Go. See. Do. Riverside and Beyond
Update from the County:
Contract awarded.
Preconstruction meeting Monday.
Work to begin in 10 days.
Estimated completion July 2016.
** Additional Info 02/28/16 **
I have been asked if I know where Fairway Drive will connect with McAllister and Van Buren. I will try to find a better answer, but here is my best guess: (I created this image by laying a map from this 2014 County document over a map from Google Maps.)
Darn. I already paid my tickets.
Here is an excerpt from the California Judicial Branch‘s website: (If this applies to you, make sure you read the full document)
On June 24, 2015, the Governor signed into law a one-time amnesty program for unpaid traffic and non-traffic infraction tickets. Here is what you should know:
When will the amnesty program be available?
Start: October 1, 2015
End: March 31, 2017Who can participate in the amnesty program?
There are two groups of people who can participate in the amnesty program:
- Persons with unpaid tickets whose fines were originally due to be paid date on or before January 1, 2013, who have not made a payment after June 24, 2015, may be eligible to have both their debt reduced by 50 or 80 percent depending on income and their driver’s license reinstated, unless an exclusion discussed below applies.
- Persons who made a payment after June 24, 2015 on a ticket are not eligible for a reduction for that ticket, but may be eligible to have their driver’s license reinstated if they are in good standing on a payment plan with a comprehensive collection program.
Persons with more than one ticket may not be eligible for a reduction on an individual ticket if the eligibility criteria are not satisfied for the ticket. Please check with your court for additional information.- Any persons eligible to have a driver’s license, (including undocumented individuals who are eligible for a driver’s license under AB 60) are entitled to participate in the traffic amnesty program if they meet the eligibility requirements.
[…]
Some pictures of the transportation exhibits at Supervisor Jeffries’ La Sierra / Lake Mathews town hall meeting last night…
Major Projects in the area:
(I segmented the larger map into nine smaller pieces so you can read the details more easily.)
Cajalco Road Widening Project:
(I plan to explore this project in future posts.)
Although the proceedings aren’t posted on the County’s website as of the time I am writing this, I received word that Citrus Heights II was approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on June 30th.
The Citrus Heights II tract is just south of the previously approved Citrus Heights development referenced in a previous post.
I have also been told that this development will provide the final portion of funding for Street “A”, although the County is still working to acquire a few of the properties needed to construct the street.
** Update 07/15/15 **
This is a picture of an exhibit from Riverside County’s La Sierra / Lake Mathews town hall meeting on 07/14/15 confirming the current status of “A” Street:
** End of update **
From agenda item 16-1 of the Riverside County Board of Supervisor’s June 30, 2015 meeting:
Tentative Tract Map No. 36475 would construct several public roadways on the site. Access to the Project site would be provided via two (2) full access connections from an approved, neighboring development project to the north (TR 36390, marketing name “Citrus Heights”). From Citrus Heights, Project residents would have direct connections to McAllister Street and Street “A”. Street “A” is also known as “Fairway Drive”, an approved public street that will provide a connection between McAllister Street and Van Buren Boulevard. In 2012 the Board of Supervisors authorized Fast Track status to the adjacent SP325 and this project site in recognition that both projects are causing the construction of Street “A”, which will not only provide access to these projects but which also greatly benefits the adjacent communities of Victoria Grove, the Orchard, and other properties around McAllister Street by bringing a connection to Van Buren Blvd.
Information on Citrus Heights II from the same document:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36475 is a Schedule “A” subdivision of 168.33 acres into 171 residential lots on 79.83 acres, two water quality/detention basins on 5.26 acres, four park sites on 3.78 acres, and 21 open space lots encompassing 50.56 acres. In addition, 29.31 acres will be dedicated for on-site infrastructure development (Streets “A” through “R”). Lot sizes for the proposed residential units will range from 14,010 sq. ft. to 116,073 sq. ft. with a minimum lot size of 12,101 sq. ft.
Previous posts about the Dufferin Closure, “A” Street / Fairway Drive and Citrus Heights topics can be found by clicking on the “dufferin closure” tag.
Have you driven on Temescal Canyon Road recently near Corona Crossings and Dos Lagos, and wondered what those pipes running along (and under) the road are for?
I was curious too, but couldn’t find anything on Corona’s website or the contractor’s website. After a bit of searching, I found some information on the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority’s (SAWPA) website.
Here is what I found:
(image and quoted text from SAWPA’s website)
Reach V Rehabilitation and Improvement Project
The work includes lining of approximately five miles of the Inland Empire Brine Line in the Temescal Valley, Riverside County and the City of Corona. The project begins at Temescal Canyon Road at Tom Barnes Road and continues southbound on Temescal Canyon Road to Glen Ivy Road.
What is the Inland Empire Brine Line?
