Political Chaos with the Hemet Transit Center

Unnecessary Bureaucratic Red Tape is sapping proposed Riverside County Transit Centers at epidemic levels

Political money games and the lack of cooperation between public entities are sapping worthy Inland Empire transit projects once more. Again, The Transit Coalition has to remind the state and feds: You have to know what's it like to be in the real world.

This Google Maps satellite aerial imagery shows the general location of a city-identified site and a prime location for a proposed transit center in the City of Hemet. The multi-modal station was proposed to be developed adjacent to a proposed courthouse in the heart of the historic downtown core complete with a transit village.

In reality, developing the transit center, a courthouse with a public square and a future Metrolink station in this area would be very desirable for this Inland suburb starved for free market economic growth. However, according to this RTA Budget & Finance Committee Report, delays at the state level combined with potential de-obligation actions from the federal government has led to nothing except for bureaucratic red tape for the Hemet Transit Center. RTA thus decided to conduct a site feasibility study to determine another optimal transit center location.

This is an outrage because plans for the Hemet station have already been in the works for nearly a decade by local officials. This is why the lack of cooperation with the state combined with overregulation and spending deadlines with the federal funds is bad for transportation projects - too many hurdles which negate Inland Empire transit development. This has happened before. RTA was forced to empty nearly all of the funds for a very desirable transit center project at the Riverside Downtown Metrolink station. According to the latest public documents from RTA, the alternative site for the Riverside Transit Center which is currently under study is now the site of the proposed Moreno Valley Transit Center, located on the western edge of the City of Moreno Valley at a proposed station for the Metrolink Perris Valley Line; the transit hub is now labeled the Northwest Transit Center. Basically, the Downtown Riverside Transit Center is back on the drawing board sitting with a near empty fund. Both the state and the White House should be outraged as The Transit Coalition is.

Moving ahead, the City of Hemet does have some local control over their transit center. Because the city envisions the development of a transit village adjacent to the transit center, why not entice private developers to come in by designating the transit center and courthouse block as a specific plan and offer tax incentives to the entrepreneurial class to build both of the public buildings and the courthouse square as part of the village complete with private sector jobs? The truth is Hemet is starved for a private job marketplace. Its residents could use some logistics, manufacturing, distribution and other blue-collar jobs. That is a smart way in getting Hemet back to a healthy state.

If local officials are serious about getting both the Riverside and the Hemet Transit Centers built next to the Metrolink rail system without going through a decade of planning, they must take the unnecessary regulations off the backs of the private sector and incentivize them to come in and build the facilities. Local officials need to have the desire and the will to have Riverside and Hemet not only survive, but to thrive. Meanwhile, both the state and the feds need to get out from their desks, visit the affected transit center sites themselves, and see what upper-level regulatory reform needs to be done to move these projects forward. The bottom line of this story: Government roadblocks continue unchecked, our transportation projects are being delayed at epidemic levels, and the riding public is paying for it.

What the Heck Happened with the Riverside Transit Center?

Political football games with transportation money is destructive to Inland Empire mobility.

As communities around California seek to reinvent their streets to be more multimodal this will be an additional challenge that must be addressed. Millions in dedicated funds for a proposed transit center in Downtown Riverside was locally de-obligated and assigned elsewhere, upsetting local bus riders. At their November 13, 2012 meeting, the Riverside City Council voted in a 6-1 majority to reaffirm its commitment toward building a multi-modal transit center on Vine Street near the downtown Metrolink station. The City agreed to work with the Riverside Transit Agency to work out differences over the project; however, some of those "differences" combined with federal deadlines and regulations came with a disastrous price tag for the Riverside riding public.

RTA had secured approximately $7 million toward this project from various public sources; the federal funding portion however was strapped with spending deadlines. Because officials failed to see how moving the existing transit hub several blocks east to Vine Street would affect the connecting bus routes, RTA decided in September to shelve the Vine Street location and instead spend $4.5 million of the transit center's funds to redevelop the existing Downtown Terminal station. The city and the local business community then expressed concerns about that plan, thus more fuel was dumped on the political fire.

