The Private Sector, Toll Lanes, and the LA-to-Vegas Transit Corridor

Public entities should support the transit improvement efforts of the free market.

Moving people between Southern California and Las Vegas is in the hands of the private sector. No question. With the cooperation from public transportation agencies, there's a great chance multi-modal mobility for the LA-to-Vegas corridor will improve with the growing competition between operators in the marketplace: XpressWest HSR, X-train, Greyhound, numerous charters, and now the Megabus.

The Stagecoach Group has brought the intercity coach back with multiple daily departures to Las Vegas. Riders can board Megabus either at Los Angeles Union Station's Patsaouras Plaza or at the Riverside Downtown Metrolink station, two very productive choices. Megabus also plans to operate express service to northern California cities from Union Station.

While Megabus will operate nonstop trips, Greyhound buses will continue to provide local intercity service between Southern California and Vegas. Several other private buses, coaches and charters also utilize the corridor. Expect ongoing transit improvements and promotional fares from the marketplace; competition will continue to grow with the implementation of Megabus and the proposed passenger rail lines. Public entities must therefore support the transit improvement efforts of the free market.

Right now, the Cajon Pass portion of the I-15 freeway which links Southern California into the high desert is heavily used and often becomes congested during peak travel times. The San Bernardino Associated Governments is currently studying the feasibility of potential HOT lanes between the 60 Freeway and Victorville. There's no report of whether SANBAG will mandate transponders for all HOV's (better if they don't), but if Vegas-bound buses and other 2+ or 3+ HOVs have a dedicated set of free-flowing lanes through the traffic-choked pass, the public-private benefit would be enormous.

At the moment, LA Metro, OCTA, and the Riverside County Transportation Commission want to mandate transponder registration on all HOVs in their HOT lanes, including private bus line entrepreneurs who want to invest in the LA-to-Vegas corridor, all in the name of automated enforcement. Does that make sense to you, the rider? After just 16 days in operation, LA Metro has handed out a whopping 12,297 automated citations since the opening of the I-110 Metro ExpressLanes, the majority of which are likely from non-registered HOVs and not from solo cheaters. (The Los Angeles Daily News also featured an article on this very subject.) There's a large possibility that a portion of the violating HOV traffic will simply migrate back to the regular lanes in lieu of registering. Not good.

Early complaints posted on Metro's Facebook page already indicate that the main freeway lanes have worsened since the FasTrak mandate took place. To be fair, Metro claims the increased congestion will go away as motorists adjust to the rules of the road. However, if the non-registered HOV's flock back into the congested general purpose lanes, it will be the I-85 HOT lane disaster all over again. The Transit Coalition hopes this hypothesis of worsened traffic in LA does not hold true. Otherwise precious resources will be wasted and the notion of converting HOV lanes into transponder-mandated HOT lanes to reduce traffic congestion is dead, period. Metro, OCTA and RCTC will then have some explaining to do to defend their positions.

Meanwhile, if you want better transit and lower fares between Southern California and Las Vegas, government agencies must give the private bus operators incentives to invest, not place a regulatory burden on the entrepreneurial class. The extra administrative overhead and internal costs of maintaining a HOT lane transponder account and each of the registered buses would mean higher fares from private bus lines. Same holds true if their buses are stuck in traffic instead of productively using the HOT lanes. A non-transponder HOV policy for HOT lanes makes it more efficient for private bus carriers and commercial HOV's to compete in the LA-to-Vegas marketplace and for riders to have a quick and efficient ride up and back. Better mass transit includes better services offered in the free market.

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".

Robust Inland Empire Economies - Paying for "More Buses"

San Bernardino and Riverside need a robust private sector job market for economic and mobile prosperity.

The City of San Bernardino was once an economically powerful region in Southern California, but it has constantly degraded over the past several decades especially since the closing of Kaiser Steel and the Norton Air Force Base in the 1980s and 1990s respectively.

More than half of the city's population now receive public assistance. The current per capita income is less than $16,000. Violent crime is also up. The city budget is out of control and is now bankrupt. Various grass-root coalitions have formed to combat the crime and public spending issues, but the fact remains that this once robust city as well as Downtown Riverside are both starved for a stronger private sector job market. Entrepreneurs continue to have little confidence that local officials will do what's necessary to improve the market economy. The lack of tax revenue thus negates transportation efficiency.

Record Bus Ridership...and Overcrowding
As gasoline prices have risen, many local commuters and travelers are turning to public transportation. It's been a long fact that whenever prices at the pump go up, so does ridership aboard public trains and buses. However the latest spike has caused not only record ridership figures for both Riverside Transit and Omnitrans, but serious overcrowding issues along major routes to the point where patrons are being turned away and have to wait for the next bus. Transit agencies simply cannot just add more buses as they are not in the fleet. There must be a means to pay for them. Each public entity will need to work out a solution to address the increased bus demand. A robust market economy is vital for productive funded public transportation.

More Private Sector Jobs: More Buses
Financial investors and small business owners know that a local economy cannot thrive with high government-mandated expenses. San Bernardino and Riverside can be thriving cities once more with a first-rate transportation network, safe streets and a robust private market like West LA, Irvine, Pasadena, and Rancho Bernardo. However, it appears these cities are still saying "no". The goal of the Transit Coalition is "Getting Southern California Moving". The goal of the cities of San Bernardino and Riverside should be "Improving Economic and Mobile Prosperity": Incline the private sector to invest in the downtown cores; eliminate all wasteful public spending and unnecessary policies and mandates. Serious damage has already occurred in San Bernardino, and the public is well aware of it.

Photo © George Lumbreras CC-BY-SA