Tag Archives: Perris Valley Metrolink
Perris Valley Line For Real This Time
Grand Opening Fares
Metrolink is offering special grand opening fares for 6 months along the 91/Perris Valley Line extension.
· A $10 promotional Round-Trip fare when traveling within Riverside County
· A 10% discount on tickets starting at one of the new stations and traveling outside of Riverside County.
· The 91/Perris Valley Line (91/PV), which will extend Metrolink service on the 91 Line, will begin operations on June 6, 2016. Led by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), the 91/PV is the first extension of Metrolink since the Antelope Valley Line was built in 1994.
The extension will continue rail service 24 miles from the Riverside-Downtown station to South Perris, and add new stations at Riverside-Hunter Park/UCR, Moreno Valley/March Field, Perris – Downtown and Perris – South. The extension will provide greater access to Metrolink service for residents throughout the region and in Menifee, Murrieta, Temecula, San Jacinto, Hemet, Lake Elsinore and Wildomar.
With the extension of the Perris Valley Line, there will be four new stations at Riverside-Hunter Park/UCR, Moreno Valley/March Field, Perris – Downtown and Perris – South. Click on the links below to view detailed station and connecting transit information.
Perris Valley Metrolink Lawsuit Settled
$3 million settlement reached with homegrown
environmental group Friends Of Riverside’s Hills
“We are pleased that the environmental and community benefits of the Project have been significantly increased by this agreement,” said Len Nunney, Secretary of Friends of Riverside’s Hills.
“It will help the most heavily impacted homeowners in the neighborhood, and increase preservation of the natural open space area near to the tracks that is part of an important linkage between Box Springs Mountain Reserve and Sycamore Canyon Wilderness Park.”
A local environmental group has agreed to drop a lawsuit blocking a $237 million commuter rail extension from Riverside to Perris, in exchange for $3 million in concessions, officials said Wednesday, July 10.
The Riverside County Transportation Commission’s chief announced the Perris Valley Line deal with Friends of Riverside’s Hills at Wednesday’s commission meeting.
Pursue Local Resolution To Rail Project Wrangling
The Press Enterprise Editorial, May 28, 2013
HE PRESS-ENTERPRISE
May 28, 2013; 04:03 PM
Expedience does not justify carving another special loophole in the state’s environmental law. Riverside County transportation officials should dump an effort to get state legislators to bypass an adverse local court ruling, and focus instead on resolving the issues raised in the court decision.
Members of the Riverside County Transportation Commission last week urged legislators to help the commission circumvent a court decision that has delayed a commuter rail project. But a local solution that ends the case and allows the rail plans to move ahead would be a far more effective — and practical — approach. The commission wants to add a $232.7 million expansion to the Metrolink system, which would extend the rail line 24 miles from Riverside to Perris.
Friends of Riverside’s Hills in 2011 sued the commission under the California Environmental Quality Act, charging that the environmental report for the rail project was inadequate. A Riverside County Superior Court judge this month said the document failed to properly address a series of issues, including construction noise and “wheel squeal” from commuter rail operations. The judge gave the commission 90 days to come up with fixes for the flaws in the environmental report.
The commission should use that time to address the concerns the judge listed, and try to end the legal wrangle. Instead, commissioners — elected officials from Riverside County and its cities — want legislators to grant the project a special exemption from the rules.
But frustration at a legal setback does not warrant more mindless tinkering with the environmental law. The California Environmental Quality Act requires public agencies to study the environmental effects of development plans, and take steps to avoid or remedy any damage. The law’s provisions can be frustratingly ambiguous, leading to confusion, inconsistency and conflict. And the law’s vague wording can invite abusive lawsuits that tie up projects over minor technicalities.
However, the state will not clarify the law or end abuses of it by cutting yet another loophole for a pet project. Legislators skirted the environmental law to aid NFL stadium proposals in 2009 and 2011. Another bill in 2011 allowed the governor to protect some projects, on a case-by-case basis, from legal challenges under the environmental act. Such changes subvert the law instead of improving it, by focusing on political favors rather than environmental protection. And giving a pass to projects with enough clout and money behind them is unfair to everyone else.
