|
|
Post by nickv on Jun 26, 2007 22:42:57 GMT -8
This post is in response to the "Builders create suburbs with downtown appeal" which was featured in the June 19 eNewsletter. If the suburbs want more transit, then smart growth development is perhaps the way to go. If you've been to San Diego's Gas Lamp Quarter, you've probably were amazed on how alive this neighborhood really is, and several transit lines service this area. Well, miles and miles north, according to many business owners, Temecula is hoping to redevelop its Old Town area to be just as alive as the Gas Lamp Quarter. Don't laugh, but the city is off to a great start. Go to Old Town on a nice weekend day to see for yourself. Smart Growth development is on the go in this suburb... buildings with streetside parking... Wide, wooden, sidewalks. Fancy lamps. Retail shops on the first floor, condos and offices on the top floors. Hey, even City Hall will be moving out the Office Park and into Old Town with a full civic center plaza complete with shops and restaurants. See what they have planned at www.cityoftemecula.orgOf course, we have lots of TOD... but without mass transit! The only public transit through Old Town are RTA Lines 23, 24 and the Greyhound Bus. The Greyhound has anywhere from 3-4 trips out of Temecula in each direction (North to San Bernardino and South to San Diego). Both RTA lines 23 and 24 use mini buses which seat 12 people. RTA line 23 runs just under every hour 7 days per week and Line 24 runs about every 60-80 minutes. By the way, Line 24 recently underwent a very necessary headway "rehab" in May; anybody familiar with RTA Line 24 should know that before the May 2007 service change, the headways were, to say the least, odd. The interval ranged anywhere from 40 minutes to over 2 1/2 hours between buses. I've seen some funny and informative comments posted: boards.eesite.com/board.cgi?boardset=ExpoLine&boardid=sandiego&thread=37&spec=6149767boards.eesite.com/board.cgi?boardset=ExpoLine&boardid=busrails&thread=41&spec=6278115Old Town is not the only part of Temecula which is going for Transit Ready Development; there's four others in the works as well (not as high dense, but they're not buiding strip malls or big boxes either): 1. Harveston Main Street (Transit: Proposed RTA Harveston Shuttle): Located just north of the Promenade Mall. Consists of retail shops near the community center and lake. Single family home residents may still have to drive there, but at least they don't have to leave their own community to shop. 2. Temecula Village (Transit: RTA Line 24): Located along Rancho California Road across the street from existing apartment complexes. Shopping, retail, office, and condos. 3. Temecula Creek Villege (No Transit): Located along Highway 79. Shopping, retail, office, and condos. 4. Temecula Education Complex (No Transit): Located on the northwest end of the city near the proposed Temecula Transit Center, right in the heart of the office parks of Temecula and Murrieta. Consists of an education complex shared by a community college and other universities, apartments, condos & lofts, and shopping & food. No transit...yet; there's some good news for Temecula, possibly with the help with this kind of development. Both Lines 23 and 24 are proposed to undergo some beauty treatments for the upcoming year according to the RTA. Each will be split into different routes which will serve more areas, yet are more streamlined to reduce the travel time to get from Pt A to Pt B. Currently, a trip from Redhawk to the Promenade Mall takes just over an hour. To drive, with Margarita Road jammed with school traffic, would take about 20-25 minutes. Commuterlink Line 206 will also have weekend trips linking Temecula to the Corona Metrolink Station and on to the Tyler Mall (you mean we can possibly go to OC from Temecula without a car on the weekend?). Commuterlink Line 202 has also become Temecula's Beach Bus with additional trips on weekdays and weekends to Oceanside. Certainly a great link, but... Sorry, no timed connections to Metrolink Weekends. Coaster connections are a bit topsy terby too. Hopefully this will change in the future. So, I think Transit Ready Development will encourage the bus agencies to expand their services in the suburbs. If there's a demmand for growth, build up, not all out. That's a lesson that Los Angeles has taught us over the last few decades. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 20, 2007 20:16:41 GMT -8
