The Santa Margarita Group of the Sierra Club would like to make you aware of a potential threat to Lake Elsinore’s namesake attraction and thriving eco-system, the lake itself. An activist group from Lake Elsinore will hold an open meeting in opposition to the project on February 26, 2018, at 7 pm, in the VFW Hall in Wildomar.
Sierra Club member and spokesperson for “Save Our Lake,” Linda Ridenour writes, “Now it is our turn to weigh in with the authorities on the madness of changing our lake into a pumped storage project for the benefit of a few entrepreneurs who would turn our lake into a muddy pond to benefit San Diego’s electric energy needs. The City, the Water District, several homeowner groups have all responded to the threat, and now it is our turn to speak up and demand our rights.”
Questions regarding the meeting should be directed to Pete Dawson at (951) 202-1584.
The following excerpts from reporter Michael Williams description of the project are taken from the August 25, 2017, issue of the Press-Enterprise:
The Vista-based firm Nevada Hydro recently submitted a Notice of Intent to File (a) License Application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on behalf of its Lake Elsinore Advanced Pumped Storage project, popularly known as LEAPS.
Nevada Hydro’s plan calls for construction of a reservoir atop the mountains west of Lake Elsinore and an underground power plant with turbines on the lake’s western edge. Water from the reservoir would be released downhill to the lake to turn the turbines, generating up to 500 megawatts during peak demand for electricity, which would be conveyed over power lines to Southern California Edison’s and San Diego Gas & Electric’s systems. Water would be pumped from the lake up to the reservoir at night when electrical costs are cheaper. The project surfaced in the late 1980s and finally reached the commission for a decision in July 2011. The commissioners dismissed the application but allowed the proponents to reapply.
The complete article can be found at:
https://www.pe.com/2017/08/25/dormant-lake-elsinore-electricity-project-powered-up-again/
An update to this information can be found at https://www.pe.com/2018/01/13/revived-lake-elsinore-hydroelectric-project-renews-fears-over-popular-lakes-future/
|
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Threat to Lake Elsinore: Save the Lake
Monday, January 15, 2018
Press Release: Transportation Workshop
Transportation Experts Address Rail Service for
I-15 Corridor
By Mary-Ellen (Elena) Garcia
The dream of traveling quickly and efficiently between Ontario and
San Diego on a publicly-funded rail service is, it seems, tantalizingly
possible but also challenging to implement. This seems to be the logical
conclusion of a half-day workshop held on October 27, 2017, sponsored by the
Santa Margarita Group of the Sierra Club. Michael Momeni, Ph.D., workshop
organizer, gathered a panel of four experts to address various aspects of such
a commuter rail system, including its technical, political, and economic
issues. What follows here is a summary of their remarks.
John Rogers, P.E., F.ASCE Los Angeles Section President, addressed
the geotechnical considerations of such a project. If a rail line of 106 miles
were projected, connecting Rancho Cucamonga and Mission Valley (San Diego), the
line would intersect with 9 freeways or highways; 97 highways or watercourse
crossings and three railroad crossings. Ideally it would connect
destination hubs between the two end points, such as San Bernardino, Riverside,
Corona and so on. Considerations for riders to get to and from the line would
include issues such as parking a vehicle, using local public transportation,
and ride sharing, to name a few. Right-of-way issues would include the fact
that freeway medians could only support either light- or high-speed rail, but
not both. Further, stations on medians would need to provide elevators or
stairs for passengers and access from and to parking or loading/unloading
areas. Final considerations were the geological realities found along the
1-15 corridor, such as earthquake fault lines, landslide areas, soil
liquefaction, potential for dam inundation and seismic settlement. This
presentation included 17 maps showing where there were potential locations for
different types of these geologic constraints.
John Standiford, Deputy
Executive Director for the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC),
spoke about the next generation rail study and the countywide long-range
transportation plan. The RCTC is a member of the Southern California Rail
Authority, or MetroLink, and is collaborating with the CalTrans Division of
Rail on the Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass Rail Study, which will identify
and prioritize rail investments through 2040. The goal of the study is to
provide daily train service between Los Angeles’s Union Station and the
Coachella Valley. Currently a service development plan is being studied, with anticipated
approval by NEPA/CEQA in 2019. The Next Generation Rail Study hopes to identify
other high-traffic corridors in the county and to discuss alternative
transportation technologies for investment and infrastructure implementation.