Even though the City of Riverside can commit the Riverside Transit Center project to any public site it pleases, RTA has fiduciary responsibility over the project's funds, not the city. What the city can and should do instead is designate the Metrolink station block as a specific plan and offer local property tax incentives and rebates so that private developers and entrepreneurs can invest and build the transit center combined with a much-needed free market job site. This win-win funding concept has yet to be adopted.

With the Riverside Transit Center mired in public financial regulations and deadlines, RTA changed course and emptied the project's fund. At their October 2012 Board of Directors meeting, RTA redirected nearly all of the Riverside Transit Center's project funds toward the Twin Cities Transit Center in the Temecula/Murrieta area.

From the perspective of the riding public, this is a complete disgrace to Inland Empire mobility. Multi-modal connectivity between the downtown core, local buses and trains at the Riverside Downtown Metrolink station is very limited. That is very clear. To be fair, the Twin Cities Transit Center down south promises to address a growing region in the Inland Empire and coordinating the project with future high-speed rail is finally in the talks. But what is disappointing to the Riverside public is the lack of cooperation between local and federal officials to get the worthy Vine Street Transit Center built with the $7 million in funds already collected, among other issues (Page 5).

$7 million is more than enough to start up a first phase of the project by adding additional bus stops along the existing streets and moving the hub and bus routes over. The truth is the project was so strapped with rules and regulations that such a logical and cost-effective move wouldn't likely work on a sheet of legal paper, but work fine out in the real world. These political roadblocks must be reformed. Unnecessary federal regulations and political football games with transportation money only delays worthwhile projects, adds layers of cost, and is destructive to Inland Empire mobility. It will be continually confronted by The Transit Coalition

The Riverside City Council also indicated that RTA was potentially moving to a grid-based bus system based on a post on the Riding in Riverside Transit Blog. It's far too early to determine what proposals are in store, but Riverside County's street layout and demographics make a countywide grid-based bus system absolutely illogical. We all remember in 2000 OCTA's ill-advised Point-to-Point grid system that negated ridership systemwide. That colossal blunder led OCTA to alter several of its routes back to a hybrid grid and hub-and-spoke model. RTA's current system operates smartly on this hybrid system: The majority of routes connect at a major hub, fan out over the region, and emulate the grid system with direct service via major streets before rejoining again at the next hub. Aside from some changes outlined in The Transit Coalition's Future Vision, RTA should maintain its current route model.

The Twin Cities Transit Center and High Speed Rail

Coordination between local and state public agencies would be an efficient and cost effective way to build a true multi-modal Twin Cities Transit Center.

The Riverside Transit Agency has secured the funding for a proposed world-class transit center in the Temecula and Murrieta region. What makes this facility set apart from other transit centers? According to public officials, the Twin Cities Transit Center is envisioned to be a multi-modal transportation hub serving local bus routes, express bus services, potential bus rapid transit, and possible Metrolink rail extensions associated with the near term implementation of the Perris Valley Line.

It is evident that the Temecula Valley is not getting a full scale Grand Central Terminal just yet, at least not initially. To compare, the $9.1 million Twin Cities Transit Center will likely mimic the Montclair TransCenter or Pomona TransCenter; both cater to local routes, express lines, Silver Streak BRT and Metrolink trains. In contrast, Anaheim's massive intermodal transit center facility with its eye-catching architecture cost $184 million.

The transit center will without question benefit the riding public. However, The Transit Coalition has long been wondering how future high-speed rail service will fit into this transit center and has advocated for project coordination between this facility and the California High Speed Rail Authority's proposed Murrieta train station. The result would be a centralized first-rate multi-modal facility for the region. Such cooperation for a combined project has not happened and planning for two separate transit centers spaced less than two miles apart continue.

Another questionable expense of the RTA Twin Cities Transit Center is the reported $364,000 price tag for scouting a suitable location along Jefferson Avenue. To be fair, existing studies never included future rail extensions and making the transit center Metrolink and high-speed rail compatible is essential for long term planning. The site feasibility study may also address the separate train station plans by CHSRA in Murrieta, but this six-figure public expense may have fared better if the research was combined with another study, such as the Highway 395 Corridor Study or Jefferson Avenue Study Area. Officials need to ensure precious public transportation dollars are making it to the streets and are not being wasted with too many studies.