The transportation commission worries that the legal delays will add to the cost of the project and threaten $75 million in federal tax funding for the rail line. But the most realistic approach available is to resolve the legal issues so the project can proceed. The commission’s appeal to the Legislature is an unlikely gambit, as well as an unsavory special-interest tactic that seeks political advantage regardless of the public policy consequences.
A local resolution of the Metrolink expansion issues would be a far better solution. The environmental law needs clarification and streamlining, not more single-project exemptions.
Local Lawmakers Push To Circumvent Judge’s Ruling
BY JEFF HORSEMAN AND PETER SUROWSKI STAFF WRITERS May 23, 2013; 05:23 PM
Local officials are urging lawmakers to help them counter a judge’s decision that has put a planned Metrolink extension on an indefinite hiatus.
Riverside County Supervisor Marion Ashley said he flew to Sacramento on Thursday, May 23, with Riverside County Transportation Commission Chairwoman Karen Spiegel and Perris Mayor Daryl Busch to meet with two Democratic lawmakers from Riverside County, State Senator Richard Roth and State Assemblyman Jose Medina.
Their goal is to revive the $232.7 million Perris Valley Line project that would build 24 miles of track and four stations from Riverside to the southern edge of Perris.
Judge Sharon J. Waters ruled the project’s environmental impact report violates the California Environmental Quality Act. In a judgment released last week, she said all approvals for the report, which is vital to the project, must be rescinded.
The decision was renounced by several local officials, including Ashley, who is the vice-chair of transportation commission’s board of directors.
“We’re just flabbergasted (by the ruling). Outraged is a good word,” he said. “It’s just awfully hard to understand if you’re a normal human being.”
Ashley said the ruling underscores the need to reform CEQA, which regulates the impacts a project can have on the environment. He said one option available to Roth and Medina is trying to make the project exempt from the provisions of the act.
Members of Friends of Riverside’s Hills, an environmental group that filed the suit, said what the officials are doing shows disregard for the rule of law.
“I think it is a source of serious concern when public agencies view themselves as being above the law, which is what this effort suggests,” said Len Nunney, the secretary for Friends.
What the trio of officials is asking of the lawmakers is no easy thing to accomplish, said Chuck Dalldorf, a spokesperson for Roth.
“It’s certainly possible, but it’s highly complicated,” Dalldorf said.
Generally, legislators introduce bills in January or February. This late in the year, the lawmakers would have two choices: they could get a waiver for the already-broken deadlines, which is “challenging to get,” or they would need to amend an already-existing bill to include the Perris Valley Line’s CEQA exemption, Dalldorf said.
The commuter rail project, when started, is expected to take 18 months to complete and see about 4,000 boardings daily, according to John Standiford, the deputy executive director of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the lead agency on the project.
Judge Sides With Metrolink Opponents
April 1, 2013 by Peter Surowski
Ruling on Metrolink More Complicated Than It Seemed
Last week, I reported on information released by the Riverside Superior Court about a lawsuit against the Riverside County Transportation Commission for its planned Perris Valley Line.
The court released one sentence about the ruling on its public access website: “Writ of mandate is denied.”
I and folks on both sides of the lawsuit took that to mean that the judge ruled in favor of RCTC and shot down the writ of mandate filed in 2011 by Friends of Riverside’s Hills, an environmental group.
Then I got my hands on the full text of the ruling, which you can read by clicking here.
RELATED: Judge sides with opponents on some Metrolink issues
It showed that, sure, the judge ruled in favor of RCTC on the majority of the counts, but it ruled in favor of Friends on five. All it takes is one favorable ruling on one item to hold up construction, said Ray Johnson, an attorney for Friends.
The ruling was a surprise to people on both sides of the lawsuit who read the decision before receiving the full ruling in the mail later.
“We got whiplash,” from the about-face the full-text ruling seemed to be from the truncated one-sentence ruling, said Johnson.
RELATED: Perris approves construction on new Metrolink station
This leaves those involved — but especially me — to wonder why the court would offer such an over-simplified piece of information on its public access website.
“There’s no reason they couldn’t have had a more accurate statement,” said John Standiford, the deputy executive director of RCTC.
So what happens next? Neither side is 100 percent sure. They’re trying to figure out what happens next and how they can resolve the problem.
