) for the Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire Section of the proposed California High-Speed Train System (HST).
Public comments may be submitted on the Authority’s website or by writing to:
Mr. Dan Leavitt, Deputy Director ATTN: Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire Section HST Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Rail Authority 925 L Street, Suite 1425 Sacramento, CA 95814
or via email with subject line “LA-SD HST Section via the Inland Empire” to: comments@hsr.ca.gov no later than November 20, 2009.
Inland Empire HSR Segment - Your Input wanted!
Thank you to all who have responded. I have gathered input from this board, blogs, the news media, and remarks addressed at the local public scoping meeting last week. I have begun preparations for a TTC ABIE report that will be submitted by the deadline; here is a text draft of some suggestions that might be included:
I. Executive Summary (Featured Comments):
A. I-15 & I-215 Alternatives Compromise: Planning staff should work with both the City of Corona and the City of Riverside so that the city not chosen for high speed trains can still benefit with direct rapid transit connections to the network.
B. Murrieta/Temecula Intermodal Transit Center: The final decision regarding the location of the region's high speed rail station should be based on local merit.
II. Ontario Airport Station:
We have noted that based on program-level reports that this station would be very feasible and would benefit the City of Ontario and patrons connecting to long distance flights at Ontario Airport. We are pleased to support the consideration of this program-level station stop for project-level inclusion.
III. I-15 versus I-215 Project-Level Rail Alternative:
We have noted that two project-level alternatives are being considered between the Ontario Aiport and Murrieta stations. One alternative is proposed for the I-15 freeway corridor, while the other alternative is proposed for the I-215 freeway corridor. We believe that the final decision regarding the rail route between Ontario Airport and Murrieta should be based on merit and project-level analysis, not local politics.
A. Noticeable Merits for each Alternative:
We would like to emphasize that the I-215 Alternative offers straighter mileage, a flatter grade, and direct connections to the county seat of Riverside County; the I-15 Alternative would require less track mileage and may offer faster trip times and lower engineering and construction costs. These merits should be considered as part of the project-level decision making process.
B. Our Position:
We currently take no position on the I-15 Alternative versus the I-215 Alternative as both have valid merits and benfits which should be considered for further analysis and study.
We, however, have concerns regarding the proposed project-level location of the Corona station. The proposal illustrates this station at the southern fringe of the City of Corona near the Dos Lagos area, not the urbanized city center and far from existing commuter rail service and proposed bus rapid transit service.
Should planning staff find the I-15 Alternative the most feasible, we request that the Corona station be placed closer to the central portion of the city, adjacent to the existing North Main Corona Multi Modal transit station. This will streamline connections for travelers connecting to/from the SR-91 corridor, would greatly increase the ridership base, would provide good access to local mass transit and other modes of transportation, and would minimize urban sprawl and impacts in the rural areas south of the city.
C. High Speed Rail Alternatives:
We have noted that both the City of Corona and the City of Riverside are seeking high speed rail stations in their cities; however, we recognize that only one of these cities will be able to accommodate high speed trains according to the project-level plans.
We suggest CA HSR and local transportation planners work with both the City of Corona and the City of Riverside so that the city not chosen for high speed trains can still benefit with direct rapid transit connections from the central area of the city to other high speed rail stations in the network.
EXHIBIT: Local bus rapid transit concepts connecting program-level high speed rail stations to central locations within the Inland Empire including the City of Corona at a multi modal transit station now under construction.
IV. San Bernardino Project-Level Proposed Station:
Our comments for this station are based on the project-level selection of the I-215 Alternative.
We have noted that this station location is being considered at the project-level. We recognize that a station at the county seat of San Bernardino County would provide a strong ridership base and possibly better airline service at the local San Bernardino Airport; however we also believe that this deviation must not cause the total trip length between San Diego and Los Angeles to increase significantly. Our support for this station stop is conditioned that the nonstop service travel times between Los Angeles and San Diego do not exceed 1 hour, 20 minutes.
If the inclusion of the San Bernardino stop causes nonstop service travel times on the Los Angeles-San Diego segment to exceed 1 hour, 20 minutes following project-level analysis, we suggest that local transportation planners work with the City of San Bernardino to establish direct rapid bus connections from the central area of the city to other high speed rail stations in the network and upgrade the existing Metrolink commuter rail service between San Bernadino and Los Angeles Union Station with better frequency and early morning to late night service span.
V. U.C. Riverside Station:
CA HSR Program-level reports indicate that this station would be very feasible with a very strong ridership base of 16,000 daily boardings. We suggest that if the I-215 Alternative is selected, the program-level station location adjacent to the Riverside County Transportation Commission rail right-of-way be considered for further project-level study as this location would be compatible with connecting commuter rail.
We also urge that planners work closely with the local neighborhood associations and address their concerns early in the planning process.
We also suggest CA HSR and local transportation planners work with the City of Riverside so that a rapid bus connection to the downtown core can be established via University Avenue. The rapid transit bus link between the station and the downtown area, end-to-end, should not exceed 10-12 minutes in total trip length.
VI. Murrieta Station:
We are pleased to support the need of a centralized, intermodal transit station for the Murrieta/Temecula region. We believe this region is long overdue for upgraded regional transportation alternatives, rapid bus, and rail travel options. However, we have noted two separate intermodal transit centers, which are each one mile apart, are currently in the works.