Nevertheless, the Twin Cities Transit Center remains promising for the future of mass transit in the Temecula and Murrieta region. Existing bus riders will benefit. Demand for a high-speed inland rail link through this region north to Los Angeles and south to San Diego will continue to grow. Project coordination between local and state public agencies would be an efficient and cost effective way to build a true multi-modal Twin Cities Transit Center.

Public Officials Must Stop the Nonsense with the Riverside Transit Center

Get the private sector onboard with a public-private partnership.

Even though there has already been much discussion about it for the past several years, let alone the last few weeks, the location of a proposed transit center in Downtown Riverside is once again back on the public agenda in Riverside. This time, the Riverside Transit Agency's Board of Directors will vote to rescind last month's approval to redevelop the existing Downtown Terminal station and instead direct agency staff to study alternative locations.

Recap of Riverside Transit Center Progress:
The Riverside Downtown Terminal is currently located northwest of the downtown core and the current facility is too small to sustain the growth in transit demand. Greyhound Bus Lines also operates a terminal next door; its facility is long overdue for a remodel. Local officials proposed closing the Downtown Terminal and developing a multi modal transit center at the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station to address long term growth; a smart thing to do. In 2006, Compass Blueprint studied the area and concluded that private developer investments be included to fund recommendations such as a pedestrian bridge over the 91 Freeway into the downtown core. Public officials have not been able to secure the funding as of now.

Early in September, with transit rerouting yet to be analyzed and federal funds in jeopardy, the City of Riverside had considered shelving the multi-modal project altogether and instead decide to renovate the existing downtown bus terminal. After the September 27, 2012 RTA Board meeting where the agency approved plans to demolish and rebuild the existing Riverside Downtown Terminal, the Riverside City Manager and the downtown business community contacted RTA and expressed concerns regarding the plans. The specifics were not disclosed; however the issue will be brought up again at the November 13, 2012 Riverside City Council Meeting. In response, RTA convened a special Executive Committee meeting and staff was directed to conduct another site feasibility study of the Riverside Transit Center.

Stop the Nonsense:
The Transit Coalition believes public officials at both the local and federal level must stop this stuff right now. We already have an existing report explaining the benefits of building the Riverside Transit Center adjacent to the Metrolink Station. Spending extra public money to re-scout and re-study the transit center's location is not the best approach, even if its bundled with RTA's upcoming Comprehensive Operational Analysis report. If Downtown Riverside's market economy was robust and RTA's bus system was first-rate, we could invest additional transportation dollars for another site feasibility study for the Riverside Transit Center. But the Compass Blueprint report has sufficient data. The private industry also continues to have limited confidence in Downtown Riverside. That means private expansion remains slow and very few new jobs being created. Unnecessary spending of precious public transit dollars must stop. There is no question about that.

Funding the Riverside Transit Center at the Metrolink Station:
As The Transit Coalition has been addressing for the past several years, seamless connections between the growing Metrolink train network and connecting local RTA buses at Downtown Riverside is limited. The 91 Freeway also continues to divide the train station with the heart of the downtown core. Compass Blueprint studied these issues and opportunities and offered several suggestions. Other than adding a carpool lane to the 91 freeway, not much has changed since 2006 in regards to demographics. These are the primary reasons why the Coalition continues to advocate for the transit center to be built next to the train station combined with a pedestrian bridge over the freeway.

Public officials may not seem to know what to do to build this transit center and bridge. So let The Transit Coalition offer a possible solution. Get the private sector onboard with a public-private partnership. Incline developers into the area by designating the Metrolink station block as a specific plan as suggested by Compass Blueprint. Offer a developer incentive for including the bus bays, parking structures, and the freeway pedestrian overpass as part of the transit-oriented development. Establish business-friendly policies so that owners and entrepreneurs can better invest in property and build up a private sector job marketplace. The result would be a powerful free market job site like Irvine Towers in Downtown Riverside complete with a multi-modal transit center, seamless rail connections and a pedestrian bridge to the downtown core.