Short answer: A separate system that transports salty wastewater generated by certain industrial processes for treatment prior to discharge to the ocean.
The Inland Empire Brine Line (Brine Line) is a unique and indispensable resource for the Inland Empire region, providing a facility for exporting salt from inland areas to the ocean. Salt export is important for protecting water quality and meeting regulatory requirements. The Brine Line provides a viable salty wastewater disposal facility for industries that generate salty wastewater during the manufacturing process, or from cooling, boiler blowdown or other processes. Salty wastewater from industry is redirected from the local wastewater treatment plant to the Brine Line, reducing the salt discharged from treatment plants into the Santa Ana River protecting plants and animals dependent on lower salt water and reducing the salt which percolates into the groundwater basins.
Why does it need to be rehabilitated and improved?
Short answer: After a failure in 2011, a study revealed that about 21,000 feet of pipe was at medium/high risk and should be repaired.
In October 2011, a catastrophic failure of the Brine Line occurred on Reach 5, a 22 mile portion of the Brine Line that provides service to customers within Eastern Municipal Water District’s service area. Subsequent excavation and repair of the brine line revealed the pipe is “out of round” or slightly oval. […]
In February 2013, SAWPA hired RMC Water and Environmental to perform a risk assessment of the Reach V Pipeline. The work included preparation of a pipeline condition study to evaluate approximately eight (8) miles of Reach V. The results of the study found that of the 41,000 feet of pipe evaluated, about 21,000 feet of pipe were in the high and medium risk categories and recommended repair with a trechless repair method such as a cured-in-place pipe lining (CIPP). The remaining 20,000 feet of pipe were placed in the low risk category for continued monitoring through periodic CCTV inspection.
So, what are those pipes?
Short answer: Bypass pipes that will carry the wastewater while the Brine Line is being repaired.
By-pass pumping of exisiting flows is necessary with this rehabiliation method. Four separate by-pass systems will be necessary to implement the project. The longest by-pass is about 12,000 feet.
How much will this cost?
Short answer: The contract amount was $12,561,000.
In August 2014, SAWPA issued a notice inviting bids for construction of the project. On October 21, 2014, SAWPA awarded the construction of the project to Charles King Company. The total contract amount is $12,561,000. A notice to construct was issued to the contractor in January 2015. […] Funding for the Project is through the California State Water Resources Control Board Clean Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program.
*** Update 11/29/15 ***
In response to a question on Facebook regarding who foots the bill for the repairs, I found the following information in the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority’s 2014-2015 budget about SAWPA’s funding sources:
The Agency’s major revenue source is discharge fees from the Brine Line Enterprise. Other funding sources include grants and contracts, interest and investments, capacity sales, use of reserves/SRF loans, member and other agency contributions, and mitigation credit sales.
Specifically regarding the Brine Line Reach V repairs:
The Agency will apply for SRF loans to fund most of the project costs for the Reach V Capital Repairs Project. If the loan is received, the reserve funds will not be used.
I also found out that while this particular contract is for $12.561 million, the total capital funding request for these repairs was $19 million.
I am not involved with this project or this agency in any way, so I don’t have any firsthand knowledge of how this will be funded. I am just trying to pass along the information I find.
*** End updated info ***
How long will it take?
The construction duration is 14 months and is anticipated to be complete in early 2016.
Updated 04/29/16: An updated schedule was uploaded to the SAWPA website after I wrote this post. Here is an image from SAWPA’s website showing dates:
My only source for this information is SAWPA’s website. I am not involved in this project in any way. If you have additional information, questions or corrections, please use the comment form below.
With our current drought conditions, I thought I would post some pictures of a time when we had a lot of rain. I took these shots from the 91 (on an old cell phone) of the flooding in January 2005 that flooded and eroded part of the Green River golf course.
Here are a few more pictures of the river basin next to the golf course before part of the golf course eroded and the basin was rebuilt.
** UPDATE 01/13/15 **
At the public hearing this morning, the Board voted 4-0 to approve the resolution.
According to Transportation Director Perez, the road is expected to cost “in the neighborhood of about $8 million”, the cost of which will be “borne by private development”.
*******************
On January 13, 2015, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors will hold a “Public Hearing on Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-002, Authorization to Adopt a Resolution of Necessity for the Street A Improvement Project”. According to the agenda, the meeting begins at 9:00 AM. The hearing is agenda item 9-2.
If you aren’t familiar with the Street A / A Street project, here is some background from the Submittal to the Board of Supervisors (you can also review the numerous posts we have written about the Dufferin closure and A Street project here: dufferin-closure):
The Street A Project is a proposed two lane collector road connecting McAllister Parkway to Van Buren Boulevard, of which 40 percent is located within the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside (County) and 60 percent is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Riverside (City).