“What we hope is they take the judge’s criticisms to heart and mitigate the issues on which they lost,” said Len Nunney, the secretary for Friends.
What Looked Like A Green Light For Construction Of A New Metrolink Line Last Week Looks More Like A Yellow Light This Week
Last week, I reported on information released by the Riverside Superior Court about a lawsuit against the Riverside County Transportation Commission for its planned Perris Valley Line.
The court released one sentence about the ruling on its public access website: “Writ of mandate is denied.”
I and folks on both sides of the lawsuit took that to mean that the judge ruled in favor of RCTC and shot down the writ of mandate filed in 2011 by Friends of Riverside’s Hills, an environmental group.
Then I got my hands on the full text of the ruling.
RELATED: Judge sides with opponents on some Metrolink issues
It showed that, sure, the judge ruled in favor of RCTC on the majority of the counts, but it ruled in favor of Friends on five. All it takes is one favorable ruling on one item to hold up construction, said Ray Johnson, an attorney for Friends.
The ruling was a surprise to people on both sides of the lawsuit who read the decision before receiving the full ruling in the mail later.
“We got whiplash,” from the about-face the full-text ruling seemed to be from the truncated one-sentence ruling, said Johnson.
RELATED: Perris approves construction on new Metrolink station
This leaves those involved — but especially me — to wonder why the court would offer such an over-simplified piece of information on its public access website.
“There’s no reason they couldn’t have had a more accurate statement,” said John Standiford, the deputy executive director of RCTC.
So what happens next? Neither side is 100 percent sure. They’re trying to figure out what happens next and how they can resolve the problem.
“What we hope is they take the judge’s criticisms to heart and mitigate the issues on which they lost,” said Len Nunney, the secretary for Friends.
When The Dust Settles Environmental Group Wins Lawsuit
The full text of a court ruling on Metrolink’s planned Perris Valley Line shows that while a judge supported transportation officials on most issues, she agreed with opponents that noise, pedestrian safety and other key points remain to be addressed.
Both sides are trying to figure out what to do next.
The court released a single-sentence ruling late Thursday, March 28, denying a writ of mandate filed by the environmental group Friends of Riverside’s Hills. The group sued the Riverside County Transportation Commission in 2011, claiming it had failed to address a number of environmental consequences of the commuter train plan.
Yet the full text made available Monday, April 1, shows Judge Sharon J. Waters ruled for Friends on five of 15 points noted in the project’s environmental impact report: the effects on soil, use of track lubricant, pedestrian safety, train wheel noise and construction noise.
Riverside County Transportation Commission officials haven’t yet determined what the ruling means for the project.
“We’re kind of scrambling to figure out the impact,” said John Standiford, the commission’s deputy executive director.
The $232.7 million project would add 24 miles of rails and four Metrolink stations: one in Riverside, one near March Air Reserve Base and two in Perris. The Riverside-Perris line is projected to see about 4,000 boardings daily.
Standiford said he was surprised by the ruling, in view of the court’s one-sentence summary of the ruling released last week.
“There’s no reason they couldn’t have had a more accurate statement,” Standiford said.
For Friends, the full text of the ruling was a happy surprise, said Ray Johnson, an attorney representing Friends.
“We think she got it right that there were significant issues … that weren’t addressed,” he said.
The judge found for RCTC on other issues named in the suit, including the project’s effect on air quality and on the habitat of the western spadefoot toad, a sensitive species.
Attorneys for Friends and the transportation commission will discuss how they can address the decision, Johnson said. He is expected to write a proposed judgment by April 24.
RCTC will discuss its next move during a closed session at its board meeting on Wednesday, April 3.
The environmental group hopes the transportation commission will change the project to address their concerns, said Len Nunney, secretary for Friends.
“(We hope) to make it a much more satisfactory project,” he said.
– See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/perris/perris-headlines-index/20130401-perris-judge-sides-with-opponents-on-some-metrolink-issues.ece#sthash.csU9CXS0.dpuf
The full text of a court ruling on Metrolink’s planned Perris Valley Line shows that while a judge supported transportation officials on most issues, she agreed with opponents that noise, pedestrian safety and other key points remain to be addressed.