Steve Fox, Senior Regional Planner for the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG), discussed the Los Angeles-San Bernardino
Inter-County Transit and Rail Connectivity Study. Significant improvements in
rail service and highway infrastructure are already underway or are being
planned for the inter-county corridor. L.A. Metro and the San Bernardino
Transportation Authority have joined in this study with a number of goals, one
seeking to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of providing both light
rail and commuter rail service in the same corridor. Another is to make sure
that transportation planning benefits residents of San Bernardino County and
serves the Ontario Airport. An overarching goal, subsuming interim study
objectives, is to determine the optimum mix of commuter rail, light rail, BRT,
and express bus in the corridor. Fleshing out various aspects of the study,
slides detailed the inter-county objectives, travel market analysis and
transportation alternatives and also presented several maps of potential configurations.
The last speaker was Michelle Boehm, Southern California Regional
Director of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, who spoke on high-speed
rail development from Ontario to San Diego. The Authority is responsible for
planning, designing, building and operating the high-speed rail system, which
will run from San Francisco to the Los Angeles basin in under three hours. It
will eventually extend to Sacramento and San Diego, 800 miles in all. It will
connect all major population centers in California, tie local economies
together, provide new mobility options, establish long-term economic growth,
and help revitalize station areas.
The Los Angeles to San Diego project section via the Inland Empire
is part of Phase 2 of the California High-Speed Rail system. It will connect
Los Angeles and San Diego in just 1 hour 20 minutes, and close the existing
passenger rail gap between the Inland Empire and San Diego County. This system
will use 100% renewable energy, virtually eliminating emissions and improving
air quality. Routing alternatives along the approximately 170-mile corridor are
currently being evaluated. Stations are being considered in locations including
Ontario Airport, San Bernardino, Riverside, Corona, Murrieta, Escondido, and
San Diego. The various aspects of the projects, including maps, economic
impacts, small business participation, and increased job opportunities, are
detailed in the many slides that illustrate her presentation.
Organizer Momeni, Chair of the Transportation Task Force for the
Santa Margarita Group, advocates commuter rail for the Inland Empire as he
writes:” It would stimulate economic development within the corridor. It would
reduce the use of Interstate 15/215 by single commuters. It would link to
the existing commuter train services both in San Diego and Los Angeles
counties. It would improve air quality within the region by removing a
large number of commuter cars from the highways. It would improve the safety
and quality of life for commuters.” It was not surprising that his dream
was supported by much of what had been covered when the workshop wrapped up at
2:00 pm.
For more information on speakers and copies of the slides used in
their presentations, see:
Saturday, January 13, 2018
Lawsuit Challenges Development That Could Doom California's Santa Ana Mountain Lions
TEMECULA, Calif.— Conservation organizations sued the city of Temecula today for approving the Altair housing development, which would endanger the local mountain lion population by disrupting critical wildlife corridors. The groups include the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, Mountain Lion Foundation and Cougar Connection.
Please read the following article:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/altair-housing-development-01-11-2018.php
Thursday, December 14, 2017
ALTAIR project was approved: The Passway to Elimination of the Mountain Lions in our Region
Last night approximately at 9:00 PM, December 12, 2017, the City
Council of Temecula approved the ALTAIR application for development. The
Council members accepted the plan without any changes. Mayor Edwards made the
final decision and pushed the vote forward. She said that the Nature Center will
not be acted on in the near future because there is no money or plan for it at
this time. Both Mayor Pro Tem Matt Rahn and Councilman Jeff Comerchero agreed
that they can do without the Nature Center. In spite of the efforts by the
Mayor Pro Tem to eliminate the Nature Center from the proposed plan, Councilmember Michael Naggar adamantly resisted
any changes to the proposal. It was retained in the final proposed construction
plan.
The final vote for approval was 4 Yes (Edwards, Rahn, Comerchero,
and Naggar) and one No (James Stewart). Environmental groups all opposed
inclusion for the Nature Center in the final plan. Any opposition group has a
30-day window to file a court action for removal of the Nature Center from the
plan.
What is your position? Are you willing to support a legal action
to stop the obstruction of the only wildlife corridor in our region?
Monday, December 11, 2017
Explosion of developments in Temecula-Murrieta region, but no mass-transit system
You have noticed that Temecula is building high-density housing on the south side of the Rancho California between Ynez Road and Margarita Road. The sizes of these developments are large and would impact the vehicular congestion within the area already overused. Since these are high-density developments, they would impact the traffic on the Interstate 15, and Rancho California.
An explosion of developments on Butterfield Stage Road between Rancho California and Murrieta Hot Spring Road has already been planned. These developments are very large and would further squeeze usage of the local roads and the Interstate 15. ALTAIR development on the western side of the Old Town in Temecula is just one among many others planned for Temecula.
Before long the population of Temecula-Murrieta would exceed 500,000 people. We are still dependent on a single road, the Interstate 15 for the regional transportation. The Interstate 15 in Temecula-Murrieta will change to the same status as the traffic on the Interstate 15 between Escondido and the highway 52, near Miramar exit.