Now that's good oversight on building a robust transit center for Downtown Riverside that would "meet [RTA's] needs well into the future".

Bus Transit Efficiency in Temecula & Murrieta

The cities and RTA should straighten up the routes to attract riders.



Looking to get more people to ride its local buses, the Riverside Transit Agency launched a promotional campaign for the Murrieta and Temecula area which allows local residents and employees to try out the bus for free during the month of October. RTA ran ads in local newspapers and mailed out flyers in the area. Each ad had a coupon good toward an RTA day pass which could be redeemed aboard two of the area's local bus lines, Route 23 or 24. Both routes have seen substantial ridership gains; however, productivity performance for these routes remains a bit lackluster.

Fix the Circuitous Bus Routes:
Local area bus riders have attested in the past that both of these routes are extremely long and slow, or more accurately, very circuitous. Circuitous local bus routes have many loops and extensions, are difficult to understand, and use excessive resources. This explains why Routes 23 and 24 averaged less than 8.5 passenger boardings per hour combined with a high subsidy-per-passenger rate during the month of August despite the reported ridership gains.

Studies Back Straighter Bus Routing:
Two 2007 studies, one local, one federal, confirm that Murrieta's and Temecula's bus routes should be more direct. However, one doesn't even need these studies as evidence. The RTA System Map already shows the overwhelmingly circuitous nature of Routes 23 and 24 and local trips between southern Temecula and northern Murrieta can last in excess of 1 1/2 to 2 hours according to RTA route timetables.

Here's the reality: No choice rider would want to spend well over an hour aboard a bus for a 5-7 mile local trip. If RTA and the local cities desire to incline more patrons to ride the bus in Southwest Riverside County, each of the public entities must consider ways to simplify and streamline the area's local bus routes to offer more direct and bidirectional connections while also reducing unproductive costs and maintaining local transit mobility. Streamlined bus routing with through-service at the proposed Twin Cities Transit Center and timed transfers to connecting routes would significantly speed up trips. Travel times between major activity centers would then be reduced dramatically. That's how the public can be inclined to patronize the local bus system.

Bridging the Transit Gap between LA and the Coachella Valley

Commuter buses are back and future intercity train service promises to bridge the transit gap between LA and the Coachella Valley. Let's get it moving.

Bus service between Palm Desert and Riverside has arrived. SunLine Transit has established a commuter link between the desert city and the Downtown Riverside Metrolink system. The route started operating on Monday and features twice-daily service for six bucks a ride. The agency will operate two trips into Riverside during the morning peak hours and two return trips in the afternoon. Although an end-to-end trip lasts nearly 2 1/2 hours, most passengers will likely utilize the route's intermediate stops. The route is considered a supplement to rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley should it eventually become a reality.

Officials in Riverside have already backed a proposal to establish rail service between Los Angeles and Indio. It was a unanimous vote on a motion that urges Amtrak to get going on their plan to upgrade their Sunset Limited service. The plan would put a daily Coachella Valley stop on the route between LA and San Antonio. It also calls for consideration of multiple daily departures on a Surfliner-like intercity service between LA and the high desert. We believe such a route would be very productive.

The expansion of inter-city passenger rail service between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley has been widely supported since the early 1990's. Therefore, if the tracks and stations are already in place, then what exactly is preventing the extra trains from leaving the station? The rail right-of-way linking the Los Angeles basin to the Coachella Valley is operated by the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), not by public agencies. UPRR continues firm opposition to any new Amtrak service on its tracks through this area. Despite widespread public support, local and state officials have no unilateral powers to force UPRR to permit expanded Amtrak service. Public agencies would also have to invest at least $500 million for a new set of tracks.

However, there may be a possibility that Class One private railroads including UPRR which long ago discontinued passenger service could reinstate and directly operate passenger trains in the future. Should UPRR desire to move forward with this concept for the LA-to-Indio corridor, public officials should clear the way for the railroad to do so and allow UPRR to stop their trains at existing transit stations. Public incentives to offset any losses connected with passenger service should be considered and discussed in lieu of the massive $500 million public investment.

Photo © Flickr/Jerry Huddleston CC-BY-SA