Both sides are trying to figure out what to do next.
The court released a single-sentence ruling late Thursday, March 28, denying a writ of mandate filed by the environmental group Friends of Riverside’s Hills. The group sued the Riverside County Transportation Commission in 2011, claiming it had failed to address a number of environmental consequences of the commuter train plan.
Yet the full text made available Monday, April 1, shows Judge Sharon J. Waters ruled for Friends on five of 15 points noted in the project’s environmental impact report: the effects on soil, use of track lubricant, pedestrian safety, train wheel noise and construction noise.
Riverside County Transportation Commission officials haven’t yet determined what the ruling means for the project.
“We’re kind of scrambling to figure out the impact,” said John Standiford, the commission’s deputy executive director.
The $232.7 million project would add 24 miles of rails and four Metrolink stations: one in Riverside, one near March Air Reserve Base and two in Perris. The Riverside-Perris line is projected to see about 4,000 boardings daily.
Standiford said he was surprised by the ruling, in view of the court’s one-sentence summary of the ruling released last week.
“There’s no reason they couldn’t have had a more accurate statement,” Standiford said.
For Friends, the full text of the ruling was a happy surprise, said Ray Johnson, an attorney representing Friends.
“We think she got it right that there were significant issues … that weren’t addressed,” he said.
The judge found for RCTC on other issues named in the suit, including the project’s effect on air quality and on the habitat of the western spadefoot toad, a sensitive species.
Attorneys for Friends and the transportation commission will discuss how they can address the decision, Johnson said. He is expected to write a proposed judgment by April 24.
RCTC will discuss its next move during a closed session at its board meeting on Wednesday, April 3.
The environmental group hopes the transportation commission will change the project to address their concerns, said Len Nunney, secretary for Friends.
“(We hope) to make it a much more satisfactory project,” he said.
– See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/perris/perris-headlines-index/20130401-perris-judge-sides-with-opponents-on-some-metrolink-issues.ece#sthash.csU9CXS0.dpuf
The full text of a court ruling on Metrolink’s planned Perris Valley Line shows that while a judge supported transportation officials on most issues, she agreed with opponents that noise, pedestrian safety and other key points remain to be addressed.
Both sides are trying to figure out what to do next.
The court released a single-sentence ruling late Thursday, March 28, denying a writ of mandate filed by the environmental group Friends of Riverside’s Hills. The group sued the Riverside County Transportation Commission in 2011, claiming it had failed to address a number of environmental consequences of the commuter train plan.
Yet the full text made available Monday, April 1, shows Judge Sharon J. Waters ruled for Friends on five of 15 points noted in the project’s environmental impact report: the effects on soil, use of track lubricant, pedestrian safety, train wheel noise and construction noise.
Riverside County Transportation Commission officials haven’t yet determined what the ruling means for the project.
“We’re kind of scrambling to figure out the impact,” said John Standiford, the commission’s deputy executive director.
The $232.7 million project would add 24 miles of rails and four Metrolink stations: one in Riverside, one near March Air Reserve Base and two in Perris. The Riverside-Perris line is projected to see about 4,000 boardings daily.
Standiford said he was surprised by the ruling, in view of the court’s one-sentence summary of the ruling released last week.
“There’s no reason they couldn’t have had a more accurate statement,” Standiford said.
For Friends, the full text of the ruling was a happy surprise, said Ray Johnson, an attorney representing Friends.
“We think she got it right that there were significant issues … that weren’t addressed,” he said.
The judge found for RCTC on other issues named in the suit, including the project’s effect on air quality and on the habitat of the western spadefoot toad, a sensitive species.
Attorneys for Friends and the transportation commission will discuss how they can address the decision, Johnson said. He is expected to write a proposed judgment by April 24.
RCTC will discuss its next move during a closed session at its board meeting on Wednesday, April 3.
The environmental group hopes the transportation commission will change the project to address their concerns, said Len Nunney, secretary for Friends.
“(We hope) to make it a much more satisfactory project,” he said.
– See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/perris/perris-headlines-index/20130401-perris-judge-sides-with-opponents-on-some-metrolink-issues.ece#sthash.csU9CXS0.dpuf
The full text of a court ruling on Metrolink’s planned Perris Valley Line shows that while a judge supported transportation officials on most issues, she agreed with opponents that noise, pedestrian safety and other key points remain to be addressed.