What are we planning on alleviating the congested Interstate 15 problem? Adding an additional lane to each side of the road will not solve the problem.
We need seriously support a regional electric commuter train, now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=tqrhOpoE-vs&list=PLHcHUZmaa2 M5Pcij_Fe8vniL2BqwbS-2I&index= 12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Tuesday, November 28, 2017
Honorable Maryann Edwards, Mayor,
Honorable Council Member Dr. Matt Rahn, Mayor Pro-Tem
Honorable Council Member Michael Naggar
Honorable Council Member Jeff Comerchero
Honorable Council Member James Stewart
Subject: Altair Disposition
At the Nov. 15th, 2017, planning commission meeting, a disturbing decision was made to rubber-stamp the adoption of the proposed Altair housing development. The Commissioners ignored the basic quality of life arguments and even the legal irregularities that make this site untenable.
Among my many concerns are:
· Too dense, including a 5-story apartment house;
· Old Town becomes wedged in between the freeway, homes and another freeway destroying its tourist appeal;


· Clogged intersections at Rancho California Rd., Winchester, Ynez, etc.

· Wildlife crossing degradation with more trespass, trails, and Nature Center;
· Ignoring requirements of the Multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan and the Fish and Wildlife Agencies;
· Escarpment and green-hill destruction making Temecula into an LA suburb
1. Base Case: no development at the proposed site according to the presently assigned Zoning;
2. Redesign the presently submitted Altair proposal using a lower density development;
3. Change to 2-lane, not 4-lane, Western Bypass that accommodates reduced density and is located lower on the hillside;
4. Implement minimum human impact from the development outside the Western Bypass boundary, particularly on the civic site and Village G;
5. Redesign the proposed facility to protect the wildlife corridor and I-15 wildlife crossing that includes barriers, law enforcement and conservation of the civic phase parcels without trails, structures, etc.; a minimum human impact.
The Altair development is beautiful as shown on paper, but it doesn’t fit in the proposed western slot of land. The environmental impacts, degradation of the quality of life and diminishing resources in Temecula precludes our City Council accepting the presently proposed ALTAIR development plan.
Respectfully,
Pam Nelson, Chair Sierra Club, Santa Margarita Group
Sunday, November 5, 2017
Status of Suburban and Commuter Trains in the United Sates as 2013
The following list is an incomplete list of the suburban and commuter train systems in the United States since 2013. The list would require an update and some information could be incomplete. But, it is a good starting point for investigation.
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
City |
Name
|
Official Link
|
Lines
|
Stations
|
System Length
|
Daily Ridership
| |
1
|
11
|
156
|
3,900
| ||||
1
|
9
|
51
|
1,600
| ||||
11
|
127
|
592
|
129,400
| ||||
11
|
239
|
785
|
296,600
| ||||
Chicago–South Bend
|
1
|
20
|
140
|
11,500
| |||
1
|
10
|
34.7
|
8,300
| ||||
1
|
6
|
33.8
|
1,500
| ||||
2
|
9
|
47.82
| |||||
Los Angeles-Orange County-Inland Empire
|
7
|
55
|
512
|
42,265
| |||
Miami/Fort Lauderdale/West Palm Beach
|
1
|
18
|
114.1
|
13,700
| |||
1
|
6
|
64
|
2,100
| ||||
1
|
6
|
51.5
|
1,000
| ||||
New Haven–New London
|
1
|
13
|
94.5
|
1,900
| |||
New Jersey/New York Metropolitan Area
|
11
|
160
|
1530
|
301,746
| |||
10
|
124
|
1100
|
345,300
| ||||
6
|
120
|
617.8
|
286,100
| ||||
1
|
12
|
50
|
4,300
| ||||
13
|
153
|
465
|
125,300
| ||||
1
|
5
|
23.7
|
1,400
| ||||
Salt Lake City/Ogden/Provo
|
1
|
16
|
142
| ||||
San Diego/Oceanside
|
1
|
8
|
66
|
4,800
| |||
San Francisco/San Jose
|
1
|
32
|
124.6
|
58,250
| |||
San Jose/Stockton
|
1
|
10
|
138
|
2,800
| |||
San Rafael/Santa Rosa
|
1
|
10
|
43
|
?
| |||
Seattle/Tacoma
|
2
|
9
|
132
|
17,057
| |||
Washington–Baltimore, Maryland/part of West Virginia
|
3
|
43
|
301
|
31,300
| |||
Washington–Northern Virginia
|
2
|
18
|
145
|
19,000
|
The source for this data
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suburban_and_commuter_rail_systems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suburban_and_commuter_rail_systems
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)