The City of Temecula is accepting public feedback for its Old Town mixed-use development project. www.cityoftemecula.org/Temecula/Government/Planning/OldTownVisioning/I've seen this idea floating around the boards; so I decided to submit it to the City: Developers paying for transit. Below is a portion of what I passed on to the City: ...this development appears to be transit ready development and needs the transit, or it will suffer from heavy traffic and parking. The City should continue to work with RTA and introduce an Old Town trolley shuttle (similar to the Scottsdale AZ Trolley) and introduce citywide services to connect Old Town to other mixed-use villages around the city and to the Temecula Transit Center. Better span of service and more frequent headways also need to be addressed. Developer fees would be a good source of funding for these transit projects. If anybody's got more ideas on TOD in Temecula, post them here if you like, but get them to the City while they're listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Jan 4, 2008 15:27:58 GMT -8
Commuterlink Line 206 will also have weekend trips linking Temecula to the Corona Metrolink Station and on to the Tyler Mall (you mean we can possibly go to OC from Temecula without a car on the weekend?). Do you have any idea when weekend service will start? Also, do they plan to increase service during the day? I live off of Murrieta Hot Springs and Margarita, about a block from Route 23. It is impossible to connect to the 206 from the 23. (the 23 starts running after the last 206 leaves the Murrieta Wal-Mart.) Is there any possibility this will be rectified in the foreseeable future? I'd really like to see the 206 run once an hour, perhaps as late as 10pm. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Jan 4, 2008 16:52:34 GMT -8
Request weekday Route 206 midday service and better local connecting service to RTA. I certainly agree with you. With better connecting local service to CommuterLink, service-based workers with jobs in...let's say the Platinum Triangle...living next to the local bus routes in SW Riverside County would not need a car at all to get to their jobs if Commuterlink had better local connections. Saturday service for Commuterlink 206 will begin January 19 (01/13/2008 Service Change) and there will be some midday trips. The line will also connect riders to select IEOC Metrolink Weekends trains too. The weekday trips will continue to run during rush hour only. Route 208 will have some later AM and earlier PM trips too on weekdays. According to the FY2008 SRTP, RTA has plans to upgrade Routes 23 & 24 from circulators into more direct routes. The SRTP reports that the two routes will be split up and more direct. I hope to see the proposed changes soon at an upcoming public hearing as SW Riverside County is in need of better bus service. RTA's COA Report also recommends that the span of service for these routes be upgraded to connect to CommuterLink. Try mentioning that in your request. |
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Jan 4, 2008 22:38:08 GMT -8
I'd like to see a transit advocacy group start up in the Temecula Valley. Is anyone else interested? If so, please write me.
wrcousert at yahoo dot com
|
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Jan 4, 2008 23:44:34 GMT -8
There's one already here, but more contributing members are needed for it to grow and mature in Temecula. I'm one of the members. The Transit Coalition is a grass-roots volunteer organization that works to improve public transit in Southern California, not just LA. I suggest being a contributing member if you haven't donated already. Be sure to subscribe the Newsletter. It covers major news events in the Inland Empire too. I've investigated several transit advocacy organizations around the area before becoming active with TTC. The Coalition covers all of SoCal which includes the Inland Empire. It's both an advocacy and service-based organization. It's not just an "I want" organization. It's project goals are also realistic and friendly for the environment. TTC also has a smart, awesome leadership team. Mr. Bart Reed, the Executive Director has been in the news. If we can get more people from the Inland Empire to support the Coalition, the Inland Empire would benefit from the Coaltion. Contact Mr. Bart Reed if you have any questions about what you can do for the Coalition to improve transit in Temecula Valley. I'm well aware of RTA's service area, and will be glad to help you with what you can give. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 10, 2008 12:13:23 GMT -8
TTC Renderings of Temecula Transit Center &
Murrieta/Temecula California High Speed Rail Station
Transit Oriented Development: A possible design of an HSR station in Temecula?