In 2006, the County approved Tract 30153 (McAllister Hills), which would have constructed a golf course residential community development. The County required this tract to construct a new road between McAllister Street and Van Buren Boulevard, referred to as Street A, which would serve traffic from the development and provide an alternate access route for residents of Victoria Grove, The Orchards, and other communities in the area north of El Sobrante and east of La Sierra Avenue.
[…]
The road design was nearly complete and right-of-way was about to commence in 2008 when work ceased on the developer’s project, which went into foreclosure due to the economic downturn.
[…]
Since that time, the community desires to see Street A move forward ahead of development due to the closure of the extension of McAllister north into the City of Riverside, which was done by the City in 2009.
[…]
The Project is a critical circulation and emergency access link for the communities of The Orchard, Victoria Grove and other developments located east of La Sierra Avenue, and north of El Sobrante.
What is a resolution of necessity? I’ll let a lawyer answer that question. From http://www.eminentdomainlaw.net/handbook2_6.php:
A “resolution of necessity” is the government agency’s formal decision to acquire property by eminent domain. It must be adopted before the condemning agency can commence an eminent domain action in court.
Why is a resolution of necessity required for this project? From the Submittal:
The Economic Development Agency/Facilities Management (EDA/FM) has presented written offers to the property owners as required by Government Code Section 7267.2. The amount of the offers is consistent with current property values in the Woodcrest area and is based upon a fair market value appraisal report.
[…]
The Project consists of six property owners; two of which have settled. However, settlement has not been reached with the remaining four property owners, although negotiations are still in process for the necessary right-of-way
How would this be paid for? From the Submittal:
All costs associated with the acquisition of these properties are fully funded by Developer Contributions in the Transportation Department’s budget for FY 2014/15. No net county costs will be incurred as a result of this transaction.
Notice anything odd about the Secretary of State election results from yesterday?
Check out who finished in third place with almost 10% of the statewide vote. Leland Yee. Why should you care?
Leland Yee’s indictment was a big story, and was difficult to miss if you watched or read any type of news at the time. Why was it such big news?
Maybe all of the votes came from people in San Francisco who were just used to seeing his name on the ballot. Nope. Over 11,000 people voted for him in Riverside County alone.
When you exercise your right to vote, please research the candidates and the issues. Rather than voting for a person we know nothing about simply because there is an “R” or a “D” next to the candidate’s name, or voting for/against an issue based on the opinion of a commentator, radio host, political party, organization, family member or friend, we need to do our homework and make our own informed decisions.
Leland Yee got almost 290,000 votes yesterday. Really California?
If your trash is picked up by Waste Management, visit the WM site to find out the holiday schedule for your area at www.wm.com.
You can put in your zip code to find your specific holiday schedule along with other information.
As an example, here is the schedule for my area of Riverside County:
This is what I got when I didn’t put in a zip code:
Updated: Nov 21, 2015
It has been almost five years since the City of Riverside closed Dufferin Avenue at McAllister, cutting off a “critical circulation and emergency access link for the communities of The Orchard, Victoria Grove and other developments located east of La Sierra Avenue, and north of El Sobrante”.
I sent a few emails last week to contacts within the County of Riverside to find out the construction status of “A” Street (Fairway Drive), since the last estimate I received was that construction might start this summer. One person told me that there is no firm timetable, and that staff is continuing negotiations to purchase the properties needed for the right-of-way (one of six has been purchased). Another person told me that the County is working with the developer, but that there is hope construction will begin by the fall.
Unless you devote many hours to attending County meetings (I don’t), construction projects can be difficult to follow. This post contains information on the construction of “A” Street from my review of County documents. If you find that I have missed something, relied on outdated documents or have any feedback, please leave a comment below. Also, if you would like to express your support for this project, it falls within Supervisor Kevin Jeffries‘ district.
The quoted words in the first sentence of this post aren’t mine (although I agree with them). They are from a submittal dated 01/15/14 from the Riverside County Transportation Department to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors recommending approval to enter into right of way and temporary construction agreements with CV Inland Communities 1, LP. The Board approved these recommendations on 02/04/14.
CV is the developer that is building the Citrus Heights community. From what I can tell, the Citrus Heights plan calls for the construction of 345 homes (no golf course) between McAllister and Van Buren (see the end of this post for info on Citrus Heights).
Background from the document:
The Riverside County Transportation Department (RCTD) proposes to construct A Street, a two-lane collector road connecting McAllister Street to Van Buren Boulevard in the Woodcrest area (Project). Approximately 40 percent of the Project is located in the unincorporated county area (County) and 60 percent is located within the City of Riverside (City) jurisdiction.
In 2006, the County approved Tract 30153 (McAllister Hills), which would have constructed a golf course residential community development. The County required this tract to construct a new road between McAllister and Van Buren, referred to as A Street, which would serve traffic from the development and provide an alternate access route for residents of Victoria Grove, the Orchards, and other communities in the area north of Cajalco and east of La Sierra.