Both sides are trying to figure out what to do next.
The court released a single-sentence ruling late Thursday, March 28, denying a writ of mandate filed by the environmental group Friends of Riverside’s Hills. The group sued the Riverside County Transportation Commission in 2011, claiming it had failed to address a number of environmental consequences of the commuter train plan.
Yet the full text made available Monday, April 1, shows Judge Sharon J. Waters ruled for Friends on five of 15 points noted in the project’s environmental impact report: the effects on soil, use of track lubricant, pedestrian safety, train wheel noise and construction noise.
Riverside County Transportation Commission officials haven’t yet determined what the ruling means for the project.
“We’re kind of scrambling to figure out the impact,” said John Standiford, the commission’s deputy executive director.
The $232.7 million project would add 24 miles of rails and four Metrolink stations: one in Riverside, one near March Air Reserve Base and two in Perris. The Riverside-Perris line is projected to see about 4,000 boardings daily.
Standiford said he was surprised by the ruling, in view of the court’s one-sentence summary of the ruling released last week.
“There’s no reason they couldn’t have had a more accurate statement,” Standiford said.
For Friends, the full text of the ruling was a happy surprise, said Ray Johnson, an attorney representing Friends.
“We think she got it right that there were significant issues … that weren’t addressed,” he said.
The judge found for RCTC on other issues named in the suit, including the project’s effect on air quality and on the habitat of the western spadefoot toad, a sensitive species.
Attorneys for Friends and the transportation commission will discuss how they can address the decision, Johnson said. He is expected to write a proposed judgment by April 24.
RCTC will discuss its next move during a closed session at its board meeting on Wednesday, April 3.
The environmental group hopes the transportation commission will change the project to address their concerns, said Len Nunney, secretary for Friends.
“(We hope) to make it a much more satisfactory project,” he said.
– See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/perris/perris-headlines-index/20130401-perris-judge-sides-with-opponents-on-some-metrolink-issues.ece#sthash.csU9CXS0.dpuf
Judge sides with opponents on some Metrolink issues – See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/perris/perris-headlines-index/20130401-perris-judge-sides-with-opponents-on-some-metrolink-issues.ece#sthash.csU9CXS0.dpuf
Judge Tosses Perris Valley Metrolink Project’s Environmental Impact Report
BY PETER SUROWSKI AND RICHARD K. DE ATLEY
A judge has rejected the environmental impact report for a proposed Metrolink line from Riverside to Perris, telling the Riverside County Transportation Commission that it failed to address such issues as train wheel noise and pedestrian safety.
The decision is a significant setback for the $232.7 million project that would add 24 miles of track and four new stations from Riverside to Perris to the Metrolink system. Projections for the line say it would see about 4,000 boardings daily.
The commission can pursue design and planning activities, but cannot proceed with any construction, Superior Court Judge Sharon J. Waters said in a ruling made available Thursday, May 16.
“I was pleased with the judgment,” said Ray Johnson, an attorney for Friends of Riverside’s Hills, a nonprofit environmental group that filed the suit in August 2011. “I think it was the appropriate decision.”
The group’s lawsuit said the RCTC failed to follow the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act, which requires governmental agencies to disclose a project’s impact and work to reduce them.
An environmental impact report describes the impact a project will have. They often cost tens of thousands of dollars and take months to complete.
A release from the commission said the decision “indefinitely delays” the project.
John Standiford, the deputy executive director of RCTC, said the lawsuit abused the intent of the quality act.
“We are disappointed in the decision and frustrated about how CEQA is being misused to stop a project that is not only environmentally friendly but also provides a number of benefits, such as a quiet zone, sound walls and safety improvements at rail crossings,” Standiford said.
PDF: Judge’s ruling on Metrolink’s proposed Perris Valley Line
METROLINK: Judge’s ruling on Perris Valley Line
– See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/riverside-county/perris/perris-headlines-index/20130516-perris-valley-line-judge-tosses-projects-environmental-impact-report.ece#sthash.v8dFqCW1.dpuf