Suggestions to make the proposed transit facilities even better:
1. The CA HSR Murrieta station is projected to attract 8,000 daily riders and is proposed in the area of the I-15 and I-215 interchange. I cannot find a a specific report on where exactly this station will be, but it would make perfect sense to place the station right next door to a proposed transit center which is projected to be very active...
2. The proposed Temecula Transit Center is about 2 miles south of the I-15 & I-215 interchange and the RTA SRTP reports that the center will have 12 bus bays; additional "bays" can also be placed on the street, which means this TC is projected to be a very active one...Sorry folks, the Compass Blueprint Web page that had this information, for some reason, just dropped out of the WWW, but here's what I was able to get from Google's cache:- The project will facilitate the development of a future bus transit station in Temecula, providing conceptual designs for development of surrounding uses including the Murrieta Creek Recreation Basin and potential transit-oriented uses to the north.
- The project also includes circulation analysis focusing on future transit projects and land uses and pedestrian needs.
- Transform an existing transit center into a transit focused mixed use hub.
- Integrate rail with regional buses
- Coordinate developers with transit planning process.
- Reduce off-street parking and use shared parking strategies to reduce overall need. Emphasize pedestrian accessibility
Recommend a market analysis to fully understand density needs that will fulfill current needs while allowing for future growth
- Development incentives are recommended using various strategies such as new zoning standards or planning funding
3. The Temecula TC Compass Blueprint report (linked above) suggests redeveloping the entire Jefferson Business Park area into TOD. The problem is most of the existing office buildings were built within the last few years and that will for sure cause some big time opposition and NIMBY-ism in the area which could kill the project. The TTC map (above) suggests developing the TOD (infill) around the existing development and using parking structures (pay a toll to park) instead of free parking lots.
4. As far as linking the Temecula TC to CA HSR, the map suggests diverting local train trips from the main ROW to the Temecula TC, using trenches through undeveloped land and underground tunnels under existing development (which can be built or paid by TOD developers). This concept would reduce the need of using eminent domain against existing development.
5. The Compass Blueprint report also suggests developing an infill sport spark in the open space south of Jefferson Ave. The TTC map suggests making the entire park space car-free by placing the parking lot underground (toll), a concept similar to Perishing Square and the Glendale Americana.
In addition, most of the residents in the TOD area can access the park without having to cross or walk next to a street; this should make the neighborhood compete with cul-de-sacs as a child can go out and play in the huge yard and open space without the worry of fast moving cars. The buildings together with a proper design of the park can provide a safety and noise "wall" between the play areas and the busy streets.
This is what an area of the Jefferson Business Park looks like now, which includes the Temecula TC site:
Here's what it could be:
The building above would be one of several and would feature ground level retail, professional/medical offices on the 2nd floor, and spacious condos with private access on the top floors, with direct access to the park, Temecula TC, and CA HSR. Properly priced parking tolls as suggested by Dr. Donald Shoup in the High Costs of Free Parking would also help address traffic concerns.
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 11, 2008 9:55:34 GMT -8
A brand new Super Walmart is in the planning stages for Murrieta, to be built behind the current Walmart at Madison and Murrieta Hot Springs (right next to the "Golden Triangle"). I think the old Walmart site would make a great transit mall.  Easy access to that big patch of land between the north and south bound lanes of the 15 fwy. Perfect place for a future Metrolink or light rail line. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 11, 2008 12:18:09 GMT -8
Actually, I think the Golden Triangle itself would be the better candidate, as it is mixed use. It would be a higher density, mixed use center complete with retail, office, and lofts.
I've actually suggested to RTA during the SRTP Public Hearing period to realign the bus routes so that the Golden Triangle area would serve as a transfer point hub. The area would be served by a restructured Route "23A" and "23B" and Route 61. Reverse-commute runs of Route 208 might also be a good route to realign into that area. Depending on the employment density once all of the development is done, I might suggest that Route 206 and 202 reverse-commute runs be realigned to serve the area too. The buses can stop at the northern half of the "Main St".