In 200B, work ceased on the developer’s project, which went into foreclosure due to the economic downturn. Since that time, the communities desire to see “A” Street move forward has been heightened by the closure of the extension of McAllister north into the City of Riverside. The County took over the “A” Street project in 2010 and is working on property acquisition to prepare for construction.
Funding for the acquisition comes from Development Impact fees collected in this area since this road will help mitigate impacts of future development.
Environmental Impact Report No. 433 (EIR) was completed in compliance with the EIR Guidelines and Riverside County Rules to implement California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). On December 21, 2004, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 2004-539, Certifying Environmental Impact Report No. 433. On September 24, 2013, Amendment No.1 to EIR No. 433 was approved by the Board of Supervisors.
CV Inland Communities 1, LP, a Delaware limited partnership (CV Communities) has agreed to dedicate the right-of-way and temporary access from the portion of the property needed for the proposed A Street project at no cost. […] There are costs of $16,200 associated with this transaction.
The County and City are working together to identify potential funding for this project. […]
Impact on Residents and Businesses
The Project is a critical circulation and emergency access link for the communities of The Orchard, Victoria Grove and other developments located east of La Sierra Avenue, and north of El Sobrante
The Board’s approval of these agreements follow the earlier approval of an agreement (link is to the first amendment) that calls for the developer to contribute $1.6 million toward the construction of Street “A” after certain conditions are met.
Background from the document:
The Amendment of SP 325 and its associated tracts is coming before the Board for consideration as a separate Item on this same agenda. A necessary infrastructure component of this project is “A” Street, a new road that will extend from McAllister Parkway to Van Buren Boulevard. “A” Street is not only necessary for this project but also a critical circulation and emergency access link for the communities of The Orchard, Victoria Grove and other developments located East of La Sierra Avenue, and North of El Sobrante. The” A” Street Project is approximately 40% within County jurisdiction and 60% within the City of Riverside jurisdiction.
On October 16, 2012 the Board entered into an agreement with CV Communities, the Developer of this project, whereby the Developer will provide the County with $1,200,000 in funding towards the construction of the road upon County approval of the entitlements, and another $400,000 within 6 months of the County awarding a construction contract. This Amendment accelerates the payment of the $400,000 and provides a vehicle for the Developer to contribute additional funding, in exchange for additional DIF credits, and also a mechanism for the Developer to receive DIF credits if they have to construct the road project. This amendment therefore helps facilitate the construction of “A” Street.
The County is in the process of acquiring the needed right-of-way for “A” Street, and working with the City of Riverside on a funding plan for the construction phase of the project.
I’ve been writing about the Dufferin closure since 2009. I’ll do my best to share what I learn as the construction process continues. You can find all of the posts I have written about the Dufferin closure and “A” Street issues here: dufferin-closure
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Info about Citrus Heights:
The best document I have found about the Citrus Heights project is here (emphasis added).
From the document:
SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 325, AMENDMENT NO.1; CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 7779; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 36390, (FAST TRACK NO. 2013-05) -Addendum No.1 to EIR
No. 433 – Applicant: CV Communities, LLC – Engineer/Representative: T&B Planning – First/First Supervisorial District – Lake Mathews Zoning District – Lake Mathews / Woodcrest Area Plan: Community Development: Low Density Residential (CD: LDR) (1/2 Acre Minimum), Open Space: Conservation (OS: C), Rural Community: Very Low Density Residential (RC: VLDR) (1 Acre Minimum), Rural: Rural Mountainous (R: RM) (10 Acre Minimum), El Sobrante Policy Area – Location: Southerly of Van Buren Boulevard and easterly of McAllister Street – 333.7 Gross Acres – Zoning: Specific Plan (SP00325) – REQUEST: The Specific Plan Amendment proposes to increase residential acreage from 98.4 acres to 135.5 acres, increase the total number of residential units from 295 to 345, increase the average residential lot size from approximately 10,237 square feet to approximately 12,976 square feet, increase the development intensity from 0.9 to 1.0 dwelling units per acre (du/ac), eliminate the 119.1-acre golf course and 3.5-acre golf course clubhouse land uses from the Land Use Plan, increase the area reserved for open space from 85.2 acres to 162.4 acres, increase the acreage designated for public parks from three parks on 2.5 acres to eight parks on 7.0 acres, provide approximately 6.6 miles of pedestrian trails and modify the internal circulation system to accommodate the modified land use plan. The Change of Zone proposes to modify the adopted Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance for SP325 and formalize all of the planning area boundaries within the Specific Plan. The Tentative Map is a Schedule A subdivision that would subdivide 333.7 acres into 343 single-family residential lots, 8 park lots, 3 water quality detention basin lots, and 43 open space lots.
Here are a few maps from the document (click on the images to view larger versions):