We have noted that the land north of the I-15 and I-215 junction is slated to be developed into a mixed-use center with the program-level proposed HSR station, based on data from the City of Murrieta. This HSR station, like other stations, is proposed to be an intermodal rail/bus facility. The city is also working to rezone this region to higher density development in its general plan and has already attracted developers from the private sector.
In contrast, we have also noted that the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and City of Temecula are working on the development of a future intermodal transit station in Temecula and potential transit-oriented uses approximately one mile south of the program-level proposed HSR station. RTA developed plans for this intermodal transit center in Temecula before the concept for a CA HSR station was proposed in Murrieta. This $8 million transit center has its site secured, is currently undergoing environmental study and portions of its costs have already been funded.
We beleive that one intermodal bus/rail facility should be built for this region, not two within a one mile distance. We also believe the final decision regarding the location of the station should be based on merit.
We strongly urge that that transportation planners from the City of Murrieta, City of Temecula, Riverside Transit Agency, and CA HSR collaborate so that a consensus can be formed in regards to the location of the Murrieta/Temecula intermodal facility which would facilitate CA HSR trains, local commuter rail, bus rapid transit, and local buses.
Regional consensus and a decision based on merit will likely streamline both the CA HSR planning process and the local RTA transit center plans, thus potentially saving millions in taxpayer money from redundant planning.
VII. Community of Rainbow:
We have noted that the existing I-15 freeway between the Murrieta and Escondido stations includes steep grades and bow-shaped bends, most notably within the rural community of Rainbow. While we understand that a straight-line high speed rail tunnel under Rainbow could be necessary following project-level analysis, we urge that the community impacts from the tunneling remain minimal.
We suggest that the tunneled sections through Rainbow be developed under existing public roadway corridors such as Rainbow Valley Road to the extent feasible. This would allow the rail tunnel features such as construction access shafts, ventilation, and emergency exits to be constructed along existing corridors instead of private property. This will also reduce the possibility of community-wide opposition or potential sore loser lawsuits.
VIII. Escondido Station:
We believe that the Escondido station should be considered to be placed adjacent to the Escondido multi modal Transit Center. With the existing transit center located adjacent to the central portion of the city, placing the high speed train station next to the existing terminal will provide for a better ridership base and would provide much better access to existing local mass transit, light rail trains, and other modes of transportation.
We recommend that local transportation planners work with the private sector and establish public/private partnerships for the added construction costs. We further suggest, to reduce impacts on residential communities, that the deviation through Escondido be developed along existing public roadway, rail, or utility corridors as much as possible.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Oct 31, 2009 23:22:05 GMT -8
CA HSR: LAUS - San Diego Alignment: Update on TTC ABIE Comments to Be Submitted to CA HSR Authority and all other Relevant Transportation Officials
Trick or Treat Everyone!
I've been getting some good feedback (and lots of concerns too) from lots of folks which will be integrated into the TTC ABIE comment report to be sent to CA HSR Authority.
If you would like to have your voice heard, please reply! Please click on the topic post to see the original draft report. Here's a small summary of stuff that I need to write and integrate into this report that will be sent to all relevant officials and planners (so it won't be "burried" in the bundle):
1. Better Coordination: Yes, I am getting nearly universal concensus from fellow advocates that CHSRA-to-local coordination needs very serious improvement! For instance, I'm dealing with such a problem here at home with an $8 million intermodal transit center planned locally while CA HSR has an intermodal station of their own planned one mile away in the project-level planning! Yes, I'm hearing the belly-aching, and it's a very serious issue that deserves to go right into the executive summary.
2. Noise Impacts: CA HSR will be urged to disclose noise impacts to cities in the project-level EIR process, mainly in the 150+mph corridor between Riverside and Escondido.
3. Separated Grades: Yes, separated grade crossings will eliminate crossing points between cars and trains; however that does not mean it would be better to have long HSR segments elevated or double-decked over existing rail or freeway right-of-ways. Based on comments, the HSR tracks should be placed adjacent to conventional rail tracks or freeways at-grade to the extent feasible (with individual separated grade crossings), keeping the concrete jungles as low as possible.
Exhibit: Concept of a CA HSR train passing through Temecula at-grade at 150 mph. The noise barrier includes a wall, heavy landscaping, and a second wall before the neighborhood. Also illustrated is the proposed I-15 Toll Lanes.
4. Keeping start-up and operational costs low so that an operating surplus can be made.
5. Business Plan Issues: I'm still gathering data for this biggie, but for starters, CA HSR should not be assuming that the local will...
6. Better Metrolink Rail Connections: First-rate rail links from other cities to connect to the CA HSR network. If you have any other input, please feel free to send them over to me. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Nov 20, 2009 19:11:04 GMT -8
CA High Speed Rail: LA-SD HST Section via the Inland Empire
A big "Thank you" goes to everyone that has helped built TTC's suggestions to CHSRA for the LA-SD Segment project-level Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement! Our Inland Empire HSR suggestions and recommendations for the November 20 deadline for public comments were submitted to the CHSRA today. From coordinated planning, to better track mileage, to preventing NIMBY's, to all of the CHSRA problems published in the TRAC newspaper, I believe we've projected a united voice to CHSRA officials.
Check out our comments that were written here.
So that our voice won't be burried in the bulk of HSR public comments, we will be writting to local transportation officials soon with copies of TTC comments. We hope this will further stimulate better coordination and reduce redundant planning. TTC is also working with TRAC for further improvements for CA HSR.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed as "we want to see high speed rail done right!"
|
|