I've only found speculation on what Wal-Mart has planned for its Murrieta store. But having shopping there before, I don't think the Murrieta Wal-Mart is going to "abandon" its current property; it looks the Supercenter expansion might be built on the the open space between the existing store and the Park & Ride section. The Wal-Mart in Temecula follows the same story; it too has a large open-space next to the building.
As far as the rail station, although it would be tempting to place the station in the I-15 freeway median, we have to be very careful. Both the Harbor Transitway and the LA Metro Green Line taught us some important lessons--Stations need to be placed within a safe and friendly walking distance of activity centers. We have to remember that air quality along a freeway is much more dirty, the noise levels are very loud, and walks to/from the activity centers, or even the local street can be lengthy.
A way around this is to enclose and/or grade-separate the walkways from the streets or "cover up" the freeway, but were talking big time costs.
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 13, 2008 21:23:23 GMT -8
Actually, I think the Golden Triangle itself would be the better candidate, as it is mixed use. It would be a higher density, mixed use center complete with retail, office, and lofts. I was thinking the same thing. Isn't it too late in the planning process to consider it? I'm pretty certain all the space spoken for. |
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 13, 2008 21:26:15 GMT -8
TTC Renderings of Temecula Transit Center &
Murrieta/Temecula California High Speed Rail Station Do you know when they are planning to break ground on this project, or how long it might take to complete? |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 13, 2008 23:00:55 GMT -8
That graphic is actually a speculative concept that we're trying to "sell" so that the Murrieta/Temecula CA HSR station ends up right next door to RTA's Temecula Transit Center. That would make the 12 Bay Temecula TC a full-fledged multimodal transit center. The Temecula TC will break ground hopefully soon; I'll have to check and see exactly when that will happen. By the way, the Compass Blueprint Web site is online again. This is what they have to say about the Temecula Transit Center. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 13, 2008 23:23:15 GMT -8
If you look at the Golden Triangle illustration carefully, you'll notice that the development is mixed use and higher density. So the developer has "started" a transit village. To finish it, what I think should be advocated are the following:
1. Establish an RTA transfer point within the Golden Triangle center with bus stop shelters and real-time bus arrival signs.
2. Plant trees or build other barriers to help filter the noise and air polution from the two freeways.
3. This last one will be a political challenge, but through the City of Murrieta, establish parking toll ordinances/regulations for the Golden Triangle, Rancho Springs Medical Center, and connecting streets to help combat traffic and encourage transit ridership. Require restricted parking (ie. Customer/patient parking only) for other establishments in the area with time limits for customers/patients and parking permits for workers (of which employees can choose to opt-out and receive a rebate).
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 15, 2008 9:25:46 GMT -8
 Walmart as a park and ride facility? Playing with my new toy. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 15, 2008 9:53:39 GMT -8
It looks like you had some fun with your new software  There's already an existing Park & Ride lot next to the RTA bus stop on the property. |
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 16, 2008 0:56:58 GMT -8
Here's one I did using Damien Goodmon's map  |
|
|
|
Post by jejozwik on Aug 16, 2008 7:35:56 GMT -8
not sure what the point of that is... and it is way, way too big to even see
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 16, 2008 10:10:08 GMT -8
If you look at the Golden Triangle illustration carefully, you'll notice that the development is mixed use and higher density. So the developer has "started" a transit village. To finish it, what I think should be advocated are the following: 1. Establish an RTA transfer point within the Golden Triangle center with bus stop shelters and real-time bus arrival signs. 2. Plant trees or build other barriers to help filter the noise and air polution from the two freeways. 3. This last one will be a political challenge, but through the City of Murrieta, establish parking toll ordinances/regulations for the Golden Triangle, Rancho Springs Medical Center, and connecting streets to help combat traffic and encourage transit ridership. Require restricted parking (ie. Customer/patient parking only) for other establishments in the area with time limits for customers/patients and parking permits for workers (of which employees can choose to opt-out and receive a rebate). I'd like to see a bus only lane on Murrieta Hot Springs Road, only during rush hour. Sometimes it takes half an hour to get from Walmart to the Ralphs center at Alta Murrieta. That's enough to ruin any schedule. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 16, 2008 10:47:37 GMT -8
If you're looking to design a city and a transit system from complete scratch, search for "smart growth", "transit oriented development" and "car free cities" on any major search engine for some tips on how to build it.
Some of the Web sites that pop up can give you some tips on how to design such a system.
Note that several of TTC teachings are similar to those found on some of these advocacy sites, such as TOD, mixed-use zoning, walkable communities, and improved public transit, but note that TTC does not endorse all of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 16, 2008 15:47:41 GMT -8
Here's a possible reason why Murrieta Hot Springs Rd, Scott Rd, and Winchester Rd get so heavy during rush hour... There is right now an 8 mile gap between Murrieta Hot Springs and Scott Roads, the only two east/west corridors between I-215 and Winchester Rd.
About 4 miles north of Murrieta Hot Springs Rd is the French Valley community. I think somebody forgot about something when the French Valley development projects were approved...Just about all of the cars from French Valley headed to the freeway are dumped onto one of these three roads, already used by the locals of other communities...Something the City of Temecula really did not like!
Let's see what happens once the construction of Clinton Keith/Los Alamos Roads to French Valley is completed; this east/west corridor will cut the gap in half and provide French Valley Residents direct access to the freeway. One thing that needs to be done is to protect that corridor from run-away car-centered development; Riverside County has already gotten in trouble once from the City of Temecula because of the run-away car-centered housing development between French Valley and Scott Roads a few years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 16, 2008 22:34:07 GMT -8
The city planners screwed up big time. They should have designed Murrieta and Temecula with some kind of grid system.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 17, 2008 0:02:37 GMT -8
There is one problem...Cul-de-sacs!
Cul-de-sacs are one of those amenities on the real estate market since WWII. I think its primary use is to calm vehicle traffic in the neighborhood, thus reducing noise and possibly crime. That's because the people who drive in and out of the cul-de-sac are the residents or guests.
Cul-de-sac housing, for the most part, also benefits another group of people: safety of small children who want to play outside (and not in the backyard). It does however force others to drive to their destinations as one usually would have to do a lot of "walking around" to make it to the through-street.
I think we need to come up with a product that will not only compete with the cul-de-sac "business", but strong enough where it will put cul-de-sacs "out of business". Yes, I know... It will be a challenge!
According to my Environmental Science 101 textbook, one product that could counter the cul-de-sac business is to cluster homes together into smaller lots (even if they are single family) which could save 50-70% of the land space for open space and parkland. That would result in very short walks to the park space for children. The saved resources could also fund a community center with on-site security to address crime.
The same holds true for TOD projects like the Glendale Americana with its car-free commons space and children's play park.
TOD and smart growth projects are now starting to counter urban sprawl. According to a WRCOG Report, 30% of SW Riverside County residents are open to living in a transit village; so TOD is on the market. Add in short and walkable access to parks and open space and that could help lower the demand for cul-de-sac living and allow streets to be built without dead-ends.
|
|
|
|
Post by wrcousert on Aug 17, 2008 21:50:40 GMT -8
Cul-de-sacs... what a pain! My mother currently rents a mobile home in a senior park near MHS & Margarita. The place is full of winding, twisting roads, and cul-de-sacs. It takes nearly 30 minutes to walk to her place from MHS Road, or from her place to route 23.
Definitely not a place I'd want to live in without a car.
But the city is full of places like this. It's frustrating to say the least.
Hopefully it's not to late to reverse this trend.
|
|
